Emerson and Stronach are no different -- and both should have faced by-elections
It's no great secret that since his post-election defection to the Conservative party, David Emerson has become one of the most controversial figures in Canadian politics.
When he was elected in the riding of Vancouver Kingsway, Emerson promised he would be Prime Minister Stephen Harper's "worst nightmare". Instead, he secretly crossed the floor from the opposition Liberals to sit as the Conservative Minister of Trade and the Pacific Gateway. His duplicity was entirely unknown to Canadians of all political stripes until he was caught by news cameras emerging from the inaugural Conservative cabinet meeting -- he had just been sworn in.
Now, Canadians of all political stripes are calling for Emerson's resignation. Leading this campaign is Vancouver Kingsway constituent Manuel Pereda. Along with Kevin Chalmers, a key fundraiser for the Emerson campaign, Pereda has organized his own little protest movement. At one point he even paid for an airplane to fly over Ottawa with a trail instrucing Emerson to "call home".
An online petition demanding the recall of Emerson (found at www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?RDE) currently has 20810 signatures -- more than enough to inspire some sober second thought from Emerson. However, it is obvious this has yet to come. Emerson has developed a habit of denouncing his critics as "partisan zealots".
Resultingly, Pereda is getting little response from Emerson. Pereda reports, " He responds to all my questiosn with one single sentence: his sentence is he's only accountable to constituents at election time."
Naturally, Emerson has tried to shy away from this attitude in public statements, saying, " the reality is I was elected. Once the election was over, I was faced with a decision on how to best serve the people of the riding, and that's all the people of the riding... I concluded I could better serve them , I could get more done, I could get more results for British Columbia if I was in the cabinet than if I was not."
Translation: " I'm bettering my own career, while claiming I'm doing so for my constituents. Meanwhile, as I claim that I am, in fact, doing this for them, I will disrespect them entirely."
Pereda's frustration with Emerson's arrogance and contempt for the electorate is familiar to many Canadians -- many felt the same way after the equally shameful defection of Belinda Stronach.
Certainly, there is one key difference: namely, that Emerson has made himself useful since crossing the floor, helping to settle Canada's softwood lumber dispute with the United States. Although the settlement didn't pull as many American teeth as critics of the settlement would have liked, it did resolve the matter faster than any Liberal government would have (then again, how much faster than "never" would he have had to be?). Stronach, on the other hand, took to a new cabinet position as the Minister for "Democratic Renewal", and proceeded to rest on her non-existent laurels. There is one other inexplicable difference -- Stronach was somehow able to get reelected after her betrayal. Now, one wonders if Emerson could accomplish the same feat.
Like any Member of Parliament who crosses the floor after election, Emerson owes it to his constituents to resign and run in a by-election.
It seems like the only party advancing in the interest in democracy is the NDP. On March 10, it was the NDP that requested that the ethics investigation into Emerson's defection also investigate the defection of Stronach. It is the NDP that is currently proposing legislation that would require any defecting Member of Parliament to immediately submit to a by-election in their riding in order to ascertain the will of their constituents.
In the wake of the last year, neither the Conservative party nor the Liberal party have any credibility on this particular matter. It may indeed be up to the NDP to address this very serious culture of duplicity, because anything the Liberals or Conservatives have to say on the subject will certainly be nothing more than partisan grand standing.
Showing posts with label Belinda Stronach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Belinda Stronach. Show all posts
Monday, May 15, 2006
Friday, May 12, 2006
Canada Needs Belinda Stronach Like Jean Chretien Needs Another Stroke
When rabid Liberals attack
What would you say if someone told you that Canada needs Belinda Stronach?
I know what I'd say -- but (believe it or not), it isn't fit for print here. Scary, huh?
And, yet, a group of pro-Belinda Liberals have insisted that Belinda Stronach is just the man... er, woman... for the job of federal Liberal leader.
Never mind the fact that she ran for (and failed to secure) the leadership of the federal Conservative party. Never mind the fact that she jumped ship to the competing Liberal party strictly to further her own career. AND, not to mention the fact that she has tried to steal a job out from under any man with whom she's spend as much as three minutes in the back of a grody taxi cab...
But I digress. Mostly because some of that is borderline slanderous. And while I do love my slander, I feel it is better spent on Jack Thompson (by the way, Jack, I'm still waiting for you to sue me).
While it is true that the race for the federal Liberal leadership has yielded few quality candidates (go Bob Rae! After all, Ontarians won't remember that whole "incompetent premier" thing), the absolute last thing that the Liberal party needs is for Belinda Stronach to enter the race and provide Liberals with yet another bad candidate for the job.
After all, there is a reason why Stronach withdrew from the race, even after having done some preliminary informal organizing for a run at the leadership.
When bowing out of the race (before even formally entering), Stronach cited a "flawed selection process" as the reason for her change of heart. She claimed that the process was too closed, despite having praised it as "open accessible and accountable" in March. At the time she said, "the rules... demonstrate the party is vibrant and is ready to take the next steps to renew and rejuvinate itself."
This particular flip-flop comes less than a year after she criticized the Liberal budget in the house of commons before jumping to the Liberals to help them pass it in May 2005. For Belinda Stronach, that's just how the world turns. It's how she rolls, if you will.
Liberal officials had warned that they would stringently enforce limits on large campaign donations, nixing what would have been a massive advantage for the Auto Parts heiress (Stronach's father owns Magda International, a company for which Belinda served as both president and CEO -- despite dropping out of business school).
There is another reason for Stronach's withdrawal that she certainly won't publicly admit to -- Elle nes pas parles francais. Translation: she evidently doesn't speak french well enough to order fries from a Burger King in Quebec.
This was exactly the opinion of a commentator for CTV, who reported that after asking her a question in French, she asked him to repeat it -- in English. Certainly, a party that wants to believe itself the flag-bearer for federalism in Quebec can't have that. So, Belinda was done before she ever started.
Aside from all this, the simple fact of the matter is that Stronach is entirely unqualified. Once one becomes familiar with her life story, it becomes plainly obvious that he has gotten where she is in life not by hard work, but by back stabbing anyone she could get close to. When it became apparent the same tactic would not yield results within the Conservative party, she jumped to one where the practice is more commonplace, only to find her blade dulled by her own untrustworthiness and incompetence.
From business school drop out to Liberal party leadership race drop out, one thing is certain: even an embattled organization like the Liberal party can do much better in choosing a leader -- although all the remaining candidates have their own issues to deal with.
What would you say if someone told you that Canada needs Belinda Stronach?
I know what I'd say -- but (believe it or not), it isn't fit for print here. Scary, huh?
And, yet, a group of pro-Belinda Liberals have insisted that Belinda Stronach is just the man... er, woman... for the job of federal Liberal leader.
Never mind the fact that she ran for (and failed to secure) the leadership of the federal Conservative party. Never mind the fact that she jumped ship to the competing Liberal party strictly to further her own career. AND, not to mention the fact that she has tried to steal a job out from under any man with whom she's spend as much as three minutes in the back of a grody taxi cab...
But I digress. Mostly because some of that is borderline slanderous. And while I do love my slander, I feel it is better spent on Jack Thompson (by the way, Jack, I'm still waiting for you to sue me).
While it is true that the race for the federal Liberal leadership has yielded few quality candidates (go Bob Rae! After all, Ontarians won't remember that whole "incompetent premier" thing), the absolute last thing that the Liberal party needs is for Belinda Stronach to enter the race and provide Liberals with yet another bad candidate for the job.
After all, there is a reason why Stronach withdrew from the race, even after having done some preliminary informal organizing for a run at the leadership.
When bowing out of the race (before even formally entering), Stronach cited a "flawed selection process" as the reason for her change of heart. She claimed that the process was too closed, despite having praised it as "open accessible and accountable" in March. At the time she said, "the rules... demonstrate the party is vibrant and is ready to take the next steps to renew and rejuvinate itself."
This particular flip-flop comes less than a year after she criticized the Liberal budget in the house of commons before jumping to the Liberals to help them pass it in May 2005. For Belinda Stronach, that's just how the world turns. It's how she rolls, if you will.
Liberal officials had warned that they would stringently enforce limits on large campaign donations, nixing what would have been a massive advantage for the Auto Parts heiress (Stronach's father owns Magda International, a company for which Belinda served as both president and CEO -- despite dropping out of business school).
There is another reason for Stronach's withdrawal that she certainly won't publicly admit to -- Elle nes pas parles francais. Translation: she evidently doesn't speak french well enough to order fries from a Burger King in Quebec.
This was exactly the opinion of a commentator for CTV, who reported that after asking her a question in French, she asked him to repeat it -- in English. Certainly, a party that wants to believe itself the flag-bearer for federalism in Quebec can't have that. So, Belinda was done before she ever started.
Aside from all this, the simple fact of the matter is that Stronach is entirely unqualified. Once one becomes familiar with her life story, it becomes plainly obvious that he has gotten where she is in life not by hard work, but by back stabbing anyone she could get close to. When it became apparent the same tactic would not yield results within the Conservative party, she jumped to one where the practice is more commonplace, only to find her blade dulled by her own untrustworthiness and incompetence.
From business school drop out to Liberal party leadership race drop out, one thing is certain: even an embattled organization like the Liberal party can do much better in choosing a leader -- although all the remaining candidates have their own issues to deal with.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Sexism Strikes Again?
Or does it? Only the Liberals know for sure
This just in! Apparently, Belinda Stronach is a woman.
Go figure, I hadn’t noticed either.
But apparently, she is indeed a woman, and as such the Federal Liberal Women’s Caucus has stepped forward to declare that much of criticism of Stronach is sexist.
Wow. I never saw that coming. Not in a million years. Nope, no sir…
Anyway, following the reaction to Belinda Stronach crossing the floor to sit with the perennially crooked Federal Liberals, the Liberal Women’s Caucus has stepped forward to decry and bemoan the sexism allegedly being directed at the embattled MP.
Ontario Conservative Bob Runciman called Stronach (a woman considered by some to be among the most attractive Members of Parliament) “a dipstick – an attractive one – but a dipstick.”
Alberta Conservative MLA Tony Abbot declared that Stronach had “whored herself for power.” Unlike the CBC, CTV allowed Abbot to elaborate by also printing, “ Some people prostitute themselves for different costs or different prices. She sold out for a cabinet position."
Liberal MP Judy Sgro weighed in, saying, “"I think it's important that we try to raise the level of discourse and debate and they shouldn't be reduced to the kinds of throw-away comments that people are clearly using last night and this morning. So I would call on Mr. Harper to apologize to Ms. Stronach and to women of Canada, and ask his colleagues to very much do the same so that we can try and restore some level of respect and discussion here in Ottawa."
Because Stephen Harper is obviously responsible for the comments made by Alberta and Ontario MLAs. And the Liberal Women’s Caucus isn’t licking their lips at the concept of Harper tucking tail on their behalf. No, not at all.
Linda Trimble, professor of Political Science at the University of Alberta stepped into the debate, saying, "When she's being called a whore and a dipstick – well, that's intensely personal, and it goes to her integrity. Those are not the kinds of comments made when male politicians cross the floor."
So what of Stronach’s integrity? She was elected by her constituency as a Conservative, but there have been plenty of MPs cross the floor to sit with other parties, right?
Then again, when Liberal MP David Kilgour crossed the floor, he didn’t do so to sit as a critic, or even as a member of the Conservative party – he did so to sit as an independent. When Conservative MP Chuck Cadman crossed, he did likewise.
When John Bryden crossed to sit as an Independent, he would eventually sit as a Conservative… but not for eight days afterward.
Even the venerable Joe Clark crossed the floor once, to sit as an… independent. Does anyone else see a pattern here? Maybe one that Belinda Stronach doesn’t fit?
Even Deborah Gray (I would like to note, also a woman) once crossed the floor, to sit as an… independent. She, however, would eventually rejoin the Canadian Alliance. Likewise with Valerie Meredith.
Here in the Nexus, if there’s anything I do, it’s call a spade a spade. Frankly, it’s fairly obvious what these individuals are trying to do. They’re following one of the cardinal rules of politics: make it hurt to take you on.
By ideologizing the issue of Belinda Stronach’s betrayal, these individuals are out to make it impossible to criticize Stronach without being branded as sexist. This is similar to attempts made by the proponents of same-sex marriage to make it impossible to criticize moves to legalize same-sex marriage without being branded as homophobic, or make it impossible to not support affirmative action programs without being accused of racism. The list goes on and on, and it’s actually a fairly effective mudslinging tactic.
Because it’s becoming fairly obvious that it’s one thing for a woman to have “great shoes,” (words of Anne McLellan) but it’s entirely an obvious to question the integrity of an MP who has just stabbed her constituents in the back.
This just in! Apparently, Belinda Stronach is a woman.
Go figure, I hadn’t noticed either.
But apparently, she is indeed a woman, and as such the Federal Liberal Women’s Caucus has stepped forward to declare that much of criticism of Stronach is sexist.
Wow. I never saw that coming. Not in a million years. Nope, no sir…
Anyway, following the reaction to Belinda Stronach crossing the floor to sit with the perennially crooked Federal Liberals, the Liberal Women’s Caucus has stepped forward to decry and bemoan the sexism allegedly being directed at the embattled MP.
Ontario Conservative Bob Runciman called Stronach (a woman considered by some to be among the most attractive Members of Parliament) “a dipstick – an attractive one – but a dipstick.”
Alberta Conservative MLA Tony Abbot declared that Stronach had “whored herself for power.” Unlike the CBC, CTV allowed Abbot to elaborate by also printing, “ Some people prostitute themselves for different costs or different prices. She sold out for a cabinet position."
Liberal MP Judy Sgro weighed in, saying, “"I think it's important that we try to raise the level of discourse and debate and they shouldn't be reduced to the kinds of throw-away comments that people are clearly using last night and this morning. So I would call on Mr. Harper to apologize to Ms. Stronach and to women of Canada, and ask his colleagues to very much do the same so that we can try and restore some level of respect and discussion here in Ottawa."
Because Stephen Harper is obviously responsible for the comments made by Alberta and Ontario MLAs. And the Liberal Women’s Caucus isn’t licking their lips at the concept of Harper tucking tail on their behalf. No, not at all.
Linda Trimble, professor of Political Science at the University of Alberta stepped into the debate, saying, "When she's being called a whore and a dipstick – well, that's intensely personal, and it goes to her integrity. Those are not the kinds of comments made when male politicians cross the floor."
So what of Stronach’s integrity? She was elected by her constituency as a Conservative, but there have been plenty of MPs cross the floor to sit with other parties, right?
Then again, when Liberal MP David Kilgour crossed the floor, he didn’t do so to sit as a critic, or even as a member of the Conservative party – he did so to sit as an independent. When Conservative MP Chuck Cadman crossed, he did likewise.
When John Bryden crossed to sit as an Independent, he would eventually sit as a Conservative… but not for eight days afterward.
Even the venerable Joe Clark crossed the floor once, to sit as an… independent. Does anyone else see a pattern here? Maybe one that Belinda Stronach doesn’t fit?
Even Deborah Gray (I would like to note, also a woman) once crossed the floor, to sit as an… independent. She, however, would eventually rejoin the Canadian Alliance. Likewise with Valerie Meredith.
Here in the Nexus, if there’s anything I do, it’s call a spade a spade. Frankly, it’s fairly obvious what these individuals are trying to do. They’re following one of the cardinal rules of politics: make it hurt to take you on.
By ideologizing the issue of Belinda Stronach’s betrayal, these individuals are out to make it impossible to criticize Stronach without being branded as sexist. This is similar to attempts made by the proponents of same-sex marriage to make it impossible to criticize moves to legalize same-sex marriage without being branded as homophobic, or make it impossible to not support affirmative action programs without being accused of racism. The list goes on and on, and it’s actually a fairly effective mudslinging tactic.
Because it’s becoming fairly obvious that it’s one thing for a woman to have “great shoes,” (words of Anne McLellan) but it’s entirely an obvious to question the integrity of an MP who has just stabbed her constituents in the back.
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Blonde Ambition Strikes Again!
Belinda Stronach Makes Blonde Jokes Fashionable Again
Politics is a game that is not unlike poker. For many, the goal is ultimately to deceive your fellow players while jockeying for the best hand you possibly can.
On May 17, 2005, Belinda Stronach played a winning hand – at least on paper – by crossing the floor to sit with the Liberal party. Her ultimate reward? A cabinet position as the minister of Human Resources and Skills Development.
Never mind the little detail that Stronach’s Newmarket-Aurora constituents elected her as a member of the Conservative party – a party for which she placed second in the 2004 leadership convention.
“ I cannot exaggerate how hard this is for me,” Stronach said at a press conference.
“ The country must come first.”
The country. Right.
“ I’ve been uncomfortable for some time with the direction the Conservative party was taking,” Stronach explained. “I regret to say that I do not believe the party leader is truly sensitive to the needs of each part of the country and just how big and complex Canada really is."
While she may have a very arguable point regarding the party’s stance on same-sex marriage, the runner-up to the party leadership crosses the floor and immediately begins criticizing Stephen Harper? Wow. Never saw that coming.
Harper had his own thoughts. “ There’s no grand principle involved in this decision, just ambition,” Harper said.
Ambition is something that Stronach is no stranger to. Considering she dropped out of the York University school of business in 1985, it might be considered curious that she would become a board member at Magna international, an automotive parts company. Then again, maybe not -- her father started the company.
In 1990 she married Magna executive Donald Walker. After five years and two children, she divorced him in 1995. Shortly after, she became a vice-president of the company. In 1999 she would replace Walker as executive vice-president of the company.
So, with a history like this, it’s supposed to be hard to believe she would actually hesitate to stab Stephen Harper in the back for the sake of advancing her career?
Right.
From Paul Martin’s end, this couldn’t have worked out any better. He makes Stronach responsible for implementing the recommendations of the Gomery inquiry and makes it look as if his party is actually prepared to act on the scandal. This was very much the PR gambit that the Liberal party desperately needs.
Furthermore, Stronach’s defection brings Martin to 133 seats in parliament. When combined with the NDP’s 19 seats, Martin has the capacity to control 152 seats – dead even with the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois, increasing the importance of Parliament’s three independent sitters.
For Stronach, however, the future should not be so rosy. In crossing the floor to sit with the Liberals, Stronach has betrayed her constituents, her party and her country – all to benefit her own career by keeping a corrupt government in power.
Thankfully, sometimes actions speak louder than words, and Stronach’s actions have spoken pretty loud.
Politics is a game that is not unlike poker. For many, the goal is ultimately to deceive your fellow players while jockeying for the best hand you possibly can.
On May 17, 2005, Belinda Stronach played a winning hand – at least on paper – by crossing the floor to sit with the Liberal party. Her ultimate reward? A cabinet position as the minister of Human Resources and Skills Development.
Never mind the little detail that Stronach’s Newmarket-Aurora constituents elected her as a member of the Conservative party – a party for which she placed second in the 2004 leadership convention.
“ I cannot exaggerate how hard this is for me,” Stronach said at a press conference.
“ The country must come first.”
The country. Right.
“ I’ve been uncomfortable for some time with the direction the Conservative party was taking,” Stronach explained. “I regret to say that I do not believe the party leader is truly sensitive to the needs of each part of the country and just how big and complex Canada really is."
While she may have a very arguable point regarding the party’s stance on same-sex marriage, the runner-up to the party leadership crosses the floor and immediately begins criticizing Stephen Harper? Wow. Never saw that coming.
Harper had his own thoughts. “ There’s no grand principle involved in this decision, just ambition,” Harper said.
Ambition is something that Stronach is no stranger to. Considering she dropped out of the York University school of business in 1985, it might be considered curious that she would become a board member at Magna international, an automotive parts company. Then again, maybe not -- her father started the company.
In 1990 she married Magna executive Donald Walker. After five years and two children, she divorced him in 1995. Shortly after, she became a vice-president of the company. In 1999 she would replace Walker as executive vice-president of the company.
So, with a history like this, it’s supposed to be hard to believe she would actually hesitate to stab Stephen Harper in the back for the sake of advancing her career?
Right.
From Paul Martin’s end, this couldn’t have worked out any better. He makes Stronach responsible for implementing the recommendations of the Gomery inquiry and makes it look as if his party is actually prepared to act on the scandal. This was very much the PR gambit that the Liberal party desperately needs.
Furthermore, Stronach’s defection brings Martin to 133 seats in parliament. When combined with the NDP’s 19 seats, Martin has the capacity to control 152 seats – dead even with the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois, increasing the importance of Parliament’s three independent sitters.
For Stronach, however, the future should not be so rosy. In crossing the floor to sit with the Liberals, Stronach has betrayed her constituents, her party and her country – all to benefit her own career by keeping a corrupt government in power.
Thankfully, sometimes actions speak louder than words, and Stronach’s actions have spoken pretty loud.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)