The Quiet Canadian

Peter Stoffer accuses Michael Ignatieff of poor leadership

NDP MP Peter Stoffer has recently taken issue with Liberal Leader -- and Leader of the Opposition -- Michael Ignatieff.

Ignatieff, Stoffer insisted, has been so very, very quiet. Too quiet.

Moreover, Stoffer credits Ignatieff's reluctance to take Prime Minister Stephen Harper on in a more aggressive fashion.

"They’ve been very, very quiet," Stoffer said. "This is one of the reasons why Harper gets to do what he gets to do, because he doesn’t have an Opposition leader breathing down his neck. If you had someone like a Frank McKenna there facing him, I think it would be a different story all together."

Whether or not McKenna -- the former Premier of New Brunswick -- knows how to be a good opposition leader may be a matter many Canadians would question. Between 1987 and 1991, Mckenna faced no opposition in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, having won every single seat after a spectacular collapse on the part of the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick.

This aside, Stoffer suggested that Harper has been his own best opposition -- the throne in his own side, and that an effective opposition leader would have pressed the advantage.

"I don’t think, to be honest with you, if Iggy knows how to be a politician," Stoffer continued. "I don’t even know if he likes it. I just don’t know. All these things have come to him on a silver platter, when you think about it, as an opposition politician. You’ve got the detainee issue. You’ve got a massive debt and deficit. You’ve got all kinds of things that the Conservatives have completely reversed themselves on ... which is perfect for the opposition to go after them."

"They don’t seem to be taking advantage of Conservative flip-flops and mistakes," Stoffer concluded. "It’s almost like he doesn’t want the job."

Looking back over Canadian politics over the past four years, there's little question that Harper has received soft treatment from Canada's opposition leaders. And while Stoffer can point to the kid gloves that Ignatieff seems to have handled the Prime Minister with -- as well as the kid gloves that Stephane Dion handled him with -- he seems to have forgotten that his own leader has handled Harper in much the same way.

In fact, the only occasion on which the opposition showed any grit in its handling of Harper was when they proposed a coalition government with the Bloc Quebecois in December 2008. And on that occasion, they managed to turn Canadians -- who recognized the governmental coalition with a separatist party as grossly irresponsible -- largely against them.

Liberal MP Scott Brison insists that Canadians will get to know Ignatieff better in the coming months.

"The toughest political leadership is Opposition leadership," Brison insisted. "And as Canadians get to know Michael Ignatieff in the coming months, and as he tours the country in January and meets with Canadians in town halls across the country, he’ll engage in an important debate."

Ignatieff's tour of university campuses may start Ignatieff on the road to winning Canadians over.

But if Michael Ignatieff plans to get tougher on Stephen Harper -- as he pledged to do, but failed to deliver -- he'd better start speaking up.


Other bloggers writing about this topic:

Walker Morrow - "Is It Just Me?"

BC Blue - "Peter 'Faker' Stoffer Wants Iffy to do a Better Job of Holding Conservatives to Account?"

Blue Like You - "Rumblings of Discontent From the Coalition Rank and File"

Will They or Won't They?

Brison, Dion confusing their Green Shift message

One of the key promises surrounding the Liberal party's "Green Shift" carbon tax plan is that it will not levy additional taxes on energy.

Yet Liberal leader Stephane Dion and Scott Brison (one of the architects of the Green Shift) seem to have differing opinions on the matter.

As reported by the Halifax Chronicle Herald, in June Brison told the paper's editorial board that the Liberal party carbon tax would lead to higher electricity costs for Nova Scotians because of the additional costs a carbon tax would impose on the production and purchase of coal.

"A Dion government would sit down with the provincial government and engage both the government of Nova Scotia and Nova Scotia Power in a constructive discussion on how to help Nova Scotia (make the) green shift, and we would invest in it," Brison promised.

However, since then Dion has helpfully assisted mr Brison in doing an abrupt about-face on the matter: there will be no side deals with provinces.

Of course, Brison's admission to the Chronicle Herald editorial board raises some rather important questions about the proposed Liberal policy.

Namely, if the Green Shift will lead to higher electricity prices due to the increased cost of coal, how can we expect that the Green Shift won't lead to higher gasoline prices due to the increased cost of oil?

Of course it will. And while the Liberals can insist their plan won't apply a new tax directly to gasoline, it certainly would inflate the cost of gasoline by applying additional costs (or, as the Liberals describe it, "shift the tax burden") to the production of fossil fuels).

The companies producing and refining petroleum certainly won't absorb all of that additional tax without passing the cost along to the consumer. Unfortuantely for the consumer, to do so these companies would be breaching their responsibility to the their shareholders. The lost profit could actually result in these companies being sued by their shareholders.

Considering that the largest portion of investment capital in the world today is controlled by various retirment funds, for these companies to breach their responsibility to their shareholders would hurt many, many average Canadians.

In other words, Canadians would pay for the Green Shift, one way or the other.

Of course, the less said by Scott Brison about these shortcomings of the Green Shift, the better -- at least if you're Stephane Dion. It's better for Brison not to talk about the inevitable higher costs of energy (and, through it, the higher costs of everything else) at all than to talk about solutions to such a problem.

Thus the about face -- one not terribly atypical of Brison.

"This is really what I would call quite predictable from Mr. Brison. He states a position; then it changes, he pouts and then he goes personal and attacks people as he’s doing now with the premier," remarked deputy Prime Minister Peter MacKay.

These are the questions the Liberal party has to answer about the so-called Green Shift: will the Liberal party admit that it will lead to higher energy costs -- costs that will find their way to consumers -- or won't they?

Not Quite the Voice of Reason

Prime Minister won't take further action on Lukiwski

It's unlikely that the scandal swirling around a Conservative MP and some homophobic comments he made on a video tape in 1991 will die a quiet death following a public apology and an announcement today that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will not be disciplining Lukiwski any further.

The tape -- as it has been played and re-played since being made public -- featured, among other things, Conservative MP and Parliamentary Secretary Tom Lukiwski making some virulently homophobic comments (although, considering the party environment in which they were being made, can't quite be taken at full value, although they are nonetheless distressing).

"Let me put it to you this way -- there's As and Bs," Lukiwski explained. "The As are guys like me. The Bs are homosexual faggots with dirt under their fingernails that transmit diseases."

The tape, discovered by NDP staffers in their new offices in the Saskatchewan legislature, almost immediately made it public.

"Obviously I just found out in the last 30-40 minutes that some comments I made back in 1991 have been made public and I just want to publicly say I am truly, truly sorry," said Lukiwski. "I have the utmost respect, I have no prejudice against gay people whatsoever. Those comments do not reflect the type of person I am and I'm very, very sorry."

Of course, Lukiwski's professed "respect" for homosexuals is far from apparent in the comments he made on tape.

Naturally, Lukiwski's apology wasn't quite enough, even for those who demanded it in the first place. "Does the prime minister realize that his tepid response to these hateful remarks against gays and Canadians suffering from AIDS tells Canadians that hate, bigotry and prejudice are just fine in his Canada?" demanded Liberal MP (and former Progressive Conservative) Scott Brison.

"Does the prime minister not realize if he does not act on this matter, if he does nothing, then he owns it?" added Ralph Goodale.

Harper, on the other hand, wasn't buying any of that. "It is my view that when such an apology is sought, such an apology should be accepted," Harper announced.

Upon first consideration, it would seem that Harper is trying to be the voice of reason on this particular issue. But there are deeper considerations at hand; considerations which seem to escape him.

Of course, no one is suggesting that the Prime Minister should cave in every time the opposition attempts to make homophobia a partisan issue; especially considering the fact that it has afflicted all of Canada's major political parties.

But attitudes like Lukiwski's simply must be addressed. Continuing to count him among his government's inner circle after the public airing of such a tape is more than simply bad politics: it really does send the wrong message.

Unfortunately for Harper, his decision not to discipline Lukiwski any further does resemble tacit approval of the comments. Considering the increasingly fickle nature of modern politics, he needs to realize that the resemblance enough is sufficiently damning.

And while the increasingly unforgiving, partisan and bloodthirsty nature of the opposition -- demanding that he be sacked despite the fact that they already got what they claimed they really wanted in the first place -- cannot be discounted, sometimes discretion really is the better part of valour. This is one of those times.

While Stephen Harper would probably be among the first to consider himself the "voice of reason" on this topic, the fact is that he's fallen quite short of it on this occasion.

Lukiwski probably should be demoted in the wake of this scandal. It may only play into the hands of those who favour fickle politics, but it is politics nonetheless.

"The comments I made should not be tolerated in any society. They should not be tolerated today, they should not have been tolerated in 1991 and they should not have been tolerated in the years before that," Lukiwski himself announced.

While his apology may well have been perfectly sincere, actions speak louder than words -- a fact that Harper himself could stand to remember. If Harper won't remove him as Parliamentary Secretary, then Lukiwski should resign.

Corruption: Is What's Good For the Goose Also Good For the Gander?

Liberals may have hit the jackpot

Prime Minister Stephen Harper may have something other than not getting along with the media to keep him busy these days.

On June 6th, the Liberals called on the RCMP to investigate a lawsuit filed against Conservative MP Rob Anders filed by James Istvanffy, a former executive assistant who alleges he was fired for questioning Anders' decisions regarding the expenditure of his campaign funding.

Istvanffy, who was paid $51,500 annually, claims that Anders borrowed thousands of dollars from him, in order to cover expenses that the House of Commons would't spring for. He also claims that Anders resorted to fraudulently billing the government in order to repay some of his debts. Istvanffy claims that Anders used expense accounts to do this, under the guise of salary increases, fake travel expenses, and book shelves. He also claims that a number of people were put to work on the federal Conservative campaign while being paid with taxpayer dollars.

Naturally, Anders denies these allegations, and has promised a strong statement of such will be released by the end of the week.

As always in Canada, Anders is innocent until proven guilty. It isn't entirely implausible that Istvanffy may be filing the lawsuit and making these accusations strictly as an act of retribution. One could wonder why Istvanffy is suing for unpaid debts while claiming that he was repaid with pilfered taxpayer dollars. Then again, one would also expect that Istvanffy wouldn't be so bold as to make these accusations unless he could prove them.

He will have to prove them -- possibly even in the course of an RCMP or Parliamentary investigation.

"Obviously these allegations are very serious and if they are true, this is something that's more than just a breach of good faith - this is outright fraud and criminal if true,'' said Liberal MP Mark Holland, who represents Ajax-Pickering.

He's absolutely right. After all the ruckus raised by the Conservatives over the sponsorship scandal (and rightfully so), the last thing the Conservatives can afford to have is an in-house scandal of this sort. Should these allegations be found to be true, they could even potentially de-rail the crucial accountability act that the Conservatives have promised.

The Anders story breaks as the Liberal party has uncovered a scandal of its own. Liberal Senator Raymond Lavigne has been accused of using a member of his office staff to cut down trees near his cottage -- while on the taxpayers' clock.

However, in what seems like an uncharacteristic move, Liberal interim leader Bill Graham has done what former leader Paul Martin wouldn't do, and has kicked Lavigne out of caucus until the investigation is settled -- one way or the other. Martin, as some may recall, refused to discipline Scott Brison, who as Vice-Chairman of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance sent an e-mail to a friend leaking what he believed would be a favourable policy regarding the taxation of income trusts.

"It is inappropriate for Senator Lavigne to sit with the Liberal caucus until any investigations have been completed," Graham said in a statement.

Wow. In an uncharacteristic move, the federal Liberals have set a good example on how to deal with potential corruption (the allegations against Lavigne are not yet proven, either). Certainly, all eyes will turn to Stephen Harper: will he follow suit and (at least temporarily) oust Anders from caucus until this matter is settled?

Hopefully, he will. At least asking Anders to voluntarily sit out from the Conservative caucus until the matter is settled certainly isn't any sort of accusation. Nor would Anders agreeing to do so be an admission of guilt. It would be an act of a government that (as promised) takes corruption -- even the mere accusations of corruption -- seriously.

It isn't often that the Liberal party sets an example that other parties should follow, but this is one of these times. Unfortunately for the Liberals, Bill Graham isn't running for their party leadership.

How, it is up to Stephen Harper to follow Graham's example and show Canadians that his party takes corruption within its ranks every bit as seriously as it has proven it takes corruption within other parties.