All posts in Conservative Party of Canada

Former Tory strategist Allan Gregg rips Harper Cons’ ‘systematic attack’ on facts and reason

A couple of old guys born just before the last King passed on, one of them your blogger, the other the pollster and former Tory strategist Allan Gregg. Below: Mr. Gregg in his iconoclastically Conservative heyday.

Long-time Tory pollster and strategist Allan Gregg ripped into the Harper Government on Saturday for what he termed its “systematic attack on evidence-based research.”

But since Mr. Gregg was speaking to the annual convention of the Alberta Federation of Labour, his startling comments went completely unremarked by Alberta’s mainstream media – notwithstanding the readily available “local angle” of an Edmonton native who did well in the big cities down east returning to his old stomping ground for a few hours.

Back in the day, Mr. Gregg was an influential pollster for the then-still-Progressive Conservatives under prime ministers Joe Clark and Brian Mulroney, and a proponent of negative political advertising. He is credited with having devised the cruel images of Liberal Jean Chretien that went so badly awry for the Conservatives in the 1993 federal election. Perhaps that is why by 2001 Mr. Gregg had undergone a much-publicized change of heart on that topic.

Nevertheless, Mr. Gregg’s harsh view of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, given his history of service to Canada’s Conservatives, was eye-popping – although it is perhaps less so when one considers the fellow has made his money for decades toiling in the field of public opinion research, which inevitably encourages a certain respect for measurable facts.

Indeed, that background no doubt informed his view that “effective solutions can only be generated when they correspond with accurate understanding of they problems they are designed to solve. Evidence, facts and reason, therefore, form the sine qua non not just of good public policy, but of good value.”

Alas, as Mr. Gregg told the 500 or so trade unionists at the AFL conference, “it seems as though our government’s use of evidence and facts as the basis of policy is declining, and in their place, dogma, whim and political expediency are on the rise.”

He added: “Even more troubling, especially from the perspective of a public opinion researcher, is that Canadians seem to be, if not buying it, certainly accepting it.”

Mr. Gregg cited a long list of evidence-based government activities that have been gutted by the Harper Government – often saving only insignificant amounts of money – since 2010.

The rampage, he noted, began with the notorious abandonment of the mandatory long-form census. “Why would anyone forsake these valuable insights and the chance to make good public policy, rather than bad public policy, under the pretense that rights were being violated when no one ever voiced concern? Was this a crazy one-off move … or was there something larger going on?”

It was pretty quickly clear to Mr. Gregg – as it was to many of the rest of us – that there was indeed something larger going on.

The demise of the long-form census was followed by the destruction of the national long-gun registry, despite the pleas of virtually every police chief in Canada that it be saved. After that, under cover of an austerity budget, there were massive cuts to Statistics Canada, Library and Archives Canada, science and social science activities at Parks Canada, the Parliamentary Budget Office, the CBC, the Roundtable on the Environment, the Experimental Lakes Area, the Canadian Foundation for Climate Science and so on.

At the same time, the government proposed multi-billion-dollar spending where the evidence didn’t support it – as in its penitentiary-building spree.

“This flew directly in the face of a mountain of evidence that suggested that crime, far from being on the rise, was on the decline,” noted Mr. Gregg. “This struck me as costly, unnecessary. But knowing the government’s intention to define itself as tough on crime before all else, once can see, at least ideologically, why they did it.”

However, he said, “when the specific cuts started to roll out, it became clear that something else was starting to take shape” – something that went beyond mere ideology.

“This was no random act of downsizing, but a deliberate attempt to obliterate certain activities that were previously viewed as a legitimate part of government decision making,” Mr. Gregg stated. “Namely, using research, science and evidence as the basis to make public policy decisions.

“It also amounted to an attempt to eliminate anyone who would use science, facts and evidence to challenge government policies,” he added.

Mr. Gregg also assailed the Harper Government’s use of intentionally misleading titles for legislation – which often do the opposite of what their names declare, as in the case of the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, which will result in more pot smokers being thrown behind bars.

“In George Orwell’s 1984, the abandonment of reason is twinned not simply with unthinking orthodoxy, but also by the willful dissemination of misinformation,” he said. “Today, more and more, we see the same kind of misdirection and Newspeak in the behaviour of our legislators.”

So why does the Harper Government want to disguise the substance of its legislation, Mr. Gregg asked, when a “fulsome and rational debate” would help Canadians make the best decisions? The pretty obvious answer: “By obfuscating the true purpose of laws under the gobbledygook of Doublespeak, governments are admitting that their intentions probably lack both respect and support.”

His explanation in the case of the Harperites: “I do believe that this particular government is pursuing a not-so-hidden agenda that few truly understand. It starts from a premise that the Canadian political spectrum has over-swung in a direction of liberalism.”

Mr. Harper and his government, the pollster argued, intend to “systematically right what they see as this wrong.”

“Their problem is, notwithstanding the fairly widespread consensus around the orthodoxies of balanced budgets, market economies, open trade which does exist and is embraced by the public today, Canadians by and large still believe in tolerance, compromise and egalitarianism.

“Policy for them should be based on conviction, and not bloodless statistics. Governments should be guided by what they believe is morally right, and not by reason and rational compromise. From this view, science, statistics, reason, and rational compromise are not tools of enlightened public policy, but barriers to the pursuit of swinging that pendulum back to where they believe it belongs.

“So to realize this agenda, given that continued point of view on the part of the public, it becomes necessary to pursue it by stealth and circumvention rather than through transparency and directness. This too explains the apparent obsession with secrecy message control and misdirection we see every day coming out of Ottawa.”

Instead of reason, he said, the Harper Tories encourage “prejudice, fear and wishful thinking.”

Mr. Gregg may be a man who once favoured red shoes, wore a rock ‘n’ roll haircut, and worked for Brian Mulroney, but it’s hard to dispute his scary assessment of the Harper Government.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Is Chuck Strahl’s dual role on the Manning Centre and security committee appropriate?

Chuck Strahl listens to a participant in the Manning Centre conference in Ottawa in March. Below: Manning Centre founder and figurehead, Preston Manning.

Should Chuck Strahl be able to serve simultaneously on the board of the Manning Centre for Building Democracy, a partisan political organization tied to the ruling Conservative Party of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other provincial conservative parties, and on the apolitical Security Intelligence Review Committee?

The SIRC is supposed to be, in the words of its website, “an independent, external review body which reports to the Parliament of Canada on the operations of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.”

“Parliament has given CSIS extraordinary powers to intrude on the privacy of individuals,” the website explains. “SIRC ensures that these powers are used legally and appropriately, in order to protect Canadians’ rights and freedoms.”

Mr. Strahl is a former Reform Party, Canadian Alliance and Conservative Member of Parliament from the British Columbia Interior who served as Deputy Speaker and held several cabinet portfolios during his political career. He retired from politics after the 2011 election and was appointed to a five-year term on the SIRC in June 2012. His biography on the committee’s site is open about his dual role, stating clearly that in 2011 he was appointed as a director of the Calgary-based Manning Centre.

As readers of this blog know, according to an email the group sent to its supporters, Mr. Strahl has now been appointed chair of the board of the Manning Centre, the organization founded and led by former Reform Party leader Preston Manning that works openly to keep the Harper Government in power and is now trying to extend the reach of neoliberal politicians into Canadian municipal governments.

Well, it’s still a relatively a free country, so the Manning Centre can call itself whatever it likes and work for the political outcomes it supports, but the question of whether the chair of this partisan organization’s board should serve in a sensitive and apolitical Parliamentary security review position is another matter entirely.

A claim by B.C. Premier Christy Clark last Wednesday that Mr. Strahl has been campaigning for her Liberal Party in the current election in that province has proved highly controversial and prompted swift backtracking by Ms. Clark.

The B.C. Conservative Party issued a press release Thursday stating Mr. Strahl was barred from campaigning in the election because of his membership on SIRC and demanding Ms. Clark apologize for saying he was doing so.

The Globe and Mail reported Ms. Clark quickly “clarified her statements,” explaining, “he has been active for the last two years and when he took on his non-partisan role just very recently, he stepped back from that.”

No doubt spokespeople for the Manning Centre will try to claim that organization is non-partisan too, but, really, how can they?

“The Manning Centre is dedicated to building Canada’s conservative movement,” the group’s website states. At the federal level, there is only one Conservative party. As the statements, speeches and participants at last March’s Manning Centre “Big Ideas” conference in Ottawa made perfectly clear, time and again, the “conservative movement” means Mr. Harper’s Conservative Party and, here in Alberta, the Wildrose Party of Danielle Smith. “Us” and “the Conservatives” meant the same thing for most participants in the conference.

For example, Mr. Manning staked out a partisan position in Alberta politics in one of his principal speeches, stating, “in Alberta an aging Progressive Conservative administration has lost its way ethically and fiscally and needs to be overhauled or replaced.”

Mr. Strahl, naturally given his position, attended the conference.

As for the Manning Centre’s foray into municipal politics, its so-called “Municipal Governance Project” is also a directly partisan activity whether or not the group is actually backing a slate or trying to unseat Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi. It is most certainly backing individual candidates, one or more of whom, presumably, may challenge Mr. Nenshi directly.

If it is inappropriate for Mr. Strahl to serve SIRC and work for the B.C. Liberals’ at the same time, surely it is equally inappropriate for him to have a similar dual role with the Manning Centre and SIRC.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Today’s weather: blue skies, seasonally adjusted temperature of Fahrenheit 78, not 451

You can’t trust anything you read on a website that is not coloured blue. This is important to remember. If you accidentally open a website that is not blue, turn your computer off immediately and dial 1-800-TORYBLU. Technicians like these will come to your house and help you reset it. Anyway, it shouldn’t take a weatherman to tell you which way the wind is blowing…

And now the weather forecast from Environm… I mean from the Harper Government of Canada… 

Good mooooorning Edmonton!

It’s going to be another beautiful day today – and I mean beautiful – with clear, Tory-blue skies and beautiful warm temperatures.

Pack up your winter coats, people! Just put ’em away! Because just like yesterday and the day before and the day before that, the seasonally adjusted temperature is a beautiful 78 degrees Fahrenheit!

And don’t worry, because this is a Conservative forecast, if you take my meaning!

Thank your lucky blue stars, Edmontonians, because none of this would have been possible without the government of our beautif… I mean, wonderful, Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, the Genius of the Laurentians! And his beautiful wife, of course.

Do you remember back when always used to be freezing this time of year?

Well, that never happens in Edmonton any more because your Harper Government of Canada doesn’t waste time and money collecting useless statistics and making dumb old forecasts that never turn our right anyway, and what’s more only used to remind you how the weather always used to be crappy this time of year!

And let’s not hear any of that trash talk about global warming because there is no such thing as global warming. Just try to find a statistic that supports it!

Where was I? Oh yeah, depressing Edmonton forecasts… Well, you can forget about them! You can leave your gumboots and cheap padded cotton jackets at home because it’s going to be a beautiful, glorious, warm spring day today – like we said, 78 degrees under the Great Big F, and no more of that Frenchiefied metric stuff either, seasonally adjusted.

The seasonally adjusted skies will be sunny and your seasonally adjusted mood will be upbeat and your seasonally adjusted inclination will be to vote for the Harper Team, every member of which is a normal person with a blue tie and nice cufflinks who would never, never do stripteases, on camera or off, and none of whom would even think of having anything wrong with their livers! People you can trust!

Sunny skies are great, people, because not only will you never need a coat again – which is a good thing, because your salary is going to have to go down like the temperatures used to go drop this time of year just to stay in line with what we’re paying the temporary foreign workers – but they’re needed so Laurie Hawn can fly his beautiful new radar-evading Royal Conservative Air Force (RCAF) F-35 back to Ottawa, where the sun is also shining and the seasonally adjusted temperature is also 78.

Instead of wasting money on boring old statistics – I mean, c’mon, people, who reads statistics? – we’ve put some of that money to work to build you a new Enviro… I mean, Harper Government of Canada weather website to serve you better!

And your weather website is blue, blue, blue – just like the beautiful skies over Edmonton tomorrow and every tomorrow ever after and just like our Maximum Prime Minister’s signs in the next election, speaking of which, don’t be surprised when the new automatic voting machines we’ll be putting in your polling place the year after next automatically correct your vote if you accidentally vote for a striptease artiste or a really, really angry old guy with a scraggly beard!

There are also lots of links to websites with good info on the many great ways Prime Minister Harper, the North Saskatchewan of Thought, is saving you money by painting the town blue. No more stupid long-form censuses, that’s for sure, just for starters.

Tomorrow’s forecast? More of the same! Sunshine, glorious Tory blue skies, just like the beautiful banner on our new weather website, and no need to bother with a coat ever again! And 78 degrees! Heck, if we’re lucky it might get up to 78! Or even 78!

If that’s not what the page shows right now, don’t trouble your pretty little heads about it. Our technicians will be working on just as soon as they can get to it.

Turning to this morning’s traffic, it’s smooth sailing through the streets of Edmonton again today. And I’ve got to say, people, our roads here are as smooth as a billiard table – if any of you can remember what a billiard table was – and there’s not a pothole in sight.

If the axel on your car broke, you’re obviously not maintaining it properly and you don’t deserve it anyway.

If you want information on your low taxes, which just keep getting lower and lower, especially if you drill a lot for oil, well, turn to the Revenue Canada web page, which is also blue – but never in a bad way!

And people, you can’t trust anything you read on a website that is not coloured blue. This is important to remember. If you accidentally open a website that is not blue, turn your computer off immediately and dial 1-800-TORYBLU. Our technicians will help you reset it.

Well, that’s enough of that. If there’s anything you can say about the Harper Government of Canada ™ it’s that there’s absolutely nothing subtle about them! This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Tory rebel gets it right about privilege in our increasingly undemocratic Parliament

Members of the federal Conservative caucus discuss Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s position on member statements in the house. Langley MP Mark Warawa’s political career is deader than the mackerels the other seals will be fed. Actual Conservative caucus members may not be exactly as illustrated. Below: Mr. Warawa and Alberta MP Leon Benoit.

The Harper Government has already been found to be in contempt of Parliament, so why would it surprise us it’s also in contempt of parliamentarians – even those, or perhaps especially those, from its own party?

I speak, of course, of the brouhaha sparked by Mark Warawa, the Conservative Member of Parliament for Langley, B.C., who has asked House of Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer to rule that his Parliamentary privilege has been breached by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s suppression of his ability to speak to his private member’s motion condemning sex-selection abortions.

Typical readers of this blog, like its author, will not agree with Mr. Warawa’s position on reproductive rights. As he is from the social conservative wing of the Conservative Party, it is safe to assume he’s using the sex-selection issue as an opportunity to wedge open the whole politically deadly can of worms that reproductive rights have become.

Moreover, it is quite understandable why Prime Minister Harper is anxious to suppress discussion of this explosive issue, at least at present as we inch inexorably toward another election season.

But regardless of your position on this important issue, you have to admire Mr. Warawa’s determination to act regardless of the certain knowledge Mr. Harper and his henchmen will crush him like a bug.

Leon Benoit, the Conservative MP for Vegreville-Wainwright here in Alberta who had earlier joined Mr. Warawa in his caucus mini-rebellion, obviously got the message and will not require further instruction in the realities of Harperite message control discipline.

At any rate, according to the Globe and Mail, Mr. Benoit was exhibiting properly docile behaviour for a Conservative MP from Alberta when he exited the caucus meeting yesterday. So he will not be crushed like an insect, although he will never again be able to sniff the wild roses along an eastern Alberta lane without first glancing over his shoulder.

The fact is, however, even though he is wrong about reproductive rights, Mr. Warawa is right on the question of Parliamentary privilege – and he is right about it regardless of what Mr. Scheer, the Harperite Speaker, decides to rule later today.

That is the fundamental (but apparently not the fundamentalist) idea of our Westminster style of responsible government: we elect individual MPs, each of whom is an independent actor who together with other MPs chooses a ministry that forms the government.

That’s the theory, but as Conservatives have whined for generations when things weren’t going their way, reality is a little different – or, under the parliamentary autocracy of Prime Minister Harper, radically different.

The delicious irony, of course, is that the Conservatives are the party that for years in various guises lectured Canadians on how they would never subject MPs to party discipline the way those bad old Liberals used to do.

No, they promised us repeatedly, the Progressive Conservatives, or the Reform Party, or the Canadian Alliance, or the Conservative Reform Alliance, or the Conservative Party, or whatever they happened to be calling their coalition of market fundamentalists like Mr. Harper and social conservatives like Mr. Warawa would let its MPs do their jobs.

Back in 1997, for example, the Reform Party of Preston Manning, once the prime minister’s mentor, promised us that high on its list of reforms would be more free votes in Parliament.

This, the party’s platform that year promised, would have the effect of “reducing the power of party discipline over individual MPs and senators while strengthening the powers available to citizens.”

We heard this commitment repeated ever after with metronomic regularity until Mr. Harper won government, and that was the end of that.

As we know now, the Harper era has been seemingly endless a litany of suppressed facts, suppressed free speech, suppressed parliamentary democracy and now suppressed parliamentary debate.

In other words, the Conservatives told the truth when they promised they’d not impose party discipline as Liberal governments had. They are radically worse in ways that would have been unimaginable a decade ago, let alone a generation.

Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau once famously said MPs were nobodies 50 yards from Parliament Hill.

Under Stephen Harper, there’s no need for them to wander that far from our country’s pathetic rubber-stamp Parliament.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

With Liberals in rear-view mirror, conservative deep thinkers ponder greener look

Your blogger offers Preston Manning a couple of big ideas for conservatives to think about. Below: Liberal Justin Trudeau, pollster Andre Turcotte.

OTTAWA

While the Forum Research polling company was proclaiming that if an election were held today, Justin Trudeau would be prime minister, conservatives of an assortment of exotic and garden varieties huddled under their “big tent” in the Ottawa convention centre to worry about … the Liberals.

Never mind Mr. Trudeau’s numbers right now, it’s the Liberals’ consistent popularity all the time that apparently troubled some of the conservatives at Preston Manning’s mutual admiration society for would-be young Republicans and aged adherents of various loony right economic cults. (A few actual Tory operatives were at the two-day meeting too, identifiable by their lean and hungry looks.)

After listening Friday to sometime American presidential candidate Ron Paul scare them about what happens when you don’t back your currency with something tangible like gold, or at least Kool cigarettes, the thousand or so conservatives, “libertarians” and Maple Tea Partiers at the “Big Ideas” event organized by the Manning Centre for Building Democracy (sic) broke into smaller sessions to consider some of those deep thoughts.

Of Dr. Paul, who is the far right’s answer to Ralph Nader – only unlike Mr. Nader, possibly actually crazy – much more must be said later.

Likewise, we will need to make some observations about former Australian prime minister John Howard, who this afternoon hailed the democratic value of coalition governments made up of political parties with similar values and platforms, and assailed politicians with no real life experience – you know, like Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

In the meantime, though, we really need to talk about this Trudeau thing.

According to this morning’s news columns, the Forum Research poll of 1,755 Canadians surveyed by telephone “showed the Liberals with Justin Trudeau as leader would be able to replace the Conservatives in power, albeit with a minority government, if an election were held today.”

The robo-call Forum poll gave the Liberals under Mr. Trudeau (theoretically speaking, since he’s not scheduled to undergo the Liberal Party’s official coronation ceremony until April) 39 per cent of the vote across the country, with Mr. Harper’s governing Conservatives trailing badly at 32 per cent and the NDP at 20 per cent easing back toward its traditional territory.

If Mr. Trudeau’s name is omitted from the survey, Forum said, Conservatives and Liberals for all practical purposes tied at 31 and 30 per cent, well within the margin of error of 2 per cent the pollster claims, and the New Democrats at posted support of 27 per cent. This is similar to another recent poll.

But let’s not fuss today about the likelihood of any of this actually happening. After all, the real political professionals in the very serious machine run by Mr. Harper’s Conservative Party of Canada – the “conservatives” who actually matter in this country – haven’t rolled their advertising slime machine over Mr. Trudeau yet, so we still have to see how he will stand up to that unsavoury onslaught.

And there’s also a possibility at an event like one put on by the Manning Centre that the organizers are just firing up the troops and dupes, who aren’t necessarily Conservatives who are in the know – like the yarn that circulated this morning about how labour unions and “the Left” do more and better data mining than conservative political parties. If only it were true!

But let’s go back to those Manning Centre break-out rooms and consider what the top minds of Canada’s conservative “movement” are worrying about – which, in the case of the session yesterday on polling results and how to use them is almost certainly the same thing as they’re worrying about in the Prime Minister’s Office.

“How conservative are Canadians?” asked pollster Andre Turcotte and “electoral data expert” Mitch Wexler, who crunched polling data from a recent survey of Canadians’ attitudes by the Calgary-based Manning Centre for their conference audience.

Not very, it would seem, at least when it comes to Mr. Harper’s Conservative Party of Canada.

Worse, from the CPC perspective in light of the Forum findings, it would appear the Manning poll shows a hell of a lot of them have been stubbornly Liberal through that party’s recent time in the wilderness.

When it comes to party identification, said Dr. Turcotte, who teaches in the communications department at Ottawa’s Carleton University, “people continue to be quite loyal to the Liberal Party.”

He said Canadians who identify themselves as Liberals outpoll those who think of themselves as Conservatives by 26 per cent to 25 per cent, with self-identifying New Democrats trailing at about 17 per cent – which, surely, is close to traditional levels despite the bad times the Liberals have suffered through since the last federal election.

What’s more, he advised his conservative listeners, not only has that base of people who see themselves as Liberals remained, but last year it showed signs of growing, a pattern he characterized as “creep-up.”

Meanwhile, Dr. Turcotte said, outside the Prairies, there’s no sign support for Mr. Harper’s Conservatives creeping up anywhere in Canada.

More bad news for Conservatives, Dr. Turcotte told his listeners, is that while respondents to the poll give the prime minister’s party passing marks for economic performance, they don’t think it’s doing nearly as well on health care, which is also creeping up the charts again as a front-of-mind issue for voters, or on the environment.

With good reason, one might say from the perspective of this blog. But count on it, Conservatives are going to try to change their public image on the latter issue – with no less an authority than Mr. Manning himself lecturing his acolytes today on the need to appear to voters as “Green Conservatives.”

So watch out, people – this is your Astroturf alert! – for Ethical Oil on steroids … and sold this time with a little more finesse!

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Ethical Oil charity complaint sparks Alberta corporate complaint

Commentator Ezra Levant lets go a broadside at Tides Canada on his Sun News Network program. Below: Researcher Tony Clark; Jamie Ellerton, executive director of Mr. Levant’s Ethical Oil Institute; National Revenue Minister Gail Shea.

As is well known, the “Ethical Oil Institute,” the Edmonton-based organization founded by Sun News Network commentator Ezra Levant to support petroleum extraction companies in Alberta, has complained to the Canada Revenue Agency demanding the charitable status of Tides Canada “be reviewed for violating Canada’s charities law.”

Last week, Ethical Oil accused the Vancouver-based environmental and social issues charity of “‘laundering’ money from contributors to groups engaged in ‘non-charitable’ political activities,” as the complaint was summarized by the Edmonton Journal.

Ethical Oil also set up an automated online form to enable those who share Mr. Levant’s and his organization’s views to send emails to National Revenue Minister Gail Shea “to report any radical or environmental lobby group you’ve seen masquerading as a charity so that their taxpayers (sic) subsidy comes to an end!”

Now an Edmonton researcher has filed a complaint with Service Alberta Minister Manmeet Bhullar arguing that by taking this action Ethical Oil is violating its Memorandum of Association with the with the Alberta government.

“Corporate entities such as Ethical Oil are bound by the Companies Act to follow the objects set in their Memorandum of Association,” researcher Tony Clark wrote Mr. Bhullar last week. “Ethical Oil has mounted a protracted campaign against what it views as violations of the Canada Revenue Agency’s rules by certain environmentally oriented charities. I believe this campaign is against the letter, if not the spirit, of the corporation’s Memorandum of Association which regulates its external activities.”

Citing statements made by Ethical Oil on its website, before a House of Commons committee, in the mainstream media, in a 143-page letter of complaint to the CRA and on a Sun News Network television program hosted by Mr. Levant, Mr. Clark argues there is nothing in Ethical Oil’s Memorandum of Association “that allows this corporation to be a referee on charities’ activities.”

On his Sun News Network program, Mr. Levant – who is president, treasurer and a director of Ethical Oil and holds 50 per cent of the corporate entity’s shares – interviewed Ethical Oil Executive Director Jamie Ellerton about the campaign against Tides Canada’s charitable status. On this episode of The Source with Ezra Levant, Mr. Levant set aside his trademark aggressive interview style and was positively warm.

Regardless, Mr. Clark’s complaint goes on, “The objects of the corporation include, among other things, ‘issues and considerations of environmental responsibility, peace, treatment of workers, democratic rights, and human rights.’ There is no mention whatsoever in Ethical Oil’s foundational documents of this corporation being used as an overseer of the Canada Revenue Agency’s rules on charities.

“I do note, however, that Ethic Oil’s Memorandum of Association, article 5, specifically states (emphasis added), ‘[t]he income and property of the Company, however derived and received, shall be applied solely towards the promotion of the objects of the Company…’,” Mr. Clark writes.

“The key word in the sentence above, Hon. Minister, is ‘solely.’ Given the scale and scope of Ethical Oil’s campaign against a few environmentalist charities, I think it is undeniable that Ethical Oil is using its resources in contravention of its objects as set out in its Memorandum of Association,” he argues.

“I urge you to use your powers as the minister responsible for the Companies Act to investigate Ethical Oil’s activities and penalize the corporation to the fullest extent of the law if you find it has violated the Act,” Mr. Clark concludes.

Meanwhile, it is hard to predict the outcome of Ethical Oil’s complaints against Tides Canada and other environmental charities.

On one hand, Prime Minister Stephen Harper would clearly like to suppress the activities of charitable organizations that do not march in lockstep with his Conservative Party’s environmental policies. On the other, many other charitable organizations with which Mr. Harper is both broadly in agreement and whose work he values are clearly in violation of the CRA’s regulations about political activities.

So on the theory the rule of law still prevails in Canada, it is hard to see how what is good for the charitable goose mustn’t also be good for the charitable gander, an outcome with which the prime minister may be uncomfortable.

One of the most glaring examples, as is well known, is the Vancouver-based market-fundamentalist propaganda organization known as the Fraser Institute, which continues to be permitted to operate as a charity despite blatantly and consistently ignoring the CRA’s limits on political activities.

In January 2012, Mr. Clark wrote Ms. Shea arguing that the Fraser Institute engages in excessive political activities and requesting that the CRA investigate its activities and revoke its charitable status.

Ms. Shea responded with a letter that ran to two pages, but contained remarkably little information. She did note that “the confidentiality provisions of the Income Tax Act prevent me from discussing the tax affairs of any particular organization without written consent from an authorized representative of that organization.”

Ms. Shea did observe in her letter to Mr. Clark that “a charity’s political activities must be reported on its annual form T3010-1, Registered Charity Information Return.”

As Mr. Clark noted in an Alberta Federation of Labour submission to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance and Tax Incentives for Charitable Organizations on Jan. 17, 2012, each year between 2000 and 2010 the Fraser Institute responded “no” to the CRA’s question “Did the charity carry on any political activities during the fiscal period?”

As the AFL submission observed: “Any rookie observer of Canadian politics knows this is nonsense: the Fraser Institute is actively involved in the Canadian political landscape. Any reporting or suggestion otherwise is a sham.”

Ms. Shea also told Mr. Clark that “a charity whose object includes the advancement of education must take care not to disregard the boundary between education and propaganda. To be considered charitable, an educational activity must be reasonably objective and based on a well-reasoned position, that is, a position based on factual information analyzed methodically, objectively, fully, and fairly. In addition, a well-reasoned position should present serious arguments and relevant facts to the contrary.”

The flawed approach to “research” taken by the Fraser Institute is well known and aptly deconstructed by Saskatoon health policy consultant Stephen Lewis, who wrote in 2011 that the organization’s research in his field was “fatally flawed,” based on a methodology that is “essentially absurd,” uses respondents’ hunches and opinions rather than real data, relies on unrepresentative samples of self-interested respondents and produces only “sortafacts” that support its market-fundamentalist ideological position.

Or, as Nova Scotia Finance Minister Graham Steele put it more bluntly: “The Fraser Institute produces junk. It is not a serious institution. It is a political organization.”

Since Canada remains a country of laws, surely we can assume that Mr. Levant’s Ethical Oil Institute will receive a similar response from Ms. Shea.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Problems with their papers? No word yet on Conservative candidates for Calgary Centre

Members of the Calgary Centre Conservative Constituency Association puzzle over nomination papers presented by would-be candidates. Alberta political insiders may not be exactly as illustrated. Below: CPC Candidates Joan Crockatt, Joe Soares, Jon Lord and Richard Billington.

Wherever are the Conservative Party of Canada’s Calgary Centre candidates?

Or, more to the point, whoever are they?

Nominations closed Thursday afternoon. According to a report published that day by the Calgary Herald, party officials indicated they expected their internal vetting process could take until this week to figure out who could officially join the race to replace former MP Lee Richardson, who quit in May to become principal Secretary to Alberta Premier Alison Redford.

Still, that long time frame was mainly fudge factor in case of complications, and party insiders had expected to know by now, after which the word would have leaked instantly to various sources in the blogosphere.

All we’re hearing, though, candidates and bloggers alike, is echoing silence.

The delay suggests some of the nomination papers filed are proving problematic.

Conventional wisdom at this point seems to be that there will be six candidates, listed here in alphabetical order:

Of those, it is said here, Mr. Billington, a lawyer and past riding insider, Ms. Crockatt, a former journalist and well-known conservative on-air personality, and Mr. Lord, a businessman and former municipal and provincial politician, all residents of Calgary, are serious contenders. All three continued selling party memberships on riding doorsteps while it mattered. (It doesn’t so much any more, because anyone who joined after last Friday won’t be able to vote.)

The others don’t sound all that serious to me, although Mr. Soares, who is said to live somewhere in Gatineau, Que., has entertainingly tried to define himself as the most Albertan candidate of all, at least in spirit, as well as the Conservative who hates Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair with the passion of a true right-wing Quebecker.

Mr. Soares (or someone) has obviously identified Ms. Crockatt as a frontrunner, devoting a page of his colourful website to attacking her for a mild criticism of Prime Minister Stephen Harper made seven years ago in a story about MP Belinda Stronach, who had not long before defected from the Conservatives to the Liberal government of prime minister Paul Martin. Oh well, just goes to show that in the digital age, information can be created, but it can never be destroyed…

Mr. Soares is repeatedly identified in the media as a former Quebec advisor to the Prime Minister’s Office, which must be true since nobody’s denied it. No one from his campaign, however, has responded to my queries about his role, whether he was paid for it, how long he advised the PM, what the nature of his advice was, and why he stopped providing it.

Mr. Spargo is best known for flying an Alberta flag over his Calgary house, and Mr. McLean, who is some species of investment advisor in Cowtown, was back in the day president of the federal Conservative youth wing.

Meanwhile, while everyone who is not a Conservative agrees it would be best if New Democrats, Liberals and Greens all supported a single candidate, that pretty clearly remains a political impossibility.

The Liberals are still holding with two approved candidates – conservationist Harvey Locke and teacher Rahim Sajan. Two others were considering running but decided not to, Liberal riding president Arthur McComish informed me last week. It was incorrectly reported here that they had not been given the green light by the party – whoops … sorry! The Liberal nomination vote is scheduled for Sept. 15.

The Greens too have a candidate, with Calgary author Chris Turner and communications consultant William Hamilton named as possibilities.

The only hope for any of the opposition parties would be to find a high-profile candidate that could appeal to supporters of the other two. It was speculated here that for the New Democrats that candidate might turn out to be former Alberta Liberal leader David Swann.

Alas, Dr. Swann, still sitting as an Alberta Liberal MLA for Calgary-Mountain View in the Alberta Legislature, appears to have scotched that suggestion, despite having turned up at a Calgary nursing picket line with a case of Orange Crush for the strikers.

This likely means that whoever wins the Conservative nomination some time during the last week of August is a shoo-in for the seat in the House of Commons, no matter how terrible a candidate that winner proves to be. Ah well, this is Alberta, after all.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Time to wax philosophical about Ralph Klein and the Order of Canada

Former Alberta premier Ralph Klein, back in the day. Below: Former Quebec premier Jacques Parizeau, also back in the day.

Now that the campaign to give the Order of Canada to Ralph Klein has all but met its goal, one wonders when the effort to hang the same gong on Jacques Parizeau will begin? Seriously! The former premier of Quebec meets the essential qualification.

For months now, a relentless campaign has been under way by a group of journalists, sometime Klein caucus mates and political allies, and other loyalists of the former Alberta premier to ensure that Mr. Klein is awarded the country’s highest civilian honour.

Mr. Klein – who is now 70 and was premier from 1992 to 2006 – is seriously ailing and that has added to the pressure not to deny him this award during his lifetime. So Mr. Klein’s supporters have now broken the rules (not that the rules matter very much for the well-connected in the Canada of Prime Minister Stephen Harper) and proclaimed that they have been privately informed the deal is done. It will be announced on or close to Canada Day, they say.

Mr. Klein deserves it, his supporters principally argue, because … because he used to be a premier.

At any rate, that Mr. Klein collected sufficient votes to become premier of Alberta is the foundation of the argument offered at various times by such journalists as Don Martin, Don Braid and the anonymous editorialist of the Edmonton Journal whose opinions have now evaporated from the Internet.

They also note that Mr. Klein, who was an undeniably popular political figure in this province, also balanced the budget, and sometimes they will remember too that he gave all us Alberta citizens enough cash to purchase a Sony Walkman or an iPod!

Understandably, Mr. Klein’s supporters often gloss over some of the more divisive qualities of his time in politics, such as his famous remarks about eastern bums and creeps, made when he was mayor of Calgary in 1988, and his intoxicated late-night visit to a men’s homeless shelter in 2001. Just as understandably, they defend Mr. Klein’s more controversial policies – for example, leaving the provincial health care system in a calamitous shambles that persists to this day – as necessary and laudable.

Now, there was a day when merely having held office as a premier was clearly not sufficient to get someone an Order of Canada. But it would seem by the arguments we have heard over the past year or two and, more importantly that seem to have been heard in Ottawa, that those days are behind us.

Well, so be it! And perhaps Mr. Klein’s supporters have a point when they say arguments he was a knocker-down of institutions rather than a builder-up of them are just sour grapes by people who disagreed with his policies while in office.

Which is why it seems not so outlandish that someone will soon argue that Mr. Parizeau, who managed after all to get elected premier of a majority government in a Canadian province just like Mr. Klein, should be awarded the Order of Canada too!

Thankfully for those here in English Canada likely to fly into a swivet at the thought of such a thing, one has the sense Mr. Parizeau would not be much interested in that particular honour. He has, after all, been declared a Grand Officer of the National Order of Quebec. (And before you start to sputter and kick, dear readers, remember that our sullen neo-Con prime minister’s newest Quebec advisor, none other that former Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney, holds the same rank in the same order.)

What’s more – unlike Mr. Parizeau, I guess – when Mr. Klein received a manifesto urging sovereignty-association for Alberta from a gang of dangerous Western separatists, he had the good sense to file it where it belonged, in the trash bucket.

But all this history brings us to a serious point. Perhaps it’s time to recognize what has been obvious all along about this Order of Canada to anyone who has been paying attention – to wit, that it is now and ever shall be essentially political.

To the winners go the spoils and, in an era where conservatives dominate the government, a disproportionate number of conservatives are going to be awarded Orders of Canada. If Mr. Klein gets one too, well, there are certainly worse people who nowadays remain qualified to wear the pin of the Order in their lapel!

So let’s not lose any sleep about this particular award, although we should make darned certain that at least one more former Conservative Alberta premier gets one too. To wit: surely the hapless Ed Stelmach deserves the honour! To him, after all, fell the political risk and the political cost of trying – not always with much success – to straighten out the catastrophic mess Mr. Klein left in Alberta’s health care system, its crumbling infrastructure and its give-away petroleum royalty regime.

While we’re at it, perhaps we should change the rules so that no one who has been awarded an Order of Canada can be stripped of the award – no matter what his or her subsequent sins may be.

Remember Stephen Fonyo, who made a valuable contribution to Canadian life by raising money to fight cancer, which had taken his leg, yet who was stripped of his membership in the Order for flaws not so different from those that bedevilled Mr. Klein.

Mr. Fonyo’s greatest failure, it can be seen now, was not having been the premier of a Canadian province.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.

Harper Conservative response to NDP seems delusional – and apparently ineffective

The Conservative Party’s Parliamentary brain trust figures out how to respond to Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair during Question Period. Below: Nik Nanos.

No one should be particularly shocked that yelps of protest by western premiers and Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives in Ottawa have failed to dent support for the Opposition New Democrats after they dared speak the evident truth about the economic impact of Canada’s muscular petro-Loonie.

Indeed, according a reasonable analysis of the Nanos Research poll published yesterday by the Globe and Mail, screeches by various conservatives may have even helped Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair and the NDP Opposition.

In an interview with iPolitics, pollster Nik Nanos suggested Mr. Mulcair’s original reference to the effects of “Dutch Disease” on the Canadian economy was no gaffe – as repeatedly claimed by mainstream media commentators playing the role of the PM’s Greek chorus – but “should be seen as part of a longer-term plan that has broken the NDP’s strategic mold.”

Mr. Nanos argued in the interview that while the NDP once tried consistently to appeal to a broad range of Canadians, now Mr. Mulcair “seems ready to ‘take a page from Harper’ and focus on segments that he has a chance to bring on side.” In other words, practice wedge politics.

Well, it could be. New Democrats certainly chose Mr. Mulcair as someone who would play politics like a grownup. But it may also be simply that the Harper Conservative strategy on this issue to date has been so laughably crude most Canadians see right through it.

Given the astonishing lack of sophistication of the recent Conservative attacks in the House of Commons, Canadians may, in fact, find Mr. Mulcair’s plain talk refreshing!

Meanwhile, voters outside the two main petro-provinces may actually see the hysterical response by these Prairie conservatives as evidence of their self-interest, and indeed as affirmation of Mr. Mulcair’s arguments.

Really, it takes a lot of brass for the Harper Cons to claim their main opponent is dividing the country by stating an observation that makes eminent sense to Canadians in every part of Canada except those corners of the Prairies awash in petro-cash. This is especially so when the Conservatives are running the most openly divisive government in Canadian history.

As has been said before in this space, the severity of the problem can be disputed, as can the best solution, but acknowledgement of the impact of oilsands development on the dollar, or the strength of the dollar on the country’s manufacturing sector, is apparent to anyone with a rudimentary understanding of economics or a hankering to travel to the United States.

Moreover, instead of just sticking to this factually wrong but faintly plausible storyline, the Harper Government’s claims have grown more delirious by the day.

Mr. Mulcair calls oil patch workers themselves a disease, some Tory claims without a shred of evidence. Mr. Mulcair has a specific date in mind to close down Alberta’s bitumen sands, another one chimes in, failing to provide a hint of substantiation.

Where do they get this stuff? Does anyone believe them? (Other than the plethora of conservative commentators in the mainstream media, that is.)

Never mind Dutch Disease, the Tories apparently make stuff up out of whole cloth on any topic.

When Mr. Mulcair asked a Question in the House Thursday about the prime minister’s unexpected ramblings about the shortness of the European runway if neo-Con economic bromides are not adopted with alacrity, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty responded by pretending the Opposition leader wants to give money to the Europeans.

Since there’s no evidence whatsoever Mr. Mulcair ever said any such thing, presumably the finance minister just made it up.

We ought not to be too smug about this. Eventually, the deep-pocketed Harperites will turn responsibility for sliming Mr. Mulcair and the NDP over to their highly competent propaganda professionals, and the results will be neither pretty nor ineffective.

The form the NDP response takes will tell the story of how successful the Tory onslaught proves to be.

But for the moment, watching the supposedly cunning and devious Harper Conservatives unravel into pathological delusions and pathetically transparent fantasies is a highly salutary experience.

This post also appears on Rabble.ca.