The attempts by conservatives in this country to canonize Brian Mulroney continue, with Paul Jackson's column trying to simultaneously take a dig a Bronconnier while putting Mulroney up on a pedestal.
Jackson's argument? Well, look at all the nasty things the Liberals did.
I'm sorry to say, but that's a pretty pathetic argument. You wish to talk about how the Liberals left the country in a sorry state financially when Mulroney came to power. Well, let's consider the fact that during Mulroney's tenure, Canada's debt - and deficit - increased steadily. His defenders will claim that he was 'setting the stage' for a future recovery - but in politics, what happens on your watch is what counts. Mulroney's attempts to tamper with the Constitution were disastrous - plagued by weak wording, and an utter lack of clarity on key topics.
On the matter of principles, or more correctly ethics, all I can say there is that Mulroney's own actions in attempting to "cover over" the Airbus Affair (which have gone as far as suing anybody who dares to reveal evidence in the matter makes one wonder just what he - and other players - are trying to hide. (Still - some 20 years later...)
His recent partisan sniping at a now deceased Prime Minister is disgraceful and cheap, suggesting that a man who has long ago retired from public life has never really left behind the partisan bitterness that often pervades parliamentary life.
Would I claim that he has "principles"? Yes, perhaps he does - whether those are admirable principles is something altogether different.