If the Throne Speech is an indication of Harper's idea of "recalibrating" his government, then I think we can safely assume that his government is out of script.
Heck, they've been out of script since early 2007 as near as I can tell, and Harper keeps forcing crisis situations so he can justify resetting parliament and then repeating the same script that he used before - it's like a really awful sitcom that keeps recycling bad material because the writers either died or ran out of material ... only there is little funny about this government.
What he just pushed out as a throne speech has been recycled so many times it's ridiculous. What passes for 'austerity measures' is at best a symbolic joke; and his recycling of the 'get tuff on crime, man' line is boring beyond belief. Those bills haven't passed because Harper keeps shutting down parliament.
... and somehow, I don't think that fiddling with the wording of the national anthem is going to persuade women that Harper is working in their greater interests ... not after what has been done to them on Harper's watch
This time, he's shut down parliament for an extra long vacation, and clearly he's done nothing constructive with that time from a policy and directions perspective.
Showing posts with label Throne Speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Throne Speech. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Thursday, October 18, 2007
An Intriguing Tactic
If you paid any attention at all to the machinations of PMSH in recent weeks, especially with regards to the throne speech it has all been structured around Harper's attempts to create a situation where he has a series of clubs with which to beat the Liberals in an election.
Most - if not all - of it has been focused on creating a situation where Harper can accuse the Liberals of being inconsistent, arguments along the lines of "Well, you voted for the throne speech, so why are you objecting to it now?". This is typical of a man whose thinking is so clearly absolutist. (Win/Lose, there is no such thing as "compromise" in Harper's mind)
Well, at least on the Throne Speech, it appears that Dion came up with an absolutely appropriate counter move:
Dion's response is a bit passive-aggressive in its nature - abstaining from a vote neither endorses nor condemns the throne speech, which does free Dion to go after Harper hard and fast on issues without the Con$ being able to resort to their usual tactics.
However, when you are dealing with a man whose tactics are those of a verbal thug, it's quite appropriate to turn the tables by taking the obvious clubs away from the thug.
This appears to be a good tactical maneuver on the part of the Liberals, now the question is whether they can parlay the small advantage they have just gained into something more substantial - by holding Harper accountable for his own lies, deceit and inconsistencies in policy.
Most - if not all - of it has been focused on creating a situation where Harper can accuse the Liberals of being inconsistent, arguments along the lines of "Well, you voted for the throne speech, so why are you objecting to it now?". This is typical of a man whose thinking is so clearly absolutist. (Win/Lose, there is no such thing as "compromise" in Harper's mind)
Well, at least on the Throne Speech, it appears that Dion came up with an absolutely appropriate counter move:
Instead, Dion said, he would introduce amendments to the speech. If those are rejected, the party would abstain, allowing the throne speech to pass.
Dion's response is a bit passive-aggressive in its nature - abstaining from a vote neither endorses nor condemns the throne speech, which does free Dion to go after Harper hard and fast on issues without the Con$ being able to resort to their usual tactics.
However, when you are dealing with a man whose tactics are those of a verbal thug, it's quite appropriate to turn the tables by taking the obvious clubs away from the thug.
This appears to be a good tactical maneuver on the part of the Liberals, now the question is whether they can parlay the small advantage they have just gained into something more substantial - by holding Harper accountable for his own lies, deceit and inconsistencies in policy.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
A Few Thoughts on the Speech From The Throne
Yesterday evening, Canadians were subjected to El Presidente Prime Minister Stephen Harper's second Speech From The Throne.
Sadly, I wasn't able to listen to it in its entirety myself, so I'll rely a bit on capsule synopsis to hit on the big points.
Harper's bringing another one of his "five priorities" speeches forward - in other words, he's got five scripts prepared and that's it. This time the priorities he's got scripted are:
1. Tax Cuts
2. Afghanistan
3. "Law and Order"
4. Greenhouse Gas Reductions
5. Arctic Sovereignty
The only way that this government can do both tax cuts and some of its ambitious spending programs is on the backs of programs that benefit Canadians who are otherwise marginalized and disadvantaged. (Programs like those clobbered last year in the billion dollar spending cuts that were rammed through by executive fiat)
Extending Afghanistan at this point strikes me as both premature and silly. That Harper wants to do that now is no surprise. Nothing is better for this politician than bad policy rushed forward without consideration. With Afghanistan's deteriorating conditions (especially in Kandahar region), I'd be very cautious about the odds of any productive effort happening to stabilize that region. (and if things in Northern Iraq heat up, it's almost guaranteed to get more unstable yet)
The "Law and Order" legislation is crap. Period. Every one of the Harper government's attempts to "get tough on crime" has violated some very fundamental tenets of our legal system. Those laws failed to complete their journey through parliament because of bad design. The "omnibus bill" he's slated to introduce will be a repackaging of the same crap he tried to impose last fall. I do notice that he's whining that the bills "did not pass", while it was his own decision to prorogue parliament that did them in.
Harper's track record in matters such as the environment is to produce more hot air and delay actual action by decades. Hardly what I'd call "effective government" at the moment, and his stance on Arctic sovereignty is rooted in cold-war era thinking. The approach he's advocating is monumentally expensive in both short and long term costs and will not produce the results that Canada needs. (Unlike Harper, I don't believe that sovereignty is necessarily bolstered by creating a military presence in the Arctic - nor do I believe that a muscle-bound approach is going to win in today's world)
... more later as I have time to think about this infernal speech further and we start to see how the opposition parties are going to respond.
Sadly, I wasn't able to listen to it in its entirety myself, so I'll rely a bit on capsule synopsis to hit on the big points.
Harper's bringing another one of his "five priorities" speeches forward - in other words, he's got five scripts prepared and that's it. This time the priorities he's got scripted are:
1. Tax Cuts
2. Afghanistan
3. "Law and Order"
4. Greenhouse Gas Reductions
5. Arctic Sovereignty
The only way that this government can do both tax cuts and some of its ambitious spending programs is on the backs of programs that benefit Canadians who are otherwise marginalized and disadvantaged. (Programs like those clobbered last year in the billion dollar spending cuts that were rammed through by executive fiat)
Extending Afghanistan at this point strikes me as both premature and silly. That Harper wants to do that now is no surprise. Nothing is better for this politician than bad policy rushed forward without consideration. With Afghanistan's deteriorating conditions (especially in Kandahar region), I'd be very cautious about the odds of any productive effort happening to stabilize that region. (and if things in Northern Iraq heat up, it's almost guaranteed to get more unstable yet)
The "Law and Order" legislation is crap. Period. Every one of the Harper government's attempts to "get tough on crime" has violated some very fundamental tenets of our legal system. Those laws failed to complete their journey through parliament because of bad design. The "omnibus bill" he's slated to introduce will be a repackaging of the same crap he tried to impose last fall. I do notice that he's whining that the bills "did not pass", while it was his own decision to prorogue parliament that did them in.
Harper's track record in matters such as the environment is to produce more hot air and delay actual action by decades. Hardly what I'd call "effective government" at the moment, and his stance on Arctic sovereignty is rooted in cold-war era thinking. The approach he's advocating is monumentally expensive in both short and long term costs and will not produce the results that Canada needs. (Unlike Harper, I don't believe that sovereignty is necessarily bolstered by creating a military presence in the Arctic - nor do I believe that a muscle-bound approach is going to win in today's world)
... more later as I have time to think about this infernal speech further and we start to see how the opposition parties are going to respond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)