News   Mar 28, 2024
 55     0 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.3K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.1K     2 

National Post (!): Harper's Hulk Persona Emerges

299 bloor call control.

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
70
The National Post has been uncharacteristically critical of Harper and the Conservatives lately... what gives??

Harper's Hulk persona emerges
PM vents at questions on isotope shortage

John Ivison, National Post
Published: Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Chris Wattie/Reuters
OTTAWA -Successful Prime Ministers tend to calm things down, rather than stir them up. By and large, Stephen Harper has managed his anger and not risen to the taunts of opposition parties.

But sometimes his rage builds to the stage he can't contain it and he delivers a response that should only be shown on television after the watershed, lest it frighten the kids. The time when he linked the Liberal vote against anti-terror provisions to an RCMP interview with the father-in-law of Sikh MP Navdeep Bains over the Air India bombing springs immediately to mind.

During Question Period yesterday, we had a fresh instance of the Prime Minister pulling his Incredible Hulk impersonation.

Mr. Harper vented at questions from Liberal MPs over the global shortage of medical isotopes because of problems with the Chalk River nuclear reactor.

The reactor has been closed by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, which says several new safety standards need to be met before it can be re-opened. The earliest the CNSC's demands can be met is December 20. Meantime, 30,000 patients in Canada, 400,000 in the U.S. and untold thousands more around the world are having decisions on their treatment deferred because of the shortage (isotopes can spot cancers that other types of tests cannot find and Chalk River produces half the world's supply).

Both the government and the reactor's operator, Atomic Energy Canada Ltd., say sufficient repairs have been made that allow for its safe operation. Late yesterday, the government said it would introduce emergency legislation to compel the restart of the reactor for 120 days to allow the production of more isotope, which was expected to pass with the help of the NDP.

Significantly, it was Michael Ignatieff, standing in for Liberal leader Stephane Dion, who got under Mr. Harper's skin. Mr. Ignatieff used centre stage to great effect, giving the Liberal caucus a tantalizing glimpse of what might have been. When Mr. Harper assured MPs that the reactor was safe to be restarted, Mr. Ignatieff hit back, with a wit that Mr. Dion would give his wisdom teeth for: "Since when is the Prime Minister of Canada an expert on nuclear safety?"

The deputy Liberal leader was clearly enjoying his place in the sun and that might explain why the Prime Minister was as angry as anyone can remember seeing him in the House. Senior Conservatives say the two men had met and agreed to a deal, whereby the Liberals took "a pound of flesh" from the government in the House over the mismanagement of the affair (it took the Conservatives three weeks to react) but agreed to pass the emergency legislation. But the deal fell apart. Before last night's vote, the Liberals said they first wanted to hear from the regulator, AECL and the ministers of Health (Tony Clement) and Natural Resources (Gary Lunn) before deciding how to vote.

Mr. Harper seems to believe the Liberals' intransigence is somehow linked to the position of Linda Keen, chairwoman of CNSC, who was a former associate deputy minister of Natural Resources when Liberal House leader Ralph Goodale was minister.

"They're protecting an appointee with a long connection to Goodale -- a connection so solid that they pushed through her reappointment just hours before the May 2005 confidence vote they nearly lost. And in the process, they're risking the health of tens of thousands of Canadians. Last week, they wanted us to act. This week, all they want is to protect one of their own," said a senior Conservative source.

In Question Period, the Prime Minister did himself few favours by referring to the "Liberal appointed Nuclear Safety Commission" which is "jeopardizing the health and safety and lives of tens of thousands of Canadians".

This seems a stretch. Mr. Ignatieff may relish being given the train set to play with for the week while his boss is in Bali but even the most cynical find it hard to believe he is willing to prolong the agony of uncertainty suffered by cancer patients for political gain. "We want action as fast as we can and it is absurd to politicize this, as the Prime Minister has done," the Liberal deputy leader said.

Mr. Harper may not believe this to be the case, which would explain the white heat of his anger. But there is substance to Mr. Ignatieff 's position that the government's legislation would suspend the regulatory regime that has kept the country safe for 50 years. "It's a serious business," he said. "Under the current legislation, we're giving the regulator no role whatsoever. I'm not saying we will vote against it but we've got to do our jobs."

No one doubts Mr. Harper is driven by the desire to save lives. Who would be a Prime Minister in such a situation, damned if you restart a reactor that may not be 100% safe, and damned if you don't by condemning thousands to the living hell of an uncertain cancer diagnosis?

But if he has to shovel blame anywhere, it should be toward his own ministers. This crisis has been telegraphed for years, not least by Ms. Keen, who said nearly three years ago that the situation at Chalk River "does not give me a very warm and cosy feeling."

This is about the same level of comfort that those of us living in the Ottawa Valley are going to have when Chalk River fires up again. Let's hope Mr. Ignatieff is wrong and that Mr. Harper's expertise does indeed extend to nuclear physics.

jivison@nationalpost.com
 
More concern over Harper's "mood swings", this time from Macleans:

The Commons: A right honourable temper tantrum
Never mind the Prime Minister's middle, is it time to consider his wildly swinging moods?
Aaron Wherry | Dec 13, 2007 | 9:49 am EST
The Scene. It is perhaps time to seriously worry about the Prime Minister's health.

Not so far, mind you, as it pertains to his much-talked-about middle. If a little extra weight around the waist was enough to disqualify the willing from public office, we'd be left with Stockwell Day and Mario Silva running the country in svelteness.

No, more disconcerting is the Prime Minister's recent tendency towards violent and unpredictable mood swings. His apparent ability to summon such tremorous fury on a moment's notice, only to turn again, in the next blink, to a jubilant partisan, seemingly delighted by his opposition. Though long prone to the odd outburst, this week he's seemed particularly untethered.

On Monday, for instance, shortly after the end of that afternoon's Question Period, the Liberal deputy crossed the floor and engaged the Prime Minister in conversation. After a bit of small talk, the pair retired to the Liberal benches to continue with a seemingly amiable exchange of ideas.

Long after most had exited the House, the two remained, chatting quietly. At one point, Stephen Harper laughed. At another, Michael Ignatieff nodded. After awhile they stood and shook hands. Harper appeared to express his thanks.

We know now that the two were in the process of negotiating a solution to the current nuclear isotope crisis. One that seems to pit the health of some Canadians against the welfare of others - the need for vital medical tests opposite the risk inherent in reopening a seemingly substandard nuclear reactor. A tricky matter of governance, for sure. But surely one that seemed bound for solution given such a display of suprapartisanship.

Continued Below




Now, compare Monday's Prime Minister with the one who arrived in the House 23 hours later. Seemingly the same man, he quickly proved wildly more distempered under questioning from the Liberal side.

"The continuing actions of the Liberal-appointed Nuclear Safety Commission will jeopardize the health and safety and lives of tens of thousands of Canadians," he thundered, as loud and indignant as he's appeared this session. "The Liberals should stop protecting their appointee and get on with getting these medical isotopes produced."

Suddenly, Ignatieff—a man whose hand he'd shook the day before—was, in the view of the Prime Minister, the most despicable of politicians, callous enough to let Canadians suffer for partisan interests.

"Mr. Speaker," asked a taken aback Liberal deputy, "since when is the Prime Minister of Canada an expert on nuclear safety?"

This bit of wit only further enraged the choleric PM.

"Since when does the Liberal Party have a right, from the grave, through one of its previous appointees, to block the production of necessary medical products in the country?" he cried. "This is not in the public interest. The longer this goes on, the greater the public health damage. The Liberal Party is standing in the way of fixing this."

Not content to then hand off to one of his ministers, as is the usual pattern, Harper came back twice more to chew out Omar Alghabra, the squeaky and diminutive Liberal backbencher who wouldn't look entirely out of place at a meeting of any university's student council.

"It is on their shoulders, and they continue to block what is necessary for the public interest and the health of Canadians," he continued. "The Liberal Party can cast around all the blame it wants ... but it should stop blocking the best interests of the health of Canadians."

Maybe not since he accused the opposition leader of harbouring sympathies for the Taliban has this parliament's duly elected leader projected himself so violently.

Only, by nightfall, he'd more or less won what he wanted. After what the morning papers described as "frantic behind-the-scenes negotiations," the parties came to grudging agreement. Legislation was passed and that dodgy reactor ordered back into operation.

So it was that Harper arrived in the House on Wednesday looking positively contented. Talking softly and folding his hands in front of him, he managed only to mildly defame the opposition before handing off to the ministers of health and natural resources for further information. Pressed by Ignatieff, the Prime Minister expressed enthusiastic support for official investigation into the matter.

When the Liberal environment critic disparaged the government's approach to climate change negotiations in Bali, the Prime Minister rose gleefully. "Mr. Speaker," he joked, "I am afraid these kinds of nonsensical questions will only stop when the House ceases sitting." Later, he laughed as heartily as he seems capable at the accusations of another Liberal backbencher.

The rest of the session passed without incident. So calm were the proceedings, at least comparatively, that Harper took an early leave, making for the door with a few questions left to be asked.
And so ended another few days in the public life of Canada's 22nd Prime Minister. Humbled one moment, furious the next, then jovial and smug. No doubt his more ardent supporters will find method in such madness. The rest might be left to wonder why a man two years short of 50 would see fit to comport himself with the instability of a five-year-old. And perhaps his dietician might suggest less sugar.
 
He is known for his long-term pathological hatred of Liberals. His much-vaunted "sense of humour" consists pretty much entirely of jokes about evil Liberals.
 
The National Post has been uncharacteristically critical of Harper and the Conservatives lately... what gives??

Balanced reporting, not like some other media outlets ie. CBC, Toronto Star, that go out of they way to be critical of Harper, even when there is no story.

BTW, I wanted to let you know that CBC news chiefs have looked at the allegations made yesterday.

They feel that the reporter's actions in pursuing the story were inappropriate and against CBC/Radio-Canada's Journalistic Standards.

They are continuing to investigate the particulars and will follow the disciplinary processes outlined in the CBC's collective agreement.

I imagine that the CBC Ombudsman will be responding to complaints and investigating what happened as well.

They want to make sure this doesn't happen in future.

Well, big ups to the CBC for moving so fast. I should certainly hope they don’t want this to happen in the future. Which begs the question: if they’ve already made a determination, and are just sorting out the appropriate discipline, why are they still silent on the matter? When a person is convicted in a court of law, it’s not kept a secret until that person is sentenced. So while I’m grateful for the heads up, I’m not sure why the CBC hasn’t just plead mea culpa publicly and given us a name.

I’m also told that the PM’s annual Christmas party for the Press Gallery was well attended by dozens of big names and junior colleagues from Global, TVA and even Radio-Canada. But in contrast, in spite of invitations being sent to all their big names, CBC Radio and TV sent just one junior reporter and a makeup person.
 
All Harper, all the time – all hail!
Dec 19, 2007 04:30 AM
GERRY NICHOLLS

I recently received a letter from our Glorious Leader Stephen Harper.

Oops, did I say "Glorious Leader"? I meant to write "Prime Minister" Stephen Harper.

I am a little confused, I suppose, because in his letter Prime Minister Harper writes, "The Conservative Party is the people's party. And the Conservative government is the people's government."

Now, I don't know about you, but terms like "people's party" and "people's government" immediately conjure up images in my mind of red-scarved multitudes mindlessly and obediently cheering the "people's" leader.

Not that I am suggesting, of course, the Conservative Party – er, I mean the People's Party – is attempting to create a personality cult around the Prime Minister. After all, in order to have a personality cult, the leader actually has to have, well, you know, a personality.

However, it does seem clear the party is actively trying to generate some sort of mystical aura around the person of Stephen Harper.

How else do you explain the special 2008 calendar I recently received from the party as a gift for my "loyal support"?

Now, most gift calendars from politicians feature photos of Parliament Hill, the Peace Tower or maybe some prairie wheat fields.

This calendar features almost nothing but Stephen Harper.

For January it's a photo of Stephen Harper getting off a plane; February features Harper posing next to a guy in a snowman costume; March shows off Harper in a turtleneck; in June there's a shot of him looking studious in his office, and on it goes, month after month.

In other words, for virtually every day in 2008, owners of this calendar can gaze upon a smiling, benevolent, wise-looking Harper. (The only reprieve will come in May, which inexplicably features a photo of the Queen.)

Why is the Conservative brain trust pushing this Harper-centric strategy?

Well, likely it's because they realize there is very little difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals ideologically speaking. Both parties basically push the same wishy-washy middle-of-the-road centrist policies.

So the only argument the Conservatives can come up with to win our votes is: "Hey, our leader is better than the other leader, because he looks good in a calendar."

It makes you wonder how far the People's Party will take this plan.

If the calendar scheme works, we may soon be seeing a Stephen Harper lunch bucket, Stephen Harper coffee mugs and Stephen Harper paperweights.

And if you think that's scary, just imagine what would happen if Harper were ever to win a majority government.

No doubt, huge portraits of Harper (probably wearing a turtleneck) would pop up all over the capital – which, of course, would be renamed "Harperville."

Schoolchildren would sing special songs in his honour and the law would require every Canadian home to have at least one Harper calendar.

Unfortunately, it would be difficult for me to get into the spirit of this political cultism. You see, Stephen Harper and I actually worked together, back in the days when we were both in the employ of the National Citizens Coalition.

How can I have god-like reverence for a guy I used to drink beers with while debating such issues as which was the best episode of the old Star Trek TV series?

But, hey, if push comes to shove maybe I can adapt. I am good with slogans: All hail the People's Party! All hail Harper!

On second thought, maybe I will just buy the Harper lunch bucket.



Gerry Nicholls is a senior fellow with the Democracy Institute and former vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition. Gerry_nicholls@hotmail.com
 
Concerning the original article posted: it makes me sick that these guys in parliament managed to make mere politics out of the Chalk River situation.

If this reactor is so essential (as is obviously noted in the article), then start demanding some investment in the facility to keep it in top working order. Spare us all the petty bickering.
 
Well, it is a big AECL screwup. They were supposed to have two replacement reactors up and running by last year to replace the rather elderly NRX, but suffice it to say the new reactors aren't working right and they can't figure out the problem.
 

Back
Top