MP Rathgeber

133 Replies to “MP Rathgeber”

1. I reject the argument that you should not criticize the CPC for what they are doing badly because of what they are doing well. Bad idea. When organizations (or people) start to drift it is irresponsible not to point out what you observe. Incrementalism I can grudgingly tolerate. What is happening now does not appear to be cautious incrementalism for the long term goal of implementing conservative governance. It looks like empire building, self interest and cover ups. If this is wrong then CPC MPs and/or Harper might want to explain what is going on. Why was the wage reporting limit raised to $400 000? What is going on with expense accounts? Who is making these decisions? Why are CPC MPs not allowed proper input into decision making – they can’t all be dolts, can they?
   I don’t take the constant outrage of the media seriously but the MPs seem to be angry too.

2. Not a good night for CPC to phone me and ask for a contribution.
   I actually feel sorry for the guy that got an earful from me, and I did explain that I realize he personally was not involved in PMO/caucus decisions. He actually tried the “other parties have scandals” line. I declared this is not a scandal, this is policy that ignores what Canadians want.
   Duffy? Schmuffy!
   When I said ‘That is not the Conservative party that I have supported in the past’, he responded with “Have a good night”…
   ET… I appreciate the list of accomplishments. However, I really have lost confidence in the CPC for their disconnect from their election promises, and from us, the beer and popcorn crowd.
   Also ET…I like your method of dealing with LAS.

3. Hastening the process artificially only raises political obstacles which could force a government bailout.
   Awesome it’s two excuses in one. It excuses inaction today AND the bailout tomorrow. And Father Steve does love his bailouts. You are a good party hack cgh almost as good as ET.
   ET: you don’t raise pertinent points. You only have talking points, not even good ones. They’re not relevant.
   OMMAG: Yes, so self-serving. Look at the history of MPs that went independent and went on a glorious power bender. But whatever you want to tell yourself. So much less stressful than dealing with the truth.
   LC: You are dealing with people who cannot and will not objecitively assess reality (hilariously, they love to project this onto me). They are hacks. They do not think, they rationalize.

4. My two cents: Harper’s PMO need a swift kick in the pants over the Duffy thingy and this MP’s Bill. They sucked big time and left themselves open to the verbal attacks from their Base.
   Granted, Harper might not like to start a guerrilla war with the public sector unions (did he or his pit bulls in the PMO even make that case to the committee?) and the upper management in the civil service, but isn’t the PM’s and supposedly the MP’s pay and perks and expenses all public knowledge?
   We are witnessing a walkout by members of the Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers over being paid less than other department employees. More “in your face Harper” from politically active public sector unions. Don’t deny it. Simple solution: cut the other department’s pay to match the strikers. Let them fight it out amongst themselves. It’s “cutbacks’ ya know. The squeaky wheel get’s the grease! So, grease ’em.

5. Old Lori – I have some problems with the data base about Duffy, Wright etc,
   I don’t watch the CBC or CTV; I don’t read the Star or Globe. I get my information from the Internet. In all cases, whether from the CBC etc or the Internet, whether from bias or inadequate reporting, I don’t have the full story. So, my opinions on these issues are as weak as the data.
   Duffy- I think that Duffy abused the system; he shouldn’t have claimed the money when he didn’t really live in PEI. I think he should, frankly, have resigned. I don’t know that there is any method of making a member of Senate resign. That’s a fault of the Senate.
   Harper should deal with it by insisting on rules for residency payment and etc. A major problem is that the Senate, legally, rules itself and isn’t subject to the House or even the PM’s Office. That’s a basic problem in the Senate. That’s why it should be reformed; I don’t think that, constitutionally, it can be abolished. Quebec, for example, wants to keep it.
   The fact that Wright paid the money is strictly between Wright and Duffy. I think that it’s Duffy who should have resigned, not Wright. Duffy was, in my view, wrong for allowing Wright to both pay his expenses AND resign.
   But, because it was a private matter between Wright and Duffy – and just because Wright has the job in the PMO doesn’t mean that he can’t do something privately – then, Harper couldn’t really say a thing. The distinction between a private and public issue can be difficult.
   As for Rathgeber, I haven’t examined his bill and can’t comment. But he can’t claim, as he seems to imply, that anger over the invalid Senate expense claims rests with him alone, or that the government is ignoring it.
   Yes, I agree with Gord Tulk about the role of the Senate; it could play an important role. But so far, the various provinces have prevented any reforms to the Senate.

6. At the core of this debate and no I’m not talking about the silly “PM Harper is the anti-Christ since he doesn’t do my bidding” discussion I see others engage in. The debate is about where do you draw the line at taking a principled stand and when do you agree to agree because the whole is greater than the individual. I tend to fall into the latter camp myself on most matters political but stand on principles when it comes to things pertaining to things I hold Holy. Obviously MP Rathgaber does not feel the same way. I once heard a Christian composer explain the difficulty he has when he tries to teach others to improve their music. His students often have a great idea but it needs a bit of tweaking to make it just that little bit better. However the student recoils at the idea of changing it because the student thinks his writing is divinely inspired and therefore perfect as originally written. MP Rathgaber seems to think his bill as originally written is perfect and any attempt at change is an affront to him and his principles. I would respectfully suggest that he grow up and recognize the rights of other caucus members when crafting legislation.

7. There is one thing that makes true conservatives (note the small c) stand apart from all the others: they don’t make excuses for rotten behaviour.

8. Et wrote: A government, as a political party in itself, has an ideology but as a government it has a duty to those outside of that ideology.
   Ah, like the old man Trudeau, or Chretien did? It was all ideology with them, as it always is with liberals and left wingers. Your statement is admirable, but not realistic. The people I just named played hardball. They didn’t concern themselves with what people who didn’t vote for them wanted, or cared about. They did whatever they wanted when they had a majority government. Now our side has the majority. I want a government that does the same thing. Not some nerf-ball playing government. I want a conservative government that plays hardball and to hell with what the other side wants. They had their kick at the can and look where are now. We’re still paying for liberal arrogance and laws they passed. This whole notion that somehow we have to stand above all that and play fair is laughable to me. I want to kick them to the curb like they did to us. The left see this as war against our side. We see it as something else. That’s why we always lose. I don’t dislike Harper personally, I just want him to play hardball and reverse the damage done by Trudeau and the others, not act like some panty-waist conservative and worry about what the left thinks about him. Or worry about stepping on their toes. Stomp on their damn toes, I say.
   Perhaps I’m going off track from the origin of this thread. Just let me finish by saying, to hell with what the other side wants. Your statement about fair play just doesn’t exist. Liberals don’t play fair. When will conservatives learn that? If that’s the way it is, so be it. Let’s do the same damn thing. The divide or rift between left and right will never mend. It will always be there. They hate us, and quite frankly I pretty much feel the same way about them. And that’s what’s got my goat about this government. I’ve never thought of myself as ever being the smartest person in a room, but I do know what the left is. And they think of governing as war against the right. As always, just my humble opinion. Sorry for the long post.

9. ET – can you really say that a member of the PMO (Wright) giving a senator (Duffy) 90K cash out of his pocket is a private matter between two citizens? Really??
   Terry – it’s not about doing what we want vs the other side. It’s not even about the morally right thing to do, though I think that’s important. What Harper and the PMO have been doing is actually stupid politics. They are losing their supporters. They are losing the undecideds, because what moral ground they had over the Liberals is being rapidly eroded, if not totally gone by now.
   With these petty scandals Harper and the PMO are giving the enemy the ammunition with which to damage the CPC, while betraying their own alleged rinciples at the same time. It’s all lose, no gain. I just don’t understand it!

10. MP Rathgaber seems to think his bill as originally written is perfect and any attempt at change is an affront to him and his principles.
    Excuse me? The changes made render the bill totally pointless I advise you read up.
    But, because it was a private matter between Wright and Duffy – and just because Wright has the job in the PMO doesn’t mean that he can’t do something privately – then, Harper couldn’t really say a thing.
    WRONG AND WRONG. When a PMO member starts throwing money at senators it’s not private, and Harper not only can say something he must.
    old Lori gets it. This isn’t just wrong it’s stupid. Then again, Harper was always kind of stupid. He was just less stupid and a lot luckier than his oponenents.
    I am grateful my decision to not vote CPC in 2011 has been vindicated over and over.

11. Old Lori – yes, I have to say that Wright’s giving Duffy the money is a private matter. I totally agree with you that BOTH are public figures, but BOTH are also private individuals.
    It cannot be the case that IF one is public, THEN, one cannot also engage in a private interaction. Privately, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Wright’s action; it’s his personal money; his choice. The fact that Duffy would accept such a gift, well, to me it tarnishes Duffy as a private person, but, I don’t believe that such an interaction is any of my business.
    Nor do I see how the PM can interfere. He also can’t make Duffy resign. All he can do, legally, is set up a review process of the Senate, its operation, its expenses. Remember, the Senate refuses outside ‘interference’ and accountability. This is nothing new; it’s refused such oversight for years.
    I agree with Joe about Rathgaber.
    Terry Anderson – heh, sorry, but I don’t agree with you. I don’t agree with the ‘tyranny of the majority’. That’s not the type of govt I want. That’s what happening right now in the Obama-USA.
    Old Lori- I think that it’s the media that are playing propaganda politics against Harper.
    I stopped watching the CBC years ago as I tired of their endless chatter about ‘when can we get an election so that we can get rid of Harper’. It’s the same now- they have the same tired old fogies on from our Canadian politcal punditry – all saying the same thing, all anti-Harper, all focused only on the Return of the Natural Governing Party, ie, the Liberals and now, all swooning over Justin.
    And they never, ever, report on how the Canadian economy is admired around the world; how Harper is respected around the world both for his economic agenda and his foreign policies. The Canadian media never say a word about these things. One hears about them only in the foreign media on the Internet. It’s disgraceful.
    So, the smears, the relentless attacks are now about the Senate (and I do think Duffy should have resigned but there’s no way to make him do so)…and next month will be about anything else. Your concern about the effect on the people – well, as I said, if it isn’t the Senate, it will be something else. It’s an endless attack.
    The key thing for the media is that now they have Justin, they are going to increase their attacks. Remember, they never, ever, never tell us anything positive about the Harper govt. Never. So, the attacks will increase because they are campaigning, now, for Justin. That’s what it’s all about.

12. ET – we’ll have to agree to disagree on the propriety of the Wright- Duffy transaction. Perhaps we can agree that the optics were terrible and Wright should have known better.
    Harper has stickhandled through the media bias pretty well until now. I don’t think he has shown the same skill in the past few weeks. I’ll go back to something I said before. I think that Harper may be tired of being PM.
    The thought of Turdo as PM is nauseating. I see that smarmy face in the media and feel nothing but disgust. But the way things are going….

13. Yes lori, I realize what you’re saying. I was commenting on a line from one of ET’s posts. I may have gone off the rails a little concerning the topic of this thread. I do apologize. And you’re right, Harper is losing his supporters. I was one of them.

14. old Lori is right.
    I was a hardcore Harper apologist. I wrote this article only in February…
    http://www.poletical.com/conservatives-against-harper.php
    However, the Warwa, Senate scandal and now the gutting of this bill have been a massive and credible problem that has pushed the base past the point of acceptance.
    Huge problems await the convention in Calgary.

15. ET I don’t support the tyranny of the majority, you missed my point. My point was that’s how the left plays this game of politics. Your high road is admirable. Now if the left would only agree with you. They never will you know. Appreciate your comments.

16. This is amazing. ET really sees no problem with public figures throwing money around at friends. I guess she doesn’t understand what a ‘conflict of interest’ is.
    And they never, ever, report on how the Canadian economy is admired around the world; how Harper is respected around the world both for his economic agenda and his foreign policies. The Canadian media never say a word about these things.
    Actually, in the real world, outside of your bubble, it gets mentioned all the time. What doesn’t get mentione is that it’s basically all thanks to Paul Martin’s awesome budget cuts circa late ’90s.

17. Old Lori- to comment further, consider the scenario.
    Duffy had to repay the money; he was creating a scandal for the govt by having taken it. He didn’t have the money to repay it. Let’s say he’s suggest a repayment over ten years; that would just increase the furor.
    So, Wright, who was a friend, gave him the money. Now, this does NOT mean that Harper asked Wright. This does NOT mean that Harper even knew about it.
    But, Wright had to go public with it; the interaction would be found out by some leak; he had to be public that he had given Duffy the money.
    Then, Duffy should have resigned. He obviously refused. Wright resigned to prevent what so many people are saying – that Harper ‘made’ Wright give Duffy the money. Rubbish.
    The person who created the mess, and is maintaining the mess is not Harper. It’s Duffy. Period.
    Harper can’t do a thing about the Senate other than try to insist that it set up and follow rules. The Senate is fiercely self-protective. Harper has fought with the Senate’s refusal to be accountable before; it rules itself.
    What, old Lori, do you think Harper should have done – and I refer only to realistic things. I know we’d prefer that he fling Duffy into the Ottawa River and abolish the Senate, and… I mean realistic actions.

18. A couple of weeks ago, I was having a late dinner in one of the pricier restaurants in the Ottawa market and the subject of senate expenses came up. I mentioned to my guests that our PM had no love lost on the senate as an institution, and would not be adverse to its disappearance. I also noted that he was an incrementalist who took the long view, and was not above skirting the moral precipice whilst feeding his opponents all the rope they could eat…and that Wright was not an idiot. The table near us, occupied with…visitors…to a certain minister, found the conversation rather entertaining. Had a good chat.

19. LAS – absolute rubbish. You’ve bought into the myth of Paul Martin as saviour? Heh. Martin just passed expenses off to the provinces.
    Have you actually looked at Harper’s economic reforms? No? Ah well. You are a die-hard Liberal and are not interested.
    And no, the Canadian media do NOT refer to Harper’s accomplishments nor international respect. They say nothing. It’s in the international media. Not the Canadian.
    Terry Anderson – why would the left agree with me that a govt should represent all its citizens not just its political followers? The left are elitists; they are Rulers of the unwashed and ignorant, ie, of anyone who is not Them.
    And what people here are missing is that the Canadian media are engaged, now, since Justin’s Coronation, in a political campaign to get him and the Natural Governing Party elected. There will be more ‘scandals’, more smears. It will be relentless. If you can’t see what they are doing….
    Again, no-one has stated what they think Harper SHOULD have done.
    Again- he can’t make Duffy resign.
    He can say Duffy was wrong; he can suggest he repay it; he can insist on some kind of rules for accountability. He did all of this. The Senate governs itself.
    What if no-one came forth to give Duffy the money? What would be the result? Any suggestions?
    If it had been one of the Desmarais family, or, heh, Chretien, heh..would that have satisfied people here?
    I totally disagree with Lori that Wright could not, because he’s in the PM’s office, give Duffy the money. Sure, it looks bad..but..please, someone tell me, how would it look if Duffy both said he couldn’t pay it back AND, AND, AND, he refused to resign? Well?

20. “What doesn’t get mentione is that it’s basically all thanks to Paul Martin’s awesome budget cuts circa late ’90s”
    Uh huh. Paul Martin, right? You mean the guy who raided the EI surplus to balance the books? Or who “cut” by offloading to the provinces? And used these, plus tax increases to create his liberal-hailed “surpluses”?
    Gee… with that strategy, any dimwit liberal or libertarian could probably do as well, financially.
    mhb23re

21. Help fuel a scandal only to solve it with extreme measures and be seen as a hero because of it?
    Not this time.

22. Wright should never have given Duffy the money. This “friend”ly donation has gone a long way to destroying the CPC. Wright must be the stupidest smart man in Canada. Surely a man like him, in an office like his, should have infinitely better judgement. Why didn’t he tell Duffy to get a loan from the bank. It’s just incomprehensible.
    Duffy must be seen for what he revealed himself to be: a pathetic and purely self- interested oaf.
    If Wright was an idiot for doing what he did, we can’t say the same for Harper. Harper should have seen this mess and fired Wright immediately. It’s a terrible loss for the CPC operationally, but Wright cost the CPC far more politically by staying on for 4 days until he resigned. The night I saw this on the news, I told my spouse that Wright was gone. It took too long.
    Rex Murphy, as usual, stated it well.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/06/01/rex-murphy-how-a-90k-cheque-became-a-death-warrant-for-harpers-brand/
    And this theoretical speech by Harper, again in the NatPo is closer to where Harper should have been on the day he met caucus.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/06/02/stephen-harper-should-have-apologized-after-he-found-out-about-90k-payment/
    As for Rathgeber – Harper should not have blocked the bill. Plain and simple. I don’t really get why he ordered that this bill be eviscerated. If there is a good reason, he failed to communicate it.
    euavze

23. Well said Revnant Dream. You pretty much covered the same thoughts I have come to have. There are now too many things that cannot be excused with the argument that Harper has to act slowly, little by little, to repair the damage done by the Liberals.

24. Well old Lori with all due respect I think that the hint to why “Harper eviscerated the bill” might well lie within his incrementalist approach to transforming the way Canada is governed. Not that it really matters in the great grand scheme of things but did anyone notice that the civil service is upset with the elected government? I hear there was a mass walk out by the diplomatic core today. In the face of this kind of tension just how wise would it be for a government to poke the wasps’ nest with legislation that puts civil servants pay on line for all to see? Do I want to see the civil service brought to heel? Absolutely!!!! But I’m not so naive as to think that some battles are best won by stealth not street fighting. From what I see MP Rathgaber wants a street fight with the bureaucrats while PM Harper wants to work with the bureaucrats even as he renovates the civil service. Personally I like PM Harper’s method. I’m not a big fan of MP Rathgaber’s method.

25. Well, what to say. So many great thoughts by posters I respect. So, what do I think. I think I am sad, and might as well have voted for Kim Campbell in 1993. The old reform Party has been laid to rest, and the bureaucrats and progressives have won.
    Yes there have been some victories that come to mind, such as the now voluntary CWB, partial roll back of the onerous firearms laws, support for Israel, thumbing their nose at the IPCC and other UN departments. But, the Ottawashing seems to have won out.

26. Heh. Martin just passed expenses off to the provinces/blah blah raided EI
    This is delusional Tory partisanese for ‘he made cuts that I’d agree with if my team were making them.
    Have you actually looked at Harper’s economic reforms? No?
    No, because they don’t exist or are trivial.
    Thanks for for demonstrating you are every bit as inable to objectively assess reality as I stated. You are the definition of rationalization.

27. This many-layered issue seems to start with the Duffy housing claim. In my view, Duffy was not entirely wrong to claim a housing allowance. Nearly all Senators get an allowance for maintaining two residences. Maybe they shouldn’t, but they do. Why should Duffy be an exception? Which residence is primary and which secondary should not be a major factor when expenses are incurred either way. Duffy’s health issues explain why he kept Ottawa as a primary residence. My reading of this is that some in the Ottawa press gallery had it in for Duffy. Glen McGregor is one. I think it is personal, dating back to Duffy suing Frank magazine. Duffy’s technical misstep is being used as a pretext to attack the CPC. I am sorry to see Conservatives being duped by yet another manufactured scandal.

28. Bravo for Rathgeber. The guy is a true conservative.
    I think of Harper as being the kind of guy who would not take one cent for himself, so why does he cover up for Duffy and the rest of the scum?
    He does it because this is the way he usually deals with the media.
    When the Duffy et al scandal surfaced, Harper went full “control freak” mode with the msm as he usually does, in order to isolate the media and control the message mostly by ignoring it until the issue dies down. This approach is the correct one when the media fabricates a fictitious scandal in order to stir sh#t up, as is usually the case.
    However in this case, this approach has backfired because this is not a make-believe scandal. This is a real problem, and more importantly, this is not something that the CPC should want to make go away. This is something the CPC should want to clean up. Like Rathgeber says, people didn’t elect the CPC to sweep the garbage under the rug.
    Of course Harper cannot make Duffy resign, but he can come out and say that he should resign. That would put pressure on him to do it. However, I don’t think Harper has the cojones to do something like that.
    This is all very disappointing to me. The only thing that would restore my trust in Harper is if he would come out and say what needs to be said. Get an interview with Ezra Levant or someone and say that Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau are a disgrace to the Canadian Senate and that they should resign.

29. Interesting. As ET pointed out,PMSH and group have done some good. But it is also right to point out their failures. When I hire somebody,which is what gubermint is via my tax dollars,then they had better be damn ready to do the job I want,or be fired, without pension,etc. If my MP,or yours,does not have the balls to put on their big guy/gal pants and represent us,then can them. We have got to get in their faces,and make sure they know who they work for. Right now,for the last 50 years,not one of them have earned the title “honourable”,unless you consider theives and psychos deserve that term. There is never a goverment by and for the people,unless the people carry baseball bats,and let our “betters” know who is in charge.

30. Wow a backbencher takes the high jump and everyone gets puffed up.
    Out here on the short grass most of us would consider ourselves conservatives. We certainly vote that way.
    Back in 1984 we got a bit excited thinking that Mulroney would represent conservative principles but of course he did the exact opposite. His leadership produced both Bouchard and Manning. Bouchard is a bit of a mystery because Mulroney like Lucifer was a Frenchman from quebec….never a conservative. Us dummies out here in AB didn’t get it and supported him. Fool me once…..
    The Mulroney legacy made me realize that having expectations of ever changing Ottawa is hopeless. Harper figured out how to win a majority under the conservative brand by making it Liberal right. Anything else was never going to sell.
    Ottawa is a corrupt place. Think stealing peoples money ends at the quebec/ontario border? Cretien and his friends perfected stealing. Adscam was just one tiny example. Wonder where the 2 billion the long gun registry cost went?
    So a couple of senators are dishonest. A guy in the PMO writes a check? Not much of a scandal after 7 years in power. I don’t like it either but Ottawa is a corrupt place and all politicians end up with ‘Ottawa disease’ as Manning used to say.
    The sr bureaucrats run Ottawa. They eat Rathgeber’s for lunch. Anybody who thinks they are going to change anything without prior approval of the Ottawa mandarin hasn’t figured out how the game is played.
    Harper is doing what he can. Sometime before the election writ is dropped he will try and reconnect with his Conservative base. Until then….don’t expect much.

31. And exactly why should Duffy resign? His expense claims are in line with those of other Senators, and he works much harder than most. Is the idea that he should fall in line with the media spin on things?

32. Harper is doing what he can.
    If that’s true, then Harper’s abilities are so limited he should be fired immediately.
    If we could convert excuses and martyr syndrome into electricity we could run much of Canada off of here. Finally, a use for Contard partisans.

33. Good job E.T and Gord. This guy Rathgeber is a grandstander, nothing more. Everyone here who is bellyacheing about Harper and the conservatives, what are you going to do next election? Trudeau? Mulcair?
    Does anyone give any thought to the idea what the alternatives are? Or that you are simply playing into the hands of the left/media right now?
    The fact of the matter is there would be no Conservative Party or Conservative government right now or over the last 7 years without one Stephen Harper. Period.
    Harper has overcome every obstacle put in front of him since he ran for the leadership of the CA. It does not matter what the media, the opposition or the progressives within his own party do, he comes out on top. And his opponents have thrown everything they can at him including sedition.
    He does so by playing a long game. He has achieved much for his base – not enough for some apparently.
    Does anyone stop to consider where Canada would be right now if Dion, Iggy or the Sedition Coalition had gained power? It would make Obama seem downright conservative.
    One thing so called conservatives on this board apparently do not realize is that you don’t shit where you sleep. Farm animals know this, but so called conservatives don’t.
    I’m not saying don’t voice you displeasure – but direct it where it will do most good. Don’t fan the flames of a media/opposition bonfire – all you do is help them achieve their agenda, which is to destroy Harper.

34. I’m more sanguine: I’m generally more with ET and Gord, as you would expect. Mr. Rathgebar is not the first Alberta Conservative to resign from caucus in my politically-aware lifetime: Jack Horner did it, as did David Kilgour (although I think he was kicked out). The historical evidence on the outcome of each of those decisions sits before us.
    The broad-based media strategy and narrative, which has been specifically designed to suppress the Conservative vote and sow confusion and Monday-morning quarterbacking among us all (in the absence of anything credible from the opposition, which is laughable, frankly — up to and including Mr. Trudeau, Jr.’s latest salvo on the Senate, which is a slap in the face to all Canadians who do not share the view that the regional tail should wag the national dog), has suffered a terrible couple of weeks, really. The “Council of Canadians”‘s lawsuit, whatever that was about and whoever they are, failed — by my count, that would make it eight for eight essentially cleared of wrong-doing in respect of the 2011 election. The video is “gone” (as Shania would say, “So you got a house. That don’t impress me much.”). And it certainly seems that the current Liberal administration in Ontario is on it’s way out, thankfully (I’m guessing that not even Andrea Horwath can find it in her heart to continue supporting it, given the current revelations of malfeasance; why would she give up her chance to be leader of the opposition and premier in waiting?).
    I’m not precisely sure what Mr. Rathgebar’s motivations are, but they seem to me to rather ill-timed and ill-considered: assuming he’s not trying to be the latest, greatest incarnation of an Alberta Liberal beachhead, why not press the government for comprehensive, legally-defensible salary sunshine provisions like the ones that exist in Ontario, apparently, as part of a new “accountability” bill which seems likely will arrive in the new session in the fall? And if he does have ulterior motives, why not execute closer to the next election, when they might actually do some damage? Assuming the worst about his motivations, I’m thinking he’s either too late, or too early.
    By any objective standard, the last few years in Ottawa have been among the cleanest in many moons (so far as we know, at least). Quite apart from various moments of Liberal ascendancy (and we all know what those were about), I well remember Mr. Mulroney’s time: cabinet ministers resigning left and right, to the point where Mr. Turner, in the 1988 debate, said something like: “I’ll appoint ministers who will defend Canadians at the cabinet table, not ministers who will have to defend themselves in the court room.” At the time, Mr. Mulroney was pursuing a longer game on policy — Canada-US Free Trade — which Canadians ultimately embraced, despite their misgivings about him and his government.
    Mr. Harper faces greater headwinds and more uncertainty than did Mr. Mulroney, and has chosen a more ambitious set of objectives in favour of economic growth, in many ways. Mr. Mulroney succeeded on Free Trade in the midst of stronger economic growth than today and a much more robust global posture on the part of the United States, among other things. By contrast, Mr. Harper faces an essentially hostile, if perhaps somewhat diminishing, administration in Washington, which nevertheless still enjoys determined and unified support. I particularly like the Supreme Court reference on the Senate: who wants to go through the bass-ackward days of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s; why not establish what’s doable and how, before we get into all that nonsense again?
    No time to go wobbly.

35. I am impressed by the thoughts raised in the last few posts in support of Mr. Harper. But they don’t address the issues:
    -Harper IS losing the base to some extent.
    -Harper IS losing even those in the media who supported him or at least weren’t overtly hostile
    -touting his past successes and the challenges he has overcome does not address the challenge coming next, which is 2015
    -making excuses for why this particular situation went badly does not address the fact that it was handled badly by the PMO, and there is no sign that they have gotten the message.
    It worries me greatly that as far as I can tell, there isn’t any signal from Harper and the PMO that the last few weeks their business as usual approach has failed, and they need to stop and think and maybe try something different. I am not suggesting they panic. But any rational management tries to adjust to new realities and situations. I don’t get a sense that this is happening.

36. Poor LAS.

37. Ward, agreed entirely.
    “what are you going to do next election? Trudeau? Mulcair?”
    Understand that this is exactly the outcome that LAS wants. He’s said so repeatedly many times in the past.
    However, old Lori is right; the perpetually cranky base is being lost to some extent. ET raised the issue earlier of what else Harper could have done with respect to Duffy. If Duffy had not been bailed out, refused to pay back the money and refused to resign, the responsibility would have been with the Senate’s disciplinary procedures to deal with it.
    If it failed to do so, then Harper would have been free to take the position, “See, the Senate does need reform/abolishing.” However, this opens the question of the Constitution which no one in their right mind wants to broach (except of course the Opposition for mischevous purposes of their own).
    Also, if the Senate failed to act, then the RCMP would have been called in, just as Marjorie Le Breton in fact did. The only real misstep here was the Wright pay-off. And until we know why Wright did it, most of this thread is mostly idle speculation.

38. Yes, poor LAS indeed. Heh. I asked LAS:
    “Have you actually looked at Harper’s economic reforms? No?”
    And he replied:
    “No, because they don’t exist or are trivial.”
    Wow! That’s quite the answer and defines LAS perfectly. He comes up with a conclusion that declares that Harper’s economic reforms don’t exist or are trivial. Got that? Yet, he also declares that he’s never examined them..to even find out if they exist or are trivial! He makes a conclusion with no evidence! That’s quite the false argument!
    Poor LAS.

39. I agree with Ward, David Southam and cgh’s comments – which deal with the broader picture.
    I admit that I may be out of the ‘battles of the day’ because I refuse to watch CBC, CTV or read the Toronto Star, Globe and, actually any newspaper. So I’m not enmeshed in the emotional highs/lows of the moment. That might be my own ‘head in the sand’!
    I like cgh’s outline of ‘what might have happened’. The Senate, as I said, fiercely protects its so-called right to govern itself. It would probably have stuck together and supported Duffy. This might even have been along party lines – and this would have harmed the CPC even more, for the Pack of Media Dogs would have howled that Harper keeps the Senate corrupt!
    There is no way that the Senate can be abolished. The Constitution sets it up almost in stone. It CAN be changed but that too is extremely difficult because of the requirement for such a high ratio of provincial approval.
    I certainly think that Duffy had no moral right to the money. He wasn’t actually using the PEI home, even if he owned it.
    Daniel: If Harper says that Duffy should resign, and Duffy refuses, then how does that help Harper or the CPC?
    LindaL, interesting comments but the fact that Duffy doesn’t use the PEI residence means that, factually, he shouldn’t claim the factual money. That is, his health is a fact; his not living in PEI is a fact. So, don’t try to live in the non-factual world ..and make money off it.
    That’s why he should resign, because he refused to deal with the real factual world.
    As for Wright, I see cgh’s point. Was it a misstep? We don’t know.
    Again, what we are seeing, in large part in my view, is the movement of our media systems, which are leftist, into campaign mode to pave the way for Justin’s accession to the Throne.
    Meanwhile, Harper is focused on reality, the reality of the economy, expanding Canadian trade, strengthening Canadian small businesses, Keystone, dealing with the morass and corruption of the Obama Gang to the south…All of this is unrecognized by our leftist media who focus only on the emotional angsts of whatever new Save the World agenda of the minute.

40. For those who think that Jack Horner joined the Trudeau Liberals out of principle let me set you straight. Horner’s old riding was being amalgamated with another riding held by a popular conservative MP. Horner’s riding was being amalgamated into the other riding because most of the people had left that riding. Its a dryland farm and ranch area. The riding it was being amalgamated into much more populous. If Horner had contested the Conservative nomination for the new riding he would have lost. His solution was to become a Liberal so when he lost the next election he might get in on the Liberal gravy train.

41. ET Duffy does use the PEI residence and incurs expenses related to that. He has paid back money related to claims deemed inappropriate. He is being viewed as the poster boy for Senate corruption, but I think that is unwarranted. Much of the anger about Duffy relates to the media pile on. I see no reason for him to resign.

42. Linda – my anger at Duffy relates to the fact that he asked for and accepted a 90,000 “gift” from the senior staffer at the PMO.
    He is a journalist. He is not politically unaware. I don’t actually believe Duffy is that stupid either.
    Such an action can only be explained on the basis of
    -an arrogant sense of entitlement
    -dementia
    -a desire to damage the CPC or the senate or both.

43. LindaL, to my understanding, the PEI residence is not Duffy’s primary residence; he was claiming expenses related to its being such while claiming that his Ottawa home was only his secondary residence.
    My point is that IF he wasn’t living for most of the time in PEI then he had no right to expect the taxpayer to fund his declaration of it as his primary residence.
    Again, the Senate reviews and governs itself, and as LeBreton has said, the Senate is undergoing changes – which might be unwelcome to some in the Senate many of whom have lived and travelled very well over the past years because of its refusal to be open – because the CPC has demanded that it be more accountable.
    Wright’s repayment of Duffy’s expenses made the situation worse because it tied that repayment to Harper – even though, factually, there was no connection.
    Again, my claim is that our Canadian media are now focused on only the next election and are campaigning now, for Justin. We’ll see more ‘scandals’, particularly as Mulcair and Trudeau must first deal with each other.
    Meanwhile, our same media totally and utterly ignore the actual accomplishments of the Harper govt in economics, domestic infrastructures and development and foreign affairs…as they focus only on personal individual and small issues.
    This tactic, the smear campaign focused on the personal, and ignoring real accomplishments, is the basic strategy of the Obama Gang.

44. ET said: This tactic, the smear campaign focused on the personal, and ignoring real accomplishments, is the basic strategy of the Obama Gang.
    Absolutely.
    And it works.
    And so far Harper was able to deal with that tactic, so it can be defeated. But it requires more deft stickhandling and caucus management than Harper and the PMO have displayed in the last couple of months. Something is amiss at the PMO or with the PM, I fear.

45. Old Lori, yes, I agree with you; the relentless smear tactics of our media and the left are highly visible.
    My question remains. What should Harper have done?
    1) He can’t ask for Duffy’s resignation because Duffy is not the first or currently the only member of Senate involved in padding his expenses. So, either he asks ALL, or none. In my view, Duffy was wrong to define the PEI as his primary residence. He obviously did it to show that he, legally, represented that area in Senate.
    2) Harper can only rely on the internal overseers of the Senate; they refuse external accountability.
    3)He can speak about Senate reform and has, for all his new Senate appointments, insisted that each one acknowledge that IF he could get term limits into the law, then, they would acknowledge that they must oblige with the limits. He can’t abolish the Senate; he can’t yet get an elected Senate.
    4) The big error was a private arrangement between Wright and Duffy and I’ve no idea who offered/asked or whatever. Harper apparently knew nothing about it. But, Wright had to resign because of the ‘image’. I repeat, I think that Duffy ought to have resigned.
    5) The key issue which ALL of our media ignore is the internal infrastructure and very existence of the Senate – with its unaccountability, its lifelong tenures, its lack of oversight, its corruption of its expense claims and so on. This is what should be dealt with. Does our media do this? No.
    Do we, here at SDA do this? No.
    Our media, in full Justin Campaign mode, ignores this and instead, focuses on the personal trivia. And many of us here do the same.
    How does that help the conservative and Canadian agenda? Do we really want the ‘social justice multiculturalists, sociologist hug-a-tree or thug types back in power?
    We should be calling for Senate reform. Not complaining that Harper isn’t ‘conservative’ enough.

46. Most of us can sympathize with Rathgeber’s concerns. I was with Reform from the beginning and carried thru to the CPC at the riding level. In the process of merging the Alliance with the PC’s Harper clamped down on grassroots public input. It is easier to control the message from top down and that was the route taken. My problem with this was that the party never retained an avenue of accountability from the grassroots other than the AGM. I am out of touch now so cannot comment on current situations.
    My issue with the CPC now is that it appears much of the agenda centers around the economy. PMSH has spent much time and effort expanding Canada’s international outreach to foreign trade. This is all great especially because of the over reliance on USA trade. To me it is highly risky because of the international debt situation which will inevitably blow up. If Harper had created a better on going conversation with Canadians he might have survived this inevitable collapse.
    What I see at street level is a general lack of faith in political process. Old Reformers know Harper and have residual faith in his direction. The Tweeners are leaving the party.

47. CT- you write, in criticism of Harper’s focus on expanding Canadian business capacity for international trade that:
    “To me it is highly risky because of the international debt situation which will inevitably blow up. If Harper had created a better on going conversation with Canadians he might have survived this inevitable collapse.”
    Are you suggesting that Harper should not attempt to expand international trade avenues for Canadians but instead, insist that Canadian business exports remain, as it was under the Liberals, 85% reliant only on the US – whose debt situation and increasing protectionism is as serious if not more than that of Europe?
    Harper’s trade agreements with other nations have enabled Canadian business to expand in the Asian areas – China, India, S. Korea, Japan..and Latin and South America.
    The world economy doesn’t stop. Should Harper have isolated Canada from this global growth?
    Plus, I don’t know what you mean by your comment on a ‘better communication with Canadians’ to enable a survival of the presumed European fiscal collapse. What does that mean?

48. CT – It may not be too late. We have 2 years to the next election.
    But the PMO has to acknowledge that there is a problem, and Harper has to want to win the next election.
    Honestly, I’d rather have Canada lose a percent of GDP than see the “‘social justice multiculturalists, sociologist hug-a-tree or thug types back in power” as ET eloquently puts it.
    Harper needs to refocus.

49. “[M]aking excuses for why this particular situation went badly does not address the fact that it was handled badly by the PMO, and there is no sign that they have gotten the message.”
    I dunno, Lori, you’d need to explain to me how the PMO handled it badly. There are all kinds of private member’s bills that never see the light of day, but I don’t see MPs leaving their party each time one is rejected. For a measure to become law in a majority parliament, it pretty much needs to be a government bill — moved (at least) and seconded by ministers, and vetted before-hand by the appropriate department and the government’s legal advisers. Meritorious ideas from individual members frequently find their way into government bills, and into law accordingly. At this point, I am not in a position, any more than anyone else is, to say why this one didn’t, or hasn’t to date — and I’m certainly not relying on the Toronto-based axis of disinformation to put me in the picture.
    Ontario, as I mentioned, has a salary sunshine law, which was brought in by Mike Harris in his first year in office. It’s still an open question, IMO, whether that legislation has done any good: the provincial Tories won one more election and then proceeded to lose the next three — in no small measure due to the animosity generated between themselves and Ontario’s broader public sector during their years in office; and I rather doubt anyone can say with any degree of confidence that that salary sunshine law has been just the ticket to curtailing compensation excess in Ontario’s public sector (utterly ineffective, more like — which might help to explain why a cabinet containing three former Harris ministers might be skeptical).
    And even if salary sunshine laws are a good thing (I happen to favour them, even if the Ontario experience has been unconvincing), I’d wager that the government would be getting advice from its legal counsel that any such initiatives need to be made consistent with HR policies and employment contracts currently extant. So, to the extent that the government is trying to find a way to do that, or is trying to find the legally-defensible level at which it can do that, Mr. Rathgeber’s criticism are off the mark, IMO.

50. I really wish the Conservatives would stop shooting themselves in the foot. I found myself ranting last night at my fiance that all politicians inevitably become elite bastards over time, sucking from the taxpayer trough, and they expect us to just sit back and take it.
    I know good & damn well that the NDP & Liberals are worse. Much worse. Shiny Pony would be an outright disaster for this country, a cult-of-personality leader akin to that idiot president down south. But how am I supposed to go cast my vote for the current lot if they won’t stop doing stupid things to themselves and expect us to swallow their cockamamie excuses? If my attitude is becoming more typical of the base, the base will simply not turn out in the kind of numbers to offset the low-information idiots who will put Shiny Pony into power.
    The Conservatives need to understand, very quickly, that the Pony is an existential threat to their political power, and cut this stupid shit out. Right frigging NOW.