It’s almost a shame that peter Newman chose the title Renegade in Power for his book on the Diefenbaker years. The term could describe the Harper years.
Don’t get me wrong. Much of the legacy that Stephen Harper will leave behind is impressive, especially the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union (EU). For more than a century, the obscure word “monopsony” – a market dominated by a single buyer – has best described Canada’s trade. That dominant buyer being the U.S.
Canadians and their prime ministers have long talked about the need to diversify the customer base for our nation’s exports. Harper will be remembered as the prime minister who delivered on the talk with a trade agreement with the EU.
So, why isn’t Harper’s government doing better in the public opinion polls? How can a prime minister squander so much political capital after winning a definitive majority? Why aren’t Canadians talking about the EU trade deal as they did with the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement 25 years ago?
Maybe Canada seems underwhelmed with the EU deal because our federal government’s reaction to it was so understated. After Harper returned from signing a tentative deal in Europe, his Senate caucus got busy throwing Senators Mike Duffy, Pam Wallin and Patrick Brazeau out of the upper chamber for the balance of the parliamentary session.
As we know, those three didn’t go quietly. What was supposed to be a quick lynching to please the Conservative base became an ugly family feud that dragged out for three weeks and knocked the EU trade deal out of the media. Wouldn’t it have made sense to get the good news about the deal out first and then squash the three senators? Reckless.
In the week following Canada and Europe reaching the tentative deal, Pat Cox, former president of the European Parliament, briefed former and current members of Parliament (MPs) from all parties in Ottawa on how Canada will benefit from the trade deal. Most of the government MPs in the audience were hearing these details for the first time. Why wouldn’t the Conservative government have made sure its own caucus understood the deal so they could sell it to their constituents?
It’s understandable that any government would want to keep its mistakes out of the public realm. But this one is so secrecy-prone, it will keep favourable information away from the public unless it can be carefully scripted. Reckless.
In another example of recklessness, the Harper government seems unbothered by the appearance of a takeover of the Bank of Canada (BoC). First, Stephen Poloz, the bank’s new governor, sounded like a member of the Harper cabinet promoting the Canadian economy in September. People started to wonder about the BoC’s independence.
The speculation picked up steam a couple of weeks later, when the man Poloz beat out for the top job, senior deputy governor Tiff Macklem, contradicted his boss by saying the economy wasn’t so rosy. Tiff took a hike soon afterward.
Then, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty started commenting publicly on monetary policy, interest rates and quantitative easing. He even hinted that interest rates in Canada will be rising soon.
The BoC is supposed to function independently of the Department of Finance Canada for the sake of confidence in financial markets. Making the BoC a branch office of the Harper Empire is not only recklessness, it’s just plain stupid,
And if that is not a convincing example of recklessness, how about the feud before the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) about the eligibility of Justice Marc Nadon to sit on the SCC bench? Even if the SCC winds up ruling that Ottawa can unilaterally amend requirements for appointments to Quebec’s Supreme Court (a related issue), the damage will have been done.
Because the federal government has decided to bypass convention in the way SCC judges are appointed, there will be a lingering suspicion Ottawa was trying to stack the court with friendly judges.
Still, Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau’s recent misstep over speaking engagement expenses could be the tipping point that stops the Liberals’ inexplicable rise.
It’s going to be an interesting year.
© 2014 Investment Executive. All rights reserved.
Uncooperative co-executor passed over by court
Case illustrates the risks of appointing multiple executors