I'll be back...just not quite yet...first, to Israel

Apologies for this corner having gone dark recently.

It's been a busy stretch at work, including spending most of the last week in Las Vegas for HP's Americas Partner conference. It's an event that always generates lots to cover for us, but then throw in HP deciding to drop $1.2 billion to buy Palm while I was there, and it got even busier. Was a fun trip though. Stayed at one of the newer Vegas properties, Aria, and I quite liked it. Unlike most cavernous Vegas properties where they don't want you to be reminded of the world outside, Aria has lots of glass and natural light. And there's also a route from your room to the conference centre that doesn't involve going through the casino , a first in my Vegas experience and surely a design flaw... And speaking of the casino, I'm not a big gambler but did finish in the green, including a win in the sports book from taking the Habs in game six. Didn't bet on game seven; they surprised me there.

After less than three days back home though, on Sunday afternoon I'm on the road again, but this time for pleasure. I've been invited on a week-long trip to Israel, organized by the CIC and funded by a private donor. Steve at Far and Wide will also be coming, along with some NDP/left-wing bloggers I look forward to meeting. Steve has a good run-down in the itinerary so I won't re-hash it, suffice to say it's busy, diverse and interesting. A good mix of sight-seeing and meetings with an interesting group of local politicians, journalists and bloggers, and even our ambassador to Israel. I shall try to approach it all with an open, but slightly skeptical mind. (If you're interested, here is the current Coles Notes of my opinion on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.)

I'm not sure the schedule will allow for much time for blogging during the trip, but I shall try, and certainly I'll have lots to say and share upon my return. All I ask are for two things while I'm gone: my Canucks to still be playing hockey, and my country not to have bumbled its way into an election.

Since my hiatus is to continue a little longer, a few brief thoughts on recent developments in Canadian political land:

* While we've all been distracted with either Jaffer/Guergis nonsense or the detainee docudrama, the Liberals have actually been talking and releasing policy. And much of it is aimed at rural Canada. First was some very sensible ideas around getting more doctors and nurses into rural areas by, among other things, forgiving part of their student loans if they make that commitment. This was followed by a "Canada First Good Policy" to support and promote local farmers and access to safe, healthy food, and a commitment to rural postal service.

Of course, policy isn't sexy enough for media coverage these days so you may not have heard about any of this, and the punditry that scolded the Liberals for not talking policy are, when they talk about it at all, scolding them for talking policy. Outside the Ottawa bubble, however, Canadians are much more concerned about finding a family doctor than they are about who Rahim Jaffer e-mailed. So I hope we keep pushing the policy.

* That's not to say the Jaffer/Guergis stuff isn't important. The investigations should proceed, and if serving ministers acting inappropriately or in contravention of the rules, that should be exposed and they should face the consequences. The e-mails and other documents that came out this week certainly seem to show that the Conservatives have been far from honest about Jaffer's access and influence in his seemingly not overly successful non-lobbying career. And it's often more the lack of honesty than the actual deeds that seems to hurt more in these stories, in my experience.

* On the docu-drama, the speaker's ruling this week was certainly very significant, as was the reaction of Conservative partisans. I think what some of them fail to recognize is that this isn't really about detainee torture anymore. It's about democracy, and it's about the right and responsibility of the legislative branch to be a check on the activities of the executive branch. Harper was elected by a little over 38,000 people in Calgary Southwest; he has no right to thumb his nose at the Parliament of Canada.

One has to think saner heads will prevail here. Ignore the testosterone-fueled rantings of the likes of Kory Teneycke. The Conservatives don't want an election over this. They won't be able to make it about coddling the Taliban, it's an asinine argument. It would be about a dictatorial leader refusing to respect the will of the people's elected democratic representatives. And the Cons didn't exactly fare well during the prorogation drama, now did they?

There will be a compromise reached that allows the opposition access to the uncensored documents, likely in a secret or confidential manner that respects national security concerns. We've seen signals along those lines already from Conservaland. Ironically, always concerned about political posturing and positioning, they're already trying to paint such a compromise as an opposition back-down. Truth is though, the opposition has been proposing such a scenario for months; the government has continually rebuffed it. So, as much as it matters, it would be them backing down. Let's just hope saner heads prevail all around though.

* Speaking of saner heads, the head of our military, General Walter Natynczyk, is cool with giving all of the un-redacted documents to parliament, saying the military has nothing to hide. Which raises two questions for me. One: must it be the Harper government with something to hide then? And two, if we employ standard Conservative logic here and respond as the government would in question period, I have to ask, why does our Chief of Defence Staff not support our troops, and why is he a Taliban sympathizer?

* Speaking of interlopers in our midst, turns out that pollster Frank Graves, who the Conservatives are portraying as some kind of undercover Liberal mole polluting the public airwaves of the CBC pretending to be unbiased, has actually been getting millions of dollars of polling contracts from the Conservative government. Including $131,440 from Harper's own Privy Council Office.

I'm sure Dean Del Mastro will join me in demanding that a Parliamentary Committee immediately investigate how this government could give millions of dollars in polling work to a know Liberal stooge. Or maybe they could just, you know, admit this whole manufactured drama is stupid and move on to serious issues. Either one would be fine.

* And on Graves and this culture war nonesense the Cons are hyper-ventilating about, I could go on at length but let me just say this: the Cons have been fighting a culture-war for years in this country. Urban vs. rural, Tim Horton's vs. academic elites and fancy gala goers, support the troops vs you're all taliban lovers, tough on crime vs hug-a-thug. They've been fighting a culture war, we just haven't been fighting back. All Graves "advised" was for the Liberals to start employing some wedges of their own, to fight back, to basically use some of the same tactics Harper et. al. have to some success. And this is news, somehow? For the Cons to be all bitchy about someone suggesting their own tactics be used against them, tactics which have been part of politics, by the way, forever, is just stupid.

* Lastly, I have a great deal of respect for Ujjal Dosanjh, for what he has consistently and resolutely stood for throughout his career, the principled approach he takes to public life, and the energy and commitment with which he approaches it. And I join those who have condemned the threats and attacks against him and others who have dared to stand up to extremism in any of its guises. I'm no sure I agree completely with his take on the impact multiculturalism is having on Canadian society. But it's an important issue we should be debating, and it should be a debate free of threat and intimidation, in the best of Canadian traditions.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

In the end, it’s really about judgment

The revelations, rumours and innuendo are swirling about so quickly these days in the drama of Helena Guergis and Rahim Jaffer that I think it’s about at the point where we need to step back, let the investigation proceed and, when all the facts are in, consider the results.

I will make some comments though, now that we apparently know the allegations that led the PMO to accept Guergis’ resignation and remove her from caucus, as broke by CTV and the Toronto Star:

The central allegation Snowdy presented is that Gillani, an accused fraudster, claimed to Snowdy that three offshore companies in Belize – a tax haven – had been "reserved" to hold cash for Guergis and Jaffer. Snowdy said he also told the Tory lawyer that Gillani boasted that he had cellphone pictures of Jaffer and Guergis partying with high-class escorts when cocaine was being snorted.

As was reported last week, the issue here is the possibility of a minister of the crown facing the threat of blackmail. That’s a very serious issue that does need to be investigated in full. That goes above and beyond the moral and comparatively minor potential legal issues of alcohol, drug use and association with dodgy characters to possibly calling the integrity of the government (as an institution, not the governing party) into question. When it received those allegations, the PMO was absolutely right to act swiftly.

Let me say though that, now that we know the source of these allegations: allegedly Gillani, via a private investigator hired by one of his alleged victims posing as a potential business partner, let me say that, while they must be investigated, I find it hard to give these allegations too much merit. Given what we’ve read of Gillani, I wouldn’t be surprised if these were just flamboyant boasts designed to impress a potential business partner with no more basis in reality than Jaffer’s alleged boasts of access to the PMO. I could be proven wrong. We’ll see what the investigation reveals. But the original source doesn’t inspire confidence, and in fairness I think we need to wait for the results of that investigation.

Anyways, the allegations are swirling so thickly like smoke now that we’ll have to wait for it all to settle. What we do know however, and what is abundantly clear, is that at its core this is all about judgment: that of both Helena Guergis and Stephen Harper.

Even if these latest accusations prove to be groundless, at the very least it’s clear that Guergis made some very poor choices about who she has been associating with, as did Jaffer. A person’s character isn’t always readily apparent, and politicians certainly do have all kinds of people trying to develop relationships. And they can't read minds. But for a minister of the crown a degree of discretion is in order, and for a normal person all kinds of alarm bells should have been going off here.

And while Harper moved swiftly when he learned of these latest allegations, the fact is he shouldn’t have put her into cabinet in the first place, and certainly shouldn’t have stuck with her until this bitter end. While these explosive allegations may have been news, there was an encyclopedia of information that should have made it readily apparent for some time that Guergis lacked the competence or the judgment for the job.

He couldn’t have known it would end up like this, but there was enough reason to seriously doubt her judgment. The fact that Harper stuck with her anyways, for what seem like purely political reasons, until he had absolutely no choice but to act, raises serious questions about the judgment of our prime minister and what guides his decision-making in any number of areas of fundamental import to this country

Those are important points that should be made. On a final note though, were I plotting Liberal strategy (perish the thought) I’d step back from this, and spend more energy on the economy and jobs, on health care (I agree no to user fees, but what IS the answer?), on pensions, on more substantive issues.

The media will keep pursuing this story anyway; better to step back and let the investigations proceed unless more information emerges. Polls are a dime a dozen, but one does show this morning that the Guergis affair may be hurting the Conservatives. That’s unsurprising. It’s not going to help the Liberals however, so let’s not worry about it.

People may briefly be willing to consider alternatives. As I’ve long been saying though, the only way they’ll consider the Liberals is if we actually offer one. So let’s build on the work that has been done, from Canada at 150 to the cross-country tours to the roundtables, and take this opportunity to put some ideas out there. That needs to be a long-term, ongoing process.

Frankly, even just BEING SEEN talking about substantive issues at a time like this would be an effective contrast.

Such a focus would be far more productive for the Liberals – and welcome by the Canadian people -- than all the ethics and conflict commissioner referrals, committee hearings and question period bluster in the world.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Rahim Jaffer: no logo, no influence

Word on twitter is that the Harper PMO has demanded embattled former Conservative caucus chair Rahim Jaffer remove the many prominent Conservative logos from his personal Web site. I guess his association with alleged con men, and allegedly busty hookers, is bad for government business. Plus the whole booze and drugs thing.

In cyberspace, though, you can never really erase these things from the record...

I wonder how long it will be before the disappearance of this photo is demanded too...

Meanwhile, spokespeople for the guy standing to the right of Rahim in that picture say it's "absurd" to thing the guy on the left would have any influence with him. I mean, it's not like he was once his hand-picked caucus chair or anything.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

What does it take for Harper to punt a minister?

Reading Kevin Donovan’s explosive Toronto Star investigative piece linking Rahim Jaffer to an alleged conman, booze and drugs and, yes, busty hookers, I can’t help but wonder what it takes for someone to get fired from Stephen Harper’s cabinet.

Now, I’m not saying it’s fair to hold Helena Guergis responsible for the sins of her husband, alleged or otherwise. I think Guergis has done plenty on her own to merit her punting from the cabinet room, from her airport tantrum to the letter writing to her sheer incompetence for the job. (I think the mortgage stuff is stupid, for what it’s worth.)

It’s not fair to hold her responsible for Jaffer’s sins as well as her own but, let’s face it, fairly or not, as long as she’s in cabinet Jaffer’s indiscretions are a drag both on her and the Conservative brand. And it has to be pissing Stephen Harper and the PMO off mightily.

Guergis and Jaffer have become a distraction for the government, and are throwing them off message. The latest story will only intensify that. This isn’t an inside the Queensway story. This is a Tim Horton’s story, and erodes the very image the Harper Conservatives have been trying to portray: work hard, play by the rules. Already we’re hearing about Conservative fundraisers being told no more donations will be coming while Guergis remains in cabinet. The Conservative grassroots are angry, and the Conservative talking heads – likely with PMO permission – have been turned loose to attack her.

Still, Harper has publicly maintained his support for her. While he clearly would like her to quit and seems to be encouraging that, he seems unwilling to fire her only for fear of handing the opposition a victory. Give them snarling masses one trophy, the old Ottawa theory goes, they’ll only be back for more.

At some point, though, you’d think enough would be enough. At some point you have to weigh giving the opposition a trophy vs. the constant embarrassing revelations and distractions, even if they’re not all on her, and say it’s just not worth it keeping this person on. It's not like this guy has ever been known for personal loyalty. Just ask Jim Hawkes and Preston Manning.

Will Harper reach that breaking-point soon? I think many would have long ago.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Video: The slow motion train wreck that is Helena Guergis

The History Channel showed the movie Bonnie and Clyde on the weekend. I'm not sure if the showing was scheduled before the recent drama in the lives of Conservative power-couple Helena Guergis and Rahim Jaffer, but it did cause me to pause and watch for a bit. Two thoughts occured to me: Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway were far more engaging, and it appeared that Clyde let Bonnie do the driving. Maybe that was Rahim's mistake?

Anyway, as even the Conservative punditry lines-up against Guergis and Jaffer, she's inexplicably doing her best to keep the story alive. CTV's Bob Fife reports that Guergis is threatening to sue Air Canada and Charlottetown Airport employees for slander and breach of privacy, for daring to blow the whistle on her behaviour at their "hellhole" of an airport. Behaviour which she to date hasn't denied, and even issued a half-hearted apology for.

I'm no legal expert, but I fail to see much merit in her case. I also find it a somewhat amusing position for Guergis to take, given her flouting of DND regulations in the past. It would also be politically suicidal. This story is already going over like a lead-balloon for the Conservatives, reportedly dragging-down fundraising and leading to calls from within the party for her ouster.

Still, perhaps the two sides can sit down and work something out. Would Guergis be willing to settle for $500?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Video: Helena Guergis, beauty pageants and death threats?

It all sounds hard to believe, but those are the shocking and unproven accusations made in this CBC report from 2000 about Conservative minister Helena Guergis and her beauty pageant days in Huronia.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Hey! Look how much we care about drunk driving!!

In what I’m sure is completely coincidental timing, coming as it does as Canadians express their outrage over former Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer (loving husband to boot-throwing, PEI hating, airport security staff berating Conservative minister Helena Guergis) walking into a courtroom facing charges of driving under the influence and possession of cocaine, and walking out with a $500 fine for careless driving, comes this bit of justice-related diversion from Conservative Justice Minister Rob Nicholson:

The Harper government appears ready to move ahead on imposing random roadside breath testing, which a new federal discussion paper says has produced "remarkable results" in catching more drunk drivers in other countries.

The Justice Department is inviting public input on the idea of random sobriety tests and federal officials plan to meet this month and next with provincial ministers and other experts to measure support.

In a rare move, the federal government has posted on its website a discussion paper, weighing the benefits of random testing, seeking feedback by the end of April.

Empowering police to conduct random breath tests would replace Canada's 40-year-old legislation on impaired driving, which dictates that breathalyzer tests can only be administered when there is reasonable suspicion of drunk driving.

You know, my first thought was that this was an attempt to distract from the latest drama of everyone’s favourite Conservative power couple, but on second thought, if it is, it’s a pretty poor one. After all, it only serves to draw attention back to the Jaffer case.

Would this proposed change -- which as I’ve written before is a really bad idea, a completely draconian invasion of privacy, unlikely to do much to prevent drunk driving, and could quite possibly be unconstitutional – have made any difference in the Jaffer case? Not with the facts as they’re known at the moment. (We could use more facts, though.) The police apparently did perform a breathalyzer in this case, which Jaffer is alleged to have failed. If there was a problem with the admissibility of that search, that may have led to the plea bargain, we don’t know right now.

The whole point of this proposal though would be to subject many more people to random searches to see if they happen to be drinking and driving – and maybe have a look around their car for other fun stuff at the same time. If the Jaffer case shows anything though it’s not that the problem is getting them pulled over, it’s what happens after that, and as the case is turned over to the justice system.

Everything in law-making is a balancing act, security vs. personal liberty. And if you’re asking me to sacrifice a great deal of my personal liberty for a marginally greater likelihood of seeing people given meaningless $500 fines, then I’d say no, and try coming up with a plan that isn’t completely stupid, please.

Personally, I think the problem isn't the laws. It's a lack of resources to enforce them. Invest in police, and invest in a justice system so they have the resources to actually try cases. Too often, prosecutors feel pushed into plea bargains to keep their clearance rates up, because they don't have the time to deal with the backlog of cases. There's also the fact prosecutors are judged on their win/loss records, leaving them leery of pursuing borderline cases.

If you really want to get tough on crime, let's start there.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Guy Giorono takes the heat, and Rahim Jaffer makes an appearance

Very interesting that stories have appeared from two different media sources telling of internal Conservative dissatisfaction with Stephen Harper's chief of staff, Guy Giorno.

The Conservative caucus rank and file seems to be displeased with the way things have gone in the party of late, from the fiscal update crisis that nearly cost them government to the campaign against Brian Mulroney, and some very concerning polling. He's also being tapped by some as a factor in the departure of Kevin Lynch as head of the Privy Council Office.

First up was this piece from CP:

Depending on what side of the Giorno fence they sit, Conservatives either say he's made the PM's office more open and collegial or else sent the "bunker-like" operation into complete disarray.

His critics inside government and within the party ranks, who spoke to The Canadian Press on condition of anonymity, say the former lawyer and Queen's Park operative has alienated a growing number of senior public servants, the powerful lobbying world, party brass and some caucus members.

"It's a question of experience and judgment," said one senior Conservative. "Tact, diplomacy, are all missing."

"He's a smart guy who will actually do work," said one Ontario Conservative. "The problem comes when he has to manage people or he has to make a judgment call."

The Globe and Mail also had a piece:

It has been a long 10 months since the day Guy Giorno won over the Conservative Party's backbench with a rousing speech at its summer conference.

Since then, the government has almost fallen, the party has been split over its relationship with Brian Mulroney, and now the head of the civil service is quitting. Mr. Giorno, Stephen Harper's chief political operative, has become the lightning rod for a lot of it.

About a month or so after taking over as chief of staff of the Prime Minister's Office, the 44-year-old lawyer was given a standing ovation by MPs after promising to open the lines of communication and provide a new respect for backbench MPs. Today, though, that early promise appears to have been replaced by controversy.

Rightly or wrongly, Giorno seems to be the lightning rod for the dissatisfaction within the Conservative camp over the style of the Harper PMO and some of the less than stellar strategic calls it has made.

Is that fair? I don't know what happens in the corridors of Conservative power. But the public angst with Giorno does remind me of a lot of the criticisms many had of Ian Brodie, Harper's last chief of staff. While Giorno's appointment after Brodie left over NAFTA-gate was supposed to signal a new era of political attackdogness from the PMO, within the family it was supposed to herald a new togetherness for the party. Instead, things seem to have come full circle.

I just wonder, at what point do the people who are kvetching about Giorno, and had issues with Brodie, begin to say to themselves maybe it's not Brodie or Giorno, maybe it's Harper? A good CoS does take the heat for the boss, but there is one common denominator here. Could be they're not ready to speak out against Harper yet, even anonymously, and the CoS is a convenient proxy. But there is a heavy sense of deja vu around all these Giorno stories.

And speaking of these stories, interesting to see Rahim Jaffer pop-up:

“You get different perspectives depending on who you talk to, but there are some concerns that some of the things that were said last summer have not been implemented,” said Rahim Jaffer, the former MP who stays in close touch with his colleagues and who acted as the party's caucus chairman at the time.

“I think that there's definitely not the same sort of interaction that a lot of MPs would have hoped.”

Jaffer walks a line with his comments, but interesting to see him as a sort of proxy spokesperson for the caucus faction that has issues with Girono. With the CPC ensuring he won't be able to run for the party nomination in his old riding and with a recently former PMO staffer going for the one open Conservative nomination in Alberta instead, Jaffer clearly has little to fear by going on the record here and being a voice for those in caucus that do still have things to lose.

It will be interesting to keep an eye on Jaffer in the next little while, and see what he has to say. Because as much as some may wish he would, he may not be going gently into that sweet goodnight.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Maybe Rahim could have a staffer run as him...

As I read this story, on the one hand I say good, rules should be rules and they shouldn't be fiddled with to accommodate a particular candidate. On the other hand, given this party's willingness to fiddle with the rules to protect Rob Anders, and given the involvement of an ex-Stephen Harper loyalist in the race for the one open Conservative nomination race in Alberta, one can't help but wonder if the rules are being fiddled with to exclude Rahim Jaffer, the ex-MP and the odds-on favourite for the nomination...

The Conservatives are effectively shutting ex-MP Rahim Jaffer out of the nomination process in his Edmonton riding, a party source says.

Jaffer had hoped to run in Edmonton-Strathcona to win back the seat he narrowly lost to the NDP last fall.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Will the real Gord Brown please stand up?

Shades of Rahim Jaffer and his assistant's radio debut...

Tory sorry for impersonating MP boss

MURRAY BREWSTER

OTTAWA (CP) - A red-faced Tory MP is apologizing after his assistant impersonated him - and provided false information - in an e-mail exchange with a constituent over the hot-button issue of Afghan detainees.

An e-mail from Gord Brown's parliamentary office, dated May 2, claimed that every alleged case of abuse involving Afghan detainees had been investigated and proven to be unfounded. That despite the fact the Afghan government has yet to finish an investigation into the torture claims.

The e-mail to Randi Davidson, obtained by The Canadian Press, was signed by Brown, the member for Leeds-Grenville. But Brown says the note was written by his assistant, Mark King, without his knowledge.
(more)

Not only was this staffer impersonating his boss, he was also plain making crap up. Fiction: it's not just for Blogging Tories anymore.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers