Initially Published in the Alliston Herald on October 31, 2008
Sadly, being selected as a member of federal Cabinet often has little to do with one’s ability. This is due to fact that the twin giants of gender and geography invariably factor large in the decisions of a prime minister.
Perhaps the most obvious beneficiary of this Canadian nuance is our own Helena Guergis. The gender/geography phenomenon resulted in Guergis being elevated to Cabinet in 2006 in priority to many superior candidates (both female and male) from across Canada.
In the 2006 election the Conservatives elected a total of four women from Ontario. Three of the four, including Guergis, made it into Cabinet. The fourth, Cheryl Gallant, was never going to make the cut as the result of her socially conservative views and rather controversial remarks made in the course of the 2004 election.
Given the dearth of choices available to Harper we should hardly be surprised by Guergis’ sad sack performance as a Cabinet Minister – a performance that has not escaped notice by the mainstream media (including those with a decidedly conservative slant).
Just last week the national affairs columnist for the National Post, Don Martin, referred to the multitude of newly elected Conservative women in a column headlined Harper’s Wealth of Women.
Now, before some of the local Conservative cheerleaders break into song and dance on the streets of New Tecumseth, they would be well advised to read more than the headline!
Martin writes: “The [election] results suggest the era of female MP’s being elevated into portfolios to meet some undefined fairer-sex quota, even if the task exceeded their experience or ability, would seem to be over.....That ‘yippee’ you hear is my teenage daughter, who is standing beside me insisting her gender doesn’t need preferential Cabinet consideration. I submit there could be no other explanation for Secretary of State Helena Guergis.”
Toronto columnist Grey Weston joined this chorus when he identified Guergis, who he describes as the “underwhelming junior foreign affairs minister”, as one of three Cabinet members who top the list of those most likely to receive a demotion or pink slip.
This week, Canada’s weekly foreign affairs magazine Embassy included an article that referred to the bungling Guergis as “...a lightweight and someone who resorts to personal attacks when questioned.”
If the reference to resorting to personal attacks sounds familiar, it should. On election night Guergis levelled a baseless allegation/attack (for which she declined to provide any particulars) that her opponent(s) had engaged in a “smear campaign”.
Along those lines, I expect that accusations of sexism and/or lacking respect for women will be levelled against any writer who dares to express an opinion that Ms. Guergis is out of her element and unqualified to be in Cabinet.
By the time this column goes to press Prime Minister Stephen Harper will have announced his new Cabinet. Hopefully, there will be more women. Indeed, I expect there will be as Harper has many newly elected and highly qualified women to choose from including Gail Shea (Prince Edward Island), Leona Aglukkaq (Nunavut), Shelly Glover (Manitoba) and Lisa Raitt (Ontario).
If Guergis is to remain a member of Cabinet I suspect it will be due solely to the fact that there remains a significant shortage of women elected as Conservatives in Ontario (there are now seven, up from four) and it is hard to imagine that Harper will reduce his female cabinet representation from this province down from three.
One should expect Diane Finley and newcomer Lisa Raitt (a former CEO of the Toronto Port Authority) to make the cut from Ontario. Given that Heritage Minister Bev Oda has also been a lackluster performer, and in light of the aforementioned numbers, gender and geography, it is entirely conceivable that Ms Guergis may remain a member of Cabinet.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
The Hole in the Trans-Canada Trail
Initially published in the Alliston Herald on October 24, 2008
The Trans Canada Trail is a system of trails that wind its way through every province and territory of Canada. At present, the trail is approximately 70 per cent complete.
When it is finished it will consist of more than 21,500 kilometres (earning it the title as the world's longest recreational trail) and will link hundreds of Canadian communities from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the Arctic oceans.
New Tecumseth presently represents a "gap" in the trail system. In an effort to remedy this situation there is presently a local effort underway to ensure that New Tecumseth is part of the Trans Canada Trail, with links to the existing system to the north and south.
The project is supported by a diverse group of interests including cyclists, hikers, all terrain vehicle (ATV) users, snowmobile organizations and horseback riders.
Although details as to the exact path of a trail through New Tecumseth are scant, there is a belief that the most logical route is along the existing town owned rail lines.
Earlier this week I attended a public information session sponsored by the town. At this session Mayor Mike MacEachern expressed a desire to both connect to the Trans Canada Trail system and link together existing trails presently scattered in a haphazard pattern throughout our community.
Although the public meeting was not particularly well attended (there were approximately 65 people present), I was surprised by the absence of any significant vocal opposition.
The issue certainly does have the potential to become bitter. Some remarks by trail supporters at the session ("anyone who has a problem needs to get educated" and "we're in the dark ages here") hint at what lingers just beneath the surface and might conceivably become a nasty debate.
Similar efforts to develop the trail system were undertaken in 2000. On that occasion, however, the plans were shelved in response to a rather heated debate and vocal NIMBY ("not in my back yard") opposition by landowners with property adjacent to the proposed trail system.
Some of the objections at that time included suggestions that users might vandalize adjacent properties and/or harm crops.
Although I have yet to hear this position articulated in response to the recent effort, such arguments ignore the reality that the most significant users of the proposed trail system are represented by groups, that have proven to be responsible users of public land. The trails are not going to attract roving gangs of bandits and lunatics who terrorize our children and destroy our farms!
The trail system already consists of more than 14,000 kilometres of developed trail throughout Canada. Notwithstanding this fact, reports of problems or vandalism to property adjacent to the system are few and far between.
While the various groups that support the trail system are presently on the same page, there is certainly the potential for these groups to point their rifles inward as the plan comes closer to fruition. After all, it seems clear that hikers and snowmobile users or ATV users and horseback riders do not mix particularly well in shared space.
The development of the trail system is fully supported by Mayor MacEachern. In fact, MacEachern appears to possess the same zeal and passion for this project as he did with the acquisition of the Banting Homestead.
At this juncture the plan also appears to have the support of a majority of council. There are, however, one or two members of council who have acquired a reputation of imitating a turtle and hiding in their shell (or, alternatively, sticking their head in the sand in the same manner as an ostrich) in the face of vocal opposition. It remains to be seen whether such councillors will "turtle" when the inevitable opposition occurs.
The Trans Canada Trail is a system of trails that wind its way through every province and territory of Canada. At present, the trail is approximately 70 per cent complete.
When it is finished it will consist of more than 21,500 kilometres (earning it the title as the world's longest recreational trail) and will link hundreds of Canadian communities from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the Arctic oceans.
New Tecumseth presently represents a "gap" in the trail system. In an effort to remedy this situation there is presently a local effort underway to ensure that New Tecumseth is part of the Trans Canada Trail, with links to the existing system to the north and south.
The project is supported by a diverse group of interests including cyclists, hikers, all terrain vehicle (ATV) users, snowmobile organizations and horseback riders.
Although details as to the exact path of a trail through New Tecumseth are scant, there is a belief that the most logical route is along the existing town owned rail lines.
Earlier this week I attended a public information session sponsored by the town. At this session Mayor Mike MacEachern expressed a desire to both connect to the Trans Canada Trail system and link together existing trails presently scattered in a haphazard pattern throughout our community.
Although the public meeting was not particularly well attended (there were approximately 65 people present), I was surprised by the absence of any significant vocal opposition.
The issue certainly does have the potential to become bitter. Some remarks by trail supporters at the session ("anyone who has a problem needs to get educated" and "we're in the dark ages here") hint at what lingers just beneath the surface and might conceivably become a nasty debate.
Similar efforts to develop the trail system were undertaken in 2000. On that occasion, however, the plans were shelved in response to a rather heated debate and vocal NIMBY ("not in my back yard") opposition by landowners with property adjacent to the proposed trail system.
Some of the objections at that time included suggestions that users might vandalize adjacent properties and/or harm crops.
Although I have yet to hear this position articulated in response to the recent effort, such arguments ignore the reality that the most significant users of the proposed trail system are represented by groups, that have proven to be responsible users of public land. The trails are not going to attract roving gangs of bandits and lunatics who terrorize our children and destroy our farms!
The trail system already consists of more than 14,000 kilometres of developed trail throughout Canada. Notwithstanding this fact, reports of problems or vandalism to property adjacent to the system are few and far between.
While the various groups that support the trail system are presently on the same page, there is certainly the potential for these groups to point their rifles inward as the plan comes closer to fruition. After all, it seems clear that hikers and snowmobile users or ATV users and horseback riders do not mix particularly well in shared space.
The development of the trail system is fully supported by Mayor MacEachern. In fact, MacEachern appears to possess the same zeal and passion for this project as he did with the acquisition of the Banting Homestead.
At this juncture the plan also appears to have the support of a majority of council. There are, however, one or two members of council who have acquired a reputation of imitating a turtle and hiding in their shell (or, alternatively, sticking their head in the sand in the same manner as an ostrich) in the face of vocal opposition. It remains to be seen whether such councillors will "turtle" when the inevitable opposition occurs.
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Good. The Bad. The Ugly.
Initially published in the Alliston Herald on October 17, 2008
Some random post-election thoughts of winners and losers, the good, the bad and the ugly:
Loser No. 1: Canadian taxpayers
The price tag for this election, which was not supposed to happen given the fixed election legislation, will ultimately cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
Loser No. 2: Stephane Dion
Dion clearly failed to inspire. The result is reflected in the worst Liberal performance (in terms of popular vote) since Confederation. I do feel bad for the guy. He apparently has several hundred thousand dollars of debt outstanding from his leadership campaign. If he doesn't leave voluntarily then one can expect the knives to come out in short order. However, I doubt Dion will even consider exiting voluntarily unless some "deal" is offered to assist with the debt.
Winner No. 1: Helena Guergis
One cannot argue with results and, whichever way you look at it, 55 per cent with an 18,000+ vote plurality is an excellent result.
The Bad: While Guergis' total vote percentage settled in at the aforementioned 55 per cent (up from 49.9 per cent in 2006), the 5.1 per cent increase was by far the lowest among Conservative incumbents in the area. Patrick Brown (Barrie) and Tony Clement (Parry Sound) each increased their percentage share of the vote by more than 10 per cent. Bruce Stanton (Simcoe North) and Peter Van Loan (York-Simcoe) hovered around nine per cent increases.
Winner No. 2: Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams
This Progressive Conservative Premier embarked with a vengeance on an "Anybody But Conservative" campaign and merrily quoted from Harper campaign literature ("There is no greater fraud than a promise not kept") at every opportunity! Newfoundland listened and shut out the Conservative Party. In the process, Williams established himself as a formidable foe and a dominant voice in Atlantic Canada.
Loser No. 3: Stephen Harper
Stephen Harper called this election in order to attain a majority. He did not achieve his objective.
The Ugly: Typically, a winning candidate will congratulate and commend his/her opponents. Ms. Guergis took a different approach. In an election night interview she accused unnamed candidates of a "smear campaign". When asked for particulars she refused to elaborate.
The Ugly - Part Deux: The Simcoe-Grey Liberal vote has plummeted from 40 per cent (2004) to 31 per cent (2006) to 21 per cent in spite of a conservative candidate who has experienced no end of fumbles and criticism as a junior cabinet minister.
Quasi Winner: The Green Party (local)
The Green Party's share of the vote in this electoral district has steadily increased each election. The l0 per cent this time around represents a significantly better performance than the 6.8 per cent polled by the Green Party across Canada.
The Ugly - Part Trois: In the course of the campaign Wasaga Beach resident Mary Jane Vaughan wrote two letters to the editor of the Alliston Herald. The letters were so effusive in their praise of Guergis that one may have mistaken Vaughan's words for a prayer! Vaughan really ought to have disclosed that she is a board member of Guergis' constituency association.
The Good: The Conservative Organizational effort
Elections Canada statistics reflect that more than 8,500 Simcoe-Grey residents took advantage of the advance polls. This placed Simcoe-Grey among the top 10 electoral districts in all of Canada in terms of number of advance voters and speaks volumes of the Conservative organizational effort to get out the vote.
The Ugly - Part Quatre: At the Collingwood debate Green Party candidate Peter Ellis referred to Guergis' pending marriage to (former) Alberta Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer and posed a rhetorical question as to where Guergis would ultimately reside. The comment, and the arguably sexist innuendo associated with it, was not appropriate and did not reflect well on the local Green Party effort. We have made great strides from the days when some grumbled they would not vote for Joe Clark because he could not "make" his spouse, Maureen McTeer, take his surname. Comments such as these, which were raised again in at least one letter to the editor, only represent a step backwards.
Some random post-election thoughts of winners and losers, the good, the bad and the ugly:
Loser No. 1: Canadian taxpayers
The price tag for this election, which was not supposed to happen given the fixed election legislation, will ultimately cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
Loser No. 2: Stephane Dion
Dion clearly failed to inspire. The result is reflected in the worst Liberal performance (in terms of popular vote) since Confederation. I do feel bad for the guy. He apparently has several hundred thousand dollars of debt outstanding from his leadership campaign. If he doesn't leave voluntarily then one can expect the knives to come out in short order. However, I doubt Dion will even consider exiting voluntarily unless some "deal" is offered to assist with the debt.
Winner No. 1: Helena Guergis
One cannot argue with results and, whichever way you look at it, 55 per cent with an 18,000+ vote plurality is an excellent result.
The Bad: While Guergis' total vote percentage settled in at the aforementioned 55 per cent (up from 49.9 per cent in 2006), the 5.1 per cent increase was by far the lowest among Conservative incumbents in the area. Patrick Brown (Barrie) and Tony Clement (Parry Sound) each increased their percentage share of the vote by more than 10 per cent. Bruce Stanton (Simcoe North) and Peter Van Loan (York-Simcoe) hovered around nine per cent increases.
Winner No. 2: Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams
This Progressive Conservative Premier embarked with a vengeance on an "Anybody But Conservative" campaign and merrily quoted from Harper campaign literature ("There is no greater fraud than a promise not kept") at every opportunity! Newfoundland listened and shut out the Conservative Party. In the process, Williams established himself as a formidable foe and a dominant voice in Atlantic Canada.
Loser No. 3: Stephen Harper
Stephen Harper called this election in order to attain a majority. He did not achieve his objective.
The Ugly: Typically, a winning candidate will congratulate and commend his/her opponents. Ms. Guergis took a different approach. In an election night interview she accused unnamed candidates of a "smear campaign". When asked for particulars she refused to elaborate.
The Ugly - Part Deux: The Simcoe-Grey Liberal vote has plummeted from 40 per cent (2004) to 31 per cent (2006) to 21 per cent in spite of a conservative candidate who has experienced no end of fumbles and criticism as a junior cabinet minister.
Quasi Winner: The Green Party (local)
The Green Party's share of the vote in this electoral district has steadily increased each election. The l0 per cent this time around represents a significantly better performance than the 6.8 per cent polled by the Green Party across Canada.
The Ugly - Part Trois: In the course of the campaign Wasaga Beach resident Mary Jane Vaughan wrote two letters to the editor of the Alliston Herald. The letters were so effusive in their praise of Guergis that one may have mistaken Vaughan's words for a prayer! Vaughan really ought to have disclosed that she is a board member of Guergis' constituency association.
The Good: The Conservative Organizational effort
Elections Canada statistics reflect that more than 8,500 Simcoe-Grey residents took advantage of the advance polls. This placed Simcoe-Grey among the top 10 electoral districts in all of Canada in terms of number of advance voters and speaks volumes of the Conservative organizational effort to get out the vote.
The Ugly - Part Quatre: At the Collingwood debate Green Party candidate Peter Ellis referred to Guergis' pending marriage to (former) Alberta Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer and posed a rhetorical question as to where Guergis would ultimately reside. The comment, and the arguably sexist innuendo associated with it, was not appropriate and did not reflect well on the local Green Party effort. We have made great strides from the days when some grumbled they would not vote for Joe Clark because he could not "make" his spouse, Maureen McTeer, take his surname. Comments such as these, which were raised again in at least one letter to the editor, only represent a step backwards.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Sitting One Out
Initially published in the Alliston Herald on October 10, 2008
In 1974 Robert Stanfield was running in his third General Election as leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. It was in the course of this election that I, aged 10, made my first political statement and prepared a crude homemade sign with coloured markers to show support for Stanfield.
It was a bad year for that 10 year old! Not only did the Boston Bruins lose the Stanley Cup final to the Philadelphia Flyers in six games, Stanfield suffered his third consecutive loss to Pierre Trudeau.
To this day I remain of the view that he is the best Prime Minister we never had.
My involvement with the Progressive Conservative Party continued through the years and included trips as a delegate to the 1983 PC leadership convention that elected Brian Mulroney and the 2003 convention that elected Peter McKay.
Following the merger of the Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance parties I actively supported the new Conservative Party.
However, I have chosen to “sit out” this election. Remarkably, it would seem that I am not alone. Many other New Tecumseth area residents who were once involved with either the Progressive Conservative, Reform or Canadian Alliance parties have similarly remained on the sidelines.
These individuals include Alliston businessman Wayne Hutchinson (who was a key Ontario organizer in the early days of the Reform Party); Beeton residents Iain MacKay (an original member of New Tecumseth town council) and Shauneen MacKay (who once ran as a Reform candidate); Cookstown area resident Floor Kromhout (who served as president of the provincial Simcoe-Grey Progressive Conservative constituency association for the better part of a decade); and, Alliston lawyer Jamie Smith – an individual whose father served as a Progressive Conservative Member of Parliament for this area and who, in past elections, routinely canvassed with former MP Perrin Beatty on Alliston’s Victoria Street.
Interestingly, former Progressive Conservative Lynda Mitchell , who was employed for a time in the Alliston constituency office of Helena Guergis, recently accompanied a candidate along Victoria Street. I nearly fell off my chair when I learned that it wasn’t Guergis that she accompanied but rather Liberal candidate Andrea Matrosovs!
I do not know the reason why the individuals noted above are on the sidelines.
Personally, for the reasons previously outlined in this column, I am unable to bring myself to vote for Helena Guergis. Thus, for the first time in many years (I never voted for Brian Mulroney!), I will not vote Conservative.
Peter Vander Zaag (Christian Heritage Party) is an individual who exudes integrity. Among this field of candidates his education qualifications are second to none (he has a Ph.D in agriculture) and he undoubtedly has a deep understanding and appreciation of the needs of Simcoe-Grey farmers.
Vander Zaag has previously commented, quite correctly in my mind, that he would likely be elected if he ran as a Liberal or Conservative. However, he has not done so out of concern that he would not be able to speak his conscience. It is not hard to admire such conviction.
It would not surprise me to see many conservatives, who are unhappy to see the Harper government break promises and abandon some key Reform principles, to mark their ballot for Vander Zaag.
I have had the privilege of meeting each of Peter Ellis (Green Party) and Andrea Matrosovs (Liberal Party). Both seem intelligent, well-spoken and sincere. Although I have not met NDP candidate Katy Austin, she appears, from a distance, to share these characteristics. All three have teaching backgrounds.
At the end of the day, my vote will go to the candidate who has the best opportunity to defeat Helena Guergis – an individual who has not served the residents of Simcoe-Grey well and who has been an embarrassment on the national stage.
As recently as last week Stephen Harper claimed the economy was sound. Now, in a time of economic crisis when our savings are disappearing, Harper has acknowledged problems but tells us to “stay the course.” It is a position parroted by Guergis in a radio interview on Tuesday. The thing is, how can we possibly have confidence in this approach when last week these same parties claimed everything was fine?
The candidate who clearly has the best opportunity in this regard, and whom I believe will make an outstanding Member of Parliament, is Liberal Andrea Matrosovs.
In 1974 Robert Stanfield was running in his third General Election as leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. It was in the course of this election that I, aged 10, made my first political statement and prepared a crude homemade sign with coloured markers to show support for Stanfield.
It was a bad year for that 10 year old! Not only did the Boston Bruins lose the Stanley Cup final to the Philadelphia Flyers in six games, Stanfield suffered his third consecutive loss to Pierre Trudeau.
To this day I remain of the view that he is the best Prime Minister we never had.
My involvement with the Progressive Conservative Party continued through the years and included trips as a delegate to the 1983 PC leadership convention that elected Brian Mulroney and the 2003 convention that elected Peter McKay.
Following the merger of the Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance parties I actively supported the new Conservative Party.
However, I have chosen to “sit out” this election. Remarkably, it would seem that I am not alone. Many other New Tecumseth area residents who were once involved with either the Progressive Conservative, Reform or Canadian Alliance parties have similarly remained on the sidelines.
These individuals include Alliston businessman Wayne Hutchinson (who was a key Ontario organizer in the early days of the Reform Party); Beeton residents Iain MacKay (an original member of New Tecumseth town council) and Shauneen MacKay (who once ran as a Reform candidate); Cookstown area resident Floor Kromhout (who served as president of the provincial Simcoe-Grey Progressive Conservative constituency association for the better part of a decade); and, Alliston lawyer Jamie Smith – an individual whose father served as a Progressive Conservative Member of Parliament for this area and who, in past elections, routinely canvassed with former MP Perrin Beatty on Alliston’s Victoria Street.
Interestingly, former Progressive Conservative Lynda Mitchell , who was employed for a time in the Alliston constituency office of Helena Guergis, recently accompanied a candidate along Victoria Street. I nearly fell off my chair when I learned that it wasn’t Guergis that she accompanied but rather Liberal candidate Andrea Matrosovs!
I do not know the reason why the individuals noted above are on the sidelines.
Personally, for the reasons previously outlined in this column, I am unable to bring myself to vote for Helena Guergis. Thus, for the first time in many years (I never voted for Brian Mulroney!), I will not vote Conservative.
Peter Vander Zaag (Christian Heritage Party) is an individual who exudes integrity. Among this field of candidates his education qualifications are second to none (he has a Ph.D in agriculture) and he undoubtedly has a deep understanding and appreciation of the needs of Simcoe-Grey farmers.
Vander Zaag has previously commented, quite correctly in my mind, that he would likely be elected if he ran as a Liberal or Conservative. However, he has not done so out of concern that he would not be able to speak his conscience. It is not hard to admire such conviction.
It would not surprise me to see many conservatives, who are unhappy to see the Harper government break promises and abandon some key Reform principles, to mark their ballot for Vander Zaag.
I have had the privilege of meeting each of Peter Ellis (Green Party) and Andrea Matrosovs (Liberal Party). Both seem intelligent, well-spoken and sincere. Although I have not met NDP candidate Katy Austin, she appears, from a distance, to share these characteristics. All three have teaching backgrounds.
At the end of the day, my vote will go to the candidate who has the best opportunity to defeat Helena Guergis – an individual who has not served the residents of Simcoe-Grey well and who has been an embarrassment on the national stage.
As recently as last week Stephen Harper claimed the economy was sound. Now, in a time of economic crisis when our savings are disappearing, Harper has acknowledged problems but tells us to “stay the course.” It is a position parroted by Guergis in a radio interview on Tuesday. The thing is, how can we possibly have confidence in this approach when last week these same parties claimed everything was fine?
The candidate who clearly has the best opportunity in this regard, and whom I believe will make an outstanding Member of Parliament, is Liberal Andrea Matrosovs.
Friday, October 3, 2008
What's Good for the Goose....
Initially published in the Alliston Herald on October 3, 2008
In the course of the 2004 General Election Conservative candidate Helena Guergis complained about our then Liberal Member of Parliament, Paul Bonwick, having a newsletter (also known as a householder) arrive on doorsteps after the election had been called.
Remarkably, Guergis has now engaged in conduct identical to that which she previously found so objectionable. In particular, this past week the residents of Simcoe-Grey received their own, rather large, four page householder courtesy of Guergis.
The literature makes multiple references to Guergis being an MP - something that is prohibited by Elections Canada rules for campaign literature - and contains no less than 17 photographs of our MP (out of a total of 20) with various people including the majority of mayors in our electoral district.
We should not be surprised by this behaviour. As previously referenced in this column, Guergis has a history of saying one thing but doing the opposite if it suits her purpose and/or advances her career.
When interviewed by the Herald about the promotional literature Guergis declared, "I've had it in the hopper probably about a month and a half now." She made similar claims in the course of the recent Rogers cable television debate when she blurted, "It was ready two weeks before the election call" and that it was not possible for her to "stop it."
These representations require scrutiny. The reason? Well, on the very first page of the householder Guergis states, "I recently (emphasis added) unveiled a historical plaque dedicated to the accomplishments of Sir Frederick Banting."
What's remarkable about this little tidbit is that the government did not announce there would be a plaque until Fri., Sept. 5, 2008. The election was called on Sun., Sept. 7, 2008.
How can literature that was ready two weeks before the election call be edited two days before the election call, but not stopped? Is it possible the government householder went to press after the election was called?
Sadly, this appears to be the latest example of Guergis' abandonment of previously stated positions/principles for the sake of personal gain. In particular, conduct that Guergis earlier criticized is now justified as entirely acceptable.
The Herald/Rogers comments, in the face of apparently contradictory evidence, demonstrate what happens when Guergis is required to go off script and think on her feet. It does not go well!.
Some in the national media have identified this and other problems and tagged Guergis as an embarrassment. For example, earlier this year MacLean's magazine writer Aaron Wherry authored a blog entitled, "Helena Guergis Irrelevancy Watch".
Indeed, whereas it is a rather simple matter to continually parrot party policy and read a prepared text, it is quite another to respond to unexpected questions in a lucid and coherent manner. One questions whether her inadequacies in this regard are the reason why she is has avoided some all-candidates debates and interviews with the media.
The pattern of avoidance has apparently extended into her employment. Last month Embassy magazine, Canada's respected and widely read foreign policy newsweekly, reported that, "Consular affairs has been an orphan of the government for the past months. The saga started when Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and International Trade Helena Guergis abruptly and unilaterally announced to PMO (Prime Minister's Office) that she would no longer be handling consular files..."
Yikes! Are you kidding me? Who gets to bail out on some of the critical aspects of their job? It's like a Tim Horton's clerk announcing that he/she no longer intends to pour coffee or a Honda associate advising they will no longer work in the stamping department. It's not acceptable!
The first sign that Guergis was in over her head may have been apparent in 2004 when she was quoted as saying: "...there is not much difference between beauty pageants and politics because of all the public service and travel required."
Umm... will someone please tell Guergis that serving as a cabinet minister is, in fact, different from a beauty pageant? If it doesn't happen soon the rest of Canada, if not the world, is liable to conclude that the residents of Simcoe-Grey belong in a scene from the Beverly Hillbillies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)