LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Like his successor, any grand foreign policy ambitions former Prime Minister Stephen Harper may have had were hamstrung by Canada's fundamentally weak geopolitical position.  As a result, the "Harper Doctrine" was equally inscrutable, save near-reflexive support for Israel or, at least, Israel's prime minister  and opposition to Russian President Vladimir Putin's annexation of Crimea.  However muddled his philosophy may have been to Canadian eyes, the International Democrat Union (IDU), a federation of centre-right political parties worldwide, liked it enough to vote unanimously for Harper as their chairman in February.  Thus he was met with a great deal of confusion after an April 9 tweet congratulating Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán on his third re-election.

A simple congratulation might sound innocuous if you aren't aware of Orbán's behavior since 2014, when he gave a widely cited public address praising "illiberal democracies," including Russia, as opposed to liberal democracies, which he believes are on the decline.  Between that address and today, he has referred to Muslim refugees as "invaders"; fast-tracked a law targeting the prestigious Central European University, criticizing them for offering degrees that are recognized outside of Hungary; introduced a tax of 700 forints ($3.50 CAD) per month on Internet data traffic, which he shelved after mass protests; tightened media regulations, including fines on "objectionable" content; delivered another speech with enough anti-Semitic dog-whistles to make Diefenbaker start howling in agony; and obsessed over Hungarian-born billionaire George Soros.

According to watchdog organization Freedom House, Hungary is now the least free country in the European Union that can still be categorized as "free," prompting government spokesperson Zoltán Kovács to accuse Freedom House of . . . doing the work of Soros.  I'm going to be very disappointed if he doesn't accuse me of doing the work of Soros after this column goes online.

Knowing all of the above, many pundits wondered why Harper, now heading an organization with the word "democrat" in its name, would be so solicitous to an increasingly authoritarian leader.  To anyone who ever believed Harper himself had an authoritarian bent, it was simply vindication.  Even Environment Minister Catherine McKenna got in on the call-outs.

But according to Harper spokesperson Rachel Curran, he was only sending out a de rigueur tweet in his capacity as chair of the IDU, of which Orbán's Fidesz party remains a member.  As such, Fidesz is in the company of the Conservative Parties of Canada and the UK, the Liberal Party of Australia, the Christian Democratic Union of Germany, and the National Party of New Zealand.  By contrast, Hungary's opposition party, the far-right Jobbik, which doesn't bother maintaining plausible deniability in its anti-Semitism, would not get in.

To date, no member party of the IDU has left, either on its own or by force.  For the latter to happen, according to the IDU's principles, a two-thirds vote of all other member parties would be required.  Membership can be suspended for failure to pay dues, but not for a party leader engaging in plainly undemocratic activity.  If a plan for a vote on Fidesz's future in the IDU is afoot, Harper is not prepared to say so.

Yet he is in a tight spot.  Upon taking up his appointment as the IDU's chair, Harper said he wanted to use his mandate to ensure "that we address the concerns of frustrated conservatives and that they do not drift to extreme options."  Fidesz had drifted long before that statement, and the IDU under its ex-chair, New Zealand's Sir John Key, had taken no action.  Orbán is Harper's problem now.

The most Harper could have done to convey his awareness of the problem at hand would be to phrase his congratulatory tweet this way:

"Congratulations to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán on his re-election.  His Fidesz party joined the IDU with a commitment to democracy.  The IDU will continue to promote our values worldwide."

But perhaps even that would have raised Orbán's hackles, and Kovács would have accused Harper of being a Soros puppet.  It doesn't take much.

It's one thing for other Canadians to dismiss Orbán as unworthy of praise or congratulation.  But Harper gave up that breathing room when he accepted his chairmanship.  If he becomes the first IDU chair on whose watch a member party was expelled, he'll finally have his moment of international significance.

Written by Jess Morgan

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


It's not good to have cowards as leaders.  Which might seem trite.  But it's from the trove of quotations I've collected over the years, some of which haven't aged well while others, including those I post daily, prove luminous far beyond their original context.

Twenty years ago R. Cort Kirkwood wrote in the Ottawa Sun "As one writer put it in the Wall St. Journal, when cowards ascend to positions of leadership, their character is revealed.  They panic in a crisis.  They don't know what to do."  I don't know who Kirkwood was citing.  But they were worth citing because these words keep coming back to me.

For instance it's now almost two years since Britons stunned various Establishments by voting to leave the European Union.  But Britain still hasn't left and there's every indication the final deal will be a sellout that saddles the UK with legal and financial obligations to the sclerotic and misconceived outfit it's meant to be walking away from.  Why?  Because Prime Minister Theresa May is a coward who, as cowards often do, resembles a cushion, bearing the imprint of whoever last sat on her, whether a cabinet hardliner, one of her wets, or some pompous EU potentate.

I remain delighted by the Brexit vote, on its merits and because I'm sick of the great and good seeking to stifle debate through snobbery.  I even give grudging credit to British Prime Minister David Cameron, a Brexit opponent, for having the grace or wit to step down when it passed.  But May, who also opposed it, promptly sidled into the top job without obvious qualifications, beliefs or program.  She was simply playing the game and standing for nothing but office.  As a result she panics and thrashes aimlessly in negotiations.

We need to be more alert to the extent to which cowardice is causing bad policy and bad politics.  Including all those "right wing" politicians who don't dare speak bluntly about economics, climate change, family and gender or almost anything else, because their PR wizards whisper that the populace is not yet rallying behind ideas that have not yet been proposed.

Tommy Douglas showed that bold advocacy can reshape public opinion.  But if you lack courage you won't dare try even.  Even though these trembling Tories gain little from their spinelessness.  They are pilloried by reputable opinion just as viciously as if they had the courage of their convictions.  And they vacate the field in harmful ways.

I believe those who still support Donald Trump because he has the right enemies will end up badly disappointed.  On Doug Ford my fingers are crossed.  And I keep saying, including about Viktor Orban in Hungary, that wilful leftist refusal to understand why decent people would vote for such a man does not help us at all.  But nor does chronic timidity on the right that leaves exasperated voters too few options.

Of course cowardice is not the only conceivable failing in a political leader or indeed the only obvious one.  In tyrannies ferocity is far more of an issue.  And even in democracies boldness in a mistaken leader can cause its own problems.

Witness our current Prime Minister, who is not a coward.  Far from it.  Like his father he is brave to the point of rashness, missing the golden mean the other way.  But democratic systems have strong filters that exclude courageous iconoclasts in favour of the time-serving, cautious greasy pole climbers who bedevil us.

Even Justin Trudeau himself seemed like a long shot partly because he generally said what he thought, if that's the word I'm looking for.  By and large it's those who understand the system and play by its rules, organizational and rhetorical, who slither to the top and are then unmasked in a crisis.  Including those around our Prime Minister.

Given the Trans Mountain Pipeline crisis, Trudeau needs colleagues and advisors capable of taking him firmly in hand, executing a decisive change of course, and coming clean with us.  But those around him seem to lack the requisite moral fibre.  The result illuminates the apparent paradox that cowards often blunder stubbornly down disastrous PR paths precisely because they find making decisions so painful they can't bear to revisit those they somehow did make.

Political incompetence is explained partly by the Peter Principle that people keep getting promoted until they land in a job they don't do well.  Or occasionally, like Trudeau, they somehow leapfrog many jobs they could not have done to land in one they have no idea how to do.  But reading the headlines, I can't shake the feeling that too many of those entrusted with important decisions are simply too scared to make them.

So when we vote, let's be sure to look for people with brains, hearts… and spines.

Photo Credit: CBC News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Last week I found myself in a rather dreary, miserable Toronto.  Lashed by rain, and wind, and snow, the city seemed to have been beaten down by this year's endless winter.

That still didn't quite prepare me for the apathy I found.  It seems everyone I talked to had resigned themselves to Doug Ford becoming premier.

From the outside, this seems pretty straightforward.  His poll numbers are as high or higher than the Progressive Conservative numbers were before the Patrick Brown saga began.  But I kind of expected people to be more opposed to the idea than they were.

This is very bad news for the Liberals.  The folks I was hanging out with aren't the type to go around saying, well, "folks" in that Fordian way.  Nor was I hanging out with a bunch of lefty media types.  But they were what I would peg as, generally, amenable to Liberal rule.  And the fact that these sorts of people aren't getting too worked up about a Grit drubbing gave me a good sense of the deep hole the Liberals are in.

When people actively don't care that your government is going down, you're in a very bad spot.  It's something of a cliché to talk about how keeping your opponents' voters at home is one of the most effective ways to win an election.  But there's a good amount of truth in it.  Usually, the game plan is to put out a bunch of mean and nasty ads and opposition research denigrating your opponent and the democratic process generally.

If your opponent is the one depressing their own vote, however, that makes the whole proposition much easier.

And, my goodness, is there plenty here to depress the Liberal vote.  Take Wednesday, when former Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty's chief of staff, David Livingston, was sentenced to spend a few months in jail for his participation in destroying documents during the gas plants scandal.

It makes for a nice juxtaposition set next to the Liberal budget of a fortnight ago, where Finance Minister Charles Sousa sold a new round of deficits — a naked bid for votes in the form of a spending splurge — as a responsible choice by a responsible government.  Which is fun, considering a bunch of emails were illegally destroyed to hide the government's responsibility in cancelling a pair of natural gas power plants costing the province in the neighbourhood of a billion dollars during a previous election.

And that's just the latest blow to the absurdly unpopular government.

So, during my trip things were to the point where friends said they would vote Green rather than cast a vote for Ford, Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne, or even Andrea Horwath*.  Having done this myself, the psychology behind it isn't really because you think the Green party has the best policies or would make a good government, but that the other options are so unpalatable it's the only thing you can do and still feel like you've done your civic duty.

Now, I can hear some of you perhaps crowing that campaigns matter.  And that's true, campaigns very much matter.  Especially when an Ontario Progressive Conservative is campaigning, as things have a tendency to rocket** straight off the rails.

This is why you'll see things like the Ford campaign ditching the traditional media bus.  Now, I happen to think the media bus is more than a bit shit.  It leads to a certain lazy narrowness to the press pack's coverage.  So this may lead to coverage more useful — and, god willing, interesting — than the usual campaign dreck. But it does also have the effect of keeping a bit of space and distance between the candidate and the media.  This is good if you're trying to keep someone prone to saying and doing extremely dumb things from doing those things in front of a pack of cameras.

It also has the added benefit of playing along nicely with Ford's continual harping against "the media."  It's not exactly hypocritical to trash journalists whenever possible, then tell them to find their own ride for the campaign.  At that point, limiting his exposure to blunder is just gravy.

Wynne has a steep hill to climb if she's to hang onto power in Ontario.  If the threat of a guy like Ford isn't enough to sway the friends of a mushy media liberal like me, what will?

***

*The reasons for not wanting to vote Horwath were quite varied and I don't have the space to explore here in detail.  But I will say none of them involved the spectre of Bob Rae.  For the most part, people of my generation remember Rae fondly, if at all, for the extra days off in elementary school.

**This is very tangental, but it's amusing to me the Toronto subway is nicknamed "The Rocket" by the TTC, and has every car plastered with decals saying it was voted the best transit system in North America for 2017 by the American Public Transportation Association.  As though a decal makes up for the obvious mess the rest of the country knows it to be.  I mean, a one-stop subway for how many billion?  lol.

Photo Credit: Jeff Burney, Loonie Politics

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.