Yes, it’s the constantly threatening hidden agenda!
What does Stephen Harper want to do with his parliamentary majority? “I want to make sure that we use it,” he told CTV’s Lisa LaFlamme in a year-end interview. “You know, I’ve seen too many majority governments, the bureaucracy talks them into going to sleep for three years, and then they all of a sudden realize they’re close to an election.”
[. . .]
You don’t have to like this list. I’m not saying Harper’s predecessors were heroes. I am saying they were not sleeping. If the Prime Minister’s comments have any meaning, he must have something up his sleeve at least as big as those accomplishments. If he doesn’t, he won’t be the first politician to congratulate himself for his achievements before he fails to achieve them.
His interviews suggest Harper plans something big. Four times during his CTV interview, and once with the Chinese-language Fairchild network, he used the adjective “major” to describe his plans for 2012.
[. . .]
It’s striking how rarely Harper sounds bold when any discussion descends from slogans to details. Take foreign policy. On Syria, he pleads the lack of a Security Council resolution. On Egypt: “We’ll try and do what we can do to encourage stability and encourage the forces of democracy, but we don’t go into these things blind. There are some very real risks.”
A policy of bold action only where success is assured is a policy of offering help where none is needed. It is a bold decision to join others’ victory parades. There is nothing major about it.
Incidentally, the bureaucrats I talk to aren’t plotting to put Harper to sleep. On the contrary. Many wonder whether this government will wake up. One of Ottawa’s most experienced civil servants tells me the widespread belief is that Harper’s government is so obsessed with each morning’s headlines that it cannot plan. This official predicts a year of high-level early retirements from the civil service if Harper does not start using his majority.
I can only hope that the PM has more changes up his sleeve. It will take years to reverse the Tru-topian country that the Liberals have concocted. Also, from the story, I can also only wish that more “high level civil servants” take early retirement; too many of them are sycophantic Liberal supporters who keep putting roadblocks in the way of change.
Comment by Dwayne — January 6, 2012 @ 13:28
As the old button/bumper sticker slogan had it: “No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in”
The best example of perception and reality there was the Belgian situation: setting a world record for politicians being unable to form a government, yet the bureaucracy seems to have barely noticed they didn’t have political overseers around.
Much of what we complain about “the government” should really be attributed to the “permanent government” that doesn’t take much notice of who we vote for.
Comment by Nicholas — January 6, 2012 @ 15:34
I think the agenda is what Harper has always said it was; to remain PM as long as possible so as to suffocate the fundraising and prospects of the Brokerage Party (a.k.a. the Liberals). The gradual pacing of his remodelling is by design, not a mere artifact being stuck with hung Parliaments.
Harper is a boring guy, at heart. He didn’t want to become an accountant, like his dad wanted; so he rebelled—and became… an economist. That ought to give you a hint as to what the PM thinks is a radical change in direction.
My gut feeling is that even if Harper had a firebrand right-wing agenda, his slow, methodical nature means it would take 40 years to implement. Everybody looking for the big overnight change is kind of failing to see the forest for the trees.
Comment by Chris Taylor — January 8, 2012 @ 18:07