Stephen Joseph Harper, who celebrated his 52nd birthday two days before leading his Conservatives to their third consecutive election victory, once joked that his father had wanted him to become a chartered accountant. “But I didn’t have enough charisma to be an accountant,” Harper told the Toronto Star in 2004. Now, as a Conservative prime minister with a comfortable majority, Harper possesses something more valuable than the magic of charisma. He finally has the power to do what he wants.
Judging by a remarkable speech Harper delivered to a right-leaning conservative group in 2003, our majority prime minister has definite ideas on the use of such power. Harper argued then that after the Reagan and Thatcher revolutions of the 1980s, the political right had finally defeated the economic ideas of their left-leaning foes, forcing socialists and liberals to “adopt much of the winning conservative agenda,” including balanced budgets, rolling back welfare entitlements, the privatization of public institutions and the use of public/private partnerships in accomplishing state goals.
More still needed to be done on the economic front, Harper argued, including deeper tax cuts and further privatization and deregulation, but the real contest between left and right had shifted to social values and “the damage the welfare state is having on our most important institutions, particularly the family.” Harper went on to mention issues he saw as “key to a conservative agenda.” They included “banning child pornography, raising the age of sexual consent, providing choice in education and strengthening the institution of marriage.” And he castigated the left for what he called its “moral nihilism” reflected, for example, in the silliness of its “moral neutrality on the use of marijuana or harder drugs mixed with its random moral crusades on tobacco.” Harper added that conservatives should not shy away from applying their social values in a wide range of political fields “including foreign affairs and defence, criminal justice and corrections, family and child care and health care and social services.”
Harper’s record as prime minister shows that he still adheres to these ideas. His multi-billion-dollar, tough-on-crime agenda, which includes harsher penalties for drug offences, is one example. For Harper, the war on drugs is not a futile waste of money and human lives. It’s a principled crusade against moral nihilism and social decay. Harper’s promise to reduce federal spending to 12.9 percent of gross domestic product—a move that would require major cuts in social spending—is another example. He touts the need for “limited government”—a goal that goes hand-in-hand with conservative social values. Not only would smaller government reduce people’s dependence on the hated welfare state, it would also make it easier to cut the taxes that social conservatives see as constraints on individual freedom.
Harper’s promise to phase out the $2 per vote subsidy to political parties also fits in with his philosophy of privatizing public functions. Why should taxpayers bear so much of the burden of financing election campaigns when private donors could do it? Harper’s admiration for all things American seems to have blinded him to the corrosive combination of money and politics south of the border. As one pol joked, the US system of government is the finest money can buy.
Finally, back in 2003, Harper castigated the liberal-left for its unwillingness to fight the international war on terrorism. He argued that Canada has a duty to use its military to take a “moral stand” on behalf of democracy, free enterprise and freedom. “This moral stand,” he continued, “should not just give us the right to stand with our allies, but the duty to do so and the responsibility to put ‘hard power’ behind our international commitments.”
Harper’s chilling militarism, his hostility to social welfare and his moralizing approach to political issues are a potent mix in a powerful leader with scant respect for parliamentary institutions. How far will Stephen Harper go? Just watch him.
Related Stories
Get out and shut down Bill C-51 (before it’s too late)
This article appears in May 5-11, 2011.
OMG Brucie lives and spews again. Yes, tough on crime is such a bad policy, right. Bruce don’t you get it? The people have spoken and either don’t give a fuck about your left wing rantings and if they did, they couldn’t muster enough energy get their asses to the polling stations.
Here’s to limited government! Canada needs a really big dose of that, no doubt.
I hope those nasty old Navy SEALs didn’t disturb his beauty rest. 5 weeks ago I described Cousin Brucie’s first election column as the best Pro-Conservative advertising I’d ever read.
Todays bit of Wank effectively erases any doubts I may have had about a Harper majority.
Not to mention, we’re getting these babies and there isn’t diddley jack squat your kind can do about it.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-phot…
Bruce writes the usual attack piece and attempting to scare Canadians.
Let me address the brief reference to party financing.
Party financing, other than rebates for election spending, was never a ‘public function’ until just before Chretien departed the scene post Adscam.
Harper has never called for, hinted at or suggested in passing that we should adopt the US system. He has only said he will eliminate the $1.95 per vote subsidy over 3 years. He has never said he would allow funding from a business or a union. He is quite happy to require a party to raise money from its supporters; the NDP are very good, the Conservatives are very good and the Liberals are getting better at convincing supporters to make donations.
The average personal donation to the Conservative party is $35 or the price of less than 30 medium coffees at TH.
Less money in politics will be good for all of us because parties will not be able to waste money. And that is good for all Canadians.
What Bruce and his ilk on the left keep doing is lying and attempting to mislead the public and they do it because they have little else to do.
I like Harper’s agenda, especially his tough-on-crime stance.
Keep in mind, Bro Tim, only 65% of the people have spoken and of that 65%, only 40% voted for Harper, that means the majority of the people who bothered to vote voted AGAINST Stephen Harper and his anti-humanitarian, neo-liberal, authoritarian regime.
I’ve got no problem with being tough on crime.
My problem is lumping crack heads, methanphetamine users , herione addicts etc in with pot heads.
Some one who uses a gun to commit crime, gets IMO too lenient a sentence. I just read today about a guy caught with an illegal loaded hand gun in Dartmouth is home on ‘house arrest’ !
Your going to put a pot smoker/grower in jail, but the gun criminal stays HOME !
W T F ?!?!?!?
Here is the Bruce Wark signature song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qgcy-V6YIuI
“I like Harper’s agenda, especially his tough-on-crime stance.”
You mean his “tough on pot heads and single moms” stance, and go EASY on crack dealers, gun dealers, child porn producers, meth cooks, and the list goes on!
The Conservative Party which “won” the election, got ONLY 39.62% of the national vote BUT they get 167 of the 308 seats in Parliament; that is 54% of the seats for only 39.62% of the vote! That’s a pretty good deal and a wonderful Racket imported from the Royal lovin’ Brits. So, Canadians do not want this “majority” government but, unless Toronto goes Cairo, we are stuck with it and its American inspired right wing nuttiness and criminal depredation.
I wonder why Bruce can not accept the result of a Democratic election? Harper won fair election just because voter turn out was at a all time low is not at fault of the conservative party. Also Harper won more seats in the Toronto area and got the vote of ethic communities and got votes from people who do not usually vote Conservative. Also since voter turn out was at a all time low why are people not liking the results of this election? Let me guess you did not vote? Did you?
@ Sweets
Toronto goes Cairo, we are stuck with it and its American inspired right wing nuttiness and criminal depredation
Could you answer this question why are most of the ridings in the Toronto Area are currently under Conservatives MPs? Go Cario? Unlike Egypt, Canada can vote Harper out. Let me guess I’m guessing another non-voter who did not even take part in our elections
The doubters and apologists, ie., the “centrists”, who voted for Harper in the belief that the Conservatives are all about fiscal responsibility and stable government, and not right wing social engineering, are about to find out that there is, indeed, a far-reaching Conservative agenda.
It will go far beyond the limited discussion of issues we saw in the recent election campaign.
The government will plow ahead with its purchase of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the acquisition cost will be far more than the Conservatives claimed, but as the total cost of the program mounts few will remember the dollar figure originally attached to the purchase. The Conservatives will argue that the mounting costs were “unforeseen” in spite of ample evidence and expert opinion available NOW which indicates that it will be far more expensive than advertised. Of course, as the F-35 fighter program starts eating up more and more of the public purse the Conservatives will point to the deficit and public debt and loudly proclaim the necessity of more and more cuts to government spending. The continued reduction of corporate income tax rates will also cut into government revenues (with little positive effect elsewhere in the economy) thereby adding to the “debt problem”. The Conservatives will use the “debt problem” as a club against any government spending that doesn’t conform to their agenda.
This isn’t a new phenomenon. U.S. President Ronald Reagan used this strategy to great effect in the 1980s when he ran on a platform of reducing the size and reach of government. Apparently, in Reagan’s view, there is “good” public debt and “bad” public debt, because while he cut the size of many government departments and crippled others by relaxing the regulatory environment, along with implementing tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, he presided over a massive program of military spending which helped him run up the U.S. debt to a level it had never before reached in the nation’s history. So much for small government, if by that one means less government spending and less government debt.
Those “social conservatives” who have been hiding in the wings since the Reform and Progressive Conservatives successfully formed a right wing coalition will make themselves heard in the Harper government. The Prime Minister will feel less inclined to muzzle and restrain them now that they have their governing majority. Majority status was their Holy Grail. They won’t waste it in compromise. They won’t “put up” with things they don’t like. Why would they?
Bruce is absolutely correct. The “agenda” is about to unfold, regardless of Harper’s election night promise to govern for all Canadians and not give us any surprises.
I wonder what Bruce would say, if things were reversed and the NDP had the majority if he and others would change their minds about first past the post. You don’t like the fact that only 60% voted, don’t bitch at me, I voted, bitch at those who didn’t.
So under proportional representation, who gets to pick and choose what person and party gets what riding. Should an MP who gets the most vote have to give up his or her seat to someone who didn’t win. Should a riding give up their choice of MP for someone they didn’t vote for. Or maybe we just count up all the votes and the leaders can handpick their MPs. Then they can throw darts to see who gets what riding.
Proportional representation will never work: for all those bitching about how Harper now has a majority when he only claimed 40% of the vote- where is the better solution? As Bro Tim points out, there are many problems associated with basing the government on percent of total instead of by riding. On the other side of things, I do think we are in for a shitty deal and a negative direction for the country with the Conservatives heading a majority. The Conservatives won fair and square, and they have the time that Canadians have given to them regardless of taking us backwards in social conservatism or increasing military spending by unprecedented amounts. In the end, we have to live with what they do and if more Canadians vote another party next election, that party will hve a chance to undo the *possible* damage the Harper government will do. Shit sucks, but stay critical about issues and keep public pressure on bad decisions for the next 4+ years and maybe we will come out of this OK. And stop bitching, this is what Canada wanted as a whole, regardless of how many of us feel on the left wing.
I think the question people can not understand how did Steven Harper win a majority with 40% of the popular vote is the same how the Liberal Party of Canada had three majorities with the same amount of the popular vote. I’m guessing the Coast lost it when it failed to have a balance election coverage and even as I remember supported the NDP in Nova Scotia when they managed to destroy this province when they got 45.26% of the popular vote in Nova Scotia. How is this any different. I keep on forgetting it the evil conservatives who one a fair election
NDP Nova Scotia popular vote source:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nsvotes2009/story…
So is Bruce going to say Dexter is a dictator too? Nope! He got a majority with 45% of the popular vote in Nova Soctia and is no different then from the Conservatives in Ottawa because if you do the math 53 % of Nova Scotians did not vote for NDP Majority
Bruce it’s 167 seats any which way you slice and dice it, democracy at it’s finest, so buy yourself an extra large mocha pony piss tree sap granola armpit hair coffee and a sookie blanket and cry yourself to sleep for the next 4 years.
The Mother of Parliaments have also rejected your left wing fantasies:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-1329…
This was a positive election. If you didn’t vote at all, shut up and stay shut up. If you did vote, and voted Conservative, you’re happy. If you did vote, but didn’t vote Conservative, you should still be pleased – there wasn’t a chance in hell that anyone else was getting a majority, and a majority government is what we need right now. If you don’t like the Conservatives, rest assured that now’s the chance for Harper to f**k up without being able to blame obstructionist opponents. If he actually does a good job so much the better, and why should anyone get all partisan about a good job?
Other bonuses: the Bloc got annihilated. No negatives in this result. And I think it’s a good thing that the Liberals got so thoroughly trounced – they are redundant. You can actually get good results from a right-of-centre majority plus a strong left-of-centre official opposition, with no wishy-washy centrist party to muddy the waters.
So Harper’s in power. Last I checked, him running a minority government wasn’t stopping either the F-35 nor massive spending on jails, so regardless of how you think about those programs, nothing much changed here actually.
Hey commenters, Please don’t criticize me for complaining that the Harperites won a majority with 40% of the vote. You won’t find that anywhere in my editorial. Nor do I mention anything about proportional representation. The editorial is about Stephen Harper’s political philosophy and how he will use power now that he leads a government with a comfortable majority in both the Commons and the Senate.
Harper’s fine as PM. Not my first choice, but not my last choice, either. I can live with him for 5 years or so. Actually he’s done a better job than I thought he would, just a few years ago when he took over.
Wanker is such a lame-ass socialist turd that he has to comment on his own articles!
Only a pencil dick weenie would stoop that low. but what more could you expect from a socialist?. I pick up a “free” copy of The Coast so that I know what commie advertisers, who give this leftest rag money, to boycott. Although It appears most of the ink money comes from their political leftist friends like Megan “Chesire” Leslie, Len “Mansion” Preyra, Geoff “Trougher” Regan. Stan “Shrink” Kutcher, and the biggest joke of them all, over-sized ego, Harvard smarts-challenged Iggy whose attempts at bullshitting Canadians fell on its face. To use his own worn out expression ” It is perfectly clear” why Iggy was touting free education at the University level … so that he could try for a 5th time to get tenure. Iggy is almost as credible in the public’s eyes as Wanker!
Everyone that voted for Harper should look no farther than south of the border to see where those policies lead.. American’s have lost many fundamental freedoms to the encroaching police state. It’s bankrupt morally, politically and economically with trillions spend on bankers, while money is spent to train other countries to take US jobs. This doesn’t include the half of all taxes paid going to support military adventures supporting oil companies. Unemployment is running about 22% and older people are losing any form or retirement or health care. If you like supporting the lifestyles of rich and famous who live without any fear of consequences then follow those footsteps. Those F-35’s are great start…nice welfare for US defense corporate execs who take home about $30M a year.. have to pay for that somehow.. Americans are tapped out so its up to Canada and Saudia Arabia to pick up the tab.. let me know how it all works out for you
“If you didn’t vote at all, shut up and stay shut up.”
We have this thing called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I have the right to free and peaceful expression EVEN IF I don’t support the major parties. Doesn’t matter if there is 1, 2, 3, or 4 parties to vote for. If they don’t represent me I am not obligated to support any of them. So you can take your ignorance and shut the fuck up.
Geez, does it matter to you people lauding this “tough on crime” BS that crime rates have fallen? That the U.S. “War on Drugs” has proven an ineffective money pit? Nope, because the scaremongering talking heads on TV have told you that youth are mean, brown people are mean, the world is mean — and you’ve swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Don’t complain while you’re paying out the ass for all the new prisons, the potheads that’ll fill them, and maybe a couple billion in G20 riot shields to boot.
Don’t complain when this province goes down the tubes economically when Harper and his xenophobic reform ilk cut immigration in half. I know you won’t, because the Sun News team has fed you all this shit about minorities receiving “special treatment” and it’s made you feel good about your own moronic prejudices. Don’t complain when you never see a balanced budget again, when criminals dominate the house of parliament, and when human rights like gay marriage are cut. You voted for this cretin!
@sodeypop: your argument is very weak. If for whatever reason you choose not to vote then you’re a bystander. Yes, in theory you’ve got the right to bitch, but please don’t posture and say the system is failing you – no, *you* are failing the system. And you’re also failing all people who bother to vote.
If none of the platforms of the major parties – let’s say you had Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green available in your riding – are particularly close to your personal positions, which is possible, it’s still preferable to vote for the candidate of the party that is closest. If that truly doesn’t work for you – let’s say you’ve got some extreme and peculiar views – then there are roughly a dozen other political parties currently registered at the federal level: get off your ass and become a candidate for one of them. If even that doesn’t work, run as an independent – the process requires some hard work and dedication, but it’s not overwhelming.
But seriously…among Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green, you couldn’t find a platform that was even acceptably close to something you could vote for? All of them were so far off that it was preferable to reject the process? Realize that that’s what you did – you didn’t make a noble gesture here, sodeypop, you threw up your hands and withdrew from the system.
So, yes, you’ve got the same right I do to complain. But you don’t have the same credibility…not when you admit to not voting. You’re a kibitzer and a bystander, not an involved citizen.
Realist, you are so full of shit and so naive. Oh, and you mainly want me to *help* someone else’s party, not one I believe in. I stand by my right to only vote for a party I fully support. You can’t bully me into voting for your party.
I am definitely investing into vineyards and dairies. Imagine all the money I’ll make when I sell all that cheese to Brucie and friends who will down it with their wine.
Happy days are here again.
I wonder what Bruce thinks about our erosion of rights under this pathetic NS NDP government? The cancellation of the “public” voluntary planning board, the release of voters private information to political parties and the fact that your property can be seized and sold if you are only charged, not convicted, under the proceeds of crime act. I’m quite tired of Bruce’s anti Harper drivel. These bunch of self proclaimed socialists make Mr. Harper look like a saint! Give it up Bruce!
‘