The 2011 federal election campaign is barely a week old, and the big story is how badly (in the double sense) Stephen Harper has performed.
Harper kicked off the campaign by attacking his main rival, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, claiming Ignatieff would form a coalition with the NDP and the Bloc Québecois, even if the Conservatives won a plurality of seats. Ignatieff promptly disavowed any such intention, but Harper kept, um, harping, on the subject.
When confronted with the letter to the Governor-General that, along with Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe, he had signed in 2004, Harper denied that it was intended to propose a coalition as an alternative to the Paul Martin Liberal minority government. I referenced that letter in a previous post. You can read what Harper had to say on that occasion and be the judge of his intentions then and whether he's being truthful now.
This isn't the first time Harper has "reinterpreted" an earlier position. There was the essay in which he called Canada a "second-tier, socialistic country" back in 2000, and the infamous "firewall" letter of 2001. Understandably, he doesn't talk (openly) like that today, which is what fuels talk of his "secret" agenda.
So, OK, against Canada in 2000; in 2011, "Canadians first and only". In 2004, in favour of a coalition with "socialists and separatists"; in 2011, agin' 'em.
But Harper has set a new personal best for reversals, and lying about them, with this week's flip-flop on one-on-one debates: on Wednesday, he was issuing challenges; by Thursday, he was chickening out. Which led Maclean's blogger Scott Feschuk to dub the Conservative campaign plane "Chicken Wings". This one could stick around to haunt Harper: people can't always tell a liar, but they sure know a coward when they see one.
Harper's big campaign promise of the week landed with a giant thud. The offer to let select – only 13% would qualify, and only the richest would benefit – families income split to save on taxes had a couple of big ifs and whens attached: if and when he gets re-elected (twice), and if and when he eliminates the deficit. Voters can probably figure out for themselves whether the guy who managed to turn an inherited $14 billion surplus into a deficit of $55 billion is likely to ever balance the budget, especially after the corporations get their tax cut, and the jets and jails get paid for. Maybe Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, as a former Mike Harris operative, can explain to Harper the effect tax cuts have in creating permanent "structural" deficits.
Now it's revealed that Harper has alienated the media following him by restricting them to five questions a day: two in French, two in English, and one from a local reporter. And there'll be no questions about ethics allowed. That oughta keep the press conferences short.
It's still early in the campaign, of course, and voters may not yet be paying attention; or Harper and the Conservatives may yet find their feet; but it will be interesting to see what the polls reveal about the effect of the first week's gaffes.
No comments:
Post a Comment