Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Harper flip-flops

My, My. Harper as been making it awfully easy of late to show his hypocrisy on issues.

First, we find out from news “sources” he’ll be stacking the Senate with 18 Conservative loyalists:

…according to insiders, what really drove Harper to move quickly and fill the vacant Senate seats is the possibility of losing political power in January at the hands of the Liberal-NDP coalition.

The point is made elsewhere that Harper has never appeared to be that serious about Senate reform anyways, but for someone who claimed to want to reform the institution so it would be democratic, and to then turn around and pack it with Con cronies because he doesn’t want another government of a different stripe filling it seems a tad hypocritical.

Second, a few blogsites have shown this already , but I’ll use it again to highlight the point (courtesy of Impolitical) that we find Harper’s haranguing about another party or parties coming to power without an election seem a bit.. er… self-serving.

It appears the fear of losing power has caused Harper to abandon his high and mighty principles.

UPDATE: Impolitical makes a good point: Harper made these comments on April 20, 2005. That was at the 10 month mark of the Martin minority government.


13 comments to Harper flip-flops

  • Tim N

    I said this elsewhere – I don’t have an issue with the Conservatives appointing Senators.

    HOWEVER, I also have not been running around for the last 5 to 10 years proclaiming what an affront to democracy appointed Senators are. This is where the hypocrisy of Harper exists, and where partisan Conservatives fail to see, or recognize it.

    This is why I can never vote for Harper (despite being a “red tory”) – he has no principles that he is willing to uphold, and as such, I have no respect for the man.

    Same with Preston if he accepts a senate seat.

  • Oh my God! He’s doing that? Well, that certainly makes Dion’s flip-flop on “Never a Coalition” fade from focus, then, doesn’t it? Or the new oxymoron, “Liberal Democracy”, as portrayed by Iggy’s coronation.

    Oh, the shame, the outrage, the flip-flops of Liberals (oops, I mean) Conservatives!

    Notice to readers: Rampant selective moral indignation is on display, here.

  • So wilson, are you lying or stupid?

    “the coalition appointing E May and 6 Separatists.”

    Uhm, no one by May has ever said anything about appointing her to the senate. Quebec only has 4 open Senate seats, not 6. And it is Bloc policy to abolish the Senate. No BQ member or supporter (or any other separatiste) would accept a Senate seat.

    Since this is all pretty obvious and a matter of public record, I think you are a liar.

  • Joe

    Harper has to fill these senate seats. He is, after all, entitled to his entitlements!

  • David

    WOW! The “con job” party offers an olive branch to the Liberals and then has the audacity to slap them in the face with the Senate appointments.

    The hypocrisy continues

  • Harper could always do what Martin and Trudeau did and appoint a few senators from the opposition parties…

    Bhaha ha ha!!! Sorry, I don’t know what I was thinking.

    Anyone care to take bets on how many western Reform votes he’s just lost with this little manoeuvre?

  • wilson

    Canadians will prefer PMSH appoint Senators when given the alternative,
    the coalition appointing E May and 6 Separatists.

    I hope Preston Manning accepts an appointment to the Senate.

  • The point — despite Barkman’s attempt — is very clear: The leader of the Conservative Party is contradicting the wants of his Party, and the mandate he was given.

    Now, I’m not so big on mandate as a concept, but Harper is saying he is.

    Thus, he is a hypocrite.

    Do as he says, not as he does.

  • janfromthebruce

    And part of this came to the fore in the minds of Harper, due to Ms. May’s public musing of getting a “senate seat” when the coalition govt came to power. That was stupid, considering it was just her public musing and nothing had been discussed. But Dion’s “weak response” when queried about her appt to sentate, instead of saying, that is not on the table, fueled speculation and distorted the main message of the coalition – economic stim package.
    So now that the cons are going to fill those positions, they will say that the coalition would have done that, and use Ms. May’s public musing as their validation. Now where is that sock that I wanted to stuff in someone’s mouth.

  • roll tide

    As Ivison pointed out. Ignatieff could not have said it better yesterday.
    “Prime Minister Harper miscalculated, with nearly catastrophic results for the country”….he has a point…….
    a Liberal led coalition with the NDP and the Bloc.

    What have the Liberals brought to the table on Senate reform, other then block it? They now complain that Harper is about to tamper with their little nest of entitlement.
    Its about time Harper plays hardball.

  • Barkman

    Yeah, sure Scott. The Liberals have never had ANYTHING to say on the matter, in support or not. Ever. Whatever, lol.

    And besides, the Mulroney government, who is NOT a province, with others had NOTHING to do or say during Meech and Charlottetown when an attempt was made to have the Constitution opened to draw in Quebec.

    The fact is, until the rules change, you cannot credibly expect Harper to NEVER EVER appoint ANYONE by playing by the same rules the Liberals have been all this time. Doing so only makes you disengenuous.

  • Barkman

    Well, until the day comes where the Liberals stop refusing to help pass electoral reform for the Senate, there is not a lot they can say when Harper is only playing by the same rulebook they do. Until then, you guys can’t have it both ways. Sorry.

    • Barkman: as you very well should know, the Liberals have nothing to do with hindering or helping Senate reform. You can’t pass Senate reform – true Senate reform – without reopening the Constitution and getting the provinces to agree to it. So nice try with the red herring, and not a very nice attempt at trying to sidestep the fact that Harper is a big hypocrite – both on the “you need an election to take power” statement, as well as his Senate reform.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.