In The Home Stretch
There it is, Canada's relatively short period of electioneering for an otherwise unanticipated federal election is drawing to a close. The current government was hoping that its brief time administering the affairs of the country as a minority government would give it the upper hand in persuading Canadians it was time to commit to a majority government for the Conservatives.
It's true the Conservatives, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, have done a credible job for the past two and a half years of minority governance. A careful agenda of middle-of-the-road, moderate decision-making has somewhat damped the apprehension of many Canadians of the feared potential of an underhanded Conservative agenda, to yank the country in a direction most Canadians would not appreciate.
Yet Prime Minister Stephen Harper has proven himself to be a conservative moderate, not a Conservative hard-liner. He has, it is true, maintained an iron grip on his caucus, much less his Cabinet, insisting on full control. He should learn to delegate, but then that speaks also to the quality of the people he must depend on.
He has most certainly not endeared himself with the news hounds on Parliament Hill, shutting off their access to easy on-the-spot interviews. That's not too bright; Canadians have a need to know what is happening, when it is, and to remain fully informed. His brittle disassociation with newspeople has come back to haunt him.
He has carefully assessed just what Canadians will accept, and he has governed accordingly. He has acted with principle on the international scene, although there are those who complain he has pulled Canada away from its place of respect within the United Nations. He has given heartfelt apologies to the Aboriginal, the Chinese and the East Indian community for harm done them in the past.
He has yet to give full attention to the need of the underprivileged in our wealthy country. There is an astounding, shameful number of families living at or below the poverty line. Too many Canadian children live in poverty, and this is a situation that simply must not be countenanced. It's to his credit that his government has increased socially-assisted housing for the poor, but far more needs to be done.
There is much yet he should be expected to do on our behalf, from more serious attention to climate change, to upholding our promise to increase international relief, and to finally conclude agreements with our First Nations Peoples. At the present time of economic uncertainty in the world, Canadians might do well to stay with the assurance of adequate governance as opposed to the fumbling inadequacies represented by the adversarial opposition parties.
And truth to tell, Canadians haven't been well served by any of our political parties throughout the course of this election campaign. All the parties have descended into an unappealing display of partisan bickering, of defamatory slags against other parties, of emotional chicanery, or accusations verging on slander, while parading their virtues as potential leaders of the country.
We are collectively unimpressed. And disappointed. Surely our political elites can do better than this, than to resort to childish back-stabbing and vituperative accusations? Well, perhaps not. It's possible, though most of us don't agree that this is so, that we deserve the motley crew we've inherited.
The spoutings and spewings of our national press do them no great credit either, with their eager searches for slip-ups and dwelling with obvious glee on the miserable performances on the part of our politicians, the better to burnish their reportorial credentials, and in the process sell newspapers.
And with two days before the election, one might think that the newspaper published in the national capital might be more ingenious in presenting a picture of the leaders' attributes than to publish a full page of irrelevancies such as a question-and-response inventory from the five main parties' leaders.
Should the voting public really care about absurd items such as: 1.What was the first album/CD you ever owned?; 2. What movie could you watch again and again?; 3.what did you have on your bedroom walls when you were a kid?; 4. What three items would you take with you to a desert island? And so on, ad nauseum.
Little wonder that, from among the five leaders, Stephen Harper was the sole non-responder. A bit of levity and light-heartedness is all very well, but given the paucity of intelligent discourse in this election and the need to present an aura of responsible leadership and rectitude, this pathetically jejune aside is silly beyond belief.
Yet, on second thought, perhaps more than slightly indicative of the well exercised state of arrested juvenile behaviour of the responders, of late, on the election stage. It serves only to further distort deficiencies of sober thought and responsible attitudes on the part of our pathetic politicos.
Tuesday evening will put us out of our misery, and place us back on the track of expectations, failed or delivered.
It's true the Conservatives, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, have done a credible job for the past two and a half years of minority governance. A careful agenda of middle-of-the-road, moderate decision-making has somewhat damped the apprehension of many Canadians of the feared potential of an underhanded Conservative agenda, to yank the country in a direction most Canadians would not appreciate.
Yet Prime Minister Stephen Harper has proven himself to be a conservative moderate, not a Conservative hard-liner. He has, it is true, maintained an iron grip on his caucus, much less his Cabinet, insisting on full control. He should learn to delegate, but then that speaks also to the quality of the people he must depend on.
He has most certainly not endeared himself with the news hounds on Parliament Hill, shutting off their access to easy on-the-spot interviews. That's not too bright; Canadians have a need to know what is happening, when it is, and to remain fully informed. His brittle disassociation with newspeople has come back to haunt him.
He has carefully assessed just what Canadians will accept, and he has governed accordingly. He has acted with principle on the international scene, although there are those who complain he has pulled Canada away from its place of respect within the United Nations. He has given heartfelt apologies to the Aboriginal, the Chinese and the East Indian community for harm done them in the past.
He has yet to give full attention to the need of the underprivileged in our wealthy country. There is an astounding, shameful number of families living at or below the poverty line. Too many Canadian children live in poverty, and this is a situation that simply must not be countenanced. It's to his credit that his government has increased socially-assisted housing for the poor, but far more needs to be done.
There is much yet he should be expected to do on our behalf, from more serious attention to climate change, to upholding our promise to increase international relief, and to finally conclude agreements with our First Nations Peoples. At the present time of economic uncertainty in the world, Canadians might do well to stay with the assurance of adequate governance as opposed to the fumbling inadequacies represented by the adversarial opposition parties.
And truth to tell, Canadians haven't been well served by any of our political parties throughout the course of this election campaign. All the parties have descended into an unappealing display of partisan bickering, of defamatory slags against other parties, of emotional chicanery, or accusations verging on slander, while parading their virtues as potential leaders of the country.
We are collectively unimpressed. And disappointed. Surely our political elites can do better than this, than to resort to childish back-stabbing and vituperative accusations? Well, perhaps not. It's possible, though most of us don't agree that this is so, that we deserve the motley crew we've inherited.
The spoutings and spewings of our national press do them no great credit either, with their eager searches for slip-ups and dwelling with obvious glee on the miserable performances on the part of our politicians, the better to burnish their reportorial credentials, and in the process sell newspapers.
And with two days before the election, one might think that the newspaper published in the national capital might be more ingenious in presenting a picture of the leaders' attributes than to publish a full page of irrelevancies such as a question-and-response inventory from the five main parties' leaders.
Should the voting public really care about absurd items such as: 1.What was the first album/CD you ever owned?; 2. What movie could you watch again and again?; 3.what did you have on your bedroom walls when you were a kid?; 4. What three items would you take with you to a desert island? And so on, ad nauseum.
Little wonder that, from among the five leaders, Stephen Harper was the sole non-responder. A bit of levity and light-heartedness is all very well, but given the paucity of intelligent discourse in this election and the need to present an aura of responsible leadership and rectitude, this pathetically jejune aside is silly beyond belief.
Yet, on second thought, perhaps more than slightly indicative of the well exercised state of arrested juvenile behaviour of the responders, of late, on the election stage. It serves only to further distort deficiencies of sober thought and responsible attitudes on the part of our pathetic politicos.
Tuesday evening will put us out of our misery, and place us back on the track of expectations, failed or delivered.
posted by Pieface | 7:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home