Trudeau's Petty Vindictiveness

"Don't worry, this isn't our first rodeo. We made sure we never used his name. Send back the nil return [access to information request]."
"He seemed proud to provide that response."
"It just doesn't seem right, the way the whole situation played out, when I was thinking back about it."
"I just wanted to make it known, whether it's relevant or not."
Witness for the defence; name protected

"In spite of the fact that I believe my view is clear, I continue to receive enquiries about my position regarding cabinet confidences pertaining to my government as relates to the case involving
Admiral Norman."
"As I recently indicated publicly, I do not assert cabinet confidence for documents relevant to this proceeding."
Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Vice-Admiral Mark Norman's lawyers are accusing the federal government of obfuscation after obtaining an email from former prime minister Stephen Harper confirming he has no objection to releasing secret documents relevant to the case. Vice Admiral Mark Norman arrives to the Ottawa Courthouse in Ottawa on Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2018. Photo: Sean Kilpatrick

"The passive position taken by the Crown throughout this investigation and throughout this application in my respectful submission, is profoundly concerning. [It represents evidence of] obfuscation and gamesmanship [on the part of the Crown]."
"How extraordinary that Vice-Admiral Norman after three years, three years of this investigation, that it is his counsel that has to try to unravel this, that has to try to bring the relevant information before this honourable court."
"To suggest this isn't obfuscation and gamesmanship, when we directly asked again and again [about both the Harper waiver and the government's position on cabinet confidence] they [the government] have refused to answer that question since July."
"After three and a half years, how is it that his counsel has to try to unravel this? And this is the tip of the iceberg."
Marie Henein, counsel for the defence of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman

Mark Norman with his lawyer Marie Henein in September 2018. Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press/File

Vice-Admiral Mark Norman who until the RCMP was requested to investigate him for leaking secret government information, was the second in command of the Canadian Armed Forces, has faced an uphill battle to defend himself against the single charge that has ruined his career and blemished his otherwise extraordinary reputation. The charge the Trudeau government has laid against him is a single count of criminal breach of trust relating to the iAOR -- the interim Auxiliary Oil Replenishment vessel for the Canadian navy.

That vessel is a floating energy source for Canadian warships. The Navy once had two in operation, so old and decrepit they were finally decommissioned. The government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in recognition of the urgency of such a supply ship had put into motion a temporary replacement until new supply ships could be built. Davie Shipyards in Quebec was given the contract. But when the Trudeau government succeeded the Harper government one of the first things done was to place the contract on hold when a Vancouver shipyard lobbied new government Treasury Board President Scott Brison (a Vancouver M.P.) to cancel with Davie and award the contract to Irving Shipbuilding.

It was Brison's intervention and Trudeau's intention to cancel the Davie Shipyards contract that was leaked to a CBC journalist and to Davie by any number of sources who had access to that information that the Privy Council Office was aware of. The public learned of the expense involved in the contract's cancellation and was not pleased. The result was that the Trudeau government was intent on using Vice-Admiral Norman as a target for punishment for embarrassing the Prime Minister into making good on the Davie contract once the scandal was publicly aired.

Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyers have been frustrated in their attempts to have government files released to them in their defence of the man's innocence of the charge brought against an honourable public servant. Where government lawyers have interfered with normal defence access to witnesses and failing to disclose records useful to his defence. Out of the blue two witnesses for the defence have presented themselves. One, a former analyst at the Privy Council Office who routinely took notes of meetings between the PCO and the office of the Prime Minister (PMO) which it advises.

"I think these notes would be relevant to your defence. I brought them to the attention of the government, and I understand that they will be provided to you. But I wanted to make sure", Melissa Burke wrote to the Vice-Admiral's lawyers. Well, the PMO did have the notes but had no intention of sending them over to the defence. And though most background information requested by the defence dates from the Harper government era, the current government, citing security issues, has stalled on releasing them, even though Prime Minister Harper is in support of his government's documents' release.

Another witness that turned up was a member of the Canadian Forces known as "Witness A", whose name has been withheld to avoid repercussions from government. He recounted how a smiling brigadier-general had him withhold documents relating to a request to release them to the defence. "We made sure we didn't use his (Norman's) name", he was told so the automatic file search would not identify the documents in question since his name had been absent on them. Consequently, lead counsel Marie Henein is now subpoenaing that brigadier-general, along with Chief of the Defence Staff Jonathan Vance and former deputy Department of National Defence minister John Forster.

And Ontario Court Judge Heather Perkins-McVey who is holding the relevant hearings, has commented on the new revelations brought before her as "Troubling. Very troubling".

Perspective: Terrorist Cult or Freedom Fighters?

"Members and supporters of the MKO terrorist group hold a rally on first of July each year in Paris."
"Harper attended this year's event alongside his former minister of foreign affairs, John Baird."
"'Thank you for your long battle for a free and democratic Iran', Harper told a crowd at the Free Iran rally in Paris in a defiant support of the MKO terrorist group."
"#Canada should seriously investigate the scope and nature of @stephenharper [Canada's 22nd Prime Minister Stephen Harper] and @Baird's [Former Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird] relationship with the #MEK [MKO] cult during their tenure as Prime and Foreign ministers', Reza Nasri, a prominent law expert from Geneva's Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies tweeted recently."
Islamic Republic News Agency

So that is the take from the official news agency of the Islamic Republic of Iran over the presence of former Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the annual National Council of Resistance of Iran group. The group had, in fact, invited an entire smorgasbord of well-known and -connected international public figures to attend and to speak at this publicized event. The group, whose founding came out of the Mojahedin--Khalq (MEK), dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian Republic, has more than its share of critics damning it as a terrorist group.

Based in Paris, the MEK's reputation is frequently assailed; though devoted to overthrowing the current Iranian regime, even among some Iranian dissidents abroad it is considered extremist and controversial, with claims of a cult of leadership along with a questionable history of violence. Mr. Harper's appearance at the event became  hugely unpopular among many critics of the MEK, along with some expatriate Iranians living in Canada such as Samira Mohyeddin known as a critic of the regime who called the MEK a "well-documented terrorist cult who have committed many crimes against humanity".

In fact, the MEK was on a terrorist watch list in the U.S. and Canada and elsewhere, but has long since been removed. Farzan Sabet, an Iranian policy expert with the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University claimed that Mr. Harper's presence at the conference "speaks to the sophistication of MEK political operations, and naivete or venality of Western politicians who chose to attend." Harsh condemnation by no uncertain means. And reflective of the usual polarized opinions strongly held by opposing parties in the Middle East.

When Stephen Harper was Prime Minister of Canada, Iranian interference in Canada with its propaganda and its efforts to control its expatriate population for propaganda and infiltration purposes -- along with its well-known record of supporting terrorism and the lesser-known fact that Iranian-produced school curricula was found in Shiite madrasas and parochial schools operating in Canada, redolent of hate-mongering -- persuaded his administration to cut diplomatic ties with the country. In so doing, he closed the Canadian embassy in Tehran and shuttered the Iranian embassy in Ottawa in a distinct persona-non-grata rebuke.

For years, Canada's UN ambassador led a well supported move to single out Iran at the United Nations on an annual basis as a human rights abuser, stemming from the murder in Evan prison of Canadian-Iranian photographer Zahra Kazemi. Under Prime Minister Harper, the government of Canada held close ties with the State of Israel. Coincidentally the MEK has ties with Israeli intelligence. The State of Israel is in the direct cross-hairs of the Iranian Republic's goal of destruction, often enough publicly stated, even within the United Nations.

It seems passing strange that among many international guests at the MEK conference there were two notable personages, one of whom was the former director of the FBI, Luise Freeh who held his position with honours for an eight-year period before stepping down. Another was the former French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kurchner, who also happens to have been a co-founder of Medecines sans Frontieres. How likely is it that two men of their calibre would support a terrorist group? They were there to support a group dedicated to dismantling a terrorist theocracy.

Stephen Harper‏Verified account @stephenharper

Proud to stand up for freedom and democracy for the people of Iran. While the Iranian regime poses a threat to us all, the most oppressed are its own citizens. Freedom, dignity and self determination are universal values.

"The Free Iran event was attended by thousands of Iranian dissidents, from all political backgrounds from around the world."
"Mr. Harper has not, and will not, endorse specific political movements or candidates."
Anna Tomala, spokesperson, Harper & Associates

Although at its founding in the 1960s,the People's Mujahedeen of Iran (MEK) helped to overthrow Shah Palevi's unpopular regime, and was involved with the typical Middle East assassinations and violence, it has long since renounced violence. Its headquarters stationed in Iraq on the border with Iran at the time of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to its being forcibly disarmed which initiated its transformation, prompting Canada and the U.S. to remove MEK from their roster of terrorist groups.

When Mr. Harper addressed the gathering of thousands, comprised hugely of expatriate Iranian supporters, he took pains to denounce the Republic's repressive regime, speaking of his own actions as prime minister of Canada including having listed Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism and his move to sever diplomatic relations with the government. "We closed the Canadian embassy in Iran and told the mullahs to get out of Canada!"

John Bolton, current American national security adviser was present at the Free Iran rally, as was Rudolph Guiliani, former New York City mayor at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Tribute To An Exemplary Man

"Certain things didn't happen in the best way but that doesn't take anything away from the immense privilege and opportunity of a lifetime, serving one of the best prime ministers our country has ever had."
"I consider him a father figure and always will."
Dimitri Soudas, former Conservative party executive director, and Prime Ministerial director of communications

"He reminded me of Pierre Trudeau. You could see his intellect working. He was very at home on policy -- very sure-footed."
"It was an impressive performance and he [had] the potential to be influential as a world leader."
Allan Gotlieb, former Canadian ambassador in Washington

"His decade in power changed this country in immeasurable ways and you know whether you agreed or disagreed with his politics, Mr. Harper is a man of enormous integrity who has dedicated his entire life to public service and continues to do so."
"I wish him the very best of luck."
"I understand he's thinking of offers in the private sector which will be a switch for someone who's dedicated his whole life to public service. But really, he's had an enormous impact and we're very proud as Calgarians that we had a prime minister for a decade who hailed from this city."
Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi

CBC News : Calgary mayor Naheed Nenshi, and (right) former Prime Minister Stephen Harper

"I wouldn't be surprised to see him try and carry on that work [influence on foreign relations] if there are donors who want to fund him to do that [set up his own foundation on international issues]."
"He had survived for almost ten years [as prime minister] which made him kind of an elder statesmen, so I think he was quite respected in those forums."
Tom Flanagan, formerly Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief of staff

As Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper was viewed by many as stiff and unbending, a man who kept his emotions intact and to himself. That he was also a man of stern principles and great integrity was simply a recognition of the mettle of the man who expected much from himself as leader of the country and who delivered to the citizens of Canada his considered and appropriate responses to situations calling for them. Doubt greeted his initial minority government, to be swiftly replaced with trust and reliance on his judgement.

Certainly not from all quarters, but of a certainty from people who shared his thoughts and aspirations for the country and its people. It could not have been but a humbling experience for this man to suffer defeat in the October 19 election that brought Justin Trudeau to office as Canada's prime minister. For many, the disappointment of seeing Mr. Harper replaced by an amateur politician who had never before entering politics prepared himself in any way to assume that office, was a profound misery.

An intellectual, a man schooled in academic economics and with the experience of positions of significance behind him, replaced by a dilettante, a man with experience in snowboarding, bar-bouncing and drama classes, whose name-recognition offered him the entree to speaking engagements where his smiling presence seemed compensation to those who attended for his lack of knowledge and gravitas. Where Trudeau is egotistical and entitled, Mr. Harper has been unassumingly humble.

It cannot have been an easy decision to remain in the House of Commons, to stay on in his elected position as a Member of Parliament, from his former status as leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and Prime Minister of Canada, but Mr. Harper quietly took his seat and diligently took part in all Parliamentary votes. He has chosen now, to leave after the Parliamentary summer break, before Parliament resumes in the fall.

His was a steady hand at the helm of the ship of state. And those who supported him and worked alongside him speak now of paying homage to his decade as prime minister. "People who care about his legacy are rolling up their sleeves", said one of those in talks relating to sponsoring a think-tank in his name to focus on foreign policy directions for Canada.

Of a certainty history and the perspective of time will be kinder to his memory than the electorate that voted to retire this man who will be recognized as one of the finest Canada ever had as prime minister.

Harrying Harper

"The internal economy committee will confirm that Senator Duffy has been withdrawn from the Deloitte review."
"It will assure him that his expenses are fully in order to date."
"As his apparent ineligibility for the housing allowance stems from his time on the road on behalf of the party, there will be an arrangement to keep him whole on the repayment."
Janice Payne, lawyer for Mike Duffy

Justin Tang,The Canadian Press

Former Conservative senator Mike Duffy arrives at the courthouse in Ottawa on Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2015. Duffy is facing 31 charges, including fraud, breach of trust and bribery.

"If someone thinks a crime has occurred, can we have an internal agreement not to refer it to the RCMP? I think that would be a scandal, no?"
"I have some vague recollection from law school about it being improper for a lawyer to seek civil advantage in connection with a promise to refer or to not refer a suspected criminal matter to the authorities."
Nigel Wright, former chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Justin Tang,The Canadian Press

Nigel Wright, former chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, is flanked by lawyers Peter Mantas (left) and Pat McCann as he arrives at the courthouse in Ottawa on Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2015.

It's election time in Canada. The current government-leading Conservatives are campaigning on their past record of managing the affairs of the country; by and large it's been a very good record. The opposition parties are busy shoving each other aside, and shovelling spending priorities at Canadian voters, with a special emphasis on the currently favoured 'middle class'. And the news media are falling all over themselves harrying the prime minister.

It is not only the opposition parties, the Liberals, NDP, Greens, that are busy painting the Conservative-led government as spent and ready to be ushered out of office, that their record has been less than sterling and the alternative parties could do far better for the country, but the news media as a whole as well. They represent a powerful, unofficial opposition, and they've made it official; they're on the war path.

Journalism vengeance toward a prime minister whose distaste for the media has been made abundantly evident over the last ten years in his unavailability for scrums or to respond to the queries and querulous complaints of the media whose coverage of a Conservative government is guaranteed to be slanted, but which hates to be slighted nonetheless.

So who is at trial here in the affair of the Senate's Mike Duffy, a man who has given new meaning to the 'dis' linked with honourable. His petty avaricious greed -- while not entirely illegal according to the loose rules of conduct in the Senate which for some strange reason seemed to feel that their members really are honourable, and would never dream of charging taxpayers unless they were entitled to by fact and reality -- has scandalized the capital.

Outside Ottawa, it's a yawn-fest. Duffy couldn't wait to charge for per diems, and for the cost of running his long-time residence in Ottawa, claiming it under Senate rules to be his secondary residence, his primary one a not-year-round-season cottage in his native PEI, which he was purportedly to represent in the Senate. So the trial will be costing taxpayers millions, but the leader of the NDP furiously accuses the Prime Minister of a cover-up.

This, from Thomas Mulcair, who is never questioned by the media about his party's illegal millions of taxfunded spending meant for Parliament Hill, but extended to improper satellite offices in Montreal. Nor is there mention made of the conviction of Liberal Senator Raymond Lavigne for fraud, nor the same unethical expense claims made by former Liberal Senator Mac Harb.

Meanwhile, the hugely entitled Mike Duffy whose bumptiously-accusing lawyer takes great pains to accuse all and sundry of railroading his naively innocent client into accepting a 'bribe' of $90,000 as a personal cheque from Nigel Wright to pay off his taxpayer-funded debt, plays to the media which laps up his performance, while mercilessly and endlessly grilling people like Nigel Wright whose ethical compass has never been corrupted as the inestimable Duffy's has.

The free-for-all hoping to trash Prime Minister Harper's reputation does no one any credit, least of all the journalists enjoying what they believe to be a man being served their version of revenge, cold on a salver comprised of newspaper headlines. The goal? To trash any aspirations Mr. Harper may have of challenging for the longest-reigning prime minister in Canada's history. On his record.

Dangerously Unsavoury Proximity

"It is a concern to us. We feel that a lot of the illegal drugs that come into this country come in through our ports."
"[Hells Angels have a presence in Vancouver, Montreal and Halifax ports the past 30 years] So as far as the ports are concerned, it’s the whole success of the Hells Angels [allowing organized crime to revel in international drug smuggling]."
Det.-Staff Sgt. Len Isnor, OPP, top law enforcement expert on Hells Angels, Canada

"We’ve had successful prosecutions against the Hells Angels but that doesn’t seem to stop them. They just keep trying to get back into business."
"As long as they continue, we’re going to continue prosecuting them."
Insp. Rick Guyader, Winnipeg Police Service

"As the bikers involved in the slayings were rounded up in the months that followed, it would have been easy to assume the gang was finished in Quebec. But only five ended up with life sentences for first-degree murder; about a dozen others who helped dispose of the bodies or get rid of evidence received lighter sentences."
"Five members of the gang’s now defunct Laval chapter — Guy-Louis “Chop” Adam, Jean-Guy “Brutus” Geoffrion, Laurent “l’Anglais” Viau, Michel “Willie” Mayrand and Jean-Pierre Mathieu — were gunned down inside the bunker. At least two other members of the Laval chapter were supposed to be killed that day as well, but they failed to show up for the meeting. A sixth man linked to the Laval chapter, prospect Claude “Coco” Roy, was killed two weeks later."
Report, National Post, March 2015

Postmedia News/Files   Five of the Laval, Que., Hells Angels chapter were killed in what came to be known as the Lennoxville Purge of 1985. In the second row, wearing the cap, is Robert “Tiny” Richard, believed to be the national leader of the Hells Angels.

"He was here? I didn't know that. I knew his wife was here", said a bearded man standing outside a Toronto-area hotel. He was wearing a "Red Devils Ottawa" jacket. And he was referring in the first instance to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and in the second to Laureen Harper, wife of the Prime Minister, both of whom were staying at the very same hotel that 30 members of the Hells Angels held reservations for.

The Prime Minister was there in Toronto in preparation to attend and participate in the first leaders' debate of the current general election campaign. His wife, Laureen, often accompanies him. And they were both in the hotel whose management seemed unaware that there might be security problems related to the presence of the Prime Minister and his wife, in the presence of a large number of individuals belonging to a criminal gang.

The hotel management seemed not to mind the presence of the Hells Angels members, one whit. They accepted the fact that they would be accommodating them, after all, and not for the first time, according to hotel staff. One employee spoke of the coincidence that the bikers were at the hotel the very same night as the Prime Minister, adding "As long as they don't bother anyone; they're quiet", said the employee, unfazed by their presence.

The Prime Minister's security team, on the other hand, did certainly take note of the presence of the bikers. On the other hand, their presence would have been difficult to overlook since they were wearing leather jackets sporting the "Hells Angels Ontario" logo. And their motorbikes were lined up on the street at the front entrance of the hotel. Somehow the propinquity of the Prime Minister of Canada and his wife, alongside members of the Hells Angels seems out of whack with intelligent caution.

The RCMP officers detached to the Prime Minister's security took extra security precautions. But they should not have had to. The hotel's disinterest in taking responsibility to see that if one group was to stay at the hotel the other group shouldn't have been in close proximity is amazing and disappointing. And that the RCMP team looking after security had no prior knowledge of the reservations at the hotel for the Hells Angels speaks to a dismal failure on their part.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Paul Chiasson    Members of various motorcycle clubs, including the Hells Angels, get their bikes ready outside a hotel Friday, August 7, 2015 in Toronto.

Unseating Stephen Harper

Dire warnings to Canadians not to trust Stephen Harper, he would turn the country into an autocracy, and military troops would be stationed on Ottawa's streets while the Conservative government would set about destroying democracy. Women, above all, would lost their hard-won rights of independence and protection from violence. And this is the man who led Canada and the United Nations into protecting the lives of women and girls in third world countries through leading health initiatives....

Funny thing, that; given the opportunity to change the order and social politics of the Supreme Court of Canada, almost all of the current justices have been appointed by the Prime Minister during his administration. The Chief Justice was appointed by the Paul Martin government. And the justices pulled their collective authority to deny the Prime Minister's appointment of a justice whose political colours they found fault with under other pretenses.

And it is also this increasingly activist Supreme Court that has overruled the elected lawmakers on Parliament Hill on a succession of issues, from changing existing laws on prostitution, to euthanasia, and to challenging the government's position on niqab-wearing during the citizenship ceremony. So much for the feared right-wing Supreme Court that would emerge from the Conservative government's nominations.

The Prime Minister is faulted for not trusting people he brings into his Cabinet sufficiently to allow them to speak publicly. He must vet everything beforehand, and he has undertaken responses during Question Period that should be responded to by the ministers involved, go the complaints. And then the complaints swing the opposite direction in a polarizing version of just how controlling and trusting is the Prime Minister.

A succession of his appointees have distinguished themselves in a manner to embarrass the man who depended on their integrity.

From Bruce Carson at the PMO to Nigel Wright, and from Arthur Porter to oversee Canada's spy agency, all have been disappointments in revelations about their character or decision-making. Not to mention the current situation with his most trusted adviser, Dimitri Soudas whose surrender to the charms of MP Eve Adams mitigated against his loyalty to the Prime Minister.

And then there are those whom the Prime Minister elevated to the Senate of Canada; Mike Duffy, Patrick Brazeau and Pamela Wallin, all ambitious for themselves, not Canada, all bringing into question the Prime Minister's ability to judge character. In other words, he has been too trusting of people who then turned around and betrayed that trust.

In the case of Eve Adams, whose behaviour has been unethical from claiming on her campaign expense account her grooming expenses, to treating the public to questionable behaviour at riding association meetings and their candidate selection process, a woman who discovered her Galahad in Justin Trudeau with whom she would have quite a bit in common, manipulating who may run in signal ridings, etcetera...good luck.

So whose judgement should be called into question here. A man whose own honesty and integrity cannot be questioned who found it in himself to trust people on the basis of their public personas only to discover that their private interests trumped the public interest? Or a man whose juvenile attitude on every conceivable matter of vital importance to the public weal has earned him a deserved reputation as a political dunce?

Hypocrisy Roosts In Revolt

"We, the undersigned, former Liberal Members of Parliament, are concerned about your [Liberal leader Justin Trudeau] recent pronouncement that people who hold a particular view on a given moral issue, as a matter of conscience, cannot be Liberal candidates for the position of MP unless they agree to park their consciences at the entrance to the House of Commons and vote directly opposite to their fundamental beliefs, as directed by you. We believe your undemocratic position will alienate many voters who have, in the past, voted Liberal. We ask that you rescind your decision, for at least the following reasons.
"First, the firm position of all previous Liberal Leaders, including Pierre E. Trudeau, has been that, on moral issues, Liberal Members of Parliament were able to vote according to their respective consciences. This clear and consistent position served the Party well, as witnessed by the number of years the Liberal Party was the Government in the 20th Century, For you to fully reverse this wise, long-held position of all your predecessors, without any cogent reason, legal or otherwise, has the potential to alienate many former Liberal voters.
"Second, since your edict singles out the issue of being opposed to abortion, but only that issue, it clearly discriminates against a select class of people, namely those who oppose abortion, and no one else, such as those who might oppose, or be in favour of, say, assisted suicide. We believe that such discrimination is a clear violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(a) which guarantees everyone, even Liberal Members of Parliament, "freedom of conscience", and (b), which guarantees everyone, even Liberal Members of Parliament, "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression."
"Third, your pronouncement deprives the members of local Liberal Riding Associations from nominating for election, anyone who is pro-life, and, by logical extension, anyone who has firm personal beliefs on any issue that differs from Party policy as imposed by you. This clearly negates your promise that Liberal nominations will be fair, open and democratic.
"Finally, if your order is not rescinded, it will stand as a precedent for you, and future Liberal Leaders, to issue similar edicts on other moral issues, such as being either for or against assisted suicide, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, animal/human genetic splicing/mixing and many such issues which we cannot even imagine today, but which may develop as our technological knowledge increases at an ever more rapid pace. After all, if the Leader can ban people from running for the Party because they are opposed to abortion, then why not because they advocate euthanasia, or agree with human cloning, or are opposed to either or both these concepts? Where does one draw the line?
"As Liberal leader, we urge you to return to democratic principles and sensible Party tradition and rescind your ban on people who hold a particular moral belief, from running for the Party, unless they agree to do exactly as demanded by you. How can such a discriminatory policy serve the democratic ideals of our great nation?"
(Signed) Garnet Bloomfield, Murray Calder, Rex Crawford, Pat O'Brien, John O'Reilly, Janko Peric, Tom Wappel, former Liberal Members of Parliament

Federal Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau says his MP John McKay has strong feeling about abortion 

which explains his 'bozo eruption' remark about Trudeau. (Jonathan Hayward/Canadian Press)

Well, Oops, Justin Trudeau. The current Prime Minister, whom you wish to replace as speedily as possible governs on behalf of all the people of Canada. You, it seems, plan to govern for those who believe as you do. Canadians should see it in their best interests to elect a seasoned, intelligent individual capable of governing the country in the very best interests of all concerned.

While it has often been claimed that Stephen Harper runs a too-tight ship, restraining his ministers from making public statements unless they have his full confidence, and that he is autocratic and mean-spirited, the truth appears to tell us a somewhat different story. The story now revolves around a Liberal leader who insists on vetting riding candidates before permitting them to run for public office, and who prefers to hand-pick choice candidates in specific ridings.

Justin Trudeau has proven himself time and again to be a person whose education is somewhat as lacking as his experience and it shows in his public performance. The tragedy is that the public sees the celebrity persona with the flashing smile and hears promises that are saccharine and meaningless in the context of the business of governance. And they are prepared to forgive him all manner of transgressions, inclusive of his ill-advised public speaking fees while a Member of Parliament, and his absences from the House, missing far too many working days in preference of glad-handing.

From expressing sympathy for the exploits of terrorists who must, according to Mr. Trudeau, have suffered some ignominious past personal painful hurt to turn them to psychopathy, to admiration for a communist dictatorship's ability to bypass public opinion, to tolerance for a simple majority in Quebec secession, and the puzzling cutting of the umbilical cord between the party and the Senate, his ill-advised opinions and dictates point to callow and shallow.

It is not just past Liberal MPs who have been critical of Trudeau, but current members as well. When Justin Trudeau initially announced his dictate that anyone opposing a woman's right to abortion under any circumstances would have no place in the Liberal Party, John McKay, a longtime Liberal who has held various cabinet posts under previous Liberal governments and who acts currently as his party's environment critic stated: "I initially thought it was a bozo eruption; that he didn't actually think about what he said."

 His leader had said Liberal members would be expected to vote against any bill that would have the effect of restricting a woman's right to have access to safe, legal abortions, in order to respect the charter. While he himself appears not to respect the charter. And at a time and place when there is no concern in Canada that women should have the right to decide for themselves whether or not they wish to carry a full-term pregnancy. In Canada, the problem is provinces like Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick that flout the unwritten law.

Mr. McKay, according to a CTV News report was recorded saying "If you don't know this is a toxic issue for a population, then you have no political sense whatever." Retired Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis at the time informed a popular television interlocutor that the recently issued dictum by Trudeau "would hurt the party", and his prognostication was quite correct. Prime Minister Harper, on the other hand, has stated on several occasions that he has no intention of changing the current situation in Canada on abortion, reflecting a Canadian consensus.

"The Liberals were already the big tent party ... He's now reduced that party to the pup tent. He's really narrowed the choice for people. He's made the Liberals a carbon copy of the NDP. I call it NDP-lite", said Pat O'Brien, former Liberal MP from Ontario. The Prime Minister is far more democratic than his challenger. It is now revealed that Mr. Harper is fully supportive of a legislative plan to strip him personally of the power, as party leader, to veto election candidates favoured by local riding associations.

Justin Trudeau has interfered in a number of riding association nominations, and is now the target of a law suit as a result. "This prime minister [Stephen Harper] is now acting in a manner that is more democratic than any of his predecessors. He becomes the first leader in a half century to declare his support for the removal of the legal veto power of party leaders over candidates. That speaks once again to his willingness to cede power to the Canadian people and to grassroots political participants so that they can exercise their own will", stated Conservative MP Pierre Polivier.

Parliament And Court At Loggerheads

"From freedom of speech to freedom of religion and freedom of association, in almost all of these areas, not only did the courts show no support for these traditional small-c conservative values, but it has dismantled quite a few policies that were based on them."
"There's an ideological homogeneity in Canadian law schools. [To train for the legal profession is to study the] politics of victimology."
Ted Morton, academic, co-author The Charter Revolution and The Court Party

"If you believe in the supremacy of the Parliament, which I do -- and I think Stephen [Harper] does -- you have real reservations about the Charter and the Constitution act."
"It, in essence, undermined the supremacy of Parliament and gave the judges a much more active role in overriding decisions of Parliament."
"The Liberal propaganda machine perpetuates a myth that the Canadian constitution is some extremely glorified document that everybody should bow down to, and it isn't. It's another one of those political myths, and eventually it will fall under its own weight."
"I think the Charter is going to be seen not as the 'living tree' that justices envisioned, but as a straitjacket that's going to cause more and more pinch between the political class and the judiciary."
Preston Manning, founder, former head, Reform Party

Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks during Question Period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa May 6, 2014. (REUTERS/Chris Wattie)

"All of the people connected to Stephen Harper himself are the leading Canadian political scientists in terms of criticism of the courts and the Charter of Rights."
"Yes, politics matters. But when we talk about the Harper government losing cases at court, we can very quickly forget that Brian Mulroney and Jean Chretien lost a lot of cases as well."
Emmett Macfarlane, professor of political science, University of Waterloo, author of Governing from the Bench: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Judicial Role

 

Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin of the Supreme Court of Canada  (Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press) 

"Judicial activism has been an issue for American conservatives for a few decades. But the big trigger in Canada was the social conservative reaction to court decisions on abortion and gay rights in Canada during the late 1980s and early 1990s."
Ian Brodie, former chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Judges of course are people with their own inbred and alternately learned biases, tempered or fostered by their exposure in academia to the rigors of the application of formal law institutionalized through the Canadian system of Justice. Itself a by-product of Britain's judicial system, a legacy that Great Britain generously handed down to all of her post-colonial countries, once part of the vast British Imperial Empire. Politicians too are people who exercise their elected role through the lens of their political ideology.

But whereas politicians and their parties take the helm of government administration through voter-based alternations of the major parties to head the country, thus altering the focus from their monocular lens of either liberal or conservative values, judges are exposed to an institutionalized view of the law and justice through an equally monocular lens, but this one of left-liberalism, tending to social activism rather than the pure neutral application of the law through the substance of precedence based on freeze-framed portraits of prevailing justice.

Canada, to the West, tends toward conservatism; to the East, liberalism and centrally not quite so firmly entrenched in either but with a healthy dollop of leftism. We do not elect our judges as is commonly done in the United States. It is our lawmakers, our Parliamentarians whom we elect to the status of lawmaker for the purpose of putting in place a government that most closely happens to reflect the mood of the majority electorate at any given time.

Those comprising the Cabinet of Ministers of the Crown at any given post-election period representing the best interests of the country and the people who elected them and those who did not, but must, until the following election, trust that they will administer bearing their interests in mind as well, and along with the elite bureaucracy of the public service select from among the judicial talents of the Canadian bar, representatives to sit on the Supreme Court of Canada.

When, as happens, and as has happened with increasing frequency with a liberal-slanted judiciary weighing their values and priorities against those of a conservative-minded government, the court finds fault with the choices of the government whom ideally they should be supporting, it becomes a formula for dysfunction, and that truly is a situation that is of no benefit whatever to the country.

Flimsily Spiteful Vengeance

"Overall, however, the organization failed to gel, and by mid-November it was apparent that we were falling seriously behind. We had no office space, no campaign pamphlet, little money, and no discernible fundraising plan. We we did have was a plan for a launch that would cost $60,000, even though we only had about $40,000 in the bank. Stephen and I realized in mid-November that the organization wasn't working and couldn't be saved. He therefore called all the paid people and told them he would have to terminate their employment, though John Williamson would stay a few more weeks as press secretary and First Past the Post would continue to do our web business. I admired the way Stephen did this; it would have been easier to tell me to fire everyone, but he didn't take the easy path. This willingness to handle the unpleasant side of things has continued to be one of his strengths in his subsequent political career. Even when he has to replace people, they appreciate how he delivers the bad news personally, and they often remain supportive and willing to work in other capacities in the future."
"Stephen's biggest tactical triumph came in autumn 2007, when he pounced on a House of Commons resolution by Gilles Duceppe to recognize Quebec as a nation. Rewording the resolution to read that "the Quebecois form a nation within a united Canada", Harper pulled off a coup by getting all parties, including the out-manoeuvred BQ, to support it. He also departed from platform commitments when he removed the tax exemption for income trusts and when he unveiled a new equalization formula that fell short of his campaign promise to allow provinces to exempt 100 percent of natural resource revenues from the transfer calculation. Under heavy pressure, he went beyond the platform to embrace the view that global warming was caused by greenhouse gas emissions and that the Canadian Government should take action to reduce those emissions, a position he had resisted in the past. He also made a dramatic apology to First Nations over residential schools, something not mentioned in the 2006 platform. I didn't particularly like either the new greenhouse gas policy or the residential schools apology, but they were in line with the incrementalist course I had recommended in the first edition of this book and which Harper openly professed in the second week of the 2008 campaign."
Tom Flanagan, Harper's Team; Behind the Scenes in the Conservative Rise to Power, second edition, C.2009

"He can be suspicious, secretive, and vindictive, prone to sudden eruptions of white-hot rage over meaningless trivia, at other times falling into week-long depressions in which he is incapable of making decisions."
Tom Flanagan, Persona Non Grata: The Death of Free Speech in the Internet Age, C.2014

So, as long as Professor Flanagan was on the inside, helping the Conservative Party of Canada in its drive to unseat the Liberals to form a government of their own, he could recognize and appreciate the outstanding leadership qualities of the man who would be prime minister, and who achieved that goal. Either Mr. Flanagan is a fairly good judge of character, or he is not. Failing that, Mr. Flanagan is without doubt, a most poisonously vindictive man in his own right.

So horribly offended at the unfairness of being professionally and personally considered outside the realm of acceptable tolerance that his presence became persona non grata when, in an off-guard moment he expressed himself in a public forum as disfavouring jail time for anyone in possession of child pornography on the grounds that they had a right to favour the kind of photos that appealed to them, and they weren't hurting anyone in the process, a line of thought repellent to the prime minister.

So Mr. Flanagan scribbled his notes and set about writing a lengthy riposte to the assault against his character that he had himself initiated, defending himself against all those who had made it clear they had no wish to be connected in any form possible to someone who saw little amiss in people aiding an industry that is horribly destructive to children. His new book soon to see publication had some vituperative leaks beforehand, so those who salivate at the prospect of reading an insider's view of the prime minister's traits would anticipate the opportunity to purchase the book.

"It's odd that after not having worked on the Hill in almost a decade, and in the context of defending his own outrageous comments on child pornography, Mr. Flanagan comes forward with these ridiculous allegations. As the public knows, and as the prime minister's record shows, he's had no difficulties making decisions in good times or bad", pithily responded Mr. Harper's director of communications, Jason MacDonald.

A common interest in politics and in specific the original Reform Party brought Mr. Flanagan and Mr. Harper together; one to become the eventual head of the newly-formed Conservative Party of Canada through a merger of the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative parties, the other to visualize, recommend and perform the backroom strategic manoeuvring that would help Stephen Harper's aspirations become reality. Mr. Flanagan quite obviously recognized the exceptional metier of the man at that time.

With the first, unauthorized book, Harper's Team, that Mr. Flanagan wrote in an obvious ploy at elevating his status as a mover-and-shaker of political vision and verity, it might be said that he had set out to alienate a man who prizes his personal privacy, to begin with. Choosing to write fairly intimate details of his observances when he was privileged with the friendship of the Harper family, it is little wonder that Mr. Harper chose not to be indifferent to this infringement of a friendship's implied trust.

"I would see Stephen sometimes get morose and sad, but it never affected his ability to do his job. Yes, sometimes he would get depressed, but he was always a hard worker and always doing his job. He is so smart and he had a great imagination and can think about all the horrible things that can happen", in all the things can conceivably go wrong, and concerning himself with exerting an effort to ensure that those matters would not surface to mar planned events, explained Gerry Nichols, who had worked with Mr. Harper at the National Citizens Coalition.

The consensus among those who knew and recognize Stephen Harper as a colleague appears to be one of affection and admiration. Obviously those among his collegial acquaintances and friends who had never disappointed the trust that he placed in their friendship. As for decision making and proceeding on the basis of those decisions the Prime Minister does not appear to have made many grave errors due to indecision and bad humour.

He has expressed the opinion of most thinking Canadians on issues from Sri Lanka to Syria, Iran to Russia, Ukraine to Israel as far as international issues are concerned. Most latterly his Ukraine file stand has all-party support, just as his decision on Libya intervention along with NATO had. In foreign policy issues, including Canada's relationship with Israel, this prime minister has proven his mettle.

His handling, along with his long-time, trusted and effectively assured Minister of Finance, with the economic file throughout a period of global financial instability has been outstanding, the envy of Canada's G7 peers. A future surplus will make a package of tax reductions for the population possible. And his feeling, compassionate eulogy for Jim Flaherty paints a full picture of a man of many parts, capable and intelligent, reliable and resilient.

Mr. Flanagan, for all his academic credentials and political associations, once a trusted adviser, chose to  burn his candle at both ends, unfortunately, and then used himself as a burnt offering with his penchant for musing in favour of sexual deviants' "right" to pursue their harmful-to-society proclivities, and his own pursuit of revenge on a man whose sensibilities simply do not match his, while outrunning him on the morality-and-decency scale by a wide, wide margin.

Stephen Harper delivers the eulogy at the state funeral for Jim Flaherty in Toronto on Wednesday, 

April 16, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn

 The Measure of a Man

"Whether it's positioning around Israel or working closely with the United States, [Stephen Harper is] very, very much focused on what is going to play well at the ballot box. That's not my vision for what Canada can be."
"All my life I've been an international traveller; I've spent years travelling around the world seeing all sorts of different countries. Stephen Harper didn't do much travelling, if any, before he became prime minister, and the lens through he looks at foreign affairs is always, 'Is this going to help my electoral prospects back home'."
"I think there are very, very real concerns about the government in Iran that need to be addressed, but one has to make sure that you think about the citizens of Iran and the Iranian government differently. I worry that this is a nuance that this government doesn't actually appreciate or understand; a good example was the closing of the embassy last year."
Justin Trudeau, leader, Liberal Party of Canada

CANADIAN PRESS/Ryan Remiorz   It's not the F-bomb that we should worry about, but the cry for help from a man burdened by a too-easy life.

Justin Trudeau travelled the world with his illustrious father, Pierre Trudeau. Travelling the world, Justin and his brothers were introduced to the marvels of Cuban freedom and democracy, a lesson he has indeed never forgotten, his loyalty to Fidel Castro discerned very clearly in affectionate respect. Canada, under its Conservative prime minister, has held a principled position with respect to how official Canada conducts itself on the world stage.

Justin Trudeau clearly finds it far more amenable to deeply admire the repressive government in Cuba, than the democratic, regional-embattled State of Israel. He sneers at Prime Minister Harper's trip to Ukraine to express his support for a country that has been pirated of an integral portion of its geography, as a "three hour photo op"; this, from a man aspiring to lead Canada as a future prime minister for whom photo ops are irresistible fodder for  his vanity.

This is a man who ostensibly commits himself to speak for the Canadian middle class, burdened by high taxes and rising prices, yet it is the Conservative government that seeks to lower taxes, while conventionally successive Liberal governments tend to raise them. This fellow speaks in adoration of self when he states in the public arena (literally, at a boxing match) "When you get in the ring ... All that -- your name, your fortune, your intelligence, your beauty -- none of that f--king matters."

In this statement he married his sublimely magnificent ego with the kind of speaking pattern he believes emulates that of the middle-class Canadian. It's truly tough, no doubt about it, to have a famous name, an inherited fortune, physical beauty, and to believe that in that melange of genetic inheritance there is also a talent for creative thinking, an intelligence he does not really possess. And it's the absence of the latter attribute that f--king matters.

Justin Trudeau, unfortunately, belongs in the celebrity-class of individuals, people admired for characteristics that have nothing to do with being a leader, unless it's being a leader of fashion, wealth, and, oh yes, beauty. His extraction from the elite class of those born with the superior talent of casually presenting as cool and hip, wealthy and admirably attractive, does not fit him for the administration of a country.

His is not a thoughtful intelligence, nor has he the scruples and the decisive integrity to present as a leader of a nation. His studied thespian showcasing of self, basking in the admiration of his followers marks him as a very small man, impetuous and ill-considered. Whose irresolute equivocation in recognizing wrong from right, ethical values from elusive ones of compromise where none should be present, presents him as third-grade.

Scatological expletives become him.

Hanging Loose

"Right now I need a bit of a break [from writing]. Hitting the deadlines in the last year or so was a bit of pressure on top of the job so I'm spending my spare time now doing a bit of music instead."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Matthew Sherwood for National Post  Prime Minster Stephen Harper performs with his band Herringbone at the 2013 Negev Dinner, hosted by the Jewish National Fund of Toronto, at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre on Sunday, Dec. 1, 2013.

He's a natural. Really, anyone who describes Stephen Harper as stiff and boring, disinterested and off-putting, should have a look at one of those videos of this musician-author-politician-economist performing on stage. As he has done on a number of occasions. His ease and comfort is palpable. His talent and enjoyment in what he's doing is obvious and calls out for appreciation. This is a multi-talented individual.

He has quite the musical ensemble to back him up, a band that consists of three musicians calling themselves Herringbone, set to release their first CD. They practise out of the suburban Ottawa basement of Blackberry staffer Andre Van Schyndel. The three band members also include Phil Nolan and Richard Linke, both teachers, performing Celtic, folk and golden oldies.

"My sense is that they're highly regarded musicians in their circle, but I don't think there's a larger demographic of people familiar with their work. I see almost a sense of self-deprecating smile on stage from the guitarist. They're having fun. This is what music should be: having fun with this", commented A.J. Sauve, spokesperson for the RBC Royal Bank Bluesfest in Ottawa.

Prime Minister Harper doesn't perform regularly with them, he won't be on their forthcoming CD, but he has appeared in public with them, and as a quartet they're quite wonderful, confident and professional. Mr. Harper's own singing and piano-playing repertoire is quite wide-ranging, from Stompin' Tom Connor's songs, to John Cash, Buddy Holly, Neil Diamond, and The Beatles.

Matthew Sherwood for National Post    Prime Minster Stephen Harper performs with his band Herringbone at the 2013 Negev Dinner, hosted by the Jewish National Fund of Toronto, at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre on Sunday, Dec. 1, 2013.

He does musical justice to them all, with perfect timing and intonation. That he fully enjoys the music and is fully integrated with the band when they're performing is obvious and creates a sense of enjoyment for the listener. When Mr. Harper first appeared on stage at the National Arts Centre in 2009 accompanied by cellist Yo-Yo Ma, the event was a revelation.

His subsequent, infrequent but wonderfully engaging performances have had an air of spontaneity and exuberant joy about them, tinctured with a placid contentment. With the publication of the hockey history book he has spent years of occasional moments writing, Mr. Harper has for now put writing behind him. A Great Game: The Forgotten Leafs & The Rise of Professional Hockey has received excellent reviews, as much for its carefully researched content as for the writing style of its author.

"As for ... why the PM is part of a band, I think the demonstrations of the Prime Minister's passion for music, such as [at the Negev dinner], speak for themselves", said Carl Vallee the Prime Minister's press secretary. "I play a little bit in my spare time in a band and had an opportunity to have Bryan Adams come over and play with me a little bit. I don't think that would happen if I wasnt Prime Minister", he informed a student group in 2010.


There are rumours circulating that after a diplomatic political trip to Israel, Mr. Harper may announce he will be stepping down from his office as Prime Minister. This writer is among one of doubtless many who hope that may not be so, not just yet. Canada needs more, much more of Stephen Harper. I daresay, I hope he hasn't overlooked the obligation to send a complimentary copy of his new book to Yann Martel.

Play on, Mr. Prime Minister!

JONATHAN HAYWARD / THE CANADIAN PRESS

Prime Minister Stephen Harper plays the keyboard and sings with the band Herringbone during the Conservative Convention in Calgary. (Nov. 1, 2013)

The Incendiary Vendetta of the Press

"Instead of trying to "explain" the situation to Senate-weary Canadians -- even for the purposes of denouncing it -- Mr. Harper seems to have taken it as a given that it wasn't worth trying. And Mr. Wright, on Mr. Harper's behalf, set off in pursuit of The Perfect Outcome -- no matter how unlikely success was, and no matter how much bigger a mess he might create in order to get there.
This is what happens, perhaps, when openness and accountability (to borrow a phrase) are the last resort. In that sense, it's the perfect Conservative scandal: a fitting outcome for a party that has become everything it once hated; a party that wouldn't trust Canadians to cook a frozen lasagna."
Chris Selley, journalist, National Post

Apart from the pathetic allusion to 'trust' exemplified by a frozen lasagna, sometimes the pursuit of revealing the truth and reality is so fraught with the very real danger of a resolutely and intrinsically honest person's words being turned inside out and their otherwise-sound explanations completely distorted, it simply isn't worth the bother.

In the interests of fairness and giving anyone the opportunity to explain themselves, one automatically assumes innocence, before screeching "guilty as charged!" in civil discourse.

The problem here stems from the fact that in just about every instance news reporters and journalists are so biased against Prime Minister Stephen Harper as a man of principle and trustworthiness because of their disgruntlement that he will not play their game of easy availability for publishable quotes at their convenience and not his, that they celebrate each and every opportunity to exercise a distinctly unaromatic penchant for portraying him as other than what he actually is.

Three Conservative-appointed Senators and one (former) Liberal Senator have been found egregiously wanting in their dedication to the public weal, in their zealous and unethical expense claims to the Senate of Canada, milking the taxpayer for whatever they thought they could get away with, in expense and travel claims, per diems and housing allowances and anything else they could conceivably charge to the Senate's accounts to enrich themselves.

Their defence is that they assumed they were doing nothing wrong in their interpretation of loose Senate rules, designed with the understanding that all those named in trust to the Senate on the basis of past performance reflecting good citizenship and fealty to Canadian values would most surely reflect in their having respect for the responsibilities settling on their shoulders, among which would be an obligation not to rip off the public.

Mr. Harper is a man of strong ethical and moral principles. He has amply demonstrated those qualities time and again. His dislike for the media is obvious, and like others holding high political office before him, his dislike for news hounds has created a gulf between the Parliamentary press and the office of the Prime Minister, particularly Mr. Harper himself. Their resentment of his standoffishness to their professionalism which he obviously finds wanting in general, has led to a fairly unified striving among the media to cast aspersions, suspicion and blame on whatever he does.

The general public has responded to the extremely bad press and the accusations levelled or implied against the Prime Minister by echoing it in large degree. Most people do have a tendency to believe what they read, rather than use their intelligence to consider the source or weigh the evidence. A general aura of suspicion and dissatisfaction has resulted from all of this.

The political opposition has benefited hugely from this state of affairs. Their aspirations to take the place of the current office holder in the PMO are no secret

Before the issues now before the public took fire about Senate-ethics revelations, there was an announcement by the Auditor-General that he had found the government was unable to track over $3-billion that had been apportioned in the aftermath of 9/11 to combat terrorism. That appealed hugely to the oppositions' opportunity to make mincemeat in their public denunciations of the Conservatives' governing competence.

How could $3-billion be mislaid, unaccounted for; where could it be?

When the Prime Minister was urged to comment on the matter, he did, and reasonably enough. "There is some lack of clarity", he said, to expressions of derision in the House of Commons from the opposition. Mr. Harper explained that the Auditor-General hadn't suggested that anything improper had taken place with the distribution, or not, of the funding in question. A problem, instead, existed of categorization and reporting of spending between departments.

In 2001 the then-governing Liberals allocated $7.7-billion in a budget for new public safety and anti-terror provisions. Over the following seven years, a total of $12.9-billion had been set aside for anti-terror measures -- across 35 government departments and agencies. Of that total, the Auditor-General had been unable to adequately trace $3.1-billion. And while Treasury Board officials stated there were likely simple explanations relating to the unaccounted money, they hadn't any details.

They have since conducted a painstaking six-month search whereby a team within Treasury Board has tracked the spending and reconstructed the full $12.9-billion in allocations. They are now capable of accounting for all of the spending: "It was a monumental piece of work", one official said. One that perhaps should have been undertaken in a routine manner before the Auditor-General had perused the records, but hadn't been.

A routine that must surely have been assumed would have taken place by the Prime Minister. He has a country to run, with all the complexities that enormous task would entail. He cannot, no one could conceivably be expected, let alone be capable of, having their finger on everything, to the very last detail. Yet his critics clamouring for blood, would have it so.

An example in the missing billions was $246-million transferred from Citizenship and Immigration to the new Canadian Border Services Agency, the funding not at the time identified as being involved in the Public Security and Anti-Terrorism initiative portfolio. Funding "lapsed" in other instances; not spent for the purpose for which it was allocated, then returned to general revenues.

The Canadian Air Transport Safety Authority returned $132.6- million, as an example, to general revenues which had been earmarked for anti-terror initiatives, but never used. In stark contrast, by the time the Conservatives had apportioned billions in stimulous spending, tracking of funding had been improved, leading the Auditor-General to view that multi-departmental spending a success, with no discrepancies.