First of all, which incompetent moron had the bright idea to put procedures to paper? It suggests a STAGGERING naivety to not factor in a possible leak and/or the ramifications of these directives becoming public. This type of information is political dynamite, and yet no one in the PMO had the foresight to see the potential landmines.
The Liberals had meetings all the time, regarding parliamentary tactics and ploys. I'm not suggesting they were comparable to what we witness now, but nor were the Liberals completely straight. The difference, the Conservative power is held in so few hands, the reigns of control so tight, that instead of a face to face meeting, the directives are merely delivered to the minions. What should have happened, particularly because of the sensitive material, all committee chairs should have met, behind closed doors and therein the details of the tactics discussed. Completely verbal, no paper trail, in private, everyone accountable.
The playbook is appalling, but the fact it even exists, in hard copy, is beyond belief in my mind, given the atmosphere and realities of Parliament Hill. Arrogance or stupidity, take you pick, neither is redeeming.
15 comments:
Problem for the CPC - most of their MP's are not that bright and probably have memory problems. If it isn't put in black and white in front of them they don't know what to do.
Same when they are interviewed - the stay on message really is that they don't know what to say to use the Harper demanded sound bites.
Well, what can one expect. Harper's chief advisor said intelligence doesn't matter - only electibility. It sure shows.
Hi Steve,
"Arrogance or stupidity, take you pick, neither is redeeming."
Assuming we can pick only one, my pick is *arrogance.
*Arrogance (from the Encarta Dictionary (North America))
Contemptuous pride - a strong feeling of proud self-importance that is expressed by treating other people with contempt or disregard.
As far as following advice goes, (and you will have to take my word for this one as confidentiality is required), I do know first hand of someone who, was paid to give the New Government advice on an issue. They did not follow this person’s advice (fair enough) and when the situation blew up in the Governments face, in fact it turned out exactly as they had been warned it would.- (you guessed it) they shot the messenger.
"Harper's chief advisor said intelligence doesn't matter"
He would seem to be speaking from experience.
sassy
That's an interesting insight. I would pick arrogance as well, because they seem to think they are far too clever.
To be honest, I think it's both.
Stupidity is obvious as it would include a complete lack of foresight, combine that with arrogance and it's disaster.
I presume the arrogance has grown after having kept everyone in check these past 16 months. They must have assumed that they had cowed all their Chair's sufficiently and therefore could trust them.
I think what they hadn't counted on and what is manifesting itself now, are those individuals who are sick of being muzzled and treated like a 4 year old.
Don Martin was on "The House" this morning and to me it sounds like it was an actual Chair who gave him the book, not an underling. To paraphrase, Martin said he was talking to his source about what the hell was going on in committees. Apparently the source said, "it's in the book". There is a podcast of the interview at the CBC The House site if you're interested.
There is a story out today that the government is asking all chairs for their books back...to determine who doesn't have one and who leaked.
What this means to me though, is the muzzle is going to get tighter. If that happens, it's clear that Harper has no idea what he is creating beneath him.
"There is a story out today that the government is asking all chairs for their books back...to determine who doesn't have one and who leaked."
Oh my, that could get awkward.
I don't think so Steve. I'm sure Martin didn't take the book, maybe just copied it? I don't know, I haven't read enough on it. In any event, he'll protect his source.
I'd love to see it come out in full, say, into opposition hands or better yet, published by "Anonymous" for mass consumption. Wouldn't that be fun and wouldn't that go a long way toward, bye-bye Harper?
Well, it this "asking for the book back" is so, it backs up the comment that I have heard more than once since this story broke "... and they are not denying it"
Possible leakers are Leon Benoit, Bob Mills, and Rob Anders.
The problem is that Harper does not really have a friend in his caucus who is also a capable individual. Chretien had Boudria, Mulroney had Mazankowski, Martin had Goodale.
Harper has ?
Outside of a couple of PMO staffers, I doubt he can count on the loyalty or capability of anybody else.
Here's the story, Sassy.
Your earlier comment was interesting. Why do these stories not make the news? I presume the individual needs to find employment again, so going public wouldn't look too good on a CV, but it would be nice to see some meat given to the bones of speculation about what the government is up to.
Anon, I'd go with Mills. Benoit followed the manual to a tee. Anders? This guy is a chairperson? That's an interesting one though. Maybe he's angry that Harper hasn't followed through enough, though you'd think he'd be all for the book.
No, Mills strikes me as the one. I don't agree with the guy, but there is a sense of decency to the guy and that seemed to be the motive behind the leak.
Plus, if it is him, what will Harper do? The others will take orders. Mills has been around too long to abide this, imo.
knb said...
"Here's the story, Sassy."
Thanks for the link knb. I had seen the story in a number of places but not the "book recall" part,
As far as meat to the bones (your reference to my previous comment) you are correct in your assumptions and I think it may also have a much to do with reputation and professionalism as anything else (as in doing the right thing for the wrong people, what was this person thinking and all that stuff) I cannot speak for that person and perahps I should not have mentioned it? Their reasons are their own and I respect that.
I can tell you that said event was not recent and, in the grand scheme of things will not make a big difference to where things stand today, as the Conservatives have kept the "arrogant" ball rolling just fine on thier own.
It's absolutely bizarre that they would put that to paper. Did you hear that Harper is recalling them all now with the idea that the one who can't produce it must have given it to the media?
Sassy, you've said nothing wrong in my view and have exposed no one.
It's interesting to me, to hear/read true accounts. I just like knowing what some of us suspect, is indeed fact.
I hope you don't shut down. You are the height of discretion. Well done!
Thanks knb
Post a Comment