Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Kill The Messengers


For those of us who follow Canadian politics closely, Mark Bourrie's scathing chronicle of the Harper years, Kill the Messengers, perhaps offers few things that we don't already know. Nonetheless, to have a comprehensive written record of the myriad abuses of democracy, transparency, openness and free expression is an unsettling reminder of how much Canada has suffered and lost under the Harper regime. On that basis alone I strongly recommend the book.

Now more than halfway through it (I read it in measured amounts out of respect for my mental health), each chapter yields much that is worth reflecting on and writing about. However, since yesterday's post dealt in part about Harper's utter disdain for war vets, a disdain he attempts to conceal through his lofty rhetoric about "our brave men and women in uniform," I offer the following excerpt from the book dealing with Lt.-Col Pat Stogran, who says,
"It is beyond my comprehension how the system could knowingly deny so many of our veterans the rights and benefits that the people and the government of Canada recognized a long, long time ago as being their obligation to provide.'
Hired in 2007 as Canada's first veterans ombudsman, Stogran lost his job in 2010 for criticizing Harper and then Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino for the way vets are treated.

Stogran, a combat veteran in the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry in Afghanistan who suffered post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from his experiences in the Balkans in the 1990s, knew well the problems that veterans face and wanted to be a fierce advocate for them and hence his interest in the position. Terminating him was not the finest strategic move on the part of the Harper regime:

Firing Stogran didn't shut him up: he immediately became a vocal critic of the government, saying it was not living up to its obligations and promises. He says that the administrators of the veterans' pension program had a "penny pinching insurance company mentality."
We started to put pressure on. They basically told me to pound salt. It became clear they weren't going to co-operate. It was a waiting game for me to leave . . . My ministers were as thick as three short planks. They were completely dependent on their deputy minister. Julian Fantino is a classic example. He's one of Harper's yes men who says the government is backing vets and is pouring money into programs to help them. At the same time, you have federal government lawyers saying in British Columbia that the government has no legal or moral obligation to the veterans. I argued against the lump sum. I said it was wrong to give people who were physically and emotionally traumatized a lump sum of money and then tell them 'have a good day.' Harper never did anything to back me up ... I despise Harper personally. He's pushed politics to another level."
Compounding the injustice of his dismissal is Stogan's belief that his medical records were improperly accessed:
In 2010 he applied to the privacy commissioner to find out why his Veterans Affairs file had been accessed hundreds of times.
The experiences of the erstwhile veterans ombudsman is but a small example of the nature of the Harper regime, serving as a pungent reminder of its intolerance of any dissent or criticism. I can only hope that voters in October roundly express their own intolerance of this repressive regime by casting it out of the office it is so manifestly unfit to hold.


6 comments:

  1. That's life in the age of neoliberalism, Lorne. It's a path that leads directly to illiberal democracy and the rise of the corporatist state. Eventually there emerges a form of transactional government now practiced in America's "bought and paid for" Congress eerily mirroring what beset the senate in Rome before the collapse of that empire. In a transactional government, people's lives are commodified. The way Harper has treated our veterans is a perfect example of this. Get your adding machine out, do a quick calculation, give the poor bastard a cheque and send him on his way. I have written extensively on what happens to these guys as the decades pass and how wounds they might have picked up half a lifetime earlier come roaring back to maim again and again, especially as they enter old age. It speaks to Harper's black, empty soul that he ignores that so blithely. It's a reflection of how, on a greater scale, he views all Canadians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Mound. Your description aptly sums up both the state of politics today and the utter contempt with which Harper views and treats almost all of us.

      Delete
  2. Lorne, it is a very sad situation.

    Harper is also playing ‘a great’ and ‘powerful’ world leader. He sent our soldiers on the front line in Iraq. Even U.S. has not done that. He also signed an agreement with the Ukrainian government to send Canadian soldiers to train Ukrainian soldiers. However, when these soldiers who survive and return from these expeditions are on their own. Harper has nothing to do with them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would seem, LD, that Harper is interested in us for only one reason: our vote. Once Canadians have awakened from their slumber, perhaps they will understand that.

      Delete
  3. It is true that Harpers abusive treatment with the vets is primarily caused by Neoliberalism, but it is Neoliberalism implemented by a profoundly, power pursuing, tyrants who wants complete control over Canada. Paul Martin implemented some Neoliberal policies, but Canada remaind democratic under his watch The combination of Neoliberalism and dictatorial rule that Harper embraces is lethal for Canada.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think, Pamela, you'll find that Martin was remarkably restrained when it came to neoliberalism. He worked tirelessly to get Canada's debt crisis under control. He kept his boot on the neck of Canadian bankers when they wanted to indulge in American-style casino capitalism, enabling Canadian banks to weather the '08 global meltdown while the banks of other Western nations collapsed. He also filled the treasury with funds for the inevitable rainy day, a reserve that Harper doled out pointlessly in defunding the federal government. Overall I think that Martin was remarkably resistant to the draw of neoliberalism that swept through the Western world. Indeed most of the policies he attempted to implement during his brief tenure would be patently offensive to the disciples of free market fundamentalism.

      Delete