Remembering The Harper Record

If the progressive community is to have any hope of ridding the country of the Harper scourge next election, it must be relentless in reminding as many people as possible of his sorry record.

While Harper is now desperately rebranding himself from the now-failed Oil Czar to Strong Leader Standing Against ISIS (even if he has to command from the closet) remembrances of things past are crucial, as in the following Rick Mercer rant on the master economist's ineptitude:

U.S. Military Takes Steps to Ensure There'll Never Be Another Disaster Like the F-35

As far as the US military is concerned, the F-35 has broken the bank. With the American people on the hook for what is estimated to be up to 1.5-trillion greenbacks for a warplane, a gimmicky bomb truck, that keeps failing to live up to expectations, the military is determined to see that something like the F-35 fiasco never happens again.

A new US Air Force report, "...paints a future of the Air Force that resembles an innovative 21st Century company as opposed to a traditional fighting force. The document says that it's now impossible for the United States to build a strategy advantage with large, expensive programs that take years — in the case of the F-35, 14 years and counting to complete.

'"We believe rapid change is the new norm and has serious implications for the Air Force," the document states.' The pace at which disruptive technologies may appear and proliferate will result in operational advantages that are increasingly short-lived. Dynamic and increasingly frequent shifts in the geopolitical power balance will have significant implications for basing, posture, and partner capabilities that may favor flexibility over footprint.'"

The F-35 isn't mentioned by name in the forecast, but the program's greasy fingerprints are all over it. The Air Force is apparently concerned that it is pricing itself out of the weapons market because it is spending so much time and money on large programs.

"Large, complex programs with industrial-era development cycles measured in decades may become obsolete before they reach full-rate production," the authors added.

"Operational advantages that are increasingly short-lived." That's Air Force code for the F-35's supposed stealth invincibility. The very adversaries for which the F-35 is said to be needed have already knocked the snot out of the stealth threat. They know its weaknesses and they've developed sensors, weapons and tactics to defeat it. What's more, they're already fielding their own stealth fighters, warplanes the F-35 was never designed to combat. Even Israeli defence planners gave America's stealth advantage a mere 5-year shelf life.

Return of the Dogfighter

The July 7 edition of Aviation Week focuses on a new emphasis on air-to-air combat capability instead of the air-to-ground focus that western nations have had for the last couple of decades. The shift is the result of Russia's intervention in Ukraine and its overall superiority in air combat capability.

Bomb trucks, like the glorified F-35, are great when you're taking out ground targets or blowing up wedding parties disguised as insurgents but they're seriously compromised against a state of the art fighter.

The F-35 is even more compromised because, unlike leading multi-role fighter-bombers on the market, it lacks super cruise. That means it can only go fast in fuel-guzzling afterburner. This is a huge disadvantage when you're trying to intercept a distant target and an even huger disadvantage when you're trying to evade pursuers. This is what caused the RAND Corporation to conclude that the F-35 won't out turn, out climb or out run its potential adversaries.

But the F-35 has stealth cloaking, right? Sort of but it's only frontal aspect stealth. Enemies approaching from the front will have a harder time finding you. That does not apply, however, to fighters scanning you from the sides, above or below, or from behind. They can see you just fine. So, in the turning, climbing, diving world of air-to-air combat, the F-35's strength is gone and its weaknesses shine through.

Will the CF-35, as the USAF warns, be obsolete before it ever appears in a Canadian hangar? Yes, quite possibly. Will it remain a mediocre warplane with degraded performance? Likely. Will that be enough to make Harper steer clear of it and find something more suitable to Canada's actual needs? Hell no. Buying the F-35 is a political decision. It's American politics that has kept it on life support for so long. Canada's military wants a nice pat on the head from their American big brothers and that means flying American hardware. That means the F-35. Harper too wants to remain a member in good standing of America's aerial foreign legion. The Brits are in. Australia's in. America's in (over its head). We're in. It's what we do.

MoS, the Disaffected Lib

Slip Slidin' Away

Slip sliding away, slip sliding away
You know the nearer your destination, the more you're slip sliding away
- Paul Simon

I know, by his public efforts to appear reasonably normal, that Stephen Harper is a Beatles' fan. Whether he has ever listened to or crooned any of Paul Simon's songs is less certain. Yet I couldn't help but think of Simon this morning as I read Lawrence Martin's latest piece in The Globe and Mail.

Entitled The Harper machine is in disarray, Martin reflects on the many obstacles that have emerged to obstruct what I presume is Dear Leader's destination, not only to win the next election but to become Canada's long-serving prime minister. (Put aside for the moment that he seems to have blighted our political landscape for far too long already.)

Like an aging tiger, Harper seems to be losing some of his truculence. As Martin notes,

Few expected this. The bet would have been that the Prime Minister would have gone to the wall to protect Dimitri Soudas, as he has many other loyalists after acts of folly.

But just four months after having been appointed, the Conservative Party’s executive director is out the door. He joins a lengthening list. In recent months, Stephen Harper has also lost his chief of staff, his finance minister and a Supreme Court nominee, plus several senators as a result of the expenses scandal.

Dimitri Soudas' dismissal, suggests Martin, may mark an act of Harper deference to the rank and file who are becoming increasingly restive chafing under their leader's storied iron grip on all facets of the operation. Why? Matin cites several reasons:

-His party has been trailing the Liberals in the polls.

-He presided over a scandal he claimed to know little about, but should have known a lot about.

-Rebellious caucus types have confronted him, demanding some freedom of speech.

-Former finance minister Jim Flaherty contradicted him on income-splitting, a major policy plank.

One could certainly add to this list considerably, but perhaps the most egregious example of trouble has to be the almost universal repugnance with which his current favourite puppet, Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre, is being met over the misnamed Fair Elections Act. I won't be surprised if loyalist Pierre is soon invited to sit in the party ejection seat as well.

Martin points out that similar problems of resistance and bickering have beset past prime ministers as they approach the 10-year mark, including Mulroney, Chretien and Trudeau, at which point it becomes a situation of fight or flight.

However unlikely, let us hope that Stephen Harper chooses the latter option.

Conservative And F-35 Myths

I have written numerous past posts both on the F-35 jets and the Minister of Incompetence who presides over the file in Canada, Peter MacKay. Despite the fact that the aircraft has had problems from almost the beginning, the myth of its superiority and the myth that it would cost our government $75 million dollars each persisted long after compelling evidence was adduced to disprove both.

Although it looks impressive, as the following short video illustrates, the accompanying story quite succinctly inters those two aforementioned falsehoods, along with the big whopper that somehow permeates the brains of the ideologues, i.e. the myth of Harper Conservative fiscal and administrative competence.

He Certainly Has Mr. Harper's Number

It is always heartening to me, and I am sure to countless others, to see that some members of the Canadian electorate are not asleep at the proverbial wheel but instead busy exercising their critical-thinking skills. Peter Dick of Toronto is one such citizen. Not content to blithely and blindly accept the official mythology that the Conservative government is an able manager of the economy, Mr. Dick, in today's Star, offers the following trenchant observations about a naked emperor and his entourage:


Re: Parliamentary session over for summer, but scandals still remain, June 20

Government House Leader Peter Van Loan continues to spout the Stephen Harper party line in Thursday’s Star, saying: “We’ve been working hard to strengthen our economy, create jobs and support Canadian families.” If only repeating this, ad nauseam, made it true! People outside the 1 per cent know how bad things are. Economies suffer and degrade when people don’t spend money, and people don’t spend money when they are unemployed, in a precarious job or making less than a living wage.

As long as Harper continues to create and support policies that export Canadian jobs, put downward pressure on Canadian salaries, weaken unions and destroy any semblance of job security, he is sabotaging the economy for us all. Add to this the deliberate degradation, rather than bolstering, of the Canada Pension Plan and employment insurance benefits, and you ensure that fewer and fewer Canadians have disposable income to spend. How strange that an “economics guy” like Harper does not make the connection between a precarious, low-paid workforce and a tanked economy. Harper’s policies contradict everything that comes out of his mouth, and your wallet already knows this. Vote accordingly.

What Do Stephen Harper and Rob Ford Have In Common?

Both, it seems, have a constitutional aversion to being honest with the people they purport to represent. Click here for a story on Harper's folly (i.e., the F-35 fairy tale Haper Inc. is fond of spinning to benighted voters) and here for how Toronto Mayor Rob Ford tried to bury the truth about the Sheppard subway line he is so passionate about.

By the way, The Toronto Star has announced that it is raising its subscription rates by an average of seven cents a day for seven-day-a-week delivery. The above stories demonstrate the excellence of its investigative reports and overall journalism that I am happy to pay a little extra for.

Department of National Defence Follies: $21 For A Bag Of Concrete Worth $2.67

While the Harper regime tells the rest of us that we must tighten our collective belts, its military arm, the DND, is spending, well, like drunken sailors. May I suggest that a trip to Home Depot might save about $18.50 per bag of concrete?

From a Star Reader: Welcome to Harper’s Harsh New World

A particularly insightful lead letter is found in today's Toronto Star. Because most letters seem to be available online for but a short time, I am reproducing writer Stephen Douglas' thoughts on the folly of our pseudo-economist Prime Minister's tax giveaways to the corporate sector, which continues its relentless mission of eradicating good-paying jobs from Canada:


On Jan. 1, 2012 the last of five annual corporate tax cuts took effect, reducing the federal rate by another 1.5 points to 15 per cent, now among the lowest rates in the industrialized world. This amounts to a total $2.85 billion in tax savings for the most profitable of Canadian business.

The notion that this will spur new jobs is a fallacy; tax breaks don’t benefit those businesses starting up who are not yet in a profitable position. Nor will it lead to increased capital expenditure by those business who do receive it; Stephen Harper himself was recently complaining about all the private business money “sitting on the sidelines” in Canada during these recent difficult times. His solution? Give them more.

At the same time, Harper’s government is proceeding with increases in employment insurance premiums. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business, representing those small- and medium-sized businesses least likely to benefit from the new lower corporate tax rate, are protesting loudly with a 15,000 signature petition that this will, in fact, deter the hiring of any new employees. It is completely without merit, they add, as they have been overpaying into EI for years. As evidence, Employment Insurance currently has a robust surplus of $57 billion (2009-10), which our own auditor general has described as excessive.

The net effect of Harper’s New Year 2012 package is yet another transfer of several billion dollars in annual income from Canadian workers and small business to the largest of corporations, which are already reaping the highest profits. To add salt to the wound, these big players that Harper is generously rewarding are also significantly held by foreign-ownership (some estimates are that foreign ownership holds more than 50 per cent of the petroleum and gas industry shares and more than 50 per cent of all manufacturing in Canada).

Without any justification, for there is no economic analysis pointing toward any type of capital exodus out of Canada (to the contrary, we are traditionally considered a safe haven in turbulent periods), this New Year’s Day package pinches hard-earned dollars out of the pockets of low- and middle-class workers and pads the war chest of corporations and the wallets of their shareholders, among whom disproportionately are the wealthy, the elite and the foreign financiers.

For the last 25 years in the U.S. and Canada — under both Conservative and Liberal administrations — economic policy has been dominated by the economic philosophy of neoliberalism, emphasizing the primacy of market competition while vilifying government intervention and regulation of markets. Neoliberals insist that price adjustments ensure full employment.

In contrast, to quote Thomas Palley, what we have witnessed has seen “a slip between the cup and the lip” as the wealthiest have concentrated their power; a fall in real wages, the undermining of unions and the erosion of workers’ rights, and growing problems of poverty alongside an increase in wealth amassed by a very small minority. What neoliberalism has failed to account for is the abuse of power that accompanies the control of media and the funding of politicians.

Money does not have a conscience, and those who act to increase their personal wealth at the expense of their neighbour will find their rationalization within neoliberalism.

Harper and his cadre of conservative ideologues share this collective denial. In these hard economic times where concern is growing about the disparity of wealth, when one in nine Canadian children live below the poverty line while fewer than 4 per cent of the households hold 67 per cent of our total financial wealth (estimated total holdings of $1.8 trillion), he is thrusting us back toward a harsh Dickensian world and hopes we will be grateful for the crumbs we receive.

Stephen Douglas, Toronto

Caterpillar, Inc. - A Reprehensible Corporate 'Citizen'

When I think of caterpillars (which, until recently, I have to admit, has been rarely), I think of a slow-moving yet determined creature on its way to metamorphosis, often into something quite beautiful. Unfortunately, that gentle imagery must be cast aside when considering Caterpillar Inc., an ugly corporate entity intent on wreaking havoc to those in its employ.

As previously noted, Electro-Motive Canada, a subsidiary of the company, has made untenable demands of its workers, resulting in a lockout at its London plant. In The Star today, David Olive writes on how the gutting of contracts is a practice well-documented in Caterpillar''s American operations, employing a tactic best described as a war of attrition against its employees:

The firm has a practiced skill at “taking a strike” for as long as required until workers straggle back to work across their own picket lines.

Indeed, the usual excuse of seeking increased productivity during difficult times doesn't even apply to its ruthless tactics:

Well ahead of the Great Recession, during a banner year for the world’s largest maker of construction and mining equipment, Cat insisted that its managers gird for a worst-case scenario of an 80 per cent plunge in sales over two years.

And on a single day in 2009, Caterpillar blithely laid off 11,000 employees, or 9 per cent of its global workforce. Like most U.S. employers, Cat has a hair-trigger for layoffs at the first sign of tough times.

Despite this well-documented practice, it was given permission by Industry Canada in 2010 to purchase Electro-Motive Canada in London, for generations the North American locomotive arm of General Motors Corp.

And yet silence over this outrageous corporate behaviour, which would assumes violates the terms of the foreign takeover, ensues from both the Harper government in general, and Industry Canada is particular.

Where is the outrage?

What were the terms, if any, that Industry Canada stipulated for Electro-Motive's purchase?

Where are the leaders of the opposition parties, who have thus far observed the same stony silence as the government?

Who will speak up in defense of good-paying Canadian jobs?

One shudders to consider the answers.