Just Another Pretty Face

Those of a certain age will remember the much beloved 1970's sitcom, The Mary Tyler Moore Show. Set in a television newsroom in Minneapolis, the series chronicled life both inside and outside the studio of its many and varied employees, who ranged from the gruff but ultimately lovable Lou Grant, played by Ed Asner, to the vapid but ultimately harmless news anchor, Ted Baxter, played by the late Ted Knight. The handsome broadcaster was essentially a sendup of all those 'pretty faces' one sees on TV who in reality are as sharp as the proverbial bag of hammers.

Reading Thomas Walkom's piece in today's Star about Justin Trudeau and his now unimpeded march to the Liberal leadership, I couldn't help but think of good old Ted. Walkom makes the following tart observations about Justin:

That Trudeau has such charisma is a given. In public, he is confident and engaging — earnest but with a sense of humor.

He presents himself as genuinely likeable, a trait that should serve him well against Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

But the fault for which Garneau once chided him is real. Trudeau’s public utterances don’t have much content. To listen to him at, say, a university campus event is to emerge disappointed.

He sounds and looks fine but doesn’t say much.

And it is, of course, this latter observation that should be of concern to those who see Trudeau fils as the one who will lead them out of the political wilderness. A man long on platitudes (he, along with the other contenders, as Walkom notes, is in favour of youth employment, transparency, openness and democracy,) but shockingly short on specifics, Trudeau and his supporters may come to realize that the so-called 'wow-factor' associated with his 'leadership' will wear thin very quickly, given that today's citizens, when they bother to vote at all, are a far more cynical lot than those who existed in the sixties and pledged their fealty to his father.

Yes, on the Mary Tyler Moore Show, everyone loved Ted Baxter but few, I suspect, would have wanted him to sit in news director Lou Grant's chair.

The Strange Economics of Stephen Harper

Even though he only has a Master's degree in economics, our Prime Minister likes to present himself as an economist. And, like the myriad other untruths propagated by his regime, perhaps the biggest lie is that resource extraction, especially tarsands oil, is the most prudent activity around which the Canadian economy should revolve. Indeed, the Harper propaganda machine is so powerful that when anyone dares question the wisdom of such a narrow approach, he or she is automatically labelled anti-Alberta, anti-growth, and profoundly un-Canadian. One doesn't have to search too far back in memory for the pilloring Thomas Mulcair endured over his 'dutch disease' remarks.

Yet somehow, the most potent criticism hurled against Hugo Chavez as President of Venezuela, his reliance on oil exports to the exclusion of a more diversified economy, is supposed to have no application to Canada in Harperworld.

In today's Star, Thomas Walkom attempts to set the record straight. Entitled Alberta’s oil woes mean trouble ahead for Canada, his piece observes that oil, the unilateral basis of the federal government's trade policies, is in trouble. Citing Alberta's deficit budget in which spending will be slashed, he examines the similarities between Alberta and Venezuela:

Curiously, Alberta has much in common with the Venezuela that Hugo Chavez bequeathed to the world. Both rely on heavy oil exports to the U.S. Both are one-party states (Alberta more so than Venezuela). Both are utterly dependent on the price of oil and both have economies that, in different ways, have been deformed as a result of this dependence.

Venezuela faces a reckoning and so does Alberta. So, indeed, does Canada as a whole.

Echoing the 'dutch disease' currency inflation problem articulated earlier by Mulcair, Walkom says, as a result of the decline in oil prices for the tarsand product,

We are already seeing a decline in the Canadian dollar as a result of the resource slowdown. In the long run, this should be good news for Canadian manufacturers who export their goods. In the short run, it means all of us are a little poorer.

Where we don’t see any change is in the federal government’s approach to the economy. The Harper Conservatives remain dazzled by resources. They believe that if the markets want Canadians to hew wood and draw water, that’s what we should do.

But markets are notoriously fickle. This is a fact the entire country will have to face. Alberta is just getting there first.

As Walkom's piece suggests, expect no new understanding or economic insights in the world that Stephen Harper and his cabal inhabit.

Ongoing Outrage

The host of letters appearing in today's Star attests to the ongoing public outrage over the Senate porkbarrellers. Although in many ways a mere sideshow to the endemic and systemic problems that face our governance, it nonetheless illustrates that Canadian anger, when it can be aroused, can be formidable.

I am taking the liberty of reproducing a few of the shorter missives below, and I also highly recommend Thomas Walkom's column, in which he lambastes the almost jesuitical reasoning being propounded by defenders of this Senate malfeascence:

They preach austerity but secretly practice gluttony, stealing from the poorest of the poor to pad their many mattresses. For those Senators their day is nigh.

Richard Kadziewicz, Scarborough

Always the outspoken critic of everyone else, I think it’s time that Mike Duffy and his Cheshire Cat smile disappear and head back to Blunderland.

Dave Lower, Brampton

If you have lost your job and are collecting EI, the government might send someone to your home to check if you are cheating the taxpayers.

If you are a senator, the prime minister and government House leader will defend your expenses in the House of Commons.

Why the difference? Because they know where you live, but they do not know where the senators live.

Keith Parkinson, Cambridge

Surely smart people like Ms Wallin and Mr Duffy had some question in their minds as to the validity of their expenses and residency status as they completed their expense forms and filed their residence confirmation documents. These actions from our appointed leaders are disgusting and Canadians do not deserve this treatemnt.. Let’s boot them out of the Senate now.

Doug Gameroff, Toronto

If Mike Duffy was unable to read the rules and understand them when most of the senators did, then it follows he is too dumb to be in the Senate. Shame! Resign!

Stella Watson, Toronto

Unions After Bill C-377

In my favorite Shakespearian play, Hamlet, there is a scene wherein his erstwhile friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, explain that an acting company that used to enjoy great popularity has fallen on hard times. Thanks to a new craze in which troupes of child actors have become the rage, and "are most tyrannically clapped for", adults have had to go on the road to earn a living. Hamlet wonders about the child actors' futures, because their current success means they are in fact "exclaim[ing] against their own succession", since they will be out of work once they grow up.

I can't help but think about human nature's shortsightedness when I read those lines. We pursue things that aren't good for us, while we denigrate that which, in the long term, is of benefit. Take, for example, the public's attitude toward unions. More days than nought, there are columns and letters published condemning unions and their well-paid members, envy and resentment seeping through the pages, seemingly in a senseless quest to bring people down to the lowest pay and working conditions possible.

It is, of course, this irrational impulse to which Bill C-377, the thinly-disguised union-busting legislation passed on Wednesday evening by the Harper government, plays. Clothed in the rhetoric typical of a workers' rights-hating regime, the law will require labour organizations to provide extensive details, such as the salaries of top union leaders, to the Canada Revenue Agency, which will publish the information on its website.

All designed, of course, to stoke even more public contempt for those enjoying better working conditions and pay than those in non-union environments.

And yet, as observed by Thomas Walkom and David Climenhaga, unions themselves must bear some of the responsibility for this current sorry state.

Writes Walkom:

What’s really killing unions is not the political right. It is that, for too many workers, organized labour is no longer relevant.

In 2011, federal figures show, 31 per cent of Canadian workers overall were unionized. Of these, the vast majority are middle-aged or older. For younger workers between the ages of 15 and 24, the rate of unionization is just under 16 per cent.

Compounding the problem, says Walkom, is the fact that union membership is concentrated in the public sector, with only 16 per cent of private sector workers belonging to unions, largely due to the collapse of manufacturing jobs and the proliferation of part-time and contract work in North America.

He adds,

Unions — which understandably pay attention first and foremost to their own members — haven’t lobbied hard enough to tighten up the employment standards legislation that allows these low-wage practices.

Nor have most unions figured out a way to deal with a new kind of workplace, where people no longer labour in large factories and where strikes can be circumvented by technology.

Echoing this idea, in The Rabble David Climenhaga writes:

Ironically, while most unions don't do enough to represent working people beyond their own membership, what little they do to fight for the powerless in society is why authoritarian neoconservatives like Harper have such a hate on for labour and other groups that speak out for traditional Canadian values.

So one worthwhile response to the effort by the Conservatives to smother unions in red tape is to fight harder for real progressive causes, not to mention never again signing a lousy two-tier contract that leaves young workers with the short end of the stick to preserve the past victories of older workers. No, an injury to one remains an injury to all, people!

Perhaps the final consideration should be given to those who "most tyrannically clap[...]' for the kind of repressive legislative agenda epitomized by Bill C-377. In a jurisdiction near you, you can probably look forward to more of this.

Thomas Walkom's Perspective on Teacher Unrest

On this blog I have written periodically about unions in both a favourable and a critical light. I have argued both for their necessity to mitigate the depredations that employers are sometimes given to, and I have pilloried them when cronyism or malfeasance have undermined their effectiveness.

In the latter part of my teaching career, I felt that my union, the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation, had become far too political in the worst sense of the word, listening only to the privileged few in executive positions while largely ignoring the rank and file, i.e., the frontline workers. As well, becoming advocates for the Ontario Liberal government, I felt, was always a very bad idea because while governments and unions may sometimes have common goals, their interests are not usually congruent, a fact that has become egregiously evident with the McGuinty government's betrayal of collective bargaining principles when it comes to teacher contracts.

In this morning's Star, columnist Thomas Walkom argues that the current unrest, soon to erupt into strikes, is easy to understand, given that teachers have nothing to lose due to the absence of anything resembling free bargaining in the current climate:

For teachers, the choice given them by the provincial Liberal government amounts to no choice at all. The government urges the unions to bargain with local school boards. But it insists that the final results must fit a template that it has already pre-ordained.

Those that don’t voluntarily agree to this template contract — which includes wage freezes for some, cutbacks that amount to wage reductions for others and the elimination of some benefits — will, under extraordinary legislation passed this fall, have it imposed on them.

The unions are being told: “Yes, we have a gun to your head. But if you wish, you can pull the trigger yourself.”

It seems the teaching unions prefer that the government’s prints alone be on the weapon.

He goes on to say that the nature of the constitutional challenge being mounted to the legislation, Bill 115, will be undermined should too many teacher locals sign contracts under duress, leaving the government with the opportunity to argue that it can't be unconstitutional if groups have agreed to its restrictions.

Left unsaid in his piece, however, is another reason I suspect the federations are refusing to be a further party to this charade. Because of the grave mistake they made in allying themselves with a political party, much of their effectiveness has been compromised over the past several years, to the point that their relevance, especially to younger teachers, is not readily apparent. I remember in the latter part of my career hearing some young teachers question the need for unions in general, and OSSTF in particular, never having witnessed them in their finest hours.

At least now, with the federations finally showing some backbone against government abuse of power, they will have an inkling of what unions are there for.

Thomas Walkom: Harper's Strategy Behind The Foreign Workers Program

Yesterday, over at Northern Reflections, Owen Gray wrote a post entitled A Lost Generation, a reflection on the discouraging prospects our young people face in establishing themselves in gainful employment, and the fact that their plight does not seem to be a factor in the Harper regime's decision-making.

I left the following comment on his blog:

Not only are our overlords ignoring the problem you describe here, Owen, but they are in fact compounding it by recruiting young people from Ireland to come work in Canada.

This inexplicable policy, apparently spearheaded by Jason Kenney, should outrage all of us, after which I provided a link to a story from the Star detailing Jason Kenney's efforts to recruit young people from Ireland to come to Canada for jobs.

Owen replied with the following:

It's all about driving down everyone's wages, Lorne. That was one of the items on the agenda when Mr. Flaherty met with the movers and shakers two summers ago.

Put that together with this government's preemptive moves on unions before a strike starts, and it's clear who this government serves.

It's not we, the people. And it's certainly not the young.

Owen's insight, it seems, is spot on. In his column today, The Star's Thomas Walkom looks at how Canada is using imported labour to do just that, keep everyone's wages down:

... the Vancouver Sun has reported, four brand new coal mines in the province’s northeast are bringing in just under 2,000 temporary Chinese migrants to do most of the work.

The ostensible reason, a spokesman for Canadian Dehua International Mines Group Inc. is reported as saying, is that not enough Canadians are skilled enough to do underground mining.

Let me repeat that. Not enough underground miners. In Canada.

Those who spent their working lives underground in Northern Ontario, or Quebec or Saskatchewan or Cape Breton would be surprised to hear this.

Walkom goes on to point out that the B.C. situation is hardly an exception, that the number of visas granted to temporary foreign workers is exploding; these workers, ranging from coffee shop staff in Alberta to those employed at XL Foods, hardly meet the criteria under which the foreign workers program was established, i.e. to do jobs for which they are uniquely qualified.

Walkom's conclusion? That they are being permitted entry because they are unlikely to complain of low wages or join a union. Their presence thus sends a strong message to the unemployed in Canada: Work for less, or others will take the jobs from you.

He concludes:

It’s one thing for the Harper Conservatives to return us to the status of a resource economy. It is another for them to insist that we become a low-wage resource economy.

And, of course, while such a policy may be a boon to our corporate masters, it is just one more obstacle that our young people have to face in their efforts to establish their careers.

Assumptions Can Be Dangerous

[Former Ontario Premier Mike] Harris assumed that small Ontario towns like Walkerton would have the good sense to keep their drinking water clean.

[Prime Minister Stephen] Harper assumed that profit-making companies would make sure that their consumers received safe products.

In both cases, they were wrong.

This excerpt from Thomas Walkom's Star column is a sobering reminder of the potentially deadly consequences of the deregulation mentality embraced by the right-wing in conjunction with its credo that business can do things better and more efficiently than government.

The shortcomings of such naive faith in industry self-regulation becomes obvious as more information is revealed about the XL Foods tainted meat scandal that has prompted the biggest recall in Canadian history. As reported earlier, three weeks elapsed between the discovery of E.coli in XL Foods' Lakeside Packers plant in Alberta and the actual meat recall. The responsibility for the time lag appears to rest solely with the company.

As reported by Joanna Smith in today's Star,

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the U.S. Department of Agriculture both discovered E. coli O157:H7 ... on beef products originating from the XL Foods Inc. plant in Brooks, Alta. on Sept. 4.

A request for full documentation of the problem was made on Sept.6 by the frontline staff of CFIA stationed at XL, but the documentation was not forthcoming.

The following statement is probably the most damning evidence of the failings of industry self-regulation:

“There was a delay in getting it . . . We have limited authority to compel immediate documentation,” George Da Pont, president of the food inspection agency, said during a news conference in Calgary on Wednesday.

Now in crisis mode, expect more fatuous assurances by the Harper regime of the safety of our food supply, even as its latest budget reduces the funding required to keep Canadian foods safe by 27 per cent.

But at least Harper Inc. is sending out a clear message to potential investors: Canada is open for business as it continues to reduce red tape and the 'heavy hand' of government 'interference.'

P.S. You might want to pack your own lunch.

Sometimes It Is Hard Not To Feel Smug

Many years ago, the singer Mac Davis wrote and performed a satirical song entitled "It's Hard To Be Humble," about a man so impressed with himself that he has no insight whatsoever into what a buffoon he really is.

I sometimes think of that song when I ponder the shenanigans of Toronto's chief magistrate, Rob Ford, a legend in his own mind and, in his fevered yet cruelly limited imagination, the victim of unwarranted aspersions cast by the envious, aka the pinko left, the chattering classes, and, well, just the damned envious.

So it was with much delight that I read this morning's column by The Star's Thomas Walkom. Entitled Three cheers for Rob Ford, true face of the modern right, the piece suggests that unlike those who try to conceal their true agenda, (think Stephen Harper and the recently-exposed Mitt Romney),

... Rob Ford is never flummoxed. Or perhaps it more accurate to say he is in a state of constant flummox.

His hypocrisy is upfront. Any other politician who made his name fighting the so-called gravy train might be embarrassed when found to use public resources inappropriately.

Ford, however, is unapologetic. Did he pressure city workers to fix up the street outside his family business? So what? Did he break conflict of interest rules? He never read them. Is he using taxpayer-funded resources for private activities? Forget about it.

And so the psychodrama continues. But unfortunately, when pondering people like Rob and brother Doug (the alleged 'brains' behind the operation), I sometimes find that, to paraphrase Mac Davis' song, it's hard not to be smug, something I usually strive to assiduously avoid in my journey through life.

The Harper Government and The Eve of Environmental Destruction

Despite recent toned-down rhetoric, I suspect Harper and his minions are fooling very few people.

Take, for example, the recent words of our Anti-Environment Minister, the integrity-challenged Peter Kent:

Confronted by a looming 2020 deadline for curbing greenhouse gas emissions, the Harper government will ramp up its efforts to reduce climate change pollutants, Environment Minister Peter Kent said Wednesday.

In fact, as the article points out, the Harper regime has contributed almost nothing to achieve current reductions which take us halfway to the target; that has been wrought primarily by the combined efforts of environmentally conscious consumers and actions taken by provincial governments.

To further undermine any semblance of veracity, it was recently revealed that last year, this contemptible Harper mouthpiece presided over a department that

tried to minimize Canadian media coverage of its contribution to a major international scientific assessment report that highlighted evidence linking human activity to extreme weather events, according to a newly released federal memorandum obtained by Postmedia News.

Actions, as they say, do speak louder than words.

And of course, it is only words we are getting from our Prime Prevaricator, the man who has amply demonstrated through the actions of his micro-managed government nothing but withering contempt for science, data, and facts in general, doing everything he can to neutralize their threat along with those who dare to challenge his stunted and regressive world-view.

Take this rather rich statement Harper recently made, apparently with a straight face:

“The only way governments can handle controversial projects of this manner is to ensure that things are evaluated on an independent basis scientifically, and not simply on political criteria,” Harper told reporters during a visit to B.C.

“And as I’ve said repeatedly, the government does not pick and choose particular projects,” the prime minister said. “The government obviously wants to see British Columbia’s export trade continue to grow and diversify, that’s important. But projects have to be evaluated on their own merits.”

I guess that explains why he neutered the National Energy Board, robbing it of its ability to make a decision on the Northern Gateway Project, a power now residing solely in the hands of Harper and his cronies.

In his column today, which I hope you will get a chance to read, Thomas Walkom has much to say on some of these issues.

Thomas Walkom - Harper and Oil

In this time of unprecedented climate change, I think most people realize that Stephen Harper has an unhealthy addiction to oil, one that marks him as truly retrogressive as he seeks to return Canada to its traditional role as primarily an exporter of resources, all the while couching that backward movement with the use of muscular language, calling us, for example, an energy superpower.

And of course, when that language fails to convince, there is always the vilification of opponents, the muzzling of scientists, etc., all arrows in the quiver of this fatuous autocrat.

Yet despite all of those weapons and propaganda efforts, resistance to sending Alberta tarsands to the west coast via pipeline is growing. Thomas Walkom has some interesting insights to offer about the Harper strategy in today's Star, which you can read here.

Upper Class Twit of the Year?

I have long given up trying to fathom the 'mind' of America. The behaviour of its political leaders, both Democratic and Republican, and the following such behaviour inspires, leaves me particularly perplexed.

However, Mitt Romney's recent foray abroad to display his foreign policy bona fides has at least provided me with an opportunity to wax nostalgic about the Monty Python comedy troupe, especially this classic:

All kidding aside, the fact that Romney is considered a serious candidate, as Thomas Walkom points out today in The Star, should be cause for world-wide alarm.

The Economy And The People

Several years ago, while he was still writing for Canada's self-proclaimed 'newspaper of record,' Rick Salutin penned a column entitled something like, The economy is doing fine, the people not so much. In it, he made some trenchant observations about how, over time, the well-being of the economy and the well-being of the people, once essentially synonymous, have sharply diverged. His thesis was that while the economy once served the people, today the opposite is true.

Echoing that thesis, in today's column entitled GM Oshawa job cuts show real economy hurting under Stephen Harper Thomas Walkom offers a similar perspective.

His biting analysis begins:

When Stephen Harper’s Conservatives talk about protecting the economy, they are speaking of an abstraction.

They override the right to strike of rail and airline workers in order to further this abstraction. They run roughshod over the environment in its name.

But the real economy is not an abstraction. It is people’s jobs and wages. It is our livelihood. It is how we get by.

And this real economy is not doing well.

Walkom then goes on to eviscerate the propaganda so proudly and persistently proclaimed by Harper Inc. that they are economic masters of the universe, the only party protecting the values and addressing the concerns of 'ordinary Canadians.'

For an inkling of whose interests the Harper regime is really protecting, please take a look at the article. Must reading in the arsenal of the critical thinker.

When The Left Is Right

Although one wouldn't know it by listening to the predictable, hysterical, and politically-motivated campaign Harper Inc. is mounting against Thomas Mulcair for his 'Dutch disease' comments, there is a growing view amongst analysts and think tanks that the NDP leader is correct to an extent in his assessments of the economic impact of unrestrained tarsands development.

In his column today, Thomas Walkom offers an overview of analyses that verify the inconvenient truth to be found in Mulcair's assertions.

Thomas Walkom Opines on E.I. Changes

To this Conservative government, anything that might interfere with the mythical free market — and particularly with the market’s downward pressure on wages — is anathema.

The above is just a brief excerpt from Thomas Walkom's column in today's Star, additional food for thought as I continue trying to critically assess these recent changes to Employment Insurance rules.

Spring Signs of A Thaw In Our Political Passivity?

It's been a long time since I've seen in print the term 'Red Tory', used to describe an economic conservationism balanced by a social progressiveness. Yet it is included in columns today by The Star's Thomas Walkom and Chantal Hebert as both reflect upon the significance of Alison Redford's Progressive Conservative victory in Monday's Alberta election. Walkom goes so far as to suggest the term is also applicable to both Dalton McGuinty and Andrea Horwath, given their recent budget deliberations that yielded some real results.

As well, public editor Carol Goar writes on the growing backlash against the outrageously inflated salaries paid to so-called 'captains of industry.' A shareholders' meeting at one of Wall Street’s biggest banks, Citigroup, rejected the pay package awarded to Vikram Pandit, its CEO, a move she attributes in part to the growing awareness of the gross disparity that exists in North America between the privileged few (the 1% identified by the Occupy Movement) and the rest of us.

One can only hope that the movement for a more equitable distribution of wealth to restore and maintain some of the traditions and values Canadians hold dear will gain real momentum.

Thomas Walkom on Fair Taxation

Long a taboo subject, increasing tax rates for the wealthy is back on the agenda, in no small part due to the Occupy Movement and, more recently, Andrea Horwath. In today's Star, Thomas Walkom presents an interesting perspective on the issue. You can click here to read it.

Would You Buy A Used Car From This Man?

The above question, first asked about Richard Nixon as he ran against John Kennedy in the 1960 Presidential race, was designed to underscore the seemingly untrustworthy nature of the candidate - his shifty, evasive gaze, heavy perspiration, and his 5 o'clock shadow all seemed to suggest a man hiding something.

In the half-century since that race, we rarely feel the need to ask that question anymore, our assumption being that politicians by and large can't be trusted, that they are in fact hiding a great deal from those whose electoral support they are seeking.

Thomas Walkom's excellent column in today's Star takes a look at Stephen Harper's abuse of the public trust, suggesting that once it is lost, it is very very difficult to regain.

After all, would you trust this man to buy an F-35 jet for you?

Thomas Walkom's Budget Analysis

Earlier today I wrote a post congratulating The Toronto Star for its journalistic integrity and the crucial role it plays in helping to keep citizens informed of the important issues affecting our country. Columnist Thomas Walkom, who epitomizes that integrity, has written his analysis of the federal budget, reminding us all of the subtle yet undeniable strategy being utilized by the Harper regime in altering (my word would be 'perverting') the ideological landscape of Canada, elevating the interests of private profit over the collective good. It is an article I highly recommend.

A New Call For a Return to Progressive Taxation

I suppose one has to be of a certain age to remember that progressive taxation has been a mainstay, until fairly recently, of our taxation system. Little by little over the past two decades, probably starting with the introduction of the GST, that principle has been on the wane, to the point where we have flattened the tax brackets and derive much of our revenue from consumption taxes and business growth, both of which have their obvious limitations.

Today, it is very rare for politicians of any stripe to even broach the subject of tax increases, as opposed to spending cuts, as a means of helping to address deficits. That is why I was so pleased to read Thomas Walkom's column in today's Star. Using a group called Doctors for Fair Taxation, Walkom examines the case for a return to true progressive taxation.

I highly recommend it for your consideration.

Protection, Patriotism and Punishment - the Harper Credo

By now, most have heard about Sun TV's faux citizenship ceremony orchestrated by the Harper regime to help promote its brand of Canadian patriotism. Putting aside questions of the ethics of a Canadian broadcaster allowing itself to be a propaganda arm of a government increasingly hostile to the traditional values of Canadians, I recommend Thomas Walkom's article in today's Star.

Entitled What the fake citizenship scheme says about Harper, the article offers the following insights on the deviant path the Harperites are treading:

The old Conservative brand, associated with prime ministers like John Diefenbaker and Joe Clark, emphasized practicality melded with compassion. The new one focuses on pride, patriotism and toughness.

Martial valour is an integral part of this new image. From that stems Harper’s emphasis on the military...

Toughness is expressed by the government’s emphasis on jails and mandatory sentencing, as well as its take-no-prisoners approach to political foes.

But above all, the Conservatives want to brand themselves as the party of patriots.

Recent reports of seismic disturbances in Saskatoon are undoubtedly due to John George Diefenbaker proving restive in his grave.