The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Political patronage has been called the glue that holds political parties together. It has also been called a lot of other things, few of them positive. What it is simply is appointing your friends to positions on boards, commissions and so on rather than your enemies or neutrals. This has been happening since the beginning of politics and is unlikely to change. Writers such as Sid Green say the system is good as long as those appointed are qualified. Still, there are those who object to any patronage as unfair (especially if they are not being appointed). Consider the case of ManitobaÕs federal cabinet minister, Vic Toews, who took quite a pasting in the press for daring to allow his name to be considered for an appointment to the Court of QueenÕs Bench. Who could be more qualified? Vic is a prominent lawyer, Crown prosecutor and former Manitoba Justice Minister, among other things. HeÕs far more qualified than the many Liberal appointees to various judgeships across Canada. This is certainly not as sensational as the case of Maxime Bernier, whose character was roundly assassinated because of his ex-girlfriend and poor judgment on his part as foreign affairs minister. The hypocritical Liberal frontbenchers have been after Bernier for bad judgment, but who could have worse judgment than a party that elects Stphane Dion as leader? The press has ÒrevealedÕ that some MPs on the government side have hired each otherÕs offspring to work in their offices, thus getting around the so called anti-nepotism law. They mentioned only Conservative MPs, but it is a sure bet that all parties are doing this, and it is not against the law or parliamentary rules. One of the masters of hypocrisy is New Democrat MP Pat Martin, who claims Ònepotism and patronageÉare the same species and...make Canadians gag.Ó Martin did mention that his own son had worked for an NDP member 10 years ago, but he does not agree with the practice. He failed to mention that the same son was appointed to Gary DoerÕs executive council, and he never objected. Do we really think being NDP had nothing to do with it? Patronage is an established practice, and governments need their friends and supporters in positions of power and influence, not those who may betray or embarrass them. This is true regardless of political stripe. Getting back to Vic Toews, a year ago the U of Winnipeg alumni magazine ran a two-page article on Toews as a law and order guy who got his B.A. there in 1973. They aptly and favourably described the career of the born-in-Paraguay devout Mennonite. Toews had a great career in law and is very popular in his ÒBible BeltÓ riding, getting two-thirds of the vote last time. Interviews with some of his voters show he has not lost his popularity. He keeps saying he is going to run again. If he doesnÕt, the Conservatives will have no problem getting a good candidate in a sure-win riding. * * * The Liberals claim their proposed carbon tax will be Òrevenue neutral,Ó meaning, I suppose, they will cut taxes or give rebates so there will be really no cost to the taxpayer. Do we really believe this? One Winnipeg writer calls it a Liberal boondoggle that will be impossible to make revenue neutral, and the extra costs to business will simply be passed on to the taxpayer. For example, will the trucker who spends thousands monthly get the same tax cut as the driver who spends less than $100/month? The writer also points out that those who donÕt pay income taxes will still have to pay the carbon tax, and how can it be revenue neutral if in needs a huge bureaucracy to administer it? He rightly concludes that the big polluters will simply pass on the extra costs to the consumer. A recent poll for an environmental group says Canadians will welcome an environmental tax and donÕt expect any money back. If you believe this, I have a bridge to sell you! RogerÕs Right Corner runs Wednesdays.
