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.
Roger and Frances and Jeremy and Paul A recent article dealt with the apparent literary transgressions of Free Press commentator Frances Russell. I first met Frances at a PC meeting in Dauphin held to elect delegates to the provincial leadership convention in late 1967. Duff Roblin had earlier resigned as Premier to contest the national PC leadership which he lost in a whisker to Robert Stanfield (often referred to as the best Prime Minister Canada never had). At the PC meeting, the elected or rather selected delegates pledged themselves to Stewart McLean, whose campaign I co-chaired with the Swan River PC president. As the oldest of the four candidates, McLean's campaign team was packed with young Tories, with the late Robert Steen, then MLA for St. Matthews and future mayor of Winnipeg, as major strategist. McLean was a Diefenbaker loyalist like most of the campaign team, which attracted Dief's closest Manitoba friends Steen and Fred Groves. Readers may remember Stewart McLean as a Dauphin boy who became mayor then MLA Appointed Education Minister and was responsible for amalgamating Manitoba's 1900 school districts (mostly with one room rural schools) into 57 which greatly bettered education in the province. He is remembered as one of the best and most successful Ministers of Education in the history of Manitoba. He was later appointed Attorney-General, but was defeated in his Dauphin seat in 1969 and was appointed a provincial judge in Saskatchewan by the Liberal government of Ross Thatcher. Stewart served until his retirement, then returned to his home town. Satisfied with the Dauphin delegate results, Bob Steen and I drove back to Winnipeg with Frances Russell as a passenger. During the four hour trip we tried to convince her that Duff Roblin would win Gordon Churchill's old seat of Winnipeg South Centre in the June 28th, 1968 election (he lost to Liberal E.B. Osler and "Trudeaumania"). Frances wrote an article predicting a Roblin win, one of the few pro-Conservative articles by her from then on. She did write one praising Premier Gary Filmon, which he quipped: "This is scary, very scary!" at a Tory gathering the next day. In many very well written columns during the past 35 years, Ms. Russell has constantly displayed her pro-Liberal/NDP bias, which of course she has the right to do. She was and is generally ignored by conservatives with no prominent Tory ever agreeing to an interview, although some articles do quote "conservative sources." In late May, a Russell commentary called "Corruption is hard to prove" tried to downplay the federal Liberal's corruption, and insinuated that the Manitoba PCs were just as bad with "Tarasgate" (a $4,000 foible in the 1995 election), and the 1988 defeat of the Pawley NDP when St. Vital MLA Jim Walding voted against his own party. Her hint that the PCs had paid off Walding was too much for this writer, and the following letter to the editor of the Free Press followed: Dear Editor: I admire and respect Frances Russell's writing ability and recognize her anti-conservative bias and her tendency to float "conspiracy theories" from time to time. Her latest mentions the difficulty to prove political corruption, and speaks of the 1988 defeat of the highly unpopular and incompetent Pawley government by the vote of Jim Walding. As PC President at the time, I was intimately involved in the issues of the day, and it was no secret that the Pawley government was falling apart Ñ Larry Desjardins had left and the NDP was dependent on former speaker Jim Walding who everybody knew was dreadfully unhappy with the Premier. Of course some conservatives talked to Walding, and one MLA told me that he spoke to him the night before the vote, and Mr. Walding said he was greatly influenced by a conversation he had with a constituent urging him to vote no. We all know the outcome, but Mr. Walding received only the gratitude of the opposition and obviously of the people of Manitoba. He was promised nothing and received exactly that, leaving the Province shortly after. Mr. Pawley can complain all he wants about "This most traumatic thing in his life," but the explanation is that it was his own fault. The so-called investigation was closed down because there was nothing there, quite unlike the Adscam Scam, which displays some real live corruption! -Roger Cathcart. As I expected the letter was not printed. Good luck Frances! Paul Martin? There is no doubt that Paul will never be considered one of Canada's greatest Prime Ministers. With "Mr. Dithers" in control, the Liberals lost their majority last time with little hope of regaining it in the near future. There is also no doubt that many Liberals would like to get rid of Paul and elect someone else, but who? What has he done that is good? How about the $4.6 billion in extra spending by the Liberal's NDP budget which barely passed? Some economists claim the extra lavish spending could be bad, and cause interest rates to be raised quickly by the Central Bank, meaning higher mortgage rates, and increases in the cost of credit. They point out that The Bank of Canada expects the economy to grow by only 2.6% this year, and the extra spending could add a full point to the GDP growth without any increase in productivity Ñ thus triggering inflation and depressing the dollar. What about the Gay Marriage Bill which passed adding Canada to the Netherlands and Belgium as the only countries to allow such unions? Ominous for Paul is that 35 Liberals voted against the bill including one cabinet minister who resigned. Stephen Harper pointed out that a majority of "Federalist MPs" voted against it, with the separatist Bloc votes giving it the edge. Pro-traditional marriage groups say the issue is far from over as it is opposed by a majority of Canadians and will be a major issue in the next election. Harper promises to re-visit the issue and allow a true free vote if he becomes PM. Did Paul Martin win on this? Further to this bill, Church groups and those opposing gay marriages have expressed concern that churches and clergy who refuse to marry homosexuals will be punished by losing their charitable tax credit status. The government said it won't happen, but pro-gay groups are proposing that it should. Best bet from here is that it will not be considered, especially by this weak federal government. As well, local MP Bev Desjarlais is to be commended for having the courage of her convictions and voting "no" to gay marriages. She was rewarded by Jack Layton taking away her critic status, but this is not a big deal for a minor fourth party in Parliament. Creighton and Denare Beach MP Jeremy Harrison was deservedly elevated to opposition critic status, becoming critic for Metis and Non-status Indians, and critic for the Minister of State for Northern Development. As Harper said: "As one of the youngest MPs in the House Of Commons, Jeremy has already proven his strong understanding and keen interest in the file." Jeremy is also a strong critic of the Prime Minister, and doesn't think Paul is a great Canadian. His recent brochure makes the following criticism: "FIRST, Paul Martin re-wrote Canada's tax-haven agreements, except he left out Barbados; SECOND, he registered his ships offshore in Barbados; THIRD, he fired his Canadian crews and hired foreigners at $2.20 per hour and escaped higher Canadian safety standards. FOURTH, he outsourced the shipbuilding to the Communist People's Republic Of ChinaÉ" Jeremy asks: "Is this someone who really has Canada's best interests at heart?" What do you think?
