Harper's “new generation” shuffles further into paranoia

The unveiling of prime minister Stephen Harper's newly-shuffled cabinet almost passed successfully: with a yawn.

This was to be the “new generation” of conservative thought in the government's idea bank; proof that there is talent to spare on the government benches, enough to secure yet another majority in the next election.

One, maybe two cycles of happy news at best, and then a summertime yawn.

But the leak of an internal email from within the prime minister's own staff killed all thought of that.

Now, instead of portraying a confident prime minister welcoming the next wave, we have the picture of an increasingly paranoid prime minister building walls against anyone and anything he doesn't like. And this will likely wear longer than the senate scandal that just won't go away.

The talk was to be about the 12 females now in the 39-member new cabinet. Since the entire Conservative caucus is but 17 per cent female, the talking point was supposed to be of inclusiveness.

But gender equality is only relevant (in a news sense) when it is grievously abridged. There is no talk of lack of ability among the new appointees. All appear to be capable individuals, and that should be the only thing that matters.

That the four new female appointees were described in a Reuters report as “hyper-partisan” and “fiercely loyal” to the prime minister should not surprise anyone. Partisanship and loyalty are qualities admired by every prime minister.

Except in the context of a leaked email that went to the CBC, the Globe and Mail, Postmedia and others — which pretty well means everyone in Canada.

The leak describes the transition books that were given to the 27 people appointed to new posts in cabinet. These books are actually substantial binders that help bring the new ministers up to speed in their portfolios.

What killed all the good-news talk around the shuffle was the inclusion of a Nixonian friends and enemies list.

“Who to engage or avoid: friends and enemy stakeholders,” was one heading included in the transition books. “Who to avoid: bureaucrats who can't take no (or yes) for an answer,” was another (but which was later dropped before printing).

These entries are not standard practice. How do we know this? Because some staffers in the PMO itself were appalled by them. CBC reports that staffers who balked at including them were cut from further communications in the matter.

At least one was appalled enough to leak it to the media.

What does this tell us? To me, it shows a prime minister who's afraid of shadows, and a guard-dog PMO that's out of control.

So who's the enemy? Environmental groups, certain non-profits, civic and industrial associations (dare we say unions?) with views that differ from the government.

Garry Neil, executive director of the Council of Canadians described the government mentality thus: “They don't view us as citizens with strongly held opinions that come from places of principle.They view us as eco-terrorists. They see us as standing with the child pornographers. I mean, that's the way they view politics.

This from the Globe and Mail: “To talk about it in terms of enemies and friends is just unheard of,” said Gary Corbett, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, representing scientists and professionals in government, including the federal civil service.

“Now it’s about enemies and friends, not people who have different opinions. And that’s really what they’re saying: if you have a different opinion, you are the enemy,” Mr. Corbett said.

In my own way, I engage in partisan debate and advocacy. And I've received my share of opposing viewpoints — and hate mail — over the years.

But I know this: your harshest critic can sometimes be your best friend. People who disagree with you are still worthwhile people; so there must be some valid basis behind disagreement. Examine that, and what comes out is better for everyone.

That is the chief strength of our style of government.

Stephen Harper does not feel confident enough to engage dissent, so he builds walls of hyper-partisanship around himself. He ruthlessly silences critics within his elected Tory ranks and within the civil service. He names you “the enemy” if you cross him in any way.

Harper likes his politics polarized. He operates at the polar opposite of leadership.