|
|---|
Monday, 4 April 2011
The Enforcer versus The Mechanic: Who is right about Who knew What and When?
Posted by 2011 at 17:09Canadians are now faced with a new drama, that pits The Enforcer against The Mechanic in a battle over who is telling the truth about five convictions of a former senior advisor to Stephen Harper.
 |
| The Mechanic & The Enforcer |
We've met The Mechanic in this saga before – Bruce Carsons, a Harper senior advisor who was part of the Harper 12 of most powerful people in the Harper Prime Minister's Office (PMO).
Macleans wrote that Carson was the fixer for Harper's government – the man you went to solve problems; and was nicknamed The Mechanic because he was a superb fixer.
Macleans wrote that Carson was the fixer for Harper's government – the man you went to solve problems; and was nicknamed The Mechanic because he was a superb fixer.
The Mechanic, who is 66, now has a slew of problems, including a possible dispute with his 22-year old fiancee.
Enter The Enforcer:
Now we have been introduced to The Enforcer, being Ian Brodie, a man who was Harper's Chief of Staff. A former student of Tom Flanagan, Ian Brodie was described in a 2006 article by Paul Wells in Macleans as The Enforcer. Wells wrote that Brodie had a special role as Chief of Staff in the Harper PMO:
His mandate is to ensure that the Harper government moves briskly and purposefully -- that Harper's reign does not dissolve into the disarray and drift that plagued Martin's brief tenure...
Paul Wells of Macleans
Brodie is a scruffy, confrontation-averse academic who ... has never been a candidate for elected office. His authority comes, not from physical stature or a short temper, but from Harper's confidence in him... Brodie co-ordinated the hiring of staffers for Harper's slate of rookie ministers, and he serves as Harper's gatekeeper, controlling access to the Prime Minister and making decisions on Harper's behalf when he's absent.
Brodie left after the Clinton/Obama NAFTA leak controversy.
 |
| John Geddes |
The Enforcer on Harper's Starve the Beast GST Cut:
In 2009 John Geddes wrote an article (also for Macleans) about the Brodie's explanation as to why Harper opted for the two cuts in the GST, even though economists (then and now) have advised that it is the wrong type of tax cut to undertake.
Geddes describes his concern about the reasons Brodie and Harper opted for a GST tax cut:
Beyond the narrow debate about the history of the GST cuts, there was something unsettling about Brodie’s candid presentation.
Geddes says that Brodie gave a presentation in which he acknowledged that the GST tax cut was regarded as a bad tax move by most experts – it cost the government $12 billion a year of income just before the financial meltdown (that's more than $40 billion of lost income since Harper came into power) - but Brodie defended the move because:
“It worked in the sense that by the end of the ’05-’06 campaign, voters identified the Conservative party as the party of lower taxes. It worked in the sense that it helped us to win.”
Brodie then explained the reasoning for choosing this ineffective GST tax cut over other kinds of cuts – because people would remember it (my highlighting):
Harper and The Enforcer Brodie said the party’s campaign researchers then explored public opinion. They discovered that Canadians tend to forget or discount past income tax cuts...
Lesson learned. Deliver a tax cut so simple nobody could misunderstand it or forget it. And so the Tories promised, and delivered, their GST cuts, a point off in the spring of 2006, and another in the fall of 2007. That second reduction came just in time for the beginning of the subprime meltdown, which would soon usher in an era when the Canadian government, like governments everywhere, would need every dime they could get.
There we have it: The Enforcer's view that a tax cut costing the government $40 plus billion is justified because it makes it easier for Stephen Harper to boast that he cut the GST, and for voters to remember his tax cut.
Of course, having starved the beast of that massive amount, now Harper has trouble offering help to Canadians who need it, and is resorting to the new Conservative substitute for cash – the postdated promise.
Brodie was very candid about the "win votes at all costs" political reasoning behind the GST cut of Harper.
Is he being as candid about what Bruce Carson told him and the PMO about his five convictions?
The Mechanic meets The Enforcer about convictions:
Bruce Carson does not seem to think so. He says he told Brodie all about all five convictions; Brodie says he was not told about them.
The Mechanic says I did too! and The Enforcer says You didn't!
 |
| Jim Bronskill |
Jim Bronskill and Joan Bryden of The Canadian Press describe these conflicting recollections this way:
But Carson said in an interview he mentioned his criminal history in early 2006 to Ian Brodie, then Harper's chief of staff, when completing an application for a Secret-level security clearance.And Carson says he hid nothing when filling out the extensive form."Certainly, my belief is that I listed all of the criminal offences to which I had been convicted. I had a discussion with Ian Brodie about this," Carson told The Canadian Press.
"Because I didn't want to fill the whole thing out and then catch anybody by surprise."
The Canadian Press reported that Carson was convicted on five counts of fraud — three more than previously known — and received court-ordered psychiatric treatment before becoming one of Harper's closest advisers.Brodie said Monday he was not aware of Carson's most recent criminal convictions, from 1990, until he read about them in the news Sunday. "I do not think Prime Minister Harper would have been aware of these more recent charges, either."
There we have it. Which of The Enforcer and The Mechanic should Canadians believe?
And if Ian Brodie did indeed hear about all five convictions, why did he not tell Stephen Harper about them?
The mystery deepens ...
Hints from The Cat for Reporters:
Hints from The Cat for Reporters:
Now we need some intrepid journalists to tie the details down a bit more so that Canadians can decide whom to believe. Just when and where did Carson meet with Brodie to tell him about the five convictions? Where any others present at the talks? Does Carson have an appointments diary with details of such a meeting? Does Brodie have one? What exactly was said in such discussions?
Canadians wait for the answers.
0 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
