Jack Be Nimble

Jack is feeling his oats. Things have turned out really swell for the leader of the New Democratic Party. His breezy self-confidence was infectious, really impressed people. Particularly the voters in Quebec who liked his smile a whole lot, his spunk and his cane as a prop to remind everyone what a courageous fellow he is.

Why he could have stood a cardboard cut-out resembling a human being out as a candidate in most of the Quebec ridings and still seen a sweep. In fact, that’s just what he did, in effect, given that some of those warm bodies couldn’t be bothered to campaign, to make themselves available for all-candidates’ meetings for public edification, and many didn’t even live in the ridings, much less bother to pop around.

A few absented themselves from the country during the campaign. Nothing seemed to matter; Quebecers, so prone to insult and offence, found nothing untoward in any of this. Out they came in their droves, and drove back the Bloc Quebecois, dropping them from owning 43 seats to a meagre four. In the process astonishing both Gilles Duceppe and Jack Layton.

As far as Jack Layton is concerned, he and his party won the election. As far as Gilles Duceppe is concerned, the fact that he was not re-elected in his own riding is a nightmare he has yet to awaken from. The misery of forlorn failure etched deeply in the frowning downturned mouth that presented as a model caricature of abject dejection.

The election, according to Jack, effectively launched a “new chapter in Canadian politics”. For the NDP had been gifted with a “clear mandate” from voters across this great country to represent “hard-working families”. No other political party in Canada has any concern whatever for the hard-working families of the country.

Certainly not the Conservatives who had lowered taxes, given parents additional breaks, and allowed seniors to combine incomes at tax time. The relief that the NDP, given the chance, would offer to hard-working families in Canada would come with higher taxation and greater support for union entitlements.

Jack is celebrating the “clear mandate” given to the NDP, though. “It’s a mandate that Stephen Harper is best to not ignore”, Jack crowed. For as the leader of the official Opposition, someone who is now entitled to move into Stornoway as an extension of living off the taxpayer which Jack and Olivia have had great run experimenting with in Toronto’s assisted housing, he and the NDP are on a roll.

Of course, being so completely focused on the startling success of the NDP in capturing 103 Seats in Parliament, with 58 rookie Members of Parliament from Quebec alone, mentored by the single experienced Quebec MP, the fact that Canada now has four years of a majority Conservative government appears to have escaped his notice.

For a majority government has carte blanch to comport itself in a manner commensurate with a confident minority government, without the acidic suspense of the opposition parties continually threatening to shut down the government and take it over themselves.

But there’s Jack, expressing his joy and jubilation and warning Stephen Harper that he will personally hold him “accountable”. The NDP alone represents a party that protects Canada’s health care system, cares about improving senior pensions, doing right by the environment and stopping corporate interests in their tracks.

“Together, we’re going to hold Stephen Harper’s government to account. Together, we’ll continue to grow our movement, reaching out to more Canadians and more communities”.

Go to it, Jack. And while you’re at it, just remember all those things you promised Quebec to persuade voters there that there was no need to maintain the Bloc in Parliament, for the NDP stands prepared to badger Canadians and threaten the country to respect the collective will of French Canadians as uniquely deserving of very special attention in recognition of their extravagant claims and superior entitlements.

Harvard's Pain

Harvard is disgruntled. And rather disbelieving. What absolute hayseeds Canadians are. How could they do this to an alumni of Harvard University where the intellectual crème de la crème of academics hang their capes and make their mark on the international community in the halls of academia.

Michael Ignatieff, after all, is one of their own. Oh yes, a Canadian, certainly so, but American in spirit and orientation; why else might they care? His speciality honed in their great halls of learning, and the beneficence of his considered wit and advice dispensed for the edification of adoring students.

He was, during his tenure, and more specifically because of his tenure at Harvard as the reigning human rights impressario with tons of right-there experience, anointed with the elixir of greatness.

How could those dull-minded clods passing for intelligent voters pass him by? What’s worse, ignominiously refusing to renew his seat, still warm from the 40th Parliament, so recently vacated. That Canadians stubbornly could not recognize the greatness with which he was imbued, thanks in good part to his sojourn in Boston, bespeaks unspeakable narrow-minded stupidity.

And what does it all reveal? Obviously, a lack of respect for the halls of higher learning, but more, far more, misplaced, ignorant resentment of America. But that’s Canada for you; a mewling, confused and uncertain nation of complainers and temporizers. Canada, as anyone can tell you, has always felt self-conscious as a neighbour of the United States. Their brash and confident neighbour to the south, imbued with a sense of itself, no stranger to recognition of merit and accomplishment.

Whereas Canada and Canadians are meek, cautious, moody and complacent. They are, above all, definitely not Americans. Describe them in any kind of pejorative terms, and that’s fine, but do not under any circumstances consider them to be too much alike Americans. They simply won’t have it. It is the most profound insult of all.

Canadians are different from Americans. They are unequivocally … Canadian.

Mr. Ignatieff’s former colleagues and fast friends cannot conceive of a collective temperament that had the opportunity to elect a Harvard man of great repute as their prime minister, and chose not to. What might they have been thinking? And those Conservative attack ads … atrocious. How could they portray the Liberal leader in such a demeaning, insulting light? Just visiting. Elitist. Ivy League academic. Not one of ‘us’.

Why Michael had a marvellous reputation at Harvard, he could pack those classrooms like no one else could, the consummate professorial communicator, enlivening the atmosphere, impressing students, a credit to the profession and his chosen field. Charismatic. Didn’t Canadian voters recognize his charisma? His character? His experience? His wisdom? The grace of his locution and verbal expression? His stature as a expert at one of the most prestigious universities in the world?

Critics in Boston and at Harvard appear to have overlooked the success in the U.S. of the election ads, where the genre originated, that they so decried being used in Canada. And while they may believe that being taken for an American in outlook and orientation reflects a high order of compliment, it is not quite taken as such by Canadians who believe their national leader should reflect a Canadian orientation, experience and outlook.

And, in the final analysis, this is what a significant proportion of the electorate chose. And the patrician intellectual will now have the opportunity of dispensing the wisdom of his experience and expertise in his chosen field at University of Toronto. Another institute of higher learning that is respected - in Canada

Serving Justice

It would most certainly qualify as a first should the sentencing hearing for Raymond Lavigne conclude with punitive incarceration in response to his having been found guilty of abuse of power and his authority as a Senator. Ontario Superior Court Judge Robert Smith will issue his decision in mid-June. For the time being, speculation is that he could be sent to prison for a year to 15 months for fraud and breach of trust.

The man most certainly disgraced himself. His behaviour was no credit to the office he held in the Senate of Canada. He behaved in an arrogantly entitled manner, treating his employees like personal servants, and illicitly claiming benefits and payments he was not entitled to, short-changing his employees in the process. At a time when he was suspended from the Senate he saw nothing wrong in charging thousands of dollars to taxpayers for his perceived entitlements.

Despite the Ontario Superior Court finding of guilt of fraud and breach of trust, claiming over ten thousand in false travel claims, among other specious claims of entitlement, his lawyer feels he should evade a prison penalty for a far lesser penalty of serving his sentence in the community. The former senator claims that other politicians had been caught embezzling, but they were never brought to justice.

"Why me? They have dragged me through the mud, attacked me and my family and assassinated me in the media. I can assure you, I swear to you ... I have never stolen a penny." From the evidence presented at his trial this is pretty far from the truth. It is abundantly clear he refuses to take ownership of having committed dishonest acts, of entitling himself to funds beyond defence.

He remains defiant in his claims he has done nothing wrong. The Senate of which he was a part thought otherwise, and they turned files over to the RCMP who conducted an investigation that led to his trial and conviction. Despite being banned from attending Senate proceedings and committee hearings, he claimed hospitality, travel and office expenses for over four years.

If justice is to be served, he should be treated like any other felon who engages in white collar crime. After serving his time in jail, he can resume his life enjoying his handsome pension of $79,000 at taxpayer expense.