Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Supreme hypocrisy | Main | Feed a fever... »

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

The REAL reason the Emerson appointment was troubling

It may surprise some (if not all) that I'm bringing up the matter of Trade Minister Emerson now, but I think a very important angle of the appointment has been missed.

Down here on the south side of the 49th parallel, we see party-switchers (as we call them) more frequently than Canadians do; so, with all due respect to Vancouver, the issue of for whom or what a constituent votes is not what bothers me.  The greater problem - and dare I say, danger - is what it portends for the current government policy, particularly toward Communist China.

David Emerson was no ordinary Liberal.  He was a minister in a Cabinet that repeatedly drove the anti-Communist, pro-China-democracy community to apoplexy.  In particular was the concern of the ChiComs worming their way into Canada's bountiful natural resources - including Albertan oil (fourth item, Edmonton Sun) and Saskatchewan's oil and uranium (Globe and Mail) - and Canadian held resources abroad (BBC).  Emerson, as Industry Minister, appeared unfazed by this (Wall Street Journal via Pittsburgh Post-Gazette).

In fact, the performance of the late Martin government was the main reason so many from outside Canada paid attention to last month's election in the first place.  We were hoping that the Conservatives in government would be as strongly anti-Communist as they had been in opposition (Epoch Times).

Now, to be fair, Stephen Harper has been Prime Minister less than three weeks.  We have seen no budget, and thus we can still hope the amount of foreign aid going to Communist China from Ottowa (UPDATE: whoops! Ottawa) is reduced to a reasonable number (i.e., zero).  Furthermore, the appointment of Stockwell Day as Public Safety Minister could be terrible news for the Communist espionage network in North America (Hansard), and terrific news for its victims.  However, when placed in the context of the Cabinet as a whole, we are presently, and sadly, closer to our worst fears than our best hopes.

Now is not the time to ask whether or not David Emerson "abandoned" his Vancouver constituents who voted Liberal.  We should instead ask how much Harper et al sacrificed the interests of Canadians who - on this issue at least - voted Conservative.

Cross-posted to the China e-Lobby

Posted by D.J. McGuire on February 22, 2006 in Canadian Conservative Politics, Canadian Politics, International Affairs | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The REAL reason the Emerson appointment was troubling:


The fact that China receives foreign aid at all is troubling. Was Canada giving foreign aid to the Soviet Union? Were we giving foreign aid to the Third Reich? It wouldn't surprise me. I don't think we should reduce aid to China; I think we should eliminate it. That's our tax money, damnit.

Posted by: Howard Roark | 2006-02-22 1:57:40 PM

Note to self: don't try to be so cute in future posts. Stick to the direct approach.

Oh, and spell the capital right the first time!

Posted by: China e-Lobby | 2006-02-22 1:59:31 PM

I’ve always believed the Liberal hand outs (bribes?) to Communist China had to do with Desmarais’ Power Corp /CSL/Martin influence of wanting to further Great West Life’s ability to sell insurance in China. Obviously Emerson would know about that but it’s been going on for decades, he didn’t start it.

In other words, it was all part of the cabal of:
Chretien/Martin/Demarais/Total Petroleum/China/MauriceStrong UN/World government plan to counter the capitalist Anglosphere.

What Harper has to do, especially given our attractive resource based economy, is insert a clause into our Foreign Policy and debate it openly in Parliament. He needs a Clarity Act on Foreign ownership. He needs to allow more foreign takeovers of Banks, Bell, Telus ETC.
But he needs to explain to Canadians the difference between allowing foreign ownership when the purchasers are:

Foreign, widely held, publicly listed, companies that are subject to SEC type disclosure
Foreign totalitarian governments (like China) that would not respect the concept of financial disclosure any more then they did disclosure about SARS.

In other words letting commies buy our Canadian companies is no different than letting the Mafia do it.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-22 2:24:37 PM

I think that there are several issues. I am not as against China as some on this blog; I think China is changing from its communist era to a capitalist and therefore necessarily democratic era. It doesn't happen overnight, but, it's happening - with far more ease than in the ME.

First, I think we should comment, openly, publicly and frequently, on what our governments, particularly the Liberals, have done to the Canadian economy - with the result that there is less than 1% of Canadians who have any big scale investment capacity. That's shocking; an industrial economy ought to enable at least 20% of its citizens to be large scale investors. Large scale investment, after all, is the basis of research, innovation, long-term industrial capacity, and mass production. An industrial economy cannot rely on local shops and local small scale production. But - that's precisely what Canada's exorbitant personal and business taxes have done - effectively set up Canada as unable to invest in its own economy.

So- we require foreign investment. To build the factories, build the large industries, finance the large scale business enterprises. We Canadians can't do it - which is also why I welcome Harper's proposal of 'no tax' on capital gains if invested back into the economy within 6 months. That's an important start to building a Canadian investor class.

But- at the moment - we have - Nothing. So, we rely on the USA, and Germany, France, UK, and increasingly, non-European. The large hotel, the Fairmont (the Royal York) has just been bought by a Saudi Arabian investor. Not a Canadian.

I see no problem with Chinese investment as long as - as nomdenet points out -they enter the public scrutiny and subject to SEC disclosure.

In my view, China is one of the key investors and sites of industrialism of the future - and far ahead of such as India..or any of the Islamic countries. The Islamic countries, despite their oil, are trapped in an ideological crisis which is inhibiting their entrance into the investor market...except by using oil revenues. But, this ignores the majority of their population.

So- it's China, followed by India..and we must ensure by our rules, that they invest, as democratic nations.

Posted by: ET | 2006-02-22 3:33:51 PM

ET, normally I agree 99% of the time with you and right now maybe I’m splitting hairs. But dissent is what conservatives believe-in right?

Frankly, today it’s even more Byzantine for my little brain to figure out what’s going on. Now we have yet more resistance to democracy with the (probably) Iranian sponsored Al Qaeda bombing of a shrine in Iraq. It’s like the wedding bomb in Jordan. Today is just more evidence that we must be right with “imposing” democracy if this has the despots so desperate. But the whole thing could collapse into civil war and that’ll make security of supply for oil really important. Ergo our tar sands are very strategic at $60-80.

Coming back to Emerson and China and Canada’s oil resources, on a macro level the ME is indeed all about oil, it’s either all about:

“Oil for despots” to buy WMD’s and fund AQ and Islamofascists, plus buy whatever excites despots
Maybe it’s about China vs. USA/India
Maybe we’ll get lucky and it’s a continuation for an orderly world market allocation of oil.

Therefore coming back to this China post, I agree with you on where China is heading. I hope we get there and the world carries on with the orderly market for oil. But I don’t like or trust commie thugs. I don’t think they’ll live up to a SEC disclosure deal so I don’t want to let them buy our oil sands. I fear they won’t democratize without a Tiananmen Square x’s 10. I don’t know what the probability of that is, but I know it’s possible and I hope the White House decision trees are factoring it in. Meanwhile it all makes my head hurt.

Bottom Line : have a full Parliamentary debate about this Foreign Investment Clarity which is really important. In the end, any deal with China is only as good as the USA helping us enforce it, so let’s get all this stuff out on the table – now! ET, I think we agree on that.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-22 4:16:01 PM

China eh?...meet the new boss.

We're all in a feeding frenzy about the Moomoo cartoons, but nothing on exposing Chinese espionage here in Canada.

Guess it doesn't sell magazines.

The best thing that happened to us is Cretien and Co. got the punt. Canada was becoming a mafia state.

Forget about human rights and Canada's future being bought out by Chinese using Canadian grant money, we have to protest cartoons.

If the WS did a series (read: not article) on Communist China's influence on the Liberal party and Canada's future, I'd be the first one in line to buy it.

So I hope Harper & Co. back us out of the mess we have at our feet with cozing up to the Commies to be vulgar.


Posted by: tomax | 2006-02-22 4:28:29 PM

nomdenet - I agree with your points, with some quibbles..

1) I think that we, in Canada, have to make it more publicly known how, and why, we lack a Canadian investor class. And - how and why we ought to start, immediately, to develop such a class.

2)The result of such a lack - is our complete dependency on foreign investment. I don't think that it is enough protection for us, to insist that these foreign investors abide by our, or international rules. We must develop our own investor class.

3) Given that such a development, since it has not been permitted, will take at least half a generation, we have to insist on point 2 - those rules.

4) Now- my analysis of social structure has very little to do with ideology (communist or Islamic fundamentalism) and is primarily focused around 'energy'. No, I don't mean energy-from-oil. I mean something wierd, thermodynamics, the study of the 'capacity to do work'.

So, I look at a society's 'energy content', which refers to their 'Material Reality', which is made up of arable land, raw resources, water and how it is supplied, climate/temperature, seasons etc. AND - their population...as the basic raw work force to transform this material reality and make it operational.

Now - given this 'energy content', I examine how it is organized. And, I assure you, it is fascinating, but there ARE rules of organization, which are directly correlated with the raw material reality (the land base, the water, the raw resources, the population).

So- when I say that China's population has moved from a local or village peasant agriculture, which was its base at the beginning of Mao's revolution, to an industrial economy in 100 years, I am also aware that the ideology which ruthlessly made this switch (from local village peasant agriculture to large scale industrial) was RIGHT for such a rapid switch, but, is WRONG for the maintenance of a large scale industrial economy. That's because a large scale industrial economy requires individual entrepreneurs and not a homogeneous collation of robots whose behaviour is rigidly run from the top-down.

The ideology is always the last to change, and I tend to ignore it IF it is not impeding the economy..I look at the energy dynamics (resources, population size and growth, capacity for adaptation etc). So, in my view, and I may be wrong, but, China will 'go democratic'. Interestingly, it will do it, as China often does, from the 'bottom up'...because China hasn't really been, in its long history, except for Mao's communism, a central homogeneous country.

China is educating its people; there are universities and colleges everywhere, everyone is learning English, their individual goal is 'make money, make money'..There are problems with an enormous sluggish and corrupt bureaucracy (you get a visa if you take the director out to dinner)..lots of problems..but, in my view, there is a clear direction ...towards industrialism..and individualism and importantly, a robust middle class..and that's the basis of democracy.

Now- the ME. Again, I look at the energy or thermodynamic properties. Here, you have, unlike China, a land base that is, astonishingly poor and can, without industrialism, only support a local village, peasant style agriculture/herding economy. There is almost no arable land, the water supply is a serious problem. The climate is terrible. They have and had nothing - until they found OIL. But, what happened, within the past two -three decades, is that their population moved from rural to urban, it exploded in size..and..nothing. No participation in the economy, in the political structure. No education - a shockingly low literate percentage; they rely on foreign workers for their skills. No science, no innovations, no nothing. AND - the tribal political infrastructure has been maintained.

Until it reached the breaking point. Again, this is a thermodynamic analysis. What is happening now, is that the size of the population is too large for a tribal political, economic and social infrastructure. It MUST go civic (non-hereditary, non-kin based). And, they are fighting this. With that oil revenue, they are able to feed their population at a low class level...but.. no middle class. The repression within the society grew..aided by the tribal powers capturing the Islamic religion, distorting it via Wahhabism, and using that religion to inhibit and repress the people. It exploded externally - against the West.

That's what's happening now. The West decided it wasn't going to be used as the sink well to assist the ME to repress its people, who would then externalize that rage..and struck back. There is no way that democracy could emerge in the ME, from within (as I say it is in China), because that oil enables the tribal leadership to act as military dictators. So, the West had to move in, and break up Iraq, to introduce democracy to the area..and assist its spread.

The tribal leaders aren't interested in enabling their people to move into being a middle class. They are interested ONLY in their own wealth and privileges (the Saudi princes, the Iran elite, the Syrian elite, Hussein's palaces)..they are fighting against this insertion of democracy.

It may come to a civil war. The Iraqi and others, ie, the ones who are harmed and reduced to a 'nothing class' by the tribal infrastructure, have to fight against being effectively disenfranchised by these tribal elite.

What should be happening? As I keep saying - the Muslims who have fled the ME, and immigrated to the West, ought to, en masse, speak up and hold rallies, hold conferences, shout it in public - that they refuse to allow their religion to be hijacked by these extremists and used to prop up corrupt tribalism. They WANT to be middle class; they want their religion to support them in their functioning in a global industrial economy. They will have to evolve their religion (ie make women equal)..but above all, they have to speak up, en masse, and speak against the extremists, speak against the hatred and the bombings.

But- they are either silent. OR, they support them!
Here we have Soharwardy, president of the islamic supreme council of Canada - and what's he doing? He's says that the WS publication of the cartoons is a 'hate crime'..and he plans to file more and more lawsuits.

Hey - doesn't he know what a hate crime is? Why doesn't he speak up against the hate crime rhetoric of the Islamic extremists??? Not a word.

And- he and his group also want Canada to introduce a law where you can't 'insult' any religious figure. Hey- what does that mean? And, no religion, which is, after all, a social construct, ought to be immune to reason and discussion. And he, a Muslim, has no right to tell a non-Muslim whether that person can/cannot make an image of Mohammed. IF there is such a rule, and there isn't, it applies only to Muslims.

So- the ME has a long way to go. As I said, one of the most vital things that would help the ME, would be if the western moderate Muslims would, en masse, publicly and loudly and repeatedly reject the extremists..and take back their religion. That would be THE KEY to empower the ordinary citizen of the ME, to enable them to move into their own democracy and free them from tribalism. But - they aren't doing it. So, THEY are moving the ME into a civil war, because THEY won't help their brethren to fight back against these extremists.

Posted by: ET | 2006-02-22 5:07:15 PM

Agree ET; we are horribly short of investment class citizens because the Liberals have redistributed all the prosperity. The prosperity has ended up with CUPE jobs ( going on strike for more pensions that we taxpayers fund) that should have been outsourced long ago to entrepreneurs. So I’m all for Foreign Investment and you make a good argument that China is closer to behaving like a responsible investor than I have ever given it credit for.

But we are both saying we must make the Chinese be transparent in their dealings with us and they must abide by North American transparent investment rules and regulations. A lot of water has to flow over the dam before China becomes like Denmark.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-22 6:14:57 PM

I am afraid that this may be more of a trend than just a coincidence.

After cabinet appointments controversy and McKay’s poor entrance into foreign affairs statesmanship here comes another serious gaffe, both political and possibly economic one. I am surprised that this bit of info has not been picked up by the blogosphere:

"Asked whether he has any concerns about doing business with Gazprom, which is controlled by an increasingly authoritarian Kremlin, Mr. Flaherty repeated: “It's a good development with respect to energy security and supply.”"


I am very disappointed with Flaherty, who I thought was one of the brightest stars in the Harper cabinet. The deal with Gazprom that is controlled not as much by Kremlin as by former KGB (I guess these are almost synonymous now) and Russian mafia involves Canada in very shady relationships. It may offer economic benefits in the short term but certainly does not increase energy security. Gazprom uses energy supply to try to exert political and economical control over ex- soviet republics like Belarus and Ukraine as well as Poland, Germany and others.

"Concerns about dealing with Gazprom grew stronger on Jan. 1, when a price dispute with Ukraine culminated in Gazprom reducing the flow of gas, which dropped the pressure in European pipelines in the dead of winter." (G&M)

Government of Poland is currently conducting an investigation into one of many scandals that involved billions of dollars, post- communist apparatchiks including both recently defeated president Kwasniewski and leftist prime minister with his government as well as some of the richest businessmen (most of them came to their riches through connections with post communists and/or secret service). This particular investigation is focused on PKN Orlen – a Polish energy firm that Gazprom was trying to use to gain control over Polish energy market.


The deal with Gazprom is, I believe, of the same importance as selling off Canadian interests to China by Liberals.



Posted by: xaveryptak | 2006-02-22 11:07:26 PM

“The Russian mafia involves Canada in very shady relationships”

Absolutely. Toronto is infested with Russian Mafia. Talk to anyone in the restaurant business. In some restaurants you can actually pin point them and differentiate the worker mafia (on minimum wage no doubt, until they earn their first kill) and the godfather types ordering wine from deep in the cellar. The RCMP should have this as a top priority except I’ve lost all faith in the RCMP to investigate anything beyond a bicycle accident. And of coarse David Miller, our NDP Mayor, thinks whatever goes wrong in Toronto is all America’s fault. Then Queens Park handles problems by downloading them to the municipalities, like the back room deal done yesterday on Police pensions between Sid Ryan of CUPE and Dalton McGuinty.

It’s all enough to make you want to say to Harper “Hey wait a minute, don’t devolve to the Provinces and Municipalities until we disclose to the public what kind of crime and corruption is going on in the country. First, give us a chance to regime-change at Queens Park”.

Again, I’ll bet Emerson knows stuff that will be useful to Harper, I hope he sings.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-02-23 7:18:57 AM

Ever wonder why few Chinese immigrants get involved in this public debate? I suspect that they still fear the Chinese Government. I have been introduced to the Chinese community on both sides of our border over the last two years. I thought all those stories of torture and persecution were sort of mythical until I met some real life victims. I have a hard time agreeing to any big shift toward Asia as a major trading partner.

Posted by: dan | 2006-02-23 9:44:09 AM


Democracy Watch: Harper Breaks Ethics Pledge
Contributed by: nancymarie Wednesday, February 22, 2006

OTTAWA - Today, Democracy Watch revealed the details of the promises Stephen Harper broke on his first day as Prime Minister when he released his new Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for Public Office Holders (the Code -- See link to the Code on the following webpage: www.parl.gc.ca/oec/en/public_office_holders/conf). The promises were all contained in the “Federal Accountability Act” section of the Conservative Party’s election platform, and on February 6th when the new Cabinet was introduced PMO officials claimed that the changes made to the Code were among many measures the new Prime Minister had implemented immediately because they did not require legislation to be implemented.

Prime Minister Harper and the Conservative Party pledged before and during the election campaign to close five loopholes in the Code. All five loopholes have been left open in the new Code (Please see Backgrounder below for all the details).

The first promise Harper broke was the promise to apply the Code to all ministerial staff and unpaid ministerial advisers. In fact, changes made in this part of the Code increase the number of part-timers and unpaid advisers not be covered by most of the requirements in the Code.

The second broken promise was the failure to extend to five years the cooling-off period before Cabinet ministers, ministerial staff and senior public servants can become lobbyists after leaving office. In fact, unless Cabinet ministers put ministerial staff on a list, the staff person will be allowed, as they were already, to become a lobbyist one year after they leave their staff position.

The Prime Minister’s Office was also dishonest about the failure to keep this commitment in the February 6, 2006 news release it issued. The “Backgrounder” of the release, under the heading “Reinforcing Government Accountability”, made the false claim that the revisions to the Code:

“include: • a five-year ban on former ministers, ministerial staff and senior public servants from acting as lobbyists to the Government of Canada, a ban which cannot be waived or reduced by the Ethics Commissioner.” (SEE release at: pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=684)


Posted by: Coleen | 2006-02-23 2:14:02 PM

“The Russian mafia involves Canada in very shady relationships”

Now is there even such a thing as a Russian mafia in Canada or in the USA?

Most of the many recent Russians I met in Canada now, I met many too, have mainly come from Israel to Canada.


A Russian requires an exit Visa which is rarely granted by their governments but Jews are allowed to immigrate to Israel.

This latter is a more honest balanced news reporting too.

Jewish mafia. Even Israel itself now had complained about these Jewish thugs comming from Russia.

A Canadian Muslim was shocked to now find out that 50 percent of Jews in Canada do take drugs and alcohol. Most Mulsims still do not too.

Jewish mafia or Russian speaking Jewish mafia

Posted by: Peter | 2006-02-23 2:24:11 PM

I suspect that a lot of "Russian" gangsters are actually from any number of ex-Soviet Countries. These people may have come from any number of religious backgrounds, Muslim, Christian, Jewish. No matter how you spin it, these people are heathens.

Posted by: dan | 2006-02-23 2:34:41 PM

"Prime Minister Harper Axe’s a Prime Mover of Same Sex “Marriage” By John-Henry Westen

OTTAWA, February 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Homosexual ‘Marriage’ was forced on Canada by a deliberate scheme which was revealed by former Justice Minister Martin Cauchon when he accepted an award form a U.S. homosexual organization, Equality Forum, in Philadelphia on May 1, 2004. There, the former Justice Minister revealed that besides himself, only three men masterminded the overthrow of the traditional family. One of those men, the clerk of the Privy Council Alex Himelfarb, has just been ousted from his privileged position by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Harper announced yesterday the appointment of Kevin G. Lynch to replace Himelfarb as Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet, effective March 6, 2006. Giving a slight hint that Lynch would follow the Conservative agenda Harper said of the new appointee, “He understands our five-priority agenda and will greatly contribute to moving it forward.”

Those priorities include federal accountability, a GST cut, a crackdown on crime, and quicker service for patients in hospital, but most importantly a proposal which is anathema to most Liberals – granting parents the right to decide what to do with their childcare dollars, whether that means public daycare, private daycare or stay at home parenting.

Harper said that Himelfarb would be appointed elsewhere but said that announcement would follow shortly.

REAL Women Canada was able to shed light on Himelfarb’s role in dismantling traditional marriage in the country by getting hold of Cauchon’s 2004 speech. During his speech, Cauchon revealed that, politically, there were actually only four individuals who were instrumental in bringing about same-sex marriage in Canada.

Besides himself, Cauchon singled out the work of Paul Genest, former policy advisor to former Prime Minister Chrétien, who, according to Mr. Cauchon, played "a key role" in the same-sex marriage question. Mr. Cauchon stated that he met with Mr. Genest on a daily basis to talk about how he should manage the approach and the strategy on the same-sex marriage issue.

Mr. Cauchon also related that Mr. Genest heavily lobbied former Prime Minister Chrétien on a daily basis to get his support for same-sex marriage. Once he got Mr. Chrétien on side, everything fell into place since Mr. Chrétien ruled as a semi-dictator over his Caucus and rubber stamp Cabinet.

The two other movers and shakers on the issue behind the political scene were Alex Himelfarb, Clerk of the Privy Council, and the Deputy Minister of Justice, Morris Rosenberg. Mr. Cauchon stated that, "the four of us have been a fantastic team that allowed the delivery of the draft bill on same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court"."


Posted by: Paul | 2006-02-23 2:36:51 PM

hey Politicaly correct usless till spin doctor.. I suspect that a lot of "Russian" gangsters are actually from any number of ex-Soviet Countries. These people may have come from any number of religious backgrounds, Muslim, Christian, Jewish.

No matter how you spin it, these people are heathens.

I speak Russian too, I haved also served as a translator to many of them, so do take your head out of the sand and face the undeniable reality they had come from Russia to Israel to Canada as self proclaiming Jews.

But yes many but not alo of them were non practsing Jews.

Posted by: Peter | 2006-02-23 2:41:49 PM

I standed correcteded

Posted by: dan | 2006-02-23 2:55:03 PM

That is OK

No one is perfect. Me especially

I am the chief of sinners too.

Posted by: peter | 2006-02-23 3:00:42 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.