The Shotgun Blog
« $20 million defence contract sold as "economic stimulus" | Main | The Principles of Civilization »
Monday, June 01, 2009
IDRC is working to bring tobacco control to the developing world. Don’t these countries have enough problems?
May 31st is World No Tobacco Day. I marked the annual occasion by stockpiling cherry-flavoured cigarillos in anticipation of post-prohibition profit opportunities courtesy of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. I also enjoyed some apple-flavoured Shisha tobacco at Calgary’s Cafe Med.
The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) marked the annual ocassion by supporting research on the “health, environmental, and economic threats from tobacco production and consumption in developing countries where 70% of the world's smokers live.”
IDRC is providing the research tobacco prohibitionists need to pass laws in developing countries that restrict tobacco use. These laws, wherever they’re found, also restrict private property rights and economic liberty – two things the developing world needs more of to improve its desperate circumstances.
The IDRC is Monte Solberg’s new hang-out. He was appointed to the organization’s Board of Governors on Friday. Maybe the libertarian-leaning former Conservative MP will encourage his new colleagues to spend taxpayers’ money advancing economic liberalism abroad, and not ruinous new big government schemes.
(Picture: Monte Solberg)
Posted by Matthew Johnston
Posted by westernstandard on June 1, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Matthew,
Saying libertarian things is reserved for Cato, Fraser, and Civitas speeches and Edmonton Sun columns. Actual professional activity is reserved for handing out Harper's pork or helping nanny statists coerce the poor and downtrodden for their immoral, pro-tobacco lifestyles.
Monty is Alberta's version of Tony Clement. Clement was all about privatizing healthcare at Fraser Institute events, then he got elected. All of a sudden government healthcare is sacrosanct and we need to regulate herbal remedies.
People on the left might be an open threats to freedom, but at least they have ethical standards (and maybe that's more important?). None of these guys are the right do. They just sit on their hands or openly violate their own supposed principles as soon as they get elected.
Until they stand up for their views and pay the media/electoral price -- instead of hanging on to power for reasons that have _nothing_ to do with their supposed principles -- no meaningful change will ever occur. When a prime minister badly looses an election for _respectfully and intelligently_ supporting private healthcare and his party refuses to change their position but maintains a core support base, that's when the media and public will view these ideas differently.
Until their actions change, we can only conclude that they are all power hungry cowards without significant moral standards. Never invite them to Western Standard events and cease all communication with them. They've alienated themselves from their principles. They should be alienated from their friends who still hold them. If we can't make them pay at the ballot box, we can make them pay in their personal and professional lives.
Scott "When's the last time I did anything for liberty? Whatever you said Lord Harper" Reid is another prime example of this odious breed.
Posted by: Robert Seymour | 2009-06-01 5:42:21 AM
I would be all for Monte Solberg's promotion to his statist trough if it meant HE went abroad to promote whatever it is useless retired pols promote.
Just as long as he never came back.
It would be worth the price to keep this guy out of the taxpayers' pocket.
Posted by: JC | 2009-06-01 3:14:36 PM
I would be all for Monte Solberg's promotion to his statist trough if it meant HE went abroad to promote whatever it is useless retired pols promote.
Just as long as he never came back.
It would be worth the price to keep this guy out of the taxpayers' pocket.
Posted by: JC | 2009-06-01 3:14:36 PM
I don't know who is also posting as JC but this is not my post. Matthew, is there any way to find out who's doing this?
Posted by: The original JC | 2009-06-01 4:14:20 PM
I'll look into this for you, Original JC, but I have a feeling it's just another libertarian-minded commenter who also goes by the name JC.
We do very little to regulate commenters -- we have no registration system; we don't verify email addresses; and we don't approve comments before publishing.
Perhaps we should.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-06-01 4:39:41 PM
Just a thought Matthew.
Maybe folks could register their monikers? :)
Posted by: The original JC | 2009-06-01 6:32:42 PM
I wonder if Monte's going to Sudan. I'll bet he's a national hero over there. Hell, he could end up being King.
So, he's a smoker. That explains why he looks mature for his age.
I hope his new post is as ineffectual as it sounds. I'd hate to see him have to learn any skills, this late in the game. Manning was a good politician, but suffered from poor judgement of character.
Posted by: dp | 2009-06-01 6:50:42 PM
Why do you say he's a smoker, dp? I'm sure he's not.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-06-01 11:09:16 PM
Hey, Original JC:
Do you reeeeeeeally think you are the first person with those initials?
I know about a dozen people with them.
One is Our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
A little humility, man. Or are you twelve years old?
Posted by: Kelvin | 2009-06-02 2:51:43 AM
He's not a smoker.
Posted by: M | 2009-06-21 4:46:42 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.