There are those who believe Harper is being 'petulant' for not putting forward another nominee to head the proposed public appointments commission after Gwyn Morgan was rejected as 'unsuitable'.
Morgan has a impressive credentials and is respected in the business and academic communities. His sin apparently, is expressing an opinion on immigration and multiculturalism that doesn't jibe with the left-lib, politically correct world-view.
Already we've had Maurice Vellacott resign because, by supporting one group in a criminal case (the police), it has been inferred that he is racist against another group (aboriginals). His opinion undoubtedly the wrong one -- not because it's actually wrong which it might well be -- but because it is not 'correct'. It would be the wrong opinion, even if it were factually accurate and verifiable because it doesn't automatically assume that the aboriginal side is always the right side.
Vellacott's other infraction is that he named Beverley McLaughlin as being the justice who suggested that the role of a supreme court judge was god-like, when in fact it was Rosalie Abella who believes she is a deity.
Harper gave them one. He accepted Vellacott's resignation -- but now he's considered petulant because he's not going to have another of his nominees shoved out for spurious reasons?
Go back a while to the days when Martin was PM. Remember Glen Murray -- rejected as chair by members of the roundtable on the environment because he had zero qualifications beyond being a Liberal who ran but lost in the previous federal election. And what did Paul Martin do? No, he didn't shut down the committee, but nor did he put forward another nominee -- he simply imposed his will on the committee members and Murray took the job and all the perqs.
Holding and expressing opinions that are neither racist, nor inflammatory should not disqualify a person from a job. Multiculturalism remains an experiment -- and Morgan is not alone in believing it's costs might outweigh its value. And, in the same vein, I don't believe Morgan was suggesting that certain 'racial' groups are responsible for violence, but rather some cultural groups don't drop their baggage when they set foot in Canada. Is this true? Well, we all know that not all Jamaicans or South East Asians are bad people. We know that most immigrants from all countries just want a better life and truly do try to achieve it here in their chosen land -- but we also know that economic and social conditions in the home countries of some immigrants lend themselves to violence. Suggesting that we watch the trends and choose our immigrants wisely and encourage them to become Canadian is hardly controversial, it just makes sense.
Morgan's biggest fault seems to be that he singled out two cultural groups. It might not be 'politically correct' to have done so, but funny, while the MP who introduced the motion to reject Morgan as commission chair, NDP MP Peggy Nash, called his remarks about Jamaican and South Asian 'deeply offensive' she never actually came out and said he was wrong. Hmmm . . .
canadianna
12 comments:
I was listening to Lowell Green this morning, who had Ms. Nash on his show. Here's the interview:
http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/Peggy_Nash_May17.mp3
if you can't read the end it says .mp3. just cut and paste in your browser. Or click here
Thanks for the link. That interview was almost surreal. Nash suggests that Gwyn Morgan is racist, but won't actually say it.
Harper is playing chess, the dippers and Libs are playing checkers.
Nice to have you back Canadianna!
Don't much like the way Morgan was treated, though hearing Jason Kenney complain about the character assassination and "gutter politics" made me want to lose my lunch.
Mr. Kenney has been one of the chief practitioners of gutter politics for some time, and his harsh partisanship is ocming back to bite him in th derriere.
This kind of crap is ugly - it's ugly when Liberals and NDP are doing it and it was every bit as ugly when Jason Kenney and his pals (including the current PM) were doing it to anyone who was Liberal friendly as opposed to Conservative friendly.
That said, I like Morgan but his comments were a tad insensitive.
Thanks for the link Sharon. It was an interesting listen.
Anon -- the problem with the many of the Lib partisan appointments is the only qualifications the people had were what they had done for the party (think Art Eggleton) or that they were Liberals (like Glen Murray)
I don't particularly like all the bleating either, but even in politics they shouldn't be accusing a person of being racist in order to show up the PM.
I wonder how worried Peggy is about the next election when Kennedy is on the ballot...
Forget chess, Harper is playing Chicken and the opposition parties are on tricycles.
and that's a key distinction - the obvious qualities the man had that recommended him to the job.
lucid, canadiana, as per usual.
I listened to the interview--thanks for the link--and was, as usual, unimpressed with that vulgarian, Lowell Green. Green seems to think that being a successful businessman should be the be-all and end-all for a government appointments commissioner.
Never mind his racial stereotyping (the youth gangs in Toronto, as you should know, are composed primarily of people born right here in Canada). Never mind the fact that a fiercely Conservative partisan was proposed as the chair of a commission to supervise impartiality in government appointments. All that counts is that this fine, upstanding white gentleman was "disrespected."
Gimme a break.
Well, Peggy Nash better lie low for a few months, or maybe until election time because she used to be a Communist, but is now with the NDP, but that's okay?? But Morgan tells the truth and gets slammed by her?? Hypocrite, but she can't see that, she thinks she is principled. The opposition is going to get wiped out so easy next election, I can't wait, and I will do everything I can to email and help get Nash gone. I hope Morgan sues her butt.
Post a Comment