PMO and the Mounties

I grew up with tales of the Mounties, of their bravery and determination in facing criminals in the early years of Canada’s expansion into the West. Now, in several provinces, they are the community police as they were then.

Maintiens le droit. Defend the law.

In High River, Alberta, homes lay unlocked and unguarded; weapons, mostly, I presume, the long guns that people in farming communities keep for ridding themselves of groundhogs and coyotes. What did the people of Alberta want the Mounties to do? Leave the guns there for anyone to take and perhaps use?

Not according to Premier Alison Redford, quoted in the Globe and Mail: RCMP officers who removed guns from evacuated homes in High River were doing necessary work to secure the flood-ravaged town in a crisis, Premier Alison Redford said in response to criticism.

But the PMO(Harper) knows better. The same article: “We expect that any firearms taken will be returned to their owners as soon as possible,” PMO spokesperson Carl Vallée said in a statement on Friday. “We believe the RCMP should focus on more important tasks such as protecting lives and private property.”

In my view that is what the Mounties were doing when they removed the guns, protecting lives.

Apparently, playing to the hard-core Conservative voter trumps common sense in the PMO.

That same article in the Globe talks about the increasing tendency of the Harper government to interfere in policing decisions.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/pmo-says-the-rcmp-should-have-better-things-to-do-than-seize-guns/article12882952/#dashboard/follows/

University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé, who is an expert on defence and security matters, quoted in the above article:

However, Mr. Lagassé said the PMO was walking a fine line by criticizing the RCMP’s activities, even though it clearly avoided giving a specific directive to the Mounties.

“This is not the norm,” he said. “We can say that we are starting to get into a zone where it is less legitimate for the government to tell the RCMP to follow other priorities,” said Mr. Lagassé.

Does anyone believe the PMO makes its pronouncements without Harper’s hand all over the script. Not our micro-manageing Prime Minister. Where will this need to control end?

Harper’s control central

Harper’s message control is unprecedented, critics say – The Globe and Mail.

The funding for a retirement home, a mere 12,000 or so, is cause for a script, “to make sure everyone stays on message.” The message, according to this article in the Globe and Mail is heavily controlled, in an “unprecedented manner” citing former staffers of the Privy Council Office.

It doesn’t sound unprecedented to me. It sounds like the kind of control exerted in countries who don’t have democratic regimes. Harper got elected by saying his would be transparent government. It doesn’t seem to be transparent; it seems to be murky as hell. Why do they have to control so heavily. What is happening that we can’t know about? If we knew it, would we be calling for an election to throw them out?

No wonder they are spending one billion or so on security at the G20, when a few months ago it was three or four hundred million. They were spending too much time worrying about the 12,000 in Edmonton in the retirement home to pay attention.

And what does one billion in security buy anyway? Does anyone really know? Don’t expect an answer. It wouldn’t be on message.