The Deficit Cure: Acupuncture or Shock Therapy?

When the neoconservative movement in Canada first appeared on the radar of many journalists, it was tied to the administrations of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Both of these leaders launched aggressive attacks on the welfare state, and left devastation in their paths.

Grant Devine in Saskatchewan, Ralph Klein in Alberta and Mike Harris in Ontario, all sought to experiment with the Thatcher/Reagan theories in their respective provinces.

On the federal scene, the Reform Party had their ideology in check, and were just waiting for their turn.

At the time, Thatcher and Reagan were not on tour, so Canada's neocons were taught strategy by New Zealand politician, Roger Douglas.

He held information seminars, speaking to the Harris caucus in Ontario, with Tony Clement, John Baird and Jim Flaherty in attendance; and Klein's in Alberta, indoctrinating Stockwell Day.

But the most important lecture, when it comes to the future of Canada, was presented to the Reform Party of Preston Manning and Stephen Harper, at their 1991 Assembly.

Douglas was introduced by Preston Manning, the only assembly speaker to be so honoured. And Manning told the delegates: There are three basic reasons why we have invited Sir Roger Douglas to be with us ... and three reasons why Reformers should pay close attention to what he has to say ... Sir Roger is an authority in fiscal reform and has advocated and promoted many of the fiscal reforms ... He is not only a reformer in word, he is a reformer in deed. Sir Roger deregulated the financial sector, phased down agricultural and other subsidies .. phased out import controls and drastically reduced tariffs levels. He instituted a 10% flat rate consumption tax (GST)*, with virtually no exemptions ... (1)

And Roger Douglas's most important message to his followers was "don't blink". Once you start cutting, keep going.

And if you developed a case of blepharospasm, uncontrollable eye blinking, a little acupuncture would fix you right up.

Because what Douglas failed to mention was how his policies affected New Zealand.

Dr. John Warnock, travelled to New Zealand to study the effects of what New Zealanders dubbed 'Rogernomics.' The figures tell a story of devastation - a word used by New Zealand's own agricultural minister to describe the state of agriculture in four years after the 'reforms': A 40 per cent drop in farm income; a 50 per cent drop in the value of farm land; a policy of paying 3,000 farmers incentives of $ 45,000 to leave and the suggestion that another 15,000 (out of 79,000) should follow them. Unemployment, which had been at 4 per cent before Douglas's reforms, jumped to over 12 per cent in just over a year and is still increasing.

"Douglas completely eliminated regional development grants and subsidies to rural services. Says Warnock, 'They had things like subsidized petroleum - regardless of where you were the price was the same - subsidized train service, bus service, airport service. They privatized all these things and the prices immediately skyrocketed.' A massive de-population of the countryside resulted, and approximately 40,000 New Zealanders per year have since left the country for Australia to find work ... (1)

He should have blinked.

Shock Therapy

While Roger Douglas may present us with a little trip down memory lane, Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty will probably forgo acupuncture for shock therapy.

This is the remedy prescribed by Milton Friedman, and articulated at places like the Fraser Institute. Friedman believed in taking advantage of disasters, like Katrina, but when none presented themselves, they could simply be created.

His most famous induced disaster, was the Chilean experiment.

In 1970, when a socialist, Salvador Allende, was elected president, many of Chile's elite, were not pleased.

Allende, a physician by training, understood the cost that malnutrition imposed upon the poor and set out to alleviate the grinding poverty in which so many Chileans were trapped. He ensured that every Chilean schoolchild had access to at least a half-liter of milk each day, and that their parents had access to jobs and the means to feed and educate their children. Median incomes began to rise dramatically in the first two years of Allende's term.

To pay for these social programs designed to create opportunities for the poor, rich Chileans who had lived all their lives off of rents, dividends and interest and who had never paid a dime in taxes, found themselves paying taxes for the first time and being forced to morally justify their lives of luxurious leisure at the expense of the poor. They didn't like it one bit. And they began to complain to their friends in Washington. (2)

Fortunately for them Washington was already aware of the situation, and with the help of several corporations, engineered a coup to oust Allende and place the murderous Augustus Pinochet in the presidential palace.

Friedman then took over, encouraging Pinochet to implement "shock therapy" on the people of Chile.

Friedman advised Pinochet to impose a rapid-fire transformation of the economy—tax cuts, free trade, privatized services, cuts to social spending and deregulation. Eventually, Chileans even saw their public schools replaced with voucher-funded private ones. It was the most extreme capitalist makeover ever attempted anywhere, and it became known as a "Chicago School" revolution, since so many of Pinochet's economists had studied under Friedman at the University of Chicago. Friedman predicted that the speed, suddenness and scope of the economic shifts would provoke psychological reactions in the public that "facilitate the adjustment." He coined a phrase for this painful tactic: economic "shock treatment." In the decades since, whenever governments have imposed sweeping free-market programs, the all-at-once shock treatment, or "shock therapy," has been the method of choice. (3)

And though Friedman and his Chicago School are still being hailed as heroes by Neoliberals/Neoconservative/Free Marketeers everywhere, his remaking of Chile was an absolute failure.

.. The country's period of steady growth that is held up as proof of its miraculous success, did not begin until the mid-eighties, a full decade after the Chicago Boys implemented shock therapy and well after Pinochet was forced to make a radical course correction.

That's because in 1982, despite its strict adherence to Chicago doctrine, Chile's economy crashed: its debt exploded, it faced hyperinflation once again and unemployment hit 30 percent—ten times higher than it was under Allende. The main cause was that the piranhas, the Enron-style financial houses that the Chicago Boys had freed from all regulation, had bought up the country's assets on borrowed money and run up an enormous debt of $14 billion.

The situation was so unstable that Pinochet was forced to do what Allende had done: he nationalized many of these companies. In the face of the debacle, almost all the Chicago Boys lost their influential government posts. (4)

So despite the fact that both of these experiments in economic reform were catastrophes, we know that it will not change Flaherty's or Harper's ideology.

Canadians will probably be subjected to a little "shock" in the upcoming budget, or if not then, in the not too distant future. The convoluted belief being that if we associate pain with social programs, we will not be too quick to want to reintroduce them (Friedman was a nut), especially if they convince us that they have been replaced with something better.

Poverty being good for the soul.

So slap on the electrodes boys. I'm ready.

Footnotes:

*The Reform Party was conflicted about the GST, with most wanting it scrapped if they came to power. Harper himself convinced them to keep the GST but eliminate any exemptions.

Sources:

1. Preston Manning and the Reform Party, By Murray Dobbin, Goodread Publishing, 1992, ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, pg. 113-114

2. Free Market Fundamentalism: Friedman, Pinochet and the "Chilean Miracle", By Scott Bidstrup

3. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, By Naomi Klein, Vintage Canada, 2007, ISBN: 978-0-676-97801-8, Pg. 8

4. Klein, 2007, Pg. 123

The Politics of Conceit: "Anything You Can Do I Can Do Better"

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

In September of 2009, journalist and author, Murray Dobbin, wrote for the Tyee:

It seems irrefutable to me after 20 years of analyzing the career of Stephen Harper that he is incapable of providing democratic governance. Harper arguably shows some traits of what psychologists refer to as malignant narcissism, a dangerously heightened sense of self importance. Otto Kernberg, a leader in the study of personality disorders, describes malignant narcissism as "extreme self-absorption and insensitivity that often result in a trail of victims -- emotional wreckage left in the narcissist's wake." The victims Kernberg refers to are, of course, individuals, but in our case the principal victim is the Canadian nation -- its humanist accomplishments, its art and culture, the foundation of its science, its international standing and its democratic governance. (1)

At the time I agreed with his analysis, but only superficially. Harper's arrogance was revealed in everything he did, but I didn't really view it as a possible illness.

Then I came across a piece by Green Party leader Elizabeth May, that showed Harper's love of self in a different light. She had been acting as Speaker of the House for the Queens University Model Parliament, and had an opportunity to visit the Government Lobby.

The Government Lobby was a frequent work space when I was Senior Policy Advisor to the federal Minister of Environment back in the mid-1980s ... [but] it did not strike me until I walked into the Government Lobby to await my turn as Speaker that I had not been in there since Stephen Harper became Prime Minister. It used to have some paintings on the wall. Past prime ministers, certainly a formal portrait of the Queen. Landscapes. I know there was the occasional photo of current Prime Ministers, but when I walked in this time, I felt chilled to the bone.

Every available wall space had a large colour photo of Stephen Harper. Stephen Harper at Alert. Stephen Harper in fire fighter gear. Stephen Harper at his desk. Stephen Harper meeting the Dalai Lama. Even the photo of the Queen showed her in the company of Stephen Harper. None were great photos. None were more than enlarged snapshots in colour. They didn’t feel like art. The student with me said it was the same in Langevin Block, the Prime ministers Office. Photos of Stephen Harper everywhere. I will advance no theories as to what this means. ... The one thing I know is that it means something. (2)

This was later confirmed in the Ottawa Citizen. (3)

I bring this up often, because it kinda' freaks me out. I'm a fan of shows like CSI and Criminal Minds, and it reminds of a stalker's lair. Only he's stalking himself. Creepy.

I just finished chapter two of Lawrence Martin's new book, Harperland, and while he is doing a very good job at keeping balance, there are some revelations that help to unravel the complexities of Stephen Harper.

And what's interesting is that the most compelling statements come from insiders. People left in the "emotional wreckage [of] the narcissist's wake", but remain for the most part supportive.

Martin says that Stephen Harper has tried to emulate Pierre Trudeau, not politically, but by replicating the things he used to stay in power for so long. He fails to understand that we liked Trudeau in spite of those things, because he was moving us in the right direction. His legacy is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

But even with those whose politics he agrees with, Stephen Harper has always been more concerned with how they achieved and held onto power. In William Johnson's book Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, he speaks of Harper's fondness for Margaret Thatcher.

And yet the story was not "let's study her policies and adopt them". But instead he and his friend John Weissenberger, read all of her election speeches looking for the right phrases to "win". (4)

But there is something else that goes back to the notion of Stephen Harper being the clinical definition of a malignant narcissist.

His friends and colleagues when speaking to Lawrence Martin, used terms like "cold", "He doesn't have human warmth", "sunless", "an emotionless robot". A former classmate called him "aloof" and said that "If there was a social event going on, he'd be the guy in the corner; pen and paper in pocket, looking at us in a kind of condescending way." (5)

The Encyclopedia Britannica defines narcissism as a:

Mental disorder characterized by extreme self-absorption, an exaggerated sense of self-importance, and a need for attention and admiration from others ... narcissism is characterized by an unusual coolness and composure, which is shaken only when the narcissistic confidence is threatened, and by the tendency to take others for granted or to exploit them.

Stephen Harper is his happiest when he's at a photo-op. You can see it. He's not acting, so his robotic nature is gone. He's in his element. All of these people focused on "him". All dedicated to making "him" look good. All paying "attention" and filled with "admiration" for "him". His "unusual coolness and composure" are gone, even if only for that brief moment in time.

And we've seen him "shaken" when his confidence was threatened. Look at how he acted in the House of Commons during the coalition threat. Or when Michael Ignatieff was challenging him and he suggested that he had been pouring over old tapes. His confidence was gone and it was visible. What we witnessed was panic.

And there's no argument that he has a "tendency to take others for granted or to exploit them". A common complaint from insiders. Look at how easily he can exploit religion, or the immigrant population for political gain. A man who is not religious and has referred to multiculturalism as a "weak nation strategy", can turn himself into a supporter so easily. He's like a Chameleon, changing colours to suit the situation.

So while he learned the art of the attack ad from Arthur Finklestein, and was indoctrinated by the anti-liberalism, anti-communist crowd; his real passion is power. The ultimate aphrodisiac for the malignant narcissist.

And with that I've come to realize something else. While he does follow the neoconservative principles adhered to by people like Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Roger Douglas, I also sense a bit of contempt.

While all three of those people did a great deal of damage, and widened the gap between rich and poor irrevocably, they also had something else in common. They all failed to finish the job they started.

I think that Stephen Harper believes in his condescending, narcissistic way, that he will win. That he will be the first to reach the ultimate goal. He will no longer be a "follower" of Thatcherism, Reaganomics or Rogernomics. Future neocons will follow him, and "Harperism" will be their battle cry.

He may be delusional, but no one has ever accused him of being sane.

And who knows. Maybe if he can hold onto power long enough ....

Previous:

The Politics of Contempt: The Nixon-Harper Ticket

The Politics of Hate: Where Will it Lead?

Sources:

1. Stephen Harper, Unfit to Govern: Few are thrilled to have another election, but we must put it to good use, By Murray Dobbin, The Tyee, September 10, 2009

2. Model Parliament, By Elizabeth May, Green Party, January 26, 2008

3. Harper gallery leaves MPs speechless: Citizens who really want a national portrait gallery in Ottawa can rest easy. The government already has one, By The Ottawa Citizen, January 29, 2008

4. Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, by William Johnson, McClelland & Stewart, 2005, ISBN 0-7710 4350-3, Pg. 49

5. Harperland:The Politics of Control, By Lawrence Martin, Viking Press, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-670-06517-2, Pg. 8

The Fraser Institute, Roger Douglas and Revisionist History

Roger Douglas has been a regular speaker at the Fraser, beginning with his first appearance in 1989.

Fresh off his dismantling of the New Zealand government, he was ready to instruct others on the art of radical reform.

However, in the case of New Zealand in 1984, when Douglas took his post as finance minister; a bit of radical reform was necessary.

They were virtually bankrupt, after several years of Keynesian policies and over zealous regulation.

The country was within days of defaulting on international loans; New Zealand's overseas diplomats were asked how much foreign cash they could raise on their credit cards. An urgent devaluation was needed to stem the outflows. (1)

But Douglas was like Margaret Thatcher on crack, and many of his actions had horrible results. He was the Yang without the Yin, and that lack of balance would cause the whole thing to come crashing down.

Roger Douglas's Revisionist History

Though the popular theory is that former New Zealand finance minister Roger Douglas (1984-1989), turned the fortunes of his country around, the fact is, that while there was a temporary change in their economic position, much of it was an illusion.

He did bring in much needed cash, but his actions were too simplistic, with little or no forethought.

Roger Douglas, a diminutive, dogged accountant ... unleashed free-market policies with such pace that they blindsided most New Zealanders — including [Prime Minister David] Lange. Douglas floated the New Zealand dollar, wooed foreign banks, wiped away controls on credit, foreign-exchange transactions and import tariffs. The once sacrosanct farmers lost their state subsidies ... (1)

He also privatized 60% of state-owned companies, fired 55% of the government workforce and placed the central bank chairman on a performance contract. But it was too much too soon, and it would end badly.

His far-right policies were already alienating some supporters, but the prime minister continued to give Douglas free reign.

" ...he continued to support the Douglas experiment until the fearful stock-market crash that October [1987]. The New Zealand market dropped the furthest in the world; its recovery took the longest.

The shock caused Lange to argue that it was "time for a cup of tea" and to rein Douglas in — but not before tens of thousands of people lost their jobs. Eventually, Douglas, fuming, walked out of Cabinet. Lange, worn out, depressed and drinking heavily, resigned in 1989. It was a sad end to Labour's great economic experiment.

According to conventional economic wisdom, New Zealand had headed down the path of righteousness. But while the old, closed economy held no hope for the future, the gains had been oversold; economic growth remained, for the most part, slower than that of the rest of the developed world; productivity and living standards barely moved for years. (1)

However, Canada's neoconservatives have lauded Roger Douglas as the guru of finance. Why?

I think the answer is pretty simple. Their goals are not to direct Canada toward a bright economic future, but simply to "starve the beast". Douglas did that in spades.

So the Fraser invite him to speak on a regular basis, not for his smarts but his moxie; and his simple message: "don't blink".

Sources:

1. 1979-1989 David Lange, Time Magaazine, By Bernard Lagan, October 29, 2009

Roger Douglas and the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

I want to pay particular tribute to Peter Holle. I’ve known Peter for a long time. I appreciate his leadership, not just in organizing this event today, but also in providing me his advice over many years, and in giving the strong direction behind the growth of this institute. Stephen Harper (1)

In the Acknowledgements to the book, Unfinished Business, Roger Douglas writes; "I am also grateful to Peter Holle from Canada for his observations." (2)

Peter Holle is the founder and president of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a western "think tank", that claims to be non-partisan, but would appear to be just part of the infrastructure of the far right movement.

This is a list of their Advisory Board members and you will see that one of those members is Roger Douglas, the man who turned New Zealand inside out with his horrendous slash and burn polices. From FPP:

Sir Roger Douglas was Finance Minister in New Zealand's Labour Government from 1984 to 1988. Sir Roger was responsible for one of the most comprehensive restructuring program ever attempted by a government anywhere. The program included cutting income tax rates in half, deregulating wide sectors of the New Zealand economy, ending farm and business subsidies, and restructuring and privatizing most state owned enterprises. Most significantly, Sir Roger overhauled the operating philosophy of government agencies and departments to make them run as competition-oriented, bottom line business enterprises that are fully accountable for resources they receive from taxpayers. Sir Roger retired from politics in 1990 and now operates an international consulting firm based from Auckland, New Zealand where he lives. In 2008 he was re-elected to the New Zealand parliament with the party he founded, the Association of Consumers and Taxpayers.

Sounds good. But they fail to mention the devastation his policies created.

Douglas was also the driving force behind Ralph Klein, Mike Harris, Stephen Harper and Preston Manning, and it would appear that he is still helping to shape neoconservative policy.

Frontier Centre For Public Policy

The FPP was founded by Peter Holle, the man who according to Harper himself, provided him with advice over the years. He also assisted Roger Douglas with his book Unfinished Business.

The Centre claims to nonpartisan, so that they can operate as not for profit, allowing them to accept donations without paying taxes, while they prop up the Reform-Conservative government.

According to Source Watch, with information provided on the FPP site:

"Independent think tanks receive their funding exclusively from non-governmental sources. This insulates them from the political pressures that frequently discourage publicly funded research groups from exploring sensitive issues," the think tank's website states. "The Centre does not accept any funding from governments to maintain its independent and fresh perspective on public policy," it states. In 2008, 10% of the think tank's funding was from corporations with a further 67% from unspecified foundations.

It is believed that much of the corporate funding they mention, is from the oil and gas sector. And according to Tasha Kheiriddin and, Ontario Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and Adam Daifallah, a member of the National Post editorial board; one of the foundations that provided seed money and future capital, was the Donner Foundation.

Because private money is so scarce in Canada, even a small reduction in funds can have an important impact on the well-being of the conservative cause. Such is the case with the Donner Canadian Foundation, the lifeblood of conservative research in this country. A decade ago, with a mission to “encourage individual responsibility and private initiative to help Canadians solve their social and economic problems,” and an annual giving budget of over $5 million, the Donner made a huge difference. From 1993 to 1999, under the leadership of executive directors Patrick Luciani and Devon Cross, it provided seed money to start a host of topnotch free-market think-tanks across Canada: the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, the Montreal Economic Institute, the Frontier Institute, the Society for Advancing Educational Research (dedicated to promoting charter schools), the conservative The Next City magazine (now defunct), and Energy Probe (a free market–oriented environmental organization). (3)

The chairman of the Donner Canadian Foundation is Allan Gotlieb. Both Gotlieb and Harper were guest speakers at FPP's 10th Anniversary, $ 150.00 a plate, gala. The Winnipeg Labour Defense League, protested at the Frontier Centre during this event, because of FPP's promotion of damaging policies, including:

... privatized child-care; a frozen minimum wage; privatized utilities for Hydro and Water; a "flat tax" where those with lower incomes pay the most; even more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations; no pay equity for women or other discriminated groups; no marketing boards such as the Wheat Board to protect farmers and consumers from the big Agri-monopolies. (4)

So if the Donner Canadian Foundation is the "lifeblood of conservative research in this country" and Donner provides funding to the FPP; remind me how they are not partisan.

Should they really be allowed to operate as not for profit, or have to declare themselves a third-party advertiser for the Conservative Party of Canada? I think you already know my answer.

Footnotes

1. Address to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, by Stephen Harper, MP Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Leader of the Opposition, May 17, 2004

2. Unfinished Business, By: Roger Douglas, Random House, 1993, ISBN: 1869411994

3. Rescuing Canada's Right, By: Adam Daifallah and Tasha Kheiriddin, Western Standard, November 8, 2004

4. What is the Frontier Centre for Public Policy? People's Voice, June 2009

How Roger Douglas Became a Friend of Science

As I have been telling the story of Roger Douglas and his influence over the neoconservative movement in Canada, some might believe it's ancient history.

However, Douglas is still very much involved with the Harper government, as an advisory board member of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

According to Policy.ca, they are:

... an independent think tank that received charitable status in April 1999. Its mission is “to develop and popularize policy choices that will help Canada’s prairie region live up to its vast but unrealized economic potential.” The Centre is non-partisan and receives its funding from non-governmental sources. The Centre communicates its research and ideas through policy notes, backgrounders, commentaries, lectures and presentations, the media, and research reports.

Of course they claim to be non-partisan, when it fact they are just part of the infrastructure of Canada's only extreme-right party, now calling themselves the Conservative Party of Canada; but formerly known as Social Credit, the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance.

Another member of the advisory board, is Dr. Timothy Ball, one of Canada's more notorious climate change deniers, and a "scientific advisor" to the Friends of Science.

Roger Douglas is also an outspoken critic of money going to what he refers to as "so-called" global warming.



So let's break down this non-partisan group.

Timothy Ball

On Sherwin Arnott's blog, he discusses meeting Dr. Ball and discussing global warming with him. But when Arnott questioned his theories, Ball called him a Socialist. This immediately peaked his interest so he asked the good Dr. if he worked for the Fraser Institute. He denied that he did and immediately walked away.

But a quick search proved that he was lying:

Turns out that Tim Ball is paid by the Friends of Science that is funded through the University of Calgary Science Education Fund, set up by Barry Cooper who is friends with Stephen Harper, which is funded by the Oil patch. He’s also connected to the National Resources Stewardship Program, Tom Harris with APCO Public Relations, High Park Advocacy Group, Canadian Gas Association and the Canadian Electricity Association. He’s effectively a paid mouthpiece with fewer credentials than he and the Fraser Institute claims he has. But I met him and he’s quasi famous and so I guess I met an almost famous guy! And I made him. That was my moment of glory.

Don Gutstein provides a great summary here.

The Frontier Centre has regular speakers closely connected to the neoconservative movement, including Nigel Hannaford, Harper's new speech writer, and Tasha Kheiriddin, the Ontario director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, Jason Kenney's old haunt; and co-author of a book Rescuing Canada’s Right: Blueprint for a Conservative Revolution.

Last spring, the Winnipeg Labour Defense League, protested at the Frontier Centre, where a guest speaker would be making a presentation at a $150.00 a plate dinner. The speaker's name was Stephen Harper.

On May 19, dozens of people responded to a call from the newly formed Winnipeg Labour Defence League to protest the latest visit to the city by Stephen Harper. The Prime Minister was the star speaker at a gala fundraising dinner for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

... The FCPP wants: privatized child-care; a frozen minimum wage; privatized utilities for Hydro and Water; a "flat tax" where those with lower incomes pay the most; even more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations; no pay equity for women or other discriminated groups; no marketing boards such as the Wheat Board to protect farmers and consumers from the big Agri-monopolies.

The FCPP has a special place for Aboriginal peoples. In a racist way, it constantly attacks "poor governance" in Aboriginal nations, forgetting the truly massive scale of corporate sleaze and corruption. Failing to recognize the colonial theft of Aboriginal land, it promotes the illusion that Aboriginal peoples are on a level playing field with the non-Aboriginal corporations that own and dominate Canada's land and resources. It attacks the very concept of `national rights,' rights which are fully enjoyed by the Canadian state, but whose denial relegates Aboriginal nations to a position of inequality, humiliation and subjection ... (2)

Friends of Science

The Globe and Mail would eventually uncover the fact that this group is actually funded by the oil companies, including Imperial Oil, where Harper's father worked. And their list of members reads like Stephen Harper's Christmas card list.

But if that wasn't bad enough, Harper also named two prominent climate change deniers to his science board:

Already alarmed over funding cuts to basic research, scientists say two appointments in particular are worrisome. Mark Mullins, the executive director of the conservative-leaning Fraser Institute — and a former adviser to the Canadian Alliance Party — was recently appointed to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), which funds university research projects that have included studies on climate change.

Dr. Mullins is an economist and critic of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations-sanctioned scientific body that has authored warnings of floods, famine and extinctions that triggered political efforts around the world to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

... On the same day Dr. Mullins was appointed to NSERC, April 23, another skeptic of global warming was appointed to the board of the Canada Foundation for Innovation, which funds large research projects. John Weissenberger is a close friend of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a former chief of staff in the Harper government and a geologist who works for Husky Energy in Alberta.

Dr. Weissenberger has written opinion pieces in the media and on his Internet blog expressing his "skepticism about global warming." That and other comments by the two appointees on the public record were compiled by NDP researchers and verified by The Globe and Mail. (1)

I've mentioned John Weissenberger before. He and Harper go back to their days at the University of Calgary, when they both worked on the re-election of Jim Hawkes, for Calgary West.

Roger Douglas must be so proud.

Footnotes:

1. Global warming critics appointed to science board, by: Bill Curry, Globe and Mail, May 11, 2009

2. What is the Frontier Centre for Public Policy? People's Voice, June 2009

Roger Douglas Tells Stephen Harper and Preston Manning Not to Blink

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

We need an unconstrained, unrestricted, full-fledged, unspoiled market economy, and we need it now ... We want to achieve the transition from a state-dominated economy to an economy based on the private sector, private initiative and private entrepreneurship . .. We are increasingly convinced that our country, or any other, is less unique than is often claimed ... The basic economic laws are valid across continents, economic systems, as well as ideological beliefs . . . The 'third way' [between central planning and the market economy] is the fastest way to the Third World. Vaclav Klaus, Czechoslovakian Minister of Finance, 1991

Roger Douglas would resign from politics temporarily in 1990, and begin touring in places like Mexico, China, Australia, Brazil and Canada, selling his free market theories, that almost destroyed New Zealand society.

Most of his ideas were borrowed from Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, but since neither of the those people were touring at the time, Douglas was the best that the Reform Party could muster. They didn't really need to be sold on these principles, but Douglas had wrapped everything up in a neat little bow, with a simple message: "Don't blink!"

Preston Manning outlines the ten basic components of what was then dubbed 'Rogernomics', after Roger Douglas spoke at the Reform Party's 1991 Assembly.

'The Politics of Structural Reform'
"Roger Douglas who led a major effort by Labour government to reduce public spending, personifies the fact that changing times and conditions the world over are breaking down the old categories of left and right in politics. His short list of ten guidelines for implementing structural reforms, particularly in the area of financial and economic policy, could help with the transition from Old Canada to New Canada.

1. Quality decisions start with quality people placed in strategic positions.
2. Implement reforms by quantum leaps. Moving step by step lets invested interests mobilize.
3. Speed is essential. It is impossible to move too fast.

4. Once your momentum starts, never let it stop. Set your own goals and deadlines.
5. Credibility is crucial. It is hard to win and you can lose it overnight.
6. Make your goals clear. Adjustment is impossible if people don't know where you are going.
7. Stop selling the public short. Voters need and want politicians with a vision and guts to create a better future.
8. Don't blink or wobble. Get the decisions right the first time.
9. Opportunity, incentive, and choice mobilize the energy of the people to achieve successful change.
10. When in doubt, ask yourself, 'Why am I a Politician?' (1)

Manning was definitely star struck. Murray Dobbin was there and discusses the event, and the truth about the New Zealanders policies:

"Douglas was introduced by Preston Manning, the only assembly speaker to be so honoured. And Manning told the delegates: There are three basic reasons why we have invited Sir Roger Douglas to be with us ... and three reasons why Reformers should pay close attention to what he has to say ... Sir Roger is an authority in fiscal reform and has advocated and promoted many of the fiscal reforms necessary to deal with the fiscal crisis that is facing our country ..

"Secondly ... he has been in a position to actively implement those reforms. He is not only a reformer in word, he is a reformer in deed. Sir Roger deregulated the financial sector, phased down agricultural and other subsidies .. phased out import controls and drastically reduced tariffs levels. He instituted a 10% flat rate consumption tax (GST), with virtually no exemptions. Thirdly, Sir Roger accomplished all these things as a minister of a labour party in government.

"What Preston Manning and Roger Douglas did not tell their audience was the story of the impact of Douglas's policies on the people of New Zealand. Saskatchewan political economist, Dr. John Warnock, travelled to New Zealand to study the effects of what New Zealanders dubbed 'Rogernomics.' The figures tell a story of devastation - a word used by New Zealand's own agricultural minister to describe the state of agriculture in four years after the 'reforms': A 40 per cent drop in farm income; a 50 per cent drop in the value of farm land; a policy of paying 3,000 farmers incentives of $ 45,000 to leave and the suggestion that another 15,000 (out of 79,000) should follow them. Unemployment, which had been at 4 per cent before Douglas's reforms, jumped to over 12 per cent in just over a year and is still increasing.

"Douglas completely eliminated regional development grants and subsidies to rural services. Says Warnock, 'They had things like subsidized petroleum - regardless of where you were the price was the same - subsidized train service, bus service, airport service. They privatized all these things and the prices immediately skyrocketed.' A massive de-population of the countryside resulted, and approximately 40,000 New Zealanders per year have since left the country for Australia to find work since 'restructuring' took effect.(2)

This was not some brilliant strategy or economic theory. It was just mean and self serving. It's like going home to your children and saying from now on we are not going to feed you, or care for you when you're sick, clothe you or educate you. You must now fend for yourselves, because your dad and I want to buy a new boat. Oh, and we're keeping your paper route money.

The quote at the top of the page can be found in the introduction to Roger Douglas's book: Unfinished Business, and came from Vaclav Klaus, the President of Czechoslovakia, when he was finance minister.

He was nicknamed the Margaret Thatcher of Czechoslovakia and his economic policies were referred to as "gangster capitalism". He is autocratic and mean.

Extremely right-wing, he has refused to pass laws to protect homosexuals, and like Stephen Harper, and in fact Roger Douglas; believes that global warming is a myth.

And he has also created a situation where Roma residents of his country have been forced to flee, after facing unchecked discrimination, and having to live under the constant threat of violence.

Jason Kenney has closed the doors to the Roma people, calling their claims bogus, and refuses to allow them in without a visa. Unfortunately, since many live as gypsies, they have no way of obtaining one.

Canwest European correspondent, Peter O'Neil refutes Kenney's claims.

PARDUBICE, Czech Republic - A ghastly arson attack that has left a two-year-old girl fighting for her life contradicts Canadian and Czech government assertions that an exodus of Roma refugee claimants to Canada is driven by economics, rather than fear of persecution, say members of the Roma community here. The Roma, once known as Gypsies, describe living conditions that might fit the image of the Southern U.S. during racial segregation.

They say they face a constant threat of neo-Nazi attacks and hateful demonstrations, where marchers head into Roma communities and call them "parasites," organized by increasingly sophisticated organizations such as the far-right Workers' Party.

But it's all for a good cause, right? Free markets and making a handful of people filthy rich. Welcome to Preston Manning's 'New Canada', where we no longer give a damn.

Footnotes:

1. Preston Manning: The New Canada, By: Preston Manning, MacMillan Canada,ISBN: 0-7715-9150-0, pg. 276

2. Preston Manning and the Reform Party. Author: Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, pg. 113-114

Ralph Klein Takes Care of Some "Unfinished Business"

In the introduction to her book, Hard Right Turn; Brooke Jeffrey describes being in Toronto in the 1990's; stuck in traffic, because thousands of protesters were blocking the streets. She asked the cab driver what the problem was and he said "Mike Harris (Ontario Premier for 1995-2002). Who wouldn't be upset with this guy?"

A few months later Jeffrey was in Edmonton, where she witnessed similar protests, which like those in Toronto, were orchestrated by teachers, nurses, municipal workers and other concerned citizens. "All of them were furious with the Klein (Ralph Klein. Premier of Alberta 1992-2006) government's cutbacks.

The premier and his controversial treasurer, Stockwell Day, were adamant the cuts would go forward as planned.

The striking thing about Klein's comments was his choice of language. It was almost identical in tone and content to arguments Mike Harris had used to defend his actions in Ontario a few months earlier ... I, like most people thought Klein's reputation as a folksy populist was established. Mike Harris admitted his 'Common Sense Revolution' took it's inspiration from the Klein government's neo-conservative agenda, but he failed to mention an authoritarian attitude was also part of the package." (1)

What Jeffrey didn't realize at the time, was that both Klein and Harris had the same mentor. A former New Zealand finance minister, named Roger Douglas, who was then on the road promoting his book, Unfinished Business.

Both Klein and Harris continue to emulate the B Movie slogan of Sir Roger Douglas, the architect of of New Zealand's harsh experiment in program-slashing: 'I ain't gonna blink.' In 1994 Ralph Klein accepted the Fraser Institute's annual prize for 'the best fiscal performance' of any North American government. 'Alberta stands alone as the only government that refuses to take the easy way out, the brainless way out, and that is to raise taxes ..."

Douglas was one of the new breed of corporate friendly politicians who promoted fiscal reform on the backs of ordinary citizens. Like others who ascribed to this theory, including Ronald Reagan; his program made a lot of money for a handful of people, but also created almost unprecedented poverty. The gap between rich and poor was never so high.

Apart from the neo-conservative writings on Thatcherism and Reagonomics provided by his friends in the 'Klein Gang', and the advice offered by the business community through the Red Deer round table, the premier also called on the services ... of former New Zealand finance minister, Sir Roger Douglas, who was peddling the wares of restraint and cutbacks. Having turned New Zealand's economy around and its society inside out ... Sir Roger was now touring the world, urging others to heed the call and take the same drastic action. This new messenger of change was actually invited to speak to the Conservative caucus, where he put forward the view that change must be significant and it must be
instituted quickly if the liberal consensus were to be broken and the state removed from the marketplace. The government that blinked would fail.

"Unfinished Business by Sir Roger Douglas of New Zealand, is credited with having provided the vocabulary of the 'Red Deer' budget round table. Terms such as 'hit the wall' and 'don't blink,' for example, made their debut at this event, and have now passed into the common parlance of all Canadian neo-conservatives." (3)

One area where the Klein government made immediate cuts, was to health care. But his policies were bizarre, under a scheme of Total Quality Management. Stockwell Day, was then Labour Minister, and with little more than a high school education; his policies were definitely ideologically driven.

Some employers quickly applied the Total Quality Management technique of substituting lesser-skilled workers for highly-skilled personnel. An example of this occurred in one UNA [United nurses of Alberta] worksite where RN's were told not to have RN on their name tags because they were now to refer to themselves as Patient Hostesses. And in another UNA worksite, LPN's were scheduled to do the work of laid off RN's and the maintenance workers were trained to give the bed baths—work previously done by the LPN's. The profession of nursing was undermined and compromised. Not only did UNA fight for improved wages and benefits in 1993—it also fought for the very profession itself.

Stockwell Day learned his lessons well from Roger Douglas, something which we will see more clearly now that he is heading up Canada's treasury. His only other known prior experience with someone from New Zealand, came from his father, an old Social Creditor, and friend of Doug Christie.

Stock Sr. once got into trouble for hiring an illegal immigrant as a domestic. He wrote to Christie: "She is a New Zealander with no criminal record; she looks like us; she speaks like us; she prays like us. Yet when we came through the waiting room, it gave me the impression that we were at a family reunion for the Harlem Globe Trotters [sic]. What the hell is going on?"

That certainly explains a lot.

Footnotes:

1. Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-Conservatism in Canada, Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 2

2. Slumming it at the Rodeo: The Cultural Roots of Canada's Right-Wing Revolution, Gordon Laird, 1998, Douglas & McIntyre, ISBN: 1-55054 627-9, pg. 66

3. Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-Conservatism in Canada, Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 93

4. Health Care Reform, 25 Years of History, United Nurses of Alberta, 1993

Brian Mulroney, Roger Douglas and a United Front

Brian Mulroney would come to power in Canada, the same year that David Lange became prime minister of New Zealand.

Lange's appointment of Roger Douglas as Minister of Finance, would have an impact on Canadian politics for years, and he would play heavily into the policies of our neoconservative government under Stephen Harper.

Brain Mulroney came from corporate Canada, so naturally the business elite looked to him to make the same "tough choices" as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher; who were already well known gurus of the neoconservative movement.

Here, surely, is the most authentic Canadian equivalent to the New Zealand experiment. It was elected to office only two months after David Lange's Labour victory of 1984, winning the largest parliamentary majority in Canadian history. Mulroney himself was the first Prime Minister since the depression to emerge from the corporate class, and his government's first Economic and Fiscal Statement outlined a comprehensive neo-liberal [Libertarian] agenda. (1)

But Mulroney got off to a slow start, in the eyes of the corporate elite and "free marketeers", though the left didn't agree, dubbing him "Reagan on the Rideau".

He would, however, put an end to the National Energy Program, a demand of Western Canada, and a campaign promise. But they would soon wish he hadn't, though you'd be hard pressed to find any Westerner today agreeing with you.

"Oscar Wilde wrote that there are only two tragedies: one is not getting what one wants; the other is getting it. In the fall of 1985, the latter tragedy befell Alberta's oil industry. The OPEC cartel failed to agree upon a world oil price. The result was a global free-for-all among producing nations. Canada's oil and gas producers were caught in the middle. Having recently gained freedom from the NEP, Canada's oil and gas industry was not protected as the price of oil dropped from US $27 per barrel ... to $8 per barrel by August 1986. ... Forty-five thousand oil workers lost their jobs." (2)

Mulroney would try to push through a free trade agreement with the United States, but then Liberal leader John Turner was adamantly opposed. The New York Times reported:

CANADA'S opposition Liberal Party announced last month that its majority in the upper house [senate] of Parliament would block the legislation necessary to implement a free-trade agreement that Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, a Progressive Conservative, had negotiated with the United States.

In a counter move to try to salvage his treaty, Mr. Mulroney is considered virtually certain to call an early election, possibly for October, and the treaty is likely to be the dominant issue in the campaign.

The trade bill would eliminate all tariffs over a 10-year period and lower barriers to investment and other curbs on trade in agriculture, energy and services. Legislation is moving through the United States Congress, which is expected to pass it before it adjourns for the November elections. (3)

He did in fact call an election, where he would run on the issue of free trade. Spearheaded by the National Citizens Coalition; a group of corporations, spent an estimated $19-million during his campaign, in support of the free trade deal. John Turner didn't have a chance. (4)

The first legislative action of the new government was to abolish the foreign investment screening agency. This was followed by a series of privatizations and de-regulatory initiatives culminating in the two free trade agreements (FTA 1988 and NAFTA 1992). Much more than tariff reduction deals, the latter constituted a virtual economic constitution for the country, limiting or prohibiting sovereignty in areas as diverse as energy pricing, government procurement, delivery of regional and industrial incentive grants, dumping and countervail actions, national treatment for cross border investment, and free trade in service industries. (1)

The free trade deal, that Turner referred to as the "sale of Canada" was devastating for the country. Thousands of manufacturing jobs were lost and more than 11,000 companies became not only foreign owned, but foreign controlled.

But Stephen Harper's newest Buy America/Sell Canada is even more intrusive. Our water has now been privatized and he has sent out tenders to the European Union to privatize our public services at the municipal, provincial and federal levels.

Footnotes:

1. "The New Zealand Experiment: A Canadian Perspective", By Peter Clancy, Electronic Journal of Radical Organizational Theory, June 1996.

2. Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada. Author: Trevor Harrison Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995. ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6, pg. 97

3. John N. Turner; Canada's Liberals Battle the Trade Pact , New York Times, By John F. Burns, August 7, 1988

4. The National Citizens' Coalition loves you - ha! ha! ha!, NUPGE, November 8, 2004.

Roger Douglas and "Economic Miracles" That Failed

The Libertarian experience in Canada was not a new concept, when Roger Douglas began to influence leaders like Preston Manning, Ralph Klein and Mike Harris.

In 1977, when Sterling Lyon came to power in Manitoba, he adopted Margaret Thatcher's system of slashing social programs and pursuing a right-wing agenda, inspired by the business elite.

Manitoba wasn't ready for this and he only lasted one term.

It's interesting that a new study is taking place by Evelyn Forget, a researcher and professor and the University of Manitoba.

She is attempting to determine whether or not the guaranteed income program initiated by the NDP prior to Lyon coming to power, had a direct result on the health and well being of the province's residents.

From 1974 through 1978, about 30 per cent of the population of Dauphin was provided with a "mincome," as the guaranteed level of income came to be
called. "We found that, overall, hospitalizations in Dauphin declined relative to the control group," said Evelyn Forget, professor of community health science at the University of Manitoba. "We also looked at accidents and injuries, and they also declined. You can argue that accident and injury hospitalizations are strongly related to poverty."

The goal of the program, which cost $17 million, was to find out whether a guaranteed income would improve health and community life. If a household's income dropped below a certain amount, the program would top it up to an income equivalent to the welfare rates at the time.

The trouble with neoconservatism is that it doesn't take in the broader picture. Keeping people fed can reduce health care costs. But then they don't believe in public health care either, so I suppose this would have little effect on the decision making.

Another attempt at neoconservatism in Canada, took place in 1981 in British Columbia, when Social Credit Premier Bill Bennet, initiated the the "Restraint" program, which slashed social services and gutted labour laws.

In this, the government was backed by a cohesive resident business sector centred in resources and trade, and the most assertive Chicago-school think tank in the country [The Fraser Institute]. (1)

And a third pre-Douglas neoconservative experiment was at the hands of the 1982 Saskatchewan Conservatives under Grant Devine, who began an aggressive privatization scheme.

His government was eventually involved in one of the worst scandals in Canadian history, that saw 14 members of the legislature convicted of fraud and breach of trust for illegally diverting hundreds of thousands of dollars from government allowances in a phony expense-claim scam.

One of Stephen Harper's MPs, Tom Lukiwski was the general manager of the party and Peter MacKay remains a strong supporter of Devine.

But beginning in the mid-1980's Roger Douglas received a lot of press in Canada, and his handling of New Zealand's finances was being referred to as an economic miracle:

Repeated airings in the Canadian media have disseminated a diffuse and contradictory set of impressions of the recent New Zealand experience. Among them might number of the following. Sometime in the mid-1980's this small English speaking island state in the south Pacific apparently experienced an economic crisis. This led a left-wing government to implement a Reagan-style program of market reforms which, though controversial at the time, has transformed the New Zealand state and business sectors in positive directions.

Today this yields a budgetary surplus, a stable currency, favorable credit ratings, moderate inflation and a buoyant export sector. Since the first three of these remain unattainable today in Canada, it might reasonably be concluded that the New Zealand experience may have something valuable to offer Canada.

However this result has not been achieved without costs. The new regime has ignored and thereby deepened the predicament of the poor, the weak, and the unlucky. All of these groups are excluded from the economic miracle, and the long run costs this imposes on New Zealand society have yet to be acknowledged. (1)

Several Canadians tuned out after "... the New Zealand experience may have something valuable to offer Canada", including Preston Manning, Stephen Harper, Mike Harris and Ralph Klein.

Footnotes:

1. "The New Zealand Experiment: A Canadian Perspective", By Peter Clancy, Electronic Journal of Radical Organizational Theory, June 1996.

Lies and Videotape Help to Pave Canada's Road to Neoconservatism

The above video shows the fall of Robert Muldoon in 1984, as the Prime Minister of New Zealand. After a long meeting with a backbencher, who threatened to vote with the opposition over nuclear-free legislation, Muldoon called a snap election. But with the early use of videotape, he was caught in an obviously inebriated condition, and that image would contribute to his fall.

David Lange would rise to power, and he in turn would choose Roger Douglas as his minister of Finance, a man who would turn the country inside out and upside down; with a series of cuts and massive deregulation.

Roger Douglas was not really a follower of Leo Strauss, though his policies were in line with the Chicago School of Economics. It would probably be more accurate to call him a Libertarian, fashioned after the political philosophy of Frederic Bastiat. He believed in the freedom and responsibility of the individual, and not the cradle to grave responsibility of government to look after it's citizens.

If he borrowed anything from Leo Strauss, it was the necessity of deception.

Not only did Strauss have few qualms about using deception in politics, he saw it as a necessity. While professing deep respect for American democracy, Strauss believed that societies should be hierarchical – divided between an elite who should lead, and the masses who should follow. (1)

Though the Labour Party of Roger Douglas was definitely left-wing, once elected it took a sharp right turn. Douglas would later advise:

"... beware the risks of candid disclosure before a fickle electorate, strike quickly once in power, define a total agenda, establish the essential control agencies, move simultaneously on a variety of policy fronts, embed the reforms as deeply as possible in legal and market channels so as to prevent early reversal, keep your nerve when faced with popular or electoral resistance and allow the programme to do its work." (2)

Stephen Harper learned how to avoid the risks of candid disclosure before a fickle electorate by 2006. It wasn't enough to just erroneously have people believe that he was Tory, to cash in on a 150 year old tradition. He had to keep his future plans from the public.

His electoral platform was more consistent with conservative principles, and he no longer spoke of things that spooked Canadians, that got him in trouble during the 2004 election campaign.

Things like the Belgian model he wanted to adopt, that divided Canadians along cultural lines, instead of by provinces. Two-tier health care was also left off, though he has been steadily moving in that direction.

And he, like Lange and Douglas, had the added bonus of capitalizing on a scandal. In fact a poll taken soon after his 2006 victory, revealed that the majority of people who voted for the Reform-Conservative Party, did so not because of their policies, but to punish the Liberals.

Who knew they could very well end up punishing themselves.

Roger Douglas would be a big influence on our neoconservative government, but the results of his slash and burn policies were devastating for the average New Zealander :

The man who would destroy that protectionist shield was Lange's Finance Minister Roger Douglas, a diminutive, dogged accountant who unleashed free-market policies with such pace that they blindsided most New Zealanders — including Lange. Douglas floated the New Zealand dollar, wooed foreign banks, wiped away controls on credit, foreign-exchange transactions and import tariffs.

The once sacrosanct farmers lost their state subsidies. The effect was akin to a department-store-sale-day stampede. Masses seized the early — and oftentimes false — fruits of Douglas' promarket policies. More than 40% of all adults ended up owning shares on the back of newly available credit; many in fresh and often questionable enterprises. (3)

A lot of people got very rich, but more became horribly poor.

Saskatchewan political economist, Dr. John Warnock, travelled to New Zealand to study the effects of what New Zealanders dubbed 'Rogernomics.' The figures tell a story of devastation - a word used by New Zealand's own agricultural minister to describe the state of agriculture in four years after the 'reforms': A 40 per cent drop in farm income; a 50 per cent drop in the value of farm land; a policy of paying 3,000 farmers incentives of $ 45,000 to leave and the suggestion that another 15,000 (out of 79,000) should follow them.

Unemployment, which had been at 4 per cent before Douglas's reforms, jumped to over 12 per cent in just over a year and is still increasing.

"Douglas completely eliminated regional development grants and subsidies to rural services. Says Warnock, 'They had things like subsidized petroleum - regardless of where you were the price was the same - subsidized train service, bus service, airport service. They privatized all these things and the prices immediately skyrocketed.' A massive de-population of the countryside resulted, and approximately 40,000 New Zealanders per year have since left the country for Australia to find work since 'restructuring' took effect.

This should give you a glimpse into how Canada will look, once Harper's agenda is fully realized. So many things have already been done behind our backs. Many irrevocable.

1. Leo Strauss' Philosophy of Deception, Jim Lobe, May 19, 2003

2. "The New Zealand Experiment: A Canadian Perspective", By Peter Clancy, Electronic Journal of Radical Organizational Theory, June 1996.

3. 50 Years in the South Pacific, 1979-1989 David Lange, Time Magazine, By Bernard Lagan, October 29, 2009

4. Preston Manning and the Reform Party. Author: Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, pg. 113-114

From Reaganomics to Rogernomics: The New Zealand Invasion

Two events would take place in 1984, that would change the course of Canadian politics for a very long time.

One was on July 26 in New Zealand, when the Labour Party came to power under David Lange, and he would name as his finance minister, Roger Owen Douglas.

Douglas had a long history with the Party. Both his father and brother had been elected members of parliament, and he himself had served since 1969.

The other occurred on September 17, when Martin Brian Mulroney would win the largest majority in Canadian history, under the banner of the Progressive Conservatives.

These two seemingly different events, would have a profound effect on the career of a future politician: Stephen Joseph Harper.

Harper's Early Political Career

Apparently while growing up in Toronto, Stephen Harper's family regularly discussed politics, so when he moved to Calgary he opted to become involved. At the time he was dating a girl, Cynthia Williams, and they decided to volunteer in the offices of Jim Hawkes, Progressive Conservative MP for Calgary West.

"At the (town hall) meeting they were among the few young people in attendance ... Steve in particular was disgusted with the Liberal government ...
My recall is that he did not know very much about the organized political party aspect of politics ... he had concerns about the policy part of politics. They (Steve and Cynthia) joined the association. Then the next thing I knew, they were working within my riding association as volunteers, and members of the executive." (1)

Harper and his girlfriend would help out with Hawke's campaign and recruited many young members from the University of Calgary, where he was studying economics. One of those was a young man named John Weissenberger, who introduced him to the neo-conservative policies of William F. Buckley.

After the PC victory, Harper joined Jim Hawkes in Ottawa as his legislative assistant, working on UI reform (UI, Unemployment Insurance was the forerunner to EI), that never materialized. He soon became disillusioned, stating that Mulroney did not have the nerve to make the necessary "tough choices" and returned to school in Calgary. In a later speech at the founding of the Reform Party, Harper would call for an end to "... government financial involvement in the unemployment insurance system..." (2)

Western Canada played a huge role in Mulroney's electoral success, based on their anger over the National Energy Program.

The NEP, introduced in 1980, was designed to protect Canada's natural resources from foreign investors, and to ensure that all Canadians could purchase oil at reasonable prices. However, 5 out 0f 7 oil companies in the west were owned by Americans, so the backlash was loud and immediate. These large multinational interests, were also backed by then U.S. President Ronald Reagan, a man who would be a huge inspiration to Harper throughout his career.

Another founding member of the Reform Party, was Ted Byfield; owner of the Alberta Report. To give some sense of Western anger, he wrote in a column:

"In the course of the conflict between the Reagan administration and Ottawa, we Albertans are expected as loyal Canadians to cheer the victory of Mr. Trudeau and his thug government. Some of us will find this very hard. We will wave the flag, of course. But deep in our hearts we will be hoping that the Americans whip the hell out of him." (2)

Roger Douglas and a New Labour Party

Though the Labour Party had always been left wing, the new Prime Minister David Lange, had caught the Libertarian bug, after viewing the radical changes made by Ronald Reagan. He became committed to the ideological framework of the 'Chicago school', that produced heavy weights like Paul Wolfovitz and Milton Friedman, Reagan's economic advisor.

The 1984 transition was no ordinary change of government. In common with its northern hemisphere relatives in Britain and America, New Zealand's Labour ... coalition (including organized business, ruling parties, and key state agencies)launched assaults upon the entire state structure, seeking no less than its basic transformation ... the political machine had to be "captured", the technocrats "empowered", and the new regime "embedded" so that it could not be
easily reversed. (3)

The Chicago school was more than just about monetary reform, but a complete philosophical approach to governing, developed by a man named Leo Strauss, who would become the father of the neoconservative movement.

Leo Strauss meets Ronald Reagan, meets Roger Douglas and Canada; to paraphrase Ted Byfield; was on the road to getting the hell whipped out of it.

Footnotes:

1. Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada by William Johnson ISBN 0-7710 4350-3, 2005, Pg. 14

2. Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada. Author: Trevor Harrison Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995. ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6, pg. 60

3. "The New Zealand Experiment: A Canadian Perspective", By Peter Clancy, Electronic Journal of Radical Organizational Theory, June 1996.

-------------------------------------------------

Continuation:

* Lies and Videotape Help to Pave Canada's Road to Neoconservatism

* Roger Douglas and "Economic Miracles" That Failed

* Brian Mulroney, Roger Douglas and a United Front

* Ralph Klein Takes Care of Some "Unfinished Business"

* Roger Douglas Tells Stephen Harper and Preston Manning Not to Blink

* How Roger Douglas Became a Friend of Science

* Roger Douglas and the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

* The Fraser Institute, Roger Douglas and Revisionist History

-----------------------------------