As untenable as this one is, do not expect any movement by any of the two parties.
Alright, I tend to be pretty quiet about proroguing parliaments as it is a commonplace occurrence in the national and provincial levels (especially in BC, where they decided to push though most of the legislation in September and called it a day). It's a tool that's generally used by majority parties and while people like to say it's done when most of the agenda is pushed through, the tories pushed all they could for the time being until the senate appointments were thrown through, no matter what the liberals want you to think.
Executive summary: it was used as a political tool in the favor of the governing party to kill off dissent in the government house just like every other prorogation.
Fact: The tories have used it to their advantage to lead. So far, between cutting the strings of UNRWA, and assisting Haiti in record time (not to mention giving the tools to the military in the form of tactical and strategic lift aircraft) were a modest start.
Next, using the G8 and G20 for a reasonable goal which does not require a herculean task, but a simple cost-effective series of solutions which can dramatically affect the quality of life of several developing nations
(link1 - nationalpost article) was one of his more recent ideas that might have lasting implications, indeed - but this is something that has really stricken me:
Prentice does a U Turn with the oilsands, makes the call towards corporations to fix the issue.
This is pretty interesting to me, as while I'm not sold as a Harperite, I am once again enjoying his game as a tactician. While the NDP and Liberals are crying afoul about the ministers not being in the hill yelling at each other over question period in what is the most undignified sport known to man, and yes I understand fully the implications of the word "sport", Harper is not only out playing his usual game of chess, but he is doing the job of leading the nation in the process, or at the bare minimum appearing to do so with solid and sound policies in small areas which they are more effective.
He is also delegating. He's letting Baird tour the airport security and cry with the orphans - which perfect considering he's a big giant teddy bear with a voice which could give any would-be terrorist PSTD. He's letting MacKay run his show, which he is doing rather well easily at the level of Bill Graham, despite not having as favorable conditions as the later. He's letting Jim Prentice do what he's wanted to do for sometime - no, what he needs to do as environment minister.
I wouldn't hear too much from Stockwell Day however. He's not going to be in the limelight, but given the praise from Harper, I expect he's doing his own cost-cutting business... not effectively but studiously. No one is going to like Stockwell day in awhile, and I would be certain that both he, Harper and the rest of the Cabinet understand that well.
I've never liked the present day tories except that their leader is a fantastic chess player, and they are still a hell of a lot better than the alternative (see: no more longarm registry, private members bill on gay marriage, etc)
Oddly enough, last thursday I had a good conversation with a Saudi Expat named Mohammed about local politics. Guy tells me that of all the leaders, he likes Harper on his own merits as his foreign policy is more focused, leading me to think of the contrasts between the titles the Economist has dubbed him including "The one-candle man", which stands in contrasts to Mr Martin's "Mr Dithers' Fiscal Cafeteria", only with foreign policy. I don't have any other backings, but stuff that I've thrown up makes that more apparent.
Perhaps that's why people in the Universities really cannot think of what Mr Harper has done for Canada in a lasting sense, in contrast to the killing of funds for many NGO's that promoted women's rights, and other nice-to-have things. Perhaps a coherent and straightforward foreign policy is what will end up his legacy.
For what it's worth, I say that the RMR Slap chop election is going to hold true next round.
IM: I'm interested in your thoughts in particular, as well as anyone else who has good examples of where exactly I'm wrong. Heck knows you're all a civil bunch.
