By Stephen J. Gray
“…my vision of incremental conservatism means endorsing even very small steps if they are in the right direction…” (Tom Flanagan.)
Let us look then at the “right direction” that “incremental conservatism” has taken.
Funding still remains in place for the Status of Women and a news release of November 1, 2007, had this to say: “The Honourable Josée Verner, Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages,” stated, "Our Government is working to advance women's participation in the economic, social and cultural life of Canada and we are doing so at record levels of funding,…" (emphasis added)
http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/newsroom/news2007/1101_e.html
Funding has also been given to a wealthy family who own a media conglomerate. The Winnipeg Sun of November 3, 2007, stated, “Ottawa has already committed $100 million to an Asper-family project, the proposed Canadian Museum for Human Rights.” More info on this “human rights museum” at:http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/070712a.html
Lifesite news of August 25, 2006, ( http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/aug/06082503.html ) had this headline: “Conservative Government Continuing Pro-Abortion Extremism at United Nations” the article went on to state, “The switch to a Conservative Government seems to have had little effect on the pro-abortion activism of Canadian representatives at the United Nations. While pro-life Canadians did not expect that the Harper government would be pro-life, it did have hopes that the radical promotion of a global right to abortion by Canadian delegates at the UN would cease.”
And the UN and the “conservative” government were mentioned in this story. The Interim of March 2007 ( http://www.theinterim.com/2007/march/02gayrights.html ) had this headline, “Canadian representatives continue to push gay ‘rights’ at the UN ” the article went on to say, “The statements on behalf of Canada by Stewart are the latest in a series by Canadian delegates, indicating that little appears to have changed under the Conservative government in terms of Canada leading the advocacy of forcing social radicalism through the United Nations.”
Still, it is not only at the UN that “social radicalism” continues. A good example of this was the farcical vote on so called “same-sex marriage” in the Canadian parliament. Sexual orientation and its illegitimate offspring “same-sex marriage” were never in the Charter, yet we had the silly spectacle of a “conservative” government introducing a motion on this that they knew would be defeated. A government with principles would have used the not-withstanding clause to return sanity to this country. But unfortunately P.M. Harper is on record as saying, regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, "I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue."
Another issue the “conservative” government goes into raptures over is Quebec, as witness this newspaper quote about Quebec earlier this year. “One thing is clear from Monday's budget: The Conservatives are wooing Quebec with the rest of Canada's tax dollars” ( Vancouver Sun, March 20, 2007). And the Calgary Herald of March 20, 2007,
had this to say, “If there ever was any doubt, it's clear the Conservatives have changed places with the Liberals as Quebec's dance partner in the waltz to win votes” Hoping to win votes is fine but when it comes at the expense of “the rest of Canada's tax dollars” then this smacks of favoritism. Could this be called most favored “nation” status for Quebec under the banner of “incremental conservatism?”
I believe, based on the evidence we have seen to date “incremental conservatism” is just an empty slogan and the main reason why many real conservatives are not buying this liberal brand of “incremental conservatism.”
Stephen J. Gray
November 4, 2007.
graysinfo@yahoo.ca website: http://www.oocities.org/graysinfo