Thursday, February 22, 2007

Methinks they doth protest too much

The Liberals arguing publicly with him are wrong, and Hillier is right: the 90's were a "decade of darkness" for the CF. Eddie Goldenberg misses the point entirely:

"His so-called 'decade of darkness' for the military was the same decade that saw $12 billion invested in higher learning through the creation of the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the endowing of 2000 Canada Research chairs in our universities and much else," said Mr. Goldenberg, an Ottawa-based lawyer. "For Canadian universities in general and particularly here in Ottawa for the University of Ottawa and Carleton, it might be called the 'decade of enlightenment'."


Feel free to argue that the Chretien years were good for universities, for Canadian finances in general, hell, for Canada as a country overall. You can probably make a case for it.

But you won't be engaging Gen Hillier in that debate, because his remarks were specific to the CF. Regardless of whether the budget cuts were good for the country, they were certainly not good for our military. How Denis Coderre, Eddie Goldenberg and other Liberals on the defensive have missed that distinction baffles me.

The Chronicle Herald gets it right:

Was that a partisan statement? Hardly. Is it a statement of fact? Certainly.

What upset Mr. Coderre, the Liberal defence critic, is that the general decried the hit the military took during the Grits’ deficit-fighting years, but did not credit them with their substantial $13-billion reinvestment in the Armed Forces in their final budget in 2005. The Tories essentially picked up where the Liberals left off in terms of defence spending. Fair enough.

But it’s unfair to suggest Gen. Hillier was taking sides against the Liberals and for the Conservatives. The only side he’s on is the military’s and there’s nothing wrong with that.


Even more on point is Barbara Yaffe in the Vancouver Sun:

The Liberals were within their rights to make those cuts to defence expenditures while in government. And to health care and transfers to provinces and a host of other spending programs, because Canada was running a $40-billion deficit by 1993, racking up debt like no tomorrow.

Voters thanked the Liberals at the ballot box in 1997, 2000 and 2004 for reintroducing fiscal sanity to this country. The gratitude did not run out until 2006, when Liberal scandal exhausted voters' patience.

However, not a slice of this reality pie appears to have been digested by Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre, who is lambasting the popular Canadian general for being "a prop" of the Conservative party.

"I felt it was part of a communication plan," Coderre told reporters. "To get involved in politics, there is one way: You should run."

That commentary is so over the top, an apology is owed Hillier. If Coderre doubts the veracity of what the chief of the defence staff has stated publicly, he can consult with his fellow Liberal, Senator Colin Kenny, who has said much worse about Liberal cuts to the military in a series of reports by a group he chairs, the Senate committee on national security and defence.


Hear, hear, Ms. Yaffe. Contrary to what Coderre and others are saying, Hillier stayed in his lane; they're the ones who should be reeling their necks back in.

I'd have a hell of a lot more respect for the Liberals on this issue if they'd simply said: "I can see why the CDS would feel that way, and I know the cuts across the whole spectrum of government expenditures were uncomfortable. But as honest as General Hillier has been, I must be equally frank: the cuts were necessary for the country as a whole. Had we not cut then as we did, the budget General Hillier would have to work with as our economy struggled today would have been positively crippling. Besides, in the last Liberal government, Mr. Goodale's budget recognized the need in the CF and addressed it in concrete terms..."

Unfortunately, it seems politicians suffer the same tragedy as liars: they can't believe anyone else isn't speaking from partisanship because they don't know how to do it themselves.

2 Comments:

Blogger JR said...

Some journalists saw something even more sinister in Hillier's remarks.

3:39 p.m., February 22, 2007  
Blogger Babbling Brooks said...

Bah. I didn't really need to see that, JR. It's enough to make mother's milk curdle.

3:44 p.m., February 22, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home