Harper sworn in as 22nd prime minister

Harper sworn in as 22nd prime minister

Clutching his personal Bible, Harper was sworn in today by Alex Himelfarb, clerk of the Privy Council, and was presided over by Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean as he took the oath of office.

Thank you, Jesus. :yup:

Harper has named a 27-member cabinet (which includes six women) – streamlined from Martin’s 37. The most surprising news was the appointment of David Emerson as minister of international trade. Emerson, former industry minister under Paul Martin’s Liberal government, crossed the floor to join the Tory cabinet…

Another surprise was the appointment of Michael Fortier, a key party organizer in Quebec, as public works minister, because Fortier is not an MP… The appointment of Marjory LeBreton – who has served every Conservative leader since John Diefenbaker – as leader of the government in the Senate is sure to be a popular move among Tories…

Harper’s new cabinet ministers began showing up just after 10 a.m., arriving in cars and taxis – a move that’s being interpreted as an effort to show that they’re closer to the people than the Liberals, who arrived in limousines.

The complete list of Stephen Harper’s Conservative cabinet.

Rona Ambrose – Minister of Environment
John Baird – President of Treasury Board
Maxime Bernier – Minister of Industry
**Jean-Pierre Blackburn **-- Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec
Lawrence Cannon – Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities
Michael Chong – President of the Queen’s Privy Council and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister for Sport
Tony Clement – Minister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario
Stockwell Day – Minister of Public Safety
**David Emerson **-- Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics
Diane Finley – Minister of Human Resources and Social Development
**James Flaherty **-- Minister of Finance
Michael Fortier – Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Stephen Harper – Prime Minister
Loyola Hearn – Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
Marjory LeBreton – Leader of the Government in the Senate
**Gary Lunn **-- Minister of Natural Resources
Peter MacKay – Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Robert Nicholson – Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Gordon O’Connor – Minister of Defence
Bev Oda – Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women
Jim Prentice – Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Metis and Non-Status Indians
Carol Skelton – Minister of National Revenue and Minister of Western Economic Diversification Monte Solberg – Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.
Chuck Strahl – Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board
**Gregory Thompson **-- Minister of Veterans Affairs
Vic Toews – Minister of Justice; Attorney General of Canada
**Josee Verner **-- Minister of International Co-operation and Minister for La Francophonie and Official Languages

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20060206/160_peter_mackay1_060206.jpg
Peter MacKay is sworn in as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency.

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20060206/160_rona_ambrose1_060206.jpg
Rona Ambrose is sworn in as Minister of Environment.

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20060206/160_david_emerson1_060206.jpg
David Emerson is sworn in as Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics.

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20060206/160_monte_solberg_0602062.jpg
Monte Solberg is sworn in as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

OK, I see that Gordon OConnor was named to DOD. I know there’s been some speculation at army.ca. Let’s see what this means. I’ll be back.

Uh-oh! Our army is not happy with OConnor.

They don’t like OConnor’s record. They feel that OConnor and CODS Gen Hillier do not get along and are therefore also afraid that OConnor will replace Hillier whom they absolutely love to pieces.

What stands out to me on the list is the glorified snub Harper has given Stockwell Day. Minister of Public Safety? Might as well still be on the back benches. Looks to me like a sop to the centrists from here.

[quote=Lapsed]What stands out to me on the list is the glorified snub Harper has given Stockwell Day. Minister of Public Safety? Might as well still be on the back benches. Looks to me like a sop to the centrists from here.
[/quote]

Well, hold up there. I don’t know what Public Safety means yet. It could mean something along the lines of Homeland Security, gun laws, gang laws, and so on.

As for the centrists, I am just reading through the Globe and Mail. It’s hard to navigate through all the insider articles which I can’t access.

Here is a list of cabinet minister profiles. Not very useful. I need to know what the new ministries do. On to the National Post. Nothing. Toronto Sun. Oh, they don’t mince words in their condemnation of Martin’s Dingwald move. Nothing new. On to the Ottawa Citizen.

Looks like it is the same story across the country. The editorials have not come in yet. OK, there is a press conference. I will see if I can transcribe some stuff if it’s new.

OK. There is a Citizen editorial on a new Canadian Foreign Security Agency. (That looks like a new thread.)

Nothing new from Harper so far: Top priority to clean up government. Tax breaks. And so on.

Let’s see what the Blogging Tories have to say: nothing new. Let’s see what the PM’s office has to say: Ah! Finally! Go to the source:

Two Cabinet committees—Operations and Priorities and Planning—have been created to ensure effective day-to-day governing and to provide strategic direction on priorities for Canadians. Three policy committees—Social Affairs; Economic Affairs; and Foreign Affairs and National Security—will identify the means to achieve these strategic priorities. Finally, Treasury Board will examine initiatives to strengthen government accountability.

In addition, a number of changes to the structure and organization of government have been made to promote accountability, efficiency and effectiveness:

The departments of Human Resources and Skills Development and Social Development have been consolidated into one Department of Human Resources and Social Development…

The departments of Foreign Affairs and International Trade have been reintegrated…

The Office of the Registrar of Lobbyists has been transferred from the Industry portfolio to the Treasury Board portfolio as a stand-alone office, to increase its independence while the government works to further revise and strengthen the Lobbyists Registration Act

A Transport, Infrastructure and Communities portfolio has been created to better link urban, interprovincial and international infrastructure development…

Prime Minister Harper issued a new guide and code of ethics for Ministers and their staff: Accountable Government: A Guide for Ministers and the Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for Public Office Holders

That’s it for now. The editorials will come in later.

The appointment of James Flaherty as Finance Minister worries me a little. He was in Mike Harris’s cabinet, probably in the equivalent position for Ontario. And we who live in Ontario, Canada, had much to fear from Mike Harris’s government.

Harris slashed welfare benefits by 21.5% thereby taking money from the very poorest of the poor. Certainly, the welfare recipients were not living high off the hog before that. I am hoping PM Harper runs the country more like Premier Davies ( a Conservative) ran Ontario in the old days.

In other words I am hoping that Harper doesn’t get James Flaherty to do his dirty work for him, because Flaherty is quite capable of doing what he is told to do.

[quote=Pondero]The appointment of James Flaherty as Finance Minister worries me a little. He was in Mike Harris’s cabinet, probably in the equivalent position for Ontario. And we who live in Ontario, Canada, had much to fear from Mike Harris’s government.

Harris slashed welfare benefits by 21.5% thereby taking money from the very poorest of the poor. Certainly, the welfare recipients were not living high off the hog before that. I am hoping PM Harper runs the country more like Premier Davies ( a Conservative) ran Ontario in the old days.

In other words I am hoping that Harper doesn’t get James Flaherty to do his dirty work for him, because Flaherty is quite capable of doing what he is told to do.
[/quote]

Hi Pondero:
Flaherty should be fine.
You can all say what you want about Mike Harris. I happen to find him to be one of the best leaders I have ever observed. Probably because I know personally of so many welfare cases who were motivated to work, and have been employed ever since - and that in itself is something no Liberal seems to understand - stewardship. He took an awful beating from the left/unions, and he’s still being convicted and blamed over things before/without proper trial.
Not to worry, the left of this country will do more than keep Flaherty in check - they’ll hammer away at these conservative value guys. I’m hoping most of them are thick skinned.

Hi Lost. I have one word for Harris: Ipperwash.

No I have another word for Harris: Waterton.

No I have yet another word for Harris: $5B missing.

Hi Ani:)

Has Harris ever been convicted in these cases?

[quote=Lost&Found]Hi Ani:)

Has Harris ever been convicted in these cases?
[/quote]

Ipperwash. The George family dropped their lawsuit when McGuinty came to power in exchange for an inquiry which is still in progress.

Waterton. I believe isn’t finished yet.

$5B. We are never going to see that.

Okay. Well I’ll certainly change my mind about Harris if a judge ever finds him guilty of any of these accusations; until then I’ll keep presuming innocence.

[quote=Lost&Found]Okay. Well I’ll certainly change my mind about Harris if a judge ever finds him guilty of any of these accusations; until then I’ll keep presuming innocence.
[/quote]

Fair enough. I guess I disliked the Harris regime for a lot of other reasons. I am just not feeling like dredging all that up right now. His common place revolution was excellent on paper. The reality was different. It seemed to me that his ends were conservative – nothing wrong with that – but his means were socialist – and there was a lot that went wrong with that.

I fought to keep Women’s College Hospital open – one of the few hospitals which was operating within its means and to boot it was a WHO designated teaching hospital.

My colleagues and I got the fallout from the school cutbacks.

And workfare was a joke: a public relations opera of gargantuan proportions and byzantine intricacy.

[quote=Lost&Found]Hi Pondero:
Flaherty should be fine.
You can all say what you want about Mike Harris. I happen to find him to be one of the best leaders I have ever observed. Probably because I know personally of so many welfare cases who were motivated to work, and have been employed ever since - and that in itself is something no Liberal seems to understand - stewardship. He took an awful beating from the left/unions, and he’s still being convicted and blamed over things before/without proper trial.
Not to worry, the left of this country will do more than keep Flaherty in check - they’ll hammer away at these conservative value guys. I’m hoping most of them are thick skinned.
[/quote]

Have you never heard of the “preferential option for the poor.”. or read the encyclical “On Human Work” (Laborem Exercens) or read the Social Teaching of the Church (Centesimus Annus) by Pope John Paul II?

There are other ways to motivate the welfare recipients, one is to offer them jobs at a liveable wage.

[quote=Pondero]Have you never heard of the “preferential option for the poor.”. or read the encyclical “On Human Work” (Laborem Exercens) or read the Social Teaching of the Church (Centesimus Annus) by Pope John Paul II?

There are other ways to motivate the welfare recipients, one is to offer them jobs at a liveable wage.
[/quote]

Hi Pondero - btw thanks for responding and for not making assumptions about me like many would have, because of my statements supporting Harris.

So… Ya can’t just toss big books & titles in front of me and expect that to be an end answer. (as consultants say -baffle ‘em with bulk.) Because we both know that we could apply those same truth principles to many different approaches in helping the poor.

I had some encounters with a group of people who were at odds with me, because I advised them to quit welfare and accept minimum wage jobs. Then the day arrived when they were finally motivated to do so. Eventually they worked their way into better jobs.

There are some very vocal groups who had a vested interest in seeing these people depend on social services.

[font=Arial]I appreciate your perspective, this is just another point of view;) [/font]

[quote=Ani Ibi]Fair enough. I guess I disliked the Harris regime for a lot of other reasons. I am just not feeling like dredging all that up right now. His common place revolution was excellent on paper. The reality was different. It seemed to me that his ends were conservative – nothing wrong with that – but his means were socialist – and there was a lot that went wrong with that.
[/quote]

Hi Ani:) (notice Ani gets a smile. Here Ani have a bunch:) :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :stuck_out_tongue: )
What do you mean “his means were socialist”?

Glad to hear you fought for the cause and were successful. I am familiar with that hospital. Glad they decided to keep it open. Did it create a tense atmosphere when they were threatening to shut the doors?

How so?

[quote=Ani Ibi]And workfare was a joke: a public relations opera of gargantuan proportions and byzantine intricacy.
[/quote]

[font=Arial]At my work-building there were workfare folks in the lobby directing visitors. I thought it was a good arrangement??[/font]

[quote=Lost&Found]I had some encounters with a group of people who were at odds with me, because I advised them to quit welfare and accept minimum wage jobs. Then the day arrived when they were finally motivated to do so. Eventually they worked their way into better jobs.
[/quote]

I agree with the principle that people thrive on the dignity of work and therefore economies thrive when they have a minimum number of people on welfare.

I don’t know what the experience of workfare was up North. This was what it was like in Toronto:

At the federal level, they had HRDC which was a bureaucratic scam. HRDC advertised jobs which didn’t exist or that required high qualifications but no pay. And federal civil servants got paid for this non-work of creating non-existent jobs. And arms length job counselling companies got paid to promote non-existent jobs.

So people on welfare who really wanted jobs had to waste their time providing evidence that they had looked for a certain quota of non-existent jobs every month. The time they spent looking for non-existent jobs was taken away from the time they could have been spending finding real jobs, that is if the economy had been stimulated enough to provide real jobs.

Now let’s talk about the other feature of workfare. Welfare recipients were linked with companies to gain experience. The companies got the benefit of free work and were not required to hire the welfare recipients at the end of their contract. Sometimes companies didn’t even bother to give references; they just went right on and got their next free placement.

A real conservative government would have found ways to stimulate the economy so that more real jobs opened up for welfare recipients wanting to find work.

Harris’s ‘conservative’ government created bigger government to monitor ‘welfare fraud,’ bigger bureaucracy by increasing the number of arms length job placement agencies, bigger corporate dependency, and a demoralized working poor.

[quote=Lost&Found]There are some very vocal groups who had a vested interest in seeing these people depend on social services.
[/quote]

I agree with you, Lost, that dependency on social services is not a good thing. I did not think Harris’s way was an effective way out of the cycle of dependency. In Toronto, anyway, I saw a lot of folks who were caught in a bad crunch.

[quote=Lost&Found]Glad to hear you fought for the cause and were successful. I am familiar with that hospital. Glad they decided to keep it open. Did it create a tense atmosphere when they were threatening to shut the doors?
[/quote]

Harris amalgamated Womens (downtown) with a hospital way out in Scarborough. Why? Because he expected more pregnant women in Scarborough. And that is so ignorant. Women’s isn’t only about pregnancy management. It is a World Health Organization designated centre for all women’s health issues. It has a breast care centre, osteoporosis centre, and all sorts of centres for specialized women’s health care as well as men, children, and geriatrics.

Basically Womens became a big clinic.

Why did Harris try to fix Women’s when it wasn’t broken. It did not have any debt when it was sent packing, while other hospitals certainly did.

Anyway, I found a whole bunch of stuff on OConnor. I’ll post it when I am less sleepy. :slight_smile:

[quote=Lost&Found]he’s still being convicted and blamed over things before/without proper trial.
[/quote]

Somebody gave the orders for Ipperwash. The buck stops at Harris’s desk.

[quote=Ani Ibi]I agree with the principle that people thrive on the dignity of work
[/quote]

right

right, Federal Fiberals

I’d argue “better than nothing”, and see your first point above, but Yes I now understand your claim about it being socialist means. Well at least they involved the private sector to some degree??

I thought they had provided a business friendly environment, open for business.

I respect and believe what you saw for yourself, that cannot be denied.

It’s history. Let’s hope that we have found a brighter present and some purpose for our future. I love Ontario. The rocks are my home.

edit: I must say that I do believe that it was different outside Toronto. In Haliburton, I stopped into Wendy’s because Wendy’s is the only fast food that I can eat. It was a small Wendy’s. Yet it had twelve servers behind the counter all clamouring to serve me.

Well I don’t know how they swung paying all those servers, but they did.

I also noticed that Haliburton was always up to some sort of economic development scheme. The whole building of the Art School up there was incredible from the get go. They really go to a lot of trouble to attract tourists.

We can learn from Haliburton. :slight_smile:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.