Purely coincidental

Since Kory Teneycke took over, Sun Media has become a laughingstock for turning itself into nothing more than a subsidiary of the Harper Conservatives.

Since Kory Teneycke took over, Sun Media has chosen to poll leadership traits purely as a two-way contest between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff (contrary to its previous practice) in order to pretend that the most popular leader in the country doesn't exist.

I wonder if there might be a connection between the two.

Video of the day

Very nicely done:

Monday Morning Links

An opinion-heavy set of links to start your week, as there's been some great commentary worth highlighting...

- Greg pins down Stephen Harper's governing philosophy:

Since Canadians insist on paying their taxes, we must spend the money as wastefully and thoughtlessly as possible until such time as we can convince them that taxes should be abolished.

- Chet offers his theory as to why the Cons are so eager to trash Canada's census:

I think that what Harper really doesn't want is for the census data to show what the effects of his own policies have been in the here and now. Harper appears to like control more than anything else, and there's just no way he can control what a thorough and complete census will tell. He's perfectly happy to take the limited data that he gets from Bay Street which seem to show that Canada's economy is doing all right in the abstract: he may not be so happy about broader census data that may show that such prosperity is not getting through to average people.

This is why governments of all stripes have often grumbled about StatsCan: the facts are usually any government's most powerful critic. Want to gauge how a party has fulfilled its election promises? The numbers can tell you a lot about that. But this government is going farther than just complaining about its marks: it's burning its report card before Mom and Dad ever get to see it.

This is in part a legacy matter: Harper wants to control his own reputation long-term, and the one thing he can't control is reliable, independently collected and analyzed data. Therefore, he's just going to prevent its collection in the first place.

- Michael Byers points out that the Cons' $16 billion fighter jet purchase looks to be based more on what the U.S. wants us to buy than what Canada actually needs:

The cost of developing the F-35 is estimated at an astonishing $276 billion (U.S.). The cost of the F-22, which is based largely on the same technology, is even higher.

The United States is desperate to spread those costs, without selling its very best planes. It needs Canada firmly on board so that other allies — some of whom are wavering — will also commit to buying F-35s. It can't wait for a tendering process.

Neither can the Harper government. For opening the procurement to tenders would require revisiting the ridiculously narrow operational requirements, and reveal that we've been sold a pig in a poke — on instructions from the Pentagon.

- Finally, lost in the revelry over the fact that the CRTC rightly denied Fox News North's application for a mandatory license is the fact that the Cons' former spinmeister apparently doesn't plan to take "no" for an answer:

Kory Teneycke, a former chief spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper who is at the helm of the new channel, said the company is preparing an amended Category 1 application and will soon try again with the CRTC.

"We're optimistic that this will be resolved in a way that works for us and allows Canadians from coast to coast to have access to the channel," he said. "We're confident that we'll have a licence in place that meets our needs prior to our scheduled launch in the new year."

Which leads me to wonder: will anything be "amended" on the new application aside from a hand-written note saying "Approve this or die. - PMSH"?

Wednesday Morning Links

- The Cons have apparently unveiled version 2.0 of their dirty tricks manual, featuring such cooperative and productive steps as having the chair utterly ignore any rules that have ever existed in order to prevent elected officials from voting. Stay tuned for the next step, as I'm sure all Con chairs are training to shriek "LALALALALAICANTHEARYOU!!!" for the entire length of a meeting.

- Jeffrey Simpson is absolutely right in saying that the CRTC couldn't approve Corn Cob Kory's application for a massive subsidy of Fox News North without looking ridiculous in the process. But I'm not sure how one can comment on the topic without noting the risk that the final decision will be made at the political level, where any concerns about trampling on common sense and existing rules could easily be outweighed by the desire to fund the most biased right-wing media mouthpiece yet.

- Sure, it might seem ridiculous for Sask Party MLA Dan D'Autremont to declare that his constituents have to choose between highways and health care. But let's be fair to D'Autremont: when a government is consumed with taking constant orders from the corporate sector, there's an obvious reason why there's nothing left for mere citizens.

- Getting quoted in a major newspaper: good. Getting quoted in a major newspaper alongside Paul Wells: excellent. Getting quoted in a major newspaper alongside Kelly McParland: well, two out of three ain't bad.

On polar opposites

Of course, there's plenty of cringe-worthy material in the Globe and Mail's plea of "Please, Corn Cob Kory, don't hurt us!!!". But one passage particularly cries out for demolition:

Mr. Teneycke's grandparents were dyed-in-the wool supporters of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, a precursor to the NDP, while their grandson has moved from the Progressive Conservatives to Reform, the Saskatchewan Party, the Ontario Tories under Mike Harris and the Harper government. Yet Mr. Teneycke doesn't consider this such a jump from the old-time CCF.

“It wasn't about running deficits(.) They were fighting rail monopolies and eastern banks; they were standing for a very traditional set of values and protecting the little guy.”

So let's take a look at the scorecard for the Harper Cons compared to the exact opposite of the values Teneycke rightly associates with the CCF/NDP.

Running record deficits? Check.
Fighting for rail monopolies against farmers? Check.
Fighting for eastern banks against the "little guy"? A thousand times check.

Naturally, I'd be entirely happy if Teneycke had the slightest interest in putting genuine CCF values into a modern context. But nobody should be fooled into thinking that the Cons are anything but Canada's most fervent political opponents of each and every one of them - so as long as Teneycke is shilling on behalf of the Harper government, his attempt to claim the CCF's populist legacy deserves to be laughed out of the building.

On public trusts

Brian Topp notes that Kory Teneycke's attempt to use his political connections to force all Canadians to fund his Prison Rape TV sets a strong example of what we shouldn't want out of cable operators. But that leads to the question of what direction we should be pursuing instead:

Canada's regulated cable monopolies are doing Prime Minister Stephen Harper's political work, building television and print empires that share the Prime Minister's political DNA. It illustrates another familiar pattern – how insiders and "public rentiers" work together and serve each other.

It's a familiar story, similar to the abuses associated with privately-owned power companies – almost all of whom were replaced by publicly owned utilities in Canada over the course of the last century for identical reasons.

So what is to be done?

Denying Sun TV a licence would only be a good start.

What is required is a period of energetic trust-busting.

The cable monopolies need to be pruned back to their core mandates. Cable and Internet rates clearly can be cut – to a level sufficient to finance the operation and growth of the cable network, not empire-building.

Perhaps the mandate to provide cable service in specific territories should be put up to regular public tender, complete with a form of term limit.

The reward for consumers will be much cheaper cable and Internet service, at a time when access to that network has become an economic fundamental.

Now, I'm not sure that Topp's suggestions fit together all that neatly: in particular, a single-private-provider model for cable service only seems likely to boost exactly the trusts that Topp quite rightly wants to see busted. Indeed, I have to wonder whether the answer may instead be found in facilitating the entry of more cable providers so as to encourage the type of a-la-carte channel selection that the current system is set up to prevent.

Either way, though, it seems safe to say that we should be looking to alternatives to a system where insiders can expect to be able to use their government access to dictate the public funding of a partisan network. And if the result is a genuinely more open market for television channels along the lines of what Teneycke is pretending to want, then he wouldn't seem to have much reason to complain.

The rules don't apply to us

For all the talk about Fox News North (or should we be calling it Prison Rape TV?) over the last week, I'm surprised that there doesn't seem to have been much discussion about how Kory Teneycke and company are gleefully ignoring the CRTC's instructions for license applications:

Quebecor is flouting a directive the regulator issued in March stating it would not entertain any applications for the prized (must-carry) carriage status until next year, when the transition from analog to digital broadcasting is finished or at least well underway.

By applying now, industry observers say Quebecor is jumping the line and could be unfairly awarded a classification that few channels will be allowed to enjoy.

Charlotte Bell, senior vice-president of regulatory affairs for Canwest's Global television operations, said she found the timing surprising given the CRTC moratorium, but is watching closely whether or not the commission will change course. Mr. Peladeau seemed sure-footed yesterday, declaring the "new voice" news channel will be available across Canada by January.

About the most generous possible interpretation is that Peladeau expects to go ahead even if he can't get must-carry status (and associated public subsidy). But that doesn't explain the brazen flouting of the rules governing must-carry status - which under most circumstances would seem to be the kiss of death for any application.

Of course, there was already reason to wonder whether Teneycke and company either have already been told that they'll receive privileged treatment, or reasonably assumes that cabinet will overrule the CRTC in order to get a Con propaganda network on the air. But the fact that the network is so openly ignoring the CRTC's rules for everybody else can only elevate those concerns while signalling many more abuses to come.

The reviews are in

Adam Radwanski:

The general consensus seems to be that Teneycke is considerably easier to deal with, on a personal level, than Buckler. But if the government's communication style was any different with him in charge than it was with her, it was very difficult to notice. The flow of information was still abysmal; the attacks on opponents were still gratuitous; the suspicion of media was still apparent.

If any proof was needed of the extent to which Stephen Harper's personality overwhelms everyone in his employ, the Teneycke experience helped provide it...

This may not let other staffers - notably Guy Giorno - off the hook for some of the miscalculations under their nominal watch. But it does remind us that there's no point trying to cast blame (or credit) too broadly for what happens in the PMO.

Foreseeable risks

A couple of recent columns look to form a nice summary of the conventional wisdom as to what's supposed to happen on Parliament Hill over the next month. But even as pundits set out their expectation that a Con budget will pass, they're also offering plenty of reason for doubt that the result would be positive for anybody other than Harper and his party.

Let's start with John Ivison - but look behind his far-too-charitable interpretation of the Cons' current spin:

When asked whether the justice bills will still be treated as confidence measures, the Prime Minister’s Office seemed to suggest only money bills will be deemed confidence votes going forward. “The government is focused on the economy. At this time, other issues are secondary,” said Kory Teneyecke, director of communications.
...
Rather, Conservatives say the Prime Minister is “reaching out” during the budget process, after being chastened by his near-political death experience before Christmas. The hope is that Mr. Harper will be more focused on the deteriorating economy than on inflicting political ill-health and penury on his opponents.

In other words, the Cons have at best hinted that "at this time", they're focused on the economy rather than on other issues. And even in the face of the Cons' complete lack of shame about breaking previous commitments, Corn Cob Kory won't bite on an opportunity to reassure the opposition and the public that Harper won't try to force a hard-right agenda through confidence votes this spring.

Moreover, even other Conservatives are left having to "hope" that Harper has somehow decided to change from his well-established track record of putting politics above good governance, rather than having any substantive reason for believing that to be the case. Which can hardly inspire any confidence for the rest of us whose jobs don't depend on feeding positive reviews of Harper's performance to the media.

All of which means there's ample reason for Chantal Hebert to be skeptical that any vote to prop up the Cons on their budget will actually buy political peace for any significant length of time:

Ironically, the prospect of a popular Conservative budget only acts as an accelerant on the election flames.

That's because the opposition suspects the Conservatives are preparing for war even as they overtly seek peace, by crafting a budget designed to become the stepping stone to a spring campaign. Having consolidated their advantage in public opinion with a well-received budget, they would be free to engineer their defeat on an issue of their own choosing later in the session.

Of course, Hebert considers that outcome as reason to expect that another election will be forced at some point in 2009, as the parties aside from the Libs find a theoretical "community of interest" in wanting to go to the polls before Michael Ignatieff settles in as the Libs' leader. But surely any Lib with an iota of foresight would anticipate the danger of ending up in that position - and recognize that there's a course of action which doesn't involve being forced into another election on Harper's chosen timing and terms.

(Edit: fixed wording.)

Mixed messages

There's been no lack of rightful skepticism about the Cons' poor attempt to change the subject away from their own refusal to do anything about the impending recession. But it's worth highlighting just how thoroughly the Cons are contradicting themselves in trying to do so.

Here's Corn Cob Kory's attempt to claim that the Cons have nothing better to do than to tinker with public-sector perks rather than dealing with the economy as a whole:

"You can't just preach from a pulpit in the House of Commons about constraining discretionary spending and then not actually take measures yourself," said Kory Tenycke, a spokesman for Mr. Harper. "We need to lead by example - that is what we're going to do."

So what's wrong with that picture of preaching fiscal restraint and reduce spending? Compare the message the Cons claim to be trying to send about government expenditures with their response as to whether or not they can be bothered to offer any economic stimulus:

"When is this prime minister and this government going to realize that we need action now, not months from now, to help Canadians get back to work and restore confidence in our economy?" Layton said.

The finance minister, in turn, cited the stimulus measures brought in by the previous Conservative government that the NDP voted against, including reductions to the GST, personal income taxes and small business taxes.

Flaherty said those measures provided a stimulus of almost two per cent for next year, which is more than the United States and other G7 nations have offered so far.

Of course, the GST cuts were the largest and most expensive element of the Cons' pattern of tax giveaways so far - making them the bulk of the stimulus which Flaherty claims should be enough to push the economy in the Cons' intended direction. And the obvious effect of the GST cut is to encourage discretionary spending within the private sector.

So if the Cons are right in saying that now is the time for belt-tightening in the country at large, then they're really only conceding that the GST cuts which figure to be the largest factor in an impending budget deficit were downright counterproductive. And the $13 billion per year thrown away to push the public in the wrong direction far outweighs any amount the Cons can hope to save by nibbling away at the edges of public spending now.

Partisanship run amok

It doesn't seem to be getting all that much attention in the midst of the glitz and glamour of an Agriculture Committee meeting, but Kady points out a remarkably partisan ministerial statement from Gerry Ritz. But now that it's clear that ministers under the Harper government don't have any role other than to attack the opposition in their areas of supposed responsibility, what is there left for the Cons to turn into a conduit for their talking points?

With that in mind, and knowing that we probably shouldn't be giving Korn Kob Kory any ideas, here are a few which I fully expect to see by the time the next federal election rolls around:

- New Government of Canada logo suspiciously matches that of the Conservative Party.
- Product labelling standards include a government-approved estimate of how much more all goods would cost under a carbon tax.
- New immigration rule: any Republican Party member willing to move to Canada gets first priority.
- All CBC programming now required to include an overlay of a smiling Stephen Harper. Global follows suit voluntarily.
- Cons decide to prorogue Parliament after all; new throne speech consists solely of Michaelle Jean thumbing her nose at opposition benches.
- New Canada Food Guide suggestion: replace 6 glasses of water with 6 glasses of Harper Kool-Aid.
- Canadian Armed Forces television ads rewritten to include "Fight Taliban Jack".

No improvement

Of all the criticisms levelled at Sandra Buckler during her stint as Deceivin' Stephen's communications direction, I don't recall "insufficiently partisan" ever coming up. But apparently that's the issue the Cons were most concerned with in naming Corn Cob Kory as her replacement and otherwise revamping the PMO:

Sources say Mr. Giorno has already promoted or fired some staff in an effort to gear up the PMO for the next federal election, which could come as early as this fall. The objective has been to replace "bureaucratic" aides with more overtly political staff, said one Conservative source.

The government is expected to be more proactive at hammering home its political message under Mr. Teneycke, who is believed to have played a major role in the government's recent attacks on Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's plans for a carbon tax. Relations with the parliamentary press gallery might not necessarily become more friendly, but reporters will no longer receive little or no response to requests for comment, said the source.

"The PMO's going to become a lot more political. It's going to be a lot more aggressive . . . Every single story, we're going to try to get our say in."

Now, there were certainly problems with the previous strategy of simply stonewalling any request for comment. But it's difficult to see how the new plan of attack will do much other than to make the Cons seem ever more petty and self-absorbed.

After all, if the media wanted the Cons' spin on an issue (as distinct from what would presumably be a more official response from the PMO), wouldn't it make sense that it would be seeking that information from the party office rather than Canada's executive branch? And does anybody but the most deluded of Harper cult followers think that the same old spin will be better received coming from the PMO instead?

Duly named

There's little reason to think Kory Teneycke's appointment as Stephen Harper's communications director will result in his being seen any more positively than the now-departed Sandra Buckler. But it would be a shame if his future battles with the press resulted in anybody forgetting about his stint lobbying his partymates on behalf of the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association.

So to ensure that his trip through the lobbying revolving door doesn't get lost as he takes up his new role keeping meaningful information out of the hands of the media, I hereby dub him Corn Cob Kory.