Politicians have all sorts of reasons and justifications why they cannot do what they promised to do if they were put in office, and every time those who put them in office allow them to break their promises they do nothing more than (to use a phrase from south of the border) embolden them, and others of their ilk.
The latest broken promise Harper has delivered comes with the “promised in error” justification.
During the election campaign Harper was quite specific in a promise to do something
“We’ll provide full compensation for residential school survivors, including those attending the ÃŽle-à-la-Crosse school,” Harper said in the advertisement.
Now, according to Jim Prentice it is “extremely unlikely” that he will follow through on that promise.
A great many people will buy into this. Some will do so because it is their guy saying it, and others because of the segment of society that will feel the brunt of this broken promise, the end result is the same; by allowing yet another promise to be broken, and, by, in many cases, supporting the broken promise justification, these people are allowing a flawed election process to continue.
Stephen Harper said that, if he was given a chance to govern, he would do something - the electorate lived up to their end of the deal, Stephen Harper did not.
“I made the promise in error” is a bullshit justification.
“I didn’t have all the information when I made my promise” is another bullshit justification.
Either the man can be trusted to follow through on his promises, or he cannot, and even if he does manage to keep more promises than he breaks how far do you trust someone known for, at best, breaking less promises than they kept?
“A great many people will buy into this. Some will do so because it is their guy saying it, and others because of the segment of society that will feel the brunt of this broken promise.”
There is a third group that will buy in: those who favour the unilateral, illegal extinguishment of claims and the dismantling of self-government initiatives.
Harper hasn’t had the balls to announce that his policy goal is assimilation. Virtually every decision he’s made on the Aboriginal policy front has been consistent with the assimilationist scenario we in the Bunker predicted some time ago: but neither he nor Prentice would ever say that.
No, no. It’s not about assimilation. Of COURSE not. There’s always another reason.
They’re delaying the payment of court-awarded, Parliament-approved Residential School reparations because they don’t like the lawyers fees. They’re delaying implementation of the Berger recommendations on the Nunavut Claim because it “needs more study”. They’re delaying recommendations of their own commission on the relocation of Kashechewan because it “needs more study”. They’re delaying implementation of the Auditor General’s recommendations on Claims Implementation because “the picture isn’t complete”. They’re refusing to meet with the Government of Ontario on Caledonia because Jim Prentice discovered another appointment. They’ve refused for a year to meet with the heads of Canada’s largest land claims organizations because…well, they haven’t said why. They just refuse.
Well, it all makes perfect fiscal sense, I guess. Elders are dying fast, and each Indian or Eskimo corpse is one compensation payment saved.