Veterans vs. Vaughan

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by Trooper on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 05:02


That, it would appear, was the choice before Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the waning days of 2014 as controversy raged over the Conservative government's treatment of Canada's military men and women.

In the eight years he'd been in government, Harper had expended considerable effort to curry favour with the country's former soldiers, as well as to secure Vaughan, the tactically vital suburban riding north of Toronto.

And in his capacity as veterans affairs minister, Vaughan MP Julian Fantino was steadily undermining the government's credibility with a core Conservative constituency.

But it was neither the votes of veterans nor those in the affluent suburb that the Conservatives were worried about. It was votes in the rest of Canada.

As the 2015 election looms, a key challenge for the Conservatives remains finding a soft side that can appeal to swing voters in suburban areas who don't respond to the tough-talking Tories on crime or foreign policy.

Being seen as unfriendly to veterans is a liability, said Dan Mader, a former chief of staff for Fantino who now works as a consultant with StrategyCorp.

"There are few things that everyone -- no matter where they are on the political spectrum -- can agree on, but one of those things (is) that we as a country owe a duty to our veterans and that the government should be looking out for them," Mader said Tuesday in an interview.

" So any government that is seen as not doing so is at risk."

A recent National Defence poll suggested that the challenges faced by veterans and returning soldiers were top of mind when respondents were asked what they knew about the Canadian Armed Forces.

Some of those challenges predate Fantino's time in the portfolio, which began in 2013; including an ongoing court case in which the government argues it has no "social contract" with former soldiers.

"It's not a question of the individual minister; we've had five ministers of veterans affairs," said NDP Leader Tom Mulcair. "Mr. Fantino is simply the most recent one carrying out Stephen Harper's wishes."

But the perception that veterans were being poorly treated was Fantino's to wear, thanks to two caught-on-camera incidents. In one, he argues with a veteran; in the other, he brazenly ignores a veteran's pleading and angry wife.

"Decisions that he made were rarely his decisions, especially those which are in the court as we speak," said retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie, who has known Fantino for nearly two decades.

"However, someone with a slightly smoother personality might have been able to stickhandle their way through it. Julie, God bless him, he's been in charge of personnel, police forces, and work within the police all those years and it's not the type of personality that will be able to stickhandle in the political arena."

Insiders say other Conservative cabinet ministers bristled at the fact that someone lacking in political finesse had been given such a sensitive file. In the fall, a decision was made that there needed to be a change.

Step one was shaking up the bureaucracy at Veterans Affairs; former chief of defence staff Walt Natynczyk was named deputy minister. Step two saw Stephen Lecce, a long-time political confidante of Fantino's, arrive from the Prime Minister's Office to help manage his affairs.

Still, Fantino knew the writing was on the wall, Conservative sources say.

At 72, he could have walked away, saying he wasn't going to run again in the 2015 campaign, since his nomination meeting had yet to be held.

But there was something keeping him in his seat, MacKenzie suggested.

"Stubbornness," he said, adding that if Fantino felt he was doing a good job and had something still to offer, there was no reason for him to walk away.

Nor did Harper necessarily want him to leave.

As the story goes in political circles, the two men began forging a relationship when Harper was leader of the opposition and drafting his criminal justice platform in the lead up to the 2005-06 campaign.

As Toronto's top cop and later head of the Ontario Provincial Police, Fantino had been outspoken about the need for stronger gang and gun laws, and had historically been one of the louder voices in the police community speaking out against the long-gun registry, which caught the Conservatives' attention.

Harper wooed him personally to run in Vaughan; in Fantino, the prime minister saw a man who could appeal to two key Conservative goals: being the law-and-order party and the party of new Canadians.

Though Fantino had a tough-talking attitude among his fellow police, he was also a beloved son of the Italian-Canadian community, which represents more than 50 per cent of the population in the riding of Vaughan.

"Guys like me who ran against him felt that he was there doing good things for Vaughan and doing good things for Canada," said Tony Genco, who ran against Fantino for the Liberals in a 2010 byelection, but supported him the following year.

Fantino has his enemies, to be sure -- many of them from the days when he was a tough-talking police chief, first in London, Ont., and later in Toronto.

Could the Conservatives win the riding without him?

"Fantino is clearly a factor in the decision-making process of the average voter, but I think people are where the Conservatives are, and he just puts them over the top," Genco said.

If Fantino endures, it's because the prime minister still values what he has to add to both policy and politics, Mader said.

"The prime minister can be confident he's not trying to do a good job hoping to get a more senior position or run for something else one day," Mader said.

"This is capping off a long career, and he enjoys doing it."

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/veterans-vs-vaughan-harper-s-calculus-for-keeping-fantino-in-cabinet-1.2176258#ixzz3O83RvCzh



















avatar
Trooper
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 5276
Location : New Brunswick
Registration date : 2013-02-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by Trooper on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 05:13

.Veterans and how they are looked after - or how the public views how the government looks after Veterans - is - and always will be a key factor in any governments decisions going into and election.

No government wants to be viewed as not supporting their Veterans going into and election, it is just not something they can Ignore.

Public perception is crucial in any election.

This PM made this decision based on public perception - that is what I think.
avatar
Trooper
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 5276
Location : New Brunswick
Registration date : 2013-02-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by bigrex on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 07:13

That is why I think that just before, or just after, the election is called, the Tories will announce that they will make the changes to the NVC, as per the committee recommendations (or closely to them). It will be their last ditch effort to buy votes from Veterans and their families and supporters.
avatar
bigrex
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3079
Location : Halifax, Nova Scotia
Registration date : 2008-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by Guest on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 16:19

the change in the position will only help with perception very little . a change in policy IS IN FACT the only way to have any significant change in perception . yup that pig ( please read this as it is written ) does look a little better with the lipstick on it but in the end it still looks like a pig.

and there you go bigrex right to the heart of it . yup policy change WILL be announced no doubt and it will all look very good and be spun to look like the greatest policy change ever .

I sudjest reading  the ACTUAL DETAILS of the changes before deciding for yourself .

declaimers;

1. the pig reference was only a reference to the old "putting lipstick on a pig" adage no other reference was intended ore should be construed .

2. no pigs were harmed and no cosmetics were tested on animals in the creation of this post.

always question authority

propat


Last edited by propat on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 17:34; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by Supreme007 on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 17:02

Lol, love ya, Propat

Supreme007
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 5
Location : Kingston Bar
Registration date : 2014-12-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by Trooper on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 17:47

propat,

The change in position is in my view is the first step taken by the government to show that they have heard the outcry from Veterans - media - opposition ect.....
I think this outcry has made it's way into the general public eye in how they perceive how the government handles our file -
Therefore resulting in the PM to take this course of action.
Mr. Fantino became a liability for the conservatives heading into this election - It is obvious that this liability supersedes the interest of the Vaughan riding.
But like the writer suggest this position change more than likely came from the PM worried about the perception of the voters from the rest of Canada.

So yes perhaps this perception may be of very little help - but I think it is a significant first step.

As far as any  policy changes go, and how we may digest them, I think I can speak for all when I say we now have a better understanding of what to look for in any announcements in deciding if it's good or not.

And yes I agree - any positive policy changes would indeed significantly change perception.

Just my opinion in responding to your post...........
avatar
Trooper
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 5276
Location : New Brunswick
Registration date : 2013-02-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Veterans vs. Vaughan

Post by Guest on Wed 07 Jan 2015, 18:08

vets vs Vaughan was never an issue that riding would have a cabinet post even if it were held by lets say this time a rock in a blue tie if that would make everyone happy . so they still do .

that was not going to change.

but a small change in perception sure . a significant first step not really and here is why I say that.

ANYONE who's vote is hanging on vets issues will not be swayed by this move . it adds up to zero votes.

change in policy that just may the extent of the effect on those voters will probably mirror the extent the changes will ACTUALY help vets.

propat

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum