CBC "Hit and Run" on Afghanistan "Cut and Run"
|
Previous "Media Bias" articles: Part I; Part II; Part III; Part IV; Part V
The media attacked PM Harper for months for being “Bush-lite” and “narrow and ideological” on the mission in Afghanistan. Suddenly they flipped 180 degrees and began vilifying him for seeking Parliamentary consensus on the issue.
The PM made these comments at the close of the spring Parliamentary session (June 2007):
“I would hope that the view of Canadians is not to simply abandon Afghanistan. I think there is some expectation that there would be a new role after February 2009, but obviously those decisions have yet to be taken.”
“This mission will end in February 2009. Should Canada be involved militarily after that date, we've been clear that would have to be approved by the Canadian Parliament.”
“I would want to see some degree of consensus around that. I don't want to send people into a mission if the opposition is going to, at home, undercut the dangerous work that they are doing in the field.” (Source)
With those words, the dog that had been gnawing the right hand of Government for months, suddenly grew enraged and bit the other with full force. The media bulldogs sunk their teeth into Stephen Harper calling him a “waffler” and accusing him of preparing to “cut and run” in Afghanistan.
Beginning with the “setup” (appropriately named) of the CBC piece, they compared his statements above, to quotes from 2006 when the PM told troops in Afghanistan:
“People who are going to use violence against you, their threats don’t go away if you cut and run. They threaten people who they think won’t stand up to them.”
They left out however the important context of his more recent remarks which was:
“I don't want to send people into a mission if the opposition is going to, at home, undercut the dangerous work that they are doing in the field.”
In other words, the Afghan mission was facing a more effective opposition here at home than the fighting troops are facing in Afghanistan! For the sake of morale in the Armed Forces, our PM is seeking to eliminate the partisan political rhetoric surrounding the mission here at home and to let the troops do their jobs.
To hear it from the CBC however, you would think that this was the very first time that PM Harper had informed the public that he would be seeking the support of Parliament for a continuation of the mission. The clear implication of the CBC report (days after the comments above) was that Mr. Harper was buckling under political pressure over an unpopular war and was prepared to “cut and run” for fear of losing votes. Witness excerpts from an unofficial transcript of a CBC At Issue panel discussing: “Afghanistan – are we cutting and running?” (26 June 2007).
What are the clear implications of this hit piece? The message conveyed by this media discussion is: “Stephen Harper said he would never leave Afghanistan. Now that there is a risk of losing votes he is waffling on the issue, and is prepared to cut and run.” But is this actually true? Did the Prime Minister only recently seek Parliamentary approval so that he could 'cut and run?'
Fortunately, the Parliament keeps a wonderful record of statements in the House called The Hansard. A little research turned up the truth that the news media either deliberately ignored or was too lazy to find out!
Here is the public history of Prime Minister Harper's declaration that extensions to the Afghan mission would require a VOTE IN PARLIAMENT:
The Prime Minister has been totally consistent from May 10, 2006 - June 22, 2007 when the CBC decided to paint him as a "waffler," pandering to votes and preparing to "cut and run." There was absolutely no change in his (or the government's) position. There was an extension until February 2009 ratified by the Parliament; any further extension of the mission would also be presented to Parliament for a vote. We understand that the Opposition wants to play both sides of the issue as usual, but this kind of treatment from the Press is an inexcusable example of media bias. The CBC should register with Elections Canada as a 4th national opposition party!
Linked quotes listed below:
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Can the Prime Minister make a commitment that any extension of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan will be conditional on a debate and a vote being held here, in this House?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc knows, as everyone knows, that during the federal election campaign we committed ourselves to holding votes on new commitments. We are already in Afghanistan. Obviously, I prefer to have the support of all parties in this House for this important mission. I hope that the Bloc Québécois will support us and support our troops in the future as it has in the past.
Wednesday, May 17, 2006 [Note: Brian Murphy (M. Dion also) voted against extending the mission in Afghanistan]
Right Hon. Stephen Harper: Mr. Speaker, members across various parties in the House have requested a vote. Members of all parties, in particular the hon. member and his party, are more than aware of the details of our engagement in Afghanistan, which we are seeking to extend. Let us be serious. The government believes there should be a vote. The government offered a vote and that vote was accepted. The process was accepted unanimously by the House, including by his party. If he does not like that, he should take that up with the leadership of his party. However, we have men and women over there who are doing great work, who are prepared to take bullets for our country. If the hon. member and his party are not prepared to stand up and simply endorse the mission, then they are, frankly, not supporting the people on the ground they claim to support, and that is what they should do. Mr. Speaker, the House, especially the party opposite understands the mission in Afghanistan. I hope that, before sending our troops, our young men and women, into a military campaign, it understood the mission in Afghanistan. This government wants strong support for our troops in Afghanistan. This is why we responded to calls from the parties to have a vote. We know the NDP may vote against the motion. However, indications are that the other parties support the motion. It will be a good message for our troops. I would just add that, in my own opinion, the comments by the parties have been clear up to this week. Our troops and the public have a hard time understanding why the parties suddenly change their mind when there is a vote.
After the mission had been extended to February 2009, the three Opposition parties (and the 4th Opposition Party – the news media) whined about how unfair the vote was and how abbreviated the debate was; just before accusing the Conservatives of wanting to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely.
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Did the Prime Minister inform NATO that Canada will be unable to continue its mission in Afghanistan beyond February 2009, unless it has the approval of the House of Commons?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we had a vote in the House of Commons this year to extend the mission of our forces in Afghanistan until 2009. I also mentioned that we intended to inform the House of Commons of our progress until 2009 and that we would consult the House again on the next steps.
Hon. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.): Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians why he is reluctant to tell us that he has already made a decision that Canadian troops will remain after February 2009? Why the cover-up? Why does the Conservative Prime Minister not have the courage to tell us right now that deep down, this government never intended to pull out in 2009?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party leader voted to send our troops to Kandahar, then he voted against sending our troops to Kandahar, and last week, he supported sending our troops to Kandahar. I can say that obviously in the next two years we will gather all the facts before making our next decision, including figuring out what the latest position of the leader of the Liberal Party will be. The reason I take my feet is just to note that I did receive a phone call this morning from President Karzai of Afghanistan. He wants to thank the Canadian people and the Canadian troops for all the good work they are doing on security and development in Afghanistan.
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): There are too many different answers to the same basic question, which is how long we are going to be there. When will the government begin to level with the Canadian people about its intentions in Afghanistan?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I think the government has been extremely clear. We brought forward a motion to the House to extend the current Afghan mission to February 2009. That was in fact supported by the deputy leader of the Liberal Party. The government has been clear that if it were to seek further extensions, it would come to Parliament to do that, and that remains our position.
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Why does this government not pledge to end this mission in 2009? Does it intend to extend it?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this Parliament extended that mission to February 2009. If the government wants to prolong the mission beyond that date, it will make proposals after assessing the situation over the next two years.
Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP): Canadians deserve an answer. For how much longer will our troops be committed to Afghanistan? The Prime Minister needs to tell us.
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I will repeat again that this Parliament extended the military mission in Afghanistan to February 2009. If the government wants to extend it further, it will seek the approval of Parliament to do that.
Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP): Will the Prime Minister wait until the last minute again to unveil his plans for Afghanistan to Canadians?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this Parliament has approved the mission in Afghanistan until February 2009. If the government wants to extend that mission, it will obtain Parliament's support.
Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.): Will the Prime Minister promise to end our combat mission in Kandahar in February 2009 and notify NATO immediately?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, NATO is not asking for our decision right now. The Leader of the Opposition keeps on changing his position. In October, he said he supported the mission, because he was convinced that most of the people of Afghanistan wanted our protection. They still want our protection, and we will continue to provide that protection.
Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.): Will the Prime Minister end our mission in Kandahar in February 2009 and inform NATO now?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Once again, Mr. Speaker, the mission in Afghanistan, unlike Iraq, is supported by the entire international community. NATO is not asking us for a decision today.
Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.): Is this a poor procurement decision, or is it a sign that the Prime Minister has already decided to extend the combat mission?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we are making military purchases for the long-term rebuilding of our Canadian Forces. These purchases are not linked to the mission in Afghanistan; the government has made a decision to rebuild our country's military pride. Also, I have to say this. We did not hear a lot about this in the last few months because Canadian troops had not suffered casualties. We see some unfortunate casualties and those members are back to attacking the mission. The Leader of the Opposition likes to talk about what is unfair. That is unfair to the men and women in uniform.
Hon. Ujjal Dosanjh (Vancouver South, Lib.): The question is, will the minister do the right thing and commit to end Canada's combat role in Kandahar in 2009 and inform NATO allies of this deadline immediately?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): As I said last week in answer to this question, the government's position is clear. Our allies, the international community, the Afghan government, nobody is asking us to make a decision on 2009 this week. I have to say that only the Liberal Party would consider a clear position to be a position that we must withdraw two years from now right away.
Hon. Lucienne Robillard (Westmount—Ville-Marie, Lib.): Will the minister finally admit that he has no intention of pulling the Canadian Forces out of Afghanistan in 2009?
Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, our position is that the military commitment is until the end of February 2009. At an appropriate time our government will discuss any possible changes to that commitment.
Hon. Lucienne Robillard (Westmount—Ville-Marie, Lib.): ...will the Minister of National Defence finally admit his secret intention to extend the mission in Afghanistan?
Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.): I call on the Prime Minister to put an end to this cacophony and tell us whether he is talking to our NATO allies to find out who will replace our troops in February 2009.
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we are clear. Parliament has decided to extend the mission until February 2009. NATO is not waiting for an answer from this government about an extension. But I can assure this House that our position is that the decision rests with the Parliament of Canada. It was the Liberal government that decided to send troops to Afghanistan, to Kandahar, without Parliament's support.
Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.): Is the Prime Minister only speaking to our allies? Is he acting responsibly to ensure we have a replacement force for our troops in Kandahar in February 2009?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, our NATO allies are not seeking a Canadian decision on this at this time. I think what our NATO allies are seeking is the same thing the Canadian population is seeking, which is clear support for the Canadian troops who are in the field right now. The Liberal Party should give them that support.
Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.): Is our government in talks with NATO or any of our NATO allies to come up with a plan for replacing our troops in Kandahar in February 2009? Why does the Prime Minister not want to act responsibly and engage NATO right now? Are we to understand that there is no deadline for the Kandahar mission, yes or no? The Prime Minister's claim that he would respect the February 2009 deadline was, once again, doublespeak.
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we left it up to Parliament to decide, and Parliament decided to extend the mission to February 2009. However, I can say with great certainty that the men and women in uniform for our allies no more appreciate the games of the opposition than the men and women in uniform for Canada.
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, all Canadians and all members of this House mourn the death of our soldiers in Afghanistan today. The government does need to be accountable with Canadians about this mission. It is incumbent upon the government to tell Canadians how long this combat mission will last. The Prime Minister has described his own end date of February 2009 as arbitrary. Will he now clearly say to the House how long this combat mission will last? Canadians deserve to know. Is it not time for the truth?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I think the government has been extremely clear on this point. Three of the four parties of this House have agreed with this military mission to February 2009. The government has been clear. If there is to be any military activity after that date, that would have to be approved by Parliament. This is, frankly, something the previous government did not do, but we will do that in the future. We have been very clear on that. I have communicated that to foreign leaders at the appropriate opportunities.
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Does the Prime Minister plan to extend the combat mission beyond February 2009 or will he commit to respecting the date he set that was passed by this House?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the government has made it clear that the mission will end in February 2009. A new mission after that date would have to be approved by this Parliament. I must remind members of the Liberal Party that their leader said that he saw a possible role for Canada in training Afghan forces and protecting reconstruction activities even after this date.
June 22, 2007 - (Press conference at the close of spring parliamentary session)
“I would hope that the view of Canadians is not to simply abandon Afghanistan. I think there is some expectation that there would be a new role after February 2009, but obviously those decisions have yet to be taken.”
“This mission will end in February 2009. Should Canada be involved militarily after that date, we've been clear that would have to be approved by the Canadian Parliament.”
“I would want to see some degree of consensus around that. I don't want to send people into a mission if the opposition is going to, at home, undercut the dangerous work that they are doing in the field.” (Source)
Note: Only to the media does months of consistent positioning not add up to a clear statement of intent!
|
||