A Conservative government would create a new, special “Office of Religious Freedom,” the party announced in its electoral platform on Friday.
The office would be housed at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and its role would be:
To monitor religious freedom around the world;
To promote religious freedom as a key objective of Canadian foreign policy;
And to advance policies and programs that support religious freedom.
Under the heading, “Defending Religious Freedom,” the Conservatives said they recognize that “respect for religious pluralism is inextricably linked to democratic development.” And that the federal government could and should do more to respond to the plight of those “who suffer merely because of their faith.”
[…]The Conservative platform also includes a pledge to create a national Holocaust memorial in the Ottawa area and to support the establishment of a memorial to the victims of communism.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper participated in a round table discussion on security with Coptic Christian leaders.
A deadly suicide bombing in Egypt on New Year’s Day claimed the lives of some 21 worshippers.
And nearly 100 people were wounded in the attack as they left a midnight mass at an Alexandria church.
Harper condemned the attacks, saying the international community must stay vigilant against such violence against Coptic Christians.
Harper met with several priests at the Church Of the Virgin Mary and St. Athanasius in Mississauga Thursday.
He says he wants Coptic Christians in Canada to know the country stands behind their right to safely practice their faith.
So, not only is Harper introducing policies that will strengthen families and marriages so that there will be fewer abortions and healthier children, but he is also dedicated to defending the religious liberty of minorities abroad.
Stephen Harper shakes hands with petulant children
From left-wing Global TV, a university professor scores the first English-language debate in the Canadian Federal election.
Excerpt:
How well did the four leaders present their points?
Dr. Royce Koop: Harper is very effective at getting his message across. He is very clear, disciplined, and it’s tough to knock him off his game. Ignatieff is not communicating as well as I thought he would. He’s clearly new to this debate format.
Who were the clear aggressors and/or defenders throughout the debate?
Dr. Royce Koop: As can be expected, the three opposition leaders are the aggressors and Harper is the defender. However, Duceppe has distinguished himself as an aggressor. His opening comment was a strong, sharp attack of Harper. However, Harper is effectively defending himself in this debate. His strength is being disciplined, and he’s keeping his cool very well.
Who preformed best?
Dr. Royce Koop: Harper behaved like the PM-in-waiting. These debate formats actually favour the incumbent PM. Everyone is attacking them, and so they are able to rise above it all and act prime-ministerial. This is how Chretien survived the debates in 1997 and 2000, by riding above all the attacks, and Harper is doing so very effectively tonight.
What was your impression of the Harper-Ignatieff face-off? Who won that tete-a-tete?
Dr. Royce Koop: I think that Harper won that exchange, but it was a close call. Ignatieff has to be able to knock Harper off his game, and he hasn’t been able to do so effectively. He came close at the conclusion of the first exchange between them, but Harper came out on top.
Harper projected calm competence and self-assurance from the outset. He carried that through, almost without interruption, to his closing statement two hours later.
There was one moment when Ignatieff had an opening. That was in the prolonged section on democracy. Ignatieff was pressing hard. He scored some good hits on Stephen Harper, branding him a control freak who disrespects democratic institutions and, by extension, Canadians. It was a compelling segment and for a few moments it seemed like Ignatieff might turn the tide.
It didn’t happen. The debate moved on to other topics and ended, advantage Harper, on health care. Here Harper was very strong, looking pragmatic and sensible as the others sought in vain to breach his defence.
Harper’s debating skills, designed for TV, outmatched all three of the other contestants. Most tellingly, he looked constantly at the camera when answering questions, not at his opponents. He was the only one to do so consistently, though NDP leader Jack Layton also used this technique towards the end.
But Harper was rock-solid with it, constantly gazing into the camera, speaking directly Canadians in reassuring tones. With his body language he projected calm confidence. He kept his gestures small and controlled and within the circumference of his body – an effective technique on television.
[…]Tomorrow, look for Harper’s numbers in English Canada to rise sharply, into the low 40s. This will come as bitter brew to Liberal supporters across Canada, but it’s the simple reality: A Conservative majority is back on the table.
Canada’s good economic standing relative to its G8 counterparts, and the country’s relatively quick emergence from recession, can, in part, be credited to encouraging investment in the corporate sector, Mr. Harper said.
While in power, the Stephen Harper Conservatives have cut the corporate tax rate from 22.5% to 16.5%, with a further reduction to 15% scheduled for 2012.
To then foist a sudden reversal in policy on corporate Canada would send the wrong message to investors, Mr. Harper said on Tuesday. He quoted Jack Mintz, a public policy expert at the University of Calgary, as saying that the additional taxes proposed by the Liberals would cost the Canadian economy 200,000 jobs and $40-billion in business investment over the long run.
“Every credible economic analyst, every major business group in this country, says that if you raise taxes, you will hurt growth, hurt jobs and hurt revenue,” Mr. Harper said.
He must be the only politician I know who actually EXPLAINS why corporate tax-hikes are a bad idea. The government needs to cut taxes to attract corporations to move to their country, and to encourage their people to start or grow businesses. That’s where jobs COME FROM. And when people are working, because they have lots of jobs to choose from, they are happier and they pay more in taxes than if they were unemployed. And when people are employed, the government spends less on unemployment and other welfare programs. Notice that our corporate tax rate down here is 36%. More than double the Canadian corporate tax rate. Compared to the Canadians, we spend way too much, and we create far fewer jobs.
If the left-wing newspapers are calling it a victory for Harper, then it was a landslide victory for Harper. I am talking William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens landslide victory. I can hardly wait to see the poll numbers from up north tomorrow. The latest pre-debate poll has Harper leading the socialist Liberal party by 12 points. (H/T Jeanie)
Stephen Harper’s Conservatives pulled off an amazing political upset in federal by-elections Monday night, stealing a rural Quebec stronghold seat from the Bloc Quebecois.
The Conservatives also reclaimed a traditionally Tory seat in Nova Scotia, ultimately winning two of the four by-elections held Monday.
The results suggest the minority Conservative government’s political fortunes are undimmed by the recession and far stronger than expected in Quebec.
So, now the Conservatives have 145 of 308 ridings. Closer and closer to a majority.
Aside: why is it so freezing these days?
But I also note that October 2009 was our 3rd coldest in 115 years. Canadian readers: please keep the cold up there, we don’t want any of that down here. But if you could have Stephen Harper visit Washington more often, and perhaps give the ACORN lawyer some advice on how to run a country without bankrupting it, that would be OK with us.
WINTERY KNIGHT 