2008-04-15

conservative secrets

Insightful response from a socio-political junkie law clerk friend of mine:

Sorry it took so long to get back to you.
In addition to everything else that "conservatives" have in common, one
strand is a belief in the need for secrecy. And this manifests in many
forms. Conservatives tend to be more religious, for example, and so tend to
believe in universal "mysteries." Conservatives tend to be stricter in
terms of crime and punishment (both at home and on the society-wide basis),
which includes as part of the approach a fundamental belief that authority
(god, state, or leadership) really should not be questioned. To me, there
is a direct relationship between this mindset and the themes discussed in
the article (which, I should say -- and I am sure you picked up on this --
is the same charge constantly leveled at the Bush administration). It
comes down to a belief that those in power have certain knowledge that is
special and out of reach except on a need-to-know basis.
I should also add that American conservatives (Republicans) have hit on a
very easy lever with which to deflect or diminish criticism of this
ultra-secrecy: simply claim that disclosing the information would either
directly undermine national security in a time of war, OR that disclosing
the information would be the equivalent of weakening the special powers of
the executive, which cannot be allowed to happen because this is a time of
war and the executive needs to be all-powerful to confront the "enemy of
the 21st century." In other words, we have power and we will be secretive,
and if you challenge that, you are undermining national security: you are a
traitor.
Can you say "slippery slope"?
My second point flows from the maxim that all politics is local. The
article mentions that the Harper government denied that a conversation
occurred between the prime minister and the president of Mexico, whereas
the Mexican government released a detailed summary of the conversation in
question. This merely reflects political considerations unique to each
country. My bet is that there was nothing to be gained by the Canadian
government admitting that the conversation happened, whereas the Mexican
authorities are always trying to convince Mexicans that they matter, that
their leaders are on an equal footing with foreign leaders, and so on. In
other words, it benefits Mexican politicians to "tell all" when it comes to
talking to foreign leaders. Not so, the reverse.
SPQR aeternum!

Subject: curious to know what you make of this:

PUBLICATION: The Toronto Star
DATE: 2008.04.07
EDITION: Ont
ILLUSTRATION: Allauddin Khan AP file photo Canadians have an
interest in what isgoing on in Afghanistan, says assistant federal
information commissioner Suzanne Legault. ;
BYLINE: Richard Brennan
SOURCE: Toronto Star
COPYRIGHT: © 2008 Torstar Corporation
Government keeps public in the dark, critics warn; Canadians denied
information to which they are entitled

Canadians are increasingly being kept in the dark by the federal government
and its agencies on matters ranging from the war in Afghanistan to the most
routine information, experts say.
Critics are alarmed at the growing trend to deny basic information that
Canadians are entitled to, especially in the two years since the
Conservative government came to power with a promise to be open and
accountable.
Suzanne Legault, assistant federal information commissioner, says that
government and its institutions have to "move from disclosing information
on a need-to-know basis to disclosing information on the right-to-know
basis."
Legault said the John Manley-led panel report into the Afghanistan mission
"hit the nail on the head when it said the government has to understand
that Canadians have an interest in what is going on in Afghanistan and
various issues that the government is tackling."
"The government has to do a better job at disclosing information," she told
the Star last week.
Former Ontario Liberal MPP Sean Conway, who spent 28 years in politics
before leaving in 2003, said the simple truth is that Canadians have a
right to know.
"It is one of the assumptions of a democratic society that its citizens are
going to be provided with timely, relevant and understandable information,"
said Conway, a former cabinet minister and now special adviser at Queen's
University.
Conway said when governments frustrate that flow of information "they are
doing something quite destructive to one of the key pillars of democratic
society."
During its more than two years in power, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's
Conservative government has often been criticized for being unnecessarily
secretive.
Just recently, Harper's aides refused to confirm whether the Prime Minister
talked with Mexican President Felipe Calderon. But Mexican officials
released a page-long news release not only confirming the two leaders spoke
but providing highlights of the topics they discussed.
Meanwhile, Legault said Canadian should not have to resort to using the
Access to Information Act to get information that should be readily
available.
"The Access to Information Act should only kick in as an exception. It
should not be the norm," Legault said.
"The norm should be that we proactively disclose information."
Legault noted that complaints filed under the Access to Information Act
have doubled in the past year, to 2,164 from 1,050. But she is quick to
point out that 70 institutions, including the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation, are now subject to the act, as a result of changes included in
the Conservative's Accountability Act.
Legault said the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada is
investigating additional layers of approval needed before information is
released that are creeping into the process, as well as the routine
applications for extensions.
Critics say the access to information act is also proving to be less and
less useful.
National security and other exemptions are cited to deny the release of
information. And even when Canadians are lucky enough to pierce the wall of
secrecy, the information is either so heavily edited that it is virtually
useless, or is so dated because of delays that it's no longer timely.
The Conservative government promised during the last election campaign that
it would be more accountable and transparent in the wake of the Liberal
sponsorship scandal.
Recent stories by The Canadian Press show the lengths the government or its
agencies will go to restrict information.
The national wire service found that government refused to release
information on compensation paid to Afghan civilians or their families for
accidental deaths or injuries.
The Canadian Press' access to information request was returned almost
entirely censored.
The agency also discovered through another access to information request
that the RCMP is now refusing to release information on the use of Tasers
that must be recorded each time an officer draws the electronic weapon.
The information - such as whether the person on whom the Taser was used was
armed or injured - used to be released, but the national police force
unilaterally decided to stop.
Taser report forms obtained under the Access to Information Act show the
Mounties have used the weapons more than 4,000 times since introducing them
seven years ago.
"In the last 15 years, as governments advertise great openness often
through legislated mandate like freedom of information and other such
policies, ... citizens get less information," Conway said.
On Parliament Hill, access to Harper and his cabinet has been so restricted
that it's a standing joke among reporters. The Hill Times recently carried
a story on how Harper goes to great lengths to avoid reporters by taking
the freight elevator and slipping out the back door.
Harper runs a very tightly controlled government where MPs are expected to
toe the line and where permission must be granted in many cases before they
are allowed to talk to reporters.
Conway said he has been struck by Harper's reluctance to make himself
available.
"Mr. Harper, now Prime Minister for over two years, has certainly made no
bones of his desire to run a highly centralized government and ... intends
to give the Canadian public such information as he thinks they should have
at that particular time."
With files from Bruce Campion-Smith and Tonda MacCharles









No comments: