Harper Accused of Trying to Sabotage Democrat Primary

[unimaginative2]

Harper meddling in U.S. primaries, Democrats say

BRIAN LAGHI

From Monday's Globe and Mail

March 2, 2008 at 10:28 PM EST

OTTAWA — Two years after U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins was accused of meddling in Canada's federal election, the same is being said of Stephen Harper's Conservatives with respect to the current U.S. contest.

Democrats appearing on a nationwide U.S. political program accused the Harper government yesterday of interfering in the primary campaigns to help the Republican Party candidate in the coming campaign.

“You've got a right-wing government in Canada that is trying to help the Republicans and is out there actively interfering in this campaign,” Bob Shrum told the popular program, Meet the Press. Mr. Shrum is a top-level Democrat adviser who has had key roles in the presidential campaigns of Al Gore and John Kerry.

At issue are reports that members of Mr. Harper's prime ministerial office leaked word last week that a member of Barack Obama's campaign told a Canadian diplomat that Mr. Obama was not serious when he raised the possibility of renegotiating the free-trade agreement.

That statement has become fodder for Mr. Obama's opponents, who have accused the Illinois senator of saying one thing to win votes in hard-pressed states such as Ohio, and another to keep the peace with the Canadian government.

ABC News says the leaker was Mr. Harper's chief of staff, Ian Brodie. Mr. Brodie reportedly learned of the conversation –which took place between Mr. Obama's economic adviser and a Canadian diplomat in Chicago – from Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States.

One of the talk show's Republican participants, Mary Matalin, used the apparent flip-flop to attack the Democratic candidates – Mr. Obama and Hillary Clinton – who have said they would reopen NAFTA.

“Then he had that Canadian thing where “I'm saying this, but I mean that,' ” Ms. Matalin said.

Ms. Matalin is a well-known Republican strategist, having worked for both George Bush Jr. and Sr. and for Vice-President Dick Cheney.

Mr. Obama's team has repeatedly denied that such a conversation took place.

Opposition MPs said it appears obvious to them that the Harper Tories want the Republicans to win and that they have taken steps to help them to do so.

The Harper government may find itself in hot water should the presidential winner be a Democrat, they said.

“This is serious,” said Navdeep Baines, the Liberal Party's trade critic.

“If there's a perception there of interference, I think it will definitely put a strain on our relationship in the future.”

The brouhaha is somewhat reminiscent of the 2006 election, when Mr. Wilkins lashed back at then-prime-minister Paul Martin for his criticisms of the United States and was criticized for interfering.

For its part, the federal government is saying that there were no calls between itself and any staff members of a campaign team.

The Canadian embassy says on its website that “at no time has any member of a Presidential campaign called the Canadian Ambassador or any official at the Embassy to discuss NAFTA.”

Mr. Harper's communications director, Sandra Buckler, said Mr. Brodie also doesn't remember such a conversation.

“Ian Brodie does not recall discussing this matter and at the end of the day Ambassador Wilson issued a statement and we stand by that statement,” Ms. Buckler said.

Last week, Mr. Harper said that reopening the NAFTA deal would be a mistake.

As well, Canadian officials have warned that a renegotiation could put the supply of Canadian oil to the United States at stake.

Ms. Matalin used Mr. Harper's remarks yesterday to argue against the idea of reopening the pact.

“Those sands up there have as much oil as Saudi Arabia,” she said.

“And Harper and the Trade Minister came out and said, ‘You want to opt out? You want to threaten to opt out? Guess what. We'll open up the clause, and we'll renegotiate so you don't get favour – favourability relative to energy trade and I – we'll sell our energy to China.' ”

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

“And Harper and the Trade Minister came out and said, ‘You want to opt out? You want to threaten to opt out? Guess what. We'll open up the clause, and we'll renegotiate so you don't get favour – favourability relative to energy trade and I – we'll sell our energy to China.' â€

Sure, I am sure they would given China passes the "democracy smell test" for strategic resources.

AoD

 

[Brandon716]

Doesn't surprise me as the history of Harper's government and before he became PM was that of a right wing US wannabe. Harper's new government will hopefully be judged for what it is and be done away with in the next election.

 

[unimaginative2]

I'm watching the news, and Obama's absolutely furious with the Canadian government. What a great plan! Enrage the likely future President of the United States. Remember the days when the Tories would rant and rave about how the Liberals were damaging our relations with the Americans?

 

[unimaginative2]

'NAFTAgate' began with remark from Harper's chief of staff
ALEXANDER PANETTA

The Canadian Press

March 5, 2008 at 8:53 PM EST

OTTAWA — If the Prime Minister is seeking the first link in the chain of events that has rocked the U.S. presidential race, he need look no further than his chief of staff, Ian Brodie, The Canadian Press has learned.

A candid comment to journalists from CTV News by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's most senior political staffer during the hurly-burly of a budget lock-up provided the initial spark in what the American media are now calling NAFTAgate.

Mr. Harper announced Wednesday that he has asked an internal security team to begin finding the source of a document leak that he characterized as being "blatantly unfair" to Senator Barack Obama.

What is now a swirling Canada-U.S. controversy began on Feb. 26, when the usually circumspect Mr. Brodie was milling among droves of Canadian media on budget day in the stately old building that once housed Ottawa's train station.

Reporters were locked up there all day, examining the federal budget until they were allowed to leave once it was tabled in the House of Commons at 4 p.m.

Since the budget contained little in the way of headline-grabbing surprises, some were left with enough free time to gather around a large-screen TV to watch the latest hockey news on NHL trade deadline day.

Mr. Brodie wandered over to speak to Finance Department officials and chatted amiably with journalists — who appreciated this rare moment of direct access to the top official in Mr. Harper's notoriously tight-lipped government.

The former university professor found himself in a room with CTV employees where he was quickly surrounded by a gaggle of reporters while other journalists were within earshot of other colleagues.

At the end of an extended conversation, Mr. Brodie was asked about remarks aimed by the Democratic candidates at Ohio's anti-NAFTA voters that carried serious economic implications for Canada.

Since 75 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S., Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton's musings about reopening the North American free-trade pact had caused some concern.

Mr. Brodie downplayed those concerns.

"Quite a few people heard it," said one source in the room.

"He said someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. . . That someone called us and told us not to worry."

Government officials did not deny the conversation took place.

They said that Mr. Brodie sought to allay concerns about the impact of Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton's assertion that they would re-negotiate NAFTA if elected. But they did say that Mr. Brodie had no recollection of discussing any specific candidate — either Ms. Clinton or Mr. Obama.

CTV News President Robert Hurst said he would not discuss his journalists' sources.

But others said the content of Mr. Brodie's remarks was passed on to CTV's Washington bureau and their White House correspondent set out the next day to pursue the story on Ms. Clinton's apparent hypocrisy on the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Although CTV correspondent Tom Clark mentioned Ms. Clinton in passing, the focus of his story was on assurances from the Obama camp.

He went to air on Feb. 27 with a report that the Democratic front-runner had given advance notice to Canadian diplomats that he was about to engage in some anti-NAFTA rhetoric, but not to take it too seriously.

The report wound up on YouTube and caused an uproar in the U.S. race — influencing the final days of the critical Ohio primary, with every indication it will also play a role in the upcoming Pennsylvania vote.

Mr. Obama has been pilloried by his opponents and faced the most aggressive questioning of his heretofore smooth-sailing campaign.

Clinton used the story to cast him as a double-talking hypocrite — winking and nudging at Canadians while making contrary promises to American voters.

Republican nominee John McCain — who proudly dubs himself a straight-talker — has also seized on the incident to paint the Democratic front-runner as anything but.

When Mr. Obama's campaign and the Canadian government denied the allegation, a leaked document was obtained by The Associated Press written by a Canadian diplomat. It chronicled a conversation between Obama economic adviser Austan Goulsbee and diplomats at Canada's Chicago consulate.

The Obama aide has challenged the wording of the memo and says it characterized the conversation unfairly. A government official said that memo was initially e-mailed to over 120 government employees.

Mr. Harper has rebuffed opposition requests to call in the RCMP and also investigate the source of the original tip that led to the CTV report that triggered the diplomatic tempest. But a team of internal security agents has begun an investigation that will see dozens of bureaucrats and political staff questioned about their knowledge of the leak.

"This kind of leaking of information is completely unacceptable. In fact, it may well be illegal," Mr. Harper told the House of Commons.

"It is not useful, it is not in the interests of the government of Canada — and the way the leak was executed was blatantly unfair to Senator Obama and his campaign.

"Based on what (investigators) find, and based on legal advice, we will take any action that is necessary to get to the bottom of this matter."

NDP Leader Jack Layton is asking Mr. Harper to call on the Mounties to find out how the leaks occurred, and whether the Security of Information Act or any other privacy legislation was breached.

"There can be no doubt about it: the leak from within the Canadian government has had an impact now on the American elections," Mr. Layton said Wednesday.

"That is about the worst thing a country could do to another country — to have an effect on their democratic process. . . If Mr. Harper isn't willing to call in the RCMP that confirms our suspicion that this was intentional."

Mr. Layton said Canadians would never accept Americans interfering in our elections, and we shouldn't tamper with theirs.

He said the incident is far more serious than another one last year in which the government called in the RCMP.

A temporary employee at Environment Canada was arrested in his office and marched out in handcuffs for allegedly leaking details of a government climate-change plan to the media.

Mr. Layton said that's small potatoes compared with inflicting political damage on one of the three contenders to lead the world's biggest superpower, and Canada's neighbour and largest trading partner.

"He's unwilling to treat it with the level of serious attention that he did when there was a junior bureaucrat at environment. . . He called in the RCMP on that one."



NAFTA leak could harm Canada, experts warn
Lack of discretion could cut Ottawa's diplomats off from key relationships, former ambassador says
CAMPBELL CLARK

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

March 5, 2008 at 4:34 AM EST

OTTAWA — The leak that caused headaches for U.S. Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign could also damage Canadian interests in Washington, experts warn.

The fact that reports of a confidential meeting with Canadian diplomats have garnered front pages could place a chill on the discreet chats that are the lifeblood of diplomacy in the United States, just as protectionism is on the rise, former Canadian ambassador Allan Gotlieb says.

And others warn that if Mr. Obama wins the White House, it could poison relations between his team and Prime Minister Stephen Harper's advisers, who were reportedly the source of the leak.

The leak sparked stories that an economic adviser to Mr. Obama, Austan Goolsbee, told Canada's consul-general in Chicago, Georges Rioux, that his candidate's call for renegotiating the North American free-trade agreement was more political manoeuvring than a solid policy plan.

Both Mr. Obama and New York Senator Hillary Clinton have campaigned against NAFTA in key, hard-hit industrial states, notably Ohio.

The affair has been dubbed NAFTA-gate by Ms. Clinton's campaign, which argued that it shows a two-faced Obama plan to oppose NAFTA on the hustings while quietly reassuring Canadian officials he's not serious.

Mr. Gotlieb, Canada's ambassador in Washington from 1981 to 1989, said nothing good can come from leaking back-channel chats. It forced denials, created red faces and could cut Canadian diplomats off from key relationships, he said.

"I don't know why they did it," Mr. Gotlieb said in a telephone interview. "It just seems to be so obvious that it would invite exactly the response that it did. It wouldn't take a genius to see how counterproductive it would be."

Canadian diplomats rely on building relations to have influence in the United States, where "access is everything," Mr. Gotlieb said, and they need it at a time when protectionism is rising. But they might have less access if Ottawa spreads confidential discussions.

"Diplomacy, by nature, is discreet," he said. "If everyone pulls back, it will be sad."

Democrats have speculated that the Conservative government of Canada was seeking to help the Republicans by undermining Mr. Obama, the leading contender, and prolonging the divisive nomination campaign.

The initial stories reporting the conversation between Mr. Obama's adviser and Canadian diplomats cited unnamed Canadian sources. ABC News reported that the source was Mr. Harper's most senior aide, chief of staff Ian Brodie.

Later, a memo written by consulate official Joseph de Mora was leaked to The Associated Press.

Mr. de Mora described Mr. Goolsbee as indicating that the anti-NAFTA rhetoric "should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans." Mr. Goolsbee said he never said that, noting the memo was in Mr. de Mora's words.

Yesterday, Mr. Harper said that Mr. Brodie was not the source of the leak, but he appeared to be speaking about the memo, rather than the initial story.

"The government is seeking to find the person responsible for divulging this information to the public, but it was not my chief of staff," Mr. Harper told the Commons.

Mr. Harper's communications director, Sandra Buckler, said last week that Mr. Brodie "does not recall" discussing the issue.

Christopher Sands, an expert on Canada-U.S. relations at the Washington-based Hudson Institute, said he does not recall a Canadian angle taking on such importance in a U.S. campaign. The memo has been covered by TV networks and newspapers across the U.S., including yesterday's New York Times.

He said if Mr. Obama wins the White House, it might taint the relationship between his administration and Mr. Harper's government.

But Mr. Sands noted that, right now, Mr. Obama is more focused on the problems it has caused his campaign than on the source - although his advisers might hold a grudge later if he still wins.

"If you're going to strike at a king, kill him," Mr. Sands said. "It does not make sense to just wound him in Ohio in the hopes it will lead to an outcome you like. That's actually a very dangerous strategy."

 

[Brandon716]

While I'm not sure what the intent was for Harper's government to get involved, I also don't know what the end result will be. Obama-Harper relations most likely would have a rough start, but hopefully by the time there is a new US President there will be a new election called and Harper ultimately removed.

 

[DENTROBATE54]

How sad and disappointing the Conservatives felt the need to stick their noses in like this. Messing with the odds-on-favorite's candidacy can't have long-term positive implications for Canada-US relations.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/310350

Harper widens NAFTA probe

Mar 07, 2008 04:30 AM
Bruce Campion-Smith
Allan Woods
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA–Prime Minister Stephen Harper is expanding the investigation into the government leaks that rocked the U.S. presidential race, a decision that could put the future of his own senior aide in jeopardy.

Harper announced the broader probe by an internal security team yesterday after The Canadian Press said it was unguarded comments by Ian Brodie, his chief of staff, that set the controversy in motion and eventually undermined presidential hopeful Barack Obama in a key race this week.

"We will investigate this entire matter and take whatever action is deemed to be necessary, based on the facts we are able to discover," the Prime Minister said in the Commons yesterday.

As well, David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, signalled Washington's quiet displeasure at the controversy.

"I guess you could say it shouldn't have happened. It was interference. But again, I don't think it's something the Canadian government did in its official capacity," Wilkins said in an interview with CBC Radio's The House, to be aired tomorrow.

"I think they've expressed their deep regret and, quite frankly, I accepted that," Wilkins said.

At issue is Brodie's reported revelation in casual conversation to CTV News a week ago that Democratic contender Hillary Clinton's tough talk on renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement was campaign rhetoric.

The broadcaster later reported that an adviser to Obama, the Democratic frontrunner, had made the same assurances to Canadian diplomats.

In a second leak, The Associated Press obtained a Canadian diplomatic memo of a meeting between Canadian consul officials in Chicago and Obama economic adviser Austan Goolsbee. The memo paraphrases Goolsbee as assuring the Canadians that Obama's "rhetoric" on NAFTA "should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

The 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement signed by the U.S., Canada and Mexico, has been under attack in the U.S., where critics blame it for job losses. Clinton credited the leak of the Obama memo as a factor in her victory in the Ohio primary this week.

Harper, who criticized the Liberals' handling of Canada-U.S. relations, now finds his own government facing its most serious controversy yet on that very file.

The issue is also attracting considerable attention in the United States, too. NDP Leader Jack Layton, who has gone after Harper on the issue, was featured last night on Lou Dobbs' show on CNN. Dobbs is a strong opponent of NAFTA.

But in increasingly tough tones this week, Harper has said someone will pay a price for the leak of sensitive diplomatic discussions, adding yesterday it was "extremely unfair" to Obama's campaign.

"I have also said that it is completely contrary to the interests of the Government of Canada," Harper told the Commons.

He said he would take "whatever steps" are recommended by Privy Council Clerk Kevin Lynch, who is leading the investigation. However, he said reports of Brodie's involvement were only "rumours."

But until yesterday, it wasn't clear whether Harper was even willing to probe both the source of the leaked memo as well as the tip to CTV News, apparently from Brodie, that first set the story in motion.

Opposition leaders said yesterday Brodie should be suspended – even fired – for his offhand comments, and they criticized Harper for saying earlier this week that the chief of staff wasn't to blame.

"Will he now apologize to this House, the American people and Senator Obama, and will he fire his chief of staff?" Layton said in question period.

"Will the Prime Minister show some backbone and show Mr. Brodie the door immediately?"

Brodie, 40, is a former political science professor at the University of Western Ontario.

Senator Hugh Segal, who served as chief of staff to former prime minister Brian Mulroney, defended Brodie, saying the senior aide was only stating a well-known fact that tough talk on NAFTA is rarely followed up because of the importance of the trade relationship.

"I think it's an unfair targeting of a guy who is just trying to do his job," Segal said.

Former prime minister Jean Chrétien axed his communications director, Françoise Ducros, in 2002 when she opined to reporters that U.S. President George W. Bush was a "moron."

But Harper has been less inclined to fire his staff over controversies. He accepted the apology of his communications director, Sandra Buckler, when she said she "misspoke" in telling journalists the military had kept the PMO in the dark about a decision to suspend detainee transfers in Afghanistan.

But this current controversy is more serious because it has had an impact on one of the tightest U.S. primary races in memory, said Peter Donolo, a former Chrétien communications director.

"I can't see how this is sustainable in terms of Ian Brodie sticking around. This has caused an international incident," Donolo said. "This is serious stuff."

- With files from Richard Brennan and Les Whittington

 

[unimaginative2]

The most interesting part is in the third-last paragraph. The media have really stayed away from this story. It's quite shocking.


John McCain should stay out of here

LAWRENCE MARTIN

lmartin@globeandmail.com


June 16, 2008

It's rare, perhaps unprecedented, for a U.S. presidential candidate to come to Canada and deliver a political speech in the course of an American election campaign. But here comes John McCain, right on the heels of the NAFTA imbroglio that embarrassed Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government.

The controversy over the Canadian leak of a diplomatic note damaging to Democrat Barack Obama has been receding with time. This can only be pleasing to the Harper team. But the appearance in Ottawa of Mr. McCain, set for Friday, is a good bet to reignite the whole business, putting Ottawa's ignoble deed again in the mix in the race for the White House.

That's bad for the Harper government, bad for bilateral relations. As interesting as it is to have the Republican candidate for the presidency here, better that he stay away.

The Prime Minister didn't invite the Arizona senator. It was the idea of the McCain team, encouraged by U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins with no apparent dissent from the Prime Minister's Office.

No doubt, Mr. McCain feels it will be politically profitable for him to use Canada as a base to remind everyone that he is an ardent free trader while his opponent - if the leaked Canadian memo is to be believed - has been speaking out of both sides of his mouth on the issue. No doubt the McCain team wouldn't mind seeing the NAFTA controversy splattered all over the front pages again.

While the Harperites didn't organize the McCain visit, they have close ties to the Republicans. They will be suspected by Democrats, already angered by the memo episode, of lending a hand to the Republican campaign effort again.

By tradition, Ottawa steers clear of American political campaigns and vice versa. No favouritism is shown because the mere hint of it causes problems. One such example was in the 2000 campaign when Raymond Chrétien, our ambassador in Washington, gave a speech that some interpreted as favouring Democrat Al Gore over George W. Bush. Another was the Canadian election of 1963 in which the Kennedy administration's leanings to Lester Pearson over John Diefenbaker provoked a storm.

Neither of those campaigns featured something as hot as the NAFTA/Obama episode. The diplomatic note suggested Mr. Obama wasn't serious about his campaign trail talk of renegotiating NAFTA. Most observers feel it cost Mr. Obama important votes in the Ohio primary and perhaps elsewhere.

Besides throwing gasoline on that fire, and making bilateral harmony more difficult, the McCain visit comes with another downside for the Harper Conservatives. John McCain is hardly as toxic as George Bush, a president from whom Stephen Harper has wisely kept a distance. But polls have shown Canadians favour the Democrat Obama by nearly a four-to-one margin over Mr. McCain. Common sense says the Tories shouldn't be seen as doing the guy any favours.

His speech will be welcome in one respect. Canadians by and large favour free trade and Mr. McCain will give it a hearty endorsement. It is needed because not only are the Democrats getting ornery on the subject, but the Republicans' record has been unimpressive. On the softwood lumber dispute, they pulled every trick in the book to circumvent the spirit and letter of the agreement.

But this one positive from the McCain visit is far outweighed by the likely negatives. The NAFTA affair is still rife with potentially damaging consequences. Prime Minister Harper himself has termed the matter very serious and unfair to Senator Obama. He called for an internal probe that failed to turn up the source of the leak. Reports have since emerged, however, alleging the PMO leaked the report to a close Republican contact, Frank Sensenbrenner. He is the son of James Sensenbrenner, a Republican congressman from Wisconsin. The diplomatic note then wound up in the hands of the Associated Press.

If these reports are true, it demonstrates unseemly cross-border collusion between Conservatives and Republicans and orchestrated interference in a U.S. election campaign by the Canadian government. Serious stuff.

John McCain is a fellow conservative but he's the last thing the Conservatives need in Ottawa this week. They should tell him to give his speech in North Dakota.