Plagiarism, Policy, And Accountability
There are those that will argue that the controversy regarding Mr. Harper and the speech that he gave in Parliament in 2003 that plagiarized a speech given by Australia’s then Prime Minister, John Howard, is little more than a political move on the part of the Liberals, who are waning in the polls.
Given that we’re in the midst of a federal election, I’ll certainly not deny that this revelation is incredibly timely, especially given the fact that the speech was made five years ago.
That said; as an independent observer, and someone that does not support the Liberal Party, nor any other party for that matter, confronting the actual issue behind the plagiarism is something I feel highly relevant.
The speech that Mr. Harper gave in 2003 was one in which he urged this country to join the ‘coalition of the willing’, and thus involve us in the US led invasion of Iraq. One therefore has to ask several fundamental questions.
1) Were the Prime Minister to gain a majority, would there be a reversal of policy regarding Iraq, even if such an alteration did not promise the inclusion of Canadian combat assistance?
2) Does the Prime Minister still hold to the belief that Canada should have supported the invasion of Iraq?
3) Given what has occurred since, would he have supported Canadian involvement in the occupation of that country?
These are fundamental questions that I feel are highly relevant.
Then there is the act of plagiarism itself. Obviously, Owen Lippert, the individual that wrote the speech given by Mr. Harper, has now resigned. Having done so, Lippert has claimed that neither Mr. Harper, nor his superiors, were aware that he had plagiarized Howard’s speech.
This is where the Prime Minister’s continual promotion of ethical government must be questioned. No matter who was responsible for writing the speech, it was one that Mr. Harper gave in the House, and therefore exists within the Parliamentary record as his own. Despite the fact that it was written by Lippert, for the Prime Minister to now claim that he cannot be held to account is entirely hypocritical given his steadfast promotion of government accountability and transparency. Five years have passed since the speech was made, and yet it is only now, after the truth was uncovered, that Lippert has resigned.
That, in and of itself, should say something to Canadians with regards to how Mr. Harper runs his shop.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 at 12:42 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 1st, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Maybe I’m a bit to much of a conspiracy geek, but I wonder how much influence the White House had on on the original Australian speech and this Canadian one? Maybe they were trying to go for a “unified message” to help build public support in all western nations.
October 1st, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Yes, this is more than likely a well played card by the Liberals given their current position but I find that revelation just as irrelevant as who wrote the actual speech. It sickens (though doesn’t surprise) me that Owen Lippert has been made the sacrificial lamb. Harper spoke those words & asked his country to believe them so he should damn well own them. As his integrity slides further I’m sure we’ll see him throw more of his staffers under the bus in an attempt to deflect any possible negativity from himself. Even those that follow him have to be questioning his ethics by now.
http://repliderium.com/political-crap/the-fundamentals-of-our-ecomomy/
October 1st, 2008 at 2:19 pm
First I’ve heard of this. Was the speech actually plagiarized or where a couple lines in the speech that were common in their wording? I’m curious if plagiarism did occur, or if its the Libs trying to make something out of nothing.
I saw a CTV news report a couple weeks ago about Jack Layton; apparently he has been stealing rhetoric from Obama in the south. They played clips from a couple speeches Obama made and compared them with a couple clips that Layton made; they were almost identical. Not sure if that would be considered plagiarism.
October 1st, 2008 at 2:22 pm
[quote comment="67206"]Maybe I’m a bit to much of a conspiracy geek, but I wonder how much influence the White House had on on the original Australian speech and this Canadian one? Maybe they were trying to go for a “unified message” to help build public support in all western nations.[/quote]
I was questioning that as well. The french debate is in 2hrs , should be interesting.
I would consider it a conspiracy FACT. Just one more to add on to the thousands!
October 1st, 2008 at 2:29 pm
[quote comment="67220"]First I’ve heard of this. Was the speech actually plagiarized or where a couple lines in the speech that were common in their wording? I’m curious if plagiarism did occur, or if its the Libs trying to make something out of nothing.
I saw a CTV news report a couple weeks ago about Jack Layton; apparently he has been stealing rhetoric from Obama in the south. They played clips from a couple speeches Obama made and compared them with a couple clips that Layton made; they were almost identical. Not sure if that would be considered plagiarism.[/quote]
Harper’s speech is very nearly verbatim.
October 1st, 2008 at 2:48 pm
[quote comment="67206"]Maybe I’m a bit to much of a conspiracy geek, but I wonder how much influence the White House had on on the original Australian speech and this Canadian one? Maybe they were trying to go for a “unified message” to help build public support in all western nations.[/quote]
Do not put anything pass the NeoCons. Their viral message has infected all parts of American Society. They seem to like it best when they wield the invisible hand of power through propaganda. Goebbels would be very impressed.
North America is so in need of a leader. With the right leadership, Canada could be this leading country. Canada is so much closer to being a nation for the people than America or Mexico. Somewhere, this leader is growing up, but the system is so good at knocking down instead of building up, the environment needs to change to open a path for this person’s ascension.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Quoting Matthew Good: “One therefore has to ask several fundamental questions.
1) Were the Prime Minister to gain a majority, would there be a reversal of policy regarding Iraq, even if such an alteration did not promise the inclusion of Canadian combat assistance?
2) Does the Prime Minister still hold to the belief that Canada should have supported the invasion of Iraq?
3) Given what has occurred since, would he have supported Canadian involvement in the occupation of that country?
These are fundamental questions that I feel are highly relevant.”
I totally agree - these are the questions that matter. I hope Dion and the other candidates don’t waste time jabbing Harper with that tonight and that we’ll get to hear more about matters of substance.
October 1st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Harper should absolutely be held accountable for the *ideas* contained in that speech. But, if he truly didn’t know about the plagiarism, I don’t really see how he can be faulted. As much as I detest him, I doubt he was aware of the plagiarism when he gave the speech - he’s not a fool. Afterwards, though, it’s possible he found out and decided to keep quiet about it.
I do find it interesting that not a single MP noticed the plagiarism at the time, given that Howard’s speech was only 3 days before. I guess Canadian politicians don’t find it necessary to pay attention to a major policy speech given by a fairly significant world leader.
Another interesting thing: the Conservatives at first claimed the issue irrelevant because it happened 5 years ago, yet when it turned out that Harper wasn’t the guilty party, suddenly it mattered enough for Lippert to resign.
October 1st, 2008 at 4:45 pm
In one segment, both leaders are heard saying:
“It is inherently dangerous to allow a country, such as Iraq, to retain weapons of mass destruction, particularly in light of its past aggressive behaviour. If the world community fails to disarm Iraq we fear that other rogue states will be encouraged to believe that they too can have these most deadly of weapons to systematically defy international resolutions and that the world will do nothing to stop them.”
I’d personally like to know where the flippin ell are the WMD?
If you change the word Iraq with U.S. , is it still a false statement???
October 1st, 2008 at 7:07 pm
[...] have to tell you, I — I’ve rarely seen such an attack on a politician like I have seen the plagiarism attack on Harper. I’ve never seen anything like [...]
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:24 am
My relpy to Joshua, at the “trackbacks and pingbacks”
Chemical weapons against the Kurds? Ok then so, correct me if i am wrong but did Bush’s father not go into Iraq in 1991?? Have you seen any documentary from 2003-2004-2005 with UN weapon inspectors specifically stating Iraq had abolished the old habits and had NO WMD! Even Colin Powell has stated those same facts!! There are Too many high ranking officials who have facts and statements that contradict your argument. If you’d like those documentaries you can write the BBC or write me and i’ll send ‘em to ya. You wanna talk Violating Un resolutions….look no further than the US itself. The documentary most valid is “The Whole Truth about the Iraq War” produced by “moveon.org and the center for American progress”. It is a ” Robert Greenwald” film.Speakers include , David Albright physicist and former weapons inspector, Scott Ritter former Un inspector , plus many veterans of the CIA and foriegn Intelligence operatives. Maybe that’ll start you down the rabbitt hole……I am not saying what Saddam did to the Kurds was ok in anyway….my argument is that….we were sold on false and/or old intelligence. They Lied! I’m done…….
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:44 am
Here’s a link , google has it….video sucks but thats not the issue…..
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7371253996117324045
October 2nd, 2008 at 4:52 am
Am I the only one who thinks that most politicians’ speeches are identical?
Harper is a snake, and he is more than willing to sacrifice our soldiers. The answer is ‘yes’ to all three of your questions, and that’s not the only evil he will do.
Plagiarism is the least of our worries with a Harper majority looming.