Plagiarism, Policy, And Accountability

Space October 1, 2008, Matthew Good

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.