Stephen Harper announces formal policy of staycation


 

From earlier today, the Prime Minister comments on Omar Khadr and the government’s general approach to Canadians travelling abroad.

On dealing with Canadians abroad, look, one of the realities, in fact I was talking about this with some diplomats I met in Mexico and Panama, one of the realities we have in this world, with the increasing amount of travel of people and also the increasing proliferation of threats and circumstances of various kinds, you know, this is a more and more difficult area. There are more and more Canadians who have challenges when they’re abroad, of very different kinds. Government, the department of foreign affairs, does what it can to aid people, but we always advise people to be cautious when they’re travelling. The government of Canada does not control affairs in other countries. We do our best to aid those who are in various forms of difficulty, but ultimately we’re not the sovereign government once people leave our territory.


 

Stephen Harper announces formal policy of staycation

  1. "And if they're muslim, dark skinned, have a funny sounding name or visit obscure countries, we will do ALL WE CAN to see that their universal rights as Canadians are denied."

    • Nothing like a irrational accustion of systemic racism to start the discussion.

    • So Canadians have universal rights wherever we go? How very colonial of you. Did you happen to work in India during the British Raj?

      • Please see:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaratio

        The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drafted from early 1947 to late 1948 by Canadian John Peters Humphrey of the United Nations Secretariat and representatives of countries which were members of the first United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which was until 2006, when it was replaced by the United Nations Human Rights Council, a standing body of the United Nations.

        Well known members of the Commission who contributed significantly to the creation of the Declaration included Eleanor Roosevelt of the United States, who was Chairman, Jacques Maritain and René Cassin of France, Charles Malik of Lebanon, and P. C. Chang of China[1], among others.

        Also please see:

        Humphrey Draft of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey_Draft_of_th

        • 1) Any universal rights we have are endowed by our Creator. Bureaucrats and what they cook up are neither here nor there.

          2) I will assume, arguendo, that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is worth more than the paper it's printed on. Can you please point me to the Article or Section that says Canadians can do whatever they like, wherever they like, without consequence? I can't seem to find it.

          3) Have you actually read Universal Declaration of Human Rights? I just had a quick glance and Canada is contravening at least 4 or 5 Articles and libs/progs would go absolutely ballistic if Feds actually tried to comply with them.

          • 1. You reject the Rule of Law, then?

            2. Where have I, or the Declaration, stated that, "Canadians can do whatever they like, wherever they like, without consequence?"

            3. Yes, I have read it. If Canada does not wish to comply the logical course of action for Canada's New Government would be to abrogate?

            Perhaps you should pray to your god [harder] to remake Canada and the planet in the image you prefer and to send an emissary [Benevolent Dictator?] to enforce same? Then the reality presently written into law and international agreements will no longer trouble you in the manner it seems to?

          • Are you a lawyer or psychologist?

            The rule of law is being followed in Kenya situation. You and gov't spokesperson are the ones claiming universal rights over-ride rule of law. Which is what got me started in the first place. Lots of people here seem not to care about Kenyan law and just expect Canadian government to ride roughshod over Kenyans.

            And I don't understand your other points and can't be bovvered to figure them out.

  2. sounds like good advice to me – what I find truly humorous is the focus the least few years as if any gov't can really do anything once it's citizen leave the country. Being someone who has travelled extensively and to most continents I daresay I would add the following -> it's a big bad world out there and you should think about taking care of yourself – because if you get into trouble the only real assistance your counry (any country can do) is send a ' Strong Diplomatic Note ' to the offending ambassador – really shakes up the foreign nationals they drop everything and respond – when you get right down to it there is only way to really get assistance when all hell breaks loose and that's know someone powerful ask the 2 girls from N. Korea about their boss A Gore!

    • Yes but the problem is that this government refuses to even send a diplomatic note on behalf of the those people in trouble abroad. And then it appeals court decisions that tell it to do so.

    • It's the refusal to try that really stings. They not only won't, but they actively fight against trying.

    • "you should think about taking care of yourself "

      Isn't part of the point in this case that she did. And the government – ours as well as Kenyas – said tough luck… until their was publicl backlash and they reacted, sort of.

      • never you mind with the actual facts of the case Ted…. they are irrelevant.

    • Canada didn't only fail to offer support; it had her arrested and charged by the Kenyans. Sure, it's a big bad world–and, in this case, Canada was part of the reason.

  3. "We do our best to aid those who are in various forms of difficulty, but ultimately we're not the sovereign government once people leave our territory."

    You're right, you're not the sovereign government when people leave Canada, but you're still OUR government, unfortunately, no matter where we are. If this is your best, dang, I would hate to see your worst. Probably the same but with more 10-percenters.

  4. Not one, but two Khadr posts today! Wow.

    • It's as if there was a court decision on the subject today.

    • Yeah well what would you expect, Harper just got his a$$ handed to him again by the courts. What is this 0-15 for the Cons on their foreign affairs files? Get these amateurs outta here; we need a real government.

  5. Harper: We do our best to aid those who are in various forms of difficulty, but ultimately we're not the sovereign government once people leave our territory.

    CP news story: Canadian consular officials called her an impostor, voided her passport and turned her case over to Kenya for prosecution.

  6. Harper: We do our best to aid those who are in various forms of difficulty, but ultimately we're not the sovereign government once people leave our territory.

    Seems to me they had a much different view when it came to the government's obligations with Zahra Kazemi.

    • Kazemi was imprisoned and murdered under the Liberals. Arar was kidnapped under the Liberals. Abdelrazik was barred entry under the Liberals for almost 3 years. Khadr was held in GITMO under the Liberals for 4 years. Seems to be a pattern here.

  7. Harper: "We do our best to aid those who are in various forms of difficulty…"

    It's a drag when our PM so blatantly lies to us, isn't it?

  8. "We do our best to aid those who are in various forms of difficulty…"

    You know it took Harper three takes to get through this with a straight face. "We do our best to aid those who are *snort* sorry, this is really hard. Ok, ok, don't stop rolling, I can do this. *ahem* We do our best to… *ha ha ha!* Now you're looking at me like you're waiting for me to laugh! Ok, take five people, I'll try this again in a minute. And get Cannon out of here, he's making it worse!"

    Lying jackass.

    • LOL! Well done. :)

      • He ripped it off Family Guy.

  9. Sampson, Arar, Khadr…all under Liberal watch.

    • Care to quote what the Harper Gang said and did during each of those episodes? No of course you don't, because it's too shameful.

  10. "one of the realities we have in this world, with the increasing amount of travel of people and also the increasing proliferation of threats and circumstances of various kinds…"

    Oh, stop panicking, Harpo. We'll protect you. By removing you from the stage of this scary, scary World.

    • You seem emotional.

      • He's poking fun at Harper who likes to push the fear button.

  11. So, if you leave Canada you're pwned? That 's our Foreign Affairs policy under the Conservatives? Great. That'll encourage international trade and development.

    Oh that's right, the Conservatives don't care about development and only care about trade in as much as it relates to the US (Not that Conservatives like Americans now that Ignatieff does.) That's just an awesome way to run policy.

  12. I believe there are 4 prominent cases which Harper is referring to.
    1) Involved a Canadian woman overseas that was working for a significant member of a foreign organized crime syndicate.
    2) Was a case where the Canadian government provided information to falsely implicate a Canadian and have him tortured in a foreign country.
    3) Was a case where the Canadian government refused to issue a passport to a Canadian citizen.
    4) Was a case where a genuine Canadian passport was not recognized.

    Now I can see that in one of these cases, a housekeeper making a really nice salary should have clued in that something wasn't quite right with her employment. Perhaps one could legitimately make the claim that Canada had no real compulsion to get involved. However, in all of the other 3 cases the Canadian government was fully involved. The Canadian press is doing Canada a real disservice by not breaking out laughing when Harper comes out with crap like this in a briefing.

    (In their defense, I guess that would lead to even fewer communications from himself.)

    • Your argument againt the PM would be stronger if, indeed, the Conservative Governemnt were in power when all of your alleged instances occured. Do not forget the in the case of Arar and Khadr it was the Liberal Governemnt that set Canada's policy.

      • They were not instances or events, they were situations that lasted for years. No doubt, previous Liberal governments were responsible for initial decisions. The Conservatives and Harper are responsible for decisions, actions, lack of action since they came into power. Whether one should hold the Conservatives or Liberals in more contempt depends on the information available when they made decisions and the length of time they formed the government. In both the cases you describe:
        1) the international situation changed following the post 9-11 frenzy
        2) considerable additional information became available
        3) the Conservatives oversaw the cases for considerable periods of time

  13. It's always nice to get a reminder of how Canada is back. The indignity of developing an anti-landmine convention, helping to build the ICC, and broadening summit diplomacy is finally behind us. Now we enjoy a proud, bold Canada, so long as you stay away from the the country of your heritage.

    You should, by the way, feel very comfortable planning a vacation to theoretically-disputed Arctic waters.

  14. "Harper Announces Formal Policy of Staycation"

    is the best headline of the day! I thought it was a Feschuk column before I clicked.

    Nice one, AW.

  15. A quick summary of Liberal spin:

    If this gov't doesn't bat 1000, all the time and everywhere, then "it's time to throw the bums out.!"

    If the Lib gov't historically never batted over 400, anywhere, ever, well, "you're not allowed to do comparisons around here"

    • The problem seems to be that the "new' Harper government doesn't want to go to bat at all, and if they do, its for the opposing team.

      • "Harper is batting for the other team"

    • They haven't even realized it's their turn to bat yet.