Sins of Omission

Curiously, the Globe and Mail, while screaming "scary, hidden agenda", glosses over the unanimous vote in Parliament that hammered this evil nail into the coffin of democracy.

-- OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper ratcheted up his government's attack on the head of the country's nuclear regulatory agency Thursday, saying her refusal to allow the restart of the Chalk River reactor had put Canada's health system in jeopardy.

How is it that quick action by the Prime Minister... which ends up being voted on and passed by all parties... is suddenly a horrible thing.

Parliament was forced to pass emergency legislation last month to ensure “the Canadian medical system was not needlessly endangered by decisions made by the president of the nuclear commission,” Mr. Harper told reporters in New Brunswick.

When “Parliament actually has to overturn the decision of the nuclear commission, unanimously … I think to label that kind of action illicit troubles me greatly,” he said.

Oh, I see... it was "forced"... what the Globe is saying is, in effect... Stephen Harper raped Parliament.

Now I get it.

**********

RELATED: There's something familiar about 1999...

Oh, yeah... that would be the era of consecutive Fiberal majority governments.

"We found a significant deficiency related to unresolved strategic challenges that could prevent the corporation from achieving its mandate,"

One is a nine-year delay in constructing a new facility to produce medical isotopes in Chalk River. Two new reactors and a new processing facility originally planned for completion in 2000 are now expected this year and in 2009, the report said.

So, to recap... longstanding, scary, irresponsible and life threatening... but the Liberals and the Dippers voted for it anyway.

And now they get to scream bloody murder.

**********

LAST WORD: Speaking of the Auditor-General...

On Nov. 15, 2002, Fraser sent a copy of her report to then Liberal resources minister Herb Dhaliwal, along with a covering letter imploring him to meet to discuss her alarming findings, particularly "unresolved issues with the government" and their potential impact on "the management of environmental risks at AECL sites."

Two months later, Dhaliwal replied, in part: "As your report was quite clear and acceptable to me, I felt no need for us to meet at this time. I was particularly pleased that you saw evidence of strong leadership ... and found that good systems and practices existed in several key areas."

Fraser issued another equally critical companion report on AECL, and again invited Dhaliwal to meet.

Again he shrugged her off: "As the report was positive in general and very clear, I felt no need to accept your generous offer to meet."

Oh, Steffi.

*