We weren't surprised when Mr Harper made public in the last election campaign that one Brian Mulroney was his mentor and key Quebec advisor. Harper served in the Mulroney/Campbell gov't - as an MP's assistant. We're sure the youngster left a mark on big Brian. We know the relationship goes back further than either will admit publicly. Then there is the MacKay link. We wonder why Peter MacKay went back on his written agreement NOT to break up the old PROGRESSIVE Conservative Party. What did Harper have on MacKay that made him turn back on his written agreement? Did the Harper crew threaten to destroy MacKay's political career if he didn't help destroy the PCs? After all, under a young, non-lying Peter MacKay (the old PC's "golden boy"), or Bernard Lord, the PCs' collective hopes were on the upswing. The Reformers had been around along enough, and unsuccessfully, that they were really ready to bust after another election loss - or continue to be relegated to a "regional rump".
Is there a deeper relationship than what appears on the surface? Isn't there always?
1 comment:
When Mulroney first signed NAFTA I thought it was bad policy but I have since changed my mind. Harper on the other hand has done and said nothing that I think would be good for the country. Health care, education and the environment are my top concerns so I will most likely be voting Liberal in the next election although that is written in stone.
Post a Comment