Dear Editor
Why would any government want to deliberately limit the depth and breath of information on any subject of possible interest to itself or to its citizens? It has become evident the Harper government has been doing that in a rather systematic way for some time. Unfortunately, Harper has been moving slowly, little by little, without much media attention, ever since becoming the PM in 2006, but his moves to muzzle anyone or any agency that may have facts he doesn't want, or doesn't want us to know, have been intensified since his government achieved a majority in Parliament in 2011. One such early move, the decision to do away with the mandatory long-form census during Harper's minority government, did have some media attention, and should have started alarm bells ringing throughout the land, but it didn't.
One reason for the rather sparse media coverage of this aspect of the Harper government may be that, in spite of having been elected in 2006 after campaigning on the issue of "open and transparent government," the Harper government is probably the most closed and secretive government in our history. Reporters have a difficult time getting information from this government, unless it is in the form of its own "talking points" on any particular topic. Even the Parliamentary Budget Officer had to take the government to court to get certain information on matters of interest to his office.
Therefore, I found Paul Wells' commentary, "What Harper Is Hiding," in the April 15 issue of Maclean's Magazine of special interest. While focusing mainly on Harper's economic action plans as non-budget budgets, Wells points out that the latest EAP states, "The government will introduce legislation as needed to consolidate operations and eliminate redundant organizations."
He shows that the statement is not "mere talk" by pointing out some recent things being eliminated, such as the Rights and Democracy Agency, the National Roundtable on Energy and the Environment, the Coast Guard station in Kitsilano, B.C. and the Kluane Lake Research Station in the Yukon. As well, Wells lists recent reductions, such as the closing of eight Veterans Affairs offices, the laying off of nearly 100 employees at the National Research Council, along with reductions of water quality sampling in the North, of VIA Rail staffing, of Federal Tobacco Control Strategy and of programs to rehabilitate young offenders.
I would suggest the answer to the question I posed at the beginning of this letter could be in two parts. Part one would be information that indicates the government is moving rapidly away from social programs most people might support, so suppression of that information would be in the best interest of the government. Part two would be information that may run contrary to government ideology, so, like the stubborn guy who says, "My mind is made up, so don't confuse me with the facts," they chose to try to hide facts that don't support their pre-determined conclusions.
Russel Lahti
Battleford
