by arthur Weinreb, associate Editor,
December 31, 2004
Paul Martin is very likely to go down in history as the most inept prime minister in Canadian history. He dithers and dawdles about just about everything. He is afraid to take a position on major issues of the day such as same sex marriage, reluctantly taking one only when the Supreme Court of Canada refused to bail him out with a declaration that the traditional definition of marriage unconstitutional. He has hummed and hawed over joining the United States in their missile defence program, being fearful to offend those who might be for it, or those who might be against it. Martin’s style is much the same as John Kerry’s who bragged that he voted against funding the war in Iraq after he voted for it. If Martin doesn’t come across as blatantly contradictory as Kerry it is more to do with the fact that he lacks the loquaciousness of the junior senator from Massachusetts, rather than any difference in substance.
There are so many things that Martin can be criticized for that the heat that he has taken over going on vacation borders on the absurd. First, he was criticized for taking a Challenger jet for his Moroccan vacation. Oh the cost of it all! Do the critics of Martin’s mode of travel actually think that our prime minister should travel the world on discount airlines? and it is hard to argue with the fact that, especially in the post-9/11 world, a private jet is necessary both for the safety of the prime minister and the safety of commercial air travellers. If people are really upset because of the way Paul Martin travels, they should boot him out of office, vote NDP and hope Jack Layton dusts off his bicycle.
Contrary to what some members of the public seem to think, politicians do work hard and put in long hours. Making decisions is work. Dithering over making decisions is more work. Martin could no doubt justify a raise because he always takes both sides of each and every issue. In the criticism of his Moroccan vacation it is almost like some people actually didn’t think he should have a vacation at all. Travelling the world and going to fancy dinners three or four nights a week might sound like fun but when you have to do it as part of your job, it’s work. Martin is entitled to a vacation as is any other "employee". It seems like a lot of fuss over nothing.
Martin was further criticized for not immediately returning to Canada in the aftermath of the tsunamis that devastated parts of asia. again, this criticism seems unwarranted. It is easy to understand why those on the left would criticize him; they want Martin to be in Canada so he can show that he feels the pain of the victims, á la Bill Clinton. Other than that, what was the rush for him to come back? Defence Minister Bill Graham, despite his penchant for fence sitting, took control of the situation. Decisions were constantly being made including increases to the amount of foreign aid that was being given to the countries involved and the decisions regarding the deployment of the DaRT. It is highly unlikely that anything would have been different had Paul Martin been in Canada. While Martin undoubtedly missed several photo/ops with immigrant groups from the affected countries, the kind his predecessor Jean Chrétien would have killed for, the effect of Martin’s absence on the victims of the asian disaster, their relatives in Canada and Canadians in general was zero. It’s true that Martin returning at once might have appeared as a show of great leadership, leading does not come naturally to our PM.
Like other people who work hard, Paul Martin is entitled to a vacation with his family. It is somewhat scary when going away at Christmas time seems to be the best shot that the opposition can take at him.