Get to know your candidates...

The latest revelations that David Emerson is deeply unhappy as a member of the Conservative cabinet and caucus should come as no surprise to anyone, least of all David Emerson. He did promise to be Stephen Harper’s worst enemy, and so its been proved.

Party politics is like a marriage – one doesn’t switch partners overnight without serious consideration. A compatibility test might not be a bad idea.

Then again, it takes two to tango, and Mr. Harper probably didn’t take his own advice, delivered during one of the English-language leadership debates during the last election:

Get to know your candidates. Get some sense of who they are and where they stand, whether they have integrity. Stephen Harper

Had he considered whether the formerly-powerful Emerson would work well under his thumb, Mr. Harper likely would have chosen some other bright-eyed local MP to take on at least some of Emerson’s roles, instead of spending so much political capital on a lead weight.

Port Moody Conservative MP James Moore was one such star, oft-touted as ministerial material. I’ve previously had much respect for Mr. Moore but on the Emerson issue Moore can’t figure out where his opinion should be. Of Belinda Stronach’s crossing he said:

I think it shows there are two kinds of people in public life—people with principle and people like Belinda Stronach MP James Moore

… yet earlier this week he stood up for David Emerson. Curious.

Moore’s not alone in the double-standard department. Peter MacKay called former Conservative Scott Brison’s move to the liberals:

a completely cynical manipulative move by Mr. Brison to enhance his own personal career. MP Peter MacKay

MacKay doesn’t apparently believe that Emerson’s career is enhanced as a cabinet minister rather than the opposition member that his voters sent him to Ottawa as.

Long-time conservative Chuck Strahl, the former critic for democratic reform, and recently annointed senior political minister for British Columbia (that’s Emerson’s old job) plays both sides of the fence too. When out of power, Strahl was a champion for measures that would put more power into the hands of ordinary people, and bring transparency into the workings of government. During the 2006 campaign Strahl promoted the idea that Conseratives would bring (welcome in my mind) checks and balances on the powers of the Prime Minister.

Have we seen those checks and balances yet? No. Instead we’ve been delivered muzzled ministers, an overturning of the votes of 46,168 people in Vancouver-Kingsway, and an undemocratic appointment to cabinet by literally sneaking into the Senate someone that didn’t even run for office so that Mr. Harper could get a former campaign co-chair into cabinet.

Is that the sort of democratic reforms Chuck had in mind? Or shall we take his late endorsement of David Emerson as a sign that power means more then principle for him too?