National Affairs
Double standard being applied
Claire Hoy

The authors of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary define "double standard" as "a rule or principle

applied more strictly to some people more than others (or oneself)," a definition which decidedly explains most of the mainstream media coverage of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's recent exchanges with China.

Harper, as you likely know, recently returned from the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam where most of the media coverage he garnered focused on his decision to openly criticize China's appalling human rights record at the risk of offending our domestic business people.

There is little question that had a Liberal or a New Democrat decided to knock China's human rights failures, he or she would be held up as an example of all that is good and pure in the world.

But when Harper does it - he is, after all, a Conservative don't you know - the media pack decided it was a huge mistake.

Hence, the double standard definition above.

In a column last week in the usually Tory-friendly National Post, for example, columnist Don Martin (fresh from his friendly biography of Tory-turned-Liberal Belinda Stronach) wrote a column headlined :"Heavy- Handed Harper Upsets Business."

What, pray tell, had Harper done?

Apparently he had suggested that China - which is currently holding Huseyin Celil, 37, a Canadian citizen on trumped-up charges of espionage - might want to clean up its' human rights record if it wanted to be accepted in the broader world community.

The initial reaction from the Chinese - who are among the world's most notorious human rights abusers - was to cancel a meeting between Harper and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Harper's reaction was, well, too bad. He'd like to speak with Jintao, but if he has to kow-tow to business interests and avoid human rights concerns - and decidedly unlike the Liberals - he'd stick with the human issues, thank you very much.

This extraordinary display of principle, no doubt catching business leaders and other politicians completely off guard, prompted Alberta's Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Gary Mar to chirp that "This is a misstep by the Prime Minister."

And most of the media agreed, although one suspects the general public doesn't.

As for the Chinese, well, apparently upon discovering that Harper had no intention of apologizing to them for daring to mention their terrible human rights record, they decided to go ahead with a short meeting between Harper and Hu Jintao after all.

Mind you, the media made sure to tell us that while the two leaders finally did meet, it was, as the Post described it, "at a reception to a gala dinner on Saturday rather than in a formal setting with cameras, government officials, policy advisors and translators."

Regular readers of the news will know that Harper and the Ottawa media have been in a constant tug-of-war ever since Harper moved into the Prime Minister's office.

Part of that is the result of some rather silly obstinancy on Harper's part, but most is because the media, which is overwhelmingly left-of-centre (or worse) simply can't stand the thought that a Conservative is now in charge.

And for a Conservative, of all people, to actually put his concerns for human rights ahead of the business agenda, well, that's tantamount to treason. People would do well to recall that this myth about Conservatives not caring about human rights, while well entrenched in the media - and among opposition politicians - is complete nonsense.

It was Conservative Brian Mulroney, for example, who led the charge during the 1980s against South Africa's evil apartheid regime, despite strong opposition from many powerful leaders, including two prominent conservative leaders, Britain's Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

While Mulroney pushed relentlessly for international sanctions to bring down the racist South African regime, many of the same arguments were heard at home, chief among them the notion that it's bad for business and, since Conservatives rely upon the so-called "business vote" - as if all business people hold the same views - it's sheer folly to go against that.

The whole tenor of the coverage of Harper's Asian trip was a constant sniping at his so-called lack of diplomacy - and his unwillingness to be constantly at the beck and call of the media.

Yet one suspects that for all the carping - and the well documented whining from business leaders and opposition politicians - most Canadians are actually proud of the fact that - finally - we have a prime minister who is not afraid to put humanity before the bottom line.

That may be upsetting to accountants everywhere. But I think it's a wonderful thing.