Dion's 2005 UN climate change speech

[capricorn]

"Mr. Harper seems to be so keen to cozy up to the Howard - Bush ideology that he will use anybody else's words to make their points. A real leader would have his own ideas and own words to defend his retrograde policies," Mr. Easter declares.

Okay, Mr. Easter, if you say so. If that's what it takes to be a real leader, what are we to make of the counter-scoop uncovered by another blogger, Steve Janke, who reported what would appear to be a far more egregious example of word-borrowing, this time by Stéphane Dion, who, as Minister of the Environment in 2005, flew to a UN conference on climate change to deliver a speech, and proceeded to read --- pretty much word for word -- the executive summary of a two-year-old UN report. Janke points out that while Dion did make a passing reference to the UN report, he didn't tell anyone he was actually reading it as his own address.

---

You'd also think a man with Mr. Dion's passion for the environment could think of something original to say on his favourite topic.

Janke runs both speeches, side by side. Apart from a few introductory paragraphs, about 80% of Mr. Dion's appears to be a straight steal.

As Mr. Easter states: " A real leader would have his own ideas and own words" to defend his beliefs.

So what's that make Mr. Dion?

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...-un-speech.aspx

In 2005, as Minister of the Environment, Stephane Dion opened a climate conference focused on the Arctic. The bulk of his speech consisted of reading the executive summary of a year-old UN report, word for word.

http://stevejanke.com/archives/274965.php

The above link shows the UN document and Dion's speech side by side. Approximately 80% of both texts are identical.

How often have we heard Dion extol his own credentials as the champion of the environment and his accomplishments as Environment Minister? So now we learn that in 2005, while Environment Minister, he took a 2-year old UN report on climate change and integrated it into his speech. Using a UN report to give a speech later at the UN must have taken a lot of guts. But lucky for him either nobody at the UN noticed or nobody chose to make a fuss about it. I wonder which it is. This could have been very embarrassing for Canada.

I expect more from Ministers of the Crown.

[Slim MacSquinty]

Well done! Its really only good for humour purposes though, I really don't care if you borrow other peoples words for speaches, as far as I'm concerned its not necesarily meant to represent original thinking its meant to convey ideas, if someone else has good words to convey your idea go for it.

Dion is at a big advantage because most of what he has ever written prior to politics that might give us a clue about his "motives" was in french so not easily accessable to many of us.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Slim MacSquinty

[capricorn]

I really don't care if you borrow other peoples words for speaches, as far as I'm concerned its not necesarily meant to represent original thinking its meant to convey ideas, if someone else has good words to convey your idea go for it.

I agree Slim. What this brings through is Dion's hypocrisy in approving that his colleagues and minions attack Harper's over 5-6 year old speeches, while he did the very same thing more recently, and while he was Minister of the Environment.

[Slim MacSquinty]

It will be very interesting to see if any TV media picks up this story. I've tried to find old speeches and writings from his professor days to see where this guy is coming from, nothing but pseudo official stuff.

Knowing what I know about sociology professors I think it would be very interesting.

[Hcheh]

It will be very interesting to see if any TV media picks up this story. I've tried to find old speeches and writings from his professor days to see where this guy is coming from, nothing but pseudo official stuff.

Knowing what I know about sociology professors I think it would be very interesting.

The best thing to do would be to contact them yourself, it would be a shame that the TV media would miss something like this.

Anyway, good find Capricorn.

[kengs333]

I agree Slim. What this brings through is Dion's hypocrisy in approving that his colleagues and minions attack Harper's over 5-6 year old speeches, while he did the very same thing more recently, and while he was Minister of the Environment.

Oh, you really think that this is going to be a big issue? Harper's speech was copied from that of another Prime Minister and dealt with sending troops to Iraq. Borrowing from an environmental report is not quite as serioes. Anyway, the damage has been done. Maybe had it been found towards the beginning of the campaign, but I don't think anyone will care. Harper has discarded the attack ads for a reason, if he goes on the attack with this issue now he'll just come out looking worse.

[Bryan]

Oh, you really think that this is going to be a big issue? Harper's speech was copied from that of another Prime Minister and dealt with sending troops to Iraq. Borrowing from an environmental report is not quite as serioes. Anyway, the damage has been done. Maybe had it been found towards the beginning of the campaign, but I don't think anyone will care. Harper has discarded the attack ads for a reason, if he goes on the attack with this issue now he'll just come out looking worse.

I disagree. Abandoning the attack is a big reason why he's slipping in the polls. People are stupid, they don't understand basic policy. The over the top attacks they understand. Dion and Layton's recent ads have been crazy over the top attacks, far worse than anything Harper ever did. And they're working. Harper definitely should come right out and call Dion a liar and a hypocrite. He should especially make special focus on the finances of the Liberal Party and make the connection that he can't even manage those finances, so we better not trust him to manage the country's.

[kengs333]

I disagree. Abandoning the attack is a big reason why he's slipping in the polls. People are stupid, they don't understand basic policy. The over the top attacks they understand. Dion and Layton's recent ads have been crazy over the top attacks, far worse than anything Harper ever did. And they're working. Harper definitely should come right out and call Dion a liar and a hypocrite. He should especially make special focus on the finances of the Liberal Party and make the connection that he can't even manage those finances, so we better not trust him to manage the country's.

Of course it's "far worse" because you're a card-carying Conservative.

Too bad that the Liberals were able to manage Canada's finances quite well, so any such attack against the party's finances will be largely ineffectual, and will just open him up to criticisms about how the Cons had finance issues with their own party; in-and-out, and all that jazz... remember?

Face it, the Conservatives are floundering, and election day can't come soon eneough.

[Bryan]

Of course it's "far worse" because you're a card-carying Conservative.

No, it's worse,because the Conservative "attacks" were accurate, and the left attacks are complete fabrications. They are arguing against a strawman instead of what Harper has actually done.

The Conservative record on finances is far better than the Liberals. Reduced taxes, increased debt repayment, restored funding to services the liberals cut like healthcare, and yet are still running a substantial surplus.

[myata]

Because this is entering a very shaky domain of blogs and private opinions, I wouldn't make any conclusions until detailed confirmed information is available.

Here's something though, from the first link:

"Janke points out that while Dion did make a passing reference to the UN report, he didn't tell anyone he was actually reading it as his own address"

Again one has to make a full investigation to undestand the meaning of "passing reference", but it's already and obviously clear that reading a referenced material is definitenly not the same, no, absolutely different from copying it and presenting it as own invention.

Good job guys. Obviously, as your leader himself, you don't always bother to read (or comprehend; or both) your own information. And hope that everybody else is just like you, i.e won't bother to read.

[eyeball]

Well done! Its really only good for humour purposes though, I really don't care if you borrow other peoples words for speaches, as far as I'm concerned its not necesarily meant to represent original thinking its meant to convey ideas, if someone else has good words to convey your idea go for it.

Exactly, the idea to follow Bush into Iraq didn't bear repeating because it was a really stupid one, ergo Harper must be really stupid. The very intelligent ideas conveyed in the 2005 UN Climate change speech OTOH do bear repeating, over and over again and as many time as is necesarry so all the stupid people have a chance to get it.

[Argus]

I disagree.

There's a big shock.

Dion's entire platform is focused around him being a champion of the environment and he can't even deliver a speech on it at the UN without stealing their words?

[myata]

There's a big shock.

Dion's entire platform is focused around him being a champion of the environment and he can't even deliver a speech on it at the UN without stealing their words?

Obviously, you don't understand the concept of "reference". Sigh. The kind of electorate Harper is counting on.

[Argus]

I disagree. Abandoning the attack is a big reason why he's slipping in the polls. People are stupid, they don't understand basic policy. The over the top attacks they understand. Dion and Layton's recent ads have been crazy over the top attacks, far worse than anything Harper ever did. And they're working. Harper definitely should come right out and call Dion a liar and a hypocrite.

I agree. This soft cozy stuff isn't working anyway. Harper should have beat the crap out of Dion and Layton at the debates. He had more than ample opportunity, what with both of them whining about the economy, while having no plans to deal with it themselves other than tax the living hell out of business.

Two segments I would have loved to see:

Harper to Layton: "You're going to do what exactly, Jack? You can't even say the word corporations without curling your lip in a sneer as if you've just uttered an obscenity, and your only plan so far that I've heard is to jack up taxes so high you drive the remainder of our manufacturing base offshore.

Harper to Dion: "I have been working on the economy for the last two years. The anticipation of these difficulties is one of the reasons we've been cutting corporate taxes and instituting a variety of tax and credit programs for business. You have a plan now? Finally you've realized the need for one? Only it's a plan to go and ask people what your plan should be."

Harper to Dion: Stephan you opposed any regulations on business to meet our deadlines and goals under Kyoto when you were in the Chretien cabinet. Two Liberal environment ministers have testified to that. All you did was name your dog Kyoto, which, pardon me, is not likely to lead to very much of a drop in CO2 emissions."

He should especially make special focus on the finances of the Liberal Party and make the connection that he can't even manage those finances, so we better not trust him to manage the country's.

That was going to be another thing I think he should have brought up. "Stephan, you can't even manage the finances of your own party. You guys are borrowing money hand over fist and some observers have said you could face bankruptcy. Why on earth should Canadians trust you with looking after the financial affairs of Canada?"

[capricorn]

it would be a shame that the TV media would miss something like this.

The question is did the media miss it or are they choosing not to report on it. My hope is that they are checking the facts, as they should, before picking it up. Think about it. It's about a Liberal plagiarizing, not a Conservative. I'm cynical.

There's another story floating around about Dion "borrowing" words from none other than John McCain in a speech Dion gave in 2005. I'm not giving details at this time as I am still looking into it to determine if it has merit.

[myata]

There's another story floating around about Dion "borrowing" words from none other than John McCain in a speech Dion gave in 2005. I'm not giving details at this time as I am still looking into it to determine if it has merit.

There's something weird, uncanny about hard conservatives debilitating inability to take in simple words and concepts. One'd think there's nothing calculus about the notion of "reference"; or "tax shift"?

Yet, they continue to drone the recorded adage no matter what. Is it genuine? Or deliverate?? I'm afraid we'll need a scientist to figure that out.

Edited October 7, 2008 by myata

[capricorn]

Myata, what this is about is that the Liberals have decided to trot out old speeches to attack Harper. The Conservatives are only doing what the Liberals started. Why is it wrong for Conservatives and right for Liberals? It's hypocritical to think it's OK for one but not the other. It's a mud fight.

[myata]

Capricorn, it's about the difference between a referenced idea and the appropriated one. Harper should have referenced the source of his inspiration in the speech - i.e something like (courtesy - m.):

"We have to be in Iraq because Mr Howard (who I btw happen to admire) thinks so, and here's what he (not me!) had to say on the matter."

Then nobody would have any reason to complain about plagiarism (but I wouldn't be so sure about the Harper's position on Canada's independence and sovereignty).

Edited October 7, 2008 by myata

[kengs333]

No, it's worse,because the Conservative "attacks" were accurate, and the left attacks are complete fabrications. They are arguing against a strawman instead of what Harper has actually done.

The Conservative record on finances is far better than the Liberals. Reduced taxes, increased debt repayment, restored funding to services the liberals cut like healthcare, and yet are still running a substantial surplus.

What? If for just a moment you could lose your strident Conservative bias and look at the Carbon Tax for what it really is, and then compare that with what Harper is saying about it, you'd realize that he's an outright liar. The Liberals are not going to tax "everything" and ruin the economy--even they aren't that stupid. The Carbon Tax is a system of tax that is being used effectively elsewhere to shift the economy away from polluting technologies by cutting personal and corporate taxes and shifting it to pollution. It's such a SIMPLE concept that even you should be able to understand it, and be able to realize that Harper's spin on it is completely wrong.

The Liberals had a $12 billion surplus while the Conservatives have worked it down to $3.3 billion and we're probably now going into a deficit. The Conservative's record is not better.

[kengs333]

Well, looks like this isn't going to be an issue...

Too bad guys, unless Dion suddenly decides to reveal that he admires Hitler and that he converses with his dearly departed mother (if she has passed, that is), then it looks like the best the Cons can do is pull off a slim minority government.

[Slim MacSquinty]

"There's something weird, uncanny about hard conservatives debilitating inability to take in simple words and concepts. One'd think there's nothing calculus about the notion of "reference"; or "tax shift"?

Yet, they continue to drone the recorded adage no matter what. Is it genuine? Or deliverate?? I'm afraid we'll need a scientist to figure that out. "

You certainly have an uncanny nack for lowering the tone of the debate, having yourself not read the speech, lecturing others about its contents is likewise hypocritical also not getting the subtle difference between passing reference and actually referenced, assuming you understand, is intentionally dishonest.

Although I have stated before and restate here, a political speech in not your final english exam, or your doctoral thesis, speeches are not copyrighted and are meant to convey ideas, if using phrases borrowed from others assists in conveying your ideas then do so, it does not mean your ideas are faulty, in fact it means your ideas are reinforced.

It is hypocritical to by definition to critisize the faults of others when you have those faults yourself.