If it's not a part of their agenda, why are they doing it?

Because the only solid base of support they have comes from their Reform/Alliance roots.

Scott, JJ, Eugene and Dan have all commented and here, I pointed out that, regardless of what Harper and Day tell us, they do have an agenda they have not divulged. Beyond what has already occurred, this is evidence of government policy which has not been given a public airing and which was not advertised anywhere in the Conservative Party from the last election to the present.

The Conservative government will not co-sponsor a United Nations resolution calling for a global moratorium on the death penalty, breaking with a nearly decade-old tradition.

An official with the Foreign Affairs Department says Canada will vote in favour of the resolution when it comes to the floor of the UN General Assembly in December, but will not sponsor it.

"There are a sufficient number of co-sponsors already, and we will focus our efforts on co-sponsoring other resolutions within the UN system which are more in need of our support," said Catherine Gagnaire.

Seventy-four other countries have put their names forward as sponsors, including the United Kingdom, Australia and France.

Last week, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day surprised the House of Commons by announcing that Canada will not oppose the execution of a Canadian citizen on death row in Montana for two murders. Day said the new policy will apply to "murderers" such as Ronald Allen Smith who have had a fair trial in a democratic country.

And what does it take to sponsor a resolution?

Canada's former ambassador to the United Nations, Paul Heinbecker, said co-sponsorship doesn't involve much effort - a simple phone call or the raising of a hand during a meeting.

He said in the absence of a radical change in the wording of such a mainstream resolution, the decision not to co-sponsor signifies a departure for the Canadian government.

"You can only take these as signs of how the government wants to be seen," Heinbecker said.

Putting us in lock-step with, guess who.

The United States and Japan are among the few democracies that have traditionally voted against anti-death penalty resolutions at the UN.

Making the Harper government even more visible as Bush water-carriers.

This is the world stage and it has everything to do with the image Harper wants to portray to his minority constituent base.

As others have already pointed out, the Harper Conservatives conducted a poll, which they kept as quiet as they could, only to discover that those in favour of capital punishment constituted a distinct minority of the population.

It's that minority to whom Harper is now playing.

This is the tough-guy image movement conservatives believe in. It doesn't matter that Canada was viewed globally as an honest broker with strong moral values. Now we are to be viewed, not as a country which punched above its weight diplomatically, but one which punches. Period.

The fact that the Conservatives executed a deliberate change in direction at the UN makes it a matter of national policy.

In short, this has been on the Conservative agenda all along, hidden from view to prevent a national debate the Conservatives could not win.

But, as we draw nearer to the inevitable federal election Harper and Day must get a recognizable signal out to the most narrow-minded of their supporters. It's a sample. A mere whisper intended to inject calm into the ranks of the radicals.

Give me a majority and I will give you everything you want.

Capital punishment IS a part of the Harper agenda

So, let's get this straight. Harper believes that the death sentence is appropriate in some cases. He said so.

"The reality of this particular case is that were we to intervene, it would very quickly become a question of whether we are prepared to repatriate a double-murderer to Canada. In light of this government's strong initiatives on tackling violent crime, I think that would send the wrong signal to the Canadian population."

Read that again.

So, this isn't about the sovereignty of the state of Montana. This isn't about whether Montana observes the rule of law. This is about the Harper government's desire to send a message to Canadians: capital punishment is justified. Period.

Then, to add to that view, Stockwell Day, inserted this into the argument:

"We have an approach of tackling crime, of tackling violent crime and our messages need to be consistent with that," Mr. Day told reporters.

Again, this isn't about some other jurisdiction. This is, according to Day and Harper, about our jurisdiction.

Harper and Day have just linked their "violent crime" agenda with capital punishment.

That thing you see sliding under long standing Canadian values is the thin edge of a very dangerous wedge. The Harper hidden agenda.

Now go read what Chet has to say.

Cheryl throwing in her two bits worth:

I have more than a few problems with Harper’s statement.

a) As a past president of the local chapter of Amnesty International, this is a deep violation of everything I believe in. And I’m pretty sure I’m not the only Canadian that feels that way

b) This is nothing more than a backdoor method to institute capital punishment on Canadians – if Canadians won’t let us kill our own, we’ll let others do the killing for us. Brings a whole new meaning to “outsourcing”

c) The part about sending “the wrong signal to the Canadian population” is offensive, demeaning, and paternalistic. Memo to Harper: you are an elected politician, therefore, you don’t send us the signals…we, the people, send YOU the signals and you act upon OUR wishes. And the last time I checked, I couldn’t hear any great Canadian groundswell demanding the re-institution of the death penalty.

This is wrong on so many levels.