Article content continued

Excuse the hyperbole. Harper was then leading the National Citizens Coalition, and in his spare time, would pen a weekly freelance column for the Calgary Sun, where I was editor. Even then, economics caught up with newspaper budgets — us freelancers these days live week to week — and something had to give. It was Stephen’s column. Plus, it was sort of boring.

So I should be happy. Maybe those nagging worries about regular audits from Revenue Canada might now cease — I know the department’s called something different today, but, as Al Capone found out, when the taxman wants his pound of flesh, you might as well roll over, belly up and hope there’s a tickle in there somewhere.

Silliness aside, there’s nothing funny about the glee accompanying Harper’s demise after winning three elections.

Yes, it was time for a change. That’s the wonderful part of democracy, and after almost a decade as prime minister, any politician is governing on borrowed time.

But to suggest the Conservative leader was some malevolent being who held back this country is nonsensical. Even worse, it’s petty.

When the reverberations of 9/11 were still being felt years later, and Canadians reached for stability and security, they found it embodied in Harper. And when the world economy risked implosion following the U.S.-bundled mortgage fiasco, Canadians were only too glad to look to the Calgary MP to provide a steadying, economic hand.

Those times have passed, and with Central Canada being rejuvinated, thanks to a dollar worth much less than it was, there’s room for a different approach. Whether that, in time, is successful, is a discussion for another, far off day.