Transcript of Harper's Monday conference call with reporters

After putting out the call for volunteers, “Gabby from QC” a frequent commenter here (and, I've noticed, at many other blogs), stepped up and has provided a transcript based on the recording of the call distributed yesterday by the Prime Minister's Office. The call was organized, the PMO said, by The Israel Project which was also responsible for inviting reporters.

Here then, is what “Gabby from QC” has provided and I am very thankful for the assistance:

[Note from Gabby in QC: Here's the transcript of the PM's tele-conference. Unfortunately, the sound wasn't always crystal clear to me so I missed a few words. The [?] indicates word/words not understood, so not transcribed.]

Transcript:

Kory Teneycke: Yes, good morning everyone, thank you for joining us this morning. The Prime Minister is joining a call from Kingston Jamaica today, where he is having bilateral meetings with Prime Minister Golding, coming out of the Summit of the Americas trip.

The Prime Minister’s time is going to be quite limited this morning, as we’re dealing with a hostage taking on a Canadian jet in Jamaica starting late last night, so we’re going to be limited to twenty minutes. If you have any follow-up calls or questions, please contact myself at our office. That number is 613-957-5555, once again 613-957-5555, and with that, here’s the Prime Minister of Canada.

PM Harper: Yes, thank you very much, everybody. I really do appreciate your being on the call. In January 2008, our government was the first to announce that Canada would not participate in the Durban II Conference. At the same time we also indicated the Government of Canada would not fund the participation of Canadian NGOs in the Durban process.

We’re pleased that many countries have since followed Canada’s lead in withdrawing from Durban II, including Israel, Australia, Italy, the United States, while others like Sweden have announced that their participation will not include a ministerial presence.

Our government is leading the world, not following it, in championing international understanding and pluralism, and we take a strong position against racism [and] anti-Semitism in all their forms, and we are very concerned that around the world anti-Semitism is growing in volume and acceptance, justified, as many of you know, by opposition to Israel itself. Canada will not lend its name and reputation to an international conference that promotes these kinds of things.

Having participated in the preparatory meetings for Durban II, we observed clear unmistakable signs that this conference will again scapegoat the Jewish people. For example, many of the conference’s preparatory meetings were deliberately scheduled to take place on important Jewish High Holidays to prevent or to minimize the participation of Jewish delegates. The NGOs who participated in the original Durban Conference in 2001, including those responsible for overt displays of racism and anti-Semitism, were re-invited to the Preparatory Committee, while Jewish NGOs such as the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy faced obstacles to receiving observer status.

Countries with a history of promoting hatred were given key organizational roles in the Preparatory Committee. In fact, as you know, Iranian President Ahmadinejad is the only head of state scheduled to address the conference and will do so on Monday, timed no doubt to coincide with the eve of Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Memorial Day.

Our government will participate in any international conference that combats racism. We will not, however, lend Canada’s good name and reputation to those such as Durban that promote it.

That’s all I have to say, Kory, I’ll just take some questions.

Telephone Operator: Thank you. At this time we’d like to open the floor to questions from the journalists. If you would like to ask a question, please press the “star” key, followed by the “1” key on your Touch-tone phone now. Questions will be taken in the order in which they are received. If at any time you would like to remove yourself from the questioning queue, please press “star” followed by “2.” Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press the “star” key, followed by the “1” key on your touch-tone phone now. Our first question will come from David Ljunggren, Reuters

Q: Prime Minister, good morning. I note that near or by the end of the call [?] you said you’d also be speaking about the threat of Iran. I was wondering very much whether I could turn the topic to that briefly? I mean, we’ve seen President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton trying to reach out to the Iranians. I’m wondering what your opinion of that is, given that Canada’s line [?] towards the Iranians is not necessarily very happy these days.

A: Well, as you know, notwithstanding our strong opposition to some of the policies of the Iranian regime – in fact, as you know, we have continually over the last few years been the sponsors successfully [?] of United Nations resolutions against Iran’s human rights record – notwithstanding those things we have maintained diplomatic relations. You know, I would just say briefly, that – you know – the new administration is trying a different approach. That’s something that doesn’t trouble me, provided, of course, that we’re not blind to the realities of the Iranian regime, and I think I’ve been clear what those are: both the promotion of hatred against Israel and the Jewish people but also an interest in, a clear interest in dangerous weapons technology. This is, in our view, a combination of what I’ve called an evil ideology. Combined with interest in a nuclear program, I think it’s a very worrisome and dangerous combination.

Q: Briefly for my supplementary [?], what was your reaction to the news last Friday that in fact the Toronto police had charged a Toronto gentleman with trying to export dangerous technology to Iran?

A: Well, I was pleased to see – you know, David, I have to be careful about commenting on police activities or things that are going to be before the courts – but obviously I was pleased to see the high level of cooperation between Canadian and American officials that allowed these particular activities to be uncovered and have allowed a process, a criminal process to begin.

David Ljunggren: Right, thank you.

Telephone Operator: Thank you. Our next question will come from Victoria Estrado [?] from LaSalle Magazine [?]

Q: Hi, Prime Minister, good morning. I was, I wanted to speak a little bit about NGOs – you mentioned them briefly. President Obama’s plans for tax cuts which hit at [?] all contributions – was there any plan about bringing in something like that for Canada? or what do you think of the plan?

A: I’m not familiar with the details of this plan. I presume it’s some kind of restriction on the activities of these kinds of charities? But in Canada we do have measures where we list organizations that are involved in terrorist or related activities and we restrict – obviously severely restrict – their ability to exercise charitable status. We’ve done this with several groups quite aggressively since we took office, we’ve done it with, obviously, groups like Hamas and Hizbullah, but also we’ve done it with groups like the Tamil Tigers in Canada.

Victoria [name ?]:… [? Inaudible]

Telephone Operator: Thank you. Again, ladies and gentlemen if you would like to ask a question it is “star” 1 on your touch-tone phone, now. Our next question will come from James Pfeiffer [?], Jewish Way [?]

Q: Ah yes, thanks for doing this. I’m wondering how you assess the Obama administration’s approach to Durban II, first, deciding to send a delegation to the preliminary meetings and then concluding that reform of the process wasn’t working, and decided to boycott this week’s conference. Do you think that was an appropriate response to the situation?

A: Well, it’s always, you know, I’m always a little bit reluctant to start rating or analyzing the activities of other governments. The Obama administration was new, was doing, you know, a clear assessment of previous policy decisions in this area. Our senior people spoke to senior people in the Obama administration about our concerns about the Durban II process, and in particular our evaluation that there was very little evidence that it would be any different than Durban I. We communicated that clearly to the Obama administration. We’re very pleased that they decided also not to participate

Telephone Operator: Thank you. Again, if you would like to ask a question, please press “star 1” on your touch-tone phone now. Our next question will come from Evan Buxbaum from CNN.

Q: Good morning, Mister Prime Minister. I’m just wondering if you are watching or have heard about Iranian President at [?] this morning and the reaction to his speech.

A: No, I haven’t, you’ll have to fill me in.

Q: Essentially, there was a protester dressed as a clown, who threw I believe a clown nose at him at the beginning and then it was followed by a mass walkout, and shouts of “you’re a racist” and it was quite the spectacle. I was just trying to get your reaction to that kind of demonstration.

A: Well, look, I’m always torn on these things. I don’t like anything that smacks of violence towards a speaker, but to the extent that the reaction demonstrated vocal opposition to what President Ahmadinejad stands for and has to say, I think that’s a very positive thing. You know, as I said earlier, I have been concerned – we see it in Canada on university campuses – I am concerned about how anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli discourse is getting a growing volume and respectability in some quarters, so I think anything that’s done that shows that there’s strong opposition to that is a very positive result. [?]

Telephone Operator: Thank you. Our next question will come from Andrea Mitchell, NBC News.

Q: Thank you. Prime Minister, good morning, I once … want … to follow up on Iran, whether you feel that the way President Obama treated Chavez at the Summit over the week-end has only weakened the perception of the new American president abroad, and whether the Iranians would now be tempted to take advantage of that, given all the criticism so far. You think that that’s legitimate – you were there – or do you think that that’s being exaggerated by the President’s critics here at home.

A: Yeah, let me be a bit of a conservative defender of the President in this regard. I was present, obviously, at all of the meetings, not the meeting between President Obama and the South American leaders, obviously I wasn’t at that, but I was present at the summit meetings, all of the plenary sessions. I thought President Obama did an excellent job of expressing the values and priorities of the United States of America. I thought that he, you know, he allowed a dialogue to take place in a good spirit to animate the room, which I thought made the meetings productive, I think made the United States, took the United States to a higher plain than the Venezuelas of the world, and I think was very effective at moving the vast majority of countries at reaffirming a very centrist position, a very progressive position on the things that concern us – democracy, human rights, open markets, trade.

So, I, you know, I have to tell you I thought the President’s approach of not being pulled down to the level of a confrontation with states like Venezuela, I thought that his … I thought that he did that in a way that created a remarkable sense of human openness without in any way compromising the things that Canada and other nations that share the fundamental values of the United States .. it was very effective. I thought it was a very effective performance.

I know it got some criticism at home, but you know, the United States is bigger than Venezuela. In the end, the United States is the United States, and I thought that President Obama led in a way that was very effective at that conference.

Q: And what do you think about his initial overtures to Iran, given the broadcast today and the comments of Ahmadinejad, do you think the US has to be more cautious about overtures to Iran?

A: Well, look, on this one, you know I don’t take any of these rogue states lightly. I certainly think Iran is a level of threat that is significantly greater and different than the Venezuelas of the world. That said, you know, President Obama is coming into office at a time where I think all leaders of the G8 would assess that the present approach to Iran hasn’t been working.

What do we do next? We’re obviously going to have a good discussion of that I think when we have the G8 meetings in Italy in July. I’m, I say, I’m always open to try new approaches, but I think it is important that we not be under any illusions whatsoever about the nature of the Iranian regime, what it stands for, and the nature of its activities, particularly as it involves the development of uranium enrichment and weapons capacity, you know. So, as I say, I’m all for new approaches as long as we don’t turn a blind eye to any realities here.

Andrea Mitchell: Thank you so much, sir.

Telephone Operator: Thank you. Again, if you would like to ask a question, please press the “star” key followed by the “1” key on your touch-tone phone now.

Kory Teneycke: I think we are limited to perhaps one additional question.

Telephone Operator: Thank you. Our next question will come from Hilary Krieger, Jerusalem Post.

Q: Hi, thanks for doing this. I apologize, but there was a problem getting into the call, so I’m sorry if I’m asking something you’re already addressing, but I’m interested in looking generally at Iran. And do you think at this point that the West has the will to stop Iran from getting a nuclear capacity, and do you see working with your international partners that this is really going to happen, and do you think that with this process of engagement it’s important to set a time limit on how long dialogue and talks go on … to make this more [?] effective?

A: Well, as I say, our primary involvement, at least, my primary involvement in this issue has been through discussions we’ve had at the G8, and I can tell you in the years I’ve attended the G8, every year I have seen an increased resolve around the table to recognize, to understand, and to deal with the Iranian threat. It will be interesting to see what transpires this year obviously with President Obama now in place. That’s a significant change in the chemistry.

I, at this point – and I know there’s been a lot of criticism of the Europeans in particular – I haven’t detected that the Europeans generally fail to understand what is at stake here. I think what we all are struggling with is how can we best be effective. I don’t think it’s a matter merely of will. I think the reality is that we’re in a complex world here where the United States and its allies do not have an unlimited ability to make happen what we want to have happen. So I think what we’re all struggling with is how do we best apply pressure in a way that will actually be effective.

And you know, I must tell you that I don’t think I could be clearer on this call how concerned I am about Iran and its activities, and also concerned that to this point, we have not been effective at moving that regime in a different direction, and it’s deeply worrisome to me, but I don’t think there are simple answers to this, I don’t think it’s merely a matter of will. I do think it’s a matter of putting our heads together and trying to figure out how we can bring our resources to bear in a way that will get the outcome we want.

Q: And for the idea of applying time limits as a way of making sure that engagement’s more effective, do you think that’s important to do?

A: Well, you know, time limits I think in anything, having timelines is always an effective approach, but it immediately raises the question, time limits for what, and then what are the fall-back actions, and these are very difficult questions.

Kory Teneycke: On that note, I think the Prime Minister’s time is at an end for participating in this call. Once again, if you have any follow-up questions, you can contact our media office. My name is Kory Teneycke, and our media office line is area code 613-957-5555. Thank you for your participation in the call today.

PM Harper: Thanks for your time, everyone.

Dimitri Soudas: Just very quickly, to add to what media [?] may be interested, especially American or Canadian media on the call, this is Dimitri Soudas, the Prime Minister’s press secretary. The Prime Minister will be taking off shortly from Kingston Jamaica en route to Montego Bay Jamaica, where he will be meeting up with Prime Minister Golding. The Prime Minister has been following the situation very closely on the airplane hijacking. He’s spoken to Prime Minister Golding early this morning to offer congratulations and will be meeting up with the Prime Minister in the next little while, early this morning to possibly meet the flight crew and make a few comments. So thank you very much.

Kory Teneycke: Thanks, everyone.