Angry in the Great White North

Plagiarism is bad. 

I mean, really, what can I say?  You copy stuff without credit, and you ought to get slapped for it.

Like everything in life, there are different flavours.

For instance, we have two people using the same words to express the same opinion, or to make the same observation, but nothing else.  That seems to be case with Stephen Harper and John Howard:

The clips then jump to Howard saying:

"As the possession of weapons of mass destruction spreads, so the danger of such weapons coming into the hands of terrorist groups will multiply. That is the ultimate nightmare which the world must take decisive and effective steps to prevent. Possession of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons by terrorists would constitute a direct, undeniable and lethal threat to Australia and its people."

According to the Hansard transcripts, Harper said:

"As the possession of weapons of mass destruction spreads, the danger of such weapons coming into the hands of terrorist groups will multiply, particularly given in this case the shameless association of Iraq with rogue non-state organizations. That is the ultimate nightmare which the world must take decisive and effective steps to prevent. Possession of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons by terrorists would constitute a direct, undeniable and lethal threat to the world, including to Canada and its people."

Sure sounds like Stephen Harper used the same words, but then he's saying the same thing.  Terrorists and rogue states with weapons of mass destruction are a bad thing.

Another case of plagiarism happens when one person uses the work of another in order to present himself as an expert in a field, when really only the original author can make that claim.  This is far more serious because it misleads people.  That seemed to be the situation in 2006 when Liberal Party leadership contender Stephane Dion passed off work down by the David Suzuki Foundation on climate change in Dion's own environmental platform without giving credit:

Liberal leadership candidate Stephane Dion's campaign hastily changed part of the candidate's environmental platform as posted on his Web site today after a blog reported that part of it were almost identical copies - without attribution - of a David Suzuki Foundation paper published the previous week.

Mr. Dion plans to formally unveil his $10-billion energy and climate change plan later today, but he has already been trumpeting his "Clean Air Plan" since Sept. 1 on his Web site.

The plan carries striking similarities to a paper published one week earlier on Aug. 25 by the David Suzuki Foundation, entitled "The Air We Breath."

Yet, prior to this morning, Mr. Dion's paper was not crediting the Suzuki Foundation as a source for the plan. After the issue was raised by the bloggers, a small footnote was put on the Web site to say that the Suzuki report was one of the sources for the Dion platform.

Probably the worst kind of plagiarism is the sort that could result in the plagiarist enjoying some sort of financial reward based on the work of others.  This is far more serious because it rewards the wrong people for the fruits of their labours.  This seemed to be the situation that Liberal Party foreign affairs critic Bob Rae faced in 1994, as reported in the January 14 issue of the Toronto Star:

When it comes to his budding career as a songwriter, Premier Bob Rae is in the same boat now as Betsy Rose.

Except Betsy's boat is copyrighted.

Rose is the little-known songwriter from a small Massachusetts town who copyrighted her song "Same Boat Now" in 1983.

It bears more than a passing resemblance to Rae's recently self-promoted ditty "We're in the Same Boat Now", which he submitted to Sony Music Canada and has sung three times this week on national television; on CBC's Midday, CTV's Canada AM and on MuchMusic.

Rose's chorus:

"We may have come here on different ships, But we're in the same boat now."

Rae's chorus:

"Come by train come by plane, we're in the same boat now."

This embarrassing similarity was raised with Sony by a Windsor woman who, while stopping short of accusing Rae of plagiarism, nonetheless thinks the Premier might be in for some trouble getting his tune published.

In any case, the two songs have a number of similarities.

Rose's version: "Don't want to be a melting pot, we're a rainbow family."

Rae's version: "All people, all colors make the best rainbow."

So it looks like Stephen Harper might have used the same words as John Howard in 2003 to say that terrorists are bad.

So it looks like Stephane Dion might have used a report by David Suzuki to sell himself as a great thinker on environmental issues even though during Dion's turn as environment minister, greenhouse gas emissions in Canada rose steadily without pause.

So it looks like Bob Rae might have submitted a song derived in large part from a copyrighted work as his own in an official song competition, and that would have resulted in him earning the recognition (and possibly the reward) as the composer.

I'm not sure what the Liberals hope will happen.  Is a Canadian voter likely to think: Hmmm, I really don't trust Stephane Dion's carbon tax to be revenue neutral, what with his billions in social program promises, and I can hardly afford gas and oil as it is, but then Stephen Harper might have lifted a paragraph from a John Howard speech in 2003 on a foreign affairs question that no longer faces Canadians, so maybe I'll switch my vote for the guy who I think is lying about taxes.

Like I said, it's a desperate ploy.

Responsibility: From the Conservative Party:

Statement by Owen Lippert:

"Since the beginning of the election campaign, I have been employed by the Conservative Party of Canada at Conservative Campaign Headquarters.

"In 2003, I worked in the Office of the Leader of the Opposition.  I was tasked with -- and wrote -- a speech for the then Leader of the Opposition.  Pressed for time, I was overzealous in copying segments of another world leader’s speech.  Neither my superiors in the Office of the Leader of the Opposition nor the Leader of the Opposition was aware that I had done so.

"I apologize to all involved and have resigned my position from the Conservative campaign."

Well, that will cut the legs out from under this story in short order.  The story was not all that relevant to start with, and now not at all.  I doubt many Canadians will be impressed if the Liberals or the media try to milk this for too long.