Like that annoying person in the choir who is habitually a half-beat behind the rest while singing, Alberta premier Ed 'don't call me Ned Flanders' Stelmach's criticism of Canada's head of intelligence has once again proved his need for a metronome.
Richard Fadden, the head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), recently said his agency was concerned about Canadian politicians being under the sway of foreign governments.
"We're in fact a bit worried in a couple of provinces, that we have an indication that there's some political figures who have developed quite an attachment to foreign countries," said Fadden.
This caused the inevitable uproar in some circles, as the comments by Fadden were made in general terms and did not include specifics. This is not uncommon and completely understandable, given his profession.
The allegation that our political scene could have been infiltrated by 'operatives' working under the direction of foreign interests should surprise no one, especially coming from the very top of our intelligence community.
Given Canada's history of moving towards Trudeau's vision of a multi-cultural utopia at the expense of such things as a proper immigration system that wouldn't weaken our overall national security, to reject such a claim out of hand would be completely naive.
Cue Ed Stelmach.
The Alberta premier called Fadden 'irresponsible' for making the suggestion without including more specific information. Apparently Stelmach doesn't understand the concept of 'national security'.
Given the choice of who to believe between CSIS and the Alberta P.C.'s, I'll pick the intelligence agency every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Imagine if CSIS warned of a pending terror attack on Canadian soil, but couldn't give specific details because it would show our hand to the bad guys.
Would Stelmach's reaction be the same? 'We don't believe you because you didn't specify an exact time, type of attack, or weapons used.'
What we cannot understand is why Stelmach is speaking out on this matter at all. There were no references to him, his office, his party, or his government. So why is he so quick to lash out? If his purpose was to quell any suspicion, he has failed.
Instead, some now wonder what prompted his diatribe.
While I would not doubt the presence of spies in our province - Alberta does possess the valuable oil sands - the answer is most likely a simple one.
Milquetoast Ed desperately needed to deflect public focus from his own government's embarrassments and failures. Fadden's comments were a convenient, if not belated, excuse.