(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
Oct. 14, 1998)
Integrity of
APEC inquiry undermined
By Leo Knight
"I
repeat ... that all power is a trust; that we are accountable
for its exercise; that from the people and for the people all
springs, and all must exist."
--
Benjamin Disraeli (19th century British Prime Minister)
WHAT
is with our politicians these days? They appear incapable of
telling the truth. What's worse, we don't seem to be able to
hold them to account for their lies.
They
all seem to be tarred with the same brush, regardless of
political stripe and level of government. And why is this?
Correct
me if I'm wrong, but they work for us. Don't they?
Take
the soon-to-be former Solicitor General Andy Scott, for example.
Here's
a man whose single biggest political feat is that he wasn't
thrown out of office in the last federal election.
But,
because he's one of the last remaining Liberal MPs from the
Maritimes following that purge, he has a Cabinet post.
Not
just any post mind you, he's the chief law enforcement officer
in the country.
There
he was two weeks ago, on a small commuter airplane, flapping his
mouth off to a Liberal backroom crony about such things as the
APEC inquiry and assorted other matters.
He
told his seatmate, a lawyer and heavy donor to the Liberal
cause, that the RCMP Public Complaints Commission hearings
currently taking place in Vancouver, were a fait accompli.
He
claimed four or five Mounties were going to take the fall for
using excessive force and that would be the end of the matter.
Scott,
never a shining light, neglected to notice that an NDP
backbencher, Dick Proctor, was seated across the aisle and, true
to his journalistic background, began scribbling furiously to
ensure he had a complete and accurate record of the minister's
verbal indiscretions.
But
when confronted in the House of Commons, Scott denied having
said any such thing.
Indeed,
he couldn't even remember who he was sitting with, he claimed,
much to the incredulity of the baying media pack.
He
actually said he couldn't recall if his seatmate was a man or a
woman.
He
kept up his denials throughout the course of last week despite a
constant pounding from the opposition MPs. Albeit, he did have a
somewhat recharged memory in recalling his seatmate was an old
Liberal crony and a man he's known for years.
When
Proctor produced his notes, meticulously numbered, showing the
continuity of the conversation, Scott maintained his denials.
Proctor then released those notes which outlined other bits of
the conversation, parts of which Scott agreed he had said.
If
some of the notes are accurate and all were made at the time of
the flight, then how is it remotely possible that all aren't
correct?
Well
it's not now, is it?
Here's
the reality. The minister lied. He lied to the House. He lied to
the media and he lied to the Canadian public.
The
Liberals are trying to claim this is a simple, "he said/he
said" situation.
It
isn't.
The
notes, you see, are corroboration of Proctor's claims. The
unbelievable loss of memory followed by the sudden recall of
part of what Proctor professed, is also corroborative.
Followed
up with the ambiguous letter written by the seatmate, not
denying the claims of Proctor, but rather saying Scott did not
say anything inappropriate, seems to put the icing on the cake.
But
Proctor took it one step further. He repeated his allegations of
lying outside the House where members are not protected by
privilege. If Scott was truthful, he'd sue.
But
Scott won't take the matter to court. He can't and won't risk
being cross-examined under oath. There's something about perjury
convictions that frightens politicians.
I'm
not entirely sure which is worse in this case: that we are lied
to by a minister of the Crown or that the whole APEC public
complaints hearings look like a setup for some line police
officers.
We
have become inured to politicians lying, especially here in B.C.
But
despite Scott's cowardice in not resigning or the prime
minister's lack of morality by not demanding it, the aspect of
what Scott was saying is very frightening.
In
looking at the words attributed to Scott, he is clearly saying
the commission has been compromised.
Regardless
of which side of the fence one is on, any pre-determination of
results makes this whole thing a charade. One designed to
download any responsibility for wrongdoing by the prime
minister, his officials or senior members of the RCMP, onto the
men and women at the barricades with the protesters trying to
get through their lines.
That's
a disgrace.
If
I were still a member of the RCMP and required to testify at the
commission, I'd have to consider very carefully whether to
co-operate.
Any
chance the Mounties had of getting a fair hearing at the hands
of the commission has gone out the window of a Dash 8 at 20,000
feet. Despite the minister's hollow protests to the contrary, it
no longer matters what the commission determines. Neither side
can trust whatever the findings are, to be fair and impartial.
Thanks
Andy. Now go away.
*
* *
Two weeks ago, in a column about organized crime, I said two brothers, members of the Hells Angels, were charged with a variety of drug offences resulting from a two-year VPD investigation. The two brothers charged are "Chico" Pires and George Pires. Tony Pires, a third brother and also a Hells Angels member, was not charged in that investigation. Lest there be any confusion.
-30-