Wednesday, November 30, 2011

 

The BC Liberals are clearly bleeding support to the BC Conservatives under their new leader John Cummins.

.

Canadian Free Press Release Service

 Press Release: BC voters dubious, anxious and want answers according to IntegrityBC poll

Submitted by PIRA on Nov 30, 2011 
A public opinion survey finds BC voters are dubious about the BC Liberal government's honesty, anxious about their economic situation and want answers from the Clark government whether it's in the legislature or through a public inquiry into the BC Rail scandal.

These are just a few of the findings in a 48 question survey – the first commissioned by IntegrityBC – to get the pulse of British Columbians on a variety of issues facing the province from voting intentions to trust levels and provincial issues.

The Oracle Research survey shows the NDP with 43.8 per cent support among decided voters, the BC Liberals at 25.3 per cent, the Greens at 16.0 per cent and the BC Conservatives with 14.8 per cent.
It's a reversal of fortunes for the Liberals from how respondents had voted in 2009. According to the survey, 41.8 per cent voted Liberal, 34.5 per cent NDP, 15.8 per cent for the Greens and the Conservatives at 7.9 per cent. The BC Liberals are clearly bleeding support to the BC Conservatives under their new leader John Cummins.
“If this survey says anything, it should tell BC Liberals that BBM ratings don't always carry into the Premier's office,” said IntegrityBC executive director Dermod Travis.

For instance, only 23.8 per cent of respondents had a favourable opinion of Christy Clark while NDP leader Adrian Dix scored a rating of 42.5 per cent. Clark and the Liberals fared just a bit better when it came to being trusted to tell the truth. Twenty-eight per cent felt they could count on Clark and the Liberals to be honest versus thirty-nine percent who felt they can count on Dix and the NDP. A further 39.7 per cent felt Clark and the Liberals are arrogant and out of touch.

Remarkably, 80.5 per cent believe that the BC Liberals broke their word when they leased BC Rail to CN for 990 years, after promising not to sell the railway. A further 85.5 per cent, including 73.2 per cent of Liberal supporters, believe the government should come clean on the deal by answering the over 100 questions that the NDP tabled in the legislature and 68.5 per cent believe a public inquiry should be called, including 53.7 per cent of Liberal supporters.

Underlying all the results is a growing sense of anxiety among respondents over their economic and political situation with 61.1 per cent agreeing with the statement that many British Columbians feel the system is not working well for them and 64.5 per cent who feel sympathy for those who feel left behind.

Oracle Research conducted 600 interviews among voting age British Columbians between November 22nd and November 25th 2011. A complete copy of the survey is available at 

www.integritybc.ca
 
Oracle Research is a full service public opinion and research firm that has polled in BC since 2000.

IntegrityBC is a non-partisan organization championing accountability and integrity in BC politics. By empowering British Columbians, IntegrityBC hopes to change politics in BC letting citizens regain their trust in government.

- 30 -

For more information:
Dermod Travis, Executive Director
250-590-5126 / 778-440-4683
info@integritybc.ca
Dr P.A. Seccaspina
CEO Oraclepoll Research Ltd.
Toll Free North America 800-494-4199
Mobile 416-986-7937
paul@oraclepoll.com
www.oraclepoll.com

http://www.wireservice.ca/index.php?module=News&func=display&sid=7060
 """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Sunday, November 27, 2011

 

Rare BC Rail photo

.
I'm pretty sure Mile 25 is Moran, i.e. where Moran Siding is, and where the train-over-the-edge thing happened....it's the "slidiest" part of the Rattlesnake Grade...I'm pretty sure Pavilion is Mile 20 or Mile 19

            ..... (photo not printing) ........

this is a BC Archives photo, but don't worry about the credit, they can't restrict non-profit use and won't try; it's also originally a PGE photo and all Crown copyright is void after 50 years anyway

Cleaning some old mailboxes and found this...I may yet find the pics taken where they're trying to retrieve locos from Seton Lake, which is kinda what I'm looking for

--
Big Mike/Skookum1


Mike:  Try other bloggers with better skills. This is really is worth a look. - M. 

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

BC Rail data search

http://www.pbase.com/search?q=bc+rail&b=recent+queries

_______________________


    Railway Museum Squamish British Columbia Canada part 1 ...
Railway Museum Squamish British Columbia Canada part 1 West Coast Railway Association ...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq-MUtslGxk
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Saturday, November 26, 2011

 

More about the gentle treatment of two Hells Angels in BC Supreme Court

.
BC Mary comment:  Honestly, I can't begin to describe how Norm has put this important story together. But I urge you: Please read up on:  

Norm Farell's excellent posting
 
http://northerninsights.blogspot.com/2011/01/questions-of-perspicacity-and.html?showComment=1322355522064#c4952648320424162970

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""



 

The fight for control of Canadian Pacific Railway

.
By Jacquie McNish and Brent Jang
The Globe and Mail

When he flew to Montreal three weeks ago to meet with senior officials of Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd., Bill Ackman came bearing a thick, limited-edition book.

The weighty volume is Mr. Ackman’s signature opening move. Ever since the New York-based shareholder activist founded Pershing Square Capital Management LP in 2003, nearly two dozen undervalued companies, including Wendy’s International Inc., Target Corp. and J.C. Penney Co. Inc. have received an Ackman book. The confidential studies, often the product of months of work by Pershing Square’s analysts and consultants, are detailed blueprints for boosting long-term profits at companies in his crosshairs.

CP shareholders can expect to learn within the next several weeks whether Mr. Ackman’s book will be embraced by the company as a road map to recovery or a declaration of war ... {Major snip ... }

In a quarterly letter to Pershing Square investors released this week, Mr. Ackman identified new management as one of his core strategies for “increasing long-term intrinsic value” at target companies. In his effusive account of the turnaround at J.C. Penney, Pershing Square’s largest investment, he trumpeted his recent recruitment of Ron Johnson, former retail chief of Apple Inc., to lead J.C. Penney’s recovery.

“I expect to look back on the decision by the company to hire Ron, and our role in identifying and recruiting him, as one of the most significant contributions that we have ever made to any company,” Mr. Ackman wrote.

He did not directly discuss management in the letter’s short four-sentence summary of the CP investment. But he left little doubt that the railway’s executive suite is a concern when he wrote that the railway’s poor performance “is generally not attributable to structural factors


Read more: http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article2250143.html#ixzz1epGg0xvk


""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Thursday, November 24, 2011

 

Tony Clement And The G8 Boondoggle. November 24. But BC Mary asks: how do we understand BC Rail by these rules?

.
By Robin Mathews
November 24, 2011.

Treasury Board president Tony Clement stands by the answers he gave to a parliamentary committee about the $50 million G8 slush fund apparently concocted by himself and (then) minister of transportation and infrastructure John Baird.  The money was spent in Clement’s Muskoka-Parry Sound constituency at the time of the G8/G20 meetings (June 2010).

The role of Stephen Harper in what many believe was the misallocation of funds and the attempt to disguise the misallocation is by no means clear.  What did he know of the undertaking?

Called the G8 legacy fund, the $50 million was used to make signs, to erect public washrooms, for sidewalks and prettyfied streets, for a gazebo, and for the expansion of an existing community centre that cost $16.7 million. Some of the gingerbreading happened miles from any G8 activity.

NDP critics Charlie Angus and Alexandre Boulerice make claims that, if true, should blow a hole in the Stephen Harper cabinet.

The critics say Clement misled the parliamentary committee on several points.

The first: Clement told the committee that proposals for (242) projects were whittled down by the municipalities themselves and that he had no role.  The NDP critics allege that documents reveal Clement’s office was involved.

The second: The critics allege Clement reported that 33 projects were suggested and one was withdrawn by the municipality independently.  They claim to have an e-mail showing Clement’s office advised the municipality not to submit the suggestion.

The third: Clement, minister for the regional economic development agency FedNor, stated that his officials were not involved, but his critics allege Clement’s office was involved in sending documents to FedNor.

In essence, Tony Clement argues that he made no decisions and that he didn’t influence decisions.  How that could be? He was the incumbent MP for the riding and admits that he “had a recommendation role as a local member of parliament”.

The critics have asked Tony Clement to table documents the NDP is seeking that relate to the transactions involved in the $50 million slush fund.  Clement avoids the question.  So far he has not released the documents.

Strangely, Tony Clement argues that he had no “determinative” role in the decisions to spend in his constituency, but that the minister of transportation and infrastructure, John Baird, made all the decisions about how the slush fund would be spent.

Tony Clement admitted that the auditor general (then Sheila Fraser) found the $50 million was ear-marked for use related to Customs and border infrastructure, and that it was removed from that allocation without informing Parliament.  The auditor general also stated that the awarding of the 32 projects in Tony Clement’s riding were made without adequate reporting.

MPs Charlie Angus and Alexandre Boulerice also allege the possibility of tampering with the integrity of Hansard, the parliamentary textual reproduction of words spoken in parliament and parliamentary committee. They want to know if Tony Clement  deleted (or had others delete) from that record the fact (they claim) that he agreed to produce documents he will not produce.

In response to the allegations by the two NDP MPs, John Baird – minister of foreign affairs – made his, by now, stock kind of denial.

He spoke through his press secretary Joseph Lavoie.  Lavoie said that “the NDP have not provided any new facts to prove their misleading attacks.”  If what the NDP alleges most recently are “old facts”, they nonetheless suggest Tony Clement, president of the treasury board, misled a parliamentary committee, and – apparently – did so on purpose.  The language used is careful.  Critics in Parliament don’t say ‘X lied outright to save his skin’. They say ‘X misled ….’

Baird’s spokesperson also said that the “matter has been thoroughly aired by the [auditor general] and the RCMP”.  The auditor general, we remember, at first made some very strong allegations of what may fairly be called wrong-doing in a leaked draft of her Report.  The subsequent announcement that the allegations of wrong-doing were being trimmed back was not made by Sheila Fraser but by John Baird.

That was a very strange sequence of events.

The statement by Baird’s spokesperson that the RCMP “thoroughly aired” the matter is almost meaningless. Unfortunately, Canadians cannot place faith in the work of the RCMP. The nearest three RCMP Commissioners have emptied the Force of credibility.  Guiliano Zaccardelli was removed in disgrace over his answers dealing with Maher Arar.  Then (political appointee) William Elliott was removed for what was, apparently, boorish, insulting inability to administer and enormous “goofs”, such as phoning the B.C. RCMP officers involved in the death of Robert Dziekanski and “sympathizing” with them hours after the event.

Finally, the present RCMP Commissioner, Bob Paulson, was promoted to Deputy Commissioner by Commissioner William Elliott (just removed from the position for being administratively inept).  Paulson was not among the officers who complained of Elliott’s unsuitability as Commissioner.  And he was found pleasing enough to Stephen Harper to be appointed by him.

Has the present RCMP investigated the G8 Scandal to the satisfaction of Canadians?  We have no reason to believe that it has.

The response from John Baird’s office only raises the level of stench in the matter.

 """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


 

The cost of silence

.
Northern Insights / Perceptivity is an online journal exploring political and social issues, with a focus on justice, ethics and accountability, and a related interest in journalism. Bloggers are akin to pamphleteers of early days and the Internet is our tool of free speech. Value it. Use it. Respect it. Protect it.

Norman Farrell, North Vancouver, B.C.

http://northerninsights.blogspot.com/2011/11/cost-of-silence-highest-losses-in-bcr.html

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""



Tuesday, November 22, 2011

 

Outraged taxpayer says (and Norm Farrell adds):

.
No tenders put out, no announcements of interest, just "your" cash going straight into Stewart Muir's (and Athana Mentzelopoulos') bank account.

Just like in the bad old days of the Federal Grits and Paul Martin . . . PORK, PORK & more PORK!

Quote:

Husband of senior Clark aide wins lucrative PR contract

By Cindy E. Harnett and Rob Shaw
 Postmedia News - November 21, 2011

The husband of one of Premier Christy Clark’s top advisers has been awarded a lucrative contract at the Vancouver Island Health Authority without going through the normal public process.

Stewart Muir, a former Vancouver Sun editor, was direct-awarded a $181,000 job as vice-president of communications and external relations for the health authority. The contract is good for up to a year.

Muir’s wife, Athana Mentzelopoulos, is Premier Christy Clark’s deputy minister for corporate priorities.

There was no public advertisement posted for the job.

Health Minister Mike de Jong said Monday he is sorting out the details of the hiring ...


Read more about it HERE:

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Husband+senior+Clark+aide+wins+lucrative+contract/5746890/story.html#ixzz1eRNUsxZb 

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Watch Norman Farrell's excellent blog:

http://northerninsights.blogspot.com/2011/11/cost-of-silence-highest-losses-in-bcr.html


Norm Farrell, North Vancouver, BC Canada  V7J 2J7

Northern Insights / Perceptivity is an online journal exploring political and social issues, with a focus on justice, ethics and accountability, and a related interest in journalism. Bloggers are akin to pamphleteers of early days and the Internet is our tool of free speech. Value it. Use it. Respect it. Protect it.






"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""




Saturday, November 19, 2011

 

It was July 13, 2009, when as the clock struck midnight in the British Columbia garden of good and evil, every benefit accruing to CN was harvested. By them and for them. And we, the former owners, had no say.

.
By BC Mary
November 19, 2011

Today, while searching the archives for something else, I found this and grieved. The date was July 2009 and it all came rushing back: I had been feeling pretty bad, sad, and mad: Leonard Krog had let us down and the critical 5-year-anniversary date of the BC Rail - CN "deal" would take on a new dimension because we had been unable to muster our resources against it.

That was July 13, 2009, when as the clock struck midnight in the British Columbia garden of good and evil, every benefit accruing to CN was harvested. By them and for them.  And we, the former owners, had no say. None. Not about selling this precious public asset. Not about the terms. Not about any sober, second thoughts on such a massive blunder as the loss of the nation's 3rd largest railway.

And so, our small world once again was shown as split apart: on the one side are those who see land and rights as bargaining chips in a massive gamble. On the other side are those of us who see precious lands, rights, and benefits as something to preserve and protect because they belong to us all, even into the future. 

We may not know yet how they did it, or who did it, or why they did it. We only know that a treacherous deal was done behind our backs. Even before the deal was signed. CPR told us so. OmniTRAX told us so. Someday we'll know the whole story.

For now, we can keep a fierce grip on the notion that a deal contrived in secret, by questionable means, is not a deal at all. Never forget that. Never forget that if we have lost a battle we haven't lost the war to preserve and protect British Columbia.

Remember that nobody came to help us. It means that the rot has spread.

Grieve. Yes, grieve because at midnight that night, British Columbians lost  something precious, massive ... but not irretrievable.  So we dare not give up. You know that.  There is a much bigger struggle underway and you know that too. Someone called us "the Nigeria of North America".  You know why. BCRail is the template as well as the key.

What we can save from the BCRail deal, will be our gift to the future of the province we love.

Courage. 

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""



Friday, November 18, 2011

 

CP'S RAILWAY TO RICHES

.
With big U.S. Invester on Board, CP faces a Boardroom Battle as it rushes to catch rival CN


{Snip} ... it’s only been recently that the rails have also been viewed as a vehicle for deep-pocketed investors to make carloads of money. Railroads, which haul everything from grain and iron ore to automobiles and refrigerators, offer exposure to the overall economy, not to mention a rare opportunity to invest in a near-monopoly business (you don’t hear about many new railroads being launched).

BC Mary commentHere is some background reading well worth considering, given the threats and implications currently swirling around BC transportation issues. 

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/11/16/railway-to-riches/

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""



 

Grab-bag of BC oddities for the weekend ...

.
Kash Heed 'could have been premier'

By Michael Smyth
The Province November 18, 2011


Liberal MLA Kash Heed, former police chief of West Vancouver and a former provincial solicitor-general, was found guilty of election campaign violations.

[Please visit Smyth's column for gorgeous photograph by: Ian Lindsay, PNG files. BC Mary.]

It was one of the weirdest recent political scandals in a province known for its political weirdness.

It was also one of the greatest "what if" stories in B.C. politics.

What if Kash Heed's career hadn't imploded over a shabby dirty-tricks scam — a two-bit piece of political trickery that probably didn't help him much in the last election anyway?

"He could have been premier," says Barinder Sall, Heed's former campaign manager. "He had everything going for him."

Heed had the political smarts and the politician's gift of the gab. He had the rugged good looks and confident swagger of a successful cop. He had the burning ambition and workaholic's metabolism. [Argghh...gag me with a spoon! - BCM.]

It didn't hurt that he was a favoured son of the politically powerful Indo-Canadian community.

And it all came crashing down over a cheap anti-NDP election flyer that looked like it was produced with scissors, a photocopier and a bottle of Elmer's glue.

Sall admitted financing the sleazy Chinese-language flyer that appeared in Heed's riding in the dying days of the 2009 election. He was fined $15,000 and placed on probation.

Heed was fined $8,000 for going about $5,000 over his campaign spending limit, though he escaped more serious charges related to the illegal flyer, of which he claimed ignorance.

Sall was determined not to take the fall quietly. Since pleading guilty, he's been dishing the dirt on Heed, his former mentor, who remains a Liberal MLA.

Sall released embarrassing emails, in which Heed trashed his Liberal colleagues.

He told me about a secret phone in Heed's office that the former solicitor-general called "the bat phone."

"Kash thought he was Batman," Sall told me. Ouch.

But Sall's most serious charge was that the Heed campaign exceeded legal spending limits by about $40,000 — not the $5,000 determined by a special prosecutor.

On Thursday, Elections B.C. said Sall had not produced enough fresh evidence to warrant a new investigation, and the case was officially closed.

"I'm surprised by that," Sall told me. "I would have been happy to co-operate with them, but they didn't even contact me."

Heed seemed relieved and did not rule out trying to revive his battered career.

But I'd say it's all over now, except for the debate about what might have been.


Read more HERE and HERE:

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Kash+Heed+could+have+been+premier/5731241/story.html#ixzz1e4s6oHLX

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Kash+Heed+could+have+been+premier/5731241/story.html

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Lessons of a Police Chief: Militarization is a Mistake


By Norm Stamper
Seattle Police Chief who oversaw Seattle’s crackdown on WTO protesters, learned the dangers of militarization. His advice for a creating a police force that truly serves and protects communities.

YES magazine, THE NATION - Nov 16, 2011


They came from all over, tens of thousands of demonstrators from around the world, protesting the economic and moral pitfalls of globalization. Our mission as members of the Seattle Police Department? To safeguard people and property—in that order. Things went well the first day. We were praised for our friendliness and restraint—though some politicians were apoplectic at our refusal to make mass arrests for the actions of a few.
Then came day two. Early in the morning, large contingents of demonstrators began to converge at a key downtown intersection. They sat down and refused to budge. Their numbers grew. A labor march would soon add additional thousands to the mix.
“We have to clear the intersection,” said the field commander. “We have to clear the intersection,” the operations commander agreed, from his bunker in the Public Safety Building. Standing alone on the edge of the crowd, I, the chief of police, said to myself, “We have to clear the intersection.”
I’m convinced it is possible to create a smart organizational alternative to the paramilitary bureaucracy that is American policing.
Why?
Because of all the what-ifs. What if a fire breaks out in the Sheraton across the street? What if a woman goes into labor on the seventeenth floor of the hotel? What if a heart patient goes into cardiac arrest in the high-rise on the corner? What if there’s a stabbing, a shooting, a serious-injury traffic accident? How would an aid car, fire engine or police cruiser get through that sea of people? The cop in me supported the decision to clear the intersection. But the chief in me should have vetoed it. And he certainly should have forbidden the indiscriminate use of tear gas to accomplish it, no matter how many warnings we barked through the bullhorn.
My support for a militaristic solution caused all hell to break loose. Rocks, bottles and newspaper racks went flying. Windows were smashed, stores were looted, fires lighted; and more gas filled the streets, with some cops clearly overreacting, escalating and prolonging the conflict. The “Battle in Seattle,” as the WTO protests and their aftermath came to be known, was a huge setback—for the protesters, my cops, the community.
More than a decade later, the police response to the Occupy movement, most disturbingly visible in Oakland—where scenes resembled a war zone and where a marine remains in serious condition from a police projectile—brings into sharp relief the acute and chronic problems of American law enforcement. Seattle might have served as a cautionary tale, but instead, US police forces have become increasingly militarized, and it’s showing in cities everywhere: the NYPD “white shirt” coating innocent people with pepper spray, the arrests of two student journalists at Occupy Atlanta, the declaration of public property as off-limits and the arrests of protesters for “trespassing.”
The paramilitary bureaucracy and the culture it engenders—a black-and-white world in which police unions serve above all to protect the brotherhood—is worse today than it was in the 1990s. Such agencies inevitably view protesters as the enemy. And young people, poor people and people of color will forever experience the institution as an abusive, militaristic force—not just during demonstrations but every day, in neighborhoods across the country.

Much of the problem is rooted in a rigid command-and-control hierarchy based on the military model. American police forces are beholden to archaic internal systems of authority whose rules emphasize bureaucratic regulations over conduct on the streets. An officer’s hair length, the shine on his shoes and the condition of his car are more important than whether he treats a burglary victim or a sex worker with dignity and respect. In the interest of “discipline,” too many police bosses treat their frontline officers as dependent children, which helps explain why many of them behave more like juvenile delinquents than mature, competent professionals. It also helps to explain why persistent, patterned misconduct, including racism, sexism, homophobia, brutality, perjury and corruption, do not go away, no matter how many blue-ribbon panels are commissioned or how much training is provided.
External political factors are also to blame, such as the continuing madness of the drug war. Last year police arrested 1.6 million nonviolent drug offenders. In New York City alone almost 50,000 people (overwhelmingly black, Latino or poor) were busted for possession of small amounts of marijuana—some of it, we have recently learned, planted by narcotics officers. The counterproductive response to 9/11, in which the federal government began providing military equipment and training even to some of the smallest rural departments, has fueled the militarization of police forces. Everyday policing is characterized by a SWAT mentality, every other 911 call a military mission. What emerges is a picture of a vital public-safety institution perpetually at war with its own people. The tragic results—raids gone bad, wrong houses hit, innocent people and family pets shot and killed by police—are chronicled in Radley Balko’s excellent 2006 report Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America.
Even as police officers help to safeguard the power and profits of the 1 percent, police officers are part of the 99 percent.
It is ironic that those police officers who are busting up the Occupy protesters are themselves victims of the same social ills the demonstrators are combating: corporate greed; the slackening of essential regulatory systems; and the abject failure of all three branches of government to safeguard civil liberties and to protect, if not provide, basic human needs like health, housing, education and more. With cities and states struggling to balance the budget while continuing to deliver public safety, many cops are finding themselves out of work. And, as many Occupy protesters have pointed out, even as police officers help to safeguard the power and profits of the 1 percent, police officers are part of the 99 percent.

Just the Facts: It's a Locking-People-Up Problem
The American problem with mass incarceration is less about crime than about how—and who—we lock up.
There will always be situations—an armed and barricaded suspect, a man with a knife to his wife’s throat, a school-shooting rampage—that require disciplined, military-like operations. But most of what police are called upon to do, day in and day out, requires patience, diplomacy and interpersonal skills. I’m convinced it is possible to create a smart organizational alternative to the paramilitary bureaucracy that is American policing. But that will not happen unless, even as we cull “bad apples” from our police forces, we recognize that the barrel itself is rotten.
Imagine the community and its cops united in the effort to responsibly “police” the Occupy movement.
Assuming the necessity of radical structural reform, how do we proceed? By building a progressive police organization, created by rank-and-file officers, “civilian” employees and community representatives. Such an effort would include plans to flatten hierarchies; create a true citizen review board with investigative and subpoena powers; and ensure community participation in all operations, including policy-making, program development, priority-setting and crisis management. In short, cops and citizens would forge an authentic partnership in policing the city. And because partners do not act unilaterally, they would be compelled to keep each other informed, and to build trust and mutual respect—qualities sorely missing from the current equation.
It will not be easy. In fact, failure is assured if we lack the political will to win the support of police chiefs and their elected bosses, if we are unable to influence or neutralize police unions, if we don’t have the courage to move beyond the endless justifications for maintaining the status quo. But imagine the community and its cops united in the effort to responsibly “police” the Occupy movement. Picture thousands of people gathered to press grievances against their government and the corporations, under the watchful, sympathetic protection of their partners in blue.

Norm Stamper was Seattle’s police chief from 1994 to 2000, and a police officer for 34 years. He is a member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and the author of Breaking Rank: A Top Cop’s Exposé of the Dark Side of American Policing. He wrote this article for the Nation.
Copyright © 2011 The Nation — distributed by Agence Global


Source, with some photos, HERE:

http://www.yesmagazine.org/peace-justice/lessons-of-a-police-chief-militarization-is-a-mistake


""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
North Van's Grumps has left a new comment on your post:

What were bloggers called during the BC Rail Trial..... well whatever it was, times have changed, by the looks of it.

On Bobby Virk's lawyer's Website, visitors are encouraged to take a look at a link

Bloggers Comment on Kevin McCullough

And it all comes back to BC Mary's blog....... and bloggers.

There appears to be Tip of hat to you
BC Mary, from Kevin McCullough.



Posted by North Van's Grumps to The Legislature Raids at 18 November, 2011

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


 

Engineering marvel ...

.
Sicker mine prompted engineering marvel. 

Special to The Citizen - Nov. 18, 2011
 
http://www.canada.com/Sicker+mine+rivalry+prompted+engineering+marvel+conclusion/5730518/story.html

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Thursday, November 17, 2011

 

Would we have lost BC Rail if we'd had free speech in our legislatures? Elizabeth May speaks out ...

.
ISLAND TIDES
November 17, 2011
www.islandtides.com

It was beginning to look as though I would not be able to deliver on a promise I made in the election. If you, dear reader, made it to any of the all-candidate meetings, or came to any smaller ‘house parties’ to meet your Green Party candidate, you likely heard my plan (even as one MP) for how I could contribute to greater decorum
in the House of Commons.

I had spoken with others—from Preston Manning to Carolyn Bennett—who began their time in the House pledging to never heckle but abandoned the highroad when
they tired of being heckled themselves.

It struck me as a new approach, worth trying, to improve decorum by refusing to heckle, and also refusing to continue speaking over heckling.

The principle seemed straightforward: interrupting and speaking in offensive
terms toward a Member of Parliament both violate Standing Orders of the House. Perhaps if I refused to continue over the interruptions and rudeness and simply sat down, even mid-question, the Speaker would call for order and then I could continue without the distracting abuse. And if the Speaker did not rise and call for order, I would miss my question.

My reasoning was, if I kept to my plan and missed many questions, the media would have to start covering my efforts and public support could push other MPs to change as well.

Since June, with one question per week in Question Period, and with over 100 interventions in debates andspeeches, I have been waiting for the first moment when I would be heckled. Yet, and this was a nice surprise, I was not being yelled at or interrupted. As the days and weeks went by, I began to assume that respect when I was on my feet in the House would merely continue. But then on November 3, I asked this question: ‘Mr Speaker, from 1913 to 1956, a period of over 40 years, time limits on debates were used ten times. In the last 40 days, it has been used seven times, making a new historical record. What used to be the exception to the rule appears to now be the rule.’


At this point I became aware of a great deal of yelling. Conservative members were shouting ‘TIME!’ The CBC’s Kady O’Malley noticed it and tweeted ‘Do the CPC MPs really have to heckle Elizabeth May…?’


My plan suddenly took hold and I simply sat down. MPs around me looked confused, so I said (not realizing my microphone was still on): ‘I am only sitting because I cannot be heard.’



The Speaker called for order and gave me back the floor. It was quiet, and I resumed: ‘Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask the government House leader if we can again restore a parliamentary tradition that limits on debates occur when matters are urgent or otherwise justified and do not
become routine?’

A second surprise: the Opposition benches broke into applause.

Not responding to the question came the reply from the Hon Peter Van Loan
(Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC): ‘Mr Speaker, in the last election Canadians gave us a strong mandate to deliver on jobs for Canadians…’

It is good news to find that refusing to speak over the noise has had one successful test.


However, the main reason I wanted to share this exchange is that it points up a topic so sensitive to the government that heckling is immediate.


I have spoken out on asbestos, climate change, tax fairness, our fisheries, the threat of oil tankers, trade union issues, human rights, the Wheat Board, pharmaceuticals, Libya, and on and on. But this, the highlighting of a
government shutting down debate, provoked immediate abuse of decorum.


Ever since we resumed Parliament in mid-September, the government has moved to shut down debate and rush bills through Second Reading. From killing the Wheat Board, ending the Gun Registry, pushing through the Omnibus Crime Bill, the so-called Human Smuggling Act (which calls for the jailing of all refugees arriving by ship for a year), the budget implementation act, and the redistribution of seats, again and again debate has been cut short. It is a new historical record—and not one of which the prime minister should be proud.


This is not the only development in this fall’s session that points to increasing control by the centre to shut down democratic debate. Parliamentary committees, the least partisan aspect of the House of Commons, had already been politicized in the previous Minority Parliament.


Conservative Committee chairs were instructed to avoid any testimony embarrassing to their party, even if it meant throwing down a pen and storming from the room to bring proceedings to a halt. Now, with their majority, the Conservative government has found a new way to avoid evidence it does not want to hear.


More and more of the business of committees is being conducted in secret. In-camera committee meetings usedto cover private discussions, such as which witnesses should be called. Now the hearings can take place in secret when witnesses are testifying, or when a vote is held on motions of importance. After an in-camera session, it is impossibleto know who said what or how anyone voted.

The increasing limitations of debate and reduced daylight on House proceedings is not healthy. Many of us are wondering, with a majority of the seats and no election until 2015, why are the Conservatives in such a hurry? Is democratic debate really such a threat?

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Elizabeth May is the MP for Saanich-Gulf Islands and leader of the Green Party of Canada.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Wednesday, November 16, 2011

 

New RCMP Commissioner: "a Cop's Cop"

.
By Robin Mathews
Wednesday November 16, 2011


Globe and Mail for November 16 calls new RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson “a cop’s cop” which, in the language of Canadians, means Every Bad Thing Possible.  Canadians want a people’s cop.  They have had all they can stand of the other.

Guiliano Zaccardelli, a cop’s cop, interfered in the 2006 federal election and reported so badly on the handling of the Maher Arar file that he had to be removed in disgrace.  He left such a mess in the ranks that it still lies there stinking.  A cop’s cop.

William Elliott came next. He thought of himself as a cop’s cop.  So much so he telephoned the alleged RCMP killers of Robert Dziekanski (before any serious investigation of their actions) to tell them how much he sympathized with them (?). They are now under charges of perjury, having been excused worse criminal charges by a Special Crown Prosecutor whose opinion of the case is not the opinion of many people in Canada.

William Elliot was a full-scale disaster – forced out because he did nothing for the ranks. And because the senior men who had to work with him were treated like idiots by him, and finally exploded in protest.

It was that full scale disaster, William Elliott, who named Bob Paulson Deputy Commissioner!  William Elliott approves of Bob Paulson.  Does Paulson need a worse testimonial?

If so, he has one.

The blindly incompetent political  appointment of William Elliott was made by Stephen Harper right out of Stockwell Day’s office.  What brains! What a smart move!

And now, the disaster called Stephen Harper has named Bob Paulson as new Commissioner of the RCMP.  Duck everybody! Duck!

We are told very little about Bob Paulson except what a wonderful, sterling, tough, able, excellent, robust, down-to-earth, hard-working, dedicated, focussed, strong, dependable, firm, unflappable, effective, efficient, forcible police officer he is.

We may be forgiven for wanting to know more about this RCMP officer who spent 21 years in British Columbia, possibly home to the most corrupt RCMP force in history.

Where was Bob Paulson during the expensive, outlandish and wholesale boondoggle of an action at Gustafsen Lake in 1995 when an army of RCMP officers with help from the Canadian Army fought a huge and valiant battle to overcome about 23 mostly-peaceful Native People? One of the RCMP officers is on record there as saying the RCMP are experts in smear and disinformation.

Where was Bob Paulson when the 1997 APEC disaster happened at UBC.  Out of it came the ridiculous and expensive Ted Hughes Report (hundreds of pages) that gave itself up to whitewash of every dirty act of the RCMP – for which Hughes seems to have been well rewarded?

Where was Bob Paulson when the RCMP – as I insist over and over – helped to fake a case against then premier Glen Clark to remove him on behalf of The Tragedy Of The Century – Gordon Campbell? I complained to the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP about the investigation of Glen Clark. The RCMP chopped my complaint.  The wonderful Commission for Public Complaints sent me a report THREE YEARS LATER to say my complaint had been wrongfully terminated by RCMP officers.  And the Commission did nothing about that.  Nothing whatever.

Where was Bob Paulson when the Gordon Campbell cabinet and its corporate friends were destroying BC Rail with what looks more and more like the assistance of the RCMP?  The Basi, Virk, and Basi (BC Rail Scandal) trial was blown out of the water by deals even the Auditor General of B.C. is showing deep concern about. And the question that served as the dynamite that blew it out of the water concerned an RCMP officer’s relations with top Liberals including then premier Gordon Campbell.  Where was Bob Paulson during those exciting years? What, precisely, was he doing?

Women have been revealing the distasteful sexual harassment going on in the B.C. RCMP during the years Bob Paulson was an RCMP officer in B.C.  What did he do,  and what did he think about that harassment going on around him?

Men have joined that chorus of complaint, saying the BC RCMP is sick, saying that complaints of unacceptable behaviour by senior officers are met with punishment of the people who complain. In B.C., Bob Paulson was an Inspector.  How much did he inspect harassment of female officers?  How much did he inspect legitimate complaints that were treated as invitations to revenge?

Bob Paulson – one may fairly believe - has been appointed and programmed to fail.  Nothing in his past – or where he lived out his past – can give anyone reason to think he will succeed in doing what Canadians want done for the RCMP and for The Rule Of Law in Canada.

Bob Paulson is making positive sounds about reforming the RCMP and attending immediately to the charges of sexual harassment in the Force.  He has about a month.  A month.  If nothing is happening by then, Canadians will know Bob Paulson is another robot put in place by Stephen Harper for political reasons – for the worst political reasons imaginable.

[Today, November 16, 2011 is the 126th anniversary of the bitterly controversial hanging of the Metis leader, Louis Riel, by NorthWest Mounted Police at Regina, Saskatchewan. Riel was a duly elected Member of Parliament and is considered to be one of the founding fathers of the Canadian nation. 

Read more HERE, HERE and HERE. - BC Mary.]  

 """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


 

You thought the B.C. Rail corruption case would fade into history after the defendants pleaded guilty last year in return for getting their whopping legal bills covered by the government? Think again, writes Les Leyne.

.
By Les Leyne
Times Colonist - Nov. 16, 2011

The train of events set in motion by the long-running [BC Rail political corruption] case continues to trundle along. And Auditor General John Doyle signaled it will be a while yet before the stories come to an end.

The plea bargain arrangement that saw former aides Dave Basi and Bobby Virk excused from their $6 million legal bill after admitting to breach of trust charges arose from the indemnity agreement that covered their lawyers' costs in the first place.

That prompted enough public concern that the government asked University of B.C. president Stephen Toope to review how the government decides on whether to cover public servants legal bills. He reported last week on the general principles of such deals.

But while he was finishing that work, the auditor general filed a petition with the B.C. Supreme Court that came to light Tuesday. If he gets what he's after, it could fill his desk to overflowing with specific details about the legal bills and how the taxpayers ended up paying them.

Doyle's office is working on an audit of all special indemnities granted by the government over the last several years, Basi and Virk's included. There have been about 100 such deals struck and the audit is to determine if taxpayers got value for the money.

Based on his work to date, Doyle appears quite skeptical of the arrangements. In requesting full access to all details of the two men's indemnities, Doyle states to the court there are a number of apparent problems with such deals.

They are granted outside of established policy, there is no set approval process and government staff may not fully understand what they're doing in processing such indemnities, he said. And in a few cases, where the minister of finance approves an indemnity, usually for an elected politician, "the approval is not supported by legal advice from the attorney general's ministry."

Doyle is making a special effort to collect information on the Basi-Virk indemnities because they dwarf any of the deals that went before. Toope reported last week that most are for a few thousand dollars and don't come anywhere close to the $6 million tab rung up by defence lawyers over the years the B.C. Rail juggernaut rolled on.

But lengthy efforts to get all the financial data have run into repeated roadblocks over issues like solicitorclient privilege, cabinet confidentiality and specific confidentiality arrangements between the government and the defendants.

In a response to the petition, filed the same day, the government gives the appearance of being ready to cooperate with the watchdog - as soon as it is ordered to do so. The government said it has waived its claims of privilege and has repeatedly advised the auditor general it is willing to provide access to documents in question.
Reviewing all 100 indemnities, the government stated the number of documents generated over the years may be as many as 10,000 or more. They've all been imaged on to a hard drive and coded to be searchable.
As far as the Basi-Virk dealings are concerned, the government said the Legal Services Branch had outside independent reviewers go over the billings. It set up a process where all bills were identified and linked to the defence strategy so "as to permit fully informed assessment before billings were certified as payable." {Snip...}


Doyle's petition said both Basi and Virk last month declined to waive some of the restrictions on accessing the legal accounts.

The issue erupted in the legislature Tuesday, with the Opposition asking what the Liberals are trying to hide.

Attorney General Shirley Bond insisted the government backs Doyle and is collaborating with him. "We are supporting the court order that is required."

As it stands, the auditor general will likely eventually get a hard drive full of information on how assorted public servants have had their legal costs covered over and above the normal channels.
He's already disclosed he's got some problems with how these arrangements have been made over the years. The deeper he gets into them, the more unlikely it is his concerns will be allayed.

lleyne@timescolonist.com

© Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist

Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/technology/Leyne+column+Questions+linger+Rail+corruption+case/5718279/story.html#ixzz1dsyxPguU

_____________________________

And here's another good one ...

Basi-Virk audit blocked

 'Independent reviewers' cite lawyer-client privilege

By Keith Fraser
The Province - November 16, 2011

Auditor-General John Doyle is heading back to court in a bid to get access to documents related to the government's controversial $6-million legal payments in the Basi-Virk case.

In July, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Bruce Greyell ordered the B.C. Attorney-General's Ministry to turn over all records related to the deal. But in a second petition filed in court this week, Doyle claims that some key documents haven't been released.

And he seeks to have two Victoria lawyers who were appointed to vet the legal bills in the Basi-Virk case provide their records to him.

The petition says that Doyle is completing the planning stage of an audit of the indemnity policy by which Dave Basi and Bobby Virk got their legal fees paid as government employees.

But Doyle claims that access to many documents over which the Attorney-General's Ministry claims either cabinet or solicitor-client privilege have been restricted.

Documents have either been delayed, edited or not released at all, slowing and hampering the audit process, he says.

"Full and unfettered access is fundamental to an auditor's role in scrutinizing the management of programs, services and resources he or she is auditing," he says.

The petition names two Victoria lawyers, Sandra Harper and Robert Jones, who were appointed as "independent reviewers" to vet the Basi-Virk bills.

But efforts to obtain documents in the possession of the lawyers were rebuffed when counsel cited solicitor-client privilege, Doyle says.

{Snip ... }

The ministry says that it will not refuse to give the access sought by Doyle as soon as a declaration is made that it may provide such access.

After only a few witnesses had been heard at trial, Basi and Virk pleaded guilty to breach of trust in connection with the $1-billion sale of B.C. Rail. They received conditional sentences.

kfraser@theprovince.com twitter.com/keithrfraser

© Copyright (c) The Province



Read more HERE:

http://www.theprovince.com/Basi+Virk+audit+blocked/5717866/story.html#ixzz1dt5drbe9

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Tuesday, November 15, 2011

 

Good Grief, haven't we seen this movie about 50 times before?

.
Auditor-General seeks more documents on Basi-Virk $6 million legal fee deal
By Keith Fraser
The Province - November 15, 2011

B.C. Auditor-General John Doyle is heading back to court in a bid to get access to documents related to the government’s controversial $6 million legal payments in the Basi-Virk case.

In July, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Bruce Greyell ordered the B.C. attorney-general’s ministry to turn over all records related to the deal.

But in a second petition filed in court this week, Doyle claims that some key documents haven’t been released.

And he seeks to have two Victoria lawyers who were appointed to vet the legal bills in the Basi-Virk case provide their records to him.

The petition says that Doyle is completing the planning stage of an audit of the indemnity policy by which Dave Basi and Bobby Virk got their legal fees paid as government employees.

But Doyle claims that access to many documents over which the attorney-general’s ministry claims either cabinet or solicitor-client privilege has been restricted.

Documents have either been delayed, edited or not released at all, slowing and hampering the audit process, he says. {Snip} ...

“Full and unfettered access is fundamental to an auditor’s role in scrutinizing the management of programs, services and resources he or she is auditing.”

In particular, the missing documents include complete indemnity files for “special” indemnities such as those given to Basi and Virk, copies of invoices from private legal counsel and briefing notes and e-mails.

The petition names two Victoria lawyers, Sandra Harper and Robert Jones, who were appointed as “independent reviewers” to vet the Basi-Virk bills.

But efforts to obtain documents in the possession of the lawyers were rebuffed when counsel cited solicitor-client privilege, says the petition. {Snip} ...
The Basi-Virk deal sparked controversy because the indemnity policy at the time called for the legal fees of government employees charged with criminal offences to be paid as long as they don’t plead guilty or are convicted.

After only a few witnesses had been heard at trial, Basi and Virk pleaded guilty to breach of trust in connection with the $1 billion sale of B.C. Rail. They received conditional sentences.



Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/Auditor+General+seeks+more+documents+Basi+Virk+million+legal+deal/5714849/story.html#ixzz1dpT16mVE


http://www.theprovince.com/news/Auditor+General+seeks+more+documents+Basi+Virk+million+legal+deal/5714849/story.html?cid=megadrop_story

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Monday, November 14, 2011

 

In Criminal Breach of Trust: Stephen Harper, the Conservative Party, 67 candidates in the 2006 election, Senator Irving Gerstein, Senator Doug Finley … and others

.
By Robin Mathews
Nov. 14, 2011

The 2006 federal election is key in the present illegitimate holding of a majority by the Harper Conservatives in the House of Commons. In that election more than 67 Harperite Conservatives and the Conservative Party conspired to defraud the Canadian people of a fair election.

The Prosecution of the violations by the people named above has been palid and ineffective.  They should have been charged, one and all, with criminal breach of trust – a charge which the Criminal Code of Canada declares requires, because of its seriousness, less evidence when dealing with public servants.  Like prime ministers, senators, and candidates for election, for instance.

The move by the Prosecution to accept a plea bargain in a matter of the greatest importance to all Canadians is an act of major irresponsibility, I insist.

Stephen Harper and at least seventy others colluded to engage in criminal breach of trust in a calculated violation of the Elections Act in 2006.

In standard Harperite practice the wholesale fraud is said to have happened without the knowledge of the man who lets nothing in the Party happen without his knowledge:  Stephen Harper.  But being leader, he cannot escape accusation.

After pleading guilty to plea bargain charges of breaching campaign spending limits and failing to report expenses, spokespeople for the Harper Party – with Orwellian lie-tactics – claim that guilt is not guilt, that the illegal is legal, that the profoundly unethical is ethical.

Orwell was describing the use of language in a fascist state.

In addition, the 2006 election campaign was marked by the entrance into campaigning – in fact – by the RCMP on behalf of the Harper Conservatives.  Military and police interference in democratic elections proclaims a move towards fascism.  In a break with honourable tradition, the RCMP announced – in the midst of election campaigning - that it was undertaking a criminal investigation of Liberal minister of finance, Ralph Goodale.  The announcement was totally gratuitous, and, of course, Goodale was cleared completely.

But the RCMP helped – along with the wholesale criminal breach of trust of the Conservative candidates and Party – to shape an illegitimate minority victory for Stephen Harper.

Not long after, Guiliano Zaccardelli, RCMP head, was caught in perjury before a Commons Committee and was forced to resign.  He was carefully tucked away by the Harper government in an Interpol position in France.  We have heard no more about him because the Mainstream Press and Media are branches of the Harper office.

The Mainstream Media is a branch of the Harper office.  Stephanie McDowall has written CBC about Evan Soloman’s slippery attack on Bob Rae on The House, November 12.  I wrote to CBC after the embarrassing failure of Carol Off to interview the Harperite representative lying about the conviction of the Conservative Party for election fraud on November 10.

Questions that leapt to my mind:  Why isn’t the lawyer for the Conservative Party being interviewed?  Did or did not the Conservative Party plead guilty? (Ms. Off never asked that.)  Did 67 Harperite candidates engage in the violation?  Why won’t Stephen Harper be interviewed on the subject?  Etcetera.

Ms. Off – to my mind – worked to kill the story.

In addition NO OPPOSITION REPRESENTATIVE was interviewed by As It Happens concerning the admission of guilt by the Conservative Party.

Canadians must publicize the “assistants to Stephen Harper” in the media whenever they show their heads.  Perhaps we should have a petition to ask that Carol Off be removed.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""



 

Canada's Stephen Harper government is spending more than 60 billion dollars on new military jets and warships while slashing more than 200 million dollars in funding for research and monitoring of the environment.

National News

November 13, 2011
http://saltspringnews.com

Dispatch from Harperland: Leader in environmental science and research no more. Environment programs gutted; scientists, gagged, leaving Canada in droves

Stephen Leahy Inter Press Service International November 9, 2011

In addition to budget cuts, PM Harper's office has placed a gag order on government scientists. [Photo: Ted Buracas/public domain. Visit this page for its embedded links.]

UXBRIDGE, Canada, Nov 9, 2011 (IPS) - Canada's Stephen Harper government is spending more than 60 billion dollars on new military jets and warships while slashing more than 200 million dollars in funding for research and monitoring of the environment.

Amongst the programmes now crippled is Canada's internationally renowned ozone monitoring network, which was instrumental in the discovery of the first-ever ozone hole over Canada last spring. Loss of ozone has been previously linked to increases in skin cancer.

"The proposed cuts go so far the network won't be able to do serious science," said Thomas Duck, an atmospheric scientist at Halifax's Dalhousie University.

Canada was the pioneer in ozone monitoring, developing the first accurate ozone measuring tool that led to the discovery that the world's ozone layer was dangerously thinning in the 1970s, which in turn led to the successful Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances.

Canada has about one-third of the ozone monitoring stations in the Arctic region. It also hosts the world archive of ozone data, which is heavily relied on by scientists around the world.

"There's only one guy running the entire archive, and he's received a lay-off notice letter," Duck told IPS.

Ozone monitoring and research is part of Environment Canada, the government department charged with protecting the environment, conservation and providing weather and meteorological information.

Environment Canada is roughly analogous to a combination of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Environment Canada had a 1.07- billion-dollar budget in 2010, which has now been cut 20 percent to 854 million dollars for 2011-12. The EPA and NOAA budgets for 2010 were 10.3 billion and 5.5 billion dollars, respectively.

Some 776 Environment Canada employees have been told their jobs may be terminated. That's 11 percent of the current staff in a government department that has been a favourite target for budget and staff cuts for the past decade, to the point where it was barely functional, said Duck.

A similar gutting of science and research is underway at Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the department responsible for protecting and managing Canada's ocean and inland waterways including the Great Lakes. In addition, the main source of public funding for environmental science for Canadian universities has run out of money, and is expected to close early next year. Not surprisingly, scientists are leaving Canada in droves.

"My international colleagues are shocked by what has happened to Canada. We were a leader in environmental science and research for so long," Duck said. ...

Posted at: Sunday, November 13, 2011 by: Jim Scott -- Permalink: (#)
      
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Jim: Please forgive my piracy. I'm counting on your usual generosity here -- allowing me to make this item available on my blog, too -- good grief, this ozone news is too bloody awful -- no wonder there's an OCCUPY movement sweeping this poor planet!! - BC Mary.


"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Saturday, November 12, 2011

 

Former BC premier comes out of the shadows ...

.
Oh.My.God. He's back. So ... all together now: "How Great I am ... no, no ...  How Great Gordo am ... no ... Gordo art ... that's it: How great he art, my heart leaps up in wonder  [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YVSYyPj3oA&feature=related] ...Don't miss the opportunity to read the happy comments from throngs of British Columbians speaking their minds after reading this Globe and Mail column.

And the thing is ... Himself is no longer a BC Liberal !!! [Neither is The Globe and Mail.] Click HERE for the dazzling details, including a happy shot of Gordo, unable to "Look left", as he steps into the London, England street ... ha ha ha. Good one:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/former-bc-premier-comes-out-of-the-shadows-into-bright-new-career/article2234388/

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Rail+stink+lingers/5709667/story.html

BC Rail stink lingers
Michael Smyth - Nov. 14, 2011

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""



Friday, November 11, 2011

 

Is it a bird? Is it a man? No, it's Superman (the vanishing Aneal Basi)

.
When all else fails:

Impaired cases tossed due to clogged courts

Louise Dickson
Times Colonist - Nov. 5, 2011


... In 2005, the provincial court had 143 judges. The current provincial court judge count is 127. Victoria provincial court used to have 13 to 14 full-time judges. It now has the equivalent of 91⁄2 judges.

The lack of court resources also led to another impaired driving case being adjourned twice this week.

Aneal Basi, an accused in the B.C. Rail matter, was stopped for impaired driving on Nov. 29, 2008. His first court appearance was on Jan. 15, 2009. The defence requested adjournments of the first two trial dates — March 10 and Sept. 9, 2010 — because the B.C. Rail matter was before the courts.

After the charges against Basi in the B.C. Rail matter were stayed, a new trial was set for July 20, this year, but the trial could not proceed because of an issue over the disclosure of documents.

The case was adjourned until Thursday, but two other cases were on the list for trial in that courtroom. The Crown chose to proceed with a two-day sexual assault trial because expert witnesses from Vancouver were waiting to testify. The Basi case was adjourned until Friday, when it was adjourned again due to lack of court time and resources. A new date is to be set Nov. 15.

"There's cause for concern that if the matter is not set for trial quickly, there's a real possibility the charge will be stayed for overly long delay," said Crown prosecutor Nils Jensen.

The B.C. government said in October that it will hire retired judges ... {Snip}

Read more HERE: 

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Impaired+cases+tossed+clogged+courts/5661745/story.html#ixzz1dRpSqSuN

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Policy won't stop payouts like those in BC Rail Case

CTV - Nov. 10, 2011

Excerpt. [For a good photo of Aneal Basi and the 2 other men accused in the BC Rail Political Corruption Trial, plus 2 of their lawyers, click HERE]:

Dave Basi, centre, and his lawyer Michael Bolton, far right, Bobby Virk, lower right, and Aneal Basi, 2nd left, and his lawyer Erin Dance, left, leave B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver, B.C., on Monday October 18, 2010. (Darryl Dyck / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

By Dirk Meissner

The Canadian Press - Nov. 10, 2011

The B.C. government will go after legal costs incurred by government workers found guilty in court, but that doesn't mean taxpayers are completely off the hook for costs such as the $6 million paid to convicted former B.C. government aides David Basi and Bobby Virk, says a report released Thursday. {Snip} ...

Attorney General Shirley Bond suggested the government won't be part of plea deals that involve paying legal costs, as occurred last October in the Basi-Virk case.

"There will be a policy framework that requires government to contemplate in every case where there is a guilty verdict or a criminal conviction, the pursuit of assets," she said. "It removes discretion during the process to actually look at doing that (in the Basi-Virk case)."

{Snip} ... Toope's report said government is obligated, in fairness, to pay the legal costs of its employees while they are considered innocent, but not otherwise.

"The requirement of reimbursement in the case of criminal convictions should be mandatory and not subject to discretion," said Toope in a letter to Attorney General Shirley Bond as part of his report.

Bond said the government will adopt the nine recommendations in Toope's report, including proceeding with plans to go after assets to recover court costs of guilty government workers.

"Yes, we are going to pursue recovery of assets," said Bond in an interview. "Government will be required to pursue the recovery of assets."

The October 2010 guilty pleas of Basi and Virk in the long-running BC Rail corruption case saw the government pay $6 million in legal fees incurred by the two former government aides. But the province decided not to go after their assets.

Toope's report said that when it comes to government workers facing charges it is fair and prudent to uphold the integrity of the presumption of innocence, which translates to indemnifying workers from paying legal costs.

"That policy should allow for indemnification throughout the entire criminal process, up to the determination of innocence or guilt," said the report.

In an interview from India, where Toope is participating in Premier Christy Clark's trade mission to Asia, he said it is up to the province to pursue costs following guilty findings.

"In my recommendations, I am at least ensuring that when there's money there to be gained back by government that government should indeed do that."

But he said government's could still end up having to cover the legal costs of government workers found guilty.

"There could still be a circumstance where taxpayers are on the hook, but I want to be clear that that is an extremely unusual circumstance," said Toope.

Opposition New Democrat Leonard Krog said Toope's recommendations provide government with the makings of a solid future policy that outlines the indemnification of government employees facing legal issues.

But it sheds little new information on the decision to pay Basi and Virk's legal fees despite their guilty pleas, he said.

"In terms of uncovering the truth around what happened with the payment of over $6 million, we are no further ahead," Krog said.

Toope said the government paid legal costs of about $11.4 million from 1999 to 2011. He said there were 95 legal cases involving government employees.

Basi and Virk pleaded guilty to charges of breach of trust and accepting bribes and were each sentenced to two years under house arrest.

As part of the plea arrangement, the government agreed to pay the pair's legal costs.

The scandal dates back to December 2003, when police officers raided the B.C. legislature, removing boxes of documents connected to the sale of Crown-owned BC Rail.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
And Aneal Basi?
______________


 

Berkshire could be the buyer, an outcome that would give BNSF coverage of the entire western U.S. and Canada.

.

BC Mary comment: I checked the calendar. It's not April 1. What gives here?



Canadian Pacific Railway marked for sale

November 10, 2011
By: Today's Trucking

The Journal of Commerce (JOC) reported last week that a private equity firm's new minority stake in the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) has prompted suggestions could lead to a large re-organization or even a full-on sale of the railroad in a consolidation of the North American rail industry.

Peter Nesvold, a Jefferies & Co. analyst, said that the Warren Buffet-led firm Berkshire Hathaway — which bought BNSF Railway two years ago — could be a buyer.

RBC Capital Markets’ analyst Walter Spraklin said a non-railroad or a Canadian pension fund would be a more likely buyer.

Pershing Square Capital Management acquired a 12.2 percent stake in CP and said it wants to hold talks with management, reported the JOC.

Pershing's founder and manager has a reputation for targeting companies that he sees as undervalued, then leaning on management for changes that would drive up the stock.

Pershing said it would "engage in discussions with management, the board, other stockholders… and other relevant parties concerning the business, management, operations, assets, capitalization, financial condition, governance, strategy and future plans."

Nesvold said that if Pershing pushes for a "strategic tie-up," Berkshire could be the buyer, an outcome that would give BNSF coverage of the entire western U.S. and Canada. Nesvold, according to the JOC, noted that a joint venture with Kansas City Southern could create the first trans-North American railroad.

CP has been struggling this year with severe weather problems. Q3 profit fell 5.3 percent to $184 million as increasing costs surpassed a 4.3 percent increase in revenue, to $1.32 billion.



Source:

http://www.workingforest.com/canadian-pacific-marked-sale/

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks to an anonymous eagle-eyed tipster for connecting these dots.

 

MacKenzie ruled that the questions asked by the Basi-Virk Defence were acceptable … and the trial could proceed. Alarm bells must have rung in cabinet and corner corporate offices all over B.C. The BC Rail Political Corruption Trial had to be stopped right away ...

.


B.C. RCMP Sexual Harassment and the BC Rail Scandal



By Robin Mathews
November 11, 2011

The BC Rail Scandal is so huge and so intricate that it reaches right into the present sexual harassment claims against RCMP officers made by Catherine Galliford, Krista Carle, and others.

Responding for the RCMP in a news release - under the Orwellian title “RCMP Health and Wellness” - BC RCMP Superintendent Kevin DeBruyckere states that the RCMP “encourages our members to report incidents of harassment….”

Ms. Carle has reported already that when she reported incidents of harassment the RCMP Management tried to cover up the problems. Males in the Force have made similar kinds of statement.

Attorney General Shirley Bond is completely unruffled by the news.  Negotiations with the RCMP for a 20 year contract with B.C. will go on as if nothing has happened, she has – in effect – said.  Ms. Bond, I suggest, is aware that the RCMP has so much on the Gordon Campbell Liberal Cabinet and its successors that she dare not suggest there will be any hitch in completing the new contract.

I suggest the BC Rail Scandal is governing the conditions under which the cabinet of British Columbia can negotiate with the RCMP.  But there is more ….

Let us remember Superintendent Kevin DeBruyckere.  He was a major investigator in the BC Rail Scandal leading to the criminal charges against Basi, Virk, and Basi.

Defence counsel claimed that he is the brother-in-law of Kelly Reichert, then executive director of the B.C. Liberal Party.  Defence counsel went on to ask in very assertive tones if Kevin DeBruyckere was conveying information about the investigation to Kelly Reichert who was discussing the matters with Gordon Campbell, then premier of the province.  Allegations were made in the media that Defence counsel had documents to back their position, documents that were never revealed because of the sudden shutting down of the trial.

Kevin DeBruyckere was – in fact – front and centre in the hasty, messy, odious, shutting down of the trial of Dave Basi, Bob Virk and Aneal Basi.

How?

Here is how I interpret major events. When the accused chose to change from their election of trial by judge alone to trial by judge and jury, they had to deal with the Special Prosecutor (who was illegitimately appointed to the position by the Attorney General’s ministry in which he had been for seven years partner and colleague of Attorney General Geoff Plant, and eleven years partner and colleague of Deputy Attorney General Alan Seckel).

The ‘dealing’ between the accused and prosecution resulted in an ‘Agreement of Facts’ between them - not a rare matter.  Often, to facilitate trial, accused and prosecution agree to a number of basic facts.

This agreement of facts, however – as I interpret it – contained an “agreement” by the accused and their counsel that they would abandon certain inalienable rights the accused has to defend against criminal allegations.  They, apparently, agreed they would not question things like the investigation process, the involvement of certain high-ranking politicians – things, apparently, of that kind.

When the trial began a complete impasse occurred.  Everything stopped dead.  It did so because – as I interpret events - the accused refused to believe that the agreement they had signed was one in which they gave away some of their right to defend against charges.  But they had signed the agreed ‘Statement of Facts”.  Their counsel had also signed the Agreement.

Defence counsel was in a terrible bind.  They had signed, and – unlike the Special Crown Prosecutor - they were legitimately in the courtroom. They would stand by their signatures.  But the accused refused to accept the interpretation of the agreement of facts made by the Special Prosecutor.

The trial stopped.  The accused were advised to seek independent advice.  They did so. Some days passed. Then … the accused  decided to proceed with their counsel in place.  But it appears that something had happened in the minds of Defence counsel.

When the first Crown witness, Martyn Brown, long-time chief of staff for Gordon Campbell, took the stand, something happened – something dramatic.

Kevin McCullough, Defence counsel, asked Martyn Brown what he knew about the relationship of Kevin DeBruyckere and Kelly Reichert.  And – if I remember correctly – he asked … or he intimated that through those two men information about the investigation was likely being reviewed by Gordon Campbell.  Gordon Campbell, premier, was alleged by Defence counsel to be a principal in the corrupt transfer of BC Rail to the CNR and, therefore, someone who should have known nothing whatever about the investigation.

No sooner was the question to Martyn Brown out of the mouth of Kevin McCullough than Special Crown Prosecutor William Berardino leapt to his feet and objected strenuously to, as he saw it, the breach of the Agreement.

High drama was playing out in the courtroom!  The judge on the trial, Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie, had refused to acknowledge that William Berardino was illegitimately in the courtroom.  She was permitting – I am convinced – an illegitimate trial to proceed.  She was – some suggested – rushing the trial forward from pre-trial and was attempting to keep it packaged in a very small scope that kept away from major politicians and major private corporation wheelers-and-dealers.

The trial stopped again.  Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie had to rule on the legitimacy of the questions asked Martyn Brown by Defence counsel.

She, now, was in a bind, as I see it.  If she ruled that the questions were not acceptable, she might be seen as denying the rights of the accused to a fair trial – and that judgement might very well be made by a higher court on appeal.  She would not look good. I believe no higher court could approve of accused people signing away their right to a fair trial.  That would contradict the most fundamental principles of our legal system.

If she ruled that the questions were acceptable, the door would swing open to Crown witness after witness being questioned about the corrupt structure and dealings to transfer BC Rail to the CNR.  The trial would turn away from the three accused to their superiors in cabinet and in private corporations, and it might reveal to British Columbians a pattern of criminal behaviour at the highest levels in British Columbia.

Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie ruled that the questions asked by the Defence were acceptable … and it could proceed.

Alarm bells must have rung in cabinet and corner corporate offices all over B.C.  The trial had to be stopped right away, I believe. Negotiations with the accused and their lawyers went into full spate.  Only one other witness was half-way through being cross-examined by Defence counsel when the trial stopped.  Shut down. Ended.

It was all over.  The Special Crown Prosecutor who was illegitimately appointed, and his assistants, would collect (from taxpayers) their (something like) $12 million dollars.  Defence counsel would be paid by the taxpayers their $6 million dollars. The accused would pay none of their costs of Defence. According to the auditor general of B.C., the approval of payment of the bills of the accused was nowhere minuted in cabinet proceedings – though cabinet approved the extraordinary payment of Defence counsels’ $6 million bill.

What sparked that rush to close up the trial?  The questions to Gordon Campbell’s chief of staff Martyn Brown about the relation and dealings between RCMP officer Kevin DeBruyckere, executive director of the B.C. Liberal Party Kelly Reichert, and Gordon Campbell, architect of the corrupt transfer of BC Rail to the CNR.

There was Kevin DeBruyckere smack in the middle of the matter that blew up the Basi, Virk, and Basi trial and caused it to end ignominiously.

And here is Kevin DeBruyckere issuing a press release on the claims by female officers that the RCMP is riddled with sexual intimidation and other misconduct. And here is Kevin DeBruyckere holding hands, you might say, with Shirley Bond – the two of them saying everything is just fine.  Relax.  The RCMP is the heart and soul of integrity and the B.C. cabinet – stuffed with members from the Great Days Of The BC Rail Sell-Out – is aching for a twenty year renewed contract with the RCMP.



""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Thursday, November 10, 2011

 

B.C. RCMP Sexual Harassment and the BC Rail Scandal

.
By Robin Mathews
November 10, 2010


The BC Rail Scandal is so huge and so intricate that it reaches right into the present sexual harassment claims against RCMP officers made by Catherine Galliford, Krista Carle, and others.

Responding for the RCMP in a news release - under the Orwellian title “RCMP Health and Wellness” - BC RCMP Superintendent Kevin DeBruyckere states that the RCMP “encourages our members to report incidents of harassment….”

Ms. Carle has reported already that when she reported incidents of harassment the RCMP Management tried to cover up the problems. Males in the Force have made similar kinds of statement.

Attorney General Shirley Bond is completely unruffled by the news.  Negotiations with the RCMP for a 20 year contract with B.C. will go on as if nothing has happened, she has – in effect – said.  Ms. Bond, I suggest, is aware that the RCMP has so much on the Gordon Campbell Liberal Cabinet and its successors that she dare not suggest there will be any hitch in completing the new contract.

I suggest the BC Rail Scandal is governing the conditions under which the cabinet of British Columbia can negotiate with the RCMP.  But there is more ….

Let us remember Superintendent Kevin DeBruyckere.  He was a major investigator in the BC Rail Scandal leading to the criminal charges against Basi, Virk, and Basi.

Defence counsel claimed that he is the brother-in-law of Kelly Reichert, then executive director of the B.C. Liberal Party.  Defence counsel went on to ask in very assertive tones if Kevin DeBruyckere was conveying information about the investigation to Kelly Reichert who was discussing the matters with Gordon Campbell, then premier of the province.  Allegations were made in the media that Defence counsel had documents to back their position, documents that were never revealed because of the sudden shutting down of the trial.

Kevin DeBruyckere was – in fact – front and centre in the hasty, messy, odious, shutting down of the trial of Dave Basi, Bob Virk and Aneal Basi.

How?

Here is how I interpret major events. When the accused chose to change from their election of trial by judge alone to trial by judge and jury, they had to deal with the Special Prosecutor (who was illegitimately appointed to the position by the Attorney General’s ministry in which he had been for seven years partner and colleague of Attorney General Geoff Plant, and eleven years partner and colleague of Deputy Attorney General Alan Seckel).

The ‘dealing’ between the accused and prosecution resulted in an ‘Agreement of Facts’ between them - not a rare matter.  Often, to facilitate trial, accused and prosecution agree to a number of basic facts.

This agreement of facts, however – as I interpret it – contained an “agreement” by the accused and their counsel that they would abandon certain inalienable rights the accused has to defend against criminal allegations.  They, apparently, agreed they would not question things like the investigation process, the involvement of certain high-ranking politicians – things, apparently, of that kind.

When the trial began a complete impasse occurred.  Everything stopped dead.  It did so because – as I interpret events - the accused refused to believe that the agreement they had signed was one in which they gave away some of their right to defend against charges.  But they had signed the agreed ‘Statement of Facts”.  Their counsel had also signed the Agreement.

Defence counsel was in a terrible bind.  They had signed, and – unlike the Special Crown Prosecutor - they were legitimately in the courtroom. They would stand by their signatures.  But the accused refused to accept the interpretation of the agreement of facts made by the Special Prosecutor.

The trial stopped.  The accused were advised to seek independent advice.  They did so. Some days passed. Then … the accused  decided to proceed with their counsel in place.  But it appears that something had happened in the minds of Defence counsel.

When the first Crown witness, Martyn Brown, long-time chief of staff for Gordon Campbell, took the stand, something happened – something dramatic.

Kevin McCullough, Defence counsel, asked Martyn Brown what he knew about the relationship of Kevin DeBruyckere and Kelly Reichert.  And – if I remember correctly – he asked … or he intimated that through those two men information about the investigation was likely being reviewed by Gordon Campbell.  Gordon Campbell, premier, was alleged by Defence counsel to be a principal in the corrupt transfer of BC Rail to the CNR and, therefore, someone who should have known nothing whatever about the investigation.

No sooner was the question to Martyn Brown out of the mouth of Kevin McCullough than Special Crown Prosecutor William Berardino leapt to his feet and objected strenuously to, as he saw it, the breach of the Agreement.

High drama was playing out in the courtroom!  The judge on the trial, Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie, had refused to acknowledge that William Berardino was illegitimately in the courtroom.  She was permitting – I am convinced – an illegitimate trial to proceed.  She was – some suggested – rushing the trial forward from pre-trial and was attempting to keep it packaged in a very small scope that kept away from major politicians and major private corporation wheelers-and-dealers.

The trial stopped again.  Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie had to rule on the legitimacy of the questions asked Martyn Brown by Defence counsel.

She, now, was in a bind, as I see it.  If she ruled that the questions were not acceptable, she might be seen as denying the rights of the accused to a fair trial – and that judgement might very well be made by a higher court on appeal.  She would not look good. I believe no higher court could approve of accused people signing away their right to a fair trial.  That would contradict the most fundamental principles of our legal system.

If she ruled that the questions were acceptable, the door would swing open to Crown witness after witness being questioned about the corrupt structure and dealings to transfer BC Rail to the CNR.  The trial would turn away from the three accused to their superiors in cabinet and in private corporations, and it might reveal to British Columbians a pattern of criminal behaviour at the highest levels in British Columbia.

Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie ruled that the questions asked by the Defence were acceptable … and it could proceed.

Alarm bells must have rung in cabinet and corner corporate offices all over B.C.  The trial had to be stopped right away, I believe. Negotiations with the accused and their lawyers went into full spate.  Only one other witness was half-way through being cross-examined by Defence counsel when the trial stopped.  Shut down. Ended.

It was all over.  The Special Crown Prosecutor who was illegitimately appointed, and his assistants, would collect (from taxpayers) their (something like) $12 million dollars.  Defence counsel would be paid by the taxpayers their $6 million dollars. The accused would pay none of their costs of Defence. According to the auditor general of B.C., the approval of payment of the bills of the accused was nowhere minuted in cabinet proceedings – though cabinet approved the extraordinary payment of Defence counsels’ $6 million bill.

What sparked that rush to close up the trial?  The questions to Gordon Campbell’s chief of staff Martyn Brown about the relation and dealings between RCMP officer Kevin DeBruyckere, executive director of the B.C. Liberal Party Kelly Reichert, and Gordon Campbell, architect of the corrupt transfer of BC Rail to the CNR.

There was Kevin DeBruyckere smack in the middle of the matter that blew up the Basi, Virk, and Basi trial and caused it to end ignominiously.

And here is Kevin DeBruyckere issuing a press release on the claims by female officers that the RCMP is riddled with sexual intimidation and other misconduct. And here is Kevin DeBruyckere holding hands, you might say, with Shirley Bond – the two of them saying everything is just fine.  Relax.  The RCMP is the heart and soul of integrity and the B.C. cabinet – stuffed with members from the Great Days Of The BC Rail Sell-Out – is aching for a twenty year renewed contract with the RCMP.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""