RCMP move Duffy investigation to PMO as those with knowledge relocated

A few years ago, we were treated to a new low in Canada when the RCMP had to raid the offices of the Conservative Party of Canada in relation to an Elections Canada investigation. And now, the RCMP are eyeing the Conservative Prime Minister's Office as well.

We hear now that the PMO has confirmed the RCMP has asked them for information related to their investigation into a $90,000 payment former Harper chief of staff Nigel Wright made to Mike Duffy, who was facing a demand for repayment of improperly claimed expenses he charged to the Senate.

The RCMP have contacted the Prime Minister’s Office as part of its investigation of a secret payment to Sen. Mike Duffy.

A senior government official, who would only speak on condition of anonymity, said that investigators have officially asked Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s office for information.

This follows a report last week that the RCMP had requested an e-mail from the PMO that allegedly outlined the terms of a deal for repayment between Wright and Duffy with other PMO staff members included on the chain, which would contradict the Harper line that only Wright had knowledge and was responsible for what transpired. The PMO was accused of dragging its feet on turning the e-mail over -- contradicting Harper's claims of full cooperation -- and denied it has received any request for information.

As the investigation moves closer to the PMO, it seems that those who may have direct knowledge of the deal -- and could contradict the Harper line that Wright acted alone -- have been quietly moved along.

In what would otherwise be an interesting set of coincidences, Of those with alleged direct knowledge of the e-mail, former PMO issues management director Chris Woodcock was moved to a minister's office,  one-time legal advisor Benjamin Perrin has returned to the private sector, and, of course, Wright himself got resigned. And while she hasn't been linked to the e-mail, Senator Marjory Lebreton resigned as government leader in the Senate just one day after being interviewed by the RCMP in relation to their Duffy investigation.

Lots of movement away from the centre as the RCMP investigation moves closer to the PMO. Could this be the first government to have both its party offices and its PMO raided by the RCMP? Suppose it depends on just how "cooperative" they choose to be.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

There's courts of law, and there’s the people's court

Lower case. Not the one with Judge Marilyn.

The word goes crazy and I’m out of the country. Still in Boston, at Logan Airport enjoying cheese and crackers in the United Lounge and waiting for my flight to San Francisco. But thanks to the wonders of PDAs, and Facebook, as I strolled (ironically enough) through the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum I was made aware of this cheery news:

Mounties raid Tory HQ
The Canadian Press with Globe and Mail Update
April 15, 2008 at 12:28 PM EDT

OTTAWA — The RCMP raided Conservative party headquarters in Ottawa on Tuesday at the request of Elections Canada.

A spokesman said elections commissioner William Corbett had asked the assistance of the Mounties to execute a search warrant, but he would not say why.
(more)

Needless to say, everyone here and here is going bananas. Paul Wells is one of the rare voices of caution, reminding us of the presumption of innocence in our legal system and what not. Fair enough, but no matter what happens in the court of law, the more important verdict will be that from the court of public opinion. And there, the presumption of innocence doesn’t apply so much, and the burden of proof is a very different thing.

These headlines are going to be splashed all over the airwaves tonight, and all over the newspapers tomorrow. A raid on a political party HQ? It’s unprecedented. And if there’s good film to be had, then it’s the makings of some devastating campaign. Remember how much mileage the Cons got from Dingwall’s entitled to his entitled footage, even though it turns out he actually was entitled? A crapload.

The public doesn’t pay much attention to the ins and outs, if you will, of the day to day political goings-on. But this one will get their attention. And no matter what happens down the road, this is what they’ll remember. That’s politics. And that’s the people’s court. It’s their verdict that will count.

I need to pack-up and catch my plane, so I’ll refer you to my past blogging on the in-and-out scheme for more on the scandal behind the headlines.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

I'm not surprised

This morning the RCMP’s Public Complaints Commission is scheduled to release the results of its probe into the bombshell that rocked the last election: the RCMP’s mid-election fax to the NDP’s Judy Wasylycia-Leis confirming the force was investigating Finance Minister Ralph Goodale’s office vis a vis the income trust leak.

While the revelation was a body blow to the Liberal campaign, and sparked a media feeding frenzy, you’ll recall in the end Goodale was exonerated. And the Conservatives flip-flopped on income trusts, breaking a clear and firm promise.

Macleans.ca’s Kady O’Malley is surprised at the lack of media attention to the investigation by commission chair Paul Kennedy into whether the disclosure constituted unfair interference in the democratic process:

At the same time, I've been somewhat surprised by how little interest his decision to investigate the allegations has generated in the media - back when it was first announced a little more than a year ago, but last month, when it was revealed that the RCMP had prepared a communications strategy surrounding possible charges against an unnamed political staffer, which eventually failed to transpire.

I’m not surprised myself. If there’s one thing the media is loathe to do it’s to admit, or even hint, that they may have been wrong. They were all over Goodale and the Liberals on this during the last election. They’re certainly not going to give much ink to a story that could indicate their fervor was misplaced. Once they decide on a narrative it will take a tsunami to push them off it. Picture the kid with their fingers in their ears crying “la la la.”

And for the record, no matter what Kennedy reports today, the infamous income trusts fax did not cost the Liberals the last election. Sure didn’t help. But we lost the last election for a multitude of reasons I’ve already explored at length. So no wondering what might have been, please.

Instead, our eyes should be looking forward. And at our own fax machines, lest any Cadman Affair-related faxes be coming from the serge-coated ones.

UPDATE: The report is out, and I'm still not overly surprised:

The RCMP didn't break any rules when it announced a criminal investigation into the federal Finance Department in the middle of the 2005-06 election campaign, because there were no rules to break, concludes a report by the RCMP's watchdog.

Well that about sums it up doesn’t it? It’s kind of hard to break the rules when there are no rules.

Kennedy goes on:

"Given the absence of any such specific policy, procedures or guidelines, (Kennedy) could not find that any RCMP officer failed to comply with applicable standards," according to a press release accompanying the report.

Kennedy said the Mounties' policies are "inadequate" to deal with situations where public disclosure of a police investigation may have an impact on a democratic process.

Now the debate will be should there be policies for such situations? Actually I think we all agree there should be a policy of some sort so the question is, really, what should the policy be?

Because if we’re to ensure there isn’t a hint of politicization in these things there needs to be a clearly defined policy that the RCMP follows in all cases. It can’t be left to the whim of the commissioner or individual officers.

I don’t think disclosure of an ongoing investigation should be treated any differently then any other investigation just because it involves public figures, or comes during an election campaign. Whatever rules apply to the disclosure of investigations involving non-public figures should also apply here.

And I’m pretty sure faxing MPs isn’t normal procedure, and calling them repeatedly to make sure they got it, isn’t normal procedure.

UPDATED AGAIN: The Globe’s coverage has some interesting revelations:

Former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli changed a press release on the force's investigation into an income-trust leak to include the name of then Liberal finance minister Ralph Goodale…

“Mr. Zacardelli directed that a media release be prepared… This release was amended upon Commissioner Zaccardelli's direction to include the name of Mr. Goodale.”

A very telling move for the commissioner of the RCMP to take, in the midst of an election campaign, and certainly one that puts his motives into question. Kennedy says he has no evidence Zaccardelli’s decision was politically motivated. Of course, Zaccardelli wasn’t exactly cooperative, so a lack of evidence is unsurprising:

Mr. Kennedy said that Mr. Zaccardelli and several senior members of the RCMP policy centre, which was responsible for the conduct and communication of the income-trust investigation, refused to provide him with any information about the disclosure.

Why did they not cooperate? Can they not be compelled to cooperate? I’d suggest Parliamentary committee hearings, but it would quickly become politicized, despite the fact these are important issues that should be resolved.

Also of note:

He also noted that the RCMP has no policy on notifying complainants when an investigation is initiated into a complaint.

Which means the RCMP decided that, for some reason, it was particularly important we know about this particular investigation. All the more reason for a formal policy.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Where’s your balls, media? And paging RCMP Commissioner Elliot

The gall of the Harper Conservatives never ceases to amaze me. This story is astounding:

CHARLOTTETOWN (CP) _ RCMP officers, acting on orders from the Prime Minister’s Office, evicted journalists from a hotel lobby Wednesday to prevent them from approaching Conservative MPs to discuss the country’s governance. While tour bus groups freely wandered the lobby of Charlottetown’s Delta Hotel, plainclothes Mounties rebuffed reporters who had convened for the Conservative party’s three-day summer strategy session.

“There’s a time and a place for the media,” a Mountie told a small knot of print reporters, making it clear the issue was not a matter of security but of communications strategy. The unnamed officer said he was acting on orders from the Prime Minister’s Office.
(more)

Forgive me for getting worked-up, but as a journalist myself I take these things seriously. I have two main points to make:

To my media friends: Are you seriously going to stand for this bullshit? You have lawyers, right? Have them get their asses to court right now and file an injunction or something. I don’t see how it can possibly be legal to bar members of the media from a place that is freely accessible to any other member of the public. There is something in the charter for rights about a free press, isn’t there? Fight this tooth and nail or you’ve officially become Pravda. At the very least one of you should force the issue and get yourself arrested. I’d be curious to see what charge they come up with.

To my RCMP friends: Since when did you become political police? I mean, seriously. Your job is to keep the public safe, and to keep the peace. Not to be a tool of Steve Harper’s communications strategy. Is this what you signed-up for, protecting media shy politicians from microphones? What law, pray tell, were you enforcing here? The police are independent in this country; you don't take orders from the PMO. Just say No.

Back when Harper appointed William Elliot, a man with strong Conservative ties, as the new RCMP Commissioner I said I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt but he would have a careful line to tread and would need to be careful not to be seen as Harper's man. Time to step up Bill.

Moving on, get this ridiculous explination from caucus chair Rahim Jaffer:

The buffer zone was attributed by Jaffer to the presence of wives and children of some of the MPs.

“We hope there will be some respect for families and others because it is a little bit different and having the cameras there, having the journalists there sometimes (is) intimidating for some of these people who don’t get a chance . . . ” he said, leaving the sentence unfinished.

I don’t doubt he left it unfinished, he must have realized how much of a massive idiot he sounded like and decided it better to just shut the hell up. What’s the old saying, better to keep your mouth closed and be thought an idiot then open your mouth and remove all doubt? Too late Rahim.

And here’s Harper’s communications chief, Sandra Buckler:

"It's quite normal for there to be private areas and then areas where the media are,'' she said by e-mail.

Sure, Sandra. But not the dammed lobby of the hotel! Get serious.

Also weighing in are: Paul Wells, Garth Turner, Liberal Arts and Minds, Impolitical and John Murney,

UPDATE:

Here’s another quote from the RCMP, via CTV:

"No cameras, no mics," one plainclothed RCMP officer told CTV News on Wednesday. "That is what the party asked."

So “the party” asks and the RCMP jumps, is that how it works?

And reading more of CTV’s coverage, I see this evening Jaffer is now changing his story:

However, later in the evening, Jaffer said the RCMP made the decision based on security concerns.

OK, so we have Jaffer saying the decision to bar the media, but not the public, from the lobby of a hotel was made by the RCMP for security reasons. And we have the RCMP saying this is what “the party asked” and that they were “acting on orders from the Prime Minister’s Office.”

Now obviously those two versions of events don’t mesh. So the question becomes who is lying, the RCMP or Rahim Jaffer and the Conservative Party? And who really ordered the crackdown? Are the Cons going to hide behind the RCMP to trample the public's right to know like they're hiding behind military members and civil servants at DND over the Afghan detainee file?

It's an interesting pattern.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

On Elliot’s Tory ties

I said earlier that I’m willing to give William Elliot a shot and the benefit of the doubt as next commissioner of the RCMP. While that still stands after learning the information below this now appears to be an even riskier appointment for Harper than originally thought.

But Mr. Elliott's Tory ties predate even his work with the Mulroney government.

In 1984, he was practising law with a large firm, but was also the president of the Ottawa West Progressive Conservative riding association when David Daubney was elected MP.

As far back as 1981, he was working on the campaign of provincial Progressive Conservative MPP Reuben Baetz, a cabinet minister in the governments of Bill Davis and Frank Miller.

I like the decision to go outside the ranks of the RCMP for the commissioner. But given the added scrutiny that such a decision brings it’s pretty risky for Harper to pick someone with such longstanding and obvious partisan ties to his own party.

A civilian commissioner is going to be under the microscope as it is. Elliot’s political ties will ratchet-up the scrutiny even further, and potentially make his already onerous task even more difficult. If Elliot has to make another decision like the income trust investigation announcement, for example, now it will be viewed through a political prism because of his partisan ties, rightly or wrongly. It puts him in a pretty tight spot.

I wish him well, because he has quite the tightrope to walk.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

I was so close to saying nice things about Deceivin' Steven!

I'm a Liberal partisan, I admit that freely, but I do try to at least somewhat fair in my writings and (however grudgingly) give credit to the other parties when it’s due. And hand to God I was ready to write an glowing post giving Harper credit for his appointment of William Elliott as the new RCMP chief. I was so close.

On the surface, I like this move. Appointing an outsider to head the RCMP, someone with a proven history of management experience and a former senior civil servant, is a great move. And, despite the inevitable protests that will come from certain elements of the force, bringing in an outsider with management skills is exactly what is needed to turn the force around. It’s the only way to combat the insider/old boys mentality in the force.

My only concern was to wonder if a career civil servant, used to taking orders his political masters, would be able to make the jump to leading the RCMP. Because the force is necessarily politically independent. Being a deputy minister isn’t quite the same as running the RCMP, as police chief you need to be willing to tell the politicians to take a hike. I was, however, willing to give Elliot the benefit of the doubt.

But then I read that Elliott isn’t just a former bureaucrat, but also has very strong Conservative ties. He was chief of staff to Mulroney’s deputy Prime Minister; you don’t get that job without strong political credentials.

Granted, he also served briefly as national security advisor to Paul Martin, so hopefully Elliott can/will be able to put partisanship aside here and do his job. And certainly the qualifications are there otherwise, so it would be difficult, if not impossible, to make a Bush/Harriet Myers comparison.

So, I’ll still give Elliott the benefit of the doubt and wish him well in taking on this challenge, but it’s not the perfect appointment it once seemed to be. Elliott is going to be watched, and scrutinized, very closely. Because the last thing the RCMP needs is a political loyalist/yes man at its helm.

Will Elliott be able to tell Harper to shove it when necessary? Time will tell, but I hope so.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers