(Video) Ralph Goodale on the EI working group

I thought Liberal MP Ralph Goodale did a good job outlining the Liberal position on the working group on Don Newman's Politics broadcast last night.

BTW, only two broooooadcaaaasts left from Newman, tonight and Friday. End of an era.

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

Can we try not to screw up Don Valley West too please?

Writing recently on the nomination brouhaha still simmering in the Saskatchewan riding of Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River, I put the events in the larger context of the poor handling of nominations by the Liberal Party of Canada across Canada. Unfortunately, warning signs are emerging another cock-up may be brewing in Don Valley West, if the party leadership doesn’t take quick and decisive action.

First, however, back to Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River for a moment. I’d written earlier that the LPC should have waived-off Orchard long ago if the riding was reserved for an appointment. It appears, however, that the LPC may have done just that. Maybe:

David Orchard knew full well that the federal Liberals wanted an aboriginal woman to run in a northern Saskatchewan byelection and shouldn't be surprised that one was handpicked to do so, MP Ralph Goodale suggested Wednesday.

The twice failed Tory leadership hopeful - and anyone else who expressed interest in running as a Liberal in the Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River riding for that matter - signed a paper warning that leader Stephane Dion may appoint a qualified woman candidate, such as Joan Beatty, Goodale said.

"Everyone was informed about the leaders prerogative to appoint a candidate and the leader might want to exercise that prerogative if the appropriate strong, female, northern-riding resident came forward," Goodale said in a telephone interview with The Canadian Press.

Goodale’s comments are predictably dismissed as “spin” by Orchard campaign manager Marjaleena Repo:

She said Orchard, who delivered key delegates to Dion during the Liberal leadership race, was told that the party was looking for an aboriginal woman to run. But when they couldn't find one, she said Dion encouraged Orchard to put his name forward.

I think there’s lots of spin going on here. Certainly Goodale’s revelations, if accurate, cast Orchard’s actions in another light. However, if Dion did give Orchard an eventual go-ahead…well, it’s all a mess and I think there’s plenty of blame to go around. I think Orchard is far from innocent, I think Goodale is far from innocent, and I think the campaign team is coming off like the Clampets.

Nevertheless, my original thesis stands: the LPC did a piss poor job of managing this and a number of other nominations, making avoidable foul-ups that give the party a black eye at times we should be gaining ground.

A repeat in Don Valley West?

Which brings us to the highly coveted (read: winnable) Toronto-area riding of Don Valley West, now held by the retiring John Godfrey. This same article points to potential nomination trouble ahead in this riding:

Meanwhile, some Liberals fear a similar controversy is brewing in the Toronto riding of Don Valley West, which will become vacant in July when Liberal MP John Godfrey retires.

Potential candidates were warned late last year that Dion intended to appoint a star candidate in the safe Liberal seat. But insiders say Dion's efforts to recruit David Pecault, chairman of the Toronto City Summit Alliance, failed and now a number of would-be candidates, tired of waiting, are starting to get organized.

Former MP Sarmite Bulte has filed nomination papers, constitutional expert Deborah Coyne, who ran for the Liberals against Jack Layton in the last election, is intending to file her papers shortly and up to a dozen more are said to be interested.

Insiders predict that Dion will eventually appoint a candidate in Don Valley West but will face a huge backlash if he waits until candidates have already sold thousands of memberships.

And the Hill Times adds another name to the mix:

Jonathan Mousley, former legislative assistant and senior policy adviser to former Liberal Cabinet minister David Collenette in the Jean Chrétien Cabinet, will run for the nomination in retiring Liberal MP John Godfrey's (Don Valley West, Ont.) riding. Mr. Godfrey won the riding in the last election with 53.3 per cent of the vote.

Remember Mark Warner, the nominated Conservative candidate for Toronto-Centre dumped by the CPC leadership? He may be in the mix too (story is from November):

Godfrey acknowledged yesterday that Warner's name has been bandied as his possible successor in Don Valley West, where he's been the MP since 1993. Before then, the riding was a Progressive Conservative one, and Godfrey thinks Warner could have appeal there.

Interesting to see Deborah Coyne, cousin of Andrew, back in the mix. She took on Jack Layton for the Liberals in the last election and had the Toronto-Danforth nomination again before deciding not to run there last month. While I like her as a candidate, I’m not keen on riding swircheroos and the optics of this, even if Don Valley West is her home riding, are iffy. So I’m of mixed feelings there. As for the potential return of Sam Bulte, another riding switchero from Parkdale-High Park where she lost her seat to the NDP in the last election, and Gerard Kennedy will run in the next one, I’m sure the digital copyright folks are already gearing-up.

Anyway, the point is with such an attractive riding in play the names are coming out of the woodwork and there is a lot of interest, high profile and otherwise. This is also exactly the sort of riding Dion has said he’d like to set aside for the appointment of qualified female candidates to meet his 1/3 female candidates goal.

With the rumours of a possible appointment and many names coming forward, Dion and the LPC need to learn from the mistakes of Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River, Outremont, Scarborough-Southwest and the other ridings where they’ve bungled the nomination process.

The party need to make clear immediately its plans for this riding. Will it be a completely open nomination process? If so, say so and let people organize. Will it be a semi-open nomination process with only female candidates (a la Vancouver-Quadra)? Or will this riding be reserved for appointment, in which case people should stop campaigning?

The uncertainly cannot be allowed to fester. To allow people to start organizing now, and then make an appointment later, is unacceptable. The decision needs to be made immediately, and it needs to be made public. This will prevent any confusion, or any attempts to sow confusion.

The LPC has the chance to defuse this bomb before it goes off. Let’s hope this time they decide to do so.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers