Basi-Virk Trial Day One - Defence Fires Both Barrels

Premier tipped off? Collins investigated pre-raid? RCMP 'bad faith'?

View full article and comments here: http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/19/BoldAllegations/

By Bill Tieleman

Published: April 19, 2007

TheTyee.ca

After waiting over three years, the defence opened its case in the B.C. legislature raid trial firing both barrels at the B.C. Liberal government and the RCMP.

The Crown alleges that government ministerial aides David Basi and Bob Virk received benefits from lobbyists in exchange for confidential information about the $1 billion privatization of B.C. Rail and that government communications aide Aneal Basi helped out.

Among the serious charges levelled Wednesday by Kevin McCullough, defence lawyer for Bob Virk, in B.C. Supreme Court:

That B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell was allegedly tipped off about part of the police investigation into David Basi by B.C. Liberal party executive director Kelly Reichert in June 2005

That the investigation Campbell allegedly heard about was a Crown counsel report into "media monitoring" contracts the BC Liberals had with Basi and whether there was any wrongdoing

That Basi's "media monitoring" contracts allegedly were "a highly political effort to sway public opinion through the use of radio shows and other events"

That RCMP Inspector Kevin DeBruyckere, a key Basi investigator, "was and still remains the brother-in-law of Kelly Reichert"

That former finance minister Gary Collins was allegedly under investigation by the RCMP in November 2003, prior to the legislature raid on Dec. 28, 2003

Allegations that the RCMP had "acted in bad faith" by telling the media that no elected officials were under investigation when they "knew full well they were investigating Mr. Collins in November"

That the RCMP allegedly misled the public by denying any politicians were being investigated, including through police news releases

That the RCMP were allegedly "clearly duplicitous" in obtaining wiretap authorizations by failing to disclose to another judge the concerns of the original Supreme Court justice who turned down wiretaps application because of concerns about parliamentary privilege being infringed with a wiretap on a government-registered cell phone used by Basi

Just allegations

The operative word, as you will have noticed, is "alleged" because, while these are serious allegations, it must be noted that they are just that -- allegations unproven in court.

It should also be remembered that the Crown has not yet had a chance to respond to the defence allegations and make its case that the defence is incorrect to Justice Elizabeth Bennett, hearing the case without a jury.

Former finance minister Gary Collins immediately denied defence allegations Tuesday, telling Canadian Press that police have said he was never under investigation.

It is also important to state that McCullough did not at any point in his arguments allege any impropriety on the part of either DeBruyckere or Reichert.

The BC Liberals' Reichert did not respond to e-mail and telephone inquires by deadline.

Premier Campbell was not in the legislature for question period or at the B.C. Liberal caucus meeting, and therefore not available to media for questions about the day's allegations.

And what allegations they were. McCullough, speaking on behalf of David Basi's lawyer, Michael Bolton, and Aneal Basi's lawyer, Joe Doyle, brought out the heavy lumber as he outlined the case that will be developed over the next three weeks of the disclosure application.

McCullough on BC Liberal Party Executive Director Kelly Reichert:

"It is trite to say he worked closely with Premier Campbell and Mr. Collins on their political machine."

"It became clear that Mr. Basi, while a ministerial assistant, was hired by the Liberal party on media monitoring contracts."

"That is a highly political effort to sway public opinion through the use of radio shows and other events."

"One of their [the RCMP's] investigations of Mr. Basi was whether there was any wrongdoing regarding the media monitoring contract with the Liberal party."

"Kelly Reichert was telling the premier in June 2005, one and a half months after the [provincial] election, that the RCMP was forwarding a report to Crown counsel on that matter."
McCullough on the RCMP:

"You have to consider whether the RCMP acted in bad faith in order to search the legislature," McCullough began, arguing that the police were aware from June 3, 2003 on that David Basi was a ministerial assistant to Finance Minister Gary Collins but obtained the wiretap authorizations under a drug investigation in which Basi had come to the RCMP's attention.

The RCMP, McCullough said, had proceeded, using the drug investigation as the reason for wiretaps because they were concerned about being denied an authorization because of parliamentary privilege concerns.

A B.C. Supreme Court judge had turned down earlier applications for a wiretap on David Basi's phone for exactly that reason, and ultimately the RCMP went to Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm with a third application and did not inform Dohm of the location of the wiretap -- which of course was the B.C. legislature.

McCullough ripped into the RCMP, saying the force also deliberately did not tell Justice Dohm of the prior wiretap applications being turned down for that reason.

"The RCMP know that the business line that they sought a wiretap for was the office line of the finance minister, Gary Collins. Yet there's no reference to the parliament buildings, no reference to Gary Collins."

"My question is whether the Crown is defending these wiretaps on the basis of good faith, and the answer is yes," he said. "They [the Crown] are arguing good faith and we're arguing bad faith."

Ironically, the wiretap on the finance minister's landline ultimately failed to work due to "technical difficulties," McCullough disclosed. "The legislature phone system is archaic."

Guess who's in court?

In another interesting development, lawyer Clark Roberts, a former B.C. Liberal party staffer and former federal Liberal Party of Canada candidate in Saanich-Gulf Islands in 1997 who holds close personal ties to Gary Collins was present in the courtroom.

Mr. Roberts told me that he was in the courtroom on behalf of a client whom he could not disclose and that he was "here on a watching brief" for that client.

And the court heard lengthy argument from McCullough about the role of another former federal Liberal candidate, Victoria lawyer David Mulroney, in the investigation in 2003.

Mulroney, he said, was advising the RCMP on how to get wiretaps on David Basi's cell phone authorized by a Supreme Court justice.

But there was no discussion in court about Mulroney's candidacy for the federal Liberal party in the riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands in 2004 and again in Victoria in the 2006 election. Mulroney lost both bids for political office.

Sean Holman of Public Eye Online and 24 Hours reported in May 2004 that Mulroney had donated $3,993.02 to the federal Liberal party in 2002, and had billed the federal government $956,872 in fiscal 2003/04 for his firm's legal services. Mulroney was a major donor to the Liberals and his firm received major work from the federal government from 1995 through 2002.

Also in the courtroom Wednesday afternoon: Attorney General Wally Oppal's public affairs officer, Seumas Gordon, from the Public Affairs Bureau. I was unable to ask Gordon why he was there.

Road ahead

As the defence disclosure application proceeds over the next three weeks expect lots more fireworks and lots of strong denials of defence claims by the Crown.

After that, a defence Charter of Rights application that could potentially throw the whole case out of court over allegations about RCMP behaviour.

If the case proceeds, it will then get on to the main event, a full trial with a full cast of political witnesses, cross-examination on the stand and more information about the conduct of B.C. politics than you can even imagine.

Related Tyee stories:
Basi-Virk Case Tests Citizens' PatienceFrustrates even trial judge with its delays, disclosure issues.
Will BC Rail Bomb Explode?
Leg Raid Hearing Intrigue
'Spiderman' in a Web of Intrigue

Bill Tieleman is a regular Tyee contributor who writes a column on B.C. politics every Tuesday in 24 Hours, the free weekday newspaper, also online at http://vancouver.24hrs.ca. Tieleman can be heard every Monday at 10 a.m. on the Bill Good Show on CKNW AM 980 or at http://www.cknw.com. E-mail him at weststar@telus.net or visit his blog at: http://billtieleman.blogspot.com.

Basi-Virk defence allegation bombshells dropped - was Premier Campbell informed of Basi investigation through BC Liberal Party?

UPDATED 5 p.m.

Lawyers for defendants David Basi, Bob Virk and Aneal Basi dropped several bombshell allegations in BC Supreme Court this morning.

Virk's lawyer Kevin McCullough alleged in court that Premier Gordon Campbell was informed by BC Liberal Party Executive Director Kelly Reichert in June of 2005 that RCMP were forwarding a report to Crown counsel on David Basi's alleged "media monitoring" contracts with the BC Liberal Party.

McCullough alleged that the report came because: "One of the investigations of Mr. Basi was whether there was any wrongdoing regarding the media monitoring contracts with the Liberal Party."

McCullough pointed out that RCMP Inspector Kevin DeBruyckere "was and still remains the brother-in-law of Kelly Reichert" although he did not at any point allege any impropriety on the part of either DeBruyckere or Reichert.

Reichert has not responded to my inquiries at this time.

The "media monitoring" contracts, McCullough said, were given to Basi at the same time he was ministerial assistant to then-Finance Minister Gary Collins.

McCullough called the "media monitoring" contracts "a highly political effort to sway public opinion through the use of radio shows and other events." McCullough did not further explain exactly what the contracts allegedly involved.

Premier Gordon Campbell was not in the Legislature for question period today nor did he attend a BC Liberal Party caucus meeting, according to my colleague Sean Holman of 24 hours and Public Eye Online, so was not available to reporters to comment. Campbell was at a cabinet meeting this morning.

McCullough said DeBruyckere disclosed his relationship with Reichert to his superiors in March 2004.

It should be noted that these are simply allegations and that they remain unproven in court.

In another major allegation, McCullough claimed that the RCMP had "acted in bad faith" by telling the media that no elected officials were under investigation when they "knew full well they were investigating Mr. Collins in November."

McCullough alleged that the RCMP misled the public by denying any politicians were being investigated, including through poice news releases.

It was also alleged by the defence that the RCMP were "clearly duplicitous" in obtaining wiretap authorizations by failing to disclose the concerns of a Supreme Court justice about Parliamentary privilege being infringed with wiretaps.

And McCullough said that the RCMP obtained a wiretap on "the Finance Minister's phone" in the Legislature in October 2003.

In an interesting development, lawyer Clark Roberts, a former BC Liberal Party staffer and former federal Liberal Party candidate with close personal ties to Gary Collins was present in the courtroom.

Mr. Roberts told me that he was in the courtroom on behalf of a client whom he could not disclose and that he was "here on a watching brief" for that client.

Also in the courtroom in the afternoon - Attorney General Wally Oppal's Public Affairs Officer Seumus Gordon from the Public Affairs Bureau. I was unable to ask Gordon why he was there.

Basi-Virk trial opening today - a quick guide

Below is my 24 hours story previewing the BC Supreme Court trial of David Basi, Bob Virk and Aneal Basi in the BC Legislature raid case.

I will be in court throughout the day covering the opening day of the defence disclosure application by lawyers for the defence.

I will be appearing on CKNW AM 980's Nightline BC tonight from 8 to 9 p.m. with host Michael Smyth to talk about the day's developments - also broadcast on the Corus Radio Network - tune in if you can.

And I am filing stories for both 24 hours and The Tyee for Thursday, and those stories will also be posted on this blog.

A NOTE: Some media, including 24 hours, are calling today's application the beginning of the trial while other are calling it a "court proceeding". There is some debate as to when exactly a trial begins and so far I've found no definitive answer.

Following the defence disclosure application there will be a Charter of Rights application by the defence, contesting evidence gathering and police conduct appartently.

Then the more recognized section of the trial will begin, with evidence presented, witnesses testifying and being cross examined. The whole process is expected to take six months - possible longer.

Lastly - if you pick up a copy of 24 hours or see it online today you will see pictures of most of the key players.

Quick guide to the Basi-Virk trial

By BILL TIELEMAN, 24 HOURS

Take a volatile mix of allegations about a controversial billion-dollar privatization, politicians, drug dealing, organized crime, influence-peddling aides and backroom boys with ties to then-Prime Minister Paul Martin's leadership campaign.

Then ignite them all with a police raid on the British Columbia Legislature captured on film.
The sensational claims in what's known as "Basi-Virk" - none of which have been proven - are almost as good as it gets in a political scandal story.

But over three years later the trial is just starting today in what first seemed a case that could topple a government or two.

And perhaps it still could. Early RCMP allegations of links to drug dealing and organized crime were dismissed, however the billion-dollar privatization of B.C. Rail and claims top government officials were bribed by corporate lobbyists will take centre stage.

The case against government aides David Basi, his brother-in-law Bob Virk and his cousin Aneal Basi in front of Justice Elizabeth Bennett unfolds in B.C. Supreme Court beginning with a defence disclosure application expected to produce even more controversial allegations.

The provincial government maintains no decisions were compromised in any way by actions of Basi or Virk. No elected officials have been implicated in the scandal.

While Bennett set aside an estimated six months to complete the case, some think it could go much longer. The evidence is expected to include wiretaps, testimony from federal and provincial political figures and defence allegations of RCMP wrongdoing.


Key Players

David Basi - On trial
Ministerial aide to then-Finance Minister Gary Collins, Basi was a powerful provincial government staffer who also worked as a federal Liberal Party organizer for Paul Martin's leadership campaign.

Bobby Virk - On trial
Bob Virk - ministerial aide to then-Transportation Minister Judith Reid and was another Martin activist.

Aneal Basi
On Trial
Government communications aide

Erik Bornmann
Crown Witness
Provincial corporate lobbyist and former fed-Liberal aide.

Jamie Elmhirst
Subpoenaed
Partner of Bornmann and Kieran, Ex-pres. of fed.-Liberal Party in B.C. Subpoenaed.

Mark Marissen
Possible Witness
Paul Martin's chief federal Liberal Party lieutenant in B.C., married to Christy Clark.

Gary Collins
Possible Witness
Minister of Finance from 2001 to 2004, hired David Basi, oversaw B.C. Rail privatization.

Bruce Clark
Possible Witness
Brother of ex-B.C. Deputy Premier Christy Clark, federal Liberal Party executive.

Brian Kieran
Crown Witness
Ex-Province columnist-turned-lobbyist and Bornmann partner.

Kevin Potvin Takes Potshots at Vancouver Sun, Province, CKNW as his 15 minutes end

The Green Party's now ex-candidate for Vancouver-Kingsway is not going gently into that good post-electoral night.

Kevin Potvin sewered his candidacy when a bizarre column he wrote following the 9-11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon was unearthed by my 24 hours/Public Eye Online colleague Sean Holman. Potvin also espoused his view that the "official conspiracy" version of the Al-Qaeda attacks was not believable.

Green Party leader Elizabeth May eventually vetoed Potvin's candidacy - leading the publisher of the Republic of East Vancouver to attack his former leader. In a somewhat milder version of "You can't handle the truth" a la Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men, Potvin said the Greens were not ready to challenge conventional authority, etc.

Now Potvin is taking potshots at his many media critics, in particular the Vancouver Sun, The Province, the National Post and CKNW radio.

In a diatribe posted on the Republic website, Potvin breaks reporters' confidences in a rather sad effort to seek revenge.

The crusading Potvin brutally outs one reporter who told him - off the record - that an editor had made an error resulting in a quote being wrongly attributed to Potvin. Potvin, rather than appreciating that reporter's candour, instead decides to expose him - for being honest with Potvin.

"Oops, was that unprofessional of me?" Potvin states next.

Yes, actually Kevin, it was, not to mention twisted.

Potvin continues to right his wrongs by attacking others for setting him up for the fall, never once discussing whether maybe, just maybe, he might be the author of his own misfortune.

But here's what Potvin said in his own words on his website about his "Revolting Confession" article:

My essay revealed that inside me was a voice that said "Yeah!" when I saw the tower hit, and "beautiful!" when I saw it fall to the ground. In the context of the essay, the definition of "beauty" was that the attack had been a perfect example of a symbolic spectacle. More than half the essay was devoted to the awful deaths of that day and in other massive tragedies, and re-reading it then, I could well recall the anguish I felt at writing what I had.

Sorry Kevin, but you invited a lot of media scrutiny when you asked voters to elect you to the House of Commons. And the Green Party asked for trouble when they didn't bother to screen your candidacy properly before acclaiming you as the candidate.

I honestly do not wish you ill, nor do I imagine that being the instant epicentre for a media frenzy is a good place to be.

But taking ill-considered shots at all involved won't make it feel better.

Bill Tieleman guest hosts The Sean Leslie Show today - Saturday - 3 to 5 p.m. on CKNW AM 980

I am pleased to be filling in once again this week for my friend Sean Leslie on CKNW AM 980

Hope you can tune in, listen up and call in.

Here’s the lineup for today’s show, produced by the excellent Craig Sorochan, with technical wizardry from the amazing Gord Leung:

3 P.M.: DANIEL WOOD, AUTHOR AND WRITER FOR THE TYEE.CA – TALKS ABOUT HIS ARTICLE THIS WEEK ON WHETERE THERE WILL BE A NORTHERN CLIMATE APOCALYPSE

3:30 P.M.: LIONEL BEEHNER, STAFF WRITER FOR THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, WASHINGTON D.C. – ON THE WORSENING SITUATION IN IRAQ – THIS WEEK A SUICIDE BOMBER PENETRATED THE GREEN ZONE AND IGNITED A BOMB INSIDE THE IRAQI PARLIAMENT

4 P.M.: JULIAN BENEDICT, SPOKESPERSON FOR THE COALITION FOR STUDENT LOAN FAIRNESS – TALKS ABOUT STUDENTS FACED WITH CRIPPLING DEBT LOADS ONCE THEY FINISH SCHOOL

4:30 P.M.: GUY GENTER, NDP MLA, DELTA NORTH – GUY UNCOVERED SOME AMAZING AND AMUSING GOVERNMENT EXPENSES – S HOULD THE TAXPAYER BE FOOTING THE BILL FOR MANICURES, PERMS AND PIZZA?

Basi-Virk trial will run for 6 months judge estimates in BC Supreme Court Tuesday

Basi-Virk trial slated for six months

By BILL TIELEMAN

24 HOURS

The breach of trust charges against former provincial government aides David Basi and Bob Virk will take as much as six months of court time, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Bennett said Tuesday.

"I have arbitrarily set 120 days for this trial. I've seen the witness list," Bennett said.

Bennett also agreed to a defence request to delay the start of a defence disclosure application that begins the case by two days, from April 16 to 18.

Bennett will hear the trial that arises from the police raid on the B.C. Legislature Dec. 28, 2003 and subsequent allegations that Basi and Virk provided confidential government information about the $1 billion privatization of B.C. Rail to lobbyists representing one of the bidders.

Outside the courtroom Basi's lawyer, Michael Bolton, said Bennett was using "an abundance of caution" in scheduling 120 court days, which means about six calendar months for the trial.

But Bolton also said it was possible the trial could conclude in October.

Bennett also asked defence lawyers if they objected to her continuing as trial judge after noting that she had taught a legal advocacy course at the University of B.C.

Defence has raised an issue over special prosecutor Bill Berardino's role in teaching the same course because key Crown witness Erik Bornmann was in the classroom as a law student after Basi and Virk were charged.

Bolton quickly told Bennett the defence would not be seeking to disqualify her as trial judge.

Bennett did not say whether Bornmann had been in her class.

Appeal needed in outrageous sentence reduction for killer of Grant DePatie, gas station attendant dragged to death

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday April 10, 2007

DePatie appeal needed

By BILL TIELEMAN

There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Maybe it's because as a young man I spent many shifts working alone in gas stations, just like Grant DePatie did before he was dragged 7.5 kilometres to his death in a gas-and-dash robbery in 2005.

Or maybe it's because B.C. Supreme Court Judge Lance Bernard found that Darnell Pratt, the then 16-year-old car thief and killer bragged to his friends that he had heard DePatie's screams from under the car as he begged Pratt to stop.

But whatever the reason, I am disgusted that last week the B.C. Court of Appeal reduced Pratt's already lenient sentence of nine years to just seven years.

And it doesn't matter that Pratt is a young aboriginal with a terrible family background, reasons the Appeal Court cited for a lesser sentence. As unfortunate as that is, it doesn't excuse his crime or the need for punishment.

But worst of all is that B.C. Liberal Attorney-General Wally Oppal won't appeal the sentence reduction to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Oppal, whose judicial career I respect, should immediately order an appeal.

Oppal must show the utter repugnance British Columbians feel for the decision of the three Appeal Court justices who gave a break to the teen killer, regardless of whether or not the Supreme Court of Canada agrees to a hearing.

Instead Oppal is arguing that it's "unlikely" the Supreme Court of Canada would hear the sentence appeal.

Is this the same Attorney-General Oppal who in 2006 ordered an appeal of the lenient two-year sentence given by the B.C. Supreme Court to Jenny Woloshyn, a drunk driver who killed 23-year-old David Firenze?

Oppal had a different story in that case: "We just think the sentence in this particular case is contrary to the law. The criminal justice system can never be out of touch with the public pulse. We must be accountable to the public."

So where is the public accountability now, in an even more horrific crime?

Maybe former B.C. Court of Appeal judge Oppal is too close to his old colleagues to see that the public interest demands he challenge this outrageous decision.

Or maybe the B.C. Liberal government, which did nothing to protect gas station attendants working alone overnight after DePatie's death until forced into it by the young man's courageous family and the B.C. Federation of Labour, is again out of touch with reality.

But you will not get a clearer case crying out for an appeal.

Mr. Oppal, please don't let this unjust decision go without a challenge. Grant DePatie deserves at least that much respect.

Tieleman guest hosting on CKNW's The Sean Leslie Show Saturday April 7, 3 to 5 p.m.

I will be sitting in as guest host for Sean Leslie on Saturday April 7 from 3 to 5 p.m. on CKNW AM 980.

Here's the lineup for the show - do tune in and call in!

[I will also be sitting in for Sean next Saturday April 14.]

3 p.m. JEAN SWANSON…COORDINATOR W/ THE CARNEGIE COMMUNITY ACTION PROJECT on the province's purchase of downtown eastside hotels.

3:30 p.m. JAY RITCHLAND…MARINE CONSERVATION SPECIALIST WITH THE DAVID SUZUKI FOUNDATION on the news that Exxon is offering to help the BC Liberal government get rid of the offshore oil and gas moratorium.

4 p.m. ARTHUR MANUEL…SPOKESPERSON FOR THE INDIGENOUS NETWORK ON ECONOMICS AND TRADE on the recent rejection of a treaty with the Lheidli T'enneh First Nation in Prince George.

4:30 p.m. BILL REES… ECOLOGY PROFESSOR AT THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING AT UBC on why ethanol is no solution to pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May Contradicts Herself Completely On Clean Air Act

Green conflicts of May

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column

Tuesday April 3, 2007

By BILL TIELEMAN

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.

- George Orwell

Will federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May come clean on why she completely contradicted herself on the proposed Clean Air Act in just nine days?

May must be wishing she had thought twice before saying the Conservative government's Clean Air Act should die on March 22 - because she was forced to praise it on March 30!

May called proposed opposition amendments to Bill C-30, the Clean Air Act, "a pointless exercise" in a March 22 news release. She urged the Parliamentary committee considering amendments to stop, saying the legislation was unnecessary anyway and should "rest in peace."

"Bill C-30 - the so-called Clean Air Act - was dead on arrival at its first reading last year," Green Party leader Elizabeth May said. "Ongoing attempts to breathe life into the corpse are a waste of time."

And she dug in deeper: "Ms. May said that Bill C-30 is not only bad legislation, it is also unnecessary. "The government already has all the legislative power it needs to reduce air pollution and meet Canada's Kyoto greenhouse gas reduction targets."

But just days later May rejoiced over the pre-Easter resurrection of the Clean Air Act.

Her March 30 release states: "Green Party leader Elizabeth May today praised members of the Legislative Committee on Bill C-30 for their efforts to rewrite the fatally flawed Clean Air Act legislation ... adding that the 'New' Clean Air Act looks uncannily similar to the Green Party's proposed amendments."

Hmmmm. Dead on arrival, MPs foolishly breathing life into a corpse one week and the next week, it's alive and well and thank God for those amendments!

And those "Green Party amendments" - who exactly would be proposing them in the House of Commons when her party doesn't hold a single seat?

In fact, New Democrat, Bloc Quebecois and Liberal party MPs in a rare moment of unity forced the changes on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority government.

And while NDP leader Jack Layton and Liberal leader Stephane Dion each claim credit, both parties' news releases state that they put aside "partisan differences" to fight climate change together.

But that proved May's earlier position that amendments were "pointless" and actually needed to be quickly recycled.

May has courted trouble before. My 24 hours colleague Sean Holman reported last year that May planned to continue undertaking national speaking tours funded by non-profit groups while also attending Green Party functions. That prompted Elections Canada to state such funding would be regarded as political contributions. Whoops!

Elizabeth May is green, alright; so green at politics that she isn't ready for prime time.

Basi-Virk Case - the Amazing Disappearing Hearing!

The planned April 2 - 9:30 a.m. BC Supreme Court update hearing prior to the David Basi-Bob Virk-Aneal Basi trial simply disappeared!

Arriving at BC Supreme Court this morning I was surprised to find that I could not find the hearing in front of Justice Elizabeth Bennett anywhere on the court docket for the day.

A call to one of the defence lawyers was required to find that the hearing has been put off yet again - to Tuesday April 10 at 9:30 a.m.

Even more mysterious, the online Supreme Court docket apparently has a clear listing of the hearing for all to see.

Par for the course on what has become the most-delayed, complex and inaccessible to the public case in recent memory.

Lastly, the question now is whether the planned April 16 Supreme Court on the defence disclosure application will proceed on time. That hearing was booked for up to three weeks of court time.

And on April 13 the defence was scheduled to file a Charter of Rights application objecting to wiretap authorizations - a move that if successful could lead to the entire case being thrown out of court.

Stay tuned - for more delay and more lack of information.

BC NDP poses 70 BC Rail & Basi-Virk questions in Legislature for Government to answer

And $1 billion BC Rail privatization deal and Basi-Virk case leave lots for BC Liberals to answer for

NDP MLA Leonard Krog (Nanaimo) yesterday filed 70 written questions in the BC Legislature for Attorney-General Wally Oppal to answer - and many of the questions go straight to the heart of the BC Legislature raid by police over three years ago.

The questions include a request for a full public inquiry into the deal following the conclusion of criminal proceedings against former BC Liberal ministerial aides David Basi and Bob Virk and government aide Aneal Basi.

For background on the case, check this blog for extensive prior coverage.

Don't expect many if any answers from the government though - it has steadfastly refused to disclose any information - hiding behind the old "matter is before the courts" excuse even when there is no connection to the case.

The next BC Supreme Court hearing date on the Basi-Virk case is April 2.

Here is the first part of the NDP news release issued today:

VICTORIA – In an effort to get the B.C. Liberal government to come clean on the problematic circumstances surrounding the sale of B.C. Rail, New Democrat MLA Leonard Krog is demanding that the Attorney General provide answers to a series of 70 questions.

“It has become increasingly clear that the Campbell Liberals will do whatever they can to avoid being held accountable for what might have happened during the sale of B.C. Rail“, said Krog, the New Democrat Critic for the Attorney General. “British Columbians deserve answers to these questions.” .......

“The Attorney General has refused to answer our questions about whether his government will commit to hold a public inquiry into the sell-off of B.C. Rail as soon as the criminal proceedings conclude so that B.C. taxpayers can finally get the answers they deserve,” continued Krog. “That is completely unacceptable.”

And here are the questions:

NOTICE OF QUESTIONS

Monday, April 16

Mr. Krog to ask the Hon. Attorney General the following questions pertaining to the BC Rail deal:

1. Will the government hold a public inquiry into the sell-off of BC Rail as soon as the criminal proceedings conclude so that B.C. taxpayers can finally get the answers they deserve?
2. When did the government first learn that the BC Rail deal was the target of an in-depth RCMP investigation?
3. When will the government release all documents -- including documents which may not be directly linked to the charges -- that relate to government policies or decisions regarding BC Rail?
4. Has the investigation into the sale of BC Rail uncovered evidence that other government policies or decisions may have been illegally or inappropriately affected? If yes, will the government release all such documents -- including documents which may not be directly related to the charges?
5. Did the BC Rail Steering Committee discuss the potential for the BC Rail deal to collapse if only one bidder remained in the bidding process?
6. Will the government release all minutes for meetings of the BC Rail Steering Committee?
7. Will the government release all documents produced for the BC Rail Steering Committee?
8. Did members of the Steering Committee or other members of the government caucus meet with or communicate with any of the proponents or their representatives during the process to sell BC Rail?
9. Did the Premier or any of his staff meet with or communicate with any of the proponents or their representatives during the process to sell BC Rail?
10. Can the government explain why then-Solicitor General Rich Coleman briefed the Premier before the search warrants were executed?
11. Can the government explain why then-Solicitor General Rich Coleman briefed the Premier's Chief of Staff Martyn Brown immediately after the warrants were executed and before alerting the public?
12. Why was Martyn Brown given the go-ahead to fire Dave Basi immediately, prior to any charges being laid?
13. How can the government defend the propriety of the Solicitor General's actions against the charge that in briefing the Premier and his top political staffer, this government put its political interests ahead of the public interest?
14. Why was provincial government staff allowed to organize for the federal Liberals in the Legislature using taxpayer resources?
15. What steps did the Premier take to ensure that the BC Liberal Party did not benefit from illegal activities by staff?
16. Will the government release the tapes and/or transcripts of phone conversations between the Premier and government ministers that were gathered during the criminal investigation into the sale of BC Rail?
17. Given the government's own forecasts for significant coal mining activity, why were projections based on coal export growth deliberately left out of revenue calculations for the BC Rail line?
18. Did the government consider cancelling the sale of the BC Rail freight division?
19. Will the government release any and all correspondence with the RCMP and BC Rail about rescinding the sale of the BC Rail freight division?
20. If the government considered cancelling the sale of the BC Rail freight division, was compensation considered for any proponents?
21. What discussions took place concerning the issue of whether CN Rail had paid too much or too little for the BC Rail freight division?
22. What was the estimated value of former BC Rail assets in 2003, before they were sold? What is the estimated value of those former BC Rails assets now?
23. Did CP Rail express concerns about the clear breach of fairness in the process to sell BC Rail prior to their letter of Nov. 21, 2003?
24. Did the government -- including any and all government ministers, the BC Rail steering committee, the government caucus and/or its advisors or technical specialists -- ever discuss the consequences of OmniTRAX dropping out of the bidding process prior to or following the withdrawal of CP Rail?
25. Did the government consider the potential consequences of a small number of proponents or a single proponent during the sale of BC Rail for its goal of "maximizing value to the province"?
26. Did the government consider the potential negative political ramifications of a small number of proponents or a single proponent during the sale of BC Rail?
27. What was discussed at the Dec. 12, 2003, meeting held at Vancouver restaurant Villa del Lupo between the Minister of Finance and senior executives from OmniTRAX, the second-place finisher in the bidding process for the government-owned BC Rail?
28. Will the government ensure that tapes and transcripts resulting from the surveillance of the Minister of Finance's meeting with OmniTRAX officials are made public?
29. Did the Minister of Finance meet with other proponents during the transaction process?
30. Was it the Minister of Finance who ordered confidential government information to be leaked to a lobby firm representing OmniTRAX?
31. If it was not the Minister of Finance who ordered confidential government information to be leaked to a lobby firm representing OmniTRAX, was the Premier's Office or any other government official responsible for this order?
32. Will the government release the "meeting minutes, presentations and other documents" referred to in the Charles River Associates report on the BC Rail bidding process?
33. Did Charles River Associates review meetings, conversations or communications outside the official process -- particularly those including ministers and ministerial aides -- in their analysis of the fairness of the BC Rail transaction process?
34. Will the government release all documents including emails, reports, interview transcripts relating to the two information leaks referenced in the Charles River Associates report?
35. Can the government provide concrete evidence for their claim that the information leaks referenced in the Charles River Associates report did not materially affect the sale of BC Rail?
36. Will the government provide the full list of files and issues in the purview of or involving David Basi, Aneal Basi and Bob Virk between June 2001 and December 2003?
37. Did the government order an internal investigation into every file that Mr. Basi touched while he worked as a top political aide to the Minister of Finance -- and if not, why not?
38. Did the government order an internal investigation into every file that Mr. Virk touched while he worked as a top political aide to the Minister of Transportation -- and if not, why not?
39. Will the government provide an explanation as to why Dave Basi was fired immediately -- prior to any charges -- while Bob Virk was only suspended?
40. Can the government provide assurances and evidence of the statement made by the then-Finance Minister in December 2003 that Dave Basi "was not involved in the budget process, never has been" and "was not involved in the drafting of legislation or policy development."
41. Will the government conduct a review of every decision made to remove land from the ALR while Mr. Basi worked in the Campbell administration?
42. Will the government provide a full enumeration of all government activities and files that involved Dave Basi and/or Bob Virk and the principals and staff of Pilothouse Public Affairs?
43. Is the government aware of any other potential or ongoing investigations that involve Basi, Virk, or Pilothouse and any other minister, ministry or public body -- and if so, what are they?
44. Will the government provide a full enumeration of the roles played in this investigation -- or any other related investigation -- by Mark Marissen, husband of then Deputy Premier Christy Clark, and Bruce Clark, the brother of the then-Deputy Premier?
45. What materials did the Special Prosecutor withhold from the defence that were the subject of the February 27, 2007 defence application?
46. Will the government provide a full enumeration of all government activities associated with Pilothouse Public Affairs?
47. Will the government provide a full enumeration of all government activities associated with K&E Public Affairs?
48. Why did the government allow Erik Bornman of Pilothouse Public Affairs to continue his lobbying activities after he had informed Bill Berardino that he had bribed Dave Basi?
49. Why did the government allow Brian Kieran of Pilothouse Public Affairs to continue his lobbying activities after he had informed the RCMP that he had tried to bribe Dave Basi?
50. Can the government assure British Columbians that lobbyists Erik Bornman and Brian Kieran no longer have access to senior government staff?
51. Why did the BC Liberal Party continue to accept money in 2004 from lobbyists named in the original warrants, long after the raids on the Legislature?
52. Why won't the BC Liberal government allow an all-party review of the Lobbyists Registration Act in order to have greater accountability over who is influencing government and how?
53. When did the Attorney General and Premier first become aware that the lead RCMP inspector was the brother-in-law of Kelly Reichart, Executive Director of the BC Liberal Party?
54. How did Kelly Reichert learn that Erik Bornman had been granted immunity in exchange for providing information about David Basi and Bob Virk?
55. When did the Attorney General and Premier first become aware that information related to the investigation was leaked to Kelly Reichart and was subsequently leaked by Mr. Reichart to principals in the investigation?
56. Does the Attorney General agree that the actions of Mr. Reichart risked compromising the investigation?
57. Why does Mr. Reichart continue to serve as the Executive Director of the BC Liberal Party?
58. Given that one of the government's objectives for the BC Rail transaction was "ensuring integrated North American access to preferred markets and carriers for interline rail shipments", why would the government attempt to sell the Roberts Bank Spur line separately, following the withdrawal of CP Rail?
59. Is it true that in November 2003, Dave Basi advised OmniTRAX that the then-Minister of Finance had authorized a consolation prize for OmniTRAX in exchange for that company staying in the bidding process?
60. Was this consolation prize the BC Rail spur line?
61. How much was the consolation prize valued at?
62. Was OmniTRAX offered any Delta ALR lands for expansion of the port as part of this consolation prize?
63. If it were not for the alleged criminal actions of high-ranking aides, would the government have proceeded with the sale of the BC Rail spur line?
64. Does $900,000 represent the total cost to taxpayers of cancelling the sale of the spur line, or did the final tab come in even higher than that? What was the final tab?
65. What was the estimated value of the spur line in 2004, when the sale was put on hold?
66. What was the estimated value of the spur line when the sale was totally cancelled in February 2006?
67. What is the estimated value of the spur line now?
68. Why won't the government exercise its rights under article 10.2 of the Revitalization Agreement to inspect all of CN's maintenance records for the former BC Rail line?
69. When will the government investigate the rash of tragic derailments since 2004 in order to shed light on this safety scandal?
70. Why has the government refused to provide evidence for its claim that the government discussed safety and maintenance with the proponents during the negotiations to sell BC Rail?

Federal Green Party polling in Vancouver Centre for Adrian Carr - we have their questions!

What do the federal Green Party and co-deputy leader Adriane Carr know about the riding of Vancouver Centre that the rest of us don't?



They will soon find out, thanks to ongoing polling being conducted right now for the Greens by Oraclepoll Research, as first reported yesterday by my 24 hours colleague Sean Holman on his must-read website Public Eye Online.



Co-deputy Green leader Adriane Carr, the former BC Green Party leader, is their candidate in the riding. Apparently the party is spending some of its federal funding on polling, and heavily targeting veteran federal Liberal MP Hedy Fry.



And now I can tell you exactly what the Green Party is asking voters in Van Centre - because I have all their questions! Just as I did when the federal Conservatives were polling Van Centre to see if Lorne Mayencourt would be a good candidate.

Once again, a diligent reader has kindly forwarded to me the results of a telephone interview that took place Monday night. Here's what the Greens want to know:



1. What do you think of the Green Party candidate Adriane Carr?

2. Has Liberal Hedy Fry been an effective MP?

3. What is the most important issue in the country?



4. What is the most important issue in the riding?

5. If a federal election were held today who would you vote for?



Liberal - Hedy Fry



Conservative - Lorne Mayencourt



NDP - Randall Garrison



Green - Adriane Carr



6. What party would you NOT consider voting for?



Oraclepoll Research has previously polled for the Green Party, asking Canadians in 2004 about including the Greens in the federal party leaders debates.

Oraclepoll 's website does not list the Green Party as a client but says it does polling for a variety of individual political candidates:

"Oraclepoll Research has conducted Riding polls for various candidates across Canada at the Federal and Provincial levels. Extensive polling has also been conducted at the municipal level. Because of issues related to confidentiality references will be dealt with as requested."

Oraclepoll Research is listed as a political contributor to the Ontario Liberal Party of Premier Dalton McGuinty in 2005, donating $315.

It also lists a variety of environmental groups and others among its clients:

environmental / associations / not for profit / labour

Environmental Defence
COPE (The Coalition Against Paving the Escarpment)
TEA (Toronto Environmental Alliance)
FON (Federation of Ontario Naturalists)
OCAA (Ontario Clean Air Alliance)
Earthroots
World Wildlife Fund
Sudbury Chamber of Commerce
AMO (Association of Municipalities of Ontario)
Canadian Institute of Chartered Business Valuators
OPSEU
OMERS
Retail Wholesale Workers Union
RiverSides

But Oraclepoll Research isn't just a green machine - it does polling for corporate clients with a less than environmentally friendly background, such as:

Corporate Clients

Inco Ltd.
Domtar
Johnson & Johnson
Northwest Territories Power Corporation
General Motors
Sea Ray Boats

BC ripped-off by Quebec vote-buying Stephen Harper federal budget

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday March 27, 2007

B.C. shafted again

By BILL TIELEMAN

As a people we are on our way to becoming a nauseating bunch of blackmailers.

- Pierre Trudeau on Quebec politicians, 1950

If a television contest were held for the title of The Greatest Quebecois and the voters were all in la belle province, the winner would be incredibly obvious - Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper!

But that's because the contest would have been rigged - the voters were just bought off with billions of dollars, our tax dollars!

Amazingly, Harper's budget last week gave a desperate Quebec Liberal Premier Jean Charest $700 million so that Quebec taxpayers could have a huge tax cut. And Harper promised more to come - $4.1 billion more to be precise, by next year.

The money for that pre-election graft was pickpocketed by Harper directly from the rest of Canada's wallets.

What a rip-off! Some fixing the so-called "fiscal imbalance" that is - we pay extra taxes in British Columbia so a failing Quebec politician can buy votes.

And we pay extra taxes and get less federal services in B.C. so Harper can also buy votes in Quebec in the national election that is sure to come shortly.

Last night's Quebec election results will show if this sleazy trick worked for Charest - this column is written before the ballots are counted - but the guy responsible is not Charest, but Harper.

How bad is the federal budget for B.C.?

This bad: Both the provincial Liberals and the opposition New Democrats agree that we got hosed badly.

To add insult to injury, federal Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty gets up in the House of Commons and talks about Canada stretching from the rocky shores of Newfoundland to the peaks of the Rockies.

Wake up you moron - B.C. starts at the Rockies, Canada doesn't stop there!

Even my right-wing 24 hours colleague Erin Airton had to admit that Harper brought in "a budget that provides a heavy dollop of sucking up to Quebec" but she then uses the incredibly lame excuse that it was the opposition's fault. Pathetic.

On top of insulting and robbing every British Columbian, this budget does nothing to fight homelessness by funding social housing and gives just $21 million for job training for aboriginal people.

Lastly, the federal budget makes very negative changes to the equalization formula which will hurt British Columbia. By now including property values at market value, the Conservatives have ensured that B.C. won't get equalization payments in future economic slumps because of our high real-estate costs.

Just when British Columbia was finally getting over the old and hated Brian Mulroney Conservative government, Stephen Harper gives us the same message that Mulroney used to send - mange merde, B.C.

Mike Harcourt holds court, party card at Darlene Marzari dinner

Former BC Premier Mike Harcourt was in good form Thursday night at a dinner celebrating the political career of Darlene Marzari, the ex-cabinet minister and Vancouver city councilor.

Harcourt told a full house at Accents restaurant in Kitsilano about his long involvement in politics with Marzari, from working together to stop the Chinatown freeway in the 1970s to their time in cabinet in the NDP government of 1991.

But it was Harcourt's comments about some former premiers that brought roars from the crowd of mostly - but not all - longtime New Democrats.

"I'm one of the former NDP premiers who still holds a membership card," Harcourt quipped to howls of laughter. Take that Ujjal Dosanjh! Pow to you, Bob Rae!

Hosted by a very funny Joy MacPhail, other speakers included former MP Margaret Mitchell, veteran human and womens' rights activist Shelagh Day, Marzari's daughter Francesca and of course Marzari herself.

The audience included former Yukon Premier Tony Penikett, Vision Vancouver councilors George Chow and Tim Stevenson, former Non-Partisan Association Vancouver councilor Jonathan Baker, former Harcourt NDP cabinet minister Tom Perry, Alex MacDonald, the former Attorney-General in the Dave Barrett NDP government, Blair Redlin, former Deputy Minister of Transportation and VanCity Credit Union directorship candidate, Vancouver Quadra NDP candidate Becca Coad

Anti-Scab vote shows which Liberals killed Bill C-257

A recorded vote in the House of Commons Wednesday lists which Liberal Members of Parliament voted to kill Bill C-257, the private members bill that would have banned the use of replacement workers in federal labour disputes.

The vote shows that led by leader Stephane Dion, recent leadership candidates Michael Ignatieff and Ken Dryden and former Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, most Liberal MPs voted with Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservatives to block passage of Bill C-257.

The New Democratic Party and the Bloc Quebecois supported the bill, which was moved by BQ MP Richard Nadeau.

British Columbia Liberal MPs Blair Wilson and Keith Martin voted with Dion and Harper to kill the anti-replacement worker legislation.

Ujjal Dosanjh was not present for the vote.

Full credit to British Columbia Liberal MPs Stephen Owen, Don Bell, Sukh Dhaliwal, Raymond Chan and Hedy Fry for voting in favour of Bill C-257 despite Dion's speech to the Liberal Caucus opposing the legislation, a move that effectively killed it.

Stephane Dion Liberals stop anti-replacement worker legislation from passing

Stephane Dion and Liberal MPs vote against anti-replacement worker Bill C-257 despite earlier support, killing the legislation.

So much for the "progressive" or "centre left" federal Liberal Party under Dion.

Despite most Liberal MPs earlier supporting Bill C-257 - which would have blocked the use of scabs during strikes or lockouts - after Dion spoke out against it in a caucus meeting Wednesday the bill was doomed.

This afternoon it was defeated by a vote of 177 to 122 on third reading.

New Democratic Party and Bloc Quebecois MPs voted in favour, while most Conservatives and a majority of Liberals voted against, according to Canadian Press. A vote breakdown by MP is not yet available.

“The bill does not clarify enough the situation of the essential workers,” Dion said. “If there is a strike in a port, an airport, bank, the effect on the Canadian economy would be very huge.”

But Canadian Labour Congress President Ken Georgetti denounced a "campaign of fear" by corporations against the legislation and Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe blamed Dion for the loss.

“It's a shame, it's a shame,” Duceppe said. “We were going to win for the first time, but Dion was influenced by big business.”

Bill C-257 would only have affected federally regulated employers. BC and Quebec have had legislation banning replacement workers for many years and supporters of the federal bill pointed out that the dire predictions of disaster from national business organizations had failed to materialize in those two provinces.

Dion claims his party will introduce its own bill with provisions to exempt essential services from a ban on replacement workers.

BC Government, Christy Clark, NPA all push for segregated schools for special needs children

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday March 20, 2007

Segregation's return?

By BILL TIELEMAN

The highest result of education is tolerance.

- Helen Keller

Long ago in B.C. our children with special needs were put in segregated schools away from their neighbourhood friends and sometimes far away from their families.

While well-intentioned at the time, it was completely the wrong way to help special-needs kids. We learned the hard way that they should have been included with all the other children in our classrooms and given the extra help they needed there.

Both kids with special needs and those without benefit from inclusion, experts around the world have concluded.

But for some children, those with autism, mental illness or deafness, it was more than wrong - it was horrible.

We later heard terrible stories from the Woodlands School and the Jericho Hill School for the Deaf of students sexually assaulted, physically beaten and mentally abused.

And so the idea of segregation of children with special needs was thankfully put to rest.

Until this year, when the B.C. Liberal government suddenly re-opened this widely discredited approach and tried to make it sound new and progressive.

The Feb. 13 Throne Speech said the government would establish "provincial schools" and Education Minister Shirley Bond later talked about "model schools" for children with autism.

Then - surprise, surprise - Christy Clark, the former education minister, said in her Feb. 25 Province newspaper column that critics shouldn't attack the government idea and that: "Segregation didn't work as a general rule. But rules have exceptions..."

That would be the same Clark whose party in opposition promised to help autistic children but in government went to the Supreme Court of Canada to overturn B.C. court rulings in favour of funding special programs for them.


Another surprise - four days later Clark pops up again to say that now she and businesswoman Wendy Cocchia want to start a separate school for special needs kids.

And - imagine that - Clark and Cocchia have already met with Education Minister Shirley Bond, who - surprise - is receptive to the idea!

And then a few days later - surprise once more - Ken Denike, the right-wing Non-Partisan Association chair of the Vancouver School Board, announces that hey, this is a good idea, we should try here!

The question that should be asked is: Why? Why is an orchestrated effort being made to once again start segregated schools?

One answer is money. The provincial government has never adequately funded school districts to provide the assistance special needs children require. Centralized, separate schools could be cheaper.

A wide range of groups, from the B.C. Coalition of People with Disabilities to the B.C. Association for Community Living to the B.C. Teachers Federation have all raised their concerns, as have many B.C. academics.

But will this government listen?

Premier Gordon Campbell - Missing In California after meeting Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

Campbell missing from picture

While BC Premier Gordon Campbell has recently found religion when it comes to "green" issues and the environment, he has apparently gone missing in California after allegedly meeting with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger!

At least, the Premier is missing completely from any U.S. media coverage of his big trip to meet the former action movie star/bodybuilder to talk environment with Arnie.

And while Campbell's visit may be a big deal for British Columbia media, it is non-news in California.

A thorough search of the Los Angeles Times newspaper, including its Sacramento state capital political coverage, shows that as far as California is concerned Premier Campbell may as well be a fictional extra in one of the Governator's old movies!

There were some promising entries in the LA Times that might have referred to Campbell's visit. For example:

CAPITOL JOURNAL
In the political murk lurk a few really foggy ideas

Perhaps the Governator had asked Campbell why just weeks ago BC was planning to allow two coal-fired power plants to open? But no.

Or this item:

Liberal lawmakers may sway key vote on Iraq war

Could Campbell have convinced U.S. politicians to get out of Iraq? Unfortunately, no.

Or could Campbell and his sidekick, Environment Minister Barry Penner have got themselves in real trouble with inappropriate financial support for Arnie?

Schwarzenegger opens his Brentwood home to deep-pocket donors
By Robert Salladay
A mere $250,000 buys entry to two receptions and a dinner -- and, critics say, influence.

That might have been money well-spent by Campbell if it resulted in some good face time but also, no.

Finally, it looked like the story I had been seeking in the LA Times was at hand - this had to be the headline:

March 15, 2007
COLUMN ONE
Drifters sure get around

But again, disappointment, this item was about the old 60s musical group, not Campbell and Penner!

One last try - a full search on the LA Times. And here come the results:

PHOTOS No matches found on search for: gordon campbell
Try broadening your search criteria.

AUDIO / VIDEO No matches found on search for: gordon campbell
Try broadening your search criteria.

VENUES No matches found on search for: gordon campbell
Try broadening your search criteria.

EVENTS No matches found on search for: gordon campbell
Try broadening your search criteria.

How disappointing for the Premier - his cameo role with Arnie is on the cutting room floor!

BUT WAIT - at least there is a small reference on Schwarzenegger's own California government website:

03/15/2007 GAAS:207:07 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Governor Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Meeting Today with British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued the following statement today after meeting with British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell:

“I want to thank Premier Campbell for meeting with me today and discussing what we both have been doing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen the effects of climate change. California and British Columbia can learn a lot from each other’s experiences with renewable energy, building a hydrogen economy and developing a clean energy industry. I look forward to working with Premier Campbell on these and other issues when I visit him in Canada this spring.”

Thank goodness! There's still hope for a Hollywood ending for Premier Campbell!

Who said: "I'm disappointed that the NPA chose to stick their heads in the poop"

Well, we can't always be serious and this is my nominee for political quote of the year so far:

"I'm disappointed that the NPA chose to stick their heads in the poop, and abdicate their role as leaders. They played partisan politics with poop, and the city is the poorer for it," our mystery commentator said.

"I will continue to raise the issue, and look forward to moving my discussions with businesses, scientists, and environmentalists forward to bring a solution for this problem," the commentator added.

Stumped?

Here's a hint: the issue was not NPA Mayor Sam Sullivan's crappy leadership, not NPA councilors constipated approach to significant city issues, not NPA school trustees exhibiting irritable bowel syndrome on education concerns.

Give up? It was none other than Vancouver COPE Park Board Commissioner Spencer Herbert.

This man has his shit together! Dog shit that is - and he want to recycle it.

Here's the COPE newsletter version:



"Herbert moved a motion at Monday night's Park Board meeting asking the board to consider some environmentally sustainable solutions for dog waste.

The City of Vancouver's over 60,000 dogs produce up to 4.4 million kilo's of dog waste a year. Much of this ends up in the city's land fill in plastic bags which won't biodegrade. Herbert wanted the Park Board to investigate possible solutions which include composting the waste, turning it into methane for use in heating, and creating electricity, and the possibility of having it go through the City's sewage system.

The motion brought much attention and had community members out to support it. The idea was featured on the front page of the Vancouver Sun, and had Herbert speaking about this unique idea on many radio shows.

Unfortunately the NPA Commissioners saw it another way, and voted against the motion defeating it in a tie vote (Commissioner's Herbert, Woodcock, and De Genova in favour).

"I'm dissapointed that the NPA chose to stick their heads in the poop, and abdicate their role as leaders."

"They played partisan politics with poop, and the city is the poorer for it. I will continue to raise the issue, and look forward to moving my discussions with businesses, scientists, and environmentalists forward to bring a solution for this problem," Herbert said.

Commissioner Herbert will also be working to draw attention to the Everett Crowley Park Committee's volunteer pilot project on dog waste composting, and see whether it can be adopted around the City."

Come on NPA - cut the crap!

BC Liberals removed farm worker protection, tragic accident directly related

Farm protection laws taken out to pasture

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday March 13, 2007

By BILL TIELEMAN

Partnership Agreement helps protect farm workers ... Effective tomorrow, farm workers are excluded from hours of work, overtime and statutory holiday pay.

- B.C. government news release, May 15, 2003

The B.C. Liberal government should hang its head in shame for systematically attacking rules and regulations that protect farm workers.

Instead, and despite last week's horrific vehicle accident that killed three women farm workers, the Liberals deny the obvious - that their actions in support of farmers and farm labour contractors are directly related to this tragedy.

With the enthusiastic backing of the B.C. Agricultural Council, representing the farming industry, Premier Gordon Campbell's government has weakened previous protections for farm workers in almost every possible way.

One of the most misleading and outrageous actions was a Partnership Agreement signed between the government and the Council in May 2003 that resulted in what the Council called "Positive Changes in Employment Standards Act Regulations" in a memo to members.

Those "positive changes" include allowing child labour - letting 12 to 15-year-olds to work with only parental permission; removing farm workers from hours of work, overtime and statutory holiday pay provisions; and reducing by up to 75 per cent the bonds labour contractors are forced to post to ensure workers are paid.

Of course, it was a farm labour contractor with a history of violations whose overloaded van crashed last week, killing the three workers.

RHA Enterprises Ltd. had previously been found to have operated without a farm-labour contractor licence. They are currently licensed.

But the agreement between government and farmers states that: "The B.C. Agriculture Council and its member organizations agree that they will not support or condone the utilization of unlicensed farm labour contractors."

Rainbow Greenhouses in Chilliwack, where the farm workers were headed when the tragic accident occurred, is listed as one of "our growers" on the website of the United Flower Growers Co-operative Association, which signed the Partnership Agreement.

What's more, RHA Enterprises Ltd. has also been found to have failed to keep proper records and failed to register a vehicle in 2005. The company was fined $500 per violation.

B.C. farm-labour contractor vehicle accidents are all too common - and avoidable if basic safety rules were followed.

On July 13, 2003, farm worker Mohinder Kaur Sunar was killed when the van she was going to work in, carrying 19 people, had a tire blow out and crash on the Trans-Canada Highway.

A coroner's report said the government should review the Motor Vehicle Act, in particular to clarify the rules surrounding the use of seatbelts for passengers in vans and buses. WorkSafe BC said the same thing.

But it wasn't done. And once again, the provincial government's refusal to protect farm workers means more lives lost.

Basi-Virk Case - Disclosure, Delay and Documents

Basi-Virk Case Tests Citizens' Patience

Frustrates even trial judge with its delays, disclosure issues.

View full article and comments here http://thetyee.ca/Views/2007/03/12/Basi-Virk/

By Bill Tieleman

Published: March 12, 2007

TheTyee.ca

"Just so we're clear, the public interest in having this case heard outweighs just about everything else."

-- B.C. Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Bennett

Over three years after the Dec. 28, 2003, police on raid the B.C. legislature and with the long-awaited breach of trust trial of former provincial government ministerial aides David Basi and Bob Virk still not underway, presiding Justice Elizabeth Bennett is understandably frustrated.

That's what led to Bennett's somewhat exasperated statement at the conclusion of another lengthy B.C. Supreme Court hearing March 7, where both defence lawyers and the special prosecutor explained why the case could not begin April 2 as planned but needs to be delayed by weeks more.

And much of the court session revolved around the thorny issues of disclosure -- of evidence and to the media. On Feb. 26, the defence had filed a lengthy application for disclosure and the hearing was to discuss related issues and the upcoming trial.

Justice Bennett began by expressing her unhappiness with the fact that while on business in Quebec last month she read a Globe and Mail newspaper report outlining a defence disclosure application before she had even seen it herself.

It briefly thrust blogger Robin Mathews, a retired Canadian studies professor who has intently followed the Basi-Virk investigation, into the spotlight after he sent a personal letter to Bennett complaining that he could not get access to the defence application through the court registry while the media obviously had the document the day it was filed.

But it was lawyers for the defence who raised the most vexing disclosure problems -- their claim that the RCMP and special prosecutor Bill Berardino continue to fail to adequately disclose evidence they have gathered so that the defence can prepare its case.

All in all, par for the course of one of the most delayed, difficult and yet ultimately extremely important cases on the court docket.

Media? What media?

Perhaps that's why there were more reporters present for The Tyee than for B.C.'s dominant newspaper chain, CanWest Global, publishers of the Vancouver Sun, Province, Victoria Times-Colonist and National Post combined. That would be me.

And just maybe that's why the day after the hearing, only five B.C. newspapers bothered to report on the latest developments: The Globe and Mail, 24 Hours -- my newspaper -- plus the Prince George Citizen, Nelson Daily News and The Daily News of Kamloops, the last three relying on Canadian Press reporter Camille Bains's filed coverage.

Or perhaps it's because a case that involves the B.C. government's controversial $1 billion privatization of B.C. Rail, charges against government aides who were highly politically active in both the federal and BC Liberal parties, allegations of connections to drugs and organized crime, claims of RCMP conflict of interest and a bungled investigation and an increasingly clear defence argument that the accused were merely following provincial government orders isn't worth reporting on.

To be fair, the Sun's Vaughn Palmer weighed in with a full column on March 10, and CanWest Global's John Daly of BCTV attended the hearing but the media turnout and subsequent reporting was sparse.

Disclosure? What disclosure?

"There's an issue I need to raise with you."

Definitely not the first words either a defence lawyer or special prosecutor want to hear from the presiding judge.

But that's exactly what Justice Bennett said to a group of about 10 assembled lawyers representing the defendants, prosecution and the federal and provincial government, as well as about six media representatives and a few observers.

"I read a lengthy report in The Globe and Mail in Quebec about the application before I received it," Justice Bennett continued. "I have a letter from a member of the public asking why he can't have access to the document."

One of those observers sitting next to me was in fact the letter writer -- Robin Mathews -- and his intervention in the case was a welcome reminder that the public does indeed have a right to know what goes on in its courts, a right that Justice Bennett amplified on considerably.

"These proceedings have to be as open as possible," she said, noting that in the most high-profile case she has previously adjudicated, the trial of former premier Glen Clark and Dimitrios Pilarinos, the building contractor and Clark's neighbour who hoped to influence a casino application, Bennett had set up a simple system to ensure access to court documents.

"Media access also means general public access," Bennett continued. "There's a presumption in the law of public access."

When special prosecutor Berardino mildly objected: "The presumption is public access but there will be documents with third-party information that...," Bennett cut him off.

"Let me be clear -- I will deal with this on a document by document basis," she said curtly.

Papers? Show me your papers

And documents there will be aplenty.

Previously in court it has been stated that over 100,000 pages of evidence have been produced, and counting.

But apparently not all the pages that the defence has been counting on.

That much was obvious when an angry Kevin McCullough, counsel for Bob Virk, lit into the special prosecutor's tardy disclosure of evidence.

"There are disclosure issues in this case that must be resolved," McCullough said. "There are several investigations of Mr. Basi and where one stops and the other one starts is very difficult to tell. There are many investigations going on."

"We've got disclosure problems and they're big problems and they've got to be dealt with. Milady, I apologize for the frustration but when my friend says he needs 13 days..."

McCullough was referring to his "friend" -- in the courtroom parlance of bonhomie -- special prosecutor Berardino, who had just told Bennett that he needs 13 business days in order to file a response to the defence disclosure application.

That's a full 13 days after the defence supplies Berardino with background to its disclosure request, because Berardino told the court that: "There is no material in support of the application."

So, who's not disclosing?

Well, Basi's own lawyer, Michael Bolton, laid the blame at Berardino's doorstep.

"The material that gave rise to the disclosure application arises predominantly from the disclosure received from the Crown," he told Bennett. It's important because it will let the defence know and the court know the Crown's theory, for example."

"What is the nature of the benefit?" he asked, referring to the allegation that Basi and Virk were to receive a benefit in exchange for providing lobbyist Erik Bornmann with confidential government information about the B.C. Rail deal for his client OmniTRAX, one of the bidders.

Bolton claimed that the original Crown theory that Basi and Virk were getting jobs in Ottawa with the federal Liberal government under then prime minister Paul Martin "seems to have been discarded."

Bolton continued by stating that a Crown failure to disclose evidence was hampering the defence case.

"The problems with pursuing the goal is that we're still receiving disclosure," he said. Bolton claimed that the defence had received a "statement from one of the key Crown witnesses, Mr. Erik Bornmann, in 2005 -- we got it in 2007."

Bolton also said that two wiretap applications the defence had been seeking for two years had only been received on Jan. 10, 2007.

And McCullough ended his exasperated appeal by stating that: "We've received critical notes from senior police officers just now."

But Bennett wasn't overly sympathetic.

"Mr. McCullough, there's nothing I can do about that now. You've received them," she said.

And Berardino defended the Crown's position. "There's a fundamental difference of opinion on disclosure," he told Bennett.

Relations? We have provincial and federal relations

While the defence and Crown sparring provided most of the sparks, legal counsel for the province gave a little levity to the proceedings.

George Copley, appearing for the "Executive Council of British Columbia" -- in other words, for the provincial government, addressed the potentially thorny issue of "privilege" -- the legal right of both cabinet privilege and solicitor-client privilege when it comes to disclosure of evidence involving cabinet members.

"I don't know how much background you know," Copley quietly began.

"Assume I know very little," Bennett replied, to muffled laughter in the courtroom.

Copley outlined that a sensitive procedure had been developed under Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm to ensure evidentiary documents seized from the B.C. legislature where privilege was claimed were examined to see if they were deemed relevant to the case.

Copley's low-key presentation revealed little of great interest -- with one prominent exception.

"Borden, Ladner, Gervais were the solicitors for the B.C. Rail deal," Copley said. "We may have to involve them."

Dates? We got dates

That left it to Justice Bennett to determine a new schedule for the now-delayed trial.

Another hearing on progress on the pre-trial preparations will be held at 9:30 a.m. on April 2.

Then, after a series of responses from defence and Crown on the disclosure application, the defence will file its Charter of Rights application on April 13.

That application -- originally expected to be filed March 21 -- is expected to ask that Justice Bennett throw the entire case out of court over the validity of search warrant applications obtained by RCMP.

And then on April 16 Justice Bennett will hear the actual arguments on the defence disclosure application in what will take up to 15 days in court.

After that the case is expected to continue on into the summer months, with Bennett noting that she is scheduled to teach a course in the second week of July but will forego it if necessary if the trial requires it.

Expect a long, hot summer of evidence -- if the case goes ahead.


Related Tyee stories:
Will BC Rail Bomb Explode?
Leg Raid Hearing Intrigue
'Spiderman' in a Web of Intrigue

Bill Tieleman is a regular Tyee contributor who writes a column on B.C. politics every Tuesday in 24 Hours, the free weekday newspaper, also online at http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/. Tieleman can be heard every Monday at 10 a.m. on the Bill Good Show on CKNW AM 980 or at http://www.cknw.com/. E-mail him at weststar@telus.net or visit his blog at: http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/.