A change of plans

So I was going to go into discussing some ideas I have for how to improve the energy situation in this country, but was shown an article in CBC that I have to comment on. I'll post the link at the end of the article for your consumption (or not) at your leisure.

Short version to the long story is that, as a result of comments made in two articles on the Liberal Party of Canada's website concerning the emerging Chuck Cadman scandal, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has filed a libel suit against the Liberal Party and leader Stephane Dion. The comments can essentially be summed up in that Prime Minister Harper knew of and was an accomplice to an attempt to bribe a sitting Member of Parliament. A copy of the notice filed, which contains the comments in specific, can be found here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/pdf/harper-libelnotice.pdf

Really, this whole suit is based on two different issues. First of all, is whether or not the Conservative party tried to bribe Chuck Cadman with a million dollar life insurance party if he voted against the Liberals in the May 2005 confidence vote. The other question is whether or not Harper knew about the bribe attempt, assuming that it actually happened.

According to Vancouver journalist Tom Zytaruk in his (as yet un-released) book "Like a Rock: The Chuck Cadman Story", Cadman was visited by two Conservative Party representatives shortly before the vote and presented with an offer of a bribe, including the life insurance policy to vote with their party. Harper is quoted as saying that the offer was "only to replace financial considerations he might lose in an election," and adds that the offer was carried out by people "legitimately representing the party". Furthermore, the allegations of the bribe offer are corroborrated by Cadman's wife Dona, and his daughter, Jodi.

Harper has stated that there is "absolutely no truth" to the allegations of bribery, and has also pointed out that Cadman himself said that no offer was made. Furthermore, Dona told press that she didn't belive that Harper knew about the offer, nor did she believe it to be a "party" offer, but rather "the overzealous indiscretion of a couple of individuals."

So let's look at this analytically. First of all, we know that Harper sued the Liberal Party for the comments made on their website for comments that he says are untrue. Conversely, he didn't sue Zytaruk for misquoting him in his book, indicating that we can believe that Harper wasn't misquoted. That being said, we also know Harper's record on talking to the press. It seems unlikely that he would have answered a question in such a way that he would be implicating himself for a federal crime, if he knew that was the question he was being asked. This isn't based on knowing what the question actually WAS, but based on knowledge of Harper's record for talking to the press.

Of further note is the response of Mrs. Cadman to the whole affair - she clearly believes that the bribe was offered, but believes that it was a couple of "overzealous' party operatives - not the work of the Prime Minister or the party.

Of final note is the information given by Mr. Cadman before he died, that no offer was made to influence his vote. The fact is that Mr. Cadman was dying - if the offer was made, then he clearly refused it, showing himself to be a man of integrity. Why then would he lie on national television under the same circumstances? He was a dying man with nothing to gain by lying, and further, an honest man is an honest man. A man honest enough to turn down a million-dollar bribe doesn't seem likely to lie about the offer on national television.

So what really happened? More specifically, to what was Harper referring as an attempt to "replace financial considerations he might lose in an election"? This is a question that I do not know the answer to and will not attempt to predict. That being said, the Prime Minister made a national platform of accountability and integrity. He has a responsibility to the people who elected him to be accountable and to show integrity in this issue and to order an investigation into the allegations. That being said, we the people have a responsibility too - a responsibility to respect the principle that says that a man is innocent until he's proven guilty - lest we inadvertantly bring an innocent man to the political gallows and destroy the career of someone who has, without doubt, done much to benefit this nation.



*note* further information, as well as sources for quotes are as follows, and you can read them at your leisure:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/03/03/harper-libel.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/03/03/cadman-statement.html