The Man From Niagara Falls Strikes Back

I was seated alone in the bar of the Hotel Vancouver, waiting for my contact who claimed to have a back door into National Defence. I was watching Rob Nicholson on CPAC, defending his government against the Contempt of Parliament motions being brought by Derek Lee and others. I had to bribe the bartender to change one of the multiple wide screen TVs to CPAC; he claimed the management had told him to show only The Nature of Things with David Suzuki. It made people drink.

I didn't see the problem. Watching Nicholson had the same effect. I heard that Derek Lee took notes on index cards during Nicholson's speech. I didn't have index cards so was using bar napkins. They were piling up around my table like...well, like a pile of bar napkins with scribbling on them. The bartender was eyeing me with concern.

My Blackberry went off. My Vancouver contact had texted me: "URGENT! l$&Xi9* Hillier #$%5bW". Clearly it was in code. Well OK, if it was clear, it wouldn't have been in code. Or if it was code, it wouldn't have been clear. But if it was in code, I should have had the code. Oh, God. I ordered another Screech.

Nicholson had mercifully finished and we had The Nature of Things on all channels. I tried to organize my notes.

"Mr. Speaker, it is not entirely clear from the submissions of the three members as to what exactly was being alleged as a prima facie case of a breach of privilege.

"For instance, the Member for Scarborough—Rouge River proceeded to accuse members of this government and officials of the Department of Justice everything from “malice” and “subversive intent” to “constitutional sedition” and “conspiracy”.

"On the other hand, the Member for St. John’s East and the Member for Saint-Jean asked you to find a prima facie breach of privilege based on the House order of December 10, 2009. Yet, from the motion they proposed should such a prima facie case were to be found, they made it clear that no actual breach of privilege has occurred since the original order lacked procedures to protect national security interests."

I was confused. I thought the issue was the supremacy of Parliament. The evil shadows of Sections 38.01 and 38.02 of the Canada Evidence Act swirled around me and made a whirlwind of napkins. What next?

"Similarly, O’Brien and Bosc cite Joseph Maingot’s Parliamentary Privilege in Canada that “A genuine question of privilege is therefore a serious matter not to be reckoned with lightly, and thus rarely raised in the House of Commons.” Similarly, they cite the 1976 report of the Special Committee on Rights and Immunities of Members, chaired by Speaker Jerome, in noting that “a question of privilege is a serious matter, when validly raised, but was frequently resorted to when no real question of privilege was actually involved.”

What? Who said this wasn't serious? And why had John Sims, Deputy Attorney-General of Canada, precipitously resigned, effective tomorrow? And why was the new Deputy Attorney-General a guy who had worked for Elmer MacKay and Brian Mulroney?

My Blackberry went off again. ""URGENTER! Trapped in bar outside *&34#>Z with ___(^SD."

Another napkin:

"Freedom of speech is essential in a free and democratic society. Freedom of speech is also the cornerstone of parliamentary privilege. Freedom of speech is essential in order to facilitate debate in the House and more generally in a democratic society. This means there is an acceptance that members will hold differing views – and they have the protected right to express those differences. That includes opinions as to interpretation of laws."

How was I to make sense of this gibberish? Why was the Attorney-General defending freedom of speech after refusing to let George Galloway into the country because of "national security"? And what did any of this have to do with the motions before the House? I was descending into a Hunter Thompson-ish fugue state of manic writing and paranoid suspicion.

My Blackberry went off a third time: "URGENTEST!..."

...to be continued.

Man Bites Elephant

Robert Fowler's therapeutic intervention in Canada's folie à deux with the United States.

The above Globe and Mail report is from last weekend's Liberal Conference in Montreal, and includes a full length post of Mr. Fowler's 30 minute speech which "the world needs to hear" (a quote from a person at the Liberal Conference).

From the National Post, December 15, 2008, part of a report at the time of his kidnap:

In nearly four decades as a public servant, Mr. Fowler, 68, was a foreign policy adviser to former prime ministers Pierre Trudeau, John Turner and Brian Mulroney, served as deputy minister of National Defence, and was Canada's longest-serving ambassador to the United Nations. He was also ambassador to Italy and the United Nations food agency.

He retired in the fall of 2006 and took up lecturing on international affairs at the University of Ottawa. Though he is still a senior fellow at the university, he did not lecture this fall.

Colleagues say Mr. Fowler has been fascinated by Africa since his first posting to Rwanda as a young foreign service officer. He returned to the continent frequently, serving as the prime minister's special ambassador for Africa when he was ambassador to Italy and, in 2005, working on an advisory team reporting to the prime minister on the humanitarian crisis in Darfur.

Mr. Fowler was careful about security while travelling in Africa, said Senator Mobina Jaffer, who travelled with Mr. Fowler and Senator Romeo Dallaire to Darfur.

"When you work in danger areas, you don't do stupid things but you just keep working, that was his attitude," she said. "He was cautious but you know when you go into a conflict zone, it is not 100% safe."

An amateur photographer, Mr. Fowler's affection for Africa and its people was evident in the many photographs he took while on travelling there, Jaffer said. Senator Colin Kenny, a friend of Mr. Fowler's and a former classmate from Bishop's College in Lennoxville, Que., said he connected with Trudeau on Africa.

"He caught the prime minister's imagination with his ability to talk about his experiences," Mr. Kenny said. "He always talked about it as a place with issues and problems but I never heard him talk in the context of personal risks."

In Ottawa, Mr. Fowler is best remembered as a powerful deputy minister of Defence under Brian Mulroney, in a difficult period that saw the department tarnished by the ill-fated mission in Somalia.

On a web page featuring many of the photographs he has taken (robertrfowler.com), Mr. Fowler writes that his travels have taken him to "some of our time's most appalling circumstances."

"Whether it be the midst of the genocide in Rwanda, the ravages of the Angolan civil war, the never-ending struggle in the Middle East, or the pervasive and grinding poverty which afflicts so much of our world as we in the West enjoy a time of unprecedented plenty, individual dignity is ever-evident and the human spirit so clearly does prevail.

"It is this that I've tried to capture in these images."

A UN official said Mr. Fowler's mission as envoy is to deal with the "general political situation" in Niger. Another official described it as a "good offices mission," which generally means acting as a go-between among opposing groups.

"We have had no indication of who or what is behind this," said a UN official. "At this stage, we don't have any details about what happened to these three people."

Former Foreign Affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy described Mr. Fowler in a TV interview as a "fearless" and greatly experienced ambassador and UN envoy who is devoted to public service.

"He's been in pretty tough situations in the past," Mr. Axworthy said, citing Mr. Fowler's taking on of the diamond trade in Angola when he was Canadian ambassador to the United Nations.

Mr. Axworthy, who served as a UN envoy himself after retiring from federal politics, noted that envoys often travel with little protection. He called the situation "disturbing."

A UN official said Mr. Fowler's special envoy work has been behind-the-scenes assistance with negotiations to quell "disturbances in the some parts of the country, pitting various groups against one another."

One conflict is between Tuareg tribesmen and government troops over ownership of land and uranium deposits, among the largest in the world. Whether Mr. Fowler and Mr. Guay were on a mission involving resource conflict is not clear.

Niger's minister of communication, Mohamed Ben Omar, told Agence France-Presse that Mr. Fowler arrived Thursday in Niamey after he sought an official invitation to celebrations in the western town of Tillaberi, which were being held to mark the 50th anniversary of Niger gaining autonomy from France.

He was not in Niger on official business, the minister told AFP.

Officials were told about Mr. Fowler's disappearance in the pre-dawn hours of Monday after his abandoned vehicle was turned over to authorities.

"Inside were found three telephones, a camera and a jacket," Ben Omar said.

"These disappearances surprise us," the minister said. He added that security forces have been deployed in the area to try to find Mr. Fowler, but noted the diplomat had not informed authorities or the UN office in Niger of his trip.

The landlocked West African country, one of the world's poorest, is coping with a rebellion in its northern region. The frontier region of Tillaberi is, however, well away from the scene of rebel fighting.

With files from Juliet O'Neill and Agence France-Presse



Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1078986#ixzz0jd94XJaL

Don embraces document trolling...

RON MACLEAN
Welcome to House of Commons Night in Canada. I'm Ron MacLean here with Don Cherry at the end of a frantic week in the House. There's almost too much going on, but first and foremost is we have yet to hear from Speaker Milliken on the Contempt of Parliament motion, and yet the government delivered about 2500 pages of detainee-related documents to the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan. How does that all add up?

DON CHERRY
Best I can do is tell you a joke.

RON MACLEAN
You're kidding!

DON CHERRY
What's the difference between Ann Coulter and George Galloway?

RON MACLEAN
OK, what?

DON CHERRY
One was stopped at the border.

RON MACLEAN
I don't get it.

DON CHERRY
Sometimes I think my best work is wasted on you.

RON MACLEAN
So tell me how that relates to the Afghan prisoner thing.

DON CHERRY
Because it's a lot of hot air. First, the government drags Frank Iacobucci through this like some kind of Mr. Clean, hoping he'll sweep the whole thing under the "national security" rug. Then, when Derek Lee and his buddies proceed with their motions anyway, the government drops two and a half thousand pages on the Committee.

RON MACLEAN
I hear with quite a few redactions...

DON CHERRY
Yeah, well it's gonna take a while to figure out what's in there, but it doesn't change Speaker Milliken's predicament.

RON MACLEAN
So why is the government bothering with all this?

DON CHERRY
Playing for time! Trying to run out the clock. We know how well that worked in the men's Gold Medal final.

RON MACLEAN
I don't think that's exactly fair. I wouldn't describe the third period as trying to run out the clock.

DON CHERRY
I know, I know. All I'm saying is, stalling isn't going to give the government the game. In my opinion, they're already dead toast in the water.

RON MACLEAN
...an interesting image...

DON CHERRY
But I wanna say, I'm doing my part as a citizen and loyal CBC staffer.

RON MACLEAN
I've never heard you use that kind of language.

DON CHERRY
Yeah, well, the CBC put out a call for citizens to help read through the 2500 pages of documents, and I'm gonna step up.

RON MACLEAN
You've been trolling through 2500 redacted pages of government documents?!

DON CHERRY
You say it like there's something wrong with it.

RON MACLEAN
I'm just astounded.

DON CHERRY
Like I say, some of my best work...

RON MACLEAN
So, tell us, what have you discovered?

DON CHERRY
OK, I'm only doing a small part of this, but that's what the CBC wanted, ordinary citizens doing a part of the reading to see what's there...

RON MACLEAN
So?

DON CHERRY
OK, so, I've got a couple examples you guys can bring up on the screen. Here's two pages from the "Blanchette" document dump.

RON MACLEAN
They look surprisingly similar.

DON CHERRY
Yeah well, there's nuances that can be found if you're willing to spend the time.

RON MACLEAN
"NUANCES?"

DON CHERRY
It's French for "clouds".

RON MACLEAN
There's something not quite right about that.

DON CHERRY
Like I said, my best work....

RON MACLEAN
So tell the viewers what you're talking about.



DON CHERRY
So what you're seeing here in this first one I'd say, is at some point in 2007, H Company from the Second Battalion, the Royal Canadian Regiment, takes a prisoner who is handed off to the Military Police in the field, who then transfer him to the "holding facility" at Kandahar Airfield.

RON MACLEAN
What's wrong....?

DON CHERRY
Nothing. Lemme finish...

RON MACLEAN
OK...

DON CHERRY
After which a Detainee Review Panel decides there's no reason to hold the prisoner, and sends him home in a taxi.

RON MACLEAN
Not exactly a smoking gun, Don.

DON CHERRY
It all depends what you're looking for. In a way, I agree with you. What we have here, apart from names and specific dates, is evidence that after taking a prisoner, who was not harmed, a Review Panel was convened at Kandahar Airfield, determined that the prisoner should not be held, and released him after arranging a taxi home.

RON MACLEAN
Yeah, so....?



DON CHERRY
So the next example is, a prisoner is taken that the Commander decides to release, but it takes the brass so long to figure out what to do that they take the guy in for the night and then release him to his employer the next day.

RON MACLEAN
It sounds pretty civilized, Don. I've been in worse bars.

DON CHERRY
Exactly my point! So that's exactly how prisoners should be handled according to the Third Geneva Convention.

RON MACLEAN
Which means...?

DON CHERRY
As of at least 2007, the Canadian Forces in the field understood Geneva 3 to be the law governing their handling of prisoners, not just Common Article 3 that people have been mumbling about in the AFGH Committee, but the whole thing.

RON MACLEAN
You never cease to surprise me...

DON CHERRY
And so, folks, according to Article 12, if Canadian Forces decided a prisoner should be held, a transfer to any Afghan jurisdiction is illegal, because none of them meets the standard of Geneva 3.

RON MACLEAN
But Canada had an agreement with Afghan government that that would be the standard if prisoners were transferred.

DON CHERRY
...and if you believe the Afghan government could honour that agreement, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn that's an unbeatable real estate opportunity. Here's Article 12....

RON MACLEAN
Which you just happen to have with you...

DON CHERRY
Doesn't everybody? Sorry about the beer stains..., but I'll read it out:

Article 12. Prisoners of war are in the hands of the enemy Power, but not of the individuals or military units who have captured them. Irrespective of the individual responsibilities that may exist, the Detaining Power is responsible for the treatment given them.

Prisoners of war may only be transferred by the Detaining Power to a Power which is a party to the Convention and after the Detaining Power has satisfied itself of the willingness and ability of such transferee Power to apply the Convention. When prisoners of war are transferred under such circumstances, responsibility for the application of the Convention rests on the Power accepting them while they are in its custody.

So the onus is on the Detaining Power - Canada - to know that transferred prisoners would be treated properly.

RON MACLEAN
Don, nobody has a higher opinion of you than I do, but you'd think some famous lawyer would have pointed that out by now. I think I read there was a document already up on the Canadian Forces website explaining all the law.

DON CHERRY
Absolutely! But if you actually look at it, there's a lot of fancy stick-work, a lot of razzle-dazzle, but nobody's crashing the net laying out the truth.

RON MACLEAN
So why would anybody be pussyfooting around the issue?

DON CHERRY
Because all of NATO is on the hook for violations of Article 12 of the Third Geneva Convention, transfers of prisoners into jurisdictions where the Convention can't be applied.

RON MACLEAN
I dunno, Don, seems a little extreme.

DON CHERRY
It's more than a little extreme, but the Bulletin of the Secretary-General of the United Nations of August 12, 1999...

RON MACLEAN
...which you just happen to have with you...

DON CHERRY
There's more to the game of parliamentary democracy than just showing up at the rink. Perparation is a lot of it, so I'll just get in one brief quote from Section 8:

"The United Nations force shall treat with humanity and
respect for their dignity detained members of the armed forces
and other persons who no longer take part in military
operations by reason of detention. Without prejudice to their
legal status, they shall be treated in accordance with the
relevant provisions of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949,
as may be applicable to them mutatis mutandis."

RON MACLEAN
OK, that seems pretty clear, except what does "mutatis mutandis" mean?

DON CHERRY
I was hoping you knew. So we're back to needing a lawyer, this time an international lawyer who knows something about International Humanitarian Law.

RON MACLEAN
OK, so on that no-doubt controversial note, that's it for document trolling here at House of Commons Night in Canada. Next week should be very interesting.

DON CHERRY
How're you going with the constitutional lawyer?

RON MACLEAN
He said he's got a moose at National Defence working on it.

DON CHERRY
A moose?

RON MACLEAN
I'm only saying what he told me.

DON CHERRY
Are you sure this lawyer knows what he's doing?

RON MACLEAN
Well, we could afford him. He went for the Leafs tickets.

DON CHERRY
You know, I think we ended up in this sorry situation because the CBC didn't get the Olympics.

RON MACLEAN
We'll never know.

DND releases anthem to AFGH Committee

The Return of The Man from Niagara Falls

Ottawa, Night.

I had been retained as a constitutional lawyer by Hockey Night In Canada. The Man In Stripes said they couldn’t pay me money, but offered two vouchers for Leafs’ playoff games, including the Stanley Cup final if the team got that far. Something bothered me about the deal, but I didn’t have time for due diligence.

My job was to figure out who investigated cabinet officers, and particularly Attorneys-General, for alleged crimes, in this case, obstruction of justice. There wasn’t much in the way of precedent, fortunately, but Rule 4 of the Law Society of Upper Canada was quite explicit:

Rule 4

"The lawyer has a duty to the client to raise fearlessly every issue, advance every argument, and ask every question, however distasteful, which the lawyer thinks will help the client's case and to endeavour to obtain for the client the benefit of every remedy and defence authorized by law. The lawyer must discharge this duty by fair and honourable means, without illegality and in a manner that is consistent with the lawyer's duty to treat the tribunal with candour, fairness, courtesy and respect and in a way that promotes the parties' right to a fair hearing where justice can be done. Maintaining dignity, decorum, and courtesy in the courtroom is not an empty formality because, unless order is maintained, rights cannot be protected."

Parliament itself was explicit:

Parliamentary Privilege

"Members of Parliament are not above the law. The right to freedom from interference in the discharge of parliamentary duties does not apply to actions taken by Members outside parliamentary proceedings which could lead to criminal charges. No Member may claim immunity from arrest or imprisonment on such charges."


Nevertheless, I couldn’t see the next step. I was going nowhere and needed help, but I couldn’t discuss this openly without breaching solicitor-client privilege.

I had a source so highly placed and so sensitive that I couldn’t contact him directly. He was familiar with the workings of the Law Society of Upper Canada and major figures in the Canadian underworld. I referred to him only as Deep Frog. If I wanted a meeting with him, I’d move my dead Christmas tree from one side of my balcony to the other. Next day, I’d find a clock with the time of the meeting penciled on the front page of my Globe and Mail. I never knew how he got to my Globe and Mail. If he couldn’t meet me, I’d find a copy of the National Post with no clock on it. I never knew how he didn’t get to my National Post either: I didn’t have a subscription. If I needed an urgent meeting, I’d turn on the lights of the tree from which I had not removed the decorations.

We met in a biker bar outside Gatineau late at night. The atmosphere was so menacing that senior civil servants rarely went there.

“What’s up?” he asked.

I told him my problem.

“Follow the lawyers,” he said, cryptically.

Suddenly, the bar was filled with the howling of a dozen Harleys arriving. When I looked back at my contact, he was gone.

What could he mean? Follow what lawyers? From the Department of Justice? Rob Nicholson, himself? Niagara Falls? Suddenly, it hit me. Where did lawyers go when they were in trouble? Who, outside the government, could investigate government lawyers? I called a crash meeting with Deep Frog.

“I wondered how long it would take you,” he said with some amusement. “But be careful how you approach The Law Society. The government has friends in high places everywhere, and I mean everywhere.”

I had contacts, “paralegals”, who did work for me when I wanted an investigation with no fingerprints. These guys worked freelance after careers in the RCMP, CSIS, the military. They were tough, reliable, and knew how the world worked. I didn’t need them.

What I needed was another kind of paralegal: people I called “moose”. I called them that because they were so clumsy and obvious that no one in their right mind would think they were connected with me, or in fact anyone other than the Loony Left or the Rabid Right. I had a moose in Vancouver, and I knew I could send him on a Mission from God, even if it meant destruction, but the collision would, like the Large Hadron Collider, yield particles of interest.

To be continued....

In memory of John Sims

The Man From Niagara Falls

I was seated alone in the bar of the Chateau Laurier, nursing my third Screech on the rocks. I was recovering from conversation with Ed, a guy from Alberta, who had wanted advice on breaking up confederation with the help of Quebec. I wasn't sure how that would go down with the Law Society of Upper Canada, but I was pretty sure - despite his enticements - that I hadn't become a constitutional lawyer to trash the constitution. He left, regretfully.

I was moodily conemplating the body of a seal, thrown carelessly into a corner by the bartender, when approached by a nondescript man remarkable only in that he was wearing a helmet, skates, and an NHL Referee's Uniform.

"I heard you're the go-to guy for consitutional law in Canada," he said. "Can I buy you a drink?"

"That all depends," I replied. "Tell me why you're asking."

"OK," he said, " I'll lay my cards on the table."

He spread out a fresh deck on the bar, still unfortunately sticky with clotting seal blood.

"I represent an important client, and the assignment is one requiring extreme delicacy, fast footwork, and a comprehensive knowledge of Canadian consitutional law." Two out of three ain't bad.

"First thing is, I need to know the client."

"Is this conversation protected by solicitor-client privilege?"

"Of course."

"OK, he said, "it's the CBC."

"And the assignment?"

"The client wishes to get close to the Attorney-General and collect sensitive information with regard to possible obstruction of justice at proceedings before the Canadian Military Complaints Complaints Commission, and specifically with regard to the possible misuse of Section 38.01 and 38.02 of the Canada Evidence Act."

I finished my drink, and ordered a fourth, fifth, and sixth refill.

"Where are you from: the fifth estate; Ideas?"

"They won't touch it."

"What makes you think I will?"

"I'm from Hockey Night in Canada."

I was stunned by the implications.

"We have a source at Rideau Hall who gave us your name," continued the Man In Stripes, persuasively. "You come highly recommended."

"The Governor General's Horse Guards?" I asked.

"I can't reveal my sources," said the striped figure emphatically. "Let's just say we got it from the horse's mouth."

Horses, seals. I was starting to feel less like a lawyer and more like a vet.

"This isn't an episode of All Creatures Great and Small" I snapped. "I need to know exactly what the job is."

"Is this conversation protected by solicitor-client privilege?"

"Of course."

"OK, we need you to get close to the Attorney-General on the Afghan prisoner file, and without him knowing, find out what he knew and when he knew it, what he didn't know, and when he didn't know it, and when he didn't know what he knew, even if he didn't know it. We also want to know who would investigate the Attorney-General for alleged obstruction of justice."

My head ached. "Rumsfeld's got a lot to answer for," I said wearily.

"You know Don?"

"Rumsfeld or Cherry?"

"Either."

"Neither."

A silence settled over us like ink from an octopus. I was back to animals, admittedly invertebrates.

"OK," I said finally, "tell me more about Nicholson. I haven't said yes and I haven't said no, but I need to know more about him. I can't approach him directly, obviously. Where's he from?"

"Niagara Falls."

A strange sensation came over me. I turned to the Man in Stripes and grasped him by the throat. Niagara Falls! Slowly, I turned, closer I came, step by step, inch by inch....

He knocked me to the floor with his elbow. "Pull yourself together!" he hissed. "This isn't Saturday night at a Flyers' game."

"Philadelphia?" I inquired from the floor.

"No, Niagara Falls."

Niagara Falls! Slowly, I turned, closer I came, step by step, inch by inch... I found myself on the floor again.

"Look," he said, "I'm offering you work. Do you want the job or not?"

"I thought the Flyers moved to Michigan."

"OK, have it your way. This isn't Saturday night in Saginaw."

"Why should I trust you? Maybe you're from the Colbert Report."

"What's that?" he asked convincingly.

I had to admit, I was intrigued. Who would investigate the Attorney-General for alleged obstruction of justice? I had to take the job.

...to be continued.

Lipstick on a Weasel

RON MACLEAN
Welcome back to House of Commons Night in Canada. Don, we've been talking a lot about the Iacobucci appointment, and you've certainly not been in favour of this under the Public Service Employment Act as an "advisor to a minister". Would that be fair comment?

DON CHERRY
That would be putting mildly.

RON MACLEAN
But just so we're clear about this, you're not criticizing Justice Iacobucci himself are you?

DON CHERRY
Absolutely not. He's obviously an A-Team guy, former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, they don't get any smarter than that. He's done good work for the government on his own inquiry before....

RON MACLEAN
"Internal Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad Abou-Elmaati and Muayyed Nureddin", the public report released in October, 2008...

DON CHERRY
...that's the one, and he's obviously taking this Afghan prisoner....I don't know what to call it...

RON MACLEAN
"Thing?"

DON CHERRY
Yeah, "thing" - it sure isn't a Public Inquiry - "thing" on in the public interest, a guy like that wouldn't be in it for anything else...

RON MACLEAN
So what's wrong with his appointment, then?

DON CHERRY
I think he just fell in with the wrong crowd, you know how it goes, a good kid in bad company.

RON MACLEAN
And the bad company in this case being...?

DON CHERRY
The Conservatives.

RON MACLEAN
Conservatives?

DON CHERRY
Not "small c" conservatives, I'm one of them anyway, so its not like I'm going to call myself "bad company"...

RON MACLEAN
...in which case I'd definitely be at risk...

DON CHERRY
Yeah, you already got into trouble, hanging out with me...

RON MACLEAN
...so you're saying the "big C" Conservatives?

DON CHERRY
Yeah, Harper's Conservatives.

RON MACLEAN
Harper's Conservatives have got a pretty loyal following out in hockey country, the West particularly.

DON CHERRY
Yeah, well that's because the government's not Liberals, I can understand that. Bad feeling about the Liberals goes back a long way in the West, farmers start mumbling about the "Crow Rate", and don't even mention the National Energy Policy...

RON MACLEAN
So what gets up your nose about these Conservatives?

DON CHERRY
I think they're a bunch of guys.....

RON MACLEAN
....they're definitely not all guys...

DON CHERRY
...the're a bunch of people who can't tell the difference between their own PR and reality, particularly when it comes to the law. I just get the impression none of these guys - and I'm talking guys here, Harper, MacKay, Nicholson, Hawn - none of these guys gives the impression they've read the law recently, or at all.

RON MACLEAN
Well that's a little much isn't it? There's a lot of law to read, even if you're a lawyer.

DON CHERRY
Ever read the Criminal Code of Canada?

RON MACLEAN
As a matter of fact, no, I've never had occasion to.

DON CHERRY
Right, because you're basically a good guy, or were until you started hanging out with me. But that doesn't mean you're not bound by the Criminal Code, because you are.

RON MACLEAN
Good point. So have you read the Criminal Code of Canada?

DON CHERRY
I thought you might ask me that. So I brought my copy with me. Sorry about the beer stains.

RON MACLEAN
It's very big, and in both official languages I notice.

DON CHERRY
Yeah, it's the consolidated version.

RON MACLEAN
Are the beer stains also in both languages?

DON CHERRY
Yeah, but I can't say which beer on account of contractual obligations.

RON MACLEAN
Are your contractual obligations covered in the Criminal Code?

DON CHERRY
I'll hit you with this thing, then you won't be such a wise guy.

RON MACLEAN
But will I know the Criminal Code afterwards?

DON CHERRY
Keep quiet a minute. I want to take you to the part about "Misleading Justice"...

RON MACLEAN
That's sounds serious.

DON CHERRY
Yeah, that's why it's in the Criminal Code, Part 4 Section 139:

Obstructing justice
139. (1) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding,
(a) by indemnifying or agreeing to indemnify a surety, in any way and either in whole or in part, or
(b) where he is a surety, by accepting or agreeing to accept a fee or any form of indemnity whether in whole or in part from or in respect of a person who is released or is to be released from custody,
is guilty of
(c) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or
(d) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Idem
(2) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

RON MACLEAN
That's pretty scary.

DON CHERRY
Yeah, well it's gonna be scary like dealing with head shots in the NHL, assuming those guys get their act together.

RON MACLEAN
So how are you saying that the obstruction of justice has got anything to do with the Conservatives?

DON CHERRY
Well, I'll have to say this carefully....

RON MACLEAN
Good idea....

DON CHERRY
If you look at the comments of the Chair of the Military Police Complaints Commission in adjourning the recent proceedings October 14, 2009...

RON MACLEAN
Which you happen to have with you...

DON CHERRY
...only in English, but I've got the beer stains in both languages, but what I wanna read you - where the beer practically stuck the pages together - at page 243, line 9, is where the Chair, Peter Tinsley, says:

"In such circumstances, notwithstanding establishment and empowerment by Parliament, experience to date in this matter has demonstrated that when the government decides not to cooperate there is no equality of arms. Indeed, herein the essential cooperation of the government has become a much-distorted concept as discussed earlier in this decision, seemingly Kafkaesque.

"It would seem that some of the key lessons of the Somalia experience from which this Commission arose wherein accusations, whether well founded or not, were fuelled by a total lack of transparency, have not been learned."

RON MACLEAN
I think we discussed that a few weeks back, you were asking who Kafka was...

DON CHERRY
Yeah, I know, he was a European, but once you get into it, it seems pretty clear that the Department of Justice was jerking the Commission's chain for a year, and holding up the proceedings by claiming it couldn't release evidence under Sections 38.01 and 38.02 of the Canada Evidence Act because of National Security.

RON MACLEAN
...and the problem with that is?

DON CHERRY
All the guys on the Military Police Complaints Commission have better security clearances and military qualifications than the Minister of Justice and the Minister of National Defence.

RON MACLEAN
So you're saying the Department of Justice is stalling?

DON CHERRY
I'm not a lawyer, but it looks that way to me. But stalling in a judicial proceeding is - and I call' em the way I see 'em - Obstruction of Justice as stated in Section 139 of the Criminal Code.

RON MACLEAN
...and the guy responsible for the Department of Justice...is the Attorney General of Canada...

DON CHERRY
The Honourable Rob Nicholson...

RON MACLEAN
....who appointed Justice Iacobucci...

DON CHERRY
Now you're catching on.

RON MACLEAN
So who investigates the Attorney General of Canada when obstruction of justice is alleged? It's practically impeachment or something....

DON CHERRY
What we need at this point is a constitutional lawyer.

RON MACLEAN
So we'll see if we can find one. There's sure to be one at a Leafs game.

DON CHERRY
I don't think that's a good idea. Any constitutional lawyer who's a Leafs fan won't be in a reasonable frame of mind.

RON MACLEAN
So maybe Montreal or Ottawa, but in the meantime, it's so long from me, Ron MacLean, and Don Cherry here on House of Commons Night in Canada

DON CHERRY
I find it hard to believe you never read the Criminal Code.

RON MACLEAN
I never got past the CHA rule book.

DON CHERRY
That explains a lot.

The further five o'clock follies....

Here’s a family anecdote. My grandfather survived three years in the trenches in the First World War. Sometime after he returned home to Manitoba (miraculously) and had a family of his own, he and my grandmother and their three children were having dinner one evening when my aunt, who was old enough to be aware of the war that her father had lived through but too young to see emotional pitfalls, asked: “Did you kill any Germans during the war, Daddy?” According to my father, my grandfather turned “white as a sheet” and rushed from the room. The subject was never again discussed, which of course was how people dealt with what couldn’t be dealt with.

These days, soldiers return home from wars with well described physical injuries, but also with unseen injuries of the heart and soul, much as my grandfather had. These wounds are now well known, but not well spoken, and even with the best of care their effects go on for lifetimes and further. Nevertheless, there exist many cheerleaders for war.

Consider from recent history the fabled Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) which applied the most powerful techniques of public relations to the moral and military disaster that was Vietnam. The daily press briefing (“the five o’clock follies”) was memorably described by Michael Herr in Dispatches as “an Orwellian grope through the day’s events as seen by the Mission”.

Now, we have a new “Mission” which in Canada at least is Afghanistan, and we have a new savage reincarnation of MACV as ISAF (International Security and Assistance Force), a wholly-owned subsidiary of NATO. You just can’t make this stuff up. On Friday, June 13, 2008, and one day after a “donors’ conference” promised $21 billion to Afghanistan (as long as it wasn’t going to be wasted like the first billions of dollars, or euros, whatever) the Kandahar central slammer, the Sarpoza Prison, was totaled in a highly professional hit, releasing almost all the prisoners, the whole thing having been organized by the Taliban. In recent memory there was an interview with Brigadier Gordon Messenger in Helmand, who was quoted by the Guardian as saying that “the Taliban's command structure had been 'fractured' and its fighters forced on to the backfoot”.

'[NATO forces] are disrupting areas where the Taliban have traditionally held sway', said Messenger, who led 40 Commando Royal Marines during the Iraq war and was recently appointed as an aide-de-camp to the Queen.”

Maybe the Queen bought it, the Taliban didn’t.

Meanwhile back at the world’s most highly defended Tim Horton’s, “Canadian forces and other NATO troops have been deployed to Kandahar after the main prison in the southern Afghan city was attacked by militants, who set most of the prisoners free.

“Maj. Jay Janzen, a spokesman for the Canadian Forces, said troops were on the scene and had established a security perimeter in the vicinity.

"We believe the situation is under control,” Janzen said, without elaborating.”

Absolutely, under control. The horses have gone, but the stable door is like, slammed tight. Well, OK, there was no door at that particular moment, but if there was one, it would be totally secure. ‘He [Major Janzen] said that despite last night's assault, the overall security situation in Kandahar, a former Taliban stronghold and Afghanistan's second-largest city, has been slowly improving. "Obviously, there are still challenges, and we continue to meet those challenges," he said.

Meanwhile back in Brussels, ISAF had knocked off for the weekend. The leading item on their website from the day of The Great Escape from Sarpoza was “ISAF commander congratulates Ministry of Interior for likely world’s largest seizure of narcotics”.

Cool. We’re making progress.

So I waited very impatiently for ISAF to open up on Monday June 16, 2008, to find out how they were going to spin this one. I imagined something MACV-like, or at least a fitting tribute to the Maximegalon Museum of Diseased Imaginings . For entertainment during the wait, nothing beat a dispatch from AFP on Sunday, June 15:

A man claiming to be one of the escapees called AFP from an unknown location to say the rebels had made it to safe havens.

"They (Taliban attackers) came in and freed us," the man who identified himself as Abdullah told AFP over the phone, adding there were buses waiting outside.

"A number of us who would not fit in the buses escaped through pomegranate gardens. We all are in safe places now," Abdullah said.

Buses? How can you organize buses without somebody noticing? So, on Monday June 16 some three days after the break, the freshly updated ISAF home page showed……nothing….. The Great Escape didn’t happen.

Finally, Wednesday June 18, 2008, ISAF admitted that: “ISAF bolster ANSF in Kandahar City”.

Whatever that means, you wouldn’t guess that about 1000 prisoners got broken out of Sarpoza Prison under the noses if ISAF five days previously, the jailbreak having been conducted in a highly organized and professional manner, the details including chartered buses for escaping prisoners. And so it goes on. The spirit of MACV, ISAF, Goebbels et al., that part of the human spirit that wants to sell lies in place of truth, is probably eternal. But as George Orwell showed, this malignancy can be fought: tooth, claw, and pen.

Meanwhile, we have further bombings in Kandahar, despite massive NATO reinforcements:

"The provincial governor, Tooryalai Wesa [the man from Coquitlam], was more circumspect. “We cannot say whether the prison was the main target,” he said, “or whether it was an attempt to get revenge on the Marja military operation or just to show they can sabotage the operation.”

"Mr. Wesa said the Taliban wanted to send the message, 'We can do whatever we want, everywhere in the city of Kandahar.'”

Cry 'havoc' and let slip the dogs of law;

RON MACLEAN
So it's Ron MacLean with Don Cherry on House of Commons Night in Canada. We're here on Saturday, Grapes, a little unusual for us.

DON CHERRY
There's no rest for angina, and we've still got a night of hockey to get through.

RON MACLEAN
Yeah, I know, Montreal and Boston...

DON CHERRY
...always a barn-burner...

RON MACLEAN
Edmonton and the Leafs...

DON CHERRY
...a good one for die hard fans...

RON MACLEAN
And Ottawa at Vancouver...

DON CHERRY
I'm breaking out in a sweat just thinking about that rink. You know I was at the men's Paralympic sledge hockey game already...

RON MACLEAN
How'd that go?

DON CHERRY
Canada beat Italy but I think most of the fans were from Italy or Commercial Drive. The place was nuts.

RON MACLEAN
So we better squeeze in the Iacobucci announcement while we get the chance. For parliamentary democracy fans who might not have heard, the Department of Justice published the terms of reference for Justice Frank Iacobucci to advise it on matters relating to prisoners taken by Canadian troops in Afghanistan. Don, what's your take on those.

DON CHERRY
Well, I haven't had time to really read it carefully, but what's clear is that Iacobucci is being appointed under Section 127 of the Public Service Employment Act, and not under the Inquiries Act.

RON MACLEAN
Does it matter?

DON CHERRY
You know, I think so. This is only off the top of my head, but the "Public Inquiries" part of the Inquiries Act specifically empowers commissioners to issue, subpoenas, take testimony under oath, all that.

RON MACLEAN
And the Public Service Employment Act is different?

DON CHERRY
Yeah well, again, just off the top of my head, they're quoting Section 127.1 subsection 1(c) of the Act, whIch I brought with me in case you were gonna ask me...

RON MACLEAN
What does Section 127.1 say, Don?

DON CHERRY
I thought you might ask me. Section 127.1, subsection 1, states that:

127.1 (1) The Governor in Council may appoint persons to the following positions and fix their remuneration:
(a) deputy minister, associate deputy minister and positions of equivalent ranks;
(b) deputy head, associate deputy head and positions of equivalent ranks; and
(c) special adviser to a minister.

RON MACLEAN
So Justice Iacobucci has been appointed under subsection 1(c), "special advisor to a minister"?

DON CHERRY
That's how I read it.

RON MACLEAN
Which minister would he be advising?

DON CHERRY
I'm guessing the Minister of National Defence.

RON MACLEAN
So his terms of reference...

DON CHERRY
...are whatever you want them to be...

RON MACLEAN
But the Justice Department website is pretty specific and detailed about the information he's supposed to look at...

DON CHERRY
...but it doesn't say what Iacobucci's supposed to do with all the information once he's looked at it. To my way of thinking, this is like putting lipstick on a weasel: it sounds like a public inquiry, it looks like a public inquiry, but it's even less of a public inquiry that Iacobucci's last effort at a public inquiry, which was held in private. This time, it's not anything at all.

RON MACLEAN
So why wouldn't the government just call a full throttle public inquiry and be done with it?

DON CHERRY
Like I said before, nobody will look good after the public inquiry that eventually will get held, and if it happens now, Harper can kiss his majority goodbye. But I'll tell you now, this whole thing isn't gonna sit well with Derek Lee. He's going to ask the obvious question: how can Justice Iacobucci, hired under section 127 of the Public Service Employment Act as an "advisor to a minister", tell Parliament what documents it can and can't see? We're still in constitutional crisis territory and I wouldn't want to be getting in Derek Lee's way any time soon.

RON MACLEAN
...which means it's time for us to say goodbye until the next time, which I'm sure will be sooner than later, on House of Commons Night in Canada.

DON CHERRY
You know, those sledge hockey hits are brutal.

RON MACLEAN
As is your new suit.

DON CHERRY
Hey, the Gold Medals were all silk screen printed.

RON MACLEAN
I have to wear sunglasses to look at you.

Lies, Damned Lies, and C/conservatives

So here’s a thing. A conference is being held in Ottawa at the Manning Centre for Building Democracy, entitled:
Manning Networking Conference 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010 7:00 PM -
Saturday, March 13, 2010 5:30 PM (Eastern Time)

The thing is that democracy has already been built, it took about a thousand years, going back to the Magna Carta, and is continuing to evolve. What’s more, the Canadian form of parliamentary democracy has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms. You know, I think we’ve got democracy. What we need to do is protect it from the forces that want to create a police state.

That’s where the Manning Centre strikes me as ominous, if not stupid. Its aim is:

“A free and democratic Canada where conservative principles are well articulated, understood, and implemented.”

Implemented?

Does that imply all Canadians would be forced to live according to "conservative principles"? Over my dead body!

You know, the Manning Centre and its attendant verbiage, public relations, and obfuscation, is a crock. Canadian democracy is not about any religion or belief – it is in fact distinctly willing to grant any citizen complete religious freedom or belief, even if that means worshipping the Intergalactic Jelly Bean of Infinite Wisdom – and in fact people are free to say and believe what they wish, as long as they don’t contravene the Criminal Code of Canada.

The reality, therefore, is that, just to pick one example at random, adult Canadians can legally have any sexual relations they wish, provided that such relations are consensual, and not abusive to minors, animals, or other groups of diminished power, although I don’t think that includes grizzlies, who can look after themselves unless threatened by firepower dreamed up by Opposing Thumbs.

So in fact, the Manning Centre is a great waste of time, and is trying to fight battles that were fought years ago, such as in the “Persons” proceeding before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1929, which acknowledged the existence of women as a political power. The Manning Centre is trying to recreate something that never existed, and attempting desperately to push onto a pedestal arguments that were demolished, reluctantly, by Charles Darwin.

I'm not saying Darwin's right, just that nobody's shown any evidence - at all - that's he's wrong. This is the sort of "innovative" thinking the government is trying to encourage while having no idea what innovation really means.

Whatever it means, you can't bring back the Dark Ages, even if Dick and Liz Cheney desperately miss them.

Stephen Harper is a Dead Duck in the Tar Sands

You know, people, you just can’t make this stuff up.

We have, as we speak, a lawsuit going on with regard to over 1600 dead ducks.

As it turns out, when you try to figure out who is responsible for what, Syncrude Canada's largest shareholder is the Canadian Oil Sands Trust, which, as it turns out, is owned by a bunch of Australians called Computershare. Go figure. So much for the National Energy Policy - we sold out to the Aussies for a bunch of dead ducks.

"Syncrude is facing charges under federal and provincial laws in relation to the deaths of 1,600 ducks in a northern Alberta tailings pond in April 2008. The migrating ducks landed on the pond, north of Fort McMurray, and sank to the bottom after being coated in toxic sludge.

"Air cannons used to scare migratory birds away from the tailings pond were not in place. The company has pleaded not guilty. It doesn't dispute that the ducks perished in the tailings pond, but says charges won't accomplish anything. Syncrude also says it did everything it could to keep birds away from the tailings pond. The company says a late winter storm prevented them from putting bird deterrents in place and the birds migrated earlier than usual. Environmentalists and those in the oil industry are watching the trial closely because it could set a precedent for tailings pond operators.

"The federal charge Syncrude is facing falls under the Migratory Birds Convention Act. The law is generally applied only to hunters and companies that dump hazardous chemicals or oil into the water. It has never been applied to a tailings pond operator. If found guilty, Syncrude could face fines of up to $1 million."

It makes me wonder if that crazy guy who won the Silver Medal at the Olympics after Alexandre Bilodeau still has a hate on for Canada and is heavily involved in seeing us destroy ourselves as we seem intent on doing.

But beyond all that, there are at least five reasons why Harper is a dead duck in the water, or sludge:

1. The National Anthem Debacle

This kind of ineptitude speaks for itself.

2. The Rights and Democracy Debacle

This kind of ineptitude speaks for itself.

3. The Afghan Prisoner Debacle

This kind of ineptitude speaks for itself.

4. The Prorogation Debacle

There's nothing to say, really.

5. The Dimitry Soudas-Channels-Josef Goebbels in Copenhagen/Yes Men/Climate Change Debacle.

Some things are just perfect, the way they are.

Don Cherry on Frank Iacobucci

RON MACLEAN
Welcome to House of Commons Night in Canada. We're back after the Parliamentary Lockout. I'm Ron Maclean here with Don Cherry. Grapes, we've had a lukewarm Throne Speech coming on the end of the Olympics and after the furor of prorogation without reasons. How do you see things now?

DON CHERRY
Yeah, I'm surprised I'm still alive and can see anything. It was death by a thousand heart attacks. I'm not sure whether Crosby or Luongo was more life threatening.

RON MACLEAN
The Prime Minister survived the game though, taking it in with Wayne Gretzky.

DON CHERRY
I didn't notice, I was trying to find new places to put a nitroglycerine patch.

RON MACLEAN
And now the House is back in session, and the government has announced it's appointing retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci to advise it on the release of information on prisoners to the Special Parliamentary Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan.

DON CHERRY
After the Olympics, this is like watching paint dry in the slow motion replay.

RON MACLEAN
That's why we have to pay attention. So the Commons has resumed, we've had the Throne Speech and the Budget, but the problem with the government coughing up documents about the Afghan prisoner transfers seems to have gone off the road...

DON CHERRY
Yeah, Harper drove it into the ditch.

RON MACLEAN
So, just so we're all on the same page here, Derek Lee, Member of Parliament for Scarborough-Rouge Valley and a lawyer, expert on parliamentary procedure...

DON CHERRY
...yeah, who literally wrote the book on parliamentary privilege and the production of documents...

RON MACLEAN
He was gonna get in a quick motion on a point of order, but it doesn't seem like it happened. I know you're a fan of Derek Lee...

DON CHERRY
...a huge fan...

RON MACLEAN
So fill us in, where are we at with that?

DON CHERRY
The trouble was, Derek didn't want to force Harper into a corner where he's gonna call a snap election. Nobody wanted that, so he's making a point of not getting in the way of House business like the Budget. But he's still steaming in the background.

RON MACLEAN
So I read that Norman Spector thinks Derek Lee is being "arcane" getting bent of shape about Parliament's right to order the government to produce documents.

DON CHERRY
What's "arcane" mean?

RON MACLEAN
Nobody knows about it.

DON CHERRY
Yeah, what that means is Spector doesn't know about it. I'm not so sure Spector's heard of habeus corpus never mind the Magna Carta.

RON MACLEAN
So you think he's wrong?

DON CHERRY
Wrong? He's out to lunch. But that's normal for him. All I'm saying is if you think the Crown can defy Parliament you're a few centuries behind.

RON MACLEAN
Which brings us to the present where the government has appointed retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci to help it review documents before release to the Commons for "national security". Have you got anything to say about that?

DON CHERRY
I got a lot to say about that. First thing is, who is Iacobucci these days? He's not a Justice of the Supreme Court, he's a hired gun for Torys, the la-de-dah law firm. That's not to say the government couldn't appoint him as a Commissioner under the Inquiries Act, like they did for the Iacobucci Inquiry...

RON MACLEAN
Is that the same Iacobucci?

DON CHERRY
How many Iacobuccis do you know in the law business? Yeah, of course it's the same Frank Iacobucci, a boy from BC, who did the inquiry "into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Abdullah Almalki, Ahmed Abou-Elmaati and Muayyed Nureddin".

RON MACLEAN
...but the supplemental report, just released, criticized CSIS...

DON CHERRY
Yeah, and that's my second beef with Iacobucci, he was appointed a Commissioner under Part 1 of the Inquiries Act, called "Public Inquiries" and then meekly followed the government's instruction to hold the public inquiry in private. You can't have it both ways.

RON MACLEAN
But the report was made public.

DON CHERRY
So what? Nobody knows what went on behind closed doors. Justice O'Connor had the Maher Arar inquiry almost all in public, and fought to make almost everything public that the government tried to suppress. Now they're hiring this guy who can't tell the difference between public and private to "advise" it in some unknown capacity on "national security".

RON MACLEAN
What's wrong with that?

DON CHERRY
It's another weasel move, that's what's wrong with it! When the going gets tough, Harper gets weasels.

RON MACLEAN
You're not saying the government doesn't have the right to get expert advice?

DON CHERRY
The government's already got expert advice coming out its ears! There's a zillion people already advising the government about this stuff, and the government already concluded that it couldn't release any information to the Military Police Complaints Commission, which is filled with guys whose national security clearances are as good or better than Iacobucci's.

RON MACLEAN
So you're saying the government is stalling?

DON CHERRY
Absolutely!

RON MACLEAN
But let me play the devil's advocate...

DON CHERRY
When were you anything else?

RON MACLEAN
..and ask what's in it for the government? Why would they take this approach unless they're genuinely worried about national security?

DON CHERRY
You're asking me for my opinion?

RON MACLEAN
Hard to believe, isn't it?

DON CHERRY
So, I'm gonna tell you.

RON MACLEAN
I'm thrilled.

DON CHERRY
There's three things. First is, Harper has this Howard Hughes complex - he thinks he's the head of a private corporation and it's none of anybody's business how he runs it.

RON MACLEAN
He'll have to grow his hair a little wilder.

DON CHERRY
You're just jealous. Second is, the government is really trying to hide something. Something went very, very wrong at National Defence in 2006 and 2007, but I don't think this government really had anything to do with it, other than not being honest about it.

RON MACLEAN
Then why try to hide it?

DON CHERRY
Good question. My guess is that a judicial inquiry - and this is Canada, folks, there will be a judicial inquiry - will make everybody look bad, especially the previous Liberal government. And let's not forget, this isn't new. The Somalia Inquiry, conducted in public by a retired Federal Court Judge, came to the conclusion that something was wrong at the highest levels of National Defence, and that it hadn't been fixed. I brought it here so I can read it right.

RON MACLEAN
That doesn't sound like you at all.

DON CHERRY
"We can only hope that Somalia represents the nadir of the fortunes of the Canadian Forces. There seems to be little room to slide lower. One thing is certain, however: left uncorrected, the problems that surfaced in the desert in Somalia and in the boardrooms at National Defence Headquarters will continue to spawn military ignominy. The victim will be Canada and its international reputation."

RON MACLEAN
And the third thing?

DON CHERRY
Third thing is, when the truth comes out, the mud will stick to everybody who had anything to do with government in the last 10 years. Harper will never get a majority. He's hoping to put off the truth until he does get a majority, and then he can bury it.

RON MACLEAN
What are his chances?

DON CHERRY
Zero.

RON MACLEAN
Yeah, well I thought you said Canada was going to win the gold medal game 5-3.

DON CHERRY
Me and my big mouth. I still think Luongo was just trying to kill me with a heart attack.

RON MACLEAN
Is that why your suit has pictures of Roberto Luongo and Canadian flags all over it?

DON CHERRY
You know how Crosby's stick went missing?

RON MACLEAN
You're saying you know something about it?

DON CHERRY
Check out those guys in blue jackets after the game, picking up the equipment. One of them is wearing sunglasses and a tie.

RON MACLEAN
A tie with the Charter printed on it?

DON CHERRY
I'm only saying, a guy with my persona, I have to travel incognito.

RON MACLEAN
Don, it's not possible for you to be incognito, like you won't be next time we're here on House of Commons Night in Canada.