Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before The Supreme Court

https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/236679/index.do

Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Amos v. Canada

Court (s) Database	Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date	2017-10-30
Neutral citation	2017 FCA 213
File numbers	A-48-16

Date: 20171030

Docket: A-48-16

Citation: 2017 FCA 213

CORAM:

WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. GLEASON J.A.

BETWEEN:

DAVID RAYMOND AMOS

Respondent on the cross-appeal (and formally Appellant)

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Appellant on the cross-appeal (and formerly Respondent)

Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.

Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:

THE COURT

Date: 20171030

Docket: A-48-16

Citation: 2017 FCA 213

CORAM:

WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. GLEASON J.A.

BETWEEN:

DAVID RAYMOND AMOS

Respondent on the cross-appeal (and formally Appellant)

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Appellant on the cross-appeal (and formerly Respondent)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT

I.                    Introduction

[1]               On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos) filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan (Claim at para. 96).

[2]               On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious, and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the Prothontary’s Order).

[3]               On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr. Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr. Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).

[4]               Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016. As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s cross-appeal.

II.                 Preliminary Matter

[5]               Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal. This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with several judges but did not name those judges.

[6]               Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7:

5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal. […]	5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale. […]
5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.	5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les juges de la Cour fédérale.

[7]               However, these subsections only provide that the judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this section.

[8]               Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide that:

3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.

3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en matière civile et pénale.

4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.

4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en matière civile et pénale.

[9]               Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that appeal book.

[10]           Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a conflict in any matter related to him. 

[11]           On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court. Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.

[12]           During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that such judge had a conflict.

[13]           The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr. Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he was a member of such firm.

[14]           During his oral submissions at the hearing of his appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb, focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada over 10 years ago.

[15]           The documents that he submitted in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street, Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.

[16]           Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R. 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable apprehension of bias:

60        In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the reasonable apprehension of bias:

… the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person, viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or unconsciously, would not decide fairly."

[17]           The issue to be determined is whether an informed person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v. Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R. (4th) 193).

[18]           The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v. Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:

27        Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement, as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.

28        The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."

29        It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J. in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.), for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge. His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.

30        That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept, that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:

            To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making, or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.

31        There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with his former firm for a considerable period of time.

32        In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage. In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving events from over a decade ago.

(emphasis added)

[19]           Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice Webb hearing this appeal.

[20]           Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R. (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.

[21]           In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4 F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr. Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.

[22]           Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD. He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.

[23]           As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him to recuse himself.

[24]           Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.

[25]           Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr. Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time, both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry, begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr. Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.

III.               Issue

[26]           The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?

IV.              Analysis 

A.                 Standard of Review

[27]           Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215, 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235 [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law (Hospira at paras. 82-83).

[28]           In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to interfere. 

B.                 Did the Judge err in interfering with the Prothonotary’s Order?

[29]           The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:

17.       Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006 in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.

(…)

21.       The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance. A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.

[footnotes omitted].

[30]           The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at para. 27).

[31]           The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada, 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:

[13]      As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:

a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;

b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and

c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.

Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28

(Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).

[32]           The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in public office because the actors, who barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).

[33]           This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321 D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:

…When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”. “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald, conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse of process…

To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”

(at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).

[34]           Applying the Housen standard of review to the Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.

[35]           The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons, these allegations are not particularized and are directed against non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such, the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action.

[36]           In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend. The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).

V.                 Conclusion

[37]           For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment, dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety without leave to amend.

"Wyman W. Webb"

J.A.

"David G. Near"

J.A.

"Mary J.L. Gleason"

J.A.

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.

DOCKET:	A-48-16
STYLE OF CAUSE:	DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF HEARING:		Fredericton, New Brunswick
DATE OF HEARING:		May 24, 2017
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:		WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. GLEASON J.A.
DATED:		October 30, 2017

APPEARANCES:

David Raymond Amos	For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal (on his own behalf)
Jan Jensen	For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Nathalie G. Drouin Deputy Attorney General of Canada

For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/the-prime-of-brian-mulroney/article998044/

The prime of Brian Mulroney

Konrad Yakabuski

Special to The Globe and Mail

Published April 30, 2004 Updated April 19, 2018 

Palm Beach, Fla., is a town where a resident's net worth is summed up in the capsule description that invariably is tacked onto their name in the local society column. As in, pharmaceutical heir Laddie Merck, Cuban-American sugar king Pepe Fanjul, oil billionaire David Koch, or Kate Ford, the widow of Henry Ford II.

Former Canadian prime minister and globetrotting rainmaker Brian Mulroney - a Palm Beach homeowner since 1997 - fits in marvellously here.

So it was, on a Friday evening in March, that a select group of the island community's seasonal and permanent inhabitants - among them Paul Desmarais, Conrad Black, Koch, Fanjul and Ford - descended on the ritzy Club Colette on Peruvian Avenue. The occasion that brought them to the private dinner club (which was once owned by Aldo Gucci, a detail too delicious to ignore for anyone familiar with Mulroney's shoe fixation) was the boy from Baie Comeau's 65th birthday party.

They were joined by an illustrious list of out-of-towners. George Bush Sr. flew over from Houston. Gustavo Cisneros, Venezuela's richest man, came up from Caracas. Dallas-based leveraged buyout wizard Tom Hicks popped over from his retreat in the Caribbean. So did Irish media baron Tony O'Reilly, who flew in on his Gulfstream III. Pierre Karl Péladeau came down from Montreal, Gerry Schwartz and Galen Weston from Toronto.

Joan Rivers, a family friend through shared charitable causes, kept everyone amused. "Mila is so attractive," the comedienne, in five-inch rhinestone heels, cracked, "that the first time I met her, I thought she was the second wife." Mila Mulroney, in a silver lamé Dolce & Gabbana creation, blushed.

If Mulroney's 65th birthday was the official reason for the celebration, there were other excuses to party.

The year had been a very good one for Mulroney, his best since leaving office in 1993. The legacy he so longed for was finally taking shape. It began with an April 17, 2003, letter from RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli informing Mulroney that he had been fully exonerated in the Airbus affair. It continued in June when he was named the second-best prime minister of the past 50 years by an elite panel of 28 academics (Lester Pearson was first). Then, in February, journalist Stevie Cameron was exposed as an RCMP informant in the Airbus case. Cameron, who had spent much of her career trying to tear down Mulroney's, ended up seriously compromising her own. Mulroney enjoyed the irony in that.

So did his friends. Those assembled at the party - the main event during a weekend of soirées, brunches and cocktails that Cisneros would label "a whole Brian Mulroney festival" - had never doubted his innocence nor underestimated his political achievements. To them, Mulroney was an icon. They'd seen him spend the previous decade building a hugely successful international business career, amassing much wealth and even greater influence than he held as prime minister.

Bush, Desmarais, Cisneros, Hicks, O'Reilly, Péladeau and others - people with names like Rockefeller, Kissinger, Munk and Forbes - had been eager helpmates in Mulroney's ascent to the top of the global business establishment. As Mulroney expanded and consolidated his worldwide network - flitting from his Montreal base at the law firm of Ogilvy Renault to Beijing, Brussels, Cape Town, Moscow, Dublin, Dallas, Paris, London, New York, Washington and Caracas - he never forgot his friends. For them, he opened doors. To them, he offered his counsel. With him, they got richer.

"I'm an unabashed Mulroney fan," says Bush, the former U.S. president and father of the Oval Office's current occupant. "If he said, 'This is something you oughta do,' that would get more than a cursory consideration from me." Adds Cisneros, who controls one of the world's biggest private conglomerates, with 72 companies in more than 80 countries: "Brian Mulroney is a walking encyclopedia. He knows all the issues better than anybody else and he can give you better advice than anyone else. He also has a wealth of contacts. If you need to talk to the president of Argentina or some other country, Brian knows them."

The late-afternoon light streams into Brian Mulroney's office on the 12th floor of a McGill College Avenue office tower. On his desk is a thick stack of paper that constitutes the memoirs he has written in longhand, about to be sent to his publisher, McClelland & Stewart; hanging behind the imposing bureau, a portrait of Mila and the kids. At the other end of the office is a large collection of framed photographs. There's Brian and the Bushes. Brian and Bill Clinton. Brian and Francois Mitterrand. Brian and Ronald Reagan. More Bushes. Brian and the Pope. Brian and Ted Kennedy. Another Bush.

Wearing a classic double-breasted blue pinstripe suit, the former prime minister looks rested and, on the eve of becoming a senior citizen, healthier than he has in years. In contrast to the dour and haggard man with the tired voice that Canadians remember from his final years in office, this Brian Mulroney is a chipper 65. Which is astonishing, considering the schedule he keeps. He has shown no inclination to slow down, despite a scare in 2002 when doctors detected an irregular heartbeat. Mulroney, who taps a pouch of Equal into his coffee, insists he is in fine shape and exercises regularly.

"The truth of the matter is that I work as hard today, if not harder, than I did when I was 35," he says. "But I'm having a great time doing it. I love it."

In the five weeks leading up to this interview, Mulroney has been in more airports than many people see in a lifetime. There was a jaunt with Desmarais to the White House for meetings with President George W. Bush and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. A trip to South Africa for a meeting of the global advisory board of Independent News and Media Group - the Tony O'Reilly-controlled communications giant that owns some 200 newspapers - and a courtesy call on an old friend, Nelson Mandela. New York was next. There, he attended board meetings at Trizec Properties Inc., Peter Munk's U.S. real estate company, and Cendant Corp., the massive franchiser that owns such name brands as Century 21 and Coldwell Banker in real estate, Avis and Budget in car rentals, and Days Inn and Ramada in hotels. A couple of days later, Mulroney was in Toronto for a meeting of the Barrick Gold Corp. board. Then to Palm Beach to speak at an American Ireland Fund dinner with O'Reilly, who is chairman of the international Ireland Funds. After that, back to New York for a board meeting at America Online Latin America Inc., a Cisneros-controlled joint venture with Time Warner Inc.

To Montreal, then, for a day of meetings as co-chair of a committee struck by Quebec Premier Jean Charest to study Montreal's plan for two new superhospitals. The next couple of days at home were devoted to work at Quebecor Inc., where Mulroney is on the board of both the parent holding company and subsidiary Quebecor Media. Then a day in New York as chairman of printing behemoth Quebecor World Inc. Mulroney ended the month as the star attraction brought in by Steve Forbes - Mulroney is the chairman of Forbes Global, the international edition of Forbes - to entertain high-powered CEOs on the Forbes yacht, the Highlander, off the Florida coast.

Mulroney sits on 16 corporate boards or international advisory boards. He almost added another to the long list last fall, when he emerged as a key figure in New York hedge fund Cerberus Capital Management's bid to become struggling Air Canada's saviour. Mulroney, the fund's senior legal adviser, would have become the airline's chairman had the Cerberus offer been accepted. (Air Canada instead opted for the bid by Hong Kong-Canadian businessman Victor Li. But by early April, Li had all but pulled out, paving the way for a revival of the Cerberus offer.) Mulroney was recruited for the Cerberus gig by Dan Quayle, George Bush Sr.'s vice-president, who heads the hedge fund's international advisory board.

Such boards - which began popping up in the mid-1990s and are now a must-have for a global company - are a networker's dream. Mulroney sits on IABs with, among others, former U.S. secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, philanthropist David Rockefeller and Clinton insider Vernon Jordan. "You meet them socially, you become friendly," Mulroney explains. "When they're looking for lawyers in Canada, they'll call me. And vice versa. Or the CEO of one of the companies I'm involved with will call me and say, 

'We're looking at spinning off a division in Europe. Do you think Hicks Muse [the Dallas-based leveraged buyout firm where Mulroney is a senior counsellor]would be interested?' " Mulroney's international advisory seats include J.P. Morgan Chase, the second-largest U.S. bank; Desmarais's Power Corp. of Canada; Frank Stronach's Magna International Inc.; General Enterprise Management Services Ltd., a Hong Kong-based investment fund run by former Li Ka-shing lieutenant Simon Murray; and China International Trust and Investment Corp. (CITIC), a huge state-owned conglomerate that specializes in joint ventures with non-Chinese partners. What do they expect from the former prime minister? "Geo-strategic evaluations," he offers. Most of his advice is highly confidential. Mulroney would never say if, for example, he has told CITIC whether he thinks George W. is toast in November. But he probably has.

His board work, Mulroney insists, is still secondary to his activities as a senior partner at Ogilvy Renault. "This is the cornerstone of my existence," he says of the firm he rejoined almost immediately after leaving office in 1993. "The promotion of the interests of Ogilvy Renault and its clients is my principal preoccupation."

Mulroney's name alone on the letterhead draws business to the firm. But he doesn't leave it at that. "He's always available to partners who like to introduce him to clients or CEOs or give talks to small groups," says Ogilvy Renault managing partner Raymond Crevier. "It's amazing the attraction he has. I've seen him talking to clients over dinner and they just stop everything and listen. He's got this Irish charm. In the past 15 years, [hiring Mulroney]is the best thing we've done as a firm."

Mulroney's job at Ogilvy Renault carries no salary. Nor does he take credit for the business he generates for the firm. When he snags a client, he immediately refers the catch to another partner. And when Mulroney chalks up billable hours on behalf of the firm, he credits it to the account of an associate. Mulroney's only remuneration for his activities at Ogilvy Renault comes from his share of the profits he derives as a partner.

Brian Mulroney was introduced to the realities of global business long before most of us. He was born in a town that owed its very existence to trade and border-crossing capital. The North Shore town of Baie Comeau was built a few years before Mulroney's birth in 1939 by Colonel Robert McCormick, to supply newsprint for his Chicago Tribune and New York Daily News. Mulroney's father, Ben, an electrician, went to work for McCormick's Quebec North Shore Paper Co., and the family settled on the English side of town, which was normally reserved for managers. Most residents of Baie Comeau stuck to their own. But young Brian easily straddled the town's two cultures, at ease with the working-class francophones with whom he fraternized at Catholic school and unintimidated by management-class Americans who ran the mill.

McCormick liked to fish near the town he had built. He also liked to be entertained. So it was that, on one of his fishing excursions to the North Shore, McCormick's PR man sought out a seven-year-old reputed to be a fine singer. Mulroney was escorted to Le Manoir, the hotel McCormick had built. Perched atop a piano, he asked McCormick what he wanted to hear. "And he said that his favourite song was Dearie but that I wouldn't know it because how could a kid from Baie Comeau be expected to know that. But I knew it and I sang it, and others as well," Mulroney told biographer L. Ian MacDonald in 1984. "And they gave me $50 and put me in the car and drove me home. And I gave it to my mother and she just about had cardiac arrest."

This anecdote has been appropriated by Mulroney's fans and critics alike. The fans say it illustrates the magnetism of his personality. The detractors say it shows how Mulroney was, from an early age, all too eager to please the rich and powerful.

To adopt the latter thesis, one has to assume a shallowness - not in Mulroney, but in those who have succumbed to his charms. Desmarais, Bush, Munk and Cisneros are a lot of things, but shallow they are not.

Mulroney was no stranger to the business world when he left politics. A gifted labour lawyer before entering public life in 1983, he had already established a successful business career that, while not making him rich, had certainly made him influential in Montreal financial circles. Two men above all had been the young Mulroney's mentors. They were Paul Desmarais and Pierre P{Zcaron}ladeau.

In 1964, 25-year-old Mulroney, fresh out of Laval University law school, joined the Montreal firm of Howard, Cate, Ogilvy. His salary was $5,200 a year. It was the same year that Péladeau, then 39, started the tabloid Journal de Montréal during a strike at La Presse, Quebec's dominant broadsheet. In 1967, the 40-year-old Desmarais bought La Presse; P{Zcaron}ladeau and Desmarais instantly became rival media barons. Like the papers they owned, the two men were a study in contrasts: Desmarais was understated, debonair and ultrafederalist; P{Zcaron}

Péladeau was boisterous, funny-looking and a Quebec nationalist. Yet both men took to Mulroney.

When workers at Le Journal de Montr{Zcaron}al unionized in the late 1960s, Péladeau called on Mulroney to negotiate the first collective agreement. In 1971, with La Presse once again embroiled in a lengthy labour conflict, Desmarais, too, turned to Mulroney. By that time, the dispute was already into its ninth month, and Péladeau's Journal was making deep inroads into La Presse's readership. "So, I thought of Brian Mulroney and said, 'We'll see whether he can be helpful,' " Desmarais recalls. "He was very helpful. He related well to the negotiating teams, both ours and the labour side. I think he had some influence on the labour leaders, such as [late Quebec Federation of Labour president]Louis Laberge. He got to know them and they trusted him." Within a week of Mulroney's involvement, the conflict was settled.

After that, Desmarais and his Power Corp. lieutenants regularly sought Mulroney's counsel. "We used him as a labour lawyer from time to time. But really he was more of a friend you would talk to whenever you had an idea you needed to bounce off someone," Desmarais says. "He's a pretty wise guy. He knew a lot of people, too. He got around a lot - more than I ever did."

Neither Desmarais nor Péladeau seemed to hold it against Mulroney that he had befriended, and simultaneously worked for, their chief competitor. Such was the extent of Mulroney's charm and legal skill. The same ease with competing interests - labour, management, Liberals, Péquistes - was evident in Mulroney's star turn on the Cliche inquiry into the construction industry in 1974.

Shortly after his first, unsuccessful bid for the Progressive Conservative leadership in 1976, Mulroney moved from a supporting role in the business world to the corner office, as president of the Iron Ore Co. of Canada, a subsidiary of Cleveland-based Hanna Mining. The position enabled Mulroney to not only demonstrate his managerial skill - he turned a troubled company into a highly profitable one and improved its labour relations record despite closing its Schefferville, Que., operations - but also to extend south his already considerable network. Iron Ore's parent had a high-powered board, and Mulroney made sure all of its members took note of his achievements.

By the time he had decided, for the second time, to make the leap from business to politics, Mulroney had accumulated no fewer than 10 notable directorships, including Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Standard Broadcasting (then controlled by Conrad Black) and Montreal's Ritz-Carlton Hotel, his favourite haunt.

His ability to win over almost anyone was the hallmark of Mulroney's quest for 24 Sussex Drive. But charm in itself is no match for the centrifugal tensions of actually being in power in Canada. Without the binding force of his ambition and personality, the coalition that Mulroney put together would split into no less than three parties - Reform, Bloc Quebécois and a PC rump. The Prime Minister's office was not, by the end, the most satisfying fit for Mulroney's abilities.

It was clear he was not headed for retirement when, at barely 54, he stepped down in 1993. Besides, he needed the money. As Iron Ore president, Mulroney evidently never earned more than $400,000 a year. For a decade he had lived on a politician's paltry salary, and his pension on leaving office barely topped $33,000. With four U.S.-college-bound children to support, having himself grown accustomed to finer tastes, and with a new $1.67-million Westmount home and $1 million in renovations to pay for, Mulroney's lifestyle required a salary in seven digits.

Perhaps it was this pressure that led him, shortly after leaving office, to accept a $300,000 consulting contract from Karlheinz Schreiber, the German-Canadian businessman whose name would come back to haunt Mulroney in the Airbus case. At the time, though, Schreiber had not been accused of any illegal activities. In the end, Mulroney didn't need Schreiber's business. His pro-market agenda as prime minister between 1984 and 1993 - centred around free trade, privatization and tax reform - had ingratiated him to big business and helped usher in an era where global networkers were indispensable to any ambitious company. As a recently retired head of state, Mulroney was on a first-name basis with some of the most powerful men and women on the planet. Combined with his people skills and head for business - he could actually read a balance sheet - he was an inviting catch for almost any major transnational corporation. The offers poured in.

Shortly before he left office, Mulroney lunched alone with a single guest. Peter Munk barely knew the outgoing prime minister, but had nevertheless requested the téte-a-téte. A couple of years earlier, Mulroney had made an indelible impression on the Hungarian-born entrepreneur after Munk stunned Bay Street with a $31.6-million gain on the stock options he held in his American Barrick Resources Corp. (now Barrick Gold Corp.). It was, at the time, the biggest payday ever recorded by a Canadian corporate boss. The Barrick chairman was pilloried in the media, accused of unabashed greed. But Munk - who had founded Barrick in 1983 and helped its stock price soar 11-fold from 1986 to 1991 - figured he deserved the reward. So did Mulroney. "I was in my office and the phone rang," Munk recalls. "Someone on the other end said, 'This is the office of the Prime Minister.' " Munk thought it was a joke. When a distinctive baritone voice came on the line, he realized it wasn't. "I just read about this coup you made and I want you to know that what Canada needs is many more Peter Munks," Mulroney declared. "I'm proud of you."

By 1993, Munk's mining empire was expanding rapidly around the globe, particularly in Latin America. Mulroney, who had just negotiated Canada's entry into the North American Free Trade Agreement, knew the area intimately. Munk naturally figured the former prime minister would be an excellent addition to Barrick's board, and that of its largest shareholder, Munk's Horsham Corp. "No one on our board knows the quality or quantity of people globally that Brian does," Munk says now. "He has got this unbelievable network that he has spent years and years developing. And he works enormously hard to maintain those contacts. That's why those contacts are so alive and useful. He wasn't born with them. He's not royalty."

Mulroney joined the boards of Barrick and Horsham in November, 1993, and was immediately granted options to buy 250,000 shares in each Munk firm. The options grant was unprecedented for a non-executive director of a Canadian company, and led shareholder-rights proponent William Riedl to wonder, "Are Mulroney's contacts worth that much?"

They were - Paul Desmarais, for instance. Munk and Desmarais had been acquaintances, but hardly anything so intimate as business partners. Mulroney changed that. The result was a Barrick-Power joint venture to develop gold deposits in China. Of course, the partnership would have been fruitless without the co-operation of the Chinese government. In early 1994, Mulroney took Munk to China, and asked Desmarais to come along. Desmarais was no slouch when it came to influencing the Chinese, having done business in the Communist colossus for years. Mulroney, though, had his own ins. The trio's dinner partner one night during the trip ended up being none other than Zhu Rongji, then head of the Chinese central bank, without whose accord access to the country's gold deposits would have been impossible. "The next day we met the Premier," says a still-stunned Munk. "This is a good example of how Brian uses his connections and contacts and turns them into international business opportunities for the companies he's involved with."

Another example: In 1994, Mulroney met with Argentinian President Carlos Menem and his Chilean counterpart, Eduardo Frei. Barrick had acquired mining concessions that straddled the historically contentious border between the two countries. Developing the mines promised to be a logistical nightmare, given laws that required miners to descend a mountain 48 kilometres and report to a border crossing before entering the part of the mine located in the neighbouring country. Mulroney, Munk says, got the countries to hammer out an agreement that allowed the Barrick workers to cross the border freely. "That was of enormous importance to us," says Munk.

In early 1995, Mulroney asked his friend George Bush to work for Barrick. Bush was reluctant. "I said, 'I have a policy, Brian. I don't go on [corporate]boards,' " explains the former U.S. president. "But Brian said, 'You wouldn't be on the board; you'll be a [senior honorary]adviser. I think this will be a wonderful experience for you.' And he was right." In 1996, Bush and Mulroney lobbied Indonesian President Suharto on behalf of Barrick's bid to win control of the Busang gold deposit in Borneo that had been discovered by Bre-X Minerals Ltd. (Is this what Munk meant when, according to Titans author Peter C. Newman, he once said Mulroney "knows every dictator in the world on a first-name basis?" Munk denies having made the comment.) Suharto, however, had a last-minute change of heart, and gave the concession to another company. That was a lucky thing for Barrick, Bush and Mulroney: What was supposed to be the world's biggest gold deposit ended up being the world's biggest mining fraud.

By 1998, Mulroney was crisscrossing Europe on Barrick's behalf. He was hired by the gold industry's World Gold Council to persuade European central banks to stop dumping their stocks of the precious metal willy-nilly into the market. Seconded by former Bank of Canada governor John Crow, Mulroney lobbied the continent's most powerful central bankers, presidents and prime ministers. The result was an agreement that is credited with stabilizing the metal's price.

Barrick occupied much of Mulroney's time during his early years out of office. But he earned far fatter paycheques from his speaking engagements during that period. Despite his oratorial prowess, Mulroney had no desire when he retired from politics to keep making speeches. When he was approached by Harry Rhoads Jr. of the Washington Speakers Bureau - the same agency that then represented Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher - Mulroney initially declined. It was Mila Mulroney, her husband says, who made him change his mind. "She said, 'Listen, you've made 11,000 speeches as a politician for nothing. Now it's time to get out and make a couple that you get paid for.' " Mulroney did far more than that. He took on dozens of engagements during his first few years out of office, talking largely about trade and leadership issues. At $45,000 (U.S.) a pop - plus expenses - Mulroney pocketed as much as $1 million (U.S.) a year from the gigs.

By late 1995, however, Mulroney would have neither the time nor the inclination to do much public speaking. His energies were consumed by a much more important endeavour - clearing his name. His reputation in Canada was already in tatters when he left office, one of the most unpopular prime ministers in history. But any chance of restoring his name seemed dead when it leaked out in 1995 that Mulroney had been named by the Canadian government in a letter requesting assistance from Swiss authorities in an RCMP investigation. The Mounties were looking into alleged illegal commissions paid on then government-owned Air Canada's $1.8-billion purchase of Airbus aircraft. The letter referred to "an ongoing scheme by Mr. Mulroney, [lobbyist Frank]Moores and [Karlheinz]Schreiber to defraud the Canadian government of millions of dollars."

News of the letter risked diminishing Mulroney's poor public standing even further. It also risked killing his business career.

"My wife and family and I had some very difficult times," Mulroney says. "There were some very sad moments when we were fighting off these accusations against this army of lawyers and experts financed by the taxpayers of Canada." But fight is exactly what Mulroney did, launching an unprecedented $50-million libel suit against the federal government. "Had the Chrétien government not tried to ruin my family and I with those false and malicious allegations, you would never have heard a peep out of me," says Mulroney, who had consciously kept a low profile in Canada after leaving office. "But I had to defend myself, the honour of my family and the good name of my government."

Mulroney had effectively called the Chrétien government's bluff. In January, 1997, the two parties reached an out-of-court settlement that saw Ottawa acknowledge that the allegations were unjustified and cover Mulroney's legal and public relations fees - a $2-million tab. Far more important than the money, however, was the apology that went with it. Still, it would be six more years before the RCMP closed its investigation in the case and fully exonerated Mulroney.

This "Kafkaesque nightmare" behind him, Mulroney is circumspect about the whole affair. Maybe he is saving the best for his memoirs. But he cannot resist turning the knife ever so subtly: "I've made it a practice for many years never to comment on the work of the police or their informants," he says with evident satisfaction. Then, turning to a cryptic quote from his political idol John Diefenbaker, he announces, "It is a long road that has no ash cans." Mulroney laughs heartily at this. Translation: What goes around, comes around.

When the Airbus allegations became public, Mulroney sent offers of resignation to Ogilvy Renault and all of the companies on whose boards he sat. They were rejected. Indeed, Archer Daniels Midland called on Mulroney to help it restore its own reputation.

Mulroney's appointment to the ADM board, his first after leaving office, seemed curious. It was a massive Midwestern agribusiness that made staples like vegetable oil and corn syrup. Mulroney had no expertise in that field. The company was known as a personal fiefdom of CEO Dwayne Andreas, who had run it with an iron fist for a quarter of a century, affording limitless opportunities for career advancement to his own family.

Andreas knew Paul Desmarais, and sat on Power's international advisory board. Another member of Power's board - and ADM's board - was Mulroney pal Ross Johnson, the Canadian-born ex-CEO of RJR Nabisco, whose spectacular attempt to take over his own company had been famously chronicled in Barbarians at the Gate.

But if personal relationships helped him land a job, Mulroney proved that they did not stop him from exercising his fiduciary duty. In July, 1995, ADM tapped Mulroney and former company chairman John Daniels to co-chair a board committee to craft the company's response to price-fixing allegations. The result was a massive overhaul of ADM's board and the departure of several Andreas cronies, including his son and heir apparent Michael Andreas, who later spent time in jail in connection with the scandal. Mulroney was the key figure in negotiating a settlement on the price-fixing charges that saw ADM pay $100 million (U.S.), a record antitrust fine at the time. Mulroney went head-to-head with Dwayne Andreas, then 78, who resisted the radical strategy, especially the sacrificing of his son.

Mulroney's work was lauded by analysts, who described him as "an important agent of change." The day the settlement was announced, ADM's shares hit a 52-week high. Mulroney had earned high regard within ADM too. After Dwayne Andreas stepped down in 1997, his successor, his nephew Allen Andreas, brought Mulroney into his inner circle as a member of his executive committee. "Brian was instrumental in guiding us during a period when we brought in a new code of ethics and revamped the entire structure of the board to meet new requirements that have since been put in place by the Securities and Exchange Commission," Allen Andreas says.

Dwayne Andreas was not the only high-powered CEO that Mulroney met through Paul Desmarais. In 1996, Mulroney went to a party at Desmarais's Montreal home that was also attended by Gustavo Cisneros, who sat with the host on the international advisory board of the Chase Manhattan Bank. Mulroney and Cisneros hit it off immediately. The two shared a common passion: free trade. "I had always had the greatest respect for Brian Mulroney as prime minister," says Cisneros, whose personal wealth is estimated at $4.6 billion (U.S.) and whose empire includes Venezuela's largest broadcaster, Peru's largest brewer and the Miss Venezuela contest. "Brian understood more than anybody else how important free trade was to Canadian prosperity. And I had been very involved in free trade discussions from a Latin-American point of view. So, I knew all about him."

Mulroney and Cisneros stayed in touch. The following year, when Cisneros was looking for directors for his Latin-American pay-TV company Ibero-American Media Partners Ltd., he thought of his new Canadian friend. Eventually, the friendship grew to include both men's wives and children. In 1999, they all went on a two-week safari in southern Africa. It was there that Cisneros learned just how plugged-in Mulroney really was. "He slept with a radio," Cisneros laughs. "So, in the morning, we would get a briefing on everything that was happening in the world. We were the most well-informed safari ever."

Mulroney recommended Cisneros - a fierce opponent of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has accused the media baron of complicity in the country's short-lived 2002 coup d'état - to another friend, Peter Munk. Cisneros joined Barrick's international advisory board in 2003, and its board of directors later that year.

Cisneros's partner in Ibero-American was Dallas-based leveraged buyout wizard Tom Hicks. By the late 1990s, his firm, Hicks Muse Tate & Furst Inc., had done deals worth more than $50 billion (U.S.) during its 15-year existence. Hicks also had become a major figure in pro sports, after personally buying the Dallas Stars and the Texas Rangers. The latter purchase in 1998 enabled Hicks's friend George W. Bush, then governor of Texas, to pocket a profit of at least $15 million (U.S.) on his initial $600,000 investment in the team.

After Cisneros recruited Mulroney for the Ibero-American board, Hicks asked the ex-prime minister to sit on Hicks Muse's Latin-American strategy board, scouting out investments and offering advice about the region's volatile political climate. Eventually, Mulroney became the chairman of that board and of the firm's European strategy board. Over dinner in Chile, in 2000, Hicks asked Mulroney to join the firm on a full-time basis. Mulroney declined, instead opting to become a senior counsellor with an undisclosed equity interest in the firm. In addition to identifying new investment opportunities, Mulroney was charged with recruiting high-profile names to the firm's advisory boards. His first catch? Henry Kissinger. "Brian's proven to be just what we hoped for. He's a sage adviser and he's got great judgment," says Hicks, citing Mulroney's involvement in Hicks Muse's $406-million purchase this year, with two bank-owned equity funds, of Canadian cable company Persona Inc.

Hicks also credits Mulroney with saving his partnership with Cisneros. After the 2001 merger of Ibero-American with El Sitio Inc., an Argentinian internet company, Cisneros and Hicks reached an impasse while renegotiating the terms of their ownership in the merged company, Claxson Interactive Group Inc. Mulroney summoned Hicks and Cisneros to a meeting at the latter's New York home. "It was one of those things that could have gone either way," says Hicks. "But because Brian had the trust of both sides, we were able to reach an agreement to redo our partnership very effectively."

Just what is the Mulroney magic that turns antagonistic rivals into concordant, if sometimes reluctant, partners? As a labour lawyer, Mulroney settled more disputes than a thousand schoolyard monitors put together. As a politician, he built the most impressive coalition in Canadian history. And now, as a business globetrotter, he continues to play matchmaker and marriage counsellor with uncanny success. "Instead of focusing only on the problem at hand, he focuses on human nature and the way people react," says his long-time confidant and former deputy chief of staff in Ottawa, Luc Lavoie, now an executive vice-president at Quebecor Inc. "He never bullies people and he makes sure that both sides in any negotiation come out of it with their dignity intact. And he never wears out. He can go on for hours, always with his eye on the ball."

Grupo Cisneros and Independent News are the lesser-known, in Canada, of the three media leviathans with which Mulroney is most closely associated. In early 1997, Mulroney reunited with his mentor, Pierre Péladeau, joining the board of Quebecor Printing Inc. Already overburdened with his other corporate and charitable obligations, Mulroney expected his involvement with the Péladeaus to end there. Fate would determine otherwise.

On Dec. 2 of that year, Pierre Péladeau suffered a massive heart attack. He lay in a coma for three weeks before his death on Christmas Eve. His sons, Pierre Karl, then 36, and Erik, 42, were ill-prepared for the loss of their father. Pierre Péladeau had left no clear succession plan in place. Chaos could have ensued. "A couple of months after Pierre died, the boys asked me to have lunch with them at le Club Saint-Denis," Mulroney says. "With the loss of their dad, they felt it might be helpful to have someone around with some grey in his hair, someone who knew the family, who knew the culture of the business, and who wouldn't be pushed around by anybody."

For the first couple of years, the relationship was mostly conducted through Ogilvy Renault, Quebecor's law firm. Mulroney offered advice or opened doors as requested. He was instrumental in Quebecor's first major foray into the English-language media business, the gutsy $983-million purchase of the Sun newspaper chain in 1998. And he played matchmaker the following year in Quebecor Printing's $1.4-billion (U.S.) bid for U.S. giant World Color Press Inc. New York leveraged buyout firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts owned a quarter of World Color's stock, and was reluctant to tender its shares. 

"At a certain point we faced a deal-breaker," Pierre Karl P{Zcaron}ladeau says. "Because of his personal contact with Henry Kravis, Mr. Mulroney was able to get the parties together and get the transaction done."

Since then, Mulroney's role at Quebecor has grown exponentially. In 1999, he became chairman of Sun Media, stepping in as interim CEO of the country's second-biggest newspaper chain when his friend Paul Godfrey left in early 2000. Later in 2000, Mulroney defused an explosive battle between Péladeau and John Weaver, the CEO of newsprint producer Abitibi-Consolidated Inc.

Mulroney also put Péladeau and Ted Rogers back on speaking terms. In the venomous battle for Quebec cable giant Groupe Vid{Zcaron}otron Lt{Zcaron}e in 2000, Quebecor killed a friendly deal between Vidéotron's controlling shareholder, Andr{Zcaron} Chagnon, and Rogers Communications Inc. by enlisting the deep pockets of the Caisse de dépot et placement du Québec and going to court to quash a lock-up agreement between Chagnon and Rogers. Mulroney used an invitation to his daughter Caroline's wedding in September, 2000, to get his friends Rogers and Péladeau to bury the hatchet and begin thinking about deals they could do together. Rogers's cellphone unit has since become one of the principal sponsors of Star Académie, the mega-hit reality show that runs on Quebecor's TVA network, acquired in the Vidéotron deal.

Whether or not Péladeau views Mulroney as a father figure, there is no denying how deeply he values the older man's counsel. Despite their closeness, Péladeau remains unflinchingly deferential toward Mulroney, always addressing him with the polite "vous" and never the more familiar "tu." "Pierre Karl says 'vous' to a lot of people, but there are not many whom he has known for a long time that he still calls 'Mr.,' " says Péladeau's partner, TV producer and host Julie Snyder. "Mr. Mulroney represents for him the past, present and future. He is a reassuring presence, because he was a friend of his father and his father had so much respect for Mr. Mulroney."

Péladeau is not the only jeune loup Mulroney has taken under his wing. He is a big backer of New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord, and has dispensed career advice to the ambitious 38-year-old, who considered running for the federal Conservative Party leadership this year. "He wouldn't push me one way or the other," Lord says. "But he told me what to expect." In anticipation of Lord's eventual rise to the national stage, 

Mulroney has also helped the young premier to network. In July, 2002, he organized a retreat with Lord at Larry's Gulch, a provincial government-owned lodge on the Restigouche River, famous for its salmon fishing. The guest list included Péladeau, Paul Desmarais Jr., then-Barrick CEO Randall Oliphant, Tom Hicks, Allen Andreas and a special guest--the elder George Bush. The latter remembers the weekend fondly, although, he laments, "the promise was to get some fish, which we got none of." Adds Lord: "What struck me in those few days was the real friendship [Mulroney]had with these people, especially Mr. Bush."

Bush, Hicks, Cisneros, Desmarais, Péladeau, O'Reilly, Andreas, Munk, Forbes. This is the core of Mulroney's international network. It remains so solid, Desmarais Sr. explains, "because he works at his relationship with people. If you read the newspapers, you'd think nobody likes Brian Mulroney. But the fact is, he is much more than Gucci shoes. He's an extraordinary man."

He has also become an extraordinarily wealthy one. Mulroney has pocketed millions in stock option gains over the past decade. A cursory glance at a few recent management proxy circulars indicates that he will get $200,000 (U.S.) this year as a director of ADM, $188,000 (U.S.) at Cendant (where he holds 420,625 options and shares) and a $75,000 (U.S.) director's fee at Barrick, in addition to an undisclosed salary as chairman of the company's international advisory board. In the past, Mulroney's consulting on Barrick's behalf has earned him an annual stipend of as much as $462,000 (U.S.). Mulroney also holds 350,000 Barrick options. He shares in the profits at Ogilvy Renault and owns equity in Hicks Muse Tate & Furst. Were he a CEO, his annual take from all of his business activities would likely place him near the top of the best-paid list.

And, at retirement age, he shows no signs of slowing down. Next month, Mulroney will be in New York, Texas, Beijing, Shanghai, London and Dublin on business. It's as if the past year, marked by his exoneration in the Airbus affair and the reappraisal of his legacy as prime minister, has energized Mulroney. Indeed, more than wealth, it is recognition that the boy from Baie Comeau values most. "He enjoys the contrast between where he came from and where he is today," says Mulroney's friend Jonathan Deitcher, a Montreal stockbroker. "It makes what he does more meaningful to him." Deitcher recalls a dinner in the ballroom of the Chateau Frontenac hotel in Quebec City during the 1987 royal visit. 

Deitcher was eager to know what Mulroney was whispering to the Queen as the two sat at the head table. He was telling her, his friend recounted, that his father was one of the electricians who wired the room decades before.

Mulroney must have been imbued with this same pride at his glittering party in Palm Beach. He had not invented a past to gain a spot in the rarefied world of the rich. He had written the story himself.

Mulroney's Network 

Paul Desmarais (MONTREAL): The Power Corp. patriarch is the source point of Mulroney's global web

Pierre Karl Péladeau (MONTREAL): Mulroney's longest and deepest involvement is with Quebecor, lately as counsel to hot-tempered "PKP"

Allen Andreas (DECATUR, ILL.): The Andreas clan called on Mulroney to clean up after a scandal at agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland

Steve Forbes (NEW YORK): The publisher made Mulroney chairman of Forbes Global

George Bush Sr. (HOUSTON): He and Mulroney bonded during the Reagan years, and later collaborated on NAFTA

Tom Hicks (DALLAS): Mulroney is a senior counsellor to the LBO wizard's firm, Hicks Muse Tate & Furst

Gustavo Cisneros (CARACAS): The Latin Rupert Murdoch esteems Mulroney's advice at AOL Latin America

Tony O'Reilly (DUBLIN): Mulroney is on the global advisory board of the media baron's Independent News and Media Group

Peter Munk (SWITZERLAND/ TORONTO): His Barrick Gold was a focus of Mulroney's first post-PM work.

Munk relies on Mulroney for contacts and problem-solving around the world

 

Follow Konrad Yakabuski on Twitter @konradyakabuski

---------- Original message ----------

From: Wlodzimierz Sokolowski <sowl@nbnet.nb.ca>
Date: Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 5:56 PM
Subject: Fw: Instruction for doctors intending to become murderers, killers and healers at the same time. Doctors murderers in New Brunswick can have a cake, eat the cake and still have a cake. WS
To: Adams Richards David Senator <david.richards@sen.parl.gc.ca>, "RICHARD Roger Orthodontist St. Louise de Kent NB" <rrichard@nb.aibn.com>, AMOS R David Social Activist <David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com>, SENATOR McIntyre Paul <paul.mcintyre@sen.parl.gc.ca>

CC: Dr. Roger Richar, Mr. David Amos

From: Wlodzimierz Sokolowski

Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 1:20 PM

To: MLA HEALTH min Burque Benoit ; BOUDREAU Victor Minister of Health ; MINISTER of HEALTH Hon M Dube ; FLEMMING Hugh MLA PC ; PREMIER Hon. Brian GALLANT ; HIGGS Blaine NB LEADER of PC Party ; COON David MLA Fredericton GREEN Party of Canada ; ALLIAANCE Party of Canada NB AUSTIN Chris ; POLICE CHIEF Miramichi NB ; POLICE Com NB Fredericton ; CORONER CHIEF for New Brunswick ; CORONER Chief New Brunswick ; HUMAN RIGHTS com NB ; NBMS NB Med Soc ; cpsnb@rogers.com ; CMA CMAJ ; ROYAL COLLEGE ; LAW SOCIETY NB ; LAW SOCIETY NB Shirley MacLean ; LAW SOC NB Marc Richard ; TEL JOUR Jack POIRIER ; TELEG-JOUR Editor CONRADI Peter ; TIMES TRANSCRIPT Moncton, NB ; GLEANER the Daily letters to the editor ; Miaramichi Leader Miramichi Leader ; sowl@nbnet.nb.ca ; CBC NB CAVE Rachel ; CBC NB ; FIFTH ESTATE The CBC Toronto ON ; FIFTH ESTATE TIPS CBC Toronto, ON ; CANADIAN Society ; Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society ; CFPC LEMIRE Francine executive director ; CFPC New brunswick ; HORIZON H N Board of Directors ; HORIZON HN Ethics Service ; VITALITE Health Network bathurst NB

Subject: RE: Instruction for doctors intending to become murderers, killers and healers at the same time. Doctors murderers in New Brunswick can have a cake, eat the cake and still have a cake. WS

Wlodzimierz Sokolowski MD, 101 Henderson St., Miramichi, New Brunswick, E1N 2R8 Tel: 506, 773-9731 e-mail: sowl@nbnet.nb.ca

December 27, 2017

RE: Instruction for doctors intending to become murderers, killers and healers at the same time.

Hallo ….. doctors potential murderers,

If you a doctor licensed to practice medicine in New Brunswick, deciding to be a murderer of an innocent patient or some other targeted for elimination human being, approaching the dreadful task to execute another human being, be cool and play a good doctor all along and you be successful, committing a premeditated homicide getting away with it, and most probably being praised for heroic efforts to safe lives.

Doctors murderers in New Brunswick can have a cake, eat the cake and still have a cake.

Some prior reading would be helpful like: “The GOOD NURSE” by Charles Graeber¹.

About German serial killer nurse Niels Hoegel². 

Last but not least our own Canadian Elizabeth Wettlaufer³.

Getting acquainted with the story of doctor Harold Frederick Shipman UK from and doctor Michael Swango USA from, could help.

Having arrived at Hotel Dieu in Chatham New Brunswick (NB) by late October of 1973, we were treated with an open hatred, brutal rejection, humiliation at every step my wife, I, and our sons made, however we had endured anticipating that after all we had landed, though in the periphery, nevertheless in Canada a highly developed western democracy, trumpeted all over the world how friendly this country and her people are to all newcomers, who chose and were allowed to settle in Canada. After the first few months in Chatham NB, my wife deeply frustrated and depressed told me that she is leaving the family unable to stand any more such total isolation and hateful rejection, we were long-suffering. Only due to my own experience gained during WW2 in occupied by the Germans Poland, when we were forced to move six or seven times always leaving behind all meager material goods we have had, in Chatham NB for me it was still tolerable, interesting and challenging work, living in the well heated apartment, abundance of food and knowing that we are not going to be killed when in the street, so I had rejected my wife's urge to move out of Chatham NB and decided to stay for bad and worse.

When by October 1975 I was told that a new full time anesthesiologist is coming who will take all the available work, leaving me with minimal income if any, I had again surrendered my pride accepting far worse situation as it was so far. I had expected everything but, to be turned into an executioner, a murderer of an innocent patient, whom I was set up to put to death by an anesthetic which was tampered with.

I executed Susan Dickson of November 6, 1975 the day I was to fly to Toronto to bring home our son. Instantly realizing that the lethal poison was in the bottle of Pentothal, thiopental sodium (TPS) I took it with me to Toronto and Montreal. This way, I had removed the crucial evidence from the crime scene. It was an unwise move which could have hurt me badly, had the perpetrators who set up the premeditated murder, were not far more stupid than I was and did not act properly, as soon as possible in this respect, waiting another nine years, till 1984 when a lawyer, bum and an arrogant lair a fraudster charged me twelve hundred dollars, advising me to let the judge in the Law Court decide if, kept at my house for nine years, sample of TPS was a credible evidence or not?

All the leaders of Hotel Dieu on November 6, 1975, at 9.30 h am, knew that the patient had died in the operating room. Was it unreasonable to get the corpse of Susan Dickson deposited in the hospital morgue for some time and then cogitate what to do next instead of dumping Susan Dickson's still warm body into a funeral truck, drag her corpse to Moncton hospital where a faked postmortem was staged?

Over twenty five years had passed and a new set of doctors assassins were setting up, conducting then covering up the premeditated slaying of Mark Oliver Saulnier 25, on June 15, 2001 and these very lazy arrogant bums did not study the case of murdered Susan Dickson, because they were too lazy and equally arrogant, and a possibility of failure did not cross their brains. They did not develop plan “B” which would have handsomely secured them a retreat and cover up the treacherous murder. What should have they done?

 

1. Call for a debriefing the team resuscitating Mark Oliver Saulnier 25 (MOS). 2. Should had not inform the Miramichi Leader that three died as a result of a car crash because it was a lie. 3. Should not rush to the Saulnier family with an information that Dr. WS made a diagnosis relating to MOSs demise as a sudden death due to homicide. Shouldn't they have called me first and try to force me to bark back my accusations and only then to kick me out? This way they could have tried to have a premeditated murder completed and a cover up secured.

Most probably the lethal drug injected to MOS was a concentrated Potassium Chloride (KCL) which is a strong base as TPS is and would not precitipate when mixed with TPS. If it indeed was so it could have been detected by toxicology testing if the blood sample was taken as soon as possible after the death, then high concentration of serum Potassium, incompatible with heart contractions could have been detected. Normal concentration of Potassium in an extracellular space, blood in the first place, is about 5.2 mEq/L, whereas intracellular Potassium concentration is thirty times higher, about 156 mEq/L. When the dead body starts to decompose, even when kept in the fridge with 3-4 degree Centigrade the cells membranes are bursting releasing an intracellular Potassium into an extracellular space, therefore to take a blood for toxicology investigation after fifty or more hours, could not prove that a lethal injection of concentrated KCL was used to murder the patient. If a murder is planned meticulously the killing by lethal injection it is best to be performed on Friday evening, or a day before a big holiday, like Christmas Eve of New Year's Eve. This way the dead is secured in morgue's fridge where it has a time to start decomposing thus the cells membranes to burst releasing the highly concentrated intracellular Potassium into an extra cellular space. Some other toxins also easily available at the operating room and ICU injected as a weapon to kill, would also cleave and metabolize with several hours passing and the murdering drug would not be detected. 

This way our good doctors murderers having it all easily outlined, but those big time morons murderers still screw it up. 

Neither the doctors murderers nor the supervising them medical authorities, College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick (CPSNB) and looking the other way majority of NB good doctors, had to tackle my inconvenient medical diagnosis, sudden death due to homicide, because the doctors murderers are having all kinds of lawyers, coroners, police, accountants, elected politicians as their farm hands on the “Animal Farm,”⁴ ready to mutilate the whistle blower who made a medical diagnosis, good doctors killers and their accomplices did not like. 

Wlodzimierz Sokolowski MD 

1 Charles Cullen was handed down six life sentences in 2006 after he admitted poisoning at least 40 people in New Jersey and Pennsylvania over the course of his 16-year nursing career.

 

2 Niels Hoegel: German serial killer nurse may have murdered more than 100 patients 'out of boredom' 

3  Elizabeth Wettlaufer, described by a judge as “the shadow of death,” was sentenced to life in prison

4 George Orwell “The Animal Farm”

---------- Original message ----------
From: Roger Richard <rrichard@nb.aibn.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2017 12:14:22 -0400
Subject: Re: “Leading from behind' on development” by David Campbell
TJ, December 20, 2017 A9 commentaryTo: Wlodzimierz Sokolowski <sowl@nbnet.nb.ca>
Cc: david@jupia.ca, susie@nbu.ca, Benoit.Bourque@gnb.ca, victor.boudreau@gnb.ca, Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca, poirier.jack@brunswicknews.com, conradi.peter@brunswicknews.com,

tteditor@timestranscript.com, news@dailygleaner.com, news@miramichileader.com, nbms@nb.aibn.com, cpsnb@rogers.com, info@vitalitenb.ca, Horizon@horizonnb.ca, EthicsServices@horizonnb.ca, pubs@cmaj.ca, mrichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca,
general@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca, blainehiggs@gmail.com, David.Coon@gnb.ca, Hugh.Flemming@gnb.ca, Madeleine.Dube@gnb.ca, NBEUB/CESPNB <general@nbeub.ca>, gordonabarnett@outlook.com, Moncton Dental <monctondental2012@gmail.com>, 

NB Dental Society <nbds@nb.aibn.com>, CRCC.Reviews@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca, 

Gerald Bourque <kisspartyofnb@gmail.com>, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, 

Ann Pohl <annpohl@xplornet.ca>

Dear Dr. Sokolowski:

I am writing to you and various leaders of professions and communities, as a concern citizen of New Brunswick.

We, rich and powerful people, are living an illusion and instead of looking directly to the problem we turn sideways pretending everything is going to be just fine.

Reasons for looking sideways are numerous, for instance, saying that it is not our mandate is the easiest one. 

Miss. Loreena McKennitt, a great Canadian artist, recently wrote:

"In difficult times, it often feels like the challenges before us are simply too big or overwhelming to respond to.  And yet those wise voices, tell us that we can and must take steps to change even if it is small steps. There are times to be silent and there are times to move.  I am convinced more than ever, now is the time we all must take our steps, even if they are small.  As the saying goes « Although we cannot always be the boss, we can always lead. »  These times demand that of us. ”

Situations, where people in charge do notting, repeats itself times and times again.  I witnessed it with my colleagues concerning fluoridated water.  I witnessed it with the RCMP's investigating commission concerning the cops burning their own cars in Rexton the 17th of October 2013.  Although, I must say, we still need to see their report.  And now, I see it as an intervener at the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board: Matter No. 375.  In the latter exemple, it is astounding the intentional ignorance of health issues cause by the smarts meters that NB Power wants to impose on us all.  Every intervenor in Matter no. 375 are looking the other way except two!  

All those stories are not unique in any one sphere of our society, Mr. David Amos can explain that better than I ever will be.  

Thank you Dr. Sokolowski for your perseverance and integrity. 

Roger Richard M.Sc.

From: Wlodzimierz Sokolowski

Sent: Friday, December 22, 2017 11:48 AM

To: Consultants JUPIA David Campbell ; UNION NB Susie Proulx-Daigle President ; MLA HEALTH min Burque Benoit ; BOUDREAU Victor Minister of Health ; PREMIER Hon. Brian GALLANT ; TEL JOUR Jack POIRIER Brunswicknews ; TELEG-JOUR Editor CONRADI Peter ; T & T ; GLEANER the Daily letters to the editor ; Miaramichi Leader Miramichi Leader ; NBMS Fredr. nb NEWEST in 2017 ; cpsnb@rogers.com ; VITALITE Health Network bathurst NB ; HORIZON H N Board of Directors ; HORIZON HN Ethics Service ; CMAJ ; sowl@nbnet.nb.ca ; LAW SOC NB Marc Richard ; LAW SOCIETY NB ; HIGGS Blaine NB LEADER of PC Party ; COON David MLA Fredericton GREEN Party of Canada ; FLEMMING Hugh MLA PC ; MINISTER of HEALTH Hon M Dube

Subject: RE: “Leading from behind' on development” by David Campbell TJ, December 20, 2017 A9 commentary

Wlodzimierz Sokolowski MD, 101 Henderson St., Miramichi, New Brunswick, E1N 2R8 Tel: 506, 773-9731 e-mail: sowl@nbnet.nb.ca

 December 22, 2017

Telegraph-Journal (TJ) 210 Crown Street Saint John, NB E2L 2X7

RE: “Leading from behind' on development” by David Campbell TJ, December 20, 2017 A9 commentary

David Campbell, Jupia Consultants Inc. 71 Park Street Moncton, New Brunswick E1C 2B2 E-mail: david@jupia.ca www.davidwcampbell.com

Dear David,

I have read your article few times and found that you had used the notion, a noun “GOVERNMENT” twelve times which to me meant The GOVERNMENT a most potent force leading New Brunswick into a sunny future.

Who is or are the GOVERNMENT? These are the civil servants, hopefully members of the society solidly educated, honest reliable voluntarily taken the burden of responsibilities to govern the rest of us, obedient to the law and supporting them, us the taxpayers majority.

However in practice who are the civil servants? They are APARATCHIKS¹, puppets moved around by the powerful puppeteers most of them Upper and Lower Canada from.

Consider my case of an immigrant to Canada since 1971 who was dumped on Miramichi NB to be humiliated chased away and eventually wasted and in the end deported out of Canada as a convicted immigrant physician murderer of the old stock Canadian citizens. 

To achieve this goal Hotel Dieu in Chatham NB, an old Catholic Mission hospital was was turned into a murderous brothel where I Wlodzimierz Sokolowski MD, a practicing anesthesiologist had executed, put to death, with an anesthetic which was tampered with, a country widow the late Susan Dickson on November 6, 1975. The victim's still warm body was dumped into a funeral truck to be taken away, dragged to Moncton hospital where a faked postmortem was staged. To take the dead into a morgue, perform an investigation, interview me an executioner was not deemed necessary, since my human dignity and professional integrity was gang raped by the medico-legal gang of criminals operating in Chatham NB and I was declared and treated as a murderous whore for the next twenty five years, during which an anonymous Newbrunswicker, Miramichier was sitting on the death row waiting to be executed by me, then I exposed caught in flagrante delicto, charged prosecuted and jailed.

Why NB forensic medicine is so profoundly retarded, two hundred years behind the standards practiced in the highly developed western democracies United States including?

How it was possible that the leaders of the NB medical profession and supporting them lawyers were conspiring for a quarter of a century  to torture and assassinate innocent old stock Canadian citizens, rural Newbrunswickers, on my account of an immigrant physician targeted for total annihilation and my descendants degraded for generations to come?

The Universal Health Care in NB is a springboard for the red (L) or blue (PC) to get to the power then decide who is to grab and hold tightly to the tit of the big udder which is a large purse of the public money cut out to support the Universal Health Care in NB. To honestly run the program and to have a vision how it has to develop is beyond the intellectual abilities of the APARATCHIKS, and their bosses elected MLAs. Then the civil servants have to stay in line because even invoking existing law of NB could bring her/him a disaster as it happened to me who only by bring up an existing law of NB triggered my own demise. 

May I hope that you would glance over my voluminous narrative and try to figure out what is wrong with New Brunswick, a province which was a founder of Canadian Confederation one hundred and fifty years ago.

If I will die sooner than later keep my message which is the same since 1975

Supporting documents sent as attachments, and more of it by the regular mail.

With respect,

Wlodzimierz Sokolowski MD 

1 A blindly devoted official, follower, or member of an organization (such as a corporation or political party) 2017  Nov.  Deposition  CORREC  TWO   2017  11  29.doc 2006  09  16  NBMS CPSNB CONCISE    2017  07  25.doc2001  06  17  first MOS death reporting - Copy.doc 2001  06  24  sec MOS death reporting - Copy - Copy - Copy - Copy - Copy.doc  CMAJ Contribute to medicicne and Society  2016  06  17.doc CMPA  2  Auschwitz on Murdermichi  2014  01  31.doc CMPA  3  Execution of MOS  Intelig to be transparent  2014  01  31.doc CMPA  4  BIG BROTHER shsield terrorists  2014  01  31.doc CMPA  5  Falsification of Susan Dickson's hospital records  2014  01  31.doc CMPA  BOLSHEVIKS' Conspiracy against  Canada  2014  01  31.doc

http://davidwcampbell.com/2017/12/attracting-international-rd-in-praise-of-siemens/

It's The Economy, Stupid

 

David Campbell – A blog about economic development in Atlantic Canada

Attracting international R&D: In praise of Siemens

Posted on December 22, 2017 by David Campbell

One of the issues we discuss very little in New Brunswick is the role of multinational firms.  When we do, many people derisively talk about how we need to ‘take care’ of our own firms and they express skepticism about why international firms would want to set up in New Brunswick unless they get massive corporate welfare.

One famous NB CEO, who shall remain unnamed but you will likely figure it out, a few years ago after winning his 99th award for business excellence got up and said something like “We don’t need any outside companies coming here and saving our bacon” and then decried provincial government efforts to attract firms. I winced – this is exactly the kind of crap that holds us back.  Of course, the great irony of this story is that this same CEO is now buying up firms around the world and, one assumes, making the case that foreign investment from his firm will be very beneficial to those jurisdictions.

This is among the most frustrating issues for me as it points to our collective self-confidence problem.  The question is not why would these firms want to locate in New Brunswick it should be why wouldn’t they want to locate in our province?

But our collective self-confidence problem aside, I was looking at some interesting data this morning that points to another important role for multinational firms in Canada – as drivers of R&D.

Statistics Canada looks the amount of total in-house research and development expenditures by firms in Canada by ‘country of control’ – either Canada or foreign.

In Ontario, Canadian controlled firms spent $5.1 billion on in-house R&D while foreign controlled firms spent another $3.4 billion.  In Quebec, Canadian controlled firms spent $3.4 billion on in-house R&D while foreign controlled firms spent another $2.0 billion.

In New Brunswick?  You know the answer before I tell you.  $89 million spent by Canadian-controlled firms and only $11 million by foreign-controlled firms.  And, I suspect that one firm, Siemens accounts for a good share of foreign-controlled firm R&D in New Brunswick.



Siemens has something like 50 staff and a major global R&D centre in Fredericton.

Despite our phobia of international firms, I think we should study the Siemens example and figure out if there are other opportunities to attract global R&D investment to our province.  Can we boost cannabis R&D here?  How about international forest products R&D?  How about international cybersecurity R&D?

We are pretty good at attracting contact centres and back offices and even the occasional IT firm.

Maybe we should sharpen our pencils and see if there is any potential to attract international R&D here.  Compared to the rest of Canada we are really missing the boat on this.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-business-model-1.4042973

NB Power's business model changes as customers try other energy sources

Utility official sees great numbers of customers switching to new technologies once prices drop

By Mackenzie Scrimshaw, CBC News Posted: Mar 27, 2017 6:04 PM AT

 

Mike Bourque, director of integrated resource planning at NB Power, spoke on Monday in Moncton at the New Brunswick Environmental Network's Smart Shift Summit. (Pierre Fournier/CBC News)

NB Power's days of producing and delivering electricity as it does now are numbered.

The utility's business model is already changing as customers start to produce their own power through rooftop solar panels, a Moncton conference heard Monday.

This means NB Power will sell less electricity, Mike Bourque, director of resource planning at NB Power, said between sessions at the event hosted by the New Brunswick Environmental Network.

The first day of the Smart Shift Summit focused on "realising opportunities" related to climate change. This comes less than a week after the federal Liberals released their second budget, allocating money for the clean technology sector.

Meanwhile, the New Brunswick government has yet to announce a promised "made in New Brunswick" carbon pricing scheme — a subject raised during an opportunities panel Bourque participated in on Monday morning.

Following that, he explained to CBC that NB Power's situation is similar to the one NBTel, as it was then known, faced in the 1980s and 1990s, with the advent of the internet. Suddenly, the company's customers had a new method of communicating across long distances.

Something similar is happening now in the electricity industry, as customers move to technologies such as solar panels and batteries.

"We need to figure out what that new business model will be for us in the future," Bourque said. "We'll continue to sell electricity as a commodity, but we'll need to attach a new business model to allow customers to build those new options."

The director said the new model will require NB Power to establish a new partnership with its customers and potentially strategic partnerships with private companies.

Not a 'quick fix'

Describing an evolving model, Bourque said he doesn't expect a quick change, but expects more people to adopt technologies over the next five years as they decrease in price.

"Once that will happen, we'll see very high penetration," Bourque said.

In New Brunswick, change is occurring very slowly, he said, and only a few NB Power customers are generating power using rooftop solar panels and operating on a net metering policy.

In the meantime, NB Power is starting to build smart grid infrastructure, as part of a 10-year partnership with Siemens. This will allow NB Power customers to plug their systems into a modernized public electricity grid.

Hearing from you

NB Power is asking customers for their input on its Integrated Resources Plan, a 25-year plan that considers the utility's current electricity system, how the system will change and how NB Power can respond to changes such as increasing loads and retiring assets.

"The discussion will be with [the] public, because it's a different conversation now that we're having with customers, because they will play a part in developing this new plan going forward, because they will actually provide new options available to NB Power, which will reduce the need for building a large generator in the future," Bourque said.

The utility will hold a public meeting on April 26 at a still-undecided place.

NB Power is also inviting its customers to fill out an online survey about their priorities and thoughts on where the utility should go.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/irving-sued-for-turbine-rotor-harbour-plunge-1.970157

Irving sued for turbine rotor harbour plunge

3 other firms also named in $40M suit filed by Siemens

CBC News Posted: Apr 27, 2010 10:45 AM AT

Siemens Canada Limited's vs. J.D. Irving et al., statement of claim

 

One of the nuclear turbine rotors destined for Point Lepreau is recovered from the Saint John harbour in 2008. ((CBC))

The manufacturer of two huge turbine rotors that sank in Saint John harbour on their way to NB Power's Point Lepreau nuclear generating station in 2008 is suing J.D. Irving Ltd. and three other companies for $40 million in damages.

In a statement of claim filed in Ontario court, Siemens Canada Ltd. accuses J.D. Irving of gross negligence, recklessness and breach of contract "for the provision of a safe and reliable handling and transportation plan."

BMT Marine and Offshore Surveys Ltd. of Montreal, Maritime Marine Consultants Inc. of Saint John, and Superport Marine Services Ltd. of Port Hawkesbury, N.S., are also named as defendants. The allegations have not been proven in court.

Rotors fell off barge

On Oct. 15, 2008, the rotors, which each weigh about 115 tonnes, and measure 7.8 metres by 4.1 metres, were to be transported by barge from Saint John to Point Lepreau as part of the nuclear plant's $1.4-billion refurbishment.

'The stability calculations done in this transportation plan were wrong. The centre of gravity calculations were wrong.' — Jonathan Lisus, Siemens lawyer

Irving Equipment, a division of J.D. Irving, had been contracted to do the work.

An Irving vehicle successfully transferred one of the rotors onto a barge, but workers failed to secure it, Siemens claims in the 27-page court document.

A second vehicle was transferring the other rotor when the entire load became unstable and toppled off the barge and into the harbour. Both rotors sank about 10 metres to the harbour floor.

An investigation by Transport Canada revealed errors, said Jonathan Lisus, a Toronto lawyer representing Siemens, which is based in Burlington, Ont.

"The stability calculations done in this transportation plan were wrong. The centre of gravity calculations were wrong," he said.

"And as a result, the load — these precision-engineered pieces of equipment — was unstable, when in motion, and ended up at the bottom of the harbour."

Repairs cost $10M

The rotors, which had been manufactured in Germany, were each worth about $10 million, according to Siemens.

The rotors sustained significant damage, Siemens claims. They have been repaired but will need early replacement. ((CBC))

It took a team of engineers, divers and two cranes four days to recover both of the rotors from what Siemens describes as the "chemically aggressive salt water environment of the harbour."

The rotors sustained "significant" damage from the impact and exposure, including pitting, corrosion, scoring, deformation of the rotating blades and a displaced coupling, the company claims.

It cost about $10 million to repair the two rotors in the United Kingdom, according to Siemens.

And they will need to be replaced after six years, instead of the previously anticipated 30 years, because of "increased susceptibility to the effects of stress corrosion," it claims.

Siemens must manufacture and deliver two new rotors at an estimated cost of $20 million, according to the documents.

In addition, Siemens also claims that Irving has refused to provide information about the nature and cause of the incident, including witness statements, or allow the company to interview any of the people involved.

Irving seeks to limit liability

J.D. Irving's vice-president of communications, Mary Keith, has declined to comment, saying the matter is before the courts.

J.D. Irving has previously filed an application in Federal Court, seeking to limit its liability to $500,000, plus interest, under the Marine Liability Act.

"Siemens assumed the risks associated with the move," the document states.

'Siemens assumed the risks associated with the move.' — J.D. Irving statement

"In any event, the incident and any loss resulting therefrom was not caused by [Irving's] personal act or omission with the intent to cause such loss or recklessly and with [Irving's] knowledge that such loss would probably result."

NB Power officials have declined to comment.

The repaired rotors were safely delivered to Point Lepreau in July 2009.

They are designed to spin faster, generating an additional $15 million worth of power each year.

The Point Lepreau refurbishment began in the spring of 2008, with the reactor originally scheduled to be back up and running by October 2009 but has run into several problems.

NB Power officials say it's unlikely it will return to service before February 2011, with cost overruns estimated at $475 million.

The Point Lepreau project is the world's first refurbishment of a Candu 6 plant. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited had hoped the process would be a model that could be sold to other countries that purchased a Candu 6.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/lepreau-nuclear-refurbishment-lawsuit-1.3469953

Point Lepreau lawsuits may finally go to trial this year

NB Power, AECL suing insurance companies over Lepreau refurbishment overruns

CBC News Posted: Feb 29, 2016 7:55 PM AT

NB Power and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. are suing 7 insurance companies over cost overruns during the Point Lepreau refurbishment. (CBC) 

A pair of multi-million dollar lawsuits involving NB Power, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. and seven insurance companies over who should pay for mistakes and delays during the refurbishment at the Point Lepreau nuclear plant are taking longer than the refurbishment itself, but may finally be ready to go to trial later this year, court records show.

Last week, Saint John court clerk Amanda Evans sent a notice to AECL's Toronto lawyer, Paul Ivanoff, requesting an update on the case. Last year Ivanoff assured the court it would be ready to proceed this year.

"The Plaintiff expects to be in a position to enter the matter for trial in the spring of 2016 for a trial in either September 2016 or in Q4 of 2016," he wrote.

The Point Lepreau refurbishment went three years longer than planned and over $1 billion over budget.

AECL and NB Power are individually suing the same group of seven insurance companies to recover money from the troubled refurbishment of Point Lepreau, which took three years longer than expected and went more than $1 billion over budget.

NB Power is seeking $320 million plus interest and costs, while AECL is looking for $204 million.
Each lawsuit is separate but are proceeding through the courts together.

Insurance companies refused to pay

The insurance companies, all operating under the banner of Lloyd's Underwriting, are being sued because they refused to pay for damage to the reactor's outer shell, known as the calandria, when it was improperly polished using coarse wire brushes during the refurbishment.

The polishing caused microscopic scratching and when new tubes were fitted into the calandria the scratches led to large numbers of the tubes flunking critical air leak tests.

All 380 tubes had to be removed and replaced, a setback that cost the project 22 months and hundreds of millions of dollars.

The insurance companies refused to pay, instead blaming AECL's and NB Power's negligence for the delays. (CBC)

The insurance companies rejected claims the calandria had been "accidentally physically damaged" by the polishing mistake and instead blamed AECL and NB Power's negligence.

The lawsuits were filed four years ago in February and have generated enormous amounts of paperwork and legal bills.

AECL says all sides have produced 100,000 documents for inspection.

Last year NB Power disclosed at the Energy and Utilities Board it had paid its legal firm Stewart McKelvey more than $1.5 million during a 12 month period in 2013 and 2014, although it did not specify how much of that was specifically for the Lepreau lawsuit.


http://fetenbday.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/executive_council/new-brunswick-jobs-board/content/david.html

Executive Council Office

 

David Campbell

 

Campbell founded his own economic development consulting and research firm, Jupia Consultants Inc., in 2008. Based in Moncton, he is one of Atlantic Canada’s leading economic development consultants and has worked with more than 40 local, provincial and national economic development agencies, industry associations and government departments in six Canadian provinces and two American states. He holds a certificate in economic development from the University of Waterloo in Ontario and a masters in business administration from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia.


http://www.wallacemccaininstitute.com/david_campbell


The Wallace McCain Institute at UNB

 local entrepreneur



David Campbell
Chief Economist
Province of New Brunswick
Moncton, New Brunswick


David is the Chief Economist for the Province of New Brunswick. 

He was formerly President of Jupia Consultants Inc., an economic development consulting firm based in Moncton and a Research Fellow with the Canadian Institute for Research on Public Policy and Public Administration at the Université de Moncton. 

Previously, David was also a long time columnist with the New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal.



 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/david-campbell-new-brunswick-s-new-chief-economist-1.2964693

David Campbell New Brunswick's new chief economist

Campbell says without growth New Brunswick is at risk of becoming "one big retirement home"

CBC News Posted: Feb 20, 2015 2:00 PM AT


Moncton's David Campbell has been hired as New Brunswick's first chief economist. (CBC)

Economic development consultant David Campbell of Moncton has been hired as the province of New Brunswick's first chief economist.

He will be part of a leadership team for the New Brunswick jobs board secretariat along with Jacques J. Pinet, who is the chief executive officer, and Susan Holt, who is chief of business relationships.

"I think I'll be an advocate for economic development, doing a lot of the things I do now only inside government ,so thinking about ways we can grow the economy, sectors that have opportunity for growth ... and promoting that inside government and hopefully across the province with the general public as well."

Campbell says the idea behind the jobs board is to develop economic policy that takes a provincial view.

Campbell says he will use his experience in the private sector in his new position with government.

'We risk becoming essentially one big retirement home and this recent talk of converting hospitals to nursing homes is one of many signs this is currently in progress.' - David Campbell, chief economist for government of New Brunswick.

"I will be bringing a very strong bias toward getting the economy moving because I do think if we continue to see weak growth in the province it's really going to put a strain on our ability to fund public services and we're going to continue to see our young people leaving."

Campbell brings private sector experience

As a consultant, Campbell has supported shale gas development and he says he continues to support the industry, even though the Gallant government has brought in a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in New Brunswick.

"The premier has set a very strict set of guidelines under which this new government would allow shale gas to go forward ... but I work for government now and I accept the policy that's underway right now."

In a post on his blog, Campbell said earlier this week that he sees his new role as a homecoming of sorts.

"If we don't find a way to get the province's economy back to at least a moderate level of economic growth no amount of fiscal austerity will be enough to bring balance to the province's books," Campbell writes.

"We risk becoming essentially one big retirement home and this recent talk of converting hospitals to nursing homes is one of many signs this is currently in progress."

Campbell says he hopes to help create a new agenda that will bring that growth to New Brunswick.
"Maybe, just maybe in ten years from now we won't be lamenting a failed 'prosperity plan' or a failed 'self-sufficiency agenda'," he writes.

"Maybe we will be celebrating living in a province with its mojo back — a place that is attracting young professionals and families from around the world. A place that is incubating hundreds of ambitious entrepreneurs and attracting capital from far and wide."




http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/david-campbell-economist-jobs-energy-solutions-1.4119963

N.B. economist David Campbell to head new Energy Solutions Corp.

 

New company will be eligible for federal infrastructure funding that NB Power doesn't qualify for

 

By Jacques Poitras, CBC News Posted: May 17, 2017 3:43 PM AT

Economist David Campbell says he's excited about taking on the 'important role' of chair of the New Brunswick Energy Solutions Corporation. (Twitter)

The high-profile chief economist at the Gallant government's Jobs Board is moving to a new position.
David Campbell, an economic development consultant the Liberals recruited in 2015 to help their job-creation efforts, will be the chair of the New Brunswick Energy Solutions Corporation.

The corporation, a joint venture between the provincial government and NB Power, will look for new customers for electricity generated in the province.

"I am excited to take on this important role and by the potential boost to export revenue from this important sector," Campbell said in a statement.

The province is creating the new company because it will be eligible for federal infrastructure funding that NB Power doesn't quality for as a provincial utility.

Watching over Grand Falls dam

The corporation would oversee the proposed expansion of NB Power's hydroelectric generating station in Grand Falls, a project that aims to market its non-fossil-fuel electricity in New England.

Campbell worked in economic development in the Frank McKenna government and started his own consulting firm in 2008. His blog critiquing government job creation efforts turned him into a frequent media commentator on economic development.

Premier Brian Gallant said when Campbell was recruited to the New Brunswick Jobs Board in 2015 that the secretariat and a new Crown corporation, Opportunities New Brunswick, would work together to help the province "better co-ordinate" job creation efforts.

 http://www.carlisleinstitute.org/governance/

Carlisle Institute operates as an independent and nonpartisan nonprofit organization. Its governance structure enables the organization to meet its strategic and operational objectives efficiently and effectively and includes a board of directors and an advisory council, the latter consisting of members of the academic, business, government and nonprofit sectors. Peter D. Lindfield, former president and chief executive officer of Balanced Viewpoint, serves as chairman of the board and chief executive officer. 

 http://www.carlisleinstitute.org/content/243711/

Our independent advisory council consults with and guides researchers working on Carlisle’s various projects and programs. It advises on the development of new research and events mandates, formats and protocols. The members of the council answer questions, make recommendations to the research roadmap and otherwise help people to be successful with the Institute's research program.

The following individuals are currently members of the Carlisle Institute's advisory council:

Chris Baker, President, Continuum Research

David Campbell, President, Jupia Consultants Inc.

Tim Coates, Managing Director, Innovation Ecosystem, Connecticut Technology Council

Charles H. Davis, Edward S. Rogers Sr. Research Chair in Media Management and Entrepreneurship, Ryerson University

Arthur T. Doyle, Principal, Arthur T. Doyle and Associates

Albert E. LeBlanc, President, Aboiteau Restaurant & Motel

Patrick Lacroix, Executive Director, Elementary Literacy Inc.

Kevin Leppmann, Internet Organizer, U.S. Public Interest Network

Sean Mitton, President, Canadian Expat Network

Donne Smith, Chair, Board of Directors, Azura Ventures Ltd.

For more information about the Carlisle Institute, contact us at info@carlisleinstitute.org.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/it-aint-broke/article1137519/

It ain't broke

CHRIS BAKER

Published May 20, 2004

Updated March 28, 2017

 

The 2000 presidential election in the United States, with its voting contortions and its controversial outcome, prompted many Canadians to express relief that, here, at least we know who the winner is after the voting ends.

Even critics of our system for electing members of Parliament - often called 'first-past-the-post' because the candidate with the most votes in a riding wins the election, with or without a majority - admit that the system's ability to deliver clear outcomes is one of its strengths.

However, critics tend to neglect or dismiss the other strengths of the first-past-the-post system. Further, they make the error of blaming this process for a host of political ills, from falling voter turnout to Canada's lagging record on the proportion of women and visible minorities in the House of Commons.

The recent report from the Law Commission of Canada, "Voting Counts: Electoral Reform for Canada," follows in this vein, making its case for using a mix of first-past-the-post and proportional representation to select MPs.

While "Voting Counts" may be good stimulus for a debate on all of this, it overstates both the desire for reform and the consensus for change. Many Canadians are concerned about the state of our democracy, but electoral reform is not the priority that the report's authors (and advocates for proportional representation, generally) believe it to be.

Even if electoral reform were to be among the top five issues of concern to Canadians, more pressing priorities would be the candidate-nomination process, controlling the influence of money on the electoral process and deciding the proper role for third-party or non-partisan intervenors.

The first-past-the-post system provides effective governments. Canadians support a range of parties, but we vote with the expectation that governments will act in accordance with the national interest. Some view the frequency of majority governments that emerge through this process as its chief failing, but majority governments have been as socially progressive as minority governments, and tend to govern better and more effectively.

We may be frustrated with the dominance of a majority government, but we like even less the horse-trading and political manipulations of minority governments. The first-past-the-post system of selecting MPs also has the advantage of encouraging political parties to be broadly based and ideologically moderate, so that they can obtain enough support to form a national government.

Given the geographic, linguistic and cultural diversity of the country, the ability of a political party to accommodate this diversity becomes one of the tests it must meet in order to form a government. As much as the first-past-the-post system allows for majority governments to be the rule rather than the exception, it is important to recognize that this system also allows for regional or ideological voices to emerge and be represented in our national legislature.

The barrier for regional parties to enter Parliament may be low, but the barrier is appropriately high for those who wish to translate a regional or ideological base into a national government. The recent merger of the Progressive Conservatives and Canadian Alliance into the Conservative Party is evidence of the political dead end that a regional or ideological party meets under the current system.

Another strength of the first-past-the-post system is that it provides clear local representation. On average, there is one MP for every 100,000 citizens (or 60,000 voters), and the constituency boundaries are drawn up so there are, with few exceptions, an equal number of voters in each riding in a province (federal boundaries are determined on a provincial basis).

The link between the MP and his or her riding is very clear and, combined with party identification, provides a higher level of accountability. Although there is a popular misconception that MPs are powerless within our political system, the strong local connection created by the first-past-the-post system supports the rights of individual MPs against majority views in both the House of Commons and within the party caucus.

The procedural rules of Parliament recognize this and, as recent events attest, party leaders interfere with the local nomination process at their peril. Even with a working majority, party leaders are usually careful not to alienate individual members of their caucus.

Ironically, one of the failings that is attributed to the first-past-the-post process, specifically the inability of our system to elect a reasonable proportion of women to office, is not the result of that process and will not be solved by the electoral reform recommended by the law commission.

Our political parties are more to blame for our lack of progress in this area. Factors other than the electoral process are also at the heart of reduced voter turnout.

The first-past-the-post system is not perfect, but it does very well at promoting the essential attributes of a democratic system. It provides stable and effective government, as well as local representation, consensus-building, broadly based parties and accountability.

Chris Baker, president of the public-opinion firm Continuum Research, was a special assistant in Jean Chrétien's Prime Minister's Office from 1996-1997.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2010/06/10/parties_basic_differences_rule_out_liberalndp_merger.html

  

Editorial Opinion

Parties’ basic differences rule out Liberal-NDP merger

There are significant barriers to the concept of a merger between the two parties

Former NDP leader Tommy Douglas on the campaign trail in 1965. Chris Baker, who served in the governments of Jean Chretien and Howard Pawley, thinks Douglas would scoff at the idea of a Liberal-NDP merger.  (Frank Lennon / Star File Photo) 

Parties’ basic differences rule out Liberal-NDP merger

There are significant barriers to the concept of a merger between the two parties

By Chris Baker

Thu., June 10, 2010

As premier and later as leader of the newly formed NDP, Tommy Douglas was often presented with various schemes that had superficial appeal but would not bear up under scrutiny. His simple phrase in these situations was straightforward: “This dog won’t hunt.”

As someone who fought his hardest political battles against Liberals, Douglas would have the same reply to those who think that electoral cooperation (or a merger) between the federal Liberals and the NDP is desirable or possible. Frankly, anyone calling to “unite the left” knows little about either the Liberal party or the NDP. Differences in philosophy, tradition and party structure make a merger, or even electoral cooperation, nearly impossible.

First of all, the Liberal party is not a party of the left — it is a capitalist, centrist party. That Liberal governments are responsible for the social safety net and strongly promote human rights may lead many people to think that it is a “leftist” party, but this is also the party that embraced balanced budgets and debt repayment. In the words of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Liberals are the party of the “radical centre.”

The NDP, founded by members of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) and the Canadian Labour Congress, is a socialist party (or social democratic party, if you find this a less pejorative term). If there is to be a merger, or even electoral cooperation, how can these two parties reconcile this fundamental difference on this essential economic question?

There is also a deep chasm between the New Democrats and the Liberals on the question of national unity as it pertains to Quebec. The Liberals still adhere to a “one size fits all” approach to our federation, where all provinces are treated uniformly in the Constitution, and claim that there is no “right” for any province to withdraw. The New Democrats, at least in their upper echelons, are friendly to the idea of “asymmetrical federalism” and have endorsed Quebec’s “right to self-determination.”

In the NDP, unions play a structural role in the decision-making processes of the party. In addition to contributing significant amounts to the NDP war chest, unions and union locals affiliated with the NDP send their own delegates to party conventions, including leadership races. By being able to vote in the delegate selection process for riding associations and affiliated unions, the views of these members are overrepresented in the councils of the NDP. This practice of “double voting” would be as unlikely for Liberals to accept as it would be for the NDP to surrender. (In the U.K., Tony Blair brought an end to a similar practice in the Labour party to make it a more acceptable option for British voters.)

While a merger may not be in the cards, what about “electoral cooperation”? This would see one party in a riding stand down in favour of the other, presumably to increase the chances of victory.

One significant barrier to this concept is the perception of Canadian voters. It is a political convention in Canada that to be seen as a serious national party a political party has to have a candidate in every riding in the country — 308 in all. It is not a formal rule but the consequences are quite clear for a party that does not run a full slate of candidates.

Further, given that the public financing of political parties is based on the number of votes they receive ($1.75 per vote per year), a decision to stand down in a riding in favour of another party affects the party’s bottom line as much as its reputation as a serious national party.

Having lost its rural base, the NDP is now competing for voters in the same urban areas as the Liberal party. The fact that Liberal and NDP candidates are each other’s strongest competition in many ridings, in Toronto and across the country, means that there is little to gain from electoral cooperation.

Even cooperation in ridings where the difference between an NDP or Liberal victory over a Conservative candidate is within the margin of voters for the other party, the possibility of this actually occurring is slim. This presumes that NDP voters in a riding would move en bloc to a Liberal candidate carrying the banner of electoral cooperation and vice versa. Partisan attachments may not be as strong now as in the past but we shouldn’t underestimate this factor among core supporters of either party. A core Liberal or New Democrat would be more likely to stay at home than to vote for another party — even if their party leadership encouraged them to do so.

The idea of a merger or some form of electoral cooperation between the Liberals and the NDP is based more on novelty, opportunism and distaste for the current minority government than sound political reasoning. In the hunt for a progressive government, just remember what Tommy said about this type of dog.

Chris Baker is president of Continuum Research, a public opinion consultancy based in Fredericton, N.B. He is a former deputy minister in the New Brunswick government and served in the governments of Jean Chrétien and Howard Pawley. For another view on this issue, see the opinion piece by George Hutchison, former aide to David Peterson, on thestar.com.