Mitch Wolfe: The Playful Contrarian

As has been reported, Senator Duffy improperly claimed the sum of $90,000 as living expenses for his Ottawa home.

After Duffy agreed to reimburse the government for this sum, apparently he did not have sufficient funds to repay this amount. Accordingly, Nigel Wright stepped in and paid that amount from his own personal resources on Duffy’s behalf.

Mr. Wright claimed that he in effect paid this amount without the knowledge and consent of Prime Minister Harper.

I do not know Nigel Wright, the former chief of staff in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). I do know, that prior to his appointment to the PMO, as a managing director of the Onex Corporation, he was very well-respected on Bay Street as a very intelligent and successful deal-maker and investor.

People whom I trust and who know Mr. Wright personally, describe him without qualification, as a man of principle and integrity with strong religious beliefs.

Until the Duffy Affair, Wright was viewed by both Conservative insiders and critics of the Harper government as a very calm, effective and professional chief of staff, administrator and political fixer.

Wright was also considered an excellent intermediary and bridge between the Canadian business community and the Harper government.

I do not know why Wright did what he did.

I can only speculate.

Based upon my knowledge of the man and the personal knowledge of my friends who know him personally, Wright was a problem solver. A very hard-working gentleman. A doer. A closer. A mensch.

I firmly believe that he had the best of intentions in assisting Duffy in paying off Duffy’s questionable living expenses. He wanted to help out Duffy who claimed that he did not have the funds to pay this $90,000 amount. And Wright apparently wanted to make the Canadian taxpayer whole, with respect to the Duffy file.

Also, Wright wanted to solve this matter so that the Harper government could pivot from the Duffy affair and instead focus on its more important economic and trade policies (i.e. the ongoing negotiations for a European Union free trade agreement) that would benefit millions of Canadian working men and women.

When the facts of this Duffy payment were disclosed publicly, Wright had no choice but to leave his position in the PMO.

Recently, prime minister Harper stated that Wright was dismissed for his role in the Duffy Affair, and that he did not merely resign.

Unfortunately, under the circumstances, Wright had to go. Resignation or dismissal. Just words. Just a question of semantics. Describing the same effect.

In a recent Toronto Star column on the involvement of Nigel Wright, Chantal Hebertspeculated: “Only a saint or alternatively a man with a guilty conscience would continue to play dead as his former boss wreaks irreparable damage on his or her reputation.”

I have great respect for Chantal Hebert. She is one of the most astute political analysts in Canada. Her knowledge and understanding of Quebec politics is — Comment dit-on en anglais? — sans pareil. When it comes to Quebec politics, Hebert has no equal.

However, in this case, the normally flawless Chantal Hebert is clearly out to lunch on her understanding of Nigel Wright.

I am speculating here of course. But my instincts tell me that Nigel Wright considers himself to be neither a saint, nor a man with a guilty conscience.

I believe that he is a man of principle and a man of action. Who was forced to do what was necessary to arrest the cancer, that was Duffy. For the greater good of the country, the prime minister, the Conservative party and their critical economic policies.

Wright does not have a guilty conscience. Nor should he have a guilty conscience.

Furthermore, Hebert is clearly off the mark when she suggests that Wright is playing dead.

Wright is keeping silent. And he will remain silent and not budge from his stated position. He is showing commendable courage, self-control and self-discipline.

Compare Wright’s silent, stoic and courageous conduct with that of that ol’ Duffy, who is pathetically spewing verbal garbage, lies, half-truths and whining like the pompous stuck pig that he has become with his snout caught in the political trough.

Hebert is also wrong to suggest that Harper has wreaked irreparable damage on Wright’s reputation.

I know the culture and the players on Bay Street very well.

I know this turf, like Hebert knows Quebec.

I believe that Bay Street still has great respect and admiration for Nigel Wright.

Bay Street knows that politics is a nasty and thankless business.

Notwithstanding, Wright temporarily gave up a very lucrative career as a very successful private equity investor to help out his country. To bring his incredible business and commercial sense and expertise in the service of his country.

When it comes to Bay Street, Chantal Hebert, is completely clueless.

Wright does not have to salvage his reputation. Nigel Wright’s reputation has not been destroyed

On Bay Street, among those who count, the reputation of Nigel Wright has never been higher.

Wright took a risk and went to his own pocket to solve a problem quickly and decisively.

Whereas in Ottawa, the politicians dither. On Bay Street, the dealmakers get things done.

Wright did not steal money from the public. He returned money back to the public. So as to salvage a character like Duffy who did not deserve such consideration.

Oscar Wilde’s classic cynical aphorism comes to mind. In the case of the noble Nigel Wright helping out the despicable Duffy,

“No good deed goes unpunished.”

I predict that Nigel Wright will survive this Duffy debacle, with grace, courage and his reputation enhanced.

This past week we watched the pathetic attempts by Senators Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau to desperately hang on to their overly generous Senate salaries and benefits.

For the past year we have read and heard allegations that these three senators, in addition to drawing $130,000 annual salaries, improperly claimed thousands of dollars of public taxpayer money for living and travel expenses.

As the revelations of these questionable expenditures were publicly disclosed, the reputations of these three senators, especially former media stars Duffy and Wallin, gradually shrunk before our very eyes.

Duffy claimed he was a victim of a conspiracy and a scheme.

Duffy also stooped to play the health card, claiming that he suffered from a serious heart ailment and was probably too sick to attend the Senate to defend himself.

Notwithstanding his claim of serious heart illness, Duffy somehow made a miraculous recovery and did in fact attend the Senate hearing. And he did give a very vigorous and full-throated defense of his actions, including his desire to hold on to his gold-plated supplementary health care benefits.

Wallin claimed that although she made mistakes, she too was a victim of backroom politics. She too stooped to play the health card, by seeking Senate sympathy on the basis that she was a cancer survivor and she needed her gold-plated Senate health care benefits to survive.

Note that as an Ontario resident, Wallin, even without her gold-plated health benefits as a senator, would still enjoy very affordable and excellent care under the current OHIP system.

I am not unsympathetic to Wallin’s health issues. But thousands of Canadian women annually suffer from cancer, unfortunately. And they do not have the luxury of being covered by the more comprehensive gold-plated health benefits that the senators enjoy.

Why should Senator Wallin, be treated any better by our public healthcare system, than the majority of Canadians who share her fate? What gives her the right to think that she is more deserving and more entitled to better care than the majority of other Canadian women who are suffering from cancer, or are cancer survivors?

Brazeau also claimed that he was a victim of the system — that is, imprecise Senate rules — in that he was not treated fairly. But nonetheless, he exploited the system to his apparent financial benefit.

After witnessing the public displays of these greedy, self-centred individuals, I am reminded of the great Humphrey Bogart, in the classic film, Casablanca.

To paraphrase:

“It doesn’t take much to see that the Senate problems of three little people don’t amount to a Parliamentary Hill of beans in this crazy mixed up world.”

Political pundits Coyne, Hebert and Anderson of CBC’s “At Issue Panel,” please take note.

What Bogart so wisely suggests is that the majority of hardworking Canadians, don’t give two figs about the personal trials and tribulations of three Senate politicos pigging out in the public trough. And neither should the Ottawa-centric political analysts, the Harper-hating liberal media and the opposition NDP and Liberals.

(Of course, the opposition NDP and Liberals are more concerned about trying to embarrass Harper and the Conservatives, over this faux-Senate expense scandal, for political advantage, than trying to deal with day to day economic matters that affect millions of Canadians struggling to make ends meet. But that is “Ottawatown,” Jake.)

The struggling senators in Ottawa (the politicos, not the hockey team) from both parties, do not appreciate, that the more this expense scandal is prolonged, the more the reputation of all the senators and the whole Senate is diminished.

As long as the opposition Liberal senators and some Red Tory senators, wish to continue investigating and debating this expense scandal, that is “rag the puck,” the popular push to abolish the Senate or render it even more irrelevant to the Canadian public, will accelerate nation-wide.

The majority of hardworking Canadians live from paycheque to paycheque. They are either on salary, commission or run their own small business. Most Canadians are just worried about paying the rent, making the mortgage and car lease payments and providing for their children.

Most Canadians, earn nowhere near the annual $130,000 salary of the senators. Nor do most Canadians have the additional benefits of fancy expense accounts, living allowances, travel expenses and souped-up health care.

I maintain that a majority of Canadians believe the current public cost of paying senators and maintaining the Senate and its infrastructure, is not justified by the work of the senators or their actual contribution to Canadian public life.

Despite Harper’s efforts to reform the Senate, it is unlikely that the Senate will ever be fundamentally reformed or even abolished, given the constitutional requirement of the approval of seven provinces representing over 50 per cent of the Canadian population.

In light of these constitutional roadblocks, we as Canadians should engage in some sober second thought about the Senate.

Accordingly, we should strongly urge Prime Minister Harper to slash each senator’s annual salary to $65,000 per annum. To avoid any funny business, no senator will be entitled to any additional living, travel or personal expense benefits.

In addition, no senator will be entitled to the benefits of any extra special healthcare coverage.

Each senator will have the benefit of the same healthcare coverage as average Canadians.

Any senator who has a problem with this form of compensation? Tough. Welcome to the real world.

Here is a radical thought: Try living on just your fixed Senate income, paid for by our hard-earned tax dollars.

I believe that this proposal will send a clear message from the Canadian people to the senators, that a Senate appointment is an honour and a privilege and not a right and an entitlement.

These senators should no longer be entitled to their entitlements.

According to a recent Globe and Mail article, the Texas energy company SWN Resources, with the legal approval of the province of New Brunswick and the town of Rexton, (just north of Moncton, New Brunswick) was using a municipally-owned road near Rexton for the purpose of doing seismic testing to search for shale gas in the area.

It seems members of a local Canadian community, Elsipogtog, had been camped along this very same road near the village of Rexton for several weeks and were preventing trucks owned by SWN Resources from using this road for the purpose of doing seismic testing for shale gas. Also the “protesters” were camped at a SWN Resources’ site which stored exploration equipment.

In early October, SWN Resources,after giving due legal notice to the Elsipogtog “protesters,” went to court to obtain a court order or injunction, ordering the Elsipogtog members to desist from blocking the SWN Resources’ trucks on the Rexton road and from blocking the SWN Resources’ storage site.

Presumably, the Elsipogtog community was represented at the court hearing and it had an opportunity to argue against the application for the said court order. After due consideration, the said court issued an injunction, ordering Elsipogtog “protesters” to permit SWN Resources to so use the road and leave the SWN Resources storage site.

Notwithstanding said court order, the Elsipogtog “protesters,” in clear defiance of the law, continued to block the road and prevent SWN Resources from using the road to do its testing and from using its exploration equipment at its storage compound.

Last week the RCMP was called in to enforce the law, that is, remove the “protesters” from the subject road and SWN Resources’ storage site. Also according to Premier Alward, the RCMP had been called in because the area had become “an armed camp and was not a safe and secure place.”

In the process of legally enforcing the court order last Thursday, the RCMP officers were met with violence from some members of the Elsipogtog community.

According to a Canadian Press report on the violence,

“Six police vehicles including an unmarked van were burned and Molotov cocktails were tossed at police before they fired non-lethal beanbag type bullets and pepper spray to defuse the situation.

“RCMP said they found improvised explosive devices that were modified to discharge shrapnel and used a fuse-ignition system. Officers also seized guns and knives after moving in to enforce a court-ordered injunction to remove protesters at the site of a compound in Rexton where SWN Resources stored exploration equipment.

“Forty people were arrested for firearms offences, threats, intimidation, mischief and violating the injunction.”

On Saturday, just two days subsequent to Thursday’s violence, other Elsipogtog“protesters” seized two media vehicles and media equipment and actually intimidated and threatened journalist Laura Brown and forced her from her car. Apparently, Ms. Brown was just trying to do her job by trying to report on another shale gas protest in the Rexton, New Brunswick area.

The above acts were not acts of peaceful, principled protest and civil disobedience.

Six police vehicles were torched and burned. Molotov cocktails were thrown at police officers who were just trying to do their job, that is, enforce a legally enforceable court order.

The so-called Elsipogtog “protesters” were found in possession of improvised explosive devices that were modified to discharge shrapnel which used a fuse-ignition system. And they possessed a cache of knives and guns.

I am sorry, I did not think that this community’s traditional way of life of hunting and fishing included the use of improvised explosive devices that were modified to discharge shrapnel.

CTV and Global media cars and equipment were also seized by these people. And they threatened and intimidated a woman journalist who was just trying to do her job.

Please note that in the United States, Section 802 of the USA Patriot Act,

“…expanded the definition of terrorism to cover ‘domestic,’ as opposed to international, terrorism. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act ‘dangerous to human life’ that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.”

Accordingly, if these acts had been committed in neighbouring Maine, the perpetrators may have been charged as domestic terrorists.

Currently, the relevant provisions in our own Canadian Criminal Code dealing with domestic terrorism do not appear as broad as those of the U.S. Patriot Act.

Perhaps they should be.

No Canadian citizens or residents are above the law. I hope the full force of the law will be brought to bear on those perpetrators of these violent acts and on those who have aided, abetted, and assisted in these violent acts.

I strongly commend New Brunswick Premier David Alward for courageously standing up to this home-grown violence and for the RCMP in properly enforcing our Canadian laws in this regard.

For Premier Wynne, when it comes to the Mississauga and Oakville gas plant cancellations, being an Ontario Liberal Premier, means always having to say you’re sorry.

On April 15, 2013, Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter reported that the politically-motivated decision to scrap the Mississauga gas plant by the McGuinty government would cost the Ontario taxpayer at least $275 million.

Since that first announcement, Wynne has been in almost constant public apology mode trying to “mea culpa” herself and her party out of these terrible gas plant scandals. Trying desperately to put these gas plant cancellations behind her. But she has failed miserably.

Because, for the most part, these apologies are non-apologies. They are more about “spin” and “PR” than sincerely taking personal responsibility.

On April 30, 2013, Wynne testified before the legislative justice committee investigating the gas plant cancellations. In that testimony, she did not address, nor apologize for the “elephant in the room.” That is, the allegation that her Liberal government had cancelled the two gas plants for purely political reasons, in order to save the seats of five Liberal MPPs in Mississauga and Oakville during the 2011 provincial election.

Instead, Wynne blamed the “process” and she regretted that the Liberals did not have a different process in place.

“The siting of these two plants failed to take into account the feelings of the community,” Wynne said. “Despite expert advice, despite an open procurement process and all the decision points along the way, the overall process failed. I’ve been very clear that I regret that we didn’t have a different process in place.”

In that same hearing, Wynne took no personal responsibility for the decision to cancel the gas plants despite her role as campaign vice-chair of the 2011 Liberal provincial campaign.

“Those were decisions that were made by other people in other conversations and I wasn’t part of those conversations, I wasn’t in those rooms,” Wynne said.

I am sorry. I just do not buy that explanation. I have watched Wynne operate as a Premier. She is one tough, determined, hands-on, political operator. She appears to be the lead Minister on every file. She runs a very tight ship. She towers over her male-dominated Cabinet. She is our very own gay Margaret Thatcher. I say this with the greatest respect for her political shrewdness and toughness.

My point is that Kathleen Wynne was not appointed as campaign vice-chair of the 2011 Liberal provincial campaign, as a token female. She was a major force and political star. Wynne was a political giant killer for having soundly defeated John Tory in the Don Valley battle of 2007. She was appointed vice chair because she was expected to play an influential role in that 2011 campaign.

It is beyond reasonable belief that she did not know and was not privy to the discussions leading to the cancellation of the gas plants. Apparently as a Cabinet minister, Wynne signed off on these gas plant cancellations.

So Kathleen Wynne knew or ought to have known the estimated full costs of cancelling these gas plants and the enormous costs of moving these plants to other locations, all in order to save five Liberal MPP seats.

Fifteen days later, on May 15, 2013, Wynne provided the following ambiguous non-apology:

“There were things that happened in terms of relocation of the gas plants that shouldn’t have happened. I’ve apologized for that. I’m not defending those decisions. In fact, I’ve said that there were decisions that were made that shouldn’t have been made.”

What is Wynne apologizing for here? What is she talking about?

The fact that the Liberals decided to cancel two gas plants to save five Liberal seats? The fact that in the case of the Mississauga plant, the taxpayers were stuck with a bill for $275 million?

The fact that in the case of the Mississauga plant, the Ontario government may have unnecessarily paid out about $210 million to a greedy hedge fund and power plant operator, for which the Ontario government had no legal obligation. So that problem would go quietly away?

I do not think Wynne is talking about any of these matters or apologizing for any of these matters.

Note: Wynne spoke about these decisions, as if these decisions were made by others. As if Wynne had no role or involvement or knowledge of these decisions.

This is a very unacceptable non-apology.

On Tuesday, October 8, 2013, Auditor General Lysyck dropped another bombshell. She reported that the estimated cost of cancelling and relocating the Oakville gas plant was between $675 million and $815 million. And total estimated costs to the taxpayers for both gas plant cancellations: approximately $1.1 billion.

Once again, Wynne tried to apologize, but failed miserably. She said it was a big mistake and that her government had learned from its errors in siting the plants in the first place. And that political staff will no longer be allowed to participate in third party commercial negotiations.

Once again Wynne did not claim personal responsibility, other than she was one of many Cabinet Ministers who signed off on this decision.

Wynne did not apologize for her prior knowledge, her participation in discussions and in the decision making process.

Nor did Wynne acknowledge or apologize for the fact, that as in the Mississauga case, the Ontario government may have not been legally obligated to pay out any compensation to the power plant developer. And potentially the costs of $815 million to the taxpayers could have been entirely avoided.

Clearly, Wynne has learned little. And apologized for less.

As previously stated, as senior Liberal Cabinet Minister and very active vice-chair of the 2011 Liberal campaign, Wynne knew or ought to have known the estimated full costs of cancelling these gas plants and the enormous costs of moving these plants to other locations, all in order to save five Liberal MPP seats.

So how can Wynne still avoid taking full and personal responsibility for the decisions to cancel these gas plants and the billion dollar cost to the Ontario taxpayers?

Who would have thought that the extreme right wing Tea Party-led US Congress would a pull a “Bob Rae”, and in effect impose “Rae Days” on 800,00 federal employees in Washington?

Before my good friend Bob Rae re-invented himself as the white-haired elder statesman of the Federal Liberal Party — about 23 years ago — he was a dark-haired, wild-eyed, idealistic socialist and the surprise Premier of Ontario as leader of the social democratic, New Democratic Party.

Back in those days, about 1993, not unlike modern day Washington, Ontario was drowning in red ink. Ontario was suffering from huge deficits. High unemployment. And Ontario was about to hit a debt wall.

When Rae was first elected Premier, the Ontario economy was already in the toilet, thanks to the spendthrift reign of the former Liberal Premier David Peterson.

Unfortunately, Rae, reading from the socialist handbook, thought more government was the answer. So he took a bad situation and made it worse, by imposing more taxes, and by having the Ontario government try to spend its way out of the recession.

That is, until the international bankers and institutional creditors holding Ontario’s debt came a calling. And told Rae that Ontario was heading down the tubes, unless he quickly implemented some drastic measures.

Hence, the birth of the infamous but very necessary, “Rae Days.” The involuntary imposition of unpaid holidays on Ontario government workers.

Washington, in 2013, is not much different than Ontario in the early 1990s.

The American government is drowning in red ink, red tape and is hemmorhaging annual deficits and a massive federal debt. Government spending is out of control. Obama, like Rae, wants to tax and spend his way out this mess. But the economic mess is only getting worse.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (“CBO”) claims that the U.S. national debt is now 73 per cent of gross domestic product, the highest in history except for a period around World War II. The figure is twice the percentage it was at the end of 2007.

The CBO has warned that under current law, growing future deficits will push the debt to 100 per cent of GDP 25 years from now. And under another scenario that envisions changes being made to some laws — including removing the so-called automatic budget cuts known as the sequester — the debt would be even higher, at nearly 190 per cent by 2038.

“The federal budget is on a course that cannot be sustained indefinitely,”
CBO director Douglas Elmendorf told reporters.

“Because federal debt is already unusually high relative to GDP, further increases in debt could be especially harmful,” the CBO report said. It said lawmakers would have to make “significant changes” to tax and spending policies to put the U.S. budget on a sustainable path for the long term. ”

The hard right Tea Party wing of Congress is sick and tired of America living beyond its means.
And these Congressmen are sick and tired of the huge deficits incurred by President Bush and now President Obama.

But the latter, Obama, refuses to do anything about it. He refuses to contemplate any serious reductions in annual government expenditures. Obama is hoping for a miracle economic recovery, that will shoot up employment, bring in tons of tax revenue and balance the budget.

I dream of a Maple Leafs Stanley Cup victory too. But that won’t happen either in my lifetime.

Frustrated by Obama’s failure to address America’s massive deficit and debt problems, the right-wing Congress, with the constitutional power of the nation’s purse strings, brought about a federal government shutdown.

“Rae Days”, American-style.

The right-wing GOP is being pilloried from the left. And mocked from the right.

But the Union still stands. City and state governments are still functioning.

Essential federal government services are still being maintained.

Members of the American military are still being paid under a separate law.

Air traffic controllers and border patrol agents are still working. The American embassies and consulates are still processing passports and visas. Even the self-funded Postal Service is still delivering the mail, through rain or shine or government shut down. And the federal government will continue to pay Social Security benefits and Medicare and Medicaid fees to doctors on time.

The sky has not fallen. Frogs and locusts are not dropping from the heavens.

Wow! Perhaps the American people may suddenly realize that they could live with a lot less government.

This situation is very different from December 1995, when GOP Congressional leader Newt Gingrich pulled the plug on the federal government.

Notwithstanding national polls to the contrary, this time around, the GOP Congressmen will survive and prosper quite well, thank you, in their GOP-favouredgerrymandered Congressional districts. Which support these Congressmen whole-heartedly.

And the U.S. may come out of this government shut down a leaner and more productive and efficient government.

Instead of financial armageddon, there may be financial rebirth.

I may be the only writer in America who does not think the Tea Partiers are whack jobs.

I think they are true American patriots.

Because these “crazy” Tea Party types are truly worried about America’s soaringpublic debt and the rising pension and health care costs that are fuelling it.

I predict they will not stop at shutting down the Federal Government to force Obama and the Democrats to deal with this problem.

I predict they will go all the way and force the federal government to go into default unless Obama and the Democrats deal substantially with America’s soaring debt.

This very high debt is not only a drag on long term growth, but more importantly, but it may lead ultimately to the irreversible downfall of the United States. Much like the eclipse of the British Empire in the 20th century.

Even staunch and committed Democrats would be opposed to America suffering that ignominious fate.