Globe Editor’s Glass House

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |19/05/09

Responding to the Editor of the Globe and Mail’s open letter attacking Brian Mulroney today, his spokesman Robin Sears said,

“In 2003, the Globe and Mail entered into discussions with Mr.Mulroney’s representatives, received documents from them, conducted followup interviews with some of those named in the documentation, and assigned reporters to develop the story handed to them. On the instructions of their then new editor, Edward Greenspon, the inquiries were cancelled, the story killed and the real reasons for the decision refused despite several inquiries.

The closest the editor came to full disclosure was the claim that the evidence “could not be corroborated in time.” This following less than a week of inquiry, and from a newspaper whose idea of sufficient corroboration on their version of this story, up to this point, had been the world of a convicted felon and a police informant.

Before the Globe accuses anyone else of seeking to suppress news they might offer their readers an opportunity to examine the materials in their possession and explain the reasons for their determination to keep them hidden.”

SPECTOR CONTRADICTS HIMSELF… AGAIN

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |19/05/09

The curious treachery and contradictory testimony of one of Mr. Mulroney’s most senior appointees continues.

Despite having twice testified under oath that he was told to kill the Bear Head project by the former prime minister, Norm Spector again yesterday contradicted himself to Canadian Press reporter Jim Brown.

Before the Ethics Committee on February 5, 2008, the former prime minister’s Chief of Staff and choice as Ambassador of Israel, said, “when presented with the facts, Mr. Mulroney did not hesitate to do the right thing and declare Bear Head dead.”

Before the Oliphant Commission last month, the long-time Victoria, B.C. retiree said, that Mr. Mulroney, upon having been informed of the escalating costs of the projects, “looked at me and said, ‘Well, if that’s the case, the project is dead.’” (Commission transcript, April 30, 2009, line 26738).

Mr. Spector was tasked by the former prime minister to end the Cape Breton project when informed the public subsidies required had climbed to over $100 million.

Mr. Spector testified before the House of Commons Ethics Committee and the Inquiry about the steps he took to implement the prime minister’s order:

“That conversation took place on a Sunday, and Monday morning, the first thing in coming to the office, I called Mr. Fowler and I called Mr. Tellier to relate the nature of the conversation that I had with the Prime Minister, and I then also told my Deputy Chief of Staff, Mr. Grauer, about the substance of the conversation.” (Commission transcript, April 30, 2009, line 26770).

Norman Spector, a three-time appointee by Mr. Mulroney and former B.C. political advisor to Premier Bill Bennett first turned against his Mr. Mulroney in his collaboration with Toronto writer Bill Kaplan on his book, “A Secret Trial.”

Reacting to his latest outburst Mulroney spokesperson Robin Sears said, “His conflicting testimony and frequently re-edited accounts make this latest attack on the former prime minister as “evasive,” somewhat ironic.”

“A pair of school children”

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |13/05/09

Shortly before the lunch break, Mr. Mulroney spoke about the letter of request, about being slandered by the government of his own country and the pain it had caused his wife and children. It was a deeply personal moment–he was reliving an awful time–and Mr. Mulroney struggled to tell the story. As he did, he looked out into the audience and saw the producer of the Fifth Estate, Harvey Cashore and Globe and Mail reporter, Greg McArthur laughing–laughing–at his testimony. It was that sight–not captured by the cameras–that caused Mr. Mulroney to break down.

“They were carrying on like a pair of school children,” said Mr. Mulroney after the break. “It just got to me.”

What a disgrace.

Robin Sears on informal discussions between leaders and heads of state

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |13/05/09

First as an aide for four years to German Chancellor Willy Brandt in his role as the Chairman of the Socialist International, and then for another four years as a trade diplomat in Asia for the Province of Ontario I endured dozens of meetings between heads of government in Europe, Asia and North America.

They come in two types: the formal sit downs with dozens of ministers, aides, translators and note takers; and the more useful type, one on one with the two leaders and maybe one staff or translator per side.
In the formal settings, prepared speeches are delivered, detailed minutes taken, and public positions re-affirmed. The ritual is important for public consumption, but few decisions are taken, and no real negotiation takes place.

The private informal discussions, usually over drinks and a meal, are where real business is transacted. Positions are tried out with no fear of embarrassment or commitment. The bureaucracy hate them, but they are essential to moving any new or difficult idea forward.

In Asia, these types of private discussions between leaders often involve several meetings and preliminary testing before the two principals get to the most difficult or crucial issue. In France and Eastern Europe equally, many toasts, apparently irrelevant stories and social positioning precedes ‘tough talk.’ In the Anglo Saxon world, the preliminaries are briefer and the style is very informal, sometimes even brusque.

I watched several leaders, including Mulroney, leave formal meetings for ‘a walk’ with their Chinese hosts in the garden surrounding the state guest house outside Beijing. I watched Willy Brandt, meeting with Gorbachov, quietly retreat to a corner of a large meeting room at the Kremlin and then to his private office to discuss delicate matters.

Famously, Gorbachev and Reagan dismissed aides and met privately in Reykjavík, to the horror of their officials.

So when Brian Mulroney reports meetings that ambassadors say they were not at, for which there are no minutes, that appear on no schedule he is merely citing an experience that anyone who has worked at that level would recognize. Anyone who claims that such discreet ‘non-meetings’ are in anyway unusual, illicit or suspect is simply reflecting their ignorance of the practice of high level diplomacy.

Norm Spector’s misleading blog post

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |07/05/09

In his Globe and Mail blog, Norman Spector today asserts: “When it closed its Airbus investigation in 2003, the RCMP did not know about the cash payments to Mr. Mulroney.”

Mr. Spector is wrong.

The RCMP was aware of Mr. Schrieber’s payments to Mr. Mulroney for international consultancy; this was evidence previously submitted to the Ethics Committee. The RCMP said:

“On April 22, 2003, the RCMP will announce that after an exhaustive investigation in Canada and abroad, the remaining investigation into the 1995 allegations of wrongdoing involving MBB Helicopters, Thyssen and Airbus has concluded that the outstanding allegations cannot be substantiated, and that no charges will be laid, beyond the charge of fraud which is already before the courts.”

As has been part of the public record for five years, the RCMP were told of the commercial relationship in 2001.

Dr. Johnston, having assessed this record in his report following the Ethics Committee hearings, said:

“The RCMP, with knowledge of the cash payments and Mr. Schreiber’s assertion that he made an agreement with Mr. Mulroney just before the latter left the prime minister’s office, determined there was insufficient evidence to proceed with any charges. The information set out in Mr. Schreiber’s November 7, 2007 affidavit caused the RCMP to review its file to determine whether there was any new evidence. After careful review, the RCMP concluded that there was nothing new. As there was no significant new information in Mr. Schreiber’s affidavit, its file at this time remains closed. I have not been presented with or discovered any further evidence beyond that known to the RCMP. My terms of reference require that I state whether I have determined if there is prima facie evidence of criminal action. In view of the extensive work done by the RCMP over eight years and my own review, my answer is no.” (Emphasis added).

Mr. Spector will no doubt want to correct his erroneous words.

Re: William Kaplan’s testimony

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |23/04/09

We well understand that Mr. Kaplan may have been frustrated by Mr. Mulroney’s determination not to expose his reputation and family to further attack.

However, like every other witness before this inquiry, and before the Commons Ethics Committee previously, Mr. Kaplan conceded on cross-examination that he had no evidence, or indeed any reason to believe, that Mr. Mulroney did anything illegal or improper while he was prime minister or in the years since.

A Week in the Life of Karlheinz Schreiber

Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |17/04/09

Four days ago Karlheinz Schreiber strode into the Inquiry promising “seven scandals in one.” By the end, he limped off the witness stand, broken by rigorous examination, discredited as a believable witness, his reputation in ruins. His main allegation – that he entered into an agreement with Mr. Mulroney while he was still Prime Minister to lobby domestically – was destroyed by his own testimony under oath. The contradictions, exaggerations and shocking statements were so many they had to be organized by subject.

Some highlights of the week:

On telling the truth

  • “Karlheinz Schreiber says he willingly lied in a letter he wrote to Brian Mulroney in 2006 in hopes the former leader would lobby Prime Minister Stephen Harper to ease the German-Canadian businessman’s extradition worries.” (CanWest News Service, 04/17/2009)
  • “When we sign a letter, we sign a letter with our signature indicating that you’re telling the truth. That’s why you sign a letter, isn’t it?’ lead commission counsel Richard Wolson asked Schreiber on his third day of questioning. ‘No,’ Schreiber replied.” (cbc.ca, 04/16/2009)
  • “[Schreiber] told inquiry counsel Richard Wolson, he would have said ‘a lot of things’ to get what he wanted.” (CP, 04/16/2009)

On the accuracy of sworn testimony

  • “After Mr. Wolson walked Mr. Schreiber through more than six meetings with Mr. Mulroney while the latter was in office, including one encounter at the prime minister’s summer residence at Harrington Lake in June, 1993, the lawyer turned to Mr. Schreiber’s 2004 [Eurocopter] testimony that he had met Mr. Mulroney only once while he was in office.

    ‘Why didn’t you tell the prosecutors that you met at Harrington Lake? You had an agreement with Mr. Mulroney to do business with him in the future: Why didn’t you do that, sir?’

    Mr. Schreiber responded: ‘I am somehow surprised. There is no reason I wouldn’t have told him.’

    Mr. Wolson pounced: ‘I’m going to suggest to you that you didn’t want to tell the prosecutor that you had a relationship with Brian Mulroney and that you had pictures with him, and met with him all the times we talked about earlier - you didn’t want that. And that’s why you limited your evidence the way you did.’ (CP, 04/15/2009)

  • GUY PRATTE: “The agreement you made with Mr. Mulroney to help you on Bear Head was made after he stepped down as prime minister.”

    KARLHEINZ SCHREIBER: “Absolutely, it was made at Mirabel.” (CBC, 04/16/2009)

    Here is what Schreiber alleged in his November 7, 2007 affidavit, the basis of his lawsuit against Mr. Mulroney. Note there is no mention that the two men “agreed to agree”:

    “15. On Jun 23, 1993 Mr. Doucet, at the request of Mr. Mulroney, arranged a meeting between me and Mr. Mulroney which took place on June 23, 199, at Harrington Lake, the official summer residence of the Prime Minister (the “Harrington Lake Meeting”). It was at this meeting that Mr. Mulroney and I entered into the Agreement. On June 23, 1993 Mr. Mulroney was still in office as Prime Minister of Canada and consequently resided at 24 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario.

    16. One of the terms of the agreement which Mr. Mulroney agreed to on June 23, 1993 was that Mr. Mulroney would perform certain services on my behalf. Mr. Mulroney undertook to support my efforts in obtaining approval of the establishment of a product facility for light armoured vehicles by Bear Head Industries Limited, and we discussed that if matters got difficult in the Province of Nova Scotia, then Mr. Mulroney would assist in moving party of the project to the Province of Quebec (the “Bear Head Quebec Project”).”

  • “This affidavit, as we’ve reviewed in some detail, is full of exaggerations and inaccuracies and just untruthful statements,” Pratte asked Schreiber. “Isn’t this right?”

    “Well, that is what you say,” Schreiber said.

    “No, that’s what you agreed to with me in the last two days,” Pratte said.

    “Well, there are points which are not correct, I agree with you,” Schreiber said. (cbc.ca, 04/17/2009)

  • “Whereas Karlheinz Schreiber has made various allegations with respect to his business and financial dealings with the Right Honourable Brian Mulroney, P.C., including those made in an affidavit sworn on November 7, 2007 and those made with respect to an agreement allegedly reached on June 23, 1993.” (Inquiry terms of reference)

    Schreiber “didn’t check” the affidavit which put in motion the sequence of events leading to the Inquiry. He seems to blame his lawyer at the time, Edward Greenspan.

    “…[Schreiber] explains that at the time the affidavit was prepared, he was in a detention centre, which meant it was drafted by his lawyer and he ‘didn’t check’ to make sure it was accurate.” (Macleans.ca, 06/16/2009)

On motive

  • “Karlheinz Schreiber admitted yesterday he never told the government he stood to earn up to $1.8 billion in commission if the deal he was pushing to build light armoured vehicles in Canada had gone ahead.” (Toronto Sun, 04/17/2009)

On friendship

  • Along with “His Royal Highness Prince Charles, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jamie Oliver,” Schreiber claimed he was a “great friend of the former Quebec premier,” Robert Bourassa. (National Post, 04/17/2009)

    “Just to be sure, I called John Parisella, who was Bourassa’s chief of staff from 1989 to 1994, who saw the premier’s schedule every day, and controlled access to him in both his Montreal and Quebec City offices. ‘I had never heard of Schreiber at the time, and I never met him,’ Parisella said. ‘As far as I know, Mr. Bourassa never met him.’” (National Post, 04/17/2009)

    • On Lobbying the federal government

    • “[Mulroney] could do nothing at the federal level. There was no need for him,” Mr. Schreiber said. (Globe and Mail, 04/15/2007)
      In fact, Schreiber quickly discarded his assertion that he hired Mr. Muloney to lobby the federal government, insisting instead he hired him to lobby the Quebec provincial government, and then Montreal City Hall.

    Statement by Robin Sears for Rt. Hon Brian Mulroney

    Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |16/04/09

    Ottawa, ON — Mr. Mulroney’s spokesperson, commenting on the surprising developments in KarlHeinz Schreiber’s testimony at the Oliphant Inquiry today said:

    “The central matter of public trust at issue in the Inquiry was Karlheinz Shreiber’s assertion, made in his affidavit of November 2007, that he and Mr. Mulroney had entered into an agreement at Harrington Lake while he was still Prime Minister in 1993.

    Today, Mr. Schreiber admitted that was not true and that the agreement was made at Mirabel on August 27,1993, two months after Mr. Mulroney had left office.

    The core foundation of Mr. Schreiber’s accusations against Mr. Mulroney has been destroyed by his own testimony under oath today.”

    SCHEDULE CHANGE: Rt. Hon. Brian Mulroney Addresses First Annual Sakura Ball

    Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |13/11/08

    Historic Apology to Japanese Canadians Remembered

    The Rt. Hon. Brian Mulroney is guest of honour and keynote speaker at the First Annual Sakura Ball on Saturday, November 15, 2008. Details are as follows:

    Saturday, November 15, 2008

    Program begins at 7 PM
    (Mr. Mulroney’s address is scheduled to begin at approximately 7:15PM)

    Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre, Kobayashi Hall
    6 Garamond Court
    Toronto, ON

    Media are required to register with appropriate credentials.

    Statement re: Canadians for Climate Leadership

    Email To Friend Email To Friend | Print Print |09/09/08

    Mr. Mulroney spoke to the importance of the environment in his April 2006 speech to the Sierra Club when he was recognized as Canada’s Greenest Prime Minister. Mr. Mulroney does not think it is appropriate to comment further in the middle of a heated election campaign. He may speak about the environment at greater lengths at a later time.

RSS