| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 |
Unprincipled. Opportunistic. Shameless. Unscrupulous. Arrogant. Duplicitous. Fraudulent. Untrustworthy.
Add another adjective to the list of those that have been used to describe David Emerson lately: gutless.
In addition to ducking and dodging his angry constituents, the Honourable Minister for the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics has been invisible at a series of recent high-profile events directly related to his ministerial responsibilities. These include the Torino Winter Olympic Games (including the Vanoc portion of the closing ceremony), the February 27th press conference at Vancouver International Airport, the February 28th Olympic flag-raising at Vancouver City Hall and the ceremonial lighting of the English Bay inukshuk.
Was Mr. Emerson, likely not one to spurn an all-expense paid luxury trip to Italy with all the VIP treatment he would have been afforded along the way, too busy to fly to Europe for the pomp and ceremony? Was he unable to go to the Olympic-related events in Vancouver? Or are he and his new Conservative colleagues too nervous about the fire he draws whenever he pokes his head up out of the trenches and appears in public?
Whatever the explanation, Mr. Emerson is clearly not thriving in his new role. In fact, he is hamstrung, his credibility irreparably damaged. It is high time he resigned his seat to enable a byelection to be called.
The Honourable David Emerson and his best buddy from a former life, Ujjal Dosanjh, shown in slightly happier times.
As the families of Ryan Snopek, Ian Bush, Kyle Tait, Kevin St. Arnaud, Gerald Chenery and Robert Bagnell, all of whom died at hands of BC police officers since 2004, continue their long, arduous and painful wait for some form of justice, it may be timely to reproduce our commentary first published in December of 2005. (Robert Bagnell died in June of 2004, yet there still has been no date scheduled yet for the mandatory coroner's inquest into his death.)
.....
When the perpetrator of a homicide is found at the scene and immediately identified, how long should it take the authorities to conclude their investigation and make a decision on whether to lay charges, thereby perhaps letting a court determine guilt or innocence?
What is a reasonable period of time for the victim's family to wait? A day? A few days? A couple of weeks? Maybe a month?
Apparently a lot longer if the assailant is wearing a police uniform.
Consider these recent examples:
On October 22, 2000, Jeff Berg, unarmed, sober, no material criminal record, is confronted by an armed police officer in a Vancouver alley. According to two civilian eyewitnesses, the officer knocks Berg to the ground and kicks him repeatedly as he is lying motionless on the pavement. Berg loses consciousness and dies as a result of a blow to the neck. The autopsy report indicates he was struck or kicked at least ten times in the head. The police officer was completely unscathed. On December 9, 2002, Crown Counsel advises the family that no charges will be laid. More than two years for Crown to make a decision...
On June 23, 2004, five police officers respond to a call for medical assistance. Two of them shock Robert Bagnell, unarmed, with 50,000 volts from their Tasers as he lies on the floor of his Vancouver rooming house washroom. His heart stops and he dies. On December 1, 2005, Crown Counsel advises the family that no charges will be laid. A year and a half to make a decision...
On December 19, 2004, an RCMP officer confronts burglary suspect Kevin St. Arnaud, unarmed, in an open field in Vanderhoof. From a reported distance of five metres, the officer fires three bullets into St. Arnaud's chest, killing him instantly. An eyewitness reports that St. Arnaud raised both hands before the first shot was fired. On February 21, 2006 Crown Counsel advises the family that the officer will not be charged. Fourteen months to make a decision...
If the shoe were on the other foot, how long would it take? In the latter case, if St. Arnaud had shot a police officer, he would have been charged in a matter of hours. If the incident had involved two civilians, a decision on charges would have been made in a few days, at the most.
more>>
The following is a summary of Mr. Ward's remarks to a public meeting of the Board of Directors of Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc. ("CLCO") on February 15, 2006:
Mr. Ward introduced himself and stated that he was appearing, not as legal counsel for the DoRavRight Coalition, but as a taxpayer and private individual. He noted that a few weeks previously, CLCO had asserted that it was a “model for best practices in governance” and took issue with that characterization. Mr. Ward said he had grave and fundamental concerns about CLCO’s governance due to its misrepresentations, secrecy and missed targets.
Mr. Ward asserted that CLCO (RAVCO) had made two major misrepresentations to the public; it had publicly stated in February 2005 that the project cost would be $1.72 B in actual dollars and then revealed a few months later that the cost would be $1.9 B (in $2003) and it had represented that much of the Cambie Street segment of the line would be constructed with an underground bored tunnel only to later disclose that it would be built using cut and cover cast in place construction.
Mr. Ward suggested that, given the amount of public funds involved in the project, everything should be open and transparent. He complained that the Concession Agreement, monthly CEO reports since March 2005 and the certificates of independent engineering firm RW Beck had not been disclosed to the public. He asked whether the Board would make these documents available.
Finally, Mr. Ward noted that the Final Project Report was to have been released to the public by December 31, 2005 and that it still had not been disclosed. He queried whether the public could trust CLCO to deliver the Canada Line on schedule and on budget when it seemed to be unable to deliver a document on time.
Chair Larry Bell and CEO Jane Bird assured Mr. Ward that both the Final Project Report amd the Concession Agreement would be released soon.
(As of February 22, 2006, these documents have still not been disclosed)
When law, politics or life gets you down, heed the words of advice a wise man once told me; pour a glass of red wine and put Lucinda Williams on the stereo.
As a matter of fact, that's good advice for Valentine's Day too.
My cynicism and disgust with politicians peaked when BC Liberal David Emerson suddenly showed up in Conservative Stephen Harper's cabinet, a mere two weeks after describing Harper as virtually the devil incarnate. This man must be so arrogant and vain to think that this province cannot survive without him at the cabinet table. Perhaps he can't stand the obscurity of Opposition and wants the perks of a Cabinet position. He could have waited a respectable period of time before crossing the floor, but then he wouldn't have received an all expense paid trip (for at least two, no doubt) to Torino as an Olympic VIP.
To those who protest that Mr. Emerson is a respected local businessman: maybe that's precisely the problem. Maybe we should insist that our parliamentary representatives have better ethics and morals than those found in Vancouver businesspeople. (Wasn't BC Premier Gordon Campbell, who refused to resign after being convicted of impaired driving, a City property developer once?)
My German-born spouse says there is a word for people like Emerson: "Wendehals".
And then there's former NDP Premier turned current Liberal Ujjal Dosanjh mounting his sanctimonius high horse and criticising Emerson's flip-flop...spare me!
It is to laugh...or perhaps cry.
Coretta Scott King, widow of the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., has died in Mexico at age 78. May she rest in peace.
The following obituary appeared in the Miami Herald:
After Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in 1968, Coretta Scott King was sometimes compared to Jacqueline Kennedy. The two bereft widows were living symbols of the great loss to America of inspiring, beloved leaders. But such comparisons were unfair to both women, who made different choices on dealing with their unwelcome status as widows of much mourned icons.
Ms. Kennedy withdrew from public life, while Ms. King, who died Monday at age 78, continued to champion civil rights and nonviolent social change. Not long after Dr. King's death on April 4,1968, Ms. King expanded on his mission. In a speech at the Lincoln Memorial during the Poor People's Campaign in June of that year, she spoke of her husband's vision of equality and then of hers, which included ''women's power'' to fight ``racism, poverty and war.''
Ms. King was a civil-rights activist before she married Dr. King. She grew up in rural Alabama and knew racism at its most virulent. When the young couple with one child was thrown into the center of the maelstrom of the bus boycott in Montgomery, where Dr. King served as a minister, her personal convictions and love for her husband compelled her to join the struggle.
Ms. King achieved much. She reared her children alone. She persuaded Congress to designate a national holiday in Dr. King's honor. And she raised millions of dollars to build the center in Atlanta that memorializes Dr. King and promotes his principles and practices. Ms. King was a loyal wife, a good mother and something more -- she was a good citizen who worked hard for peace and equal rights for all. We need more such good and brave citizens.
