Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Francois Perrault's book that will be released in Febuary was all done behind the scenes with Gomery, it hints of "inside trading." Is Chretien right about Gomery bias? The book seems to point that way.

Kinsella

La Press

January 31, 2006 - Forgive me for being blunt, but how in the name of Christ was the official spokesman for the Gomery Commission permitted to write a book about what was going on behind the scenes at the Gomery Commission?
This is the big surprise I had been planning for you - but La Presse beat me to it.

It's about Francois Perrault, the Gomery Commission's head flak, was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for a year's work - sole-sourced, too - by the tax payer. Some of the things Perrault said about Jean Chretien now actually form part of Chretien's Federal Court case alleging bias.

Here's the gist of the La Presse story, for those of you who cannot read French:

* Perrault's slender book is called ''Inside Gomery.' It's being published by Douglas and McIntyre.

* The book will be released on February 21, at a party at the National Arts Centre.

* Perrault himself admitted that the writing of such a book is analogous to "insider trading."

* Despite that, he started to write the book in October, when the first Gomery volume had yet to be released.

* Gomery knew all about it. He even wrote the preface for the book.

If you don't understand why this is an issue, you are either hopelessly partisan, or you think Gomery was right to "exonerate" Paul Martin.

This is, indeed, like "insider trading." While this multi-million dollar commission was underway - a commission that would have a huge impact, as Gomery admitted many times, on the reputations and lives of many, many people - one of the most senior commission officials was secretly writing a book about it all, with the secret approval of the judge who presided over the commission. The same judge who repeatedly promised to observe "confidentiality" in his opening statement, and who even said this:

"In the course of the Inquiry's hearing process, evidence may emerge in support of a factual finding which, broadly construed, might be perceived as adverse or unfavourable to the reputation of a person or organization. Given that possibility, it is of paramount importance that the Inquiry's process be scrupulously fair."

"Fair," eh? Here's my favourite, from Gomery's own Rules of Procedure. It's relevant to what I'm talking about here:

"48. No media scrums, interviews, or reporting will be allowed in the hearing rooms or within the distance of ten (10) meters from the hearing room entrances."

Unless, of course, you're Francois Perrault. In which case you can "report" from right inside the judge's chambers, or any other place that real journalists were not permitted to go.

This is bloody outrageous, what has happened here. And it is wholly, completely reflective of why the Gomery Commission was wrongly conceived, poorly led, and badly received.

What a disgrace.

"Any man under 30 who is not a liberal has no heart, and any man over 30 who is not a conservative has no brains."

— Winston Churchill

Posted

What surprises me is that not one reporter in the English media has even hinted at this news. I posted this news on my blog yesterday after also reading Kinsella's blog. Gomery is delivering the last of his report today and I am wondering if anyone will ask him about this book. Will be watching to see.

C/ B)

Posted

It is not the fact the Gomery is/was biased that is the news. The news is that not only did he allow an insider privileged data while excluding all other media, he did so by breaking his own rules of procedure. Francois Perrault used taxpayers money to write a book using information gained through communication with Gomery and witnesses. No other legitimate member of the media was allowed such direct access. Hell no other reporter/journalist was allowed within ten meters of the hearing while Perrault sat front and center busily typing away. B)

C/

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,900
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Ana Silva
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ana Silva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Politics1990 earned a badge
      Very Popular
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...