Saturday, July 10, 2010

 

The Supreme Court of British Columbia:
A Naturally Dysfunctional Basket-Case?
....... Or Something Else?
What the “Journalist Accreditation System” Tells.

by Robin Mathews

Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm signed search warrant material at a foreign holiday spa to “further” the B.C. Premier Glen Clark (almost baseless, 1999-2002) fraud case. I call it the “fraudulent investigation and trial of Glen Clark” – months and months of RCMP investigation and 136 days of trial costing millions of dollars, to fight over some ten or twelve thousand dollars spent on a residence sun deck. Clark was cleared of all wrong doing … but was (as intended?) ruined politically.*

The first questions about Clark’s propriety in the matter came from … (wait for it) the constituency office of Gordon Campbell.

RCMP Sergeant Peter Montague (an alleged friend of Campbell’s) was caught on a to-be training film (at the Gustafsen Lake melodramatic fiasco against Native sun-dancers in 1995) sharing the assertion that we (the RCMP) are specialists in smear and disinformation. He moved in to be chief investigator in the Clark case (1999-2002). The examination (I applied for) of the prolonged RCMP investigation of Clark was stopped wrongfully the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP reported (three years after the complaint!). Nothing was done. No badges came off.

Is B.C. determined to make life here strive toward the condition of a third-rate Hollywood Thriller? You might think so.

The same Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm signed search warrants in the BC Rail Scandal matter (2002-???) like confetti falling at a summer wedding. They were part of (but only part of) the now-famous “legislature raids”, December 28, 2003. Dohm refused to do the usual thing – release the search warrants after the fact. Pushed on the matter, he finally handed them over – with 80% of the material blacked out and never – to this day - revealed. Why?

Some of the raids occurred on the offices of (now accused) Dave Basi and Bobby Virk, Order-in-Council appointees close to Gordon Campbell, Chief of Staff Martyn Brown, and cabinet minister “bosses”, Gary Collins and Judith Reid. No other legislature offices were searched – though other locations around Victoria and Vancouver were “raided” – and though all the close superiors of the men accused were also close participants in the corrupt transfer of BC Rail to CNR (an aspect of which brought the charges against the three accused). A whole year followed before charges were laid against the two men and also against Order-in-Council appointed Aneal Basi, accused of money laundering in the case. A whole year. What was going on in that year?

[Just to sweeten the story, the Special Prosecutor appointed to the huge and varied task was appointed in violation of the legislation governing the appointment of Special Prosecutors - which calls for unquestionable independence. He had been a partner and colleague, for years, of the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General in the ministry that appointed him.]

Pre-trial hearings lasted more than three years – to be cut off fairly soon after a change in judges took place that many saw as inexplicable and unnecessary … and even dubious. (Patrick Dohm had a part in that, too.) To add luster to the Grade “C” movie character of the goings-on, a retroactive publication ban was imposed (March 2010) covering all pre-trial matters of importance.

I consider the ban an affront to the public’s right to know … an on-going affront which the Mainstream Press and Media have accepted almost completely and silently, tugging on their forelocks ….

Which brings the story to my request (after reporting for more than three years on the BC Rail Scandal) for “accreditation” as a journalist – a status that lets the person granted take a small recording device into the court in order to assure that quotations made in reports are accurate. The person recording may not publish or broadcast parts of the trial – even though it is “open” and “public” when the jury is present…. (more on that in another column, later).

I was refused “accreditation” by the strange group formed to screen applicants. And I go on being refused until I make formal application, “serve” copies on Prosecution and Defence counsel, and request of the Crown a time in which to be heard on the matter (and not necessarily, even then, granted “accreditation”). If I hadn’t been refused, I might not have looked into the accreditation process – which, upon examination – is more ridiculous, more unbelievable, more damning of the Mainstream Press and Media – and the B.C. Supreme Court than such a simple little matter suggests ….

In the first place, no accreditation should be needed. (“Accreditation” is Orwellian – favourites of the court will be granted, antagonists refused.) Criminal trials are held in “open court”. Any Canadian should be able to walk into a trial with a recording device. At that point a sheriff could approach the person and say: “there are rules attached to using a recording device. They are as follows….” Instead Canadians are generally judged as dangerous and most likely criminal in the matter, and so are judged in advance and refused the right to record. That is unacceptable in a democratic society.

Secondly, “accreditation” is undertaken by “favourites of the court”, journalists from Mainstream Press and Media appointed (or accepted) who should refuse any kind of appointment by the court. Their primary role as journalists is to be free of connection, to be independent and to be able to turn the spotlight on anything they believe the public should know about in the court system.

By accepting appointment as “accreditation” officers, they become a part of the court system they are supposed to be free to criticize. They become “court lap dogs”.

I believe the Mainstream Press and Media representatives have failed repeatedly to criticize “the court” when it needed criticism in the BC Rail Scandal matters. I believe they have failed tragically to demand release of materials on behalf of the public’s right to know, and – now – fail to challenge the draconian publication ban imposed by Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie. Court lap dogs.

Thirdly, their qualifications are horrendously in doubt. Who is acceptable to be a court officer? (They will say ‘We aren’t court officers’. ‘If not that’, I reply, ‘what…?’) I’m not acceptable to be an accreditation officer, for instance. Nor – I suggest – is anyone else who has criticized the conduct of judges, court bureaucratic tangles, denial of the public’s right-to-know, etcetera. And so … the appointees, or volunteers, or whatever they choose to be called are – like it or not – court lap dogs, betraying, I say, the basic role they have, as journalists, in the structure of democratic society.

My “accreditation” committee of “volunteers” was made up of three CanWest reporters and a CTV journalist. I have unstintingly criticized CanWest for failing to report with integrity the BC Rail Scandal matters. I was refused accreditation by the committee.

Fourthly, what is the BC Supreme Court doing in taking “accreditation” out of its own hands and lodging it in the hands of “volunteer”(?) journalists from the so-called Mainstream…? If accreditation must be undertaken, it should be undertaken by a certified court officer. It should be a wholly court activity (which press and media are free to criticize.) The last thing the certified court officer should do is ask the Mainstream Press and Media folk if they “approve” of someone asking for accreditation.

To place the activity into the hands of “volunteers” from the press and media is an act of irresponsibility on the court’s part. Anyhow, most press and media in Canada now are owned by large private corporate entities with – many believe - distinct designs to limit Canadian democracy in order to increase profits. To hand any court activity to representatives of big corporate capital is an act of irresponsibility.

But that is happening increasingly. Private, for profit operators now, I am told, control the production of absolutely necessary transcript materials. They charge, I am told, exorbitant prices for publicly required materials necessary to the fair administration of justice. So much for justice.

Finally, if the Supreme Court is happy with Mainstream Press and Media “volunteers”, and they – in turn – are happy working for the Supreme Court, is there something else observers might conclude? That they are in each other’s pockets, for instance?

That is a touchy question, because it is so important. More and more observers wonder if the RCMP carried out something less than a full investigation of the BC Rail Scandal… an investigation pleasing to the Gordon Campbell forces. The publicly recorded failure of the RCMP – from the highest levels down – in the Robert Dziekanski matter suggests the Force can adjust facts to its own convenience quite readily. And then say almost … anything. Did it do so in the BC Rail Scandal?

The Mainstream Press and Media have never questioned the role of the RCMP in the BC Rail Scandal. They haven’t, either, questioned the appointment of the Special Prosecutor, wrongfully appointed. Instead, the Mainstream Press and Media, like the judge sitting on the Basi, Virk, and Basi case, pretend there is nothing to question. The solidarity of the court and the journalists on that matter is deeply disturbing.

Editorials in the major press should have pushed all of those matters. But when editorials are written (almost as if the case is unimportant), they are made of fog and posturing, mostly.

And then … there’s the delay. The delay. The delay. Begun on May 18, the trial has seen the jury in court for brief moments, rarely for a day. In all there can’t have been more than four or five full days in six weeks in which the jury was present. And now the two month break….

The court has been a place of tireless wrangling over (publication banned) matters of procedure. The judge, I insist, should lay out for the public the basis of the disagreement – in a statement to be published widely. She should take the public into her confidence and explain why the trial is being delayed (and will continue to be). This case is a criminal case, but not one that has any relation to “normal” criminal cases in Canadian courts. And so the judge has a responsibility to confide in British Columbians – ALL of whom are principals in this case.

It is a case that is of primary importance to every British Columbian – indeed to every Canadian. It is about government lies, deceptions, betrayal of trust, and the alienation of public wealth by planned, organized, misrepresentation. Because every British Columbian – every Canadian – is affected by the matter of this trial, Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie has a special responsibility to inform the public as plainly and as fully as possible.

She acts as if that is not so.


She is – almost perversely it seems – acting as if this is a trial in which she does not have special responsibilities. So enormous are the matters at the root of this case she cannot be excused. And, alas, she cannot escape the question of her alliances. Are they to the fair and impartial conduct of the courts in a search for justice? Or are they to special interests – none of which in my opinion have done their job: the Campbell government and especially the Attorney General; the RCMP and especially its head in B.C., Gary Bass; the Mainstream Press and Media – now a servant of the court; and the court itself which – over the years of Basi, Virk, and Basi matter before it – has raised serious questions in my mind about its impartiality.

Every delay and every smothering of information – like it or not – serves the power and the purposes of Gordon Campbell and his associates in the BC Rail Scandal. I believe if they had been properly investigated, they would be facing criminal charges now … and I have written that to Gary Bass, RCMP Deputy Commissioner in B.C.

The “journalist accreditation” tempest-in-a-teapot, it turns out, is more than that. It points to an unsavoury and demeaning relation between the B.C. Supreme Court and the Mainstream Press and Media. And it points outward from that to more serious uncertainties – all of which call into question the administration of justice in the province of British Columbia.

*(bolding impossible to resist by kootcoot)


Comments:
Well done Robin. The comparison as to what happened to Glen Clark and the statement by Montague at Gustafsen Lake surely in comparison here begs a lot of questions.

Not the least of which I suggest would be mass collusion on the parts of the media, the justice system, the RCMP and the Liberal party or Gordon Campbells office.

Being unable to attend court I often wonder what goes on without the jury present and I think you have answered my question.
 
I admire mr.matthews hard work, but it should be clear by now that we, BCers, are not going to get help from this province. The rank and file are running the show and what is needed here is a bigger badge!
 
Bravo, Robin Mathews!

This summary should be sent far and wide.

I'd like to see people on the sidewalk in front of the Vancouver Law Courts building, handing out printed copies; let the world know what's going on in the BC Rail Political Corruption case.

And somehow, we the people must get that Publication Ban lifted (OK, except for the Secret Witness stuff).

Thanks, Koot.
.
 
"I admire mr.matthews hard work, but it should be clear by now that we, BCers, are not going to get help from this province. The rank and file are running the show and what is needed here is a bigger badge!"

Could the commentor above, who appears to be posting from Ottawa (which would explain posting at 3:34am OUR time - of course if the poster is in BC 3:34am drunkeness could explain the lack of sense the comment makes)please clarify what in the hell he/she means.

Are you a BCer in Ottawa?

What province are we not going to get help from?

What "rank and file" are running which show?

And what in the hell do you mean by "what is needed here is a bigger badge" and to just what "here" are you referring?

I've tried and tried to decipher just what in the hell you are trying to say, so I would appreciate it if you would try to make sense. Or maybe some other reader actually understands the comment, I sure don't!

Also, I've been kinda remiss in encouraging/promoting Mary's no-anon policy, but I'm beginning to understand why she was promoting such a policy. You don't have to register with Google Blogger or anything, but some kind of identifier is handy, unless you are a PABster, and trying to pretend to be multiple people.
 
Printed hand-outs of Robin's summary would be a symbol of hope on the sidewalk in front of the BC Legislature, too, as well as an added tourist attraction. I can imagine discussion circles forming.

And more printed hand-outs in front of the Empress Hotel. And more discussion.

Plus the Victoria Court House.

Vancouver offers plenty of opportunities in addition to the Law Courts building.

A bit of busking wouldn't go amiss, either? Make it a class act, just like RossK does.

Good luck!
.
 
I wonder if Chief Justice A MacKenzie will be going to Newfoundland, 37th annual National Criminal Law Program with some of the other Judges and Lawyers for 5 days starting Sunday, July 11, 2010 - Check-in opens

Tuesday LOL discussions on "The Trial of Fraud and Other Document-driven Crimes • Lectures on Funding of the Defence"
some of the attendees.

Gregory Fitch, Q.C.
Ministry of Attorney General
Vancouver, British Columbia

The Hon. Justice Elizabeth Bennett
Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Richard C.C. Peck, Q.C.
Peck and Company

Peter Wilson
Wilson, Buck, Butcher & Sears
Vancouver, British Columbia
Abd after all thier hard work, can You imagine Judges Lawyers, Crown Prosecutors going on a PUB CRAWL!
6:00 pm Rally in the Alley. St. John’s has more bars and pubs per capita than any other city in Canada and most of them are located on the infamous George Street. Faculty and registrants are invited to experience St. John’s famous nightlife via an optional “Rally in the Alley” hosted by local provider McCarthy’s Party. The evening features a traditional pub dinner followed by an organized Pub
Crawl ending with music and dancing.

and this"The Trial of Fraud and Other Document-driven Crimes • Lectures on Funding of the
Defence"

http://www.flsc.ca/en/pdf/NCLP2010Brochure.pdf
 
Check this out

Robert Matas
Vancouver — Globe and Mail Update
Published on Thursday, Jul. 08, 2010 7:17PM EDT

Last updated on Thursday, Jul. 08, 2010 9:57PM EDT
Canadian Brian Hall, charged in a U.S. court with importing marijuana with a street value of $3.6-million, was released on $400,000 bail Thursday, in part because the RCMP have refused to provide some information to the court in Spokane, Washington.

Further in Story

RCMP Corporal Annie Linteau confirmed that the Mounties have refused to release some information that was part of their investigation, such as the information that was required to obtain a search warrant.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/abbotsford-man-on-drug-charges-in-us-granted-bail/article1633576/

Going back- In 2008 He was arrested

Goddard said Hall was taken to Vancouver, where he made a brief appearance Tuesday in B.C. Supreme Court and was ordered held in custody until July 29 by Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm.

Goddard said the criminal case against Hall resulted from a two-year joint U.S. and Canadian law enforcement initiative that resulted in the seizure of large amounts of marijuana and cash.
...
According to U.S. court documents obtained by The Vancouver Sun, Hall and Albertan David Sidwell allegedly conspired to import more than 100 kilograms of marijuana into eastern Washington state from B.C. between May 1, 2002 and April 30, 2003 and then conspired to import more than 1,000 kilograms the following year.
 
Sorry missing link to the last story

Which also states
The Sun has learned Hall was part of a Canada Revenue Agency investigation into the assets and earnings of bikers in B.C.

Hall was served on Jan. 24, 2005 with a CRA letter of requirement demanding that he file individual income tax returns for the years 2001, 2002, 2003 and statements of assets and liabilities for the same three years.

He was one of 42 members, associates, wives and girlfriends who then filed a Federal Court of Canada challenge against the CRA demands, claiming the agency was improperly colluding with police to investigate the proceeds of organized crime.

Just as the case was going to be heard this spring, the CRA agreed to withdraw the letters and the litigation ended.
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=bddf3771-1254-4cea-a103-b954ae9fe59f
 
E.M.,

Ended, you say Just like that, the "litigation ended" rather than the Canada Revenue Agency reveal its own evidence??

Do I hear journalistic wheels spinning as they go after an important story?

Folks, I have just got home feeling pretty good, but there are 704 emails waiting to be answered so see ya later
 
E. M. and anybody else needing clarification on this point (not that you necessarily do E.M.)

On the last thread I left a comment referring to a comment by Skookum in which I referred to the witness in the BC Rail trial who testified by video link from Halifax from CRA.

In that case the CRA refers to Charles Rivers Associates who prepared the so-called fairness report (as a whitewash response?) after allegations from non-CN bidders of favoritism etc.

I would have to look up the particulars but I think the fellow's name was Ian. Also he isn't employed by CRA anymore and it would almost seem like he and the other associate who prepared the "Fairness Review" on the BC Rail scam were both let go from CRA as a attempt to allow CRA to deny responsiblity/accountability for the findings of the review. They (CRA)issued some statement distancing themselves from the findings BECAUSAE Ian and another guy were no longer associates.

I also don't remember if the video link testimony was before the jury, or more like a pre-trial deposition. It seems more likely the latter as I don't recall hearing or reading anything about this video testimony - and of course ever since J-the Mack truck that likes to run over justice took over, we the people cannot know or speak of anything that happens in the jury's absence.

Perhaps some reader is more up to date, remembers more clearly or has access to info about this witness and what may have happened or been said. I can't do a search on this right now......
 
kootcoot said...
"I admire mr.matthews hard work, but it should be clear by now that we, BCers, are not going to get help from this province. The rank and file are running the show and what is needed here is a bigger badge!"

Could the commentor above, who appears to be posting from Ottawa (which would explain posting at 3:34am OUR time - of course if the poster is in BC 3:34am drunkeness could explain the lack of sense the comment makes)please clarify what in the hell he/she means.

Are you a BCer in Ottawa?

What province are we not going to get help from?

What "rank and file" are running which show?

And what in the hell do you mean by "what is needed here is a bigger badge" and to just what "here" are you referring?

I've tried and tried to decipher just what in the hell you are trying to say, so I would appreciate it if you would try to make sense. Or maybe some other reader actually understands the comment, I sure don't!



OK Koot, I will attempt to decipher. I see this poster as having a lot of anger at what is happening in BC. Feeling that everyone is on side with the corrupt Campbell and his party of friends and insiders (rank and file). The bigger badge thing...well he/she means that the badge of our current upholders of the law are also not on our side, so BC needs some bigger force to save us all.

Not that analyzing this poster is that important but do want to note that most important political changes come from grass roots movements. Anger brewing at that level is good. We need it.


islandcynic
 
Island Cynic, I think your analysis of the comment is very helpful. Frankly, though the poster thought I was trying to "be a jerk" with my question above - some clarification from either the original poster or someone like yourself was what I was seeking.

The likelihood of the comment perhaps being left from another jurisdiction (because of the time and the visitor logs) made it all the more confusing to myself as suddenly it wasn't clear how to interpret pronouns like "this" in relation to province and I'm still puzzled by the use of rank and file, because it is obvious that the "rank and file" aren't running much of anything in this case at least not in my understanding of that expression. The whole BC Rail scam illustrates corruption from the TOP down in both government, the justice system and law enforcement, the RCMP in particular.

Perhaps I thought that was a typical Reich Whing drive by on the NDP and their "union special interests," a meme with which I have NO patience at the best of times. Too many people, in this province especially, have bought into the PAB - Canned Waste fantasy that the labor unions and their slavish NDP enablers are some kind of greedy "special interest" groups and meanwhile the BC LIEberals and their Corporate Elite piggie friends are motivated by only the public interest! Hogwash that would repel hogs, hogs being the intelligent animals they truly are!

As I said to start though, I think your analysis is helpful, unfocused anger is a good call - and if those who care about BC aren't angry, something is surely amiss!

Perhaps I could have been more "diplomatic" in my request for clarification, but that isn't my style all the time and the less "mannered" approach has at least engendered responses, which after all was what I was looking for - so Thanks I.C.
 
Ian, like in "Ian Munro" Page 105

Function with CRA on the BC Rail Fairness Report "Transaction Process" Page 105

"Areas of Expertise": "Restructuring and Privatization, Financial Analysis and Due Diligence, and Management of Transaction Process" Page 106

http://web.archive.org/web/20051226214304/www.prov.gov.bc.ca/prem/down/bc_rail/Fairness_Report.pdf
 
Just to comment that I've been to George St in St John's - the vortex of that city's nightlife - and it's hard to imagine Justice Bennett and her colleagues whooping it up in those alleys. Paparazzi material for certain . . .

George St is sorta like Granville Mall on a Friday, but with happier drunks and no ornery-looking riot squad hanging out. More bars per sq ft than anywhere else in north America, rocking 24x7. London doesn't party that hard; it resembles the Patpong district of Bangkok, but without tge sex clubs and fake-watch vendors. Maybe there's a part of Montreal that's that busy but I've never heard so.

What's interesting is all that booze, and almost no fighting.
 
The average BC citizen, is outraged, by the corruption in this province. The corrupt sale of the BCR, is being tried, in a corrupt court. Martyn Brown, seems brain dead, how does he manage to hold his position? Well, we think, being brain dead, is crucial, if he wants to be kept employed by Campbell. If the RCMP, don't keep their mouths shut, their contract will not be renewed. I don't buy any newspapers from Vancouver, bias is obvious. No bad press is allowed, about Campbell. Certain TV media, are not worth watching. Campbell is guilty, he is the one who sold the BCR, not knowing the terms?? The BCR corruption case, is nothing but a farce, costing the BC tax payers, millions of dollars. However, the CSIS is watching BC, very closely.
 
koot, I think You were a little harsh on Ottawa, I understand Your frustration will the Christian/links ect. But I think this person is on our side, and didnt deserve getting ripped. He/She said " I admire mr.matthews hard work, but it should be clear by now that we, BCers, are not going to get help from this province.(meaning the RCMP/Politicians) The rank and file are running the show and what is needed here is a bigger badge!"

I know its rough monitoring a site like this, I have done it, only one mind You, when things get too much, walk away from the computer, LOL, take a breath, things might not seem as they were 15 minutes before.Your doing a great job, way too much to do to analyze why people make comments. Huge hugs to ya, just saying.
 
Re Ian Munro-CRA fairness Report

linkdin


Current

* Ian Munro at Ian Munro
* Freelance Consultant at Ian Munro

Past

* Director of Research at Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (AIMS)
* Principal at CRA International
* Senior Economist at Industry Canada

Education

* Dalhousie University
* Carleton University
* Mount Allison University


Connections
38 connections
Industry
Public Policy

Ian Munro’s Experience

*
Ian Munro

(Public Policy industry)

December 2008 — Present (1 year 8 months)

*
Freelance Consultant
Ian Munro

(Management Consulting industry)

December 2008 — Present (1 year 8 months)

*
Director of Research
Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (AIMS)

(Think Tanks industry)

December 2006 — November 2008 (2 years )

*
Principal
CRA International

(Public Company; 501-1000 employees; CRAI; Management Consulting industry)

February 2000 — December 2006 (6 years 11 months)

Economic and policy consulting, specializing in the design and implementation of complex bidding processes
*
Senior Economist
Industry Canada

(Government Agency; 1001-5000 employees; Government Administration industry)

June 1994 — February 2000 (5 years 9 months)

Senior economist in radiocommunication and broadcasting regulatory branch

http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/ian-munro/4/6a2/310
 
Mary, not sure if this is what You were asking for.

But I am going to bed, and these are my notes re Review of the BC Rail Revitalization, "Switching Tracks"

These are available on the link I gave.
The Original ``Switching Tracks`` was done by Arn van Iersel, CGA
Acting Auditor General March 2007 submitted.

The second purpose of our review was to assess whether an
adequate process is in place to adequately monitor the performance
of CN regarding its commitments under the BC Rail Investment
Partnership. More specifi cally, we wanted to know:
what are the commitments of CN to the Province and
stakeholders under the Partnership;
who is monitoring CN to ensure its commitments to the
Province and stakeholders are fulfi lled;
what remedies are available to the Province and
stakeholders should CN fail to meet its commitments; and
is CN fulfi lling its commitments to the Province and
stakeholders?
Our review was carried out between November 2005 and
November 2006. We focused on the commitments made by CN in
the agreements that form the BC Rail Investment Partnership and
on the processes to monitor CN’s performance in meeting these.
The process to select a partner and to attribute a financial value to BC Rail for its sale was evaluated and assessed by an independent consulting firm contracted by the Province, and is not included within the scope of our review. Nor did we directly examine CN’s performance under the Partnership or its operations over BCRC’s
railway line.
...
We concluded that a generally adequate system is in place to
monitor CN’s delivery on its commitments under the BC Rail
Investment Partnership. We make one recommendation relating
to the monitoring of the Consent Agreement, that BCRC should
request a copy of any notice of non-compliance (with the agreement) that may be issued by the Competition Bureau, to CN.

and My favorite part

Various remedies are available should CN fail to meet its commitments
We found various remedies are available under the agreements
defi ning the Partnership and through the federal agencies, should CN fail to meet its commitments. The remedies include:
a prescribed dispute resolution processes directly between
connecting carriers and CN;
fi nancial penalties against CN for failures to perform to
stated transit time benchmarks or fulfi ll its guarantees to
shippers for ordered cars;
rulings, arbitration, or mediation for any complaints taken
by industry stakeholders to the Canadian Transportation
Agency; and
targeted inspections, negotiated settlements, or prosecution
for any complaints taken by industry stakeholders to the
Bureau.Should these remedies prove insufficient, and should
CN continue not to meet its commitments, (ha re read that continue NOT to meet)further remedies are available to BCRC through its lease of the railway line to CN, that is, through the Revitalization Agreement, including terminating
the lease and re-letting the railway line to another railway operator.
cont next comment
 
Mary, not sure if this is what You were asking for.

But I am going to bed, and these are my notes re Review of the BC Rail Revitalization, "Switching Tracks"

These are available on the link I gave.
The Original ``Switching Tracks`` was done by Arn van Iersel, CGA
Acting Auditor General March 2007 submitted.

The second purpose of our review was to assess whether an
adequate process is in place to adequately monitor the performance
of CN regarding its commitments under the BC Rail Investment
Partnership. More specifi cally, we wanted to know:
what are the commitments of CN to the Province and
stakeholders under the Partnership;
who is monitoring CN to ensure its commitments to the
Province and stakeholders are fulfi lled;
what remedies are available to the Province and
stakeholders should CN fail to meet its commitments; and
is CN fulfi lling its commitments to the Province and
stakeholders?
Our review was carried out between November 2005 and
November 2006. We focused on the commitments made by CN in
the agreements that form the BC Rail Investment Partnership and
on the processes to monitor CN’s performance in meeting these.
The process to select a partner and to attribute a financial value to BC Rail for its sale was evaluated and assessed by an independent consulting firm contracted by the Province, and is not included within the scope of our review. Nor did we directly examine CN’s performance under the Partnership or its operations over BCRC’s
railway line.
...
We concluded that a generally adequate system is in place to
monitor CN’s delivery on its commitments under the BC Rail
Investment Partnership. We make one recommendation relating
to the monitoring of the Consent Agreement, that BCRC should
request a copy of any notice of non-compliance (with the agreement) that may be issued by the Competition Bureau, to CN.

and My favorite part

Various remedies are available should CN fail to meet its commitments
We found various remedies are available under the agreements
defi ning the Partnership and through the federal agencies, should CN fail to meet its commitments. The remedies include:
a prescribed dispute resolution processes directly between
connecting carriers and CN;
fi nancial penalties against CN for failures to perform to
stated transit time benchmarks or fulfi ll its guarantees to
shippers for ordered cars;
rulings, arbitration, or mediation for any complaints taken
by industry stakeholders to the Canadian Transportation
Agency; and
targeted inspections, negotiated settlements, or prosecution
for any complaints taken by industry stakeholders to the
Bureau.Should these remedies prove insufficient, and should
CN continue not to meet its commitments, (ha re read that continue NOT to meet)further remedies are available to BCRC through its lease of the railway line to CN, that is, through the Revitalization Agreement, including terminating
the lease and re-letting the railway line to another railway operator.
cont next comment
 
I check this blog often but have never posted, my thanks to all of you who attend court & write, research, offer comments and do the monitoring. I was going to offer a similiar analysis & opinion to islandcynic & EM. When I read your comment kootcoot, frankly I thought is he drunk? How could he not understand Anon's anger & meaning?? I was surely taken aback and EMs advice is well taken... breathe, have a laugh, maybe extend a little more patience/ credit/ generosity where you might not otherwise have done.

I think anyone who knows even a little about the farce that is BC under Campbell and his friends is damn angry and I know I feel so impotent - its big & ugly & powerful & evil & so unjust & overwhelming but I sure appreciate being able to check in here and know I'm not crazy, other people see it, know it too... that is some small comfort so thanks again all.

macrim
 
You work so hard BC Mary. I appreciate reading your blogs. I am politically and courtroom procedure challenged, out of my depth. So, I rely on you to untangle some of the knots. This is off topic, but perhaps someone, can explain this to me. There is one thing, for some reason I am uneasy about. It seems to me, China is getting too much of a grip, on BC, and the entire country. It seems, everything that is done, is geared for China. The new Ashcroft rail terminal. The expansion of sea ports, Kitimat, and Prince Rupert. China, owns a chunk, of the tar sands. There is a dirty oil pipeline, which will go to Kitimat, and the dirty oil tankers from China, will pick this oil up, and take it back to China. Some of our mills went to China, and our raw logs go there as well. Maybe, I am spooked over nothing. Our mill workers in BC, have lost, 26.000, mill jobs over the time, Campbell has been in office. Any answers for me?
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home