Showing posts with label William Marshall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label William Marshall. Show all posts

24 August 2009

Rumpole and the Old, Old Story

The sorry tale of the Summer of Discontent in Gander turns out to be a much sorrier tale than first appeared.

At the end of a story entitled “One Judge Short” from last February (not online), The Beacon reported that then-provincial Court Chief Judge Reg Reid had “requested the minister fill the position [in Gander] as quickly as possible.” 

It seems that justice minister Tom Marshall could have used the same list of candidates from which he picked Don Singleton for a round of musical judicial chairs to also find a name to fill the vacancy in Gander.

When the Singleton appointment went sour, though, Marshall did nothing with either of the two vacancies.  Nor did he do anything with the list of candidates in front of him either – except flick it to one side - even though there were other names on it of people who not only met the bare minimums set out in the legislation but exceeded them. 

And that was six months ago.

In the meantime, not only are there still vacancies in Gander and St. John’s yet to be filled but two more have turned up.

Chief Judge Reg Reid retired in April.  That leaves newbie Judge Mark Pike in the role of assistant chief judge, a position that appears to have been created for him to fill but there is still a new vacancy in St. John’s.

On top of that, Judge Joe Woodrow – familiar to visitors to Courtroom Number Seven  - opted to retire in February and now sits on a per diem basis (as required).

There you have it:  three judges’ seats in St. John’s empty and one in Gander, all of which need to be filled.  Plus – and for some equally unfathomable reason – cabinet has not gotten around to appointing a replacement for Reid even though he’s been gone since April.  The chief judge’s job is a cabinet appointment, you see.

As a sign of how serious the problem is in Gander, consider that The Beacon reported last February the issue came up at a Gander town council meeting that month.

The chair of the town’s economic development committee wanted someone to have a chat with Hander member of the House of Assembly Kevin O’Brien.  The prospect of having cases directed to other towns caused some furrowed brows, it seems, since the people attending trials in Gander bring with them a certain benefit to the local innkeepers and restauranteurs. The slowdown in the courthouse meant a slowdown in the local economy.

Now this sort of dithering and delay is nothing new either for the justice department or the current administration as a whole.

Retired justice Bill Marshall (no relation) has been working on not one but two separate “reviews” one of which appears to have been underway since 2004.  Not a thing has come of either review and the government is also refusing to release any information about the status of either review.

Since 2003, a surprising number of senior public service positions have gone without a permanent appointment for periods of up to two years.  Some are appointed on an acting basis for extraordinarily long times and for no apparent reason. In other instances, legislation is passed but  not put into effect and in other instances, reports and promised policies have sat untended for two or three years.  It’s all part of the “missing in action” syndrome that befalls chunks of government these days.

Now part of the cause of all this might be that the appointments to the bench are supposed to be made  - ultimately - by the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council.  That’s legalese ease for cabinet.  And, if the practice with deputy ministers is any indication, “cabinet appointment” now means the picks are made by the Premier Himself and only the Premier.

And if he is pre-occupied with other things, no matter what those other things are, … well, that’s been pretty much the old, old story of this administration since Day One.

-srbp-

24 April 2009

Freedom from Information: another missing report by Bill Marshall

Coincidence of coincidences.

Your humble e-scribbler mentions Bill Marshall in jest in a post that connects back to the whole Ed Byrne Tory-gate spending scandal.

As it turns out, on the very same day that Danny Williams decided to tell the world about the auditor general’s investigation of Ed Byrne back in June 2006  justice minister Tom Marshall released government’s response to the Lamer commission report into wrongful convictions.  Williams had known of the AG investigation since the middle of the day before he made it public, apparently, but that’s another story.

Anyway…

June 21, 2006.

Gee.

And right there in the middle of the release is an announcement that former cabinet minister and retired supreme court judge Bill Marshall would be running a review of the Crown prosecutor’s office, as Antonio Lamer recommended:
Establishing an independent review of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is one of the recommendations Minister [Tom] Marshall [no relation to Bill] said government will implement immediately.  Commissioner Lamer recommends that an independent review be called to ensure that steps have been taken or will be taken to eliminate the "Crown culture" that contributed to the wrongful conviction of Gregory Parsons, and was also evident in the prosecution of Randy Druken. 
"This is an important recommendation on which government must act immediately and we are pleased that retired Court of Appeal Justice, William Marshall, will immediately head up the review," said Minister Marshall. "The review will be very thorough, independent and at arms length; it will examine resources, training, morale and the systemic issues identified in the report." [bold and italics added]
imageImmediately head up the review but not immediately finish the thing, as it turns out.

Just  a few weeks shy of three years after Bill Marshall immediately headed up the review into Lamer’s recommendation 18, there’s no apparent sign the work of the government’s favourite Grand Inquisitor is anywhere near done. [the link in the picture is dead]
 
Perhaps the former Supreme Court Justice and Tory cabinet minister has been too busy with another review, this one of inland fisheries

The second one was a sort of star chamber, since the whole thing was never announced. 
Indeed, government has never revealed either the scope of inland fisheries probe or when Marshall started work on it.  Opposition House leader Kelvin Parsons asked a question in the House about an access to information request that wanted to find out some basic stuff about the judge’s inquest – like how much it had cost so far – but the minister answered with a mere two sentences:
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the review being undertaken by retired Judge William Marshall, I believe the review is not completed to this point. Obviously, the information could not be disclosed until we have the results of the review.
That, dear friends, is all we know of that one.

So now we have it:

Two investigations.

Same guy, running both.

Zero results.

Unknown costs.

And it’s not like Bill Marshall isn’t popular when it comes to the current administration. 

Way back in October 2003, the guy who started campaigning for the premier’s job in the now infamous St. Barbe by-election appointed Bill Marshall as sort of a watchdog:
Bill Marshall, a recently retired Appeal Court judge and former PC cabinet minister, will act as the liaison between Williams and departing premier Roger Grimes. 

Liberals warned against new contracts 
Williams says the outgoing Liberal government should not make any plans for spending announcements. 

"I don't expect them to do that, "he says. "That would be irresponsible for an outgoing government that, no longer has a mandate to take those kind of actions. So, I'm trusting that Mr. Grimes and his government will do the honourable thing, and I expect them to do that."
The whole thing was just another of the nasty, mean-spirited, petty, small-minded, miserable  little insinuations about others that Danny Williams likes to make, as we have come to learn.

As it also turns out, the guy who started his latest political life as the Premier’s watchdog has, in his retirement, become a sort of Tory Torquemada – if you will plant your tongue firmly in cheek – ready, nay eager, to take on any investigation, inquiry or inquisition that needs to be done.

Too bad he apparently can’t finish them.

-srbp-

23 April 2009

Tory-gate: former electoral officer supports spending probe

Paul Reynolds’ predecessor knows that to do.

Former chief electoral officer Chuck Furey says that he’d have appointed a retired judge to investigate the St. Barbe by-election.

Furey, a former Liberal cabinet minister, now lives in Dominica.  Furey was Danny Williams’ pick for the chief electoral officer three years ago.  At the time of Furey’s appointment, Williams’ new release described the OCEO job like this:

The Chief Electoral Officer operates under the Elections Act 1991 and is responsible for exercising general direction and supervision over the administrative conduct of elections and enforcing fairness, impartiality and compliance with the act.

Williams handed the job to former Tory party president Paul Reynolds when Furey resigned. The news release at the time Williams announced Reynolds as his choice  described the office’s responsibilities with exactly the same words.

The release didn’t include Reynolds’ extensive pedigree with the province’s Tory party in the release.

For reasons that should be obvious, Furey’s comments virtually guarantee there won’t be an investigation into campaign finance irregularities in at least one by-election held since 2000.

For reasons that should be even more obvious, Furey’s advice is sound.  In a situation where there is a question of irregularities – especially a question of irregularities involving the party the chief electoral officer is tied to – the most sensible thing to do is call in an independent person and have them sort through the mess.

Anything else – anything else  - gives the controversy legs.

Refusing to investigate, especially using a preposterous series of excuses, just looks suspicious.

After all,  if things really were as innocuous, limited and uneventful as Reynolds claims, then why not have some impartial investigator have a look?

Just don’t look to get Witch-hunt Willie Marshall on the case.  He’s already busy with a sooper- sekrit investigation that he apparently hasn’t finished yet and the government refuses to talk about.

-srbp-