VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight

[Journeyman]

And from Twitter...

Erin O'Toole @ErinOTooleMP

I would note that the PM left the House shortly before this motion. He has personally apologized in the House for incidents prior to Confederation, but would not even stay for this symbolic motion for Admiral Norman. #sunnyways

 

[Remius]

He really isn't helping is case...

I wonder if he has hit a wall where he just doesn't care anymore and has seen the writing on the wall and will just do what he wants

 

[Fishbone Jones]

He really isn't helping is case...

I wonder if he has hit a wall where he just doesn't care anymore and has seen the writing on the wall and will just do what he wants

Which is different from what he's been acting like since the election how?

 

[Strike]

He really isn't helping is case...

I wonder if he has hit a wall where he just doesn't care anymore and has seen the writing on the wall and will just do what he wants

The man is a narcissist. He doesn't know how to REALLY apologize and likely believes he can do no wrong and was justified in his actions. Heck, look at what happened when the one female MP claimed he had verbally attacked her.  His response was that wasn't how he interpreted things.

 

[Blackadder1916]

The man is a narcissist. He doesn't know how to REALLY apologize and likely believes he can do no wrong and was justified in his actions. Heck, look at what happened when the one female MP claimed he had verbally attacked her.  His response was that wasn't how he interpreted things.

So, in other words, he is a politician.

 

[OldSolduer]

Which is different from what he's been acting like since the election how?

Are we speaking of King Joffrey?

 

[Jarnhamar]

In the Prime Ministers defense he was off to apologize for the *spins wheel* 1730 Massacre at Fox Fort, Quebec.

 

[YZT580]

He has never, that I recall, apologised for any of his own actions, just historical ones.  It is easy to say you are sorry for someone else's actions but to admit personal errors requires real cojons and an acknowledgement of personal involvement neither of which he has ever shown that he possesses.

 

[FJAG]

He has never, that I recall, apologised for any of his own actions, just historical ones.  It is easy to say you are sorry for someone else's actions but to admit personal errors requires real cojons and an acknowledgement of personal involvement neither of which he has ever shown that he possesses.

You don't have to apologize when you are perfect in every way.

;D

 

[dapaterson]

So you're saying he's a NWO officer?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

So you're saying he's a NWO officer?

Which you obviously are not, DP.

Otherwise you would have known that it is either "NWO" period, or "NW officer".

But not "NWO officer, which is a tautology in the same category as SIN number.

/pedant NWO off


;D

 

[dapaterson]

And here I thought it was Naval Warfare Operations... or New World Order, but those are the ones flying black helicopters.

 

[kratz]

It's no surprise the Liberal majority blocked the call for a parliamentary inquiry, but the weak justification is slim at best:

NationalPost.com

Liberals block parliamentary inquiry into Mark Norman case, reject invitation to have him testify
BRIAN PLATT MAY 16, 2019

OTTAWA — Liberal MPs have blocked an attempt by the opposition parties to hold a parliamentary inquiry into whether there was political interference in the Vice-Admiral Mark Norman criminal case.

The Liberals also voted against inviting Norman to testify at the House of Commons national defence committee and tell his side of the story.

The Conservatives and NDP had brought a motion to the defence committee to launch a study of the Norman case, but the Liberals used their majority on the committee to vote it down on Thursday afternoon.

“This is very disappointing, to know that Vice-Admiral Norman has put in over 30 years in service to his country in uniform, and the Liberals won’t even give him three minutes,” said Conservative MP James Bezan after the meeting ended.

Liberal MPs argued the committee wouldn’t be the right forum for Norman to speak in, describing the atmosphere as “hyper-partisan.”

“Vice-Admiral Norman is one of our highest-ranking military officers, it’s a question about political interference, optically we should not insert him into a politically-charged forum to make the case that he needs to make,” said Liberal MP Sven Spengemann.

The Liberals suggested the media might be a better place to tell his story, but the Conservatives argued he should have the protection of parliamentary privilege, which shields him from liability over what he says.

But Conservative MP Erin O’Toole — a former air force officer — said he doesn’t think active members of the military should be seeking to testify, and that it would have been more appropriate for the committee to invite Norman.

“Rather than the Liberals turning themselves into pretzels to try to find ways not to do this…if the majority is going to be used to crush it, just come out and say that,” O’Toole said. A few minutes later, the Liberals voted against the invitation to Norman.

Norman was charged in March 2018 with a single count of breach of trust over an allegation he systematically leaked confidential info about a $700-million navy supply ship project. The case collapsed last week after prosecutors acknowledged they had no reasonable prospect of conviction.

The original motion put forward by the opposition would have seen many witnesses called to testify, including Norman, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, and various other senior government figures. It would have also invited Liberal MP Andrew Leslie (who offered testify on Norman’s behalf) and former CBC reporter James Cudmore (who received some of the alleged leaks, and is now a Liberal staffer).

It was NDP MP Randy Garrison who tried to find a compromise by amending the motion to only call on Norman as a witness.

“I remain concerned that he says he has more to say, and that he be given a forum to do that where he can be protected from prosecution,” Garrison said.

Speaking after the meeting, Garrison said he had no confidence the Liberals were serious when they said maybe Norman could testify if he requested to.

Other Liberal MPs on the committee said they don’t see any evidence of political interference in the case. Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen called such allegations “hearsay,” and said the Conservatives were pushing that narrative to avoid talking about the country’s economy.

“I too believe that this is a bit of a fabricated, partisan exercise,” said Liberal MP Julie Dzerowicz. She said it’s a distraction from the “key issues of the day,” and said her Toronto constituents are more concerned about climate change, Ontario Premier Doug Ford, and the success of the arts community.

 

[Loachman]

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-norman-not-the-only-victim-of-trudeaus-vindictive-streak#comments

LILLEY: Norman not the only victim of Trudeau's vindictive streak

Brian Lilley

Published: May 15, 2019

As the Conservatives hammered the Liberals in the House of Commons for the second night in a row, a woman at the centre of the drama surrounding Vice-Admiral Mark Norman was hammering the actions of the Trudeau government.

Kelly Gabie was the lead federal representative in the negotiations to award a supply ship retrofit contract to the Davie shipyard in Quebec.

<snip>

In a letter to Conservative MP Michelle Rempel, Gabie thanks the MP for her support of Norman but says he hasn’t been the only one hurt.

"The Liberal government has not just hurt (Vice-Admiral) Norman; there has been so much collateral damage affecting every member of the integrated team that worked on that file, either DMs retired out early, ADMs promoted quietly out of Ottawa," Gabie writes.

<snip>

 

[FSTO]

Front page of the Globe and Mail today. Me thinks this thing has legs for a few more days.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-trudeau-set-in-motion-mountie-probe-that-led-to-charges-against-vice/

 

[Journeyman]

Liberals block parliamentary inquiry into Mark Norman case, reject invitation to have him testify
BRIAN PLATT MAY 16, 2019

[Liberal MP Julie Dzerowicz] said it’s a distraction from the “key issues of the day,” and said her Toronto constituents are more concerned about climate change, Ontario Premier Doug Ford, and the success of the arts community.

Yes, potential government impropriety, and by extension national security (ship building programme), is a distraction from the arts community!  :facepalm:

 

[Navy_Pete]

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-norman-not-the-only-victim-of-trudeaus-vindictive-streak#comments

LILLEY: Norman not the only victim of Trudeau's vindictive streak

Brian Lilley

Published: May 15, 2019

As the Conservatives hammered the Liberals in the House of Commons for the second night in a row, a woman at the centre of the drama surrounding Vice-Admiral Mark Norman was hammering the actions of the Trudeau government.

Kelly Gabie was the lead federal representative in the negotiations to award a supply ship retrofit contract to the Davie shipyard in Quebec.

<snip>

In a letter to Conservative MP Michelle Rempel, Gabie thanks the MP for her support of Norman but says he hasn’t been the only one hurt.

"The Liberal government has not just hurt (Vice-Admiral) Norman; there has been so much collateral damage affecting every member of the integrated team that worked on that file, either DMs retired out early, ADMs promoted quietly out of Ottawa," Gabie writes.

<snip>

Wow, that's a bit of a leap. Had the misfortune of working on the NSS file for a while, and a lot of these people were just empire building on the back of a project, and would constantly delay progress to push some BS agenda. Hated that posting, and had me actively applying to civvie jobs. Not going to get into the details, but she was part of the problem, so while I wish her the best in recovery, wasn't sad to see a number of people transferred out.

The worst part of working there was having people who had never stepped worked in a shipyard explaining to me that they somehow understood ship repair and shipbuilding better than anything myself or the various shipbuilding experts we had on call did. I think my final straw was putting together a report from a group with over a century of work in shipbuilding, and having it ignored completely in the decision process. The big giant heads love them some third party expert reports, right up until it doesn't support their uninformed preconceived opinions. :facepalm: :facepalm:

 

[MilEME09]

Wow, that's a bit of a leap. Had the misfortune of working on the NSS file for a while, and a lot of these people were just empire building on the back of a project, and would constantly delay progress to push some BS agenda. Hated that posting, and had me actively applying to civvie jobs. Not going to get into the details, but she was part of the problem, so while I wish her the best in recovery, wasn't sad to see a number of people transferred out.

The worst part of working there was having people who had never stepped worked in a shipyard explaining to me that they somehow understood ship repair and shipbuilding better than anything myself or the various shipbuilding experts we had on call did. I think my final straw was putting together a report from a group with over a century of work in shipbuilding, and having it ignored completely in the decision process. The big giant heads love them some third party expert reports, right up until it doesn't support their uninformed preconceived opinions. :facepalm: :facepalm:

Sadly from what I have seen in the forum that seems to be the norm, not the exception. I has the pleasure weeks ago chatting to Rhemantall during a train the trainung course for those new 720G radios. I won't go into detail but what you described seems to not be isolated at all.

 

[Caesar Augustus]

What abt Gen. Vance's involvement? Nobody seems to discuss it here? He seems pretty involved in this too.

'I own it': Vance says decision to suspend Mark Norman was his, not PM's

http://flip.it/zvo-S7

 

[FSTO]

From Murray Brewster. A lot of poo hit the fan on this issue and I think the only entity that didn't get spattered is Seaspan. ;D

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mark-norman-supply-ship-trudeau-1.5141446

Who was at fault? According to the government, nobody — or maybe everybody

Murray Brewster · CBC News · Posted: May 20, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 4 hours ago

There's a time-honoured tradition in Ottawa: when things go wrong — horribly wrong — somebody gets thrown under the bus.

The collapse of the criminal case against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman saw that custom accelerated at breakneck speed this week as the Liberal government sought to put as much distance as possible between itself and the failed prosecution.

The most prominent person among those tossed beneath the wheels is the country's top military commander, Gen. Jonathan Vance, who — according to both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan — was the one who decided to suspend Norman in the first place.

"The chief of defence staff has full responsibility for the administration and command of the Canadian Armed Forces," Trudeau told the Commons during question period this week.

Sajjan, who served under Vance in Afghanistan, also tried to steer blame toward the chief of the defence staff during marathon questioning Wednesday night related to his department's budget.

"When the decision [to suspend Norman] was made, I supported it," the minister said, citing the chief's authority under the National Defence Act. "I have faith in the chief of defence staff to carry out his duties."

Those remarks made it sound as though the minister was an innocent bystander who had no authority to question or challenge Vance's decision.

That's pretty ironic, since senior government officials have for months framed the prosecution of Norman, on allegations of leaking cabinet information, as an effort to reinforce civilian control over the military.

The commander of the navy, they argued, should never be allowed to usurp the will of the elected government of the day by agitating for a leased supply ship.

The notion that military men should be "limited to request[ing] and advising on needs" is seeded throughout the Crown's factum in the Norman case, filed last December.

Chief of the Defence Staff Jonathan Vance participates in an interview with The Canadian Press in his office in Ottawa on Friday, Jan. 11, 2019. (Justin Tang/The Canadian Press)
On Friday, Vance insisted that the decision to suspend Norman was his alone and was made without political direction or interference.

And beyond informing Sajjan and Trudeau of the RCMP investigation, the defence chief said, "I have never, ever spoken to anybody political about this, beyond that, ever. Period."

There are some in Ottawa who will interpret that statement as Vance taking a bullet for the Liberal government — but the law does invest him with the authority to act.

Whether he should have acted so swiftly — whether he should have demanded to see more information from the RCMP in advance — is a question observers have been asking from the outset. But the calls have become louder since the Crown conceded it did not have all of the evidence when it decided to lay a charge of breach-of-trust against Norman.

"The main point to take away from all of this," said retired lieutenant-colonel Rory Fowler, a former military lawyer now in private practice, "is that the CDS was not obliged to do what he did and, quite frankly, the decision had nothing to do with the Code of Service discipline. His decision was administrative in nature."

Others being tossed under the bus this week include harried (and occasionally befuddled) civil servants whose slow, deliberate combing of federal government documents subpoenaed by the defence turned the court process into an extraordinary exercise in frustration.

Buckets of black ink were poured over the various records through redaction, apparently in the interest of preserving cabinet secrecy or solicitor-client privilege.

"The decision to redact information was made by public servants in this case and overseen by the court," said Justice Minister David Lametti. "We met all our obligations."

What the Liberals failed to explain was why Conservative-era cabinet documents — which could have helped to exonerate Norman early on — were not in the hands of either the RCMP or the Crown.

The Conservatives are using that fact, among others, as the foundation for their call for a public inquiry.

Not even the Ontario government escaped the bus this week. In what was one of the more creative deflections, justice officials and (eventually) Liberal MPs argued that it wasn't the federal government that actually prosecuted Norman.

Rather, the director of public prosecutions was acting in the name of the Attorney General of Ontario because the case was grinding through provincial court system.

Given all their verbal and mental gymnastics this week, Liberal MPs have shown little curiosity about how they got into this mess in the first place — and a fierce desire to get far away from it.

Maybe in quieter moments they'll reflect on why the former Conservative government felt compelled to hotwire the military procurement system in an exceptional deal with the Davie Shipyard, in Lévis, Que., to lease a supply ship for the navy.

And why former ministers failed to speak to the RCMP after Norman was charged.

"The deal has literally no comparison," said Dave Perry, a defence analyst at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. "Procurement regulations were changed to make it go ahead the way it did. A letter of intent signed immediately prior to the election period. Everything about this was atypical."

And perhaps, one day, the Liberals might ask why one of the country's most senior and decorated naval commanders staked his career on that project.