Thursday, May 9, 2013

“Valuable Consideration Mutually Given and Received”

This item is written by a Northern Insight reader I've known for years. He's done business regularly with the BC Government but in recent years, it's been a problematic relationship because he has refused all exactions issued by the "Pay to Play" BC Liberals. For that refusal, his business was targeted for injury. It's a business style we used to think was confined to third world nations. It is not so confined while Christy Clark, Rich Coleman and friends are in charge. It's business as usual.

"For valuable consideration mutually given and received."

This ubiquitous phrase in legal agreements has taken on new significance as documents related to the indemnification of Basi and Virk were released to the public by Jas Johal. Link

One has to ask what value the people of British Columbia received when BC Liberals relieved Basi and Virk of responsibility to repay taxpayers $6 million in legal fees owed as a result of their criminal activities.

What would have been the value of knowing the real reasons Liberals sold BC Rail to CN, a big financial contributor headed by a friend of Gordon Campbell, the Premier who promised voters he would not sell BC Rail.

What would have been the value of hearing testimony from elected officials and bureaucrats about the roles they played in the BC Rail matter, in court and under oath?

What would have been the value of learning how a plea bargain followed arrangement of generous terms for Basi and Virk, an inducement to plead guilty that shut down the judicial process that seemed certain to expose wrongdoing by BC Liberals?

We know the valuable consideration Basi and Virk gained was $6 million, no jail time and easy house arrest that barely confined them to home.

What mutual valuable consideration did the people of British Columbia gain?

The sad but obvious answer is none.

Recommend this post

12 comments:

  1. ...answer is none, though former premier Gordon Campbell and several of his political colleagues benefited greatly from having their roles in the tainted sale of BC Rail NOT exposed and scrutinized for propriety, beginning with Gary Collins on the eve of his scheduled testimony in court.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes doing business without being a friend who donated to the party seems nonexistant. However for the past 12 years right up to this day our MSM are still telling us nothing to see re-elect the porkbarrel lieberals. How with all that has been revealed over the years they say the NDP are bad for BC just like all that BS from Alberta by Jack Mintz. Honesty is not the liberal strength.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack Mintz. It seems we've heard that name before. Oh yeah, I remember. He's the Calgary economist of the 'Rich Businesses Very Good - Government Very Bad' school. The Liberals hired him to try and sell HST to us. Now he's returning the favour.

      Delete
  3. We need to demand our own corruption commission here in BC. I think all major projects done under the Liberal banner need to be probed with a fine tooth comb. They stink to high heaven.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Norm... this is exactly why the Charbeneau commission and the Anti corruption commission were formed in Quebec. It appears as if an organised conspiracy is at work in their case, as well as here in our province.
    The formation of a commission, with the power to investigate corruption to the highest levels, with the ability to subpeona, arrest, seize property and other forms of wealth, under a beefed up proceeds of crime legisation, is a "must have" for the province of BC.

    This "economic subversion" has infiltrated our democratic institutions to such an extent, that most people consider it "normal behavior". Nothing could be further from the truth. The legal community is either powerless to investigate, or is ignoring it. The appropriate legislation or even the political will, to do something about "obvious corruption", simply doesn't exist.

    The question is" how can we the public, ensure that we get our own Anti Corruption Commission?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It appears that Gordon Campbell lied about not selling BC Rail to get elected so he could do just that...sell BC Rail to one of this friends.

    This is not a small-time con job...this is a billion dollar fraud. I wonder how Gordon Campbell can have a clear conscience about this. He must be a sociopath to not feel guilt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most definitely fraud, worth way more than the $Billion supposedly received. Maybe someone from CN could provide a cancelled cheque as proof of payment.
      The railway was worth way more and even farmers who lease their land get a yearly payment for use of it. This is not counting any of the economic development value that BC Rail was meant to support and did. And not counting the value of the jobs lost to other jurisdictions as CN gutted BC Rail.

      Delete
    2. Agreed!! Ten Billion or more would be more appropriate. And it would be interesting to see how much we REALLY realized from the "sale"!
      John's Aghast!

      Delete
  6. Norm, I had this front and centre in my mind yesterday when I went into the advance poll. I hope the Dix government gets to the bottom of this. Wait, what's that pulling into the legislature? Oh, another truckload of shredders.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Whenever there's a taint of scandal to some of the many activities (atrocities?) the Liberals are alleged to have committed, the names of Rich Coleman, Kim Haakstad and Brian Bonney always seem to surface, somewhere. Mystifying.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is no small consideration either that the Attorney General saw nothing wrong with letting his subordinates negotiate with the defendants regarding plea considerations in an ongoing criminal trial without telling the special prosecutor appointed under the Crown Counsel Act.

    One consequence of this action was that the special prosecutor unknowingly let a statement of facts be entered into court that was missing key facts germane to the judge’s ability to discharge her obligations regarding voluntary pleas. The judge is bound not to accept an involuntary plea, and a $6 million inducement available only if a guilty plea is entered would have made her ruling a tad more difficult.

    Another consequence was to bring the administration of justice in this province into disrepute. Yet Mike de Jong told Jas Johal he was okay with it because it saved money.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Justice Anne MacKenzie chose not to ask difficult questions about the inducement. In addition, she signed off on "house arrest" that was almost meaningless. All Basi and Virk had to do in the first year was sleep at home from midnight to 6am. The rest of the time they could go almost anywhere and claim they were allowed under any of the numerous exceptions. I surmise MacKenzie was happy to see the trial ended. That did not serve justice but was politically convenient.

      Delete

COMMENTING

This is an archive only of items published before April 22, 2016. These and newer articles are available at:

https://in-sights.ca/

If you read an article at this blogger site, you can comment on it at the new site.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.