Veterans Stabbed in the Back by Liberals

I was 22 years old when, as an infantry 2nd Lieutenant, my neck and back were fractured serving my country. I didn't know then that the rest of my life would be severely altered by those very same injuries. I persevered in my service for 4 more years, finally retiring as a Captain. Even then the damage done by my injuries hadn't shaken my life. Now things are different - very different. I can't get into all the details publicly at this time as they are evidence in an ongoing legal action against the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, but suffice it to say that my injuries began taking a serious toll on me by my early thirties. Today at 51 my injuries rate me a 101% disability rating on the odd scales used by Veterans Affairs. I am one of those soldiers, veterans, who by virtue of the New Veterans Charter that took effect in 2006.

I spent 5 years in the Veterans Affairs machinery, being chewed up and spit out at various levels along the way. The same amount of time my father fought the Nazis in World War II. Veterans Affairs initially rated my injuries and disabilities at 5%, or $14,000 for a ruined spine (cervical and lumbar). It was devastating. Not just on a personal care level, dealing with the effects of my injuries, but at a professional level as well. The military is an honour based institution. You are honoured with a salute. You are honoured to give a salute. You consider it an act of honour to look after the welfare of your men, and to complete a mission with them. Your Regimental battle honours (flag) are just that - honours earned by men and women before you. The sense of dishonour and betrayal imparted on you from the bureaucracy and political masters of Veterans Affairs can destroy you if you don't have the support to take it on. I was lucky, because I had that support from my family. Many are not, and many end their lives is sheer frustration at a system that denies them their honour and desperately needed help.

That brings me to the Liberal government, Justin Trudeau and Kent Hehr. During the last election the Liberals promised to recognize the "sacred obligations" Canada has to its veterans - especially its injured and disabled veterans. Trudeau himself made statements about it several times on the campaign trail and as Prime Minister:

"For 10 years, Stephen Harper draped himself in the Canadian flag, then betrayed the men and women who fought for it."

"There are a lot of court cases across this country that this government has taken on to deprive veterans of their benefits, to go after individuals for unreasonable reasons... we would actually cease (them) if this government changes on October 19."

Then after being elected, and as Prime Minister, Trudeau pledged:

"We are also committed to ensuring that new and significant investments are made to meet the scared obligation that we have to our veterans."

All that changed this week. The federal government ended the year long truce with six veterans who sued in the British Columbia courts to have the sacred obligation of the federal government to its injured troops upheld, and the treatment of those veterans to reflect that principle. The Harper government went to the BC Court of Appeal to have the lower courts decision overturned that the six veterans had the right to file such a class action lawsuit. However, with the installation of Erin O'Toole as Veterans Affairs Minister, the appeal by the government was put on hold for a year to negotiate an honourable result. This week the federal government notified the court it intended to continue the appeal of the veterans' right to launch the class action suit.

The documents submitted to the court by the Liberals painfully, and humiliatingly, denounce any obligation whatsoever to injured and disabled veterans:

" the submissions made by [former Conservative attorney-general Rob Nicholson] on the hearing of the appeal, and as set out in the factum filed by him, accurately reflect the current position of the federal government...

The House of Commons motion referenced by the plaintiffs (6 veterans), while it records the opinions of the then members of Parliament on the matters referred to in the motion, does not have the force of law and cannot bind the federal government."

There is nothing that cuts so deep as a betrayal of trust. There is nothing that is more important to the dignity of the individual soldier than the honour of his service. Trudeau, and his Liberal government managed to destroy it all by this one court action. His minister Kent Hehr appeared on CTV's Power Play show with host Mercedes Stephenson yesterday and several times reiterated "Canada's sacred obligation to its veterans". He did so while trying to wiggle out of the straight forward questioning of the host on the government's court actions. His words range hollow. His own government's position is his words mean nothing and are simply the "opinions of the then members of Parliament... (which) does not have the force of law".

The Liberal Party has made a very serious mistake in stabbing the veterans of this country in the back. It took decades for veterans, and military people in general, to look past previous Liberal governments and their treatment of the military. That leap of faith has now been dashed. The lingering wound of betrayal is festering in all veterans as we seek not only to have our own wounds looked after, but those that inevitably come after us. It is a brotherhood ( and that includes our fellow female soldiers). The brotherhood now knows how easily, and without a bit of shame, a Liberal government can leave the bitter taste of betrayal in their mouths. It means we now have to fight another battle together against another government, but for the Liberals it means that whatever bond they had hoped to hold with the vast veteran community, and military community at large, is as broken as any betrayed bond can be. Anything other than a complete reversal of the Liberals "new" position, and anything other than a new minister, will bury the Liberal Party of Canada and leave it dead in the eyes of veterans, and military men and women, across this country who honourably served it.

Danny Williams in Contempt

Without Prejudice


This past Tuesday I was in front of Justice Orsborn requesting a date be set to hear my application that Danny Williams' lawsuit against me for defamation be thrown out. The grounds for striking the lawsuit were that Williams accepted being named to a court house building in Corner Brook that houses the chamber of the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, and through which justices of the Court rotate through as part of their duties.

Justice Orsborn, quite seriously, put an end to the Court's involvement in the matter. He stated that neither he, nor any other justice of the Trial Division would hear the case, and that he had requested Chief Justice Green of the Appeal Court appoint an Appeal Court Justice to preside over the matter. In effect, Justice Orsborn recused himself and the entire Trial Division from hearing the matter. I was surprised. Williams' lawyer was in a state of shock. Then came the big one. Orsborn continued by saying he had written former premier Marshall on the naming issue, and had decided to give counsel a copy of the letter. The Court Clerk dutifully delivered us each a copy sealed in a vanilla-type envelope.

The letter, which is below, essentially raises many of the same concerns I had over the court house naming after Williams. Kind of common sense stuff, which doesn't seem to be so common in the Government of this Province.

I made the decision to release the letter to the media, because, in my mind, it was a very real matter of public interest, and a classic example of abuse of power and position. It most importantly illustrated that the sanctity of the Courts could be violated by politics, which then brings the independence of our court system into question. This is especially true given our judges are appointed by politicians. In effect this takes on the perception that powerful politicians become judge, jury and executioner.

The story went across the country. Williams, belatedly spoke to the issue. I was almost as shocked by his response as I was of the similar theme between Justice Orsborn's commentary and my own argument.

Williams actually attacked Justice Orsborn's integrity.

Here are some samples of what he said:

" Obviously, this Chief Justice Orsborn had an issue that he had dealt with privately, unsuccessfully, and then basically through another vehicle (that would be me) decided to table it and make it public"

Now, if I was Justice Orsborn, Williams would be waking up this morning in jail. Parse the above statement. " 'This' Chief Justice Orsborn." Really? As if he is speaking down to one of the top judges in the province, like a petty little school girl. Then, in the remainder of the sentence he accuses Justice Orsborn of willfully and with malice of using his courtroom and position in a way that would be an abuse of the bench. In my way of reading, if that isn't contemptuous of the position of Justice Orsborne, and the Court, then I'm not sure what the meaning of contempt of court would be. Black's Law Dictionary defines contempt of court: Contumacy; a willful disregard of the authority of a court of justice or legislative body or disobedience of its lawful orders. Contempt of court is committed by a person who does any act in willful contravention of its authority or dignity.

 I'll go with that last one. Willful contravention of the dignity of the Court. Also, It would also seem to me that Justice Orsborn has a very strong, and likely very expensive defamation case against Williams if he wants one.

"there were other judges there and: They didn't see anything wrong with it, but obviously Chief Justice Orsborn has a different opinion. That's probably the nicest way I can put it." So now Williams, typical to form, is pitting people against people to try and win a point. The problem with this particular comment is that he's referring to Justices of the Courts. It's as if he is not conscience of the fact that Judges shouldn't be endorsing political events. It's as if he doesn't care. It's as if "hey, everyone else is doing it, so it must be right, and you must be odd man out." It's childish and it's stupid, and it's contemptuous of the positions that judges hold, and have to hold, in our society. All this from a man that purports to hold a law degree.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Law Society describes these 3 criteria for it's members:

2.1-1 A lawyer has a duty to carry on the practice of law and discharge all
responsibilities to clients, tribunals, the public and other members of the profession
honourably and with integrity

[2] Public confidence in the administration of justice and in the legal profession may
be eroded by a lawyer’s irresponsible conduct. Accordingly, a lawyer’s conduct should
reflect favourably on the legal profession, inspire the confidence, respect and trust of
clients and of the community, and avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

2.1-2 A lawyer has a duty to uphold the standards and reputation of the legal
profession and to assist in the advancement of its goals, organizations and institutions.

Seems quite obvious to me Williams has not followed these rules of his profession.

Williams is also quoted as saying:

"I was quite surprised, you know, that a current chief justice would have sent a letter to the Premier raising an objection, because you know, there's a clear distinction between the role of the executive branches of government, and you know, that crosses the line."

Really? What line? Williams' line, because Williams wants the ego trip of having a court house named after him? It's clearly a constitutional requirement that judges protect their independence from the appearance or perception of bias. You would think Williams would know that. Still, he ridicules the Chief Justice.

Then in an attempt to show just "how normal and non-controversial" the naming of the court house after him was, Williams says:

" The Court House in Grand Bank was named after Chief Justice Hickman who was the former Minister of Justice in either the Smallwood or Moores era I think, but he was alive at the time and of course there wasn't ever an issue with that, so."

Williams conveniently doesn't mention that after his political career, Hickman was Chief Justice for 20 years until he retired. Whether that remains a correct thing to do or not is up for debate, but it in no way compares to Williams situation. Justice Orsborn assessed it as such in his letter to Marshall.

All of this is the way Williams has attempted to rule Newfoundland and Labrador since at least 2003. Pit people against each other in an attempt to humiliate and marginalize his opposition. Ignore realities that don't suit and manipulate arguments to suit the purpose. Threaten those that disagree by accusing them of "crossing the line". For myself and the Telegram provincial newspaper that meant being sued by Williams for defamation. For Chief Justice Orsborn it apparently means being derobed of your judicial dignity and independence publicly by a man consumed by his own image - as he sees it.

It is time for Danny Williams to be brought down a whole lot of pegs. It's time that his abuse of his public position as former premier, that is to say using that position to threaten and demean those that see things differently than him, to end. Attacking a well-respected, extremely experienced and highly intelligent Justice like Chief Justice Orsborn is an outrage. Williams should be dragged through every editorial column in the land for even daring to attack the integrity of a Chief Justice. The Court should defend the honour and integrity of Chief Justice Orsborn, and its own, by throwing Danny Williams into jail for contempt, so that he realizes that nobody is above the law. Yes, not even Danny Williams. Or, perhaps, especially not Danny Williams. We have to know that the Courts and the media aren't afraid of the little man from St. John's.