NOTLEY TWISTS TRUSSLER’S POLITICALLY LOADED “ETHICS” FINDINGS FOR POLITICAL GAIN
It was shocking that the Trussler Report would issue on Leader’s Debate Day. While The Hon. Mme. Trussler recommended that the Conflicts of Interest Act be amended to stay proceedings during the writ period, there was no reason that such a brief report could not have been issued weeks ago or even after the election, given that the key findings in the report were of such a limited nature. Nothing in the Conflicts of Interest Act requires the “Ethics Commissioner” or the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly to interfere in the electoral process by releasing a report on the day of the scheduled leaders’ debate to clearly advantage one candidate for Premier over another. This can’t be seen as anything other than deliberate political interference by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly in favor of Rachel Notley.
The two key findings with regard to any alleged interference in the Pawlowski prosecution were as follows :
1. 44 Crown Prosecutors confirmed that “they did not receive any contact relating to their files from the Premier’s Office.”
2. “Minister Shandro told her (Premier Smith) that there was nothing that could be done, and she accepted his advice. There were no further conversations between Minister Shandro and the Premier on the subject.”
Rachel Notley and her propagandists at the CBC lied repeatedly about these key findings and repeatedly accused Premier Smith of “breaking the law” and interfering in the Pawloski prosecution. The Trussler Report makes it crystal clear that no such interference took place.
Section 3 of the Conflicts of Interest Act states that:
3. A Member breaches this Act if the Member uses the Member’s office or powers to influence or seek to influence a decision to be made on behalf of the Crown to further a private interest of the Member, a person directly associated with the Member or the Member’s minor child or to improperly further another person’s private interest. (emphasis added)
The opinion of Trussler J. was that any interference in the judicial process is “improper” and that therefore Premier Smith violated the Act simply by asking her Attorney General for legal advice which The Hon. Mme. Trussler admits on page 12 of her report was followed by Premier Smith without any further conversation or pressure being applied to Attorney General Shandro.
The finding on page 12 that Premier Smith simply followed AG Shandro’s advice stands in stark contrast to and contradicts Mme. Trussler’s politically loaded finding on page 15 where she says:
“Speaking to an Attorney General about a specific ongoing criminal case, in the way that Premier Smith did on the call with Minister Shandro, is not acceptable. Just as with the case with Prime Minister Trudeau in the SNC-Lavalin case, Premier Smith was the only person, who by virtue of her position, could clearly exert influence over the Attorney General and had the power to remove the Minister of Justice and Attorney General. I believe that Minister Shandro must have felt considerable pressure and concern for his tenure as Minister as a result of the call.”
To be clear, there is nothing “improper” for a Premier to ask an Attorney General for legal advice. That was AG Shandro’s job. She asked a question, he answered it, and she accepted his answer.
End of story.
This was not a case like the SNC-Lavalin mess where friends of a Prime Minister were alleged to have engaged in bribery and acquiring prostitutes for clients to land contracts and the Prime Minister then applied so much pressure on the Attorney General to not pursue charges against his friends that she was left no option but to resign.
In this case, AG Shandro did not feel sufficiently pressured to resign. At best he whined to Mme. Trussler that he felt that Premier Smith was “passive/aggressive” and as determined by Mme. Trussler “she did not direct him (to stay the charges against Pawlowski) to do so.”.
If anything this discloses no wrongdoing on Premier Smith’s part but again underlines the backstabbing, misogyny of the Kenney “Cocktail Cabinet” that has been actively undermining Premier Smith since she was elected Leader of the UCP.
Of course, Rachel Notley, being the anti-feminist that she is, is happy to have the old boys club do her dirty work for her.
The Trussler Report is no indictment of Premier Smith. The Report is evidence of how low some people will sink to corrupt an election and create propaganda points out of nothing.
This entire episode reflects the low depths to which Rachel Notley and the NDP will sink to win this election. It also demonstrates how unfit Rachel Notley is to govern and how little we should trust the candidate who claims that “trust” is the major issue in this campaign.
Jeffrey R.W. Rath, B.A.(Hons.), LL.B.(Hons.)
Foothills, Alberta
23 May, 2023