Alteration of document defunding aid agency 'gives rise to very troubling questions' : Speaker Peter Milliken

Alteration of document defunding aid agency 'gives rise to very troubling questions'

Last Updated: Friday, February 11, 2011 | 1:52 PM ET Comments581Recommend45

, CBC News

Speaker Peter Milliken has ruled a 2009 CIDA document signed by International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda, which defunded the aid agency KAIROS, was 'doctored.'

A scathing ruling by the Commons Speaker Peter Milliken confirms that a key government document signed by International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda and two of her most senior officials was deliberately “doctored.”

Milliken called the document tampering "very troubling."

“Any reasonable person confronted with what appears to have transpired would necessarily be extremely concerned, if not shocked,” Milliken wrote in his decision.

Milliken said technicalities prevented him from doing anything further about the incident.

Nonetheless, the Speaker’s harshly worded ruling and Oda’s connection to a doctored document is certain to trigger opposition calls for the minister’s head.

Liberal MP John McKay called the incident “morally reprehensible,” and told CBC News he will be asking the prime minister to take immediate action against Oda.

He said the affair shows Oda’s management of her department has become “a gong show.”

The original document in question was from Oda’s department, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

It recommended the minister approve about $7 million in funding to a long-established faith-based foreign aid agency called KAIROS.

But sometime after the minister’s two top officials had signed the document, someone inserted a hand-scrawled “NOT” into the recommendation.

The change made it appear the department was suggesting the government reject the funding request, which is ultimately what happened.

KAIROS funding cut

Without warning, KAIROS was simply informed it would be getting no money from CIDA, a cut that reportedly represented about 40 per cent of the group’s total funding.

The demise of funding for KAIROS ignited political controversy over whether Stephen Harper’s government was systematically punishing aid groups that do not share its views.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney fanned the flames when he subsequently claimed the government cut off KAIROS because of the group’s criticisms of Israel on the Palestinian issue.

International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda says she has no idea who altered the document she signed. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press file photo)

But Oda claimed in the Commons that KAIROS had lost its funding because the group’s work no longer fit with CIDA’s objectives, strongly suggesting she was acting on the recommendation of her department.

The minister’s parliamentary secretary, Conservative MP Jim Abbott, couldn’t have been more clear in the Commons:

“CIDA thoroughly analyzed KAIROS’ program proposal and determined, with regret, that it did not meet the agency’s current priorities.”

Abbott later apologized for unintentionally misleading Parliament.

'Profoundly disturbing questions'

In his Speaker’s ruling Thursday, Milliken acknowledged there are “profoundly disturbing questions that evidently remain unanswered.”

The key one, of course, is who inserted the mysterious “NOT” into a signed document, and why.

Oda’s two top officials have confirmed the document they signed was a strong recommendation to fund KAIROS, a conglomerate of 11 churches that has been delivering foreign aid for more than 35 years.

The two bureaucrats, CIDA head Margaret Biggs and her vice-president, Naresh Singh, have denied altering the document, and say the hand-scrawled “NOT” did not appear on anything they signed.

Oda testified at a parliamentary committee in December that she didn’t insert the mysterious “NOT” on the document, either, but agreed with the decision to cut off KAIROS.

In a series of answers to questions from the committee, Oda said she had no idea who altered the document that carries her signature, which, she said, she may or may not have written.

MCKAY-Privilege-En (2)

• Post a comment
  581Comments have been posted
• Recommend this story

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2011/02/11/kairos-speaker-oda.html#ixzz1DijwHHmI

Top court upholds secret evidence law: In ruling stemming from Toronto 18 trial : court says security concerns may let accused walk free.

In ruling stemming from Toronto 18 trial, court says security concerns may let accused walk free

Last Updated: Thursday, February 10, 2011 | 12:39 PM ET Comments73Recommend8

CBC News

Allowing an accused criminal to walk free is a "lesser evil" than disclosing top-secret national security information, the Supreme Court of Canada held Thursday in a ruling stemming from a high-profile terrorism case.

The court was asked to decide whether portions of the Canada Evidence Act, which give the Federal Court — and not the trial judge — authority to decide what material can be withheld if national security is at stake, are constitutional.

In upholding the law, the court said Thursday the provisions sometimes force the choice between protecting national security and prosecuting crimes.

Even though withholding information could harm a person's right to a fair trial, the law allows that in some situations the appropriate remedy would be stopping the prosecution all together, the court said.

"If the end result of non-disclosure by the Crown is that a fair trial cannot be had, then Parliament has determined that in the circumstances a stay of proceedings is the lesser evil compared with the disclosure of sensitive or potentially injurious information," the court said in its ruling.

Toronto 18 terror case

The issue arose in the terrorism case known as the Toronto 18, when Ontario Superior Court Justice Fletcher Dawson struck down provisions of the Canada Evidence Act.

Prosecutors in the case — as is common in terrorism cases — argued that disclosing certain information to the defence could hurt national security.

Dawson struck down portions of the act that gave the Federal Court power to determine privilege because he said they interfered with the Superior Court's jurisdiction to apply the constitution.

The Supreme Court acknowledged the legislation deprives judges of the ability to order the disclosure or even their own inspection of material that is withheld on national security grounds.

But it said there are other remedies available to the judge to protect an accused's right to a fair trial, such as a stay of the entire proceeding.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2011/02/10/bc-scoc-secret-evidence.html#ixzz1DdRLdkC8

bill — C-389 Transgender protection bill approved .

An NDP private member's bill to protect transgender people from discrimination was passed by the House of Commons, but could face a roadblock in the Conservative dominated Senate.




The bill — C-389 — seeks to add protection to Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code for those who've changed gender or are in transition.



It was introduced by British Columbia New Democrat MP Bill Siksay and has faced a storm of criticism from lobby groups such as REAL Women and Campaign Life Coalition.



Both groups argue it will protect sexual predators — something that Siksay dismisses as ridiculous and alarmist.



He says criminal behaviour will still be prosecuted.



The vote Wednesday pretty much split along party lines with the Conservative government voting against, but MPs from the Liberals, Bloc Quebecois and the NDP supporting it.







Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2011/02/09/ndp-transgender.html#socialcomments#ixzz1DXARIHB8

Senior Drugged Against Family's Wishes

The daughter of an elderly dementia patient is revealing how her mother was given a potentially dangerous drug - unapproved for treating her condition - in B.C. care facilities.




Hilda Penner was given the anti-psychotic drug Loxapine, without consent and despite her daughter's objections, records provided by her family show.



"We told them they were not to give her anti-psychotic drugs," said daughter Doreen Bodnar of the care facilities. "We knew those drugs were terrible for her - that they did terrible things to her."



Penner was given Loxapine and other anti-psychotic drugs several times over a two-year period, as she was moved through several facilities in B.C.'s Fraser Valley.



According to Health Canada, Loxapine is intended for treating schizophrenia, but is not approved for dementia patients. In 2005, the agency warned anti-psychotic drugs have been linked to a higher death rate among seniors with that condition.



Records show the drug eventually contributed to Penner suffering a major seizure.



The 83-year-old died in November of natural causes. Her case is now under investigation by the provincial College of Physicians and Surgeons and the B.C. Ombudsperson.



"[Health care staff] made an invalid out of her," said Bodnar. "She couldn't walk and, a lot of times, she couldn't talk because they had her so drugged - and her condition got worse and worse and worse."



Doctor knew family's wishes: daughter



Penner was initially placed in Cheam Village in Agassiz in 2008. She had suffered from a stroke three years earlier. Bodnar said the family was unable to care for her at home, because dementia was setting in.



They chose Cheam because Penner's physician, Dr. Lachlan MacIntosh, was the medical director on site. Bodnar said MacIntosh knew the family was opposed to anti-psychotic drugs, because Penner had suffered adverse effects from another drug in that same class that she had taken after she had her stroke.



However, Penner did not settle in at Cheam, Bodnar said, and would constantly ask people to take her home.



"She wasn't ready to be locked up. She called me 17 times the first day. 'Get me out of here. Get me out of here. Get me out of here,'" said Bodnar.



"She was very repetitive. I guess that's why they started drugging her, because she just got annoying."



Doctor resigned



Records show MacIntosh authorized staff to administer Loxapine to Penner, after staff called him to say they couldn't settle her down.



"I did prescribe medications to Mrs. Penner without informing her family, not getting their consent," MacIntosh is recorded as saying in the records. "This was done, initially as a matter of urgency, in response to requests from nursing."



"He said [nursing staff] must have caught me in a weak moment," Bodnar recalled of her conversation with MacIntosh at the time. "That was the first thing that he told us. We were devastated when we found out that that's what he had done."



MacIntosh's assistant told CBC News he has "nothing to say" about the case.



In his response to the College, MacIntosh wrote Penner's agitation increased, to the point that she would "hit out" at other residents. He added that he often approved drug changes for patients over the phone.



"In defence of the prescription 'without consent,'" he wrote, "I would say this is probably a daily occurrence ... I had not been in the habit of informing families at that time."



Changes have been made since, he added, "I introduced a consent form for the use of anti-psychotics."



MacIntosh also told the College he also stepped down as medical director at Cheam, because of the fallout over the Penner case.



"I resigned...feeling I had been responsible for undue and unnecessary investigations of the facility by the authorities."



Family not informed of prescription



Bodnar said she discovered her mother was on the drug several weeks after it was first prescribed, when she showed up for a visit and her mother was incoherent.



"The care aide got her up - you know, he was just shaking her. 'Come on Hilda - wake up. Wake up.' She couldn't wake up. She was so dozy ... it was only then they told me she was being drugged."



Bodnar acknowledged her mother was very difficult for staff to deal with, but said she felt that was no excuse.



"I think that's the nature of dementia. I think you have to realize that when you take on the job. You don't have to drug people into oblivion, especially when it is threatening their life," Bodnar said.



Laura Watts, outgoing director of the Canadian Centre for Elder Law, pointed out it is illegal to give patients drug treatment without consent.



"It's clear. You cannot provide treatment to somebody unless they as a capable adult agree or if they are not capable the correct legal substitute decision maker. There is no end run that can be used," she said.



Watts said this is not an isolated case, and she has heard many similar complaints.



"This is happening as an epidemic across the country, and it has to stop. We would never accept drugging people with developmental disabilities, and what we are now doing is drugging our senior population into submission."



Dr. Paula Rochon at the Women's College Hospital in Toronto has studied the risks of using anti-psychotic drugs to manage dementia patients. She said there is almost always a better alternative.



"There are problems that can be solved in other ways," said Rochon. "We need to find better ways to manage these people so that they are comfortable and well looked after and they are safe."



Senior certified 'incapable'



Penner's family eventually took her to hospital in Chilliwack. Fraser Health then placed her in a "special care" unit at Maplewood House in Abbotsford, where staff again gave her Loxapine.



Her daughter complained again - in writing - and the drugs were stopped two weeks later.



Soon afterward, however, staff sent Penner to the Abbotsford Regional Hospital, where doctors certified her 'incapable' under B.C.'s mental health legislation. That meant her family no longer had any legal say over her care.



Watts said that the mental health legislation can be used inappropriately. "Once someone is certified - when you are in a situation of combat [with family] - it is a trap door that the system will use and certainly it is not appropriate to be used in most of these cases."



"We were scared when she was at the hospital to do anything," said Bodnar. "Because we were afraid when they certified her that if we spoke up at all they were going to just bar us from the hospital - and then mom would have nobody to speak for her."



Drugs triggered seizure



Records show Penner was put back on Loxapine again, and then suffered a major seizure.



"The seizure may be contributed to by her Loxapine and other anti-psychotic medications," reads a neurologist's assessment done at the time. "Nonetheless, I do not think we can stop them due to her extremely difficult-to-control behaviour."



Penner was eventually discharged to another care home in Langley, where Bodnar said she continued to deteriorate, but was not given any anti-psychotics. She died soon afterward, from complications caused by a blood clot.



Fraser Health declined a request for an interview, but sent a statement, which says anti-psychotic drugs are used on dementia patients when staff is unable to calm them down another way.



"While the preferred approach is to look for alternative ways to reduce the distress patients experience associated with dementia, medications, including anti-psychotics, are sometimes necessary."



'Standard practice': health authority



In Penner's case, Fraser Health calls the use of Loxapine "in keeping with standard practice."



B.C.'s acting health minister, Colin Hansen, indicated he is concerned about the increased use of such drugs in provincial facilities. He told CBC News he has ordered a review "immediately."



"We need to look more carefully at the manner in which the use of anti- psychotic drugs has grown," said Hansen. "I have asked Ministry of Health officials to work with the health authorities and to work with the College of Physicians and Surgeons ...to look at why."



Doreen Bodnar said she believes staff shortages, and perhaps lack of training or motivation, are the root of the problem.



"I think they want their job as easy as possible and a lot of times there is probably not enough of them," said Bodnar. "The doctors are not there to see if there's an actual problem."

A CRTC proposal that could make it easier to broadcast false or misleading news has prompted confusion and criticism among opposition MPs and consternation in at least one of the unions that represents Canadian journalists.

CRTC plan to lift ban on false news prompts political investigation





A CRTC proposal that could make it easier to broadcast false or misleading news has prompted confusion and criticism among opposition MPs and consternation in at least one of the unions that represents Canadian journalists.



It has also led to allegations of interference by the Prime Minister’s Office and a hastily called investigation by federal politicians, who were caught off guard by the move.





.A little-watched committee of Parliament has been pressing the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission for many years to do something about a regulation that bans the broadcast of false or misleading news because the wording appears to contravene the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.



Andrew Kania, the rookie MP who is the chairman of the joint committee for the scrutiny of regulations, said on Monday the committee has been asking the CRTC about the regulation for a decade.



Government officials said the problems with the ban were noted as early as 1996 – four years after the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel that the right to freedom of expression meant a person could not be charged for disseminating false information.



The regulations committee pointed out to the CRTC in 2000 that its regulation seemed to be out of step with that ruling and asked the commission what it planned to do about it. Letters were intermittently exchanged, but the CRTC indicated no interest in responding to the committee’s concerns.



Then, on Jan. 10, the commission announced it was seeking comments on a proposal to change the wording of the regulation to say that it applied only in cases in which broadcasters knew the information was false or misleading and that reporting it was likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public. The cut-off date for public input was set at Feb. 9.



The decision caught many people by surprise.



“We’ve looked everywhere to try to find out who’s pushing this, and we can’t find anybody,” said Peter Murdoch, the vice-president of media for the Communication, Energy and Paperworkers Union, which represents more than 20,000 journalists, including those at The Globe and Mail.



“It’s totally bizarre. Nobody in the industry has called for it,” Mr. Murdoch said. “Where is the motivation for change that would lower the standards of truth and fairness in broadcast journalism?”



NDP MP Charlie Angus noted that the proposed change precedes the start of Sun TV, a network that has been shepherded in large part by Kory Teneycke, the former director of communication to Prime Minister Stephen Harper.



“We all know our Prime Minister well enough to say we don’t have to be in the realm of conspiracy theory here,” Mr. Angus said at a news conference on Monday. “We can draw our conclusions and they are pretty clear.”



Behind the scenes, officials say the timing is purely coincidental, the PMO had nothing to do with it, and that the CRTC simply realized it eventually had to answer the concerns of the regulatory committee.



But Mr. Angus persuaded the Commons committee on Canadian heritage to initiate a study of the CRTC proposal. And he urged Canadians to let the commission know how they feel about it before the Wednesday deadline.



“What’s disturbed us with this [proposed] regulation change is that it’s happening very quickly and there’s very little awareness of it,” Mr. Angus said.



“It seems astounding that the CRTC would consider such a move at a time when we see the growing backlash in the United States to the poisoned levels of political discourse in the American media.”

Canada spent more than $41-million on hired guns in Afghanistan over four years, much of it going to security companies slammed by the U.S. Senate for having warlords on the payroll.

Canada's hired guns in Afghanistan rejected by U.S. for unsavoury ties


Canada spent more than $41-million on hired guns in Afghanistan over four years, much of it going to security companies slammed by the U.S. Senate for having warlords on the payroll.



Both the Defence and Foreign Affairs departments have employed 11 security contractors in Kabul and Kandahar since 2006, but have kept quiet about the details.




How one bomb changed so many lives Now documents tabled in Parliament at the request of the New Democrats provide the first comprehensive picture of the use of private contractors, which have been accused of adding to the chaos in Afghanistan.



The records show Foreign Affairs paid nearly $8-million to ArmorGroup Securities Ltd., recently cited in a U.S. Senate investigation as relying on Afghan warlords who in 2007 were engaged in “murder, kidnapping, bribery and anti-Coalition activities.”



The company, which has since been taken over by G4S Risk Management, provided security around the Canadian embassy in Kabul and guarded diplomats.



Tundra SCA stands on guard for the Defence Department outside Canadian military forward operating bases and has collected more than $5.3-million.



The U.S. Senate report included Tundra on a list of companies that poach staff from Afghan security forces – something that has long angered President Hamid Karzai, who last year moved to eject all private security from the country.



More than $438,000 of the Afghan-owned, Canadian-run company's expenses remain secret, for operational security reasons. But Tundra's website, unlike other contractors, promotes its intelligence “gathering and analyzing” abilities.



A Kandahar warlord, with links to former governor Gul Agha Sherzai, earned $2.5-million since 2008 providing security outside of the provincial reconstruction base.



Colonel Haji Toorjan employed a 40-man militia. But there are questions about how much was spent for his service because the documents tabled in the House of Commons are not consistent with access-to-information records and published reports that show he was on the payroll in 2007.



More than $3.4-million went to Washington, D.C.-based Blue Hackle to guard the governor of Kandahar and train his security detail. Canada started paying that expense in 2008, after Mr. Karzai replaced the notorious Asadullah Khalid, who was accused of human-rights abuses and had his own private militia known as Brigade 888.



All of the contracting happened even though the federal government has no overall policy or legislation to govern the use of hired guns – unlike other countries, notably the United States, which has imposed strict accountability guidelines on its contractors.



Even with those rules, the American system was found lacking by U.S. senators, who heard complaints from NATO that there was “little awareness of money flow” and that some of the contracts were “enriching powerbrokers, undercutting counterinsurgency efforts and delegitimizing the Afghan government.”



The Canadian International Development Agency, which delivers aid projects in Afghanistan, said it does not employ security companies, but agencies that it hires to deliver programs do.



One of those contractors, SNC Lavalin, hired the Watan Group to guard one of Ottawa's signature development projects, the Dahla dam. The company, owned by relatives of Mr. Karzai, was recently blacklisted by the U.S. military.



A spokesman for the Defence Department declined comment on Friday.



Foreign Affairs said it has no concerns about the record of the ArmorGroup's new owners, despite the criticism in Washington and noted the company had signed on to a non-binding international arrangement of best practices for armed contractors.



“All private security contractors employed by Canada are known to the Afghan Government, and are subject to Afghan law,” said Jean-Bruno Villeneuve, a department spokesman, in an email late Saturday night.



“G4S Risk Management is a signatory of the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers, which was signed in Geneva this past November.”



He said the department has no plans to draft an oversight policy and believes the current reporting mechanism – applied through contract language – are sufficient.



The NDP's foreign-affairs critic said it's appalling Ottawa had no mechanism to govern hired guns and charged that what the country tried to accomplish in terms of rule of law in Kandahar has suffered.



“It undermines our credibility,” said MP Paul Dewar. “Afghans are not stupid. They see these people. They see what they're doing and they know who is paying them.”



Opposition parties have throughout the war mounted attacks on the use of contractors, but never had a complete picture from which to draw conclusions. Even with the release of figures and contract names, Mr. Dewar said there are still many important questions left unanswered.



“We've spent tens of millions of dollars on what I would consider to be some very dubious characters, to do what?” he said. “Foreign Affairs, in particular, needs to be held to account. I'm blown away by what I'm seeing here.”



Mr. Dewar questioned why contractors were needed in the first place. But a defence expert, who has written extensively on the use of hired guns in war zones, said they are a fact of life in the age of all-volunteer armies.



The contractors, usually ex-soldiers, are most often used in a defensive manner, taking up guard duties that free combat troops, said researcher Dave Perry in Ottawa.



He also cautioned that moral outrage over unsavoury alliances with local warlords should be tempered.



In conflict zones “I think it would be hard to find somebody who could provide credible security force that did not have something in their past that somebody could point to and say that they've done something inappropriate,” said Mr. Perry.



What is needed, he said, are concrete guidelines.



There are an estimated 40,000 armed security contractors operating in Afghanistan. Mr. Karzai ordered them out of the country last fall, but concern about how aid and development groups would protect themselves forced him to back down.



Instead, the Afghan government has demanded that firms register with the government and begin paying taxes.

Internet billing May cause a federal election in Canada?.

Now here's an issue which could cause a federal election in Canada.



It's Internet billing.



The Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission ruled last month that there won't be unlimited Internet access in this country. The CRTC ruled that large Internet service providers, or ISPs, such as Bell, would be allowed to meter bandwidth to independent providers which buy it wholesale, then resell it to consumers at a lower price.



It also forces large ISPs to sell bandwidth to wholesalers at a 15% discount, which the CRTC said would help boost competition.



CRTC boss Konrad von Finckenstein said the ruling was fair because it avoided penalizing ordinary Internet users for heavy downloaders. About 14% of residential Internet users are responsible for 83% of its traffic.



Von Finckenstein said it's an easily understood principle, that if one uses the Internet more than the average customer, then it costs more.



But the federal government said no to the CRTC ruling.



Industry Minister Tony Clement said that decision will be over-ruled by the Conservatives if its not changed.



He left no doubt about that, even after the CRTC said it would review its ruling.



"Regardless of the outcome of the CRTC review, this ruling will not be implemented," Clement said.



Von Finckenstein emphasized the CRTC didn't agree to a review because of the industry minister's position, but because Bell and another Internet provider asked for a delay in the implementation of the ruling. So the deadline to implement the new regulations has been pushed back 60 days from March 1.





Or, just in time for the federal election expected this spring.



Granted, this issue might give Prime Minister Stephen Harper an edge when Canadians go to the polls. About 550,000 people use independent ISPs in Canada and would have been directly affected by the ruling. That's only about 6% of Internet users, but given low voter turnout in recent federal elections...



But an on-line petition of Internet users gathered more than 250,000 signatures. Harper has also weighed in personally, demanding a review.



All of this raises several questions.



One is why even have a CRTC when the government of the day can over-rule its decisions? Isn't the regulator supposed to be an arms-length agency?



Or, are CRTC rulings only OK when they jive with the government's position?



Harper and the Conservatives, of course, are taking advantage of the CRTC's ruling to make it look like they're sticking up for the little guy (or gal) who's trying to get a good deal on Internet services.



And by bullying the CRTC into reviewing its decision, the government has effectively delayed it until an election decision has been made.



That will likely come next month when the Conservatives bring in their federal budget, and the Liberals, Bloc Quebecois, New Democrats and a few odd independent MPs decide whether this is an issue worthy of an election.



Corporate tax breaks in the budget have been fingered as an issue the opposition says it can't stomach. But whether it's an issue that resounds with Canadian voters is another question.



Not many believe business should pay less taxes while the rank and file see their taxes jacked higher, even if the tax break does, in theory, create jobs.



But everyone can and does understand more expensive Internet fees.



Not that this will be a factor if or when the writ drops.