Premier Alison Redford misled Albertans by insisting she had no involvement in the decision to award a massive tobacco lawsuit to the consortium of firms, including that of her ex-husband. Or did she?
Speaker Gene Zwozdesky ruled Monday that she did not mislead the Alberta legislature, though opposition parties insist this is not the case.
In justice and government alike, it is not enough to be unbiased. One must also have the appearance of being unbiased.
Failing to do so has turned this event into a scandalous affair, regardless if it is, in fact, a scandal.
The Wildrose believes so strongly in their conflict-of-interest allegations that the party filed a formal complaint with the ethics commissioner last week urging him to either conduct an investigation or turn it over to a third-party to conduct an investigation.
NDP leader Brian Mason called on the premier to step aside until an investigation is concluded.
The Wildrose party alleges Redford had a direct role in awarding the $10-billion contract to the International Tobacco Recovery Lawyers – which includes the firm of her ex-husband Robert Hawkes – but Redford insists this is not the case. She said her successor Verlyn Olson was justice minister when the decision was made.
Redford held that position until mid-February 2011 when she stepped down to run for the Progressive Conservative leadership.
Documents obtained by the Wildrose last week through a freedom of information request detail a series of communications by Redford, dated two months before her resignation, apparently selecting the firm.
It appears the opposition’s argument has merit.
The opposition parties, particularly the Wildrose, allege that Redford and the PCs are deliberately lying to Albertans.
The facts surrounding this allegation will not entirely be known unless an investigation is conducted and the results made public.
Regardless whether the PC party is lying or not, it certainly isn’t helping matters that the individual at the centre of this debacle, Premier Redford, continually dodges questions from opposition MLAs during question period and from the media during press conferences.
Failing to answer questions – whether they are asked by an opposition MLA, a reporter or an Albertan – gives the appearance of guilt. It makes onlookers think something is being camouflaged.
Redford quickly dodged questions in the legislature last week, failed to address the same questions in media scrums and subsequently put doubt in the minds of Albertans.
When you have tape recorders recording and cameras filming, it’s best to address the questions and do so honestly. Instead, it appears the PC government would rather cancel this opportunity altogether, preventing media from asking questions and getting answers. A media availability was scheduled with the premier Thursday afternoon, at the peak of government tension, but was cancelled with no explanation just 19 minutes before it was set to begin.
The PC government only has itself to blame for putting its decisions under the microscope. If the government isn’t providing answers, people are going to dig deeper and deeper until they find their own answers.
Ultimately, it is important for Albertans to know to what extent Redford was involved, if at all, in the decision to award the contract to the International Tobacco Recovery Lawyers.
The government must address the questions of MLAs and media – both of which represent a great deal of Albertans – in order to recover or maintain the trust Albertans have in the party chosen to lead the province.
