I agree with the Star Editorial below. It is legitimate, and proper, for witnesses at public inquiries to have counsel and for those counsel to be paid. I'll admit that the fee of $2,000,000 seems pretty rich, especially for a little over a week of testimoney -- at my rate that's nearly three full years of billing full time to Mulroney's file and nothing else -- but the concept is legitimate.
I am more troubled at the tax deal where the former Prime Minister admitted to having significant cash income and was taxed on just half that amount. The reason for such deals is that most cash deals are never discovered so to encourage people to come forward and admit the money there is a significant incentive given. But it feels wrong -- perhaps I expected too much from Mr. Mulroney?
Star OpEd here: http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/638410
The fuss over the federal government's payment of former prime minister Brian Mulroney's $2 million in legal fees arising from the Oliphant inquiry is misplaced.
A public inquiry is a massive undertaking. A judge presides over it, but under him or her is a wide array of lawyers and researchers digging into files and conducting tough cross-examinations of the subjects of the inquiry, who are often former senior office holders like Mulroney. Furthermore, it is not a trial (Mulroney stands accused of no crime) but a search for information. The conclusions drawn from the inquiry are generally political (whom to blame) or policy-oriented (how to avoid a reoccurrence). It is only right, then, that the government pay the legal expenses of the subjects of the inquiry, both to protect their interests and to assist in the fact-finding.
I am more troubled at the tax deal where the former Prime Minister admitted to having significant cash income and was taxed on just half that amount. The reason for such deals is that most cash deals are never discovered so to encourage people to come forward and admit the money there is a significant incentive given. But it feels wrong -- perhaps I expected too much from Mr. Mulroney?
Star OpEd here: http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/638410
The fuss over the federal government's payment of former prime minister Brian Mulroney's $2 million in legal fees arising from the Oliphant inquiry is misplaced.
A public inquiry is a massive undertaking. A judge presides over it, but under him or her is a wide array of lawyers and researchers digging into files and conducting tough cross-examinations of the subjects of the inquiry, who are often former senior office holders like Mulroney. Furthermore, it is not a trial (Mulroney stands accused of no crime) but a search for information. The conclusions drawn from the inquiry are generally political (whom to blame) or policy-oriented (how to avoid a reoccurrence). It is only right, then, that the government pay the legal expenses of the subjects of the inquiry, both to protect their interests and to assist in the fact-finding.
1 comment:
The fuss over Mulroney's $2 million (and counting) legal bill is not misplaced.
If we have to pay for Mulroney's legal assistance, fine. But then he should get legal aid lawyers like the rest of us.
The presumption that he should get some special rich-person's disposition is repugnant.
No other citizen would be allowed to select a team of high-priced layers and publicists. That Mulroney is able to do so represents an inequity of justice in this country.
And if evidence of that inequity is needed, we need look no further than this case itself, where Mulroney, by virtue of his high-priced legal help, manages to escape paying taxes on half the unreported stuffed-envelop money he received for, um, services rendered.
An ordinary person, with ordinary lawyers, would pay full tax, interest and penalties. That's if they didn't wind up in jail first.
We have to stop coddling these people. Their wealth should create a presumption that requires a closer scrutiny into the ethics and legality of their finances, not support for a system that makes it easier for them to hide and explain away their dealings.
Post a Comment