Why didn't Stephen Harper sue Chuck Cadman's biographer, Tom Zytaruk?
I never thought that Stephen Harper’s lawsuit against the federal Liberals was anything but an attempt to get the media to stop reporting on the Conservative party’s conduct before a 2005 budget vote.
Yesterday’s news that the case has been dropped suggests that Harper really didn’t want to hear what a judge might say about his unproven allegation about Surrey reporter Tom Zytaruk.
The pro-Harper news media routinely portray the prime minister as a man of integrity.
This nasty business involving the taped interview got in the way of that storyline. In the same way, his failure to keep promises about his so-called accountability legislation reinforces Opposition claims that Harper can’t be trusted.
Here’s the story in a nutshell: Zytaruk, who wrote a biography of former MP Chuck Cadman, included an astonishing revelation from Cadman’s wife Dona.
She said that her husband, who died in 2005, told her he was offered a $1-million life insurance policy if he voted with the Conservatives against the 2005 budget.
Cadman voted with the Liberals, and said he wasn’t offered anything to do this.
Zytaruk also quoted Harper, then Opposition leader, saying he knew there were discussions.
After the book was released last year, the federal Liberals posted a statement on their Web site claiming that the Conservatives had offered a bribe to Cadman. Harper went ballistic (yes, the man has a temper) and sued.
His local henchman, Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam MP James Moore, led the attack on the Liberals and the veracity of the tape.
Harper also claimed that Zytaruk's tape was doctored. However, a court-ordered analysis suggested there was no tampering in the section in question.
Harper never sued Zytaruk. The prime minister only filed an action against the federal Liberals.
It would have been a shocking act of mendacity for Zytaruk to do something like this, considering that it could conceivably cost Harper his job as prime minister.
If Harper truly wanted to clear his name, why didn’t he include the Surrey reporter as a defendant?
Could it be because Zytaruk might have turned around and filed a counterclaim, which would elevate the risk of a judge nailing Harper for not telling the truth with his allegation of a doctored tape?
We’ll never know because this case has been dropped and Zytaruk was never named as a defendant.
Let’s hope the public doesn’t forget this the next time national columnists suggest with a straight face that Harper’s trump card is his integrity.
As with his failure to keep his promises with his accountability legislation, Harper also didn't demonstrate the most savoury character in this instance.
If he really wanted to clear his name, he would have sued Zytaruk. But instead of doing this, Harper only sued the federal Liberals.
Draw your own conclusions.
No comments:
Post a Comment