CKNW Editorial
for February 15, 2001

I don't mean to pick on Stephen Owen, the rookie Liberal MP from Quadra. I have long admired him and his career ... his family and mine have been friends for several generations. But, dammit, Stephen should have seen it coming.

The issue wasn't long in happening and when it did, it cost Stephen a whole lot of credibility he has carefully built up over the years, especially as Ombudsman and Deputy Attorney-General. He was seen as a man of wisdom and probity and even those of us who wouldn't vote Liberal if their lives depended on it admired him.

It has taken some time for the public to understand that MPs , especially on the government side, are lackeys. I have in my unkinder moments called them lickspittles. When I'm feeling especially grouchy I call them political whores. But what else can one say?

In theory the MP is supposed to represent our interests in Ottawa. I think we all understand that there are political parties and that there must be solidarity from time to time. But when I interviewed Stephen Owen as he departed to Ottawa I canvassed the problem of an MP disagreeing with his party, for that read the Prime Minister. Stephen drew the distinction between matters of mere policy and matters of conscience and said that if the majority decided a matter of policy that he would have to go along with it despite his personal feelings. But, he said emphatically, if it were a matter of conscience or personal conviction, then it was the duty of the MP to act on his own.

Let's examine this issue. The Liberal Red Book of 1993 called for an Ethics Commissioner to be selected by the House of Commons to report to the House of Commons. The reason for this is obvious - if the Commissioner is subject to being fired by the government he will have a personal stake in pleasing that government. In fact, the model used by British Columbia, namely having people in these positions free from cabinet restraint is what the Liberal Red Book copied.

Now Stephen Owen didn't just talk to me about this issue. He not only made it plain to me that the BC experience taught us that Ethics commissioners, or as we call it Conflicts of Interest Commissioners must report to the legislature not the government he made this abundantly clear in an interview with the National Post. And he made these points knowing that the question of the rights of MPs would be front and center in this session of Parliament. It had been an election issue and the Alliance had made it clear that it would be a Commons issue as well. I point this out because Stephen's outspoken position was taken in the full knowledge that he would be called upon to deal with this issue. I can only conclude that because Stephen Owen made this point emphatically - and recognizing that he is a man who is steeped in the political process and once served as a servant of the legislature that this question was a matter of principle for him. He has, then, abandoned principle in record time. I'm not naïve ... I know the pressures our utterly hopeless system places on decent men and women who really want to do well and be sincere and honest advocates. But Stephen walked into this with his eyes wide open . When he was selected as Liberal candidate I publicly asked if he knew what he was doing. And he heard the concerns I expressed on behalf of many British Columbians. Yet Stephen Owen accepted a nomination from a man who is a dictator and resists all calls for giving power back to the MP and he ran for a party which has always put party discipline ahead of principle. He must have known that when he gave me and gave the National Post the interviews he did that his views ran counter to those of the Prime Minister. He must have known that he would be leaned on ... that the Prime Minister through the government whips would give him the carrot and stick treatment that keeps government MPs in line. Yet he said what he did then marched into the House of Commons and voted against what he so firmly stood for.

What is so sad is that two Liberal MPs had the gumption to vote with the Alliance on this issue and four others had the courage to abstain. I was surprised when Stephen took the tough stances he did on this question on my program and was even more surprised when he did so with a national newspaper. But he did - unequivocally and in plain unadorned English. For just a moment I allowed myself the luxury of thinking that BC finally had a government member who would stand on principle.

The term political whore has a special meaning that has nothing to do with sex ... it means someone who would sacrifice his principles for hope of reward. P.J. O'Rourke wrote an excellent book called Parliament of Whores. The expression, as I say, has nothing to do with sexual morals though the very best candidate, until now, for the appellation, Hedy Fry, tries to pretend it does. By definition those Liberal MPs who would put party and personal advantage before principle ... who would have us believe that they can speak one way and vote another ... are political whores. To that list must be added, I say with considerable sorrow, the name Stephen Owen, MP