Vancouver Courier
for May 20, 1998

A couple of items today both, in the broader sense, involving insurance.

As 33% of you know, according to the last poll taken, on September 14, 1997 the premiers (save Bouchard) passed what started out called the Calgary Framework but since been upgraded by the Central Canadian dominated media to the Calgary Declaration. Soon, no doubt it will be an "Accord", then a "Manifesto" and ultimately Holy Writ.

Just as a TV network has exposed the secrets of magicians I lay before you the sleight-of-word by Jean Chretien whereby an innocent "framework" containing five words becomes translated into two words with quite a different meaning which happens to be synonymous with his pet phrase, "distinct society".

The premiers and their etymologists, knowing the marked antipathy of the public (especially in B.C.) to the term "distinct society" scrambled through their thesauruses and discovered "unique character of Quebec society". That was much better!

The trouble was, as I blushingly admit I predicted, a different spin was instantly put on this phrase by the likes of Jean Chretien and Stephan Dion and especially their clients Premiers Romanow and McKenna abetted by the Toronto Globe and Mail and the Southam press. The words "character of Quebec" were dropped the phrase becoming "unique society" and thus utterly synonymous with "distinct society."

Prime Minister Chretien pulled this verbal legerdemain out of his homburg saying that the phrases mean the same thing announcing that when the Calgary "Declaration" is approved by all provinces he will seriously consider substituting "unique society" for "distinct society" in the House of Commons December 1995 resolution. He will then press for a constitutional amendment.! Houdini would love it!

B.C.'s Constitutional minister Andrew Petter has just tabled a motion in the Legislature to approve the Calgary Framework (they've gone back to the original wording). But there's a wrinkle. A very important wrinkle and it will be interesting to see how Jean Chretien's poodles, the national press, plays with this.

Now I tell you fair that I don't think we should pass this motion at all if for no other reason than it will raise expectations which can't be met. Having said that, let me refer to the last "whereas" in the motion. "AND WHEREAS the Calgary Framework does not imply agreement to constitutional change, and any further amendment to the Constitution of Canada must be approved by British Columbians in a referendum ..." This, one might think, prevent any proposed "unique society" amendments to the constitution.

It won't. In all likelihood the captive media will ignore this vital caveat. Jean Chretien will simply say that he accepts the resolution as consent under the Constitution. If B.C. asks the Federal government to veto such an amendment under the goofy House of Commons "regional veto plan" Mr Chretien will say that he considers that B.C. has agreed and if the government failed to hold a referendum that's none of his concern.

Failing that, he'll proceed without B.C. under the section which requires consent of 2/3rds of the Provinces having 50% of the population - the very move his constitutional minister Stephane Dion deplored on my program last Fall. If there are to be constitutional amendments they must be done through the front door, not shoes in hand sneaking through a window in the basement.

The NDP government could scarcely do less than make it clear that they were approving a framework, not a constitutional change in defiance of our Constitutional Amendment Approval Act. I give full marks to minister Petter, for refusing to be stampeded into a trap. It's sound insurance against future problems.

Speaking of insurance, this item from the Trial Lawyers of B.C. news letter. ICBC has a huge advertising budget giving it the power to bully publishers of newspapers. Now you wouldn't think that a department of government (for that's what ICBC really is) would stoop to that would you?

Stoop they did. They demanded that the Richmond Review publish an ICBC spin doctored news release at the same time the Review as running an ICBC ad or ICBC would refuse to advertise in the Review or its sister publication, the Surrey/Delta Leader.

What ICBC got was a Cash Surrender Value without the Surrender for editor Dave McCullough printed his own ad with a copy of his note to his advertising staff under the headline "Our news is not for sale." The note explained that despite hating to lose advertising revenue, the integrity of The Review would not be compromised by capitulating to the insurance giant.

In my close personal experience I have watched the local media back off the Kemano Completion Project under pressure from Alcan (which they tried to apply without success against my radio program) and fall all over themselves supporting, uncritically, Mulroney's Charlottetown Accord.

Just as my regard for my profession had sunk as low as a snake's belly, along comes a community newspaper to remind the big guys what it's supposed to be all about.