The Coleman Files

Following the release of the German report last year, I posted a video of Rich Coleman being interviewed by Sean Holman, with a dissection of what he said and how he said it. You can find that post here:

Since then, Sam Cooper has broken story after story of how completely out of control the situation is in BC casinos, with criminals having washed an estimated billion dollars plus in a completely unfettered manner. ( you can find his stories in that embedded link)

That’s why the decision to disband the IIGET still makes no sense, nor do the many explanations given by Rich Coleman then, or since. Frankly, the decision stunk more than old herring eggs washed up onto the beach do, after sitting in the sun for a few days…

In fact, his statements have most often been at odds with documents Holman obtained via FOI requests, and with statements given by others…and after going back to look I saw Sean had more Coleman videos on the same story.

Just for posterity, I wanted to bring all that info here in one post to make it easy for you to watch and read. One article or video alone takes on a far greater context when it is read and compared to the others.

Let’s start with this video posted October 2009, the fall after the decision to disband the IIGET was made.

Huh. According to Coleman, everything was awesome at BC casinos, BCLC has all eyes and ears and surveillance in casinos, sophisticated equipment most problem gaming happened at illegal gaming houses (he disputed Fred Pinnocks statements. )

We’ll get back to this all in a moment, but here is Holman with Coleman again, asking more questions following documents that contradict his statements.

So,to be perfectly clear, at different times, Coleman has stated: that the board made the recommendation to disband; that he consulted with senior members of the RCMP; that the unit was inefficient and had not achieved directives; that it was redundant with the increase in officers and funding in other units that would cross over investigations with organized crime.

Yet as Sean Holman pointed out here: , that’s not what some RCMP were told was the reason for disbanding:

” Last month, Housing and Social Development Minister Rich Colemantold Public Eye the government-funded RCMP team wasn’t shutdown because of funding pressures. Instead, he said the team was shutdown because it hadn’t prepared a business plan and the government wasn’t “getting the results we wanted.”

But, in March, the RCMP’s criminal operations branch cited urgent “funding pressures, criminal enterprise activity and/or other operational and investigative priorities” as the reasons for that shutdown, which took place on April 1.

This, according to a message sent to officers in British Columbia and obtained via a freedom of information request.

That’s consistent with what a RCMP spokesperson earlier told Public Eye.

And it seems to support former unit commander Fred Pinnock‘s statement that illegal gaming was pushed to the backseat because of a need to focus on other enforcement priorities

In an exclusive interview, Pinnock said those priorities included criminal activities that would “keep (the RCMP) positioned to ensure the renewal” of their provincial policing contract in 2012, such as gang violence.

The following is a complete copy of the aforementioned message.


To: All Members “E” Division
From: Criminal Operations Branch


Dissolution of Integrated Illegal Gaming Enforcement Team (IIGET)

Established in 2004 under the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch (GPEB), Police Services Division (PSD) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), IIGET was created due to a growing concern about the enforcement response to illegal gaming in British Columbia and acted within the regulatory framework of the Gaming Control Act.

IIGET was dedicated primarily to preserving the integrity of legal gaming in this Province and targeted illegal gaming activity such as; illegal lotteries, common gaming houses, the distribution of illegal video lottery terminals, animal fights, bookmaking, and internet gaming.

Other activities of the IIGET included; the education of partner agencies, the gathering and recording of intelligence and reporting on the scope and extent of illegal gaming provincially.

On 2009-02-18, given exigent funding pressures, criminal enterprise activityand/or other operational and investigative priorities, a decision was made not to seek a renewal of the current MOU for the IIGET.

Please be advised that effective April 1, 2009, the IIGET is to be collapsed and will cease to exist as a unit. As IIGET will no longer be in a position to take on illegal gaming investigations, the relevant “police force of jurisdiction” will now be responsible for illegal gaming investigations.

Funding pressures….or an inefficient, redundant unit?

Lets move on again, to the infamous video interrogation interview Holman conducted in 2010…part 1 here, followed by the second portion.

Holman does a complete write up with the above video here:

But here’s what continues to confound us: neither of those reports recommended shuttering the team – quite the opposite. Other records obtained by Public Eye also show the RCMP and the minister’s own communications staff were offering opposing explanations for its closure – citing funding pressures and the need to focus on other policing priorities. And those explanations are more consistent with what the team’s former unit commander Fred Pinnock told us last year during an interview in which he questioned the government”s commitment to “meaningful” illegal gaming investigations.

So what was the minister’s response to that inconsistency? Well, you can see for yourself what he had to say when we spoke to him last week in his office.

But, it gets better. Here is the second part of that interview

From Holmans report:

Who made the controversial decision to shutdown the province’s anti-illegal gaming enforcement team? In October, Rich Coleman told reporters he did. Later, the gaming minister explained he only meant to take “responsibility for that decision” – which was actually made by the team’s consultative board. But internal documents obtained to-date by Public Eye suggest the board may have had little involvement in disbanding IIGET. Here’s why: for starters, that decision was supposedly made on February 18, 2009. But the board’s last minuted meeting happened on January 26, 2009. And those minutes don’t record any discussion about disbanding the team. Although its members did discuss “the uncertainty of future funding for IIGET.” Then, there’s the email that was sent on February 18, to the gaming policy and enforcement branch’s general manager Derek Sturko.

“Did iiget get the funding or not?,” wrote Larry Vander Graaf, executive director of the branch’s investigations and regional operations division.

“No, but we have not yet advised them,” replied Mr. Sturko, who was also a member of the consultative board.

He then went on to add the director of the ministry of public safety and solicitor general’s police services division Kevin Begg “will advise the RCMP and let me know when he’s done so. Until then, the decision is confidential.”

Then, a month later, another civil servant asked Mr. Sturko whether “the Board and OIC of IIGET” needed to be told of the team’s status.

The response: “IIGET is being discontinued. The IIGET Board knows,” later adding in a separate email, “I think they all know. Certainly Dick Bent does” – a reference to the RCMP’s deputy criminal operations officer in British Columbia.

But if the team’s board had made that decision in February, why would there be any uncertainty about its members knowing IIGET was being disbanded?

These are the questions we had for Minister Coleman when we spoke to him earlier this month in his office.

His response: “The minister doesn’t deal with everybody else’s emails. So what Derek is writing to one person or this person is writing to that one is never an issue for me…I don’t get into the minutiae of the little discussion going back and forth. And I can’t speak for those guys little minutiae of discussions. I just know for me it was, it wasn’t working, looked at the budget, got the board decision, shut it down.”

The minister later stated that while the consultative board may have recommended shutting down IIGET, he was responsible for executing that decision.

Later that summer, in August 2010, Holman posted this:

The province’s gaming minister has said an RCMP team targeting illegal gaming was axed, in part, because it “never, ever” prepared a “business plan” – a document describing how it would be managed over the long-term. But records obtained via access to information requests show the team did prepare a pair of “business cases” arguing for its expansion in 2007 – with the more detailed of the two including a three-year budget plan. By January 2009, it had also completed the research needed to write a “five-year strategic plan,” as well as a “final business case” that would have included short and long-term objectives and performance measures for the team. Three months later, though, the provincially-funded unit’s doors were closed – with a government spokesperson later stating a business case isn’t a business plan because it only explains why a particular program is needed.
In an action plan written during the early months of 2008, Wayne Holland – the officer who was then in charge of the team – acknowledged the more detailed, 19-page business case he had prepared for his RCMP superiors was “somewhat lacking in content.”
The reason: according to the inspector, the team hadn’t yet prepared a threat assessment on the “scope and extent of illegal gaming” in British Columbia.
But once that happened, Insp. Holland promised the team would be able to paint a more comprehensive picture of the team’s future – including “timeframes for the recruitment and training of additional staff and the infrastructure required to support them.”
That threat assessment – which warned Asian and Italian organized crime figures, as well as Hells Angels, were likely involved in illegal gaming – was ready by January 29, 2009.
Three months later the team’s doors were closed with no record of any further business cases – or plans – being written.

Every single reason Coleman is on record for, has been contradicted or opposed. In documents or by statements from people like Fred Pinnock, and almost entirely by Sean Holman. In fact other than a report in the Globe and Mail by none other than Sean himself, it really doesn’t appear that the press really picked this up back then, which is a shame. ( This isn’t surprising considering how some of the older members of the press gallery recently acted, attacking Plecas prior to the release of his report)

You can access Seans archived stories on this here:

Why does all this matter?
Because as Coleman finally started getting put under the spotlight last year about this, he still pulled out all these old reasons that have been largely contradicted…

“Coleman told CKNW’s Lynda Steele Show that it is “load of garbage” to suggest his government knew money laundering was going on and didn’t stop it because the government was addicted to the gaming revenues.When Coleman was serving as solicitor general, the government decided to scrap the Integrated Illegal Gambling Enforcement Team (IIGET) even though there were reports that showed substantial money laundering in B.C. casinos.

“I think we tried. I think the challenge was IIGET didn’t work. I thought IIGET would work better than it did. And I think that was our biggest disappointment,” said Coleman.

“We did everything we could. I had the confidence to do my job arm’s length from any interference with any investigation from police.”

But as we have seen above, neither report recommended shuttering that team, and RCMP issued a statement following this segment refuting Coleman.

And as far as having an arms length from BCLC decisions and operation…we know that’s not quite accurate either.

55 thoughts on “The Coleman Files

  1. Just finished “visiting” RossK’s Pacific Gazetteer, where he is referring to an article in the paper last week announcing Paragon Gaming is selling their interest in the downtown Vancouver resort style casino. Now isn’t that a surprise. Wonder what caused that? Wonder if they decided to cash out their chips before they were confiscated by a provincial government if they ever held a corruption/money laundering inquiry, involving casinos. Proceeds of crime and all that sort of stuff. Now it maybe coincidence, but I’m not so sure. If you have a read of some of the old articles RossK is referencing and posting, you might get the idea. Coming over here to check out the blog it was some fun surprise to see your post up. Read it but can’t watch the videos, just got through some of the orange oaf’s sputterings and you can only take so much b.s. in one evening.

    good article, Laila. loved the “art work” at the top!


    1. Not my work to thank, it’s all Sean’s just gathered here. Too many dont even know his work or the fact that most media didnt touch this back then.

      An excellent read here today from Sean.

      If there is one thing anyone can read to understand how the elders in the press gallery work in Victoria, this is it.

      ” …That should have suggested to journalists there could be something to the allegations against James, especially when it became clear they involved spending at the legislature. In my experience investigating provincial politics, I’ve found most officials accused of wrongdoing rarely believe they are doing anything wrong. Instead, they believe they are doing something normal. Otherwise, they couldn’t live with themselves. And James’s spending at Elections BC suggested to me that he may have believed such lavish expenses were normal. Indeed, at the time that spending was revealed, Travis said it demonstrated a “culture of entitlement.”

      However, the political news media didn’t seem to appreciate the implications of this earlier controversy. And I believe that has to do with their biases.

      There may be some right-wingers in the press gallery. There may even be some left-wingers.

      But more than anything else, many of its longest-serving members are establishmentarians who worship at what journalism professor Jay Rosen has called the “church of the savvy.” That means, in the main, they favour members of the province’s political establishment (regardless of their ideology) over those who would challenge its institutions, practices and traditions.

      This tendency is reinforced by their sources, most of whom come from that establishment. After all, when you are looking for official comment on the story of the day at the legislature, that’s who you are going to be talking with most often. But it’s also reinforced by the way those journalists cover politics: as a game where someone is up and someone is down. This means there is a tendency to cheer for those who are good players (i.e. savvy) while booing those who aren’t — something I could be guilty of too, when I was at the gallery….”

      Read on. It’s quite something. And then take a moment to thank Dermod and Sean for all they have done and do for this province.


      1. And more from Sean’s Tyee piece.

        ” …Soon after, I was hauled into Barisoff’s office, along with then press gallery president Tom Fletcher. Barisoff seemed to take umbrage at me questioning him in the Speaker’s corridor, the hallway next to the main MLA entrance to the legislative chambers. My impression was my access to the corridor, and perhaps even the legislative precincts themselves, might be at risk of being revoked, something the Speaker has the power to do.

        I couldn’t risk that, despite having the support of press gallery members such as Vaughn Palmer, Lindsay Kines and Rob Shaw. It would have threatened my ability to question MLAs and other officials who weren’t returning my phone calls and emails, one of the few perks of having a legislature press pass. And that would have threatened my livelihood. I dropped the story.

        But I remembered that experience when I got a tip to file a freedom of information request for James’s expenses at Elections BC. At the time, I was in middle of filming Whipped: The Secret World of Party Discipline. That meant I needed Barisoff’s permission to use footage from Hansard. I believed reporting on James’s spending might put that permission at risk. However, I didn’t feel I could take a pass on the story either. So I passed it on to Travis.

        If Plecas had never made his allegations against James, this anecdote might be little more than a historical footnote. But, since those allegations have been made, it also demonstrates why it’s so difficult to report on legislature officials.

        Because the Speaker’s office (and the legislative assembly as a whole) isn’t covered by the province’s freedom of information law, we only know what its members chose to tell us about what’s going on in it. That’s why I needed to ask Barisoff about Hicks instead of just filing a freedom of information request for the records related to that decision. And it’s partially why the Speaker was one of the few individuals in a position to make allegations against James. Moreover, even if someone at the legislature had leaked information about James to the gallery, the Speaker has the power to frustrate reporters seeking transparency and accountability by barring them from the precincts.

        So what does this all mean? Does it mean, as some have suggested, that members of the press gallery owe Plecas an apology? I don’t think so. Plecas gave them more than enough cause to cover him critically. It’s also possible Plecas will be proven wrong and that James and Lenz will be proven innocent. But regardless of how this controversy ends, I think the gallery owes it to themselves and their audiences to question how they have gone about their jobs in the past and how they will go about them in the future.

        That job will be made easier if the government follows through on its commitment to bring the legislative assembly under the province’s freedom of information law. Such a change will allow the public, including the news media, to request records from the assembly that its officials would not otherwise willingly publicize. The possibility of publication could also pre-emptively reduce the chances of wrongdoing.

        As the Globe and Mail’s editorial board wrote in 1965, when NDP MP Barry Mather became the first MP to introduce a freedom of information bill, “there is nothing like the spotlight of publicity to improve a man’s democratic manners.”

        However, I also think the Speaker needs to be stripped of the office’s power to affect who can and can’t cover the legislature, as well as the usage of Hansard footage. I don’t believe it should be given to the press gallery either. Its handling of DeSmog Canada’s (now the Narwhal) request to attend a news conference is proof it can’t be trusted with that power. Instead, it should be given to one of the legislature’s independent officers, perhaps the information and privacy commissioner or the ombudsperson, both of whom have an interest in ensuring accountability and transparency.

        If all of this doesn’t happen, I fear that the people’s house will remain the private domain of some of the most privileged officials in provincial politics. And that serves no one’s interest, except theirs. “


  2. Sean Holman didn’t just peel away one ring of the smelly eye burning nose stinging stinky onion of the establishment Press Galley, he peeled off the the whole works and got to the core. Love the explanation of The Church of Savvy. Thanks for posting the link. More insight and depth into the this whole community of media and politics is always a better thing for being informed. Sean Holman is one of the best. Love his clear detail.


    1. Yep. Miss his work on Public Eye Online. This is why it’s so important to support independent media like him or Bob Mackin. He couldn’t make a go of it enough to make a living…not many can. Narwhal does amazing work too but people poo poo it as a left wing paper which is stupid because they do foi’s just like Sean and have broken some excellent stories not covered anywhere else.


    1. Bob’s a rockstar and I’ve seen him mocked by senior reporters too. Because hes a bulldog who doesn’t let go and goes where they refuse to like Sean Holmans piece points out


  3. In the news today:

    “In a review of other Canadian rate-regulated utilities, Bellringer found that BC Hydro is the only one that does not follow generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Rather, it uses “prescribed standards” for its rate-regulated accounting.

    BC Hydro began using rate regulated accounts in 2004 to pay for power generation built by independent power producers.

    Under power purchase agreements, private companies financed the construction of wind farms and run-of-river projects. So while BC Hydro did not have to borrow to cover the capital of building these new wind farms and run-of-river projects, it was obliged to pay the developers for that power over a period of decades.

    BC Hydro’s use of rate regulated accounting has increased since then.

    Bellringer describes the over-use of regulatory accounting as “intergenerational inequality,” since future ratepayers end up paying disproportionately more than they should so that current ratepayers enjoy artificially lower rates.”


  4. I don’t think i’m in a trusting mood for Auditor Bellringer carrying the ball still in that capacity, just because of what I’ve taken in so far. Big example being from Norm Farrell’s recent and excellent piece The Lady Doth Protest Too Much concerning the Plecus and ledge files.


    1. Totally . If one is a long time follower here, Bellringers report isnt even news. Auditor John Doyle ripped the Libs many years ago for those deferral accounts and much more and zip….he was gone.

      Erik Anderson, Norm Farrell and dear Rafe rung that bell hard. Props to the ag for catching up…


        1. Those in the dark about the reference to under pants:
          Norm Farrell, march 30, 2012;

          “May I suggest a new name for Bill Good’s CKNW Friday morning,
          Cutting Edge from the Ledge better titled Dull Edge from the Ledge

          Today, the boys got to say what they really think about the blog world:

          “Vaughn called them nut cases in the past . . .”
          “Nincompoops ranting in their underpants is the term for people blogging, for me.”
          “I don’t believe these Weirdos on the internet.”

          Thanks guys. You remain our inspirations with that never ending quest to find and report the real stories. By the way, are you willing to disclose your secondary income sources and investment portfolios? No involvement with industries reliant on government permissions, no doubt.

          PS. Vaughan, for you today, I put on pair of slacks. Gives me a sense of power.


  5. Amazing how many “Brand X” washday miracles have been cited in BC politics lately. Depending on your choice of partisan crusade the future could not be brighter. But remember, looking back to previous scandals or asking dangerous questions about inaction now could really muck up the works. And then? It would be your fault for being too curious about politics and lies.

    The Standard Offer.

    For voters to succeed in witnessing government doing precisely what party advocates say it must do, various scandals will be resolved by the detergent brilliance of simply shifting brand loyalties from “Liberal” to “NDP”. Failing that, next election, vice versa. Forget the importance of legalizing actual Reform. It’s easier to disentangle decades of scandals from the works by promising to do something..

    Is there still a Casino Gate problem cited in the media? How about LNG? A problem with BC Hydro still using batshit accounting practices ? A business plan still missing from Site C? Too few reasons not to restructure ICBC? How about abandoning two-tiered health care?

    The Usual Complications. CasinoGate and a public inquiry? Not with sleepwalking Dave Eby at the helm. An ultimatum to change BC Hydro’s books or just sack the main players? Zero visible activity. Landslides around Site C? Full steam ahead! LNG? Who cares that there’s no identifiable market? ICBC? Aside from making a scowling face Mr Eby demands that users pay more. Health care? If a physician’s complaint is correct then somehow the Attorney General – not the Minister of health – has decided that a two-tiered system works just fine for him.

    “Much has been said about ICBC’s new payment caps for so-called “minor injuries,” and the recent withdrawal of settlement offers that many believe will increase litigation costs across the board. As a physician, I was surprised recently by another related change — when in my annual college renewal form I was asked if I wanted to become a “Registered Care Advisor” for ICBC.”
    “An RCA provides rapid second opinions to doctors who are unable to make a clear diagnosis or whose injured patients are facing delays or complications. An RCA must have competence in musculoskeletal injuries, acute and chronic pain and/or mental health and other psychosocial issues. The idea is that a patient is referred to a chosen RCA within 90 days of the accident and must be seen within 15 days.”

    “The kicker? The Insurance Corp. of B.C. will pay $380 for this expedited assessment. For perspective, an orthopedic surgeon is paid about $106 for a regular waiting-list Medical Services Plan consultation. In psychiatry, my much-longer MSP consultations pay $239.”

    “Welcome to two-tiered medicine, NDP style.”

    “The Horgan NDP promised in the 2017 election to make FOI reforms, beginning with a Duty to Document law and fines for the destruction of records. We are now in 2019 and nothing has changed. In some cases, the NDP has taken steps backwards.”

    “Farnworth’s words were the first, welcome words about transparency reforms of any type since the Horgan Horde was sworn-in July 18, 2017. They’re now aiming to take ownership of the issue, the week after BC Liberal leader Andrew Wilkinson proposed a 20-point accountability plan for the Legislature that crazily omitted FOI reform.”

    “The executive director of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association said this is “just one piece of the puzzle” in the struggle for reform.” 

    A year from now will the target of BC ire no longer be Mr Coleman and his colleagues but Mr Eby and his colleagues? How can so many BC institutions reform so little and still get paid?

    Please advise.


  6. Excellent points and timely…today on Facebook I saw several people telling Bob Mackin his piece on this was like an attack piece more seemly of the MSM…

    So yes, I or anyone else who points out the obvious will be blamed. Even when we are right, its become acceptable among many to simply accept less from the ndp rather than speak out and push within.

    Attacking the few who shone a bright light for 16 years serves no one but partisan trolls who check blogs 196 times in one day because they are so worried about what people like you are saying, E. Random.

    Jinny Sims got caught deleting, Rob Flemings advisor uses gmail and asked trustees to delete emails so the laws must be changed. And did they ever enact a duty to document ?

    Had a discussion with a former backroom ndp type out of the blue recently.
    His reasons for not calling an inquiry alarmed me.

    I quote:

    “Personally I would like to see the government move on progressive policies long overlooked, than spending all their time mopping up the last mess.
    An inquiry wont save any lives or solve much in my opinion, although I am not necessarily opposed to doing so, just more inclined to push government to actually do stuff while they still have power instead of sorting out someone elses mess to no particular end while wasting precious time.
    No state government can stop international capital and its corrupt practices. At best they can root out local low level sorts which is good I guess. I agree there is political potential to pursue what you suggest, which is why I am not necessarily opposed to doing so, I just wonder at what cost in terms of making real progressive gains. In terms of the mess going back to the 90s, to me is a stretch sure the Clerk and company have always been high rollers, but that seems to be coming to an end, which is a cultural shift more than a political liability from the past.”

    Barf. If this is the same argument Meggs and crew are using, we are in deeper trouble than anyone even realizes.

    Can anyone tell me if all the bureaucrats behind this mess and others are still here?


    Then it matters.


      1. His comment that an inquiry wont save lives was in response to this statement of mine:

        ” They must do both.(* progressive policy and clean this mess via an inquiry*) If all these revelations dont tell you something’s seriously wrong I don’t know what will. People are dying. Peoples lives have been ruined. Are you really ok with allowing it to continue?”

        Apparently so.

        This is the dark belly of the beast in politics. The omerta. The unspoken agreement not to investigate the last governments actions. Just let it go and move on.

        Except those bureaucrats doing all this shit are still doing it.

        It’s like the response I got after Harry Bains walked away from commenting on the sea to sky shadow toll story. The ndp refused to make a fuss in opposition over it and I was on my own in all the press over it refuting govt. When I asked why they did nothing , I was told they will never go after something they might do themselves in government.

        Well we know now they will do things they opposed before…but damn please show me I’m wrong about them not doing an inquiry.


    1. Whomever that NDP backroom operator quoted above really is, the logic provided is not actually recent. Conceptually it’s as old as trying to justify SNAFU and FUBAR, and commonplace in administrations where Dereliction of Duty became the norm.

      “Personally I would like to see the government move on progressive policies long overlooked, than spending all their time mopping up the last mess.”

      “An inquiry wont save any lives or solve much in my opinion, although I am not necessarily opposed to doing so, just more inclined to push government to actually do stuff while they still have power instead of sorting out someone elses mess to no particular end while wasting precious time.”

      Huge effort, like public inquiries, doesn’t solve anything much? That’s news…And quite a picture. Thousands of government workers enslaved in cleaning up undefined “messes”?

      Sixteen years of being outside government wasn’t sufficiently long to develop any alternate solutions?

      Our NDP Zealot’s problem? Without “mopping up the last messes” progressive policies (always deliberately overlooked!) are futile to implement. Because? Anyone can build a house on a rotten foundation, or on quicksand. But only a partisan would insist that the dwelling will never fail.

      Given what matters most to partisans (retaining power) that new house “offer”, this time, must work out just fine. Hurry! Invest belief in it, Now! Join the Herd!

      In, “The Secret War” a lengthy book about WW2 intel failures and successes, Max Hastings writes,

      “In peacetime few nations commit their best brains to national security. Brilliant people seldom choose careers in intelligence – or, for that matter, in the armed forces. A struggle for national survival alone makes it possible for a government to mobilize genius, or people possessing something close to it, in the interests of the war effort.”

      “Career officers and politicians have a strong interest in cooking raw intelligence to make their master’s favourite dishes.”

      Replace the words above “commit their best brains to national security” with “commit their best brains to maintaining the trustworthiness of public officials”

      Aren’t political humans a curious lot? Only during war does the importance of National Security emerge? Only during a series of enormous business collapses does it suddenly become obvious that hiring the best and brightest people to analyze, to plan, to implement and conform business and government policy to reality (see Bletchley Park on that account) is crucial to state or business survival?

      The Lesson in fewer words: clear focused non-partisan thinking matters, always.

      In Peacetime government administration? Well look around, who cares?

      Heroic partisan efforts to saturate-advertise dramatic political promises subside once the main partisan political objective is reached: control of the public purse. Success offers pols the ability to repay backers with unearned wealth far beyond whatever was spent to buy in..

      Worse? Not only can subordinate officials be coerced to allow, but even to assist the corrupt to completely mangle whatever public safeguards might impede illegal ambitions. An inquiry into how off the rails we’ve gone? No way. It must not be allowed.

      In only 60 years ours has become a fascinatingly retrograde system. We watch the worst of us profit however they wish. Because? In the logic of every failed state the real powers must not be hindered in their pursuit of self-interest.

      “No state government can stop international capital and its corrupt practices.”

      Meaning no one ever has?

      With the support of laughable policies like “Trickle Down” employed to justify whatever absurd Gold Rush Ponzi schemes haven’t yet failed, only much later can the electorate afford to see really um, Progressive Legislation. But not now. Those “messes” will have to wait for others to visit. Because “No state government can stop it”

      Questions we see discussed on this site: concerning what constitutes a democracy; what constitutes political legitimacy; why honesty, integrity, transparency, and public interest is vital; rarely stimulate even cursory public attention. Mea culpas, if any, wait until after the main benefactors of partisan misconduct begin to display the downsides of having failed to be honest or even competent.

      The result? An increasingly verified downside collapse of trust in all who claim that being ready to lead is at least as important as being worth following .


  7. Also…this is gross.

    And yes all parties do this. This is why I tell people never to sign any petition started by a political party.

    Or add your name to show you oppose corruption. With your phone number(?)

    Or add your name, email address and phone # to wish Ms. Clark a birthday greeting.or Horgan- they both did this.

    Those seemingly innocuous items do not require so much personal info, this is how they identify potential supporters and do voter outreach .

    Hopefully they all smarten up.


  8. An inquiry with teeth that sets the precedent for others that follow in the political and other fields to think about the consequences of any wrong doing and what may come upon them. suffering shame, prosecution’s, jail time and disgrace. That’s what is needed now to set the bar for the future for second sober thought. People cannot get away with leaving such a dirty trail of damage behind them. No damn way. Too many people have been hurt because of these filthy F…..S. They cannot be allowed to carry on in peace and live off the avails of our money and just fade away past memory. Screw that. Good job posting Rich Coleman’s face once in awhile too Laila. It’s fitting for these posts. And if Horgan betrays the people of BC and not take the very high road with an inquiry, then i believe suffering shame and disgrace should come on him.. And i think it will. Too many people are outraged by the damage.


    1. The rigged BC Rail payout. I don’t believe for one minute that the justice system wasn’t dirty in this and still is. Who’s covering who. Corruption runs rampant here in BC and hurts us all and future of our kids and on and on.


  9. Not just in BC, lad.
    Corruption gets no more obvious than this. Say what you will about Jody Wilson-Raybould, this would be a travesty if done to anyone.

    From Bob Mackin:
    “Globe and Mail reports troubled SNC-Lavalin lobbied Team Trudeau for leniency, led to pressure on Jody Wilson-Raybould while she was A-G. Her riding includes part of the planned $2.83B Broadway Subway that SkyTrain specialist SNC-Lavalin wants to build.”

    The globe insists I pay to read the article so I cannot link it.


    1. I posted it this morning in the comments above I think…but here is a readable link to share

      Trudeau denies. But look at what he is asked..and what he answered.

      “During a visit to Vaughan, Ont., today, Trudeau said the allegations in the newspaper story “are false.”

      “Neither the current nor the previous attorney general was ever directed by me or anyone in my office to take a decision in this matter,” he said.

      Asked whether he or his office had applied any influence or pressure on the minister, Trudeau repeated that they had never directed Wilson-Raybould or Lametti to intervene.”

      THIS is one to watch. If supporters are willing to turn a blind eye to shit like this, **regardless of party, left or right**, it sends a message that it’s ok.

      It’s not enough for supporters to simply say they oppose their parties actions. That’s exactly how the BC Libs grew into the snake pit they have become. No amount of new candidates can make it better. They got this way because all those who supported them to retain power said nothing, did nothing.

      Slippery slope for Trudeau.And his supporters


      1. So far i find Jody Wilson Raybould to be a real independant thinking tough trooper, and is in a qaundary now because of the lying bastard Trudeau and his protecting the big and the dirty. She has some real hard decisions to make about which road to take. Tough place. I hope she goes for Trudeau’s throat one day. He’s a coward and a mockery to justice. Jody’s to good to stay in politics with that POS.


        1. kennylad, I agree on all counts and if the truth is on Jody’s side, I support her, admire her and will somehow find a way to encourage her. Regardless of party.
          I don’t know that “independent candidate” and Ottawa are a good mix, especially a smart one but, I see some real opportunities, right here in BC for the likes of her in the not too distant future.


  10. Regarding that helpfully talkative NDP booster quoted above.

    Is it likely the Times Colonist editorial staff debates whether to react to one-off comments appearing only in your blog? Likely that one NDP insider’s absurd attempt to divert attention from our Attorney General’s permanent Sitzkreig (The Phony War) would alter anything in the media stance?

    With the notable exception of people like Sam Cooper after months of media inattention is it likely that accomplishing nothing on the CasinoGate and Real Estate Laundering files would result in media resistence?

    Is claiming that an Inquiry remains “on the table” the same as exposing criminal networks? Or at least as good as bringing criminals to Justice? Does continuing to deflect his own responsibility make David Eby an improvement over any previous A.G.?

    Despite Vaughn Palmer insisting that digging too deeply into the world of BC crime isn’t worth the time or money, perhaps, the winds have changed. Because something finally made T\C’s hackles rise..

    Remember the years before the 2001 provincial election? An oddly deaf epoch where learned NDP enthusiasts tried to argue away all obstreperous detractors. Did those same perfectly confident boosters fail? Completely.

    Political habits being irresistible perhaps It’s understandable that today’s NDP backer might resort to the same sort of Pivot:

    “An inquiry wont save any lives or solve much in my opinion…”

    Not one life could ever saved?

    Could one quote result in a tough T\C editorial. Not unless the trivializing PR sentiment that a Public Inquiry would fail by “not saving lives” is a standard NDP go-to talking point evasion and it has finally hit a media nerve. Has the response become “inoperative”?

    Today Dermod Travis and Integrity BC posted the following link. …

    “Coroner: Overdose deaths outnumber suicides, homicides and vehicle fatalities”

    “The number of illicit overdose deaths in B.C. plateaued in 2018, but the province’s chief coroner and addictions experts say the public cannot become complacent, as people continue to die at an alarming rate.“

    “Last year, 1,489 people in B.C. died of illicit drug overdoses, according to data released Thursday by the B.C. Coroners Service, approximately the same number of deaths seen in 2017. Fentanyl was detected in 86 per cent of deaths in 2018. To put the numbers in perspective, more people died of illicit overdose deaths than suicides, homicides and vehicle deaths combined, said Lisa Lapointe, B.C.’s chief coroner. That means that about four people a day continue to die of illicit drug overdoses.”

    Is no one in media aware what’s been obvious for months? The public wants an Inquiry, even the BCGEU is in agreement.

    Seen any astoundingly complacent politicians recently?

    How were billions harvested and laundered by selling lethal drugs? What is the only method that ever works to expose and prosecute all those prospering from violent crimninal activity?

    Seen anyone who needs to demonstrate a commitment to putting a halt to the growth of Organized Crime?

    So much for the argument that there’s no possible “life saving justification” for a full-on Public Inquiry…


    1. “Overdose deaths surpassed homicides, suicides and vehicle deaths” ….yet the police continue to ticket the tax paying masses for the endless revenue stream of speeding and drunk driving offenses because it “saves lives”…..

      Can you say “easy Cash grab” as opposed to Expensive investigative police work resulting in…
      Expensive prosecution resulting in….
      Expensive criminal convictions of drug dealers that will result in….
      Expensive incarceration.

      The govt doesnt want to deal with dealers.
      Its too expensive…….


      1. For unfathomable reasons nonconfidencevote writes,

        “Overdose deaths surpassed homicides, suicides and vehicle deaths” ….yet the police continue to ticket the tax paying masses for the endless revenue stream of speeding and drunk driving offenses because it “saves lives”

        An endless revenue stream? An awful affront to the accounting mind, or what?

        Despite such arguments, I can’t concede that prosecuting and incarcerating drunk drivers is only an “easy cash grab.” or an expensive prosecution resulting in expensive criminal convictions.

        Why not? In December I witnessed a drunk run down a 24 year old. The victim was struck from behind while walking across an intersection, on a solid green light. Before the drunk’s truck ran her down, the drunk… accelerated.

        But calling 9-11 (a Cost), summoning the ambulance (a Cost) and the fire department (a Cost), testing the drunk for sobriety, (a Cost), prosecuting him (a Cost), sending him to jail (a Cost), hitting him with fines (a Cost), and taking away his license (a Cost) is just too intrusive and pricey to be confused with Justice in a Democracy?

        Since when?

        Even assuming nonconfidencevote was being ironic or didn’t actually mean what was posted, it was an interesting complaint. A superb send up of the last 50 years of Beancounter Revolt.

        Underlying this Crusade Against Costs is a mentality which detests civic intervention and which seeks to restrict debate over benefits to whether this or that policy conforms to the straightjacket of beancounter logic. Since what used to be an acknowledged Social Contract (to justify and legitimize government) has been shrunk to near nothing the next stage is to end any attempt by any level of government to redress anyone for anything.

        As in? Should money be spent to reduce industrial and domestic pollution levels? Meaning, is it cost\justified to stop poisoning the public and the planet? Should we build more public housing? Improve Public transit? Strengthen Universal Health Care? Build and employ more professionals in more new hospitals? Protect military vets and the elderly from privation? End homelessness? Reduce tuition fees to help educate more youth? Help provide First Nations communities with fresh clean water? Protect the environment on which we rely? Protect consumers from gangsters?

        Nope. No way. Any truly outraged beancounter will insist that you, specifically you, must not allow any of that nonsense. Not if some clerk with a spreadsheet declares, “Hey! Look! This stuff costs Big Money!” After which, he shuts off his cranium.

        At work is a classic “there’s-only-one-right-way” advocate. A Scrooge Emeritus straight out of Dicken’s who not only stops looking for policy upsides but who refuses to ask, what if the person victimized by a disaster was me, or my family? Or my kid sister run over by a truck? Then what?

        Please advise..


        1. @ E. Random

          My “view” was .
          The police nail the easy targets . ie drunk drivers, speeders, etc because its a very cost effective revenue stream for …. the govt.

          Spending years and millions of dollars chasing drug dealers and money launderers for a possible conviction….isnt cost effective.

          The govt takes the ….profitable…. easy… road.

          Even when its proven that drugs are killing more people per year than speeders , drunk drivers and homicides combined.

          Are you getting any of this?

          Its about money NOT lives.


  11. I wondered why Jody Wilson Raybold was dumped.

    I guess SNC Lavalin got the message across to any other independent thinkers in the Federal Liberal Cabinet……
    “Dont screw with us or we will bury you.”,
    Not to be confused with the previous provincial Liberal Cabinet that did anything SNC desired………

    Pretty amazing what Lobbyist dollars and promises of future high paying jobs post politics as “consultants” can achieve….


  12. Hello.

    ” B.C. Lottery Corp. vice-president of corporate compliance Robert Kroeker has stepped down, months after B.C.’s gambling regulator pledged to investigate allegations that Kroeker instructed his staff to “ease up” on anti-money-laundering measures and “allow dirty money to flow into casinos,” Global News has learned.

    ~ snip ~

    Documents obtained by Global News through freedom-of-information requests and from casino industry sources show that B.C.’s gaming policy enforcement branch (GPEB) received a complaint against Kroeker in early 2019.

    “We will be investigating,” Sam MacLeod, assistant deputy minister responsible for B.C. gambling, confirmed in a February 2019 email that was disclosed in a Global News freedom-of-information request.”

    I’m waiting for more to come forward on certain govt bureaucrats…..


    1. And there is a connection between Peter German and Kroeker.

      Which taints his first report even more.

      Please recall :

      From this post

      ” An anti-money laundering expert hired for B.C.’s “arms-length” probe into casino money laundering was previously hired to work for Great Canadian Gaming, the company at the centre of the probe, according to documents and sources.
      Documents obtained by Global News and source interviews indicate that, Jerome Malysh — a former RCMP financial crimes investigator — was hired as a consultant to complete compliance audit work for Great Canadian by Robert Kroeker, the gaming company’s former director of corporate security and compliance.
      Kroeker left Great Canadian Gaming in 2015, to become B.C. Lottery Corp.’s vice-president of corporate compliance.
      After September 2017 Malysh was also hired by Peter German, a former RCMP executive, to complete work for German’s March 2018 report, Dirty Money: An Independent Review of Money Laundering in Lower Mainland Casinos…..
      ….German cited Malysh’s previous work for B.C.’s Gaming Enforcement Branch. But there is no known mention of Malysh’s previous work for a casino company.
      Some critics have raised questions about Malysh’s participation in German’s report. The critics, including current Lottery Corp. staff, wonder if German’s report “minimized” the role of River Rock staff in the acceptance of bags of suspicious cash.”


  13. Why did all three BCLC execs Jim Lightbody, Robert Kroeker, and Brad Desmairis really go on that expensive jetaway to Macua. the Vegas casino style Portugese principality with links to corrupt Chinese government odfficials bad dirty bloody money, and criminality. Just for a G2E MEET. Bullshit. Was this a part of Christy Clark’s bring your dirty money and high crimes here promotions. I notice there seems to be a lot of ex cops in these stories too such as Kroeker, Desmairis, Senator Larry Campbell, oh christ he needs a real close looking at, and Peter German. Some were not just low regular level cops either. Very interesting and WTF.


  14. Those three actually went on the Macau junket a week after the May 2017 election. I guess the NDP couldn’t have done much about it. Looks like these three tax wasters got in before the taps got turned off. But once again. What was their purpose for all three to go and spend all that money of mine and yours and everyones in the corrupt Vegas land of Macau. It’s disgusting and criminal and shameful and entitled. It doesn’t seem any different than those leglislature tax wasting slimeballs with their trips with spouses and outragoues expenditures and such. The dirt, the dirt, the bad dirty dirt.


Comments are closed.