The Bedard Bombshells

So, has the advertising sponsorship scandal out of Ottawa caught your attention yet? If not, Wednesday’s revelations at the parliamentary inquiry should do the trick. Taking a turn right out of a Grisham novel, the inquiry featured the testimony of Miriam Bedard and her contribution has sent the controversy into overdrive.

Bedard introduced a couple of topics for consideration that are sure to take this inquiry into a whole new direction. Bedard testified that executives at VIA Canada funneled 12 million dollars (US) into a special account through the Groupaction advertising agency for Jacques Villeneuve. In return for the money, Villeneuve would wear a Canada tag and flag on his car racing jumpsuit. Not bad money for simply wearing a badge, especially when his racing success or lack of this past season, resulted in few if any opportunities to be seen in his jump suit. Villeneuve frequently found his car out of the race, most of his racing time spent in the off track paddock areas. One hopes that a refund clause was put in place, for those races where we never saw much of Jacques after the first couple of laps.

Bedard claims she was told the information by her former agent Jean Marc St. Pierre. She was unable to provide further details of the sponsorship arrangements such as length of time, method of payment and who else might have known about the arrangements. For his part St. Pierre claims to have had no such discussions with Ms. Bedard.

While that alone might be enough to shake the faith of the average Canadian, Bedard went one step further. Advising the committee that she had heard from former VIA President Marc LaFrancois, that Groupaction was involved in illegal drug trafficking. Again, she offered no documented proof, only recounting a conversation with LaFrancois that she described as “top secret”. Like St Pierre, LaFrancois claims no such disucssions ever took place. Explosive comments that no doubt have everyone running for their lawyers. Groupaction president Jean Brault not surprisingly has said the charges are “entirely false, without any element of proof, without an iota of truth."

Not having been called to testify yet, LaFrancois said he was anxious to be called to appear, so as to tell his side of the story. He and Mr. St. Pierre, may wish to explore the possibility of joining the witness protection program, should things suggest that Ms. Bedard is on to something. As they would say in a Grisham novel, something here is not meeting the smell test.

Bedard who testified with Parliamentary privilege, declined to repeat her charges outside of the hearing setting. But with her comments relayed by the televised proceedings it’s now considered part of the record. A point which has the folks at Groupaction in shock and disbelief, wondering how the committee could allow this kind of hearsay testimony, without any form of cross examination attempted.

This is probably not what Prime Minister Martin had hoped for when he launched the committee meetings to get to the bottom of the sponsorship scandal. Funneling millions of dollars into false invoices and questionable work for pay projects is one thing, getting tied up in the tentacles of drug trafficking and where that may lead is another thing completely. Its things like these that can bring down governments or at least ensure that they don’t get re-elected.

With the charges now part of the parliamentary record, the media and opposition will have yet another lead to follow in it’s pursuit of scandal. If this was a clever way of sidetracking a rather unsavory aspect of Federal financing, it’s not going according to plan. If her bombshell charges are proven true, and no doubt the media will be investigating every handshake made by the members of Groupaction, then the government will find itself entwined in yet an even deeper criminal investigation.

Ms. Bedard's testimony combined with the unusal revelation that her live in partner had some input with former Prime Minister Jean Chretien's Iraq war policies, might call her credibility into quesiton. Sending the hearings off the rails temporarily. If all her comments are proven true then the government is in a bit of trouble. If she's shown to be a loose cannon, no substantial value will come of her appearance and the credibility of the entire hearing may suffer.

Regardless of how this plays out, Canadians are not going to be reassured about the company our elected officials kept. Slush funds and drug trafficking, the more we dig into the issue, the deeper and deeper into trouble the government seems to get. The appearance of rot getting worse with each passing day.


The above posting appeared in my Boondoggle blogsite,for more government related postings and links check it out.