On July 13, 2001, Jean Pelletier, Jean Chrétien’s former chief of staff, was given a five-year appointment as the chair of Via Rail. For reasons that have never been clear, Olympic athlete Myriam Bédard ended up working at the crown corporation. Bédard left her employment on January 18, 2002, claiming that she was forced to resign her position due to the atmosphere that surrounded her and that was contributed to by Pelletier. an arbitrator subsequently found that she had quit her job voluntarily.
On February 13, 2004, Bédard wrote a letter to Prime Minister Paul Martin, listing her complaints about Pelletier and Via Rail. On February 27, Pelletier gave an interview with La Presse in which he said that Bédard was "lying shamelessly" and went on to add that she "deserves pity" because "[s]he is struggling as a single mother with economic responsibilities." Later that day Via Rail issued a press release in which they and Jean Pelletier apologized for the comments that were made about Myriam Bédard. Three days later, Pelletier was fired and subsequently filed an application to review his termination with the Federal Court of Canada.
On November 18, 2005, the court quashed Pelletier’s termination, returned him as the chair of Via Rail and sent the matter back to the Governor General in Council for a new determination. Justice Simon Noël found that the Governor General in Council had a duty to act fairly and that this duty was breached. Pelletier had not been told the exact reasons for the termination of his position; nor had he been given an opportunity to be heard.
So what did Paul Martin have to say about Noël’s decision? He defended the firing including the way that it was handled despite the findings of the court that the government had breached the duty of fairness. While Federal Court had found that Pelletier was not given the reason for his termination, Martin said, "It was a decision taken for the exact reason we gave at the time". The PM, of course did not say what that exact reason that the court found did not exist, was. Martin, much like he does about the government’s current spending spree, denied that his firing of Jean Chrètien’s former chief of staff had any political motivation. The prime minister was completely unapologetic for the lack of procedural fairness that the court found and was unconcerned by the findings of Justice Noël. This is the same Paul Martin who as a devout Catholic brought in same sex marriage legislation because the courts made him.
after the decision came out, it just got better and better. Paul’s little separatist buddy, Transport Minister Jean Lapierre, announced that he had no confidence in Pelletier and the Via Rail chair would be fired again; after giving him an opportunity to be heard, of course. It’s nice to know that the government will give him a fair trial before they hang him.
If only Jean Pelletier had devoted his life to good instead of evil. If only he had worked for Osama bin Laden instead of Jean Chrètien, he would be running Canada’s trains until the expiration of his term next July. If only he had worked on blowing up Israel and the U.S. instead of keeping Canada together, he would have been dealt with fairly by Paul Martin.
When Maha Elsamnah, the matriarch of Canada’s first family of terrorism brought her 14-year-old son, Karim back to Canada in april 2004, Paul Martin was much more concerned with the little terror tyke’s rights than he ever was about Pelletier’s. Karim was seriously wounded in a shootout with Pakistani troops (the same troops that dispatched Papa Khadr to paradise) near the afghanistan border and was brought back to a Canada, a country that his family detests, to get free health care. While many law abiding Canadians were upset by the "Return of the Khadrs" (it should be made into a horror movie that they are), Paul Martin staunchly defended their rights. He wasted no time telling the unwashed masses that the Khadrs had a right to health care and a right to dissent. It is so typically Liberal to uphold the rights of those who would destroy us while being oblivious to the rights of political opponents like Jean Pelletier.
Rights, much like morality, are relative to Paul Martin. We will undoubtedly end up seeing Jean Pelletier v. attorney General of Canada, the sequel, coming to a Federal Court courtroom near you. But it’s important to remember--nah, it wasn’t political.