rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Canada's political police?

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

Bob Paulson, the Commissioner of the RCMP, disgraces himself in a letter to the Ottawa Citizen today, going after journalist Stephen Maher for his very mild comments on the RCMP's decision not to proceed with charges against Nigel Wright. Besides being ridiculously self-serving, it appears to be a attempt to intimidate Maher for daring to say out loud what Canadians from coast to coast are thinking.

Let's recap. Wright wrote a personal cheque for $90K to disgraced Senator Mike Duffy. There was a quid pro quo: in exchange for this money, which was to cover inappropriately-claimed expenses, Duffy would be “whitewashed” by a Senate committee investigating his expense claims. By so doing, the PMO would get both itself and Duffy out of a serious jam. Effectively, the $90K was to buy Duffy’s silence, extricating him from a damning Deloitte audit that was going on at the time. Thereafter, in fact, Duffy ceased cooperating with the auditors.

In case readers need reminding, here is the relevant section of the Parliament of Canada Act:

16. (1) No member of the Senate shall receive or agree to receive any compensation, directly or indirectly, for services rendered or to be rendered to any person, either by the member or another person,

(a) in relation to any bill, proceeding, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, arrest or other matter before the Senate or the House of Commons or a committee of either House; or

(b) for the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence any member of either House.

And here’s the relevant section of the Criminal Code:

119. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who

(a) being the holder of a judicial office, or being a member of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by them in their official capacity, or

(b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by that person in their official capacity.

I’m almost embarrassed to quote this stuff. It's so clear-cut that only the RCMP could find room to wiggle. But wiggle they did.

iPolitics journalist Michael Harris asks all of the right questions, and also sets a bit of context. This isn't the first time by any means that the RCMP has shown an apparent political side in its work. From blocking reporters from asking Harper questions on the 2008 campaign trail, to throwing young people out of a Conservative rally during the 2011 election campaign because they had been identified with other parties, to intimidating ordinary citizens for daring to question the Prime Minister's pro-pipeline stance, the RCMP has been acting more like Harper's Praetorian guard than an independent national police force.

When a plane hired by my former union, the Public Service Alliance of Canada, flew an anti-Harper banner in Ottawa, the RCMP grounded it, claiming (falsely) that it had entered restricted airspace, and then telling the pilot that the airborne message ("Harper Hates Me" in French) could be construed as "hate speech." To use Paulson's own words in his letter today, "Come on."

Not should we forget the dutiful Commissioner's order last year that senior RCMP officers would have to get clearance from him if they were to meet with MPs or Senators, stating in an email that such meetings "can have unintended and/or negative consequences for the organization and the government." [emphasis added]

The RCMP: independent or political? You decide.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.