How judicial inquiries work

In the UK and Canada, the accepted way to "deal with" a scandal which is having unpleasant political repercussions is to hold a judicial inquiry or a royal commission. Here's how it works. You find an "unbiased" (but compliant) judge -- a retired judge verging on senility perhaps -- and give him terms of reference that effectively take away his fishing pole. That is, you restrict him from poking too deeply into the dirt at the heart of the matter.

A paradigm of futility would be Canada's famous White Oliphant commission, a topic Walt harped on [wrote on, surely. Ed.] back in 2010. The real scandal was the money that former Prime Minister Lyin' Brian Mullarkey received from Airbus Industries for his part in getting Air Canada (then a crown corporation) to buy a substantial number of its A320 aircraft.

However, the commissioner, Mr Justice Oliphant (retd), was told he was to enquire only into whether Baloney had had any business dealings while he was still prime minister with Karlheinz Schreiber, an oleaginous German-Canadian dealer in armored cars, spaghetti machines and what have you. It was Schreiber who gave the Jaw That Walks Like A Man brown envelopes full of 1000-dollar bills, which the Jaw stashed away and, errr, forgot about until the Mounties started investigating, errr, Schreiber.

The other thing you do, to make sure an inquiry or commission does no harm to anyone, is to deny it the power to punish anyone. It can make findings, and even recommendations, but don't let it initiate criminal proceedings or actually punish anyone or order anyone to do anything. Walt finds that this is ridiculous and recommends that future commissions actually be provided with a few teeth.

Fast forward three years and change location to London, where the British government and its broadcasting arm, the British Broadcorping Castration [British Broadcasting Corporation! Ed.] are up to their nether regions in shit over hundreds of sex crimes which (an independent broadcaster has revealed) were committed by the famous comedian and notorious paedophile, Sir Jimmy Savile.

"Sir Jimmy" got his knighthood from Her Britannic Majesty, by the way, and a similar honour from the late Unblessed Pope John Paul II. Embarrassingly for the Queen and the Vatican, the honours cannot somehow be taken back, since the old bugger mercifully died some months before his delicts came to light.

This week, Brits have been shocked [Shocked, I tell you! Ed.] by more claims of sexual abuse, this time by a senior politician of the Thatcher era. On the BBC's Newsnight programme, a young man said he had been abused by an unnamed politician -- not Lord McAlpine -- at the Bryn Estyn children's home in Wales.

The response of the British government to the latest wave of sex abuse allegations has been altogether predictable. On Tuesday, Home Secretary Theresa May announced a new police inquiry is to investigate fresh allegations into the way police handled child abuse accusations in care homes during the 1970s and 80s.

And -- get this! -- there will also be a judicial inquiry into the failings of previous judicial inquiries. Amazing, isn't it?

Further lurid details: Wales child abuse: PM orders sex abuse inquiry probe

Footnote: The legal beagle who drew the terms of reference for the useless Oliphant commission duly received his reward from a grateful Conservative government. He is now the Governor-General of Canada.

Forgotten the Oliphant commission already? See "The Oliphant labours, and brings forth...nothing" and "The Oliphant hath laboured...". [Some lack of originality in the second headline. But that was back in 2010. We're doing better now...aren't we? Ed.]

War of 1812 bicentennial celebrations: has anything been learned?

The first shots -- purely rhetorical -- in the commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the beginning of the War of 1812 have been fired. At the historic battlefield of Queenston Heights, Ontario, yesterday, the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General of Canada (and winner of the Steve Harper Prize for Excellence in Drafting Terms of Reference) launched "1000 days of commemorations" of the first war started and lost by the USA.

Perhaps because it was not a Great American Victory [like Vietnam? Ed.], the War of 1812 is not well known in the Excited States. War was declared by President Madison on June 18th, on the advice of many political and military notables, including President Jefferson who opined that the annexation of Canada -- that being the point of the exercise -- was "merely a matter of marching".

As in Vietnam, Iraq and, now, Afghanistan, it turned out to be not so easy. The United States was not prepared to prosecute a war. Madison had assumed that the state militias would easily seize Canada and that negotiations would follow. In 1812, the US Army comprised fewer than 12,000 men. Congress authorized its expansion to 35,000, but the service was voluntary and unpopular. It offered poor pay, and there were few trained and experienced officers.

The militia objected to serving outside their home states, were not open to discipline, and performed poorly against British forces when outside their home states. One of the first places this lesson was learned was at Queenston, in October of 1812, when units of the New York militia refused to cross the Niagara River to join in the invasion.

All the same, enough Americans scaled Queenston Heights to overpower a small British force and capture its gun. The British, led by Major General Isaac Brock, counter-attacked. Brock, unwisely dressed in his full-dress uniform replete with gold braid, made an easy target for American sharp-shooters as he ran up the hill, and perished.

However, his 2IC, General Roger Hale Sheaffe, arrived with reinforcements -- British regulars, Canadian militia and a large number of "Indians" (as "First Nations" people were then called), whom the Americans feared greatly for their interest in scalp-collecting.

The men in red (and green and tan and assorted other colours) handed the Americans a crushing defeat, which will be re-enacted this fall. In his address yesterday, the Governor General expressed the hope that, in the spirit of friendship between the two countries, the Americans would refrain from using live ammunition. [Ed. Please check this; I didn't really listen to the speech.] Nevertheless, as they always sing in their national anthem, the Canadians will "stand on guard".

Footnote: Major General Brock became "Sir" Isaac Brock only after his death, being knighted posthumously. A very tall monument on Queenston Heights is surmounted by a statue of Brock, looking watchfully across the river -- standing on guard, no doubt. The only statue dedicated to General Sheaffe -- who actually won the battle -- is a small one...of his horse.

Another footnote: On June 15th, Canada Post issued two stamps, one showing "Sir Isaac Brock" and the other his great Indian ally, Tecumseh. The inscription on the marginal tab (above Tecumseh) says "They protected territories from American expansionism". Indeed.

Recommended reading: Two entertaining pop histories by Pierre Berton: The Invasion of Canada (covering the period 1812-13) and Flames Across the Border (1813-14). In the latter, you can read how the Americans routed the Brits from Newark (now Niagara-on-the-Lake) and burned the village to the ground. Of course you'll also have to read about the British and Canadian burning of Buffalo. Niagara-on-the-Lake was rebuilt and is today a very pretty little town. As for Buffalo... well...