National Affairs
'Context, dear hearts, is everything'
Claire Hoy
With apologies to Charles Dickens, Brian Mulroney's regime as prime minister could be described as the "best of times" and "the worst of times."

The best because, whatever you may think (or thought at the time) of Mulroney, the record clearly shows an impressive array of major achievements - economic growth, the GST and Free Trade to name a few.

The worst because, whatever you may think (or thought of the time) of Mulroney's accomplishments, some of the people he hung out with could be fairly described as unsavory and he wasn't known as "Lyin' Brian" for nothing.

Which brings us, of course, to Mulroney's recent defense of allegations leveled against him by former German arms dealer - and accomplished prevaricator - Karlheinz Schreiber.

During the Mulroney years, this writer was a member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery, covering the Tory government on a daily basis (publishing the best-selling "Friends In High Places: Politics and Patronage in the Mulroney Government), and generally making myself one of Mulroney's least liked journalists.

Just to put into perspective the defense of Mulroney which follows in this column, Mulroney as prime minister was so upset with my coverage of him that I was the only press gallery member who did not receive an annual Christmas card from the Mulroneys. That meant that someone had to deliberately go into the Press Gallery data base and delete my name. Merry Christmas to him too.

Then, when lawyer-author William Kaplan wrote his book on Mulroney - revealing the fact that Schreiber gave Mulroney $300,000 in cash (Mulroney now says it was $225,000) - Kaplan wrote that many Ottawa-based journalists simply hated Mulroney, citing a column I had written about Jean Chretien's decision to sue Mulroney for taking kick-backs in the Air Bus scandal, noting that I wrote that I would like to see Mulroney "go to jail."

What Kaplan didn't write, however - and what for this journalist takes some of the shine off his halo - is that the rest of the sentence, which he edited out, said that there isn't a shred of evidence to tie Mulroney into any kick backs from Air Bus. None.

And there still isn't, despite the mindless braying from opposition parties, much of the media, and Mulroney haters coast to coast.

There is no doubt that his relationship with Schreiber was tacky. An ex prime minister - or anybody else, for that matter - shouldn't be accepting cash payments for consulting work with no invoices and no paper trail whatsoever.

But that, of course, is what Mulroney apologized for, admitting it was one of those "moments of failure, sorrow and error" that all leaders - and for that matter, all humans - are susceptible to.

What is abundantly clear, however, is that for all the efforts of the Chretien gang before - and the current efforts of Stephane Dion, Jack Layton, et al - the current zeal to connect Mulroney to illegal kick backs - or any other illegality at all - is a good, old-fashioned smear campaign, aimed at a guy who, generally speaking, is not held in the highest esteem by many Canadians.

Mulroney flatly denied having "received a cent" in connection with Air Canada's purchase of 34 aircraft from Air Buss in 1988. He flatly denied getting any money from Schreiber (then head of Thyssen Industries) "or any other client" of Schreibers while he was in office. He flatly denied Schreiber's claim that he had a lawyer and a secret bank account in Geneva - the thrust of Chretien's accusations against him, which led to the Liberal government having to pay Mulroney $2 million for libel. Much is made of the fact that at the time of the libel case in 1998, Mulroney testified he "never had any dealings" with Schreiber beyond a cup of coffee or two. This has been pounced upon by Kaplan, opposition parties and others, as "proof" that Lyin' Brian was at it again.

Wrong. Context, dear hearts, is everything. As Mulroney explained to the Commons' ethics committee last week - and as the record of the examination of discovery from 1998 clearly shows - his sworn testimony about Schreiber was confined to the Air Bus affair, not his dealings with Schreiber in other commercial ventures.

This is not, as many Mulroney bashers claim, splitting hairs. It is absolutely unfair to take a quote related to one situation and apply it to everything else. Indeed, both the National Post and Globe and Mail, as Mulroney told the committee, published "apologies and/or clarifications for having repeated this libel," but that hasn't stopped his attackers from repeating it.

There's the old saw that "if you play with the bull you get the horn," and Mulroney certainly discovered that by accepting money for post-political services rendered to the seedy Schreiber.

Poor judgment is one thing. Illegality is another. And on that score, Mulroney is - dare we say it - innocent.