Grant Lafleche wrote in "Call grows for G20 inquiry" (St.Catharines Standard, Dec.9, 2010):
"Canada needs a full public inquiry into the G20 summit security scandal at the federal level, said John Pruyn, a Thorold resident arrested in Toronto last June.
"We need a unified body to look at everything that happened at the G20 together," he said Wednesday. "To have a judge look at this law they changed is a piecemeal approach ... all these serious incidents, they're inter-related."
In September, Justice Roy McMurtry was appointed to review an obscure law that was secretly amended before the G20 giving police the power to search and detain protesters. Ontario ombudsman Andre Marin blasted the provincial government's changes to the Second World War-era Public Works Protection Act in a report released Monday.
"The law should never have been changed in the first place -- we have a different constitution now," Pruyn said.
Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Jim Bradley defended McMurtry's review, which is expected to be completed in the spring.
"He is a former chief justice and a former attorney general so, boy, will he be able to provide an excellent perspective on this," Bradley said.
On Wednesday, Premier Dalton McGuinty admitted his government "moved too quickly" and "failed to communicate" the changes to the law that allowed police to arrest protesters.
Bradley would not discuss the constitutional validity of the act, created in 1939, or the amendment made to it for the G20 conference in Toronto. However, he said he felt the amendment was not all that radical.
"It was just extending to the area inside the fenced security zone what is already in place now in courthouses and public buildings," Bradley said.
At the time of the summit, Toronto police also enforced a five-metre zone outside the fence -- which was not part of the amendment.
Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak said the review by McMurtry is "well and good," but not that helpful
"There are already a lot of facts on the table," he said. "We have the ombudsman's report and other investigations. The question now is who will pay the price for enacting what amounts to war measures in the city of Toronto and then conspiring to keep it secret from the public."
Hudak urged Bradley's predecessor, Rick Bartolucci, who held the community safety portfolio at the time of the G20 conference, to "do the honourable thing" and step down from his current post as minister of municipal affairs and housing.
"I think the McGuinty government is hoping this will just go away. The Ontario PCs are not about to let this just go away," Hudak said.
John Pruyn's daughter Sarah Pruyn, who was also detained by police at the G20 summit, echoed her father's call for a public inquiry.
"I don't think it's enough," she said, referring to the ombudsman's report. "It's good, but it doesn't draw enough attention to the widespread violence or cover all instances of police brutality."
Police tore off her father's prosthetic leg and arrested him at Queen's Park last June.
"I'm still anxious and upset about what happened," John Pruyn said. "We were there for a legal protest. I want to know how police were trained, how this spiraled out of control." "
So finally a local reporter sort of interviewed and mentioned Liberal MPP Jim Bradley regarding the G20. That's a first since the Liberals created their controversial amendment!
Yet reporter Grant Lafleche didn't get around to asking Bradley why the Liberals kept the law secret from the public!!
On Dec.8, 2010 in Question Period Bradley trotted out that the ca.1939 PWPA was resuscitated because of potential terrorist threats - but Bradley never explained to the House why it was KEPT SECRET.
Lafleche didn't report asking Bradley why this Liberal-passed law was NOT immediately made public, but purposefully hidden for several weeks by McGuinty's Liberal government.
Lafleche didn't mention asking Bradley when exactly it was that Bradley himself knew of his own government's secret Liberal G20 law! (Great pre-Wrong-Righter reporting eh?!)
Laflech didn't report whether Bradley was asked to clarify the difference between McMurtry's fixed-terms-of-reference probe into the PWPA itself, vs. an investigation into HOW AND WHY THE EXISTENCE OF THIS LAW'S COVERT AMENDMENT WAS SUPPRESSED BY BRADLEY'S LIBERALS FROM THE PUBLIC.
The McMurtry probe is a but a sideshow to Bradley's Liberal government's complicity in the massive civil rights violations his Liberals created.
It's telling when Lafleche did report that "Bradley would not discuss the constitutional validity of the act" or the amendment which the Liberals made to the act.
The 'constitutionality' of what McGuinty's Liberals did, of course, is the whole point, isn't it?!
So that's why Bradley will babble on about anything else but that very issue!!
Lafleche reports Bradley telling us that the G20 amendment his Liberals made 'was not all that radical'.
Really?! So, it was no big deal, eh?
Yet Lafleche didn't report asking Bradley the far more pertinent follow-up question of why - if the Liberals' secretive amendment was supposedly so meek, so minor, so mild - the Liberals, after passing it, then KEPT IT SECRET!!! That's the point - isn't it?! Don't ask/don't tell seems to be the game here.
Lafleche didn't report whether Bradley was asked to comment on whether he agrees that Bartolucci should resign, or whether Bradley would support a public inquiry. (The Standard has still not bothered to report Bradley's reaction to this week's Auditor's report!)
See how Bradley syndrome works?
Jimmy's apparently the 'good guy' in all this!! Jim's here to fix everything! Jimmy's our Saviour!!
[Bradley also will never discuss the constitutionality of his Liberal single-payer health-care monopoly, either! Bradley also will not publicly reveal his 'scientific' basis for agitating for Kyoto back in the early 2000's!].
When Bradley says in Lafleche's story that the PWPA amendment "was just extending to the area inside the fenced security zone what is already in place now in courthouses and public buildings", was Bradley then asked by Lafleche why people such as Pruyn, who were in officially-sanctioned public areas - NOWHERE NEAR the fenced security zone! - were intimidated and brutally attacked by police?
Was Bradley ever asked these questions by the St.Catharines Standard - at any time since June?!
Was Bradley asked, but refused to answer? Or does the Standard only print tidbits of whatever scraps Bradley chooses to strategically toss their way, and remain obediently ahem non-investigative otherwise?
Who is looking into Jim Bradley's own role in his Liberals' secret G20 law?
Jim Bradley is the white-washing cover-up point-man for his Orwellian Liberal government; we almost expect Bradley to soon tell us, in all seriousness, that 'ignorance of our secret law is no excuse for breaking it; therefore, you are guilty of a secret crime under our secret laws, because you should have known that what you were doing - or thinking - was illegal.'
So now, dear sheeple, bend over and willingly submit to Jim Bradley's and Dalton McGuinty's secret Liberal desires.
also see here; here