Clark and company were deemed innocent

Reader defends actions of Glen Clark's NDP government at budget time

Re: Will truth die on deficit hill? (B.C. Views, Dec. 5)

In 2000 a verdict by Madame Justice Mary Humphries ruled Glen Clark’s NDP government did not commit fraud or lie about their 1995 and ’96 budgets. Justice Humphries found no case to support the oft-repeated allegations in and by the media, or its accusers, the National Citizens’ Coalition.

She said there was no conspiracy, and assumptions reached were published and available to the public, showing caution rather than deceit.

I can draw no adverse conclusions around the credibility of Elizabeth Cull (author of the ’96 budget) or Clark and my conclusions would not have been different if a lesser standard of proof had been used.

Leading forecasting agencies said the forecasts were reasonable and well within private sector forecasts.

Auditor general George Morfitt’s report agrees with Justice Humphries and begins: “Although the media has tried to paint a different picture, the ’96 budget included no action or decision made by senior people in government elected or appointed that was not permitted by such legislation or other authorities.”

While this is written without prejudice, one can only ask why, in the face of such overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is this kind of pillory allowed to happen to people deemed to be completely innocent?

Ken Dicks