The Crocus Facts You Won't Read Elsewhere

The Winnipeg Free Press recently ran a series of articles to reveal the 'story behind the failure of Crocus'. Some of the information reported in the stories seemed to be less than factual to George Stephenson - so he wrote a Letter to the Editor to point out a few things. The Free Press would not publish his letter.

"It's a shame," says MFL President Darlene Dziewit, "that the main stream media is reluctant to print such an honest assessment of itself. In addition to slavish reporting of the Opposition position, the media has given others, including the Crocus shareholders association and it's spokesperson, Bernie Bellan, an equally easy ride."

As a public service, and of course with the permission of Stephenson, the MFL is reproducing below the letter that was sent to the Free Press - but not printed.

The Free Press recently carried a good roundup of some of the central issues in the long-running debate over the failure of the Crocus Investment Fund. It followed a week of bark and bluster from provincial Liberal and Conservative politicians who claimed they had unearthed the 'smoking gun' that showed the NDP government was to blame for the fall of Crocus.

As the articles made clear, the gun was a zero-caliber memo from six years ago and the only smoke was generated by the Opposition fog machine that redlines every time the word Crocus is muttered. While the Free Press articles rightly pointed out the flaws in the Opposition assault and in some of the actions and inactions of the government, nary a mention was made of the media's role in spreading the latest disinformation.

The media often hold up their hands and cry that people shouldn't shoot the messenger. In response one might ask in this case: Why not? In this case, the media were the trumpet players in the Opposition musical, playing all the notes they were given without every questioning why the performance sounded more than tinny.

The extravaganza began on a Friday with the 'leak' of the ancient cabinet document that outlined "liquidity concerns" that had nothing to do with eventual collapse of the fund four years later. Liberal Leader Jon Gerrard, who obtained the memo, said it showed the fund was "a pyramid scheme" and that it was a warning about its impending doom.

However, the memo addressed concerns that had nothing to do with the ultimate demise of Crocus, a fact virtually non-existent in the immediate news coverage. The government "ignored red flags" about Crocus, said one story. The government "was warned the fund was facing financial trouble," said another.

The government-was-warned story line gained even more steam when the Wrath of Jon was joined by Tory Leader Hugh McFadyen, who claimed the former provincial auditor general told him he couldn't remember seeing such a document when he conducted an audit of the fund in 2005. His lack of memory was interpreted to mean that the government covered up the memo. One story said "the NDP government withheld crucial information." Another said "the NDP never disclosed" the memo to the auditor.

This was apparently the result of McFadyen's tortured reasoning that while the former auditor general couldn't remember seeing the document "if he had seen it he would have remembered it..."

Wrong, wrong and wrong again. As we now know, the document was in the files of the auditor general. The media, of course, would wonder how they are supposed to know that. They simply reported what the Opposition claimed. Well, that is the problem.

As news consumers we should expect reporters to do more than just act as stenographers for anyone, whether the Opposition or the government. A little skepticism about this leaked memo was obviously warranted. After all, Opposition party attacks on governing parties are not the most startling of events (and in other news, another plane landed safely at the airport). Even a dab of research might have helped people understand the issue.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that many reporters had that understanding or the energy to dust off the 2005 auditor's report. It's just so darn complicated, what with all the talk of "liquidity" and "pacing" and "valuations." It is much easier to mix it all up, wrap the whole thing in a box called "financial crisis" and deliver it to their customers.

But had reporters read the 2005 report, they might have noticed that the liquidity problem of 2000 was in fact mentioned in the document. That should have given someone pause as to whether the leaked memo had indeed been kept from the memory-challenged auditor general.

Even after current Auditor General Carol Bellringer made clear that the government did not withhold the document, CBC quoted McFadyen suggesting there might be some "secret" between the government and auditor general's office. The Tory leader was quoted as saying a full inquiry was necessary because "now it turns out that the auditor's office was in on the secret."

Oh, good grief; now we're just making stuff up. The story, of course, never pointed out there was no secret or that McFadyen had not even a CSI-like, microscopic bit of evidence to support his conspiracy theory.

The Opposition can be faulted for continuing the war of fog in its search for weapons of the NDP's destruction, but that's politics and understandable. What is less understandable is seeing the media give up their role to sort and sift supposed facts and put them in some context.

Before immediately salivating over a leaked bone, they might first determine whether there is any meat on it because in the end it's not just the politicians' whose credibility ends up in tatters.