Farber: HRCs lack competence, are "dumping grounds" for political hacks

What a fascinating report from Jonathan Kay of the National Post. He describes an editorial board meeting with the Canadian Jewish Congress, which had requested the meeting to try to talk the Post out of their belief in freedom of speech.

The most interesting part of Kay's report, is near the end:

To my surprise, members of the CJC delegation acknowledged that the folks who staff these commissions are sometimes lacking in competence, and thus — as I have argued — give the adjudication of human rights a bad odour in some instances. (I won't name names here, because the CJC clearly sees these commissions as allies, and I don't want to embarrass anyone.)

...One of the visitors — who shall remain unnamed — went further, suggesting that some human-rights commissions had become dumping grounds for political hacks without the skills to make it in truly merit-based jobs. He had the air of a man whose dream was being stifled by bad execution.

Good lord. The CJC said this to reporters? I'm surprised that Kay, a reader's editor, a newsman's newsman, hasn't outed the CJC staffer who said such things. Was it an off-the-record meeting?

I'm guessing it was the CJC's anti-hate tub-thumper, Bernie Farber. Sylvain Abitbol, an exquisitely elegant Sephardic Jew, is far too dignified to engage in that sort of trash talk. And I'm guessing that, as a lawyer, Mark Freiman had more self-control.

By the process of elimination, I'm guessing it's Farber. I don't think there's too many other people in the Jewish community about whom it could be said that human rights commissions form the substance of their "dreams". (If it wasn't Farber, I'd be happy to print a correction with the name of the CJC rep who did make this stunning statement).

If I was one of the HRC staff on Farber's speed dial, I'd be wondering "is he talking about me? Why won't he say that to my face? If he has a problem with our HRC's competence, why is he bitching to the Post, our sworn enemy?"

I wonder how that admission will affect the CJC's case before the Canadian Human Rights Commission right now. The CJC is an intervenor. If they're conceding that the CHRC is incompetent, isn't that legally relevant? Has that incompetence affected their investigation and prosecution of the CJC's own case? (It obviously has, but it's amazing to hear it from the CJC.)

And what about that second insult -- that HRCs have becoming "dumping grounds for political hacks without the skills to make it in truly merit-based jobs". That's astounding.

Well, let's make a list of such "political hacks", to see who Farber could have been talking about. The biggest name, of course, is Barbara Hall, the boss of the Ontario HRC, who was defeated as Toronto's mayor. The shoe fits her. But Farber didn't just say "political hack", he said "political hacks" -- plural. Who else does he mean?

I don't think Farber has as much experience with other provinces' HRCs -- he prefers the CHRC because of their national reach, and their censorship of the Internet. So who over there could be one of Farber's unemployable political hacks? 

Did he mean Giacomo Vigna, who ran a failed campaign for public office? Or did he mean one of the official commissioners of the CHRC?

I don't know. If I was Hall, Vigna, or anyone else who might be properly called a political hack, I'd send Farber an e-mail to make sure he wasn't talking about me.

UPDATE: I'm reminded by someone who was at the meeting that there were several more people in attendance than those named by Kay. Fair enough: like I say, if it wasn't Farber, he can e-mail me the name of the person who said it, and I'll edit this post accordingly. But the shocking words were said, whether by Farber or one of his minions. Those words -- stunning, damaging, but honest! -- were the official view of the CJC. And even if Farber didn't say it -- and he hasn't challenged my deductions yet -- then he tacitly approved it by letting the statement stand. There really is no escape clause here, is there? 

UPDATE 2: In the comments (click above) Jonathan Kay himself provides more information about who said what. If the defamer of HRCs wasn't Farber -- though Kay doesn't say that -- the fact remains it was a member of the CJC's senior leadership delegation to the editorial board meeting. It was a slur against the HRCs -- again, a slur I agree with, for it's so abundantly clear that Canada's HRCs are incompetent, and staffed by political hacks -- and it wasn't rebutted or disowned by anyone else in the meeting. In a way, it's even more powerful not knowing, with 100% certainty, which CJC leader it was. The cloud hangs over all of them -- and appropriately so, given that none of them disowned the comments. It's always slightly uncomfortable watching a lovers' quarrel played out in public, but when it comes to this CHRC/CJC fight, I hope it gets noisier and ruder.