Turn the Fage

When I heard on the radio last night that Ernie Fage was involved in a hit-and-run last November, I’ll admit the first thing that popped into my mind was that he might have had a few before hand. Otherwise, why run, right? At that time, I quickly posted what I had heard and read, but shortly thereafter more complete reports came out that witnesses smelled alcohol on him and captured the images of him and his car on camera-phone.

The premier said Fage told him of a “minor fender-bender” sometime before Christmas, but looked no further into the issue. For Michel Samson, the interim Liberal leader, this is not good enough; he maintains that the premier should have looked into the incident instead of dismissing it. When I first heard this, my immediate reaction was that Samson is merely trying to make a political issue out of something that has already been handled – Fage came forward, admittedly late, and MacDonald accepted his resignation.

However, David Rhodenizer makes an interesting point in this morning’s Daily News:

why MacDonald accepted Fage’s story of a “minor accident,” knowing it happened following MLAs’ traditional session-closing piss-up at the Old Triangle.

I don’t believe that a premier, or any leader for that matter, is responsible for the personal behaviour of members of his party, provided everything stays legal and it doesn’t affect their actual job. That was why I initially thought that MacDonald did what he had to do – a member of his Cabinet said he had a fender-bender, big deal.

Conversation 1:

“Hey Rodney, I, uh, got into a bit of a bump with the car a couple of weeks ago.”

“Anyone hurt?”


“Good. Much damage?”

“Nah, just a dent in the bumper and fender.”

“Cool. Cream in your coffee?”

Conversation 2:

“Rodney, I, uh, had a few pops one night a couple of weeks ago and got into a bang-up in an intersection.”

“Whoa, any damage? Were the cops involved?”

“Not much. I reported it a few days later, it all seems cool.”

“Phew, this would look really bad if anyone found out.”

As of right now, there is no indication in anything that MacDonald or Fage has said to this point that indicates which conversation occured. However, the only way we’re actually going to find out is if we don’t take these guys’ word for it. Michel Samson is doing the right thing; where is Daryl Dexter?

For me, the next question is when does MacDonald kick Fage’s sorry ass out of caucus – before or after the trial?


18 thoughts on “Turn the Fage

  1. My guess for when Rodney’ll kick Ernie out of caucus is – never. With a minority government, Rodney needs every warm body he can get. As for the NDP, I don’t know about Darrell Dexter, but the NDP House Leader, Kevin Deveaux has commented on it.


  2. Devin: Why, because of the history with Robert Chisholm? On the contrary, I think the smart thing for Dexter to do would be to acknowledge it and go after the Tories with a ‘more in sorrow than in anger’ vein. OTOH, since the booze-up was for the end of session, was it an all-party affair? If it was, both Dexter and Samson should look into which of their respective MLA were at the affair and how they got home, it wouldn’t do to have an embarrassing story break in the media.


  3. Dan,
    I don’t believe it was an all-party thing. What happened with Chisholm, by the way. He disappeared sometime while I was living out of the province.


  4. Fage seems to have taken a page from the Crusher Boudreau/Billy Joe MacLean playbook: “continue to screw up as often and as embarassingly as possible until you can (in B.J.’s case) set up your own private fiefdom in some small town.” His main problem is that it seems to be the Cape Bretoners who will shake their heads and say, “Oh well, boys will be boys” as the latest fiasco hits the news. Maybe all Rodney wanted all along was to be King of Mabou?


  5. Kev: According to this article the piss-up in question was an all-party affair.

    Flash: Personally, I think Rodney’s part of a cunning ruse by the Cape Bretoners pushing for nation status – at this stage, if it got rid of Rodney, I think a goodly portion of Nova Scotia would be happy to let CB go its own way.


  6. Devin: Why so coy? Is there a closet drunken hit-n-runner in the NDP caucus of whom we are unaware? Please do spill, if there is anything worth spilling.

    If you are simply suggesting that the NDP should stick to the business at hand during this extra legislative session (finance reform?), I kinda agree. They probably should spend more time on actual provincial business than charbroiling Mr. Fage. I’d limit the Fage-fest to a half-day session, at most.


  7. Here we go, Bri – apparently Dexter’s got a drinking and driving conviction from when he was 19. If that was an attempt on Devin’s part to appear coy and insider-like, it’s pretty pathetic since he told the party about it in 1998 and admitted it in public back in 2002.


  8. Briguy:

    I am not comparing Fage and Dexter… You are correct in saying that the incidents are different, maybe not very different, but different. I am no Ernie Fage apologist. I called for his head over Potato-gate and do the same now.

    Mr. Dexter has apparently fessed up to his DUI, which is commendable (and more than can be said for his predecessor). Although I must say that the fact that it took so long for you guys to figure it out is an indication of the level of disclosure Mr. Dexter has made concernining his crime.

    The double standard I am referring to is the one that describes one person’s transgressions as a long forgotten “lapse of judgement” and another’s as the crime of the century (see the NDP’s recent manufactured outrage over the Lioberal trust fund)

    All my original comment was intended to say is that Mr. Dexter needs to tread lightly on the issue of drunk driving, lest the media jump all over him about his past. You’ll note that Kevin Deveaux has done most of the talking on this one — demonstrating that the NDP understands the delicacy of the situation.


  9. Has it occurred to you that the reason that Darrell Dexter’s letting Kevin Deveaux handle this is because Deveaux’s the Justice critic and this is properly his perview?

    ‘So long for you guys to figure that out’? Whatever are you talking about – that took me 10 minutes. If you’re under the impression that myself and the rest of the ‘Kloggers have nothing better to do with our lives but leap into research mode every time you make some cryptic comment, then I heartedly apologize for my previous comment of ‘pathetic’ – I must amend it to add self-centred, egotistical, and far too full of himself

    Or, if you were under the impression that we were going to fall all over ourselves going ‘OMG, Devin, you’re so smart!’, just because you think you’re the only person on the planet that can use Google and Wikipedia – then I’m doubly sorry, this is a site for debate, if you’re looking for Ego Masturbation, might I suggest this site?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s