Allan Rock always thought he was pretty special. The Ottawa-born lawyer - a former head of the Law Society of Upper Canada came breezing into the nation’s capital in 1993 as the Liberal MP for Etobicoke Centre and represented the folks there until stepping down in 2004 when Jean Chretien made him Canada’s ambassador to the United Nations.

Claire Hoy During all those years in Parliament, Rock consistently saw himself as prime ministerial material. He served in major portfolios - Justice from 1993 to 1997 and Health from 1997 to 2002 - but not with any particular distinction. any particular distinction.

Indeed, it was Rock who brought us the failed (and extraordinarily expensive) gun control law. He was also ineffective in dealing with the tainted blood scandal and Rock was also the man who led the disastrous legal move against former prime minister Brian Mulroney in the Airbus affair, resulting in taxpayers forking over $2.1 million.

And now we find him as president and vicechancellor of the University of Ottawa, a sinecure he’s held since 2008.

The old Swiss philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau once observed that, “the greatest braggarts are usually the biggest cowards.”

Which brings Rock to mind, of course, over his mishandling of the Ann Coulter affair and his cowardly decision to let university provost Francois Houle take all the heat for something that it turns out Rock was directly responsible for.

What a guy.

To refresh your memory, we take you back to March of this year when controversial conservative American pundit Ann Coulter was scheduled to speak at the University of Ottawa.

Keep in mind that Rock, as the top dog there, had already overseen the handcuffing of three student protesters being removed from his office - one of whom was trying to make an appointment with Rock and another was president of the Student Federation of the University of Ottawa, a position that Rock himself held when he was a student at that university.

Part of the controversy came about after Rock had an Israeli Apartheid Week poster removed from the university.

As offensive as the coupling of Israel and Apartheid is - and how wrong historically it is - nevertheless, one likes to think that a former federal minister, law society chief and UN diplomat would be open to a free flow of ideas, even if some of those ideas did not sit well with him.

Apparently not.

You may recall the hullaballoo which arose when Coulter received a pre-speech threatening letter signed by the aforementioned Houle, a man who works for Rock, in which Coulter - who, whatever you think of her politics, is extremely bright, informed and wildly successful - was warned to “educated” herself about the kind of speech which is acceptable in Canada and suggesting that “promoting hatred against any identifiable group ... could in fact lead to criminal charges.”

After the note became public, Houle became the subject of considerable editorial outrage, many arguing he was not fit to be a university provost.

For his part, Rock quietly rode out the extended controversy, allowed Houle to be subjected to the abuse.

It turns out - thanks to a successful access to information request from The Canadian Press (CP) - that it wasn’t Houle, but Rock himself, who led the unseemly attack against Coulter’s right to free speech.

Worse, it seems that at one point, while Houle was taking the heat, Rock suggested that perhaps they should issue a public offer to Coulter to return to the university, no doubt thinking that the offer would make him appear as the champion of free speech along with truth, justice and the Canadian way.

What a hypocrite.

Why? Because Houle wrote his letter on Rock’s instructions, having received a message from Rock instructing Houle to warm Coulter about the dangers of potential legal action.

Here’s what Rock - the great “diplomat”- wrote about Coulter: “Ann Coulter is a mean-spirited, small-minded, foul-mouthed poltroon ... the loud mouth that bespeaks the vacant mind. She is an illinformed and deeply offensive shill for a profoundly shallow and ignorant view of the world. She is a malignancy on the body politic. She is a disgrace to the broadcasting industry and a leading example of the dramatic decline in the quality of public discourse in recent times.”

Coulter, of course, is none of these things. But Rock is. And whatever you make think of Coulter’s views, at least - unlike Rock - she has the courage to offer them in public.