GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Introduction On November 1, 2005, Justice John sions, had been paid to advertising and Focus Gomery released the first part of his communications companies operating This News in Re- long-awaited report on the sponsorship in Quebec, often for work that was not view story focuses on the Gomery scandal. Gomery began his investiga- even done. All of these companies were Commission Phase I tion into the scandal in September 2004. known to be close supporters of the Report on the His report pointed an accusing finger at Liberal Party in Quebec. In response to sponsorship scandal some prominent figures inside the a massive public outcry, Prime Minister that plagued Paul administration of Jean Chrétien, includ- Martin promised a full investigation Martin’s minority ing the former Liberal prime minister into the scandal. He fired Gagliano Liberal government for over a year. The himself. However, Paul Martin, the from his new position as ambassador to report cast a dark current prime minister, was totally Denmark and he promised to resign if shadow on former exonerated. The scandal involved the there was any evidence that he had been prime minister Jean misappropriation of millions of dollars involved in any fraudulent activity, or Chrétien’s legacy. of taxpayers’ money that had been had even known about it while he Our story summa- rizes the main illegally channeled into the pockets of served as finance minister in Chrétien’s findings of the advertising executives and others close administration. He also dismissed the report, assesses its to the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party heads of three Crown corporations that possible implica- in the period following that province’s Fraser’s report had found were involved tions, and examines 1995 sovereignty referendum. The in the transfer of money through ques- its likely impact on the federal election extremely narrow federalist victory in tionable means to Quebec advertising to be held in that vote had convinced Chrétien and agencies during the sponsorship pro- January 2006. his advisors that the federal government gram. needed to embark on an aggressive The opposition political parties, marketing campaign to sell the benefits especially Stephen Harper’s Conserva- Did you know . . . of remaining in Canada to Quebec tives, eagerly seized on the sponsorship The 1995 Quebec voters. In order to promote national scandal as evidence of deep-seated referendum was unity, millions of dollars were ear- Liberal corruption and exploited the won by federalists marked to sponsor events and activities issue aggressively during the 2004 by the narrowest of inside the province that would show- federal election campaign. But despite margins. In fact, 49.4 per cent voted case the federal government. The the widespread disgust the scandal had “yes” to start the project fell under the administration of triggered in the minds of many voters, process of separa- the federal Public Works Department, Martin’s Liberals were able to squeak tion from Canada under the direction of Alfonso through to victory with a minority and 50.6 per cent Gagliano, a Quebec Liberal cabinet government. A year later, as even more voted “no.” A few minister who was also Chrétien’s damning evidence of the extent of the thousand votes were the difference. lieutenant in the province. scandal began to emerge from For many years, unproven allegations Gomery’s inquiry, it appeared that of abuses in the spending of public Martin’s government was in danger of funds in the federal sponsorship pro- being ousted in a non-confidence gram had swirled around Ottawa. Then, motion. Although the Liberals narrowly in early 2004, Auditor General Sheila survived that challenge, they knew that Fraser delivered a damning report, once Gomery’s report was made public, finding that approximately $100-mil- they would face another backlash of lion, in the form of fees and commis- public outrage and political attack.

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 6 To pre-empt this, Martin promised Gomery Commission Phase I Report Definition that he would call a federal election that his party would no longer support Crown corporations within 30 days of the release of the the Liberals in Parliament. The NDP are corporations owned by the second part of Gomery’s report, ex- would vote with the other opposition provincial or fed- pected in February 2006. This section groups to defeat Martin’s government eral governments. will lay out specific proposals for the on a non-confidence motion. Thus, by In effect, this government to act on, in order to pre- late November 2005, it appeared almost makes their citizens vent any other such scandal from ever certain that Canadians were heading for the true owners. occurring again. But Martin’s pledge the polls after an election campaign that did not satisfy the opposition parties, would span the holiday season. It who were pressing for a federal election seemed highly likely that the findings Did you know . . . much sooner. The Bloc Québécois, of Gomery’s report, and the allegations A “non-confi- whose popularity had surged in Quebec of corruption and abuse of public funds dence” motion is a motion designed to in the aftermath of the scandal and were they entailed, would become a key issue test whether a eager for another election, lined up during the ensuing electoral battle that legislature supports solidly behind the Conservatives. would determine the fate of Paul the existing gov- Finally, NDP leader Jack Layton an- Martin’s Liberal government. ernment. In Cana- nounced shortly after the release of the dian parliamentary tradition, if a government loses a To Consider motion of non- 1. What is the “sponsorship scandal”? confidence, it should resign immediately.

2. Why has the sponsorship scandal posed such a serious problem for Prime Minister Paul Martin’s Liberal government?

3. What impact has this scandal exerted on federal politics in Canada since the details of it first emerged? What are its further implications likely to be for 2006?

4. Do you think that the federal government should spend millions of dollars advertising the benefits of Canada to Quebecers? Explain.

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 7 GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Video Review

1. What political party is frequently called “Canada’s natural governing Answer the ques- party”? Why? tions as you view the video. Check with your teacher to ensure that you understand the 2. Who is Sheila Fraser? What did she find in the report she issued in Febru- questions and have ary 2004? correct responses.

3. Who is the civil servant in the Public Works Department who “blew the whistle” on abuses of public funds in his department?

For what senior bureaucrat did he work?

What happened to him after he made his revelations public?

4. What are two specific examples of misuse of public funds under the fed- eral sponsorship program that are referred to in the video?

5. What evidence is there that funds illegally directed to the Quebec Liberal Party as a result of the scandal may have influenced the result of the 1997 federal election?

6. What role did each of the following people play in the sponsorship pro- gram? a) Chuck Guité ______

b) Jean Brault ______

c) Alfonso Gagliano ______

d) Jacques Corriveau ______

7. What degree of responsibility for the scandal did Gomery attribute to former prime minister Jean Chrétien?

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 8 8. How did each of the following political leaders respond to the findings of the Gomery Commission Phase I Report? a) Jean Chrétien

b) Paul Martin

c) Opposition Leader Stephen Harper

d) NDP Leader Jack Layton

e) Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe

9. What recommendations will be included in the second part of the Gomery report?

10. What impact might the Gomery report have on the next federal election, in January 2006?

11. In your opinion, what lessons can be drawn from the sponsorship scandal?

12. How has the sponsorship scandal influenced your view of Canadian poli- tics and politicians in Canada?

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 9 GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Timeline of a Scandal

October 30, 1995 – The Quebec May 23, 2001 – Federal Ethics Coun- Review the timeline sovereignty referendum results in an sellor Howard Wilson clears Gagliano of major events in extremely narrow victory for the feder- of any conflict of interest in awarding this somewhat complex case and alist “no” side. In response to this threat contracts to advertising companies in then respond to to national unity, the Liberal govern- Quebec under the sponsorship program. ment of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien the questions that September 2001 – Communication follow. initiates a program to promote federal- Canada is created, assuming responsi- ism inside Quebec and hires advertising bility for the sponsorship program from and communications companies. the Public Works Department. Update November 1997 – The federal spon- As of May 2004, the January 15, 2002 – Prime Minister sorship program is created, to be man- Ethics Counsellor Chrétien drops Gagliano from the had been renamed aged by the Communications Co- cabinet and appoints him ambassador to the Ethics Commis- ordination Service Branch of the federal Denmark. He denies that the move has sioner. For further Public Works Department. Chuck any connection to the sponsorship information about Guité, a senior bureaucrat, is named scandal. this person, visit director of the program. www.parl.gc.ca/ May 8, 2002 – Federal Auditor Gen- oen/en. August 1999 – Guité retires and is eral Sheila Fraser releases a report replaced by Pierre Tremblay, former charging that the federal government chief of staff to Alfonso Gagliano, “broke just about every rule in the Further Research federal Public Works Minister. book” with sponsorship contracts To stay informed December 31, 1999 – The Globe and awarded to Groupaction. The RCMP about details of Mail reports that Ottawa paid $324 000 launches an investigation into the this long-running story, consider to rent a $100 000 hot-air balloon in the $1.6-million awarded to the firm. shape of a Mountie on horseback to tour visiting the Web May 17, 2002 – Public Works Minis- sites of the RCMP the country. ter Don Boudria is criticized for spend- (www.rcmp-grc.ca) May 31, 2000 – It is revealed that ing a skiing weekend at the country and the Auditor General (www.oag- almost all of the budget of the federal home of Claude Boulay, president of bvg,gc.ca/). sponsorship program is being spent in Groupe Everest, another Quebec adver- Quebec, even though the Chrétien tising firm in receipt of sponsorship government denies that the program’s contracts. Chrétien replaces Boudria main purpose is to boost support for with Ralph Goodale. federalism in that province. September 17, 2002 – The RCMP August 26, 2000 – Gagliano is raids the Montreal offices of accused of awarding contracts to Que- Groupaction in search of evidence of bec advertising companies that are also fraud related to federal sponsorship major donors to the Liberal Party. An contracts. internal audit of contracts awarded April 28, 2003 – Goodale releases under the program reveals that they did new rules for the awarding of advertis- not meet federal rules and raised ques- ing contracts under the sponsorship tions whether the Quebec firm program. Groupaction Marketing Inc. actually did any work in return for the contract it September 18, 2003 – Quebec was awarded. advertising executive Paul Coffin is charged with 18 counts of fraud involv-

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 10 ing more than $2-million in false in- to an end just prior to the federal elec- Did you know . . . voices billed to Communication tion campaign. The lead counsel Canada. Coffin was a major donor to for the Gomery May 27, 2004 – Alfonso Gagliano the Liberal Party. Federal opposition launches a multimillion-dollar lawsuit inquiry is Bernard parties call for a judicial inquiry into the Roy, a former ally against the federal government for and associate of scandal and the recall of Ambassador wrongful dismissal, lost wages, and Brian Mulroney, Gagliano from Denmark to answer personal damages. former prime questions relating to his role in it. minister and politi- June 28, 2004 – Paul Martin’s Liber- December 12, 2003 – Paul Martin cal foe of Jean als are re-elected, but with a minority Chrétien. succeeds Jean Chrétien as prime minis- government. The opposition parties, in ter, and names Stephen Owen as the particular the Bloc Québécois and the new Public Works minister. One day Conservatives, made the scandal a after assuming office, he cancels the major issue during the campaign, federal sponsorship program. costing the Liberals seats, especially in February 10, 2004 – Sheila Fraser Quebec. releases a second, even more critical, September 7, 2004 – Justice John report on the sponsorship scandal, Gomery begins hearing testimony at the charging that the federal government public inquiry into the sponsorship mismanaged hundreds of millions of tax scandal. dollars from 1997 to 2001. Martin denies any knowledge of the way the December 16, 2004 – In an inter- program was managed and claims that view, Gomery says he is coming to the any abuses were the work of a very same conclusions about the scandal that small group of people. A few days later, Auditor General Sheila Fraser did. he says, “every Liberal right across the January 25, 2005 – Lawyers for Jean country wants to find answers to this. Chrétien demand that Gomery be Every Liberal is sick about this.” removed from the inquiry, claiming he February 24, 2004 – Martin sus- has lost objectivity. Gomery later pends the heads of three Crown corpo- admits he was mistaken to speak to the rations, Michel Vennat of the Business media about his opinions, but refuses to Development Bank of Canada, Via Rail step down. president Marc LeFrancois, and Canada February 8, 2005 – In testimony Post president André Ouellet, for their before the inquiry, Chrétien criticizes alleged involvement in the scandal. Gomery for comments he made about March 30, 2004 – In a speech given the former prime minister, such as in London, England, former prime characterizing Chrétien’s decision to minister Jean Chrétien defends his order golf balls with his initials printed government’s record and complains that on them as “small-town cheap.” the attention given to the scandal is February 10, 2005 – For the first paralyzing Martin’s administration. time in 130 years, a sitting prime minis- May 10, 2004 – The RCMP lays ter appears before a public inquiry, as fraud charges against Chuck Guité and Paul Martin gives his testimony to Jean Brault, head of Groupaction. Gomery. He claims to have had no involvement in the operation of the May 18, 2004 – Opposition members program while he was Finance minister of the parliamentary Public Accounts in Chrétien’s government. Committee denounce the Liberals for bringing its investigation of the scandal

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 11 April 7, 2005 – After hearing testi- June 17, 2005 – After months of Definition mony from many important figures testimony, the Gomery Commission Forensic account- implicated in the scandal, Gomery wraps up in order to prepare the first ants are account- releases a publication ban on Jean part of its report. ants that are Brault’s evidence indicating that he employed to work September 21, 2005 – Guité and in court cases and gave cash contributions to the Liberal Brault plead not guilty to charges they criminal detection. Party in Quebec and put election work- defrauded the taxpayers of $2-million They use their skills ers on Groupaction’s payroll in return through the sponsorship program. in the detection of for sponsorship contracts. fraud and embez- November 1, 2005 – The Gomery zlement. May 21, 2005 – Following a month of Commission Phase I Report is tabled in constant opposition attacks in Parlia- Parliament. Gomery concludes that ment over the scandal and the explosive while former prime minister Jean evidence of Brault, Guité, and others Chrétien was not directly involved in before the Gomery inquiry, the minority the sponsorship program, he must bear Liberal government narrowly survives a some responsibility for the scandal non-confidence vote with the support of arising from it because it was run out of the NDP and two independent MPs. A his office. People close to Chrétien, in few days before, in a speech to the particular Guité, Corriveau, and former nation, Martin promised to call a federal chief of staff Jean Pelletier, come in for election within 30 days of the release of strong criticism. Paul Martin is found Gomery’s report on the scandal, ex- blameless in the affair. The second part pected later in the year. of Gomery’s report, which will outline May 24, 2005 – A team of forensic proposals to prevent further such scan- accountants releases a report to the dals, is to be released on February 1, inquiry concluding that the federal 2006. government spent $355-million on November 28, 2005 – The three sponsorship programs. opposition parties combine to bring May 31, 2005 – Paul Coffin, the first down the Martin government in the person to be charged with criminal House of Commons in a non-confi- offenses in the scandal, pleads guilty to dence vote, paving the way for a federal 15 counts of fraud. He is given a condi- election to be held in January 2006. The tional sentence of two years of commu- sponsorship scandal is expected to nity service. become a major issue in the campaign.

Inquiry 1. After reading the timeline, select what you think were the three main turning points in the development of this scandal and indicate in your notebook why they were so important.

2. Why do you think it took so long for the details of the sponsorship scandal to emerge?

3. Who do you think was mainly responsible for a) revealing and b) covering up the scandal?

3. Why do you think so many Canadians were angry about the scandal?

4. What is your personal reaction to this affair?

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 12 GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Main Findings of the Report

• The office of former prime minister tions or other contributions to the The first part of the Jean Chrétien, via his chief of staff Liberal Party in that province. Jacques Gomery Commis- sion’s report into Jean Pelletier and Public Works Corriveau, a prominent Quebec Lib- the scandal sur- minister Alfonso Gagliano, directed eral organizer and close friend of rounding the the awarding of contracts through the Chrétien’s, was the central figure in federal sponsorship federal sponsorship program, bypass- this scheme, which enriched him program, “Assign- ing normal departmental supervision personally and filled the party’s ing Responsibility” was released on and oversight. Pelletier essentially coffers with illegal campaign contri- November 1, 2005. acted as an unelected “minister” for butions. Running hundreds the program, failing to take even the • Former Public Works minister of pages in length, most elementary precautions against Alfonso Gagliano must have known and based on a mismanagement in the spending of about the kickback scheme, despite a huge amount of millions of taxpayers’ dollars. testimony, it is lack of clear evidence of his involve- unlikely that many • Chrétien holds personal responsibility ment in it. While Chrétien probably Canadians will read for the actions of Pelletier and other did not know about the kickbacks, he it in its entirety. key aides involved in the program and still bears indirect responsibility for Here is a brief is to blame for the mismanagement of them because he should have been summary of its main findings. public money arising from it. aware of the fact that the sponsorship Circle the three • Chuck Guité, a former bureaucrat who program was operating without proper that you believe administered the sponsorship pro- oversight of its financial activities. are most important gram, operated outside the normal • A “culture of entitlement” existed and be prepared to explain your structures of government accountabil- among federal officials and bureau- choices. ity, rewarding friends and advertising crats involved with the program, firms close to the Liberal Party with leading them to accept financial and lucrative contracts, sometimes for non-monetary benefits from their work that was not even completed. participation in it. • Paul Martin, who was minister of Finance in the Chrétien government at It is important to note that the Gomery the time the program was operating, is report is not a legal judgment, and its fully exonerated from any responsibil- conclusions do not establish criminal ity for the scandal. responsibility for any of those figures • A system of “kickbacks” existed named in it. It will be up to the RCMP under the program. In return for being to determine if any of the people awarded sponsorship contracts, adver- Gomery held most responsible for the tising and communications firms in scandal will face criminal charges for Quebec would make financial dona- their actions.

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 13 Activities 1. What do you think is the most serious finding of the Gomery report into the federal sponsorship scandal? Why?

2. What do you think Gomery means by the term “culture of entitlement”? How do you react to this?

3. Do you think Gomery is right to assign responsibility to former prime minister Jean Chrétien and exonerate Paul Martin, the current prime minister, from any blame for the scandal? Explain.

4. Do you think that criminal activity is part of the sponsorship scandal? Explain.

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 14 GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Two Prime Ministers: One Scandal

When Justice John Gomery released the power in the hands of partisan political Quote first part of his long-awaited report on figures who did not hesitate to enrich “Justice Gomery is the federal sponsorship scandal, two both themselves and their party at the simply wrong on his findings. On this major Canadian political figures anx- public’s expense. and much else.” iously awaited its conclusions. One was In an angry response to the report, — Jean Chrétien, former prime minister Jean Chrétien, Chrétien charged that Gomery was Toronto Star, who had set up the sponsorship pro- biased against him and his administra- November 2, 2005 gram after the 1995 Quebec sovereignty tion, and claimed that he would initiate referendum as a means of promoting legal actions against it. Chrétien was federalism and national unity in that concerned that his legacy as prime province. The other was Chrétien’s minister would be tarnished by the successor and one-time political rival, report and reminded Canadians of some Paul Martin, who knew that the report’s of the important decisions he had taken findings would play a key part in deter- while in office. For example, he pointed mining the fate of his minority Liberal out that if he had sent Canadian troops government. to participate in the U.S.-led invasion of Gomery’s report reserved much of its Iraq, resulting in military casualties, harshest criticism for some key bureau- hardly anyone would be paying atten- crats and Liberal Party officials close to tion to the Gomery report. Chrétien who were found directly For his part, Paul Martin’s reputation responsible for a gross misuse of public emerged unscathed from the report. funds in the operation of the program. Gomery could find no evidence of any Even worse, some of them were ac- involvement on his part in the abuses cused of having established an elaborate arising from the administration of the scheme of kickbacks under which sponsorship scandal while he had been advertising firms receiving sponsorship minister of Finance in the Chrétien contracts made generous and illegal government. Further, Martin gained contributions to the Liberal Party in credit for his decisions to cancel the Quebec. While Jean Pelletier, Alfonso program, set up the Gomery Commis- Gagliano, Chuck Guité, and Jacques sion, dismiss federal officials impli- Corriveau were the main culprits cated in it, and commit himself to Gomery named, he placed ultimate calling a federal election within 30 days responsibility for the whole affair at the of the release of its final report. While feet of Jean Chrétien. This was because he was reluctant to criticize his prede- he had created the sponsorship program cessor directly, Martin made it clear in the first place and made the fatal that he was taking the report seriously decision to run it out of the Prime and would support any criminal investi- Minister’s Office. This resulted in gation of its charges, wherever it might widespread political interference in the lead. spending of tax dollars, a near total The reaction of these two political disregard for established rules and leaders to the Gomery report’s findings procedures for the administration of was just the latest installment in the public funds, and the concentration of long-running rivalry between them. For

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 15 years, it was no secret that there was may conclude that Martin has acted Quote very little love lost between these two decisively and responsibly to deal with “The story that prominent federal Liberals. Their past scandals and make sure they do not unfolds is trou- bling. But it’s a personal and political animosity had happen again. Historians may regard story that needed bitterly split the party between pro- the abuses of the sponsorship scandal to be told—in full, Chrétien and pro-Martin camps, espe- and the kickbacks involved in it as in detail and in cially in Quebec. Now that the Martin damning indictments of Jean Chrétien, public.” — Paul minority government faced a serious and portray him as a corrupt and irre- Martin, Toronto election challenge, many Liberals were sponsible leader. Or they may weigh the Star, November 2, 2005 concerned that the report would reopen negative consequences of the scandal old wounds, and make it more difficult against the originally positive goals that for the party to regroup and unite to inspired the establishment of the spon- face a re-energized opposition in the sorship program in the first place, most difficult campaign ahead. importantly the need to ensure the unity It is too soon to determine whether of Canada after the 1995 sovereignty the fallout from the Gomery report will referendum in Quebec. They may also prove fatal either to Paul Martin’s view the sponsorship scandal as a political future or Jean Chrétien’s relatively minor episode of Chrétien’s historical legacy. The voters might administration when placed in the decide to punish the Liberals at the broader context of some of his more polls for the corruption and arrogance important achievements in domestic that seem to have permeated their and foreign policy. administration. On the other hand, they Activities 1. Do you think that former prime minister Jean Chrétien deserves the criti- cism he has received from the Gomery report for his actions during the sponsorship program? Explain clearly.

2. Do you think that Gomery was too quick to exonerate Paul Martin from any responsibility for the sponsorship scandal? Explain.

3. How do you think the Gomery report will impact on a) the political future of Paul Martin and his government, and b) Jean Chrétien’s historical legacy as prime minister?

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 16 GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Point/Counterpoint

“Gomery’s report is devastating. Despite the current spate of rushed reforms, Here is a selection Liberals in power since 1993 perpetuated a partisan, corrupt contracting system of responses to the that made friends rich and paid party bills. Quite rightly, Gomery puts blame for findings of the its worst excesses where it belongs—on politicians at the top. . . . For John Gomery report, Gomery, that’s where the buck stops and mercifully for Paul Martin it stops at from Justice Jean Chrétien. Rarely in federal politics does something so rotten turn out so Gomery himself, journalists, and well for those with so much to lose.” — James Travers, Toronto Star ordinary Canadians. (www.thestar.com), November 2, 2005 For each of them, Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______state your re- sponse—i.e. ______whether or not you agree with the “The dramatic revelations at public inquiries and the media attention given to statement by them tend to distort reality and to make the misconduct that the inquiry uncov- checking off either ers appear to be more widespread than it really was. I fear this has occurred in Agree or Disagree. this case.” — Justice John Gomery, macleans.ca, November 8, 2005 Briefly explain your Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______views in the spaces provided. ______

“With so few policy differences between the two major parties . . . and with the Definition electorate so fractured by language, culture, ethnicity and, most of all, by sheer geography, the only glue available to hold together a national party is patron- Patronage refers to age. And patronage opens the doors to all other forms of corruption. . . . The the practice of political parties in notion that our political system is inherently corrupt, rather than just occasion- power rewarding ally so because some rotten apples happen to occupy important posts at a their supporters particular time, will be deeply offensive and depressing to most Canadians. But with government why is it that the ghost of John A. Macdonald keeps finding an excuse, and a jobs, contacts. need, to slip back amongst us to ask tauntingly, ‘So, what else is new?’” — Richard Gwyn, Toronto Star (www.thestar.com), November 2, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

“They lied to us in public. They lied to our faces. They mishandled our money and they lied to deceive us. Paul Martin had to know because he was Finance minister. I blame both him and Chrétien. I feel as strongly about the scandal now as I did when I first heard about it last year. I care about it a lot. Anyone who follows politics feels the same way—and we’re not going to get over it.” — Toronto real estate agent George Carayiannis, Toronto Star (www.thestar.com), November 3, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 17 “Paul Martin did well to pick the right judge to handle the inquiry against his biggest political foe. If Martin had written this report, it would not have been any more favourable to his cause. It amazes me that a government has been considered responsible for financial misconduct, yet the Finance Minister of the same government has been completely exonerated. I think the inquiry has been unfair to Jean Chrétien and was too fair to Martin.” — Mubashir Rizvi, Toronto Star (www.thestar.com), November 2, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

“This much is clear. Between now and the election, the Liberals will do their best to erase the scandal from the minds of voters and the Opposition parties will do all they can to keep it alive.” — editorial in Regina Leader-Post, Novem- ber 2, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

“All Canadians should thank Justice Gomery for rendering his findings with such clarity. We deserve that much. No one is served by obscuring the ugliness of what transpired in the name of a well-intentioned program . . .” — editorial in Charlottetown Guardian, November 2, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

“It’s not a small chunk of money. People work hard for their money. Nowadays, folks making between $30,000 and $70,000 are working poor. . . . People are left feeling that their money is being squandered and they are, to say the least, disenfranchised. If anything more comes down the road, that’s it.” — Todd Leach, Toronto Star (www.thestar.com), November 3, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

“Twelve years ago this fall, the Liberal Party of Canada came to power in Ot- tawa. After so many years, it becomes difficult to believe that the culture of corruption that progressively wormed its way within the organization will suddenly disappear.” — Le Devoir (Montreal), November 2, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

“The Liberal Party is corrupt and must be held to account.” — Stephen Harper, Toronto Star, November 2, 2005 Agree __ Disagree __ Explanation: ______

______

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 18 GOMERY REPORT: ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL Activity: Tracking the Impact of the Gomery Report

As a result of a non-confidence vote largely inspired by the findings of the Gomery Commission Phase I Report, Paul Martin’s Liberal minority government fell on November 28, 2005. One day later, the Prime Minister paid a visit to Governor General Michaëlle Jean, requesting a dissolution of Parliament and permission to call a federal election for January 23.

As the political parties prepared for a mid-winter campaign, it appeared that the Gomery Report and the evidence of corruption and financial mismanage- ment it had brought to light would emerge as a major issue in the election.

As a class, form groups to track the impact of the Gomery report on the election campaign as it unfolds. Each group should monitor how the major political parties employ the issue to their advantage as a means of discrediting its oppo- nents and/or bolstering its own image in the minds of the voters. Each group should focus on one of the following parties and leaders. Party Web sites and public advertising should provide much material.

• Liberals (www.liberal.ca) — Paul Martin • Conservatives (www.conservative.ca) — Stephen Harper • Bloc Québécois (www.blocquebecois.org) — Gilles Duceppe • New Democratic Party (www.ndp.ca) — Jack Layton • Green Party (www.green.ca) — Jim Harris

Groups should monitor media coverage of the election, focusing on statements the parties and their leaders make about the scandal over the course of the campaign. Each week, groups will prepare and present an update of events and developments to the class, followed by a class discussion of the impact the scandal appears to be having on voters’ intentions. Opinion polls released during the campaign should also be carefully noted.

On election day, groups can present their final reports and predict how they think the scandal and the Gomery report’s findings will impact on the results.

On the day following the election, the class can hold a “postmortem” discus- sion, evaluating the ways in which the Gomery report and the sponsorship scandal may have shaped the results, and their implications for the major Cana- dian political parties and their leaders.

Extension In February 2006, after the release of the second part of the Gomery report, the class can revisit the issue and examine the specific recommendations Justice Gomery is expected to make regarding how future scandals of this kind might be avoided. Students could discuss how effective they think these recommenda- tions are likely to be, and whether or not they would suggest any others.

CBC News in Review • December 2005 • Page 19