How Much Did Martin Know?

Eight in 10 Say Martin Knew More
by Chris Wattie, National Post - February 14, 2004
Exclusive poll: 52% say PM 'responsible' for sponsorship mess, 64% name Chretien

An overwhelming majority of Canadians believe Paul Martin, the Prime Minister, knew more about the $100-million sponsorship scandal than he has acknowledged to date, according to a new public opinion poll. A COMPAS poll, conducted yesterday for the National Post, found that 46% of those surveyed believed Mr. Martin knew "a lot more" about the gathering scandal than he has said, while 34% believed he knew at least "somewhat more." Only 11% said they believe the Prime Minister was unaware of the scheme to transfer millions in federal funds to Liberal-connected advertising agencies in Quebec.

"There's no question this has captured people's attention - they're really mad," said Conrad Winn, the president of COMPAS Inc. "This is a very strong response and a very negative one towards Mr. Martin. "They hold him almost as responsible as [former prime minister Jean] Chretien."

Sheila Fraser, the Auditor-General, revealed on Tuesday that $100-million in commissions and fees was funnelled to several advertising firms over five years while Jean Chretien was prime minister and Mr. Martin was finance minister. The opinion poll found that most people blamed Mr. Chretien and his chief Quebec lieutenant at the time, Alfonso Gagliano, for the sponsorship mess, with 64% of those asked saying they considered the former prime minister "very responsible." Mr. Gagliano was blamed by 61% of those surveyed. However, 52% of those surveyed by the pollster also held Mr. Martin responsible for the scandal the federal Auditor-General called "shocking." Opposition critics have demanded to know what Mr. Martin knew about the program and why he did nothing to stop the abuses the Auditor-General called "a blatant misuse of public funds."

The Post reported yesterday that a senior Liberal party official urged Mr. Martin to look into rumours about improper use of federal money in the government's sponsorship program in early 2002. In a February, 2002, letter to the then finance minister, Akaash Maharaj warned him about "the growing rumours that funds from the sponsorship program are being diverted to partisan purposes" through advertising firms linked to the Liberals.

Mr. Martin has said he knew little about the program during his tenure as Mr. Chretien's finance minister and that he believed problems ailing the sponsorship program were merely administrative until Ms. Fraser's first report on the issue was released in May, 2002. "No one believes that at all - even among Liberal voters the results were very bad for him on this question," Mr. Winn said. Mr. Martin said yesterday that Mr. Maharaj's letter confirms his contention that he had heard rumours but little more about the growing scandal until early 2002. Among Liberals surveyed in the poll, 36% held Mr. Martin very responsible for the scandal, 62% held Mr. Chretien to blame and 55% fingered Mr. Gagliano.

It appears that the high-profile scandal has already begun to eat away at the federal Liberals' enormous lead among voters, according to the poll results. The survey found that support for the Liberals was at 43.5% among those contacted for the poll, down from 49% in another COMPAS poll earlier this month. "The Liberals are definitely falling and falling quite dramatically," Mr. Winn said. The Conservatives rose to 26.4%, up from 19% two weeks ago, while the New Democratic Party edged up slightly to 18.7%, compared with 17% in the earlier poll.

Mr. Martin has taken "personal responsibility" for getting to the bottom of what went wrong, but has also said that the bureaucrats involved in the scandal were receiving "political direction." He has insisted that people around the former prime minister kept him in the dark on Quebec-related matters. Aides to the Prime Minister told the Post this week that Mr. Chretien's office would take the blame for covering up "criminal" activity.

The poll, for which 600 Canadians were contacted yesterday, is considered accurate within four percentage points, 19 times out of 20. The poll asked respondents: Using a seven-point scale where seven means entirely responsible and one, the opposite, to what extent Mr. Martin, Mr. Chretien and Mr. Gagliano were responsible for the misuse of funds in the sponsorship program and advertising grants.

Respondents were also asked: There is talk about what Paul Martin knew when the misspending took place and he was finance minister. Do you believe that he knew a lot more than he now says, somewhat more than he now says, or did he really not know at all?

COMPAS: Lib 43.5%,Conser 26.4%, NDP 18.7% IPSOS: LIB 39% CONSER 24% NDP 18

Martin cannot recall letter sent to him about scandal - Chretien's friends fight back
The Saskatoon StarPhoenix - February 14, 2004
Anne Dawson, CanWest News Service

BROCKVILLE, Ont. - Prime Minister Paul Martin attempted Friday to declare an end to the acrimony between Liberals loyal to former prime minister Jean Chretien and those loyal to himself, saying all Liberals are on the same team when it comes to getting to the bottom of the Quebec sponsorship scandal. "You know, the leadership race is over," Martin told reporters during a stop in Brockville, a small city south of Ottawa. "I take responsibility for dealing with this issue. I'm going to deal with it. "Every Liberal across the country wants to know what happened and I certainly want to know what happened and I believe that just as Canadians are outraged by this, Liberals are outraged by it."

But, devoted Chretien MPs are not taking Martin's campaign to pin the blame for the fraudulent government program on the former prime minister lightly, and have made clear they intend to fight back. One angry Chretien-supporting MP warned if Martin wants to get into a fight with his former boss, "then he'd better have a nuclear arsenal." Chretien, who has just arrived back from a China business trip, has not yet decided whether he will make a statement on the controversy that has badly tarnished him in recent days, according to Senator Jim Munson, a former Chretien aide.

Martin, who is on a media blitz for the next week to get his side of the sponsorship scandal story out front and centre, also said he could not remember receiving a letter from a Liberal party executive in early 2002. The letter urged him to investigate growing rumours that funds from the sponsorship program were being diverted to partisan purposes connected with the 2000 general election campaign in Quebec, through advertising and public relations firms associated with the Liberal party. Martin did not answer a question as to whether he turned the letter over to Chretien, who was then prime minister, although he has previously said Chretien did not consult with him on Quebec issues. Martin noted that within weeks of the letter being written, the government called in the auditor general to investigate. "To be quite honest, I can't remember receiving the letter, but the letter is a classic example of the kind of thing that was happening. I know Akaash Maharaj," said Martin, referring to the party's former national policy director, who wrote the letter. "He's talking about rumours that were abounding and the fact is that rumours were abounding. That's why, within a matter of weeks, the auditor general began her study."

In the February 2002 letter, Maharaj referred to damning reports he was hearing about the sponsorship scandal from both provincial representatives across the country and e-mails from party faithful. Maharaj asked Martin, in his "unique combination of roles as our government's chief financial officer and our party's most senior Quebec minister" to look into the matter and prepare a "fact-based reply" saying to ignore the matter would be interpreted as implicating the party.

For the first time Friday, Martin was more cautious in his response as to whether he intends to proceed with a spring election, although he insisted he is not concerned that the scandal and the internal party conflict will affect his party's chances at the polls. "No I'm not (concerned). Our government takes full responsibility for finding out the facts and let me tell you anybody who has transgressed in this particular matter is going to pay the consequences." He said he would call an election "when it's appropriate to do so."

Martin also said he would place "no limits" on the public inquiry he has launched to get to the bottom of the scandal, and hinted he would be prepared to fire Crown corporation officials before the inquiry is over if they were complicit in the scandal. "As soon as we have the facts and if the facts indicates that (they were complicit) we will act very quickly," said Martin.

During his visit to Brockville Friday, Martin received a warm welcome from some 20 community representatives anxious to hear what his new government will do to address their concerns on regional development, a shortage of doctors, and the mad cow crisis. Liberal MP Joe Jordan won his seat here in the 2000 election by only 55 votes and conceded that the scandal has been damaging to his party. "If we're arguing fiscal competency as one of our trump cards, these things aren't helpful. We have to regain that issue," said Jordan.

Brockville Mayor Ben TeKamp blamed Chretien for the scandal. "I believe that his close involvement with his Quebec lieutenant at the time and they recognized there was a need to keep Quebec in Confederation and I believe they made certain deals with I certain entities in Quebec that would accomplish that," said TeKamp, who is counting on Martin's government to deliver more money to his city. "I think it was orchestrated by prime minister Chretien. I really do." TeKamp, who said he swung between voting Liberal and Conservative in the past, said he does not believe Martin knew the magnitude of the sponsorship wrongdoing.

Surprise, Surprise
By Douglas Fisher, February 16, 2004

OTTAWA - Have we a real scandal within the Chretien/Martin Liberal government? Insofar as Paul Martin and his supportive caucus are concerned, the answer is no. What happened over several years to a big share of money spent on a federal sponsorship program in Quebec was "intolerable" and "unacceptable" and "most regrettable," they say. Normal rules and procedures were broken or not followed, and this government, dedicated to transparency and integrity, is going to get to the roots of the matter and see it never happens again!

Even though Martin was the chief financial officer for the Liberal government during most of this program, he says he had no inkling of anything untoward while it was going on, although the auditor general's report on it (revealed publicly yesterday) was shown to the government last November. Further, his former ministerial colleague responsible for the program, Alfonso Gagliano, had been dispatched to represent Canada in Denmark by Jean Chretien under a cloud of criticism almost two years ago. Apparently, Martin wasn't even told of the problems in 2002 after an internal audit in the Department of Public Works first uncovered evidence of wrongly assigned funds and ignored rules.

Yesterday, many opposition MPs simply couldn't accept that the PM, when minister of finance, had not known of any misuse of the sponsorship program designed to strengthen federalism in Quebec after its slender victory over the separatists in 1995's referendum. Opposition MPs were roused to raging in question period when Martin and his Treasury Board minister, Reg Alcock, blandly asked them to "co-operate" in "getting to the bottom" of this "intolerable situation." I must say, I'm with the opposition skeptics. It's hard to believe Martin knew nothing about the clever switching of tens of millions in federal money to members and friends of the Liberal Party in Quebec. Remember, for several years, our new PM worked up almost total support for his leadership bid in the party's Quebec wing.

I am doubly skeptical because early in 1998, some months after Gagliano was made minister of public works and responsible "politically" for the party's state in Quebec, I was chatting off the record with a knowing, veteran Liberal MP from Ontario. Aside from sourness he was not in the ministry, he was morbid over the low priority his pet issues had on the government's "to do" list. I commiserated, but said at least he should be happy the Chretien government had not been battered by allegations of toll-gating and contract-jobbing which had irregularly stained both past Liberal and Tory governments since the swatch of scandals which afflicted the Lester Pearson government in the mid-1960s. The MP was explosively blunt: "Wait for it. Wait for it. That's coming!" Where? How? After a long pause, he said, "Just keep this under your hat but remember it." He advised me to keep an ear out for the way the new minister of public works was carrying out his role as political minister in Quebec under - as he emphasized - the direction of the Prime Minister's Office. It wasn't until the 2000 election campaign was almost over that I heard some talk about the reported system and money flow, first in a few accusations from rival parties about federal spending on projects touted as campaign benefits from the Liberal Party.

I don't envy the judge who is going to run the royal commission inquiry in the next year or two. If you would bet on the inquiry's consequences, wager that none of those who are, or have been, top Liberal politicians will go to jail. Oh, there might be some judicial taps on the wrist, but the inquiry isn't going to lead to the prime minister's resignation or criminal charges against his predecessor.

Remember that several years ago, as evidence of odd and seemingly bootless spending by a clutch of advertising agencies across Quebec in cities, towns, and villages, Chretien openly countenanced what might be seen as an excessive rush and a breaking of normal rules. There was such an immediacy and urgency to the fundamental issue of rescuing federalism in Canada from the Bloc Quebecois and the likes of Lucien Bouchard, Jacques Parizeau and Bernard Landry.

It is rare for a federal scandal, or even a clutch of them, to climax with the nation as a whole demanding "heads" and the resignation of a prime minister or someone as august as a minister of finance. One reason for this lack of public anger is that so many of the scandals regarding federal money and services have developed in Quebec. It is most incorrect politically, even for MPs in opposition parties, to wax extravagantly on graft, nepotism, conflicts of interest, and alleged toll-gating farmed out to friends and even apparatchiks of the ruling party in Quebec. Better mark this scandal down as a flawed stroke of genius by Chretien. At least he has stood behind Gagliano in this costly endeavour to save Canada. As for Quebec as the country's key political locale, Martin has taken a big step to assure its adherence to Confederation by picking a new Quebec lieutenant in Jean Lapierre, a convert back to federalism from the separatist Bloc Quebecois.

Tony Soprano in Ottawa
By Nigel Hannaford, Calgary Herald - February 14, 2004

What exactly makes a party capable of forming a government? Fair question. There must be a reason why the Liberals out-poll the Conservatives 44% to 19. (At least, before Auditor General Sheila Fraser took the stage Tuesday.)

Here's how one argument might run: "Ah, Mr. Hannaford, Ontario votes strategically. Unlike you western idealists, they're not so interested in policies as who can form a government. They're unsure about conservatives so, though they might not like the Liberals, they vote for them because at least they're experienced in government." This sounds like old hound dogs, not real people. And, if that's really how Ontario see things, we're doomed.

However, Ontarians were smart enough to park a quarter of their votes with the Alliance in 2000, since when much has happened. Even old hound dogs should be asking, "What exactly is it these clowns do so darn well, that the other guys couldn't?" Answer, they run things like Tony Soprano. That's what it looks like from Fraser's report, anyway.

Consider this: Even in big-spending Ottawa, a quarter-billion dollars creates a bow wave. So, it's facile to suppose former Public Works minister Alfonso Gagliano was a solo act, or that firing him fixes anything. A lot of people knew what he was doing, and why. It strains credulity, for instance, to suppose that in several years, Cabinet never monitored a program so richly endowed, and designed for so lofty a purpose as saving Canada.

Even less likely is that Gagliano, Jean Chretien's chief Quebec lieutenant, would not have called in at Sussex Drive occasionally to kiss the ring. One may choose to believe Chretien was deceived or not told, but what did he think Gagliano was doing with $250 million? And what did then-finance minister Paul Martin think he was doing with it?

Finance ministers are famous for saying no. You want helicopters? No. Money for health? Not in the budget. Tax cuts? You just had some. So, why did Martin say "yes" to $250 million in grant money to Quebec? And especially without demanding rigorous accounting? As he would know, being from there, Quebecers count their fingers after they shake hands with their politicians.

Now, of course, he says he knew nothing. Well, he should have. In any case, focusing on formal government structures ignores the informal ones. Rumours are bartered like cowrie shells in Ottawa. Many people had to know something was up: MPs phoning for constituents, their executive assistants, the hangers-on, the girls who prepared the cheques, the accountants who kept the books in the ad agencies, their wives, mistresses and all the Ottawa camp-followers - hundreds of people, from cabinet down, knew enough to say, "This is wrong," to the politicians, the police or the press. Nobody did. Why? Call it the Tony Soprano management style:

• Cynicism. They're used to it. How's buying Quebec different from rigging EI to keep Atlantic Canada's seasonal workers on side?

• Intimidation. Former BDBC president Francois Beaudoin knows what happens when you get on the wrong side of the Prime Minister's Office. So does reporter Juliet O'Neill. Rock the boat and get pushed overboard. People learn to keep still;

• Reward. Play the game and you could be in cabinet, the Senate, or ambassador to Denmark.

And in Ontario, they call this experience in government? Actually, they wouldn't. But they keep voting for it. Maybe they will again, though now that Fraser has shone some light under the rock, heaven knows why. Either way, my small request to Ontario is this: If you can't stomach a national party with a Calgary head office, so be it. But don't ask the West to buy this gang-boss management style as Canada's only option. And don't kid yourselves the transition from Chretien to Martin means cleansing and rejuvenation. It's business as usual, with the bar set down on the ground, until you vote for something different. As my cheroot-smoking old grandmother used to say, governments are like underwear. You have to change them now and then.