Canada: Sponsership Scandal and Governance

[ShadowHM]

I read this thread, and still can't figure out what the 'problem' is.  Some Canadian money went 'missing'?
[right][snapback]74856[/snapback][/right]

A while back (1995), Quebec held a referendum on whether they should remain part of Canada. It was only narrowly defeated - 50.58 per cent to 49.42 per cent. The Liberal Federal government of the day decided that they should have a 'sponsership fund' to (essentially) wave the Canadian Flag at Quebec events, in an effort to convince Quebecers that remaining in Canada was a Good Thing™.

This fund was (to put it mildly) poorly supervised. The Auditor General of Canada put out a report in early 2004 concerning a number of discrepancies in how it was administered. Justice Gomery was named shortly thereafter to head an Inquiry into the whole mess.

It transpires that, not only was a lot of money billed for minimal to no performance, but that contracts were awarded to companies that gave "liberally' to the Liberal party. Details are still emerging, as testimony at the Inquiry proceeds.

The business of governing has ground to a crawl, if not a halt, as the opposition has had a field day with accusations and cat-calling in Parliament.

It appears that the head of the sponsership fund administration routinely reported to the Prime Minister's office directly for 'guidance' on where to spend funds.

Just to add some interest to the story, the Prime Minister of the day, Jean Chretien, loathed our current Prime Minister, Paul Martin. It is actually quite possible that, despite his title at the time of Minister of Finance and head of the Treasury Board (where the sponsership fund was nominally under), Mr. Martin may not have been allowed to be 'in the loop' for decisions.

Justice Gomery has been remarkably candid in his public comments about the behaviour he has heard testimony on - to the point that some who have testified have complained about the chance that their criminal trials may be jeapardized by difficulty finding a jury that has not already got a pre-conceived notion about their guilt. :unsure: I am looking forward to reading his report.


Edit: Wikipedia has an entry here that gives a more detailed summary.