WEEKLY COMMENTARY
"Just Between Us"
October 10, 2005
Corruption has been built into Canada's system of government
The lady who clips and files newspaper stories for the Citizens Centre asked us two weeks ago Monday where she should put David Dingwall.
In addition to running the Canadian Mint, it seems the former Chretien cabinet minister is a "registered federal lobbyist," and the bureaucrats were giving him a hard time about not completing his paperwork on one contract. "Lobbying under review," said the headline.
"Do you want this filed under Parliament/Policy, or under Corruption?" asked our clipper.
His offence sounded pretty harmless to me, but she said, "Oh, there'll be more--there always is," and filed it under Corruption.
Sure enough, it was followed the next day by "Dingwall big spender as head of Canadian Mint", and the day after that by "Dingwall resigns as head of Mint".
Then came loads of details on how this one toiling public servant managed to cost Canadian taxpayers over $1 million a year in salary and expenses--$13,228 in one day of travel, $1.29 for a pack of Mint chewing gum, etc.
And then "Dingwall to get $500,000 severance"--something he clearly has no legal right to.
All the same, as of last week John McCallum the minister responsible (or irresponsible) was still claiming the government legally must pay Dingwall some severance, though he still couldn't explain why.
All of which calls to mind Andre Ouellet, former boss of Canada Post. The same "minister irresponsible" had to order Ouellet a year ago to produce documentary justification for the $2 million he had claimed as corporate expenses.
McCallum is still waiting for him to do it.
In a country with more honesty than Canada, the Liberal party would be dead. But on the last poll I saw (Decima, late September), the Conservatives were still trailing the Liberals 10 percent in Ontario, and 7 percent nation-wide.
Eastern voters say they don't like corrupt politicians. I'm sure they don't. But they keep voting for corrupt policies.
They imagine that somehow you can find honest politicians to engage in the massive vote-buying and interest-group pandering that has become the defining characteristic of Canadian public policy.
Any party that might even question it is rejected as "scary" and "extremist."
The Oxford dictionary defines "corruption" as "moral deterioration, especially widespread."
Corruption doesn't start with spendthrift good-old-boys like Dingwall and Ouellet milking the system while everyone looks the other way, or shopping bags stuffed with sponsorship cash going secretly to political campaign offices.
That comes later.
It starts with popular but dishonest political language and spending aimed at buying votes en masse.
Employment Insurance, for example--a program so popular in Dingwall's native Cape Breton that when the Chretien government cut the extra benefits paid to maritimers, Nova Scotians responded by throwing out every Liberal MP in the province in the next election.
The Liberals took the hint, partially restored the benefits, and Nova Scotians partially restored the Liberals.
In fact, EI is not "insurance" at all, just another gigantic regional equalization program, in which year-round workers in high-employment areas like Ontario and Alberta subsidize seasonal workers in low-employment areas like Cape Breton.
When we base our public policies on such blatant dishonesty, why be so shocked when it spreads to everything else?
- Link Byfield
Link Byfield is chairman of the Edmonton-based Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy, and an Alberta senator-elect.
"Just Between Us" is a feature service of the Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy. The purpose of the Citizens Centre is to enhance freedom and democracy by enabling ordinary citizens to become active and effective on important issues outside the normal processes of party politics.
"Just Between Us"
October 10, 2005
Corruption has been built into Canada's system of government
The lady who clips and files newspaper stories for the Citizens Centre asked us two weeks ago Monday where she should put David Dingwall.
In addition to running the Canadian Mint, it seems the former Chretien cabinet minister is a "registered federal lobbyist," and the bureaucrats were giving him a hard time about not completing his paperwork on one contract. "Lobbying under review," said the headline.
"Do you want this filed under Parliament/Policy, or under Corruption?" asked our clipper.
His offence sounded pretty harmless to me, but she said, "Oh, there'll be more--there always is," and filed it under Corruption.
Sure enough, it was followed the next day by "Dingwall big spender as head of Canadian Mint", and the day after that by "Dingwall resigns as head of Mint".
Then came loads of details on how this one toiling public servant managed to cost Canadian taxpayers over $1 million a year in salary and expenses--$13,228 in one day of travel, $1.29 for a pack of Mint chewing gum, etc.
And then "Dingwall to get $500,000 severance"--something he clearly has no legal right to.
All the same, as of last week John McCallum the minister responsible (or irresponsible) was still claiming the government legally must pay Dingwall some severance, though he still couldn't explain why.
All of which calls to mind Andre Ouellet, former boss of Canada Post. The same "minister irresponsible" had to order Ouellet a year ago to produce documentary justification for the $2 million he had claimed as corporate expenses.
McCallum is still waiting for him to do it.
In a country with more honesty than Canada, the Liberal party would be dead. But on the last poll I saw (Decima, late September), the Conservatives were still trailing the Liberals 10 percent in Ontario, and 7 percent nation-wide.
Eastern voters say they don't like corrupt politicians. I'm sure they don't. But they keep voting for corrupt policies.
They imagine that somehow you can find honest politicians to engage in the massive vote-buying and interest-group pandering that has become the defining characteristic of Canadian public policy.
Any party that might even question it is rejected as "scary" and "extremist."
The Oxford dictionary defines "corruption" as "moral deterioration, especially widespread."
Corruption doesn't start with spendthrift good-old-boys like Dingwall and Ouellet milking the system while everyone looks the other way, or shopping bags stuffed with sponsorship cash going secretly to political campaign offices.
That comes later.
It starts with popular but dishonest political language and spending aimed at buying votes en masse.
Employment Insurance, for example--a program so popular in Dingwall's native Cape Breton that when the Chretien government cut the extra benefits paid to maritimers, Nova Scotians responded by throwing out every Liberal MP in the province in the next election.
The Liberals took the hint, partially restored the benefits, and Nova Scotians partially restored the Liberals.
In fact, EI is not "insurance" at all, just another gigantic regional equalization program, in which year-round workers in high-employment areas like Ontario and Alberta subsidize seasonal workers in low-employment areas like Cape Breton.
When we base our public policies on such blatant dishonesty, why be so shocked when it spreads to everything else?
- Link Byfield
Link Byfield is chairman of the Edmonton-based Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy, and an Alberta senator-elect.
"Just Between Us" is a feature service of the Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy. The purpose of the Citizens Centre is to enhance freedom and democracy by enabling ordinary citizens to become active and effective on important issues outside the normal processes of party politics.
Comment