Trudeau must address fundraising
Cash for access could topple government
The federal Liberals can’t possibly win the cash-for-access war of attrition in which they’ve been engaged for weeks and to which they seem grimly committed. The only question is how soon they’ll concede — and how severe a drubbing they’ll sustain in the interim.
To understand Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s reluctance to acknowledge what is plain — that cash-for-access fundraisers violate the letter and spirit of his own rules for open and accountable government — we must first appreciate this PMO’s approach to what is euphemistically termed “issues management;” that is to say, scandal.
The current tenants of the Langevin Block observed how, after the Nigel Wright affair went public in May 2013, former prime minister Stephen Harper never quite recovered his footing. Before that there was the F-35 fracas. In each case Harper’s PMO responded as one would to a burning sack of horse manure on the porch — with frantic efforts to stamp out the flames. Government thus became a series of reactions, often self-defeating, with a corresponding loss of emphasis on the long game.
The watchword in Trudeau’s PMO is to do the opposite. Ignore daily headlines, particularly those emanating from the House of Commons; deflect or duck opposition and media criticism, which is inevitable and disruptive by design; and focus on achieving key, big goals — such as, for example, getting an oil pipeline to tidewater, or nurturing a new trading relationship with China.
As strategies go, it’s neither crazed nor unprecedented. It’s lifted from the Brian Mulroney playbook of the late 1980s and early 1990s. Slings and arrows are inevitable and popularity is fleeting. What matters — all that matters, Mulroney held — is the calibre of a PM’s major achievements while in office.
In that sense, recent commentary suggesting Trudeau and his team have cynically flipped from “sunny ways” to “darker days” misses the mark. It would be more accurate to say they know they’re in for a slog on the pipeline file, understand they face great uncertainty on the trade and geopolitical fronts with the accession of Donald Trump to the White House, and consider cash-for-access stories to be a distraction. So let Government House Leader Bardish Chagger gamely repeat her talking point that no rules were broken, keep calm and carry on.
This is a mistake, potentially very damaging to Trudeau, his government and their ability to get things done, for this reason: It not only cedes the moral high ground but makes a mockery of it. That erodes their standing, not only in the Commons but, ultimately, in the real world. The Liberals have too many tough ground battles ahead, put simply, for them to jettison so much political capital, so soon in their mandate.
For there is no getting around the “general principles” section of the PM’s guidelines for open and accountable government, which read: “Ministers and parliamentary secretaries must ensure that political fundraising activities or considerations do not affect, or appear to affect, the exercise of their official duties or the access of individuals or organizations to government.”
Further: “There should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access, accorded to individuals or organizations because they have made financial contributions to politicians and political parties.”
The Liberal party’s Laurier Club, restricted to supporters who contribute the maximum-allowed $1,500, violates that standard any time members exclusively attend a reception with a minister or parliamentary secretary. There is no getting around it.
Wednesday, Trudeau acknowledged in question period that there are “lots of questions” about a series of recent Liberal cash-foraccess fundraisers (which include one in May attended by a Chinese billionaire who later donated $200,000 to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation and an additional $50,000 for a statue of the former prime minister), then continued to defend them. Unfortunately for him, there is no defence against the text of his own guidelines. They are clearly written.
To be fair, the federal parties are all in a bind as fundraising goes. There’s no pervote subsidy any longer. Corporate and union donations are banned. And no individual donations above $1,500 are allowed. Small donations are bound to fall off as the Trudeau brand become less popular — which it inevitably will, applying the Mulroney doctrine of swinging for the fences. Getting pipelines built, a key Liberal strategic goal, will not result in their being universally beloved.
Take away the draw of rubbing shoulders with famous politicians and fundraising may soon be slim pickings, therefore. Yet changing the federal fundraising rules again — for example by restoring the per-vote subsidy, or raising the donation cap — would be controversial and difficult, at a time when the government is already mired in challenges.
Be that as it may, this is a vice of the government’s own making, and a problem it can no longer duck. Trudeau will either put an end to cash for access, or face a potentially crippling erosion of his brand. When that realization sinks home, the siege will end.
IT NOT ONLY CEDES THE MORAL HIGH GROUND BUT MAKES A MOCKERY OF IT. THAT ERODES THEIR STANDING. — COLUMNIST MICHAEL DEN TANDT