Sponsorship scandal: Encyclopedia II - Sponsorship scandal - Political consequences

Sponsorship scandal - Political consequences

The Liberal Party of Canada, for the most part, has weathered the damage from the scandal by pointing out the conclusions of reports of the Auditor General and the Gomery Commission: misdeeds were committed by a small, isolated, and corrupt subculture within the previous Liberal government and in particular the PMO of former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Similarly, supporters of Prime Minister Paul Martin have argued that the "culture of corruption" was a byproduct of Chrétien's leadership and that any malicious elements have been purged, both from the government and the party, since the discoveries of wrongdoing.

Since assuming the leadership of the party and the country, Martin has made an active effort to dissociate the Liberals from any individuals implicated in the scandal, hoping to illustrate that the current Liberal Party bears little or no connection or resemblance to party elements involved in the sponsorship program.

Within the Liberal Party during 2004-05, revelations of scandal and the subsequent Gomery Commission highlighted the rift between the "Chrétien camp" and "Martin camp". These two groups had been fighting perhaps even prior Chrétien's election as party leader in 1990; the Chrétienites were descended from the leftist Pierre Trudeau while the Martinites were linked to the right-leaning John Turner. Chrétien supporters have alleged that Martin used the scandal as an excuse to remove Chrétien supporters from their positions in government and the party. Martin supporters contend that many Chrétien loyalists left with or shortly after Chrétien left in 2004, before the scandal was revealed. The departure of John Manley and other Chrétien cabinet ministers from the party, many of whom did not stand for candidacy in the 2004 federal election, is indicative of this assertion. Martin's supporters assert those expunged from the party were ejected for their impropriety and not for their leadership affiliations.

The Chrétien camp also contends that the Gomery Commission was established to make them look bad, and that it was an unfair investigation. Martin supporters respond to such allegations by pointing out that the commission was set up to search for facts under independent judicial oversight. Furthermore, Justice Gomery's commission has operated without undue influence from Martin or anyone outside of the investigation, having all due and necessary authority to investigate and draw conclusions on the matter. However, the commission was specifically directed not to make any conclusions or recommendations on criminal charges or civil liability.

It should be noted that many inside and outside of the Liberal Party contend that, going into the 2006 election, Martin-vs.-Chrétien issues are effectively behind the Liberals. Formally, the two leaders have remained publicly respectful of each other.

Critics of the Liberal Party and even former Liberals, like Sheila Copps, have argued that the sponsorship scandal has highlighted a "culture of corruption" within the Canadian government. Some critics allege that the problems within the Liberal Party are so systematic it can only be effectively reversed by a change of government and argue the Liberals, who have been in power for over a decade, are too arrogant and complacent to be trusted with instituting necessary reforms. The sponsorship crisis has thus become a key election issue, and will likely remain a rallying-point for conservative opponents of the Liberals in the 2006 federal election.

Quebec sovereigntists – led by the Bloc Québécois in the federal parliament and the provincial Parti Québécois – have cited the scandal as "proof" of institutional corruption and dysfunctionality of the federal government and of the arrogant attitude of English Canada. Critics have argued that the entire sponsorship scandal, originally intended to encourage pro-Canada sentiment in Quebec, has emboldened separatist forces in Quebec: recent polls indicate increased support for sovereignty, rising to approximately 53% (as of 19 December 2005).

The New Democratic Party (NDP) caucus of Jack Layton has also been criticized for alleging major corruption in the Liberal Party of Canada, while simultaneously working with the Martin government to achieve NDP policy objectives.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Political consequences", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki