A story of breathless insouciance and sheer persistence
Opinion
'Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive!' So wrote Sir Walter Scott two centuries ago in his epic English poem, Marmion: A Tale of Flodden Field. Writing in today's colloquial English, one would simply say, 'When lying liars lie about their lies.'
Both are fitting characterizations of the stunning ethics and conflict of interest report released this week by ethics commissioner Jeffrey Schnoor into the attempted breach of the caretaker convention by a defeated government after the 2023 Manitoba election. He found that former premier Heather Stefanson, deputy premier Cliff Cullen, and Jeff Wharton, minister of economic development, investment, and trade, attempted to approve an environmental licence for the controversial Sio Silica mine during the caretaker period, despite having no political authority or legitimacy to do so.
In doing so, Schnoor found that they had first, breached the caretaker convention which governs the behaviour of governments during and after an election, and second, in doing so, they had sought to 'further another person's private interests' — Sio Silica. An ethical and conflict of interest breach of a decisive and unprecedented nature.
MIKE DEAL / FREE PRESS
Former premier Heather Stefanson and some members of her government tried to push through a controversial mining permit — after the PCs were defeated in the last election, an investigation has found.
The caretaker convention is a bedrock political convention of Canada's system of responsible government and democracy. Simply put, an outgoing government cannot take decisions on any matters that are not routine, urgent, or administrative in nature only. Sio Silica's licence approval was anything but. It was anti-democratic in the extreme.
To read the report is to be struck by both the breathless insouciance and the sheer persistence of the main protagonists in their actions. They simply didn't give up. Despite saying to the Commissioner in testimony that they understood the caretaker convention, each of them sent written submissions to him insisting it actually didn't matter. Schnoor wasn't having any of it, writing of Stefanson: 'Her efforts to have the project licence issued during the transition period were themselves a breach of the caretaker convention.'
This was no shortage of attempts by the deputy premier to advance the Sio Silica licence through the bureaucracy during the election period from Sept. 5 to Oct. 3, 2023. A draft licence was in fact prepared and shared with the company.
These efforts accelerated following the PC government's loss during the transition period.
Not able to issue the licence themselves, or unwilling to shoulder that controversial responsibility, Cullen and Wharton sought to entwine officials in their machinations, from the clerk of the executive council to the deputy minister of environment, desiring they find a way to do so.
That 'way' was to concoct a scheme, led by Wharton in this instance, to get the defeated minister of environment, Kevin Klein, to issue it on his own authority, under Section 11.1 and 11.2 of the Environment Act, a never-before used power that allows the minister to issue a licence on his own. He refused, so they moved on to pressure Rochelle Squires, also defeated, to do so in a highly irregular move in her formal capacity as 'acting minister of environment,' under the Executive Council Act.
This spurious ploy would have required a just-defeated acting minister to act in place of a just-defeated minister who had refused to act on his own accord. A legal fig leaf to cover up an illegitimate act.
Unsurprisingly, each of the respondents sought to minimize their knowledge and actions throughout this sordid exercise. 'No harm, no foul' became their default excuse.
Since no licence was ever issued, they cannot retroactively be found to have done wrong. Schnoor disagreed, writing: 'A private interest does not actually have to be furthered; it is sufficient that there is an opportunity to do so.' He went on to call Stefanson's repeated dismissal of the caretaker convention as 'disheartening.'
That is an understatement. The former premier has evidently learned nothing from the whole affair, continuing to dissemble about her actions while dismissing the report and its findings. Her statement on the report says, 'I had no obligation to do so but reached out to the incoming government and fully considered their views before deciding on what to do,' Any actions she took, were 'to further and protect the public interest.'
Wednesdays
A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom.
No obligation? This means she believed she could have issued the licence but deigned not to, not because of the caretaker convention but because out of some unknown principle known only unto her. How striving to ignore that same caretaker convention furthers and protects the public interest is breathtaking in its impertinence.
Out of politics now, Stefanson's primordial interest in her defence seemed to be how this would affect her future job prospects. This was revealed via a final representation from her legal counsel who wrote the commissioner, asserting: 'with respect to whether any of your potential findings would impact Ms. Stefanson's capacity to serve as a director of any publicly traded Canadian companies. He opined that they would not…'
Schnoor recommended stiff fines for each of Stefanson, Cullen, and Wharton. These are the first-ever such recommended by the ethics commissioner. Why, because it was Stefanson's predecessor as premier, Brian Pallister, who toughened up the Conflict of Interest Act in 2021 to allow for such fines.
Sir Walter Scott might call that poetic justice.
David McLaughlin is a former clerk of the executive council and cabinet secretary in the Manitoba government.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Analysis: An outline is emerging of the US offer to Iran in their high-stakes nuclear negotiations
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The outline of the U.S. offer to Iran in their high-stakes negotiations over Tehran's nuclear program is starting to become clearer — but whether any deal is on the horizon remains as cloudy as ever. Reaching a deal is one of the several diplomatic priorities being juggled by U.S. President Donald Trump and his trusted friend and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff. An accord could see the United States lift some of its crushing economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for it drastically limiting or ending its enrichment of uranium. But a failure to get a deal could see tensions further spike in a Middle East on edge over the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip. Iran's economy, long ailing, could enter a free fall that could worsen the simmering unrest at home. Israel or the U.S. might carry out long-threatened airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities. And Tehran may decide to fully end its cooperation with the United Nations' nuclear watchdog and rush toward a bomb. That makes piecing together the U.S. offer that much more important as the Iranians weigh their response after five rounds of negotiations in Muscat, Oman, and Rome. Possible deal details emerge A report by the news website Axios outlined details of the American proposal, the details of which a U.S. official separately confirmed, include a possible nuclear consortium enriching uranium for Iran and surrounding nations. Whether Iran would have to entirely give up its enrichment program remains unclear, as Axios reported that Iran would be able to enrich uranium up to 3% purity for some time. Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, negotiated under then President Barack Obama, allowed Iran to enrich to 3.67% — enough to fuel a nuclear power plant but far below the threshold of 90% needed for weapons-grade uranium. Iran now enriches up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels. U.S. officials all the way up to Trump repeatedly have said that Iran would have to give up enrichment entirely. The English-language arm of Iranian state television broadcaster Press TV on Tuesday published an extended article including details from the Axios report. Iranian state television long has been controlled by hard-liners within the country's theocracy. Press TV extensively repeating those details suggests that either they are included in the American proposal or they could be elements within it welcomed by hard-liners within the government. Iranian media largely have avoided original reporting on the negotiations, without explanation. Iran's reaction The idea of a consortium enriching uranium for Iran and other nations in the Middle East also have come up in comments by other Iranian officials. Abolfazl Zohrehvand, a member of Iran's powerful parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy, said that he understood that one of the American proposals included the full dismantlement of the country's nuclear program in a consortium-style deal. The Americans will 'make a consortium with Saudi Arabia, the (United Arab) Emirates and Qatar … on an island to keep it under U.S. control,' Zohrehvand told the Iranian news website Entekhab. 'Iran could have a certain amount of stake in the consortium, but enrichment would not take place in Iran.' Zohrehvand didn't elaborate on which 'island' would host the site. However, the Persian Gulf has multiple islands. The UAE already has a nuclear power plant, while Saudi Arabia is pursuing its own program. Qatar has said that it's exploring small nuclear reactors. A consortium could allow low-enriched uranium to be supplied to all those countries, while lowering the risk of proliferation by having countries run their own centrifuges. While a consortium deal has been discussed in the past, it has fallen through previously. Now, however, the Gulf Arab states largely have reached a detente with Iran after years of tensions following Trump unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. in 2018 from Tehran's nuclear deal with world powers. Meanwhile, Fereidoun Abbasi, a former head of the civilian Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, suggested on Iranian state television that one of Iran's disputed islands with the UAE could be a site for the project. Iran, under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, seized three islands in the Persian Gulf in 1971 as British troops withdrew just before the formation of the Emirates, a federation of seven sheikhdoms home to Abu Dhabi and Dubai. 'What do we need the U.S. for?' Abbasi asked. 'We have the know-how.' What happens next Iran likely will respond to the American offer in the coming days, possibly through Oman, which has been mediating in the talks. There also could be a sixth round of negotiations between the countries, though a time and location for them have yet to be announced. This coming weekend is the Eid al-Adha holiday that marks the end of Islam's Hajj pilgrimage, meaning talks likely wouldn't happen until sometime next week at the earliest. But the pressure is on. Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium could allow it to build multiple nuclear weapons, should Tehran choose to pursue the bomb. Western nations may pursue a censure of Iran at the Board of Governors at the International Atomic Energy Agency — which could see them ultimately invoke the so-called snapback of U.N. sanctions on the Islamic Republic. The authority to reestablish those sanctions by the complaint of any member of the original 2015 nuclear deal expires in October. 'There is still time for negotiating an agreement that reduces Iran's proliferation risk. But that time is short,' wrote Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. 'Given that Iran is sitting on the threshold of nuclear weapons and officials are openly debating the security value of a nuclear deterrent, any escalatory spiral could kill the negotiating process and increase the risk of conflict.' ___ Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran, and Matthew Lee in Washington, contributed to this report. ___ EDITOR'S NOTE — Jon Gambrell, the news director for the Gulf and Iran for The Associated Press, has reported from each of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, Iran and other locations across the Middle East and wider world since joining the AP in 2006.
Montreal Gazette
6 hours ago
- Montreal Gazette
Hanes: Bill 40 appeal shows the Legault government has learned nothing
By Whenever a new fracas erupts between the government of Premier François Legault and the anglophone community, Eric Girard, the minister responsible for relations with English-speaking Quebecers, is dispatched to try to patch things up. Recently, he admitted that new directives issued last summer that suggested eligibility certificates for education in English could be used to access health care in English were ' not our finest moment' and that he was 'disappointed' at how the whole saga played out. Previously, Girard acknowledged that tuition hikes for out-of-province students that disproportionately harmed Quebec's English universities had ruffled feathers, and he vowed to smooth things over. When he was appointed to the portfolio in 2022 after the angst surrounding the adoption of Bill 96, Quebec's update of protections for the French language, Girard promised to allay fears and 'do better.' 'When I say we need to do better, I mean we need to improve relations,' he told The Gazette back in the early days of his tenure. But time and again, these prove to be empty promises. Because actions speak louder than words. And even though it was less than a month ago that Girard called for the latest reset, the Legault government has demonstrated the depth of its contempt for the rights of English-speaking Quebecers anew by announcing its intention to appeal the latest ruling on Bill 40 all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada (if the top court agrees to hear it, that is). The attempt to abolish English school boards and replace them with service centres was one of the first bones of contention between the anglophone community and the Legault government after it was first elected in 2018. The Quebec English School Boards Association launched a constitutional challenge of the law immediately after its passage and has since won two resounding victories. Both Quebec Superior Court and the Quebec Court of Appeals have agreed that Bill 40 is a violation of Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and affirmed the rights of the English-speaking minority to manage and control its own schools. Both courts have categorically said that transforming school boards into service centres like their francophone counterparts, centralizing many of their decision-making powers in the ministry of education, and axing the elected councils of commissioners run counter to those constitutional guarantees. But the Legault government is forging ahead trying to defend the discredited law. At this point, there is no principled reason to drag this out — and no pragmatic imperative, either. Quebec's English school boards obtained an injunction in 2020, keeping them intact for the duration of the legal proceedings. For five years they have continued to operate as they always have, overseen by elected representatives from the community, alongside French service centres. At this point the government's argument that it can't have two different systems for running French and English schools doesn't really hold water. In fact, there is growing concern that francophone service centres, administered by parents drawn from local school governing boards, lack transparency and accountability. And since Bill 40 was adopted five years ago, Education Minister Bernard Drainville has grabbed even more authority from service centres, like the power to appoint their directors general and overturn their decisions. The English school boards have already proven their management and control rights — twice. But the Legault government just won't let it go. Are they gluttons for punishment? Or is this merely a continuation of the pattern of antagonizing the English-speaking community? So often over two mandates in office, the premier or his ministers say one thing and do another. Legault claimed nothing would change for anglophones under Bill 96, yet there has been major upheaval. English colleges now have quotas for francophone and allophone students and new French course requirements, which has left them destabilized. English versions of government and public websites now have warnings about who is allowed to consult the content, which is an insult to intelligence. English court documents and decisions must be accompanied by French translations, which are costly and time-consuming, impeding access to justice. And these are just a few examples. The rights of anglophones are either complete afterthought or collateral damage. A year ago, when new rules on simultaneous translation of court judgments came into effect, a Quebec Court judge on the verge of presiding over an English criminal trial had to convene representatives of the prosecution service and attorney general's office to get basic information on how this was supposed to work. He was essentially told there was no plan and things were still being figured out. For his efforts, he was the subject of a complaint to the judicial council for overstepping his authority. He was later totally exonerated. His decision declaring the new regulations inoperable for English criminal trials is being appealed, however. The list of slights goes on and on. Yet concerns are frequently dismissed as the rantings of 'angryphones' acting like the world's most spoiled minority — until the government gets egg on its face over something truly ludicrous. Whether it's having to intervene on the Go Habs Go fiasco, override a library's decision not to allow an English book club to meet without simultaneous translation or rewriting the confusing health directives, each incident erodes trust. If Girard was at all serious about wanting to rebuild confidence with English-speaking Quebecers, there was one, simple, concrete gesture the government could have made that would have gone a long way and meant a lot in laying the groundwork for a truce: not appealing the Bill 40 ruling to the Supreme Court. Instead, the Legault government couldn't resist fighting a losing battle to the bitter end.
Montreal Gazette
6 hours ago
- Montreal Gazette
TALQ of the town: Anglo-rights group QCGN rebrands
By The Quebec Community Groups Network is becoming TALQ, a new name for an anglophone advocacy group that has grown more assertive in recent years and now wants to reach out to francophone Quebecers. The old name 'doesn't reflect what we are today and where the community wants to go,' president Eva Ludvig told The Gazette last week as the organization prepared to announce its rebrand on Wednesday. 'We also realize how difficult it is for us to reach the majority here in Quebec — the francophone, monsieur et madame Tout-le-Monde.' The new name 'dispels the 'us vs. them' perception,' she said. 'We celebrate the vibrancy of the English-speaking community in a profoundly French Quebec.' TALQ (pronounced 'talk') is a standalone name and not an abbreviation, the organization says, though a tagline will also be used: 'Talking. Advocating. Living in Québec.' The 'Q' at the end of TALQ is a nod to Quebec. The accent in the province's name — often omitted by English speakers — acknowledges Quebec's French identity. The organization, which did not disclose the cost of the rebranding, is also replacing its orange logo with blue, a colour historically associated with Quebec. The new name is 'English in origin, anchored in Quebec and proud of its bilingual spirit.' Ludvig said the group will remain a strong voice for anglophones while seeking deeper engagement with the francophone majority. 'Talking is as much about being heard as it is about listening,' Ludvig said. Trevor Ham, a consultant on the rebranding project, said the new name will help 'rejuvenate' the brand. 'QCGN is a mouthful, as is Quebec Community Groups Network,' he said. TALQ is a 'conversation starter, it's bridging the gap, an outstretched hand,' Ham said. 'Conversation is something we all share. There's humanity behind conversation. You don't need to take up arms if you can sit down at a table and talk about things and have rational conversations.' A federally funded nonprofit, the QCGN is celebrating its 30th anniversary. It was born in the wake of the October 1995 Quebec referendum. Alliance Quebec, a prominent anglophone rights group, had fallen apart amid internal divisions. To fill the vacuum, several anglophone groups formed the QCGN. It has long been a defender of anglophone rights. In 2014, for example, the organization warned that the Quebec Liberal government's health reform threatened access to English health services. But its advocacy became more assertive after Premier François Legault came to power. Before the 2018 election, Legault, a former Parti Québécois minister who promised not to hold a sovereignty referendum, wooed the anglophone community. Once he took power, many of his Coalition Avenir Québec's laws didn't sit well with English speakers. From banning hijabs and other religious symbols among government employees (Bill 21), to abolishing school boards (Bill 40) and tightening language laws (Bill 96), anglophones felt ignored by the CAQ, Ludvig said. That spurred the QCGN to take a harder line, aggressively denouncing CAQ government policies and defending anglophones' rights, school system and access to health and social services. The more confrontational stance sparked internal turmoil, leading some groups and board members to quit the QCGN in 2019, complaining it was too Montreal-centric. Ludvig, who became president in 2022, said before the CAQ came to power, Quebec was experiencing a period of 'linguistic peace.'. Since then, the Legault government has 'certainly made it more fragile.' She said the organization has a duty to react to CAQ policies. At the same time, it 'tries to demonstrate that we are Quebecers who belong here, and that we are a community that is not apart.' 'We have our values, our history, but we share our history with the rest of Quebecers,' Ludvig said. 'It's often forgotten that together with other Quebecers, we've built this province, not only economically but culturally and in other ways.' She said the anglo community has changed dramatically over 50 years, but myths remain entrenched, including tired clichés that portray the community as 'unilingual rich Westmounters.' She wants to build bridges with francophones by emphasizing areas of agreement. For example, on the CAQ government's new immigrant integration law, Ludvig said the QCGN shares concerns raised by former Parti Québécois ministers Louise Beaudoin and Louise Harel. When the bill was introduced, the two ardent nationalists joined others arguing the law promotes an assimilationist approach by requiring immigrants to adhere to a 'common culture' and placing disproportionate responsibilities on them. 'We have common issues,' Ludvig said, 'but the focus seems to always be on how the community is different — that we're not part of Quebec, we're not real Quebecers — and that's not true.' 'That's where we want to go — (emphasizing) that we have a lot in common with all Quebecers. We need to focus on that rather than on differences or the divisions artificially created by politicians.' The organization is also trying to engage individual Quebecers by opening membership to the general public. About 150 individuals signed up, joining 48 organizational members, a list that includes Catholic Action Montreal, Gay and Grey Montreal, the Morrin Cultural Centre and YES Employment Services. The Department of Canadian Heritage provides the QCGN's core funding — about $1.5 million annually. The federal support stems from the government's obligations under the Official Languages Act to language minority communities. Ottawa funds francophone groups in the rest of Canada. About 1.3 million Quebecers — roughly 15 per cent of the population — speak English as their first official language, Statistics Canada says. 48 groups belong to QCGN Forty-eight organizations are members of the QCGN: Association of English Language Publishers of Quebec Atwater Library Avenues Montreal Black Community Resource Centre Blue Metropolis International Literary Festival Canadian Parents for French Catholic Action Montreal Chez Doris Coasters Association La Fondation Place Coco Contactivity Centre DESTA Black Youth Network English Parents' Committee Association of Quebec English-Speaking Catholic Council Family Resource Centre Fondation Toldos Yakov Yosef Gay and Grey Montreal Hear Entendre Québec Heritage Lower Saint Lawrence Kabir Cultural Centre LEARN Quebec Literacy Quebec Loyola High School Morrin Cultural Centre Phelps Helps Project 10 Quebec 4-H Association Quebec Anglophone Heritage Network Quebec Association of Independent Schools Quebec Board of Black Educators Quebec Community Newspaper Association Quebec Counselling Association Quebec English-language Production Council Quebec Farmers' Association Quebec Federation of Home and School AssociationS Quebec Music Educators Association Queen Elizabeth Health Complex Regional Association of West Quebecers Repercussion Theatre Saint Columba House SEIZE Seniors Action Quebec South Shore Community Partners Network The Concordian Cote des Neiges Black Community Association Townshippers Association Tyndale St-Georges Community Centre YES Employment Services
