Calling it the "most massive propaganda effort" using taxpayers' dollars "in Canadian history," the opposition parties say they won't let the government get away with what they say is a violation of the Conflict of Interest Code and allege Conservatives tried to pass off federal government money as partisan money to constituents by handing out giant cheques with the party's logo or political signatures.

Liberal MP Marcel Proulx (Hull-Aylmer, Que.), in an interview last week, said his party will continue to keep raising the 181 examples of "giant prop cheque" presentations by Conservative MPs, Cabinet ministers and Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) with partisan logos and slogans which appear as if the money being presented for various infrastructure projects is coming from the Conservative Party or individual Tory MPs rather than the Government of Canada.

CBC's The National's

'At Issue' panel

Topic: "Tory partisan cheques"

Date: Oct. 15

Andrew Coyne

Maclean's magazine

"Well, on the one level, you can say this is just a novelty cheque, but it's symbolic of something underneath, which is a habit of mine, that says that the public's money is their own, a program of government, that says it's entitled to use that money to the furtherance of its own partisan political interests. Whether it will be damaging or not, I don't know because the Tories have got where they are practically by, you know, handing out money in this way. But there really is sort of layer upon layer of scandal here. You've got not just the use of the logos but the use of individual MPs handing out this money. This is not the role of MPs. Gerald Keddy is not a minister of the Crown. He's got no business anywhere near that ceremony. This is a corruption of their role. They're supposed to be watchdogs on the public purse. They're supposed to be fighting against pork, not wallowing around in it. And on top of that, of course, you've got this whole partisanship in the distribution of the funds. I'm not sure if it would be any better if it was bipartisan pork, but at root of this you've got a philosophy that says this is what MPs are supposed to do, this is what government is supposed to do is to bring home the bacon, and that is what is most disgraceful in this whole thing."

Chantal Hébert

The Toronto Star

"I'm not sure I would use the word "scandal," but certainly tiresome business as usual. I was listening to the Liberal critics talking about the Conservatives acting as if they owned the government and as if the government was the Conservative Party, and I'm sure I'm not the only one for whom all of this sounded eerily familiar because that is exactly the accusation that the Conservatives used to level at the Liberals over a variety of controversies like that. It's not for me a scandal in the sense of the sponsorship scandal because I don't think that public money was diverted to the party chest. I don't think that money was paid or at least I expect money wasn't paid for work that wasn't really done. So on that basis, that's a level down, but it goes against everything that Stephen Harper campaigned on and against the notion once again that a new Prime Minister and a new regime was going to clean up the way Ottawa works."

Allan Gregg

Harris/Decima Research

"Well, before we whip ourselves into an indignant lather, a couple of points. First, politicians taking the applause for local largess from government is as old as politics itself. And secondly, I think there's a very legitimate argument that one of the ways you make politics more relevant to Canadians is by giving members of Parliament a larger role in their communities and a more meaningful role. In this instance, I think the government and these members are far more guilty of stupidity than corruption. I mean, far from subliminal advertising, this is magical thinking. I mean, who in their right mind would believe that a facsimile cheque signed by a member of Parliament with a big party logo is actually coming from them or the party? I mean, it's ridiculous, and an error on their part clearly."

Mr. Proulx who held a press conference on the Hill on Thursday along with Liberal MP David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Ont.) to announce that the Liberals are filing complaints against 47 Conservative MPs including the Prime Minister with the Ethics Commissioner to see whether they violated any provision of the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons which was enshrined into law in 2006 as part of the Federal Accountability Act. Also, they're asking the Auditor General, Elections Canada and the Public Service Commission of Canada to investigate whether the Tories were trying to give away taxpayer money as partisan gifts to Canadians.

"We believe this is probably the most massive propaganda effort of any kind ever seen in the federal level in Canadian history," Mr. McGuinty told reporters.

Both MPs said that their party was able to find 181 examples going back to 2007 where Tory caucus members have taken credit for taxpayer-funded federal funding announcements through the use of "personalized partisan cheques" by either personally signing or using party logos on them. MPs said these partisan cheques falsely give the impression that the money is coming from the Conservative Party or individual MPs and not from taxpayers which in their view is promoting one's own "personal" interest.

Mr. McGuinty in the press conference made reference to Sec. 4 and Sec. 9 of the code as the basis of their complaint to the Ethics Commissioner.

Sec. 4 of the code states that "A public office holder is in a conflict of interest when he or she exercises an official power, duty or function that provides an opportunity to further his or her private interests or those of his or her relatives or friends or to improperly further another person's private interests." And Sec. 9 states that "No public office holder shall use his or her position as a public office holder to seek to influence a decision of another person so as to further the public office holder's private interests or those of the public office holder's relatives or friends or to improperly further another person's private interests."

Mr. Proulx said the Liberals have not lodged these complaints and are not highlighting this issue to make up any lost ground in the public opinion polls some of which show that the Tories have a 15 point lead over the Liberals and could win a majority government if an election had held last week.

"It's not necessarily a question of gaining the lost ground or coming back. It's a question that we want to make sure that the Canadian public understands that the Conservatives are doing these things and we want to make sure that the Conservatives understand that these things should not be done. So, that's why we're putting them on notice as of now," said Mr. Proulx.

"Any time, they use the Conservative logo on the government's logo or announcements, we would expect the Conservative Party of Canada to pay for it, not pay for the sign but pay for the announcement. If they're announcing $100,000 with the Conservative logo, the Conservative Party of Canada should pay the $100,000. The same thing should apply or would apply to signatures by MPs whether they be MPs, whether they be ministers, whether it's the Prime Minister. They should pay for it."

NDP MP Peter Stoffer (Sackville-Eastern Shore, N.S.) told The Hill Times that his party is planning on raising the issue in the House Ethics Committee. He said that although he is not a member of the committee he's already in touch with NDP MP Bill Siksay (Burnaby-Douglas, B.C.), his party's representative on the Ethics Committee and will discuss more details with him this week.

"Bill [Siksay] will be doing that for us. That's why I'm going to talk to him, hand him over my information [next week] and allow him and the committee to work on this because I think the Liberals and the Bloc will want to raise this issue as well," said Mr. Stoffer. "To give you the façade that this money is coming directly from me [Tory MPs], that's false and that has to stop because you can't bribe Canadians with their own money."

The committee would need a support of a majority of the committee members to discuss this issue and the opposition parties do have a majority on this committee. Of the 11 members of the Committee, six are from the opposition parties and five from the Conservative Party.

He added that his party's demand is that both the Prime Minister and the Treasury Board President should apologize to Canadians, promise that they won't do it again and identify the person who came up with this idea.

The issue gained traction last week after news reports in Nova Scotia carried a picture of Conservative MP Gerald Keddy (South Shore-St. Margaret's, N.S.) giving away a "prop cheque" of $302,620 with the Conservative Party of Canada logo on it at a public event on Sept. 19 for a local rink. After this, the federal Liberals made public 181 similar pictures of Conservative MPs and Cabinet ministers in which the prop cheques either carried the party logo or were signed by either individual MPs, Cabinet ministers or the Prime Minister.

After the story made national headlines, the Prime Minister's Office issued a memo to Conservative MPs reminding them "that tax-funded projects and grants must be announced as Government initiatives, not Conservative Party initiatives."

Mr. Keddy at first was unapologetic and said that he'd do it again but later issued a statement acknowledging his mistake.

"The use of this logo on a cheque representing public funds was inappropriate. This cheque was one small part of a larger event celebrating the outstanding achievements of the board of directors of Church Memorial Park in Chester, N.S.," stated Mr. Keddy.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) in a media interview in Edmonton also acknowledged that Mr. Keddy's move was a "mistake that is not going to be repeated."

PMO spokesperson Dimitri Soudas sent an email to reporters last week, noting that even Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough-Agincourt, Ont.) told Maclean's magazine that "cheques like that have been delivered since Parliament was invented."

Allan Gregg of Harris/Decima Research said on last week's At Issue panel on CBC TV's The National that this controversy is nowhere near the Liberals' sponsorship scandal, but it could be a problem.

"It does open up a flank for the Conservatives because what it does it plays to a prevailing perception that the longer you are in power, the more likely you are to abuse it. If the Liberals can leverage that beyond these simple incidences to a much larger pattern, this could prove to be a real problem for the government," Mr. Gregg said.

arana@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times