Because it works

One of my first reporting projects in Ottawa, more than 20 years ago,  was an access-to-information request on where  skills-training dollars were spent by Brian Mulroney's Conservative government.  The government turned over computer printouts -- pages and pages of them, on each individual grant.  And line by line, back in the old Globe library, I went through the job contracts and counted -- an amazing amount of "skills development" money was financing low-skill service labour in donut shops, hardware stores, etc. 

When I was ready to write about this dubious spending to enhance skills in the Canadian labour market,   I approached an opposition politician, who said he absolutely would NOT condemn the dollars spent. "Every time one of those grants comes to my riding, I get to go down to the donut shop and hand over the cheque, and when an election rolls around, I get the credit," he said, bluntly. "That's our job -- to bring dollars to the riding."

Being young and idealistic then, I was somewhat taken aback by the brazen cynicism. I also wondered: "Who the heck casts their vote on how much money goes to the donut shop in town?"

Today, though, it's conventional wisdom, but wisdom worth questioning when we read this bombshell leak from the forthcoming Auditor-General's report. Apparently the Conservative government may have bypassed Parliament and senior civil servants to dole out millions and millions of dollars in things such as bunny trails, parks and landscaping in Muskoka. Before we get all caught up in the process issue -- ie., what the government did, don't you think we should also be asking why?

The cynical answer is: Because it works. No politician would take this risk for the sheer kick of it. Obviously there was some thought that pouring this much money into Muskoka would bring political benefit over and above the potential criticism.

And that takes me back to the question that baffled me when I was 28 years old and new to this business.  Do people really base their vote on something that crass? Booty or loot for the riding? If that's the case, we might want to demand better of ourselves, as voters, as well as the politicians. Is your vote really cheap enough to be purchased in exchange for some landscaping?

Comments

[Barry Johnston-Spooner, M.Ed.]

Susan, as a Green Liberal NDPer, 63 years old - psychotherapist for 40 years - I see Stephen Harper as a covert bully. He's using these tactics because he works within a Bush/Cheney/Strauss Neo Conservative mindbox: "with us/agin us". This Black or White approach is used to polarize opinion, create fatigue so they can enact their agenda while we're aghast at their negativity. He cannot tolerate ambiguity. I suspect he is fundamentally a narcissist.

I have a serious offer: $1000 deposited with my lawyer, affidavit and terms to win the money based say on some known #SH 'friend' deposing an oath of having smoked a joint with him. Alternatively $1000 also won by finding an article/platform or indication that #SH could be judged as showing empathy.

I accept Brian Mulroney, Joe Clark or Andrew Coyne (Maclean editor) as arbiter.

Thanks for your reporting Susan. Barry Johnston-Spooner

[Bill Hulet]

Susan:

It might be something more subtle than that. I work in a job where I have the opportunity to see people's attitudes about the honesty of everyone else----and the actual truth. My experience has been that people are many orders of magnitude more honest than most people think that they are.

I suspect that the politicians may believe that people are that crass, as you say, but I doubt that they are. But voters might very well give politicians who do this sort of thing a "free ride" because they think that "they all do it".

I think that this also fuels a lot of the negative advertising and cheap shots. My feeling is that most of the sleaziest things done by the Conservatives come about because they feel that this is just the way that the other side plays and they have to do the same thing if they want to have a fair chance (remember that idiotic Liberal advert about "troops in the cities" in a past election?)

Another aspect comes from a bit of a culture clash. Some things that look like really sleazy tricks to others are just a "ruse de guerre" to others. I remember a while back where a Mayor in my city got caught plagarizing a speech that she gave at the New Year's levy. I think she and her supporters were genuinely surprised about how upset some people were about it. But she was mayor of a university town and on a campus plagiarism is the closest thing to a capital crime (you get instantly expelled if caught doing it.)

Different cultures, different values---.