|
|Monday March 15, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
I WILL DEFEND MY INTEGRITY
Former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano, who was fired from his job as
ambassador to Denmark and who two weeks ago told major Canadian newspapers
that he has been “branded like a criminal” for his part in the Liberals’
$100-million ads and sponsorship scandal, says he’s determined to fight to
the end in order to prove his innocence and to defend his integrity.
Mr. Gagliano will
appear before the House Public Accounts Committee this week. In an
interview TO The Hill Times Alfonso Gagliano outlined the defensive strategy
he intends to adopt with the parliamentary board of inquiry that
investigates the sponsorship scandal in Quebec. He also expressed his severe
doubts about the line adopted by the Federal government in coping with this
crisis.
"This is a very stressful period. Living with charges of fraud and such is
not easy. Fortunately," added the former Public Works minister, "I have the
support of my wife, my children, my grandchildren, and some friends. They're
helping me through this terrible phase."
Gagliano maintains that many people are shying away from their
responsibilities, "and I have the impression that many people, including me,
will have their reputation ruined, at least for a period. However, I'm
confident that in the end we shall find out about the true facts of the
matter."
How was it possible that you, a minister, did not notice anything?
"Well, this remark is understandable, but an explanation of what happened
presupposes a knowledge of how the Canadian government works."
What do you mean?
"A minister prepares the programs, but hands them to lower officials who are
supposed to follow the rules in force. Yesterday, while I was consulting
some documents, I saw a contract that I had never seen before. The Ministry
has 14,000 employees, handling over 50,000 contracts every year, managing
funds for over $10 billion. By the way, the system itself prevents the
minister from micromanaging things. If one tried to do so, one would be
accused of favouring friends. This is how the Canadian system works, and
people who don't know this might not understand."
What exactly did you know about the sponsorship program?
"To begin with, the program me did not begin with my arrival: it was already
in place, and documents prove it. A funding request for sponsorship programs
dates back to November 1996; it bears the signatures of then-minister Diane
Marlow and then-PM Jean Chrétien, for an amount of about $18 million and
with a specific list of events. The Ministry lacked enough staff to run the
program, so it used some external agencies and paid 15 percent fees. I had
no clue that things were that bad."
Were you surprised?
"Of course. Let's take the Blue Nose project: it is incredible that, out of
over $2 million, they only got $359,000."
Were you aware of the project?
"Yes, I was, I had to be informed about all projects, but just because I had
to go to the Cabinet and ask for funds. I recall that project. But what
should be clarified is, why aren't they calling the agencies and asking them
for explanations?"
Do you think your Italian origin played any role in this situation?
"Definitely. I think so, it isn't the first time. I have no place in my body
for other scars. For the first time a Political Minister for Quebec was of
Italian origin. Clearly, this disturbed several people. Also, when one
occupies a post of some responsibility, one often has to say no to some
requests. Some of those who are denied their requests get angry and say
stupid things. I once asked a journalist who constantly wrote those things
about me why he was so relentlessly attacking me. Very candidly, he replied
that he had no grudge against me, but he was getting anonymous letters every
day."
If you did not know, then Martin may rightfully say the same.
"I never talked with Paul Martin about this, nor with Chrétien. Of course,
how could I talk about things I wasn't aware of? And if I, the minister in
charge of the program, was not informed, how could any other minister be"
When did the first problems surface?
"It was in 2000, after an internal audit that, by the way, I had ordered."
What did you do when you got the report?
"I remember asking the auditor whether I had to call for the police. He
replied that there was no indication of fraud. He said so in front of the
Vice Minister and other people who were attending that meeting, held in my
office on the fourth floor of the Center Block. I was told that there were
some administrative problems, and we drafted a plan of action in 37 points
in order to correct those problems."
Did you talk to Chrétien?
“The last time I spoke with him was before the Toronto leadership
convention. We just exchanged greetings, and I wished him good luck."
And since then?
"I was surprised to get a personal call from Chrétien on March 6. He told me
that he had seen my declarations on TV and that he never thought for a
minute that I had done anything wrong."
If this was what he thought, why did he fire you from the cabinet?
"This is another record that should be set straight, dispensing with myths.
Following the 2000 election, in the spring of 2001 we happened to talk about
his future. All of a sudden he asked me about my intentions. I told him I
had decided not to run in the next election. After fighting so many battles,
and knowing that the next leadership would be tough, I did not feel like
continuing. I told him that when he left, I'd leave as well."
How did he react?
"He told me I was too young to retire, and asked me what I'd like to do. I
mentioned that, if the opportunity presented itself, I would have liked to
close my career with an ambassadorial post. Our conversation ended there."
So we come to the cabinet shuffle.
"On the morning of January 14, 2002, he called me, told me about Tobin's
resignation, and recalled our past conversation. He told me that, in
consideration of my intention not to run again, he might offer me the
position in Denmark. In the same period there was the Jon Grant controversy,
but my exit from the cabinet had a different reason."
We once wrote that you would support Martin. Were we right?
"Martin asked me a couple of times whether I was willing to support him. I
was very open with him, and always replied that I was the PM's
representative in Quebec, so, as long as Mr. Chrétien remained at the helm,
my place was beside him. The day after he leaves, I said, call me and we
shall talk. Logically, he never called, since I left before Chrétien did."
How damaging is this controversy for the Liberal party?
"I've been out of politics for the past two years, so it's difficult for me
to judge this. Of course, I can read the polls like everyone else, and I've
been in the Opposition. They attack, but the Government decided to wash its
hands because there is a public investigation underway. That's true, but
there is also an election coming, and like someone - I think it was Winston
Churchill - said, if nobody cries foul, lies become truths by sheer
repetition."
Now, an election is coming up.
"My experience tells me that elections are won or lost almost exclusively
during the campaign."
If you could go back, what would you do different?
"I had already changed this program. Of course, had I learnt of the 1996
report, this would have probably never happened. We should not forget that
the reasons for this program were noble, i.e. defending the national unity.
Chrétien decided to act and results came. Now people wonder why the PM and
Gagliano signed directly for those programs. That was a program that the PM
himself had personally approved, taking a leadership role to keep the
country united. For the same reason he brought Stephan Dion in, as he
considered him articulate and capable of explaining Canadian Federalism. As
a matter of fact, Quebec had a separatist government back then, it has a
federalist one now; as long as Chrétien was the PM, every poll had the
separatists running. Now everything has changed."
Do you agree with the strategy chosen by the government to cope with this
problem?
"It's hard to say. They decided that there is nothing to hide and that
everything is to be done with the public inquiry. In theory the government
is right. In politics, however, things assume a different meaning, since the
oppositions try and exploit everything to their advantage. I understand
them, I've been an opposition MP. But if nobody defends, things will become
hard. What do you think will be discussed during the campaign?"
Someone says that the money did not go to individuals, but to the Liberal
party.
"Since 1993, the eight or nine agencies gave a total of $650,000, less than
one percent of the funds raised by the party; and by the way, the party was
running a deficit."
Still, $100 million are missing.
"That's what I don't understand. Why don't they detail the costs? I really
don't know what they might be thinking. The opposition is attacking us every
day, and no one responds. That's how it looks."
You are going to testify to the board next week. Will there be surprises?
"I don't think so. I just want to clarify some matters, such as the starting
date for the program, which many wrongly believe I initiated. The program
was already in place. Also, it depends on what questions will be asked."
What do you expect?
"Clearly, I don't expect compliments: I will be in their hands. I'm
perfectly willing to stay and continue testifying even on a second day. I
don't think there will be any surprise. I'm glad that all cabinet documents
are public, so I can freely discuss them without violating any oath. I can
only say that I sleep very well at night and that I feel perfectly at peace
with my conscience." |
