|
Monday December 6, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
An open
letter to peter macKay
Dear Peter,
I have decided to write you an open
letter to talk about two events you have lately dealt with in the House: the
"immigration-ballerina" affair and the Mafia accusations against Alfonso
Gagliano.
Before I venture into the
subjects, I want to assure you that these considerations are coming from
someone who has had a lot of respect for you in the past, and is struggling
to preserve that for the future.
I've always considered you
one of the young Canadian politicians who has a lot of potential and,
definitely, one of the future political leaders of this country. Educated,
but not snobby, aggressive, but level-headed. You were also pragmatic and
perceived as a real "Progressive Conservative" and, in an era when "the
medium is the message," you also had the physique-du-role to master the
media.
When Joe Clark decided to
step down, I told a common friend that you would have been a very good
candidate. He agreed. However, he told me that you were too young, and
needed more time before engaging in such a task.
He was right. However,
because of the lack of alternatives, I assume, you were forced to take the
job.
We know what happened: you
signed a deal you later ignored.
Was it the right thing to
do? Former Ontario premier Mike Harris kept his promises at all costs and
was condemned; his successor, Dalton McGuinty, decided to forfeit his
promises for the sake of the province, and is chastised. It's hard to judge
a person who has to choose between the interests of the country and his or
her personal credibility. You made your choice, you unified the Conservative
Party.
I understand your desire to
regain the "momentum" you enjoyed on the magic night of May 31st in Toronto;
but you have to understand that history will be more generous with you than
the daily news. It takes time, patience, and, especially in your case,
respect for people to fulfill those dreams.
It may be conventional
wisdom to believe that the word "politics" is like a container to throw
whatever solid or otherwise garbage into it. But it's not true. There is an
ideal line that cannot be crossed. The stature of a politician is defined by
the ability to find that line and respect it: at all costs.
A few years ago I was at
Queen's Park and I met an Ontario Conservative minister and a friend of
mine, the late Al Palladini. He was fuming. The day before, he had made one
of his flamboyant, but unmistakably innocent remarks that offends nobody,
but can be used by a street-smart politician to score cheap political
points. In fact, during the following Question Period, an opposition MPP
threw him some very offensive slurs.
He showed me a note sent to
him, immediately after QP, by the same MPP, saying, "Sorry Al, you know I
did not mean it. But that's politics." I asked for the note: "Sorry that's
personal." I insisted: "Al, that's politics." His answer was final: "That's
not my politics." And he shred it.
Al Palladini drew the line
and did not cross it. The opposition MPP did not.
I believe that you, Mr.
MacKay, are trying hard to find that line, and I hope that the following
considerations will help you in your endeavours.
Start with the ballerina
case. We, media and politicians, break into the private lives of an
individual without considering the human factor, the repercussions within
her family and her future, without knowing if she did or did not do anything
wrong. We threw her life up in the air and the only thing we know is her
desire for a better life.
We have accused the Minister
of Immigration, Judy Sgro, to use her power for political gains. Well, I can
assure you of one thing: if the Liberal Party will present as a candidate a
donkey wearing glasses in the Toronto York-West riding, the Liberal
candidate would be elected. Ms. Sgro did not need the support of the young
Romanian stripper to win the riding. This does not mean that there aren't
problems with the immigration system or with the financing of political
organizations. There are numerous "numbered companies" donating to political
organizations, including to the Liberal Party. There's also a "numbered
company" that owns a strip club and has generously donated to the Liberal
Party. However, throwing open the private life of this stripper is just a
way to score some political points and it's not the way to solve the
problem.
Then we have the Gagliano
Affair.
You and me have already
dealt with this issue and you have apologized to the Italian-Canadian
community for your statement about la famiglia. I believe you were sincere
and there is no malice in your statements.
Nonetheless, your good faith
may help you to go to Heaven, but it still creates Hell to some people on
Earth.
Your decision to read in the
House the quotes from a murderer about a former Canadian minister were
wrong.
I'm not drawing any
conclusion about Mr. Gagliano's behavior, the courts will.
I only want to give you some
elements about the cultural environment many of us, immigrants and former
immigrants, live.
When new immigrants arrive
in Canada they feel isolated and look for familiar faces. People who come
from the same village look for each other.
They go to the same club,
they exchange favours and help each other. If you come from certain regions,
it might happen that some of your "friends" have "questionable" connections.
They might also ask you to handle their books, if you are an accountant. In
that environment, you don't say no: especially if you are young and you need
to work. You might also have some pictures taken with some of those
individuals.
A few years ago an Italian
Canadian politician and myself, decided to stop for a coffee in a
restaurant. After a few minutes a reputed member of the Mafia came in and
sat close to us for a brief and innocuous chat. What were we supposed to do?
Kick him out? Peter, let's pretend for a moment that an RCMP agent was
following him with the camera, today we might have a picture of a journalist
and a politicians dining with a mobster.
I'm not saying that this is
what happened to Alfonso Gagliano. I'm just giving you more elements to
judge people before standing up in the House and make statements before
knowing the facts.
And these are the facts.
A serial confessed killer,
considered by the experts "not reliable source", has accused Mr. Gagliano
during a testimony with the FBI to be part of the Mafia. The federal agency
has decided not to submit those accusations to the Courts. It means that
they do not exist.
Peter, you stood up in the
House, protected by the parliamentary immunity, and repeated unsubstantiated
accusations from a murderer against a Canadian citizen. Who protects Mr.
Gagliano's reputations? How is he supposed to defend himself? If he tells
media that is not true, people will say "Yeah, yeah, yeah, did you ever see
a Mafioso admitting to be so?" Peter, I understand you are eager to prove
yourself, your ability and you want to move forward. You don't need to grab
newspaper headlines, trampling over human feelings and people's carrier. You
have other qualities: use them. |
