Bring on the ugly campaign

Thanks to the Prime Minister’s pained, dignified public statement, backed by his communications director’s lengthy tirades and threats of lawsuits against virtually everyone on the opposition front bench, the country is now engaged in an important and necessary debate: In the years that senior officials in the Liberal Party of Canada’s Quebec wing, along with a bevy of crooked ad men, friends of Alfonso and various other hangers-on were busy looting the federal treasury, were they assisted at any point by the services of organized crime?

The allegation was made in Parliament Thursday by the Opposition leader, Stephen Harper, in the course of moving no confidence in the government. It was clearly no slip of the tongue. He said it twice in his prepared speech, and again in answer to a question. It was calculated, and it was deliberate.

The interesting thing is that almost no one picked up on it initially. The first wire service reports made no mention of it. Neither did the networks. Ho hum, ruling party linked with organized crime, what else is new? It wasn’t until Scott Reid started working his Blackberry magic and the Prime Minister performed his famous rendition of He Done Me Wrong that the story acquired, as they say, legs.

The Prime Minister’s people were obviously hoping to turn this into a “gaffe”: a little too obviously, perhaps. Naturally I have no opinion on the question, but if I were the Grits I would not be too eager to encourage much water-cooler discussion of whether the ruling party did or did not outsource its “elaborate kickback scheme” (Judge Gomery’s words) to the mob. Nor is the image of the Prime Minister’s henchman spraying the room with threats of legal action likely to convey an impression of serene self-confidence at the top. Frankly, it looks a little panicky.

Oh, but I forgot: this is all part of the “nasty, ugly” election campaign the media are already hyperventilating about. Or should I say salivating? It’s hard not to detect an undercurrent of excitement in all those pursed-lip reports of who said what outrageous thing about whom. Reporters who spent the day running back and forth between opposition and government members on Parliament Hill, relaying the latest insult in hopes of provoking an equally snide reaction, are ill placed to pronounced upon the unseemliness of the spectacle.

Moreover, it implies a moral equivalence that is anything but impartial. It’s true that all parties engage in negative campaigning, but it’s not true that all are equally guilty of it, or that every accusation, no matter how baseless, is of a piece with every other, no matter how justified; to overlook these distinctions amounts to giving the worst offenders a pass. There is a place for negative campaigns, and the mere fact that they make unpleasant viewing should not be enough to condemn them. The issue is whether the attacks are justified: whether they are true, whether they are relevant, and whether they are fair.

The coming campaign will test how well we understand this. Senior Liberals have been found by a judicial inquiry to have engaged in a massive conspiracy to divert public funds into party coffers, bankrolling its campaigns in at least two and arguably three elections. That is about as serious as it gets in a democracy, and they deserve to answer for it -- answer, either in the sense of being thrown out of power, or of explaining to the voters’ satisfaction why they should be entrusted with it again.

Moreover, there remain many unanswered questions, even after the judicial inquiry. Questions like: Where is the $40-million of sponsorship money that even a team of forensic accountants could not find? How were those involved able to get their hands on such enormous quantities of untraceable cash, the better to pass around to Liberal candidates and party workers? Why was the former executive director of the party’s Quebec wing, Daniel Dezainde, in fear for his life -- so much so that he requested RCMP protection before testifying?

None of this is enough to justify Mr. Harper’s specific charge of mob involvement. He will have to back up the accusation in the course of the campaign, or withdraw it. But it is not enough either to dismiss the charge out of hand, simply because it is harsh or shocking. Something was terribly rotten inside the Liberal party’s Quebec wing in past years -- for all we know it may still be -- and while criminal trials and judicial inquiries have their part in rooting it out, so do we, the voters.

It won’t be easy, and it won’t be pleasant, but it’s our job.