Truth will mean little in handling of Gagliano affair

HUGH WINSOR
G&M Monday, February 18, 2002 – Page A5

An Opposition MP will try when Parliament returns today from its winter break to persuade Speaker Peter Milliken to officially declare the obvious, that former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano lied to the House of Commons about his relationship with Crown corporations in his portfolio.

Parliament operates on the assumption all MPs are honourable and hence their word must be taken as the truth. As a consequence, lying is deemed a very serious offence.

As to this particular accusation from Canadian Alliance MP Peter Goldring, the Speaker's evaluation of Mr. Gagliano's veracity has been made much easier by information that has emerged since the former minister was plucked from his post in last month's cabinet shuffle, especially some dynamite information in a document submitted in a recent court case involving a former Canada Lands Co. official.

The information only confirms a pattern: accusation emerges, minister denies, subsequent information emerges contradicting minister's denial. The accusations about Mr. Gagliano's use of his position to direct jobs or contracts toward his cronies began long before the most recent fiasco.

The minister has always replied with his standard mantra. He doesn't interfere with the operations of Crown corporations which are the responsibility of the Crown's management and directors.

Most observers of the political game always took the Big Denial policy with a grain of salt but without a mountain of specifics. The minister got away with it for a long time -- aided by a system designed to obfuscate information about ministers and contracts.

We now know Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's acute instinct for political survival has served him well in dumping Mr. Gagliano. If he were still a minister, his position today would be untenable.

Which brings us back to Mr. Milliken's challenge. Mr. Goldring cites Mr. Gagliano's statements to the Commons on last Nov. 5, 7, and 8. In each case, he said in some version that he as minister did not get involved.

Here is a brief sketch of some of what we now know to the contrary: the case of former Canada Lands chair Jon Grant being asked by Mr. Gagliano to give political supporter Tony Mignacca a job was only the straw that broke the camel's back. It turned out Mr. Gagliano had tried the same tactic with former Canada Lands president Erhard Buchholz.

A letter to Mr. Buchholz from the former Quebec vice-president for Canada Lands Michel Couillard filed in a Quebec court contained allegations of other instances of direct ministerial involvement. After the whistle-blowing letter, Mr. Couillard was subsequently dismissed from Canada Lands and charged with breach of trust in connection with unrelated matters including the management of the disposal of a former military base.

Nevertheless, the information in the initial letter has checked out. Mr. Gagliano wanted Canada Lands legal business in Quebec transferred to Tomasso Nanci, a Montreal lawyer and one of Mr. Gagliano's political organizers. From 1998 to 2001, Mr. Nanci received legal work from Canada Lands Co.

Mr. Gagliano wanted engineering work on a real-estate redevelopment project called the Benny Farm project to go to the firm of Pageau Morel, where Mr. Gagliano's son-in-law worked. Mr. Gagliano ordered that construction work for the same project go to a firm belonging to a long-time supporter, Emmanuel Triassi, and also asked that the tendering process be avoided to ensure he got the job. Mr. Triassi's firm did get the job but a Canada Lands spokesman said there had been an open and fair competition.

The evidence is clear that Mr. Gagliano, contrary to his protestations, did interfere directly in Canada Lands business on a regular basis. And we wonder about a similar pattern in other Crown corporations that reported to him.

But even if the Speaker eventually rules the minister lied to the Commons, it will be a futile gesture. As long as the Liberals continue to use their majority to block any further committee investigation or testimony, there is no further recourse for what in theory is supposed to be a major violation of Parliament.
hwinsor@globeandmail.ca