leash

Wednesday July 22, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday July 22, 2020

Ethical questions abound in politics

July 16, 2020

For the third time since he became prime minister in 2015, the behaviour of Justin Trudeau is being investigated by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. The investigation involves a proposed non-tendered contract worth $19 million to the WE Charity, which was supposed to operate a new student-volunteer program. Trudeau had participated in the cabinet meeting that approved the contract.

Because both the prime minister and his wife had a close relationship with the charity, the opposition complained to the ethics commissioner that Trudeau was guilty of violating the conflict of interest law. Days later it was revealed that Trudeau’s mother and brother had been paid nearly $300,000 for multiple speaking engagements at WE Charity events. This seems to be a classic case of confusing or intermingling private interests with the public interest, which is the essential nature of a conflict of interest.

The case caused me to reflect on why politicians appear to have such difficulty reasoning and acting ethically. Here are some random thoughts:

July 11, 2020

There is illegal and unethical behaviour in all occupations, but politics seems to involve greater temptations and risks that legal rules and ethical standards will be violated.

Politics involves contention over competing ideas and interests, together with competition to gain power, and these fundamental facts can override respect for ethical norms. Politicians and their advisers take the pragmatic view that if they do not break or bend the rules, they will lose ground to their opponents. They tell themselves that after they win, they will behave in an exemplary ethical manner, but then re-election becomes a strong motivation.

Most politicians enter public life for altruistic reasons of public service. A minority, however, become corrupted by the political process. They develop the view that politics is a game and to the winner go the spoils. Individuals from a famous political family, or long-serving politicians, may develop the view that they are, as a former Liberal cabinet minister declared, “entitled to their entitlements.” Rewarding family and “political friends” is seen as a perk of the job. (Winnipeg Free Press) 

 

Wednesday June 20, 2012

By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator, Wednesday June 20, 2012

Hamilton Bylaw Enforcement

Sixty per cent of Hamilton’s dog population is not licensed. So it’s entirely appropriate that city council wants to take a hard line to get owners to obey the Responsible Pet Owner bylaw.

Dog owners who won’t obey the law get no sympathy here. Licensing a dog is pretty much a user fee. If you can’t afford to pay the $28 per year to license a spayed or neutered dog, you probably can’t afford the dog, period. The city’s 87,000- strong dog population costs money, everything from leash-free parks to disposing of pet waste to running animal care and euthanasia services. It only makes sense for the people taking advantage of those services — dog owners — to foot part or all of the bill.

And yet, thousands of owners don’t. It’s enough of a problem that Councillor Chad Collins is proposing spot checks by bylaw enforcement, so someone walking their leashed dog could be “pulled over”, so to speak. Random checks without due cause might be a step too far. Still, it’s good to see council and staff acting on this problem. There’s valuable revenue waiting to be collected, and the public would be well-served by a much greater degree of compliance. Source

Meanwhile, Ontario’s deputy chief coroner, Dr. Dan Cass, announced 14 recommendations Monday stemming from a review of 129 cycling deaths over five years, including several high-profile tragedies in Hamilton.

In addition to recommending helmets for adults, Cass also called for mandatory cycling safety lessons in school, side-guards on heavy trucks, more paved shoulders on highways, point-of-sale safety information and beefed-up educational campaigns for both two- and four-wheeled drivers. (Source: Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Wednesday November 19, 1997

The shadows of political rivalry between Jean Chrétien and Brian Mulroney persist, encapsulating the enduring questions surrounding Mulroney's claim of being a victim of politically-motivated abuse of power, further complicated by the complexities of the Airbus and Karlheinz Schreiber saga.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday November 19, 1997

Airbus fiasco still stinks

You don’t have to be a fan of Brian Mulroney to say that the Liberal government’s handling of the Airbus affair has the smell of a rotten potato. The former prime minister’s penchant for gloating and partisanship is distasteful in the extreme, but the fact remains the government has much to explain about a fiasco that sandbagged taxpayers. The odour surrounding the RCMP’s botched prosecution against Mulroney isn’t likely to fade as long as the Liberals refuse to clear the air with an independent inquiry.

It’s hard to blame Mulroney for going public with his belief that he was the victim of a politically-motivated abuse of power. No evidence of any impropriety by Mulroney in the sale of Airbus jets to Air Canada has ever surfaced. The Liberals allowed the RCMP to malign Mulroney’s reputation with a letter to Swiss authorities that treated him as guilty. They still haven’t withdrawn the letter. No senior officials in the cabinet or the RCMP have taken any responsibility for the mess, which saddled taxpayers with a $2-million out-of-court settlement with Mulroney. Inexcusably, the government has done nothing to answer many lingering questions.

Mulroney aside, people should care when individuals are subjected to prosecutions that prove to be politically-driven witchhunts. Mulroney’s case has disturbing parallels to the RCMP’s abortive prosecution of former Liberal cabinet minister John Munro, who incurred nearly $1 million in legal fees to fight unfounded allegations about a grant to the Assembly of First Nations. Unlike Mulroney, Munro received no compensation from the government and no apology.

The arrogance of politicians and police in cases such as these is breathtaking. Too often, the strategy is to close the door, and let a scapegoat take the rap. RCMP Staff Sergeant Fraser Fiegenwald appears to be the convenient fall guy in the Airbus affair.

The case against Mulroney collapsed when the government learned that Fiegenwald had discussed the case with a journalist. He was subsequently charged with violating the RCMP’s oath of office, but the charges were dropped last month in return for his retirement from the force. The settlement enabled the RCMP to avoid a potentially embarrassing hearing which might have revealed some answers.

The government saw fit to express regret that the facts wouldn’t be disclosed because of the hearing not going ahead. Regret? It has many avenues at its disposal to determine the truth. A judicial inquiry is one. A special judicial review, such as that by Justice Archie Campbell into the police investigation of the Paul Bernardo case, is another. The worst approach is to do nothing in the hope that the case will be forgotten.

Mulroney is carrying bombast to the extreme in calling for a royal commission, but the Liberals are wrong to draw a veil of secrecy on this affair. The Chretien government can only damage its reputation by refusing an inquiry to let the chips fall where they may. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial, A10, 11/19/1997)

* * * Airbus Affair Redux * * *

As I dust off the ink-stained pages of my cartoon archives, I find myself drawn back to a piece I penned in 1997, capturing the tumultuous Airbus affair that left the Canadian political landscape in disarray. The editorial cartoon depicted Jean Chrétien releasing the RCMP hound, chasing down Brian Mulroney, tethered by a leash of political rivalry and whispers of vendetta.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday March 2, 2024 Reflecting on Brian Mulroney's passing, a celestial scene contrasts with a contemporary tableau of present federal leaders engaged in an uncivilized punch-up, highlighting the disagreeable nature of today's political discourse and its evolution.

March 2, 2024

In those inked strokes of satire, I sought to encapsulate the palpable tension, the whiff of personal vendetta, and the lingering conspiracy that Mulroney was being unjustly picked on. Two prime ministers, locked in a fierce rivalry — one notorious for driving the getaway car for his old boss Pierre Trudeau, the other infamous for his Gucci shoes and cozying up with Reagan. The narrative echoed a Shakespearean drama, unfolding in the political theatres of Ottawa.

Fast forward to 2024, and the shadows of the Airbus affair still loom over my drawing board. The cartoon remains a time capsule, preserving the skepticism and questions that swirled around Mulroney’s claims of being the victim of a politically-motivated abuse of power. The Liberal government’s handling of the affair, the odorous air surrounding the RCMP’s actions, and Mulroney’s bombast in calling for transparency through a royal commission — all etched in the strokes of my pen.

As the ink of time has dried, it’s imperative to acknowledge the nuances that emerged in the subsequent years. The legal processes, epitomized by the Oliphant Commission, walked a fine line, revealing inappropriate dealings without casting a definitive judgment on guilt. Mulroney’s assertions persist in the annals of Canadian political lore, a narrative thread that unraveled in echoes from the past.

Karlheinz Schreiber, a central figure in the affair, moved from the shadows to the spotlight. His connections, cash payments, and the intertwining of his fate with Mulroney’s further complicated the narrative, adding layers to a story already rich in political intrigue.

As a cartoonist navigating the corridors of time, my reflection on that 1997 cartoon is not one of finality but of ongoing curiosity. The questions persist: Was Mulroney truly a victim of political vendetta? Did the inked lines of my cartoon capture a moment of political theatre or unveil a deeper truth?

In the realm of editorial cartoons, where satire and skepticism dance a delicate waltz, the Airbus affair remains an evergreen muse. The characters may change, but the questions linger, inviting new generations to scrutinize the inked frames of history, searching for the elusive shades of truth and justice. (Graeme MacKay, March 3, 2024)