|
|
|
- This Ruling will deal with two applications, one by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada who is now seeking full party standing during the public hearings which commenced on September 7, 2004, and the other on behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada and the Liberal Party of Canada (Quebec), hereinafter referred to together as the "Liberal Party", which seeks leave to apply for standing beyond the delays, and for full party standing before the Inquiry.
- With respect to the application by the Office of the Auditor General, she was given intervenor status before the Inquiry by my Ruling dated July 5, 2004; she had not applied for full party standing. Since then she has realized that it may be necessary for her attorneys to cross-examine certain witnesses, and that she needs full party standing to have that right. In fact, last week in the course of her testimony and that of her staff they were cross-examined by counsel for three other Parties, and it became apparent that her methodology, the conclusions of her Report and the manner in which she expressed them would be challenged, putting into question both her competence and credibility. Outside the hearing room counsel for Mr. Gagliano made statements to the media confirming that he intends to question the appropriateness of the language used by the Auditor General in her public statements.
- In my opinion these developments are a sufficient justification for the application. Counsel for the Auditor General of Canada should be enabled to cross-examine with a view to defending the reputation of his client and the conclusions of her Report.
- With respect to the application of the Liberal Party for leave to apply for standing in spite of the fact that the delay for doing so expired some three months ago, the only excuse offered by the applicant for the lateness of its motion is that it had been concerned that active participation in the work of the Commission "would be viewed in a partisan light", and that it did not at first appreciate that the interests of the Liberal Party would need to be defended and protected. In the light of the public debate which followed the publication of the Report of the Auditor General, especially during the recent election campaign, these are surprising allegations. Nevertheless, the Commission should not exclude a party from participation if no prejudice is caused by its admission. The Liberal Party, like the other political parties already granted intervenor status, has interests and perspectives which may be useful to the Commission's mandate.
- The more difficult question is whether the Liberal Party should have full party standing.
- It bases its application for full standing on the need to protect its reputation. It points to the fact that the government at the origin of the sponsorship program was a government formed by members of Parliament, a majority of whom were elected as representatives of the Liberal Party. However, the distinction between the Government of Canada and the political party which controls the House of Commons, should not be overlooked. The Government of Canada is already represented by counsel having full standing. As well, the political choices of the Government are not a matter within the Commission's mandate. The sponsorship program itself is not in issue before the Commission, but rather the manner in which it was administered.
- The application also refers to allegations, which at present are unsubstantiated, that funds originating from the sponsorship program and advertising activities of the government were diverted into the electoral funds of the Liberal Party. Should evidence supporting these allegations be made in the course of the Commission's hearings, it may be necessary for the Liberal Party to have full standing to defend its interests and reputation. The Commission has the right to revise its rulings in the light of the evidence produced, but for the present, I do not see the need for the Liberal Party to have a greater participation in the work of the Commission than that of the other political parties.
- FOR THESE REASONS, the application of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada for full party standing is granted, and the application of the Liberal Party for leave to apply for full party standing beyond the delays is granted, but its application itself is granted in part only, and the Liberal Party is granted the status of an Intervenor before the Commission, under reserve of its right to present a further application should the circumstances justify it.
__________________________________________
John H. Gomery, Commissioner
Dated at Montreal September 13, 2004 |
|
