Gomery gave Martin and Chrétien a break

To arrive at his fact- finding report, Justice John Gomery followed every thread in the sponsorship web, sometimes making educated leaps to arrive at his destination. In the end, his efforts to trace back the kickback scheme that allowed the Liberal party to raid the public purse for partisan purposes stopped short of Jean Chrétien and his immediate entourage. To arrive at that conclusion, Gomery had to accept that there was a startling break in the chain of command between Chrétien’s PMO and the Quebec Liberal machine.

For the judge had a relatively easy time following the sponsorship money all the way to the upper levels of the Quebec wing of the party. He dismissed out of hand the self- serving Liberal notion that the party had unwittingly fallen prey to a handful of unscrupulous, clandestine operators. The judge also dismissed Alfonso Gagliano’s claim that he was ignorant of the malfeasance happening under his nose. On the basis of some of Gagliano’s own actions as Quebec lieutenant, Gomery concluded that he had to have been aware of the system put in place by some of his associates. Gomery then went on to find that the kickback buck stopped with Gagliano.

While he blamed Chrétien and his then chief- ofstaff Jean Pelletier for operating the sponsorship program with little regard for normal administrative safeguards, the judge did not find that they were in the loop of the kickback scheme. Over the course of the commission, scores of witnesses had described Gagliano as a good soldier, certainly more of a yes- man than a headstrong loner. Still, on the crucial issue of kickbacks, Gomery decided Gagliano had acted on his own initiative. He came to that conclusion in spite of the fact Chrétien was hardly a distant, uninterested party regarding the post- referendum Liberal finances in his home province of Quebec.

After the 1995 referendum, more than just national unity was at stake for the then prime minister in Quebec. With party coffers empty, Chrétien was facing the fight of his political life.

In the referendum, his riding of Saint- Maurice had turned its back on him and solidly supported the Yes side.

If the same pattern followed on election night, Chrétien would lose his seat.

In the interval between the 1995 vote and the federal election, the Bloc Québécois selected a new leader. Yves Duhaime, Chrétien’s designated Bloc opponent in Saint- Maurice, was a top contender for the job. To the private anguish of Chrétien loyalists, the campaign boosted Duhaime’s profile. Had he been chosen as Bloc leader, Chrétien would have faced extra- long odds to keep his seat. To their collective relief, Gilles Duceppe beat Duhaime. On election night, Chrétien kept his seat. But to secure the third lowest Liberal majority in Quebec for the prime minister, the Liberal machine had to go into overdrive for the entire campaign.

That same 1997 night, the Liberals also added seven more Quebec seats to their 1993 election score. Given heavy Liberal losses in Atlantic Canada, those seats made the difference between a minority and a majority government.

If Chrétien had lost his seat or been reduced to a minority, there is no doubt he would have been history. Even with a second majority, there were calls at the time for him to step down.

In his report, Gomery found that the former prime minister and his hands- on chief of staff were not aware that dirty money had gone into helping Chrétien prevail at a life- and- death juncture in his political career. He accepted, without reservation, the notion that, despite the high stakes involved, neither Chrétien nor Pelletier got involved in the nittygritty of Liberal finances in Quebec. Gomery is a magnanimous judge. Last week, he gave both past and present Liberal prime ministers the benefit of the doubt. Chantal Hébert’s national affairs column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. chebert@thestar.ca.