Democracy Watch's opinion is that there is ample evidence to warrant an official, independent, public inquiry under the Inquiries Act into the list of federal government issues from the past 20 years set out below.

The Inquiries Act stated purpose is for inquiries into“any matter connected with the good government of Canada or the conduct of any part of the public business” (section 2).

However, currently the federal Cabinet has sole power to initiate an inquiry under the Act.  As a result, many situations that should face an inquiry remain unexamined, and the truth about wrongdoing in these situations remains hidden.

As a result, Democracy Watch proposes that the Act should be changed to allow a majority of opposition party leaders to initiate an inquiry, with the inquiry commissioner(s) chosen by all the federal political party leaders.  For details, click here.

Democracy Watch calls on all federal political parties to ensure that judicial inquiries are initiated not only into the Mulroney-Schreiber-libel case payment situation, but also into the following highly questionable situations that have arisen over the past 20 years of federal politics (NOTE: To be clear, Democracy Watch is not saying that any of the situations definitely involved wrongdoing, just that all of the situations raise key questions that remain unanswered). 

Before initiating inquiries into any of the following 15 questionable situations, all federal political parties should ensure that the new whistleblower protection law is extended to cover testimony of everyone at the inquiry to protect them from any form of retaliation::

1. Broken promises and dishonesty inquiry - to determine exactly how many election promises have been broken, and how many politicians and government officials have been dishonest with the public, in the past 15 years, and to develop recommendations for rules, enforcement systems and penalties to discourage dishonesty in politics (To see the list of the federal Conservatives' 24 broken accountability and democratic reform promises, click here -- For more details, go to Democracy Watch's Honesty in Politics Campaign page).
2. Recent sham Cabinet investigations inquiry - many federal Conservative Cabinet ministers and government departments have faced serious questions about wrongdoing since they came to power in January 2006, but in each case the Cabinet minister has controlled the investigation into the alleged wrongdoing (in the cases of NAFTAgate, listeriosis food contamination, Maxime Bernier's missing documents, among others).  Not surprisingly, every investigation found that the Cabinet minister and their staff did nothing wrong.  An inquiry would investigate all of these situations independently.
   
3. Karlheinz Schreiber's missing money inquiry - Mr. Schreiber was lobbying federal government officials from 1983 through to the mid-1990s, and more than $10 million of the money he had when he arrived in Canada to begin lobbying is still unaccounted.  Although an inquiry into some of his dealings with former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was held in 2009-2010, many questions remain uninvestigated and unanswered (For more details, click here).
   
4. Former Prime Minister Chrétien’s dealings in Shawinigan inquiry - the federal Information Commissioner lost her case seeking a court order that the federal Access to Information Act requires Chrétien to disclose his agenda books from between January 1994 to June 1999 (curiously, the Conservatives defended Chrétien's secrecy) -- if Chrétien's agenda books are ever made public they may provide the basis for an inquiry to determine the extent of Chrétien’s dealings in Shawinigan (For more details, click here and click here).
5. Former Prime Minister Paul Martin’s business dealings inquiry - Martin owned Canada Steamship Lines for much of the time he was Prime Minister, and both Ethics Counsellor Howard Wilson and Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro were completely ineffective at ensuring that federal ethics rules were complied with -- an inquiry would determine whether Mr. Martin complied with all of the ethics rules at all times (For more details, click here and click here and click here).
   
6. Missing Adscam sponsorship scandal money inquiry - the Gomery Commission did not determine where more than $40 million of the funds involved in the sponsorship program ended up -- an inquiry would attempt to track down the missing money (For more details, click here).
7. Ethics Counsellor’s enforcement record inquiry - a Federal Court ruling in July 2004 found that Ethics Counsellor Howard Wilson was biased because he was controlled by the Prime Minister, and that he was therefore ineffective in enforcing the federal Cabinet’s ethics rules -- an inquiry would determine just how many Cabinet ministers, their staff, and senior government officials violated the ethics rules during Mr. Wilson’s term in office from June 1994 to June 2004 (For more details, click here and click here).
8. Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro’s enforcement record inquiry - Democracy Watch’s challenged Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro in court, alleging that he improperly failed to enforce federal Cabinet ethics rules, and the new ethics rules for MPs (which came into force in October 2004), in more than an dozen cases, but the court case was derailed by the resignation of Mr. Shapiro in April 2007 -- an inquiry would determine just how many Cabinet ministers, their staff, senior government officials, and MPs violated ethics rules during Mr. Shapiro’s term in office from July 1994 to April 2007 (For more details, click here).
9. Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson's enforcement inquiry - Commissioner Dawson was appointed in July 2007 and continued the same kind of negligent and extremely weak enforcement record of her predecessors Howard Wilson and Bernard Shapiro (For details, click here).
   
10. Gifts and benefits inquiry - federal ethics rules for Cabinet ministers, their staff, MPs, and public servants restrict gifts and benefits, but Ethics Counsellor Howard Wilson and Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro were completely negligent and never ruled publicly on exactly what type and amount of gifts and other benefits they are allowed to receive -- an inquiry would determine who has received what gifts and benefits, and make recommendations to close this secret gift-giving loophole (For details, click here and/or go to Democracy Watch's Government Ethics Campaign page).
11. Lobbying law enforcement inquiry - Federal Registrar of Lobbyists Michael Nelson, who is the front-line enforcement officer for the Lobbyists Registration Act (LRA - now known as the Lobbying Act), admitted to a parliamentary committee that before 2006 the LRA was essentially not enforced.  His sucessor under the Lobbying Act, Commissioner of Lobbying Karen Shepherd, has not issued rulings on several complaints filed by Democracy Watch.  An inquiry would determine how many lobbyists have violated the Act from 1988 (when the Act became law) on and why the law is has been so weakly and negligently enforced (For more details, click here).
12. Party leadership races inquiry - donations to party leadership races were not limited nor required to be disclosed until after the Conservatives’ race was completed in spring 2004, and MPs ethics rules were not in force until October 2004; as a result some federal politicians may have been, or may continue to be, in a conflict of interest because of large, secret donations made to their campaigns (either during the campaign, or to pay off campaign debts) -- an inquiry would determine the extent of these conflict of interests (For details, go to Democracy Watch's Money in Politics Campaign page).
13. MPs “trust funds” inquiry - former Liberal MP and Cabinet minister Tony Ianno told the media in 2003 that he maintained a trust fund that contained more than $200,000 in donations but the identity of donors and the amounts they donated has not been publicly disclosed -- an inquiry could determine how many other MPs had such trust funds (which were, finally, made illegal by the Federal Accountability Act as of June 12, 2007), and who donated how much to the funds, and on what the funds were spent (For details, go to Democracy Watch's Money in Politics Campaign page).
14. Riding associations “trust funds” inquiry - the 2006 Federal Accountability Act did not make trust funds maintained by federal riding associations illegal, so an inquiry would determine how many riding associations have such funds, who donated how much to the funds, on what the funds are being spent, and make recommendations to close this secret donations loophole (For details, go to Democracy Watch's Money in Politics Campaign page).
15. Political party “trust funds” inquiry - the 2006 Federal Accountability Act did not make trust funds maintained by federal political parties illegal, so an inquiry would determine which parties have such funds (and have had such funds in the past, including funds for retiring party leaders), who donated how much to the funds, on what the funds are being spent, and make recommendations to close this secret donations loophole (For details, go to Democracy Watch's Money in Politics Campaign page).
16. Political fundraising inquiry - when he retired from the Senate of Canada, Liberal fundraiser Leo Kolber told the media that many people asked him over the years what the government would do for them in return for their donation -- an inquiry would examine the extent of donors requesting such favours over the past 20 years (such requests are illegal under the Criminal Code of Canada) (For details, go to Democracy Watch's Money in Politics Campaign page).
17. Nomination races inquiry - federal election candidate nomination races are controlled by the political parties (other than Elections Canada’s regulation of donations since January 2004) -- an inquiry would determine the extent of undemocratic problems with such races over the past 20 years (For more details, click here).
18. Hiring, appointments and contracts inquiry - serious questions have been raised about many hirings, appointments and large government contracts (from the recent billions in military hardware purchases to the gun registry computer contracts) in the past 20 years -- an inquiry would focus on answering these questions and recommending measures to ensure fair hiring, appointments and contracting processes. (For more details, go to Democracy Watch's Voter Rights Campaign).