"I have always practised full disclosure.  I believe the Canadian people are entitled to full disclosure."
Paul Martin, June 11, 2002

Tuesday, May 6, 2003

OTTAWA - Today, as Liberal Party leadership candidates each question whether the others are following the party's leadership campaign donation disclosure rules, Democracy Watch pointed out that all the leadership candidates have violated federal ethics rules by raising money in secret.  The dispute also highlights the pressing need to pass Bill C-24 (which requires leadership race donation disclosure), and to close loopholes in the bill (for example, the bill should also limit spending in leadership races).

Under the Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for Public Office Holders (the Public Office Holders Code -- which covers Cabinet ministers, parliamentary secretaries, ministerial staff, and some Cabinet appointees) secret donations are illegal, as are donations that create a conflict of interest (See rules set out below).

Donations were made before June 2002 to Paul Martin (when he was Finance Minister), John Manley and Sheila Copps, and those donations were not disclosed as required under the Code (following new rules released by the Prime Minister on June 11, 2002, Manley and Copps finally disclosed in July 2002 donations they had received in the past, but Martin has still not disclosed past donations).  Donations to the so-called "blind" trusts of all the candidates also remain secret.

"Secret donations are a recipe for corruption, and all the Liberal leadership candidates took secret donations in violation of ethics rules while they were Cabinet ministers," said Aaron Freeman, Board member of Democracy Watch and Chairperson of the nation-wide Money in Politics Coalition.  "As usual, the federal Ethics Counsellor has done nothing about these ethics rule violations."

 The rules in the Public Office Holders Code are as follows:

• section 20 prohibits all donations and gifts "that could influence public office holders in their judgment and performance of official duties and responsibilities";
• section 21 prohibits donations and gifts not "within the bounds of propriety, a normal expression of courtesy or protocol or . . . hospitality" or donations that would "bring suspicion on the public office holder's objectivity and impartiality" or would "compromise the integrity of the Government";
• section 22 requires ministers, when they "directly or indirectly" receive a donation of "$200 or more" to "notify the Ethics Counsellor and make a Public Declaration".