Harper didn’t know about the 'unusual gift' ?!

[ConsRconž]

by John Geddes on Wednesday, May 15, 2013 Macleans

Wright and Duffy: the contrast in styles is vivid, but what about the rules?


It is tempting to frame the news that Nigel Wright, the Prime Minister’s
chief of staff, took the extraordinary step of personally giving more
than $90,000 to Mike Duffy, the senator from (ostensibly) Prince Edward
Island, strictly in terms of the stark contrast between the two main
characters.

The story—broken over at CTV by Robert Fife—has Wright giving Duffy a
fat cheque to allow him to repay improperly claimed Senate housing
allowances. The gift-giver could hardly be a more guardedly low-profile
public office holder; the recipient is about the most outsized character
in the Upper Chamber.

If Duffy’s fame as a longtime TV news personality, before his Senate
appointment, was once a boon to the Conservatives, allowing him to serve
as a party fundraising draw, that same notoriety now makes this
unwelcome story that much bigger. And if Wright’s reticence was
previously seen as an exemplary attribute in a Harper-era political
aide, that same discretion might make him seem, in this new context, a
rather shadowy figure.


But there aren’t just fascinating political personas in play here. There
are rules. Specifically, The Conflict of Interest Code for Senators,
which stipulates clearly that senators may not accept any gift “that
could reasonably be considered to relate to the senator’s position.”
The sole, narrowly defined exception to that prohibition is for gifts
“received as a normal expression of courtesy or protocol, or within the
customary standards of hospitality.”


The code is a more technical framing device for the story. Wright’s gift
of money to Duffy obviously “relates to the senator’s position,” and
just as obviously doesn’t amount to “a normal expression of courtesy.”
So is Senate Ethics Officer Lyse Ricard looking into the matter? She
won’t say. In an email, Ricard’s office said she “cannot publicly
comment on the individual circumstances of senators,” and nothing much else.

The besieged Duffy is unlikely to offer up a satisfying explanation for
how he felt entitled to accept the gift. But might Wright feel obliged,
given his influential position, to explain himself? After all, he is the
most powerful political staffer in Ottawa, the key link between Prime
Minister Stephen Harper’s office and the senior staffs of his cabinet
ministers.

The PMO reportedly says that Wright was motivated by his personal
friendship with Duffy, and that Harper didn’t know about the unusual
gift. <<===========

Still, it seems unlikely the Prime Minister will be able to
distance himself too far from the actions of his top adviser on such a
significant issue of judgment, and one touching directly on an issue
Harper has often made his own — Senate reform.

Almost all Canadians know Duffy from his long run as a TV news
personality before Harper named him to the Senate. But Wright was a
Toronto investment executive before Harper recruited him in 2010, highly
regarded in his circles but unknown beyond them. Apart from appearing
before a parliamentary committee at the outset, he has almost never been
in the public eye, despite his lofty position in Ottawa.

There have been a few stories. Early this year, federal Ethics
Commission Ethics Mary Dawson found that Wright had not violated the
Conflict of Interest Act when he was lobbied, as reported by the
Canadian Press, by Barrick Gold Corp., whose founder, Peter Munk and his
son, Anthony Munk, are Wright’s close friends.

As well, Maclean’s reported last fall that Wright had been lobbied by
representatives of the Canadian venture capital sector, which he worked
in before taking his job with Harper and is expected to return to when
he exits politics. Wright said that lobbying didn’t involve the “private
interest” of his old company, Onex Corp., and so he had not violated any
conflict of interest rules.

If nothing more, Wright’s evident links to powerful and wealthy business
interests now add to the intrigue of his personal intervention in the
Duffy saga.

They make an unusual duo—offering plenty for opposition QP tacticians to
work with. But this shouldn’t be merely about Question Period fireworks
when the House resumes sitting after its break this week.

This should be a moment to seriously test the rules and probe the
assumptions that govern the actions of those lucky enough to be
appointed by the Prime Minister to high office.