Premier Scott Moe’s new beginning should begin with a throne speech addressing political donations, conflict of interest and third-party influence.
But is any governing party going to relinquish its entitlements? Well, history tells us that we shouldn’t be betting the throne speech even contains the words “disclosure,” “donations,” “conflict of interest” or even “ethics.”
Yes, many of these issues go back decades in Saskatchewan. And maybe a bit of the blame extends to the last NDP administration, which could have — and should have, if it was smarter — limited the size and sources of political donations.
But the last NDP government also didn’t do this, because the party benefitted from large, single-source union donations. Stupidly, it underestimated both the impact and the Sask. Party’s capacity to raise money from big, out-of-province donors wanting something in return.
Nevertheless, let us be clear: It is always up to the government of the day to identify problems and put forward a plan for ethical reforms. Seventeen years in power is ample time to figure out the right thing to do.
Alas, doing the right thing seems less important to this Sask. Party government with its annoying penchant of focussing only on what gets it votes.
Worse, its focus has far too often wandered to what is personally or collectively beneficial — which is where issues of influence and ethics matter.
This wasn’t just a couple of ethical shortcomings or conflict-of-interest fiascoes from a few Sask. Party members last term.
What exactly do we get out of this, other than the non-approved demolition of a building in the park? Why was there no automatic provincial auditor or ethics commissioner investigation?
While longstanding issues of conflict, ethics and perhaps influence applied by political donors go unresolved, new ones are popping up every year. Now some of them are even bleeding into municipal politics, as we saw in the recent elections.
Both the federal Conservatives and the Sask. Party deny anyone within their ranks had any knowledge or involvement. But RAH presented a screenshot from the canvassing app CIMS to Go (or C2G) showing both the Sask. Party and the Conservative Party as “live” selections. It “appears to circumvent both legal and ethical boundaries,” the group said in its complaint.
It should be evident to everyone that Advance Regina was little more than a front for conservative political/business interests and that the political denials are about as valid as Advance Regina’s claim it was “grassroots.”
Worse, the avenues for such influence peddling are getting more sophisticated, which makes this ethics review all that much more crucial.
As we are failing to address old conflict and influence issues, we are about to face artificial intelligence (AI) creating even more complex issues.
Any “new beginning” now begins with addressing all of this.
Sadly, it seems Moe and the Sask. Party prefer the old ways they’ve found beneficial.
Mandryk is the political columnist for the Regina Leader-Post and the Saskatoon StarPhoenix.
Our websites are your destination for up-to-the-minute Saskatchewan news, so make sure to bookmark thestarphoenix.com and leaderpost.com. For Regina Leader-Post newsletters click here; for Saskatoon StarPhoenix newsletters click here