Trust is maintained by Transparency

Globe editorial: The SNC-Lavalin saga won’t end until the whole story comes out
The Globe and Mail March 22, 2019

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-globe-editorial-the-snc-lavalin-saga-wont-end-until-the-whole-story/?utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_source=Globe%20Opinion&utm_type=text&utm_content=GlobeOpinion&utm_campaign=2019-3-23_17&cu_id=duF4Be0wsCfC2EFDKe%2BaydZcn7xjnYRB 

Interesting headline and conclusion for the editors of the Globe and Mail.

The machinations, hypotheses etc. are obviously interesting as they are selling ink and air time.  My particular interest, however, lies in transparency in the carrying on business of the people’s government.  Alas that has never been how our governments have acted.

Suppose a firm, e.g. SNC Lavalin, came forward in pursuit of a ruling for a Delayed Prosecution Agreement.  As Kim Campbell so ably pointed out, prosecution was going to happen even with a DPA, what the firm was pursuing was merely a matter of timing. 

What if the opening discussion had been held in the public eye?  What if the firm was asked to specify exactly which factors to its case it felt must be confidential?  What if the firm had to make a case for confidentiality for each factor separately?  What if the firm then had to make a case for confidentiality of the matter as a whole?

What if there was a government test for confidentiality required because the default procedure was to have everything done in public?  Exceptions might be made for only those factors not already in the public domain and not germane to the process of administration of justice which would do additional harm.

Had the government’s default position been to carry on its business in public, imagine the case in hand, namely SNC Lavalin and the DPA.   

What information and opinion would we have formed regarding all the characters in this story?

Would the Loyal Opposition would have been better able to carry out its duties as part of the public process? 

I think this case proves the point that we would be far better served where government business is by default carried on in public.

Indeed, the whole story would have come out as it unfolded, rather than through interpretations and misinterpretations after the fact and we would have a much more fulsome understanding of the issues considered in setting and carrying out policy. 

Michael Klein March 24, 2019