I | INTRODUCTION |
Paul
Martin, born in 1938, 21st prime minister of Canada and leader of the
Liberal Party, who was credited with turning around the Canadian economy as
finance minister under the government of Jean Chrétien. Martin became prime
minister upon Chrétien’s retirement in December 2003 and served until his party
lost power in January 2006.
Martin was born in Windsor, Ontario, to Nell
and Paul Martin, Sr. His father was a member of the Canadian Parliament,
representing Windsor, and later became a prominent federal Cabinet minister.
Martin spent part of his childhood years in Windsor, but received most of his
schooling in Ottawa, where his family spent the fall and winter months while
Parliament was in session. Because his father was French-speaking, Martin was
educated in French-language and bilingual schools and became fluently bilingual
in English and French. After taking an undergraduate degree in philosophy at the
University of Toronto, he studied law, but he chose a career in business rather
than law. Martin married Sheila Cowan, a friend of his sister, Mary Anne, and
daughter of his father’s law partner, in 1965. They have three sons.
II | BUSINESS CAREER |
Martin made his start in business as an
assistant to the chief executive officer of Power Corporation, a Québec firm
with large and varied interests. Martin quickly became a troubleshooter in Power
Corp., developing a reputation as a person who could solve difficult problems.
One of the firms he was asked to take on was Canada Steamship Lines (CSL), a
shipping company engaged in cargo hauling on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence
River. In 1981 the head of Power Corp. decided to sell CSL, and Martin found a
partner to join him in borrowing the money to buy it. Martin turned CSL into a
major international shipping company. Ultimately he acquired sole ownership of
the firm, expanded his business interests, and built a substantial personal
fortune.
III | INTEREST IN POLITICS |
Martin’s interest in politics was shaped by
his close relationship with his father, who was a Cabinet minister in Liberal
governments for nearly 30 years and who ran twice, both times unsuccessfully,
for the leadership of the Liberal Party. Martin worked for his father in both
leadership campaigns, which many commentators believe helped stimulate his own
ambition to be a leader. But throughout his business career his political role
was mainly that of a casual supporter of the Liberal Party. It was not until
1988 that he first ran for Parliament as a Liberal candidate in Montréal,
Québec, where he and his family had made their home. He was elected that year as
member of Parliament for the constituency of LaSalle-Émard, which he continues
to represent.
IV | THE 1990 LEADERSHIP CONVENTION |
When the Liberal Party called a leadership
convention in 1990, Martin decided to run. There were four other candidates, but
the campaign quickly became a contest between Martin and Jean Chrétien, a
popular French Canadian who had been a minister in Liberal governments from 1966
to 1984. Chrétien won with 2,622 votes while Martin placed second with 1,176.
The campaign created an enduring personal rivalry between the two men that
influenced the internal politics of the Liberal Party from that date on.
The rivalry involved more than competition for
leadership. There was also a significant difference between the two men over the
emotionally divisive issue of how best to deal with the separatist movement in
the province of Québec. Martin believed that the federal government could best
reduce support for separatism by making an accommodation with moderate,
nonseparatist, Québec nationalists who were committed to keeping Québec in
Canada but wanted recognition of Québec’s uniqueness as a predominantly
French-speaking province. Chrétien had been a leading figure for 15 years in the
fight against separatism and believed that all forms of Québec nationalism
should be resisted. Chrétien believed that even in its moderate form nationalism
posed a threat to the effectiveness of the federal government in promoting
national unity.
This issue played an important part in the
1990 leadership campaign. The campaign occurred at a time when the incumbent
Conservative federal government and nine of the ten provinces were trying to
secure ratification of the Meech Lake Accord. The accord was an agreement to
give the province of Québec special constitutional recognition as the home of
the French language and culture in Canada. Martin supported the Meech Lake
Accord, while Chrétien opposed it.
On the day of the balloting at the Liberal
Party Convention, it was learned that the accord had failed ratification. Many
nationalists who were supporters of the Liberal Party felt Chrétien had
contributed to its defeat. When Chrétien’s victory was announced, two of the
nationalists, who were members of Parliament, resigned from the Liberal Party.
Soon afterward they joined a former Conservative minister in forming a new
separatist party—the Bloc Québécois—to speak for the separatist movement in the
federal Parliament.
Martin remained firmly opposed to this
extremist expression of nationalism, but a personal strain developed in his
relationship with Chrétien due to critical comments he made during the campaign
about Chrétien’s position. Martin believed Chrétien simply did not understand
modern Québec and said so publicly. Chrétien particularly resented this
criticism because he prided himself on his roots in French-speaking Québec. The
criticism seemed to resonate with the frequent assertion by nationalists that
Chrétien had “sold out” his fellow French Canadians.
V | MINISTER OF FINANCE |
Despite their difficult relations Martin gave
his full public support to Chrétien’s leadership, while Chrétien appointed him
as one of the party’s leading spokespersons in Parliament and made him cochair
of the group that drafted the Liberal platform for the next election. In 1993
the Liberal Party defeated the Conservatives. Chrétien became prime minister and
appointed Martin to the senior Cabinet position of minister of finance.
In this role Martin had to deal with the
biggest problem faced by the new administration. For two decades the government
had been running budgetary deficits, which had driven up the size of the public
debt so that interest payments were absorbing an ever-larger portion of the
government’s revenues. This had narrowed the government’s ability to advance new
policies and contributed to a weakening of investor confidence in the Canadian
economy.
In his first budget in 1994, Martin tried to
solve the problem through moderate adjustments. When this failed he decided the
only solution was to make drastic spending cuts that would include even the most
politically popular programs. He won the support of the prime minister for this
plan, which helped ensure that other members of the Cabinet would go along with
it, and introduced the cuts in his second budget in 1995. The plan had its
intended result. In his budget in 1997 Martin delivered the first in a series of
annual surpluses that enabled the government to begin paying down its debt,
reduce taxes, and restore some of the spending cuts it had made. The wider
effect of this achievement was to enable Canada to enter upon a period of
sustained economic growth. During Martin’s remaining six years as finance
minister, the Canadian economy outperformed those of the other leading
industrialized countries.
VI | CONFLICT WITH THE PRIME MINISTER |
Martin’s success could not have been achieved
without the support he received from Jean Chrétien. Yet relations between the
two men continued to deteriorate. In part this was because of their continuing
disagreement about how best to deal with the separatist challenge in Québec. In
the 1993 election, a majority of Québec seats had gone to the Bloc Québécois,
and in 1994 the provincial separatist party, the Parti Québécois, won election
on a platform promising to hold a referendum that would ask voters to approve
separation. When the referendum was held in 1995, the separatist option won the
support of 49.4 percent of those who voted, among them a majority of the voters
whose first language was French. Martin believed that this result reflected the
failure of the “hardline” Chrétien approach toward all forms of Québec
nationalism.
In internal government policy discussions he
continued to challenge the prime minister’s position on an issue that Chrétien
regarded as the defining issue of his political career. Another reason for their
estrangement was that Martin’s success had brought him a personal prominence
rivaling that of Chrétien. Admirers in the Liberal Party and journalists began
to speculate about Martin as a future prime minister, and Martin made no attempt
to conceal his ambition to succeed Chrétien. As a result Chrétien and his
supporters in the party began to see Martin as a potential threat to Chrétien’s
leadership.
After the Liberal Party won a second election
under Chrétien in 1997, in anticipation that the prime minister might soon
retire, supporters of Martin began to build an organization that could be
mobilized for a leadership campaign. This caused further strain in the
relationship, particularly since there was growing evidence that Martin had
become more popular than Chrétien, both with voters and with a growing number of
party members, including a significant group in the parliamentary caucus. By
1998 the party was clearly dividing between pro-Martin and pro-Chrétien
factions.
In the fall of 2000 the Liberals won a third
successive election. After the election the prime minister said it would be his
last, but he did not say when he would retire. This created a situation of
increasing tension within the party caucus because there was now a large block
of members of Parliament who felt Chrétien’s leadership had become a problem for
the party. One reason was the growing feeling that Chrétien did not appear to
have a clear sense of where he wanted to lead the government. Another was an
accumulation of controversies about mismanagement of government programs and
allegations of ethical misconduct, which Chrétien dealt with dismissively,
refusing to acknowledge that they were significant. A third reason was that many
members of the Liberal caucus felt Chrétien had centralized power within the
staff of his own office at their expense. They believed he was increasingly
disdainful of their views and had marginalized their role in his
administration.
By early 2002, as discontent continued to
grow within the caucus, Chrétien blamed Martin’s supporters. Although he had
told ministers they could begin to organize for a change of leadership, at a
Cabinet meeting in May he ordered them to shut down their campaigns in a move
that was interpreted as a direct attack on Martin. This led to a public break
between the two men, and in June Martin was forced out of the Cabinet.
VII | LIBERAL PARTY LEADER AND PRIME MINISTER |
In forcing Martin from the Cabinet, Chrétien
had actually given him an advantage over other ministers who wanted to run for
leadership of the Liberal Party because it left Martin free to conduct a
campaign. For more than a year all across the country Martin’s organization had
been building support in constituency associations that would elect delegates to
a convention. Martin was now free to pursue this strategy without challenge. By
August 2002 it was apparent that Martin had control of a majority of these
associations.
Faced with the likelihood that this support
for Martin might now be turned directly against him, Chrétien finally asked the
party executive to call a convention for 2003. Other candidates quickly
discovered that Martin’s organization had built an insurmountable lead and
withdrew. Only one candidate persisted to the end, but when the balloting
occurred in November 2003, Martin was elected with more than 90 percent of the
vote. On December 12, 2003, Martin became prime minister.
Martin brought a very different style of
leadership to the party and government. While Chrétien was a managerial leader
with no broad program of long-term policy innovations to achieve, Martin had
always been intensely interested in policy. He steeped himself in the nuances of
policy across a broad range of issues and sought to relate them to an underlying
and defining set of national values. Martin believed it was his role as leader
to set long-term policy objectives for the country and organize the agenda of
government to pursue them.
In summarizing this aspect of the
differences between Martin and Jean Chrétien, one of Martin’s advisers described
his leadership style as “intellectual” and Chrétien’s as “intuitive.” Martin was
also different from Chrétien in his approach to conflict. Chrétien had always
described himself as a “fighter” who refused to back down in the face of
adversaries. He believed that he should take a stand and defend it. Martin, on
the other hand, was a leader willing to engage in discussion with those who held
opposing views and to accept their ideas if he found them convincing. If he
believed he had been wrong about a position, he was prepared to admit his
mistake, apologize for it, and accept the political consequences.
A third difference lay in their approach to
relations with members of the party caucus. Whereas Chrétien centralized power
in his office and insisted on the primacy of loyalty to the leader, Martin
believed members of Parliament who are not in the Cabinet should be given
greater independence and increased responsibility. This view reflected his
belief that the best decisions come from vigorous debate in which all of the
participants, regardless of their positions, are treated as equals.
VIII | MARTIN’S GOVERNMENT |
When Martin came to office, his political
foes in the opposition parties wanted to stress the continuity of his
administration with that of Chrétien. The purpose was to hold it accountable for
the Chrétien government’s record, particularly its record on ethical issues. In
contrast, Martin was determined to identify his administration as a new
government. Both were trying to appeal to what polling firms had identified as a
widespread public desire for change.
To put a new face on the government, Martin
appointed 22 new ministers, retaining only 15 from the Chrétien Cabinet. He
reorganized government departments and the administrative structure of the Privy
Council Office (the PCO), which is the central agency governing the federal
bureaucracy, to emphasize a new set of policy directions. In addition, he
invested the second tier of the executive branch that sits in
Parliament—parliamentary secretaries—with enhanced authority and gave its
members special responsibilities for carrying out reforms to which he had
committed himself during his leadership campaign.
Among the priorities Martin announced when
he first met with Parliament were plans to rebuild the infrastructure of
Canadian cities, improve conditions for Canada’s aboriginal peoples, reform
Parliament to give its members more voice in the decisions of government, and
appoint an independent ethics commissioner to build public confidence in the
integrity of government.
Among the more significant changes in
direction under Martin’s leadership was his approach to Québec nationalism. He
signaled his desire to find an accommodation with moderate nationalists by
appointing as his chief political lieutenant in Québec one of the Liberals who
had left the party in 1990.
The difference in Martin’s style of
leadership was reflected, as well, in his attempt to improve relations with the
United States. He created a new branch in the Privy Council Office and appointed
a parliamentary secretary to deal exclusively with Canada-U.S. relations. Martin
did not disagree with the substance of the Chrétien government’s policy toward
the United States. Rather, he felt that the resolution of disagreements between
the two countries had been made more difficult by a lack of effective management
and unnecessary problems in communication with the American government. His
general posture in foreign policy was to pursue a multilateral approach to
international conflicts, while working closely with the United States in defense
of North American security and in pursuit of shared economic interests.
IX | CONTINUING ETHICAL ISSUES |
Opposition parties discounted Martin’s
innovations, arguing that he had been the most important minister in the
Chrétien government until 2002 and, therefore, had to bear full responsibility
for its failings. They found a common focus for their criticism in questions
about ethical issues. Of these, the most serious were raised by the auditor
general, Sheila Fraser, an independent official responsible to Parliament for
conducting audits of government spending.
Following the 1995 referendum in Québec, the
Chrétien government had established a program to sponsor cultural and sporting
events in that province as a means to improve the federal government’s image
among Québecois. As early as 2001, serious problems had been found in the
management of this program, and the auditor general had been asked to make a
complete investigation. In February 2004, the auditor general reported that $100
million of the $250 million spent on the program had been improperly authorized
or accounted for and that significant portions had been diverted into the hands
of advertising companies with close ties to the Liberal Party. Fraser described
the handling of the sponsorship program as “shocking” and called for a criminal
investigation.
On the day the auditor general’s report was
made public, the Martin government moved to distance itself from the developing
scandal. It announced the establishment of an independent judicial inquiry,
appointment of a special counsel to take legal action to recover improperly
diverted funds, and a complete review of the government’s system for maintaining
financial accountability to prevent a recurrence of the problem.
But Martin himself came under direct attack
from the opposition parties. They argued that as finance minister in the
Chrétien government he must have known what was happening in the sponsorship
program. Martin denied any personal knowledge of how the program had been
managed, saying that he been excluded from participation in all political
decisions about Québec. He promised to ensure full public exposure of all the
facts, find out who had been responsible, and ensure that they were punished. To
back up his statements, he fired a number of senior government officials who
appeared to have been involved in the sponsorship program—all of them people who
had been close to Chrétien.
There were two consequences from this
episode. First, relations between Martin and Chrétien’s supporters in the party
were further embittered, weakening party organization. Second, while newspaper
editorials and columnists generally praised Martin’s direct and open approach,
opposition party criticism succeeded in undermining Martin’s attempt to present
himself as an agent of change. The harm that had been done was immediately
apparent when Martin called an election for June 28, 2004.
X | THE 2004 ELECTION |
Until the sponsorship scandal broke, the
Liberal Party had held such a commanding lead in public opinion polls that it
was expected to win the next election with a substantially larger majority. But
the scandal led to a sharp drop in Liberal support. For the first time since
1988, the Liberals faced a strong opposition party that could effectively
challenge its hold on power.
A significant factor in the Liberal victory
in 1993 had been the collapse of the governing Progressive Conservative party
and the growth of rival regionally based parties in Québec (the Bloc Québécois)
and western Canada (the Reform Party). While the Bloc’s purpose was solely to
pursue separatism for Québec, the Reform party sought to become a national party
that could appeal for the support of conservative voters across the country.
Through the 1990s efforts to unite the Progressive Conservatives and Reformers
in a new Conservative Party failed, dividing the conservative electorate in the
nine predominantly English-speaking provinces and contributing to the success of
the Liberals in the elections of 1997 and 2000.
In the fall of 2003, however, the two
right-wing rivals united to form a new single national Conservative Party. By
2004, under the leadership of Stephen Harper, this new party provided a credible
alternative to the Liberals in the English-speaking provinces and became the
official opposition party in the Canadian Parliament.
By mid-campaign Martin’s Liberals were
trailing Harper’s Conservatives in the polls. But the Conservatives ran into
difficulty, largely brought on by their own mistakes and by an effective Liberal
Party advertising campaign that implied the Conservatives were too far to the
right on some issues. As a result, the Liberals won 135 seats, 36 more than the
Conservatives. This gave Martin enough seats to form a government, but one
without an overall majority in Parliament.
XI | DEFEAT |
The victory did not stem the tide of
criticism for Martin’s government, however. Stephen Harper led the attack,
charging the Liberal Party with corruption and calling for new elections. The
charges centered on the sponsorship financial scandal involving alleged
kickbacks and money laundering by members of the Liberal Party government under
Jean Chrétien. The opposition finally forced a confidence vote on Martin’s
government in May 2005. Martin skillfully lobbied for support leading up to the
vote and his government narrowly won, but only after the House of Commons
Speaker Peter Milliken cast the tiebreaking vote—an unprecedented event in
Canadian history.
Further details about the financial scandal
emerged in a government report released in October. A month later another
confidence vote was held, and Martin’s government lost, 171-133. Martin
immediately announced that new parliamentary elections would take place in late
January 2006. In the elections Harper’s Conservatives won 124 seats while the
Liberals captured just 103, ending 12 years of Liberal Party rule in Canada.
Martin subsequently resigned as party leader, although he retained his seat in
Parliament, and Harper became the country’s new prime minister.
XII | ASSESSMENT |
Martin’s achievements during his career in
government represent an important political legacy for Canada. As one of
Canada’s most successful finance ministers, Martin ended nearly two decades of
deficits, brought the national debt under control, and created a fiscal
environment that left Canada well positioned to maintain long-term economic
growth.
Martin came to the office of prime minister
with an ambitious agenda of policy innovations intended to lead his party and
Canada into a new era of progressive reform. But the financial scandals
surrounding the 2004 election and the 2005 confidence votes left him little room
to exercise independence in policymaking and eventually toppled his government
before it could achieve its ambitious goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment