Marois' Hubby Makes Ethics Debate Toxic for PQ

Mr & Mrs Marois..' You've got some 'splainin' to do'

When the Liberals and the CAQ demanded that Pauline and her husband Claude Blanchet appear before a National Assembly committee to explain the possible 'deal' between him and the FTQ, one that was alluded to at the Charbonneau Commission, it was mostly seen as politicking and grandstanding, an effort to  humiliate the Premier while scoring some valuable political points.

" In a conversation on 20 April 2009, presented to the committee on January 21, the former president of the FTQ-Construction Jean Lavallée said that he felt it was time to talk about "our friends in PQ" to convince them not to support the idea of ​​a commission on the construction industry, then proposed by the defunct ADQ. 

Michel Arsenault then replied: "Well they are stuck , because we have a deal with Blanchet."  Link{fr}

Later on in testimony before the commission, Arsenault tried to backtrack, admitting that he thought about using pressure on Blanchet, but ultimately decided against it. Hmmm...
Making the story all the more plausible is the fact that the Union's Fond Solidarité fund made a dubious loan to Blanchet's company for some overvalued shares, a loan that was never repaid.

At any rate the incident was swept aside and half forgotten with the announcement of a provincial election, but re-surfaced with a vengeance yesterday.

With the publication of a poll showing the Liberals ahead of the PQ, it appears Marois hit the panic button and attempted to crudely shift the focus of the campaign from sovereignty and referendums, to that of ethics, which up to now, was a non-issue.

"Marois tried to get her campaign back on track Tuesday, questioning Liberal leader Philippe Couillard's ties to alleged fraudster Arthur Porter. The attack came as the latest CROP poll shows the PQ trailing the Liberals for the first time since the beginning of the election campaign.

During a news conference at a Verdun elementary school, Marois repeatedly alluded to a Le Devoir story that alleges Porter broke the law by forming a business partnership with Couillard in 2010. Porter, who was head of the McGill University Health Centre at the time, did not ask permission from the ministry of health and social services before founding a consulting firm with Couillard — a violation of provincial ethics laws.

The Liberal leader was not in provincial politics at the time, and hasn't been(sic) accused of doing anything illegal. But the PQ appears set on using his association with Porter — who is in a Panamanian prison awaiting extradition to Canada on bribery and money-laundering charges — to compare Couillard to the scandal-plagued Liberals of 2012.

"I find the Couillard's Liberals look an awful lot like Jean Charest's," Marois said, referring to the former Liberal premier. "I see Couillard had to clarify the situation (with Porter), so it worries me since he's the Liberal leader."

An investigation by The Gazette found that Porter and Couillard's consulting firm never got off the ground and was eventually dissolved." Link  

But Couillard wasn't having any of that, accusing Pauline of mudslinging and shooting back with a vicious threat of his own, one that really must have shaken Pauline quite a bit.

In a radio interview, Couillard warned Marois that if she raises questions about Liberal ethics, he will bring the issue of the Blanchet 'deal' to the table in the leaders debate on Thursday, a threat Marois would be wise to consider.

"If she wants to play in the mud, either directly or through an intermediary, that's not the kind of politics that I want to conduct. We're here to tell Quebecers how we want to govern Quebec over the next years. I would be very happy to have a debate on this level. If she wants to wade down in the mud I have about four or five questions, interesting points about the deal, among others. " Link{fr}

It's a bit strange that nobody in the media noticed that the PQ never mentioned the ethics issue before in this campaign, the issue was if you recall, the cornerstone of the PQs last election strategy.

Could it be that PQ strategists steered away from the ethics question up to now because the party was ahead in the polls and because they believed that the supposed Blanchet/FTQ  'deal' a toxic issue that any public discussion of ethics was bound to raise?

Pauline is actually more vulnerable to an ethics debate than Couillard, she clearly has more baggage.
Her loathsome husband has never really answered for his actions, at least not to the satisfaction of the public.

What evidence we do have today in the FTQ ' deal' file may not prove he's a crook, but it does show him to be an opportunist at the least, one who used his wife's political connections for personal gain.

I'll remind readers this isn't the first ethical question that has arisen over Blanchet. First was his cushy settlement that he wrung out of the government after being relieved of his duties at a government investment agency that he ran to the ground. Then there are questions about the swanky estate that he and Pauline owned, where the land was mysteriously re-zoned, ballooning the value.  Read: How estate was built on public, farm lands 

Mr. Marois attempted to silence the critics by suing the Gazette for defaming him, ultimately reaching the most asinine out-of-court settlement, one in which he tacitly admitted that the article was factual.
Read this hilarious translation of the settlement.

"The Gazette considers that it's article of September 22, 2007 on the subject didn't falsely represent the facts, but the Gazette recognizes that others could have falsely interpreted its article and that Madame Marois and Mr. Blanchet could have suffered a prejudice.

I wonder if Pauline ever considered the phrase that tells us that "People in Glass Houses, shouldn't throw stones" a modern take on the biblical passage that warns us "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone" and her  playing of the ethics card, a strategy that has every likelihood of backfiring.

I expect Marois will remain cloistered today, preparing her responses to these possible questions about her husband and the FTQ that Couillard has promised to deliver if an ethics debate is opened by Marois herself.

It's the kind of debate that cannot be won and brings to mind Richard Nixon's famous "I am not a crook" a speech that cemented most people's view that he was indeed a crook. Watch the speech

"On November 17, 1973, President Richard Nixon infamously denied any involvement in the Watergate scandal with his now timeless defence. 
Thing is, he was. Link

At any rate, it appears that up to now, the campaign couldn't go any worse for Marois, the return of the sovereignty and referendum debate a killer issue and now a possible ethics debate in the face of the unresolved issue of her husband's, and her implication in that now infamous 'deal' with the  FTQ.

For PQ boosters, it is evident that the campaign is off-kilter and yesterday, in a Journal de Montreal opinion piece, the wordy Mathieu Bock-Coté urged the PQ to get back to the wedge politics of the Charter of Values. The tried and true PQ politics of division and hate.

And so the campaign will hinge on which party manages to control the debate, be it the Charter of Values, or ethics or sovereignty and referendums.

If the PQ can't get the debate to focus on the Charter of Values, they are sunk.

So if I was a betting man, Pauline will steer clear of an ethics brawl in the leaders debate, hoping that Couillard sticks to his promise to leave Pauline alone over her husband.

Too bad.....