{"id":42964,"date":"2023-04-14T10:32:10","date_gmt":"2023-04-14T14:32:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thehub.ca\/?p=42964"},"modified":"2023-05-01T14:08:49","modified_gmt":"2023-05-01T18:08:49","slug":"howard-anglin-the-trudeau-foundation-deserves-to-be-saved-from-itself","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thehub.ca\/2023-04-14\/howard-anglin-the-trudeau-foundation-deserves-to-be-saved-from-itself\/","title":{"rendered":"Howard Anglin: The Trudeau Foundation deserves to be saved from itself"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
I want to say a good word about the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation. Maybe it\u2019s my previously-confesse<\/a>d contrarianism, maybe it\u2019s a hitherto undiagnosed masochistic streak, but when I see the sort of pile-on that we\u2019ve witnessed over the last few days, my instinct is to try to find some saving grace and salvage something from the wreckage. In this case, it isn\u2019t easy, but I\u2019ll try.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But first the bad (and buckle up, there\u2019s a lot). As Andrew Coyne put it<\/a>, for much of its existence the Trudeau Foundation \u201cappears to have been run like a cross between a college housepainting service and a Panamanian shell company\u201d\u2014an assessment that does a disservice to both college housepainters and Panamanian accountants. He\u2019s right, and I won\u2019t defend it. I\u2019m not that <\/em>contrarian or masochistic. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nor am I interested in defending the inexplicable greed and gullibility that has been damningly revealed<\/a> by Bob Fife and Steven Chase in the Globe and Mail<\/em>. What would possess the foundation\u2019s board to accept donations from a transparent front for the Chinese Communist Party is beyond me, and beyond my sympathy. It\u2019s not like a foundation sitting on a $125 million plus taxpayer endowment needed the money.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So what is left to defend? Two things, I think. <\/p>\n\n\n\n First, the foundation\u2019s work, which was the target of a drive-by hit<\/a> from the usually astute Brian Lilley in the Sun<\/em> earlier this week. Lilley opened by asking \u201c[i]f the Trudeau Foundation ceased to exist, would Canadians notice?\u201d It\u2019s a silly question that typifies an attitude that is unfortunately common in politics: if something doesn\u2019t affect you and your life, it can\u2019t have much value. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Lilley notes that the Trudeau Foundation was originally set up to create a program similar to the British Rhodes Scholarship program, but \u201cafter 21 years\u201d he\u2019s \u201cnot sure they can claim success on that front.\u201d I don\u2019t know what he\u2019s basing this judgement on, but it sounds to me like he has too lofty an opinion of Rhodes scholars and too low an opinion of Trudeau scholars. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I can only speak from experience (which includes meeting quite a few scholars from both programs in Canada and in Oxford), but on balance, the Trudeau scholars stack up well. If a lot of what they have produced is \u201cmuch of … the same banal material academics produce elsewhere\u201d that says more about the state of academia than the foundation\u2019s selection process. And I can assure you, the work<\/a> of Rhodes scholars is no more inspiring<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Second, and this may seem like a small thing, I want to praise the decisive action by the foundation\u2019s executive and (most of) its board. When was the last time anyone in Canadian public life took responsibility for anything the way they did, resigning en masse<\/em>? Faced with similar allegations of interference in their own party, has a single Liberal cabinet minister demurred, let alone departed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Again, my information is anecdotal, but friends I trust have told me that the now-former president and CEO, Pascale Fournier, was doing an excellent job stewarding the selection and development of the program\u2019s scholars. Like many who resigned, she was not in charge when the board decided to accept the Chinese tea money, and from what has been reported<\/a>, her team went to grimly comical extremes to try to give it back. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I\u2019m not saying everyone who resigned is blameless, but as I see it most of the foundation\u2019s past incompetence, including accepting the dodgy donation, can\u2019t be reasonably pinned on the management that resigned. And yet they still resigned. I don\u2019t want to make it out to be a more heroic act than it was, but it was refreshing to see someone step up and show real accountability. So, good for them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I don\u2019t understand is why, of all the people to keep on as chairman<\/a> of the three-member board that remains to keep the foundation\u2019s work going and to prepare it for whatever comes next, they would choose Edward Johnson, who is neck deep in the foundation\u2019s, shall we say, complicated<\/em> history. Why is one of the men responsible for the foundation\u2019s problem\u2014he is a founding member and was a director when the Foundation accepted the donation\u2014now in charge when his fellow board members, many of whom weren\u2019t, have resigned?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Johnson is an old Trudeau family insider, having served as Pierre\u2019s executive assistant from 1980 to 1984. He is also the senior vice-president and general counsel of Power Corporation, which in 1978 founded the Canada China Business Council to facilitate trade with recently-opened Red China. This may look suspicious, but I assure you it\u2019s not. It\u2019s worse: this is how the Canadian Establishment works when it\u2019s not<\/em> being suspicious. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Another of the remaining board members is curious for another reason, but one that points to the same problem. According to his corporate biography<\/a>, Peter Sahlas is a director by virtue of being \u201celected by the members representing the Estate of the Late Right Honourable Pierre Elliott Trudeau.\u201d (The other director nominated by the Trudeau estate, who did resign, was the late prime minister\u2019s daughter, Sarah Coyne). <\/p>\n\n\n\n Both men highlight the Trudeau Foundation\u2019s fundamental flaw, and the clue is in the name. No matter how much good work it did in providing doctoral scholarships, fellowships, and academic mentoring, the foundation could never shake the perception that it was the private plaything of the Trudeau family and their extended family in the Liberal Party because, at least in part, it was. If you want proof, look at the latest 2021-2022 Annual Report<\/a>, where all three of Trudeau\u2019s living children were still listed as members or directors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n