(Quebec) The former Minister of Education Jean-François Roberge had been aware for a year of the conclusions of the devastating report of the Québec Ombudsman on the favoritism practiced within his ministry, when distributing grants to organizations .
He was informed of this in the fall of 2021, his cabinet confirmed on Friday, the day after the publication of the report’s conclusions.
On Thursday, the new Minister of Education, Bernard Drainville, indicated that a number of the Québec Ombudsman’s nine recommendations had been implemented, but only several months later, in April 2022. He added that other changes would occur in how to manage the grants, without saying which ones.
On Friday, the Québec Ombudsman specified that the investigation into the Ministry of Education had begun in February 2018, therefore under Liberal administration, and that it had continued until November 2021, under CAQ administration. The investigation was conducted following a request from a whistleblower, whose name does not appear anywhere.
The Ministry of Education was led by Liberal Sébastien Proulx, from 2016 to 2018, and by caquiste Jean-François Roberge, from 2018 to 2022.
At the end of this long investigation, the Québec Ombudsman revealed and denounced on Thursday a scheme put in place at the Ministry of Education to financially assist certain partner organizations of the Ministry to the detriment of other organizations. He essentially criticizes the Ministry of Education for having transformed a program of an administrative nature into a tool used to distribute political favours.
This is, according to the Québec Ombudsman, a “serious case of poor management” of a program whose annual budget reaches 60 million.
Far from distancing himself from his Liberal predecessor in this matter, Minister Roberge, who has since become responsible for the French language in particular, claims to have acted “like his predecessor” and “to have followed the protocol that was in place by awarding subsidies to organizations supporting students.
He even endorses the statement made Thursday by Mr. Proulx, saying that “if I had to do it again, I wouldn’t hesitate for a second, I would do it again”.
In an exchange of text messages with his cabinet, he also affirms that the Protector recommended in particular that this program “be more marked out, by standards”. He says he asked his officials to “prepare standards and put them in place”.
But he does not say, however, what standards he is referring to or when they were to be put in place, with what consequences on the relations between the cabinet and the civil servants, or even between the cabinet and the partner organizations. Nor does it mention to what extent the new standards were to exclude any form of favouritism.
Minister Roberge refused a request for an interview on Friday.
The Protector’s document is sparing of details, to the point where it is difficult to draw a complete picture of the situation and say who did what and when. Marc-André Dowd declined interview requests.
The conclusions of the investigation indicate that the minister’s office favored, without justification and often in defiance of the recommendations of officials, the payment of subsidies to certain non-profit organizations, such as the Breakfast Club of Canada, Allo Prof, the Cantine pour tous and the First Nations Adult Education Trust. The exhaustive list is not available.
Unfair practices and numerous irregularities have been observed in the granting of sums paid to these organizations, and this, repeatedly, writes the Protector.
“In several situations, organizations have truly benefited from preferential treatment”, he wrote, noting that “political authorities have encroached on the roles of the administrative apparatus to influence decisions on the granting of financial assistance “.
The “close relations” between the political staff and the heads of the organizations in question meant that decisions were made at the political level, whereas the study of files would normally have had to go through the administrative level.
The scheme went so far as to transform “recommendations to the Minister not to grant a subsidy” into “positive recommendations”.
Organizations have even received financial assistance from the government without ever having applied for it or presented a project.
Former Liberal minister Sébastien Proulx, who says he has no regrets in this case, criticizes the Protector for never having contacted him to hear his version of the facts.
The opposition parties remained unsatisfied and note the many gray areas in this affair.
On Friday, the leader of the Parti Québécois, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, felt that several questions remained unanswered. He asked the Protector to “provide clarification on the facts”.
“The protector must specify the facts and behaviors that he considers alarming,” he said in a telephone interview. Once all the facts are known, we can “evaluate whether it is embezzlement or a normal use of public funds”.
The day before, the interim leader of the official opposition, Marc Tanguay, also demanded that all the light be shed on this file.
Asked about this while on mission in Tunisia, Prime Minister François Legault dismissed the criticism, saying that what is at issue here “is not a system of patronage”.
He called for ministers to have leeway in this area, saying that the government was often criticized for leaving too much room for bureaucracy.
“We must leave room for judgment”, and be transparent, he argued.