Canada would seem to have some pretty focused and clear criminal laws against influence peddling. Officials are not permitted to use their position to gain, or attempt to gain, any benefit or anything of value for themselves, their families or friends. The definition of official is very inclusive.
Violations of the law are reported relatively infrequently. One presumes case law defines necessary proofs, but it seems like a very high standard.
Does the US have similar laws? The Canadian lobbying system is less influential than in the US. Are these laws successful there, or merely honoured in the breach? Do these laws truly deter politicians in any country from shady conduct? Are our politicians more honest and service minded than typically credited?
Part of it is that Canada tends to avoid the kind of razor-thin majorities that the US seems to get stuck with on a regular basis, so we’re less likely to have one or two members of Parliament in a position to completely block legislation. So there’s less of a point to bribing them, since you’d have to bribe a lot more of them to stop any particular bill.
Even in a minority government situation like we have now, with this breakdown of seats:
| Liberal |
159 |
| Conservative |
119 |
| Bloc Québécois |
32 |
| New Democratic |
25 |
| Green |
2 |
| Independent |
1 |
…the ruling Liberal Party only needs 11 more votes to pass legislation, and the NDP with 25 votes is supporting them. So you’d have to bribe the equivalent of more than half the current NDP caucus to derail legislation.
I concede your point at the national level, where concerns for conflict of interest may have more to do with corporate governance, such as actions regarding Rio Tinto, cleared by the Ethics Commissioner.
At the municipal level, such numerical arguments likely do not apply. At the provincial level, Ford’s actions against French imply that these concerns are taken seriously. (If my recall of the reported facts is correct).
We do have laws against out and out bribes, although those laws have been severely weakened by the courts. Most of the influence peddling in the US comes in the form of campaign contributions.
Based on my very brief look at Canada’s campaign finance system it seems that the majority of campaign spending comes from public subsidies, while in the US, campaigns are almost exclusively privately funded. As with Canada there are limits to how much an individual can contribute to a single candidate, but there are loopholes that you drive a truck filled with hundred dollar bills through.
This is true and significant. But in the rare cases in Canada that come to light with regard to campaign spending, the dollar amounts are shockingly modest and measured in half-pieces of silver.