Inquiry must be called to get answers on sand mine scandal

Winnipeg Free Press

23-05-2025

Opinion
It's pretty clear by now that an inquiry should be called into the Sio Silica scandal.
Ethics Commissioner Jeffrey Schnoor released his long-awaited report into the matter this week. He found that former premier Heather Stefanson, then deputy premier Cliff Cullen and then economic development minister Jeff Wharton, violated the province's Conflict of Interest Act by attempting to approve a licence for a controversial silica sand mining project after their government was defeated in the Oct. 3, 2023 provincial election.
All three ministers pushed to have a Class 2 licence under the Environment Act approved for Sio Silica, days before the new NDP government was sworn into office.
MIKE DEAL / FREE PRESS FILES
Ethics Commissioner Jeffrey Schnoor found that former premier Heather Stefanson, then deputy premier Cliff Cullen and then economic development minister Jeff Wharton, violated the province's Conflict of Interest Act.
They did so even though they knew, or ought to have known, that it violated the 'caretaker convention,' a longstanding constitutional principle in Canada that prohibits governments from making major policy decisions once a general election is called (unless it's related to an urgent matter of public importance).
'The efforts to have the project licence approved by Ms. Stefanson, Mr. Cullen and Mr. Wharton were taken despite their knowledge that voters had rejected the former government and had placed their trust in a new government,' Schnoor wrote in his report. 'All three knew the requirements of the caretaker convention and both Mr. Cullen and Mr. Wharton had been given specific warnings that approving the project licence during the transition period would breach the convention.'
They never did get the project approved. But they tried every which way to manipulate the system to get the job done.
That included attempting to invoke a never-before-used section of the Environment Act, which allows the environment minister to approve a Class 2 licence, something normally handled by a senior public servant, in this case the director of the Environmental Approvals Branch.
Then-environment minister Kevin Klein and acting minister at the time Rochelle Squires were asked by Wharton following the election to approve the licence. Both refused.
'The exercise of power in a matter of great controversy and with long-term implications, even if well motivated, was improper within the meaning of the act and calls for significant denunciation,' wrote Schnoor.
There are good reasons why cabinet ministers should not make major policy decisions during elections, especially after they are defeated at the polls. They no longer have the mandate of the people to act. Attempting to do so is an affront to democracy.
Schnoor recommended all three minsters should be fined (something the legislative assembly must vote on). Wharton has apologized for his actions (he initially denied any wrongdoing) and he was stripped of his critic role by Progressive Conservative Leader Obby Khan. But he's still in caucus.
Stefanson, though, has been defiant. She claims she did nothing wrong, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It's further evidence that she was never fit to be premier.
'None of the decisions I took in the period before the new NDP government was sworn in were made for any purpose other than to further and protect the public interest.' Stefanson said in a written statement from her lawyer.
Her statement makes no sense. She was prohibited from making major policy decisions once an election was called, whether she believed it was in the public interest or not. She subverted democracy and is refusing to take responsibility for her role in this scandal.
This matter should not end here. Manitobans deserve to know what motivated Stefanson, Cullen and Wharton to try to push this licence through.
Schnoor said he found no evidence the ministers in question would have benefited personally from the project. But he had limited ability to delve further into what the motivating factors were.
That is why a commission of inquiry under the Evidence Act should be called. An inquiry, headed by an independent commissioner, would have broad investigative powers, including the ability to gather necessary evidence and compel witness testimony in public hearings.
Who stood to benefit from this project? Why was there such an urgent push to have it approved after the Tories lost the election?
Wednesdays
A weekly look towards a post-pandemic future.
Manitobans deserve answers to those questions. And those involved should be held accountable for their actions.
More importantly, an inquiry is necessary to explore options to try to prevent this from happening in the future.
This isn't just about a few cabinet ministers trying to do an end-run around the law. It's about preserving and protecting our democratic institutions.
Premier Wab Kinew should call an inquiry to get to the bottom of this mess.
[e-mail]
Tom BrodbeckColumnist
Tom Brodbeck is a columnist with the Free Press and has over 30 years experience in print media. He joined the Free Press in 2019. Born and raised in Montreal, Tom graduated from the University of Manitoba in 1993 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and commerce. Read more about Tom.
Tom provides commentary and analysis on political and related issues at the municipal, provincial and federal level. His columns are built on research and coverage of local events. The Free Press's editing team reviews Tom's columns before they are posted online or published in print – part of the Free Press's tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press's history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.
Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber.
Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.