I am happy to report that the Canadian government scandal (which my local paper previously and repeatedly failed to report) has finally made it into the Philadelphia Inquirer:

OTTAWA, Canada - Prime Minister Paul Martin scrambled yesterday to prevent the fall of his government amid a kickback scandal in his Liberal Party, as a new poll showed the opposition Conservatives would easily win elections if held today.

Martin reiterated that he had nothing to do with the ethics case, in which party members are accused of having taken kickbacks from ad agencies hired to promote federalism in the French-speaking province of Quebec.

"Not only do I have the moral authority, I have the moral responsibility" to keep the government afloat until the full inquiry concludes in the fall, Martin said. "Canadians are entitled to ask someone to step forward, and I'm the prime minister of this country. I can assure you that anyone who has been implicated is going to be punished."

How long Martin could maintain his post was uncertain, and the halls of Parliament were rife with speculation on whether elections were around the corner.

The separatist Bloc Quebecois could introduce a confidence motion by Thursday, though the more powerful Conservative Party was hedging, knowing most Canadians are not keen for new elections.

"There is a depth of anger there. The Liberal Party is in deep, deep trouble," said Richard Simeon, professor of political science at the University of Toronto.

A poll published yesterday by the Toronto Star indicated that only 25 percent of those questioned last week would vote for the Liberals if elections were held today. The Conservatives were backed by 36 percent, up 10 points from a survey in February.

I'm delighted, of course. News is news, and it should be reported when it is known. Otherwise, we have two classes of people: elitists who know, and the ordinary uninformed who don't. It strikes me as bordering on fraud when those entrusted to do the reporting fail to do so even when they know what's going on.

That said, I recognize that there are two sides to the Canadian publication ban. Nick Packwood warns against blanket condemnation of the ban by people who don't understand the facts:

Unless and until you would prefer another standard of guilt I suggest you give that thought some consideration before pointing fingers about the imminent collapse of democracy in this country. Justice Gomery is no fan of the Liberal government or its last incarnation under Jean Chretien. He is doing his job and in so doing he is defending our democracy.

UPDATE: Canadian blogger Colby Cosh has lots more (on the steering of public money into a "swamp of federo-separatist crooks, or separo-federalist ones"), and concludes by asking,

Do the French have a word for the situation in which a monstrous excuse for criminal conduct doesn't even turn out to be factually correct? I'm pretty sure English doesn't.