Humans are social animals. We are fascinated by personal stories, interpersonal relations, examinations of human behaviour. We are captivated by everything from salacious gossip to scientific studies into the human condition.

The Jaffer-Guergis scandal has many Canadians paying close attention to the goings-on in our nation’s capital. We are intrigued because of the personal in this story. Drunk driving, cocaine possession, shady business dealings with shady individuals, meltdowns at airports, suspicious mortgages; all wrapped up in poor judgment, perhaps a sense of entitlement, and potentially an abuse of power.

I recently read in The Mark (an online publication for which I have written) that Jaffer-Guergis is a distraction and that we “would be better served if we focused less on interpersonal affairs and more on the affairs of the state.”

I appreciate what the writer is saying and indeed I agree with many of his conclusions as I too want more profound civic engagement. But we shouldn’t treat the Jaffer-Guergis story as a mere diversion.

First, Jaffer-Guergis is about accountability. What does the Harper government know and why the secrecy? We may also want to have a broader discussion on the roles of Ministers in Harper’s cabinet, the caliber and moral fibre of those who are attracted to run for the Conservative Party, and the role of women in this Conservative government (others such as Ambrose, who picks up Guergis’ junior portfolio, and Raitt come readily to mind).

Second, this is about power and the conduct of an elected official. Guergis represents the people of Simcoe-Grey as a Member of Parliament and she represented Canadians as a Minister of the Crown. Did she abuse her position? We won’t know the details until the allegations against her are made public (rumours are trickling out, but until they are proven they remain rumours).

But in addition to these questions, Canadians are interested because we are held rapt by human actions. Personal travails and trials, scandals and triumphs, we understand these things. We have all exercised poor judgment or suffered regrets. I’m certainly not excusing the actions of Jaffer or Guergis, but I propose that we comprehend the humanity behind their individual failings.

In 1969, three eminent personalities were asked to define the Man of the Decade for the 1960s. Broadcaster Alistair Cooke chose John F. Kennedy, writer Mary McCarthy picked Ho Chi Minh, and anthropologist Desmond Morris championed John Lennon. Ho and JFK were most likely chosen because they both left an indelible mark on geopolitics. Lennon was a fascinating choice because Lennon was judged on the myriad facets of his character, on his raw humanity.

That is, people watched him (and the Beatles) help define a decade in terms of music, culture and fashion; they heard and read candid interviews where, especially after the death of manager Brian Epstein, Lennon was far more frank than today’s PR-managed and scripted stars; they heard his political views, his views on protest; they saw his penis (not only on the cover of Two Virgins but also in one of Yoko’s films where for 25 minutes one sees Lennon achieve a semi-erection in slow motion); they consumed his personal art, his humorous writings and plays, and filmmaking. While Lennon certainly had secrets, his life was at times so guileless, so frequently the centre of conversation and controversy, that people felt they knew him. And I would submit that Lennon’s humanity – which when stripped from his life of wealth and fame was ordinary in its fears, joys, neuroses, prejudices and loves — made him a comprehensible, three-dimensional personality.

I don’t think the Jaffer-Guergis scandal detracts one iota from the gravity of the Afghan detainee debacle, from the Harper government’s failure to provide Canadians’ access to information despite his supposed dedication to transparency, or from this government’s myriad missteps, muck-ups and misdeeds. Indeed, because the Jaffer-Guergis scandal is easier to follow compared to complex, labyrinthine policy issues, it’s possible that more Canadians are closely observing the actions and behaviour of this government.

It’s false and demeaning to suggest that we can keep but one issue in our heads at a time. We can follow Jaffer-Guergis without forgetting Harper’s preference to prorogue when the going gets tough.

This is not a popular government with about 70 per cent of Canadians supporting other parties. If Jaffer-Guergis sheds light on how Harper and co trade in secrecy and denial, if it lifts the veil on the secretive and contemptible lot we have in government, then this issue of personal scandal has served a much greater purpose: it is engaging citizens in the affairs of the state.

Eric Mang

Eric Mang

Eric Mang served as a political aide in the Harris government in Ontario and the Campbell government in British Columbia. His politics have since shifted left. He works full-time in health policy, part-time...