Topic: Adscam/ Gomery Inquiry/ et al

[geo]

Fred...
Have you ever caught him in an out and out lie?

[Michael Dorosh]

Why do the people of Canada continue to reward the present reigning party with election after election when all these cold hard facts about lying, scamming,fraud and waste keep slapping them in the face?
   Why do people keep saying that even if the Conservatives did win the election that they would be just as bad when you haven't even given the Conservatives a chance since the 80's?

A lack of acceptable personality among Conservative candidates as well as a feeling that the conservatives are not truly a national party.

[kcdist]

By acceptable personality, you mean of course a leader who hails from either Ontario or Quebec.....

[Thucydides]

The "Martini" spin doctors (having advanced access to the report) have been able to spin the report placing the blame on Creitien and claiming that Martin was completley innocent.

Since he was both the President of the Quebec Caucus and the Minister of Finance during the period in question, this means either the "Martinis" were able to execute an excellent cover up and pin the blame on Creitien, which also weakens the internal rivals inside the Liberal Party, or that Martin is entirely clueless (how could the President of the Quebec Caucus and the Minister of Finance be unaware of such a large scale operation happening in areas of his jurisdiction?)

Either answer (and there really does not seem to be a third possibility) means that the man is unfit for office, and a political party which could raise such a person to high office is also unfit to govern.

Feel free to quote this opinion wherever you like.

[geo]

a majoor....
having worked in business finance, once he's reviewed the budget, the VP Finance susally does not go into the nitty gritty detail of all the transactions that have gone thru the account... he'll typicaly leave that to the indians to sort out, record & if something is wrong... to sing out.

It's been well documented that Martin and the Chrétien/Gagliano crowd did not get along together - there was plenty of acrimony. While finance minister, Martin kept some budget surplus numbers very close to the vest so that Chrétien & cronies did not get wind of all that extra money they could squander / spend for little value... you'll probably find that the Old guard were probably sworn to secrecy.

It's something like when Brian Mulroney when he retired..... Kim Campbell really didn't know what hit her. He ran the PC party into the ground and then claimed the country was in the best of shape when KC got the party nod.

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote from Geo,
having worked in business finance, once he's reviewed the budget, the VP Finance usually does not go into the nitty gritty detail of all the transactions that have gone thru the account... he'll typicaly leave that to the indians to sort out, record & if something is wrong... to sing out.

Well that maybe true, but the chance of said VP finance not only keeping his job but getting promoted on top of that would be considered ludicrous.....

[Michael Dorosh]

Quote from Geo,
having worked in business finance, once he's reviewed the budget, the VP Finance usually does not go into the nitty gritty detail of all the transactions that have gone thru the account... he'll typicaly leave that to the indians to sort out, record & if something is wrong... to sing out.

Well that maybe true, but the chance of said VP finance not only keeping his job but getting promoted on top of that would be considered ludicrous.....

But that has little to do with Paul Martin - Chretien left and Martin was the best man for the job of being his replacement.

You'd think Chretien would just lie down and take one for the team but that doesn't seem to be his way...

[Thucydides]

having worked in business finance, once he's reviewed the budget, the VP Finance susally does not go into the nitty gritty detail of all the transactions that have gone thru the account... he'll typicaly leave that to the indians to sort out, record & if something is wrong... to sing out.

It's been well documented that Martin and the Chretien/Gagliano crowd did not get along together - there was plenty of acrimony. While finance minister, Martin kept some budget surplus numbers very close to the vest so that Chretien & cronies did not get wind of all that extra money they could squander / spend for little value... you'll probably find that the Old guard were probably sworn to secrecy.

Mr Martin had multiple avenues of information, as Minister of Finance, Treasury Board President, Deputy Prime Minister, and President of the Quebec Caucus. He also had intimate dealings with riding associations across Canada, in order to carry out his coup against Chreitien. In addition, he is often portrayed (in fact touted) as a very "hands on" manager, who needs to know all the details and make all the decisions.

Given all this, I personally do not protestations of "not knowing" to be very believable, but if we accept this as being true, then you need to ask what else got "overlooked" while he was fulfilling all these roles and micromanaging everything in these files?

[geo]

Michael,
Chrétien hates Martin with a passion. Been that way for a while - like from the time that they ran against each other for the party leadership.... and Jean like Dubya does not forget and certainly never forgives.

Majoor,
you may be right, the finance minister shoulda known.... but as it stands right now, he's convinced the commissioner that he didn't... go figure!

Now, if we could only get a party leader from another party that would have some personality and could project the image that he / they represent the whole country we could get started in carving out a new era....

What scares me is that, if new Gov't gets into town.... spending freeze goes into effect until new Gov't gets it's feet wet and gets up to speed on where it is and where it wants to go............
Something to look forward to.

[E.R. Campbell]

Here is an interesting piece from the Globe and Mail's web site at: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20051114.wcomment1114/BNStory/National/
 
My emphasis added.

It is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Web-exclusive comment

Let's learn Gomery's lesson
An effective civil service is the best defence against public abuse and institutional failure

By HUGH SEGAL

Monday, November 14, 2005 Posted at 2:05 AM EST
Special to Globe and Mail Update

The first report of the Gomery commission has once again brought the issue of government mismanagement to centre stage, with the inevitable finger-pointing, blame-shifting and column-writing that accompanies such an event.

But the content of the report does not shake my belief that we have a public service that is, though not perfect in every respect, among the finest in the world. When we see individual public servants singled out in official inquiries or specific court cases for alleged or proven wrongdoing, those events are newsworthy precisely because they are very much the exception.

By focusing on the bad apples in the public service, the buzz around the Gomery report risks deflecting attention from the broader issue of effective delivery, administration and management, which I believe is the core challenge facing governments, at a time of increasing demands for coherence, co-operation and network operations.

The challenge is epitomized in Canada's governments today by the increasing prevalence of "floating executives" with generalist economic or social policy skills, who move among departments in frequent rotations and promotions. In recent years, deputy ministers typically stay five years - and often less than three - in a given department.
 
Such rotations worked when the visiting deputy minister could be supported by assistant deputy ministers (ADMs) and directors-general who themselves had come up from the operational and street-level roots of the department and had precise technical and practical experience. But with the advent of the rotating ADMs and the accelerated executives, we have a cycle in some departments where the constant movement of senior officials diminishes both real accountability and genuine connection to the delivery end of the ministry or departmental statutory mandate.

My concern is not about senior public servants not working their hardest or trying their best. But, in a context that dilutes the administrative drill-down ability of a department to actually do the job for which it is both funded and established, even the best efforts can be in vain.

In everything from policy relative to aboriginal communities and first nations, to Kyoto and income security measures, we have seen failures in coherence and intended impact and outcome that all of us deeply lament. Some of this happens when governments reduce complement and operational capacity while increasing pressure for output and delivery. Some of this happens when program goals are fuzzy or contradictory. But some of it is because many departments lack the implementation expertise to actually execute effectively and evaluate that execution in simple and direct terms.

In a policy environment in which governments must respond in a coherent, co-operative and joint manner, [/i]we lack institutions that provide education and training opportunities for public service, military and police officers to develop operational capacity. The National Defence College, closed by the Chrétien government in 1994 as a cost-saving measure, once provided such an opportunity through a year-long course in the area of national and international security studies. Should we not ask whether such an institution needs to be recreated on a broader scale to help public servants better understand and implement the spectrum of policy challenges that face Canada today?[/i]

Virtually every other democratic country has some form of a public or civil service staff college with formal professional development courses for those selected for higher administrative responsibility. Canada does not. Why?

Our challenge here is to be rational and balanced. The fact that some things do not work well (as the Gomery report vividly illustrates) does not mean that everything is going to hell in a hand basket. But, it is vital that we engage fully on the opportunity that focused execution-capacity actually represents.

Senator Hugh Segal is president of the Institute for Research on Public Policy, which is co-hosting, with the Trudeau Foundation, a conference titled Responsibilities of Citizenship & Public Service: Crisis or Challenge?

 

© Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.

[/color]

I have no doubt that the public service, including the parts most important to the military (PCO, DND, DFAIT, TB and Finance) has been degraded (maybe worse) over the past 20 years - partially through cuts but, maybe more, through social engineering which has been just as pervasive (although less controversial) in the PS as in the military.  'Who' one is - in racial, cultural, gender and, especially, linguistic terms - matters more, I think than 'what one can do.'  The end result is that fewer people (and there were real cuts in parts of the PS, are doing more work but too many of them are doing it with inadequate skill and knowledge.  It is my belief that current PS HR policies are driving out good, experienced people who are, quite simply, tired of working with - even for - poorly qualified individuals.

I need to emphasize that I am not a public servant, never was in the civil service, and never applied for a civil service position, but I do work with some government organizations and I have friends in the PS.  In fact when I retire next year I believe my replacement will be a PS EX who wants to retire for just the reasons I stated above.

A sound, competent, apolitical public service is one of the key foundation stones of a successful Westminster style parliamentary democracy.  I believe ours has, over the past 35+ years, has been systematically degraded so that it is suspect in both areas.

[Thucydides]

Here is a story the Parliamentry Press Gallery is NOT following (Hmmmmm........). IF what Mr Guite is saying is true, then there is a huge amount of follow up work to do to make a full accounting (and settling of accounts) on ADSCAM. Where is the fourth estate to do the investigative journalism required to bring this story front and centre?

http://www.boundbygravity.com/2006/05/guites-documents.aspx

Guite's Documents  

AdScam was back in the news a couple weeks ago, and somehow I missed it. I don't remember seeing any bloggers picking this up, but Politics Watch was all over it:

While Gomery's findings were quickly assumed as gospel by the media and opposition parties, he never did explain how Guite and a Quebec Liberal party organizer could use the vast machinery of government and Crown corporations without anyone else's knowledge.

But recent testimony and documents at Guite's trial this week is beginning to point the finger at the PMO, suggesting involvement in the advertising and polling contracts handed out through the public works department, even though the Liberals promised to take politics out of contracting when they came to power.

On Monday, Guite dropped his own bombshell and produced an April 1995 letter from Pelletier to Guite's boss at the time, the public works minister David Dingwall.

Guite planted the suggestion that the PMO was involved in overseeing advertising rules.

"After 17 months in government, I believe it is an opportune time to again draw attention to the Treasury Board policy on contracting for polling and advertising," Pelletier wrote.

Pelletier said PMO director of operations Jean Carle would be "the individual responsible for ensuring that the policy has been respected."

Guite producing that letter during his trial fits into the underlying theme of his defence that his political masters were aware of what he was doing.

But even more interesting is it reveals that Guite may have covered his tracks and has kept documents more than a decade old.

Of course, this begs the question: so why didn't this come up during the Gomery Commission?

The article contains two other fragments of testimony that link Chretien's PMO to the Sponsorship Scandal.

[Bruce Monkhouse]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070627.LAFLEUR27/TPStory/National

Fair Dealings....


Disgraced ad executive Lafleur will learn his sentence today
DANIEL LEBLANC

June 27, 2007

OTTAWA -- Jean Lafleur no longer has his own tennis court. His collection of expensive paintings has been sold. Gone too is the luxurious cottage in the Eastern Townships.
And the millions he made as an adman at the heart of the sponsorship program? Vanished ... at least from his Canadian bank accounts.

With all that in mind, a judge in Montreal will announce this afternoon how many months Mr. Lafleur will spend in prison for his criminal involvement in the sponsorship scandal.
Madam Justice Suzanne Coupal will also rule on a critical question: How much, if anything, will Mr. Lafleur have to pay back to Canadian taxpayers, on whose backs he built much of his fortune a decade ago?
 The former president and owner of Lafleur Communication Marketing has pleaded guilty to 28 charges of fraud involving $1.5-million in sponsorship contracts, and is facing a term of between 2½ and five years.

At his sentencing hearings this month, however, the Crown and the defence painted widely divergent pictures of Mr. Lafleur's current financial situation.
With the help of police investigators, the Crown depicted Mr. Lafleur as a high-flying adman with a penchant for trips across Latin America, and who seemed bent on stashing funds in tax havens, too.

In recent years, Mr. Lafleur has lived in Costa Rica and Belize, and travelled to Mexico, Brazil and France, sometimes for weeks on end. The Crown added that soon after Mr. Lafleur sold a cottage in Sutton, Que., for $1.5-million in 2004, he tried to transfer the amount to a bank in the Bahamas.
The transaction was flagged as fishy by the bank and it did not proceed.

Still, Mr. Lafleur's bank accounts in Canada have fallen dramatically in size over the years, according to the Crown. An account at CIBC Wood Gundy now holds about $20,000, whereas it contained up to $3-million a few years ago.
Another account at CIBC is worth less than $2,000, despite having held more than $500,000 in early 2005.
Most of Mr. Lafleur's remaining money in Canada is at Canaccord Capital, where he has $411,000 in RRSP form and $20,000 in cash, the Crown showed.

Still, Mr. Lafleur declared assets of more than $2-million last year when he applied for a credit card in Belize.
Mr. Lafleur's lawyer at the sentencing hearing, Jean-Claude Hébert, went to great lengths to play down his client's wealth earlier this month. Lafleur Communication raked in more than $80-million in federal contracts from the mid-1990s until the sale of the company in 2001, but Mr. Hébert said almost all of the money was used to cover expenses.

Mr. Lafleur's salary in those days ate up about $10-million, but Mr. Hébert said that after taxes and support payments, Mr. Lafleur only took home about $400,000 a year.
Mr. Lafleur has also hinted that he does not wish to reimburse a $1.5-million sum obtained through the use of 76 fake or inflated invoices. In a handwritten letter to Judge Coupal, he said he has numerous regrets and suggested that he wishes to pay his debt to society in time rather than cash.

"The regret that gnaws at me is to have, in a few years, wasted my life and, more importantly, mortgaged my kids' lives. ... This regret is accompanied by a wish: To pay back my debt to society at the expense of my freedom, and to return to my loved ones as soon as possible," he wrote.



Yea, because we all know how hard jail is these days. I'm sure his lawyers have already picked out which one has the best golf course.

Take his money.....

[E.R. Campbell]

...
Yea, because we all know how hard jail is these days. I'm sure his lawyers have already picked out which one has the best golf course.

Take his money.....

Agreed.  Jail time does nothing to punish most 'white collar' criminals.  It (jail) may make the general public feel better, briefly, but that's hardly a reason to 'punish' in that way.

Harsh, exemplary financial punishments hurt and, in some cases and if properly applied, might help some victims, too.

[E.R. Campbell]

Here is the good news, reproduced from today’s Globe and mail under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070627.wlafleur_sentence0527/BNStory/National/home

Payback time for Lafleur
Jean Lafleur sentenced to 42 months and told to return all of the $1.5-million he took from Canadian taxpayers
 
THAN TU HA
Globe and Mail Update

June 27, 2007 at 3:23 PM EDT

Former Montreal ad executive Jean Lafleur has been sentenced to 48 months in jail, the harshest penalty so far against someone involved in the sponsorship scandal.

When taking into account the time he has already spent in detention, Mr. Lafleur got an additional 42 months. He will be eligible for some sort of parole in seven months.

Quebec Court Judge Suzanne Coupal also ordered him to repay the whole of the $1.5-million he admitted to defrauding from federal sponsorship contracts that were supposed to help improve Ottawa's image in Quebec.

Because he is a first-time offender for a non-violent crime, Mr. Lafleur is expected to be eligible to some form of parole after one sixth of his sentence.

Crown attorney Ann-Mary Beauchemin had asked for a sentence of 4 ½ to five years and repayment of the entire sum of the 28 government contracts

Defence lawyer Jean-Claude Hébert had suggested a 30-month sentence.

Mr. Lafleur once wooed top federal Liberals as his advertising firm clinched millions in government contracts. The Gomery inquiry heard that he took influential politicians on salmon fishing trips and courted heads of Crown corporations with champagne in a Montreal Canadiens corporate box.

The 66-year-old Mr. Lafleur was a target of broad public scorn after his 2005 testimony at the inquiry headed by Justice John Gomery. Mr. Lafleur claimed a bad memory to avoid questions about how millions of sponsorship dollars were misspent by Ottawa in its ill-fated campaign to increase visibility in Quebec.

The judge said Mr. Lafleur preferred looking like “an imbecile” rather than tell the truth.

In his report, Judge Gomery noted that Mr. Lafleur was involved as early as 1996 in talks at the birth of what would become the sponsorship program.

Mr. Lafleur pleaded guilty to 28 of 35 counts of fraud last April after returning to Quebec from Belize when an international arrest warrant was issued against him.

The Crown presented evidence during pre-sentencing arguments suggesting that Mr. Lafleur had funnelled his assets out of Canada.

Mr. Lafleur's account with CIBC Wood Gundy held $3-million in 2002 but had shrivelled to $23,000 by 2005 because of a number of withdrawals, an RCMP fraud investigator, Cpl. Richard Sabourin, told the court.

A country house Mr. Lafleur owned in Sutton, a hilly, verdant part of Quebec's Eastern Townships, sold for $1.5-million in December of 2004. Two months later, the RCMP's Integrated Proceeds of Crime Unit was advised by the Montreal branch of the Banque Nationale de Paris that a lawyer representing Mr. Lafleur wanted to transfer $1.5-million to the Bahamas. The bank refused to execute the transaction.

By 2006, Mr. Lafleur had moved to Belize. The court heard that the manager of the Belize Bank of San Pedro stopped a $9,960 transfer to Mr. Lafleur's account from a Toronto bank. The manager thought the amount was too close to the $10,000 limit over which Mr. Lafleur would have to declare the money's origin.

RCMP investigators found that Mr. Lafleur said on credit card applications in Belize that he earned $20,000 a year in the Central American country, had $1.6-million in Canadian funds and $140,000 in U.S. funds as of August 2006.

While in Belize, Mr. Lafleur bought a $17,000 motorboat and rented an ocean-view apartment for $1,100 (U.S.) a month while he kept an empty flat in Montreal at $1,425 (Canadian) a month.

During that time, he also travelled to Brazil, Costa Rica, France and Mexico.

As a general principle I oppose jailing most white collar criminals – I regard jail as an expensive way to separate dangerous offenders from likely victims.  I think we have better, cheaper ways of depriving offenders of their liberty.  I think the ‘best’ punishment for most white collar criminals involves some combination of restitution, exemplary financial penalties (which may ‘deprive’ the offender’s immediate family) and community service.

[Bruce Monkhouse]

He doesn't miss a trick does he?......a scam man to the very end.


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080724/sponsorship_scandal_080724/20080724?hub=Canada

Disgraced adman Jean Lafleur files for bankruptcy
Updated Thu. Jul. 24 2008 11:22 PM ET

The Canadian Press

MONTREAL -- Following his son's example, disgraced formed advertising executive Jean Lafleur has filed for bankruptcy, threatening to leave Ottawa on the hook for more than $7 million.
Lafleur was handed 42-month prison sentence last year and ordered to pay a $1.5-million fine for his role in the sponsorship scandal.

The 67-year-old was recently released from jail, and indicated in court documents that he was unable to pay the fine.
He blamed his financial woes on his "criminal conviction."
According to the documents, Lafleur sold his home near Sutton, Que. in 2005 for $1.5 million.

His lawyer deposited the money in a bank account in Liechtenstein, which Lafleur then accessed to live in Costa Rica and Belize until he turned himself in to police in April 2007.
He still owes Revenue Canada $181,000, Revenue Quebec $174,000 and $1.3 million of his fine.
The federal government is also seeking $6.5 million from Lafleur in a civil suit that is to get underway this fall.

Ottawa is trying to recoup funds that Lafleur over billed the government for sponsorship work.
His company, Lafleur Communication Marketing, made $36 million in royalties from federal contracts between 1994 and 2000.
Government lawyer Sylvain Lussier said Thursday that he intends to ask federal bankruptcy authorities to examine Lafleur's filings closely.

Lafleur's son, Eric, declared himself broke in 2007 and settled a $2 million civil suit with Ottawa by agreeing to pay back $150,000 over 10 years.
Eric Lafleur served as a subcontractor for his father's firm.
Jean Lafleur pleaded guilty to 28 counts of sponsorship-related fraud after giving 76 fake bills to Charles Guite, the bureaucrat who was responsible for the program in the federal government's Public Works Department in the 1990s.

[Thucydides]

This hardly needs comment.....

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/08/22/kelly-mcparland-jean-chretien-and-the-glory-that-is-china.aspx

Kelly McParland: Jean Chretien and the power of China
Posted: August 22, 2008, 10:00 AM by Kelly McParland
Full Comment, Kelly McParland

A conspiracy theorist would have great sport with Jean Chretien's sudden intrusion into the current government's relations with China.

During his ten years in office, Mr. Chretien wasn't always the keenest of travellers. He famously skipped the funeral of King Hussein of Jordan in 1999, insisting he couldn't possibly have made it in time from his ski holiday in Whistler. He had umpteen opportunities to attend the opening of various Olympics, but rarely could seem to find the time. He didn't go to Lillehammer, didn't go to Nagano, didn't go to Sydney, didn't go to Salt Lake City. The one Games he managed to make were in Atlanta, perhaps just coincidentally the closest and easiest to reach from Ottawa.

He did show enthusiasm for trade junkets though, especially to China. As opposition leader Mr. Chretien was a bear on trade, since the Tories were in favour of freeing it up. But as Prime Minister he discovered that's how Canada's economy survives, so he was for it. Especially with China. He visited China six times while in office, led two trade junkets, and made a point of forging close ties with Chinese leaders. One of his last foreign visits in office took him to China; on his final day he made a point of meeting with China's prime minister.

After leaving office he became a consultant to powerful business interests, using the relationships he'd forged in office to open doors and grease deals. His first major foreign trip, barely two months out of office, was a high-level, low-profile visit to China organized by China International Trust and Investment Corp., a vast state-owned conglomerate with holdings across the globe. It's into steel, aviation, communications, energy --- you name it. With Mr. Chretien was André Desmarais,  president of Power Corp. and a  director of CITIC Pacific Ltd., CITIC's  Hong Kong arm, in which Power has a big stake. Mr. Desmarais is married to Mr. Chretien's daughter.

If the Desmarais family isn't Quebec's most important, the other guys are keeping a low profile. Power Corp has major investments and interests in China. Peter Kruyt, vice president of Power Corp, is chairman of the  Canada China Busness Council. Andre Desmarais is honorary chairman. His father, Paul Desmarais, is founding chairman.

Though it's not an absolute rule that former prime ministers refrain from commenting on the governments of their successors, for the most part they reserve their interjections for the most crucial of issues. Blabbing away every other Tuesday would just diminish the novelty factor and reduce the ability to deliver any real impact. Other than his well-known bitterness over the Gomery report, Mr. Chretien has been relatively quiet -- and even on Gomery he mainly had former aides and associates do the beefing.

Then on Monday he suddenly and unexpectedly declared to the Canadian Bar Association that Stephen Harper had seriously undermined relations with China by failing to attend the opening of the Olympic Games in Beijing and by offering honorary citizenship to the Dalai Lama. Never mind that the Dalai Lama is one of the world's most admired people, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, and that working for peace is usually considered a good thing. It doesn't take a Gomery inquiry to understand that Mr. Chretien's remarks were so heavily freighted with personal and private interests it's a wonder they even managed to struggle from his lips without collapsing to the floor in a dead heap from the sheer weight of gravity. Olympic weightlifters have had trouble cleaning and jerking half as great a load in medal competitions this week. The remarks were picked up and carried in Chinese newspapers, where they were presumably viewed with approval by the people who will make the decisions next time Mr. Chretien comes calling.

You're getting the drift here, right? Mr. Chretien has deep ties to Power Corp and the Desmarais family. Power Corp has extensive corporate interests in China. Mr. Chretien has worked to promote those interests, and suddenly pipes up, out of nowhere, to attack the government in public in the midst of the Olympics, in remarks that are sure to put him and his interests in a good light in China, possibly at the expense of Canada's own interests.

Yet when the Conservatives dared to point out this obvious conflict, Liberal worthies went down with the vapors. Bob Rae, the foreign affairs critic, deemed it "absurd," "disgraceful from top to bottom" and "guttersnipe politics." Mr. Rae's brother John is executive vice-president of Power Corp. John managed his brother's run for the Liberal leadership, and lent him most of the money he borrowed to finance it.

None of which necessarily means anything, since the Liberals are all fine, upstanding and goodhearted citizens, as they have always been, right through Mr. Chretien's term in office. Mr. Rae is an honest man and he's repaid his loans. But, given the  significant role Power Corp and the Desmarais family plays in Mr. Chretien's life, and the extent of Power Corp's interests in keeping China sweet, to suggest it's "absurd" or "guttersnipe" to even mention Mr. Chretien's obvious bias — when it was Mr. Chretien who lobbed the first unexpected grenade — is a bit rich. Were the Tories supposed to simply ignore the fact Mr. Chretien has "Power Corp." all but tattooed on his forehead?

On the same page of the National Post that carried the Chretien story Thursday was another item, in which Bloc Quebecois MP Francois Legault bemoaned the deep cynicism of Canadian voters. It's difficult to sell them on anything — whether its sovereignty for Quebec or saving the environment — because they just don't want to hear it. "There's a loss in confidence in all the political class," he said.

Gee. A loss of confidence in politicians. You have to wonder where that's coming from.

National Post

[E.R. Campbell]

I resurrecting a nacrothread because this story, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today's Globe and Mail, illustrates just how bad things were in the Liberal party of Canada in the later Chrétien  years and it also indicates that the story is not over:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/benot-corbeils-downfall-linked-to-friend-who-became-agent-c4590/article1336323/

Benoît Corbeil's downfall linked to friend who became agent C4590
Citing ‘vengeance' rather than cash payments, Alain Renaud offered to work with the RCMP to help bring down key figure in the Liberal sponsorship scandal
 
Daniel Leblanc

Montreal

Friday, Oct. 23, 2009

Benoît Corbeil and Alain Renaud were best of friends in the heyday of the Chrétien government, calling themselves “brothers” as they organized for the Liberals through the 1990s and early 2000s.


Benoît Corbeil, left, and Alain Renaud, who worked for the Liberal Party in the 1990s and 2000s.
Globe and Mail

The friendship seemed strong enough to last a lifetime – except that in 2004 Mr. Renaud embarked on a secret mission as “C4590,” a key informant in the massive RCMP investigation into the sponsorship scandal.

In a previously unknown tale of intrigue and betrayal, Mr. Renaud wore a wire to help the Mounties nail Mr. Corbeil on charges of fraud and influence peddling last year. For his work, he received $29,000 plus a $50,000 performance bonus, and has now been relocated into the witness protection program, with the RCMP effectively granting him immunity from prosecution. And his labours could bear further fruit: Mr. Renaud provided information on at least two other players in the scandal, with the potential for more bonus money, documents show.

Mr. Corbeil, now 46, former director-general of the Liberal Party's Quebec wing, pleaded guilty last year and underwent a sentencing hearing in Montreal Friday.


Benoît Corbeil, who pleaded guilty in June to fraud and influence peddling, makes his way from a courtroom in Montreal on Oct 23, 2009.
Globe and Mail

The RCMP's hiring of Mr. Renaud demonstrates the extent to which the Mounties have been manoeuvring in recent years to get to the bottom of the corruption that plagued the sponsorship program. While the RCMP laid charges of fraud against four individuals in 2003 and 2004, it only managed to bag Mr. Corbeil in the five subsequent years.

The $79,000 Mr. Renaud received seems relatively low, especially compared with the six- or seven-figure sums handed to informants in some biker-gang cases. But the Mounties believe Mr. Renaud, now 53, agreed to become C4590 not so much for money as for “vengeance” against the people he feels cheated him in the 1990s.

“He has mentioned to his handlers that he looks forward to seeing the RCMP investigation reach its goals and to see people like [former Groupaction Marketing Inc. president] Jean Brault, Benoît Corbeil [and others] arrested,” the RCMP said in a warrant application. “He claims that those individuals manipulated him and used him to enrich themselves, while he obtained nothing.”


The above agreement was signed by informant Alain Renaud and two RCMP officers on April 14, 2008, four days before the arrest of former Liberal organizer Benoît Corbeil. The letter states that the RCMP is paying a $50,000 "reward" to Mr. Renaud, who provided information that led directly to the laying of charges of fraud and influence peddling. The agreement points out that the money is taxable income.
Globe and Mail

In those days, Mr. Renaud was a door opener/lobbyist who helped direct federal sponsorship contracts to advertising firms, most notably Groupaction. He received about $1-million in salaries and expenses. At the same time, he was highly active as an organizer and fundraiser in the Liberal Party, oftentimes working alongside Mr. Corbeil.

Court records show that in 1997, the pair collaborated to collect a businessman's $50,000 undeclared cash payment to the party. In 1999 and 2000, they also organized a series of fake invoices to move $117,000 out of the Liberals' Quebec wing, along with a now deceased bagman.

Like everyone involved in the sponsorship program, Mr. Renaud was well aware in 2002 when the RCMP launched an investigation into the disgraced national-unity initiative, which was designed to put up Canadian flags and banners at various events in Quebec.

For unknown reasons, he started providing information to the RCMP in 2004 as an “informant,” receiving $14,600 in payments for his various tips.

Two years later, he went one step beyond and became an “agent source,” by which he agreed to gather information in undercover operations and to testify in court against his targets, if need be.

In exchange for a series of payments that went on to total $14,400, Mr. Renaud organized meetings in late 2006 with three suspects: a businessman involved in the sponsorship program, a senior Liberal staffer, and Mr. Corbeil.

Mr. Renaud was paid $800 a week for his efforts at first. The payments were boosted to $1,000 a week in the summer of 2007 when he wore hidden microphones as part of a number of discussions with Mr. Corbeil, both in person and on the phone.
 

The above is one of many internal RCMP receipts used to keep tabs on payments made from 2004 to 2007 to informant Alain Renaud, who went by the code name C4590 among Mounties. The receipt is proof that the money was given to Mr. Renaud in front of two RCMP witnesses, signed by all three.
Globe and Mail

During the meetings, Mr. Renaud frequently discussed a number of incidents, including the fake-invoice scheme and the cash donation, in an attempt to obtain a confession from Mr. Corbeil.

According to documents, the RCMP got Mr. Renaud's co-operation after making it clear that they were focusing on people higher up in the Liberal hierarchy.

A warrant, filed in court in 2007, said that while Mr. Renaud “never received a formal promise from the RCMP that he would not be charged, his handlers mentioned to him that he was not a target of the RCMP investigation into the sponsorship scandal.”

According to the RCMP, Mr. Renaud operated with the understanding that he would not be charged.

Through it all, Mr. Corbeil seemed blissfully unaware of his friend's true intentions. From January to July of 2007, the pair spoke more than 40 times on the phone and had at least six one-on-one meetings. In March of 2007, Mr. Corbeil even tried to help Mr. Renaud find employment.

Mr. Corbeil only learned of Mr. Renaud's moonlighting after he was charged in April of last year and discovered how the RCMP had built its case against him. He is hoping to avoid a prison term, arguing that he did not benefit financially from his crimes. The Crown is asking for 18 to 24 months imprisonment.

If the RCMP investigations are ongoing it is bad news for Price Michael's Liberals, bad news, in fact, for all Liberals with ties to Chretien - people like Bob Rae and Denis Coderre andf so on.

[Thucydides]

Maybe this was the reason the Liberals were in such a hurry to force an election after summer break; ensure the story never saw the light of day.

Now they should try to sit out 2010 and maybe try for an election late fall next year when this story fades, or (depending on how cunning and ruthless the Martin/Ignatieff faction(s) is(are), play up the story for all its worth; purge the Chretien wing of the party once and for all and then be prepared to fight an election with a unified command and the true ability to show clean hands.

[Thucydides]

Well, the Liberals have hired a former Chretienite as the COS, but this should take some more wind out of their sails:

http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2009/11/motion-on-adscam-to-be-moved/

Motion on Adscam to be moved

I’ve learned that Peterborough Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro will move the following motion at committee on Tuesday:

    November 1st 2009 represents the fourth anniversary of the first report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities, presided over by Justice Gomery. Despite the time that has passed, we are no closer to knowing which Federal Liberal riding associations benefited from the stolen taxpayer funds or where the missing $43 million dollars highlighted by Justice Gomery ultimately wound up.

    The Standing committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics calls on the Auditor General of Canada to conduct a full audit of the sponsorship program to determine which federal Liberal riding associations received stolen funds and to clarify for Canadians who received the missing $43 million dollars.

[Thucydides]

Well we know these guys have experience:

http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2009/11/michael-ignatieffs-new-director-of-communications-has-an-interesting-background/

Michael Ignatieff’s new Director of Communications has an interesting background

“Everything old is new again” is the buzz coming from Liberals and journalists in Ottawa. Peter Donolo’s the new boss of the OLO shop (the Dunno-LO as one journalist told me weeks ago) and today we’ve learned that he’s finally put the some new key players in place after the wholly awkward ejection of Davey/Fairbrother.

Among the “fresh” faces is Michael Ignatieff’s new Director of Communications, Mario Laguë, a man the CBC’s Rosemary Barton tells us is among the new gang that “[knows] Quebec inside-out”.

But, a Lexis-Nexis/Informart plunge into the past tells us more!

It appears that Mario Laguë was not only hired by Paul Martin to put a brave face on the sponsorship scandal, but Ignatieff’s new D.Comm was also part of a three-man panel with Chuck Guité that hired then Public Works Minister Alfonso Gagliano’s Chief of Staff to replace Guité, who was retiring. Stephen Harper, then opposition leader, criticized the hire saying the sponsorship scandal could have been stopped if a senior bureacrat was hired in the position instead.

    Affidavit shows how Guité was replaced Document reveals membership of team that chose boss for sponsorship program — The Globe and Mail, October 18th, 2005 by Daniel Leblanc.

    OTTAWA — An affidavit prepared by the Public Service Commission for the Gomery inquiry sheds new light on the controversial hiring of a former Liberal aide to head the sponsorship program in 1999, including the role of a federal official who would become an aide to Prime Minister Paul Martin.

    The inquiry heard conflicting testimony about how Pierre Tremblay, then the chief of staff to then public works minister Alfonso Gagliano, was hired to replace retiring bureaucrat Chuck Guité. Mr. Guité said he rigged the process at Mr. Gagliano’s behest; the former minister denied any political interference.

    The affidavit, which went unnoticed when it was tabled in May, shows that Mr. Tremblay’s hiring was approved by a three-member selection board made up of Mr. Guité, Public Service Commission executive resourcing consultant Michael Carey, and Mario Laguë, a long-time Liberal supporter who became Mr. Martin’s first director of communications when he became Prime Minister. The affidavit said Mr. Tremblay was hired “based on the recommendation of the selection board.”

    Conservative Leader Stephen Harper said yesterday the problems with the sponsorship program could have been stopped if an experienced civil servant had been hired in 1999 instead of Mr. Tremblay. The problems continued until an RCMP investigation was launched in 2002, but by then Mr. Tremblay was working in another federal agency.

When Prime Minister Paul Martin was in office he hired Laguë to “cover-up” the sponsorship scandal according to opposition Conservatives at the time.

    Assistant to PM contributed to cover-up, opposition says Mario Lague included in strategy sessions when problems first surfaced, e-mail says; Mario Lague included in strategy sessions when problems first surfaced, e-mail says — The Globe and Mail, February 20th, 2004 by Campbell Clark

    OTTAWA — Prime Minister Paul Martin’s communications director was a key player in the Chrétien government’s efforts to put the best face on serious problems in the sponsorship program in 2000, government records show.

    Opposition politicians focused many attacks in the Commons yesterday on Mario Lague, Mr. Martin’s communications director, insisting he was involved in efforts to “cover up” the sponsorship scandal, which saw millions misused from 1996 to 2002.

    Mr. Martin fought back, asserting that Mr. Lague “was not involved in the management of the sponsorship file.”

    However, records show that Mr. Lague was included in top-level meetings to plan strategy when problems began to emerge. An e-mail from September, 2000, obtained by an independent researcher and provided to The Globe and Mail, indicates that Mr. Lague was one of a small group of senior officials and political aides who plotted to put the best face on a damaging audit.

[Thucydides]

A long wait for some answers, and maybe even some justice:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/key-figure-in-sponsorship-scandal-set-to-become-witness/article2107295/

July 22, 2011
Key figure in sponsorship scandal set to become witness
By DANIEL LEBLANC
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Luc Lemay is on verge of long-pending immunity deal with prosecutors, and will likely testify against former Liberal organizer Jacques Corriveau

The RCMP is closing in on its first major Liberal operative after a decade-long probe into the sponsorship program, as it nears cutting a deal with another player in the scandal to become a state witness and testify about millions in alleged political kickbacks, government sources said.

It is the bookend to a story that, until recently, The Globe and Mail has been prevented from investigating. Only after a winning a lengthy battle at the Supreme Court last year against Groupe Polygone could the newspaper continue to press on in the public interest. Polygone was attempting to force the newspaper to reveal the identity of a key source as part of its defence against a federal lawsuit aimed at recouping money the former Liberal government paid the firm. As part of its ruling, the top court struck down a contentious publication ban preventing The Globe from reporting on negotiations to settle the federal lawsuit.

Now, a series of ongoing secret negotiations in Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City are paving the way for the Mounties to go after Jacques Corriveau in the coming weeks, senior sources said. The one-time friend of former prime minister Jean Chrétien and prominent Liberal organizer in Quebec made $8-million out of the sponsorship program for little or no work, in part through the use of misleading invoices, according to a public commission into the sponsorship scandal.

Mr. Corriveau was at the centre of major revelations involving cash payments and secret political donations at the 2005 Gomery inquiry, where he was identified in the final report as a "central figure in an elaborate kickback scheme." However, the 78-year-old has not faced any legal consequences for his actions, as police have yet to go beyond four admen and one bureaucrat in their bid to punish those responsible for the waste of tens of millions of dollars in public funds.

According to information obtained by The Globe, recent breakthroughs in the RCMP's Operation Carnegie are related to the promised collaboration of Luc Lemay. The Montreal businessman's firms, Groupe Polygone and Expour, received $37-million in federal sponsorships from 1997 to 2002, all the while offering alleged kickbacks of $6-million to Mr. Corriveau, according to a federal lawsuit.

Mr. Lemay is nearing an immunity deal that has been months in the works with Crown prosecutors in Quebec, sources said. Simultaneously, federal sources said, Mr. Lemay will be expected to pay $8-million to $10-million to settle a civil lawsuit that was launched by Ottawa in 2005 to recoup wasted sponsorship funds.

Freed from the possibility of criminal charges or a civil trial, Mr. Lemay would then be expected to act as a Crown witness if the RCMP lays charges in coming months against Mr. Corriveau.

The complex criminal and civil negotiations involving Mr. Lemay constitute a key point in the police investigation into the sponsorship scandal, which contributed directly to the Liberal government's defeat in 2006 and the party's subsequent decline. After years of apparent stagnation on the file, the RCMP has set its sights on political officials involved directly in the scandal, which was a priority for the Canadian public after a series of crooked dealings were exposed by the media, the Auditor-General and the Gomery inquiry.

In particular, evidence at the Gomery inquiry showed Mr. Corriveau made six-figure cash payments to senior Liberal officials in Quebec ahead of the 1997 federal election, among a series of secret donations to the then-governing party.

Government sources said Mr. Lemay, whose hunting-and-fishing shows and various publications were one of the biggest recipients of sponsorship cash, has already made significant contributions to the RCMP case.

"Lemay has provided excellent information, including previously undisclosed material," said a government official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Under the sponsorship program, the federal government offered hundreds of millions of dollars to sporting and cultural organizations in the late 1990s and early 2000s in exchange for the placement of federal advertising at the event sites. The program was marred by fraud and mismanagement, which financially benefited firms that made donations to the Liberal Party.

Court records show that in June, 2005, the RCMP raided Groupe Polygone's offices, and arrested Mr. Lemay for questioning, before releasing him on the same day. Mr. Corriveau's house was raided by the RCMP in 2007, with the search warrant alleging that Mr. Corriveau and Mr. Lemay "committed fraud and a conspiracy to commit fraud against the government of Canada" in conjunction with Jean Brault, the president of Groupaction Marketing Inc.

Mr. Brault pleaded guilty to five counts of fraud in relation to sponsorship contracts in 2005. An RCMP search warrant shows Mr. Brault is now collaborating with the RCMP, attending eight interview sessions with Mounties in which he provided explanations on payments of $500,000 to Mr. Corriveau.

Mr. Lemay has always publicly denied any wrongdoing.

"It was the Government of Canada which freely and of its own volition decided the amount to be paid for each sponsorship," Groupe Polygone said in a statement of defence against the federal lawsuit.

Still, the fact Mr. Lemay has been involved in negotiations related to an immunity deal suggests the RCMP built a case against him. Mr. Lemay's lawyers could not be reached for comment on Friday.

Sources who spoke to the Globe about the ongoing legal negotiations involving Mr. Lemay expressed frustration at the slow pace of the proceedings, which have been years in the works. The RCMP investigation into the sponsorship scandal started in 2002, and the raid against Mr. Corriveau's house was carried out more than four years ago.

Sources said the 2005 federal civil lawsuit contributed to delays in the criminal proceedings - without an immunity deal, any statement from Mr. Lemay to the RCMP could potentially be used against him in the civil matter. Mr. Lemay's proposed immunity deal was recently reviewed by Louis Dionne, the director of prosecution services in Quebec, and it is expected to be finalized by the end of the summer, government sources said.

If Mr. Lemay ends up paying $8-million to $10-million to settle the civil lawsuit, it would be the largest payout obtained by federal lawyers. Public Works Canada reports having so far recovered a total of $7-million from 11 other groups involved in sponsorships.

[E.R. Campbell]

Chrétien wins another round according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/chrtien-wins-200000-in-sponsorship-feud-pmo-demands-he-give-it-back/article2280903/

Chrétien wins $200,000 in sponsorship feud; PMO demands he give it back

DANIEL LEBLANC

OTTAWA— The Canadian Press
Published Thursday, Dec. 22, 2011


Ottawa has to pay $200,000 in legal costs incurred by Jean Chrétien in his fight to restore his name after being blamed for the sponsorship scandal by the Gomery inquiry in 2005.

However, the Prime Minister’s Office called the ruling “disappointing,” and said the money rightly belongs to taxpayers.

“It is our belief that the Liberal Party must pay back the millions of dollars stolen from taxpayers through the sponsorship scandal. We call on Jean Chrétien to give this $200,000 back to taxpayers on behalf of the Liberal Party,” PMO spokesman Carl Vallée told The Globe and Mail.

Mr. Chrétien refused to comment on the matter, as did John Gomery, the former judge who came down hard in 2005 on the former prime minister for his role in establishing the scandal-plagued sponsorship program.

Mr. Chrétien’s reputation was clearly tarnished by the final report of the Gomery inquiry, which stated he created a program that was secretive and circumvented normal administrative safeguards.

However, the former prime minister convinced the Federal Court in 2008 to strike out the negative findings against him, arguing that Mr. Gomery, through a series of public comments during the hearings, showed a clear bias. The Federal Court of Appeal later upheld the ruling, and last week, the Federal Court ruled in Mr. Chrétien’s favour on the issue of legal costs.

In his ruling, Mr. Justice François Lemieux decided to award five times more money than Ottawa was offering because of the high stakes at play.

“The appeal concerned the reputation of a former prime minister of Canada and the proper conduct of federal commissions of public inquiry. These were important and complex issues of public importance,” Judge Lemieux said.

Mr. Justice Max Teitelbaum of Federal Court ordered in 2008 that all sections of Mr. Gomery’s report dealing with Mr. Chrétien and his former chief of staff, Jean Pelletier, be considered “void.”

It was sweet victory for Mr. Chrétien who had chafed under Mr. Gomery's characterization of him as “small-town cheap,” and insisted his legacy was being unfairly tarnished.

Mr. Gomery's chief sin, according to Judge Teitelbaum, was a preoccupation with the media spotlight that led him to give interviews he should have eschewed, make comments that indicated he judged issues before all evidence was heard, exhibited bias against Mr. Chrétien, and trivialized the inquiry proceedings.

Mr. Pelletier, who is now deceased, also received $200,000 in legal costs, to be provided to his succession.

The legal establishment didn't like the way Judge Gomery did his business and it thinks it is punishing him by rewarding Chrétien and Pelletier but what they are really doing is giving the Conservative another opportunity to revisit Adscam and even Chrétien's real estate dealings that were peripheral to it - and I hope the Conservatives do not waste time reminding Canadians, yet again, that Jean Chrétien and  Jean Pelletier, aided by a bevy of Québec insiders led a corrupt enterprise from Parliament Hill and the PMO that aimed to give your and my hard-earned money to Québec-Liberal hacks, flacks and bagmen.