Beef prices are soaring. Here's why Canada is facing record-low cattle numbers
High demand, drought, international trade, tough decisions on the ranch are all factors
If there is a small bit of positive news for those who love to grill a steak in the summer or enjoy a roast dinner during the chilly winter months, beef prices are expected to climb further in 2026 — but not by as much as in recent years.
“The bad news is it won’t be going down,” said Mike von Massow, a food economist at the University of Guelph in Guelph, Ont.
Beef prices are at record highs after climbing 16 per cent over the last year and up 35 per cent in October compared with the five-year average. The retail price of beef is expected to creep up again next year.
In general, meat prices rose by the highest rate of any food category in 2025, driven by the soaring cost of beef, according to the recent national food price report by Dalhousie University in Halifax.
There are many considerations as experts weigh the question of when shoppers may finally see relief at the meat counter.
For the love of beef
Whether it’s burgers on the barbecue or stew on a chilly winter evening, there are certain foods that become traditions and part of the food culture. Those habits that can hold social significance can help explain why demand is still high for beef, regardless of the sticker shock at restaurants and grocers.
"We like beef, and beef is the favourite protein of Canadians,” von Massow said. "Canadians were very much creatures of habit. So if something was in our basket at the grocery store last week, it's going to be in our basket at the grocery store this week."
Still, one noticeable trend is that some shoppers are avoiding the higher-priced items for secondary cuts, such as choosing a blade steak instead of a roast. “Rather than leave beef, we’re seeing people trade down for beef,” he said.
The robust demand for beef can also be attributed to people wanting more protein in their diet.
“Beef demand has been phenomenal,” said Kevin Grier, a livestock market analyst based in Guelph. “If you want to know who to blame for high beef prices, look in the mirror,” he said.
So far, record prices don't seem to be scaring away many shoppers. But that demand is only one reason why prices continue to climb.
Too few cows
For many decades, the number of cattle in Canada has been on the decline, and severe drought in parts of Western Canada in recent years caused the herd size to decrease further. Drought conditions drove up the price of feed at the same time as other expenses were on the rise, such as fertilizer, labour and energy prices.
“It’s been really dry, and it's been even drier in the United States, and that dramatically increases costs,” said Ellen Goddard, an agricultural economist and professor emerita at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
"The cycle for beef is very, very long. I guess we should be glad we don't eat elephants because the cycle would be even longer," she said.
WATCH | How much more will groceries cost in Canada in 2026?:
Food prices could be going up next year, report saysDecember 9|Difficult choices for ranchers
Ranchers are facing a difficult decision on whether to expand their operations.
Cattle prices are at historic highs after jumping by more than 20 per cent in each of the last two years, according to Canfax, a Calgary non-profit organization that researches Canadian beef statistics.
Farmers can choose to sell their cows at really high prices, but they can also decide to keep them for a few more years to have calves. Holding onto their cows could result in retail prices temporarily climbing further.
"If we want to have a rebuild of the herd, we actually need to have short-term pain, which is more heifer retention for producers, which actually reduces supplies of beef to the market in order to get longer-term increase in supply," said Brenna Grant, executive director of Canfax, which is a division of the Canadian Cattle Association.
For ranchers, growing their herd may also be risky considering the prevalence of drought.
"We were buying feed at $250 to $300 per bale. That's never been heard of before," Alberta rancher Brenda Rosadiuk said, describing how prices spiked in recent years because of parched pasture land and fields.
Ranchers have to weigh many considerations, including their financial situation, age and succession planning.
By 2033, 60 per cent of farmers will be over age 65, representing one of the largest leadership transitions in the country’s history, according to RBC Economics.
Succession planning is a particular challenge in agriculture because of the rising cost of farmland, of the volatility of income from year to year and the rural lifestyle can be unappealing to younger generations.
"With the high cattle prices, some producers are saying, 'Hey, this is a good signal for us to retire or move on to something else,'” said Rosadiuk, who ranches near Evansburg, about 100 kilometres west of Edmonton.
"Others are saying, ‘Oh, I've got some renewed optimism here, and I'm going to try and rebuild my herd.'"
Outside factors affect prices
Prices in Canada are impacted by many factors outside of the country, especially considering there is an open border for beef with the U.S.
In 2025, the Trump administration has introduced, changed and dropped tariffs on imports of beef from several countries, including Argentina, Brazil and Australia.
Tyson Foods, the largest U.S. meatpacker, announced plans last month to close a Nebraska beef plant and reduce operations at a Texas facility. Meanwhile, U.S. cattle producers are facing the threat of disease known as New World screwworm, a devastating pest, entering from Mexico.
All of these factors can have varying effects on demand for Canadian beef.
“Prices in Canada and the United States are so strong that it’s a magnet beacon [for imports],” Grier, the livestock analyst, said.
At the same time, some types of Canadian beef are exported because consumers in other countries are willing to pay higher prices for particular cuts, which are not in as high demand in Canada, he said.
That’s why it’s common to see some Canadian beef being shipped to countries like South Korea, while some Australian beef can show up on store shelves in Canada.
The steaks are high
Despite all of the variables in the industry, the general consensus by experts is that beef prices will remain high until at least 2027, when the supply begins to noticeably improve.
Still, the improvement in retail prices may only be “modest," Grier said.
Rebuilding that herd takes time because of how long it takes cattle to reproduce, he said, especially compared to other farm animals like chickens.
“The cattle industry is like an ocean liner. It takes a long time to turn,” he said.
As for demand, people’s appetite for the red meat shows no signs of abating.
"We are still stepping up to the meat case. We're still going to restaurants, whether it's hamburger or whether it's a striploin,” Grier said. “We're still buying it."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from the CBC's Paula Duhatschek
David Amos
Trust that legions of politicians and their minions know that I have a beef with the people who wrote the recent national food price report by Dalhousie University in Halifax.
David Amos
I wonder if any farmers reading this recall what I have done on their behalf from 2004 until this very day
Alberto en Rosen
Reply to David Amos
Yes but it ran out in 2015....
Alberto en Rosen
Reply to David Amos
I remember what Chretein did to us in 1994....cost us lots of little farmers...
Anthony Iommi
Reply to David Amos
What?
David Amos
Reply to Alberto en Rosen
Nope I ran again in 2018 and 2019 and again last year Remember?
David Amos
Reply to Alberto en Rosen
I remember what Chretein did to me in 2003
David Amos
Reply to Anthony Iommi
Perhaps you should research David Raymond Amos
Alberto en Rosen
Reply to David Amos
As Carney says...who cares....
David Amos
Reply to Alberto en Rosen
That is the awful truth which is why so many folks don't vote I said it 20 very long years ago Enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ERN3OrEBWU&t=248s
I have never said one word against any province in Canada. I love where we live and the country as a whole.
Some people disagree because I don't agree with their ideals.
David Amos
Reply to Margie Anderson
I resemble that remark
Sam Smithmoose
No more 4 more years of L party. PC ship is sinking. We need a party to vote for!
Bob Seusers
Reply to Sam Smithmoose
Red team.. keeping you in the red for over ten years..
Sam Smithmoose
Reply to Bob Seusers
Then there is a banker.
David Amos
Reply to Bob Seusers
Oh So True
N.B. cattle farmer working to maintain profit margin as beef prices soar
Report from Dalhousie University predicts 4-6% meat price increase for 2025
A recent report from Dalhousie University’s Agri-Food Analytics Lab shows beef prices increased by 9.2 per cent between September 2023 and 2024.
But that doesn’t come as a surprise to cattle farmer Cedric MacLeod, who is seeing the rise at a retail level and is trying to keep up.
“With all the inputs rising, it's tough for us all to maintain profitability,” said MacLeod, who owns Local Valley Beef in Long Settlement near Centreville.
Now, that has more than quadrupled at upwards of $4 per pound.
During COVID-19, MacLeod said a 25-pound premium package cost $185, but now, that same package costs $275.
“I’ve got to maintain a level of profitability on my operation so that I can feed my own family, because I buy groceries, too,” he said.
The Dalhousie food report is forecasting an overall food price increase of three to five per cent, with a four to six per cent increase predicted for meat.
Stacey Taylor, a business professor at Cape Breton University, was one of the report’s authors. She said her biggest concerns, looking at the report, centre around food and nutrition security.
“As prices continue to rise, people are in really tough positions in terms of having to make really tough choices, whether it's, you know, buying less of a product, buying a different product altogether or not buying the product at all,” she said.
And Taylor said that even if people decide to pivot to a product, such as chicken, if they can no longer afford beef, these prices are also on the rise so a switch will only stave off the increases.
Taylor said couponing and using food rescue apps are going through the roof. Food bank demand is also skyrocketing.
She said this is concerning because the question isn’t only if people can afford food, it’s whether they can afford to maintain a healthy diet.
“But we're not necessarily seeing that that is remaining the cheap area of the grocery store, which means that there is no area in the grocery store anymore that really feels cheaper.”
Luckily for MacLeod, he said his market has remained steady. During COVID-19, he said a lot of customers showed up to support the business, and those customers have remained loyal.
As a grass-fed beef operation, he said his farm has always maintained a bit of a premium in the market, but they try to follow retail prices as much as possible without overwhelming customers.
But at the end of the day, he said it will be up to the consumer whether they want that beef on their plate.
“So far, our customers are keen to support us, they're glad to have our products on the plate and they're willing to pay that price,” said MacLeod.
“We’ll continue to work with them and be loyal to them and make that as affordable as possible."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from Information Morning Fredericton
Food prices could increase in 2026, with meat leading the way, say Dalhousie researchers
Higher beef prices will push up costs for other meat, according to annual forecast
Food prices in Canada could increase by four to six per cent next year, largely driven by pricier meat products, according to a forecast by researchers at Dalhousie University.
Beef in particular is expected to get more expensive, potentially rising seven per cent, as cattle sizes shrink (those markets are susceptible to tariffs) and more ranchers leave the industry, said the research team behind Canada's Food Price Report.
Tightened beef supply is expected to last through 2027, though the country has upped its import volume to deal with those challenges, according to the forecast.
"We're expecting another difficult year due to beef prices and, because people are pivoting towards chicken, chicken prices are also on the rise," said Sylvain Charlebois, director of the university's Agri-Food Analytics Lab and lead author of the report.
"So that's why the entire category will actually be more expensive, unfortunately."
Meanwhile, food products usually found in the middle section of a grocery store could get more expensive after years of stagnant prices, he said. That includes pantry staples like canned goods.
"Typically the centre of the store is a go-to place for people who are seeking harbour ... from inflation," he said. "That's not going to be the case in 2026."
- What are you doing to keep costs down this holiday season? We want to hear from you. Send an email to ask@cbc.ca.
Generally, several factors could contribute to grocery inflation over the next 12 months, according to the Food Price Report — among them the ongoing trade dispute with the U.S., changes to the food manufacturing landscape and other economic factors, like labour conditions.
Food banks see more clients
Roughly a quarter of Canadians live in food-insecure households, according to Food Banks Canada, meaning that they have inadequate access to food for financial reasons.
Neil Hetherington, CEO of the Daily Bread Food Bank in Toronto, said his organization now serves 330,000 clients a month — a figure that hovered around the 60,000 mark before the pandemic.
"We're not adding more food. What we're seeing is more clients," said Hetherington, who works with about 14,000 volunteers across the city.
She's running a food bank out of her garage"The number of clients here in Toronto could fill the Rogers Centre eight times every single month. That's how many people we're feeding."
With food prices generally trending upward since April 2024, many consumers say they're already feeling the strain. Those who spoke to CBC News were dismayed by the prospect of more price growth at the grocery store.
Toronto resident Sabra Al-Harthi said she's considering buying meat less frequently. "I think I might just cut off the meat a little bit; make it a weekend thing."
Why you might need to pay more for meat next yearMeanwhile, Giacomo LoGiacco said he's splurging less on food. "I work a full-time job in a factory and I'm barely scraping by. I live paycheque to paycheque," he said.
"Sometimes I only get something on sale, but I'm only getting, like, milk, eggs, bread — the essentials."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from Nisha Patel, Anis Heydari and Shawn Benjamin
David Dingwall on cabinet ministers, baseball and entitlements
18 years later after he lost re-election, Dingwall looks back on political life
As Justin Trudeau's new set of cabinet ministers — many of whom are political rookies — get their feet wet this week, we have some words of experience from a guy who's been there, done that.
At the height of his political career in the mid 1990s, Maclean's magazine described David Dingwall as having "the stamina of a triathlete, the killer instinct of a pit bull, and the political acumen of an Allan MacEachen."
Dingwall, the son of a janitor, went from living in the basement of the school in South Bar, Cape Breton, to the upper reaches of power as one of the most influential ministers in Jean Chrétien's government.
When Dingwall lost his seat in 1997 to the little-known NDP candidate Michelle Dockrill, it was one of the biggest vote reversals, and biggest surprises, in Canadian politics.
Dingwall recently sat down with Information Morning in Cape Breton for a wide-ranging interview with host Steve Sutherland, 18 years after he was voted out of office.
From that interview, here are some quotable quotes from Dingwall, a guy never noted for his bashfulness:
1.On entering politics
Dingwall: "I've always wanted to help people, and I found that public life was a way in which you could impact the decisions that affect people. You can make an impact if you're part of the process."
2. On Lying
Sutherland: "Is it ever OK to tell a lie?"
Dingwall: "Of course!"
3. On the potential closure of the Stora pulp and paper mill in 1994
"Well I don't think I can say on air what I told the CEO of Stora (who) had flown over from Sweden. It was a pretty rough conversation. He didn't like it, and I didn't like saying what I said, but it had to be said. And the fight was on."
4. On Pierre Trudeau-era cabinet minister Marc Lalonde
"Lalonde was a workaholic. I remember him saying to me when I was his parliamentary secretary: he said, 'I hear you're very bright.' I said, 'Well, thank you very much, Mr. Minister.' 'Well,' he said, 'just don't be wrong.'"
5. On Cape Breton political icon Allan J. MacEachen
"Before I went into cabinet in '93, Mr. MacEachen and I had dinner, and I asked him for advice. He said, 'Look, you just have to master your own portfolio. Don't try to be a master of everybody else's portfolio.' And boy that was good advice.
"When you're around a cabinet table, a prime minister will look upon you for expertise in that portfolio. If you're the minister of health and you're commenting on international issues that you know very little about — you haven't been briefed, you may not even have read the cabinet document — you're not going to come across as persuasive as you normally would.
"However, if you're very well briefed on your own portfolio, people then look to you and say, 'Hey, they know what they're actually talking about.' And that gives you a little bit of leeway to comment on other things."
6. On Chrétien-era cabinet minister Sheila Copps
"Sheila Copps was a fighter. If she shook your hand and said, 'Look, I'm going to support [you],' you knew that she would support you both in cabinet, cabinet committee meeting, and behind the scenes. Whereas others would not."
7. On former prime minister Jean Chrétien
"You had to be on your toes with Mr. Chrétien, because you didn't know whether he read the file or didn't read the file. But he would ask you four or five questions, and if you knew your stuff, you were fine; but if you didn't know your stuff, he'd let you know."
8. On losing his seat in 1997
"The last two and a half weeks of the campaign, I knew that I was in trouble. I remember Mr. Chrétien called me — he was on the bus — and I said, 'Look, I'm in deep doo-doo here. My numbers are going down, I can see it, I can see it at the doors.'
"People would say, 'Nice to see you Dave!' and then they'd turn their heads. I'm not sure if I could've done anything differently. I think the dye was cast, the wave was coming, and I was out."
9. On saying, 'I'm entitled to my entitlements'
"These guys were trying to deny me — and most important, my wife — of a pension. There are certain legal rights that you have as an individual, and when they're trying to take those things away … that's why I said what I said.
"It was an arrow which was going straight through to the prime minister of the day, to the clerk of the privy council of the day, opposition parties, anyone that wanted to listen … that I was going to get what I was entitled to. Should I have said it differently? Perhaps. But I said it."
10. On being interviewed for the position of commissioner of Major League Baseball after leaving politics
"I remember quite distinctly: [the executive recruiter] put his hand by his mouth and he said, 'I'm sorry, the compensation is only seven.' I thought he meant 700,000 [dollars], and at that time, they were offering the commissioner 7.5 [million dollars]! When he said that, I had to bite my hand."
David Amos
10 years after this interview I am have been checking out Dingwall and his cohorts closely and made certain that he knows why
honeythedog
He's still an arrogant SOB. A leopard doesn't change its spots.
Telescope
"I am entitled to my entitlements." Amazing how this arrogant, slimy lawyer resurfaces (literally) the moment the Liberals get back in. He's obviously looking to find himself a high paying partisan appointment on a board or committee. To hell with him.
Dean Drone
Reply to Telescope
@Telescope "Special Envoy Without Portfolio" to the United Nations might suit his unique talents.
Dean Drone
Is there are statute-of-limitations on expense claims for entitlements?
Because I found an unclaimed receipt for a pack of gum I bought in 1997, when I was doing important government business.....
D.D.
dodger43
Ahh, the Liberals are back in power...so its time for Dingwall to do whatever is necessary to get his snout back into the trough.
Dean Drone
Reply to dodger43
@dodger43 They can get pretty hungry after hiding in the cracks of the wood-work for 10 years.
spunky
Although I don't agree with everything Mr. Dingwall did or said, according to a few acquaintances, he did a very good job at the Mint, better than his predecessors.
Regardless of what your opinions are about his pension, it was wrong that they were trying to take his pension away. If any of you cared to check pension law, it's there for a reason, and that is, to protect the employee from arbitrary decisions from their employer. That means, you, me, and any other person who has ever paid into a pension plan. It also includes Mr. Dingwall.
Unfortunately, some employers are unscrupulous and find ways to get around pension law. Those are the ones we should be watching.
Telescope
Reply to spunky
@spunky Conrad Black.
Waylon
The epitome of Liberal arrogance - plenty more to come, despite the besotted press's failure to report it or anything else about the Prince and his party.
The Great Gazoo
Reply to Waylon
@Waylon I don't think this sort of arrogance is a question of political party it is one of personal character. Politics in general is infesting with this sort of prancing arse. I don't really see any difference between him and someone like a Pierre Poilievre (sp?). Both are obnoxious chicken hawks who ride the political wagon to personal fortune.
Telescope
Reply to The Great Gazoo
@The Great Gazoo He's just an older, slightly brighter version of Andrew Younger without hair.
shoredude
From the article, in section 8 (as of 9:59 a.m. AST) - "I think the dye was cast, the wave was coming, and I was out." He may have said this phrase, but one assumes a CBC staffer wrote it. As often is the case in these articles where are the proof readers? Usually it is a 'die' that is cast, not a colouring product.
The Great Gazoo
Lets put some of these comments through a political double speak translation app:
"I've always wanted to help people" I realized early on that one of the ways to wealth and power was politics. If you have the connections it's also a very fast route to such things, particularly in Nova Scotia. Look at Peter Mackay, Geoff Regan or myself if you need proof of that. Without politics I'd just be a mediocre lawyer spending most of my time in Small Claims Court.
"I hear you're very bright." I'm a sly Machiavellian who knows that the real worth of language is the way it can be warped to say almost anything. I have no respect of the truth but am in an ongoing passionate love affair with myself.
"Sheila Copps was a fighter". Like me, for lack of talent, Copps made up for it by being a hyper partisan bulldog.
"These guys were trying to deny me — and most important, my wife — of a pension" A massive pension, one not remotely like what is found in the public sector, and not one I really needed since I was 45 when I lost my seat, an age when most people are only starting to invest for their pension years not enjoying one. All of which to say I have so much money I don't know what to do with it all, neither does my wife.
As for the MLB story...whatever.
P.Stubbington
oink oink
Tronald Dump
I have a really hard time believing he was ever considered as commissioner of MLB. They must have interviewed him as a joke. Far as I can see he's nothing but a two bit lawyer in Cape Breton.
Art Rowe
Given his obvious love of money, wonder how much he demanded to be paid for the interview, after all he would be "{entitled}"
hfxman2
Should have asked about the million dollar Dingwall wall. lol
johnsharper
He is not especially likeable but he does outstanding work. Politicians make the laws so of course they enumerate themselves very well, which is wrong and selfish. In the present system we got more than what we paid for out of Mr. Dingwall even though he made that famous quote.
Art Rowe
Reply to johnsharper
@johnsharper : The word you were looking for is "remunerate" which means to pay, not 'enumerate' which means to count.
Regardless you are 100% on the mark. They certainly do look after themselves. Some deal eh? Being able to set your own salary and pension.
Capt.frigg-it
Reply to johnsharper
@johnsharper
Enumerate=.Itemise numerically, mention (a number of things) one by one:
Remunerate= Pay for services rendered or work done.
unofficially unilingual
In '97 Chretien and Matin decided they could screw around with the maritimes and it blew up in their Quebecois faces.
johnsharper
Reply to unofficially unilingual
@unofficially unilingual Yea, we are so tough?
Dean
Oh it's the "I'm entitled to my entitlements" dingbat .... don't care ...
HabsNation
Reply to Dean
@Dean Obviously you care, because you made the effort to comment.
Capt.frigg-it
Oh wow, the original greedy politico. He gets a fat cat pension while many Nova Scotians try to live on less than 600 a month. We have people sleeping in the streets in CANADA....going without doctors in CANADA....kids going to sleep hungry in CANADA. Yup folks he sure is entitled to his entitlements.
David Dingwall named Cape Breton University’s new president
David
Dingwall will be the next president of Cape Breton University after its
board of governors approved a recommendation to hire the South Bar
native and former Liberal federal cabinet minister Wednesday. Dingwall
listed his priorities as focusing on students and student services,
faculty and staff and the community. - Nancy King Photo by Nancy King /Nancy KingSYDNEY, N.S — In turning to David Dingwall to lead Cape Breton University, the chair of its board of governors says they were responding to a feeling that the university had lost its way in terms of its connection to the community.
That was a recurring theme in the consultation that was done as the search process unfolded, Robert Sampson said.
“Sometimes those inside have the least objectivity to assess that,” he said. “It wasn’t like it was new news, but it was profound and it was consistent.”
In a unanimous vote at a special meeting Wednesday, members of the board of governors approved the recommendation from the presidential search committee to hire Dingwall.
“Any time you get an opportunity to engage with highly intelligent people, people who are focused on a university and wish to grow a university, I jumped at the chance to become its next president and vice-chancellor,” Dingwall said.
“Cape Breton University is a gem.”
The terms of his contract aren’t yet finalized. He officially takes the job at the end of March.
Dingwall will replace acting president Dale Keefe, vice-president academic, who had been filling in since former president David Wheeler was ousted in late 2016.
Sampson said Dingwall was among about 20 applicants for the position and emerged from a short list of candidates who were each interviewed at least five times.
A lawyer by trade, Dingwall grew up in the basement of the South Bar school where his father was caretaker. He was first elected as Liberal MP from Cape Breton-East Richmond in 1980 and rose through the political ranks in Ottawa, holding senior portfolios in Jean Chretien’s Liberal government. He lost his seat in 1997.
Sampson said the search process, which included involvement of a headhunting firm, included broad consultation.
Dingwall described CBU as being very much a part of his life, having attended its precursor Xavier College, and having had ongoing engagement with faculty members such as Sr. Peggy Butts and Rev. Donald Campbell.
He listed his priorities as focusing on students and student services, faculty and staff and the community.
Sampson said they performed “very in-depth” reference checks of candidates.
In an interview with the Cape Breton Post, Dingwall said he was approached by several people both within CBU and in the community suggesting he submit his name as a candidate. He said he had also been approached during previous presidential search processes.
While the term hasn’t been finalized, Dingwall expects that his contract will be for five years.
Dingwall is coming on board at a challenging time for the university, in areas including finances and recruitment and retention of students. It was recently revealed that while Acadia had received additional funding in the wake of formula changes that disadvantaged only it and CBU, the Cape Breton institution’s requests for extra assistance were rebuffed. It has subsequently received a boost.
Sampson said government relations was another factor in the decision to hire Dingwall.
“Right, wrong or indifferent, there’s a feeling … by a lot of people that from an equitable point of view, we’ve not been treated the same and as a result there’s a feeling that there’s a deficiency, that we’ve fallen down in so far as our leaders having the required skill set to understand that system,” Sampson said. “Whether we like it or not, the ghost at our table at every turn is the government.”
Dingwall acknowledged he is not yet aware of the intricacies of those issues but he intends to work with the province — CBU’s biggest funder — to resolve those challenges.
“I think we need to look to the future with some degree of optimism,” he said.
He agreed that government relations are important.
“We need to work harder at that relationship and to convince these public policy makers and purse strings individuals that we are a significant asset … and as a result of being an asset, wouldn’t you want to participate in making this asset grow and make a more significant contribution to the community and to the island as a whole?” he said. “We’re not there with our hand out, we’re an asset, we’re not looking for chump change, we’re looking for investments and for people to be a part of the solution.”
CBU is an important economic cog in Cape Breton, Dingwall said, noting it issued 1,100 T-4 slips last year, has about 400 permanent employees and generates $60 million in economic activity.
Dingwall said he has always viewed CBU as a beacon of hope for all four counties in Cape Breton. Regarding the need to re-engage with the community, Dingwall said he doesn’t think the fact that he is a native Cape Bretoner will hurt but it won’t be the primary factor in any success.
“The bridge will be on my behaviour. I think we can talk ‘til the cows come home, but if we don’t outreach more to our natural constituencies that are out there — our Aboriginals’ our Celtic people, both Irish and Scottish; and our francophones — it’s the obligation of the institution to reach out. I think that will be the test and I intend to do that with our community groups in order to involve, engage and get answers to some problems going forward,” Dingwall said.
Whenever a university hires a president who is not an academic it is a cause for debate and criticism. Dingwall — whose previous involvement with post-secondary education including serving as guest lecturer, student mentor, visiting professor at Ryerson University and legal counsel for university officials and departments — said he intends to reach out to faculty.
“I think I have an understanding, but I’m not an academic, so my approach is that I am going to meet with the academic community here at Cape Breton University to understand what they do, their needs, their aspirations and we’ll see what takes place after that process is completed,” he said.
Sampson thanked Keefe for the work that he has done as interim president, saying he kept the ship moving in the right direction. Keefe will return to his position as academic vice-president.
nancy.king@cbpost.com
David Dingwall
• Age: 65
• Home Community: South Bar
• Family: Wife, Nancy; three children, Jay, Leigh Anne and Jennifer.
• Elected: Served as Liberal MP from Cape Breton-East Richmond from 1980-1997, when he was defeated by the NDP’s Michelle Dockrill in the new riding of Bras d’Or. He held major portfolios including Health.
• After politics: Was appointed CEO of the Royal Canadian Mint but resigned amid scrutiny about expense claims. Also practised law with Affleck Greene McMurtry in Toronto.
Previous CBU presidents:
Rev. Donald F. Campbell (founding president) 1974 – 1983
William Reid 1983 – 1989
Peter Hill 1989 – 1992
Jacquelyn Thayer Scott 1993 – 2002
John Harker 2003 – 2013
David Wheeler 2013 – 2016
Dale Keefe 2016-2018 (interim)
Dismissed Cape Breton University president to run for NDP in Halifax
David Wheeler says he always had interest in public policy and even worked with Tony Blair
The man dismissed as president of Cape Breton University last December has emerged as the NDP candidate in the provincial riding of Halifax Armdale.
The New Democrats said on Thursday that David Wheeler will be nominated at a party meeting next week.
"I've always been interested in public policy," said Wheeler, who was dean of management at Dalhousie University in Halifax before taking on the president's job at CBU.
His 3½-year tenure at the helm of CBU ended when the university board of governors voted to dismiss him over concerns they hadn't been provided certain information about labour negotiations. There was a negotiated severance package but details were not disclosed.
Tony Blair
Wheeler's attention is now turning to politics, but it's not the first time he has delved into that world. Originally from the U.K., Wheeler said during the 1980s he was principal academic adviser to the British Labour Party on environmental issues.
He also noted that in the late 1990s he was an adviser to Tony Blair, helping him with "business outreach" prior to his first term as British prime minister.
Wheeler said he knows the Halifax Armdale area quite well, since he lived near the riding when he was working at Dalhousie.
He has high praise for NDP Leader Gary Burrill, for whom he said he has "enormous respect."
Burrill not worried about dismissal
Burrill said he's "over the moon" Wheeler will run for the NDP and is not concerned about his dismissal from CBU. Wheeler was trying to avoid layoffs at the university, Burrill said, "a pretty honourable position to take, in my mind."
He praised Wheeler's extensive knowledge of environmental and post-secondary issues, and called him "one of Nova Scotia's primary intellectuals."
"His credibility is in the stratosphere in Nova Scotia," Burrill said.
Eliminate tuition fees
Like Burrill, Wheeler is a proponent of reducing the cost of getting a post-secondary education. He supports Burrill's recommendation that tuition fees be eliminated for all Nova Scotia Community College students.
"I think that's a good first step," Wheeler said, adding that reducing or wiping out university tuition should be the province's next move following that, in conjunction with the federal government.
Asked how he feels about running against incumbent Halifax Armdale MLA and Liberal cabinet minister Lena Diab, Wheeler said: "I like her a lot. But unfortunately she represents a government that really has no economic game plan. She voted with the government against the teachers. I guess she must take responsibility for those things."
Wheeler expects an election call to come "sooner rather than later," given the recent stream of government funding announcements that the NDP is calling "March Madness."
"No one is betting against a May election," he said.
Stacey Taylor did not get my message yesterday. However as an Assistant Professor of Business Analytics she should have understood what I was trying to explain to her today but she didn't care to know it.
Need I say I called Dingwall and MacInnis as well? They did not pick up so I left voicemails
Sunday, 6 July 2025
From: Minister of Finance / Ministre des Finances <minister-ministre@fin.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:56 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
From: Fraser, Sean - M.P. <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:57 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contacting the constituency office of Sean Fraser, Member of Parliament for Central Nova.
This is an automated reply.
Please note that all correspondence is read, however due to the high volume of emails we receive on a daily basis there may be a delay in getting back to you. Priority will be given to residents of Central Nova.
To ensure we get back to you in a timely manner, please include your full name, home address including postal code and phone number when reaching out.
Thank you.
-------------
Merci d'avoir contacté le bureau de circonscription de Sean Fraser, député de Central Nova. Il s'agit d'une réponse automatisée.
Veuillez noter que toute la correspondance est lue, mais qu'en raison du volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons quotidiennement, il se peut que nous ne puissions pas vous répondre dans les meilleurs délais.
Pour que nous puissions vous répondre dans les meilleurs délais, veuillez indiquer votre nom complet, votre adresse personnelle, y compris le code postal, et votre numéro de téléphone lorsque vous nous contactez.
Nous vous remercions.
Facebook : facebook.com/SeanFraserMP
Twitter : @SeanFraserMP
Instagram : SeanFraserMP
Sans frais : 1-844-641-5886
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:53 PM
Subject: Fwd: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management
To: <bobpozen@mit.edu>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin <fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>, ministryofjustice <ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca>, justmin <justmin@gov.ns.ca>, Mike.Comeau <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, <CrownAdminOttawa@ontario.ca>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, Sean.Fraser <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:49 PM
Subject: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management
To: <Leadership@mfs.com>, <kimc714@mit.edu>
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry
Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
William H.
Donaldson
ChairmanSecurities and Exchange Commission
Witness Panel 2
-
Mr.
Matthew P.
Fink
PresidentInvestment Company Institute
-
Mr.
Marc
Lackritz
PresidentSecurities Industry Association
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
Stephen M.
Cutler
Director - Division of EnforcementSecurities and Exchange Commission
-
Mr.
Robert
Glauber
Chairman and CEONational Association of Securities Dealers
-
Eliot
Spitzer
Attorney GeneralState of New York
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: Understanding the Fund Industry from the Investor’s Perspective
Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
Tim
Berry
TreasurerState of Indiana
-
Honorable
Gary
Gensler
ChairmanU.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
-
Mr.
James K.
Glassman
Resident FellowAmerican Enterprise Institute
-
Mr.
Don
Phillips
Managing DirectorMorningstar, Inc
-
Mr.
Jim
Riepe
Vice Chairman of the Board of DirectorsT. Rowe Price Group, Inc.
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Operations and Governance.
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
Jack
Bogle
FounderThe Vanguard Group
-
Ms.
Mellody
Hobson
PresidentAriel Capital Management
-
Mr.
David
Pottruck
President, Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board of DirectorsCharles Schwab
-
Mr.
David
Ruder
Former ChairmenU.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: The Regulatory Landscape
Date: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Ms.
Lori
Richards
Director, Office of Compliance, Inspections, and ExaminationsSecurities and Exchange Commission
-
Mr.
Paul
Roye
Director, Division of Investment ManagementSecurities and Exchange Commission
-
Ms.
Mary
Schapiro
Vice Chairman of NASD and President of NASD Regulatory Policy & OversightNational Association of Securities Dealers
-
Honorable
David M.
Walker
Comptroller General of the United States
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Operations and Governance
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Professor
Mercer
Bullard
Associate Professor of LawUniversity of Mississippi School of Law
-
Mr.
William D
Lutz
Professor of EnglishRutgers University
-
Mr.
Robert
Pozen
Non-Executive ChairmanMassachusetts Financial Services Co.
-
Ms.
Barbara
Roper
Director of Investor ProtectionConsumer Federation of America
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Costs and Distribution Practices
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Honorable
Daniel K.
Akaka (D-HI)
United States Senator
-
Honorable
Susan
Collins (R-ME)
United States Senator
-
Honorable
Peter
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
United States Senator
-
Honorable
Carl
Levin (D-MI)
United States Senator
Witness Panel 2
-
Mr.
Paul G.
Haaga, Jr.
Executive Vice President and Director of Capitol Research and Management Company, and Chairman of the Investment Company Institute
-
Mr.
Chet
Helck
President and Chief Operating OfficerRaymond James Financial
-
Mr.
Thomas
Putnam
Founder and CEOFenimore Asset Management
-
Mr.
Edward
Siedle
Founder and PresidentThe Benchmark Companies
-
Mr.
Mark
Treanor
General Counsel and Head of Legal DepartmentWachovia Corporation
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: The SEC's Perspective
Topic
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
William H.
Donaldson
ChairmanSecurities and Exchange Commission
archive.today webpage capture | Saved from | |
| All snapshots | from host www.govinfo.gov | |
WASHINGTON :
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800
Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001
97–186 PDF 2004
S. HRG . 108–711
REVIEW OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS
AND REGULATORY ACTIONS REGARDING
THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST AND SECOND SESSION
ON
INVESTIGATIONS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS REGARDING THE
MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY AND INVESTORS’ PROTECTION
NOVEMBER 18, 20, 2003, FEBRUARY 25, 26, MARCH 2, 10, 23, 31, AND
APRIL 8, 2004
Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
REVIEW OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS
AND REGULATORY ACTIONS REGARDING
THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2003
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–538 of the Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Senator Richard C. Shelby (Chairman of
the Committee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN RICHARD C. SHELBY
Chairman SHELBY. The hearing shall come to order.
This hearing is part of the Committee’s ongoing oversight of the
mutual fund industry. Today, the Committee will review current
investigations and enforcement proceedings and examine regu-
latory actions taken to date in order to fully inform and guide the
Banking Committee’s consideration of possible legislative reform.
On September 30, 2003, this Committee first examined the scope
of problems confronting the mutual fund industry. At that time,
Chairman Donaldson testified about the SEC’s ongoing enforce-
ment actions and described the SEC’s regulatory blueprint for
adopting new regulations aimed at improving the transparency of
fund operations and stopping abusive trading practices. Since
Chairman Donaldson’s testimony, we have learned that improper
fund trading practices are a widespread problem that fund insiders,
brokers, and privileged clients have profited from at the expense of
average investors.
In early September, New York Attorney General Spitzer uncov-
ered arrangements through which brokers facilitated improper
trades for their clients in certain prominent mutual funds in ex-
change for large, fee generating investments. Since this initial set-
tlement, we have learned the extent to which both intermediaries,
such as brokers, and fund executives have engaged in illicit trading
activities. We have read about the backhanded ways by which the
brokers colluded with their customers to disguise improper trade
orders to make them appear legitimate, thus evading detection by
mutual fund policing systems.
Even in situations where mutual funds attempted to halt im-
proper trading activity, certain brokers created fictitious names
and account numbers to fool fund compliance officers and to con-
tinue trading. Recent investigations have also revealed that mutual
fund executives and portfolio managers have actively engaged in
improper trading activity. And these allegations are particularly
troubling because fund executives and portfolio managers have
represented themselves as protecting client assets, but they failed
by either knowingly permitting improper trading by brokers or
actively engaging in illegal trading activities themselves.
Such practices may not only violate prospectus disclosures, but
also violate the fiduciary duties that funds owe to their share-
holders—the duties to treat all shareholders equitably and to pro-
tect shareholder interests. Further, regulators have indicated that
they may soon file charges against funds that have selectively
disclosed portfolio information to certain privileged investors and
fund executives that may have engaged in illegal insider trading by
acting on the basis of nonpublic information.
As this Committee made clear during Chairman William H.
Donaldson’s September 30 appearance here, a regulatory response
to improper trading activities is just one of the many actions that
the SEC must take to address the many troubling issues that have
come to light in the mutual fund industry. This Committee remains
concerned with the transparency of fund operations and ensuring
that investors can learn how their fund is being managed. It has
become very, very apparent that many of the questionable fund
practices that are now being examined are not just the result of a
few bad actors, but are longstanding industry practices that have
largely gone unregulated and not well disclosed to, or understood
by, most investors.
Therefore, this Committee must take a comprehensive look, I be-
lieve, at the industry to determine if the industry’s operations and
practices are consistent with investors’ interests and the greater
interests of the market. It may be that we must consider possible
realignment of interests to ensure that mutual funds are operating
as efficiently and fairly as the market and investors demand. We
will examine fund disclosure practices regarding fees, trading costs,
sales commissions, and portfolio holdings. So, we will continue to
question the conflicts of interest surrounding the relationship be-
tween the investment adviser and the fund and how potential
changes to fund governance and disclosure practices may minimize
these conflicts.
We will also focus on fund sales practices to ensure that brokers
sell suitable investments to their clients, provide adequate disclo-
sure of any sales incentives, and give clients any breakpoint dis-
counts to which they are entitled.
Chairman Donaldson has told this Committee that the SEC has
the necessary statutory authority to reform the mutual fund indus-
try and is in the process of conducting a comprehensive rulemak-
ing. As we have learned in other contexts, however, additional reg-
ulation is not the only answer. Late trading is clearly illegal and
market timing is actively deterred and policed. Despite prohibitions
and warnings, these activities continued unabated because of the
inadequate compliance and enforcement regimes at the SEC, the
mutual funds and the brokers. Whether due to a lack of resources
or other pressing priorities, mutual fund abuses simply did not re-
ceive adequate attention from the SEC. Although recent enforce-
ment actions indicate that priorities have changed, we need to
and halt future fund abuses.
Vigorous enforcement remains the key to restoring integrity to
the fund industry, and Attorney General Spitzer’s timely actions
once again demonstrate, I believe, the significant role that States
play in prosecuting fraud and abuse in the securities markets. Re-
gardless of the number of rules or amount of resources, it would
be impractical to expect the SEC to detect every single fraud and
manipulation in the fund industry. Therefore, the mutual funds
and the brokerage houses themselves must proactively adopt new
compliance measures to detect fraud and abuse. For many years,
participants in the mutual fund industry maintain industry ‘‘best
practices.’’ These practices, however, have clearly proven to be in-
adequate as brokers and funds have disregarded conflicts of inter-
est and colluded at the expense of investors without detection.
Although funds and brokers owe different types of duties to their
investors, both groups have an obligation to refrain from knowingly
ignoring their clients’ interests and profiting at their expense.
With over 95 million investors and $7 trillion—yes, $7 trillion—
in assets, mutual funds have always been perceived as the safe
investment option for average investors. America has become a Na-
tion of investors, but there is no doubt that recent revelations
about mutual funds have caused very many to question the per-
ceived fairness of the industry. Many are surprised to learn that
the mutual fund industry is plagued by the same conflict that was
at the root of the Enron scandal and the global settlement—one set
of profitable rules for insiders and another costly set for average
investors.
Beyond the legal concepts of fiduciary duties and transparency,
there is a more fundamental principle that should underlie the
operation of the mutual fund industry and our securities markets
in general.
This principle is that securities firms and mutual funds should
not neglect investors’ interests and knowingly profit at their ex-
pense. Until firms can demonstrate an ability to abide by this
ideal, investors will not trust the markets, nor should they. In our
own way, Congress, the SEC and regulators, and industry partici-
pants must collectively work to reform the mutual fund industry in
order to restore investor confidence. I believe, we must reassure in-
vestors that mutual funds are a vehicle in which they can safely
invest their money and not fall victim to financial schemes. The
mutual fund industry is simply too important to too many Ameri-
cans to do otherwise.
Examining the mutual fund industry is a priority for this Com-
mittee, and I look forward to working with my fellow Committee
Members, especially Senators Enzi, Dodd, and Corzine, all of whom
have already expressed significant interest in this issue.
Our first witness today is Chairman Bill Donaldson, and on the
second panel we will hear from Matthew Fink, President of the In-
vestment Company Institute, and Marc Lackritz, President of the
Securities Industry Association.
Now, I will call on my Members.
Senator Sarbanes.
Chairman
MFS Investment Management
and
Visiting Professor
Harvard Law School
“REVIEW OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS
REGARDING THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY:
FUND OPERATIONS AND GOVERNANCE”
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
Committee for this opportunity to present my views on appropriate reforms for the mutual fund
industry.
My name is Robert C. Pozen and I am from Boston, Massachusetts. I am currently
Chairman of MFS Investment Management, which manages approximately $140 billion for
approximately 370 accounts including over 100 mutual funds serving approximately six million
investors. I am also a visiting professor at Harvard Law School and author of the textbook The
Mutual Fund Business (2 ed. Houghton Mifflin 2001).
I commend the Committee for engaging in a deliberative and broad-ranging review of the
operations and regulation of the mutual fund industry. While I welcome questions about any
aspect of the fund industry, I will limit my testimony today to three areas where I believe that MFS is helping to set important new standards for the fund industry:
The current system of paying for goods and services with “soft dollars”, taken out of
brokerage commissions, is detrimental to mutual fund shareholders. The use of “soft dollar”
payments makes it virtually impossible for a fund manager to ascertain the true costs of executing trades because execution costs are bundled together with the costs of other goods and services such as research reports and Bloomberg terminals. If these costs were unbundled, then fund managers could pay cash out of their own pockets for independent research or market data, and could negotiate for lower execution prices for fund shareholders.
broker on Wall Street, the trader pays five cents a share for execution plus a broad range of
goods or services from the executing broker or third parties: e.g., securities research, market data and brokerage allocations to promote fund sales. These goods and services are paid in “soft dollars”: that is, they are bundled into the five cents per share charge in a non- transparent
1 of 6
be required to pay five cents per share by the full-service broker.
In other words, it is almost impossible to obtain a price discount from a full-service
Wall Street firm for executing a large fund trade. However, that firm is willing to provide an in-kind
discount in the form of soft dollars that can be used to purchase various goods or services. This is
more than a technical pricing oddity. The key point is this: a price discount on the trade (for
example, from five cents to three cents per share) would go directly to the mutual fund and its
shareholders. In-kind services like market data services go directly to the fund management
company and only indirectly to the mutual fund and its shareholders.
MFS has already eliminated the use of “soft dollars” to promote sales of mutual fund
shares. Since January 1, 2004, MFS has been paying cash out of its own pocket to broker-
dealers to promote fund sales. While the SEC has proposed a rule to this effect, MFS has
switched from soft dollars to cash to promote fund sales regardless of whether and when the SEC
adopts its rule.
More dramatically, earlier this month MFS decided to stop using soft dollars to pay for
third-party research1 and market data. Again MFS will pay cash out of its own pocket for these
items. MFS estimates that this decision will cost the management company $10 to $15 million per
year. Yet MFS has agreed not to raise its advisory fees for its funds over the next five years.
Why is MFS willing to take the lead on getting off the addiction to soft dollars and moving to the healthy environment of price discounts?
1 We are not stopping the use of “soft dollars” for proprietary research and other services. Only recently has the SEC issued a concept release on accounting for all the elements of a bundled commission. SEC Release IC-26313 (Dec. 19, 2003).
2 of 6
MFS will issue an individualized quarterly statement, rather than a general listing of fund expenses in basis points, which will show each fund shareholder a reasonable estimate of his or her actual fund expenses in dollar terms.
various categories of fund expenses in basis points. The table might say, for instance:
Advisory Fee 53 bp
Transfer Agency Fee 10 bp
Other Fees 2 bp
12 b-1 Fee 25 bp
Total Expenses 90 bp
Nevertheless, some critics have argued that mutual fund investors need customized
expense statements. By that, these critics mean the actual expenses paid by a shareholder in
period. For example, we would have to compute the exact expenses of a shareholder who held
Fund A from January 15 until March 31 without reinvesting fund dividends; another shareholder
who held Fund B for the whole year and reinvested all fund dividends; and yet another
shareholder who held Fund C from February 1 until June 15 as well as from August 22 until
December 11 (during both periods, assuming no record date for fund dividends occurred).
This type of customized expense statement would, in my opinion, involve enormous
computer programming costs. The program would have to track the holdings of every fund
shareholder on a daily basis, take into account whether a fund dividend was reinvested or paid
out to the shareholder, and apply monthly basis point charges to fund balances reflecting monthly
appreciation or depreciation of fund assets. Of course, these large computer costs would
ultimately be passed on to fund shareholders.
At MFS, we will provide every fund shareholder with an estimate of his or her actual
expenses on their quarterly statements.2 We can do this at an affordable cost by making one
reasonable assumption—that the fund holdings of the shareholder at the end of the quarter were
the same throughout the quarter. Although this is a simplifying assumption, it produces a good
estimate of actual fund expenses since most shareholders do not switch funds during a quarter.
Indeed, this assumption will often lead to a slightly higher estimate of individualized expenses
than the actual amount because some shareholders will buy the fund during the quarter and other
shareholders will reinvest fund dividends during the quarter.
In addition, MFS will send its shareholders in every fund’s semi-annual report the
total amount of brokerage commissions paid by the fund during the relevant period as well as the
fund’s average commission rate per share (for example, 4.83 cents per share on average). But
this information on brokerage commissions should be separated from the fund expense table
because all the other items in the table are ordinary expenses expressed in basis points. By
contrast, brokerage commissions are a capital expense added to the tax basis of the securities
held by the fund, and brokerage commissions are expressed in cents per share.
2 These individualized expenses will not include brokerage costs because they are capitalized in the cost of the portfolio
security.
4 of 6
The mutual fund industry has a unique governance structure: the fund is a separate entity from its external manager. The independent directors of the fund must annually approve the
terms and conditions of the fund’s contract with its external manager. Of course, the independent directors usually reappoint the management company. In an industrial company, how often do the directors throw out the whole management team? But the independent directors of most mutual funds, in my experience, do represent fund shareholders by negotiating for contract terms and monitoring potential conflicts of interest.
industry. To begin with, over 75% of the board is comprised of independent directors, who elect their own independent chairman. The chairman leads the executive sessions of independent directors, which occur before or after every board meeting. The independent chairman also helps set the board’s agenda for each meeting. A lead independent director could definitely take charge of the executive sessions and a lead director could also help set the board’s agenda. Thus, it
does not matter which title is employed; the key is to insure that a senior independent director
plays these two functions.
In many boards, the independent directors have their own independent counsel, as
the MFS boards do. But the independent directors of the MFS funds are going one step further by
appointing their own compliance officer. This officer will monitor all compliance activities by MFS
as well as supervise the fund’s own activities, and will report regularly to the Compliance
Committee of the Board (which itself is composed solely of independent directors).
On the management company side, MFS is the only company I know of that has a
non-executive chairman reporting to the independent directors of the MFS funds. This is a new
position designed to assure that the management company is fully accountable to the funds’
independent directors.
Finally, MFS as a management company has established the new position of Executive Vice President for Regulatory Affairs, and filled the position with a distinguished industry veteran. In addition, MFS has hired a distinguished law firm partner as its new general
5 of 6
This high profile position within MFS is more than symbolic; it represents the great significance
given by MFS to these regulatory functions. While these functions are performed in most fund
management companies, it is rare to see the person in charge of these functions having the title of executive vice president and serving on the executive committee of the firm.
Conclusions
In summary, MFS is trying to establish standards of best practices in three important
areas to fund shareholders:
proposing and adopting a myriad of rules on disclosure requirements and substantive prohibitions or the fund industry—which overlap to a degree with the efforts of the fund management firms.
Because the SEC and the management firms are making such serious efforts to develop
higher behavioral norms for the mutual fund industry, it might be useful for Congress to monitor these efforts before finalizing a bill on mutual fund reforms. These are complex issues that may be better suited to an evolutionary process, led by an expert public agency with the flexibility to address the changing legal and factual environment.
to answer any questions the Chairman or Committee Members might have.
Robert C. Pozen
- Former president of Fidelity Investments and executive chairman of MFS Investment Management
- Expert who has made hundreds of appearances to companies, television audiences and leaders around the world
- Writer for the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times, the Harvard Business Review, and more around the globe
Support Staff
Kimberly Crumpton
Get in Touch
- Building E62-483
- bobpozen@mit.edu
- (617) 715-4813
- (617) 258-6855
334 Comments
42 Comments
93 Comments
AGRI Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Notice of meeting Amended
Committee Members
Chair
Vice-Chairs
Members
Address
Agri-Food Analytics Lab
Dalhousie University
Faculty of Agriculture
Agricultural Campus
PO Box 550
Truro, Nova Scotia, Canada B2N 5E3
Courier & Mailing Address
Agri-Food Analytics Lab
Dalhousie University
Kenneth C. Rowe Management Building
6100 University Ave, Room 3032
PO Box 15000
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 4R2
For media or administrative inquiries, contact:
Sylvain Charlebois
Join Paula & Jay over Tea & Coffee as they talk about the news of the day, life, and whatever comes up. Special Guest: Dr. Sylvain Charlebois
Stacey Taylor
Assistant Professor, Business Analytics
Department: Financial and Information Management
Email: stacey_taylor@CBU.ca
902-293-4959
Experience
-
-
-
* Lead Facilitator (Core 2): Provide guidance to all of the Atlantic Canada Core 2 facilitators on particular topics and administrative tasks, as well as answer any questions from candidates that they are unable to answer, as well as answer facilitator questions. * Facilitator (Core 1, Core 2, Tax, Assurance, Capstone 1 and Capstone 2): Mark candidate weekly submissions and peer reviews, as well as answer candidate questions * Mentor (Core 1, Core 2, Tax, Assurance): Provide guidance to other facilitators on how to improve their marking and help them address candidate questions, as well as answer their questions * Session Leader (Core 1, Core 2, Tax, Assurance, Capstone 1, and Capstone 2): Lead a mandatory two day interactive workshop that covers concepts learned in the virtual environment, as well as introducing and teaching new concepts
-
-
-
-
-
* review candidate business cases and quantitative calculations, providing constructive feedback on national exams to candidates in the CMA program * grade national exam papers * provide feedback to program mentors as to candidate performance, both overall and on an individual basis * answer questioned posed by candidates online
-
-
-
-
-
* Course: MBA 7100 Strategic Management * Collaborated on creation of the course outline * Taught lecture to 33 MBA students, was mainly responsible for course content * Selected the majority of cases to be taught throughout the course and developed case-based solutions for each * Taught students how to write a formal business case (with management or Board of Directors) as the main audience * Evaluated students based on a rigorous rubric that addressed: 1) course content and tools, as well as their ability to provide reasonable, feasible, and supported recommendations; 2) Presentation skills.
-
-
-
-
-
* review candidate business cases and quantitative calculations, providing constructive feedback on national exams to candidates in the MBA-CMA program * grade national exam papers * provide feedback to program mentors as to candidate performance, both overall and on an individual basis * answer questioned posed by candidates online
-
-
-
-
-
* prepared and distributed projections and financial statements * prepared the County’s tax return and various financial information returns * signed off on payroll and preparation of benefit deductions * created a fraud and whistleblower’s policy * responsible for accounting of Tangible Capital Assets worth $77 million dollars * financial analysis for various projects and management reporting * point of contact for the External Auditors * prepared Requests for Proposals * researched, wrote, and presented business cases * evaluated and provided recommendations on business plans
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
* was the sole Oracle Administrator in the Dartmouth office (the remainder of the team was in Toronto) * provided multi-country production support for Canada, France, and the Netherlands in Oracle and International Money Movement System (IMMS) * posted the General Ledger in Oracle for Canada and in IMMS for France * conducted daily IT audits * monitored the Oracle in-box, addressing or escalating requests * partnered with banking, finance, and National Paytech Production for incoming and outgoing payroll wraps * partnered with the Command Centre in the United States on disaster recovery and mainframe shut downs * assisted in planning and carrying out disaster contingency plans and exercises * created business cases for change requests * implemented approved change requests * provided monthly reporting for Senior Management on the activities of the Oracle Administration and Project Testing teams * assisted the Project Testing teams with writing, evaluating, and running test scripts * provided training and assistance to the Dartmouth staff * provided guidance to staff and management on Oracle internal controls * supported the Oracle Administration team in Toronto, filling in for the various shifts when requested (including the overnight monitoring shift)
-
-
-
-
-
* prepared multi currency Oracle General Ledger, bank reconciliations and journal entries * balance Trust Accounting subsystems in Accounts Payable and Accounts Receivable daily to the General Ledger * daily cash forecasting of UK portfolio with strict deadlines * ensure compliance with CICA 5900 and SOX * identification and recommended resolution to Internal Control and Audit concerns * prepared overdue receivables report to Senior Management * prepared Monthly ROI Audit * conducted a daily EDI Wire Audit * prepared the monthly Zero Balancing Entries * participated in documentation Creation * conducted peer reconciliation reviews * participated in disaster recovery exercises
-
-
-
-
Education
Office of the President
The President & Vice Chancellor is responsible to the Board of Governors and the Senate for the management and operation of CBU’s administrative and academic actions.
The president is supported by members of senior administration, special advisors and staff including Vice-President Academic and Provost; Vice-President, Finance & Operations, Director of Marketing & Communications, Vice-President of Development and the Chief of Staff.
The President’s Office is responsible for co-ordinating meetings and activities of the Board of Governors, Senate and various standing and ad hoc committees.
President David C. Dingwall
The Honourable David C. Dingwall was installed as the 7th President and Vice-Chancellor of Cape Breton University on April 6, 2018.
Under his direction, Cape Breton University has achieved many significant milestones including the establishment of new strategic, research and academic plans, a new CBU brand, unprecedented enrolment growth, a revitalized campus including a major renovation to the Canada Games Complex (the future home of Female and Para Hockey in Canada), a Centre for Discovery and Innovation, a medical campus, a new School of Nursing, and several new programs including a Bachelor of Social Work.
President Dingwall is a member of the King’s Privy Council and is an active member of Universities Canada, Universities Canada International Committee, the Association of Atlantic Universities, the Council of Nova Scotia University Presidents (Chair), M Square Media International Advisory Board and the Canada-China Business Council, to name a few.
Mr. Dingwall is also a former Cabinet Minister and is highly regarded for his substantial, in-depth experience in both the private and public sectors, at both the national and international level. He also has extensive corporate governance experience and is the author of “Negotiating So Everyone Wins” – Secrets you can use from Canada’s top business, sports, labour and political negotiators.
Mr. Dingwall holds degrees in commerce and law from Dalhousie University, has studied Corporate Governance at Harvard Law School and is also a graduate of the Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD.D), Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto. In 1997, he received an Honorary Doctorate of Laws from Cape Breton University.
He has been an extraordinary mentor to many Cape Bretoners and Canadians from coast to coast, helping them establish their own careers and make a mark across our country and beyond. He is the proud father of three children and grandfather to four grandchildren.
| David_Dingwall@cbu.ca | 902-563-1120 |
Vice-President Finance & Operations
Reporting to the President, the Vice President, Finance & Administration is responsible for all non-academic operations of the University. Working in cooperation with Senior Management Group members, the Vice-President provides leadership on administrative and financial matters of concern to the University. The Vice-President, in the capacity of treasurer of the institution, serves as a member of the University’s Board of Governors.
Gordon MacInnis, FCPA, FCA
Vice-President, Finance & Operations
Cape Breton University
Gordon MacInnis is responsible for the financial affairs of Cape Breton University as well as areas of human resources, facilities management, and information technology. He is also a strong contributor to setting the strategic directions of CBU and functions as a key liaison for senior orders of government.
Mr. MacInnis is a fellow chartered accountant and a member of the Institute of Public Administration of Canada with several decades of experience in senior public-sector management positions. He has participated on many provincial workgroups and task forces concerning public-sector policy initiatives. In addition to volunteering with several local community groups, Mr. MacInnis is a member of the Board of Directors of Inter-university Services Inc., an inter-provincial organization with a goal of promoting collaboration between universities. He served as a member of the Premier’s panel charged with evaluating candidates for receipt of a Premier’s Award of Excellence to recognize outstanding on-the-job contributions of provincial employees and was also past-Chairman of the Board of Directors of the former Cape Breton Development Corporation, a federal crown corporation.
Since joining Cape Breton University in 2000, Mr. MacInnis has served in the roles of Chief Financial Officer and Interim President prior to assuming his present duties in 2003. Mr. MacInnis serves on the CBU Senate, various university committees and is a member of the University’s Board of Governors in his role as Treasurer of the Board.
| Gordon_MacInnis@cbu.ca | 902-563-1128 |
Dingwall entitled to entitlements, arbitrator rules
David Dingwall was doing a good job running the Royal Canadian Mint when lingering hostility within the federal Liberal party forced him to resign, according to an independent report released Wednesday.
The report by arbitrator George Adams upheld a $417,780 severance payment the former Liberal cabinet minister received in February, along with a $42,010 annual pension.
- FROM FEB. 2, 2006: Dingwall receives $417,780 in severance for Mint ouster
"He had performed his job well regardless of any perceived allegiances … He was entitled to [the federal government's] rational support when serious charges concerning his expenditures were made against him."
Dingwall's leadership at the Mint, a Crown corporation that manufactures Canada's coins and paper currency, came under question as former prime minister Paul Martin struggled to keep his minority government alive in September 2005.
Then in opposition, Stephen Harper's Conservatives accused Dingwall of racking up $730,000 in expenses.
In fact, an audit of the expenses later found that more than 70 per cent of them were incurred by other employees in Dingwall's office at the Mint, and that all the payments had been properly approved, Adams' report said.
- FROM OCT. 19, 2005: Dingwall says expenses 'falsely reported'
The former Nova Scotia MP, who held a Cape Breton riding for 17 years, had been given "substantial performance awards" for turning a money-losing organization into one that had a pre-tax profit of $15.9 million in 2004.
Yet nobody from the Martin administration was prepared to go to bat for Dingwall in the firestorm that erupted over the expenses, the arbitrator found.
Dingwall received one phone call from John McCallum, the minister responsible for the Mint, "berating him for having to deal with an expense-related issue at such a delicate time."
The Clerk of the Privy Council also called to pass on a message about the government's displeasure.
"Dingwall is a very experienced politician," Adams wrote. "In light of these conversations and given his association with former prime minister Chr¿tien, he now understood there would be no support from the government regardless of the complete absence of wrongdoing on his part."
- FROM SEPT. 28, 2005: Mint head Dingwall resigns, wants to clear his name
"Several former Chrétien cabinet ministers had lost their jobs and were involved in very public (and expensive) litigation. No one disagreed with his assessment that he was next," the report said.
The federal government "subsequently failed to honour the arrangement, giving rise to the instant dispute and this arbitration," Adams wrote.
The arbitrator ruled in his favour, noting that Dingwall had not worked since leaving the Mint "and has no prospects for other work."
In the midst of the controversy over his resignation and compensation package, Dingwall drew the scorn of opposition parties when he told a Commons committee: "I'm entitled to my entitlements."
Harper's party picked up the phrase and used it repeatedly as an example of Liberal arrogance during the campaign leading up to the Jan. 23 general election.
Kevin G. Lynch PC OC (born January 1951) is a Canadian economist and former Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet, Canada's most senior civil servant.
Kevin G. Lynch | |
|---|---|
.jpg) Lynch speaking at the Horasis Global Meeting; Portuguese Riviera, 2017 | |
| Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet | |
| In office March 6, 2006 – June 30, 2009 | |
| Prime Minister | Stephen Harper |
| Preceded by | Alex Himelfarb |
| Succeeded by | Wayne Wouters |
| Deputy Minister of Finance | |
| In office March 20, 2000 – October 31, 2004 | |
| Minister | |
| Preceded by | David A. Dodge |
| Succeeded by | Ian Bennett |
| Deputy Minister of Industry | |
| In office October 16, 1995 – March 19, 2000 | |
| Minister | John Manley |
| Preceded by | Office established |
| Succeeded by | Vernon Harder |
| Personal details | |
| Born | January 1951 (age 74) Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada |
| Alma mater | |
Life and career
Born in Sydney, Nova Scotia, he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from Mount Allison University, a Master of Economics degree from the University of Manchester, and a PhD in economics from McMaster University in 1980. He is married with two children.
Lynch began his career with the Bank of Canada as an economist in 1976. In 1981, he joined the Department of Finance and rose quickly through the ranks, becoming a Director in 1983 and an Assistant Deputy Minister in 1988.[citation needed] In 1992 he became Associate Deputy Minister at Industry and Deputy Minister of that department in 1995. In 2000, he returned to Finance, this time as Deputy Minister.[citation needed]
In 2004, he moved from Ottawa to Washington, DC, to serve as Executive Director for the Canadian, Irish and Caribbean constituency at the International Monetary Fund.
On March 6, 2006, he became the 20th Clerk of the Privy Council. On May 7, 2009, he announced that he would step down on July 1. He was replaced by Secretary of the Treasury Board Wayne Wouters.[1]
On May 11, 2009, he was sworn in as a member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada giving him the Pre-nominal title "The Honourable" and the Post-nominal letters "PC" for Life.
He is Chairman of SNC-Lavalin, the Montreal-based engineering company; Vice-Chair of the BMO Financial Group[2] and the Chair of the Board of Governors of the University of Waterloo.[3]
In 2011, he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada "for his contributions as a senior public servant, notably as head of Canada’s public service, and as a business leader and volunteer".[4]
In September 2011, the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada (APF Canada) and the Canada West Foundation established the Canada-Asia Energy Futures Task Force with Kevin G. Lynch and Kathleen (Kathy) E. Sendall, C.M., FCAE, a former Governor and Board Chair of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), as co-chairs, and to investigate a long-term Canada-Asia energy relationship. One of their recommendations was the creation of a public energy transportation corridor.[5]
On July 1, 2013, Lynch became Chancellor of the University of King's College in Halifax, Nova Scotia.[6]
On December 19, 2017, Lynch was named chairman of the board of directors of SNC-Lavalin.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Butts
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gerald Michael Butts born July 8, 1971 in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia,
: Upon graduating from McGill University, his first job was working as a research assistant in the Senate office of Allan MacEachen. There, he helped organize MacEachen's past correspondence for the purposes of his intended memoirs (which in the event were never written).
On February 18, 2019, Butts stepped down as Trudeau's principal secretary and stated that it was to defend himself from allegations made against him in relation to the SNC-Lavalin affair and to avoid drawing attention away from the prime minister's work.[4] In a statement released on Twitter, Butts denied influencing the Attorney General and noted that he specifically recruited Jody Wilson-Raybould to join the Liberal Party of Canada and was an avid supporter during both her candidacy and her tenure as a minister.[4] Butts reiterated these claims in testimony to the House Judiciary Committee on March 6, 2019.[23] At the time of Butts' resignation, Trudeau had responded by thanking him for his service, while acknowledging the integrity, guidance, and devotion that Butts had provided him.[24] In July 2019, Prime Minister Trudeau hired Butts back to play a key role in the Liberal 2019 election campaign.[25]
Between January 2017 and February 2024, Butt's Eurasia Group received over $1.5 million in contracts from the Government of Canada for consulting and geopolitical research.
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/02/jody-wilson-raybould-resigns-from.html
Tuesday, 12 February 2019
Jody Wilson-Raybould resigns from cabinet in wake of SNC-Lavalin allegations
From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:50:40 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: The Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell can
never deny that I tried to inform him of what the RCMP, the CBC and
his latest client Jody Wilson-Raybould knows Correct Me Butts?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
message will be carefully reviewed.
To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
Thank you
-------------------
Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
Vancouver Granville.
Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
votre adresse et votre code postal.
Merci
https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Methinks truth is stranger than fiction and anyone can easily Google "David Amos Federal Court file No. T-1557-15" in order to sort out the truth from fiction for themselves N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/02/jody-wilson-raybould-resigns-from.html
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wilson-rayboul-snc-lavalin-1.5015755
Jody Wilson-Raybould resigns from cabinet in wake of SNC-Lavalin allegations
David Amos
Surprise Surprise Surprise
David Amos
And now the lady quits? Yea Right
Trust that Mr Scheer and everyone else who sits in opposition know that Jody Wilson-Raybould may have lost her mandate as Justice Minister because of her failings in Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal within my lawsuit against the Crown that was filed when Harper was the Prime Minister and Mr Scheer was the Speaker. Need I say that it irritated me bigtime when Jody appointed her Deputy Minister to the bench of Federal Court not long after I argued their minions in the Federal Court of Appeal?
Methinks anyone can check my work by simply Googling two names "Jody Wilson-Raybould David Raymond Amos" N'esy Pas?
Everybody knows why I am about to put the aforementioned matter before the Supreme Court and file several more lawsuits in the Federal Court against the RCMP and the CRA etc and also run for a seat in Parliament again N'esy Pas?
Jody Wilson-Raybould resigns from cabinet in wake of SNC-Lavalin allegations
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stressed Monday that he had 'full confidence' in Wilson-Raybould
Jody Wilson-Raybould — the former justice minister who has kept largely silent since a news report claimed the Prime Minister's Office pressured her to help Quebec-based engineering firm SNC-Lavalin avoid criminal prosecution — has resigned from cabinet.
She tweeted a link to her resignation letter this morning.
"With a heavy heart I am writing to tender my resignation as the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence," she wrote.
With a heavy heart I have submitted my letter of resignation to the Prime Minister as a member of Cabinet... https://jwilson-raybould.liberal.ca/news-nouvelles/statement-from-the-honourable-jody-wilson-raybould-member-of-parliament-for-vancouver-granville/ …
"When I sought federal elected office, it was with the goal of implementing a positive and progressive vision of change on behalf of all Canadians and a different way of doing poltics."
Wilson-Raybould, who was shuffled to the Veterans Affairs portfolio in January, has been under intense scrutiny since a Globe and Mail report alleged last week that the PMO wanted her to direct federal prosecutors to make a "deferred prosecution agreement" (DPA) to avoid taking SNC-Lavalin to trial on bribery and fraud charges in relation to contracts in Libya.
Wilson-Raybould, who plans to stay on as MP for Vancouver-Granville, has been quiet since the story broke, saying she can't comment because she's bound by solicitor-client privilege.
In her resignation letter, she said she has retained the services of lawyer Thomas Cromwell, a former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, to advise her on "topics that I am legally permitted to discuss on this matter."
In an email to CBC News, Cromwell said he would not be making any statements or doing any interviews.
A spokesperson for MP Francis Scarpaleggia, chair of the national Liberal caucus, said that as of Tuesday morning, Wilson-Raybould hadn't left caucus.
Ethics investigation launched
Her resignation marks a significant turning point in the emerging SNC-Lavalin affair.
Just a day earlier, Prime Minster Justin Trudeau told reporters he continues "to have full confidence in Jody."
He also insisted that he did not direct Wilson-Raybould to come to any specific conclusions on whether to direct the Public Prosecution Service of Canada to reach an agreement with SNC-Lavalin.
"She confirmed for me a conversation we had this fall, where I told her directly that any decisions on matters involving the director of public prosecutions were hers alone," Trudeau said Monday.
"I respect her view that, due to privilege, she can't comment or add on matters recently before the media. I also highlight that we're bound by cabinet confidentiality. In our system of governance, her presence in cabinet should speak for itself."
On Monday, Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion informed the NDP MPs who had requested an investigation that there is sufficient cause to proceed with an inquiry into Trudeau's actions in the case.
Responding to a letter from NDP MPs, Dion said he would investigate the prime minister personally for a possible contravention of Section 9 of the Conflict of Interest Act, which prohibits any official responsible for high-level decision-making in government from seeking to influence the decision of another person so as to "improperly further another person's private interests."
SNC-Lavalin faces charges of fraud and corruption in connection with nearly $48 million in payments made to Libyan government officials between 2001 and 2011.
The company has pleaded not guilty.
If convicted, the company could be blocked from competing for federal government contracts for a decade.
The case is still at the preliminary hearing stage.
Gerald Michael Butts (born July 8, 1971) is a Canadian executive and former policy advisor to governments and political leaders. He is vice chairman and senior advisor at Eurasia Group and a Board Member of the World Wildlife Fund. He served as the Principal Secretary to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau from November 4, 2015 until his resignation on February 18, 2019.[2][3][4] From 2008 to 2012, he was president and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund Canada,[5] part of a global conservation organization. In 2014, Maclean's magazine declared Butts to be the fourteenth most powerful Canadian.[6] As the former Principal Secretary to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Butts was praised as the architect behind the Liberal Party of Canada platform that led to its victory in October 2015 and was one of the most senior staffers in the Office of the Prime Minister.
Born in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, with three older brothers and one older sister,[7] he is the son of Charles William "Charlie" Butts, a coal miner[8] who was 56 years old when Butts was born and retired when Butts was 6 years old, and Rita Monica (Yorke) Butts, a nurse[8] and a first-generation Canadian daughter of a Ukrainian father and a Polish mother.[9][10] He attended Bridgeport School (now closed) and then St. Michael's High School (now closed).
He received a B.A. and M.A. in English literature from McGill University in Montreal, Quebec. It was at McGill that he was introduced to Justin Trudeau by a mutual friend.[7][11] There, he was also elected president of the Canadian University Society for Intercollegiate Debate and won the national debating championships two years in a row.[7] He briefly attended York University to pursue a Ph.D.[10]
Career
Upon graduating from McGill University, his first job was working as a research assistant in the Senate office of Allan MacEachen. There, he helped organize MacEachen's past correspondence for the purposes of his intended memoirs (which in the event were never written).
In 1999, Butts became a policy director within the Government of Ontario.[7] He was the policy secretary, and later the principal secretary, in the office of the then premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, in Toronto.[12] Prior to the 2007 election, Butts was a McGuinty insider. After the election, he became McGuinty's principal adviser. As one of his biographical notes describes it, Butts "was intimately involved in all of the government’s significant environmental initiatives, from the Greenbelt and Boreal Conservation plan to the coal phase-out and toxic reduction strategy".[13]
Butts had previously worked with Senator Allan MacEachen and with George Smitherman.[7]
Butts advised the campaigns that led to the Ontario Liberal Party's election victories in 2003 and 2007.[10]
On June 25, 2008, Butts was announced as the president and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund Canada. He officially took up the position on September 2, 2008,[14] succeeding Mike Russill.
On October 16, 2012,[15] Butts left WWF Canada to become the political advisor to Justin Trudeau.[16] His position at WWF Canada was filled by David Miller, a former mayor of Toronto.
On December 13, 2012, Butts was interviewed by Steve Paikin for The Agenda on the topic of "The Best Way to Clean Up the Environment".[17][18] Butts has published articles in the Boston Book Review, the Literary Review of Canada, and Gravitas. He has also appeared on television programs such as W5 and TSN's Off the Record.
2015 Canadian election and premiership of Justin Trudeau
If the Liberals were to win the 2015 election, Gerald Butts could become one of the most powerful people in Canada.
— Lee Berthiaume[7]
... it's hard to picture Trudeau running for prime minister without [Gerald Butts].
— A fellow political aide[19]
In 2012, stemming from a two-decade-long friendship, Butts became the senior political adviser to Justin Trudeau [19] and one of the few people with whom Trudeau consulted regularly.[10] During Trudeau's initial time as Liberal Party leader. He also assisted on the vast majority of policies on which Trudeau campaigned.[10] He was appointed Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister on November 4, 2015.[2]
On September 21, 2016, The Globe and Mail reported that Butts had charged moving expenses to Canadian taxpayers in the amount of $126,669.56 to relocate his residence from Toronto to Ottawa.[20] These expenses included a personalized cash payout of $20,799.10.[21] After it was revealed publicly, Butts agreed to repay $41,618.62.[22]
On February 18, 2019, Butts stepped down as Trudeau's principal secretary and stated that it was to defend himself from allegations made against him in relation to the SNC-Lavalin affair and to avoid drawing attention away from the prime minister's work.[4] In a statement released on Twitter, Butts denied influencing the Attorney General and noted that he specifically recruited Jody Wilson-Raybould to join the Liberal Party of Canada and was an avid supporter during both her candidacy and her tenure as a minister.[4] Butts reiterated these claims in testimony to the House Judiciary Committee on March 6, 2019.[23] At the time of Butts' resignation, Trudeau had responded by thanking him for his service, while acknowledging the integrity, guidance, and devotion that Butts had provided him.[24] In July 2019, Prime Minister Trudeau hired Butts back to play a key role in the Liberal 2019 election campaign.[25]
Between January 2017 and February 2024, Butt's Eurasia Group received over $1.5 million in contracts from the Government of Canada for consulting and geopolitical research.[26][27]
Personal life
Butts is the nephew of the former Canadian senator Mary Alice "Peggy" Butts, whom he cites as a major influence on him.[28]
He is married to Jodi (Heimpel) Butts, a lawyer,[29] and they have two children, Aidan Ignatius (born May 6, 2006)[1] and Ava Augusta (born December 1, 2007).[30] They resided in Toronto for 13 years until the family relocated in the summer of 2016 to Ottawa. Butts currently resides at Champlain Park area of Westboro, Ottawa.[28]
References
- "Alumnotes". McGill University. Archived from the original on June 7, 2017.
External links
From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:50:24 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: The Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell can
never deny that I tried to inform him of what the RCMP, the CBC and
his latest client Jody Wilson-Raybould knows Correct Me Butts?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
support, please contact our Customer Service department at
1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.
If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
publiceditor@globeandmail.com<
Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com
This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
press releases.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Hon.Ralph.Goodale (PS/SP)" <Hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:50:29 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: The Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell can
never deny that I tried to inform him of what the RCMP, the CBC and
his latest client Jody Wilson-Raybould knows Correct Me Butts?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Merci d'avoir ?crit ? l'honorable Ralph Goodale, ministre de la
S?curit? publique et de la Protection civile.
En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de la correspondance
adress?e au ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un
retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Soyez assur? que votre
message sera examin? avec attention.
Merci!
L'Unit? de la correspondance minist?rielle
S?curit? publique Canada
*********
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of
Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence
addressed to the Minister, please note there could be a delay in
processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be
carefully reviewed.
Thank you!
Ministerial Correspondence Unit
Public Safety Canada
---------- Original message ----------
From: charlie.angus@parl.gc.ca
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:50:40 +0000
Subject: Autoreply
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for contacting my parliamentary office. This automated
response is to assure you that your message has been received and will
be reviewed as soon as possible, noting that constituents of Timmins -
James Bay will be given priority. Due to the high volume of
correspondence received, I am not able to respond personally to every
inquiry. In most cases, anonymous, cc'd, and forwarded items will not
receive a response.
If you have submitted a request for assistance please insure you have
included your full name, your mailing address and daytime telephone
number. To reach my community offices directly, please contact:
Timmins 1-866-935-6464
Kirkland Lake 1-866-504-2747
Cochrane 1-705-465-1315
Thank you kindly,
Charlie Angus
Member of Parliament for Timmins - James Bay
Je vous remercie d'avoir communiqué avec mon bureau parlementaire. La
présente réponse automatique vous est envoyée pour vous informer que
votre message a été reçu et qu'il sera examiné le plus rapidement
possible, la priorité étant accordée aux électeurs de Timmins - Baie
James. En raison du volume élevé de correspondance reçue, je ne peux
répondre personnellement à chaque demande. Dans la plupart des cas,
les lettres anonymes, copies conformes et pièces transmises resteront
sans réponse.
Si vous présentez une demande d'aide, n'oubliez pas d'indiquer votre
nom au complet, votre adresse postale et votre numéro de téléphone
(jour). Pour joindre directement mes bureaux locaux, veuillez
composer :
Timmins 1-866-935-6464
Kirkland Lake 1-866-504-2747
Cochrane 1-705-465-1315
Cordiales salutations,
Charlie Angus
Député de Timmins - Baie James
---------- Original message ----------
From: Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:50:40 +0000
Subject: Thank you for contacting the Office of Elizabeth May, O.C., M.P
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for contacting me. This response is to assure you that your
message has been received. I welcome and appreciate receiving comments
and questions from constituents.
I receive a much larger volume of correspondence (postal and email)
than the average MP. All emails are reviewed on a regular basis,
however due to the high volume of emails my office receives, I may not
be able to respond personally to each one.
My constituents in Saanich-Gulf Islands are my highest priority. If
you are a constituent, please email
elizabeth.may.c1a@parl.gc.ca<
help me serve you better, please ensure that your email includes your
full name and street address with your postal code.
For meeting requests and invitations, please email
requests@greenparty.ca
Thank you once again for contacting me.
Elizabeth May, O.C.
Member of Parliament
Saanich - Gulf Islands
Leader of the Green Party of Canada
--
Je vous remercie d'avoir communiqué avec moi. La présente réponse vous
confirme que votre message a été reçu. Les questions et les
commentaires des électeurs sont toujours les bienvenus.
Je reçois une correspondance (postale et électronique) beaucoup plus
abondante que le député type. Tous les messages électroniques sont lus
régulièrement, mais, en raison de l'abondance des courriels reçus à
mon bureau, il se peut que je ne sois pas en mesure de répondre
personnellement à chacun d'entre eux.
Mes électeurs de Saanich-Gulf Islands passent en premier. Si vous êtes
un électeur, veuillez écrire à
elizabeth.may.c1a@parl.gc.ca<
Pour m'aider à mieux vous servir, veillez à ce que votre courriel
comporte votre nom complet, votre adresse municipale et votre code
postal.
Pour les demandes de rencontre et les invitations, veuillez écrire à
requests@greenparty.ca
Je vous remercie encore d'avoir communiqué avec moi.
Elizabeth May, O.C.
Députée à la Chambre des communes
Saanich-Gulf Islands
Chef du Parti vert du Canada
---------- Original message ----------
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:50:13 -0400
Subject: The Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell can never deny that I
tried to inform him of what the RCMP, the CBC and his latest client
Jody Wilson-Raybould knows Correct Me Butts?
To: TCromwell@blg.com, catharine.tunney@cbc.ca,
Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
JagmeetForBurnaby@ndp.ca, maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca,
charlie.angus@parl.gc.ca, elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca,
Hunter.Tootoo@parl.gc.ca, tony.clement.a1@parl.gc.ca,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc@canada.ca,
Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca,
jp.lewis@unb.ca, Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca,
steve.murphy@ctv.ca, Newsroom@globeandmail.com, news@kingscorecord.com
---------- Original message ----------
From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 10:07:59 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: RE:: DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HMQ - COURT FILE
NO.: A-48-16 , Attn Lorri Warner have you and your bosses talked the
RCMP and the FBI YET???
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
message will be carefully reviewed.
To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
Thank you
-------------------
Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
Vancouver Granville.
Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
votre adresse et votre code postal.
Merci
The Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell C.C.
Senior Counsel
Phone: 604.632.3460
Fax: 604.662.5327
TCromwell@blg.com
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Jody Wilson-Raybould resigns from cabinet after SNC-Lavalin allegations
Catharine Tunney · CBC News · Posted: Feb 12, 2019 11:39 AM ET
"Wilson-Raybould, who plans to stay on as MP for Vancouver-Granville,
has been quiet since the Globe and Mail story broke, saying she can't
comment because she's bound by solicitor-client privilege.
In her resignation letter, she said she has retained the services of
lawyer Thomas Cromwell, a former justice of the Supreme Court of
Canada, to advise her on "topics that I am legally permitted to
discuss on this matter."
In an email to CBC News, Cromwell said he would not be making any
statements or doing any interviews."
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Gallant, Premier Brian (PO/CPM)" <Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 17:05:07 +0000
> Subject: RE: So what does Premier Gallant and Minister Doucet et al
> think of my lawsuit? How about David Coon and his blogging buddy
> Chucky joking about being illegally barred from parliamentary property
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you for writing to the Premier of New Brunswick.
> Please be assured that your email has been received, will be reviewed,
> and a response will be forthcoming.
> Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.
>
> Merci d'avoir communiqué avec le premier ministre du Nouveau-Brunswick.
> Soyez assuré que votre courriel a bien été reçu, qu'il sera examiné
> et qu'une réponse vous sera acheminée.
> Merci encore d'avoir pris de temps de nous écrire.
>
> Sincerely, / Sincèrement,
> Mallory Fowler
> Correspondence Manager / Gestionnaire de la correspondance
> Office of the Premier / Cabinet du premier ministre
>
>
> On 1/19/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Good Day Sir
>>>
>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed
>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>>
>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who
>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt
>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>>
>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>>> suggested that you study closely.
>>>
>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>>
>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>
>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>
>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>
>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>
>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>
>>>
>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>
>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>
>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>>
>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>>
>>> Date: 20151223
>>>
>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>>
>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>>
>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>>
>>> BETWEEN:
>>>
>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>
>>> Plaintiff
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>
>>> Defendant
>>>
>>> ORDER
>>>
>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>>> December 14, 2015)
>>>
>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
>>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
>>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
>>> in its entirety.
>>>
>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
>>> he stated:
>>>
>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>>
>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>>> Police.
>>>
>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>>
>>>
>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
>>> is no order as to costs.
>>>
>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>>> Judge
>>>
>>>
>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>>
>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>>
>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the
>>> most
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>>> dudes are way past too late
>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>
>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>
>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>
>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Merci ,
>>>
>>>
>>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>
>>>
>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>>
>>> January 13, 2015
>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>>
>>> December 8, 2014
>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>>
>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>>
>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>>
>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>>> campaign of 2006.
>>>
>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>>
>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>>
>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>>
>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>>>
>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>>
>>> Subject:
>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>
>>> January 30, 2007
>>>
>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>>
>>> Mr. David Amos
>>>
>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>
>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>>
>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>>> Minister of Health
>>>
>>> CM/cb
>>>
>>>
>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>>
>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>>
>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>>
>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position
>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>>
>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>>
>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>>> Traffic Services NCO
>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:35 AM
>>> Subject: RE My complaint against the CROWN in Federal Court Attn David
>>> Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to submit a motion for a
>>> publication ban on my complaint trust that you dudes are way past too
>>> late
>>> To: David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca, peter.mackay@justice.gc.ca
>>> peacock.kurt@telegraphjournal.
>>> david.akin@sunmedia.ca, robert.frater@justice.gc.ca,
>>> paul.riley@ppsc-sppc.gc.ca,
>>> greg@gregdelbigio.com, joyce.dewitt-vanoosten@gov.bc.
>>> joan.barrett@ontario.ca, jean-vincent.lacroix@gouv.qc.
>>> peter.rogers@mcinnescooper.com
>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, gopublic@cbc.ca,
>>> Whistleblower@ctv.ca
>>>
>>> https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-
>>>
>>> http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/
>>>
>>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>>
>>> I repeat what the Hell do I do with the Yankee wiretapes taps sell
>>> them on Ebay or listen to them and argue them with you dudes in
>>> Feferal Court?
>>>
>>> Petey Baby loses all parliamentary privelges in less than a month but
>>> he still supposed to be an ethical officer of the Court CORRECT?
>>>
>>> Veritas Vincit
>>> David Raymond Amos
>>> 902 800 0369
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:10:14 -0400
>>> Subject: Yo Mr Bauer say hey to your client Obama and his buddies in
>>> the USDOJ for me will ya?
>>> To: RBauer@perkinscoie.com, sshimshak@paulweiss.com,
>>> cspada@lswlaw.com, msmith@svlaw.com, bginsberg@pattonboggs.com,
>>> gregory.craig@skadden.com, pm@pm.gc.ca, bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>> bob.rae@rogers.blackberry.net, MulcaT@parl.gc.ca, leader@greenparty.ca
>>> Cc: alevine@cooley.com, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com,
>>> michael.rothfeld@wsj.com, remery@ecbalaw.com
>>>
>>> QSLS Politics
>>> By Location Visit Detail
>>> Visit 29,419
>>> Domain Name usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
>>> IP Address 149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
>>> ISP US Dept of Justice
>>> Location Continent : North America
>>> Country : United States (Facts)
>>> State : District of Columbia
>>> City : Washington
>>> Lat/Long : 38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
>>> Language English (U.S.) en-us
>>> Operating System Microsoft WinXP
>>> Browser Internet Explorer 8.0
>>> Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET
>>> CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2;
>>> DI60SP1001)
>>> Javascript version 1.3
>>> Monitor Resolution : 1024 x 768
>>> Color Depth : 32 bits
>>> Time of Visit Nov 17 2012 6:33:08 pm
>>> Last Page View Nov 17 2012 6:33:08 pm
>>> Visit Length 0 seconds
>>> Page Views 1
>>> Referring URL http://www.google.co...
>>> Search Engine google.com
>>> Search Words david amos bernie madoff
>>> Visit Entry Page http://qslspolitics....-wendy-
>>> Visit Exit Page http://qslspolitics....-wendy-
>>> Out Click
>>> Time Zone UTC-5:00
>>> Visitor's Time Nov 17 2012 12:33:08 pm
>>> Visit Number 29,419
>>>
>>> http://qslspolitics.blogspot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Could ya tell I am investigating your pension plan bigtime? Its
>>> because no member of the RCMP I have ever encountered has earned it yet
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:36:04 -0400
>>> Subject: This is a brief as I can make my concerns Randy
>>> To: randyedmunds@gov.nl.ca
>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> In a nutshell my concerns about the actions of the Investment Industry
>>> affect the interests of every person in every district of every
>>> country not just the USA and Canada. I was offering to help you with
>>> Emera because my work with them and Danny Williams is well known and
>>> some of it is over eight years old and in the PUBLIC Record.
>>>
>>> All you have to do is stand in the Legislature and ask the MInister of
>>> Justice why I have been invited to sue Newfoundland by the
>>> Conservatives
>>>
>>>
>>> Obviously I am the guy the USDOJ and the SEC would not name who is the
>>> link to Madoff and Putnam Investments
>>>
>>> Here is why
>>>
>>> http://banking.senate.gov/
>>>
>>> Notice the transcripts and webcasts of the hearing of the US Senate
>>> Banking Commitee are still missing? Mr Emory should at least notice
>>> Eliot Spitzer and the Dates around November 20th, 2003 in the
>>> following file
>>>
>>> http://www.checktheevidence.
>>>
>>> http://occupywallst.org/users/
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: "Hansen, David" David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca
>>> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 19:28:44 +0000
>>> Subject: RE: I just called again Mr Hansen
>>> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Hello Mr. Amos,
>>>
>>> I manage the Justice Canada civil litigation section in the Atlantic
>>> region. We are only responsible for litigating existing civil
>>> litigation files in which the Attorney General of Canada is a named
>>> defendant or plaintiff. If you are a plaintiff or defendant in an
>>> existing civil litigation matter in the Atlantic region in which
>>> Attorney General of Canada is a named defendant or plaintiff please
>>> provide the court file number, the names of the parties in the action
>>> and your question. I am not the appropriate contact for other
>>> matters.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> David A. Hansen
>>> Regional Director | Directeur régional
>>> General Counsel |Avocat général
>>> Civil Litigation and Advisory | Contentieux des affaires civiles et
>>> services de consultation
>>> Department of Justice | Ministère de la Justice
>>> Suite 1400 – Duke Tower | Pièce 1400 – Tour Duke
>>> 5251 Duke Street | 5251 rue Duke
>>> Halifax, Nova Scotia | Halifax, Nouvelle- Écosse
>>> B3J 1P3
>>> david.hansen@justice.gc.ca
>>> Telephone | Téléphone (902) 426-3261 / Facsimile | Télécopieur (902)
>>> 426-2329
>>> This e-mail is confidential and may be protected by solicitor-client
>>> privilege. Unauthorized distribution or disclosure is prohibited. If
>>> you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us and delete
>>> this entire e-mail.
>>> Before printing think about the Environment
>>> Thinking Green, please do not print this e-mail unless necessary.
>>> Pensez vert, svp imprimez que si nécessaire.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:23:24 -0300
>>>> Subject: ATTN FBI Special Agent Richard Deslauriers Have you talked to
>>>> your buddies Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly about the wiretap tapes YET?
>>>> To: boston@ic.fbi.gov, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
>>>> bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>>> Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov, Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov,
>>>> jcarney@carneybassil.com, bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net
>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, birgittaj@althingi.is,
>>>> shmurphy@globe.com, redicecreations@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> FBI Boston
>>>> One Center Plaza
>>>> Suite 600
>>>> Boston, MA 02108
>>>> Phone: (617) 742-5533
>>>> Fax: (617) 223-6327
>>>> E-mail: Boston@ic.fbi.gov
>>>>
>>>> Hours
>>>> Although we operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, our normal
>>>> "walk-in" business hours are from 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
>>>> through Friday. If you need to speak with a FBI representative at any
>>>> time other than during normal business hours, please telephone our
>>>> office at (617) 742-5533.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:20:20 -0300
>>>> Subject: Yo Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly your buddy Whitey's trial is
>>>> finally underway now correct? What the hell do I do with the wiretap
>>>> tapes Sell them on Ebay?
>>>> To: Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov,
>>>> Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, jcarney@carneybassil.com,
>>>> bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net, wolfheartlodge@live.com, shmurphy@globe.com,
>>>> >> jonathan.albano@bingham.com, mvalencia@globe.com
>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
>>>> PATRICK.MURPHY@dhs.gov, rounappletree@aol.com
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bostonglobe.com/
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>
>>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must ask
>>>> them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>
>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>>>> cards?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>
>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>
>>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>
>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>
>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>> United States Senate
>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>
>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>
>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>> tapes.
>>>>
>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously.
>>>>
>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "David Amos" david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>> To: "Rob Talach" rtalach@ledroitbeckett.com
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:59 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Attn Robert Talach and I should talk ASAP about my suing
>>>> the Catholic Church Trust that Bastarache knows why
>>>>
>>>> The date stamp on about page 134 of this old file of mine should mean
>>>> a lot to you
>>>>
>>>> http://www.checktheevidence.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:37:08 -0400
>>>> Subject: To Hell with the KILLER COP Gilles Moreau What say you NOW
>>>> Bernadine Chapman??
>>>> To: Gilles.Moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, phil.giles@statcan.ca,
>>>> maritme_malaise@yahoo.ca, Jennifer.Nixon@ps-sp.gc.ca,
>>>> bartman.heidi@psic-ispc.gc.ca, Yves.J.Marineau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>> david.paradiso@erc-cee.gc.ca, desaulniea@smtp.gc.ca,
>>>> denise.brennan@tbs-sct.gc.ca, anne.murtha@vac-acc.gc.ca,
>>>> webo@xplornet.com, julie.dickson@osfi-bsif.gc.ca,
>>>> rod.giles@osfi-bsif.gc.ca, flaherty.j@parl.gc.ca, toewsv1@parl.gc.ca,
>>>> Nycole.Turmel@parl.gc.ca,Cleme
>>>> >> oig@sec.gov, whistleblower@finra.org, whistle@fsa.gov.uk,
>>>> david@fairwhistleblower.ca
>>>> Cc: j.kroes@interpol.int, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com,
>>>> bernadine.chapman@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>>> Juanita.Peddle@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
>>>> Wayne.Lang@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Robert.Trevors@gnb.ca,
>>>> ian.fahie@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/nb/
>>>>
>>>> http://nb.rcmpvet.ca/
>>>>
>>>> From: Gilles Moreau Gilles.Moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:03:22 -0500
>>>> Subject: Re: Lets ee if the really nasty Newfy Lawyer Danny Boy
>>>> Millions will explain this email to you or your boss Vic Toews EH
>>>> Constable Peddle???
>>>> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> Please cease and desist from using my name in your emails.
>>>>
>>>> Gilles Moreau, Chief Superintendent, CHRP and ACC
>>>> Director General
>>>> HR Transformation
>>>> 73 Leikin Drive, M5-2-502
>>>> Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R2
>>>>
>>>> Tel 613-843-6039
>>>> Cel 613-818-6947
>>>>
>>>> Gilles Moreau, surintendant principal, CRHA et ACC
>>>> Directeur général de la Transformation des ressources humaines
>>>> 73 Leikin, pièce M5-2-502
>>>> Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2
>>>>
>>>> tél 613-843-6039
>>>> cel 613-818-6947
>>>> gilles.moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>
>>
>
OGGO Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
38th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates
EVIDENCE
CONTENTS
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
| ¹ | 1530 |
 |
The Chair (Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC)) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall (As an Individual) |
| ¹ | 1535 |
| ¹ | 1540 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister (Portage—Lisgar, CPC) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| ¹ | 1545 |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
| ¹ | 1550 |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
The Chair |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
| ¹ | 1555 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.) |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
| º | 1600 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia |
| º | 1605 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pat Martin |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pat Martin |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| º | 1610 |
|
Mr. Pat Martin |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent (Ottawa Centre, NDP) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| º | 1615 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
| º | 1620 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Brian Pallister |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| º | 1625 |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
| º | 1630 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn (Saanich—Gulf Islands, CPC) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| º | 1635 |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Joe Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| º | 1640 |
|
Mr. Odina Desrochers |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Odina Desrochers |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Odina Desrochers |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Odina Desrochers |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Odina Desrochers |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, Lib.) |
| º | 1645 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| º | 1650 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Joe Preston |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC) |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
| º | 1655 |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Pierre Poilievre |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau (Sudbury, Lib.) |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
| » | 1700 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
The Chair |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Ms. Louise Thibault |
| » | 1705 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| » | 1710 |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Hon. Ed Broadbent |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| » | 1715 |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Ken Boshcoff |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Marc Godbout |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC) |
| » | 1720 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
| » | 1725 |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Peter MacKay |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
The Chair |
| » | 1730 |
|
Hon. David Dingwall |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gary Lunn |
|
The Chair |
CANADA
Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates |
|
l |
|
l |
|
EVIDENCE
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
* * *
¹ 
(1530)
[English]
The Chair (Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC)): Good afternoon, everyone.
I call this meeting to order. We're here today to discuss the activities of the office of the President of the Royal Canadian Mint and relevant expenditures.
As members are aware, it is the responsibility of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates to review the effectiveness of government operations as well as the expenditure plans of central departments and agencies, commissions, foundations, and selected crown corporations. Of course, the Royal Canadian Mint is one of those crown corporations.
We have before us today the former president of the Mint, Mr. David Dingwall. Mr. Dingwall is accompanied by legal counsel. I remind members that counsel is restricted to an advisory role and may not ask questions or reply on Mr. Dingwall's behalf. I just say this so that you are aware of it.
Mr. Dingwall, I would like to once again welcome you here this afternoon. I'd like to respectfully remind you—and you are aware of this, of course, being a former Liberal cabinet minister—that a failure to reply truthfully or the refusal to answer questions may give rise to a charge of contempt of the House.
Mr. Dingwall, you have five minutes to make your opening statement. I understand it may go to seven minutes, which is fine. I look forward to your statement, and we'll get directly into questions following the statement.
Hon. David Dingwall (As an Individual): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Members of the committee, I welcome the opportunity to be here today. For the past two weeks I have waited quietly and patiently for the results of the independent audit report, which I expect will fully answer all questions regarding the expenses of the office of the president of the Mint.
Mr. Chairman, as the president, I am accountable to the board of directors and to the shareholder for complete financial performance of the Mint. I take full responsibility for all of the expenses of the office of the president.
I will begin by outlining briefly the nature of the expenses that were incurred by the office of the president. The vast majority of those expenses were administrative costs allocated to the cost centre of the office of the president and unrelated to business travel or hospitality expenses. That is an important distinction to make.
The expenses of the Mint were allocated to key cost centres. As you can see in your handout, the overall costs of the office of the president for 2004 were $747,597. These can be broken down into several categories.
Salaries and benefits for myself and my staff of three accounted for 72%; business travel, meals, and hospitality, foreign, 12.7%. The primary purpose of those trips was to open and build new markets for the Mint--to forge the relationship necessary to create and maintain sustainable partnerships with our customers.
Business travel, domestic, was 5.3% of the cost centre. The primary purpose of these trips was to meet with customers, suppliers, master club members, potential customers, financial institutions, and our partners in promotional and marketing efforts to build the brand and to increase the revenues of the Mint. As well, you will recall that the Mint has two operating facilities, and I had to be available in both operations.
Office expenses were 3.8% of the cost structure. Essentially this encompassed the overhead of the entire office, from courier to telephone to extensive mail-outs.
Training seminars, workshops, rewards, and recognitions of the Mint were 1.7% of the cost centre.
Hospitality, domestic, was 1.5% of the cost centre. This consisted primarily of hosting current and prospective customers for working dinners or lunches.
Membership and vehicle were 1.5% of the cost centre. As the CEO of a large commercial corporation, I am at times called to play host to customers and suppliers of the Mint. As a result of my appointment, the board approved, as part of my benefits package, the cost of two memberships as well as the cost of several professional memberships.
It has been falsely reported that I have a leased car, Mr. Chairman. I paid for my car myself; the maintenance and expenses were part of my employment contract with the Mint.
Meals, domestic, were 1.5%. Working breakfasts, lunches, and dinners for employees are included in this category. On a number of occasions I have asked employees to give up family time and personal time to discuss Mint business. The most practical way was to do this over a meal, either during lunch hour or in the evening over a dinner. Also included were administrative meetings four times a week, executive meetings once a week, executive retreats twice a year, and an annual leadership conference of Mint employees that for the first time included union representatives and their members.
Mr. Chairman, the expense of $5,300 has been erroneously reported as one meal for myself and my staff. In fact, this expense was the cost for a two-day business seminar involving 28 people from the Royal Canadian Mint. This event provided valuable discussion and direction for our organization, and indeed this cost should come under the responsibility of the office of the president.
The travel approval process at the Mint is well established and must be followed for every single expense that is submitted.
Before travel arrangements can be made, a pre-approval form for travel must be submitted and signed by the immediate supervisor. In my case, the policy was for the chief financial officer to pre-approve my travel.
During the trip, the travel policy determines the specific items that can be claimed, and any deviation will be disallowed from the claim. In my case, all expenses were backed by receipts.
After the trip is completed, an expense claim is prepared. My expenses are put under the scrutiny of the chief financial officer, who goes through each and every item claimed and has the opportunity and authority to approve and to disapprove them. Subsequently, the accounts payable section of the finance division carries out a review of the claim to determine compliance with the travel policy.
¹ (1535)
The audits. The expenses of all members of the board of directors, including myself, are reviewed on an annual basis by the internal auditor and a report is prepared for the chair of the audit committee, who then reports the results to the audit committee and the board. In addition, all operational and capital expenditures are audited on an annual basis by the Office of the Auditor General to determine whether all policies were adhered to.
Mr. Chairman, in June 2005, the Office of the Auditor General's five-year special examination of the Royal Canadian Mint was released. Under the Financial Administration Act, crown corporations must undergo a special examination of their financial and management control and information systems as well as management practices at least once every five years. In the opinion of the Auditor General of Canada, and I quote:
| ...based on the criteria established for the examination, there is reasonable assurance that there were no significant deficiencies in the systems and practices we examined. |
In addition, I have already mentioned that I have asked for an independent audit of all the expenses of the president of the Mint during the relevant period. That audit is ongoing, and I understand it will report on October 26.
The Royal Canadian Mint, Mr. Chairman, is a $324 million commercial corporation, which is listed under part II, schedule III, of the Financial Administration Act. This means the Mint operates in a competitive environment without appropriations and with the expectation that it will create a profit. The fact is, and the numbers show, that in my two and a half years with the Mint and within eight months of my appointment, it grew into a profitable corporation and has posted 22 consecutive months of profit.
Expenses do have to be seen in the context of the Mint's turnaround, and those facts are all there for all to see. The result was that we were able to earn a profit of $16 million pre-tax in 2004, marking one of the largest single fiscal swings in the Mint's history. Our corporate revenues, Mr. Chairman, in 2004 increased by 27%--almost $70 million over 2003. Our foreign circulation revenues went from $7.1 million in 2003 to $25.1 million in 2004, and our bullion revenues increased by $35 million in 2004.
For the first time in a decade, Mr. Chairman, the Mint has issued a dividend of $1 million to our shareholder. In addition, $64 million of seigniorage payments was made to the shareholder, the Government of Canada. These results cannot be achieved solely over the telephone, as one or two of my critics have now claimed. I had to go on the road and spend my time with prospective customers to build up our business.
Mr. Chairman, let me state again that although all of my expenses were thoroughly scrutinized during my tenure, should the independent audit discover any error, I will repay the corporation fully. However, I make this promise lightly, because knowing the rigour at the Mint, I have full confidence that no errors were made. I await the audit report with confidence that the auditors will find the expenses of my office were appropriate. Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, I am also confident that the auditors will find that the corporation did not pay for this package of gum.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
¹ (1540)
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall, for your opening comment.
We'll go directly to questioning, and first up for questioning is the Conservative member, Mr. Pallister.
Mr. Brian Pallister (Portage—Lisgar, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, colleagues.
I'll leave the myth of your self-proclaimed management capabilities for another day, sir. My questions concern simply facts that I'd like you to give me yes or no answers to today, if you would do me that honour.
On September 27, we released information regarding your expenses while you were president and CEO of the Royal Canadian Mint. On September 28, the Prime Minister announced in the House of Commons that he had spoken to you and you were resigning. Is that correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Did you or any representative of yours speak with Treasury Board Minister Reg Alcock before you resigned?
I understand you did speak to Minister Alcock and he asked you to stay on. I understand that representatives from the Empire Grill were interested in your staying on as well. I wonder if you or any representative of yours spoke to Mr. Alcock after you resigned.
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I—
Mr. Brian Pallister: Did you or any representative of yours speak to Mr. Alcock after you resigned, sir, yes or no?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, in response to the honourable member's question, I did have the opportunity to speak with the minister of the Treasury Board prior to my public pronouncement. We had a brief discussion with respect to what was taking place.
Mr. Brian Pallister: This isn't the nature of my question, Mr. Dingwall, as you well know. I asked you a simple question. I expect a simple answer.
Did you speak to Minister Alcock after you resigned, you or any representative of yours?
Hon. David Dingwall: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Thank you, sir.
So you didn't raise the issue of severance with Minister Alcock at any point in time?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Thank you, sir.
Did you or any representative of yours speak with Minister McCallum regarding severance before or after you resigned?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I did speak with the minister responsible for the Royal Canadian Mint, yes.
Mr. Brian Pallister: And did you raise the question of severance when you discussed your resignation with him, sir?
Hon. David Dingwall: I believe I raised the issue of entitlements, yes.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Did the minister raise it or did you raise it, sir?
Hon. David Dingwall: I raised it.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Thank you.
Have you spoken to the Prime Minister personally, apart from your conversation when you announced your intention to resign, sir?
Hon. David Dingwall: Not since then, no.
Mr. Brian Pallister: And neither you nor a representative of yours has spoken to anyone in the Prime Minister's office at any point in time prior to or since your resignation announcement?
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, I've spoken with officials at the Privy Council Office.
Mr. Brian Pallister: I see. Could you tell us who those officials are, by name?
Hon. David Dingwall: I believe it was the Clerk of the Privy Council I spoke with.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Okay. And that was concerning your entitlements?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes.
Mr. Brian Pallister: I see. Thank you.
Apart from the conversations you've alluded to with the Privy Council Office, have you or any representative of yours spoken to anyone in the Liberal government concerning severance, anyone other than—
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm sorry?
Mr. Brian Pallister: Have you spoken to any officials within the Liberal government about severance, with the exception of the conversation you've already alluded to?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I have not spoken with any member of the cabinet, any member of the government, nor any member of the opposition, nor any member of other parties of this House.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Okay. That would be understandable, sir.
Now, on the issue of speaking to Minister McCallum concerning severance, can you tell us, since you raise the issue of severance, did you state specifically what your expectations were as to the amount of severance you expected to receive?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, in my discussions with Mr. McCallum we talked about the Mint, the successes of the Mint, and the difficulties the Mint would likely incur in the months flowing. I raised the issue of entitlements. He indicated to me I should talk to officials in PCO, and that was it.
¹ (1545)
Mr. Brian Pallister: So in your conversations subsequent to that time with officials at the PCO, have you stated in those discussions what your expectations are for severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I have left that to lawyers.
Mr. Brian Pallister: So representatives on your behalf are in negotiations with the PCO at this point on the nature of the severance you might negotiate with the government?
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, I'm not an expert in terms of entitlements, as far as my—
Mr. Brian Pallister: Au contraire, monsieur.
Hon. David Dingwall: Am I allowed to complete my answer, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Brian Pallister: Certainly.
Hon. David Dingwall: I am not an expert in terms of entitlements, and I've retained legal counsel. Legal counsel is providing me information and recommendations, and legal counsel in due course will have the appropriate discussions with officials of the government.
Mr. Brian Pallister: So you're not an expert on entitlements, but you raised the issue of entitlements with Minister McCallum before you announced your intention to resign. Is that correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, during the conversation I raised it, yes.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You did. All right.
So when you made the decision to resign, you had received assurances from a minister in the Liberal government that you would be receiving severance. Is that correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, that is not correct.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You received assurances that it might be negotiated subsequent to your resignation. Is that correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I did not receive those assurances. All that was referred to in our discussions was to direct them to officials in PCO. That's what we adhered to and that's what we followed.
Mr. Brian Pallister: And, sir, do you believe you're entitled to receive severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: I believe I have entitlements as a result of the performance I provided at the Royal Canadian Mint.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You believe you have entitlements, sir. In terms of your remuneration contract, you negotiated a number of entitlements, which we don't need to go into here—of course there are many—but none of them related to severance. Do you believe you're entitled to negotiate severance after the fact?
Hon. David Dingwall: I am going to leave that to the lawyers. I'm not going to prejudge what might be hypothetical in terms of what you may think or what I may think. That's why I retain legal counsel, to provide me with that kind of advice.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Would you admit, though, sir, that it's clearly not a legal obligation on the part of the government to pay you severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: That is an issue that my lawyers will determine and provide me with the appropriate advice so that we can begin the appropriate actions if necessary.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You are aware, of course, that virtually every other Canadian who quits a job, under any circumstances, least of all the circumstances under which you announced your resignation, is not entitled to severance. Would you agree that the offering of severance to you would create the impression of a double standard or a separate set of rules that would apply to Liberal patronage appointees as opposed to working Canadians?
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm not going to take your counsel on this.
Mr. Brian Pallister: I'm not offering counsel; I'm asking a simple question, sir. Yes or no?
Hon. David Dingwall: If I may, Mr. Chairman, I think I'm allowed and entitled to provide some sort of response. I'm not going to take counsel or advice from the honourable member. I'm going to leave that to professionals, and they will provide me with the professional advice as it relates to my entitlements, and thereafter we'll take the appropriate actions.
Mr. Brian Pallister: That's interesting, sir. I thank you for that observation.
While you're up in the ivory tower, I'd suggest that you perhaps speak to the Prime Minister who's up there with you, looking down on the average working Canadian with such disdain that you would allow Canadians to be used as a personal ATM for your party and your patronage appointees. That's exactly what the Prime Minister will do if he pays you a penny in severance. Don't you agree?
Hon. David Dingwall: I certainly don't agree with the preamble of the honourable member.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You know, sir, your claim to severance is very frail. The government has tried to support it virtually every day since your resignation was announced, which gives me the impression that they were of the opinion that they would have to pay you severance, even though you've not openly said that today. They've made several arguments, and I don't have time to go into them now, but virtually every day they have made an argument to the media, to the Canadian public, that they had to pay you severance. Yet none of those stand up to scrutiny, sir, which leads me to ask you, I guess, because the possibility is very real that there are no precedents or legal grounds for severance to be paid to you, and it creates the impression that you have something on the Prime Minister: do you think it's possible that unlike your relationship with Chuck Guité, the Prime Minister isn't entirely certain that unless he pays you severance you won't rat on him? Is that a fair observation, sir?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, the preamble of the honourable member is just ludicrous, just ludicrous.
The Chair: Mr. Pallister, your time is up.
¹ (1550)
Mr. Brian Pallister: Thank you, sir.
The Chair: For the second round, we'll go to Madame Thibault for seven minutes.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be sharing my time with my colleague.
Mr. Dingwall, in your statement, which I am paraphrasing, you say that all of the expenses were covered by the corporation's operating revenues and not by taxpayers. You will agree with me in saying that we would all hope that the person in charge of a Crown corporation would contribute to making it profitable.
But you seem to be saying that such a situation is quite rare and that because you earned a profit, the expenses that you claim should be very generous. As a matter of fact, your policies provide ample proof of this. I might come back to this issue later. I do have many reservations with regard to your statement. I would therefore invite you to share with us, in one minute, any comments you may have in this regard.
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member, part II of schedule III of the Financial Administration Act outlines those crown corporations that are designated as commercial entities. We receive no appropriations from the Government of Canada. We make our revenue by selling a variety of different products, whether it be numismatics or whether it be our gold bullion.
As I alluded to in my statement, we had a very good year in 2004 in terms of our foreign circulation, selling Canadian coin to various other countries. That is the revenue that we generate for the corporation, and the operational expenses are taken out of that. But we have not received appropriations from the Government of Canada during my tenure. I believe only three or four commercial corporations are in that category. The Mint is one of those in that category, and as a result, no appropriations are forthcoming.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: You have not answered my question, sir. I will put a second one to you.
If I understood correctly, on the basis of the interventions made by my colleague from the Conservative Party, your contract contained no clause providing for a severance of any kind. Is that the case?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: I believe, and my lawyers believe, there are entitlements. I've asked them to provide me with good counsel, and they are doing so. When I get their recommendations, and after their discussions with government representatives, we'll then be in a better position to move in a prudent way.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: You believe that it is included in your contract, but that it is not sufficiently clear for the average citizen to easily determine it. This is in fact what you are telling me.
My final question relates to your situation as a lobbyist. As a Minister, you were responsible for several portfolios. I am convinced that you are very familiar with the post-employment rules that apply in departments and organizations. You even were called upon to enforce these rules. Normally, there is a two-year limitation period.
Why then, barely nine months after having ceased your ministerial duties, did you undertake lobbying activities? How can you explain that you did this without having in any way been registered as a lobbyist?
[English]
The Chair: Mr. Dingwall.
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, if I understand the question correctly, yes, I did go into the private sector after the electors in my constituency decided to give me another job.
I was in the private sector. I was registered accordingly. I followed the rules of the Lobbyists Registration Act and registered accordingly, as well as the post-employment guidelines; I adhered to those as well.
The Chair: Mr. Dingwall, before we go to Mr. Desrochers, I would just like to get clarification.
We'll just stop the clock; you have your time still.
You've been asked twice today about the issue of severance and you haven't responded to it directly. Both members have asked you whether in fact you have discussed specifically severance, not entitlement. Would you please answer that question, Mr. Dingwall?
¹ (1555)
Hon. David Dingwall: I have discussed entitlements with officials. I have discussed entitlements with my legal counsel, and I'm waiting on recommendations from legal counsel in terms of how I might proceed.
The Chair: Is severance part of the entitlements, or one of the entitlements, as you see it, that you've discussed?
Hon. David Dingwall: It may or may not be. I'm waiting for recommendations from my counsel.
The Chair: Does that mean then that you have not specifically discussed severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: I told you in response to previous questions, Mr. Chairman, that I raised the issue of entitlements and I was told to discuss it with the officials, and that's what we're doing.
The Chair: You know, Mr. Dingwall, you've come here today....
Is there a point of order?
Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, you're asking some very good questions, and I think the members around the table are going to ask those. I think the chair should maybe let us get on with our questioning.
The Chair: With all due respect, Mr. Szabo, when someone comes before this committee, we all expect that witness to answer questions. He is not answering this question about severance.
Mr. Dingwall, I would remind you that you are expected to answer questions, not to avoid answers, and respectfully—
Hon. David Dingwall: With due respect, Mr. Chairman, you're asking a very specific question, and I'm giving you an answer you don't like. You don't like the answer I'm giving, but that is the answer, Mr. Chairman: I raised the issue of entitlements. I was told, speak to the officials. I spoke to the officials. My lawyers are now in discussions with the officials, and I'm waiting for advice from my lawyers. How long that will take.... Well, you know what lawyers are like.
The Chair: Is one of those entitlements severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't know, Mr. Chairman, at this point in time. I don't have a recommendation before me at this point, and I will wait until I get good legal advice before I make any statement of that nature.
The Chair: Okay. From your answer I'm taking it that you have not specifically discussed the issue of severance.
Hon. David Dingwall: I discussed the specific issue of entitlements.
The Chair: Mr. Dingwall, the committee will deal with the issue of, quite frankly, not getting an answer to a very specific question. We'll discuss that later. We'll go on with the questioning now.
Mr. Desrochers, you still have a little over three minutes; we stopped the clock...unless Madame Thibault was not finished.
Go ahead, Madame Thibault. I'm sorry, I thought you were finished and wanted to go to Mr. Desrochers.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: We will come back later to the severance issue.
If I understood correctly, Mr. Dingwall, you stated that you were registered as a lobbyist. Were you registered as a lobbyist nine months after ceasing your official duties as Minister? Is that what you are saying? Is that normal? Is that the policy, to start lobbying nine months later, with the benefit of contacts and acquaintances that others do not have? Is it normal to lobby a department one was Minister of, in this instance Public Works?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't have the provisions of the act in front of me, but as I understand it, subject to review, you are allowed to register as a lobbyist--for activities with the Government of Canada--in terms of your post-employment guidelines, but you are not allowed to lobby the department you had immediately left, which in my particular case was as the Minister of Health. I had been the minister for almost two full years. I registered for a number of companies that had nothing to do with the health portfolio. That's what I recall.
The Chair: Madame Thibault, you still have two minutes.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: Thank you very much.
I come back to my question. It is a very simple one. There is a contract between two parties. Does it contain provisions for severance?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: The contract speaks for itself. You've read it. You can make your own assessment as to whether or not you believe it does or not. I've given it to my lawyers, and I expect them to give me their advice.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: Do you believe it is specifically set out in your contract that you must receive a severance? Is that what you are saying?
º (1600)
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: I think what are included are entitlements, and I would hope, pending counsel advice, that I would have the opportunity to get those entitlements.
The Chair: Very good, Madame Thibault. Thank you.
Next is Mr. Scarpaleggia, for seven minutes.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for coming, Mr. Dingwall.
On the issue of contingency fees--one of the main headlines in this case--you took contingency fees for some lobbying activity. Were you unaware that the TPC guidelines or rules prevented lobbyists from taking contingency fees?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I believe the honourable member raises an important issue. The case he refers to is--
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: Excuse me, Mr. Dingwall. If you could keep your answer brief, I'd appreciate it, because I have some follow-up questions.
Hon. David Dingwall: Okay.
I declared upon my registration of that particular company that I would receive a success fee. As you know, that is not contrary to the legislation whatsoever; however, subsequently we were advised that, as a matter of policy, the TPC did not allow for a success fee. Therefore, the client and I amended the contract and no success fee was paid.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: Thank you.
Mr. Dingwall, you have a reputation--and I don't say this facetiously at all--of being a pretty tough guy in the political realm, as somebody who stands his ground, a tough negotiator. Given that you were aware of the figures you presented today about your $747,000 of expenses and given that you were aware that 72% was for salaries and benefits and so on--in other words, given that you were aware of information the opposition did not seem to be aware of, so that in your mind there were no irregularities with expenses--why would you offer to resign?
Hon. David Dingwall: First of all, some members of the opposition--not all--falsified by taking my cost centre and saying it was my personal expenses.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: I agree, and in fact you would know that their allegations are false with the cost of the expenses.
Hon. David Dingwall: They are false.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: However, given that you're someone who stands your ground, that you've been in the political realm for many years, being a strong player, why would you, based on a false allegation by an opposition member seeking headlines, all of a sudden decide that's it, I'm resigning? It seems to me that is out of character, that's all.
Hon. David Dingwall: No, it's not out of character. In the role of a CEO you have a fiduciary obligation to your corporation, and what was created was a firestorm that went across this country. People were outraged that I would spend $750,000 as personal expenses, which was false information, but the firestorm started and I had a decision to make: either I take that firestorm and make it a crisis at the Royal Canadian Mint...and I did not want to make that a crisis at the Royal Canadian Mint. Therefore, we made that decision.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: I would submit, Mr. Dingwall, that you decided to resign over the allegations about TPC, so if there was a controversy surrounding the Mint, it was because of the allegations over TPC. I'm not judging on these allegations.
My next point, Mr. Dingwall--
º (1605)
Hon. David Dingwall: I disagree with your conclusion.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: Fine. That's no problem. It just seems to me and to many to be like that, but I accept your disagreement.
Canada has been good to you, Mr. Dingwall. You've spent 20 years as an elected member. It's a great privilege. You have acquired the title “Honourable”. It's a great privilege. You were a cabinet minister for seven years, or maybe a bit less. You have a minister's pension, which you've earned. You worked hard as a member of Parliament and as a minister. There's no doubt about that. After a great career in politics in terms of longevity, you were appointed to a crown corporation. You did a good job in managing that corporation. I have no issue with that. You turned it into a profitable enterprise.
Out of a sense of honour, out of a sense of responsibility—and you don't need to speak to your lawyer about this—would you not forgo any right you may think you may have to a severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: I will wait for the advice of counsel before I make that decision, Mr. Chairman.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Scarpaleggia.
Is there any Liberal member who would like to take the last two minutes of Mr. Scarpaleggia's questioning?
Mr. Godbout, go right ahead, please.
Mr. Marc Godbout (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.): I want to go back to the severance aspect because this is very important for Canadians, and I'll try to ask my question as clearly as possible. Given everything that's happened in the present context—and you have alluded to that—are you expecting a severance package from either the Government of Canada or the Royal Canadian Mint?
Hon. David Dingwall: When I spoke with officials with regard to entitlements, their response was, “Look, we have a legal department. Do you have a lawyer?” I said yes. They said, “They should talk with regard to your entitlements.” That's where I left it. It wasn't a three-hour conversation or a two-hour conversation. It was a couple of minutes, bang, and that was it.
Mr. Marc Godbout: Following on the same line, I understand—and you'll correct me if I'm wrong—that you did offer your resignation, and that resignation was not subject to getting a severance package. Am I wrong in assuming that?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I don't think you're wrong.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Godbout.
Now we go to Mr. Martin.
Mr. Martin, if you choose, you can share your time with Mr. Broadbent. You have given an indication that you may want to do that. Go ahead, please.
Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Yes, I would. Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Dingwall, I'm not going to nickel and dime you about the price of a package of gum, but I will tell you this. I'm a former union representative, and on the planet that I live on, when you quit your job you don't get severance. It's as simple as that. Severance is for when you are wrongfully let go or have to be let go for unforeseen circumstances. That's when you get a severance compensation package.
My question is pretty clear. If all your costs and expenses were within the Treasury Board guidelines, did you quit or were you fired? There are a lot of people here who think you were let go by the Martin government because you were just about to get fingered in the Gomery commission as one of the key architects of the sponsorship scandal. That's what a lot of people think.
My question simply is, did you quit or were you fired?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member, I'm disappointed that he would make such an allegation as he is making here today. I used to have some measure of respect for the honourable member. But to leap to that conclusion and to portray as a conclusion that somehow I would step down because of what may or may not be coming in a judicial review is not only unfair, it's totally wrong.
Mr. Pat Martin: We're about two weeks away from the bombshell going off in the Gomery commission. You were fingered all throughout, or certainly mentioned throughout, as a key architect of the sponsorship scandal.
Hon. David Dingwall: Ah, Mr. Martin—
Mr. Pat Martin: Surely this has crossed your mind, that the optics of this—the timing is so obvious to a lot of us—are that where there's smoke, there's fire. Was this more hush money than it was severance pay, I suppose?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, again I'm disappointed by the honourable member, who represents a great constituency in Manitoba. But I want to tell him, Mr. Chairman, that I am absolutely confident that Justice Gomery will make no negative recommendation in terms of what I may or may not have done with respect to the sponsorship program, and I resent quite emphatically the comments in the preamble of the honourable member.
º (1610)
Mr. Pat Martin: Well, you don't get severance when you quit; you get severance when they're trying to buy you off and get rid of you.
I'm going to share the rest of my time with my colleague, Mr. Broadbent.
The Chair: Mr. Broadbent, welcome. Just go right ahead.
Hon. Ed Broadbent (Ottawa Centre, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to go back to the question of being entitled to severance, ethically or legally. Like you, I had many years in politics. In addition to my pension as an MP, I had a pension that came to me because I was leader of a party for a number of years.
To put it directly, I'm astonished or troubled with the very notion that one could accept, in addition—and I have no problem with this, for I think, as has already been said, you're entitled to these pension benefits...that you would even consider, from an ethical point of view, accepting severance pay from a job that you quit. I find it equally bizarre and not entirely ethically acceptable that you seem to be refusing to answer the question directly and are indulging in some kind of euphemism or another term to avoid using the word “severance” pay.
This is all a preamble, if you like, but I would like some frankness on the severance pay issue. Did you ever use the word in the conversation with Mr. McCallum, or any of the officials in the PCO? Did the word “severance” pay come up? That's one I'd really like to know.
Ethically, I want to know your view about whether you think, in addition to your appropriate pensions, for a job you quit.... And by the way, from the record, you've done a good job. I want to be clear, the performance in other respects seems to be quite commendable. But do you think you're ethically entitled to severance pay?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I think I'm ethically entitled to the entitlements that I believe are owed to me. I do not have a full exhaustive report from counsel. I know counsel has had some brief discussions with government representatives. But I want the honourable member to....
Well, you twitch your eyes, but just let me give you one little example. If you're the president and CEO of the Royal Canadian Mint and you wait 23 months to get your cost of living index.... That's an entitlement. It may be small potatoes to some, but as it relates to a whole host of things, it's an entitlement. It has never been paid; it's been owed to me for quite some time—23 months since I went to the Mint. So there are a variety of entitlements. Does it include severance? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I don't know.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: Okay.
My point is, whether in some narrowly defined legal sense you're entitled to a severance--that isn't my question. I'm asking you the ethical question: having voluntarily resigned from a job, in addition to the very substantial pension you're getting as a former cabinet minister and MP, do you think you're ethically entitled to severance pay? That's the question. It's not a legal question.
Hon. David Dingwall: It is a legal question.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: No, it is not.
Hon. David Dingwall: It is. You can twist it any way you want.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: I'm not twisting it.
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes, you are.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: How am I twisting it?
Hon. David Dingwall: You're trying to say that I'm not entitled to my entitlements. I am entitled to my entitlements, and if that includes severance, so be it--
The Chair: Mr. Dingwall—
Hon. David Dingwall: —and I will wait for legal counsel and the experts and the professionals to provide me with that advice. They have not done that.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall.
Could you please wait for Mr. Broadbent to finish asking his questions?
Mr. Broadbent, do you have more questions?
Hon. Ed Broadbent: No, I want to get clear on this one.
You may be legally entitled to severance pay from some kind of interpretation of the law. Mr. McCallum once said, for reasons I don't understand, it's a common law benefit and so on. I'm separating the ethical from the legal. I'm saying, notwithstanding what your legal entitlement might be, ethically do you think, having resigned, in addition to all the other pensions you're getting, you should accept severance pay?
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, I don't think the honourable member should talk about “all the other pensions”.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: Well, there are two, as a cabinet minister and as an MP, and I'm not questioning those.
Hon. David Dingwall: It's an MP's pension.
I resigned as president of the Royal Canadian Mint because I believed it was in the best interests of the Royal Canadian Mint for me to step down. I believe the minister agreed with that. I believe the Prime Minister agreed with that. Why? Because we didn't want to throw the Mint into a crisis. The Mint is at a very important stage in its journey. As a result of that, those were the reasons why I stepped down.
The proof is in the pudding. Two days ago—
º (1615)
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall. The time is up.
We go now to Mr. Pallister for seven minutes and then to Mr. Szabo for seven minutes.
Go ahead, Mr. Pallister.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It's rather Lewis Carrollish here: you're entitled to your entitlements, but your entitlements are to be defined by legal counsel and the government later. You don't even know what you're entitled to because you don't know what you're going to get in entitlements. I mean, we're getting a dance from you, sir.
Will you admit that there is nothing in your remuneration contract that entitles you to severance? At some point today will you admit that there is nothing in your remuneration contract that entitles you to severance?
Hon. David Dingwall: I think that calls for a legal opinion, and I'm not prepared to give you what my opinion is. I am waiting for counsel to provide that to me.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Sir, we've obtained a copy of your remuneration agreement. It's black-dotted like 101 Dalmatians, of course, but it has no category whatsoever for severance, which tells us severance is at the discretion of the government.
Now, will you admit—because we could produce it and give it to the media again if you want—that there is no reference to severance in your remuneration agreement?
Hon. David Dingwall: I will wait for legal counsel to provide me—
Mr. Brian Pallister: Why would you possibly wait for that, sir?
Hon. David Dingwall: Because I'm not an expert on what entitlements are.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You're not an expert on reading a two-page document?
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm not an expert, and I will wait for the experts to provide that advice.
Mr. Brian Pallister: It almost defies logic that we even bother to ask you questions, sir.
The fact of the matter is it is purely at the discretion of the government, and you know that. The fact of the matter is you quit less than three years into a five-year contract in disgrace and now you're trying to soft-shoe around the issue that you're entitled somehow to something for that--that massive sacrifice of time you put in.
I'll dispel the myth of your management capability another day, but what disturbs me—and you are not my adversary here. My concern is, sir, a Prime Minister who would praise you in the House of Commons. I would like to know if that was part of the deal you cut with Paul Martin.
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, there was no deal with the Prime Minister. I spoke to the Prime Minister. It was a cordial discussion. He agreed and I agreed that it was in the best interests of the Mint for me to move on—
Mr. Brian Pallister: Sir, I can understand that. What I'm puzzled by—
Hon. David Dingwall: —because he understands the fiduciary obligation that a CEO has with regard to a corporation. With this firestorm that was taking place, how would that be—
Mr. Brian Pallister: No, I've heard this song and dance before, sir. I didn't ask you—
Hon. David Dingwall: —helpful to the Mint. It would not be helpful to the Mint.
Mr. Brian Pallister: —about this and I didn't ask for a repeat of this.
The fiduciary obligation that concerns me most is the one the Prime Minister has to the people of Canada. The fact of the matter is for the last three weeks we've been treated to six different excuses by the Prime Minister and his cronies about why they should pay you severance, and we've dispelled every one of them.
First they said it was private and it was your remuneration agreement. We know that's not true. Then they said it was the Financial Administration Act. It is not. Then they said it was the Canada Corporations Act. It is not. Then they said it was the Royal Canadian Mint Act. It is not. Then they said it was just common sense. There's nothing common sense about paying you a red penny more than you've been paid. Then they said it was common law, but they won't produce a legal opinion. For crying out loud.
And finally, there is one last excuse, one pathetic excuse, that Paul Martin offers the Canadian people on why he has to pay you more, and that excuse is this. I'll ask you one question and I'd love a straight answer from you, sir. They tell us that if you aren't paid severance you're going to go after the Canadian people and you're going to sue them. So I want to ask you, do you have plans to sue the Canadian people if you don't get your severance, sir?
Hon. David Dingwall: Listening to the honourable member, I think you've now made it quite clear why one needs good legal advice, and that's what I'm hoping to have. When I have that legal advice, I'll make my decision at that time in terms of the actions I will take.
Mr. Brian Pallister: So you'll keep hiding behind your lawyer even in the face of obvious straight questions that require honest answers. Is that correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: Why don't you be straight about your question?
Mr. Brian Pallister: Okay. You held up a pack of gum and did a little theatrical presentation, but we have receipts that you billed the people of Canada for: $1.98 for candy; $1.43 for a Globe and Mail; a chocolate bar; a bag of chips; $6 for a hot dog; $12.86 for a mini-bar; $4 another time for a mini-bar; when you were in Japan it was 615 yen, and we'd need a currency expert to tell us that's probably $6; $1.82 for a bagel; $1.74 for two newspapers and some water; $1.50 for coffee.
Sir, I'll tell you, you waved that pack of gum around like you're proud of it. You ain't going to “Wrigley” out of this one. These kinds of bills given to the Canadian people may look trivial to some—they may try to apologize this away—but I'll tell you there's a good chunk of the Liberal caucus that understands that paying you severance is nothing but an insult to the Canadian people. That's all it is.
º (1620)
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the honourable member for his non-partisan, constructive comment.
Mr. Brian Pallister: There's nothing partisan about it. If you were in my party, I'd be despising you as well. This is wrong, and you should admit to it.
Hon. David Dingwall: Everything was adhered to in terms of the policies of the Royal Canadian Mint.
The Chair: Order.
Mr. Pallister, please be judicious in your—
Mr. Brian Pallister: That's fine.
You were in Ottawa less than 80 days last year and you billed for almost 100 meals at over $10,000. Do you want to just run through again how that makes sense?
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm sorry?
Mr. Brian Pallister: You billed over $10,000 for meals in Ottawa last year. You were in Ottawa less than 80 days. Would you like to explain to the Canadian people how that makes sense, how it's a great investment of their tax dollars?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, in 2004 I travelled extensively to various foreign posts. Upon returning to Ottawa, as most CEOs would have to, you would call upon your staff to be briefed on the various initiatives they were taking in your absence. As you can imagine, growing a business by $70 million in 2004 requires a lot of effort by a lot of different people: senior management, the board, unionized employees, and a host of others. I have asked individuals, whether it be for breakfast, lunch, or for dinner, to join with me to explain, to update, and to assist me as it relates to the activities of the Mint. I thought it was appropriate that the president's office should pay for those expenditures; I was taking them away in many instances from family and private time and I thought it only appropriate.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall.
Mr. Pallister, you have about 20 seconds.
Mr. Brian Pallister: I had the chance to go over to the Rivermead club, sir. It's quite a nice club, I have to admit. I'm curious. How many rounds did you get in at the expense of the Canadian taxpayers in that particular private club? I understand it's $15,000 per share. Is that correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I think it's probably a bit more.
Mr. Brian Pallister: Oh, it is, eh? Good.
Hon. David Dingwall: But if I may, Mr. Chairman, my membership at the Rivermead was paid for by myself. I was a member of the Rivermead Golf Club long before I became the CEO. The only thing that is paid for, which is part of my employment contract with the Mint, approved by the board of directors, is that they pay the annual corporate membership for me, so that I entertain customers, suppliers, and employees.
Mr. Brian Pallister: My question, again, sir, is how many rounds you got in at the Rivermead in 2004.
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't know.
Mr. Brian Pallister: You don't know?
The Chair: Mr. Pallister, your time is up.
Mr. Szabo, you have seven minutes. Then we'll get into the five-minute round with Mr. Lunn.
Mr. Paul Szabo: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Dingwall, thank you for providing the summary of the financials. I've had a careful look at it. It concurs with the research done by our staff. I suspect, having looked at it, that we will get the rest of the answers we need from the PricewaterhouseCoopers work, once it's completed—I understand next week. I have no questions with regard to your expenses and no conclusions, other than that they appear to be reasonable given the level of activity the Mint undertook during the period in which you were the president and CEO.
This then leaves us with what the members obviously have been asking about, Mr. Dingwall, which is the severance issue. I think you've laid out fairly clearly that your rationalization was the firestorm about the allegation that your spending was way out of line, and also that it would be in the best interest of the Mint. Would that be a fair characterization?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think that is a fair characterization of the firestorm, which was--
Mr. Paul Szabo: And as a consequence--I'm sorry.
Hon. David Dingwall: On the firestorm, I think we all have to acknowledge, and I'm sure members from all political parties will acknowledge, this is a pretty poisonous atmosphere in this city. This was just going to continue. I mean, the access to information...the amount of time that people at the Royal Canadian Mint had to spend on these kinds of things was way, way out of proportion to what it should have been. Whether it's my CFO, my legal counsel, the people who work for legal counsel, sales and marketing, everyone was totally consumed by what was taking place in the avalanche of requests, but that's the environment that you and others are precipitating here in Ottawa.
º (1625)
Mr. Paul Szabo: Thank you. I understand. We had heard that.
Your term of appointment was for five years as the president and CEO of the Mint.
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes.
Mr. Paul Szabo: So you were two and a half years in. You were certainly personally aware that to suggest that $747,000 in expenses being characterized as your “travel and hospitality” was in fact not the case. You were confident that this was not the case.
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, I was confident that this was not the case, and I felt pretty upset that members would run off at the mouth telling the Canadian people that a cost centre was the personal expenses of the president of the Royal Canadian Mint, which was a flagrant falsehood that they perpetrated in the House and outside the House continuously, consistently, and repeatedly.
Mr. Paul Szabo: Okay. I think I can understand the predicament you were in, and you had to make a decision. Theoretically, you probably would have anticipated that if the Auditor General or some external auditors were to look at this, all of the matters that you brought out today would clearly have come out and the firestorm would have been found to have been premature and maybe a little excessive.
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't think so, Mr. Chairman, if I may....
Mr. Paul Szabo: No, you were confident that the expenses would be explained.
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes, I was confident about that, but I certainly was not confident that the firestorm would stop. The firestorm was on a track and it didn't appear to me that it was going to stop at all.
Mr. Paul Szabo: I have two last aspects.
Language is always important. Everybody seems to be saying you resigned. I always thought that when this resignation issue came up...there is an adjective in front of the word “resign”; people can “offer” their resignation, they can “tender” it, they can “volunteer” it. I want to be sure that I understand what yours was. Did you say, “I resign” in your communication to the board, for instance, or did you say, “I offer my resignation, if you want to take it”?
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't remember the exact words.
Mr. Paul Szabo: Maybe your lawyer does.
Hon. David Dingwall: I think I was compelled to resign because of the situation. I think that's the word--
Mr. Paul Szabo: Sorry? I didn't--
Hon. David Dingwall: I think it was that I was compelled to resign because of the situation. I don't know if that was contained in the--
Mr. Paul Szabo: You were compelled to resign, okay.
So let me summarize.
On September 28, you wrote a letter to the Prime Minister and the chair of the board of the Mint, in which you announced you were tendering your resignation. “Tendering” doesn't mean, “I resign”; it means, “I'm offering it”. Okay? Then you go on to explain that during the summer months you had some opportunity to reflect on your career with your wife and your family and some close friends, and you told them at that time, last summer, that you were likely leaving your position as the CEO some time over the next number of months to pursue a number of projects, and that you were fortunate to have your health, that you have quite a number of years left in your career, and that your central decision--and this is the key. You say in the letter that central to your decision was the achievement of the goals you set out in consultation with the board of directors and the Government of Canada. Mr. Dingwall, in this letter to the chair of the board and to the Prime Minister, you identify that you were leaving because you had achieved everything you needed to do at the Mint, and it had nothing whatsoever, apparently, to do with a firestorm or unease.
So I'd like to ask you the question, Mr. Dingwall, was it your intention, after two and a half years, after consulting with family and friends, to resign, or is the story that you resigned because there was a firestorm? It cannot be both. Which one is the truth?
º (1630)
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member, I think it was pretty clear after my discussions with my family that I would not live in the five-year term I had at the Royal Canadian Mint. I believe I was somewhat compelled, because of the firestorm that was burning around us, to come into the Mint...that it would result in a crisis at the Mint that was not needed, not necessary, and not appropriate. For those reasons I tendered my resignation to the chairman of the board and to the Prime Minister.
Mr. Paul Szabo: My understanding, from checking with legal advice, is that to tender one's resignation is not to resign; it is to offer your resignation, if the board should accept it. And this is the sticky point. But it would appear from the correspondence, which I'm sure is available to all, including your own legal counsel, that you announced that your decision had been taken to leave the post before your five years were up because you had completed all of your tasks that you wanted...and you had other projects to work on, and you've even mentioned today family issues, etc.
Under those circumstances, I would think there is some discussion, as you have said, but that the balance of evidence is, in your own writing—in your so-called letter of resignation—that you had no intention of staying in any event and that you in fact are not entitled to a severance.
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member, I did have a number of projects that I wanted to complete, very significant not only for the Mint but I believe for the country as a whole. One was in relation to a new coin we would want to release in 2006, and there is a very special program that we were working on and didn't make as much progress on as I had hoped we would make; it was with regard to a significant Olympic program that would provide some profile for Olympic athletes as well as some financial remuneration for the kinds of things Olympic athletes need in order to perform in international competitions.
The Chair: Mr. Szabo's time is up.
We're into the five-minute round now. We'll start with Mr. Lunn, followed by Mr. Desrochers.
Mr. Lunn.
Mr. Gary Lunn (Saanich—Gulf Islands, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you could, give me a three-minute warning; I want to try to share some time with my other colleagues.
Mr. Dingwall, just a straight answer: did you voluntarily resign from the Mint?
Hon. David Dingwall: I tendered my resignation as a result of the firestorm that had been created.
Mr. Gary Lunn: I listened to your opening statement. You almost portray yourself as a victim or as a man who has done nothing wrong. You're a veteran politician. You're used to being questioned; you're used to being grilled. You've been through this many times before as a minister. Yet you resigned before the ink was dry in the papers, when the stories came out.
Why did you resign so quickly? Did somebody in the government suggest you might want to tender your resignation?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I don't recall that being said.
Mr. Gary Lunn: So no one in the government suggested you tender your resignation?
Hon. David Dingwall: But I do recall people understanding the situation in terms of the crisis this was going to create for the Mint.
Mr. Gary Lunn: I want to come back to some of your earlier testimony, because you're sort of fixed on entitlements. You actually stated earlier that in your discussions with.... I don't want to misquote you, but you did actually state at the very beginning of this meeting that in a discussion with Mr. McCallum you discussed the issue of severance with Mr. McCallum.
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't think I used the word “severance”. I think I—
Mr. Gary Lunn: I believe you did, but the record can clarify that. I have it written down; you did use the word “severance” in your discussions with Mr. McCallum. Did Mr. McCallum give you a positive response with respect to that discussion?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I don't believe I used the word “severance”. The record will show that. We talked about entitlements. His response was, “You'll have to talk to Privy Council officials”, and that was it.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Okay. I'm going to go on another track here and I'll tie it all back together.
Briefly on the Technology Partnership Canada success fees, did you bill those in U.S. dollars, yes or no? When you billed for the success fees with respect to the Technology Partnership Canada contracts—they're all a matter of public record—did you bill those in Canadian dollars or U.S. dollars?
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, there's a preamble to your question that I don't necessarily agree with. If you're asking me if the moneys I received for the work I had done were in Canadian funds, the answer is yes.
º (1635)
Mr. Gary Lunn: But concerning the success fee, or the fee for $350,000—in that range—was it in U.S. dollars? It's a simple yes or no.
Hon. David Dingwall: There was no success fee.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Was that fee I'm speaking about in U.S. or Canadian dollars?
Hon. David Dingwall: There was no success fee.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Okay. Whatever you would like to call it, was it in Canadian or U.S. dollars? Just answer that, please. It's a pretty simple—
Hon. David Dingwall: I was paid in Canadian dollars.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Thank you.
Hon. David Dingwall: But there was no success fee.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Are you, or are you aware that you're under investigation by the RCMP right now with respect to Technology Partnerships Canada?
Hon. David Dingwall: Not at all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Okay.
I have one final question. I think it's a fair question.
You stated that you had discussions with Mr. McCallum. Again, I want to confirm, with respect to severance, that Mr. McCallum.... Did he give any indication to you, with respect to the severance that you refer to as “entitlements”, using your language...? Did he give you any suggestion whether you would be receiving any type of severance or that it would be a matter that would be pursued?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, my discussion with the minister was cordial, it was short, and it was clearly suggested that I contact Privy Council, and that was the end of it.
Mr. Gary Lunn: I think in fairness to my colleagues, I'd like to defer the rest of my time.
The Chair: Mr. Preston, go ahead. You have about a minute left.
Mr. Joe Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC): Thank you.
On the same subject of severance, you said you were compelled to resign. Who compelled you? Were you asked by the government to resign?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I was compelled I think by the situation. The situation is that the heroin, if you will, of politics these days is expenses. They were falsely—
Mr. Joe Preston: Okay. I have a question about—
Hon. David Dingwall: Just a moment, Mr. Chairman.
The honourable member should know that they were falsely—my cost centre was falsely—identified as personal expenses to the tune of $755,000.
Mr. Joe Preston: Let's talk a little bit about those expenses. It's reported today in the media that, somehow by the myth of your management, the Mint showed great financial achievements, and therefore the taxpayers didn't really have to cover these expenses; they were covered by the profits of the Mint.
The shareholder of the Mint is...? Who is the shareholder of the mint, sir? The Canadian taxpayer.
Hon. David Dingwall: The Government of Canada, yes.
Mr. Joe Preston: Right. So you're saying that because of the profit now made by the Mint, the taxpayer wasn't paying this large amount of expenses. I submit to you, sir, that the expenses that had to be paid came out of the Canadian taxpayers' pockets.
Hon. David Dingwall: I disagree. The Royal Canadian Mint, along with three or four other crown corporations, is a commercial entity. They don't—
Mr. Joe Preston: But the shareholder of those commercial entities—
Hon. David Dingwall: One moment, please, if I may.
These corporations do not get appropriations—
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall.
Your time is up.
Hon. David Dingwall: —from the Government of Canada. We have to live on the income we generate as a crown corporation.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall.
Now on the five-minute round is Mr. Desrochers, followed by Mr. Boshcoff, and possibly Mr. Godbout, if there's time left.
[Translation]
Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Dingwall, you are well known in the House of Commons. Every time you appear, there is talk of waste. We know that you are very closely linked to the Sponsorship Program. And here you are again today involved in a wastage problem.
I read your statement carefully, and in it you say that you have done absolutely nothing wrong. I know of no CEO who steps down without being guilty of something.
Why did you resign?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I don't believe I have done anything wrong. I resigned because of the best interest of the Royal Canadian Mint. And I think I have been proven to have done it in the best interest of the Mint.
If the firestorm with me had to continue, it would impact directly on the Royal Canadian Mint to throw it into a crisis. The Royal Canadian Mint does not deserve that and does not need it; it is not in its short-term or long-term interest. And that's a call; it's a fiduciary obligation of a CEO, that he or she has to make in the best interest of the corporation. And I made that decision.
Was it an easy decision? No, it was not an easy decision.
º (1640)
[Translation]
Mr. Odina Desrochers: Mr. Dingwall, it is you yourself who brought about this firestorm. You are alone in having spent so much. Are we in agreement on that fact?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm sorry, I didn't get the question.
[Translation]
Mr. Odina Desrochers: Mr. Dingwall, you tell us that you resigned because there was a firestorm at the Royal Canadian Mint. However, it seems to me that you are the one responsible for this firestorm. You are the one who spent all that money. I believe you are responsible for this firestorm.
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: There is no question that I've gotten more ink in the last two weeks than most of the people around this table would get in a lifetime, with the exception of the honourable member opposite.
[Translation]
Mr. Odina Desrochers: Mr. Dingwall, in a Crown corporation, there always exists a so-called delegation of signing authority. What was your authority? We can look at the process and say that everyone had verification rights, but as president of a Crown corporation, what were your powers in terms of signing authority? What was the total amount you were entitled to spend?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: If I understand the question correctly, we had policies at the Royal Canadian Mint, but for the president and CEO there were exceptions to the policy as it relates to the president, which was part and parcel of his or her employment contract. There were special processes that were in place to make sure that these expenses were approved, and approved properly, that they were receipted, etc. You had checks and balances. In terms of the amount, I had to bring various capital expenditures—and contracts, of course, and things of that nature—to the board, where they would approve them. Other than that, as the president and CEO I had signing authority for quite a bit of the activities at the Royal Canadian Mint.
I hope that answers your question.
[Translation]
Mr. Odina Desrochers: I would like to ask a final question, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Dingwall, you did not answer my question. Any signing authority comes with a maximal amount. I want to know what was the maximum amount you were entitled to spend as president of the Royal Canadian Mint. It is a simple question.
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: I would have to come back to the honourable member to give him the precise...because there were delegations to different VPs for different things. I may be off on the numbers, but I could provide that to him in terms of the delegation of authority each of the VPs had. Then, over and above that, I would have a signing authority over and above it. My signing authority was contingent upon what the board approval would be, as well as the terms of some Treasury Board guidelines related to capital expenditures going forward.
[Translation]
Mr. Odina Desrochers: Mr. Dingwall, you said you could provide us with a document that would clarify the level of signing authority in your organization. I would like you to show in this document also what were your powers. I would like to know the amount of money that was tied to this delegation in order for us to see clearly what authority you had within the organization and which allowed so much money to be spent.
[English]
The Chair: The time is up.
Mr. Dingwall.
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, let me say very briefly, I'm a private citizen now, but I'll undertake to make the representation to the Mint to provide that information to you so that you can see, in terms of the delegation of authority and thereafter, what room I had as a CEO—of course, that was buffered, if you will, by the board of directors—so that we can be certain on the various figures.
The Chair: Mr. Dingwall, would you send that information to the committee?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes, of course.
The Chair: The next round of questioning is Mr. Boshcoff's.
If you wish to share the time, that's up to you.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, Lib.): Mr. Dingwall, with the great fanfare and the number of editorials that pilloried you for the fact that $747,000 of your own personal pocket money became $538,000 worth of salaries for four people, you can imagine why the public was taking such exception to this. Now, through this type of investigation here today, we find the vicious nature of the allegations. I have to agree, as a former member of the Mint board, that I was thinking some very bad thoughts about you, and you can imagine why the public was taking that tack. Now that we know you have been condemned before being questioned, I have to ask why the Mint would not have tried to do some explanation for some of these things beforehand.
º (1645)
Hon. David Dingwall: We attempted, Mr. Chairman, to do the best we could to try to explain, but people didn't want to listen. They wanted to believe that it was $747,000 of my personal expenses. Members in this committee falsified the information by calling it my personal expenses, and that went across the country the way water would go down over a hill. And there was an appetite—there's an appetite in this city—to pick it up and run with it, for every expense.
Of my cost centre, 72% went for salaries and benefits; 1.5% out of the entire cost centre went for meals with staff and others; and 12.5% of the cost centre—where did it go?—went for foreign travel. And look at the results for foreign travel. We went from $7.5 million to $25.1 million in new revenue in 2004. But nobody wanted to report that.
We attempted time and time again to try to get that message out. And I say to the honourable member, yes, it was tough.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: A few minutes ago, one of the questions was about golf at $15,000, when the total for membership and vehicle was $11,000. I can see now the nature of the falsehoods that are being perpetrated. But in fairness—
Hon. David Dingwall: In fairness, the honourable member who asked the question knew that. He also knew that the Mint did not pay the $15,000 membership at Rivermead. He knew that I paid out of my own pocket, well before going to the Mint, that membership fee. He also knew, Mr. Chairman, that what was paid at the Mint was the corporate annual membership of a few thousand dollars to entertain, as my board affirmed, customers, suppliers, and employees. He knew that.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: Would you say an annual membership is a normal presidential or CEO expense for corporations around the country?
Hon. David Dingwall: To answer that question, I sat on several publicly traded boards and privately held companies as a board director, and that is the norm in terms of what companies do.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: When it was falsely—you used the statement “falsely”—reported that you have a leased car.... Do you have a leased car or not?
Hon. David Dingwall: I do not have a leased car. I bought my car in 2001 and paid for it myself. I saved up, bought the car, have the car, and like the car. It is not a leased car.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: Why would someone erroneously report that you have had a meal of $5,300 if it wasn't just for yourself? It seems very strange that a member of government would accuse you of that.
Hon. David Dingwall: What is very disconcerting about that is that it was said they knew—but the falsehood was perpetrated, was shown, was displayed, was buffered, that it was for the president and a staff person. It was for 28 employees of the Royal Canadian Mint who were in a two-day seminar that I led as the chief executive officer, examining the goals on a quarterly basis so that we can generate the kinds of profits and increase the employment in Winnipeg for the Royal Canadian Mint. And we did that, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: Do you not find it strange that there have been very few questions, outside of the question of severance, about expenses today? It seems that your report here has addressed them all. There have also been very few questions regarding your performance or your competence, but a lot of the malice that was expended upon you seemed to be in inverse proportion to that. You took a real whupping for expenses, and now people are very quiet about it. Do you have an explanation for that?
Hon. David Dingwall: That's the poisonous atmosphere that has befallen this particular Parliament. You have a minority Parliament. I think the cupboard is bare—I can say that now as a private citizen—with the Conservative Party. That's all they can do—throw dishes. I was in the storm when the dishes were flying. But you know what? I'm throwing a few dishes back today.
º (1650)
The Chair: Your time is up, Mr. Boshcoff.
We go to Mr. Preston for five minutes, followed by Madame Marleau.
Mr. Joe Preston: Well, prepare for the dishes.
It was great to see you on your soapbox and to see how well you have done at the Mint.
I do have a few expenses. If Mr. Boshcoff would like to hear of some of them, we could certainly go through them. We thought we'd start with some of the higher-ticket items before; we'll get down to the bottom if we need to.
Besides car washes for the BMW and bottled water, there's one that really stuck out here for $1.24 at Simply Smoothie.
The Mint went up in profit by how much for the $1.24 smoothie?
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, about $15.9 million.
Mr. Joe Preston: The questions we're asking here—that is, that a CEO of a corporation the size of the Mint...certainly should be making a profit in a corporation like the Mint. Let's not get sidetracked here and celebrate the fact that the Mint made money while you were the CEO. It's supposed to make money. That's what corporations do.
Hon. David Dingwall: The fact is that three years before, it didn't make money, sir.
Mr. Joe Preston: Well, I wish we'd been here to talk to the president then.
But let's talk about yours.
I'm going to share my time with Mr. Poilievre. We've talked about some of those expenses. I guess there are others I could cover here, but I think I will just leave it for Mr. Poilievre and let him take it.
The Chair: Mr. Poilievre.
[Translation]
Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): I can assure you that every time you attack us, the popularity of the Conservative Party increases. So I beg you to continue.
Mr. Dingwall, I believe you know all about Liberal corruption. You, yourself, were in the midst of the sponsorship scandal. Furthermore, you were involved in another scandal, that of Technological Partnerships Canada which has already lost at least two billion dollars. So you know all the dirty secrets of the Liberal Party of Canada and its leader, Paul Martin.
You stated today that there was no legitimate reason for you to resign. Therefore, members of this Committee and myself can imagine the real reason. When you spoke with the Prime Minister before resigning, what assurance did you give him in exchange for his promise of severance?
[English]
The Chair: Mr. Dingwall, go ahead.
Hon. David Dingwall: Nothing, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: Nothing at all? So you are telling me there is no legitimate reason whatsoever that you should have needed to resign and that you're perfectly prepared to defend all of your actions during your tenure at the Mint, but for some reason you were compelled to do so and nothing was promised to you in return?
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I was compelled to make a decision. The decision I had to make was what was in the best interests of the Royal Canadian Mint. You and your colleagues have falsified my cost centre by telling the Canadian people that it was my personal expenses. You sir, have the responsibility to own up on the facts now that you have been caught.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: We are owning up on the facts. And now that you have been caught accepting a $350,000 lobbying fee for intervention in the Technology Partnerships Canada program, which by the way has loaned out $2 billion more than it has returned, I want you to explain to us whether or not you intend to repay that portion, the $350,000.
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I got no such thing from Technology Partnerships Canada.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: No, you got it from a company you were lobbying on behalf of.
Hon. David Dingwall: The honourable member once again falsifies, misleads, characterizes the facts in a way that is not true, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: I asked a direct question.
Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.
Hon. David Dingwall: I suggest, Mr. Chairman—
The Chair: On a point of order, Mr. Poilievre.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: He's not answering the question. I'd like him to return to my specific question, which is whether he intends to repay the $350,000 contingency he received.
º (1655)
The Chair: Mr. Poilievre, it's not a point of order.
Mr. Dingwall, would you answer the question?
Hon. David Dingwall: It's a false.... The premise of his question is false.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: You never received a $350,000 payment from any company you were working on—
Hon. David Dingwall: No success fee was paid, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: Nothing? Zero?
Hon. David Dingwall: I answered the question—I don't know if you were in the room—with regard to the specific issue. I indicated to you, and I will repeat it again, that upon my registration with the company, I registered for a success fee. This is not contrary to the legislation. When we were advised that with the Technology Partnerships program the policy had changed, we changed our agreement. There was no success fee paid.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: So you did not receive $350,000?
Hon. David Dingwall: No success fee was paid. I worked for the company for an extended period of time.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: Okay. What did you receive in salary?
Hon. David Dingwall: In terms of...? At the Royal Canadian Mint?
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: In compensation from this company. Was it nothing at all?
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, I'd have to go back and check my files. I'm not at liberty to share confidential information that I don't have access to at this point in time.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: Was it more than $350,000?
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't know, to be truthful.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: You don't know.
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't.
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: You have not even a rough idea?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, I'm not going to speculate, because if I speculate in this way, you're going to come back and say, “Well, you didn't do it this way.”
Mr. Pierre Poilievre: Okay. You have to ask your lawyer about that too.
Hon. David Dingwall: No.
The Chair: Mr. Poilievre, your time is up.
Madame Marleau, you have five minutes, please.
Hon. Diane Marleau (Sudbury, Lib.): Mr. Dingwall, I'd like to know why the price of a package of gum became such a flashpoint. I know you've said you did not get paid for the package of gum. It just seems to me that somehow everyone's gotten hung up on that. I want to know whether you had any means of getting a straight amount, when you travelled, for incidentals. I know for a fact that all MPs who travel on government business—all of us, when we travel—get an amount of money for incidentals for which we don't have to supply receipts. We all do. I'm not sure what the amount is. It depends what country—
Hon. David Dingwall: I think it's $74 a day, isn't it?
Hon. Diane Marleau: Is it $74 a day?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes.
Hon. Diane Marleau: Okay.
It means that wherever you travel, whatever you purchase with it—whether you use it or not—you get that money and you don't have to explain.
Does the Mint have that kind of policy?
Hon. David Dingwall: The Mint used to have a policy whereby per diems were paid to employees. I terminated that policy and asked employees that, instead of getting their per diem, they submit reasonable expenses in lieu of it. As a result, considerable savings were made to the Royal Canadian Mint, and that policy remains intact today.
Hon. Diane Marleau: Is that why something like a package of gum would show up on an expense report? That's why I'm asking this—because it seems so out of character to see that on an expense report.
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, let me say to the honourable member, I don't know how the honourable member or members opposite do their expenses, but when I'm travelling internationally, with all the receipts you get—you have them in your pocket—I come back from my trips, put them in an envelope, give them to a person, and then it goes from there. Sometimes there are taxi chits; there may be receipts for a lunch or for a dinner; there could be any number of things—a sandwich you get in an airport where you're waiting for three or four hours, or a meal that you're getting. You provide that to the person.
Now, I have to take responsibility, and I'm not ducking that responsibility. It wasn't an assistant who did this; it was me. But that's the process you follow: you submit in an envelope, they add them up, and you sign off. Some are approved; some are disapproved. And that's where it was.
Hon. Diane Marleau: And you're saying in this case the gum was disapproved?
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm confident that the independent auditor will show unequivocally that there was no payment by the Royal Canadian Mint for gum—Dentyne.
Mr. Paul Szabo: They just pay for mints, is that it?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Hon. Diane Marleau: One of the opposition members made a statement about the Mint: it is a crown corporation and it's supposed to make money. But Mr. Dingwall, could you perhaps give the committee an overview of the state of the finances of the mint at the time you took over? I understand they weren't very good.
» (1700)
Hon. David Dingwall: I came in in March of 2003. The fiscal year of the Mint ends with the calendar year. On December 31, 2002, there was a deficit of $7.5 million. In eight months we began our first profitable month, and we've had 22 consecutive profitable months since that time. Revenues increased by $70 million in 2004, and year to date in 2005 by another $35 million, for a $105 million increase. I spoke previously with respect to foreign circulation in bullion and the increases there.
We restructured the corporation into four different business lines. As a result of the new revenue and our new wealth, we were able to hire about 150 new employees, most of whom are in Winnipeg and performing very well for those of us at that corporation.
Hon. Diane Marleau: Thank you. These were the questions I had in mind, because I don't believe the committee was fully aware of how much difficulty you faced when you first came to the Mint and the tremendous task you undertook. You not only increased revenues but you also increased employment. That's a very good thing, and I think the people of Winnipeg, where the bulk of the employment is, should be thankful for that.
The Chair: Ms. Marleau, your time is up.
For five minutes, Madame Thibault.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Royal Canadian Mint sent us a number of documents. They spell out its policies and I refer specifically to its business travel policy which was adopted while you were at the helm. We also have policies that go back further and which deal mainly with travel.
I was struck by one statement that is to be found mainly in the introduction and the main provisions. Two words occur regularly, Mr. Dingwall. Travel expenses in view of the mandate of the Royal Canadian Mint should be as cost effective and as productive as possible.
I am looking at the documents which relate to the provisions voted by the Human Resources Committee of the Board. They mention memberships in business associations, golf clubs and such. Were these benefits offered to you? Did you request them to be included in your entitlements? Instead of simply paying you a given amount of salary, were you offered a greater range of benefits? Did you request them or were they offered to you?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: No, they were provided by the board, which is pretty well the norm in terms of the private sector and certainly with crown corporations in terms of memberships in various professional organizations, the golf, certain other clubs.
In terms of the business travel, I flew economy. I also flew business class. But the terms of my employment contract said I was to fly business class and many times I flew economy class.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: You never flew first class, although the policy allowed you to do it?
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh no, I did travel business class, yes.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: I was talking about travelling first class.
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: Maybe once or twice in terms of an international flight. I think I had a flight from Bangkok to New York where we had won a major contract.
[Translation]
Ms. Louise Thibault: Nevertheless, there is one thing that strikes me, sir. You keep saying that your situation was different, that in your case it was justified because you compare the business you managed, the Crown corporation that you headed, to the private sector. I asked about this earlier. Since this corporation is similar to a private company, and is a profit-making business, it becomes normal, for example, to get reimbursed to the tune of $1,000 per month for one's car expenses. I do not want to provide free advertisement by mentioning the make of your car, but I do not believe it was a an economy model.
I get the feeling that you thought it normal, because you were supposed to be profitable and in order to make profits, one must spend, no matter the cost!
Rectify if I am mistaken. Do you not think that from an ethical standpoint, when we are dealing with the money of Canadians, of Quebeckers, the cost should be as low as possible?
» (1705)
[English]
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, as a CEO of a corporation, there's no question you're going to have to incur expenses. We adopted across the corporation a major focus on the customer. The precondition of implementing a customer focus is that executives, employees, and others at the Mint have to get out from behind the desk to meet with the customers to ascertain not only their needs but also their aspirations about where they want to go. We did that, and as a result we've had great success.
Yes, there were occasions when business travel was incurred; there were occasions when meals were incurred; there were occasions when receptions had to be held. In fact, we hosted receptions at the Royal Canadian Mint for members of Parliament and senators. Why? Because we wanted them, wherever they went in the world, to tell the story of the Royal Canadian Mint so that we could really move our foreign circulation business, which is housed in Winnipeg. That was the purpose of many of those things as we developed our corporate plans.
To conclude, Mr. Chairman, I made it a precondition with all of my executives that I wanted them to visit on site with customers and on site with suppliers to find out their needs and their aspirations. And do you know what? It worked, because we know more about our business than we ever have before. The customer will tell you how you're running your business.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dingwall.
Madame Thibault, your time is up.
Five minutes go to Mr. Broadbent, who will be followed by Mr. Boshcoff.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to get at the question of the kind of language you used in your letter. It was brought out that you “tendered” your resignation. You chose that word as opposed, for example, to simply sending a letter saying “I resign”. Did you use the word “tender” either because you knew or had legal advice that doing this could have entitled you to some kind of severance pay?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, Mr. Chairman.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: So you had no reason to expect severance pay?
Hon. David Dingwall: I have reason to expect entitlements, and if that includes severance, fine, but I don't know yet.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: I found the line of questioning we had interesting, because ministers in the House have made a point of saying you may be legally entitled to severance, and it would appear this could be directly related to the kind of language you used in your own letter, as opposed to simply saying “I resign”. Again I want to make the distinction between what is legal and what is ethical here.
I found it a little bizarre, if I could put it this way, that as an original member of the rat pack in the House of Commons, and best known for totally unseemly political behaviour, you should be lecturing members of this committee on their behaviour in the House of Commons. I just say that in passing.
I want to get back again to the use of language that may have very good and positive legal implications for you on the question of contingency fees. You said you didn't get $350,000 as a contingency fee after it was discovered that your contract in the TPC program did not permit the company—it was illegal for the company—to give you a “contingency fee”. When you altered this arrangement, did you get the equivalent of the $350,000 in any other way?
Hon. David Dingwall: I'll make two points, if I may, Mr. Chairman.
I know the honourable member would like to keep the record clear. Just for his own benefit and the benefit of others, I was not a member of the rat pack. So don't join with your friends to your right in spreading falsehoods.
» (1710)
Hon. Ed Broadbent: I withdraw the comment. I accept his word, if that's the case.
Hon. David Dingwall: Thank you.
Secondly, with regard to the compensation I received from the company in question, it was over an extended period of time. I think it was in addition to what the honourable member has referred to as the quantum, because I think I was with the company for close to four years.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: When the discussion took place that you weren't entitled to the $350,000 contingency fee, was it discussed in any way that this could be paid to you in some other form?
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, yes, we had a contract that was accorded with the company to comply with the provisions of the Lobbyists Registration Act, and there was no success fee of $350,000 paid.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: I'm not clear on the answers. If I understood what you said earlier, and the fact the contingency fee was stopped after it was discovered it was illegal for the company to pay you the fee...I'm still not clear. Are you saying this amount of money got to you in any case, but in some other form--yes or no?
Hon. David Dingwall: We amended the contract, which reflects the success fee and reflects the time in which I worked for the company. It was for an extended period of time.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: Well, I would interpret that as to say you got around the legal problem of calling it a contingency fee by getting the $350,000 anyway, but by some other method. That's my conclusion.
Now I want to get back to the ethical question. It seems to me quite reasonable that as a former parliamentarian responding to parliamentarians, you answer as a matter of public policy. When you're getting a good pension, a deserved pension--and I'm not challenging, by the way, your performance at the Mint. Any evidence so far has been that the performance has had a net public benefit and was a successful business operation. We're not asking questions about that, I say to my colleagues on the other side; I have no question about that.
I am questioning about an ethical matter, which is to say that most workers in Canada who quit get no severance pay. One of the things that has bothered a lot of Canadians and has bothered me is if I submit a resignation for something, I would not have the ethical right to say I'm entitled to some kind of severance pay. So I want to ask you that ethical question. Do you think, being in that position--given that I heard your reasons for resigning--you should be entitled to severance pay?
Hon. David Dingwall: I should be entitled to my entitlements that my lawyers will so advise. What they are, I'm still not clear on.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: But if the entitlement includes severance pay, I think you said earlier, “So be it”.
Hon. David Dingwall: So be it.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: So you think it's all right?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes.
Hon. Ed Broadbent: Okay. That's all I have to say.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Broadbent. Your time is up.
Mr. Boshcoff, you have five minutes, followed by Mr. MacKay for five minutes.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be sharing my time with Monsieur Godbout.
In terms of your management style as CEO, would you have described yourself as a beer or champagne...or hands-on, or do you send memos--that type of thing--as opposed to talking to staff? What I'm looking at is that over the past two and a half years, while you were the CEO of the Mint, there were the issues of accountability and transparency, integrity in government, and the procedural systems. It seems that by going from a per diem system to a direct expense system, you actually ended up saving the Mint some money. Could you answer that question directly?
Hon. David Dingwall: We attempted, through a variety of different means, to instill accountability at every phase of the Royal Canadian Mint. When we started off the administrative meetings, the executive meetings every Wednesday, the town hall meetings with employees, the annual employee meetings with our Winnipeg workers as well as our Ottawa workers, we shared all the financial information with them; it was always hidden from the employees at the Royal Canadian Mint until well after the fact, until an annual report would come out.
We changed a number of the policies, one of which was the per diem that was offered to employees in the past. We did away with that and asked employees to submit receipts for the various expenditures. So there's not one thing--there were a whole host of things, little things that, collectively, when they add up, helped to instill that kind of accountability throughout the organization.
» (1715)
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: I have a quick supplemental.
If you, as the head of a crown corporation or as a deputy minister in charge of a public service or as a minister of the government, eliminated alcohol as an expendable item, do you think there would be significant savings in all those three realms to the Canadian taxpayers?
Hon. David Dingwall: Probably not.
Mr. Ken Boshcoff: Probably not?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes.
Mr. Marc Godbout: Mr. Chair, I will not go further into the expenses.
I think you've given us some interesting information. We were going to have the audit anyway; we'll look at that.
But I'd like to go at the process. Could you go through...when you did submit your expenses, what was the approval process in place? Just go through very rapidly the....
Hon. David Dingwall: I think I referenced it in my remarks, but briefly, if you were travelling, you had to have a form signed off--in my case, it was the CFO--where practical. I mean, if I'm in Winnipeg and I have to fly down to Michigan because of one of the suppliers, it's going to be hard to get back to get the signature.
So you have a pre-form that is signed. You would do your travel. When you came back, you would submit your expenses. They would be written up and passed to the CFO. He would approve or disapprove. From there, it would go to the finance division. They would want to make sure it complied with all of the policy. As the CEO, I am on the board; therefore, my expenses had to be audited by the internal auditor. That was done. All other board members had the same. It would be a report filed to the audit committee; thereafter, a report would be made to the board. The Auditor General of Canada is the auditor of the Royal Canadian Mint. I don't think they look at individual expenses of various individuals, but they would look at the operational expenses as well as the capital expenditures and approve or disapprove. That was the process.
Mr. Marc Godbout: I have two quick questions. Was the chair of the board involved in the process at all?
Hon. David Dingwall: The chair of the board oversees the operations at that level, but he--
Mr. Marc Godbout: Not directly.
Hon. David Dingwall: No, not directly. However, the chairman of the board and the board gave direction to me in terms of travel. It was expected, as written in the minutes by the board, that I would travel both domestically and internationally to try to grow the business of the Mint.
Mr. Marc Godbout: Were any of these expenses refused? What would we say would be a percentage of these expenses that would be disallowed or refused or disapproved?
Hon. David Dingwall: I don't recall the internal auditor or the audit committee....
Mr. Marc Godbout: But it did happen.
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, it certainly didn't happen with me. If they didn't approve my expenses, I would want to know why, because everything was done to cricket. We had the receipts and the agendas for your various international travels as well as your domestic travels.
Mr. Marc Godbout: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Godbout.
You have five minutes now, Mr. MacKay.
Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ciamar a tha thu.
Mr. Dingwall, as someone who learned the craft of graft from one of the great ones, at the knee of one of the great ones, another Cape Breton Islander, Allan J. MacEachen--somebody who, as my colleague friend Mr. Broadbent pointed out, was an original member of the rat pack--one finds it a little bit hard to stomach when you start characterizing these questions as vicious attacks or that there is a poisonous atmosphere here in Parliament. You recognize, if you will, that you took part in some of the most acrimonious days, and your participation during your parliamentary career as an opposition member certainly did very little to enhance the image of decorum in the House. So when you take exception to my colleague Mr. Pallister's question about your golf membership and a few thousand dollars, I tell you, that's a lot of money to a Donkin miner, as you know. I don't think, quite frankly, that we're here to take any lessons from you, sir, on decorum in questioning.
I have a few questions. You spoke of record profits, increased employment, a miracle turnaround at the Mint during your tenure there--$70 million in profit--and you referenced in response to a question the Winnipeg agreement. I would like, if you would, sir, to have that Winnipeg agreement tabled, and I want to ask you about that. Was there ever an agreement, written or verbal, between the Department of Finance and the Royal Canadian Mint that was to offset operating costs at the Mint, essentially subsidizing your overseas sales? Is that in fact the case?
» (1720)
Hon. David Dingwall: No, it's not the case.
Mr. Peter MacKay: There was no agreement?
Hon. David Dingwall: No. We have a contractual agreement with the Department of Finance to provide product to them, just as FedEx would have an agreement with the Government of Canada to provide services, just as Air Canada would have an agreement with the Government of Canada to provide services.
Now, I have a couple of points. First of all, I was not a member of the rat pack, which I'm sure you'll want to retract.
Second, none of us--certainly not I nor any member of the Mint team--has ever used the words “miracle turnaround”.
Third, our profit was not $70 million. Our profit, in 2004, was $15.9 million, pre-tax. We did increase the revenues in 2004 by $70 million. If you take into consideration 2005, year to date, it's an additional $35 million over 2004, for $105 million of new revenue.
The facility in Winnipeg does two things--and I think this is important, and I'm glad the honourable member has asked it. In Winnipeg we produce our domestic coins for Canadian circulation and we produce coins for foreign markets. Over the years, Canada, at that facility, has produced coin for 65 different countries.
Mr. Peter MacKay: So you're telling us that agreement between the Department of Finance and the Royal Canadian Mint would be available? It's in writing somewhere?
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, I'm sure it would be. I think it's commercially sensitive. We wouldn't want to give that to some of our competitors, but--
Mr. Peter MacKay: And you're saying that it in no way--in no way--impacted on the bottom line of the profitability of the Mint? There wasn't anything that would--
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, no, no, no--
Mr. Peter MacKay: --be perceived as a subsidy coming from the Department of Finance to help make what you are so proud of, that being a successful turnaround of the Mint?
Hon. David Dingwall: No, that agreement would be one of the key factors in terms of our success at the Royal Canadian Mint, but I thought your question was with regard to the foreign coin circulation and the new revenues we were able to generate there. The agreement doesn't have an impact on that.
Mr. Peter MacKay: Well, my question--and I'll restate it--is this. Did the agreement between the Department of Finance and the Royal Canadian Mint impact--positively, I would suggest--
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, of course.
Mr. Peter MacKay: --on the bottom line of the Mint's profitability?
Hon. David Dingwall: Of course.
Mr. Peter MacKay: Therefore there was money coming from the Department of Finance--
Hon. David Dingwall: As a contract.
Mr. Peter MacKay: As a contract--
Hon. David Dingwall: Just as money would go from the Government of Canada to FedEx, just as government--
Mr. Peter MacKay: And the Prime Minister was the Minister of Finance at that time, correct?
Hon. David Dingwall: I'm sorry?
Mr. Peter MacKay: Paul Martin would have been the Minister of Finance at that time, correct, when the agreement was signed?
Hon. David Dingwall: Yes, he probably was.
Mr. Peter MacKay: I have another question. If you could, sir, would you explain this alloy recovery program? How did that impact on the bottom-line profitability of the Mint?
Hon. David Dingwall: It contributed quite successfully to the profit of the Royal Canadian Mint. This was one of the ideas we had received through a number of discussions with our employees, particularly in Winnipeg. We would take existing coin out of circulation, melt it down for its nickel component, and then sell the nickel on the open market. As I'm sure the honourable member is well aware, in view of where he comes from, nickel today is at a pretty good price. It's dropped somewhat in the last number of months, but it is at a good price, and with our Multi-Ply technology we can replace the coin cheaper; therefore, the surplus is a positive thing to the Royal Canadian Mint.
Mr. Peter MacKay: It's a pretty good deal, though. You bring in all of those coins at no cost, essentially, and then turn a profit because you're reusing the material. It's a very good scheme, but I'm suggesting to you that it very positively impacted on the bottom line.
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, it did, and I don't think anyone--certainly not me--would deny that it has impacted quite positively.
There are some associated costs, and as the Mint moves forward in 2006 and 2007, they'll have to incur some capital expenditures, as well as HR expenditures, in order to reap the same kinds of returns that we believe to be important for the future.
» (1725)
Mr. Peter MacKay: One last question, Mr. Dingwall. You stated you never received a success fee or anything improper, in terms of a fee for lobbying, with respect to a TPC partnership program. It's correct that you said you never received anything. Is that right?
Hon. David Dingwall: Oh, I received compensation for the work I provided.
Mr. Peter MacKay: Well, why did the company that was involved, this Bioniche, issue a press release that stated they had to repay your fee to the government, plus interest on the cost of what the government audit...? You know, this was in the government audit. Why would they repay for a fee that you never received? Can you explain this? Why would that happen?
Hon. David Dingwall: Well, you'll have to ask the company. The company has not contacted me with regard to this. Presumably it's their business decision.
Mr. Peter MacKay: Well, if they're as good at saving their receipts as you were, I hope they'll have something.
The Chair: Mr. MacKay, your time is up.
Next is Mr. Szabo, for the final questioning.
Mr. Paul Szabo: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Dingwall, I want to reiterate what Mr. Broadbent said earlier. It appears that the committee has not raised the issue of your performance at the Mint. I think the facts speak for themselves in terms of the work that's been done, and the progress. For that you should be commended.
We do have these other problems. I do understand the concept that...people will react. They'll react to a pack of gum. They'll react to an allegation. I found it interesting that on October 4, 2005, just about a week after you tendered your resignation, the interim president, Ms. Nadeau, filed with the board of directors a complete explanation of the $747,000. It took less than a week for them to come up with a complete analysis that ties in perfectly with what you provided to us today and with what the researchers have provided to us. We have three corroborating documents here.
If it only took a week to come up with authoritative third-party evidence as to the explanation, why was it necessary to resign so quickly, even though there was some concern that it may have some impact on the Mint?
That leads to my second question. If you were concerned that there would be some impairment to the activities of the Mint, do you still feel that way today? Has the Mint been impaired in any way as a consequence of your resignation, and are you comfortable today that the Mint is in good shape to carry on with the good work you've done so far?
Hon. David Dingwall: I am quite confident the Mint is in good shape to carry on all of the good work it has done over the last number of years. I am confident they will be successful.
I don't think we should have any illusions. If I had remained as the CEO of the Royal Canadian Mint, the firestorm, which was quite great, would be even greater. I'm sure the falsehoods, the misrepresentations, the mischaracterization that had gone on with regard to my cost centre versus that of my expenses would continue, would be exaggerated, and it would be very difficult for the Mint not to move out of a crisis mode. I think it's very important that we make the right decision, which was on behalf of the Mint.
Mr. Paul Szabo: All I can say, Mr. Dingwall, is that on the basis of what we've been provided and having the audit coming next week, I have a comfort level that the issue with regard to the propriety of your spending is not going to be the issue. We thank you for clarifying it, and hopefully these other matters will come to a fair and equitable resolution. After all, it's important that we carry on with the business of governing, and the Mint, in terms of its profitability.
Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Szabo.
We are out of time, Mr. Dingwall, but I wanted to give you an opportunity to answer a question asked by members from all the parties, I believe, at different times throughout the day and for which they received no answer. That was the question about severance, and whether in fact you had spoken about that issue to any member of the government, to any member of the Liberal cabinet, or to someone from the PCO. It was asked in every way imaginable. You did not answer the question. I would like to give you a final chance to do that.
» (1730)
Hon. David Dingwall: Mr. Chairman, I thought I had answered it. I did not specifically have any discussions with regard to severance. I did have specific discussions--short, albeit--with regard to entitlements. There is an understanding that my legal counsel and their legal counsel will have the appropriate discussions. I'll get a recommendation at some point in time in terms of what my rights are, and at that point in time I'll make a decision.
The Chair: Thank you.
We have a point of order.
Mr. Gary Lunn: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Because this Winnipeg agreement was referenced and Mr. Dingwall said it could be made available, I would ask that it be tabled with the committee or be sent to the committee for the committee's perusal.
The Chair: We will ask the Mint for that information.
Thank you, Mr. Lunn.
Thank you, Mr. Dingwall, for coming today.
The meeting is adjourned.
No comments:
Post a Comment