Brown Envelopes Stuffed with Cash Are Not Illegal!

You've hit it big, you've won the Lotto and are a multi-millionaire. It's a bit strange being so rich, especially around your friends and family who come from modest means, so you decide to help them out with some cash donations. You give your Mom and Dad enough money to pay off their mortgage and have a comfortable retirement.
Your sister, a single mom, is struggling to make ends meet, so you write her a check for half a million dollars.
You give your best friend $75,000 dollars to start that business he's always dreamt about. You start a college fund for your brothers kids and fund it with $200,000.

All of this is done with no strings attached. The transferred money isn't a loan, it's an outright gift. Nobody is expected to pay you back. You tell those who have benefited, not to declare the money on their income tax statement and you don't mention the gifts to the Canadian Revenue Agency at all.

In a different case, a fabulously wealthy businessman is friendly with a Member of Parliament who he has supported politically over the years, forging a close friendship along the way.

The politician is not rich, those who make public service a career never are, and so when the politician tells his friend that he'd like to renovate his house and add an extension, but can't afford to, the industrialist tells him not to worry.
He writes a check for $10,000 dollars and collects another $100,000 in cash and cheques from other like minded friends.
He gives the money to the politician. Nobody declares the money transfer to any government organization.

Another politician, who is in the midst of a heated re-election campaign meets a donor friend over coffee. The donor and his wife have both already contributed to the political campaign to the tune of $3000 each, the maximum allowed by law.
The donor friend tells the politician that after the campaign, he'd like to send the politician and his family on a vacation. He takes out an envelope stuffed with $10,000 in cash and turns it over, "Bon Voyage!"
The politician doesn't declare the money to the Canadian Revenue Agency or to the Election commission.

So who broke the law?

Actually.....nobody...Really!

You see, giving gifts in Canada has no tax consequences, either to the giver or the receiver and using cash is completely legal, even in large amounts. Although it may look fishy, it remains completely within the law.

Here's what the law says;

"A contribution refers to any gift of money to a party or to an independent candidate, any service rendered or goods furnished free of charge, for political purposes. Any money, goods or service furnished by the candidate himself in view of his election is also considered a contribution.:

Yup... Brown envelopes stuffed with cash can be given to politicians quite legally, even in the middle of a political campaign!
It happens every day and takes place in many other forms. Cash, cheques, blank traveller cheques, free travel, complimentary goods and services, etc., etc.

Ah, you may ask.
"But why did Brian Mulroney get in trouble for accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash from Karl-Heinz Schreiber?"
Simple.
Brian Mulroney told authorities that the money was payment for consulting services, for that infamous 'pizza' business.
It was therefore income, subject to taxes which had to be declared.

The reality is that the onus is on the politician not to use gifts for political ends. If a 'gift' is used to pay for campaign expenses, it is the politician who has broken the law, not the donor. If a benefit is exchanged in consideration of the gift, then both parties have broken the law. 

Simply put, it boils down to this.
There's no law against giving politicians brown envelopes stuffed with cash, be it $5, $5,000 or $50,000, but there is a law against using the gift for political purposes or providing a political benefit to the donor in return, but go prove intentions in court. That's the real issue.

A case in point is the current situation with the matter of Laval mayor Gilles Vaillancourt who is alleged to have offered $10,000 in cash to Serge Menard, then running in an election for the PQ in a Laval riding.
Since the money was never actually handed over, no crime was committed. Even if the transaction had taken place, the statute of limitations has long run out.  Even then, it would have to be proved that the money wasn't a straight up gift.

And so it remains that gift transactions that require no disclosure almost always go unreported.
That's the way it is. Sorry to tell you.

There always has been and always will be those who offer money to politicians. Like drug dealers in the bathroom of the night club, it's up to the individual to refuse.

Too many politician say Yes.

As a fund-raiser and political organizer I've seen my fair share of 'transactions,' but I must say the story of the mayor of Laval and the city manager of Mascouche allegedly offering or giving cash to a politician that he didn't know personally is something remarkable.
Brown envelope transactions are usually conducted between people who know and trust each other, where a wink and a nod is par for the course.
The level of perceived invincibility displayed here (if it did happen) is stunning and demonstrates a level of unprecedented arrogance.

Another revelation that floored me, is the accusation by defeated Liberal candidate David Grégoire, who claimed that the city manager of Mascouche gave him an envelope of cash, which he claims that he accepted.
Consider that Grégoire was a "poteau," a derogatory term for a candidate who runs in a riding which is a lost cause, why on Earth would the city manager make an illegal campaign contribution to someone who was, without a doubt,  going to lose?
Do the people he represents have so much money to spread around that they'd subsidize someone bound to lose on the if-come that he'll become a somebody one day? 

This week the Liberal party announced with great fanfare that the personal limit on political donations will be lowered to $1,000 from the previous $3,000, an obvious and lame attempt to be seen doing something about influence.
All this will accomplish is to push underground those intent on giving money and increase the use of those infamous brown envelopes.

Let me tell the readers a little about influence. Contrary to popular belief, giving $3,000 to a political party doesn't buy influence, it's small potatoes, nothing more than loose change. The idea that attending a fundraiser and bringing a cheque of three grand will buy you something other than a handshake is ludicrous.

The people who really have influence are the professionals who can raise big money. They are the organizers of the organizers who hold cocktail parties and the receivers of brown envelopes containing large amounts of cash. Someone who can arrange a cocktail party where twenty or thirty thousand is raised is considered a friend of the party. Someone who can arrange twenty or thirty cocktail parties is a player. He is the one with influence and within each party, there are only a few.

Political parties and individual candidates need money to run campaigns. The legal limits are a farce and actually turn honest people into crooks.

Let's not blame politicians, they are no more corrupt than you and I. If cheating is easy and expedient, than cheating it will be.
Whether you are a doorman at a hotel taking a rake off from cabbies for a fare to the airport, or someone paying a doctor to move themselves up the operating room waiting list, we are all corrupt.

Cheating unemployment insurance or workman's comp, while vacationing in Mexico, boosting an insurance claim, goldbricking at the office, paying a contractor or hairdresser cash for a discount, makes us all cheaters.

Get over it. Let's not be holier than thou!


To the tiny minority of you people out there who are shaking their heads in disbelief, all I can say is it's worse than you thought.

Pierre-Karl Péladeau Finally Stumbles

Pierre-Karl Péladeau's meteoric ascension to the top of the Quebec and Canadian media establishment, taking a failing print based company and turning it into a media powerhouse, is stuff business legends are made of. Read my post about his rise 

After a rough start at the helm, Péladeau in a defining moment, locked out journalists at his flagship newspaper Le Journal de Montreal, claiming that the newspaperman were lazy fat cats, earning too much and producing too little. The lockout has lasted for a year and a half but hasn't put a dent in the conception, production and distribution of the newspaper. Using a loophole in the labour legislation, that forbids scabs from crossing a picket line, the newspaper hired outside agencies to produce content and then submit it via the Internet.
The hapless and stubborn journalists remain locked out, likely never to return!

A month ago, with much fanfare and showmanship, Péladeau announced  that he was launching a cellular service to compete with the big boys, Bell, Telus and Rogers.
He manged to secure a whole morning's worth of free coverage on both of Quebec's television all-news channels where he smoothly played the nationalism card to hawk his product with the help of fawning reporters, to an eager audience, thrilled to see one of their own take on the establishment.
Promising that his new company would generate funds to support Quebec artists, he used phrases like 'winning conditions' and 'pride' to describe his entry into cellular, nakedly stroking the Quebecois ego.  Well-played!

His steely-jawed determination and his forceful personality has driven him to one success after the other and Quebeckers, always on the lookout for a local Francophone hero, have taken notice.
Married to Julie Snyder, a popular and omnipresent television presenter, the power couple has become the darlings of both the gossip and business pages. 

Péladeau's latest project is also controversial, the launch of the conservative cable news channel SUNTV News a project that has got the hackles of liberals up, who have sarcastically dubbed it FoxNews North.

You'd think that Péladeau would be inured to the barbs of the media and be able to brush criticism aside, but it seems by his recent action in suing a CBC executive for defamation, he's exposed himself as remarkably thin skinned.
Out of anger, rage or a desire to send a message that he's not to be trifled with, Péladeau sued a CBC executive for defamation after he was characterized  as a 'VOYOU'(hoodlum) in several interviews, over Péladeau's decision to unilaterally stop paying into the  Canadian Television Fund, an important source of income for the CBC.

The whole suing affair has degenerated into a circus with Péladeau and his wife looking rather foolish.

Perhaps Péladeau should have taken a lesson from Spiro Agnew, Richard Nixon's vice-president who taunted the press, only to be mercilessly attacked in return by the press and ultimately driven out of  office. LINK

The judge who was assigned to adjudicate the affair at trial wasn't too impressed with the case and made his feelings quite clear on the first day.

I could imagine Péladeau's lawyer's stomach turning as he realized that his case was likely headed to the toilet, even before the first witness was presented!
When Julie Snyder tearfully described how hurtful the accusation was to her family, the press couldn't resist chuckling at her fine performance. Boohoo!

Last week the judge, Claude Larouche, came to court in a furious snit, brandishing a magazine in his hand that featured a front page story on Péladeau and accusing the mogul of placing news stories to further his case. YIKES!

Lawyers for both sides sat in stunned silence, wondering who'd be the first to explain to the judge that  both magazines La Semaine and L'actualité were issued by competitors and both articles were not particularly flattering.

In fact one of the articles pummeled Péladeau by printing a spread, seeking reader opinions as to whether they actually believed that Péladeau was a 'VOYOU,' a device clearly meant to further propagate the alleged slur and punish  Péladeau for his actions.  Great Fun!!

Lawyers for Péladeau were forced to call the editors of the two magazines into court to explain the facts of life to the judge who remained unimpressed.

The latest news is that the judge refused a request by Péladeau's chief lawyer for a delay in the trial so that he could attend his sister's sudden death in Ontario. The judge ordered the trial to continue with the second chair pleading the case.

Péladeau's enraged legal team saw their opportunity to abandon the sinking trial and made an application that the judge recuse himself for his actions.

The none to pleased judge ruled yesterday that he wouldn't recuse himself.
Looks Like PKP is headed for a very public and embarrassing defeat.

For Péladeau it's 'In for a penny, in for a pound' and even if he loses the case, can an appeal be far away?

The case is somewhat disturbing, as it seems to be setting a nasty precedent for the rich and powerful to sue those who call them names in public.

Premier Charest is rumbling that he's considered suing Action democratique du Quebec leader Gerard Deltell for calling him the 'Godfather of the Liberal party," a pretty clever jibe, one would have to admit. LINK

Perhaps the Premier should take note of the case between Vic Cotroni and Maclean's  back in the sixties where the reputed mobster took offense at being called the 'Godfather of Montreal' and sued the magazine for $1.5 million.

"The judge however concluded that Cotroni's reputation was tainted and awarded just an insulting $2, a dollar for the English version and a dollar for the French version." LINK

Can the Premier do much better?

Me, I hope Péladeau wins and justice repeats itself. With inflation, maybe he'll be awarded a sawbuck!

Stay tuned!

Danny Williams- Good Riddence!

A while back I attended a funeral of an old acquaintance of the family who was, truth be told, a right bastard on any scale with which one would care to measure a man's worth. A disreputable businessman who'd cheat friend or foe, his personal life wasn't much better.

I assumed that they'd gloss over these deficiencies at the funeral, adhering to the old adage of not speaking ill of the dead,  but I never expected him to be eulogized by family and clergy as an outstanding citizen and family man. Eccch!

And so the Canadian press greeted Danny William's announcement of his retirement with a shower of accolades and tributes, conveniently forgetting that he too, was also one right bastard.

There's isn't any doubt that Williams was successful, he certainly brought home the bacon for Newfoundland, by hook or by crook.
His policy of putting Newfoundland before Canada, no matter what, was roundly embraced by the people of the province and his dubious methods forgiven, in consideration of the results.

Bullying, tantrums and threats were his stock in trade. So afraid of Williams was the lily-livered, weak-kneed Paul Martin that he gave away the offshore oil rights to Newfoundland that rightfully belonged to all Canadians.

And so Newfoundlanders traded in a welfare check for a much, much bigger royalty check, working just as hard for one as they did for the other. Claiming that they've worked their way out from being the butt-end of Canada through hard work and ingenuity remains a sad joke perpetrated by the master spinner, Danny Williams.

Newfoundland remains what it always was. Pretending that the province somehow 'earned'  it's prosperity is a fanciful notion, as believable as Jed Clampett claiming hard work led to his riches. In fact, Newfoundlanders can be best described as the Canadian version of the Beverly Hillbillies.

Danny Williams was so used to getting his own way, that when he didn't, as in his inability to reverse the decidedly one-sided Churchill Falls power agreement with Quebec, it galled him to no end and degenerated into a maniacal obsession.

His tried and true methods of bullying, tantrums and vengeful threats all fell on deaf ears in Quebec and each passing year of failure, fed his rage and frustration.

Lost on him and other Newfoundlanders is the simple fact there's about as much chance that Quebec will ever renegotiate the power agreement, as there is the Americans renegotiating compensation to the Indians for the sale of Manhattan, sold for fifty guilders and some colourful beads, centuries ago.  

So like a true demagogue, he amped up the rhetoric to vitriolic levels and when that too failed, he resorted to hate.

For that, I will never forgive him or Newfoundlanders.

He railed against Quebec for putting its selfish interests before that of the region, as if Quebec somehow had a larger obligation than Newfoundland to be altruistic.

When that didn't work he attempted to drive a wedge between Quebec and the provinces, by whining that Quebec was getting too much in federal transfer payments.

This from a province that for sixty years sucked more out of Ottawa on a per capita basis than any other province in the Dominion!

His most galling attacks hinted that Quebec was dishonest, an egregious case of the pot calling the kettle black, if ever there was one.

Nothing but nothing can compare to the fraud perpetrated by successive Newfoundland governments in creating a network of phony fish plants whose only function was to operate for ten weeks in order to qualify Newfoundlanders for federal unemployment insurance. This organized scheme sucked billions out of Ottawa, in a program that would make a Tony Soprano's no-show job scam  proud. LINK

So cruel and selfish is Danny Williams that when New Brunswick was offered the deal of the century by Hydro-Quebec, he hurriedly pissed in the soup by spreading the fear that after Quebec swallowed NB Power, the evil Quebecois would swallow the entire province.
The nefarious hate campaign was a smashing success for Newfoundland and a stunning setback for New Brunswick and so Quebec's sweetheart deal was left on the table. Then New Brunswickers were badly betrayed when the province was  left out of Williams new 'regional' power plan.
Well-played Danny! Here's another dagger!

The latest Newfie joke is the proposed go-around Quebec power transmission line that will cost an estimated seven billion dollars. When the true costs finally come in, it's likely to top off at the ten to twelve billion dollar range, making the whole project suspect.
Of course Williams has called on the hated federal government to help finance this folly and I sincerely hope that Harper tells Newfoundland to take a hike.
All this money, spent to satisfy the desire for vengeance by one angry man. Unbelievable!

Perhaps the new Premier of Newfoundland can put emotions aside and consider what's is in the real economic interest of the province. Building this expensive boondoggle just because Williams is angry at Quebec is the height of stupidity, but of course it's Newfoundland.

A real Premier would swallow her pride, put Churchill Falls behind her and make a deal to use existing transmission facilities through Quebec which would cost a fraction of the proposed go-around project.

The caveat being that the province hire a Toronto law firm, preferably Jewish, to do their negotiating!

For Newfoundlanders, reading this, who feel particularly irked, understand that seven years of Williams Quebec-bashing has sown the seeds of hate and poisoned relations between two neighbours for no good reason. Congratulations!

Do you honesty believe that if the shoe was on the other foot, that the Churchill Falls power agreement favoured Newfoundland, that Danny Williams would re-open negotiations?

That would be a real Newfie joke.
Here's another;

Jean Charest's Last Gambit

It's rare to see a leader do nothing in the face of overwhelming adversity, even when doing nothing is the bravest and smartest course of action.

You can call Jean Charest a lot of bad things, but even his enemies understand that his political instincts are unrivalled in this province.

Given the pressure to call an inquiry into corruption, Charest understands that doing so would not only spell the end of his government, but would likely hurt the party for years to come.

So he has decided to do nothing. For him and the party it's the only logical decision, even in the face of overwhelming pressure.

One only has to look back to the Paul Martin government and the foolish decision to launch an inquiry into the sponsorship scandal.
Martin felt he was on solid ground, he wasn't responsible for the mess and felt that the public would understand. It was better to clear the air. In his autobiography Martin wrote;

"I wanted to make it clear that we had nothing to hide and would not sweep anything under the rug"

Proof positive that even Prime Ministers can be fools.
How badly he overestimated the public. How badly he underestimated the political fallout.
Did he honestly believe that nobody would be made to pay?

Jean Chretien, the last great political operator on the federal scene, summed it up succinctly when he commented that Martin was indeed better off sweeping the whole thing under the rug, because no matter how big the bump underneath, the alternative was worse.

That my friends is politics. Chretien and Charest are consummate pros, while Martin an amateur.

So, dear reader, are you outraged? You think Martin showed courage?

In life nice guys finish last, in politics nice guys don't even finish the race.

Again, if you are angry with this point of view, remember, it was the public that destroyed the Martin government, over a Jean Chretien affair.

And so in spite of all, Jean Charest maintains his control over his caucus while bungling Steven Harper is losing control of his.
Considering the positions of the two leaders, it's quite an achievement.

So what is Jean Charest thinking and what is he telling his caucus?

First, he's told them to forget about an inquiry. It will never happen under his watch. He's reminding them that it would destroy them all.

Then he's telling them that things are not as bad as portrayed in the press. The polls are actually quite close and all the negative publicity is brewed by a separatist press.

If he pulls off a by-election win next week, (and it's likely he will) it will be a stunning reversal of fortune.  The press will have to admit that he is far from dead. The caucus will eat it up.
Never mind that it took a two billion dollar pork project to seal the deal.

But the real gamble is this.
Charest is placing all his money on the police investigations into corruption turning something up. The rumours are saying that there will be arrests. If this happens next year it will be a game changer.

If the arrests happen and people are hauled into court Charest will crow that his course of action was solid.

Under the best case scenario, the crooks will take a deal, plead guilty and admit they were fixing construction prices without bleeding over the government.

The public will be somewhat satisfied. Not the pequistes, but the Liberal base and that's what counts.

It all comes down to a gamble, but when you are down by a lot of goals in a hockey game, it's time to take risks.

Can he pull it off?

Time will tell.

Stupidity and Greed Cross Language Divide

Financial abuses in Quebec's School board system is so legendary that the public is largely inured to surprises. The disconnect that the administrators have from their students and the public that they serve is nothing less than legendary.

And while student population falls across the province, the number of administrators keeps going up.

How about the cegep director who expensed a guided tour of the Grand Canyon and also claimed reimbursement for a meal in a museum that didn't have a restaurant? (It was actually for money spent on presents in the gift shop.) Did she lose her job?  LINK f

Recently, the Minister of Education had to step in when plans for a spanking new $13 million head office for the Commission scolaire des Patriotes were revealed, plans that included hiring of a company to water the plants. The head of the commission, continues to insist that the board needs more office space, even in light of falling enrollment

Such is the sense of entitlement, that when the minister turned down the proposal summarily, the furious, head honcho of the commission, Normande Lemieux, demanded a meeting to explain her position. Thankfully the minister told her to take a hike. Link fr

Yoga classes, meditation sessions, workshops of all assorted manner are all de riguer for school boards administrators, all on the public dime and all done on company time.

To date, I've read about these abuses, smugly assuming that it is a problem found only on the francophone side of the education system.

How arrogantly stupid I was... Shame on me!

A story in the Journal de Montreal, had me gagging on my morning coffee. I'm a cynic by nature and not much surprises me, but the abusive disregard of the public trust as described in the article had me seeing red.

It seems that a bunch of school directors  from anglophone schools went to a swanky hotel in the Dominican Republic to ostensibly improve their leadership skills, all on the dime of their respective school boards. All of this of course in the dead of winter.

Why the Dominican Republic? To study the fine education system down there and to learn how the schools cope with limited resources.

Sorry, I have to scream...

AGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

According to the organizer of this pork barrel vacation, a certain Lynnn Butler-Kisber, the trip to the stunning beach front hotel in the middle of winter is not really a vacation. "They went there to work"
Of course, she admitted that during the free time participants were most certainly free to partake of the hotel's fine facilities and access to the ocean.

By the way, the conference locale is no Motel 6, take a look a the promotional video of the place, it's a palace!

 

Next time these administrators feel the need to study schools operating in adverse conditions, perhaps they might plan a trip to the Gaza Strip or North Korea. Although the hotel situation may not be as favourable,  it'll certainly be a great learning experience.

In reaction to the story, school board spokespersons are all hiding and with good reason.

Anybody who tells us that this was an 'educational experience' must think we are morons.
Anybody who defends this abuse deserves to be fired.

By the way, each of the participants should be T4ed for the pleasure part of the trip.

How are we anglos going to react to this unforgivable insult to our intelligence and the disgusting abuse of public funds, by our very own people frittering away the school taxes that we pay?

While there appears to be no accountability in the French school boards, is there any in the English ones?

I fear we are one and the same. Losers.