Dingwall got $418,000 package!

[Colpy]

Re: RE: Dingwall got $418,000 package!

Colpy, if Mr. Dingwall was indeed forced into resignation, then he should be entitled to whatever "entitlements" that such a thing would entitle him to. Forgive the overuse of the expression, lol.

For a Government of Canada to pick and choose when it should honour its contractual obligations, and when it should not, would be quite hypocritical and unacceptable, in my opinion.

Absolutely.

My problem is with their complete lack of any ability or intention to speak truth on the matter.

And, I really don't like Dingwall. He is the personification of everything wrong with the Liberal Party of Canada. Arrogant, smeaky, a liar, and guilty of a multitude of sins before the whole expense account deal.

 

[iamcanadian]

He quit. Pure and simple.

And if he did not quit and was fired With Cause, then a trial should have been held so the truth would come out publicly. Not some private in-camera arbitration crap that just served to put the recommendation in to pay him big bucks for nothing.

If he was fired With Cause and it was found to be wrongfull then the person that fired him gets fired for incompetence.

Pure and simple.

But they will not let the public know what realy went on hidding everything behind closed doors.

The Public has a right to be suspicious and fire the people that keep looking suspicious.

In the Private Sector people get fired for looking suspicious all the time.

 

[Sassylassie]

The conclusion of the Board was "Constructive Dismissal" meaning the Employer changed the terms and conditions of the employee's employment-- thus forcing the employee to vacate the position. Dingwall is like pond scum he will be back working for another company that no doubt will benifit from his contacts in Government.

 

[the caracal kid]

RE: Dingwall got $418,000

"Tories accuse Liberals of Dingwall 'cover-up'

The Conservatives are accusing the Liberals of keeping David Dingwall's severance package under wraps, a "cover-up" they say may have cost them a majority win"
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060205/dingwall_tories_060205/20060205?hub=TopStories

would the cons like some cheese with their whine?

oops, sorry, I forgot they are already cheesy enough! (like the kid with cheese stains on their fingers pointing at another to blame for the cheesies being gone)

 

[iamcanadian]

Prove that any one hunted him. What a buch of civil servants on this board. There was no proof other than he quit and then his friends gave him a pay off for something.

It was a scam untill they can prove they are inocent on this one.

 

[TenPenny]

Re: RE: Dingwall got $418,000 package!

Prove that any one hunted him. What a buch of civil servants on this board. There was no proof other than he quit and then his friends gave him a pay off for something.

It was a scam untill they can prove they are inocent on this one.

Harper went after him with a bunch of half baked bullshit, just to make points. All that assinine bullshit about gum on the expenses just proves that Harper and his crew are complete idiots. Anyone who has to travel for business expects their employer to pick up their expenses on the road.

It was a stupid farce to make Hitler, I mean Harper, score points. He's a moron, and his people are morons. Anyone who could take this farce seriously is a moron.

And yes, Dingwall is a scumbag, but you don't have to invent petty stupidity to nail him.

 

[iamcanadian]

In law one side makes the case then the other side proves it wrong.

In Dingwall's case he quit and then he got paid. The onus is on the to prove it was legitimate. Prima fascia theres guilt.

 

[TenPenny]

You'd have to know the exact terms of his package, wouldn't you? There are lots of CEOs who get a package if they quit, or if the company loses tons of money.

Even the gov't can't decide to ignore a contract at will, although Peter MacKay seems to be able to.

 

[annabattler]

PLUS, Dingwall will still get his MP's pension, for the 17 years he served.
While exact pension amounts are not available,the complicated formula for them is...Anne McLellan(defeated this last time round)will receive a pension of over 3 million dollars.Now that is a lot of taxpayer pennies.

 

[FiveParadox]

Pensions and Entitlements

In relation to the Honourable Anne McLellan, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, she earned that pension, in respect of the Acts that have been passed in the House of Commons; the pensions were not decided in particular by the Government, but rather over years of legislatives measures to that effect.

Respecting the Honourable David Dingwall, a Member of Her Majesty's Privy Council, Mr. Dingwall should not be denied any pensions or entitlements that he would have been reasonably guaranteed under his contract with his employer, under the terms of that contract. As for the assertions above that he should be deemed guilty of defrauding the Government and the people of Canada until proven otherwise, I would argue that the opposite is true; in the interest of avoiding hypocracy, we must deem Mr. Dingwall to be clear of any wrongdoing until it has been proven otherwise.

 

[iamcanadian]

Honorable Shonerables. What a buch of cheerleading crap.

People in private sector only get paid based on merit and abilty. These people get paid based on heredetary priviedges and entittlements.

In the private sector they would have been lucky to be selling cars for commission.

 

[FiveParadox]

Hardly cheerleading; rather, a formality and sign of respect.

To be frank, the House of Commons is not the private sector.

 

[iamcanadian]

I have no respect for any part of the Canadian Government Bureaucracy everyone involved in managing money or jobs is corrupt. Their elected puppets I feel sorry about for having to pander to them to stay elected like cheap whores.

 

[#juan]

Edmonton Journal - 8 hours ago
An independent arbitrator has ruled Dingwall, the former Royal Canadian Mint president who left his post last year amid controversy over his expenses and questions over lobbying activities, was forced out of his job and should receive more than $400,000 ...

BTW, it will be the Tories who pay Dingwall. Isn't it great.... :wink:

 

[FiveParadox]

Conservative Irony

That should be somewhat ironic to the Honourable Leader of the Opposition (until eleven o'clock tomorrow morning, Eastern time) — had he not vehemently opposed paying any sort of severence to the Honourable David Dingwall whatsoever?

 

[iamcanadian]

This is because all policians must pander equaly to higher buraucrats for life in order to stay elected.

 

[zoofer]

Probably most of the award will be paid by Tories as they are generally employed and pay taxes rather than suck on the public teat.

Tories claim Liberal deception in compensation award to Dingwall
Jim Brown, Canadian Press
Published: Sunday, February 05, 2006
OTTAWA (CP) - The incoming Conservative government say they are powerless to stop a hefty settlement with ousted Mint boss David Dingwall announced in the final hours before Paul Martin was due to leave office.

The $417,780 award was based on the findings of an independent arbitrator who concluded that Dingwall, contrary to past claims by the Martin government, was forced out of his job and didn't leave voluntarily.

Neither PCO nor Dingwall's lawyers would elaborate on the reasons for that conclusion. The detailed ruling by arbitrator George Adams, a retire judge of Ontario Superior Court, was not made public.

Tory MP Jason Kenney insisted the Liberals knew about the compensation award on Jan. 20 - three days before election day - and sat on it to avoid political embarrassment.

"I believe that could have been the difference between a Conservative minority and a majority," Kenney said Sunday on CTV's Question Period.

"This was a cover-up that affected the result of the election - and I think in a way subverted democracy.,"

Jay Hill, another Conservative MP, suggested Dingwall or others might be called before a parliamentary committee to explain the situation.

"We can only be left to surmise what difference it would have made if they had been honest with Canadians and had this come out on the Friday before the Monday election," said Hill.

Bob Quinn, a spokesman for the Privy Council Office, said it's true that lawyers for the government and for Dingwall were notified of the arbitrator's ruling on Jan. 20.
.
.
.
Link

 

[iamcanadian]

A majority government. Heaven's forbid; the Government would never want that. All that democratic power getting in the way of the Rulling Bureaucratism

 

[Triple_R]

Clearly, one of two things occurred here...

1) David Dingwall resigned, and as such, was not entitled to the same severance pay that he would be entitled to if he was fired. If this is the case, then we are wasting money on a man who is not entitled to it.

2) David Dingwall was fired, and as such, the Liberal party (up to, and including, Paul Martin) was lying, and they covered-up that fact during a key part of the election campaign (the final weekend).

The faux counter-outrage from Liberal supporters here is pathetic. I guess being a Liberal supporter means never having to admit when your party is wrong.

Canadians have a right to be upset over this situation. They were either lied to about Dingwall's 'was he fired or did he resign?' situation, or they're getting screwed by this nice fat golden parachute of sorts being given to Dingwall.

Harper pushed for Dingwall's resignation because the poor excuse for a government employee was wasteful in his spending. If he was fired, that suggests that the Liberals agreed with Harper. If he resigned, that suggests that he doesn't deserve this severance package.

Either way, to try to somehow pin this on Harper is laughable in the extreme.

This either shoes gross dishonesty, or gross incompetence, on the part of the Liberals. Take your pick.

 

[TenPenny]

Re: RE: Dingwall got $418,000 package!

Clearly, one of two things occurred here...


Harper pushed for Dingwall's resignation because the poor excuse for a government employee was wasteful in his spending. If he was fired, that suggests that the Liberals agreed with Harper. If he resigned, that suggests that he doesn't deserve this severance package.

So any time we feel that one of Harper's appointees doesn't measure up to OUR idea of the spending guidelines, can we force them to resign? Despite what the rules are?