Canadians Expect Security: Government Inadequately Funds It
*** "Pension funds were used to maintain RCMP and Public Service workload, address work back-logs and deliver on a wide variety of initiatives," ***
How are the RCMP supposed to be effective against terrorists and crooks when they've been so starved of operating funds that, I suspect, they have had to dig into this to keep afloat? The government's line that they've kicked $7.7 billion into security but this is an illusion when this has to go on. What the government has done to the RCMP is a national disgrace and has left Canadians unprotected! If they had been properly funded, they wouldn't have had to resort to this.
The government claiming that all is well with security is nothing more than financial sleight of hand. Just listen to question period if you don't believe this. It is impossible to find out anything from the government side. Obfuscation! Obfuscation! Obfuscation!
It seems that the only thing that has been important to the government has been the Musical Ride -- nice and showy, the kind of thing that looks great in photographs; protection of Canadians has been a remote priority -- and still is, by the looks of the Paul Martin budget.
*** Our Liberal government, however, did find money for the gun registry and sponsorships so it wasn't as if Canada's federal government couldn't find any funds to prevent Canada's national police force from sinking into the abyss. ***
At the same time, our security services have to contend with terrorists and a $30 billion criminal enterprise being operated in this country; the RCMP have nowhere near the resources to cope with the problems.
*** It looks as if there were a reason the Liberal government does not have adequate whistleblower legislation that would protect Mounties such as Cpl. Read or Sgt. Stenhouse--or other whistleblowers. How very convenient! Now, who would benefit from that? ***
OTTAWA - The RCMP is facing accusations that it may have misused its own employees' pension fund of millions of dollars by billing the fund for administrative and other expenses unrelated to pensions, the National Post has learned.
"Pension funds were used to maintain RCMP and Public Service workload, address work back-logs and deliver on a wide variety of initiatives," concludes a secret internal RCMP report on pension administration problems that was delivered last November to Giuliano Zaccardelli, the RCMP Commissioner.
[. . . .] When internal auditors asked why the RCMP pension fund was being billed by RCMP financial managers for costs unrelated to pension fund administration, the RCMP staffers involved replied they had received "informal instructions" -- they didn't say from whom -- to " 'be creative' in spending funds provided."
[. . . .] RCMP Inspector Tim Cogan confirmed last night that an audit of the RCMP's pension fund administration is ongoing.
"The audit is not complete at this time. It has raised a number of concerns and we are following up on those concerns," Insp. Cogan said.
[. . . .] So far, the RCMP has quietly ordered a "review" to determine if a full financial audit is required to quantify how much "may have been inappropriately charged to the pension plan and that should be recovered," the audit report states.
The RCMP Pension Fund had assets totalling $13.4-billion at March 31, 2003, the latest period for which financial information is available. It reported $13.4 million in administrative expenses during the period, up more than 40% from the $9.3 million in such expenses reported for 2001-2002, documents show.
The RCMP pension plan is overseen by a unit inside the RCMP's National Compensation Policy Centre. On April 1, 2003, some of the administrative functions associated with the RCMP pension plan were privatized and are now carried out by Morneau Sobeco, a firm based in Montreal.
[. . . . ] Auditors uncovered a host of RCMP management expenses improperly billed to the pension fund, the largest of which was the entire bill for a $3.6-million project to clean up computerized RCMP personnel data before the RCMP outsourced some pension administration functions to Morneau Sobeco.
The RCMP personnel data that was "cleaned up" in the complex computer project supports RCMP staffing, payroll, benefits and other RCMP corporate and financial activities, yet the force paid for none of it, auditors found. Pensioners footed the entire bill.
"Pension plan members may view as inappropriate the charging of 100% of costs associated with data cleanup given that the accuracy of original data entry is the responsibility of the organization and not solely of the pension plan," the audit states.
[. . . . ] "In fact, there appears to have been a general tendency to fund unrelated costs through the pension plan," the audit report concludes.
There are details, if you link.
This reminded me of something I wrote on March 11, 04. There was a problem with $$$ and computer hardware, software and related services that the Auditor General and her department pointed out: See this entry.
Link to it or read the short excerpt here. Then think.
Note: Compaq/HP acted, at the Liberal government's behest, as an umbrella organization for the government to oversee six subcontractors
*** The contract to provide software, hardware and computer services to DND was originally awarded to Compaq Canada in 1991. It was transferred to HP after its acquisition of Compaq.
HP said it was kept out of the loop as it hired subcontractors at the request of DND.
"DND's instructions to HP were to process invoices for these suppliers, although the nature of the work being performed was, in many instances, never disclosed by DND. Despite repeated HP requests for particulars of the work to be provided, DND informed HP that the work was confidential and that, in the interest of national security, HP was not entitled to this information," Mr. Ireland said. ***
When the public is kept in the dark, when the public becomes enraged at what has happened to law and order in Canada, when the public feels inadequately protected, when the public is lied to by its government, the public has a short fuse. It may turn on agencies of which it knows too little -- especially -- instead of upon the government which causes the problem.
It seems to me--a layman in these things, admittedly--that if the kind of thing that is referred to in the story I have mentioned above applied to computers/computing services in DND, similar problems could arise with other departments. Canada's security services are tasked with providing services Canadians expect and assume our government funds adequately. There have been deficits in the funding for the RCMP and other security services.
Despite protestations to the contrary, there has been great secrecy about how taxpayers' money is used in any federal government department or crown corporation, particularly the "crowns" because of the "arms length" relationship with the "crowns". Those who understand more about the fine points of these relationships might be able to explain this better. Still, I would ask, is it not possible? Could our government have beggared our security services, as well as our military, leaving all to "be creative" in order to carry on? It is worth a second thought. NJC
Hansard: CPC MP Kevin Sorenson-vs-Hon. Anne McLellan
Hansard--or selected exchanges, anyway--could become a best seller.
Readers, you just have to know where to look for the information, start to question, and be able to do some basic math. It appears that the media are so controlled--or is it lazy?--in this country that most of the media--most of the time--just take the press releases at face value without ever challenging the information. Most of the media are too complacent; they simply regurgitate whatever is fed to them.
Think about the following. Read it and then, read it again.
How is it possible that all this activity can go on unimpeded and everybody just looks the other way in the hope that the general public won't pay attention? How could major criminal activity have reached the $30 billion level without being severely challenged? The sad part is that top investigators like RCMP Corporal Robert Read and RCMP Sgt. Stenhouse were thrown to the wolves -- while the crooks in Canada have had a free hand.
*** The first duty of a government is to protect its citizens. Obviously, NOT IN CANADA! Is it possible that the first duty of certain people in our government was to make sure their friends were looked after? NJC ***
Hansard March 31- Question Period National Security
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, CPC): Mr. Speaker, for a decade the Prime Minister has been part of a government that has failed to effectively protect Canadians.
In her report the Auditor General found major deficiencies in inter-agency cooperation and a lack of coordination of intelligence management. These were the same problems that the Auditor General found in 1996, eight years ago.
Why, after a decade of neglect and a decade of failure, should Canadians trust the Prime Minister with the security of our nation?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is this Prime Minister who on December 12 created a new Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. It is this Prime Minister who created for the first time a new position of national security advisor. It is this Prime Minister who is going to create a new committee of parliamentarians to deal with questions of national security.
Stop right there! Think about what she said. "create new . . . ". These are bureaucratic positions, are they not? What has been the actual funding for our security forces on the ground to use for INVESTIGATIONS, MANPOWER--whatever is necessary--to provide Canadian citizens with real security? NJC
In fact, there is no one more committed to the safety and security of Canadians than this Prime Minister.
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the minister can boast all she wants about the belated creation of the department of national security. The reality is that it is too little, too late.
The fact remains that this Prime Minister was part of a government that failed to fulfill its fundamental role which is the protection of its citizens.
The Auditor General stated that it will take years to rectify. We do not have years. We are named as a terrorist target today. Check the headlines today.
The Prime Minister has repeatedly failed Canadians. Why should we trust the Prime Minister again?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, far from failing Canadians in relation to safety and security, I guess the hon. member forgets that as finance minister the Prime Minister committed $7.7 billion in the fall of 2001 to help enhance the safety and security of Canadians.
The hon. member refers to Canada being a named country. I want to reassure Canadians that the naming of Canada as a target is not new news. Osama bin Laden did that some 18 months ago. In fact, there are no specific. . .
ยน (1500)
Does the gun registry $$$ come out of this $7.7 billion? If you count $1-billion for the registry, I believe, then add to it all the bits that have gone to other departments or branches which are part of this, I understand that brings it up to about $2-BILLION CANADIAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
It is VERY DIFFICULT to find out where money goes in this government -- as those who tried to follow the expenses of our Governor General can attest. It took concerted effort and looking at several departments on the part of the Auditor General's Department to find out the $$$ trail -- a massive over-spending of Canadian taxpayers' money for dubious value.
If what I have just written is wrong, please correct me. I shall post it. NJC
Using Underage Actor Bad: Film About Pedophilia OK
A friend sent me this; I am appalled that this so-called "art film" was even considered for public funding -- but the reason for NOT funding it is even worse. Thanks, HH, for this.
This is the kind of "culture" that leftists/Liberals/Canada's cultural elite seem to think is perfectly ACCEPTABLE--EVEN NORMAL--to fund, although, with an election looming, they have probably reconsidered its impact on the election.
This is the kind of slippery slope that has loosened the bonds of decency in Canada. The minute our governments become involved in funding this kind of activity under the guise of "culture" and "art", it has the same effect as letting the little things go -- things like allowing homelessness on the street and doing nothing about it. It is one of the ways of signalling an open attitude or a lack of boundaries in a society -- in all areas that used to have standards.
It is the kind of attitude that leans more toward sociological excuses for crime and criminals than toward protecting the innocent victims. Calling this "art" is but one step down that slippery slope to "Any behaviour is acceptable; anything goes". (See excerpt below for a link to the whole article by MacDonald on the little things that have exacerbated the problems in Toronto -- things like the homeless on the streets.)
Responding to media attention, the Independent Filmmakers Co-operative of Ottawa (IFCO), a publicly funded group, has announced that it will not be providing funding for the pedophilia-themed film Last Night with Jesse. Filmmaker Ken Takahashi had requested a "major" grant from the group.
. . . the IFCO said the decision was based on "concerns that were legal in nature. On March 29, 2004, the IFCO Board met and decided to refuse the grant based on the inability of the filmmaker to provide assurances that the film would not contravene any existing law."
IFCO did not appear to be concerned about the immoral nature of the film rather than its possible illegality. It said,"The denial of the production service grant application is due to concerns that are legal in nature, and not due to the particular subject matter nor the recent media attention and pressures," the IFCO writes. "If the filmmaker is able to provide the assurances requested, he is able to resubmit his request for production support."
The IFCO also clarified that it "is a publicly funded organization" that provides monetary assistance to artists ".made possible through revenue generated by IFCO and is not funded by public funds." [. . . .]
Thanks to Ottawa city councillor for Bell-South Nepean, Jan Harder, for her efforts against funding this type of what is pushed onto Canadians as "art". It isn't ,and most Canadians would be horrified by funding this, I would think.
*** The film had been approved for funding by the selection jury of the IFCO, which gets public money from the Canada Council, the Ontario Council for the Arts and the City of Ottawa. ***
*** Sheila Pokiak, IFCO's executive director, said funding for the movie was denied because Takahashi was not able " to confirm whether he would use a minor or a person of the age of majority" in the film.
"If [Takahashi] were to have confirmed that he would use a person of the age of majority, we most likely would have approved it," Pokiak said. ***
Before you go any further, read that again. Think about what Pokiak is saying.
OTTAWA - A taxpayer-funded grant for a film depicting a sexual relationship between an adolescent boy and an older man has been pulled.
[. . . . ] The film had been approved for funding by the selection jury of the IFCO, which gets public money from the Canada Council, the Ontario Council for the Arts and the City of Ottawa.
But the group's board quashed the grant on Tuesday, saying the film's director, Ken Takahashi, couldn't confirm whether he planned to use a minor as an actor.
[. . . . ] In Toronto, provincial Culture Minister Madeleine Meilleur said she was "uncomfortable with government funding for any film that depicts a sexual relationship between an adult and a child."
In Ottawa, Jan Harder, councillor for Bell-South Nepean, led the attack against public funding for the film, threatening to withdraw municipal money from IFCO if the group approved the grant.
[. . . . ] Sheila Pokiak, IFCO's executive director, said funding for the movie was denied because Takahashi was not able " to confirm whether he would use a minor or a person of the age of majority" in the film.
"If [Takahashi] were to have confirmed that he would use a person of the age of majority, we most likely would have approved it," Pokiak said.
[. . . . Takahashi ] described his film as a coming-of-age story about "a relationship between an older man and an individual coming into sexual maturation."
Check into a film named "Bubbles" which, if I am not mistaken, celebrated hard-core lesbian love -- and was funded by Canada's culture vultures -- with taxpayer money (all, or in part), of course. If I am wrong, correct me. NJC
In the Toronto Sun, Bob MacDonald's Sunday column should be worth reading. He has received emails, letters, and phone calls from citizens on Toronto's situation and how to fix it.
*** I'll outline some of their suggested solutions. Believe me, they are no pussy-footers. ***
*** "At one time, lawmakers and law breakers were as opposite as night and day. But somewhere, somehow, the line has gotten blurred. The police--the very men and women who put their lives on the line for us each and every day--have, to some, become the enemy." ***
"The problem is that we've got too many myopic left-wing pussycat do-gooders that can't see the forest for the trees."
"Ever since the early 1970s, the Liberals have proven time and again their loyalties are with the criminals. The lax laws, the minimum sentences, the early releases, the even softer convictions for re-offenders."
[. . . . ] They blamed politicians for being opportunists who weakened the criminal justice system by getting rid of capital punishment, bringing in weak, permissive special laws for young offenders, introducing and keeping a wide-open, poorly enforced immigration system, and for undermining the police.
And they blamed the judiciary for handing down "slap-on-the-wrist" judgments and sentences that make a mockery of the criminal justice system.
