The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Dingwall and Pallister By now, everyone has heard of David Dingwall, the former Chretien cabinet minister who was recently toasted in the Commons by a Tory musical chorus led by Portage-Lisgar MP Brian Pallister. An MP for 17 years and Public Works Minister who set up the Sponsorship programme in 1996 (and who hired disgraced Liberal Chuck Guite), Dingwall was turfed by his voters in 1997 as the appeal of national PC leader Jean Charest and Peter Mackay resulted in all Liberal MPs being defeated in Nova Scotia. Not discouraged, David went on to make some real money, first as an unregistered lobbyist (quite illegal), then really lucked out in being appointed head of the Canadian Mint in 2003. Mr. Guite told the Gomery Inquiry that his boss, Dingwall, told him not to consider the lowest bid for the sponsorship contracts Ð but (obviously) if they were Liberal supporters, they would get prime consideration. After 1997, Dingwall started earning hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying for firms seeking Sponsorship contracts Ð all quite illegally. One firm paid him half-a-million dollars to get them a federal loan. After the scandal broke, the Liberals clawed the $500,000 back from the company rather than go after Dingwall, saying the company could go after David for the money. Is this Liberal favouritism or what? The ex-Nova Scotian really hit the jackpot when Chretien appointed him head of the Mint at a salary, including bonuses, of around $277,000. The Mint began to do well and so did David with his outrageous spending Ð far more than the Manitoba Crocus Fund management. Revealed by Pallister under the Freedom of Information Act, the expenses included a golf club membership, huge foreign and domestic travel expenses, a $6,000 dinner at an Ottawa restaurant, limousine services, and what really antagonized critics, $1.29 for a pack of gum and $1.89 for a bottle of water. Even understanding that an assistant would buy the items and turn in the bills, one wonders what he spent the $277,000 salary on. The day after Pallister revealed the spending, Dingwall resigned, which tells us something about his chances of being vindicated. At this writing, he claims all expenditures were valid, the fault was the opposition in the Commons, and he deserves a settlement. The Liberals talked of a half-million dollar settlement, which outraged the opposition and a lot of Liberal MPs. They then switched tunes and spoke of a settlement minus any unwarranted expenses, but insisted he really deserved a settlement to "prevent a lawsuit." Why did he resign? Some speculate that he cut a deal with the Martin gang to get out of the way in return for a payoff. Would the noble Liberals do this? When he quit, Dingwall was praised and defended by the Mint's union bosses as worth the money and the one who "gave us our jobs." This of course is all public money. Think of it this way: last year, the Government got about a million-dollar dividend from the Mint. Dingwall's salary, bonuses and expenses were close to that Ð so the public broke even. Will Dingwall make a difference? He certainly should to the Canadian voters. As Stephen Harper pointed out, his excessive spending took place under Paul Martin's watch: "Despite all of his talk about being 'Mad as Hell' about the Sponsorship scandal, the latest Liberal scandal shows that Paul Martin has learned nothing. The Liberals only act when they've been caught. That's just not good enough." Pallister, critic of the Mint, is from an old and well-established family in the district. First elected as a PC MLA, Brian quickly became an effective minister in the Filmon Government, and was often touted as a successor to the PC leader. Attracted to federal politics, Pallister was first elected as an Alliance MP in his home riding, then as a Conservative last time, always by substantial margins. He will be a major contender for a cabinet post in a Stephen Harper government. After a Kim Campbell visit in the 1993 leadership contest, Pallister, Darren Prazniuk, myself and a few others sat around assessing the meeting. Prazniuk was a short, young and enthusiastic lawyer who became Attorney-General in Filmon's cabinet. Pallister kidded Darren about being a lawyer and told him the "What's the difference between a lawyer and a jackfish?" joke. Darren suffered some discomfort, but we all had a hearty laugh and enjoyed Brian's wit and charm, which he is now bringing to Parliament his new venue.2/11/05
