Where did all the money go to Attawapiskat?

[Michael Hardner]

It's clear that this band council and its chief are as thoroughly incompetent as anyone could be, and have neither the intelligence nor aptitude for handling finances. The band council's finances should be administered by an outsider. In fact, the band council should simply be fired and the reserve should be administered by an outside agency until things are set up properly.

I get what you are saying but - the band was already set up for co-management, with someone coming in to assist them with these things. The council is elected, somehow, locally. It would be like Mike Harris firing the mayor of Toronto, I think.

So why didn't Indian Affairs and Northern Development look into these budgets? Because, evidently, this sort of gross mismanagement is commonplace among "first nations", who are generally administered by locals whose only calling for their jobs is popularity.

The thing is - I think that they are supposed to under co-management. From what I've read they're supposed to do a quarterly review. The idea that mismanagement is commonplace leads to inertia and a paternalistic attitude. Obviously they are capable of better but you can't turn a northern town into a well-oiled machine overnight - as if any city in Canada is managed at that level - so some perspective is important.

[Argus]

I get what you are saying but - the band was already set up for co-management, with someone coming in to assist them with these things. The council is elected, somehow, locally. It would be like Mike Harris firing the mayor of Toronto, I think.

I believe there are provisions in most provinces for the province to fire a local board or council for malfeasance and replace them with a stewardship, much as they have done to local school boards in the past.

The thing is - I think that they are supposed to under co-management.

Whatever that implies the 'co-manager' clearly does not keep the books, nor compel them to do so. I strongly suspect he or she also has no power to ensure contracts are let properly (ie, for necessary work, at a decent price) as opposed to those in power in the local band office giving high priced work to friends and relatives.

The idea that mismanagement is commonplace leads to inertia and a paternalistic attitude.

Ya think? Unfortunately, from all I've read, mismanagement IS commonplace, and the attitude IS paternalistic (and politically correct). Politicians don't want to pick fights with natives because they invariably get accused of racism, etc. Dwight Duncan, Ontario's finance minister, expressed what might be seen as the most common political response among those on the left to this when he dismissed the audit as of little importance.

Mind you, expecting Ontario's finance minster to express any degree of discomfort for gross financial mismanagement and incompetence would be like expecting to hear Maurice Boucher complain about violence in the streets.

Obviously they are capable of better but you can't turn a northern town into a well-oiled machine overnight - as if any city in Canada is managed at that level - so some perspective is important.

Oh, was this reserve established yesterday? I was under the impression it had been around for quite some time. And while I have previously expressed my dismay and contempt for municipal government in Canada you seem to be making excuses here, perhaps out of an overly sensitive fear of criticizing natives. Then again, I was once suspended here for a month for calling the Attawapiskat band council a bunch of dumbasses, so maybe you're smart.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

I believe there are provisions in most provinces for the province to fire a local board or council for malfeasance and replace them with a stewardship, much as they have done to local school boards in the past.

Really? The Ontario premier could fire the mayor and council for a town ?

Oh, was this reserve established yesterday? I was under the impression it had been around for quite some time. And while I have previously expressed my dismay and contempt for municipal government in Canada you seem to be making excuses here, perhaps out of an overly sensitive fear of criticizing natives. Then again, I was once suspended here for a month for calling the Attawapiskat band council a bunch of dumbasses, so maybe you're smart.

Not making excuses - I want improvement, but we had another poster claiming that the situation was beyond hope even though some improvement is acknowledged to have happened. So I'm just asking for clarity - how much improvement is enough and how much isn't.

Please don't try to suppose you understand what's going on inside my mind. I have a hard enough time with that, it would be impossible for you to do accurately.

[Moonbox]

Really? The Ontario premier could fire the mayor and council for a town ?

Where did he say that Michael? Please.

Not making excuses - I want improvement, but we had another poster claiming that the situation was beyond hope even though some improvement is acknowledged to have happened. So I'm just asking for clarity - how much improvement is enough and how much isn't.

Sorry Michael, but your implications and questions are, if not excuses, misdirections. Theresa Spence is making a fuss outside Parliament Hill, and meanwhile the band she's in charge of has been proven to have mishandled $50-60M. Not only did they mishandle it, but they did so for a period of over 10 years despite numerous and ongoing warnings. No amount of improvement on her part (imposed or otherwise) will put her in a position where the government or the average Canadian is going to be interested in good faith dialogue with her. She's given far too many reasons for everyone not to trust her.

She's proven her immense incompetence already, and the possibility of her outright corruption is still very real. At the very least, she and her band have knowingly acted in extreme bad faith and with a total disregard for taxpayer money. She's taken this one step further, however, by having the gall to stage a protest about the situation on her reserve prior to the upcoming audit release which she knew wouldn't reflect favorably on her. Either this was a pre-emptive move to build sympathy prior to being raked over the coals (another sign of her disinterest in cooperating) or she's once again shown how much of a moron she is by failing to understand the optics behind staging a protest while knowing that she and her band have completely bungled the situation on their own, and that this knowledge would be made public.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Moonbox

[dre]

I wonder what would happen if this firm audited our federal, provincial, and municipal governments, and some of our biggest corporations? Multi billion dollar no-bid military contracts? Sponsorship scandals? Billions spent on bridges that arent safe in the winter?

Seems like these natives are integrating into our society better than we thought!

[TimG]

I wonder what would happen if this firm audited our federal, provincial, and municipal governments, and some of our biggest corporations? Multi billion dollar no-bid military contracts? Sponsorship scandals? Billions spent on bridges that arent safe in the winter?

Actually, when audits are done dubious spending _is_ uncovered (think Gazebos) because proper records *are* kept. I cannot recall any audit where they said they did not know where the money went. This makes the abuses in Attawapiskat even worse by comparison.

People who think that Attawapiskat is forgiveable simply because they kept no documentation (and therefore no proof of corrupt spending) need to give their head a shake.

Aside: Trying to lump the F35 as 'government waste' is quite pathetic since no signficant money was actually spent. If anything the fact that the F35 budget overruns were caught before the government committed to spending the money is evidence that the checks and balances in the government are working.

Edited January 10, 2013 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

Where did he say that Michael? Please.

Follow the thread - I said to Argus "It would be like Mike Harris firing the mayor of Toronto, I think" and he came back with an assertion that the province can remove some "boards" then referred to school boards which is not the same thing in response to my question. That's why I came back with the very same question I started with.

Sorry Michael, but your implications and questions are, if not excuses, misdirections.

No way. There's enough to criticize without making unsubstantiated assertions and accusations, and if we're going to discuss this we may as well be realistic.

Either this was a pre-emptive move to build sympathy prior to being raked over the coals (another sign of her disinterest in cooperating) or she's once again shown how much of a moron she is by failing to understand the optics behind staging a protest while knowing that she and her band have completely bungled the situation on their own, and that this knowledge would be made public.

The optics aren't designed to win over people like you, they're designed to appeal to her constituents. There are other possibilities behind her protest: the desire to align with Idle No More in case the AFN became a target, and the stated goal of protesting the omnibus bill.

[Michael Hardner]

Actually, when audits are done dubious spending _is_ uncovered (think Gazebos) because proper records *are* kept. I cannot recall any audit where they said they did not know where the money went. This makes the abuses in Attawapiskat even worse by comparison.

Absolutely true - although if you look at the audit, there is an explanation for most of the line items just missing documents. This would never happen to a business but does happen with municipalities and government.

[TimG]

Absolutely true - although if you look at the audit, there is an explanation for most of the line items just missing documents.

Not my understanding - 60% of the spending items had no explanation of what the money was spent on.

[Michael Hardner]

Not my understanding - 60% of the spending items had no explanation of what the money was spent on.

Look at the audit - very few are marked as 'unknown unknowns' - almost all have an explanation but not all have documentation.

[TimG]

Look at the audit - very few are marked as 'unknown unknowns' - almost all have an explanation but not all have documentation.

The fact that they wrote vague phrases like 'write-offs' or 'buildings' does not mean they know where the money went. The phrasing is often so vague that it sounds made up.

[Michael Hardner]

The fact that they wrote vague phrases like 'write-offs' or 'buildings' does not mean they know where the money went. The phrasing is often so vague that it sounds made up.

Perhaps. You clearly have looked at the details, and as such your opinion has much more value now than people who just read the headline of the CBC article, or just read a rabble article or a facebook post. Thank you.

As for your point, you're right. Although there seem to be as many positive entries in that category, the phrases are very vague. In fact, I wonder why the auditor would accept an explanation like 'buildings' without writing down exactly which one(s).

[Michael Hardner]

By the way - this reminds me of my moribund hobby horse - Government 2.0.

Does anybody else see now how much clarity occurs when government opens its books ?

When is the Harper government going to live up to its commitments made in Brazil last year and open up its book ?

Can't wait.

[Moonbox]

Follow the thread - I said to Argus "It would be like Mike Harris firing the mayor of Toronto, I think" and he came back with an assertion that the province can remove some "boards" then referred to school boards which is not the same thing in response to my question. That's why I came back with the very same question I started with.

Your question was an irrelevant misdirection. Argus said that the province can remove/replace disfunctional school boards. He did not say the premier could fire the mayor of Toronto, nor did he imply it.

No way. There's enough to criticize without making unsubstantiated assertions and accusations, and if we're going to discuss this we may as well be realistic.

What unsubstatiated assertions/accusations? I think my criticisms have been pretty clear, and they've definitely been substantiated by the audit. Let's stick with that. Does it appear to you that Theresa Spence and her band have acted in good faith? Honestly?

The optics aren't designed to win over people like you, they're designed to appeal to her constituents. There are other possibilities behind her protest: the desire to align with Idle No More in case the AFN became a target, and the stated goal of protesting the omnibus bill.

The point of the protest is to get dialogue going with the government, or to embarrass it into doing something (ie abolishing the omnibus bill). An honest, good-faith dialogue with Theresa Spence is not going to happen, because she's proven herself untrustworthy, incompetent and belligerent and shown zero desire to be cooperative. Outside of appealing to her constituents (not hard to appeal to a group of people in poverty when complaining about the government), she's not building any sympathy and, as numerous other First Nation's chiefs have suggested, doing the opposite not just for herself but for the rest of the First Nations.

As for your point, you're right. Although there seem to be as many positive entries in that category, the phrases are very vague. In fact, I wonder why the auditor would accept an explanation like 'buildings' without writing down exactly which one(s).

The auditor didn't accept anything. The accountants who had been looking at Attawapiskat's books raised numerous concerns in the past and were summarily ignored. They have no authority over the band and what they say are merely suggestions, generally made diplomatically at that.

When is the Harper government going to live up to its commitments made in Brazil last year and open up its book ?

Ah. Another misdirection. How does this have any bearing on the current conversation?

Edited January 10, 2013 by Moonbox

[scribblet]

....

The point of the protest is to get dialogue going with the government, or to embarrass it into doing something (ie abolishing the omnibus bill). An honest, good-faith dialogue with Theresa Spence is not going to happen, because she's proven herself untrustworthy, incompetent and belligerent and shown zero desire to be cooperative. Outside of appealing to her constituents (not hard to appeal to a group of people in poverty when complaining about the government), she's not building any sympathy and, as numerous other First Nation's chiefs have suggested, doing the opposite not just for herself but for the rest of the First Nations.

Well said.

allegations saying current Conservative Gov't has done nothing for First Nations, or is implementing assimilation policies is completely without merit.

http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-HQ/STAGING/texte-text/ap_fn_cfng_rep_1327192143455_eng.pdf

[Michael Hardner]

Your question was an irrelevant misdirection. Argus said that the province can remove/replace disfunctional school boards. He did not say the premier could fire the mayor of Toronto, nor did he imply it.

So he dodged my question then. So I asked again.

What unsubstatiated assertions/accusations?

The assertions and accusations that I ask questions and respond to on here.

I think my criticisms have been pretty clear, and they've definitely been substantiated by the audit. Let's stick with that. Does it appear to you that Theresa Spence and her band have acted in good faith? Honestly?

The audit doesn`t touch on `good faith`. The operations were mismanaged, which I have said repeatedly.

The auditor didn't accept anything.

Sorry - to be clear - they received the answer, or copied it from the band's accounting and didn't ask any more. I don't know how audits work so that just struck me as strange.

Ah. Another misdirection. How does this have any bearing on the current conversation?

I think that there should be some perspective on what constitutes good management and an understanding that we need to frame the situation in terms of where are we, and where should we be. But my point was more about the effectiveness of opening the books in general.

[Canuckistani]

Sorry - to be clear - they received the answer, or copied it from the band's accounting and didn't ask any more. I don't know how audits work so that just struck me as strange.

I don't pretend to know how audits work, but this is exactly how I think they work. The audit covers what is presented by entity being audited and then makes a report on what was found. The auditor did ask for explanations for expenditures, then went with what was given. This wasn't a forensic audit. Even there, the auditor can't discover documentation that doesn't exist, but just report it. Certainly if a company ran their business the way this band did, Revenue Canada would be all over them for taxes, since they can't prove the expenditures.

[Michael Hardner]

I don't pretend to know how audits work, but this is exactly how I think they work. The audit covers what is presented by entity being audited and then makes a report on what was found. The auditor did ask for explanations for expenditures, then went with what was given. This wasn't a forensic audit. Even there, the auditor can't discover documentation that doesn't exist, but just report it. Certainly if a company ran their business the way this band did, Revenue Canada would be all over them for taxes, since they can't prove the expenditures.

Ok - this makes sense then. Do you think a 'forensic audit' would fly ? Would it be helpful ?

[PIK]

Ok - this makes sense then. Do you think a 'forensic audit' would fly ? Would it be helpful ?

Yes we need one to cover everything,right up to the top.

[Canuckistani]

Ok - this makes sense then. Do you think a 'forensic audit' would fly ? Would it be helpful ?

No. There's no real cause for it, since the regular audit didn't indicate any malfeasance, just gross incompetence. What's needed is a CFO who understands the financial aspects who's the only one with the power to disburse money. The band presents a budget, or makes one with his/her help, then submits proper documentation before any money is paid out. This of course is paternalist racism so will never fly. Also, this CFO should have a means of communicating directly with the ordinary band members, to educate them where their money is going. Adrienne Arsenault certainly seems to have talked to band members who are not enamored with Chief Spence. Spence is certainly in a conflict of interest situation with her co-manager, even tho both gave affidavits to Deloitte Touche that they are not - that may be criminality. But certainly, as is the usual case, the band administration has way too many people on the payroll earning way too much money for what they do. I doubt the ordinary band member who doesn't get to partake in this largess isn't too impressed with that.

[Moonbox]

So he dodged my question then. So I asked again.

It wasn't a real question. It was rhetoric, and a red herring at that. We all know the answer to the question, which is no, the Premier can't force the replacement of the mayor of Toronto, but the implications of your question are based on the fallacal assumption that the City of Toronto is even remotely the same thing as the Attawapiskat reserve.

The assertions and accusations that I ask questions and respond to on here.

I'm not sure if you're referring to the accusations that your questions are bunk, but a bunch of them are, such as the one above.

The audit doesn`t touch on `good faith`. The operations were mismanaged, which I have said repeatedly.

It's not the audit's job to make those conclusions. The audit's job is ONLY to tell us whether diligent records were kept and if the accounting appears to have been done legitimately. The whole purpose of the audit is to give an opinion on whether or not the money was properly tracked. The conclusions of bad faith are based on the series of events that led up to the audit, mainly being that long-standing deficiencies were discovered with the accounting, numerous complaints and warnings were brought up and the Attawapiskat band still made no little to no effort to remedy the situation. The end result of $50-60M worth of cash unaccounted for was not a surprise or a one-time thing. It was ongoing. There is zero chance that the Attawapiskat band was unaware that their level of record keeping was unacceptable because they were told and warned numerous times that it wasn't. That, my friend, is operating in bad faith.

Sorry - to be clear - they received the answer, or copied it from the band's accounting and didn't ask any more. I don't know how audits work so that just struck me as strange.

It's because all the accounting firm does is help prepare the books as best as they can. They're not certifying that records are accurate or sufficient because they never had access to the necessary information in the first place, particularly not in this case.

I think that there should be some perspective on what constitutes good management and an understanding that we need to frame the situation in terms of where are we, and where should we be.

Perspective about what constitutes good management? That's a pile of tripe, sorry, as is your fluffy implication that the gross incompetence and bad faith dealings of the Attawapiskat band don't really have any bearing on the current situation. As far as anyone knows, the situation in Attawapiskat is way worse than it needs to be because of Theresa Spence and her band.

But my point was more about the effectiveness of opening the books in general.

Make your point explicitly then. The fact that we're having to interpret your vague suggestions, implications and questions is probably why we're getting frustrated with you. It's hard to tell what you're saying, if anything. It's like we're arguing against fog.

[Argus]

Really? The Ontario premier could fire the mayor and council for a town ?

The municipalities are creations of the province. The procince can add or remove powers, or even eliminate a municipality if it wants to. I know they can replace school boards, and merely suppose they can impose something similar on other lower level governmental bodies...

Not making excuses - I want improvement, but we had another poster claiming that the situation was beyond hope even though some improvement is acknowledged to have happened. So I'm just asking for clarity - how much improvement is enough and how much isn't.

When we know what the money is being spent on, and that it's not being wasted, that would, in my opinion, be the minimum required improvement.

[Argus]

I wonder what would happen if this firm audited our federal, provincial, and municipal governments, and some of our biggest corporations? Multi billion dollar no-bid military contracts? Sponsorship scandals? Billions spent on bridges that arent safe in the winter?

All governments in Canada at all levels are reguarly audited, and the audits made public. The politicians are then required to explain themselves to the electorate.

[Rockwoodrick]

The dialogue and discussion that the Idle No More 'movement' has heard several First Nations folks to question the spending of their own band councils. The audit of of the Attawapiskat books is likely the first of many. If there is one thing I have learned during this excercise, it is about equality. It turns out the First Nations politicians are equally as corrupt and incompetant as their federal and provincial government counterparts. Sleazy politicians come in all flavours.

[Michael Hardner]

The municipalities are creations of the province. The procince can add or remove powers, or even eliminate a municipality if it wants to. I know they can replace school boards, and merely suppose they can impose something similar on other lower level governmental bodies...

I`m assuming the answer is no, then.

When we know what the money is being spent on, and that it's not being wasted, that would, in my opinion, be the minimum required improvement.

Look at what you`ve written here. You`re setting a higher bar than for any other government in Canada.