Where did all the money go to Attawapiskat?

[Guest Manny]

I couldn't care less what you think that word means. I used it because I wanted to avoid something like piece of s***. If anyone wants to try and make that argument, they are free to make the attempt, but I'll assure them I use the same sort of language for anyone public service who abuses their public responsibilities, which the Attawapiskat band clearly did.

Well you're the one throwing in words like "creature" here, as though to describe someone as sub-human. Just sayin, if you want your arguments to be credible. You of course, can go spouting off all you want. It doesn't help those of us who want to have a responsible debate about the money. You are simply harming our cause with the heated rhetoric.

[Spiderfish]

Ok - sorry to confuse you but I`m debating with like 5 people on this thread.

Try and keep up.

He`s a co-manager - an accountant from the credentials I read. Not a project manager.

I believe he is the closest thing to Project Manager the reserve has. He is now working under the 3rd party manager, but still in charge of projects.

Yes, Kennedy is the co-manager. You called for an 'independent' manager or somesuch to come in - and I was pointing out that that is what a 3rd party is, and that it was tried and un-tried etc. etc. Maybe they can/will try again. Maybe they will have to as they have evidently (from this thread) stirred up so much anger from their base that they will have to take more drastic action.

I called for an independent PM, someone to take over the projects from Mr. Kennedy, not just oversee funding. He is obviously a big part of the problem here,

Vendor management is a subset of project management. You said "refuse funding to projects that don't have supporting documents". It's confusing because the audit is about lack of supporting documents, i.e. receipts, but projects are funded at the outset based on project documents such as a charter, project plan, etc.

Vendor and sponsor management is part of project management, but is still a process, just like all other types of processes in project management. As such, the PM is responsible for maintaining the required inputs, control the process, and produce the outputs for each process. the project is funded at the outset, however the problem here is not the funding, the money is there. The problem is managing the funding, and supporting the funding with the required documentation. No supporting documentation, no further progress funding. That's why the houses that were under construction sat unfinished for 2 years.

There's funding to the band, and funding to the projects. As I said, it was just allowed to happen.

The government didn't ask any more of the Attawapiskat leadership, evidently.

And that needs to change.

[Moonbox]

Not going to happen. Starting a fight over identity, or criticizing another culture isn't going to happen, nor would it lead to productive engagement.

Whatever Theresa Spence is doing isn't going to lead to productive engagement either. She's making a joke out of herself now. Her protest has turned into a mockery in light of the accounting scandal on the reserve under her watch (as either Chief or Deputy Chief) and now after getting basically what she demanded from the start (a meeting with Harper) she's moved the goalposts and is demanding something else. Yawns, laughs and sneering contempt are what she's going to end up getting. Her reputation is ruined.

Even other First Nations Chiefs are distancing themselves from her. “I admire what Spence is doing, but it’s tough to defend those numbers,” Kanesatake Grand Chief Serge Simon told the Montreal Gazette shortly after a damning audit into Attawapiskat’s finances was released.“When something like this happens, it kind of rubs off on all of us,” added Ryan Rice, an administrator for the Kahnawake Mohawk Council.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Moonbox

[Moonbox]

Well you're the one throwing in words like "creature" here, as though to describe someone as sub-human. Just sayin, if you want your arguments to be credible. You of course, can go spouting off all you want. It doesn't help those of us who want to have a responsible debate about the money. You are simply harming our cause with the heated rhetoric.

Get over it. It's a word. The only reason you took extra exception to it is because she's a member of the First Nations, and for some reason you keep trying to add racial implications to comments that had none, just like the Vegas one previously. Theresa Spence is deserving of every ounce of mockery and criticism she's getting, and it's not because she's Cree. It's because she's an idiot or a crook, or just as likely both.

[Michael Hardner]

Because the facts are there, put the same situation into a town or city and people would be in jail.

In what town are we talking about ? I have an example of a town in the mid-west USA where a woman regularly stole 1/2 the money from the town for ten, twenty years. They caught her red handed and she had built a horse business and stables with her booty.

She went to jail.

Now think of all the incompetences, misappropriations, conflicts of interests and money thrown down the hole by governments that you've heard of. Did anybody go to jail ? For the Long Gun registry ? For Adscam ? Did politicians go to jail ?

But like alot of people on the left , you just can't come out and say it, to scared to offend someone and of course your white mans quilt is off the scale.

You have no proof that I'm scared to offend people. All I am asking is for people to not make things up, and to be specific in their criticism so for some reason you feel like you want to go after me personally for that.

I hear a lot of people saying the left is afraid to offend people, that they easily cry racism etc. Well, how often has that happened on this thread compared to people making false accusations, going after people personally, misstating the facts ?

If you want people to behave responsibly, you should start by looking in the mirror.

[Michael Hardner]

Try and keep up.

Cut me some slack, I'm like Bruce Lee Enter the Dragon here with 5 guys on me !

I believe he is the closest thing to Project Manager the reserve has. He is now working under the 3rd party manager, but still in charge of projects.

I called for an independent PM, someone to take over the projects from Mr. Kennedy, not just oversee funding. He is obviously a big part of the problem here,

Wow. 'Closest thing'. That's really too bad, they need better there. Yes, they need somebody to take over.

The problem is managing the funding, and supporting the funding with the required documentation. No supporting documentation, no further progress funding. That's why the houses that were under construction sat unfinished for 2 years.

Ok - but what do you mean by 'supporting documentation' ? I gave you some examples. Are you talking about the receipts ?

[Moonbox]

Ok - but what do you mean by 'supporting documentation' ? I gave you some examples. Are you talking about the receipts ?

Itemized bills and receipts explaining what was spent, what it was spent for, where the money went, the cost breakdowns etc. They don't have that.

[Spiderfish]

Cut me some slack, I'm like Bruce Lee Enter the Dragon here with 5 guys on me !

Wow. 'Closest thing'. That's really too bad, they need better there. Yes, they need somebody to take over.

Ok - but what do you mean by 'supporting documentation' ? I gave you some examples. Are you talking about the receipts ?

Not just receipts. there has to be justification for progress payments. You don't pay out 80 % of the funding for a project if only 30% of the project is complete. There has to be an accounting for labour and material including breakdowns, confirmation of progress to date and progress forecasting, change orders and directives, etc. All of this has to be supported with documentation.

the reserve has been given free reign up till now. The government wants responsible project management moving forward including ethical and competent documentation and process management...I don't think that's asking too much.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Spiderfish

[Michael Hardner]

Itemized bills and receipts explaining what was spent, what it was spent for, where the money went, the cost breakdowns etc. They don't have that.

Right. Well.... here's the thing. Your idea is to punish the leadership by halting projects mid-flight if they don't regularly produce receipts (I think) but it's not so easy. Maybe better to have a real PM in there, that would solve it.

[g_bambino]

Itemized bills and receipts explaining what was spent, what it was spent for, where the money went, the cost breakdowns etc. They don't have that.

Or even a budget.

[Michael Hardner]

Not just receipts. there has to be justification for progress payments. You don't pay out 80 % of the funding for a project if only 30% of the project is complete.

The money is really just going to contractors, I expect, but sure. Like I just said I think real management for individual projects would be a better idea than having the town leaders run projects.

the reserve has been given free reign up till now. The government wants responsible project management moving forward including ethical and competent documentation and process management...I don't think that's asking too much.

I don`t either but putting it in place is the question. Co-management was somewhat successful. They should find a PM that can work with the leadership and will run projects according to pre-planned budgets.

How well will they do ?

Hopefully as well as governments (eHealth $1 billion, Long Gun registry $ 1 billion, etc. etc) have done...

[Spiderfish]

I don`t either but putting it in place is the question. Co-management was somewhat successful. They should find a PM that can work with the leadership and will run projects according to pre-planned budgets.

That's what I have been arguing! Competent Project Management/Program Management would solve 99% of this problem, at least on the housing and reserve infrastructure projects. Hire an independent PM to oversee projects and it would go a long way. Many firms and portfolio managers hire independents, it's not uncommon. The problem is, the band does not want to do this, because it brings accountability and transparency into the process and takes away control. This goes back to that cooperation thing we talked about earlier.

[gunrutz]

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ay-meeting.html

last paragrappgh

"Global News reported Tuesday that one of their television reporters and a photojournalist trying to visit Spence's isolated James Bay community was threatened with arrest and escorted back to the airport by the band police. Reporter Jennifer Tryon said the acting chief told her she had received a call from Spence, who wanted all the media to leave the"

That seems like reasonable behavior right? The kind that people with nothing to hide would allow, so much for this free country we had, but no, they don't consider themselves above they law, they just have their own police force preventing journalists from entering the community and maybe seeing things for what they are. Im sure that in a fine upstanding place like that the police would never be of any extra benefit of having that close a relationship with the chief. My god, how can anyone support anything about this situation. As an aside the CBC should be hung out to dry for the cheer leading they were doing and even now the soft reporting they continue to do.

[PIK]

The money is really just going to contractors, I expect, but sure. Like I just said I think real management for individual projects would be a better idea than having the town leaders run projects.

I don`t either but putting it in place is the question. Co-management was somewhat successful. They should find a PM that can work with the leadership and will run projects according to pre-planned budgets.

How well will they do ?

Hopefully as well as governments (eHealth $1 billion, Long Gun registry $ 1 billion, etc. etc) have done...

He is the one to do a deal.

In what town are we talking about ? I have an example of a town in the mid-west USA where a woman regularly stole 1/2 the money from the town for ten, twenty years. They caught her red handed and she had built a horse business and stables with her booty.

She went to jail.

Now think of all the incompetences, misappropriations, conflicts of interests and money thrown down the hole by governments that you've heard of. Did anybody go to jail ? For the Long Gun registry ? For Adscam ? Did politicians go to jail ?

You have no proof that I'm scared to offend people. All I am asking is for people to not make things up, and to be specific in their criticism so for some reason you feel like you want to go after me personally for that.

I hear a lot of people saying the left is afraid to offend people, that they easily cry racism etc. Well, how often has that happened on this thread compared to people making false accusations, going after people personally, misstating the facts ?

If you want people to behave responsibly, you should start by looking in the mirror.

You have been disagreeing with everyone, how much more do you need to be able to figure this out. Look at martin and trudeau running up there for photo ops with her, you think trudeau will have the guts to deal with this, no. Harper is the only one that can deal with this, the libs are just using this to score points. That is why they are in 3rd place , no balls to do what is right. Chretien use to be minister for indian affairs, he of all people should have known how bad it is and he did nothing in 13 years of being PM..

[carepov]

Hi Michael,

I just want to give you my support and thanks for all your posts. I know that you are not excusing mismanagement or caving in to FN demands like others seem to be accusing you of doing. I admire the way that you respectfully push for a reasonable discussion about pragmatic solutions that are based on facts. Keep up the good work!

edit: <sincerity>

Edited January 10, 2013 by carepov

[Guest Manny]

Hi Michael,

I just want to give you my support and thanks for all your posts.

Agreed. He has maintained the most respectful of mannerisms

[PIK]

Agreed. He has maintained the most respectful of mannerisms

When you dig yourself into a hole you quit digging. This problem has been known for years. And we may thank spence for this years down the road, by bringing it to light. But it was not the way she planned it and it is blowing up in her face.

[Michael Hardner]

That's what I have been arguing! Competent Project Management/Program Management would solve 99% of this problem, at least on the housing and reserve infrastructure projects. Hire an independent PM to oversee projects and it would go a long way.

Right - how to do it is the question. Well, the co-manager worked out to a point, maybe they can find a FN project manager too.

[Michael Hardner]

He is the one to do a deal.

You have been disagreeing with everyone, how much more do you need to be able to figure this out.

If you read my posts, you'll see that I disagree with the content of the criticisms, not the overall conclusion that things have been poorly run.

[Moonbox]

Right. Well.... here's the thing. Your idea is to punish the leadership by halting projects mid-flight if they don't regularly produce receipts (I think) but it's not so easy.

No offense intended, but do you have ANY experience with handling large sums of anyone else's money? It really doesn't seem like it. Regularly producing receipts, proving the work you're doing is both necessary and has actually been done, progress and expense reports etc. are all requirements in the real world to keep money flowing. If that doesn't happen, money is withheld. There's a good reason for that. It's so that potential misappropriations are either caught or rectified before even more money is misappropriated. In this case, you can't exactly withhold money required for survival of a community, but you can take over its distribution and remove the offending parties (Theresa Spence and the Attawapiskat band) from the equation.

If you read my posts, you'll see that I disagree with the content of the criticisms, not the overall conclusion that things have been poorly run.

I think that's due less to your measured and level-headed approach to the issue and more to the fact that you don't seem to really understand what an audit is and what this audit determined. Your response to its findings seem more appropriate for a Kindergarten classroom than any sort of rational debate. "Oh! You made a big oopsie! Let's try to do better moving forward okay?"

Oops. $60M of taxpayer money is unaccounted for. No big deal. Let's move on. We're doing better now, right, and that's all that's important?

Edited January 9, 2013 by Moonbox

[Michael Hardner]

Hi Michael,

I just want to give you my support and thanks for all your posts. I know that you are not excusing mismanagement or caving in to FN demands like others seem to be accusing you of doing. I admire the way that you respectfully push for a reasonable discussion about pragmatic solutions that are based on facts. Keep up the good work!

Assuming you're not being sarcastic, thanks. Pardon my suspicion but I am more often misunderstood and called petty - which I understand.

[Michael Hardner]

No offense intended, but do you have ANY experience with handling large sums of anyone else's money?

Handling as in counting it in my hands ? No. Running projects ? Yes, lots.

It really doesn't seem like it. Regularly producing receipts, proving the work you're doing is both necessary and has actually been done, progress and expense reports etc. are all requirements in the real world to keep money flowing.

Where I come from you produce a charter, and a project plan during initiation, and that includes the budget which is paid sometimes in advance, sometimes at the end and sometimes in installments. You can have project checkpoints with phases in between, but there are practicalities.

For example, stopping payment of necessary housing would be difficult to make fly, politically. Stopping and starting projects - if the requirements aren't met - incur costs of their own too.

There are projects where the work is inspected, and that's planned as part of it. I think we'd both have to understand a little more about how projects work in that environment before saying anything definitive.

you can take over its distribution and remove the offending parties (Theresa Spence and the Attawapiskat band) from the equation.

We already talked about removing offending parties. The government already tried that, and was unable to prove mismanagement in court for some reason. Maybe it was because they had already decided that things were going well enough to re-install the co-management situation.

[Moonbox]

Where I come from you produce a charter, and a project plan during initiation, and that includes the budget which is paid sometimes in advance, sometimes at the end and sometimes in installments. You can have project checkpoints with phases in between, but there are practicalities.

A couple of questions Michael:

If you are running these projects, and you ask for money without producing a budget, what happens?

If you begin the project and start spending money, but you don't record where any of it was spent, what happens when you request subsequent installments?

If the progress of your project is abysmal, and you can't account for where 50% of the money you were given, what happens?

We already talked about removing offending parties. The government already tried that, and was unable to prove mismanagement in court for some reason. Maybe it was because they had already decided that things were going well enough to re-install the co-management situation.

Which, when you get right down to it, is a pathetic state of affairs. $50-60M unaccounted for? Oopsie. Well, at least they're doing better now. That's a joke.

[Michael Hardner]

A couple of questions Michael:

If you are running these projects, and you ask for money without producing a budget, what happens?

Why do you think that I don't produce a budget ?

If you begin the project and start spending money, but you don't record where any of it was spent, what happens when you request subsequent installments?

I usually deal with fixed price projects where my vendor costs are invisible to the client. It's much easier that way.

If the progress of your project is abysmal, and you can't account for where 50% of the money you were given, what happens?

I have a contract with the client to produce a service or product for a fixed price. You're asking an obvious question - of course if I delivered nothing I'd be out of business pretty quick.

I suggest that it might be better for them to engage a PM to act as a point of contact for contractors who could manage the whole project, but again I think we'd have to know more about the environment before rushing to that recommendation.

Which, when you get right down to it, is a pathetic state of affairs. $50-60M unaccounted for? Oopsie. Well, at least they're doing better now. That's a joke.

That's something though and the Harper government has been part of that result. If you want to dismiss that progress, maybe you can suggest a better approach. The 3rd party thing was tried - you seem to understand that now - so what else ?

I didn't expect to see any optimism when I started looking into these issues, but I can see a few rays of light...

[Argus]

I actually worked as a finance clerk for the federal government some years back. My job was paying the bills. That required an invoice. No invoice, no money. If it was project work of some kind, money going to a contractor, I needed to have a file set up beforehand with the work to be done, the cost, and milestones, and then the manager's signature on each invoice that the work had been done to their satisfaction. Normally any contractor also would have had to go through a bidding process. For example, if we needed a temp I would fill out the forms, which would go to the branch, which would then contact several temp agencies, collect three or four resumes from each, and send them on to us for us to choose who we wanted. We didn't get to say which agency was contacted either. This to avoid favoritism. The amounts spent would be entered into the system and would be put into proper general ledger accounts and then applied against the budgets of the different groups, sections and divisions.

None of this is brain surgery. You don't need to be an accountant to do it. Any reasonably knowledgeable accounting clerk would have this down pat.

Btw, I once spent money (approved by my manager) on something I wasn't supposed to. Yes, they noticed. That was early on. It was some Christmas decorations for the floor. Everything was pretty tightly monitored, and if you spent money on something and had no invoice or explanation, you would have been in major trouble.

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.

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. In most towns or cities the mayor will be a person with an education and usually some long experience in politics or business or both. On most reserves, the chief and band council generally have little education or business experience. Nepotism and favoritism is the norm. And given the large sums involved, it's difficult to believe there aren't a lot of people making a lot of money by slipping undocumented funds into their own bank accounts. I mean, why wouldn't they? Because natives don't steal? Please.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Argus