Dingwall resigns "to clear his name"

[Canuck E Stan]

The CEO of CIBC received 50 million in bonuses and resigned a week before CIBC announces a 2.5 billion payment to clean up a mess created by that CEO. Where was your outrage then?

I did the best thing I could do.

Keeping my money out of CIBC, and if I had enough of it I wouldn't invest in the bank.

What should I do with Dinglwall? With hold my taxes?

Write my MP? How about an e-mail to the PM?

I'll do the only thing I can do, and that's to make sure my vote doesn't go to that party in the next election.How much more do we have to take?

And if everyone did the same maybe,just maybe the next party will give us a break with this crap, and just maybe they will learn that if they try to pull this kind of stuff,they too will get turfed.

And just maybe the parties will learn that if we care so they should too.

[Riverwind]

I did the best thing I could do.

Keeping my money out of CIBC, and if I had enough of it I wouldn't invest in the bank.

Fair enough, however, the vast majority of shareholders and customers just shrugged and business goes on as before. I agree with Argus when he says there is good reason to believe that Dingwall was not qualified for the job which would imply that the amount he was paid in wages, expense or severance is irrelevant. The real issue is how do you make sure that gov't appointments are always 'qualified'. I have heard horror stories regarding the current hiring rules that exist in gov't and how they are routinely subverted at all levels of the bureaucracy so I am not sure that more 'rules' would solve the problem.

At the end of the day they only way these abuses will stop is if there is a change in the ethics of our leaders. However, I don't see how we can expect our gov't leaders to have ethics that are any different from our corporate leaders since politicians do not exist in vacuum - especially in a world where we expect out gov't be to run 'like a business'.

[August1991]

Fair enough, however, the vast majority of shareholders and customers just shrugged and business goes on as before.

Very reasonable of you Sparhawk (usually posters here vociferously deny a point rather than concede even a trifle... )

I don't think shareholders shrugged, but the share price may have since it had already adjusted to the news.

Political parties and governments have no similar testing ground except the imperfect ballot box. I'm with Mr. Stan on this. The Liberals will not get my vote. Enough is enough. Now then, to be honest, the Liberals were not going to get my vote before so the change is moot. But how many Liberal voters are thinking as I am now?

At the end of the day they only way these abuses will stop is if there is a change in the ethics of our leaders.

Call me naive, but I agree with you.

[Guest eureka]

And so the comedy continues!

Sometimes these forums present like a gaggle of gossiping old crones exercising their fingernails. I have yet to see what Dingwall has done that is wrong. I have yet to see any evidence that his job at the Mint was not performed with competence.

And here we go again. "I am not voting Liberal because-----" Pitiful and particularly appropriate for the naive Quebeckers among us.

[Argus]

Uh, does this mean that other Liberals have received more than they were legally entitled to?

The CEO of CIBC received 50 million in bonuses and resigned a week before CIBC announces a 2.5 billion payment to clean up a mess created by that CEO. Where was your outrage then?

The CEO does't work for me. The board doesn't work for me. My money is not in CIBC. I don't invest in CIBC.

The Liberals are public employees. They work for you and me. It is our duty to supervise them, even if from a distance, by watching what they do and how they do it and clobbering them when they do it wrong. If Canadians had been more resolute in this duty we'd have better government now.

[Argus]

And so the comedy continues!

Sometimes these forums present like a gaggle of gossiping old crones exercising their fingernails. I have yet to see what Dingwall has done that is wrong.

You are confessing to having no sense of morality or ethics.

How odd in a Liberal supporter.

[Riverwind]

The CEO does't work for me. The board doesn't work for me. My money is not in CIBC. I don't invest in CIBC.

The big Canadian banks are widely held by most Canadians via pensions funds and RRSPs. In many cases it is not practical for Canadians to sell their interest in CIBC because it is a small part of these assets. For that reason the public trust violated by the CIBC CEO is at least as significant as any public trust violated by Dingwall.

Furthermore, you cannot make artificial distinctions between the behavior of gov't officials and large institutions like CIBC because ethics in the business world affects what is considered acceptable in gov't. The CPC is not immune to this influence and you would see exactly the same kinds of abuses if they ever get a majority gov't. If the people in the CPC were really different then they would be calling for an end to 'corruption' in the exceutive suite of Canada's big corporations as well.

Does this justify what may have happened in the Dingwall case? Not at all, however, if you want a solution you have to recognize that this kind of behavoir is a result of a broader malaise in our society and not some failing that is unique to the Liberal party.

[Canuck E Stan]

Spar,

If the people in the CPC were really different then they would be calling for an end to 'corruption' in the exceutive suite of Canada's big corporations as well.

Another lame reason, to add to your list of why you won't even consider supporting the CPC.

You keep coming up with new reasons continually.

Now the CPC has to call an end to corruption in the executive suites of corporate Canada to make you happy, what next?

This party hasn't been in power for a decade and a half what do you want,lies,broken promises.

I will vote for the CPC,I will give them a chance,I will vote them out if they end up being like the Liberals.

I do not have any more tolerance for this type of governing,I want a change.

If this issue of corporate corruption is important to you, I think you should redirect your question to the Liberal government that's been heading the show for the last 13 years,

"why don't you Liberals end corruptioin in the executive suites of Canada's big corporations?

I'm sure they would make it a high priority item....after they stop laughing.

[cybercoma]

I'd like the Liberals to end corruption within their own party before they even begin to try and stop corporate corruption. Corporations let me choose whether or not to pay them, the government doesn't give me the same luxury.

[Riverwind]

Now the CPC has to call an end to corruption in the executive suites of corporate Canada to make you happy, what next?

I would be happy if the ended their hypocracy on the 'corruption' issue and tried to do something constructive with their power in the minority parliment. As I said before, Harper and the CPC will get my vote in the spring if they can demonstrate that they can be constructive and co-operate with the Liberals during the fall session.

I want a gov't that works and that is not going to happen if the Liberals cut deals with the NDP or the CPC cuts deals with the BQ. The next parliment will likely be another minority so it is time the Liberals and Conservative both grew up and stop throwing mud at each other.

[Canuck E Stan]

Spar,

Don't expect the government to "work" this fall.

Any bills of importance has been pulled by the Liberals from this Fall's agenda and there is really little "work" to do.

It's the LIberals who are not making Parliament "work" not the Conservatives.

So much so, that the Senators in the Senate have absolutely no bills before them and are taking time off.

Against your wishes for the Liberals and Conservatives to grow up and stop throwing mud...never gonna happen.

Have you forgotten,we're talking about Politicians.

[BHS]

Uh, does this mean that other Liberals have received more than they were legally entitled to?

The CEO of CIBC received 50 million in bonuses and resigned a week before CIBC announces a 2.5 billion payment to clean up a mess created by that CEO. Where was your outrage then?

The CEO does't work for me. The board doesn't work for me. My money is not in CIBC. I don't invest in CIBC.

The Liberals are public employees. They work for you and me. It is our duty to supervise them, even if from a distance, by watching what they do and how they do it and clobbering them when they do it wrong. If Canadians had been more resolute in this duty we'd have better government now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks, Argus. I was reading throught this post and was hoping someone would make this point eventually.

Sparhawk, comparing private companies to government is completely inappropriate. No one is required to invest in a private company, not even pension fund retirees. If you are unsatisfied with the way a company is being managed you put your money elsewhere. (If you have the luxury of controlling a large bloc of voting stock you can make your displeasure known directly to the board of directors, whos' jobs probably depend directly upon your support).

It goes without saying that I can't pull my money out of paying taxes, and decide to put it to a different use. The government has a monopoly on the services it provides. The free market doesn't apply.

It irks me to see this comparison being made. I've heard it argued that MP's salaries should be in line with corporate executives salaries, to "attract talent". "If they paid more they'd get better people". What nonsense, even if the vast majority of MPs weren't rubber stamps for the PMO. There's nothing I've ever seen an elected official do that couldn't be duplicated by volunteers on a stipend. All of their technical/legal expertise is derived from their hired staff. An MP's job boils down to yes/no decision making, most of which is either completely partisan politics or just plain common sense.

The same argument carries into political appointments. The government isn't in business to make a profit, so there's no need to reward good performance, especially at the upper levels of management.

[Argus]

Now the CPC has to call an end to corruption in the executive suites of corporate Canada to make you happy, what next?

I would be happy if the ended their hypocracy on the 'corruption' issue

Where is the hypocrisy?

and tried to do something constructive with their power in the minority parliment. As I said before, Harper and the CPC will get my vote in the spring if they can demonstrate that they can be constructive and co-operate with the Liberals during the fall session.

So you'll vote for the Tories if they can prove they're the same as the Liberals, and support the Liberals through the year? Interesting.

[Canuck E Stan]

The resignation that wasn't really a resignation

Don Martin's column today was quite enlightening about Dinglwall.

He stated that Dinglwall didn't resign,he was fired,

and that 's why the severance has to be paid to the former Adscam Chretien loyalist. THe question that Don Martin puts forth is, Why was he fired?

Somehow I don't think it was about the expense account.

[Canuck E Stan]

The lighter side of federal politics

OTTAWA (CP) - Some people want David Dingwall to get his severance, by gum! A university student in Ottawa is proposing what he calls the One Tonne of Gum Challenge to pay off the former head of the Royal Canadian Mint.

Chris Rougier is urging Canadians to mail Prime Minister Paul Martin packages of gum so Martin can forward them to Dingwall.

A $500,000 severance would only require 387,597 packs of gum at $1.29 a pack," Rougier says on his website.

Stick it To Him.

387,597 packs of gum,but is it enough to burst the Liberal's bubble(gum)

[August1991]

The former mint president and CEO, who resigned last month after revelations of hefty spending on meals, travel and club memberships, has been called before the government operations committee.

In a statement released prior to his appearance, Dingwall said he is "delighted to ... correct the misinformation and mischaracterization of my expenses."

Contrary to published reports, said the former Liberal cabinet minister, "all expenses came from the operating revenue of the corporation, not from taxpayers' dollars."

National Post

Not only is Dingwall apparently a crook, but it looks like he's a stupid crook. If the Royal Canadian Mint has higher operating expenses, that means less profit to be paid to its sole shareholder - the government of Canada, or more exactly, Canadian taxpayers.

Canadian taxpayers, as ultimate owners - shareholders if you will, have every reason to be interested in how a Crown corporation spends its money. The money is theirs.

[newbie]

And yet another Tory rush to judgement.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...1026?hub=Canada

[cybercoma]

Canadian taxpayers, as ultimate owners - shareholders if you will, have every reason to be interested in how a Crown corporation spends its money.  The money is theirs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can't understand why this idea escapes some people.

[Riverwind]

Canadian taxpayers, as ultimate owners - shareholders if you will, have every reason to be interested in how a Crown corporation spends its money.  The money is theirs.

My financial interests are more affected by the similar levels of corruption that is endemic in the executive suites the corporations that I need to invest my retirement savings in. I don't really have a choice but to tolerate this corruption because investing in GICs or similarly 'untainted' instruments would likely ensure that I would be enjoying a diet of cat food in my elder years.

Even when an extremely egregious case of corruption comes to light such as the CIBC-Enron fiasco, I find myself with the 'choice' of selling assets at a loss in a useless attempt to send a 'message' to the management of the company or to hold on and hope that the corruption will return to the normally distasteful levels that do not adversly affect the stock price or dividend.

I must apply the same logic to governments since it is unreasonable to expect government leaders to any less corrupt than our corporate ones. In other words, the question is not is a Liberal gov't free of corruption but rather is the level of corruption low enough to ensure that taxpayers get a reasonable ROI compared to the ROI offered by other parties. Note that ROI of tax money cannot be measure by how low the taxes are but rather what we get for the money we pay.

[Army Guy]

I find this alittle ironic don't you.

My Webpage