First our infinitaly wise government wants to give David Dingwall a severance package, even though he quit, and there is no law that says they are required to. That's $500,000 entitlement that Mr. Dingwall is not entitled to. Then their is the case of Mr. Dingwall's "success fee" through in the TPC program - which was $350,000. Industry Minister Emerson has claimed that there is a 2-year statute of limitations on going after Mr. Dingwall and since this occured more than two years ago, too bad-so sad, another entitlement that he is entitled to.
Problem is that (according to Democracy Watch) the Industry Minister is wrong.
...Today, Democracy Watch called on federal Crown prosecutors to proceed to charge any lobbyist who has been found to have not properly registered under the Lobbyists Registration Act through the audit of the Technology
Partnerships Canada (TPC) fund. Democracy Watch believes that the two-year time limit on filing charges under the Act begins when the illegally secret lobbying is discovered, not when the lobbying took place as federal Industry Minister David Emerson's recently claimed.
The relevant section of the Act reads that charges may be filed "not later than two years after the time when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose" (Act subsection 14(3)). Black's Law Dictionary defines the verb "arise" as, in part, "to come into notice" or "to become visible." Given that the audit of the TPC fund began only last year, the illegal lobbying has only become visible and noticed in the past year, which leaves a full year and more before the time limit on laying charges under the Act expires.
It simply does not make any legal sense that all a lobbyist has to do to escape being prosecuted under the Act is hide their illegal activity for two years, and in any case Crown prosecutors should proceed with charges so that the courts can issue a legal ruling on the definition of the Act's time limit.
Many people who have commented publicly on the TPC lobbying situation are, like the Industry Minister, also incorrect when they claim that the federal lobbying regulation system does not in any way address "success" or contingency fee arrangements between lobbyists and their clients. In fact, the Lobbyists' Code requires lobbyists to act "with integrity" and to "observe the highest professional and ethical standards" and to "conform fully with not only the letter but the spirit of . . . all the relevant laws." Clearly, any lobbyist who fails to properly register or is involved in a contingency fee arrangement that violates federal government policies is also in violation of the Lobbyists' Code.
Democracy Watch called on the federal Registrar of Lobbyists to confirm the findings of the TPC audit immediately and quickly issue the required public reports to Parliament finding all lobbyists who were not registered or were involved in illegal contingency arrangements guilty of violating the Lobbyists' Code.
Why are the Liberals so bound and determined to not pick a fight with Mr. Dingwall. What happened to being "mad as hell", to "bridging the democratic deficit" to "end old style patronage"?
