Author Topic: WE Scandal (Read 3307 times)

kimmy · « **Reply #90 on:** August 07, 2020, 10:06:42 pm »

We were told that "WE is the only organization with the national reach to deliver this program."

Now we find out that since WE's national reach apparently doesn't extend to Quebec, they had subcontracted the Quebec portion of the CSSG to a PR firm called "National".

I was already curious about the vetting process that determined that WE was somehow the only organization in Canada capable of administering the program. Particularly in light of WE laying off more than half of its employees earlier this year, and most of the board of directors resigning. Now we find out that their much-ballyhooed national presence didn't actually extend into Canada's 2nd-largest province. I wonder how that got missed during the vetting process.

And why a PR firm, exactly? What does a PR company know about administering a volunteer grant program? If WE was just going to subcontract the work out to private companies, why couldn't the public service have done that themselves? Why exactly did we need to hire the Kielburgers as middle-men?

Leaving aside questions about Trudeau and Morneau family ties to the organization, I am also baffled about some of the communications we have been given. Early communications described it as a $912 million program, but now we know that there was only $500 million budgeted. What is the $912m referring to? Early on we were told that WE's cut would be $19.5 million, when Bardish Chagger testified we found out that it was actually going to be $43.5 million. Why the discrepancy? Why did the real numbers only come out once people were under oath before the committee?

-k

waldo · « **Reply #91 on:** August 07, 2020, 11:30:18 pm »

Quote from: kimmy on August 07, 2020, 10:06:42 pm

Leaving aside questions about Trudeau and Morneau family ties to the organization,

nice member kimmy - nice!

PM Trudeau has no family ties to WE Charity; Finance Minister Morneau has a daughter that works for WE Charity

Quote from: kimmy on August 07, 2020, 10:06:42 pm

I am also baffled about some of the communications we have been given. Early communications described it as a $912 million program, but now we know that there was only $500 million budgeted. What is the $912m referring to? Early on we were told that WE's cut would be $19.5 million, when Bardish Chagger testified we found out that it was actually going to be $43.5 million. Why the discrepancy? Why did the real numbers only come out once people were under oath before the committee?

clearly you've shown it doesn't take much to "baffle you"! In any case you can thank Scheer/Poilievre/CPC and lazy-azzed & biased media for the purposeful misinformation... emphasis on purposeful as the proper figures eventually came forward and were ignored by those hell-bent on manufacturing yet another fake scandal - besides, falsely hyping a $Billion dollar figure is more click-bait worthy!

Quote from: waldo on July 27, 2020, 05:05:56 pm

facts matter!

- the Canada Student Service Grant program was allocated a $900 million budget
- per the formal Contribution Agreement with the WE Charity Foundation of Canada, up to $500 million could have paid out in the form of grants to students across three cohorts of potential volunteers
- based on the actual number of student volunteers realized, up to $43.53 million would have been allocated to the WE Charity Foundation for administering the program
- of that potential $43.53 million administration amount, up to $8.75 million of that $43.53 million was eligible to be shared among the partnering charities and non-profit organizations that supervised the volunteers
- slimeball Pierre Poilievre has so easily shifted from his shrieking over $1 billion dollars down to the actual $500 million that could have been paid as grants to students; yet somehow PP et al are still nattering on about an admin payment range (for eligible expenses) to WE Charity of between $19.5 and $43 million... not properly factoring in payments to partnering charities & non-profits => actual range as between $14.2 and $34.18 million.

yes, facts matter!

and actually: as came forward during the Keilburger brothers testimony, there is an expectation that the cost of the program would settle in closer to ~$300 million based on the anticipated number of students participating and the resultant number of volunteer hours.

waldo · « **Reply #92 on:** August 07, 2020, 11:41:57 pm »

Quote from: kimmy on August 07, 2020, 10:06:42 pm

We were told that "WE is the only organization with the national reach to deliver this program."

I've never heard/read that spin - "national reach" - care to cite?

Quote from: kimmy on August 07, 2020, 10:06:42 pm

I was already curious about the vetting process that determined that WE was somehow the only organization in Canada capable of administering the program. Particularly in light of WE laying off more than half of its employees earlier this year, and most of the board of directors resigning. Now we find out that their much-ballyhooed national presence didn't actually extend into Canada's 2nd-largest province. I wonder how that got missed during the vetting process.

you keep nattering on about WE employees layoffs and director resignations: ever hear of COVID-19... apparently its been the cause of many companies laying off employees - go figure!

As for directors resigning, so you can actually present some foundation for your continued blathering, cite a source for resigning directors - one that includes reasons for - sure you can!

try a googly: apparently the public service contacted up to 20 companies in total. A few did say they could manage handling the program - in normal times; however, that COVID-19 thingee caused those same companies to state they wouldn't be able to manage the program. As for the public service itself, the claim is they didn't have the wherewithal to take on yet another program... cause, like... you know COVID-19 and all the support programs have taxed Canada's public service - again, go figure!

waldo · « **Reply #93 on:** August 08, 2020, 12:09:07 am »

Quote from: kimmy on August 07, 2020, 10:06:42 pm

Now we find out that since WE's national reach apparently doesn't extend to Quebec, they had subcontracted the Quebec portion of the CSSG to a PR firm called "National". {bold highlighting added by the waldo}

response per WE Charity:

waldo · « **Reply #94 on:** August 08, 2020, 12:24:28 am »

to the prior referenced MoneySense 2019 by sector ranking of Canadian charities, added MoneySense 2020 rating of Top 100 Canadian charities

Quote from: waldo on August 03, 2020, 01:08:11 pm

MoneySense 2019 sector ranking of Canadian charities MoneySense 2020 ranking of Canadian charities - showing WE Charity with a Top 10 position (tied for 4th place ranking)

waldo · « **Reply #95 on:** September 10, 2020, 11:55:37 am »

WE Charity ending its Canadian operation - well done #pigeonPierre/weakAndy, superb job NDP Angus/Jagmeat... batter-up! Look out UNICEF, United Way.....

Queefer Sutherland · « **Reply #96 on:** September 10, 2020, 12:42:20 pm »

Quote from: JMT on August 02, 2020, 08:20:18 pm

I often wonder how any of us would really look under the microscope. Sure, Trudeau broke the rules. Morneau broke the rules, and probably should go. He's too naive for politics. In the process, we've destroyed a Canadian charity with very low overhead that is a big deal to many students.

An international development organization isn't supposed to be a "big deal to many students", it's supposed to provide money and resources to the poor in developing countries. Spending charitable donations on speaking fees for celebrities, including the Trudeau's, isn't much of a priority.

People wanting to give will still have many other charities to donate their dollars, and more of it will probably go to the people that actually need it.

Queefer Sutherland · « **Reply #97 on:** September 10, 2020, 12:46:59 pm »

Quote from: waldo on September 10, 2020, 11:55:37 am

WE Charity ending its Canadian operation - well done #pigeonPierre/weakAndy, superb job NDP Angus/Jagmeat... batter-up! Look out UNICEF, United Way.....

The WE brothers and the Liberal government did this to WE, not the opposition. They were just doing their job...until Trudeau & co. thought it a nice idea to shut down Parliament & thus the investigation so MPs could all have a nice summer vacation.

kimmy · « **Reply #98 on:** September 10, 2020, 10:57:19 pm »

Quote from: waldo on September 10, 2020, 11:55:37 am

WE Charity ending its Canadian operation -

Oh no, how will rich people send their kids on exotic "voluntourism" adventures now?

Quote from: waldo on September 10, 2020, 11:55:37 am

well done #pigeonPierre/weakAndy, superb job NDP Angus/Jagmeat... batter-up! Look out UNICEF, United Way.....

As we discussed earlier, WE was floundering badly before the service grant scheme was conjured up and had laid off more than half their employees earlier in the year. "The coronavirus, have you heard of it?" I believe you said by way of explaining their struggles.

Perhaps a model designed around big rallies, selling merch in schools, and "voluntourism" was not well suited to survive in an environment where big rallies are illegal, schools have been mostly online, and international travel is a non-starter.

Perhaps Pierre and Jagmeet and Charlie didn't actually kill this thing, maybe it just went where it was destined to go before Bardish and Bill and Justin dangled this life-line to them.

Perhaps we should heed the Star's advice and keep an eye on the money:
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2020/09/10/keep-watching-the-money-as-we-charity-shuts-its-canadian-operations-observers-say.html

-k

waldo · « **Reply #99 on:** September 10, 2020, 11:31:46 pm »

Quote from: Gorgeous Graham on September 10, 2020, 12:46:59 pm

...the opposition. They were just doing their job

no - said Opposition hacks aided by an obliging media decided to sacrifice the charity's good works as a means to attack PM Trudeau/Liberal party. The most inconvenient fact, for you... and said Opposition hacks, is the clear line of demarcation between the government accepting a recommendation and the public service (ESDC) that reviewed, then selected, then recommended WE Charity.

Queefer Sutherland · « **Reply #100 on:** September 11, 2020, 12:45:08 am »

Quote from: waldo on September 10, 2020, 11:31:46 pm

no - said Opposition hacks aided by an obliging media decided to sacrifice the charity's good works as a means to attack PM Trudeau/Liberal party. The most inconvenient fact, for you... and said Opposition hacks, is the clear line of demarcation between the government accepting a recommendation and the public service (ESDC) that reviewed, then selected, then recommended WE Charity.

WE also shouldn't have put themselves in such a conflict of interest, given their ties to the Trudeau's and Morneau (his daughter works for WE, remember). But the brothers were desperate for an influx of cash to keep their struggling charity afloat. They made their bed and now they get to lay in it.

I'm sure of a Scheer or O'Toole gov did this and a Liberal opposition & the media called them on their shite, you would have eagerly defended WE just as passionately!

Michael Hardner · « **Reply #101 on:** September 11, 2020, 08:55:01 am »

Here's the worst thing working against WE:

What do they do ?

Why is there a charity out there getting so much funding and attention and nobody knows what they do ?

waldo · « **Reply #102 on:** September 11, 2020, 09:19:35 am »

Quote from: Gorgeous Graham on September 11, 2020, 12:45:08 am

WE also shouldn't have put themselves in such a conflict of interest, given their ties to the Trudeau's and Morneau (his daughter works for WE, remember). But the brothers were desperate for an influx of cash to keep their struggling charity afloat. They made their bed and now they get to lay in it.

conflict of interest? Detail it - specifically define what you interpret as 'interest conflict'... I appreciate it will be very hard for your partisanship to distinguish between the actual related conflict rules and the/your perceived appearance of conflict. But hey, give it a try anyway! Now I've read a fair amount on this fake, trumped-up, so-called "scandal" - yours is the only statement that seeks to blame the actual charity itself!

Quote from: Gorgeous Graham on September 11, 2020, 12:45:08 am

I'm sure of a Scheer or O'Toole gov did this and a Liberal opposition & the media called them on their shite, you would have eagerly defended WE just as passionately!

WE Charity doesn't need any defending in this matter - they were simply approached by the public service (ESDC) to provide a statement of interest; one that reflected upon its ability to meet the demands of the projected program. As for a government, as you say, "doing this": a government, any government, relies upon the public service to support its policy intent. Unless you can present information that suggests/implies the public service (ESDC) was lax/negligent/fraudulent in its actions, then a government, any government, would be justified in moving forward on a recommendation received from that public service support base. As has been stated many times over, ESDC determined that WE Charity was the only organization in a position to fulfill the program requirements... so, a government, any government, that presumed to move forward on its policy intent would be a government, any government, that accepted the public service (ESDC) recommendation.

waldo · « **Reply #103 on:** September 11, 2020, 09:20:24 am »

Quote from: MH on September 11, 2020, 08:55:01 am

Here's the worst thing working against WE:

What do they do ?

Why is there a charity out there getting so much funding and attention and nobody knows what they do ?

Jesse, is that you?

cybercoma · « **Reply #104 on:** September 11, 2020, 11:38:51 am »

Quote from: MH on September 11, 2020, 08:55:01 am

Here's the worst thing working against WE:

What do they do ?

Why is there a charity out there getting so much funding and attention and nobody knows what they do ?

"Nobody" knows what they do because they haven't looked into it. It's not top secret or anything.

Canadian Politics Today

News:

Author Topic: WE Scandal (Read 3307 times)

kimmy

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

Queefer Sutherland

Re: WE Scandal

Queefer Sutherland

Re: WE Scandal

kimmy

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

Queefer Sutherland

Re: WE Scandal

Michael Hardner

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

waldo

Re: WE Scandal

cybercoma

Re: WE Scandal