Committee meetings regarding WE

[Merry]

Am listening to the committee questioning the Kielburger brothers about payments made to speakers at WE events, and I’m shocked to hear how many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been paid out over the years, out of money that was supposed to be intended for charitable purposes.

When donations are made to charities, it’s a known fact that some of the money will be used for administration. But I think less consideration is given to how much is spent paying folks like Margaret Trudeau to make public appearances on behalf of the charity. In my naïveté I’d always assumed that rich people sometimes donated their time to such groups, as part of their overall philanthropy. Clearly I was mistaken.

I do expect that people will be reimbursed for any out of pocket expenses, but was surprised to hear they were paid for their time to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Is it morally acceptable for people (particularly wealthy people) to use charities as vehicles for them to make extra cash? And the other question is, would folks like Trudeau‘s mother and brother be considered knowledgeable enough in any given subject to be worthy of speaking at any given event, much less paid that much money, if they weren’t connected to the highest office in the land?

There are many ways to “buy” access to the corridors of power. Was this one of them?

[Merry]

The other large question looming is WHY the Government cash was deposited to a holding company rather than WE charity itself?

The answer given was to protect the WE charity from any liability that might arise as a result of the program.

Fair enough, but Charlie Angus then questioned how come the holding company (which was just a shell, having absolutely NO other holdings in it) had conveniently been set up prior to receiving the Government money if, as the Kielburgers claim, they had no prior knowledge that the money would be forthcoming?

Fair question, but he never really got a straight answer.

[Ka-El]

I do expect that people will be reimbursed for any out of pocket expenses, but was surprised to hear they were paid for their time to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Speakers being paid big money to speak to audiences is nothing new, but the apparent symbiotic relationship between WE and the Trudeau and Morneau family does not pass the smell test, nor does donating money in exchange for free travel.

[Merry]

When questioning the former Board chair about disagreements between her and the Kielburgers which led to her resigning, she cited a lack of transparency about possible financial difficulties the organization appeared to be experiencing.

She said there had been layoffs, but when she asked about the necessity of such layoffs, she wasn’t given clear answers. And despite asking twice for a meeting with the Chief Financial Officer, the meeting never took place.

When she raised the issue with one of the Kielburger brothers, he hung up on her. And shortly after, the other brother suggested she resign.

It’s odd that a Board of Directors would be denied explanations about potential financial problems within the organization the Board is responsible for. And such behaviour definitely raises red flags about the way this organization is run.

So I think it’s a good thing that they are no longer going to be administering almost a billion dollars of our hard earned cash. Sounds like we taxpayers just “dodged a bullet”.

[Pete Podoski]

Morneau lied under oath.

Burgers confirmed that today.

[Merry]

I do expect that people will be reimbursed for any out of pocket expenses, but was surprised to hear they were paid for their time to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Speakers being paid big money to speak to audiences is nothing new

Well qualified, knowledgable speakers can command large salaries. But do Trudeau’s mother and brother really fall into that category?

I don’t think so.

But the bigger question is just HOW much money is it appropriate for a charity to pay for such a service?

An honorarium is one thing, but hundreds of thousands of dollars on such things seems excessive to me (as well as being totally inappropriate).

but the apparent symbiotic relationship between WE and the Trudeau and Morneau family does not pass the smell test, nor does donating money in exchange for free travel.

I agree.

Reimbursing travel expense money by donation rather than direct repayment, makes it eligible for a tax deduction. And, if that’s the reason it was done that way, that is a reprehensible act on the part of our Finance Minister. Particularly given the fact he’s a multi millionaire who can well afford not to behave that way.

[The Green Barbarian]

Is it morally acceptable for people (particularly wealthy people) to use charities as vehicles for them to make extra cash? And the other question is, would folks like Trudeau‘s mother and brother be considered knowledgeable enough in any given subject to be worthy of speaking at any given event, much less paid that much money, if they weren’t connected to the highest office in the land?

I remember Justin's brother came to Kelowna for some event at which he would be speaking, and the organization in their email was all agog and gushing about how this was Justin's brother and how amazing it was to have a Trudeau coming to speak at their event, and all I could think was, what could this clown possibly have to say that I would want to hear?

[Sparki55]

Well qualified, knowledgable speakers can command large salaries.

When the money comes from a charity, they shouldn't be spending money on speakers. If it was a private corporation, they can hire whomever they like for whatever price they want to pay.

How does paying a smooth talker to speak at an event help the charity? Why don't the people running the charity speak for themselves?

Looks more like a "donate to me and I'll fill your pockets with speaker opportunities".

As a society, we're all up in arms about wealth inequality these days: that CEOs are way overpaid for their work. What about these speakers?! Couple days worth of work, writing a speech and traveling and presenting for more than most make in a year.

How can a charity justify that? The entire point of a charity is to help the needy, not prop up your friends and families into the top 1%.

[The Green Barbarian]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... arity.html

These "charities" set up by celebrities and people like the Kielburgers aren't about helping people, it's just high-end virtue signaling. "Look at me, I'm a great guy because I set up an anti-poverty charity" - and then most of the money gets paid out to friends and family instead of going to help people. Check out the Clinton Foundation, same thing. It's all a big scam.

[jimmy4321]

All I got from this so far is Pollievre is a complete embarrassment.
Maybe that's the drawback to it being telivised

[Pete Podoski]

Sometimes people are embarrassed when they are faced with someone of much higher intelligence than themselves.

*removed*

What's the penalty for Morneau's perjuring himself regarding the Burger call in April?

[blueliner]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1314543/Bonos-ONE-foundation-giving-tiny-percentage-funds-charity.html

These "charities" set up by celebrities and people like the Kielburgers aren't about helping people, it's just high-end virtue signaling. "Look at me, I'm a great guy because I set up an anti-poverty charity" - and then most of the money gets paid out to friends and family instead of going to help people. Check out the Clinton Foundation, same thing. It's all a big scam.

BINGO we have a winner .

[Merry]

Another interesting fact that’s come out of these hearings is that the WE organization didn’t begin paying Margaret Trudeau until 2015, despite the fact she had spoken at some of their events prior to that date.

Since then she’s received hundreds of thousands of dollars for her activities on behalf of that “charity”.

Now I wonder what was so special about 2015 that Ms Trudeau would suddenly be deemed worthy of payment?

Oh, wait, I just though of something.........

[The Green Barbarian]

Now I wonder what was so special about 2015 that Ms Trudeau would suddenly be deemed worthy of payment?

Oh, wait, I just though of something.........

It's just a coincidence Merry. Just like it was a pure coincidence that Bill Morneau approved $3 million of funding for WE on the same day that WE hired his daughter. Just all big fat coincidences.

[dv7834]

Sometimes people are embarrassed when they are faced with someone of much higher intelligence than themselves.

*removed*

What's the penalty for Morneau's perjuring himself regarding the Burger call in April?

In this country? I would guess $200 and no access to the Commons cafeteria for a month.