Today's blog post comes from Ken Summers, our long time non-Green commentator. Ken has taken the leap from the comments section to the post section.
----------------------------
I'm going to go ahead and out a rumour I've been hearing. If I heard it, some of you must also have. The difference with me is that I have nothing personally to lose by bringing it more out in the open.
What I heard is that one of the Councilors asked persistent questions about current cash flow and how the required March bank loan payment was going to be made. After some going over the figures and apparent befuddlement from the bean counters it was acknowledged that there was indeed a problem. As I heard it, this appeared to be a surprise to the bean counter[s] in question. I'm particularly skeptical of that, but that gets ahead of the story. The rumour goes on to say that the consequence of this reckoning is that immediate spending cuts are required, which includes staff layoffs.
In the first place, it may be primarily a vast and misleading overstatement of something that did transpire. That the grain of truth is very small.
But it may be essentially true, and even if it turns out that there are no staff layoffs- that would have to be visible to all if there is any substance to the rumour at all.
I'll throw a related piece of hard information into the mix. This is not speculation, it is information available from Elections Canada filings.
The Central Nova EDA had a very substantial piggy bank of funds squirreled away out of view and accountability. This was set in motion before the 2008 election, with the only possible purpose being the availability of a big stash of cash for continuing to run the essentially permanent campaign there, without having to discuss it at Council.
There is no question it is/was a lot of money. Over a $100,000 in early 2009. It was not transferred to the GPC before October 1. So at that point in time all or part of it was still in Central Nova, or transferred to another EDA, such as SGI. The link for those numbers: read my comments here.
With that stash in mind lets look again at the rumoured account that the GPC bean counters were surprised that there was a cash flow crisis right in front of them. Even without knowledge of this Central Nova piggy bank, I'd be more than skeptical about this 'surprise'. I don't care how incompetent you think people can be, the person watching the store had to know about this. Expressing surprise- and letting people think you are as stupid as you know they think you are- being preferable to admitting you knew full well there was an issue that you did not want to discuss.
In summary: my expectation is that the rumored layoffs will not materialize. Some funds will magically appear to take care of the short term problem- funds that were known about all along and were the planned 'if things don't work out, as looks like will be the case, we use this'. Those would be funds cannibalizing something. Hence the reluctance to admit that there is a Plan B for patching the cash flow crisis, and instead playing dumb: 'oh gee, I guess we do have a problem," and letting people circulate rumours of layoffs. When the layoffs don't happen: "guess that was much ado about nothing."
And one potential ace to pull out for a big cash flow band-aid, is a chunk of that Central Nova piggy bank. It wasn't stashed for this purpose, but it exists.
That link above just lists the piggy bank amount as it was early this year- at its peak. Since that time the campaign's ongoing national fundraising would have pulled in some, but have spent more than that until the headquarters was wound down. Taking a conservative projection of that fundraising based on 2007 and 2008 figures, and even assuming there was tardiness in winding down the Central Nova ongoing headquarters expenses... the stash would this summer when the shift to SGI happened, still have been around $70-80,000... if not more.
As is accounted for in that above link, about $34,000 of that would be the rebate for the May campaign. Parties do sometimes have the remittance of those rebates signed over to the national party. If so, it does not show up as a transfer into the GPC and is not part of any public filing. So it is possible the GPC got these funds and they are just part of undifferentiated GPC cash flow that is gone already. But that would have to have been set in motion in 2008, and would have been completely counter to the practice of moving as much money as possible into the Central Nova piggy bank.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
From my experience of presenting this kind of information I rather expect a lot of people- maybe most- may have a hard time just following it all.
Critisism and deep skepticism is expected. But don't be shy about "I don't get it" questions. Though I can't be expected to reply without a reference to something in particular.
National Fundraising CN EDA 2007&2008: 39,000
National Fundraising CN EDA 2009: ?
National Fundraising May campaign: 25,000
Transfers GPC to EDA and May campaign: 126,000
Total Cash Inputs from national sources:
over 200,000
- NOT including May campaign rebate of $34,000
Transfers EDA and May campaign to GPC: $ 0
March 2009: in extensive Herald interview May tells reporter “people would be surprised to know that my campaign received no more resources than any other Green campaign”.
Even without knowing the full extent of the numbers above, Greens were indeed surprised enough to call the reporter, and in a follow-up interview he asked her about the $80,000 transfer to her campaign during the election.
Half of that she said was a repayment from her London North Centre campaign. ??!? The other half of the $80,000 she said was a loan.
But that second $40,000 when transferred 6 months before the interview went straight into May campaign SURPLUS. And grew from that point to a $66,000 surplus, with all bills paid, at the end of the campaign.
Not only was that $40,000 “loan” not repaid. A total of more than $100,000 had migrated to the Central Nova EDA after the election by early 2009, without a dime of it having to be recorded as coming from the Green Party of Canada.
Plus all the staff salaries for the 2 years the HQ was staffed, including during the writ period, were paid by the GPC. And again, because of what Elections Canada reporting does NOT require, without a dime having to be publicly reported as coming from the Green Party of Canada to the endless Central Nova May campaign.
Two things that are obvious:
1) The party is spending a whack of money to elect EM in SGI. CN X 2, minimum.
2) Money the party doesn't have. (Don't sit by the mailbox waiting for your revenue-sharing cheque.)
Which is why it's called the Elizabeth May Party of Canada.
By early this year, over a quarter million dollars had gone into the pot of Elizabeth May’s quest for a seat in Central Nova. [Over $200,000 in cash from national resources. Staffing expenses solely for the CN operation paid by the GPC over 2 years: conservatively, $50,000. May campaign candidate rebate: $34,000.]
That was before she began to float the “questioning” that perhaps more of a priority and more resources should be put into her winning a seat.... as if it was not already.
Yet, before those words were out of her mouth, a quarter million dollars had already gone into the pot. Not all of it was spent- a goodly chunk being in that Central Nova piggy bank.
But every bit of the quarter million having already gone one way or another from the GPC into the pot.
Rather quiet lot.
I know, absolutely, that if it was my party and I heard about something like this Central Nova piggy bank, I’d be demanding answers.
And it wouldn’t matter if I was skeptical about the credibility of the information. If I was a Council delegate and I did not have hard information that refuted a suggestion like this, I would be asking pointed questions. And I would not be waiting for the end of the day “Other Business” agenda item when everyone is mentally checked out.
If I was not a Council delegate I’d still make sure the questions get asked.
There are a lot of other questions raised which should also have answers. But the first would be how much money the Central Nova EDA had after the 2008 May election campaign, what became of it, who made the decisions to funnel all the money there in that fashion, with what rationale, and after what discussions.
I mean, given that the party only began to discuss putting significantly more resources into getting May elected at least several months AFTER all this shuffling and stashing of funds was completed, there seems to be something seriously out of whack here.
And maybe there is a way to get answers without having to wait for the next Council meeting. Not to mention that the obvious answer there would be “we’ll have to get back with a report on the information you are asking for. For one thing , you know, the Central Nova EDA is an independent body that we cannot speak for. Etc. Etc.”
Ken, we're rabbits in the headlights. It seems so preposterous, it takes a bit to sink in. It's kind of like being the first Geologist to say we're running out of oil. You may be right, but no-one will thank you for it. I personally was a little weirded out when I saw that Central Nova had so much money left over after the general election. How could they have been running to win, while spending such a small proportion of their ready cash? Thanks for posting these numbers. It will certainly make people ponder, but all will be afraid to acknowledge the possibility that you've raised. (Myself included, dance carefully BGB!!)
This is a secondary point BGB, but actually the evidence is strong that the May campaign in the election last year really did spend at least close to what they were allowed by the spending limit.
According to the filing with Elections Canada, they underspent by $20-25,000. But there are no staff expenses reported. Those and perhaps some other significant expenses were paid directly by the GPC, and NOT reported as candidate campaign expenses- as unambiguously required by Elections Canada, whoever makes the payments.
Elizabeth May herself made reference in that long Herald interview to an internal ‘misunderstanding’ of what is allowed, which led to said ‘underspending’. I’d be willing to bet most anything that this ‘misunderstanding’ was actually a disagreement with the GPC bean counter- who could see not reporting the expenses as required, but not based on that fiction going ahead to spend substantially more. If you take that chance, and Elections Canada does not let your report slide by as is, you are in serious trouble.
So I think the evidence indicates they both spent substantially the limit, and used the campaign to channel as much money again into the hidden piggy bank for the in practice endless and endlessly expensive campaign to elect Elizabeth May.
But I understand your main point. Months after noticing the pattern and amounts involved in moving all that money to the Central Nova EDA, it still surprises me.
enigmatic
tony's dots link to a soft porn site
Update on the Central Nova $100,000 piggy bank stash.
On his blog Dave Bagler dismissed me as a liar and said the loan had been repaid. This being the $80,000 transfer from the GPC to the May campaign that Elizabeth herself called a loan.
Having backed up all of my claims, I suggested that Bagler back up his with verifiable information.
A couple days later, Friday, Dave says he has been busy and that he will get back to it Sunday or Monday. No sign of that yet.
Since he seemed to be having trouble I detailed all the information gleaned from Elections Canada filings...demonstrating that it has not been repaid, and that it was never a loan in the first place: that it was transferred in under the safe cover of the May election campaign to be used to fuel the endless and cash hungry campaign headquarters AFTER the elction in 2009.
See
http://www.davebagler.ca/done-with-report-on-greens
.
That discussion with Dave Bagler fizzled out, but along the way I was able to fill in a few details- things I had guessed at, but could not confirm. Which means I have to qualify less and can be blunter and quicker. So here's what the Central Nova piggy bank shuffles boil down to:
Long before there was any discussion or airing of how much was to be spent, year round and year to year, on getting a seat for Elizabeth May.... a great deal was being spent: an average in Central Nova of several to $10,000 per month of nationally procured resources, for 16 months BEFORE the 2008 election.
In September 2008 $80,000 was transferred from the GPC to the Elizabeth May campaign for use AFTER the election period. The purpose of doing it during the elction is because no one would ask questions. And indeed; after the election even critics assumed the transfer was for the election. But the entire amount was transferred to Central Nova after the election.
In February 2009 Elizabeth May began to raise the ‘question’ that perhaps the party would like to make electing her more of a priority. In an extended interview she told Stephen Maher of the Chronicle Herald that "people would be surprised to know that my campaign has received no more resources than other Green party campaigns."
When Maher called her for a follow-up and asked about the $80,000 transfer, she said that money was a loan. At that time the entire $80,000 had already been transferred to Central Nova and was in the process of being spent on the ongoing operation of the campaign headquarters.
Ken Summers
Post a Comment