The We Charity scandal is far from over
CANADA, AS USUAL, FINDS ITSELF IN A TENUOUS POSITION. — KELLY MCPARLAND
This isn’t over — not by a long shot. Just because the cosy contract between the Government of Canada and We Charity has been nullified, doesn’t mean we’re through with this controversy; and just because Marc and Craig Kielburger and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau want to walk away from a mess that seems entirely of their own construction does not mean they should be allowed to do so.
This is a $900-million program that appears to have been ever so casually passed on to Trudeau’s friends. A stir arose and now both parties say, “Oh my, how unfortunate this is. If we’d known this would stir a controversy, we would never have agreed to it.”
But it’s rather rich for Trudeau to have claimed a week ago that We was the “only organization” in all of Canada that could administer the program, then turn around and say that it will be handled by others. When Trudeau confidently asserted that the Kielburger impresarios had the only delivery mechanism for nearly $1 billion in government funds, what information was he relying on? So far, the government has been unwilling to give us a straight answer to this question.
Who buys the line that the decision to give the Kielburger boys the contract came solely from the civil service? especially given the fact that Craig Kielburger can be seen on video saying that, “the Prime Minister’s Office kindly called us” and asked for help with the program. He backtracked very swiftly on that, saying he was speaking “loosely and enthusiastically.” (Huge single-source contracts will charge up the old enthusiasm.)
Who in cabinet or the civil service investigated the available resources, including other charities, to determine that only two flashy charity celebs, and they alone, could disburse a $900-million volunteer fund that came from the pockets of hard-working Canadians?
And what about the other people in government? What was their view? What did deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland think of it? Why has no one asked her — or Bill Morneau, our ostensible finance minister? What did he say? Also, who made the decision to cancel the arrangement? Was it the full cabinet? Was it Trudeau? Why did they so swiftly cancel a decision that should have been given great consideration — it was $900 million, not a glass of orange juice — before handing out the contract just weeks earlier?
Let’s see the research that went into the decision and get a record of the discussions that preceded the award. How many meetings did the Kielburger boys have with either public servants, political aides or politicians to discuss the program, outline their readiness, spell out their methods and set up a system of oversight?
Craig and Marc Kielburger are very articulate men. Surely they could show up at a news conference and lay out the presentations they made, the people they met and take us through how this wonderful boondoggle was conceived. Or a Commons committee could (and should) summon them, when and if the House of Commons is resurrected and Trudeau kindly consents (and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh likewise agrees) to a return of parliamentary government.
It would also be really good to know how or why the Liberals came up with a “volunteer” program built entirely around the idea of paying volunteers. The program intends to offer between $1,000 and $5,000 to the so-called volunteers and, in We’s implementation, would have offered $12,000 to the teachers who recruit them and $25,000 to the summer camps that host them. Passing out big bucks to everyone who had anything at all to do with it seems to be the essence of this entire scheme. Here’s $900 million: spend half of it to give the other half away. Hell, with that mandate, even I could run it.
On a wider scale, there might usefully be some inquiry into why Kielburger Inc. has such easy access to the Canadian school system. We has both a charity and a for-profit arm. Why are school principals and teachers so obliging to this particular corporation?
It’s one thing to proclaim a good cause, but should that allow significant access to the educational system? does any other “charity” call the school kids to stadiums?
We sending kids for a couple of weeks to Africa or elsewhere is a millennial SJW update to the 19th-century missionaries. Instead of clerical collars they wear T-shirts, instead of dreary Bible readings they bounce around the stage with Ariana Grande, or some secondary luminary. There’s a lot of First-world condescension built into its model.
Canada should be ashamed of the vanity of this whole enterprise. And the opposition (if we still have one) and the press should not let the many questions surrounding the outrage fade.