If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.
Bill Morneau can try to dress it up any way he likes, but his conflict of interest is a conflict of interest, and there is no way to tart it up to look like anything else.
I suppose he should get a smidgen of credit for finally – two years after he should have – finally doing the right thing. But doing the right thing only because you’ve been caught doing the wrong thing is hardly worth a standing ovation.
When I saw how he structured his holdings in Morneau Shepell, it was pretty clear to me that the advice given to him by the federal ethics commissioner wasn’t worth the paper it was written on.
LISTEN: Kim Moody of Moodys Gartner Tax Law on the Liberal tax changes and the conflict of interest allegations against Bill Morneau
WATCH BELOW: Danielle Smith joins Global Calgary to offer her perspective on Bill Morneau’s financial holdings
READ: Finance Minister Bill Morneau has been getting at least $65K a month from firm he regulates
It was reported Wednesday the way Bill Morneau held his 1 million shares worth about $20 million in Morneau Shepell was through a complicated structure of private corporations involving his wife Nancy McCain.
She was a director in an Alberta-based private company, 1193536 Alberta Ltd. The “shareholders” of the company were listed as another private company registered in Ontario. The 100 per cent owner of that company is Bill Morneau.
So, we are to believe that if Morneau owned 100 per cent of the shares directly, the ethics commissioner would have required him to place the shares in a blind trust. But because he owns 100 per cent of the shares indirectly – using fancy accounting schemes to obscure the paper trail between two private corporations registered in two different provinces – there’s no need.
Poppycock. He was simply exploiting a loophole in the interpretation of the ethics laws. Exploiting a loophole – how ironic.
Now he’s seen the light, it appears. On Thursday, he announced he will set up a blind trust, divest his and his families’ shares in Morneau Shepell, and abide by new conflict of interest guidelines through the transition. This is what he should have done in the first place.
LISTEN: Audio from the Minister of Finance Bill Morneau and listeners thoughts
Unfortunately for him, the question and answer period following his press conference and Thursday’s Question Period created even more confusion and more questions.
He claimed to recall just two instances when he removed himself from meetings due to a conflict of interest. Yet there are numerous decisions where he should have recused himself.
Morneau Shepell is registered in the known tax haven of Barbados. Bill Morneau’s department is responsible for renegotiating the tax treaty with Barbados. Did he absent himself from those discussions?
LISTEN: Rob Breakenridge’s thoughts on the Bill Morneau conflict of interest allegations
READ: Bill Morneau to place assets in blind trust after conflict of interest allegations
Morneau Shepell will be taking over the management of the Sears pension plan after the company’s collapse. Did he have any involvement in those discussions?
Morneau Shepell provides a pension plan to business owners, which (a listener tells me) they began to aggressively market to doctors after the finance minister announced changes to the treatment of passive income for small businesses and professional corporations. Did he absent himself from those discussions?
It appears the entire structure for holding his Morneau Shepell shares – as well as the French villa he forgot to declare – was through privately held family corporations. Meanwhile, his department is regulating the entire way Canadian private corporations are taxed. Did he absent himself from those discussions?
LISTEN: Global News reporter Mike LeCouteur on Bill Morneau conflict of interest allegations
The more we learn about Morneau’s private business affairs, the more it seems like his entire assault on the small business community over the last few months was simply to try to distract attention away from his own aggressive use of what he likes to term “unfair tax loopholes.”
Can the credibility of this finance minister be salvaged? I doubt it.
Have any questions, comments, even concerns? You can reach me at danielle@newstalk770.com
Comments