OTTAWA - CBC hires back dozens of retirees each year as contractors or consultants.Wouldn't Mr. Braaa.....dcast Don Newman former host of the old CBC Politics show come to mind as one of those "retirees" that have been hired back? Because he now writes a column on the CBC website and appears on panels etc on CBC television from time to time. How much is he and others sucking out of the taxpayer by doing this? I would like to know. He's probably receiving a pension and collecting a fee or a salary or whatever. I hope when the information committee investigates the CBC after the Christmas recess, we can find out.
Documents obtained through access to information show that between 2005 and
2007 the state broadcaster hired 125 people who were also receiving an annuity or pension from CBC.
The records took three years to obtain and required the intervention of the federal information commissioner. At first CBC refused to release any records, claiming all records were considered personal information and not subject to the access law.
After an investigation by the information commissioner's office, CBC agreed to release the total number of retirees hired back on contract.
The practice of retirees returning to work as consultants in federal government departments is not uncommon in the federal government and is often referred to as ³double-dipping.² In 2005 CBC hired back 21 retirees, 37 in 2006 and 67 in 2007.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
CBC Retirees Double Dipping?
As part of Brian Lilley's series on the CBC he's discovered that dozens of retirees have been hired back as consultants or contractors and of course we pay their pensions and their consultant or contractor fees. So could they be double dipping? I would say so.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't know how good their pensions are. I know that my Dad worked as an outside consultant for the Town after he retired, after working their for 25 years. He needed the money. They needed his expertise.
ReplyDelete'Double Dipping' when you check the definition means 'the practice of simultaneously holding multiple elected positions.' Specifically Double Dipping applies to politicians only.
The fact that the CBC refused to release these names for 3 years shows that the mother corpse knows the Canadian public would find this type of behaviour unacceptable.
ReplyDeleteThey were right.
I was always a little suspicious of CBC creep Don Newmans announced "retirement", because he still works for the CBC. I recall the 2 on 1 with Soloman and Newman badgering and bullying Kory Teneyke in a pre rehearsed ambush. That was quite the spectacle. I wonder how much taxpayer money Newman sucked up over his 30=40 year reign as the top political agenda setter of the Trudeaupian CBC.
ReplyDeleteI was always a little suspicious of CBC creep Don Newmans announced "retirement", because he still works for the CBC. I recall the 2 on 1 with Soloman and Newman badgering and bullying Kory Teneyke in a pre rehearsed ambush. That was quite the spectacle. I wonder how much taxpayer money Newman sucked up over his 30=40 year reign as the top political agenda setter of the Trudeaupian CBC.
ReplyDeleteProbably not a lot. Most of the money seems to go to the top executives, not to the talent who actually works.
As to Kory Teneyke, are you trying to deny that there was a story there, just as there is a story here?
Why retire or claim that he is retired when in fact Newman still works for CBC but in another field (area) and is getting 'free' money from the very public he talked too on a daily basis.
ReplyDelete'FREE' MONEY TO CBC paid by the public is the easiest way for CBC to make money.
We want to know all of their salaries, charities, organizations, political party/ies they pay into and give.
Brian Lilley can not and must not act like a schoolboy when dealing with the public paid CBC; he should do his job to the fullest.
"Mad hatter", I'm not denying anything. I was simply making the point that Newman was supposed to have retired, but is still around. Is Newman receiving a retirement pension while he collects a wage, and continues to shill for the "Liberals"? In other words is Newman retired or not? if not, what amount is the taxpayer paying him? You might not care how the Crown Corporation, CBC spends taxpayer money, but I, along with millions of other Canadians do. As for Teneyke, he"s a big boy and can look after himself, I'm not here to defend him, but for anyone who witnessed Soloman and Newman bullying their way through that rehearsed 2 on one attack of Teneyke it left a bitter, sickening feeling, that reeked of bias and a predetermined imbalance. What was a so called retired "Liberal" mouthpiece like Newman doing there, and was he being paid extra, above his "retirement" package to do so? Who is double dipping at the CBC and why?
ReplyDeleteSean M.
ReplyDeleteSo considering how bad the pensions are that most Canadians receive, you would deny Don Newman the opportunity to supplement his income?
And you focus on him, rather than the President of the CBC and his staff? If you are concerned about money, you have to target the hogs, not the little guy.
So considering how bad the pensions are that most Canadians receive, you would deny Don Newman the opportunity to supplement his income?
ReplyDeleteDon't worry,I don't think he's suffering. I'm sure that Don Newman is collecting a handsome little pension. He did work and still works for the taxpayer funded public network. That's why we need to know.We are the ones paying his pension and consultant fees or whatever and the others too don't forget.
Don't worry,I don't think he's suffering. I'm sure that Don Newman is collecting a handsome little pension. He did work and still works for the taxpayer funded public network. That's why we need to know.We are the ones paying his pension and consultant fees or whatever and the others too don't forget.
ReplyDeleteAre we? Can you prove this?
The CBC is a curious hybrid of public/private. Part of it's funding is from the taxpayer, part from commercials. Commercial rates for Hockey Night In Canada are extremely high.
So it could be argued that his pension was funded by the commercials, not government funding. And if it was, what right do we have to question it? Or it could be half and half, in which case we have some rights to question.
Actually the current Public/Private monstrosity is bad. It's bad for the CBC, and it's bad for the taxpayers.
My personal preference would be to take the CBC totally public. Get the CBC out of competing with the private networks, and into showing and producing nothing but Canadian content, with the aim of selling that content into other markets, through a totally separate sales organization, the revenues from which would go into government coffers, just like the revenues from the LCBO goes directly to the Province of Ontario. In other words similar to what the BBC does, which allows the BBC to take chances that a commercial network couldn't.
With the proper stewardship, the CBC could do a lot of good for Canada and Canadians. The current setup stinks.
Oh, one final note. It would have to be run at arms length from the government, to prevent political interference, something that is an issue at present.
What I would like to see happen to CBC is the government should privatize it. Let it sink or swim on it's own. As far as I'm concerned it's just sink hole and they at the CBC are of the belief they're not accountable to the taxpayer.
ReplyDeletePrivatization is the other option. The big issue with privatizing a government owned entity, is that all too often the government doesn't realize the value of the asset. In other words, we, the taxpayers, get ripped off, because the government sells the asset at too low a price.
ReplyDeleteThere are some beautiful examples of this, and it's not just a Canadian problem. Some of the asset sales from the G. W. Bush administration in the United States should have been investigated, and criminal charges laid (both against the buyer, and the sellers agents) in my opinion.
For example, after Katrina, large parts of the New Orleans school board properties were sold off at fire sale prices to private interests. If they have have been sold for their real value, there would have been far more money in the city's coffers to fix the problems left from the hurricane.
The CBC is hobbled by the rules it works under now. It isn't really allowed to compete with the private broadcasters for ad revenue, but it's supposed to fund operations from ad revenue. This doesn't make sense. The CBC is in a Catch 22 situation.
Heads I win, Tails you loose.
Now I would prefer to see the CBC go totally public. There are places in this country where the CBC is the only option, because the private broadcasters can't profitably serve those areas. And also because it's the only decent source of Canadian made television. Make the CBC 100% Canadian Content, both on TV and Radio. This will cause an expansion of Canadian production, and give our cultural exports a huge boost.
Whether or not the CBC's Canadian made television is decent or not is a matter of taste and perception. The English half of CBC is used as a promotional tool of the Trudeaupian imposed ideology, where Canada is portrayed as a "bilingual", "multi-culty" nation... nations within nations. This is not a reflection of what Canada is, nor where Canada comes from and in my view is a complete distortion of reality and history. CBC "news" programming is so warped and slanted to the "Liberal", "Progressive" left it leaves one nauseous and extremely frustrated that all taxpayers are forced to fund this clearly biased propaganda. The bureaucratic execs, and staffers of CBC behave as if they are unaccountable to the taxpayer and entitled to their entitlements, and its this kind of behavioral arrogance that leads one to believe the CBC has a lot to hide. Why does the CBC run from accountability and oversight if they have nothing to hide? The CBC's continuing flaunting of the laws is a farce and a disgrace. As far as I'm concerned the CBC operates as a force that feeds and nurtures a radical anti=Americanism and extreme left bias that does not adequately reflect the population that is forced to pay for it. If we are going to have a national broadcaster it must reflect the nation that exists and not the warped ideologies and social engineering schemes of a state imposed left wing radicalism. Canadians have a right to know what goes on within the corridors and shadows of the CBC, and how they spend our money, they must be accountable and much more transparent in how they spend taxpayers money. The CBC has become ideologically corrupted over the last 3 to 4 decades and many Canadians, including myself have become exhausted with being held captive by a pack of unaccountable bureaucrats and "Liberal" propagandists.
ReplyDeleteBut Canada is a series of nations. It always has been. You used to be able to visit the Irish neighborhood in Toronto, and it was like going to a different country.
ReplyDeleteFor that matter there's the old battle of city v. country, which is still going on (see my articles about the Long Gun Registry, and remember, that I'm a country boy).
Social engineering schemes. Hum, like Bill C-32? That's a social engineering scheme all right, though it's one doomed to failure.
My point being, that the CBC is biased. So is the Star (a Tory cabinet minister once told me that if the Star was complaining about him, he knew he was doing something right). So is the Sun. So is the Globe. So is City TV. Everything is biased, me and you included.
I agree - Canadians should know what's going on at the CBC, and the easiest way to make sure of that is to make the CBC 100% state funded. Of course that could be another case of Social Engineering. But making it 100% private would be another case of social engineering. Survival of the fittest. Could Global survive? I doubt it.
Wayne