PDA

View Full Version : Paul Coffin pleads guilty to fraud in adscam


Txiasaeia
May 31st, 2005, 11:18 AM
Paul Coffin, the first person charged in the sponsorship scandal, pleaded guilty to 15 out of 18 counts of fraud this morning in a Montreal court.

Coffin, president of Communication Coffin, was arrested in September 2003 on charges relating to 18 federally sponsored events.

Under his pleas, the agreed amount of total fraud against the federal government is $1,556,625 -- which amounts to half of the ad executive's total billings.

Three of the 18 fraud charges that Coffin originally faced were withdrawn by the Crown.

His plea this morning comes six days ahead of the scheduled beginning of his fraud trial. Sentencing arguments will take place on Aug. 16.

Reports indicate Coffin's lawyers have been in negotiations with the Crown and that lawyers and the judge have held two telephone conference calls.

Coffin told the sponsorship inquiry on April 27 he regularly submitted false invoices valued at $2.7 million to the federal government at the request of sponsorship program boss Chuck Guite, who has denied the allegations.

Coffin previously pleaded not guilty to the charges.

In his inquiry testimony, Coffin shed light on alleged bureaucratic cooperation in a scheme to create a trail of falsified paperwork and inflated bills for several files, including then-prime minister Jean Chretien's Clarity Act, which set ground rules for sovereignty referendums.

Justice John Gomery's inquiry is examining irregular spending in the sponsorship program -- which was supposed to promote Canadian unity after the Quebec referendum, but has been accused of funnelling millions in government contracts to Liberal-friendly ad firms.

Coffin also testified at the Gomery inquiry that:
-He fronted a Health Canada ad contract for another ad agency, Gingko Group, and took a commission even though Gingko did all of the work.
-He had a close friendship with Guite and once hired the bureaucrat as a consultant following Guite's retirement.
-Guite and assistant Huguette Tremblay were participants in a scheme to top off production-fee budgets for a number of sponsorship files from 1997 to 1999.
-Guite asked him to bill for hours worked even though Coffin's firm didn't keep time sheets.
-Public Works officials approved, and even encouraged, the massive fees each agency took for managing $250 million in sponsorship deals from 1997 to 2003.
-He sometimes billed taxpayers for work done by his wife, who was not on his payroll.

From http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1117545330123_112954530/?hub=Canada


Excellent. Now that one of these crooks has plead guilty, maybe his testimony will be used to implicate others. On the other hand, he's an ad exec and not a politician - maybe he's the scapegoat? I'd sure like to see some politicians go to jail over this. Before the 20th century there was "Debtor's prison" where people tremendously in debt would be placed in jail until they could pay off the money they owed (to whoever)... wouldn't it be nice to put these thieves in jail until they paid off the money they stole from Canadian taxpayers?

asim99
May 31st, 2005, 11:20 AM
good
liberal party will be better off without these bad persons

Excellent. Now that one of these crooks has plead guilty, maybe his testimony will be used to implicate others. On the other hand, he's an ad exec and not a politician - maybe he's the scapegoat? I'd sure like to see some politicians go to jail over this. Before the 20th century there was "Debtor's prison" where people tremendously in debt would be placed in jail until they could pay off the money they owed (to whoever)... wouldn't it be nice to put these thieves in jail until they paid off the money they stole from Canadian taxpayers?

Bordello
May 31st, 2005, 11:50 AM
good
liberal party will be better off without these bad persons

and Canada is better off without the Liberals in general.

asim99
May 31st, 2005, 11:54 AM
i suppose you mean the u.s.
canada is where liberal ideology is right at home

and Canada is better off without the Liberals in general.

devious9191
May 31st, 2005, 12:18 PM
i suppose you mean the u.s.
canada is where liberal ideology is right at home

Sad but true.

mlc2000
May 31st, 2005, 12:21 PM
Sad but true.
yea, prolly better than the Reformatives.

devious9191
May 31st, 2005, 12:27 PM
yea, prolly better than the Reformatives.

Maybe so. Pretty hard to make that call without giving another party a shot at governing. 'Better the enemy you know than the one you don't' right? That's a favorite liberal slogan. ;)

d_jedi
May 31st, 2005, 01:07 PM
Maybe so. Pretty hard to make that call without giving another party a shot at governing. 'Better the enemy you know than the one you don't' right? That's a favorite liberal slogan. ;)
Devil..
hell, they've even got the colours right :->
(pun intended)

asim99
May 31st, 2005, 02:13 PM
why do conservatives keep on changing their name, while liberal party has stayed with the same name pretty much all along

do the conservatives need a new break every time they change their name? :evil:

Maybe so. Pretty hard to make that call without giving another party a shot at governing. 'Better the enemy you know than the one you don't' right? That's a favorite liberal slogan. ;)

d_jedi
May 31st, 2005, 02:18 PM
why do conservatives keep on changing their name, while liberal party has stayed with the same name pretty much all along

do the conservatives need a new break every time they change their name? :evil:
Reform->Canadian Alliance - the first attempt at a "unite the right" movement. Actual name of the Party - Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance suggests this. This failed when few PCs were swayed to join the new party..
Canadian Alliance/PC->Conservative - the second (successful) attempt to "unite the right"

I think the reason for the name changes is to prevent the impression that it was a takeover of a party rather than a merger.. of course, some people still see the Conservative party as an Alliance takeover of the PCs..

d_jedi
May 31st, 2005, 02:20 PM
An interesting tidbit:

the party voted to adopt a new name - the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance, a declaration of policy and a new constitution.

However, media covering the convention quickly pointed out that if one added the word "Party" to the end of the party's name, the resulting initials were "CCRAP" even though it, like the Bloc, didn't actually have the word Party in its name. When it became clear after a few days that the joke was not going to subside, the party's official name was quickly changed to the Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance.


:D

asim99
May 31st, 2005, 02:25 PM
haha...reminds me of the time when the pentagon changed the name of 'operation iraqi liberation'

An interesting tidbit:
:D

devious9191
May 31st, 2005, 02:25 PM
why do conservatives keep on changing their name, while liberal party has stayed with the same name pretty much all along

do the conservatives need a new break every time they change their name? :evil:

Well, it isn't the same party. That would be like saying that if the NDP and Liberals (two left of centre) merged, that they should keep the same name.

Noone with the Conservative party was a member of the previous governing PC party, so it really is a different party in Federal politics.

asim99
May 31st, 2005, 02:29 PM
all the more reason to call it alliance :cheesygri

Well, it isn't the same party. That would be like saying that if the NDP and Liberals (two left of centre) merged, that they should keep the same name.
Noone with the Conservative party was a member of the previous governing PC party, so it really is a different party in Federal politics.

devious9191
May 31st, 2005, 02:35 PM
all the more reason to call it alliance :cheesygri

Except that isn't what it is ;p I never had a problem with the alliance anyways. The Liberals look out for the East coast, Alliance looks out for the West. Unfortunately, there's more votes in the East ;p