Precious Yutangco
staff reporter
A rookie Toronto police officer faces impaired driving charges after he allegedly crashed his vehicle into a parked car while off duty.
Police were initially called to 443 Adelaide St. W., near Bathurst and King Sts., at 6 a.m. today after they were told a vehicle had driven into a parked car.
They arrested the driver of the vehicle and charged him with impaired driving.
Charged is Const. Chaitanya Joshi, 24, who has been part of Toronto Police Services for 18 months.
Joshi currently works out of 23 Division, which covers the northern half of Etobicoke.
He is scheduled to appear in court at Old City Hall on Aug. 11 at 3 p.m.
Toronto Star
critter cartoon
Friday, July 3, 2009
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Proof goes Poof!
When Robin Chatterjee was pulled over for having a missing licence plate, police claimed they smelled marijuana in his car.
They searched the car and found $29,000 in cash and a few items commonly used for growing marijuana. The police recognized they did not have evidence to charge him with any crime. Instead, they confiscated the items, along with the $29,000.
Shockingly, this happened in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada recently ruled such forfeitures do not violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
If the police just "think" property in your possession may have come from criminal activity, it can be legally confiscated.
Ontario's Civil Remedies Act "does not require an allegation or proof that a particular person committed a particular crime," the court wrote. This is an extraordinary grant of police power and the potential for abuse or misuse is extreme.
Many readers have no problem with the notion of police powers being exercised against criminals. But Chatterjee was never even charged with a crime, let alone convicted of one. This did not matter to the court, which wrote the trial judge "could have accepted wholeheartedly (Chatterjee's) claim that he was entirely innocent of any involvement with marijuana cultivation, yet still ordered forfeiture."
That is a remarkable statement. What happened to proof beyond a reasonable doubt? What ever happened to the principle that "the punishment must fit the crime?"
Chatterjee may have been a suspicious character. After all, it is rather unusual to travel with tools typically used for growing marijuana plus $29,000 in cash. But it is not illegal.
Receipt, please
Imagine the police pull your car over for a broken tail light or come to your house because you are waking your neighbours. Will you need to provide a receipt to justify any unusual or expensive possessions the police notice that you have?
And if you can't, should you lose your things, even with no criminal conviction?
I think it violates the principle of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to confiscate alleged proceeds of crime without any criminal charge. In a free and democratic society, we should not have to explain ourselves to the police any time we are pulled over.
In my view, if the police do not have grounds to arrest you, you should be free to go, and to take your property without having to prove it is lawfully yours.
The unfortunate trend, however, is our society's interest in personal privacy continues to degrade, coming close to the point of no return.
Since 2004, six other provinces have joined Ontario by enacting civil forfeiture laws. B.C., has confiscated more than $5 million since its law came into effect in 2006. B.C.'s Civil Forfeiture Office (BCCFO) is funded by proceeds of confiscated goods, and the office became entirely self-funded 18 months ahead of schedule.
This should be nothing to be proud of, but the BCCFO gleefully boasts it is "an exercise in efficiency" and it's "business model" is premised on "ease of access for law enforcement personnel."
It scares the hell out of me that a government forfeiture office sees itself as a business. Confiscating goods and money without sufficient proof of criminal conduct should not be undertaken so cavalierly.
U.S.-style abuses
Such programs are likely, if not certain, to suffer from the exact same sorts of abuses that have occurred in the U.S., where it is not uncommon to hear of forfeited goods going missing or forfeited cars winding up in the hands of law enforcement personnel.
The state took Chatterjee's money and other items because the cops smelled marijuana in his car. I am left to wonder what they would have confiscated had Chatterjee actually had drugs on him. Maybe his kidney?
The Toronto Sun
They searched the car and found $29,000 in cash and a few items commonly used for growing marijuana. The police recognized they did not have evidence to charge him with any crime. Instead, they confiscated the items, along with the $29,000.
Shockingly, this happened in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada recently ruled such forfeitures do not violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
If the police just "think" property in your possession may have come from criminal activity, it can be legally confiscated.
Ontario's Civil Remedies Act "does not require an allegation or proof that a particular person committed a particular crime," the court wrote. This is an extraordinary grant of police power and the potential for abuse or misuse is extreme.
Many readers have no problem with the notion of police powers being exercised against criminals. But Chatterjee was never even charged with a crime, let alone convicted of one. This did not matter to the court, which wrote the trial judge "could have accepted wholeheartedly (Chatterjee's) claim that he was entirely innocent of any involvement with marijuana cultivation, yet still ordered forfeiture."
That is a remarkable statement. What happened to proof beyond a reasonable doubt? What ever happened to the principle that "the punishment must fit the crime?"
Chatterjee may have been a suspicious character. After all, it is rather unusual to travel with tools typically used for growing marijuana plus $29,000 in cash. But it is not illegal.
Receipt, please
Imagine the police pull your car over for a broken tail light or come to your house because you are waking your neighbours. Will you need to provide a receipt to justify any unusual or expensive possessions the police notice that you have?
And if you can't, should you lose your things, even with no criminal conviction?
I think it violates the principle of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to confiscate alleged proceeds of crime without any criminal charge. In a free and democratic society, we should not have to explain ourselves to the police any time we are pulled over.
In my view, if the police do not have grounds to arrest you, you should be free to go, and to take your property without having to prove it is lawfully yours.
The unfortunate trend, however, is our society's interest in personal privacy continues to degrade, coming close to the point of no return.
Since 2004, six other provinces have joined Ontario by enacting civil forfeiture laws. B.C., has confiscated more than $5 million since its law came into effect in 2006. B.C.'s Civil Forfeiture Office (BCCFO) is funded by proceeds of confiscated goods, and the office became entirely self-funded 18 months ahead of schedule.
This should be nothing to be proud of, but the BCCFO gleefully boasts it is "an exercise in efficiency" and it's "business model" is premised on "ease of access for law enforcement personnel."
It scares the hell out of me that a government forfeiture office sees itself as a business. Confiscating goods and money without sufficient proof of criminal conduct should not be undertaken so cavalierly.
U.S.-style abuses
Such programs are likely, if not certain, to suffer from the exact same sorts of abuses that have occurred in the U.S., where it is not uncommon to hear of forfeited goods going missing or forfeited cars winding up in the hands of law enforcement personnel.
The state took Chatterjee's money and other items because the cops smelled marijuana in his car. I am left to wonder what they would have confiscated had Chatterjee actually had drugs on him. Maybe his kidney?
The Toronto Sun
Saturday, June 6, 2009
OPP's conduct 'illegal'
Lawyer wants charges laid over background checks on jurors
By TRACY MCLAUGHLIN, SPECIAL TO SUN MEDIA
Last Updated: 6th June 2009, 2:44am
BARRIE -- Either the attorney general or the OPP should be charged for allowing Barrie Crown attorneys to conduct illegal searches into the backgrounds of potential jurors, a Toronto lawyer said yesterday.
"It's illegal, and it's scandalous," said Mitchell Worsoff, who asked for a mistrial for his client because he claimed the entire jury panel was "tainted".
The issue arose in a Barrie court Tuesday when Worsoff asked for a mistrial for his client, Ravi Badhwar, because he believed the jury panel was "tainted," after he learned the Crown prosecutor obtained private information on hundreds of persons who were selected as possible jurors to sit on the man's trial.
In court, Worsoff produced the list to the judge that showed names, ages and occupations of more than 200 potential jurors.
Beside many of the names, handwritten notations were made.
"Suicidal in 2001" was written beside the name of retired manager from Collingwood.
Under present law to prevent a biased jury, the Crown and the defence lawyers are only allowed to know the name, age and occupation of a juror, unless they have a criminal record for an indictable offence, which would automatically exclude them as potential jurors.
"Ongoing neighbour dispute -- neighbour shot his cat," was written beside the name of a Penetanguishene man who is a machine operator.
"Witness to parent's domestic. Dad is a drinker and assaultive to her mother," was written beside the name of another woman from Victoria Harbour who is a student.
Several others on the list had drinking-and-driving convictions beside their names -- which is not an indictable offence.
Another man from Perkinsfield had "calls for minor complaints" as a notation.
In court, Worsoff produced another document endorsed by Barrie's deputy Crown attorney Mike Minns, that was sent to OPP detachments in Collingwood, Huronia West, Midland, Nottawasaga, Orillia and Southern Georgian Bay.
It was attached to a list containing the names of hundreds of potential jurors throughout their regions with a memorandum that stated: "It would be helpful if comments could be made concerning any disreputable persons we would not want as a juror."
"This is completely illegal," said Worsoff. "We are not supposed to know anything about them."
On Tuesday, Crown attorney Karen McCleave asked Justice John McIsaac for a publication ban on the proceedings to protect the integrity of Badhwar's trial. The judge granted a temporary ban until he could hear arguments from the Crown and defence.
The same evening, after an article was published on the Internet about the issue, McCleave told the judge she would be exploring contempt charges against the publication.
She added in light of the article, all potential jurors on the jury panel list of 120 may be biased and now must be dismissed.
Yesterday, Justice McIsaac lifted the temporary ban after finding there were no grounds to keep the information from the public.
An almost identical complaint from another defence lawyer arose in court just a week earlier.
After the issue hit the headlines last week, a directive from Attorney General Chris Bentley was sent out to the region's Crowns and OPP detachments to "cease and desist" collecting any information on potential jurors, other than the name, age and whether or not they have an indictable criminal offence conviction.
Worsoff said he's wondering why he ended up with yet another "tainted" jury panel well after the directive came out.
Erin Moroz, a spokesman for Bentley, said yesterday the minister would not be commenting because the case is still before the courts.
But Worsoff said trials from past years may also be tainted.
"It's going to create a disaster in the courts," he said. "Every jury case in the past several years will now have to be looked at."
In the wake of the controversy, at least one lawyer is asking the Court of Appeal to review the case for Ibrahim Yumnu, 52, of Wasaga Beach, who was convicted in the murder of a Toronto couple who were beaten and shot near the Barrie Drive Inn in 2002.
The Toronto Sun
By TRACY MCLAUGHLIN, SPECIAL TO SUN MEDIA
Last Updated: 6th June 2009, 2:44am
BARRIE -- Either the attorney general or the OPP should be charged for allowing Barrie Crown attorneys to conduct illegal searches into the backgrounds of potential jurors, a Toronto lawyer said yesterday.
"It's illegal, and it's scandalous," said Mitchell Worsoff, who asked for a mistrial for his client because he claimed the entire jury panel was "tainted".
The issue arose in a Barrie court Tuesday when Worsoff asked for a mistrial for his client, Ravi Badhwar, because he believed the jury panel was "tainted," after he learned the Crown prosecutor obtained private information on hundreds of persons who were selected as possible jurors to sit on the man's trial.
In court, Worsoff produced the list to the judge that showed names, ages and occupations of more than 200 potential jurors.
Beside many of the names, handwritten notations were made.
"Suicidal in 2001" was written beside the name of retired manager from Collingwood.
Under present law to prevent a biased jury, the Crown and the defence lawyers are only allowed to know the name, age and occupation of a juror, unless they have a criminal record for an indictable offence, which would automatically exclude them as potential jurors.
"Ongoing neighbour dispute -- neighbour shot his cat," was written beside the name of a Penetanguishene man who is a machine operator.
"Witness to parent's domestic. Dad is a drinker and assaultive to her mother," was written beside the name of another woman from Victoria Harbour who is a student.
Several others on the list had drinking-and-driving convictions beside their names -- which is not an indictable offence.
Another man from Perkinsfield had "calls for minor complaints" as a notation.
In court, Worsoff produced another document endorsed by Barrie's deputy Crown attorney Mike Minns, that was sent to OPP detachments in Collingwood, Huronia West, Midland, Nottawasaga, Orillia and Southern Georgian Bay.
It was attached to a list containing the names of hundreds of potential jurors throughout their regions with a memorandum that stated: "It would be helpful if comments could be made concerning any disreputable persons we would not want as a juror."
"This is completely illegal," said Worsoff. "We are not supposed to know anything about them."
On Tuesday, Crown attorney Karen McCleave asked Justice John McIsaac for a publication ban on the proceedings to protect the integrity of Badhwar's trial. The judge granted a temporary ban until he could hear arguments from the Crown and defence.
The same evening, after an article was published on the Internet about the issue, McCleave told the judge she would be exploring contempt charges against the publication.
She added in light of the article, all potential jurors on the jury panel list of 120 may be biased and now must be dismissed.
Yesterday, Justice McIsaac lifted the temporary ban after finding there were no grounds to keep the information from the public.
An almost identical complaint from another defence lawyer arose in court just a week earlier.
After the issue hit the headlines last week, a directive from Attorney General Chris Bentley was sent out to the region's Crowns and OPP detachments to "cease and desist" collecting any information on potential jurors, other than the name, age and whether or not they have an indictable criminal offence conviction.
Worsoff said he's wondering why he ended up with yet another "tainted" jury panel well after the directive came out.
Erin Moroz, a spokesman for Bentley, said yesterday the minister would not be commenting because the case is still before the courts.
But Worsoff said trials from past years may also be tainted.
"It's going to create a disaster in the courts," he said. "Every jury case in the past several years will now have to be looked at."
In the wake of the controversy, at least one lawyer is asking the Court of Appeal to review the case for Ibrahim Yumnu, 52, of Wasaga Beach, who was convicted in the murder of a Toronto couple who were beaten and shot near the Barrie Drive Inn in 2002.
The Toronto Sun
Friday, June 5, 2009
MPs call for Dhalla nanny investigation
Probe abuse allegations: Committee
June 05, 2009
Dale Brazao
The federal and provincial governments should investigate allegations by caregivers that they were mistreated and abused while working at MP Ruby Dhalla's home, a Commons committee has recommended.
While stopping short of calling for a police investigation the report recommends, "the authorized bodies in the provincial and federal governments investigate allegations of the former live-in caregivers in the Dhalla residence and take measures as appropriate."
The 31-page report of the Citizenship and Immigration committee recounts the allegations of abuse made by caregivers Magdalene Gordo, 31, and Richelyn Tongson, 35, while working at the Mississauga home shared by Dhalla, the 35-year-old MP for Brampton-Springdale, her mother Tavinder and her brother, Neil.
The allegations were first reported in a Toronto Star investigation last month after the two Filipino nannies came forward saying they were interviewed and hired by Dhalla to look after her mother, but ended up working long hours in non-caregiving jobs, such as shining shoes, washing cars, shovelling snow cleaning at family owned chiropractic clinics.
Both admitted to working "illegally" at the Dhalla home without proper federal approvals (commonly called LMO's) or work permits. Both alleged Dhalla had taken and held on to their passports while promising to get them the proper federal documents they needed to work legally.
"The committee regrets that such situations may occur under the live-in program," according to a draft copy of the report obtained by Torstar News Service.
Both Gordo and Tongson "expressed concern about requests for passports or holding passports purportedly for the purpose of the LMO and work permit applications," the report says.
Dhalla, who appeared before the committee shortly after the women testified offered a different version of events, and vehemently denied any mistreatment of the nannies by any member of her family.
The report categorizes her testimony as having a "different perspective."
"She denied any involvement with the employment or immigration status of the caregivers and claimed the allegations against her were false," the report says. "She addressed some of the specific claims made by the caregivers concerning pay, tasks, and passports and asserted that people entering the family home were treated well and with respect."
The investigation will likely involve the federal departments of Citizenship and Immigration, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada and Canada Border Services Agency, as well as well as the provincial labour department as the allegations made by the caregivers touch on all these jurisdictions, a source told Torstar News Service.
HRSDC processes requests from Canadian residents wishing to hire a foreign caregiver. The Immigration department hands out the work permits necessary before they can began working in a home. But it is up to the provinces to enforce labour laws as it relates to hours of work, minimum wage, days off and overtime.
The federal live in caregiver program is governed by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act which calls for maximum penalties of two years in jail and $50,000 fine for anyone "employs a foreign national in a capacity in which the foreign national is not authorized under this Act to be employed."
Ignorance of the law is no excuse and "a person who fails to exercise due diligence to determine whether employment is authorized under this Act is deemed to know it not authorized."
Reached for comment yesterday, Magdalene Gordo said she welcomed the investigation.
"I have endured a lot of emotional trauma since I went public with this, but I felt I was doing the right thing to improve the working conditions for all caregivers working in Canada."
"I am confident the truth will prevail, and we have told the truth."
The Spec
June 05, 2009
Dale Brazao
The federal and provincial governments should investigate allegations by caregivers that they were mistreated and abused while working at MP Ruby Dhalla's home, a Commons committee has recommended.
While stopping short of calling for a police investigation the report recommends, "the authorized bodies in the provincial and federal governments investigate allegations of the former live-in caregivers in the Dhalla residence and take measures as appropriate."
The 31-page report of the Citizenship and Immigration committee recounts the allegations of abuse made by caregivers Magdalene Gordo, 31, and Richelyn Tongson, 35, while working at the Mississauga home shared by Dhalla, the 35-year-old MP for Brampton-Springdale, her mother Tavinder and her brother, Neil.
The allegations were first reported in a Toronto Star investigation last month after the two Filipino nannies came forward saying they were interviewed and hired by Dhalla to look after her mother, but ended up working long hours in non-caregiving jobs, such as shining shoes, washing cars, shovelling snow cleaning at family owned chiropractic clinics.
Both admitted to working "illegally" at the Dhalla home without proper federal approvals (commonly called LMO's) or work permits. Both alleged Dhalla had taken and held on to their passports while promising to get them the proper federal documents they needed to work legally.
"The committee regrets that such situations may occur under the live-in program," according to a draft copy of the report obtained by Torstar News Service.
Both Gordo and Tongson "expressed concern about requests for passports or holding passports purportedly for the purpose of the LMO and work permit applications," the report says.
Dhalla, who appeared before the committee shortly after the women testified offered a different version of events, and vehemently denied any mistreatment of the nannies by any member of her family.
The report categorizes her testimony as having a "different perspective."
"She denied any involvement with the employment or immigration status of the caregivers and claimed the allegations against her were false," the report says. "She addressed some of the specific claims made by the caregivers concerning pay, tasks, and passports and asserted that people entering the family home were treated well and with respect."
The investigation will likely involve the federal departments of Citizenship and Immigration, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada and Canada Border Services Agency, as well as well as the provincial labour department as the allegations made by the caregivers touch on all these jurisdictions, a source told Torstar News Service.
HRSDC processes requests from Canadian residents wishing to hire a foreign caregiver. The Immigration department hands out the work permits necessary before they can began working in a home. But it is up to the provinces to enforce labour laws as it relates to hours of work, minimum wage, days off and overtime.
The federal live in caregiver program is governed by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act which calls for maximum penalties of two years in jail and $50,000 fine for anyone "employs a foreign national in a capacity in which the foreign national is not authorized under this Act to be employed."
Ignorance of the law is no excuse and "a person who fails to exercise due diligence to determine whether employment is authorized under this Act is deemed to know it not authorized."
Reached for comment yesterday, Magdalene Gordo said she welcomed the investigation.
"I have endured a lot of emotional trauma since I went public with this, but I felt I was doing the right thing to improve the working conditions for all caregivers working in Canada."
"I am confident the truth will prevail, and we have told the truth."
The Spec
Thursday, June 4, 2009
OPP asks if tow-truck firms paid off policeman!
I can't help but snicker at this situation as a whole, right from the very night that the Manchesters were killed in a collision in Conservative Frank Klees riding to Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer being charged last week, The whole thing stinks!
It was only after the legislation was passed that it became known that Mr. Manchester was twice over the legal limit that night, that left his daughter an orphan, whom became a poster child for BILL203
In my opinion, this SGT who is Suspended with pay until he's found guilty in a court of law, not on the side of the road, like his victims, is just the tip of the iceberg!
Jun 04, 2009 04:30 AM
Kenyon Wallace
Staff Reporter
The OPP is investigating whether a senior officer at the force's Port Credit detachment received kickbacks from tow-truck drivers after motorists had their vehicles impounded, according to towing companies interviewed by police.
Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer, 49, was arrested and charged last week with three counts of breach of trust and one count of attempting to obstruct justice after an investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police Professional Standards Bureau.
The OPP says Mahoney-Bruer, a 12-year member of the force, allegedly used false evidence to lay charges last month against three drivers, two of whom had their cars impounded.
He has not been charged with accepting kickbacks. However, owners and managers of Mississauga towing companies say OPP detectives have been asking them if they had ever paid Mahoney-Bruer to use their services or heard about Mahoney-Bruer allegedly receiving kickbacks from other towing companies.
The officer has been suspended from duty with pay.
Mahoney-Bruer's lawyer, Harry Black, declined to comment to the Star about the case. Several phone calls to Mahoney-Bruer's Burlington home were not returned. Attempts to speak to Mahoney-Bruer in person at his home were unsuccessful.
The charges against Mahoney-Bruer stem from three incidents in May in which one driver was charged with speeding and two drivers were charged with "stunt" driving – travelling 50 kilometres an hour over the speed limit.
Under the Highway Traffic Act, motorists caught travelling 50 kilometres over the speed limit face a mandatory seven-day licence suspension and roadside vehicle seizure, in addition to fines between $2,000 and $10,000. Add to that the cost of towing and storage, and a potential increase to insurance rates.
Introduced in October 2007, the law was hailed by OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino as a tough measure to combat dangerous driving.
Critics say the legislation gives police too much power, allowing them to find drivers guilty before they have a chance to fight the charge in court.
In court documents, Mahoney-Bruer has been told not to communicate with six people, including Mark Bell and Doug Polus.
Bell owns Atlantic Towing and Polus runs Elite Towing, both in Mississauga.
When contacted yesterday, Bell said he didn't know why his name was on the court documents, but suggested it was because he owns "one of the biggest towing companies in Mississauga."
He said he had been interviewed by police, but was not asked about whether money changed hands.
"They asked me how many tows I did for that guy (Mahoney-Bruer) in a certain amount of time," Bell said. "But let me just make something very clear to you. All of it's rumour and there's no facts. I know nothing about it and it doesn't involve our company."
Polus said he has "no clue" why his name appears in Mahoney-Bruer's court documents, and said he had not been interviewed by police.
Other tow truck companies in Mississauga say they too were visited by detectives prior to the charges being laid against Mahoney-Bruer.
"Investigators came to my shop from the OPP asking about him (Mahoney-Bruer)," said Joe Mghraye, owner of Affordable Towing. "They asked me if I ever gave Mahoney cash. It never happened. They asked me, `Have you ever seen other companies doing that?' I said no."
Lisa Goncalves, a manager at Abrams Towing Services, said OPP detectives interviewed her last week and asked her if the company had ever paid money to Mahoney-Bruer for using the company's towing services. She said no.
According to the OPP, Mahoney-Bruer's full name is Leslie Dennis Mahoney-Bruer.
A Toronto Police Service spokesperson said yesterday that Leslie Mahoney-Bruer worked for the force as a traffic services officer but resigned in October 1997.
OPP spokesperson Insp. Dave Ross said police are working with the Crown to withdraw charges laid against the three drivers by Mahoney-Bruer.
Ross said the force is also reviewing other charges where Mahoney-Bruer was involved as an investigator, but "we haven't yet determined the scope of that review."
In a statement released last week, Fantino said he was "very disappointed" by the outcome of the OPP Professional Standards Bureau investigation.
"It was important for the OPP to initiate an immediate investigation and a comprehensive review, with the intent to bolster safeguards, to prevent similar situations in the future," Fantino said. "I believe that the public trust is a fundamental cornerstone of the OPP and policing."
Mahoney-Bruer will appear in a Brampton court on July 13.
The Toronto Star
It was only after the legislation was passed that it became known that Mr. Manchester was twice over the legal limit that night, that left his daughter an orphan, whom became a poster child for BILL203
In my opinion, this SGT who is Suspended with pay until he's found guilty in a court of law, not on the side of the road, like his victims, is just the tip of the iceberg!
Jun 04, 2009 04:30 AM
Kenyon Wallace
Staff Reporter
The OPP is investigating whether a senior officer at the force's Port Credit detachment received kickbacks from tow-truck drivers after motorists had their vehicles impounded, according to towing companies interviewed by police.
Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer, 49, was arrested and charged last week with three counts of breach of trust and one count of attempting to obstruct justice after an investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police Professional Standards Bureau.
The OPP says Mahoney-Bruer, a 12-year member of the force, allegedly used false evidence to lay charges last month against three drivers, two of whom had their cars impounded.
He has not been charged with accepting kickbacks. However, owners and managers of Mississauga towing companies say OPP detectives have been asking them if they had ever paid Mahoney-Bruer to use their services or heard about Mahoney-Bruer allegedly receiving kickbacks from other towing companies.
The officer has been suspended from duty with pay.
Mahoney-Bruer's lawyer, Harry Black, declined to comment to the Star about the case. Several phone calls to Mahoney-Bruer's Burlington home were not returned. Attempts to speak to Mahoney-Bruer in person at his home were unsuccessful.
The charges against Mahoney-Bruer stem from three incidents in May in which one driver was charged with speeding and two drivers were charged with "stunt" driving – travelling 50 kilometres an hour over the speed limit.
Under the Highway Traffic Act, motorists caught travelling 50 kilometres over the speed limit face a mandatory seven-day licence suspension and roadside vehicle seizure, in addition to fines between $2,000 and $10,000. Add to that the cost of towing and storage, and a potential increase to insurance rates.
Introduced in October 2007, the law was hailed by OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino as a tough measure to combat dangerous driving.
Critics say the legislation gives police too much power, allowing them to find drivers guilty before they have a chance to fight the charge in court.
In court documents, Mahoney-Bruer has been told not to communicate with six people, including Mark Bell and Doug Polus.
Bell owns Atlantic Towing and Polus runs Elite Towing, both in Mississauga.
When contacted yesterday, Bell said he didn't know why his name was on the court documents, but suggested it was because he owns "one of the biggest towing companies in Mississauga."
He said he had been interviewed by police, but was not asked about whether money changed hands.
"They asked me how many tows I did for that guy (Mahoney-Bruer) in a certain amount of time," Bell said. "But let me just make something very clear to you. All of it's rumour and there's no facts. I know nothing about it and it doesn't involve our company."
Polus said he has "no clue" why his name appears in Mahoney-Bruer's court documents, and said he had not been interviewed by police.
Other tow truck companies in Mississauga say they too were visited by detectives prior to the charges being laid against Mahoney-Bruer.
"Investigators came to my shop from the OPP asking about him (Mahoney-Bruer)," said Joe Mghraye, owner of Affordable Towing. "They asked me if I ever gave Mahoney cash. It never happened. They asked me, `Have you ever seen other companies doing that?' I said no."
Lisa Goncalves, a manager at Abrams Towing Services, said OPP detectives interviewed her last week and asked her if the company had ever paid money to Mahoney-Bruer for using the company's towing services. She said no.
According to the OPP, Mahoney-Bruer's full name is Leslie Dennis Mahoney-Bruer.
A Toronto Police Service spokesperson said yesterday that Leslie Mahoney-Bruer worked for the force as a traffic services officer but resigned in October 1997.
OPP spokesperson Insp. Dave Ross said police are working with the Crown to withdraw charges laid against the three drivers by Mahoney-Bruer.
Ross said the force is also reviewing other charges where Mahoney-Bruer was involved as an investigator, but "we haven't yet determined the scope of that review."
In a statement released last week, Fantino said he was "very disappointed" by the outcome of the OPP Professional Standards Bureau investigation.
"It was important for the OPP to initiate an immediate investigation and a comprehensive review, with the intent to bolster safeguards, to prevent similar situations in the future," Fantino said. "I believe that the public trust is a fundamental cornerstone of the OPP and policing."
Mahoney-Bruer will appear in a Brampton court on July 13.
The Toronto Star
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Minister orders review of spending at eHealth Ontario
First comes the review, then comes the inquiry!
The Ontario government has ordered an independent review of spending at eHealth Ontario in the wake of CBC News reports that the agency awarded nearly $5 million in untendered contracts.
Health Minister David Caplan said he asked for the third-party audit to make sure the agency was following best management practices.
"I thought that there were enough questions and enough areas where we needed more information and we needed expert advice," said Caplan.
EHealth Ontario says it has directed PricewaterhouseCoopers to perform the audit into the organization's procurement and employment practices, as well as any other related spending issues.
"We look forward to the completion of this work on an expedited basis," said Dr. Alan Hudson, who serves as the agency's board chair.
CBC News obtained documents last Wednesday that showed eHealth Ontario CEO Sarah Kramer had doled out about $4.8 million in contracts during the agency's first four months of operation without opening up the contracts to competitive bids.
Documents also showed Kramer was awarded a six-figure bonus after her first few months, spent $51,500 on her office furniture, hired two consultants who live in Alberta and an executive assistant who costs about $1,700 a day.
One consultant, who charged $300 an hour, billed the agency for reading a New York Times article, reviewing Kramer's holiday voicemail greeting and a debriefing that took place during a chat on the Toronto subway system.
NDP questions board's role in review
Last week, Caplan's response to news of eHealth's questionable spending was markedly different. "No rules were broken," he insisted during question period.
The health minister said he met with Hudson over the weekend and expressed his concerns.
Caplan also said he'd be meeting with Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter, who had begun looking into spending practices at eHealth late last year.
McCarter had said his review of eHealth would be included in his annual report this December.
New Democrats questioned why eHealth's board should be responsible for naming the auditor to review its own spending practices.
"It's a bit frightening to think that the same board that's causing this government so much problem is still going to be responsible for this review. It's time for the minister to get involved and take responsibility for this mess," said NDP Leader Andrea Horwath.
Hudson refused requests from CBC News for an interview.
EHealth was created last September by the Liberal government when it merged the Smart Systems for Health Agency with the e-health program at the Ministry of Health.
It is tasked with creating electronic health records for all Ontarians by 2015.
CBC.CA
The Ontario government has ordered an independent review of spending at eHealth Ontario in the wake of CBC News reports that the agency awarded nearly $5 million in untendered contracts.
Health Minister David Caplan said he asked for the third-party audit to make sure the agency was following best management practices.
"I thought that there were enough questions and enough areas where we needed more information and we needed expert advice," said Caplan.
EHealth Ontario says it has directed PricewaterhouseCoopers to perform the audit into the organization's procurement and employment practices, as well as any other related spending issues.
"We look forward to the completion of this work on an expedited basis," said Dr. Alan Hudson, who serves as the agency's board chair.
CBC News obtained documents last Wednesday that showed eHealth Ontario CEO Sarah Kramer had doled out about $4.8 million in contracts during the agency's first four months of operation without opening up the contracts to competitive bids.
Documents also showed Kramer was awarded a six-figure bonus after her first few months, spent $51,500 on her office furniture, hired two consultants who live in Alberta and an executive assistant who costs about $1,700 a day.
One consultant, who charged $300 an hour, billed the agency for reading a New York Times article, reviewing Kramer's holiday voicemail greeting and a debriefing that took place during a chat on the Toronto subway system.
NDP questions board's role in review
Last week, Caplan's response to news of eHealth's questionable spending was markedly different. "No rules were broken," he insisted during question period.
The health minister said he met with Hudson over the weekend and expressed his concerns.
Caplan also said he'd be meeting with Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter, who had begun looking into spending practices at eHealth late last year.
McCarter had said his review of eHealth would be included in his annual report this December.
New Democrats questioned why eHealth's board should be responsible for naming the auditor to review its own spending practices.
"It's a bit frightening to think that the same board that's causing this government so much problem is still going to be responsible for this review. It's time for the minister to get involved and take responsibility for this mess," said NDP Leader Andrea Horwath.
Hudson refused requests from CBC News for an interview.
EHealth was created last September by the Liberal government when it merged the Smart Systems for Health Agency with the e-health program at the Ministry of Health.
It is tasked with creating electronic health records for all Ontarians by 2015.
CBC.CA
Saturday, May 30, 2009
OPP Officer Charged For Allegedly Falsifying Traffic Stops
facebook photo
Another OPP SGT charged, this all around stand up guy, great community leader is suspended with PAY, this officer has his day in court July 13th, Unlike his Victims whom had their trial on the side of the road!
If you think you were unfairly stopped by this officer and have a complaint to make, call (905) 278-6131
Friday May 29, 2009
CityNews.ca Staff
The OPP have arrested and suspended one of their own, after an officer was accused of laying charges against three different drivers for speeding or violating the new street racing law based on false evidence.
One was accused of exceeding the posted limit, while the other two were alleged to have violated the province's street racing law and had their licences suspended and their cars temporarily seized. The OPP Professional Standards Bureau won't say how they came across the accusations but admits all charges against the trio have since been withdrawn.
Insp. Dave Ross won't say what the motive might have been.
The allegations make other stops Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer may have been involved with suspect as well and a review of all his past cases is underway. Ross tells CityNews.ca that could keep investigators busy for a while - as many as 200 provincial cases and 50 criminal cases are being given a second look.
The 49-year-old cop has been a member of the force for 12 years and is based in Port Credit. His primary patrol area is the QEW and Highway 403.
The accused has been suspended from duty with pay and will appear in a Brampton court on July 13th. He's charged with three counts of breach of trust and one of obstructing justice.
Commissioner Julian Fantino, often cited as a 'cop's cop,' is disappointed by the outcome but says it's vital the public knows he won't stand for anything untoward in the ranks.
"It was important for the OPP to initiate an immediate investigation and a comprehensive review, with the intent to bolster safeguards, to prevent similar situations in the future," he notes in a statement. "I believe that the public trust is a fundamental cornerstone of the OPP and policing."
If you think you were unfairly stopped by this officer and have a complaint to make, call (905) 278-6131.
CityNews
Withdrawn charges can stay on record, court rules
Scary stuff in the POLICE STATE of Ontario
Man says police check with false accusations ruined job prospects
Tracey Tyler
LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER
The stigma of being accused of a criminal offence is almost impossible to escape, a Mississauga man learned yesterday when Ontario's highest court ruled police could disseminate information about charges that were laid against him, but later withdrawn.
The man, a former group home operator in his 60s who has never been convicted of a crime, said his employment chances were ruined when Peel police disclosed that eight charges of sexual assault and sexual exploitation were laid against him in 2002 and later withdrawn by the Crown.
In a 3-0 decision yesterday, the Ontario Court of Appeal set aside an injunction issued by a Toronto trial judge two years ago, which restrained police from referring to the withdrawn charges when providing information for background checks conducted for the man's prospective employers.
The ruling has the potential to affect a large number of people. A one-day snapshot from a police database in 2005, obtained by the Star for its Crime and Punishment series last year, revealed the Canadian Police Information Centre had some 500,000 records for people without convictions. They included records for people who were acquitted as well as those whose charges were stayed or withdrawn.
Even if withdrawn charges included in reports from record checks were based on false allegations, a person applying for a job still has an opportunity to explain these circumstances to a would-be employer, said Justices Marc Rosenberg and Kathryn Feldman, who co-authored the court's decision.
But Clayton Ruby, one of the lawyers representing the former group-home operator, said the truth is that employers faced with two or more equally qualified job applicants will not hire the person who was once charged with a crime, even if they are entirely innocent.
"Essentially, it (the court's ruling) condemns people who have had charges withdrawn, innocent people, to second-class status on the employment market," Ruby said.
In an affidavit, his client said the charges were "false and without merit" and he described the group home as his sole source of income. When the charges were withdrawn in 2003, he agreed to enter into a peace bond that temporarily prohibited him from being in the company of anyone younger than 14.
The following year, he applied for work at other group homes and as a counsellor, was required to undergo police checks. He signed forms authorizing Toronto police to conduct a criminal records search, as well as a "vulnerable persons search" – which allowed the force to comb through national and local data banks. Peel police forwarded its information about the withdrawn charges to Toronto.
But in a decision last year, Superior Court Justice William Somers said disclosing information about withdrawn charges was not authorized by statute and seemed to be just a practice or custom, one that had "a basic unfairness" about it.
Although the man signed forms consenting to the search and disclosure of information, the forms didn't specify that withdrawn charges might be included in information and he may well have expected that to remain private, Somers said. The appeal court yesterday, however, accepted Peel police arguments that there were good reasons for believing the man knew information about the withdrawn charges could be disclosed.
After receiving the results of the criminal records search, the man was asked to consent to another search – the "vulnerable persons search" – that would have signalled that information other than a criminal record could be disseminated.
As well, the man kept applying for record checks after having been turned down for jobs. Even if he didn't initially know the withdrawn charges would be mentioned in the police reports, "he certainly knew once he received the reports and once he was turned down for the social work jobs he was applying for."
The Toronto Star
Man says police check with false accusations ruined job prospects
Tracey Tyler
LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER
The stigma of being accused of a criminal offence is almost impossible to escape, a Mississauga man learned yesterday when Ontario's highest court ruled police could disseminate information about charges that were laid against him, but later withdrawn.
The man, a former group home operator in his 60s who has never been convicted of a crime, said his employment chances were ruined when Peel police disclosed that eight charges of sexual assault and sexual exploitation were laid against him in 2002 and later withdrawn by the Crown.
In a 3-0 decision yesterday, the Ontario Court of Appeal set aside an injunction issued by a Toronto trial judge two years ago, which restrained police from referring to the withdrawn charges when providing information for background checks conducted for the man's prospective employers.
The ruling has the potential to affect a large number of people. A one-day snapshot from a police database in 2005, obtained by the Star for its Crime and Punishment series last year, revealed the Canadian Police Information Centre had some 500,000 records for people without convictions. They included records for people who were acquitted as well as those whose charges were stayed or withdrawn.
Even if withdrawn charges included in reports from record checks were based on false allegations, a person applying for a job still has an opportunity to explain these circumstances to a would-be employer, said Justices Marc Rosenberg and Kathryn Feldman, who co-authored the court's decision.
But Clayton Ruby, one of the lawyers representing the former group-home operator, said the truth is that employers faced with two or more equally qualified job applicants will not hire the person who was once charged with a crime, even if they are entirely innocent.
"Essentially, it (the court's ruling) condemns people who have had charges withdrawn, innocent people, to second-class status on the employment market," Ruby said.
In an affidavit, his client said the charges were "false and without merit" and he described the group home as his sole source of income. When the charges were withdrawn in 2003, he agreed to enter into a peace bond that temporarily prohibited him from being in the company of anyone younger than 14.
The following year, he applied for work at other group homes and as a counsellor, was required to undergo police checks. He signed forms authorizing Toronto police to conduct a criminal records search, as well as a "vulnerable persons search" – which allowed the force to comb through national and local data banks. Peel police forwarded its information about the withdrawn charges to Toronto.
But in a decision last year, Superior Court Justice William Somers said disclosing information about withdrawn charges was not authorized by statute and seemed to be just a practice or custom, one that had "a basic unfairness" about it.
Although the man signed forms consenting to the search and disclosure of information, the forms didn't specify that withdrawn charges might be included in information and he may well have expected that to remain private, Somers said. The appeal court yesterday, however, accepted Peel police arguments that there were good reasons for believing the man knew information about the withdrawn charges could be disclosed.
After receiving the results of the criminal records search, the man was asked to consent to another search – the "vulnerable persons search" – that would have signalled that information other than a criminal record could be disseminated.
As well, the man kept applying for record checks after having been turned down for jobs. Even if he didn't initially know the withdrawn charges would be mentioned in the police reports, "he certainly knew once he received the reports and once he was turned down for the social work jobs he was applying for."
The Toronto Star
Friday, May 29, 2009
'Bury' new tax, McGuinty told
Why would he bury it, when everybody likes this NEW TAX according to his Finance Minister Dwight Duncan!
Mr Duncan, do the sensible thing and follow Mr. Bryant, Rumor has it that Toronto is looking for a project leader for painting the yellow lines down Jarvis St.
Premier faces pressure from fellow Liberals to embed blended levy in prices next year
May 28, 2009 04:30 AM
Robert Benzie
Queen's Park Bureau Chief
The Liberal government is struggling over whether to bury Premier Dalton McGuinty's new 13 per cent harmonized sales tax in the price tags of goods and services, sources told the Toronto Star.
Insiders say there is mounting pressure on McGuinty to follow the lead of such places as the United Kingdom, where the price tags on items displayed in shops incorporate the retail price and a 15 per cent value-added tax.
The Liberals have had difficulty marketing the tax change, which is designed to be business friendly and enable Ontario to better compete with jurisdictions already boasting harmonized taxes, such as Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.
Some Liberals are urging the premier to embed the HST, which will combine the 8 per cent provincial sales tax and the 5 per cent GST, in prices after it takes effect July 1, 2010.
Proponents of incorporating the tax into price tags argue it would simplify things for consumers and businesses alike so a product or service labelled $10 would actually cost that – rather than $11.30.
A post-budget analysis by the law firm Blakes predicts the HST "will likely have less of a psychological impact on consumers if tax-inclusive pricing is adopted (i.e., if the sticker price is the final sale price)" – a consideration unlikely to be lost on a government that has been scrambling for a way to sell the tax to dubious Ontarians.
A Star-Nanos Research poll published May 16 found 67 per cent of people polled have a negative view of the melded tax compared with 23 per cent who see it as positive and 10 per cent who are unsure.
Other Liberals, however, are concerned "tax-inclusive pricing" would only highlight how much more goods and services are costing after the HST is implemented, which could hurt in the 2011 election.
McGuinty confirmed yesterday that the change is on his radar.
"That's something that's been talked about," the premier said. "It's not something that's been actively considered at this point in time. It wasn't part of our original proposal," he said before pointedly leaving open the possibility of just such a move. "It might end up being there. But what ... I certainly made clear that, whatever we do, we'd want transparency to be there."
When Ottawa in 1991 replaced the manufacturers' tax, which was included in price tags, with the GST, the visibility of the new levy was touted as a benefit.
Despite growing anxiety within the government, the premier and Finance Minister Dwight Duncan are insisting any pricing revamp would have to indicate the amount of HST.
To get around criticism of gouging, two figures could be printed on a price tag: the retail price and the price including the 13 per cent HST.
"What I mean ... by transparency is even if you go shopping ... you'd have the final price right there in front of you like they do in the U.K.," said the premier. "But also we'd want to have made visible in that final price the actual tax that you're paying."
Duncan, who unveiled the melding of the provincial and federal consumption taxes in the March 26 budget, said "people have to see what the harmonized tax will be.
"Both in my view on the price tag and on the receipt," he said, adding "you could have both" prices on a retail product.
Boosters of an all-inclusive price tag also argue a switch to "what-you-see-is-what-you-get" pricing, which would require federal legislation, might force businesses to pass along savings realized after the taxes are streamlined.
Because pricing is a finely honed craft, there would be more of an onus on businesses to keep prices reasonable to remain competitive.
"This lets the marketplace decide. Business costs will be lower, the tax on take-home pay will be lower," one insider said.
The Retail Council of Canada warned Feb. 17 that "practices for the pricing of merchandise must be a business decision, not a government decision, and should not be legislated."
Blakes' report published April 1 said if Ontario adapted an embedded tax, other provinces with harmonized sales taxes would likely follow suit.
The Toronto Star
Mr Duncan, do the sensible thing and follow Mr. Bryant, Rumor has it that Toronto is looking for a project leader for painting the yellow lines down Jarvis St.
Premier faces pressure from fellow Liberals to embed blended levy in prices next year
May 28, 2009 04:30 AM
Robert Benzie
Queen's Park Bureau Chief
The Liberal government is struggling over whether to bury Premier Dalton McGuinty's new 13 per cent harmonized sales tax in the price tags of goods and services, sources told the Toronto Star.
Insiders say there is mounting pressure on McGuinty to follow the lead of such places as the United Kingdom, where the price tags on items displayed in shops incorporate the retail price and a 15 per cent value-added tax.
The Liberals have had difficulty marketing the tax change, which is designed to be business friendly and enable Ontario to better compete with jurisdictions already boasting harmonized taxes, such as Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.
Some Liberals are urging the premier to embed the HST, which will combine the 8 per cent provincial sales tax and the 5 per cent GST, in prices after it takes effect July 1, 2010.
Proponents of incorporating the tax into price tags argue it would simplify things for consumers and businesses alike so a product or service labelled $10 would actually cost that – rather than $11.30.
A post-budget analysis by the law firm Blakes predicts the HST "will likely have less of a psychological impact on consumers if tax-inclusive pricing is adopted (i.e., if the sticker price is the final sale price)" – a consideration unlikely to be lost on a government that has been scrambling for a way to sell the tax to dubious Ontarians.
A Star-Nanos Research poll published May 16 found 67 per cent of people polled have a negative view of the melded tax compared with 23 per cent who see it as positive and 10 per cent who are unsure.
Other Liberals, however, are concerned "tax-inclusive pricing" would only highlight how much more goods and services are costing after the HST is implemented, which could hurt in the 2011 election.
McGuinty confirmed yesterday that the change is on his radar.
"That's something that's been talked about," the premier said. "It's not something that's been actively considered at this point in time. It wasn't part of our original proposal," he said before pointedly leaving open the possibility of just such a move. "It might end up being there. But what ... I certainly made clear that, whatever we do, we'd want transparency to be there."
When Ottawa in 1991 replaced the manufacturers' tax, which was included in price tags, with the GST, the visibility of the new levy was touted as a benefit.
Despite growing anxiety within the government, the premier and Finance Minister Dwight Duncan are insisting any pricing revamp would have to indicate the amount of HST.
To get around criticism of gouging, two figures could be printed on a price tag: the retail price and the price including the 13 per cent HST.
"What I mean ... by transparency is even if you go shopping ... you'd have the final price right there in front of you like they do in the U.K.," said the premier. "But also we'd want to have made visible in that final price the actual tax that you're paying."
Duncan, who unveiled the melding of the provincial and federal consumption taxes in the March 26 budget, said "people have to see what the harmonized tax will be.
"Both in my view on the price tag and on the receipt," he said, adding "you could have both" prices on a retail product.
Boosters of an all-inclusive price tag also argue a switch to "what-you-see-is-what-you-get" pricing, which would require federal legislation, might force businesses to pass along savings realized after the taxes are streamlined.
Because pricing is a finely honed craft, there would be more of an onus on businesses to keep prices reasonable to remain competitive.
"This lets the marketplace decide. Business costs will be lower, the tax on take-home pay will be lower," one insider said.
The Retail Council of Canada warned Feb. 17 that "practices for the pricing of merchandise must be a business decision, not a government decision, and should not be legislated."
Blakes' report published April 1 said if Ontario adapted an embedded tax, other provinces with harmonized sales taxes would likely follow suit.
The Toronto Star
Thursday, May 28, 2009
McGuinty at his finest!!
I just love how our tax dollars get pissed away and Daddy Dalton gets all concerned!
Government concerned by eHealth spending: McGuinty
Premier's concern 'cold comfort' for taxpayers: Runciman
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty admitted his government is concerned with news of nearly $5 million in untendered contracts by newly minted eHealth Ontario and wants to speed up a review of their spending practices.
In the face of sharp criticism from opposition parties at Queen's Park Thursday, McGuinty responded, "This is a concern to us, as well."
"There are some facts that have been brought to the fore which do not sit easy with us," he added.
CBC News reported Wednesday that eHealth Ontario CEO Sarah Kramer approved about $4.8 million in contracts without opening up the deals to outside bidders during the first four months of the agency's operation.
"This is your appointee, this is your agency. To say that you're concerned is cold comfort, I would think, to taxpayers," interim Progressive Conservative Leader Bob Runciman replied to McGuinty in the legislature.
Late last September, McGuinty announced the creation of eHealth to set up to create a digital record system by 2015 to allow health-care providers to electronically share patient information.
It was formed as a merger of an e-health program at the Ministry of Health and Long-term Care and Smart Systems for Health Agency (SSHA), an organization that had come under criticism for spending on consultants and for lacking a strategic plan.
"The very reason that we want to move ahead with an electronic health record system in Ontario is to deliver better health care by finding greater efficiencies and being more respectful of the Ontario taxpayer dollar," McGuinty said in the legislature.
Workers fired for challenging procurement: sources
New information also surfaced Thursday that nine senior eHealth employees — including the acting director of procurement and chief legal counsel — were fired between December and March. Sources told CBC News that some of them had challenged the agency's tendering practices.
Kramer denied the allegations, saying workers were let go due to skill-based reasons and said the agency has encouraged its workers to express any concerns they have.
The eHealth CEO has defended the agency's procurement policy as justified because of the rapid transition process from SSHA to eHealth.
"We needed to turn a big ship around very quickly. If you don't turn a big ship around quickly, it'll be 2015 and we'll be floating out to sea," Kramer said.
She wouldn't speak to specifics about questions raised about bills obtained by CBC News showing an executive assistant hired for $213 per hour, or about $1,700 a day.
Ontario's auditor general is currently investigating spending at eHealth and its predecessor, SSHA, with plans to unveil his findings in a December annual report.
But McGuinty said he welcomes recommendations "sooner rather than later" from the auditor general.
Documents show Kramer earns a base salary of $380,000 and received a $114,000 bonus in March, about five months after her start date.
The next month, Kramer announced in a memo that the company was cutting back on employee bonuses.
Kramer's expenditures also came under scrutiny in April when opposition members complained she spent $51,500 on office furniture.
Documents also raised concerns about two of eHealth's consultants who are listed as senior vice-presidents and commute to Toronto on a regular basis from their homes in Alberta, at a cost of $1.5 million a year for flights, accommodation and per diems.
Another consultant, who charged $300 an hour, billed the agency for reading a New York Times article, reviewing Kramer's holiday voicemail greeting and a debriefing that took place during a chat on the Toronto subway system.
Asked whether Kramer got value for some of the questioned expenses, she replied, "I do think I got value for money and the way I know is everything that we wanted to get done got done on time, on budget, and in many cases much better than we hoped could be done."
cbcnews.ca
Government concerned by eHealth spending: McGuinty
Premier's concern 'cold comfort' for taxpayers: Runciman
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty admitted his government is concerned with news of nearly $5 million in untendered contracts by newly minted eHealth Ontario and wants to speed up a review of their spending practices.
In the face of sharp criticism from opposition parties at Queen's Park Thursday, McGuinty responded, "This is a concern to us, as well."
"There are some facts that have been brought to the fore which do not sit easy with us," he added.
CBC News reported Wednesday that eHealth Ontario CEO Sarah Kramer approved about $4.8 million in contracts without opening up the deals to outside bidders during the first four months of the agency's operation.
"This is your appointee, this is your agency. To say that you're concerned is cold comfort, I would think, to taxpayers," interim Progressive Conservative Leader Bob Runciman replied to McGuinty in the legislature.
Late last September, McGuinty announced the creation of eHealth to set up to create a digital record system by 2015 to allow health-care providers to electronically share patient information.
It was formed as a merger of an e-health program at the Ministry of Health and Long-term Care and Smart Systems for Health Agency (SSHA), an organization that had come under criticism for spending on consultants and for lacking a strategic plan.
"The very reason that we want to move ahead with an electronic health record system in Ontario is to deliver better health care by finding greater efficiencies and being more respectful of the Ontario taxpayer dollar," McGuinty said in the legislature.
Workers fired for challenging procurement: sources
New information also surfaced Thursday that nine senior eHealth employees — including the acting director of procurement and chief legal counsel — were fired between December and March. Sources told CBC News that some of them had challenged the agency's tendering practices.
Kramer denied the allegations, saying workers were let go due to skill-based reasons and said the agency has encouraged its workers to express any concerns they have.
The eHealth CEO has defended the agency's procurement policy as justified because of the rapid transition process from SSHA to eHealth.
"We needed to turn a big ship around very quickly. If you don't turn a big ship around quickly, it'll be 2015 and we'll be floating out to sea," Kramer said.
She wouldn't speak to specifics about questions raised about bills obtained by CBC News showing an executive assistant hired for $213 per hour, or about $1,700 a day.
Ontario's auditor general is currently investigating spending at eHealth and its predecessor, SSHA, with plans to unveil his findings in a December annual report.
But McGuinty said he welcomes recommendations "sooner rather than later" from the auditor general.
Documents show Kramer earns a base salary of $380,000 and received a $114,000 bonus in March, about five months after her start date.
The next month, Kramer announced in a memo that the company was cutting back on employee bonuses.
Kramer's expenditures also came under scrutiny in April when opposition members complained she spent $51,500 on office furniture.
Documents also raised concerns about two of eHealth's consultants who are listed as senior vice-presidents and commute to Toronto on a regular basis from their homes in Alberta, at a cost of $1.5 million a year for flights, accommodation and per diems.
Another consultant, who charged $300 an hour, billed the agency for reading a New York Times article, reviewing Kramer's holiday voicemail greeting and a debriefing that took place during a chat on the Toronto subway system.
Asked whether Kramer got value for some of the questioned expenses, she replied, "I do think I got value for money and the way I know is everything that we wanted to get done got done on time, on budget, and in many cases much better than we hoped could be done."
cbcnews.ca
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
No more taxes after HST...I promise!
They had No Choice!
They wore these or I took away thier toys for 7 days!
No kidding!
"Damn Street Racer"pays with Brusies
