January 18, 2005

MPs question severance payout

George Radwanski quit as federal privacy commissioner yesterday, accepting a four-month severance package worth about $79,000 but crying foul all the way to the bank.

"I have been left with no other choice," Radwanski said in a five-page resignation statement that included his complaint that he had been unfairly treated by a parliamentary committee examining his lavish spending practices.

"I have been forced out."

Radwanski, 56, refused all interviews, saying in the prepared statement that he was "gagged" by order of the Commons committee.

But he insisted he "never intentionally misled Parliament or any of its committees, nor have I committed any other improprieties."

The agreement to accept his immediate resignation was reached after Radwanski and his legal counsel Morris Manning held "discussions" late last week and over the weekend with Privy Council Clerk Alex Himelfarb, who acts as Prime Minister Jean Chretien's deputy minister.

Jim Munson, Chretien's communications director, said Radwanski and his lawyer initiated the talks over the "possible terms of his departure," and denied any pressure or influence was exerted on Radwanski, an independent officer of Parliament who was just three years into a seven-year term.

"This was all done in the interests of preserving the integrity of the office and safeguarding the work environment of the public servants in that office," Munson said.

An order-in-council accepting Radwanski's resignation from his $210,000-a-year job and confirming the severance package was signed by Governor-General Adrienne Clarkson late yesterday.

The severance package was based on the amount of time it was estimated that Parliament would have taken to act on the pending recommendation from the standing committee on operations and estimates to fire Radwanski if the Commons and Senate did not re-convene until September as scheduled.

It equals four months' salary- $70,000 plus benefits, pegged at 13 per cent of the four months' salary, for a total of $79,100.

Already, the decision to award any compensation to the controversial former privacy commissioner is being questioned.

"Severance is supposed to be for wrongful dismissal," said Liberal MP Roy Cullen, a member of the committee. "I think Parliament and our committee has made the case he deserves to be fired. The bottom line is I don't think he's entitled to a severance package."

"It's outrageous that there should be any kind of golden handshake for this man," said New Democrat committee member Pat Martin.

Martin cited Radwanski's attempts to "mislead" the committee and "falsify" documents, as well as revelations last week that Radwanski had owed Revenue Canada more than $557,436 in unpaid taxes. Shortly before he was appointed to the office of privacy commissioner on July 27, 2000, Radwanski settled personal and business bankruptcy proceedings with a lump-sum payment of $62,726.

Officials in the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office say Radwanski did not disclose his tax arrears during the background screening process, nor did the criminal checks with the RCMP, CSIS and Revenue Canada turn up his financial picture, because no criminal tax evasion or fraud charges were ever pursued.

Now, said Martin, the involvement of the Prime Minister's Office raises even more questions.

"Radwanski's supposed to be completely arms-length, completely neutral, completely objective," Martin added. "How is it that he's negotiating some kind of a severance deal with God-knows-who, the PMO or the PCO? It helps to illustrate that there was something fundamentally wrong with this appointment to begin with."

Yesterday, events unfolded rapidly.

Radwanski was closeted in his office most of the morning with his legal staff, said one employee. At noon, an e-mail circulated announcing that the privacy commissioner had "delegated all of his powers under the Privacy Act to Gerald Neary"- a director-general of investigations in his office- the first real indication something was up.

Then, around 3: 30 p.m., staffers were directed to his resignation statement that was posted on the Internet.

"I think most people were just relieved because it's been very stressful on everyone," said Linda Charron, an employee in the privacy office. "Everyone just wanted it to be done so we could get on with our work."

The news hit the 24-hour television newscasts just as the Commons committee pondering Radwanski's fate was meeting by teleconference to review its draft report recommendation that Parliament fire him. "Someone said, 'Go to a TV, he's resigning.' And you could hear the telephones drop across the country," Martin said. "People scrambled to their TV. It was quite dramatic."

Martin said the committee still plans to release its report on Thursday.

He said Radwanski's characterization of the committee's work as a partisan witch hunt is ridiculous and when Canadians see what's in the final report "they'll understand why Parliament has lost confidence in Mr. Radwanski. He showed more judgment in resigning than he did when he was in office."

The committee will meet in Ottawa tomorrow morning to review the final draft, which had not been completed in time for yesterday's call as planned.

Reg Alcock, head of the committee, said: "I can understand he (Radwanski) wants to appear a victim but his wounds are entirely self-inflicted."

Liberal MP Judy Sgro, another committee member, said she did not buy Radwanski's defence that the restaurants in which he dined were often chosen by his guests. "If I'm inviting you to lunch and I'm paying the bill, you go to the restaurant that I can afford."