Angry in the Great White North

SICEA was implemented in December of 2002, that announcement made by Jean Chretien's Industry Minister Allan Rock:

Industry Minister Allan Rock, on behalf of the Government of Canada, today announced the implementation of the $110 million Softwood Industry and Community Economic Adjustment Initiative (SICEAI), designed to address the adjustment and transition needs of forest-dependent communities across Canada.

"The communities affected by this dispute, can now begin preparing their ideas and economic development proposals to help bring hope to families in rural communities across Canada," said Minister Rock.

Herb Dhaliwal, Minister of Natural Resources, said "This initiative builds on the Government of Canada's support for the communities most affected by the softwood lumber trade dispute [with the United States, in which tarriffs were imposed], and will help these communities deal with the effects of this issue."

A call for formal project proposals was made in May of 2003, and by the June deadline, 140 communities applied for money.

The government web site makes this statement:

The national Softwood Industry Community Economic Adjustment Initiative program is funded with $110 million for 2003/2004, of which British Columbia received $50 million to support diversification projects in impacted communities.

Now this might be true, but the public accounts show that the Contribution Program for Softwood Industry and Community Economic Adjustment was funded with $24,415,385.

This might be a subcomponent of the larger program.

Now consider this. Of the $24,415,385, the subsequent breakdown showing individual grants to individual communities and associations adds up to $17,355,991, leaving $7,059,394. This might be explained by the fact that the transfer list only prints those transfers equalling $100,000 or more in value. At best, therefore, assuming every missing grant is just under $100,000 in value, there are 70 individual grants not listed. Of course, these small grants might be far less in value, suggesting far more than 70 grants are not listed.

Assuming the missing $7,059,394 went to small grants in the first place. We can't audit this.

Of the grants that are listed, 50% went to communities in Quebec, 40% to British Columbia, and 10% to Ontario. In fact, one of the largest Ontario grants went to Sunnybrook and Women's College Hospital, which is downtown Toronto. Not a lot of softwood trees in downtown Toronto. And Sunnybrook does not specialize in lumber-related accidents:

Our program areas of excellence in cancer, heart, neurosciences, orthopaedics, perinatal & gynaecology, trauma, women’s health, caring for war veterans...

Now Ontario does represent 11% of the softwood lumber exports from 1990 through to 2004, so the contributions seem to be in line. But Quebec was responsible for only 18% of exports over that same time, and yet garnered 50% of the approvals for contributions. BC is responsible for 56% of the output, but was only approved for 40% of the money. The other provinces export 15% of the total, and got nothing. (export data)

What was also intereting is the 83% of the money that went to BC went to one organization: the Community Futures Development Association of British Columbia, which in turn dispersed the money through its programs. On the other hand, the Quebec money went to individual communities, directly from the federal government.

Shades of the Sponsorship Program? A desire to make sure that the money was seen to be coming from Ottawa, with little Canadian flags on each of the cheques?

And like the Sponsorship Program, what confidence do we have that the money was well spent? Heck, I'll say it -- how do we know the money didn't get kicked back to the Liberals? I mean, they decided to send 50% of the money to a province that has 18% of the problem. A province where we already know the government was engaged in using spending programs as a means of rewarding local friends and moving money into party coffers.

Remember, no audits here.