XPost: can.politics, bc.politics, ab.politics   
   XPost: man.politics, sk.politics, ont.politics   
   XPost: nb.general   
   From: {~_~}@nyet.ca   
      
   huffingtonpost.com  -  03/27/2014   
      
      
     Harper Government Under Fire Over $482 Million In Outside Legal Fees   
      
      
   OTTAWA – The Conservative government has spent $482 million on outside   
   legal fees since it came to power in 2006. And more than $447,045 to   
   defend the Prime Minister, his staff and ministers, according to   
   documents tabled in the House of Commons.   
      
   “It’s just a shocking number,” Liberal MP Sean Casey told The Huffington   
   Post Canada Wednesday.   
      
   “They closed Veterans [Affairs]’ district offices and saved $5 million   
   bucks, [but] over the past eight years, they’ve spent half a billion on   
   outside lawyers. It’s pretty stark.”   
      
   Casey, the Grits’ justice critic who requested the departmental costs,   
   said the $481,927,263 spent since April 2006, and shared between 27   
   departments and their agencies, is proof of how many lawsuits and   
   appeals the Conservative government has initiated while in power.   
      
   The top spender was the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution,   
   which spent roughly $30 million a year on non-government lawyers to   
   conduct federal prosecutions for a total of $245 million.  Other   
   departments that relied heavily on outside legal services include:   
   Foreign Affairs ($80 million), Canada Revenue Agency ($40.6 million),   
   Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development ($25 million), Correctional   
   Service Canada ($17.4 million), Fisheries and Oceans ($12.2 million) and   
   Natural Resources ($9.2 million).   
      
   Although the Department of Justice employs approximately 2,500 lawyers   
   who defend the government on all types of matters, it also relies on   
   private-sector law practitioners to carry out its mandate, spokeswoman   
   Carole Saindon said Wednesday.   
      
   NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus said the government should use its very   
   large in-house legal team rather spend half a billion dollars on outside   
   law firms “while telling Canadians that the cupboard is bare.”   
      
   “It shows, I think, a disrespect for taxpayers and a disrespect for the   
   legal expertise that we have in [the bureaucracy],” he said.   
      
   Angus requested the information about the use of private legal counsel   
   by ministers and their staff.   
      
   He found that the vast majority of outside legal services used by Tory   
   cabinet ministers and those under their employ were used to defend   
   against probes by Commons’ Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson or   
   investigations by Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault, who looks   
   into abuses of the Access to Information regimen.   
      
   At Public Works and Government Services Canada, for example, $194,988   
   was paid between 2011 and 2013 to Paul K. Lepsoe, the Conservative Party   
   of Canada’s former lawyer. Lepsoe’s work was related to an ethics probe   
   involving former minister Christian Paradis as well as an investigation   
   into whether his political staff improperly interfered in the handling   
   of Access to Information requests.   
      
   “A lot of the money is being spent on ethics problems and interfering on   
   access to information,” Angus said.   
      
   “When they are using outside law firms to deal with their ethical   
   messes, I don’t think the taxpayers should be paying the extra amount   
   for it,” he added.   
      
   Angus pointed to a $10,500 fee paid to provide legal advice to David Van   
   Hemmen, the executive assistant to Nigel Wright, Harper’s former chief   
   of staff who was implicated in the Senate scandal by the RCMP.   
      
   The Prime Minister’s office, however, said it is common practice to seek   
   outside legal advice when someone employed by Crown is being challenged   
   by another part of the Crown.   
      
   “Under long-standing government policy, ministers of the Crown and their   
   staff can receive legal assistance and/or indemnification for lawsuits   
   against them within the scope of their official duties,” Harper’s   
   director of media relations Stephen Lecce wrote in an email.   
      
   Documents suggest former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin used   
   taxpayers’ money to pay for outside legal help: $20,461 for a assistance   
   with an ethical investigation and $16,214 to fight a civil action   
   brought forward by Warren Kinsella.   
      
   Aboriginal Affairs, the only department that responded to queries about   
   its outside legal fees, said it believes litigation should be a last   
   resort and noted that the majority of its legal costs – two-thirds of   
   its $106 million bill in 2012-2013 – was incurred by hiring Department   
   of Justice lawyers.   
      
   “Our government treats taxpayers’ money with the utmost respect,” said   
   Erica Meekes, the press secretary for Aboriginal Affairs Minister   
   Bernard Valcourt.   
      
   No government department conducted any studies to determine whether   
   whether it would be cheaper to employ in-house lawyers rather than hire   
   pricey outside firms, the documents show.   
      
   The Canadian Taxpayers Federation’s Gregory Thomas said he finds   
   $482-million price tag surprising.   
      
   “When you are talking about half a billion dollars on something as   
   intangible as legal fees, I think this is something that the government   
   operations committee and the public accounts committee should be doing a   
   special study of …. And they should be asking the government to justify   
   these expenses,” he said.   
      
   Several departments, such as Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird’s   
   office, which spent $14,787 in 2013 in outside legal fees, did not   
   provide any details to justify the expense, other than to say it was for   
   “Ministerial Legal Advice.”   
      
   “Because it’s legal advice, there is a cloak of silence around it. What   
   were the billing rates? How many hours were billed? How good was the   
   advice? … And what is the process for picking the law firms?” Thomas asked.   
      
   “Why doesn’t the Auditor General do an examination of the value for   
   money that taxpayers are getting for all this advice?”   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)