Dingwalled

So Dave Stonewall gets his "entitlements" -- $418,000 in severance pay, half again as much as his annual salary, plus pension benefits -- literally hours before the old government hands over power to the new. How convenient: after the election is safely over, but before the incoming Tories can do anything to stop it. Perfect.

One one level, the arbitration ruling -- announced, even more conveniently, on a Saturday -- settles a mystery: was Dingwall fired, or did he, as both he and the government maintained throughout, resign of his own free will -- "to clear up his good name," if you'll recall.

Of course, that was just the start of the mystery. If he quit voluntarily, everyone naturally asked, why should he be paid severance? And if he was fired, what for? After all, both he and the government maintained he did nothing wrong. Remember the defence of his character offered in Parliament, by none other than the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister?

Well now, thanks to the arbitrator, we know that he was fired. And if, as the arbitrator has also ruled, he is entitled to severance, we can assume he was not fired for cause -- $748,000 expense accounts notwithstanding. That is, he did nothing wrong.

But if he did nothing wrong, then why was he fired? And if he was fired, then why did everyone involved deny it?

A FIRST: Daimnation is hoping the lawyers get most of the money.

A SECOND: Doublemint Dingwall! Double your pleasure, double your funds! A THIRD: Of course, after his services to their campaign, the Tories may be tempted to double the amount. BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE:

On top of that, CTV News has learned the deal was actually approved on Jan. 20, three days before Canadians voted in the federal election. The government issued a cheque to Dingwall on Friday... A senior official in the Prime Minister's Office said neither Prime Minister Paul Martin nor any other campaigning politician knew about the Dingwall settlement until Saturday, when officials in the Privy Council Office issued a news release. Government bureaucrats refused a CTV News request to view the report produced by Adams. No one in the Prime Minister's Office or the Privy Council Office would appear on camera.

Nobody knew, nobody talks. And nobody sees the report. Perfect. LOOMING SPECTOR: A former deputy minister writes:

Who decided to arbitrate Dingwall's severance? And who decided on sending the dispute to an old arbitration softie like George Adam? If it was an official who made these decisions, he/she should be demoted, if not fired. The wise course of action would have been to face Dingwall in Court -- if it came to that -- and let him explain previous statements about his departure.