On reference materials

The terms of reference for Robert Hale's investigation of the Lingenfelter membership controversy have been released. And there seems to be little doubt that the review should cover nearly everything that one could want to see examined about the incident:

1. Bob Hale shall interview persons and obtain all relevant documentation that may be necessary to assist the LCC in endeavouring to answer the following:

a) Who within the Dwain Lingenfelter Campaign had oversight and responsibility for the processing of membership applications, and in particular the subject 1100 membership applications?

b) When did Dwain Lingenfelter and the senior members of the Dwain Lingenfelter Campaign first become aware of a problem with the subject membership applications and how did they become aware of the problem?

c) What process did the Dwain Lingenfelter Campaign follow in terms of obtaining and processing the subject membership applications?

d) Who obtained the names of the applicants on the 1100 membership applications in issue and how and when were those names obtained?

e) Who completed the handwritten information on the subject 1100 membership applications, including the signatures of the purported applicants? How were the birthdates shown on the membership applications obtained?

f) Who were the individuals involved at the local level in the Meadow Lake Constituency in obtaining any of the subject 1100 membership applications? What instructions, training and/or incentives were provided to these individuals and what, if any, expectations were conveyed to them about obtaining membership applications?

g) Who handled the membership applications once received at the Dwain Lingenfelter Campaign office and what role did each play in terms of their handling of the membership applications? Did any of these individuals have any concern about the accuracy or legitimacy of the subject membership applications prior to April 30, 2009, and if so what were their concerns and to whom, if anybody, did they express them?

h) Dwain Lingenfelter has publicly stated that because of the financial "hardship" to the applicants his campaign paid for the membership fees that accompanied the submission to the NDP of the subject membership applications. How was it determined all of these 1100 applicants were financial "hardship" cases, when was it so determined, and who made that decision?

i) Dwain Lingenfelter has publicly stated that his campaign paid for the membership fees that accompanied the submission to the NDP of the subject membership applications. Payment for the subject membership applications was tendered in cash (primarily bills of $10 and $20). Why did the Dwain Lingenfelter Campaign provide payment to the NDP in cash as opposed to by cheque?

j) To ascertain the timelines and process followed by the NDP when the subject 1100 memberships were submitted to the Provincial Office?

k) How might a similar circumstance be avoided in the future?

2. Bob Hale is to provide his written report, which will include his recommendations about how to avoid a similar circumstance in the future, to the LCC by not later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday May 12, 2009, or such other date and time as the LCC may determine.

If there's any area where there might seem to be room to go further, it's in testing other memberships besides the 1100 from Meadow Lake to see if similar processes were applied anywhere else. As I noted yesterday, that would be one way of determining whether the problem was limited to the questioned memberships alone.

Based on what's now publicly known about the sequence of events at Flying Dust, though, it's more than understandable that the investigation is focused on the 1100 memberships alone for now, particularly in light of the narrow time frame involved. And the answers to the questions about the knowledge of senior campaign officials and the expectations conveyed to volunteers would offer another obvious means of tracking down any broader issues.

So for now, it looks like Hale has the authority he needs to trace exactly what happened surrounding the pulled memberships, along with the cooperation of Lingenfelter and his campaign. But the greatest question in the long run remains whether there's any possible explanation and subsequent response which can ease the obvious concerns about the Lingenfelter campaign.