Comments on: Champagne wishes

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 08:36:00 +0000

Way to go Paul, or should I say Reggie. Always knew you could do it. Just wished I was around when the money began to roll in. Pisses me off I missed out on the parties, the Sens games, the trips, golf,and all the fun. I chose to live honestly and to think how I could have lived had I followed in your foot steps. You know who I am. Look at the sig. There is only one person knows what that means. We all admired what we thought you had done, but at the same time we knew it couldn’t be true. The real story is actually what we should have expected. You were always a thief. Remember your poker line, “I play to win”, while stealing from your best friends at cards. Nice. I should have figured it out long before anyone else did. I knew just from looking you in the face in the summer of ’98 something was up. Fact is I know you too well and your comments to Macleans are just more of the same old shenanigans. C’mon, Paul like your wife thought that you bought her a half million in jewelery and homes in Turks and Caicos and Florida on govt bonuses and it was all gotten legally. Lets see, couple million govt employees, and consultants out there and your the only one cashing those kind of cheques. Give me a break. Paul, send me some of that cash you’ve got stashed and we’ll call it even. You can find me if you look hard enough. I’ll be waiting. Thanks (remember index finger on side of nose when we make our meet)

By: gold wedding rings

gold wedding rings — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:38:17 +0000

I really don't get it. How could that happen?

By: observer

observer — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:00:14 +0000

The entire "problem" started and was "allowed" to continue in order to make budget. Spend it or lose it still persists.

By: Deep in thought

Deep in thought — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 08:35:18 +0000

So why is it people are crying the blues about our justice system?

Now, i am not in a million years going to stand up for this guy. He agreed to his salary when he took the job. If he was to be making a commission on $ saved, that should have been discussed when he is hired. As far as i am concerned, saving the government that much money was him doing his job.
The big issue to me, that i see very little discussion on, is the budget spending. I was very taken back by the comment that underspending is about as horrible as over spending because it means budget cuts. This notion causes a horrifying amount of wasteful spending, and indeed, led to this absurd scam. That issue needs some serious attention.
Just my thoughts.

By: Deep in thought

Deep in thought — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 08:34:33 +0000

I think there is really somthing sadly archaic and perhaps even beastly about human nature that seems to have us 'enjoy' watching others suffer. we know that this person did something very wrong, and for that we want them to endure suffering. Nothing good comes of it. They will not learn any lesson, as we know (basic entrly level psychology classes teach that. In addition basic entry level criminology level classes teach that stricter consequences do not influence behaviour. For example, the year after Canada stopped giving the death penalty, murder rates dropped… People were terrified suddenly everyone and their grandmother would go on killing sprees because of the absence of mega punishments – but that clearly didn't happen. Why? because when someone commits crimes they are not thinking about the negative consequences) it does not influence behaviour.
Thefore, the only real benefit to punishing people is the pleasure others experience in watching the individual being punished suffer.
Keep in mind, A) Strict consequences do not influence behaviour {Ask any criminologist). B) Punishment is a very ineffective method of changing behaviour (ask any psychologist).
more next paragraph

By: Deep in thought

Deep in thought — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 08:33:15 +0000

I am very interested in all that is getting dragged into this debate. I admittedly have some strong feelings here.

There is not much to defend here about this guy – He is a criminal. He stole money. He admit it. There is nothing noble about crime – regardless of how much money you save people along the way. Interestingly enough, i'll bet a few of these angry posters don't hate robin hood they way they hate this fellow.

What I really don't understand is the fixation with punishment in our society. Sorry folks, but it is VERY old news that punishment has very little effect on behaviour. If you spank your kid they will probably not act out until you leave the room.
'positive reinforcement' is what changes behaviour. Pull people over and give them scratch and win tickets if you see them wearing seatbelts, and suddenly the whole town is wearing seatbelts all the time – 20 years later, 19 after the scratch and win tickets are no longer being given out and people are still religiously wearing seatbelts….

More next paragraph

By: I was there

I was there — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:22:20 +0000

Champagne got results and that was the only thing that mattered. His actions saved DND $$$$$$ regardless of how it was accomplished. We may not agree but in this case

"The end justified the means".

And please, don't tell me his Superiors didn't know what was happening!

By: Pike

Pike — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:23:18 +0000

The question I have always had is where was the supervision? I work in a similar field, and the idea that someone at his level could authorize such large expenditures is staggering. Frankly, I think I already know the answer:

1) Most Military officials do not understand PS rules and procedures, and are often contemptuous of the need to do so. Such things are lumped under the term "bureaucracy", and are usually delegated to whatever level can't delegate them further.

2) DND values results above all else, and Paul Champagne got results. He made problems go away, and he did so without any messy paperwork. He was a Military manager's dream.

Bureacracy can be a pain, fair enough, but it's also bureaucracy that ensures rules are followed and taxpayers' money is safe-guarded. If even the most basic rules had been followed, Paul Champagne could not have gotten away with this.

I note that Gen Paul Hellier has some pointed comments towards "bureaucrats" in his new book, so this attitude is still pervasive. DND still has a lot of work to do if they want to ensure this doesn't happen again.

By: DND

DND — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:35:38 +0000

Flawed logic but very insightful. I don't want to defend his or DND's actions. It is ridiculous this went on this long and even more ridiculous money is spent at year-end this way.

They deserved each other.

By: Be_rad

Be_rad — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:47:46 +0000

So, in other words, the money wasn't saved. You freed it up to be spent elsewhere. Whereas if you didn't perform this magic, it would have gone unspent. Using your own logic, but reverse-engineering it, I think you owe the Canadian taxpayer a 10% fee for finding a way to spend more, don't you?

By: Be_rad

Be_rad — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:12:42 +0000

Paul, this habit you have of assuming multiple personae: did you not get it resolved with your prison psychiatrist?

Also, your petty comment gives me an opportunity to clarify my comment above. Your new Land Ark home is lovely. It was the monstrostiy in Kerscott Heights that was a gross pile of bricks. That you chose to create it in the midst of middle class family homes to lord it over them speaks volumes about your character.

Good luck in your next caper.

By: DND

DND — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:17:35 +0000

You don't seem to understand. When he came in DND was spending $200m on IT contracts. He reduced that to $50m. Thus saving $150m. per year! Therefore there was an area where other groups could have "their" year end money spent!

By: Circling the drain

Circling the drain — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:15:57 +0000

Budget money was merely diverted. Champagne took advantage of the ridiculous year end spending frenzy to divert vast amounts of money to other areas while allowing himself and his other criminal friends to take a percentage off the top.

There was no money saved. There was no money saved. There was no money saved.

By: DND

DND — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:18:02 +0000

I am not disputing that theft is wrong. I am also not trying to rationalize his actions. I am stating that overall IM budgets were drastically reduced during his tenure. DND as a Department saved a ton of money and I assume that is why this was allowed to go on so long. Obviously the Department turned a blind eye and stated "the end justified the means". It is ridiculous that "year-end" spending was handled in this fashion.

By: Circling the drain

Circling the drain — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:17:10 +0000

I'm sure you understand (or perhaps not) that the theft 140 million dollars is wrong. The facts are that nothing was saved by the department and trying to rationalize the theft is the product of a sick mind.

By: knew him well

knew him well — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:09:54 +0000

you know him well, you were probably involved

By: jealous

jealous — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:09:00 +0000

jealous loser

By: DND

DND — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:48:08 +0000

I don't like what the guy did but you are now distorting facts with your comments. It is a fact backed up by documentation that was backed by the Crown and DND that Champagne did reduce the budget dramatically during his tenure. The fact that DND's overall budget increased has nothing to do with the IM group Champagne worked for.

When you spout facts know of what you speak.

By: Circling the drain

Circling the drain — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:37:35 +0000

Champagne or his alter ego tries to make us believe that he saved DND a billion dollars or so.

No way Champ – facts prove otherwise – the accounting shows that your department's budget increased every year and it was completely spent every year – and on top of that you stole an extra 140 million.

There were no savings.

You have Antisocial personality disorder

Three or more of the following are required:

Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;

Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;

Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;

Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;

Reckless disregard for safety of self or others;

Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;

Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.

By: theory

theory — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:17:58 +0000

It is a fact he saved over a billion dollars for DND. It was stated in court and supported by the Crown counsel and DND themselves. This does not condone the theft but keeping the facts straight are important to this discussion.

I have always felt there is more to this than one guy. Seems odd this had gone on that long and no one at DND acted.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:01:38 +0000

As for saving DND money, I have not read anywhere other than in this egotistic interview that he did.

The bottom line is he stole $100 million (a deliberate act) and should have paid the piper, alittle over a year is pathetic.

By: Governmentwaste

Governmentwaste — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 23:14:19 +0000

What about the $1 billion plus he saved our troops then? Without him (I am not defending theft!!!!!) our incredible government and DND would have blown another $1billion that our troops needed. He may be a thief but he saved lots of $$$$$$$

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:18:19 +0000

The bottom line is he Screwed Our Troops ! and that is tantamount to TREASON ! ! He should have gotten a LIFE sentence.
$100 Million would have went along way buying our Troops some much needed equipment.
Did you know that our Troops when they started going to Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992, did not have enough Kevlar helmets (read the book Tarnished Brass for examples) it was apparently so bad that the Troops rotating out would leave the Kevlar helmets for the Troops rotating in.

By: Ed vanden

Ed vanden — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:14:41 +0000

Wow, … other important blind and deaf staff members must have been involved here otherwise this guy wouldn't been ended up doing time in a townhouse. Bud again, the government as an institute is a joke although we should not laugh with sick people, just pay them and you are good to go.

By: bored

bored — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:55:20 +0000

There is nothing to hide. HP settled with him as did the Government. It may not be right but it is finished. Move on.

By: bored

bored — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:53:34 +0000

It must be incredible to be so insightful and so without sin yourself. Let it go.

By: Gene Simmons

Gene Simmons — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 23:44:18 +0000

This is simple, there alot of people that want him to keep quiet. He steals $140 million and spends it like a drunkun sailour and spends only 14 months in the slammer? And we are supoose to feel sorry for this crook. In the USA if they steal from the public , all assets are taken. Not in this case, where his family are still able to live in a paid home and have enough money while Dad is away to apy for the expenses. This just stinks, and no reporter is trying to look at this story? If this guys gets a new job at Tim Hortens, his steal donuts and coffee. To thik that he was the only one at DND that can figure out this scheme is sad

By: Gene Simmons

Gene Simmons — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 23:06:07 +0000

I got it .. Champange can do no wrong with his next job. he can work with the Liberals and be the spokesperson for the country Stimulus plan. The guy knows how to spend money !!!

By: Really?

Really? — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:10:51 +0000

Those who knew him more than superficially all has a sense that Paul Champagne wasn't what he pretended to be. He was not the high tech success, the loyal husband and the faultless father that he pretended to be. He wasn't the "happy-go-lucky give you the shirt off his back" guy either- unless he was giving you your own shirt back. He was a fake then and he's a fake now. I say that with no qualifiers and I can honestly say that I've never said that about anybody.

But this guy- well, he's in a class of his own. It must be awful to have to live with someone like that- where's the trust ? So far, he's done alright considering a "mistake" that lasted ten years and not exactly in the "spur of the moment" category.

Judging by this site, few are buying what he's selling though. Every dollar that he or those connected with him spend will have a question mark on it. Some might call that his real penalty- with no timeline on it as he had hoped. I truly feel sorry for the guy- not for what he did but for he thought he got away with.

By: Really ??

Really ?? — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:09:41 +0000

Champagne thinks this article will ease his way back into society. Why else would he open up and crawl out from under that rock ? He got the absolute best resolution of his "problem" that he could. Who steals 146 million, pays back a fraction and get 3 months of hard time and 11 months in a condo to land back on an Ottawa street in a halfway house ? I mean really ????

You have to hand it to him for being up front- just like he was when he had the gads of money. Who buys $20,000 dollar bottles of wine when they're an 80K a year bureaurat with a high school education ?

This guy went big because he thought it would be easier. Now he's interviewed by Macleans because he thinks we'll buy his line that its all over and that he has nothing to hide. Really ? I mean REALLY????

By: facts

facts — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:59:03 +0000

I am not Champagne. Each time someone comes up with a different viewpoint posters always attack. So predictable. Your comments regarding the facts are thought provoking and well thought out. My comments are:

fact: Champagne admitted his guilt in the article, that can not be disputed.
fact: He could have stayed in the Turks&Caicos forever. He came back.
fact: Maybe you are right and HP and DND wanted to kill the story.
fact: 7 years is no gift.
fact: Every first time non violent federal offender is offered 1/6
fact: HP shareholders have a right to be pissed.
fact: Confidential settlement between HP and Champagne. Obviously HP wasn't completely in control if they settled.
fact: Stupid comment due to settlement agreement.

I could care less about Champagne and I think getting out on 1/6 is ridiculous.

By: Circling the drain

Circling the drain — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:39:12 +0000

Not a chance Champagne.

Fact-Champagne has admitted his guilt and accepts full responsibility.
Champagne denied everything until he had no choice but to tell the truth.

Fact-Champagne came back to face his charges from a country with no extradition treaty. They would not have kicked him out.
Tourism is # 1 revenue for the Turks and Caicos and Canadians are the second largest visitors. Champagne's Lawyer's told him that people in power in The Turks would make his life very difficult on the island.

Fact-Champagne did not fight this in court.
DND and HP handed Champagne a gift to keep the story out of the press – when you don't have a court case, you don't have any news.

Fact-Champagne got 7 years. Manso got 2 years.
A gift to keep your mouth shut……

Fact-He was released on 1/6 of his sentence (non violent crime first time federal offender)
A gift to keep your mouth shut…….

Fact-Government got back all their money $146million from settlement with Hewlett-Packard
Millions have been spent and overlooked to get your ass into court.
Hewlett Packards shareholders who are people investing for retirement paid the 146 million……where do you think the cash came from that paid for your ten years at the beach……

Fact-Hewlett-Packard sued Champagne and they settled out of court
Hewlett Packard was in the drivers seat and you were given one choice – give us most of what you have left and we'll let you keep some of the stolen cash. Tell us what you promised them to keep your mouth shut…..

Fact-Champagne obviously was left with money from his civil suit or why would he settle
You had no choice Champagne – none of us believe your BS

By: Get a job

Get a job — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:14:20 +0000

Come on Champ !!!!!!!

Yes we're all jealous of you and your accomplishments. Has the time in jail been productive?
Bowling anyone?

By: Champagne bubbles

Champagne bubbles — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:11:29 +0000

Please…please…please….what is deserving is doctors, nurses, a fireman, a police officer, a soldier, teachers, even the Tim Hortons worker who greets you with a smile on their face and a piping hot cup of coffee. There is no value in being stupid and taking advantage of where you are working, there is no glory in stealing millions of dollars.

By: Champagne bubbles

Champagne bubbles — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:05:24 +0000

If you read this Mr. Maich I am sure my husband would love to sit down with you and tell you what it was like to live in Afghanistan for 8 long months, out in the middle of the desert, living with dust everywhere, the heat, sleeping in a tent and waiting for care packages to arrive from home and praying that when you went out in a vehicle that you weren't hit by an IED and hurting so bad when you heard that a fellow soldier had been killed. Mr. Champagne should have gotten a lot longer of a sentence than he did so he could truly reflect on what he did and the lives he affected.

By: Champagne bubbles

Champagne bubbles — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:01:50 +0000

I cannot believe that Mr. Maich would write an article about Paul Champagne who is nothing more than a thief. He stole from all of us. Are we suppose to somehow feel sorry for this man because he missed his childrens birthdays, his anniversary, etc. etc. Well, why not an article about my husband who just returned from 8 months in Afghanistan. He missed birthdays, he missed our anniversary, he was not beside me when family members passed away, because he was serving his country in a war torn dangerous place. Not a day went by that I didn't worry for his safety. I for one do not feel sorry for Champagne and can't believe that he would have hurt his family like that, and all for what, MONEY. We don't have hot tubs, pools, personal trainers, big houses, but what we do have is self-respect, honesty, and love and I would take that any day over being a thief and hurting people around you.

By: facts

facts — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:39:20 +0000

I thought it was an interesting story. It is a sad reflection on how the Government handles its budget especially at Government year end. For this to go on for 10 years is ridiculous. But the facts are:

Fact-Champagne has admitted his guilt and accepts full responsibility.
Fact-Champagne came back to face his charges from a country with no extradition treaty. They would not have kicked him out.
Fact-Champagne did not fight this in court.
Fact-Champagne got 7 years. Manso got 2 years.
Fact-He was released on 1/6 of his sentence (non violent crime first time federal offender)
Fact-Government got back all their money $146million from settlement with Hewlett-Packard
Fact-Hewlett-Packard sued Champagne and they settled out of court
Fact-Champagne obviously was left with money from his civil suit or why would he settle.

In the article Champagne apologized to Canadian taxpayers, took full responsibility.

We may not like him or the situation but the facts are the facts. I just hope this type of thing never happens again.

By: jack

jack — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:26:11 +0000

Why, did you think he was corrupt or were you just the jealous type.

By: interested

interested — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:24:08 +0000

I only heard of 1 DUI and that was over 10 years ago.

By: jack

jack — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:22:03 +0000

You must be a very close friend, probably someone helping spend al that cash.

By: Homer Simpson

Homer Simpson — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:06:07 +0000

Sorry Jack – I paid my for my own ticket and drinks – never wanted to be involved with that lot. It was way over the top. I just observed the Champ and his bought friends. I could not stand the guy!!!

By: yodelayeehoo

yodelayeehoo — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:33:14 +0000

Those lawyers must have done something magic. Three DUI's brings on a whole bunch more than a one year suspension for the average planet walker. If they all occurred within a ten year period, we're talking a lifetime ban and an unpleasant visit to the jug. Why am I not surprised that connected people with wads of dough in Ottawa can avoid problems?

By: drinking problem

drinking problem — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:12:46 +0000

Champagne had three DUI's culminating with him losing his license for 1 year.
All the lawyer's ge could buy didn't keep him driving.

By: yodelayeehoo

yodelayeehoo — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:52:26 +0000

hey Paul: Take it easy man….. you're the guy who screwed-up and wrecked your life. I know all about The T & C and you'll have a rough ride there too. Those people definitely are not anxious to become known as a destination for criminals. At one point they were actively pursuing Russian and Italian money, until they found themselves in bed with all the wrong people. Now The T & C are in a desperate scramble to clean up their act. The British Parliament is preparing to take over total control of their country, if they haven't already. I don't really blame you for stealing the money. It's all stolen money as far as I'm concerned. We don't have an actual tax system, it's more like financial rape. They have the jails and the guns, so it's hand over 60% of your dough sucker or else!!!!!! If you didn't steal it, someone else would have. There is absolutely no scenario that would have seen a single dime come back to average Canadians, so who cares? I just think that cases like yours are an excellent opportunity to ratchet up the anger around here and help bring on the revolution. It's fantastic ammo to humiliate Ottawa and eventually collapse the whole joint. WE WILL see a revolution in Canada, a digital one. Personally, I think the day is coming very soon when significant numbers of Canadians completely disengage from government on all levels. That's really all it will take to crush them……. It's the old Omerta plan……. a conspiracy of silence. Once this is accomplished, they can try to deal with it. The simple truth is that they have been hiring all the immigrants to conceal the failure of Canada's immigration policies and on top of that promoting completely unqualified people, without consideration to merit. Well, nice job folks, but it looks like that's your staff. If I was forced to operate like that, I'd be bust in a week. Once the system is placed under heavy pressure, these people will fold like tents. This historic fraud can't go on and I fully intend to help grease the wheels. I'm pretty good at it too. You'll see…..

By: jack

jack — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:48:04 +0000

you are sick