Non-disclosure of Costa Rican companies prompts Opposition to ask for court ruling
Advertisement
Read this article for free:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Monthly Digital Subscription
$1 per week for 24 weeks*
- Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
- Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
- Access News Break, our award-winning app
- Play interactive puzzles
*Billed as $4.00 plus GST every four weeks. After 24 weeks, price increases to the regular rate of $19.00 plus GST every four weeks. Offer available to new and qualified returning subscribers only. Cancel any time.
Monthly Digital Subscription
$4.75/week*
- Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
- Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
- Access News Break, our award-winning app
- Play interactive puzzles
*Billed as $19 plus GST every four weeks. Cancel any time.
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Add Free Press access to your Brandon Sun subscription for only an additional
$1 for the first 4 weeks*
*Your next subscription payment will increase by $1.00 and you will be charged $16.99 plus GST for four weeks. After four weeks, your payment will increase to $23.99 plus GST every four weeks.
Read unlimited articles for free today:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 17/05/2016 (3434 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
The Opposition NDP wants a judge to decide whether Premier Brian Pallister erred in not disclosing two companies he controls in Costa Rica in conflict-of-interest forms submitted to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
New Democrat justice critic Andrew Swan called out Pallister during Tuesday’s question period for failing to disclose the majority shares he currently holds in two companies located in the foreign country.
“The Conflict of Interest Act is pretty clear, it says that at the start of every legislative session, every MLA must submit a declaration… including shares of any corporation, any corporation in the world,” Swan said.

“You can go over to the clerk’s office right across the hall and you can have a look at Mr. Pallister’s declaration from last November, in which he does not include those.”
The Costa Rica Star newspaper reported last month that public records search showed Pallister owns three parcels of land, through a holding company in Costa Rica of which he is listed as president. The paper also reported Pallister controls a second holding company that owns two vehicles. It said it is common practice for foreign nationals to place real estate and vehicles in holding companies.
Pallister was quick to shut down Swan’s accusations, telling the media after question period he had complied with all conflict-of-interest rules. The Tories previously stated Pallister had acted on the advice from the province’s Conflict of Interest Commissioner in all his disclosure obligations.
“I would encourage Mr. Swan to not try and reframe the gutter politics of the last third of the election campaign again, I don’t think it serves anyone in public life very well,” Pallister said.
According to the Conflict of Interest Act, within 15 days of becoming an MLA, members must submit a statement disclosing assets and interests. This includes “the name of every corporation, and every subsidiary of every corporation” in which the member holds a beneficial interest in five per cent or more or holds a share warrant or purchase option in respect of five per cent or more.
On his disclosure form filed with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, dated Nov. 30, 2015, Pallister listed properties he owned in Manitoba, along with corporate shares in Pallister Insurance Agency.
Swan wants to see the issue go to a Court of Queen’s Bench judge decide if Pallister is breaking the Conflict of Interest Act by not disclosing his stake in the foreign companies.
“I have asked the Attorney General (Justice Minister Heather Stefanson) today if she would simply refer it directly to a judge at the Court of Queen’s Bench, who is the person who has to make the decision,” said Swan. “It goes directly to court because it is so important.”
kristin.annable@freepress.mb.ca