Is it suspicious that Dhanon and Mann waited so long to ask for receipts?
Here's one of the cheques
Here's (again) what Jim Holt (president of Grewal's riding association) says in explanation about it and the cheque of Dhahan (which seems to have been treated exactly the same way) (hat tip again to SDA):
Next we have a Mr. Dhahan. Here we have a person who in addition to attending a political dinner for Gurmant Grewal back in December of 2003 (two thousand three) happens also to be a good friend of Ujjal Dosanjh. And Mr. Dhahan, nearly one and half years after a cheque was written and cleared, is now asking for a receipt for his "donation". In checking this one out, we have determined that the item was countersigned over to The Grand Taj Hall in Surrey to help pay for the dinner, it cleared through their bank, and then presumably went back to Mr. Dhahan's.Mr. Holt makes two points about both individuals: that they are friends of Dosanjh and that they had waited a suspiciously long time before they began to ask for their receipts.
We trust that someone is asking (or perhaps maybe someone will be asking) Mr. Dhahan to explain why an event that occurred some time in the distant past didn't seem to need a receipt then, but does now. It would also be interesting to determine if this item was an "outstanding item" in accounting terms, and we guess that only a formal examination of Mr. Dhahan's Income Tax records would determine if this item had been in fact processed as a normal business expense for either 2003 (when the cheque was written), or in 2004 (when the item cleared the bank), or can it indeed be demonstrated by Mr. Dhahan or his auditors that this payment has been kept on his books as an unresolved item all these many months (and through at least one Income tax cycle). For if this item had indeed already been processed in accounting terms, then the accuracy and substance of Mr. Dhahan's claims to you will represent an entirely different legal matter altogether.
Next we have a Mr. Mann. As backgrounder on this complainant, it is a well-known fact that he is a very good friend of Ujjal Dosanjh. So good a friend is he of Mr. Dosanjh that just after the Taping Incident became public, and Mr., Dosanjh's central and principle role in that event became known to the public, Mr. Mann telephoned Mr. Grewal and voiced extreme displeasure with Mr. Grewal's actions. And then just a few short weeks later, up pops a complaint relayed to you regarding two cheques. Mann has provided you with two items, one for $1800. and another for $600. In the matter of the item for $600., our research shows that this item followed the same pattern as Mr. Dhahan's above. Namely, it was used to help pay for the December 2003 dinner, this cheque cleared in nearly identical fashion to that of Mr. Dhahan's, and all of the above questions must be asked of Mr. Mann.
In fact, however, I think that for Dhahan, at least, the interval is not beyond explanation. He wrote his cheque Dec. 27th, 2003, and it cleared in early January. Did he regard this contribution to have occurred in 2003 or 2004? Let's assume the latter. In that case, he would not be looking for his receipt until early 2005 (that is, at any rate, how it works with my RRSPs, donations to church, etc.). And he may not have gotten ansy about it until he began to do his taxes.
This is consistent with what we find in the (from Macleans story:
Barj Dhahan, a Vancouver businessman, said the Mounties planned to take a statement from him on Wednesday. Dhahan said he contributed $600 toward Grewal's campaign on Dec. 27, 2003, and has had about a dozen phone conversations since February with staff at the MP's constituency office about a receipt.According to this, at least, Dhahan's quest for a receipt began long before the taping episode.
The Conservative suggestion that there is something strange about how long he waited should be rejected.
(This is not to say that there may not be foul play with some of the other cheques--the plumbing cheque and the Atwal cheque look to me much more dubious, which may be why the media has not payed much attention to them.)