When listening to the radio, watching television or reading the newspapers about events in this province, there seems to be a missing link. One that bridges all that information together and provides a way for people to contribute, express or lobby their concerns in their own time. After-all, this is our home and everyone cannot fit in Lukie's boat and paddle their way to Upper Canada, nor should we!
Yesterday Sue's Blog focused on the journalistic style of James McLeod in his story headlined "Nalcor audit won’t be done before retirement: AG".
Today let's look at some of the other information we can take from this interview.
The AG Terry Paddon is retiring at months end. He leaves behind an unfinished audit of specific operations of Nalcor.
The story does not tell us some important things.
How far along is the audit?
When did Paddon expect to finish it when it began?
Did he run into unforeseen difficulties in attaining the information he needed?
Was it Paddon's intent to finish the audit before he retired?
What does Paddon think the cost will be to finish it?
Is it more costly under a new Auditor General than if he completed it before he retired?
Did he find anything worth noting now?
Terry Paddon is one of those nice people. Not much - I've ever seen in his personality that would put people off. He is a professional by designation and as best I could tell - took his role seriously.
Paddon - however - missed a couple of key areas in his tenure with the Department of Finance and as Auditor General. He missed some real activity regarding the Federal - Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act (Equalization) - despite being alerted to it.
Equalization - as the program is normally referred to - primarily has been to the benefit of Quebec. The program which Stephen Harper promised he would change but then did not - I assume was kept whole for Quebec.
Harper's promise to remove royalties from non-renewable resources from the formula - would have meant that our oil revenues could have served to improve the lives of future generations so much more. That was a digression. (still angry at CPC for deliberately conning Newfoundland and Labrador and "Seantor" Manning's standing at Harper's side as he did it)
BREAKING NEWS
Many people may not have noticed - but Hydro-Quebec does a significant
amount of public program spending. They have been doing that for
decades. Why is the question....
ANSWER
Back in 2000 Stephane Dion then President of the Queen's Privy Council and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs appeared on Bill Rowe's Open-Line. I asked questions the Minister could not answer on line - so he did as he promised - wrote me the answers to my questions.
Below is the response:
"On the question of the treatment of Churchill Falls under the Equalization program, it should be noted that an adjustment has been made in the calculation of Equalization payments since 1982 which takes into account how Churchill Falls hydro is priced. Equalization payments are based on the relative ability of each province to raise taxes; and the Churchill Falls adjustment shifts some capacity to tax hydro sites from Newfoundland to Quebec. The net effect is to reduce Quebec's annual Equalization payments while raising Newfoundland's. Furthermore, to the extent that profits from Churchill Falls translate into profits to Hydro Quebec that are remitted to the Quebec government, these too have the effect of lowering Quebec's Equalization."
Right from the get-go we were being further penalized on the Upper Churchill - while Quebec reaped even more benefits. Then the formula was changed to reflect the real contract (albeit not enough in my opinion).
Were we ever compensated for the past - NO.
The real kicker though was found accidentally in the last sentence of Dion's response. "Furthermore, to the extent that profits from Churchill Falls
translate into profits to Hydro Quebec that are remitted to the Quebec
government, these too have the effect of lowering Quebec's
Equalization."
That little remark was an eye opener for anybody watching Hydro-Quebec - as I certainly was.
The hundreds of News Releases coming out of Hydro-Quebec in those years were phenomenal. Now it made sense. Before profit - expenses come out. If Hydro-Quebec delivered or helped to deliver public programming on behalf of the Government of Quebec - they lowered their profits - while the province of Quebec saved equalization money - which gave the province even more to spend on public programs.
In short - Hydro-Quebec making billions off our resource - reduced their profits - lowered remitances to the government - in some years almost to zero - to avoid the loss of equalization. This in turn exponentially increased the value from Labrador resources for Quebec.
At the time Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro was making money and was remitting profits to Newfoundland and Labrador. At the time we could have taken advantage of the same. Today Nalcor is not "profitable" - only by force of the PUB, our laws, and oil activity. Nalcor never did do the investment and development that Hydro-Quebec has successfully.
Terry Paddon was aware of this and we did nothing. We sat on our hands and did nothing.
The political and media spin in Newfoundland and Labrador became we MUST become a "have" province. The romantic - naive - irrelevant title of "have". The "have being based on a formula that could see a financially destitute province be "have" while a thriving growing super power province be "have not".
Let me be more clear: Quebec has an unemployment rate of 6% Newfoundland and Labrador is at almost 15%. The population in NL was 530,854 in 1971 and 528,817 in 2017 meanwhile the population in Quebec was 6,137,305 in 1971 and 8,394,034 in 2017. Provincial debt NL is $23,052 per person while in Quebec it is $22,104. This does not include the albatross of 13 Billion for Muskrat Falls. Then we take into account that Nalcor is not financing all it's own obligations - we put in a fair chunk and it is only barely profitable because of oil operations. When compared to Hydro-Quebec which has hundreds of millions in profits - without oil revenues.
Paddon failed by not describing what equalization truly is and how the system works. It's not all his fault - but political masters should not have had that much say.
The media - should really get its collective act together and do some real reporting. It should make itself knowledgeable about important issues and policies before it puts out fluff - this denying the people of balanced information on which they can make a decision.
It is no longer acceptable to have zero leadership in politics and zero accountability of the news media.
We are broke. We continue to repeat mistakes. We continue to dream without doing anything that remotely will help us achieve our dream of prosperous future.
By the way - are there any MHA's willing to wade in to this discussion or members of our "press corps"?
James McLeod presented a news story on October 7th in the Telegram.
It was headlined "Nalcor audit won’t be done before retirement: AG"
As usual - pose a question - get an answer - print answer. No follow-up, no definitions of terms used, and no independent thought respecting the answer.
I'll get into Auditor General in another post - but for now - let's watch this "journalistic" masterpiece unfold.
The conversation between the two must have wandered into the need for a forensic audit. McLeod reports as follows on that question:
Paddon
was cautious when talking about a potential forensic audit for Muskrat
Falls. He said he knows it wouldn’t be cheap though.
“I’m not quite sure that the word ‘forensic audit’ is
appropriate. I mean, I think really what people are looking for is for
somebody to go in and look at, perhaps, the decision-making process and
the execution process, and those sorts of things,” he said.
“It would take a lot of time and a lot of resources. The outcome? I have no idea what the outcome would be.”
IN MY OPINION HERE IS WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED:
1. Paddon was cautious but did say it wouldn't be cheap though. Question: what's cheap? why are you cautious?
2. Paddon was not quite sure that the word 'forensic audit' is appropriate.
Question: why is it not appropriate? what part of a forensic audit would be inappropriate?
3. Paddon believes he knows what critics are calling for - decision making and execution process Question: how does that fall out of the purview of a forensic audit? Why do you believe "people" are only looking at those components?
4. Paddon believes it would take a lot of time and a lot of resources. Questions: How much time would this forensic audit need? How much would it cost. Cost relative to what? What might be the cost of NOT doing it?
5. Paddon has no idea what the outcome would be. Question: is that perhaps why people want one done? Is the reason you can't speculate on the outcome because you do not know what perimeters would be set?
and of course: Based on the doubling of the costs, hidden documents, continued extension on time-table for completion, independent contractors information hidden from shareholder. Don't these things present a red-flag to an accountant?
AFTER THIS MCLEOD SHOULD HAVE SOUGHT ANOTHER ACCOUNTING SOURCE AND ASKED THE SAME QUESTIONS.
Now let's do a bit of research ourselves and see if a forensic audit is exactly what we are asking for and know that we need.
Forensic auditing is a specialization within the field of accounting, and forensic auditors often provide expert testimony during trial proceedings. Most large accounting firms have a forensic auditing department.
The audit covers a wide range of investigative activities performed by accountants. The process may also include serving as an expert witness in a fraud trial.
The investigation process follows a similar path as a regular audit of financial statements. The steps can include planning, review and a report. If the investigation was undertaken to discover the presence of fraud, evidence is presented to uncover or disprove the fraud and determine the amount of the damages suffered. The findings are presented to the client — and possibly the court should the case go that far.
During the planning stage, the forensic auditing team establishes
objectives, such as identifying if fraud has been committed, how long it
has been going on, the parties involved, quantifying the financial loss
and providing fraud prevention measures. While gathering evidence, the
team collects evidence in the proper manner in order for it to be used
in a court case. There are various techniques used to gather evidence. A
report is produced for the client with the findings. Lastly, those
involved in the forensic audit may be asked to present their findings to
the court.
Forensic audits uncover several types of fraud. The most common involves
theft, including cash, inventory and fraudulent payments. Another type
of fraud is corruption, such as a conflict of interest, bribery and
extortion. The last major category is financial statement fraud. This
relates to misstatements of the financials of a company.
There are many other sites - but this should suffice to ensure that what we are asking for is exactly what we want and need.
This blog has already posted the RED FLAGS post on the need for a forensic audit.
McLeod should have put to a few known critics - the responses of the Auditor General and get another take on it.
This - let me find a source who has a title and a designation - and I can write a news piece is flawed and can lead to the readership relying too much value on the information presented.
This is the spin of spin and is yet another artificial deterrent to completing a forensic audit and attempting to curtail increased calls for a forensic audit.
It seems to me there are many people who just want this whole sordid mess to disappear. Unfortunately for them - social media is alive and growing.
Her experience in the Court of Appeal can be found here.
Albeit - Pennecon - her client - did not win the day and Metal World - not her client - was awarded party and party costs - the case had some connection to a Mechanics Lien and the construction industry.
So how about Ms. Manning quit as Attorney General and instead head-up the Judicial/Public Inquiry on the HVP affair.
In this way - we the public - get to see her act within her profession - and determine if partisanship can be overlooked for such a proceeding.
Now I know she does not have the legal experience of Clyde Wells - we can still test her metal as she reviews the mess which is the HVP fiasco.
Let's see if she's comfortable questioning the "unelected" Premier or the "unelected" Premier in waiting who quit or the "interim" "unelected" Premier or the once "unelected" then "elected" Premier and current Cabinet colleagues such as Kevin O'Brien.
After the Inquiry is finished - we may be up to a general election. Let's see if she still wants to run for the PC's then.
This would be a big feather in her CV - and also allows us - the electorate - to see her in action. We would like to see "vintage" Manning and see if we like the bouquet. As it sits now - the bouquet - resembles that of rotting herring.
Although Inquiries are headed up by a Commissioner - usually a judge - Cabinet posts are usually filled by elected people - so we can make an exception.
Let's put all partisanship aside. Let's simply examine Mr. Coleman based on performance to date.
Here are the signs to me - as a voter - that Frank Coleman is not ready to be Premier.
1. He believes that the Tory's have done a good job to date. This means he is offside right from the get-go with the majority of people in Newfoundland and Labrador.
2. Pro-Choice Pro-Life positioning in that he does not acknowledge that by participating in anti-abortion rallies - he does hope to influence legislative powers to make changes.
3. Response to the Humber Valley Paving controversy.
4. His limited and controlled accessibility to the media.
The most pressing concern right now for Mr. Coleman, the government, and the people is the cancelled contract for road development and paving between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and Humber Valley Paving. There is no question that timing for both Mr. Coleman's entry into the Tory leadership race and HVP being let out of contractual obligations to the government (the people of NL) is at best unfortunate and coincidental or at worst deliberate and not usual.
Mr. Coleman must recognize the concerns the people have with this and understand their reasons for that concern. Mr. Coleman does know that he is becoming an unelected Premier, both at the Party level and through general election under his leadership. Mr. Coleman had a golden opportunity to demonstrate his leadership prowess and interest by simply acknowledging the concerns of ordinary people and the questions by the media - by publicly calling on the government he wants to lead to call in the Auditor General to clear the air. He did not have to comment about a company he used to own - he simply had to recommend that a third - independent party - review the situation. In this way he would have shown some respect for the people he hopes to lead. In this way he would clear the air of an environment that has been secret and unaccountable.
Mr. Coleman must know that this whole situation looks unusual and also appears to be politically privileged. This was not the time to avoid, hide, or limit communications - this was a time to demonstrate societal leadership not a time to protect private business interests.
Frank Coleman failed to do this and as such demonstrated his leadership style. I believe the people of Newfoundland and Labrador through continued polling results have said - we are not interested in this type of leadership or government.
What's happening with the land that used to be the Salmonier Prison Camp?
How does anybody get an acre of land in the St. John's metro for $300 an acre?
How does somebody get ownership of a river or the power it produces?
How does one miraculously get a time record setting land use change at City Hall?
How does one move so smoothly from a top public service or elected position to a corporation seeking things from the government?
How does one get to cheat and break the Elections Act and then immediately run again for office?
How do corporations that violate the Elections Act waltz around continuing to operate without punishment?
How do heads of these same corporations not suffer legal consequences for breaches of the law?
How do fish corporations in Newfoundland and Labrador continue to get permission to offload raw resources for their profitability while causing loss of jobs in the jurisdiction they harvest the resources from?
Where is all our money?
Why is the Auditor General's report not followed completely?
Why are political party bag men allowed to hold publicly paid positions - resign from them to politic - then return to those same highly paid positions?
Why indeed!
Why is Nalcor permitted to fund charities - then celebrate itself - like it's a private corporation?
What questions do you have?
How does a young man die on the ice - and no Inquiry, though needed, is called?
My stomach is still turning - I still have sleepless nights - they are still gutting us.
Both Opposition Parties in Newfoundland and Labrador have made their first 2015 election promise.
The race to replace has begun.
We - the people will hold them to it.
It is positive to see politicians respond immediately to the people by making a promise that all of us really need right now. A commitment to eliminate this cloak of secrecy - called Bill 29.
Last night Charlene Johnson either lied or demonstrated unfathomable ignorance by blaming the constituency spending allowance on the previous Liberal government.
The statements made - not yet available on Hansard - were beyond irresponsible they were grossly negligent.
The three political parties suffered blame as members of each were trotted off to jail. How did that happen? Read the Green Report. Read the Auditor General's special reports.
The Deputy Premier of Danny Williams - a person he put great trust in was front and centre in the political scandal of our time. His second in command - a Cabinet Minister in control of significant information secret and otherwise. This person who admitted to forging documents and stealing over $100,000 from us the people. This person who the Auditor General said received almost $500,000 over his entitlements.
Do we need a system that is open and transparent? Yes.
Do we need a system that seeks to thwart transparency? No
The government had options.
1. They could have let the debate finish naturally, they did not - they invoked closure.
2. They could have had Bill 29 reviewed by Chief Justice Green, Senator Beth Marshall, or by former Auditor General John Noseworthy (the man who brought the cost of secrecy to light).
3. They could have created an all-party committee to travel the province and consult with the people on the proposed changes.
4. The government could have sincerely considered amendments brought forth and at least pretended to have interest in the process.
5. The government could have killed the Bill - and in doing so appropriately recognized the wisdom of their colleagues, the people, and members of the media who were screaming foul.
Dan Crummell was just now on VOCM open-line suggesting that the media took offence to the Bill more than anybody. He said he believes they want to be in the Cabinet Room.
There is no defence to reducing access to information - yet Dan attempted to do it anyway. Way to trot to the trough there Dan. Fill-er-up. Gotta get a Cabinet Post - gotta get - me - me -me Dan.
Newfoundland and Labrador politicians have absolutely no right to reduce access to information - simply because the wound is too deep and fresh from the constituency allowance scandal. How arrogant must they be to support cloak and dagger legislation - when many of them were there when their colleagues were put in cuffs.
The Opposition parties have now taken a necessary step to rebuild confidence and trust in the electorate. They appear to understand that we are not prepared to "trust" them - on their word - just yet.
What Dunderdale, Collins, Marshall, Kennedy, King, Sullivan, Burke, and Johnson seem not to understand is reducing access now - so soon after the scandal - is like giving a parent giving their teenage son or daughter the car a week after they are convicted of drinking and driving.
Yes it is that serious! Yes it is that condemnable!
Now it is up to the NDP and Liberal MHA's to remind the people and the PC caucus that they will reverse the Bill and will reveal all hidden documents - as soon as practicable after the PC's are defeated.
By the way where is Danny on this? Where is Danny on this? Will this be the issue that excuses Danny away from "his" party and toward Dean? It remains incredible that all these PC backbenchers have not yet figured out that the fix is in.
They play you like a fiddle and in turn you fiddle while your political reputations burn.
Premier Dunderdale - where are you dear? The 2015 Election Campaign began early this morning. The race to boot the Tories out has begun and you were nowhere to be found.
Sue's Blog featured two posts on the "secret committee" of government responsible for advising the Minister of Health regarding new listings of generics on our formulary.
Further to these posts - I would like to inform the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that we have lost almost 1 million dollars more from January - April of 2012.
Many of you are familiar with Plavix - a drug that helps to prevent future risks of heart attacks and strokes.
In Canada it is estimated that the introduction of the generic form of Plavix would save Canadians and provincial drug plans hundreds of millions a year.
The sales of Plavix are estimated to be 300 million a year - Newfoundland and Labrador's portion is 6.6 million.
The cost of Plavix versus the cost of the generic equivalent is about double.
The generic version was approved by Health Canada, December 2011 and was listed by several provinces by January 2012.
4 months will have passed before Newfoundland and Labrador gets the benefit of the new generic. That means that we will have spent $1,650,000 when we could have spent $822,500 if the generic was listed in a timely manner.
Why would people in Nova Scotia or Ontario get timely access when we do not?
Why are we wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars in health care when we have people crying out for surgery to remove access skin - or waiting on cardiac surgeries?
Over the next few days I will list a dozen more examples of extreme waste in our system.
When will the Opposition parties demand answers?
When will the media ask questions?
What is going on in this secret committee? Will government release the minutes of their deliberations?
Remember now this is only one drug. Imagine what dollars have been and continue to be wasted.
The Auditor General needs to be called in. Investigation needed.
Do you want to witness wastage of our health care dollars?
An open request to the Auditor General: Please review the workings, processes, and results of the interchangeable drug review advisory committee.
This committee consists of individuals appointed by the Minister of Health and must comprise of 2 pharmacists, 2 physicians, the Deputy Minister, and other persons the Minister may wish to appoint.
When a drug comes off patent and generic equivalents are made available - this committee reviews submissions by generic drug companies to have their products listed on our formulary. These drugs which range between 50-60% of brand price have the potential to save tens of millions of dollars a year.
First you must understand that in order for a generic to be permitted for use in Canada - Health Canada reviews the scientific data and confirms that the generic is safe. Once that has occurred any pharmacy in Canada can purchase the drug and dispense it under various private insurance plans and cash paying customers. In fact these new generic equivalents are almost immediately available in our hospitals - and quite often are dispensed to a patient when in hospital - only to be unavailable at a retail pharmacy when they are released.
Newfoundland and Labrador is notoriously slow to list many of these generic equivalents as they become available. This money is wasted and over the years the tens of millions could be hundreds of millions. In some cases one month delay equals over $100,000 loss of health care dollars.
So how is it that other provinces in Canada are dispensing a generic equivalent under publicly funded drug cards and hospitals in our province are dispensing this same drug - but this "committee" has not cleared it for retail pharmacies - costing us tens of millions of dollars?
The review committee sits in private and the deliberations are secret. The minutes are not available to the public.
Will the media attempt to find the answers to this gross wastage of health care dollars? Will the Auditor General review this situation and report to the House of Assembly what is going on?
Will the Opposition parties step to the plate?
This is a serious and ongoing issue - that is being kept from public scrutiny.
The opportunity is there for the Opposition parties in Newfoundland and Labrador - to make a difference.
The people of this province are upset that Muskrat is being rammed down their throats by people who are drunk on power and obsessed by it.
The people of this province are upset that the Auditor General is once again being hindered - leaving us to wonder who is making and how they are making decisions on the expenditure of billions of dollars.
The people of this province are upset that the Public Accounts Committee has not met in public for 6 years despite the fact that each party had at least one MHA taken off to a prison cell for criminal behavior regarding the use of public funds.
The people of this province are upset that Chief Justice Green's report on the whole mess and accountability has been essentially trashed - while each party points fingers here or there.
The people of this province are upset that kissing up to Stephen Harper by a weak Premier has resulted in continued cuts by the feds. When they are not cutting they are increasing costs for people travelling on the Island's Trans Canada Highway - the Marine Atlantic Ferry.
The people of Labrador need a highway - a real highway before the Island based government strips yet more valuable resources - in return for temporary employment.
The people of the province are upset that industry continues to downsize or close - paper mills and fish plants.
The people of rural communities are upset that they are being forsaken for the temporary wealth of St. John's Metro from non-renewable offshore resources owned by the feds.
The people of this province are upset that Search and Rescue and Fisheries science are being diminished and tinkered with - like we are second class participants in (Con)federation.
The people of this province are upset that shipbuilding is not king in Newfoundland and Labrador.
The people of this province are upset that speaking out against a policy of the DunWill government may mean personal consequences. (This is the same crew that were hyped on Whistle Blower legislation) Ha ha ha ha.
The people of this province are upset that Vickie Kaminski seems to spend more time apologizing for continued incompetence, errors, and trouble with our health care system - than doing what she was employed to do - clean it up.
So what then are the Opposition doing?
While Michael is noticeable and relevant on some Health Care issues - they are traditional core NDP positions and do not require a great deal more than repetition. The caucus has one wanna be leader who appears to fancy himself a Jack intellectual. He definitely has the arrogant bit down and definitely believes that people look way up to him.
The Liberals remain fractured with some hoping for a Messiah and others believing they might have a leader already. They might - but that leader must demonstrate it. He must - above all - lead; that's going to take competent and willing staff - exceptional research and then ultimately standing for something.
As a result they are all waiting for the people to cause the opposition they need - in order that a partisan bandwagon may form.
This is exactly what Len Simms was the beneficiary of when the Power of the People took it to Clyde on privatization.
Right now it appears that Opposition members wait for some event organized by a labour group, professional body, or by like-minded citizens and then ask to be invited.
There are some journalists in the province stepping up to the plate and many well-known public figures are weighing in. Ordinary citizens who are not currently consumed by fear that speaking out will make them a "target" of government - are doing their part. The only problem for the Opposition parties is that - as yet - they have not come together.
The opposition parties appear frustrated that there is no pack to follow - so they take a wait and see approach. Right now - we need courageous Opposition members and leadership - in the same way we needed it during the Upper Churchill fiasco.
There is no doubt that Premier Dunderdale is out of her league as it relates to open public debate and therefore hides behind her power.
There is no doubt that decisions are not being made using the best possible information as Dunderdale's government hides behind a curtain and thwarts established processes such as the PUB.
There is no doubt that the Dunderdale government utilizes the skills of a human resource like Ross Reid to control messaging and democracy.
There is no doubt that fear is the optimal choice of persuasion when your mouth can't utter an informed position.
There is no doubt that arrogance is rampant within the regime and that most backbenchers are puppets - hanging on to the best gig they will ever get.
There is no doubt that the PC's claim that all who oppose them are partisan naysayers - is weakened everyday - as more and more well known Tories fall among the aforementioned group.
Right now - sadly - it also appears there is no doubt that the Opposition parties are seeking an opposition movement - that they can follow.
As I write this - I know from experience that all of them would just like me to shut-up. Let's see what punishment they dish out this time. Or as Ches Crosbie may put it - how are they planning to piss on me at every opportunity - when I'm not in the room.
I can assure the reader that the seals are leaving more than cods gutless. Keep clapping and flapping.
Have you driven by the people's building yet? You know the (Con)federation building.
Have you noticed all the sheets draped over it?
Outside of changing the bricks to Tory blue - the sheets are holding another meaning.
Since (con)federation in 1949 and the initial Joey's ownership years that followed - the WillDun administration must be the most secretive and unaccountable government.
So enter stage right - Danny Williams - and boom - all truths will be revealed. Let's bring the Auditor General in and let him see what everybody else was trying to hide. While former MHA's were being carted of to jail - Williams was busy.
Yes we seen an untendered pile of money go to Dean MacDonald's company, Persona for "good" public policy reasons. I call this "Flip that Utility" - which you can read HERE.
Then we seen Williams - after demonstrating shock and disappointment - over the findings of the Auditor General - promptly call in Chief Justice Greene to study what went wrong and present a report on how to fix it.
Chief Justice Greene in his usual style - expertly reviewed the material - and presented a superior report with recommendations. (He should be a Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada) If that were to happen I could actually say that the federal government had for once made a good decision. In either case, Chief Justice Greene's report spoke specifically about the need for accountability in public accounts.
So Danny - King of the Truth and Accountability - after the worst mess since Sir Richard Squires - proceeded in presiding over government MHA's that did not hold a public meeting in 6 years. Nobody noticed! Excuse me - we had 4 MHA's locked up and nobody noticed that the PUBLIC Accounts Committee was not holding PUBLIC meetings?
Roland Butler the Chair of the Committee and a Liberal - said nothing. Just the other day - the retired Butler said he tried but the Tories would not let him. He's RETIRED and now he's talking.
What of Lorraine? Well the NDP did not have a seat on the Committee - however - the Leader wanted one right? Where are all the News Releases over the past 6 years complaining about the fact that the Committee was not holding public meetings? Is the deal here that if I don't have a seat on the Committee it does not matter? Well no sooner had I wrote this last night than Ms. Michael says in the Telegram today that "When our caucus is represented, I can assure you we will speak very strongly in favour of regular public meetings". I'm sorry Ms. Michael but that is very weak. Why would we have you on it - if you will not speak of it until you are there?
So after the King of Truth exposed the corrupt and criminal behavior of MHA's including his choice for Deputy Premier - Ed Byrne - he proceeded in running a secretive government.
Anybody remember poor Tom Osborne? He was booted from Cabinet by Williams - why? Well as we all recall a bureaucrat did not advise Osborne about error rates in the hormone receptor tests; Osborne has not been in Cabinet since the removal.
Kathy Dunderdale for her part - just experienced a scathing review on accountability by our current Auditor General. Anyway you slice it - it's keeping the public away from how decisions were made on billions of dollars. Open and accountable? Not a chance. What did she say about the negligent behavior of her own MHA's regarding the Public Accounts Committee? Well - apparently she didn't notice either - but now that the CBC has advised her on the operations of a House Committee - she will be drilling down on that.
Let's have a serious discussion here people. We the people are not in control of our own government or the MHA's that we elect. After the most disgusting exposure of corruption and criminal behavior by some of our elected representatives and the not-criminal but very questionable expenditures and behavior of many more - we are allowing them to set up another system that is ripe for abuse.
The PC, Liberal, and NDP had at least one of their MHA's locked in a prison cell - and therefore every party should be super sensitive to anything that may look odd to the people they serve. For 6 years these politicians sat on their hands and said nothing about this very disturbing situation.
How arrogant are they? Well they take the recommendations of a Chief Justice and essentially flush them down a toilet. What do we do? Is it time to meet on the steps of the Colonial Building?
You see what better way to set up a secretive government than by claiming to be the King of Truth and Accountability on the front end?
Waiting for change from these politicians? Boot them out first or make them change the rules first? Which comes first the chicken or the egg? I am going to have to trek from here to the chicken farm by Cochrane Pond to think about it - oh wait that's private property now - right?
John Noseworthy ruined his announcement regarding his political debut today in several ways.
First - he tried the same old line of electing a member on the "government side". Mr. accountability and transparency would have all of Newfoundland and Labrador vote one way with all the MHA's sitting on the government side. So much for accountability and so much for transparency - if you follow Noseworthy's logic to the end - there would be no opposition.
Listening to the above slip and slide from his mouth should be enough to end any chance he has politically.
Second - he explained how he was offered the Liberal leadership and it was a "done deal" if he said yes. Now we hear that the Executive Board of the Liberals did not offer this to Noseworthy - so who did it?
It does not matter - the man is an experienced Chartered Accountant and as he says he knows the rules and processes. That is what he was paid to do for many years. The Liberal Party as with all parties has a Constitution and there is a process for any leadership. The Party Executive is charged with the responsibility to deal with emergency situations - as was the case with the unexpected retirement of Yvonne Jones from the leadership position. Noseworthy knows this and as a result he knew that he could not be offered - deal done - the position. What was his real purpose then to say what he said? The simple answer - to fit into the PC style of misleading and spinning.
Too bad Mr. Noseworthy - the people you helped to lock-up did not follow rules either.
This was originally posted by Sue's Blog - September of 2007.
Considering that Loyola Sullivan and Fabian Manning want your vote - it is worth considering the following.
The Auditor General's Report also dealt with the "special" "onetime" $2875 constituency allowance payment. Primarily because during the last election some MHA's went on an election spree and spent up to 90% of their yearly allowance in just 6 months. That helps with the vote hey?
There was a commitment by all parties that this money would be paid back. Unfortunately - this has not been the case.
As at August 16 - 07 - nine MHA's had not paid any back nor made arrangements to do so. Another three had not paid any back but had made arrangements and six had paid some back and had made arrangements.
Those in the first category are:
Wally Anderson
Percy Barrett
Ed Byrne
Randy Collins
Kathie Goudie
Roger Grimes
Jim Hodder
Fabian Manning
Loyola Sullivan
According to a local news story the Premier said "Williams says the repayment of the bonus seems to be a question of means."
Okay - I have TWO words for that - SCHOOL TAX
Was or is the former Minister of Finance Loyola Sullivan being gouged for mega-interest on the monies owed? He had no problem gouging ordinary citizens who owed resurrected back accounts for school tax.
Or how about those people suffering from ALS - no experimental drugs?
Public Pensioners with no indexing?
Not enough nurses?
To the MHA's
Is your electricity disconnected?
Your phone cut off?
Credit cards maxed?
Houses run down?
Eviction notices?
Car repossessed?
No furnace oil?
Going to the foodbank?
Come on tell us about your financial hardship! Now you want another pension? More income? You are kidding right? The funniest part of Fabian offering himself is who is running his campaign - the former Auditor General and now Senator Elizabeth Marshall. My how her standards are lowering.
Below you will find a post from 2007 - It should help us to remember our history so we do not repeat our mistakes.
Sue's Blog hopes you find it informative as part of the election process. Meanwhile I am working on a special report on the Muskrat Falls deal with Emera.
Danny surrounds himself with the best people. That's what he says.
When the PC's were in Opposition Ed Byrne and Loyola Sullivan were like Danny's pit bulls - attack when they were tormented or challenged.
Sullivan would go on and on about financial mismanagement - bad deals - inappropriate spending like travelling with spouses. Sullivan would speak endlessly to budgets and publicly review the Auditor General's reports.
Do you remember when the House of Assembly fired Frasier March? These holier than thou MHA's passing judgement on others and their poor accounting methods.
Then Loyola's party won and they were government. He ended up with his dream job - Minister of Finance. He then began the "preach" of fiscal management - accrual accounting - tightening the belt - spend only what we have to spend.
He tortured citizens with decade old school tax accounts - with compounding interest. He was holding the Premier's fiscal hand when public servants hit the streets and then threatened to legislate them back. We just don't have the money he'd say - we are almost bankrupt.
That's when Loyola should have brought in a Chartered Accountant and asked - if we are almost bankrupt what should we spend the little money we have on. I bet he/she would not have said Seasons Tickets to the St. John's Maple Leafs.
Then there was the Premier - going off his head at the mere mention that Loyola Sullivan might appear to be in conflict of interest when Cabinet discussed the RMS system for the fishery or the sale of FPI (parts of which did end up under a couple of his brothers). Do you remember Danny saying - how dare you question the integrity of somebody like Loyola Sullivan. The man's reputation is impeccable.
Then we move to Loyola "knockout punch" Sullivan who took on the feds over equalization and won. He took on the mean old Liberals and brought home the bacon. Remember him standing next to Williams - puffed up with pride. Well that fellow has ended up taking an appointment from Newfoundland and Labrador's mortal enemy - Stephen Harper - while running away from the FPI fiasco - the Auditor General's latest expose and yet to come report on the fibre-optical illusion. Where is Loyola now that Harper has lied to us about equalization? Not a peep from Sullivan.
To top it all off - the big spending scandal - the one which resulted in criminal charges - took place during a time where Sullivan was the longest continuous sitting member of the Internal Economy Committee.
Where is he now? He's now named in the latest AG's report as being one of only 9 MHA's who had not paid back or made arrangements to pay back the $2875 special payment - by August 16 of this year.
He is named for buying season hockey tickets for the St. John's Maple Leafs from his constituency allowance. $4800 + $1000 to Mile One.
Now can those of you looking for potential life saving drugs - or a house without mold - or a retired public servant looking for indexing really blame the "scrooge" for wanting some hockey tickets? As you pay back your thousands of dollars in interest on a school tax bill of a couple of hundred - remember the drop of the puck at Mile One.
Note to the above story - Danny then added Kathy to his list of chosen people - not a good track record.
Have a look at John Noseworthy's Auditor General Report and scroll below what Sue's Blog posted when the deal was first done. How about the Lower Churchill Deal - designed for a flip???
ORIGINAL POST 2007
I guess most of the readers are familiar with the various TV shows on flipping houses - where the buyer picks up a property - renovates and or adds an addition and flips it for a profit.
Newfoundland and Labrador has it's own new program now - called Flip this Utility. I cannot for the life of me figure out why CBC or NTV have not picked up the pilot and a couple of completed programs in the can. The least the Telegram or VOCM could do is give the reader and listener some highlights of the new series so we can encourage one of the TV networks to pick it up. I don't expect "Out of the Fog" would be interested.
The program is filled with energy as the hosts and flippers are interesting well known characters - that give it a kind of soap opera appeal - mixed with a tinge of a reality series.
The creator of the series is a well kept secret but I think it's fair to say that Brian Tobin might be the producer and the government of Newfoundland and Labrador acts as a partial financier of the renos.
Cable Atlantic picked up the government contract and away they went. Shortly after the owner of Cable Atlantic flipped the property for a tidy profit to Rogers - not a (local) company.
Dean MacDonald - Danny Williams - Ken Marshall - and Brian Tobin are featured predominantly in the pilot and the backdrop is priceless - as one of the flippers - apparently not believing that Tobin's government had done a good job became the leader of the other political party and went on to become Premier.
The second program starts off with one of the flippers of the first property picking up Persona - and while Danny is becoming Premier - Dean Macdonald leaves Rogers - the purchaser of the renovated Cable Atlantic - and starts to work on Persona. Not to be left out Brian leaves as the Premier and he ends up on the Board of the new property to be renovated and does work for the company that picked up the first flip.
The third show features all the same players - but this time the Premier who was a flipper on the first - decides government needs some reno work itself - and Persona who is ready to be the second property - just happen to come together with the same plan. So instead of going out to the market to find another property to invest in - government decides why not just deal with the same gang. No tender of RFP needed.It worked before. Same storyline - local company gets reno...
Now this episode gets real fun as the biggest communications (telephone) company Aliant experiences a real tragedy and has a fire in one of its buildings knocking out cell and telephone services far and wide. Danny - and Dean - recognizing this irony jump all over this to convince us that another reno is essential.
They send out a new character Trevor - to announce all the plans - and poor Trevor is all over the map as to exactly what it is they are doing for the reno and why. He fondly becomes known as the "duct tape man".
Then our Minister of Business Kevin O'Brien jumps in - to be honest witchu - and starts selling the audience on the real value in this property.
The audience is in for great laughs as everyone runs around trying to figure out if they want strands or a whole network or how many fibres they will need and whether or not they will light them. And if they are lit - who will do it. The funniest part is when the neighborhood spokesperson won't reveal who is going to pay what for maintenance and the whole meeting goes up when one of the property owners asks for an administration fee to sort it out.
Once again the appeal to us the audience is that another local property wants to reno and expand. Unfortunately - once again the audience is torn when the property is flipped to another company on the mainland.
Unlike the first flip where the profit details were available - the producer will keep us guessing as the real profit off this one will not be known.
The producer is not talking but the last episode might go something like this - Danny leaves as Premier - Dean takes that job - and Brian picks up a property to reno and appoints Danny to the Board. The new government under Dean will encourage reno's to that asset and will partially finance the upgrades - without a tender or RFP. I haven't heard yet if they will release the results of that flip and the profits which might accrue.
Utility Flip - coming soon - from your local cable provider.
I listened to Paul Dicks this week - through a prepared statement doing a few things. They were very similar - in fact too similar to Walter Noel's reappearance a few days earlier. Both of them said I made errors in judgement - both were sorry - then both of them claimed they were within the rules.
Walter Noel and Paul Dicks were Cabinet Ministers - Dicks was Minister of Justice and Attorney General and the Minister of Finance. Noel was Minister of Government Services and Minister of Mines and Energy. Both have premium pensions for their public service. What a pathetic sight they were - either deliberately taking advantage of a flawed system - they were part of controlling - or not possessing the ability until now to determine what they were doing was wrong.
As Ministers what were they responsible for? The two geniuses voted to sell Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - both were involved in energy planning and Lower Churchill discussions. The finances of the province were in Paul's hands and to make matters worse so was the Department of Justice.
This whole mess is more serious than these two people let on - and they know it. These individuals did make judgements of others and they made decisions on behalf of you and me. How reasoned were those decisions?
Dicks announced last week that he was going to pay back the money spent on art and wine. I am curious - where is the art? Where is the wine? If they were purchased as Dicks claims - as a result of errors in judgement - have these items appreciated? If we were to conclude that Dicks purchased these assets with our money - in a sense a loan - which he now is paying back - where is the interest?
How did "intelligent" men believe that buying art - wine - and Christmas presents out of a constituency allowance was okay? They were sitting MHA's and Ministers - did they not think to ask their fellow MHA's on the Internal Economy Commission about the appropriateness of such spending? Did they not - all on their own - think it might be reasonable to suggest a change in the rules?
Paul Dicks is a lawyer practicing with the firm Benson-Myles and is currently a Director of the Bank of Canada. Is this alright? If these two were in charge of setting rules for corporate spending and later it was determined that they made rules in the best interest of themselves versus the shareholders - what might happen? I don't know but Conrad Black might have part of the answer. Yet Walter insists that while he made an error in judgement - he was only making the same errors as if he was in the private sector. Okay Walter try it out - and we will watch your progress.
A public inquiry must occur so that we can ask these people what exactly they were doing. We can also bring up and sort out the whole sordid affair of booting the Auditor General out of their books - ironically brought about by the AG's concern over expenditures made by Dicks.
Instead these people ride off into the pensioned sunset - living with reputations that have been false - but helped them carry on into private life. Let's say the Dick's spending had become public when he was still in office - would he have received the same opportunities after he left?
Would Junior Achievement of Canada looked at him the same way? Would the Federal Minister of Finance have offered him a board appointment to the Bank of Canada? Would Benson - Myles have offered him a position with that law firm? We might never know the answers to these questions and fortunately for Dicks - enough time had passed before the discovery for him to establish himself financially and professionally. The question now is will he be asked to do the right thing or will he offer to do the right thing and resign from positions he now holds - and like so many others of us - have to start again - and again.
All of this is notwithstanding that Wally Anderson is on the campaign trail with Danny Dumaresque - Randy Collins has taken up a great job again with his union - Paul Dicks is living high on somebodies hog - Walter has shown his head during the federal Liberal leadership contest and in this provincial campaign. If no criminal convictions come out of the current charges - it does not change what the Auditor General found. It does not change the over-spending and inappropriate spending.
For all of this this Danny is still making excuses for these people - Gerry does not even want to talk about it - Tom Rideout says he will repay the bonus constituency payment when he loses or retires out of his severance. Not one of them give a damn that thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians do not want to vote - as they are sickened by the whole works of them. Then they come out and ask people to vote - and tell them nothing is accomplished by not voting.
I say to people - go vote - mark the ballot up - send whatever message you want - write in names - scratch off names - or better yet mark in the words - "I want a Public Inquiry".
What are we here anyway? There are people named in the AG report with significant "errors in judgement" who are running again. What have we been reduced to?
"There is enough guilt to go around and everyone feels bad enough as it is"
and
"I don't think that should become an election issue, because it can work both ways"
These are quotes by Liberal leader Gerry Reid found in a Telegram story today about the party's candidate Linda Goodyear raising the issue of double billing during a campaign event on Bell Island.
It says - I think voters are FOOLS
If that's not bad enough - Goodyear's figures on her Tory competitor and incumbent Diane Whelan were wrong. Very wrong. Apparently Linda got her figures from a story she read in the Independent either read improperly or written factually incorrect - and not from the Auditor General's Report.
First Gerry Reid has determined that the spending scandal should not be an issue in this election. He also believes that politicians already feel bad enough. Here's the deal voters - leave them alone - it was not their fault. Voters should back off and understand that because all political parties were involved - therefore voters can't just blame one.
This means - Reid has not accepted that taxpayers were ripped off - treated like fools - their money like a cookie jar. He wants people to understand how hard it's been on all the embattled MHA's - who cares about someone who needs life saving drugs or a medical test - or a safe house - or food for their kids - the politicians need a break from this incessant criticism.
As for Linda Goodyear - she gave Diane Whelan a pass to re-election or at least a good fight between her and NDP's Gavin Will. If Linda Goodyear cannot get that level of research correct and she uses that false information to take the last and biggest swipe at her opponent - she probably won't be so hot when examining legislation.
Then Reid states in the Telegram that:
"I'll have a talk to Linda and tell her it's not just Tory MHAs that double-billed. Liberal MHAs double billed as well."
First of all - it appeared on a CBC Morning Show report that Linda did know that all political parties were involved - and if she did not as Gerry seems to think - then Goodyear is not in the same world as the rest of us.
Disarray - Confusion - Mixed Messages - and Continued Cover-Up would seem to be the Liberal's campaign theme.
This is one big reason Danny Williams is so high in the polls. An awful lot of Liberals just do not want to vote or are switching sides.
The latest special Report of the Auditor General on the fibre-optic deal is a marshmallow.
I am frankly surprised that the man who likes to dig deep has barely scratched the surface on this particular task.
It does nothing to convince me that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians got the "best" deal for its investment - and is particularly weak when it comes to the Lobbyist Act.
First of all the project or "investment" of 15 million was not tendered and there was no request for proposals to achieve the government's stated objectives. On that basis alone we cannot determine if we got the "best" deal our money could buy.
Secondly - the financial assessment of whether or not our 15 million was needed was based on the cost of construction and did not include potential markets and revenues which could be generated for the companies involved. That is not acceptable.
Third - the Auditor General has a radio and a television and presumably keeps up with current affairs - he would then have known that this project was sold to the people as a "consortium" of companies - that did not have a name - as the party that needed the 15 million not Persona alone. In fact when the Electronic Warfare Associates report was - in part - made public - people questioned why Persona's finances could not be investigated - the response was that Rogers was a public company while Persona was private. This supposed consortium did not really exist as Persona is the owner of the system.
Fourthly - the AG determined that officials of Persona were not in violation of the Lobbyist Act as the Act states that 20% of the individuals time had to be spent lobbying. Clearly MacDonald could argue as the President of Persona - he did not spend 20% of his time lobbying for this project. However the Act provides for 2 types of lobbyists - in house - and consultant - The AG and according to him the office responsible for the lobbyist registry - found therefore there was no violation. They apparently ignored the possibility that MacDonald was acting as a consultant lobbyist which has no % of time associated with it.
MacDonald claimed he met with government officials on behalf of the consortium - Rogers - Persona - and MTS. This clearly makes MacDonald a consultant lobbyist as he was not only representing Persona - but a consortium. I therefore continue to believe the Act was violated.
Finally while there has been much fanfare from the AG office over the past year or so concerning the "spending scandal" and while the AG has been quite available for the camera - holding his own News Conferences - this report was floated out following the constituency allowance report on appropriateness of spending which had all taxpayers losing their stomachs and as such went under our radar.
This was a marshmallow report - which in the end did not provide taxpayers value for their money. In fact an imaginary News Release from the so called "consortium" probably would have looked very similar.
No recommendations - no concern about the lobbyist act - and no concern about the "best" value for our dollar.
Between the election call - the constituency spending - and conferences - and regular news events - the media did not have time to blink. I hope when the dust settles this report gets more scrutiny and more questions are asked.
Danny surrounds himself with the best people. That's what he says.
When the PC's were in Opposition Ed Byrne and Loyola Sullivan were like Danny's pit bulls - attack when they were tormented or challenged.
Sullivan would go on and on about financial mismanagement - bad deals - inappropriate spending like travelling with spouses. Sullivan would speak endlessly to budgets and publicly review the Auditor General's reports.
Do you remember when the House of Assembly fired Frasier March? These holier than thou MHA's passing judgement on others and their poor accounting methods.
Then Loyola's party won and they were government. He ended up with his dream job - Minister of Finance. He then began the "preach" of fiscal management - accrual accounting - tightening the belt - spend only what we have to spend.
He tortured citizens with decade old school tax accounts - with compounding interest. He was holding the Premier's fiscal hand when public servants hit the streets and then threatened to legislate them back. We just don't have the money he'd say - we are almost bankrupt.
That's when Loyola should have brought in a Chartered Accountant and asked - if we are almost bankrupt what should we spend the little money we have on. I bet he/she would not have said Seasons Tickets to the St. John's Maple Leafs.
Then there was the Premier - going off his head at the mere mention that Loyola Sullivan might appear to be in conflict of interest when Cabinet discussed the RMS system for the fishery or the sale of FPI (parts of which did end up under a couple of his brothers). Do you remember Danny saying - how dare you question the integrity of somebody like Loyola Sullivan. The man's reputation is impeccable.
Then we move to Loyola "knockout punch" Sullivan who took on the feds over equalization and won. He took on the mean old Liberals and brought home the bacon. Remember him standing next to Williams - puffed up with pride. Well that fellow has ended up taking an appointment from Newfoundland and Labrador's mortal enemy - Stephen Harper - while running away from the FPI fiasco - the Auditor General's latest expose and yet to come report on the fibre-optical illusion. Where is Loyola now that Harper has lied to us about equalization? Not a peep from Sullivan.
To top it all off - the big spending scandal - the one which resulted in criminal charges - took place during a time where Sullivan was the longest continuous sitting member of the Internal Economy Committee.
Where is he now? He's now named in the latest AG's report as being one of only 9 MHA's who had not paid back or made arrangements to pay back the $2875 special payment - by August 16 of this year.
He is named for buying season hockey tickets for the St. John's Maple Leafs from his constituency allowance. $4800 + $1000 to Mile One.
Now can those of you looking for potential life saving drugs - or a house without mold - or a retired public servant looking for indexing really blame the "scrooge" for wanting some hockey tickets? As you pay back your thousands of dollars in interest on a school tax bill of a couple of hundred - remember the drop of the puck at Mile One.
So Danny's two "best of" team members should make you question if Danny has a problem in identifying the "best we have" for things like the Lower Churchill development or the spending of 15 million to Persona to lease some strands.
True it was not Danny Williams that did these things - but he picked these two as his lead team members.
If we are to accept that one MHA - Elizabeth Marshall - above all others was the catalyst for the Auditor General to gut the financial operations of the House of Assembly - and there's no shortage of people who would claim that to be true - then Elizabeth Marshall's constituency spending and accounting should be perfect.
Let's look at this MHA's record - as prepared by the AG - for three of the four years she has been in office.
Of 115 MHA's that served the people (yah right) over a 17 year period - almost 25% had no double billings. Their average years of service was about 5 years. Elizabeth Marshall double billed.
Despite that the current Auditor General John Noseworthy states and the former Auditor General Elizabeth Marshall should know - that alcohol only purchases are inappropriate and represented part of the concern then AG Marshall had with former Cabinet Minister Paul Dicks - Marshall managed to make alcohol only purchases in the few short years she has been sitting. This despite that fact that 50% of her colleagues did not.
When the $2875 special payment was given to the MHA's as a "top-up" of their constituency allowances - although the former AG did not take it - she did not make it public either and waited for the current AG to get his hands on it and report.
I would also like to know whether or not the donations made by Marshall over the past 4 years have in any number or amount been claimed on her personal income tax return. Given the amounts reported and averaged and working with the latest taxation information - Marshall could have benefited in access of $2000 per annum personally.
The question is - will she tell us?
Given the Member for Topsail has only been in office for 4 years - the bar set by this former AG is not very high.
As the Report accentuated the abuse of taxpayer dollars by Paul Dicks - I have sent the following to the Governor of the Bank of Canada - where Mr. Dicks sits on the Board of Directors.
Dear Mr. Dodge,
I am writing as a citizen of Canada who wishes to express my concern respecting the previous activities of a member of the Bank's Board of Directors.
Mr. Paul Dicks - a board member and former MHA and Minister of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has been named by the Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador as having made numerous and significant inappropriate expenditures of public money.
Please refer to the Report of the Auditor General 2007 issued as at today's date. Please use the link below to access.
I feel the behavior of Mr. Dicks with respect to his fiduciary duties to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador was abysmal.
A fiduciary is expected to be extremely loyal to the person to whom they owe the duty (the people): they must not put their personal interests before the duty, and must not profit from their position as a fiduciary, unless the principal consents.
I trust the information delivered by the Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador would cause concern to any citizen of this province - this country - and the leadership of the Bank of Canada.
Please take the time to review the tabled report and I trust the Bank will take appropriate action.
The funniest part is when the neighborhood spokesperson won't reveal who is going to pay what for maintenance and the whole meeting goes up when one of the property owners asks for an administration fee to sort it out.
