Thanks to Wikileaks!
We all remember Hydro-Quebec's bid to purchase New Brunswick Power right?
Below is a Wikileak note: It outlines a discussion between Quebec Premier Jean Charest and U.S. Ambassador David Jacobson.
"Charest also told the Ambassador that HydroQu????bec (sic) is planning to acquire the privately-owned Prince Edward Island power company," the document reads.
"The generating assets involved are quite small, but Charest said HydroQu????bec (sic) would be also acquiring important wind assets and environmental credits."
So the idea was to acquire all that is power in New Brunswick and PEI - now what to do with Newfoundland and Labrador? The answer to that is Emera - in the case of NB Power it was crown owned and PEI (Fortis) not as attractive without the NB deal.
Emera is the easy way in for Hydro-Quebec - and I believe they will take it.
Further the mess that Dunderdale will put Nalcor in with the giveaway deal on the Lower Churchill - will lead to an argument to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to unburden us from the debt. Fortis will be there to pick up the pieces with Hydro-Quebec and NL will be left with nothing other than very high electric bills.
I trust Senator Beth Marshall is working on that loan guarantee from Ottawa - will that in any way help Fortis? Fortis very strong on nothing to do with Lower Churchill - no not upfront - what may happen after Emera enters?
Possibility exists that Fortis and Hydro-Quebec could own the whole works.
You never underestimate companies and rich shareholders who want more. They are very clever.
Showing posts with label Beth Marshall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Beth Marshall. Show all posts
Friday, May 20, 2011
Friday, April 15, 2011
Political Pigs at the Trough and Bacon in the Senate - goodbye Maple Syrup
Stephen Harper - stated he was going to move toward an elected Senate. He - being different than PM's before him would bring democracy to bear on the Upper Chamber.
What do Canadians think of the Senate - my guess is not much - and as of late disgusted.
Harper has yet to fulfill another of his election fibs (lies).
Harper used to have a real antagonistic relationship with the unelected Senate - that is when the majority of them were Liberal appointees. Nowadays no such urgency. The Senate now has a majority of Conservatives which pleases Harper and assists in moving forward quickly his "legislative" agenda.
What did Harper do when becoming Prime Minister? As quickly as he could he "appointed" to the Senate Michael Fortier and then right on to his Cabinet as Public Works Minister. This was to accommodate the city of Montreal - which had not elected a Conservative.
We do remember right when an entire province Newfoundland and Labrador did not elect a Conservative - did we get somebody appointed to Cabinet from outside caucus? NO! We got Peter MacKay.
So this Reformer - Stephen Harper - the man who wants/ed an elected Senate did a fine job appointing Conservatives to the Chamber regardless of his "strongly held" fundamental beliefs.
If all these lies and deceit is not enough - Senators are running around the country kissing babies, rubbing elbows, and running Conservative candidates' campaigns. Does this sound right to you? Does this sound like a party or a potential Prime Minister that wants to have the Senate answerable to voters? Maybe we misunderstood him - as apparently is often the case - maybe what he meant was Senators should get involved in electing Conservatives to the House of Commons. Perhaps now he means we can call a Conservative riding headquarters and ask to speak to the Senator who is helping the Conservative candidate out. Maybe that's what he meant by "answerable to the voter".
As I watched Preston Manning the other night answer a reporters question about being proud of where the Conservatives are today - I was reminded that a few reformers sat at a table and planned to get a Reform government in by 2000. Manning added they were just 12 years late. The archival clips shown were of those reformers Manning and Harper saying the Progressive Conservative Party had to go. Then I am reminded of political wimps like Peter MacKay and Loyola Hearn that accommodated that destruction.
Don't be fooled by the Newfoundland and Labrador PC faces that show up at your door looking for a vote. These people have become members of a party that was built on extreme right-wing philosophies and are only shrouding that until they get a majority. Then the likes of Fabian Manning, Jerry Byrne, John Ottenheimer, and Loyola Sullivan will have to sit and take the absolute extremism a Progressive Conservative does not support the likes of which has never been seen in our Province.
These Pigs at the Trough are learning to say and do anything to get elected - and then learn to shut-up as reformers alter this country to something between a police-state and a Bush party.
The ABC campaign must be stronger than before and more aggressive. Just today I was reading an announcement for an upcoming debate - being sponsored by a community services group. It read that 4 parties were participating - Liberal - NDP - Progressive Conservative - and the Green Party. It also listed Loyola Sullivan as a Progressive Conservative. A wolf in sheeps clothing.
Well Newfoundland and Labrador if you elect these opportunistic - ideologically void - pigs at the trough - they won't hesitate to sell us out and tell us we have an attitude of defeatism if we complain.
What do Canadians think of the Senate - my guess is not much - and as of late disgusted.
Harper has yet to fulfill another of his election fibs (lies).
Harper used to have a real antagonistic relationship with the unelected Senate - that is when the majority of them were Liberal appointees. Nowadays no such urgency. The Senate now has a majority of Conservatives which pleases Harper and assists in moving forward quickly his "legislative" agenda.
What did Harper do when becoming Prime Minister? As quickly as he could he "appointed" to the Senate Michael Fortier and then right on to his Cabinet as Public Works Minister. This was to accommodate the city of Montreal - which had not elected a Conservative.
We do remember right when an entire province Newfoundland and Labrador did not elect a Conservative - did we get somebody appointed to Cabinet from outside caucus? NO! We got Peter MacKay.
So this Reformer - Stephen Harper - the man who wants/ed an elected Senate did a fine job appointing Conservatives to the Chamber regardless of his "strongly held" fundamental beliefs.
If all these lies and deceit is not enough - Senators are running around the country kissing babies, rubbing elbows, and running Conservative candidates' campaigns. Does this sound right to you? Does this sound like a party or a potential Prime Minister that wants to have the Senate answerable to voters? Maybe we misunderstood him - as apparently is often the case - maybe what he meant was Senators should get involved in electing Conservatives to the House of Commons. Perhaps now he means we can call a Conservative riding headquarters and ask to speak to the Senator who is helping the Conservative candidate out. Maybe that's what he meant by "answerable to the voter".
As I watched Preston Manning the other night answer a reporters question about being proud of where the Conservatives are today - I was reminded that a few reformers sat at a table and planned to get a Reform government in by 2000. Manning added they were just 12 years late. The archival clips shown were of those reformers Manning and Harper saying the Progressive Conservative Party had to go. Then I am reminded of political wimps like Peter MacKay and Loyola Hearn that accommodated that destruction.
Don't be fooled by the Newfoundland and Labrador PC faces that show up at your door looking for a vote. These people have become members of a party that was built on extreme right-wing philosophies and are only shrouding that until they get a majority. Then the likes of Fabian Manning, Jerry Byrne, John Ottenheimer, and Loyola Sullivan will have to sit and take the absolute extremism a Progressive Conservative does not support the likes of which has never been seen in our Province.
These Pigs at the Trough are learning to say and do anything to get elected - and then learn to shut-up as reformers alter this country to something between a police-state and a Bush party.
The ABC campaign must be stronger than before and more aggressive. Just today I was reading an announcement for an upcoming debate - being sponsored by a community services group. It read that 4 parties were participating - Liberal - NDP - Progressive Conservative - and the Green Party. It also listed Loyola Sullivan as a Progressive Conservative. A wolf in sheeps clothing.
Well Newfoundland and Labrador if you elect these opportunistic - ideologically void - pigs at the trough - they won't hesitate to sell us out and tell us we have an attitude of defeatism if we complain.
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Another 4 Years of Destruction....
I watched David Cochrane of CBC explain some time ago how the Greene Report and recommendations would allow media to catch the self-serving politicians if they attempted to hide or otherwise sneak legislation through that increased or changed the nature of their allowances. So much for that - as it was a blogger - I believe who caught the crowd as they all postponed the changes until after the election.
The fact that the media did not catch it is no surprise - they had that opportunity when legislation was amended to boot the Auditor General (Beth Marshall) at the time - out of the books. They should have done the job they are really meant to do. That is to protect our democracy when all political parties are in it together. They dropped the ball - and the rest as they say is history.
Then there is Loyola - the 30 million dollar big spender - while more influential MP's and federal cabinet colleagues are passing out Billions!!!
The man who so willingly takes pot shots at Gus Etchegary - while using him as a human campaign poster for the last election. It's not as if the fellow did not know Etchegary's position on the fishery. It is not as if they had ever met. The fact is Gus did not change - the metamorphosis occurred in Hearn after he won the election.
We have Manning and Doyle backing up the Minister by talking about the Atlantic Accord. They saved the Accord - funny the Accord was not a discussion during the election. Harper promised to remove non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization formula. That would have eliminated the need for the Accord and would have been a universal amendment not geared to any province specifically but representative of a change in economic thinking - which promotes long term financial health of jurisdictions exploiting non-renewable resources.
At the same time we have the provincial Liberals seeking Joey for policy - the Tories doing what they want with whom they want - whenever they want - including very significant decisions made on the fishery (FPI) - energy with no plan yet unveiled including wind development - privatization of energy resources - the Lower Churchill etc. - business deals with buddies - and tourism services provided out of Quebec. But Gerry et al will not make a dent - and the media is on the BBQ circuit with them. Danny Dumeresque as part of the Efford - Dumeresque team with leader Reid will not be effective in building the party - however will achieve Effords objective - the one he demonstrated after he lost the leadership race to Grimes. All Liberals left out there should really think about what that was.
There is no obvious movement in the provincial NDP - with most identifiable labour reps choosing to seek nominations for the other parties.
There is no doubt we have a mess - and one we will have to suffer through for the next 4 years.
The only people who have a chance are Labradorians under the Labrador Party. Continued luck to them - and I hope they take the lead and protect those extremely valuable resources.
The fact that the media did not catch it is no surprise - they had that opportunity when legislation was amended to boot the Auditor General (Beth Marshall) at the time - out of the books. They should have done the job they are really meant to do. That is to protect our democracy when all political parties are in it together. They dropped the ball - and the rest as they say is history.
Then there is Loyola - the 30 million dollar big spender - while more influential MP's and federal cabinet colleagues are passing out Billions!!!
The man who so willingly takes pot shots at Gus Etchegary - while using him as a human campaign poster for the last election. It's not as if the fellow did not know Etchegary's position on the fishery. It is not as if they had ever met. The fact is Gus did not change - the metamorphosis occurred in Hearn after he won the election.
We have Manning and Doyle backing up the Minister by talking about the Atlantic Accord. They saved the Accord - funny the Accord was not a discussion during the election. Harper promised to remove non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization formula. That would have eliminated the need for the Accord and would have been a universal amendment not geared to any province specifically but representative of a change in economic thinking - which promotes long term financial health of jurisdictions exploiting non-renewable resources.
At the same time we have the provincial Liberals seeking Joey for policy - the Tories doing what they want with whom they want - whenever they want - including very significant decisions made on the fishery (FPI) - energy with no plan yet unveiled including wind development - privatization of energy resources - the Lower Churchill etc. - business deals with buddies - and tourism services provided out of Quebec. But Gerry et al will not make a dent - and the media is on the BBQ circuit with them. Danny Dumeresque as part of the Efford - Dumeresque team with leader Reid will not be effective in building the party - however will achieve Effords objective - the one he demonstrated after he lost the leadership race to Grimes. All Liberals left out there should really think about what that was.
There is no obvious movement in the provincial NDP - with most identifiable labour reps choosing to seek nominations for the other parties.
There is no doubt we have a mess - and one we will have to suffer through for the next 4 years.
The only people who have a chance are Labradorians under the Labrador Party. Continued luck to them - and I hope they take the lead and protect those extremely valuable resources.
Sunday, February 04, 2007
A society of partisan secrecy and misplaced loyalties....
Yesterday Sue's Blog received the following comment in response to the post "Is this what happened?"
We wonder - as a people - how things like the House of Assembly scandal happen. Primarily they happen because our political system teaches us to "stay quiet" - "keep you powder dry" - "air your dirty laundry inside the party". This mentality has driven many a good person from seeking public office.
There are times when we should call it like we see it - I don't mean private one on one conversations (off the record) as we have witnessed recently with Judy Foote and before her Tom Marshall. When political parties and MHA's are acting improperly as it relates to our money and our province - we should speak up.
The person who left the comment above - obviously has respect for Beth Marshall and believes she is capable of being a good representative and Cabinet Minister. I do not disagree - until last week I was regularly asking the Premier - on the blog - why Beth continues to be overlooked during Cabinet shuffles.
Marshall is a professional and intellectually has much to offer in service to the people and her province - but she doesn't have the guts. Sure she stood up to Danny and resigned - but much too quietly - if we are not going to get the benefit of Marshall in Cabinet - we need to know why.
The other issue for Marshall is what she chooses to stand for. Before us today is one example of blatant disregard for the public purse and blatant use of taxpayer dollars to buy votes. When it comes to the people's treasury - that is Ms. Marshall's area. This is what she had no problem doing from the relative comfort of her Auditor General's chair - and she should feel the same need to expose from the caucus chair.
If Danny refuses to let Beth perform at her level - she has alternatives - she can make a stand. There is a benefit in this for the people as we can really understand how our Premier is operating. Danny has a duty to find and utilize the best talent we elect in their areas of strength. Obviously accounting and finance is Marshall's calling - and she - more than anybody else - is responsible for getting the current dirt out but as a vocal AG - now she needs to be a vocal MHA.
There is no doubt our party system in the province and country discourages people from speaking out when there are important issues on the table. None so evident when Efford chose the Prime Minister and not his province and people during the Atlantic Accord - Loyola Hearn chose the bureaucracy instead of Newfoundland and Labrador when he backed out of his promise to us - that custodial management would be achieved on the nose and tail of Grand Banks and Flemish Cap - and these are but a couple of examples we have suffered over the past five decades.
We have people in the PC caucus that know better regarding the fishery - but they have shut-up disappeared - Harry Harding - Roger Fitzgerald - Charlene Johnson - and even Trevor Taylor. I think Roger has given up - gone into early retirement and not up for the fight. Charlene and Harry are so in awe of the Premier - the thought of just being able to clap - giggle - and cheer for Danny in the House is good enough for them. And Trevor - well there's really no excuse other than he likes the office - he loves Cabinet and what it does for his own personal achievement record. Meanwhile thousands of our people leave to find work - families and communities destroyed because the party - not the people - come first.
On the situation with the constituency bonus - we need to know if our belt-tightening scrooge of a Finance Minister - Loyola Sullivan - knew what was coming in the report. Why did Loyola take the $2875 payment - why did he say nothing? Oh the party loyalty is gone to the extreme - while personal rackets such as those between Grimes - Efford - and Dumeresque could be avoided - real issues must be tackled straight-up.
And what's worse - this extends to people who are not even elected. If you speak out against obvious policy apathy and just ridiculous statements by members on either side - there is nothing you can offer the party.
In the long run the people are bettered by those who have and use a voice - and so would the party - but the immediacy of political office is all that's considered when some fool (politician or staffer) is sent out to personally attack and ridicule those citizens who speak freely.If one states that neither party is doing anything concrete to deal with the fishery - there is no place for that person in politics. The people of the province genuinely approve of a person speaking out - it's what exposes the messes - hopefully before it is too late. The political parties shun the same people because they are not capable of dealing with a challenge or finding a solution to whatever the problem is. If however a person speaks badly of only one side - the other is hot to trot to keep them close - butter them up - encourage through praise - the continuation of a partisan attack.
This more than anything else has hurt our province.
When Danny says - he has the best people working on this or that - what he means is the best people among his list of people acceptable to him - those who openly support his every position - the same is true of Reid - and all other Premier's or leaders before them.
So when Danny says, "we should be more like Quebec and fight for the province not a partisan position" - he should understand that he is admitting Newfoundland and Labrador has yet to have a real leader.
I believe Beth has been working within an environment that doesn't want her around. Its clear to me that she had to stay quiet about it TO THE PUBLIC but I bet she stood up (once again) to the Premier and has been sidelined for it. Beth is in survival mode... waiting for Danny to finish his reign. I hope she remain around.
We wonder - as a people - how things like the House of Assembly scandal happen. Primarily they happen because our political system teaches us to "stay quiet" - "keep you powder dry" - "air your dirty laundry inside the party". This mentality has driven many a good person from seeking public office.
There are times when we should call it like we see it - I don't mean private one on one conversations (off the record) as we have witnessed recently with Judy Foote and before her Tom Marshall. When political parties and MHA's are acting improperly as it relates to our money and our province - we should speak up.
The person who left the comment above - obviously has respect for Beth Marshall and believes she is capable of being a good representative and Cabinet Minister. I do not disagree - until last week I was regularly asking the Premier - on the blog - why Beth continues to be overlooked during Cabinet shuffles.
Marshall is a professional and intellectually has much to offer in service to the people and her province - but she doesn't have the guts. Sure she stood up to Danny and resigned - but much too quietly - if we are not going to get the benefit of Marshall in Cabinet - we need to know why.
The other issue for Marshall is what she chooses to stand for. Before us today is one example of blatant disregard for the public purse and blatant use of taxpayer dollars to buy votes. When it comes to the people's treasury - that is Ms. Marshall's area. This is what she had no problem doing from the relative comfort of her Auditor General's chair - and she should feel the same need to expose from the caucus chair.
If Danny refuses to let Beth perform at her level - she has alternatives - she can make a stand. There is a benefit in this for the people as we can really understand how our Premier is operating. Danny has a duty to find and utilize the best talent we elect in their areas of strength. Obviously accounting and finance is Marshall's calling - and she - more than anybody else - is responsible for getting the current dirt out but as a vocal AG - now she needs to be a vocal MHA.
There is no doubt our party system in the province and country discourages people from speaking out when there are important issues on the table. None so evident when Efford chose the Prime Minister and not his province and people during the Atlantic Accord - Loyola Hearn chose the bureaucracy instead of Newfoundland and Labrador when he backed out of his promise to us - that custodial management would be achieved on the nose and tail of Grand Banks and Flemish Cap - and these are but a couple of examples we have suffered over the past five decades.
We have people in the PC caucus that know better regarding the fishery - but they have shut-up disappeared - Harry Harding - Roger Fitzgerald - Charlene Johnson - and even Trevor Taylor. I think Roger has given up - gone into early retirement and not up for the fight. Charlene and Harry are so in awe of the Premier - the thought of just being able to clap - giggle - and cheer for Danny in the House is good enough for them. And Trevor - well there's really no excuse other than he likes the office - he loves Cabinet and what it does for his own personal achievement record. Meanwhile thousands of our people leave to find work - families and communities destroyed because the party - not the people - come first.
On the situation with the constituency bonus - we need to know if our belt-tightening scrooge of a Finance Minister - Loyola Sullivan - knew what was coming in the report. Why did Loyola take the $2875 payment - why did he say nothing? Oh the party loyalty is gone to the extreme - while personal rackets such as those between Grimes - Efford - and Dumeresque could be avoided - real issues must be tackled straight-up.
And what's worse - this extends to people who are not even elected. If you speak out against obvious policy apathy and just ridiculous statements by members on either side - there is nothing you can offer the party.
In the long run the people are bettered by those who have and use a voice - and so would the party - but the immediacy of political office is all that's considered when some fool (politician or staffer) is sent out to personally attack and ridicule those citizens who speak freely.If one states that neither party is doing anything concrete to deal with the fishery - there is no place for that person in politics. The people of the province genuinely approve of a person speaking out - it's what exposes the messes - hopefully before it is too late. The political parties shun the same people because they are not capable of dealing with a challenge or finding a solution to whatever the problem is. If however a person speaks badly of only one side - the other is hot to trot to keep them close - butter them up - encourage through praise - the continuation of a partisan attack.
This more than anything else has hurt our province.
When Danny says - he has the best people working on this or that - what he means is the best people among his list of people acceptable to him - those who openly support his every position - the same is true of Reid - and all other Premier's or leaders before them.
So when Danny says, "we should be more like Quebec and fight for the province not a partisan position" - he should understand that he is admitting Newfoundland and Labrador has yet to have a real leader.
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Is this what happened?
Sometimes it is difficult to look at events from yesterday - when talking about an event today.
I believe we need to look carefully at the situation May of 2004 - to determine if something else was going on which caused Elizabeth Marshall and Danny Williams to be the only ones that did not take the constituency bonus.
During the years Danny spent in Opposition - he beat the Liberals silly with the Auditor General reports - some of which were completed when Elizabeth Marshall was the AG.
Marshall was handpicked by Williams as this CBC story at the time states.
The story also uses the headline "Accountability target in Topsail"
Here's the most interesting section of that CBC feature on Elizabeth Marshall - the candidate:
Marshall spent 10 years criticizing the Liberal government for its spending habits and book keeping as auditor general. She's the Conservative poster candidate for transparency and accountability — two areas in which she hammered the Liberals in her annual reports.
"I think I'm going in with a great benefit in that I know government very, very well," she says. "I've already thought a lot of things through in my mind, so I think it's a great benefit that I've had that experience in the past."
Cut wasteful spending
Marshall's message when campaigning in the district is one of fiscal responsibility. She says the government has to prioritize, given the province's fiscal position.
So there is Elizabeth - May 2004 - Minister of Health and member of the Internal Economy Commission (IEC) - and no doubt very close to the Premier - politically speaking.
The IEC meets - Beth knows the bonus payment is on the heels of a bitter strike, belt tightening - and increased taxes (service fees). We do not know what she said in that meeting but we do know she would not take the money. Beth also knows this is likely to be picked up on by the Auditor General (a man who was deputy auditor when she was AG) sometime in the future. At the same time - Elizabeth and the Premier would have been collaborating on the development of the Accountability legislation and preparing for what they knew would be messy. (allowing the AG at the books of the HOA)
No doubt Beth Marshall reported on her own colleagues and the Liberals sitting on the IEC to Danny - and I suspect she informed the Premier about that "poor decision" in May of 2004. Being Cabinet buddies and confidantes would have allowed the two to predict the eventual outcome of taking this cash and the two obviously knew it was wrong. Despite the Premier saying he knew nothing of it at the time (his underlings were taking care of it - he described in an interview) I believe Beth Marshall told him about the IEC decision and advised him she would not be taking the payment.
I don't think the Premier gave a damn if a few of his old buddies got the hammer - (Sullivan and Byrne) were expendable - as they were only tolerated and used as they were the old gang that held the works together while Dan was building Cable Atlantic.
After the deed was done and the accountability legislation was well in hand - the formidable Beth Marshall - despite her star qualities and expertise - was now expendable for Williams - she resigned in September of 2004.
So much for her campaign promise of transparency and accountability - she said nothing about the decision to increase the allowances and nothing about the vague way in which was noted.
Well now she is no longer in Cabinet and no longer on the IEC - her expertise and credentials no longer needed to lead government's financial affairs - but Elizabeth - remember - this particular expenditure - was under your watch. And Premier it's about time you said something about the elimination of your star candidate from Cabinet and your determination that she has nothing to offer the people of the province in such a role.
What does the Premier say about it all? Pay it back - okay that could have been avoided had you spoken up 2 years ago. What does Elizabeth Marshall say? Nothing - that speaks volumes.
From what we've seen from the AG so far - the Liberals were not keen on ensuring good records were kept or indeed did not bother to take the lead to correct the mess. Naturally they all took the cash - and from what I heard from Gerry Reid on CBC - entitled to their entitlements - until caught at which point you say "in hindsight it was a bad decision". Ha Ha Ha.....
I believe we need to look carefully at the situation May of 2004 - to determine if something else was going on which caused Elizabeth Marshall and Danny Williams to be the only ones that did not take the constituency bonus.
During the years Danny spent in Opposition - he beat the Liberals silly with the Auditor General reports - some of which were completed when Elizabeth Marshall was the AG.
Marshall was handpicked by Williams as this CBC story at the time states.
The story also uses the headline "Accountability target in Topsail"
Here's the most interesting section of that CBC feature on Elizabeth Marshall - the candidate:
Marshall spent 10 years criticizing the Liberal government for its spending habits and book keeping as auditor general. She's the Conservative poster candidate for transparency and accountability — two areas in which she hammered the Liberals in her annual reports.
"I think I'm going in with a great benefit in that I know government very, very well," she says. "I've already thought a lot of things through in my mind, so I think it's a great benefit that I've had that experience in the past."
Cut wasteful spending
Marshall's message when campaigning in the district is one of fiscal responsibility. She says the government has to prioritize, given the province's fiscal position.
So there is Elizabeth - May 2004 - Minister of Health and member of the Internal Economy Commission (IEC) - and no doubt very close to the Premier - politically speaking.
The IEC meets - Beth knows the bonus payment is on the heels of a bitter strike, belt tightening - and increased taxes (service fees). We do not know what she said in that meeting but we do know she would not take the money. Beth also knows this is likely to be picked up on by the Auditor General (a man who was deputy auditor when she was AG) sometime in the future. At the same time - Elizabeth and the Premier would have been collaborating on the development of the Accountability legislation and preparing for what they knew would be messy. (allowing the AG at the books of the HOA)
No doubt Beth Marshall reported on her own colleagues and the Liberals sitting on the IEC to Danny - and I suspect she informed the Premier about that "poor decision" in May of 2004. Being Cabinet buddies and confidantes would have allowed the two to predict the eventual outcome of taking this cash and the two obviously knew it was wrong. Despite the Premier saying he knew nothing of it at the time (his underlings were taking care of it - he described in an interview) I believe Beth Marshall told him about the IEC decision and advised him she would not be taking the payment.
I don't think the Premier gave a damn if a few of his old buddies got the hammer - (Sullivan and Byrne) were expendable - as they were only tolerated and used as they were the old gang that held the works together while Dan was building Cable Atlantic.
After the deed was done and the accountability legislation was well in hand - the formidable Beth Marshall - despite her star qualities and expertise - was now expendable for Williams - she resigned in September of 2004.
So much for her campaign promise of transparency and accountability - she said nothing about the decision to increase the allowances and nothing about the vague way in which was noted.
Well now she is no longer in Cabinet and no longer on the IEC - her expertise and credentials no longer needed to lead government's financial affairs - but Elizabeth - remember - this particular expenditure - was under your watch. And Premier it's about time you said something about the elimination of your star candidate from Cabinet and your determination that she has nothing to offer the people of the province in such a role.
What does the Premier say about it all? Pay it back - okay that could have been avoided had you spoken up 2 years ago. What does Elizabeth Marshall say? Nothing - that speaks volumes.
From what we've seen from the AG so far - the Liberals were not keen on ensuring good records were kept or indeed did not bother to take the lead to correct the mess. Naturally they all took the cash - and from what I heard from Gerry Reid on CBC - entitled to their entitlements - until caught at which point you say "in hindsight it was a bad decision". Ha Ha Ha.....
Friday, February 02, 2007
Minister of Business needs Rules and Direction
I mean you know - with regards to - be honest witchu Minister of Business - Kevin O'Brien - could not tell Randy Simms on Open Line this morning what his constituency allowance was.
This is the Minister of Business!
Kevin O'Brien then added that his spouse and Executive Assistant manage his allowance for him.
This is the Minister of Business!
Kevin O'Brien now says the decision to grant themselves $2875 was not a good one. Hindsight!
This is the Minister of Business!
Kevin O'Brien says he needs a clear set of rules and directions in order to spend his $30,000 allowance properly.
This is the Minister of Business!
and now this MHA sits on the IEC.
Tell me what advice and leadership can he provide business?
This is the Minister of Business!
Kevin O'Brien then added that his spouse and Executive Assistant manage his allowance for him.
This is the Minister of Business!
Kevin O'Brien now says the decision to grant themselves $2875 was not a good one. Hindsight!
This is the Minister of Business!
Kevin O'Brien says he needs a clear set of rules and directions in order to spend his $30,000 allowance properly.
This is the Minister of Business!
and now this MHA sits on the IEC.
Tell me what advice and leadership can he provide business?
Thursday, February 01, 2007
They can keep the money - but should lose their jobs...
The IEC members at May 2004 - when the checks for $2875 were cut were:
Harvey Hodder (Chair)
Roger Fitzgerald
Ed Byrne
Loyola Sullivan
Elizabeth Marshall
Kelvin Parsons
Percy Barrett
They gave themselves a bonus which did not require receipts.
Just a few months later these members were in the House of Assembly debating the whole issue of the Auditor General being permitted to review their books.
The debate was interesting - especially as it relates to the desire of some members to audit on a go-forward basis. Yes I imagine there was an interest is auditing on a go-forward basis - then we would not have been "exposed" to all that mess from 2000 forward right?
Anyway on the issue of the day - the bonus pay - well Loyola Sullivan managed to duck under the radar again - escaping to Federal cash instead. You see Loyola was on the IEC throughout the period in question and apparently nothing caught his attention - and then Mr. belt tightener and scrooge to the public sector employees did not protest at all at the bonus in 2004. He was the Finance Minister? He was a great Finance Minister?
Then there's Beth Marshall - who along with Danny did not take the payment. Maybe not however Beth was sitting at the IEC table when the decision was taken. I did not see a note in the AG report that says Marshall voted against the bonus. I did not here her tell the public - as a matter of accountability - that this was a payment that should not have been made.
For the two of them - there was no attempt by our sitting Minister of Finance or our previous AG and Chartered Accountant - that the way the account was presented was so vague the public would not be able to figure out what it was for. Where was the protest?
Loyola Sullivan has skated through this - and apparently without a blemish - yet if he was that competent or concerned about taxpayer dollars (he said we were almost bankrupt)then why did he not demand the books be audited by the AG from 2000-2004 - why Loyola?
Harvey Hodder is presenting himself as the facilitator of change - wanting to get right at the accountability of the HOA - yet he was the Chair when the bonus was handed out. He was the Chair when the HOA overspent it's budget.
Ed Byrne - yeah okay - same old same old...
Then there is Kelvin Parsons and Percy Barrett - two members who would like to achieve government again - great way to demonstrate it - no problem taking the bonus there - in fact the culture of "I'm entitled to my entitlements" lead by the Tobin era of accountability carries right on in their political genetics.
Let them keep their money - all of them - but don't let them keep their jobs. I hear there's an employee review coming in October - I guess we can give them a performance review at that time...
AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT
Harvey Hodder (Chair)
Roger Fitzgerald
Ed Byrne
Loyola Sullivan
Elizabeth Marshall
Kelvin Parsons
Percy Barrett
They gave themselves a bonus which did not require receipts.
Just a few months later these members were in the House of Assembly debating the whole issue of the Auditor General being permitted to review their books.
The debate was interesting - especially as it relates to the desire of some members to audit on a go-forward basis. Yes I imagine there was an interest is auditing on a go-forward basis - then we would not have been "exposed" to all that mess from 2000 forward right?
Anyway on the issue of the day - the bonus pay - well Loyola Sullivan managed to duck under the radar again - escaping to Federal cash instead. You see Loyola was on the IEC throughout the period in question and apparently nothing caught his attention - and then Mr. belt tightener and scrooge to the public sector employees did not protest at all at the bonus in 2004. He was the Finance Minister? He was a great Finance Minister?
Then there's Beth Marshall - who along with Danny did not take the payment. Maybe not however Beth was sitting at the IEC table when the decision was taken. I did not see a note in the AG report that says Marshall voted against the bonus. I did not here her tell the public - as a matter of accountability - that this was a payment that should not have been made.
For the two of them - there was no attempt by our sitting Minister of Finance or our previous AG and Chartered Accountant - that the way the account was presented was so vague the public would not be able to figure out what it was for. Where was the protest?
Loyola Sullivan has skated through this - and apparently without a blemish - yet if he was that competent or concerned about taxpayer dollars (he said we were almost bankrupt)then why did he not demand the books be audited by the AG from 2000-2004 - why Loyola?
Harvey Hodder is presenting himself as the facilitator of change - wanting to get right at the accountability of the HOA - yet he was the Chair when the bonus was handed out. He was the Chair when the HOA overspent it's budget.
Ed Byrne - yeah okay - same old same old...
Then there is Kelvin Parsons and Percy Barrett - two members who would like to achieve government again - great way to demonstrate it - no problem taking the bonus there - in fact the culture of "I'm entitled to my entitlements" lead by the Tobin era of accountability carries right on in their political genetics.
Let them keep their money - all of them - but don't let them keep their jobs. I hear there's an employee review coming in October - I guess we can give them a performance review at that time...
AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)