For a Party that has avoided a real leadership contest in almost two decades - 19 years - the choice of a delegate style event seems underwhelming.
In a country where provincial and federal parties are opening up the leadership process to all but children - the Newfoundland and Labrador Tories are determined to keep this in their controlled house.
The question is why?
When the Party was at its height - in popularity - somewhere holding on to the coattails of Danny Williams - people were kept at bay from challenging the "I don't want this job" interim Premier Kathy Dunderdale.
At first there were rumors that several caucus members would throw their hats in - then some speculation on outside interests. Brad Cabana paid his money - but was blocked from even a challenge - to what the party interests wanted. In the end - no takers.
So now the field has become wide open (so to speak) for any select individuals to step forward. As mentioned in an earlier post - I believe this process is taking on such flurry now because particular corporate interests wee unsuccessful in getting their chosen Liberal leader.
Such as all this is - why shut the people of the province out? Why not allow all to vote who want to vote? Why use delegates on a floor instead of the more progressive and open approach of letting everybody cast their own votes?
Instead of over 20,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians casting individual votes - as was the way with the Liberal Party - late last year - we are going to see about 500 district delegates and some ex-officio's engage in some good old backroom politics and deals.
For a party that says it wants to listen to people more, engage them more, and be more open and accountable - their first act of contrition - is to control the party once again from within.
The slight of hand thing has already been set in place with wannabe - really wannabe - Cabinet Minister - Sandy Collins - referring to the Liberal Convention this way "we should strive to repeat your process. I really liked the sounds of crickets in the half filled room. Tumble weed nice touch."
Sandy has taken over from Minister Kent who used to do the useless hacking until he was placed in Cabinet. Of course like children - if they see another child being rewarded for bad behavior - similar behavior may follow.
In either case - what the Liberal process did was allow everybody to cast their own private vote and to choose a second third and fourth choice. The fact is over 20,000 people participated directly in that democratic process.
Collin's instructed position is that we would rather stuff 500 in a room via delegate selection - so the optics would be better. He likes the sounds of cheers and wants to be taken to a room and be smoozed into voting for one or another.
The 500 or so who attend may well represent only 1000 or less people. You and I will never know unless we attend each and every district association meeting.
In our democracy you don't get a separate vote for the Premier - so a leadership contest is the only inclusion there is. When you strip that to a delegate convention - you may party hardy and hoop and holler - but you are doing nothing to directly involve tens thousands of people.
So here we go again - the method of communications - is key - not the message. That's why they say Dunderdale was dumped. Pile people in a room - they are delegates - therefore they should have their expenses paid. Pile people in a room - looks like the party is growing in its enthusiasm. Pile people into a room and feed the media cameras.
Let's not forget - not that long ago people piled into a room for now former Premier Kathy Dunderdale. The media reported that all was happy in Toryland. In fact Telegram reporter James McLeod headlined "Support for Premier rock solid at convention". This was September - just 4 months ago.
Now after 19 years of no leadership contest - after appointing and anointing the chosen - the Tories are going to the backrooms to pick a leader.
The message has not changed - the Tories are putting more lipstick on a pig.
Showing posts with label Ross Reid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ross Reid. Show all posts
Monday, January 27, 2014
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Dunderdale's Tribalistic Box
When the current Government of Newfoundland and Labrador look out across the land they are not expecting to find signs of intelligent life. They treat the population with disdain and with an arrogance unbecoming their collective intellect.
Russell Wangersky's opinion piece in the Telegram yesterday is well worth a read and some considerable thought.
"Drunk on power" speaks of the current political fiasco in the US starring Governor Christie and compares the actions of causing traffic disruption for political reasons to our government paving roads in Tory districts. There are some other comparisons and I encourage you to read it.
I'm going to go a step further. This government is no doubt engorged with partisan zealots who have one mission - keep themselves in power. There are others who mistakenly believe they work for multinational corporations - not the electorate. Then there are the ones like Ed Martin and Gilbert Bennett. Ed just thinks hey I'm the CEO "the buck stops with me" (your right and too many of them for my liking) so I'm the CEO yeah I am - got awards to show for it. The province might be dark - but I'm the bright light of energy planning. The man spends money like it belongs to really generous, not so cautious, frankly negligent shareholders and Board members.
Gilbert Bennett the crossover Cable Atlantic guy is very arrogant to ordinary citizens who want to question his decisions. I'd swear that when I appeared in front of the Environmental Assessment hearings on Muskrat - he acted like he was still working for Danny Williams in the private sector - not me - or us - collectively as people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
There is no doubt that Dunderdale's PR and Policy handlers spend more time studying human behavioral patterns that they do putting out real and complete information. The study of which rural community to obliterate - or which plant to let close - or service facility to eliminate - and in what order - is far more important than being creative, industrious, and forward thinking.
The bad news comes in dribs and drabs so that not too many people will be upset at a given time - while the "good" news of re-announcing spending initiatives are mass released based on polling periods or as an offset to bad news.
The fact that the money they are spending is ours and they are only choosing what to spend it on - appears to escape the partisan zealots who act like it's coming from their personal bank accounts. That more so as they attempt to train the electorate that support for their government or for that matter Harper's zealots is the only way to cash-in. We are faced with - vote for me to be on the Government side. Then we witnessed the separate and inappropriate behaviors of Peter Penashue and Kevin O'Brien.
In my opinion thisWilliams Dunderdale government has and continues to confuse the Newfoundland and Labrador people's trustworthy nature with a lack of intelligence. There is no doubt that we have suffered and do suffer the consequences of abuse of that trust by many politicians.
That brings me to the title of this post "Dunderdale's Tribalistic Box". First and foremost when this government looks to seek independent local expert review, ideas, or opinion - they determine what they think that person's political persuasion is. If that person does not pass the PC BOX test - they are dismissed outright - regardless of their background and professional credentials. They are called naysayers and conspiracy theorists. Demonstrably this government are what they call their critics. Paranoia appears to abound, secrecy is the order of the day, rigging unscientific polls is a matter of a duty for backbenchers, naysayers of alternate thoughts to their own and absolutely conspiracy theorists. In my opinion they would have us believe that the actions of a number of citizens who question the Muskrat Falls deal has caused the population as a whole to move their political support away from them and therefore what is necessary are bunches of News Conferences, mass and expensive advertising, incessant calls to talk-shows, and the production of any number of "independent" reviews.
The journalists in our province need to step to the plate and begin the process of discovery. They should never allow - unchallenged - the use of the words naysayers and conspiracy theorists - when used by politicians on productive, intelligent, and engaged citizens. It speaks volumes that when the province seeks experts to recheck the work of our employed "experts" that they seek people, corporations, and organizations outside the province. How refreshing it would be to have local experts with opposing views review the work of government - on matters such as the Muskrat Falls development deal or ferry building - or international trade agreements. The American media will chase their politicians down until they expose necessary information - and the ruling side of the House will adopt - from time to time - policies that were hatched on the other side.
This government has been without societal authority to make big decisions for a significant period of time - based on a continuing "crisis" in the polls. When they were in Opposition they had no problem asking then Premier Roger Grimes to make no significant resource deals as he did not - in their opinion - have the support of the people.
Stop confusing misplaced trust with a lack of intelligence. Stop doing things for "our own good" when we clearly do not want it. Stop manipulating the whole picture through ommission of information, propoganda, and cherry picking statistics. Stop politically threatening us or attempting to buy us with our own money.
Above all else remove overpaid executives in Crown Corporations - where it has been demonstrated that the person did not do their job. Further eliminate from Crown corporate Boards people who are not comparable in expertise to Crown corporate Boards in other provinces.
Next post will be on the PUB - What is government doing to it?
Russell Wangersky's opinion piece in the Telegram yesterday is well worth a read and some considerable thought.
"Drunk on power" speaks of the current political fiasco in the US starring Governor Christie and compares the actions of causing traffic disruption for political reasons to our government paving roads in Tory districts. There are some other comparisons and I encourage you to read it.
I'm going to go a step further. This government is no doubt engorged with partisan zealots who have one mission - keep themselves in power. There are others who mistakenly believe they work for multinational corporations - not the electorate. Then there are the ones like Ed Martin and Gilbert Bennett. Ed just thinks hey I'm the CEO "the buck stops with me" (your right and too many of them for my liking) so I'm the CEO yeah I am - got awards to show for it. The province might be dark - but I'm the bright light of energy planning. The man spends money like it belongs to really generous, not so cautious, frankly negligent shareholders and Board members.
Gilbert Bennett the crossover Cable Atlantic guy is very arrogant to ordinary citizens who want to question his decisions. I'd swear that when I appeared in front of the Environmental Assessment hearings on Muskrat - he acted like he was still working for Danny Williams in the private sector - not me - or us - collectively as people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
There is no doubt that Dunderdale's PR and Policy handlers spend more time studying human behavioral patterns that they do putting out real and complete information. The study of which rural community to obliterate - or which plant to let close - or service facility to eliminate - and in what order - is far more important than being creative, industrious, and forward thinking.
The bad news comes in dribs and drabs so that not too many people will be upset at a given time - while the "good" news of re-announcing spending initiatives are mass released based on polling periods or as an offset to bad news.
The fact that the money they are spending is ours and they are only choosing what to spend it on - appears to escape the partisan zealots who act like it's coming from their personal bank accounts. That more so as they attempt to train the electorate that support for their government or for that matter Harper's zealots is the only way to cash-in. We are faced with - vote for me to be on the Government side. Then we witnessed the separate and inappropriate behaviors of Peter Penashue and Kevin O'Brien.
In my opinion this
That brings me to the title of this post "Dunderdale's Tribalistic Box". First and foremost when this government looks to seek independent local expert review, ideas, or opinion - they determine what they think that person's political persuasion is. If that person does not pass the PC BOX test - they are dismissed outright - regardless of their background and professional credentials. They are called naysayers and conspiracy theorists. Demonstrably this government are what they call their critics. Paranoia appears to abound, secrecy is the order of the day, rigging unscientific polls is a matter of a duty for backbenchers, naysayers of alternate thoughts to their own and absolutely conspiracy theorists. In my opinion they would have us believe that the actions of a number of citizens who question the Muskrat Falls deal has caused the population as a whole to move their political support away from them and therefore what is necessary are bunches of News Conferences, mass and expensive advertising, incessant calls to talk-shows, and the production of any number of "independent" reviews.
The journalists in our province need to step to the plate and begin the process of discovery. They should never allow - unchallenged - the use of the words naysayers and conspiracy theorists - when used by politicians on productive, intelligent, and engaged citizens. It speaks volumes that when the province seeks experts to recheck the work of our employed "experts" that they seek people, corporations, and organizations outside the province. How refreshing it would be to have local experts with opposing views review the work of government - on matters such as the Muskrat Falls development deal or ferry building - or international trade agreements. The American media will chase their politicians down until they expose necessary information - and the ruling side of the House will adopt - from time to time - policies that were hatched on the other side.
This government has been without societal authority to make big decisions for a significant period of time - based on a continuing "crisis" in the polls. When they were in Opposition they had no problem asking then Premier Roger Grimes to make no significant resource deals as he did not - in their opinion - have the support of the people.
Stop confusing misplaced trust with a lack of intelligence. Stop doing things for "our own good" when we clearly do not want it. Stop manipulating the whole picture through ommission of information, propoganda, and cherry picking statistics. Stop politically threatening us or attempting to buy us with our own money.
Above all else remove overpaid executives in Crown Corporations - where it has been demonstrated that the person did not do their job. Further eliminate from Crown corporate Boards people who are not comparable in expertise to Crown corporate Boards in other provinces.
Next post will be on the PUB - What is government doing to it?
Thursday, December 05, 2013
Cool Hand Luke meets Premier Dunderdale
Premier Dunderdale was faced with yet another bad polling result yesterday - in the latest quarterly CRA poll.
The polls are telling them that people do not support their government, it's direction, it's approach or her leadership.
The change in party support is virtually within the margin of error.
The Premier has decided that it has nothing to do with the policies or direction of government - rather it's how they brag about their achievements.
In this respect there are a few problems with the Dunderdale assessment.
1. Essentially it means the voting public must be stupid - we just don't get it. We are unable to see all the great things around us - unless of course the right marketing agency or personnel tell us in simpler - more understandable terms.
2. The Dunderdale government has spent untold fortunes advertising and a use of tremendous human resources to "message us".
3. The Dunderdale government has filled all social media and dominated talk shows to "message us".
4. The Premier feels that more fuzzy "home heating" like promotion may warm the cockles of our feeling cold Tory hearts.
5. Refusal to accept that certainly some - if not all - of the public dissatisfaction is because we do understand what they are doing.
We all should be very wary of what this government may do next. They may go on a spending spree filling our homes with flyers, surveys, and broadcast and print media advertising.
So - based on what the Premier said we should expect the following:
1. No change whatsoever in policy.
2. An elimination of participating in talk shows.
3. All members of the PC caucus will be off Twitter and Facebook.
4. Inundation of advertising and promotional material to brainwash us into seeing the light.
5. Re announcing funding initiatives 6 times over instead of 3.
The little (margin of error) bump in the polls is what she needed to satisfy her docile caucus and hang on to her job for another 3 months.
Her advisor (Ross Reid) must of helped to come up with an excuse for their continued failure in the polls. (communication)
The Premier's message to us is; what we've got here is a failure to communicate.
No - Warden Dunderdale - I will not get used to wearing the PC Chains of resource giveaways and failed policy - not to mention arrogance.
The polls are telling them that people do not support their government, it's direction, it's approach or her leadership.
The change in party support is virtually within the margin of error.
The Premier has decided that it has nothing to do with the policies or direction of government - rather it's how they brag about their achievements.
In this respect there are a few problems with the Dunderdale assessment.
1. Essentially it means the voting public must be stupid - we just don't get it. We are unable to see all the great things around us - unless of course the right marketing agency or personnel tell us in simpler - more understandable terms.
2. The Dunderdale government has spent untold fortunes advertising and a use of tremendous human resources to "message us".
3. The Dunderdale government has filled all social media and dominated talk shows to "message us".
4. The Premier feels that more fuzzy "home heating" like promotion may warm the cockles of our feeling cold Tory hearts.
5. Refusal to accept that certainly some - if not all - of the public dissatisfaction is because we do understand what they are doing.
We all should be very wary of what this government may do next. They may go on a spending spree filling our homes with flyers, surveys, and broadcast and print media advertising.
So - based on what the Premier said we should expect the following:
1. No change whatsoever in policy.
2. An elimination of participating in talk shows.
3. All members of the PC caucus will be off Twitter and Facebook.
4. Inundation of advertising and promotional material to brainwash us into seeing the light.
5. Re announcing funding initiatives 6 times over instead of 3.
The little (margin of error) bump in the polls is what she needed to satisfy her docile caucus and hang on to her job for another 3 months.
Her advisor (Ross Reid) must of helped to come up with an excuse for their continued failure in the polls. (communication)
The Premier's message to us is; what we've got here is a failure to communicate.
No - Warden Dunderdale - I will not get used to wearing the PC Chains of resource giveaways and failed policy - not to mention arrogance.
Wednesday, December 04, 2013
The CRA Poll will be 2015 Result
The latest CRA poll - I believe - will end up representing the election result in 2015.
The Tories have come in the same as last poll when you allow for percentage of error.
The NDP have collapsed and those left of centre swing Liberal/NDP have moved back to their Liberal base.
This is all of course premised on the Liberal Opposition not doing anything so outrageous (as happened with the NDP) as to eliminate themselves. As I have posted before - Dwight Ball's style of leadership is build not burn bridges and his thoughtful approach to policy is inclusive and open not exclusive and secret.
Back to the numbers:
1. The Liberals 52% is representative of the 30% or so solid Liberal support. 15% recaptured from the left leaning Liberals who had parked themselves tentatively with the NDP and 7% of centre Tories who swing based on the mood of the electorate and the current leadership of the Liberal Party.
2. The Tories are currently sitting with their solid PC base and not much else.
3. The NDP are likely to drop a couple of more points yet as they return to their solid base only - with that support going to the Liberals.
4. The Tories have shown they are unable to spend their way out this time and despite exorbitant amounts of warm and fuzzy Muskrat advertising - the population is not convinced that this project is good for Newfoundland and Labrador.
5. There will be a couple of more points coming to the Liberals as the sports fan like undecided - go out and vote for the winning team.
The Liberals chose the best leader at the best time. Dwight Ball will reinvigorate the party, rebuild party coffers, gain business support, promote district association development, unite right and left with solid economic planning, respect and include government employees, engage and involve the municipalities, be proactive on housing, health, education, and seniors issues, attract new industrial interests while maintaining and growing local small business. Ball will also be able to attract quality candidates including some of his leadership rivals. He is a quintessential Liberal.
This does not mean there will not be challenges over the coming 18 months. Ross Reid will try to direct a comeback for the Tories through outrageous spending, brainwashing levels of Tory self-promotion and advertising, and sometime in the New Year present a new potential leader. If the PC's cannot gain significantly by the next CRA poll result - the Tories will be in rebuild for 2019 mode.
Now let's talk about district predictions.
Here is my list of retirees (either before or at the dropping of the 2015 writ):
Felix Collins, Paul Davis, Kathy Dunderdale, Clayton Forsey, Tom Hedderson, Ray Hunter, Clyde Jackman, Charlene Johnson, Tom Marshall, Kevin O'Brien, Joan Shea, Susan Sullivan, Ross Wiseman.
Here is my list of potential floor crossers:
Dave Brazil, Sandy Collins, Tony Cornect, and Keith Russell
Those remaining may run again but only the following has a chance of retaining their seats:
Terry French, Keith Hutchings, Steve Kent, and John Dinn
This is what makes the next prediction very interesting.
I believe that Darin King thinks he is a leader in waiting and I believe that Hutchings and French will be his team of support. The problem is - I believe that - Darin King will lose his seat.
Dwight Ball has made it this far without the team of 10 establishment interests from both the Liberal and PC parties - if he keeps this approach - he will be a people's leader able to do the real job of a Premier.
As for the 2 independents - Mitchelmore and Kirby - I can see Kirby being comfortable under a Dwight Ball Liberal Opposition and Government - however Mitchelmore presents more as an opportunist who is a Tory one day and an NDPer the next. If he does not go Liberal he will - I predict - lose his seat.
The Tories have come in the same as last poll when you allow for percentage of error.
The NDP have collapsed and those left of centre swing Liberal/NDP have moved back to their Liberal base.
This is all of course premised on the Liberal Opposition not doing anything so outrageous (as happened with the NDP) as to eliminate themselves. As I have posted before - Dwight Ball's style of leadership is build not burn bridges and his thoughtful approach to policy is inclusive and open not exclusive and secret.
Back to the numbers:
1. The Liberals 52% is representative of the 30% or so solid Liberal support. 15% recaptured from the left leaning Liberals who had parked themselves tentatively with the NDP and 7% of centre Tories who swing based on the mood of the electorate and the current leadership of the Liberal Party.
2. The Tories are currently sitting with their solid PC base and not much else.
3. The NDP are likely to drop a couple of more points yet as they return to their solid base only - with that support going to the Liberals.
4. The Tories have shown they are unable to spend their way out this time and despite exorbitant amounts of warm and fuzzy Muskrat advertising - the population is not convinced that this project is good for Newfoundland and Labrador.
5. There will be a couple of more points coming to the Liberals as the sports fan like undecided - go out and vote for the winning team.
The Liberals chose the best leader at the best time. Dwight Ball will reinvigorate the party, rebuild party coffers, gain business support, promote district association development, unite right and left with solid economic planning, respect and include government employees, engage and involve the municipalities, be proactive on housing, health, education, and seniors issues, attract new industrial interests while maintaining and growing local small business. Ball will also be able to attract quality candidates including some of his leadership rivals. He is a quintessential Liberal.
This does not mean there will not be challenges over the coming 18 months. Ross Reid will try to direct a comeback for the Tories through outrageous spending, brainwashing levels of Tory self-promotion and advertising, and sometime in the New Year present a new potential leader. If the PC's cannot gain significantly by the next CRA poll result - the Tories will be in rebuild for 2019 mode.
Now let's talk about district predictions.
Here is my list of retirees (either before or at the dropping of the 2015 writ):
Felix Collins, Paul Davis, Kathy Dunderdale, Clayton Forsey, Tom Hedderson, Ray Hunter, Clyde Jackman, Charlene Johnson, Tom Marshall, Kevin O'Brien, Joan Shea, Susan Sullivan, Ross Wiseman.
Here is my list of potential floor crossers:
Dave Brazil, Sandy Collins, Tony Cornect, and Keith Russell
Those remaining may run again but only the following has a chance of retaining their seats:
Terry French, Keith Hutchings, Steve Kent, and John Dinn
This is what makes the next prediction very interesting.
I believe that Darin King thinks he is a leader in waiting and I believe that Hutchings and French will be his team of support. The problem is - I believe that - Darin King will lose his seat.
Dwight Ball has made it this far without the team of 10 establishment interests from both the Liberal and PC parties - if he keeps this approach - he will be a people's leader able to do the real job of a Premier.
As for the 2 independents - Mitchelmore and Kirby - I can see Kirby being comfortable under a Dwight Ball Liberal Opposition and Government - however Mitchelmore presents more as an opportunist who is a Tory one day and an NDPer the next. If he does not go Liberal he will - I predict - lose his seat.
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Question Period - PC's on last political legs
Watch carefully, Question Period in the House of Assembly. There is a real sign that the Tories are on their last political legs.
Question Period is to gain information from government and to call on government to account for its policies and actions.
Members Opposite ask the questions and government provides the answers. We all know that our government is not very good at providing answers and for the most part Question Period is like an adult playground for Government Ministers and Members.
These days - however there is one particular behavior that is ramping up. When an Opposition or Third Party Member asks a question more often than not the Minister responding - says "I want to know what the Liberals or NDP" thinks about this or that - or supports this or that.
This is going to become a "be careful what you wish for" scenario. So the Ministers of the Dunderdale government want to ask questions in the House of Assembly - no problem - just hang on for a couple of years and the few who are left standing will get plenty of time to do just that.
The Dunderdale Ministers and backbench hecklers are begging - no longing - to become Opposition - keep it up and they will get their wish.
Soon enough the few that are left can become a real rat-pack and ask all the questions they like.
The partisan zealotry of this government and vindictiveness toward those who are not absolute Kool-Aid drinkers goes beyond anything most of us have seen before. These people are not fit to govern and are absolute abusers of power.
Will any of them do a polygraph? We are the employers so maybe that's what we should demand.
Question Period is to gain information from government and to call on government to account for its policies and actions.
Members Opposite ask the questions and government provides the answers. We all know that our government is not very good at providing answers and for the most part Question Period is like an adult playground for Government Ministers and Members.
These days - however there is one particular behavior that is ramping up. When an Opposition or Third Party Member asks a question more often than not the Minister responding - says "I want to know what the Liberals or NDP" thinks about this or that - or supports this or that.
This is going to become a "be careful what you wish for" scenario. So the Ministers of the Dunderdale government want to ask questions in the House of Assembly - no problem - just hang on for a couple of years and the few who are left standing will get plenty of time to do just that.
The Dunderdale Ministers and backbench hecklers are begging - no longing - to become Opposition - keep it up and they will get their wish.
Soon enough the few that are left can become a real rat-pack and ask all the questions they like.
The partisan zealotry of this government and vindictiveness toward those who are not absolute Kool-Aid drinkers goes beyond anything most of us have seen before. These people are not fit to govern and are absolute abusers of power.
Will any of them do a polygraph? We are the employers so maybe that's what we should demand.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Dunderdale's Zarrow Shuffle
Did you see that? The slight of hand that Premier Dunderdale tried out on her audience yesterday. If she was in Vegas she might have been thrown out of the casino.
Dunderdale claims that her eroding popularity is due to making tough choices and decisions. So whatever she is talking about?
What could they possibly be?
It can't be Muskrat - as her government claims that a majority love the deal. Therefore we are left with health and finance.
Tom Marshall has already been the Minister of Finance and we know where we are with that; deficits, debt, and failing pension plans. Susan Sullivan has been hammering health now for some time and the problems keep getting worse not better - probably the only worse record is that of Vickie Kaminski. So there was no change there - yet these are presumably the areas of "tough" decisions. The two Ministers have shown no success in messaging - if we consider the dead last polling her party is suffering. It also demonstrates a lack of confidence in her caucus - when recycling bad is better than introducing new.
Danny Crummell - well his name is Danny - maybe that will help her.
Steve Kent - I have no faith that - with his lax approach to all facts and details - municipal affairs will improve. In fact he may just drive municipal leaders away through incessant tweets and self-praise on the open line programs.
The worst appointment yesterday - by far - was Kevin O'Brien moving to Advanced Education and Skills - described "the department has a mandate to ensure the province has highly educated graduates and skilled workers for a fast-growing economy. This will be achieved through a spectrum of services, supports and strategies."Mr. O'Brien is hardly a reasonable representative of this mission statement. He needs to work on improving oral language skills (listening and speaking) before taking on such a post. Making matters worse - he is a proven bully and this is the last attribute we need in a Minister responsible for any portion of education.
All in all nothing has changed - two new faces - who will not challenge the Premier. They are flattered, grateful, starstruck and "proud".
This shuffle was not for our benefit - it was for the Premier. It was to ensure that those who remained or joined cabinet would not jump ship and leave her sinking on the rusty barge.
Dunderdale claims that her eroding popularity is due to making tough choices and decisions. So whatever she is talking about?
What could they possibly be?
It can't be Muskrat - as her government claims that a majority love the deal. Therefore we are left with health and finance.
Tom Marshall has already been the Minister of Finance and we know where we are with that; deficits, debt, and failing pension plans. Susan Sullivan has been hammering health now for some time and the problems keep getting worse not better - probably the only worse record is that of Vickie Kaminski. So there was no change there - yet these are presumably the areas of "tough" decisions. The two Ministers have shown no success in messaging - if we consider the dead last polling her party is suffering. It also demonstrates a lack of confidence in her caucus - when recycling bad is better than introducing new.
Danny Crummell - well his name is Danny - maybe that will help her.
Steve Kent - I have no faith that - with his lax approach to all facts and details - municipal affairs will improve. In fact he may just drive municipal leaders away through incessant tweets and self-praise on the open line programs.
The worst appointment yesterday - by far - was Kevin O'Brien moving to Advanced Education and Skills - described "the department has a mandate to ensure the province has highly educated graduates and skilled workers for a fast-growing economy. This will be achieved through a spectrum of services, supports and strategies."Mr. O'Brien is hardly a reasonable representative of this mission statement. He needs to work on improving oral language skills (listening and speaking) before taking on such a post. Making matters worse - he is a proven bully and this is the last attribute we need in a Minister responsible for any portion of education.
All in all nothing has changed - two new faces - who will not challenge the Premier. They are flattered, grateful, starstruck and "proud".
This shuffle was not for our benefit - it was for the Premier. It was to ensure that those who remained or joined cabinet would not jump ship and leave her sinking on the rusty barge.
Wednesday, August 07, 2013
Ross Reid - bringing down another PC Party?
Yesterday - the big announcement from the White House on the Parkway - Ross Reid becomes new Chief of Staff for Premier Dunderdale.
More curious - however - were his duties in the "new" role.
Rossie is apparently going to play a "key role in policy development".
Is that what a Chief of Staff does?
How about Rossie has always been involved in policy and has been involved in much of the mess this government has produced?
He moves smoothly from politician to democracy fighter to "adviser" to Williams/Dunderdale - then pops out of his job - we pay him for - to run election campaigns - then hops back to a government position again. Well now he is the Chief of Staff - what will that mean to us - the people who pay his salary?
1. Select and supervise (control) staff?
2. Control access to the Premier's office? that should be good...
3. Manage communications and flow of information? kind of like a Bill 29 human back-up
4. Negotiate with different departments - or external groups to achieve Dunderdale's agenda? (protect the Muskrat Falls development)
Rossie is now at the beck and call of the Premier? My guess he's running the place and has been for a while. The question is will Rossie use his experience in "allegedly" helping to democratize regimes such as Afghanistan - to allow democracy back in our province?
Please advise us - Madame Premier - Queen of the Muskrat - what has Ross Reid done for the past decade and what will he be doing differently now? Details please...
For people like Kent and Lane - Reid's new title might bring them brief but needed hope that their parties death may have been greatly exaggerated and for the ladies in waiting Shea and Sullivan - Ross may provide a brief relief from the Premier's busy social agenda (Garden parties - where they present and restate already committed dollars, festivals where they can sing their own praises, BBQ's where the roasting is more friendly, or travelling the world in search of Waldo).
Rossie's Policies - that has the potential to be an ward winning election jingle - Perhaps VOCM could have one of the talk shows sponsored by Rossie's Policies.
Perhaps the people who elected Bonnie Hickey knew something I didn't know at the time. Perhaps they knew the real Ross Reid - perhaps they knew he should have gone away with the Mulroney PC's. He was at one time the "advisor" to Mulroney right? Perhaps Ross can become "National Director" of the NL PC's? Perhaps Ross can be part of another destruction of a Progressive Conservative Party? Not to worry with people like Kent, King, and Kennedy the CARP (Conservative Alliance Reform Party) of NL might be right around the corner. Maybe Len Simms can play the "MacKay" role this time round.
More curious - however - were his duties in the "new" role.
Rossie is apparently going to play a "key role in policy development".
Is that what a Chief of Staff does?
How about Rossie has always been involved in policy and has been involved in much of the mess this government has produced?
He moves smoothly from politician to democracy fighter to "adviser" to Williams/Dunderdale - then pops out of his job - we pay him for - to run election campaigns - then hops back to a government position again. Well now he is the Chief of Staff - what will that mean to us - the people who pay his salary?
1. Select and supervise (control) staff?
2. Control access to the Premier's office? that should be good...
3. Manage communications and flow of information? kind of like a Bill 29 human back-up
4. Negotiate with different departments - or external groups to achieve Dunderdale's agenda? (protect the Muskrat Falls development)
Rossie is now at the beck and call of the Premier? My guess he's running the place and has been for a while. The question is will Rossie use his experience in "allegedly" helping to democratize regimes such as Afghanistan - to allow democracy back in our province?
Please advise us - Madame Premier - Queen of the Muskrat - what has Ross Reid done for the past decade and what will he be doing differently now? Details please...
For people like Kent and Lane - Reid's new title might bring them brief but needed hope that their parties death may have been greatly exaggerated and for the ladies in waiting Shea and Sullivan - Ross may provide a brief relief from the Premier's busy social agenda (Garden parties - where they present and restate already committed dollars, festivals where they can sing their own praises, BBQ's where the roasting is more friendly, or travelling the world in search of Waldo).
Rossie's Policies - that has the potential to be an ward winning election jingle - Perhaps VOCM could have one of the talk shows sponsored by Rossie's Policies.
Perhaps the people who elected Bonnie Hickey knew something I didn't know at the time. Perhaps they knew the real Ross Reid - perhaps they knew he should have gone away with the Mulroney PC's. He was at one time the "advisor" to Mulroney right? Perhaps Ross can become "National Director" of the NL PC's? Perhaps Ross can be part of another destruction of a Progressive Conservative Party? Not to worry with people like Kent, King, and Kennedy the CARP (Conservative Alliance Reform Party) of NL might be right around the corner. Maybe Len Simms can play the "MacKay" role this time round.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Steve Kent hides behind Cloak? Come out in the Open!
Kent and Harper - two Steve's I want to forget but still living with their incompetence.
Harper lies and generally speaking is not competent on matters of Canada.
Kent just yaps and then re-yaps to explain or re-explain whatever he is talking about.
Both play around with democracy like it's an institution they own and are willing to do whatever to portray favourably whatever outcome they are seeking.
When Kent was dealing with the Boy Scouts of Canada scandal - he assured us he checked and there was nothing hidden. But then he re-explained that there was - he just did not know at the time. Steve's facts are apparently determined based on Steve's knowledge at any given time and not the actual facts of a situation. This makes him dangerous as a public servant.
A fact is: A thing that is indisputably the case.
First of all there are two measures of fairness and balance when the Tories wish to reveal information.
One for Ross Reid and Len Simms, and another for Sue Kelland-Dyer (me)
But let's review what Mr. Kent had to say in the House of Assembly on March 13th 2013.
______________________________
They talk about fiscal responsibility and they suggest mismanagement when we provided, in the past, modest bonuses to executives who are doing great work to improve and strengthen the public services we provide. They will talk about those modest bonuses, and the Minister of Finance addressed those in Question Period today, but you will not hear them talk about the $59,000 they paid to Sue Kelland-Dyer for consulting work from May 2001 to April 2002. May 2001 to April 2002, they paid $59,000 to Sue Kelland-Dyer for consulting work.
Mr. Speaker, the folks over there, like the hon. Member for the Bay of Islands and the Leader of the Opposition, talk about fiscal responsibility, but they will not tell you about what happened several months later in December 2002. In December 2002 they spent $88,000 to hire none other than Sue Kelland-Dyer again.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. KENT: Eighty-eight thousand dollars, because she was out criticizing government, but once a couple of payments over a period of time totalling $59,000 and then $88,000 on top of that to be a consultant in the Premier's office to monitor the radio shows, Mr. Speaker, and the polls. It is rather disingenuous for members opposite to stand up and talk to us today about fiscal responsibility.
______________________________
This comparative to Len Simms and Ross Reid?
If we are going to talk about private citizens who no longer are under the employ of government and who cannot answer statements made in the People's House of Assembly - then perhaps we should try to do it fairly.
Len Simms and Ross Reid are long-standing Tories - previously elected Tories - fundraising Tories and remain employed by the Government or a Government Agency.
I am not a long-standing Liberal - not previously elected as a Liberal nor run as a Liberal Candidate.
In fact, Mr. Kent, Liberals used to call me a Tory when I opposed the governments of Clyde Wells and Brian Tobin.
I did not take a leave of absence or quit and hit the campaign trail or become a campaign co-chair and then get re-hired after an election.
Please advise us all of the total dollars I have ever received from working with the government, opposition, or as a consultant and then reveal the total compensation that Ross Reid and Len Simms have received.
Then Kent suggests that I was given $88,000 by the government because I opposed the government and then as a consultant to the Premier's Office to monitor Open-Line shows and polls.
First Mr. Kent you should seek the report that was completed by me as a consultant - release it - and then discuss the contents. The "Crown Jewels".
Then you need to ask yourself if I was actually monitoring Open-Line shows and polls or was I in fact working on things such as the need to establish the Ombudsman's Office, Office of the Child and Youth Advocate, A report on our Place in Canada; and policy matters such as natural resource developments, equalization, and class-action lawsuits.
You are a poor excuse of an MHA and even more so as the holder of facts.
Give me a place and time that you and I can discuss these matters in a public forum. Let's see how you hold up when the House of Assembly cloak is removed.
Harper lies and generally speaking is not competent on matters of Canada.
Kent just yaps and then re-yaps to explain or re-explain whatever he is talking about.
Both play around with democracy like it's an institution they own and are willing to do whatever to portray favourably whatever outcome they are seeking.
When Kent was dealing with the Boy Scouts of Canada scandal - he assured us he checked and there was nothing hidden. But then he re-explained that there was - he just did not know at the time. Steve's facts are apparently determined based on Steve's knowledge at any given time and not the actual facts of a situation. This makes him dangerous as a public servant.
A fact is: A thing that is indisputably the case.
First of all there are two measures of fairness and balance when the Tories wish to reveal information.
One for Ross Reid and Len Simms, and another for Sue Kelland-Dyer (me)
But let's review what Mr. Kent had to say in the House of Assembly on March 13th 2013.
______________________________
They talk about fiscal responsibility and they suggest mismanagement when we provided, in the past, modest bonuses to executives who are doing great work to improve and strengthen the public services we provide. They will talk about those modest bonuses, and the Minister of Finance addressed those in Question Period today, but you will not hear them talk about the $59,000 they paid to Sue Kelland-Dyer for consulting work from May 2001 to April 2002. May 2001 to April 2002, they paid $59,000 to Sue Kelland-Dyer for consulting work.
Mr. Speaker, the folks over there, like the hon. Member for the Bay of Islands and the Leader of the Opposition, talk about fiscal responsibility, but they will not tell you about what happened several months later in December 2002. In December 2002 they spent $88,000 to hire none other than Sue Kelland-Dyer again.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. KENT: Eighty-eight thousand dollars, because she was out criticizing government, but once a couple of payments over a period of time totalling $59,000 and then $88,000 on top of that to be a consultant in the Premier's office to monitor the radio shows, Mr. Speaker, and the polls. It is rather disingenuous for members opposite to stand up and talk to us today about fiscal responsibility.
______________________________
This comparative to Len Simms and Ross Reid?
If we are going to talk about private citizens who no longer are under the employ of government and who cannot answer statements made in the People's House of Assembly - then perhaps we should try to do it fairly.
Len Simms and Ross Reid are long-standing Tories - previously elected Tories - fundraising Tories and remain employed by the Government or a Government Agency.
I am not a long-standing Liberal - not previously elected as a Liberal nor run as a Liberal Candidate.
In fact, Mr. Kent, Liberals used to call me a Tory when I opposed the governments of Clyde Wells and Brian Tobin.
I did not take a leave of absence or quit and hit the campaign trail or become a campaign co-chair and then get re-hired after an election.
Please advise us all of the total dollars I have ever received from working with the government, opposition, or as a consultant and then reveal the total compensation that Ross Reid and Len Simms have received.
Then Kent suggests that I was given $88,000 by the government because I opposed the government and then as a consultant to the Premier's Office to monitor Open-Line shows and polls.
First Mr. Kent you should seek the report that was completed by me as a consultant - release it - and then discuss the contents. The "Crown Jewels".
Then you need to ask yourself if I was actually monitoring Open-Line shows and polls or was I in fact working on things such as the need to establish the Ombudsman's Office, Office of the Child and Youth Advocate, A report on our Place in Canada; and policy matters such as natural resource developments, equalization, and class-action lawsuits.
You are a poor excuse of an MHA and even more so as the holder of facts.
Give me a place and time that you and I can discuss these matters in a public forum. Let's see how you hold up when the House of Assembly cloak is removed.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Russell Wangersky - Tom Marshall - Muskrat Falls
Russell Wangersky hits a home run in this weekend's Telegram. The column titled, "Now things are getting nasty", demonstrates yet again the attitude of our elected representatives.
This piece takes on a letter submitted to the paper by Finance Minister, Tom Marshall. More particularly it challenges one specific point Marshall makes. The quote being discussed is: “I suspect Mr. Jones is not really interested in seeing Newfoundland and Labrador reach its true potential by moving forward with large-scale energy developments that are clearly in the best interests of this province.”
The Mr. Jones referred to is Telegram columnist - Brian Jones. Jones has been appropriately and fairly challenging the proposed deal between Emera and Nalcor - to develop Muskrat Falls.
Wangersky finds the statement "out of character" for Marshall who Russell describes this way: "Tom Marshall is usually one of the province’s more moderate ministers. He doesn’t boil over in House of Assembly debates or question period, and when he’s faced with something that he views to be inaccurate, he will usually find a plain and almost soft-spoken way to correct the record."
If you have had direct dealings with Tom Marshall - you may have experienced the same sort of Jekyll and Hyde. I find the Minister does appear pleasant, polite, understanding, and overall level-headed. If you - however - do not come around to his "thinking" or "position" on an issue - he will become aloof, disinterested, and yes as nasty as the best of em.
From my continued observation of both Brian Jones and Tom Marshall - I "suspect" if either of them has an hidden agenda, it is Marshall. In fact most all the PC MHA's are behaving in the same way. The difference of course is that Jones is not asking to spend 8 billion dollars belonging to you and I - Marshall is. If the Minister feels the expenditure is a good investment - he and his colleagues have failed to prove that to the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
The PC's will berate, intimidate, insult, and sometimes even sue former Cabinet Ministers, former MHA's, professionals, bloggers, talk show participants, the media, and the public at large - if they question the logic and viability of this proposed energy deal. This despite our history of poor resource deals and the history of corruption globally when billions of dollars are involved.
You see it is not the job of Brian Jones to sell this Emera/Nalcor fiasco - while it is his and all of our jobs to challenge it. The job of "con"vincing belongs to the government - to date they have failed. I "suspect" that the deal is so bad that it cannot be sold on its merits.
I "suspect" that absent the physical warfare - the Dunderdale administration is reducing itself to partisan tribalism. This is Newfoundland and Labrador not Afghanistan and I "suspect" that one senior official of this government has all kinds of experience in countries that deter open and free debate through ridicule and otherwise interference in the lives of those who challenge them.
I "suspect" that from the Railway to Churchill Falls - generations of these merchants continue to call the shots - and they do not want ordinary people to stand in the way of their wealth building.
I further "suspect" that the government, Nalcor, departments, and the PC Party have done numerous public opinion polls on this deal - where are they? Where's MQO when you need them? I "suspect" they might be just around the corner - with I "suspect" a less-than-scientific poll.
This piece takes on a letter submitted to the paper by Finance Minister, Tom Marshall. More particularly it challenges one specific point Marshall makes. The quote being discussed is: “I suspect Mr. Jones is not really interested in seeing Newfoundland and Labrador reach its true potential by moving forward with large-scale energy developments that are clearly in the best interests of this province.”
The Mr. Jones referred to is Telegram columnist - Brian Jones. Jones has been appropriately and fairly challenging the proposed deal between Emera and Nalcor - to develop Muskrat Falls.
Wangersky finds the statement "out of character" for Marshall who Russell describes this way: "Tom Marshall is usually one of the province’s more moderate ministers. He doesn’t boil over in House of Assembly debates or question period, and when he’s faced with something that he views to be inaccurate, he will usually find a plain and almost soft-spoken way to correct the record."
If you have had direct dealings with Tom Marshall - you may have experienced the same sort of Jekyll and Hyde. I find the Minister does appear pleasant, polite, understanding, and overall level-headed. If you - however - do not come around to his "thinking" or "position" on an issue - he will become aloof, disinterested, and yes as nasty as the best of em.
From my continued observation of both Brian Jones and Tom Marshall - I "suspect" if either of them has an hidden agenda, it is Marshall. In fact most all the PC MHA's are behaving in the same way. The difference of course is that Jones is not asking to spend 8 billion dollars belonging to you and I - Marshall is. If the Minister feels the expenditure is a good investment - he and his colleagues have failed to prove that to the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
The PC's will berate, intimidate, insult, and sometimes even sue former Cabinet Ministers, former MHA's, professionals, bloggers, talk show participants, the media, and the public at large - if they question the logic and viability of this proposed energy deal. This despite our history of poor resource deals and the history of corruption globally when billions of dollars are involved.
You see it is not the job of Brian Jones to sell this Emera/Nalcor fiasco - while it is his and all of our jobs to challenge it. The job of "con"vincing belongs to the government - to date they have failed. I "suspect" that the deal is so bad that it cannot be sold on its merits.
I "suspect" that absent the physical warfare - the Dunderdale administration is reducing itself to partisan tribalism. This is Newfoundland and Labrador not Afghanistan and I "suspect" that one senior official of this government has all kinds of experience in countries that deter open and free debate through ridicule and otherwise interference in the lives of those who challenge them.
I "suspect" that from the Railway to Churchill Falls - generations of these merchants continue to call the shots - and they do not want ordinary people to stand in the way of their wealth building.
I further "suspect" that the government, Nalcor, departments, and the PC Party have done numerous public opinion polls on this deal - where are they? Where's MQO when you need them? I "suspect" they might be just around the corner - with I "suspect" a less-than-scientific poll.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
A Day in the House of Assembly - no longer for the People
For those of you who have not been in the House of Assembly for awhile - now might be the time to check on your employees.
I know many of you watch on television and see bits and pieces on the news but you need to sit in the public gallery.
When the House is televised you generally get a view of a person asking or answering a question. When you are in the House you get the full scope of the behavior.
The government members - who are your employees - would not last a day in any other workplace. They would be summarily dismissed and would soon not be hired by any employer.
The rancor of debate is normal and you might see that in a particularly feisty case in court but you would never see the rest of the behavior in any workplace.
As the government members stood on their feet last night you seen their face in the camera and you heard the words they were told to say. You would have listened to protestations of "we are only here to serve the people and do what's best for the people".
The people who were not on camera were laughing and giggling, making faces, showing pictures on their iPads, texting, reading the paper, moving from seat to seat, whispering and pointing to their employers in the gallery and generally attempting to bully anybody they could.
The job they were doing - passing legislation - was the furthest thing from their minds - in fact most - based on their commentary - knew nothing about the legislation they were passing, and less than that about the subject area and potential impacts.
Joan Burke's job apparently - apart from distributing candy for their late night party - is to constantly say kirby.com giggle giggle kirby.com hehehehe. Then when she had a spare moment she became Darin King's BFF and the two delighted in sliding their fingers across the iPad. At one point the Premier, Joan, Darin, and Charlene were holding their bellies with laughter. What were they laughing at? Well - just like bullies - they were whispering and pointing - using hand gestures - and trying their hardest to make somebody feel unwelcome or unimportant.
Tom Marshall's job appears to require a better chair - perhaps a La-Z-Boy - where he can really stretch out and disengage.
Kevin O'Brien was the man of the hour last night - sitting stoically next to the Minister of Health - as the two displayed ignorance I have never witnessed in my life time. The Opposition members both NDP and Liberal would say something and then Susan would lean her ear into Kevin and await the hasty explanations put forth from the guru of pharmacy. He kept looking into the gallery - to watch the responses from actual pharmacy owners as he mislead the camera and caucus colleagues.
Squeaking from the back bench was this obscure person - who seems desperate to want to make the starting line-up and acts like he would do anything to get there. He went so far as to put his own prescription requirements out for the public to assess - so be it.
Practically all of them felt comfortable in attacking people in the public gallery - knowing they were not allowed to respond. They pointed to the people in the gallery and called them names, attacked their character, belittled their accomplishments, and generally attempted to intimidate them. This was all under the protection of the rules of the House of Assembly.
Finally there are the muted head-bobbers - who as if they understood a pecking order - contributed nothing more than literally nodding their head up and down in approval for 10 hours.
Terry French and Clyde Jackman are an unfortunate duo - who have reduced themselves to making personal attacks on people who cannot respond; both are also competant campaigners who know how to praise enough people to keep them elected.
It is safe to say that Dale Kirby and Yvonne Jones are the MHA's who are targeted most on the floor - by government members who behave like bullies. You see the bullies cannot stand on brain power - they stand on intimidation by numbers.
These MHA's in the House of Assembly looked up to the public gallery and advised their employers what they should or should not do and what they are allowed and not allowed to do - as if they had the power to control them.
Make no mistake about the following conclusion. Democracy in Newfoundland and Labrador means that you elected the Dunderdale government and as such they believe you gave them absolute power to do as they wish - when they wish. The government will dictate what public discourse is appropriate - when and how many times - on all issues.
Their one line of debate is; they are elected. They were elected - in their view - to proceed unimpeded by any opposition - legislative or public and any interference to that by anybody will be met with the full force of their governmental power.
They feel free to advise legitimate corporate entities on who they should employ and who they should not. They feel free to instruct the number of times one might appear on a talk-show - before they determine it is unacceptable. They have no problem advising experts in one field or another that despite their expertise - it is the government that has the power and really facts or knowledge don't enter into it. They feel they have a right to dictate what a group can or cannot do to express their position to government. They feel free to tell business owners in Newfoundland and Labrador that the owners have no right to speak but they will negotiate with the companies employees. (more on this in a separate post)
Simply put - these are people who do not understand or do not care about a democratic process which is open and accountable. The people report to them - they do not answer to the people. The only time this government and its members will answer to the people is 12 hours every 4 years. The Ross Reid led strategic political plan - can be and should be likened to strategies employed in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosova, and the Ukraine. Ross spent much time moving these regions along - is it possible he learned more from them than he taught about political systems and the power of a government?
I add that many of the people I sat with in the public gallery until 1 o'clock last night and over the past two days - left - shaking their heads, disgusted, disappointed, and with a resolve to share what they experienced. Were they disappointed with a decision that impacted their business, their communities, and most importantly the people they serve? Yes - but that they can deal with that. What they will not accept are insults, mistreatment, disrespect, innuendo, and lies. In this the government made it's largest mistake.
P.S has MQO put out any "gratis" polls of late?
Over the next week or two I will be posting on the events in the House, the fallout, how you will be impacted, and the erroneous and/or false statements made by government members and Ministers.
I know many of you watch on television and see bits and pieces on the news but you need to sit in the public gallery.
When the House is televised you generally get a view of a person asking or answering a question. When you are in the House you get the full scope of the behavior.
The government members - who are your employees - would not last a day in any other workplace. They would be summarily dismissed and would soon not be hired by any employer.
The rancor of debate is normal and you might see that in a particularly feisty case in court but you would never see the rest of the behavior in any workplace.
As the government members stood on their feet last night you seen their face in the camera and you heard the words they were told to say. You would have listened to protestations of "we are only here to serve the people and do what's best for the people".
The people who were not on camera were laughing and giggling, making faces, showing pictures on their iPads, texting, reading the paper, moving from seat to seat, whispering and pointing to their employers in the gallery and generally attempting to bully anybody they could.
The job they were doing - passing legislation - was the furthest thing from their minds - in fact most - based on their commentary - knew nothing about the legislation they were passing, and less than that about the subject area and potential impacts.
Joan Burke's job apparently - apart from distributing candy for their late night party - is to constantly say kirby.com giggle giggle kirby.com hehehehe. Then when she had a spare moment she became Darin King's BFF and the two delighted in sliding their fingers across the iPad. At one point the Premier, Joan, Darin, and Charlene were holding their bellies with laughter. What were they laughing at? Well - just like bullies - they were whispering and pointing - using hand gestures - and trying their hardest to make somebody feel unwelcome or unimportant.
Tom Marshall's job appears to require a better chair - perhaps a La-Z-Boy - where he can really stretch out and disengage.
Kevin O'Brien was the man of the hour last night - sitting stoically next to the Minister of Health - as the two displayed ignorance I have never witnessed in my life time. The Opposition members both NDP and Liberal would say something and then Susan would lean her ear into Kevin and await the hasty explanations put forth from the guru of pharmacy. He kept looking into the gallery - to watch the responses from actual pharmacy owners as he mislead the camera and caucus colleagues.
Squeaking from the back bench was this obscure person - who seems desperate to want to make the starting line-up and acts like he would do anything to get there. He went so far as to put his own prescription requirements out for the public to assess - so be it.
Practically all of them felt comfortable in attacking people in the public gallery - knowing they were not allowed to respond. They pointed to the people in the gallery and called them names, attacked their character, belittled their accomplishments, and generally attempted to intimidate them. This was all under the protection of the rules of the House of Assembly.
Finally there are the muted head-bobbers - who as if they understood a pecking order - contributed nothing more than literally nodding their head up and down in approval for 10 hours.
Terry French and Clyde Jackman are an unfortunate duo - who have reduced themselves to making personal attacks on people who cannot respond; both are also competant campaigners who know how to praise enough people to keep them elected.
It is safe to say that Dale Kirby and Yvonne Jones are the MHA's who are targeted most on the floor - by government members who behave like bullies. You see the bullies cannot stand on brain power - they stand on intimidation by numbers.
These MHA's in the House of Assembly looked up to the public gallery and advised their employers what they should or should not do and what they are allowed and not allowed to do - as if they had the power to control them.
Make no mistake about the following conclusion. Democracy in Newfoundland and Labrador means that you elected the Dunderdale government and as such they believe you gave them absolute power to do as they wish - when they wish. The government will dictate what public discourse is appropriate - when and how many times - on all issues.
Their one line of debate is; they are elected. They were elected - in their view - to proceed unimpeded by any opposition - legislative or public and any interference to that by anybody will be met with the full force of their governmental power.
They feel free to advise legitimate corporate entities on who they should employ and who they should not. They feel free to instruct the number of times one might appear on a talk-show - before they determine it is unacceptable. They have no problem advising experts in one field or another that despite their expertise - it is the government that has the power and really facts or knowledge don't enter into it. They feel they have a right to dictate what a group can or cannot do to express their position to government. They feel free to tell business owners in Newfoundland and Labrador that the owners have no right to speak but they will negotiate with the companies employees. (more on this in a separate post)
Simply put - these are people who do not understand or do not care about a democratic process which is open and accountable. The people report to them - they do not answer to the people. The only time this government and its members will answer to the people is 12 hours every 4 years. The Ross Reid led strategic political plan - can be and should be likened to strategies employed in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosova, and the Ukraine. Ross spent much time moving these regions along - is it possible he learned more from them than he taught about political systems and the power of a government?
I add that many of the people I sat with in the public gallery until 1 o'clock last night and over the past two days - left - shaking their heads, disgusted, disappointed, and with a resolve to share what they experienced. Were they disappointed with a decision that impacted their business, their communities, and most importantly the people they serve? Yes - but that they can deal with that. What they will not accept are insults, mistreatment, disrespect, innuendo, and lies. In this the government made it's largest mistake.
P.S has MQO put out any "gratis" polls of late?
Over the next week or two I will be posting on the events in the House, the fallout, how you will be impacted, and the erroneous and/or false statements made by government members and Ministers.
Friday, February 03, 2012
Don't miss the REAL story in Ches Crosbie's comments on Muskrat
When an established and respected Newfoundland and Labrador lawyer provides the following statement - as a preamble for speaking on the Muskrat Falls proposed development - we must take stock of what we've become.
Quote: Ches Crosbie Telegram, February 3-2012
“I don’t want to get pissed on by the government,” he said. “Like anyone, I don’t want to make myself a target.”
Can you imagine how the ordinary citizen feels? How afraid are we? I would love to see the Telegram ask Premier Dunderdale and Minister Kennedy - if they felt responsible for this type of fear? Why would anybody feel they would be a "target" or get "pissed on" because they spoke in opposition to a development of natural resources or a public policy?
Quote: Ches Crosbie Telegram, February 3-2012
“I don’t want to get pissed on by the government,” he said. “Like anyone, I don’t want to make myself a target.”
Can you imagine how the ordinary citizen feels? How afraid are we? I would love to see the Telegram ask Premier Dunderdale and Minister Kennedy - if they felt responsible for this type of fear? Why would anybody feel they would be a "target" or get "pissed on" because they spoke in opposition to a development of natural resources or a public policy?
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Premier Dunderdale is in Contempt - MOCHA any one?
MOCHA Members of Closed House of Assembly
Relax - have a MOCHA moment.
We are working - just not in the House of Assembly.
Simple really - YOU were elected as Members of the House of Assembly.
You refuse to go into the House of Assembly.
Cabinet and the Premier are supposed to answer the questions of the people in the House of Assembly. The people have elected opposition members of the House of Assembly and they have a role to play in our democratic process.
The people expect that the Opposition Members that they elect will have a reasonable opportunity to utilize Question Period. The people expect that Opposition Members may introduce a Private Members Bill. How can any MHA introduce a Private Members Bill if the government as a body supersedes the elected body?
Dunderdale's party had the most MHA's elected so they form government and appoint a Cabinet. This has nothing to do with members as members to perform their MHA duties.
Note to MHA Perry and others promoting the message - that "just because we are not in the House of Assembly does not mean we are not working". Your message is ridiculous - has no validity - and is a poor excuse for avoiding your duties.
Each MHA has the same value and importance and each has the power of their vote, their voice and their participation in the House of Assembly.
When Ms. Perry you were elected as an MHA - you were elected to represent the people of your constituency regardless of your party and the outcome of what party becomes government.
Ms. Perry you may sit in the House of Assembly and vote against government measures all day long - and while your party may boot you from the particular political association - they cannot remove you from the House of Assembly.
All MHA's should be pushing for the opening of the House of Assembly - period.
When government starts dictating the value of the House of Assembly to the point where a Premier could declare there is no reason to open it - she has crossed a boundary - she is in contempt of the people and their vote.
It is an abuse of governmental power to treat this institution with such disregard.
Open the House of Assembly or resign sit back and have a MOCHA.
The Progressive Conservative Party does not own the House of Assembly - the people do.
As an MHA you should demand respect for the House of the people or resign - you are a disgrace.
What next? Should we expect that the House of Assembly has been acquired by the PC Party? Will it now show up as an asset on the balance sheet of the PC Party at the office of the Chief Electoral Officer?
The man who acquires the ability to take full possession of his own mind may take possession of anything else to which he is justly entitled. ~Andrew Carnegie
Relax - have a MOCHA moment.
We are working - just not in the House of Assembly.
Simple really - YOU were elected as Members of the House of Assembly.
You refuse to go into the House of Assembly.
Cabinet and the Premier are supposed to answer the questions of the people in the House of Assembly. The people have elected opposition members of the House of Assembly and they have a role to play in our democratic process.
The people expect that the Opposition Members that they elect will have a reasonable opportunity to utilize Question Period. The people expect that Opposition Members may introduce a Private Members Bill. How can any MHA introduce a Private Members Bill if the government as a body supersedes the elected body?
Dunderdale's party had the most MHA's elected so they form government and appoint a Cabinet. This has nothing to do with members as members to perform their MHA duties.
Note to MHA Perry and others promoting the message - that "just because we are not in the House of Assembly does not mean we are not working". Your message is ridiculous - has no validity - and is a poor excuse for avoiding your duties.
Each MHA has the same value and importance and each has the power of their vote, their voice and their participation in the House of Assembly.
When Ms. Perry you were elected as an MHA - you were elected to represent the people of your constituency regardless of your party and the outcome of what party becomes government.
Ms. Perry you may sit in the House of Assembly and vote against government measures all day long - and while your party may boot you from the particular political association - they cannot remove you from the House of Assembly.
All MHA's should be pushing for the opening of the House of Assembly - period.
When government starts dictating the value of the House of Assembly to the point where a Premier could declare there is no reason to open it - she has crossed a boundary - she is in contempt of the people and their vote.
It is an abuse of governmental power to treat this institution with such disregard.
Open the House of Assembly or resign sit back and have a MOCHA.
The Progressive Conservative Party does not own the House of Assembly - the people do.
As an MHA you should demand respect for the House of the people or resign - you are a disgrace.
What next? Should we expect that the House of Assembly has been acquired by the PC Party? Will it now show up as an asset on the balance sheet of the PC Party at the office of the Chief Electoral Officer?
The man who acquires the ability to take full possession of his own mind may take possession of anything else to which he is justly entitled. ~Andrew Carnegie
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Politicians do not have Thick Skin - they have Power - media even more so!
How many times have you heard - to be a politician you need thick skin?
In my opinion they do not have thick skin - they have power and are willing to abuse it.
To make matters worse the media's skin is almost as thin. Try to critique the media and see what happens. Ask Dave Cochrane.
No matter what any of us normal mortals have to say about issues which affect us and are using our money - we are to say nothing or risk retribution in one fashion or another. The politicians and media are not interested in constructive criticism or even reasonable questions about the quality of their work - they are only interested in finding ways to make the criticism or questions stop.
This is not thick-skinned this is "we have the power" just watch us.
How many times during the election did you hear PC candidates say "we need to be on the government side". Why? What are the consequences if we are not? Better yet people - what are the consequences of zero opposition?
It is not acceptable to have less than adequate investigative journalism - and if the problem is the new budget - let the people know. Let us know why you are announcers of prepared government statements or the bearers of tabloid sensationalism like the twitter story. Show us the meat - then we can make up our own minds.
Make no mistake about it - the government and the media will X you out if you open your mouth in protest or in question. They will use their powers to cause you misery one way or the other. You are labelled as naysayers and treated with disdain. Ask Dunderdale how she treats me - professionally? Ask her how she gets to pick and choose the citizens she will talk to? Ask her how she punishes our own people while bowing to Ottawa or big corporations?
How about Dunderdale - opens the House of Assembly and the media do a story on what people think of how their doing.
Thick skin? - NO Power and Arrogance? - Yes Ignorance? The more the better they say. It is bliss after all.
In my opinion they do not have thick skin - they have power and are willing to abuse it.
To make matters worse the media's skin is almost as thin. Try to critique the media and see what happens. Ask Dave Cochrane.
No matter what any of us normal mortals have to say about issues which affect us and are using our money - we are to say nothing or risk retribution in one fashion or another. The politicians and media are not interested in constructive criticism or even reasonable questions about the quality of their work - they are only interested in finding ways to make the criticism or questions stop.
This is not thick-skinned this is "we have the power" just watch us.
How many times during the election did you hear PC candidates say "we need to be on the government side". Why? What are the consequences if we are not? Better yet people - what are the consequences of zero opposition?
It is not acceptable to have less than adequate investigative journalism - and if the problem is the new budget - let the people know. Let us know why you are announcers of prepared government statements or the bearers of tabloid sensationalism like the twitter story. Show us the meat - then we can make up our own minds.
Make no mistake about it - the government and the media will X you out if you open your mouth in protest or in question. They will use their powers to cause you misery one way or the other. You are labelled as naysayers and treated with disdain. Ask Dunderdale how she treats me - professionally? Ask her how she gets to pick and choose the citizens she will talk to? Ask her how she punishes our own people while bowing to Ottawa or big corporations?
How about Dunderdale - opens the House of Assembly and the media do a story on what people think of how their doing.
Thick skin? - NO Power and Arrogance? - Yes Ignorance? The more the better they say. It is bliss after all.
Friday, November 04, 2011
What do you think about the Len Simms - Ross Reid scandalous Reappointments?
Let's talk about our electoral system - do you think it represents you?
Let's talk about "innovative" polling - particularly during election campaigns.
Let's talk about intimidation during elections. Call with your stories!
How about the rights enjoyed by Len Simms and Ross Reid - what about all other "public" servants?
First past the post system - is it our best choice?
What do you think about proportional representation?
Do you think a Minister like Kevin O'Brien can deal with this type of debate and policy debate instead of painstakingly explaining how we now change our clocks at two in the morning?
Do you believe a referendum should be held on electoral reform?
"Talk with Sue" Sunday night and 8pm
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/talkwithsue
This show is a real peoples program - where politicians do not rule - you do.
Let's talk about "innovative" polling - particularly during election campaigns.
Let's talk about intimidation during elections. Call with your stories!
How about the rights enjoyed by Len Simms and Ross Reid - what about all other "public" servants?
First past the post system - is it our best choice?
What do you think about proportional representation?
Do you think a Minister like Kevin O'Brien can deal with this type of debate and policy debate instead of painstakingly explaining how we now change our clocks at two in the morning?
Do you believe a referendum should be held on electoral reform?
"Talk with Sue" Sunday night and 8pm
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/talkwithsue
This show is a real peoples program - where politicians do not rule - you do.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Kathy's Kakorrhaphiophobics
The CBC employee responsible for this photo - should be recognized for the best piece of journalism the station has produced in a while.
 | |||||||
| In the Beginning |
Saturday, October 29, 2011
The Cabinet that Kathy Built
Ms. Dunderdale has built her cabinet.
The cabinet is wooden not steel.
The cabinet has hardware.
The cabinet has knobs.
The cabinet has a door but it won`t open.
The cabinet responds to a clapper.
The cabinet is made of bleached white wood - most of it reclaimed.
The cabinet looks masculine but sounds childlike as it squeaks.
The cabinet is a smaller copy of the one Danny built.
The cabinet holds no files.
The cabinet does not come with a warranty.
The cabinet is not accessible but can be viewed through an opaque window.
The cabinet has no known purpose.
The cabinet may have been co-designed by up and comer Stephen Harper in consultation with re-hire Ross Reid.
The cabinet foreman is Len Simms to make sure it fits the house.
The cabinet will travel throughout the world, country, and province first-class and with security.
The cabinet has been rearranged with some parts removed and other parts left out.
The cabinet is not pleasing to the City of St. John`s - surprising - since it is N ew D underdale and P artisan driven.
The cabinet did not include building materials from Kent - is not of Perryod and did not require a Hunter.
The cabinet is bullet proof particularly resistant to the Tommy gun.
The cabinet appears to have a lazy-susan, sagging drawers, yet it is fit for a king if not a wise-man.
The cabinet is well oiled but may be penetrable by running water.
The cabinet was assembled at the defunct mill in Grand Falls-Windsor by people who were promised or threatened during the election.
The cabinet is getting good reviews from a panel polled yesterday.
The cabinet also received significant media attention - particularly from one David who was favourable to a conservative building plan.
The cabinet was not liberal with colour and reports claim that one tainted with a red origin was rejected to sit in the chair.
The cabinet was built with resources found in Labrador but not by Labradorians with the exception of a nick in the wood.
The cabinet smells of muskrat despite being sprayed with a french cologne.
The cabinet may become unhinged if dragged into the House.
The cabinet will be carefully and slowly installed in the House and then may suffer catastrophic failure.
The cabinet is likely to cause long-term damage to people who are exposed to the green wood.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Len and Ross up the Patronage Tree Pis_in_ on You and Me
Let’s get the rules straight shall we?
All Deputy Ministers and Crown Agencies Chairs and Crown Corporations CEO’s may resign during elections and work on whatever political party’s campaign they wish – and they shall be reappointed after the election – regardless of who wins.
Further let’s remind everybody that anybody who works for government is not a senior executive but from time to time may talk to one – must not stuff an envelope or place a sign on their lawn.
This in an effort to assure the public that there will be no conflict perceived or real.
Make no mistake about it – the Dunderdale crew believes you and I are stupid. Additionally they believe the media is inept and will not interfere with their interference of democratic principles.
We have reached the point where strips of pavement, inaccurate polls and “threats” – determine who wins and regardless of the lunacy placed before us we shall follow.
We have reached a point where both the federal and provincial governments believe they can strip us of whatever they wish and we will say nothing other than reward them with votes.
It was pathetic listening to the media “report” that Len Simms and Ross Reid had been reappointed. Imagine that – thanks for letting us know. For all the news in Newfoundland and Labrador please refer to the government webpage. For crime and carnage please follow your traditional radio or television station.
There used to be a time when reporters longed to be journalists – now we have announcers longing to be anchors.
There used to be a time when boys longed to be men and girls – women – now we have adults longing not to think to achieve but only to cheer and follow.
So tell me then – who is responsible for the future of your children?
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Tell me again how this should be allowed!
It is rural areas that will suffer - particularly the fishery.
Funny how the PC vote was pretty dead on - but the other little mess probably cost some seats for the Liberals.
Friday, October 07, 2011
CBC needs to Rethink - Decisions Questionable
Did anybody catch the political panel on CBC Here and Now tonight?
If you did you were probably scratching your head.
First question - did CBC choose the panelists?
PC representative - Ross Reid Current Campaign Chair Forever Tory
NDP representative - Lana Payne active with current and ongoing ties to the NDP
Liberal representative - Bill Matthews the Liberal/PC with no obvious current ties to the Liberals
This was an obvious problem from the get go. First Matthews has not always been Liberal - rather for a significant period of his political career he was Tory. Second - he has not been obviously involved with the Party during this election or over the past number of years. Third - he seemed disconnected with what's current in the Libs organization and campaign.
This contrasts completely with the other two individuals who are stalwarts of their respective parties and are obviously current and involved.
The first question revolved around the ongoing battle in St. John's Centre and the battle between Gerry Rogers NDP and the incumbent Shawn Skinner PC. Really there was nothing left to do but agree for Bill.
Then we got into the polls and the expectation of seats. Ross Reid just had to sit back and let Bill Matthews do the hacking for him. Lana predicted 5 for the NDP and then predicted 4-5 for the Liberals. Ross just sat there smug as Bill agreed with Lana and was unable to talk about any seats outside the overpass. Ross sat there again letting them split 7 or 8 seats.
Regardless of the types of polls done - accurate or inaccurate - when you remove the greater St. John's areas and a few strong Tory seats in other areas of the province - the numbers for a significant number of rural seats would probably show a very close split between the Liberals and Tories.
Let's look at this:
Yvonne Jones - does anybody believe she is at 16%?
Andrew Parsons?
Eddie Joyce?
Dwight Ball?
Kevin Aylward?
Neil Ward?
Joanna Guy Ryan?
Danny Dumderesque?
Wayne Morris?
Eric Skinner?
Merv Wiseman?
Chris Montague?
Randy Edmunds?
Todd Squires?
Leanne Hussey?
Jim Bennett?
Marshall Dean?
Barry Snow?
Ryan Lane?
I could carry on. Anybody like to take a crack at the popular vote in these districts before the election?
Despite the continued attack on the Liberals by certain anti-liberal media it will be interesting to check these polls on election day.
I have to say CBC - the panel on tonight was the worst demonstration of balance I have ever seen. That is unless the Liberal party sent Matthews. If that's the case - something worse is on the go.
If you did you were probably scratching your head.
First question - did CBC choose the panelists?
PC representative - Ross Reid Current Campaign Chair Forever Tory
NDP representative - Lana Payne active with current and ongoing ties to the NDP
Liberal representative - Bill Matthews the Liberal/PC with no obvious current ties to the Liberals
This was an obvious problem from the get go. First Matthews has not always been Liberal - rather for a significant period of his political career he was Tory. Second - he has not been obviously involved with the Party during this election or over the past number of years. Third - he seemed disconnected with what's current in the Libs organization and campaign.
This contrasts completely with the other two individuals who are stalwarts of their respective parties and are obviously current and involved.
The first question revolved around the ongoing battle in St. John's Centre and the battle between Gerry Rogers NDP and the incumbent Shawn Skinner PC. Really there was nothing left to do but agree for Bill.
Then we got into the polls and the expectation of seats. Ross Reid just had to sit back and let Bill Matthews do the hacking for him. Lana predicted 5 for the NDP and then predicted 4-5 for the Liberals. Ross just sat there smug as Bill agreed with Lana and was unable to talk about any seats outside the overpass. Ross sat there again letting them split 7 or 8 seats.
Regardless of the types of polls done - accurate or inaccurate - when you remove the greater St. John's areas and a few strong Tory seats in other areas of the province - the numbers for a significant number of rural seats would probably show a very close split between the Liberals and Tories.
Let's look at this:
Yvonne Jones - does anybody believe she is at 16%?
Andrew Parsons?
Eddie Joyce?
Dwight Ball?
Kevin Aylward?
Neil Ward?
Joanna Guy Ryan?
Danny Dumderesque?
Wayne Morris?
Eric Skinner?
Merv Wiseman?
Chris Montague?
Randy Edmunds?
Todd Squires?
Leanne Hussey?
Jim Bennett?
Marshall Dean?
Barry Snow?
Ryan Lane?
I could carry on. Anybody like to take a crack at the popular vote in these districts before the election?
Despite the continued attack on the Liberals by certain anti-liberal media it will be interesting to check these polls on election day.
I have to say CBC - the panel on tonight was the worst demonstration of balance I have ever seen. That is unless the Liberal party sent Matthews. If that's the case - something worse is on the go.
Thursday, October 06, 2011
Resignations and Arrogance - Len Simms? Intimidation?
October 06 2011 - 9:13 p.m.
So we all heard the news on September 14th that Len Simms quit his job as Newfoundland and Labrador Housing boss - to assist in the election for the Tories.
We also heard that many public servants cannot put a sign on their lawn, stuff and envelope, or wear a button - even when not at work.
We all know that Mr. Simms quit the last election too and then was rehired - but this one takes the cake.
Let's say you are a person availing of a housing unit from the crown corporation and Len Simms sees a Liberal sign on your window? Now we would not like to think that people might find that Mr. Simms is seen as impartial when making a decision.
Well here's the problem CLICK HERE
So has he resigned? Nothing like a bit of intimidation hey? Guess there's not enough people working for government to get that changed right?
Has he campaigned? Where and with who?
Hey media - what's up with that? Guess this is not the type of news you want to cover.
So we all heard the news on September 14th that Len Simms quit his job as Newfoundland and Labrador Housing boss - to assist in the election for the Tories.
We also heard that many public servants cannot put a sign on their lawn, stuff and envelope, or wear a button - even when not at work.
We all know that Mr. Simms quit the last election too and then was rehired - but this one takes the cake.
Let's say you are a person availing of a housing unit from the crown corporation and Len Simms sees a Liberal sign on your window? Now we would not like to think that people might find that Mr. Simms is seen as impartial when making a decision.
Well here's the problem CLICK HERE
So has he resigned? Nothing like a bit of intimidation hey? Guess there's not enough people working for government to get that changed right?
Has he campaigned? Where and with who?
Hey media - what's up with that? Guess this is not the type of news you want to cover.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)