The following is a copy of email correspondence between Nalcor and I over the past 2 weeks.
If this is a sample of transparency - we are in real trouble. I am a shareholder of Nalcor and so are you. It is our company - it does not belong solely to Ed Martin, Kathy Dunderdale, Jerome Kennedy, Danny Williams, or Dean MacDonald.
Please notice how basic the request is and how long the response is taking.
June 08-2012 Sent to info@nalcorenergy.com
Please advise where I may find a copy of the bylaws outlining the responsibilities of the Board of Directors.
Thank you,
Sue Kelland-Dyer
June 08-2012 Sent from NalcorAdministrator@nalcorenergy.com
Thank you for your enquiry to Nalcor Energy. Questions and general
enquiries will be responded to within five business days.
Job enquires and applications will be forwarded to the Human Resources
department. Please visit nalcorenergy.com/careers, where you can find
current opportunities, submit a general application and sign up for job
notifications.
Visit HydroSafety.ca for tips and videos that will help keep you and your
families safe.
June 18 - 2012 Sent to info@nalcorenergy.com
Please advise what the status of this request is.
Thank you,
Sue Kelland-Dyer
Showing posts with label information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label information. Show all posts
Monday, June 18, 2012
Dunderdale NOT a Leader - Just Facilitating a Plan
Last week we seen the end of a record setting filibuster in the House of Assembly.
The debate was cut short by the PC's in the house through closure.
Bill 29 an Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act was and is a very controversial piece of House business. The crux of the concern is the reduction of access to information.
The Newfoundland and Labrador electorate is still suffering trust issues from the constituency allowance spending scandal - which ultimately sent 4 former MHA's to jail. One of the convicted was Ed Byrne - a PC MHA who became a Cabinet Minister and Deputy Premier under the Danny Williams administration.
In large part - the entire criminal fiasco was caused by not allowing the Auditor General to review the expenditures of the MHA's. The concept of maximized transparency and access to information was touted by Danny Williams as a hallmark of his government - of which current Premier Kathy Dunderdale served in Cabinet and as the Deputy Premier.
Any changes to law which would diminish - in any way - transparency and access should concern Kathy Dunderdale a great deal. It - however - did not phase her - apparently it did not even interest her.
Instead of being a leader by explaining to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador why her government wants to change the access to information law - she ran away. Dunderdale was here:
The Honourable Kathy Dunderdale, Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, will be the keynote speaker at the sixth annual Memorial University Calgary Affinity Dinner tomorrow (Wednesday, June 13) at the Fairmont Palliser Hotel in Calgary. The dinner begins at 7:00 p.m. MDT, with the Premier scheduled to speak at approximately 8:30 p.m.
The theme of the keynote address is Bold and Tenacious: Driving Growth and Prosperity in the New Newfoundland and Labrador.
Oh I can hear the tapping of partisan twitter characters already. They will suggest that this event was planned for some time and it is an important piece of business for our province.
Let's say we accept this rationale completely.
No problem, the Bill did not have to be called until the Premier returned. Or in the alternate - the debate did not have to be shut down until the Premier returned.
When so many people and media in the province were calling foul on this Bill - Kathy had a choice - she chose to run away. Do you really think she will take any responsibility for soaring power rates and massive debt if the Emera deal proceeds?
Dunderdale is not a leader - she is simply facilitating a plan.
The debate was cut short by the PC's in the house through closure.
Bill 29 an Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act was and is a very controversial piece of House business. The crux of the concern is the reduction of access to information.
The Newfoundland and Labrador electorate is still suffering trust issues from the constituency allowance spending scandal - which ultimately sent 4 former MHA's to jail. One of the convicted was Ed Byrne - a PC MHA who became a Cabinet Minister and Deputy Premier under the Danny Williams administration.
In large part - the entire criminal fiasco was caused by not allowing the Auditor General to review the expenditures of the MHA's. The concept of maximized transparency and access to information was touted by Danny Williams as a hallmark of his government - of which current Premier Kathy Dunderdale served in Cabinet and as the Deputy Premier.
Any changes to law which would diminish - in any way - transparency and access should concern Kathy Dunderdale a great deal. It - however - did not phase her - apparently it did not even interest her.
Instead of being a leader by explaining to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador why her government wants to change the access to information law - she ran away. Dunderdale was here:
The Honourable Kathy Dunderdale, Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, will be the keynote speaker at the sixth annual Memorial University Calgary Affinity Dinner tomorrow (Wednesday, June 13) at the Fairmont Palliser Hotel in Calgary. The dinner begins at 7:00 p.m. MDT, with the Premier scheduled to speak at approximately 8:30 p.m.
The theme of the keynote address is Bold and Tenacious: Driving Growth and Prosperity in the New Newfoundland and Labrador.
Oh I can hear the tapping of partisan twitter characters already. They will suggest that this event was planned for some time and it is an important piece of business for our province.
Let's say we accept this rationale completely.
No problem, the Bill did not have to be called until the Premier returned. Or in the alternate - the debate did not have to be shut down until the Premier returned.
When so many people and media in the province were calling foul on this Bill - Kathy had a choice - she chose to run away. Do you really think she will take any responsibility for soaring power rates and massive debt if the Emera deal proceeds?
Dunderdale is not a leader - she is simply facilitating a plan.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Bill 29 - Review by Chief Justice Green?
So the PC MHA's are going to shut down debate on Bill 29 - An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
First of all it's cowardly and very undemocratic. It demonstrates weakness and a complete disrespect for the people of the province.
The above is not exaggerated - it is appropriate considering the law we wish to change.
When such actions are taken by sitting government MHA's one can reasonably conclude that transparency is not atop their agenda and secondly that they are willing to risk a repeat of the criminal fiasco we had the last time a blockage of information occurred.
The history is too recent and the wound is too fresh - the parade of MHA's trotting off to jail.
It appears that Dunderdale and caucus are of the belief - that regardless of the position they take on any subject - they are above debate, above critique, above scrutiny, and essentially above the law.
I say this because the PC's in the House of Assembly will use the legislature to change any law they wish to accommodate their own protection. Further - they are willing to invoke closure when they are ready to silence the opposition members. All MHA's were elected and this is the people's House - not Jerome Kennedy's or Kevin O'Brien's or Tom Marshall's.
The Dunderdale Regime appears certain that if a democracy elects a dictatorship - tough! You elected us to do what we wish when we wish.
You see a mature democracy and intelligent and competent elected Members do not need to ram something down our throats or change the law to hide information on the decision making process. Mature politicians are able to promote their policies and ideas to the people without hiding information they used to make a decision.
You cannot claim democracy - when you only practice it 12 hours every 4 years (election).
Why not advise the multinational companies, multi-millionaires, and the stock market that if you wish to make a fortune on our resources - deals will be subject to public scrutiny. Corporations do not vote - they are not the electorate. We - the people - own the resources and we deserve as all shareholders do - complete disclosure.
By the way - where is Danny on Bill 29? He will yammer on about the virtues of Muskrat and the "need" for power here and there - yet the purported superhero of accountability and transparency has not commented on this?
How about we let Chief Justice Green review the proposed amendments and publicly report on his findings. He is a man above reproach and somebody that Jerome Kennedy, Tom Marshall, and Felix Collins can trust.
The media, citizens, national and provincial bodies have trouble with Bill 29 - and once again the critique is coming from across the political spectrum.
What is happening in our House of Assembly now is very significant and very scary. What next? It appears that Kent - while sitting as Chair - is intolerant of the opposition and Kennedy is intolerant of the Chair. It appears the current Dunderdale posse is frustrated with the whole idea of the House of Assembly. First she did not really want to open it - and second - only did so it appears to achieve a budget and shut down information.
What other Bills are in our future? A change to funding for the Opposition? A change to Question Period rules? A change to our system? Sure why not - Dunderdale seems prepared to rule by decree and the men and women around her have decided they serve her and not the people.
This Bill should not see the light of day - let alone become law.
Considering the checkered past of MHA behavior and longstanding record of bad deals, corruption, and fleeing business gurus to Panama - please ask that Chief Justice Green officially review Bill 29 and report his findings and recommendations in full to the people.
First of all it's cowardly and very undemocratic. It demonstrates weakness and a complete disrespect for the people of the province.
The above is not exaggerated - it is appropriate considering the law we wish to change.
When such actions are taken by sitting government MHA's one can reasonably conclude that transparency is not atop their agenda and secondly that they are willing to risk a repeat of the criminal fiasco we had the last time a blockage of information occurred.
The history is too recent and the wound is too fresh - the parade of MHA's trotting off to jail.
It appears that Dunderdale and caucus are of the belief - that regardless of the position they take on any subject - they are above debate, above critique, above scrutiny, and essentially above the law.
I say this because the PC's in the House of Assembly will use the legislature to change any law they wish to accommodate their own protection. Further - they are willing to invoke closure when they are ready to silence the opposition members. All MHA's were elected and this is the people's House - not Jerome Kennedy's or Kevin O'Brien's or Tom Marshall's.
The Dunderdale Regime appears certain that if a democracy elects a dictatorship - tough! You elected us to do what we wish when we wish.
You see a mature democracy and intelligent and competent elected Members do not need to ram something down our throats or change the law to hide information on the decision making process. Mature politicians are able to promote their policies and ideas to the people without hiding information they used to make a decision.
You cannot claim democracy - when you only practice it 12 hours every 4 years (election).
Why not advise the multinational companies, multi-millionaires, and the stock market that if you wish to make a fortune on our resources - deals will be subject to public scrutiny. Corporations do not vote - they are not the electorate. We - the people - own the resources and we deserve as all shareholders do - complete disclosure.
By the way - where is Danny on Bill 29? He will yammer on about the virtues of Muskrat and the "need" for power here and there - yet the purported superhero of accountability and transparency has not commented on this?
How about we let Chief Justice Green review the proposed amendments and publicly report on his findings. He is a man above reproach and somebody that Jerome Kennedy, Tom Marshall, and Felix Collins can trust.
The media, citizens, national and provincial bodies have trouble with Bill 29 - and once again the critique is coming from across the political spectrum.
What is happening in our House of Assembly now is very significant and very scary. What next? It appears that Kent - while sitting as Chair - is intolerant of the opposition and Kennedy is intolerant of the Chair. It appears the current Dunderdale posse is frustrated with the whole idea of the House of Assembly. First she did not really want to open it - and second - only did so it appears to achieve a budget and shut down information.
What other Bills are in our future? A change to funding for the Opposition? A change to Question Period rules? A change to our system? Sure why not - Dunderdale seems prepared to rule by decree and the men and women around her have decided they serve her and not the people.
This Bill should not see the light of day - let alone become law.
Considering the checkered past of MHA behavior and longstanding record of bad deals, corruption, and fleeing business gurus to Panama - please ask that Chief Justice Green officially review Bill 29 and report his findings and recommendations in full to the people.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Secrecy and the Consequences - Dunderdale vs. Stiglitz
I will over the next couple of days take excerpts
from a lecture given by Joseph E. Stiglitz- Economist.
Below you will find some information about this
professional followed by Exerpt 1 of the lecture.
As a public - the current "secrecy" bill before our House of Assembly - should be frightening. You and I need to be very afraid of what the Dunderdale government is doing and why.
Appointments:
University Professor. Teaching at the Columbia
Business School, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (Department of
Economics) and the School of International and Public Affairs
Co-founder and Co-President of the Initiative for
Policy Dialogue (IPD)
Co-Chair of Columbia University's Committee on
Global Thought
Chair of the Management Board, Brooks World Poverty
Institute, University of Manchester
Member, CFTC-SEC Advisory Committee on Emerging
Regulatory Issues
President of the International Economic Association,
2011-2014
A Modest Proposal for International Monetary Reform,
paper presented at the June
2008 meeting of the International Economic
Association, Istanbul.
Sharing the Burden of Saving the Planet: Global
Social Justice for Sustainable Development, Keynote speech at the June 2008
meeting of the International Economic Association, Istanbul (see the powerpoint
here).
Co-Chair of the Commission on the Measurement of
Economic Performance and Social Progress.
GDP Fetishism, Project Syndicate, September 2009.
GSP Seen as Inadequate Measure of Economic Health,
by David Jolly, New York Times, September 14, 2009.
Towards A Better Measure of Well-Being, Financial
Times, September 13, 2009.
Chair of the Commission of Experts of the President
of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary
and Financial System
One Small Step Forward, The Guardian (UK), June 28,
2009.
Recommendations for Immediate Action, a statement
from the first meeting of the Comission of Experts, January 4-6, 2009, New
York.
West urged to increase aid to poor nations, article
about the Commission by Heather
Stewart, The Guardian (UK), January 11, 2009.
UN Panel Calls for Council to Replace G20, by Harvey
Morris, Financial Times, March 22, 2009.
Dollar Reserve Reform Urged, by Harvey Morris,
Financial Times, March 27, 2009.
Final Report of the UN Commission of Experts,
released September 21, 2009
Excerpt
1
To me, the most compelling argument for openness is
the positive Madisonian one: meaningful participation in democratic processes
requires informed participants. Secrecy reduces the information available to
the citizenry, hobbling their ability to participate meaningfully. Any of us
who has participated in a board of directors knows that the power of a board to
exercise direction and discipline is limited by the information at its
disposal.
Management knows this, and often attempts to control
the flow of information. We often speak of government being accountable,
accountable to the people. But if effective democratic oversight is to be
achieved, then the voters have to be informed: they have to know what
alternative actions were available, and what the results might have been. Those
in government typically have far more information relevant to the decisions
being made than do those outside government, just as management of a firm
typically has far more information about the firm’s markets, prospects, and
technology than do shareholders, let alone other outsiders. Indeed, managers
are paid to gather this information.
The question is, given that the public has paid for
the gathering of government information, who owns the information? Is it the
private province of the government official, or does it belong to the public at
large? I would argue that information gathered by public officials at public
expense is owned by the public— just as the chairs and buildings and other
physical assets used by government belong to the public. We have come to
emphasize the importance of intellectual property. The information produced,
gathered, and processed by public officials is intellectual property, no less
than a patentable innovation would be. To use that intellectual property for
private is just as serious an offense against the public as any other
appropriation of public property for private purposes.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)