Premier Paul Davis wants to know what the problem is. He wants to know why people are not supporting his government.
I think these musings by our Premier are misleading and I don't believe him.
He has to know by now that the electorate of Newfoundland and Labrador want an election. They want an election before the spring. If he does not know this - he is unfit to be Premier. Why? Any person watching and listening to anything political in our province over the past few months who does not recognize the people want to vote - is in denial or in a cave without electronics.
I believe Paul Davis and the entire Tory caucus know that - therefore the problem is denial (if not something worse) - not knowledge. Why deny? Well power and benefits affect some people in a way that hanging on by the fingernails is almost an involuntary behavior. Unfortunately - many of them are politicians.
Here are the problems Premier Davis:
1. The people want an election and you won't call one,
2. People are extremely worried about Muskrat Falls and you appear not to care,
3. People do not trust their energy/power system anymore and you keep sending out Smiley Martin,
4. The price of oil and your budgetary guesstimates,
5. Rural population/employment decimation,
6. Giveaway policy for our natural resources,
7. Everything is under review, reassessment and analysis,
8. We have liabilities where the amount of those liabilities are not known,
9. You continue to spend like drunken sailors with no clue how we will pay for it,
10. Your caucus and Cabinet are arrogant,
11. Bill 29,
12. Lay-offs and then rehiring (don't know what you're doing)
13. You get rid of family violence prevention court but contract PC connected lawyers,
14. Debt, deficit, unemployment, population loss and aging,
15. Patronage,
16. Extreme partisanship,
17. Loss of manufacturing and processing industries,
18. Appointment of unelected Minister,
19. Your attack on small local business,
20. Your continued attempt to blame the people for not understanding the good you do - instead of wondering whether the people just don't like your policies and decisions.
21. Allowing the federal government to erode their presence in our province,
22. Burton Winters enquiry,
23. Focusing on the Avalon economy instead of the entire province,
24. Continuing to pillage Labrador without growing Labrador
25. Lack of transparency and accountability.
This is a short list - and I'm sure many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have more to add.
The only way to deal with this is call an election and put out your own platform - not just a continuation of the Williams platform. This also would demonstrate integrity instead of preservation of self (Party). Most importantly this would prove you are a man of your word - when you claimed - "I will listen to the people".
Showing posts with label judy manning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judy manning. Show all posts
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Wednesday, November 05, 2014
Yes Judy Manning it IS personal!
It is very personal for Pat and Kim Dunphy.
Empathy is a word that Judy Manning uses frequently. It rolls off the unelected Minister's tongue as easy as the words Good Morning.
Well the morning is anything but good for the people Ms. Manning left behind to catapult from relative public obscurity to a high-powered seat in the Paul Davis government.
I have received permission this morning to relate what happened to Pat Dunphy last night. Mr. Dunphy is the gentleman you may recall featured on a CBC story last week. Press HERE to see the story.
I was in contact with Pat and his wife Kim this morning after learning that Pat took a fall last night. In their words "he was on his way to bed, I (Kim) was already gone to bed. He (Pat) had to get out of wheelchair because house is not accessible. He was dragging himself to the room walking holding onto the walls and he collapsed onto the rail of his bed bounced and hit the wall and landed on the floor."
"I (Kim) could hear something crunch I had to lift him (Pat) from the floor to the bed and undress him for bed he went into a seizure after the fall... His spinal cord is over 50% cut - he can walk but the neurosurgeon does not advise it".
Pat went on to tell me that, "...he (Pat) had a lamininectomy so he has no bones to protect the outside of his spinal cord - so if he hits that area he will die".
Pat and Kim describe his initial injuries this way: "initial cervical spine injury, quadriplegia, disc protrusion, 50%compromise of spinal cord, cervical myelopathy,progressive myelopathy,
Empathy is a word that Judy Manning uses frequently. It rolls off the unelected Minister's tongue as easy as the words Good Morning.
Well the morning is anything but good for the people Ms. Manning left behind to catapult from relative public obscurity to a high-powered seat in the Paul Davis government.
I have received permission this morning to relate what happened to Pat Dunphy last night. Mr. Dunphy is the gentleman you may recall featured on a CBC story last week. Press HERE to see the story.
I was in contact with Pat and his wife Kim this morning after learning that Pat took a fall last night. In their words "he was on his way to bed, I (Kim) was already gone to bed. He (Pat) had to get out of wheelchair because house is not accessible. He was dragging himself to the room walking holding onto the walls and he collapsed onto the rail of his bed bounced and hit the wall and landed on the floor."
"I (Kim) could hear something crunch I had to lift him (Pat) from the floor to the bed and undress him for bed he went into a seizure after the fall... His spinal cord is over 50% cut - he can walk but the neurosurgeon does not advise it".
Pat went on to tell me that, "...he (Pat) had a lamininectomy so he has no bones to protect the outside of his spinal cord - so if he hits that area he will die".
Pat and Kim describe his initial injuries this way: "initial cervical spine injury, quadriplegia, disc protrusion, 50%compromise of spinal cord, cervical myelopathy,progressive myelopathy,
spinal stenosis"
Further they say, "he has had surgeries anterior cervical disectomy and fusion
and spinal decompression,laminectomy and fusion".
So this couple went through another horrific night and morning - something that has happened many times in the 20 years since his workplace injury.
Ms. Manning did not complete this review as a Commissioner of the WHSCRD - as she left to take her place at the Davis Cabinet table.
Empathy Ms. Manning? Really Ms. Manning? While you and your colleague Tony Cornect - Minister responsible for the WHSC - were looking for votes in CBS - Pat was still waiting. These are people who needed your decision to move forward.
Ms. Manning must understand that she had responsibilities - and that these were life-altering responsibilities. The Minister should not have walked away from that until those duties were fulfilled.
If the unelected Minister does not consider this an abrogation of responsibilities - then I fail to see how Manning can assure the people she will not do the same as Attorney General or Minister of Justice.
Election day is today in CBS - we should remember what Cornect and Manning were doing while Pat and Kim Dunphy suffered through another day.
Tuesday, November 04, 2014
Manning - face and eyes into new job...
The unelected Minister - Judy Manning - is face and eyes into her new portfolio. See!
Out on the campaign trail drumming up votes for somebody else as she sits on her unelected throne.
Churning up the activity - on family violence court, WHSCC reviews, and generally preparing new legislation.
Seen here leafing through the voluminous material and briefing notes with her Cabinet colleague?
Pounding the pavement for justice and getting up to speed on her appointed Ministry?
Posing again above with Departmental literature? Enjoying a stroll while explaining to the good people of CBS why they should elect a PC MHA.
Why they must ask? Why not appoint somebody from the district right on into Cabinet and then hold a by-election. Hardly seems fair that Placentia - St. Mary's has 2 representatives. One donated by the Premier - the other elected but not in the mood to sit in Cabinet.
I suppose this could be be on-the-job political training.
Maybe Ms. Manning should have done as her uncle Fabs did. Run - don't get elected and get reappointed. Win - Win
The people of CBS must be at least a little annoyed that this person is being shoved in their faces in the middle of a democratic process.
Out on the campaign trail drumming up votes for somebody else as she sits on her unelected throne.
Churning up the activity - on family violence court, WHSCC reviews, and generally preparing new legislation.
Seen here leafing through the voluminous material and briefing notes with her Cabinet colleague?
Pounding the pavement for justice and getting up to speed on her appointed Ministry?
Posing again above with Departmental literature? Enjoying a stroll while explaining to the good people of CBS why they should elect a PC MHA.
Why they must ask? Why not appoint somebody from the district right on into Cabinet and then hold a by-election. Hardly seems fair that Placentia - St. Mary's has 2 representatives. One donated by the Premier - the other elected but not in the mood to sit in Cabinet.
I suppose this could be be on-the-job political training.
Maybe Ms. Manning should have done as her uncle Fabs did. Run - don't get elected and get reappointed. Win - Win
The people of CBS must be at least a little annoyed that this person is being shoved in their faces in the middle of a democratic process.
Manning Sound Bites 2 - Listening
The first installment of Manning Sound Bites deals with the Minister's propensity to blame others or avoid answering at all - questions regarding background, experience, and suitability for the job.
Today we will deal with - listening.
As Paul Davis touts that his administration will listen to the people - one would expect Ms. Manning to be a good listener.
This sound bite and the others I will write about all come from Ms. Manning's interview with David Cochrane (On Point). Listen HERE
Cochrane: You mentioned just a few minutes ago that you're contemplating legislative changes as part of the public safety Agenda. I guess I'm curious - how do you plan to advance that public safety agenda where you're not elected because legislative changes are legislation which has to be done in the House of Assembly. So you can't table legislation - you can't champion it and you can't debate it in the House. How do you make this work from outside the legislature.
Manning: Well I'd just like to correct you a little - on one point there. I'm certainly sitting at the Cabinet table and I'm certainly able to champion legislative changes at the Cabinet table.
The first thing Manning does is correct Cochrane on something that he was not incorrect on. Cochrane was surely referring to all the things she could not do in the House and asked her specifically what she could do outside the House. Sitting at a Cabinet table is not in the House of Assembly and Cochrane's reference was certainly championing inside the House. You should also note the continued condescending tone Ms. Manning uses with Cochrane with phrases - such as "I'd just like to correct you a little". The Minister comes across as patting a little child on the head and helping to correct the mistakes they might make.
The Minister continued...
Manning: You're absolutely right I will not be sitting in the House until such time as I'm elected and I'm looking forward to having that happen as soon as possible.
Right after applying a little correction she points out on the matter of her not sitting in the House - that Cochrane is absolutely right. Wow - she gave Cochrane that one - imagine he was right that she would not be sitting in the House. It was a perfect display of patting the child on the head and encouraging them for at least getting half of his statement right.
Secondly of course is the false and misleading statement that she's looking forward to getting elected as soon as possible. Clearly Ms. Manning has chosen to avoid that opportunity - and very publicly so. The Minister is NOT listening to the people and neither is Premier Davis. It is abundantly clear the people want her to seek election now - in one of the by-elections. That will not happen.
On the continued claim that Minister Manning is under unusual scrutiny - well yes if you compare it to an elected MHA moving into a Ministerial portfolio. The people of the province usually provide a honeymoon period - wherein they mostly overlook flubs - however - this individual received an extraordinary appointment. When the Premier reached outside the body elect and plucked this person out of thin air - there is no honeymoon - as the extraordinary talents and experience she must possess for such an extraordinary appointment would mean she's hit the ground running right?
To date Minister Manning is not demonstrating a real talent for listening - instead the message seems to be - look at me - I am polished - listen to me - I am well-spoken - and by all means understand that I empathize with anybody beneath my station. Arrogance and unjustified superiority? Ms. Manning comes across as feeling entitled - and as such why should she have to justify anything?
Ms. Manning does not seem to understand the basic premise of her position. She is there to serve the people not to address her subjects from a respectable distance.
Today we will deal with - listening.
As Paul Davis touts that his administration will listen to the people - one would expect Ms. Manning to be a good listener.
This sound bite and the others I will write about all come from Ms. Manning's interview with David Cochrane (On Point). Listen HERE
Cochrane: You mentioned just a few minutes ago that you're contemplating legislative changes as part of the public safety Agenda. I guess I'm curious - how do you plan to advance that public safety agenda where you're not elected because legislative changes are legislation which has to be done in the House of Assembly. So you can't table legislation - you can't champion it and you can't debate it in the House. How do you make this work from outside the legislature.
Manning: Well I'd just like to correct you a little - on one point there. I'm certainly sitting at the Cabinet table and I'm certainly able to champion legislative changes at the Cabinet table.
The first thing Manning does is correct Cochrane on something that he was not incorrect on. Cochrane was surely referring to all the things she could not do in the House and asked her specifically what she could do outside the House. Sitting at a Cabinet table is not in the House of Assembly and Cochrane's reference was certainly championing inside the House. You should also note the continued condescending tone Ms. Manning uses with Cochrane with phrases - such as "I'd just like to correct you a little". The Minister comes across as patting a little child on the head and helping to correct the mistakes they might make.
The Minister continued...
Manning: You're absolutely right I will not be sitting in the House until such time as I'm elected and I'm looking forward to having that happen as soon as possible.
Right after applying a little correction she points out on the matter of her not sitting in the House - that Cochrane is absolutely right. Wow - she gave Cochrane that one - imagine he was right that she would not be sitting in the House. It was a perfect display of patting the child on the head and encouraging them for at least getting half of his statement right.
Secondly of course is the false and misleading statement that she's looking forward to getting elected as soon as possible. Clearly Ms. Manning has chosen to avoid that opportunity - and very publicly so. The Minister is NOT listening to the people and neither is Premier Davis. It is abundantly clear the people want her to seek election now - in one of the by-elections. That will not happen.
On the continued claim that Minister Manning is under unusual scrutiny - well yes if you compare it to an elected MHA moving into a Ministerial portfolio. The people of the province usually provide a honeymoon period - wherein they mostly overlook flubs - however - this individual received an extraordinary appointment. When the Premier reached outside the body elect and plucked this person out of thin air - there is no honeymoon - as the extraordinary talents and experience she must possess for such an extraordinary appointment would mean she's hit the ground running right?
To date Minister Manning is not demonstrating a real talent for listening - instead the message seems to be - look at me - I am polished - listen to me - I am well-spoken - and by all means understand that I empathize with anybody beneath my station. Arrogance and unjustified superiority? Ms. Manning comes across as feeling entitled - and as such why should she have to justify anything?
Ms. Manning does not seem to understand the basic premise of her position. She is there to serve the people not to address her subjects from a respectable distance.
Sunday, November 02, 2014
Manning Sound Bites 1
Manning Sound Bites
The unelected Minister Manning's entire interview with David Cochrane - On Point - is now online. This is not one you want to miss. This is a great opportunity to watch our Minister "shine" for the people of the province.
Over the next few days I will be posting parts of the interview - questions and answers. You decide if this person is capable to do the duties of her position.
We will start with what I now fondly refer to as Manningisms. These are where Ms. Manning blames somebody else for her actions or words or simply talks as if a question or point has not been made. In this particular example - the response could be considered incoherent.
Click HERE to watch the complete interview.
Cochrane: In your criticism and your characterization of it as character assassination - you said facts were omitted. Facts can only be omitted if they're known and shared but you didn't share.
Manning: The characterization of character assassination - that arose as a result of overall how I have been trying to advance facts and I note that unfortunately - first of all I'm very comfortable with the legal training and legal experience that I have to advance my position as a Minister and as Attorney General. I certainly could stand with to do with some more media training. Until our initial re our initial interaction our baptism by fire shall we say and you were part of that on the day that I was appointed and ah that was my initial interaction with the media and I respect you have a job to do. Where I could stand to improve perhaps - would be - in I guess - I guess it would be remiss to say - I'm not good at developing soundbites.
The unelected Minister Manning's entire interview with David Cochrane - On Point - is now online. This is not one you want to miss. This is a great opportunity to watch our Minister "shine" for the people of the province.
Over the next few days I will be posting parts of the interview - questions and answers. You decide if this person is capable to do the duties of her position.
We will start with what I now fondly refer to as Manningisms. These are where Ms. Manning blames somebody else for her actions or words or simply talks as if a question or point has not been made. In this particular example - the response could be considered incoherent.
Click HERE to watch the complete interview.
Cochrane: In your criticism and your characterization of it as character assassination - you said facts were omitted. Facts can only be omitted if they're known and shared but you didn't share.
Manning: The characterization of character assassination - that arose as a result of overall how I have been trying to advance facts and I note that unfortunately - first of all I'm very comfortable with the legal training and legal experience that I have to advance my position as a Minister and as Attorney General. I certainly could stand with to do with some more media training. Until our initial re our initial interaction our baptism by fire shall we say and you were part of that on the day that I was appointed and ah that was my initial interaction with the media and I respect you have a job to do. Where I could stand to improve perhaps - would be - in I guess - I guess it would be remiss to say - I'm not good at developing soundbites.
Saturday, November 01, 2014
Manning playing gender card
If Judy Manning is trying to impress the public with her skills - she is failing.
To date we have a "superior work ethic" that has been alleged by the Premier but not proven.
We have "extensive legal experience" that has not been backed up by demonstrated work.
Now Ms. Manning is playing the gender card. That is not a card that one should use so cavalierly. There are real situations where women are discriminated against - this is not one of them.
She is a lawyer - yet she is doing her profession a disservice if what she calls responsible public scrutiny - "character assassination". There is zero evidence that this is the case.What has been reported has been accurate and if that information causes Ms. Manning to believe that she is seen in an unfavourable light - then she should take time and reflect herself.
The latest interview with Ms. Manning by David Cochrane highlights what appears to be a pattern for the unelected Minister. According to the CBC On Point story - Ms. Manning contends "that she was surprised by the focus of the interview, thinking it would be about general delays in the system and not her role as review commissioner." However the story goes on to say: the Oct. 24 email from CBC asking for the interview stated this: “I am working on a story about Minister Manning's previous role with the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division (WHSCRD). My specific areas of inquiry are the number of cases she handled in that role, the number of reports she filed, and what happens to cases she did not complete.”
Then there is this quote in the story: “Did I break the system in the three months that I heard hearings? No. I have great empathy for the people that are going through this process, and I understand the frustration that’s emerged with the delays, but am I the author of those delays? Absolutely not”
Notwithstanding Ms. Manning's misrepresentation of the focus of the interview - she goes on to say she has great empathy for the people going through the process. Empathy defined as the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings. This itself is questionable as it was Ms. Manning who walked away from the files to take an unelected position in the Davis Cabinet. It was Ms. Manning's resignation from the WHSCRD that has caused the delay for these people.
Here we are today - and Ms.Manning is going to haul out the gender card and seek empathy for herself from women who truly face discrimination in the workplace. The questions that are asked of Ms. Manning is appropriate scrutiny of any person who is an unelected Minister. It is unusual for Ministers to be unelected and as such these exceptional circumstances require exceptional scrutiny - replacing what would normally be electoral scrutiny. Further as Ms.Manning refuses to run in any of the three by-elections called or anticipated - she demonstrates a sense of entitlement and arrogance - hardly a just comparison with the injured workers left to wait for decisions on basic human needs.
I now have to look at why Ms. Manning has chosen to throw out an unsubstantiated claim of possible gender discrimination. My take is that Ms. Manning may be playing the card now in an effort to thwart off what will be a continued and justified volley of criticism in the House of Assembly - as Question Period proceeds without her. Perhaps Ms. Manning is putting it out there so people will relate probing in the House of Assembly as the Opposition members - picking on a woman.
None of Ms. Manning's protestations to date are becoming of a Minister of Justice and Attorney General - it has nothing to do with being a woman.
It is time for Ms. Manning to resign - or in the alternative run in one of the three upcoming by-elections.
Perhaps the greatest criticism of the Manning appointment should fall at the desk of Premier Paul Davis. Ms. Manning was chosen by Mr. Davis - to date he has not successfully justified his choice - his call - his decision.
To date we have a "superior work ethic" that has been alleged by the Premier but not proven.
We have "extensive legal experience" that has not been backed up by demonstrated work.
Now Ms. Manning is playing the gender card. That is not a card that one should use so cavalierly. There are real situations where women are discriminated against - this is not one of them.
She is a lawyer - yet she is doing her profession a disservice if what she calls responsible public scrutiny - "character assassination". There is zero evidence that this is the case.What has been reported has been accurate and if that information causes Ms. Manning to believe that she is seen in an unfavourable light - then she should take time and reflect herself.
The latest interview with Ms. Manning by David Cochrane highlights what appears to be a pattern for the unelected Minister. According to the CBC On Point story - Ms. Manning contends "that she was surprised by the focus of the interview, thinking it would be about general delays in the system and not her role as review commissioner." However the story goes on to say: the Oct. 24 email from CBC asking for the interview stated this: “I am working on a story about Minister Manning's previous role with the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division (WHSCRD). My specific areas of inquiry are the number of cases she handled in that role, the number of reports she filed, and what happens to cases she did not complete.”
Then there is this quote in the story: “Did I break the system in the three months that I heard hearings? No. I have great empathy for the people that are going through this process, and I understand the frustration that’s emerged with the delays, but am I the author of those delays? Absolutely not”
Notwithstanding Ms. Manning's misrepresentation of the focus of the interview - she goes on to say she has great empathy for the people going through the process. Empathy defined as the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings. This itself is questionable as it was Ms. Manning who walked away from the files to take an unelected position in the Davis Cabinet. It was Ms. Manning's resignation from the WHSCRD that has caused the delay for these people.
Here we are today - and Ms.Manning is going to haul out the gender card and seek empathy for herself from women who truly face discrimination in the workplace. The questions that are asked of Ms. Manning is appropriate scrutiny of any person who is an unelected Minister. It is unusual for Ministers to be unelected and as such these exceptional circumstances require exceptional scrutiny - replacing what would normally be electoral scrutiny. Further as Ms.Manning refuses to run in any of the three by-elections called or anticipated - she demonstrates a sense of entitlement and arrogance - hardly a just comparison with the injured workers left to wait for decisions on basic human needs.
I now have to look at why Ms. Manning has chosen to throw out an unsubstantiated claim of possible gender discrimination. My take is that Ms. Manning may be playing the card now in an effort to thwart off what will be a continued and justified volley of criticism in the House of Assembly - as Question Period proceeds without her. Perhaps Ms. Manning is putting it out there so people will relate probing in the House of Assembly as the Opposition members - picking on a woman.
None of Ms. Manning's protestations to date are becoming of a Minister of Justice and Attorney General - it has nothing to do with being a woman.
It is time for Ms. Manning to resign - or in the alternative run in one of the three upcoming by-elections.
Perhaps the greatest criticism of the Manning appointment should fall at the desk of Premier Paul Davis. Ms. Manning was chosen by Mr. Davis - to date he has not successfully justified his choice - his call - his decision.
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Minister Judy Manning must be replaced
Here we go again.
CBC has completed some research with respect to Ms. Manning's experience and background.
This person is supposed to be our Attorney General and Minister of Justice.
Sorry she does not cut it. Please remove her from the position.
Evidence for such a move as follows:
The CBC reported and asked Ms. Manning about the information below
Ms. Manning's response was
But Manning is defending her role at the WHSCRD, saying commissioners routinely miss the legislated 60-day deadline for decisions.
It is absolutely unacceptable - unprofessional - and perhaps worse... The Attorney General of our province justifies breaking the laws of our province by advising that others routinely do.
This is not acceptable from any Commissioner but from the Attorney General? This does not evoke any sense of confidence in our Department of Justice - in fact it does the opposite.
The Minister goes on to say
"I'm entirely comfortable with how I've discharged my duties as a review commissioner and certainly to date I'm entirely comfortable with the energy and the enthusiasm that I've brought to this position,” she said.
“And I'm looking forward to continuing to execute in a similar manner."
Let's get this straight - our Minister of Justice is entirely comfortable with not finishing files she is responsible for - not concerned about breaking the law - connects enthusiasm with quitting and not finishing files and then advises Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that she plans to do the same with this job?
Will she commit to quitting in 5 months?
The CBC story is filled with more of these remarkable and troubling statements.
Why not we call a spade a spade and recognize that Ms. Manning in not even close to being ready to be Minister of Justice or Attorney General.
Great piece of journalism Rob Antle - giving us the information we need to make decisions - without drawing the conclusions for us.
CBC has completed some research with respect to Ms. Manning's experience and background.
This person is supposed to be our Attorney General and Minister of Justice.
Sorry she does not cut it. Please remove her from the position.
Evidence for such a move as follows:
The CBC reported and asked Ms. Manning about the information below
According to the provincial
government, Manning was assigned 19 cases and held hearings for all of
them, but did not file any decisions before her resignation.
Now, the family of one of those injured workers is complaining about
delays in his case — an appeal for a wheelchair-accessible vehicle —
saying they have had no contact from anyone about what will happen now.Ms. Manning's response was
But Manning is defending her role at the WHSCRD, saying commissioners routinely miss the legislated 60-day deadline for decisions.
It is absolutely unacceptable - unprofessional - and perhaps worse... The Attorney General of our province justifies breaking the laws of our province by advising that others routinely do.
This is not acceptable from any Commissioner but from the Attorney General? This does not evoke any sense of confidence in our Department of Justice - in fact it does the opposite.
The Minister goes on to say
"I'm entirely comfortable with how I've discharged my duties as a review commissioner and certainly to date I'm entirely comfortable with the energy and the enthusiasm that I've brought to this position,” she said.
“And I'm looking forward to continuing to execute in a similar manner."
Let's get this straight - our Minister of Justice is entirely comfortable with not finishing files she is responsible for - not concerned about breaking the law - connects enthusiasm with quitting and not finishing files and then advises Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that she plans to do the same with this job?
Will she commit to quitting in 5 months?
The CBC story is filled with more of these remarkable and troubling statements.
Why not we call a spade a spade and recognize that Ms. Manning in not even close to being ready to be Minister of Justice or Attorney General.
Great piece of journalism Rob Antle - giving us the information we need to make decisions - without drawing the conclusions for us.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
The Open and Accountable Tory Times
We should have a new online paper called the "Tory Times".
Everyday the examples of secrecy, incompetence, and avoidance of elections should be headlined.
Today we should deal with falling oil prices. I predict the election will come before the budget - if the prices stay down. What will the PC's do with the financial mess we are in?
The Humber Valley Paving Contract remains a mystery as the "open and accountable" Davis government will not call a much needed inquiry into the mess. Labrador paving deadlines continue to fall to the wayside while the Minister believes everything is wonderful.
Minister Manning - continues to run away from the opportunity to be elected by the people - while John Crosbie continues to try and "con"vince us this is okay. Amazing the levels of entitlement some people feel and believe.
The Muskrat Falls fiasco hums along - while the failing CEO continues to collect a cheque - a very big cheque.
Whatever is going on at Ocean Pond?
How many lawsuits are we currently involved in and with whom?
Paul Davis says he IS listening to the people so he changed the changed name of the former Department of Justice. He apparently is NOT listening to the people who want an election.
Where is the contribution list for the Premier's leadership campaign?
What is going on with the roving transformer?
Let's keep an eye on the Tory Times which has an "unelected" "mandateless" Premier guiding an unelected Minister of some department - supposed to be similar to Justice - who is determined to run only when her hometown is available. That is to say Davis has a preferential candidate - who he is introducing as a Minister - prior to her election - in some pathetic effort to tell the people of Placentia - St. Mary's what to do.
Call an election Premier Davis and see if you can get a mandate of your own.
Everyday the examples of secrecy, incompetence, and avoidance of elections should be headlined.
Today we should deal with falling oil prices. I predict the election will come before the budget - if the prices stay down. What will the PC's do with the financial mess we are in?
The Humber Valley Paving Contract remains a mystery as the "open and accountable" Davis government will not call a much needed inquiry into the mess. Labrador paving deadlines continue to fall to the wayside while the Minister believes everything is wonderful.
Minister Manning - continues to run away from the opportunity to be elected by the people - while John Crosbie continues to try and "con"vince us this is okay. Amazing the levels of entitlement some people feel and believe.
The Muskrat Falls fiasco hums along - while the failing CEO continues to collect a cheque - a very big cheque.
Whatever is going on at Ocean Pond?
How many lawsuits are we currently involved in and with whom?
Paul Davis says he IS listening to the people so he changed the changed name of the former Department of Justice. He apparently is NOT listening to the people who want an election.
Where is the contribution list for the Premier's leadership campaign?
What is going on with the roving transformer?
Let's keep an eye on the Tory Times which has an "unelected" "mandateless" Premier guiding an unelected Minister of some department - supposed to be similar to Justice - who is determined to run only when her hometown is available. That is to say Davis has a preferential candidate - who he is introducing as a Minister - prior to her election - in some pathetic effort to tell the people of Placentia - St. Mary's what to do.
Call an election Premier Davis and see if you can get a mandate of your own.
Thursday, October 02, 2014
Davis - putting lipstick on a pig?
As the bogeyman can be either gender - the use of the word should not cause sexist issues. Now as our new "unelected" Attorney General raised the topic of fear - I should not be accused of being nasty.
Judy Manning believes that criticism of her appointment is coming from the Opposition Parties as they are "threatened by the Progressive Conservative Government". Telegram story HERE
I would "with respect" reword that to read the electorate is threatened by the Progressive Conservative Government.
Threatened by the mounting debt,
Threatened by the unfunded pension liabilities,
Threatened by the Muskrat Falls project and escalating energy costs,
Threatened by scandal such as the Humber Valley Paving Contract,
Threatened by the erosion of democratic conventions,
Threatened by the level of patronage that continues,
Threatened by the continued loss of industry,
Threatened by our population statistics,
Threatened by the loss of the Justice Department,
Threatened by an "unelected" Attorney General who makes decisions based on her emotions (my heart is in the Placentia - St.Mary's District so I can't run anywhere else)
Threatened by the continued loss of rural communities, and
Threatened by the arrogance and disrespect this government has toward the people of the province.
If the whole idea of Ms. Manning's appointment was to frighten the Opposition - then I guess they are relying on the introduction of a bogeyman to frighten the critics into better behaviour.
Considering Ms. Manning brought up the topic of threatened let's look at why the PC's are making "innovative" changes to our democracy. Paul Davis is going to be different - see - look what he did. He plucked a well-connected Tory unelected out of a sole practitioner law office and threw her into a new Department of Public Safety. Furthermore - just to be different our "unelected" Premier chose somebody who was afraid to run in any of the by-elections. Then - just to be different he accepted the resignation of one Minister (who he would have fired anyway) and left another Minister named in the HVP report right where he was. Additionally - just to be different - he found that Labrador was without a Minister so - he plucked arguably the most controversial and bad-tempered off the backbench and presented him to the electorate as a changed man. Lastly he wanted to up the number of women in government - so he ignored an elected woman and went out and found one that he thought was more worthy of a Cabinet post?
One can only reasonably believe that Davis made such outrageous choices in a desperate attempt to put lipstick on a pig. Or if you prefer -You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. The end product is the same.
How about we outline why the PC government feels threatened:
1. The polls,
2. The by-election losses,
3. The defections or resignations of key Cabinet and caucus people,
4. The acrimonious mess of a failed first leadership race,
5. The divisive actions of Deputy Premier Steve Kent during the second leadership contest,
6. The very loud criticism from Progressive Conservatives,
7. The weak backbench (as evidenced by the "unelected" Premier's recent Cabinet shuffle),
8. Continued failure to communicate or continued failure of decisions,
9. The numbers of people showing up to vote for Liberal nominations in Tory districts, and
10. The growing voice of the people demanding both an election and a judicial inquiry on HVP.
Please just call an election - so we can sort this out. Let's see who the people want and don't want.
Judy Manning believes that criticism of her appointment is coming from the Opposition Parties as they are "threatened by the Progressive Conservative Government". Telegram story HERE
I would "with respect" reword that to read the electorate is threatened by the Progressive Conservative Government.
Threatened by the mounting debt,
Threatened by the unfunded pension liabilities,
Threatened by the Muskrat Falls project and escalating energy costs,
Threatened by scandal such as the Humber Valley Paving Contract,
Threatened by the erosion of democratic conventions,
Threatened by the level of patronage that continues,
Threatened by the continued loss of industry,
Threatened by our population statistics,
Threatened by the loss of the Justice Department,
Threatened by an "unelected" Attorney General who makes decisions based on her emotions (my heart is in the Placentia - St.Mary's District so I can't run anywhere else)
Threatened by the continued loss of rural communities, and
Threatened by the arrogance and disrespect this government has toward the people of the province.
If the whole idea of Ms. Manning's appointment was to frighten the Opposition - then I guess they are relying on the introduction of a bogeyman to frighten the critics into better behaviour.
Considering Ms. Manning brought up the topic of threatened let's look at why the PC's are making "innovative" changes to our democracy. Paul Davis is going to be different - see - look what he did. He plucked a well-connected Tory unelected out of a sole practitioner law office and threw her into a new Department of Public Safety. Furthermore - just to be different our "unelected" Premier chose somebody who was afraid to run in any of the by-elections. Then - just to be different he accepted the resignation of one Minister (who he would have fired anyway) and left another Minister named in the HVP report right where he was. Additionally - just to be different - he found that Labrador was without a Minister so - he plucked arguably the most controversial and bad-tempered off the backbench and presented him to the electorate as a changed man. Lastly he wanted to up the number of women in government - so he ignored an elected woman and went out and found one that he thought was more worthy of a Cabinet post?
One can only reasonably believe that Davis made such outrageous choices in a desperate attempt to put lipstick on a pig. Or if you prefer -You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. The end product is the same.
How about we outline why the PC government feels threatened:
1. The polls,
2. The by-election losses,
3. The defections or resignations of key Cabinet and caucus people,
4. The acrimonious mess of a failed first leadership race,
5. The divisive actions of Deputy Premier Steve Kent during the second leadership contest,
6. The very loud criticism from Progressive Conservatives,
7. The weak backbench (as evidenced by the "unelected" Premier's recent Cabinet shuffle),
8. Continued failure to communicate or continued failure of decisions,
9. The numbers of people showing up to vote for Liberal nominations in Tory districts, and
10. The growing voice of the people demanding both an election and a judicial inquiry on HVP.
Please just call an election - so we can sort this out. Let's see who the people want and don't want.
Judy Manning and HVP Inquiry
Her experience in the Court of Appeal can be found here.
Albeit - Pennecon - her client - did not win the day and Metal World - not her client - was awarded party and party costs - the case had some connection to a Mechanics Lien and the construction industry.
So how about Ms. Manning quit as Attorney General and instead head-up the Judicial/Public Inquiry on the HVP affair.
In this way - we the public - get to see her act within her profession - and determine if partisanship can be overlooked for such a proceeding.
Now I know she does not have the legal experience of Clyde Wells - we can still test her metal as she reviews the mess which is the HVP fiasco.
Let's see if she's comfortable questioning the "unelected" Premier or the "unelected" Premier in waiting who quit or the "interim" "unelected" Premier or the once "unelected" then "elected" Premier and current Cabinet colleagues such as Kevin O'Brien.
After the Inquiry is finished - we may be up to a general election. Let's see if she still wants to run for the PC's then.
This would be a big feather in her CV - and also allows us - the electorate - to see her in action. We would like to see "vintage" Manning and see if we like the bouquet. As it sits now - the bouquet - resembles that of rotting herring.
Although Inquiries are headed up by a Commissioner - usually a judge - Cabinet posts are usually filled by elected people - so we can make an exception.
Albeit - Pennecon - her client - did not win the day and Metal World - not her client - was awarded party and party costs - the case had some connection to a Mechanics Lien and the construction industry.
So how about Ms. Manning quit as Attorney General and instead head-up the Judicial/Public Inquiry on the HVP affair.
In this way - we the public - get to see her act within her profession - and determine if partisanship can be overlooked for such a proceeding.
Now I know she does not have the legal experience of Clyde Wells - we can still test her metal as she reviews the mess which is the HVP fiasco.
Let's see if she's comfortable questioning the "unelected" Premier or the "unelected" Premier in waiting who quit or the "interim" "unelected" Premier or the once "unelected" then "elected" Premier and current Cabinet colleagues such as Kevin O'Brien.
After the Inquiry is finished - we may be up to a general election. Let's see if she still wants to run for the PC's then.
This would be a big feather in her CV - and also allows us - the electorate - to see her in action. We would like to see "vintage" Manning and see if we like the bouquet. As it sits now - the bouquet - resembles that of rotting herring.
Although Inquiries are headed up by a Commissioner - usually a judge - Cabinet posts are usually filled by elected people - so we can make an exception.
Wednesday, October 01, 2014
Dear "unelected" Premier Davis
Dear "unelected" Premier Davis,
I am writing this open letter to see if you are listening to the very loud and numerous voices of the people from all political stripes. If you are listening - I imagine you are hearing the following:
1. Premier Davis must fire Judy Manning
2. Premier Davis must call a Judicial Inquiry into HVP affair
3. Premier Davis must get to the election by February
Now let's see if it's Party of the people or if it's Party of the entitled.
Let's see if you "unelected" Premier Paul Davis are going to be accountable and transparent.
Let's see if you "unelected" Premier Paul Davis are going to listen to the people.
It's never been a communication problem - it's never been Kathy's fault. It's always been the policy choices, patronage and cronyism, arrogance and entitlement.
"With Respect"
Sue
PS - have you heard the very clear voice of Former Tory Premier Tom Rideout?
I have the audio attached for your convenience.
PRESS HERE CBC NL Central Morning Show
I am writing this open letter to see if you are listening to the very loud and numerous voices of the people from all political stripes. If you are listening - I imagine you are hearing the following:
1. Premier Davis must fire Judy Manning
2. Premier Davis must call a Judicial Inquiry into HVP affair
3. Premier Davis must get to the election by February
Now let's see if it's Party of the people or if it's Party of the entitled.
Let's see if you "unelected" Premier Paul Davis are going to be accountable and transparent.
Let's see if you "unelected" Premier Paul Davis are going to listen to the people.
It's never been a communication problem - it's never been Kathy's fault. It's always been the policy choices, patronage and cronyism, arrogance and entitlement.
"With Respect"
Sue
PS - have you heard the very clear voice of Former Tory Premier Tom Rideout?
I have the audio attached for your convenience.
PRESS HERE CBC NL Central Morning Show
The slippery slope - Davis style!
Newfoundland and Labrador - Hong Kong
I guess the difference is - they actually have a Department of Justice. Do we need an election really? How long should the Tories have to renege on their 2003 election promise and subsequent laws regarding the early resignation of a Premier.
So under their own terms Davis is an "unelected" "mandateless" Premier.
Coincidentally Hong Kong has 100,000 people on the street right now protesting. Protesting what?
Look at this quote from the protest:
“It is definitely better to have the [chief executive] elected by 5 million eligible voters than by 1,200 people. And it is definitely better to cast your vote at the polling station than to stay home and watch on television the 1,200 members of the election committee cast their votes.”
or this:
"Hong Kong’s chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, insisted Beijing would not back down on new electoral rules that would allow the Communist party leadership to choose candidates for the region to vote on."
Yes Hong Kong were promised
And Hong Kong used to have an Attorney General - that's been changed to Secretary of Justice.
The Secretary for Justice is appointed by the Central People's Government upon nomination by the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The Secretary for Justice is the principal legal adviser to the Chief Executive, to the government and to individual government departments and agencies. The incumbent Secretary has been appointed to the Executive Council. In addition to his duties and responsibilities in relation to the conduct of criminal proceedings, the Secretary for Justice is the defendant in all civil actions brought against the government.
Before 1 July 1997, the post of Secretary for Justice was called Attorney General.
The Department of Justice is headed by the Secretary for Justice, who fulfils a wide range of duties. Chief among these is to act as the principal legal adviser to the Chief Executive, to the government and to individual government bureaus, departments and agencies. The Secretary for Justice is also a member of the Executive Council....
Amongst many other functions, the Secretary for Justice is Chairman of the Law Reform Commission, Vice-Chairman of the Fight Crime Committee, and serves on the Chief Secretary for Administration's Policy Committee, the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission and the ICAC's Operations Review Committee.
So Premier Davis - which way are you going to run this government as an unelected Premier. Do you really think it's okay to change so much without getting a mandate from the people? You are using our taxpayer dollars to roll out your Blue Book.
We are on a slippery slope - Davis style.
I guess the difference is - they actually have a Department of Justice. Do we need an election really? How long should the Tories have to renege on their 2003 election promise and subsequent laws regarding the early resignation of a Premier.
So under their own terms Davis is an "unelected" "mandateless" Premier.
Coincidentally Hong Kong has 100,000 people on the street right now protesting. Protesting what?
Look at this quote from the protest:
“It is definitely better to have the [chief executive] elected by 5 million eligible voters than by 1,200 people. And it is definitely better to cast your vote at the polling station than to stay home and watch on television the 1,200 members of the election committee cast their votes.”
or this:
"Hong Kong’s chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, insisted Beijing would not back down on new electoral rules that would allow the Communist party leadership to choose candidates for the region to vote on."
Yes Hong Kong were promised
And Hong Kong used to have an Attorney General - that's been changed to Secretary of Justice.
The Secretary for Justice is appointed by the Central People's Government upon nomination by the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The Secretary for Justice is the principal legal adviser to the Chief Executive, to the government and to individual government departments and agencies. The incumbent Secretary has been appointed to the Executive Council. In addition to his duties and responsibilities in relation to the conduct of criminal proceedings, the Secretary for Justice is the defendant in all civil actions brought against the government.
Before 1 July 1997, the post of Secretary for Justice was called Attorney General.
The Department of Justice is headed by the Secretary for Justice, who fulfils a wide range of duties. Chief among these is to act as the principal legal adviser to the Chief Executive, to the government and to individual government bureaus, departments and agencies. The Secretary for Justice is also a member of the Executive Council....
Amongst many other functions, the Secretary for Justice is Chairman of the Law Reform Commission, Vice-Chairman of the Fight Crime Committee, and serves on the Chief Secretary for Administration's Policy Committee, the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission and the ICAC's Operations Review Committee.
So Premier Davis - which way are you going to run this government as an unelected Premier. Do you really think it's okay to change so much without getting a mandate from the people? You are using our taxpayer dollars to roll out your Blue Book.
We are on a slippery slope - Davis style.
Felix Collins - on his own terms?
Last evening came news that Felix Collins refused the Cabinet post of Attorney General. The unelected person who took his place is conveniently a Manning from the Cape Shore. Her "heart" is preventing her from seeking election in the upcoming three by-elections and on that basis we the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have to suffer an unelected Minister.
If Felix Collins - elected by the people of Placentia - St. Mary's, is unwilling to serve in the Cabinet at the Premier's pleasure - then he should clearly resign. The people of his district deserve a member who is willing to step to the Cabinet table when asked.
So Felix what are you up to? Do you live in the district anymore? Why are you sitting around in caucus for what's left of this term - when you clearly have no real interest in governing.
Now because the PC's are so cute with words sometimes - this question must be asked for clarification. Did Paul Davis ask you to become Attorney General only if you agreed to run in the next election? Is that why you said no?
So Judy Manning - the Manning insert - seemed to have as little problem justifying the unjustifiable as Fabs did when he sat with Harper as he nailed Newfoundland and Labrador.
Paul Davis appears to be shoring up a chosen candidates in a very unique way. Let's start you off in Cabinet and then tell the people of Placentia - St. Mary's that this is who you need to please me - the Premier.
Paul Davis and company seem to believe the people of the district are less than astute. The Premier thinks it's okay for a member from the area to turn down a Cabinet post and just sit there until he decides to call an election.
Felix - are you willing to be used in such a fashion? I think you owe the people of Placentia - St. Mary's more that that. Resign your seat and release Manning from her "heart" felt dilemma.
I hear there's polling going on in the district. If that's favourable - I guess your boss will tell you when to go. I recommend you leave on your terms - with a bit of integrity and show some respect to the people who provided you such a rare opportunity to serve.
If Felix Collins - elected by the people of Placentia - St. Mary's, is unwilling to serve in the Cabinet at the Premier's pleasure - then he should clearly resign. The people of his district deserve a member who is willing to step to the Cabinet table when asked.
So Felix what are you up to? Do you live in the district anymore? Why are you sitting around in caucus for what's left of this term - when you clearly have no real interest in governing.
Now because the PC's are so cute with words sometimes - this question must be asked for clarification. Did Paul Davis ask you to become Attorney General only if you agreed to run in the next election? Is that why you said no?
So Judy Manning - the Manning insert - seemed to have as little problem justifying the unjustifiable as Fabs did when he sat with Harper as he nailed Newfoundland and Labrador.
Paul Davis appears to be shoring up a chosen candidates in a very unique way. Let's start you off in Cabinet and then tell the people of Placentia - St. Mary's that this is who you need to please me - the Premier.
Paul Davis and company seem to believe the people of the district are less than astute. The Premier thinks it's okay for a member from the area to turn down a Cabinet post and just sit there until he decides to call an election.
Felix - are you willing to be used in such a fashion? I think you owe the people of Placentia - St. Mary's more that that. Resign your seat and release Manning from her "heart" felt dilemma.
I hear there's polling going on in the district. If that's favourable - I guess your boss will tell you when to go. I recommend you leave on your terms - with a bit of integrity and show some respect to the people who provided you such a rare opportunity to serve.
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Why Judy Manning?
Why Judy Manning?
That certainly is a reasonable question considering she has never been elected.
Why Judy Manning?
Why not John Ottenheimer who garnered half the support of the delegates at the convention?
Why not John Ottenheimer as he has considerable experience?
Why Judy Manning?
How does the Premier know her?
What does he know about her career and experience - considering the job ahead?
Why Judy Manning?
Apparently this really has nothing to do with the Attorney General having to be a lawyer because the Premier did not stop there. Davis added Status of Women, Fire and Emergency Services and the entire portfolio of Public Safety (which now includes Justice).
Why Judy Manning?
Is she a long time Tory or have significant Tory connections outside Senator Fabian Manning?
If you really felt that despite having a lawyer who IS elected take the position of Attorney General - then why Judy Manning?
What puts her above other choices in the legal community?
Was anybody else asked?
Did Felix decline? If so is he planning to resign?
Did Ottenheimer say no? Was he even asked?
Why Judy Manning?
It is particularly interesting since she claims she won't run in any upcoming by-elections but in the general election only.
This certainly demonstrates bad judgement. She could have accepted under the condition she will seek opportunity to be elected at the earliest opportunity. That would have shown respect for the people - but no - she accepts a mandate Paul Davis and Paul Davis alone bestowed upon her.
Why Judy Manning?
Yes - why indeed.
That certainly is a reasonable question considering she has never been elected.
Why Judy Manning?
Why not John Ottenheimer who garnered half the support of the delegates at the convention?
Why not John Ottenheimer as he has considerable experience?
Why Judy Manning?
How does the Premier know her?
What does he know about her career and experience - considering the job ahead?
Why Judy Manning?
Apparently this really has nothing to do with the Attorney General having to be a lawyer because the Premier did not stop there. Davis added Status of Women, Fire and Emergency Services and the entire portfolio of Public Safety (which now includes Justice).
Why Judy Manning?
Is she a long time Tory or have significant Tory connections outside Senator Fabian Manning?
If you really felt that despite having a lawyer who IS elected take the position of Attorney General - then why Judy Manning?
What puts her above other choices in the legal community?
Was anybody else asked?
Did Felix decline? If so is he planning to resign?
Did Ottenheimer say no? Was he even asked?
Why Judy Manning?
It is particularly interesting since she claims she won't run in any upcoming by-elections but in the general election only.
This certainly demonstrates bad judgement. She could have accepted under the condition she will seek opportunity to be elected at the earliest opportunity. That would have shown respect for the people - but no - she accepts a mandate Paul Davis and Paul Davis alone bestowed upon her.
Why Judy Manning?
Yes - why indeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)