Kent reveals Tory problem

After seven by-election losses in a row - the Tories are on their way out. Many of them understand what the people are saying and are planning their retirements in one way or another.

What happened to the PC's?

Media and some pundits credit the loss of public support to Danny Williams departure. I don't accept that reasoning rather I credit the downfall to Danny Williams leadership style and policies.

In my opinion - Williams enjoyed being surrounded by weak people (those who would not dare defy him) and eliminating those who might. (Beth Marshall, Paul Shelley, Tom Osborne and Fabian Manning) Danny did not build a strong leadership pool nor did he take the time to consult or include grass-roots Tories. I believe it was after all - all about him.

Danny's policy choices - most importantly - Muskrat Falls - have not been embraced by the people. Williams pot of money for governing was huge - oil revenues galore and let's not forget the benefits of Voisey's. These were Liberal deals and timing made it his administrations money.

How he spent that money - on behalf of the people - did not equate into anything more than quick wealth on the Avalon and a wonderful market to build houses in.

We are in debt trouble, we are in deficit trouble, we are in demographic trouble, and we are in free fall. Highly doubtful that his Galway community is going to be the golden touch project he thought it might be.

People are very concerned about Muskrat Falls - the cost - the purpose - and most importantly the giveaway. Our resources should be used to grow our population - create long-term well paying jobs. It was Danny who was champion of this concept while in Opposition. Then how do we explain his fisheries, forestry, mining, and hydro policies? We can't because - once Premier - the giveaways were okay.

In what I refer to as Danny's decade - the province has not enjoyed growth in any real way. They all pump up the GDP - but who cares if that indicator is in isolation from other meaningful indicators such as population growth and age. Growth on the Avalon is attributed to shrinking in rural populations.

The former Premier got out before the crap hit the fan - but before he did - he groomed weak people to continue his path. His first was Kathy Dunderdale. The joy and pride of being Danny's chosen one was evident from day one. She would carry the Muskrat torch to the end - while he would carry on with his business interests - power to the Avalon and mining in Labrador.

His other political weaklings included Kennedy, Marshall, Kent, Johnson, Sullivan, Shea, and King (essentially the Cabinet base) were somehow of the belief somehow that they had a crack at the top job now.

When the day came however for a leadership race - they ran away - hid under Danny's coattails once again and allowed an "interim" Premier who did not want the job (supposedly) to actually win - uncontested. The beginning of the end.

As all political weaklings do - as party fortunes were changing - they pointed a finger at somebody else - not them - no not them. A bunch of children standing in front of a broken window.

Eventually their finger pointing and whispers caught on with an uninspired media and we were advised that Kathy Dunderdale had problems communicating the "really good" things they were doing.

As with gutless bullies in packs - they worked on Dunderdale until she left. There they sighed - all must be good now right?

Onward to a leadership election - while nice man Tom kept the Williams adoration embers burning. Minus their political guru Danny - the  guys and gals did not know which way was up - they did not know which way to go. We had speculation on a dozen or so within the PC caucus who were thinking about it. One by one they dropped off - as the collective wisdom determined they needed a fresh face - somebody from outside. So Wayne Bennett and Bill Barry stepped forward while Danny's Cabinet flourished being followers. Barry came out bold - aggressive - unpolished while Bennett annoyed the Party brass.

As might be expected when the weak did not know what to do - Danny stepped in and proclaimed Barry unfit for leadership and indirectly pushed for a fellow named Frank Coleman. As with all good sheep the caucus followed and proceeded to prepare for a Frank coronation despite the presence of a formidable opponent (Barry).

We heard excuse after excuse from former wannabe leaders within the sitting rank and file - ranging from "not my time" to "health" to "family priorities".

Meanwhile Barry was fighting a losing battle in a delegated convention wherein his commentary to the people of the province really did not matter if the Party brass was orchestrating a winner.

Many people asked why Coleman - a political neophyte - by reports private family and business man would throw himself under the bright lights of politics. This was quickly followed by awkward appearances of a man who appeared quite friendly but out of his comfort zone.

Barry following the condemnation by the great one and in true gritty business style - weighed his odds and determined the risk was unfitting the unlikely reward. Barry quit leaving Coleman as an unwilling political deer in headlights. What followed was not able to be scripted. Coleman became Premier in waiting - even starting to put together staff for his 8th floor domain. Then like an unpredicted failure of a detonation test - HVP - came to the fore. I think it's fair to say the Coleman will be remembered in Newfoundland and Labrador for performance bonds related to a paving contract not for almost becoming Premier. As quick as you could say "cheese" for a photograph - we had the sad picture of Coleman's back as he walked away from his indescribably short political stint.

Now what? Well the wannabes who all had excuses they wanted us to believe just a month or two before - shed those reasons and came flying back to the leadership race. Once again we had the speculation of who was running - who was supporting - who had a chance. In the end - and after another stint with the nice man - there was Ottenheimer, Davis, and Kent. The once held idea of a new fresh face was replaced with the need for experience. Ironically the same weaklings who just a month before were willing to accept a fellow who had never sought political office before were now questioning the option of Ottenheimer because he did not have a seat in the legislature.

When Steve Kent started his political climb - I remember a young man tenting on the corner of streets with a sign - asking the people of Mount Pearl to support him for Council. It must have been a real power rush - some years later - to find himself a political traffic cop on the corner directing leadership. Here he was - a new man - at the heart of political power in the province - a kingmaker. Kent relished it - played it up - played coy - loved the attention and could not believe he was actually in a position to broker his own political pinnacle.

Ottenheimer claimed the fix was in - Davis and Kent denied it and then in a joyous coming-out paraded it on the convention floor. Shortly thereafter he became Deputy Premier. Did this new power go to his head? Unfortunately yes - culminating in Tweets last night after his party's loss of two more by-elections. Here they are:

1. What's next? You're going to see bold, progressive leadership from @PaulDavisNL and the @PCPartyNL. We've got big plans for this province.

2. There was no honeymoon period for our new Premier. That's life. A lot can change over the next year. Things change fast in politics. #NLpoli

3.  Our Party still has a clear majority. We still plan to bring in a Throne Speech and a Budget. We will govern. We will lead.

4. The transformation in NL over the last decade has been nothing short of extraordinary. We're still the best party to govern. #PCNL #NLpoli

Unfortunately his words represent what IS wrong with the Tories. The real problem. He in essence has concluded the following: we don't care what the people think - we are right, we don't care what the people say we will lead anyway, we own the province and we are going to do what we want - what we think is best, and in spite of the people we are in power and plan to keep it that way.

Unfortunately the tweets also have a ring of desperation in them. That is because Kent believes that politics is a career rather than a period of public service. Career politicians are not helpful - not insightful - not life experienced - and not leaders. They expect a leader to perform for them - to ensure the longevity of the benefits both financial and social that politics and the people have provided.

Kent personifies the Tory problem - imagine if he is the only Tory seat left after the next general election. He does not like the prospect and it shows.

I believe the real strings of the Tory machine are well above Kent's power level. While he might be seen as a pliable one of those strings the puppeteers simply want to keep power for other more tangible business reasons. That's a sphere than Kent will never be allowed to enter - but he can certainly man the coat-check for those entering the real corridors of power.

Students from St. John's Metro bussed to Rural Communities?

So there are empty seats in some of our rural schools.

Some of these facilities are fairly new or renovated.

Why not send kids from Mount Pearl, St. John's, and Paradise to such schools that fall within a 45 minute trip - one way.

In this way we can sustain essential K-12 in our rural areas and cut down on the need to build new schools in St. John's Metro.

On this point - are we currently sending youth who have been expelled from St. John's Metro to schools in rural communities nearby?

I want to see our new big, bold, and bulging new catch-all singular school board be creative and use the facilities we already have.

Surely the urban crowd should do their bit to be efficient and support our outports.

What are the economics around this proposal?

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.