The Liberal leadership has brought a barrage of commitments from all candidates regarding openness, transparency, and accountability. This is a great thing.
The candidate who has been on the firing line the most on this issue is Cathy Bennett. Rightly - other Liberal hopefuls have suggested her work as the Chair of Nalcor was wrought with secrecy and during a time when government was shutting information doors.
Ms. Bennett says she was opposed to Bill 29 and determined to open the information lines to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
She was tested the other night and failed.
The debate at Memorial University was public. The exchanges were heated. Leadership was on the line.
We know that Cathy Bennett said something to Danny Dumaresque immediately following the debate.
We know that Cathy Bennett apologized to Danny Dumaresque for the comment.
Considering this was a public forum being held as part of a process to choose a leader of the Liberals; who may well go on to be Premier - we should know what Cathy Bennett said to Danny Dumaresque.
The comment may have been made at the heat of the moment - but we can anticipate that a Premier of a Province may have many such moments when dealing with Ottawa, provincial colleagues, executives of companies, union representatives, or citizens. We need to know what happens to Cathy Bennett when she is challenged. We need to know how she conducts herself in these circumstances.
The fact that Cathy Bennett will not tell us - means her transparency will be based on what she thinks we have a right or need to know. That's exactly what we have now.
Cathy Bennett has failed her first transparency test.
2 comments:
Does anyone know if Ms. Bennett is involved with the development of Muskrat Falls by having being awarded contracts to any personal service industries she might own? I am curious if she has been asked that question?
I am not against Ms. Bennett winning contracts for Muskrat Falls. I do think though that if any of the politicians of the past or the future is involved it should be divulged to us, the electorate, since it could sway decisions on what is acceptable to them in the Muskrat Falls contract, but might not be in the best interest for the hydro-consumers of Newfoundland and Labrador, who ultimately will be paying for this very expensive project.
How is this relevant? How is this showing a lack of transparency? This is ridiculous and so is your lame blog.
Post a Comment