When someone holds too many positions, service suffers. Plain and simple-Service suffers.
It also leads to fewer people participating in decisions and causes a lessening of internal democracy. Concentration of power in fewer and fewer hands leads to the development of secrecy, which leads to the creation of suspicions, which may cause paranoia and could...in some extreme and rare cases lead some to believe they are being blackmailed or smirked at, which in turn leads to all kinds of trouble. All kinds of embarassingly expensive trouble.
This brings to the fore another grave problem we have experienced going on 10+ years, the problem of training and co-operating with alternates.
In our system, knowledge gained is collective knowledge and rightfully belongs to the organization, therefore alternates should be trained in order to pass along this valuable knowledge.
The main problem some folk have with alternates is political. They feel they may be training people who could become their replacements. Choose the right people and this won't be a problem.
What amplifies and broadcasts this scenario is 'that in one notable case the full time guy just plain refused to co-operate with three....count 'em 3 alternates and leadership let him get away with for these last 8 or 9 years. Flat out refused to co-operate with any alternate. Has absolutely had his way with the position to the present. Will not share knowledge that should be treated as collective knowledge. If this guy got hit by a bus-the whole program would simply end.
A hugely expensive program would simply disappear*poof* Just like that.... like money out of the Liberal Sponsorship scandal.
This "Wag The Dog"scenario continues to this day, to this very day..Some leadership.
The problem with this situation is that it "has been personalized. The ol'"personality differences"excuse gets trotted out by leadership as a way of avoiding.....indeed in this particular case.....flatout abrogating responsibility. BTW. The very same excuse that has kept this situation in limbo these last 10+ years....and with many of the same players in the leadership ranks as well.
Sad part of all this is that old excuses are tainting the new blood.
The view these people should be taking is,"Service to the dues-payers".
Time for not just, Accountability, Ethics, a policy on nepotism, but also for term limits and yes.... The inclusion and full training of alternates should be incorporated in our bylaws.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Monday, April 17, 2006
Scandal corruption and radical alternatives
Scandal and corruption can sometimes lead to electorates choosing radical alternatives.
It has been argued that one of the many reasons for the recent election of Hamas in Palestine was because of allegations of favouritism, nepotism and corruption by the ruling Fatah faction in the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian people are well versed politically so they must have known the reaction of their enemies to the election of Hamas. Yet they voted this way mainly as a rejection of corruption.
The same can be argued about a study in Britain that suggests that fully 25% would vote for the extremist BNP. This isn't to suggest widespread racism, though that may play somewhat of a role, but seems yet another example of the population rejecting what they percieve as corruption or at least lack of proper representation by the established political parties.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/farright/story/0,,1755286,00.html
It has been argued that one of the many reasons for the recent election of Hamas in Palestine was because of allegations of favouritism, nepotism and corruption by the ruling Fatah faction in the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian people are well versed politically so they must have known the reaction of their enemies to the election of Hamas. Yet they voted this way mainly as a rejection of corruption.
The same can be argued about a study in Britain that suggests that fully 25% would vote for the extremist BNP. This isn't to suggest widespread racism, though that may play somewhat of a role, but seems yet another example of the population rejecting what they percieve as corruption or at least lack of proper representation by the established political parties.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/farright/story/0,,1755286,00.html
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
New Conservative Government
Meanwhile, here in Canada the electorate has sent a minority Conservative government to Ottawa. This government has promised an accountability act. Great idea. A limited idea, but a great start.
During one of my classes a participant remarked that we should have some sort of a government body that holds a winning party accountable for what it promised during the election campaign. Even better idea.
I tried to broaden the scope of the argument but we ran out of time and had to return to curriculum, but the idea remained with me because this current of a system of accountability ran through most of the classes. The political climate at the time was dominated by the Gomery Inquiry and this led to discussions about accountability.
As far as I am concerned we should indeed have an institution within government, with which all parties' election platforms are registered. This body would then hold the winning party to its election promises and would prevent government from instituting whatever it opposed during the election campaign.
I know that at this point it all sounds a bit murky, but hopefully we can develop the idea as we go along. I believe that this is an idea whose time has come, an idea that hopefully will restore citizens interest and faith in electoral politics.
During one of my classes a participant remarked that we should have some sort of a government body that holds a winning party accountable for what it promised during the election campaign. Even better idea.
I tried to broaden the scope of the argument but we ran out of time and had to return to curriculum, but the idea remained with me because this current of a system of accountability ran through most of the classes. The political climate at the time was dominated by the Gomery Inquiry and this led to discussions about accountability.
As far as I am concerned we should indeed have an institution within government, with which all parties' election platforms are registered. This body would then hold the winning party to its election promises and would prevent government from instituting whatever it opposed during the election campaign.
I know that at this point it all sounds a bit murky, but hopefully we can develop the idea as we go along. I believe that this is an idea whose time has come, an idea that hopefully will restore citizens interest and faith in electoral politics.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Yesmen and the damage they do
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has long been Bush's yesman. What kind of damage can a yesman do and how does it impact the very constituency he/she is appointed to serve? What kind of legacy do yesmen leave? Can democracies survive the proliferation of yesmen in the highest echelons of power?
WASHINGTON—Alberto Gonzales has always been there for George W. Bush.
The U.S. attorney general has been the president's "go-to guy" dating to their days in Austin, Tex., there to protect Bush from publicity over a drunk-driving conviction, making his death penalty decisions easier, giving his administration the wiggle room it sought in dealing harshly with prisoners in the war on terror, advocating greater presidential power.
Gonzales earned his stripes again at hearings in perhaps his most arduous day as the boss's surrogate, defending Bush's right to eavesdrop on conversations involving Americans without seeking court approval.
Here's a look at a number of times Gonzales has ridden to Bush's rescue since 1994, when he became general counsel to then-governor Bush in Texas:
WASHINGTON—Alberto Gonzales has always been there for George W. Bush.
The U.S. attorney general has been the president's "go-to guy" dating to their days in Austin, Tex., there to protect Bush from publicity over a drunk-driving conviction, making his death penalty decisions easier, giving his administration the wiggle room it sought in dealing harshly with prisoners in the war on terror, advocating greater presidential power.
Gonzales earned his stripes again at hearings in perhaps his most arduous day as the boss's surrogate, defending Bush's right to eavesdrop on conversations involving Americans without seeking court approval.
Here's a look at a number of times Gonzales has ridden to Bush's rescue since 1994, when he became general counsel to then-governor Bush in Texas:
- 1994-1997: More than 50 times, Gonzales provided confidential clemency reports to Bush, who had the power to commute sentences of Texas death row inmates.
None was ever granted clemency, and an investigation by The Atlantic Monthly in 2003 concluded Gonzales routinely ignored mitigating factors such as inept legal counsel, conflicts of evidence and evidence of innocence. According to Democratic Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, one Gonzales memo failed to mention that the lawyer of one condemned man fell asleep during his trial. - 1996: When governor Bush was summoned for jury duty, Gonzales was said to have sprung into action to argue he should be excused because of a conflict — the governor had the power to ultimately pardon the accused.
But it appears a bigger issue was at play. Bush was being asked to sit on a jury trying an Austin stripper on drunk-driving charges and would have had to reveal his own 1976 drunk-driving conviction.
That remained secret until the eve of the 2000 election. Gonzales denied the story under oath during his 2005 Washington confirmation hearings, but Newsweek magazine reported he made the conflict argument in secret in judge's chambers. Gonzales said he recalled no such meeting. - 2001: As Bush's legal counsel, Gonzales played a leading role in Bush's claim of unfettered wartime powers, allowing him to round up and seize "enemy combatants," ultimately rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court as an unjustified "blank cheque" for the president. That same year, he wrote the order establishing "military commissions" to try terrorist suspects, tribunals since widely derided as "kangaroo courts."
- 2002: Gonzales signed the infamous memo to Bush calling the Geneva Conventions "quaint" that did not apply to enemy combatants scooped off the battlefields of Afghanistan. He was also central in the August 2002, justice department memo — since repudiated by the government — asserting torture could be very narrowly defined and opening the door, many believe, to the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
- 2004: Gonzales led the vetting process for Bush's chosen Homeland Security chief, Bernard Kerik. The former New York police chief withdrew his nomination within a week after it was learned, among other things, he had entertained women in a hotel room across from the World Trade Center set aside for exhausted police officers.
- 2005: At his attorney general confirmation hearing, Gonzales covered for Bush on the very question that brought him back to the committee yesterday.
When asked specifically whether the president could authorize warrantless wiretapping, Gonzales dismissed the question as hypothetical, even though the program had been in effect for about three years.
Feingold said yesterday Gonzales had purposely misled the committee. Gonzales said he answered truthfully when he said the president would not authorize something in contravention of criminal statutes.
Saturday, February 04, 2006
It appears as though the fallout from the invasion and occupation of Iraq is continuing. The North American media, indeed Western media is on trial and is likely to suffer from its blantanly false "reporting" regards just about everything to do with this war.
In fact there is a lot of accountability going on in society in general. I have gotten quite a few queries on the article on nepotism from those who know me, asking if I were referring to this or that particular organization. This tells me that the quest for accountability is snowballing. Just about every institution/organization is about to get closely scrutinized.
But first read about how media is beiung held to account. I guess the free market will rule on this one.
Arabic-language media have an unprecedented chance to take over as the world's premier news source because trust in their US counterparts plummeted following their "shameful coverage" of the war in Iraq, a conference heard today.
The US media reached an "all-time low" in failing to reflect public opinion and Americans' desire for trusted information, instead acting as a "cheerleader" for war, said Amy Goodman, the executive producer and host of US TV and radio news show Democracy Now!, at a news forum organised by al-Jazeera.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1700692,00.html
In fact there is a lot of accountability going on in society in general. I have gotten quite a few queries on the article on nepotism from those who know me, asking if I were referring to this or that particular organization. This tells me that the quest for accountability is snowballing. Just about every institution/organization is about to get closely scrutinized.
But first read about how media is beiung held to account. I guess the free market will rule on this one.
Arabic-language media have an unprecedented chance to take over as the world's premier news source because trust in their US counterparts plummeted following their "shameful coverage" of the war in Iraq, a conference heard today.
The US media reached an "all-time low" in failing to reflect public opinion and Americans' desire for trusted information, instead acting as a "cheerleader" for war, said Amy Goodman, the executive producer and host of US TV and radio news show Democracy Now!, at a news forum organised by al-Jazeera.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1700692,00.html
Friday, December 30, 2005
Political accountability
One outcome, I believe, of the invasion and occupation of Iraq is how it re-arranged the notion of democracy here in the West. People started talking about the powers Prime Ministers and Presidents had to wage war, legal or not, despite unprecedented protests by the citizenry of many of the countries involved with the invasion.
Democracy as we currently practice it is not a writ in stone, concrete thing, unchanging and stagnant. As human society evolves, so too will democracy. Iraq has helped speed up the process and a good thing too. As apalled as we all are at the carnage that has been unleashed on that unfortunate country, we can take some comfort in the fact that the invading countries have themselves undergone some fundamental changes. An important debate is taking place in the U.K. about giving Parliament a say in taking the country to war.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,11816,1673996,00.html
Democracy as we currently practice it is not a writ in stone, concrete thing, unchanging and stagnant. As human society evolves, so too will democracy. Iraq has helped speed up the process and a good thing too. As apalled as we all are at the carnage that has been unleashed on that unfortunate country, we can take some comfort in the fact that the invading countries have themselves undergone some fundamental changes. An important debate is taking place in the U.K. about giving Parliament a say in taking the country to war.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,11816,1673996,00.html
The Yes-men
Usually it is the yes men and invariably they are men, who get attacked for being what they are naturally.........which is.........yes-men/women. They can't help it. Thats what they are like. They follow. They position themselves where they can be of the greatest service to someone, anyone who'll just tell them what to do!! Shouldn't they have a right to cushy jobs?
Should we attack the yes-men or should we attack the system that creates and perpetuates this practice of using yesmen?
Should we attack the yes-men or should we attack the system that creates and perpetuates this practice of using yesmen?
Monday, October 10, 2005
Whats wrong with a lil' bit of nepotism?
Whats wrong with a lil' bit of nepotism? Probably nothing in the greater scheme of things.
Very likely goes on all the time.
A lot of family businesses may even owe their successes to a bit of "keep it in the family" kinda nepotism.
May even work in many cases, where it does not impede or injure others.
So! When exactly can we say that nepotism or any of its henchmen such as cronyism and favouritism becomes a problem?
First of all, it usually works in small Mom and Pop organizations, where problems are more readily apparent, than in larger organizations where there are many more variables.
It becomes a problem when the organization itself starts becoming dysfunctional and when others are trampled, over-looked or impeded in their own careers. It becomes a problem when it becomes the nepotism of the arrogant. Thats when nepotism becomes truly lethal, as in the case of New Orleans where real live, tax paying citizens have been, killed, injured, or worse, left living at the mercy of an Administration that, compounding the arrogance of appointing a one-time horse trainer to head up a national disaster relief/preparedness agency, continues to give disaster-relief tax dollars to its most favourite corporations to administer. This ensures that profit comes first and that relief is fitted in there somewhere, but thats another story for "accountabilitynow" for another time.
Nepotism thus takes on different meanings. Nepotism for survival in a small/family organization may be workable even desirable.
The nepotism of arrogance, the just because one can attitude, becomes a whole different kind of monster. A deadly monster in larger organizations, because arrogance invariably and demonstrably appoints mediocrity.
Bears repeating. Arrogance appoints mediocrity. Mediocrity breeds mediocrity.
Mediocrity always leads to corruption. Mediocrity inevitably leads to the demise of excellence, because mediocrity is the enemy of excellence. So! You end up with mediocre members who, in order to keep their own positions as cushy as can possibly be, recommend other mediocrities with the same goal and thus banishes the hard/visionary/inspired/creative work that excellence brings to the table. The kind of work that helps an organization stay competitive with the other sharks out there.
An organization that is filled with the spawn of nepotism is an unstable organization. It is riven with internal factions, each striving for dominance. Depending on the rank of ones relatives, levels of factions begin to form. Factions within factions. It is the perfect breeding ground for a possible dictator within the organization, as those appointed out of arrogance aren't usually the sharpest knives in the drawer. Their own survival will always, always, take precedence over the survival or the future health of the organization.
Mediocrity costs an organization more in real dollars as well, because as anyone knows it just simply takes a lot more mediocre people to do the job of a few talented ones. Mistakes and mediocrity also go hand in hand. A lot of resources that also cost real dollars get wasted like this.
Mediocrity fills an organizations rivals with talent. How? Remember that mediocrity always banishes excellence. That excellence sometimes ends up with a competitor, usually at much higher compensation. Thats because loyalty never needs to be highly compensated.
All this leads to sub-standard service, product, profits and eventually the demise of the organization itself.
They'll probably blame it all on the departure of the talent from their organization, because in the end.......Mediocrity always blames the excellent for the predictable result of mediocrity.
Very likely goes on all the time.
A lot of family businesses may even owe their successes to a bit of "keep it in the family" kinda nepotism.
May even work in many cases, where it does not impede or injure others.
So! When exactly can we say that nepotism or any of its henchmen such as cronyism and favouritism becomes a problem?
First of all, it usually works in small Mom and Pop organizations, where problems are more readily apparent, than in larger organizations where there are many more variables.
It becomes a problem when the organization itself starts becoming dysfunctional and when others are trampled, over-looked or impeded in their own careers. It becomes a problem when it becomes the nepotism of the arrogant. Thats when nepotism becomes truly lethal, as in the case of New Orleans where real live, tax paying citizens have been, killed, injured, or worse, left living at the mercy of an Administration that, compounding the arrogance of appointing a one-time horse trainer to head up a national disaster relief/preparedness agency, continues to give disaster-relief tax dollars to its most favourite corporations to administer. This ensures that profit comes first and that relief is fitted in there somewhere, but thats another story for "accountabilitynow" for another time.
Nepotism thus takes on different meanings. Nepotism for survival in a small/family organization may be workable even desirable.
The nepotism of arrogance, the just because one can attitude, becomes a whole different kind of monster. A deadly monster in larger organizations, because arrogance invariably and demonstrably appoints mediocrity.
Bears repeating. Arrogance appoints mediocrity. Mediocrity breeds mediocrity.
Mediocrity always leads to corruption. Mediocrity inevitably leads to the demise of excellence, because mediocrity is the enemy of excellence. So! You end up with mediocre members who, in order to keep their own positions as cushy as can possibly be, recommend other mediocrities with the same goal and thus banishes the hard/visionary/inspired/creative work that excellence brings to the table. The kind of work that helps an organization stay competitive with the other sharks out there.
An organization that is filled with the spawn of nepotism is an unstable organization. It is riven with internal factions, each striving for dominance. Depending on the rank of ones relatives, levels of factions begin to form. Factions within factions. It is the perfect breeding ground for a possible dictator within the organization, as those appointed out of arrogance aren't usually the sharpest knives in the drawer. Their own survival will always, always, take precedence over the survival or the future health of the organization.
Mediocrity costs an organization more in real dollars as well, because as anyone knows it just simply takes a lot more mediocre people to do the job of a few talented ones. Mistakes and mediocrity also go hand in hand. A lot of resources that also cost real dollars get wasted like this.
Mediocrity fills an organizations rivals with talent. How? Remember that mediocrity always banishes excellence. That excellence sometimes ends up with a competitor, usually at much higher compensation. Thats because loyalty never needs to be highly compensated.
All this leads to sub-standard service, product, profits and eventually the demise of the organization itself.
They'll probably blame it all on the departure of the talent from their organization, because in the end.......Mediocrity always blames the excellent for the predictable result of mediocrity.
Saturday, September 17, 2005
Yes men, political hacks and cronies
US response to the victims of hurricane Katrina was plagued by the incompetence of the yes-man Bush had put in charge of the agency responsible for disaster relief.
Now, any halfwit will tell you that the presence of cronies, pals, yesmen and family members at the highest levels, or at the bureaucrat level, only leads to disaster.
Heres the million dollar question!!
Who is to blame?
Who will be accountable?
Is it enough for the yesman to merely resign after so many lives were needlessly lost, or for the guy who put this incompetent fool in charge, to theatrically proclaim that he takes responsibility?
I say not!! Both the yes man and his master must bear responsibility.
Lets put this system of bankrupting solid organizations via the cancers of cronyism, nepotism and favouritism, out of business once and for all.
Everybody has the duty and the right to challenge the directions and the hiring decisions of their own organizations. If any are found to fit the pattern, where cronies or yesmen are prevalent, then these must be purged from positions they obtained via their ass-kissing ways or their relations to those in power.
Now, any halfwit will tell you that the presence of cronies, pals, yesmen and family members at the highest levels, or at the bureaucrat level, only leads to disaster.
Heres the million dollar question!!
Who is to blame?
Who will be accountable?
Is it enough for the yesman to merely resign after so many lives were needlessly lost, or for the guy who put this incompetent fool in charge, to theatrically proclaim that he takes responsibility?
I say not!! Both the yes man and his master must bear responsibility.
Lets put this system of bankrupting solid organizations via the cancers of cronyism, nepotism and favouritism, out of business once and for all.
Everybody has the duty and the right to challenge the directions and the hiring decisions of their own organizations. If any are found to fit the pattern, where cronies or yesmen are prevalent, then these must be purged from positions they obtained via their ass-kissing ways or their relations to those in power.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Political accountability
The British are currently undergoing a soul searching and are demanding accountability from the Blairistas.
Unlike his predecessor, the late and much missed Robin Cook, who resigned from cabinet in protest against the illegal and brutal invasion of Iraq, the current Foreign Secretary Jack Straw still vociferously defends the actions of the blairistas and claims the London bombings have nothing to do with the atrocities being committed daily against the Iraqi people.
Have the citizens of Blairistan been served properly by having a yes-man like Straw blindly follow his master into Iraq, despite his alleged reported misgivings as stated by the now famous Downing Street memos?
Is simple removal from office sufficient punishment enough for the death and destruction wreaked on an innocent public in Iraq?
Unlike his predecessor, the late and much missed Robin Cook, who resigned from cabinet in protest against the illegal and brutal invasion of Iraq, the current Foreign Secretary Jack Straw still vociferously defends the actions of the blairistas and claims the London bombings have nothing to do with the atrocities being committed daily against the Iraqi people.
Have the citizens of Blairistan been served properly by having a yes-man like Straw blindly follow his master into Iraq, despite his alleged reported misgivings as stated by the now famous Downing Street memos?
Is simple removal from office sufficient punishment enough for the death and destruction wreaked on an innocent public in Iraq?
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Another CEO bites the dust
Bernard Ebbers, the CEO of WorldCom has just been sentenced to 25 years in prison for his role in the collapse of his company. It is said to be the largest accounting fraud in US corporate history.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar
/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1121291413255&call
_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar
/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1121291413255&call
_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes
Friday, January 14, 2005
Highway 407 rip-off
Last week there was another court ruling that upheld the original bad contract the Conservatives signed when they privatized Highway 407 and once again proved that they are very bad when it comes to managing economic portfolios. Good for businesses-Bad for consumers.
The following is an editorial in the Toronto Star on the subject;
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_
Type1&c=Article&cid=1105614487708&call_pageid=
968256290204&col=968350116795
The editorial asks the question whether the case should be pursued, whether it is in the taxpayers interest.
I say yes and more. There are some other strategies that can be employed in this horrendous give-away of taxpayers' hard earned money.
The Conservative Party should be sued along with key cabinet ministers. This makes accountability a key factor in the process and makes political parties be accountable for the policies they push onto the taxpayers. It will also make cabinet ministers take the publics interests into account when making decisions.
It has the added advantage of securing more press coverage of an issue that should be of greater concern to the voting public.
The Government can also look at eliminating tax credits for those who claim travel as a tax deductible expense, thus forcing people who use the highway to pay for it's use out of their own pockets. This should put a serious dent in the number of users, affect the profitability of the highway and force the owners to re-open the contract and sign a better deal with the taxpayers of the province.
This giveaway of a key taxpayer owned asset should not be allowed to fade from memory.
The following is an editorial in the Toronto Star on the subject;
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_
Type1&c=Article&cid=1105614487708&call_pageid=
968256290204&col=968350116795
The editorial asks the question whether the case should be pursued, whether it is in the taxpayers interest.
I say yes and more. There are some other strategies that can be employed in this horrendous give-away of taxpayers' hard earned money.
The Conservative Party should be sued along with key cabinet ministers. This makes accountability a key factor in the process and makes political parties be accountable for the policies they push onto the taxpayers. It will also make cabinet ministers take the publics interests into account when making decisions.
It has the added advantage of securing more press coverage of an issue that should be of greater concern to the voting public.
The Government can also look at eliminating tax credits for those who claim travel as a tax deductible expense, thus forcing people who use the highway to pay for it's use out of their own pockets. This should put a serious dent in the number of users, affect the profitability of the highway and force the owners to re-open the contract and sign a better deal with the taxpayers of the province.
This giveaway of a key taxpayer owned asset should not be allowed to fade from memory.
Monday, November 29, 2004
Highway robbery-407 style
Once again the boondoggle known as privitization in Ontario has reared its ugly head in the form of the oft mentioned Highway 407.
Yet again the operators of this once taxpayer owned highway is plagued with troubles. Not satisfied with repeatedly raising rates, it has recently been revealed that it is double billing its customers. When said customers rightly refuse to pay twice, their cases are sent off to collection agencies and they are getting several calls a day to pay up. The foreign owners of this highway now want the province to suspend the licenses of those people who refuse to pay twice. How'd you like that?
A Toronto M.P. Mike Colle, held a public meeting to hear complaints from customers of this notorious highway.
This whole mess is a rotten deal. We were sold out by the government of the day, which was a Conservative one.
Our taxes built that highway and it was supposed to be paid off and then used to relieve the traffic jams on Highway 401. Instead the Tories sold the highway and inked a bad deal to boot.
Whoever said that Conservatives are good at managing the economy, should take a close look at this particular deal. It is a dead giveaway, with all the advantages being held by the owners of the highway.
If people who use this highway have problems in the future, they should consider suing the Ontario Conservative Party as well as former and current members of the cabinet and government that voted for what amounts to highway robbery.
In the meantime the Conservative Party ought to consider a name change.
The Highwaymen would be a good one.
Yet again the operators of this once taxpayer owned highway is plagued with troubles. Not satisfied with repeatedly raising rates, it has recently been revealed that it is double billing its customers. When said customers rightly refuse to pay twice, their cases are sent off to collection agencies and they are getting several calls a day to pay up. The foreign owners of this highway now want the province to suspend the licenses of those people who refuse to pay twice. How'd you like that?
A Toronto M.P. Mike Colle, held a public meeting to hear complaints from customers of this notorious highway.
This whole mess is a rotten deal. We were sold out by the government of the day, which was a Conservative one.
Our taxes built that highway and it was supposed to be paid off and then used to relieve the traffic jams on Highway 401. Instead the Tories sold the highway and inked a bad deal to boot.
Whoever said that Conservatives are good at managing the economy, should take a close look at this particular deal. It is a dead giveaway, with all the advantages being held by the owners of the highway.
If people who use this highway have problems in the future, they should consider suing the Ontario Conservative Party as well as former and current members of the cabinet and government that voted for what amounts to highway robbery.
In the meantime the Conservative Party ought to consider a name change.
The Highwaymen would be a good one.
Friday, November 19, 2004
Accountability for investors
SEC accuses Black of fraud
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a lawsuit against Conrad Black and his top deputy David Radler, accusing them of using the newspaper company they ran as their "personal piggy bank" over a period of four years.
In a suit filed in federal court in Chicago, where Hollinger International is based, the SEC accused Black and Radler of siphoning money from the company to themselves and then misleading the board about those transactions.
Stephen Cutler, the SEC's head of enforcement, said the two men ``abused their control of a public company and treated it as their personal piggy bank."
Hollinger publishes the Chicago Sun-Times and The Jerusalem Post. Until recently it also owned The Daily Telegraph of London.
The suit adds to Black's legal troubles. The Canadian-born businessman is already being sued by Hollinger International for the recovery of money it says he improperly diverted to himself and his associates.
The company's lawsuit makes broader accusations against Black and claims that he and his associates and companies under his control caused more than $500 million (U.S.) in damages to Hollinger International.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a lawsuit against Conrad Black and his top deputy David Radler, accusing them of using the newspaper company they ran as their "personal piggy bank" over a period of four years.
In a suit filed in federal court in Chicago, where Hollinger International is based, the SEC accused Black and Radler of siphoning money from the company to themselves and then misleading the board about those transactions.
Stephen Cutler, the SEC's head of enforcement, said the two men ``abused their control of a public company and treated it as their personal piggy bank."
Hollinger publishes the Chicago Sun-Times and The Jerusalem Post. Until recently it also owned The Daily Telegraph of London.
The suit adds to Black's legal troubles. The Canadian-born businessman is already being sued by Hollinger International for the recovery of money it says he improperly diverted to himself and his associates.
The company's lawsuit makes broader accusations against Black and claims that he and his associates and companies under his control caused more than $500 million (U.S.) in damages to Hollinger International.
Monday, November 08, 2004
Used subs
Canadas used submarines, bought in good faith from Britain are now undergoing a check of their eletrical systems as part of an investigation into what went so horribly wrong in the tragic death of a submariner on the ill fated Chicoutimi.
Investigators are focussing their efforts on the subs electrical wiring.
Investigators are focussing their efforts on the subs electrical wiring.
Friday, October 22, 2004
Correction
I was wrong about the cost of the submarines Canada bought from Britain.
It turns out that the actual cost was $750 million and the estimates for repairs is around $200 million.
Close to a billion-but-not the billions that I wrote about earlier.
Sorry about that.
Anyhow-How can one put a price tag on the life of a brave submariner?
As regards whether or nor the seller took out any systems they did not want us Canadians to have-Thats up for debate.
If they did not-Then that makes an even stronger case for the selling of faulty products.
Buyer beware-Can we really trust any British products?
It turns out that the actual cost was $750 million and the estimates for repairs is around $200 million.
Close to a billion-but-not the billions that I wrote about earlier.
Sorry about that.
Anyhow-How can one put a price tag on the life of a brave submariner?
As regards whether or nor the seller took out any systems they did not want us Canadians to have-Thats up for debate.
If they did not-Then that makes an even stronger case for the selling of faulty products.
Buyer beware-Can we really trust any British products?
Saturday, October 16, 2004
Canadas used submarines
Just about everybody is attacking the Canadian government for the failures of the used subs they purchased from Britain.
Isn't this criticism misplaced? Since when is the customer to blame for a faulty product?
The real culprits in the death of the Canadian submariner is the Brutish governmentof lapdog Tony Blair.
They are the ones who sold faulty equipment, probably equipment that was deliberately disabled to remove technology they did not want us Canadians to have access to.
Wheres the accountability?
Caring Canadians have recourse. It is very simply an economic one. Boycott!
Boycott all Brutish products, until reparations have been paid to the family of the heroic submariner as well as to the Canadian taxpayer.
If we are going to have accountability, we have to target the real culprits.
Write a letter to your M.P. and demand that they go after the Blair regime for repayment of the billions they stole for these used subs.
Isn't this criticism misplaced? Since when is the customer to blame for a faulty product?
The real culprits in the death of the Canadian submariner is the Brutish governmentof lapdog Tony Blair.
They are the ones who sold faulty equipment, probably equipment that was deliberately disabled to remove technology they did not want us Canadians to have access to.
Wheres the accountability?
Caring Canadians have recourse. It is very simply an economic one. Boycott!
Boycott all Brutish products, until reparations have been paid to the family of the heroic submariner as well as to the Canadian taxpayer.
If we are going to have accountability, we have to target the real culprits.
Write a letter to your M.P. and demand that they go after the Blair regime for repayment of the billions they stole for these used subs.
Friday, October 08, 2004
The Bloc and the Conservatives
Well Gilles Ducceppe and Stephen Harper almost brought down the government last night.
What an un-holy Alliance! The Seperatists and the Re-formed alliance of Tories.
What was clearly on display last night, what should be most evident to all Tory/Reform supporters is that their party can now be viewed as the party who will advocate the break-up of Canada, so that we can be added onto the American Empire piecemeal and then blame it on the Bloc.
Their MPs were describing Jack Layton of the N.D.P. as kooky for exposing their plot to make Harper the next Prime Minister of Canada.
Looks as though Jack was bang on in his assessment.
I do hope there is an election soon, so that Canadians can now make their decision via the ballot box, about Canadas newest seperatist party.
What an un-holy Alliance! The Seperatists and the Re-formed alliance of Tories.
What was clearly on display last night, what should be most evident to all Tory/Reform supporters is that their party can now be viewed as the party who will advocate the break-up of Canada, so that we can be added onto the American Empire piecemeal and then blame it on the Bloc.
Their MPs were describing Jack Layton of the N.D.P. as kooky for exposing their plot to make Harper the next Prime Minister of Canada.
Looks as though Jack was bang on in his assessment.
I do hope there is an election soon, so that Canadians can now make their decision via the ballot box, about Canadas newest seperatist party.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
Corporate accountability
News reports state that Italy has one of the strongest investors rights legislation. This has become apparent in the prosecution of the executives of the now bankrupt dairy giant Parmalat.
Earnings were mis-stated, excess funds that were supposedly offshore.......were not there and thousands of small investors lost their shirts.
The two now on trial are so-called indpendent auditors. It will be interesting to see what comes from the trials of these two.
It is not just the executives of this company, or for that matter the executives of other North-American companies that went belly-up who are to be held accountable, but also these so called independent auditors who seem to give credibility to the schemes of the people who hire them.
For example, the same yardstick of accountability could be applied to "independent home inspectors" who are hired by real estate agents or for that matter, the trustees of unions.
Accountability ought to be a buzzword, to ensure that the little guy, the shareholder, the investor, the dues payer get what he/she pays for.
Accountability........and accountability now!!
Earnings were mis-stated, excess funds that were supposedly offshore.......were not there and thousands of small investors lost their shirts.
The two now on trial are so-called indpendent auditors. It will be interesting to see what comes from the trials of these two.
It is not just the executives of this company, or for that matter the executives of other North-American companies that went belly-up who are to be held accountable, but also these so called independent auditors who seem to give credibility to the schemes of the people who hire them.
For example, the same yardstick of accountability could be applied to "independent home inspectors" who are hired by real estate agents or for that matter, the trustees of unions.
Accountability ought to be a buzzword, to ensure that the little guy, the shareholder, the investor, the dues payer get what he/she pays for.
Accountability........and accountability now!!
Friday, August 13, 2004
Highway 407
What gives with the highway 407 debacle? Wheres the accountability?? Why....ohh...why do people not hold the destructive regressives, the Tories, responsible for this mess. They gave away the store folks, they sold us out!!
Heres how it went.
They wanted to give their rich buddies a tax break, but, they had to have cash for programs that Ontarians took for granted. Cash that would disappear with a tax break. Viola! They sold off a public asset, the 407, to a Spanish consortium to finance the tax break. This Spanish consortium hold the people of Ontario to ransom, by constantly raising tolls on the highway. When the government of the day, the Liberals want to do right by the citizens who voted for the, said Spanish consortium whines to the Sapnish government, who then threaten to hold up a vital trade deal. A decision that harms Canadians in general, not just the Ontarians who voted for the Harris Tories.
We need .........we desperately need.........
"ACCOUNTABILITY....NOW"!!
Heres how it went.
They wanted to give their rich buddies a tax break, but, they had to have cash for programs that Ontarians took for granted. Cash that would disappear with a tax break. Viola! They sold off a public asset, the 407, to a Spanish consortium to finance the tax break. This Spanish consortium hold the people of Ontario to ransom, by constantly raising tolls on the highway. When the government of the day, the Liberals want to do right by the citizens who voted for the, said Spanish consortium whines to the Sapnish government, who then threaten to hold up a vital trade deal. A decision that harms Canadians in general, not just the Ontarians who voted for the Harris Tories.
We need .........we desperately need.........
"ACCOUNTABILITY....NOW"!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)