Showing posts with label InTRD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label InTRD. Show all posts

16 March 2011

Operation Ridiculous

Usually when one is in a hole, it is a good idea to stop digging.

There may be exceptions to this rule,  but for most occasions,  when you can no longer see over the edge of the hole even on your tippee toes, best thing to do is lay the shovel down and start figuring out how to get out of the self-inflicted predicament.

If your friends are in a hole, then you can offer them a hand up out of the hole.  Under no circumstances, though, should you start shovelling dirt in on top of them.  Jumping in with them may be noble but it is never sensible and if you are in the hole, it is never wise to start pulling the shite back in around your own feet.

Evidently, someone forgot to explain this subtle bit of mystical political knowledge to Premier Kathy Dunderdale.

Instead,  Premier (pro tempore) Dunderdale got hold of the Danny and Liz playbook, a portion of which Liz decided to continue this week in her ongoing campaign to destroy whatever shreds of her own dignity she might have left.

Remember that claim about not knowing about the appointment?  Well, kiss that nose-puller goodbye when the evidence is unveiled.  Elizabeth Matthews told the Telegram that in fact she had a copy of the order in council the Liberals released on Tuesday.

The she tried to turn the whole thing into a process story:

The job of vice-chair of the CNLOPB requires approval from the federal government and Matthews said she was not “informed in any official capacity” that she had been named to the board.

So she knew, but not officially and therefore she didn’t know.

Or did she?

Liz Matthews may well turn out to be the political progeny not of Danny Williams but of Tom “TimeLord” Rideout.  Liz knew but didn’t know.  Back in 2007, Tom wanted to explain that the Green report recommendations on allowances would come into effect tomorrow but in his world, tomorrow meant six months in the future, not the day after this one.

How in the name of heavens can anyone not wilfully and pathologically blinded by Danny-envy be surprised that the Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight, the crowd that brought you a low rent version of Doctor Who  - Rideout, Hedderson and Marshall editions - and the Abitibi expropriation blunder couldn’t even handle a simple appointment to a board whether out of unfettered lust for patronage or a secret John-Turnerish promise to Danny?

Seriously.

Who is shocked by this?

Didn’t think so.

Unable to hide from the media any longer, the person who actually made the Elizabeth Matthews nomination made a few comments today.  The result was, well, let’s just say that when she frigs up Kathy Dunderdale does not settle for half measures. She laid her shovel down alrightee and then dragged in a backhoe just to really bury herself.

Before going any further, let us remember that the core point Dunderdale could have used was simple:  appointment’s not done yet.  We’ll let you know when and if it is made. That is the same line Matthews could have used and it is the one Shawn Skinner could have tried. 

There might have been a bit of a stink about patronage or potential pork-barrelling but it wouldn’t have been half as bad as day after day of the appointee and a senior minister saying things that they both ought to have known were bullshit and that could be shown to be bullshit fairly easily.

Think of it this way:  they did not impeach Clinton for a quickie in the closet with a young woman a fraction of his age.  They got him for insisting that he had not had sex with that woman and then engaging in some amateur lawyer bullshit about the definition of “is” in order to perpetuate the patently ridiculous denials.

So take a gander at the raw footage of Dunderdale talking to reporters. 

Making it up as she goes along 

Dunderdale claims there is a regulation requiring first a board appointment and then the second stage of a vice-chair nomination.  She then claims that a letter conveys the official appointment.

Dunderdale knows or ought to know this is preposterous.  There is no regulation governing the appointment.  The Atlantic Accord implementation acts simply state that the nominee for vice chair needs the support of both the federal and provincial governments.  If both governments agree on the nomination, a board appointment can follow in due course.  Both governments can even agree whether it will be a federal, provincial or joint appointment.

Take a look at the order in council.  It is clear that Matthews is appointed with effect from January 1 and that – in addition – cabinet put Matthews forward as a nominee for vice-chair subject to federal agreement.  There’s even a reference to negotiating the salary for the vice chair’s job.

Simply put, Dunderdale is wrong.  You have to be on the board if you are vice chair but you don’t have to be on the board before becoming vice chair.

Let’s go one step beyond.  If, as Dunderdale claims, she never intended Matthews to sit on the board in any capacity other than as vice-chair, the order in council would have been written to say that.  More likely, it would have followed the agreement and approved the appointment and salary as already agreed.

Dunderdale defends her nomination of Matthews because she believes the former Williams communications aide is a “strategic thinker” who is articulate.  Clearly the events of the past couple of days speak to the contrary impression.  Articulate strategic thinkers don’t usually default to easily disprovable crap as the first thought.

Dunderdale claims that the process is not secret, that it has to be straightforward and done in public.  The events as they unfolded and Dunderdale’s own account of how things were supposed to happen make her claims about welcoming debate patently false.

Had things unfolded as Dunderdale intended, no one would have learned of the appointment until after it was copper-fastened, to use a hideous Dunderism.  Michael Connors of NTV (or so it sounded like) made the point in a question that an appointment to the board announced in December would have sparked controversy.  Indeed, it would have.

As for welcoming the chance to defend Matthews, it is almost laughable that both Matthews and Dunderdale talked about their willingness to defend the appointment only after Matthews quit the process and therefore made such a defence unnecessary. 

People who genuinely believe they can win don’t quit.  It’s that simple.  Everything else is nonsense.

As for what really happened, the full story may never emerge.  It is possible, for example, that Dunderdale – like her patron and water rights – got caught in a rather amateurish effort to engineer something for Matthews.  Heck, maybe the same legal geniuses behind that fiasco and the expropriation cooked up this scheme with their less-than-perfect knowledge of the law and procedure.

Faced with a federal twin vice-chair who might well have wound up as the official replacement for Ruelokke, any other schemes about changing the board using Matthews may well have been scuttled.

Then again, the simple fact that Matthews blew her own feet off with her patently false claims on Friday, coupled with industry and political pushback made the appointment too stinky to survive the very debate Dunderdale supposedly welcomed. Dunderdale and Matthews can talk all the brave talk they want:  fact is they lost.

The whole Matthews mess is almost too embarrassingly ridiculous to believe. Had it not unfolded in front of our eyes, anyone could reasonably reject it as too incredible to be true.

[But the fact is] you just cannot make this stuff up.

All we can do is wait to see what Dunderdale does next.

[Updated:  corrected typos;  subhead clarified;  words added in square brackets to clarify sentence.]

- srbp -

Related:

03 January 2009

Not my department:

The provincial government’s innovation department achieved almost all its targeted reduction in “red tape” during the fiscal year ending March 2008.

They killed 22% towards the goal of a 25% reduction.

Innovation Trade and Rural Development, the people who never learned google, did it the old fashioned bureaucratic way.  They didn’t actually eliminate the sorts of pointless, redundant bureaucratic obstacles imposed by government departments that the reduction initiative  is aimed at.

Nope.

These clever innovators shuffled responsibility for 731 “regulatory requirements” – whatever that is – off to another government department.

Human Resources, Labour and Employment is now the proud owners of 731 regulations.

RED TAPE REDUCTION

In 2005 the Provincial Government introduced a Red Tape Reduction Initiative to reduce regulatory burdens for the business community by 25 per cent within three years. INTRD originally identified 6,692 business
regulatory requirements but that number was reduced by 731 when the Provincial Nominee Program was moved to HRLE. The Department has achieved a 22 per cent reduction and expects to attain the additional three per cent within the required timeframe. INTRD is committed to ensuring high-service standards with its clients and the public.

That little piece of "innovation" only took three years to figure out.

The year before that, the department focused on finding issues with what the red tape reduction was really all about:  counting up the number of lines of forms and seeing if there were creative ways of collapsing the number of lines.  They weren’t concerned so much with reducing the actual amount of information gathered, mind you, just the number of specific lines it took to collect the information. 

RED TAPE REDUCTION

To support the Province’s initiative to reduce red tape and regulatory road blocks for the business community by 25 per cent, the Department conducted a full inventory of its programs. INTRD identified 6,692 business regulatory requirements – 80 per cent of which were various funding program forms. INTRD reviewed all forms as well as the departmental processing system looking for ways to simplify the forms, eliminate
duplication and make processing more effective and consistent for clients and staff. During 2006–07, the Department reduced the number of regulatory requirements by 20.6 per cent.

An earlier external review of INTRD’s programs found a high client–approval rating for the Department’s response time and service. A departmental review in 2006–07 explored ways to benchmark the major–funding
approval process. A report to recommend clear standards for client services is nearing completion.

Oddly enough, the 2007-08 HRLE annual report doesn’t mention any red tape reduction.

But notice that in 2006-07, the department was proud that its clients gave it high marks.  Well, they should. Companies like SAC Manufacturing got cash and folded four months later, apparently with very little security left for the public cash they took. Over a half million dollars of public cash. No mention of SAC in the 2007-08 annual report, though. 

-srbp-

06 February 2008

As innovative as a 55 gallon oil drum

Since we first introduced you to SAC Manufacturing - here and here - the Telegram has taken up the story and added interesting new details (see below).

VOCM makes it sound like the provincial government is looking for the cash rather than trying to avoid noting that the cash is missing in the first place but hey, that's a whole other story.

Anyway, the Telly confirmed that the company went under, a fact the provincial government knew in September 2007 yet for some bizarre reason, apparently failed to disclose to the Auditor General while he was doing the Public Accounts.

AG John Noseworthy included mention of Hebron and some other changes long after the close of the fiscal year he was auditing that looked rosy for the books, but this little story somehow escaped attention.

However, since the company shares could be worthless, the AG really should have listed that fact in the notes to his audited financial statements.

Somewhere.

And he might well have done so.

If he knew.

But in order for him to know, the people who did have the information would have to pass it along.

And apparently they didn't.

Just like they never issued a news release on the $500,000 equity position the provincial taxpayers took in a little company no one heard of. Not like say, Consilient or Blue Line both of whom received a similar equity injection. Or Orphan Industries and it's nearly $1.0 million of provincial cash.

Oh and don't forget that like those other equity stakes, this $500,000 equity position was decided and approved by cabinet.

And for another example, the Telly discovered that the province's $500,000 was in addition to a $175,000 loan dropped into the mysterious company the year before.

And for another example, the Telly quotes the province's innovation minister admitting his department was aware the company had "cash flow issues" and that there were other problems with the company yet dropped the cash in anyway.

Interesting his explanation that somehow SAC Mfg had an innovative product and therefore the cabinet invested in it.

That's interesting because some further digging in the oil patch turned up some people who were familiar with the SAC idea. While they didn't know all the details, these experienced industry players, referred to the concept as a pressure vessel for natural gas, in other words a form of compressor like the industry already uses in several forms.

Or like an oil drum?

Exactly.

Or as one of them put it: as innovative as a 55 gallon oil drum.

If that's the case, the market basically gets its 55 gallon drums from the people who can produce them at high speed at the lowest price. Not much time consuming analysis needed on that one. Also no surprise since, as Trevor Taylor admitted, SAC is now a floater in the East River of failed Newfoundland government business ventures, due to competition from the American market. Innovative ideas don't have much competition.

The Telegram also notes that the company got the $500,000 cash in December 2006 and, as Bond Papers can now note, the directors of the company listed their house for sale the following April. The two year old home was sold within two months.

And if all that wasn't odd for you, try comparing innovation minister Trevor Taylor's comments about SAC to what he said last week about local companies and the investments the Ag criticised in his report.

Last week, Taylor was talking about the need to keep companies here through government investment rather than see them up-stakes and head to where the capital is that might just buy into this or that product.

Ok.

Except in this case, the product was aimed - as Taylor admits - at the Alberta natural gas acreage.

Alberta.

The place with lots of capital, private especially, looking for innovative ideas. As Bond has already noted, the product in this case really isn't useful locally - unlike Blue Lines energy monitor, for argument's sake - and is pretty much aimed at a niche market. Whatever SAC might have gotten around to building, it also wouldn't be a product that needed to be built here, as opposed to Alberta or Saskatchewan.

So why the heck would the provincial government drop cash into it?

That is as much a mystery as the company itself.

And as for government's explanations so far?

Well, those are about as innovative as a 55 gallon drum.

They ring about as hollow too as a brand new empty one rolling down Barter's Hill.

-srbp-

The story below was also carried in The Western Star (Corner Brook). Note that some information at the back end of the piece was chopped. Note especially, though, that the headline conveys a bit of a different twist on the story than what the story itself suggests.

The Telegram

February 5, 2008, p. A1

Business

Company shut down after $675-K handout
Closure came months after infusion of tax cash

Rob Antle

A local oil industry firm ceased operations last year, just months after quietly receiving a $500,000 equity investment from the provincial government.

The province had previously provided a $175,000 loan to SAC Mfg. Inc. of Paradise. Taxpayers are now out a total of $675,000.

But Innovation Minister Trevor Taylor insisted that officials did due diligence on the company, which was working to develop a natural gas compressor for use in the Alberta oil industry.

"We knew it was a high-risk investment," Taylor told The Telegram. "We knew that the company, there were cash-flow issues ... that this was as far as we could go, and that they were going to need to change the way they were conducting their business, or get further private investment or whatever in order to be able to carry forward.

"The reason we invested in it is because it was an innovative product. It was something that was explained to us - as we understood it, based on the analysis that was done - (that) this was an unconventional piece of equipment, that if it took off, would have had a good placement in the oil industry."

There are no news releases in provincial government archives announcing or even referencing any investments in SAC Mfg. Inc. Details of the equity infusion are buried in a schedule attached to the recently-released 2006-07 public accounts.

Taylor said he didn't know why there was no news release trumpeting the SAC cash, even though his department routinely does so for other infusions of government money. "I really couldn't tell you, to be honest with you ... I don't know." But Taylor noted there was no direction from him to keep it quiet.

In early 2006, the province loaned SAC $175,000. Later that year, in mid-December, the government made a $500,000 equity investment in the
company through its new commercialization program.

But soon after SAC received the money, the company's sole two directors - Dana Clancy and Sandy Clancy - sold their Paradise home, according to records filed at the provincial Registry of Deeds. That address doubled as the contact point for the company, according to documents filed at the Registry of Companies.

The house sale went through in June 2007, less than six months after the $500,000 government investment in SAC. There is no record of the Clancys subsequently buying another house in Newfoundland and Labrador. Taylor said one of the firm's principals moved back to Alberta.

The government said it was informed in September 2007 that SAC lacked sufficient capital to continue operations, citing competition from the U.S. and downturns in selected markets.

Government officials are now examining their options to recoup the cash. Taylor acknowledged he is concerned that the company's directors left so soon after the equity investment, but defended the actions of his department.

"We don't have a crystal ball around here that we can gaze into and say, 'Oh yeah, I just saw this person selling a house six months after we gave them money.'"

The province knew SAC Mfg. Inc. was a "high-risk" venture, and decided it was "worth a shot," Taylor said, insisting that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador want the government to take such risks.

"They've asked us - as a department, and as a government - to invest in research and development, and to put our money on the line and to do our due diligence, and understand what the risks are, and understand what the benefits might be if a technology is developed."

SAC officials were not reachable for comment. Sandy Clancy's e-mail address returned messages as undeliverable. All local phone numbers associated with the firm are out of service. And SAC's website has disappeared from the Internet. In fact, its domain is not currently registered by anyone.

The Department of Innovation was slow to respond to inquiries about SAC.

The Telegram first asked about the investment on Jan. 30, following a posting on the company by Internet blogger Ed Hollett.

rantle@thetelegram.com






31 January 2008

AG raises issues with public cash in three private ventures

in his annual report, the Auditor general examined the provincial government's investment programs for business, including three businesses which fell outside the programs already established.

The three companies are identified as High Technology Company A, High Technology Company B and High Technology R&D Company. They are, in order, Blue Line, Consilient and Trans Ocean, as revealed by comparing Volume II of the Public Accounts with the AG report.

The Auditor General's conclusions on the three were:

We are of the opinion that there is no explicit authority under the Financial Administration Act
for the Department to make direct investments in companies. During 2005-06, the Department made three such investments totalling $1,050,000 to three companies. Furthermore, there are no documented procedures for approving, disbursing and monitoring such unique investments and, as a result, these investments were not subject to the same due diligence required for investments under the SME Fund. As a result, there were deficiencies. For example:

- none of the three companies were required to repay the investment contingent on either income earned or a maximum seven year period;

- one company was not required to submit documentation to support specific expenditures;

- shareholders for one company (Knowledge-based IT Company A) who received $500,000 were not required to make new equity investments as part of their contribution to the project; instead,
previous investments were accepted;

- shareholders for one company (Knowledge-based IT Company B) who received $500,000 were not required to provide personal net worth statements; and

- Department officials were not entitled to attend any company meetings for one company (Knowledge-based IT Company B) even though the company was provided with funding totalling $500,000

The innovation department responded:

With respect to other investments outside our normal programs, we do not concur with your interpretation that there is no explicit authority under the Financial Administration Act for the Department to make direct investments in companies. We understand that there is a separate section
in the Report on the Financial Administration Act to which the Department of Finance has responded.

Government, as has always been the case, receives proposals from companies seeking financial assistance of various types and levels that do not fit our normal business programs. Government reviews each case based on its own merit, including full due diligence, and, when considered appropriate, has provided assistance to some of these companies. The process that is followed in these cases is the Cabinet process. Economic development and business growth, especially new growth sectors, are priorities. Access to capital is an important issue for these SMEs in this Province. These investments levered additional funding for these companies and involved young entrepreneurs, leading edge technology, the potential to increase export sales and to increase quality employment opportunities in new growth sectors for our post-secondary graduates.

As noted, these investments were approved, with the required analysis and due diligence outside the SME program and therefore were not subject to the same requirements for auditing purposes. At the time of the approval, the Department did not have a program to support commercial research and development, and/or invest in businesses at the pre-commercial stage of operation. Since then, the Department has established a Commercialization Program that accommodates projects of this nature.

Given that these transactions took place two fiscal years ago, perhaps the Auditor General will report on some more recent transactions similar to the ones cited above - which took place since then - when he issues his next report: January 2009.

-srbp-