SOL Day 23: Announcing another announcement previously announced

Like every other news outlet in the province, CBC is reporting that federal fish minister Loyola Hearn released management plans for two marine protected areas in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Okay.

The official fisheries and oceans news release includes this odd comment:

"As we move closer to these two new Marine Protected Areas, it shows what can be done for the environment when everyone works together," says Minister Hearn. "This is another example of how Canada’s New Government is taking real action to protect our precious marine environment."

It's odd because there's no way of knowing what Hearn means by "move closer to these two new Marine Protected Areas."

These MPAs aren't new. They received official MPA designation in 2005, but the actual work at Eastport, for example, began in 1997 with the establishment of a joint management project involving a local fishermen's committee and the fisheries department. Eastport remains a model for co-operative management of fisheries resources. Ditto Gilbert Bay where that MPA is protecting a subspecies of North Atlantic cod. Another project at Leading Tickles is struggling along but it hasn't achieved the same success as the other two.

Hearn might mean "moving closer" in the sense that he went to Eastport to make the announcement but other than that the phrase is a head scratcher. The management plan is good news but the MPAs have worked with some sort of management plan from the outset.

In the Summer of Love, there is obviously no reason not to announce an announcement of a previously announced announcement.

-srbp-

Hillier not looking at political career

All that speculation about Chief of Defence Staff General Rick Hillier looking at a future political career?

Turns out the idea Hillier would head to Newfoundland and Labrador to try his hand at the premier's job was just the usual bumpf from north of the Queensway.

Turns out the word from the horse's mouth makes it clear the other stuff was from the equine's other end. And that pretty much describes the sort of foolishness typically found at the small local blog Web Talk.

-srbp-

SOL Day 22: Cash and Pictures and some Hickey-ups with facts

On this, the 22nd day of the Summer of Love campaign, the provincial government issued no fewer than six cash announcements.

The biggie was Premier Danny Williams and finance minister Tom Marshall handing out cheques in their own districts to support the 2008 Newfoundland and Labrador Summer Games and an ironman competition. The cheques came complete with grip-and-grin photos distributed by the provincial government information service.

Also announced:

- Funding for the Baccalieu Trail tourism industry;

- $575,000 in funding for medical student bursaries;

- Tender award for construction of a new courthouse in Corner Brook; and,

- Another announcement on the Nicholsville bridge in Deer Lake in which transportation minister John Hickey shows a Rideout-esque propensity for saying things that are not backupable. Would that make them Hickey-ups?

In the release Hickey claims that "[t]he Williams Government assured the people of the Nicholsville area from day one that we would replace their bridge in a timely fashion and we have delivered."

What Hickey actually said on Day One - October 30, 2006 - was that the bridge was closed.

What Hickey actually said on Day Two was this:

If we look at the whole Humber Valley district here, there are a number of bridges … that need work," Hickey told CBC News.

"Many of those locations only have one bridge in and out of the community or location, so it will be something we'll be putting on our list of priorities for review when budget time comes."

What the provincial government actually said on Day 19 was that they were working on some solution but that they would look at all the choices before deciding:

"Government’s primary concern regarding the Nicholsville Bridge was the safety of the general public. We addressed that by closing the bridge," said Minister Hickey.

"We are aware of the anxiety of residents regarding the future of the link and we began reviewing our options immediately after we made the decision to close the bridge. However, we want to ensure due diligence before making any pronouncements."

Hickey didn't announce funding for the bridge formally until May 11, 2007; that would be Day 195 or thereabouts.

What a Hickey-up that release was.

-srbp-

Hebron talks going somewhere. Or nowhere. Maybe. Sort of.

A vice president of Chevron, the lead partner on the Hebron project, was in St. John's this week for meetings on an unspecified topic, as CBC reported.

Premier Danny Williams is downplaying the significance of the visit.

Sort of.

Williams seemed to be playing coy with reporters in Corner Brook on Wednesday saying only that James Bates "...could be in [town] for some interaction with some officials...".

The logical deduction from that comment is that Bates also might not be in town for talks with government officials.

Williams also said that while "at this particular point" he would not say negotiations were back on - obviously they aren't - he said that "[i]f there's going to be negotiations on the project, I would estimate that it would be sooner rather than later."

Williams also said the talks are exactly where they were when they broke off and that the provincial government's position is exactly where it was at that time.

Given the Premier's extensive use of conditional language - "could", "if", "would" - no one should be at all optimistic that talks actually will begin at all, let alone by the fall.

Maybe there's a clue in Bates' background and other appointments. Bates is general manager, asset development with Chevron Canada. He previously held an appointment with Chevron Nigeria. But, as the link indicates Bates also sits on the board of the Centre for Cold Ocean research and Development at Memorial University. Bates may well have been in St. John's in connection with that responsibility.

That would certainly explain the Premier's use of conditional language, since saying definitely that Bates was here for an exchange of information could have easily been acknowledged with the proviso that there are no negotiations. The Premier's vague response suggests that he was merely trying to keep alive the prospect formal negotiations might resume in the fall.

Straight answers like yes or no - something the Premier definitely didn't give in this instance - are usually a sign of credibility. Vagueness suggests something else.

-srbp-

It's not easy being green or accountable

Note: Then environment minister Tom Osborne announced a consultation into new pesticide regulations in February 2004 to replace pesticide regs introduced the year before. In September 2005, he announced the new regs would be implemented shortly thereafter. They were introduced in April 2007.


Environment minister Clyde Jackman is in the hot seat these days and it isn't from the swelteringly humid weather.

Jackman is facing increasing public criticism for his decision to reduce the demands on the law care industry to notify people living adjacent to a property where the companies will be applying pesticides and herbicides.

Until very recently, companies were required to give written notice to neighbours within a 50 metre radius of the property being sprayed. Jackman quietly reduced the distance to a mere 15 metres. When we say quietly, we mean he changed the requirements in the regulations without any notice to the public.

There are a couple of things to notice about this.

Firstly, there is no requirement in the Environmental Protection Act that the minister notify the public to changes made to terms and conditions of a license for pesticides.

The Act allows the cabinet to make regulations and those regulations, such as the amendments gazetted on April 20, 2007, empower the environment minister to set terms and conditions of a license to hold and apply pesticides.

So when Jackman says he merely changed the terms and conditions of license [revised, added aside] - and that he did not legally need to notify people - he is correct. That's what the law provides and that's what he did. However, in using this argument that conditions are somehow not regulations, Jackman is engaging in the same game of petty semantics as Tom Rideout recently did on the Green accountability bill.

The terms and conditions are an integral part of the regulation and as it occurs,* Jackman's power as minister to set and enforce any terms and conditions result from regulatory power conferred on him ultimately by public statute. They are not merely internal administrative rules on what type of pen to use or what colour paper a form shall be printed in. The terms and conditions are integral to the license itself.

Secondly, though, and flowing from that, Jackman's actions are an all too common feature of government in Newfoundland and Labrador. Increasingly, substantive powers are delegated from the legislature to the cabinet - such as the break-up of Fishery Products International - and mandatory public disclosure as would be required legislative change is eliminated entirely.

In the case of making regulations, it is normal to give cabinet the power to establish regulations. It would extremely cumbersome to bring a bill to the legislature each time some part of the myriad regulations governing life in the province had to be changed.

However, the regulations gazetted on April 20 simply repeat the delegated authority established when the new regulations were introduced in 2003 and give authority to the minister in as broad a set of terms as possible.

Nowhere is public disclosure established beyond the historic requirement that any legislative measures take effect once published in the Gazette. How many people are aware the Gazette exists, let alone how many read it? To make that the standard of public disclosure - of accountability and transparency - in the 21st century is to sanction the passage of the Green bill in a manner the Green commission report expressly condemned.

That's really the root of the current problem: a lack of public disclosure.

Province may not have made pesticide reg changes as claimed in '05

It is important to note here that pesticide and herbicide spraying are well know issues of public health and environmental concern. They are so well known that Jackman's predecessor issued a news release in February 2004 on a public consultation on the proposed pesticide regulations. The consultation included a discussion paper outlining the issues and a consultation period of 60 days.

As it turned out, the whole business was so involved that it took 18 months to produce a news release that the amended regulations would be introduced. It is interesting to note however that there is no evidence on the provincial government website that any amendments were made to the pesticide regulations until the changes made in April 2007.

Jackman's predecessor - today the justice minister - was eloquent in his statement at the time:

"One of government’s main goals is to reduce and, ultimately, eliminate the unnecessary use of pesticides, as the public must be reminded that there are alternatives to addressing lawn problems besides using pesticides like proper lawn installation and maintenance. Actions such as banning the sale of fertilizer/herbicide blend products from domestic markets and mandatory certification and training for vendors of domestic class pesticides, which will also help educate consumers to make wise decisions on pesticide use, will indeed play an important role in helping us achieve our goal."

Calls were made by several groups, including the Canadian Cancer Society, for a ban on the use of pesticides and herbicides for cosmetic use since the products involved have possible or probable carcinogenic effects. While the government did not enact the ban, its intention to apply tighter controls and eventually promoting alternatives to pesticide use was plainly evident.

Source: Statistics Canada

There was good reason to restrict pesticide application in the province. As recent information from Statistics Canada shows, pesticide use in Newfoundland and Labrador doubled from 1994 to 2005/2006. The proposed 2005 regulations may have reduced use somewhat in the province, but further loosening of the restrictions on notification make it effectively much easier to use pesticides and that is essentially contrary to the policy goal of this administration when it introduced the new regulations less than two years ago.

Being fully aware of the likelihood of public controversy resulting from any changes to the pesticide regulations, it is astonishing that Jackman failed to make any mention of the changes introduced in April and any other decisions he made as a consequence of the new powers.

Perhaps he was afraid of embarrassment since it appears the 2005 announcement was never implemented. However, the minor embarrassment for such an admission might pale if the new regulations actually improved public protection.

As it stands, the reduced notification period does not appear to do that, at least as measured by government's stated intention in 2005. As well, the intention in 2005 of applying restrictions to use around public spaces - absent from the 2003 version of the regulations - appear to be toothless in the final version. Under the April 2007 regulations (s. 8.1), pesticides not listed as exempted or as being a reduced risk may still be applied at or near senior citizens homes, hospitals, personal care homes, licensed day care centres, parks and other open spaces and near schools either where the building will be unoccupied for at least 48 hours after the application or with a special exemption as granted by the minister.

The provincial environment minister is under fire from concerned citizens and some advocacy groups for failing to disclose changes to regulations. Maybe he felt it might be embarrassing if the changes promised in 2005 had not been implemented. Well he should be in a government which claims to be accountability and transparent as often as another government says it is "new".

But, as it turned out, Jackman is in a controversy all the same and his tortured explanations of the past few days are not helping matters.

In the days ahead, he may well come to appreciate why it would have been better that he had simply made the announcement in April in the first place.

-srbp-

* This marks a change. In the original version the phrase read "as a matter of law". in the absence of a legal opinion on the point, the author is not able to make such an authoritative pronouncement. The amended version more accurately reflects the situation without implicitly carrying any legal interpretation.

Advocating give-aways

Simon Lono at Offal News has been doing a bang-up job of exposing the misinformation being spread by some people in the province on everything from fisheries to hydro-electric projects and development of aluminum smelters.

Well, one of the little pieces of information the economic myth-mongers won't acknowledge is the massive subsidies necessary to put heavy industrial projects in places like Iceland.

Iceland Review reported in early July that Century Aluminum Iceland will pay a mere three cents per kilowatt hour for power (US$0.03 per kw/h) from Reykjavik Energy Company for 40% of the power demand on its new smelter. The remaining power will come from another Icelandic company.

According to Iceland Review, farmers in the tiny country pay upwards of six cents per kilowatt hour for electricity.

-srbp-

Chaos in Control

There are times when deputy premier Tom Rideout seems to be channeling the late Don Adams in Adams' most famous role, that of Maxwell Smart, left.



One of those times has been the series of media interviews Rideout, right, has done trying to explain why the Green accountability bill is not actually in place today, despite the fairly obvious way in which Rideout and his colleagues attempted to suggest it was when the bill was passed - extremely quickly - on June 14.

"Zany" and "madcap" are fine words to describe comedy, but it has been entirely bizarre to have Rideout engage in the sort of semantic gymnastics that would make Buck Henry and Mel Brooks envious.

Consider Rideout's efforts to explain that while today might well have been June 14 when the bill was passed, tomorrow did not actually mean June 15. Rather it meant some date four months hence.

Since Green didn't say the act comes into effect today, we, in consultation with him, said what can come into effect today comes into effect today, what needs time to come into effect tomorrow comes into effect tomorrow, and tomorrow is Oct. 9, 2007.

The latest instalment in Rideout's apparent audition tape for the forthcoming Get Smart movie came in the Telegram's July 14 edition in which Rideout took exception to having it pointed out that a week before he acknowledged that the accountability provisions of the Green bill would not take effect until October 9th, Rideout had said they were in place now.

In a letter to the editor, Rideout accused the Telegram's Rob Antle of engaging in petty semantics and then explained that now was in fact not now but then, and when then arrived, Rideout's statement would be accurate, retroactively in the future. The whole thing has been eerily reminiscent of Max Smart attempting to explain that Antonio Carlos Carioca, also known as "The Lover" was in fact "The Blaster" and that Carioca's boat was named El Amador, which is Spanish for "The Lover".

The problem for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in all this, though is not that Rideout, right, and his fellow members of the legislature have demonstrated remarkable unaccountability in dealing with a bill on accountability, using their own version of the Cone of Silence.

Nor is the problem that Rideout apparently cannot tell time.

Rather the problem is that, to paraphrase a former English teacher, chaotic use of language suggests a chaotic thought process.

For those who aren't familiar with the local cabinet, let us recall that Rideout is the minister of fisheries. He is the province's attorney general and as such is the chief legal advisor to cabinet. He is also the government house leader and, as such, is responsible for piloting the government's legislative agenda through the House of Assembly. Rideout is also the deputy premier and, as such is, in a manner akin to Dan Quayle, a mere heartbeat away from the most powerful office in the land, an office he one occupied.

Of all the people the Premier might have chosen for those extremely important jobs, he chose Tom Rideout.

The problem for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in all the Green mess might well be that chaos is in control.

-srbp-

BHP Billiton considering US$50 billion bid for ALCOA

In the wake of Rio Tinto's successful bid of US$38 billion for ALCAN, mining giant BHP Billiton is reportedly considering making a US$50 billion bid for ALCOA.

BHP Billiton is already heavily involved with Alcoa through marketing arrangements in the US and its 39.25 per cent stake in Alcoa of Australia, which operates the Portland and Point Henry aluminium smelters in Victoria that provide about 30 per cent of Australia's aluminium production, and the Kwinana, Pinajara and Wagerup alumina refineries in Western Australia.

Meanwhile Rio Tinto is reportedly looking at options to cope with ALCAN's debt.

"We will be looking at the full range of Rio Tinto businesses in the new, larger Rio Tinto," he told ABC television.

He did not specifiy which parts of the business could be sold but said there could be some that "don't quite fit" or would be more valuable in the hands of another company.

"We might find buyers that are willing to pay more for them than we would necessarily see ascribed in our valuations or in our balance sheet," he said.

Analysts have said that Rio could offload its aluminium smelters or Alcan's engineered products division.

-srbp-

Kruger closes CB paper machine, other companies may follow suit

Kruger Inc. announced late on Friday that it was shutting down a newsprint making machine at the company's Corner Brook mill effective July 22.

The company blamed the rising Canadian dollar for the unexpected shut-down.

Other factors also likely played a role, namely surplus capacity in the North American market coupled with surplus production capacity.

Editor & Publisher reported on July 5 that North American newsprint demand fell year over year by slightly over 8% in May and was down 11% in the first five months of 2007. The online edition of the newspaper industry journal also reported:

Further closures by Abitibi-Consolidated Inc. or Bowater Inc. are not likely to come until after the two companies merge, which is slated for late July. Mid-sized companies also are expected to indicate plans to close high-cost machines this year, noted Dillon.

Recently, some producers announced closures. Catalyst Paper Corp. indicated last month that it would indefinitely idle its 134,000 tonnes/year No. 4 newsprint machine at Port Alberni, B.C., by Sept. 1. More recently, a June fire at Abitibi-Consolidated Inc.’s Grand Falls, Nfld., newsprint mill resulted in a decision to shut the mill down for three weeks for repairs. Meanwhile, Kruger Inc. reportedly announced downtime at several mills.

-srbp-

Docs finger short time span in review foul up

Dr. Joe Tumilty, president of the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, said on Thursday that errors in the review of radiology reports from the Burin hospital can be traced to the speed in which the review was conducted.

In late May, health minister Ross Wiseman ordered the review completed in 10 days, while Eastern Health had indicated (likely as Wiseman had been briefed as well) only two days earlier that Eastern Health would need four to six weeks to complete the assessment of records on what was estimated at the time to be 3,500 patients.

Tumilty comments echo ones he made in late May that the review "must balance timeliness with quality control."

Tumility's comments Thursday came in the wake of revelations that an administrative error led to the omission of as many as 1,000 reports from the initial review. Tumilty did not comment on whether or not the review to date had actually balanced timeliness with quality control.

-srbp-

The Darwin Awards of Crisis Communications

Health minister Ross Wiseman and how not to handle a crisis, a detailed commentary at Persuasion Business.

-srbp-

Burin radiology timelines

The tick tock:

February 2007: Concerns raised within Eastern Health of reports by a radiologist at Burin hospital. Eastern Health initiates preliminary review of sample of records [Source: News media coverage//Hansard]

May 10: Unidentified officials in Department of Health and Community Services advised of issue by EA officials. [Source: Hansard, Question Period, Answer by Ross Wiseman, May 23]

May 18: Wiseman briefed by department officials on Burin radiologist issue. [Source: Hansard, May 22, May 23]

May 22: Eastern Health announces suspension of radiologist at Burin and a review of 6,000 patient records involving 3,500 patients.

Announcement made immediately before news conference announcing public inquiry into breast cancer testing.

EA chief executive George Tilley states it will take four to five weeks to complete the review, initially stating it would take "several" weeks.

May 24: Minister of Health and Community Services Ross Wiseman publicly orders completion within 10 days. [ Source: media coverage//Timescale - Hansard, May 24]

May 29: End of Week 1 from date of announcement.

Jun 05: End of Week 2.

Jun 08: (Two weeks after announcement) EA announces review of 4,600 records completed. Review did not include an unspecified number of bone density scans that would be completed at an unspecified later date.

Jun 12: End of Week 3

Jun 19: End of Week 4

Jun 22: Through his lawyer, suspended radiologist expresses confidence in his own abilities despite media reports.

Jun 26: End of Week 5

Jul 03: End of Week 6

Jul 05: Wiseman meets with Tilley, accuses Tilley of mismanaging Burin radiologist case. [Source: Wiseman news media briefing, July 11, media debrief by CBC Radio.]

Jul 09: Tilley tenders resignation. EA announces resignation, which came as a "surprise".

Asked about government involvement in Tilley's departure, Wiseman ducks the question, stating that the matter is between EA and Tilley:

"Keep in mind Mr. Tilley is an employee of Eastern Health, and the board chair [announced] the board has accepted his resignation, and those issues in and around that employment relationship are better directed to Mr. Tilley himself," Wiseman told CBC News.

Wiseman described the departure "as a personal decision that Mr. Tilley came to an understanding with his board as to what his future was going to be." [Emphasis added]

Jul 10: End of Week 7

Jul 11: EA announces 1,000 - 1,100 reports from review unread due to apparent discrepancy in list of patients and reports. Acting EA CEO says list reconciled manually based on scheduling and billing records.

Jul 11: Wiseman admits meeting with Tilley on 5 July and accusing Tilley of mismanaging radiologist issue. [Source: CBC Radio news debrief] vocm.com attributes comment toWiseman that "Eastern Health of Eastern Health did not advise government they needed more time." Wiseman apparently made no reference to his insistence that 10 days was sufficient to read 6,000 radiology reports.

-srbp-

CT inks Bloom Lake ore sale

Consolidated Thompson announced today that it has signed an agreement with Wordlink Resources to supply iron ore concentrates from CT's Bloom Lake mine to mills in China.

The agreement will see five million metric tons of concentrate shipped from Bloom Lake annually beginning in the first quarter of 2009.

The agreement is subject to regulatory approvals.

-srbp-

More on Tilley departure

cbc.ca/nl has an updated story on the sudden resignation yesterday of Eastern Health region's George Tilley.

Meanwhile at Persuasion Business, there's a piece on credibility titled "The Gorge of Eternal Peril" that discusses the Tilley announcement yesterday and another government interview for some of the public relations implications. The reasons behind the difference in performance are not important for the purpose of the commentary. Rather, the key idea is how different approaches affect or may affect key relationships for the organizations involved. The CBC piece gives some of the vacuous answers Eastern Health and provincial government representatives used yesterday.

There'll be more as the story unfolds.

-srbp-

SOL Day 13: The Love Boat!

It's a provincial government holiday in Newfoundland and Labrador, but holidays can't stop the election love machine from spreading cash and good news throughout the land.

Federal foreign affairs minister Peter Mackay and provincial tourism guru Tom "Kayak" Hedderson will host a joint news conference today to announce funding for the group that works to attract cruise ships to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Yes, it's the Summer of Love Boat!

Nearly $300K from the federal government and $100K from the provincial government, as the news release indicates.

-srbp-

Tilley pulls pin

George Tilley resigned today as president and chief executive officer of Eastern Health authority, based in St. John's.

He will be replaced temporarily by Louise Jones, formerly the chief operating officer for acute care facilities in the St. John's area.

-srbp-

Risk brings change to Gazprom project

Only last October, Russian gas giant Gazprom claimed it exploit the Shtokman gas field on its own.

But, Gazprom is now considering a partnership with a western private-sector petroleum company because of concerns about spiraling costs.

Observers point to the complexities of the project - including freezing weather conditions, icebergs, and lack of infrastructure to transport the gas to market - for Gazprom's shift in tone.

A Gazprom spokesman also pointed to the company's concern about the potential for operating costs to spiral, saying: "We can't afford to take those financial risks."

-srbp-

Key Green provisions delayed to October 9 and beyond

Members of the House of Assembly will be spending their constituency and other allowances until after the next election as Bond Papers reported on 22 June 2007.

In addition, as The Telegram reported on Saturday, those members won't have to worry about accountability since the sections of the Green bill bringing the legislature under the province's access to information laws also won't take effect until October 9, 2007.

But even then members may not have to worry about the public discovering how they spent their allowances in the months leading up to the provincial election. Even on October 9, the access to information laws would not apply to the pre-election period. Outgoing speaker of the legislature Harvey Hodder told the Telegram:

"That has not been clarified," Hodder told The Telegram. "The intent of the legislation is that it would be on a go-forward basis."

A closer examination of the bill passed in the legislature in June 14 show that other key accountability provisions of the bill won't come into effect until October 9 or, in one case, August 2008.

The delayed provisions are:

1. October 9, 2007: Section 24, which provides a mechanism to deal with appealing expense claims that are rejected or that would allow members to obtain an opinion from the speaker on the permissibility of an expenditure before it is made.

2. August 31, 2008: Section 28(3)(l) that provides the clerk of the legislature, in his or her capacity as chief financial offer is responsible for "certifying to the commission as required that the House of Assembly and statutory offices have in place appropriate systems of internal control and that those systems are operating effectively".

Section 28(3)(h) as it relates to statutory offices is delayed until April 1, 2008. This section establishes the clerk is responsible for "authorizing and recording all financial commitments entered into on behalf of the House of Assembly and statutory offices."

In his report, Chief Justice Derek Green specifically notes a failures by the Internal Economy Commission and certain officials to certify compliance with established rules and procedures:

Over the years, the House and the IEC have repeatedly emphasized a commitment to the imperatives of transparency and accountability. Yet, as the forgoing indicates, there is reason for concern with respect to the manner in which the IEC and the administration of the House has handled its important obligations with respect to: compliance, reporting and public disclosure. [Emphasis added]

3. October 9, 2007: Section 31 requiring the clerk of the legislature to be accountable to the Public Accounts Committee of the House "for measures taken to organize the resources of the House of Assembly service to deliver the programs in compliance with established policies and procedures; measures taken to implement appropriate financial management policies; measures taken to maintain effective systems of internal control; certifications that are made under section 29; and performance of other specific duties assigned to him or her by or under this or another Act in relation to the administration of the House of Assembly service and the statutory offices."

That section also enables the clerk to seek advice from the deputy attorney general or the comptroller general in instances where a disagreement exists between the clerk and the Speaker on a matter of policy.

4. October 9, 2007: Sections 35 to 42 of the ethics and accountability section of the legislation that allow for the establishment of a code of conduct for members of the legislature, give a mechanism for lodging a a complaint against a member and resolving the complaint.

In recommending this section, Chief Justice Green noted:

In making this recommendation, I recognize that there are more elaborate mechanisms employed in some jurisdictions with respect to the way in which allegations of a breach of code of conduct may be investigated and enforcement action taken. I have declined to recommend a more elaborate scheme at the present time. This is partly because the provisions of Part II of the House of Assembly Act dealing with conflicts of interest of Members are not technically within the scope of my mandate and the whole area of the code of conduct, including conflict of interest, should be reviewed comprehensively. That would require a more detailed analysis than I was able to give to the matter for the purposes of this report. I regard the foregoing recommendation, therefore, as an interim measure, but an interim measure that should be proceeded with forthwith with a view to restoring public confidence. [Bold and italics added]

5. October 9, 2007: Section 53, which establishes clear a right of any person to seek a mandatory order directing "a member, the speaker, deputy speaker, clerk, clerk assistant or the commission" to observe or comply with a duty imposed under the Green Act.

Chief Justice Green described mandamus as another layer of accountability:

It is not unreasonable, therefore, that members of the public who become aware of a major failure to comply with a statutory duty should have an opportunity, out of sense of public duty, to seek enforcement of those duties through the courts where they perceive that others in the system are not taking appropriate enforcement action. [Italics added]

6. October 9, 2007: Section 67 which brings the House of Assembly - with certain specific exceptions - under the Access to Information and protection of Personal Privacy Act.

7. October 9, 2007: The Rules, contained in the schedule to the bill that among other things, prohibit members from spending public money on partisan activities or on gifts and donations, hold members personally liable for overspending and require members to keep records of spending.

Even the manner in which the Green bill was passed, along with its amendments delaying some provisions, repeated a pattern Green criticised severely. In a section of chapter four, titled "An ever-weakening legislative framework" Green described the unsatisfactory manner in which the members of the legislature amended the rules governing House operations:

When the IEC wished to change policy, it did so. If such policy was inconsistent with the rules, it changed the rules. If such policy was inconsistent with the legislation, the legislation was amended - and amended expeditiously. Changes to the Internal Economy Commission Act tended to be made in the last day or two of a session when efforts seemed to be focused on concluding business in order to close the House. From our review of Hansard, it appears the changes would be made with the pre-approval of all parties, minimal notice, minimal debate in the House and unanimous approval. [Emphasis added]

The reality is that the normal checks and balances that are inherent in an adversarial parliamentary system do not effectively operate where the subject under discussion directly engages the self-interest of all members regardless of political affiliation. Some mechanism must be found to improve the likelihood that important changes to the legislative framework involving MHA compensation and allowances will receive considered reflective attention in the House and cannot be pushed through without debate in the rush to bring a legislative session to a close.

When the bill was hastily passed on June 14, members of the legislature who spoke publicly left the clear impression that the entire bill was in effect immediately. In the wake of the first Bond Papers report, Deputy Premier Tom Rideout initially dismissed the matter as "poppycock". Later in the day, he admitted to reporters that the rules would come into effect on October 9.

He made no mention of other sections of the bill that would be delayed and offered no explanation beyond mentioning that implementation of some provisions required staff training and new software.

In addressing the issue of delayed implementation of the access to information provisions, Rideout said:"There was no recommendation (from) Green as to when it came into effect, so nobody, including myself, read anything into this...".

In fact, Recommendation 80 described the need to introduce the bill as soon as possible for debate and enactment with the attached schedule of rules being presented forthwith. "Forthwith" means "immediately; without delay or hesitation; with no time intervening."

In Rideout's view, by contrast, some provisions will come into effect today, while others will come tomorrow "and tomorrow is October 9". If tomorrow will not arrive until October 9, April 1 and, in one instance, August 31, one might wonder exactly when "today" is.

-srbp-

Telegram: Legislature exempt from FOI law until after election

The Telegram
p. A1

Legislature exempt from FOI law until after election
Quiet addition to Green report

Rob Antle
The Telegram

The House of Assembly has quietly exempted itself from the province's freedom of information laws until after the October general election.

And The Telegram has learned there is confusion over whether taxpayers will be able to access any House information generated prior to that Oct. 9 implementation date.

Chief Justice Derek Green recommended in his "Rebuilding Confidence" report that the House be covered by FOI laws.

Those laws allow members of the public to obtain government documents and information.

The legislature is currently exempt - a situation Green suggested played a contributing role in the constituency spending scandal.

It will remain that way for at least a few more months.

The delay in FOI access was added without fanfare to the text of Green's suggested legislation, passed June 14. There was no news release announcing it. And figuring it out requires stitching together a number of subsections of two pieces of law.

Government House Leader Tom Rideout defended the decision, and the transparency with which it was made.

Rideout characterized it as not being a delay at all, as Green did not cite a specific implementation date. The FOI decision was made in consultation with the chief justice, Rideout said.

He denied an inaccurate impression was left with the public, and said it was unnecessary issue a news release about the later date.

"There was no recommendation (from) Green as to when it came into effect, so nobody, including myself, read anything into this," Rideout said Friday.

"Since Green didn't say the act comes into effect today, we, in consultation with him, said what can come into effect today comes into effect today, what needs time to come into effect tomorrow comes into effect tomorrow, and tomorrow is Oct. 9, 2007."

Rideout said he thought everyone was aware of that date for certain elements of the Green report's implementation.

The chief justice was not available for comment Friday.

Here is how the FOI delay became law.

On June 14, the legislature unanimously passed Bill 33, the act implementing Green's stringent new accountability, ethics and spending rules for the House.

The delay is tucked away in Sec. 72 (2) (b) of Bill 33. It simply notes that Sec. 67 of the legislation will be put off until after Oct. 9.

Sec. 67 concerns amendments to the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Those sections of the existing FOI law deal with the public's right to access legislative documents.

It is unclear whether or not the FOI provisions will be retroactive.

Rideout said it is his understanding that they will.

But House Speaker Harvey Hodder suggested the new commission of politicians set up to govern House affairs will decide. "That has not been clarified," Hodder told The Telegram. "The intent of the legislation is that it would be on a go-forward basis."

When the new FOI law was brought into effect in 2005, however, it did apply retroactively.

But maybe not so for the House, the Speaker suggested. "To what extent it can be retroactive before Oct. 9, that has not been discussed in my presence," Hodder said.

The delay in FOI provisions is in addition to another last-second amendment that put off tough new spending rules for MHAs until after Oct. 9.

Internet blogger Ed Hollett unearthed the existence of that information two weeks ago.

There was also no news release announcing that delay.

Bill 33, including the amendments, whooshed through the House in less than two days, just before the legislature broke for the summer.

rantle@thetelegram.com

-srbp-

When will Danny start blogging?

The Governor General is already ahead of him.

-srbp-