Members of the Lansdowne Partnership Plan should pay attention to the words of Alan Williams, retired ADM Materiel at DND. In his article in last Saturday’s Ottawa Citizen (Flying Solo, July 24, 2010) Alan Williams is highly critical of the federal government’s decision to acquire the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) for DND on a sole-source basis.
He notes that Canada’s involvement in development of the JSF does not compel the government to sole source it’s procurement and says that to do so is incredibly bad business. He criticizes the decision in terms of increased cost, reduced opportunities for Canadian industry and uncertainty as to the JSF is the best solution to meet Canada’s needs.
He also addresses the ethical dilemma that the government puts itself in by going the sole source route: “… Procurement demands not only the highest degree of integrity but also the appearance of the highest degree of integrity. Undertaking sole-source deals leaves the procurement process more vulnerable to fraud, bribery and payoffs, and leaves the federal government more susceptible to such charges.”
It seems to me that all of these issues apply equally to the planned sole-source development of Lansdowne Park by OSEG and the city. Council must pay attention and reconsider its decision to go ahead with this project in its present form.
Showing posts with label federal government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label federal government. Show all posts
Monday, July 26, 2010
Sunday, January 3, 2010
A token democracy
One of the catch phrases used to define democracy in our society is "government for the people of the people by the people." In Canada, the only time citizens get to make government accountable appears to be during an election. By proroguing parliament Prime Minister Harper has once again protected himself from being accountable to parliament for his decisions, and for those of his government.
This is the second time within a 12 month period that Harper has halted the normal process of parliament: the first time, to protect his minority government from a confidence vote that they would likely loose; the second time, to stop debate on questionable actions taken by his government that are being challenged by the opposition.
His publicly stated reason for proroguing parliament - to enable his government to concentrate on the next phase of the economic recovery - is a complete sham. It suggests that each and every time the PM needs to prepare new strategic plans, he will suspend day-to-day accountability of himself and his government to parliament and hence to the public.
By taking this decision over a holiday period and with the house in recess Harper hopes that public response will be muted and that the public will largely have forgotten about it once parliament resumes in March.
This is an issue that needs to be kept in the public eye. Democracy is not being well served by Harper?s actions. He and his government must be called to account.
This is the second time within a 12 month period that Harper has halted the normal process of parliament: the first time, to protect his minority government from a confidence vote that they would likely loose; the second time, to stop debate on questionable actions taken by his government that are being challenged by the opposition.
His publicly stated reason for proroguing parliament - to enable his government to concentrate on the next phase of the economic recovery - is a complete sham. It suggests that each and every time the PM needs to prepare new strategic plans, he will suspend day-to-day accountability of himself and his government to parliament and hence to the public.
By taking this decision over a holiday period and with the house in recess Harper hopes that public response will be muted and that the public will largely have forgotten about it once parliament resumes in March.
This is an issue that needs to be kept in the public eye. Democracy is not being well served by Harper?s actions. He and his government must be called to account.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Oda, Kenney and Harper (bad, badder and baddest)
Inevitably government leaders make unpopular decisions at times when parliament is not in session and also when the news media is less attentive. This holiday season the Conservative Government in Ottawa has taken several decisions that would have the full attention of the media and the public at other times. The effective shutting down of investigations of alleged torture and abuse of detainees handed over to Afghan authorities by the Canadian military immediately comes to mind. But there are other issues some of them equally or more serious.
One of these is the government’s decision to cut off CIDA funding to KAIROS, an ecumenical Christian organization that works for peace, development and social justice around the world (Shaming us all, Janice Kennedy, Ottawa Citizen, December 27, 2009). Bev Oda, minister for the Canadian International Development Agency announced that KAIROS was being cut off because its priorities didn't match CIDA's. Then Jason Kenney, Immigration Minister, said the de-funding of KAIROS was part of the Canadian government's vigilant efforts to disempower anti-Semitic groups.
Kenny apparently believes that KAIROS is anti-Semitic. It is true that the organization has expressed concerns about some Israeli government policies regarding the treatment of Palestinians, as many Israeli Jews have also done. But it has not promoted, nor does it support, any anti-Israel sanctions.
Interestingly, despite the seasonal media hiatus, this decision by the federal government has received a lot of media attention in Canada and internationally. But as parliament will not be in session again until the end of January, later if Prime Minister Harper decides to prorogue parliament, there is no effective platform from which to challenge the decision.
Understandingly, not all MP’s work takes place in parliament. They have important responsibilities to constituents in their home ridings. But shutting down parliament for extended periods during holiday seasons (winter and summer) and allowing important government decisions to be made without parliamentary accountability is just plain wrong.
One of these is the government’s decision to cut off CIDA funding to KAIROS, an ecumenical Christian organization that works for peace, development and social justice around the world (Shaming us all, Janice Kennedy, Ottawa Citizen, December 27, 2009). Bev Oda, minister for the Canadian International Development Agency announced that KAIROS was being cut off because its priorities didn't match CIDA's. Then Jason Kenney, Immigration Minister, said the de-funding of KAIROS was part of the Canadian government's vigilant efforts to disempower anti-Semitic groups.
Kenny apparently believes that KAIROS is anti-Semitic. It is true that the organization has expressed concerns about some Israeli government policies regarding the treatment of Palestinians, as many Israeli Jews have also done. But it has not promoted, nor does it support, any anti-Israel sanctions.
Interestingly, despite the seasonal media hiatus, this decision by the federal government has received a lot of media attention in Canada and internationally. But as parliament will not be in session again until the end of January, later if Prime Minister Harper decides to prorogue parliament, there is no effective platform from which to challenge the decision.
Understandingly, not all MP’s work takes place in parliament. They have important responsibilities to constituents in their home ridings. But shutting down parliament for extended periods during holiday seasons (winter and summer) and allowing important government decisions to be made without parliamentary accountability is just plain wrong.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Corporate donations to municipal election campaigns
The issue of corporate donations to candidates campaigning for office at municipal and provincial levels has been a concern of mine for a long time. At the federal level Elections Canada took steps to eliminate corporate donation some time ago. Why are the two lower levels of government not introducing similar legislation?
If the province introduced income tax credits at the municipal level, similar to those that already exist at federal and provincial levels, more people would consider donating to municipal candidates’ campaigns. This in turn might result in renewed levels of interest in municipal elections and help increase the number of voters who turn out.
It was disappointing, though not surprising, to learn that Ottawa City councillors have turned down yet another opportunity to speak to the provincial government on this issue (Bid to ban corporate, union donations fails, Patrick Dare, Ottawa Citizen, November 24, 2009). A motion by Councillor Alex Cullen to ask the province to prohibit such donations was defeated by a vote of 4-6 by the audit, budget and finance committee.
Dare’s article notes that only five councillors out of the 24 on council do not accept corporate donation and union donations. However, at least one member of this group of five receives a substantial amount of donations to his campaign from individual owners, executives and senior staff of corporations, primarily developers. Interestingly, this individual voted in favor of Cullen’s motion.
New municipal election rules that are being considered by the province will put a limit on the maximum value of contributions that any individual, corporation or other organization can make. But this does not prevent a large number of individuals with ties to a particular corporation or organization from donating. This defeats the intent of the proposed legislation.
It’s time for this issue to be cleared up once and for all. No matter how much councillors take offence and protest that their votes cannot be bought when challenged on this issue, the perception will always be there. We just need to remove the temptation.
If the province introduced income tax credits at the municipal level, similar to those that already exist at federal and provincial levels, more people would consider donating to municipal candidates’ campaigns. This in turn might result in renewed levels of interest in municipal elections and help increase the number of voters who turn out.
It was disappointing, though not surprising, to learn that Ottawa City councillors have turned down yet another opportunity to speak to the provincial government on this issue (Bid to ban corporate, union donations fails, Patrick Dare, Ottawa Citizen, November 24, 2009). A motion by Councillor Alex Cullen to ask the province to prohibit such donations was defeated by a vote of 4-6 by the audit, budget and finance committee.
Dare’s article notes that only five councillors out of the 24 on council do not accept corporate donation and union donations. However, at least one member of this group of five receives a substantial amount of donations to his campaign from individual owners, executives and senior staff of corporations, primarily developers. Interestingly, this individual voted in favor of Cullen’s motion.
New municipal election rules that are being considered by the province will put a limit on the maximum value of contributions that any individual, corporation or other organization can make. But this does not prevent a large number of individuals with ties to a particular corporation or organization from donating. This defeats the intent of the proposed legislation.
It’s time for this issue to be cleared up once and for all. No matter how much councillors take offence and protest that their votes cannot be bought when challenged on this issue, the perception will always be there. We just need to remove the temptation.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
H1N1
It’s difficult to comment negatively on a major initiative in the city that is providing urgent protection for citizens. Front-line workers (nurses and other officials) are working hard to immunize people against the H1N1 pandemic, but the process initiated by the city’s public health authority has some serious flaws. Efforts and plans being made by multiple levels of government authorities involved in the process seem to be uncoordinated and their priorities are not always consistent. Coupled with this, the media is overzealous on the issue and reporting is often inaccurate and inconsistent.
With a limited initial supply of vaccine available from the start, the primary goal should be to inoculate health care workers first. This could have been done more effectively if initial supplies of the vaccine had been sent directly to hospitals, clinics and other health care facilities (paramedics, etc.). Steps should also be taken to ensure that individual family doctors are inoculated. Extending the priority list as the city has done, without an adequate supply of vaccines available and with only a few injection sites available has resulted in long queues, and serious confusion.
There is no question that this issue is being over-reported by the media. This is resulting in conflicting and inaccurate information being reported on the radio, TV and newspapers. As an example, exact information on who is included on the priority list for early vaccinations has not been communicated accurately by the media and this is still a confusing issue. A report on CBC television indicated that turning up for an injection if you were not on the list would result in one being turned away. Firstly it is unclear what the list consists of:
* Is it just the list of categories (health care workers, pregnant women, young children, adults in high risk categories, etc.)?
* Or is it a list with named individuals?
If it is the former, the decision as to who qualifies is being left in the hands of individual members of the public. If it is the latter, this is personal information, where did this information originate? The public health authority is also responsible for much of the confusion here. Their approach has not been clear or consistent.
It is unclear why vaccinations for the general public are not being handled in the same way as seasonal vaccinations at family doctors’ offices. This would significantly reduce the pressure on public vaccination sites. Public sites present their own special problems; bringing such large numbers of people together in one location for extended time periods increases the possibility of cross-infection before people are vaccinated and before immunity becomes effective. As healthy school aged children appear to be particularly vulnerable to H1N1, why are vaccinations not being made available in school? These measures would all help to relieve pressure on public sites and reduce waiting times to manageable proportions.
Public health authorities are learning from some of these early mistakes and are implementing some of the measures noted here. If all three levels of government were to work together more closely during the planning and preparation stages of a crisis many of the current problems could have been avoided altogether. Effective cooperation between multiple levels of government continues to be a serious problem in Canada, particularly within the Province of Ontario.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Lansdowne Live is not the only sole-source plan that is alive and well in the city of Ottawa
It appears that Lansdowne live is not the only example of blatant sole-source contracting in the City of Ottawa. It has come to my attention recently that by-passing the City’s procurement rules has become a convenient short-cut by the City to fast-track projects and to help keep them from public scrutiny. Here are a couple of recent examples that also appear to break other rules:
The City of Ottawa’s $47.7 Million Terry Fox Drive extension, funded under the Infrastructure Stimulus Program is purported to be "shovel ready." However it appears that the City was in no way to proceed with this project when funding was announced. In order to have a faint hope of starting construction of some portions of the project within timelines of the funding program, the City sole-sourced a $1.9 Million engineering contract to Dillon Consulting. That's right, $1.9 Million sole-sourced (See Page 47 of Document 1 in June 16, 2009 Corporate Services Committee Report: http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/csedc/2009/06-16/08a%20-%20ACS2009-CMR-FIN-0021%20-%20DOC%201.pdf)!
The project traverses 1.5 km of Carp River floodplain and is likely unprecedented in the Province of Ontario in terms of the amount of floodplain storage that will be displaced since the Flood Damage Reduction Program was introduced in the 1970's. Under this program the three levels of government signed an agreement that they would not build, fund or approve projects where floodplains had been mapped (http://www.ec.gc.ca/Water/en/manage/flood/e_agree.htm#1)
The site of the project lies just downstream of a flood damage center, on a reach of the Carp River where an Order of the MOE Minister has been issued. The City has not yet responded to the conditions set in the Minister's Order. So why is this project being funded?
Secondly there is a $510,945.69 sole-sourced contract awarded to Novatech Engineering for the $65 Million Hazeldean Road Expansion Project that includes building new bridges over the Carp River: (See Page 89 of 100 Page Document 1, available at: http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/csedc/2009/10-06/04%20-%20ACS2009-CMR-FIN-0041%20-%20DOA%20-%20Apr%201%20-%20Jun%2030%20%202009-%20FINAL.htm).
Just like the Terry Fox Drive project to the north, the Hazeldean Road project overlaps with Carp River floodplain where issues about flood levels have yet to be sorted out with the MOE Minister. More concerning about the Hazeldean Road project is that it is just downstream from Glen Cairn where hundreds of homes flooded on July 24th, and the City is not expected to complete its investigation until summer 2010 of what caused the flooding, the third such incident for may residents over the last 13 years.
So again, why are these projects being funded through sole-source contracts?
The City of Ottawa’s $47.7 Million Terry Fox Drive extension, funded under the Infrastructure Stimulus Program is purported to be "shovel ready." However it appears that the City was in no way to proceed with this project when funding was announced. In order to have a faint hope of starting construction of some portions of the project within timelines of the funding program, the City sole-sourced a $1.9 Million engineering contract to Dillon Consulting. That's right, $1.9 Million sole-sourced (See Page 47 of Document 1 in June 16, 2009 Corporate Services Committee Report: http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/csedc/2009/06-16/08a%20-%20ACS2009-CMR-FIN-0021%20-%20DOC%201.pdf)!
The project traverses 1.5 km of Carp River floodplain and is likely unprecedented in the Province of Ontario in terms of the amount of floodplain storage that will be displaced since the Flood Damage Reduction Program was introduced in the 1970's. Under this program the three levels of government signed an agreement that they would not build, fund or approve projects where floodplains had been mapped (http://www.ec.gc.ca/Water/en/manage/flood/e_agree.htm#1)
The site of the project lies just downstream of a flood damage center, on a reach of the Carp River where an Order of the MOE Minister has been issued. The City has not yet responded to the conditions set in the Minister's Order. So why is this project being funded?
Secondly there is a $510,945.69 sole-sourced contract awarded to Novatech Engineering for the $65 Million Hazeldean Road Expansion Project that includes building new bridges over the Carp River: (See Page 89 of 100 Page Document 1, available at: http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/csedc/2009/10-06/04%20-%20ACS2009-CMR-FIN-0041%20-%20DOA%20-%20Apr%201%20-%20Jun%2030%20%202009-%20FINAL.htm).
Just like the Terry Fox Drive project to the north, the Hazeldean Road project overlaps with Carp River floodplain where issues about flood levels have yet to be sorted out with the MOE Minister. More concerning about the Hazeldean Road project is that it is just downstream from Glen Cairn where hundreds of homes flooded on July 24th, and the City is not expected to complete its investigation until summer 2010 of what caused the flooding, the third such incident for may residents over the last 13 years.
So again, why are these projects being funded through sole-source contracts?
Monday, June 15, 2009
Municipal Elections Campaign Contributions - Proposed By-law Amendment
I sent an edited version of the following letter to the Ottawa Citizen last week. Unfortunately it was not published.
Ottawa City Council yesterday made the unfortunate decision to not outlaw municipal election campaign contributions by businesses and unions (Council agreed to ask province to create election contributor by-law, Ottawa Citizen, June 10, 2009). The article cites analysis that suggests some candidates rely heavily on election campaign contributions from developers and other businesses that deal directly with the city. Contributions of this nature are no longer allowed in federal election campaigns. It is time that the city and the province enact similar legislation.
It should also be noted that while some candidates do not accept contributions from businesses or unions, some do receive significant contributions from business owners and executives whose firms deal directly with the city. The watered-down agreement that will ask the province to allow the city to enact a by-law requiring candidates to submit a list of campaign financial contributors within 30 days of an election will help a little, but it does not go far enough and will do nothing to eliminate possible conflicts of interest.
Proposed election contribution by-law a cop-out
Ottawa City Council yesterday made the unfortunate decision to not outlaw municipal election campaign contributions by businesses and unions (Council agreed to ask province to create election contributor by-law, Ottawa Citizen, June 10, 2009). The article cites analysis that suggests some candidates rely heavily on election campaign contributions from developers and other businesses that deal directly with the city. Contributions of this nature are no longer allowed in federal election campaigns. It is time that the city and the province enact similar legislation.
It should also be noted that while some candidates do not accept contributions from businesses or unions, some do receive significant contributions from business owners and executives whose firms deal directly with the city. The watered-down agreement that will ask the province to allow the city to enact a by-law requiring candidates to submit a list of campaign financial contributors within 30 days of an election will help a little, but it does not go far enough and will do nothing to eliminate possible conflicts of interest.
Friday, June 12, 2009
The Official Plan still requires attention
Some see this week’s vote by Ottawa City Council to cut back on the urban boundary expansion originally proposed by city staff as a small victory. However, it does nothing to address the need to radically change the overall plan that is really required. At the moment, this city is really being planned by the developers and not by the city (Development Plans lack proper direction. Randal Denley, Ottawa Citizen, June 11, 2009).
A well thought out Official Plan will provide for the development of communities that are more self-contained; communities in which a majority of residents can live, work and play. This requires a long-term vision as well as a high level of consultation and cooperation by all three levels of government.
Let us hope that in the five year period until the next mandatory (did someone say arbitrary?) review of the plan that council undertakes serious consultations with its provincial and federal counterparts and also directs city staff to rethink the planning process.
A well thought out Official Plan will provide for the development of communities that are more self-contained; communities in which a majority of residents can live, work and play. This requires a long-term vision as well as a high level of consultation and cooperation by all three levels of government.
Let us hope that in the five year period until the next mandatory (did someone say arbitrary?) review of the plan that council undertakes serious consultations with its provincial and federal counterparts and also directs city staff to rethink the planning process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
