News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 


Doug Ford sues his own government.
Considering that these mandate letters were never released until the Liberals thought they could feign openness - I can't imagine that anyone would expect them to be released.
 
Considering that these mandate letters were never released until the Liberals thought they could feign openness - I can't imagine that anyone would expect them to be released.

So, to reiterate; you're opposed to greater government transparency in respect of a simple thing, like ministerial mandates, for this government; on the grounds that only one previous government could be bothered, and you didn't like them anyway.

Ooookay, then.
 
Considering that these mandate letters were never released until the Liberals thought they could feign openness - I can't imagine that anyone would expect them to be released.
Imagine, people wanting transparency out of a government who claimed to be “for the people”. The horror!

The question is, why do you think transparency is such a bad thing?
 
I'd like to get a transcript of all cabinet meeting too - for transparency sake.
But I realize that some things must be done behind closed doors.
 
I'd like to get a transcript of all cabinet meeting too - for transparency sake.
But I realize that some things must be done behind closed doors.

Maybe we can ask the Russians for the transcripts of meetings behind closed doors. ? ? ;)
 
I'd like to get a transcript of all cabinet meeting too - for transparency sake.
But I realize that some things must be done behind closed doors.

First off, this argument doesn't jive with anything about mandate letters.

There ought to be nothing confidential in a mandate letter.

Lets be honest, mandate letters are not legally binding, they are essentially political documents for the record.

There's really no reason to conceal them, or at least there ought not to be.

***

As to cabinet meetings, I'd like to see a large part them in the public domain.

I think it could be handled somewhat similarly (not the same) as City Councils.

Certain items, ongoing contract talks, legal advice, etc, would be designated in camera, and off-the-public-record, at least for a period of time.

But other 'routine' business would be fully public.

Those items in the proverbial middle, could see a public agenda item; but the discussion around the table could still be private.

I see no reason not to aim high when it comes to transparency, while not being naive, and realizing that some portion of the decision making process will remain closed off from public view; at least for a time.
 
First off, this argument doesn't jive with anything about mandate letters.

There ought to be nothing confidential in a mandate letter.

Lets be honest, mandate letters are not legally binding, they are essentially political documents for the record.

There's really no reason to conceal them, or at least there ought not to be.

***

As to cabinet meetings, I'd like to see a large part them in the public domain.

I think it could be handled somewhat similarly (not the same) as City Councils.

Certain items, ongoing contract talks, legal advice, etc, would be designated in camera, and off-the-public-record, at least for a period of time.

But other 'routine' business would be fully public.

Those items in the proverbial middle, could see a public agenda item; but the discussion around the table could still be private.

I see no reason not to aim high when it comes to transparency, while not being naive, and realizing that some portion of the decision making process will remain closed off from public view; at least for a time.
If mandate letters were not intended to be confidential, why did every government in Ontario (and Canada), treat them as confidential, except 1. And not doubt those 1 governments likely created a mandate letter for public consumption, while another existed for internal purposes.

Question Period is the public portion of debate. Cabinet meetings are the in-camera part. Any cabinet meeting that would be open to the public would just be a dog-and-pony show, and the real discussions would just happen after they go into private.
 

So in the end, the PC's just expand on the Liberal's sex-ed program.



I love SoCon tears.

On the one hand I'm glad to see it's basically the same curriculum, with some improvements. I don't think gender identity in Grade 6 is too early, but Grade 8 isn't a huge concession.

On the other hand, it's unfortunate so much time and political bandwidth was wasted to essentially deliver the same curriculum. Interestingly enough, they arguably did less 'consultation' than the Liberal government.
 
Oddly enough, Ford ally McVety likes the new plan, despite the fact that it is the same as what Wynne had to offer.. Tanya got mad at him on Twitter when he praised Ford. Gotta love the infighting!
 
If mandate letters were not intended to be confidential, why did every government in Ontario (and Canada), treat them as confidential, except 1.

Absence of publication is not the same as confidential. It’s more likely that mandate letters were treated as a boring jargoned declarations of what’s been promised during the election.

When I order a burger at a restaurant, I have had zero expectation of seeing the order chit, or being told the exact order as given to the cook, as long as I get what I ordered. That chit or verbal order is not confidential (don’t try to argue it is).

But hey, if I order a burger and get a bowl of pasta, damn right I wanna know what the cook was told to make.
 
If mandate letters were not intended to be confidential, why did every government in Ontario (and Canada), treat them as confidential, except 1. And not doubt those 1 governments likely created a mandate letter for public consumption, while another existed for internal purposes.

Actually, one government created a government for public consumption while another existed for personal purposes. I will let you guess which one that is.

Surely, the *most transparent, apparently incorruptable government ever* (nevermind the oddly capable friends and family members that seem to have a penchant for delivering resignation letters) to have existed wouldn't have the slightest problem with a bit more actual transparency?

AoD
 
Last edited:
Actually, one government created a government for public consumption while another existed for personal purposes. I will let you guess which one that is.

Surely, the *most transparent, apparently incorruptable government ever* (nevermind the oddly capable friends and family members that seem to have a penchant for delivering resignation letters) to have existed wouldn't have the slightest problem with a bit more actual transparency?

AoD

Yeah, it's like BurlOak's logic is: "Ontario governments weren't transparent before, so why did they decide to be transparent all of a sudden?"

Look: you can make that troll argument re *any* new government policy. Like, going back a century: "they didn't give women the vote before, so why did they decide to give women the vote now?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: syn
The (rough) equivalent to a municipal council session is not a Cabinet meeting but a sitting of the Legislature. Given that there are no parties in Ontario municipal politics, I'm not sure there is an equivalent to Cabinet. The Cabinet forms the Executive Branch of our system. Perhaps a municipal executive committee but I don't know if their meetings are public.
 

Back
Top