ExFlyer

Why argue with me? I only provided a link (and an old one at that and said so). Question the link? Then do some research and provide better or newer or more self full filling data LOL Your opinion means nothing to me as I have already told you I do not care.

What makes you think you are entitled to know everything (or anything for that matter) that goes on?? Pretty arrogant, self righteous and narcissistic of you to believe you have the right to know anything.

What is hostile about using outside sources to solve problems?? How outside sources derive their manpower is not an Ontario issue unless you are wanting Ontario to step in and disallow workers from taking on additional part time positions? I have to get infusions on a regular basis and almost all the nurses working there are full time hospital workers and are working at the infusion clinic part time.

I don't write or collate the reports or links. Research and come up with better numbers, although I really do not care that much. I am only dispelling misinformation by the OP.

Times change. Events Change. New things to work on forever. Progress does not stop. Entitlements and pensions are what are bargained for by the workers. The ones constantly complaining are the ones that do not want to work. They just keep complaining about what others have. Hmmm, sound like anyone you know? LOL

And more. Point is a myopic topic from a person with a very narrow scope of understanding and reality.

Are you wanting governing to be exciting? How more exciting can it be in todays cancel culture? Erasing history. Demonizing fathers, mothers sons and daughters of confederation and history? Tearing down symbols and structures and writings of historians and historical figures?

What is misinformation? I told you the nearest I could find is a 10 year old report. I do not make up the reports, they are published by health authorities,. You many not like them but, you have no better information. Your broad statement that "Over 30,000 deaths related to medical errors reported in 2021. " is in all of Canada and the topic is Ontario. Also, what is included in "medical errors" is a very broad brush statement. Your link clearly defines medical errors being numerous issues " Some of the more common medical mistakes include: surgical and anesthesia errors, inadequate monitoring after a procedure, and birth injuries or trauma. Delayed diagnosis and treatment Misdiagnosis, late diagnosis, and failure to diagnose are also some of the most serious types of medical errors. Shearer said, “If the ER is busy and you have common symptoms, maybe something gets missed that contributes to a serious injury or fatality.” Oh and your link is a "Sponsored Content" advertisement from "Personal injury lawyer Catherine Shearer". No doubt to drum up business. Your pedestal is as small as your point.

Topic is Ontario. You are providing misinformation. Nearest I could find and it is an 10 year old report is "Ontario hospitals disclosed that 36 patients had suffered severe adverse events – 10 of them fatal – because of medication errors.". "covers the period from October 2011 to December 2012, roughly the first year after the Ontario government ordered hospitals to begin reporting critical incidents involving medications or intravenous fluids." https://www.longwoods.com/newsdetail/3399 I am sure it has increased since then but..... "Misdiagnosis, late diagnosis, and failure to diagnose are also some of the most serious types of medical errors. Shearer said, “If the ER is busy and you have common symptoms, maybe something gets missed that contributes to a serious injury or fatality.”

Firstly, you are aware the health care system is Provincial? Canada does not hire doctors, the provinces do. Canada or the provinces cannot hire doctors any faster than the schools produce them and every doctor coming from a school is hired. What Canada does internationally is not a provincial matter nor a provincial expenditure.

Where did you get that statistic? In Ontario?? Having questioned that, Fords announcement is a good thing. We have clinics and they have facilities and openings to do many surgeries. I have an example. I have a colleague that needed hip replacement. He was on a waiting list for over 2 years (before COVID) and suffered dramatically for that period of time. He finally got the operation and he was told it cost over $100K. I have a personal friend that also needed a hip operation and was also on a waiting list for 2 years, then COVID happened. He could not get any information as to when he would get his hip replaced. It got so bad he went to Montreal, got diagnosed, got in within 3 weeks, had his hip p\replaced. It cost him 4 days and $25K. I think "private" health care can be useful but not at the demise of the public system. Private clinics should be able to operate and function within the present health system as an alternative to public hospitals. I think private clinics should be able to bid on operations from a waiting list. The difference between Canadian and American systems is that the American system is a huge for profit system whereas our system is a huge money wasting system that really costs the same. In Canada, including private clinics could be financially beneficial to our health care system.

Says a guy with almost 38,000 posts?

Been away for 3 weeks only to come back and see WestConMan is still riding the horse with 3 asses. One in back, one in front and one on the middle. A one trick person riding a one trick pony. He is the epitome of the boy that cried wolf. https://dcmp.org/media/7006-the-boy-who-cried-wolf

There has always been a separate justice system for aboriginals.

Been away for 3 weeks only to come back and see WestConMan is still riding the horse with 3 asses. One in back, one in front and one on the middle. A one trick person riding a one trick pony. He is a epitome of the boy that cried wolf. https://dcmp.org/media/7006-the-boy-who-cried-wolf

Carbon tax 10 years ago?? Regardless, GST is on every product or service you get or buy.

Key here is the "you"never give a contract. "You" only provide a list of requirements. Only when the winner is announced do you know who it is and then, if you feel there may be a conflict, you report that. That will be investigated and the winner may be disqualified and a new company (also qualified but second cheapest) be given the contract.

Well, debating the ethics commissioners office can be fruitless. I have given links to their annual reports. Lots of information in there. I have done quite a few (hundreds I could say) Standing Offer and Supply Arrangement contracts in my PWGSC days. I can also say any calls would only be to provide status. The client does not know who is bidding. I, as an evaluator, have recused myself from evaluations because I knew the company or an individual (on a personal side) offering the services but, the client (the one requiring the services) does not see the bids, only the lowest cost compliant bidder. I have had clients come back when the winner was announced and complained they did not want the company or person but, they would have to provide, formally in writing why because the company that would be losing the bid would have to be told why. Now, has there been or can there be anomalies? For sure, no system is fault free or perfect but, it does not happen very often. (in my experience)

My head hurts. I am overrun buy fools and closed minded simpletons. I am going on a break. Need some sense in my life. Happy New Year to you all, those few intelligent ones, all the fools and simpletons alike. Sort yourselves out. To me and a few others they are easily sorted

If, if, if.... The ethics commissioner did nothing. No ifs The way it works is a requirement is written. Any company that meets the requirements then submits a bid for the product or service. A group of people (none of which work for the office that needs the product or service) then evaluates the bids and, you guessed it, lowest cost compliant wins. Yes, if there is some sort of conflict, it has to be reported. If there does not seem to be a conflict and if the service is deemed innocuous, it can easily be deemed compliant.

I guess what you are saying is once elected, a person is no longer allowed to talk to or ask, or question anyone that they knew prior to getting elected? Oh and "Dion said both confirmed to him that they did not discuss a contract with each other, with Ng saying "the entire process was delegated" to her chief of staff, who was aware of the friendship." So, as I said, using the Supply Arrangement tor

What rules? A commissioner saying one thing but doing nothing clearly indicates there are no broke rules You are so naive.... I keep saying that about you so it must be true LOL Bosses, ministers, CEO's have delegates doing the menial work for them. You and Groot must both be very low level workers, if you even work. Both do not seem to have a clue how business is structured, managed and done. You seem and sound like people on the very bottom of the totem pole and never climb up so all you do is complain about your lot in life and are pissed everyone else is doing better. Not know how and when to do things and not wanting or accepting holds you back. But hey, every business needs peons.

Baloney...make that double baloney with mustard LOL Read the reports I linked. lots of accusations and innuendos and very few, if any, repercussions.

The only one "clueless" is you. That is the most obvious thing in your post.

And did nothing... my point. "Based on the documents provided by both Ms. Ng and Ms. Alvaro, Ms. Ng does not appear to have been involved in the subsequent discussions pertaining to the negotiation of the final terms of the contract,""