Jump to content

Tony Clement's Sars Performance


Recommended Posts

In another thread, another poster repeated the oft-repeated common wisdom that Tony Clement handled the SARS wisdom well. Such is one of the planks of his current run for the CPC leadership.

Having had only a few glimpses of how people at the very top of the latter do their jobs, it seems to me difficult if not impossible for the public to assess such a thing. A Minister of Health is the captain of a very large ship that takes a long time to turn. In times of crisis, of course, it's important the captain to be there.

But what do we say of a captain who appears on the bridge just in time to steer the ship past icebergs ? "Thanks for saving us" or "Why did we end up near those icebergs in the first place ?"

I'm interested firstly in what Clement did to distinguish himself during the crisis.

From a rough search of newspaper articles (incomplete, I admit - add your own if you wish) I came up with the following general points that others said about him, and that Mr. Clement himself said about his performance during the crisis.

1. He had to 'perform under pressure'.

Globe and Mail - Feb 16, 2004

2. He had to 'shoulder the responsibility'

(Vancouver Province - Jan 30, 2004)

3. He worked long hours during the crisis.

Globe And Mail - April 30, 2003

4. He exhibited excellent coordination skills in bringing groups together.

Globe And Mail - April 30, 2003

5. He insisted on daily briefings.

Toronto Star - Feb 12, 2004

6. He realized that the system had a shortage of labour.

CTV - May 6, 2003

Of these qualities, I would say that points 1-3 are expected of a minister. That isn't to say that one shouldn't be thankful to our public officials for serving us, but working long hours, performing under pressure, and especially shouldering the responsibility are all requirements of the job and don't qualify one for high praise IMO.

Point 4 - coordination.

This is certainly an important skill for a minister to have, and a high official who does it well shows a degree of intelligence and a worthiness for higher office.

Point 5 - daily briefings.

This was the right thing to do. This initiative went a long way to preventing panic in Ontario, I think. But, it also seems to be to bit somewhat of a 'no brainer' as they say. I'm not a minister, but it doesn't seem to me like a brilliant decision. Still, I suppose it's praiseworthy.

Point 6 - labour shortage.

This speaks more to the job that Tony Clement was charged with performing in the long term. I found it shocking that he was surprised as to the extent of the cuts.

After reading the articles, it seems to me that praising Tony's "performance" is something akin to praising the performance of an actor in Hamlet. It moves us, it binds us together emotionally, it reaffirms our humanity. And these things are all important especially in times of public crisis.

But to me, being a minister is much more than that.

I'd like to think that a minister would be judged by the whole job not just how he reacts and performs during the high drama of crisis. Certainly it seems to be counter-productive for voters to change their minds about a leader based on how he/she performs during a crisis. If Tony Clement had mismanaged his position up until the crisis then impressed people with his performance, that sends a bad message to politicians.

I'm not saying he necessarily did mismanage the Ministry of Health, only that for him to base a run for the leadership on his performance is unsettling.

If we as a society had a better idea of exacty what happens behind the scenes of these crises and what exactly leaders do, then this praise might make more sense.

Additionally, if we could take a more balanced view of the whole job of being a minister - being a leader and a manger - then perhaps crisis management could take its proper place in the public's assessment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- MH - Yes, it is true that Tony Clement is rightly claiming that he is the only candidate among the three who has had actual ministerial experience including being in the eye of the hurricane during perhaps the most potentially devastating in human life and actually devastating in recovery costs and in commerical revenues lost of any specific emergency to hit Canada since WWII. In addition to the obvious truth that he is the only one with this invaluable experience, he also suggests he did a good job in the aforementioned crisis - the SARS crisis - and I agree. Here is why:

1/ While Chretien was away on a luxury golfing holiday with Slime Bucket Billy Clinton and federal Health Minister Ann McLelland was away campaigning for Paul Martin's leadership bid (for which she is now rewarded as Deputy Prime Minister), there was a total leadership vacume federally on SARS which created severe problems (see below) and made Clement's job even more difficult that it already was. So any assessment of Tony's performance during these critical weeks must take this into consideration.

2/ When the WHO asked Ottawa to install new technology at the departures points of our international airports so we could test for SARS symptoms and thereby prevent the export of SARS carriers to third world countries where even one or two cases could lead to epidemics, Tony Clement added his voice - privately because he needed some federal co-operation - to the WHO's request. Of course, the asleep at the switch or otherwise occupied morons in Ottawa ignored this request, passing out booklets instead. This so aggravated the WHO that within two weeks they slapped a world wide travel warning on Toronto which, more than anything thing else, led to the billions of dollars in fall off of the GTA and Ontario tourism and convention business.

3/ As the extraordinarily punitive impact of the WHO's travel warning became clear in the ensuing few days, while Chretien golfed and McLellan campaigned, Tony Clement took the initiative and assembled a small team of public health experts from the provincial, federal and municipal levels, he led them in putting together an iron clad health and public safety case for the lifting of the travel warning, he got the feds to finally commit to installing the new SARS testing technology at the airports, he learned the brief that he would present to the WHO, and then with just two or three assistants he flew commerical to Geneva and made the masterful presentation to the WHO general director that resulted in the lifting of the travel warning within 48 hours of his presentation. THIS WAS A FEDERAL RESPONSIBLITY as it was a matter between a national jurisidiction and a UN agency but Tony took the initiaitive and the risk and made the effort and he won big! (This while the feds were doing dick as usual and Mayor Mel was insulting the WHO and asking who they were.)

4/ After the crisis was over, Clement presented the bill to Ottawa for about $900 million and the disgustingly partisan Chretien feds tried to stiff him with $250 million. Ultimately, the new Liberal administration got about $350 million because Clement wouldn't "take it or leave it" with cap in hand.

5/ As to other aspects, yes, as you noted, he worked hard, communicated and co-ordinated well, and was there 24/7. Indeed, Tony lost some 25 pounds off his already slender frame in the two plus months of SARS crisis and inspired his officials with his 24/7 gung ho attitude and effort. He comunicated to the public regularly and articulately and honestly and credibly, partly because of his extraordinary speed in assimulating and understanding complex materials. But what the public saw and liked, while important, was just the tip of the iceberg (see above).

6/ As to running the ministry in less inclement times, Clement set a very positive, progressive focus, tone and pace as minister which is what a strong, effective minister should do to channel and inspire and embolden those in his ministry to move forward. He had - at 27 billion dollars - the largest ministerial budget in the entire country. He had the most difficult ministerial job in the country - health minister in any of the large provinces today is the most difficult of ministerial jobs because the stakes are highest including life and death, the money is never enough, the stakeholders are many and diverse and divided, and there is always political hay for the opposition and the media. While I don't have the time to get into detail, I can tell you that the highest increase in health spending during the PC years came during Tony's tenure due to his persuasive and knowledgable representation and that the SHORTEST waits from GP referral to hospital bed are in Ontario and the province is still considered to have one of the three top health care systems in Canada (with Alberta and BC).

Am I a Tony Clement fan now? You bet! I can't wait to hear him excoriate and eviscerate Paulie Martin for his viscious cuts to health care transfer payments which reduced the federal contribution from 26% of costs to less than 16% of costs, stiffing the provinces for billions while posing as the defneder and protector of medicare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very convicing post, Baron. Shame he doesn't have the money to raise his profile more. Still not convinced about his record for the long haul in Ontario Health, though. He performed well in one particular time of crisis, but these days it seems like every day is a time of crisis for healthcare, and I'm not sure he did that much for Ontario overall.

I do also agree with what someone said in another thread, which was that while Harper will not draw as many votes in Ontario, if Clement wins, he will draw votes in Western Canada as long as he's leader.

Maybe Clement is the guy who can unify the country, and give Ontario voters that national party they're looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very convicing post, Baron. Shame he doesn't have the money to raise his profile more. Still not convinced about his record for the long haul in Ontario Health, though. He performed well in one particular time of crisis, but these days it seems like every day is a time of crisis for healthcare, and I'm not sure he did that much for Ontario overall.

I do also agree with what someone said in another thread, which was that while Harper will not draw as many votes in Ontario, if Clement wins, he will draw votes in Western Canada as long as he's leader.

Maybe Clement is the guy who can unify the country, and give Ontario voters that national party they're looking for.

- UD - THANK YOU. As for money, Clement has enough of it to get the job done and the red herring by Harper that Clement is not really in the race because he doesn't have enough money proves only that Tony is scaring Stephen as his campaign gains momentum. The debate this Sunday between 2 and 4 pm is televised and should give Tony another leg up on Stephen as well as burying Belinda's faint hopes.

- Yes, every day is a day of crisis for health care in Ontario and in every other province because an aging population, avaricious health care people especially doctors and exploding costs for new drugs and technology is bankrupting the public system. Currently, health care costs run to nearly half the total budgets of the provinces and it is estimated that at the current rate at which health care spending is increasing in Ontario as a percentage of total Ontario spending, by 2042 there will be no money left for anything other than health care. None of this is Tony's fault, as McGuinty and company are discovering, and the current system as currently funded is simply not sustainable.

Since I was the guy in the other thread who remarked that Harper won't pick up many votes in the east and Clement won't lose many votes in the west, I won;t argue the point, LOL. And I do think that Clement is the best of the three Conservative choices to unite and grow the party. You know, the last federal PM from Ontario was Lester Pearson 35 years ago. Among the six since then, none are from Ontario while three (Clark, Campbell, Turner) are from the west. I do not consider it unreasonable to finally have another leader and PM from the place where over 35% of the population and seats and over 40% of the economy are located.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking for that post... <_<

Anyway, I don't wanna sound like I agree too much, so I'm gonna argue this for the hell of it.

As for money, Clement has enough of it to get the job done and the red herring by Harper that Clement is not really in the race because he doesn't have enough money proves only that Tony is scaring Stephen as his campaign gains momentum.

...What campaign? I haven't heard anything out of Clement's camp since he first announced his intention to run. We hear from Belinda almost daily, and while it's not all good, they say any news is good news... Harper is also in the spotlight, especially since he's the only one in the House of Commons...

Meanwhile, Clement is virtually invisible. I don't know about Ontario, but here in the West, he's more of a spectre of our collective imaginations than an actual candidate. Maybe Harper should be scared, but we sure aren't sensing it out here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind Tony Clement so much even if he does look alot like Groucho Marx sans 'stach.

That is kinda cool cause Layton kinda looks like Lenin sans gote, who was a Marxist. Wierd uh.

Anyway, the Conservatives have to stop changing leaders every two years and inflict an identity on the party. This is why I will support Harper instead of a quick fix heroine or a so called hero of the so called SARS crisis.

Understand that most of the people infected with SARS in Toronto received it via the health care delivery system. Both ministers of health, Federal and Provincial should be held responsible and not made heros because of attempts to stamp out flames they set. Like the firefighter near Kamloops that started one of the biggest fires in BC from his carelessness, is he a hero because he took action, even though it was immediate and staightforward? I hope not. What about walkerton, who was ultimately held responsible for that? Did the big cheese pay a price, of course. So he should, and so should those that infected Torontonians with a fairly obscure disease by North American standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- MH - Yes, it is true that Tony Clement is rightly claiming that he is the only candidate among the three who has had actual ministerial experience including being in the eye of the hurricane during perhaps the most potentially devastating in human life and actually devastating in recovery costs and in commerical revenues lost of any specific emergency to hit Canada since WWII. In addition to the obvious truth that he is the only one with this invaluable experience, he also suggests he did a good job in the aforementioned crisis - the SARS crisis - and I agree. Here is why:

1/ While Chretien was away on a luxury golfing holiday with Slime Bucket Billy Clinton and federal Health Minister Ann McLelland was away campaigning for Paul Martin's leadership bid (for which she is now rewarded as Deputy Prime Minister), there was a total leadership vacume federally on SARS which created severe problems (see below) and made Clement's job even more difficult that it already was. So any assessment of Tony's performance during these critical weeks must take this into consideration.

2/ When the WHO asked Ottawa to install new technology at the departures points of our international airports so we could test for SARS symptoms and thereby prevent the export of SARS carriers to third world countries where even one or two cases could lead to epidemics, Tony Clement added his voice - privately because he needed some federal co-operation - to the WHO's request. Of course, the asleep at the switch or otherwise occupied morons in Ottawa ignored this request, passing out booklets instead. This so aggravated the WHO that within two weeks they slapped a world wide travel warning on Toronto which, more than anything thing else, led to the billions of dollars in fall off of the GTA and Ontario tourism and convention business.

3/ As the extraordinarily punitive impact of the WHO's travel warning became clear in the ensuing few days, while Chretien golfed and McLellan campaigned, Tony Clement took the initiative and assembled a small team of public health experts from the provincial, federal and municipal levels, he led them in putting together an iron clad health and public safety case for the lifting of the travel warning, he got the feds to finally commit to installing the new SARS testing technology at the airports, he learned the brief that he would present to the WHO, and then with just two or three assistants he flew commerical to Geneva and made the masterful presentation to the WHO general director that resulted in the lifting of the travel warning within 48 hours of his presentation. THIS WAS A FEDERAL RESPONSIBLITY as it was a matter between a national jurisidiction and a UN agency but Tony took the initiaitive and the risk and made the effort and he won big! (This while the feds were doing dick as usual and Mayor Mel was insulting the WHO and asking who they were.)

4/ After the crisis was over, Clement presented the bill to Ottawa for about $900 million and the disgustingly partisan Chretien feds tried to stiff him with $250 million. Ultimately, the new Liberal administration got about $350 million because Clement wouldn't "take it or leave it" with cap in hand.

5/ As to other aspects, yes, as you noted, he worked hard, communicated and co-ordinated well, and was there 24/7. Indeed, Tony lost some 25 pounds off his already slender frame in the two plus months of SARS crisis and inspired his officials with his 24/7 gung ho attitude and effort. He comunicated to the public regularly and articulately and honestly and credibly, partly because of his extraordinary speed in assimulating and understanding complex materials. But what the public saw and liked, while important, was just the tip of the iceberg (see above).

Much of your case rests with the mismanagement and neglect that the Liberals showed during this crisis. I agree that the Liberals made Mr. Clement's job harder, saddled him with extra responsibilities, and forced him to step up and fill in for them, and that they tried to force Ontario to raise all of the money they lost during SARS. But this isn't really what I was looking for.

6/ As to running the ministry in less inclement times, Clement set a very positive, progressive focus, tone and pace as minister which is what a strong, effective minister should do to channel and inspire and embolden those in his ministry to move forward. He had - at 27 billion dollars - the largest ministerial budget in the entire country. He had the most difficult ministerial job in the country - health minister in any of the large provinces today is the most difficult of ministerial jobs because the stakes are highest including life and death, the money is never enough, the stakeholders are many and diverse and divided, and there is always political hay for the opposition and the media. While I don't have the time to get into detail, I can tell you that the highest increase in health spending during the PC years came during Tony's tenure due to his persuasive and knowledgable representation and that the SHORTEST waits from GP referral to hospital bed are in Ontario and the province is still considered to have one of the three top health care systems in Canada (with Alberta and BC).

This board is about the details. Please provide them when you have time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This board is about the details. Please provide them when you have time.

- MH - I don't know what gave you the idea that this board was about details but if it is true, this is the only political discussion board on the www that is about details. Most of such boards are about sweeping generalizations with no details (bullshit) and/or about some arcane and irrelevant trivia (e.g. Bush got caught 25 years ago driving while plastered) with no true relevance to the current situation and posted purely for partisan purposes (birdseed).

- Since most boards are almost exclusively of the bullshit and birdseed variety, I rarely bother to post on most boards anymore. This board is refreshingly more substantive and civilized (as long as the Rudyards are kept out) than most and does, indeed, provide more detail, context and relevance than most. But I fail to see how some sort of daily diary of Tony Clement's record as health minister or whatever it is you are looking for will accimplish anything much here. It certainly won't change your mind about him or the Harris government or compel you to switch to the PCs from the NDP. So I shall pass on your request. Hope you understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- MH - I don't know what gave you the idea that this board was about details but if it is true, this is the only political discussion board on the www that is about details. Most of such boards are about sweeping generalizations with no details (bullshit) and/or about some arcane and irrelevant trivia (e.g. Bush got caught 25 years ago driving while plastered) with no true relevance to the current situation and posted purely for partisan purposes (birdseed).

MapleLeafWeb shall lead by example, then.

- Since most boards are almost exclusively of the bullshit and birdseed variety, I rarely bother to post on most boards anymore. This board is refreshingly more substantive and civilized (as long as the Rudyards are kept out) than most and does, indeed, provide more detail, context and relevance than most. But I fail to see how some sort of daily diary of Tony Clement's record as health minister or whatever it is you are looking for will accimplish anything much here. It certainly won't change your mind about him or the Harris government or compel you to switch to the PCs from the NDP. So I shall pass on your request. Hope you understand.

Actually, it may indeed change my mind about him.

I don't think I said on this board that I will definitely be voting NDP. My policy is to wait until an election is called. I then review the major party platforms and vote mainly based on those platforms and the party leaders. I've only voted for minor parties once I think - Mel Hurtig's effort ten years ago.

I have been saying that I think that the three major Canadian parties are quite close in platform. I know you disagree on this point. It makes sense from a marketing point of view - even the Communist party platform is going mainstream. They're merely advocating a 10$/hr minimum wage, minimal nationalization of industry, and more vacation time.

Expensive, yes, but these are the COMMUNISTS. I don't think I'll be voting for them, though.

The similarity of the big three is giving me cause to give them all a long look. I would say I'm closer to voting CPC then I ever have been. I'm probably going to go with the party that puts forward the most responsible plan to manage our institutions, our social programs and our crumbling infrastructure.

As for the Clement comments, I understand your unwillingness to put much effort into trying to convince me. I have spent hours on other boards putting together reasoned arguments on various topics, only to have my opponent flip me off with an insult and be gone. I wouldn't do that, but I might not change my mind either.

Perhaps you could just rhyme your evidence off in point form for my edification. For me, the larger "project" here is to try to deconstruct how these myths are created.

I'm not interested in Tony Clement so much, as how a politicans image matches his/her work.

It's easy for us to admire the works of the builder politicians (Trudeau, LB Johnson and the space program, FDR etc.) but in this age, we're looking for manager politicans and this type of ability isn't as easy to assess. If we take only the bottom line, we're missing something.

I think it would be interesting to find out what makes a politician's "image" and perhaps dissect whether the image fits the man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This board is about the details.  Please provide them when you have time.

- MH - I don't know what gave you the idea that this board was about details but if it is true, this is the only political discussion board on the www that is about details. Most of such boards are about sweeping generalizations with no details (bullshit) and/or about some arcane and irrelevant trivia (e.g. Bush got caught 25 years ago driving while plastered) with no true relevance to the current situation and posted purely for partisan purposes (birdseed).

- Since most boards are almost exclusively of the bullshit and birdseed variety, I rarely bother to post on most boards anymore. This board is refreshingly more substantive and civilized (as long as the Rudyards are kept out) than most and does, indeed, provide more detail, context and relevance than most. But I fail to see how some sort of daily diary of Tony Clement's record as health minister or whatever it is you are looking for will accimplish anything much here. It certainly won't change your mind about him or the Harris government or compel you to switch to the PCs from the NDP. So I shall pass on your request. Hope you understand.

Hi Unc'...

Glad to see that you're hale & hearty & posting. I was a touch worried when you disappeared from Frank.

I know you care...so I'll tell you what my opinion is about this wee Canadian fiasco.

Paul's da man. I actually think that ( like Demosthenes was hoping for) we've found an honest man.

But unfortunately I think that your fellow Ontarians have the collective IQ of the poor chickens we just gassed out here in BC & may not actually notice.

I hope they are in a coma & just vote Liberal via muscle spasm, as usual...as for once they will be right!

Your bestest friend,

Rudyard the Insane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get a kick out of all the pro,s and con,s about T. Clements chances for leadership, he might be a great guy,but not a hope in hell, with your face on T V closeups, you can;t look like Groucho Marks and become Primeminister. I don;t know how the little one from Quebec did it, maybe his clowning around, but Tony can;t even do that. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...