McGuinty to pay up for Walkerton

[Topaz]

There's enough blame to go around and the Harris era wasn't that happy of times. People died in Walkerton but people also died in other areas of Ontario because of the polices Harris had. People died in ambulances because the hospital couldn't take them, councillors died of heart attacks when Harris idea to bring the counties into one big municipality I think only two regions of Ontario did before they said forget! So as Premier, what did he do, he quits! Goes spend time with his girlfriend instead of his family! He loser and always will be, he hurt too many people with his ideas.

[guyser]

People died in Walkerton but people also died in other areas of Ontario because of the polices Harris had.

Got some specific link that agrees?

People died in ambulances because the hospital couldn't take them,

Well yeah, they are dead, send them to the morque.

Edited May 26, 2011 by guyser

[MiddleClassCentrist]

We do, but we need somebody to come from big business, who has headed up a large company and oversaw operations at some point in his/her career.

It really depends on the company and the person anyways (as always)

I would never want a corporate activist in a position to manipulate government money and policies.

[Scotty]

That's a strange take on it, i.e. because they weren't caught the extra level of safety didn't work. The lack of deaths doesn't count in there somehow ? If Harris had any idea how to manage things, he would have undertaken a top-to-bottom audit of the system. Mike Harris deserved to be vilified to a degree, because more is expected from the ones at the top than the button pushers at the bottom.

This is why we have safety systems that don't depend solely on individuals doing the right thing. This is why we have levels built in there.

How far do you go with this? Do you hire one public servant to constantly check up on another public servant? Then who checks up on the first guy? This is why taxes are so high. I understand the need to monitor the private sector, but this is government monitoring government. The fault, so far as i can see, lies with the Walkerton government which appointed unqualified clowns and then failed to keep an eye on them. I just don't buy that it's the province's responsibility to keep checking up on what municipal workers are doing.

[Michael Hardner]

How far do you go with this? Do you hire one public servant to constantly check up on another public servant? Then who checks up on the first guy? This is why taxes are so high. I understand the need to monitor the private sector, but this is government monitoring government. The fault, so far as i can see, lies with the Walkerton government which appointed unqualified clowns and then failed to keep an eye on them. I just don't buy that it's the province's responsibility to keep checking up on what municipal workers are doing.

We know that there are problems with government services, but fixing them involves more than defunding and waiting to see what happens, especially when safety is involved. The private sector has to have its own workers checking the work of other workers because they are liable if something goes wrong.

[Wild Bill]

We know that there are problems with government services, but fixing them involves more than defunding and waiting to see what happens, especially when safety is involved. The private sector has to have its own workers checking the work of other workers because they are liable if something goes wrong.

Maybe, Michael. Still, the public and private sectors are far from equivalent. In most private companies, workers would be caught falsifying lab results and fired. In very few would political connections save them.

As public sector workers would not Stan and Frank have been CUPE members? Somehow, I've never seen that mentioned but if so, it may have been almost impossible to fire them. Anyone who has a spouse like I did that belonged to CUPE or a close friend has seen this with their own eyes, perhaps multiple times.

I've worked in the private sector for companies that had quality control measures. None of them would have considered it cost-effective to cascade workers checking on workers. Rather, they used statistical methods of sampling finished product, information feedback loops to pertinent points along the line of process and QUICK AND STRONG corrective measures if necessary, including more training or if necessary, replacement of workers who make too many mistakes.

Walkerton could have been prevented rather cheaply. You just have a few roving inspectors who work for the provincial government, travelling from time to time and taking their own samples, with their arrivals unannounced to the local municipality. The cost of a few salaries to do this function would be mice nuts.

However, such a thing has never happened and likely never will. Why? Because it's illegal! If one government agency wants to inspect another, it's provincial law that they must arrange an appointment ahead of time. No surprise inspection raids allowed!

I witnessed this here in Hamilton some years ago. A good friend worked for the provincial OHIP department at an office building downtown. The staff often had breathing problems brought about by poor and even absent ventilation. Some were even diagnosed by their doctor and given notes to excuse them from work, on regular occasions.

After some years of snooping observation it was discovered that the ventilation system was often deliberately turned off, so that hot or cold fresh outside air couldn't be drawn in, increasing A/C or heating costs. In this particular building this meant the air would become stale very quickly.

So several of the workers informed the Labour Board, citing the situation as an obvious health issue. Sadly, it proved to be a total waste of time.

Why? Because the Labour/Safety Board was not allowed to pull a suprise inspection on a fellow government department! They would call and arrange an appointment and a couple of days before they were to appear to take their tests the ventilation system would be turned on. The inspectors would come in, take their tests and of course, find nothing wrong.

It went on like that for nearly another decade until that particular department was moved to another building, for reasons that had nothing to do with air quality.

As I keep saying Michael, there is always what seems logical and what is actually going on. Assuming that the official rationale is the true one is usually false, especially with government functions. Goverenment safety boards are there first and foremost to APPEAR to be protecting us! If they actually do that once in a while that's just a bonus. If at any time that function might embarrass another part of the government the goal of worker protection is sacrificed at the drop of a hat.

When I was courting my ex-wife back in the early 80's I was surprised one day to hear that she wasn't sure if she would get a coming long weekend. "Of course you will!" I had said. "It's a statutory holiday!"

"Doesn't apply to me!" she replied. "I'm a dental health worker and specifically exempt from receiving stat holidays under the Labour Act."

I found it hard to believe her so a few days later when we met for lunch she had brought a copy of the Labour act from her work.

There, on the very first page, I read with my own eyes how employees of professionals such as lawyers, doctors, engineers and yes, dentists were specifically NOT covered by the Act!

So it was totally up to her boss's discretion as to her having the day off. Fortunately for her she got the holiday. Employees of other dentists weren't so luck.

My point with both these examples Michael is that in both cases we see that commonly held premises are false. Systems allegedly put in place for the benefit of citizens are often full of unspoken loopholes that actually benefit the people putting such systems in place.

This has been going on for far longer than the terms of Mike Harris. It is the natural way that governments of any party function. It only appears to surface as a problem when a particular party attacks the ruling party while they are in Opposition, only to have something similar eventually happen to themselves when they take power, such as McGuinty with Caledonia after crucifying Harris over Dudley George.

Call me cynical but I do believe I'm accurate! It's a rigged game. Still, although we little folk will never likely have the power to change it we can at least be aware of it and not be fooled.

[Michael Hardner]

Maybe, Michael. Still, the public and private sectors are far from equivalent. In most private companies, workers would be caught falsifying lab results and fired. In very few would political connections save them.

Yes, they are different. You may also find situations in the private sector where cash settlements ensure that revelations are not made public.

As public sector workers would not Stan and Frank have been CUPE members? Somehow, I've never seen that mentioned but if so, it may have been almost impossible to fire them. Anyone who has a spouse like I did that belonged to CUPE or a close friend has seen this with their own eyes, perhaps multiple times.

They received jail time according to this report.

I've worked in the private sector for companies that had quality control measures. None of them would have considered it cost-effective to cascade workers checking on workers. Rather, they used statistical methods of sampling finished product, information feedback loops to pertinent points along the line of process and QUICK AND STRONG corrective measures if necessary, including more training or if necessary, replacement of workers who make too many mistakes.

With safety, it's different. You need to have layers of checks in place, with somebody checking the checkers.

Walkerton could have been prevented rather cheaply. You just have a few roving inspectors who work for the provincial government, travelling from time to time and taking their own samples, with their arrivals unannounced to the local municipality. The cost of a few salaries to do this function would be mice nuts.

The challenge isn't in coming up with a solution, it's implementing it with so many political stakeholders and doing so in an environment where information is abused by both sides.

As I keep saying Michael, there is always what seems logical and what is actually going on. Assuming that the official rationale is the true one is usually false, especially with government functions. Goverenment safety boards are there first and foremost to APPEAR to be protecting us! If they actually do that once in a while that's just a bonus. If at any time that function might embarrass another part of the government the goal of worker protection is sacrificed at the drop of a hat.

I agree.

Call me cynical but I do believe I'm accurate! It's a rigged game. Still, although we little folk will never likely have the power to change it we can at least be aware of it and not be fooled.

Most people don't take the time to make themselves aware of it. There is likely a devoted core of civic-minded folks who do care, and I expect you will find that type here on MLW. This is why my push is for Open Government, i.e. demanding that government posts plans and results in a web accessible and objectively verified manner so as to allow citizens to monitor government directly, without the mediation of the classic press.