This sort of thing surprises no one, and it seems to me that rewarding friends is a disease that crosses all party lines. What was it Mulroney once said in his own defence? Oh yes... "Ya dance with the lady what brung ya."

What interests me is the fact that no political party has ever been able to live up to its promise to rid government of the nepotism bug. Having never been a political official, I cannot say why this is so. But I'd sure like to know why maintaining such a commitment is so damned impossible. Anyone out there have an insider's perspective on this? Are you reading this, Rafe?

More of the liberals, "Govern as we say, not as we do" routine.

Let's cut to the chase:

Did the Liberal Party pay to have Pro Show crews produce (and capture for posterity) Campbell's trips?

Or was there an invoice paid by the government for these services, separate from those for the "open cabinet" meetings?

If neither, then Pro-Show seems to have been providing the premier or the party with free services in exchange for untendered contracts.

Seems like a lot more work is involved here than, say, building a new back porch for your neighbor. Again, no casino licence was issued, but in this case the porch-builder seems to have won a pretty big jackpot.

Also: If the our taxes paid for these trips, there should be no film or images from Pro-Show among Liberal campaing materials.

For a Premier who lied with such ease about privatization of BC Rail and Hydro? And who promised an open government but is running one of the most closed politburos, this stuff is chicken little!

J. Pular

I didn't know BC Hydro had been privatized. My bill still comes from BC Hydro. I realize they sold BC Rail ( thank god ) but all I heard about BC Hydro is their billing dept. is now private. Is this what you are referring to ? Or do you have some inside information that they have been sold ?

erwin why do you say thank god b.c. rail was sold knowing they are making windfall profits from coal and more to come, it is my opinion we have been burned by a drunken liar!!! One who knew dam well coal would be moving and profits would be made. The cynic in me wonders how much went into the cayman account for that little deal.Eight billion dollars went into off shore accounts last year alone!

Davey-boy's post reminds me of one of my fave pork barrel stories:
Mulroney's knock out TV debate blow over John Turner, came when Mulroney attacked Turner for rubber stamping a long laundry list of partronage appointments Trudeau had put together after his walk in the snow. Mulroney: "You had a choice, sir!"
Turner: "I had to, I had no choice".
Mul. : "You had a choice!".
Mulroney quickly proceeded to try to out do all prior gov'ts in his granting of patronage appointments to Conservatives and supporters. He even made an anapologetic joke about it, when some reporter asked if he might open up appointments to non Tory partisans.
Mul: "Not while there's still any living breathing Conservatives out there !"
(My quotes may not be verbatim).
I agree with Davey that patronage has always been part of our politics and will be very hard to eradicate.
When politicians become loudly indignant about patronage, it's not patronage they oppose, it's that the patronage is benefitting the wrong side, the enemy!There's "good" and "bad" pork barreling.

Accenture has the nasty part of handling the money at Hydro, Ron. They are based in Bermuda according to rumour, and were donors to Campbell as well.

I believe Accenture also handles the books and records for the BC Medical Services Plan. There is concern that new US homeland security laws mean the US gov't can demand YOUR medical history from Accenture!
Here's Yahoo Finance's Profile on Accenture, which also gives their address, as on "Canons Court, Hamilton". http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=ACN The co. apparently likes to keep a low profile on their Bermuda head office location. They give a postal code, but never mention it's Bermuda! (By the way, Bermuda is the flag Paul Martin's Canada Steamship Lines flies to avoid Cdn. taxes).
I googled their street and city and found other businesses also there less shy about advertising they're Bermudan.
Even if their head office is in Bermuda, the company likely originally incorporated in the US, making US security laws still applicable.

Accenture is also the firm that, under the name Arthur Anderson, oversaw the Enron Corporation's criminal activities in what may be the largest fraud in history.

They got a New Jersey court to declare that they were no longer Arthur Anderson, and thus avoided criminal charges. They were hired apparently by Gordon Campbell personally, who flew to New York as soon as they were loose from Enron.

The letter he wrote to confirm was sycophantic and hero-worshipping, as though these people were his absolute ideal date. Maybe because they got away with it, and kept most of the money too. The letter was posted on the HEU website at the time, which might explain why he hates the HEU with such a personal hatred.

Interestingly, the Enron fraud involved buying up privatized power systems and wrecking them, then tripling and retripling the price of power until the State of California was near bankruptcy on the grounds that there was now a power shortage.

California has sued BC Hydro over their part in the affair. They claimed that BC Hydro was instrumental in sucking all those Californians dry during the manufactured brownouts by charging many times the regular price on the spot power market, knowing that California was desperate, and knowing why.

Surprisingly, the US Supreme Court recently overturned all criminal convictions of Arthur Andersen over the Enron affair. They're now innocent of all charges.
Accenture is a mere ghost of its former self, A.A. The criminal charges caused clients to flee from AA like rats from a sinking ship. I believe AA declared bankruptcy and resurrected in runt form as Accenture.
Even if the Supreme Ct. decision sticks (it's appealable in this case), still, the co. was punished by being pretty much wrecked from the fallout.But I fear executives involved may have landed on their feet.
I'd like to read that Gordo letter. Sounds entertaining.

I never knew about the letter posted on the HEU website, Bailey, thanks... that does seem to explain a lot of Campbell's personal venom towards them. (Besides them being a big bad union, of course).

It's amazing what a change of name allows you to get away with, an absolution of all past sins, for awhile at least... from Arthur Anderson to Accenture... from Reform to Alliance to Conservative... from Social Credit to ReformBC to BS Liberal.

Ontario's auditor general slamed Accenture for the terribe job they did with Ontario welfare. And, I think New Brunswick fired them mid contract.

They also are getting slammed for poor work all over the US, including their performance running elections!

They are doing really financially well, as they vulture-like attack public services. They will take over any public service work. Google them and poor performance,or terms like that and there is a lot to be found.

This article deals with matters more serious than patronage and only scratches the surface. One day the chickens will come home to roost for Cambell etal.

Oops, I didn't mean the article wasnt' in depth. It was a good investigative article. I meant this incidence is one among many with this crew.

To the best of my knowledge, Accenture has been banned from doing business in California and in other Sates, although this may have been changed under Arnie.

We have to understand that one of the main reasons Gordo is selling BC's infrastructure to Americans, apart from his undying admiration of the so called "free enterprise" system, is that under NAFTA and WTO rules, services sold to foreigners can no longer be put back under public control. E.g. If any future government wanted to cancel the BC Rail deal, under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, CN could sue Canada for 99, or 990 years of "lost profits" and win. This is what so called "free trade" is all about. Ed Deak, Big Lake

http://www.polarisinstitute.org/corp_profiles/public_service_gats/corp_profile_ps_accenture.html

Yes, Ed, New Brunswick had to pay them off too, when they cancelled, even though they were cancelled because they couldn't deliver on the terms agreed.

What can I say. One day, it'll all come out and there will be accountability. Tides turn and they are starting to turn in the US, which is the writing on the wall for us. The free ride these people have been enjoying will come to an end, just as it is in Ottawa with Gomery

It's infuriating, isn'it?! These neo-cons and their governmments are just business agents that are brokering for the US, literally stealing all the that is best of Canada from out of Canadian public hands. It really is treason and I hope one day the punishment fits the crime for this band of quislings.

It's a nice thought that all will be revealed and the bad behaviour will be punished and all, but how will that happen, exactly?

All the suspicious circumstances surrounding recent governmental activities seem to center around two things; secrecy and money.

That is a very telling fact. When the trustees of your funds hinder the auditor and prevent him from doing what auditors are supposed to do, it can only be because there is something discreditable to find in the books. Something very fishy there.

If you want to know what's going on, you must restore and increase the auditor's ability to audit. Get a thorough look at the books of the Ministries, various officials offices and aides, programs and their outcomes, value returned for payments received.

I doubt if treason could be shown in peacetime, but we really need very badly to know in no uncertain terms exactly where the money is going, and what we get for it. And what political parties and candidates get for it too.

Not to mention what is happening to our resources while we languish in the dark here.

yes, Fiat Lux, you're right with the above quote, however, perhaps we should take a page from the South American democracies....(peoples' power; and, although they are not saddled yet with these Pacts ,i somehow think they ain't gonna buy the farm, either)...and tell the Nafta's and WTO's to shove it and sue.
Fidel knew how to handle these turkeys!

Yes Accenture and their type of ultra neo cons really are modern day pirates. Take all ye can get, and give nuthin' back.

To the best of my knowledge, Accenture has been banned from doing business in California and in other Sates, although this may have been changed under Arnie.

"We have to understand that one of the main reasons Gordo is selling BC's infrastructure to Americans, apart from his undying admiration of the so called "free enterprise" system, is that under NAFTA and WTO rules, services sold to foreigners can no longer be put back under public control. E.g. If any future government wanted to cancel the BC Rail deal, under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, CN could sue Canada for 99, or 990 years of "lost profits" and win. This is what so called "free trade" is all about." Ed Deak, Big Lake

I agree with Ed (above). Its all about a fire sale (short term profit)

This is exactly the same way they got into trouble with Doug Walls -- untendered contracts to Liberal/Campbell cronies, no matter how questionable, with the key criterion for hiring being loyalty (to the party in power, that is, not loyalty to the people they were actually hired to serve). This is they way they do business throughout government, especially if it's in any way politically sensitive.

Yes, all parties do it, but that doesn't excuse it for a minute, as Mr. Campbell took pains to point out in Opposition. What a hypocrite!

This goes to the very core of sound fiscal management--which was supposed to be the main reason why people elected Mr. Campbell and the reason why we're supposed to overlook all his other faults.

More on Accenture's neandercon-assisted tentacular spread into B.C. can be found below...

http://tinyurl.com/aq2ff

Accenture is a public company. If they wanted to,concerned citizens could buy a share, go to the Annual General Meeting and raise coordinated sh*t,a strategy used by environmentalists wanting to raise issues with forest companies.
In reality, large shareholders have the most clout. Ontario Teachers Pension Fund, for one, is activist in pressuring co. boards to alter policies deemed unfair or unethical,(granted, it's usually in regards to treatment of shareholders rather than concern about the greater public interest).

Good plan Bobb999. I could use a nice holiday in Bermuda.

It's not just a tax haven. It also isolates them inside a really big moat.

There are two separate issues here: 1) hiring someone to work directly with the premier and 2) letting out contracts without tender.

The first, a premier should in fact appoint people working closely with him that he has trust and faith in. That should never be in doubt. Imagine tendering those positions out to anyone. They are not even in a union, because they live or die with the premier.

2) Going to tender with government contracts is one way, and probably the only way, to keep government monies available to the best, and to the most economical. This is where Campbell falls. The companies that run his elections may, in fact, not be paid for this service, but are promised hefty contracts after the election which pay off these obligations. This is what has been going on with the Liberals federally, by my estimation.

The Socreds, and especially Gaglardi, were notorious for siphoning government monies into private hands. It doesn't take a genius to see how this works.

This is not something the NDP was accused of. So much was made of the fast ferries, but at no time was there ever accusations that money was being siphoned off into private hands, or that unqualified friends and family were hired and thus added to cost. There is a difference.

I am afraid that Vera Kristiansen is quite wrong to say that "This is not something the NDP was accused of. So much was made of the fast ferries, but at no time was there ever accusations that money was being siphoned off into private hands, or that unqualified friends and family were hired and thus added to cost. There is a difference."

As the article points out Mike Harcourt was criticized for spending way too much on "communiciations" contracts with Ron Johnson's Now Communications company. Reporters and pundits were furious, as they regarded the NDP's spinmeitsters as not only favoured insiders, but kind of amateurish as well. And there was also Carl Strubble, the UD Democratic Consultant who was always doing work for the NDP when Harcourt was Premier, though I don't think he was around when Glen Clark was in office.

Finally there is the little matter of Patron of Patronage John Pollard and his little black rolodex choc-a-bloc full of names of once-upon-a-time NDP lawn sign coordinators or convention delegates or what have you. Mike Harcourt's Premiership was essentially sunk on the rock of Pollard's appointment, and the subsequent appointments he made to boards, commissions, agencies etc. Pollard was intellectually incapable of making rational, acceptable choices, and when he screwed up, which he did all the time, Harcourt took the blame. By the time Harcourt left office, it was leave or be crushed in the ensuing election.

Much has been written in recent weeks about Carole James biggest potetntial headaches and challenges in her new 33 seat caucus. Some have mentioned Krog, some Chudnovsky, etc. In reality, the biggest potential headaches is that Sue Hammell (aka Mrs John Pollard) is back from Surrey Green Timbers. This is not exactly a cause for celebration.

Yes, Bud Campbell, the NDP screwed up time and again. However, when the NDP awarded contracts to Ron Johnson, it was under public tender. The opposition made great headlines out of it, but the advertising industry said very clearly that these were public tenders and the appointments were reasonable. I think Johnson got something like 5% of the government's advertising contracts. However, this was not reported in headline form so you probably missed it.

Of course the NDP did and will make mistakes. I just wanted to impress the difference between public tender which is there to insure some reasonable access for all companies wanting to do business and reasonable costs to the government, and appointments of people in the premier's office with whom he has to work closely and intimately.