Monday, May 11, 2009

Thoughts on political contributions and SWSDA Staff.....

-------- Your tax dollars at work ---------

My two cents.....

One comment asked what I thought about large contributions by one contributor....

I'm no expert on this but I do have views....in many ways the question is more fundamental and that is .... should the system for political candidates be brought into the 21st century. We know that the present system lends itself to corruption, cronyism and politicians who spend too much time raising money rather than arguments for the things they want to do while in office.

My view is that political donations should be restricted in size and source... For example, no contributions should be made by anyone who cannot vote in the particular election. That would mean no corporate donations, including donations from not for profit societies. Donations over a small amount like $50 and the name of the contributor who made the donation should be published at least one month before they can be used by the candidate..... That would be my perfect system..... I am sure political operatives would find ways to frustrate the effort but it couldn't be worse than the present system.

In search of Deep Throat

Over the past week or so I have focused the light on SWSDA's Board, Municipal and Provincial officials and politicians. Aside from SWSDA's CEO, I have said little about other SWSDA staff. In part, because I believe that many SWSDA staff are good, honest, hard-working, sincere individuals who are equally troubled by what they see and know about SWSDA. These unfortunate folk are caught between a rock and a hard place. Many have seen the abuses I've referred to first hand and know SWSDA's governance and accountability problems intimately. For those folks I feel a certain amount of compassion.

At the same time, I believe these folks have a moral responsibility to represent and protect the folks who pay the bills and their salaries.

That is why I am making a public plea at this time for staff to report any abuses they have seen or see to the Ombudsman's Office at PO Box 2152, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3B7. Plain manila envelopes posted to me at PO Box 995, Sheburne, Nova Scotia B0T 1W0 will also work. So will anonymous postings to this blog.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

What a predicament to be in. On one hand you do the best job you can under the circumstances, with a mortgage, kids, and all that goes with these personal responsibilities; and then on the other you know you are seeing things that are "not right" within your work environment. What would you do?
I suspect I'd find myself a big brown envelope and find the address of the Ombudsman, and hope that eased my conscience. Not too many on the South Shore can afford to give up a good job.

To all the honest SWSDA workers, and I'm sure there are a few left, thanks. They say what goes around comes around, so hopefully you'll see brighter days soon.

To the cohorts of those doing the dastardly deeds, I think I would get my hands as clean as possible at this stage. I wouldn't want to be in your spot for all the tea in China. Sleep well...

Anonymous said...

What a topic for "The Fifth Estate" to cover. I didn't realize it goes right up the ladder to the Feds with Greg Kerr's office in the SWSDA bldg. in Y'mouth. Now I see the infamous Pat Nickerson has landed on her $%#, I mean feet in Keddy's office. What a lady she must be, and she didn't have to take up candlemaking after all. Yes, I see Hannah interviewing the Development Officers spilling the beans now - voices and faces disguised of course. That would be a three part show, and it would no doubt win best documentary of the year award. Unreal! Only in Nova Scotia I say.

Anonymous said...

I agree with your take on political contribution rules being amended. Our system encourages career pols who lose their way and sully everything they touch.

After 15 wasted years, my advice to the current Board of Directors is, clean this RDA up ASAP. You are there to direct the CEO, not to bury your heads in the sand. Partisanship doesn't belong in this agency as you're there to represent a diverse population.

To the Staff of SWSDA: If you have been part of any misdoings during your time on the job, it will eventually be discovered. If you have any information on what you deem abuse of funds, only you can make a decision on how you handle that. I'd cover my a.. and use that manila envelope.

Anonymous said...

Good Point on this Post. I agree, that no candidate should accept over 31% of his donations from one source, and if anyone tries to donate that much, it is a clear attempt to corrupt power.

I also wonder what the serious impacts would be if the donor was an editor of a major media outlet in the area, and the recipient is about to be a major player in the new Nova Scotia Government. That's not a very trasparent process.

What if the recipient is Sterling Belliveau and what if the donor is Timothy Gillespie, editor and owner of Shelburne County Today?

Page 379 of recent Elections NS Donations Report shows an alarming fact of Gillespie donating over 31% of Belliveau's total reported election contributions.

It can't be

Unknown said...

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS.... I am not sure I agree that the political contribution scheme in Nova Scotia needs an overhaul, but I DO think that looking at political contributions is one way to get one view of how a candidate gets where he/she has gotten. A snapshot view of the last provincial election might be of some use in the current one. In Southwest Nova, the campaign filings show some interesting vignettes, if they are of any use.

Richard Hurlburt had the most large donors, with 33% ($9350)of his contributions coming in donations of $1000 or more. SWSDA sweetheart Ralston MacDonnell was the winner here with $1500.

Eddie Nickerson's campaign was unique in that the PC Party made 23% of his contributions. Kirk Cox's coffers saw 25% of the money flowing from Ottawa, Halifax and elsewhere beyond the county.

The two largest contributors in Shelburne County were Terry Hawkins ($500 to Cox and $1000 to Nickerson) and me (Timothy Gillespie) with almsot $1700 to Sterling Belliveau. My contribtion was in-kind and I worked for Belliveau because he asked me, which no other candidate did. I came to believe in him as a solid candidate and think he has done a decent job.

Only one candidate in this election has asked for my support, and it isn't Sterling, but I remain uncommitted as yet, though I think anyone would be well advised to avoid presuming that money or encumbency will be the deciding factor in this election.

Anonymous said...

This "in-kind" political contribution explanation is appreciated, but it's a non-issue today. Considering the narrow win by Belliveau last time around, it is going to take more than donation$ for Darian or Sterling to win this one! People are hungry for a government that hasn't forgotten its mandate. - Signed by: Ex-Tory Voter, thanks to R. Hurlburt's partisanship at Shelburne County taxpayer's expense

Anonymous said...

The political machine of this country is fed by
donations....for which something is "always" expected in return.Take a look at who is who on our so called nonpolitical boards and commissions. Check the expenditures of these cozy little niches!Every is being (or hopes) to be paid off! There is so much graft in this province that not even Mr Clean could cleanse it!
The PC 's are sinking the province again! Stop it!

Anonymous said...

Let me see: Keddy,Hurlburt etc.Eh, the Tory mob!
All we need is another "Nickerson" in the mix!Is the SWSDA bank rolling a candidate?