Will Transport Canada become known as the Titanic Department in the Harper Government?
I told you yesterday that this whole matter about Bill C-3 and the Conservatives was very strange to me. I thought that the Transport Minister frankly had been sold a bill of goods with this legislation and that it would come back one day to bite him. If that happened, given his powerful position in the Government, someone would be in big trouble for embarrassing him by allowing him to introduce this Bill.
Say what you will, there is only one target for this legislation: the Ambassador Bridge Company. DRIC is nothing more than part of the exercise to pressure them to get out of the bridge business and to buy time to put this legislation into place. When you read the key provisions about how it can put the Bridge Co. into serious difficulty financially and build up their competition at their expense, you will understand what I mean. You tell me of one single business person who would stand for this kind of Government action! I'll provide those provisions in another BLOG soon.
I can think of better ways for the Conservatives to win friends in Washington than by having one of their first pieces of legislation being viewed as Anti-American. I can see the Liberals and their civil service friends laughing themselves silly at the Minister's action. He is following their agenda to his detriment. So much for him helping win seats in Quebec in future.
What is interesting to me is the deliberate leaking that went on about this matter in the so-called tight Harper Conservative-captained ship. All for a good purpose I bet too. If it can happen with the Department of one of the most powerful Ministers with no consequence, why not anywhere?
There were strong rumours that the Bill was going to be introduced. Still it came out so quickly when it was NOT an important part of the Harper 5 Point agenda. It was C-THREE! Someone was worried about something.
Obviously, the Bridge Co. is front and centre in all of this. Look at the Star story yesterday:
- "The act would enable Ottawa to block the Ambassador Bridge Company's plans to twin the bridge, which is the busiest crossing between the U.S. and Canada. Twenty-eight per cent of all goods traded between the two countries passes over the local crossing...
Earlier this year, bridge owner Matty Maroun told The Star he will sell the bridge if the price is right."
Someone in Ottawa must think that Moroun (I wish the Star learned how to spell his name correctly) can be bullied or can be forced to sell out cheaply! Interestingly, another media outlet picked up the "sell" feature later as well.
The introduction seemed rushed to me, to have it in place before the Bridge Co. representatives could meet the Minister. Was someone afraid that the Minister might get a different side to the story and delay the introduction? That would not serve someone's agenda.
Why do I say this? It seems that there was a leak about a number of bridge-related matters to Today's Trucking Magazine Online last week "TodaysTrucking.com has learned" and then a discussion about Bill C-44, the predecessor to Bill C-3, in the story. There was a need to get a something out before the Bill was introduced. How could one stop then if the story was out there already!
Oh my goodness....yes, a leak, in the water-tight Harper-controlled Government. Why would someone dare take the risk of getting their head chopped off by the Prime Minister's Office by leaking such a story? You remember the stories about how ministers cannot say anything without approval, news conferences being controlled, denying access to reporters etc etc etc.
Huh, what, Today's Trucking--who ever heard of that before? How could that be? Why did this journal get the story and not some major media outlet like CBC or CTV news or the Toronto Star or Globe and Mail or National Post or even the Windsor Star?
With the online world these days, if one wants key people to read something, one does not have to ensure that it goes on the frontpage of the Toronto Star but that it gets reported somewhere and online so that a search tool or a media service picks it up for distribution to clients. The leakor suspected that he/she would never get caught since no one would care.
The Today's Trucking's story changed very slightly from the time of first publication. What was astonishing to me was that there was a change in the story in the first place and how quickly it happened. It was as if "the leakor" was afraid of the error and had to get it corrected.
Imagine that the Transport Minister might be "tarred" by people actually thinking the Minister may have met the Bridge Co. owner because of a mistake in the leaked story. Moreover, the Minister had to be above all of this or else Harper might think he caused the leak or knew about it if there was a meeting.
First Version:
The introduction seemed rushed to me, to have it in place before the Bridge Co. representatives could meet the Minister. Was someone afraid that the Minister might get a different side to the story and delay the introduction? That would not serve someone's agenda.
Why do I say this? It seems that there was a leak about a number of bridge-related matters to Today's Trucking Magazine Online last week "TodaysTrucking.com has learned" and then a discussion about Bill C-44, the predecessor to Bill C-3, in the story. There was a need to get a something out before the Bill was introduced. How could one stop then if the story was out there already!
Oh my goodness....yes, a leak, in the water-tight Harper-controlled Government. Why would someone dare take the risk of getting their head chopped off by the Prime Minister's Office by leaking such a story? You remember the stories about how ministers cannot say anything without approval, news conferences being controlled, denying access to reporters etc etc etc.
Huh, what, Today's Trucking--who ever heard of that before? How could that be? Why did this journal get the story and not some major media outlet like CBC or CTV news or the Toronto Star or Globe and Mail or National Post or even the Windsor Star?
With the online world these days, if one wants key people to read something, one does not have to ensure that it goes on the frontpage of the Toronto Star but that it gets reported somewhere and online so that a search tool or a media service picks it up for distribution to clients. The leakor suspected that he/she would never get caught since no one would care.
The Today's Trucking's story changed very slightly from the time of first publication. What was astonishing to me was that there was a change in the story in the first place and how quickly it happened. It was as if "the leakor" was afraid of the error and had to get it corrected.
Imagine that the Transport Minister might be "tarred" by people actually thinking the Minister may have met the Bridge Co. owner because of a mistake in the leaked story. Moreover, the Minister had to be above all of this or else Harper might think he caused the leak or knew about it if there was a meeting.
First Version:
- "However, sources later told TodaysTucking.com that a meeting with Moroun, at least, has already taken place this past week. Reportedly, the Grosse Pointe, Mich.-based powerbroker wanted to bend Cannon's ear on everything from the future of the Ambassador to the bridge company's involvement, if at all, on a new crossing at the border."
Revised Version:
- "However, sources later told TodaysTucking.com that a meeting with Moroun, at least, will take place by week's end. Reportedly, the Grosse Pointe, Mich.-based powerbroker wants to bend Cannon's ear on everything from the future of the Ambassador to the bridge company's involvement, if at all, on a new crossing at the border."
Note the subtle difference but it gets the Minister off the hook, right. There was no meeting after all (Today's Trucking again in a new story suggested there was one but I was told by Transport Canada officially that no meeting took place.)
After the change, the story then became a non-event with no meeting taking place. If there had been a meeting, the Minister's office would have had to field a flood of media calls and the leakor's role might have become known to his/her jeopardy. Who though would write about a meeting that did NOT take place. No one and no one did. However, those in the media or in Government or industry who read the story would be well-informed and have been pre-sold when Bill C-3 was introduced.
Given the last paragraph, they would also know that it is the FEDS in charge even if the Province owned an international crossing, say in Windsor as the gossip suggests the Liberals want. WHAP!:
- "The intent, says Transport Canada's Brian McGregor, is to give overall governance regime to bridge's and tunnels, whether they're provincially owned and regulated, federally regulated, or privately operated."
The leakor is breathing easier now: the story got out, the Bill was introduced before the Bridge Co. got to meet the Minister, pressure is being applied to them that may give rise to a sale and the Minister is all above this. OR IS THE LEAKOR IN REAL TROUBLE NOW?
PS...for those that like conspiracies and who understand the background of the border battle, why do you think Bloomberg reported the Bill C-3 story first, of all of the major media outlets.
No comments:
Post a Comment