PMO delayed Gainey death report

[slowpoke]

This is not a major item but I find it disturbing that the PMO would seek to exercise this kind of control over supposedly "arms length" investigations.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/04/03/gainey-report-pmo-harper-election.html

PMO wanted Gainey death report held until campaign over: emails
TSB prepared report after young woman swept overboard from tall ship

A series of government emails shows an arm's-length investigatory body was told that the Prime Minister's Office wanted it to "hold off" on releasing a safety report into the high-seas death of Laura Gainey.

The emails — which the Opposition argues show inappropriate interference in the independent agency — surround the release of the report by the Transportation Safety Board into Gainey's death after she was swept overboard from a tall ship in December 2006.

The board was probing the ship's safety practices and also examined Transport Canada's oversight of the tall ship industry.

The series of emails obtained by the Canadian Press are between Aarin Masson, the director of communications at the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, and Roseline MacAngus, who was the director of parliamentary affairs for Rona Ambrose, the minister of intergovernmental affairs at the time.

On Sept. 3 — five days before last year's federal election was called — Masson wrote to MacAngus, asking her to look at a news release stating the report on the death of Gainey was to be released on Sept. 24.

"I will wait for your guidance with respect to whether PMO has any concerns and whether we have the green light to proceed with this release," she wrote.

On Sept. 12, four days after Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the Oct. 14 election, MacAngus replied, "My Chief of Staff has just been told by PMO to hold off on the release of the report until after the election.

"However, PMO would like to be made aware of any development that occurs once you speak to the family and tell them that there is a blackout on release of reports during the [election] writ period."

The email goes on to say the Prime Minister's Office also wanted to know if any requests under the Access to Information Act had been made "regarding the incident."......

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

LOL. Slowpoke, it looks like you're getting to the bottom of the barrel.

The article goes on to say:

The Canadian Press first reported on Oct. 6 that the blackout order had been issued during the federal election.

At the time, Masson said there was "a misunderstanding" and, in fact, the TSB was authorized to release the documents. It was released on Oct. 30 in Ottawa, two weeks after the election was over.

In an interview, MacAngus, who now works for Ambrose in the Department of Labour, said the matter was the result of "a genuine misunderstanding within the minister's office."

Asked why her email states that the PMO had told her chief of staff to hold off on releasing the report, she said "there was no PMO involvement in it."

"My understanding was there was a total misunderstanding."

Keep up the good work slowpoke. Let us know when you have something relevant.

 

[slowpoke]

LOL. Slowpoke, it looks like you're getting to the bottom of the barrel.

The article goes on to say:

The Canadian Press first reported on Oct. 6 that the blackout order had been issued during the federal election.

At the time, Masson said there was "a misunderstanding" and, in fact, the TSB was authorized to release the documents. It was released on Oct. 30 in Ottawa, two weeks after the election was over.

In an interview, MacAngus, who now works for Ambrose in the Department of Labour, said the matter was the result of "a genuine misunderstanding within the minister's office."

Asked why her email states that the PMO had told her chief of staff to hold off on releasing the report, she said "there was no PMO involvement in it."

"My understanding was there was a total misunderstanding."

Keep up the good work slowpoke. Let us know when you have something relevant.

I read the entire article but I dont buy that "misunderstanding" excuse for an instant. Why would an "arms length" inquiry into an accidental death need to ask the PMO if it would be OK to release their report immediately or delay it until the coast was clear? This request took place on Sept 3 (5 days before the election was even called). Rosalie McAngus in the PMO didn't reply until Sept 12 (after the election had been called) and her e-mails clearly state that her chief of staff wanted the report delayed even further - until after the election. They also wanted to be kept abreast of the family's reaction and to be informed if any access to information requests emerged about the inquiry. I can't see a lot of room for misunderstanding in that e-mail. Of course McAngus is now backpedalling with her story about a genuine misunderstanding that clears the PMO. What possible choice do you think she has now that her e-mails have been published? The only genuine misunderstanding seems to be taking place inside your head.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

I read the entire article but I dont buy that "misunderstanding" excuse for an instant. Why would an "arms length" inquiry into an accidental death need to ask the PMO if it would be OK to release their report immediately or delay it until the coast was clear? This request took place on Sept 3 (5 days before the election was even called). Rosalie McAngus in the PMO didn't reply until Sept 12 (after the election had been called) and her e-mails clearly state that her chief of staff wanted the report delayed even further - until after the election. They also wanted to be kept abreast of the family's reaction and to be informed if any access to information requests emerged about the inquiry. I can't see a lot of room for misunderstanding in that e-mail. Of course McAngus is now backpedalling with her story about a genuine misunderstanding that clears the PMO. What possible choice do you think she has now that her e-mails have been published? The only genuine misunderstanding seems to be taking place inside your head.

Right.

Stay diligent, I'm sure you'll find something legitimate to bitch about someday.

 

[train]

Selective editing by slowpoke yet again You and iamme are the poster boys for bias.

 

[slowpoke]

Selective editing by slowpoke yet again You and iamme are the poster boys for bias.

Not long ago I was lectured for pasting up whole articles. Some posters feel the link should be enough. So this time I paste up half the article AND I provide the link but now I'm being too selective?? Anyone who was even remotely interested in my post could follow the link and read the whole story. Selective editing? I think not...

 

[slowpoke]

Right.

Stay diligent, I'm sure you'll find something legitimate to bitch about someday.

You can count on me finding something legitimate to bitch about on any given day. Our current PM routinely provides me with a cornucopia of wrong-headed decisions to bitch about. But I wasn't really "bitching" when I started this thread. My first 9 syllables were: "This is not a major item but...". I then went on to say that I found the PMO's control over this "arms length" investigation "disturbing". You should also be somewhat concerned about this but you're too busy trying to find mitigating circumstances (ie: excuses) for the PMO. Talk about bias!

For those who are visually or conceptually challenged, "arms length" really means "hands off". An inquiry like this needs to be independent of any external influence or interference from above to be taken seriously. Otherwise it is surely a waste of time and money or maybe even a complete sham - designed only to pacify the public without really exposing the root causes of a preventable tragedy.

If it was one of your kids who'd been washed overboard, you'd probably feel cheated and outraged if you learned that the PMO had been "hands on" enough to tell the investigators when they could or couldn't release their findings into this tragedy. If this story about PMO involvment is true, the whole notion of an independent inquiry just went out the window. This is the part that I found disturbing. I still find it disturbing. You clearly don't see anything wrong with the way this was handled. So one of us must be wrong about this.

 

[train]

Not long ago I was lectured for pasting up whole articles. Some posters feel the link should be enough. So this time I paste up half the article AND I provide the link but now I'm being too selective?? Anyone who was even remotely interested in my post could follow the link and read the whole story. Selective editing? I think not...

Well now we are lecturing you for posting lame articles with unimportant and unsubstantiated charges in a biased manner with selective emphasis.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

You can count on me finding something legitimate to bitch about on any given day. Our current PM routinely provides me with a cornucopia of wrong-headed decisions to bitch about. But I wasn't really "bitching" when I started this thread. My first 9 syllables were: "This is not a major item but...". I then went on to say that I found the PMO's control over this "arms length" investigation "disturbing". You should also be somewhat concerned about this but you're too busy trying to find mitigating circumstances (ie: excuses) for the PMO. Talk about bias!

For those who are visually or conceptually challenged, "arms length" really means "hands off". An inquiry like this needs to be independent of any external influence or interference from above to be taken seriously. Otherwise it is surely a waste of time and money or maybe even a complete sham - designed only to pacify the public without really exposing the root causes of a preventable tragedy.

If it was one of your kids who'd been washed overboard, you'd probably feel cheated and outraged if you learned that the PMO had been "hands on" enough to tell the investigators when they could or couldn't release their findings into this tragedy. If this story about PMO involvment is true, the whole notion of an independent inquiry just went out the window. This is the part that I found disturbing. I still find it disturbing. You clearly don't see anything wrong with the way this was handled. So one of us must be wrong about this.

You're contradicting yourself. First you say "This is not a major item" then you go on to say you find it "disturbing". Which is it, no big deal or disturbing?

Anyway, I trust you will keep us informed of the developments of the governments great Bob Gainey conspiracy.

 

[slowpoke]

You're contradicting yourself. First you say "This is not a major item" then you go on to say you find it "disturbing". Which is it, no big deal or disturbing?

Anyway, I trust you will keep us informed of the developments of the governments great Bob Gainey conspiracy.

Please!!! An inquiry into the safety practices on tall ships is pretty obscure to begin with. And I am not aware of any other fatalities among tall ship crews. So, no matter how you slice it, this is not a major item on the Canadian political landscape.

The fact that the PMO seems to have exerted undue influence on an arms length inquiry should rightfully concern everyone. It makes you wonder how many other "independent" investigations have fallen under the PMO's sway. It also suggests that the PMO's emphasis on controlling the flow of information is getting out of hand. But again, obsessive behaviour in the PMO is no longer news. So this is not a major [news] item. It is merely disturbing compared to so many of the PM's other antics.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Please!!! An inquiry into the safety practices on tall ships is pretty obscure to begin with. And I am not aware of any other fatalities among tall ship crews. So, no matter how you slice it, this is not a major item on the Canadian political landscape.

The fact that the PMO seems to have exerted undue influence on an arms length inquiry should rightfully concern everyone. It makes you wonder how many other "independent" investigations have fallen under the PMO's sway. It also suggests that the PMO's emphasis on controlling the flow of information is getting out of hand. But again, obsessive behaviour in the PMO is no longer news. So this is not a major [news] item. It is merely disturbing compared to so many of the PM's other antics.

So, it's no big deal?

Good, we agree.

 

[slowpoke]

So, it's no big deal?

Good, we agree.

Asking a question and then answering it is not normal. The whole purpose for asking a question is to seek an answer from another person. Otherwise, it isn't really a question. It is just fucking stupid.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Asking a question and then answering it is not normal. The whole purpose for asking a question is to seek an answer from another person. Otherwise, it isn't really a question. It is just fucking stupid.

So, it is a big deal?

Good, we disagree.