Whistleblowers or Masters of the Swamp?
At the center of this political storm are Cameron MacDonald and Antonio Utano, formerly of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), who find themselves suspended without pay amid swirling allegations of misconduct concerning the ArriveCan app’s contracting practices.
The crux of the matter here is whether MacDonald and Utano are whistleblowers exposing deep-seated issues within the federal procurement system, or whether they are, in fact, part of the very “swamp” that has seemingly engulfed Ottawa and the CBSA. It’s a saga that delves into the murky depths of government accountability, transparency, and potential conflicts of interest.
I think ” suspended without pay ” says it all. When has a government employee ever been suspended without pay? I have never heard of it before. Seems to me this is a keep quiet or else message to all.
Perhaps Canada needs to return to the idea of ministerial responsibility. Obviously, today’s”honorable” cabinet ministers will no longer resign like they used to but financial consequences could be brought in. Suspend the pay and perks of cabinet ministers and deputy ministers until they clean up their department, including: releasing documents, a transparent investigation and firing corrupt staff. I suspect investigations into corruption would be considerably quicker.
“The principle of individual ministerial responsibility holds that ministers are accountable not only for their own actions as heads of government ministries, but also for the actions of their subordinates.”
https://www.leg.bc.ca/dyl/Pages/Ministerial-Responsibility.aspx
I’m pretty sure they can be both whistle-blowers and swamp creatures…
They also seem to be patsies to protect the upper echelons.
Yea…Love to read it.
Paywalled.
As for suspended without pay..??
Hey, you’re toast in their eyes.
Next.
I found no paywall in effect. Don’t know why you would.
What is happening is what happens when the 2nd or 3rd rule of criminal conspiracy are violated.
2nd rule – ensure that all parties are compensated accordingly
3rd rule – no one attempts to take more than their fair share
When those rules are violated it makes the first rule null and void and invokes the forth rule
1st rule – the code of silence is presumed to be in effect
4th rule – make sure there are no loose ends
There is of course a caveat
None of the rules apply to competitors.
The caveat takes effect when someone’s meal ticket becomes null and void (example would be if the head of the organization “retires” or has that decision thrust upon them.)
My point is that it appears there is a management reorganization taking place in Ottawa and the rats are looking for a new meal ticket.
Sort of like how the Sponsorship scandal broke coinciding with the Chretien Martin feud.
Its now a matter whether Justin gets pushed out or a rival gets thrown under a bus to determine who gets blamed for Arrivescam.