Various levels of government have independent auditors. The federal givernment auditor, for one, turns u some real gems. But the problem is that there are too few auditors, given the scope of what they have to mandate. I also wonder whether some activities are de faco off limits to them.
Perhaps multi-billion projects should have teams of dedicated independent auditors, with some members of the team having a detailed knowledge of the subject matter. I for one, would be delighted to see my tax dollars spent on this.
Paul, I agree with your realpolitik assessment of how governments operate and the naivete of Hourigan in expecting “a culture of early reporting of issues, challenges and mistakes.” But wasn't one of the more significant findings of Hourigan that Watson and Kanellakos lied to the commission of inquiry? I accept the idea that to make an omelette (get an LRT built) you have to break some eggs. But then to testify under oath at a commission of inquiry and lie, is a little beyond the pale. Obviously Watson and Kanellakos knew what was coming and departed before the report was issued. For me, what exacerbates the immorality of Watson lying under oath to Hourigan, is his self-righteous testimony before the Rouleau POEC. I can't imagine that Rouleau will give Watson's testimony much weight after Hourigan's findings on Watson's credibility.
The reality that the Peter principle is alive and active in government bureaucracy. The civil Service act makes it hard for a government to monitor or discipline incompetence so we end up with delays and overruns because the bureaucrats are protected from responsibility.
The word "shady" comes up. Of course nothing can be proved, but stonewalling, and a lack of transparency, make it difficult not to see visions of brown envelops, vacation properties, and sugar plumb fairies dancing in ones head.
Thank you for this.
Various levels of government have independent auditors. The federal givernment auditor, for one, turns u some real gems. But the problem is that there are too few auditors, given the scope of what they have to mandate. I also wonder whether some activities are de faco off limits to them.
Perhaps multi-billion projects should have teams of dedicated independent auditors, with some members of the team having a detailed knowledge of the subject matter. I for one, would be delighted to see my tax dollars spent on this.
Paul, I agree with your realpolitik assessment of how governments operate and the naivete of Hourigan in expecting “a culture of early reporting of issues, challenges and mistakes.” But wasn't one of the more significant findings of Hourigan that Watson and Kanellakos lied to the commission of inquiry? I accept the idea that to make an omelette (get an LRT built) you have to break some eggs. But then to testify under oath at a commission of inquiry and lie, is a little beyond the pale. Obviously Watson and Kanellakos knew what was coming and departed before the report was issued. For me, what exacerbates the immorality of Watson lying under oath to Hourigan, is his self-righteous testimony before the Rouleau POEC. I can't imagine that Rouleau will give Watson's testimony much weight after Hourigan's findings on Watson's credibility.
The reality that the Peter principle is alive and active in government bureaucracy. The civil Service act makes it hard for a government to monitor or discipline incompetence so we end up with delays and overruns because the bureaucrats are protected from responsibility.
The word "shady" comes up. Of course nothing can be proved, but stonewalling, and a lack of transparency, make it difficult not to see visions of brown envelops, vacation properties, and sugar plumb fairies dancing in ones head.
Where was City Council's Gen. Leslie Groves? Oppenheimer didn't get the Manhattan Project done; Groves did.
Uhm... British Army? Otherwise, this is the usual excellence I expect in my inbox!
Aww heck. Who makes these rules? Good catch.
Charles II. ;)