The Minister was not being honest.
Given the
evidence that, both prior to sanction and afterwards, the MF project estimates
were falsified, it is reasonable to think that the Minister would not want to
be mired in the deceitful culture that has grown up around Nalcor and her
Department. But the Minister demonstrates no such caution.
It is one
thing to say, as she has, that the government has questions about the project estimates,
as did the whistleblower engineer. But a verbal expression of concern, alone, is
not enough.
One might
expect that Coady would not only want to know the origins of the alleged
deceitfulness, and who is responsible, but that she might set new standards of
disclosure for her officials to follow.
The public
needs reminding that the Tory administration set up the current Oversight
Committee, giving it a very limited role and no budget. It was a proposition
that allowed Nalcor’s analysis and data to be reported unchallenged and that
afforded Ed Martin's propaganda to proliferate as fact.
Did the new
Liberal government act to correct this serious deficit, even after its sad financial
state and management incompetence were revealed following the election? Hardly.
Indeed, the
Government did nothing except release a single —
and then only an Interim - EY Report, last March. To this day it has failed to
follow through with release of the promised final version.
Yet the
Minister happily approved release of a press statement, allowing a series of
false claims to cover for her sudden dumping of virtually the entire series of missing
monthly reports onto the Committee’s web site. She even boasted that the “new
format [is] designed to increase the amount of project information available
while being easier to review”.
Even that assertion
is not true.
Readers are
given pages of stale exhibits, absent explanation or analysis.
The general
public is expected to play civil engineer, performing observation and interpretation
of data when the job of oversight includes making it comprehensible. It should describe
progress and problems, conduct reviews of management successes and failures,
advise how the data was obtained and offer opinion on its veracity, discuss the
project’s safety record, critical path, including the cost and schedule. It should
both review and be forward looking.
Most
importantly — given the history of deceit and falsification at Nalcor — the Minister
provides no confirmation what, if any, parts of the information were
independently verified.
She does not
even say if the reports were reviewed by the expanded Oversight Committee, or
if even a scintilla of them justify elevation above the whitewash issued under
the Tories.
That’s all
bad enough. But in releasing those meaningless and outdated reports, Coady adds
two false claims. First, she states:
“As a
government, we have consistently questioned the decision-making process of the
previous administration on this project.”
The Liberals
have done no such thing. Indeed, the evidence points to their embrace of a Tory
boondoggle, complete with its allegedly falsified underpinnings.
It is
precisely this failure to act quickly — and to do things differently — that has
upset many watchers of the MF project, as they see the full suite of
rationalizations used by every Tory Premier from Williams to Davis fall like
dominoes.
Secondly, Coady’s
Press Release continued:
“Knowing why decisions were made as
they were, what assumptions were used to justify the project, and why costs
were not accurate must be clearly understood. The knowledge and expertise of
the strengthened oversight committee further supports our commitment to
increased accountability and transparency of the Muskrat Falls Project.”
This is pure
pretention. There is no relationship between “why decisions were made… and what assumptions
were used…” and the work of the Oversight Committee. None. Nada.
The Committee is prevented from engaging in this kind of inquiry. Not only does it
not look back, it is robbed of the right to review current management or health
and safety issues, among others — matters deserving of constant oversight, as Hydro’s
recent tragedy has confirmed.
Coady did
not even say if only the previous Oversight Committee or also the newly enlarged one reviewed those
reports. She provides no separation between either group — a complete
disservice to the new Committee Members unless, of course, she is content
that the expanded one is as “fake” as the one Tom Marshall contrived.
Why Coady is
deliberately misleading the public over these critical issues is puzzling.
Possibly,
having gotten smoked out by Paul Lane and others, the Oversight Committee is
the new scapegoat. I don’t know.
But Coady is
skating on very thin ice. She does not handle untruths very well.
It is better
that the Minister just stopped hiding.
She should call
that forensic audit. In so doing, she will demonstrate at least some of the courage
exhibited by the whistleblower.
Else, as in
the case of the Premier, we might ask: who is she afraid of?