I was saying:
The government made the decision during the election campaign to cancel construction of a gas fired power generation plant being built in Missausaga to replace the dirty coal-fired generation plant which Hazel made them promise to shut down during the previous election.
Questions were asked why construction did not actually stop.
People said; "What about the money already spent? "
Understandably so.
The answer, not provided, would have been problematic. Only now has construction stopped.
The process to arrive at a contract award and construction underway is lengthy and hugely expensive for all parties .
It can be stopped . But only by agreeing to pay. Oh My how we pay.
Quite possibly full cost of the contract. Whatever horrendous amount that might be.
Awarding a government contract is more than a friendly handshake. Engines crank into high gear which cannot be shut down.
Materials are not bought off the shelf. They have to be manufactured for the purpose.
Manpower has to be in place for the term of the contract.
Funds have to be secured pending government payments.
Everything swings into gear, at great expense, for governments plans to be realised.
Once the contract is signed and sealed both parties are obligated . No ifs ands or buts.
If the government changes its mind. The government pays.
A contractors with a legal contract for a mega million dollar project cannot be bankrupted because politicians conduct themselves like flibberty-gibbet teen-age divas driven by hormones during election campaigns, while going about with solemn countenance and inspiring hand gestures to instill confidence and trust among the people.
So..... When ......
The Minister Stated
there is a need, “to examine everything the government does, piece by piece, to find creative, efficient and effective ways to deliver public services.”
He was kidding....... right ..... Yeah right.
Posts
2 comments:
Which sort of brings us back to that contract with
the Dept. of Defence. How can we decide if the deal
struck as the perpetrators were fleeing the sinking
ship was an honorable one if we cannot examine it.
Each time you pause and think that's the end of it,
another loose and costly arrangement floats to the
surface.
You can't leave it to staff as they are not responsible
to the electors, only interested in feathering their ownlittle nests. One example is at Hydro where you
get paid according to the number of people on your crew. You can bet each foreman 'needs' a large crew.
We are seeing this now here withe the 'need' for more
staff, more space, more autonomy.
Post a Comment