Thoughts and Opinions On Today's Important Issues

Saturday, November 21, 2009

What Did Basse And Leak #2 tell us

DUH....Councillor Jones was NOT the Leakor. Don't you think Basse would have named him if he was or there was a good probability of it. It was someone else. Or perhaps more than one person who were working together.

How convenient that there was a second report and how convenient that Ron's name can be splashed over the Star so that the real Leakor gets off. For now. That person's name will come out during the bad faith OLRB claim and lawsuit when there is full discovery and people are questioned under oath unless CUPE chickens out and "moves on."

We also know now from the excerpt above that the accusations against CUPE as the Leakor were smears too. Was it part of the campaign to crush them?

Someone from the City leaked the information and it reached the media. Why? Clearly to sabotage a settlement after the City's June 17 flip-flop that was disclosed in the Lewenza meeting that the Star chose not to cover. If the Star had done so, people's views about the strike would have changed.

How do I know that there is another revealed all:

  • "Does anyone in Windsor believe that only one set of "loose lips" on city council muddied the waters during the CUPE strike last summer?

    Any councillor, for example, proven to have passed sensitive information along to leaders of the city's two CUPE locals during the course of last summer's fierce three-month strike could be in serious legal trouble...

    But I happen to know for a fact there is more than one potential leak. A councillor who was not Jones offered to be that leak to me over the phone half a year ago. Being wary of quicksand, I never took the councillor up on the offer."

The Star publisher, Editor and Mini-Gord surely have the responsibility to tell us who that Councillor was. This is a damaging accusation that tarnishes every member of Council. Or was the word "Councillor" used to throw us off the trail? After all, mini-Gord told us:

  • "Any councillor, for example, proven to have passed sensitive information along to leaders of the city's two CUPE locals during the course of last summer's fierce three-month strike could be in serious legal trouble...

    Councillors have a fiduciary duty to taxpayers. They can't just go tattling the corporation's plans to the "other side" during a strike. Hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake.

    Conspiring with the competition is a moral and legal no-no. Just as it would be for a CUPE insider to whisper the union's plans to management in the midst of a bitter standoff."

Why would a Councillor do such a thing? What could he/she gain from doing so? The only thing that I can think of is terrific coverage in mini-Gord's column. You scratch my back by giving me good coverage and I scratch yours by giving you scoops.

Anyone who is that corrupt ought to be named and driven from office. Anyone that stupid---mini-Gord has him/her at his mercy now doesn't he---ought to be kicked out.

But here is an interesting point....Newcombe only talked about "hundreds" or multiple calls in his report. What did mini-Gord say:

  • "A reliable source tells me the number of calls in question totalled more than 500. Five hundred calls over three months is unheard of -- even for most spouses over that period."

I wonder who that source was. Only someone in that room when Basse revealed the number could have leaked it. That person just did not learn anything or did not care. Was that person the Leakor trying to protect him/herself again to make things look bad for Jones?

I have an idea what the second report is all about. Not about leaking but:

  • "But let's pretend for a moment that Fox's claim is true, that the 500 calls from the unnamed councillor were "personal." That raises equally disturbing questions about the possibility of an inappropriate relationship between management and hourly staff during negotiations."

I bet that thought came from the reliable source too. If that is the case, then just come out and say it!

What did we get for $15,000, if that is the amount? Remember though that I doubt that Basse was going to publish much with an OLRB bad faith complaint outstanding. If true, that is unfortunate. He should not have been concerned about that if that was the reason. Let the chips fall where they may.

However, since Mr. Basse is an experienced ex-RCMP officer and forensic accountant, we have to assume that he knew what he was doing and he just kept his cards close to his vest when writing his report.

One wonders if he did that also because of what is in Report #2 which we will probably never see because I do not believe that he had the legal authority to commence it.

So what can we tell from the little that was revealed in his report:

  1. Jones was NOT the leakor

  2. CUPE was NOT the leakor

  3. Edgar (aka Eddie) was called at 8 PM before the 11PM news report was broadcast. It would appear that the Mayor was NOT asked to confirm details because Newcombe already had them. So why was the Mayor called and what did Edgar say? Did Edgar ask Newcombe NOT to run the story because it would ruin negotiations? If not, why not?

  4. The bad faith and back wages claims of CUPE have been increased because even Basse recognized that the leak was detrimental and that the strike would not be settled for another 4 weeks

  5. Basse clearly did not do the job he could have done because he thought he had no "judical power" but he had broad powers under the Public Inquiries Act. He could have asked for records not under the City's control

  6. Clearly, he believes that the leak came from the City. Is that why the City tried to blame that non-CUPE union member to divert attention? This should give CUPE workers a very strong bargaining position for their $30M back wages and punitive damages claims!

  7. Basse warned to be careful of attacking people without evidence but that advice was ignored
  8. Whatever the evidence was in the Eh-Channel news broadcast, it was so overwheleming that Basse found the City leaked the information. Accordingly, it is NOT odd that no one from CUPE was interviewed! Obviously Basse had no doubt that the City leaked the information. Moreover, he threw in this remark that can only mean that he confirms my suspicion why the leak was made and how much harm it cost CUPE workers

Do you need any more proof that the CUPE strike was not a labour dispute but political action?

And if CUPE thinks the war is over, just read the report coming up soon "Outsourcing of Provincial Offence Officers." After Henderson's diatribe today, do you think any Councillor will dare vote no

  • "They gambled that the old rules still applied. And lost. Now garbage and recycling collection are on the way out, to be followed by parking enforcement a week from Monday and then, who knows, maybe a slice or two out of the parks and recreation empire.

    The genius of this is that we can all win, including CUPE members who pay Windsor taxes, if this is done right."