PDA

View Full Version : Stelmachs Cabinet - Guy Boutilier is an *****



EdmTrekker
14-12-2006, 05:32 AM
Here is an extract and link to testimony thatGuy Boutilier gave to the AEUB recently. The guy is an ***** - good grief read his response to what are serious issues...is this was "Steady" Eddie is going to have in cabinet??

If Ed Stelmach is considering Guy Boutilier for his cabinet, I suggest he have a look at the Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo MLA’s testimony earlier this year before the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, when he appeared as ordinary MLA rather than environment minister.

The following are excerpts from an exchange between Boutilier and Don Mallon, lawyer for the Mikisew Cree First Nation:

Q (Mallon). I'm going to talk about the paragraph where you look forward to fishing with your grandson, and today you said granddaughter, but I gather from what you said today and what it says in the following paragraph that you don't have a
grandchild yet, or am I mistaken?

A (Boutilier). Actually my wife and I don't have a son or daughter yet, but we're in the process of privately adopting, so as a follow-up to our adoption, we expect to have grandsons and granddaughters.

Q. All right. So I'm going to assume that your grandson is precocious. And has become a river ecologist, a river biologist. And your son advises you as the Minister of Environment that the Athabasca River system's ecosystem is in danger of imminent collapse and that you and he are not going to be able to fish in that river anymore. And the reason for it is that the flows are too low and that we're removing too much water. Now, the responsibility that you have, which is an absolute responsibility, then, is to protect the river, right?

A. It's important to recognize that I'm here as MLA, I'm quite prepared to answer any question, but not as Minister of Environment.

Q. Well, I'm sorry, sir, you don't get to pick and chose who you are one minute and who you are not the next. You are the Minister of the Environment.

A. Right.

Q. And I'm asking you, sir, that as the Minister of Environment, is it not appropriate, if that ecosystem is in danger, to reduce or completely stop the withdrawal of those flows for the period of time that it takes in order to allow that system to get back to square one?

A. Mr. Chairman, I am here today as the MLA representing the region and citizens.

Q. And we know that Alberta Environment is the protector of the environment in this province.

A. Yes, I'm here today, though not as Alberta Environment but as the MLA.

Q. And we've heard that many times. And would it be appropriate, then, for Alberta Environment to set specific targets and timelines for objectives that they saw were important?

A. I think, Mr. Chairman, you asked would it be appropriate for Alberta Environment? I am here as the elected MLA for the citizens of Fort McMurray.

Q. You don't know if your department should be setting targets and bench lines over the things that they think are important?

A. I'm here as the MLA today. And I'm saying to you that I understand that those questions, I assume, you have asked to the actual technical people within Alberta Environment and the over thousand people that work for me within that department.

Q. When you appear here as the MLA, do you just turn off an area of your brain where you were the Minister of Environment?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Well, that's interesting. It's an interesting exercise. So you're not prepared to tell us in a general sense that the Alberta Environment ought to be setting targets and timelines with respect to those things that they consider important? Just consider that question. It's not a hard one.

Q. Are you or are you not the Minister of Environment? That's again a very simple question.

A. I appear this afternoon at this hearing as the --

Q. I know how you appear, sir.

For the full transcript of Boutilier’s testimony before the AEUB click here

COMMENTS
Posted by Larry Johnsrude on December 13, 2006 10:34 AM MDT
Permalink
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/blog/johnsrude.html

MylesC
14-12-2006, 08:23 AM
:lol:

That's pretty funny, actually.

RichardS
14-12-2006, 09:49 AM
Who's on first?

DanC
14-12-2006, 11:09 AM
Amazing...I appear here today as the MLA representing being as stupid as possible.

snakes on a blog
14-12-2006, 11:44 AM
his obvious ducking of very simple questions only tells me that his only interest is protecting the interests of the oil sands companies. It would seem that his dedication to the Ministry of the Environment are pathetic to say the least!!!

Sonic Death Monkey
15-12-2006, 11:20 AM
The new cabinet:

Ed Stelmach (Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville) Premier, President of Executive Council, Chair of Agenda and Priorities, Vice-Chair of Treasury Board

Lloyd Snelgrove (Vermilion-Lloydminster) President of the Treasury Board, Minister of Service Alberta, (Minister Responsible for Personnel Administration Office)

Doug Horner (Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert) Minister of Advanced Education and Technology

Iris Evans (Sherwood Park) Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry

Mel Knight (Grande Prairie-Smoky) Minister of Energy

Dave Hancock (Edmonton-Whitemud) Minister of Health and Wellness, Government House Leader

Ray Danyluk (Lac La Biche-St. Paul) Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing

Ron Liepert (Calgary-West) Minister of Education

Janis Tarchuk (Banff-Cochrane) Minister of Children's Services

Rob Renner (Medicine Hat) Minister of Environment, Deputy Government House Leader

George Groeneveld (Highwood) Minister of Agriculture and Food

Lyle Oberg (Strathmore-Brooks) Minister of Finance

Luke Ouellette (Innisfail-Sylvan Lake) Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation

Ron Stevens (Calgary-Glenmore ) Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Deputy Government House Leader

Greg Melchin (Calgary-North West) Minister of Seniors and Community Supports

Guy Boutilier (Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo) Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations

Ted Morton (Foothills-Rocky View) Minister of Sustainable Resource Development

Fred Lindsay (Stony Plain) Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security

Hector Goudreau (Dunvegan-Central Peace) Minister of Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture

amanzano
15-12-2006, 11:35 AM
it's good to see a good mix of N/S alberta in these. Let's hope the Capital gets a better voice in the Leg!

DanC
15-12-2006, 12:58 PM
Ted "incentives" Morton is in charge of sustainable resources development...oh no.

They should just build a pipeline and funnel Alberta's futures to Montana for upgrading.

daleb
15-12-2006, 04:45 PM
I'd expect nothing less out of snortin morton.

ThomasH
15-12-2006, 06:59 PM
On the plus side, Mark Norris isn't in the cabinet!

Oleskiw
15-12-2006, 08:03 PM
So Calgary, which overwhelmingly supported Dinning, gets three cabinet posts, while Edmonton, which threw itself behind Dinning big time, gets only one. :shock: :?

Looks like Edmonton isn't out of the political wasteland just yet. :x

afzal
17-12-2006, 03:18 AM
well there are positions of people from St Albert and Sherwood Park...so I always group Metro Edmonton with Edmonton

RichardS
17-12-2006, 09:08 AM
Just remember what city placed Liberals and NDP's into the Leg and the answer on why there isn't more Edmonton proper MLA's is clear...

...and Calgary was whining...

LindseyT
17-12-2006, 01:00 PM
Kinda what I feared...

Edmonton 1, suburbs 4.

RichardS
17-12-2006, 03:57 PM
yeah...but look at what he had to choose from in terms of sheer numbers.

Oleskiw
17-12-2006, 05:48 PM
Yeah, but the bottom line is still that Edmonton gets only 1 seat at the cabinet table. The "metro region" posts don't really count as Edmonton. Mayor Mandel could certainly attest to how well the surrounding regions cooperate with Edmonton.

Sonic Death Monkey
17-12-2006, 08:01 PM
I'm going to take a wait-and-see approach on this new Cabinet before passing judgement on how they handle urban issues, especially the capital city. Doesn't look promising on paper though, despite the shift of power from south to north.

MylesC
18-12-2006, 01:44 AM
I'm not going to worry right now. I'll wait and see.

There was a definite shift to rural areas AND shift to the north which is fine. Stelmach really couldn't get away with jiggering to Edmonton per se his first cabinet. We shall see....

Besides, in the end it's important to have people cabable of doing the jobs, not people capable of sucking up to the big wig.

Dusty Bear
18-12-2006, 02:40 PM
So Calgary, which overwhelmingly supported Dinning, gets three cabinet posts, while Edmonton, which threw itself behind Dinning big time, gets only one. :shock: :?

Looks like Edmonton isn't out of the political wasteland just yet. :x

Stelmach's other options for Edmonton were Gene Zwozdesky and Thomas Lukaszuk. I think he made the best choice with Hancock. Gene would have been OK, but Lukaszuk is interested only in himself.

Ed made some other good choices, but I'm disappointed there are only two women. Apparently, he said something about the number of women in caucus leaving him little choice, but that doesn't wash when you consider strong MLAs like Cindy Ady, Mary Anne Jablonski, Yvonne Fritz and Shirley McClellan.

Of course, I didn't envy him having to make those decisions. It's always easier to second guess.

RichardS
18-12-2006, 03:44 PM
Yes, it is....

LindseyT
18-12-2006, 07:02 PM
Stelmach's other options for Edmonton were Gene Zwozdesky and Thomas Lukaszuk. I think he made the best choice with Hancock. Gene would have been OK, but Lukaszuk is interested only in himself.

Ed made some other good choices, but I'm disappointed there are only two women. Apparently, he said something about the number of women in caucus leaving him little choice, but that doesn't wash when you consider strong MLAs like Cindy Ady, Mary Anne Jablonski, Yvonne Fritz and Shirley McClellan.

Isn't it the exact same thing? You somewhat apologized for the lack of Edmonton's influence based on a numbers game, but are dissapointed with the lack of woman when the same numbers game applies.

Dusty Bear
19-12-2006, 02:03 PM
Isn't it the exact same thing? You somewhat apologized for the lack of Edmonton's influence based on a numbers game, but are dissapointed with the lack of woman when the same numbers game applies.

What? There are far more women to pick from than there are Edmonton Tory MLAs. How is that the "exact same thing." Simple math shows he had more choice of women than he did for Edmonton MLAs. There's no inconsistency in my statement.

And I didn't "apologize" for anyone. Let's make that absolutely clear. I would like to see more Edmonton representation, but he doesn't have a lot to work with. That's not an opinion. That's fact.

Really, there's a bigger point that hasn't yet been mentioned. Cabinet is one thing. When it comes to clout, the agenda & priorities committee and the treasury board carry the big sticks. Edmonton has only Hancock on agenda & priorities, and no one on treasury.