Chronicle-Herald provincial reporter David Jackson should be congratulated for his article published last week that lays out more mendacity on the part of Trade Centre Limited.
See, in September Jackson got word that somebody was conducting a public opinion poll about the proposed convention centre. The way Jackson heard it at the time, the questions were about which politician people would find most trustworthy to talk about the convention centre. Jackson asked TCL for the poll results, but the crown corporation refused to turn them over.
Jackson then filed a freedom of information request for them, and got the results in late December. That Trade Centre was able to delay releasing information related to a straight-forward request involving no trade secrets or personnel information for three months shows just how broken our freedom of information process is, but that’s an editorial for another day. Trade Centre manipulated the process right to the end, releasing the information not directly to Jackson, as used to be protocol, but on the TCL website during the week between Christmas and New Year’s, when the public wasn’t much paying attention to the news.
But while Jackson knew about the “most trustworthy politician” question—it was Peter MacKay—he didn’t know what other questions were on the poll, including the straightforward “Do you approve or disapprove of the convention centre proposal?” As Jackson reported, the poll “found that 50 percent either strongly (31 percent) or somewhat (19 percent) disapproved of the convention centre project. That compared with 42 percent who strongly (12 percent) or somewhat (30 percent) approved of it. Eight percent had no opinion.”
Trade Centre president Scott Ferguson tried to mumble his way out of the stark truth, but understand what happened here: TCL paid $20,000 of public money for a public opinion poll, didn’t like the results, so kept the results secret.
We’ve seen this before. TCL tried to keep the business case and economic impact analysis of the proposed convention centre from the public, and had to have their arms twisted through the freedom of information act to release them.
And those reports showed a consistent effort to mislead the public. As I reported in October of 2010: “We had four consulting firms doing an analysis on the need for and potential economic impact of a proposed convention centre, basing all their projections on a 150,000 square foot convention centre, as opposed to the 120,000 square foot convention centre that’s proposed. Along the way, the firms added in an arbitrary inflator that made the future delegate count much higher than was justified, and then that figure was used by Gardner Pinfold to forecast the economic impact of the convention centre. But Trade Centre Limited evidently wasn’t happy with even those inflated results, and so did their own in-house delegate projection that was more than double that projected by the consultants; those higher figures were then given back to Gardner Pinfold to run a second economic impact analysis that showed a supposed economic impact two-and-a-half times the first.”
Let’s also not forget TCL’s role in the concert scandal. I revealed in early 2010 that Trade Centre Limited had lost $300,000 on the Paul McCartney concert through a forgivable loan on expected ticket sales that never materialized—a scheme that Ferguson shifted over to a secret city account for future concerts.
In documents I uncovered through a freedom of information request last month, there is an email from Ferguson to city staffer Wayne Anstey. In the email, Ferguson tells Anstey that TCL had used an advance-ticket-sales scheme for the world hockey tournament held at the Metro Centre, and that TCL’s auditor had reprimanded him for it—that is, Ferguson knew that loaning money from expected ticket sales was an improper risk. But it didn’t stop him from recommending the same scheme to the city, ultimately costing taxpayers another $359,550.
One of the enduring mysteries in this town is why Trade Centre Limited can repeatedly lie to the public and is repeatedly at the centre of financial scandals, and nobody calls them on it. Why isn’t the provincial auditor general investigating? Why isn’t the public outraged?
This article appears in Jan 5-11, 2012.
When you take an arena manager under Fred M and put him in this role, what you see is what you get. He’s pretty, but he’s not pretty smart.
OUTRAGE. << really, I have it. No one seems to be able to act on it though? What's the matter with these people? The upcoming election will have no impact at all on this - so how do we affect change?
Sign me up also for “outraged”.
TIM Tim Tim..let me help you out here with this……..you claim…………..
“Jackson asked TCL for the poll results, but the crown corporation refused to turn them over.
Jackson then filed a freedom of information request for them, and got the results in late December. That Trade Centre was able to delay releasing information related to a straight-forward request involving no trade secrets or personnel information for three months shows just how broken our freedom of information process is, but that’s an editorial for another day. Trade Centre manipulated the process right to the end, releasing the information not directly to Jackson, as used to be protocol, but on the TCL website “……………….
Yet..and let me quote here directly from David Jackson’s Dec 28 article in the Chronicle Herald found here….:
http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/46988-p…
“Trade Centre had refused to release the survey question about the spokesperson when The Chronicle Herald asked about it in September. The Crown corporation supplied it and the poll results in response to a freedom of information request from the Herald.
Trade Centre later posted the information on a website with the convention centre data Wednesday afternoon”
Once again Tim very sloppy reporting. It is hard to trust the article when the reporter can’t be bothered to be accurate. Did you even read the article Tim or you just skim it for what you are hoping to find?
Why no outrage?
The unwillingness to act and to accept responsibility is a symptom of America’s growing self-satisfaction with the status quo. The result is a paralysis of the spirit, entirely uncharacteristic of Americans during the previous stages of their history. Even the complaints about high taxes and high prices are illusory. Behind them is hidden the reality that the majority, in terms of sheer creature comfort, never had it so good. Those who are still on the outside looking in are not strong or numerous enough to make a political difference.
A major reason why so large a majority is smugly docile is that it has accepted the unwritten rules of the game: Don’t rock the boat as long as you get your cut. Why become worked up over corruption as long as there are enough benefits of the fallout to go around? Once the acceptance of corruption becomes sufficiently widespread, effective exposure seems threatening to too many people and interests. Clamor for closing loopholes declines in direct proportion to the number of people who benefit from loopholes of their own.
James Cambon said: “We have to defend the country against mediocrity: Mediocrity of soul, mediocrity of ideas, mediocrity of action. We must also fight against it in ourselves.” It is a lonely and hard thing to speak out against mediocrity or the evils of the system. One feels the frustration which arises only in those who are compelled to act. The detached spectator does not feel this helplessness because he never tries to surmount the problems that exist.
The spectator is a man who has no conscience, who doesn’t die, who cannot laugh, and who is unaware of personal responsibility. He does not necessarily do wicked things, but he does passive things. There are many spectators in the world today who choose passivity. They will do anything so that their accustomed life is undisturbed, anything so as not to cross over into hardship today; at the same time, they hope tomorrow will take care of itself.
Admiral H. G. Rickover USN
TCL, the crown corporation that will run the proposed convention centre, throws out unreliable numbers and surpresses correct information on the proposed convention centre. You can see on their website that the accumulated loss from the first 25 years of operation of the WTCC is around $42m. The Loss from Operations is the ongoing loss that shows up on the financial statements of TCL. Any real company would have been out of business long long ago but TCL is a very special kind of company. My reasonable business assumption in the absence of any evidence to the contrary would be that a facility three times the size of the current would lose three times as much. This is 2012 … the continent is awash in convention centres that produce nothing but economic transfers of taxpaying dollars. If Mr. Ramia was sure that this project would make profits his company Rank Inc. wouldn’t need our taxes to go ahead. Nova Scotians will lease the white elephant for the privilege of losing ~$10 million a year in capital costs plus the continuing operating losses of the convention centre of $2-$4 million. Convention business is down around the planet and dropping, because of the ability to have webinars, online conferences, and because of ever increasing fuel prices. Therefore, Mr. Ramia needs Mr. Ferguson’s help whatever the price may be. It is beyond me why the NS NDP would support this kind of old style Halifax cronyism. Perhaps recognizing the weak economic record, convention and tourism officials in the USA have been changing their sales pitch: Convention centres shouldn’t be judged, they now say, by how much business they bring to local hotels, restaurants, and local attractions. This proposed convention centre is backwards and will be a disaster for Halifax and the Nova Scotia taxpayer, as it will also soon be considered outdated.
On behalf of Trade Centre Limited, I am compelled to respond to this inaccurate article.
The research on the convention centre was still in the field when the results were requested by David Jackson of the Chronicle Herald. As the research was not complete and we had not received it, we were not in a position to release it. I informed David, however, that we planned to release the information in advance of public consultation on the project. TCL was not withholding the results as you claim, our plan was always to release the results. Shortly thereafter on October 24, 2011, David submitted a FOIPOP application for the information, which we were required to process and respond to under legislation. Furthermore, and contrary to another inaccuracy in your article, the information was released to David on December 20, 2011, approximately one week before it was posted to our website on December 28, 2011.
I also want to clarify a few points regarding TCL’s involvement with the concerts on the Commons. The $300,000 repayable grant extended for the Paul McCartney concert (to be repaid through ticket sales) was done through the Department of Tourism, Culture and Heritage directly to Power Promotional Events Inc. and not, as you incorrectly assert, initiated by TCL. Nor did TCL initiate or recommend the financial support extended to Power Promotional Events Inc. by the Halifax Regional Municipality.
Your post/article is factually incorrect and inaccurately characterizes TCL.
Suzanne Fougere
Trade Centre Limited
So is The Coast going to pull this article and replace it with an apology or is this paper now OK with Tim publishing blatant lies?
The whole reasoning behind the NDP support for the convention centre and the involvement of super sleuth Scott Ferguson is because if the truth be known, these dippers are just a gaggle of mentally stunted you lead I will follow wanna bees. Seeing that every thing they touch they screw up there is not much reason to change their methods now. They are in over their heads. This whole convention centre bull sh*it will come tumbling down, main reason being, (1) There is not one honest person involved in this whole caper. (2) Rama is heading for the toilet his whole project is build on sand. It should have been left in the kitty litter box where it belongs
The poll alluded to in the article above asked the question:
“which politician people would find most trustworthy to talk about the convention centre?”
and the answer, apparently, was Peter Mackay.
Where is the outrage over that?
The man is a media-whore bullshit artist of the highest order.
While we all would like to see something done with that eyesore on Argyll Street, I don’t believe that TCL has yet provided any definitive proof that their proposed new facility will truly benefit Halifax or create more economic growth.
Furthermore, I question the ability that TCL has to effectively sell the vast new building to future conventioneers, considering that as TCL’s new Director of Marketing, Ms. Fougere’s only experience in that industry was for a very brief period in 2007 when she was the PR rep for the failed 2014 Commonwealth Games Bid disaster.
If TCL wants to compete and succeed against all those new convention centers out there they’ll need a much stronger sales and marketing team than they have now. If they can’t even sell this plan to the locals, how do they sell it to future convention goers?!?
-A. MacPhee,
Dartmouth
i only want to know the answers to these simple questions:
1) if TCL can’t make money with the convention centre we already have, why is building a bigger one the answer to that problem?
2) if the staff at TCL can’t make money with the convention centre we already have, why should they be allowed to keep their jobs in any new, bigger convention centre that might be built?
3) if the staff at TCL knew they weren’t going to get to keep their jobs at any new, bigger convention centre that might be built, with their only remaining stake in it being as taxpayers themselves, what might they be willing to tell us all about the details of this deal?
without answers to these very simple questions, why would anyone not getting paid off in high figures even consider this deal for a nanosecond?