Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 116

Thread: Lukaszuk runs up $ 20,000 in roaming charges

  1. #1
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Where ever Visa is accepted
    Posts
    4,496

    Default Lukaszuk runs up $ 20,000 in roaming charges

    Last edited by Barry N; 25-08-2014 at 02:41 PM.
    Go ahead, speed pass me... I'll meet you at the next red light.

  2. #2
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,304

    Default

    He could have easily bought a SIM card while abroad to use in his iPad. The thing is, most of these people are too stupid to know how much stuff costs, so they don't even look into it before going on a trip.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  3. #3
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    2.29 gigabytes? That's more of a statement on how badly we are served by our wireless providers in Canada than anything else. He should have known better, however, and I have no doubt that there would have been readily available Wi-Fi that was free or worth no more than a $10 a day or something.

    This is dirty politics, given how the information was received by the Sun.

  4. #4
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    If he is dealing with confidential government documents, however, he is not going to be wanting to use open Wi-Fi.

    Eve

  5. #5
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    This is dirty politics, given how the information was received by the Sun.
    Can politics be anything other than ' dirty ' ?



    To Top_Dawg it only lends credence to what's being whispered on the ground.

    Ol' Jimbo's camp is rightfully worried that all those Pee Cees who so publicly washed ' the saviour' s ' ballsack are now privately considering voting for the devil they know.



    Self preservation 'n all.

  6. #6
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    If he is dealing with confidential government documents, however, he is not going to be wanting to use open Wi-Fi.

    Eve
    Exactly, from the interview I just heard he was away and then was required to work on GoA business (so this was not planned ahead of time). The last thing you want to do is use a free wi-fi service.

    He also said that his staff tried to negotiate with the carrier and when that was unsuccessful he changed carriers (all following the trip etc. of course).

    Very interesting how this is leaked now, I assume that others are getting worried!!
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  7. #7

    Default

    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report.
    "The fact is, it was unavoidable," he said. "Lots of documents were shipped then and that was in official capacity and I continued working. That was the biggest part, the amount of documents flying back and forth."
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip

    What's this "Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back......" Sounds like somebody in the ledge was not buying his bull ship. That statement implies someone did ask him to pay it. Now he's trying to window dress it as business. This was a personal trip that he said morphed into a government business trip. If that's the case, did he ask for some of his air fare back. It sounds like the story of the captain of the Costa Concordia who said he fell into a life boat when the ship was sinking.
    Tom, if you cannot handle a phone plan what are you doing running to be premier of a multi-million dollar province.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  8. #8
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    I am the exact opposite of Lukaszuk fan but while it is obvious he screwed up, and has admitted as such, the carriers facilitate this kind of mistake. He's hardly the first to get fleeced for thousands of dollars by unexpected roaming charges. Since then the government has negotiated a proper roaming contract so we shouldn't see anything like this again.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  9. #9

    Default

    I'm sure the guy had a laptop with him. Could he not have acquired files that way and then forwarded them on. As for the government now putting a proper roaming contract in place. C'mon, were they living in the stone age and just cottoned onto this. I think what's happened here is that the Lukaszuk has been caught and he is trying his best to look contrite and concerned about it. These are the people who are asking to run the province for cripes sake and they cannot even be sensible about a cell phone plan. Somebody should ask him that when his personal trip morphed into a working trip did he start to expense his food, hotel bill and air fare. As for the way the info was realized, more power to whoever did it. I hope there is more doo doo uncovered on these shysters.
    Last edited by Gemini; 25-08-2014 at 05:16 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  10. #10
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    If he is dealing with confidential government documents, however, he is not going to be wanting to use open Wi-Fi.

    Eve
    I'm no expert, but using some sort of a VPN it could still be done securely with Wi-Fi, I would imagine. And I doubt anything he was receiving was "top secret", in any case.

  11. #11

    Default

    nothing is secure in open-wifi, not even encrypted VPN traffic.

    Sure, its an added layer, and certainly better than sending stuff plain-text... but not secure.

  12. #12

    Default

    What was it he sent that was so important and even needed a secure line. As far as I can tell by his comments it was a personal trip. Now, all of a sudden he's Mr. Important and the PC's are asking him to send files back and forth. The ledge was not even sitting at the time. The MLA's were probably running around somewhere with lamp shades on their heads. What was so pressing. It could not have been international security issues as that is the Feds job. Tom flubbed and the taxpayer is paying the bill, again.
    Last edited by Gemini; 25-08-2014 at 05:39 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  13. #13

    Default

    Free Wi-Fi is not necessarily insecure if the actual data being transferred have been properly shielded, no? At least that is how every other network platform worked back in the days when I did such things.

    As long as the encryption keys themselves are not broadcast plaintext, what can grab them?

    I agree very strongly with the post above that the leak is dirty action, right-wing Wildrose style.

    Not all politics is dirty, but right wing politics is, certainly; and that goes double for so-called populist media.
    Last edited by AShetsen; 25-08-2014 at 06:08 PM.

  14. #14
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    What was it he sent that was so important and even needed a secure line. As far as I can tell by his comments it was a personal trip. Now, all of a sudden he's Mr. Important and the PC's are asking him to send files back and forth. The ledge was not even sitting at the time. The MLA's were probably running around somewhere with lamp shades on their heads. What was so pressing. It could not have been international security issues as that is the Feds job. Tom flubbed and the taxpayer is paying the bill, again.
    He was Deputy Premier at the time of the trip and the trip occurred during the legislative session. There doesn't seem to be any question in the leaked documents that it was government files that were transferred so I'm trying to figure out what you think he's been caught doing? People in positions like this rarely escape work no matter where they are

    As for security, it's not unusual for IT departments to restrict networking to specific modes they are absolutely familiar with. It's usually overkill but given the consequences, particularly politically, of data leaks they've gotten very paranoid.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  15. #15
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Free Wi-Fi is not necessarily insecure if the actual data being transferred have been properly shielded, no? At least that is how every other network platform worked back in the days when I did such things.

    As long as the encryption keys themselves are not broadcast plaintext, what can grab them?

    I agree very strongly with the post above that the leak is dirty action, right-wing Wildrose style.

    Not all politics is dirty, but right wing politics is, certainly; and that goes double for so-called populist media.
    emphasis added...

    so are we to assume that "left wing politics" are somehow certainly not?

    tommy banks had it bang on in today's journal guest editorial. it's not about "politics". it's about government and it's about principles or the lack thereof. neither of which has anything to do with right wing or left wing.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opini...894/story.html
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  16. #16

    Default

    According to this http://www.albertaprimetime.com/Stories.aspx?pd=4359 the fall ledge sitting started October 23/2012. He said he took a week off at the start of the ledge setting and was at a holocaust function in Poland on Oct. 19th. various functions in between and returned to Canada Oct. 30th. (no news if he got a hero's welcome when he returned). What that Telus Invoice fails to show is the dates these files were sent. The invoice is dated Nov. 21/2012. Where is the page that states the actual date these files were sent.

    Then he goes to sign it off as other expenses......................

    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip

    I don't care who made this leak. We need more whistle blowers doing this type of thing then maybe the trough will not be so lucrative for these rubes.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  17. #17
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    I hope this brings light to how crooked the telecom companies are.

    Dinosaur era businesses in the modern world trying to cling to every last bit of revenue.
    be offended! figure out why later...

  18. #18

    Default

    ^dinosaur telecom company meet dinosaur Alberta P.C's.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  19. #19
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    According to this http://www.albertaprimetime.com/Stories.aspx?pd=4359 the fall ledge sitting started October 23/2012. He said he took a week off at the start of the ledge setting and was at a holocaust function in Poland on Oct. 19th. various functions in between and returned to Canada Oct. 30th. (no news if he got a hero's welcome when he returned). What that Telus Invoice fails to show is the dates these files were sent. The invoice is dated Nov. 21/2012. Where is the page that states the actual date these files were sent.

    Then he goes to sign it off as other expenses......................

    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip

    I don't care who made this leak. We need more whistle blowers doing this type of thing then maybe the trough will not be so lucrative for these rubes.
    In what way did Lukaszuk benefit at all for doing government business on his personal time?

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  20. #20

    Default

    ^He's still got his job, that's plenty benefit for a government that has screwed the Alberta taxpayer over one too many times.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  21. #21

    Default

    Here is Lukasuk's own explanation. http://lukaszuk.ca/news-release-roaming-charges/ Comes with a letter from his parents (sorry, law company) saying they sent him data. Me thinks Tom is trying too hard to cover this.
    By the way, could this not have been handled by his assistant or a director or a manager, or yet again, Redford. Somebody with more knowledge of cell phone plans. I am sure they all knew he was on a private jaunt and who would stand in his absence. Don't these things get sorted before they leave on vaykay. Who, would have handled this if Tom had of been in a coma? . One of the above.
    Last edited by Gemini; 25-08-2014 at 07:35 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,496

    Default

    we the public have to pay up roaming charges from our own money out of pocket but Lukaszuk use taxpayers's money to cover the cost of $ 20,000 , is that fair ?? even he makes big salary ?? he can afford the payments.

    right now I'm very sure many Albertans is feeling like they are being screwed by some politicians who use taxpayers's money and laughed it off at us .
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  23. #23
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jagators63 View Post
    we the public have to pay up roaming charges from our own money out of pocket but Lukaszuk use taxpayers's money to cover the cost of $ 20,000 , is that fair ?? even he makes big salary ?? he can afford the payments.

    right now I'm very sure many Albertans is feeling like they are being screwed by some politicians who use taxpayers's money and laughed it off at us .
    My employer pays my charges when I do work remotely. If he'd been watching Netlflix I'd have an issue but he was doing his job.

    And to be clear here. I really dislike the man and don't think it'll be soon enough to see him gone. Decisions he was a part of had direct negative effects on my household.

    However, that doesn't change the fact this screw up wasn't malicious nor entirely his fault. Executive level positions require constant availability and in this case it appears a fairly major legal matter required his attention. It is entirely plausible that whatever the case was required his personal attention.

    I'd add that I'm pleased the government appears to have taken prompt action to make sure this doesn't happen again.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  24. #24

    Default

    ^None of us know exactly what day(s) data was sent. The Telus invoice does not provide us with the dates the data was sent, just the invoice numbers and the invoice dates and amounts. Unless we have someone who can interpret Telus's way of billing on this invoice we really have no data dates to go on. I read a newspapers comment on line and they said for that amount of a bill to be presented there had to be a tremendous amount of data going back and forward. They were of the mind that there could have been streaming etc. happening. Again, we need a Telus person to interpret the figures. If these transactions were done, let's say on the 28th. October it would be disgraceful as he was due back on October 30th. As previously mentioned, I am sure this could have been relegated to someone else. Now, is there a Telus techy in the room to interpret just what kind of volume of data would have been sent/received for that amount of money.
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  25. #25
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    It was stated in the original article, and my post: 2.29gb, which is next to nothing these days. Most of that was probably from skyping in to a cabinet meeting, which was also specifically mentioned. Perhaps try reading the links provided.

  26. #26

    Default

    I do read the links provided. When it comes to gb etc: I'm not tech savvy. I just know enough to do modifications/changes to my phone when I travel (or should I say I get someone in the family to do it). Now, I will ask again. How much data is 2.29gb. Is it as much as 500 pages, 1,000 pages, writing and pictures?. Telling me it's gb's does not resonate. What is it in actually pages.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    He could have easily bought a SIM card while abroad to use in his iPad. The thing is, most of these people are too stupid to know how much stuff costs, so they don't even look into it before going on a trip.
    Bingo
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  28. #28
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    He could have easily bought a SIM card while abroad to use in his iPad. The thing is, most of these people are too stupid to know how much stuff costs, so they don't even look into it before going on a trip.
    He should have thought about it before he went overseas but I'm sure he knew that taxpayers will cover his roaming charges anyway .
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  29. #29
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,304

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Telling me it's gb's does not resonate. What is it in actually pages.
    Isn't it a bit silly to go on a witch hunt when you don't even understand the information provided? What if we told you that it could be 50 pages of text? Would that be unreasonable?

    Well, it's more than 50 pages of text, but you'd never actually know what it was. Straight text is smaller than a PDF, but a PDF with some charts and graphs and photos would be even larger. Add in a skype chat and the amount of data isn't unreasonable. You also won't be able to figure out exactly when the data was used by looking at the billing date. What's unreasonable is that he had no clue that using his iPad while on a Telus account would result in a high charge for the data.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  30. #30

    Default

    Reminds me of pure government mismanagement of financial risk. and complete inability to understand modern technologies.

    However Lukaszuk is not to blame in any way imo.

  31. #31

    Default

    Looking at the bigger picture here, this looks like some fairly sketchy and underhanded tactics used by other members of the PC party, possibly one, or some whom are running for leadership. Going so far as to fraudulently have this sent to the press, to the point that authorities are now involved. Considering the fact that this party isn't going to perform to well in the next election, you'd think they would try a bit harder to polish their image as whole, rather than dump on each other like a bunch of school kids. Are they really that far out of touch with the reality of their future and reputation?

  32. #32
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I do read the links provided. When it comes to gb etc: I'm not tech savvy. I just know enough to do modifications/changes to my phone when I travel (or should I say I get someone in the family to do it). Now, I will ask again. How much data is 2.29gb. Is it as much as 500 pages, 1,000 pages, writing and pictures?. Telling me it's gb's does not resonate. What is it in actually pages.
    Impossible to say, as Gord explained, because it depends on the type of data, file formats, how much was from Skyping in to the cabinet meeting (probably the vast majority), and so on. Let me put it this way, you can barely even buy USB storage sticks less than 8gb these days, and an 8gb stick will cost you about $7 (http://www.memoryexpress.com/Category/USBDrives). It's not very much data at all. Again, this is more a testament to how ridiculous data charges from cell companies is than anything else. 2gb is roughly the equivalent of a single, 2 hour, high definition movie. Give or take. If it was ONLY documents, then it would be thousands of pages of plain text, hundreds if it was image heavy.

    This image is actually several years old, and only about data transfer domestically, but still pretty relevant:



    Basically, Telus was charging the AB government $10,000 per GB. That's insanity.

    And I would agree that really none of the blame for this should fall on him at all. Someone else in his office should be worrying about his cell plan. Executives have far, far better things to do than worry about the minutiae of their cell plans and data rates.

    It's yet another sign of bureaucratic incompetence in our government, not much more.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 26-08-2014 at 07:51 AM.

  33. #33
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Over $8/MB, which is what my carrier, Bell charges, for pay as you go in the areas he was travelling. Now these days with Bell, don't know about Telus, you can buy a travel pass at any time but two years ago I doubt it was as easy as it is now. Plus I've heard recent horror stories suggesting Telus is still very inflexible on roaming.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  34. #34
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,793

    Default

    I think the real crooks here are Telus. They should be forced to pay most of this back or lose their government contract to say ..... Rogers. Blatant theft of the people of Alberta's money. Telus you suck and you are hated by many.

  35. #35
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    (no news if he got a hero's welcome when he returned).


    Top_Dawg's got to give you a high five for that one Gems.

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Telling me it's gb's does not resonate. What is it in actually pages.
    Isn't it a bit silly to go on a witch hunt when you don't even understand the information provided? What if we told you that it could be 50 pages of text? Would that be unreasonable?

    Well, it's more than 50 pages of text, but you'd never actually know what it was. Straight text is smaller than a PDF, but a PDF with some charts and graphs and photos would be even larger. Add in a skype chat and the amount of data isn't unreasonable. You also won't be able to figure out exactly when the data was used by looking at the billing date. What's unreasonable is that he had no clue that using his iPad while on a Telus account would result in a high charge for the data.
    No, I'm not on a witch hunt. I stated I was not to tech savvy when it comes to roaming charges and transferring data per cell phone/ipad etc. It's obvious Lukaszuk is in the same boat. The difference is, I'm paying my own cell phone bill and the public is paying his cell phone bill and the rest of caucus. Í also stated could this have not been delegated to someone else. Apparently the matter in question was an Alberta matter where a law firm had to be retained. Could these so called pressing matters not have been delegated to Lukaszuk's assistant or an executive or a manager or even the premier. Does the government not have a policy that a minister's delegate can have signing authority for him. It would seem prudent that a member of his staff could step in for him just in case Tom was unavailable for any reason.
    Last edited by Gemini; 26-08-2014 at 11:35 AM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  37. #37

    Default

    Post #32. Appreciate the explanation of what and how much of the data that could of been involved. I know pictures, movies etc. take up more gigs and written pages not as much. I just did not have any concept of how many pages may have been involved or how long it would take a movie to use that amount.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  38. #38
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,566

    Default

    It takes a lot, A LOT to make me feel sorry for the hairdo ...but I can see how this happened.

    He was probably using an iPad and unless you deliberately switch off roaming - even in wifi territory the iPad defaults to the local wireless carrier.

    Ouch.
    ... gobsmacked

  39. #39

    Default

    Could Telus tell if he was streaming movies?
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  40. #40
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    The irony of this just occurred to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. (Ricky Gervais)

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Himser View Post
    Reminds me of pure government mismanagement of financial risk. and complete inability to understand modern technologies.

    However Lukaszuk is not to blame in any way imo.
    If you don't think Lukaszuk is to blame then I suggest you read this provided by the #15 poster.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opini...894/story.html


    Another thing, trying to hide this under 'other expenses' does not pass the smell test. Then there is the fact he did not try to negotiate the bill down. I should imagine the government spends any amount of money with Telus and all they had to say is we will no longer be going with you plans when the contract is up. Do you think Telus would want to loose a lucrative contract with the Alberta P.C's over one bill. No, neither do I. If this government can't even negotiate a cell phone bill then WTH are they doing in power.
    Last edited by Gemini; 26-08-2014 at 02:26 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  42. #42
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    While he is to blame for the cost, he received no personal benefit, this money would come out of his department's budget.

    This isn't JUST a result of our telephone companies exhorbitant fees but also the fees set by the roamed country. In my case Telus sets a certain fee based on what AT&T charges them for roaming.

    But you'd think that people would know this sort of thing by now.

  43. #43
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Himser View Post
    Reminds me of pure government mismanagement of financial risk. and complete inability to understand modern technologies.

    However Lukaszuk is not to blame in any way imo.
    If you don't think Lukaszuk is to blame then I suggest you read this provided by the #15 poster.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opini...894/story.html


    Another thing, trying to hide this under 'other expenses' does not pass the smell test. Then there is the fact he did not try to negotiate the bill down. I should imagine the government spends any amount of money with Telus and all they had to say is we will no longer be going with you plans when the contract is up. Do you think Telus would want to loose a lucrative contract with the Alberta P.C's over one bill. No, neither do I. If this government can't even negotiate a cell phone bill then WTH are they doing in power.
    You seem to be spending more time being offended than actually reading and understanding. First you claimed it was not during session when the articles clearly said it was, now your saying he didn't try to negotiate the bill down when the article again clearly states he did:

    "So when I came back, I dealt with Executive Council and I said 'Guys, we're not paying this bill. Negotiate it. Bring it down because this is ridiculous' and they negotiated with the service provider but they couldn't bring it down."
    My staff and Executive Council staff fought with the telephone company to have the charges reduced. They were unsuccessful. The bill was begrudgingly paid, and publicly reported in February 2013 as part of my office expenses. I subsequently changed providers, and government has a better data plan.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  44. #44

    Default

    ^Please point out from this article where it actually states the ledge was in session on the actual dates of these transmissions:
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip Or is it just your assumption that the ledge was in sitting. I said it would be interesting to know what dates this data was actually transmitted. The bill does not actually state the dates of transmission. He was in Poland on October 19th. the ledge sitting started October 23rd. he was back in Canada on 30th.

    From the same article:
    'Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report.


    Even after being unable to negotiate a better rate on a cell phone bill he could not get the bill down. For cripes sake, gawd help us if this government has to negotiate anything more important than a cell phone bill. They cant even get a deal on that and they no doubt spend millions per year on cell phones but they could not negotiate a $20,000 in the scheme of things.
    Last edited by Gemini; 26-08-2014 at 03:14 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  45. #45
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Please point out from this article where it actually states the ledge was in session on the actual dates of these transmissions:
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip Or is it just your assumption that the ledge was in sitting. I said it would be interesting to know what dates this data was actually transmitted. The bill does not actually state the dates of transmission. He was in Poland on October 19th. the ledge sitting started October 23rd. he was back in Canada on 30th.
    You get this one as it was in the original Edmonton Journal article which they've replaced with the one about the investigation. However, I would say there is nothing implausible about having to handle issues in the week prior to session or that the issue itself happened during the session. Either way, given there is a court ordered publication ban on whatever the case is, we're not going to find out. Of course the fact of the ban makes the base story even more plausible. It's obviously a big enough case to warrant publication ban and the attention of Deputy Premier's office. It's highly implausible Lukaszuk orchestrated a publication ban on streaming movies.

    Edit: Also consider that it is unlikely he received an urgent issue on the weekend which leaves exactly one day of his trip outside of the session.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    As for"
    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report.
    From the same article.

    Even though Lukaszuk's statement is convoluted in the fact refused to consider paying it back because it's the cost of doing business.
    My take on this is he though it's not worth negotiating a lower rate as it's the cost of doing business.
    His staff tried to negotiate a better rate but sounds like he threw the towel in.

    Other people may read that statement another way.
    You're cherry picking and ignoring the explicit statement that his department did attempt to negotiate with Telus and failed. You're further ignoring that in response the government improved their practices and data plans. He made an expensive mistake but there's no evidence of malicious intent so why would he be required to pay $20,000 out of pocket for doing his job?
    Last edited by Paul Turnbull; 26-08-2014 at 03:24 PM.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  46. #46

    Default

    What ever happened to personal accountability?

    From Telus

    Once you enter a new country, you’ll receive a free SMS notification with the pay-per-use rates. While using data outside of Canada, you will receive notifications at pre-set thresholds. You will also receive a notification when you begin to use data so you can better monitor your usage. When you return to Canada, you will receive a notification summarizing your total data usage in each zone you visited while on your trip.
    This has been in place for years. He was warned, he ignored the warnings, got burned & somehow it's the taxpayers' responsibility? This is slimy, even for greasy, orange Tommy L.
    Last edited by noodle; 26-08-2014 at 03:32 PM. Reason: added url
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  47. #47

    Default

    Andrew Grose interviewed Mr. Lukaszuk today on Ched (Tencer was away. Highlights include:
    - the initial data push of documents was sent by the bureacrats to Mr. Lukaszuk; I don't know enough about the email on an Ipad to know if the device would automatically retrieve the documents to local storage
    - Telus did not have a reciprocal agreement with the local wireless providers at the time in question, and most of the money they charged actually went to the local provider, which was inflexible on reducing the charges.
    - Government policy is not to send and receive sensitive documents by public Wi-Fi. I know you can get secure virtual private networks for Windows PCs to encrypt things over Wi-FI, but I don't know if that tech was available for the IPad back in 2012.
    - Mr. Lukaszuk was told he had to handle whatever the situation was, as deputy premier, even though he was on the vacation at the time. He did not seem to have an issue handling the task while on vacation, and he did not mention who required him to handle the situation remotely, but given who was premier at the time, we can draw some conclusions

  48. #48

    Default

    VPN was most assuredly available for iOS devices in 2012.

    http://www.iphonelife.com/issues/201...e/ConfigureVPN

    There's an article from a year earlier on how to configure the VPN software built into the OS.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  49. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Please point out from this article where it actually states the ledge was in session on the actual dates of these transmissions:
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip Or is it just your assumption that the ledge was in sitting. I said it would be interesting to know what dates this data was actually transmitted. The bill does not actually state the dates of transmission. He was in Poland on October 19th. the ledge sitting started October 23rd. he was back in Canada on 30th.
    You get this one as it was in the original Edmonton Journal article which they've replaced with the one about the investigation. However, I would say there is nothing implausible about having to handle issues in the week prior to session or that the issue itself happened during the session. Either way, given there is a court ordered publication ban on whatever the case is, we're not going to find out. Of course the fact of the ban makes the base story even more plausible. It's obviously a big enough case to warrant publication ban and the attention of Deputy Premier's office. It's highly implausible Lukaszuk orchestrated a publication ban on streaming movies.

    Edit: Also consider that it is unlikely he received an urgent issue on the weekend which leaves exactly one day of his trip outside of the session.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    As for"
    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report.
    From the same article.

    Even though Lukaszuk's statement is convoluted in the fact refused to consider paying it back because it's the cost of doing business.
    My take on this is he though it's not worth negotiating a lower rate as it's the cost of doing business.
    His staff tried to negotiate a better rate but sounds like he threw the towel in.

    Other people may read that statement another way.
    You're cherry picking and ignoring the explicit statement that his department did attempt to negotiate with Telus and failed. You're further ignoring that in response the government improved their practices and data plans. He made an expensive mistake but there's no evidence of malicious intent so why would he be required to pay $20,000 out of pocket for doing his job?
    Oh, I get it, I'm cherry picking but your not and you believe everything thumping Tom says. I have ocean front property in Arizona, are you interested in buying it.

    On another note:

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...k-roaming-bill
    In January 2014, it was reported that Energy Minister Diana McQueen was hit with a $14,577.37 charge for cellphone roaming while she was on a government trip throughout Europe in fall 2013.
    The government was able to have the charge reduced to just $191.77.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  50. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    VPN was most assuredly available for iOS devices in 2012.

    http://www.iphonelife.com/issues/201...e/ConfigureVPN

    There's an article from a year earlier on how to configure the VPN software built into the OS.
    Fair enough. Someone should have walked Thomas through securely connecting back to the government servers on WiFi. But, as usual, I'm sure no one in the bureaucracy thought to ask the techs about it before Skypeing and sending massive documents back and forth

  51. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    Andrew Grose interviewed Mr. Lukaszuk today on Ched (Tencer was away. Highlights include:
    - the initial data push of documents was sent by the bureacrats to Mr. Lukaszuk; I don't know enough about the email on an Ipad to know if the device would automatically retrieve the documents to local storage
    - Telus did not have a reciprocal agreement with the local wireless providers at the time in question, and most of the money they charged actually went to the local provider, which was inflexible on reducing the charges.
    - Government policy is not to send and receive sensitive documents by public Wi-Fi. I know you can get secure virtual private networks for Windows PCs to encrypt things over Wi-FI, but I don't know if that tech was available for the IPad back in 2012.
    - Mr. Lukaszuk was told he had to handle whatever the situation was, as deputy premier, even though he was on the vacation at the time. He did not seem to have an issue handling the task while on vacation, and he did not mention who required him to handle the situation remotely, but given who was premier at the time, we can draw some conclusions
    Very interesting info. Now, let's just say it was Redford that said he absolutely had to look after this file. Why is Thumping Tom not throwing her under the bus. What does he have to loose. She is no longer in politics. Any issue that has come up lately has been blamed on her. Give Tom a couple of days. He'll realize what a golden opportunity it will be to just blame Redford. Off the hook in a flash.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  52. #52

    Default

    It's amazing what things get overlooked when you've got a huge sense of entitlement & access to unlimited funds at someone elses' expense.

    I mean, I managed to see the SMS warning, duck into a mobile shop, snag a simcard & a data plan for $30 while on a layover in Joburg in 2011. It's hardly rocket science & frankly I am a little concerned about a politician that legitimately had no clue about data roaming in this day & age. I mean, there's been Federal inquiries on these things.

    He's either corrupt or woefully out of touch. I'm guessing a little from both.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  53. #53

    Default

    While we are all thinking Thumping Tom is a fool he's probably thinking we all think he is so important that he even get's called up on his holidays. Does this government not believe in delegating work when people are away. It's the sign of good management to have your underlings know what to do when your gone.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  54. #54

    Default

    He has a habit of being out of town at crucial times. I mean he was overseas on vacation when the government made all the cuts to post-sec while it was his Ministry. Wonder if there was any overages on his trip to Vietnam?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  55. #55
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,801
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardW View Post
    I hope this brings light to how crooked the telecom companies are.

    Dinosaur era businesses in the modern world trying to cling to every last bit of revenue.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    It was stated in the original article, and my post: 2.29gb, which is next to nothing these days. Most of that was probably from skyping in to a cabinet meeting, which was also specifically mentioned. Perhaps try reading the links provided.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Over $8/MB, which is what my carrier, Bell charges, for pay as you go in the areas he was travelling. Now these days with Bell, don't know about Telus, you can buy a travel pass at any time but two years ago I doubt it was as easy as it is now. Plus I've heard recent horror stories suggesting Telus is still very inflexible on roaming.
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I think the real crooks here are Telus. They should be forced to pay most of this back or lose their government contract to say ..... Rogers. Blatant theft of the people of Alberta's money. Telus you suck and you are hated by many.
    While I won't go as far as saying "crooks", what TELUS charges me for wireless data is insane. They, and other wireless carriers, offer LTE wireless routers for people who cannot connect via DSL/Cable, but the data limits and overages are out of this world!!! I work from home mostly, and if I were to do this 100% from my rural place, it would cost me $15,000 a month in overage charges. $15,000! Even negotiating with TELUS to have my city services retained to bundle this, and even keep the ancient rural land line up, was to no avail. So, I can see how a few Skype calls can make a bill this high before you know it....especially if you are not paying attention...or...

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    What ever happened to personal accountability?

    From Telus

    Once you enter a new country, you’ll receive a free SMS notification with the pay-per-use rates. While using data outside of Canada, you will receive notifications at pre-set thresholds. You will also receive a notification when you begin to use data so you can better monitor your usage. When you return to Canada, you will receive a notification summarizing your total data usage in each zone you visited while on your trip.
    This has been in place for years. He was warned, he ignored the warnings, got burned & somehow it's the taxpayers' responsibility? This is slimy, even for greasy, orange Tommy L.
    ...you may see these warnings which I do get when I travel. In fact, within minutes of landing in SAN I received my 2 Mb warning, then a 10Mb warning, then a notice that my entire roaming pack was consumed. All over 2 emails that were sent to me with large attachments. I shut off my data for the remainder of the trip.

    While it is a bit ludicrous to completely assume your bill won't be a bit outrageous when this topic has been around for some time in Canada...it just also goes to show the absolutely outrageous and price gouging data rates the wireless providers in this country charge for data. Even if you are a long term customer and want to even expand your service (and they do not offer any internet other than LTE/HSPA), they still will not give you a data plan that is equivalent to their urban data plans - and I'm sorry, $15,000 per month, it would not be long before I could pay for running the line to the entire hamlet.
    Tired of being taken advantage of .

  56. #56
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    It's amazing what things get overlooked when you've got a huge sense of entitlement & access to unlimited funds at someone elses' expense.

    I mean, I managed to see the SMS warning, duck into a mobile shop, snag a simcard & a data plan for $30 while on a layover in Joburg in 2011. It's hardly rocket science & frankly I am a little concerned about a politician that legitimately had no clue about data roaming in this day & age. I mean, there's been Federal inquiries on these things.

    He's either corrupt or woefully out of touch. I'm guessing a little from both.
    Again, that sort of thing isn't something an executive should even be worried about. They have far, far bigger fish to fry. Do you honestly think that the CEO, CFO, COO, board member, President, Vice President, etc etc etc of a large multi-billion dollar company should be personally taking care of his cell phone plan? That's ludicrous.

    I'm not personally a fan of Lukaszuk, but this is silly. Labelling him "corrupt"? Give me a break. Was Telus giving him a cut in kickbacks? How does corruption even factor in here?

  57. #57

    Default

    So he's a gilded ill-informed lout surrounded by morons who don't know better & this makes it OK?

    Fine, he's not corrupt, just slimy & unethical.

    I can't believe you're using an affluenza excuse for a provincial politician. Did we, as a province, get $20,000 in value by Greasy Tom firing up the iPad? Because if he tried to expense the $20k as a "whoopsie" at an actual operating business he'd be turfed out so fast his orange head would spin.
    Last edited by noodle; 26-08-2014 at 04:47 PM.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  58. #58
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    I already said that this is a pretty good indication of bureaucratic incompetence, and that can certainly be blamed on him and the rest of our elected representatives that make up the government. I didn't say it's okay. But you are really reaching calling him corrupt, slimy, and unethical over something that should be several levels below his awareness.

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    While it is a bit ludicrous to completely assume your bill won't be a bit outrageous when this topic has been around for some time in Canada...it just also goes to show the absolutely outrageous and price gouging data rates the wireless providers in this country charge for data. Even if you are a long term customer and want to even expand your service (and they do not offer any internet other than LTE/HSPA), they still will not give you a data plan that is equivalent to their urban data plans - and I'm sorry, $15,000 per month, it would not be long before I could pay for running the line to the entire hamlet.
    Bolded by me.

    On that note it costs Telus approx 20,000 per km to put fiber in...

    On one development i was working on we were seriously considering starting our own ISP just for the development due top the Charges. Also considered bringing in our own fiber line.

  60. #60

    Default

    No, I call him corrupt, greasy, slimy, gross, orange & unethical for a lot of things. Not just this latest brou-ha-ha.

    He's a horrible politician, a sub-par, out-of-touch, hypocritical human being & the province would be better served with almost anyone else in his seat.

    If you're above being aware of the consequences of your actions you shouldn't be in public office.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  61. #61

    Default

    Get a grip and read this as previously posted.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opini...894/story.html

    People bleating away that it's the big bad cell company. Yes, the big bad cell company charges ridiculous rates but he should know that. Could he not have phoned his office and delegated the matter. Good managers do have go to people that can be trusted to act in their absence. If the guy was in a coma then there would be no option but to delegate it to someone else. Do you think if they were Thumping Tom's personal electronics he would make sure he knew exactly how much it would cost him to do data transfers (well, probably not).
    Just because it's taxpayers money should not give them carte blanche to do what they want and to then apologize after the fact. For all the people who think this is O.K please give me your name and addresses and I will let Revenue Canada know you would not mind paying my share of taxes.
    Last edited by Gemini; 26-08-2014 at 04:58 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  62. #62
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,801
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I don't think anyone is excusing the act, nor the apparent nonchalance at the excuse. No one is giving carte blanche. The melodrama is not needed on the whole "call Revenue Canada and you can pay my taxes" part.

    But $20K in roaming...that is ludicrous for ~3Gb of data. That is what people are saying. The price TELUS wanted to charge me for my overages was about that huge...and that is in Alberta. That sub story is one that needs to be told too. Heck, I know that TELUS can readily ping/email/call users who experience a huge spike in their calling patterns and/or bills. Where were they when they saw this hit? Oh, that's right, they turned a blind eye. I guess they too like the excess revenue? Where's the call to have them return some taxpayer coin?
    Tired of being taken advantage of .

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    No, I call him corrupt, greasy, slimy, gross, orange & unethical for a lot of things. Not just this latest brou-ha-ha.

    He's a horrible politician, a sub-par, out-of-touch, hypocritical human being & the province would be better served with almost anyone else in his seat.

    If you're above being aware of the consequences of your actions you shouldn't be in public office.
    Calling him 'orange' is going to far. I know he may buy self tanning lotion because his government expense card may not stretch to tanning beds, but calling him 'orange' is a low blow.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    I don't think anyone is excusing the act, nor the apparent nonchalance at the excuse. No one is giving carte blanche. The melodrama is not needed on the whole "call Revenue Canada and you can pay my taxes" part.

    But $20K in roaming...that is ludicrous for ~3Gb of data. That is what people are saying. The price TELUS wanted to charge me for my overages was about that huge...and that is in Alberta. That sub story is one that needs to be told too. Heck, I know that TELUS can readily ping/email/call users who experience a huge spike in their calling patterns and/or bills. Where were they when they saw this hit? Oh, that's right, they turned a blind eye. I guess they too like the excess revenue? Where's the call to have them return some taxpayer coin?
    Thumping Tom and his cohorts just love these types of comments. The more people call it a Telus problem the heat is off the actual issue. The story gets lost of the $20,000 the taxpayers are springing for and morphs into a Telus witch hunt. TT should have know (and the government) the cost of transmitting data on cell/ipad devices. It would be great if Telus said it was not data but he was streaming Harry Potter for a few hours. and a Debbie does Dallas movie. Do we really believe anything this government says anymore.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  65. #65
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,801
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Gemini,

    No.

    The "heat" is not off the minister to explain the how and the why of such a bill.

    The government has responded and tightened the controls from what I gather. So, they too are not removing accountability.

    Because there is another story here that needs to be told doesn't remove the accountability of the party involved. In my example, the reason why I know what the overages would be is because I researched the costs and asked TELUS directly. Even their agent was blown away at the forecasted overages.

    ...but please, feel free to continue the witch hunt.
    Tired of being taken advantage of .

  66. #66
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Please point out from this article where it actually states the ledge was in session on the actual dates of these transmissions:
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip Or is it just your assumption that the ledge was in sitting. I said it would be interesting to know what dates this data was actually transmitted. The bill does not actually state the dates of transmission. He was in Poland on October 19th. the ledge sitting started October 23rd. he was back in Canada on 30th.
    You get this one as it was in the original Edmonton Journal article which they've replaced with the one about the investigation. However, I would say there is nothing implausible about having to handle issues in the week prior to session or that the issue itself happened during the session. Either way, given there is a court ordered publication ban on whatever the case is, we're not going to find out. Of course the fact of the ban makes the base story even more plausible. It's obviously a big enough case to warrant publication ban and the attention of Deputy Premier's office. It's highly implausible Lukaszuk orchestrated a publication ban on streaming movies.

    Edit: Also consider that it is unlikely he received an urgent issue on the weekend which leaves exactly one day of his trip outside of the session.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    As for"
    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report.
    From the same article.

    Even though Lukaszuk's statement is convoluted in the fact refused to consider paying it back because it's the cost of doing business.
    My take on this is he though it's not worth negotiating a lower rate as it's the cost of doing business.
    His staff tried to negotiate a better rate but sounds like he threw the towel in.

    Other people may read that statement another way.
    You're cherry picking and ignoring the explicit statement that his department did attempt to negotiate with Telus and failed. You're further ignoring that in response the government improved their practices and data plans. He made an expensive mistake but there's no evidence of malicious intent so why would he be required to pay $20,000 out of pocket for doing his job?
    Oh, I get it, I'm cherry picking but your not and you believe everything thumping Tom says. I have ocean front property in Arizona, are you interested in buying it.

    On another note:

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...k-roaming-bill
    In January 2014, it was reported that Energy Minister Diana McQueen was hit with a $14,577.37 charge for cellphone roaming while she was on a government trip throughout Europe in fall 2013.
    The government was able to have the charge reduced to just $191.77.
    No I'm not cherry picking anything. I set aside my dislike for Lukaszuk and looked at all the details as presented. It's far more plausible as presented than any alternative. The idea that he would run up that much data on personal business and then concoct a story claiming government business isn't plausible in the least. I put stupid mistake before malice in this case.

    The McQueen incident is evidence they've improved their setup since 2012 since they were able to kill the charges.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  67. #67

    Default

    The new process was explained by Service Alberta Minister Doug Griffiths in a memo to caucus in April 2014, said Johnson, where he advised caucus on how to reduce data charges when traveling overseas.
    In January 2014, it was reported that Energy Minister Diana McQueen was hit with a $14,577.37 charge for cellphone roaming while she was on a government trip throughout Europe in fall 2013.
    The government was able to have the charge reduced to just $191.77.
    [email protected]

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...k-roaming-bill
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  68. #68
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    The new process was explained by Service Alberta Minister Doug Griffiths in a memo to caucus in April 2014, said Johnson, where he advised caucus on how to reduce data charges when traveling overseas.
    In January 2014, it was reported that Energy Minister Diana McQueen was hit with a $14,577.37 charge for cellphone roaming while she was on a government trip throughout Europe in fall 2013.
    The government was able to have the charge reduced to just $191.77.
    [email protected]

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...k-roaming-bill
    Some interesting details in that article:

    In 2011, Service Alberta signed a new contract with its cellphone provider to save over $6 million per year by eliminating the bundled plans and data roaming packages that were hardly used.
    So the $20,000 bill was a result of a 2011 change to save $6 million that was then tweaked in 2013 to handle the roaming charges.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  69. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Please point out from this article where it actually states the ledge was in session on the actual dates of these transmissions:
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rnational-trip Or is it just your assumption that the ledge was in sitting. I said it would be interesting to know what dates this data was actually transmitted. The bill does not actually state the dates of transmission. He was in Poland on October 19th. the ledge sitting started October 23rd. he was back in Canada on 30th.
    You get this one as it was in the original Edmonton Journal article which they've replaced with the one about the investigation. However, I would say there is nothing implausible about having to handle issues in the week prior to session or that the issue itself happened during the session. Either way, given there is a court ordered publication ban on whatever the case is, we're not going to find out. Of course the fact of the ban makes the base story even more plausible. It's obviously a big enough case to warrant publication ban and the attention of Deputy Premier's office. It's highly implausible Lukaszuk orchestrated a publication ban on streaming movies.

    Edit: Also consider that it is unlikely he received an urgent issue on the weekend which leaves exactly one day of his trip outside of the session.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    As for"
    Lukaszuk refused to consider paying it back because it's "the unfortunate cost of doing business." He signed off on the charge on December 19, 2012 and it was logged under "other expenses" in his office's February 2013 expense report.
    From the same article.

    Even though Lukaszuk's statement is convoluted in the fact refused to consider paying it back because it's the cost of doing business.
    My take on this is he though it's not worth negotiating a lower rate as it's the cost of doing business.
    His staff tried to negotiate a better rate but sounds like he threw the towel in.

    Other people may read that statement another way.
    You're cherry picking and ignoring the explicit statement that his department did attempt to negotiate with Telus and failed. You're further ignoring that in response the government improved their practices and data plans. He made an expensive mistake but there's no evidence of malicious intent so why would he be required to pay $20,000 out of pocket for doing his job?
    Oh, I get it, I'm cherry picking but your not and you believe everything thumping Tom says. I have ocean front property in Arizona, are you interested in buying it.

    On another note:

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...k-roaming-bill
    In January 2014, it was reported that Energy Minister Diana McQueen was hit with a $14,577.37 charge for cellphone roaming while she was on a government trip throughout Europe in fall 2013.
    The government was able to have the charge reduced to just $191.77.
    No I'm not cherry picking anything. I set aside my dislike for Lukaszuk and looked at all the details as presented. It's far more plausible as presented than any alternative. The idea that he would run up that much data on personal business and then concoct a story claiming government business isn't plausible in the least. I put stupid mistake before malice in this case.

    The McQueen incident is evidence they've improved their setup since 2012 since they were able to kill the charges.
    If Toms roaming charges happened in 2012 and McQueens in 2013 I wonder why they would not reduce Toms charges but reduced McQueens. Unless the government uses different carriers for their cell phones. If that is the case, you would think they would be able to negotiate a better deal if they just stuck with one.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  70. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    The new process was explained by Service Alberta Minister Doug Griffiths in a memo to caucus in April 2014, said Johnson, where he advised caucus on how to reduce data charges when traveling overseas.
    In January 2014, it was reported that Energy Minister Diana McQueen was hit with a $14,577.37 charge for cellphone roaming while she was on a government trip throughout Europe in fall 2013.
    The government was able to have the charge reduced to just $191.77.
    [email protected]

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...k-roaming-bill
    Some interesting details in that article:

    In 2011, Service Alberta signed a new contract with its cellphone provider to save over $6 million per year by eliminating the bundled plans and data roaming packages that were hardly used.
    So the $20,000 bill was a result of a 2011 change to save $6 million that was then tweaked in 2013 to handle the roaming charges.
    No, the $20,000 bill was a result of Toms ignorance.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  71. #71

    Default Roaming charges scandal?

    It's amazing how the Progressive Conservatives have gone from doing no wrong in the eyes of most Albertan's for so many years to the "off with their heads mentality" now. Some years ago Ralph could fly everywhere, throw money at the homeless and only get mildly chided. Now everything they do seems to turn to crap in the court of public opinion.

    If I had to make a list of the 100 biggest financial mismanagement blunders over the years of the provincial government, I think AHS centralization, carbon capture, electricity deregulation, the tax and royalty systems would all be high on the list. All around a $ billion plus each (ever wonder why our Heritage Fund doesn't grow much?). Dollar wise, I don't think this would even make the top 1,000 so I wonder why it gets so much attention. Perhaps it is a good distraction and serves someone's political purpose.

    I'm no big fan of Lukaszuk. He's done various bonehead things over the years, but he is hardly the 1st person to have used a cell phone outside of Canada and got surprised by the huge bill later. I suspect many corporate expense claims that we will never hear about have been submitted for exactly this sort of thing. Until this sort of thing started to get publicized, the phone companies didn't exactly go out of their way to warn or inform people about these horrendous roaming charges.

  72. #72

    Default

    ^Corporate misdeeds get reported to the shareholders. Governments are ran with tax payers money. If they cannot get a grip on a $20,000 cell phone plan how well do you think they will fare with the big issues.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  73. #73

    Default

    From the Star, here are two examples of roaming where the providers involved reduced an insane charge. The second example in the article had Bell reduce a $9,380 iPad roaming charge to the $1,607 if the person in question had bought a business travel data plan.

    According to Mr. Lukaszuk in his Ched interview , Telus did not have a business travel data plan, and refused to play ball in dropping the bill. I read or heard in an article somewhere (can't remember where, and someone can correct me if I misheard) that the government switched mobile phone providers some time after the incident. The new provider seems more amenable, as they helped the minister who travelled in Europe reduce her bill after the fact. I suspect the incident with Mr. Lukaszuk may have been one of the reasons the GoA switched providers, assuming I didn't miss-hear.

  74. #74
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,223

    Default

    Gemini, this doesn't rise to the level of a "corporate misdeed". Many many people get caught up in this telecom scam. Someone I know got caught with a $1700 bill because her daughter was texting for a month. And she had done all the research to make sure that those texts were on her plan. (This was with Virgin.)

    She managed after many many phone calls to get the bill knocked down to $700. She didn't even owe that much rightfully but she didn't want her credit rating ruined.

    If you're going to get indignant at someone how about the Telco's?

    And I'm certainly no Lucaszuk fan either. But I agree with Dave. There are many types of government mismanagement that have cost both money and lives. I don't have time to pore over some executive's expense accounts.

    Eve
    Last edited by EveB; 26-08-2014 at 08:27 PM. Reason: Corrected a dollar amount

  75. #75

    Default

    I get that there are horror stories about kids running up exorbitant bills texting nonsense. The're young, not that that should give them a free pass. I'm sure the government forwarding documents to Lucaszuk was not the first time they had forwarded documents half way across the world to ministers without any brain cells. Surely they knew the cost of transmitting data was high way before that incident. To act like this was their first rodeo on data transmission is a stretch. He got caught, me thinks he protest to much. Read his own explanation on it. Trying to make it sound like he was on some kind of humanitarian mission to save the east. I don't give a rat's what he was doing on his own times. He could have been sourcing clothes pegs for all I care. Just stick with the facts Tom. Just say you were overseas on holiday.

    http://lukaszuk.ca/news-release-roaming-charges/
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  76. #76
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I get that there are horror stories about kids running up exorbitant bills texting nonsense. The're young, not that that should give them a free pass. I'm sure the government forwarding documents to Lucaszuk was not the first time they had forwarded documents half way across the world to ministers without any brain cells. Surely they knew the cost of transmitting data was high way before that incident. To act like this was their first rodeo on data transmission is a stretch. He got caught, me thinks he protest to much. Read his own explanation on it. Trying to make it sound like he was on some kind of humanitarian mission to save the east. I don't give a rat's what he was doing on his own times. He could have been sourcing clothes pegs for all I care. Just stick with the facts Tom. Just say you were overseas on holiday.

    http://lukaszuk.ca/news-release-roaming-charges/
    Prior to 2012 roaming was included in the general government contract so it could very well have been Lukaszuk's first encounter with roaming charges.

    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  77. #77
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,304

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    What ever happened to personal accountability?

    From Telus

    Once you enter a new country, you’ll receive a free SMS notification with the pay-per-use rates. While using data outside of Canada, you will receive notifications at pre-set thresholds. You will also receive a notification when you begin to use data so you can better monitor your usage. When you return to Canada, you will receive a notification summarizing your total data usage in each zone you visited while on your trip.
    This has been in place for years. He was warned, he ignored the warnings, got burned & somehow it's the taxpayers' responsibility? This is slimy, even for greasy, orange Tommy L.
    Except he was using an iPad. I'm not sure if he can receive an SMS on an iPad equipped with 3G. A quick Googling returns that you can't with the standard iPad apps; you'd have to download a specific app for that.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  78. #78

    Default

    Wouldn't you think the government should have some policies in place regarding roaming and IPADs? I'm a bit shocked if they didn't. If they didn't, its certainly not his fault. If they did, and he breached the policy, its his fault. I would think that's the end of it (alhough the policies might need updating).

    PS. I think secure / non-wifi makes sense, but of course, nothing can stop spying by a government today per all the recent revelations, but at least you can cut out random hackers.

  79. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I get that there are horror stories about kids running up exorbitant bills texting nonsense. The're young, not that that should give them a free pass. I'm sure the government forwarding documents to Lucaszuk was not the first time they had forwarded documents half way across the world to ministers without any brain cells. Surely they knew the cost of transmitting data was high way before that incident. To act like this was their first rodeo on data transmission is a stretch. He got caught, me thinks he protest to much. Read his own explanation on it. Trying to make it sound like he was on some kind of humanitarian mission to save the east. I don't give a rat's what he was doing on his own times. He could have been sourcing clothes pegs for all I care. Just stick with the facts Tom. Just say you were overseas on holiday.

    http://lukaszuk.ca/news-release-roaming-charges/
    Prior to 2012 roaming was included in the general government contract so it could very well have been Lukaszuk's first encounter with roaming charges.

    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.
    Doesn't mean any of us are right but we have a right to our opinion. We have not heard from the other party in all this, which is Telus. They might have a whole different spin on this although I doubt we will hear from them. Until we all know the complete facts we are all just blowing smoke.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  80. #80

    Default

    This is the same guy who bought a $12,000 table for the Deputy Premier's office during a renovation & when chastised over it said "It's from the approved vendors list!"

    The man is scum with a sense of entitlement more developed than his spray tan.

    And the whole "open wifi is insecure, use 3G instead" is a complete non-starter, since the encryption inherent in 3G GSM has been blown wide open for years. You need to add encryption for both GSM & wifi to increase the security. Neither of them are particularly secure by default. Hence the need for VPNs.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  81. #81
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I get that there are horror stories about kids running up exorbitant bills texting nonsense. The're young, not that that should give them a free pass. I'm sure the government forwarding documents to Lucaszuk was not the first time they had forwarded documents half way across the world to ministers without any brain cells. Surely they knew the cost of transmitting data was high way before that incident. To act like this was their first rodeo on data transmission is a stretch. He got caught, me thinks he protest to much. Read his own explanation on it. Trying to make it sound like he was on some kind of humanitarian mission to save the east. I don't give a rat's what he was doing on his own times. He could have been sourcing clothes pegs for all I care. Just stick with the facts Tom. Just say you were overseas on holiday.

    http://lukaszuk.ca/news-release-roaming-charges/
    Prior to 2012 roaming was included in the general government contract so it could very well have been Lukaszuk's first encounter with roaming charges.

    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.
    Doesn't mean any of us are right but we have a right to our opinion. We have not heard from the other party in all this, which is Telus. They might have a whole different spin on this although I doubt we will hear from them. Until we all know the complete facts we are all just blowing smoke.
    We won't hear from Telus because they won't release customer data and that's a good thing. Perhaps if Lukaszuk authorized Telus to release the data but he really doesn't have any incentive to do that as the story has fizzled outside the chronic Lukaszuk haters. The only real action occurring seems to be in determining where the leak came from.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  82. #82

    Default

    His $20,000 cellphone bill from October 2012, leaked with such clumsy ardour, now cycles back to a purely private family dispute involving a cabinet minister.

    From: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opini...041/story.html

    Has the ship now hit the fan on this matter.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  83. #83
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    His $20,000 cellphone bill from October 2012, leaked with such clumsy ardour, now cycles back to a purely private family dispute involving a cabinet minister.

    From: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opini...041/story.html

    Has the ship now hit the fan on this matter.
    I was just reading that. If this is the case then it may be more appropriate the Party or the cabinet minister who initiated the contact pay the bill as it was not a government matter. Also, if this is the case Lukaszuk is going to have to explain why he claimed it was a government matter.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  84. #84

    Default

    ^Well, not wishing to gloat I just want to remind you of how you rubbed this in my face.
    Who's wearing the egg now buster.

    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. (Ricky Gervais)
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  85. #85
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Well, not wishing to gloat I just want to remind you of how you rubbed this in my face.
    Who's wearing the egg now buster.

    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. (Ricky Gervais)
    No egg at all. I make my judgements based on the evidence available and not speculation based on my prejudices. More evidence can mean changed conclusions and I don't have a problem with that.

    You spent a lot of time making accusations based on little more than dislike for someone. Notably, none of your accusations actually predicted this as all them went after parts of his story that still hold up fine. What has changed are the specifics of the legal issue he was dealing with. Also notably it isn't an issue he initiated or could have changed at the time. What is at issue now is how he and the PCs handled it after the fact. If the story presented here is accurate then I don't blame him for not wanting to cover the bill for another minister's problem but it does seem that it may not be something the government should have paid for.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  86. #86
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,685

    Default

    Lukaszuk is an *****. This "help" a cabinet minister with a personal matter does not involve me or you...the taxpayer. He could have called the RCMP or City Police. That is what anyone else would have done. They would have handled it pdq. I expect to see a full payment back to Albertans by Lukaszuk. No way in hell would I support that arsehole.

  87. #87

    Default

    ^^You spend a lot of time blaming the big bad Telus company.

    Remember his first story. He said he was told he had to look after this 'file'. Now he's saying that he phoned the premiers office after the fact (the next day) and was told to make sure the minister is looked after. What's it to be?. It seems this whole bill was racked up in a 24 hour period. Got the first initial call, papers sent, words exchanged. Next day he phones the premiers office and that's when his involvement ended.
    Well, have to say I must apologize for saying he could have been watching Harry Potter.
    Next installment "Who is Deep Throat".
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  88. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    Lukaszuk is an *****. This "help" a cabinet minister with a personal matter does not involve me or you...the taxpayer. He could have called the RCMP or City Police. That is what anyone else would have done. They would have handled it pdq. I expect to see a full payment back to Albertans by Lukaszuk. No way in hell would I support that arsehole.
    Well, if he can spin it that he was helping a cabinet minister while he was on a private trip, we can spin it that he expected us to pay $20,000 to cover up a P.C. members private problems while he (Lukasuk) was on a private trip. He said he didn't know the P.C member personally, in fact does not recall if he ever spoke to him. Circle the wagons.
    Last edited by Gemini; 27-08-2014 at 09:12 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  89. #89

    Default

    Can you believe this, Lukaszuk was travelling with a lawyer from the firm that was retained to deal with this fiasco. The lawyer helped the cabinet minister by providing after hours contact info for another lawyer in his office. And this cost us $20,000. All Lukaszuk had to say was get in touch with this guy, he'll take care of it. By.

    This from http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...049/story.html


    Lukaszuk said it was nighttime in Edmonton when he received the call during the day in Poland, while on vacation. He was travelling with Duncan and Craig lawyer Sol Rolingher, who helped the cabinet minister by providing after-hours contact information for a lawyer in his office.

    From the Edmonton Sun
    “Altogether, it didn’t take me longer than an hour of work but because it was so far away, that’s where the cost comes from.”
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/08/2...rsonal-dispute

    An hours worth of unnecessary work cost the taxpayers $20,000.
    And again from this Sun article, he's trying to imply the premiers office told him to deal with this matter while it was happening. In the Journal article he said he phoned the premiers office after the fact. Tom, get your story straight. Can't you see why people don't believe you.
    Last edited by Gemini; 27-08-2014 at 09:47 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  90. #90

    Default

    CBC News has viewed the cabinet minister’s family law court file, which is the subject of a publication ban and forbids identifying any of the individuals involved.
    But the court documents show the cabinet minister’s sibling had sought an emergency restraining order against the minister in relation to a family dispute. The restraining order has been removed. At one point, police were called in relation to the dispute.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...pute-1.2748969

    ^And the story changes again.


    The P.C's are probably going to put Tom in an medically induced coma just to get him to button it. He's talking up a frenzy and telling a different story every time.
    You have to laugh when he said he called a lawyer and he was travelling with one at the time.
    Then he goes on to say - from the same article:

    “It turned out that this was a matter that did not touch government,” Lukaszuk said. “The cabinet minister retained independent, privately legal counsel. And that was the end of the matter.”

    You absolutely could not make this crapanacky up.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  91. #91
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    I love how he contradicts himself in a matter of minutes:

    In an interview with CBC News on Wednesday, Lukaszuk continued to insist he was dealing with what he has described as "an urgent government matter." [...]

    "It turned out that this was a matter that did not touch government," Lukaszuk said. "The cabinet minister retained independent, privately legal counsel. And that was the end of the matter."

    So, it was government business until everyone realized it wasn't. Uh-huh.

  92. #92
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,534

    Default

    With luck, he'll spin in ever decreasing circles up his own orifice.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  93. #93
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    So a cabinet minister has an emergency restraining order placed upon him and we shouldn't know which cabinet minister this is?

    I sure don't want my vote going to a person would do something that would lead to this sort of legal action, the name should be made public.

    As for Lukaszuk, he should have known to buy a local cell phone or buy a different data plan when he arrived (or have had Redford's assistant prebuy something).

  94. #94
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Nothing in the new information contradicts the original story asides from the murky issue of who is responsible for the bill. My instinct is the unnamed cabinet minister should be handling it since it was that individual who decided the only person he could call was the one farthest away. As for Lukaszuk, he took a panicked call from a cabinet minister who thought their life was endangered. I'm not surprised he did the initial work of finding an off hours contact for a law firm to handle things. I am surprised that the Premier's office had him continue working on things the next day given where he was.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  95. #95
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,018

    Default

    ^^




    Yeah, that would have been a good job for granny's ' travel scout '.

  96. #96
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,575

    Default

    Seems to me that the PC Party itself should probably be footing the bill, and it can go after the cabinet minister if it so chooses. It's definitely not something that the taxpayer should be footing the bill for.

  97. #97
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Nothing in the new information contradicts the original story asides from the murky issue of who is responsible for the bill. My instinct is the unnamed cabinet minister should be handling it since it was that individual who decided the only person he could call was the one farthest away. As for Lukaszuk, he took a panicked call from a cabinet minister who thought their life was endangered. I'm not surprised he did the initial work of finding an off hours contact for a law firm to handle things. I am surprised that the Premier's office had him continue working on things the next day given where he was.
    emphasis added...

    that makes the assumption that the individual making the call knew where the person being called was at the time. i often make calls to cell phones not knowing where the person is other than they are out of the office (particularly when it's "after hours").

    whether the call is answered is up to the person being called but if is answered disclosure of location and how to respond depending on location is up to the person receiving the call, not making the call. i have personally been on both ends of those kinds of calls and involved in each of the respective alternative scenarios.

    i do not have enough information - despite what has been reported - to know for certain whether the responses in this case in both those areas were appropriate or not. i have also been the recipient of "distress calls" from individuals in differing circumstances and as a result i also know that what might after the fact to outsiders seem like options were really not options at the time for those involved.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  98. #98
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Nothing in the new information contradicts the original story asides from the murky issue of who is responsible for the bill. My instinct is the unnamed cabinet minister should be handling it since it was that individual who decided the only person he could call was the one farthest away. As for Lukaszuk, he took a panicked call from a cabinet minister who thought their life was endangered. I'm not surprised he did the initial work of finding an off hours contact for a law firm to handle things. I am surprised that the Premier's office had him continue working on things the next day given where he was.
    emphasis added...

    that makes the assumption that the individual making the call knew where the person being called was at the time. i often make calls to cell phones not knowing where the person is other than they are out of the office (particularly when it's "after hours").

    whether the call is answered is up to the person being called but if is answered disclosure of location and how to respond depending on location is up to the person receiving the call, not making the call. i have personally been on both ends of those kinds of calls and involved in each of the respective alternative scenarios.

    i do not have enough information - despite what has been reported - to know for certain whether the responses in this case in both those areas were appropriate or not. i have also been the recipient of "distress calls" from individuals in differing circumstances and as a result i also know that what might after the fact to outsiders seem like options were really not options at the time for those involved.
    Very reasonable points.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  99. #99

    Default

    At this point one thing is abundantly clear:

    This was an internal matter between coworkers. It did not then, nor does it now, directly concern the ongoing operation of the government or the province in any meaningful matter. It's a private matter, hence the publication bans. If it's a private matter it's inappropriate to use public funds to deal with it.

    Either pay back the money or air the dirty laundry in public by removing the publication ban. I'd much rather get the money, frankly.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  100. #100

    Default Who you gonna call?

    It just gets more interesting! I still don't fault Lukaszuk on this one, he was taking a phone call to try deal with someone else's crisis, but the urgent government business does not seem so government related with the additional revelations now.

    Arguably, there is some government role to protect members of the government so they can carry out their duties effectively, so this is not completely black and white. We don't know all the details of this situation and probably will not get to ever, so it is hard to say for sure if there is any real justification or not for it being regarded as a government matter. However, it seems like this was mainly a personal matter and would have been better dealt with by the (annonymous) cabinet minister in question dealing with it in another way, rather than calling someone who was half way around the world at the time.

    I think the annonymous cabinet minister bears some responsiblity for this mess, perhaps more so than Lukaszuk.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •