Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
One of the reporters mentioned that it is normal that before a deal becomes finalized, there will be things kept confidential if that information might impact other business. Notley's response was that because public money is involved and the period of confidentiality doesn't end until after the election, the public should know all the details before voting.
I can see her point and it is really convenient and likely by design that the UCP timed it like that, but if the deal falls through and it hurts 3rd party business, that wouldn't be good either.
|
Then this announcement should have been delayed. You can't make something an election issue and not provide any information for voters to decide the election issue on.
Remember the last time the city and CSEC had a deal? There were several pages of information brochures, pie charts showing costs, all the details we needed to say "ya, that deal looks fair enough". This was clearly rushed, and I'm going to go on a limb here and suggest Smith said something like "either announce it now, or a UCP government won't provide any funding later." The city is of course going to say yes to free money, so here we are.
Smith just can't help but find ways to get in the way of everything.