August 19th, 2017

Taxpayers on the hook for judgment

By Letter to the Editor on March 17, 2017.

Regarding the article in the Lethbridge Herald on March 2 “RCMP fined for harassment,” I know the title of the article is accurate in as much as, that is what the judge said. What the judgment should have said was “taxpayers fined $141,000” because let’s face it, that is who is paying the fine.

I don’t understand it. How every time some person or persons employed by the government mismanages people or processes, the taxpayer gets stuck with the bill. My first question: are the RCMP officers that bullied Sgt. Peter Merrifield for over seven years being held accountable to pay for some of the damages? More important, have these officers been disciplined with time off without pay or what seems more appropriate, fired for just cause with no compensation?

Once a bully always a bully. I must wonder if these same bullies are not some of the same officers who caused some of the sexual harassment to female officers that cost the taxpayers millions of dollars. These occurrences continue to happen with no apparent consequences to the perpetrators, only to the taxpayers.

Since it seems that both the government and its employees are immune from paying out on lawsuits, we need a better plan. I suggest that every employee at every level of government be required to pay into an insurance policy that would cover off all lawsuits. The individual premium would be based on your job responsibilities and salary level.

Managers and supervisors would naturally pay more because they are in positions to create more risk. Also, like how WCB raises premiums based on the number of claims submitted, the same process could be levied against a level of government or department; the more claims the higher the premiums.

I think the Members of Parliament, Members of the Legislative Assembly, the RCMP and the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs would no doubt be paying the highest premiums.

Barrie Orich


3 Responses to “Taxpayers on the hook for judgment”

  1. already extinct says:

    You are right Barrie.

    Your example is not largely different than when a large contingent of civic employees decide to take a vacation on the municipal tab, calling it a “mission” of one sort or another – like recently when the mayor “hosted” a bunch from this city in communist China.

    These junkets often disguised as “trade missions” cost we taxpayers a great deal of money ferrying, feeding, hoteling, & sprinkling gifts of “friendship” on people we the financier will never know, because most of us will never have the money for such lavish vacations!. The taxpayer involvement in these things – we get the bill.

    There will be no explanation either – nothing- likely forth coming in two three four years showing us if the “exercise” actually had some benefit other than showing a part of the world to civic employees, most of us will never in a lifetime see personally.

    We’re seeing the same thing evolving in this city with curbside recycling. When officials have successfully convinced about half the taxpayers that tens of millions of dollars in initial expenditure and the same amount for evermore to keep it going – to deal with 1/10th of the waste generated – will be covered by a “$7.00” addition to the utility bill – well you know they are very successful at what they see as their job – obfuscation of fact, obfuscation of where the money is best spent, obfuscation of greatest benefit to the majority of the people who pay the bills.

    Books, plenty of them, have been written of the multitudes of ways our elected (and unelected)officials fleece the sheeple – the various methods used to fleece them since feudal times, which have returned.

    Your example and mine are just two of hundreds ongoing this very minute.

  2. Montreal13 says:

    I agree. It seems as though the more info out there the more it is twisted. Is the manipulation and falsification of data coming out of city hall from all sectors- at the highest level in this city’s history? Does it seem like there is whole departments designing spin? It has been said before ,”he who controls the data ,controls the story”. Spearman ran on a get the crooks campaign. Did he plan to follow that pursuit and did not find himself up to the challenge? Do you think his frustation if any, may have played itself out in part and explain why he is on his third assistant? But do you think ,to put on the top hat and pretend like the show must go merrily along as he gets more and more absorbed by it – is insulting? Is he fooling many people any more? Check out the wine endorsements and car endorsements on social media. Any wonder why politics turns some people’s stomach’s?

  3. already extinct says:

    Answer to last question NO!

    Oh yes Montreal13, remember the slogan that went something like “Elect Chris Spearman he has plans to throw a spear into………” the corruption or whatever the slogan said.

    I don’t remember it accurately but I do remember him having big problems with the confusion and problems at city hall, and he soon found out where the bear poops in the buckwheat – who runs things down there – nothing changed, maybe gotten worse under his leadership(?)

    .I guess we’ll see come October how much the people loved the past four years of the circus act and top hat. The unfortunate part is those who actually run the show down there are the large numbers of unelected, who will just wake up the day after the election and set about retraining a brand new pack of democratically (?) elected councillors.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.