[All] Strategic Plan consultation: the most shameful and stupidest I've ever attended.

Wed Feb 23 17:38:55 EST 2011

Maybe GREN can issue a press release on the Consultant Approach to  
community involvement OR ? And to think that taxpayers pay for this  
manipulative bullshit! This is not democracy but elected dictators  
playing control games through their agent consultants (& relatives).
Robert M

On 23-Feb-11, at 5:08 PM, Ginny Quinn wrote:

> OMG  Greg    this is exactly what happened at the Kitchener parks so- 
> called" open round table"  discussions?  with the out of town parks  
> consultant   " Fred Galloway" from London;brother to Tom Galloway.   
> We were made to name ONLY   ONE  on the list of needs and  
> priorities   and when questioned about this limitation,like a  
> BULLY , he kept saying  "No not 2   not  3  ONLY  ONE."   Daphne    
> and Gord and Yvonne and many of us were angry  and should have ALL  
> walked out.
> They will not allow freedom of choice or multiple choice in degrees  
> because then those bullies lose control.
> I have an old friend from long ago who was in high upper management  
> (long gone now)  and he gave me the best definition of a  
> "Consultant"  that I've ever heard.....and there are very few for  
> whom I have gleaned any respect because most don't know a pittance  
> about the subject they "consult on"  especially in another community.
> My friend told me that  "A consultant is a guy who borrows your  
> watch to tell you what time it is ".
> Yes, that means he picks the brains of those in the know  or aught  
> to be; finds out what answers they want to 'reach?'  and then takes  
> charge to do it come Hell or High Water over the backs of the common  
> folks.
> He was dead on for 90% of the ones I've met  or had to tolerate.  
> Kinda like  "Them that can't-- Consults"  Ginny
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gregory C. Michalenko
> To: Louisette Lanteigne ; all at gren.ca
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 3:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [All] Strategic Plan consultation: the most shameful  
> and stupidest I've ever attended.
>
> Re:  Waterloo strategic plan consultations.  I went last night --  
> and walked out.  We were put in small groups - only 4 in mine.  We  
> talked productively about our visions and hopes for Waterloo for  
> about an hour, and then each of the 3 groups gave short summaries.   
> Before there was any chance for us to comment on the ideas coming  
> from the other groups, the hired consultants swung into action.  We  
> were each handed a gizmo that looked like a remote control for a  
> tv.  Then they started explaining that we were to compare the "6  
> pillars" (eg, environment, economic) of the strategic plan to each  
> other. Since there were 6 pillars, that made 15 possible  
> combinations (eg 1+2, 1+3, 1+4...3+4, 3+5 etc.). The gizmo allowed  
> us to pick which of each pair we favoured and rank on a score of  
> 1-10.  And instantly it all would get added up and we would know  
> what mattered most!  I put up my hand and asked what that was  
> supposed to prove:  they cut us off from productive group  
> interaction and were reducing us to individuals in a secret ballot  
> voting at the same time for something and against another.  I  
> mentioned how the School Board at a big public consultation after  
> the Harris cuts tried to do the same thing: they tried to lure 200  
> people by giving each of us 3 votes to select our favourite things  
> from a list of about 20 (eg, outdoor ed, special ed, music) so that  
> they would know what to cut.  I spoke out and said that we needed  
> all these things in an educational system, and chopping any of them  
> would be like hacking off the leg or ears or liver of a body and  
> expecting it to still function.  Now we were doing the same thing  
> again.  The consultants just bulldozed me aside and kept on going.   
> I walked out and was joined by only one other person.
>
> So if you go - don't be afraid to challenge such shenanigans.   
> Insist that you came to talk together and interact, not generate a  
> bunch of numbers using gee-whiz technology.  Tell them that this is  
> not public consultation but a shell game, and they should be ashamed  
> of themselves
> - Greg Michalenko
> aFrom: all-bounces at gren.ca [all-bounces at gren.ca] on behalf of  
> Louisette Lanteigne [butterflybluelu at rogers.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 2:48 PM
> To: all at gren.ca
> Subject: [All] Strategic Plan, Nuclear not profitable and Tar Sands  
> update
>
> Hello folks
>
> Here's the latest
>
> Waterloo Strategic Plan
> Tonight is the last evening where Waterloo residents can participate  
> in a workshop regarding the Strategic Plan. The meeting starts at  
> 6:30 at Forbes room at RIM Park.
>
> Nuclear still not profitable
> After 50 years, Nuclear power still relies heavily upon subsidies.  
> The industry is still not economically viable according to a report  
> released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists. (UCS). To view  
> the press release and the link to the report visit here:
> http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/nuclear-power-subsidies-report-0504.html
>
> Europe & Tar Sands update
> The European Union is rejecting the Tar Sands oil saying it would  
> circumvent their efforts to reduce emissions. They knew that Canada  
> may challenge them at the World Trade Organization if they took this  
> stance so prior to doing so the European Commission conducted their  
> own analysis and published the data showing how dirty Tar Sands oil  
> really is. That report is published on line here:
> http://ec.europa.eu/clima/studies/transport/fuel/index_en.htm
>
> The issue is said to be threatening the European Free Trade deal:
> http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idCATRE71K2FL20110221?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews
>
> Currently the EU is on the verge of  approving a law that aims to  
> cut the carbon pollution from vehicles: the Fuel Quality Directive  
> as seen in this PDF: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:0088:0113:EN:PDF
> This legislation will result in suppliers of petrol, diesel and gas  
> oil reducing emissions of greenhouse gas by 2020 but the Canadian  
> government is lobbying heavily to change the legislative text and  
> undermine EU's climate policy in an effort to promote Tar Sands oil.  
> The World Wildlife Fund has a quick sign petition to address this  
> issue to help keep Tar Sands oil out of Europe. Here's the link:
> http://wwf.panda.org/how_you_can_help/campaign/ac_detail.cfm?ActionUrl=http://buffy.bluegecko.net/action/c489daab-6f4f-49fb-804c-96028eb782f1
>
> Meanwhile, several prominent scientists are still demanding further  
> studies for toxins in Alberta.http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Potent+toxins+need+studied/4309179/story.html
>
> That's it for now.
>
> Lulu :0)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> All mailing list
> All at gren.ca
> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca
> _______________________________________________
> All mailing list
> All at gren.ca
> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20110223/d8515b68/attachment.html>