Ed, ........Strategic you say ; is how one thing relates to another, it is not long term planning. I paused on that for a couple of reasons. I wondered if I think in a strategic way vs long term. I expect both are important.
Given your description, to think that hardly any politician thinks in a strategic fashion is demoralising, given the size and complexity of the business of running the government, its many departments, and so many problems to be solved or improved.
I wonder if your military training has influenced your thinking? Were you 5 years or so with the ROTP while at university?
Have you one or several books near finished to publish?
Last night I came across a book I had not read, it got buried under other books but was important at the time, and I had it signed by the author, Jeffery Simpson in 1988. There are only 14 pages on Nfld as it deals with all of Canada from it's early days. Its titled "Spoils of Power: The politics of Patronage".
Chapter 6 is on Nfld. Its opening paragraph reads:
Newfoundland, perhaps more starkly than any other part of Canada, provides a poignant and comprehensive case study of the infusion of patronage, pork barrelling and corruption into every aspect of political life..........for base political morality, pervasive patronage, persistent venality and even sheer thievery, Newfoundland's rogues' gallery of politicians until recently set the province apart". Given this was in 1988, it ends saying thinks changed under Clyde Wells.
Question; did you have influence with Mr Wells on that matter?
Ed. I asked 4 questions, the first 2, about your background, how or if it may have influenced your thinking.
The 3th question, is that as I become aware of your vast knowledge of politics in this province and your ability to write with ease and a interesting style, I would be surprised if you don't write a book sometime.
The last question is probably what you addressed and describe as a simple question with a simple answer.
Simpson says "the Liberals elected "a new breed of leader, a lawyer with a clinical mind and cool demeanour, Clyde Wells, who........appreciated that the days of the old -style patronage were over, although patronage itself would remain in an attenuated form in the body politic of Newfoundland.
Is that a fair assessment of Premier Wells, and his views?
I was not until recently aware that you were Well's chief of staff, is that even correct?
I admire that you seem aware of and critical of the recent levels of poor practice of influence by some well connected to politicians.
I should ask whether you and Wells were aligned with the idea that patronage was bad, or whether you provided sound and good advice that was not taken?
I just read part of John Crosbie's book "No Holds Barred" it is interesting and he has a sense of humour and likeable in many ways, but is pretty critical of Wells, but also points out Wells good qualities. Was Crosbie unfair about Wells?
Let me answer all of your questionsrather than just the last one, which is what the emphatic no was about.
1. Influences on my thinking: military background - somewhat. There are some habits, ways of thinking etc that come out of that. My interest in strategic thinking, decision-making etc pre-dates my military reserve time. The academic interest came before the actual military one but they fit together.
The interest in planning, thinking, assessment, evaluation, etc is really the core of it and that came from somewhere else. I have no idea where. What's more interesting to me is how so much of what I was initially interested in came to be of use later on without me being conscious of it.
I naturally look for patterns and commonalities. That's part of how I think about things myself so my academic background is about both system and sequence.
2. My writing interest is Bond. After 21 years, I produced about 6K to 9K words a week, give or take. That's a new book's worth of output every 10 weeks.
if you gather together all the writing on electricity from 2005 to about 2020ish, you will get 350K words. roughly seven books worth.
In addition, I have edited a collection of columns a couple of times now but never took them to a publisher. The last one was done expressly to mark the 20th anniversary so it includes a sampling of the whole time.
On top of that, I have started (sketched out) two or three others but just never started on them. The work on them is all through Bond.
The earliest example of that sort of thing was something I wrote on the 2004-05 Danny goes to Ottawa thing. I produced 42K words on that and have the manuscipt somewhere salted away. Meant it to be a chapter of a book (maybe 10K) but it got away from me.
3. I was a junior staffer for Wells. His chief of staff was Edsel Bonnell.
4. That's how I could answer the last question so emphatically. Clyde Wells has his own mind and if anything, some of his ideas managed to pentrate my think skull not the other way around.
Purely for your amusement, check out Bill Rowe's best and worst premiers book. I get four and a half pages in there in which Bill ran me down to the dirt because I had pissed him off a couple of times, including calling out his shitty behaviour about the author of the Farrell fire investigation report.
For a non-Premier to get that much space in a book about Premiers (and most of Bill's tirade is just nonsense) only shows how little effort Flanker gives to fact-checking. Still, I got to be counted among the Premiers even if I will never be one. I think I might have come off a bit better than some actual ones.
Ed, ........Strategic you say ; is how one thing relates to another, it is not long term planning. I paused on that for a couple of reasons. I wondered if I think in a strategic way vs long term. I expect both are important.
Given your description, to think that hardly any politician thinks in a strategic fashion is demoralising, given the size and complexity of the business of running the government, its many departments, and so many problems to be solved or improved.
I wonder if your military training has influenced your thinking? Were you 5 years or so with the ROTP while at university?
Have you one or several books near finished to publish?
Last night I came across a book I had not read, it got buried under other books but was important at the time, and I had it signed by the author, Jeffery Simpson in 1988. There are only 14 pages on Nfld as it deals with all of Canada from it's early days. Its titled "Spoils of Power: The politics of Patronage".
Chapter 6 is on Nfld. Its opening paragraph reads:
Newfoundland, perhaps more starkly than any other part of Canada, provides a poignant and comprehensive case study of the infusion of patronage, pork barrelling and corruption into every aspect of political life..........for base political morality, pervasive patronage, persistent venality and even sheer thievery, Newfoundland's rogues' gallery of politicians until recently set the province apart". Given this was in 1988, it ends saying thinks changed under Clyde Wells.
Question; did you have influence with Mr Wells on that matter?
A simple question with a simple answer: no.
Ed. I asked 4 questions, the first 2, about your background, how or if it may have influenced your thinking.
The 3th question, is that as I become aware of your vast knowledge of politics in this province and your ability to write with ease and a interesting style, I would be surprised if you don't write a book sometime.
The last question is probably what you addressed and describe as a simple question with a simple answer.
Simpson says "the Liberals elected "a new breed of leader, a lawyer with a clinical mind and cool demeanour, Clyde Wells, who........appreciated that the days of the old -style patronage were over, although patronage itself would remain in an attenuated form in the body politic of Newfoundland.
Is that a fair assessment of Premier Wells, and his views?
I was not until recently aware that you were Well's chief of staff, is that even correct?
I admire that you seem aware of and critical of the recent levels of poor practice of influence by some well connected to politicians.
I should ask whether you and Wells were aligned with the idea that patronage was bad, or whether you provided sound and good advice that was not taken?
I just read part of John Crosbie's book "No Holds Barred" it is interesting and he has a sense of humour and likeable in many ways, but is pretty critical of Wells, but also points out Wells good qualities. Was Crosbie unfair about Wells?
Wells hasn't written about his days in politics?
Winston:
Let me answer all of your questionsrather than just the last one, which is what the emphatic no was about.
1. Influences on my thinking: military background - somewhat. There are some habits, ways of thinking etc that come out of that. My interest in strategic thinking, decision-making etc pre-dates my military reserve time. The academic interest came before the actual military one but they fit together.
The interest in planning, thinking, assessment, evaluation, etc is really the core of it and that came from somewhere else. I have no idea where. What's more interesting to me is how so much of what I was initially interested in came to be of use later on without me being conscious of it.
I naturally look for patterns and commonalities. That's part of how I think about things myself so my academic background is about both system and sequence.
2. My writing interest is Bond. After 21 years, I produced about 6K to 9K words a week, give or take. That's a new book's worth of output every 10 weeks.
if you gather together all the writing on electricity from 2005 to about 2020ish, you will get 350K words. roughly seven books worth.
In addition, I have edited a collection of columns a couple of times now but never took them to a publisher. The last one was done expressly to mark the 20th anniversary so it includes a sampling of the whole time.
On top of that, I have started (sketched out) two or three others but just never started on them. The work on them is all through Bond.
The earliest example of that sort of thing was something I wrote on the 2004-05 Danny goes to Ottawa thing. I produced 42K words on that and have the manuscipt somewhere salted away. Meant it to be a chapter of a book (maybe 10K) but it got away from me.
3. I was a junior staffer for Wells. His chief of staff was Edsel Bonnell.
4. That's how I could answer the last question so emphatically. Clyde Wells has his own mind and if anything, some of his ideas managed to pentrate my think skull not the other way around.
Purely for your amusement, check out Bill Rowe's best and worst premiers book. I get four and a half pages in there in which Bill ran me down to the dirt because I had pissed him off a couple of times, including calling out his shitty behaviour about the author of the Farrell fire investigation report.
For a non-Premier to get that much space in a book about Premiers (and most of Bill's tirade is just nonsense) only shows how little effort Flanker gives to fact-checking. Still, I got to be counted among the Premiers even if I will never be one. I think I might have come off a bit better than some actual ones.