Wednesday, May 28, 2014

What’s the right word to describe the gas plant scandal?

Ontario Liberals are up in arms because Andrea Horwath is using the word “corrupt” to describe the gas plant scandal.

In case you’re not up to speed, during the 2011 election campaign, the McGuinty Liberals put a rush job on cancelling unpopular natural-gas energy plants — they commissioned — which cost taxpayers $1.1-billion.

Bean counting

Apparently the Liberal war room did some number crunching and discovered if they lost the seats in the gas plant ridings, they would lose their majority.

So they canceled the gas plants. Made sure the contractors were “made whole.” (Kathleen Wynne was McG’s campaign co-chair and her sig was on related docs.)

But they lost their hard-fought majority by one seat! (Gosh darn it! And after going through all that trouble!)


Since I live in Hamilton and happen to be a close friend of Andrea’s, I suggest that Liberal supporters email me a word that they would find more suitable to describe the gas plant scandal from the following list.

Then I will get the word out to Andrea, pronto, and we can wrap up this whole unfortunate misunderstanding:

  • crooked

  • fraudulent

  • nefarious

  • rotten

  • shady

  • unethical

  • unscrupulous

  • untrustworthy

  • venal

  • base

  • debached

  • exploiting

  • foul

  • profiteering

  • reprobate

  • tainted

  • double-dealing

  • faithless

  • fast and loose

  • gone to the dogs

  • knavish

  • perfidious

  • treacherous

  • underhanded


I may have overstated my relationship with Andrea somewhat. But I do have an “Andrea Horwath” sign staked up in front of my house!


  1. One of the main reasons I'm having trouble supporting the NDP this time around (and I am a long-time supporter) is exactly this.
    The Liberals were forced into campaigning on cancelling the plants only because both the conservatives and the NDP were doing so, and polls showed them that a "NIMBY gap" would likely cost them these ridings. (Remember that?)
    Since the source of the outrage from the other parties is that the Government did something that the opposition parties 1) maneuvered them into doing and 2) would have done themselves, this entire "scandal" is purely a matter of partisan posturing.
    Sleazy, disgraceful, dishonest, "politics-as-usual".
    I usually support the NDP because, usually, they avoid shameful tactics like this.

    1. Let's compare this to other scandals.

      Ad Scam: mismanagement of $250M leads to the embezzlement of a few million by low-level bureaucrats.

      G20 billion-dollar weekend boondoggle. Million-dollar fake lake. Egregious waste of taxpayer dollars. Self-promotion.

      $200M Economic Action Plan Ads. Flagrant self-promotion on the taxpayer dime. Freeloading copious amount of campaign advertising.

      $1.1-billion Gas Plant Scandal. Government spent whatever money it took to cancel gas-plants it commissioned to save gas-plant riding seats in attempt to win/buy majority government.

      I think its obvious the gas plant scandal is the worst of all. It was a flagrant abuse of a huge amount of taxpayer money in a desperate (and failed) attempt to influence a democratic election.

      Is having to settle for a minority government really all that bad?

      It is not a stretch to use the word "corrupt" to describe the scandal by any means. It's not sleazy to use an applicable word to describe a scandal. This is part of the Liberal record. It should certainly be an election issue like any other scandal.

  2. I did some research on the gas plant scandal and I think the best word is foolish. (After looking it up, reprobate was tempting)

    It was foolish to put the plants where they should have known there would be a lot of opposition. It was foolish not to move the earlier. The negotiations where handles foolishly and the Napanee was a foolish choice for the new location of the Oakville plant.

    Corrupt isn't a good word, because there was nothing illegal about it and they gained nothing financially from it.

    1. According to, the first definition of corrupt is: "guilty of dishonest practices, as bribery; lacking integrity; crooked: a corrupt judge."

      Nothing illegal was done. But "dishonest" and "lacking integrity" seem to fit the bill.

      They didn't attempt to gain money, they attempting to gain unfettered power.

      I really think there ought to be a law against doing this kind of thing. Or at least consequences.

  3. In answer to your question, a mistake in judgement by a former government.

    1. Ok, that's your opinion. Andrea's is that it was corrupt. I think the final answer should be left to voters.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.