08 December 2005

Methinks he doth protest too much

Danny Williams likes to use sales jargon, like talking about "the ask".

Well, in sales as in poker, there's a thing called "the tell". It's something that gives away the truth, despite the apparent demeanor of the other person.

Whenever anyone asks Danny Williams a question he doesn't like - that is one that comes close to the truth - he immediately turns into attack mode. He lashes out and accuses his questioner of all sorts of evil motives.

That form of personal attack, while rather entertaining to watch is actually the weakest form of argument.

And it is noticeable that when you strike close to the truth, Williams gets personal.

All the time.

It isn't just that a question is about someone close to his family, and therefore he's defending his relatives. Williams has a noticeable tendency to employ people close to his family, so much so that it's become a bit of a joke at Confederation Building, in fact. he lashes out whenever someone is getting close to the real reason for some action.

Danny Williams didn't like questions yesterday about the hiring of his daughter's fiance as a communications director with the Department of Justice. Before that, the man was a staffer in the Government Members' Office. Beyond that, no one knows what his background is.

There was no competition for the position.

The Premier lashed out at the guy asking the question - Roland Butler - who was involved in a hiring scandal several years ago. Under a different Premier, Butler's boss and others paid a price for the incident.

But the question yesterday focused on the Premier's future son-in-law, whom the Premier described in this way:

"This government has hired this bright, capable, qualified, young man in a temporary position, which is a perfectly legal thing to do and which the members opposite know is according to the rules and according to the rules of the Public Service Commission. So, he was hired in a temporary position and he is eminently qualified and that is according to law and according to rules. Shame on you!"

My questions for the Premier are simple:

1. Would the Premier please make public Bill Hickey's resume?

If he is so eminently qualified for the position, then it should be obvious why he was appointed into a position without a competition.

2. As for the competition currently underway for communications directors, would the Premier assure that it will be run fairly - not like other Public Service Commission competitions - so that incumbents, like Mr. Hickey, do not have an unfair advantage over other, eminently qualified candidates?

The questions are simple.

The replies should be equally simple.

Let's see if we can get them.