By Trevor Greyeyes
Two recent stories cracked me up with the words offered up in the face of mounting pressure with the senate scandal and MANFF bowing out of managing the flood evacuees.
Firstly, let's look at the Conservative's recent strategy in trying to deflect at least some of the scandal from the senate saga by bringing up questionable wrongdoing by NDP leader Thomas Mulcair seventeen years ago.
An interesting strategy that I must point out has been used by everyone under the age of 10 to no avail with parents across the ages.
I'll give you a personal aside as to how this strategy is a big failure.
When I was young, I broke a lamp.
My mother came in and asked me if I broke the lamp.
Instead of answering, I pointed at my younger brother Vince and, of course, passing along an explosive little ditty that I was sure was so explosive that there was no way my mother would even consider punishing me for the broken lamp.
I can remember sitting in stony silence with my brother in our room we shared as children.
Trying to deflect criticism by pointing out someone else's past transgressions doesn't work.
In fact, it's downright childish and desperate to even try.
Still, I got to thank them for the laugh.
Now, if you haven't noticed the people who are in charge over at MANFF have recognized that perhaps the organization doesn't have the experience or personnel to properly manage the 2,000 flood evacuees from 2011.
Of course, this realization happens after a little over two years and $78 million later.
I probably would have been more inclined to believe a line like that if it was just a few months after the organization starting managing the daily operations taking care of the flood evacuees.
Instead, MANFF decided it didn't have the capacity after media reports surfaced of hotels being owed millions of dollars, questionable overtime claims and snacks being charged to the tune of around $1 million.
I don't think the feds or the provincial government are looking to get down to the facts about spending on the evacuee flood file.
For example, in a Winnipeg Free Press story (Native firefighters to stop helping flood evacuees, Mia Rabson, 06/3/2013) the story stated that "Aboriginal and Northern Development Canada insists that review is not a real audit but more a value-for-money examination."
What? No audit.
I would've preferred to sift through a document prepared by an established accounting firm.
My worry is that there might be some items overlooked that might be important to evacuees, First Nation citizens and even the regular Canadian taxpayer.
There should be a full accounting.