Just to sum up
A lot of effort and hot air has been expended for the public good this week. I refer to the manoevres in the Hospital debacle. A perfectly good discussion of the issue - can we change direction and have the announced departmental cuts reversed - has developed into a test of wills between the Board and its members.
We must understand that the Hospital Association is just that, a membership of people who get together once a year to give people they elect to the Board the responsibility of running the Hospital on their behalf. Once a year the membership come together to elect new members to the Board or to replace the ones they have. It is the only guaranteed act that the bylaws allow - to vote in an election.
The present Board, in an effort to keep people they consider not qualified, one of the applicants was told by a member of the nominating committee, producing a potential Human Rights complaint, "You are too ****ing old!", out of the election nominated a slate of people equal to the number of vacancies and then are now prepared to declare them elected by acclamation. This will take place without a vote by the members.
This naturally produced pushback and 10% of the members asked for a special meeting the subject being the removal of Directors. The present Directors obviously declared the 'requisition' not within the purview of the role of a member and refused to schedule a special meeting.
Let's look at this phrase 'not within the purview of the role of a member'. This was the phrase used when Ben Burd tried to place a motion into the AGM. It has not been defined or explained. Mr Hudson, the Board Chair referred Mr Burd to section 296 of the Corporations Act. and that section explains the rightds of a member to make 'requisitions'. Why the CA you ask, well it's because not only is the NHH an association it is a Corporation in Ontario. Which brings us back to the Corporations Act.
This Act defined shareholders' rights and all shareholders are entitled to two things: the right to attend an Annuual Meeting and the right to vote as such a meeting. Also business may be brought before the meeting if the person making the 'requisition' has the support of other shareholders.
Now for the important part - if shareholders have the right to vote for Directors they also have the right to Unvote them. Ever heard of shareholders' uprisings Mr Hudson, well we have one here. I guess it's time to go back to the lawyer and force the NHH Board to live by the Corporations Act.
BTW letters have been received by the people who requested membership lists that they are now available. Apparently the Privacy Commissioner told Mr Biron what some of us have been telling him - that the list is public. Anyway when Mr Morand phoned to find out how to pick it up he was told by Mr Biron that it was only available from him. When Mr Morand went to Mr Biron's office, after being told it was available Mr Biron had gone away for the weekend. A piece of class! But still the stalling effort continues in his attempt to stop the membership being informed about their affairs. With a mailing ready to go out to all the members the loss of the weekend was crucial.
i
We must understand that the Hospital Association is just that, a membership of people who get together once a year to give people they elect to the Board the responsibility of running the Hospital on their behalf. Once a year the membership come together to elect new members to the Board or to replace the ones they have. It is the only guaranteed act that the bylaws allow - to vote in an election.
The present Board, in an effort to keep people they consider not qualified, one of the applicants was told by a member of the nominating committee, producing a potential Human Rights complaint, "You are too ****ing old!", out of the election nominated a slate of people equal to the number of vacancies and then are now prepared to declare them elected by acclamation. This will take place without a vote by the members.
This naturally produced pushback and 10% of the members asked for a special meeting the subject being the removal of Directors. The present Directors obviously declared the 'requisition' not within the purview of the role of a member and refused to schedule a special meeting.
Let's look at this phrase 'not within the purview of the role of a member'. This was the phrase used when Ben Burd tried to place a motion into the AGM. It has not been defined or explained. Mr Hudson, the Board Chair referred Mr Burd to section 296 of the Corporations Act. and that section explains the rightds of a member to make 'requisitions'. Why the CA you ask, well it's because not only is the NHH an association it is a Corporation in Ontario. Which brings us back to the Corporations Act.
This Act defined shareholders' rights and all shareholders are entitled to two things: the right to attend an Annuual Meeting and the right to vote as such a meeting. Also business may be brought before the meeting if the person making the 'requisition' has the support of other shareholders.
Now for the important part - if shareholders have the right to vote for Directors they also have the right to Unvote them. Ever heard of shareholders' uprisings Mr Hudson, well we have one here. I guess it's time to go back to the lawyer and force the NHH Board to live by the Corporations Act.
BTW letters have been received by the people who requested membership lists that they are now available. Apparently the Privacy Commissioner told Mr Biron what some of us have been telling him - that the list is public. Anyway when Mr Morand phoned to find out how to pick it up he was told by Mr Biron that it was only available from him. When Mr Morand went to Mr Biron's office, after being told it was available Mr Biron had gone away for the weekend. A piece of class! But still the stalling effort continues in his attempt to stop the membership being informed about their affairs. With a mailing ready to go out to all the members the loss of the weekend was crucial.
i
9 comments:
"For the public good", not a chance. You heard it here first. If this stunt works it will spell the end to your local hospital. It will set off a chain of events that will focus the government on why local hospitals left to their local egos cannot function and put it number one on the list to close.
That's a dire predication Anonymous. On what basis do you make it? Has it happened before? What do you mean by "local egos" the hosptial CEO and his gang of bum boys or the citizens' groups who are trying to ensure democracy is practised under the rules of the Corporation Act?
Just wondering, and I make no apology for inserting my own freely held opinion into my questions.
I'll say it again - the only pressure point that will bring lasting results is Queen's Park. The buck stops there, and like it or not, that's who writes the rules. The first comment is likely to be more relevant than you wish.
Deb asks "On what basis do you make it?" I'd point to past experience for an indication of the direction that all this is likely to turn to. No one can accurately predict the outcomes but experience suggests some unexpected ones. There may well be some regrets down this road, on both sides of what should have only one side, people who need affordable health care provided by a system meant to deliver it where and when as needed. At least that's the original objective, isn't it? So what's happened here to get in the way of that noble purpose, and why? To me, that's the billion dollar question needing a straight answer.
btw - this is not the same annon as the first one.
Don't worry Deb O your job in the victim's industry is safe.
Something that has always bugged me in this is the amount of people who still park at Walmart etc. and walk over so they do not have to pay for parking. Try spending some time in Sick Kids or Kingston General and you quickly realize that the parking here is cheap.
We are lucky to have a great hospital in this Town, It is time to get behind it, not try to bring it down.
Is there some jealous motive behind this? Because Biron makes a lot of money?
Maybe you should try runing it, Ben, it may be a lot harder than it looks from the out side.
BTW whatever happened to your Peter Delanty "should run or not" survey.
Seems to me - that people voted not how you would - so it took it off.
Glass House
Jesus Christ, Ben, if only for the sake of dolts like me that like a kind of minimalamist order in their otherwise totally chaotic lives, you gotta drop all these stupid, stupid, stupid 'Anonymous' comments.
How the hell does anyone tell one anonymous from another? Or are they all the same person? And if that's the case is that person so utterly purblind STUPID that they can't figure out how to get a Google ID such that they might clarify their own argument?
Or don't they know a godamned 9-year old that can help the figure it out like I did?
Or are they just purposefully trying to cloud, to obfuscate, to confuse, to muddy the wat
ers, to make Deb shadow-box her way into old age? C'mon, Ben. Straighten this out or there's no argument at all and anybody worth listening to is just wasting their breath.
I will second that opinion. It's getting tiresome and I hate to insult the wrong Anonymous by mistake.
For a remedy even easier than getting a Google account, a poster can pick "name/URL" and then make up one. Like "reactionary anonymous" maybe, or "shy anonymous". Anything so we can tell them apart.
Sheeesh, don't you hefty lefties ever stop whining and telling others what to do?
Just because you have low level intellgence and can't distinguish one arguement or posit from another, doesn't mean the world revolves around you dolts. Merk & Deb -- get back to the arguements being made.
Your god-damned Allah-damned whining is irritating and chronic.
Copy/paste the point, italicize it, and then proceed. If you two don't know how to do this, go get a 9yr old.
Anonymous is right. If the government brings in a supervisor I predict dire consequences for NHH and the community as a whole. When one looks at other hospital that have had supervisors inposed on them (Quinte, Kingston General, Huronia, Toronto East General) there are usually more cuts and rationalizations than would otherwise occur. Do the research people.
Post a Comment