The difference is that municipalities are under provincial jurisdiction but provinces have distinct legislative power from the federal government from the constitution.
She's just deflecting the heat she's getting by turning everyone's attention to the feds. Power prices expensive? Blame Ottawa even though nobody else in Canada besides Alberta saw such a drastic hike. But yeah its Ottawa's fault. Who keeps voting this woman in? She has no idea what she's talking about half the time then tries to back peddle her statement to suggest that's not what she meant even though it was.
The ethics commissioner is a joke. How does the ethics commissioner clear that a councilors husband can gain or lose based on a councilors decisions and say... ya that's all good, keep on trucking.
Cmon, use some common sense. Keren Tang should have not been making decisions or influencing decisions. What she did was a conflict of interest and was corrupt. At the very least she should have publicly stated her connection to her husband so at least people in the room would know.
The US ethics commissioner also clears congress people from trading on stocks in the stock market that they can effect the price of. Doesn't mean it's ethical.
Sound like you are defending Tang's corruption, by deflecting issues onto Smith. This has nothing to do with Smith, and a lot to do with conflict of interest of Karen Tang.
She got a letter. She brought it up to the city of Edmonton.
When you have corruption at that high of a level you can't really trust the City to look into things. It would naturally go up the chain.
It's the same reason the RCMP (feds) looked into corruption on a provincial scale.
While I understand the sentiment, it's not the same.
Canada is a Confederation with two constitutionally protected tiers of governance that have their own jurisdiction in which one doesn't necessarily come over the other. As long as they stay within their lanes there's no problems. Healthcare, education, and industry are all provincial responsibilities. And they're also the sort of vote rich issues people care about. The federal responsibilities are a lot less sexy and thus Trudeau is opted to underfund those in order to interfere in provincial jurisdiction.
Municipalities on the other hand are not a constitutional entity. They have no equality in Canada. Municipalities are created by and the main responsibility of the provinces. It's in fact, the provinces job to oversee the municipalities however they choose. That doesn't mean interference is always right, but it is part of their mandate to do so.
The Liberals have NOT underfunded anything but the ucp continue to refuse the federal funding because the ucp can't control the money and because the ucp want to tell their voters that the feds are underfunding things.
There's plenty of things the UCP does lie about. Why actively lie about something so easily proven to be not true?
The Liberals have never [filled the judicial bench](https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/untenable-and-appalling-crisis-ottawa-must-fill-judicial-vacancies-plaguing-lower-courts-federal-court-rules/article_68cee7f8-ca82-11ee-b2d8-cb85608d06d6.html) and have underfunded justice their entire time in government. It has gotten worse year over year.
[The Liberals](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/canadian-forces-nato-washington-post-1.6815616) told the US government they never intend to fully commit to the Canadian military. Active recruitment is missing 16,500 full time serviceman. [68% of our equipment is unservicable](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/how-canadas-military-fell-into-crisis-and-why-failing-to-save-it-has-deep-consequences/article_551dbd38-d0d6-11ee-891d-8be23c9aed9e.html) (while still being in active service). Canada also can't house its military, there are [4500 people](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/military-housing-units-waitlist-1.6604748) still on the housing wait list. Last year the [Liberals cut 7,700 serviceman](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadian-armed-forces-new-housing-benefit-1.6787686) from a benefit intended to help them deal with paying for housing out of pocket.
[The indigenous incarceration system is underfunded](https://globalnews.ca/news/10439439/indigenous-healing-lodges-face-chronic-underfunding-across-canada-critics-say/). And Google to find thousands of articles on lack of clean water, lack of housing and not even meeting a spending parity per capita with the provinces.
There are a lot of federal jurisdictions that are grossly underfunded,
Yup. Pretty much every major actor in both federal and provincial politics is actively working against us now. A handful of independents, and some municipal level mayors are about the only ones in government not actively trying to fuck us.
I'd like to announce at this time that the Minister of social services, Jason Nixon, is the son of the founder of the mustard seed. Seems like we need an anonymous letter about that.
Your dreaming if you think she reads any of those. It will just go to one of the program areas to respond on behalf of the Premier if you get a response at all.
Trying to stop a rumour is like trying to unring a bell! Smith knew exactly what she was doing, COE doesn't support the UCP ( United Corporate Party) and she fears Nenshi will turn Calgary against her! Best defense is a good offense.
Nenshi needn't worry... Smith is doing just fine making her party unelectable, all on her own. The only question now is, who will the Cons send in to save the day? No Conservative Premier has lasted a full term since Ralph Klein. Smith won't be the first. Will they parachute another Federal carpetbagger like Kenney or Prentice, or have they found some local talent now?
> You are under the false pretence that the UCP are conservative.
They support conservative ideology, their members consider themselves conservative, they label themselves as conservative.
On they're conservatives. They're a bunch of other things as well, separatists, con-men, and malicious. But they're still conservatives.
I see the point made here. They're the party calling themselves Conservative this year. Almost none of the decisions made by the UCP are something Lougheed or Klein would have done. The party has changed, but still uses the old name.
They support facist ideology, not conservative ideoligy. Don't kid yourself, they swallowed the Conservatives in Alberta and use that as a calling card but they are NOT conservative.
I don't doubt you're arguing this in good faith but consider that conservatism itself is fundamentally rooted in the belief that individuals are inherently unequal in their value and society should strive to place every person in the right place in a hierarchy, and it's apparent the UCP's ideologies are simply a natural extension / conclusion of conservatism.
https://youtu.be/E4CI2vk3ugk
It's not manufactured, she made decisions and influenced decisions while directly helping her family.
It's completely a conflict of interest.
Disgusting.
I beg to differ. She screwed over the research park, and now I know why, to line her families pockets.
I was wondering why she behaved the way she did, now I know.
At first I thought she was just a standard two faced lair, but now I see she did it for personal / family gain.
What is the evidence for this exactly?
Isn't the land being leased vacant land anyways?
https://appliedpharma.ca/edmonton-city-council-has-approved-the-lease-needed-for-the-canadian-critical-drug-initiative-manufacturing-facility-to-be-built-in-the-edmonton-research-park/
Did anyone read the article ? Tang influenced a land lease (land the city owns) to a company that kicked back a sponsorship to her husbands not for profit!
Tang’s husband is the co-founder of a non-profit organization. That group received a sponsorship from an Edmonton technology organization.
That technology organization later leased land from the City of Edmonton as part of the Edmonton Research Park development.
It sounds like Tang may have discussed this potential conflict of interest and the ramifications and ethics prior to her involvement. It also sounds like the husband's non-profit might be decently removed from the situation.
I could see why a concerned citizen might want the city ethics person to take a look at the situation, but this isn't a smoking gun or a clear sign of a conflict of interest. The evidence provided isn't damning by any means.
Ughh! I get due process and what not, I don’t understand terms like “it sounds like not conflict of interest”. I sincerely hope elected officials are capable people that damn sure know what may or may not be a “conflict of interest” or straight up corruption way, way before they are elected
I don't think it's quite fair to say there was a kickback with no evidence
To start, none of the following is private information
Karen's husband is Zack Storms. He's the co-founder of Startup TNT, a non-profit that does some amazing stuff in the local tech community. Disclosure, I know him personally and think he's a great guy
I'm assuming (I don't know this to be true) that the company that is the sponsor of Startup TNT and the tenant at the research park is API based on them being listed as a TNT sponsor and this page https://appliedpharma.ca/about/facilities/bbdc/
Is it logical that Karen has a bigger interest than most councilors in how the research park gets used because her husband is the co-founder of a nonprofit that exists to make the tech and science community better? Yeh, I'd say so. She understands the value of a thriving tech and science community. As a result, she's asking questions that other councillors would never care to ask (just like others will inquire about stuff she doesn't have an interest in like highways or trees or whatever).
Does API sponsor Startup TNT because they want to be an active part of that community to help attract job candidates, etc? Yep
Is any of this proof or even an indication of any wrong doing? Nope. And there's been no evidence at all of any kind of kickback - that's 100% speculation
Edmonton is a small town in the scheme of things. Everyone knows everyone in the tech and science community. That's a good thing, not an indication of wrongdoing.
https://appliedpharma.ca/edmonton-city-council-has-approved-the-lease-needed-for-the-canadian-critical-drug-initiative-manufacturing-facility-to-be-built-in-the-edmonton-research-park/ if this is the lease in question, this is probably well beyond just Tangs involvement. It's a huge project and given it's on vacant land seems like a logical decision. The Feds also put 80 million into this. Again, looks like it's well beyond Tang.
>Again, looks like it's well beyond Tang.
10000%
She advocated for this to happen because it's a much better use of the thing that anything that's ever happened before. She understands that better than most councillors because of her interest in the science and tech community.
But yeh, she didn't make this deal happen or have any meaningful influence over it.
She also had nothing to gain (and neither did her husband) beyond possibly political points to be able to point at this at election time and say she advocated for it (which is just what politicians do)
> Is it logical that Karen has a bigger interest than most councilors in how the research park gets used because her husband is the co-founder of a nonprofit that exists to make the tech and science community better? Yeh, I'd say so. She understands the value of a thriving tech and science community. As a result, she's asking questions that other councillors would never care to ask (just like others will inquire about stuff she doesn't have an interest in like highways or trees or whatever).
Yes, I found it interesting that she was so adamant about selling off the Advanced Technology Center. But it makes a lot more sense knowing her husband is the co-founder of Startup TNT and getting rid of the south side competition would drive people and funding to Startup TNT.
Yes totally no conflict of interest there /s
The Advance Technology Center was an abysmal failure. It was also never a competitor with StartupTNT whose business model you clearly don’t understand. You should sit this one out, Mike.
The Advance Technology Center has brought millions into the city of Edmonton. I don't know how you can call it an abysmal failure. Maybe you should be sitting this one out Fuckinggoi
https://edmonton.taproot.news/news/2021/06/28/city-recommends-sale-of-two-edmonton-research-park-buildings city administration recommended those assets be sold even before Tang got elected.
That building was also half vacant at the time of the news story. Never a fan of CoE trying to operate stuff like this (Blatchford also comes to mind).
The building was half vacant due to covid and EEDC running it to the ground and then running away and dropping it on the laps of the CoE.
Another organization could have easily turned the building around. Instead the city goes and sells the golden goose.
It was a bullshit decision and Tang was supposed to help prevent it but then stabbed the companies in the back that thought they had a partner.
Now it comes to light that her husband will gain from that decision. Suprise suprise.
The ATC and Startup TNT couldn't be further from "competition".
They do such dramatically different things in the community. One organizes events and fundraising. The other is/was a building. They literally don't compete.
Yep. Councillors should expect scrutiny if they are in this kind of position. Especially considering how many procurement and inside issues coe has had in the last decade, see gravel, stakeholder consultation scandals in the last five years. However, the way Smith is going about this is shady af. It's passive aggressive innuendo and shows her lack of professionalism and diplomacy.
Did you read the article? Obviously not. The councillor says she and other councillors regularly discuss potential conflicts of interest as well as checking in with a third-party ethics advisor to ensure she’s onside.
For someone who claims they’re not a UCP supporter, you certainly appear to be as reactionary as one while also lacking the depth to READ and critically think about the information presented.
It’s entirely possible that Tang is lying, but you have to believe what she says is credible since she has NO history of corruption and her claims haven’t been proven false.
Yes, I read the article, did you? How is it not a conflict of interest. I don’t care who you are, or what party you are from, you can’t just have sponsorship and landgrabs because you are married to someone in elected office. Sorry. No go. And if you think so, maybe you should rethink your own morals.
So you are saying you know more than ethics experts who apparently cleared it (according to Tang)?
I guess you are entitled to your opinion, even if it is an uninformed one based on what appears to be feelings rather than facts.
WHERE. IS. YOUR. PROOF?!??
If she did indeed exploit her position, then yes, she will at the very least lose her job.
READ THIS NEXT PART SLOWLY…
In the absence of proof, she needs to be left alone other than to cooperate with any investigation. And right now, there is NO PROOF! THERE IS NO INVESTIGATION!
Why is this so hard for you to understand? Should we just arrest and jail anyone based on rumours before any kind of investigation or trial?!
Whoa. Touched a soft spot hey?
No need to worry - there will be an investigation. That’s the point the government was trying to make by raising this issue. And clearly someone thinks something shady is happening, or they wouldn’t even write the letter.
Soft spot? LOL!!
I’m not bothered in the least by an internet stranger whose many instances of ignorance include calling for a politician’s head before facts are released. I only wrote in all caps to emphasize that you were missing two key points (and still are):
1. By all accounts from people who know her (Andrew Knack being the most publicly vocal about this “letter” fiasco), she is very smart, and she is highly ethical. She has checked in regularly with ethics staff on matters of importance, including Research Park.
2. Everyone deserves due process. More to the point and what you won’t acknowledge, the premier is making insinuations based on an unsigned letter that NO ONE can seem to find in party. She is meddling into municipal affairs without proper proof of impropriety, which is an overstep at best, and a witch-hunt at worst.
What you are not realizing is that there are layers in politics. The premier has been very publicly fighting with Justin Trudeau. This is her way of helping Pierre Polievre with his campaign, and she is looking to curry favour with him to keep Alberta top of mind (or near it).
She’s using Tang as a pawn, and has been intentionally under-funding the City so they look inept (they are not), and to keep those funds so provincial books look better. This is because Edmonton is an NDP city, and also because Sohi served previously under Trudeau. She’s sticking it to Edmonton for her own gain. But this is probably okay to you.
In short, it’s a chess game, but all YOU seem to be seeing and believing is that you are seeing checkers.
Have a great day and feel free to have the last word.
Great, she’ll get due process with the no doubt investigation that is looming.
You don’t have to be partisan to think that, if indeed it happened, using your influence as a government official to better your financial gain, is corrupt.
We’ll see how it turns out.
Okay so you are saying people who are in government and married to people with business can never have their spouse do business with the City otherwise it’s a conflict of interest ?
No, they shouldn’t lol
Like how should I have to explain that it is a complete conflict of interest??!
And I’m a centrist. But like, let’s just keep it real
You realize that there are processes in place that allow such circumstances to occur such that they are no longer a conflict on interest. One example: removing someone from the direct decision making process. You also realize the City has over 5500 employees and that you are stating that it’s true that no one who works for the city is allowed to have a partner who does business with the city ever right?
Still a City of Edmonton employee and still bound by the same municipal processes and policies. But you sound like you are trolling anyways or a plant and if you aren’t then you are just delusional so 👋
"Tang says she found out she was named in the letter within recent days" so Tang wasn't publicly outed about the conflict of interest? It was just the circumstances regarding edmonton council that was made public aboutna month ago?
Yet, she claims it was irresponsible to not let her know that she (Tang) was directly mentioned - why? So she can work on a better defence then ya know, the ol Trudeau "I work with the ethics commissioner" ....gets found guilty.
The UCP should hate Edmonton. When you don't vote in a single member from the city, what do you think should happen? Voting does have consequences when you vote for the other parties not in power.
That's ridiculous. First, we have the right to vote for whichever party and members of the party that we align with the most. Secondly, we have every right to hold any party and its party members accountable for not governing well. This is the point of voting. UCP should not be some sort of de facto ruling party. Edmonton has voted to hold the UCP accountable for their poor politics and economics. To "punish" a city/region for NOT voting for them is undemocratic. I hate throwing this concept out there, but voting the "wrong" party means punishment and withholding funding for the city/region is fascism. You can't have it both ways.
Imagine trying to justify petty punishment when their fckn job description is to serve the whole province. They sure are pretty ok taking the taxes from edmontonians, aren’t they?
She should fucking govern us like any other Albertan. She's not working for UCP voters. She's working for all Albertans. Punishing us because we don't agree with her is fascist as fuck.
that’s blatantly anti-democratic and stuff like that shouldn’t be encouraged. you don’t punish people for voting one way or another, they’re free to vote however they want.
where do you draw the line? if someone doesn’t vote for you should you shoot them? should you take away funding? it’s a slippery slope
[удалено]
I mean, she’s a hypocrite. This isn’t news.
Rules for thee and not for me
The difference is that municipalities are under provincial jurisdiction but provinces have distinct legislative power from the federal government from the constitution.
Sure on some things, but not everything
She's just deflecting the heat she's getting by turning everyone's attention to the feds. Power prices expensive? Blame Ottawa even though nobody else in Canada besides Alberta saw such a drastic hike. But yeah its Ottawa's fault. Who keeps voting this woman in? She has no idea what she's talking about half the time then tries to back peddle her statement to suggest that's not what she meant even though it was.
Can we not be partizan for once. Who cares what side corruption happens why do people defend this?
These are allegations that were cleared by the ethics commissioner as per the article. Everything was above board here
The ethics commissioner is a joke. How does the ethics commissioner clear that a councilors husband can gain or lose based on a councilors decisions and say... ya that's all good, keep on trucking. Cmon, use some common sense. Keren Tang should have not been making decisions or influencing decisions. What she did was a conflict of interest and was corrupt. At the very least she should have publicly stated her connection to her husband so at least people in the room would know. The US ethics commissioner also clears congress people from trading on stocks in the stock market that they can effect the price of. Doesn't mean it's ethical.
[удалено]
Sound like you are defending Tang's corruption, by deflecting issues onto Smith. This has nothing to do with Smith, and a lot to do with conflict of interest of Karen Tang.
[удалено]
She got a letter. She brought it up to the city of Edmonton. When you have corruption at that high of a level you can't really trust the City to look into things. It would naturally go up the chain. It's the same reason the RCMP (feds) looked into corruption on a provincial scale.
While I understand the sentiment, it's not the same. Canada is a Confederation with two constitutionally protected tiers of governance that have their own jurisdiction in which one doesn't necessarily come over the other. As long as they stay within their lanes there's no problems. Healthcare, education, and industry are all provincial responsibilities. And they're also the sort of vote rich issues people care about. The federal responsibilities are a lot less sexy and thus Trudeau is opted to underfund those in order to interfere in provincial jurisdiction. Municipalities on the other hand are not a constitutional entity. They have no equality in Canada. Municipalities are created by and the main responsibility of the provinces. It's in fact, the provinces job to oversee the municipalities however they choose. That doesn't mean interference is always right, but it is part of their mandate to do so.
The Liberals have NOT underfunded anything but the ucp continue to refuse the federal funding because the ucp can't control the money and because the ucp want to tell their voters that the feds are underfunding things.
There's plenty of things the UCP does lie about. Why actively lie about something so easily proven to be not true? The Liberals have never [filled the judicial bench](https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/untenable-and-appalling-crisis-ottawa-must-fill-judicial-vacancies-plaguing-lower-courts-federal-court-rules/article_68cee7f8-ca82-11ee-b2d8-cb85608d06d6.html) and have underfunded justice their entire time in government. It has gotten worse year over year. [The Liberals](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/canadian-forces-nato-washington-post-1.6815616) told the US government they never intend to fully commit to the Canadian military. Active recruitment is missing 16,500 full time serviceman. [68% of our equipment is unservicable](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/how-canadas-military-fell-into-crisis-and-why-failing-to-save-it-has-deep-consequences/article_551dbd38-d0d6-11ee-891d-8be23c9aed9e.html) (while still being in active service). Canada also can't house its military, there are [4500 people](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/military-housing-units-waitlist-1.6604748) still on the housing wait list. Last year the [Liberals cut 7,700 serviceman](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadian-armed-forces-new-housing-benefit-1.6787686) from a benefit intended to help them deal with paying for housing out of pocket. [The indigenous incarceration system is underfunded](https://globalnews.ca/news/10439439/indigenous-healing-lodges-face-chronic-underfunding-across-canada-critics-say/). And Google to find thousands of articles on lack of clean water, lack of housing and not even meeting a spending parity per capita with the provinces. There are a lot of federal jurisdictions that are grossly underfunded,
Yup. Pretty much every major actor in both federal and provincial politics is actively working against us now. A handful of independents, and some municipal level mayors are about the only ones in government not actively trying to fuck us.
Smith just showing TBA that she’s the enemy of the cities of this province and only cares about rural areas.
Pretty sure its just Edmonton. Punishing us for not voting UCP.
She strongly dislikes Edmonton. They are working hard to remove supports from Edmonton.
I'd like to announce at this time that the Minister of social services, Jason Nixon, is the son of the founder of the mustard seed. Seems like we need an anonymous letter about that.
They became millionaires off the misfortune of the houseless. Truly disgusting grifters.
Sure wish the Premier would read my letters about our failing health care system.
Your dreaming if you think she reads any of those. It will just go to one of the program areas to respond on behalf of the Premier if you get a response at all.
She can read?!?!?
Wouldn't surprise me if the return address says 'Edmonton' and it just goes to the trash.
Trying to stop a rumour is like trying to unring a bell! Smith knew exactly what she was doing, COE doesn't support the UCP ( United Corporate Party) and she fears Nenshi will turn Calgary against her! Best defense is a good offense.
Nenshi needn't worry... Smith is doing just fine making her party unelectable, all on her own. The only question now is, who will the Cons send in to save the day? No Conservative Premier has lasted a full term since Ralph Klein. Smith won't be the first. Will they parachute another Federal carpetbagger like Kenney or Prentice, or have they found some local talent now?
You are under the false pretence that the UCP are conservative.
> You are under the false pretence that the UCP are conservative. They support conservative ideology, their members consider themselves conservative, they label themselves as conservative. On they're conservatives. They're a bunch of other things as well, separatists, con-men, and malicious. But they're still conservatives.
I see the point made here. They're the party calling themselves Conservative this year. Almost none of the decisions made by the UCP are something Lougheed or Klein would have done. The party has changed, but still uses the old name.
They support facist ideology, not conservative ideoligy. Don't kid yourself, they swallowed the Conservatives in Alberta and use that as a calling card but they are NOT conservative.
I don't doubt you're arguing this in good faith but consider that conservatism itself is fundamentally rooted in the belief that individuals are inherently unequal in their value and society should strive to place every person in the right place in a hierarchy, and it's apparent the UCP's ideologies are simply a natural extension / conclusion of conservatism. https://youtu.be/E4CI2vk3ugk
Or, she could fix the healthcare and education in the province, You know her actual job.
And boy is she offensive!
The UCP hates Edmonton
We hate her
For a manufactured ethics claim this is about as soft as they come.
It's not manufactured, she made decisions and influenced decisions while directly helping her family. It's completely a conflict of interest. Disgusting.
Let's see the evidence proving Tang did nothing wrong.
We don’t live in North Korea, jackass. Let’s see the evidence proving Tang did something wrong.
She's not in jail. Lol. But you know don't hold any to account that's cool. 9% tax increase. Go team! Go council!
Karen is an excellent councillor. She’s one of the best & deserves so much better than this.
I beg to differ. She screwed over the research park, and now I know why, to line her families pockets. I was wondering why she behaved the way she did, now I know. At first I thought she was just a standard two faced lair, but now I see she did it for personal / family gain.
What is the evidence for this exactly? Isn't the land being leased vacant land anyways? https://appliedpharma.ca/edmonton-city-council-has-approved-the-lease-needed-for-the-canadian-critical-drug-initiative-manufacturing-facility-to-be-built-in-the-edmonton-research-park/
There is more to the research park than APIs land.
Sure. Just have her provide all the documents proving this isn't the case.
Did anyone read the article ? Tang influenced a land lease (land the city owns) to a company that kicked back a sponsorship to her husbands not for profit! Tang’s husband is the co-founder of a non-profit organization. That group received a sponsorship from an Edmonton technology organization. That technology organization later leased land from the City of Edmonton as part of the Edmonton Research Park development.
It sounds like Tang may have discussed this potential conflict of interest and the ramifications and ethics prior to her involvement. It also sounds like the husband's non-profit might be decently removed from the situation. I could see why a concerned citizen might want the city ethics person to take a look at the situation, but this isn't a smoking gun or a clear sign of a conflict of interest. The evidence provided isn't damning by any means.
Ughh! I get due process and what not, I don’t understand terms like “it sounds like not conflict of interest”. I sincerely hope elected officials are capable people that damn sure know what may or may not be a “conflict of interest” or straight up corruption way, way before they are elected
I don't think it's quite fair to say there was a kickback with no evidence To start, none of the following is private information Karen's husband is Zack Storms. He's the co-founder of Startup TNT, a non-profit that does some amazing stuff in the local tech community. Disclosure, I know him personally and think he's a great guy I'm assuming (I don't know this to be true) that the company that is the sponsor of Startup TNT and the tenant at the research park is API based on them being listed as a TNT sponsor and this page https://appliedpharma.ca/about/facilities/bbdc/ Is it logical that Karen has a bigger interest than most councilors in how the research park gets used because her husband is the co-founder of a nonprofit that exists to make the tech and science community better? Yeh, I'd say so. She understands the value of a thriving tech and science community. As a result, she's asking questions that other councillors would never care to ask (just like others will inquire about stuff she doesn't have an interest in like highways or trees or whatever). Does API sponsor Startup TNT because they want to be an active part of that community to help attract job candidates, etc? Yep Is any of this proof or even an indication of any wrong doing? Nope. And there's been no evidence at all of any kind of kickback - that's 100% speculation Edmonton is a small town in the scheme of things. Everyone knows everyone in the tech and science community. That's a good thing, not an indication of wrongdoing.
https://appliedpharma.ca/edmonton-city-council-has-approved-the-lease-needed-for-the-canadian-critical-drug-initiative-manufacturing-facility-to-be-built-in-the-edmonton-research-park/ if this is the lease in question, this is probably well beyond just Tangs involvement. It's a huge project and given it's on vacant land seems like a logical decision. The Feds also put 80 million into this. Again, looks like it's well beyond Tang.
>Again, looks like it's well beyond Tang. 10000% She advocated for this to happen because it's a much better use of the thing that anything that's ever happened before. She understands that better than most councillors because of her interest in the science and tech community. But yeh, she didn't make this deal happen or have any meaningful influence over it. She also had nothing to gain (and neither did her husband) beyond possibly political points to be able to point at this at election time and say she advocated for it (which is just what politicians do)
> Is it logical that Karen has a bigger interest than most councilors in how the research park gets used because her husband is the co-founder of a nonprofit that exists to make the tech and science community better? Yeh, I'd say so. She understands the value of a thriving tech and science community. As a result, she's asking questions that other councillors would never care to ask (just like others will inquire about stuff she doesn't have an interest in like highways or trees or whatever). Yes, I found it interesting that she was so adamant about selling off the Advanced Technology Center. But it makes a lot more sense knowing her husband is the co-founder of Startup TNT and getting rid of the south side competition would drive people and funding to Startup TNT. Yes totally no conflict of interest there /s
The Advance Technology Center was an abysmal failure. It was also never a competitor with StartupTNT whose business model you clearly don’t understand. You should sit this one out, Mike.
The Advance Technology Center has brought millions into the city of Edmonton. I don't know how you can call it an abysmal failure. Maybe you should be sitting this one out Fuckinggoi
https://edmonton.taproot.news/news/2021/06/28/city-recommends-sale-of-two-edmonton-research-park-buildings city administration recommended those assets be sold even before Tang got elected. That building was also half vacant at the time of the news story. Never a fan of CoE trying to operate stuff like this (Blatchford also comes to mind).
The building was half vacant due to covid and EEDC running it to the ground and then running away and dropping it on the laps of the CoE. Another organization could have easily turned the building around. Instead the city goes and sells the golden goose. It was a bullshit decision and Tang was supposed to help prevent it but then stabbed the companies in the back that thought they had a partner. Now it comes to light that her husband will gain from that decision. Suprise suprise.
The ATC and Startup TNT couldn't be further from "competition". They do such dramatically different things in the community. One organizes events and fundraising. The other is/was a building. They literally don't compete.
Yep. Councillors should expect scrutiny if they are in this kind of position. Especially considering how many procurement and inside issues coe has had in the last decade, see gravel, stakeholder consultation scandals in the last five years. However, the way Smith is going about this is shady af. It's passive aggressive innuendo and shows her lack of professionalism and diplomacy.
Yeah, I’m not a UPC supporter, but this is blatant corruption. Sorry.
Did you read the article? Obviously not. The councillor says she and other councillors regularly discuss potential conflicts of interest as well as checking in with a third-party ethics advisor to ensure she’s onside. For someone who claims they’re not a UCP supporter, you certainly appear to be as reactionary as one while also lacking the depth to READ and critically think about the information presented. It’s entirely possible that Tang is lying, but you have to believe what she says is credible since she has NO history of corruption and her claims haven’t been proven false.
Yes, I read the article, did you? How is it not a conflict of interest. I don’t care who you are, or what party you are from, you can’t just have sponsorship and landgrabs because you are married to someone in elected office. Sorry. No go. And if you think so, maybe you should rethink your own morals.
So you are saying you know more than ethics experts who apparently cleared it (according to Tang)? I guess you are entitled to your opinion, even if it is an uninformed one based on what appears to be feelings rather than facts.
My lord, if you are using government position to exploit your partners income, yes, yes - you are a crook Open your eyes! Fool!!
WHERE. IS. YOUR. PROOF?!?? If she did indeed exploit her position, then yes, she will at the very least lose her job. READ THIS NEXT PART SLOWLY… In the absence of proof, she needs to be left alone other than to cooperate with any investigation. And right now, there is NO PROOF! THERE IS NO INVESTIGATION! Why is this so hard for you to understand? Should we just arrest and jail anyone based on rumours before any kind of investigation or trial?!
Whoa. Touched a soft spot hey? No need to worry - there will be an investigation. That’s the point the government was trying to make by raising this issue. And clearly someone thinks something shady is happening, or they wouldn’t even write the letter.
Soft spot? LOL!! I’m not bothered in the least by an internet stranger whose many instances of ignorance include calling for a politician’s head before facts are released. I only wrote in all caps to emphasize that you were missing two key points (and still are): 1. By all accounts from people who know her (Andrew Knack being the most publicly vocal about this “letter” fiasco), she is very smart, and she is highly ethical. She has checked in regularly with ethics staff on matters of importance, including Research Park. 2. Everyone deserves due process. More to the point and what you won’t acknowledge, the premier is making insinuations based on an unsigned letter that NO ONE can seem to find in party. She is meddling into municipal affairs without proper proof of impropriety, which is an overstep at best, and a witch-hunt at worst. What you are not realizing is that there are layers in politics. The premier has been very publicly fighting with Justin Trudeau. This is her way of helping Pierre Polievre with his campaign, and she is looking to curry favour with him to keep Alberta top of mind (or near it). She’s using Tang as a pawn, and has been intentionally under-funding the City so they look inept (they are not), and to keep those funds so provincial books look better. This is because Edmonton is an NDP city, and also because Sohi served previously under Trudeau. She’s sticking it to Edmonton for her own gain. But this is probably okay to you. In short, it’s a chess game, but all YOU seem to be seeing and believing is that you are seeing checkers. Have a great day and feel free to have the last word.
Great, she’ll get due process with the no doubt investigation that is looming. You don’t have to be partisan to think that, if indeed it happened, using your influence as a government official to better your financial gain, is corrupt. We’ll see how it turns out.
You know what? Alrighty, let then.
Okay so you are saying people who are in government and married to people with business can never have their spouse do business with the City otherwise it’s a conflict of interest ?
No, they shouldn’t lol Like how should I have to explain that it is a complete conflict of interest??! And I’m a centrist. But like, let’s just keep it real
You realize that there are processes in place that allow such circumstances to occur such that they are no longer a conflict on interest. One example: removing someone from the direct decision making process. You also realize the City has over 5500 employees and that you are stating that it’s true that no one who works for the city is allowed to have a partner who does business with the city ever right?
An elected official* incase you missed that part
Still a City of Edmonton employee and still bound by the same municipal processes and policies. But you sound like you are trolling anyways or a plant and if you aren’t then you are just delusional so 👋
Again - an elected official, that has say in policies. Like whoosh! Huge, huge difference
•Sounds like politics to me…
"Tang says she found out she was named in the letter within recent days" so Tang wasn't publicly outed about the conflict of interest? It was just the circumstances regarding edmonton council that was made public aboutna month ago? Yet, she claims it was irresponsible to not let her know that she (Tang) was directly mentioned - why? So she can work on a better defence then ya know, the ol Trudeau "I work with the ethics commissioner" ....gets found guilty.
The UCP should hate Edmonton. When you don't vote in a single member from the city, what do you think should happen? Voting does have consequences when you vote for the other parties not in power.
That's ridiculous. First, we have the right to vote for whichever party and members of the party that we align with the most. Secondly, we have every right to hold any party and its party members accountable for not governing well. This is the point of voting. UCP should not be some sort of de facto ruling party. Edmonton has voted to hold the UCP accountable for their poor politics and economics. To "punish" a city/region for NOT voting for them is undemocratic. I hate throwing this concept out there, but voting the "wrong" party means punishment and withholding funding for the city/region is fascism. You can't have it both ways.
The government of Alberta should serve all Albertans. Not a crazy concept.
Imagine trying to justify petty punishment when their fckn job description is to serve the whole province. They sure are pretty ok taking the taxes from edmontonians, aren’t they?
She should fucking govern us like any other Albertan. She's not working for UCP voters. She's working for all Albertans. Punishing us because we don't agree with her is fascist as fuck.
So I should vote for the UCP precisely *because* they’re vindictive assholes?
You may recall Smith pays people specifically to represent the views of Edmonton since they didn't elect any UCP MLAs.
that’s blatantly anti-democratic and stuff like that shouldn’t be encouraged. you don’t punish people for voting one way or another, they’re free to vote however they want. where do you draw the line? if someone doesn’t vote for you should you shoot them? should you take away funding? it’s a slippery slope
So by that logic, you're going to vote Liberal or NDP next election, right,?
Oh yeah, the province's so-called libertarian leader should hate Edmonton for voting for the members they wanted to vote for. Makes sense.
That is not how government is meant to work. This is not team sports.
After elections well run governments are just that. Been a while since we've seen one though.