Citizens respond to Bills 1 and 6

1. Amendments you propose to the Auditor General Act are an assault on democracy. Accountability for public finances is central to the performance of democratic government – but on what democratic basis should anyone submit to the payment of taxes to a public body that is not accountable for how those taxes are spent? An independent Auditor-General that undertakes examination of public finances without political pressure or hinderance is the only mechanism available to our society for holding public officials accountable for public finances. In 1835 Joseph Howe called out the the government officials of his day in Nova Scotia as “the most negligent and imbecile, if not the most reprehensible body that ever mismanaged a people’s affairs” and won the enduring freedom of our society from the graft and corruption that always – yes, always – characterizes an absence of public accountability for government finances. Government can have no claim to taxes in a democracy if there is no independent Auditor-General – or equivalent and competent entity – to report on government finances and hold government officials accountable for those finances.

2. Amendments you propose to the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act are also an assault on democracy. As stated, the purpose of the Act (among other things) is to provide information to the public related to policy development, to ensure fairness in government decision-making and to permit the airing and reconciliation of divergent views – all of which are key to the functioning of a democratic society. The amendments you propose will provide the heads of public and municipal bodies the right to ignore any request for information under the Act if they deem the request “trivial, frivolous or vexatious” or if a request might “unreasonably” interfere with the operations of the public body – but none of these terms is defined. The redress measures set out through the Review Officer mechanism are fatally flawed because the Officer will have the ability to refuse a review for any reason, and the proposal that anyone who is not satisfied may take their case to the Supreme Court is surely an abuse of the purpose of the Supreme Court while also designed as a fully impractical solution for ordinary Nova Scotians. These issues extend not simply to public discourse in this province, but to the ability of an individual to obtain personal information that the government may hold – is anything more egregiously dictatorial?

3. Amendments you propose to the Civil Service Act can only create a toxic workplace for those who are paid with the tax dollars of Nova Scotians. The Nova Scotia Labour Standards Code sets out the minimum employment rules in Nova Scotia that employers and employees must follow. The amendment you propose to exempt the Provincial government from the requirements of the Code also allows removal of the minimum rules from future collective agreements with the Union and will trigger a race-to-the-bottom: reduced standards will result in reduced pay/salaries will result in reduced ability to attract high quality employees will result in reduced performance and effectiveness of government – and all made worse because a deputy head may dismiss an employee without cause. Taxpayers have a right to demand a high quality of performance from public employees and there must be an ability for government to dismiss employees who do not meet that standard – but this must be based on clear rules that are applied against criteria for the performance of a job, and not on an arbitrary basis without cause.

In my professional career I have undertaken projects financed by Canada and other democracies over extended periods of time in countries that are dictatorships. Bill 1 removes accountability from the financial and policy actions of government, provides government with the power to simply ignore the citizenry that provides it with legitimacy and introduces a blanket level of lawless behaviour of government towards its employees – all of which are hallmarks of dictatorships.

This Bill is a disgrace to you, your government and to Nova Scotia and the work of generations to build a rules-based free and democratic society. Do the right thing: withdraw the Bill.
DH
Habitant, Kings County
Nova Scotia

I really do not think you have the support of the public for these bills. It appears the content of these bills has largely been kept from the public and the media and yet these bills are now being fast-forwarded behind closed doors in the legislature as we speak, with no opportunity for public input. Further, it is my understanding that the media are not being allowed or engaged except under strictly controlled government settings. These are egregious denials of transparency, accountability and democratic processes by this government, including you as our MLA.

Bill 1, which gives the government the power to dismiss the Auditor General without cause and withhold and redact their report, would enact an alarming abdication of financial accountability and transparency. The bill also reverses the government’s own fixed-election-date legislation and earlier election promise. Further, it aims to do away with the non-partisan Communications NS and make changes to the Freedom of Information Act to enable the refusal of applications. All of these represent dangerous precedents for accountability, transparency and democracy itself. Such proposed changes warrant broader public discussion.

Bill 6, which repeals the bans on uranium mining and fracking and fast-tracks mining and other resource extractions, is irresponsible and denies past, present and future public processes. Nova Scotia is too small in land mass and too permeated with ground and surface waterways to safely conduct activities such as uranium mining and fracking. Further, fast-tracked resource extraction is not an appropriate response to tariff threats from the USA. Instead, innovative economies based on safe and sustainable value-added products and services are warranted, such as developed through ecological forestry, sustainable fisheries, agriculture and mining, tourism, and educational institutions.

By extension, I do not support the tabled deficit budget that finances the fast-tracking of resource extraction. Rather, the budget should support the development of made-in-NS value-added products and services, such as from ecological forestry, sustainable fisheries and agriculture, and tourism. Revenues for this should be generated by further taxing the wealthy, both corporations and individuals.

Further, Premier Houston has said the government has no intention of listening to so-called “special interests,” which he seems to characterize primarily as anyone with environmental concerns. It is unfathomable to me how the pros and cons of any proposed resource development policy or project can be considered and discussed without input from environmental experts and communities. This is a problematic approach, given this government says they intend to fast track the resource extractions and developments “that can be done safely”. How can safety be confidently and responsibly defined and determined without inputs from environmental experts at arms-length from industry and government?

The situation we now find ourselves in is exacerbated by the fact that the current government now claims a broad but shallow (pseudo-)majority that does not reflect the majority of the public. Unfortunately, however, this (pseudo-)majority appears to have emboldened and enabled the Premier and conservative MLAs to ignore democratic process and public input. The bills as proposed represent nothing short of a further attempt to consolidate power and exclude community input.

I’m curious as to what your thoughts are on these bills and the government’s behaviours. To me, they are so egregious that I cannot imagine anyone would support them except for the power-and-wealth elite who want to concentrate it further into their own hands, such as developers and resource extraction industries, who are already extremely powerful “special interest” groups whose opinions should be suspect, given their self-serving conflicts of interest. To the outside observer, the government’s actions are more akin to authoritarianism than democracy.

I look forward to your response. I urge you to express my concerns, which are shared by many others who do not feel comfortable writing letters, in the legislature. I also urge you to not support either of these bills.
Respectfully,
KB
Feb 21, 2025:Response to my letter to my MLA and Premier from Opposition Leader . It’s the only response I’ve received thus far.

Thank you for your advocacy in regard to the Houston government’s extremely concerning attempts to undermine the Auditor General. As Claudia stated in this CBC Article the proposed changes “should send a chill through Nova Scotians who believe that they have a responsible government.”

The Auditor General is an independent officer who provides invaluable reports on issues impacting Nova Scotians and oversight of this government. The AG is first and foremost accountable to Nova Scotians; they don’t belong to the sitting government, or the Premier.

For our democracy to function properly, it is crucial that the people of Nova Scotia understand how government decisions are being made, and how public money is being spent. As an independent expert, the Auditor General plays a large role in making sure that that is the case.

The Auditor General has called out the Houston government for $1 billion of out-of-budget spending each year, the violence in public schools, and the tens of millions of dollars spent on Hogan Court. By changing the rules around the AG’s dismissal, this government is effectively putting her on notice and threatening her job.

It is, unfortunately, yet another example of this government’s complete unwillingness to accept any form of criticism.

When speaking with media, the Auditor General made it clear: she cannot do her job if the government goes ahead with the changes that they have proposed.

Yesterday in Question Period Claudia put it plainly to the Premier, what does this government stand to gain from changing the rules for dismissing the Auditor General?

Premier Houston’s response was disappointing and, frankly, not believable given the circumstances:
“I have great respect for the Office of the Auditor General, the Auditor General, and the work they do. It’s really important to taxpayers. I have great respect for that office, and I look forward to continuing to work with them.”

Given changes this government is attempting to make, there is no indication that this is actually the case.

Claudia and her NSNDP Caucus colleagues will continue to oppose the Houston government’s attempt to consolidate their power and deny Nova Scotians the important information they deserve about policies and government spending– both in and outside of the legislature.

I truly appreciate you adding your voice to this opposition. If you have not done so already, I encourage you to send your concerns along to the Premier at premier@novascotia.ca and/or sign up to speak at the Law Amendments Committee by calling 902-424-8941.

Quite frankly, the changes regarding the Auditor General (I refer to the desire to be enabled to fire the AG with a 2/3 vote in legislature), and that reports of the Auditor General may be kept secret from citizens, raise my hackles and smack of something more in keeping with what we are seeing happening south of the border in the Kingdom of Donald Trumplandia. This is no time for your party, which now has a death grip on this province due to the circumstances of the last election — a snap election called, not upon the SET election date which was understood by all, but on very short notice at the time of an impending Canada Post strike so that proper election information could not be dispensed to voters, etc.. Many voters, especially older residents who are not connected to the internet, could not receive that information and there was gross confusion over where and when to vote. I need not go into all of this. I’m sure you are quite aware of how many of us feel about the circumstances of the election.

In any case, I return to recent concerns. We are suddenly being inundated with changes being demanded by the Premier — apparently in a panic to respond to recent tariff threats from the south. There is to be a repeal of the ban on fracking. A sudden drive to map out uranium deposits in the hope of opening up our province to uranium mines. Something about a repeal on subsurface energy storage (what? is this natural gas storage?). None of this has been discussed with the people of our province. Further, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the platform presented to the people of this province before the election. Why all of this while all of the concerns under which the election took place, seem swept to the side? Why are these unexpected matters suddenly being thrust upon us without discussion? Is this any way to maintain trust with the citizens of this province?

On top of this, we hear rhetoric referring to citizens who care about the environment and ecology of our province as being members of some tiny but apparently powerful “special interest group” who are always blocking the way of progress.

I ask, who are these tiny but powerful special interest groups? It seems to me that the only “special interest groups” who almost invariably get their way are those of powerful developers, mining companies, forest industry companies, and others, who seem to have a 99 percent success rate of being granted whatever their heart’s desire, even when opposed by solid science and common sense.

Now we are also told that citizen opposition “will not be tolerated”.
Premier Houston, as quoted from a CBC article, Feb. 14th:
“Giving groups vetoes that impoverish our fellow Nova Scotians will no longer be tolerated,” the speech says. “We must not let special interests polarize our province.”

Please understand that I know of no one or group that is out to “impoverish our fellow Nova Scotians.” And what is this about “no longer tolerated”? Sounds like a rather “totalitarian” statement, don’t you think?

Two days ago, Governor JB Pritzker of Illinois stated:
Tyranny requires your fear, your silence, and your compliance. Democracy requires your courage.

I am not prepared to sit silently watching while democracy in Nova Scotia is eroded. I join my voice with others who want to know what is going on here?

I would hope that, as representative of our Annapolis riding, you will not remain silent and will speak for the people to whom you owe a responsibility.

BW
Annapolis Royal, NS
——–
RESPONSE
On Feb 20, 2025, at 3:50 PM, David Bowlby <mladavidbowlby@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for your email, BW,

We respect the independent and integral role of the Auditor General in keeping our democracy and spending in check. The proposed amendments to the Auditor General Act are simply a clarification in legislation and we have no plans to dismiss the Auditor General.

These amendments keep our Auditor General Act in line with other provinces such as Manitoba.

I hope this helps clarify the issue.

Please feel free to contact our office with anything we might be able to help you with!

Nick
Constituency Assistant
——-
BW FOLLOW-UP

From: BW
Date: Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 3:39 AM
Subject: Re: Legislation regarding Auditor General , Fracking, Uranium, Subsurface energy storage.
To: David Bowlby <mladavidbowlby@gmail.com>, iknowdavebowlby@gmail.com <Iknowdavebowlby@gmail.com>
Cc: <claudiachender@nsmla.ca>, Iain Rankin <info@iainrankin.ca>

Dear “Nick”

Unfortunately, you are incorrect in saying that “These amendments keep our Auditor General Act in line with other provinces such as Manitoba.” You are dispensing misinformation to constituents.

I call your attention to the article by Michael Tutton —a very well-respected political journalist with Canadian Press, who covered the story about the Auditor General — which was published in several news sources on February 19th. Here is a quote from the article as it appears on MSN News.
“As of Wednesday, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador all required cause before an auditor general could be fired.”

PLEASE DO NOT CONTINUE TO DISPENSE MISINFORMATION TO OTHERS WHO WRITE TO DAVID BOWLBY!!!! I have posted your reply on our 1800 member Annapolis Environment & Ecology group along with Michael Tutton’s article so that people will be informed of the real information.
FURTHER, I would like to receive a reply directly from David Bowlby so that I know that my concerns have actually been seen and addressed by him.

For your reference, I include more of the article by Michael Tutton (below) as well as the URL where you can read the entire article. You would do well to do more research before dispensing “information” to constituents in future.

BW
Annapolis Royal, NS

NDP Leader Claudia Chender asked Houston in the legislature Wednesday why he “would threaten the job of an independent officer of this legislature in a world full of fake news and misinformation.”

Houston replied the changes were to “just bring things in line with the way it is across the country,” and to “normalize things.”

However, Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, said in an interview Wednesday that the legal changes proposed by Nova Scotia run against efforts to create transparent, democratic government.

As of Wednesday, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador all required cause before an auditor general could be fired.

Manitoba law allows for the removal of its auditor general without cause when the legislature is sitting, if approved by a two-thirds vote. However, the province does require cause for a suspension when the legislature is not in session.

“This kind of action by a government is threatening to a watchdog and is essentially a message to toe the line or we might fire you,” Conacher said of the Nova Scotia bill.

“That’s a very Trump-like thing to do,” he said in reference to the U.S. president, who has been removing independent watchdogs in the U.S. government since he took office.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 19, 2025.

Michael Tutton, The Canadian Press

URL OF FULL ARTICLE:: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/nova-scotia-move-to-allow-firing-of-auditor-general-without-cause-described-as-threat/ar-AA1zniaU

REPLY FROM CLAUDIA CHENDER
From: Claudia Chender

Subject: Re: Legislation regarding Auditor General , Fracking, Uranium, Subsurface energy storage.

Date: February 21, 2025 at 11:01:44 AM AST

To: BW

Thank you for your advocacy in regard to the Houston government’s extremely concerning attempts to undermine the Auditor General. As Claudia stated in this CBC Article the proposed changes “should send a chill through Nova Scotians who believe that they have a responsible government.”

The Auditor General is an independent officer who provides invaluable reports on issues impacting Nova Scotians and oversight

of this government. The AG is first and foremost accountable to Nova Scotians; they don’t belong to the sitting government, or the Premier.

For our democracy to function properly, it is crucial that the people of Nova Scotia understand how government decisions are being made, and how public money is being spent. As an independent expert, the Auditor General plays a large role in making sure that that is the case.

The Auditor General has called out the Houston government for $1 billion of out-of-budget spending each year, the violence in public schools, and the tens of millions of dollars spent on Hogan Court. By changing the rules around the AG’s dismissal, this government is effectively putting her on notice and threatening her job.

It is, unfortunately, yet another example of this government’s complete unwillingness to accept any form of criticism.

When speaking with media, the Auditor General made it clear: she cannot do her job if the government goes ahead with the changes that they have proposed.

Yesterday in Question Period Claudia put it plainly to the Premier, what does this government stand to gain from changing the rules for dismissing the Auditor General?

Premier Houston’s response was disappointing and, frankly, not believable given the circumstances:

“I have great respect for the Office of the Auditor General, the Auditor General, and the work they do. It’s really important to taxpayers. I have great respect for that office, and I look forward to continuing to work with them.”

Given changes this government is attempting to make, there is no indication that this is actually the case.

Claudia and her NSNDP Caucus colleagues will continue to oppose the Houston government’s attempt to consolidate their power and deny Nova Scotians the important information they deserve about policies and government spending– both in and outside of the legislature.

I truly appreciate you adding your voice to this opposition. If you have not done so already, I encourage you to send your concerns along to the Premier at premier@novascotia.ca and/or sign up to speak at the Law Amendments Committee by calling 902-424-8941.