I think this is one of the best stories, Michael has written. I wait to read his stories every morning with great anticipation. He starts my day with a Bang.

Edited Comment By LFP EDITOR - When you click the comments at the bottom of the Michael Smyth Province article you will also see their comments like Barbara.s BTW DITTO ABOUT THE BEST EDITORIAL I HAVE EVER SEEN FROM MICHAEL SMYTH. - LFP EDITOR
Barbara Moxin | 07.20.08 - 12:33 pm | #

I'm sure this will feed Doyle's ego and cause him grandstand in time. It should be easy for him to audit ICBC, as the program has always been a train wreck. I'm not sure why they need so many high-paid managers on big benefit packages.
Informed | 07.20.08 - 1:03 pm | #

Careful Informed remember MP Mark Warawa a junior team member of the Fab 4.5, worked for ICBC before striking the MP gold mine! He no longer has to work the ICBC coal mine! lol. Irrespective, Hooray, we see eye-to-eye on something finally! ICBC!
LFP Editor | 07.20.08 - 2:15 pm | #

Editor you missed two more things in The Province newspaper today. Their editorial Page A23 Murphy's View Cartoon portrayed Langley Minister Rich Coleman as ..(edited).. and it was not flattering at all. Secondly on page A23 on the same editorial pages this letter to the Editor was printed titled SLEAZY DOCUMENT by a J. Michael Drew of Vancouver -

"It's amazing how a Liberal good ol' boy like Rich Coleman can justify his position on forest lands with a five-page document that barely focuses on the issues involved.

Auditor-General John Doyle had every right to tear apart such a sleazy document. Coleman did not show due regard to the public interest in this matter."

Edited Reply By Siteowner - Thank you, I missed them. Guess I was overwhelmed with The Province Michael's outstanding editorial! I do find it amusing that the Vancouver letter writer used a term you see often on LFP referring to some of our political Fab 4.5 cartel, as "good ol' boy". How flattering! - LFP EDITOR
Anonymous | 07.20.08 - 4:02 pm | #

What shocked me the most is when Mr.Frank Bucholtz, the Times Editor in his editorial said, ' While Doyle has every right to look into such matters, his report seems more political than financial. '

Mr. Bucholtz gives no evidence or rationale to his statement other than saying Mr. Doyle should limit his comments only to the financials as an auditor.

Mr. Bucholtz is so very wrong on both counts in my opinion. His accusation of political grandstanding by the Auditor is ridiculous. Why and how could Mr. Doyle profit from his so called political angle more than financial report (assuming Bucholtz is remotely right)? Mr. Doyle would, if Bucholtz was even remotely correct, risk getting fired or worse still of not being ever hired by any other government or prospective employer as an auditor if indeed he was being political in his report ! I don't think Mr. Doyle is that incompetent.

Remember it's the ruling political parties that hire auditor generals. Would you hire someone who does not do their job and is 'political' in doing it rather than factual and honest? For Mr. Doyle to do otherwise is ridiculous and the accuser should perhaps be accused of being political instead.

So I think that Mr. Bucholtz owes Mr. Doyle and indeed the taxpayers an apology for what I believe is a ridiculous accusation.
Newspapers | 07.21.08 - 11:26 am | #