Doug Ford is the 100-million-dollar-man for meddling in Hydro One

New Person

本站元老
注册
2003-08-26
消息
5,828
荣誉分数
1,350
声望点数
323
Doug Ford set out to get rid of the six-million-dollar-man. In doing so he’s made himself into the 100-million-dollar-man.

That’s a terrible deal — and it’s even worse in Canadian money.

On Wednesday, Hydro One abandoned its takeover of U.S. energy company Avista Corp. As a result it will have to pay a termination fee of $103 million (U.S.) That’s a staggering $137 million on our side of the border.

That $137 million, tossed out the window with absolutely no benefit to Ontario’s electricity users or taxpayers, is the price of the premier’s incompetent meddling in Hydro One.

No one but Ford can be blamed for wasting that money. He was warned, repeatedly, but he refused to listen. And it’s Ontarians who will pay for it now.

When Ford promised to get rid of Mayo Schmidt, the so-called six-million-dollar-man who was Hydro One’s CEO, he was told that such a move would come with heavy costs and wouldn’t reduce electricity bills, as he simplistically suggested.

He pushed him out anyway, along with the company’s entire board. And the cost, as predicted, is many times greater than Schmidt’s generous compensation package.

Ford was told he was damaging Hydro One’s reputation and its expansion plans — the very reason for having partly privatized the utility in the first place.

Last December, regulators in Washington State blocked the takeover and they didn’t mince words about why: “Provincial government interference in Hydro One’s affairs, the risk of which has been shown by events to be significant, could result in direct or indirect harm to Avista.”

And still Ford continued to meddle, pushing for his choice for Hydro One CEO over the new board’s shortlist of candidates.

In January, a second regulator, this time in Idaho, weighed in. “It is abundantly clear that the province does not have to own 51 per cent of Hydro One in order to effectively control the company,” it said.

And that is not a company any one in their right mind feels comfortable doing business with.

For all the talk of creating a robust business climate Ford’s government has shown the world it is so keen to interfere in what’s supposed to be a hands-off, market-driven company that Hydro One might as well still be a Crown corporation.

And, looking beyond this failed deal, how can Hydro One possibly deliver under these conditions on its pledge to become North America’s leading investor-owned utility?

Ontario taxpayers still own nearly half the company, so one way or another we will pay for all this.

Ontario Energy Minister Greg Rickford is busy trying to claim otherwise. “Any costs incurred as a result of (Wednesday’s) decision will not be paid by Ontario electricity customers,” he said.

Such a ridiculous line is entirely in keeping with the Ford government’s overarching view on costs: If they’re not easy to see, they just don’t count.

So, sure, this money won’t be recouped as a line item on electricity bills. What would they call it anyway? Ford’s interference levy?

But Ford’s brand of politics aside, real people know that the bill always comes due.
 
任性的代价。
 
GettyImages-969776070.jpg
 
既然已经是上市公司,就按照上市公司的方法来。为何要用政治手段让CEO退休?还不就是为了选票嘛。
 
拿HYDRO ONE当靶子就是政治炒作。因为很多电费就是HYDRO ONE收得。但HYDRO ONE是个输配电公司,只是收了个过路费。上网电价并不是HYDRO ONE定的。
 
所以选民又被骗了。。。总是逃离不了被骗的命运啊:monster:
我替阿土喊一句:改革,是有代价的。。。如果让福特省长终身制,执政20年。。。英特纳雄奈尔,就一定会实现。:monster:
@阿土
 
我替阿土喊一句:改革,是有代价的。。。如果让福特省长终身制,执政20年。。。英特纳雄奈尔,就一定会实现。:monster:
@阿土
你是不是爱特错了?
我帮你喊他:@阿土仔
 
现象是这个现象, 坑可是聘用时就挖好的。
为什么聘用时挖这么大的坑?这家伙不可替代?反思的更应该是这类促成这些条款的人。
不光是电力,自来水,燃气,石油弄不好都是这种坑。
记得TARGET到加拿大铺摊的家伙吗?他拿走了多少?
都是些吃人不眨眼的家伙!
 
想炒作从不缺话题
那个合并不成要赔100M的合约是胖福上台前签的吧,签的时候没想到合并不成的可能?
能得100M赔款找个啥借口不行啊

只要自己说不,对方就赔100M,这等条约怎么有天上掉馅饼得味道呢
 
最后编辑:
借口就是政治手段干预上市公司运作:
Last December, regulators in Washington State blocked the takeover and they didn’t mince words about why: “Provincial government interference in Hydro One’s affairs, the risk of which has been shown by events to be significant, could result in direct or indirect harm to Avista.”.
 
既然已经是上市公司,就按照上市公司的方法来。为何要用政治手段让CEO退休?还不就是为了选票嘛。
资本家为了利润可以不择手段,挺而走险。政客也一样,不过是为了选票。
 
资本家为了利润可以不择手段,挺而走险。政客也一样,不过是为了选票。
正面看,开除一个总裁,省了600万年薪,15-20年一个周期。。。我看值了。
 
要是比浪费,福特还太嫩。
 
后退
顶部