Remember BC Rail and how little the News Media asked questions and how little the BC Liberal Government explained EXACTLY why they were going to break an election promise to not sell BC Rail and they went ahead and did it anyway? They call it a 990 year lease. We own the Tracks, but we don't collect a penny by way of a toll for every box car, tanker car, or bulk car that passes over given points like the Public has to when it comes to paying a TOLL on bridges, possibly tunnels.
Can't remember, can you. Its like being a Star Witness at the BC Rail Trial and trying to remember way back seven long years. Its like after having read all of the nitty gritty news media coverage of the Disclosure during the lead up to the BC Rail Trial, to then have to Swear to tell the Truth, the Whole Truth and nothing but the Truth and then when questioned by the Lawyers, your mind goes Blank.
Since the current RFP process is being managed by government as BC Liquor Distribution Branch shareholder, the media look to provincial representatives (Rich Coleman) to balance out comments by other organizations such as major unions, the NDP, and the Federation of Canadian Taxpayers.
It is expected there will be continuing coverage of private companies (Excel) involved in the RFP process as well as more on controversies in the south and interior and other parts of the province. BC Liquor Distribution Branch will not publicly comment on these issues. The shareholder's spokespeople (Rich Coleman) will be assigned to handle media interest in BC Liquor Distribution Branch topics. Some suggest the best advice from now until a decision is made is to "batten down and weather the storm." Source: BC Rail Inside Track June/July 2003 Page 2 of 4
We guess that there is no BC Liquor Distribution Branch magazine like the BC Rail Inside Track, however if the BBC were to take a wild guess it would probably be called "Inside the Bottle"!
If the idea by BC Government is to portray the image of everything is coming up roses at BC Liquor as it "was" at BC Rail and their employes, check out August/September 2003 Letter to the Editor section on Page! 4