Just a quick question, how do you respond to the accusations that you: 1) are not exactly objective and have repeatedly presented false and misleading data and 2)in the case below clearly not done your due diligence?

If the two issues raised below are true, I would say it's definitely troubling.

http://www.wellingtonfund.com/blog/2010/07/08/when-lobby-groups-overspin/


William


Response from Community Air's Brian Iler:

TPA Chair Mark McQueen’s post, strangely now removed, repeated his tiring mantra – that CommunityAIR gets its facts wrong, and misleads as a result. If he can’t deal with the arguments, he’s very quick to resort to name-calling, it seems.

The most extreme version of that was contained in a letter accusing us of myth-making, mostly posted on the TPA website last January – see the full letter (signed by the TPA CEO, but clearly penned by McQueen) and our lengthy and factual response “TPA Defames CommunityAIR – CommunityAIR Responds” on the home page of CommunityAIR’s website http://www.communityair.org/

 We responded with the facts, making it clear for all to confirm, that it is the TPA, and not CommunityAIR, that plays with the facts. Neither the TPA nor Mark McQueen respond in any way.

 Now he’s up to the same thing – claiming a recent poster on the CommunityAIR blog  got the identity of the polling company wrong. That may be. But the identity of the polling company is irrelevant to the point made: that the TPA’s hired PR firm is once again carrying out a survey with questions designed to obtain the answers the TPA wants to get. Two people polled reported that is precisely what they experienced.

 Check it out for yourself – last year’s TPA poll questions and answers are at http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/notices/4049%20TPA%20Interview%20Schedule.pdf

 And CommunityAIR’s Press Release on that poll, released August 25, 2009: http://blog.communityair.org/2009/08/28/whats-with-that-tpa-poll.aspx