Sue's Blog

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

What does Alcoa want?

Back to Registry of Lobbyists - Newfoundland and Labrador


For months now people have asked questions about the Energy Plan - and possible markets for Lower Churchill Power. For his part - the Premier has not lived up to prior commitments on the release date of the energy plan - and frankly does not care to answer legitimate concerns of people on the significant power potential in Labrador.

Kathy Dunderdale does not respond at all - either by choosing to ignore - or told to keep quiet.

Heavy industry is wheeling and dealing globally to enter into power contracts that provide cost competitive - renewable - and reliable supply.

Alcoa has an interest in the Lower Churchill development - we need to know what that interest is.

The provincial registry of lobbyists contains the following:

Particulars: Lower Churchill Development
Registration Number: CL-204-168
Lobby Activity Date: 2007-01-15
Status: Approved
Effective Date: 2006-12-20
Amended Date: 2007-01-15
Approval Date: 2007-01-22

William Wells Consultant Alcoa Canada

Bill is a past CEO of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and arguably has much more experience negotiating on a potential Lower Churchill deal than Ed Martin. If he has been hired by Alcoa to lobby respecting the Lower Churchill development - what is Alcoa interested in?

An aluminum smelter in Labrador?

Let me remind the reader that Danny Williams - when leader of the Official Opposition - wanted all details of negotiations or potential deals on the table in the House of Assembly.

We are still waiting to find out why Conservative strategist and Harper supporter - Timothy Powers - has been hired by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - how much has he been paid - and what exactly are his terms of lobby.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is time that that the Act of Patronage stopped. These people have been recycled from one Crown Corporation to another for years, or in the case of Acting Lobbyist for an outside Corporation, the duties there, of course, are to see our precious resources sucked out of here for the benefit of another province, or most likely that is the case? Could I be reading that right Sue?

Such people add nothing to their own province's well being. What they do is make a damn good living for themselves while aiding and abetting the export of our natural resources out of here for other locales to thrive with a market economy, while we languish on equilization payments that the rest of Canadians like to credit us with a being on welfare, while what we get is only a small percentage of the value of what the resources that that are exported out of Newfoundland and Labrador for those other provinces well-being are worth. Such people have no compunction for what they are doing. They are are "me syndrome" people. They have little care whether the rest of us starve.

When is it going to stop?

It is too bad that the average Newfoundlander and Labradorian is oblivious of what is going on?

Anonymous said...

"Bill is a past CEO of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and arguably has much more experience negotiating on a potential Lower Churchill deal than Ed Martin."

What did Bill Wells ever do to give you proof of this?
Ed Martin, with his previous experience in the oil and gas industry, has been at the table of many big project negotiations (including his role as the chief negotiator for the on-going Hebron negotiations). In essence, The Lower Churchill is just another big project with different terminology.

Bill Wells has experience as a CEO. He was part of negotiating the latest Lower Churchill deal which was obviously a sham. I'm not saying he did a bad job as CEO but to say he would be better than Ed Martin is a statement with no credibility.

Sue Kelland-Dyer said...

What was Ed Martin's position prior to hydro?
There is a difference in the two sectors.
Bill was at it longer - I am not a fan of either.

I am not talking about what Ed does now - what did he do before?

Have you got the resume?

Further the idiotic statement he made in Ontario - let Ontario pick our low hanging fruit - is enough to convince me - he;s not the optimum choice for us.

Anonymous said...

I'm not going to bother looking for the resume. Not really worth the time and will prove little.

And the "idiotic statment"... What is wrong with a bit of lobbying for the project? The more interest this project gains from other provinces and companies (i.e. ALCOA) means a bigger chance of it finally getting off the ground. I'm not saying that selling the power to one particular customer is the right thing, but it will never hurt to have many potential customers.
And by ALCOA registering with the provincial registry of lobbyists, doesn't this tell you that there are talks going on with them as well. Isn't this what you want?? But still the 100% critcism.

I also see no reason why you don't like Ed Martin. He has done nothing really to garner distaste thus far, unless he hasn't been giving you enough attention.

I will admit I enjoyed your views on Ed Hollett. But your constant negativity focused on Hydro and the Govn. with regards to the Lower Churchill project places you in the same category as Hollett. It is tiring and a breath of positive air never hurts. I like many of your views but you always place them in a negative context. People tend to ignore this method over time.

Sue Kelland-Dyer said...

Okay no resume - there's a reason for that - now as for discussions with Alcoa or any industry - let's hear about them in the open.

This is our energy and no one person is perfect.

Open and accountable.