St. John's South - Is there an election?

Tom Osbourne is not somebody I would consider to be "unbeatable" however with the current state of the Liberal and New Democratic parties - apparently he is.

This idea of sticking names on a ballot to give people a choice is garbage. My district is St. John's South and best I can tell - there is a coronation here as well.

I have received nothing from the NDP or Liberal candidates - not a visit - not a brochure - not a notice regarding my polling information.

In fact I received more during the nomination process between two PC's (Tom Osbourne and Hubert Ryall) than I have for the actual election.

Tom has sent out two brochures and my polling information - and if I needed it a ride to vote. Nothing from the other two.

Now from the standpoint of my Liberal contender Rex Gibbons - I know all I need to - not to vote for the privatization agenda again.

On the Liberal website this quote is used from Rex:

" On October 9th, I invite the voters of St. John's South to surprise the pundits again, and return me to the House of Assembly."

Now there's something to vote for! Rex you were elected because Clyde was popular.

On Rex's personal website - this statement - apparently an endorsement by leader Gerry Reid:

As MHA for St. John's West from 1989 to 1997, Rex contributed tremendously to public life. His leadership skills were respected and admired as he took on the role of Minister responsible for Mines and Energy, including other Natural Resource sectors, for about two years during that same period.

Yes Rex was great - people like you and I had to fight him for over 2 years to stop him from privatizing Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Not only is Rex bad news - but apparently leader Gerry Reid thinks he's a leader with great policy ideas.

Clyde Bridger is my NDP candidate - I am told by that website that he is a union activist who likes to take pictures - bike - and backpack.

There is not an election in my district - there are names on a ballot. There is no real choice for me - but I do have the right to spoil my ballot - because I am going to the polls.

Danny is a bully - very dictatorial - and loves power. It's really too bad that voting Liberal would actually be worse - would be further to the right.

See you tomorrow as we assess the damage.

Does Risley want another piece of Newfoundland and Labrador?

Just two days away from the "vote" - and I am thinking about FPI. This once king of "seafoods" companies gone from our rural communities - gone from the memories of our politicians - as well.

John Risley - the "Danny" slayer has done what media and opposition could not. Risley has taken Danny on and won.

On Friday FPI issued a news release - advising of a special meeting of shareholders. On October 22nd - the shareholders will vote on the sale of FPI assets. The get-together will also be used to discuss the future of FPI. The release says in part:

FPI intends to transition from an operating company engaged in the harvesting, processing, global sourcing and marketing of seafood products to an investment and holding company.

So now that our politicians have allowed the company to moan and groan its way out of commitments to our communities - and at the same time making some millionaires of a select few - what are the boys going to do with the money? What exactly does the statement above mean? An investment and holding company?

Why not let John Risley answer that question. The Montreal Gazette attributes the following quote to Danny's conqueror:

"our historical business has been the seafood business and our future business will be something other than the seafood business"

Apparently the name of the new company will be FP Resources Ltd. What now - will they come after energy investments? Do they want a piece of the Lower Churchill? How about Labrador uranium? Or maybe gas projects? Will they suck the good out of other resources in Newfoundland and Labrador and then change-up again?

And in a twist of irony - FPI announced today the appointment of a new director - another "Newfoundlander and Labradorian" - Mr. Graham Roome - who started his career with the "Lake Group" - one of the fish companies that had to be rescued by the formation of FPI - when we the taxpayers became the owners. Talk about having sea-legs - apparently Mr. Roome who went from Lake to FPI in Bonavista - to Clearwater - and then back to FPI - is doing a hell of a lot better that our fishermen.

Danny - Tom - Gerry - Loyola - and Loyola - "hook line and sinker". Way to go Risley - no wonder you and Ches Penney have the personal wealth you have.

On your Ballot - write the words - I want a public inquiry!

I listened to Paul Dicks this week - through a prepared statement doing a few things. They were very similar - in fact too similar to Walter Noel's reappearance a few days earlier. Both of them said I made errors in judgement - both were sorry - then both of them claimed they were within the rules.

Walter Noel and Paul Dicks were Cabinet Ministers - Dicks was Minister of Justice and Attorney General and the Minister of Finance. Noel was Minister of Government Services and Minister of Mines and Energy. Both have premium pensions for their public service. What a pathetic sight they were - either deliberately taking advantage of a flawed system - they were part of controlling - or not possessing the ability until now to determine what they were doing was wrong.

As Ministers what were they responsible for? The two geniuses voted to sell Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - both were involved in energy planning and Lower Churchill discussions. The finances of the province were in Paul's hands and to make matters worse so was the Department of Justice.

This whole mess is more serious than these two people let on - and they know it. These individuals did make judgements of others and they made decisions on behalf of you and me. How reasoned were those decisions?

Dicks announced last week that he was going to pay back the money spent on art and wine. I am curious - where is the art? Where is the wine? If they were purchased as Dicks claims - as a result of errors in judgement - have these items appreciated? If we were to conclude that Dicks purchased these assets with our money - in a sense a loan - which he now is paying back - where is the interest?

How did "intelligent" men believe that buying art - wine - and Christmas presents out of a constituency allowance was okay? They were sitting MHA's and Ministers - did they not think to ask their fellow MHA's on the Internal Economy Commission about the appropriateness of such spending? Did they not - all on their own - think it might be reasonable to suggest a change in the rules?

Paul Dicks is a lawyer practicing with the firm Benson-Myles and is currently a Director of the Bank of Canada. Is this alright? If these two were in charge of setting rules for corporate spending and later it was determined that they made rules in the best interest of themselves versus the shareholders - what might happen? I don't know but Conrad Black might have part of the answer. Yet Walter insists that while he made an error in judgement - he was only making the same errors as if he was in the private sector. Okay Walter try it out - and we will watch your progress.

A public inquiry must occur so that we can ask these people what exactly they were doing. We can also bring up and sort out the whole sordid affair of booting the Auditor General out of their books - ironically brought about by the AG's concern over expenditures made by Dicks.

Instead these people ride off into the pensioned sunset - living with reputations that have been false - but helped them carry on into private life. Let's say the Dick's spending had become public when he was still in office - would he have received the same opportunities after he left?

Would Junior Achievement of Canada looked at him the same way? Would the Federal Minister of Finance have offered him a board appointment to the Bank of Canada? Would Benson - Myles have offered him a position with that law firm? We might never know the answers to these questions and fortunately for Dicks - enough time had passed before the discovery for him to establish himself financially and professionally. The question now is will he be asked to do the right thing or will he offer to do the right thing and resign from positions he now holds - and like so many others of us - have to start again - and again.

All of this is notwithstanding that Wally Anderson is on the campaign trail with Danny Dumaresque - Randy Collins has taken up a great job again with his union - Paul Dicks is living high on somebodies hog - Walter has shown his head during the federal Liberal leadership contest and in this provincial campaign. If no criminal convictions come out of the current charges - it does not change what the Auditor General found. It does not change the over-spending and inappropriate spending.

For all of this this Danny is still making excuses for these people - Gerry does not even want to talk about it - Tom Rideout says he will repay the bonus constituency payment when he loses or retires out of his severance. Not one of them give a damn that thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians do not want to vote - as they are sickened by the whole works of them. Then they come out and ask people to vote - and tell them nothing is accomplished by not voting.

I say to people - go vote - mark the ballot up - send whatever message you want - write in names - scratch off names - or better yet mark in the words - "I want a Public Inquiry".

What are we here anyway? There are people named in the AG report with significant "errors in judgement" who are running again. What have we been reduced to?

Gerry Reid will PRIVATIZE NLH

I can state this because Reid is opposing the people of this province investing in oil and gas projects offshore.

I am left to wonder if Reid's "war room" actually even considered that this thinking could be applied to all our resources.

Think about this for a minute - first Reid says Newfoundland and Labrador already owns the oil and gas. In fact we do not - Canada owns it - and we receive royalties based on Canada's recognition that we are the province adjacent to the resource. If we want to own it - we must separate from the federation.

Then Reid says - Danny should not risk the peoples money by taking an equity position - in fact he says if we elect the Tories and let Danny buy equity - he will bankrupt the province.

On that basis - the debt outstanding by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro would also be seen as a risk and have to be eliminated. Reid's thinking would have our Crown Corp sold off to outside investors (Ontario Pension Fund) or perhaps Fortis - and we will take royalties instead of the profits. Taking that further - he would develop the Lower Churchill by giving that development to outside investors and ask for a few royalties in something we actually own. Under Reid's New Liberalism we - of course - could not risk investing our money in such a project.

Williams has many weaknesses in policy - especially in areas such as the fishery - pulp and paper - agriculture - and rural development - and in these areas he does not enjoy broad-based support. Reid chooses to take on the equity position - which does have broad-based support of a people who are sick of giving away our wealth for a few coppers and jobs.

Reid has gone from left of center - to Harper's best economic policy bud. And all of this because the Libs have resurrected policy experts like Rex Gibbons. The Liberal leader has not yet learned that this direction is a political failure. If the party does not wake up and understand that people of this province want more from our valuable resources - Williams will have an unending term of office. This is not what we need and the fishery and rural Newfoundland and Labrador will suffer. But if we elect Reid - everything is gone.

The Testosterone Monologues

Leaders debate 2007

Danny's was a repeat performance of the 2003 fiasco.

Other men speak - Danny carries on with his own testosterone monologue - like a bee buzzing around your head. With Roger and Jack in 03 - Williams just talked on and on over and under Jack and Roger's comments.

This time the testosterone was still there - but when faced with Lorraine withdrew and treated her with "empathy" - it was condescending as most of his comments have been about the leader of the NDP.

Gerry for his part was weak on the opening and close - appearing nervous and unsure - but when debating with Danny and equally Lorraine was passionate. The only problem Gerry had was he had nothing to be passionate about. Fiery without policy - feisty without real belief in a policy direction - but he was willing to be scrappy.

Lorraine's message was heard - and she was polite but forceful to get her points across. Just once I would have liked to have seen the NDP drop a policy bombshell. For instance - the NDP would seek to develop the Lower Churchill power on the basis that if industry wanted to use it they would have to come to Labrador. Her comments were consistent with NDP policy - healthcare - homecare - pharmacare - poverty - education. These are most important issues - but she needed some remarkable economic policy - she did not present it.

Danny appeared coached and even with the best of fiscal resources you can't make a public performer out of this individual. You can dress him up - give him a manicure - and use the "youthful" approach of parting his hair in the center - but you can't make him comfortable giving a public statement.

Biggest disappointment - they all had to "read" from a script for a 2 minute opener and closer. News Flash - if you know your stuff and you are comfortable in your skin - give that speech from the heart - show the passion. All this reading from papers - should not be necessary - if you have already developed - researched - and debated a vision. You know what your policies are and you also know the weaknesses of the other side.

If you look down at a piece of paper to say rural Newfoundland and Labrador or the fishery - or education - or health - you are not with it - you are supposed to be leaders.

All in all Ms. Michael won the night while the boys just went on with their testosterone monologues.

Call an Inquiry or "Simon Says" Call an Inquiry

This from a CBC story July 06-07

St. John's blogger Simon Lono, however, believes it is not the job of the police to look at where the constituency spending system broke down.Lono is spearheading an online petition calling for a public inquiry into the operations of the house of assembly.

Gerry Reid today in the Telegram on MHA spending:

"There is enough guilt to go around and everyone feels bad enough as it is," he said.

"I don't think that should become an election issue, because it can work both ways."

Question is will Gerry speak to Simon and ask him not to mention the issue - or will Simon do what he is passionate about and call for a public inquiry during the campaign?

What does this say to you?

"There is enough guilt to go around and everyone feels bad enough as it is"

and

"I don't think that should become an election issue, because it can work both ways"


These are quotes by Liberal leader Gerry Reid found in a Telegram story today about the party's candidate Linda Goodyear raising the issue of double billing during a campaign event on Bell Island.

It says - I think voters are FOOLS

If that's not bad enough - Goodyear's figures on her Tory competitor and incumbent Diane Whelan were wrong. Very wrong. Apparently Linda got her figures from a story she read in the Independent either read improperly or written factually incorrect - and not from the Auditor General's Report.

First Gerry Reid has determined that the spending scandal should not be an issue in this election. He also believes that politicians already feel bad enough. Here's the deal voters - leave them alone - it was not their fault. Voters should back off and understand that because all political parties were involved - therefore voters can't just blame one.

This means - Reid has not accepted that taxpayers were ripped off - treated like fools - their money like a cookie jar. He wants people to understand how hard it's been on all the embattled MHA's - who cares about someone who needs life saving drugs or a medical test - or a safe house - or food for their kids - the politicians need a break from this incessant criticism.

As for Linda Goodyear - she gave Diane Whelan a pass to re-election or at least a good fight between her and NDP's Gavin Will. If Linda Goodyear cannot get that level of research correct and she uses that false information to take the last and biggest swipe at her opponent - she probably won't be so hot when examining legislation.

Then Reid states in the Telegram that:

"I'll have a talk to Linda and tell her it's not just Tory MHAs that double-billed. Liberal MHAs double billed as well."

First of all - it appeared on a CBC Morning Show report that Linda did know that all political parties were involved - and if she did not as Gerry seems to think - then Goodyear is not in the same world as the rest of us.

Disarray - Confusion - Mixed Messages - and Continued Cover-Up would seem to be the Liberal's campaign theme.

This is one big reason Danny Williams is so high in the polls. An awful lot of Liberals just do not want to vote or are switching sides.

Read - Reid - Read - to succeed...

Danny Williams is now learning Labrador politics - they no longer want to be a colony of Newfoundland. They will not allow the development of the Lower Churchill unless they are the "primary" beneficiaries. Thanks to them - another townie government will not repeat the Upper Churchill fiasco.

Now it's time for "read - REID - read" to succeed.

It is not possible that column after column - news story after news story - industry publication after industry publication - can be wrong when they state that aluminum chases cost competitive - reliable - renewable - and now my own word "kyotoble" power everywhere in the world but Labrador.

The continued ignorance of our collective elected reps is not acceptable anymore.

Here's another such story out of West Virginia - as Jackson County celebrates the 50th anniversary of its aluminum smelter. READ the Charleston Daily News STORY HERE

Here are a few of the interesting statements and comments in the article:

The Ravenswood plant has 660 employees. The average salary is $50,700. The plant has a $34 million annual payroll.

High energy costs have decimated the smelter industry in the United States, Hale said. In 1974, there were 34 smelters in the United States and they accounted for 34 percent of global aluminum production. Today there are only 13 smelters in the United States and they represent just 7 percent of global production, he said.

Hale said alumina accounts for 37 percent of the plant's costs, while electricity accounts for 26 percent, labor accounts for 16 percent, carbon accounts for 8 percent and other raw materials account for 12 percent.

Because aluminum is a worldwide commodity, Century can't control the price it receives for its product, Hale said. Therefore, the company focuses on costs in order to keep the plant competitive.

Century, like others in the aluminum smelter business, is expanding in locations where power costs are low. Century owns a giant smelter in Iceland powered with electricity generated using hydro and geothermal power. Century plans to have another in plant in operation in Iceland by 2013.

Most of the aluminum produced at Ravenswood is used next door at Alcan Rolled Products' rolling mill. The businesses were established as one unit in 1957, but split into two in 1999. Hale said Century just signed a new contract to supply Alcan through 2009.

Just so that we can feel more assured about this fellow Hale who is quoted throughout the story:

Wayne Hale, Century's executive vice president and chief operating officer and Hale worked here from 1986 to 1989. "It's a place where I learned about people," he said. Hale most recently worked in Moscow, where he oversaw operations at 11 aluminum plants in Russia and Ukraine for Sual-Holding.

If you export the power they will not come - once they understand that to use the superior power of the Lower Churchill they have to set up operations in Labrador - they will come. And as you can see above - the smelter is one piece - then there is the value added secondary production.

There is no argument to export that power - there is only the desire and the determination to use it for industry.

The Leader of the Opposition must do something other than follow Williams on this one - or repeat the mistakes of the Wells - Gibbons energy policy. You see if Williams can demand things of the oil companies and mining companies - he can certainly demand them for Labrador power.

So read Reid read to succeed.

Windy future for Energy Policy

As much as all of us get annoyed from time to time with our power bill - at least we have get a bit of it back through our ownership of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

Danny Williams - Gerry Reid - and Lorraine Michael appear to be uninterested in the latest energy projects in the province - wind.

The last great announcement by the Premier was a wind project - owned in part by the Government of Italy - with a power contract that has not been made public. We know we are paying for it - and lately all of the political parties are jumping on board claiming that the Holyrood fiasco might disappear or be substantially reduced by wind energy.

Of course none of them seem to care that piecemeal privatization of generation is occurring with potential "windfall" profits going to support education and health in Italy. We are consumers - however - should be worried about something more.

The Energy Plan mentioned our electrical grid and its inability - without upgrade - to handle much more input into the grid of wind supplements.

Have a look at some statements made by Eric Rosenbloom - Science Editor in Vermont.

Wind power promises a clean and free source of electricity. It will reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels and reduce the output of greenhouse gases and other pollution. Many governments are therefore promoting the construction of vast wind "farms," encouraging private companies with generous subsidies and regulatory support, requiring utilities to buy from them, and setting up markets for the trade of "green credits" in addition to actual energy.

A German Energy Agency study released in February 2005 after some delay [click here] stated that increasing the amount of wind power would increase consumer costs 3.7 times and that the theoretical reduction of greenhouse gas emissions could be achieved much more cheaply by simply installing filters on existing fossil-fuel plants.

In 1998, Norway commissioned a study of wind power in Denmark and concluded that it has "serious environmental effects, insufficient production, and high production costs."

Denmark (population 5.3 million) has over 6,000 turbines that produced electricity equal to 19% of what the country used in 2002. Yet no conventional power plant has been shut down. Because of the intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants must be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand for electricity.

The head of Xcel Energy in the U.S., Wayne Brunetti, has said, "We're a big supporter of wind, but at the time when customers have the greatest needs, it's typically not available." Throughout Europe, wind turbines produced on average less than 20% of their theoretical (or rated) capacity. The Searsburg plant in Vermont averages 21%, declining every year. This percentage is called the load factor or capacity factor. The rated generating capacity only occurs during 100% ideal conditions, typically a sustained wind speed over 30 mph. As the wind slows, electricity output falls off exponentially.

In high winds, ironically, the turbines must be stopped because they are easily damaged. Build-up of dead bugs has been shown to halve the maximum power generated by a wind turbine, reducing the average power generated by 25% and more. Build-up of salt on off-shore turbine blades similarly has been shown to reduce the power generated by 20%-30%.

Germany -- from Der Spiegel
"Windmühlen-Wahn: Von umweltfreundlicher Energie zur subventionierten Landschaftszerstörung"
( The madness about wind turbines: from the dream of environmentally friendly energy to highly subsidized destruction of the countryside )

Christopher Dutton, the CEO of Green Mountain Power, a partner in the Searsburg wind farm in Vermont and an advocate of alternative energy sources, has said (in an interview with Montpelier's The Bridge) that there is no way that wind power can replace more traditional sources, that its value is only as a supplemental source that has no impact on the base load supply. "By its very nature, it's unreliable," says Jay Morrison, senior regulatory counsel for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

FPL Energy says it requires 40 acres per installed megawatt, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says 60 acres is likely. Facilities worldwide generally use 30-70 acres per megawatt, i.e., about 120-280 acres for every megawatt of likely average output (25% capacity factor).

Click Here to see the area impacted per MW of power

Especially vulnerable are large birds of prey that like to fly in the same sorts of places that developers like to construct wind towers. Fog -- a common situation on mountain ridges -- aggravates the problem for all birds. As Country Guardian, a U.K. conservation group, puts it, wind farms constitute an increase in energy supply, not a replacement. They do not reduce the costs -- environmental, economic, and political -- of other means of energy production. If wind towers do not reduce conventional power use, then their manufacture, transport, and construction only increases the use of dirty energy. The presence of "free and green" wind power may even give people license to use more energy.

and then last but not least:

Despite their being cited as the shining example of what can be accomplished with wind power, the Danish government has cancelled plans for three offshore wind farms planned for 2008 and has scheduled the withdrawal of subsidies from existing sites. Development of onshore wind plants in Denmark has effectively stopped. Because Danish companies dominate the wind industry, however, the government is under pressure to continue their support. Spain began withdrawing subsidies in 2002. Germany reduced the tax breaks to wind power, and domestic construction drastically slowed in 2004. Switzerland also is cutting subsidies as too expensive for the lack of significant benefit. The Netherlands decommissioned 90 turbines in 2004. Many Japanese utilities severely limit the amount of wind-generated power they buy, because of the instability they cause. For the same reason, Ireland in December 2003 halted all new wind-power connections to the national grid. In early 2005, they were considering ending state support. In 2005, Spanish utilities began refusing new wind power connections. In 2006, the Spanish government ended -- by emergency decree -- its subsidies and price supports for big wind. In 2004, Australia reduced the level of renewable energy that utilities are required to buy, dramatically slowing wind-project applications. On August 31, 2004, Bloomberg News reported that "the unstable flow of wind power in their networks" has forced German utilities to buy more expensive energy, requiring them to raise prices for the consumer.

Communities in Germany, Wales, and Ireland claim that even 3,000 feet away the noise is significant. Individuals around the world say they have to close their windows and turn on the air conditioner when the wind turbines are active. The noise of a wind plant in Ireland was measured in 2002 at 60 dB 1 km (3,280 ft) upwind. The subaural low-frequency noise was above 70 dB (which is 10 times as loud on the logarithmic decibel scale). A German study in 2003 found significant noise levels 1 mile away from a 2-year-old wind farm of 17 1.8-MW turbines, especially at night.


Read the whole paper here!

Can't vote Liberal - Energy Policy by Gibbons and Dumeresque

Voting Liberal means returning to the energy policies of Clyde Wells and Rex Gibbons - PRIVATIZATION included and further deters any ownership of oil and gas projects. And worse he tries to dupe the media - or he does not understand the issue at all.


It's no secret that I have policy issues with the Premier. I support his move to acquire equity in the oil patch - but I do not support his failed fisheries policy - failed rural policies - and especially the suggestion that Lower Churchill power be exported. The "pamphlet" he calls an "energy plan" could have been written in a few nights by myself and a couple of energy zealots. Further it is an insult to Labradorians - simple as that.

I also don't like his style - the Führer comment that got him into an outrage - pontificating on hitting below the belt. The Premier says they will do the campaign without getting into "gutter" politics. The truth is - the man threatened civil servants - threatened to sue bloggers - and generally is a bully. He surrounds himself with "experts" as long as they are his buddies or past business partners.

I support his stand on removing non-renewable resource revenues from equalization - but he is doing nothing practical to make "Steve" live up to his promises.

He's just dragged out the joint management of the fishery again and his desire to see Canada take custodial management of the nose and tail of the Grand Banks - but oddly when Loyola Hearn reneged on this promise - he claimed Tom Rideout and the provincial government agreed with changes made to NAFO on surveillance and penalties. Then the whole works of them got rid of FPI - no equity there. This also includes the Liberals who did not want to upset some of the potential for political contributions.

But let's get to it.

Gerry Reid has just added another piece of logic to his "no equity" policy. Now he says Norway just took equity because it needed to kick start it's offshore - in the same way that Canada did when it took equity in Hibernia.

Why then Gerry does Norway continue to take equity position? Why then Gerry does Norway continue to be a major shareholder in Norsk Hydro? How about this?

Norway has produced this year - a "simple" easy to follow "FACT" sheet on the petroleum sector. Here's a sample found in the document.

The government receives a large share of the value created through:

* Taxation of oil and gas activities

* Charges/fees

* Direct ownership in fields on the Norwegian continental shelf (through the State’s Direct Financial Interest, SDFI)

* Dividends from ownership in Statoil

The State’s Direct Financial Interest (SDFI) is an important source of state revenues, in addition to taxes, fees and dividends from its ownership in Statoil. SDFI is an arrangement in which the state owns interests in a number of oil and gas fields, pipelines and onshore facilities. Each government take is decided when production licences are awarded and the size of the state interest varies from field to field. As one of several owners, the state pays its share of investments and costs, and receives a corresponding share of the income from the production licence.

Gerry - regardless of what Rex says - trying to sell the media that crap is bound to come back and bite you.

And Gerry - let me cut this off at the pass - on Hydro...

Just last month - and based on the current and future value of hydro-power the Government of Norway issues this News Release:

The right of reversion – The Government secures public ownership of hydropower

It says in part:

Today, a provisional decree has been passed in the King’s Council with instant effect which is considered to bring the right of reversion in accordance with the ruling of the EFTA Court and the EEA agreement. It is stated that the basic principle of public ownership of the Norwegian hydropower resources at state, regional and local level is being maintained. It will no longer be given licenses for acquisition of waterfalls and hydropower plants to private actors. Such actors can, however, still own one third of public owned hydropower plants, Mr. Enoksen says.

and

I am very pleased that we have reached an arrangement which completely keeps our most important renewable resource on public hands. We maintain public ownership at state, county and municipal level and thus secure all public hydropower owners rights to the hydropower without time limits, Minister Odd Roger Enoksen states.

Voting Liberal means returning to the energy policies of Clyde Wells and Rex Gibbons - PRIVATIZATION - included and further deters any ownership of oil and gas projects. And that goes for Party President and Candidate Danny Dumeresque (another Clyde boy that promoted and apparently still does support the ideology of privatizing hydro).

Fix This!

While your sniffing perfume - changing underwear - hanging paintings - scratching your lotto tickets - having a puff or a swallow - or making excuses for your spending habits - find a way to fix this!

(numbers are rounded to the nearest 100)

............................1988..................................2006

Total Population 575,000...............................509,700

Years of Age

0-19.....195,500...............................111,700

20-39....195,700...............................132,400

40-59....111,400...............................166,100

60 +......72,500................................98,500

Add to that the estimate of population for 2007 is 506,500

Primary and secondary education costs record level - with 83,800 less students (0-19)
Health costs at record level - with 70,000 less people

People to have the $1000 babies are down 63,300 since 1988 (20-39)

The next generation following to have $1000 babies down 83,800 since 1988 (0-19)

The people who are generally in the middle to late career age up 54,700 since 1988 - and the ones leaving now to find work or joining their adult sons and daughters who have left after graduation.

People who are at the beginning to middle career years down 63,300 since 1988.

60+ up 26,000 people - including retirees who without pension indexing are continuing to have their disposable income deteriorate - and their quality of life diminished.

The fishery was destroyed by Ottawa's mismanagement - yet nothing is done. And now we want to turn our superior hydro energy over to Ontario - the Maritimes - Quebec - or even the New England States. They do not need more industry and their populations are growing.

Now let me make your day!

Here is a headline from today's Globe and Mail online:

Thirty-somethings drive 2005 birth rate to seven-year high...

and this paragraph from the story:

The number of births dropped to a 55-year low in 2000 but, except 2002, has risen every year since — largely because most babies were born to parents belonging to the echo generation (the children of baby boomers) had entered their prime childbearing years as of 2001.

Unfortunately for Newfoundland and Labrador - the thirty-somethings have left or are leaving and the generation following is diminishing to record lows. The price of oil can go to $100 bucks a barrel - and the only thing that will do is stave off our extinction - unless we start doing other things right.

I'll need that other glass of wine now Mr. Dicks.

The smell of "Old Liberalism" cannot be masked by expensive perfume...

What is it with the Liberals? They describe themselves as left of center on their web-page (at least it did until they updated it today)- while going right of Williams and the Tories on energy policy.

The answer is Rex Gibbons - if the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador continue to follow the strategy of this man on energy - the Liberals will fail - politically.

Yesterday Gerry Reid was telling university students that equity in oil projects would not happen under a Liberal government. In defense of this position - Reid said that Alberta does not do it - so if that energy powerhouse does not do it - why should we?

Two answers to that Mr. Reid - and you would see them if Gibbons would stop advising for a little while.

1. Alberta owns it oil and gas resources. We do not. When Alberta develops it can say - you may develop this parcel if we receive this amount in royalties and we get a refinery or other petro-chemical industry in Alberta to process the resource. We are not allowed to refine our own oil until the refineries in Eastern Canada are fully satisfied. Do you understand this? Have you read the Atlantic Accord recently? Rex has - and Rex knows. Rex was the Minister of Energy - he made the deals on oil and he attempted to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. His policies failed and he has not been re-elected since.

2. Who cares if Alberta or other Canadian provinces do not take equity? I don't - I do not need Alberta to guide us on what we as our own jurisdiction should or should not do. We can have independent policy choices. Further - Reid should know that many other jurisdictions in the world do seek and achieve equity positions - such as Norsk Hydro.

Then there is the Liberal policy on wind development. Once again Rex (Clyde) rares his head and Gerry spews a suggestion regarding private wind generation.

Here is the situation Gerry - if Hydro guarantees to buy the output of such generation then you and me Gerry will pay for it via our electric bill. When that is paid - who do you prefer a portion be returned to - our provinces treasury or let's say the Government of Italy. This creeping in of private sector energy developments is back-door privatization of a resource we own outright. Further Gerry - you should ask Rex what happens when you have multiple players in the generation sector inputting into an electricity grid. You should ask him why Ontario had the big blackout when Quebec did not. You should ask him how we guarantee maintenance with a group of private generators and the cost of not having that control. You should ask him what happened with the joint use of utility poles - and what happens when one group maintains the poles a little more or less than another.

Until the Gerry Reid's "New Liberalism" stops depending on failed "Old Liberalism" policies - the party will continue to enjoy falling polls. It's time to let new thinking take over from Rex Gibbons - Clyde Wells - and past Minister Walter Noel. There is no perfume they can buy to make these policies smell good.



And as for Labrador energy policy - both the Liberals and the Conservatives fail - and they will get a sense of that as they crawl and slither around Labrador looking for a vote (the right to exploit Labrador to benefit the Avalon).

As I write this - back comes John Efford - dipping his toes in the political ocean - John - even if we can get past all the spending scandal and you were as pure as the driven snow in the administration of your constituency allowance - you are the one who told us to take or leave a lesser deal on equalization.

I close with this observation. If Williams does not win 3 of 4 seats in Labrador - he will not have a real mandate to develop the Lower Churchill under less than "best" terms for the Big Land. This is something I hope Labradorians will consider.

How Colonial can they be?

Danny wants to hightail Lower Churchill Power to the Island - but believes it is too expensive to service areas of Labrador. Gerry wants to exploit all Labrador resources - and give them some of the revenue back.

Both are colonial - both are backward - both are experiencing Island disease - and both are wrong.

The Lower Churchill power must be used to develop Labrador - industrially - in that way Labrador can benefit from population growth - a booming economy - infrastructure development - and municipal revenues.

Here's the tough part for St. John's or Carbonear - the boys want to export the power - grab the money - and pass some back to Labrador for what they (Gerry and Danny) thinks Labrador needs.

They prefer to receive more money and let the industry - jobs - and people go to Ontario - than - receive less money and grow industry in Labrador and keep Newfoundlanders and Labradorians home. Even this colonial attitude is wrong - because mathematically - for a "society" not a "cable monopoly" it is best to use the power home.

Danny does not expect you to read the Blue Book - he just wants you to adore and follow him - blinders are in the mail. Gerry thinks all red books end up in the "trunks of cars" and that nobody really wants to read that stuff anyway.

Maybe the two gurus can much on these tasty bits from the "energy for industry" world. (That's the one everybody else lives in but us)

These statements from a story in the Gulf News out of the Middle East:

The world is currently experiencing a shrinkage in the number of 'power islands' able to competitively support energy intensive industries such as aluminium production. In recent times, new power supply contracts at considerably higher prices in the United States and parts of Western Europe have resulted in a number of smelter output reductions and permanent closures.

In the future, new aluminium smelting capacity is expected to be concentrated in areas such as the Middle East, Russia, Iceland and South America.

And then there is this from the The Wall Street Journal Online:

With energy prices steadily increasing, the world's biggest aluminum companies are investing heavily to secure dedicated power sources, at times buying local power plants or building aluminum-making operations in remote parts of the world where energy is more abundant and cheaper.

United Co. Rusal, Alcoa Inc., Norsk Hydro ASA and others are jockeying to corner supplies of hydro power in Siberia and Iceland, and cheap natural gas in the Middle East, to fuel new metal plants. The producers are acknowledging that it is more important to be closer to energy sources than to customers...

The only thing missing in these stories is a direct reference to Labrador - that is because neither the Tory nor Liberal leader have the guts and/or intelligence to do what is right with Lower Churchill power - if it is to be developed at all.

I expect there is a good reason Norsk Hydro and other Norwegian firms visit Sue's Blog - don't you think?

Questions and Answers Hebron MOU

The only thing I want Danny Williams to do respecting the Hebron MOU is release it. Then I and any others interested can get a first-hand look at the document and do our own review.

As for major resource development - I call on Gerry Reid - Lorraine Michael - and Danny Williams - to introduce legislation that would require such MOU's to be released and debated in the House of Assembly. Otherwise you are all hypocrites.

Now that Danny won't release the MOU and Gerry has gotten into a list of questions - which I say the Premier will have a list of answers to during a televised election debate (won't be pretty) - I have some questions and answers of my own.

Why in the face of obvious public support for equity ownership (risks-benefits) accepted - do Gerry Reid and the Liberal Party continue to question the policy choice?

Here's one of Gerry's questions:

How long will it take for government to recover its up-front investment?

An estimated $600 million is a lot of money to put forward in up-front costs without any immediate return on investment. How long will it take to recover this investment before any real money flows into the province's coffers?

My answer is - yes it is a significant investment - with significant reward potential - nothing is guaranteed. At a time when oil was below $20 a barrel the feds purchased a piece of the Hibernia action and it has paid off exponentially. Now when oil sits at almost 4 times that value - we are wondering why we should take a piece of the action. Well that thinking gets us right back into the Upper Churchill. If we had taken some of the financial risk of that investment as Quebec did - we might be sitting here now with a few hundred million a year to work with. Labrador could have a highway of gold.

What is more puzzling is that the NDP and the PC's are willing to invest in equity and the Liberals are waffling on the whole idea. Get your arse pants off the picket fence and make solid policy choices.

Yes there are risks with equity - but you still buy a home right? Anything might happen.

With the size of our stake and the associated costs - one might imagine the "risk" the companies must be taking with the other 95%. We all know the oil companies do one thing better than any other industry - make profit. They too would have to speculate what the market would deliver - and they expect to make money from the Hebron development. We will also.

Let's look at another of Reid's questions:

How much money has been left on the table by compromising on the royalty regime and allowing a one percent payment until payout?

If the generic royalty regime with an increasing royalty rate from 1% to 7.5% until payout is applied, similar to White Rose, hundreds of millions of extra dollars will flow into the province=s coffers in the early years of production. What impact will your compromise have on the amount of money that could have flowed into provincial coffers in the first ten years of production?

Well I will address this two ways. First if we take more royalties on the back end of the deal instead of in the first ten years - we have essentially accomplished our equalization objective. Harper did not remove non-renewable resource revenues from the formula - so why scoop them all up now - only to lose equalization payments? No let's be more clever - bide our time - maybe the formula will change to reflect that policy in years to come - but if we are in the country let's max equalization as is done in Quebec.

Secondly if the profits of the equity are funneled into the new Energy Corporation and invested in much needed social and economic programs - we hide them from the equalization formula - thereby increasing our take again of the resources in our waters.

The Liberals had this advice in the past and ignored it. Too bad - they could have used the boost in public popularity and increased our benefits. Notwithstanding all of this in order to be a Norsk Hydro or a Hydro-Quebec we have to be players - and under past Liberal policy we were not. I only wish the Premier had done the same with wind - because in that you find Danny's weakness - inconsistency. That should have been further obvious when he did not release the MOU.

Over the next few days I will respond to Gerry's questions - and give you my take. Meanwhile Danny release the MOU. I have my own theory on where the oil companies made the gains and it's not with Hebron.

The Weakest Link

It's real easy to beat up on Gerry Reid today - the polls are miserable for the Liberals - to say the least.

As the Leader of the Official Opposition - Gerry's pay is a little more - but he's certainly not compensated for the load placed on his shoulders.

There is no doubt - now - to people who care about the existence of a Liberal Party and who genuinely want to rebuild it - from the bottom up - with complete top-down replacement - that the policies and the people delivering them are not resonating with the voters.

This is not just Gerry Reid - he just wears it. First of all almost half of people who will at least admit they will vote Liberal - will not back their leader - they choose Danny or are undecided. That's a tough one for the party and it's advisers - who chose to place Gerry Reid up-front despite the numbers showing he is lagging behind the party. That was and is a a strategical error in the Liberal campaign. Secondly the Liberal policies (such as they are)are not being supported by Liberals let alone the general population. Thirdly "New Liberalism" is an oxymoron if delivered by Gerry Reid - Danny Dumeresque - Rex Gibbons - John Efford - Norm Whelan - Walter Noel - and Roger Grimes. "New Liberalism" must fall to the party supporters - who clearly want a change in the old "party".

So while Gerry wears the shirt - the rest of them are responsible for manufacturing it.

There are real issues out there to challenge the Premier on - but if the communications director and other staffers and executive - don't see immediate media interest - it is placed on the back-burner. Currently there Liberal leadership seems to take direction from the media - which ultimately traps them into Danny's message. Generally speaking the local "journalists" are frightened to death - disinterested - and/or incapable of doing the necessary investigative pieces needed in a democracy - when the Opposition is weak. There are some exceptions - usually in the Telegram or on the Fisheries Broadcast. Outside of that - we get carnage - school opening - doggy-doo - red herrings - and an update of government News Releases.

The whole cable-gate fibre-optic fiasco would be hammered by Opposition and media alike in any other province. But since Kelvin Parsons made the slip in the House of Assembly of saying - the deal might be alright - while challenging the process - not a word. The Liberal caucus has buried it.

The energy plan that has been promised time and time again - has still not been released - despite the announcement of a wind project - the issuing of a draft on the gas royalty regime - to the major oil and gas players - but not to the public or media. The energy plan still in hiding despite the continuation of Lower Churchill discussions - and work in the field. Without that plan we cannot know what this government believes will be the energy needs for Newfoundland and Labrador for the next 50 years. Therefore the direction for the Lower Churchill is cart before the horse. But the Libs say nothing and worse have not released any suggestions of their own.

The sale of FPI - and the disregard of this government respecting the value of the marketing arm - and it's disposal to Nova Scotia. The joke of a fisheries conference and the continued out-migration of our people caused by the instability in this our most valuable natural renewable resource.

Instead of hammering and hammering on the Stephenville mill or the situation with the Metis - they continue to fall all over the Hebron MOU and the Premier's position with the oil magnates.

Inconsistency in policy by this Premier when it comes to equity positions and demands for processing facilities - goes unchallenged.

The non-response to the restructuring of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - and what the real potential problems might be. The piece meal privatization of generation projects such as the wind project - which sees Newfoundlanders and Labradorians paying the Italian Government for energy.

To hold a News Conference to say - we will lower fees for your automobile - seems a little shallow when compared to the astronomical decisions which have to be made.

It still amazes me that cling-ons of the Liberal Party - demand to keep control - and do - despite the outright rejection of the voters. This is what happened to the federal Tories and if this continues here - there will be a wipe-out of this Liberal Party.

MHA Roland Butler was just on VOCM talking about matters in his district - when Randy Simms asked him about the poll. He answered "...we can't ignore what the polls are saying..." well yes Roland - unfortunately the Party is ignoring what the polls have been and are saying - that is the problem. Roland also mentioned the polling is done with 400 or so people - no - that's wrong - they alter the numbers every other poll - this time over 800 people were polled. This is something the staffers might have advised him on.

The Liberal Party has chosen to promote its weakest link heading into this fall election - I only hope there are Liberals who are seeking office - who reject this decision and keep their feet firmly on the ground in their chosen districts - and stick to what works for their particular constituency. Remember people - there are and could be some backbench members that will have less of a voice than a strong Opposition member.

Although the numbers for the PC Party are astronomical - Danny is still ahead of his party - that's something neither the Liberals nor the NDP can campaign on. The NDP may hang on to their traditional vote and may even take some from the Liberals - but Lorraine's leadership is limited to maintaining the one seat the Party has kept - primarily because Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi has become a seat of entitlement for the NDP - something which also must change.

I await with interest to see if the hold-up in the St. John's East Tory nomination - is not being held to "Marshall" the cable guy's agenda. Will we see Ken or Steve come forward in the next couple of days? Despite Jerome Kennedy's billing as the star winger - the center-man has yet to emerge for the Ballard - oops I mean William's team.

For Newfoundland and Labrador - the loss in not restricted to the Liberals imploding - it may also include the loss of the Lower Churchill as a key growth potential for Labrador - as the Premier gets drunker on "power".

Williams held his News Conference in the wrong Venue

As Sue's Blog has already posted - I support and have supported the Premier regarding his position on Hebron.

Now - unfortunately all positive feelings on the MOU for the development - have been removed and replaced by my feelings of contempt of an individual who believes he is above even his own principles.

When Williams stated that this resource development would not be brought to the floor of the House of Assembly for debate and ratification - he and he alone placed himself squarely in the college of Stephen Harper - Paul Martin - Loyola Hearn - and John Efford. Premier you are now misleading your own people.

During the Voisey's Bay negotiations and subsequent Statement of Principles you stated that such deals must go to the peoples House - whether the deal or good or bad - you felt anybody could miss something and maybe the wisdom of 48 could prevent serious errors or loopholes.

You are now saying that because a deal or MOU is brokered by you - the same should not apply. Not only is this arrogant but it borders really close to a dictatorship (one man rule)mentality.

What I can say now is this - neither you or nor Gerry Reid are sincere when stating resource deals should be brought to the HOA for debate and ratification because neither of you tabled legislation during your tenures to assure this.

I will take Lorraine Michael at her word and therefore she stands as the lone voice of democracy and principles of openness and accountability.

Listening to Paul Oram on VOCM open-line this morning was nauseating as he tried to justify Williams being above all others - therefore the checks and balances of our elected institution should not apply. Paul Oram - as an individual grown man - should really stand back and listen to what he actually said this morning - and try to find where he left his common sense - and rethink hero worship of a human being.

Gerry Reid is no better than Williams - both used the concept of bringing resource deals to the HOA for purely political gains as opposed to doing it because it's right.

It is time that government introduced and passed this legislation to ensure that any leader falsely believing they are above error or scrutiny are put back in their place in a thinking democracy.

If this is how Williams is going to respond to openness and accountability - he should have booked a space at the Basilica or the Cathedral for the announcement.

The voter must now really reflect on what or who they vote for. If you elect Williams now - in great majority - we give him the continued right to rule by decree - and worse carry on with the Lower Churchill development in the same atmosphere as the Upper Churchill fiasco. He should not be permitted to hold himself above everybody else or even more scary - believe he actually is.

These Tory Puppets should think long and hard about supporting let alone praising this stance.

What a sad day - following what should have been a celebratory occurrence for the people and the Province.

The Premier by allowing the closure of the Stephenville Mill - changing his mind on the status of the Metis - and now this refusal to place the MOU before the House of Assembly - is choosing to keep company with the Prime Minister (Steve) right Dan?

The NDP needs new Leadership so...

Newfoundland and Labrador can have three choices.

Danny Williams is riding high in the polls - too high for the results he has achieved in major sectors of our economy. His stance with the oil companies is correct - however that is marginalized by his stance on exporting power from the Lower Churchill. His stance with Ottawa is correct - however it is without a plan. Stephen Harper - with a minority Conservative government has defeated Danny Williams and Newfoundland and Labrador - because when the hammer was dropped on equalization promises - Williams did nothing but moan and whine.

Getting rid of Loyola Hearn and Fabian Manning in the next election is hardly a competent response to Newfoundland and Labrador losing 11 billion dollars.

Gerry Reid is from the "old" party and is demonstrating nothing more than agreeing with the Premier on most significant resource issues - like exporting power from Labrador and privatizing FPI. He squeaks a bit on the Hebron development but only to be weak. So the message of "Gerry Reid's New Liberalism" is the government is doing fine but we should be more flexible with the oil companies. Until the Liberal Party elders and permanent cling-ons relinquish leadership and direction to "new" participants - the Party will continue to be stagnant despite the mistakes of this Premier.

In this time of Liberal "destruction" and then hopefully renewal - the NDP should be primed to take over the role of Official Opposition and government in waiting. Unfortunately the new leadership under Lorraine Michael is failing to raise the interest of people to the point where real gains can be made. Jack Harris was a great parliamentarian but not much of a Party builder. Lorraine does not have the expertise or on the ground wisdom of Newfoundland and Labrador affairs over the past 15 years to be as articulate and participatory as Jack was.

This does not bode well in the upcoming fall election and leaves Danny Williams with a free reign over issues that can decide our future - such as the fishery and the Lower Churchill power. I was amazed last week when Lorraine called one of the VOCM talk programs and stated that while on a tour of rural areas on the Island one fisherman begged her to talk about the fishery - so she did. This is not a fraction of the effort required by this leader to deal with such an important policy area. Lorraine should be out-speaking - me - Jim Morgan - Gus Etchegary - and the fishermen who call the Fisheries Broadcast regularly with industry concerns. If Lorraine is relying on the FFAW to form her fisheries policy - she may wish to think again. There are many fishermen and plant workers in the province that have major concerns about their union.

More peculiar is Lorraine's tendency to believe she has a candidate when she does not. Just a short while ago the leader called an open line program to announce that Simeon Tshakapesh had agreed to run for the NDP in Torngat Mountains - in fact it is still on their website as at this writing - seems Simeon has changed his mind and also stated on CBC's Morning Show that he told Lorraine he had not completely made up his mind on whether to seek the NDP seat or run for local office. In either case NDP president Nancy Riche expressed - no displeasure in Simeon's switcheroo - in fact she fully understood Simeon's right to change his mind.

Now this does not add up - just a few months ago Labrador West was going through a provincial by-election and the NDP were courting a female candidate from the area - Karen Oldford. When Karen officially announced - it was for the Liberals - not the NDP. Nancy Riche was not so gracious to Oldford when publicly speaking about Karen's apparent switcheroo - in fact Oldford states that she had informed the NDP (and says she has emails to prove it) that she had not fully made up her mind.

I can tell you the response to Ms. Oldford - changing her mind - could only be seen as politically brutal when compared to that of Simeon Tshakapesh.

It is true that Lorraine Michael has minimum resources to wage a campaign when compared to the PC's or even the Liberals - but that fact was obvious - or should have been when she took over the leadership role. Ms. Micheal should be heard - bellowing to the roof-tops that public funding of elections is necessary to even up the playing field a little.

The other reality is that candidates with major connections to labour organizations in the past have and are lining up to seek PC or Liberal nominations - this must be a blow to the party and questions whether or not some traditional support may be slipping.

Ms. Michael is not inspiring the masses and as such the NDP is not flush with growing enthusiasm. While I have heard media claim that Lorraine has been accepted by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians as a legitimate leader - that has not converted to the party support required for substantial growth.

I do hope some NDP candidates make it - especially in areas where the Liberals are folding - that may generate enough interest where - in 4 years time - the NDP will be presenting a new leader - new ideas - new candidates - and a real shot at Opposition.

Just some Things...

Like this story out of Hamilton Ontario

The entertainment piece on Shaye contains this sentence:

Ex-Newfoundlanders Kim Stockwood and Damhnait Doyle and PEI native Tara MacLean are shown balancing family, friendships and the pressures of the music industry. All three had pre-Shaye solo careers and all three continue to work on their own projects outside of the group.

I'd like to know what the gals think about being referred to EX-Newfoundlanders...
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The Security and Prosperity Partnership (Bush Harper and Calderon) with Corporate Elite determine for us what our country will be like in the future.

Three right-wing gurus "brainstorming" in other words being lead around by the nose by corporate masters.

Council of Canadians and Maude Barlow provide these highlights on the group:

1. The SPP is the political manifestation of a corporate plan for economic and security integration that was never voted on in any country.

2. Energy is arguably the sticky goo holding the SPP together. Canada and Mexico have agreed to give U.S. oil companies an even tighter grip of both countries’ resources in return for vague assurances that the U.S. won’t shut the border to our goods.

3. An SPP roundtable on the “Future of the North American Environment” on April 27, 2007 in Calgary discussed “water consumption, water transfers and artificial diversions of bulk water,” with the aim of achieving “joint optimum utilization of the available [North American] water.” The meeting was part of the White House-funded North American Future 2025 Project that has Canadian government backing as a venue “to help guide the ongoing Security and Prosperity Partnership,”...

4. Joint Canada-U.S. no-fly lists, exclusive airport service for “trusted travelers,” and racially based immigration policies that criminalize people from “high risk” countries. These are among a few of the extremely disturbing “security” measures contained in the SPP. The simple fact that Maher Arar is still on the U.S. no-fly list, despite exoneration and a formal apology from the RCMP and our federal government, is proof that none of these measures can make Canadians any safer.

5. In May 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper put 10 members of the CCCE onto a permanent high-level advisory board called the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC). This group has been asked to “prioritize the priorities” in the SPP and to “drive change.” Meanwhile, the public and most of our publicly elected officials have been left out of the picture completely.

6. The Council of Canadians demands that Canada cease all talks leading toward deeper integration between Canada and the United States. At the very least, we must bring the SPP to the House of Commons for a full debate. We must also disband the North American Competitiveness Council and consult with Canadians in a meaningful and participatory way on Canada-U.S. relations. The majority of Canadians would prefer a “Sovereignty and Justice Partnership” with the United States, which protects Canada’s energy and water, preserves an independent foreign policy, and addresses real security concerns instead of the fantasies of the Bush administration.

Meanwhile our MHA's and wannabes are still stuffing hotdogs on the BBQ circuit.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

E Source Ranks Electric and Gas Company Web Sites

The three best Canadian web sites are provided by BC Hydro,
Terasen Gas, and Hydro-Quebec.

Meanwhile where is our energy plan? How much is Timothy Powers of Summa getting paid by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to "lobby" the feds? So what then is John Fitzgerald (Danny's boy in Ottawa) doing? What is Ed Martin doing? Has Ed Marting ever brokered a hydro electric deal prior to becoming CEO of NLH? Unfortunately the media is tied up finding out what happened to Tara Oram's voting. Or that the RNC hired two people. Or the highway and police carnage of the day. Or Danny's red herrings like Grenfell or gravel pit camping instead of his failed threats to Harper over equalization.

Where's the energy plan? What's happening with the police investigations of the other MHA's? What about the Auditor General's report on House of Assembly spending? Or his report on Persona? What happened with Persona? Are they sold? What does that do to the "local" argument? What about the fishery? FPI? Or where is Loyola Sullivan - who takes a job under the Prime Minister that lied to us and him when he was provincial Finance Minister?

Why are we talking energy nationally when "Mr. Open and Accountable" has not brought any Lower Churchill discussion to the House of Assembly? Who is writing the bits and pieces "red non-book" for the Liberals? Who are the policy gurus? Are they Walter Noel? Roger Grimes? Danny Dumeresque? Art Reid? John Efford? Norm Whelan? Rex Gibbons?

Why did Yvonne Jones say Danny was a statesman - when the whole Liberal message is that he is a bully who cannot negotiate anything?

It would be nice to have an aggressive media don't you think?

Newfoundland and Labrador is one big Flea Market

As Danny babysits the oil and gas sector - he gives away our wind - and the lucrative FPI fisheries marketing arm.

It should be unacceptable to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to have the Italian government have partial ownership of a wind farm while we ask for no equity involvement. This is the beginning of a very bad policy. You see we have to be in on the front end - as Norsk Hydro has done with oil and gas. We are backpedaling now trying to get in on the offshore action - while we stupidly go forward with new wind development with no equity and no energy plan.

It seems to me that SNC Lavelin - currently holding training programs in Labrador related to the Lower Churchill development - knows more about what the Premier plans for that project that we do.

While we are at it - what happened to the draft royalty regime on gas - distributed to the oil companies but not the people of the Province. The media has yet to deal with that issue.

The there is the NAFO fiasco - where major changes are being proposed which if adopted could further harm our control of the fishery. We had to be informed of those changes by a retired civil servant from Ontario - while our millions of dollars of expertise didn't make a peep. As for the Fisheries Minister or Leader of the Opposition - not a speck of concern - nothing. They are - after all - on a 5 month campaign trail to get YOUR VOTE.

What of FPI? Well the historically successful marketing arm of the company is about to be sold to a Nova Scotian company with the Icelanders coming in on the rest. Nothing - no leadership here either. Newfoundland and Labrador is like a giant flea market - with everybody coming around to take a look and buy bits and pieces of us. Did you ever hear one of those stories where somebody buys something from a flea market for a buck - only to find out later from an appraiser that the item is valued in the thousands of dollars. This is an indication that the original owner of the goods had no clue of the value of some items. Well Danny you are turning out to be the vendor of our giant flea market while Lorraine Michael and Gerry Reid are like nosy neighbours - watching what you do - but doing nothing themselves.

When Danny Williams is the best of our lot - and he supports the export of reliable - cost competitive - renewable hydro - from Labrador - we are in a sorry state. When he continues to present himself as the defender of Newfoundland and Labrador - but can offer no more of a solution than to prevent the election of Conservatives in a federal election - we are in a sorry state - When our Premier therefore assists career politicians Judy Foote and Oliver Langdon to bail from the provincial fisheries fiasco and head on up to Ottawa for a second pension - we are in a sorry state.

Then we have the backroom of Ross Reid - Doug House - and Dean MacDonald influencing policy privately - while our role is simply to follow Danny with pom-poms. The Premier is roaming around Newfoundland and Labrador in his hamper-pamper-camper with his flunkies in Cabinet and Caucus following him in the US BUS - enjoying his ability to trounce on Opposition by distributing our own money like Santa Claus. Should we have pity - no - the Liberals have done the same when in office - I think Tobin used helicopters. What we should demand is better candidates - we should be rejecting this lot outright.

What we should realize is that our excitement over getting any provincial money is just a reflection of how poor the policies of these politicians have left us. In other words - keep the people desperate and they will be joyful over crumbs.

Meanwhile not one of these lot have been able to stop our young educated people and their families from leaving. Not one of them is able to deal with the collapse of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Not one of them is showing any vision - when there is a fire sale on hydro-electric power. Not one of them has any guts as Danny let's Stephen away with broken promises costing us billions - when Danny lets Stephen walk away from fallow field legislation - while the Liberals idea is reduced to say nothing about FPI and capitulate to the oil companies. And where is the NDP? Good question.

Who do You work for???

Last week when I called Back - Talk to talk about energy - Iceland - and Newfoundland and Labrador - Randy asked me who I worked for. For readers of Sue's Blog - can you figure it out?

Government - Federal or Provincial - no
so let's start from there.

Exxon Mobil - not unless they like the criticism

Voisey's Bay - no they do not like my thinking

Petro-Can - no way

The Fish Merchants - not a chance

The Provincial PC's - you're kidding right.

The Provincial Liberals - uh huh they love me talking about the party moving to oblivion.

The Provincial NDP - I don't think so - they don't like my comments about the NDP.

So who is it?

Loyola Hearn?
Stephen Harper?
Stephan Dion?
Jack Leyton?
The Bloc?

Who?

Persona?

Who?

You will quickly determine that I unlike all those who are asking - work for the people for $0 - when I am blogging or am on open line - unlike all the cluttered and frenzied politico's - I work for nothing. We pay the politicians - when they come on - you are paying them - and when the wannabes come on they want your vote so you can pay them. Randy Simms when he talks about public issues is paid - he is not doing it for nothing. Bill Rowe and Linda Swain are paid when they talk about public issues. Ryan Cleary when he writes falsehoods about me or innuendo's he is paid. Reporters are paid. Broadcasters are paid. Dean Macdonald is paid when he gets on to defend Persona's 15 million dollar check from your wallets as taxpayers. The Premier is paid - Gerry Reid is paid - Lorraine Michael is paid - Earle McCurdy is paid - Carol Furlong is paid - Debbie Forward is paid - Andy Wells is paid - Keith Coombes is paid - Wade Locke is paid - Axel Meisson is paid - retired politicians are still being paid - when I get on the air and when I do the 30 or so hours a week I put into my research to prepare public commentary I do not get paid. The exact opposite is true - the questions I ask and statements I make to try and prevent this Province from being taken again and again and again - means certainly I will never be paid.

I have never heard Randy or Bill or Linda or any reporter ask anybody ever - the questions he asked me today. So why were the questions asked? My defense of the Province and her people is questioned because those who have an interest in screwing us or are interested in keeping power want my credibility challenged. There are people hired - some with your money who transcribe or record everything I say. They are paid. If somebody really sticks up for this province and asks the right questions - the people who own the Province will try and intervene. They do not want to lose control and they do not want the people of the Province asking for more.

Unfortunately big business and politico's - especially those in power - do not want anything I ask or state to stick - that might harm them or those who support them. My support must come from the people - the reward I receive is not financial it is only the phone-calls and emails I receive everyday from people who love this Province.

So when Randy asked mt to prove a negative - that is that I am not in secret conflict - I am asked to prove I am innocent. Wait now - what country is this? Where is the media? Tell me when anybody else was asked these questions on open-line?

Can I award government contracts?
Can I spend government money?
No!

The only influence they fear is influencing the people - especially around election time - that is the last time I was asked these questions. The people are supposed to accept what those in power are telling them and the policies they come up with are best for them. That is why we lead everybody in outmigration and have more deaths than births. That is why our fishery was destroyed and Upper Churchill contract was signed. Just a few short years ago - Hydro was being privatized - it cost me 3 years of my life and I was not paid - but the people who spent over 20 million of your dollars to try and convince you and put together the deal were paid.

It is a sad place we live in when real public service is questioned while the boys and girls run off with your money and resources. It is a sad place indeed when those people being investigated by the RNC about the HOA scandal and all the politicians who sat there and booted the Auditor General out were not questioned like I was today. At least not in public.

What does this say about us? I asked that question when the Premier threatened to sue me just a few short months ago. I was never told what it even was about. If they shut Sue up - what is the reward to the people? How does it help? These are the questions you should be asking.

As for Ryan Cleary - the "journalist" that made the statement - I will deal with him all on his own. Coming soon to this blog.