Kent reveals Tory problem

After seven by-election losses in a row - the Tories are on their way out. Many of them understand what the people are saying and are planning their retirements in one way or another.

What happened to the PC's?

Media and some pundits credit the loss of public support to Danny Williams departure. I don't accept that reasoning rather I credit the downfall to Danny Williams leadership style and policies.

In my opinion - Williams enjoyed being surrounded by weak people (those who would not dare defy him) and eliminating those who might. (Beth Marshall, Paul Shelley, Tom Osborne and Fabian Manning) Danny did not build a strong leadership pool nor did he take the time to consult or include grass-roots Tories. I believe it was after all - all about him.

Danny's policy choices - most importantly - Muskrat Falls - have not been embraced by the people. Williams pot of money for governing was huge - oil revenues galore and let's not forget the benefits of Voisey's. These were Liberal deals and timing made it his administrations money.

How he spent that money - on behalf of the people - did not equate into anything more than quick wealth on the Avalon and a wonderful market to build houses in.

We are in debt trouble, we are in deficit trouble, we are in demographic trouble, and we are in free fall. Highly doubtful that his Galway community is going to be the golden touch project he thought it might be.

People are very concerned about Muskrat Falls - the cost - the purpose - and most importantly the giveaway. Our resources should be used to grow our population - create long-term well paying jobs. It was Danny who was champion of this concept while in Opposition. Then how do we explain his fisheries, forestry, mining, and hydro policies? We can't because - once Premier - the giveaways were okay.

In what I refer to as Danny's decade - the province has not enjoyed growth in any real way. They all pump up the GDP - but who cares if that indicator is in isolation from other meaningful indicators such as population growth and age. Growth on the Avalon is attributed to shrinking in rural populations.

The former Premier got out before the crap hit the fan - but before he did - he groomed weak people to continue his path. His first was Kathy Dunderdale. The joy and pride of being Danny's chosen one was evident from day one. She would carry the Muskrat torch to the end - while he would carry on with his business interests - power to the Avalon and mining in Labrador.

His other political weaklings included Kennedy, Marshall, Kent, Johnson, Sullivan, Shea, and King (essentially the Cabinet base) were somehow of the belief somehow that they had a crack at the top job now.

When the day came however for a leadership race - they ran away - hid under Danny's coattails once again and allowed an "interim" Premier who did not want the job (supposedly) to actually win - uncontested. The beginning of the end.

As all political weaklings do - as party fortunes were changing - they pointed a finger at somebody else - not them - no not them. A bunch of children standing in front of a broken window.

Eventually their finger pointing and whispers caught on with an uninspired media and we were advised that Kathy Dunderdale had problems communicating the "really good" things they were doing.

As with gutless bullies in packs - they worked on Dunderdale until she left. There they sighed - all must be good now right?

Onward to a leadership election - while nice man Tom kept the Williams adoration embers burning. Minus their political guru Danny - the  guys and gals did not know which way was up - they did not know which way to go. We had speculation on a dozen or so within the PC caucus who were thinking about it. One by one they dropped off - as the collective wisdom determined they needed a fresh face - somebody from outside. So Wayne Bennett and Bill Barry stepped forward while Danny's Cabinet flourished being followers. Barry came out bold - aggressive - unpolished while Bennett annoyed the Party brass.

As might be expected when the weak did not know what to do - Danny stepped in and proclaimed Barry unfit for leadership and indirectly pushed for a fellow named Frank Coleman. As with all good sheep the caucus followed and proceeded to prepare for a Frank coronation despite the presence of a formidable opponent (Barry).

We heard excuse after excuse from former wannabe leaders within the sitting rank and file - ranging from "not my time" to "health" to "family priorities".

Meanwhile Barry was fighting a losing battle in a delegated convention wherein his commentary to the people of the province really did not matter if the Party brass was orchestrating a winner.

Many people asked why Coleman - a political neophyte - by reports private family and business man would throw himself under the bright lights of politics. This was quickly followed by awkward appearances of a man who appeared quite friendly but out of his comfort zone.

Barry following the condemnation by the great one and in true gritty business style - weighed his odds and determined the risk was unfitting the unlikely reward. Barry quit leaving Coleman as an unwilling political deer in headlights. What followed was not able to be scripted. Coleman became Premier in waiting - even starting to put together staff for his 8th floor domain. Then like an unpredicted failure of a detonation test - HVP - came to the fore. I think it's fair to say the Coleman will be remembered in Newfoundland and Labrador for performance bonds related to a paving contract not for almost becoming Premier. As quick as you could say "cheese" for a photograph - we had the sad picture of Coleman's back as he walked away from his indescribably short political stint.

Now what? Well the wannabes who all had excuses they wanted us to believe just a month or two before - shed those reasons and came flying back to the leadership race. Once again we had the speculation of who was running - who was supporting - who had a chance. In the end - and after another stint with the nice man - there was Ottenheimer, Davis, and Kent. The once held idea of a new fresh face was replaced with the need for experience. Ironically the same weaklings who just a month before were willing to accept a fellow who had never sought political office before were now questioning the option of Ottenheimer because he did not have a seat in the legislature.

When Steve Kent started his political climb - I remember a young man tenting on the corner of streets with a sign - asking the people of Mount Pearl to support him for Council. It must have been a real power rush - some years later - to find himself a political traffic cop on the corner directing leadership. Here he was - a new man - at the heart of political power in the province - a kingmaker. Kent relished it - played it up - played coy - loved the attention and could not believe he was actually in a position to broker his own political pinnacle.

Ottenheimer claimed the fix was in - Davis and Kent denied it and then in a joyous coming-out paraded it on the convention floor. Shortly thereafter he became Deputy Premier. Did this new power go to his head? Unfortunately yes - culminating in Tweets last night after his party's loss of two more by-elections. Here they are:

1. What's next? You're going to see bold, progressive leadership from @PaulDavisNL and the @PCPartyNL. We've got big plans for this province.

2. There was no honeymoon period for our new Premier. That's life. A lot can change over the next year. Things change fast in politics. #NLpoli

3.  Our Party still has a clear majority. We still plan to bring in a Throne Speech and a Budget. We will govern. We will lead.

4. The transformation in NL over the last decade has been nothing short of extraordinary. We're still the best party to govern. #PCNL #NLpoli

Unfortunately his words represent what IS wrong with the Tories. The real problem. He in essence has concluded the following: we don't care what the people think - we are right, we don't care what the people say we will lead anyway, we own the province and we are going to do what we want - what we think is best, and in spite of the people we are in power and plan to keep it that way.

Unfortunately the tweets also have a ring of desperation in them. That is because Kent believes that politics is a career rather than a period of public service. Career politicians are not helpful - not insightful - not life experienced - and not leaders. They expect a leader to perform for them - to ensure the longevity of the benefits both financial and social that politics and the people have provided.

Kent personifies the Tory problem - imagine if he is the only Tory seat left after the next general election. He does not like the prospect and it shows.

I believe the real strings of the Tory machine are well above Kent's power level. While he might be seen as a pliable one of those strings the puppeteers simply want to keep power for other more tangible business reasons. That's a sphere than Kent will never be allowed to enter - but he can certainly man the coat-check for those entering the real corridors of power.

Felix Collins - on his own terms?

Last evening came news that Felix Collins refused the Cabinet post of Attorney General. The unelected person who took his place is conveniently a Manning from the Cape Shore. Her "heart" is preventing her from seeking election in the upcoming three by-elections and on that basis we the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have to suffer an unelected Minister.

If Felix Collins - elected by the people of Placentia - St. Mary's, is unwilling to serve in the Cabinet at the Premier's pleasure - then he should clearly resign. The people of his district deserve a member who is willing to step to the Cabinet table when asked.

So Felix what are you up to? Do you live in the district anymore? Why are you sitting around in caucus for what's left of this term - when you clearly have no real interest in governing.

Now because the PC's are so cute with words sometimes - this question must be asked for clarification. Did Paul Davis ask you to become Attorney General only if you agreed to run in the next election? Is that why you said no?

So Judy Manning - the Manning insert - seemed to have as little problem justifying the unjustifiable as Fabs did when he sat with Harper as he nailed Newfoundland and Labrador.

Paul Davis appears to be shoring up a chosen candidates in a very unique way. Let's start you off in Cabinet and then tell the people of Placentia - St. Mary's that this is who you need to please me - the Premier.

Paul Davis and company seem to believe the people of the district are less than astute. The Premier thinks it's okay for a member from the area to turn down a Cabinet post and just sit there until he decides to call an election.

Felix - are you willing to be used in such a fashion? I think you owe the people of Placentia - St. Mary's more that that. Resign your seat and release Manning from her "heart" felt dilemma.

I hear there's polling going on in the district. If that's favourable - I guess your boss will tell you when to go. I recommend you leave on your terms - with a bit of integrity and show some respect to the people who provided you such a rare opportunity to serve.

Why Judy Manning?

Why Judy Manning?

That certainly is a reasonable question considering she has never been elected.

Why Judy Manning?

Why not John Ottenheimer who garnered half the support of the delegates at the convention?

Why not John Ottenheimer as he has considerable experience?

Why Judy Manning?

How does the Premier know her?

What does he know about her career and experience - considering the job ahead?

Why Judy Manning?

Apparently this really has nothing to do with the Attorney General having to be a lawyer because the Premier did not stop there. Davis added Status of Women, Fire and Emergency Services and the entire portfolio of Public Safety (which now includes Justice).

Why Judy Manning?

Is she a long time Tory or have significant Tory connections outside Senator Fabian Manning?

If you really felt that despite having a lawyer who IS elected take the position of Attorney General - then why Judy Manning?

What puts her above other choices in the legal community?

Was anybody else asked?

Did Felix decline? If so is he planning to resign?

Did Ottenheimer say no? Was he even asked?

Why Judy Manning?

It is particularly interesting since she claims she won't run in any upcoming by-elections but in the general election only.

This certainly demonstrates bad judgement. She could have accepted under the condition she will seek opportunity to be elected at the earliest opportunity. That would have shown respect for the people - but no - she accepts a mandate Paul Davis and Paul Davis alone bestowed upon her.

Why Judy Manning?

Yes - why indeed.

The Spite Act - biting back

Apparently the House of Assembly Act has been nicknamed the "Spite Act" by a Labradorian blogger. That's probably accurate - based on the PC's failure to accept their lot with respect to the upcoming election.

There is no doubt that Williams and company spent a significant amount of time referring to Roger Grimes as the unelected and illegitimate Premier when they were in Opposition. Williams was determined to fix what he saw as a weakness in our democracy. Almost as soon as they achieved government - he and his colleagues did just that. There was no way - in Williams mind (as he articulated it) that any Premier who was elected by the party but was not the leader under the last general election should be making any significant policy decisions and certainly not be signing contracts.

Many provinces have opted to go with a fixed election date - but only this province it appears has gone with a change in election dates based on an early resignation of the Premier. This further proves that Williams and his Tory caucus absolutely meant to shorten the time to an election should a Premier resign early.

Unfortunately for the Tories - the first test of this law has come under their administration and while the polls are horrific. This does not change the law.

The PC's would like us to swallow - and their doing a good job of that with most media outlets - that the 12 month election clock comes after the swearing in of their newly elected leader. So for a moment lets look at what that would have to mean. It would mean that the House of Assembly Act - a non-partisan legislation - has gone to the dark side. They would have us believe that the law was designed to allow a political party on its own time to pick/select/elect a leader and then recognize that the party needed time to re brand - so be lenient - and allow the party to get its act together (no pun intended). This is too silly to even consider as legitimate. Danny Williams used to pontificate that a bunch of Liberals got in a convention room and picked their leader - who was then thrust upon the people without their approval.

Now the Tories want us to believe their new leader is "legitimate" and "elected" totally contrary to their position in 2001-2003. They want their new leader to be able to make deals and sign contracts and spend billions before going to an election.

What is most ludicrous about this is there are media and politicians running around claiming and believing this is what the Act means.

If that's the case we might as well add another feature and allow the official opposition an additional 12 months before an election following the resignation of one leader and only after they elect and swear in a new Opposition leader. After all - the House of Assembly Act must be seen to be equal to all officers of the House and our government and democracy.

Why not throw a by-election into the mix. Allow the governing party to appoint an interim member to replace a resigned member until they choose to have a nomination and then allow the party to rebuild the party image in the district before going to the polls. 

There is NO room in this act for political party anything - this is an act that deals with the House - all 48 members. If this Act was seriously worded to suggest that a political party can have time to call for nominations, have a convention, elect a leader, and that person swear in before a clock started sticking to an election - then I guess the Act would have prescribed a maximum amount of time to achieve a new leader. Otherwise it would be indefinite.

The election must be called by January with an election no later than February.

While the Tories are at it the "interim Premier" particularly - stop committing the taxpayers of this province to billions in spending over long periods of time. You arrogant hypocritical people.

If this Act was indeed a result of spite - I guess it's in spite of oneself. Perhaps you should table a new Bill entitled "An Act to revoke other Acts if we are down in the polls"

Will lawmakers follow their own law?

Let me preface this post by stating that it is the right of a Lieutenant Governor or Governor General to cause an election to be called at any time. Secondly an election would follow a successful vote of non-confidence in a government. These are long-standing parliamentary practises.
 
Newfoundland and Labrador also has a fixed election date. It is to occur on the 2nd Tuesday of October in the 4th calendar year following the most recent general election. This because of a new law in 2004. The only exception to this is if a Premier resigns before the end of the third year of the term - also enacted in 2004.

This means the fixed election date is replaced with a date not to exceed 12 months following the actual resignation date of the Premier. Once that election is held - regardless of the month, week or day - the election following will revert back to the fixed election date.

Okay let's take the Tory interpretation of this exception.

The Tories would have us believe that they have until they decide to hold a leadership, elect a leader, and swear the person in as Premier before the 12 month clock starts ticking.

Let's say a Premier resigns on October the 5th of the third year of the term. If we take their current actions as a benchmark - it would take them 8 months to select a leader. That would bring us to June of the last year of the term. Then let's say they were quick and swore the new leader in as Premier in June. What they claim is they would have 12 months past June to call an election - in other words 8/9 months later than the fixed election date.

The Tories would have us believe that the law they fondly nicknamed the Roger Grimes law was meant to give an "unelected" Premier even more time in office? Of course not. The whole point the Williams lead government was making is that you can't let an "unelected" Premier run the show - an election must be called. They used the words "unelected" and "illegitimate" Premier to describe Roger Grimes - but at that time it was only political rhetoric. Once the Tories took office - they made it real, legal, and binding regardless of which party formed a government.

The only meaning for the word "afterward" in section 3.1 (the section wherein there is an early resignation of a Premier) could only be related to a fixed date. That date is the resignation date of the Premier. The House of Assembly Act deals with sitting members of the House and the administration of our legislature and government - it has no interest - nor should it - with a Party's business and administration. It deals with Government and is not partisan.

The Act says without debate 12 months - that is a fixed number of months. The Act was giving a time frame relative to another fixed point in time. As the call for nominations and a party leadership process is a movable and a partisan time-frame - it certainly cannot be used as the fixed time frame from which the 12 months follow.

They must call an election by January 24th of 2015 and from there the Elections Act provisions will guide the date options of the election and the rules of the election.

Seriously people - do the people who made the laws - our MHA's - understand the laws they made?  They want your vote in order to make more laws - think about that.

Election must be called by January 2015

If the PC's go beyond January 24th to call an election - they are ignoring the law. The House of Assembly Act was amended in 2004. This is the first time since - provisions for election upon the early resignation of a Premier - 3.1 - apply.

Where are the experts? Where are the authoritative opinions or interpretations? Our democracy and laws are at stake.

Here are the relevant sections:

 Duration of House of Assembly

        3. (1) Notwithstanding subsection (2), the Lieutenant-Governor may, by proclamation in Her Majesty’s name, prorogue or dissolve the House of Assembly when the Lieutenant-Governor sees fit.

             (2)  A polling day at a general election shall be held on the second Tuesday in October, 2007 and afterward on the second Tuesday in October in the fourth calendar year following the polling day at the most recently held general election.

Election on change of Premier

      3.1 Where the leader of the political party that forms the government resigns his or her position as leader and as Premier of the province before the end of the third year following the most recent general election, the person who is elected by the party to replace him or her as the leader of the party and who is sworn in as the Premier of the province by the Lieutenant-Governor shall, not later than 12 months afterward, provide advice to the Lieutenant-Governor that the House of Assembly be dissolved and a general election be held.

The people of this province must demand that the law be upheld and demand a ruling on the legislation.

Let's look at the intent - the law provides the establishment of a fixed election date - to provide predictability and stability in the election process and to reduce political opportunism. Secondly the law provided for an exception - in that it anticipates that a Premier could resign early. The law defines early as before the end of the third year. Given this eventuality the law prescribes that the fixed election date provision is no longer applicable and establishes a new process with limits.  The limit prescribed is-  not later than 12 months afterward.

The reason the wording "before the end of the third year" is used in 3.1 to outline timing - is that by the end of the third year the election is already set by law in 3.

Therefore the only meaning one can attribute to the word "afterward" is relative to the resignation date NOT the date a new leader is chosen and sworn in. Otherwise an election would never have to be held as long as he/she is not sworn in as Premier. That is also the reason the words "in either case no later than provided for in 3" are not used to define a new time limit in the event of a resignation.

The election must be called by January 24th 2015 and we must demand the law be followed. If this means going to the Lieutenant Governor or to the courts for interpretation - then so be it.

The reason for my review of the language again - this time - taking off the "loophole" blinders and giving credit to the drafters (Justice Department officials) - is because what was taking place by the PC's appeared to be in direct conflict with the intent of the law.

Additionally if one reads section 3.1 minus the wording between comma's which defines a new leader - one can see the intent was the date referring to the resignation. The only reason the inserted wording was used was to differentiate the authority of a new leader versus an interim leader.

 

Wanted: Captain Obvious

I waited with interest to see what the headlines would be this morning on the definitive defeat of the PC's in St. George's - Stephenville East.

I was not surprised - which means I was disappointed in our media.

Last night the governing Tories were crushed with a wave of discontent - in the middle of their "exciting" leadership debacle. Last night the polls continued to send a strong message to the government that their time is done. Get out - we no longer support your policies or direction - the electorate seem to be saying.

The numbers in this by-election certainly put an exclamation mark on the feelings of dissatisfaction the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have with this government.

The numbers are as follows:

2011 General Election - Results St. George's - Stephenville East
Eligible Voters: 7959  
Votes Cast: 4287 
Voter turnout 53.9 %
PC's 49.3%
Liberal 32.7%
NDP 16.5%
Kevin Aylward was the candidate and the Leader of the Liberal Party at the time. A experienced politician - from the district - who actually did a decent job in helping to keep the Liberals in an Opposition position.

2014 By-election - Results St. George's - Stephenville East
Eligible Voters: 7274 (a significant reduction in voting population in three years)
Votes Cast: 3738
Voter turnout 51.4
PC's 25.4%
Liberal 59.1%
NDP 15.5%

A by-election in the last week of summer vacation almost matched the turnout of a fall general election - that's pretty remarkable. It is also remarkable that a Minister's seat was so soundly defeated.

The candidates were solid people in what appears to have been a clean race.

What does this mean for the three Premier wannabes?

1. It was not all Kathy's fault,
2. They are as to blame for the by-election defeat as Kathy and Tom would be,
3. As all are former Ministers of this failing government and have been directly involved in policy choices - that clearly the people do not approve of,
4. The leadership candidates are not making a difference in the mood of the electorate,
5. They should stop spending taxpayer dollars on deals or agreements and call an election.

They have clearly lost the support of the people as the by-elections in Virgina Waters, Carbonear-Harbour Grace and now St. George's - Stephenville East have demonstrated. In their arrogance they continue to spend billions on a project the people DO NOT want, continue to commit billions in multi-year schemes and plans, and continue to govern like they have the overwhelming support of the people.

Their desperation to hang on to every little benefit their elected office provides - and their desperation to get all the contracts nailed down on energy resources reflects a feeling of political entitlement that has nothing to do with the electorate. They are finished.

Whether the election is being delayed for reasons of gross incompetance or mass manipulation of their leadership circus - the people are being ignored. The much touted House of Assembly Act passed by the Tories that included a provision should a leader leave before the end of the third year in office is being blatently ignored. The media is ignoring this.

The headlines in the media this morning do not reflect the gravity of this situation. The headlines were as if the Liberals were a popular government and they won another by-election. The headlines should have been screaming as loud as the people. "It is time to call an election".

Perhaps our media outlets would be best served if they hired "Captain Obvious" as lead journalist.

Minister Hutchings unwittingly questions Muskrat

In a VOCM story today Minister Hutchings is responding to Federal Minister Gail Shea regarding the shrimp quota disaster.

As is usually the case from this PC Government the Minister talks about how good we are doing and what good confederation children we are. In part he says:

...in 2007 there were 187 licensed fish plants; today there are 86, and at the peak in the '80s there were 250. He says the province has stepped in with the fisheries loan guarantee program and a host of others to give harvesters the ability to access capital or to buy out, all of which is consolidation and rationalization.

Yes there we have it. So in short - Look at us - we have downsized, cut, rationalized and sold out - so why can't we have more shrimp?

So this province has lost 164 fish plants, 2 pulp and paper mills, several mines and recently a shoe factory - we need more power? So this province has lost 50,000 people but we need more power? Our population has aged with many of our young families moving to other provinces and countries for work and we need more power for the seniors left behind? All of our houses are modern and energy efficient as are the appliances in them - so we need more power?

Better yet Hutchings alludes to even more rationalization meaning less fish plants - and we need more power?

Muskrat = somebody needs more money and they'll have the suckers of Newfoundland and Labrador pay for it.

Hutchings has no problem speaking confidently about rationalization - he just has a problem being rational. Kindly stop the BS - and while your at it - if you are seeking re-election you might want to tone down the - we are going to shut-down things to do better thing.

a Grim/m Fairytale? Cop-Boyscout-Lawyer

 Is this a grim/m Fairytale?

You decide.
 
Stretching another 4 years out of this tired government is difficult when one considers the polling trends.

The back room of the Newfoundland and Labrador PC's must be abuzz with plotting, scheming, and planning in an attempt to squeeze another term in office. There are many more resources they want to "develop".

So let's pretend we are in the room listening to the suggestions for extended office.

The first discussion probably would have been dragging the election date out - to compensate for Kathy's early departure. That damn law they might have said - and we put it there too - they might add.

The first plan therefore might have been to use whatever method possible to drag the term the full 4 years - giving them more time to attempt recovery in the polls.

The second discussion likely was who and what to blame the poor poll results on. Well we cannot blame it on Muskrat they may have mused and we can't currently blame the feds - so what then? The second plan could have been to blame it on communications - if all else fails it was her failure to communicate our message. Not policy - they could not blame it on policy.

The third discussion might have been - yah maybe not all policy but some stuff is bad. Bill 29 for example. That we can blame on Kathy and all we need to do is extend it out - buy some time - pretend we are listening. It won't stop Muskrat from proceeding but it will get their attention. So the third plan might have been Bill 29 - off to examination.

On to the fourth discussion - okay but what about leadership - we need a new face they may have suggested. Okay but we got to be careful here - don't want any radical change to our resource development policy. Protect Muskrat - Protect Muskrat - at all costs was probably suggested. So the fourth plan they might have concluded was to "con"vince somebody - totally non-political - a business person - somebody who looks professional - somebody who supports Muskrat. Further - we have to get somebody who can eventually win a seat - and we need a seat where somebody is leaving. Not as easy as we think - they might have uttered - how do we convince such a person. Fourth plan - Voila - Frank - but how do we convince Frank. And so it might have been done. He was convinced. Poor fellow though - he looked and acted like he was being dragged through the political streets of Damascus - under the Dannymon Empire.

Now to the fifth and they probably have agreed to plead it - how do we drag this on to extend the election? They might have suggested, alright we gotta get a few months out of Frank - let him get used to the people - don't swear him in right away. Then if we extend that long enough - perhaps Frank could leave at the last moment - if he does not work out and we can bring in the back-ups.

 Picture Evening Telegram - See my back? Job done?

So the plan perhaps became to drag out Frank as long as possible - then call a new leadership process when Frank quit. We have the back-ups and we can assign each of them some Cabinet support - well who do we get? Well Kent is always ready to cooperate - he's a social media animal - we can get some twitter, facebook, and web page support out of him. And best of all - we might be able to robo-call the VOCM question of the day - to get the results we want and we are sure VOCM will report.

Be Prepared - to Robo-call and Tweet

How about the diplomat? How about the fellow who likes Harper and loves Muskrat.

Yes the silvered hair guy who looks knowledgeable and even-keeled. Good Tory boy  comes from the right schools - has a stately name - and can speak circles around Kevin O'Brien. Surely they must have considered this.

Remember Me? I don't remember me!

So Ottenheimer it is they might have concluded.

Finally we need somebody in-between - almost like Goldilocks - you know the just right fellow. That is a task - not too much political baggage, looks good in a blue suit or uniform - able to speak coherently - has communication experience - family guy - PC district and is re-electable. Can we build a resume that highlights some areas but downplays either the lack of ability or lack of desire to lead? A fighter - that's what he is - on the side of good - almost like running Spiderman for election. Spin a web - fight crime - on the side of good - and be able to hide any underlying deficiencies. Yes that's him they all might have exclaimed at once. We got it! We got it! Paul Davis -  they all might have chimed together on the Atlantic Place escalator.

I'm the Good Guy. Is Muskrat Falls a societal crime?

They might have mused that with mini-me in control of the party wing

 - we can keep Danny out of the circus while quietly helping delegates to make up their mind - with the exception of Mount Pearl - who will send in the city scouts to support their boy/man Steve.

Okay - Okay - they probably gasped with some short-term relief - now we need a plan - we need to attract the people back into our fold. Alright - spend money - lots of it. Employ people to do whatever up there in Labrador. Keep the trades involved - the nurses happy - and take advantage of the BBQ circuit. Announce - re-announce - put fillers in pot holes near and far. Announce hospitals, schools, arenas, fire-trucks, pavement (a km. each), a new penitentiary, and Muskrat jobs. Now do this right where if we happen to lose we already got the Liberals committed to billions over the next decade and if we win - we can delay delay - study study. In this way we can put it all out another 4 years - if we win - or torture the Liberals to make good on the billions in commitments we made.

Win win win - now - let's get at it. Nothing better than buying them with their own debt - they might have convinced themselves.

A grim Fairytale or a grim Reality?

Innovative PC's - Kent? I think not!

Here we are the great "energy warehouse" hydro-powerhouse - and yet?

There they are - the little Northern Nation of Iceland humming along with half our population and resources.

So what's new?

The Icelandic company Even has purchased, and in the next few months intends to set up, 200 new express electric-car charging stations around the country.

According to plans outlined by the government, 10 percent of cars should rely on sustainable fuels by 2020. Currently, however, it is not very practical to own an electric car in Iceland as there are very few charging stations, most of them located in the capital area.

Oh yes they are even complaining because they are behind Norway - you know the land of Statoil of which Danny Williams thinks Nalcor is like.

As of May 2014, a total of 30,319 plug-in electric vehicles have been registered in Norway, of which, 95% are all-electric vehicles. The registered plug-in electric fleet consists of 28,827 all-electric passenger and light-duty vehicles, and 1,492 plug-in hybrids.

From September 2013 to March 2014, five times an electric car has ranked as the top selling new car in the country. The Tesla Model S has been the top selling new car three times, twice in 2013, first in September and again in December.

AND  Among the existing government incentives, all-electric cars are exempt in Norway from all non-recurring vehicle fees, including purchase taxes...

Did we have a chance to be in on this action? You bet we did. What did we do about it? Nothing! The partisan brains allow only partisan activity. They will drive Steve Kent or his supporters to robo vote on a VOCM poll - diligent, fervent, and maniacal interest in that - while opportunities pass us by.

Innovation? I think not. So as we lose and lose more business interests in our province - somehow the nation of Iceland keeps plugging into this innovation.

In Newfoundland and Labrador - our government is still trying to figure out how to keep the power on. We have the physical resources but we lack the visionary leadership to do anything but give them away.

As we have learned this week - companies know how to suck the money out of this government and use it to advance themselves without regard for the people who financed them...

Take the PC SMELL TEST

Jobs Jobs Jobs

Let's go back to the theory that a monkey can make a deal to give away natural resources.

Okay where are we?

1. Unprocessed fish
2. Unprocessed ore
3. Energy fuelling industry somewhere else
4. Unprocessed oil
5. Unused gas
6. Pulp and Paper gone gone gone - we are subsidizing what's left.

Where will this get us?

Where is the value to future generations?

Why is our population stagnant?

Why is our population aging quicker?

The PC government were screeching and bawling about natural resource giveaways in 2001-2002.

They never shut-up - Voisey's Bay - not one ounce - Grimes was giving away the Lower Churchill - they said - they moaned about the loss of fish processing. Since? Nothing. Ship it off - dig it up give it away. They talk about all the jobs being created to build the great Muskrat project - the people employed to build it won't be able to afford to pay for the power once it's done. Our great oil resources benefiting refineries everywhere but here - no processing. How about ship building - oh yeah the Tories were hot to trot on that in 2002 - how are we doing?

The media is doing what? They are great at attacking ordinary people - they come at them with a vengeance. They are running around sorting out what the NDP and Liberal policies are - without figuring out what the people who are in control of the government - right now are doing.

The most serious of questions and debate on Muskrat has all been precipitated by bloggers and letters to the editor.

My God - we are more interested in if the Libs and NDP would stop Muskrat than we are in figuring out if we even can.

There is no real critique of the Gil and Ed Executive duo. The geniuses of budgeting and project management.

I know more about when the media are getting together for a political pow wow at a club - or what type of bow-tie to expect - or who is watching what sports team than I gain knowledge from something they are writing about a real issue. I see more tweets regarding who is watching who at media conference - and who gets their names raised publicly by a politician.

So a simple question - if the government said it wanted to demolish Cabot Tower - knock down all the schools and flatten all the hospitals - would you line up for the job?

Does it really matter to you what the job is - or what it means for our future?

And here we are today sizing up Kent, Ottenheimer, and Davis - to what - become a Premier? Really? This after we sized up Coleman, Barry, and Bennett. This after the Marshall Premier pension and the Dunderdale Premier pension and the Williams Premier pension. By the time we are through the already underfunded plans will need to cover almost every Tory sitting - at the Premier's level.

The real fascination for many of the media - is "will Marjorie be attending the next swearing in"? Or will Tony the Tory ever find a kind word for the Liberals? Or the most favorite one - what does Danny think about this or that - who is Danny supporting - is Danny going to get a new hockey team? Is Danny going to rename his subdivision?Or maybe - will Len and Ross get their jobs back after the next election?

We owe our children much more than this.

Something stinks - can you smell it?

Tick-Tock the Muskrat and Election Clock

Tick-Tock Tick-Tock goes the Muskrat Clock. Tick-Tock Tick-Tock goes the Election Clock.

Is Hydro-Quebec sitting back and waiting for a bankrupt project? Is the company watching the mess carefully? You know they are.

The Tories and their continued clinging to power and power are ruining this province and her people. The project is over-budget and delayed. Sadly - it may not be delayed enough.

We need some information quickly.

1. What is the cost of getting out of the Emera contract?
2. What is the REAL supply situation on the Island and what is the REAL industrial demand in Labrador?
3. How much exactly have we spent both already expended and contractually expended?
4. If we stopped the project now - what would be the cost?
5. If we continue what is the cost over 50 years?
6. Are we able to interest industrial customers in the Big Land?
7. What are the PC "protectors of natural resources" doing shipping raw - unprocessed ore?
8. Why should we accept and expect huge cost overruns?
9. Will the Tories commit to not signing any more deals on resource development until the next election?
10. Why are Newfoundlanders and Labradorians willing to work on a project that will harm their children and grandchildren?

Who are the real people behind this deal? Please name those Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are becoming multi-millionaires either directly or indirectly from the Muskrat deal?

Why are their so many Emera utility trucks on our highways?

Why is Emera servicing any of Newfoundland and Labrador?

Why is Emera getting a piece of the light bill you and I will pay on the Island.

Why are Ed Martin and Gilbert Bennett still on our payroll? 

Wake-up everybody - we are being socially, economically, and voluntarily robbed of our natural wealth and the future wealth of our children. 

Davis: Do same thing - different result?

A while ago I talked about Paul Davis being a reasonable potential for leadership. First thing he did was say no. That was some months ago. Now he says yes. Regardless of excuses - his first choice was no thanks.

Second - I expected Minister Paul Davis would embrace Child Youth and Family Services - and make some real difference - given his stated background and interest. He left that portfolio and clearly the job was not finished. He moved to the larger Health portfolio without first denting the problems in his previous role.

Third - I expected Paul Davis might not necessarily row the failing PC oar - that continues to do circles instead of moving forward. His campaign launch put an end to that possibility. Both he and his cohort Derrick Dalley feel that the government has done great things - the low polls are just an incurable communications problem. Once again he failed to lead and kept plugging at the same tired message.

Davis used the words "New Beginning" but they were oxymoronic - when followed up with essentially - stay the course. Now either Davis believes Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are daft and cannot comprehend the wonderful things they are doing or he is continuing to be in denial - that is - the things they are doing are not what the people want - regardless of the messenger.

From the standpoint of the electorate - we need some more background information on "leadership" roles he has played and the progression of his career and experiences.

From the standpoint of the electorate - we need to know why he supported Bill 29, Muskrat Falls (including overruns), Nalcor executive, and continued assault on small local businesses.

From the standpoint of the electorate - we need to know why he supports deficits, debt, and unfunded pension liabilities.

From the standpoint of the electorate we need to know if there are outside political influences and if so who they are.

Most importantly - if he is to take the reins of the party - we want to know how quickly he will call an election. 

Muskrat - Incompetence? Corruption? Deliberate lies?

Are you willing to read a paragraph to protect your children and grandchildren?

As Tory MHA's current and past line up to run for the Party leadership remember this: They were all part of the Muskrat fiasco.

Please read an excerpt from an article in the Business Excellence Magazine written late last year.

The most recent project to be completed was the $5 billion Eastmain 1A-Sarcelle-Rupert project, in the James Bay area. It was launched in 2007 with approval to build the Eastmain-1-A and Sarcelle powerhouses and divert part of the Rupert River's flow. The diversion began in 2009, two of the three generating units at Eastmain-1-A powerhouse were commissioned in 2011, the third in January 2012. The first generating unit at Sarcelle powerhouse was commissioned in April 2013 and the two other units have now come on line. “From an environmental and logistic standpoint it was the most challenging project in the history of Hydro-Québec,” he says. “It covers an area the size of some European countries but we were able to bring it in on time and a little under budget so we are very proud of that result.”

We need an investigation to determine what caused the unacceptable overruns in the Muskrat Falls project. We need the senior management of Nalcor to resign. We need to hold this government accountable now.

Ed Martin steps to a mic - declares an 800 million overrun - therefore we the people will pay more - then walks back to his very lucrative job.

Fire Ed Martin and the senior management involved in this project.We don't pay them millions a year to be wrong.

Fire the Tories - insist that they call an election now.

Find out how the external expertise we used to confirm the bad numbers - are themselves in a mess with overruns.

Don't turn away from this robbing of the public purse. Look it square in the eyes. Tell Tom Marshall, John Ottenheimer, Paul Davis, and Steve Kent that we no longer wish to be bamboozled. Show them the door and then see if there is a reason for them to lose their pensionable benefits.

Ottenheimer fumbles out of gate

The PC CAMP Condescending - Arrogant - Manipulative - Peremp(tory) is desperate to cling to power.

Sue's Blog has already raised the issue of the Tory Party abusing the intent of a law - the Tory government introduced in 2004. Now ten years later and the first time this part of the law is being utilized - they are showing us how they really operate.

There is no doubt that popular Tories of 2004 - are no so hot to trot with their new law - when they are behind in the polls.

Minister Terry French said this on December 07-2004

"Mr. Speaker, I believe, like I said from the beginning, that people of this Province, certainly, have the right to elect the Premier. The party should not have the right to select a Premier for this Province. Sure, they have the right to select a leader who will carry them into an election, and, sure, the party has the right to select the person they feel who is best qualified for the job, but then it is the job of the government of the day to put that person out in front of their party and say to the people of this Province: Who do you want? Who would you prefer? This person or that person? I believe this legislation will allow for that."

Right now Mr. French and all his PC colleagues are using a loophole Sue's Blog pointed out months ago after Dunderdale resigned. They are using their leadership process to drag on the time frame in which they must call an election. It was not the intent of this law to have political parties abuse and use it for political gain - in fact it was supposed to minimize political interference.

Enter Ottenhiemer     Cochrane's Failure

John Ottenheimer is now an official entrant in the PC leadership race. His debut on CBC'c On Point with David Cochrane was less than stellar and gave us some insight as to how he may use his office - if elected by the Party.

Ottenheimer is an experienced lawyer and parliamentarian - yet he chose these words:

"It's well perhaps 14 or 15 months before the next general election - which is in keeping with what the mandate allows the party anyway - in terms of when we were first elected or more recently elected in 2011."

Ottenheimer talks of a mandate as if there were no premature resignation of the Premier. He knows - he was there - he knows that a law - his party - the party he wants to lead - promoted and as majority government passed - says the original mandate no longer exists. Therefore Mr. Ottenheimer has decided to mislead instead of dealing with the subject truthfully.

For David Cochrane's part - it was a miss - he ignored the much touted and self praised initiative of the Tories - to remove pure politics from the calling of an election.

For Ottenheimer there remains many questions regarding his time as Minister of Health and this latest foray into a convenient memory does not bode well - if such is a demonstration of his leadership.

The PC's of late have been adopting Liberal policy almost as quick as they hear it - bankrupt clearly of anything progressive on the policy development side.

Next up - The Crosbie Monarchy

PC Leaders in wait?

This is the shortest post I will probably ever write.

A leader does not wait to see who's in the race before they enter it. 

Next up - the words to watch from Bill Barry. There were some real indicators from Barry when interviewed by David Cochrane last week.

Journalism dealt another blow by James McLeod

This morning - the Telegram has served up another waste of space by "journalist" James McLeod. Under the News section you'll see a story headlined; "Rumours swirl about PC leadership ahead of critical meeting Saturday".

The story begins by outlining rumours about who may seek the leadership of the Newfoundland and Labrador PC Party.

It quickly turns into another Liberal bashing through the bias pen of the reporter.

The subheading reads: "Throwing stones" In this paragraph McLeod talks about tweets by Liberals regarding the Tory delegate style convention. What it does not say - is there have been Tory tweets as well taking smacks at the Liberal convention style.

McLeod then adds that it is unclear what glass ceiling the Liberal party broke as they elected a middle-aged man. If McLeod is using a strict interpretation of glass ceiling - with feminist meaning - then I would suggest - the open leadership of the Liberal party allowed many thousands of women to vote for the next leader - without restriction of finance to attend a convention, without restriction of geography, and without restriction of conflicting commitments to job and family. If one were to use a more broad interpretation of glass ceiling  - where men and women could be included in the advancement - then obviously over 20,000 people voting in a leadership election for any party in our province - not only broke it but shattered it.

McLeod then says "it was the PC Party that first put a woman in the role of Premier". If James were actually producing news not spin - he might have opined that there were rumours of backroom deals to keep men interested in the role from running. It is also interesting that McLeod finds that anybody putting a woman anywhere is somehow breaking a glass ceiling.

The next subheading reads: "Delegates decide" - and in that paragraph McLeod paraphrases something allegedly said by PC Party President Sheahan. He said the Liberals were so thoroughly decimated — without active district associations, donors or membership lists — that they needed to use their leadership race to rebuild the mangled party.

Right of the top - this is an example of Tories once again taking smacks at the Liberal process and further ignores the obvious balance to that statement.

The Tories are probably using the delegate style convention because they have been decimated in the polls and must raise some excitement to rebuild the battered party. The rumours of so many people running may simply be a set-up by the PC's in an attempt to show artificial interest in the publicly admonished party. Names like Ottenheimer, Skinner, Manning, and Oram - Tory stalwarts not new blood - and a bunch of Cabinet Ministers positioning themselves to be a king/queen maker.

The other obvious thing here is that the PC's that McLeod says put the female Premier in office - are the same group that so obviously threw her out and the same bunch that are acting now like it was all Dunderdale's fault.

There are some real problems with much that McLeod reports on - but this one is Duffyesque and shows a real bias.

What was John Ottenheimer talking about?

Okay let's go a step further.

After the signing of the 1999 GWAC agreement between CFLCo - which was refused release by government at the time for: "Commercial agreements such as those among Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, CF(L)Co and Hydro-Quebec are confidential. If released, they could compromise ongoing negotiations between Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Hydro-Quebec related to the Gull Island development. Commercial agreements of this magnitude cannot be negotiated in public."

Then Minister Paul Dicks alluded to John Ottenheimer's concerns which were:
 "It is most inaccurate for Mr. Ottenheimer to suggest that the new Shareholders’ Agreement gives control to Hydro-Quebec, "Mr. Dicks said. "If Mr. Ottenheimer had inquired, he would have found out that Hydro-Quebec previously had many of these rights under previous contractual agreements and the laws of the Canadian Business Corporations’ Act. The Shareholders’ Agreement, which was executed in 1999, serves to recognize many of these rights that were already held by Hydro-Quebec."

Oh yes - the entire Tory caucus had issues with this GWAC/Shareholders Agreement. They had issues regarding control of our energy future under this 1999 agreement.

Dicks also said: there is no circumstance where Hydro-Quebec could gain control over CF(L)Co or dilute Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro’s ownership interest from the current 65.8 per cent.

Yup - that's true but the concern was of management control not actual ownership.

Where have all those concerns gone? 

What did Quebec get by providing and additional 2 billion dollars of revenue for our hydro - over the life of the contract? What did they get. 
 
 

Who Owns Nalcor? Let the Shareholders (you and me) Vote on Muskrat at the AGM on June 22nd

While Premier Dunderdale, Minister Shawn Skinner, and CEO Ed Martin treat Nalcor as their own private entity - the reality is you an I - the people of Newfoundland and Labrador own it.

We fought very hard to stop the takeover bid by nameless faceless wealthy and mostly offshore investors - under the Clyde Wells administration.

At the time the PC's were in Opposition and purportedly fighting along side us to keep the profitable company under the ownership of the people. How quickly they forget - or perhaps how quickly they become arrogant when the political tides turn and they find themselves across the floor in government.

Premier Dunderdale and the PC's used our knowledge and expertise when they were in Opposition and we - the people were fighting the Liberals on the privatization attempt. They held us up as people - who knew their stuff and had a vision for the Crown Jewel - then known as Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

Political expedience and unknown agendas personal and professional - now see the PC's view the very same people they held up as experts - reduced to bothersome mosquito's not worthy of input.

Then you have the likes of Gil Bennett - a person who owes his job and opportunity with Nalcor to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador - sit in a chair with such arrogance and disdain of the very same people.

Premier Dunderdale has not demonstrated the necessary knowledge or presented the necessary qualifications to pilot a deal - such as the Muskrat Falls. She is out of her league when it comes to dealing with private entities such as Emera - and frankly out of her league keeping up with her own bureaucrats. This is particularly dangerous as some of the same bureaucrats are still around as were around during the privatization fiasco.

The Telegram, CBC, and NTV have all noted that experts in the field - some of them with significant PC pedigree - have and continue to question the Emera giveaway. The concerns range from straight economics to social and industrial advancement of Labrador.

Dunderdale continues to stumble over any questions - or simply avoids them - one has to wonder if Tim Powers is lurking somewhere - and all Cabinet attempts to bolster the Premier's obvious weaknesses - fail.

This is in part due to the atmosphere of the "rah rah" backbench which are as clueless now as when they sat and cheered for exactly opposite positions under Williams. The most obvious example of this was the "new found" support for Harper.

Danny says "do not elect Conservatives Stephen Harper is a dangerous man". Backbenchers and Cabinet alike "rah rah" "ABC" "ABC". Kathy says "elect Conservatives - Stephen Harper is a changed man". Bankbenchers and Cabinet alike chanted "rah rah" "ABC is dead" "ABC is dead".

Now is the time for us - the shareholders of Nalcor - to start exercising our shareholders rights. Now is the time to weed out the weaknesses at the Executive level of our Corporation. Because these hydro resources are owned by the people and because Nalcor is owned by the people - a shareholders vote must be taken.

The time for a referendum is now.

Nalcor is holding it's AGM on June 22 - 2011 - and imagine this - they have opened it to the public. I imagine they have we own it. They would like people to register in advance - they point out - in the event the meeting if full - registrants will get first dibs on the unknown number of places at the Holiday Inn in St. John's. They also suggest any questions you have - you can submit them in advance.

 What would happen if let's say two or three thousand people turned up for the event - to listen to our employees give an update on their "successes" regarding Nalcor and the performance of our company.

What do you think?

Nalcor Energy’s Annual General Meeting

On Wednesday, June 22, 2011, Nalcor Energy will hold its Annual General Meeting (AGM) at the Holiday Inn in St. John's.

Ed Martin, President and CEO; and Derrick Sturge, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer will host Nalcor's AGM.

The AGM is open to the public. Those interested in attending are asked to register by Friday, June 17, 2011. Registration is not required; however, registered participants will be given priority if the meeting reaches capacity.

Wednesday, June 22, 2011
1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn, Salon A/B
180 Portugal Cove Rd
St. John's, NL


The AGM will also be available by live stream from the Nalcor Energy website. Details will be made available prior to June 22.

REGISTER HERE

 

Those who attend the AGM will have an opportunity to ask questions.  Questions may also be submitted online in advance.

Ontario Wins Big, Newfoundland shows Guts, the Big Land goes it Alone and Dunderdale may have Trouble!

Congratulations are in order for Ontario - for once again dictating the outcome of the federal election. Harper will be there for our biggest "greatest" province.

There may now be hope for the federal Liberals - if - they clean house at the executive and backroom level. Canada's "heartland" will set the agenda for the upcoming parliament and have rewarded Harper for the massive corporate bailouts in the auto and associate industries.

Irving and companies will also be a big winner in New Brunswick.

Now that the NDP is an essentially Quebec and Ontario based party 58 and 22 seats respectively close to 80% of their seat count with over 50% out of Quebec - what and who will they represent? Further the NDP had more of a say in the minority than they have in a Harper majority.

Now that Canada has sent a message to the Liberals to clean-up - they have done so by electing a fellow who has shown complete disregard for the truth, parliament, and our democracy. Harper has his majority and it is going to be real tough on the Progressive Conservatives in the party.

The Bloc is temporarily down - while Quebec takes a break from a nationalist party in Ottawa - but may very well elect a sovereignist party provincially. This is just another Quebec change-up.

The Conservatives are nasty and they will - without humility - rub this victory into the faces of Canadians who believe that moderate not extreme is Canada. This is a very clear example for Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador - that we really don't matter much in this system.

We witnessed a taste with Bev Oda - and her leaning respecting funding and pro-choice ideology. More interesting is her decisive win last night - rewarding her despicable behavior. Ontarians in her riding have redefined public service and the value of honesty. What did Oda have to say?

“Those who know me know I would never lie or mislead,” This is unbelievable!

 In Newfoundland - we absolutely did the right thing and showed extreme courage by not electing one Conservative on the Island. Despite the on the ground boots of most all Dunderdale's Cabinet - they lost. We actually said to those who betrayed this province - we don't want you. Sullivan, Ottenheimer, Manning and fibre-optic Taylor were defeated - in most cases soundly.

In Labrador I can take some solace in knowing that the Big Land did what it wanted to do and not what our Island suggested they do. They have made a decision and it was their own. That is also the case with the Lower Churchill - this time it will not be shoved down their throats - rather they and they alone will determine what happens to this great resource. Further this time - they will sit in Cabinet at the federal level - not representatives from the Island. It is also clear that Labrador believes that Harper will live up to his promises for the base and the loan guarantee.

The deal on the Lower Churchill is up to them. If they wish to export - do so - and they can even make us pay for it. After all power leaves their place and heads to other jurisdictions - and they are left with royalties for the aboriginal peoples (or some of them) and a handful of jobs after construction - it will not be our fault as it was with the Upper Churchill.

Peter Penashue has a great deal of responsibility resting on his shoulders and good luck to him. I hope he brings to Labrador what Labradorians want. I hope he delivers in spades for his people and uses his voice to eliminate the long-standing social problems. For now they can choose their destiny - and the direction is all theirs. They can stand proud and make decisions that are good for them - eliminating the Island and most non-aboriginal influence. They can further build corporate partnerships between aboriginal companies and other Labrador based operators. They can take control of tenders and dictate how many jobs will be kept in Labrador and how many will leave. They can control the route of the hydro power resource and determine if they want industrial development at all - or prefer to go for royalties only. I have fought for the equal rights of Labradorians as an Islander for most of my adult life - and I have now experienced closure in that regard. Presumably Dunderdale will have to answer to Labrador and if the deals are not already done - will have to be done with the aboriginal peoples and corporate Labrador. Labrador now has control of its destiny and that is a good thing.

From a provincial Progressive Conservative point of view - there are many significant developments on the Island. The votes were mainly Liberal and NDP and both rural and urban voters have said no to Kathy Dunderdale and her team of Cabinet Ministers. We know what happened when Danny said ABC - the province listened. When Kathy Dunderdale said ABC is over and now we need to vote Conservative - the province did not listen. The PC urban vote did not recover and did not show well in other rural communities - with the exception of perhaps Felix Collins and Keith Hutchings. The federal election of 2006 saw almost 43% popular vote for the Conservatives. The ABC of 2008 demonstrated a complete collapse of that vote to 17% and now that ABC was called off by Premier Dunderdale the vote climbed to only 28%. The urban PC vote stronghold has not regained anywhere near the reliability needed to guarantee the almost always guaranteed vote for the PC's in St. John's and surrounding communities.

Let's look at the Avalon Peninsula - as it relates to influence by the current Premier Kathy Dunderdale versus the influence under Danny Williams. Same provincial layout - with only 2 opposition members in a bastion of Blue including a significant number of the Cabinet.

2006 When Danny got promises from Harper on equalization, Five Wing Goose, and custodial management.

Loyola Hearn enjoyed 44.6% of the popular vote.

Fabian Manning enjoyed 51.5% of the popular vote.

Norm Doyle enjoyed 46.5% of the popular vote.

2008 When Danny Williams declared ABC most all PC MHA's campaigned for Liberals or NDP.

St. John's South/Mount Pearl District (formerly Hearn, candidate Merv Wiseman) dropped to 12.6% of the popular vote.

St. John's East (formerly Doyle, candidate Craig Wescott) dropped to 9.3% of the popular vote.

Avalon District  (Manning) dropped to 35.2% of the popular vote.

2011 When Kathy Dunderdale declared ABC over and has all but one PC MHA campaigning for Conservatives.

St. John's South/Mount Pearl District only recovers to 22.8% of the popular vote.

Avalon District only recovers to 40% of the popular vote.

St. John's East District only recovers to 20.9% of the popular vote.

Without a doubt the vast majority of the people continue to support Danny Willams position on Stephen Harper and the majority reject Kathy Dunderdale's new relationship with Stephen Harper. This despite - what can only be called strong provincial MHA's Caucus and Cabinet out in force as never before for federal Conservative candidates.

Further the Conservative candidates in St. John's East and St. John's South/Mount Pearl in the 2008 election, Craig Wescott and Merv Wiseman respectively were arguably much weaker candidates than the "star" candidates of 2011 in Loyola Sullivan and Jerry Byrne. One might speculate that the candidates themselves brought the difference to the table versus any recommendation by Dunderdale. In Manning's case where he was the constant he went down 16 points during ABC and only recovered 5 points last night. That we can write off to PC's feeling it was okay to vote at all.

This was not a good night for Kathy Dunderdale despite the tremendous victory for her friend - and colleague Stephen Harper.

The October election remains up for grabs and in many critical seats. The only thing holding back a resurgence for the provincial Liberals is the party itself. They should be able to make great gains in October as may well a few more NDP seats on the strength of Layton and Harris. (depends on how NDP policy impacts NL)

If the Liberals do some cleaning and add some star candidates of their own - they may very well cause Dunderdale and company real problems. After the turnaround of PC MHA's back to Harper which was seen by the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians as disingenuous and opportunistic - seats won on Danny's coat-tails will be vulnerable.

My overall feelings are that Canada was crushed by the Ontario not Orange wave and that never bodes well for Atlantic Canada. Further Canadians have absolutely decided with the exception of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI, Quebec and parts of British Columbia that lying is okay, contempt of Parliament is dandy, and that the Elections Act is not anything relevant. Let's see if the right wing extremeists get the upper hand this time. Will Harper moderate? I don't believe a word he says - so my guess is he will not. You know when Preston Manning is delighted - we moderate people should be very concerned.

A great night for Newfoundland as we told Harper - you cannot lie to our people. Labrador - time will tell - if the Big Land gets what it wants I am happy for them. If it does not - the Island - for once will not be responsible.