1st days of PM Trudeau reveals one critical weakness

On September 27th 2012 - Sue's Blog predicted that Justin Trudeau would be the next Prime Minister.

There were 20 reasons given for this call - some of which dealt directly with who I thought Trudeau was and where he came from.

What that post did not deal with were possible weaknesses. I believe the stated strengths noted in the 2012 post are proving to have merit and now we need to look at what weaknesses are there and how Trudeau can rise to strengthen them.

As a public figure - I like the way he carries himself and that will reflect on Canada and her people as a whole. I do not know him personally and perhaps never will. Some federal Liberal Party stalwarts remain and they will not find memories of my criticisms in the past pleasant. Be that as it may - Trudeau is a new leader and a new Prime Minister - I can neither judge him by his colleagues nor of ever-present partisans who reside in all parties.

I am a Canadian citizen and I like to participate - usually causing politicians to avoid rather than engage. This unfortunately dismisses real and valid points and policy suggestions that I and others like me have. Trudeau will be faced with many people like me and it will be instructional to see how he and his Cabinet respond. I hold out hope that this leader will draw from society - will seek to listen with non-partisan ears - and truly unite Canadians.

The election win was a combination of people wanting to get rid of Harper and of choosing the alternative that provided the most potential.

There is no doubt that when Tom Mulcair listened to or participated in the decision to attack Trudeau versus choosing to raise his profile from Opposition leader to the nations Prime Minister - he and the NDP lost. Conversely when Trudeau and his team chose to take the road of answering critics head on by offering reasoned, calm, and modern thinking - he lead the party to victory.

The media - in their usual - deer in headlights response to an unexpected result - chattered and giggled about how the Niqab killed the NDP. Not only was that wrong - it was illogical. Trudeau took the same position on the Niqab as Mulcair - yet took ownership of Quebec.

Journalists on the Hill had bought into the "just not ready" theatrics which helped in their defence of propaganda coverage dictated by Stephen Harper. The five questions - no follow up rule was juvenile and mainstream media sucked it up in an equally juvenile and unprofessional manner. Andrew Coyne's very public sulking at the end of the campaign - added fuel to the fire that they all had bosses to listen to. Then in a very apparent/non-transparent way - we were all left to pity them.

Now the media floodgates are open - they are all over Trudeau and his Cabinet. Tripping and giggling at their regained power. The very same day - they failed to scrum Harper and let Rona Ambrose control the number of questions permitted.

Canada is a geographically large and culturally diverse nation. Our confederation continues to be challenged by obvious problems that politicians have yet to address - let alone improve. If and when a leader has the courage to deal with these problems - our confederation may permanently remove the threat to separate by any province.

On Wednesday I watched the Cabinet unfold with millions of other Canadians. For the most part I believe Trudeau ticked most of the important boxes and as he said "it is 2015".  Gender equality in Parliament is important and there was no reason based on qualifications - that it should not have been achieved. There was also a great representation of age and experience. New ideas versus tried and true policy will provide great debate at the Cabinet table.

In all the newness that is Justin Trudeau - in all the forward looking that is Justin Trudeau there remains an antiquated view of regional representation in Cabinet. It is the final bastion of Upper and Lower Canada. It can be argued that we got Harper because the West (primarily the prairies) wanted in and they seen the Reform/Alliance as the way to get there.

If there is any such thing as "Old Stock Canadian" thinking it is geographic not racist and it is most assuredly the position that Ontario and Quebec are the most important pieces of geography in the country and also the most needy people when it comes to Cabinet placements.

We are a confederation of provinces - joined to form a Country based on common interests. All MP's are concerned with homelessness, affordable housing, health care, education, justice, transportation, taxation, security, and sovereignty - therefore all are representatives of these fundamentals. Cabinet should be utilized to deal with regional issues. This should not be based on population but rather on geography, assets, and particular needs.

If Ontario's focus is on the auto sector, banking, transit, manufacturing, and immigration - surely five competent MP's placed into Cabinet should be able to represent this. Likewise with all provinces and the North. A combination of population, geography, industrial sectors and cultural issues should be at the forefront of Cabinet appointments.

If we cannot have an equal, elected, and effective Senate - we must certainly strive to level the Cabinet playing field.

If Ontario has 11 Cabinet members to represent its interests there is no doubt that policy direction will favour that province. Quebec holding 6 posts and the Prime Minister means it has plenty of people to speak. 18 of 31 Ministers held by Upper and Lower Canada means that economic growth, population growth, and social growth will be dominated by these provinces. The fact that mainstream media - more often that not - refers to Atlantic Canada, Western Canada, Territories, Ontario and Quebec when describing our country demonstrates the real problem in identity and regional preferences in our  country.

By reducing Ontario and Quebec's representation in Cabinet to 10 from 18 - would allow all provinces and the Territories to at least have 2 Cabinet posts. This better reflects Canada and its confederation.

This is a weakness in Trudeau. He needs to look outside the population box to unite the provinces and territories in a real partnership. It is outdated, regressive, and divisive - it must be corrected. If 8 provinces and 3 Territories feel a Cabinet direction is favouring the growth of Quebec and Ontario at the cost of the other 11 then real action could be taken.

The real and obnoxious attention to Quebec and Ontario was most recently witnessed in the election. All leaders with the exception of Elizabeth May (who concentrated efforts in BC) doted on the neediness of Upper and Lower Canada. It is time for real leadership on this most troubling and chronic problem.

If Canada continues to govern itself based on the preservation, growth, and dominance of 2 provinces  we will cease to be a real confederation.

British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and the North are the sea borders of our country and are bountiful in natural ocean resources. These resources being owned and managed by the federal government is absolutely wrong and patently unfair. More than this - Cabinets dominated by central Canadian MP's have either neglected or mismanaged these resources at a unfathomable loss to the affected populations.

The fishery, oil and gas, and search and rescue assets have been crucified by Cabinets dominated by people who have no clue about them or real interest in the fall-out of critical errors. The House of Commons - dictated to by population representation - can kill a small province with one vote.

For all the modern and youthful thinking of the new Prime Minister - Justin Trudeau demonstrated significant weakness in the area of Cabinet representation. Ironically 5 of the 36 seats held by the Liberals were from Newfoundland and Labrador. We represented 1/7th of what they had. What are we now?

If somebody does not deal with the inequalities in Cabinet representation and provinces continue to suffer losses in population growth, economics, and industry - there will come a time when people want out not in.

I wait to see if our new Prime Minister recognizes and then attempts to deal with this.

EPRA - the Good,the Bad, & the big FEE

 EPRA Electronic Products Recycling Association

Today was a day of the upset consumer.

Buy a $150 Television and pay an additional $42.50 for a recycling fee.

There are some pretty upset people out there and they want answers.

Sometimes when trying to listen to politicians on something they have already bungled becomes more and more difficult.

Every now and then for various reasons - I will go at something in an attempt to find the real skinny on the subject. This was one of those times - and is a result of one consumer who got to the checkout and realized they could not afford the purchase. They had received advertising - as is so obvious this time of year - and were delighted to find they could afford a very special gift for their child. The sale meant there would be a very special surprise for one little guy very proud parents that they could achieve this. You probably have guessed by now that they became very embarrassed at the check-out and more importantly somewhat devastated that the surprise for their son had just evaporated.

What happened?

What happened was an environmental recycling fee of $42.50 that they were unaware of and the company had not informed them of in the advertisement.

Time to go backwards:

1. The government decided that electronics must be recycled and that industry players must become stewards of these materials.

2. The regulations were put in place and EPRA was chosen to be the administrator of such a program.

3. This was first advertised by EPRA in July and became effective in August.

4. The MMSB and government worked with EPRA to see the program established.

5. The Government and the MMSB did not conduct public consultation or awareness on electronic recycling and did not involve the public in choosing the agency or corporation private or public that would undertake and manage the program.

6. The public for the most part does not know who the EPRA is and does not know what they do and why they are doing it.

Different electronic products have different fees and they are established by EPRA - all manufacturers and retailers of these products within Newfoundland and Labrador must collect the set fees and remit them to the EPRA. These fees are for the administration, collection, and processing of these materials.

The EPRA is a not-for-profit corporation without share capital and its members are retailers and manufacturers of electronic products.

Currently the EPRA's head office is in Ontario and they operate provincially in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, Nova Scotia, PEI, and Newfoundland and Labrador.

First thing that strikes you is that Ontario does not currently operate under EPRA but the national office is there. I write that off to normal arrogance. I am advised however that Ontario will be the next EPRA location.

Now let's get to the fees. The fees are different based on the product but one significant example is for what's termed a big-screen TV. I am told that that is any TV over 30 inches. In Newfoundland and Labrador the fee is $42.50 and is higher than in other provinces - which I am advised is because of additional transportation costs.

In Newfoundland and Labrador there are 17 drop-off locations which is not acceptable if the program is to succeed. Nova Scotia has 39 locations - which when you compare the geography - is ridiculous. There is 55,000 square kilometres in Nova Scotia and 405,000 square kilometres in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Clearly we are going to need some hundreds of locations in this province. With a mere 5,000 square kilometres in PEI - they have 6 drop-off points. So right off the bat we are not rolling this project out in the best possible way.

Once products are dropped off in any of the 17 locations they are forwarded to a collaboration centre in Mount Pearl and from there head to the mainland.

That is to say Newfoundland and Labrador does none of the processing of the products. Our products are shipped to Quebec for processing. Nova Scotia currently has a processor that handles about 20% of their recycling. There is no Atlantic regional facility and that - in my opinion - is a lost opportunity for us.

The choice of processing location I am told was through an RFP (request for proposals) but not within Newfoundland and Labrador. That - in my opinion - was another mistake and we should now work diligently to establish an Atlantic Processing facility here in our province. In that way we can gain employment from this recycling initiative.

The choice for the collaboration facility was not done through tender or an RFP but was done by the company based on their own research - leading to communication with a few potentials and ultimately chosen by them - I am told on the basis of price, service, and experience. This too - in my opinion was a mistake and leaves the door wide open to speculation on why so and so got the contract.

Now for the breakdown. A drop-off location is paid a fee to collect and store materials dropped off to them by us the consumers - then a processing centre is paid to recycle the materials. The processing centres - which are private - for-profit enterprises also retain all revenues generated by selling the recycled materials. Clearly these processors are not paying corporate tax or benefits in our province because we have no processors here. EPRA is paid to administer and manage the program.

I do not yet have specific breakdowns with respect to what percentage of the fee we pay goes to EPRA, the drop off centres, or the processors. I do not know what remuneration is in place for the national and provincial executives. The list of these individuals can be found at the end of this post.
                                                                                                                                                                   EPRA will be tested over the next year and then we can determine if the organization here in our province and in fact nationally is run well. Whether or not the MMSB could have administered this program more efficiently is a question worth asking. Whether or not the best drop-off locations have been established is a good question. Whether or not the best collaboration centre has been achieved is a good question and whether or not we could have done at least a percentage of the processing here is a good question.

There clearly was an opportunity here for government to go after processing these materials for Atlantic Canada and we certainly have enough empty plants etc. to put such a facility in - and our private sector could have been tapped for a partnership initiative.

My experience with EPRA today was mixed. The first phone call I made was to the head office - in Ontario. I was met with significant resistance first and then promised that my questions could be answered by Christy Teasdale, National Director Marketing and Communication for EPRA. I called back at the scheduled time and was left on hold for 45 minutes. I then called the main office again and asked some general questions of the staffer and was further advised to talk to Terry Greene - Program Director for Newfoundland and Labrador. The Executive Director for our region is located in Nova Scotia - in my opinion - another mistake.

Terry Greene is a personable fellow with a good grasp of the company he works for and the program. He was able to answer the questions I had with confidence and for the most part without hesitation. The problems I have with this program are not with him - they are with government and the MMSB.

Before EPRA was chosen for this province there should have been broad public consultations with more than one option for proceeding. Further the government and the MMSB should have taken the transitional lead in the introduction of this program to consumers here in our province.

Secondarily - but as important - are the retailers and manufacturers who are the members of EPRA - they should have collectively decided to conduct responsible advertising and list the environmental fees alongside product costs in their flyers and promotional materials.

EPRA needs to outline its executive remuneration and also more particulars about how are money is spent. Without this information the consumer who pays the fee will be left to speculate on whether or not money is being spent wisely and ethically. It is also important to know that some of our money will be spent in the USA and Europe as some of the processing will be done there.

Is recycling electronic products the right thing to do? Sure it is. Is this the best program to do it? I don't know and I suspect our politicians don't know either. Is EPRA the best company to administer it? I don't know - perhaps the MMSB could have. Are we maximizing our full potential to gain additional employment? No. Has EPRA used the best process in choosing drop-off and processing facilities - I don't believe so. Have the retailers and manufacturers done enough to educate and promote openly this initiative? No. Has the government explained how this whole thing started, why it started, and who started it? No.

Most importantly the fees are determined and established by EPRA without government involvement. Therefore they should have to answer to a PUB like regulator to ensure the fees are appropriate and the expenditures warranted. 

EPRA represents the industry retailers and manufacturers - middlemen to accommodate government regulation. Is this the best process? It's time we had the discussion with the people we elect to govern and make policy and legislation.

The Opposition parties hold some responsibility here as well - where were they when this all went down and what did they recommend?

Chief Executive Officer and Staff

Cliff Hacking

as Chief Executive Officer. 

Other senior EPRA staff includes:

Lynda Kitamura

Chief Financial Officer 

Jay Illingworth

Director of Harmonization

Sean De Vries

Director, Recycler Qualification Office

Christy Teasdale

Director, Marketing and Communications

Each provincial EPRA program has an Executive or Program Director responsible for the day to day management of

the programs:

Craig Wisehart

EPRA Western Canada

Dennis Neufeld

EPRA Manitoba

Dominique Levesque

EPRA-Québec

Gerard MacLellan

EPRA Atlantic Canada

 

Did Dunderdale meet Quebec Premier Marois for 1 to 1 meeting?

According to a story in the Montreal Gazette:

"In addition to Lac-Mégantic, Marois has a one-on-one meeting planned with Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Kathy Dunderdale to discuss hydroelectrical projects in Labrador.

Newfoundland plans to build a $7.6-billion, 824-megawatt hydroelectrical project at Muskrat Falls, downstream from the 5,428-megawatt Churchill Falls dam, operated by Hydro-Québec.

Newfoundland is still bitter about a 1969 agreement giving Churchill Falls power to Hydro-Québec for 0.25 of a cent a kilowatt hour, dropping to 0.20 of a cent a kilowatt hour from 2016 until 2041.

Dunderdale wants to export Muskrat Falls power to New England using undersea transmission lines to Newfoundland and then from Newfoundland to Nova Scotia.

At the July meeting of the Council of the Federation in Niagara-on-the-Lake, Marois proposed discussing the situation with Dunderdale at the La Malbaie meeting."

Did this meeting occur? If not - why not? If so what happened?
 

Has SNC Lavalin got Muskrat by the Tail?

On the heels of more bribery and corruption allegations against SNC-Lavalin and particularly as related to design and management of "mega projects" - it is unconscionable and frankly stupid not to get complete information on the Muskrat Falls project.

I no longer care about "proprietary information" - I care as a shareholder and as a ratepayer.

The project should be stopped - and each and every component of the deal between Emera and Nalcor needs to be examined. Further SNC Lavalin's role in the project should be audited completely.

We need to know if the code "PCC" or "CC" exist as it relates to the Muskrat deal.

This Quebec company - is rotting from the outside in - and we do not need additional history of rot in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Kathy Dunderdale and Co. have shown they can be inept in matters of law and contracts and we must not let another 3 generations of our people suffer the consequences of either corruption or incompetence.

I need to know that public officials cannot and have not been bribed. I need to know who specifically is becoming rich on this project. I need to know who is driving it.

As yet another set of polls (the British Columbia election) goes up in smoke - nothing has convinced me that people in our province want or believe in this project.

Has the ambidextrous octopus swallowed the Cabinet?

Trudeau will be the next PM

The timing is right and Justin Trudeau has his homework done. I predict he will become the next Prime Minister of Canada.

Here are the factors:

1. Harper is destroying Canada as a right wing fanatic.

2. Mulcair will not solidify but rather he will confuse the NDP base.

3. Quebec support of NDP will shift to Trudeau.

4. Trudeau's message is simple, genuine, and achievable: my father left me with a beautiful country and I want to do the same for my children.

5. He has political smarts.

6. He will get the necessary hype from the media.

7. He dominates the social networks meaning youth will vote in numbers unseen before.

8. He has the generational attraction from the 50 plus who adored his father.

9. He is a Liberal in the true sense of the philosophy.

10. He will attract Canadians who enjoy seeing Canada as a respected global leader.

11. He will attract Canadians who want their politicians to stay out of the bedrooms of the nation.

12. He will attract Canadians who want their universal health care system enhanced not dismantled.

13. He will attract Canadians who are disgusted with Americanization of the country.

14. He will attract Canadians who want to see peacekeeping not war making.

15. He looks young but has a wealth of experience. Fresh, vibrant, energetic, and honest.

16. The media will enjoy accessibility - something stripped by Harper. This will result in mass media attention.

17. Strong but not as central dominated government as his father supported.

18. Arts and Culture will return to the fore.

19. Environmental prowess linked with industrial opportunities.

20. His innate sense of equality for all peoples. 

As for winning the Party leadership - yes - because Liberals are looking for somebody who can win.

Regional Cooperation = Robbing Newfoundland and Labrador

The word "regional" flows from the lips of our provincial Tories much too loosely.

First of all I must remind each and every one of you accepting a salary from us and stating that for that salary you represent us - that your job is NOT regional growth.

Nova Scotia - New Brunswick - Prince Edward Island and Quebec "region' have their own politicians as well as federal representatives.

Regional to us has meant - the giveaway of the Upper Churchill, the giveaway of fisheries stocks, the giveaway of our people, the giveaway of our secondary processing of minerals, and the giveaway of refining for our top grade oil.

Regional cooperation has not returned resources and people from other provinces including the "region".

We have sent our people to Alberta, Ontario, Nova Scotia,  and Prince Edward Island for work. What do they do? Well they process and refine fish, oil, gas, and minerals in these provinces.

We have sent 5000 MW's of power to Quebec at outrageous prices and in return they have created tens of thousands of jobs that we cannot qualify for.

We do not have the transportation infrastructure that other provinces in our region do. In fact our transportation has seen the elimination of railway, inadequate ferry service to Canada, and inadequate search and rescue assets.

We do not have the population growth and size of other provinces and yet we continue to export raw resources and minerals.

Now they want cooperation in order they may take even more hydro resources. We will subsidize power going to Nova Scotia. Why? They (Ottawa included) feel that Muskrat Falls is a good project so we can do OUR SHARE in the reduction of greenhouse gasses. Listen up - the 5000 MW's 5 BILLION Watts that we send from the Upper Churchill is the largest per-capita contribution to greening up in Canada. It is now time to do what we do for us.

We cannot be a "have province" in a region of "have-nots" that have more jobs, people, and infrastructure that we do. Where is our equivalent population growth or where is the lowering of our average age?

How about our cooperation on our fisheries resources?

What did we ultimately get in return? What did we give up? What other provinces benefited from the giveaway of fish stocks to foreign nations? How many communities have we lost?

Tourism numbers - how many tourists in the other provinces in our region? How many do we see?

Regional cooperation has always been a one way benefit and it has not been for us.

Tell me - what have we received from our historic cooperation (giveaway) of our resources? Nothing other than loss of communities, resources, and people.

Then there is Labrador - what can I say? Missing one gold plated highway, search and rescue resources, two smelters, four refineries, and hydro power for all communities.

Harper Enemy of the State? Premiers must take Action

I always begin my posts on the Prime Minister by reminding the reader that Stephen Harper is a liar. No doubt that causes problems in our nation - not the least of which is setting a very bad example for young Canadians.

Now our "leader" is threatening our country. How? Well this man who sits atop the Canadian political heap is shovelling sh-t (figuratively speaking) and tossing it on the masses below.

Once again this ne'er-do-well is saying no to yet another First Ministers meeting.

Canada consists of provinces and territories and under confederation agree to a federal presence in areas of joint service delivery, national security, and to a certain degree matters of law. Under such terms provinces and territories agree to a federal taxation base provided by personal and corporate interests. Considering the monies raised to allow a country to exist are garnered from these sources - it is necessary and only reasonable that these parties are directly involved in the allocation of those funds.

Harper's insistence on running a one-man state and his determination to design Canada in his vision continues to jeopardize both the national economy and sovereignty. Make no mistake the international corporate giants do have his ear - while the electorate does not. This is a recipe for disaster. Harper's obvious desire to be a CEO should be achieved in private not public service.

The Premier's for their part are starting to wear some of the blame here. It is unacceptable to be ignored by the federal government and therefore the provinces and territories must take action to correct this problem. The whining of these individuals to the media has not and will not achieve regular meetings with Harper.

As Quebeckers go to the polls my instinct tells me that this is a real problem for Charest and will become a bigger problem as the dog days of summer continue to the fall. This in turn may cause additional and constitutional problems as we head into the winter of our discontent.

The people of Canada elect their respective provincial governments and they fully expect these politicians to represent their interests in the federation. If they fail in doing so - the people look to the media for proper questioning of the situation. I cannot think of anything more important in Canada right now than the state of communication, collaboration, and cooperation between the PMO and the Premier's. This means a first Ministers meeting must occur at least on an annual basis.

Currently the aloof Harper is winning the battle without having to raise a sword. This is not acceptable.

The Premiers, media, and federal MPs have the responsibility to deal with this situation or run the risk that Harper's spoiled honey will stick to them.

RIM - Time for Stock Innovation

Okay - I do like my Blackberry and PlayBook. I like the fact that this is a Canadian Company.

You have fallen on hard times - time for some more innovation.

How about you offer shares with the sale of your products.

Buy a Playbook for $200 get 20 shares. Let us in - let average Canadians in on the action.

People buying your products now are afraid - it's risky - are you going to be there in a month.

For the risk - offer shares.

Market your innovation, your history, and your maple leaf.

Surely the shareholders that remain would go for something that has a real chance of recovering value.

You want a chance to show your stuff again - you need time - you need shareholders.

Come on Research in Motion - get mobile - and share a Cinderella story with fellow Canadians. Go from Province to Province and meet with people. Do the BBQ circuit. Time for the Nerds to let loose and seek support from those of us who use your technology and support it.

The Joy of Industrial Collapse - Dunderdale/Harper Alliance

I can only sit in amazement as I watch politicians attempt to turn another fiasco into a blessing.

One mill down - ah that's alright - in fact it's better for the region.

Two mills down - ah that's alright - we will attract more by not having the mill here.

Three mills down - sure that's a hat trick - great all round.

One fish plant goes - fine makes the other ones stronger.

Two plants down - rationalization is occurring - Great!

Three plants down - marvelous let's do more aquaculture.

Four plants down - now we are getting somewhere.

Five plants down - well you knew that would happen.

Six plants down - perfect St. John`s and Mount Pearl are booming!!

Now with all this industry gone - we will surely need more power - don`t you see it?

While we are at it - let's downsize Search and Rescue surely this must be good.

Or better yet let's back out of 70 billion in federal shipbuilding work because Kiewit is too busy - that's good news right? 

How about cuts to the Canada Food Inspection Agency in Newfoundland and Labrador - great - marvelous!

Cuts to DFO - fisheries science - yay!

How about the loss of Veteran's Affairs office in Corner Brook - rolls right along with the mill. Perfect!

How about ACOA and the federal parks - downsize - rightsize - marginalize Newfoundland and Labrador - hip hip hooray!

How about cuts to the community access programs - Yes that is wonderful news for rural towns!

Now let's focus on EI - yes that will help Newfoundland and Labrador.

Or maybe the (un)equalization formula - made in Quebec to punish Newfoundland and Labrador.

So what's next? Old Harry?

Can't wait the future looks very bright indeed.

We can be the hippest, coolest, youngest province to become non-existent.

Stop being so negative - emphasize all these positives!! 

Kennedy and Martin make Dangerous Assumptions

So there's nothing to worry about?

Minister Jerome Kennedy has been assured by Ed Martin that all is okay on the SNC-Lavalin front as it relates to Muskrat Falls contracts. 

This according to a story by CBC of April 30th. 

It's one thing to promote your own intellectual superiority to the people under "normal" circumstances however this statement by Kennedy and through Kennedy by Ed Martin is reckless and stupid. 

The Quebec Engineering Firm is the engineering, procurement and construction manager contractor for Nalcor Energy and is taking applications from companies to prequalify for things like building dams and a powerhouse. 

What are the allegations against SNC-Lavalin former employees?

How about corrupting a public official, fraud and money laundering?

The shareholders are very worried.

According to a Canadian Press story: Its share price has plummeted by 34 per cent, wiping out $3.3-billion worth SNC-Lavalin’s market value as events claimed the employment of three senior executives, including its former CEO.

Meanwhile back here in Newfoundland and Labrador Minister Kennedy and Nalcor CEO Ed Martin have it all under control – no need to worry here!

I do not take any comfort from those hollow words of reassurance. They have no more control over this mess than anybody else. It smells like Enron, it tastes like the Mortgage scam, and looks like a duck.

And by the way – what does SNC mean when they say they are the engineering, procurement and construction manager for Nalcor? Do they mean just Muskrat Falls – because the wording suggests otherwise. 

What an absolute mess the Dunderdale government and Nalcor executives have us in. Just say no to them before it is too late.

Rex Murphy Blows It in the National Post

Rex Murphy - Newfoundland and Labrador's Mano'Words stings critics of the Oil Sands while ignoring the elephant in the room. From there - Rex proceeds to demonstrate why he needs to come home more often and talk to the impacted people, their families, and their communities.

Below is an excerpt from Rex's Column in the National Post. Oil sands are a triumph for the human 'environment'.

In my view, this is the first and deepest justification for Fort Mac and the oil industry. Jobs are essential for the human environment — for a woman’s or a man’s sense of self-reliance and independence. By this, I mean the right to be able to obtain what you need for yourself and your family from what you have honestly earned. Being able, because you are employed, to stay off welfare, to turn aside from handouts — this is good for the environment of human dignity.

It mightn’t have the smug appeal of a panda face, and you will not see it on the vivid posters of the Sierra Club or Greenpeace, but having a job and earning a living is a great thing. Those who have been out of work know what a cruel “environment” that is — an emotional and psychological assault of frightful power. So we should celebrate some of the contributions that the oil sands have already made to the fundamental human environments of so many Canadians.

I have thought, and thought again, of my own province of Newfoundland, caught in the great calamity of the fisheries’ close-down in the 1990s, and how providential it was that “out West,” an oil economy was booming at the same time. Many Newfoundlanders (and Maritimers) migrated there in a time of real need.

Great social misery was averted because of the oil boom and Newfoundland’s related offshore developments: Thousands of divorces never happened, thousands of families didn’t break up, thousands of men and women didn’t fall into the trap of depression and worse, which so often attends long-term unemployment — because there was a great oil industry that allowed them the wherewithal to feed their families. It is a great story of modern Confederation: How Alberta, in particular, modified and mitigated the misery of Newfoundland — and other places.
__________________________________________________________________

Let's start this way Rex - jobs at all costs is one of the main reasons your homeland has suffered. It is the reason we delivered raw resources to other provinces in Canada - while no secondary processing occurred.

Next Rex - your idea that human 'environment' consists primarily of the ability to get a job - be self-reliant - and stay off welfare is ignorance at its finest. Bring on the asbestos right Rex? There are concerns of the human 'environment' - Rex - that include our children's right to clean water, air, and a safe food supply. When our parents are gluttonous of resources regardless of how they are extracted, developed, or utilized so we as the children can guarantee that our family has income - does come at a price. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who were 'employed' during the development of the Upper Churchill were happily employed, self-reliant and off welfare - yet left 100 years of misery in its wake. If developed, utilized, and contracted properly - your homies would be enjoying an additional $Billion a year - but hey it was great that we employed a few while it was being built.

Finally Rex - the fisheries example you use on our collective back - is the one that takes your entire argument and destroys it. You say the Oil Sands have been a savior to Newfoundland and Labrador after the shut-down of the fisheries in the 1990's. You use the worst man-made environmental disaster on our planet (the loss of the ground stocks) to show how great it is that we have yet another environment to potentially destroy. Perfect Rex - that is very sound judgement.

On this issue of the Oil Sands preventing thousands of divorces, thousands of family break-ups, thousands of people suffering from depression, and worse outcomes - here you are most ignorant.

There have been too many divorces - thousands of family break-ups, significant cases of depression and worse because they had to move away from Newfoundland and Labrador. Rex - people had to leave their homes - now worthless - as the community essentially died - people left their aging parents to the life of a private or public care home as they were not here to care for them (as is the rural way), children had one parent as many could not afford to move the family, and yes oh yes there was and is depression abound. That's not to mention how many of our people have lost their young lives tragically either on the job or on the great Canadian highway on their way to the job. These children who have left with their parents are lost to us as is their employable futures and the tax base.

As we enter into an aging demographic and retiring Newfoundlanders and Labradorians migrate home to live out their lives - they leave all their productive tax in Alberta.

Maybe it's time to move home Rex - get assimilated - and then rewrite this column.

Now that you have found the oil sands - keep looking to find the tar sands.

The First Characteristic of a Muskrat

The Characteristics of a Muskrat are very interesting.

First and most importantly it can swim backwards and forwards.

Oh yes - you see up until a couple of years ago - the primary reason for developing Muskrat was to go-around Quebec. There was no talk of imminent power outages or as the Minister says - the need to bring hot bricks to bed with you. No it was not from cold houses - it was from a frosty relationship with Hydro-Quebec and Quebec.

Now how do you justify spending us into debt oblivion and catapulting our power bills beyond affordability? Well fighting with Quebec would not do it - so a power crisis might work.

I want you all to think back before the Emera deal was concocted. Who was talking about the emergency need to develop power for the Island? Where is that in Hansard?

We must believe that nobody in their right mind would seek to spend 6 billion of our dollars - unless we were so desperate for power that we would be living in third world conditions - if we did not heed the warning.

This being the assumption from Nalcor and Government - when did they first realize the crisis was upon us?

We have had years and years of people complaining about the Holyrood power-plant pollution. I don't remember once when government said - the ONLY solution was to develop Muskrat Falls - and more particularly doing so separately from Gull Island.

When Williams was first talking to Quebec or about Quebec - it was to develop all of the Lower Churchill for export and for some industry use in Labrador. There was talk of renegotiating terms of the Upper Churchill before any deal on the Lower Churchill was reached.

I will say this once more and as many times as needed. We have been running out of power for decades according to reports from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. We should have run out in 1980 - 1990 - 2000 - and now 2016.

Meanwhile our population has shrunk by almost 15% since the crisis was first identified. Power intense industries have continued to disappear on the Island. Houses are more efficient as are the appliances we use in them.

Show me where Williams was concerned about shortage of power for the Island portion of our province prior to the Emera fiasco?

If this assumption is fundamentally flawed - how then could any independent review detect that - without open - unfettered - access to all the information? It can't - so once again - government denies people the whole truth.

Swim - swim - backwards and forwards.

The Wild Rose of Private Health Care - Dunderdale's Choice

As more information flows out of Ottawa's plan for health care - Canadians who believe in universal health care should be very concerned.

It should come as no surprise that Harper's funding plan will benefit Alberta the most with an almost 1 billion dollar windfall for that province.

If you ask yourself - which province is most willing to have a private health care system - what would your answer be? Mine is Alberta - hands down.

For those who read my last post - Harper's plan to use Premiers to push his fundamentalist agenda of private health care seems even more likely.

So the province with the attitude that private is better - is going to get the most while other provinces will be suffering through what amounts to decreased funding.

The whole idea of per-capita funding for health is antiquated and incomplete.

If you take a province such as Newfoundland and Labrador with a huge geographic footprint and minimal population - the idea of per-capita finding is scary. Our people need equal access to quality and timely health care but in order to achieve that - dialysis units, MRI's, Cat-Scans, and surgical units would have to be placed geographically in many regions. If our health care transfers are based on per-capita alone - without the ability to factor in regional needs leaves us behind the eight-ball.

Throw on top of that - the Quebec factor - where there health care funding is different than all other provinces and you have a mess.

How many readers can tell me how the Quebec system works?

Do you know that Quebeckers have a different federal tax system than all other provinces?

Do you know that Quebeckers have more direct control of federal taxation relative to health care?

Do you know that all other provinces had the option to do the same thing but rejected it?

How can we place Charest into the equation and come up with a national plan?

The question is - what is Kathy Dunderdale going to do about it?

The question is - will Kathy Dunderdale fight hard for us?

The question is - will Kathy Dunderdale push to have the unique circumstances of our province recognized and funded?

The question is - will we remain the province that relies on the templates of places like Alberta and Ontario instead of designing what's best for us?

Premier Dunderdale has the opportunity to come up with a made in Newfoundland and Labrador solution which has the potential to protect the essential health care needs of our people. The Premier has the opportunity right now to deal with the demographics that have the potential to financially cripple our province in 10 years time. If the Premier looks outside the "officials" and her "colleagues in the "big" provinces she may well find the solution. As long as we are slaves to the templates of Ontario and Alberta - our children are doomed to the debt and pressure that will be ours in a decade if we do not stand on our own two feet.

Will Minister Tom Marshall lie? Yes! Will he mislead? Yes!

Minister Tom Marshall appeared on Open-Line Friday of last week. The purpose of the call was to attack through innuendo, misrepresentations, threats, and misinformation - the independent pharmacy owners in the province.

The irony was that he called to correct something Randy Simms (host) said in his preamble.

Quote by Marshall:

Randy, we're negotiating now. There's a chair at the table for CICPO. CICPO refused to show up. Randy, Premier Dunderdale wants lower electricity costs for the people in this province. She wants lower drug costs for the people of this province. People have no choice. If the doctor says they got to have drugs, they got to have them, Randy. And the cost of generic drugs in this country are higher than they are in the US and higher than they are in other OECD countries. And there's got to be a reason for that. And we've looked into it and other provinces have looked into it. And British Columbia and Alberta and Saskatchewan and Ontario and Quebec and Nova Scotia have all taken an approach to reduce the cost of generic drugs to their citizens, to their taxpayers.

First - if the Premier wants to lower drug costs in the province - the first line of attack would be the brand drugs that are increasing in cost every year. The fact is brand name drugs which represent over 70% of the costs of all drugs prescribed and dispensed are going up in costs year over year. The generic drugs which are currently the target of this PC government are going down every year. Further the generic partnership with pharmacy has what has been keeping dispensing fees low and allowing pharmacies particularly small independent rural dispensaries to offer essential extra services.

Making matters worse is that the Dunderdale government is hiding its intent relative to a trade deal between the EU and Canada which would see our province have to pay an additional 50 million dollars for essential medications - by agreeing to extend the patent protection for the brand drug companies. Canada and the EU are set to go back to the table just after our provincial election and this term forms part of what a proposed deal will include.

The end result of the PC government move is:

1. The price of drugs will actually go up for citizens and taxpayers.

2. Dispensing fees for most people will have to double or the pharmacies will close.

3. Delivery to seniors and those without transportation will cease or there will be a cost for such delivery.

4. Independent pharmacies will have to stop credit programs for prescription drugs - thereby causing people not to buy and take their medications in a timely manner. This non-compliance will cause the emergency rooms of hospitals to experience unsustainable traffic, re admissions to hospital, or worse.

5. The government drug card clients will have to call their MHA or social worker to have the necessary forms completed for continuity of their prescription drug cards, or to complete their annual tax returns (in order to qualify for the card).

6. It will cause independent pharmacies to cease filling "special authorization" drugs until the approval has been given by government. In that instance the patient will have to return to their doctor to have a prescription changed, go without their medication for up to one month until approval for payment has been achieved, or have to return to the hospital.

7. Prescribing errors made by physicians will have to be handled in a different manner. Currently our independent pharmacies are dealing with between 5 to 25 prescribing errors a day. When the mistake is caught by the pharmacist - the patient will then have to return to the doctor or hospital to have the correction made. If the patient wants the pharmacist to deal with the error for them - they will have to pay a fee based on the amount of time it takes for a pharmacy to contact the doctor, achieve contact with that doctor, the faxing of a new prescription, and the paper work required for the government for a change in prescription. Usually this takes the pharmacy between half an hour to 8 hours to achieve.

8. The pharmacy will have to charge for special packaging for patients who take multiple drugs for chronic illnesses.

9. The hours and availability of pharmacies will be reduced to make the necessary savings on human resources and other expenses.

10. Services such as reprinting of receipts for income tax purposes, transferring of files, supplying hospitals with drug reviews for patients (where the hospital already has the records) or communication with the drug card program for patients will have to be additionally charged.

These are but a few of the changes that will be experienced by patients under the government's plan. The most negative result will be the out and out closure of some pharmacies.

Tom Marshall is not telling the truth or he is completely incompetent on this file.

The government including Premier Dunderdale is hiding the truth from the people and the media need to call them out on the Comprehensive Economic Trade Deal (CETA) with the EU.

Marshall goes on to say the following:

We understand that in terms of the true cost of the drug that's been passed on by the pharmacy to the customer, it has markups on it running from 140 percent to 619 percent. They're very high markups. Now that's before you take their cost into, their expenses of operation into consideration. So what happened - this all started, Randy when the pharmacies announced they weren't going to honour the drug card anymore. They were going to make people pre-pay for their drugs and have to seek reimbursement from the government, which was totally unacceptable because people didn't have the money.

First the Minister talks about markups on drugs running from 140 to 619 percent. Where is the evidence of this? Pharmacy cannot change the price of drugs as the provincial government sets them under the provincial formulary. Further Minister Tom Marshall will not address the Dr. Wade Locke report completed on pharmacy - using actual financial data from pharmacies. This is a government who only a few days ago were holding Dr. Locke's opinion and study regarding Muskrat Falls as gospel - yet when it comes to a comprehensive Activity Based Costing study on pharmacy the Minister of Finance deliberately avoids it. This is a lie by omission.

This statement also points to pharmacy and says - they were going to have people unable to get their essential prescription drugs - this is absolutely false and further is exactly the opposite of what is true. It is the government everyday that prevents people from getting medications. Patients are released from hospital with prescriptions they cannot fill because the government prevents retail pharmacies from determining the validity of a special authorization - so instead it goes into government pharmacists in a bureaucratic setting. This in turn causes delays - up to one month - where people who on income assistance or fixed incomes such as seniors - cannot get their medications because the government has not approved them. In this case local independent pharmacies put it on account for the individual so that they can take their medications immediately thereby preventing re admissions into hospital or a trip to the emergency room. Our pharmacies never let patients leave without their drugs for reasons of inability to pay. This is one significant difference between the large corporate chains and our members.

Next the Minister uses this line:

They want to go to court, I think that's wonderful. Go to court and let it come out what the proper margins out, okay let it come out what the rebates are, let it come out why the true cost of the drugs are not being passed on and while the true cost of the drug to the pharmacy is not being passed on, we want to sit down with the pharmacists and we have sat down with the pharmacists and what we're trying to do is come up with an agreement. 

So the Minister of Finance thinks its wonderful that the CICPO wants to go to court. Well that's a mouthful in and of itself. Yes anything instead of meeting, talking, collaborating, and developing a superior policy. Then Minister Marshall - a lawyer - pretends that the issue being brought to court has something to do with generic drug pricing. The court case deals with two issues: a) whether or not the government had the right to alter a provider agreement unilaterally and second whether the "object" of PANL legislatively is valid. So once again he lies to or misleads the people regarding this very serious issue. Further the information he is seeking above is already available to him from the Dr. Wade Locke report. He once again says they are negotiating with pharmacists not pharmacies. This continued misrepresentation does not negate the fact that government signs provider agreements with corporations (legal entities) not pharmacists. If that is not the case then Wal-Mart, Shopper's Drug Mart, Lawton's and Costco could not be doing business with government.


Minister Marshall then takes the public down another twisted version of the facts:

And we've looked into it and other provinces have looked into it. And British Columbia and Alberta and Saskatchewan and Ontario and Quebec and Nova Scotia have all taken an approach to reduce the cost of generic drugs to their citizens, to their taxpayers.

Let's start with the fact that all provinces are using different models for remuneration and different approaches on the restructuring of generic drug costs. Ontario, which is what is law in Newfoundland and Labrador as it relates to generic pricing is the worst. It has caused the most damage to rural independent pharmacies and where ATM's are replacing the community pharmacy - in some cases now it will be LPN's. In Ontario now three independent pharmacy owners are running for the PC Party of Ontario in large part because of what the Liberal Ontario government has done with pharmacy and health issues generally. And here we have the PC government adopting failed Liberal policy out of Ontario.

Further in Ontario - consultations were had with the Ontario Pharmacists Association, the Canadian Association of Chain Drug Stores (CACDS) the Independent Pharmacists Association of Ontario and the Ontario Community Pharmacies Coalition. That is hardly a comparative for our province where the Premier and her Minister's keep saying we will only talk to PANL.


Then let's talk about British Columbia where a deal was struck between the Government, the BC Pharmacy Association and the Canadian Association of Chain Drug Stores. Once again broader consultation was held and a different remuneration formula was reached. Unfortunately - in BC as in Newfoundland and Labrador - the chains were pandered to while independent pharmacy was left behind. Lastly, at least the Government of BC acknowledges that no agreement reached with either the Pharmacy Association or the CACDS is binding on any individual business.

Then take the most ridiculous of Minister Marshall's comparisons - Quebec. In Quebec a pharmacy can only be owned by a pharmacist. This negates the concerns of independent owners as the government can only negotiate with them - large corporate interests are not permitted to own the dispensary. If Minister Marshall would like to entertain this idea - we would be more than happy to deal with that.

In Saskatchewan the government also reached an agreement between the Pharmacists' Association of Saskatchewan and the Canadian Association of Chain Drug Stores - once again admitting that the strong lobby by the giant retailers and chains is unduly influencing policy development. But at least they admit it. In Newfoundland and Labrador they will not admit to the discussions with CACDS because to do so would mean the CICPO would have a rightful place to put it's arguments forward separately.

In Canada the chain drug stores and mass retailers are dictating provincial policy and it is leading to reduced and inferior services in rural communities. In our province with our geography and relatively small population - this means destruction to our rural communites and inner-city neighbourhoods. Minister Marshall and Premier Dunderdale had the chance to make a difference and derive policy based on local business and rural communities - instead they have chosen to follow the mess found in other Canadian provinces. This is not leadership - and there are not enough lies in the world to cover this up.

Finally Minister Marshall refers to the following:

Okay, they had a meeting set up with Minister Kennedy. Minister Kennedy was in the House. They walked out. They left about five minutes before Minister Kennedy came in. So don't give me that. 

The truth about this meeting will be addressed by those attending this meeting. Minister Marshall and I were not there so we cannot speak directly to it. Those who were in attendance will publicly discuss what happened to this meeting and why it did not occur. safe bet though that with pharmacy owners travelling anywhere from 1 km to 800 km's to attend the meeting did not leave under the circumstances the Minister has described. Either the Minister is misinformed or is lying.

Before attending the SOS RALLY Look at This! It's more than just Pride - It's Lives

 

Have a look at the map above - this is the area covered by the Search and Rescue Centre in Halifax. Are MP's able to view a MAP?

It is not only unacceptable for Newfoundland and Labrador lose a sub-centre - it should actually be home to the main Search and Rescue Centre currently located in Halifax. 

Before you go the rally today on the waterfront - please read the information below taken from the Federal Government website. 

Further - as you read it - you will notice we lost a rescue centre from Torbay in the 1970's as it was all sent to Nova Scotia. The sub-centre was supposed to make up for that. Now they want it all - when geography does not bear it out.

Is the sub-centre in Quebec City being closed? 

Newfoundland and Labrador either wins this fight - or we get out. Do not let the Harper Conservatives insult or harm us anymore. 

Who do you think is most at risk - from a marine perspective? 

Nobody has the right to place our people at increased risk!

How about we take over forest-fire communications for Ontario, or flooding response communication in the Prairies? Why don't we take over the Search and Rescue Centre for British Columbia? There should be no reason that we can't control marine rescue for the Great Lakes and shut down Trenton.

The following is the information is taken from the federal government website. 

The Halifax Search and Rescue Region (SRR) is bounded on the east at 30 degrees West Longitude, on the west at 70 degrees West Longitude, to the south at approximately 42 degrees North Latitude and to the north at 70 degrees North Latitude.  This area comprises all of the Atlantic provinces, the eastern half of the province of Québec, the southern half of Baffin Island and an area of the western North Atlantic extending to 30º west, an area of approximately 4.7 million square kilometres.  With over 29,000 kilometers of coastline, eighty percent of the region is covered by water.

The 1970's saw changes that provided better support for people in distress.  Air resources were now located in Gander Newfoundland, and Summerside Prince Edward Island.  Halifax became the sole RCC with the closing of Torbay, although the Coast Guard established Marine Rescue Sub-Centres (MRSC) in St. John's and Québec City, Québec.  Aircraft began dropping pumps in aid of vessels taking on water in 1970; in January of that year, the Motor Vessel USEN #1 was the first successful recipient of a pump.  The year 1970 saw the number of cases rise to a total of 963 

The operations of the SAR fleet account for most of the Canadian Coast Guard SAR Program costs. On average, 65-75% of the budget for SAR is spent on the fleet. A further 8% is spent on capital projects. Rescue Co-ordination accounts for 16% and the management, monitoring and administration of the program accounts for the remaining 8%.

Rescue Co-ordination Centres and Maritime Rescue Sub-Centres

The Canadian Coast Guard jointly staffs three Rescue Coordination Centres (JRCCs) with the Canadian Forces. The JRCCs are located at Victoria, British Columbia, Trenton, Ontario, and Halifax, Nova Scotia. The Canadian Coast Guard also operates two Maritime Rescue Sub-Centres (MRSCs) at Quebec City, Quebec, and St. John's, Newfoundland. The function of a MRSC is to reduce the JRCC's workload in areas of high marine activity. These centres are staffed by SAR Co-ordinators who operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, year round. The maritime area for which the Canadian JRCCs/MRSCs are collectively responsible for is more than 5.3 million square kilometres.
The JRCCs/MRSCs are responsible for the planning, co-ordination, conduct and control of SAR operations. JRCCs/MRSCs have highly trained staff, detailed operational plans and an effective communications system. Once an JRCC/MRSC is notified that a person(s) is in danger, the SAR Co-ordinator begins to organize the rescue. All available information about the person(s) in danger is gathered and recorded and the positions of potential assisting resources in the area of the incident are determined. SAR Co-ordinators are trained to evaluate various situations and send the most effective resources to deal with a particular incident. In complex and major incidents, many resources are often sent or tasked to assist.

To fulfill our mission, our objectives are to:

• Save 100% of lives at risk.
• Reduce the number and severity of SAR incidents.
• Minimize loss of life, injury, property damage and risk to the environment.
• Support and involve the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary.
• Maintain the highest professional standards.
• Provide national leadership and effective SAR Program management.
• Provide international SAR leadership.
• Maximize SAR system efficiency through innovation.
• Promote volunteerism.
• Increase awareness of the SAR Program.
• Assist in the development of the National SAR Program.
• Foster co-operative SAR agreements.
• Provide humanitarian aid and civil assistance where possible.

These objectives will help us provide an effective SAR service for all those at risk in the maritime environment in Canada.

Ignorance is Bliss - not in this case - the Real Stephen Harper

Important information - please read before voting:

If you are from Atlantic Canada, Quebec, a member of the Canadian Labour Congress, a woman, ethnic, a supporter of choice, or a liberal minded Canadian, or a Canadian period - please read. I have highlighted for emphasis.


Below - please take the time to read quotes from a speech Stephen Harper delivered as, then vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition, to a June 1997 Montreal meeting of the Council for National Policy, a right-wing U.S. think tank, and taken from the council's website:

Let's take the New Democratic Party, the NDP, which won 21 seats. The NDP could be described as basically a party of liberal Democrats, but it's actually worse than that, I have to say. And forgive me jesting again, but the NDP is kind of proof that the Devil lives and interferes in the affairs of men.

Some people point out that there is a small element of clergy in the NDP. Yes, this is true. But these are clergy who, while very committed to the church, believe that it made a historic error in adopting Christian theology.

The NDP is also explicitly a branch of the Canadian Labour Congress, which is by far our largest labour group, and explicitly radical.

However, our executive is the Queen, who doesn't live here. Her representative is the Governor General, who is an appointed buddy of the Prime Minister.

First, facts about Canada. Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it. Canadians make no connection between the fact that they are a Northern European welfare state and the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States.

In terms of the unemployed, of which we have over a million-and-a-half, don't feel particularly bad for many of these people. They don't feel bad about it themselves, as long as they're receiving generous social assistance and unemployment insurance.

But the important point is that Canada is not a bilingual country. It is a country with two languages. And there is a big difference.

In fact, before the Reform Party really became a force in the late '80s, early '90s, the leadership of the Conservative party was running the largest deficits in Canadian history. They were in favour of gay rights officially, officially for abortion on demand. Officially -- what else can I say about them? Officially for the entrenchment of our universal, collectivized, health-care system and multicultural policies in the constitution of the country. At the leadership level anyway, this was a pretty liberal group. This explains one of the reasons why the Reform party has become such a power.

If you look at the surviving PC support, it's very much concentrated in Atlantic Canada, in the provinces to the east of Quebec. These are very much equivalent to the United States border states. They're weak economically. They have very grim prospects if Quebec separates. These people want a solution at almost any cost. And some of the solutions they propose would be exactly that.

For years, we elected Quebec prime ministers to deal with that, Quebec prime ministers who were committed federalists who would lead us out of the wilderness. For years, we have given concessions of various kinds of the province of Quebec, political and economic, to make them happier.

As long as there are exams, there will always be prayer in schools. 

The complete speech found here CTV

Has the Canadian media become part of Conservative Election Campaign?

To the reader:

Please take the time to read this and then sit back and think about it for a while. Let me know what you think.

Sue

From the gate - Stephen Harper while not taking questions as he exited the Governor General's residence claimed the opposition parties were attempting to form a coalition.

He controlled that message from day one. This was a carefully crafted PR move by somebody and Harper played his role perfectly.

Election called - first message - unquestioned - they want a coalition.

Then came a week of:

The coalition wanted an election - Canadians did not.

The coalition have a plan to take over power - Canadians do not want a coalition.

The coalition will... and so on.

The media for their part - despite any evidence of the foregoing - reported and re-reported that the coalition was the election issue.

Harper played the media like a fiddle - all the while blocking open access to them and limiting questions and controlling the physical environment.

The media like a part of the Harper team - chased Ignatieff here and there and would not allow any questions but those on the coalition. Then Harper "suggested" to the media that they need to get a commitment from Ignatieff that he would not form a coalition. They almost dutifully tracked Ignatieff and asked and asked until - Ignatieff - exhausted from the inability to get to any other subject - mistakenly - promised no coalition.

All the while Harper skirted the real question - on why he was limiting questions and controlling the media - which they have since capitulated and now follow his rules. This did not help the voters or our democracy. It was - in my opinion - one of the greatest media blunders of recent memory.

Next we had Harper segue into the economy - he would say it would not be good for our economy if we had a coalition - it would damage our progress he would add. So then he had the media reporting that Harper's concern was now all about the economy. Throughout this dog and pony show - the public were not treated to a question posse by the media - wherein Harper should have been asked about his problem with democracy and why he felt that Canadians should not be allowed to choose their own democracy - including the possibility of a coalition.

Now the real duping might finally be revealed to our investigative journalists. Harper wanted a commitment in the media from Ignatieff - to not form a coalition - for two reasons. The first is to ensure that if he formed another minority - he would hold on to the job of Prime Minister (or be able to state to Canadians that Ignatieff lied if a coalition were formed) and second to do what the party started today. The Conservative candidates now have the media reporting that even if Ignatieff did not want a coalition - they might vote down the budget and then the Governor General might ask Ignatieff if they might be able to form a coalition.

Where is Stephen Harper in all these games? Unavailable to the media!

Now the coup de grace has arrived as Harper above all people complained that the Liberal ads have him misquoted. This man - a proven liar - a cheat - in contempt is complaining about a quote on universal health care. Now the media has yet another shift in coverage - essentially accommodating Stephen Harper.

Tomorrow it is Quebec and how if a majority is not achieved - Gilles Duceppe will be in a position to move the separatist agenda forward into another vote on sovereignty.

If the media is at all interested in constructive criticism - they might want to consider how they have been used as part of a Harper re-election campaign and begin the process of returning to independent journalists giving Canadians the information they need to make their own minds up.

To the handlers of Michael Ignatieff and to Ignatieff himself - talk to Canadians about our issues and continue addressing problems of contempt, lies, cheating, right-wing fanaticism, and one scary Harper who gets up every day plotting to get and keep power.

Connect the Vote - Connect the Map Mark Kelley - you missed something else!

I guess we all remember Mark Critch chastising Mark Kelley - of CBC Connect the Vote - because the program left Newfoundland and Labrador off their cross-country tour during the election.

Kelly - within a couple of days - crew in tow showed up in St. John's - they say because of the outcry from Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. As we know the story goes - Quebec was next on the agenda for the tour.

So yesterday Mark stopped in Quebec and did what he had never done before - interview his brother - who happens to be a Quebec provincial Cabinet Minister.

I have another really pressing issue for Mark and CBC - look at the video of the interview below - and tell me why Mark Kelley did not ask Minister Kelley about the huge map set as the backdrop as the two brothers meet and embrace. What's with the boundary Mark? (about 1 minute in)

The question of the interview? "What's it like to be federalist in Quebec". I don't know Mark but I can tell you what it's like to be a Newfoundlander and Labradorian in Canada. 

Hard not to be cynical isn't it?

VIDEO PRESS HERE

Leave it to Old Harry - he can tell you all about the failures of Danny Williams!

Equalization will have to change again - if Ottawa is going to appease Quebec. Unfortunately - it will all be too late for us.

So the feds and Quebec are set to make a deal on offshore oil - in the disputed area between Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec. Old Harry as the area is nicknamed will see Quebec receive 100% of the royalties from any oil recovered.

Now the problem - Quebec - who argued that NL should not be exempt from equalization respecting oil revenues - non-renewable resource revenues - will now have to argue that they should be able to keep all the revenues without being penalized by Ottawa.

The Atlantic Accord which was supposed to insure that Newfoundland and Labrador was the primary beneficiary of offshore oil development - did not deliver on that promise. The weakness of the agreement - signed off by our politicians of the time - became evident as we witnessed Ottawa claw back close to 80% of the revenues under equalization. So for years the ranting went on - and finally the Williams administration caught Paul Martin on a weak political moment and righted the historical wrong. The Government of Canada passed over 2 billion which at least partially compensated our province by making us the primary beneficiary of the resource.

Then along came Harper - who promised equalization changes that would remove revenues from non-renewable resources from the formulary - allowing our children to benefit from resources that we were going to expire.

Harper lied - became the Prime Minister and then proceeded to put our province virtually right back to where we were before we made gains. That lie cost our province over 10 billion dollars. Danny started the ABC campaign - Conservatives were not elected in any riding and Fabian went to the Senate.

Problem is Danny was bluffing - there was no consequence to Harper - and then Danny quit. He had the political support but he chose to sit back and allow our province to be screwed - yet again - by Ottawa.

Now what do you think will happen to Quebec - do you believe they will let Ottawa claw back revenues from oil or gas under equalization? I for one am not that stupid. If Quebec ever recovers oil from this offshore parcel - equalization will be changed to accommodate that development. By then our resources will effectively be exhausted and the change will provide minimal to no return for us.

Today the feds and Quebec are set to sign a deal on the deposit ( potential 2 billion barrels of oil and 5,000 billion cubic feet natural gas) with environmental studies set to be complete by 2012.

Then there are the lagging questions - once again left hanging by Premier Williams - who owns the resource, which boundary is correct, if Newfoundland and Labrador opposes it what is the government going to do about it?

So Danny thinks he got one up on Quebec with the Emera deal. What a failure - and what a cost to our people.

Rona Ambrose - will not dare offend Quebec

Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs Rona Ambrose needs more staff to help her read correspondence.

Here is a copy of a letter I sent to Ambrose July 20 - 07

Dear Minister,

I am writing to you as a citizen of Canada and of Newfoundland and Labrador. It has come to my attention now on many occasions that official maps of the Government of Quebec represent a false border between Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec. These maps are being widely distributed by the Tourism Quebec - Natural Resources Quebec - Transport Quebec - Elections Quebec - and even by Hydro-Quebec a Crown Corporation.

Could you please investigate why this is occurring as the borders between the two provinces were established in 1927 by the Privy Council and accepted by Canada - and further acknowledged at the time of Newfoundland and Labrador's entry into Canada in 1949.

If one lives in Quebec or in Newfoundland and Labrador they should be able to view maps of provinces and of the country that represent proper borders. Further I have noticed documents filed by Hydro-Quebec with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans that ignore the correct boundaries of the provinces.
What can the Federal Government do to correct this situation?
I look forward to your earliest reply.

After 2 months the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs answers with this:

Dear Ms. Kelland-Dyer:

Thank you for your e-mail of July 23, 2007, regarding the border between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador.

As you point out, the border between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador was determined in 1927 by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and confirmed in 1949 when the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed the British North American Act, 1949, which made Newfoundland, as it was then known, a Canadian province and confirmed that Newfoundlands border was the one delimited by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the British North America Act, was renamed the Newfoundland Act in 1982). All maps issued and used by the Government of Canada show the border based on the 1927 determination by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and confirmed in the Newfoundland Act.

Thank you for sharing your views on this matter. I trust that you will find this information useful.

Well that's useful the Minister of INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS managed to tell me what I told her - but will not - as the Minister responsible - delve into the falsified maps of Quebec. Further she will not even deal with that jurisdiction when they submit these same incorrect maps to a federal government department. Can't touch Quebec - good thing the border problem did not exist between let's say Alberta and Saskatchewan. We are only Newfoundland and Labrador - only 7 seats - right Minister Ambrose - right Prime Minister Harper?

And any Canadian is supposed to believe that this government will protect our borders north - the Northwest Passage? That means Harper has to take on the USA - sure - they can't even control the nonsense out of one province.