Muskrat Falls - There will be NO Dissent

So how are we shaping up here regarding the open discussion on the Muskrat Falls development?

Bloggers should be eliminated.

Open Line callers opposed should be thwarted.

The House of Assembly is closed.

The PUB does not get extension.

Public/Private partnership means not ALL information is available.

People and companies in the New England States, Nova Scotia and Ottawa will hear more from Nalcor our elected government members than we do.

All critics regardless of their professional background and experience - for some reason fail to comprehend the knowledge the Premier claims to possess.

The government is in control of all provincial assets and the budget, can spend away at Public Relations but now require inundation of open line programs as well.

The government despite it's belief that the people of the province are all for the project will not entertain a referendum on the deal.

A referendum would provide funds to critics from the public purse to debate the issue intelligently and openly. The tax dollars do come from us after all and that's the money government wishes to spend.

There have been no real public consultations by the Province as the developing jurisdiction.

We have not been told about the negotiations with Quebec and Gull Island power nor have we been told about what other options were not fully explored regarding industrial development in Labrador.

The Premier is hiding and wants to stay low and push ahead. She wants the public to believe all is well and it's only a few from the peanut gallery that wish to cause trouble. She has not identified what the agendas of these people are - other than those who are known partisans.

What do you call this type of government? They want to spend 6 billion dollars of our money and they want to spend it without opportunity for dissent.

This is our water - this is our resource - this is our project......heard this stuff sometime before. I might have been 9 years old at the time.

OH - SEE - I something's fishy about Marystown Taxation

A story in the Telegram today has left me with more questions than answers.

The Headline read "OCI and Marystown settle municipal taxes".

Excuse me? What taxes - how many years were owed? What prevented the taxes being paid before now? What do they mean a settlement? Why won't they tell the public what the settlement was?

What does the following quote from the story mean? "While both parties have mutually agreed to the settlement of taxes up to and including 2011 we look forward to negotiating a more fair and reasonable tax structure for 2012 and beyond with the Town of Marystown as we have with other municipalities”...  

So let me get this straight - if you are an employer in a community needing employment - the municipal tax structure is out the window. If a fisherman/woman or plant worker is having a rough year - taxes will be waived - renegotiated? Why not open it up to negotiating provincial tax as well.

Does OCI - owned by Ches Penney have problems paying tax? 
How much more do we have to turn over to merchants to remain in their good graces?
How much access to the resources do they already have?
Are they losing money or something?


Why not visit the OCI website and have a look! 


While you are there review the News Release regarding Loyola Sullivan being appointed VP of Resource Management and Sustainability. 


So yes Loyola achieved a great deal when he was Canada's Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation - right?


The News Release lists Martin Sullivan as CEO and Blaine Sullivan as COO - all in the family for conservation right? Who is conserving what? Who are they conserving it for?


Oops better stop talking now - or OCI might haul up their stakes and move from Marystown. 


Looks like Newfoundland and Labrador is on the way to creating an Irving sort of control. So how much is enough? 


Was there enough tax saved in Marystown to pay for a philanthropic Ches Penney venture?


Ah just another rut in the highway of Corporate Voodoo - get those paving trucks out - again and again - and again...


One final note what are the media allowed to ask these days? 


From Sprung to Brinco - and from Cable Atlantic to Persona - what control do we have of our government anymore? 


No Control!


I must admit Mr. Penney - you have managed to put some squarely in their appropriate social status. 


The Former president of FPI is now where?
The Former Minister Sullivan is now where?


How was that pick - up and "purchase" of FPI assets.
I must say that when I go to the the FPI site today our familiar little fishy is still around - unfortunately it's now controlled by Highliner USA - then again we've lost control of all our little fishies right? That is the ones we can find. 


Remind me again - who owns the resources? Who should be the primary beneficiary?

Cry me a River downstream

This is a readers digest discussion of the woes of the Upper Churchill contract and continues on from the first installment Cry me a River.

Frank Moores becomes Premier at a time when the first hint emerges that the deal Brinco has with Hydro Quebec is one sided and that Brinco if left alone stood to lose money over the term of the agreement. This is when Newfoundland and Labrador became directly involved in the contract.

Essentially Brinco wanted to develop the Lower Churchill same terms as Upper Churchill - Newfoundland and Labrador political geniuses had now figured out what Quebec was getting in the first round said no. The rest of the story since related by John Crosbie in his book - No Holds Barred - is surely the same as all the rest of the "expose" semi-fictional novels where the author is the hero and others around the situation were just weak. 

In either case Frank set out to buy Brinco's water rights - we are told in order to develop the Lower Churchill. The additional truth is that Frank went to a hotel room in Montreal and for all we knew bailed Brinco (Rothschilds) out of a bad deal which would see them lose money.

John Crosbie's interpretation or "recollection" in his book has Frank Moores as spineless and Crosbie further was "unimpressed" Sir Val Duncan or Bill Mulholland or "any of them". Crosbie articulated he assumed he was as brainy as the other side of the table. At this point I will note it is too bad that the grey matter was not up to the same snuff when we did the Upper Churchill. But romantic reflections of our current Lieutenant Governor aside Crosbie admitted the price to buy back the water rights in Labrador and the control of CFLCo was too steep. I'll say - 160 million dollars or so for an investment of what 10 million dollars. They collectively gave the Rothschilds a return on their investment that they never would have seen on the Upper Churchill fiasco.

Three others observations of Crosbie from the time are very relative to now and this proposed deal with Emera.

1. Crosbie concluded that Joey was responsible for the mess of the Upper Churchill which sees hundreds of millions going to Quebec as we receive little more than 10 million (pre resale power under Tobin). Even though John and Bill and Bill and Clyde and others mentioned in the Cry me a River installment - were around during the deal they collectively all watched or assisted it in happening. But no - it's the dead guys fault.

 2. Crosbie concluded that there is no doubt the Upper Churchill should not have been developed by Brinco but rather as a joint project between the governments of Newfoundland and Quebec. In this he suggests that nationalizing and maintaining control of resources such as the renewable energy in Labrador is essential. He almost after all these years got it right - yes it should belong to the people - but he forgot the people of Labrador and the absolute battering they have taken on what could have been the industrialization of Labrador for the benefit of the great land.

3. Crosbie speaks of Joey's insistence on dealing with Brinco despite the potential loss to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and speaks to potential conflicts of interest where he speculates on Joey's dabbling in Brinco stock and Smallwood's violation of the peoples' trust. He then compares this to Frank Moores who would not allow any Minister to make decisions on a deal or development of resources where they had private interests - and then goes further to say at the time the provincial legislation was better than the federal in that it did not recognize blind trusts. According to Crosbie and I quote "A blind trust is useless when dealing with private companies." Yes so true is it not? Think about that and what Crosbie is actually saying. For sure if you are the Premier now you could not have interest in the Lower Churchill construction or shares in Emera - but if you are a private citizen you sure can. What's the time frame after having been a Premier  - one must wait as a private entrepreneur to buy interest in a private company set to develop the Lower Churchill as a "windfall"?

another installment around the corner.....