Rob Antle and Dave Cochrane - two CBC journalists - are to be commended for scratching the surface of PC hypocrisy. Their story today deals with promises made by the Tories in 2003 regarding electoral reform - and the promises broken regarding same. You can read their story HERE.
The bravado and chest-thumping of Danny Williams in 2002-2003 - came with it - promises to do many things differently than the Liberals.
Party leadership contests and the financing of same was absent in legislation and Williams promised to fix it. It did not get fixed.
This is a serious matter - no doubt - but pales in comparison to other promises of change made by then Opposition leader Danny Williams.
These two journalists have begun the process - I hope they continue the probe by reviewing promises on - energy, mining, forestry, and fishery. The people deserve to know - if not by the Tories or Opposition - then by the media - what exactly was promised on natural resource developments.
The information is all there - the only thing missing - the direct questions to the government on why they did not live up to the promises they made.
The commentary on the fishery, the paper mills, the mining sector, and energy was very aggressive and designed to make people believe that we would get more benefits under natural resource development than we would have under the Liberals.
The continued pouncing on the governing Liberals by Williams and rat-pack was specific and aimed toward the ear of the voter.
What should we have expected over the decade that followed 2003? How many long-term jobs from industrial development? How many projects where "construction" was not the objective - but permanent well paying trades positions was the objective?
The Tories have stripped away at the value of resources for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, they have ushered in closures of many industrial operations, failed to improve our place in Canada, and squandered billions of our oil revenues.
So hats off to Cochrane and Antle - let's keep the accountability coming.
I do have one small critique - you state that, "This is the party’s first contested leadership race in nearly two
decades, and the first chance for the Tories to play by the rules they
promised to implement while in opposition."
It's not a contested race yet.
Showing posts with label fish plants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fish plants. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 04, 2014
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Define Moratorium
Moratorium - A SUSPENSION of Activity
So that's where we are? A suspension of activity?
This suspension of activity has caused the loss of over 40,000 people from our province.
This suspension of activity has caused the death or near-death of some rural communities.
This suspension of activity has caused the loss of relationships and breakup of families.
This suspension of activity has caused the closure of secondary related business and industry.
Moratorium sounds so - clinical - and in some ways hopeful.
This word is not appropriate for the loss of our cod fishery/ground stocks.
This word does not do justice in defining the catastrophic damage caused due to "suspension" of activity.
Somehow Canada - Ottawa - the Feds - have convinced many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that it's our fault or at the least we are partially to blame.
Listening to Canada - or federal politicians from other provinces make this claim - is - what I can expect. Listening to our own politicians and experts making the same claim is sickening.
So how did Canadian and Newfoundland and Labrador politicians get away with the largest socio/enviro mess ever seen in this country?
1. Announce a moratorium in 1992 and claim that stocks will recover - should have been fixed by 2002. (DID NOT HAPPEN)
2. Announce programs to bridge the gap for fishermen, plantworkers, and communities (DID NOT begin to COVER LOSS)
3. Increase Fisheries Science (DID NOT HAPPEN)
4. Retirement Packages (DID NOT HAPPEN)
5. Then they slowly got us used to words like rationalization, down-sizing, and right-sizing - carefully explaining to us that the fishery was never meant to handle that many people. (BUNK)
6. From there we went to dumping FPI and eliminating marketing.
7. They closed one plant - most other plants and workers shut-up - they feared they would be next.
8. They have and continue to pit one community against another.
9. Downloading federal fishery support services to the province.
10. Pit offshore against inshore - recreational against commercial.
11. Use municipal politicians by offering pavement, arenas, tourism dollars, and water/sewer.
12. Commit to one study after another to delay any real action.
13. Pit urban residents against rural residents.
14. Promote and focus on non-renewable oil assets.
15. Above all - convince us - we were greedy, we took all the fish, and we destroyed ourselves.
16. Marginalize people like Gus Etchegary and Phil Earle.
17. Eliminate the people left with EI changes.
18. Give all fish to kingpins.
19. Over utilization of other stocks.
All of this while the FACT remains that management was the responsibility of the federal government. They were negligent. As a result we were harmed. Therefore we need compensation. 1 billion a year until the stocks return.
The Ministers of Fishery we have had federal and provincial are too gutless, ignorant, or complicit to do what is needed.
So that's where we are? A suspension of activity?
This suspension of activity has caused the loss of over 40,000 people from our province.
This suspension of activity has caused the death or near-death of some rural communities.
This suspension of activity has caused the loss of relationships and breakup of families.
This suspension of activity has caused the closure of secondary related business and industry.
Moratorium sounds so - clinical - and in some ways hopeful.
This word is not appropriate for the loss of our cod fishery/ground stocks.
This word does not do justice in defining the catastrophic damage caused due to "suspension" of activity.
Somehow Canada - Ottawa - the Feds - have convinced many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that it's our fault or at the least we are partially to blame.
Listening to Canada - or federal politicians from other provinces make this claim - is - what I can expect. Listening to our own politicians and experts making the same claim is sickening.
So how did Canadian and Newfoundland and Labrador politicians get away with the largest socio/enviro mess ever seen in this country?
1. Announce a moratorium in 1992 and claim that stocks will recover - should have been fixed by 2002. (DID NOT HAPPEN)
2. Announce programs to bridge the gap for fishermen, plantworkers, and communities (DID NOT begin to COVER LOSS)
3. Increase Fisheries Science (DID NOT HAPPEN)
4. Retirement Packages (DID NOT HAPPEN)
5. Then they slowly got us used to words like rationalization, down-sizing, and right-sizing - carefully explaining to us that the fishery was never meant to handle that many people. (BUNK)
6. From there we went to dumping FPI and eliminating marketing.
7. They closed one plant - most other plants and workers shut-up - they feared they would be next.
8. They have and continue to pit one community against another.
9. Downloading federal fishery support services to the province.
10. Pit offshore against inshore - recreational against commercial.
11. Use municipal politicians by offering pavement, arenas, tourism dollars, and water/sewer.
12. Commit to one study after another to delay any real action.
13. Pit urban residents against rural residents.
14. Promote and focus on non-renewable oil assets.
15. Above all - convince us - we were greedy, we took all the fish, and we destroyed ourselves.
16. Marginalize people like Gus Etchegary and Phil Earle.
17. Eliminate the people left with EI changes.
18. Give all fish to kingpins.
19. Over utilization of other stocks.
All of this while the FACT remains that management was the responsibility of the federal government. They were negligent. As a result we were harmed. Therefore we need compensation. 1 billion a year until the stocks return.
The Ministers of Fishery we have had federal and provincial are too gutless, ignorant, or complicit to do what is needed.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Clawing our way Forward - Co-op-eratively
Fisheries Policy in Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador is - to say the least - a failure.
1. Our ground fish stocks were destroyed by federal management.
2. We have lost 80,000 people from our province as a result.
3. We have lost dozens of communities as a result.
4. Continued decline of processing these natural resources.
5. Continued increase in Corporate desire to ship unprocessed catch.
The lobster fishermen in our province are moving forward with a "new" approach to their fishery by voting to form a Co-op. This in turn allows them more control with respect to pricing and offers them alternatives to the continued control of pricing by the buyers/processors.
Sounds great to me.
How about this?
If the species is processed in the province - let the harvesters and buyers/processors work it out while growing jobs for secondary added value.
The only time the government of Newfoundland and Labrador should consider a request to ship raw catch out of the province is when that request comes from a harvesters co-op.
If you want to be a processor - then process. Do not seek to become a harvester by proxy - while diminishing the real economic potential of value-added production.
The province should then reinstate a marketing arm that will help harvesters sell their catch to foreign markets - when processors have no interest in value-added production of the species.
The government of Newfoundland and Labrador have a responsibility to all people of the province and in the socio/economic well being of same. The corporate processors have responsibility to make as much profit as possible for the shareholders of their companies.
1. Our ground fish stocks were destroyed by federal management.
2. We have lost 80,000 people from our province as a result.
3. We have lost dozens of communities as a result.
4. Continued decline of processing these natural resources.
5. Continued increase in Corporate desire to ship unprocessed catch.
The lobster fishermen in our province are moving forward with a "new" approach to their fishery by voting to form a Co-op. This in turn allows them more control with respect to pricing and offers them alternatives to the continued control of pricing by the buyers/processors.
Sounds great to me.
How about this?
If the species is processed in the province - let the harvesters and buyers/processors work it out while growing jobs for secondary added value.
The only time the government of Newfoundland and Labrador should consider a request to ship raw catch out of the province is when that request comes from a harvesters co-op.
If you want to be a processor - then process. Do not seek to become a harvester by proxy - while diminishing the real economic potential of value-added production.
The province should then reinstate a marketing arm that will help harvesters sell their catch to foreign markets - when processors have no interest in value-added production of the species.
The government of Newfoundland and Labrador have a responsibility to all people of the province and in the socio/economic well being of same. The corporate processors have responsibility to make as much profit as possible for the shareholders of their companies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)