Congratulations Paradigm Hyperloop

Yesterday was a tremendously exciting day for some post-secondary students from Newfoundland and Labrador.

It was also a day that made our people truly proud of our youth and their innovation.

As their website describes: "We are an international team of students from Northeastern University and Memorial University of Newfoundland & Labrador who have come together to make the Hyperloop concept a reality. We aim to prove the viability of air based levitation for use in high-speed applications by building a prototype Hyperloop pod capable of reaching 200mph."

This SpaceX competition is a very big deal and young men and women from this province were in the thick of it.

The SpaceX founder is none other than Elon Musk - who you might recognize as the founder of Tesla Motors. Tesla was the first company to mass produce electric cars. Musk was on site for the final competition.

Our team, Paradigm Hyperloop, made the final 3 in the competition and they with 2 other teams one from Germany - the other from Switzerland - put their prototype through a "speed test". These three were chosen from 25 teams from around the world earlier.

Yesterday the speed test happened and Paradigm Hyperloop Pod hit a speed of 101 km/hr on a 1 mile vacuum track!

This beauty will no doubt play a role in the ever-changing, thirsty world for high-speed mass transportation. 

The technology is fascinating and solid.

For people with mechanical and design interests press here

Air bearings for low-friction levitation was exclusive to the Paradigm Hyperloop Pod - and clearly it worked.

The Warr team from Germany won the speed test hitting 200 km/hr - thereby taking first place in the competition.

The Paradigm pod was second in speed - but as with all innovation - they all finish first.

The dedication of these young people to compete at such a high level and perform under great pressure is remarkable and should be recognized.

It also should be noted that this team was very thrifty and managed costs well. While there were sponsors both at the public and private sector level - what they produced for so relatively little is amazing.

These young adults are to be congratulated for this outstanding achievement. They no doubt will move forward with successful careers.

As this post is dedicated to excellence in innovation - I won't sully it with politics.

Next post will deal with that. 

Poster scandal symptom of larger problem

The political signs in the news were and are a demonstration of expression by people who feel the Premier is not serving them well. This is a legitimate form of protest in our democracy. Considering the most recent CRA poll - the signs and their owners reflect the feelings of a significant number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Rather than attempt to deal with those legitimate feelings toward a newbie Premier and Cabinet - the government decided that removing the sight of a protest was far more important than dealing with it.

Many people in the province have been struggling to determine if the Premier and his government are deceptive, grossly incompetent or both.

What we do know is that:
1. Ed Martin was given a very questionable and costly severance package,
2. the Nalcor Board went rogue and government did nothing to protect us,
3. The Muskrat Falls debacle continues,
4. The Government missed significant contract deadlines to begin negotiations with two significant Unions,
5. Delivered a budget completely contrary to the election promises (claiming ignorance of the scale of the financial mess left by the PC's).

Each of these topics deserve their own attention and I will - as one citizen - do my part and post separately on each one.

For now I will focus on the sign issue.

What makes this so relevant is the attempt by government to cover-up involvement by a staffer in the Premier's Office to thwart democratic expression and what is a growing pattern of deception, incompetence or both.

The CBC uncovered the fact that the Communications Director for the Premier, Nancy O'Connor, emailed the Memorial University for 3 reasons:

1. She wanted to know who owned poles on the parkway,
2. If the University owned the poles did they have a policy about posters on them, and
3 If the policy was no posters allowed - would they take them down.

Nancy O'Connor was clearly looking for a way to remove the signs calling for the Premier's resignation.
Nancy O'Connor was not seeking to police MU on its policies on campus.
Nancy O'Connor does not know the most basic information about our electrical supply system.
Nancy O'Connor is either incompetent or dismissive regarding the very basics of democracy.
Nancy O'Connor placed a priority on this minor albeit politically annoying issue when compared with the issues that generated the poster campaign.

The priority to protect her boss from having to see his political mugshot on the way to work is not the action of a competent communications "expert". This in part (albeit a hidden one until yesterday) is what in part caused the sign scandal.

O'Connor's email was clear and it was an attempt to have political expression quashed.
The Minister of Transportation and Works is on the record as saying it was not his decision to remove the signs and if it were it may very well have been a different decision.
So while the Minister is concerned about the actions of a worker conducting unacceptable "operational" tasks - the Premier's Director of Communication was out attempting to achieve the same result.

The Premier in a scrum yesterday on this issue answered the first question by stating the actions of Nancy O'Connor "...it really wasn't about taking the posters down."
The public are left again asking the question incompetence or deception?
O'Connor's email was clear - she was seeking a way to have the posters removed.

Then the Premier said the call (email) of O'Connor "that would be expected of someone working in the Premier's Office or a Director of Communications simply to get some clarification on what the policy was around those posters." Here - once again - the public are left to ask incompetence or lies? In a government where the overriding belief is supposed to be supportive of free political expression as part of democracy - a Communications Director for the Premier would not be asking the University about it's poster policies.

The next question and answer is telling. The Premier was asked why he did not tell the public about this when asked about it three weeks ago. The Premier responded, "The question was about taking down those posters. There was no direction given from the Premier's Office in any way shape or form in taking down those policies (not a typo) ."

This is - at best - obfuscation. Let's review the actual body of the email from Nancy O'Connor to the University "Telling DB to resign ... Are these poles belonging to MUN or Power? And are ppl allowed to put posters on them? If not can someone take them down?"

The request was made by Nancy O'Connor to "take them down". The fact that she was unsuccessful as she was barking up the wrong pole owner and trivializing free expression only demonstrates her ignorance not her intent. The fact that she was unsuccessful does not remove the Premier's Office from the same thinking and actions used by somebody working for the Department of Transportation and Works.  

Lastly the Telegram's James McLeod asked the logical question after the Premier stated earlier that O'Conner's call (email) "...it really wasn't about taking the posters down". He asked "but she did ask to take these posters down?" The Premier responded "if indeed the policy was that they were allowed to be there - the answer came back and said this was not a contradiction or indeed there was no policy around this they were allowed to be there."

It clearly was about taking the posters down if O'Connor could get another party to do it. To say it was not about taking the posters down is a deceptive comment. The fact that O'Connor spent time on a Sunday to find someway to take the posters down and was unsuccessful leads the mind to ask about the coincidence that an unknown person in the Department of Transportation and works was thinking the same political way on that Sunday.

This is what makes this story go far beyond posters or signs. It adds to a pattern of incompetence or deception or both. This is what is driving the polls for the Liberals and the Premier off a cliff.

I would need to hear the response from the University to determine if Nancy O'Connor found out from them that not only did they not own the poles but that the real owner allows posters. If the response did not state this as a fact - how did O'Connor ever determine that posters were allowed on the poles. Did O'Conner ever ask the city? Newfoundland Power? Nalcor? Ministers?

Let's imagine for a moment that MU owned the poles and had a policy of no posters - is it really the job of the Premier's Office to police MU to ensure it's following its poster rules? Is that the priority? Of course not - instead it looks like the work of a rookie zealous party partisan. 

If a manager in the Department of Works and Services got word that the Premier's Office were trying to find a way to remove posters from utility poles - perhaps they decided they were assisting the Premier's Office in achieving its objective.

I repeat from yesterday, if Nancy O'Connor - who has stated experience in communications regarding Nalcor and Muskrat Falls - does not know who owns utility poles and has no resources to find out other than a University colleague - she should be fired. In a Telegram story this morning one of the people involved in the poster campaign said “We didn’t go out and do this willy nilly. We actually read the municipal guidelines and made sure what we were doing was not illegal,” (emphasis added)  Instead we watch a Premier protecting a senior staffer in the same way he protected Ed Martin and the former Board until the contract and severance package became public.

One more line of questions: why did this reportedly seasoned communications professional concentrate on these posters on a Sunday? Did the Chief of Staff give her a call? Did anybody encourage her to take on this useless waste of time? Perhaps I am being harsh and somebody else should be fired. Perhaps this pattern of behavior is not coming from the Director of Communications - maybe it's higher up.








 

Cathy Bennett fails 1st Transparency Test

The Liberal leadership has brought a barrage of commitments from all candidates regarding openness, transparency, and accountability. This is a great thing.

The candidate who has been on the firing line the most on this issue is Cathy Bennett. Rightly - other Liberal hopefuls have suggested her work as the Chair of Nalcor was wrought with secrecy and during a time when government was shutting information doors.

Ms. Bennett says she was opposed to Bill 29 and determined to open the information lines to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

She was tested the other night and failed.

The debate at Memorial University was public. The exchanges were heated. Leadership was on the line.

We know that Cathy Bennett said something to Danny Dumaresque immediately following the debate.

We know that Cathy Bennett apologized to Danny Dumaresque for the comment.

Considering this was a public forum being held as part of a process to choose a leader of the Liberals; who may well go on to be Premier - we should know what Cathy Bennett said to Danny Dumaresque.

The comment may have been made at the heat of the moment - but we can anticipate that a Premier of a Province may have many such moments when dealing with Ottawa, provincial colleagues, executives of companies, union representatives, or citizens. We need to know what happens to Cathy Bennett when she is challenged. We need to know how she conducts herself in these circumstances.

The fact that Cathy Bennett will not tell us - means her transparency will be based on what she thinks we have a right or need to know. That's exactly what we have now.

Cathy Bennett has failed her first transparency test.

The Race to Save Canada from its CEO

It's hard to tell just how much damage Harper can do over the next three years.

After the federal election - May of 2011 - Harper said the following: “One thing I’ve learned in this business is that surprises are generally not well-received by the public, and so we intend to move forward with what Canadians understand about us and I think what they’re more and more comfortable with”.


Read and reread the quote.

Our Prime Minister is an educated man and he understands fully the statements he makes.

I would like a few English professors to interpret this quote.

What it means to me is Harper believes he is an all powerful CEO of a privately held major corporation.

What it means to me is Harper does not understand he is running a country.

What it means to me is that the shareholders of the company he believes he runs are not Canadian.

What it means to me is that Harper believes "voters" understood him and his ilk.

What it means to me is that Harper fully plans to make us comfortable with his agenda.

What it means to me is that Canada will not be recognizable when he's finished.

What it means to me is that - the Race is On to Save Canada - and it had better happen before too many policies are virtually irreversible.

What is particularly scary about Harper is that not one Progressive within Conservative rank and file MP's has crossed the floor.

He was raised as an adult by ideology that is foreign to most Canadians and his role is to deliver this country up to particular global entities. 

Liberal and NDP members in the Commons had better do more than posturing.

Canadians had better do more than gasp.

Our PM lies with ease, deceives at his pleasure, and rules through intimidation.

Our laws mean nothing to him and he believes he is entitled to secrecy whenever he chooses.

He is not a man of science but is rather a man of ideological zealotry. Canada did not suit his beliefs - so he will change it.

Hi is a very dangerous person and he happens to be the Prime Minister.

Award winning Journalists and the Fighting Dunderdale Government

Oh my - how do I say this politely? What a joke! Wait now let me say it again. What a joke!

Just a few days ago the CBC, and the Telegram ran stories about our award winning journalists. Topping that is Tom Marshall expressing delight that Kathy Dunderdale picked the winning horse in the Federal election - almost at a level of mind-reading genius. (more on that in next post)


With all the talent and genius in this province at the media and political level - perhaps one or all of them could show real interest in the real issues and trouble brewing around us.


Dunderdale is celebrating the potential loan guarantee for a Lower Churchill development that will be the worst resource deal in our history - should it proceed and the media is back slapping each other for the weather turmoil that unfortunately wrecked some communities and lives.


Meanwhile Hydro-Quebec carries on the plunder and the "in your face" disregard for our boundaries or our rivers. The Quebec owned utility has just published it's sustainability report for 2010 - and it demonstrates for all those willing to open their eyes - unplug their partisan ears - and open their PC mouths - that our province is being treated like dirt. We are ignored, ridiculed, and politically abused.


Please go the the following link (HERE) and notice the maps (page 2-3) before you in this 2010 report. Please note the boundaries on this official government document and please note the Romaine River which Quebec is now developing for its own use and profit.


Now try to sit there as a Newfoundlander and Labradorian or an aboriginal person and not ask yourself - are we fools? Where are the so-called award winning journalists and where are the fighting Newfoundland and Labrador politicians?


The media in our province is reporting - not investigating and they are through their own fault or that of assignment editors refusing to cover the absolute destruction of our province and its resources. The Dunderdale government says we must export power so the debate (if any) is whether or not to pump it out through Quebec or Nova Scotia. The debate should have always been about whether to export or not - and then go into the other areas of discussion.


So we are avoiding Quebec - so Kathy says and the media dutifully report - and if it costs us our future - so be it. We will win - Quebec will lose - we are advised. Not only is that not true - it gets worse when you see what Dunderdale and Cabinet are not taking on. We will lose our Labrador borders to Quebec - unless we fight to protect them. We have already conceded the Romaine River, on our way to conceding Old Harry, and the Romaine Caribou Herd. What's next? Oh our children will certainly find out as they realize that yet again inept politicians and either directed or disinterested (journalists) reporters have sold us up and down the river.


By the way where are the intellectual voices of our university professors or historians? Shame on us all!

I thought we understood "squatters rights".

And for those politicians, media, and lazy arses that continue to say - it does not matter - WE know the difference. This sustainability report IS an official government document and is viewed worldwide. It is viewed by large industrial companies and investors. Further it's a little late for the Romaine River right?

Student Power - Will this be the fix for Canada?

I was moved yesterday as I watched the YouTube video of students at Memorial University celebrating Democracy and promising to be a real part of it going forward.

If you too are not moved by what you see - you have become too partisan and are putting party ahead of our children and their future.

The Vote Mob going on in the Country spurred on by Newfoundland and Labrador's own Rick Mercer is engaging youth for the first time.

It is not there to patronize them under something called a "youth wing". These young people are the future - they are the present and perhaps we should have a "middle-age wing" instead of the same old same old running the political parties in Canada.

Our federation is broken and the only fix may be the youth of our Country. The untarnished, un-lobbied, un-purchased, with thinking heads not nodding heads are the only solution to the regeneration of Canada and all Provinces and Territories.

In Newfoundland and Labrador recycling politicians is the only "green" program effectively in practice and the same old tired voices with failed policies are once again at the political trough seeking more of our tax dollars to employ them.

The sad reality is - that despite the brains and energy available to us - embodied in universities, colleges, and low-paying jobs - we simply ignore them in an attempt for the establishment to gain and retain power.

Yesterday - I watched a candidates "debate" on our local cable station. One of them - Jerry Byrne - Conservative St. John's East campaigns on the slogan of bringing renewal to Ottawa. Renewal? I think not as he read prepared statement after prepared statement - nervously and certainly without much passion. Why? Because it was the same old Conservative rhetoric - need a majority for security and stability - crime - guns - tax blah blah blah. Nothing from his own mouth and barely competent in repeating the mantra.

Hard to think renewal when one turns on the TV or looks at signs on the highway and sees Vote Ottenheimer, Manning, or Sullivan.

Maybe the youth have finally had enough - particularly when the decisions we make today - they pay for tomorrow. Maybe they see what many of us don't - that if real renewal does not occur this Country will fall apart. Harper scare mongers the public with Quebec sovereignty. That is not the real fear Mr. Harper - the real fear is present in all regions - the federation no longer works. Duceppe and Quebec just get it.

Another persistent annoyance the Canadian youth can eliminate - is the sight of middle-aged men - with chests puffed out excited like a child at Christmas - why? Because Stephen Harper is standing next to them - or mentions their name - or shakes their hand in front of a camera. The site of grown women - old enough to know the difference - in reverence of a leader (Harper) - who lies and cheats for power and a vote. A man who punishes a woman (Guergis) by association.

I - for one -will promote the takeover of Canada by youth - now! Go students Go - and don't stop until the job is done. Eliminate the failure, the prostitution of public policy, the back slapping ignorant candidates who offer nothing more than partisan tripe. These adults who have failed you in the past and believe they are the only ones with a brain in a population full of underutilized young people.

In this election - give the politicians, media, and pundits everything they do not expect. Use twitter and facebook to fool the pollsters and make them take notice.

I surrender to youth happily and anticipate the return of democracy to our Country.

Go Students Go

Memorial University Students send a message to Politicians - Heed Them!

Watch Memorial Students - GO GO GO students - Make a difference - Change your Country - Own your Future.

Tell these political opportunists that you make a difference and the decisions they make AFFECT you.

What does Democracy Look like? 

WATCH HERE