There is no cost greater than a human life. This blog does not attempt to trivialize any loss of life resulting from the terrible hurricanes that have hit countries and are about to hit others.
Regarding the financial losses of a Hurricane such as Harvey and Irma currently and like Katrina in 2005 - we can make comparisons to our ongoing Harvey called Muskrat. Although it is man-made - the financial devastation will be similar.
Let's look at it this way. The cost to Texas from Harvey is the same as the cost of Hurricane Muskrat. The difference is we will experience this type of financial disaster year over year for the next 25 years.
Now the big question - who's going to help us?
Let me put this in perspective. There are 29 million people living in Texas and the government has said the disaster could cost $150 billion. That works out to equal $5200 per person.
There are 529,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador - let's say Muskrat costs $13 billion - this works out to $25,000 per person. When this amount is attributed to ratepayers then the amount could be $68,000 per person.
That's 13 Harvey like equivalencies already.
Now envision this comparable:
The economy of Texas is the second largest in the United States. It has a gross state product of $1.616 trillion (2016),[10] the second largest in the U.S. As of 2015, Texas is home to six of the top 50 companies on the Fortune 500 list and 51 overall (third most after New York and California).[11] In 2012, Texas grossed more than $264.7 billion a year in exports—more than exports of California ($161.9 billion) and New York ($81.4 billion) combined.[12][13][14]
As a sovereign country (2016), Texas would be the 10th largest economy in the world by GDP (ahead of South Korea and Canada).[15] Texas's household income
was $48,259 in 2010 ranking 25th in the nation. The state debt in 2012
was calculated to be $121.7 billion, or $7,400 per taxpayer.[16] Texas has the second largest population in the country after California.
Newfoundland and Labrador has a GDP of $25 Billion and is falling. We are the home of 0 Fortune 500 companies. The economy of Texas is larger than that of Canada - so where would we sit? The unemployment rate in Texas moves between 4-5% while in Newfoundland and Labrador it sits between 14-16%. Texas tops the USA in population growth regularly while Newfoundland and Labrador continues to lose people with projections of losing another 40,000 over the Muskrat decades. On top of the Muskrat billions on the ratepayers backs - we have a provincial debt of about $23,000 per person while Texas shows up at $7400 per person. If we lose another 40,000 people and while increasing the percentage of an aging population - the remaining ratepayers could be up to $82,000 per person and the taxpayers remaining could increase each persons share of provincial debt by another $5000.
Now back to the "big" question - who is going to help us?
In the case of wealthy Texas - who by the way is the leader in medically uninsured people and whose leaders want to eliminate the affordable care act. A state which glorifies the "dog eat dog" far right economic system - is seeking funds and assistance from all over - particularly from socially democratic Canada and all kind and caring people. This might be a donation to the Red Cross or it could be the assistance from disaster relief personal. Insurance will cover another fair chunk of the $180 billion in losses and another chunk will be covered by the federal government.
Texas is able to afford it's own provision of essentials - including state assistance for income, housing, and food. They will however seek to do this through contributions from the private sector, caring individuals, and other states and countries. They will seek to minimize the costs to their own taxpayers. They don't like tax in Texas so they will try to mitigate their own human responsibility.
Meanwhile in Newfoundland and Labrador - we have nobody to help with Muskrat - its all on us. It is a man-made hurricane with no relief in sight - lest we sell off something else cheap - like Gull Island. That then ruins another 2 generations.
I hope that by comparing hurricanes to Muskrat - and by saying we will experience - per-capita - the costs of Hurricane Harvey over and over again like Muskrat (groundhog) Day for the next 25 years - that perhaps a few more people will get the seriousness of our mess.
At the start of the this post - I removed the element of human loss - as experienced by Texas and other hurricanes in the past - I must add that our human loss could be far greater - IF - the North Spur fails.
I bet many good people of Newfoundland and Labrador have already contributed to help people in Texas.
Unfortunately - the path we are on - there will be no people left in our place. Unfortunately our children and grandchildren will be lost to another province or country.
The very first thing that must happen is Muskrat must stop. A forensic audit must be completed immediately to properly assess what options we may have on this fiasco of a project. We must recognize our debt crisis and unsustainable spending habits. We need to listen to people who have great ideas on how to spend less but deliver better services. We must virtually eliminate waste in our public institutions and eliminate rewarding incompetence - through bonuses or packages.
Our politicians who rely on continued electoral success as a career - should be unceremoniously fired at the ballot box and we must try to attract those truly interested in advancing our society as a contribution.
We need to change now or face our own extinction.
Showing posts with label muskrat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label muskrat. Show all posts
Thursday, September 07, 2017
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
The chickens ate the fox...
Now that we have seen the first moves of Nalcor's new CEO - underwhelmed seems an appropriate reaction.
Stan Marshall the successful head of regulated private utilities has either lost his touch or has been directed to stay the course.
Ed Martin was not the only executive responsible for the complete failure of our corporation. Martin however appears to be the only casualty.
We have already been told that Marshall will carry on with Muskrat without real justification or real numbers relative to cancel or go on the project.
The savvy that the former head of Fortis demonstrated at the helm of the private utility is absent now.
One very telling comment came during a media event last week when Marshall was responding to a question regarding potential privatization of the Crown Corporation. He stated "The sheer fact that I'm in my role means it can't be done."
In a world of real journalism this would have been like a red flag to a bull. This would have caused a flurry of questions similar to a nor'easter - fast furious and fierce. Here in Newfoundland and Labrador progressive natural resource deals were placed on the endangered list starting with the Upper Churchill deal - and competence on the subject from our "journalists" has been extinct for decades.
There is no excuse for missing this. We must be able to have some faith in the news media - but we can't. If we are relying on them to keep their eye on the ball - we have lost the game before we played.
What was Stan Marshall saying? He is in a conflict? What role? What can't be done? What prevents him from considering that option?
As all of you know I am the champion of keeping Nalcor/Hydro Crown - but if what Marshall says means what I think it does - it would also prevent the company from looking at the reverse - nationalizing Newfoundland power. It would also prevent Nalcor from becoming aggressive with other potential opportunities. Ones that could make us money.
Worse than all of this - in a round about way - was Marshall indicating that the conflict of interest provisions applicable to the former CEO of Nalcor's contract do not exist in his?
If this is the case and Marshall refuses to clean up the conflict - he too should be replaced.
Enough already. Show us Marshall's contract - what are you hiding now?
MacDonald Tobin Williams - the three amigos - whose turn is it this time?
Stan Marshall the successful head of regulated private utilities has either lost his touch or has been directed to stay the course.
Ed Martin was not the only executive responsible for the complete failure of our corporation. Martin however appears to be the only casualty.
We have already been told that Marshall will carry on with Muskrat without real justification or real numbers relative to cancel or go on the project.
The savvy that the former head of Fortis demonstrated at the helm of the private utility is absent now.
One very telling comment came during a media event last week when Marshall was responding to a question regarding potential privatization of the Crown Corporation. He stated "The sheer fact that I'm in my role means it can't be done."
In a world of real journalism this would have been like a red flag to a bull. This would have caused a flurry of questions similar to a nor'easter - fast furious and fierce. Here in Newfoundland and Labrador progressive natural resource deals were placed on the endangered list starting with the Upper Churchill deal - and competence on the subject from our "journalists" has been extinct for decades.
There is no excuse for missing this. We must be able to have some faith in the news media - but we can't. If we are relying on them to keep their eye on the ball - we have lost the game before we played.
What was Stan Marshall saying? He is in a conflict? What role? What can't be done? What prevents him from considering that option?
As all of you know I am the champion of keeping Nalcor/Hydro Crown - but if what Marshall says means what I think it does - it would also prevent the company from looking at the reverse - nationalizing Newfoundland power. It would also prevent Nalcor from becoming aggressive with other potential opportunities. Ones that could make us money.
Worse than all of this - in a round about way - was Marshall indicating that the conflict of interest provisions applicable to the former CEO of Nalcor's contract do not exist in his?
If this is the case and Marshall refuses to clean up the conflict - he too should be replaced.
Enough already. Show us Marshall's contract - what are you hiding now?
MacDonald Tobin Williams - the three amigos - whose turn is it this time?
Friday, May 01, 2015
Tory Flip-Flop on long-term care
Budget 2015 is an embarrassment. It is an acknowledgement of abject failure in the running of provincial finances.
The Tories just love to remind people regularly about the past Liberal governments and point to this and that.
So for the next week or so I will blog on what the PC's said when in Opposition. It will of course be relevant to this years budget.
Budget 2003 Loyola Sullivan expressed this point of view:
Mr. Speaker, when the government brought down its election budget just two weeks ago, they justified quadrupling the deficit and increasing the Province's debt to well over $11 billion by saying they were only listening to the will of the people.
In that same breath, the Minister of Finance said she plans to privatize the provision of long-term care in Corner Brook Mr. Speaker, the Romanow Commission into Canada's health care system recently reported that the overwhelming majority of Canadians do not want a private health care system. My question for the Premier is this: Why is it that his government is prepared to listen to the people in order to justify its election budget, but is not prepared to listen to the people when it comes to privatizing health care? Could it be that government is only interested in listening to the people when it suits their political agenda? (emphasis added)
Good question Minister Sullivan. Now let's see if we can get Steve Kent or the Premier to answer it.
Let's all remember that this current government has enjoyed a wealth of revenues from oil and minerals that previous governments did not have. Let's all remember the majority of that wealth came from deals made by the previous Liberal administration.
This budget must be defeated.
The Tories just love to remind people regularly about the past Liberal governments and point to this and that.
So for the next week or so I will blog on what the PC's said when in Opposition. It will of course be relevant to this years budget.
Budget 2003 Loyola Sullivan expressed this point of view:
Mr. Speaker, when the government brought down its election budget just two weeks ago, they justified quadrupling the deficit and increasing the Province's debt to well over $11 billion by saying they were only listening to the will of the people.
In that same breath, the Minister of Finance said she plans to privatize the provision of long-term care in Corner Brook Mr. Speaker, the Romanow Commission into Canada's health care system recently reported that the overwhelming majority of Canadians do not want a private health care system. My question for the Premier is this: Why is it that his government is prepared to listen to the people in order to justify its election budget, but is not prepared to listen to the people when it comes to privatizing health care? Could it be that government is only interested in listening to the people when it suits their political agenda? (emphasis added)
Good question Minister Sullivan. Now let's see if we can get Steve Kent or the Premier to answer it.
Let's all remember that this current government has enjoyed a wealth of revenues from oil and minerals that previous governments did not have. Let's all remember the majority of that wealth came from deals made by the previous Liberal administration.
This budget must be defeated.
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Minister Hutchings unwittingly questions Muskrat
In a VOCM story today Minister Hutchings is responding to Federal Minister Gail Shea regarding the shrimp quota disaster.
As is usually the case from this PC Government the Minister talks about how good we are doing and what good confederation children we are. In part he says:
...in 2007 there were 187 licensed fish plants; today there are 86, and at the peak in the '80s there were 250. He says the province has stepped in with the fisheries loan guarantee program and a host of others to give harvesters the ability to access capital or to buy out, all of which is consolidation and rationalization.
Yes there we have it. So in short - Look at us - we have downsized, cut, rationalized and sold out - so why can't we have more shrimp?
So this province has lost 164 fish plants, 2 pulp and paper mills, several mines and recently a shoe factory - we need more power? So this province has lost 50,000 people but we need more power? Our population has aged with many of our young families moving to other provinces and countries for work and we need more power for the seniors left behind? All of our houses are modern and energy efficient as are the appliances in them - so we need more power?
Better yet Hutchings alludes to even more rationalization meaning less fish plants - and we need more power?
Muskrat = somebody needs more money and they'll have the suckers of Newfoundland and Labrador pay for it.
Hutchings has no problem speaking confidently about rationalization - he just has a problem being rational. Kindly stop the BS - and while your at it - if you are seeking re-election you might want to tone down the - we are going to shut-down things to do better thing.
As is usually the case from this PC Government the Minister talks about how good we are doing and what good confederation children we are. In part he says:
...in 2007 there were 187 licensed fish plants; today there are 86, and at the peak in the '80s there were 250. He says the province has stepped in with the fisheries loan guarantee program and a host of others to give harvesters the ability to access capital or to buy out, all of which is consolidation and rationalization.
Yes there we have it. So in short - Look at us - we have downsized, cut, rationalized and sold out - so why can't we have more shrimp?
So this province has lost 164 fish plants, 2 pulp and paper mills, several mines and recently a shoe factory - we need more power? So this province has lost 50,000 people but we need more power? Our population has aged with many of our young families moving to other provinces and countries for work and we need more power for the seniors left behind? All of our houses are modern and energy efficient as are the appliances in them - so we need more power?
Better yet Hutchings alludes to even more rationalization meaning less fish plants - and we need more power?
Muskrat = somebody needs more money and they'll have the suckers of Newfoundland and Labrador pay for it.
Hutchings has no problem speaking confidently about rationalization - he just has a problem being rational. Kindly stop the BS - and while your at it - if you are seeking re-election you might want to tone down the - we are going to shut-down things to do better thing.
Wednesday, July 02, 2014
Muskrat - Incompetence? Corruption? Deliberate lies?
Are you willing to read a paragraph to protect your children and grandchildren?
As Tory MHA's current and past line up to run for the Party leadership remember this: They were all part of the Muskrat fiasco.
Please read an excerpt from an article in the Business Excellence Magazine written late last year.
The most recent project to be completed was the $5 billion Eastmain 1A-Sarcelle-Rupert project, in the James Bay area. It was launched in 2007 with approval to build the Eastmain-1-A and Sarcelle powerhouses and divert part of the Rupert River's flow. The diversion began in 2009, two of the three generating units at Eastmain-1-A powerhouse were commissioned in 2011, the third in January 2012. The first generating unit at Sarcelle powerhouse was commissioned in April 2013 and the two other units have now come on line. “From an environmental and logistic standpoint it was the most challenging project in the history of Hydro-Québec,” he says. “It covers an area the size of some European countries but we were able to bring it in on time and a little under budget so we are very proud of that result.”
We need an investigation to determine what caused the unacceptable overruns in the Muskrat Falls project. We need the senior management of Nalcor to resign. We need to hold this government accountable now.
Ed Martin steps to a mic - declares an 800 million overrun - therefore we the people will pay more - then walks back to his very lucrative job.
Fire Ed Martin and the senior management involved in this project.We don't pay them millions a year to be wrong.
Fire the Tories - insist that they call an election now.
Find out how the external expertise we used to confirm the bad numbers - are themselves in a mess with overruns.
Don't turn away from this robbing of the public purse. Look it square in the eyes. Tell Tom Marshall, John Ottenheimer, Paul Davis, and Steve Kent that we no longer wish to be bamboozled. Show them the door and then see if there is a reason for them to lose their pensionable benefits.
As Tory MHA's current and past line up to run for the Party leadership remember this: They were all part of the Muskrat fiasco.
Please read an excerpt from an article in the Business Excellence Magazine written late last year.
The most recent project to be completed was the $5 billion Eastmain 1A-Sarcelle-Rupert project, in the James Bay area. It was launched in 2007 with approval to build the Eastmain-1-A and Sarcelle powerhouses and divert part of the Rupert River's flow. The diversion began in 2009, two of the three generating units at Eastmain-1-A powerhouse were commissioned in 2011, the third in January 2012. The first generating unit at Sarcelle powerhouse was commissioned in April 2013 and the two other units have now come on line. “From an environmental and logistic standpoint it was the most challenging project in the history of Hydro-Québec,” he says. “It covers an area the size of some European countries but we were able to bring it in on time and a little under budget so we are very proud of that result.”
We need an investigation to determine what caused the unacceptable overruns in the Muskrat Falls project. We need the senior management of Nalcor to resign. We need to hold this government accountable now.
Ed Martin steps to a mic - declares an 800 million overrun - therefore we the people will pay more - then walks back to his very lucrative job.
Fire Ed Martin and the senior management involved in this project.We don't pay them millions a year to be wrong.
Fire the Tories - insist that they call an election now.
Find out how the external expertise we used to confirm the bad numbers - are themselves in a mess with overruns.
Don't turn away from this robbing of the public purse. Look it square in the eyes. Tell Tom Marshall, John Ottenheimer, Paul Davis, and Steve Kent that we no longer wish to be bamboozled. Show them the door and then see if there is a reason for them to lose their pensionable benefits.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Emera Stock past five days - upwardly mobile
Look at the Pretty Picture - Kathy Dunderdale says we should all be happy...Yay
Emera Stock: look at what happens on yesterday - somebody is happy.
and further:
Look at this analysis as to why Emera is the place to plant your money. Yay...
Emera Stock: look at what happens on yesterday - somebody is happy.
Look at this analysis as to why Emera is the place to plant your money. Yay...
Thursday, December 05, 2013
Cool Hand Luke meets Premier Dunderdale
Premier Dunderdale was faced with yet another bad polling result yesterday - in the latest quarterly CRA poll.
The polls are telling them that people do not support their government, it's direction, it's approach or her leadership.
The change in party support is virtually within the margin of error.
The Premier has decided that it has nothing to do with the policies or direction of government - rather it's how they brag about their achievements.
In this respect there are a few problems with the Dunderdale assessment.
1. Essentially it means the voting public must be stupid - we just don't get it. We are unable to see all the great things around us - unless of course the right marketing agency or personnel tell us in simpler - more understandable terms.
2. The Dunderdale government has spent untold fortunes advertising and a use of tremendous human resources to "message us".
3. The Dunderdale government has filled all social media and dominated talk shows to "message us".
4. The Premier feels that more fuzzy "home heating" like promotion may warm the cockles of our feeling cold Tory hearts.
5. Refusal to accept that certainly some - if not all - of the public dissatisfaction is because we do understand what they are doing.
We all should be very wary of what this government may do next. They may go on a spending spree filling our homes with flyers, surveys, and broadcast and print media advertising.
So - based on what the Premier said we should expect the following:
1. No change whatsoever in policy.
2. An elimination of participating in talk shows.
3. All members of the PC caucus will be off Twitter and Facebook.
4. Inundation of advertising and promotional material to brainwash us into seeing the light.
5. Re announcing funding initiatives 6 times over instead of 3.
The little (margin of error) bump in the polls is what she needed to satisfy her docile caucus and hang on to her job for another 3 months.
Her advisor (Ross Reid) must of helped to come up with an excuse for their continued failure in the polls. (communication)
The Premier's message to us is; what we've got here is a failure to communicate.
No - Warden Dunderdale - I will not get used to wearing the PC Chains of resource giveaways and failed policy - not to mention arrogance.
The polls are telling them that people do not support their government, it's direction, it's approach or her leadership.
The change in party support is virtually within the margin of error.
The Premier has decided that it has nothing to do with the policies or direction of government - rather it's how they brag about their achievements.
In this respect there are a few problems with the Dunderdale assessment.
1. Essentially it means the voting public must be stupid - we just don't get it. We are unable to see all the great things around us - unless of course the right marketing agency or personnel tell us in simpler - more understandable terms.
2. The Dunderdale government has spent untold fortunes advertising and a use of tremendous human resources to "message us".
3. The Dunderdale government has filled all social media and dominated talk shows to "message us".
4. The Premier feels that more fuzzy "home heating" like promotion may warm the cockles of our feeling cold Tory hearts.
5. Refusal to accept that certainly some - if not all - of the public dissatisfaction is because we do understand what they are doing.
We all should be very wary of what this government may do next. They may go on a spending spree filling our homes with flyers, surveys, and broadcast and print media advertising.
So - based on what the Premier said we should expect the following:
1. No change whatsoever in policy.
2. An elimination of participating in talk shows.
3. All members of the PC caucus will be off Twitter and Facebook.
4. Inundation of advertising and promotional material to brainwash us into seeing the light.
5. Re announcing funding initiatives 6 times over instead of 3.
The little (margin of error) bump in the polls is what she needed to satisfy her docile caucus and hang on to her job for another 3 months.
Her advisor (Ross Reid) must of helped to come up with an excuse for their continued failure in the polls. (communication)
The Premier's message to us is; what we've got here is a failure to communicate.
No - Warden Dunderdale - I will not get used to wearing the PC Chains of resource giveaways and failed policy - not to mention arrogance.
Friday, July 26, 2013
What was John Ottenheimer talking about?
Okay let's go a step further.
After the signing of the 1999 GWAC agreement between CFLCo - which was refused release by government at the time for: "Commercial agreements such as those among Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, CF(L)Co and Hydro-Quebec are confidential. If released, they could compromise ongoing negotiations between Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Hydro-Quebec related to the Gull Island development. Commercial agreements of this magnitude cannot be negotiated in public."
Then Minister Paul Dicks alluded to John Ottenheimer's concerns which were:
"It is most inaccurate for Mr. Ottenheimer to suggest that the new Shareholders’ Agreement gives control to Hydro-Quebec, "Mr. Dicks said. "If Mr. Ottenheimer had inquired, he would have found out that Hydro-Quebec previously had many of these rights under previous contractual agreements and the laws of the Canadian Business Corporations’ Act. The Shareholders’ Agreement, which was executed in 1999, serves to recognize many of these rights that were already held by Hydro-Quebec."
Oh yes - the entire Tory caucus had issues with this GWAC/Shareholders Agreement. They had issues regarding control of our energy future under this 1999 agreement.
Dicks also said: there is no circumstance where Hydro-Quebec could gain control over CF(L)Co or dilute Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro’s ownership interest from the current 65.8 per cent.
Yup - that's true but the concern was of management control not actual ownership.
Where have all those concerns gone?
What did Quebec get by providing and additional 2 billion dollars of revenue for our hydro - over the life of the contract? What did they get.
After the signing of the 1999 GWAC agreement between CFLCo - which was refused release by government at the time for: "Commercial agreements such as those among Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, CF(L)Co and Hydro-Quebec are confidential. If released, they could compromise ongoing negotiations between Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Hydro-Quebec related to the Gull Island development. Commercial agreements of this magnitude cannot be negotiated in public."
Then Minister Paul Dicks alluded to John Ottenheimer's concerns which were:
"It is most inaccurate for Mr. Ottenheimer to suggest that the new Shareholders’ Agreement gives control to Hydro-Quebec, "Mr. Dicks said. "If Mr. Ottenheimer had inquired, he would have found out that Hydro-Quebec previously had many of these rights under previous contractual agreements and the laws of the Canadian Business Corporations’ Act. The Shareholders’ Agreement, which was executed in 1999, serves to recognize many of these rights that were already held by Hydro-Quebec."
Oh yes - the entire Tory caucus had issues with this GWAC/Shareholders Agreement. They had issues regarding control of our energy future under this 1999 agreement.
Dicks also said: there is no circumstance where Hydro-Quebec could gain control over CF(L)Co or dilute Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro’s ownership interest from the current 65.8 per cent.
Yup - that's true but the concern was of management control not actual ownership.
Where have all those concerns gone?
What did Quebec get by providing and additional 2 billion dollars of revenue for our hydro - over the life of the contract? What did they get.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Doing Emera Deal will spell disaster in 2041
The following is an exchange in the House of Assembly on Tuesday during Question Period:
MR. BALL: Well, they are not in the boxes. There was a comment made in this House last week, though, that it was kind of conclusive, the impression I had from that.
Mr. Speaker, the government’s 2007 Energy Plan clearly states that our Province will receive the full benefit of the Upper Churchill in 2041; however, the Manitoba Hydro report states that Nalcor has not considered sourcing Upper Churchill power because of the uncertainty of what will happen in 2041.
I ask the Premier: Can you explain why Nalcor is uncertain of what will happen with Upper Churchill power after 2041? Are there concerns that we may not gain control of this resource?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member opposite mentioned the Energy Plan. The Energy Plan is the platform in which we lead to 2041 and the return of the Upper Churchill. What we are doing, Mr. Speaker, we are taking our non-renewable resource monies, our oil money, we are building schools, infrastructure and hospitals leading with Muskrat Falls and Gull Island, hopefully, to the development of a renewable resource economy. What we are always looking for, Mr. Speaker, is looking towards that day for our children and grandchildren when the Upper Churchill will be returned.
There are other issues, yes, certainly, Mr. Speaker. CF(L)Co is owned 65 per cent by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and 35 per cent by Hydro-Quebec. It is not simply a matter that there will be free power upon the return of the Upper Churchill in 2041. There are issues that have to be worked out, the CF(L)Co board has fiduciary obligations upon them. Mr. Speaker, we are always looking towards 2041, and Muskrat Falls is an important first step. (Emphasis Added)
As noted by Sue's Blog the 2041 debacle is going to be a great shock to our grandchildren as they learn we have fooled them again.
The Minister of Natural Resources - Jerome Kennedy - has stated in the past on several occasions that 2041 will see the return of the Upper Churchill.
The return of the Upper Churchill? What do you mean Mr. Kennedy? Explain it to us fully.
The Minister has obviously been informed that 2041 does not mean the "return of the Upper Churchill" to Newfoundland and Labrador.
The next post will deal with - why the above situation is the greatest reason NOT to do the Emera deal.
MR. BALL: Well, they are not in the boxes. There was a comment made in this House last week, though, that it was kind of conclusive, the impression I had from that.
Mr. Speaker, the government’s 2007 Energy Plan clearly states that our Province will receive the full benefit of the Upper Churchill in 2041; however, the Manitoba Hydro report states that Nalcor has not considered sourcing Upper Churchill power because of the uncertainty of what will happen in 2041.
I ask the Premier: Can you explain why Nalcor is uncertain of what will happen with Upper Churchill power after 2041? Are there concerns that we may not gain control of this resource?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member opposite mentioned the Energy Plan. The Energy Plan is the platform in which we lead to 2041 and the return of the Upper Churchill. What we are doing, Mr. Speaker, we are taking our non-renewable resource monies, our oil money, we are building schools, infrastructure and hospitals leading with Muskrat Falls and Gull Island, hopefully, to the development of a renewable resource economy. What we are always looking for, Mr. Speaker, is looking towards that day for our children and grandchildren when the Upper Churchill will be returned.
There are other issues, yes, certainly, Mr. Speaker. CF(L)Co is owned 65 per cent by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and 35 per cent by Hydro-Quebec. It is not simply a matter that there will be free power upon the return of the Upper Churchill in 2041. There are issues that have to be worked out, the CF(L)Co board has fiduciary obligations upon them. Mr. Speaker, we are always looking towards 2041, and Muskrat Falls is an important first step. (Emphasis Added)
As noted by Sue's Blog the 2041 debacle is going to be a great shock to our grandchildren as they learn we have fooled them again.
The Minister of Natural Resources - Jerome Kennedy - has stated in the past on several occasions that 2041 will see the return of the Upper Churchill.
The return of the Upper Churchill? What do you mean Mr. Kennedy? Explain it to us fully.
The Minister has obviously been informed that 2041 does not mean the "return of the Upper Churchill" to Newfoundland and Labrador.
The next post will deal with - why the above situation is the greatest reason NOT to do the Emera deal.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Thursday, October 06, 2011
Let's get Simple on Muskrat
Show me how we are going to need the increase in power projected for the Island.
Show me.
By all means - all PC supporters welcomed to explain - especially MHA's.
Show me.
By all means - all PC supporters welcomed to explain - especially MHA's.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Time for the Premier to Go
Kathy Dunderdale is not the Premier Newfoundland and Labrador needs at this time in our history. With a new Conservative majority in Ottawa announcing major cuts to program spending - we need strength and determination to hold on to the little bit of the Ottawa pie we have.
This is just one reason for Dunderdale to step aside or be ousted by the electorate. From a provincial perspective the important files are the Muskrat Falls proposed deal, the fishery, pensions, loss of resource related industries, rural development, health, small business, and transportation.
Dunderdale receives a failing grade on the following:
Muskrat Falls - The deal is not good for the province and particularly bad for Labrador. While power prices will soar on the Island portion to pay for Nova Scotians and others to achieve lower or stable power rates - it is once again being exported out of the Big Land without any industrial usage and without achieving renewable hydro power for many areas of Labrador. This coupled with the fact that Dunderdale will not debate this deal despite the fact that she is an unelected Premier. When in Opposition she along with her colleagues stated that unelected Premiers must not make significant resource deals and that every detail of negotiations and the deal must be made public. If Dunderdale is permitted - by the electorate - to carry on - this deal will be the worst in our history and will destroy the future of several generations.
The Fishery - Dunderdale is doing nothing to protect this essential renewable resource and less to ensure that rural communities and their people are able to continue the employment associated with it. This is a critical resource that has been continuously neglected by the Government of Canada and the provincial government has done nothing to hold the feds feet to the fire. The losses to our economy are close to a billion a year. Further it has placed more pressure on shellfish stocks as fishermen try to hang on to some employment. The Premier and her Cabinet are absolutely ignoring the injustice and resulting economic catastrophe - this mismanagement has caused. Dunderdale is ignoring past commitments of Harper, Hearn and unelected Senator Manning - to take custodial control of the nose and tail of the Grand Banks. They are also ignoring the current goings on regarding the Comprehensive European Trade Agreement - once again turning OUR fishery over to foreigners.
Dunderdale and Cabinet continue to ignore the plight of public service pensioners in our province. Sue's Blog has stated in the past the policy of the PC government on this issue amounts to waiting for people to die. These MHA's with lucrative and in many cases unearned (quality of work and results) salaries - also enjoy the benefit of a pension after very few years of employment. Simply put - they don't give a damn that seniors who spent a career in public service are living below the poverty line and really do have to make choices between heat and food. If allowed the Dunderdale government will cause electrical bills to simply become unaffordable period.
Industrial development is simply non-existent under Dunderdale's term as Cabinet Minister and now Premier. Newfoundland and Labrador has suffered the loss of two paper mills and the jobs that went with them. The continued losses in the processing sector of the fishery continues to destroy rural communities and continues to drive population to other provinces to find work. If Dunderdale continues her obsession to export all the clean renewable hydro out of Labrador - our people will follow the power to industry in Nova Scotia and other maritime jurisdictions.
Rural development unfortunately is an oxymoron under the Dunderdale administration. Our Premier and her caucus continue to hide from the obvious - our rural communities are suffering death by a thousand cuts. The creeping normalcy; the way a major negative change, which happens slowly in many unnoticed increments, is not perceived as objectionable. One loss at a time - in a manner that suits the social experiment being conducted by Dr. Doug House - since the Wells administration. The underfunded tourism initiatives which sees Newfoundland and Labrador come second to Anne of Green Gables in PEI. The erosion of our transportation assets - the highways and roads, the airline service particularly between Newfoundland and Labrador. The Marine Atlantic service - always a deterrent to cross over from Nova Scotia - and yet another failure by our provincial government as they "take on" the feds. The cosy picture of Harper and Dunderdale highlighted again on the Fighting Newfoundlander blog.
Sue's Blog will continue with the list in the next week or so - as we crawl toward October. The BBQ's have started and the hand-shaking, back-slapping, reconnection with the voters has returned. This Premier and her government must go - it's a choice between them or us (the people of Newfoundland and Labrador). I choose the latter. What's your take?
This is just one reason for Dunderdale to step aside or be ousted by the electorate. From a provincial perspective the important files are the Muskrat Falls proposed deal, the fishery, pensions, loss of resource related industries, rural development, health, small business, and transportation.
Dunderdale receives a failing grade on the following:
Muskrat Falls - The deal is not good for the province and particularly bad for Labrador. While power prices will soar on the Island portion to pay for Nova Scotians and others to achieve lower or stable power rates - it is once again being exported out of the Big Land without any industrial usage and without achieving renewable hydro power for many areas of Labrador. This coupled with the fact that Dunderdale will not debate this deal despite the fact that she is an unelected Premier. When in Opposition she along with her colleagues stated that unelected Premiers must not make significant resource deals and that every detail of negotiations and the deal must be made public. If Dunderdale is permitted - by the electorate - to carry on - this deal will be the worst in our history and will destroy the future of several generations.
The Fishery - Dunderdale is doing nothing to protect this essential renewable resource and less to ensure that rural communities and their people are able to continue the employment associated with it. This is a critical resource that has been continuously neglected by the Government of Canada and the provincial government has done nothing to hold the feds feet to the fire. The losses to our economy are close to a billion a year. Further it has placed more pressure on shellfish stocks as fishermen try to hang on to some employment. The Premier and her Cabinet are absolutely ignoring the injustice and resulting economic catastrophe - this mismanagement has caused. Dunderdale is ignoring past commitments of Harper, Hearn and unelected Senator Manning - to take custodial control of the nose and tail of the Grand Banks. They are also ignoring the current goings on regarding the Comprehensive European Trade Agreement - once again turning OUR fishery over to foreigners.
Dunderdale and Cabinet continue to ignore the plight of public service pensioners in our province. Sue's Blog has stated in the past the policy of the PC government on this issue amounts to waiting for people to die. These MHA's with lucrative and in many cases unearned (quality of work and results) salaries - also enjoy the benefit of a pension after very few years of employment. Simply put - they don't give a damn that seniors who spent a career in public service are living below the poverty line and really do have to make choices between heat and food. If allowed the Dunderdale government will cause electrical bills to simply become unaffordable period.
Industrial development is simply non-existent under Dunderdale's term as Cabinet Minister and now Premier. Newfoundland and Labrador has suffered the loss of two paper mills and the jobs that went with them. The continued losses in the processing sector of the fishery continues to destroy rural communities and continues to drive population to other provinces to find work. If Dunderdale continues her obsession to export all the clean renewable hydro out of Labrador - our people will follow the power to industry in Nova Scotia and other maritime jurisdictions.
Rural development unfortunately is an oxymoron under the Dunderdale administration. Our Premier and her caucus continue to hide from the obvious - our rural communities are suffering death by a thousand cuts. The creeping normalcy; the way a major negative change, which happens slowly in many unnoticed increments, is not perceived as objectionable. One loss at a time - in a manner that suits the social experiment being conducted by Dr. Doug House - since the Wells administration. The underfunded tourism initiatives which sees Newfoundland and Labrador come second to Anne of Green Gables in PEI. The erosion of our transportation assets - the highways and roads, the airline service particularly between Newfoundland and Labrador. The Marine Atlantic service - always a deterrent to cross over from Nova Scotia - and yet another failure by our provincial government as they "take on" the feds. The cosy picture of Harper and Dunderdale highlighted again on the Fighting Newfoundlander blog.
Sue's Blog will continue with the list in the next week or so - as we crawl toward October. The BBQ's have started and the hand-shaking, back-slapping, reconnection with the voters has returned. This Premier and her government must go - it's a choice between them or us (the people of Newfoundland and Labrador). I choose the latter. What's your take?
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Dear Premier Dunderdale...
Due to the significance of a development such as the Lower Churchill - I hereby request a debate with you on the deal your government proposes.
As a citizen of Newfoundland and Labrador - and an individual who has spent over 20 years researching, debating, and writing on renewable energy in the province and as an individual involved in the prevention of the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - I ask that you grant and facilitate my reasonable request.
We cannot afford to ruin the future for another 3 generations of our people.
Sincerely,
Sue
As a citizen of Newfoundland and Labrador - and an individual who has spent over 20 years researching, debating, and writing on renewable energy in the province and as an individual involved in the prevention of the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - I ask that you grant and facilitate my reasonable request.
We cannot afford to ruin the future for another 3 generations of our people.
Sincerely,
Sue
Friday, May 20, 2011
The Argument Dunderdale will use to Privatize Hydro and Wikileaks connection.
Thanks to Wikileaks!
We all remember Hydro-Quebec's bid to purchase New Brunswick Power right?
Below is a Wikileak note: It outlines a discussion between Quebec Premier Jean Charest and U.S. Ambassador David Jacobson.
"Charest also told the Ambassador that HydroQu????bec (sic) is planning to acquire the privately-owned Prince Edward Island power company," the document reads.
"The generating assets involved are quite small, but Charest said HydroQu????bec (sic) would be also acquiring important wind assets and environmental credits."
So the idea was to acquire all that is power in New Brunswick and PEI - now what to do with Newfoundland and Labrador? The answer to that is Emera - in the case of NB Power it was crown owned and PEI (Fortis) not as attractive without the NB deal.
Emera is the easy way in for Hydro-Quebec - and I believe they will take it.
Further the mess that Dunderdale will put Nalcor in with the giveaway deal on the Lower Churchill - will lead to an argument to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to unburden us from the debt. Fortis will be there to pick up the pieces with Hydro-Quebec and NL will be left with nothing other than very high electric bills.
I trust Senator Beth Marshall is working on that loan guarantee from Ottawa - will that in any way help Fortis? Fortis very strong on nothing to do with Lower Churchill - no not upfront - what may happen after Emera enters?
Possibility exists that Fortis and Hydro-Quebec could own the whole works.
You never underestimate companies and rich shareholders who want more. They are very clever.
We all remember Hydro-Quebec's bid to purchase New Brunswick Power right?
Below is a Wikileak note: It outlines a discussion between Quebec Premier Jean Charest and U.S. Ambassador David Jacobson.
"Charest also told the Ambassador that HydroQu????bec (sic) is planning to acquire the privately-owned Prince Edward Island power company," the document reads.
"The generating assets involved are quite small, but Charest said HydroQu????bec (sic) would be also acquiring important wind assets and environmental credits."
So the idea was to acquire all that is power in New Brunswick and PEI - now what to do with Newfoundland and Labrador? The answer to that is Emera - in the case of NB Power it was crown owned and PEI (Fortis) not as attractive without the NB deal.
Emera is the easy way in for Hydro-Quebec - and I believe they will take it.
Further the mess that Dunderdale will put Nalcor in with the giveaway deal on the Lower Churchill - will lead to an argument to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to unburden us from the debt. Fortis will be there to pick up the pieces with Hydro-Quebec and NL will be left with nothing other than very high electric bills.
I trust Senator Beth Marshall is working on that loan guarantee from Ottawa - will that in any way help Fortis? Fortis very strong on nothing to do with Lower Churchill - no not upfront - what may happen after Emera enters?
Possibility exists that Fortis and Hydro-Quebec could own the whole works.
You never underestimate companies and rich shareholders who want more. They are very clever.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
The Expose begins...Newfoundland and Labrador - it will bring us to the Muskrat
While the Eagle is on the Ridge of Paradise River and the Northern Lights (Aurora) creates it's own expanse - the time is now to review who wants what - of our resources. The silence is deafening.
It is an interesting time - for sure and October draws closer - can't wait. Should be an exciting summer. I know there are many curious and intelligent minds in Newfoundland and Labrador. Let your imagination flow as you read the content below. I will fill you in - week by week.
"Marino Specogna is a convicted stock market manipulator who exposes in a straight forward manner the deceptive techniques used by manipulators and traders to scam your hard earned dollars. The book goes into detail on the factors an individual investing in the stock market should be alerted to, to avoid being scammed.Included in the book are details on company share structure, tricks of manipulators and crooks on how to create share positions, facts never before disclosed in written form. After reading the book an individual will know how a scam deal is initiated, how the scam is furthered and how the manipulator manipulates a stock. The methods of a manipulator are exposed and can be detected by the reader in real time deals currently trading.This book may reveal methods that shock you and will leave you shaking your head in disbelief for a long time to come."
96/09
March 8, 1996
The British Columbia Securities Commission has prohibited Marino Specogna from participating in the securities markets for 20 years for manipulating the shares of Doromin Resources Ltd., a Vancouver Stock Exchange listed company. Marino Specogna was a director of Doromin and ran its day to day affairs.
In addition, the Commission prohibited Marino Specogna from acting as an officer or director of any reporting issuer for 20 years and ordered that he pay an administrative penalty of $35,000.
On the basis of evidence at the hearing, the Commission concluded that Marino Specogna was responsible for a number of significant violations of securities regulatory standards, many of which were intentional, including:
- disseminating false assay results, which created a misleading appearance of trading activity in, and an artificial price for, the shares of Doromin traded through the Exchange on December 1, 1989, contrary to section 41.1 of the Act;
- trading in 13 brokerage accounts, which created a misleading appearance of trading activity in, and an artificial price for, Doromin shares in 1993, contrary to section 41.1 of the Act;
- failing to file insider reports contrary to section 70 of the Act;
- causing Specogna Minerals, a control person of Doromin, to distribute Doromin shares without a prospectus or available exemption contrary to section 42 of the Act.
The Commission said:
The Commission also determined, based on various contraventions of the securities legislation, that it was in the public interest to make the following orders, that:
- Specogna Minerals Corporations trading privileges be withdrawn for 20 years; Specogna Minerals is a private company owned by Efrem and Lucia Specogna;
- Efrem Specognas trading privileges be withdrawn for four years and that he pay an administrative penalty of $5,000; Efrem Specogna was a director and the president of Doromin; and
- Lucia Specognas trading privileges be withdrawn for one year and that she pay an administrative penalty of $1000.
The British Columbia Securities Commission is a provincial government agency responsible for regulating trading in securities and exchange contracts.
Copies of the Commission's decision (21 pages) may be obtained in person at 1100 - 865 Hornby Street, Vancouver, British Columbia.
RENO, Nev., May 19, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Potash America, Inc. (OTCBB: PTAM) (the "Company") announced today that during mid-March, the company entered into a Letter Of Intent covering the purchase of 100% of the potash claims located in Newfoundland, Canada title 018321M that is part of the historic St. Finton's Potash Intercept.
It is an interesting time - for sure and October draws closer - can't wait. Should be an exciting summer. I know there are many curious and intelligent minds in Newfoundland and Labrador. Let your imagination flow as you read the content below. I will fill you in - week by week.
"Marino Specogna is a convicted stock market manipulator who exposes in a straight forward manner the deceptive techniques used by manipulators and traders to scam your hard earned dollars. The book goes into detail on the factors an individual investing in the stock market should be alerted to, to avoid being scammed.Included in the book are details on company share structure, tricks of manipulators and crooks on how to create share positions, facts never before disclosed in written form. After reading the book an individual will know how a scam deal is initiated, how the scam is furthered and how the manipulator manipulates a stock. The methods of a manipulator are exposed and can be detected by the reader in real time deals currently trading.This book may reveal methods that shock you and will leave you shaking your head in disbelief for a long time to come."
96/09
March 8, 1996
Securities Commission Releases Specogna Decision
Released: February 29, 1996 Contact: Ron Messent 660-4800 or (BC only) 1-800-373-6393The British Columbia Securities Commission has prohibited Marino Specogna from participating in the securities markets for 20 years for manipulating the shares of Doromin Resources Ltd., a Vancouver Stock Exchange listed company. Marino Specogna was a director of Doromin and ran its day to day affairs.
In addition, the Commission prohibited Marino Specogna from acting as an officer or director of any reporting issuer for 20 years and ordered that he pay an administrative penalty of $35,000.
On the basis of evidence at the hearing, the Commission concluded that Marino Specogna was responsible for a number of significant violations of securities regulatory standards, many of which were intentional, including:
- disseminating false assay results, which created a misleading appearance of trading activity in, and an artificial price for, the shares of Doromin traded through the Exchange on December 1, 1989, contrary to section 41.1 of the Act;
- trading in 13 brokerage accounts, which created a misleading appearance of trading activity in, and an artificial price for, Doromin shares in 1993, contrary to section 41.1 of the Act;
- failing to file insider reports contrary to section 70 of the Act;
- causing Specogna Minerals, a control person of Doromin, to distribute Doromin shares without a prospectus or available exemption contrary to section 42 of the Act.
The Commission said:
"One of the purposes of securities regulation is to develop and maintain a fair and efficient market that warrants public confidence. Where a person trades in a security and knows that the trading activity creates a misleading appearance of trading activity, and an artificial price, for a security traded on the Exchange, this purpose is frustrated. Fiction is substituted for fact. ....the market for Doromin shares was distorted by Marino Specogna and made into a stage-managed performance. The trading .... had an enormous illusory effect on the reported trading activity in Doromin. We find that Marinos Specognas trading of Doromin shares through the Group Accounts in 1993, seriously prejudiced the public interest."
The Commission also determined, based on various contraventions of the securities legislation, that it was in the public interest to make the following orders, that:
- Specogna Minerals Corporations trading privileges be withdrawn for 20 years; Specogna Minerals is a private company owned by Efrem and Lucia Specogna;
- Efrem Specognas trading privileges be withdrawn for four years and that he pay an administrative penalty of $5,000; Efrem Specogna was a director and the president of Doromin; and
- Lucia Specognas trading privileges be withdrawn for one year and that she pay an administrative penalty of $1000.
The British Columbia Securities Commission is a provincial government agency responsible for regulating trading in securities and exchange contracts.
Copies of the Commission's decision (21 pages) may be obtained in person at 1100 - 865 Hornby Street, Vancouver, British Columbia.
RENO, Nev., May 19, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Potash America, Inc. (OTCBB: PTAM) (the "Company") announced today that during mid-March, the company entered into a Letter Of Intent covering the purchase of 100% of the potash claims located in Newfoundland, Canada title 018321M that is part of the historic St. Finton's Potash Intercept.
Mineral Rights Inquiry Report
Thursday, May 19, 2011| Last Updated: | 2011/03/16 | ||||
| Licence Number: | 018321M | ||||
| File Number: | 775:1680 | ||||
| Original Holder: | Specogna, Marino | ||||
| Licence Holder: | Habitants Minerals Ltd. | ||||
| Address: | 500 - 120 Eglinton East Toronto, ON Canada, M4P 1E2 | ||||
| Licence Status: | Issued | ||||
| Location: | Robinsons River,Western Nfld | ||||
| Electoral Dist.: | 11 St. George's-Stephenville | ||||
| Recorded Date: | 2010/12/03 | ||||
| Issuance Date: | 2011/01/03 | ||||
| Renewal Date: | 2016/01/03 | ||||
| Report Due Date: | 2012/03/05 | ||||
| Org. No. Claims: | 11.0000 | ||||
| Cur. No. Claims: | 11.0000 | ||||
| Recording Fee: | $110.00 | ||||
| Receipt(s): |
| ||||
| Deposit Amount: | $550.00 | ||||
| Deposit: |
| ||||
| Map Sheet No(s): | 12B/02 |
| Comments: | |
| Mapped Claim Description: | |
|
| Land Claims (effective 2005/12/01): | |||||
| LISA: 0.00% | LIL: 0.00% | VBP: 0.00% | Crown: 100.00% | ||
| Extensions: | None |
| Work Reports: | None | |
| ||
| Licence Transfers: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| Partial Surrenders: | None |
| This Licence replaces Licence Number(s): | None |
| This Licence is replaced by Licence Number(s): | None |
| Work Report Descriptions: | None |
| Detailed breakdown of projected required expenditure: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
What a Tragic Day for Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, and Democracy
Where do I start?
There is no doubt that Stephen Harper is a liar. There is also no doubt that he is a right wing fundamentalist. He also heads up a party that ignores election laws and rewards people who lie - with a Cabinet post.
The real problem and concern is that he is also very shrewd - he will use his intelligence not for the common good but for his own advancement and that of his secret corporate buddies.
Today as Newfoundland and Labrador witnesses the appointment of Peter Penashue to Cabinet - we should be celebrating this historic move - instead we have to ponder how cynical this actually is.
Without questioning at all the sincerity of Mr. Penashue - I absolutely am sickened by what this means for our future. I am able to hypothesize why Harper has made the move - but I am yet unable to determine if Penashue will fall for it.
Peter Penashue is now the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs - and as such may be the individual that delivers the loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill development to the province. As an Innu leader - Harper can claim that he not only gave our government what it wanted but it was done through an aboriginal person. This development - possibly the largest giveaway in our history - should be stopped not financed. Harper for his part will use Penashue to deliver cheap - green - reliable power to other provinces of importance to him. This is great news for Nova Scotia, Ontario, and perhaps other Maritime provinces or New England States - but it is devastating to us. What a clever lad our Prime Minister is - how deceptive, vindictive, and sarcastic he is.
Meanwhile back at the ranch - that Stephen Harper's surreptitious mind lives on - he has once again appointed Fabian Manning to the Senate joined by other failed Conservative candidates. Another absolute slap in the face to the people of our province who chose again NOT to elect him. Remember Harper - promising to deliver an elected Senate? Not only has he continued to renege on this - he appoints people the people have said no to.
Then the kicker - Harper finished his News Conference on the Cabinet appointments - then passes on the information on the Senate appointments and does not stick around to answer questions about it. John Baird the newly minted Minister of Foreign Affairs - also refused questions on this absolute contempt of the Canadian people.
For political desert - if your stomach is not already upset - Bev Oda returns to Cabinet!
For the 22% of the voting public that elected this mess - well done. For the over 70% who did not - shame on those who did not vote and the remainder of us should simply work very hard to make sure the next four years does not destroy our country and ensure this type of administration is never elected again.
Cheers to Peter MacKay - your sly and manipulative manner has surely paid off.
There is no doubt that Stephen Harper is a liar. There is also no doubt that he is a right wing fundamentalist. He also heads up a party that ignores election laws and rewards people who lie - with a Cabinet post.
The real problem and concern is that he is also very shrewd - he will use his intelligence not for the common good but for his own advancement and that of his secret corporate buddies.
Today as Newfoundland and Labrador witnesses the appointment of Peter Penashue to Cabinet - we should be celebrating this historic move - instead we have to ponder how cynical this actually is.
Without questioning at all the sincerity of Mr. Penashue - I absolutely am sickened by what this means for our future. I am able to hypothesize why Harper has made the move - but I am yet unable to determine if Penashue will fall for it.
Peter Penashue is now the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs - and as such may be the individual that delivers the loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill development to the province. As an Innu leader - Harper can claim that he not only gave our government what it wanted but it was done through an aboriginal person. This development - possibly the largest giveaway in our history - should be stopped not financed. Harper for his part will use Penashue to deliver cheap - green - reliable power to other provinces of importance to him. This is great news for Nova Scotia, Ontario, and perhaps other Maritime provinces or New England States - but it is devastating to us. What a clever lad our Prime Minister is - how deceptive, vindictive, and sarcastic he is.
Meanwhile back at the ranch - that Stephen Harper's surreptitious mind lives on - he has once again appointed Fabian Manning to the Senate joined by other failed Conservative candidates. Another absolute slap in the face to the people of our province who chose again NOT to elect him. Remember Harper - promising to deliver an elected Senate? Not only has he continued to renege on this - he appoints people the people have said no to.
Then the kicker - Harper finished his News Conference on the Cabinet appointments - then passes on the information on the Senate appointments and does not stick around to answer questions about it. John Baird the newly minted Minister of Foreign Affairs - also refused questions on this absolute contempt of the Canadian people.
For political desert - if your stomach is not already upset - Bev Oda returns to Cabinet!
For the 22% of the voting public that elected this mess - well done. For the over 70% who did not - shame on those who did not vote and the remainder of us should simply work very hard to make sure the next four years does not destroy our country and ensure this type of administration is never elected again.
Cheers to Peter MacKay - your sly and manipulative manner has surely paid off.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Here comes the truth on the ship building contract! What was the excuse again Premier?
Please read the story below from Metro News in Halifax.
I have highlighted the areas of importance.
One thing is for sure - something stinks or somebody is incompetent. Madame Premier - which is it?
Hurry up Premier Dunderdale - if Quebec gets the contract - we will have to giveaway Muskrat to Nova Scotia to help them through the loss. If Irving gets it - MacKay did a great job. Poor old Kiewit - see if you can find them some engineers then go for an extension.
Just last week, all three parties in the Nova Scotia legislature were aligning themselves behind Irving Shipbuilding’s bid to obtain a lucrative national shipbuilding contract.
Yesterday, in another rare display of crossing party lines, the governing NDP and the third-place Progressive Conservatives teamed up to attack the federal Liberal’s position on the issue.
The parties were reacting to news reports that quoted Denis Coderre, a high-profile Liberal MP from Quebec, as saying a Liberal government would extend a key deadline to allow the Davie Shipyard to compete for the $35-billion, 30-year contract.
“In power, the Liberal Party will issue a directive, so that Quebec can also apply for this important contract,” Corderre told Le Journal de Levis.
PC MLA Chuck Porter said the federal Liberal position would threaten Irving’s chances.
“(Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff’s) plan is one that could push the Halifax Shipyard out of contention contract,” said Porter.
Premier Darrell Dexter agreed with Porter, saying he was “very shocked” to read Coderre’s comments.
“I have asked my staff, on my instruction, to draft a letter to the leader of the federal Liberal Party expressing our disappointment in his comments,” said Dexter.
“If this was to be in fact the position of the federal government, it runs the risk of stunting the growth of Atlantic Canada.”
I have highlighted the areas of importance.
One thing is for sure - something stinks or somebody is incompetent. Madame Premier - which is it?
Hurry up Premier Dunderdale - if Quebec gets the contract - we will have to giveaway Muskrat to Nova Scotia to help them through the loss. If Irving gets it - MacKay did a great job. Poor old Kiewit - see if you can find them some engineers then go for an extension.
Just last week, all three parties in the Nova Scotia legislature were aligning themselves behind Irving Shipbuilding’s bid to obtain a lucrative national shipbuilding contract.
Yesterday, in another rare display of crossing party lines, the governing NDP and the third-place Progressive Conservatives teamed up to attack the federal Liberal’s position on the issue.
The parties were reacting to news reports that quoted Denis Coderre, a high-profile Liberal MP from Quebec, as saying a Liberal government would extend a key deadline to allow the Davie Shipyard to compete for the $35-billion, 30-year contract.
“In power, the Liberal Party will issue a directive, so that Quebec can also apply for this important contract,” Corderre told Le Journal de Levis.
PC MLA Chuck Porter said the federal Liberal position would threaten Irving’s chances.
“(Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff’s) plan is one that could push the Halifax Shipyard out of contention contract,” said Porter.
Premier Darrell Dexter agreed with Porter, saying he was “very shocked” to read Coderre’s comments.
“I have asked my staff, on my instruction, to draft a letter to the leader of the federal Liberal Party expressing our disappointment in his comments,” said Dexter.
“If this was to be in fact the position of the federal government, it runs the risk of stunting the growth of Atlantic Canada.”
Do you have an opinion? Politicians need you to shut up!
Sue's Blog wanted to delve further into the House of Assembly today - particularly the new buzz word "cluster".
That and further discussion on the Lower Churchill fiasco and the bad Peter Kiewit joke will have to wait a day while I issue the following warning to the public.
If you have an opinion on a politician or a particular political party and you express that opinion publicly you must appreciate the following:
Not only do politicians listen to Open Line programs but they record and transcribe them as well. Next they identify the individual expressing the opinion and depending on the persons commentary - you are marked.
Politicians and their zealous supporters will hack your facebook account, hack your blog, hack twitter, set up pages under your name and generally violate your privacy. Worse - certain politicians will attempt to impact your employment and try to have your opinions suppressed.
With respect to the VOCM list of talk shows - while informative to the general public and a great place to get issues out and debated - politicians will mark you if they feel you are impacting in any way whatsoever the message they wish to deliver.
It is fine for Bill Rowe to suggest to the caller that there are no punches pulled - however Mr. Rowe must appreciate that while listeners and callers to his program are great contributors and supporters - and in fact generate good advertising dollars - they may find themselves subject to partisan political intrusion into their private and professional lives.
In our political environment and the strong-arm tactics used by those in power - it is important that callers know that their lives may be very negatively impacted by the choice to participate publicly.
Since my blog was resurrected in January of this year - I have had all my online social media accounts hacked. I have had threatening anonymous comments to my blog. I have experienced attempts by politicians through several people to undermine my employment. This of course was also the case when I was an active and regular contributor on talk shows both on CBC and VOCM.
The latest came from a "opaline darwin" making me the administrator of a facebook page. Interesting choice of name they used and certainly is one more confirmation that evolution needs some help.
You have all heard talks of whistle blower protection in the past - where employees of government or government agencies should be protected if they reveal information of significant importance to the public and government programs. We have heard that teachers, nurses, and other professionals employed by government are "frightened for their jobs" if they speak publicly. This includes information that is of importance to public health and safety.
Unfortunately - the person working in the private sector, or those running a small to medium size Newfoundland and Labrador business are also under constant professional threat if they participate in public debate where politicians or their parties are being critiqued.
So what do we do? The easiest thing is to shut-up, go away, mind your own affairs, and learn that if you want to be successful in your personal life - grab on to and promote those in power. Change your political stripe to whichever party is in power. Praise don't criticize government or big business. Call talk shows to congratulate whatever Minister of the day is making some announcement or another. Praise the media and the host of the program you are talking to while saying how great a job the government is doing.
The other option is to speak openly about it and tell our politicians that this behavior will not be tolerated and learn once again to protect our freedom of speech. Protect one another and our right to express an opinion and demonstrate loudly when political hacks call a program to personally attack or threaten a genuine caller.
In our past there have been two great travesties:
1. The giveaway of all our natural resources - while everybody stayed silent to protect their own interests.
2. The Mount Cashel affair and the associated atrocities perpetrated on generations of innocent children while everybody stayed silent to protect their church, priest and in some cases politicians and their own interests.
Newfoundland and Labrador is one tenth of what we could be today because the pride has been beaten out of us both figuratively and literally.
The fighting Newfoundlander and Labradorian has been told to shut-up - tow the party line - listen to your leaders - and do not object.
You really think this is a mature and sustainable democracy? Do you really believe that those in power are not using that power to silence critics?
Do you remember when myself and Ed Hollett were chastised publicly by Premier Danny Williams for daring to challenge things like the fibre-optic disaster? What do you believe this does to a person working in the private sector. Has the Premier not just said to every potential employer and business opportunity out there - to avoid these people?
If a project such as the Lower Churchill can be argued economically and socially as a good project for us the people - then these tactics would not be required to sell it. It is the largest red flag that anyone could plant in front of you - the voting public. It is telling you that critics have real points to make and that something stinks.
The talk show hosts will not lose their jobs and will forever be able to continue on in private life without a blemish. They also have the power of the microphone. Callers - however - who criticize government policy or a big resource deal should really understand that until the public starts to protect the right to speak without enduring unwarranted and damaging punishment from those they criticize - they should hold their tongue and understand the consequences.
Look around you and see who is sitting on boards of crown agencies or in high profile positions within government. How do you think they got there?
For those of you who do call the talk shows - how many times have you heard your neighbours and friends say you should get on and talk about that - while they refuse to do the same? Or they might say - you are good at that - and I can't do it - you know my job and all.
If we do not change this culture of essentially forced silence - we will lose whatever future might have been for our children and grandchildren.
What way are we going to have it? What will we accept as people? If you are one of those involved in these negative partisan activities - shame on you - you are hurting the future of your own children.
To the politicians - our "leaders" - what a disgrace you are - particularly when you let a colleague engage in such backward behavior while you sit by like the gang of a bully and do and say nothing while allowing tax dollars to pay for some of these activities.
If we don't find the guts of our codfish - we will either sink to the bottom or be pecked into oblivion by a seagull standing by like the opportunistic feeder of the dregs.
That and further discussion on the Lower Churchill fiasco and the bad Peter Kiewit joke will have to wait a day while I issue the following warning to the public.
If you have an opinion on a politician or a particular political party and you express that opinion publicly you must appreciate the following:
Not only do politicians listen to Open Line programs but they record and transcribe them as well. Next they identify the individual expressing the opinion and depending on the persons commentary - you are marked.
Politicians and their zealous supporters will hack your facebook account, hack your blog, hack twitter, set up pages under your name and generally violate your privacy. Worse - certain politicians will attempt to impact your employment and try to have your opinions suppressed.
With respect to the VOCM list of talk shows - while informative to the general public and a great place to get issues out and debated - politicians will mark you if they feel you are impacting in any way whatsoever the message they wish to deliver.
It is fine for Bill Rowe to suggest to the caller that there are no punches pulled - however Mr. Rowe must appreciate that while listeners and callers to his program are great contributors and supporters - and in fact generate good advertising dollars - they may find themselves subject to partisan political intrusion into their private and professional lives.
In our political environment and the strong-arm tactics used by those in power - it is important that callers know that their lives may be very negatively impacted by the choice to participate publicly.
Since my blog was resurrected in January of this year - I have had all my online social media accounts hacked. I have had threatening anonymous comments to my blog. I have experienced attempts by politicians through several people to undermine my employment. This of course was also the case when I was an active and regular contributor on talk shows both on CBC and VOCM.
The latest came from a "opaline darwin" making me the administrator of a facebook page. Interesting choice of name they used and certainly is one more confirmation that evolution needs some help.
You have all heard talks of whistle blower protection in the past - where employees of government or government agencies should be protected if they reveal information of significant importance to the public and government programs. We have heard that teachers, nurses, and other professionals employed by government are "frightened for their jobs" if they speak publicly. This includes information that is of importance to public health and safety.
Unfortunately - the person working in the private sector, or those running a small to medium size Newfoundland and Labrador business are also under constant professional threat if they participate in public debate where politicians or their parties are being critiqued.
So what do we do? The easiest thing is to shut-up, go away, mind your own affairs, and learn that if you want to be successful in your personal life - grab on to and promote those in power. Change your political stripe to whichever party is in power. Praise don't criticize government or big business. Call talk shows to congratulate whatever Minister of the day is making some announcement or another. Praise the media and the host of the program you are talking to while saying how great a job the government is doing.
The other option is to speak openly about it and tell our politicians that this behavior will not be tolerated and learn once again to protect our freedom of speech. Protect one another and our right to express an opinion and demonstrate loudly when political hacks call a program to personally attack or threaten a genuine caller.
In our past there have been two great travesties:
1. The giveaway of all our natural resources - while everybody stayed silent to protect their own interests.
2. The Mount Cashel affair and the associated atrocities perpetrated on generations of innocent children while everybody stayed silent to protect their church, priest and in some cases politicians and their own interests.
Newfoundland and Labrador is one tenth of what we could be today because the pride has been beaten out of us both figuratively and literally.
The fighting Newfoundlander and Labradorian has been told to shut-up - tow the party line - listen to your leaders - and do not object.
You really think this is a mature and sustainable democracy? Do you really believe that those in power are not using that power to silence critics?
Do you remember when myself and Ed Hollett were chastised publicly by Premier Danny Williams for daring to challenge things like the fibre-optic disaster? What do you believe this does to a person working in the private sector. Has the Premier not just said to every potential employer and business opportunity out there - to avoid these people?
If a project such as the Lower Churchill can be argued economically and socially as a good project for us the people - then these tactics would not be required to sell it. It is the largest red flag that anyone could plant in front of you - the voting public. It is telling you that critics have real points to make and that something stinks.
The talk show hosts will not lose their jobs and will forever be able to continue on in private life without a blemish. They also have the power of the microphone. Callers - however - who criticize government policy or a big resource deal should really understand that until the public starts to protect the right to speak without enduring unwarranted and damaging punishment from those they criticize - they should hold their tongue and understand the consequences.
Look around you and see who is sitting on boards of crown agencies or in high profile positions within government. How do you think they got there?
For those of you who do call the talk shows - how many times have you heard your neighbours and friends say you should get on and talk about that - while they refuse to do the same? Or they might say - you are good at that - and I can't do it - you know my job and all.
If we do not change this culture of essentially forced silence - we will lose whatever future might have been for our children and grandchildren.
What way are we going to have it? What will we accept as people? If you are one of those involved in these negative partisan activities - shame on you - you are hurting the future of your own children.
To the politicians - our "leaders" - what a disgrace you are - particularly when you let a colleague engage in such backward behavior while you sit by like the gang of a bully and do and say nothing while allowing tax dollars to pay for some of these activities.
If we don't find the guts of our codfish - we will either sink to the bottom or be pecked into oblivion by a seagull standing by like the opportunistic feeder of the dregs.
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
The Lower Churchill/Emera Deal - Danny's Legacy - Our Nightmare
I had the "privilege" of attending the Joint Panel on the Lower Churchill development and listened to the NALCOR presentation.
Gilbert Bennett VP - Lower Churchill Nalcor delivered what can only be described as a propaganda manifesto for the Williams/Dunderdale government.
Further I am witnessing Kathy Dunderdale on her feet in the House of Assembly now repeating the propaganda and I am unsure if she actually believes or understands it.
This development is not for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador - it will not be good for Newfoundland and Labrador - and it will disadvantage both residents and businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Let me start with Mr. Bennett - who sits in his position today because I and my fellow Newfoundlanders and Labradorians stopped the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. He only joined Hydro in 2005 and guess what - he once worked for Cable Atlantic. The virtues and praises of the company he sings - is only possible because the people not government had a vision for our green energy.
After his prolonged and basic presentation - he took questions from the audience. Unlike the less than thorough report provided by the Telegram I and others in the audience gave him questions that he did not answer or did not answer satisfactorily.
Further - his behavior while I was asking questions was like watching a couple of school children attempting to intimidate a classmate as he and his cohort grinned and giggled and raised eyebrows as I spoke.
Mr. Bennett - number one you work for the people of this province - we are the shareholders of the company you are fortunate to have employment with. Second; for you to in any way try to make light of my questions and commentary is nothing more than a joke. We both know who did what to save the Crown Jewel - Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and the jobs with it.
To my questions:
I asked Mr. Bennett if the deal with Emera was already done - as he was presenting as if it were including the awarding of contracts to Quebec companies like SNC Lavalin. After a bit of dancing he said no.
I asked Mr. Bennett if he could tell me the difference in the cost of power produced at the Lower Churchill if all the transmission lines to the Island and to Nova Scotia were not built. After screwing around with industry numbers - we got to it and he said it was about half price.
I asked if he was aware that Norway, Iceland, Quebec, Russia, and now Greenland have established aluminum smelters and he acknowledged that he did. I then followed with why Labrador could not establish same and if he was aware of what the power arrangements were in the aforementioned jurisdictions. Mr. Gilbert in a nut-shell said nothing has fallen into our laps and then went on with a convoluted attempt at trying to answer what the other jurisdictions were doing.
I asked him - outside of construction - how many jobs were going to be created in Newfoundland and Labrador on a long-term basis. He answered 35 and 50 respectively. I asked if he knew how many jobs could be produced long-term if an aluminum smelter set up in Labrador - he acknowledged it could be over a thousand.
The chair advised my time was up but I was permitted one more question - at which point Gilbert used the raising of the eyebrows and grinny look - I asked if he had a problem? He said no and added gruffly what is your question? I thanked the panel and sat down instead. I had seen enough of this sham of a consultation process and knew if I - who had such a long history with advocacy for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro could be treated with such disdain others would have no hope.
I listened to the presentation and I have to say there were more - 180 degree turns than I had witnessed in a while. When Nalcor and the government wanted to provide the Italian government and company with a "wind"fall by allowing privatization of wind energy - Hydro felt it was the best thing since sliced bread. Now that they "must" push this Emera deal through wind is intermittent and must be backed up - hydro is the best. You don't say Mr. Bennett - I remember the words coming out of my mouth while hydro execs were singing the wind energy tune to satisfy unknown shareholders.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador and here is why. The government cannot prove the numbers and projections it is using for power needs on the island. The projections on where energy costs may be in 2016 does not consider hydro's ability to lower costs as our current investments are paid off. The projections are the same incorrect projections used since the late 70's early 80's which would have seen our power supply exhaust in the early 1980's. This has not happened - primarily because of efficiencies, zero growth in population and the hemorrhaging of industry out of the island. I have copies of all of these projections and reports.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it once again does not use the power to attract industry to Labrador as the basis for development. The government has not provided the media or the public with evidence that they have tried but failed to attract industry. It further takes Islanders off thermal generation but does not take Labradorians off same.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it has us holding the debt to subsidize power to other provinces - thereby enabling our neighbours to attract industry using our power - while we are disadvantaged.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it forever puts at risk our control of exporting power by having one side controlled by Hydro-Quebec and the other by Emera (could be sold to Hydro-Quebec).
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it does not foresee or protect the takeover of Emera by Hydro-Quebec - even though this possibility is more real and fiction. That is if Danny Williams was telling you and I the truth when he said Hydro-Quebec would do anything to block us
The deal is bad and incomplete for Newfoundland and Labrador because Danny Williams and his government promised to find redress on the Upper Churchill before any deal on Lower Churchill and this has not been achieved.
This deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because the proper assessments of alternative use for the power have not been competed.
This deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because the permanent jobs associated with such a significant hydro development are well below acceptable standards for good social-economic policy.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because the net permanent job growth is zero. There are currently 85 people working at Holyrood - that goes to 35 loss of 50 - then 50 picked up in Labrador where there currently are zero. The only good thing here is that Labrador picks up jobs.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because we have an offshore company involved in the project on a virtually permanent basis when no such company should be needed. Particularly if we are seeking a loan guarantee.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because federal money/grants will end up going outside the province to support other jurisdictions to control power rates. This after the people fought so hard to stop privatization which would have driven our power rates through the roof the past 15 years. Now government suggests we almost double them?
Then there is this whole business of Harper and Ignatieff followed by a bunch of PC MHA's and Cabinet Ministers including the Premier and Liberals preaching to us that this project is good for Canada. We are going to contribute to the greening up of Canada. Excuse me - this must be lost on the federal leaders but it should be ingrained here. WE ARE ALREADY CONTRIBUTING 5000 MW'S OF POWER TO CANADA FROM THE UPPER CHURCHILL. Newfoundland and Labrador through this export of power represents the largest per-capita export of green energy to other provinces in the country.
The business community - the government boasts - is behind the development. When - has the business community not been behind extracting resources - regardless of whether or not it's the best deal? We have had many lopsided and bad deals on resources in this province before - each and every time business was behind it. That's because their role - particularly publicly traded companies - is not to achieve the best deal for the people - rather they are concerned about making money for their shareholders. Premier - it is your job and the job of your government to do the best deal for the people.
The Government, Premier, and Opposition leaders are responsible for doing the best deal for our province - not to make the best deal for other provinces. They have their own representatives.
The Liberal Opposition is absolutely falling hook line and sinker for the power price thing. This is put out there so that Kathy and the Willderdale government can come back with a subsidy of a few cents to complete their argument.
The truth is the whole works of them have done nothing to develop the "best deal" for the province and particularly Labrador. If they are unable to do better than this - they should let it flow until somebody has a real vision for the proper development of the tremendous resource.
Neither Gilbert Bennett, Ed Martin or the Premier are able to hold their own under scrutiny of this deal. Bennett and Martin are given direction and they follow it and the Premier or other Premier gives direction- which is incompetant at best and who knows at worst.
Ed martin was just on CBC with Debbie Cooper - now stating permanent jobs are 120? The information you are hearing is to promote this deal at all costs. Clearly it does not matter to those desperate to see it proceed - what has to be done and said to get the deal done.
Who wrote the questions for Debbie Cooper? What information and background did they have to prepare the questions? Would they agree that the questions are limited to the combined knowledge of those writing or asking the questions? Does that mean all questions are not being asked and that the interviewer may not have the knowledge to conduct a free-flow conversation. That being the case who will CBC interview on the other side of the argument? Who will represent all the interests and points of those opposed to the project? How will the viewer know that all sides have been heard?
I know the difference.
Next up the Boards of Directors associated with Nalcor. See you then.
On a side note - Kathy Dunderdale is the Premier of the province. Her job is to represent the province regardless of who may come calling. Showing up at a staged political event for the Conservative Party of Canada did nothing for Newfoundland and Labrador or her position. Her role should be to seek all she can from all major parties and their leaders. Her demonstration of odd partisanship with a party that differs significantly in ideology and with a leader that caused so much monetary damage to her own province and people is neither statesperson-like nor intelligent. This alone confims for me that she is unable to reliably or competantly complete a project the size of the Lower Churchill.
Ditto for Ms. Jones and Miss Michael.
Is there any way Russell Wangersky could take up the role of investigative journalist for this project?
Gilbert Bennett VP - Lower Churchill Nalcor delivered what can only be described as a propaganda manifesto for the Williams/Dunderdale government.
Further I am witnessing Kathy Dunderdale on her feet in the House of Assembly now repeating the propaganda and I am unsure if she actually believes or understands it.
This development is not for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador - it will not be good for Newfoundland and Labrador - and it will disadvantage both residents and businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Let me start with Mr. Bennett - who sits in his position today because I and my fellow Newfoundlanders and Labradorians stopped the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. He only joined Hydro in 2005 and guess what - he once worked for Cable Atlantic. The virtues and praises of the company he sings - is only possible because the people not government had a vision for our green energy.
After his prolonged and basic presentation - he took questions from the audience. Unlike the less than thorough report provided by the Telegram I and others in the audience gave him questions that he did not answer or did not answer satisfactorily.
Further - his behavior while I was asking questions was like watching a couple of school children attempting to intimidate a classmate as he and his cohort grinned and giggled and raised eyebrows as I spoke.
Mr. Bennett - number one you work for the people of this province - we are the shareholders of the company you are fortunate to have employment with. Second; for you to in any way try to make light of my questions and commentary is nothing more than a joke. We both know who did what to save the Crown Jewel - Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and the jobs with it.
To my questions:
I asked Mr. Bennett if the deal with Emera was already done - as he was presenting as if it were including the awarding of contracts to Quebec companies like SNC Lavalin. After a bit of dancing he said no.
I asked Mr. Bennett if he could tell me the difference in the cost of power produced at the Lower Churchill if all the transmission lines to the Island and to Nova Scotia were not built. After screwing around with industry numbers - we got to it and he said it was about half price.
I asked if he was aware that Norway, Iceland, Quebec, Russia, and now Greenland have established aluminum smelters and he acknowledged that he did. I then followed with why Labrador could not establish same and if he was aware of what the power arrangements were in the aforementioned jurisdictions. Mr. Gilbert in a nut-shell said nothing has fallen into our laps and then went on with a convoluted attempt at trying to answer what the other jurisdictions were doing.
I asked him - outside of construction - how many jobs were going to be created in Newfoundland and Labrador on a long-term basis. He answered 35 and 50 respectively. I asked if he knew how many jobs could be produced long-term if an aluminum smelter set up in Labrador - he acknowledged it could be over a thousand.
The chair advised my time was up but I was permitted one more question - at which point Gilbert used the raising of the eyebrows and grinny look - I asked if he had a problem? He said no and added gruffly what is your question? I thanked the panel and sat down instead. I had seen enough of this sham of a consultation process and knew if I - who had such a long history with advocacy for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro could be treated with such disdain others would have no hope.
I listened to the presentation and I have to say there were more - 180 degree turns than I had witnessed in a while. When Nalcor and the government wanted to provide the Italian government and company with a "wind"fall by allowing privatization of wind energy - Hydro felt it was the best thing since sliced bread. Now that they "must" push this Emera deal through wind is intermittent and must be backed up - hydro is the best. You don't say Mr. Bennett - I remember the words coming out of my mouth while hydro execs were singing the wind energy tune to satisfy unknown shareholders.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador and here is why. The government cannot prove the numbers and projections it is using for power needs on the island. The projections on where energy costs may be in 2016 does not consider hydro's ability to lower costs as our current investments are paid off. The projections are the same incorrect projections used since the late 70's early 80's which would have seen our power supply exhaust in the early 1980's. This has not happened - primarily because of efficiencies, zero growth in population and the hemorrhaging of industry out of the island. I have copies of all of these projections and reports.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it once again does not use the power to attract industry to Labrador as the basis for development. The government has not provided the media or the public with evidence that they have tried but failed to attract industry. It further takes Islanders off thermal generation but does not take Labradorians off same.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it has us holding the debt to subsidize power to other provinces - thereby enabling our neighbours to attract industry using our power - while we are disadvantaged.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it forever puts at risk our control of exporting power by having one side controlled by Hydro-Quebec and the other by Emera (could be sold to Hydro-Quebec).
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because it does not foresee or protect the takeover of Emera by Hydro-Quebec - even though this possibility is more real and fiction. That is if Danny Williams was telling you and I the truth when he said Hydro-Quebec would do anything to block us
The deal is bad and incomplete for Newfoundland and Labrador because Danny Williams and his government promised to find redress on the Upper Churchill before any deal on Lower Churchill and this has not been achieved.
This deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because the proper assessments of alternative use for the power have not been competed.
This deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because the permanent jobs associated with such a significant hydro development are well below acceptable standards for good social-economic policy.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because the net permanent job growth is zero. There are currently 85 people working at Holyrood - that goes to 35 loss of 50 - then 50 picked up in Labrador where there currently are zero. The only good thing here is that Labrador picks up jobs.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because we have an offshore company involved in the project on a virtually permanent basis when no such company should be needed. Particularly if we are seeking a loan guarantee.
The deal is bad for Newfoundland and Labrador because federal money/grants will end up going outside the province to support other jurisdictions to control power rates. This after the people fought so hard to stop privatization which would have driven our power rates through the roof the past 15 years. Now government suggests we almost double them?
Then there is this whole business of Harper and Ignatieff followed by a bunch of PC MHA's and Cabinet Ministers including the Premier and Liberals preaching to us that this project is good for Canada. We are going to contribute to the greening up of Canada. Excuse me - this must be lost on the federal leaders but it should be ingrained here. WE ARE ALREADY CONTRIBUTING 5000 MW'S OF POWER TO CANADA FROM THE UPPER CHURCHILL. Newfoundland and Labrador through this export of power represents the largest per-capita export of green energy to other provinces in the country.
The business community - the government boasts - is behind the development. When - has the business community not been behind extracting resources - regardless of whether or not it's the best deal? We have had many lopsided and bad deals on resources in this province before - each and every time business was behind it. That's because their role - particularly publicly traded companies - is not to achieve the best deal for the people - rather they are concerned about making money for their shareholders. Premier - it is your job and the job of your government to do the best deal for the people.
The Government, Premier, and Opposition leaders are responsible for doing the best deal for our province - not to make the best deal for other provinces. They have their own representatives.
The Liberal Opposition is absolutely falling hook line and sinker for the power price thing. This is put out there so that Kathy and the Willderdale government can come back with a subsidy of a few cents to complete their argument.
The truth is the whole works of them have done nothing to develop the "best deal" for the province and particularly Labrador. If they are unable to do better than this - they should let it flow until somebody has a real vision for the proper development of the tremendous resource.
Neither Gilbert Bennett, Ed Martin or the Premier are able to hold their own under scrutiny of this deal. Bennett and Martin are given direction and they follow it and the Premier or other Premier gives direction- which is incompetant at best and who knows at worst.
Ed martin was just on CBC with Debbie Cooper - now stating permanent jobs are 120? The information you are hearing is to promote this deal at all costs. Clearly it does not matter to those desperate to see it proceed - what has to be done and said to get the deal done.
Who wrote the questions for Debbie Cooper? What information and background did they have to prepare the questions? Would they agree that the questions are limited to the combined knowledge of those writing or asking the questions? Does that mean all questions are not being asked and that the interviewer may not have the knowledge to conduct a free-flow conversation. That being the case who will CBC interview on the other side of the argument? Who will represent all the interests and points of those opposed to the project? How will the viewer know that all sides have been heard?
I know the difference.
Next up the Boards of Directors associated with Nalcor. See you then.
On a side note - Kathy Dunderdale is the Premier of the province. Her job is to represent the province regardless of who may come calling. Showing up at a staged political event for the Conservative Party of Canada did nothing for Newfoundland and Labrador or her position. Her role should be to seek all she can from all major parties and their leaders. Her demonstration of odd partisanship with a party that differs significantly in ideology and with a leader that caused so much monetary damage to her own province and people is neither statesperson-like nor intelligent. This alone confims for me that she is unable to reliably or competantly complete a project the size of the Lower Churchill.
Ditto for Ms. Jones and Miss Michael.
Is there any way Russell Wangersky could take up the role of investigative journalist for this project?
Friday, April 01, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)