The Liar and the Traitor - toxic combination for Newfoundland and Labrador

The Liar and the Traitor

The above "photo" forms part of a story out of the Globe and Mail today by Jane Taber.

Before I proceed with a short commentary - I would like to take a couple of sentences written by Ms. Taber in the article as I believe it demonstrates the disinterest the upper Canadian media has in - critical issues - for Newfoundland and Labrador and her people.

Mr. Manning, who had only served one term, from 2006 to 2008, was, in part, a victim of former premier Danny Williams's “Any But Conservative” campaign. He was angry with Stephen Harper over equalization issues.

As you can see Ms. Taber first makes Manning a victim of Danny Williams and secondly describes Williams as angry with Harper over equalization issues. In the first instance Manning is a victim of his own choices which absolutely went against the will of the people he supposedly represented and sought to represent again. In the second instance Williams was not "angry" over "equalization issues" - rather he was angry - as were the majority of people in our province - over the FACT that the Prime Minister LIED - he LIED directly to the Premier - he LIED directly one on one to me and he LIED to ALL Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. 


The lie was costly - about 10 billion dollars worth - and it will affect many generations of our people. It means the value of our natural non-renewable resources has been diminished to immediate economic benefit versus long-term invested benefit and immediate return. That is the problem with non-renewables - and that is what Harper promised to fix. He promised it as an economist, as a matter of principle, as a matter of good Canadian policy - but in the end he just lied.


If the two gentlemen above are elected again expect the same result for our province. If Fabian gets elected and Harper wins a minority - we can expect both to find ways to diminish our lot to improve the lot of others in Quebec and Ontario. If he wins a majority - there will be nothing left.

Minister Flaherty states the Fed's case on Equalization...

After the last federal budget - the one in which Stephen Harper reneged on his promise to remove non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization formula - I wrote Canada's Minister of Finance to ask a question and to make a few points.

Well lo and behold his response showed up yesterday in my email (only 6 months later).

Contained in my letter to the Minister was the following question:

My question to you is simple - will you honour the written promise made to voters during the last federal election - that is to remove all non-renewable natural resource revenues from the equalization formula?

Here's the Minister's Spin:

September 12, 2007

Dear Ms. Kelland-Dyer:

Thank you for your correspondence of March 8, 2007 regarding Budget 2007 and the Atlantic Accords. Please excuse the delay in replying.

Budget 2007 delivers on the commitment of Canada’s New Government to restore fiscal balance in Canada. A major feature of this commitment is a renewed and strengthened Equalization program that will now help to better ensure that all provinces are able to provide their residents with reasonably comparable levels of services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

The Government of Canada’s position has been clear and fair.

First and foremost, the Budget fully protects the Atlantic Accords. They have not been tampered with; they remain intact. Nothing has been taken away from provinces that currently benefit from the Atlantic Accords. Under Budget 2007, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador can operate under the existing Equalization formula for the life of the Atlantic Accords – and receive the same benefits as before, with no fiscal capacity cap on either Equalization or Atlantic Accord payments. This means that Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador will receive every dollar to which they are entitled under the Atlantic Accords.

This also means Nova Scotia keeps the very same arrangement that provides benefits under the 1986 and 2005 Accords, which includes an $830 ­million up-front payment, and Newfoundland and Labrador keeps the arrangement that provides benefits under the 1985 and 2005 Accords, including a $2­billion up-front payment. This arrangement is not available to any other province.

In addition to respecting the Accords, Budget 2007 goes further by offering both provinces a positive choice for the future. At any time over the life of the Accords, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador can choose to opt into the renewed Equalization program, if either province determines this as being advantageous. Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador could therefore receive even higher benefits than under the existing formula, while retaining their right to offset payments under the Accords. This is a choice that is up to each province to make; it will not be imposed upon them.

Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador have also been given even more flexibility beyond what was set out in Budget 2007. The budget legislation passed by Parliament allows both provinces to opt into the new Equalization formula for 2007­08, while preserving their ability to stay in the existing formula for the life of the Accords.

If Nova Scotia or Newfoundland and Labrador choose the new Equalization formula, it is only fair that the whole package would apply, including the fiscal capacity cap that is an integral part of the new Equalization program. It would not be fair to other provinces if only these two provinces were allowed to choose those parts of the new Equalization program that benefit them.

It must not be forgotten that placing the Equalization program on a principled basis going forward was an important, shared goal of the Government of Canada and all the provinces. The report of the Expert Panel on Equalization and Territorial Formula Financing provided an independent, balanced basis to do just that. An important principle was the application of a fiscal capacity cap, which sets a ceiling on Equalization payments based on the fiscal capacity of the highest non-receiving province. As stated in the report, “Equalization…should not result in less wealthy provinces having a greater fiscal capacity than provinces that do not receive Equalization.” The Government of Canada recognized this important principle last fall in Advantage Canada.

The growing prosperity of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador is something to celebrate. The fiscal position of both governments is getting stronger – both provinces are forecasting surpluses for 2006­07 and onward, while providing their residents with general tax relief. With 100­percent protection of the Atlantic Accords, each province can more than ever make sustained improvements to its economic and fiscal situation.

In short, we have delivered on our commitment to the provinces and territories. Our plan to restore fiscal balance ensures that this federation works for the good of all Canadians – including those in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you for communicating your views.

Sincerely,

James M. Flaherty

I highlighted the last paragraph for emphasis.

You will note the one question asked was not answered.

I also note that Flaherty only used commitments stated after they became government. The Minister is not prepared to address Stephen Harper's promises made to get elected. In this one finds the reason not to vote Conservative based on any promises or commitments made during the next federal election - for they are worthless.

The next Prime Minister for the Country of Ontario-Quebec has arrived...

Update:

As predicted by Sue's Blog earlier today - and according to a VOCM news story:

Stephane and Danny talked turkey on the Lower Churchill with Dion saying - he would be very pleased to work with Newfoundland and Labrador and the province of Quebec, to try and reconcile the views of both provinces and move forward on the development of the Lower Churchill project.

and

Dion says the development would greatly benefit the entire country, pointing to our energy needs and the issue of climate change.
_________________________________________________________________



Stephane Dion is here - and he brings this message:

We will honour the Atlantic Accord - a promise Dion says that Stephen Harper broke.

I wonder can Stephane Dion read English? Evidence so far suggests he cannot.

For Stephane and cling-ons Siobahn Coady - Judy Foote - Walter Noel et al. - here's the promise the Prime Minister made:

We will remove non-renewable resource revenue from the equalization formula to encourage the development of economic growth in the non-renewable resource sectors across Canada.

Dion delivers safe - safe - safe message for Quebec and Ontario - usual crap for Newfoundland and Labrador.

So Stephane - what's your position on non-renewable resource revenues? Don't come here and tell us that you will live up to the promise that Harper did not make.

While your visiting with our Premier - don't forget to push Canada's energy objective - to remove the Lower Churchill power from Labrador and move it into Central Canada to help air-quality and energy shortages in Ontario. And true to form - don't forget to push that power through a Quebec owned transmission line. You have a Premier who is determined to solve the energy issues in Canada - while leaving our province without the industrially attractive hydro-power.