A Change in Direction for Sue's Blog

Hi all,

Sue's Blog is coming down for a while. When it returns all the archives will be intact but there will be a new look and a new direction.

Some surprises coming as we enter into the 2015 election mode. 

Hope to see you all back.

Sue

Dunderdale's Interview - You be the Journalist

“The criticism can sometimes be relentless, and from a small handful of people, but they tend to be very loud and scathing, and personal, and mean”

Okay so the Premier makes the statement above during a media interview. You be the journalist!

What questions would you ask of her?

How about the following:

Premier - What or who specifically are you talking about?

Premier - Can you give me some examples of this?

Premier - What criticism is acceptable?

Premier - Who do you think should be allowed to criticize you?

Premier - Isn't this just a part of democracy?

Premier - Do you attack critics personally?

Premier - What's personal?

Premier - Do you think refusing to open the House of Assembly has precipitated some of this?

When they get answers to this - perhaps the media can ask for the other side to comment on the Premier's remarks.

As it stands - the media is allowing all bloggers to be tarred with the same brush. They are allowing the Premier to threaten free speech by casually throwing out innuendo in an attempt to thwart justified commentary by the people She serves.

It is not acceptable for CBC to simply place the following poll online:

Dunderdale is not the first politician to be peeved with the tone and content of online criticism. What do you think?

Do the right thing CBC - get the answers from the Premier and then allow those she is attacking personally to respond.

Why YOU should care about the Fishery!

Please click HERE - to listen to the latest episode of Talk with Sue and Shannon - Newfoundland and Labrador's newest Talk Show.

This discussion on the fishery was feisty and demonstrates why YOU should care about this industry and valuable renewable resource.

Join us again next Sunday for the next show.

"Talk with Sue" - A new Online Talk Show

Hi all - I am starting a new radio talk show "Talk with Sue"
The introductory show will take place this evening at 8 o'clock.
To listen in please go to http://www.blogtalkradio.com/talkwithsue
This is a test this evening - so who knows how it will go.

This program will talk openly about issues important to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Let's see what happens when commercial and political party interests are not at play.

Oilweek Magazine and the National Enquirer - Can you Tell the Difference?

Sometimes I will read Oilweek - when I have the time and opportunity to do the articles justice.  

The magazine provides the following description of itself: 

Established in 1948, Oilweek is Canada’s leading publication covering the oil and gas industry. Dubbed “the oil and gas authority,” readers trust Oilweek to deliver insight, analysis and an in-depth understanding of issues and trends of importance to their business. With offices in both Calgary and Edmonton, Oilweek editors and reporters are tapped in to the communities that drive the business of energy in Canada.

Pay particular attention to the insight, analysis, and in-depth part as I describe what can only be described as an inaccurate,sensationalized, and self-serving article by Wes Reid.  

The magazine says; Wes Reid: With his uniquely East Coast view, opining on events shaping the offshore industry.  

Opining should not be confused with uneducated, incorrect, and myopic monologues.  

First the article uses the following quote from Danny Williams to draw on:

"Believe me, I was quite prepared to stay on for another term," Williams said when he announced his departure. "But with the completion of the Lower Churchill deal, it is time for new ideas and new leadership."

When you start with that premise on the project - the magazine and Reid have nowhere to go but the land of propaganda.

  

At what time was the Lower Churchill deal completed? 

If it actually was completed prior to Williams’s departure; then somebody is lying to the people. The Term Sheet was not supposed to be a signed, sealed, and delivered project. 

The article also makes the following observations: 

People of the Rock never undervalued his worth by calling him Danny Millions. The nickname, however, underrates his abilities.

It should be changed to Danny Billions, because through hardnosed bargaining and the legislation, he created a royalty and tax system that will see oil companies annually contribute, for a generation or more, billions of dollars to Newfoundland and Labrador´s treasury.

Before retiring from 10 years of turbulent politics, the last seven of which he spent as premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, Williams led the Rock from rags to riches.

This should tell the reader where Reid's opining is going. Again the statements are inaccurate and incomplete. Lead the province from rags to riches? Then there are those revenues - non-renewable revenues from the oil sector. While Danny's policy did see the province buy an equity stake in the oil field - which I did support, he failed in something far more important. Williams walked away from a promise by Harper to remove those non-renewable resource royalties from the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act. That one piece of incomplete business will ensure that future generations will not achieve full benefits from this resource - which will be exhausted when they become adults. 

Williams lowered the flag when Paul Martin attempted to renege on the Atlantic Accord promises - yet he apparently cowered and ran when Harper took all the benefits away. 

The next statement by Reid was:

Some appear convinced that Williams stepped down as premier only to step behind the curtain. Sue Kelland-Dyer can be counted among them and among Williams´ nemeses.

So according to Reid - I am one of Williams' nemeses.

Defined one way: A formidable and usually victorious opponent.

Thank you Wes - but I only go after policies which I believe are not good for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. This opinion is based on significantly more information than Reid uses in his article.

I agreed with Williams taking on Martin.

I agreed with Williams taking equity for the people in the offshore oil sector.

I disagree with the Muskrat Falls deal with Emera.

I disagree with Williams walking away from Harper's promises.

Reid might not know this - because he did not talk to me before writing about me. He should have asked Danny - he could have told him that. 

Reid continued on with the following statements:

"I believe his decision to leave was already made," Dyer stated on her blog.
The political pundit once handled communications for Newfoundland and Labrador´s Liberal Party. She printed the Williams quote: "I would take my own money and put it in if I could." Kelland-Dyer then wrote, "Now that he can put his money into it [left office], has he?"

Poorly punctuated and ambiguous, Kelland-Dyer´s prose seems to suggest that Williams quickly finalized the Upper Churchill deal to increase Emera´s share values so he, once free of office and possible conflict of interest, could profit from the arrangement by investing in Emera.

She wrote, "Was the deal so good for Emera-he actually left to do that? It was an ‘unexpected departure‘right? The chain of command was so set-that everybody else ran away from the leadership. And Kathy is ‘extremely‘ focused on ushering a deal through-that she is unable to debate."

First inaccuracy; I did not at any time handle communications for the Liberal Party. 

Second inaccuracy; By quoting Williams I appeared to be saying...Well Mr. Reid, how about what Danny said himself, the absolutely unexpected exit from politics, and questions that should have seemed obvious for Reid himself to ask of Williams. Do not pontificate what is going on in my mind, Mr. Reid - you would not stand a chance.

Third inaccuracy; is the reference to Williams finalizing the Upper Churchill deal - I guess that one is just obvious. The fact that it was not picked up prior to posting or printing the story says much more about the knowledge of the writer, the editors, and the magazine itself - than the story could ever say about me. 

When you want to write a one-sided and self-serving commentary - the least you could do is talk to the person you are attempting to undermine. This article is not worth the paper it is printed on - and serves as nothing but a rank amateur attempt at propaganda. 

After reading this - what articles by Reid or the magazine should I put any stock in? That's something Oilweek might want to review.

What a fun year we will have leading to the election - truth - truth - and more truth - and then some more again

Below you will find an interesting comment to Sue's Blog and then you see my Response! Who is who - and what is what? The expose starts today. I would like to thank the reader for starting off the conversation. 

Sue, the how to do so presents a conundrum, since I know you were quite vociferous on the Open Line shows over the years on the corruption that was being perpetrated on our electorate, but those who wanted to shut you up, won the day. I find even the News Media outlets were complicit in perpetrating the devious act of having you shut down. They would bring you on for the entertainment factor and then they would set out to denigrate you.

As far as I am concerned all the Media, Newsprint - both commercial and free-print, Radio and T.V. seem to be reliant on both levels of government for advertising monies, or whatever it is they get from them that helps keep them going. And in order to get those advertising dollars they, no doubt, have to keep people like you, who hold so much information, silenced so as to keep the rest of us ignorant.

I can only suggest that you run as an Independent in the political arena. I am sure not one of the 3 political parties would want you to represent them, as they are all tarred with the one brush and none of them want the electorate of Newfoundland and Labrador to know the truth of why their province has languished for the past 61 years with very little economy established, despite being part of supposedly the best country in the world and being endowed with a coveted supply of natural resources and a great geographic location. You are too smart a lady for any of them and that's a liability for any of the political parties.

Sue, really running as an Independent is the only suggestion I can give you unless you can get someone to Fund one of these free newsprints that I see hanging around in the coffee shops, but I doubt that you will have someone come on side with the funds needed to do so because your rason d'etre is to inform your fellow Newfoundlanders and Labradorians of what has been perpetrated on them in the past by our political system; and to have done in our province, in the future, what is right and honest for its people. That is not what both levels of government want, they want our people (Newfoundlanders and Labradorians) to remain ignorant, it is much easier to tow away our resources when gravity isn't present. Unless you can get a philanthropist to come forward with no agenda of his/her own on what truth you will print in the newsprint that he/she will fund, you might be out of luck in getting the very informative stuff you have in your memory files on what has transpired in our province out there to the general public. Good Luck to you my dear, the factual stuff needs to be presented so that everyone can hear and read it for themselves.

I am sick of being looked down upon by my fellow Canadians, who have no idea what we have contributed to their country and their provinces at the expense of my fellow Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

The politicians who have aided and abetted in the deviant acts are not looked down upon, they are wealthy and they don't give a hoot. They can afford all the necessities in life, including expensive Medicare if they need it. They all suffer from the "Me Syndrome".

Response from me...

Most of your commentary is accurate. I am shut-up or shut-down is inaccurate. As I have been doing this sort of thing for over 20 years - the "establishment" - has tried everything - stopping short of having me "disappear". None of that has worked. Don't get me wrong - it is not that they have not affected me - they have - made my life very difficult and still do. But as you are witnessing now – I never really go away.

At some point this year I will be outlining specific cases of interference in both my personal and professional life. No doubt many people will find the information disturbing - but enlightening.

I suspect as I blog about particular examples - the blogosphere will light up just to see who is who.

The reason I stopped blogging just before the election in 2007 was that people had made their minds up with respect to Danny and the people were certainly entitled to elect Danny and live with his actions.

Notwithstanding that I needed a break - despite the ridiculing media - which I don't mind (easier to pick on me than a powerful politician) - people generally agree with the promotion of good policy for the province. The media and others are responsible for establishing a "saviour" mentality which drives the propaganda through the roof.

All three parties have players and they are driven - tories - liberals by the same establishment. They look at the political wind and just place their person in to lead their charge.

Right now that is being driven by the dollars to be made on the Lower Churchill. There are billions of dollars at stake and they will buy or coerce any way they can to protect their windfalls.

For some people it’s a matter of somebody like a Danny Williams giving them a nod or takes a picture of them together and so on. For others it is a perk or job that keeps them on side - then others it's an acknowledgement of some sort to a Board or an award.

Then there is the money machine (establishment) same for both parties who we never see or hear from - they are just the boys or girls that collect the cash from the deals.

Some of our politicians know exactly what's up - others just sit there and make a pension - or be quiet because they might get a Cabinet post - or just don't have the guts to speak.

Danny necessarily surrounded himself with people who were and are weak. It suits his dictatorial leadership style. It also allows him to batter individuals or media persons. There are not too many people who will stand up to that. They are more likely to just back-off and make their lives easier.

The media is so quiet on the Lower Churchill deal that it is disconcerting. I assume that is what happened during the Joey days of the Upper Churchill. Even Rowe and Crosbie did nothing to stop that - although there is no shortage of opinion on that deal now.

I have posted Danny's own words on resource developments particularly the Lower Churchill and not one media outlet is taking him or the rest of them to task on it.

You look at the psychology of our current Premier Kathy Dunderdale - who one day is out encouraging and congratulating women and in the same time-frame is bashing this woman for having an opinion.What would make one woman do this to another woman? I am articulating problems I have with a deal on the Churchill - that will harm the future potential of our province. She takes smacks at me professionally - albeit not to my face and without merit. It is strange sometimes to watch a woman who is elevated by a man - in part for smacking another woman for having an opinion and a point of view.

There are MHA's in there that could make a difference - but they just do not have the courage to speak. I experienced that during the attempt to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. They knew it was wrong - but the thought of taking on Wells or their party was too daunting.

In that instance the people won the day - but if this deal goes through on the lower churchill - it will all have been for nought.

Just think about Kathy taking smacks at me for my opinions on the lower churchill when she is unable to debate the project with me - she is unable to debate the history of the resource with me - and she is working with Nalcor as a crown corp - that I along with others prevented from being privatized. That's a joke. She must understand that the people were right in that fight - as she is using the saved asset to do a new deal - yet she thinks we all don't know what we are talking about now? She and her colleagues - if the deal goes through will become responsible for the next greatest giveaway in our history. Will it bother her? Who knows?

Do they ever stop and think - what possible reason could Sue Kelland-Dyer be doing this for? Can they come up with a reason? No - other than she loves her province. The Libs can't point to me being Tory or the Pc's point to me being Liberal - as I take policy smacks at them both. I certainly do not do it for my own financial benefit - none exists. In fact it harms that in every way you can think.

I realize now that the only way I can protect people and this province from this type of politics and deal making is to tell them all the things that have happened. Right from the days of Ed Roberts becoming an unelected Minister to taking over a Labrador seat - to now.

I believe that it might be therapeutic to people - just reading why I am cynical about governments. It might be the only thing that shakes people enough - to understand they have to wrestle their government and politics back from the establishment. It might very well interest people enough to read - the entire goings on - a real tell all scenario - not the type found in a Bill Rowe book.

The blog is going to do a department by department breakdown and the monies wasted and the monies that are leaving the province through multinationals instead of staying in province to support reinvestment in essential services. My time is silence has not been wasted.

Then we need to go through the lobbying activities. These are very interesting. It is time people knew who is who and what is what.

Everybody who writes me like you - remains anonymous - I am assuming therefore that you are concerned about what might happen to you?Maybe it's time we all took the plunge so that a few people willing to put their names out are not slaughtered for speaking up in a democracy.

I trust that people will be interested enough to spread the word via social media – and there is an option to go to the traditional media when it becomes necessary. 

How much longer before the election? There is no retreat in the world that changes what can happen to politics in just a day. 

Think about what you are saying Randy! Let's have a Debate

Randy - thanks for your post in response to my blog post on the fishery. I unlike you am very concerned if many of our people have the myopic view you continue to demonstrate respecting the fishery.

The fishery was destroyed by mismanagement - the question is was the destruction so horrific - that it was unable to rebuild the way we were lied to it would. That makes sense from the federal side of the equation - as they are responsible for the mismanagement. These things should not be difficult to follow - and the fishery is not half as complex as those sent with propaganda want us to believe.

If you believe the rest of the world has stopped fishing - what is our recovery stock - you are not myopic you are painfully naive. Can you find St. Pierre and Miquelon?

Then if we are to believe your fisheries argument - then it becomes who should be entitled to what's left? The John Risley's of the world or the fishers of Newfoundland and Labrador. That too should be easy to conclude.

Back to the issue of the consequences to our people - your position is    
"Sadly that means people will have to look for alternate employment in other areas and in other industries. This is not a matter of opinion but one of fact."

Really - it is a fact? If the Federal Government is responsible for the mismanagement - which it constitutionally is - and that mismanagement has lead to the continued inability to commercially prosecute the fishery - then they pay - NOT OUR PEOPLE. The federal government annually contributes more to farming disasters - for which they are not responsible than they do for our situation which is their fault. If you wish to inflict the harm on our people versus having the guts to go after those which are responsible for the mess - then good for you - I am not in your flock. 

We are owed at least 500 million per year for at least the past 10 years as well as monies lost from population exodus as a result. This includes things such as transfers, taxation, brain drain, additional costs for things such as home care as our elderly have seen their young families leave the community. Then there are the financial consequences to our municipalities and the families that have had to leave what once were hundreds of thousands in assets - which are now rendered valueless. I do not elude or say that you are taking pleasure in the situation - as you assume - I am saying you are flippant - when somebody has been harmed by a party that had a fiduciary duty to manage a stock - that in your opinion they just have to accept it and move on. That is defeatist. Tis easy to be that way when you - personally - financially - have not been harmed. 

Then you add:

"If anything is implemented it has to include some form of pension (compensation) for older workers forced to retire because of the current reality. I have proposed that if Ottawa is not willing to help we should do it ourselves while we have the money to make it happen"  

This is the height of it Randy - if there is to be some compensation - you think????? We should do it! Why is that? There is a party responsible for it and they should be made to pay for it. If your house burned down and you had insurance - if your insurance company refused to pay for it and promised you over and over that they would replace your house and 20 years later it did not happen - would you ask the citizens of Mount Pearl to pay for it.

The absolute bunk we have been fed on the fishery over the past few decades is nothing more than buying political time election over election until so many people have left the fishery - that there is nobody left to fight. That is a social experiment in political expediency which you have fallen for hook line and sinker.

It is time for all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to stand side by side and deal with this travesty. We do not need apologists for the feds, apathy from our community leaders, or bobbing heads repeating the corporate line. We need guts.

As for the oil revenues and 30 years - wishful thinking - and doing something with it to try and guarantee our future when the resource is exhausted - well then. We are unable to keep the benefits of our oil resources because of the equalization formula - which if not changed guarantees our failure. Even if we could it would only make up for the revenues that will no longer be there from oil. It does not and will not compensate us for the loss of a natural renewable resource.

You want to debate the fishery outside of the microphone you control - I and others would be happy to do it in a public forum. Let's see then what the collective public opinion would be.