Since 2006 Sue's Blog has been warning through posts about the disastrous Muskrat Falls project.
Bits and pieces of the Inquiry refer to critics of the project - not being experts.
Let's take that at face value and reflect upon the experts.
Clearly the highly paid experts were wrong in many areas of assessment. Clearly they failed initially to project and overcome engineering and design difficulties regarding the site. Clearly the project is a failure on every measurable level.
Miraculously the non-experts were right in many areas of assessment. Miraculously the non-experts did not miss the peculiarities of the site engineering. Miraculously they were successful in assessing the Muskrat Falls deal was horrific.
Now the other non-experts (politicians) were clearly incapable of understanding what the experts were concluding. They were clearly unable to see the massive flaws in the deal and the engineering. They were clearly non-experts listening to paid experts -most of whom will not likely suffer from this boondoggle.
For what use is an expert - if the person acting on an "experts" advice would not be independently be able to see the potential flaws? What's worse - the politicians refused to listen to critics - ignored or worse subjected the non-experts to terms such as partisans, naysayers, and conspiracy theorists.
There were opportunities to engage the citizenry but they were not afforded.
Citizen groups should have been provided funding throughout the processes from conception to sanction. This funding could have provided the non-expert politicians with real concerns, real hazards, and real findings from the non-expert citizenry.
Further this size of a deal should have gone through a referendum process where - the citizen non-experts were given the opportunity to promote and educate regarding their points of view and real concerns.
You see if the non-expert politicians felt expert enough to make the legislative commitment - they should have allowed the non-expert citizenry a real opportunity to be heard.
None of the politicians did this. No political party did this.
Declining population, increasing efficiencies in housing and appliances, closure of two mills, numerous fish plants, schools, clinics etc are examples of reasonable considerations to determine future power supply requirements.
Muskrat Falls versus the entire Lower Churchill or even Gull Island begged the question why choose Muskrat.
Emera owning ANY part of our domestic distribution system is illogical and not to our benefit. It will increase prices.
Dealing with Emera - a company that could be the subject of a hostile or welcome takeover - particularly when Hydro-Quebec is the touted enemy - and could easily consume Emera minus Nova Scotia Power - was a poor choice.
The critical removal of alternate energy sources into the future was naive at best and corrupt at worst.
The engineering challenges - poorly thought out, considered, or even dealt with was another red flag for a layman.
The power needs of Labrador - routinely and as is usual dismissed including but not limited to plugging an industry of substance into the new supply - another red flag.
The continued interference with the Public Utilities Board - when they are the stop gap for consumers - yet another red flag.
Budgets that were routinely over - became the norm - raising another red flag.
The lack of knowledge of many MHA's regarding the history of the hydro-potentials in Labrador was and continues to be a very disturbing situation.
The obvious angst of indigenous peoples despite the approval by some of their leaders should have been addressed.
This is but a short list of how a citizen could have been and some citizens were very concerned about this failed project.
The decision by Dwight Ball and the Liberal government to push through the remainder of the project without thorough analysis and public input into other options - just continued the madness that is Muskrat.
The Inquiry is a political decision to thwart anger of consumers and taxpayers away from the current government and will do nothing to demonstrate the mess that occurred after they took office.
The EXperts they say? Funny how the naysayers, conspiracy theorists, partisan hacks, and all other names given to critics of the project - were miraculously right.
As I write today the folly continues and we are made to look more the fools than we already are.
Showing posts with label vocm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vocm. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 16, 2018
Thursday, October 12, 2017
More Breaking News
Puerto Rico as you have all probably heard by now - is essentially bankrupt - on fiscal life support - in need of massive bailout. It is considered impoverished.
Newfoundland and Labrador on the other hand is designated as a "have province". That puts us ahead of the provinces collecting equalization.
In the 2017-2018 year, the following provinces will receive equalization payments:
Outstanding debt: 70 billion
Population: 3.4 million
$20,588 per person
Unemployment 10%
Newfoundland and Labrador
Outstanding debt: 13 billion
Population: 528,000
$24,621 per person
Unemployment 15%
This does not include the 13 billion dollar boondoggle Muskrat.
Both Puerto Rico and Newfoundland and Labrador see migration to the continental parts of their countries - both permanently and for temporary work.
Puerto Rico and Newfoundland and Labrador are losing population.
Puerto Rico's aging demographics are much healthier than Newfoundland and Labrador's
We must also consider that Newfoundland and Labrador receives as all provinces do - transfer payments for programs such as health and education not so much for Puerto Rico.
There is a three-pronged problem here.
The first is the understanding or lack thereof of the Equalization program. I have discussed this briefly in a previous post.
The second is that even the reasonable or equitable (to some degree) parts of equalization - leaves us essentially bankrupt because although we have the resources to generate tax, royalties, revenues - we have mismanaged the resources so badly that what equalization considers we should generate from resources - we don't actually generate from them. (oil revenues unfair part)
The third problem is the absolute ignorance deliberate or otherwise of our politicians - refusing to actually understand the mess we are in.
And these same people continue to permit spending on Muskrat Falls.
The people of Puerto Rico just like the people of Newfoundland and Labrador love where they live and want to stay. However both jurisdictions are likely to see significant migration to their respective "mainlands" simply to survive and thrive.
Note to Labradorians - my use of the word "mainland" does not refer to you. I recognize the difference.
Newfoundland and Labrador on the other hand is designated as a "have province". That puts us ahead of the provinces collecting equalization.
In the 2017-2018 year, the following provinces will receive equalization payments:
- Quebec ($11.081 billion) (please note this amount) program designed to suit them.
- Manitoba ($1.820 billion)
- Nova Scotia ($1.779 billion)
- New Brunswick ($1.760 billion)
- Ontario ($1.424 billion)
- Prince Edward Island ($390 million)
Outstanding debt: 70 billion
Population: 3.4 million
$20,588 per person
Unemployment 10%
Newfoundland and Labrador
Outstanding debt: 13 billion
Population: 528,000
$24,621 per person
Unemployment 15%
This does not include the 13 billion dollar boondoggle Muskrat.
Both Puerto Rico and Newfoundland and Labrador see migration to the continental parts of their countries - both permanently and for temporary work.
Puerto Rico and Newfoundland and Labrador are losing population.
Puerto Rico's aging demographics are much healthier than Newfoundland and Labrador's
We must also consider that Newfoundland and Labrador receives as all provinces do - transfer payments for programs such as health and education not so much for Puerto Rico.
There is a three-pronged problem here.
The first is the understanding or lack thereof of the Equalization program. I have discussed this briefly in a previous post.
The second is that even the reasonable or equitable (to some degree) parts of equalization - leaves us essentially bankrupt because although we have the resources to generate tax, royalties, revenues - we have mismanaged the resources so badly that what equalization considers we should generate from resources - we don't actually generate from them. (oil revenues unfair part)
The third problem is the absolute ignorance deliberate or otherwise of our politicians - refusing to actually understand the mess we are in.
And these same people continue to permit spending on Muskrat Falls.
The people of Puerto Rico just like the people of Newfoundland and Labrador love where they live and want to stay. However both jurisdictions are likely to see significant migration to their respective "mainlands" simply to survive and thrive.
Note to Labradorians - my use of the word "mainland" does not refer to you. I recognize the difference.
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
Real BREAKING NEWS
Yesterday Sue's Blog focused on the journalistic style of James McLeod in his story headlined "Nalcor audit won’t be done before retirement: AG".
Today let's look at some of the other information we can take from this interview.
The AG Terry Paddon is retiring at months end. He leaves behind an unfinished audit of specific operations of Nalcor.
The story does not tell us some important things.
How far along is the audit?
When did Paddon expect to finish it when it began?
Did he run into unforeseen difficulties in attaining the information he needed?
Was it Paddon's intent to finish the audit before he retired?
What does Paddon think the cost will be to finish it?
Is it more costly under a new Auditor General than if he completed it before he retired?
Did he find anything worth noting now?
Terry Paddon is one of those nice people. Not much - I've ever seen in his personality that would put people off. He is a professional by designation and as best I could tell - took his role seriously.
Paddon - however - missed a couple of key areas in his tenure with the Department of Finance and as Auditor General. He missed some real activity regarding the Federal - Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act (Equalization) - despite being alerted to it.
Equalization - as the program is normally referred to - primarily has been to the benefit of Quebec. The program which Stephen Harper promised he would change but then did not - I assume was kept whole for Quebec.
Harper's promise to remove royalties from non-renewable resources from the formula - would have meant that our oil revenues could have served to improve the lives of future generations so much more. That was a digression. (still angry at CPC for deliberately conning Newfoundland and Labrador and "Seantor" Manning's standing at Harper's side as he did it)
BREAKING NEWS
Many people may not have noticed - but Hydro-Quebec does a significant amount of public program spending. They have been doing that for decades. Why is the question....
ANSWER
Back in 2000 Stephane Dion then President of the Queen's Privy Council and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs appeared on Bill Rowe's Open-Line. I asked questions the Minister could not answer on line - so he did as he promised - wrote me the answers to my questions.
Below is the response:
"On the question of the treatment of Churchill Falls under the Equalization program, it should be noted that an adjustment has been made in the calculation of Equalization payments since 1982 which takes into account how Churchill Falls hydro is priced. Equalization payments are based on the relative ability of each province to raise taxes; and the Churchill Falls adjustment shifts some capacity to tax hydro sites from Newfoundland to Quebec. The net effect is to reduce Quebec's annual Equalization payments while raising Newfoundland's. Furthermore, to the extent that profits from Churchill Falls translate into profits to Hydro Quebec that are remitted to the Quebec government, these too have the effect of lowering Quebec's Equalization."
Right from the get-go we were being further penalized on the Upper Churchill - while Quebec reaped even more benefits. Then the formula was changed to reflect the real contract (albeit not enough in my opinion).
Were we ever compensated for the past - NO.
The real kicker though was found accidentally in the last sentence of Dion's response. "Furthermore, to the extent that profits from Churchill Falls translate into profits to Hydro Quebec that are remitted to the Quebec government, these too have the effect of lowering Quebec's Equalization."
That little remark was an eye opener for anybody watching Hydro-Quebec - as I certainly was.
The hundreds of News Releases coming out of Hydro-Quebec in those years were phenomenal. Now it made sense. Before profit - expenses come out. If Hydro-Quebec delivered or helped to deliver public programming on behalf of the Government of Quebec - they lowered their profits - while the province of Quebec saved equalization money - which gave the province even more to spend on public programs.
In short - Hydro-Quebec making billions off our resource - reduced their profits - lowered remitances to the government - in some years almost to zero - to avoid the loss of equalization. This in turn exponentially increased the value from Labrador resources for Quebec.
At the time Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro was making money and was remitting profits to Newfoundland and Labrador. At the time we could have taken advantage of the same. Today Nalcor is not "profitable" - only by force of the PUB, our laws, and oil activity. Nalcor never did do the investment and development that Hydro-Quebec has successfully.
Terry Paddon was aware of this and we did nothing. We sat on our hands and did nothing.
The political and media spin in Newfoundland and Labrador became we MUST become a "have" province. The romantic - naive - irrelevant title of "have". The "have being based on a formula that could see a financially destitute province be "have" while a thriving growing super power province be "have not".
Let me be more clear: Quebec has an unemployment rate of 6% Newfoundland and Labrador is at almost 15%. The population in NL was 530,854 in 1971 and 528,817 in 2017 meanwhile the population in Quebec was 6,137,305 in 1971 and 8,394,034 in 2017. Provincial debt NL is $23,052 per person while in Quebec it is $22,104. This does not include the albatross of 13 Billion for Muskrat Falls. Then we take into account that Nalcor is not financing all it's own obligations - we put in a fair chunk and it is only barely profitable because of oil operations. When compared to Hydro-Quebec which has hundreds of millions in profits - without oil revenues.
Paddon failed by not describing what equalization truly is and how the system works. It's not all his fault - but political masters should not have had that much say.
The media - should really get its collective act together and do some real reporting. It should make itself knowledgeable about important issues and policies before it puts out fluff - this denying the people of balanced information on which they can make a decision.
It is no longer acceptable to have zero leadership in politics and zero accountability of the news media.
We are broke. We continue to repeat mistakes. We continue to dream without doing anything that remotely will help us achieve our dream of prosperous future.
By the way - are there any MHA's willing to wade in to this discussion or members of our "press corps"?
Today let's look at some of the other information we can take from this interview.
The AG Terry Paddon is retiring at months end. He leaves behind an unfinished audit of specific operations of Nalcor.
The story does not tell us some important things.
How far along is the audit?
When did Paddon expect to finish it when it began?
Did he run into unforeseen difficulties in attaining the information he needed?
Was it Paddon's intent to finish the audit before he retired?
What does Paddon think the cost will be to finish it?
Is it more costly under a new Auditor General than if he completed it before he retired?
Did he find anything worth noting now?
Terry Paddon is one of those nice people. Not much - I've ever seen in his personality that would put people off. He is a professional by designation and as best I could tell - took his role seriously.
Paddon - however - missed a couple of key areas in his tenure with the Department of Finance and as Auditor General. He missed some real activity regarding the Federal - Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act (Equalization) - despite being alerted to it.
Equalization - as the program is normally referred to - primarily has been to the benefit of Quebec. The program which Stephen Harper promised he would change but then did not - I assume was kept whole for Quebec.
Harper's promise to remove royalties from non-renewable resources from the formula - would have meant that our oil revenues could have served to improve the lives of future generations so much more. That was a digression. (still angry at CPC for deliberately conning Newfoundland and Labrador and "Seantor" Manning's standing at Harper's side as he did it)
BREAKING NEWS
Many people may not have noticed - but Hydro-Quebec does a significant amount of public program spending. They have been doing that for decades. Why is the question....
ANSWER
Back in 2000 Stephane Dion then President of the Queen's Privy Council and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs appeared on Bill Rowe's Open-Line. I asked questions the Minister could not answer on line - so he did as he promised - wrote me the answers to my questions.
Below is the response:
"On the question of the treatment of Churchill Falls under the Equalization program, it should be noted that an adjustment has been made in the calculation of Equalization payments since 1982 which takes into account how Churchill Falls hydro is priced. Equalization payments are based on the relative ability of each province to raise taxes; and the Churchill Falls adjustment shifts some capacity to tax hydro sites from Newfoundland to Quebec. The net effect is to reduce Quebec's annual Equalization payments while raising Newfoundland's. Furthermore, to the extent that profits from Churchill Falls translate into profits to Hydro Quebec that are remitted to the Quebec government, these too have the effect of lowering Quebec's Equalization."
Right from the get-go we were being further penalized on the Upper Churchill - while Quebec reaped even more benefits. Then the formula was changed to reflect the real contract (albeit not enough in my opinion).
Were we ever compensated for the past - NO.
The real kicker though was found accidentally in the last sentence of Dion's response. "Furthermore, to the extent that profits from Churchill Falls translate into profits to Hydro Quebec that are remitted to the Quebec government, these too have the effect of lowering Quebec's Equalization."
That little remark was an eye opener for anybody watching Hydro-Quebec - as I certainly was.
The hundreds of News Releases coming out of Hydro-Quebec in those years were phenomenal. Now it made sense. Before profit - expenses come out. If Hydro-Quebec delivered or helped to deliver public programming on behalf of the Government of Quebec - they lowered their profits - while the province of Quebec saved equalization money - which gave the province even more to spend on public programs.
In short - Hydro-Quebec making billions off our resource - reduced their profits - lowered remitances to the government - in some years almost to zero - to avoid the loss of equalization. This in turn exponentially increased the value from Labrador resources for Quebec.
At the time Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro was making money and was remitting profits to Newfoundland and Labrador. At the time we could have taken advantage of the same. Today Nalcor is not "profitable" - only by force of the PUB, our laws, and oil activity. Nalcor never did do the investment and development that Hydro-Quebec has successfully.
Terry Paddon was aware of this and we did nothing. We sat on our hands and did nothing.
The political and media spin in Newfoundland and Labrador became we MUST become a "have" province. The romantic - naive - irrelevant title of "have". The "have being based on a formula that could see a financially destitute province be "have" while a thriving growing super power province be "have not".
Let me be more clear: Quebec has an unemployment rate of 6% Newfoundland and Labrador is at almost 15%. The population in NL was 530,854 in 1971 and 528,817 in 2017 meanwhile the population in Quebec was 6,137,305 in 1971 and 8,394,034 in 2017. Provincial debt NL is $23,052 per person while in Quebec it is $22,104. This does not include the albatross of 13 Billion for Muskrat Falls. Then we take into account that Nalcor is not financing all it's own obligations - we put in a fair chunk and it is only barely profitable because of oil operations. When compared to Hydro-Quebec which has hundreds of millions in profits - without oil revenues.
Paddon failed by not describing what equalization truly is and how the system works. It's not all his fault - but political masters should not have had that much say.
The media - should really get its collective act together and do some real reporting. It should make itself knowledgeable about important issues and policies before it puts out fluff - this denying the people of balanced information on which they can make a decision.
It is no longer acceptable to have zero leadership in politics and zero accountability of the news media.
We are broke. We continue to repeat mistakes. We continue to dream without doing anything that remotely will help us achieve our dream of prosperous future.
By the way - are there any MHA's willing to wade in to this discussion or members of our "press corps"?
Friday, September 29, 2017
Dwight's Muskrat Feast of deception
Last night was a spectacle to behold. Dwight Ball's Muskrat dinner was something to forget - if we could.
First let me thank some of the media for tweeting the latest Liberal Party function. Last night was a show of support for Dwight Ball by the party - thereby connecting themselves fully to his disastrous performance on the job.
From a media perspective - any journalist who is willing to portray that what the public (used to be naysayers, partisans, and conspiracy theorists) wants is an Inquiry is ignoring the so-called longstanding opposers to the project.
The indigenous people want the project to stop completely and they want specific material on the North Spur.
The longstanding opposers to the project want and are demanding a forensic audit now.
I believe most want the project to stop until an audit is complete so as the people can review all options for Muskrat Falls.
There is a strong belief that there is corruption, incompetence, straight up lies, hidden information, and incomplete data - regarding the project.
VOCM's question of the day - treats the public as if they got what they wanted with the announcement of an Inquiry. Then it encourages the public (based on that false assumption) to say what they want to find out from an Inquiry. Table #8 was Steele Hotels.
Then there is the permanent speaking note for Ball. "It's too late to stop it now". Then couched in - if I could I would tomorrow. Dwight Ball is just lying here. He uses Stan Marshall to back him up - so that he won't be responsible for that decision.
An Inquiry is going to review a project that will destroy us economically. An Inquiry is like reading a postmortem report. This is not what's going to get us out of this fiasco.
Next thing Ball's managers do is craft a little bit of we will get our way out of this through a new relationship with Quebec. In plain language - we are going cap in hand - completely vulnerable - to a savvy hydro giant to seek help. It means we are giving something else away.
Unbelievably but yet so - the amateur drafter of the speech must have been told that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are so gullible that if we throw in a Donald Trump reference - it will dissuade the discussion of looking at new political options. It must have taken Dwight's administrators some time to get him to understand how he could use the "specter" of "populism".
Finally let's look at the forum used to make such an announcement. Ball did not look to the media for live air-time to talk to the people and present factual data on why the project cannot be stopped or why an Inquiry is better than a forensic audit. He did not use a live appearance to explain why doing a forensic audit now and then being guided by those results to look at options - one being an Inquiry is not the right choice..
So Ball decided - or it was decided for him (he does not make decisions) that a Liberal Party fundraiser was to become a de facto branch of government that can be used when necessary to conduct government business. This is not an issue for the party - it is an issue for the province and her people. This was a disrespectful, idiotic, arrogant and despicable choice of forum.
As $500 a plate meals were served to those thriving off Muskrat - Ball thought he was talking to the people? No he was simply reassuring the corporate elite that despite what the people want - the project would continue and a forensic audit would be avoided right now.
All in all this was a kick in the face to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador - and Ball does not mind being used to do this.
Dwight Ball lied last night. Dwight Ball lies all the time.
After he takes his knocks for this - the Party will present an alternative to his leadership - so they can carry on.
As for Siobhon Coady - her absence from all these "decisions" is an attempt to preserve her for another term.
Why Dwight Ball is doing this? I'd have to really look at who he is indebted to and for what. I can assuredly and confidently tell you he is a liar.
First let me thank some of the media for tweeting the latest Liberal Party function. Last night was a show of support for Dwight Ball by the party - thereby connecting themselves fully to his disastrous performance on the job.
From a media perspective - any journalist who is willing to portray that what the public (used to be naysayers, partisans, and conspiracy theorists) wants is an Inquiry is ignoring the so-called longstanding opposers to the project.
The indigenous people want the project to stop completely and they want specific material on the North Spur.
The longstanding opposers to the project want and are demanding a forensic audit now.
I believe most want the project to stop until an audit is complete so as the people can review all options for Muskrat Falls.
There is a strong belief that there is corruption, incompetence, straight up lies, hidden information, and incomplete data - regarding the project.
VOCM's question of the day - treats the public as if they got what they wanted with the announcement of an Inquiry. Then it encourages the public (based on that false assumption) to say what they want to find out from an Inquiry. Table #8 was Steele Hotels.
Then there is the permanent speaking note for Ball. "It's too late to stop it now". Then couched in - if I could I would tomorrow. Dwight Ball is just lying here. He uses Stan Marshall to back him up - so that he won't be responsible for that decision.
An Inquiry is going to review a project that will destroy us economically. An Inquiry is like reading a postmortem report. This is not what's going to get us out of this fiasco.
Next thing Ball's managers do is craft a little bit of we will get our way out of this through a new relationship with Quebec. In plain language - we are going cap in hand - completely vulnerable - to a savvy hydro giant to seek help. It means we are giving something else away.
Unbelievably but yet so - the amateur drafter of the speech must have been told that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are so gullible that if we throw in a Donald Trump reference - it will dissuade the discussion of looking at new political options. It must have taken Dwight's administrators some time to get him to understand how he could use the "specter" of "populism".
Finally let's look at the forum used to make such an announcement. Ball did not look to the media for live air-time to talk to the people and present factual data on why the project cannot be stopped or why an Inquiry is better than a forensic audit. He did not use a live appearance to explain why doing a forensic audit now and then being guided by those results to look at options - one being an Inquiry is not the right choice..
So Ball decided - or it was decided for him (he does not make decisions) that a Liberal Party fundraiser was to become a de facto branch of government that can be used when necessary to conduct government business. This is not an issue for the party - it is an issue for the province and her people. This was a disrespectful, idiotic, arrogant and despicable choice of forum.
As $500 a plate meals were served to those thriving off Muskrat - Ball thought he was talking to the people? No he was simply reassuring the corporate elite that despite what the people want - the project would continue and a forensic audit would be avoided right now.
All in all this was a kick in the face to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador - and Ball does not mind being used to do this.
Dwight Ball lied last night. Dwight Ball lies all the time.
After he takes his knocks for this - the Party will present an alternative to his leadership - so they can carry on.
As for Siobhon Coady - her absence from all these "decisions" is an attempt to preserve her for another term.
Why Dwight Ball is doing this? I'd have to really look at who he is indebted to and for what. I can assuredly and confidently tell you he is a liar.
Friday, September 22, 2017
We can't stop Muskrat now!
You know the old saying If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.
We are the proverbial people spoken about.
Lie 1
We need the power
Lie 2
This is the cheapest alternative
Lie 3
We need to get around Quebec
Lie 4
Holyrood will be eliminated
Lie 5
It will cost 7-8 billion dollars
Lie 6
We need it for industry
Lie 7
We will own the transmission line to the Island
Lie 8
Ed Martin quit/retired
and now the biggest whopper of them all
Lie 9
We can't stop Muskrat now
For each and every lie above we had head-bobbing from ignorant MHA's and Ministers, we had a media in report but not research mode, and we had and have leaders who lead us down a garden path.
Each and every one of these lies was repeated, reported, repeated, reported, and repeated and reported.
Each and every one without a modicum of real and unfettered independent investigation.
The first big whopper - "we need the power" was one leader and the last big whopper "we can't stop Muskrat now" from our current leader.
Both of them have tried to back up the statements with "input" from experts. The current expert Stan Marshall - riddled with government exempt conflict - has proclaimed "this is a boondoggle" but "we can't stop it now".
The first part of his statement "this is a boondoggle" is something that should be used in the Captain Obvious Hotels.com commercials. The second part "we can't stop it now" is coming without real proof or true independent review - that should be demanded by the people.
We suspect there has been/is some form of corruption going on. We know for certain incompetence has been abound and continues. We know we were lied to. Any reasonably minded person would say - it is time to stop the boondoggle, forensically audit the boondoggle, review the results publicly, and then look at all options.
Not here though. Lie repeat. Lie repeat. Lie report repeat.
It is unfathomable.
We are the proverbial people spoken about.
Lie 1
We need the power
Lie 2
This is the cheapest alternative
Lie 3
We need to get around Quebec
Lie 4
Holyrood will be eliminated
Lie 5
It will cost 7-8 billion dollars
Lie 6
We need it for industry
Lie 7
We will own the transmission line to the Island
Lie 8
Ed Martin quit/retired
and now the biggest whopper of them all
Lie 9
We can't stop Muskrat now
For each and every lie above we had head-bobbing from ignorant MHA's and Ministers, we had a media in report but not research mode, and we had and have leaders who lead us down a garden path.
Each and every one of these lies was repeated, reported, repeated, reported, and repeated and reported.
Each and every one without a modicum of real and unfettered independent investigation.
The first big whopper - "we need the power" was one leader and the last big whopper "we can't stop Muskrat now" from our current leader.
Both of them have tried to back up the statements with "input" from experts. The current expert Stan Marshall - riddled with government exempt conflict - has proclaimed "this is a boondoggle" but "we can't stop it now".
The first part of his statement "this is a boondoggle" is something that should be used in the Captain Obvious Hotels.com commercials. The second part "we can't stop it now" is coming without real proof or true independent review - that should be demanded by the people.
We suspect there has been/is some form of corruption going on. We know for certain incompetence has been abound and continues. We know we were lied to. Any reasonably minded person would say - it is time to stop the boondoggle, forensically audit the boondoggle, review the results publicly, and then look at all options.
Not here though. Lie repeat. Lie repeat. Lie report repeat.
It is unfathomable.
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Vladimir Lenin
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimirle132031.html
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimirle132031.html
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Vladimir Lenin
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimirle132031.html
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimirle132031.html
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
Triple D - Danny's and Dwight's Dominoes
The title includes both Danny Williams and Dwight Ball - as Williams started the Muskrat mess and Ball seems determined to finish it.
The domino affect for Newfoundland and Labrador of this disastrous, ill-conceived, potentially corrupt project is astounding.
1. the astronomical debt burden on taxpayers and ratepayers
2. the questionable engineering to date on the project
3. the unquestionable loss of population that will occur
4. the unquestionable decimation of disposable income for a significant percentage of people
5. the unquestionable destruction of small/medium sized businesses relying on disposable income
6. the unquestionable increase in unemployment (already at third world levels)
7. the unquestionable reduction in essential services - as government seeks to find savings
8. the unquestionable increase in poverty - particularly seniors on fixed income and children
9. the unquestionable rise in taxation that will have to be introduced should energy subsidies occur
10. the unquestionable giveaway of more resources to try an offset 1-9 above
This project will be successful as the driving factor for out-migration and those remaining will have to shop at Costco or Walmart to survive - thereby eliminating and NL or even Canadian company existence.
Many of our abnormally high aging population will be left here as their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren move to more economically stable province, States or countries.
Rural Newfoundland and Labrador will be decimated at a greater pace.
Health care, education, and social safety nets will not be maintainable at today's level - let alone advance.
Crime, drug addictions, and suicides will - in my opinion - be on the rise.
Meanwhile the fat-cats will be enjoying the wealth attained through the destruction of our province.
The fat-cats don't care - for the most part that's why they're fat-cats.
More seniors homes and long-term care will be needed as they cannot live at home with assistance from their children (who are gone) - yet there is no money to do this.
As younger taxpayers/ratepayers leave Newfoundland and Labrador the taxation and revenue needed to fulfill debt obligations will be shared among fewer people.
This is the catastrophic position we are in.
Ball - for his part - will not stop Muskrat and conduct a forensic audit and truly examine all options. Muskrat has consumed him and many of his colleagues. Ball - instead - will hold out on making a decision - any decision - as is his norm. This will cost us - our province.
Williams is running around complaining about infrastructure St. John's is "unfairly" imposing on him - and taking potshots at Dobbin - another "leader" of the business community.
Ball's biggest concern about seeking leadership, winning leadership, seeking elected office as the Premier - is whether or not the Townie big corporate community would accept him and take him seriously. He is working extremely hard to win their approval.
In my opinion - Williams for his part is unwilling to accept criticism - of any type and will parade around like a litigation happy snapping turtle.
The current crop of MHA's and. Ministers are primarily incompetent as it relates to policy areas such as energy, education, and health - to name but a few.
The government backbenchers are as probing as our media was during the Muskrat cheer-leading days.
The Official Opposition is in free-fall having promoted and backed the Muskrat fiasco - including Kent who opportunistically found another source of grand public servant pay - as leadership hopes or return to Ministerial prominence was fading like the caplin stock. Leadership potential is about as good as chicken left on the counter for 2 days.
The NDP is nowhere in sight - as it finishes its dismantling to start anew. Now that the union workers have completed a fair chunk of the Muskrat fiasco - it might be okay now to throw out a few jabs.
The Danny dominoes were lined up when the Liberals took power - and the dominoes are now falling quickly after Dwight pushed the first one.
As I said in my last post - time is NOT on our side.
The domino affect for Newfoundland and Labrador of this disastrous, ill-conceived, potentially corrupt project is astounding.
1. the astronomical debt burden on taxpayers and ratepayers
2. the questionable engineering to date on the project
3. the unquestionable loss of population that will occur
4. the unquestionable decimation of disposable income for a significant percentage of people
5. the unquestionable destruction of small/medium sized businesses relying on disposable income
6. the unquestionable increase in unemployment (already at third world levels)
7. the unquestionable reduction in essential services - as government seeks to find savings
8. the unquestionable increase in poverty - particularly seniors on fixed income and children
9. the unquestionable rise in taxation that will have to be introduced should energy subsidies occur
10. the unquestionable giveaway of more resources to try an offset 1-9 above
This project will be successful as the driving factor for out-migration and those remaining will have to shop at Costco or Walmart to survive - thereby eliminating and NL or even Canadian company existence.
Many of our abnormally high aging population will be left here as their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren move to more economically stable province, States or countries.
Rural Newfoundland and Labrador will be decimated at a greater pace.
Health care, education, and social safety nets will not be maintainable at today's level - let alone advance.
Crime, drug addictions, and suicides will - in my opinion - be on the rise.
Meanwhile the fat-cats will be enjoying the wealth attained through the destruction of our province.
The fat-cats don't care - for the most part that's why they're fat-cats.
More seniors homes and long-term care will be needed as they cannot live at home with assistance from their children (who are gone) - yet there is no money to do this.
As younger taxpayers/ratepayers leave Newfoundland and Labrador the taxation and revenue needed to fulfill debt obligations will be shared among fewer people.
This is the catastrophic position we are in.
Ball - for his part - will not stop Muskrat and conduct a forensic audit and truly examine all options. Muskrat has consumed him and many of his colleagues. Ball - instead - will hold out on making a decision - any decision - as is his norm. This will cost us - our province.
Williams is running around complaining about infrastructure St. John's is "unfairly" imposing on him - and taking potshots at Dobbin - another "leader" of the business community.
Ball's biggest concern about seeking leadership, winning leadership, seeking elected office as the Premier - is whether or not the Townie big corporate community would accept him and take him seriously. He is working extremely hard to win their approval.
In my opinion - Williams for his part is unwilling to accept criticism - of any type and will parade around like a litigation happy snapping turtle.
The current crop of MHA's and. Ministers are primarily incompetent as it relates to policy areas such as energy, education, and health - to name but a few.
The government backbenchers are as probing as our media was during the Muskrat cheer-leading days.
The Official Opposition is in free-fall having promoted and backed the Muskrat fiasco - including Kent who opportunistically found another source of grand public servant pay - as leadership hopes or return to Ministerial prominence was fading like the caplin stock. Leadership potential is about as good as chicken left on the counter for 2 days.
The NDP is nowhere in sight - as it finishes its dismantling to start anew. Now that the union workers have completed a fair chunk of the Muskrat fiasco - it might be okay now to throw out a few jabs.
The Danny dominoes were lined up when the Liberals took power - and the dominoes are now falling quickly after Dwight pushed the first one.
As I said in my last post - time is NOT on our side.
Sunday, September 10, 2017
Dear Premier - do you see the red flags? Forensic Audit
A forensic audit is the process of reviewing a person's or company's
financial statements to determine if they are accurate and lawful.
Monday, August 28, 2017
Nalcor bonuses - reflective of arrogance
The latest round of Nalcor executive bonuses is reflective of the arrogance of our elected officials.
The province can stop these bonuses from occurring but have not.
This province is virtually bankrupt from the Muskrat Falls fiasco - and we the ratepayers, shareholders and taxpayers cannot afford these ludicrous insulting bonuses.
In my opinion - the Premier and the CEO of Nalcor are testing our resolve. They are testing the waters for what we will stand for and if we are willing to pull the plug on their stupidity and arrogance.
If we accept these bonuses - will we also sit like little lambs as the power bills soar?
Will we continue to demand a forensic audit?
There is not a truly reasonable consideration that would allow Gil Bennett and other executives to receive a reward for "performance".
Speak up now and be heard. What are you waiting for? The doubling of your power bill? The loss of another 40,000 people? The loss of your job?
If we were to implement the real costs of Muskrat on our bill now - would that make you stand up? I think Con O'Brien might be on to something when he says - put it on our bill now. In that way the following generations (if there are any left here) would not be paying for our mess. Perhaps if it was on our power bill now - you and everybody else would hit the streets in protest.
Right now - we should be demanding the retraction of these absurd bonuses - and force the government to take some action.
Call your MHA and say - no bonuses for Nalcor and demand a forensic audit immediately. Tell them your vote depends on what they do right now - today.
TO CONTACT YOUR MHA CLICK HERE
If we wait for Muskrat to be history - we won't be studying it in Newfoundland and Labrador - we won't exist.
The province can stop these bonuses from occurring but have not.
This province is virtually bankrupt from the Muskrat Falls fiasco - and we the ratepayers, shareholders and taxpayers cannot afford these ludicrous insulting bonuses.
In my opinion - the Premier and the CEO of Nalcor are testing our resolve. They are testing the waters for what we will stand for and if we are willing to pull the plug on their stupidity and arrogance.
If we accept these bonuses - will we also sit like little lambs as the power bills soar?
Will we continue to demand a forensic audit?
There is not a truly reasonable consideration that would allow Gil Bennett and other executives to receive a reward for "performance".
Speak up now and be heard. What are you waiting for? The doubling of your power bill? The loss of another 40,000 people? The loss of your job?
If we were to implement the real costs of Muskrat on our bill now - would that make you stand up? I think Con O'Brien might be on to something when he says - put it on our bill now. In that way the following generations (if there are any left here) would not be paying for our mess. Perhaps if it was on our power bill now - you and everybody else would hit the streets in protest.
Right now - we should be demanding the retraction of these absurd bonuses - and force the government to take some action.
Call your MHA and say - no bonuses for Nalcor and demand a forensic audit immediately. Tell them your vote depends on what they do right now - today.
TO CONTACT YOUR MHA CLICK HERE
If we wait for Muskrat to be history - we won't be studying it in Newfoundland and Labrador - we won't exist.
Thursday, August 24, 2017
Continuing to fail our children
At what point do we - as a society - say - enough?
The history of child abuse in Newfoundland and Labrador is horrific.
The cover-ups at Mount Cashel, the inordinate number of times we witnessed "systemic failure", and the constant stories of our children being battered, tortured, molested and traumatized by foster parents, parents, priests, relatives, and strangers.
These precious little people, innocent, without a voice, without protection from society.
Pedophiles in every position of power and authority - having their pick of victims.
Please have a look into the sweet faces of one of your children, grandchildren, your niece or nephew - and try to imagine a so-called human-being harming them.
These predators need to go to prison and go to prison for a long time. Yet many of them are walking among us - they are living life freely as they take a child and crush their trust, their innocence, their life.
The "system" designed to protect them has failed over and over again.
It is time to terminate the employment of adults who through negligence, incompetence, or reprehensible lack of caring, allow these atrocities to occur.
It is time to create a fail-safe system.
Clearly policies and legislation have failed.
The voices of adults speaking out against, racism, gender bias, and inequalities of all sorts are strong, united, and get the attention of media on a daily basis. Yet virtually the only time we hear the voice of a child who is a victim of abuse is after the crime has been committed - and usually it is after multiple occurances.
A 12 year old girl impregnated by her adult caregiver twice and twice having an abortion!
If we can't do something to prevent this - then we are not fit to be called an advanced society.
Grown men - pretending to be boys - stalking young girls on the internet for their twisted pleasure while the community and family want to add that otherwise they are good people?
Little children being murdered by a parent - to spite another parent? Yes people this is the type of garbage walking our streets.
So politicians and bureaucrats - get your collective act together - and make certain our children are protected.
Fish policy, energy policy, forestry policy, health policy, tourism policy, education policy can all be damned if we cannot first find a way to make our children safe.
We have had Inquiries, reviews, panels of experts, and promises.
Enough of that crap - protect the children of our province. If you can't step aside, quit, hide your head somewhere out of it.
If a child is failed by the system - fire the system.
It is rather difficult to focus on all the economic turmoil, corruption, and boondoggles of our province when 12 year olds are whisked into a room for impregnation by an adult caregiver.
Does this turn your guts? It should. Please join me and demand a resolve to this. Let no other child suffer like this again.
No more excuses.
The history of child abuse in Newfoundland and Labrador is horrific.
The cover-ups at Mount Cashel, the inordinate number of times we witnessed "systemic failure", and the constant stories of our children being battered, tortured, molested and traumatized by foster parents, parents, priests, relatives, and strangers.
These precious little people, innocent, without a voice, without protection from society.
Pedophiles in every position of power and authority - having their pick of victims.
Please have a look into the sweet faces of one of your children, grandchildren, your niece or nephew - and try to imagine a so-called human-being harming them.
These predators need to go to prison and go to prison for a long time. Yet many of them are walking among us - they are living life freely as they take a child and crush their trust, their innocence, their life.
The "system" designed to protect them has failed over and over again.
It is time to terminate the employment of adults who through negligence, incompetence, or reprehensible lack of caring, allow these atrocities to occur.
It is time to create a fail-safe system.
Clearly policies and legislation have failed.
The voices of adults speaking out against, racism, gender bias, and inequalities of all sorts are strong, united, and get the attention of media on a daily basis. Yet virtually the only time we hear the voice of a child who is a victim of abuse is after the crime has been committed - and usually it is after multiple occurances.
A 12 year old girl impregnated by her adult caregiver twice and twice having an abortion!
If we can't do something to prevent this - then we are not fit to be called an advanced society.
Grown men - pretending to be boys - stalking young girls on the internet for their twisted pleasure while the community and family want to add that otherwise they are good people?
Little children being murdered by a parent - to spite another parent? Yes people this is the type of garbage walking our streets.
So politicians and bureaucrats - get your collective act together - and make certain our children are protected.
Fish policy, energy policy, forestry policy, health policy, tourism policy, education policy can all be damned if we cannot first find a way to make our children safe.
We have had Inquiries, reviews, panels of experts, and promises.
Enough of that crap - protect the children of our province. If you can't step aside, quit, hide your head somewhere out of it.
If a child is failed by the system - fire the system.
It is rather difficult to focus on all the economic turmoil, corruption, and boondoggles of our province when 12 year olds are whisked into a room for impregnation by an adult caregiver.
Does this turn your guts? It should. Please join me and demand a resolve to this. Let no other child suffer like this again.
No more excuses.
Monday, August 07, 2017
Ches Crosbie takes himself out of contention
And with one sentence - Ches Crosbie removed himself from being a potential Premier.
The sentence is found at his blog Press Here
"If you agree that we need an immediate forensic audit of Muskrat Falls so that we can be smarter with how we spend our resources on the remainder of the project,.."
Before this audit - he calls for is even complete - he determines that the project will be finished (just a question of how we spend our money for the remainder of the project).
Yes people of Newfoundland and Labrador generally our politicians believe we are that naive - that ignorant.
Raised in a house of politics will allow you to gain the special skill of siding both ways.
Crosbie's message is - he will order an audit - but in the same breath he concludes regardless of the findings we will finish the project.
Message to labour, message to Tories, and most importantly a message to the corporate elite.
Unless that position is changed - Crosbie is the same old - same old.
The sentence is found at his blog Press Here
"If you agree that we need an immediate forensic audit of Muskrat Falls so that we can be smarter with how we spend our resources on the remainder of the project,.."
Before this audit - he calls for is even complete - he determines that the project will be finished (just a question of how we spend our money for the remainder of the project).
Yes people of Newfoundland and Labrador generally our politicians believe we are that naive - that ignorant.
Raised in a house of politics will allow you to gain the special skill of siding both ways.
Crosbie's message is - he will order an audit - but in the same breath he concludes regardless of the findings we will finish the project.
Message to labour, message to Tories, and most importantly a message to the corporate elite.
Unless that position is changed - Crosbie is the same old - same old.
Wednesday, August 02, 2017
Proof that Emera is in control
Below is an excerpt from Emera's response to the Massachusetts Clean Energy RFP July 2017.
"Hydro-Québec’s current contractual access to energy from the Churchill
Falls facility, through arrangements with Nalcor, expires in 2041. As
the end of that contract draws closer, having Atlantic Link as an
additional large-scale transmission path creates options for
Massachusetts and the New England electricity system to secure
cost-effective clean energy, including supply originating at Churchill
Falls. Massachusetts has a unique opportunity to position the New England
electricity system for future optionality by choosing Atlantic Link
infrastructure in the 2017 Clean Energy RFP process."
So good to know that Emera is going to take the reigns of the Upper Churchill for the next generation of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
I wonder - should we expect CFLco to have something to say about this?
It also says: " Nalcor is currently constructing the 824 MW Muskrat Falls generating station (scheduled in-service date of 2020)."
Is this correct also?
Seems Emera has more information than the people of our province do.
Why not have a peek at what Emera has in store for us. It is Emera that is running our energy system. I think Emera may be running the whole works. Of course we can't stop Muskrat "Premier" Ball - Emera won't let you.
I plan to contact the Massachusetts Clean Energy group and give them our side of the story. What Emera is saying is simply inaccurate or WE the people don't have a clue as to what's going on.
Wednesday, June 21, 2017
Protect our children - Stop the predators
A story in the Telegram this week reminds us all - once again - that predators continue to threaten our children and that the current system of punishment fails to deter them.
In this particular case a former Tim Horton's franchisee was in court "for the first part of his sentencing hearing on charges of possession of child pornography and unlawfully luring a child (under 18) by means of a computer system."
The former District Governor for the Lions Club is hardly a model choice when the Lions Quest Program is to "Inform and Strengthen our Youth".
This "man" (deviant) plead guilty to possessing child pornography and luring a child under 18 - in this case an 11 year old girl.
He asked for and received sexually explicit photos of the child and sent pictures of an adult male penis to her. They also had online conversations with many sexual references.
The Crown lawyer asked for a sentence of 18-24 months that "his name be placed on the National Sex Offender Registry for life, that he be subject to a firearms prohibition for five years, be placed on probation for three years and a Section 161 order imposed that would place limits on him having contact with anyone under 16."
The lawyer for the child predator suggested a "lighter sentence" of 15 months, "a two-year period of probation and that a general no-contact order with youth is not needed. If it is ordered, he asked that it include an exception to allow contact with his grandchildren.He also disagreed with the firearms prohibition and the length of time on the sex offender designation."
Oral Clarke's (predator) actions apparently had "already cost him greatly". He lost his Tim Horton's relationship, was booted from the Lions and people are "treating him different". This his lawyer suggested would "help achieve the sentencing principles of deterrence and denunciation."
Let's look at this suggestion and determine the reality of the situation.
Oral Clarke was a successful business person with significant social standing in the community at large. Despite this Oral Clarke decided to lure an 11 year old girl via the internet. He decided his desire to see an 11 year old girl's vagina and breasts and his desire to show an 11 year old girl an adult male penis was okay.
Oral Clarke knew full well what he was doing was criminal and extremely harmful to a child, he knew his actions would be extremely harmful to his family, business, and social organizations he was involved in.
Oral Clarke knew if he was caught - his material world would take a hit and his family would also be victims. Oral Clarke knew he was deliberately and knowingly harming a child. His sick perverted desires outweighed all else. He satisfied his deviant need to violate an innocent child.
Clarke said he "realized the foolishness of his actions". The fact that he made such a statement demonstrates how trivial he finds his behavior. Foolishness is "lack of good sense or judgment; stupidity". We are reminded by the definition how all of us may have behaved foolishly in the past or in our youth. Clarke's behavior was not "foolishness" it was deviant, criminal, predatory, and beyond the comprehension of most human beings.
In order to protect our children - we must force ourselves to look seriously at how Oral Clarke and other child predators think. Despite the disgusting nature of the crime - we must force ourselves to talk about it and deal with our legislators with regard to punishment and deterrence.
If knowing you would lose your business, your social standing, and perhaps all of your family was not a deterrent for Oral Clarke - then 15-24 months in jail won't deter him.
The problem is that thinking about such crimes is so abhorrent - most of us try to erase the fact we've ever read it.
It is important to note that Clarke's lawyer also suggested "that a general no-contact order with youth is not needed. If it is ordered, he asked that it include an exception to allow contact with his grandchildren."
If the Court were to except the order as it relates to his grandchildren - it might be knowingly placing children in harms way. If the parents of the children were actually willing to give Oral Clarke access to them - they need to be protected from themselves and the court should ensure that.
Oral Clarke has no doubt victimized many people whom he claims to love and care about - but Oral Clarke was only ever interested in himself and satisfying his twisted need to sexually exploit a child.
The police did their work and now society (lawyers, judges, legislators, and citizens) need to do ours. We need to do whatever we must to truly punish and deter these predators. This means our MHA's and MP's must be guided to adjust sentencing to truly reflect the crime and to more assuredly deter the predator.
Think of it this way. One morning Oral Clarke woke up and decided what he needed was to lure an 11 year old girl to satisfy his deviant and criminal mind. He then proceeded to find one, lure one, and exploit one. Wrap your head around those thoughts - it's not possible. The children need to be permanently protected from Oral Clarke and other predators. Make sure the sentence protects children and has nothing to do with Oral Clarke's personal or business losses. If it were your child what would you want the sentence to be?
In this particular case a former Tim Horton's franchisee was in court "for the first part of his sentencing hearing on charges of possession of child pornography and unlawfully luring a child (under 18) by means of a computer system."
The former District Governor for the Lions Club is hardly a model choice when the Lions Quest Program is to "Inform and Strengthen our Youth".
This "man" (deviant) plead guilty to possessing child pornography and luring a child under 18 - in this case an 11 year old girl.
He asked for and received sexually explicit photos of the child and sent pictures of an adult male penis to her. They also had online conversations with many sexual references.
The Crown lawyer asked for a sentence of 18-24 months that "his name be placed on the National Sex Offender Registry for life, that he be subject to a firearms prohibition for five years, be placed on probation for three years and a Section 161 order imposed that would place limits on him having contact with anyone under 16."
The lawyer for the child predator suggested a "lighter sentence" of 15 months, "a two-year period of probation and that a general no-contact order with youth is not needed. If it is ordered, he asked that it include an exception to allow contact with his grandchildren.He also disagreed with the firearms prohibition and the length of time on the sex offender designation."
Oral Clarke's (predator) actions apparently had "already cost him greatly". He lost his Tim Horton's relationship, was booted from the Lions and people are "treating him different". This his lawyer suggested would "help achieve the sentencing principles of deterrence and denunciation."
Let's look at this suggestion and determine the reality of the situation.
Oral Clarke was a successful business person with significant social standing in the community at large. Despite this Oral Clarke decided to lure an 11 year old girl via the internet. He decided his desire to see an 11 year old girl's vagina and breasts and his desire to show an 11 year old girl an adult male penis was okay.
Oral Clarke knew full well what he was doing was criminal and extremely harmful to a child, he knew his actions would be extremely harmful to his family, business, and social organizations he was involved in.
Oral Clarke knew if he was caught - his material world would take a hit and his family would also be victims. Oral Clarke knew he was deliberately and knowingly harming a child. His sick perverted desires outweighed all else. He satisfied his deviant need to violate an innocent child.
Clarke said he "realized the foolishness of his actions". The fact that he made such a statement demonstrates how trivial he finds his behavior. Foolishness is "lack of good sense or judgment; stupidity". We are reminded by the definition how all of us may have behaved foolishly in the past or in our youth. Clarke's behavior was not "foolishness" it was deviant, criminal, predatory, and beyond the comprehension of most human beings.
In order to protect our children - we must force ourselves to look seriously at how Oral Clarke and other child predators think. Despite the disgusting nature of the crime - we must force ourselves to talk about it and deal with our legislators with regard to punishment and deterrence.
If knowing you would lose your business, your social standing, and perhaps all of your family was not a deterrent for Oral Clarke - then 15-24 months in jail won't deter him.
The problem is that thinking about such crimes is so abhorrent - most of us try to erase the fact we've ever read it.
It is important to note that Clarke's lawyer also suggested "that a general no-contact order with youth is not needed. If it is ordered, he asked that it include an exception to allow contact with his grandchildren."
If the Court were to except the order as it relates to his grandchildren - it might be knowingly placing children in harms way. If the parents of the children were actually willing to give Oral Clarke access to them - they need to be protected from themselves and the court should ensure that.
Oral Clarke has no doubt victimized many people whom he claims to love and care about - but Oral Clarke was only ever interested in himself and satisfying his twisted need to sexually exploit a child.
The police did their work and now society (lawyers, judges, legislators, and citizens) need to do ours. We need to do whatever we must to truly punish and deter these predators. This means our MHA's and MP's must be guided to adjust sentencing to truly reflect the crime and to more assuredly deter the predator.
Think of it this way. One morning Oral Clarke woke up and decided what he needed was to lure an 11 year old girl to satisfy his deviant and criminal mind. He then proceeded to find one, lure one, and exploit one. Wrap your head around those thoughts - it's not possible. The children need to be permanently protected from Oral Clarke and other predators. Make sure the sentence protects children and has nothing to do with Oral Clarke's personal or business losses. If it were your child what would you want the sentence to be?
 |
| This is Oral Clarke (Telegram Photo) |
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
Stan Marshall? Not at this cost!
Oh come on media - where are you?
After such a big miss on the energy monolith - one might expect for the media to be on their toes.
After a complete miss on Muskrat and all the information freely provided by citizens was ignored - the damning truth was forced on them and all of us.
In comes Stan Marshall - instant messiah treatment oozed out of dull swords of ink painfully reminiscent of the coming of Danny Williams.
Stan Marshall's appointment was swift with few details. One available was Marshall would accept the same as Ed Martin but with no severance option.
Time went by and no contract.
Then the contract appeared to be stalled in negotiation.
Marshall won. We lost.
His employment is in complete conflict.
There are no excuses - no spinning - no exceptions that make this okay.
The media has disappeared. The media will not take Marshall on the same way they avoided Williams.
Martin's contract dealt with Conflict of Interest. Here is the clause:
3 (c) The Executive shall not acquire, directly or indirectly, an interest in any firm, partnership, association, entity or corporation, the business or operations of which would in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business of operations of Nalcor and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither the Executive nor any family member (this term having the same meaning as defined in Newfoundland and Labrador's Conflict of Interest Act, 1995 shall directly hold any shares in the Fortis Inc. group of companies including Newfoundland Power excepting however interests acquired in a publicly traded corporation through retirement mutual fund(s) investment vehicles.
Marshall's contract deals with Conflict of Interest. Here is the clause:
4 (a) The Executive shall not acquire or hold, directly or indirectly, an interest in any firm, partnership, association, entity or corporation, the business of operations of which would in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business or operations of Nalcor, NLH or a company considered to be a subsidiary of Nalcor in accordance with Section 13 of the Energy Corporation Act, with the exception to the foregoing being that the Executive may own 5% or less of the shares of a publicly traded company;
Here's the deal - Marshall is allowed to be in a potential conflict of interest. This defies all logic and pith and the purpose of same.
Unfortunately but understandably Marshall nor his family want to be interfered with as that relates to personal financial affairs. Unfortunately this means Mr. Marshall does not qualify to sit as the head of our Crown Corporation.
When a government starts making exceptions to Conflict of Interest guidelines, laws, and intent we are already on the wrong side of right.
We have experienced too much of this. We need change.
Marshall - despite his professional qualifications - has decided not to relinquish his other interests - same for his family - some of which conflict.
Marshall should resign or should be replaced.
In our desperation to replace Martin - we must not be forced to forego conflict of interest protection - regardless the candidate.
Tomorrow we delve into this contract and terms further.
After such a big miss on the energy monolith - one might expect for the media to be on their toes.
After a complete miss on Muskrat and all the information freely provided by citizens was ignored - the damning truth was forced on them and all of us.
In comes Stan Marshall - instant messiah treatment oozed out of dull swords of ink painfully reminiscent of the coming of Danny Williams.
Stan Marshall's appointment was swift with few details. One available was Marshall would accept the same as Ed Martin but with no severance option.
Time went by and no contract.
Then the contract appeared to be stalled in negotiation.
Marshall won. We lost.
His employment is in complete conflict.
There are no excuses - no spinning - no exceptions that make this okay.
The media has disappeared. The media will not take Marshall on the same way they avoided Williams.
Martin's contract dealt with Conflict of Interest. Here is the clause:
3 (c) The Executive shall not acquire, directly or indirectly, an interest in any firm, partnership, association, entity or corporation, the business or operations of which would in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business of operations of Nalcor and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither the Executive nor any family member (this term having the same meaning as defined in Newfoundland and Labrador's Conflict of Interest Act, 1995 shall directly hold any shares in the Fortis Inc. group of companies including Newfoundland Power excepting however interests acquired in a publicly traded corporation through retirement mutual fund(s) investment vehicles.
Marshall's contract deals with Conflict of Interest. Here is the clause:
4 (a) The Executive shall not acquire or hold, directly or indirectly, an interest in any firm, partnership, association, entity or corporation, the business of operations of which would in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business or operations of Nalcor, NLH or a company considered to be a subsidiary of Nalcor in accordance with Section 13 of the Energy Corporation Act, with the exception to the foregoing being that the Executive may own 5% or less of the shares of a publicly traded company;
Here's the deal - Marshall is allowed to be in a potential conflict of interest. This defies all logic and pith and the purpose of same.
Unfortunately but understandably Marshall nor his family want to be interfered with as that relates to personal financial affairs. Unfortunately this means Mr. Marshall does not qualify to sit as the head of our Crown Corporation.
When a government starts making exceptions to Conflict of Interest guidelines, laws, and intent we are already on the wrong side of right.
We have experienced too much of this. We need change.
Marshall - despite his professional qualifications - has decided not to relinquish his other interests - same for his family - some of which conflict.
Marshall should resign or should be replaced.
In our desperation to replace Martin - we must not be forced to forego conflict of interest protection - regardless the candidate.
Tomorrow we delve into this contract and terms further.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
When a loss is a big win
The media spin was typical and unfortunately dismissive of a very important win in the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal.
The headlines to this story could have - should have been much more interesting.
Example: Brad Cabana's Appeal denied
Yes the Appeal by Cabana was dismissed but the real story is the Appeal's Court take on costs.
Appeal's Court Justices Malcolm Rowe, Gail Welsh, and Michael Harrington helped define a very real and important principle in justice.
These exemplary jurists did rule the applications judge was wrong to award the defendants costs against Cabana — two counsel for the government and one each for Nalcor and CF(L)Co.
They ruled instead in favour of good people interested in the public well-being.
They rules that Cabana's interests were not for personal gain but rather for the good of society.
They sent a clear message to government, Crown Corporations, and other heavy hitters that the Court will not automatically squash the little guy for challenging a serious public issue.
We all know now what many of us have been preaching for some time about Muskrat Falls - it is an absolute mess. It is going to cost a fortune and we have once again subjected future generations to the enormous costs of either corrupt or incompetent activities.
Brad took his fight a different way - he tried valiantly to protect the people from their leadership.
We should take note today that three Appeals Court Judges found that Brad Cabana's motives were pure.
Tell me - can we say that about the politicians and corporate executives involved in Muskrat Falls?
The headlines to this story could have - should have been much more interesting.
Example: Brad Cabana's Appeal denied
Yes the Appeal by Cabana was dismissed but the real story is the Appeal's Court take on costs.
Appeal's Court Justices Malcolm Rowe, Gail Welsh, and Michael Harrington helped define a very real and important principle in justice.
These exemplary jurists did rule the applications judge was wrong to award the defendants costs against Cabana — two counsel for the government and one each for Nalcor and CF(L)Co.
They ruled instead in favour of good people interested in the public well-being.
They rules that Cabana's interests were not for personal gain but rather for the good of society.
They sent a clear message to government, Crown Corporations, and other heavy hitters that the Court will not automatically squash the little guy for challenging a serious public issue.
We all know now what many of us have been preaching for some time about Muskrat Falls - it is an absolute mess. It is going to cost a fortune and we have once again subjected future generations to the enormous costs of either corrupt or incompetent activities.
Brad took his fight a different way - he tried valiantly to protect the people from their leadership.
We should take note today that three Appeals Court Judges found that Brad Cabana's motives were pure.
Tell me - can we say that about the politicians and corporate executives involved in Muskrat Falls?
Monday, June 27, 2016
Referendum needed - not another overlord
We all know by now the Muskrat Falls project is another epic failure - added to the annals of Newfoundland and Labrador's resource development.
This morning it's worth your time and effort to read Uncle Gnarley and educate yourself a little more on this millstone around our societal neck.
For years all of us who questioned, cautioned, and criticized the project were labelled in a very unflattering way.
The media relied on Ed Martin, the unsatiable corporate elite and their all-party political flock.
For years Martin was supposed to be an electrical power guru (which he was not). His real credentials and accomplishments never once questioned or best I can tell even researched.
A few weeks ago Ed rode off into his "retirement" to spend more time with grandchildren while our grandchildren were left to pay for this horrific mess.
Martin's grandchildren - if they remain here - may well have more of a cushion to rely on when attempting to cover the cost of living.
Now we are going to roll out the new overlord - Stan Marshall.
CBC headline - It's official: Muskrat Falls a boondoggle, says Marshall.
Just a year ago - anything that came out of Ed Martin's mouth would have been given the same esteem.
We have also been told - it is too late to stop.
As I have said already Stan Marshall's credentials are far superior to Martin's regarding regulated utilities and development of hydro projects. But he is not God - and he too is fallible and has baggage.
For once in our lives and on the 100th anniversary of Beaumont Hamel - let's show the courage our men showed in 1916.
We must demand a referendum on the Muskrat Falls project. We must demand to be shown all the options and the numbers attached to each. We must demand to be heard and that government give interested citizens and groups funding to do the research leading up to a referendum. We must demand that this be stopped until that time.
We have been told it's too late to stop because we cannot afford to do so and we've essentially been told we can't afford it when it's finished.
I do not want to rely on the financial imagination and business acumen of one man. I want all of our people to have a shot at coming up with solutions.
If the project is safe - and that's a big if - we need to see if another deal can be made for the power running through the Quebec system. In this way the power can be sold and help pay for the project. We need to see if an appetite is there to develop Gull Island through CFLco and sell that power at market price.
This is but one suggestion there are many more and potential for industrial end-use in Labrador in the future.
We accepted the "trust us" now for a decade and look where it has gotten us. Now we are supposed to just "trust us" again? If we accept this - we accept our inevitable financial and societal demise.
I will knock my head off the concrete wall again and ask the obvious question: Where is Stan Marshall's Executive Contract? Are there any potential conflicts? A few weeks ago local media was salivating all over the Martin contract - yet nothing on Marshall's contract.
Stan Marshall does not have all the answers and the politicians have proven they don't have a clue.
Stan Marshall should look at nationalizing Newfoundland Power for the same reasons he once wanted to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. The efficiencies can save us money. The consumers will benefit. Can Marshall look at that possibility? Is he constrained by conflict of interests?
I am not willing to accept that this particular Muskrat deal can't be stopped. I am not willing to accept that Stan Marshall is the only one with answers to our mess. I am not willing to treat Marshall any differently than I treated Ed Martin. I want more information - I want all of it. Then I as one citizen want the right to vote on another 6 billion dollars before it is spent.
Ref-er-en-dum - A general vote by the electorate on a single question that has been referred to them for a direct decision.
We have the right at 12 Billion Dollars to have that direct say.
This morning it's worth your time and effort to read Uncle Gnarley and educate yourself a little more on this millstone around our societal neck.
For years all of us who questioned, cautioned, and criticized the project were labelled in a very unflattering way.
The media relied on Ed Martin, the unsatiable corporate elite and their all-party political flock.
For years Martin was supposed to be an electrical power guru (which he was not). His real credentials and accomplishments never once questioned or best I can tell even researched.
A few weeks ago Ed rode off into his "retirement" to spend more time with grandchildren while our grandchildren were left to pay for this horrific mess.
Martin's grandchildren - if they remain here - may well have more of a cushion to rely on when attempting to cover the cost of living.
Now we are going to roll out the new overlord - Stan Marshall.
CBC headline - It's official: Muskrat Falls a boondoggle, says Marshall.
Just a year ago - anything that came out of Ed Martin's mouth would have been given the same esteem.
We have also been told - it is too late to stop.
As I have said already Stan Marshall's credentials are far superior to Martin's regarding regulated utilities and development of hydro projects. But he is not God - and he too is fallible and has baggage.
For once in our lives and on the 100th anniversary of Beaumont Hamel - let's show the courage our men showed in 1916.
We must demand a referendum on the Muskrat Falls project. We must demand to be shown all the options and the numbers attached to each. We must demand to be heard and that government give interested citizens and groups funding to do the research leading up to a referendum. We must demand that this be stopped until that time.
We have been told it's too late to stop because we cannot afford to do so and we've essentially been told we can't afford it when it's finished.
I do not want to rely on the financial imagination and business acumen of one man. I want all of our people to have a shot at coming up with solutions.
If the project is safe - and that's a big if - we need to see if another deal can be made for the power running through the Quebec system. In this way the power can be sold and help pay for the project. We need to see if an appetite is there to develop Gull Island through CFLco and sell that power at market price.
This is but one suggestion there are many more and potential for industrial end-use in Labrador in the future.
We accepted the "trust us" now for a decade and look where it has gotten us. Now we are supposed to just "trust us" again? If we accept this - we accept our inevitable financial and societal demise.
I will knock my head off the concrete wall again and ask the obvious question: Where is Stan Marshall's Executive Contract? Are there any potential conflicts? A few weeks ago local media was salivating all over the Martin contract - yet nothing on Marshall's contract.
Stan Marshall does not have all the answers and the politicians have proven they don't have a clue.
Stan Marshall should look at nationalizing Newfoundland Power for the same reasons he once wanted to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. The efficiencies can save us money. The consumers will benefit. Can Marshall look at that possibility? Is he constrained by conflict of interests?
I am not willing to accept that this particular Muskrat deal can't be stopped. I am not willing to accept that Stan Marshall is the only one with answers to our mess. I am not willing to treat Marshall any differently than I treated Ed Martin. I want more information - I want all of it. Then I as one citizen want the right to vote on another 6 billion dollars before it is spent.
Ref-er-en-dum - A general vote by the electorate on a single question that has been referred to them for a direct decision.
We have the right at 12 Billion Dollars to have that direct say.
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, June 10, 2016
Quebec controls our power - Emera shareholders rejoice?
In 2011 I wrote a piece on the proposed Emera deal. The big talking point for politicians was to avoid big bad Quebec and Hydro-Quebec.
At the time I asked what protections were in place to keep Emera out of the hands of Hydro-Quebec.
Please read the earlier post HERE
The Government of Nova Scotia may have some protections against the takeover of Nova Scotia Power (wholly owned subsidiary of Emera) however the parts of Emera important to our province have no such protection.
What has changed since 2011? Hydro-Quebec has. They have announced a new direction.
The Crown Company will back off new large scale hydro while optimizing current assets and completing those started (Romaine 3 and 4), concentrate on energy efficiency, transportation electrification, environmentally sustainable management practices and ...
Putting aside for a moment the exceptional organization, human resources, performance, and tight governmental directions for the corporation - HQ continues to plan 15-20 years out with measurable targets and results.
The ... above represents the real problem for Newfoundland and Labrador. It is the promise to double the profits and size of HQ from $13.5 billion to $27 billion.
They have formed a special new group within the company to focus on mergers and acquisitions.
Specifically their sights are set on assets in Europe, the US and the Maritimes.
Imagine if they follow through - Emera shareholders may be in for a bonanza and HQ will have us going out and in both on the Island and Labrador. Even the line that crosses at Soldiers pond may be partly owned by HQ. Imagine that!
So all the people who pushed Emera and Muskrat down our throats may be in for a big payday - if they are shareholders of Emera. In my opinion the problem with cutting a deal with HQ on the Lower Churchill was never really about avoiding Quebec it was about making sure the partner was a venue that was available for share acquisition. No direct money for the elite if Hydro-Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro cut a deal.
HQ CEO - Éric Martel says, “The idea is to increase the benefit for Quebec, to enrich Hydro-Québec and Quebec at the same time, without having to increase rates too much. So this will help us meet our engagement of maintaining rate increase to the cost of inflation, or less”.
Imagine if our leaders did the same.
At the time I asked what protections were in place to keep Emera out of the hands of Hydro-Quebec.
Please read the earlier post HERE
The Government of Nova Scotia may have some protections against the takeover of Nova Scotia Power (wholly owned subsidiary of Emera) however the parts of Emera important to our province have no such protection.
What has changed since 2011? Hydro-Quebec has. They have announced a new direction.
The Crown Company will back off new large scale hydro while optimizing current assets and completing those started (Romaine 3 and 4), concentrate on energy efficiency, transportation electrification, environmentally sustainable management practices and ...
Putting aside for a moment the exceptional organization, human resources, performance, and tight governmental directions for the corporation - HQ continues to plan 15-20 years out with measurable targets and results.
The ... above represents the real problem for Newfoundland and Labrador. It is the promise to double the profits and size of HQ from $13.5 billion to $27 billion.
They have formed a special new group within the company to focus on mergers and acquisitions.
Specifically their sights are set on assets in Europe, the US and the Maritimes.
Imagine if they follow through - Emera shareholders may be in for a bonanza and HQ will have us going out and in both on the Island and Labrador. Even the line that crosses at Soldiers pond may be partly owned by HQ. Imagine that!
So all the people who pushed Emera and Muskrat down our throats may be in for a big payday - if they are shareholders of Emera. In my opinion the problem with cutting a deal with HQ on the Lower Churchill was never really about avoiding Quebec it was about making sure the partner was a venue that was available for share acquisition. No direct money for the elite if Hydro-Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro cut a deal.
HQ CEO - Éric Martel says, “The idea is to increase the benefit for Quebec, to enrich Hydro-Québec and Quebec at the same time, without having to increase rates too much. So this will help us meet our engagement of maintaining rate increase to the cost of inflation, or less”.
Imagine if our leaders did the same.
Wednesday, June 08, 2016
Stan Marshall - Conflict of Interest? Fracking?
Stan Marshall has had an illustrious career with Newfoundland Power and then Fortis. He has proven himself in a way that Ed Martin never did. The comparison of Ed Martin to Stan Marshall in terms of executive remuneration is a joke.
A Telegram story upon Marshall's retirement noted the following:
"Since 1996, total shareholder return is approximately 855 per cent and the average annual total shareholder return is approximately 13 per cent."
As the new CEO of Nalcor his role should be no different - it's just the nature of the shareholders.
He has the potential to be great at the job if and these are big ifs:
1. He is not in a conflict of interest and
2. He has progressive direction from government.
Yesterday I outlined the conflict of interest clauses in Martin's contract and asked if they were included in Marshall's. I have not seen anything yet to let people know exactly what the terms of the employment are.
If he is a shareholder in Fortis - it is my opinion he cannot do the job needed for Nalcor. There are too many possibilities of business, administrative and operational issues that may collide and thereby not be considered.
But Stan Marshall's interests go beyond Fortis.
Stan Marshall is a Director of Enerflex - this vote occurred on May 5th after he became the CEO of Nalcor.
There are potential conflicts or appearances of conflict here. Did Marshall seek from the new Board of Directors of Nalcor approval for this new professional commitment? If not why not and are there any rules he has to follow. Afterall - we must remember that Marshall protested taking the job by telling us he did not want it.
Enerflex for example builds/designs customized and standardized fractionation equipment.
Other areas include: oil and gas - particularly LNG.
I want Marshall to concentrate on Nalcor. I want him to deliver for Nalcor, the government, the province and the people of the province.
Is he qualified? Yes particularly in the area of regulated utilities.
It would be interesting to find out who in fact recommended him to the Premier.
People like Dave Vardy (who I respect) who welcome the appointment of Marshall must also not do so in oblivion to the terms of the appointment.
As Marshall has already stated it's too late to stop Muskrat - it would appear to me that those supporting the appointment now - are not concerned about the project continuing in the absence of a thorough review of the option to stop the project. Further I am sure many who may support Marshall's appointment must be waiting to hear what Marshall is going to say or do about the North Spur.
One can have all the potential and expertise in the world to deliver the goods - but he is not a savior - so giving him a pass on conflict does not cut it. Further if the government is asking him to determine the goals and aspirations of the people of the province and how they can be achieved through proper management of natural resources - they are being negligent of their duties as elected officials.
Next - a post on what it could look like and a Corporate move that could be devastating to Newfoundland and Labrador.
A Telegram story upon Marshall's retirement noted the following:
"Since 1996, total shareholder return is approximately 855 per cent and the average annual total shareholder return is approximately 13 per cent."
As the new CEO of Nalcor his role should be no different - it's just the nature of the shareholders.
He has the potential to be great at the job if and these are big ifs:
1. He is not in a conflict of interest and
2. He has progressive direction from government.
Yesterday I outlined the conflict of interest clauses in Martin's contract and asked if they were included in Marshall's. I have not seen anything yet to let people know exactly what the terms of the employment are.
If he is a shareholder in Fortis - it is my opinion he cannot do the job needed for Nalcor. There are too many possibilities of business, administrative and operational issues that may collide and thereby not be considered.
But Stan Marshall's interests go beyond Fortis.
Stan Marshall is a Director of Enerflex - this vote occurred on May 5th after he became the CEO of Nalcor.
There are potential conflicts or appearances of conflict here. Did Marshall seek from the new Board of Directors of Nalcor approval for this new professional commitment? If not why not and are there any rules he has to follow. Afterall - we must remember that Marshall protested taking the job by telling us he did not want it.
Enerflex for example builds/designs customized and standardized fractionation equipment.
Other areas include: oil and gas - particularly LNG.
I want Marshall to concentrate on Nalcor. I want him to deliver for Nalcor, the government, the province and the people of the province.
Is he qualified? Yes particularly in the area of regulated utilities.
It would be interesting to find out who in fact recommended him to the Premier.
People like Dave Vardy (who I respect) who welcome the appointment of Marshall must also not do so in oblivion to the terms of the appointment.
As Marshall has already stated it's too late to stop Muskrat - it would appear to me that those supporting the appointment now - are not concerned about the project continuing in the absence of a thorough review of the option to stop the project. Further I am sure many who may support Marshall's appointment must be waiting to hear what Marshall is going to say or do about the North Spur.
One can have all the potential and expertise in the world to deliver the goods - but he is not a savior - so giving him a pass on conflict does not cut it. Further if the government is asking him to determine the goals and aspirations of the people of the province and how they can be achieved through proper management of natural resources - they are being negligent of their duties as elected officials.
Next - a post on what it could look like and a Corporate move that could be devastating to Newfoundland and Labrador.
Tuesday, June 07, 2016
Nalcor CEO - Conflict of Interest?
It seems the information on Stan Marshall's contract remains behind closed doors as I write this today.
The past month has been consumed with outrage and calls of "we did not know" as it related to the Ed Martin platinum handshake.
The lesson for the people, media, and MHA's should be don't be blindsided again - make sure we will not end up with more problems resulting from a contract with Nalcor's new CEO.
The now infamous Martin Executive Employment Agreement (renewal) ended up being a lottery win for a fellow who does not show up much on Executive searches for jobs held prior to becoming the CEO of Nalcor. It did however contain important clauses that deserve the same level of scrutiny.
Clauses 3(c) and 4 deal with a common issue for corporate executives and the companies they work for. The issue is conflict or potential conflict of interest.
These clauses are absolutely necessary to ensure that the interests of the company they work for are placed ahead of all other professional involvements.
As such Ed Martin's contract contained the following clauses:
3(c) the Executive shall: not acquire, directly or indirectly, an interest in any firm, partnership, association, entity or corporation, the business or operations of which would in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business or operations of Nalcor and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither the Executive nor any member of his family (this term having the same meaning as defined in Newfoundland and Labrador's Conflict of Interest Act, 1995) shall directly hold any shares in the Fortis Inc. group of companies including Newfoundland Power excepting however interests acquired in a publicly traded corporation through retirement mutual fund(s) investment vehicles.
4. The Executive may, with the approval of the Board, serve as a director or member of service clubs, charitable, recreational and community organizations and may also serve as a director of publicly traded entities which would not in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business or operations of Nalcor having first obtained the approval of the Board.
Stan Marshall's background is well known particularly his tenure with Newfoundland Power and Fortis.
We need to know if these clauses were maintained in Marshall's contract and if not why not.
Further we need to know who drafted the Marshall contract - was it in house (Government) or outside private lawyers.
Tomorrow I will expand on the potential conflicts of interest that are existing.
I repeat: what I think of the appointment of Stan Marshall is not relevant to this discussion - as this discussion deals with prudent precaution regardless of the qualifications of the Executive.
The past month has been consumed with outrage and calls of "we did not know" as it related to the Ed Martin platinum handshake.
The lesson for the people, media, and MHA's should be don't be blindsided again - make sure we will not end up with more problems resulting from a contract with Nalcor's new CEO.
The now infamous Martin Executive Employment Agreement (renewal) ended up being a lottery win for a fellow who does not show up much on Executive searches for jobs held prior to becoming the CEO of Nalcor. It did however contain important clauses that deserve the same level of scrutiny.
Clauses 3(c) and 4 deal with a common issue for corporate executives and the companies they work for. The issue is conflict or potential conflict of interest.
These clauses are absolutely necessary to ensure that the interests of the company they work for are placed ahead of all other professional involvements.
As such Ed Martin's contract contained the following clauses:
3(c) the Executive shall: not acquire, directly or indirectly, an interest in any firm, partnership, association, entity or corporation, the business or operations of which would in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business or operations of Nalcor and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither the Executive nor any member of his family (this term having the same meaning as defined in Newfoundland and Labrador's Conflict of Interest Act, 1995) shall directly hold any shares in the Fortis Inc. group of companies including Newfoundland Power excepting however interests acquired in a publicly traded corporation through retirement mutual fund(s) investment vehicles.
4. The Executive may, with the approval of the Board, serve as a director or member of service clubs, charitable, recreational and community organizations and may also serve as a director of publicly traded entities which would not in any manner, directly or indirectly, compete or conflict with the business or operations of Nalcor having first obtained the approval of the Board.
Stan Marshall's background is well known particularly his tenure with Newfoundland Power and Fortis.
We need to know if these clauses were maintained in Marshall's contract and if not why not.
Further we need to know who drafted the Marshall contract - was it in house (Government) or outside private lawyers.
Tomorrow I will expand on the potential conflicts of interest that are existing.
I repeat: what I think of the appointment of Stan Marshall is not relevant to this discussion - as this discussion deals with prudent precaution regardless of the qualifications of the Executive.
Monday, June 06, 2016
The Martin/Marshall contract
Our history is riddled with mistakes, incompetence, corruption and bad decisions.
The last two weeks have been about the Ed Martin compensation lottery.
Part of the fury is the contract itself. The public did not have ready access to the document until it was released by Des Sullivan. Uncle Gnarley shed light on the whole sordid mess is an articulate post.
There has been much made of the contract and the Executive benefits Martin enjoyed during his tenure of failure.
We now have a new CEO, Stan Marshall. His success with private or publicly traded regulated utilities is well known and unlike his predecessor he has the bio to prove it.
Regardless of what I think about the appointment (I will deal with that in another post) there is a need for more openness and accountability. This is what was promised and expected.
With the aforementioned considered we are in need of significantly more information on this appointment than what we have now.
1. Has a contract been executed with Stan Marshall?
2. When was the contract achieved?
3. What is the duration of the contract?
4. Was the contract achieved under Section 7 or 9(1)(2)(3) of the Energy Corporation Act?
5, What are the terms of the contract?
I really do not care if it's Bill Gates we have employed - the public must know the terms of Stan Marshall's appointment. We must know if it contains clauses that are unacceptable regardless of his past accomplishments.
We have many times had a "savior" in politics who turned out to be not so beneficial despite successes in their pre-political life. Now we are depending on a "savior"for Muskrat Falls. This thinking is deliberately ignorant and very dangerous.
It is not acceptable that we be in the dark about it until Marshall goes out the door.
Considering what we have just gone through and continue to go through - the government and Nalcor should be anxious to make this information available and the media should be anxious to go after it.
The last two weeks have been about the Ed Martin compensation lottery.
Part of the fury is the contract itself. The public did not have ready access to the document until it was released by Des Sullivan. Uncle Gnarley shed light on the whole sordid mess is an articulate post.
There has been much made of the contract and the Executive benefits Martin enjoyed during his tenure of failure.
We now have a new CEO, Stan Marshall. His success with private or publicly traded regulated utilities is well known and unlike his predecessor he has the bio to prove it.
Regardless of what I think about the appointment (I will deal with that in another post) there is a need for more openness and accountability. This is what was promised and expected.
With the aforementioned considered we are in need of significantly more information on this appointment than what we have now.
1. Has a contract been executed with Stan Marshall?
2. When was the contract achieved?
3. What is the duration of the contract?
4. Was the contract achieved under Section 7 or 9(1)(2)(3) of the Energy Corporation Act?
5, What are the terms of the contract?
I really do not care if it's Bill Gates we have employed - the public must know the terms of Stan Marshall's appointment. We must know if it contains clauses that are unacceptable regardless of his past accomplishments.
We have many times had a "savior" in politics who turned out to be not so beneficial despite successes in their pre-political life. Now we are depending on a "savior"for Muskrat Falls. This thinking is deliberately ignorant and very dangerous.
It is not acceptable that we be in the dark about it until Marshall goes out the door.
Considering what we have just gone through and continue to go through - the government and Nalcor should be anxious to make this information available and the media should be anxious to go after it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)