Dear Minister King, Jan 31/2012
At a
time when both you and the Premier have made comments recently,
pertaining to what power or right our government has on influencing NL
companies which export our resources, I would like to communicate my
concern on our practice of exporting raw and partially processed fish to
foreign markets.
No doubt in some situations it would be
appropriate for private companies to export raw, or otherwise partially
processed products, out of our province. In this situation the company
makes a profit, provides some jobs here and generally adds to the GDP of
the province. However it is a totally different situation for the
province, our government, our GDP and our people if the bulk, or large
amounts, of these resources are shipped in this manner.
An example of
this point is unfolding right now in our mining industry with the
opening of the new mine in Labrador, where one company bidding for the
contract, wants to ship out raw ore creating 200 jobs, and another who
wants to produce concentrate pellets here creating 1700 jobs. The value
added jobs and economic input into the communities of Labrador by our
processing of the ore , may not provide the company with a big % of
profit, but it will have multiple, far reaching positive affects into
the future of the province, even after the mine is gone.
The
fisheries equivalent to this situation is the shipping out of our
unprocessed and partially processed fish to China and EU countries, such
as that which our province is now facing with the OCI. Naturally a
company that ships out some raw fish, gets a high % of profit, creates
some jobs and adds some value to the province. But shipping out the bulk
of our resource in this manner destroys many more jobs then it creates,
creates little, or zero, value added affect for our coastal communities
and province.
On the other hand a company that processes ashore and
then sells to higher end market’s in places like the USA and UK would
create 100's of processing and value added jobs, and add over all wealth
to our communities and our province. This over all increased value,
provided to our people, would further input and strengthen our
infrastructure, support and lift our coastal towns and spirit.
Dr. Phil Earle
Showing posts with label John Furlong. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Furlong. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
OCI and Advice to Minister King
Below is a letter to Fisheries Minister Darin King from the Fisheries Community Alliance
January25th/2012
Hon.Darin King,
Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture,
St. John's, NL
Dear Minister,
Over the last few weeks the request of OCI to export unprocessed fish
and the expected response of our Government have occupied the minds of fishery
participants in the Province. We understand your decision will be made public
in the near future and we therefore wish to consolidate the views of the
Fisheries Community Alliance on the subject and inform the Minister
accordingly.
1) Following detailed
discussions with marketing experts in Europe, North America and Asia we have
identified the current state of resources in various fish exporting countries and the demands of the
main importers and exporters of fish products by species in those
countries. There is no doubt there is a market for round fish for
direct consumption in Asia, especially for small, undersized round
fish. But that market has existed for the centuries. There is also a
market for large fish that is processed into finished products for the
US or EU market and the value of which is increased through injection
of 15/20 percent water into fillets. We can provide you with the formula
used in
Asia.
2) The quality of exports of Asian seafood products is now
being seriously questioned by US authorities and a US Senate
Committee is about to be formed to deal with problem.
3) There was and still is a very strong market for processed
primary and secondary fishery products in Europe, the US, Canada, Asia
and some South American Countries. There are well over a one and half
billion people in those countries who are sophisticated seafood
consumers paying prices far exceeding
those in China or Vietnam. There should not be a problem in that market to sell a miniscule quantity of
yellowtail fillets if a N&L fish exporter had an effective
marketing and sales
organization.
4) The Deloitte verification of OCI losses must be further
investigated. Not as far as its accuracy is concerned but the question is,
does it include the costs of its FFT harvesting, landing frozen
fillets in Bay Roberts and later trucking to Marystown plant. Then having
thawed the fish, processed it in the largest and most expensive plant
in N&L in terms of fixed costs, the operators surely had to know it
would be difficult to compete with harvesting by an efficient
wet-fish trawler and processing in a smaller and far less expensive plant.
This would have avoided exporting badly needed N&L processing jobs.
5) Exporting unprocessed
fish by OCI will result in a mass demand by all harvesters to export their catch and the resultant loss
of thousands of plant processing jobs. That loss will be permanent and we
will lose the processing expertize that has taken 70 years to develop
and train those workers.
6) The growing export of unprocessed fish which includes an
increased percentage of small, undersized fish will destroy any hope
whatever of rebuilding our once huge groundfishery. It is an undeniable fact that without restoration of the groundfishery fishing communities
in N&L will not survive. Federal and Provincial authorities by granting
the licenses to export large and small, undersized fish are contributing
to the demise of the N&L fishery. The Province must take a
leadership role in stopping this activity and seriously promoting the resource
rebuilding process by confronting the Canadian Government on major
issues being discussed in the Free Trade negotiations with the EU, NAFO
fisheries mismanagement and DFO reduction in N&L fisheries
management
responsibilities and particularly in the area of fishery
science capability and the retention of necessary top level
scientists and technologists.
We sincerely hope our Government will take into
consideration the major impact the continuation of exports of unprocessed fish will
have on the fishing population of N&L. We, the members of the
Fisheries Community Alliance are convinced it will eventually destroy what's
left of our diminishing resource and the survival of many N&L
fishing communities.
Yours very truly,
Gus Etchegary
Gus Etchegary
Chair
Fisheries Community Alliance.
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
A fishery, who’s history has been cess pooled by private corporate usurping
Below please find a response to John Furlong's article on the Fishery:
Who are We?
“And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall,
Then how should I begin
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?”
‘The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, by T. S. Eliot.
It would be totally understandable, though not acceptable, if an ordinary citizen of our province had written the
Jan 1,2012 CBC news (cbc.ca) post ‘Assigning blame for lost jobs helps no one’, by John Furlong, host of NL’s CBC radio show ‘the fisheries broadcast’. Many people don’t, nor should they have to, understand the complexity of our fisheries problems. A fishery, who’s history has been cess pooled by private corporate usurping, and powering, of fish licences and quotas attained through the persuasion and coercion of the fisheries mismanaged federal and provincial governments.
Since our confederation a fishery, our treasured heritage, that the federal government has bartered and pandered away for favorable reciprocal international trading practices with the foreign fishing nations of NAFO and the EU. The final blow of the federal government’s policy of disinheriting us from our fishery will be played out in the coming months of the Canadian/EU free trade agreement.
The effect of this, as any elementary school child knows, has been the loss of 40,000 fisheries jobs, borderline rural poverty, gutted coastal communities and the dissemination of our maritime culture. Perhaps many young people, today, in the province don’t understand that it was the fisheries 500 year life line that gave our forefathers substiance, that built our family structures that gave us our unique character and godliness and made the province what it is today.
Losing our fishery will sever the connection we have always had to the sea, and to all these eternal things which we have uniquely been and to which we cling to today. Losing our fishery will destroy our ability, as individuals, to achieve, to connect to what our forefathers mastered and knew so well, the right they passed on to us. Losing our connection to the sea will destroy our birth right of dignity, in finding peace and pleasure, security and contentment within ourselves in our own homeland, from learning and exercising the mastered skills of seafarers. Who, or what, will we be then?
The conventional idea that a solution will solve a problem is an illusion, the thought or notion that ‘coming up with’ or ‘guessing at’ answers to problems will solve them. This hit or miss affair which does not encompass the breadth and depth of ‘what’s wrong’ and thus has nothing to do with the real structure of a problem and what will correct it. Only full understanding of a problem, which includes understanding it’s root cause, the nature and record of its history, if applicable to what may be still happening today, can bring proper insight and action that is needed to fix it. Simply put, if you learn and know fully, the problem, what it has been and what it is now. It will tell you what the solutions are. Fact!
“And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall,
Then how should I begin
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?”
‘The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, by T. S. Eliot.
It would be totally understandable, though not acceptable, if an ordinary citizen of our province had written the
Jan 1,2012 CBC news (cbc.ca) post ‘Assigning blame for lost jobs helps no one’, by John Furlong, host of NL’s CBC radio show ‘the fisheries broadcast’. Many people don’t, nor should they have to, understand the complexity of our fisheries problems. A fishery, who’s history has been cess pooled by private corporate usurping, and powering, of fish licences and quotas attained through the persuasion and coercion of the fisheries mismanaged federal and provincial governments.
Since our confederation a fishery, our treasured heritage, that the federal government has bartered and pandered away for favorable reciprocal international trading practices with the foreign fishing nations of NAFO and the EU. The final blow of the federal government’s policy of disinheriting us from our fishery will be played out in the coming months of the Canadian/EU free trade agreement.
The effect of this, as any elementary school child knows, has been the loss of 40,000 fisheries jobs, borderline rural poverty, gutted coastal communities and the dissemination of our maritime culture. Perhaps many young people, today, in the province don’t understand that it was the fisheries 500 year life line that gave our forefathers substiance, that built our family structures that gave us our unique character and godliness and made the province what it is today.
Losing our fishery will sever the connection we have always had to the sea, and to all these eternal things which we have uniquely been and to which we cling to today. Losing our fishery will destroy our ability, as individuals, to achieve, to connect to what our forefathers mastered and knew so well, the right they passed on to us. Losing our connection to the sea will destroy our birth right of dignity, in finding peace and pleasure, security and contentment within ourselves in our own homeland, from learning and exercising the mastered skills of seafarers. Who, or what, will we be then?
The conventional idea that a solution will solve a problem is an illusion, the thought or notion that ‘coming up with’ or ‘guessing at’ answers to problems will solve them. This hit or miss affair which does not encompass the breadth and depth of ‘what’s wrong’ and thus has nothing to do with the real structure of a problem and what will correct it. Only full understanding of a problem, which includes understanding it’s root cause, the nature and record of its history, if applicable to what may be still happening today, can bring proper insight and action that is needed to fix it. Simply put, if you learn and know fully, the problem, what it has been and what it is now. It will tell you what the solutions are. Fact!
These are just a few simple facts of what the fishery has
been and what it ‘is’ now, today. They are not biased or based on my
impression, opinion, wants, feelings, emotions or ego. It has nothing to do
with me or any one person’s opinion, nor does it have anything to do with going
back to the ways of the past, fishing in the ‘old ways’. It has to do with one
thing only, the truth. There are many who don’t want the truth exposed or who
would like those like me proven wrong and shown to be fools. Well that’s simple
to do, it only requires taking on the truth of the matter as it has been
requested. Why has it not been done?
After reading Furlongs article and in light of my comments I give the following response.
It is not acceptable that the host of NL’s premier fisheries radio show be permitted to belittle and denigrate the fisher people, the fishery and the coastal communities of this province. His opinion and manner in attacking attempts to expose fisheries truth and the people whose lives depend on it is wrong. But its consequences, of him being in the position of holding up the peoples trust on the Fisheries Broadcast, are in total disrespect of the crisis facing our province. For some time the FB present host has subtly been pushing and defending the federal and corporate agenda. He should be replaced.
What is this all about? Do you know?
It is about this planet’s god given treasure to us Newfoundlander’s and Labradorian’s, the Grand Banks of NL and the surrounding greatest fishery in the world. And what is that for? Yours and my children, and their children’s children. Fact!
“We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown
Till human voices wake us, and we drown.”
Philip Earle
After reading Furlongs article and in light of my comments I give the following response.
It is not acceptable that the host of NL’s premier fisheries radio show be permitted to belittle and denigrate the fisher people, the fishery and the coastal communities of this province. His opinion and manner in attacking attempts to expose fisheries truth and the people whose lives depend on it is wrong. But its consequences, of him being in the position of holding up the peoples trust on the Fisheries Broadcast, are in total disrespect of the crisis facing our province. For some time the FB present host has subtly been pushing and defending the federal and corporate agenda. He should be replaced.
What is this all about? Do you know?
It is about this planet’s god given treasure to us Newfoundlander’s and Labradorian’s, the Grand Banks of NL and the surrounding greatest fishery in the world. And what is that for? Yours and my children, and their children’s children. Fact!
“We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown
Till human voices wake us, and we drown.”
Philip Earle
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Gus Etchegary responds to Fisheries Broadcast Host John Furlong
The following is a response from Gus Etchegary
to the Host of the Fisheries Broadcast - John Furlong
John, Reading your diatribe on the present state of the fishery finally confirms what we suspected from the early days you came on the scene as host of Fisheries Broadcast. The Ottawa fishery bureaucracy of DFO convinced the hierarchy of CBC to put someone in charge of the broadcast who could discover and make the most inane and stupid comments on the N&L fishery since we joined Confederation. Having heard you occasionally on the Broadcast and being assured by White Hills Communications Branch, those experts in remote Ottawa were certain you would come through in "flying colors".
Pretending, and somehow believing, you are somewhat of an expert in the fishery of this Province you somehow or other got really confused between the cause of closure of Marystown and Port Union fish plants and the loss of a supermarket in Churchill Square and the narrow-gauged railway that used to operate across NFLD many years ago. On the basis of the statements made on the CBC website today it is clear you have no idea what you are talking about and considering the importance of our fisheries to the survival of N&L, CBC officials had better wake up and replace you with some competent individual as soon as possible. Maybe you did everyone a favor today by exposing your serious deficiencies in performing the job as host of Fisheries Broadcast.
The fact is our the renewable fishery is all important to the survival of rural N&L at the present time and will be just as important to the survival of St. John's when the non- renewable oil and minerals are exhausted. It's so important, during this crucial period, for our present N&L Government to provide the real leadership needed to forcefully persuade the federal Government to rebuild the resource. Your confused outburst today on our CBC website illustrates conclusively that you are not the person to convey to the public or anyone else the urgency of rebuilding and sustainably managing our vital fisheries. John, a moratorium on our groundfisheries was declared in 1992. For your information there is no sign whatever of its recovery to date. In your position you should have been using every opportunity on the Broadcast to make Canadians aware of the contrast between the well-managed fisheries of Norway, Iceland and other countries and those in N&L in particular where fisheries mismanagement by Ottawa has caused its collapse. Wake up John, its 2012.
Anyone with real knowledge of our fisheries is aware of the continuing overfishing on a diminishing groundfish resource, the declining crab and shrimp stocks and the fact that DFO have abandoned their fisheries management responsibility. Our science capability has been gutted and further financial cuts are due along with serious reductions in the number of fishery scientists and other technology personnel, research survey vessels and the important annual surveys that are so essential. Foreign NAFO members and EU Free Trade negotiators have exchanged documentation to facilitate expanding foreign activity inside 200 miles. These Free Trade negotiations regarding fisheries, now taking place, are a major issue and should be publicized. Seismic blasting , pollution of valuable fishing grounds and the loss of important fishing areas on the Grand Banks are also issues that must be dealt with along with contents of the MOU.
Surely, John those matters should be of more concern to the host of Fisheries Broadcast, than the loss of the railway fifty years ago and the closure of the Churchill Park supermarket. CBC, you have received a strong signal for a change in delivering Fisheries Broadcast. Unless Mr. Harper's directive to CBC takes precedence.
Monday, January 02, 2012
Apathy is the Solution for Fishery Woes? John Furlong's Answer?
When I first read "Assigning blame for lost jobs helps no one" I gasped, shook my head, and then settled into a period of remorse - as yet another Newfoundlander and Labradorian had been overcome by a rogue wave hitting the beach off the Fisheries Broadcast.
John Furlong's article does nothing more than justify apathy, dissuade questions and accountability, and marginalize any person who is fighting for the survival of the fishery (that is in any other way than resettlement and downsizing).
I took from his piece that one who owns assets has the answers and those who work within the sector do not. The Corporate merchants - they are the ones we need to look to for the way forward.
This story followed another by Furlong titled, "Change in the N.L. Fishery: Get used to it" and are both pro-apathy pieces from the Fisheries Broadcast host.
Fortunately for John - his corporation saw fit to have an entire program on this resource and not replace it with one called The Supermarket Broadcast - in recognition of that renewable natural resource. But he will get to retirement on it - unless perhaps the Sullivan's file a complaint with Stephen Harper and get the show cancelled before Furlong's on-air farewell.
To compare the loss of fishplants and that industry in dozens of rural communities to the loss of a supermarket in the middle of St. John's is absurd and irresponsible. Further if the oil economy is right - there may be a replacement in the area sooner rather than later - as the buoyant population of the city - and the free-flowing wealth will be catered to.
Then Furlong goes on to talk about the racket regarding the loss of the train. We all got over that right? What a joke. The highway cannot tolerate the traffic of heavy vehicles, we do not have a divided highway across the province, we have lost the ability to have fed input (cash) as we gave that up to for a piece of a road being widened without any ongoing funds for maintenance. As for the narrow gauge argument - that was propaganda as well - as many still exist or have made some changes to standard gauge and remain a very efficient, reliable, method of transporting goods and in many cases people.
The townies did not "need" it therefore it can go. There were political buddies that made money on the changeover to highway transport. Just to make sure it never came back - a quick destruction of the assets was employed and now we get to fight over snowmobiles, atv's or hikers.
Looking for answers is a real problem for Furlong and he is asking that you stop too. As one of the richest pieces of geography on the planet we had better keep looking for answers or future generations will have nothing left. In Furlong's world there would not be a need for a new host for the Broadcast in the future - who would listen? The Penney's Barry's and Sullivan's of the world do not need the CBC and may in fact hate tax-dollars being used for it. What they need is increased profits, greater access to the raw resource, and little to no interference by the owners of the resources, the people - through their elected bodies (both provincial and federal).
As the owners of what was one of the best renewable fisheries in the world, significant hydro-electric resources, forestry resources and fresh water coupled with non-renewable wealth such as minerals, oil, and gas - we have not done very well have we?
This quote from Furlong is particularly disturbing:
"We live on what used to be the world's richest fishing grounds. Year after year we turned out a fishery that was uneconomical, not very competitive and pretty well uninspiring. There's plenty of blame to go around to explain that."
Okay John, what happened to the resource? When was it uneconomical? Was it more beneficial for the merchant, the fisherman, or the plant-worker? When was it "not very competitive" - and how was it uninspiring? There's plenty of blame you claim - okay John - who is to blame? What is the role of the federal government? Who will make up for the billions in lost revenue to this province? If you do not want to consider workers, communities, or entire populations as relevant - how about the cash?
Your outward feelings on people like Dr. Phil Earle or Gus Etchegary are also quite revealing. What do you think their agendas are? Who are they trying to harm? Why are they so dismayed at what is happening? Is their information incorrect? Are they nuisances for continuing to ask questions? Do you believe they do not want a positive outcome? Are you annoyed because they want answers? Do you find them foolish for wanting a reason for the collapse - in order to find the best way forward for all our people not just the merchants?
The moratorium was supposed to be over by now - the stocks were supposed to be recovered - what happened to that? What does John Crosbie think went wrong with that? If there has been a harm and a party was constitutionally or legally responsible for the management - then there is blame and there is compensation. We have not been compensated John. You do understand John that a supermarket in St. John's is not a renewable resource nor is it or was it the responsibility of the federal government to manage. You do understand John - the government believes that the retail market in the St. John's area is so hot - that we have jobs now that can't be filled - so likely there will be immediate and like opportunities to those displaced by that closure in Churchill Square. You do know that many of those working in the retail sector are doing it while attending university or college or may be supplementing retirement income. You also know that most in the fishery are in it as a lifelong occupation.
I wonder if the employee in a St. John's supermarket somehow cannot find work in this "hot" retail market suddenly found that they could not pay their mortgage due to revenue loss - would they suffer a devaluation of that asset? This in comparison to somebody losing a job in a rural community - that also happened to lose the entire industry - rendering their asset essentially valueless. Do you John see any difference there other than the one difference you did quote?
You do realize John that a supermarket being lost is not going to cause too much economic upheaval over the next 20 years - whereas the loss of natural renewable resources will cripple us when the oil is gone. What is the difference between the two from a straight economic perspective?
If you believe that no further study is needed to determine cause - then tell us what was the cause? If that cause or causes include the federal government mismanaging the resource - then there has been an injury and where there is injury there is remedy through compensation.That compensation would do a number of things; including but not limited to - allow the proper compensation for lost wages, career, and asset devaluation - no different than what would be awarded in other litigation's such as victims of accidents. The compensation would allow the province to complete more not less scientific research of the fishery. The compensation would allow the survival of communities until the resource recovers or until other industrial opportunities are found. It would also allow those affected start-up funds for other ventures such as the development of land in St. John's purchased at $4000 an acre. Perhaps the fishers should be awarded provincial parks, or rivers for small-hydro development. Perhaps the entire quota should be delivered to the communities, fishers and plant-workers to sell in Asia.
Why are any resources in the hands of an OCI as a corporate entity when owners of the resource are shut out?
What Furlong has concluded is the who,what,where, when and why is discouraged while "get used to it" apathy is encouraged. Do not be fooled by this approach people - the continued destruction of this industry and resource will harm your children and their children much more than the closure of a supermarket in Churchill Square and will impact our ability to deliver health care, education, and build essential infrastructure a decade out.
If you can at all believe that the oil resources will eventually be exhausted - it is not a stretch for you to consider what next.
In every other resource sector, hydro-electric, mining, forestry, and oil we have been a population that has not processed enough finished product - and as a result we did not enjoy maximum industrial benefits. If other countries and provinces can create wealth - without their own resources - but simply by processing ours - we have to ask ourselves - what are we doing?
If we do not ask why - or who is to blame - we will NOT find a solution that works for people - we will simply capitulate to a few wealthy shareholders who will take whatever we will give them - the less they have to commit the better.
OCI knew what they were doing when they got the buy from FPI and from the time they got their hands on it - was the time they started to plan to reduce commitments and maximize profits. This is fine for a supermarket chain - it is not fine for a natural - renewable - resource owned by the people.
There is no doubt the answer is giveaway - now we MUST ask why we continue to allow it.
John Furlong has his own opinion and we are allowed to have ours. We are permitted to ask questions and demand answers despite John's feeling that this is a waste of time.
We don't have to "get used to" anything - in fact we are fully within our rights to tell those we elect and employ that we will not get used to it and if you can't do what we need and want - we can hire somebody else.
The slow death of communities and the fishery sector has been in part very orchestrated and very planned. Bit by bit - while urban populations are bored and growing with a temporary oil bonanza - one by one rural communities are being decimated. The townies do not want to hear the "whining" of fishermen - in a sense telling their great-great grandparents to shut-up.
Part of the placation of the fishermen and plant workers was a new boom in the shellfish sector. What John will become of that? We are only mismanaging that because we are suffering from the mismanagement of groundfish.
Watching each other bleed until enough of us are gone - is not the answer. Stepping up to the plate - showing some real guts and fighting for what is right - includes the asking of questions.
Two interesting story ideas for John:
1. Is your job being impacted by the disaster?
2. Why do more rural Newfoundlanders and Labradorians carpool than commuters in the city?
Thank you to social media - for I fear that if mainstream media still had control - we would know nothing of our impending death. That is unless is was crime in the courts or carnage on the highway.
If we believe that the only wisdom is that which comes from our elected government or journalists - apathy has won. There is nothing in the world more damaging than good people encouraged to do nothing and actually listening to that advice.
One thing has become completely predictable - the mantra of "stop asking questions". What's up with that?
John Furlong's article does nothing more than justify apathy, dissuade questions and accountability, and marginalize any person who is fighting for the survival of the fishery (that is in any other way than resettlement and downsizing).
I took from his piece that one who owns assets has the answers and those who work within the sector do not. The Corporate merchants - they are the ones we need to look to for the way forward.
This story followed another by Furlong titled, "Change in the N.L. Fishery: Get used to it" and are both pro-apathy pieces from the Fisheries Broadcast host.
Fortunately for John - his corporation saw fit to have an entire program on this resource and not replace it with one called The Supermarket Broadcast - in recognition of that renewable natural resource. But he will get to retirement on it - unless perhaps the Sullivan's file a complaint with Stephen Harper and get the show cancelled before Furlong's on-air farewell.
To compare the loss of fishplants and that industry in dozens of rural communities to the loss of a supermarket in the middle of St. John's is absurd and irresponsible. Further if the oil economy is right - there may be a replacement in the area sooner rather than later - as the buoyant population of the city - and the free-flowing wealth will be catered to.
Then Furlong goes on to talk about the racket regarding the loss of the train. We all got over that right? What a joke. The highway cannot tolerate the traffic of heavy vehicles, we do not have a divided highway across the province, we have lost the ability to have fed input (cash) as we gave that up to for a piece of a road being widened without any ongoing funds for maintenance. As for the narrow gauge argument - that was propaganda as well - as many still exist or have made some changes to standard gauge and remain a very efficient, reliable, method of transporting goods and in many cases people.
The townies did not "need" it therefore it can go. There were political buddies that made money on the changeover to highway transport. Just to make sure it never came back - a quick destruction of the assets was employed and now we get to fight over snowmobiles, atv's or hikers.
Looking for answers is a real problem for Furlong and he is asking that you stop too. As one of the richest pieces of geography on the planet we had better keep looking for answers or future generations will have nothing left. In Furlong's world there would not be a need for a new host for the Broadcast in the future - who would listen? The Penney's Barry's and Sullivan's of the world do not need the CBC and may in fact hate tax-dollars being used for it. What they need is increased profits, greater access to the raw resource, and little to no interference by the owners of the resources, the people - through their elected bodies (both provincial and federal).
As the owners of what was one of the best renewable fisheries in the world, significant hydro-electric resources, forestry resources and fresh water coupled with non-renewable wealth such as minerals, oil, and gas - we have not done very well have we?
This quote from Furlong is particularly disturbing:
"We live on what used to be the world's richest fishing grounds. Year after year we turned out a fishery that was uneconomical, not very competitive and pretty well uninspiring. There's plenty of blame to go around to explain that."
Okay John, what happened to the resource? When was it uneconomical? Was it more beneficial for the merchant, the fisherman, or the plant-worker? When was it "not very competitive" - and how was it uninspiring? There's plenty of blame you claim - okay John - who is to blame? What is the role of the federal government? Who will make up for the billions in lost revenue to this province? If you do not want to consider workers, communities, or entire populations as relevant - how about the cash?
Your outward feelings on people like Dr. Phil Earle or Gus Etchegary are also quite revealing. What do you think their agendas are? Who are they trying to harm? Why are they so dismayed at what is happening? Is their information incorrect? Are they nuisances for continuing to ask questions? Do you believe they do not want a positive outcome? Are you annoyed because they want answers? Do you find them foolish for wanting a reason for the collapse - in order to find the best way forward for all our people not just the merchants?
The moratorium was supposed to be over by now - the stocks were supposed to be recovered - what happened to that? What does John Crosbie think went wrong with that? If there has been a harm and a party was constitutionally or legally responsible for the management - then there is blame and there is compensation. We have not been compensated John. You do understand John that a supermarket in St. John's is not a renewable resource nor is it or was it the responsibility of the federal government to manage. You do understand John - the government believes that the retail market in the St. John's area is so hot - that we have jobs now that can't be filled - so likely there will be immediate and like opportunities to those displaced by that closure in Churchill Square. You do know that many of those working in the retail sector are doing it while attending university or college or may be supplementing retirement income. You also know that most in the fishery are in it as a lifelong occupation.
I wonder if the employee in a St. John's supermarket somehow cannot find work in this "hot" retail market suddenly found that they could not pay their mortgage due to revenue loss - would they suffer a devaluation of that asset? This in comparison to somebody losing a job in a rural community - that also happened to lose the entire industry - rendering their asset essentially valueless. Do you John see any difference there other than the one difference you did quote?
You do realize John that a supermarket being lost is not going to cause too much economic upheaval over the next 20 years - whereas the loss of natural renewable resources will cripple us when the oil is gone. What is the difference between the two from a straight economic perspective?
If you believe that no further study is needed to determine cause - then tell us what was the cause? If that cause or causes include the federal government mismanaging the resource - then there has been an injury and where there is injury there is remedy through compensation.That compensation would do a number of things; including but not limited to - allow the proper compensation for lost wages, career, and asset devaluation - no different than what would be awarded in other litigation's such as victims of accidents. The compensation would allow the province to complete more not less scientific research of the fishery. The compensation would allow the survival of communities until the resource recovers or until other industrial opportunities are found. It would also allow those affected start-up funds for other ventures such as the development of land in St. John's purchased at $4000 an acre. Perhaps the fishers should be awarded provincial parks, or rivers for small-hydro development. Perhaps the entire quota should be delivered to the communities, fishers and plant-workers to sell in Asia.
Why are any resources in the hands of an OCI as a corporate entity when owners of the resource are shut out?
What Furlong has concluded is the who,what,where, when and why is discouraged while "get used to it" apathy is encouraged. Do not be fooled by this approach people - the continued destruction of this industry and resource will harm your children and their children much more than the closure of a supermarket in Churchill Square and will impact our ability to deliver health care, education, and build essential infrastructure a decade out.
If you can at all believe that the oil resources will eventually be exhausted - it is not a stretch for you to consider what next.
In every other resource sector, hydro-electric, mining, forestry, and oil we have been a population that has not processed enough finished product - and as a result we did not enjoy maximum industrial benefits. If other countries and provinces can create wealth - without their own resources - but simply by processing ours - we have to ask ourselves - what are we doing?
If we do not ask why - or who is to blame - we will NOT find a solution that works for people - we will simply capitulate to a few wealthy shareholders who will take whatever we will give them - the less they have to commit the better.
OCI knew what they were doing when they got the buy from FPI and from the time they got their hands on it - was the time they started to plan to reduce commitments and maximize profits. This is fine for a supermarket chain - it is not fine for a natural - renewable - resource owned by the people.
There is no doubt the answer is giveaway - now we MUST ask why we continue to allow it.
John Furlong has his own opinion and we are allowed to have ours. We are permitted to ask questions and demand answers despite John's feeling that this is a waste of time.
We don't have to "get used to" anything - in fact we are fully within our rights to tell those we elect and employ that we will not get used to it and if you can't do what we need and want - we can hire somebody else.
The slow death of communities and the fishery sector has been in part very orchestrated and very planned. Bit by bit - while urban populations are bored and growing with a temporary oil bonanza - one by one rural communities are being decimated. The townies do not want to hear the "whining" of fishermen - in a sense telling their great-great grandparents to shut-up.
Part of the placation of the fishermen and plant workers was a new boom in the shellfish sector. What John will become of that? We are only mismanaging that because we are suffering from the mismanagement of groundfish.
Watching each other bleed until enough of us are gone - is not the answer. Stepping up to the plate - showing some real guts and fighting for what is right - includes the asking of questions.
Two interesting story ideas for John:
1. Is your job being impacted by the disaster?
2. Why do more rural Newfoundlanders and Labradorians carpool than commuters in the city?
Thank you to social media - for I fear that if mainstream media still had control - we would know nothing of our impending death. That is unless is was crime in the courts or carnage on the highway.
If we believe that the only wisdom is that which comes from our elected government or journalists - apathy has won. There is nothing in the world more damaging than good people encouraged to do nothing and actually listening to that advice.
One thing has become completely predictable - the mantra of "stop asking questions". What's up with that?
Tuesday, November 01, 2011
Inept Politicians Responsible for kicking the Pride out of our People
It is true that I am opinionated - but unlike frenzied partisan zealots - my opinion is based on research.
The title of this post is no longer a matter of opinion - it is a fact.
How many of you have listened or read negative and quite often nasty comments made by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians regarding the fishery?
You know like "it's time we rationalized" - "time to stop the welfare" - "I am sick of hearing fishermen complaining"?
How sad - to hear our own people kick our own people - when they are NOT responsible for the fisheries disaster.
How sad to hear other people inflicted by unemployment caused by inept politicians turn on unemployed fishermen and plant workers instead of the inept politicians.
How utterly pathetic to hear inept politicians ponder how to cut the guts out of the fishery, entire communities and families rather than tackle Uncle Ottawa.
1. The fishery was mismanaged by the federal government.
2. That mismanagement costs this province 1 billion dollars annually.
3. The recovery expected by 2001 did not occur.
4. There has been NO compensation for the past decade meaning we have lost 10 billion dollars.
5. The federal government continues to diminish fisheries science rendering the resource and the industry dead.
6. Newfoundland and Labrador has lost over 40,000 people and rendered many communities bankrupt from this loss.
7. The fishery continues to be a bargaining chip for foreign trade without the benefits of such accruing to Newfoundland and Labrador.
8. The provincial government does not have the knowledge, the will, or the guts to do what is right.
9. Rationalization is a word used to cover up incompetence at both the federal and provincial levels.
10. Politicians are responsible for kicking the pride out of our people and for turning one Newfoundlander and Labradorian against another Newfoundlander and Labradorian.
The title of this post is no longer a matter of opinion - it is a fact.
How many of you have listened or read negative and quite often nasty comments made by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians regarding the fishery?
You know like "it's time we rationalized" - "time to stop the welfare" - "I am sick of hearing fishermen complaining"?
How sad - to hear our own people kick our own people - when they are NOT responsible for the fisheries disaster.
How sad to hear other people inflicted by unemployment caused by inept politicians turn on unemployed fishermen and plant workers instead of the inept politicians.
How utterly pathetic to hear inept politicians ponder how to cut the guts out of the fishery, entire communities and families rather than tackle Uncle Ottawa.
1. The fishery was mismanaged by the federal government.
2. That mismanagement costs this province 1 billion dollars annually.
3. The recovery expected by 2001 did not occur.
4. There has been NO compensation for the past decade meaning we have lost 10 billion dollars.
5. The federal government continues to diminish fisheries science rendering the resource and the industry dead.
6. Newfoundland and Labrador has lost over 40,000 people and rendered many communities bankrupt from this loss.
7. The fishery continues to be a bargaining chip for foreign trade without the benefits of such accruing to Newfoundland and Labrador.
8. The provincial government does not have the knowledge, the will, or the guts to do what is right.
9. Rationalization is a word used to cover up incompetence at both the federal and provincial levels.
10. Politicians are responsible for kicking the pride out of our people and for turning one Newfoundlander and Labradorian against another Newfoundlander and Labradorian.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
Harper's Vendetta will now cost Lives - will Dunderdale stand by "her" Man?
Stephen Harper will not do right by Newfoundland and Labrador.
The Prime Minister has lied to Premier Williams directly, he has lied to me directly, he has lied to our people directly and it has cost us billions of dollars.
Each decision he makes guarantees that our Province and her people lose again.
The Prime Minister has lied on equalization, custodial management of the Nose and Tail, Air Force Base Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Senate appointments, and Income Trusts.
Regardless of your point of view about Danny Williams - he was right in his assessment of Harper and his very public warning about Harper's character should be remembered.
Harper is now threatening Fisheries Science again and places into more peril the stocks which the federal government is already responsible for mismanaging. Cuts to the Department, puts another nail in the coffin which is our future. That was figurative! With respect to cuts to the Coast Guard and emergency response - the man is placing in jeopardy - real lives. This certainly must be the last straw for our people!
The way Harper sees it is if we don't voluntarily jump off the bridge - he will push us.
Last but not least - Harper takes particular pleasure in having Newfoundlanders and Labradorians stand by his side while he takes aim at our province. Manning, Hearn, Sullivan, Beth Marshall, and Fabian have been used successfully and now he has our Premier Dunderdale holding his left hand and Peter Penashue holding his right hand. Let's hope they let go before more damage is done.
The Prime Minister has lied to Premier Williams directly, he has lied to me directly, he has lied to our people directly and it has cost us billions of dollars.
Each decision he makes guarantees that our Province and her people lose again.
The Prime Minister has lied on equalization, custodial management of the Nose and Tail, Air Force Base Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Senate appointments, and Income Trusts.
Regardless of your point of view about Danny Williams - he was right in his assessment of Harper and his very public warning about Harper's character should be remembered.
Harper is now threatening Fisheries Science again and places into more peril the stocks which the federal government is already responsible for mismanaging. Cuts to the Department, puts another nail in the coffin which is our future. That was figurative! With respect to cuts to the Coast Guard and emergency response - the man is placing in jeopardy - real lives. This certainly must be the last straw for our people!
The way Harper sees it is if we don't voluntarily jump off the bridge - he will push us.
Last but not least - Harper takes particular pleasure in having Newfoundlanders and Labradorians stand by his side while he takes aim at our province. Manning, Hearn, Sullivan, Beth Marshall, and Fabian have been used successfully and now he has our Premier Dunderdale holding his left hand and Peter Penashue holding his right hand. Let's hope they let go before more damage is done.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Cod and who pays?
Below is a response to my fisheries blog yesterday. I believe it is very important to dialogue back and forth agreeing or disagreeing - in an effort to find solutions to significant problems. Please read the response by a reader and my response to it.
Response
Welcome back Sue. While I love your passion for our province I feel your bent about any of our provincial leaders ability to control or do anything about the fishery is misplaced as we only control processing licences.
Since the fishery is a national/international common property resource and the majority of Canada's population lives either in ON/QU or Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver for all intensive purposes we have no say in how the fishery is managed or controlled. In fact I submit to you that all of the national parties use it as a bargaining chip to better the majority of the population through DFAIT.
Until we start electing Independent federal MP's nothing will change because it is essentially an
National/International Tragedy of our Commons at the hands of our
Tyranny of the majority political system
where by any and all of the national party MP's we elect to represent us on the federal stage will continue to toe their national party lines of doing what is in the best interest of the majority of the population to get their national party elected or re-elected.
We need a veto on fisheries issues in the national party cabinets,and NAFO. Even if we have to do it in conjunction with the maritime provinces.
Wanna make a bet that the 2013 UNLOS deadline will come and pass with the flemish cap being given away and or ownership and control since we already have custodial management being the adjacent state just we all of hte national parties choose not to act on it.
Response to the Response
You will notice that I continue to state the federal government is responsible for the mismanagement and therefore responsible for compensation.
Provincial leaders have the responsibility to go after the feds if they believe we have been wronged.
The federal government is not going to pursue itself.
If you were wronged personally or in business due to mismanagement of a responsibility of the other party you are the only one that could take an action.
While the provincial leaders do not have jurisdiction over many areas (confederation) all provincial leaders fight for fairness and equity for their province.
This case is unique - the feds manage our fish stocks unlike manage the weather in the case of western farming losses year over year. And even though the farms are not the responsibility of the feds (unlike our fishery) they are still compensated year over year.
Regardless of who goes to Ottawa - the federal system will never work for our province.
It is time that this province sought and received compensation for the following:
Loss of economic value of the ground-stocks for ten years.(first ten years tags encarp)
Loss of population = loss of transfer payments (not equalization)
Revenue to the province for increased costs due to increased need for seniors care (once provided for by the moved away family members)
Compensation directly to rural communities for outrageous losses of property value and tax base
Compensation in the form of increased federal presence in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Response
Welcome back Sue. While I love your passion for our province I feel your bent about any of our provincial leaders ability to control or do anything about the fishery is misplaced as we only control processing licences.
Since the fishery is a national/international common property resource and the majority of Canada's population lives either in ON/QU or Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver for all intensive purposes we have no say in how the fishery is managed or controlled. In fact I submit to you that all of the national parties use it as a bargaining chip to better the majority of the population through DFAIT.
Until we start electing Independent federal MP's nothing will change because it is essentially an
National/International Tragedy of our Commons at the hands of our
Tyranny of the majority political system
where by any and all of the national party MP's we elect to represent us on the federal stage will continue to toe their national party lines of doing what is in the best interest of the majority of the population to get their national party elected or re-elected.
We need a veto on fisheries issues in the national party cabinets,and NAFO. Even if we have to do it in conjunction with the maritime provinces.
Wanna make a bet that the 2013 UNLOS deadline will come and pass with the flemish cap being given away and or ownership and control since we already have custodial management being the adjacent state just we all of hte national parties choose not to act on it.
Response to the Response
You will notice that I continue to state the federal government is responsible for the mismanagement and therefore responsible for compensation.
Provincial leaders have the responsibility to go after the feds if they believe we have been wronged.
The federal government is not going to pursue itself.
If you were wronged personally or in business due to mismanagement of a responsibility of the other party you are the only one that could take an action.
While the provincial leaders do not have jurisdiction over many areas (confederation) all provincial leaders fight for fairness and equity for their province.
This case is unique - the feds manage our fish stocks unlike manage the weather in the case of western farming losses year over year. And even though the farms are not the responsibility of the feds (unlike our fishery) they are still compensated year over year.
Regardless of who goes to Ottawa - the federal system will never work for our province.
It is time that this province sought and received compensation for the following:
Loss of economic value of the ground-stocks for ten years.(first ten years tags encarp)
Loss of population = loss of transfer payments (not equalization)
Revenue to the province for increased costs due to increased need for seniors care (once provided for by the moved away family members)
Compensation directly to rural communities for outrageous losses of property value and tax base
Compensation in the form of increased federal presence in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Have you found our Cod? Have we found our Guts?
Minister Shea - proudly announces the sale of seal meat to China. Well and good. Europe is feeling the pain. Have you ever listened to the pain in Gus Etchegary's voice as he talks passionately about our fishery?
I think Gus put too much faith in Danny Williams when he expected him to do something real about it. Political expedience was Danny's mastery. He fought Ottawa under the Liberal regime and gained 2 billion from Martin. Unfortunately he did not invest that money into the Lower Churchill so we took a hit on the markets. We don't know what the net result of that was.
Then Danny lost the battle with Harper, Manning, and Hearn and we lost 10 billion dollars as Quebec's position remained enhanced. I do believe equalization should be renamed the Quebec federalist fund but anyway back to Gus.
Gus of course is right and we have been robbed - but Gus needs to turn to real Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to get the fight started. First we need to admit that the federal government lied. The fish have not come back and as a result we are down over 500 million a year and tens of thousands of citizens.
We must not be fooled by the overall value of our fishery by including all species - because by doing so we let the gross mismanagement go uncompensated for. It is time Newfoundlanders and Labradorians - who are really passionate - demand recovery of either the stock or cash.
Listen to Gus listen to his plea. Why do you think Gus does this? He's not looking to be elected - nor is he looking for a plum government job. He loves this place and her people. Do you believe that Gus knows more about the fishery than your MHA. You know he does. His advice is free and well meaning and above all he is right and you know it.
As parents we have a broader responsibility than putting a roof over their heads and food in their bellies - we have a responsibility to pass to them a province of renewable resources that we have protected and nurtured for them. If you turn your back on the fishery, fishers and the wonderful communities built on the resource - you really turn your back on your children and grandchildren.
Sometimes it is really hard to watch the apathy of our people while watching rural Newfoundland and Labrador's is decimation. We get more reaction to the Haitian crisis than when tens of thousands of our own citizens pack their bags, leave their homesteads, leave their elderly parents, uproot their children, and cry in a U-Haul while they await the Canadian ferry.
I have never been able to stop myself completely from wanting to protect this place - and as such continue to receive the ire and professional attacks from political zealots who do not see past 50 signatures. Sometimes I receive the most hateful of emails and barrages of personal slander from Tory or Liberal party hacks. The fact that I have reinstated this blog has caused the usual of "where are you running to now Dyer", "why don't you just shut-up and go away", or some of what Cabana was talking about today to the media.
Problem is - I don't need this - the same way you don't. What's the option? The option is - say nothing allow the plundering to continue and try to tell our grandchildren that "we did not know". That's what we were told. We do know - so do you want to say of our fishery and our beautiful communities "we knew but we did nothing - thought somebody else was looking after that".
Gus represents what is good about passion for the place he calls home. That readers is real passion - not the type that occasionally lowers a Canadian flag or cites the alphabet to punish Stephen Harper. Trust me when I tell you Canada nor the federal government cared a bit when the only punishment was Fabian losing a seat. I don't imagine Manning is suffering the same way in his Senate seat as the people from his own home who are bawling all the way out of their devastated community without a cent in their arse pocket. People who lived in a house that lost 80 percent of its value when a plant closed.
This October while we will not get political change whether it be Tory or Liberal - we can demand that for our vote certain things must be done. This will have to do until we place real passionate leadership in place - unencumbered by corporate lobbyists hailing from everywhere but here.
I think Gus put too much faith in Danny Williams when he expected him to do something real about it. Political expedience was Danny's mastery. He fought Ottawa under the Liberal regime and gained 2 billion from Martin. Unfortunately he did not invest that money into the Lower Churchill so we took a hit on the markets. We don't know what the net result of that was.
Then Danny lost the battle with Harper, Manning, and Hearn and we lost 10 billion dollars as Quebec's position remained enhanced. I do believe equalization should be renamed the Quebec federalist fund but anyway back to Gus.
Gus of course is right and we have been robbed - but Gus needs to turn to real Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to get the fight started. First we need to admit that the federal government lied. The fish have not come back and as a result we are down over 500 million a year and tens of thousands of citizens.
We must not be fooled by the overall value of our fishery by including all species - because by doing so we let the gross mismanagement go uncompensated for. It is time Newfoundlanders and Labradorians - who are really passionate - demand recovery of either the stock or cash.
Listen to Gus listen to his plea. Why do you think Gus does this? He's not looking to be elected - nor is he looking for a plum government job. He loves this place and her people. Do you believe that Gus knows more about the fishery than your MHA. You know he does. His advice is free and well meaning and above all he is right and you know it.
As parents we have a broader responsibility than putting a roof over their heads and food in their bellies - we have a responsibility to pass to them a province of renewable resources that we have protected and nurtured for them. If you turn your back on the fishery, fishers and the wonderful communities built on the resource - you really turn your back on your children and grandchildren.
Sometimes it is really hard to watch the apathy of our people while watching rural Newfoundland and Labrador's is decimation. We get more reaction to the Haitian crisis than when tens of thousands of our own citizens pack their bags, leave their homesteads, leave their elderly parents, uproot their children, and cry in a U-Haul while they await the Canadian ferry.
I have never been able to stop myself completely from wanting to protect this place - and as such continue to receive the ire and professional attacks from political zealots who do not see past 50 signatures. Sometimes I receive the most hateful of emails and barrages of personal slander from Tory or Liberal party hacks. The fact that I have reinstated this blog has caused the usual of "where are you running to now Dyer", "why don't you just shut-up and go away", or some of what Cabana was talking about today to the media.
Problem is - I don't need this - the same way you don't. What's the option? The option is - say nothing allow the plundering to continue and try to tell our grandchildren that "we did not know". That's what we were told. We do know - so do you want to say of our fishery and our beautiful communities "we knew but we did nothing - thought somebody else was looking after that".
Gus represents what is good about passion for the place he calls home. That readers is real passion - not the type that occasionally lowers a Canadian flag or cites the alphabet to punish Stephen Harper. Trust me when I tell you Canada nor the federal government cared a bit when the only punishment was Fabian losing a seat. I don't imagine Manning is suffering the same way in his Senate seat as the people from his own home who are bawling all the way out of their devastated community without a cent in their arse pocket. People who lived in a house that lost 80 percent of its value when a plant closed.
This October while we will not get political change whether it be Tory or Liberal - we can demand that for our vote certain things must be done. This will have to do until we place real passionate leadership in place - unencumbered by corporate lobbyists hailing from everywhere but here.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Fisheries Broadcast represents the fishery ...
better than all our elected politicians - fish merchants - and industry unions combined. If not for the Broadcast - the fishery would be completely off the sonar. John Furlong puts the tough questions to all parties and properly let's us the listeners make up our own mind.
Despite the attempts of politicians the FFAW and merchants to keep the fishery a secret - the Broadcast continues to bring the news - good and bad to the public. With respect to our federal and provincial lot of politicians and senior bureaucracy - all of which we pay - I have never seen such a cover up of planned resettlement - outmigration - and giveaway of this precious and renewable resource. We - the people - are not supposed to know.
Two things this morning - first the link to the Broadcast - where you can listen to John's interviews with Applebaum and Bevin on the latest NAFO fiasco and a story in the Globe and Mail where the writer describes us this way:
Thanks to a Sue's Blog reader for pointing out the Globe piece.
Thanks to the Fisheries Broadcast and John Furlong for keeping our history - culture - and future in the public eye. I recommend that all Sue's Blog readers consider adding the Broadcast to their daily regimen of news.
And a big Brick to our politicians who either through ignorance or duplicity are keeping the information from us. When you think about the HOA scandal the Mount Cashel cover-up - the latest healthcare disaster - and the wrongful convictions - and remember nothing good ever comes from keeping the truth from us. Speak now or lose this industry and resource for good.
Despite the attempts of politicians the FFAW and merchants to keep the fishery a secret - the Broadcast continues to bring the news - good and bad to the public. With respect to our federal and provincial lot of politicians and senior bureaucracy - all of which we pay - I have never seen such a cover up of planned resettlement - outmigration - and giveaway of this precious and renewable resource. We - the people - are not supposed to know.
Two things this morning - first the link to the Broadcast - where you can listen to John's interviews with Applebaum and Bevin on the latest NAFO fiasco and a story in the Globe and Mail where the writer describes us this way:
On the domestic front, after fighting against consolidation in the industry for decades, those shell shuckers in the Newfoundland and Labrador government have approved a preliminary agreement for the sale and breakup of FPI Ltd. (FPL-TSX). Some of those assets will likely come High Liner's way.
Thanks to a Sue's Blog reader for pointing out the Globe piece.
Thanks to the Fisheries Broadcast and John Furlong for keeping our history - culture - and future in the public eye. I recommend that all Sue's Blog readers consider adding the Broadcast to their daily regimen of news.
And a big Brick to our politicians who either through ignorance or duplicity are keeping the information from us. When you think about the HOA scandal the Mount Cashel cover-up - the latest healthcare disaster - and the wrongful convictions - and remember nothing good ever comes from keeping the truth from us. Speak now or lose this industry and resource for good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)