Moratorium - A SUSPENSION of Activity
So that's where we are? A suspension of activity?
This suspension of activity has caused the loss of over 40,000 people from our province.
This suspension of activity has caused the death or near-death of some rural communities.
This suspension of activity has caused the loss of relationships and breakup of families.
This suspension of activity has caused the closure of secondary related business and industry.
Moratorium sounds so - clinical - and in some ways hopeful.
This word is not appropriate for the loss of our cod fishery/ground stocks.
This word does not do justice in defining the catastrophic damage caused due to "suspension" of activity.
Somehow Canada - Ottawa - the Feds - have convinced many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that it's our fault or at the least we are partially to blame.
Listening to Canada - or federal politicians from other provinces make this claim - is - what I can expect. Listening to our own politicians and experts making the same claim is sickening.
So how did Canadian and Newfoundland and Labrador politicians get away with the largest socio/enviro mess ever seen in this country?
1. Announce a moratorium in 1992 and claim that stocks will recover - should have been fixed by 2002. (DID NOT HAPPEN)
2. Announce programs to bridge the gap for fishermen, plantworkers, and communities (DID NOT begin to COVER LOSS)
3. Increase Fisheries Science (DID NOT HAPPEN)
4. Retirement Packages (DID NOT HAPPEN)
5. Then they slowly got us used to words like rationalization, down-sizing, and right-sizing - carefully explaining to us that the fishery was never meant to handle that many people. (BUNK)
6. From there we went to dumping FPI and eliminating marketing.
7. They closed one plant - most other plants and workers shut-up - they feared they would be next.
8. They have and continue to pit one community against another.
9. Downloading federal fishery support services to the province.
10. Pit offshore against inshore - recreational against commercial.
11. Use municipal politicians by offering pavement, arenas, tourism dollars, and water/sewer.
12. Commit to one study after another to delay any real action.
13. Pit urban residents against rural residents.
14. Promote and focus on non-renewable oil assets.
15. Above all - convince us - we were greedy, we took all the fish, and we destroyed ourselves.
16. Marginalize people like Gus Etchegary and Phil Earle.
17. Eliminate the people left with EI changes.
18. Give all fish to kingpins.
19. Over utilization of other stocks.
All of this while the FACT remains that management was the responsibility of the federal government. They were negligent. As a result we were harmed. Therefore we need compensation. 1 billion a year until the stocks return.
The Ministers of Fishery we have had federal and provincial are too gutless, ignorant, or complicit to do what is needed.
Showing posts with label moratorium. Show all posts
Showing posts with label moratorium. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Fishery - the One Billion Dollars Solution
If you can first put aside the learned hatred of everything fish for one moment - then we might start pulling on the same oar.
Ottawa is responsible for the collapse of the fishery as they control the management of the stocks and fishing grounds.
20 years after a moratorium slated to last 10 years - we are collapsing further.
This is not the time to downsize or rationalize - we will not have an industry left. All we will witness is GDP and that will be attributable to unprocessed fish being gouged by a few corporations.
Now is the time to seek a real solution.
We have lost a billion a year since 2002 when the moratorium was supposed to be over. That did not happen.
Because of that we have lost twice that - as we have also lost transfer payments (per-capita) - due to population loss - that pays for transportation, health, and education.
We have also lost communities, investment, families, depreciated asset value, and future industrial potential.
If we demand that Ottawa - pay up - 1 billion x 10 years = 10 billion so far and counting.
Why are we rationalizing?
Why are we downsizing?
Because we have lost our fishery!
That is not acceptable.
We need our fishermen for science, research, and industrial planning.
We need our plant workers to work on new product lines.
We need these people and our provincial government to work on markets.
Is this a reasonable ask?
Of course it is - the feds bail out agriculture year over year to preserve food security, communities, families and that industry. Remember that the feds are not even responsible for drought, floods, market woes, and foreign subsidization for our competitors. They still pay - year over year.
Of course it is - the feds bailed out Ontario when the auto-makers collapsed and industry suffered in Central Canada. Billions and billions. They were not responsible for that occurrence.
They are responsible for the loss of the ground-fish stocks and are responsible for not protecting the fishing grounds. They are responsible for bartering our fish stocks away to foreigners so that other provinces would get manufacturing and industrial investment.
Instead our politicians are sucking their thumbs and doing nothing to correct this problem. We have suffered a grave injury and we are entitled to compensation.
Instead our politicians are looking for ways to boot people out of the fishery with a package.
Instead our politicians are looking to downsize and rationalize.
There is no rationalization - there must be compensation.
Then 25,000 of our people per year could be doing something beneficial - to help rebuild stocks, develop product and markets, and foster growth in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
Why is it that Newfoundland and Labrador is not demanding what is just?
Why do we keep letting the feds off the hook?
Why are we allowing not only the continued loss of stocks but downsizing science, SAR, and other critical assets to this industry?
Why indeed!
Ottawa is responsible for the collapse of the fishery as they control the management of the stocks and fishing grounds.
20 years after a moratorium slated to last 10 years - we are collapsing further.
This is not the time to downsize or rationalize - we will not have an industry left. All we will witness is GDP and that will be attributable to unprocessed fish being gouged by a few corporations.
Now is the time to seek a real solution.
We have lost a billion a year since 2002 when the moratorium was supposed to be over. That did not happen.
Because of that we have lost twice that - as we have also lost transfer payments (per-capita) - due to population loss - that pays for transportation, health, and education.
We have also lost communities, investment, families, depreciated asset value, and future industrial potential.
If we demand that Ottawa - pay up - 1 billion x 10 years = 10 billion so far and counting.
Why are we rationalizing?
Why are we downsizing?
Because we have lost our fishery!
That is not acceptable.
We need our fishermen for science, research, and industrial planning.
We need our plant workers to work on new product lines.
We need these people and our provincial government to work on markets.
Is this a reasonable ask?
Of course it is - the feds bail out agriculture year over year to preserve food security, communities, families and that industry. Remember that the feds are not even responsible for drought, floods, market woes, and foreign subsidization for our competitors. They still pay - year over year.
Of course it is - the feds bailed out Ontario when the auto-makers collapsed and industry suffered in Central Canada. Billions and billions. They were not responsible for that occurrence.
They are responsible for the loss of the ground-fish stocks and are responsible for not protecting the fishing grounds. They are responsible for bartering our fish stocks away to foreigners so that other provinces would get manufacturing and industrial investment.
Instead our politicians are sucking their thumbs and doing nothing to correct this problem. We have suffered a grave injury and we are entitled to compensation.
Instead our politicians are looking for ways to boot people out of the fishery with a package.
Instead our politicians are looking to downsize and rationalize.
There is no rationalization - there must be compensation.
Then 25,000 of our people per year could be doing something beneficial - to help rebuild stocks, develop product and markets, and foster growth in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
Why is it that Newfoundland and Labrador is not demanding what is just?
Why do we keep letting the feds off the hook?
Why are we allowing not only the continued loss of stocks but downsizing science, SAR, and other critical assets to this industry?
Why indeed!
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
80,000 people lost from coastal NL Letter to Minister King
Please find below a response to Minister Darin King from Dr. Phil Earl regarding the OCI situation.
Their reaction is typical of the philosophy of the ASP corporations which are all about their own concerns of bottom lines and profits. If these corporations are permitted to continue dominating our provinces fishing industry and have inordinate influence with governments the future of the fishery and any hope of saving costal NL is doomed. The first, and main, duty and philosophy of our government should be to protect the jobs and peoples of our coastal fishing communities and not companies whose success appears to be also the success of the ‘industry’. How can their ‘industry’ success be success if at the same time it destroys the fisher people, their communities and the resource itself? The government must step in now to protect the resource for the future of our people.
Everything under the sun has been done and given to corporations for the holiness of saving and protecting their success and propagation. To the point where what was zero unprocessed fish shipped out a few years ago by FPI, is today 75% of shell and 80% of ground fish being shipped out. This fact alone is enough to explain all that has befallen our coastal plants and their workers in the past four years.
Stopping the exemption, as you have done, is the first step, reversing all the rest of the ‘unprocessed exemptions’ must be started, it is the only way that will give any air to the chance of restoring our Industry. This action may appear to be what would break the companies, if some can’t handle it then they would fold but that would only create the chance for others, smaller operations with different approaches, to be successful. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Regardless of my rambled, incomplete, remarks one over all description of the whole situation can be truthfully summarized. What OCI pertains to in the Industry is that group of corporations which cry out in every possible manner and way, at any cost to anything else or anyone else in their way, to continue their selective, personal or collective existence. On the other side of the balance scale in this situation is the survival of the fish stocks and the dependent fishers and their communities. That’s a fact.
We have been watching the tipping of these scales for 20 years, where stocks have disappeared, not recovered, 80,000 people lost from coastal NL and 40,000 fisheries jobs gone to hell, and a great part of this is due to what governments have allowed corporations to do on their end if the scales.
If you are really serious about wanting to protect the welfare of our fishers, our coastal peoples and saving our fishing heritage and culture you, our government, must act now and show the leadership that can save it. You are the government, you are the people. You cannot be directed by the chosen, corporate powerful, wealthy few, you must take your direction from the people. The people who are Newfoundland and Labrador. God be with you to do the right thing.
Respectfully
Philip Earle
Dear Minister King, Jan 10/12
As you can see, and not surprising, the quick response from OCI to our government’s announcement of refusing their request to ship out more unprocessed fish is one that can be likened to blackmail.
As you can see, and not surprising, the quick response from OCI to our government’s announcement of refusing their request to ship out more unprocessed fish is one that can be likened to blackmail.
Their reaction is typical of the philosophy of the ASP corporations which are all about their own concerns of bottom lines and profits. If these corporations are permitted to continue dominating our provinces fishing industry and have inordinate influence with governments the future of the fishery and any hope of saving costal NL is doomed. The first, and main, duty and philosophy of our government should be to protect the jobs and peoples of our coastal fishing communities and not companies whose success appears to be also the success of the ‘industry’. How can their ‘industry’ success be success if at the same time it destroys the fisher people, their communities and the resource itself? The government must step in now to protect the resource for the future of our people.
Everything under the sun has been done and given to corporations for the holiness of saving and protecting their success and propagation. To the point where what was zero unprocessed fish shipped out a few years ago by FPI, is today 75% of shell and 80% of ground fish being shipped out. This fact alone is enough to explain all that has befallen our coastal plants and their workers in the past four years.
Stopping the exemption, as you have done, is the first step, reversing all the rest of the ‘unprocessed exemptions’ must be started, it is the only way that will give any air to the chance of restoring our Industry. This action may appear to be what would break the companies, if some can’t handle it then they would fold but that would only create the chance for others, smaller operations with different approaches, to be successful. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Regardless of my rambled, incomplete, remarks one over all description of the whole situation can be truthfully summarized. What OCI pertains to in the Industry is that group of corporations which cry out in every possible manner and way, at any cost to anything else or anyone else in their way, to continue their selective, personal or collective existence. On the other side of the balance scale in this situation is the survival of the fish stocks and the dependent fishers and their communities. That’s a fact.
We have been watching the tipping of these scales for 20 years, where stocks have disappeared, not recovered, 80,000 people lost from coastal NL and 40,000 fisheries jobs gone to hell, and a great part of this is due to what governments have allowed corporations to do on their end if the scales.
If you are really serious about wanting to protect the welfare of our fishers, our coastal peoples and saving our fishing heritage and culture you, our government, must act now and show the leadership that can save it. You are the government, you are the people. You cannot be directed by the chosen, corporate powerful, wealthy few, you must take your direction from the people. The people who are Newfoundland and Labrador. God be with you to do the right thing.
Respectfully
Philip Earle
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?
Saturday, July 09, 2011
Remembering our History and Forgetting Confederation - A winning Combination
This result from a recent Telegram Poll - I find it interesting!
While most want equal consideration to both - which currently does not happen - 28% said Remembrance only while 20% said Canada Day only.
The feelings in this province regarding Confederation are changing every year. I wonder why?
Do you consider July 1 a day to celebrate Canada, or one of remembrance — in particular, for the Battle of Beaumont Hamel in the First World War?
While most want equal consideration to both - which currently does not happen - 28% said Remembrance only while 20% said Canada Day only.
The feelings in this province regarding Confederation are changing every year. I wonder why?
Do you consider July 1 a day to celebrate Canada, or one of remembrance — in particular, for the Battle of Beaumont Hamel in the First World War?
- Celebrate Canada Day 20%
- Remembrance 28%
- Equal consideration to both 45%
- Neither. It's just another holiday. 7%
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Fish and Chips - Shame on us and shame on you Dunderdale and Harper
The head of Iceland’s Marine Research Institute (Hafro) says that stock measurements indicate the country’s cod stock is getting stronger.
The headline above says it all - in a country where fishing activities remains the single biggest economic activity. So I guess taking real action in the past - regarding foreign fleets and the protection of their livelihood is paying off.
What a sad reflection of Canada and our provincial governments. You think maybe someday we will feel the pride of being our own nation or even just feeling pride - and do what's necessary to protect the future of our children.
Shame on us!
With all due respect to Gus Etchegary, Dr. Phil Earle and others - the time for study and inquiries is over. Sue the federal government for mismanagement, the loss of our fishery, communities and tens of thousands of people. Is McCurdy still trying to get a buy-out package? What a disgrace we will be in the eyes of future generations.
The headline above says it all - in a country where fishing activities remains the single biggest economic activity. So I guess taking real action in the past - regarding foreign fleets and the protection of their livelihood is paying off.
What a sad reflection of Canada and our provincial governments. You think maybe someday we will feel the pride of being our own nation or even just feeling pride - and do what's necessary to protect the future of our children.
Shame on us!
With all due respect to Gus Etchegary, Dr. Phil Earle and others - the time for study and inquiries is over. Sue the federal government for mismanagement, the loss of our fishery, communities and tens of thousands of people. Is McCurdy still trying to get a buy-out package? What a disgrace we will be in the eyes of future generations.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Rowe says Manning - one of the superb candidates running...What's your take?
I just finished listening to Fabian Manning on back-talk with Bill Rowe.
I got the distinct feeling that Fabs wanted to stay as far away from ABC and Harper's lies as possible. Now how does somebody like Manning avoid the obvious?
He essentially called the people of rural communities - fools. Outside of brushing aside the elephant romping around the campaign office - Fabian decided that he will be concentrating on community needs and projects.
Specifically:
a) wharves
b) breakwaters
c) highways
d) stadiums
Old-time Joey politics - he went as far as to say Ottawa doesn't believe Canada stops in Nova Scotia like "we thought" - Ottawa - says Manning - believes it ends in Quebec.
So Manning concludes - there is no sense going to Ottawa to change attitudes - so he will go up and get what he can for his district.
If you listened carefully - you would hear - that Fabian was talking about ALL Ottawa politicos - including his own Harper. This you see would separate him from the treachery of standing with Harper when that liar removed a 10 billion dollar promise from our table.
Here's the deal Mr. Manning - you were gutless and worse you were a traitor when you stood shoulder to shoulder with Harper while he robbed the future from your children and mine by not allowing us to fully benefit from our non-renewable resource developments.
Do you have any idea how many wharves, bridges, roads, stadiums, schools, and hospitals one could build with 10 billion dollars?
Then there are the other lies! Remember the promise to take custodial control of the Grand Banks and Flemish Cap?
Our fishery decimated by the federal government - when your own people have had to move away to work.
The loss of over 1/2 billion dollars a year from the ground-stocks.
And you Fabian Manning are going to talk about wharves?
You go to Ottawa to represent this province - and our place in Canada. The only thing Harper has said is that his government would give a loan guarantee or a financial equivalent to this province for the Lower Churchill - a promise/lie that all leaders have made. Guess what Fabian? The reason they all gave for giving the guarantee is so that Atlantic Canada can benefit from green reliable energy.
Let's put that in perspective - if Ottawa gives money to Quebec for one thing or another or to Nova Scotia for one thing or another - they do not find it necessary to say - we are doing this so it will benefit Newfoundland and Labrador.
Today on Bill Rowe - you confirmed for me - you are a broken political man. You have given up on changing our place in Canada - and you are starting to feel the disgust your people feel at your gutless and treacherous actions.
Hold off - people of the Avalon - we can get more than extensions to community EI projects - and we need people who will fix the wrongs that have been perpetrated on us.
I told you myself -I have never felt so betrayed as when you stood in the House of Commons and did the unthinkable and unforgiveable. You sold out your Newfoundland and Labrador.
I say to my children - over and over - Let Me Fish Off Cape St. Mary's. Our Pride - Our People - Our Place
Tell me Fabian - was it worth it? That one moment where Stephen Harper paid attention to you - and let you stand next to him in the almighty House of Commons. Was it really worth it?
Fabian ends by saying "the good Lord willing" I will be successful.
I got the distinct feeling that Fabs wanted to stay as far away from ABC and Harper's lies as possible. Now how does somebody like Manning avoid the obvious?
He essentially called the people of rural communities - fools. Outside of brushing aside the elephant romping around the campaign office - Fabian decided that he will be concentrating on community needs and projects.
Specifically:
a) wharves
b) breakwaters
c) highways
d) stadiums
Old-time Joey politics - he went as far as to say Ottawa doesn't believe Canada stops in Nova Scotia like "we thought" - Ottawa - says Manning - believes it ends in Quebec.
So Manning concludes - there is no sense going to Ottawa to change attitudes - so he will go up and get what he can for his district.
If you listened carefully - you would hear - that Fabian was talking about ALL Ottawa politicos - including his own Harper. This you see would separate him from the treachery of standing with Harper when that liar removed a 10 billion dollar promise from our table.
Here's the deal Mr. Manning - you were gutless and worse you were a traitor when you stood shoulder to shoulder with Harper while he robbed the future from your children and mine by not allowing us to fully benefit from our non-renewable resource developments.
Do you have any idea how many wharves, bridges, roads, stadiums, schools, and hospitals one could build with 10 billion dollars?
Then there are the other lies! Remember the promise to take custodial control of the Grand Banks and Flemish Cap?
Our fishery decimated by the federal government - when your own people have had to move away to work.
The loss of over 1/2 billion dollars a year from the ground-stocks.
And you Fabian Manning are going to talk about wharves?
You go to Ottawa to represent this province - and our place in Canada. The only thing Harper has said is that his government would give a loan guarantee or a financial equivalent to this province for the Lower Churchill - a promise/lie that all leaders have made. Guess what Fabian? The reason they all gave for giving the guarantee is so that Atlantic Canada can benefit from green reliable energy.
Let's put that in perspective - if Ottawa gives money to Quebec for one thing or another or to Nova Scotia for one thing or another - they do not find it necessary to say - we are doing this so it will benefit Newfoundland and Labrador.
Today on Bill Rowe - you confirmed for me - you are a broken political man. You have given up on changing our place in Canada - and you are starting to feel the disgust your people feel at your gutless and treacherous actions.
Hold off - people of the Avalon - we can get more than extensions to community EI projects - and we need people who will fix the wrongs that have been perpetrated on us.
I told you myself -I have never felt so betrayed as when you stood in the House of Commons and did the unthinkable and unforgiveable. You sold out your Newfoundland and Labrador.
I say to my children - over and over - Let Me Fish Off Cape St. Mary's. Our Pride - Our People - Our Place
Tell me Fabian - was it worth it? That one moment where Stephen Harper paid attention to you - and let you stand next to him in the almighty House of Commons. Was it really worth it?
Fabian ends by saying "the good Lord willing" I will be successful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)