Talk with Sue - For the Record will host Bruno Marcocchio, Thursday October 18th, 8pm Island Time and 7:30 in most of Labrador and Nova Scotia.
Over the past few months many of you have probably heard the feisty conversations between Bruno and talk-show hosts in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Bruno is an environmental activist and has led or participated in many significant campaigns throughout the country.
He has also participated in hearings and meetings regarding the proposed Muskrat Falls deal at the request of Labradorians.
His knowledge of regulatory issues relative to industrial development and environmental remediation is significant and important as part of our understanding as we examine the proposed Muskrat Falls development.
This will be an interesting and probing conversation as we look at this issue through another glass.
The program will run for 90 minutes allowing us the time to really understand what Bruno's concerns are and to focus on Labrador issues.
I hope you join us next Thursday as Talk with Sue continues to gather as much information as possible with respect to the broad range of concerns held by critics of this project.
Press HERE to visit the show page.
Press HERE to listen to the conversation with former Premier Roger Grimes
Press HERE to listen to the conversation with former Director of Hydro & MHA Danny Dumaresque
Showing posts with label todd russell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label todd russell. Show all posts
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Piece Meal Deal no this is not KFChicken it's Muskrat
From what I read in the Telegram today - the provincial government is attempting to change a deal on the fly. This reminds me of Premier Lord in New Brunswick when Hydro-Quebec was attempting to buy that province's energy company.
Minister of Natural Resources is quoted in the Telegram story as saying "There are going to be benefits for the people of Labrador, and they will become clearer as this process unfolds and more information gets out." Skinner also said of Danny Dumeresque's critique of the deal, "I'm just concerned that he's out trying to say it's a bad deal when all the terms of the deal have not been negotiated."
I would like to add for Minister Skinner's benefit, that it is not only Danny Dumeresque concerned about the proposed deal and that others have more fundamental concerns regarding the entire approach. I for one can say that the whole proposal negates the fundamental principles of developing renewable hydro for industrial development in Labrador.
All of this was in response to a survey conducted with Labradorians by MP Todd Russell regarding the Muskrat Falls development proposal. See Below and also at the Heart of Labrador
Minister of Natural Resources is quoted in the Telegram story as saying "There are going to be benefits for the people of Labrador, and they will become clearer as this process unfolds and more information gets out." Skinner also said of Danny Dumeresque's critique of the deal, "I'm just concerned that he's out trying to say it's a bad deal when all the terms of the deal have not been negotiated."
I would like to add for Minister Skinner's benefit, that it is not only Danny Dumeresque concerned about the proposed deal and that others have more fundamental concerns regarding the entire approach. I for one can say that the whole proposal negates the fundamental principles of developing renewable hydro for industrial development in Labrador.
All of this was in response to a survey conducted with Labradorians by MP Todd Russell regarding the Muskrat Falls development proposal. See Below and also at the Heart of Labrador
RUSSELL RELEASES PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF MUSKRAT FALLS SURVEY
Results for those surveys processed as of February 8th are as follows:
On the main question, “Do you support or oppose the proposed Muskrat Falls agreement?”,
· 45% of respondents strongly oppose and 13% somewhat oppose;
· 12% strongly support and 20% somewhat support;
· 10% are not sure.
Results from other questions reveal public concerns about the economic, environmental, and other aspects of the proposed project:
Q1. Does the proposed Muskrat Falls development provide enough benefit for the people of Labrador? — 83% NO.
Q2. Are you concerned about the environmental impacts of the proposed Muskrat Falls project? — 78% YES.
Q3. Have Labradorians been properly consulted about the proposed Muskrat Falls project? — 78% NO.
Q4. Do you feel that you have enough information about the proposed Muskrat Falls project? — 83% NO.
Q5. Should Muskrat Falls power be available in Labrador for residential and commercial customers? — 95% YES.
Q6. Does the proposed agreement respect the Aboriginal rights of Innu, Inuit, and Metis in Labrador? — 67% NO.
Q7. Are you satisfied with the proposed employment benefits for Labrador residents? — 66% NO.
Q8. Do you believe that Labrador will receive a fair share of revenues from Muskrat Falls power sales? — 86% NO.
Q9. Should a dedicated Labrador development fund be a condition of a proposed Muskrat Falls project? — 83% YES.
Q10. Do you support federal funding for transmission lines to Newfoundland or Nova Scotia? — 46% NO, 40% YES. (This was the only question on which opinion is “split”.)
Q11. Do you feel that Labradorians will be the “primary beneficiaries” of the proposed Muskrat Falls project? — 87% NO.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Broken Promises to Newfoundland and Labrador - Divorce Please
I see Newfoundland and Labrador Liberal MP's are gearing up for a spring election. They have started by using the national party's "Five Years of Harper : Broken Promises" list.
First of all I want to thank them for the obvious - Stephen Harper does not tell the truth - he lies. They have compiled a partial list of promises broken - and no doubt it reiterates in a not so direct way - that Stephen Harper lies.
For Newfoundlanders and Labradorians - that have suffered "broken promises" lies since CONfederation - this is not news.
For the people of our province -there are two things troubling about this list:
The first is the list itself - the focuses - the missed elements,
The second is the Liberals do not say what THEY will DO about the issues noted in the list.
Let's look at some of the "list"
29. Replace CAIS with separate farm income stabilization and disaster relief programs that are simpler and more responsive.
Government Action: Broken. The Conservatives simply changed the name of the program but farmers say it’s no easier to use.
30. Commit to adding an additional $500 million annually to farm support programs.
Government Action: Broken. Although they committed the money early on, overall support for farm support programs has dropped.
31. Get the $5B in softwood lumber tariffs back.
Government Action: Broken.
33. Extend the two hundred mile limit to the edge of the Continental Shelf, the nose and tail of the Grand Banks, and the Flemish Cap in the North Atlantic.
Government Action: Broken.
57. Make the Canadian Coast Guard as a stand-alone agency.
Government Action: Broken. It remains a Special Operating Agency as the previous government had made it.
83. Achieve permanent changes to the equalization formula.
Government Action: Broken. The “permanent” changes lasted one year before they were changed again.
88. Make the Senate an effective, independent, and democratically elected body that equitably represents all regions.
Government Action: Broken
90. Make all votes in Parliament, except the budget and main estimates, “free votes” for ordinary Members of Parliament.
Government Action: Broken.
98. Recruit 13,000 additional regular forces and 10,000 additional reserve forces personnel.
Government Action: Broken.
112. Modernize the administration of our fisheries to ensure greater focus on conservation and using administrative sanctions, rather than court proceedings, to deal with violations.
Government Action: Broken. The new Fisheries Act died when Stephen Harper called an early election in 2008 – the bill has not been re-introduced.
113. Work with Western Canadian grain farmers to ensure that the results of the barley plebiscite are respected and that they are given the freedom to choose whether to sell grain on the open market or through the Canadian Wheat Board.
Government Action: Broken.
116. Assert Canada's rights over our Arctic waters, including the Northwest Passage
Government Action: Broken. The Conservatives released yet another “Arctic strategy” in 2010 while failing to fulfill their past promises for the North. They continue to insult the people of the North with more empty promises and rhetoric.
117. Reforming or Abolishing the Senate.
Government Action: Broken. Stephen Harper broke his pledge to only appoint elected Senators, instead he appointed 38 Senators - all Conservatives - just since the last election.
Let's have a quick review of the "broken promises" above. Numbers 29, 30, and 113 are relative to farming and if you read them carefully - the Liberals focus will probably remain on the Prairies for vote gains and breakthroughs in those farming provinces. Remember now - the Government of Canada does not manage or control the farming sector and is not responsible for weather phenomenon, world commodity prices etc. but they actually demonstrate through cash and incentives more for that sector that they do for a renewable resource (the fishery) they were directly responsible for managing. They throw around 500 million additional in farm support programs.
This has been no different than the Liberals when they held government.
Number 31 deals with getting the 5 billion dollars back for the softwood tariffs fiasco with the United States. The Liberals presumably are all for going after that money - yet I hear no commitment to Newfoundland and Labrador to give our 5 billion back for the devastation of the ground fish stocks.
Now number 33 is one of my favorites - dealing with extending the 200 mile limit to the nose and tail of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap. Wow are the Liberals really complaining about that promise broken? They invented it. Then we compare the note that only says "broken" to that promise to the note attached to number 116 see below.
116. Assert Canada's rights over our Arctic waters, including the Northwest Passage
Government Action: Broken. The Conservatives released yet another “Arctic strategy” in 2010 while failing to fulfill their past promises for the North. They continue to insult the people of the North with more empty promises and rhetoric.
Now which one to you think the Libs will focus on the Arctic or the nose and tail?
CONfederation the Libs and Conservatives have never recognized that they now have a new east coast and it is not Nova Scotia.
Now number 83 deserves it's own separate post but nevertheless "equalization" - the Libs apparently disappointed in not achieving permanent changes to that formula. I'm glad it was not permanent - it's costing us 10 billion dollars. We beat (figuratively speaking) 2 billion out of Lib Paul Martin only to lose it to Stephen Harper's lies and Manning's absence of backbone.
Numbers 88 and 117 deals with promises on Senate Reform - they can't be serious - the Libs are telling us that we should be angry that the Senate is not elected, not equal, and not effective. Best I can tell they are simply annoyed that the Cons now have majority in this dysfunctional waste of money. The Upper House - the brain trust of our people - the intellectual haven - right Fabian?
Number 90 deals with "free votes" in the House of Commons - and the Libs are apparently complaining about this "broken promise" - sure you are. We should have been in an election by now.
Number 98 deals with additional armed forces personnel both full service and reservists. Now everybody say after me "Happy Valley - Goose Bay" One can quickly note that neither the Libs or the Cons are committed to this.
Number 112 needs to be reprinted here
Modernize the administration of our fisheries to ensure greater focus on conservation and using administrative sanctions, rather than court proceedings, to deal with violations.
Government Action: Broken. The new Fisheries Act died when Stephen Harper
called an early election in 2008 – the bill has not been re-introduced.
Yes let's all administrate the violators into submission - Is that the best you can do relative to the fishery?
Now even this short review gives us the voters enough to work with and reminds the MP's and wannabe MP's that talk is cheap and the idea of going to Ottawa is not to get yourselves atop the agenda but rather do what it is you were elected to do. Get the job done or move over.
How many Newfoundland and Labrador MP's does it take to change a light bulb?
One to talk about the light bulb - one to promise to change it - one to shop for a new light bulb - one to put up a ladder - one to study if that's the best approach - one to call for public consultations - one to ask questions of the government about changing the bulb - and the last to remind us that the Conservatives promised to change it and didn't. Oh we are one short!
First of all I want to thank them for the obvious - Stephen Harper does not tell the truth - he lies. They have compiled a partial list of promises broken - and no doubt it reiterates in a not so direct way - that Stephen Harper lies.
For Newfoundlanders and Labradorians - that have suffered "broken promises" lies since CONfederation - this is not news.
For the people of our province -there are two things troubling about this list:
The first is the list itself - the focuses - the missed elements,
The second is the Liberals do not say what THEY will DO about the issues noted in the list.
Let's look at some of the "list"
29. Replace CAIS with separate farm income stabilization and disaster relief programs that are simpler and more responsive.
Government Action: Broken. The Conservatives simply changed the name of the program but farmers say it’s no easier to use.
30. Commit to adding an additional $500 million annually to farm support programs.
Government Action: Broken. Although they committed the money early on, overall support for farm support programs has dropped.
31. Get the $5B in softwood lumber tariffs back.
Government Action: Broken.
33. Extend the two hundred mile limit to the edge of the Continental Shelf, the nose and tail of the Grand Banks, and the Flemish Cap in the North Atlantic.
Government Action: Broken.
57. Make the Canadian Coast Guard as a stand-alone agency.
Government Action: Broken. It remains a Special Operating Agency as the previous government had made it.
83. Achieve permanent changes to the equalization formula.
Government Action: Broken. The “permanent” changes lasted one year before they were changed again.
88. Make the Senate an effective, independent, and democratically elected body that equitably represents all regions.
Government Action: Broken
90. Make all votes in Parliament, except the budget and main estimates, “free votes” for ordinary Members of Parliament.
Government Action: Broken.
98. Recruit 13,000 additional regular forces and 10,000 additional reserve forces personnel.
Government Action: Broken.
112. Modernize the administration of our fisheries to ensure greater focus on conservation and using administrative sanctions, rather than court proceedings, to deal with violations.
Government Action: Broken. The new Fisheries Act died when Stephen Harper called an early election in 2008 – the bill has not been re-introduced.
113. Work with Western Canadian grain farmers to ensure that the results of the barley plebiscite are respected and that they are given the freedom to choose whether to sell grain on the open market or through the Canadian Wheat Board.
Government Action: Broken.
116. Assert Canada's rights over our Arctic waters, including the Northwest Passage
Government Action: Broken. The Conservatives released yet another “Arctic strategy” in 2010 while failing to fulfill their past promises for the North. They continue to insult the people of the North with more empty promises and rhetoric.
117. Reforming or Abolishing the Senate.
Government Action: Broken. Stephen Harper broke his pledge to only appoint elected Senators, instead he appointed 38 Senators - all Conservatives - just since the last election.
Let's have a quick review of the "broken promises" above. Numbers 29, 30, and 113 are relative to farming and if you read them carefully - the Liberals focus will probably remain on the Prairies for vote gains and breakthroughs in those farming provinces. Remember now - the Government of Canada does not manage or control the farming sector and is not responsible for weather phenomenon, world commodity prices etc. but they actually demonstrate through cash and incentives more for that sector that they do for a renewable resource (the fishery) they were directly responsible for managing. They throw around 500 million additional in farm support programs.
This has been no different than the Liberals when they held government.
Promise needed by all parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador 1 billion a year or find the fish. What will the Liberals do for the fishery? What have they broken promises on in the past relative to the fishery?
Number 31 deals with getting the 5 billion dollars back for the softwood tariffs fiasco with the United States. The Liberals presumably are all for going after that money - yet I hear no commitment to Newfoundland and Labrador to give our 5 billion back for the devastation of the ground fish stocks.
Promise needed by all parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador - at least 500 million a year for 10 years for loss of industry, people, employment and communities resulting from fisheries mismanagement.
Now number 33 is one of my favorites - dealing with extending the 200 mile limit to the nose and tail of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap. Wow are the Liberals really complaining about that promise broken? They invented it. Then we compare the note that only says "broken" to that promise to the note attached to number 116 see below.
116. Assert Canada's rights over our Arctic waters, including the Northwest Passage
Government Action: Broken. The Conservatives released yet another “Arctic strategy” in 2010 while failing to fulfill their past promises for the North. They continue to insult the people of the North with more empty promises and rhetoric.
Now which one to you think the Libs will focus on the Arctic or the nose and tail?
Promise needed by all political parties to Newfoundland and Labrador - extend the jurisdiction and assert our rights on the fish stocks.
CONfederation the Libs and Conservatives have never recognized that they now have a new east coast and it is not Nova Scotia.
Promise needed by all political parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador - real presence and real response times to protect our fishers and offshore workers.
Now number 83 deserves it's own separate post but nevertheless "equalization" - the Libs apparently disappointed in not achieving permanent changes to that formula. I'm glad it was not permanent - it's costing us 10 billion dollars. We beat (figuratively speaking) 2 billion out of Lib Paul Martin only to lose it to Stephen Harper's lies and Manning's absence of backbone.
Promise needed by all political parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador - the removal of non-renewable resource revenues from the formula before the oil is gone and our childrens' future destroyed.
Numbers 88 and 117 deals with promises on Senate Reform - they can't be serious - the Libs are telling us that we should be angry that the Senate is not elected, not equal, and not effective. Best I can tell they are simply annoyed that the Cons now have majority in this dysfunctional waste of money. The Upper House - the brain trust of our people - the intellectual haven - right Fabian?
Promise needed by all political parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador - elected, equal, and effective Senate or abolish it and find a way for provinces such as Newfoundland and Labrador get a real vote on major issues affecting us. This structure of both Parliament and the Senate is killing us.
Number 90 deals with "free votes" in the House of Commons - and the Libs are apparently complaining about this "broken promise" - sure you are. We should have been in an election by now.
Promise needed by all political parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador - any issue including budget and estimates that would negatively affect a region or province - must be allowed to be a free vote. These MP's are elected to represent their people - period - full stop.
Number 98 deals with additional armed forces personnel both full service and reservists. Now everybody say after me "Happy Valley - Goose Bay" One can quickly note that neither the Libs or the Cons are committed to this.
Promise needed by all political parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador - Happy Valley - Goose Bay priority number 1 and we will not tolerate any more delays. Further some creative presence in Stephenville focused around the port and airport would be necessary.
Number 112 needs to be reprinted here
Modernize the administration of our fisheries to ensure greater focus on conservation and using administrative sanctions, rather than court proceedings, to deal with violations.
Government Action: Broken. The new Fisheries Act died when Stephen Harper
called an early election in 2008 – the bill has not been re-introduced.
Yes let's all administrate the violators into submission - Is that the best you can do relative to the fishery?
Promise needed by all political parties this election to Newfoundland and Labrador -once again pass over the 5 billion and an additional 1 billion annually or find the fish.
Now even this short review gives us the voters enough to work with and reminds the MP's and wannabe MP's that talk is cheap and the idea of going to Ottawa is not to get yourselves atop the agenda but rather do what it is you were elected to do. Get the job done or move over.
How many Newfoundland and Labrador MP's does it take to change a light bulb?
One to talk about the light bulb - one to promise to change it - one to shop for a new light bulb - one to put up a ladder - one to study if that's the best approach - one to call for public consultations - one to ask questions of the government about changing the bulb - and the last to remind us that the Conservatives promised to change it and didn't. Oh we are one short!
Monday, September 24, 2007
Read - Reid - Read - to succeed...
Danny Williams is now learning Labrador politics - they no longer want to be a colony of Newfoundland. They will not allow the development of the Lower Churchill unless they are the "primary" beneficiaries. Thanks to them - another townie government will not repeat the Upper Churchill fiasco.
Now it's time for "read - REID - read" to succeed.
It is not possible that column after column - news story after news story - industry publication after industry publication - can be wrong when they state that aluminum chases cost competitive - reliable - renewable - and now my own word "kyotoble" power everywhere in the world but Labrador.
The continued ignorance of our collective elected reps is not acceptable anymore.
Here's another such story out of West Virginia - as Jackson County celebrates the 50th anniversary of its aluminum smelter. READ the Charleston Daily News STORY HERE
Here are a few of the interesting statements and comments in the article:
The Ravenswood plant has 660 employees. The average salary is $50,700. The plant has a $34 million annual payroll.
High energy costs have decimated the smelter industry in the United States, Hale said. In 1974, there were 34 smelters in the United States and they accounted for 34 percent of global aluminum production. Today there are only 13 smelters in the United States and they represent just 7 percent of global production, he said.
Hale said alumina accounts for 37 percent of the plant's costs, while electricity accounts for 26 percent, labor accounts for 16 percent, carbon accounts for 8 percent and other raw materials account for 12 percent.
Because aluminum is a worldwide commodity, Century can't control the price it receives for its product, Hale said. Therefore, the company focuses on costs in order to keep the plant competitive.
Century, like others in the aluminum smelter business, is expanding in locations where power costs are low. Century owns a giant smelter in Iceland powered with electricity generated using hydro and geothermal power. Century plans to have another in plant in operation in Iceland by 2013.
Most of the aluminum produced at Ravenswood is used next door at Alcan Rolled Products' rolling mill. The businesses were established as one unit in 1957, but split into two in 1999. Hale said Century just signed a new contract to supply Alcan through 2009.
Just so that we can feel more assured about this fellow Hale who is quoted throughout the story:
Wayne Hale, Century's executive vice president and chief operating officer and Hale worked here from 1986 to 1989. "It's a place where I learned about people," he said. Hale most recently worked in Moscow, where he oversaw operations at 11 aluminum plants in Russia and Ukraine for Sual-Holding.
If you export the power they will not come - once they understand that to use the superior power of the Lower Churchill they have to set up operations in Labrador - they will come. And as you can see above - the smelter is one piece - then there is the value added secondary production.
There is no argument to export that power - there is only the desire and the determination to use it for industry.
The Leader of the Opposition must do something other than follow Williams on this one - or repeat the mistakes of the Wells - Gibbons energy policy. You see if Williams can demand things of the oil companies and mining companies - he can certainly demand them for Labrador power.
So read Reid read to succeed.
Now it's time for "read - REID - read" to succeed.
It is not possible that column after column - news story after news story - industry publication after industry publication - can be wrong when they state that aluminum chases cost competitive - reliable - renewable - and now my own word "kyotoble" power everywhere in the world but Labrador.
The continued ignorance of our collective elected reps is not acceptable anymore.
Here's another such story out of West Virginia - as Jackson County celebrates the 50th anniversary of its aluminum smelter. READ the Charleston Daily News STORY HERE
Here are a few of the interesting statements and comments in the article:
The Ravenswood plant has 660 employees. The average salary is $50,700. The plant has a $34 million annual payroll.
High energy costs have decimated the smelter industry in the United States, Hale said. In 1974, there were 34 smelters in the United States and they accounted for 34 percent of global aluminum production. Today there are only 13 smelters in the United States and they represent just 7 percent of global production, he said.
Hale said alumina accounts for 37 percent of the plant's costs, while electricity accounts for 26 percent, labor accounts for 16 percent, carbon accounts for 8 percent and other raw materials account for 12 percent.
Because aluminum is a worldwide commodity, Century can't control the price it receives for its product, Hale said. Therefore, the company focuses on costs in order to keep the plant competitive.
Century, like others in the aluminum smelter business, is expanding in locations where power costs are low. Century owns a giant smelter in Iceland powered with electricity generated using hydro and geothermal power. Century plans to have another in plant in operation in Iceland by 2013.
Most of the aluminum produced at Ravenswood is used next door at Alcan Rolled Products' rolling mill. The businesses were established as one unit in 1957, but split into two in 1999. Hale said Century just signed a new contract to supply Alcan through 2009.
Just so that we can feel more assured about this fellow Hale who is quoted throughout the story:
Wayne Hale, Century's executive vice president and chief operating officer and Hale worked here from 1986 to 1989. "It's a place where I learned about people," he said. Hale most recently worked in Moscow, where he oversaw operations at 11 aluminum plants in Russia and Ukraine for Sual-Holding.
If you export the power they will not come - once they understand that to use the superior power of the Lower Churchill they have to set up operations in Labrador - they will come. And as you can see above - the smelter is one piece - then there is the value added secondary production.
There is no argument to export that power - there is only the desire and the determination to use it for industry.
The Leader of the Opposition must do something other than follow Williams on this one - or repeat the mistakes of the Wells - Gibbons energy policy. You see if Williams can demand things of the oil companies and mining companies - he can certainly demand them for Labrador power.
So read Reid read to succeed.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Minister of National Defense Responds
The Minister Responds - and I suggest what Canada needs to do to compensate Newfoundland and Labrador for the collapse of the fishery.
In January I wrote the Minister of National Defence and MP's regarding my concern over the embarrassing event of the navy running out of cash to run ocean patrols off the east coast.
I am pleased to report that I have received a response from the Minister - despite the fact I have not heard from any MP from Newfoundland and Labrador.
Below is the response I received from Minister O'Connor - and below that - my response back to him and copied to all MP's.
Dear Ms. Kelland-Dyer:
Thank you for the copy of your e-mail of 22 January 2007 concerning the protection of Canadian sovereignty
Increasing Canada's presence and our sovereignty is a critical component of the Government's "Canada First" Defence Strategy. Our policy of Canada First will strengthen the Canadian Forces capacity to defend our country and its citizens, assert our sovereignty, and assume a leadership role in international operations.
As you may be aware, the Government provided an additional $5.3 billion to the Department of National Defence (DND) over the next five years in its 2006 budget. This increase will provide the Canadian Forces with the support and resources needed to carry out its important tasks. When added to previous funding commitments, this new money will bring our defence budget to approximately $15.4 billion for fiscal year 2006/2007.
As part of the Government's Canada First commitment to strengthen Canada's multi-role, combat-capable defence force, DND announced in June 2006 that it would be investing approximately:
- $5 billion for strategic and tactical aircraft, with an additional $3.3 billion to be spent over the next 20 years on in-service support, most of which will be done by Canadian industry;
- $2 billion for medium- to heavy-lift helicopters, with an additional $2.7 billion to be spent over the next 20 years on in-service support, which will largely be done by Canadian industry;
- $1.1 billion for medium-sized logistics trucks and associated components; and
- $2.1 billion for three replenishment ships-design, construction, and associated logistical and training support-in a competitive Canadian environment and in accordance with Canadian shipbuilding policy.
The Department is also developing a long-term plan for defence, including guidance on equipment priorities. I hope to have this plan finalized in the near future.
With the possible opening of the Northwest Passage to commercial shipping, and the increasing economic viability of northern natural resource extraction, this strategy will demonstrate to Canadians and the world that we are committed to enhancing Canadian northern sovereignty. As this region becomes more valuable to the national and international economic interests of Canada, we will make substantial investments in those military capabilities that enhance surveillance, reconnaissance and presence in Canada's Arctic Archipelago.
This defence vision consists of a well-equipped three-ocean navy, a robust army, and a revitalized air force. In my visits to the northern territories, I have seen first-hand the resources that are needed to keep watch in this immense part of the country. Now, more than ever, I remain convinced that our arctic sovereignty claims must be backed by, among other things, strong military capabilities. Accordingly, the Government intends to dedicate more people, equipment, and money to the defence of the north.
Of particular importance is establishing a three-ocean navy by increasing our naval presence in the straits leading to the Arctic Ocean. This is especially challenging because the demands of operating in ice and in open water require very different types of naval vessels. Before a decision is made on how to proceed, I have instructed the navy to analyse the various options and to develop an Arctic maritime plan that meets Canada's requirements. In addition, before any equipment is purchased, we will ensure that any future capital purchases for the northern navy are procured in a fair and competitive process benefiting the Canadian taxpayer.
As we move closer to implementing this Canada First vision for sovereignty, the Department of National Defence will continue, in concert with other local and federal departments and agencies, to assess the potential future threats to Canadian sovereignty.
I trust this information is of assistance and thank you again for writing.
Sincerely,
The Honourable Gordon J. O'Connor, PC, MP
Minister of National Defence
My Response
Minister of National Defence
The Honourable Gordon J. O'Connor
February 16-07
Dear Minister O'Connor,
Thank you for your response.
Newfoundland and Labrador exists in a geography which is critical to the protection of North America. Our province is located between many nations and Canada. Since we joined Confederation in 1949 - the strategic importance was evident to both Canada and the United States during periods of global conflict. More recently during the 911 event in New York - Newfoundland and Labrador was utilized as a safe place for landing many commercial aircraft.
There has also been a complete lack of importance placed on our jurisdiction in times of relative peace and various infrastructure utilized in the past by Canada - Great Britain - and USA during war time have been diminished if not eliminated over the past 30 years. This loss of presence and the failure to diversify these assets to Canada's benefit has harmed this province - and in my opinion our country.
Further there has been a catastrophe in our local fishery which is comparable to 100 times the current potential loss of 2000 auto jobs in Central Canada. It must also be said the fishery off the east coast was one of the most valuable renewable resources in the world. There are two definite contributors to this ecological and economic disasters:
The first is the failure of the federal government to manage the stocks and the second is the failure of the federal government to protect our waters from foreign plundering of the breeding stocks.
In your letter you make this statement:
"With the possible opening of the Northwest Passage to commercial shipping, and the increasing economic viability of northern natural resource extraction, this strategy will demonstrate to Canadians and the world that we are committed to enhancing Canadian northern sovereignty. As this region becomes more valuable to the national and international economic interests of Canada, we will make substantial investments in those military capabilities that enhance surveillance, reconnaissance and presence in Canada's Arctic Archipelago."
I would agree with your objectives for that region and can only ask why the same concern to protect the economic sovereignty off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador is not as essential. It is an important part of global shipping lanes between the east and the west. I add that our ocean continues to be damaged by ships passing through bilging and just plain dumping oil and gas pollution.
It is necessary for the federal government to accomplish the following objectives.
A short-term - medium-term - and long-term plan to recover the fishery while compensating the rural communities for the decimation caused by mismanagement. That compensation must consist of income replacement - income stabilization - meaningful employment opportunity in the science and recovery efforts - early retirement funds - industry diversification - increased Coast Guard presence - increased military presence - new initiatives for environmental disaster response and accident prevention - and a significant increase in federal jobs and crown agency headquarters in all segments of federal government jurisdiction. This compensation must equal the ongoing damage to our province on an annual basis - until such a time as the fishery recovers to levels comparable to the the level at confederation. For our province of 500,000 people with alarming outmigration numbers and an aging population greater than the national average - living up to your constitutional responsibilities is not an option - it is the honourable thing to do. We cannot withstand a 200-500 million loss in our revenue on an annual basis. Increasing the harvest of our crab and shrimp in an attempt to mitigate the loss from groundfish collapse - is not only too little it is extremely irresponsible.
When I ask the MP's of our country to speak up - this is certainly what I mean. This is a disgrace to all Canadians - and causes extreme tension between the nation and our province. I would suggest it is difficult for you to progress on the Arctic front when the Government of Canada has left this atrocity to fester without proper response.
I further ask that MP's take a long look at the proposed new Fisheries Act and ask the important questions. This Act while needing amendments - is not ready for a Parliament that is too ignorant to debate it. Many thanks to MP Sackville--Eastern Shore, Nova Scotia, Peter Stoffer who is giving a valiant effort to protect this resource and through that the survival of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
For any MP to ignore this situation places our federation in a precarious state and fails to demonstrate any real sovereignty on the East Coast of our country.
Best Regards,
Sue Kelland-Dyer
In January I wrote the Minister of National Defence and MP's regarding my concern over the embarrassing event of the navy running out of cash to run ocean patrols off the east coast.
I am pleased to report that I have received a response from the Minister - despite the fact I have not heard from any MP from Newfoundland and Labrador.
Below is the response I received from Minister O'Connor - and below that - my response back to him and copied to all MP's.
Dear Ms. Kelland-Dyer:
Thank you for the copy of your e-mail of 22 January 2007 concerning the protection of Canadian sovereignty
Increasing Canada's presence and our sovereignty is a critical component of the Government's "Canada First" Defence Strategy. Our policy of Canada First will strengthen the Canadian Forces capacity to defend our country and its citizens, assert our sovereignty, and assume a leadership role in international operations.
As you may be aware, the Government provided an additional $5.3 billion to the Department of National Defence (DND) over the next five years in its 2006 budget. This increase will provide the Canadian Forces with the support and resources needed to carry out its important tasks. When added to previous funding commitments, this new money will bring our defence budget to approximately $15.4 billion for fiscal year 2006/2007.
As part of the Government's Canada First commitment to strengthen Canada's multi-role, combat-capable defence force, DND announced in June 2006 that it would be investing approximately:
- $5 billion for strategic and tactical aircraft, with an additional $3.3 billion to be spent over the next 20 years on in-service support, most of which will be done by Canadian industry;
- $2 billion for medium- to heavy-lift helicopters, with an additional $2.7 billion to be spent over the next 20 years on in-service support, which will largely be done by Canadian industry;
- $1.1 billion for medium-sized logistics trucks and associated components; and
- $2.1 billion for three replenishment ships-design, construction, and associated logistical and training support-in a competitive Canadian environment and in accordance with Canadian shipbuilding policy.
The Department is also developing a long-term plan for defence, including guidance on equipment priorities. I hope to have this plan finalized in the near future.
With the possible opening of the Northwest Passage to commercial shipping, and the increasing economic viability of northern natural resource extraction, this strategy will demonstrate to Canadians and the world that we are committed to enhancing Canadian northern sovereignty. As this region becomes more valuable to the national and international economic interests of Canada, we will make substantial investments in those military capabilities that enhance surveillance, reconnaissance and presence in Canada's Arctic Archipelago.
This defence vision consists of a well-equipped three-ocean navy, a robust army, and a revitalized air force. In my visits to the northern territories, I have seen first-hand the resources that are needed to keep watch in this immense part of the country. Now, more than ever, I remain convinced that our arctic sovereignty claims must be backed by, among other things, strong military capabilities. Accordingly, the Government intends to dedicate more people, equipment, and money to the defence of the north.
Of particular importance is establishing a three-ocean navy by increasing our naval presence in the straits leading to the Arctic Ocean. This is especially challenging because the demands of operating in ice and in open water require very different types of naval vessels. Before a decision is made on how to proceed, I have instructed the navy to analyse the various options and to develop an Arctic maritime plan that meets Canada's requirements. In addition, before any equipment is purchased, we will ensure that any future capital purchases for the northern navy are procured in a fair and competitive process benefiting the Canadian taxpayer.
As we move closer to implementing this Canada First vision for sovereignty, the Department of National Defence will continue, in concert with other local and federal departments and agencies, to assess the potential future threats to Canadian sovereignty.
I trust this information is of assistance and thank you again for writing.
Sincerely,
The Honourable Gordon J. O'Connor, PC, MP
Minister of National Defence
My Response
Minister of National Defence
The Honourable Gordon J. O'Connor
February 16-07
Dear Minister O'Connor,
Thank you for your response.
Newfoundland and Labrador exists in a geography which is critical to the protection of North America. Our province is located between many nations and Canada. Since we joined Confederation in 1949 - the strategic importance was evident to both Canada and the United States during periods of global conflict. More recently during the 911 event in New York - Newfoundland and Labrador was utilized as a safe place for landing many commercial aircraft.
There has also been a complete lack of importance placed on our jurisdiction in times of relative peace and various infrastructure utilized in the past by Canada - Great Britain - and USA during war time have been diminished if not eliminated over the past 30 years. This loss of presence and the failure to diversify these assets to Canada's benefit has harmed this province - and in my opinion our country.
Further there has been a catastrophe in our local fishery which is comparable to 100 times the current potential loss of 2000 auto jobs in Central Canada. It must also be said the fishery off the east coast was one of the most valuable renewable resources in the world. There are two definite contributors to this ecological and economic disasters:
The first is the failure of the federal government to manage the stocks and the second is the failure of the federal government to protect our waters from foreign plundering of the breeding stocks.
In your letter you make this statement:
"With the possible opening of the Northwest Passage to commercial shipping, and the increasing economic viability of northern natural resource extraction, this strategy will demonstrate to Canadians and the world that we are committed to enhancing Canadian northern sovereignty. As this region becomes more valuable to the national and international economic interests of Canada, we will make substantial investments in those military capabilities that enhance surveillance, reconnaissance and presence in Canada's Arctic Archipelago."
I would agree with your objectives for that region and can only ask why the same concern to protect the economic sovereignty off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador is not as essential. It is an important part of global shipping lanes between the east and the west. I add that our ocean continues to be damaged by ships passing through bilging and just plain dumping oil and gas pollution.
It is necessary for the federal government to accomplish the following objectives.
A short-term - medium-term - and long-term plan to recover the fishery while compensating the rural communities for the decimation caused by mismanagement. That compensation must consist of income replacement - income stabilization - meaningful employment opportunity in the science and recovery efforts - early retirement funds - industry diversification - increased Coast Guard presence - increased military presence - new initiatives for environmental disaster response and accident prevention - and a significant increase in federal jobs and crown agency headquarters in all segments of federal government jurisdiction. This compensation must equal the ongoing damage to our province on an annual basis - until such a time as the fishery recovers to levels comparable to the the level at confederation. For our province of 500,000 people with alarming outmigration numbers and an aging population greater than the national average - living up to your constitutional responsibilities is not an option - it is the honourable thing to do. We cannot withstand a 200-500 million loss in our revenue on an annual basis. Increasing the harvest of our crab and shrimp in an attempt to mitigate the loss from groundfish collapse - is not only too little it is extremely irresponsible.
When I ask the MP's of our country to speak up - this is certainly what I mean. This is a disgrace to all Canadians - and causes extreme tension between the nation and our province. I would suggest it is difficult for you to progress on the Arctic front when the Government of Canada has left this atrocity to fester without proper response.
I further ask that MP's take a long look at the proposed new Fisheries Act and ask the important questions. This Act while needing amendments - is not ready for a Parliament that is too ignorant to debate it. Many thanks to MP Sackville--Eastern Shore, Nova Scotia, Peter Stoffer who is giving a valiant effort to protect this resource and through that the survival of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
For any MP to ignore this situation places our federation in a precarious state and fails to demonstrate any real sovereignty on the East Coast of our country.
Best Regards,
Sue Kelland-Dyer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)