Showing posts with label Loyola Hearn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Loyola Hearn. Show all posts

13 August 2010

Loyola new ambassador to Dublin next?

Looks like Loyola Hearn is up for a new job.

With former Prince Edward Island Tory Premier Pat Binns shifting from his comfortable digs in Dublin to more comfortable ones in Boston, that leaves a diplomatic post open. Binns went to Dublin in 2007 to replace a career diplomat who’d been in the job of about a year.  Binns’ relocation looks to be a bit premature.

Word around Ottawa for some months now has one of the architects of the Conservative Party merger heading to the Emerald Isle to replace Pat Binns. Yes, folks, if the rest of the little scenario plays out, Loyola Hearn will be the new Canadian ambassador to Ireland.

Loyalty to Stephen Harper certainly seems to have its rewards so it wouldn’t come as any surprise if the next diplomatic appointment sent Hearn to his native soil.  Hearn stuck with the party he helped create and its new leader through the family feud. 

Now that the feud is officially over its would be only natural for the leader of Canada’s other Reform-based Conservative Party to endorse the appointment.

Wonder what Danny would say about that appointment given the harsh words he used to have for Loyola?

- srbp -

07 September 2008

Fear and loathing on the campaign trail, Labrador version

Federal fish minister Loyola Hearn couldn't help but try some old-fashioned politicking.  He took a swipe at a provincial cabinet minister - calling the guy an idiot - and accusing the Liberal member of parliament of being negative. As Hearn put it in a Telegram interview:

When discussing that region's issues, the outgoing federal Fisheries minister said the people there, especially in Goose Bay, have to learn to help themselves, which he said they haven't done at the polls.

"They have an idiot for a provincial member (of the House of Assembly) who just goes out there yelling and bawling (and) doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about. They sent a federal member to Ottawa
who's left no impression except to be negative and sarcastic," said Hearn, MP for St. John's South-Mount Pearl.

Okay, we can see that Hearn loathes his political opponents, especially those within his own party but what's this help themselves stuff?

Maybe some fear mongering that links voting and political pork.

Gee, it's not like voters in Newfoundland and Labrador haven't heard that stuff before.

-srbp-

29 August 2008

Connie bitch-slapping intensifies

The Family Feud continues unabated.

There must be a federal election coming.

The latest volley is a statement released by federal fish minister Loyola Hearn this afternoon:

It's interesting to hear the Premier say today that he was simply "stepping up to the plate" to fund arts initiatives within the province, and to highlight his own commitment to the arts.

Residents of Mount Pearl may find this message a little bit confusing.  The original proposal for Mount Pearl's Lifestyle Centre included a local theatre.  With federal and municipal money on the table, the Williams government responded that they would not fund the project if the federal government was involved. 

In the end, the Lifestyle Centre became a victim of the ABC campaign, and will proceed without a theatre.

Hearn's a scrappy old silverback politician.  You don't have to agree with his politics to appreciate that he's unlikely to take the sort of pokes Danny Williams has been making without hitting back.  And it's not like Hearn has been afraid to go right up Danny's nose if need be to make a point.

But at this early stage of the campaign, it won't be too long before the Universal Rule is broken and someone's mother gets dragged dragged into the whole fracas.

Oh dear.

Fights in the family are always the ugliest.

How ugly?

Well, there's always this video of a very young, but no less irk-filled Danny Williams telling CBC's Deanne Fleet what a great premier Loyola Hearn would make.

 

-srbp-

18 December 2007

Dumb things said to reporters, the umpteenth edition

Federal fish minister Loyola Hearn got lost in his own metaphor in a scrum on Monday trying to explain something or other about the Premier and his anti-Harper crusade.

He said, in part,

It's something like demanding Santa give you what you want, when all you have to do, instead of standing on a chair and shouting up the chimney,'Santa, I want everything or I'll light the fire,' sit down and write a letter and make sure it gets to the right people, and you might get what you want," Hearn said. "That's providing you've been a good boy - if you haven't been a good boy, then it depends."

How many ways is this wrong? Just a few:

  1. Just as the war is over, Loyola takes a pointed shot at Danny.  Talk about blowing it just when your side won the war, Loyola. This sort of nonsense just enflames people needlessly.
  2. Comparing Ottawa to Santa.  Bad enough provincial premiers and others think of Uncle Ottawa in that sort of facile way already.  It's worse when a cabinet minister actively encourages people to think in terms of irresponsible "gimme,gimme,gimme" attitudes.
  3. santa steveComparing Stephen Harper to Santa.  Just not an image an adult should have in his or her head, let alone a picture to paint for a small child so close to Christmas.  Gets your attention, like say Debbie suddenly popping up in red leather anchoring the news, but in a totally creepy way.
  4. Danny did write a letter.  That's the problem. Danny wrote a letter.  Danny got a reply and not from those whack jobs who sneaked into the Canada Post elves department recently. He got a big fat promise. He played nice. He got ashes anyway.  That's why he's pissed.
  5. Warning: Small children, talk show listeners, members of the Privy Council and other easily led, impressionable types, turn away now...Seriously.  Go read something else. Adults.  Highlight to read beginning here...> Santa doesn't exist. Canadians just wish Harper didn't.

-srbp-

07 May 2007

FPI deal possible, but no quotas for Rideout

After a weekend meeting with the principals, federal fish minister Loyola Hearn is still optimistic a deal can be done.

There just won't be any quotas under the control of the provincial government and Tom Rideout, right.

-SRBP-

23 April 2007

Danny loves Loyola, Update

A video featuring Danny Williams supporting Loyola Hearn in the 1989 provincial Progressive Conservative Party leadership contest is picking up more attention with each passing day.

The video is posted on youtube.com.

When Bond Papers posted the link on Friday, the total viewers was 91. That number hit 241 by mid-day Monday. The video was featured on CBC's Here and Now supperhour news show on Monday evening and as of 10: 45 Pm Monday night the hit counter had reached 369.

20 April 2007

Hearn hits back

Federal fish minister Loyola Hearn delivered a luncheon speech on Friday in which he took a few strips off the provincial government, in return for the strips Premier Danny Williams took off Hearn's hide a few days ago.

Hearn, seen at right at a function some months ago, seemed to be either pointing fingers at the Premier or, perhaps, inviting the feisty Mr. Williams to see what happens when he pulled Hearn's finger.

There is nothing uglier than a fight within a family.

Regular Bond readers will recall the cat fight last year, left [not exactly as illustrated], over Premier's scheme to install Andy Wells as head of the offshore regulatory board. That, too, had all the earmarks of a fight a la Crystal and Alexis.

Incidentally, Hearn's remarks as quoted by the CBC story kinked above as well as other reports on the speech, will seem familiar to Bond Papers' readers. Several federal departments are regular Bond readers but that is likely nothing more than a coincidence.

One thing is certain from today: John Crosbie had some good advice for both Williams and Hearn. Premier Williams should consider Mr. Hearn a potential asset in trying to deal with the current dispute on a diplomatic level. Crosbie knows exactly how much can be accomplished by a federal regional minister on behalf of the province.

He's done it before throughout disputes between St. John's and Ottawa during both the Brian Peckford and Clyde Wells administrations. The relationship between a premier and a regional minister doesn't always have to be amicable.

Heavens knows that Wells and Crosbie often had a few choice words for each other both publicly and - to tell tales out of school - in private. Let's just say that soundproof doors aren't quite so soundproof when two strong-willed politicians are involved in what can euphemistically be termed a difference of opinion. Through it all, though, they still met and they still took each others' telephone calls.

Can the same be said of the current situation?

Maybe Crosbie has another clue to a fundamental change that needs to happen.

If not, then Hearn's comment today on fighting it out in an election might be the only way to resolve matters. Perhaps Mr. Williams would consider running as an independent Progressive Conservative in the next federal election, potentially leading - as did Lucien Bouchard - a nationalist bloquiste party.

Williams could even take Hearn on directly, that is if Hearn will be running next time out. As much as your humble e-scribbler would not like to see that blood letting on his own front lawn, that contest might just get all the testosterone out of the air and let people start building productive relationships again.

No need for Canadian Tire to stock up on mounds of absorbent pads just yet, though. Current word from Ottawa is that there won't be an election until sometime in 2008.

In the meantime, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are likely to hear the family next door in a knock-down, drag-out on the front lawn for months to come.

*sigh*

-30-

16 April 2007

That was then. This is now.

Then, federal foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay said:
"It is important to note that if Nova Scotia opts for the new system, it doesn't have to give up its Accord–in fact, the Accord will be fully respected and continue to provide benefits to Nova Scotia," said Minister MacKay. The Accord provided Nova Scotia with $830 million immediately upon signing.
Then - a mere few days ago - federal fish minister Loyola Hearn told reporters much the same thing:
Hearn insists the Atlantic Accord, which the province and Nova Scotia negotiated with the former Liberal government in 2005, is safe.

"Are we going to get screwed? The answer is no, we're not," Hearn told reporters Friday.

"Are we going to be disadvantaged … by a billion dollars or by a dollar? The answer to that is no, because the government of Canada committed that we would not be disadvantaged."
Then, Prime Minister Stephen Harper told the House of Commons:
"The Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador asked repeatedly that this government reject the recommendation of the O'Brien commission that would have put a cap on the equalization benefits of the Atlantic accord," Harper said to the House.

"The Atlantic Accord is preserved in this budget and is preserved due to the good work of the minister of fisheries and oceans and of course other members of our Newfoundland and Labrador caucus. Promise made and promise kept."
Now, finance minister Jim Flaherty admits that his budget caps Equalization offset payments in both the 1985 Atlantic Accord and a supplementary deal in 2005:
The province will also have the right to opt permanently into the new, improved, Canada-wide Equalization system. This choice provides the province with flexibility for the future and improves Newfoundland and Labrador's chance of qualifying for an extension beyond the existing system. If the province chooses the new Equalization system, it is only fair that the whole package would apply, including the fiscal capacity cap, to ensure fairness. In this case, it would not be just to other provinces if only Newfoundland and Labrador is allowed to double-dip or cherry-pick only those parts of the new Equalization program that will benefit the province.

To do so would give Newfoundland and Labrador access to Equalization payments above all the other Equalization provinces even though its fiscal capacity is higher than Ontario's and British Columbia's, which receive no Equalization payments. [Emphasis added]
To apply the cap, the Government of Canada is unilaterally amending both the 1985 Atlantic Accord signed by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Premier Brian Peckford and the 2005 deal between Prime Minister Paul Martin and Premier Danny Williams.

Forget a broken election promise.

Harper and his cabinet can't even stick to the same commitment over the course of four weeks.

To see the full impact of this latest revelation, compare Wade Locke's original analysis and the one based on capping what they said wasn't capped.

If the provincial government had waited until the evidence was amassed, the impact of this Conservative perfidy would hav been plain for all to see.

-30-

13 April 2007

Premature gasket-blowing

From Tom Marshall, minister of finance:
The Honourable Tom Marshall, Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, today confirmed that the federal government has misled the Provincial Government and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador regarding the true implications of the new equalization program as outlined in its 2007 Budget.
However, as Simon Lono points out at Offal News, there is something odd about Marshall's release in that it provides no provincial government calculations. Indeed, the provincial government has thus far provided not a shred of information or analysis to back its original contentions on Equalization. Ditto for the federal government, represented in this case by federal fish minister Loyola Hearn.

As Offal puts it:
You would think the Hearn would release numbers of his own to defend the federal position. He does not. Instead he's reduced to a weak claim that no province will be harmed.

But does he actually have any real idea whether the province will be harmed? Apparently not.

As for Marshall, he's definitely on the warpath now. And you can expect the Premier to be leading the barbarians at the federal gate as soon as he gets home.

But didn't Marshall already know that Locke's numbers were off in the first place?
Apparently not.

Wade Locke's latest analysis is interesting for two reasons.

First, it suggests that there is an interpretation of eligibility for Equalization offsets which is different from the one used in his original presentation. More will follow on that in a separate post.

Specifically, Locke quotes this section of an e-mail from an unnamed senior federal finance official:
In effect, NL would be eligible to receive Equalization and offsets as long as long its own-source per capita fiscal capacity (including non-resource yields and 100% of resource revenues) is not equal to or greater than the own-source per capita fiscal capacity of the non-receiving province with the lowest per capita fiscal capacity. [Italics in original]
On the face of it, this section does not contradict what appears to be the intention of the 2005 offshore deal or the 2007 federal budget as announced.

What Locke has done here is identified a potential issue. It is far from proven conclusively. As well, the provincial government appears to have blown a gasket before conducting its own review. Tom Marshall stated in a number of interviews that his officials were still seeking clarification on the issue, he had endeavoured to have the issue clarified with his federal counterpart and that provincial justice officials were reviewing the federal legislation. In one interview it appeared that Marshall was entirely unaware of this issue until Locke brought it to his attention sometime before Locke's news release today.

The one thing that can be concluded from this entire episode over the past 24 hours is that federal-provincial relations are at an all time low state. Marshall's inflammatory news release, done with the full approval of the Premier presumably, will not help resolve this matter successfully.

Claiming to be misled is one thing, if you have evidence and can prove it. Flaming the federal government - or anyone, for that matter - without substantive evidence is grossly unprofessional.

Dr. Locke has provided an invaluable public service with his analysis. Would that the politicians acted with the same professionalism he has displayed.