Danny Chavez?
Danny Arafat?
How about the Cuckoo of Corner Brook?
- srbp -
The real political division in society is between authoritarians and libertarians.
Go to the Globe and Mail website.
Try and find a story from the February 11 edition by Rheal Seguin on a supposed border flap between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador.
You’ll to look a bit. For some reason a story that was prominent is now buried away on the “Others” page instead of on the national politics section where it was.
The story is bogus. There is no border dispute. The matter was settled in 1927 and the Romaine river hydro-electric project isn’t even close to the 1927 boundary. This is another of those Sasquatch hunter things about the Labrador border: people keep hunting because they know it’s there but the only “proof” turns out to be fiction.
That’s because the border controversy, like the Sasquatch, is made up.
And the story is one of the problems when you drop into Newfoundland and Labrador every once in a while rather than pay attention to what is going on here on a regular basis.
You wind up hunting Sasquatch instead of looking at the case of a real undefined border – this one in the Gulf of St. Lawrence – which is impeding exploration for and development of oil and gas resources.
Meanwhile over at the National Post, a editorial on the latest federal transfer racket contains an astonishing amount of stuff that is not true.
Now Mr. Williams and his government have calculated that switching to the new formula would be better for the coming fiscal year — netting Newfoundland’s treasury and extra $1.3-billion to $1.6-billion — so they want to switch. However, in January’s budget, federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty eliminated that option.
Not so.
The amounts quoted were totals over three years, not one.
More importantly they are estimates.
The only figure that seems to be plausibly correct is about $400 million that won’t flow in 2009 but even that is based on:
The National Post editorialist didn’t stop with those untruths. It went farther with other things it actually labelled as true when they aren’t:
It’s true Mr. Flaherty and the Harper government eliminated the switching option without first consulting their colleagues in the Williams government. It is also true that this policy change only affects Newfoundland, even though the province is not singled out by name. And it is true the Harper government is tired of Mr. Williams and the constant bashing they take from him, all of which could lead to the conclusion that this is what Mr. Williams claims — an act of vengeance aimed at him and his province.
Now that last part – about being tired of the tirades - is probably true. It’s quite the stretch though to go from that to suggest that this was a policy designed to screw over one province when the facts – as previously reported – show something else.
The relationship between the current provincial administration and the federal government – irrespective of political stripe – is dysfunctional. It got that way as the result of a lot of hard work after 2003. The dysfunction may be deliberate or it may be an accidental by-product of old-fashioned political posturing. That part doesn’t matter. The fact is the dysfunction exists.
It can only change if the people - it takes two to tango - who are causing or contributing to the dysfunction change their behaviour.
That change isn’t helped by newspapers that are notionally national printing bogus information as if it were fact.
-srbp-
Even if Mr. Williams disagrees with all this, he is at the very least guilty of coming off as a bumptious blowhard. It is unusual enough for a provincial premier to campaign against a sitting federal government (most confine themselves to championing federal candidates from their own party within their province), but it is unprecedented for a premier to advocate nationally for the defeat of a government in Ottawa of his own party.And if that wasn't enough, there's Don Martin's take:
This is not a sign of how bad the Harper government has treated Newfoundland. Rather, Mr. Williams’ latest outrageous proposals are a sign that he has become a captive to his own bluster. He has gone to this well so often, that each dip must be bigger and splashier than they last, until now he has no credibility left.
Of course, there's a wingnut factor to be factored into any Williams damage assessments.
This is, after all, the premier who yanked down Canadian flags in protest, howled at Paul Martin with identical vitriol and stormed out of his first First Ministers conference with little provocation.
Williams makes the point that Newfoundland is on the verge of achieving economic independence, an overdue prosperity from offshore oil that could be short-lived.
A look at Newfoundland's history through a local lens explains why Mr. Williams' attacks on big business and Ottawa play so well around the kitchen tables of Gander and Corner Brook. Dragged into Confederation by the narrowest margin, the formerly independent colony has been rewarded with collapsed cod stocks, a hydro deal that virtually donates electricity to Quebec (which resells it to Americans for a tidy profit), two generations of talented young people decamping for work in Alberta and elsewhere, and the largest per capita debt and highest unemployment in Canada.
Cynics outside the province might suggest Newfoundlanders had something to do with bad economic planning, but locally, says Mr. [John] Crosbie, the feeling is "we're always being outsmarted and done in by mainlanders."Since this piece was written by a mainlander, he can be forgiven for assuming every single person on what the Post calls The Rock - a word destined to join the other "n" word on the list of banned ethnic slurs - buys into the nationalist mythology on which the latest caudillo thrives.