$8 million government loan to Kodiak under review

The provincial government is reviewing an $8.0 million interest-free loan made two years ago to Kodiak, according to the Telegram.

The cash was supposed to cover the cost of consolidating the company’s Canadian operations at Harbour Grace. As a result, and according to the official government news release, the work force of 170 at the boot plant in Newfoundland was supposed to increase by another 75.

Last week, the company slashed the Harbour Grace operation to 100, blaming a depressed marketplace.

In the government hand-out photo, from left to right, Harbour Grace MHA Jerome Kennedy, Premier Danny Williams, then-business minister Paul Oram and then-innovation minister Trevor Taylor try on some Terra boots at the cash hand-out ceremony in September 2008.

The loan to Kodiak represents more than half the cash the Williams administration has managed to hand out to business since it announced its cash give-away programs in 2007.

Out of $75 million in total budgeted for the business attraction fund since 2007, only $14 million has actually been announced. In the first year, the government spent not so much as a penny of the $30 million initially budgeted. As the Telegram’s Rob Antle noted:

Other pots of cash set aside by the department to generate economic activity in the province have had similarly little take-up.

A "special initiatives" fund has doled out just $4 million of a budgeted $19.5 million over the past three years.

The department has budgeted an additional $7.75 million for special initiatives this year.

-srbp-

Related – The Fragile Economy series:

• Staying the course
• Reductio ad argentum
• …and two steps back

I thought *you* had jobs to send to *us*…

Take a look at the very limited amount coverage available on the Internet about the southern governors and Canadian premiers conference.

There are lots of platitudes about relationships.  There was plenty of interest in energy jobs. But aside from vapid comments about things like the international awareness of American business leaders – they are apparently very, very good -  there wasn’t much of substance coming from any mouths.

That’s hardly surprising:  the southern United States is looking for people to move in a create local jobs. Take, for example, the situation in Alabama, as described by an editorial in the Anniston Star newspaper:

It's a non-debatable, obvious fact. Alabama needs jobs.

Anniston – roughly the size of Corner Brook - is looking for someone to come to the state, set up a business and create jobs for Alabamans. Neal Wade, of the state economic development agency, told Associated Press [quoted in the Anniston Star]:

"What we want to see is not just the assembly jobs, but the research and development, renewable energy projects that will impact not just our state but all of the country…. I think there are tremendous opportunities not just to reduce the cost of energy in our state, but also to increase jobs."

Three years into the exercise this particular conference of governors and premiers seems to be coming up very short.  Some provinces, like Quebec, may be able to profit but it is hard to know why a province like Newfoundland and Labrador is devoting such effort as sending the premier to the meetings while other, more lucrative prospects have been either neglected or trashed.

After all, you can just hear Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour and Premier Danny Williams when they first met:  “But I thought you had jobs to send to us.”

At least, Danny didn’t have to travel far to get to Biloxi.

-srbp-

The Fragile Economy: …and two steps back

In 2007, the contracts manager at Metalcraft Marine, a Kingston Ontario boat builder noticed the growing number of reports from the united States that predicted a looming downturn in the American market.

The threat was potentially devastating for a company that did 95% of its business manufacturing small patrol boats for American government agencies.

The company shifted its marketing focus to South America, the Middle East and Asia.  The work paid off:  revenues in 2010 will be 50% higher than 2007 based on new customers outside North America.

Inertia

Meanwhile, since 2007, the provincial government in Newfoundland and Labrador has been working alongside the other eastern Canadian provinces to increase trade with the United States. There is now a whole trade focus on the south-eastern Untied States complete with junkets and conferences. 

Just this weekend – April 2010 -  the Premier co-hosted the latest conference for the south-eastern project.  This is the same trade venture. incidentally, that drew Paul Oram to Georgia when he was the business minister. His grasp of recent events in the province is breathtaking.  Well, breathtaking that is, if you have no idea what he is talking about.  If you do have half a clue, you’d wonder what planet he was from to have cocked everything up so badly.

Now to be fair, the whole idea for this venture seems to have been cooked up back before 2007 when it looked to some like the growth in the United States economy would know no end. By the time the bureaucrats and politicians managed to get themselves organized, the first signs of looming trouble were showing up.  And by October 2008 when Oram was in Georgia, the entire arse had fallen out of the American economy.

By then, of course, or even by 2007, the bureaucratic juggernaut couldn’t be stopped even if someone wanted to.  And now three years after the first one, a whole bunch of people get together regularly at taxpayer expense to talk about how nice it would be if the private sector companies in the respective jurisdictions did a little business with one another. 

These trade affairs never seem to do much more than talk, of course and set up permanent offices employing public servants to help co-ordinate future meetings.  That’s what happened with the Tobin-era Irish junket-fest, revived by the Williams crew or the Team Atlantic missions to anywhere that has warmth and sun in the wintertime.  But the purpose of this discussion let’s run with the assumption used by governments, namely that these trade missions and junkets actually work.

Increasing Dependence on a Single Market

Politicians who come into office without any idea of what to do usually wind up following the flow.  This American trade idea is likely no exception. 

You see, the United States has been the province’s major foreign trading partner for decades.  In 1999, two thirds of all exports from Newfoundland and Labrador  went to the States. By 2006, that proportion had climbed to 75%.  Even in 2008 – the last year for which the provincial government provides statistics – 71% of exports from Newfoundland and Labrador went into the American market.

To put it another way, take a look at the export value compared to the province’s gross domestic product (GDP):  the  total value of goods and services produced in Newfoundland and Labrador. In 2008, about half the GDP went to the Untied States. The GDP in 2009 was 22 billion.  The drop was pretty much all due to the collapse of the American market.

Now that level of dependence is not as bad as Metalcraft's problem in 2007, but it certainly should have made someone within the provincial government sit up and take notice.  After all, the provincial government’s own statistics analysts produced the figures cited above.  The level of dependence on the American economy is not a state secret.

Rather than trying to increase trade with the United States, Newfoundland and Labrador would be strategically better advised to diversify its markets. But since 2003, the provincial government has been doing exactly the opposite. 

What’s more, the provincial government  - in an apparently capricious move -  specifically rejected getting involved with a major international trade initiative aimed at diversifying the markets for local goods and services. 

Sure Paul Oram took a jet to India in 2008, but the very next year, the provincial government rejected a major national effort designed to open the European union to free trade with Canada. A few million dollars worth of seal bits trumped what had managed to become, by 2008, close to a couple of billion dollars of trade into the European Union. The prospect of more trade with the Europeans opens opportunities for new business throughout the province not to mention offering the chance to resolve some long-standing trade issues in the fishery.

However, none of that seems to have had any impact on the group of politicians and bureaucrats determining the province’s economic policy.  So it is that the European opportunity was neglected, to put it mildly, while the American continues.

Markets?  We dun need no stinking markets?

Now this is not the first or only time such a situation has occurred since 2003.

The provincial government took a hand in smashing to bits the only internationally competitive fishing enterprise based in the province.  Fishery Products International continues as a brand.  The brand, along with the international marketing arm went to a Nova Scotia-based company.  Another section, a seafood marketing arm based in the United Kingdom also wound up on the block, snapped up just as quickly by someone else with far greater vision than the provincial government and the band that sliced the company to pieces.

Now it does not matter if the provincial government actively worked to destroy FPI or if it merely went along for the ride because it lacked a coherent fisheries policy of its own.  The end result is the same:  The parts of the company that could have helped to diversify markets for local seafood are gone to others.  The unprofitable and problematic bits – the processing bits – remain in the province and continue to be highly problematic  although they are now held by a smaller company with far less global clout.

The others are doing quite well for themselves.  John Risley, vilified by the Premier during the FPI debacle, personally runs a successful company that last year turned a profit of $25.8 million despite the downturn in the American market and the high Canadian dollar.  A key part of the success is the FPI stuff Risley bought with the same Premier’s agreement.

Oh to be in that room

There is no small joke in discovering that the Biloxi conference co-hosted by Danny Williams is sponsored,in part, by AbitibiBowater. Williams’ expropriation gambit of AbitibiBowater’s and other’s assets in 2008 has turned out to be a legal disaster for the provincial government and may well prove to be as big a financial mess too.

Irrespective of that, though, there is something fitting in having Williams hosting an event designed to encourage trade while it is sponsored by a company which is the poster-child for the Williams administration’s erratic, contradictory policies. 

It is one thing to sell products in another market.  Another key component of trade missions is attracting new investors.  What could more readily turn off investors than the spectacle of a provincial government seizing control of assets, revoking permits and unilaterally quashing legal action? 

Williams did not just lay waste to AbitibiBowater’s presence in the province with his December 2008 surprise.  The expropriation bill also seized assets belonging to two other companies:  the Italian multi-national ENEL and St. John’s-based Fortis.  There is still no sign of any settlement with any of the parties affected, including those like ENEL and Fortis which appear to have been collateral damage in whatever war lay at heart of the expropriation.

One step forward and two steps back

Two decades ago, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador recognised both the problems faced in the province and the opportunities posed by changes in the global economy. The Strategic Economic Plan aimed to make fundamental changes in the economy, diversify industries and markets.  The plan was a step forward.

Two decades later, the province is two steps back.  The SEP and all the knowledge that lay behind it are tossed aside. 

As the old adage goes:  fail to plan.  Plan to fail. 

The results are there for all to see:  increasingly, the provincial labour force is dominated by people whose jobs depend on tax dollars, rather than on jobs that generate tax dollars.

 

The provincial government now accounts for almost 25% of the employed labour force in the province.  This is not just the result of the near collapse of the forest sector and the steady decline of the fishery:  public sector employment like public sector spending generally continues to grow apace. Curiously enough, the Williams administration started out with a policy of reducing the public service.

Since 2003, the only development projects that have taken place were all either begun before the current administration took power or build modestly on existing work.  Nothing new has turned up despite the creation of an entire department supposedly devoted to generating new economic development.

More of the provincial economy in 2010 depends on exports to the United States than a decade ago. About 71% of all foreign exports now head to the United States.

Oil generated one third of the provincial gross domestic product in 2009;  that’s about seven billion dollars in a $22 billion economy. Total provincial government spending for 2010 is about seven billion.  As industries like forestry and the fishery have withered or faltered, the provincial government has stepped in to take its place.

The provincial economy is increasingly driven by public sector spending which, itself cannot be sustained at current levels.

There are ways to correct the course the provincial government has currently set.

That is where this series will turn next.

-srbp-

The Fragile Economy: reductio ad argentum

Political parties that come into power without direction tend to fall back on a couple of crutches to help them get through.

One is inertia.  They just keep going with what happened before.  Sometimes they just take ideas pushed up by the bureaucracy but that is really just another form of carrying on with the set of assumptions everyone knows.

The collapse of health regions and education districts into just a handful is just such an idea.  Faced with an apparent financial problem – which the new Williams administration should have known all about before they got to office, by the way – the novice Premier took a couple of suggestions pushed forward by bureaucrats as a way of saving cash.

Poof:  four health regions and five education districts. The changes didn’t actually deal with the problem nor does it appear they were thought through. Yet they were quite accepted quite readily as the election commitment of growing our way out of economic tough times  - “Jobs, jobs, jobs” - was replaced by the staples of cuts, freezes and re-organization.

That’s not really all that surprising.  After all, this was an administration that had not even been able to figure out what its departments were going to be called.  That decision wouldn’t arrive for another month.

The noobs elected in October 2003 took five months to get enough material together to present to the House of Assembly.  But even then, the overwhelming majority of the bills were modest amendments to existing laws that had been in train before the election. 

Those that weren’t already planned by the old administration didn’t produce dramatic changes of direction for government. Amendments to the Elections Act, for example, mandated that a by-election had to be called within 60 days when a vacancy occurred.  The old version dated from the early 1990s and set the maximum at 90 days.

For a government that supposedly had a plan and was keen to get to work on its new agenda, there wasn’t much sign of that new agenda from the first session of the legislature.

Aside from a toothless lobbyist registry, the Transparency and Accountability Act was the only major new piece of government business. Duly passed after a cursory debate the government then didn’t bother to put the law into force until two years later.  Even then, the bill only took effect two afters later still, that is, four years after it was passed.

Another new bill, the Court Security Act, is still not in force and likely won’t be implemented.

It’s only when one goes back and looks at that first session in hindsight that one can see exactly how little new material the brand new government brought to its first legislative session.

Directionless governments also have difficulty making decisions.  Most governments find decisions difficult to make because they issues involved are enormous and the opportunity to make a tragic mistake is great. Contrary to what people may think politicians are sincere people trying to do what they think is best. But in a directionless administration, all those sincere people have to struggle to agree on what “best” actually means.

Now by directionless, we mean nothing more than a group of people who have not learned how to work together effectively as a team.  Lack of direction may also arise where political power generally or on a given issue is so diffuse that no one individual or group of individuals can get enough support among colleagues to move in a particular direction.

Directionless governments tend to decide in favour of the lowest common denominator.  On some issues the LCD is no decision.  But, more often than not, agreement is easiest to reach if it involves spending money.

Take a look at the current administration and you can quickly see the prominent role money plays.  In fact, money is the only real measure of anything.  news releases typically refer to how much money will be spent and how much has been spent.  When asked about how important a subject like the fishery is, a typical Williams administration reply will focus on how much money has been spent on fisheries-related issues.

A by-election is fought based on how much money the premier and his party delivered to the district.  Puzzled at a by-election loss, the Premier will note how much money the district received and then roll his eyes up dismissively at the rejection.

The final Hibernia South agreements were not good enough in themselves. Rather, the estimated valued of the deal had to be inflated by an entirely artificial means.

Everything - not just principle - converts to cash. Indeed, so pervasive is the reference to money that you likely took it for granted.  But from this point onward, you will likely have a hard time looking at any news story from the provincial government and not seeing the focus on, the near obsession with cash.

There are other examples of how the current administration lacks focus and direction.  Equalization, the delays and cost over-runs throughout government, the health care cuts that sparked last fall’s crisis,  the break-up of Fishery Products International:  all are signs of an administration which lacks a coherent view of the problems it faces and a cohesive organization that can tackle them successfully.

Knowing how the current administration has a problem finding its way is one thing.  The consequences for the province and its people are something else.

-srbp-

The Fragile Economy series:

• “Staying the course”
• Next –    “…and two steps back”.

The Fragile Economy: staying the course

“Obviously, I don't like to run deficits, but if I've got to fight a recession ... if we've got to get the economy booming again, then I'm not afraid to spend money and we're not afraid to lower taxes to stimulate the economy - that's good public policy.”

Finance minister Tom Marshall often speaks about one thing and does another.  He’s famous for trotting out a debt clock during one budget consultation farce only to deliver a budget that did nothing to reduce debt.

This year Marshall has been trying to pass off deficit spending as if it was something new for this administration.  It isn’t. They’ve run cash deficits in all but two years since 2004.  If their current forecast holds, they will be adding a considerable amount of debt for the foreseeable future.

Adding debt is just staying the course for the Williams administration.

Premier Danny Williams himself has dismissed balanced budgets as meaningless. Marshall explicitly rejected any action like balanced budget legislation or having a debt reduction policy.

Marshall’s predecessor as finance minister - Loyola Sullivan  - talked about balancing the books on a cash basis – he only did it once – and possibly not balancing the accrual books for a number of years.  That was back in the early days of the administration when it looked like they were actually going to deal with some of the provincial government’s financial woes. But even for all that notice debt got within the first couple of years after Williams and the Tories took office,  they were willing to rack up additional public debt.

Since we are discussing debt, let’s dispose of one of the finance minister’s more laughable claims from budget day:

“But we have cash to pay for that deficit. We will not increase our borrowing. Our debt will go up, but we don't have to borrow for that.”

On the face of it people may well wonder how you can increase public debt while not borrowing money.

The answer is pretty simple and it goes to the heart of the public debt charade Marshall and his colleagues have been foisting for the past few years.

Marshall covered the half billion shortfall in 2009 from temporary investments – extra cash – the provincial government had on hand.  He didn’t have to go to the banks and negotiate a loan but he sure as heck borrowed the money:  he borrowed it from taxpayers.

As for the debt, what he is referring to is net debt.  Now for those who may not know, net debt is a calculation of what is owed compared to assets – cash, property and so on – that could theoretically be sold off to pay down the money that is owed.

Those temporary investments that the provincial government racked up over the past couple of years helped to make it look like the public debt had been paid down. That’s because they are exactly the sort of assets that would have bee used to figure out the net debt:  liabilities less assets.

So when Tom took the cash and spent it, the net debt could only go back up.  The net debt will go up again next year and the year after and any other year Tom winds up having to cover off over-spending.

Just remember, though, that the total liabilities haven’t changed much in the past few years. You can see that from a post last December on net debt and liabilities and in another post on net borrowings.

This is not a subject the Fan Clubbers like to talk about but it is real. it also just happens to be one of the major financial problems facing the province that isn’t being addressed by the current administration.

Just to give you a sense of how much the past two budgets have followed what we could call the Williams administration debt addition policy, take a look at just the current account spending since 2003.  That’s the money that pays the heat and light and delivers the services and salaries every day of every year. 

And just to really keep it in perspective think of it this way.  You can have a great net debt because you have a nice house, an expensive car and some jewels that could possibly be sold off if the bank called all your loans. 

But since the house and the jewels don’t generate any cash each year they don’t help you pay the bills today.  If you can’t afford food without whipping out the credit card you could be in a situation of being cash poor. Lots of nouveau riche business types are leveraged to the max.  They drive flashy cars but they don’t really have a copper to their name. So without considering the cash deficit, the net debt could be a very misleading figure.

Anyway, take a gander at this table.  It shows the percentage increase in current account spending every year from 2003 to the current budget.

Fiscal Year	Percent increase from previous year
2004	Zero
2005	5.3
2006	4.6
2007	8
2008	7.8
2009	10
2010 (forecast)	7

That’s right.

Except for that first year, there’s never been a time when current account spending didn’t go up by at least twice the national rate of inflation.  In some years spending shot up three and four times the rate of inflation.

This sort of spending is unsustainable.

This sort of financial state – all that spending coupled with all that untended debt – is unsustainable.

There are other consequences to the Williams administration economic policy, consequences that will become more obvious as this new series – The Fragile Economy – rolls out in the days ahead.

-srbp-

Budget hints from Marshall

Excerpts from a speech by finance minister Tom Marshall, in Corner Brook, as reported by the Western Star:

Although he said the rate the province has been spending is not sustainable, Marshall said spending on new programs and projects will highlight the next budget.

“We have to get control now,” said Marshall. “I’m not talking about cutbacks. There will be new initiatives and programs, but we have to temper our expectations and we have to keep things under control. We have to make sure the spending we do today is sustainable for the children of the future.”

…

“We have to get control now,” said Marshall. “I’m not talking about cutbacks. There will be new initiatives and programs, but we have to temper our expectations and we have to keep things under control. We have to make sure the spending we do today is sustainable for the children of the future.”

…

“Now we have to benefit from new industry, benefit from the knowledge economy, the innovation economy.”

Knowledge economy.

Innovation.

Hmm.

Those ideas sound awfully familiar.

-srbp-

What would Beaton do?

If you can’t build ‘em a greenhouse, then the next best thing for a government bereft of any ideas is create some government jobs handing out government cheques.

"Our government is committed to creating jobs in all regions of the province," said the Honourable Susan Sullivan, MHA for Grand Falls-Windsor-Buchans. "The establishment of this new office in Central Newfoundland further emphasizes the commitment that has been made to support the residents living in this region."

The new office in Grand Falls-Windsor will employ 25 people sending cheques to people who are helping to save the race from extinction.  The office workers will also hand out money to help people pay their home heating bills.

The whole thing sounds awfully familiar.

Frighteningly familiar.

 

-srbp-

How bad is it?

You just know things are pretty tense in Corner Brook.

You can tell because the provincial government has been pouring on the happy-talk while over at the city’s major employer, the company operating the paper mill is looking for a 10% wage roll-back from employees.

The latest happy-talk is a hope-drenched a study on the oil and gas potential for the west coast.

According to the official news release, the study was commissioned based on an election commitment from 2003. 

That’s okay. 

We can wait while you go and check your calendars again.

Yes, it was indeed seven years ago.

The work on this particular report, though, was only done in 2008.  Check the dates on some of the consultation sessions;  that’s the only way to figure out the timelines for sure since most of the document has been scrubbed of dates. You can hunt around and eventually find the news release that kicked it off, from December 2007. 

That would make it a bit more than two years for this study to see the light of day.

After all that time and all that work, the recommendations are stunning: 

Ensure a regulatory and administrative environment to maximize investment in onshore and offshore exploration and attract industry operators and businesses to the region;

Ensure the protection of key natural resource areas, including Gros Morne National Park, the Humber Valley and the Bay of Islands;

Establish a clear environmental regime between the provincial and federal governments;

Continue to improve infrastructure in the region through investments in education, health-care facilities, transportation and commercial land availability;

Encourage the planning, regeneration and use of existing infrastructure, including that in Port aux Basques, Stephenville, Corner Brook, Deer Lake, Port Saunders and St. Anthony, to ensure it continues to support existing economic sectors;

Maintain and upgrade infrastructure specific to the needs of potential hydrocarbon projects, including wharves and air facilities at Corner Brook and Stephenville;

Facilitate the training of local residents to help them meet the demand for skills in this emerging sector;

Continue to invest in public education, health care, cultural and recreational opportunities to serves the needs of the region; and,

Continue to promote the western region as a place of opportunity for business investment and families.

In a nutshell:  fix the roads, spend money on things like education and health care, protect the ecologically sensitive and important bits (like Gros Morne)  and “promote” the potential in the area.

They are about as surprising as the recommendations made by the task force that spent 18 months trying to figure out how to keep more young people from leaving the province.  Its major conclusion:  create work for them so they can find jobs and stay here.

All standard. 

All patently obvious.

Nothing concrete and measurable.

Like explaining what is meant by “[e]nsure a regulatory and administrative environment to maximize investment in onshore and offshore exploration and attract industry operators and businesses to the region.” 

Maybe there is a tax issue here or problems with issuing permits. You won’t find anything in the report to explain what this means.

And the stuff that appears to be specific  - like the suggestion to “twin” selected portions of the Trans-Canada between Port aux Basques and St. John’s as needed – is actually just a confirmation of what has been government policy since 1988.  Under the roads for rails agreement, the provincial government used federal cash to do exactly that.  And yes, for those who need reminding that would be from the last time the Conservatives formed the provincial government.

So what are these study guys talking about 20 years later?

Not a heckuva lot, apparently, given that any administration at any time can claim:

• to have either already done that or,
• to be doing exactly what was recommended as it carries out the existing maintenance of the existing road.

Look in vain and you will not find a single thing in this 71 pages of pure bumpf is tied to  drilling more holes, finding oil and getting it into production.

Things seem to be pretty tense in Corner Brook these days.  That’s just as they have been in other towns in this province since 2003 when the major employer found itself in hard financial straits.

What’s most interesting since 2003, though, has not been the problems themselves but how the provincial government has reacted to each development.

The oil and gas study released on Monday seems to be very much par for the course, very much a sign of the times.

-srbp-

An admission of abject failure

A quarter of a century ago, Doug House and the Royal Commission on Employment and Unemployment heard time and again of the the need to get rid of make-work programs. 

Qualifying people for federal employment insurance benefits promoted a culture of dependence and destroyed innovation and self-reliance.

Some 17 years ago, the province’s Strategic Economic Plan introduced a bold, new approach in order to bring about fundamental changes within Newfoundland and Labrador.  There’d be no more make work and government free gifts to businesses.  Neither one worked to produce sustainable jobs.

Less than a decade after the Royal Commission – with the change of administration in 1996, in fact -  things were heading back to the old ways of megaprojects and make-work schemes.

In 2003, there was a new crowd, who supposedly had a plan called the New Approach.  Some of it seemed familiar.  Doug House came back and then left again.

Nothing changed.

It’s still megaprojects,  make-work and more make-work and handouts to business, hand-outs to business, hand-outs to business, hand-outs to business and hand-outs to business.

Oh, and let’s not forget hand-outs to business.

And hand-outs to business.

-srbp-

Great Gambols with Public Money: Sprung Cukes 2

Another view of the Peckford Pickle Palace, this time with some questions which proved to be prophetic.

Don't forget that at the time, supporters of the regime du jour accused journalists and other who questioned the wisdom of such schemes as being pessimistic and too negative to be worthy of any consideration.

It seems everything is being recycled these days including the Fanboy arguments.

 

“Peckford pummelled over greenhouse funding plan”

The Financial Post,  November 2, 1987

by Philip Mathias

 

Newfoundlanders are puzzled by Premier Brian Peckford's decision to commit $11.4 million in government funds to a huge experimental greenhouse.

Greenhouse experts are equally mystified by Peckford's loyalty to what many feel is a far-fetched and overpriced scheme. Even in Newfoundland, one government specialist advised against the scheme.

The province's media and opposition parties are pounding Peckford, and cucumber jokes have multiplied. The $18.4-million Newfoundland Environponics Ltd. project is a 6.4-acre greenhouse being built outside St. John's. Plants will be grown hydroponically on racks - in other words, without soil, in a slow-moving nutrient solution.

The greenhouse, due to start up this month, is meant to make Newfoundland self-sufficient in cucumbers and tomatoes, which are now mostly imported.

The joint owners are the province and Philip Sprung, who also owns a Calgary company that manufactures marquees. Sprung is said to be putting $4 million of cash and loan guarantees into the St. John's project.

Sprung is a self-educated horticulturalist who says he has the key to revolutionary greenhouse technology. The big question is whether he is far ahead of conventional horticulture, or badly out of step with it.

Among Sprung's early ventures was a greenhouse in Calgary. It suffered, he says, from hydrocarbon vapours rising out of the soil, which had been underneath an old oil refinery.

Sprung offered to relocate the greenhouse in Quebec and then on Prince Edward Island. Both provinces declined his request for funds. The project was also given the thumbs down by the National Research Council and the Department of Regional Industrial Expansion. '

Sprung's next stop was Newfoundland. The province's agriculture branch wrote a critical report on the project.  Nonetheless, Sprung was welcomed by Peckford and his cabinet.

The provincial government has agreed to provide $3.5 million in equity (land and cash); a $7-million loan guarantee; and a $900,000 provincial sales tax rebate. The unit now being built in St. John's is Sprung's Calgary greenhouse transported holus-bolus to Newfoundland.

Peckford may soon face some tough questions:

• How does the premier justify the $18.4-million cost of the greenhouse? 

The most advanced greenhouses being built elsewhere, experts say, cost half what's being paid by Newfoundland.  The province could probably buy two proven, conventional greenhouses for the price of Sprung's one.

• Can the greenhouse achieve the phenomenal yields projected by Philip Sprung?

He has told the government it will produce seven million pounds of vegetables on 6.4 acres. This yield is 2 1/2 times the best commercial yields in Canada.

Sprung's secret is to pack his greenhouse with three times as many plants as a regular hydroponic model. A hot, humid, jungle-like environment is maintained constantly. Simple arithmetic says three times the plants equals three times the yield.

Horticultural experts say it's not that simple: Yields fall off sharply at high plant densities. Professor Andre Gosselin of Laval University says, ''Sprung's yields are biologically possible, but I doubt if he can get them.''

Professor Herman Tiessen of the University of Guelph adds that Sprung's projected yields are ''unrealistic.''  Sprung recently severed connections with a British ex-partner Soil-Less Cultivation Systems Ltd., which claims to be the technical and managerial brains behind the system.

Sprung is reported to be looking for a new manager. If one cannot be found who is versed in his unusual technique, yields may be lower than promised.

• -Can the greenhouse be economic at lower yields?

The cost of growing tomatoes at the highest yields obtained at research stations would be about $1.75 per lb., using Sprung's capital and labour inputs. The price of tomatoes in Newfoundland (less retail and wholesale markups) is $1.05-$1.45 per lb. In other words, the cost of Sprung's process seems to be far above probable selling prices.

Sprung claims his yields will be much higher than those achieved at research stations.

• Can Sprung maintain projected levels of employment?

The province has been promised the greenhouse will provide jobs for 150 people - more than three times the industry average for hydroponic greenhouses.  If yields turn out to be anything other than phenomenal, the economics would be improved by reducing employment levels to the industry norm (about 40 people for 6.4 acres).

That might raise questions about the wisdom of the Peckford government advancing $11.4 million for the project. Unemployment in Newfoundland is officially 18%, unofficially about 28%.

• If the greenhouse proves uneconomic, will the province pour even more cash into the project?

Peckford's critics and other commercial greenhouse operators in the Atlantic provinces fear it will.  Critics complain that Peckford has veered away in the Sprung case from regional development guidelines laid down by the 1986 Newfoundland Royal Commission on Employment and Unemployment.

-srbp-

Missing in Action: the 2006 economic policy review

In 2006, Danny Williams decided he needed to take a second look at the economic development plans he was following.

"Over the past two years we have undertaken strategic initiatives that are significant planks in our economic development agenda," Premier Danny Williams said. "Now, halfway through our mandate, it is time to take stock of what has been initiated to date, and move to the next phase to ensure our development strategies are being carried out in an integrated, co-ordinated fashion, in line with our original goals."

He appointed Doug House to “lead the process”.

The process was supposed to lead to some called an “integrated provincial development plan”.

So where the heck is it?

Missing in action, apparently.

In April 2008, House quietly slipped back to his real job as a sociology professor at Memorial University. There’s absolutely no reference in his resume to what he did after the 2006 news release other than to mention he was a deputy minister.

There’s a mention in his biographical sketch of the work he did but no title for the final report or indeed any sign that there was a final plan produced after two years of work.  In fact the only thing House mentions in his bio is being a “key contributor” to the 2003 Tory party platform, although he doesn’t call it that.  Likely that was the chapter that paraphrased the 1992 Strategic Economic Plan.

Now maybe there’s a good reason for all that.  Maybe the plan doesn’t exist.  Maybe it doesn’t exist because of a fundamental difference of opinion between Doug House and some others  - or maybe just one big other - in the current administration. 

You see, going back to the 1986 report of the Royal Commission on Employment and Unemployment, House has been one of those who has rejected the megaproject model for local economic development.  You know megaprojects:  things like Hebron, Hibernia South and the Lower Churchill.

You can find a good description of the report – titled Building on our strengths – in House’s memoir of his time at the Economic Recovery Commission in the 1990s.  House defined what he viewed as the attitude of the Old Guard within the bureaucracy.  They combined the industrialization policy of the Smallwood era with the resource-management focus of the Peckford years.  The result was a focus on big projects Hibernia, Voisey’s Bay and the Lower Churchill which were – and are – often described as the “last chance” for the province.  This same Old Guard view rejected or was suspicious of the potential for  small scale industrial development, agrifoods, and aquaculture.

The Old Guard  - the attitudes that House fought against from 1989 to 1996 - also believes in an expanded federal presence in the province comprising things like a federal penitentiary and defence bases.

Now it shouldn’t take too much energy for someone to realise that the economic development policies of the current administration heavily favour large scale industrial development projects.  Other stuff  like forestry and agriculture and the list House mentioned don’t get nearly as much attention.  There is a bit of cash thrown at them in the budget but when it comes to capturing the attention of the real decision maker(s) in the current administration, if it isn’t really big it just doesn’t exist.

With all that as background, it’s really no wonder House left government.  What’s really amazing is that he stayed as long as he did. 

-srbp-

The Leprechaun Play

Oil is there on the island’s west coast but why is it that the provincial government has to exploit the potential for oil instead of a local private company either alone or in partnership with others?

In a province where the private sector is so notoriously underdeveloped, the single biggest argument against NALCO’s recent bailout of Leprechaun Resources is that it stunts the local private sector.

It’s not like there isn’t considerable private sector activity on the west coast already, much of it undertaken at great risk by small local companies.  They’ve  soldiered on, risked much and raised plenty of capital from many sources all in search of a commercially viable play.  Some of those local companies have far better plays on the go than Parson’s Pond.

It’s the epitome of what the provincial government should be encouraging in the province and it’s the kind of entrepreneurial spirit one would expect would get the unquestioned support from a Premier who told reporters recently that his heart is in the private sector.

The whole thing is even more incongruous when one considers that, in speaking with reporters yesterday, the Premier used Leduc (1947) as a point of comparison.  Leduc was the first major oil discovery and it was made by the private sector. 

In Newfoundland and Labrador, the first oil discoveries have already been made and they were made by the private sector.  The commercial finds on the west coast will come, and it should be the private sector doing the work.

Danny Williams may like to tell reporters he as “private sector guy” but his actions say something else.

This is a guy who has never really competed in the private sector in his life, outside of his law practice

But that’s not the private sector he likes to point to when he talks about being a private sector kinda guy. Nope, Williams likes to talk about running a cable company.  But that is nowhere near like running an oil company.  At Cable Atlantic, Williams had others doing the work in what was effectively a highly regulated monopoly.  That’s essentially the situation he’s been trying to recreate for NALCO.

By muscling into the local onshore oil sector, NALCO has set itself up as the biggest player in the room with all sorts of grossly unfair advantages.  It has the unlimited pockets of the taxpayer and therefore no problem pissing cash down hole after hole even if there is no sign and no possibility of a sign of oil.  There are no shareholders to answer to and, unlike all the private sector companies, NALCO is effectively unregulated.

NALCO’s minister and the minister who makes regulatory decisions about the oil industry are one and the same.   The department’s deputy minister sits on the board of NALCO Oil and Gas’s parent.  NALCO just bought into licenses that expire in six months.  Ordinarily an investor would have to struggle to justify an extension under the circumstances.  NALCO knows they’ll get an exemption, extension or anything else it needs because it has connections no private sector company can match.

Whatever is behind NALCO’s sudden interest in onshore oil plays, it isn’t about repeating the glorious success of Leduc. It’s not about strengthening the province’s oil and gas sector or just the local private sector, the people who really make jobs and exploit opportunities.

Nope.

NALCO’s bailout  isn’t even the giant make-work scheme many of its supporters seem to think it is.  Government doesn’t create sustainable jobs and contrary to the baloney that comes from some mouths, economics shows that government doesn’t get the bulk of its spending back in taxes.

Whatever the motivation for sinking $20 million of public cash in this one venture, someone will have to dig deeper and ask more probing questions of the Premier to find out what’s really on the go.

In the meantime, let’s hope that the real private sector guys – the ones who’ve been looking for oil for years – hit oil before NALCO. 

There’d be another sweet irony in such a development as well.   You see if Danny Williams really was a private sector guy, he’d have never gotten into politics in the first place.  If he really wanted to create jobs, jobs, jobs – as he claimed in 200o3 -  he’d have taken his cable cash and invested in the private sector. 

He’d have taken risks,  been buoyed by a few successes, endured a few failures and then invested in new enterprises here and elsewhere.  He’d be pushing for government policies that support entrepreneurs and encourage the growth of a sustainable, diverse private sector built on daring and imagination.

Instead, the supposed “private sector guy” got into politics and built the existing government bureaucracy into an even larger behemoth backed by policies that discourage innovation and investment and hook private sector companies in the province on government cash.

There hasn’t been a new approach since 2003.  We’ve actually seen the same old approach in Newfoundland and Labrador that has consistently failed to deliver decade, after decade, after decade in a province led by saviour after genius after business success.

And, as we learned in Mount Pearl, Holyrood and elsewhere, there is no pot of gold at the end of that old rainbow of green cukes and red-soled rubbers, at least not for the people  - the taxpayers of the province – whose money goes out the door.

-srbp-

An unhealthy trend

In a province with a notoriously underdeveloped private sector,  the news of a manufacturing venture in Argentia should be bringing a lot more voices of concern than it likely will.

That’s because the metal fabrication facility will be a joint venture of JV Driver, D.F. Barnes Group and the provincial government. 

Out of a total estimated cost of $10 million, the provincial government is tossing in $4.0 million. And of that amount fully half is going to purchase specialized equipment for welding pressure vessels as well as training employees.

In other words, the provincial government is taking on the capital costs and the human resource costs for two private sector companies of the start-up venture. 

Now it’s not like these sorts of government-backed ventures have a spectacular history of success in Newfoundland and Labrador, and that history spans a half century and more.  Typically, the ventures that need such massive transfusions of public money are marginal at best or  - even worse - unthinkable without it. 

Places that have a market demand and industrial sectors where there is demand usually can attract sufficient private sector investment to make a go of things without government involvement to the tune of 40% of project cost and with government absorbing the cost of training and capital equipment purchases. 

If you look at the news release, there’s no sign this new venture has any contracts already aside from whatever demand might come from local offshore projects.  That might point to another issue, namely that this pressure vessel fabrication plant is competing with well-established players globally that are considerably closer to customer locations than Newfoundland and Labrador.   The existing companies would also have the competitive advantage of experience and a proven track-record for delivery.

Taken altogether, those points suggest it might be difficult to break into the pressure vessel market successfully without using government subsidy as a way of lowering costs.

This is not the first example of government subsidized industry in this province and, if the current administration’s policies are any clue, it won’t be the last.  What this project indicates is that government has decisively abandoned the 1992 Strategic Economic Plan. 

That plan, you may recall was built on the twin ideas of lower to non-existent government subsidy on the one hand and on the other a focus on industries where Newfoundland and Labrador offered an obvious competitive advantage.  The idea was to create businesses that were sustainable in the long-haul in a global economy without government financial support.

What is now appearing more obviously is that the provincial government’s industrial development policy is a throw-back to the rubber boot and eyeglass factories  of the Smallwood era and the 1980s vintage cucumber grow-ops. 

Plus ca change, it would seem, or perhaps res ipsa loquitur:

"In particular, My Government will create sources of capital to enable businesses to establish, grow, diversify, and prosper."

There are also white tips poking through the sand, portents of the bleached bones of Latvian dinosaurs from the days when another government brought back little more from its wanderings than the crushing weight of debt. It is not for government to create sources of private sector capital out of public money, Premier Williams. One shudders at what the winds of time will expose of that seemingly Smallwoodian tyrannosaur.

After years of looking at the Irish and Icelandic models, the province’s industrial policy has apparently reverted to its original Latvian root.

-srbp-

The fault, dear Wade…

Wade Locke doesn’t like a story in the Thursday Telegram. He dislikes it so much he called a local radio talk show to set the record straight.

Locke didn’t accuse the reporter of misquoting him in exactly those words, but he did end the conversation with the radio host by suggesting that maybe his comments were deliberately misrepresented.

Locke said something along the lines that he couldn’t imagine anyone reading the comments and coming to the conclusion he was suggesting the economy might be headed for disaster.

Locke went out of his way in the Open Line call to repeat phrases along the lines of “the future is bright” and “the future is rosy.”

The root of the issue is in comments Locke made for a news release from the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council. The headline on the story by Peter Walsh reads “N.L. economy facing disaster: experts”. The rest of the story summaries the comments from Locke and fellow economist Scott Lynch.

Here’s exactly what APEC attributed to Locke before getting into the specific suggestions Locke and Lynch had for the federal government’s budget:

Depressed commodity prices continuing throughout the year and longer would have a disastrous impact for Newfoundland and Labrador from a fiscal perspective and for the continuation and expansion of major resource projects within the province. A continuation of the existing tight credit market conditions will adversely impact small export firms and fishing enterprises and will be felt disproportionately in rural parts of the province.

If the U.S. economy continues to lose jobs as it did last quarter, then real GDP would decrease by 5% on an annual basis, which would produce a significant deep and prolonged recession. Forecasts of U.S. growth at -2.5 to -3% with recovery in late 2009 assumes that the Obama stimulus package removes deflationary expectations and returns the economy to its trend growth rate. For this optimistic scenario (successful stimulus and late 2009 recovery) Canada could experience a 1 to 2.5% decrease in real GDP, with the earliest recovery in September/October.

However, should the U.S. recession reflect the 5% decline in real GDP then Canada, as a small open economy, will follow the U.S. and be faced with a significant period of rising unemployment and declining economic activity, with recovery occurring in 2010. If, on the other hand, the recession in the U.S. is closer to the pessimistic scenario, then this may produce a decoupling of the Canadian/U.S. trade relationship and in that case, predicting possible outcomes becomes very murky.

It’s hard to imagine anyone reading that and not coming to the conclusion the boys were suggesting there could be disaster out there.

In fact, that’s exactly what Locke said in the very first sentence:

Depressed commodity prices continuing throughout the year and longer would have a disastrous impact for Newfoundland and Labrador from a fiscal perspective and for the continuation and expansion of major resource projects within the province.

Locke’s problem likely isn’t with the Telegram, Peter Walsh – who wrote the story – or indeed with APEC.

Rather his problem is that his APEC stuff wasn’t on the same page as the line being pumped by Locke and the provincial government before Christmas. The government crew have been in lock-step with one of their favourite outside consultants on this economic bubble thingy since the get go.

They were matching up word-for-word before Christmas and Locke this morning and the APEC suggestions sounded almost like a replay of what the Premier delivered to the feds last week. [edited to clean up the sentence jumble; link added to Premier's comments.]

Number One thingy: reform employment insurance to give people more money for longer.

Number Two thingy: Build ships and dole out the money so Newfoundland shipyards can get the work.

Number Three thingy: Lower Churchill. Never mind that the thing is shaky, let’s get people out there cutting brush and doing stuff of some possible, theoretical kind.

The odd thing is that Locke’s APEC assessment is actually closer to the truth than anything else. If commodity prices stay down for the rest of this year, into next year and maybe a few years after that, then there will be disaster.

But it won’t be a disaster necessarily for Newfoundland and Labrador, as in the province. It will be a disaster for Newfoundland and Labrador, the provincial government.

There’s a difference even if some people tend to forget that in these “l’etat c’est moi” days. That’s not to say there won’t be problems in some sectors of the local economy. Tight credit is going to force the fishing industry to sort itself out once and for all. Lower prices for minerals will mean that mines will shut down for periods and lay people off.

And let’s not forget that a slow down in Alberta will mean that remittance workers will either roost here and agitate for government help or leave altogether, permanently.

But still, there are mines that will be working away. There’s a new project coming for Long Harbour and the oil industry will continue to do very well, despite lower prices and reduced production. After 2009, production will pick up again. If we look farther out, then Hebron will come along.

The disaster Locke noted in his very first sentence for APEC (unless APEC misquoted him terribly) is really one for the provincial government’s treasury. Their disaster is entirely self-made. They boosted spending based solely on highly unreliable commodity prices and foolish predictions of ever higher or constantly high prices. They did very little to pay down public debt (accumulated borrowings) or sock away money in a rainy day fund. The provincial government also committed to a raft of borrowing to support the oil plays.

That put the provincial finance minister looking at 2009 with a shortfall of over a billion dollars in cash and demands for higher spending. Downturns in the market put extra costs in there to cover pension shortfalls. The 21% wage increase promise looked great politically but it was way beyond the rate of inflation even in the headiest of commodity price days over the past couple of years.

That sounds pretty much like a disaster to anyone who cares to take a look at it either from an economic or public policy standpoint.

It’s hard to imagine anyone could look at that and not see the disaster waiting to happen. Now the disaster doesn’t have to happen if the government shifts its policy direction in a number of significant ways.

That would require people in power to look at the world as it is and take appropriate action. But if think we live in a bubble, you’d be almost guaranteed to head down the wrong track.

You’d keep smiling all the way to disaster.

And it would be your own fault.

-srbp-

Reality, what a concept: the global economic crisis version.

Only a few short weeks ago, some were wringing their hands over the imminent peril of the perils of inflation.  This was despite the obvious signs of a looming market "correction".

How long before they notice the scope of the problem and the current deflationary pressures?

Meanwhile the state-approved economist had another go at prognosticating in the Telegram on Saturday.  Sadly, the story isn't on line. [Afternoon update:  Courtesy of The Western Star.]

On top of his prediction last month that the the provincial government surplus will be as large or larger this year and originally forecast (and that prediction after the global meltdown started mind you) he is now saying that the economy will recover from the current crisis.

Well, of course it will. A penetrating insight into the obvious is that.

Outside of a few anarchists, everyone knows it will. Even in the 1930s after the Great Depression, the economy rebounded, eventually.

The question is not whether it will turn around but what will it look like when it does recover.

Pretty much like it did before - think 2006 with oil running at 80 or 90 bucks a barrel - apparently, since all the "fundamentals" that led to high oil prices are still there we are told in the Telegram story.

Really?

Well, at least, according to the state's favourite economist.

Like the ridiculous credit situation in the United States that fueled demand to heights never seen before. 

Yep.

That will exist after the current mess is over. 

After all, it is one of the fundamental causes of the demand spiral.

Now one of the things to bear in mind through all this is that in 2004 or 2005 you wouldn't have found an economist on the planet seriously suggesting oil at US$90 a barrel let alone US$150.  Those predictions didn't emerge until oil hit close to 150 and even then Goldman was thought a bit loopy to be tossing around 200 bucks by the end of 2008.  These days not too many are willing to buy into the current Goldman idea of oil being over $100 again next year.

That's because economic forecasts have a distressing tendency to rethink the future in terms of the here and now. As oil prices climbed above first 40 and then 50 and then 70 dollars, you started to see more and more revised forecasts for oil staying that those prices into the future.  A few months or years earlier and none of them seriously projected 50 let alone the heights it reached.

Apparently, it is taking some people a while to realise the scope of the current problem.  It isn't limited to the financial services sector and the automobile sector in North America, as if it was merely a couple of companies.  There is a broadly-based - fundamental - problem and as such it will have an impact both in time and across all sectors of the economy.  [Aside:  some analysts provide a refreshingly sober view of things, as in this video from CBC Here and Now.] 

You'd be silly to think we don't have a problem right now, but you'd be equally silly to think that a correction of this magnitude isn't going to alter some of the conditions that existed beforehand and which led to the current mess.  Fundamentally altering the fundamentals will likely produces a very different situation, and that likely doesn't mean one that will see oil shooting up to US$100 a barrel any time soon.  To be sure, let's make it plain that it isn't likely to occur again for a couple decades, much like the last time this sort of pattern  - high climb and then sudden price collapse - emerged.

Some companies will continue expansion plans.  This will especially apply to companies that are well managed or that secured their funding for expansion before the string of bank crashes.  Think IOCC in western Labrador.

That's proof of a well managed company, not any sign that the company believes in historically high prices for iron ore on into the future.  Rather the company management likely knows that by lowering costs whenever it can, the company is more likely to thrive even in lean times. That's how oil companies do it.

Smart business managers don't budget on the basis of historically  - and in some instances absurdly - high prices continuing forever just because they happened a couple of times.

Governments shouldn't do it either.

-srbp-

The bits they didn't say

A youth conference discussing ways of keeping young people in the province.

A speech by the Premier, including the comment:

"It is by making sound choices in the coming years, both individually and as one team, that we will be able to remove the word 'outmigration' from our vocabularies in the same way that we removed the word 'have-not,' " Williams said during a speech.

That quote from a CBC news story includes comments from two participants, one of whom uses very familiar phrases:

"I don't think it needs to be Alberta wages," Snow said. "I'm not looking for Alberta. I love Newfoundland and Labrador and I love St. Anthony. I just want to stay — Newfoundland is home."

The old homing pigeon drive.

or these comments from the voice of the cabinet minister version:

Twenty year old St. Anthony native Kara Snow says Newfoundland and Labrador is a proud strong determined province and the people here have a lot of things to show that.

Jonathan Earle from Red Bay, Labrador says he thinks the Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy is a step in the right direction.

Proud. Strong. Determined.

Nothing like a political party slogan or, for that matter, a fellow attending the conference.

And Kara and Jonathan are, evidently just two young people attending this conference, they being typical of young people across Newfoundland and Labrador who are, quite naturally interested in these things on a go forward basis.

Typical they might be but they do have a couple of features that make them stand out, features left out of the news stories.

Like the fact that the conference or summit was by invitation only, meaning that those in attendance were selected by the provincial government and its hired consultant.  Not so much a gathering of people driven by their own interests as much as a carefully selected group.  Carefully selected according to some unknown criteria;  perhaps their ability to spout talking points or their enthusiasm for the official views.

Certainly it is not for new ideas since the original news release and the stuff just recently speaks of discovering what young people are prepared to give up.  Government is apparently less interested in creating an environment that promotes excellence and accomplishment and more one based on "an understanding of the trade-offs and choices young people are prepared to make."

The homing pigeon policy. 

We can solve outmigration, to go back to the Premier's speech, not by innovation and creativity but by figuring out how little people are prepared to settle for. Or in Kara's construction, people should expect to make less money since she does not want "Alberta", she wants something else, called Newfoundland and Labrador.

How edifying a notion.

How far the opposite of "have" could one get when by the very words they use the Premier and the people at his conference accept notions that limit everyone to accepting less than might be attained elsewhere.

This is fundamentally the opposite of the approach set by government, based on genuine consultation, in the years when most of these young people were toddlers, in diapers or not even thought of.  The 1992 strategic economic plan - Change and challenge - set as its vision "an enterprising, educated , distinctive and prosperous people working together to create a competitive economy based on innovation, creativity, productivity and quality." 

There was no need to ask young people what it would take to get them to stay here.  For the most part, people leave because elsewhere offers greater personal and financial opportunities.  The solution to ending outmigration lay in creating a province in which wealth - genuine "have" status - could be found at home.  Creating wealth - the synonym is "prosperity"  - came from unleashing talent and creativity, of daring against the best in the world. 

In 1992, staying in Newfoundland and Labrador did not have to mean compromise.  In 2008, compromising, settling, accepting less is the stated foundation of government strategy.  In 1992, compromise was rejected;  in 2008, it is embraced.

But then there is the other bit about Kara and Jonathan and likely a bunch of others at the session.  These are not just any young people but part of the group selected already by the provincial government to work with the consultants:

A Youth Advisory Panel will provide ongoing advice on the project’s research design and the development of materials such as dialogue workbooks.

This project seems less about research, of finding out what people want and more about confirming a pre-determined set of ideas, of guiding people along a path.

Certainly, if the familiar phrases used by the conference organizers and presented as ostensibly unvarnished opinion is any guide, the strategy is working.

It's always the stuff they don't tell you that is more revealing.

-srbp-

More public cash for private business

Dynamic Air Shelters, a manufacturer located in Grand Bank is poised to get more public money.

That would be on top of public money - $180,000 -  in early 2008.

And that was on top of public money - $250,000 worth - in 2007.

Update:  And that's in addition to almost $500,000 from ACOA in 2006.

-srbp-

Whistling past the economic graveyard

The business world in a free market runs so extensively on psychology it's amazing that business schools around the world spend so much time on balance sheets, marketing and business plans.

Psychology is pretty much the reason why western government's responded to the American financial crisis with assurances that "the fundamentals" of the economy are sound.

However, in some instances, the efforts to describe the Canadian economy as somehow able to avoid any consequences of the move toward a recession south of the border became somewhat bizarre.

Take, for example, comments by Premier Danny Williams in an interview with the National Post:

"The fortunate thing about Newfoundland and Labrador and Saskatchewan in today's fragile economy is that our provinces are very, very well-positioned. We have strong economies, a lot of it based on natural resources, but we're going to weather this storm and weather it very well."

Finance minister Tom Marshall told reporters on several occasions that he doesn't see a problem find cash to build the Lower Churchill project. In other news stories, Marshall said he was concerned that lower oil prices would lower government revenues.

The Premier told VOCM listeners on Sunday night that the provincial "economy is growing very well."  That isn't accurate.  All economic forecasts - including the provincial government's own forecasts  - show the province having incredibly modest growth.  Some project the growth this year and next year will be scarcely above 1% and some have forecast growth at one half of one percent.  That is as perilously close to a decline as it can get.

At the same time, European countries are taking action to bail out where necessary and take other actions to avoid repercussions from the American downturn.  Odd is that, given that European countries are not as dependent as Canada generally or Newfoundland and Labrador specifically on the healthy American economy.

Iceland, once touted by some nationalists as a model for Newfoundland and Labrador to emulate, is in serious economic difficulty:

But in the financial world Iceland is now a hot topic of discussion for a different reason: many people suggest that it could become the “first national casualty” of the ongoing credit crunch. Until last year, Iceland’s economic track record in this decade had been phenomenal—its annual growth rate averaged close to four per cent over the past decade, and its per-capita gross national income is now higher than that of the U.S. This year, though, the country’s currency, the króna, has fallen twenty-two per cent against the euro; the economy has stagnated; and a global rating agency has put the nation’s three major banks on a credit watch. Now analysts are wondering whether the new Nordic Tiger will end up, instead, as “the Bear Stearns of the North Atlantic.”

Take, as but one example, an article from the weekend Globe and Mail.  It included this comment one one manufacturer from Newfoundland and Labrador:

Mr. [Lorne] Janes, president of Newfoundland-based Continental Marble of Canada, is already getting the cold shoulder from his customers in Florida, Maryland and California. “The reply I'm getting now is, ‘Lorne, save the phone call, don't call any more until this sorts out,'” said Mr. Janes, whose 12-employee company manufactures equipment to produce moulded stone countertops.

Janes wouldn't be alone.  A Bond Papers post from last July highlighted the extent to which the provincial economy is dependent on exports - especially energy exports - the majority of which heads to the United States. In 2005, the last year for which information is posted online at the provincial government website, 52% of international exports from Newfoundland and Labrador headed to the United States.

As the United States economy slows, the effects on Newfoundland and Labrador will be felt directly and in some instances very strongly:

1. As demand for energy products declines, exports to the United States will also likely decline.  That will reduce provincial government revenue.
2. As the price of oil declines, provincial government revenue will decline accordingly.  If crude oil averages US$87 in 2008, the provincial budget will run into deficit to the tune of about $800 million.
3. Declining commodity prices and lessened demand for minerals, forest products and fish would affect the three traditional major economic drivers in Newfoundland and Labrador.
4. The American credit crunch - and the resulting tightening of capital available for major projects - will affect virtually all the major projects projected for Newfoundland and Labrador:

• The NLRC refinery project is already in serious trouble and may well be dead for all practical purposes.
•  Hebron is not yet sanctioned.  While many believe the project is underway, it is not.  Oil prices, increased costs and tight capital may delay project sanction.
• The Lower Churchill needs $9.0 billion in capital investment, capital which is growing increasingly scarce. The project currently does not have a single power purchase agreement.  PPAs are crucial for securing long-term financing. A decline in revenues from oil and gas developments and mineral production would adversely affect the provincial government's ability to cover the costs of doubling the provincial debt in order to build the project.

The Newfoundland and Labrador economy is not immune from the effects of a serious downturn in the American economy.  As much as politicians are tempted to say something different from that for political reasons, it would be far better to provide people with an accurate picture of the provincial economy and the interrelationship between international events and local economic well being.

The shock of finding out the truth if serious consequences follow will be far greater than if politicians didn't try to whistle a happy tune as they walk towards what - for some economic projects - might well be a graveyard of ambition. That shock will have far greater consequences than what would occur from telling it like it is right now.

-srbp-

The market for oil and gas support industries

The real key to long-term economic benefit from oil and gas is not in revenues flowing to a state-owned oil company, but from the development of a healthy, innovative support and service sector.

Oil industry consultant Gerrit Maureau thinks the overseas opportunities for petroleum service companies have never been greater.

The hungry market is with foreign national oil companies (NOCs).

Foreign NOCs are so hungry for technology and training that Maureau believes a good service company will almost certainly find a market overseas if its sales effort is well-informed. But success is unlikely to come cheap, he warns: "Above all, be persistent. Canadians have developed an unfortunate reputation overseas for showing up once and never coming back." In his experience, a half dozen visits may be needed before a significant breakthrough occurs.

The rest of the Maureau profile can be found at

DOB Magazine.

-srbp-

Feds and provinces ink gateway agreement

The federal government and the four Atlantic provinces signed a memorandum of understanding on Sunday setting up a committee to further develop the concept of an Atlantic gateway for trade and export.

Text of the MOU can be found at the gateway website.

The purpose of this MOU is to affirm the intention of the Parties (Canada, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) to collaborate on the development of an Atlantic Gateway strategy within 24 months from the signing of this MOU by:
• Confirming a shared vision and shared objectives;
• Outlining a governance structure for developing the Atlantic Gateway;
• Developing a joint action plan; and
• Adopting a communications protocol.

-srbp-