A cut too far #nlpoli

There's a scene in the movie A Bridge too far where the British soldiers are trying to push down a road as part of a major attack on the Germans in September 1944.

The whole plan was built, according to the movie, around dropping parachute troops at key bridges and then having ground troops charge along a single road.  The soldiers on the ground had 48 hours to get to the last of the airborne soldiers, who were at Arnhem.  They didn't make it, hence the idea that the plan always involved going one bridge too far.

There are wrecks everywhere and the dead are everywhere after the first clash in the campaign.  As soldiers clear the way and take away the wounded, one officer looks up at another who is sitting on a scout car.  How do the generals expect them to keep up the pace under these conditions, the fellow asks looking up.  The fellow sitting on the armoured car has his binoculars and is scanning the road ahead.  J.O.E Vandeleur,  played by Michael Caine, looks down at his cousin, Giles,  and says:

"You don't know the worst. This bit we're on now?"

"Yes,"  says Giles, quizzically.

"It's the wide part."

Setting fire to your own ass is never a good idea #nlpoli

While Paul Davis and the Conservatives were launching their official election campaign,  Ryan Cleary turned up in a recorded interview on NTV to talk about the controversy he embodies.

The single biggest thing Cleary did was confirm that his answer to David Cochrane last week was a lie.

Did you discuss running in Virginia Waters-Pleasantville, David Cochrane asked Cleary for the second time.

“Absolutely not,” said Cleary clearly.

Yet there was Cleary not even a week later telling NTV’s Lyn  Burry that – in fact – Cleary had talked to NDP leader Earle McCurdy about Cleary running in Virginia Waters instead of the current candidate Bob Buckingham. Cleary brought up the idea by questioning whether Buckingham could run a law practice and be a candidate at the same time.

It was Greek to me #nlpoli

After days of intense talks,  the Europeans apparently have finally reached a final deal to help Greece out of its latest financial misery.

Greece is broke.  With a gross domestic product of about US$238 billion, the country had a government debt of about US$346 billion.  Some of the country’s banks have very low reserves of cash.  People have already made a rush and withdrawn their money from them.  This has forced the government to impose a tight limit on withdrawals in order to avoid a bank collapse of the type that hit Newfoundland in 1894.

Under the new deal,  the European Union will place officials in key parts of the Greek government in order to ensure that the Greeks actually implement reforms that are part of the bail-out deal.

It’s a tough response, but then again the Greeks are in a tough economic spot.  The third tough spot, since 2009. For all that, though, there are people around the world who believe the whole problem is imaginary.  They believe that something called “austerity” is the real culprit.  If you just got rid of it, so this way of thinking goes, the Greeks could go back to the way things used to be.

The little things that stand out #nlpoli

Throne Speech 2015 was the kind of document you’d expect from a group of politicians who are out of new ideas.

People are making a big deal out of the review of the provincial curriculum for K-12 schools.  That’s what the folks in the education department do for a living.  It’s nothing new.

The promise that the review will produce a 21st century curriculum is such a cliche that it is laughable, given that we are in the second decade of the new century.

Not very impressive, is it?

Fishing for support #nlpoli

When the going gets tough, the tough go fishing.

In this case,  a bunch of politicians in a tough spot with voters are fishing among a small bunch of politicians in Ottawa for support in their campaign to turn a deal achieved in 2013 into something else entirely.

This isn’t really news, by the way, but in the world of the provincial government these days, intergovernmental affairs minister Keith Hutchings sent out a news release on Friday to tell  everyone what was reported before Christmas.  That is,  Keith and Premier Paul Davis are trying to get federal members of parliament and senators a from Newfoundland and Labrador to back the provincial government in its latest war with Ottawa.

All they need for Christmas is new talking points #nlpoli

Keith Hutchings - the provincial cabinet minister leading talks with the federal government on European trade  - issued a statement on December 9, 2014.that began with a simple statement.

“In June, 2013,” Hutchings began,

“our governments agreed that, in exchange for the [provincial government] agreeing to lift minimum processing requirements (MPRs) for the European Union (EU), the Federal Government and the provinc[ial government] would establish a fund that would provide for total expenditure of $400 million based on a 70/30 federal/provincial cost share.”

The money was for “industry development and renewal [in the fishing industry] as well as worker displacement”  according to Hutchings.

But when Hutchings spoke with the Telegram’s James McLeod six months later, things weren’t quite so cut and dried.

Province increased CETA demands after crucial agreement #nlpoli

Almost a year after reaching an understanding with the federal government on a joint federal-provincial fisheries fund related to the European trade talks, the provincial government tried to alter the deal radically.

Documents released by the provincial government in 2013 and 2014 show that the federal and provincial governments agreed in June 2013 to  fund a cost-shared (70% federal and 30% provincial) “transition program” of up to $400 million that would address “industry development and renewal as well as worker displacement.” 

But in May 2014,  provincial fisheries minister Keith Hutchings changed the provincial demands.

Recurring Behaviour #nlpoli

Exactly one year ago,  the provincial government was in a controversy over its part in the European free trade deal.  The Conservatives were  heralding the great deal, including a $400 million fisheries development fund.

The opposition Liberals asked for details.  The provincial Conservatives and then-Premier Kathy Dunderdale wouldn’t release any information.  On December 5, 2013,  Premier Kathy Dunderdale relented and released 80 pages of letters and e-mails between federal and provincial officials about the talks. 

A year later,  the provincial Conservatives are still in a political quagmire over the deal. This time the problem is that there isn’t any deal. Premier Paul Davis said on Monday that the whole thing was just a matter of crossing a few tees and dotting some eyes.  On Tuesday, ,  Davis and a gaggle of his cabinet ministers said the negotiations on the fund were going no where.  He needed to take it to the Prime Minister and so Davis and Stephen Harper would meet on Wednesday.

That was fine except that the Prime Minister’s Office said there’d been no meeting scheduled. Harper was scheduled to be in Montreal for Jean Belliveau’s funeral.

Province abandons fisheries policy…quietly #nlpoli

Two years.

That’s all it took to destroy the provincial government’s historic fisheries policy that had been built on the highly successful state-controlled model pioneered by such economic powerhouses as the Soviet Union, Albania, and North Korea.

Inertia #nlpoli

In a letter last May to his federal counterpart, economic development minister Keith Hutchings described minimum processing requirements as the “only policy instrument within provincial jurisdiction that ensures fisheries resources adjacent to the province result in processing jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador.”

For those who do not know what they are,  minimum processing requirements are a condition that the provincial government sets on the licenses it gives to companies that process fish in the province.  The name says it all:  the companies have to process a certain amount of the fish in order to create jobs in fish plants around Newfoundland and Labrador.

There’s been a fairly steady row about processing rules over the past decade as the companies struggle to stay financially viable.  There are way too many plants for the amount of fish available and there are way too many people in the province drawing pathetically small wages slicing up the fish that comes ashore.  Companies can’t process fish profitably here and yet the provincial government insists they keep at bit.

The provincial politicians and bureaucrats know perfectly well that they need to change their ways. The politicians knew about it when they set about to destroy the only truly globally competitive fish company in the province.  They’ve known about it as the fought over exactly the same issue with the company the government’s policy favoured over exactly the same issue.

And yet the politicians persist with their bankrupt idea.

The Conservatives and federal-provincial relations #nlpoli

Two news stories last week reminded us once again of the nature of federal-provincial relations for Newfoundland and Labrador over the past decade.

A story in the Chronicle Herald reported on recent comments by Danny Williams about a sharp personal exchange he supposed had with Stephen Harper before the later became prime minister.

The second story was the release late in the week by Premier Kathy Dunderdale of some documents about the provincial government’s position on the Canada- European Union trade agreement. The 80-odd pages of e-mails and letters include an effort by the provincial government to tie search and rescue, an offshore safety agency,  and the federal government’s Hibernia shares in a deal between the federal and provincial governments. 

How not to promote immigration #nlpoli

The provincial Conservatives currently running the place have finally discovered what pretty well everyone else in government knew 20 years ago.

The population is getting older, on average.   That’s not good for a whole bunch of reasons.

They decided to create something called a population growth strategy, which is supposed to do exactly what it says:  make the number of people in the province get larger.

D’uh.

And there are really a whole lot of other “d’uh” moments when you read their background paper on how to get more people in the province.

Concerning Partisan Communications from Non-Partisan Government Officials #nlpoli

Keith Hutchings issued a news release on Tuesday to respond to”inaccuracies on CETA negotiations.” That’s what the headline on the release said it was about.

He did so in his capacity as a cabinet minister, a non-partisan provincial government official, not as a Conservative.  The media contact name listed is for the departmental communications director.  If this person didn’t write the release, then she approved it, as did the minister and at least one senior official in Cabinet Secretariat.

If you want to understand the communications problem facing the provincial government, then you have a tidy example in this release.

Familiar tunes amid the Shifting Balance of Power #nlpoli

All the talk the past week or so about negotiations between the crowd in Confederation Building and the crowd in Ottawa  brought out the conventional wisdom about premiers using fights with the feds for political purposes.

The coincidence of a talk on nationalism the week before linked the two ideas together neatly for some people. Kathy Dunderdale was having a row with Ottawa, possibly to boost her polling and maybe as a show of nationalist fervour that we all love.

Yeah, maybe that’s true.

And then again, maybe it just isn’t.

Dunderdale and Dalley tell different trade talk stories #nlpoli

Premier Kathy Dunderdale (via NTV):

We’re looking for a ‘carve-out’ on the minimum processing regulations … so they’ll be exempted, and we want access to the European market on a number of our fish lines…

Carve out. 

Hideous jargon for “not going to trade away” minimum processing regulations.

Period.

Fisheries minister Derrick Dalley (via the Telegram):

Fisheries Minister Derrick Dalley was at a media event in St. John’s Tuesday, where he assured reporters that the provincial government is not going to give away minimum processing requirements unless it’s a good deal.

Not going to trade away minimum processing requirements.

Oh wait.

There’s more.

Does he believe anything he says? #nlpoli #cdnpoli

Now that he’s safely latched on the public tit in Ottawa, Noob Bloc-NDP MP Ryan Cleary says that everything he ever wrote was just to stir debate.

Well, that’s what he says now when a journalist confronts him with some of past comments, like bashing the crap out of Quebec, the seal hunt,  the European Union, the New Democrats, the Lower Churchill or any of the other tubs Cleary’s thumped over the years.

The accident waiting to happen now tells the Globe and Mail that you gotta look at “the context”.

Before he went to Ottawa at public expense, Cleary used to bash “Quebec” as the bane of Newfoundland’s existence.  More recently, he was  lovin’ Thomas Mulcair to be the Bloc-NDP leader. 

These days he may believe something else. It’s hard to know. Maybe the context has changed. The context for Newfoundland, one wonders, or the context for Cleary?

Even that isn’t clear. 

The context of the context depends on the context, at least in the slippery world of the classic Newfoundland blow-hard politician’s most recent incarnation:  Ryan Cleary.

Ready for a better tomorrow, or maybe ready for a better tomorrow now?  They are truly all the same creature.

So in the end, does Cleary believe anything he says? Should Cleary’s constituents believe him?  And should they believe what he said then or what he says now?

That’s the thing, you see, you can never be sure if the guy really believes what he is saying at any one moment, anymore. After all, by his own admission, he wrote it or said just to stir up debate and it all depends on the context.

No wonder people are starting to call him Climb-down Cleary.

- srbp -

Never give up. Never Surrender. #nlpoli #cdnpoli

Ryan Cleary's news release about the seal hunt, arising from his comments to the Fisheries Broadcast:

I will not back down from any issue: Cleary 

St. John's – NDP MP Ryan Cleary (St. John's South-Mount Pearl) released the following statement to clarify misleading comments in the media concerning his position on the Newfoundland and Labrador commercial seal hunt.

"On Sunday I was asked in an e-mail by John Furlong, host of the CBC's Fisheries Broadcast, to clarify the NDP position on the seal hunt. He asked whether the NDP is changing its position on the hunt or proposing there be a buyout of licences, 'Someone is telling me that the NDP might also (along with yours truly!) be sensing that the writing may be on the wall,' Furlong wrote.

Furlong interviewed me and I made it clear that the NDP stand has not changed. The party and I are in full support of the commercial seal hunt – period. I then reacted to Furlong's column (Death on the ice: Time to pull the plug on the seal hunt? John Furlong www.CBC.ca/nl  January 21, 2012)  Furlong begins his article with the statement, 'There's no question in my mind that the commercial seal hunt is probably on the way out. So does anyone care?'

The answer is yes. Of course everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador cares.

We cannot hide behind the debate and pretend that the market for seals is not in trouble.  Markets for seal products are closed in the United States, the European Union, and Russia. It is also unclear what is happening in the Chinese market. Facing this reality head on is the only way to address this situation.

The debate about the future viability of the industry is a worthy one and it needs to happen. It can only be a good thing as we chart a future course for our overall fishery.

Having this debate does not signify in any way an end to the hunt – we simply need to start talking. For too long, simply raising the seal hunt issue has been taboo. It shouldn't be.

I will not shy away from any issue as a federal MP. I will continue to embrace all sides of every argument in the interest of healthy and reasoned decision making.  There may be room to negotiate a better deal for our fish products generally.

Let me re-iterate, I am not proposing to ban the commercial seal hunt in any way.

If we don't do things differently, we will end up with the same result every time. We can't be afraid of the conversation."

-30-

For more information contact: 

Matt White, Office of Ryan Cleary M.P., 772-4608 or 682-1653, ryan.cleary.a1@parl.gc.ca

- srbp -

Containing Ottawa’s Skyrocketing Power Bill

by Tom Adams and Brian Lee Crowley

[Note:  the authors prepared the following commentary to coincide with the recent energy ministers meeting.  It has appeared in other publications across the country.]

Federal taxpayers are exposed to an explosion of liabilities to fund provincial electricity misadventures, the worst of which are undermining Canada’s international trading reputation. A federal-provincial energy conference in Kananaskis, Alberta running until July 19th threatens to up the ante.

Last week, Texas energy titan T. Boone Pickens launched a $775-million
NAFTA challenge alleging the Ontario government has discriminated against his privately owned wind energy company. Pickens is demanding that the federal government pay up.

The federal government is also defending protectionist elements of Ontario’s controversial Green Energy Act against a challenge Japan has launched with the support of the United States and European Union at the World Trade Organization.

Ontario is not the only province with electricity initiatives undermining Canada’s trading reputation and sending the bill to Ottawa.

Last August, a NAFTA dispute panel obliged federal taxpayers to pay the industrial firm Abitibi-Bowater $130 million after the government of Newfoundland and Labrador confiscated electricity generation assets. Far from holding the Newfoundland government responsible for shafting federal taxpayers, Prime Minister Stephen Harper instead promised loan guarantees for submarine transmission connections
required by a Labrador power megaproject with very dubious economics.

With the subsidy offer, Harper effectively rewarded Newfoundland’s government and further impaired Canada’s trade reputation in an unsuccessful bid to win seats on the Rock (although the Conservatives did pick up a seat in Labrador).

Newfoundland justifies its power scheme on the basis that provincial power costs are going to soar anyway, eventually making pricey Labrador power relatively cheap by comparison. Most of the new Labrador power, however, is earmarked for the Maritimes and potentially New England. Unlike Newfoundland, those markets have access to North America’s glut of natural gas, a key factor driving down average power rates across the U.S.

Any subsidies to Labrador power are likely to attract yet more trade complaints from generators in New England, particularly those now selling significant amounts of power into the Maritimes. International competitors of export industries in Atlantic Canada may also complain.

The Newfoundland government estimates that a federal subsidy for the Labrador power project in the form of a loan guarantee will cut local power costs by 6 or 7 per cent. Likely cost over-runs could push the value of the federal guarantee much higher.

The Kananaskis meeting provides a platform for provincial governments and lobby groups to push the federal government deeper into provincial electricity matters. Many, including the governments of Ontario and Newfoundland & Labrador, have demanded federal subsidies to interprovincial transmission projects. Ontario also demands federal subsidies for its nuclear expansion ambitions.

The federal track record in the electricity business is dubious, as illustrated by its recent cut-the-losses exit from nuclear power development and marketing. Even if the federal record in the electricity business was solid, using the federal spending power to buy its way into provincial energy affairs now will annoy our trading partners, promote inefficiency and create jurisdictional confusion.

The federal government should focus its electricity sector involvement first on its core constitutional responsibility for interprovincial trade and commerce. The best way to make Labrador power truly competitive against abundant natural gas is to avoid hugely expensive long distance submarine transmission and to instead achieve the best possible economies of scale with more affordable transmission over land.

To reach markets in Ontario or the U.S. Northeast, Labrador power must transit Quebec, which has its own electricity export ambitions. If those provinces cannot negotiate a mutually agreeable solution, the federal government should act to ensure the constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of interprovincial trade. Ontario and Newfoundland should not require Quebec’s approval to move electricity any more than Alberta needs Saskatchewan’s permission to move natural gas to Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec.

Naturally, Quebec does not welcome another big hydro-power competitor, particularly while market prices are low. However, to maintain its access to electricity markets in the United States, Quebec already accepts the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s non-negotiable rules compelling them to open their market to electricity imports. The constitutional powers that the U.S. relies upon to promote highly successful inter-state trading are similar to our own federal
government’s constitutional authority, which Ottawa has always been reluctant to exercise in the electricity sector.

Canadians too should be entitled to an open national electricity system, where no province can hold its neighbours hostage and Canadians can buy and sell power freely. The federal government should keep federal tax dollars out of the electricity sector. Any subsidies to the sector create unfairness to taxpayers across the county and harm Canada's trading reputation, vital to our long term economic interests. Instead Ottawa should use its legitimate powers to create an open national electricity market that treats everyone transparently and fairly.

- srbp -

Tom Adams is an independent energy and environmental advisor. He has held a variety of senior responsibilities including Executive Director of Energy Probe from 1996 until September 2007, membership on the Ontario Independent Electricity Market Operator Board of Directors, and membership on the Ontario Centre for Excellence for Energy Board of Management. His guest columns have appeared in many major Canadian newspapers. He has been a media commentator for 20 years and a lecturer in energy studies at University of Toronto. He has presented expert testimony before many regulatory tribunals in Canada on a wide variety of energy subjects. He has made presentations to Legislative Committees in Ontario and New Brunswick, academic, regulatory and trade conferences, the Atomic Energy Control Board, and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

Brian Lee Crowley has headed up the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI) in Ottawa since its inception in March of 2010, but he has a long and distinguished record in the think tank world. He was the founder of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (AIMS) in Halifax, one of the country’s leading regional think tanks. He is a former Salvatori Fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington DC and is a Senior Fellow at the Galen Institute in Washington. In addition, he advises several think tanks in Canada, France and Nigeria.

Crowley’s published numerous books include two bestsellers: Fearful Symmetry: the fall and rise of Canada’s founding values (2009) and MLI’s first book, The Canadian Century; Moving Out of America’s Shadow, which he co-authored with Jason Clemens and Niels Veldhuis.

Crowley twice won the Sir Antony Fisher Award for excellence in think tank publications. From 2006-08 Crowley was the Clifford Clark Visiting Economist with the federal Department of Finance. He has also headed the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council (APEC), taught politics, economics and philosophy at various universities in Canada and Europe.

Crowley is a frequent commentator on political and economic issues across all media. He holds degrees from McGill and the London School of Economics, including a doctorate in political economy from the latter.

Trade talks with Europeans = “doing a back-room deal with a group of serial rapists”

What your humble e-scribbler said:

this guy could be an accident waiting to happen.

Wait no longer.

After musing about breaking his major campaign promise to the people of his riding, noob Bloc NDP member of parliament Ryan Cleary decided to inject himself into another discussion on a subject he knows nothing about, namely international trade talks between Canada and the European Union.

The comments turn up on his blog, something he may well be forced by jack Layton to shut down very soon [hotlinks in the original]: 

Why should Newfoundland and Labrador be concerned about the Harper government’s secret free-trade negotiations with the European Union?

Because they could screw us to the wall.

The same Europeans nations that fished out/raped the Grand Banks are negotiating a deal with the Government of Canada.

And no one reports to Parliament on the status of negotiations.

In other words, Canada is doing a back-room deal with a group of serial rapists.

How scary is that?

How scary indeed.

Well, it is pretty scary when a member of parliament cannot even report accurately and factually on things that are already well established.  This is a guy, after all, who is expected to render thoughtful judgment on all sorts of issues ranging from the taxes you pay to the criminal law in Canada.

So if he doesn’t know basic stuff, then it is a pretty good bet his lack of information has a good chance of coming back to bite you and me on the ass.

The talks aren’t secret. The national media have been reporting it for years.  So too did the local media in Newfoundland and Labrador all during the time the former investigative reporter was plying his trade. They even carried a story on it this past March, noting that the provincial government in Newfoundland and Labrador had joined the talks.

Evidently, they weren’t so secret after all.

Then there’s the issue of blaming Europeans for destroying fish stocks on the Grand Banks.  That’s a line pushed by Cleary’s buddy Gus Etchegary.  The only problem:  it is a load of codswallop.  The Europeans, Japanese and – you guessed it – Canadian companies including one Cleary’s buddy used to help manage all had a hand in driving cod to the brink of extinction.

As for reporting to parliament, the federal cabinet shows up in parliament every day the House of Commons sits.  When Cleary is in his desk in the House, they are all the people to the left, right and immediately behind that fellow the Speaker keeps calling “the Right Honourable the Prime Minister.” 

Each day, people around Cleary get to ask questions of those ministers.  If they wanted, they could even ask about these talks because – as ministers of the Crown – they are directing the talks.  If Cleary wanted, he could ask about them so they could report on the talks.  They might not give him intimate details – negotiations are usually confidential – but they will confirm the talks are going on.  In other words, they aren’t secret.

And if Cleary and his buddies have a problem, then they can raise their concerns in the House and in the media and maybe provoke some discussion about it.

So in six sentences, Cleary gets off to a rotten start and that’s before we consider the issues that are at stake for Newfoundland and Labrador if the talks fail.

Instead he has opted to shoot his mouth off based solely on an opinion derived entirely from – you guessed it – obvious ignorance.

In the greater scheme of things, the House of Commons has seen its fair share of these self-important blowhards over the decades.  Usually, they tend to frequent provincial politics in these parts but every now and then one of the little darlings gets into a position where they can display their profound ignorance on a national scale.

Cleary will likely delight the punters.  The tinfoil hat brigade will cheer him on as he rants about things he – and they – evidently know nothing about.  So much for looking after the best interests of his constituents and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Bloc NDP may have a few days of embarrassment. But since Cleary has already confirmed your humble e-scribbler’s first prediction, we can go a step farther. 

It is only a matter of time before the new Chief Spokesperson of the League of Professional Victims launches into a tirade on another of his favourite targets:  the nefarious, perfidious and generally odious crowd from Quebec and their efforts to take control of Labrador and destroy Newfoundland.

Perhaps Cleary will tell his fellow Bloc NDP MPs what he told macleans.ca:

“I don’t think I have a big mouth. I just have something to say and I’m going to say it.”

Oh to be a fly on the caucus room wall after he flings that crap at every fan in sight.

- srbp -

Provincial government wakes up on EU trade

Almost two years after your humble e-scribbler pointed out the blatant stupidity of the provincial government’s decision to boycott free trade talks, the provincial government is now sorting itself out.

The provincial government trade gang will switch from observers to participants at the upcoming trade talks between Canada and the European Union in April.

The old policy  - supported unquestioningly by the same people who have now turned 180 degrees – was stupid because it jeopardized the existing and future economic interests of the province and left local industry to being left out of a new lucrative market.

What’s worse, the old, stupid policy threatened to increase the dependence of the local economy on  on the American market. As a result, the provincial economy would become even more fragile than it had already grown as a result of seven years of backward economic policy by the provincial government.

It may have taken two years but the current crowd have finally figured it out.

- srbp -