There is plenty of rejoicing at the news today from the Hebron consortium that the partners are closer to filing a development application. They have an agreement among themselves on a bunch of things.
There are a few more steps to go and, as David Cochrane reported on CBC Radio this afternoon it could be 2012 before we see first oil. Next we should see a development application (if I understand correctly) which will include local benefits proposals, a development mode and all the things necessary to start hearings.
The Premier is suitably excited, although he cautioned the proponents, led by Chevron Canada, that the province will expect improved benefits over previous developments. He singled out royalties, local construction and supply and secondary processing (read refining).
Ok. We'll let's just take a step back and look at some issues that will affect the outcomes.
First let's see what overall circumstances affect the context of these upcoming talks.
1. The provincial energy minister has control over approval since the security of supply provisions of the Real Atlantic Accord are satisfied. You can find the Real Accord along with a ton of other useful information on the regulatory process at the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board website.
2. High oil prices forecasted to last well into the future make this a viable project with less of the fear of it being "marginal" like Hibernia was considered to be. There won't be any demand for government loans and loan guarantees.
3. The provincial government has bags of cash and no fear of sudden financial ruin. As a consequence, there is much less pressure to sign a good deal when something slightly better might be attainable. The Premier can slag Grimes for trying to entice the Hebron consortium a few years ago, but he should be fair in his comments. He has a distressing tendency to play a game of "neener-neener-neener" with public policy issues. Danny Williams has benefited from improved overall circumstances, not necessarily his superlative management skills, his spin machine to the contrary.
Put the two situations in context; make a fair comment. Personally, I learned a long time ago to walk a mile in someone else's shoes or face a genuinely tough situation before I start to pat myself on the back. There are times when Danny Williams' comments sound a lot like: "There'll be no more of this sun going down thing in the daytime while I am here. I won't be repeating the same sunshine mistakes of that guy who was here on the night shift, giving away our precious solar resource and settling for too much blackness."
4. In Hibernia, the province pushed the expensive GBS platform on the companies, driving up costs on an expensive project. That led directly to decreased government revenues in the long-term as companies sought offsets.
5. In this case, the proponents are already favouring a smaller GBS. They can't build that anywhere - the closer to the site the better - therefore the companies themselves have automatically boosted local industrial benefits as part of their start-up calculations. The government doesn't have to say a word to automatically start out with greater benefits than previous projects.
Expect to see the GBS built at Marystown where the private-sector yard is efficient. Bull Arm might get the work but here's hoping the companies resist working with a Crown-owned entity. Better for government to dispose of Bull Arm to the private sector, otherwise, the companies are likely to drive some hard - and I mean hard - bargains to guarantee quality of work, low costs and firm timeline guarantees.
6. Note that the Hebron GBS is preferred because of the conditions of the field involved. Comparing Hebron to Terra Nova or White Rose is a foolish, specious comparison. Danny Williams can claim that previous governments didn't ask for enough but the truth is something different.
7. In the broader context, look cautiously at what the province may be cooking up in its idea of a new Crown-owned energy mega-corporation or Crown-owned oil company.
8. Background and technical stuff: If you flip back to the archives there are some posts with links to some background information on the offshore and other oil issues.
- The US government Annual Energy Outlook 2005, with forecast to 2025 covers every source of energy on which the US depends. Here's the link.
- Here's an assessment of the value of the Hebron field from Chevron Canada analyst Deborah Provais.
- If you want to understand what API is and the implications, try this link. Go here before you read the Chevron assessment to get a full appreciation of what the oil look like in the Hebron field.
Second, let's look at the Premier's comments on enhanced local benefits. Premier Williams singled out three ways to increase benefits and basically the first two are the ways one would normally expect to see benefits flowing.
Royalties: By negotiating a special royalties deal, the Premier would be throwing away the generic royalty regime which is actually competitive in the marketplace and produces significant cash benefits for the province. Terra Nova is paying off early and moving to higher levels of benefits under the existing regime. Expect White Rose to do the same, much to the benefit of the province.
Incidentally, the only deal that is really less lucrative for the province as a whole than was expected is the Peckford Hibernia deal. Note that all the people whining are the people responsible for that mess; all the people blaming the Liberals for lousy deals on Terra Nova and White Rose are people like Brian Peckford. Let's just say they have an interest in deflecting attention away from their progeny.
In turn , they will point out that Hibernia was signed by the Wells government, but I am here to tell you it was largely done by the time Wells came along. Peckford had already forced the GBS on the proponents and bargained away the royalties.
Turning back to the current situation, there is a possibility of enhancing the royalty regime. But, and this is a big but, putting royalties in play allows for a Peckford-style trade off of cash for jobs. Keep your eye on that ball to see what actually happens.
Local Supplier Benefits/Construction: Watch for a few things here.
As noted, we are likely to get increased industrial benefits in the province due to GBS construction before Danny Williams lifts a finger. We might lose some cash along the way if Bull Arm becomes the construction site and we fail to meet cost, performance and quality targets through the Crown-owned site. There are a bunch of factors that will impact on the final contract. Let's take this deal (or lack of a deal) on its merits, based on facts.
Look for NOIA, the local supplier association, to start pushing for the Premier to insist that local companies get first look at supply work based on geography moreso than competitiveness. They have pushed for this approach on the past two projects and gotten nowhere fast.
In the offshore revenue struggle, NOIA gave Ottawa the finger and fawned over the Premier in the hopes of achieving some unspecified goal. Danny Williams owes them something or I am sure they feel he does. If he spurns their advances, NOIA will be "oh" for three on boosting local participation in the industry through government policy.
Personally I think NOIA does its members a bit of a disservice when it comes to government relations, but hey, I don't pay NOIA membership dues.
Paging John Shaheen! The Peckfordites long dreamt of a massive petrochemical industry here, turning Newfoundland and Labrador into a cross between the Persian Gulf and Alberta. It was more like a grander version of Come by Chance but fortunately for taxpayers pockets, reality was indeed another concept.
Not too surprising therefore that the Tory's last Blue Book resurrected every old hope of an oil refinery on the site of every old fish plant.
Here's where things could get really curious.
Heavy crude, like the stuff coming from Hebron, requires some expensive and complex refining unless you want to produce something really simple like asphalt. In the current marketplace and in the near-term, we can expect to see increasing pressure to maximize the refining of even heavy crude so that it produces as much petrol and other "light" products as possible.
Refining capacity is growing again, after many years of sluggishness and a surplus capacity in the 1980s. The most rapid growth is in Asia according to US government forecasts, while in the US, where the largest capacity exists, emphasis is on increasing capacity at existing operations and making them much more efficient.
There is a shortage of heavy crude refining capacity. The Saudis have the oil. The problem is there is such a shortage of capacity that the Saudis have actually had to sell the grades of heavy crude at deep discounts in recent months. There is plenty of oil and a sluggishness in the development of capacity to handle heavy crude.
In general though, there is much international interest in refineries that are located close to major markets. That's a key point here: close to markets. Venezuela's state-owned oil company operated refining capacity in the southern US, the Kuwaitis bought refineries and gas stations across Europe and most recently Russia's major oil company has expanded its refining and distribution systems.
But they did it right at the doorstep of the market. The big reason I would point to is the relatively high cost of refining heavy crude compared to lighter oil like the stuff from Hibernia. Heavy crude is expensive to extract and expensive to refine. It attracts a lower per barrel price as a consequence so it has some unique cost issues. Put the refinery on the North American mainland and it is merely a railcar journey or pipeline trip away from a major market or distribution node.
Building a refining capacity here does not seem to be an economically viable idea on the face of it, that is, without government concessions. While the rest of this enhanced benefits piece profits from significant positive changes in the overall situation, trying to build downstream petroleum processing here seems to be a step backward.
Here's a piece of this entire story that is worth watching extremely closely. Opening up the royalties could look good on the face of it, but in practice it might wind up being a Hibernia style trade off as we subsidize jobs with government revenues.
Yet again.
Look even more closely to see if government actually tries to use Hebron as a springboard for its own energy corporation, or Petro-Newf as I lovingly call it. I am naturally cautious of people who want to use public assets (like my tax-cash) and use it to muscle their way into the bigger private sector plays. It's usually a bad idea. They particularly might look at refining as an oil-related asset Petro-Newf could work on developing .
Basically, it comes down to this:
1. The Hebron announcement today is good news for the province.
2. The provincial government will already see significantly better benefits from a Hebron project than from others due to changed domestic and international circumstances.
3. Keep a close eye on what the provincial government actually does in negotiations versus what it says it will do or is doing.
4. Keep a really watchful eye on Petro-Newf to see if it makes a comeback through Hebron.
06 April 2005
05 April 2005
The Indy and The Michener revisited
The early morning -email included a note from a journalist whose reporting and judgment I respect.
He advises that while the Micheners are indeed self-nominated, they are vetted to get to the stage the Indy is at (a finalist) and then are vetted again to determine a winner.
Ok. Fair enough. And to be fair, under the circumstances, the finalist status is a feather in the Indy cap, as my journalist-correspondent noted.
That said, I still think the Indy should have made it clear how the award nominations were made and how the judging takes place. Those are basic facts that help an informed reader make a judgment. When reporting on itself, the Indy should be even more cautious than usual about hyperbole and spin.
I still think public masturbation should be against the law.
He advises that while the Micheners are indeed self-nominated, they are vetted to get to the stage the Indy is at (a finalist) and then are vetted again to determine a winner.
Ok. Fair enough. And to be fair, under the circumstances, the finalist status is a feather in the Indy cap, as my journalist-correspondent noted.
That said, I still think the Indy should have made it clear how the award nominations were made and how the judging takes place. Those are basic facts that help an informed reader make a judgment. When reporting on itself, the Indy should be even more cautious than usual about hyperbole and spin.
I still think public masturbation should be against the law.
Public Masturbation Alert - Spindy Nominates Self for Award?
Grab a copy of The Independent this week and you will see a front page story about the paper being nominated for a Michener Award for journalistic achievement.
The nomination is for the six part yawner that was supposed to provide a cost-benefit analysis of Confederation with Canada for Newfoundland and Labrador. The series was widely criticized for its faulty (read as non-existent) methodology. The Globe smashed the basic premises to pieces in one single graphic obtained by calling up Statistics Canada; managing editor Ryan Cleary spent a lot of time whining about a lack of complete information.
Each week since the series first appeared the Indy ME has relentlessly reminded us of this Magnificent Achievement in Canadian Journalism (patent pending).
This week, as if we haven't seen it enough, Cleary's column recounts the entire saga for us yet again. (How many weeks is this on the self-promo best-seller list anyways? I blacked out weeks ago.) This week's twist: the supposed irony of "Canada" wanting to honour the Indy for its achievement towards separation.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, go check out the entry rules for the Michener. Turns out you get to nominate yourself for the award.
Turns out "Canada" doesn't want to nominate Cleary and the Indy for anything. Unless it is for best money shot in a gratuitous unrestricted display of auto-manipulation on a never-ending basis.
Turns out there are some facts the Indy doesn't want to tell you, contrary to Cleary's editorial boasts and some truths he doesn't think you can handle.
I thought public masturbation was against the law.
Turns out Ryan's Cleary's breathlessness from the page one story is entirely self-induced.
At least, the other nominees offered something substantive:
The Calgary Herald is up for coverage by a single reporter that took a year to produce. Compare that to Cleary's Crew numbering two or three less than the Telly - a daily - but constantly spoken of by Cleary as if there were two reporters, one of whom works part-time, and a blind guy who speaks no English, with a wooden leg and no arms who shows up once in a while to just help out.
The Mother Corp is up for a major investigation into adverse drug reaction reporting that led to something other than the yawns the Indy has induced in anyone other than hard core Newfoundland pseudo-nationalists.
The Canadian Medical Association Journal and Decouverte (Radio-Canada) are being considered based on their efforts in covering the Clostridium difficile outbreak in Montreal last year. (Psst Ryan: ever think of checking out cleanliness and infection control in local hospitals. Yes, I know it would break the flow of your columns to date, but at least it would be....ummm...what's the word? ....oh yeah.... NEWS.)
The Globe, otherwise known as Toronto's national newspaper, has two nominations. One is for a team from Report on Business into improper use of insurance and mutual funds. The other is for ongoing coverage of the Gomery Inquisition.
As for the Spindy, who do you think wrote this line from its nomination description? "...the newspaper's work was a significant contribution to the debate about equalization and Newfoundland and Labrador's place in Canada."
Would that there was another love that dare not speak its own name.
The nomination is for the six part yawner that was supposed to provide a cost-benefit analysis of Confederation with Canada for Newfoundland and Labrador. The series was widely criticized for its faulty (read as non-existent) methodology. The Globe smashed the basic premises to pieces in one single graphic obtained by calling up Statistics Canada; managing editor Ryan Cleary spent a lot of time whining about a lack of complete information.
Each week since the series first appeared the Indy ME has relentlessly reminded us of this Magnificent Achievement in Canadian Journalism (patent pending).
This week, as if we haven't seen it enough, Cleary's column recounts the entire saga for us yet again. (How many weeks is this on the self-promo best-seller list anyways? I blacked out weeks ago.) This week's twist: the supposed irony of "Canada" wanting to honour the Indy for its achievement towards separation.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, go check out the entry rules for the Michener. Turns out you get to nominate yourself for the award.
Turns out "Canada" doesn't want to nominate Cleary and the Indy for anything. Unless it is for best money shot in a gratuitous unrestricted display of auto-manipulation on a never-ending basis.
Turns out there are some facts the Indy doesn't want to tell you, contrary to Cleary's editorial boasts and some truths he doesn't think you can handle.
I thought public masturbation was against the law.
Turns out Ryan's Cleary's breathlessness from the page one story is entirely self-induced.
At least, the other nominees offered something substantive:
The Calgary Herald is up for coverage by a single reporter that took a year to produce. Compare that to Cleary's Crew numbering two or three less than the Telly - a daily - but constantly spoken of by Cleary as if there were two reporters, one of whom works part-time, and a blind guy who speaks no English, with a wooden leg and no arms who shows up once in a while to just help out.
The Mother Corp is up for a major investigation into adverse drug reaction reporting that led to something other than the yawns the Indy has induced in anyone other than hard core Newfoundland pseudo-nationalists.
The Canadian Medical Association Journal and Decouverte (Radio-Canada) are being considered based on their efforts in covering the Clostridium difficile outbreak in Montreal last year. (Psst Ryan: ever think of checking out cleanliness and infection control in local hospitals. Yes, I know it would break the flow of your columns to date, but at least it would be....ummm...what's the word? ....oh yeah.... NEWS.)
The Globe, otherwise known as Toronto's national newspaper, has two nominations. One is for a team from Report on Business into improper use of insurance and mutual funds. The other is for ongoing coverage of the Gomery Inquisition.
As for the Spindy, who do you think wrote this line from its nomination description? "...the newspaper's work was a significant contribution to the debate about equalization and Newfoundland and Labrador's place in Canada."
Would that there was another love that dare not speak its own name.
The -EST Premier
Danny Williams is an EST guy.
No, I don't mean a graduate of the 1970s sensitivity training program.
I mean a guy for whom everything must be superlative. As in best, biggest, most.
No surprise therefore that the release yesterday on the Lower Churchill proposals plays up the number of expressions of interest - 25 - without actually breaking them out. During the news conference, though, questions from reporters did garner some clarification.
Out of that 25, only 10 actually are comprehensive development proposals that include financing, building and transmitting power. The others are all from people wanting a piece of the action - engineering firms, environmental companies, equity investment houses, the guys who sell toilet paper, maybe.
Before we go any further, let's all remember that Ontario was at the table between 1989 and 1992. It's nice to see them back. The premier described their value accurately. It's just not the first time they have been there.
The number of proposals the premier acknowledged is a bit interesting since the actual call for expressions of interest is pretty clear about what government wanted. Check page 7:
"The proponent shall provide a summary description of the proposed technical project configuration including generation and transmission infrastructure. The proponent shall provide a description of the proposed nature of commercial arrangements for project construction, project financing, operation, sale of power, and other key elements. In particular, the description should cover arrangements between the proponent and the Government, and arrangements between the proponent, other participants and other government entities. The commercial arrangements must address ownership of the facilities, types of power sale arrangements, potential risk allocation, potential financial incentives/ support requested, proponent’s perspective on royalty arrangements, ownership of potential greenhouse gas credits and other relevant terms." [Emphasis added]
Right off the bat we can flick more than half the submissions into the discard pile since they failed to meet the tender specs. It would be a monumental waste of time to entertain any comment from anyone who is really not prepared to put forward a proposal to handle the whole thing as they were asked to do. Environmental guys, engineers, financiers and the guys who sell chemical toilets can bid on the tenders coming from the successful proponents.
For the remaining proposals, though, if we think it through for a second, we can limit the whole thing down to some basic considerations.
1. Markets. Any project must have a market for the power. In this case, expect to see Quebec and Ontario as the major markets. New York is a possibility.
2. Competitive pricing. No point in spending a buck fifty to get a fifty cent cuke on the market. Therefore, while California is a potential customer, as is Chile, the costs of getting Labrador electricity to those places is just too high to make it commercially viable.
Bring yourself a little closer to home. Now think about the costs of adding to existing infrastructure using established technology. That brings you back to the three markets I just mentioned which can be reached cost-effectively using either existing transmission lines or by adding to the grid.
The non-Quebec route is fine as long as the power to the potential customer - New York state - is as cheap or cheaper than our competitors.
3. Capital. With those two things in place - especially the long-term purchase agreement, we can raise the cash. A project of this size is likely to cost upwards of $5.0 billion, all-up, including transmission lines. The people with cash want to know their investment is secure. The long-term purchase arrangements will make them sleep soundly at night.
Consider too that if we pile on local benefits and drive up royalties, those things add to the project costs and/or drive up the unit cost the end-user pays. If those things price us out of the market, then we won't get the tremendous benefits the premier talked about today and we don't have a project at all.
Basically every single one of the 10 real proposals received last week has to address those three points to be viable. We can pick among the best of the lot and try some bargaining, but just look closely at it and you'll see that contrary to what some people may say, the possibilities are not really endless.
If the only viable markets turn out to be Ontario and Quebec, are they going to pay more for the energy than if they developed it themselves? Do you feel the options dwindling somewhat?
Ontario and Quebec are savvy energy players. They have tons of experience, but so do we here in the province, if we look around and find Stan Marshall for example.
We have some leverage in all this, potentially, but since I am not an -EST guy, I really don't have the need to inflate expectations beyond some level of probability. There is a deal to be done here and a good one if the thing is handled properly.
We just don't have any flags to tear down.
Let's see what happens in the next few months.
No, I don't mean a graduate of the 1970s sensitivity training program.
I mean a guy for whom everything must be superlative. As in best, biggest, most.
No surprise therefore that the release yesterday on the Lower Churchill proposals plays up the number of expressions of interest - 25 - without actually breaking them out. During the news conference, though, questions from reporters did garner some clarification.
Out of that 25, only 10 actually are comprehensive development proposals that include financing, building and transmitting power. The others are all from people wanting a piece of the action - engineering firms, environmental companies, equity investment houses, the guys who sell toilet paper, maybe.
Before we go any further, let's all remember that Ontario was at the table between 1989 and 1992. It's nice to see them back. The premier described their value accurately. It's just not the first time they have been there.
The number of proposals the premier acknowledged is a bit interesting since the actual call for expressions of interest is pretty clear about what government wanted. Check page 7:
"The proponent shall provide a summary description of the proposed technical project configuration including generation and transmission infrastructure. The proponent shall provide a description of the proposed nature of commercial arrangements for project construction, project financing, operation, sale of power, and other key elements. In particular, the description should cover arrangements between the proponent and the Government, and arrangements between the proponent, other participants and other government entities. The commercial arrangements must address ownership of the facilities, types of power sale arrangements, potential risk allocation, potential financial incentives/ support requested, proponent’s perspective on royalty arrangements, ownership of potential greenhouse gas credits and other relevant terms." [Emphasis added]
Right off the bat we can flick more than half the submissions into the discard pile since they failed to meet the tender specs. It would be a monumental waste of time to entertain any comment from anyone who is really not prepared to put forward a proposal to handle the whole thing as they were asked to do. Environmental guys, engineers, financiers and the guys who sell chemical toilets can bid on the tenders coming from the successful proponents.
For the remaining proposals, though, if we think it through for a second, we can limit the whole thing down to some basic considerations.
1. Markets. Any project must have a market for the power. In this case, expect to see Quebec and Ontario as the major markets. New York is a possibility.
2. Competitive pricing. No point in spending a buck fifty to get a fifty cent cuke on the market. Therefore, while California is a potential customer, as is Chile, the costs of getting Labrador electricity to those places is just too high to make it commercially viable.
Bring yourself a little closer to home. Now think about the costs of adding to existing infrastructure using established technology. That brings you back to the three markets I just mentioned which can be reached cost-effectively using either existing transmission lines or by adding to the grid.
The non-Quebec route is fine as long as the power to the potential customer - New York state - is as cheap or cheaper than our competitors.
3. Capital. With those two things in place - especially the long-term purchase agreement, we can raise the cash. A project of this size is likely to cost upwards of $5.0 billion, all-up, including transmission lines. The people with cash want to know their investment is secure. The long-term purchase arrangements will make them sleep soundly at night.
Consider too that if we pile on local benefits and drive up royalties, those things add to the project costs and/or drive up the unit cost the end-user pays. If those things price us out of the market, then we won't get the tremendous benefits the premier talked about today and we don't have a project at all.
Basically every single one of the 10 real proposals received last week has to address those three points to be viable. We can pick among the best of the lot and try some bargaining, but just look closely at it and you'll see that contrary to what some people may say, the possibilities are not really endless.
If the only viable markets turn out to be Ontario and Quebec, are they going to pay more for the energy than if they developed it themselves? Do you feel the options dwindling somewhat?
Ontario and Quebec are savvy energy players. They have tons of experience, but so do we here in the province, if we look around and find Stan Marshall for example.
We have some leverage in all this, potentially, but since I am not an -EST guy, I really don't have the need to inflate expectations beyond some level of probability. There is a deal to be done here and a good one if the thing is handled properly.
We just don't have any flags to tear down.
Let's see what happens in the next few months.
04 April 2005
Maybe thinking should at least give us pause
While I have been very critical of the Independent in recent weeks, I will say that every now and then something appears which makes the paper worth the buck I spend each Sunday to buy it.
This week, there are two things.
One is the front page story by Stephanie Porter on the Hibernia project. She makes a couple of basic factual errors, but on balance the story accurately describes the financial situation of the Hibernia project. Of course, there are quotes from guys like Ron Penney who was on the Real Accord negotiating team and who, most likely, believed the Peckford government's palaver about eating our oil revenue cake and having it too. But other than that, I'd say give it a read.
The second thing is the regular column by Indy owner Brian Dobbin. He publishes under the title "Publish or perish", which is a phrase the Herald used to use relentlessly in drumming up letters to the editor.
Dobbin makes three comments in the piece that I want to address.
First, he says he learned last week in The Independent something he didn't know, namely that the provincial government is looking at setting up a state-owned oil company to invest in the offshore. Second, he slags a consultant by saying, as Dobbin put it, if the consultant had any insight, he would be "an economic do-er as opposed to being a commentator on other do-ers". Third, Dobbin backs the idea of a Crown-owned oil corporation.
Let's tackle these in order.
1. That's a new one: the Energy Mega-Corp. If Dobbin heard about the energy corporation idea only from reading the Indy, he might want to get out more. The story was reported last year in The Express and this week alone The Express covered it again, before the Indy went to press. Heck, it's even in the Tory Blue Book.
Conrad Black. Lord Thomson of Fleet. Rupert Murdoch. Newspaper owners all, and all renowned for reading more than the ink-blotters they printed. It's one of the things, incidentally that distinguishes entrepreneurs: they thirst for information and analysis. They hunt it out in weird and wonderful places and ponder the gems they find.
Information - or intelligence as the b-school crowd call it now - is the starting point of generating ideas that stand a hope of lasting. Open Line is full of people with ideas. Don't expect that the Moon Man has too many people lining up to give him cash, though. Smart entrepreneurs know that with more information they have a better chance of picking out the gold from the pyrite, or in this case the crude from the canola.
2. Slagging commentators. My self-interest aside, Dobbin should realize that another hallmark of successful entrepreneurs is that they realize one thing: they don't know it all. They employ guys like the expert he slagged to give them more information, ideas and opinions before they make a decision. Then the entrepreneurs do what they do best: take calculated, informed risks.
3. Petro-Newf Reborn. Perhaps the most bizarre part of the column is the bit where Dobbin the Do-er advocates government getting into the private sector realm by buying up big shares in the offshore through an energy Crown corporation. He uses as back-up for his position a meeting he had five years ago with then premier Beaton Tulk and a few senior officials over some proposal by the Taiwanese state-owned oil enterprise to invest in producing gas offshore Newfoundland and Labrador. Without knowing all the background here, let's just leave this little gem off the table for now. If Dobbin wants to expand on that proposal with some, oooh, maybe little things like facts and details, then we can tackle it.
But Dobbin would know, if he read more, that there is a substantial body of opinion out there that opposes state-ownership of what should be private sector businesses. Consider that the World Bank has devoted considerable energy to pointing out just exactly how inefficient state-owned oil companies are in producing anything, let alone wealth. The people who pay for the inefficiency? You and me, the average taxpayer.
For another thing, Dobbin should know from living here for more than five minutes that the provincial government has proven time and again that it simply cannot run anything normally in the private sector as efficiently as that same enterprise would run in the private sector. More often than not these ventures have proven to be massive drains on the public treasury. Who pays? You're catching on fast.
As much as he may tune out the Sprung Greenhouse, Dobbin would take two lessons from it, if he read more than his own paper. He'd learn that it was a colossal failure that cost taxpayers at least $22 million. He'd also know that bureaucrats - the very people he slags unmercifully in his column - warned up, down and sideways that every single claim by cuke proponents The Sprungs was sheer hogfodder. There was a premier who would over-rule them, much to the delight of the proponents, but he did so despite overwhelming evidence and carefully considered opinion that growing cukes in this province in a hydroponic greenhouse was asinine.
And that's really where I depart from Dobbin on a fundamental level. Dobbin marks this all down to fear. It really isn't about fear at all. Dobbin is essentially advocating the kind of carpet-bagging lunacy that we have seen time and again from Shaheens and Doyles and Sprungs. It is about political decision-making that is autocratic - to be generous - of the type offered by Smallwood or Peckford. It is about managing something, in this case government, in a way that one seldom sees in sophisticated modern business. Are there any unemployed Latvians out there Brian thinks need work?
What Dobbin offers is the same old idiocy we have seen time and time again. The only fear involved is the fear that yet another fly-by-night promoter can come here and gain access to my tax dollars by flattering The Boss. Were we to follow Dobbin's model, we would toss aside the expertise of successful local companies like, say Fortis and Rutter, and go back to some other model that has simply never worked. We would abandon common sense and all the progress in developing the economy over the past 15 years and simply repeat the same inane mistakes of the past.
What Dobbin would essentially throw away is the actual sophistication, the genuine expertise of the local business community in favour of some massive, state-owned bureaucracy squandering tax dollars on sluggish administration. Money like that would be better spent on health care and could be better obtained in other ways; like say improving revenue deals for the province from private sector developers, and by encouraging local investment by the private sector in new businesses. These guys will generate real wealth locally and abroad.
If Dobbin was a modern entrepreneur, he'd be running about trying to convince Danny to find a way so that local private sector companies can get into the oil business. That he does exactly the opposite suggests to me that Dobbin really does hearken back to the dark pre-Confederation times. That's when local businesses controlled government and used public money to subsidize the lifestyles of the handful of business owners in St. John's. It was our own piece of the Third World in North America and thankfully it is long gone.
Brian Dobbin: if you want my money either for an oil company or another private sector scheme, better try asking me directly. I don't plan to stand by while you suck cash out of my pocket through your political buddies and flush it away on some goof-ball idea. That's one of things that makes state-owned oil enterprises such appalling bad ideas. It's the kind of thing you find in Zangaro, not Zeebrugge.
The public sector has no place subsidizing let alone operating things that genuine entrepreneurs should be running.
Fear shouldn't stop us from doing anything that is well-founded and carefully thought through, Brian, but maybe thinking should at least give us pause enough to consider how outmoded your ideas actually are.
This week, there are two things.
One is the front page story by Stephanie Porter on the Hibernia project. She makes a couple of basic factual errors, but on balance the story accurately describes the financial situation of the Hibernia project. Of course, there are quotes from guys like Ron Penney who was on the Real Accord negotiating team and who, most likely, believed the Peckford government's palaver about eating our oil revenue cake and having it too. But other than that, I'd say give it a read.
The second thing is the regular column by Indy owner Brian Dobbin. He publishes under the title "Publish or perish", which is a phrase the Herald used to use relentlessly in drumming up letters to the editor.
Dobbin makes three comments in the piece that I want to address.
First, he says he learned last week in The Independent something he didn't know, namely that the provincial government is looking at setting up a state-owned oil company to invest in the offshore. Second, he slags a consultant by saying, as Dobbin put it, if the consultant had any insight, he would be "an economic do-er as opposed to being a commentator on other do-ers". Third, Dobbin backs the idea of a Crown-owned oil corporation.
Let's tackle these in order.
1. That's a new one: the Energy Mega-Corp. If Dobbin heard about the energy corporation idea only from reading the Indy, he might want to get out more. The story was reported last year in The Express and this week alone The Express covered it again, before the Indy went to press. Heck, it's even in the Tory Blue Book.
Conrad Black. Lord Thomson of Fleet. Rupert Murdoch. Newspaper owners all, and all renowned for reading more than the ink-blotters they printed. It's one of the things, incidentally that distinguishes entrepreneurs: they thirst for information and analysis. They hunt it out in weird and wonderful places and ponder the gems they find.
Information - or intelligence as the b-school crowd call it now - is the starting point of generating ideas that stand a hope of lasting. Open Line is full of people with ideas. Don't expect that the Moon Man has too many people lining up to give him cash, though. Smart entrepreneurs know that with more information they have a better chance of picking out the gold from the pyrite, or in this case the crude from the canola.
2. Slagging commentators. My self-interest aside, Dobbin should realize that another hallmark of successful entrepreneurs is that they realize one thing: they don't know it all. They employ guys like the expert he slagged to give them more information, ideas and opinions before they make a decision. Then the entrepreneurs do what they do best: take calculated, informed risks.
3. Petro-Newf Reborn. Perhaps the most bizarre part of the column is the bit where Dobbin the Do-er advocates government getting into the private sector realm by buying up big shares in the offshore through an energy Crown corporation. He uses as back-up for his position a meeting he had five years ago with then premier Beaton Tulk and a few senior officials over some proposal by the Taiwanese state-owned oil enterprise to invest in producing gas offshore Newfoundland and Labrador. Without knowing all the background here, let's just leave this little gem off the table for now. If Dobbin wants to expand on that proposal with some, oooh, maybe little things like facts and details, then we can tackle it.
But Dobbin would know, if he read more, that there is a substantial body of opinion out there that opposes state-ownership of what should be private sector businesses. Consider that the World Bank has devoted considerable energy to pointing out just exactly how inefficient state-owned oil companies are in producing anything, let alone wealth. The people who pay for the inefficiency? You and me, the average taxpayer.
For another thing, Dobbin should know from living here for more than five minutes that the provincial government has proven time and again that it simply cannot run anything normally in the private sector as efficiently as that same enterprise would run in the private sector. More often than not these ventures have proven to be massive drains on the public treasury. Who pays? You're catching on fast.
As much as he may tune out the Sprung Greenhouse, Dobbin would take two lessons from it, if he read more than his own paper. He'd learn that it was a colossal failure that cost taxpayers at least $22 million. He'd also know that bureaucrats - the very people he slags unmercifully in his column - warned up, down and sideways that every single claim by cuke proponents The Sprungs was sheer hogfodder. There was a premier who would over-rule them, much to the delight of the proponents, but he did so despite overwhelming evidence and carefully considered opinion that growing cukes in this province in a hydroponic greenhouse was asinine.
And that's really where I depart from Dobbin on a fundamental level. Dobbin marks this all down to fear. It really isn't about fear at all. Dobbin is essentially advocating the kind of carpet-bagging lunacy that we have seen time and again from Shaheens and Doyles and Sprungs. It is about political decision-making that is autocratic - to be generous - of the type offered by Smallwood or Peckford. It is about managing something, in this case government, in a way that one seldom sees in sophisticated modern business. Are there any unemployed Latvians out there Brian thinks need work?
What Dobbin offers is the same old idiocy we have seen time and time again. The only fear involved is the fear that yet another fly-by-night promoter can come here and gain access to my tax dollars by flattering The Boss. Were we to follow Dobbin's model, we would toss aside the expertise of successful local companies like, say Fortis and Rutter, and go back to some other model that has simply never worked. We would abandon common sense and all the progress in developing the economy over the past 15 years and simply repeat the same inane mistakes of the past.
What Dobbin would essentially throw away is the actual sophistication, the genuine expertise of the local business community in favour of some massive, state-owned bureaucracy squandering tax dollars on sluggish administration. Money like that would be better spent on health care and could be better obtained in other ways; like say improving revenue deals for the province from private sector developers, and by encouraging local investment by the private sector in new businesses. These guys will generate real wealth locally and abroad.
If Dobbin was a modern entrepreneur, he'd be running about trying to convince Danny to find a way so that local private sector companies can get into the oil business. That he does exactly the opposite suggests to me that Dobbin really does hearken back to the dark pre-Confederation times. That's when local businesses controlled government and used public money to subsidize the lifestyles of the handful of business owners in St. John's. It was our own piece of the Third World in North America and thankfully it is long gone.
Brian Dobbin: if you want my money either for an oil company or another private sector scheme, better try asking me directly. I don't plan to stand by while you suck cash out of my pocket through your political buddies and flush it away on some goof-ball idea. That's one of things that makes state-owned oil enterprises such appalling bad ideas. It's the kind of thing you find in Zangaro, not Zeebrugge.
The public sector has no place subsidizing let alone operating things that genuine entrepreneurs should be running.
Fear shouldn't stop us from doing anything that is well-founded and carefully thought through, Brian, but maybe thinking should at least give us pause enough to consider how outmoded your ideas actually are.
General Bullshit - revised
After reading this story and hearing the on-air version, I had to check the bio of one Gordon O'Connor, Conservative Party defence critic.
Seems O'Connor is blaming the Liberals for the RAF withdrawal from Goose Bay.
He pledges that the Conservatives would "do their damnedest" and if that failed, well, you know...
"But if that doesn't happen, we have other operational requirements within [our] sovereignty and security which we would have to deploy, and would deploy to Goose Bay."
Now let me make this clear:
Gordo is a zipperhead. That's military slang (not necessarily complimentary) for an armoured type, prone to bobbing around in large motorized metal boxes trying desperately not to get bogged. Bogged: as in up to the turret in, well, bog.
One of my former army public affairs colleagues was found standing on the cupola of his Centurion, the only bit of the tank visible above ground. His course report suggested he might find advantageous employment in another corps. He did.
What Gordo knows about aircraft and air operations likely comes entirely from his experiences in Air Canada First Class and the bits of his army staff courses he slept through on his way to BGen.
Now I could be wrong, because, according to CBC News, his last posting involved " responsibility for planning the future force structure of the Canadian Forces (organization, equipment and personnel) and co-ordinating all resources related to about 300 ongoing Canadian Forces equipment and infrastructure projects."
But as Gordo told CBC about Goose Bay: "O'Connor says it is too soon to say what forces a Conservative government would station at Goose Bay."
That's, like, just a bit of equivocating, don't you think?
So because he held an august appointment planning future force structures (read as "what we have in order to do what we do with"), Gordo should know what the operational requirements are for every inch of space in the DND system. He knows the current operational requirements of the Canadian Forces intimately.
Or at least he should.
He likely does, but here's what I think:
I think Gordo knows full well that Goose Bay has NO operational utility for DND/CF such that DND needs to own a base and maintain assets there.
I think Gordo is spouting stuff he knows is pure bullshit because there is a by-election coming.
I think Gordo is driving around trying desperately not to get bogged down in an issue where he knows the difference between what is likely and what he has to say for political purposes.
I think Gordo should try this one at his next meeting of zipperheads: A Conservative government will move every tank in the Canadian Forces armoured corps to Goose Bay and its associated training areas. We'll even build new training areas there and a big firing range for whatever the zips will be driving and shooting from.
It's operationally needed, tell them.
Why? Because we need to be able to operate in dense wooded terrain where tanks can't really go.
And we can use the runways to practice wheelies and doughnuts.
Try that on 'em, Gordo and watch the less than enthusiastic response you get.
Note: The whistling sound you hear, Gordo, is the discarding sabot round from a Leopard going past your head.
Gunnery training ain't what it used to be.
Yep.
Put all the tanks in Goose Bay.
"Driver: Advance!" that one, Gordo and see how far you get.
Seems O'Connor is blaming the Liberals for the RAF withdrawal from Goose Bay.
He pledges that the Conservatives would "do their damnedest" and if that failed, well, you know...
"But if that doesn't happen, we have other operational requirements within [our] sovereignty and security which we would have to deploy, and would deploy to Goose Bay."
Now let me make this clear:
Gordo is a zipperhead. That's military slang (not necessarily complimentary) for an armoured type, prone to bobbing around in large motorized metal boxes trying desperately not to get bogged. Bogged: as in up to the turret in, well, bog.
One of my former army public affairs colleagues was found standing on the cupola of his Centurion, the only bit of the tank visible above ground. His course report suggested he might find advantageous employment in another corps. He did.
What Gordo knows about aircraft and air operations likely comes entirely from his experiences in Air Canada First Class and the bits of his army staff courses he slept through on his way to BGen.
Now I could be wrong, because, according to CBC News, his last posting involved " responsibility for planning the future force structure of the Canadian Forces (organization, equipment and personnel) and co-ordinating all resources related to about 300 ongoing Canadian Forces equipment and infrastructure projects."
But as Gordo told CBC about Goose Bay: "O'Connor says it is too soon to say what forces a Conservative government would station at Goose Bay."
That's, like, just a bit of equivocating, don't you think?
So because he held an august appointment planning future force structures (read as "what we have in order to do what we do with"), Gordo should know what the operational requirements are for every inch of space in the DND system. He knows the current operational requirements of the Canadian Forces intimately.
Or at least he should.
He likely does, but here's what I think:
I think Gordo knows full well that Goose Bay has NO operational utility for DND/CF such that DND needs to own a base and maintain assets there.
I think Gordo is spouting stuff he knows is pure bullshit because there is a by-election coming.
I think Gordo is driving around trying desperately not to get bogged down in an issue where he knows the difference between what is likely and what he has to say for political purposes.
I think Gordo should try this one at his next meeting of zipperheads: A Conservative government will move every tank in the Canadian Forces armoured corps to Goose Bay and its associated training areas. We'll even build new training areas there and a big firing range for whatever the zips will be driving and shooting from.
It's operationally needed, tell them.
Why? Because we need to be able to operate in dense wooded terrain where tanks can't really go.
And we can use the runways to practice wheelies and doughnuts.
Try that on 'em, Gordo and watch the less than enthusiastic response you get.
Note: The whistling sound you hear, Gordo, is the discarding sabot round from a Leopard going past your head.
Gunnery training ain't what it used to be.
Yep.
Put all the tanks in Goose Bay.
"Driver: Advance!" that one, Gordo and see how far you get.
Blogs and real world information
Two episodes over the weekend illustrated one of the conflicts between the land o' blogs on the Internet, sometimes called the blogosphere, and the world inhabited by lesser mortals.
The first one was a draft commentary I put together on the Borden AIDS story. You've already seen my posts in which I named the accused. It's bee public since the outset. Well it seems some news outlets will no longer identify the accused in the case since she is herself a victim of crime.
It makes for some curious reporting. Someone dependent solely on that one news outlet will not have information the rest of us share. The accused in this case is, well, the accused. In the absence of a publication ban, trial information is public and the name of the accused is open to publication.
What it boils down to is this: if I do the commentary, I'll rework the thing to avoid mentioning the name of the accused. I'll do that solely to respect the editorial policy of the news outlet involved. I'll keep it here in this blog since the information is already out there and there is no legal injunction against using it.
The second case is testimony by one of the witnesses at the Gomery inquisition. I chose the word advisedly because I am not sure what is going to come from this that the cops haven't seen already. For example, the testimony that has everyone in Ottawa a-twitter, comes from one of the two people facing criminal charges in the case.
If this individual hadn't put his complete information in front of the cops already, I'd be pretty surprised. While it sure as heck doesn't appear to exonerate him, it implicates others.
There is a publication ban in this case, so I cannot legally tell you what was said. Truth is, I don't know for certain what the testimony was.
What I can tell you is that the blogosphere is itself vibrating with the electric buzz from some American bloggers who have reported what they think is the testimony. That has been picked up by Canadian bloggers, including Norman Spector (Mulroney's ex-chief of staff and therefore a completely unbiased source) and Warren Kinsella (the lawyer cum self-promoter who brought us the devastating Barney attack on Stockwell Day as part of Liberal campaigns past).
The blog buzz has reached such a pitch that Rosemary Thompson (CTV) included a picture of the American blog front page in her report for the national news on Sunday night.
Now I'll say this:
Based on what I have read, I really cannot see how accusations of corruption against a previous regime will affect the Martin government. Some bloggers - like Spector - are likely trafficking in as much innuendo as fact "Oh I wish you knew what I knew cause if you did, Martin is toast." His approach would warrant some Liberal recounting the litany of Tories from Spector's time who did hard time for political crime, or others, Like Sinc Stevens who was cast into the pit for trying to run a business out of his ministerial office.
People who live in glass houses, Normie, people who live in glass houses. But more to the point, Norm, would the history of corruption under Mulroney disqualify his progeny from winning next time out? If you want Harper in 24 Sussex, trying selling Harper.
Since I can't give you the testimony either, if I had it, nor can I point you to people claiming to have it (I like my ass out of jail, thanks) , I do have the capacity to do something a little different. I'll give you some links to follow for interesting comment on Gomery:
Warren Kinsella - He's a Liberal and a dedicated partisan, but man I have to say he is a bit much to take sometimes.
Norman Spector - He's a Conservative, and like Warren, is equally hard to take slightly more often. Only slightly. Big value here is the wide range of links Norm has to other stories on Gomery. Big downside: it's Norman Spector.
Nealenews - The look of Matt Drudge's now infamous Drudge Report. As I recall this site yesterday was linking to the US site. He must have spoken to a lawyer in the meantime.
Oddly, CTNnews.ca has also taken down Rosemary's story and they did it in the matter of a few seconds this morning as I was trying to download it.
Judge Gomery may be boring at times and at others he may be amusing (Chretien made an ass of him pretty easily) but he is still a judge with full powers to slap Canadians in jail.
Surf the net and use google, by the way, and you'll find the testimony in question.
The first one was a draft commentary I put together on the Borden AIDS story. You've already seen my posts in which I named the accused. It's bee public since the outset. Well it seems some news outlets will no longer identify the accused in the case since she is herself a victim of crime.
It makes for some curious reporting. Someone dependent solely on that one news outlet will not have information the rest of us share. The accused in this case is, well, the accused. In the absence of a publication ban, trial information is public and the name of the accused is open to publication.
What it boils down to is this: if I do the commentary, I'll rework the thing to avoid mentioning the name of the accused. I'll do that solely to respect the editorial policy of the news outlet involved. I'll keep it here in this blog since the information is already out there and there is no legal injunction against using it.
The second case is testimony by one of the witnesses at the Gomery inquisition. I chose the word advisedly because I am not sure what is going to come from this that the cops haven't seen already. For example, the testimony that has everyone in Ottawa a-twitter, comes from one of the two people facing criminal charges in the case.
If this individual hadn't put his complete information in front of the cops already, I'd be pretty surprised. While it sure as heck doesn't appear to exonerate him, it implicates others.
There is a publication ban in this case, so I cannot legally tell you what was said. Truth is, I don't know for certain what the testimony was.
What I can tell you is that the blogosphere is itself vibrating with the electric buzz from some American bloggers who have reported what they think is the testimony. That has been picked up by Canadian bloggers, including Norman Spector (Mulroney's ex-chief of staff and therefore a completely unbiased source) and Warren Kinsella (the lawyer cum self-promoter who brought us the devastating Barney attack on Stockwell Day as part of Liberal campaigns past).
The blog buzz has reached such a pitch that Rosemary Thompson (CTV) included a picture of the American blog front page in her report for the national news on Sunday night.
Now I'll say this:
Based on what I have read, I really cannot see how accusations of corruption against a previous regime will affect the Martin government. Some bloggers - like Spector - are likely trafficking in as much innuendo as fact "Oh I wish you knew what I knew cause if you did, Martin is toast." His approach would warrant some Liberal recounting the litany of Tories from Spector's time who did hard time for political crime, or others, Like Sinc Stevens who was cast into the pit for trying to run a business out of his ministerial office.
People who live in glass houses, Normie, people who live in glass houses. But more to the point, Norm, would the history of corruption under Mulroney disqualify his progeny from winning next time out? If you want Harper in 24 Sussex, trying selling Harper.
Since I can't give you the testimony either, if I had it, nor can I point you to people claiming to have it (I like my ass out of jail, thanks) , I do have the capacity to do something a little different. I'll give you some links to follow for interesting comment on Gomery:
Warren Kinsella - He's a Liberal and a dedicated partisan, but man I have to say he is a bit much to take sometimes.
Norman Spector - He's a Conservative, and like Warren, is equally hard to take slightly more often. Only slightly. Big value here is the wide range of links Norm has to other stories on Gomery. Big downside: it's Norman Spector.
Nealenews - The look of Matt Drudge's now infamous Drudge Report. As I recall this site yesterday was linking to the US site. He must have spoken to a lawyer in the meantime.
Oddly, CTNnews.ca has also taken down Rosemary's story and they did it in the matter of a few seconds this morning as I was trying to download it.
Judge Gomery may be boring at times and at others he may be amusing (Chretien made an ass of him pretty easily) but he is still a judge with full powers to slap Canadians in jail.
Surf the net and use google, by the way, and you'll find the testimony in question.
01 April 2005
What are they thinking? Are they thinking? They think?
Enjoy this Sun story.
Apparently, Stephen Harper has decided that public bluster is better than anything else when it comes to dealing with the C-43 controversy.
Now it could be that the Sun chain is just keeping something on life support that should be allowed to pass peacefully into eternity. Then again, maybe the Opposition parties are just getting up a head of steam to see if they can force the Martin government into blinking.
Consider too that over at the local weekly The Express, Norman Doyle is blaming John Efford for the whole mess. Geez, Norm this "Blame Efford" thing is getting even more tiresome than the C-43 story.
Three opposition parties. Three different problems with Bill C-43.
What should a government do?
It's a bit of a poser.
Stephen Harper now wants both Kyoto and the offshore bills taken out of the budget measure. Since the Kyoto - or more correctly - the environmental provisions are not really budget measures, perhaps the government could meet him on that one. But knowing Mr. Harper has upped the ante, I'd be more inclined to take my chances if I were Paul Martin.
After all, Stephen Harper doesn't support the offshore deal. His solution is a change to Equalization and I have yet to see Mr. Harper state in writing that if he were prime minister he would honour the commitment reached on January 28. Statements from his media wrangler don't count.
So, we are in the same place we were a week ago. Lots of bluster and threats. Lots of media speculation.
The bill doesn't come for a vote for about three weeks.
I am not sure I can stand three more weeks of this palaver.
Apparently, Stephen Harper has decided that public bluster is better than anything else when it comes to dealing with the C-43 controversy.
Now it could be that the Sun chain is just keeping something on life support that should be allowed to pass peacefully into eternity. Then again, maybe the Opposition parties are just getting up a head of steam to see if they can force the Martin government into blinking.
Consider too that over at the local weekly The Express, Norman Doyle is blaming John Efford for the whole mess. Geez, Norm this "Blame Efford" thing is getting even more tiresome than the C-43 story.
Three opposition parties. Three different problems with Bill C-43.
What should a government do?
It's a bit of a poser.
Stephen Harper now wants both Kyoto and the offshore bills taken out of the budget measure. Since the Kyoto - or more correctly - the environmental provisions are not really budget measures, perhaps the government could meet him on that one. But knowing Mr. Harper has upped the ante, I'd be more inclined to take my chances if I were Paul Martin.
After all, Stephen Harper doesn't support the offshore deal. His solution is a change to Equalization and I have yet to see Mr. Harper state in writing that if he were prime minister he would honour the commitment reached on January 28. Statements from his media wrangler don't count.
So, we are in the same place we were a week ago. Lots of bluster and threats. Lots of media speculation.
The bill doesn't come for a vote for about three weeks.
I am not sure I can stand three more weeks of this palaver.
Time for a New Approach
Goldman Sachs yesterday - so it isn't an April Fools Day joke - reported crude prices may hit US$105 in the next few years with a possible "superspike" coming at US$135 per barrel.
Some implications:
- Provincial government oil revenues will exceed even the most optimistic projections. No amount of fudging by the Finance Department will hide the dollar bills sticking out through the windows and poking under doors.
- Newfoundland and Labrador will become a "have" province for a decade or more.
- The January deal will only be worth $2.0 billion not the scads more predicted by Danny and his boys.
- The province is ultimately faced with a serious political question for the first time in its recent history. We have to decide whether or not we want to blow the whole wad on everyones' wish lists or do something practical and productive with it.
It will be time for a genuinely new approach to politics.
Some implications:
- Provincial government oil revenues will exceed even the most optimistic projections. No amount of fudging by the Finance Department will hide the dollar bills sticking out through the windows and poking under doors.
- Newfoundland and Labrador will become a "have" province for a decade or more.
- The January deal will only be worth $2.0 billion not the scads more predicted by Danny and his boys.
- The province is ultimately faced with a serious political question for the first time in its recent history. We have to decide whether or not we want to blow the whole wad on everyones' wish lists or do something practical and productive with it.
It will be time for a genuinely new approach to politics.
I wish it was an April Fools' joke
Mile One is a time machine for ancient entertainment.
VOCM is reporting that country music singer George Jones is coming to Mile One to perform 50 years of hits. Yep a half century of country from a guy who retired from the business before half the people who usually go to concerts were even born.
In the first season, the Mile One line-up consisted of every C List entertainer still alive and willing to go anywhere for a gig. It was a bit like flicking on any recent PBS fundraising telethon.
Seems the only guy they haven't tried to book is Frank Gorshin. Keith Coombs might check him out.
Frank even has a link to a raft of those guys who now turn up mostly on John Gushue's Trivia Crosstalk on CBC Radio. You know them, the kind of people only ubernerds like me remember.
Guys like Jawa Number 3 from Star Wars. (Seriously. He's there.) Or people who had one appearance in the original Star Trek as one or another guest star. Sorry guys, no expendable crewmen in red tunics.
C'mon Keith, there are enough Star Trek fans around to want to see Frank and his minor, minor, minor Star Trek alum again.
VOCM is reporting that country music singer George Jones is coming to Mile One to perform 50 years of hits. Yep a half century of country from a guy who retired from the business before half the people who usually go to concerts were even born.
In the first season, the Mile One line-up consisted of every C List entertainer still alive and willing to go anywhere for a gig. It was a bit like flicking on any recent PBS fundraising telethon.
Seems the only guy they haven't tried to book is Frank Gorshin. Keith Coombs might check him out.
Frank even has a link to a raft of those guys who now turn up mostly on John Gushue's Trivia Crosstalk on CBC Radio. You know them, the kind of people only ubernerds like me remember.
Guys like Jawa Number 3 from Star Wars. (Seriously. He's there.) Or people who had one appearance in the original Star Trek as one or another guest star. Sorry guys, no expendable crewmen in red tunics.
C'mon Keith, there are enough Star Trek fans around to want to see Frank and his minor, minor, minor Star Trek alum again.
31 March 2005
Kevin O'Brien for Health Minister
Tom Marshall must be some kind of bizarre two-legged homing pigeon. Either that or he is a binary traveler: St. Johns or Corner Brook.
How else to explain the story on VO's website today that the freshly minted acting health minister is out collecting information on cancer clinics by visiting Corner Brook?
He apparently said he is pleased with what he saw but thinks improvements will be needed in the future. Will that future be before or after changes in Grand Falls?
When is Tom headed to Grand Falls, anyway?
How else to explain the story on VO's website today that the freshly minted acting health minister is out collecting information on cancer clinics by visiting Corner Brook?
He apparently said he is pleased with what he saw but thinks improvements will be needed in the future. Will that future be before or after changes in Grand Falls?
When is Tom headed to Grand Falls, anyway?
Winter availability
For just a little background on the winter availability deals between CFLCo and Hydro Quebec, flip to these two releases:
1. Issued By Natural Resources Minister Ed Byrne last year.
Skip down a bit from the Premier's comments about reselling the power "outside the province" and you can easily see that what follows in the second link is actually the truth of it.
2. Issued by Paul Dicks as Mines and Energy Minister in 2000.
As the release says: "The release of this information by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro should put to rest, once and for all, the misleading and inaccurate statements made by the Leader of the Opposition," said Minister Dicks. "Mr. Byrne is just plain wrong and his deliberate misrepresentation of the truth is irresponsible and detrimental to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador."
Go down a little bit more in the older release and you find this:
"The minister noted that without the GWAC and Shareholders’ Agreement, both of which arose from the March 9, 1998 Framework Agreement with Hydro Quebec, CF(L)Co would have been in financial jeopardy. Indeed, in the absence of such arrangements, it would have been possible for Hydro Quebec to take greater ownership and control of CF(L)Co. These agreements protect Newfoundland and Labrador’s interests over the long term," said the minister." [Emphasis added]
"These agreements have been very beneficial to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and to the province as a whole. In fact, the GWAC and Shareholders’ Agreement, as well as the 130 mw Recall Block arrangement, will result in revenues of $2 billion over the life of the deals. These revenues will be used to develop hydro resources in the province, contributing to our economy, and will also provide substantial revenues to government to support social and economic programs as required."
Geez, Danny and Ed, I guess the Liberals did such a fine job of running the place into the ground you just kept on doing the same things.
By the way, where was Ed Byrne yesterday in government's initial response to the Ontario/Quebec proposal?
1. Issued By Natural Resources Minister Ed Byrne last year.
Skip down a bit from the Premier's comments about reselling the power "outside the province" and you can easily see that what follows in the second link is actually the truth of it.
2. Issued by Paul Dicks as Mines and Energy Minister in 2000.
As the release says: "The release of this information by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro should put to rest, once and for all, the misleading and inaccurate statements made by the Leader of the Opposition," said Minister Dicks. "Mr. Byrne is just plain wrong and his deliberate misrepresentation of the truth is irresponsible and detrimental to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador."
Go down a little bit more in the older release and you find this:
"The minister noted that without the GWAC and Shareholders’ Agreement, both of which arose from the March 9, 1998 Framework Agreement with Hydro Quebec, CF(L)Co would have been in financial jeopardy. Indeed, in the absence of such arrangements, it would have been possible for Hydro Quebec to take greater ownership and control of CF(L)Co. These agreements protect Newfoundland and Labrador’s interests over the long term," said the minister." [Emphasis added]
"These agreements have been very beneficial to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and to the province as a whole. In fact, the GWAC and Shareholders’ Agreement, as well as the 130 mw Recall Block arrangement, will result in revenues of $2 billion over the life of the deals. These revenues will be used to develop hydro resources in the province, contributing to our economy, and will also provide substantial revenues to government to support social and economic programs as required."
Geez, Danny and Ed, I guess the Liberals did such a fine job of running the place into the ground you just kept on doing the same things.
By the way, where was Ed Byrne yesterday in government's initial response to the Ontario/Quebec proposal?
More Churchill Stuff
Here's some additional information and observations on the Churchill hydroelectric issues.
Tomorrow, I would hope to see from the provincial government a list of all the proposals received with the names of the various companies or consortia (groups) that have expressed an interest in developing the Lower Churchill. We know enough about one proposal. Let's see the same level of detail from the others.
As a matter of accountability, that is the least we should expect at this point.
1. To start let's correct something I posted earlier about the Tobin plans for the Upper Churchill.
The rivers involved did flow south into Quebec. Seems the plan was to dam them and buildup the water level to the point where they could be diverted back to the Upper Churchill system. The environmental impacts and political costs associated with it were deemed too high and so the plan was scrapped. Without the added water, there was no value in adding more turbines to the Upper Churchill.
2. It is interesting to see Ontario again involved in the Lower Churchill. Those with memories will recall that in the negotiations between 1989 and 1992, Ontario was a part of the discussions. In fact the first meeting of energy ministers and officials, as I understand it, was held in the Ontario energy minister's office.
Talks continued until 1992 when the downturn in the economy made the project less attract. Quebec simply didn't respond to the last Newfoundland and Labrador proposal, preferring to "lay it aside" for the time being given the circumstances.
Incidentally, Quebec had made it clear that they felt they would be able to use all the Lower Churchill Power. Nonetheless, Ontario remained interested in the development since they were and are interested in new sources of electrical power.
3. It was interesting to hear Fortis' Stan Marshall on CBC radio this morning talking about the Ontario/Quebec proposal. Fortis has developed considerable expertise in electricity production and distribution throughout North America and Marshall's insights and advice should be taken into account.
He made many of the same observations that people have made before on the prospect of a Lower Churchill deal involving Quebec. Basically, it boils down to this, and these are my words (not Marshall's) for it:
- The Upper Churchill deal is in the past.
- If a deal with Quebec is a good deal, then let's sign it. The odds are small that the province will make the same sort of mistake as Brinco made made almost 40 years ago.
- Ontario's involvement is worthwhile for a number of reasons, not the least of which is to make the public perception in this province much better. Marshall called it optics. The main benefit they bring to the table is the ability to raise capital based on guaranteed Ontario purchases over a long period.
4. Overall, I'd still point to a few issues that we need to keep in mind:
- I am not yet convinced that the Grimes deal was quite as bad as people say. Maybe it is just the fact that the thing became such a political football, but I can't help but look at all the associations of all the people who condemned it to leave me with some doubts about the public perception of the last Lower Churchill deal.
- The odds of renegotiating the Upper Churchill deal are nil. That said, Hydro Quebec has been willing to look at creative ways of addressing some of the financial issues though things such as the winter availability contract that ultimately do nothing so much as keep CFLCo solvent and therefore in Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro's hands. Marshall's comments this morning on the Ontario/Quebec offer are likely to be very similar to what the provincial government will say if this is the proposal that is accepted for negotiation.
- The default provisions of the Upper Churchill deal (forestalled by things like winter availability) are likely in any deal on the Lower Churchill in a situation where someone else is fronting the cash. Private sector or public sector developers are likely to insist on the same thing or something like it involving substantial cash penalties for failing to deliver the power.
- Newfoundland and Labrador (including Hydro) lacks the ability to raise the needed capital to develop this project on its own. Even with purchase agreements with Canadian or US customers to backstop a funding request to the banks, the provincial government would be courting other financial problems if it tried to assume the debt for such a large project.
- There is likely very little appetite in Ottawa for pushing more cash or appearing to push more cash to Newfoundland and Labrador in the he wake of the crass way the provincial government handled the offshore talks from October to December last year. Paul Shelley just got politely shown the door. The Churchill projects wouldn't be any different, especially since the provincial governments in Ontario and Quebec can handle raising the needed capital.
Another few hours to go and we'll know more about what is happening.
Tomorrow, I would hope to see from the provincial government a list of all the proposals received with the names of the various companies or consortia (groups) that have expressed an interest in developing the Lower Churchill. We know enough about one proposal. Let's see the same level of detail from the others.
As a matter of accountability, that is the least we should expect at this point.
1. To start let's correct something I posted earlier about the Tobin plans for the Upper Churchill.
The rivers involved did flow south into Quebec. Seems the plan was to dam them and buildup the water level to the point where they could be diverted back to the Upper Churchill system. The environmental impacts and political costs associated with it were deemed too high and so the plan was scrapped. Without the added water, there was no value in adding more turbines to the Upper Churchill.
2. It is interesting to see Ontario again involved in the Lower Churchill. Those with memories will recall that in the negotiations between 1989 and 1992, Ontario was a part of the discussions. In fact the first meeting of energy ministers and officials, as I understand it, was held in the Ontario energy minister's office.
Talks continued until 1992 when the downturn in the economy made the project less attract. Quebec simply didn't respond to the last Newfoundland and Labrador proposal, preferring to "lay it aside" for the time being given the circumstances.
Incidentally, Quebec had made it clear that they felt they would be able to use all the Lower Churchill Power. Nonetheless, Ontario remained interested in the development since they were and are interested in new sources of electrical power.
3. It was interesting to hear Fortis' Stan Marshall on CBC radio this morning talking about the Ontario/Quebec proposal. Fortis has developed considerable expertise in electricity production and distribution throughout North America and Marshall's insights and advice should be taken into account.
He made many of the same observations that people have made before on the prospect of a Lower Churchill deal involving Quebec. Basically, it boils down to this, and these are my words (not Marshall's) for it:
- The Upper Churchill deal is in the past.
- If a deal with Quebec is a good deal, then let's sign it. The odds are small that the province will make the same sort of mistake as Brinco made made almost 40 years ago.
- Ontario's involvement is worthwhile for a number of reasons, not the least of which is to make the public perception in this province much better. Marshall called it optics. The main benefit they bring to the table is the ability to raise capital based on guaranteed Ontario purchases over a long period.
4. Overall, I'd still point to a few issues that we need to keep in mind:
- I am not yet convinced that the Grimes deal was quite as bad as people say. Maybe it is just the fact that the thing became such a political football, but I can't help but look at all the associations of all the people who condemned it to leave me with some doubts about the public perception of the last Lower Churchill deal.
- The odds of renegotiating the Upper Churchill deal are nil. That said, Hydro Quebec has been willing to look at creative ways of addressing some of the financial issues though things such as the winter availability contract that ultimately do nothing so much as keep CFLCo solvent and therefore in Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro's hands. Marshall's comments this morning on the Ontario/Quebec offer are likely to be very similar to what the provincial government will say if this is the proposal that is accepted for negotiation.
- The default provisions of the Upper Churchill deal (forestalled by things like winter availability) are likely in any deal on the Lower Churchill in a situation where someone else is fronting the cash. Private sector or public sector developers are likely to insist on the same thing or something like it involving substantial cash penalties for failing to deliver the power.
- Newfoundland and Labrador (including Hydro) lacks the ability to raise the needed capital to develop this project on its own. Even with purchase agreements with Canadian or US customers to backstop a funding request to the banks, the provincial government would be courting other financial problems if it tried to assume the debt for such a large project.
- There is likely very little appetite in Ottawa for pushing more cash or appearing to push more cash to Newfoundland and Labrador in the he wake of the crass way the provincial government handled the offshore talks from October to December last year. Paul Shelley just got politely shown the door. The Churchill projects wouldn't be any different, especially since the provincial governments in Ontario and Quebec can handle raising the needed capital.
Another few hours to go and we'll know more about what is happening.
The Churchill Options
As much as Premier Danny Williams might like to open development of the Lower Churchill to the world and have it developed using creative thinking, the whole project really boils down to a handful of issues and options.
1. Increased demand, but think Canadian before American. There is a growing demand for "clean" electrical energy, both in Canada and in the US. Quebec is actually a net importer of electricity. Ontario has a pressing need for new sources of power to replace some current nuclear capability or planned nuclear plant capacity. Both provinces need power from sources that don't contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.
The same can be said of the US marketplace, particularly New York state.
The most likely markets for Labrador power are in Canada.
2. There are basically only two ways out of Labrador. As much as Premier Williams may like to talk of Labrador electrical power as being a "world-class" resource, no one is likely to figure out how to send Labrador power to the People's Republic of China. Since we are looking at North American markets, we can either ship to or through Quebec or go across the Straits of Belle Isle to Newfoundland and then on to the mainland again via Port aux Basques.
The most economical way out of Labrador is through Quebec. The other route has significant engineering and other technical challenges that remain as they were in the 1960s when they were first proposed: very expensive.
3. There are basically two options for building the Lower Churchill plants.
a. Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro builds them, raising all the capital itself or with loan guarantees from the province and/or the federal government; or,
b. Someone else builds them: either public sector (Hydro Quebec) or private sector.
4. Who pays? With a debt level reaching closer to $14.0 billion, Newfoundland and Labrador has a limited capacity to assume any further debt directly or indirectly considering that the provincial government plans to keep running massive deficits for the next five years or more.
The latest provincial government estimate is that the project will cost in the neighbourhood of CDN$3.3 billion. Consider that to be a low estimate since it doesn't include a range of costs that would have to be factored into the final tally.
It is tempting to talk of using the new offshore money and the provincial government may look seriously at that option. Using a combination of cash and borrowing, the provincial government may be able to raise the necessary capital directly or through Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. The economics of this approach have to be considered carefully, given that the oil cash is one-time money and revenues from the sale of power will have to reimburse the costs of construction (pay off the debt) before it could be used for other things.
Consider as well that Hydro would likely only turn over some of its net earnings to government as a dividend so the potential for generating large amounts of cash for the provincial treasury may not be as high as people might think.
Revenues must be competitive, as well. If the project required construction of new transmission lines over longer distances (the fabled power corridor), then Hydro would have to deal with much greater costs. In the Upper Churchill case, one of the continuing problems in developing the project was getting the power to market at a competitive rate and recover initial investments. We can't just charge what we want for the power - the industry is competitive.
In any event, the $2.0 billion from oil was supposed to pay down the provincial debt. As it now appears, the debt will continue to spiral. The "We build it" option would likely produce little more than an increased debt load in exchange for a modest increase in long-term revenue. We would spend a lot to make a little.
In the other option, the capital costs are borne by the private sector, as with the original Churchill project. Then the private sector legitimately reaps the lion's share of the revenues as a reward.
The decision matrix on this one is pretty easy to draw. I'll be curious to see how many concrete proposals actually arrive in the mail at the Natural Resources Building by five o'clock tomorrow. My guess is the number of proposals won't be nearly as high as the number of companies who inquired.
5. Two Columbos
One more thing: Linda Calvert did a short piece on Canada Now Wednesday evening on Churchill Falls. She made a comment that the Upper Churchill capacity can't be increased because the company (Churchill Falls Labrador Corporation) is contractually obligated to deliver a set minimum amount of power to Quebec. Any increased generating capacity (more turbines) might jeopardize that obligation.
Interesting.
The way I heard it is that Tobin's big promise to add two more turbines at the Upper Churchill in 1998 foundered when surveyors discovered that the rivers they planned to divert actually flowed the wrong way. The expansion couldn't proceed because of a lack of added water to push the extra turbines.
And one more, one last thing: Premier Williams has said in the past he wanted to link a "redress" of the Upper Churchill contract to development of the Lower Churchill with Quebec as a prospective partner. Don't hold your breath too long waiting for that. Much like the shell game of the "recall power sales", there might be some accommodation. I suspect that if anything ever came of any "redress", it would be much like the offshore deal: a lot less than the hucksters and pitchmen would have you believe.
Hands up anybody reading this besides me who has actually ever seen the Upper Churchill contract?
1. Increased demand, but think Canadian before American. There is a growing demand for "clean" electrical energy, both in Canada and in the US. Quebec is actually a net importer of electricity. Ontario has a pressing need for new sources of power to replace some current nuclear capability or planned nuclear plant capacity. Both provinces need power from sources that don't contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.
The same can be said of the US marketplace, particularly New York state.
The most likely markets for Labrador power are in Canada.
2. There are basically only two ways out of Labrador. As much as Premier Williams may like to talk of Labrador electrical power as being a "world-class" resource, no one is likely to figure out how to send Labrador power to the People's Republic of China. Since we are looking at North American markets, we can either ship to or through Quebec or go across the Straits of Belle Isle to Newfoundland and then on to the mainland again via Port aux Basques.
The most economical way out of Labrador is through Quebec. The other route has significant engineering and other technical challenges that remain as they were in the 1960s when they were first proposed: very expensive.
3. There are basically two options for building the Lower Churchill plants.
a. Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro builds them, raising all the capital itself or with loan guarantees from the province and/or the federal government; or,
b. Someone else builds them: either public sector (Hydro Quebec) or private sector.
4. Who pays? With a debt level reaching closer to $14.0 billion, Newfoundland and Labrador has a limited capacity to assume any further debt directly or indirectly considering that the provincial government plans to keep running massive deficits for the next five years or more.
The latest provincial government estimate is that the project will cost in the neighbourhood of CDN$3.3 billion. Consider that to be a low estimate since it doesn't include a range of costs that would have to be factored into the final tally.
It is tempting to talk of using the new offshore money and the provincial government may look seriously at that option. Using a combination of cash and borrowing, the provincial government may be able to raise the necessary capital directly or through Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. The economics of this approach have to be considered carefully, given that the oil cash is one-time money and revenues from the sale of power will have to reimburse the costs of construction (pay off the debt) before it could be used for other things.
Consider as well that Hydro would likely only turn over some of its net earnings to government as a dividend so the potential for generating large amounts of cash for the provincial treasury may not be as high as people might think.
Revenues must be competitive, as well. If the project required construction of new transmission lines over longer distances (the fabled power corridor), then Hydro would have to deal with much greater costs. In the Upper Churchill case, one of the continuing problems in developing the project was getting the power to market at a competitive rate and recover initial investments. We can't just charge what we want for the power - the industry is competitive.
In any event, the $2.0 billion from oil was supposed to pay down the provincial debt. As it now appears, the debt will continue to spiral. The "We build it" option would likely produce little more than an increased debt load in exchange for a modest increase in long-term revenue. We would spend a lot to make a little.
In the other option, the capital costs are borne by the private sector, as with the original Churchill project. Then the private sector legitimately reaps the lion's share of the revenues as a reward.
The decision matrix on this one is pretty easy to draw. I'll be curious to see how many concrete proposals actually arrive in the mail at the Natural Resources Building by five o'clock tomorrow. My guess is the number of proposals won't be nearly as high as the number of companies who inquired.
5. Two Columbos
One more thing: Linda Calvert did a short piece on Canada Now Wednesday evening on Churchill Falls. She made a comment that the Upper Churchill capacity can't be increased because the company (Churchill Falls Labrador Corporation) is contractually obligated to deliver a set minimum amount of power to Quebec. Any increased generating capacity (more turbines) might jeopardize that obligation.
Interesting.
The way I heard it is that Tobin's big promise to add two more turbines at the Upper Churchill in 1998 foundered when surveyors discovered that the rivers they planned to divert actually flowed the wrong way. The expansion couldn't proceed because of a lack of added water to push the extra turbines.
And one more, one last thing: Premier Williams has said in the past he wanted to link a "redress" of the Upper Churchill contract to development of the Lower Churchill with Quebec as a prospective partner. Don't hold your breath too long waiting for that. Much like the shell game of the "recall power sales", there might be some accommodation. I suspect that if anything ever came of any "redress", it would be much like the offshore deal: a lot less than the hucksters and pitchmen would have you believe.
Hands up anybody reading this besides me who has actually ever seen the Upper Churchill contract?
The choice is ours - Goose Bay revisited
Since Thursday is turning out to be a Labrador day here at the Bond Papers, I thought I'd also reprint the text of a commentary done by your humble scribe for CBC Radio Morning Show last year.
As you can tell from the context, it was shortly after the provincial government hosted the American ambassador. The comments I made on the radar site are still valid: if the thing is built in Goose we are talking maybe 100 people plus their families. I still hold to the view that the Americans have no military interest in Goose Bay or Labrador generally as a site for their equipment. If an X-band radar winds up in Goose it will be built with Canadian money. But here again, I caution that National Defence has no operational interest in Goose Bay other than as a staging area. They don't need a base there.
Other than that, here's the commentary:
"US ambassador Paul Celucci didn’t go to Goose Bay last week to check out the training facilities. The American military already has bases that do everything Goose Bay can do or wants to do and more besides. The Americans, like the Germans, are closing bases at home and overseas. As the German ambassador keeps saying: how can you close bases at home and at the same time invest in new facilities at Canada?
In the modern context, that’s one of the reasons why pushing Goose Bay as a place to train pilots is like trying to grow cucumbers in Mount Pearl. Someone else can do it better and cheaper. What’s worse, the demand for pickles – in this case manned combat aircraft - is dropping. As a result, countries are changing their military forces to take advantage of new technology and lower their costs.
No small irony, then that the same week Celucci was being pitched on pilot training at Goose Bay, the Canadian Forces was testing a Predator remotely piloted vehicle from the same airport. Coupled with ground-based radar, like the surface wave system developed by Northern Radar of St. John’s and the American defence giant Raytheon, in the next five years, remotely piloted vehicles will do just about everything that needs to be done for coastal defence and security in Canada.
Count on it!
Ambassador Celucci is interested in Goose Bay as a possible site for part of the American ballistic missile defence system. For Goose Bay, though, being a BMD site won’t bring as many people to the community or as much money as people might think. That doesn’t mean Goose Bay won’t have military forces in its future. It’s just that the military options are limited. There may be better civilian opportunities for economic development in central Labrador, but for Goose Bay, the Cold War is finally over.
As for Premier Williams, he is really just making the same out-dated pitch his predecessors have used. Like Danny Williams now, Roger Grimes used to complain the federal government should be spending more money on Goose Bay.
That’s just misguided.
DND isn’t a regional economic subsidy program. The Canadian Forces do not train at Goose Bay now because they do not need Goose Bay. It is that simple. DND already spends too much on buildings it doesn’t need and doing jobs it just shouldn’t be doing.
Rather than gripe or chase old ideas, let’s look at something DND would be interested in – like strengthening the reserve forces here or basing Aurora patrol aircraft at Gander, both of which would actually improve Canadian defence capabilities.
The best defence-related economic potential for Newfoundland and Labrador isn’t in military bases at all. It’s in supplying goods and services. Northern Radar is one defence contractor in the province. Rutter, North Star, Stratos, GRI Simulations and others compete globally with the best and have produced thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in sales often without much meaningful support from the provincial government.
That needs to change, too.
As in Goose Bay last week, we can either reminisce about the good old days or be part of the future.
The choice is ours.
As you can tell from the context, it was shortly after the provincial government hosted the American ambassador. The comments I made on the radar site are still valid: if the thing is built in Goose we are talking maybe 100 people plus their families. I still hold to the view that the Americans have no military interest in Goose Bay or Labrador generally as a site for their equipment. If an X-band radar winds up in Goose it will be built with Canadian money. But here again, I caution that National Defence has no operational interest in Goose Bay other than as a staging area. They don't need a base there.
Other than that, here's the commentary:
"US ambassador Paul Celucci didn’t go to Goose Bay last week to check out the training facilities. The American military already has bases that do everything Goose Bay can do or wants to do and more besides. The Americans, like the Germans, are closing bases at home and overseas. As the German ambassador keeps saying: how can you close bases at home and at the same time invest in new facilities at Canada?
In the modern context, that’s one of the reasons why pushing Goose Bay as a place to train pilots is like trying to grow cucumbers in Mount Pearl. Someone else can do it better and cheaper. What’s worse, the demand for pickles – in this case manned combat aircraft - is dropping. As a result, countries are changing their military forces to take advantage of new technology and lower their costs.
No small irony, then that the same week Celucci was being pitched on pilot training at Goose Bay, the Canadian Forces was testing a Predator remotely piloted vehicle from the same airport. Coupled with ground-based radar, like the surface wave system developed by Northern Radar of St. John’s and the American defence giant Raytheon, in the next five years, remotely piloted vehicles will do just about everything that needs to be done for coastal defence and security in Canada.
Count on it!
Ambassador Celucci is interested in Goose Bay as a possible site for part of the American ballistic missile defence system. For Goose Bay, though, being a BMD site won’t bring as many people to the community or as much money as people might think. That doesn’t mean Goose Bay won’t have military forces in its future. It’s just that the military options are limited. There may be better civilian opportunities for economic development in central Labrador, but for Goose Bay, the Cold War is finally over.
As for Premier Williams, he is really just making the same out-dated pitch his predecessors have used. Like Danny Williams now, Roger Grimes used to complain the federal government should be spending more money on Goose Bay.
That’s just misguided.
DND isn’t a regional economic subsidy program. The Canadian Forces do not train at Goose Bay now because they do not need Goose Bay. It is that simple. DND already spends too much on buildings it doesn’t need and doing jobs it just shouldn’t be doing.
Rather than gripe or chase old ideas, let’s look at something DND would be interested in – like strengthening the reserve forces here or basing Aurora patrol aircraft at Gander, both of which would actually improve Canadian defence capabilities.
The best defence-related economic potential for Newfoundland and Labrador isn’t in military bases at all. It’s in supplying goods and services. Northern Radar is one defence contractor in the province. Rutter, North Star, Stratos, GRI Simulations and others compete globally with the best and have produced thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in sales often without much meaningful support from the provincial government.
That needs to change, too.
As in Goose Bay last week, we can either reminisce about the good old days or be part of the future.
The choice is ours.
RAF Goose Bay: a fond farewell
Today is the last day for the Royal Air Force detachment at Goose Bay.
CBC keeps referring to it as the "British" Royal Air Force as if there was another one.
In honour of this event, ending decades of British presence at the Goose, I offer up a column I wrote for the old Independent last year at this time. The federal defence minister had announced a bunch of obvious things and the local concerned citizens committee was still flogging old ideas about training.
What has changed in a year? Not much, sadly. The locals have switched from more low level training to an X-band radar. Go back and check my archives for early March to see some posts that point out the radar idea is not much better than the old Goose Bay obsession.
When it is all added up, though, the government still hasn't bothered to find anyone who actually udnerstands defence and can develop a sensible policy to get what can be had for Goose Bay. At the very least someone with a clue can save everyone from chasing nonsensical ideas.
For what it is worth, here's the column:
The panic is on to save Goose Bay.
Anybody paying attention has known for a few years the allies are reducing their training at Goose Bay. Defence minister David Pratt’s announcement the other day didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know: in 2006, the current training agreements expire, but in the meantime there will be some activity. Apparently, Canada is going to look into setting up a new training centre at Goose Bay that let’s pilots fly supersonic, drop live weapons and do just about anything they would do in wartime except kill people. To make sure training stays for those last two years, the federal government is prepared to charge Germany, Britain and a couple of others only for their gas and sandwiches. Everything else is free.
There aren’t many surprises in all that. NATO air forces have been changing in the past 10 years, in part to save money, and in part to keep up with the role of air power in the modern world. The changes have meant fewer aircraft, for the most part, and the mission profiles have seen the low altitude role reduced dramatically. There is also an even greater need for training with allies, especially the United States.
The Luftwaffe, for example, has reduced the number of aircraft it flies and consolidated training in New Mexico. Why New Mexico? Well for one thing, the weather lets them fly round the clock all year. Second, the desert terrain is more like the land they might be flying over operationally. Third, the German pilots get to train with their major ally, the Americans. Fourth, they can also consolidate a bunch of different training for the army and air force, thereby saving a ton of money. Fifth, they can use the existing facilities in the U.S. that cover everything they need to do – supersonic, chaff, live weapons. Costs are cheaper and they are available today – not after a lengthy, expensive and sometimes difficult political process needed to start building from scratch as we would do at Goose Bay. Existing facilities at New Mexico are such an attractive option for the Germans that they invested more than US$40 million of their own money to build new hangars and offices there in 2000.
The slow-down at Goose has been coming for years, not like a Stealth fighter, but like a B-36 throttling up at the end of the runway. You couldn’t miss it, even if you were dead.
Officials in Newfoundland and Labrador didn’t miss it; they just followed a historic local pattern of ignoring the opportunities until a crisis emerged. Defence spending brings a lot of money to this province. Hundreds of millions of dollars comes from bases like Goose Bay, or from the reserve forces in the province. The money they spend comes in the form of salaries and purchased goods and services from local companies. In addition, though, a growing number of businesses throughout the province are landing contracts manufacturing components for military equipment or supplying communications and other high technology services. They generate as much or more in the private sector than the federal government could ever spend here. Those companies work without the recognition and support they should be receiving from government.
It really is time to take a new approach to defence. One of the most productive things the Williams government could do is hire someone who knows defence issues. Get someone who speaks the language understood by defence officials in the public and private sectors. Set him or her to work securing what we already have and identifying new opportunities for increasing public and private sector investment. The amounts at stake here for the whole province are considerably more than the $100 million some say the Goose training program generates. That new approach would ensure we are acting before decisions are made, not like Goose Bay, nuclear submarines, coastal patrol vessels, the Gander base or the NATO air weapons training centre where we have never been on the leading edge.
In the usual panic with these things, we wind up losing money. We discount our services, as defence minister David Pratt announced last week and as the Goose Bay lobby endorses. Worse still, we wind up competing in areas where others have a big advantage. Odds are really good that in building new infrastructure like supersonic and live weapons ranges, the taxpayers of this province and Canada will wind up eating the costs. That is in stark contrast to New Mexico where the Germans invested their own money to train. Wow!
A couple of weeks ago, The Sunday Independent profiled a local defence contracting coalition, Northstar Network. Companies in that venture are working to get a piece of the multi-billion dollar defence business, something they have already shown they can do. Local companies can compete successfully against the best in the world. They have shown it already. They play to our strengths. They plan. They work. They reap the benefits in jobs and profits.
There’s an old military saying: fail to plan; plan to fail. In this province, we know the truth of that axiom in just about every sector of the economy. It’s time to learn from our mistakes.
CBC keeps referring to it as the "British" Royal Air Force as if there was another one.
In honour of this event, ending decades of British presence at the Goose, I offer up a column I wrote for the old Independent last year at this time. The federal defence minister had announced a bunch of obvious things and the local concerned citizens committee was still flogging old ideas about training.
What has changed in a year? Not much, sadly. The locals have switched from more low level training to an X-band radar. Go back and check my archives for early March to see some posts that point out the radar idea is not much better than the old Goose Bay obsession.
When it is all added up, though, the government still hasn't bothered to find anyone who actually udnerstands defence and can develop a sensible policy to get what can be had for Goose Bay. At the very least someone with a clue can save everyone from chasing nonsensical ideas.
For what it is worth, here's the column:
The panic is on to save Goose Bay.
Anybody paying attention has known for a few years the allies are reducing their training at Goose Bay. Defence minister David Pratt’s announcement the other day didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know: in 2006, the current training agreements expire, but in the meantime there will be some activity. Apparently, Canada is going to look into setting up a new training centre at Goose Bay that let’s pilots fly supersonic, drop live weapons and do just about anything they would do in wartime except kill people. To make sure training stays for those last two years, the federal government is prepared to charge Germany, Britain and a couple of others only for their gas and sandwiches. Everything else is free.
There aren’t many surprises in all that. NATO air forces have been changing in the past 10 years, in part to save money, and in part to keep up with the role of air power in the modern world. The changes have meant fewer aircraft, for the most part, and the mission profiles have seen the low altitude role reduced dramatically. There is also an even greater need for training with allies, especially the United States.
The Luftwaffe, for example, has reduced the number of aircraft it flies and consolidated training in New Mexico. Why New Mexico? Well for one thing, the weather lets them fly round the clock all year. Second, the desert terrain is more like the land they might be flying over operationally. Third, the German pilots get to train with their major ally, the Americans. Fourth, they can also consolidate a bunch of different training for the army and air force, thereby saving a ton of money. Fifth, they can use the existing facilities in the U.S. that cover everything they need to do – supersonic, chaff, live weapons. Costs are cheaper and they are available today – not after a lengthy, expensive and sometimes difficult political process needed to start building from scratch as we would do at Goose Bay. Existing facilities at New Mexico are such an attractive option for the Germans that they invested more than US$40 million of their own money to build new hangars and offices there in 2000.
The slow-down at Goose has been coming for years, not like a Stealth fighter, but like a B-36 throttling up at the end of the runway. You couldn’t miss it, even if you were dead.
Officials in Newfoundland and Labrador didn’t miss it; they just followed a historic local pattern of ignoring the opportunities until a crisis emerged. Defence spending brings a lot of money to this province. Hundreds of millions of dollars comes from bases like Goose Bay, or from the reserve forces in the province. The money they spend comes in the form of salaries and purchased goods and services from local companies. In addition, though, a growing number of businesses throughout the province are landing contracts manufacturing components for military equipment or supplying communications and other high technology services. They generate as much or more in the private sector than the federal government could ever spend here. Those companies work without the recognition and support they should be receiving from government.
It really is time to take a new approach to defence. One of the most productive things the Williams government could do is hire someone who knows defence issues. Get someone who speaks the language understood by defence officials in the public and private sectors. Set him or her to work securing what we already have and identifying new opportunities for increasing public and private sector investment. The amounts at stake here for the whole province are considerably more than the $100 million some say the Goose training program generates. That new approach would ensure we are acting before decisions are made, not like Goose Bay, nuclear submarines, coastal patrol vessels, the Gander base or the NATO air weapons training centre where we have never been on the leading edge.
In the usual panic with these things, we wind up losing money. We discount our services, as defence minister David Pratt announced last week and as the Goose Bay lobby endorses. Worse still, we wind up competing in areas where others have a big advantage. Odds are really good that in building new infrastructure like supersonic and live weapons ranges, the taxpayers of this province and Canada will wind up eating the costs. That is in stark contrast to New Mexico where the Germans invested their own money to train. Wow!
A couple of weeks ago, The Sunday Independent profiled a local defence contracting coalition, Northstar Network. Companies in that venture are working to get a piece of the multi-billion dollar defence business, something they have already shown they can do. Local companies can compete successfully against the best in the world. They have shown it already. They play to our strengths. They plan. They work. They reap the benefits in jobs and profits.
There’s an old military saying: fail to plan; plan to fail. In this province, we know the truth of that axiom in just about every sector of the economy. It’s time to learn from our mistakes.
30 March 2005
First Lower Churchill proposal unveiled
In a proposal unveiled today, Ontario and Quebec have partnered with the private sector engineering firm SNC-Lavalin to develop the Lower Churchill.
Actually Ontario and Quebec are making two proposals:
Option 1 would see the two provinces funding development of Gull Island and Muskrat Falls and lease the sites from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro for 50 years. Both provinces would split ownership of a new joint venture company based on one-third for Ontario and two-thirds for Hydro Quebec.
Option 2 would involve Ontario and Quebec signing a power purchase agreement with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. In this version NL Hydro and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador would have to raise the capital necessary to build the project and the distribution system to the Quebec border.
Under both versions, Ontario would purchase one third of the total power output (945 megawatts out of a total of 2, 824 megawatts) produced by the two sites.
Hydro Quebec will also build a new distribution connection to Ontario.
Short-listed proposals will have to undergo feasibility studies before the provincial government chooses one or any of the proposals expected to be received. As CBC is reporting, the Ontario/Quebec options would see construction start in 2006 with expected completion by 2011.
The news from Ontario and Quebec is of such importance that Premier Williams has issued a statement welcoming the proposal despite the fact he has been out of the country on vacation since last Thursday.
The only other interest in the Lower Churchill thus far has been the so-called Sino-Energy consortium which signed an agreement with the provincial government last year to gain access to all information on the Lower Churchill held by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and the provincial government. Signed in late May 2004, the existence of the disclosure agreement was kept secret until late July when Premier Williams revealed it in a media briefing. Details - like which companies were involved - were not made public until September.
Last October, the Telegram revealed that one of the partners in the consortium - CMEC from the People's Republic of China - was under sanction from the US government for arms sales to countries like Pakistan. The information - obtained through a simple google search - was apparently unknown to the provincial government; Premier Williams accused unnamed competitors from leaking the information despite the fact it was contained on US government websites.
The provincial government hired a Montreal-based legal firm to look into the sanctions but its report has not be released by the province.
The US will not import from a sanctioned company, thereby preventing from the Sino-Energy consortium from being involved in the production of Lower Churchill electricity that might be sold to US customers.
Actually Ontario and Quebec are making two proposals:
Option 1 would see the two provinces funding development of Gull Island and Muskrat Falls and lease the sites from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro for 50 years. Both provinces would split ownership of a new joint venture company based on one-third for Ontario and two-thirds for Hydro Quebec.
Option 2 would involve Ontario and Quebec signing a power purchase agreement with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. In this version NL Hydro and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador would have to raise the capital necessary to build the project and the distribution system to the Quebec border.
Under both versions, Ontario would purchase one third of the total power output (945 megawatts out of a total of 2, 824 megawatts) produced by the two sites.
Hydro Quebec will also build a new distribution connection to Ontario.
Short-listed proposals will have to undergo feasibility studies before the provincial government chooses one or any of the proposals expected to be received. As CBC is reporting, the Ontario/Quebec options would see construction start in 2006 with expected completion by 2011.
The news from Ontario and Quebec is of such importance that Premier Williams has issued a statement welcoming the proposal despite the fact he has been out of the country on vacation since last Thursday.
The only other interest in the Lower Churchill thus far has been the so-called Sino-Energy consortium which signed an agreement with the provincial government last year to gain access to all information on the Lower Churchill held by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and the provincial government. Signed in late May 2004, the existence of the disclosure agreement was kept secret until late July when Premier Williams revealed it in a media briefing. Details - like which companies were involved - were not made public until September.
Last October, the Telegram revealed that one of the partners in the consortium - CMEC from the People's Republic of China - was under sanction from the US government for arms sales to countries like Pakistan. The information - obtained through a simple google search - was apparently unknown to the provincial government; Premier Williams accused unnamed competitors from leaking the information despite the fact it was contained on US government websites.
The provincial government hired a Montreal-based legal firm to look into the sanctions but its report has not be released by the province.
The US will not import from a sanctioned company, thereby preventing from the Sino-Energy consortium from being involved in the production of Lower Churchill electricity that might be sold to US customers.
A prayer for John Ottenheimer
No matter how you feel about anything, say a quiet prayer for John Ottenheimer.
John Ottenheimer is one of those guys in politics whose sincerity makes up for all the other politicians on the planet who get know for something else. He is a good and decent man.
That's why it is especially distressing to hear about his health problems.
On a flight from Gander on Tuesday, the provincial health minister lost consciousness for an extended period (upwards of four minutes) and was reported by his executive assistant to have been experience some physical weakness after regaining consciousness and being shipped to the local hospital.
There was lots of spec yesterday that the flu story being pumped out was a cover. I found it odd that the EA used the word "episode" in his media interview; that's a term the med-types like to use in relation to cardiac problems.
Pretty well anyone with a history of cardiac problems in their family can sense that the sniffles don't usually send you out cold and leave you with weakness. No surprise therefore that CBC is reporting this morning that Ottenheimer has had a pacemaker installed and has been shipped back to St. John's for further treatment.
Here's a quiet prayer John is back on his feet very soon.
John Ottenheimer is one of those guys in politics whose sincerity makes up for all the other politicians on the planet who get know for something else. He is a good and decent man.
That's why it is especially distressing to hear about his health problems.
On a flight from Gander on Tuesday, the provincial health minister lost consciousness for an extended period (upwards of four minutes) and was reported by his executive assistant to have been experience some physical weakness after regaining consciousness and being shipped to the local hospital.
There was lots of spec yesterday that the flu story being pumped out was a cover. I found it odd that the EA used the word "episode" in his media interview; that's a term the med-types like to use in relation to cardiac problems.
Pretty well anyone with a history of cardiac problems in their family can sense that the sniffles don't usually send you out cold and leave you with weakness. No surprise therefore that CBC is reporting this morning that Ottenheimer has had a pacemaker installed and has been shipped back to St. John's for further treatment.
Here's a quiet prayer John is back on his feet very soon.
Surprise, surprise, surprise,
as Gomer Pyle used to say.
This CP story today confirms what many of us have been saying for days: The whole C-43 thing would blow over if it wasn't actually a complete scam from the outset.
There isn't a single party in Ottawa that genuinely wants an election right now. In fact, just about everyone would work not to have the writ drop.
So no surprise that Conservative leader Stephen Harper is suddenly backing this January deal and Jack Layton is going to be constructive with some new ideas. Both the NDP and Conservatives apparently are committed to vote against C-43 in its present form.
Here's a curious twist. According to CP, Harper wants the offshore bits of the bill put into a separate pile so he can vote for that and against the rest of C-43. Grandma's OAS cheque is left in there Stevie. Why not strip out the Kyoto bits that you and Jack have problems with and go tear that apart?
Closer to home, though, people should be looking more closely at Blarney the Dinosaur. While he will probably run around claiming victory, the simple fact is: there never was a crisis. It's an old political con to warn of something you know won't happen and then claim victory when it doesn't. This isn't the first time he's pulled it or raising issues that really aren't big issues.
At some point, even the Open Line guys will start wondering if Blarney is worth listening to any more.
This CP story today confirms what many of us have been saying for days: The whole C-43 thing would blow over if it wasn't actually a complete scam from the outset.
There isn't a single party in Ottawa that genuinely wants an election right now. In fact, just about everyone would work not to have the writ drop.
So no surprise that Conservative leader Stephen Harper is suddenly backing this January deal and Jack Layton is going to be constructive with some new ideas. Both the NDP and Conservatives apparently are committed to vote against C-43 in its present form.
Here's a curious twist. According to CP, Harper wants the offshore bits of the bill put into a separate pile so he can vote for that and against the rest of C-43. Grandma's OAS cheque is left in there Stevie. Why not strip out the Kyoto bits that you and Jack have problems with and go tear that apart?
Closer to home, though, people should be looking more closely at Blarney the Dinosaur. While he will probably run around claiming victory, the simple fact is: there never was a crisis. It's an old political con to warn of something you know won't happen and then claim victory when it doesn't. This isn't the first time he's pulled it or raising issues that really aren't big issues.
At some point, even the Open Line guys will start wondering if Blarney is worth listening to any more.
New hope for old media hound
Terri Schiavo's parents can rest easy.
Jesse Jackson has now shown up before the cameras telling everyone he is on their side. See this story and the nice picture of Jesse.
This is proof positive that the Schindler's campaign to have a feeding tube reinserted in their daughter has now attained a critical mass of cameras. The Jesse-o-meter is the proof. He just doesn't show up for something without the right level of media attention.
Jackson, who must surely be cringing at the thought of setting foot in Florida - he once called New York a derogatory term because of so many Jews living there - is well known to Canadians as the guy who showed up at Oka offering to help resolve the stand-off. He demonstrated the accuracy of his intel by telling reporters at a scrum that two deaths were too many. Incredulous reporters - who knew only one person had been killed - took delight in embarrassing Jesse pretty badly. He got very testy when they didn't just stand their and record his blather for posterity or at oeast the US wire services.
On a related matter, go over and check Paul Wells' blog. He starts by riffing on Ottawa Sun columnist Earl MacRae through a link to a couple of other articulate blogs. It is worth following especially since the root of the riff is in MacRae's looney column on Terri Schiavo.
Here's one of my favourite lines from the guys looking to have the tube reinserted. They claim that Terri's husband has moved on with his life by marrying again and fathering two children. Minor problem: Schiavo didn't divorce his wife, Terri. He did not re-marry, nor did he marry another woman while at the same time being married to Terri. Yes, he is co-habitating and has fathered two children, but there is a big difference between that and the illegal acts he is alleged to have committed. It just goes to show that even the most basic of facts are irrelevant to some people when they get fired up with a righteous cause.
The only thing I can say with any conviction on this case is that were Terri Schiavo capable of uttering a single cluster of coherent syllables it would likely be something designed to get rid of the carrion-birds feasting off her body long before she is dead.
Jesse Jackson has now shown up before the cameras telling everyone he is on their side. See this story and the nice picture of Jesse.
This is proof positive that the Schindler's campaign to have a feeding tube reinserted in their daughter has now attained a critical mass of cameras. The Jesse-o-meter is the proof. He just doesn't show up for something without the right level of media attention.
Jackson, who must surely be cringing at the thought of setting foot in Florida - he once called New York a derogatory term because of so many Jews living there - is well known to Canadians as the guy who showed up at Oka offering to help resolve the stand-off. He demonstrated the accuracy of his intel by telling reporters at a scrum that two deaths were too many. Incredulous reporters - who knew only one person had been killed - took delight in embarrassing Jesse pretty badly. He got very testy when they didn't just stand their and record his blather for posterity or at oeast the US wire services.
On a related matter, go over and check Paul Wells' blog. He starts by riffing on Ottawa Sun columnist Earl MacRae through a link to a couple of other articulate blogs. It is worth following especially since the root of the riff is in MacRae's looney column on Terri Schiavo.
Here's one of my favourite lines from the guys looking to have the tube reinserted. They claim that Terri's husband has moved on with his life by marrying again and fathering two children. Minor problem: Schiavo didn't divorce his wife, Terri. He did not re-marry, nor did he marry another woman while at the same time being married to Terri. Yes, he is co-habitating and has fathered two children, but there is a big difference between that and the illegal acts he is alleged to have committed. It just goes to show that even the most basic of facts are irrelevant to some people when they get fired up with a righteous cause.
The only thing I can say with any conviction on this case is that were Terri Schiavo capable of uttering a single cluster of coherent syllables it would likely be something designed to get rid of the carrion-birds feasting off her body long before she is dead.
29 March 2005
You can hear the eyelids slamming shut...
After a few days of hype and what is euphemistically called speculation by serious journalists, there is a CBC national radio news story tonight from Caroline Dunn about the fuss over Bill C-43. (Sorry there's no link to it.)
While Caroline is very quick to point out there is nothing official yet, she does give two reliable quotes, one Liberal and one Conservative, that point to...wait for it... a deal on Bill C-43 that would allow the right bits of the bill to pass, the difficult ones to go somewhere else and for everyone to avoid an election this spring.
Scan back over these e-pages the past couple of days and you will likely find at least one spot where I either predicted this outcome or strongly suggested it as a sensible option. Certainly I never subscribed to the Great Evil Liberal Conspiracy being foisted by local worrywarts on radio-call-in shows here in Newfoundland and Labrador.
When you take a step back and look at the whole schlamozzle, first raised by Blarney The Dinosaur from The Southern Shore last Thursday or Friday there really never was much chance of an election anyway.
The Liberals may be in the best spot in months but they wouldn't be too anxious to force an election or appear to cause one to occur.
The Conservatives, for all their bluster, have some problems like everyone else in politics, so they weren't about to be seen to smash money for Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, plus cash for seniors, children and just about everyone else all over what they were saying early in the crisis was the word "toxic" being omitted from part of the bill. Even in the grander version, the Conservatives weren't about to be portrayed as electioneers by stomping on an environmental initiative...
at the expense of grandma's' OAS cheque.
Nope.
Everyone knows that taking cash out of a voter's pocket is no way to start an election.
Anyone who was planning something else just blinked so loudly blind people could hear the eyelids slamming shut in Ottawa.
While Caroline is very quick to point out there is nothing official yet, she does give two reliable quotes, one Liberal and one Conservative, that point to...wait for it... a deal on Bill C-43 that would allow the right bits of the bill to pass, the difficult ones to go somewhere else and for everyone to avoid an election this spring.
Scan back over these e-pages the past couple of days and you will likely find at least one spot where I either predicted this outcome or strongly suggested it as a sensible option. Certainly I never subscribed to the Great Evil Liberal Conspiracy being foisted by local worrywarts on radio-call-in shows here in Newfoundland and Labrador.
When you take a step back and look at the whole schlamozzle, first raised by Blarney The Dinosaur from The Southern Shore last Thursday or Friday there really never was much chance of an election anyway.
The Liberals may be in the best spot in months but they wouldn't be too anxious to force an election or appear to cause one to occur.
The Conservatives, for all their bluster, have some problems like everyone else in politics, so they weren't about to be seen to smash money for Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, plus cash for seniors, children and just about everyone else all over what they were saying early in the crisis was the word "toxic" being omitted from part of the bill. Even in the grander version, the Conservatives weren't about to be portrayed as electioneers by stomping on an environmental initiative...
at the expense of grandma's' OAS cheque.
Nope.
Everyone knows that taking cash out of a voter's pocket is no way to start an election.
Anyone who was planning something else just blinked so loudly blind people could hear the eyelids slamming shut in Ottawa.
More offshore goings on - what is happening.
Flip around the net today and you'll see some stories on the offshore bill currently before parliament in Ottawa.
CBC Radio has Loyola Sullivan writing the feds, as noted in the Blarney post. This story also has Roger Grimes criticizing Danny Williams for not seeing this problem and negotiating a separate piece of federal legislation.
VOCM is quoting a number Bill Matthews encouraging his [former (?)] political soulmates Loyola Hearn and Norm Doyle to pressure their party to vote the right way on the offshore bill.
So what is it all about in as few words as possible?
1. On one level, the federal Opposition parties are flexing their muscle to see what they can get the government to do to make them happy. It is a cosmic game of chicken among the parties in Ottawa, the Libs included.
Even Jean LaPierre's musing about not wanting an election feeds into the game since it is possible the Opposition types would be dumb enough to defeat the government and head to the polls. Since the Liberals are on an upswing and all the Other Guys are not, it isn't the government that stands to lose. LaPierre's comments about losing seats in Quebec is almost laughable; the Blocheads know full well they are about at their peak - they have to wonder if it's worth gambling their huge winnings last time on picking up a handful of new seats next time.
Contrary to appearances, the Cons still have some deep internal divisions, especially here in Newfoundland and Labrador. Everyone might blunder into an election, but no one should feel smug about the outcome. Expect the Martinites to fight a slightly better campaign than their last one.
2. On another level, the federal Conservatives are playing to their money base with the play against Kyoto. Irony of ironies, even though the provincial government here doesn't like some aspects of Kyoto either, the local take on this pits oil money against oil interests and oil interests are losing in popular opinion. The Harperites might be emboldeneed by some internal polling and their supposed convention bounce; personally if I were a Con strategist, I'd count on a few policy meltdowns on the trail. That is, unless you manage to dump every single one of your old Reform/Alliance members of parliament.
3. The Libs are trying to hide their Kyoto tardiness. Big announcement, but so far no plan and no progress. The measures in C-43 are little bits of Kyoto that look like action without being substantive moves forward. They will play well across the country, except in some segments of Alberta opinion. Truth is, health care is more important to Albertans than Kyoto. Ask any polling firm. The Martinites are looking strong on health and toher key issues.
4. On an individual level, Loyola Hearn is using this for his own purposes, aided and abetted by his buddy Loyola Sullivan and the letter to John Efford. They are identifying the wrong problem (it isn't the government, guys) and the jabs at Efford suggest the Loyola Twins are still setting one or both of the pair up for a run at federal politics next time out. It's a pretty crass game, boys. Be ashamed.
5. The provincial government stopped working before the fight was over. I had some government sources telling me a few months ago that no one on The Hill had bothered to do a count and see if the offshore bill would pass. They took it for granted; I was floored. Now we have the proof that the provincial government wanted to declare victory and start the floor show long before the job was actually done.
6. Roger Grimes scores big on other issues; flubs the offshore. Despite a strong and effective performance in the budget aftermath, especially on the Grand Falls cancer clinic, Grimes is just throwing something at the wall when he talks about negotiating some kind of deal beforehand on how the bill would proceed.
No government is going to stand for having its running of the House a subject for negotiation with the outside world. I don't tell you how to speak to your wife at breakfast, Roger. There are some things that are just none of anyone's business. If someone had suggested to Roger the format for government legislation, I would hope Roger would have told them to sod off.
More to the point, though: Look up, Roger, at point 4, and see a stronger argument.
7. Efford is shocked; Who cares? The CBC Radio story says Efford is shocked at this situation - that's their starting comment. Who cares how you feel John? Make a substantive comment. Too many politicians, Efford and Grimes included, like to start their media comments with phrases like "shocked", "dismayed" or "appalled" as in 'The politician in question is shocked at recent media reports..."
Short answer from the news rooms of the world: who gives a flying toss about your mental state? If you are feeling something try taking a pill, getting some exercise or seeing a psychiatrist. Your moods aren't news. Give me some substantive comment or get lost.
8. Efford may be sleeping. As I have noted, in Nova Scotia, their federal cabinet rep took the lead on the story. Here it was Blarney, the Dinosaur. Efford was unseen and unheard until a couple of days into the story. John needs to revamp his office in a big way. Start with yourself. When it comes to any staff changes, just make sure you hand out the pink slips correctly the first time, John.
9. Last but not least, VOCM needs new talk show hosts who actually understand current events. If Open Nite Line is actually pure entertainment, then by all means replace the current talking heads with actors and other performers. Brian Tobin is looking for work. Maybe you can cut a deal with Rogers to borrow their Out of the Fog team now that they have a stronger call-in show on Sunday nights to handle news and current events.
CBC Radio has Loyola Sullivan writing the feds, as noted in the Blarney post. This story also has Roger Grimes criticizing Danny Williams for not seeing this problem and negotiating a separate piece of federal legislation.
VOCM is quoting a number Bill Matthews encouraging his [former (?)] political soulmates Loyola Hearn and Norm Doyle to pressure their party to vote the right way on the offshore bill.
So what is it all about in as few words as possible?
1. On one level, the federal Opposition parties are flexing their muscle to see what they can get the government to do to make them happy. It is a cosmic game of chicken among the parties in Ottawa, the Libs included.
Even Jean LaPierre's musing about not wanting an election feeds into the game since it is possible the Opposition types would be dumb enough to defeat the government and head to the polls. Since the Liberals are on an upswing and all the Other Guys are not, it isn't the government that stands to lose. LaPierre's comments about losing seats in Quebec is almost laughable; the Blocheads know full well they are about at their peak - they have to wonder if it's worth gambling their huge winnings last time on picking up a handful of new seats next time.
Contrary to appearances, the Cons still have some deep internal divisions, especially here in Newfoundland and Labrador. Everyone might blunder into an election, but no one should feel smug about the outcome. Expect the Martinites to fight a slightly better campaign than their last one.
2. On another level, the federal Conservatives are playing to their money base with the play against Kyoto. Irony of ironies, even though the provincial government here doesn't like some aspects of Kyoto either, the local take on this pits oil money against oil interests and oil interests are losing in popular opinion. The Harperites might be emboldeneed by some internal polling and their supposed convention bounce; personally if I were a Con strategist, I'd count on a few policy meltdowns on the trail. That is, unless you manage to dump every single one of your old Reform/Alliance members of parliament.
3. The Libs are trying to hide their Kyoto tardiness. Big announcement, but so far no plan and no progress. The measures in C-43 are little bits of Kyoto that look like action without being substantive moves forward. They will play well across the country, except in some segments of Alberta opinion. Truth is, health care is more important to Albertans than Kyoto. Ask any polling firm. The Martinites are looking strong on health and toher key issues.
4. On an individual level, Loyola Hearn is using this for his own purposes, aided and abetted by his buddy Loyola Sullivan and the letter to John Efford. They are identifying the wrong problem (it isn't the government, guys) and the jabs at Efford suggest the Loyola Twins are still setting one or both of the pair up for a run at federal politics next time out. It's a pretty crass game, boys. Be ashamed.
5. The provincial government stopped working before the fight was over. I had some government sources telling me a few months ago that no one on The Hill had bothered to do a count and see if the offshore bill would pass. They took it for granted; I was floored. Now we have the proof that the provincial government wanted to declare victory and start the floor show long before the job was actually done.
6. Roger Grimes scores big on other issues; flubs the offshore. Despite a strong and effective performance in the budget aftermath, especially on the Grand Falls cancer clinic, Grimes is just throwing something at the wall when he talks about negotiating some kind of deal beforehand on how the bill would proceed.
No government is going to stand for having its running of the House a subject for negotiation with the outside world. I don't tell you how to speak to your wife at breakfast, Roger. There are some things that are just none of anyone's business. If someone had suggested to Roger the format for government legislation, I would hope Roger would have told them to sod off.
More to the point, though: Look up, Roger, at point 4, and see a stronger argument.
7. Efford is shocked; Who cares? The CBC Radio story says Efford is shocked at this situation - that's their starting comment. Who cares how you feel John? Make a substantive comment. Too many politicians, Efford and Grimes included, like to start their media comments with phrases like "shocked", "dismayed" or "appalled" as in 'The politician in question is shocked at recent media reports..."
Short answer from the news rooms of the world: who gives a flying toss about your mental state? If you are feeling something try taking a pill, getting some exercise or seeing a psychiatrist. Your moods aren't news. Give me some substantive comment or get lost.
8. Efford may be sleeping. As I have noted, in Nova Scotia, their federal cabinet rep took the lead on the story. Here it was Blarney, the Dinosaur. Efford was unseen and unheard until a couple of days into the story. John needs to revamp his office in a big way. Start with yourself. When it comes to any staff changes, just make sure you hand out the pink slips correctly the first time, John.
9. Last but not least, VOCM needs new talk show hosts who actually understand current events. If Open Nite Line is actually pure entertainment, then by all means replace the current talking heads with actors and other performers. Brian Tobin is looking for work. Maybe you can cut a deal with Rogers to borrow their Out of the Fog team now that they have a stronger call-in show on Sunday nights to handle news and current events.
Blarney - the Green Dinosaur from the Southern Shore
The ongoing whining about Bill C-43 reached a predictable pitch over the past 24 hours as more news media picked up the story and the Open Line shows displayed yet again that anyone can call and say anything without the hosts being able to correct misinformation and sometimes sheer bull****.
The spin, especially the Open Line spin, has been that the dastardly Liberals are jeopardizing the offshore revenue deals by lumping them with a bunch of other bits of controversial legislation. Loyola Sullivan, provincial finance minister and close ally of the future candidate for the federal riding of Avalon (i.e. the Whiner from Renews Loyola Hearn) has written to the federal government seeking reassurances that the offshore money bill deal will pass.
Well, let's just look at a few things:
1. Last year, like every year, the Official Opposition voted against the government budget bills. What would be different if they did the same thing this year?
2. Last year, Loyola Hearn voted against a government bill that changed the Atlantic Accord so that Newfoundland and Labrador would always be able to chose the offset mechanism that gave it the most cash. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Whiner voted against Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
3. In a minority parliament, the Opposition parties actually have to make principled decisions, not reflexively vote the party line. Hence their quandary this time. As I noted before, Hearn's real complaint is two fold: first, he knows his party doesn't support the offshore revenue deal so that after an election, a Tory government would kill the cash. Second, in the short-term, Loyola Hearn lacks the political power to ensure his colleagues vote the right way on Bill C-43.
4. Rather than reflexively supporting his Tory Twin, the local Loyola should be writing to his federal leader, one Mr. Stephen Harper seeking his assurances that the federal Cons will support the provincial Tories and vote to pass C-43. Hint for the Loyolas: the Liberals are already behind this bill.
5. The dastardly bill C-43 includes 24 sections. Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12, 23 and 24 all provide improved financial benefits to individuals, corporations and the provincial governments. Three sections, namely 5, 8 and 11, are ones that Loyola Sullivan should be very concerned about if the Cons vote against the bill and in so doing force an election. The Local Loyola should be screaming for Mr. Harper to hold his nose and pass the bill since those sections alone provide more cash for children, municipalities and, yes Loyola's own coffers from the offshore.
Basically, the only thing the federal Conservatives are upset about are three sections that make changes to environmental legislation. There is way more good in this bill than bad. Rather than threaten to defeat the bill maybe the Cons could try some old-fashioned political bargaining and see if they can cut a deal on the environmental provisions. Maybe a deal can be made that meets the needs of all Canadians and reflects the range of opinion in the country and in the Commons.
I'd strongly suggest Mr. Harper contact his Republican friends from the U.S. and ask them how to handle the kind of bargaining that is commonplace in the US federal congress and any state legislature.
Bottom line: Mr. Hearn and his colleagues are playing the worst kind of old-fashioned politics with this bill trying to blame others for their own lack of imagination and genuine political skill. Hearn has even taken to criticizing John Efford in an effort to divert attention away from his own impotence. Talk about playing the same old sound-track over and over again.
I won't engage in the sort of shameless hyperbole that Hearn has been using.
Nope.
I'll just say what I have heard since last Friday is sadly typical of the b/s Mr. Hearn has been spouting for the 23 years he has been a politician.
That he has a ready audience on Open Line is also sadly typical. If anyone - especially Linda or Bas - bothered to look at C-43, they'd see through the Blarney from Renews in a heartbeat.
The spin, especially the Open Line spin, has been that the dastardly Liberals are jeopardizing the offshore revenue deals by lumping them with a bunch of other bits of controversial legislation. Loyola Sullivan, provincial finance minister and close ally of the future candidate for the federal riding of Avalon (i.e. the Whiner from Renews Loyola Hearn) has written to the federal government seeking reassurances that the offshore money bill deal will pass.
Well, let's just look at a few things:
1. Last year, like every year, the Official Opposition voted against the government budget bills. What would be different if they did the same thing this year?
2. Last year, Loyola Hearn voted against a government bill that changed the Atlantic Accord so that Newfoundland and Labrador would always be able to chose the offset mechanism that gave it the most cash. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Whiner voted against Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
3. In a minority parliament, the Opposition parties actually have to make principled decisions, not reflexively vote the party line. Hence their quandary this time. As I noted before, Hearn's real complaint is two fold: first, he knows his party doesn't support the offshore revenue deal so that after an election, a Tory government would kill the cash. Second, in the short-term, Loyola Hearn lacks the political power to ensure his colleagues vote the right way on Bill C-43.
4. Rather than reflexively supporting his Tory Twin, the local Loyola should be writing to his federal leader, one Mr. Stephen Harper seeking his assurances that the federal Cons will support the provincial Tories and vote to pass C-43. Hint for the Loyolas: the Liberals are already behind this bill.
5. The dastardly bill C-43 includes 24 sections. Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12, 23 and 24 all provide improved financial benefits to individuals, corporations and the provincial governments. Three sections, namely 5, 8 and 11, are ones that Loyola Sullivan should be very concerned about if the Cons vote against the bill and in so doing force an election. The Local Loyola should be screaming for Mr. Harper to hold his nose and pass the bill since those sections alone provide more cash for children, municipalities and, yes Loyola's own coffers from the offshore.
Basically, the only thing the federal Conservatives are upset about are three sections that make changes to environmental legislation. There is way more good in this bill than bad. Rather than threaten to defeat the bill maybe the Cons could try some old-fashioned political bargaining and see if they can cut a deal on the environmental provisions. Maybe a deal can be made that meets the needs of all Canadians and reflects the range of opinion in the country and in the Commons.
I'd strongly suggest Mr. Harper contact his Republican friends from the U.S. and ask them how to handle the kind of bargaining that is commonplace in the US federal congress and any state legislature.
Bottom line: Mr. Hearn and his colleagues are playing the worst kind of old-fashioned politics with this bill trying to blame others for their own lack of imagination and genuine political skill. Hearn has even taken to criticizing John Efford in an effort to divert attention away from his own impotence. Talk about playing the same old sound-track over and over again.
I won't engage in the sort of shameless hyperbole that Hearn has been using.
Nope.
I'll just say what I have heard since last Friday is sadly typical of the b/s Mr. Hearn has been spouting for the 23 years he has been a politician.
That he has a ready audience on Open Line is also sadly typical. If anyone - especially Linda or Bas - bothered to look at C-43, they'd see through the Blarney from Renews in a heartbeat.
28 March 2005
Sex, biological weapons and not a condom in sight
Flip around the net long enough and other things appear on the Jennifer Murphy case. Flip down to the end of this post for some really interesting information about what is housed at Borden.
Here's the text of another Star story. Seems the "minor, unrelated matter" was Jennifer Murphy being in the single persons quarters at Camp Borden. Single quarters, known colloquial as the shacks have limitations on who can be there and when. As this Star story indicates, Ms. Murphy had been detained for "trespassing".
Former Canadian Forces members may be surprised to see the lackadaisical attitude that is taken to single quarters these days, since at least one person is quoted as saying that the shacks are like college dorms with lots of casual sex going on. Ms. Murphy is alleged to have gone from room to room in the shacks wearing nothing but panties and boots - here's that same story again but in another locale. Does anyone think there might just be tons of rumour going on here and not much fact?
Personally, as a former DND public affairs officer, I am gobsmacked by the freedom with which people are making comment, like the woman identified as Private Trisha Harnett. Canadian Forces members can speak to the media based on something called Defence Administrative Orders and Directives, specifically the 2008 series covering public affairs. The main thing that used to be taught was to "stick to your lane" meaning comment only on things you know about. Private Harnett's comments strike me as being damned close to rumour and gossip, not something she can attest to as a matter of fact.
It would seem that in DND/CF these days anybody is free to say anything to anyone at any time.
Consider this part of a CP story: "Borden resident Wanda Seymour, whose husband is a military police officer, recalled seeing Murphy at a local Tim Hortons dressed in only a miniskirt and tube top - in minus 20 C weather."
Now think about that. The woman who made that comment is married to a military police officer. Aside from the fact that Ms. Murphy's attire at a Timmy's had nothing at all to do with the charges against her - let's go back to my consistent comment that there is more gossip here than fact in the rapportage - one wonders what else this woman told reporters that didn't get into the actual story. She did manage to tell them she was married to a meathead so even her own gossip and speculation could be mistaken for something more credible than it is.
The more I see of this story, the more I am thinking there is a public affairs disaster brewing here - and it isn't just about the matter of sexual promiscuity and the threat of AIDS among CF personnel.
Nope. I am starting to think there has been a general breakdown in discipline in the CF to the point where public affairs officers have no idea what is being said by anyone and no one feels obliged to be circumspect in their comments to media (including PAOs).
Beyond that there is a complete breakdown of fundamental common sense to the point where this issue could mushroom into a major crisis in the CF. Forget Somalia. Apparently, Borden has turned into the CF's very own little Sodom and Gomorrah.
Take the sum total of all the stuff you have seen posted here over the past couple of days and you have this:
- rampant sexual activity on DND property contrary to good order and discipline (the old section 129 of the National Defence Act); Contrary to a comment from one soldier, DND shacks should not be like the mythical college dorm from Animal House.
- routine trespassing by civilians in personnel quarters on a base that includes the Canadian Forces Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons Defence School and the Canadian Forces nuclear emergency response team. This bit of the story alone makes me wonder what is going on. It's not like NBC defence is a minor issue in these days of global terror; and,
- mature adults who have never heard of condoms. Talk about your Homer Simpson moment. Even if Jennifer Murphy was the skank some people are making her out to be, the phrase "unprotected sex" is enough for me to charge every single male who comes forward and confesses to having unprotected sex with her with:
- conduct prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the Canadian Forces (Sect 129 of the NDA); and,
- an offence related to willfully self-inflicted wounds since acquiring HIV will render the person unfit for active service (deployment overseas) in most instances.
There could be other things but that is a start.
I am thinking that as this story spreads, it will only get worse for DND/CF. It might be time for some Rick Hillier common sense to apply here.
Here's the text of another Star story. Seems the "minor, unrelated matter" was Jennifer Murphy being in the single persons quarters at Camp Borden. Single quarters, known colloquial as the shacks have limitations on who can be there and when. As this Star story indicates, Ms. Murphy had been detained for "trespassing".
Former Canadian Forces members may be surprised to see the lackadaisical attitude that is taken to single quarters these days, since at least one person is quoted as saying that the shacks are like college dorms with lots of casual sex going on. Ms. Murphy is alleged to have gone from room to room in the shacks wearing nothing but panties and boots - here's that same story again but in another locale. Does anyone think there might just be tons of rumour going on here and not much fact?
Personally, as a former DND public affairs officer, I am gobsmacked by the freedom with which people are making comment, like the woman identified as Private Trisha Harnett. Canadian Forces members can speak to the media based on something called Defence Administrative Orders and Directives, specifically the 2008 series covering public affairs. The main thing that used to be taught was to "stick to your lane" meaning comment only on things you know about. Private Harnett's comments strike me as being damned close to rumour and gossip, not something she can attest to as a matter of fact.
It would seem that in DND/CF these days anybody is free to say anything to anyone at any time.
Consider this part of a CP story: "Borden resident Wanda Seymour, whose husband is a military police officer, recalled seeing Murphy at a local Tim Hortons dressed in only a miniskirt and tube top - in minus 20 C weather."
Now think about that. The woman who made that comment is married to a military police officer. Aside from the fact that Ms. Murphy's attire at a Timmy's had nothing at all to do with the charges against her - let's go back to my consistent comment that there is more gossip here than fact in the rapportage - one wonders what else this woman told reporters that didn't get into the actual story. She did manage to tell them she was married to a meathead so even her own gossip and speculation could be mistaken for something more credible than it is.
The more I see of this story, the more I am thinking there is a public affairs disaster brewing here - and it isn't just about the matter of sexual promiscuity and the threat of AIDS among CF personnel.
Nope. I am starting to think there has been a general breakdown in discipline in the CF to the point where public affairs officers have no idea what is being said by anyone and no one feels obliged to be circumspect in their comments to media (including PAOs).
Beyond that there is a complete breakdown of fundamental common sense to the point where this issue could mushroom into a major crisis in the CF. Forget Somalia. Apparently, Borden has turned into the CF's very own little Sodom and Gomorrah.
Take the sum total of all the stuff you have seen posted here over the past couple of days and you have this:
- rampant sexual activity on DND property contrary to good order and discipline (the old section 129 of the National Defence Act); Contrary to a comment from one soldier, DND shacks should not be like the mythical college dorm from Animal House.
- routine trespassing by civilians in personnel quarters on a base that includes the Canadian Forces Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons Defence School and the Canadian Forces nuclear emergency response team. This bit of the story alone makes me wonder what is going on. It's not like NBC defence is a minor issue in these days of global terror; and,
- mature adults who have never heard of condoms. Talk about your Homer Simpson moment. Even if Jennifer Murphy was the skank some people are making her out to be, the phrase "unprotected sex" is enough for me to charge every single male who comes forward and confesses to having unprotected sex with her with:
- conduct prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the Canadian Forces (Sect 129 of the NDA); and,
- an offence related to willfully self-inflicted wounds since acquiring HIV will render the person unfit for active service (deployment overseas) in most instances.
There could be other things but that is a start.
I am thinking that as this story spreads, it will only get worse for DND/CF. It might be time for some Rick Hillier common sense to apply here.
27 March 2005
The Nigeria scam spreads
About 10 years ago, the bunko artists in Nigeria - the oil-soaked country is actually one giant criminal wasteland, but that is another story - came up with a brilliant scam: write to people claiming to be a bank representative seeking to get some phantasmagorical sum out of Nigeria. All they need is your bank account number, branch and address, a specimen signature, your full name and address and some of your official letterhead if that is something you have.
In exchange, they promise to send you tens of millions of dollars.
What they do is drain your account since they have all the necessary bits.
The scam is so old now I doubt there are people who haven't heard of it. The con types stopped using paper a long time ago and now use e-mail to flip their messages around the world.
Here are the latest variations I found in one e-mail inbox of mine:
- Gina Gloria Bello - claiming to be an Afghan woman whose husband was killed in the war on terror. The interestingly named "Afghan" woman, who name sounds more like an Italian porn actress-cum-member-of-parliament than a farsi-speaking widow, supposedly has US$25 million stashed away that she wants to turn over to charity. My personal favourite Bello remains Maria. She starred alongside Mel Gibson in the movie Payback, which as we all know is a mother.
- one Cheung Pui of the Hang Seng Bank claiming to have $24.5 million belonging to a former Iraqi army officer. In order to subvert laws whereby this money will become property of the Hong Kong government (Hong Kong doesn't have its own government as such), I need to send this guy some paperwork so I can be made the next of kin for one Major Fadi Bassem. This one is so widespread, I am just gonna link you to the results of the google search using "fadi bassem".
- A Senator Gwarzo from Nigeria wants assistance in smuggling US$45 million in exchange for which I will get 30% of the gross. He claims to know Sani Abacha, the former president of Nigeria. He knows him so well in the e-mail Gwarzo claims Abacha is currently in power; the late General Abacha is dead. This particular scam is so old there is a website in its honour.
- MR.YANG CHEN,managing director of Hebei Metals & Minerals Import and Export Corporation (HMMIEC) wants me to be his agent in North America. There is a website for the company, whose rep is one Jacky Chan. Interestingly, the website lists no street address for the company. They might be legit. - Maybe Danny Williams would like to put these guys in touch with local business developers like he did with another Chinese company with a definitely shadey bunch of associations.
- Anthony Tunde of Nigeria who wants to squirrel away about US$27 million.
- Oko William and his US$36.8 million. This guy wants my passport photo too.
- Someone named Queensley Rhoda who advises I have won US$2.5 million with some lottery tickets.
All of these were sent to an e-mail address in the name of "horridlm", as in Horrid Little Man, a nick-name I picked up a long time ago.
Obviously, I know these offers are all legitimate ones since they weren't just sent to anyone on an e-mail list.
And for those in the trivia business, the name of the Mel Gibson character in Payback is the same as the guy who sent me the link to sign up for that particular e-mail account. He didn't tag me with the horridlm name; a mutual friend did. Porter just thought it was appropriate.
In exchange, they promise to send you tens of millions of dollars.
What they do is drain your account since they have all the necessary bits.
The scam is so old now I doubt there are people who haven't heard of it. The con types stopped using paper a long time ago and now use e-mail to flip their messages around the world.
Here are the latest variations I found in one e-mail inbox of mine:
- Gina Gloria Bello - claiming to be an Afghan woman whose husband was killed in the war on terror. The interestingly named "Afghan" woman, who name sounds more like an Italian porn actress-cum-member-of-parliament than a farsi-speaking widow, supposedly has US$25 million stashed away that she wants to turn over to charity. My personal favourite Bello remains Maria. She starred alongside Mel Gibson in the movie Payback, which as we all know is a mother.
- one Cheung Pui of the Hang Seng Bank claiming to have $24.5 million belonging to a former Iraqi army officer. In order to subvert laws whereby this money will become property of the Hong Kong government (Hong Kong doesn't have its own government as such), I need to send this guy some paperwork so I can be made the next of kin for one Major Fadi Bassem. This one is so widespread, I am just gonna link you to the results of the google search using "fadi bassem".
- A Senator Gwarzo from Nigeria wants assistance in smuggling US$45 million in exchange for which I will get 30% of the gross. He claims to know Sani Abacha, the former president of Nigeria. He knows him so well in the e-mail Gwarzo claims Abacha is currently in power; the late General Abacha is dead. This particular scam is so old there is a website in its honour.
- MR.YANG CHEN,managing director of Hebei Metals & Minerals Import and Export Corporation (HMMIEC) wants me to be his agent in North America. There is a website for the company, whose rep is one Jacky Chan. Interestingly, the website lists no street address for the company. They might be legit. - Maybe Danny Williams would like to put these guys in touch with local business developers like he did with another Chinese company with a definitely shadey bunch of associations.
- Anthony Tunde of Nigeria who wants to squirrel away about US$27 million.
- Oko William and his US$36.8 million. This guy wants my passport photo too.
- Someone named Queensley Rhoda who advises I have won US$2.5 million with some lottery tickets.
All of these were sent to an e-mail address in the name of "horridlm", as in Horrid Little Man, a nick-name I picked up a long time ago.
Obviously, I know these offers are all legitimate ones since they weren't just sent to anyone on an e-mail list.
And for those in the trivia business, the name of the Mel Gibson character in Payback is the same as the guy who sent me the link to sign up for that particular e-mail account. He didn't tag me with the horridlm name; a mutual friend did. Porter just thought it was appropriate.
Some questions for DND/CF
According to a Canadian Press (CP) story, the Canadian Forces (CF) has issued a CANFORGEN to all Canadian Forces personnel warning them to seek medical attention if they have had sexual relations with the woman accused of having unprotected sex with at least one soldier from Camp Borden.
In a gigantic nose-puller, the military public affairs officer assigned to the National Investigative Service said it would be a mistake to call this a military alert. What exactly is a CANFORGEN, then, Captain Mark Giles? CF members will recognize the spin Capt. Giles is applying here to a Canadian Forces General Order.
A CANFORGEN may not put the CF on some state of war readiness but it damned well constitutes an official communication from the very top of the chain of command. Canadian Forces members ignore it at their peril and I don't mean because of the health implications in this case.
Here's another curiosity from another CP story courtesy of the Lethbridge Herald. The story is titled "Woman charged with spreading HIV volunteered her status to investigators: Star" and datelined last Friday.
According to this report, Ms. Murphy was originally questioned in a "minor, unrelated matter" and volunteered her HIV status.
Two things:
First of all, since when should Captain Giles be releasing such information to the public about what a suspect revealed or didn't reveal in the course of any investigation? This may be a privacy violation not to mention a violation of just plain old common sense for police services not to talk about a matter which is currently before the courts.
Second of all, and more importantly, was Ms. Murphy cautioned? That is, was she advised of her right to counsel and to remain silent and did she knowingly waive that right before "volunteering" the incriminating information. I refer those curious about this to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Other media reports had the meatheads issuing an alert for a woman based on a complaint. This CP story has it the other way around: Ms. Murphy incriminated herself, named the victim and then was subsequently charged.
How then did Ms. Murphy wind up assisting police with their inquiries on another matter and just coincidentally happening to volunteer this information? What was the other "minor" matter, anyway?
Since Captain Giles is being quite liberal with his comments on this matter perhaps it's time he laid it all out for the public in a televised news conference.
In a gigantic nose-puller, the military public affairs officer assigned to the National Investigative Service said it would be a mistake to call this a military alert. What exactly is a CANFORGEN, then, Captain Mark Giles? CF members will recognize the spin Capt. Giles is applying here to a Canadian Forces General Order.
A CANFORGEN may not put the CF on some state of war readiness but it damned well constitutes an official communication from the very top of the chain of command. Canadian Forces members ignore it at their peril and I don't mean because of the health implications in this case.
Here's another curiosity from another CP story courtesy of the Lethbridge Herald. The story is titled "Woman charged with spreading HIV volunteered her status to investigators: Star" and datelined last Friday.
According to this report, Ms. Murphy was originally questioned in a "minor, unrelated matter" and volunteered her HIV status.
Two things:
First of all, since when should Captain Giles be releasing such information to the public about what a suspect revealed or didn't reveal in the course of any investigation? This may be a privacy violation not to mention a violation of just plain old common sense for police services not to talk about a matter which is currently before the courts.
Second of all, and more importantly, was Ms. Murphy cautioned? That is, was she advised of her right to counsel and to remain silent and did she knowingly waive that right before "volunteering" the incriminating information. I refer those curious about this to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Other media reports had the meatheads issuing an alert for a woman based on a complaint. This CP story has it the other way around: Ms. Murphy incriminated herself, named the victim and then was subsequently charged.
How then did Ms. Murphy wind up assisting police with their inquiries on another matter and just coincidentally happening to volunteer this information? What was the other "minor" matter, anyway?
Since Captain Giles is being quite liberal with his comments on this matter perhaps it's time he laid it all out for the public in a televised news conference.
Loyola's Latest Lamentations
Oh, my.
With Parliament closed for Easter, seems like Loyola Hearn has nothing better to do than bombard VOCM with his cryptic comments that are more motivated by advancing his own political interests than anything else.
Flip over to the revamped and much improved VOCM website to see Loyola pledging to vote "in the best interests of the province" when it comes to Bill C -43. That's the one he was complaining about the other day, although a closer inspection revealed he was actually complaining about his own lack of juice and his own party's stance on offshore revenues.
Now, Loyola, what exactly does it mean to vote "in the best interests of the province"?
That is the sort of meaningless drivel that old-fashioned politicians like Hearn love to throw out in utter contempt for their constituents' ability to think. It gets their name in the news without having to actually do anything or say anything. I'll bet Loyola actually thought about pledging to support the bill "in the fullness of time" and see if he can separate the offshore bits so this can be dealt with "on a go-forward basis".
Does it mean Loyola will buck his party and thereby jeopardize his chances of a cabinet seat in a future Harper government? Does it mean he will vote with his party, defeat the government and try to get himself in the cabinet in that future Harper government? Bonus points to anyone who can tell what Loyola will do based on his comments.
My money would be on the whole thing being more empty posturing on Loyola's part. There would have to be a conjunction of all Opposition parties voting against the bill or parts of it simultaneously to bring down the government. Loyola knows full well that none of the Opp parties want an election when the Liberal Party and the Prime Minister are running ahead in the polls. They also have some cash problems left from the last election. Until all that gets into a better position, the Opposition would be a little wonky to force an election at this point.
So, Loyola spins out some gibberish comments and gets some coverage without having to take a clear position on anything.
When you have finished looking over Loyola's Latest Lamentation, have a look at two other sites.
One is Loyola's own website, particularly his news releases, out-of-date though they are. Go through them and count the number of times Hearn attacks John Efford even though Hearn isn't the Natural Resources critic. Remember what I said about Loyola planning to run against John next time? Don't forget that the chief provincial architect of the "Attack John" movement was Loyola Sullivan, Hearn's old buddy and campaign manager.
Of course the February 18 release is just hysterically funny: Loyola Hearn who doesn't even understand the Accord he voted in favour of in the House of Assembly 20 years ago criticizes John Efford for not getting it.
Maybe I need to post the series of Loyola-isms on the Accord.
The second link is to the text of Bill C-43, the one that has Loyola lamenting everything he can think of and more besides. It makes for some interesting reading, despite Loyola's moaning from Renews.
The next post will walk through the Bill to see what horrendous things Loyola might be opposed to other than the offshore revenue bits.
With Parliament closed for Easter, seems like Loyola Hearn has nothing better to do than bombard VOCM with his cryptic comments that are more motivated by advancing his own political interests than anything else.
Flip over to the revamped and much improved VOCM website to see Loyola pledging to vote "in the best interests of the province" when it comes to Bill C -43. That's the one he was complaining about the other day, although a closer inspection revealed he was actually complaining about his own lack of juice and his own party's stance on offshore revenues.
Now, Loyola, what exactly does it mean to vote "in the best interests of the province"?
That is the sort of meaningless drivel that old-fashioned politicians like Hearn love to throw out in utter contempt for their constituents' ability to think. It gets their name in the news without having to actually do anything or say anything. I'll bet Loyola actually thought about pledging to support the bill "in the fullness of time" and see if he can separate the offshore bits so this can be dealt with "on a go-forward basis".
Does it mean Loyola will buck his party and thereby jeopardize his chances of a cabinet seat in a future Harper government? Does it mean he will vote with his party, defeat the government and try to get himself in the cabinet in that future Harper government? Bonus points to anyone who can tell what Loyola will do based on his comments.
My money would be on the whole thing being more empty posturing on Loyola's part. There would have to be a conjunction of all Opposition parties voting against the bill or parts of it simultaneously to bring down the government. Loyola knows full well that none of the Opp parties want an election when the Liberal Party and the Prime Minister are running ahead in the polls. They also have some cash problems left from the last election. Until all that gets into a better position, the Opposition would be a little wonky to force an election at this point.
So, Loyola spins out some gibberish comments and gets some coverage without having to take a clear position on anything.
When you have finished looking over Loyola's Latest Lamentation, have a look at two other sites.
One is Loyola's own website, particularly his news releases, out-of-date though they are. Go through them and count the number of times Hearn attacks John Efford even though Hearn isn't the Natural Resources critic. Remember what I said about Loyola planning to run against John next time? Don't forget that the chief provincial architect of the "Attack John" movement was Loyola Sullivan, Hearn's old buddy and campaign manager.
Of course the February 18 release is just hysterically funny: Loyola Hearn who doesn't even understand the Accord he voted in favour of in the House of Assembly 20 years ago criticizes John Efford for not getting it.
Maybe I need to post the series of Loyola-isms on the Accord.
The second link is to the text of Bill C-43, the one that has Loyola lamenting everything he can think of and more besides. It makes for some interesting reading, despite Loyola's moaning from Renews.
The next post will walk through the Bill to see what horrendous things Loyola might be opposed to other than the offshore revenue bits.
26 March 2005
Laughable Loyola
If he weren't so utterly annoying, the whiner from Renews Loyola Hearn would be the funniest member of parliament elected from this province since maybe Dave Rooney.
Dave used to spend most of his time as MP sending off entries to National Lampoon's "True Facts" page. Since it happened to be in his riding, Dave is the guy who sent the Lampoon the picture of the road sign that pointed to Dildo in one direction and Heart's Content in another.
Would that Loyola would send road signs out as news releases instead of the tripe he foists on the people of the riding he represents but doesn't even see fit to live in. Mr. Hearn has apparently described a budget bill tabled in the Commons on Thursday as the "sneakiest, lowest form of politics he's ever seen. " At least, that what the Telegram is reporting on Saturday.
The bill is an omnibus one, meaning it has a whole bunch of different subordinate ones inside the big bill. It is a budget measure so that if the government loses a vote on it, there would likely be an election.
Here's the truly laughable statement from Loyola, who has repeatedly assured us that his party will give Newfoundland and Labrador everything on the offshore it wants. Mr Hearn is apparently worried that "if something isn't done, the province may never see any of the $2 billion in Atlantic Accord funding."
How would that work exactly, Loyola? If the bill passes, the province gets all the money it signed on for. If the bill is defeated, we have an election. If the Liberals are returned to power, the bill gets passed and the province gets its money.
What happens if Mr. Hearn becomes a cabinet minister in a Harper government? Apparently, Loyola is worried he can't deliver the goods. Loyola knows that if the Tories get elected, the whole offshore deal is toast. We will get not a sausage; bugger all. Mr. Harper is committed to changing the Equalization formula, not to giving this province an offset deal like the one signed in January. That requires consent of all the provinces, so the chances of it happening are pretty slim.
So what Loyola is really saying is that we should work to get the Liberal bill through or get the Liberals re-elected because his guys just can't be trusted. The sneaky part of this whole exercise would be Loyola's assurances about the Cons supporting Loyola and the province on the offshore issue. The "lowest" part of this would be Loyola attacking the Liberals when he should be attacking his own guys or maybe apologizing to the people he represents for misleading them. Have I got that right, Loyola?
By the way, Mr. Harper also plans to sell off the Hibernia shares "for the good of all Canadians" as he put in in a letter to Danny Williams. Loyola doesn't want to talk about that, however.
Mr. Hearn: try telling the truth for once instead of launching into your partisan diatribes, most of which are built on saying things that are untrue, false and factually inaccurate.
If Loyola says this budget bill is the lowest thing he has seen, he knows of sneaky political behaviour. He has been witness to or perpetrated some of the lowest forms of political behaviour in Newfoundland history. Like, for example, slashing the Opposition budget as close to zero as possible after the 1982 election. One of Loyola's Tory buddies said the Liberals could go meet in a phone booth for all he cared. There went a democrat, hey, Loyola?
Of course, Loyola himself has been known to participate in some low forms of political behaviour.
Like spreading totally false information. His last constituency flyer issued right before the writ dropped for the 2004 election had some complete and utter falsehoods in it about the Atlantic Accord. Actually, throughout the Accord discussions, Mr. Hearn was fond of spreading misrepresentations and other falsehoods. They were all things Mr. Hearn knew to be untrue or ought to have known were untrue when he uttered them.
As for Mr. Hearn's behaviour during the campaign it was some of the most cowardly or arrogant behaviour imaginable. I can't decide which it is when the candidate runs on a platform of accountability and then steadfastly refuses to appear on any platform or at any event with any of his fellow candidates. I think the Mount Pearl Chamber of Commerce is still waiting for the arrogant Mr. Hearn to respond to their invitation to an all-candidates debate.
Some of us here in the riding thought of sending out search parties to find the little fellow from Renews when couldn't be found either campaigning or doing media interviews. He did participate in a CBC Radio forum but refused to show up in the studio with the others. Brave Mr. Hearn literally phoned it in.
Any guy who tells his constituents things that are simply not true in order to get ahead shouldn't be criticizing anyone else for anything.
If Mr. Hearn had an ounce of class, he'd apologize for his behaviour and then just clam up for a while.
Dave used to spend most of his time as MP sending off entries to National Lampoon's "True Facts" page. Since it happened to be in his riding, Dave is the guy who sent the Lampoon the picture of the road sign that pointed to Dildo in one direction and Heart's Content in another.
Would that Loyola would send road signs out as news releases instead of the tripe he foists on the people of the riding he represents but doesn't even see fit to live in. Mr. Hearn has apparently described a budget bill tabled in the Commons on Thursday as the "sneakiest, lowest form of politics he's ever seen. " At least, that what the Telegram is reporting on Saturday.
The bill is an omnibus one, meaning it has a whole bunch of different subordinate ones inside the big bill. It is a budget measure so that if the government loses a vote on it, there would likely be an election.
Here's the truly laughable statement from Loyola, who has repeatedly assured us that his party will give Newfoundland and Labrador everything on the offshore it wants. Mr Hearn is apparently worried that "if something isn't done, the province may never see any of the $2 billion in Atlantic Accord funding."
How would that work exactly, Loyola? If the bill passes, the province gets all the money it signed on for. If the bill is defeated, we have an election. If the Liberals are returned to power, the bill gets passed and the province gets its money.
What happens if Mr. Hearn becomes a cabinet minister in a Harper government? Apparently, Loyola is worried he can't deliver the goods. Loyola knows that if the Tories get elected, the whole offshore deal is toast. We will get not a sausage; bugger all. Mr. Harper is committed to changing the Equalization formula, not to giving this province an offset deal like the one signed in January. That requires consent of all the provinces, so the chances of it happening are pretty slim.
So what Loyola is really saying is that we should work to get the Liberal bill through or get the Liberals re-elected because his guys just can't be trusted. The sneaky part of this whole exercise would be Loyola's assurances about the Cons supporting Loyola and the province on the offshore issue. The "lowest" part of this would be Loyola attacking the Liberals when he should be attacking his own guys or maybe apologizing to the people he represents for misleading them. Have I got that right, Loyola?
By the way, Mr. Harper also plans to sell off the Hibernia shares "for the good of all Canadians" as he put in in a letter to Danny Williams. Loyola doesn't want to talk about that, however.
Mr. Hearn: try telling the truth for once instead of launching into your partisan diatribes, most of which are built on saying things that are untrue, false and factually inaccurate.
If Loyola says this budget bill is the lowest thing he has seen, he knows of sneaky political behaviour. He has been witness to or perpetrated some of the lowest forms of political behaviour in Newfoundland history. Like, for example, slashing the Opposition budget as close to zero as possible after the 1982 election. One of Loyola's Tory buddies said the Liberals could go meet in a phone booth for all he cared. There went a democrat, hey, Loyola?
Of course, Loyola himself has been known to participate in some low forms of political behaviour.
Like spreading totally false information. His last constituency flyer issued right before the writ dropped for the 2004 election had some complete and utter falsehoods in it about the Atlantic Accord. Actually, throughout the Accord discussions, Mr. Hearn was fond of spreading misrepresentations and other falsehoods. They were all things Mr. Hearn knew to be untrue or ought to have known were untrue when he uttered them.
As for Mr. Hearn's behaviour during the campaign it was some of the most cowardly or arrogant behaviour imaginable. I can't decide which it is when the candidate runs on a platform of accountability and then steadfastly refuses to appear on any platform or at any event with any of his fellow candidates. I think the Mount Pearl Chamber of Commerce is still waiting for the arrogant Mr. Hearn to respond to their invitation to an all-candidates debate.
Some of us here in the riding thought of sending out search parties to find the little fellow from Renews when couldn't be found either campaigning or doing media interviews. He did participate in a CBC Radio forum but refused to show up in the studio with the others. Brave Mr. Hearn literally phoned it in.
Any guy who tells his constituents things that are simply not true in order to get ahead shouldn't be criticizing anyone else for anything.
If Mr. Hearn had an ounce of class, he'd apologize for his behaviour and then just clam up for a while.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)