For want of a telephone call

For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for the want of a shoe the horse was lost; and for the want of a horse the rider was lost, being overtaken and slain by the enemy, all for the want of care about a horseshoe nail.

- Benjamin Franklin

For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?

- 1 Corinthians 14:8

_________________________________________________

Consider the irony.

Four telecom companies in Newfoundland and Labrador - Persona Communications, Bell Aliant (TSX: BA.UN-T), Rogers (TSX: RCI), and MTS Allstream (TSX: MBT) - are embroiled in a controversy involving a government deal that will likely affect their corporate bottom lines and all because the companies involved neglected two words:

Public relations.

Here's how.

Public relations is about connecting a company with the public interest. It is about gaining and maintaining public support by developing awareness, information, attitudes and behaviour.

Public relations these days is very much about an organization's reputation: attitudes over time.

And time is the key element.

Public relations professionals will you that in order to gain and maintain support, people have to know. The only way they know if you tell them.

None of the companies involved told what needed to be told in a timely way. The companies involved with government in laying new fibre-optic cables across the province waited until the end of the process - once the deal was done with the provincial government - to tell people that a deal was even in the works.

Naturally, public interest was peaked. Spending public money gets their attention anyway. And when two of the three companies behind the deal are headed by individuals with a long-standing business and personal relationship with the Premier, they are bound to wonder what's up.

The information the companies and the provincial government gave initially was limited and confusing. One company spokesperson - Paul Hatcher of Persona - described an $82 million project already underway with no mention of the federal and provincial government money involved. The government announcement added up to only $52 million.

Public comments by business and political leaders in the wake of a fire at Bell Aliant's St. John's headquarters seemed to smooth the ground for the government announcement. But, a week later, as the full scope of the project slowly seeped in the public domain, questions mounted. A week after the announcement, news stories spread across the country alleging that the public money actually came as a result of a deal among buddies rather than something that was actually in the wider public interest. [For a telecom industry/business view, see here.]

The controversy will likely be fueled in the second week by bumbling comments by the finance and business ministers as well as contradictory comments by innovation minister Trevor Taylor and Persona's chief operating officer Paul Hatcher, another Cable Atlantic alumnus.

In an interview with NTV's Issues and Answers, Taylor played up the government's purchase of fibre-optic strands for $15 million. Hatcher told the Telegram that the provincial government cash was needed to fund the expensive portion of the project, namely the sub-sea connection into Nova Scotia.

As the Telegram story put it:

More than a year ago, the consortium pitched the undersea cable to the province - they had $37 million and asked the province to make up the shortfall.

To make matters worse, while concerns about public safety were raised by the Premier himself as the deal was being approved, Taylor said this weekend that province-wide 911 service is being examined. The cost and technical feasibility of expanding broadband to Labrador will also be studied with no commitments being made at this point.

Underneath the whole controversy are allegations of unfair dealings of a government with companies headed by individuals who hold appointments to the province's hydroelectric corporation, both of whom are the Premier's former business partners.

As easy as it is to decry suspicion of politics and politicians, Trevor Taylor gave credence to this aspect of the affair by confirming that the proposal had been reviewed by cabinet at least twice in the past year and rejected on both occasions out of concern of a perceived conflict of interest. Ordinary residents of the province can hardly be faulted for wondering why a single incident suddenly erased the concerns if the politicians were worried about real or perceived conflict of interest twice before. If the deal was good now, it was good then.

To a public relations professional, that sort of suspicion - even if based on appearance rather than fact - is the most damaging. Releasing information when the proposal was first made would ensure awareness and accurate information. Tackling head-on the questions about conflict of interest at the outset would have sent reassuring messages about government and corporate sensitivity to ethics questions. Early and complete disclosure instills confidence.

For Bell Aliant's part, the issue is more one of opportunity lost. The company simply has missed every chance to deal frankly with its telecom service to the province. Its competitors have relentlessly pointed to the supposedly exorbitant cost of leasing space on Aliant's fibre-optic cables. They have pointed to increased service to the public. Aliant has been silent on the existing surplus capacity in the system and the likelihood that consumer prices will drop anyway as a result of deregulation of the nation's telecom industry.

This deal has put Bell Aliant is in a hard competitive spot anyway. It will hardly lose anything by speaking more forthrightly about how this project will affect them and their customers. On the face of it, would speaking publicly about the controversial deal make it less likely that Aliant can get the government account back or that it can win any other telecom contracts?

Bell Aliant can deal authoritatively with technical issues. The company can speak frankly about its service, costs and long-term telecom issues. By speaking openly and frankly, the company will give its consumers the chance to see - if they don't already - a company that is interested in more than the customer's bank account.

But look at it this way, as well: if early and complete disclosure instills confidence, then silence is taken as consent. Every negative comment made by Aliant's competitors about Aliant's costs and service is left unchallenged. To the ordinary consumer, that looks like an admission of guilt or fault.

To be sure, each of the companies involved has first-rate marketers handling corporate advertising. The bigger companies - like Rogers and Aliant - have competent public relations professionals on the payroll. Persona uses a well-connected and creative advertising firm in St. John's. Nothing said here is a slight to them and their competence.

What seems to be missing in this controversy is an understanding in the corporate headshed that there is more to public relations than issuing a happy-faced news release supporting the latest marketing venture. If the in-house team of general public relations practitioners lacks the specialized skills - and they are specialized - to handle a controversial government relations and media relations issue, then there are plenty of practitioners who can lend a hand.

If all you have is a marketer, understand that advertising is built on image. PR handles your reputation and a competent PR professional will make sure that your media appearances are considerably more successful than Dean Macdonald's recent foray to the local open line shows or a short-lived trip into another corporation's boardroom. [See here, here and here.]

The business landscape in Newfoundland and Labrador is littered with the carcasses of good projects that have foundered for want of some straightforward public relations support. The failures affect the bottom line, either in lost opportunities, unrecovered expenditures, or added expenses from delays. For publicly traded companies, the impact on share price - even if marginal - is still an impact that could be avoided. For all, the impact on their reputation is easy to figure out.

It might be difficult sometimes for managers to see the return on a public relations investment. But ask Fishery Products International, the Hebron consortium, IOC, INCO, Fortis and its Belize dam and now the Telecom Four about the cost of not investing in building awareness, understanding, of influencing attitudes and behaviour.

Few projects are lost irretrievably. Even if the public relations efforts were left out or botched, there is always a chance to sort out the mess.

All it takes is a phone call.

Coyne on Dion and the nation issue

Commended for your reading enjoyment and intellectual stimulation, Andrew Coyne as he delivers his usual insights into:

1. Stephane Dion as a political leader; and,

2. Michael Ignatieff on the question of Quebec as a nation.

The net of gross fallacy

Newfoundland nationalists are a funny lot.

They thrive largely on myth and fantasy, not the least example of which is the complete nonsense that Newfoundland and Labrador has been losing out on a multi-billion boondoggle in the fees collected by NavCanada for aircraft using Canadian airspace.

There's a replay of the argument in the Sunday Telegram [not available online but reprinted below], in the form of an opinion piece by David Fox. Living now in Halifax, Fox is retired and has been championing the cause of having the provincial government collect some sort of air space usage tax.

Fox calls it his:

"air-space revenue theory" being a "rightful revenue stream" for the province...

While obviously wants to believe this idea is still open for discussion by the provincial government, let's recall that it has already been examined recently as two years ago [if memory serves]. The conclusion, in a rough paraphrase, is that the entire argument is foolish.

Oddly enough, the Telly printed Fox's submission but neglected to note they had carried a story on the provincial assessment. The two side-by-side would have been amusing especially since Fox notes the number of times he has raised the issue (gross) but neglects to point out the one time where a factual assessment shot his entire argument out of the sky (net).

Let's dispose of this nonsense as quickly as possible.

Firstly, there is no constitutional basis for the provincial government to levy any form of tax on aviation. The entire matter is the jurisdiction of the federal government, as established in the Terms of Union.

Secondly, there is no cash windfall nor is there any debt, as Fox argues. The fees charged are used to provide air navigation services. That operation is currently carried on by NavCanada, a non-for-profit corporation. Even if by some miracle, someone could manage to get control of aviation handed to the provincial legislature, the money collected would and could only go to sustain air traffic control and related services. There is no boondoggle waiting be had.

While Fox may be right that 57 years worth of fees adds up to billions, he is talking about gross revenues. What he needs to look at is net, namely what's left after the costs of providing air navigation services are taken into account. As we can see from this 1999 story, the net is pretty small. Considering that it reflects the net from all air activity in Canada - not just over Newfoundland and Labrador - there really isn't any cash here to be had even if we could figure out how to get it.

In other words, the net of Fox's gross fallacy is naught.

'nuff said.
_____________________________
Reprint begins:

Province losing revenue in air-space fees

Most of us are aware "timing" in politics is all-important if one wishes to get an important item approved by government that is in the best interest of the party pushing it.

Such is the case with creating a provincial royalty fee protocol for air-space users applicable to all aircraft users (both commercial and military) flying over 500,000 square kilometres of Newfoundland and Labrador land area to a height of 90 kilometres.

To date, this provincial air-space resource (legally defined the same as land ownership), is now being used by private, national and international airline companies along with all world military aircraft users, headquartered and administered outside the province. And the province, in return, is getting absolutely nothing for this in terms of a royalty which should be collected if there were an existing agreement with Ottawa.

This situation has been ongoing since 1949. To date, no proposed fee protocol has been discussed, let alone signed off between Ottawa and our provincial government which, if it were approved by both governments, would have given the province its rightful compensation.

To put it in a more fundamental and financial perspective, after some 57 years following Confederation to October (at least by my calculations), the province has lost about $8.532 billion (including interest on the unpaid yearly balance owed), with Transport Canada owing some $6.373 billion from 1949 to 1996 and NavCan owing about $2.158 billion from 1997 to October.

Losing millions annually

Included in these lost revenues are the revenue and interest contributions by the national and international commercial airline users at about $6.315 billion and all the national and international military aircraft users at about $2.216 billion due to all parties daily 1,000-plus aircraft overflights through our provincial skies.

Such losses since 1949 (by my calculations) now add up to an average annual air-space revenue loss to the province of about $147,104,000 per year to October.

Every time you see an aircraft, you can easily figure the province is losing about $0.40 per air kilometre traveled.

Since going public with my idea of an "air-space revenue theory" being a "rightful revenue stream" for the province, as outlined in my paper submitted to the royal commission in December 2002 and followed up with my letters in your newspaper in January 2004 and February 2005, you can bet there are folks in Transport Canada, the Department of National Defence and NavCan Ottawa and elsewhere who have already digested and calculated, with sombre thought, I might add, the "dollar consequences" of this subject, just in case this air-space fee charge idea is in fact proven constitutionally correct and in the favour of the province. Regardless of what is now written in the already signed- off Terms of Union document of 1949, we know nothing today is "written in stone."

I only hope the premier and his intergovernmental committee will present this idea to Ottawa for approval and not let our neighbours from Quebec from the Party Quebecois beat Newfoundland to the punch with this same fee.

David J. Fox
Halifax, N.S.

Rule changes could make telecom deal unnecessary

The commission regulating Canada's telecommunications industry is reviewing current rules with an eye to leveling the playing field between the big and smaller players.

Because smaller companies such as Manitoba Telecom Services Inc. are allowed to piggyback on existing Bell and Telus lines and equipment, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission regulates how much the big companies must provide them with help, and at what price.

MTS is one of the partners in a consortium laying new fibreoptic lines in Newfoundland and Labrador. The project is being promoted on the grounds that the companies with smaller shares of the Newfoundland and Labrador marketplace can lower prices and compete more successfully with Bell Aliant if they were not required to pay Bell Aliant for use of infrastructure laid by the major telecom company in the mid 1990s.

Deregulating the telecom industry could mean that the provincial government's contribution of $15 million towards the project is unnecessary.

More to follow.

Teaser: 4 AD

What do all these things have in common?

1. Finance minister Loyola "Rainman" Sullivan has postponed pre-budget consultations next week so he can release an updated financial statement on the provincial government for FY 2006.

2. Labour minister Paul Shelley is talking about holding a job fair to attract workers into Newfoundland and Labrador.

3. Demographic projections done for the provincial government over a decade ago have proven accurate.

Check the Bond Papers for observations on the state of the provincial government and economy four years after Danny Williams came to power.

Stand by - GRAP fibre deal: more information, less filling

For those following the recent government decision to investment $15 million in a fibreoptic cable deal with three private sector companies, some recent public comments by the business minister, his development colleague and the companies involved have changed dramatically the amount of information in the public domain on the original announcement.

Things have changed and comments in earlier posts will have to be amended as a result.

For example, we now have a better perspective on the scope and cost of the project. We also have a much better idea of what government is getting and not getting from the deal.

We can also see just exactly how far government has strayed from its own stated intentions only last year.

Stand-by. Bond Papers will offer a more detailed commentary - including a summary of the information as it currently stands - over the next 24 hours.

Blog impact

From a survey of Europeans:

Ipsos MORI found a direct link between blogs, or user-generated content, and people's intentions to buy goods or services.

Any company that fails to come up to standard should beware. The blog is replacing word of mouth for endorsing or condemning a product or service.

About a third of those Europeans questioned said they had been put off making a purchase after reading negative comments on the Internet from customers or other web-users, while 52 percent said they had been persuaded to buy after a positive review on a blog.

Get it right, and blogs could be a boost to companies and even save on their advertising and marketing budgets.

Blogs, or weblogs, are a more trusted source of information (24 percent) than television advertising (17 percent) and email marketing (14 percent), the survey commissioned by Hotwire, a technology public relations consultancy, said.

Technovation!

Now you can subscribe to Bond Papers - free of charge - and receive an e-mail notifying you when new material is posted.

check out the box at the top of the right column.

Promise made. Promise ...well...you know.

Some choice bits from the now infamous Blue Print:

During its first mandate, a Progressive Conservative government will make it illegal for government to spend money without prior legislative approval when the House of Assembly is in session, and restrict spending by Special Warrant to a specific emergency that occurs when the House is not in session.

In a recent radio appearance, finance minister Loyola Sullivan admitted some of the money spent on the logo came from special warrants. Does that Little Shop of Horrors thing count as a "specific emergency"?

Limit political contributions by a person, corporation, or union in any year, including an election year, to a total of $10,000 to a registered political party and a total of $5,000 to one or more district associations of a registered party or one or more candidates in a provincial election in relation to their candidacy, by way of cash, cheque, money order, credit card or goods and services, but excluding the purchase of tickets or passes and donations in kind to fundraising events sponsored by a registered political party or district association of a registered party.

Put that one in the "yeah, right" category.

Set and publish content rules for government advertising that will stop the use of public funds for political advertising.

Check newspapers in the province and see yet further examples of personal advertising by the Premier using public money. He isn't alone. Everyone is doing it. The practice was banned in 1989, but in 1996 the old system returned apparently to stay.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have grown tired of the flurry of closed-door, invitation-only consultations in recent years that were little more than "telling and selling" exercises.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have grown tired of them. Unfortunately, politicians in power love to restrict access. Try getting into a fisheries consultation without an invitation to the closed-door session.

A Progressive Conservative government will base policies and regulations for the procurement of goods and services and capital works on the following principles:

* Open and effective competition.

So explain how this works again. The provincial government is the majority shareholder in a telecom consortium with Persona, Rogers and the Manitoba phone company.

The provincial government is the largest telecom customer in the province.

The provincial government will call tenders for telecom work.

How does that promote open and effective competition?

'Allo, 'Allo. What's all this then?

Scanning the list of political contributions available at the Chief Electoral Officer's website yields some curious things.

Left: The ethics constable just felt something was not right about the whole situation.

Some of this stuff has been raised in other places but there's one people missed that really speaks to the need for much stronger restrictions on political contributions in the province.

Circumstances have changed dramatically since the early 1990s when the political contribution laws were last revised. There is a pressing need to revise them dramatically in light of the sort of things that have been going on over the past decade involving both the Liberal party and the Progressive Conservatives.

Here are two examples:

1. This is just plain wrong: There have been instances of town councils giving money to political parties. Like Cottlesville with the Liberals and Pasadena and Stephenville to the Tories in different years.

There is simply no reason for a town council to be spending public money in this way. Full stop.

2. This is just beyond wrong, if that's possible. Bond Papers previously raised questions about publicly funded entities - like health care foundations around the province - or other health-related charities taking donations from the Premier's family foundations.

The practice has continued in 2005. According to Revenue Canada's most recent filling on the Williams family Foundation, donations went to several health-related charities, some of which are directly tied to the provincial government:

- Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Care Foundation: $1, 000
- Trinity Conception Placentia Health Foundation: $500
- Cerebral Palsy Association: $500
- Newfoundland and Labrador Association for Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus: $500

Then there's the Cox's Cove Wellness Foundation. Ed Joyce described the foundation this way in the House of Assembly in 2004:

This Foundation is a non-profit organization recently established in the Town of Cox'’s Cove for the sole purpose of helping residents of the town who are required to travel to other areas of the Province or out of Province for medical treatment.

In this case, we have a foundation operated a municipality in the province that raises money to do what the provincial government is supposed to do: namely financially support people who have to head out of the province for medical treatment not available here.

Great purpose and God will surely smile on the Williams Family Foundation for this humanitarian effort. But the question we have to ask is why any foundation must exist in the province to do something government should be doing?

Fundamentally, the problem is this: one sort of organization is funded by the public purse or is operated by a public entity and may need to lobby for added funds.

It gets a bit sticky if the Premier is putting cash in your pocket, even if it is from a legitimate family charitable foundation. This money changing hands compromises both sides. And even if the set-up works on a particularly ethical set of politicians, there is nothing - absolutely nothing - to stop a future group of people with a less highly refined sense of ethics to start linking private charitable donations to political silence during times of controversy.

The other type of organization - the private charity - gets equally compromised if it has to take issue with a government decision having received moneylegitimatelyy given by a legitimate charity for legitimate purposes.

The whole business of money changing hands like this just compromises the relationships involved and that's why some donations just shouldn't be made.

But even if all that was just fine, what should we think of the Western Health Care Corporation making a political contribution in 2004 to the ruling Progressive Conservative Party? It did. $150.

Holy ethical collapse, Batman!

The amount doesn't matter; the problem is the very idea of an arm of government making a partisan political donation.

To make matters worse, 2004 was the same year when the Williams Family Foundation donated $2000 to the Western Regional Hospital Foundation, the corporation's associated charity.

Let's be clear: there is nothing to suggest that there was any quid pro quo, arrangement or anything else going on here other than a legitimate and generous contribution by the Premier's family charity.

But why in the name of merciful heavens would anyone at the Western Health Care Corporation think it was okay to make a contribution to any political party ever?

So goodbye already

Soon Ralph Klein will be gone and likely the collective IQ of Canada's Premier's will jump noticeably as a result.

After all, who else but the Clown King of Alberta would use a line like this, let alone in public:

"I don't think she ever did have a Conservative bone in her body, well except for one," Klein told the audience at the charity event. "Speaking of Peter MacKay . . ."

Thanks Ralph for reminding us that we in Newfoundland and Labrador are not alone in electing politicians with a childish need to draw attention to themselves.

Don't let the door hit you on the way to cash your gigantic pension cheque.

Some constructive suggestions

Wiser and cooler heads persuaded your humble e-scribbler of the need to pull the previous post on the Remembrance Day ceremonies.

In it's place, here are some observations from last year.

The committee organizing the ceremonies are a dedicated and hardworking group of volunteers. They deserve a ton of recognition for their efforts.

That said, the ceremony at the National War Memorial in St. John's has needed a review and re-organization for some time to deal with problems of crowding and the easy flow of events.

There are organizations laying wreaths that likely could be moved to another spot in the program. Worse, there are representatives of allied countries who should be there who simply don't participate.

Overall, though the site needs some physical reworking. The original layout, as noted last year allowed for more, useful space.

The site deserves to be restored to its promient place. The ceremony needs to be rearranged as well.

Maybe everyone can pull together over the next year and sort things out.

Note for Andy

Re: Andy Panda Wells' interview with the Telegram published on Thursday:

Good luck.

Under s. 119 of the Atlantic Accord implementation act, 1987, the development application for Hibernia South contains information that is pretty clearly confidential under either the federal access to information act or the implementation act.

As a result, the opinions and advice of the board staff as a result of their evaluation of the application would also be confidential.

At the very least, so much of the document would be blacked out that it would unusable for anyone trying to understand what went on.

And before the local indignation brigade tries to set fire to their computers to banish the references to only federal statutes, let me assure them that the provincial Accord implementation act says exactly the same thing. The provincial statute gives the section number as s. 115.

Following the money

CBC Radio started on Thursday with a story on political donations to the provincial Progressive Conservatives.

Offal News picked up the thread and expanded on it.

Meanwhile the New Democrats have been silent on the GRAP deal and the Liberal Opposition is struggling to figure out what the fuss is about, as evident from fumbling releases like this one.

Try and figure out why the fonts change and the "@" symbols are all over the one from Roland Butler before you begin searching - in vain - to find out what the heck he was questioning back in September 2005.

Then there's this one...same formatting problems that mar its delivery followed by a pretty bland news release about Fishery Products International.

Huh?

Someone needs to check the links.

The best one of all is the November 6 effort from Gerry Reid. The "news" in this release? That he has received a bunch of e-mails critical of the GRAP deal.

Yawn.

And that they are telling him something is afoot here.

Yep. There is a problem. We dunno what it is or what it is all about, apparently, but we gots mail.

At the end, Reid concedes the decision is popular in the business community (he obviously has no contacts in the business community) and pledges that - for all those people wondering why the Opposition hasn't been on this already - they will get around to it when the House opens.

Backside. Dark. Flashlight. Both hands.

Do the math.

Fibre-optic follies

The Attack of the Triffids.

For starters, try the Offal News take on the recent fibreoptic deal cut by the provincial government with Persona and Rogers that gets the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador into the telecom business.

this is a written version of the comments Simon Lono has been making within the past couple of days on local talk radio. So effective is the Lono criticism - compared to other comments out there - that the Premier's Pitcher Plants started to attack Lono and his character.

One planted caller referred to Lono has having worked for every political party around, supposedly attesting to his lack of morals or lack of firm convictions. Another planted caller claimed Lono was opposed to everything good for the province and would undoubtedly sell us all out as politicians have done in the past.

So much for sophisticated reasoning.

The ad hominem attack is the last refuge of the scoundrel and well, it was a frank admission that the Pitcher plants didn't have a concise rebuttal. Purists will remind me that the original quote from Samuel Johnson is that patriotism is the last refuge. Well, let's just remind everyone - while we are at it - that the typical argument of the Pitcher Plants is that everything the Premier does is automatically a matter of patriotism. Anyone who questions or criticizes this particular administration is not being a good Newfoundland.

The problem with serial connections.

When Trevor Taylor announced the $15 million GRAP deal he made all sorts of claims about its benefits to the province. One of the benefits was that the unsolicited proposal from Persona, Allstream and Rogers was that it "fully embraced governmentÂ’s vision as outlined in the Blueprint."

ok.

Here's the Blueprint vision, such as it is: "Advancing the use of computing and high-speed digital networks in every region of the Province" or "Enhancing connectivity through upgrading of broadband infrastructure and other means, such as innovative combinations of satellite and wireless communications."

That's a pretty bland pair of statements given that both the provincial and federal governments have been investing in broadband infrastructure since 2002.

In November, 2005, InTRD minister Kathy Dunderdale issued a news release announcing a national request for proposals to find "a consultant who will recommend an advanced network model that meets government'’s existing and anticipated future technology needs."

Interestingly enough, Dunderdale said at the time that "[i]n terms of its current network capabilities and capacity, Newfoundland and Labrador is falling behind the rest of the country and the world."

There are a couple of things to observe about this release from about one year ago:

1. Apparently, there has been no public discussion of this consultant and his or her efforts over the past year. This was supposed to lead to a strategy that would drive future projects. What we have with GRAP is a commitment to spending without a strategy.

2. The GRAP deal came out of what Dunderdale's replacement described as an "unsolicited proposal" apparently aimed primarily at lowering costs to consumers. A bunch of things were mentioned in the news release but the first mention was a commercial competitive issue: price.

3. Trevor Taylor hasn't mentioned yet that the current network capabilities and capacity are falling behind the rest of the country, let alone the world. To the contrary, the GRAP deal has been justified on the basis of things like avoiding interruptions in service. Others have pointed out that the existing fibreoptic network is not operating at its existing capacity. Basically, the infrastructure can't be falling behind in capacity and not using existing capacity at the same time.

4. A "Big Backgrounder" issued jointly by the federal and provincial government in February 2005 makes it clear that the issue is not one of cost but of making broadband accessible to the largest number of communities. Some of those interviewed in order to prepare the backgrounder mentioned costs, but giving maximum access - most number of communities and greatest number of people - is where the document puts itemphasisis.

5. The broadband shortfall in Newfoundland and Labrador is in connectivity, not capacity. Initiatives continued under the Williams administration from its predecessor would give broadband access to 80% of the population but only 40% of communities. That situation won't be corrected by the GRAP deal since it merely duplicates the lines across the island portion of the province and adds a line on the seabed off the south coast.

6. The GRAP initiative reinforces the surplus capacity in the major population centres in its land route. In the sea route, the line connects up a handful of coastal communities with considerably more capacity than is required. There are other ways - possibly cheaper ways - of extending capacity to more communities.

7. Up to February 2005, the federal and provincial governments, as well as the telecom industry committed a total of $23 million to expanding broadband access throughout the province under the BRAND program. The federal government committed a total of $14.2 million. The provincial government tossed in $544,000. The balance came from industry contributions.

8. Put another way, the Williams administration just committed 27 times more money to three private sector companies than it committed up to February 2005 to expanding broadband throughout the province. The supposedly evil federal government tossed in as much money up to February 2005 to widen access - increase connectivity - than Danny Williams' administration just committed to developing surplus capacity on already-served routes.

9. All of that is separate from a $15 million initiative to connect schools to the Internet using broadband. The deal was originally singed in June 2003 and then-education minister John Ottenheimer announced it again in June 2004. That project involved $5.0 million of provincial money, or one third of the commitment just made to GRAP.

Mid-week quickies

1. Conference Board provincial economic outlook

The Conference Board of Canada is predicting the central Canadian economy will slow in 2007, in tune with a slowdown in the American economy.

Newfoundland and Labrador is forecast to see economic growth at 5.7%, up from 2.9% in 2006. Growth is attributed entirely to resumed production at Terra Nova and Voisey's Bay.

No comparable new economic initiatives are on the table for Newfoundland and Labrador. In April 2006, the $10 billion Hebron development was shelved in a dispute over taxes and the provincial government's demands for an ownership position among the operators of the project.

No other initiatives - including a proposed second refinery at Southern Head, Placentia Bay or the Lower Churchill - are likely to receive approval.

2. Ontario/Quebec upgrade power connection

Ontario and Quebec will announce shortly plans to improve the electricity interconnection between the provinces.

"It will allow us to access more power from Quebec and ideally, over time, from Newfoundland, as well," said Ontario energy minister Dwight Duncan.

3. Cable smackdown draws crowd

Government's announcement it would acquire a 28% interest in a private sector cable deal is generating growing controversy across the province.

The Williams administration has been deploying cabinet ministers, back-bench members of the legislature and the usual parade of planted callers on Open Line shows to attack anyone criticising the deal.

So far, none of the deal's supporters have been able to explain why the provincial government invested in a private sector venture that the private sector had already started and was clearly able to fund.

Work began on the project when it was priced at $82 million. Government stepped in with a 28% interest in a project estimated to cost $52 million.

Meanwhile, at vocm.com, the public wasn't looking kindly on the deal. The on-line survey "Question of the Day" is not scientific but Williams and his Pitcher Plants have been known to try and skew the thing.

This time out, vox populi won out over TMV [Their Master's Voice] despite a last minute flurry from the crew who get their call-in scripts from the Premier's Office.

On Tuesday, the votes were running 60/40 against the Premier's plan to pump $15 million in public money into the deal. Despite a last minute flurry of activity by the Pitcher Plants, official results show opposition to the deal running at 51% to 47%.

4. Offshore Board tackles Hibernia South

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board met on Monday and Tuesday to tackle the development application amendment for Hibernia South. Decision on the application was delayed pending appointment of a new chairman and chief executive officer.

No word on when a decision is expected.

5. Patrick new Mass governor

Massachusetts' new governor is Deval Patrick.

Among the campaigns, Patrick's most recent television spots are an example of American end-game positive messaging.

Why GRAP explanations are crappy

Trevor Taylor's explanations of the GRAP - Government, Rogers, Allstream, Persona - fibreoptic deal don't add up.

Here's why:

1. There is no reason to spend public money on a private sector deal like this one.

- According to Persona chief operating officer Paul Hatcher, the project was already underway, at a cost of $82 million with Persona contributing $30 million of its own money.

- The announcement on November 2 was for a $52 million project.

- The private sector companies could easily finance the project themselves - obviously - and deliver benefits to consumers by improving their own competitive position.

2. The GRAP will not deliver province-wide 911 service.

- If the provincial government wanted to develop a secure, government-operated emergency communications system, then it could do that separately from this project.

- There is no mention of emergency service in the initial government news release. The news release focuses on competition, all of which the private can obviously and should obviously bear by itself.

- For the province's ownership stake, it will have access to its own fibreoptics system. But, to ensure redundant access to allow secure 911 operation, the provincial government should purchase service from all providers, including Aliant.

3. The province doesn't need to compete with the private sector where service exists already.

- Under this GRAP deal, the provincial government will become a business partner with private-companies competing directly with Aliant - an established service provider.

- The provincial ownership stake will generate cash but this cash amounts to a hidden tax on telecommunications in addition to any other taxes it levies on businesses like this.
4. The Premier's relationship with the proponents is too close for comfort.

- Some media outlets are reporting that Dean MacDonald (Persona) and Ken Marshall (Rogers) were employees of Cable Atlantic.

- In fact, they were business partners with the Premier, as detailed in Henley v. Cable Atlantic:

Danny Williams: 93%
Dean MacDonald: 4.5%
Ken Marshall: 0.6%

- Under provincial conflict of interest legislation, the Premier would be obliged to remove himself from any process in which he has a conflict of interest.

- In this instance, there is a perceived or potential conflict of interest so, prudently, he should have removed himself from any process involving these players; that just covers his own backside.

- The provincial government has acknowledged a concern about conflict of interest. According to Trevor Taylor, this proposal took longer than it otherwise might have because of concern about a perceived conflict of interest.

We'd agree. A perceived conflict of interest should have caused greater concern - and a greater degree of openness - about this deal.

The Cable Guys: another viewpoint

There is a small but growing interest across the province - and likely elsewhere as well - in the provincial government's decision announced last week to spend $15 million on a third and fourth fibreoptic line across Newfoundland with connections to the mainland at North Sydney.

Even though the proposal from a consortium involving Persona, Rogers and Allstream was made to government as long as 12 months ago, there was no public discussion of the initiative before a fire at Aliant headquarters in St. John's interrupted telephone and internet service for upwards of six hours in late October.

Immediately in the wake of that event a number of commentators - including cabinet ministers, officials at St. John's city hall and others - voiced loud and sustained criticism of the events, and implicitly of Aliant's handling of the problem.

Particularly vocal were St. John's mayor Andy Wells and city solicitor Ron Penney. Penney called for a probe into the Aliant fire.

Premier Danny Williams focused on issues of public safety when news of the Persona/Rogers/Allstream proposal came to light. Canadian Press reported it this way:

A six-week-old child stopped breathing for several minutes during the five-hour outage, and had to be driven to a nearby hospital for help after calls to 911 failed.

"That alone is a significant, serious situation," Williams said. "There could've been a loss of life, so any time you're talking safety and life loss, that's obviously paramount."

In the same story, Canadian Press also reported:

- Persona had already begun construction of the new links backed by a commitment of $30 million toward a project then estimated to cost $82 million.

- St. John's mayor Andy Wells wrote to provincial innovation minister Trevor Taylor supporting provincial government participation in the additional links.

On November 2, the provincial government announced the $15 million commitment which would bring the provincial government an ownership stake in the new telecommunications project. The project apparently would cost $52 million ($15 million from the province plus $37 million from the private sector), but Canadian Press still reported the project as costing $82 million.

Before the deal was announced, R.F. Davis, an engineer from St. John's submitted an opinion article to The Telegram. It was carried in the Saturday edition and is reprinted below. Davis' comments take issue with some of the claims being made about the existing Aliant service. He also draws attention to the issue of private sector companies improving their competitive position through a public-sector investment. As Davis notes, Aliant laid dual fibreoptic cables across the island portion of the province in the mid 1990s with no public money being either sought or obtained.

Following is Davis' article as carried by The Telegram.

The Telegram
04 November 2006
R.F. Davis

A second fibre-optic cable already exists off island


From time to time we see references parroted by a media as being "gospel" because the point being made came from a politician. When that politician is Premier Danny Williams, people tend to sit up and take notice.

In a story in the Oct. 27 edition of The Telegram, headlined "Province ponders second line in wake of phone outage," Williams said Newfoundland is considering construction of a second fibre-optic link to Nova Scotia that would prevent 911 services from shutting down as
they did recently.

Didn't stop blackout

It is unfortunate that the advice being given to the premier on this matter is incorrect. There have been two fibre -optic cables connecting Newfoundland and Labrador to the national telecommunications network for 10 years. The presence of this second cable did not prevent the 911 system from failing Oct. 20. Neither will a third cable provide any increased protection for the 911 system. The Gulf fibre cables have nothing to do with providing protection for the 911 system.

Two Aliant fibre-optic cables already exist across the Gulf and carry huge amounts of telecommunication voice and data traffic (including the Internet). They are diverse both physically and electrically and telecommunications traffic is carried simultaneously over both cables. Likewise, across the island there are two physically and electrically diverse fibre-optic cable routes that simultaneously carry the traffic. These cable systems are supported and maintained by a very experienced and dedicated team of engineers, technicians, construction and repair personnel.

The story referenced above and statements since Oct. 20 by various municipal and provincial politicians, including the premier, are leading the public to believe that another fibre-optic cable across the Gulf will save us. A third fibre-optic cable is not required for service diversity or protection purposes nor is it required to provide additional capacity to meet the needs of the province.

New system proposed

The story went on to report that the provincial government is considering investing in an $82-million proposal by Rogers Communications; MTS Allstream and Persona Inc. to build this new cable system.

(Telegram Editor's note: an announcement was made Thursday after this submission was written that the province will invest $15 million while Persona Communications, Rogers and MTS Allstream will invest another $37 million to install a new, fully redundant fibre-optic telecommunications link from St. John's to Halifax along two diverse routes to connect to national carriers on the mainland.)

If investment by the provincial government triggers the building of a third cable, the revenue generated will only go to serve the interests of the companies and their shareholders who will own and control the cable. The general interests of the people of the province will be secondary.

If the provincial government is considering investment in infrastructure for telecommunications there is a better use of the money. The people of the province would be better served if the government looked at upgrading its own 911 system by providing a new provincewide E911 system utilizing the all digital telecommunications network currently. An E911 system has been under consideration for years and is no closer to realization.

No government help

The two Aliant cables that exist today were totally financed by Newtel Communication (now part of Aliant). There was no financial support by the provincial government - neither offered nor requested. Aliant is obligated to provide universal access to basic local and long distance telecommunications services in the province. The companies wishing to tap into the public purse to help finance their infrastructure investments operate totally in the competitive environment and carry no such obligation to serve and provide access to basic services.

The telecommunications failure Oct. 20 should not be used by the provincial government as a rationale in attempting to convince the public that we should make an investment in unrequired infrastructure. If the business proponents of the third fibre-optics cable wish to have the capability, which this cable will give them, of competing in the long haul telecommunications marketplace, then I say let them build the cable themselves with their own money.

Remember, remember the fifth of November

Remember, Remember the fifth of November
The gunpowder treason and plot
I see no reason why gunpowder treason
should ever be forgot

Guy Fawkes Guy, 'twas his intent
to blow up king and parliament
Three score barrels were laid below
to prove old England's overthrow

By God's mercy he was catched
with a dark lantern and lighted match
Holler boys,Holler boys, let the bells ring
Holler boys Holler boys, God save the King

On the night of 4/5 November 1605, Guy Fawkes and other plotters attempted to blow up the King and the House of Lords. Fawkes was caught beside 36 barrels of gunpowder that had been moved underneath the buildings.

Left: The Discovery of the Gunpowder Plot [Guy Fawkes, in dark clothing, centre.]

Fawkes and his co-conspirators were arrested, tortured and executed. As was the custom for treason, Fawkes was hanged until nearly dead and then slowly dismembered.

Each year since then, bonfires have been lit on the anniversary of the plot in celebration of the plot being thwarted.

Until the 1980s, bonfires were a common occurrence in many parts of Newfoundland and Labrador. St. John's city council banned the celebration, ostensibly because of the problems caused for the local fire brigade. Truthfully there were some truly idiotic occurrences. Some people thought it was cool to toss propane cylinders on the fire, but oddly, there doesn't seem to have ever been a major fire from a bonfire getting out of hand or of an explosion that resulted from stupidity. [I stand to be corrected on that.]

One of the largest ones I recall was on Freshwater Road, in front of the housing development across from what used to be the municipal depot. It was amazing to me, as a child, to be driving in the car with my family and see this immense fire roaring away in the centre of town.

The Gunpowder treason had its roots in tensions between Roman Catholics and Protestants.

In 1601, with the Wright brothers, Catesby was mixed up in the ill-fated rebellion of the Earl of Essex against the dominance of Robert Cecil. It saw him wounded, imprisoned and fined. From then on he was seen as a dangerous character by the government. He had, apparently, been involved in discussions with the Spanish government in 1602 about arranging a rebellion in England. He was one of those who were arrested as a precaution by the English government in 1603 after the death of Queen Elizabeth.

Catesby originated the Gunpowder Plot, having decided that the Spanish would not help the English Catholics. He disclosed it initially to Christopher and John Wright and Thomas Winter, and later to Guy Fawkes and Thomas Percy, in May 1604, at Catesby's lodgings in the Strand in London. Catesby, the 'moving spirit' behind the Plot, recruited others in 1604 and 1605.

More than 400 years after his death, Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder treason continue to inspire. Guido Fawkes' blog is a compendium of scandal and rumour about English politics.

The 1980s graphic novel V for Vendetta is set in a futuristic Britain after a limited nuclear war. The country is run by fascists; V is an anarchist who sets about to topple the government. He hides his identity behind a Guy Fawkes mask. It was adapted as a film in 2005, with an altered premise (no nuclear war). The film attracted some criticism including from the creators who felt that the movie version ran contrary to the theme of the original work. In place of a conflict between fascism and anarchism was a battle between American conservatism and American liberalism, albeit while retaining the British setting.

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Printer versus GPMG

A disgruntled United States Army officer (his collar tabs say captain) displays some questionable - but highly humourous - judgment dealing with an HP printer that won't work.

He decided to introduce the printer to the FN MAG, a general purpose machine gun firing 7.62 mm rounds. It's a fine piece of kit capable of reaching out the better part of two kilometres if mounted on a proper tripod. Canadian soldiers will recognise it as a C6.

It also makes short work of the printer.

Monkey fist strikes again

Danny Williams campaigned door-to-door in Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi in order to get his candidate elected.

He deployed his caucus and cabinet.

He lost.

So what does he do?

Blame the guys who didn't run a candidate.

Is this a case of Danny tossing the monkey or spanking it?

General Ursus, left, explains that the secret to either tossing or spanking is in the grip.

What's he gonna flip the province for?

Danny Williams made his reputation by taking a cable television company, adding on a bunch of telecommunications assets and then flipping the thing for cash and stocks.

The company Danny owned was Cable Atlantic, formerly Avalon Cablevision. Danny was the majority owner, but small pieces were owned by Dean Macdonald and Ken Marshall.

1. The easiest thing to point out about Thursday's news release on government's suddenly discovered "telecommunications strategy" is that the key players in the deal are the provincial government, Persona and Rogers, headed respectively by:

- Danny Williams;
- Dean MacDonald; and,
- Ken Marshall.

2. The next easiest thing to notice is that the fibreoptic lines are to run along the TransCanada highway and along the south coast. There is nothing in this announcement to include Labrador.

3. The next easiest thing to note is that while this is supposed to be a private sector venture, the provincial government as the largest or second largest shareholder. Dannystan winds up with 28.8% of the investment in this project, while the three private sector companies are ponying up a total of $37 million. According to an earlier news story Persona was dropping in $30 million on its own. However since the original proposal was for an $82 million job and the total announced Thursday was $52 million, we have to wonder what the portions wind up being.

4. The next easiest thing to wonder is how the government shares are going to be held. Will they be held by say, the Department of Finance or Trevor Taylor's innovation crowd? Or will they be handed over to Hydro under its new mandate?

5. The next easiest thing to wonder is what Newfoundland and Labrador will earn for its financial interest. Use of these fibreoptic cables has a cost attached to it. If government is investing in the construction then it should also be getting a piece of the action. Every time you sign up for any service provided by Allstream, Persona or Rogers, you'll be funneling an extra payment into the provincial treasury.

If not then the province is double-subsidizing the private sector, first by investing in this project and secondly by foregoing legitimate revenues in order to recover the public investment.

6. The next easiest thing to wonder is where this "telecommunications strategy" thing came from. The minister mentioned it at Thursday's newser but truthfully, I haven't found a single person outside of a handful directly involved who had heard of it before. We do know that persona approached the Premier some time ago with this expensive scheme; it took the fire at Aliant to push cabinet into investing in it.

But the most obvious thing to ask is this:

If Danny got into telecomms just before he sold off Cable Atlantic, should we all be wondering what he is going to flip the province for and who the prospective buyer is?

_____________________________

Update: nottawa has been slogging away at the telecom thing for a few days now.

Check his posts here and here.

We weren't kidding...

when we subtitled a list of old columns "Travels in Danny-land".

Scroll down on the right and you'll see it.

[Left: Premier Danny Williams. Photo: Greg Locke/Current]

Check out this account from The Current online of an encounter between the president of the Conservative Party of Canada and some local senior Progressive Conservatives at the Tory convention in Gander last month.

The name is official.

sort of.

Update: Take a look at the Offal News take on this story as well.

I can add a bit of colour to Lono's comments, in the sense of background. As it turned out in June 1990, the task fell to me for co-ordinating the security and logistics details of two visiting first ministers during Meech Lake. I got the prime minister and the Ontario premier, David Peterson. Another guy in the office got McKenna and Grant Devine.

Now you have to bear in mind that this was during the course of the very heated debate in the House of Assembly. Emotions were running high and the Premier and the Prime Minister quite clearly didn't see eye-to-eye about very much of anything. Even at the level I operated on, which was several layers down from the grown-ups, the general approach we followed is the one to most people would expect. To the best of my knowledge, it's the approach pretty well any first minister's office has followed.

Your job as a staffer is to make things happen and to represent your boss, the office he holds and the province as a whole with as much professionalism and dignity as you can muster.

And hey...no matter how much you disagree with his policies, the guy is still the prime minister of the country or the Premier of Ontario. As they say in the army, even if you can't salute the man, salute the rank.

Mulroney came down, the trip went without a hitch and there was never - to the best of my knowledge - anything that would reflect badly on the Office of the Premier, the Premier himself and the province. Courtesy was the order of the day, even when the advance guy was being a complete ass about cameras in the legislature.

As an aside, the CBC television producer involved wound the guy up tighter than tight before he finally agreed to a request both knew was easy enough to accomplish. The problem was in the guy's tone. But that's another story.

To get back to the point, in the little saga The Current lays out, one of the people involved is Tommy Williams, the premier's brother; the other was allegedly one of the Premier's senior staffers. Even though Tommy isn't on staff, people know who the heck he is and he really falls under the same sort of expectations as the staff. That is, unless his goal is to be like Jimmy Carter's doltish brother.

If he acted the way he is alleged to have acted, then we have a serious problem. If people carry on this way when they represent the Premier we all look like schmucks.

We all get branded as boors.

There really isn't much chance that the staffers can work around the bosses' disagreements - public or private, real or imaginary - because the staffers are basically acting as boorishly as the grown-ups.

To make matters worse, when people representing the province act like horse's asses, you can imagine how little they really think of the province and its people.

If the Gander story is true, it wasn't the national Conservative party president who got told to off.

Nope.

By implication, we have all been put on notice:

This is Dannystan.

Danny takes a hit

Provincial New Democratic Party leader Lorraine Michael defeated Progressive Conservative Jerome Kennedy in a by-election in Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi [pronounced either "kiddy viddy" or "kweyeda - veyeda"] this evening by a 55% to 45% margin.

Michael polled 1968 votes to Kennedy's 1585. The Liberals didn't field a candidate, ostensibly out of courtesy to Michael.

The district has been held by the New Democrats since the early 1990s.

Showing the strength of their grass-roots organization, New Democrats turned out 80% of their votes from the 2003 general election while the Williams Conservatives pulled 71% of their previous vote.

The Williams defeat came as a surprise to many who expected the ruling party to sail to victory. Williams' personal popularity continues at record levels and St. John's is traditionally a Tory stronghold. The Premier spent a considerable amount of time campaigning door-to-door in the district on behalf of his candidate and deployed considerable numbers of his caucus to help with the campaign.

Still, the Tory campaign had some curious missing elements. For example, the campaign never established a website, preferring instead to focus on door-to-door work and signage. Kennedy's signs, however, were typically found on public land while Michaels signs turned up more often than not in windows and on front lawns.

Kennedy's radio spots were also lacklustre compared to Michael's efforts. While Kennedy featured himself and endorsements from Danny Williams, Michael's spots featured endorsements from well-known figures like actor and community leader Greg Malone.

Some observers noted that Kennedy and Williams focused on what is locally down as the downtown arts community. Some recent media coverage drew attention to a supposed split in the arts community with actors Mary Walsh and Amy Howse campaigning for Kennedy. Walsh and Howse likely represented personal choices given Kennedy's strong involvement with the local arts community. He previously appeared as a guest on Walsh's Open Book CBC television program discussing works by well-known or lesser-known contemporary authors.

Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi is comprised of a broad demographic cross-section with only a relatively small portion being made up of the St. John's-based arts community.

Speaking on a local radio call-in show, Kennedy would not commit to running in next year's general election saying that he has to sit back and evaluate the outcome and return to focusing on his law practice.

Kennedy was gracious in defeat, although during the campaign he told CBC Radio:

The NDP doesn't really have a campaign that I can see, other than, 'Elect us because we need someone in the house of assembly.'

Taking a look at the turn-out and relative votes, some curious points turn up:

1. The Tories should have won. They have a strong government, tons of resources and volunteers, had a great candidate and basically were the shoe-ins despite the fact the New Democrats have held the seat for so long.

2. 71% is nothing to write home about given the points noted above. Even allowing for a lower turnout in a by-election, the Tories were able to turn out fewer of their supporters than one would have expected.

Were the Tories over-confident or was this a sign - as some have noted - that Danny's support among old-line Tories in St. John's is getting soft?

3. Kennedy was Danny's personal choice. Other potential candidates were actively discouraged from running. Both played up their personal connections and previous work. Jerome constantly confirmed his unquestioning support for the Premier's line on everything.

This defeat has got to have set a few dishes flying about any room Danny was in.

St. John's can take the hit

Danny Williams has been able to keep some of his problems as little more than pictures on a television screen. Problems in Harbour Breton and Stephenville, exacerbated by his own posturing and a failure to deliver on his promises, couldn't get media attention outside of the regions where the problems occurred.

Monday's job fair was different. The spectacle of 9000 people turning out in the capital city for the chance at a job in Alberta cannot be ignored. To the contrary, it has set tongues wagging across the northeast Avalon.

Simon Lono, at Offal News, has put this into perspective rather well.

The difference between this situation and Stephenville, for example, is more than the fact it is in town.

Unlike their cousins from the south and west coast of the island, these latest economic refugees are people looking for work in the oil industry. They are, in many cases people who were lined up to work on Hebron.

They are heading for Alberta, not because of Chinese competition or a shortage of resource or any of a host of other factors that could be blamed for problems in other industries.

No. These people are packing up the F-150 and heading west because of Danny Williams ' apparent belief that, in the words of Offal News, "we are better off awaiting a better offer in government royalties and equity."

Williams - perhaps channeling Marie Antoinette, instead of the usual e.e. cummings - put it another way: "St. John's can take the hit."

Maybe it can.

But that's not really the point.

Williams is under increasing pressure to produce something of substance and at every turn he seems to be genuinely incapable of delivering on anything. The latest on the list is the energy plan. The oft-used excuse for inaction - "we won't decide until we release the energy plan" - will now not arrive until 2007, the better part of two years behind schedule.

All of this will inevitably fuel the growing Quiet Revulsion.

On top of that political problem, Williams has an abysmal reputation with Ottawa. Danny Williams relationship with Stephen Harper is arguably worse than the relationship between any former premier and the corresponding prime minister. Clyde Wells and Brian Mulroney? They could sit and chat civilly if for no other reason than their disagreement - while deep-seated - was based on something other than one inviting the other to a meal and then publicly kicking him in the goolies just because it suited his personal political agenda.

Williams' problems do not stop there. He has also alienated a great many of his fellow first ministers. Jean Charest is merely the latest. Danny is surely off the Charest's Christmas card list Danny's intemperate and decidedly ignorant characterization of Quebec politics as volatile and unstable. Williams only compounded his initial insult by apologizing not for the remarks but that people felt offended at being told they were a threat to the country. By Williams own version, he could not apologize for simply stating fact.

No, the real question is not whether St. John's can take the economic hit from Williams' actions over Hebron.

With his self-induced economic and political problems and the growing Quiet Revulsion, the question remains whether Danny Williams will be able to withstand the political hit he is likely to take. Maybe not in Wednesday's by-election or even next year's general election.

but one day.

soon.

Something says St. John's can indeed take the hit.

But something also says the thin-skinned premier cannot.

Energy plan delayed until 2007; Lower Churchill prospects dimmer

Interviewed by Randy Simms on VOCM Open Line Tuesday, Premier Danny Williams said:

1. The Lower Churchill will be financed by Newfoundland and Labrador alone. Quebec's role will be as the energy transporter, with Ontario as a possible customer for the power.

Don't count on the project proceeding, at least not on terms that are financially favourable to Newfoundland and Labrador. The huge cost of the project, estimated at upwards of $9.0 billion, would effectively double the province's debt. If the province can even arrange financing - and that remains a big if - the terms might render the project financially unpalatable except to a government which has nothing else to offer as an economic development.

2. The energy plan is now delayed until Spring 2007. Originally promised by the end of 2006 and set to include the long-awaited natural gas royalty regime, Williams today said the plan will be out by the end of the year or early in the New Year.

Count on sometime in spring 2007. Williams is notoriously bad at meeting timeliness. He is typically six months or more off original time estimates.

As a result, we can count on even further delays - measured in years - for prospective development of offshore gas.

Refinery marginalia

Natural resources minister counted some chickens before they were hatched Monday with a statement anticipating construction of a second oil refinery in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As she put it:

The initial stages of the feasibility study on a second refinery for Placentia Bay determined that a new refinery can compete effectively throughout the Atlantic Basin marketplace and the proposed project is now in the final stages of that feasibility process

But a few paragraphs later comes this proviso:

A significant amount of work and analysis still needs to be done before a project of this type can be given the green light to proceed, but I am well aware of the tremendous economic spin offs of additional refinery capacity and I'm delighted with the progress to date.

Government "news" releases are always good at keeping us abreast of crucial developments, like progress reports on a minister's mental well-being. It is vital to know that the minister is "delighted".

Let's take a closer look at the project and forget Dunderdale's mental state.

The first quote is lifted almost word-for-word from Newfoundland and Labrador Refining's release from late September, to wit:

The initial economic analysis completed in Stage One of the feasibility study determined that a new refinery in Placentia Bay can compete effectively throughout the Atlantic Basin marketplace...

But, as Bond Papers has already noted, the sanction for this project will come only if the third stage of the feasibility study - not due until the end of the year. As well, a recent announcement by Irving that it will build a second refinery at Saint John, next to its existing 250,000 barrel per day facility puts a crimp in the economics of the second refinery in Newfoundland and Labrador.

When asked about the impact of the Saint John expansion, Brian Dalton, spokesperson for NL Refining said that the site in Placentia Bay was excellent. Unfortunately for Dalton, site won't be the determining factor in whether or not he and his partners go ahead with the multi-billion dollar project.

Site, in this instance, is like Dunderdale's enthusiasm for the spinoff benefits. That won't matter either when it comes to the business decision of investing in a greenfield project in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Curiously, the project is registered with the provincial environment department, een before project sanction has been achieved. There is still no sign of the project on the federal government's environmental assessment registry.

There are a couple of interesting points to note in the provincial environmental department's description of the project:

2) Southern Head (Placentia Bay) Oil Refinery Project
Proponent: Newfoundland and Labrador Refining Corporation (Reg. 1301)

The proponent proposes to construct an oil refinery at Southern Head, between North Harbour and Come by Chance, at the head of Placentia Bay. The oil refinery is proposed to have an initial production capacity of 300,000 barrels per day with the option to expand to 600,000 barrels per day. Primary products of the oil refinery would be gasoline, kerosene/jet fuel, ultra-low sulphur diesel and refining by-products. Infrastructure required would include process facilities, marine terminal, crude and product storage tanks, access road and utilities. Construction will take approximately three years to complete and production is planned to begin in late 2010 or early 2011. The undertaking was registered on October 25, 2006; public comments are due by December 4, 2006; and the minister's decision is due by December 9, 2006.

1. The proposed refinery will handle heavy sour crude. Historically that type of refinery is the one with the lowest margins and hence is one of the most difficult to make a solid profit on in the long haul.

Come by Chance works because the thing was built and paid off decades ago. Because of the low margins, refineries have typically been built close to market to lower transportation costs.

Come by Chance processes imported crude, mainly from Iraq, largely because Vitol has been able to acquire feedstock at good prices.

Currently all Newfoundland and Labrador crude production is light, sweet. Hebron is a heavy sour field but it will likely not be in production before 2015 at the earliest. Thus, the proposed refinery is likely built on the assumption that it will use imported crude.

2. The planned start of operation is obviously an estimate, contingent on completion of the feasibility process. No one should be getting their knickers in a bunch that Arnold's Cove is about to become the second Calgary.

3. This would be a honkin' big refinery. The Saint John project is estimated to be 300,000 barrels per day. The proposal calls for a refinery project that would ultimately equal the output of both Saint John's existing and planned refineries.

4. Without detailed information on the proposed refinery, it will be extremely difficult to assess for environmental impact of this very large refinery within the very short timeframe provided by the provincial government.

Ruelokke takes helm of offshore board

Following is the text of the official announcement on Monday from federal natural resources minister Gary Lunn on the appointment of Max Ruelokke as chairman and chief executive officer of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board. Lunn also announced the appointment of Fred Way as vice-chairman.

Compare the text that follows with the tiny release issued by the provincial government on Friday at 5:10 pm.

Such is the abysmal state of federal-provincial relations that Ottawa and St. John's could not even get together on such a simple thing as a joint news release announcing a joint appointment to a joint board.

Appointments at the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

OTTAWA - The Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources, today announced the appointment of the Chair and CEO, and of the Vice-Chair, of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB). Mr. Max Ruelokke will hold the Chair and CEO position, and Mr. Fred Way, has been appointed the Vice-Chair.

The announcement follows the July 25, 2005, request by the Government of Canada for the establishment of a panel to select a Chair and CEO, and Vice-Chair, for the CNLOPB.

"Mr. Ruelokke brings a wealth of experience and expertise to the CNLOPB, which will benefit the organization greatly. Mr. Way will serve the Board well given his past work both as Vice-Chair and as Acting Chair and CEO," said Minister Lunn. "I am confident that both of these very accomplished individuals will be able to address and act on key issues that are important to the province and industry."

Mr. Ruelokke was born in Grand Bank, Newfoundland, and has more than 35 years of experience in offshore shipbuilding and support services, engineering design and construction. He has held a number of senior executive positions in industry, most recently serving as General Manager, East Coast Canada, for AMEC Oil and Gas. Mr. Ruelokke also served the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, first as Assistant Deputy Minister (1993 - 94) and then as Deputy Minister (1996 - 98) of the Department of Industry, Trade and Technology.

A member of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Newfoundland, Mr. Ruelokke received his Engineering Diploma in 1966 and a Bachelor of Civil Engineering in 1968, both from Memorial University in St. John's.

Mr. Way was appointed Vice-Chair of the CNLOPB in 1999, and served as Acting Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from May 2004 to October 2006. He had a distinguished career with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and served as Deputy Minister for the Department of Mines and Energy with the provincial government from 1996 to 1998.

Mr. Way obtained a Bachelor of Arts (Economics) in 1971 from Memorial University of Newfoundland and continued with part-time graduate studies in Economics at Memorial University between 1972 and 1974.

The CNLOPB manages the petroleum resources in the Newfoundland and Labrador offshore area on behalf of the governments of Canada, and Newfoundland and Labrador. The Board's authority is derived from legislation implementing the 1985 Atlantic Accord between the two governments.

Ignatieff's (and Harper's) folly

From Lysiane Gagnon's column in the Monday Globe:

The irony is that the Liberal Party really won't even benefit from its demagogic U-turn on the national unity file. The Quebec-wing resolution didn't pass the test of Quebec's political class and the overbidding has already started. Many nationalist commentators, including Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Benoit Pelletier, insisted that the only valid recognition of Quebec as a nation should be constitutional. Others said that a "symbolic" constitutional recognition wouldn't be enough if it didn't provide for more powers for the province and explicitly recognize Quebec's "right to self-determination."

As Montreal Gazette columnist Don Macpherson wrote, "even before the federal Liberal convention tears itself apart over the offers [of recognizing Quebec as a nation], Quebec has already rejected them."

Federalists should stop obsessing about the threat of another referendum on sovereignty. First, it's far from sure that there will even be one. Second, if the sovereigntist movement ever grew strong enough to convince a majority of Quebeckers to break away from Canada, it is not a token recognition of their "nation" that would stop the tide.

Iggy's supporters can take Bond Papers off their e-mail lists and his local supporters can stop calling trying to get me to buy a ticket to a luncheon or a breakfast with a guy i have already written off as being the very last person who should ever hold the job of leading the Liberal Party of Canada.

Ignatieff's folly - like that of the Prime Minister during the last election - in playing the Quebec nationalist card should be enough to discount him from further serious contention.

Mad rock?

"'Mad Rock'... I think that's probably my nickname in Ottawa these days," Williams chuckled Thursday in a speech at a conference of maritime emergency officials.

That's from a CTV story on Danny Williams replacing Ralph Klein as Canada's most outspoken first minister.

Word from Ottawa is that while Williams is regarded being a bit out-of-plumb by some at the highest levels of the federal government, his nickname is a bit more earthy:

Danny "F***ing" Williams.

Defence round-up - Afghanistan

1. Al Queda document contains threats to Canada.

Translated by the SITE Institute, the document states, in part: "They will either be forced to withdraw their forces or face an operation similar to New York, Madrid, London and their sisters, with the help of Allah."

Canada is described as having a fanatical adherence to Christianity.

2. New navy helicopters to have troop-lift capability.

Canadian Press is reporting a change to the specs for Canada's new shipborne helicopters. The Sikorsky S-92 variants will enter service in 2009. The change will allow the helicopters to be converted rapidly to carry soldiers.

Chief of Defence Staff General Rick Hillier describes the change as being related to potential use from an amphibious assault ship being acquired for the navy.

3. TF 1-07 drug testing allegedly showed 16-18% used illegal substances; Army questions news reports.

While defence officials are neither confirming nor denying the reports, some news media are reporting that 16-18% of urine samples taken from soldiers currently training for the next rotation to Afghanistan have tested positive for traces of illegal drugs, including amphetamines ("speed"), heroine and marijuana.

4. Roadside blast kills NATO soldier.

One NATO soldier was killed and eight wounded in a roadside blast on Sunday in Afghanistan.

5. NATO change of command.

On Wednesday, Canada will relinquish command of the NATO forces in the Kandahar region to the Netherlands.

6. Canadians continue reconstruction/humanitarian missions in Afghanistan.

The officer pictured is Captain Dave Muralt from the Provincial Reconstruction Team.

At one point, Captain Muralt was the public affairs officer at 5 Wing, Goose Bay.

Also mentioned in the story linked above is Captain Howard Chafe, possibly the same Howard Chafe from St. John's who served with the Royal Newfoundland Regiment and, among other things, hosted a radio program aimed at local civilians during a tour in Bosnia. It wouldn't be surprising for that Howard Chafe to turn up in Afghanistan with the PRT.

How many Howard Chafes can there be in the army?

What exactly do we mean by "nation"?

There is always a risk that discussion of national unity or federal-provincial power distribution will cause rampant insomnia, or as with others, a debilitating case of apoplexy.

[Left: At the thought of yet another constitutional debate, Canadians' heads started to explode.]

This is the risk we took yesterday in suggesting people take a gander at Andrew Coyne's column in the National Post.

The risk is well worth it, though, especially when Michael Ignatieff's comments have earned praise from no less a sovereignist than former Quebec Premier Bernard Landry. Landry welcomed Ignatieff's proposal to recognize that Quebec is a nation and then proceeded, as reported by CBC Radio, to point out that it is only logical to wonder why a nation - which as a nation Landry equated in French interviews to sovereign states - would have the same political powers within Canada as Prince Edward Island.

Landry has also been quoted extensively by French language media on the same issue.

[Photo right: La Presse. For a moment, Bernard couldn't remember which finger he needed to raise to Canada.]

To further the discussion, following is the column by Stephane Dion published in the National Post on Thursday, October 26.

Dion will undoubtedly raise the ire of a great many of the local landrys but then again that is a risk we shall have to take. It's either this, Slim Whitman recordings or an mp3 loop of Danny's dirge.

Either will cause the brain of your average sovereignist to pop.


What, exactly, do we mean by "nation"?

Stephane Dion
National Post
October 26, 2006

Before entering politics, more than 10 years ago, I maintained that we Quebecers could be described as forming a nation, in the civic and sociological sense of the term. Last Saturday, however, I voted against the resolution put forward by the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada calling for the party to undertake the necessary steps toward a formal recognition of Quebec as a nation.

Before we ask other Canadians to support such a formal recognition (in the constitution, no doubt) we should first of all determine what we expect from such a recognition. Hiding behind the apparent consensus in Quebec on this question are at least three disagreements.

- First question: Are Quebecers the only nation to be recognized within Canada, or will we accept that other groups, heartened by our example, be given the same recognition? Will the pressure exercised by an undetermined number of groups in Canada, including groups in Quebec, to be recognized as nations lead us to conclude that our own national recognition has been trivialized or diluted?

- Second question: Is this recognition necessary or is it merely desirable? Those who say it is necessary must follow their reasoning to its conclusion: If we Quebecers do not obtain this recognition then we must leave Canada. Indeed, one cannot live without something that is necessary.

Those who say that, on the contrary, this recognition would only be a good thing to obtain should not place it at the heart of the Canadian unity debate. You do not break up a country on account of something that is good but not necessary.

- Third question: Do we want this recognition to be purely symbolic or do we want it to lead to concrete consequences on, say, the division of powers or the allocation of public funds? And how does this approach square with the previous question? It is contradictory to affirm that the recognition of Quebec as a nation is necessary but purely symbolic. But that is the untenable position Michael Ignatieff has decided to advocate. Gilles Duceppe, the Bloc Quebecois leader, and Claude Morin, the former PQ minister, have already responded that if the recognition of Quebec as a nation in Canada is important then it must bring about "something" beyond symbolism.

We've seen this movie three times already. First it was the debate on the constitutional recognition of Quebec as a "distinct society" contained in the Meech and Charlottetown accords. Then came the Calgary Declaration, a 1997 episode which few people remember. The premiers of the other provinces tried to define, for us Quebecers, the type of recognition we wanted. They had their legislatures adopt a declaration that recognized "the unique character of Quebec society." When the declaration landed in Quebec, the province's political class rejected it, stating that this recognition "had no teeth."

So, here is my position: I am proud to belong to the Quebec nation within Canada. The constitutional recognition of such a fact, although desirable, is not necessary because nothing prevents us Quebecers from participating and succeeding in this great endeavour that is Canada, a country we have contributed so much to building.

Nothing can justify our renouncing our Canadian identity. Such a rupture would be a tragedy, for ourselves, our children and future generations. We should not be encouraged to make such a mistake on the basis of a recognition that is desirable but not necessary. That is my position and I am more than willing to debate it because I do not underestimate the importance of symbols and recognition. But I do not believe that we should ask other Canadians for such a recognition until we have clarified what we are hoping to obtain from it.

Although it is an important one, I do not believe this debate is the most important thing we can do to improve Quebec and Canada as a whole. For me, the main priority by far is to ensure Canada is part of the solution, not the problem, to the crucial challenge of the 21st century: how to reconcile humanity with the ecological limits of the planet. That is the vision and the plan of action I am proposing to Canadians in order to combine the three pillars of our success: economic prosperity, social justice and environmental sustainability.

Quebecers have better things to do than to see this movie for a fourth time. We should mobilize ourselves to make our country a pathfinder in the 21st century. Let's contribute all our talents, energies and our own culture, as we have always done in the past, when we have had to respond with other Canadians to great challenges.

Thursday threesome

The Michael J. Fox television spots supporting candidates in the American-terms have garnered a ton of media attention in addition to the impact the spots are likely having in the markets where they are being shown as paid ads.

Offal News has already taken a look at one of them and we linked to it earlier.

There are actually three, each one superbly lit, produced, written an performed. Take a look at all three. Notice, among other things that the core message is the same in all three but the way the message is communicated is radically different. They are quiet and relatively low-key, compared to the negative stuff that is almost cliche.

The Missouri spot is pitched very locally to a state full of independently-minded people.

The Maryland spot is another matter, appealing more generally to voters. It ends with a "respectful" call to action.

The Wisconsin gubernatorial spot starts by connecting with local pride: "Wisconsin holds a special place in my heart..."

Notice, as well, that Fox makes some very specific statements intended to counteract Republican attacks pre-emptively. He also links stem cell research to a variety of medical conditions other than his own Parkinsons.

No wonder the Republicans are literally screaming invective and personal hatred at Fox. These spots are compelling. In states where the races are tight, Fox might tip the balance in favour of the Democrats. In other states - even ones not targeted by Fox - the GOP candidates are having severe troubles with voter anger over everything from scandals involving Republican politicians to the war in what some American reporters call "Eye-raq". Given the buzz around these spots, Fox could tip the balance in races other than the ones he has specifcally helped.


Claire McCaskill (D), Missouri senate race



Ben Cardin (D), Maryland senate race



Jim Doyle (D), Wisconsin gubernatorial race

Two to watch Thursdays

Check out the latest from Offal News on political advertising, specifically on Michael J. Fox's 30 in support of a candidate in a Missouri senate race.

Simon gives an excellent overview of the spot and on the basic idea of political advertising, but here's a little thing for you to notice.

How do Missourians pronounce the name of their state? Mike took the time to get it right. All politics is indeed local.

On a totally different topic, there's Andrew Coyne's observations on Michael Ignatieff and his proposal to recognize Quebec as a nation. Take the time to read the whole thing.

And when you're done - those of you who live in the Secret Nation, that is - ponder how much of what Coyne says about Quebec applies equally to the pretentions of some of our local politicians, old and new.