The rubbish tip of history

A self-congratulatory column in the Toronto Star this weekend by Independent editor in chief Ryan Cleary included some curious comments, among them the claim that Hydro Quebec made $2.0 billion in profit from the Upper Churchill last year compared to $34 million for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

"With that in mind," wrote Cleary, "The Independent took a strong Newfoundland and Labrador focus from the start. Most of our investigations delve into motherhood issues. From the 'negotiations' that led to the Terms of Union to the infamous upper Churchill contract - which saw Quebec rake in an estimated $2 billion in profit last year alone, compared to this province's $34-million take - most projects have a distinct local flavour."

According to Hydro Quebec's 2005 annual report, the company had a net income of $1.87 billion in 2005. That's analogous to profit, in that it is the money left over from revenues after all the bills are paid.

Perhaps, Quebec made more in profit than it actually made.

Unlikely.

But the financial statements also report an income from operations of $2.249 billion.

So if Cleary is right, then the Upper Churchill is responsible for 88% of Hydro Quebec's net income. That doesn't seem right since the Upper Churchill, as large as it is, doesn't constitute 88% of Hydro Quebec's generating capacity.

Something tells me Cleary's numbers are not correct.

But let's take it a step further; Cleary claims Newfoundland and Labrador earned $34 million from the Upper Churchill. The 2004 recall power purchase agreement with Quebec on a $130 megawatt block of power yields the province about $46 million each year over its five-year term. That isn't counting the revenues that flow from the sale of the rest of the Upper Churchill's 5, 800 megawatts of power to Quebec.

Clearly, something is missing in Cleary's numbers.

This doesn't mean the Upper Churchill contract is a fine and wonderful thing. Rather Cleary's column points yet again to the fundamental misunderstandings and misrepresentations that are the bedrock of so much discussions of the Upper Churchill contract. Since that contract is the fuel for so much political rhetoric about ending give-aways of our resources, it doesn't take long for fundamental errors - like Cleary's - to become the basis for public policy goals that are out of whack with what can be realistically achieved.

We wind up with a case of policy GIGO. Computer programmers will recognize that acronym: garbage in, garbage out.

"With that in mind", referred to the idea that Confederation was a giant con job, what I like to call the idea that the fiction yarn Secret Nation was actually a documentary:

There have been whispers of conspiracies and plots, treason and treachery ever since, based on the theory that Newfoundland didn't so much join Canada as was manoeuvred into it.

What was also in mind was everything from mainlanders referring to the province as "have-not" to the jokes about "newfies".

The distinct local flavour Cleary mentioned, though, is that GIGO business and the mythology that goes with it.

It is a flavour we can do without.

That is, we can do without it unless we want to keep going back to the rubbish tip for another whiff or, God forbid, another taste of the myths that have hobbled Newfoundland and Labrador and its people for too long.

Fish and oil

People are wondering if the provincial government will try and take an equity position in the fishery, in the same way they are trying to do in the oil and gas sector.

The answer is already in front of us.

In the spectacular - unprecedented? - government assistance given to Bill Barry's efforts to buy chunks of Fishery Products International (FPI) last week, both Premier Danny Williams and fish minister Tom Rideout indicated that their preferred approach would be to have government purchase the fish harvesting quotas currently held by FPI while an unspecified, but fairly obvious, private sector enterprise would lease those assets from the government to operate however many fish plants they want.

The question isn't whether or not the provincial government will take some ownership stake in the fishery in the near future. It's pretty clear that Danny and Tom want to own the fishery indirectly even if they legally don't set quotas.

In order to get the oil and gas analogy correct, the real question is whether or not the provincial government will seek an equity position in the Barry Group's operation of FPI plants comparable to its demand for an ownership stake in the oil and gas operations offshore.

Something tells me they won't. The Premier has already said he has no interest in getting into the fishing business, i.e. the processing business, believing that is best left to the private sector.

So what's the difference between the oil processing business and the fish processing business?

Great minds think alike

Former Mulroney chief of staff Norman Spector's column in Monday's Globe and Mail tackled the issue of the Harper administration's efforts to control media access to cabinet ministers.

Limiting reporting of the return of fallen soldiers, on the other hand, smacks of a government that is nervous about public opinion. While the decision not to fly the flag at half-mast on Parliament Hill is defensible in light of precedent, restricting access to military bases will increase the anxiety of Canadians, many of whom feel we slipped into the Afghanistan war without adequate parliamentary debate or media coverage.

The opposition parties and political cartoonists were licking their chops last week at the prospect of being able to portray Mr. Harper as George Bush-lite. The greater risk for Mr. Harper is that he will re-awaken fears that he harbours a hidden agenda. Heading into an election in which the ballot question will be whether he can be trusted with a majority government, that's a perception that Stephen Harper would be wise not to encourage.

The Bond Papers came to a similar conclusion some time ago:

In the short term, though, the gag order also sends a powerfully negative message about the Harper government. Gagging your own team tells the world that you are not in control, that you are afraid. If Stephen Harper and his ministers can't deal with a few scraggly reporters, how in the name of heavens will they cope with the real challenges every prime minister will face?

Spector is right about the issue of Afghanistan, but his conclusion applies in a broader sense to the entire Harper ministry. Gag orders and media control smack of insecurity. They speak to a level of nervousness about public opinion, not just on dead soldiers but on virtually every file, that ultimately is a perception of Stephen Harper that the prime minister would not wish to encourage.

Unfortunately for him, the reaction to the recent case of soldiers killed in Afghanistan was enhanced because of all the other gag orders and control issues out there. Spector's warning might be a bit too late.

The scripted zinger for a scripted question

It may be an overly technical point but natural resources minister Ed Byrne sounded just a little too scripted in the House of Assembly at one point on Monday.

Byrne was trying to pull his usual routine of late, trying to convince people that there are no consequences for the local oil and gas sector from the Hebron fiasco. So after a long-winded answer in which Byrne said there are no consequences but if there are, then any slowdowns at Hibernia are due to a lost drill bit and that there can't be any slowdowns since the project doesn't exist at Hibernia South because there is no development application anyway.

Then, Ed threw out this comment:

"But to say or make an allegation, or even to leave an impression that as a result of the breakdown in Hebron discussions now Exxon Mobil and Hibernia South is all off the rails, Mr. Speaker, would be equivalent to Chicken Little saying the sky is falling or Eeyore saying: Oh, hum, we are expecting rain tomorrow."

It's that Eeyore thing that was just a bit much. Now I could take Byrne running all over the place isn't we should remain calm and that all is well. But, for some reason, I just don't think that your average middle-aged man will toss out Eeyore into a conversation as an example of someone who is saying things that aren't true. Doesn't matter how heated the moment.

The Hundred Acre Wood just isn't the sort of place adults go to naturally to illustrate points of high government policy. Sure, being born in the Year of the Tiger, I'll sometimes after striking my head on a low-hanging shelf in my daughter's bedroom, I'll lament that my top isn't made of "da rubber" like Tigger's. But she's eight years old and she'll get it.

But if I am discussing the way this government throws out policy options, I am not really going to tell other adults that it's like they were playing Pooh-sticks.

Byrne's comment sounded an awful lot like a scripted zinger. That is, a line developed by Byrne's staff for use in answer to the highly predictable Opposition questions. Chicken Little is a common enough popular reference. A.A. Milne is not either in the original or the Disney incarnation.

The question Byrne was answering was recycled from before Easter and was, in fact, no better delivered the other day than it was before everyone in the legislature took off for a couple of weeks vacation.

Questions that are badly constructed and badly delivered tend to elicit the sort of nonsensical answers Ed Byrne has been throwing out lately.

John Kenneth Galbraith, 1908-2006

Internationally acclaimed economist John Kenneth Galbraith has died at the age of 97.

The Canadian-born Galbraith received an honorary doctorate from Memorial University in 1999. Here is a link to his biography that occasion, the oration delivered by Dr, Shane O'Dea and the text of Dr. Galbraith's remarks.

Remain calm. All is well.

Hebron is but one project in an exciting industry. We have three oil and gas projects that are proceeding, natural gas development in front of us and we'’re excited about the future of the industry.

Natural resources minister Ed Byrne, quoted in The Telegram, Friday, April 28, 2006

There's optimism.

There's seeing the glass half full.

Then there's Ed Byrne.

Ed Byrne makes a pollyanna look suicidal.

One step closer and I'll blow my brains out

It's taken a while but the rumblings from some within the Liberal Party have finally emerged as the story that there are plans afoot to dump Jim Bennett as party leader after only a few weeks on the job.

Here's the VOCM version, although Craig Jackson of the Telegram broke the story yesterday.

Okay, so Bennett isn't the sharpest knife in the political drawer. Okay, so he doesn't have a group of close confidants and advisors helping out. Okay, so he doesn't consult much with caucus.

But here's the thing.

The rocket scientists in the Liberal Party who decided the party only needed a few months to get ready for the next election, who did sweet fanny adams to get rid of the party debt over the past two years and who didn't put forward a candidate of their own are likely the same diminutive ersatz Macchiavellis who now cook up this idea to dump Bennett and replace him with someone else all in even less time than the party got Bennett.

It's not like the Party hasn't had its fair share of leaders with little or no election potential or guys who got stuffed in as leader when they couldn't have won the job the proper way.

It's not like anyone on the planet expects the party to do anything of consequence as the Danny machine steamrolls over them in late 2007.

So let Bennett run the place for a while and then deal with whatever problems there are later on.

If nothing else, as David Cochrane has been pointing out over the past couple of days, a leadership review followed by a leadership contest will tap the available cash and likely bankrupt the party financially.

Think, people. Think.

There is plenty to keep everyone occupied over the next few years. The opportunity to make a contest out of 2007 was lost in the time wasted getting to the point where Jim Bennett was the only guy willing to take on the leader's job. The only person, full-stop. It's not like who is leading the Party will make a huge difference in 2007 anyway.

And that is at a time when the current administration is showing just how to run a province by the seat of one's pants. "Making it up as we go along" takes on a whole new meaning when watching Tom Rideout and Danny Williams in running about in complete disarray on files like FPI, Hebron and Abitibi. It would be a political opportunity of historic proportions if the past two years hadn't been spent doing nothing.

So, those strategic geniuses who want to oust Jim Bennett should just suck it up and deal with the problem as it is. The alternative is worse.

And besides, who do these anonymous party insiders have in mind for the job?

Sue?

She's busy doing other things.

Bill?

Been there. Done that. Tossed the brown envelope.

The machinators forget one thing: the last time the Liberal Party held an open audition for the role of leader, Jim Bennett was the only person who showed up.

If they punt Jim Bennett, these self-styled insiders might have to hold a seance to find someone to vote Liberal next election, let alone replace Bennett.

Better these long-time party conspirators devoted their energy to putting some cash in the bank - doing something useful for a change - than carrying on the business of back-biting a guy who at least was willing to take on a job no one else wanted.

The depths of PETA's ignorance

In their ongoing efforts to prove how looney they are, PETA recently took a swipe at the Inuit people of Canada who wound up as collateral damage in PETA's campaign against the busby's worn by the five regiments of Foot Guards in the United Kingdom. [Grenadier, Coldstream, Scots, Irish, and Welsh]

Seems PETA didn't know Inuit hunt polar bears when they suggested Inuit were "more likely to hunt Santa's elves" rather than bears.

Apparently too neither PETA nor the members of parliament understood where the bearskins for the busbys comes from. Ministry of Defence officials waded in at the end of the tussle to point out that the bearskins are acquired from a humane population-control policy in various Canadian provinces.

Of course, PETA didn't take notice of the fact that the army has been unable to find a synthetic alternative or that on average a busby last 40 years.

Conflict, schmonflict

In a media scrum today, Premier Danny Williams said that finance minister Loyola Sullivan will no longer be part of any cabinet discussions with respect to Fishery Products International and the proposal by Barry Group to take over FPI's assets in the province.

Sullivan's brother is Karl Sullivan, a senior executive with Barry Group.

Apparently, the Premier suddenly noticed the relationship between his finance minister and the Barry Group. It doesn't appear to have been an issue when the government provided Barry group with loan guarantees, when Barry Group stepped into the Harbour Breton schlamozzle or, for that matter when the Premier and his fisheries minister pushed to get Barry's seal oil capsules back on the shelves at Costco.

No word today though on how the province will deal with any financial implications of the FPI mess since the finance minister has removed himself from the files.

But anyway, since the provincial government appears in the mood to address conflicts of interest when dealing with the Barry Group, what about the relationship between
fisheries minister Tom "Toque" Rideout and the same Karl Sullivan, brother of the finance minister?

Karl was chief of staff to Tom Rideout for the 43 days Rideout was premier. He also served Rideout as deputy minister of fisheries back in the 1980s.

Who gives a turbot's fingernails if Karl and Loyola share the same parents when the cabinet minister in charge of the FPI file - Tom Rideout - has a long-standing relationship with one the Barry Group's senior executives?

Maybe it's time for Danny Williams to find a new job for Tom Rideout too.

The German blog from here

An e-mail today advised that the Bond Papers have been added to a local blog maintained in German.

Wow.

The blog is called Windrose and is written by Pia Banzhaf. As she describes it:

My blog is a what I'd call a micro-blog with a very small number of readers interested particularly in Newfoundland and Canada. (thirty-ish, I'd say, on a regular day - your international readers would just add a tiny fraction to your regular ones, I would guess.)

There seems to be an infatuation with Canada in many people in Europe, but the news headlines are dominated by the big neighbour to the south, as you can imagine. So, I write a bit about my personal impressions of actually living here, about things I gather from the press about politics and so on. Often I contrast the way similar issues are being dealt with in Canada/Newfoundland and Germany or other European countries, like the immigration/environmental /health care issues. And of course, as you have seen, I love taking photographs, because I enjoy discovering the beauty of the lines, shapes and colours everywhere around us, although I am not as accomplished in photography as I would like to be.

Now I speak German only if one considers being able to count to nine and grasp the basic German from Raiders of the lost Ark as having any ability at all in a foreign language. I picked up the word for rubber dummy - gummipuppen - from watching The longest day and that one stuck only because of the laughable reaction of the actors playing the Germans in the movie as they heard stories of rubber dummies that had been dropped to appear as though a massive drop of paratroops (fallschirmjaeger) had taken place behind the Normandy beaches on D-day.

When I answered Pia's original e-mail I mentioned something about her post in which she talked about the laundromat being out of order.

Turns out that had I googled geldautomat I would have seen in a couple of seconds she was talking about an instant-teller in one of her posts. Hopefully she got a good chuckle out of my ignorance...or pretentiousness.

One doesn't need to understand German, though, to appreciate Pia's artistic ability as a photographer. Her site is full of stunning photographs that show her love of, as she put it above, the beauty of lines, shape and colour.

So what brings a young German to Neufundland?

The usual story: The significant other got a hardly resistible offer for work. (Didn't work very well for me though, that's why you would find occasional sarcastic postings about Canadian immigration policy.)

The shortcomings of our immigration policy to one side, we are obviously richer for Pia's presence.

Her blog can be found here and there is a new link in the Top o' the pile section.

Wilkommen, Pia.

Tom Rideout and the Tar-baby

For most of its term, the Williams administration has been treating Fishery Products International as a sort of tar-baby. They dance around and around without wanting to delve into the issue and resolve it.

Premier Danny Williams and fish minister Tom Rideout knew in December, 2005 of the need for an early retirement package for workers due to be laid off by FPI as the company works to deal with its financial mess. FPI officials briefed on the proposed restructuring.

Williams and Rideout did nothing, save for the torqued outburst by the toqued minister about charging the company for doing something he knew full-well his predecessor had approved.

Today, they still have done nothing except dance around an issue they seem incapable of grasping or at least unwilling to touch.

This time the government's merry jig includes a face familiar to the Premier and his fisheries minister and deputy premier. That face is Bill Barry. Most recently, Premier Williams and Tom Rideout poured the weight of the provincial government into putting one of Barry's products back on shelves from which they'd been removed due solely to poor sales.

Speaking to reporters, Rideout said he had received expressions of interest from two companies that want to purchase some of FPI's assets. One of those interested was apparently a company owned by Bill Barry.

The curious thing about this revelation is that Rideout is the one making it. FPI is a publicly traded company currently working to restructure and currently in negotiations with its workers. Rideout may be aware of certain offers but it is highly improper for him to be revealing details of discussions between two companies in public, highly improper indeed.

Given the history of this administration and FPI, one wonders what Rideout is up to.

What we do not need to wonder about, though, is the need to get politics and politicians out of the fishery. FPI's request - repeated yet again - for the government to repeal the FPI Act and put the company firmly in the private sector is one that should be heeded, just as it should have been heeded months and years ago.

The more that politicians muck about with the fishing industry - especially ones who carry with them out-moded ideas from the last time they held the fisheries portfolio - the more likely the rest of us are to get flung into a briar patch.

Dignified vs....something else

To add to the comments on changes to the federal government's website, consider the following.

The main web portal for the Government of the United States is located at firstgov.gov.

Note that it is devoid of partisan advertising since it is...the government website.

For those unschooled in the art of subtle but meaningful distinctions, i.e. the current administration in Ottawa, government is not the same as partisan.

In other words, just because the Republicans happen to be sitting in the White House, the entire United States federal government does not suddenly sprout elephants on it everywhere.

That's because American partisans, like more sophisticated Canadian politicos, realize that their party merely forms an administration in a government that isn't theirs to do with as they please.

The symbols and image of that government and the country are not things to be shagged about with. The President is still the President, after all. He walks like one and, more often than not acts like one. Try catching George showing up to a heads of government meeting in a hunting vest. You don't have to like the guy's politics, but he does know how to comport himself appropriately.

Then take a trip to the White House site. Now here we might reasonably expect to see the odd pachyderm; but we don't. Not a one. There is George Bush and plenty of him, but the site is low keyed and dignified. Again, that's because it is a government website, not the home of iheartgeorge.com.

Now visit the new home of the Government of Canada website.

And the prime minister's site.

The word dignified is not the first word that comes to mind here.

Nor is government.

But partisan leaps up there pretty fast. Notice the similarities between the Conservative Party's own site and new home for Steve Harper's leftover campaign photos.

To add to the contrast though, take a look at the Grand Old Party's political website ... clean and professional looking. It doesn't seem like it was designed by someone who last week built a site for a used car dealer and next week will be building a site to lure men into purchasing a monthly membership in a site where women do unusual things with parts of their anatomy.

The new Canadian government site is garish. Tawdry. Cheap.

Low-rent, as in using a line from our national anthem as an advertising tagline for the country.

Like we were missing a slogan or a catchy jingle to help us stand out in the crowded online world of porn hucksters and the guys who promise they have a miracle cure for brewer's droop that also works as a good car wax.

Imagine going to firstgov.gov and seeing this one:

United States of America
"and the rockets' red glare"

Somehow, there's no no way I could imagine that the Government of the United State's website - that is the Internet presence of the government of all Americans irrespective of race, creed, colour or partisan affiliation - could be turned into an assault on the world's eyeballs by a bunch of second-rate pitchmen.

But we have it Canada.

Another word that springs to mind about harpersthepm.ca is insecurity. It's a word that seems to come to mind quite often with Harper as the prime minister. Insecure. The media control issues, the gag orders, the flag business and now this website with Steve's picture every and the fact he's the prime minister on every page.

The Conservatives - or maybe just their boss - don't feel confident in running the country. So, they engage in petty displays of authority and, as in the case of the website redesign, take an opportunity to remind the world that Harper is the Prime Minister. That's Stephen Harper, the prime Minister. The guy with the five items on his agenda. The Stephen Harper agenda for a Stephen Harper Canada.

And in case you didn't notice, that was Stephen Harper. You know. The Prime Minister.

of Canada.

This is not a government administration in perpetual campaign mode, as some have suggested. These are guys who act like they don't think they belong where they are. So they need to keep reminding us, or, more accurately reminding themselves.

And that's the thing.

Even for those of us who didn't vote for Harper's crew, even for those of us who worked so they wouldn't get elected, some of us figured they would change a few things for the good. We figured there was a good chance they'd accomplish something - that they had a plan and by God-bless-Canada, they'd work to put it in place. Fresh-faced and eager, they'd work their butts off.

They'd do something.

We never expected what they would do is start mucking around with Canada's national symbols and treat the government of our country like it was the plaything the Liberals supposedly used it as when they were in power.

Colour me surprised.

Colour me embarrassed.

And for all those people who keep screaming that Stephen Harper is trying to be like George Bush:

We should be so lucky.

Will Danny be there this year?

Early next week, the North American oil and gas industry will be in Houston for the Offshore Technology Conference (OTC) .

It's always been a big deal for the local oil industry and this year is no exception. The provincial government-sponsored exhibit space is crammed with displays by the local oil and gas sector.

Technical panelists for some of the discussions include Steve Campbell of Trans Ocean Gas talking about ways of developing so-called stranded gas. Campbell's company has developed a new way of transporting gas at high pressure and low temperature inside containers made from composite materials.

Beyond that there are three sessions that will focus respectively on opportunities for development offshore India, Russia and Australia. There's plenty of discussion of the issues involved in drilling deep water.

Even Venezuelan energy minister Raphael Ramiriz Carreno is a luncheon speaker covering Venezuela's "strategy for the worldwide energy balance."

Last year, Premier Danny Williams issued a news release proclaiming that he was heading a delegation representing 47 local companies and organizations to OTC. He delivered a breakfast speech and did the rounds promoting the Newfoundland and Labrador offshore.

"I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with top executives of Chevron to discuss how we can collectively move the Hebron project forward," said Premier Williams. "We had a very productive discussion about the challenges and opportunities of the Hebron project, and I was encouraged by what I heard. I also laid out very clearly the province's expectations in terms of the benefits we will expect for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We must work with industry to see this project progress; however, government will also be vigilant in ensuring proper and fair benefits for the people of the province."

The year before natural resources minister Ed Byrne led the local crowd to OTC.

"The further development of our oil and gas industry plays a very important part in government'’s agenda for success to generate new revenues and new jobs," said Minister Byrne. "We will aggressively pursue investors, encouraging them to establish and invest in Newfoundland and Labrador. Based on what we know about the discovered resources offshore, the oil and gas industry presents solid investment opportunities now and into the future. Events such as OTC provide us with the venue to reiterate that message."

Pretty well every year for the last decade or more the provincial delegation has been boosted by the support and presence of the Premier, the energy minister or both.

But here's the question:

Will either Danny Williams or Ed Byrne be in Houston for the 2006 offshore technology conference?

Natural gas project under development in Newfoundland and Labrador

CBC news is reporting this evening that North Atlantic Pipeline Partners L.P. (NAPP) has purchased large tracts near Arnold's Cove with plans to development a liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility between the oil transshipment facility at Whiffen Head and the Vitol-owned refinery at Come by Chance.

In 1997, NAPP proposed construction of a 1500 mile pipeline to ship gas from offshore Newfoundland and Labrador to markets in the United States. This approach appears to have been superseded by the use of submerged loading/offloading bouys, at least for movement of gas between Newfoundland and the United States. The submerged bouy system eliminates the need for liquid natural gas ships to enter American ports or facilities near major population centres.

Since 2001, security experts have raised concerns about terrorists targeting liquid natural gas storage and transshipment facilities. The problem has been highlighted at Boston where an LNG facility at Dorchester offloads 33 million cubic feet of LNG.

Purchase of the land was noted privately as long ago as last fall but until today the identity of the land-owners had not been revealed. It is possible the provincial government has known about the NAPP proposal for some time. At around the same time as rumours of the land purchase began to circulate, Premier Danny Williams told the Telegram he would prefer not to see gas simply transported to market without some added value to Newfoundland and Labrador. Bringing gas ashore at Arnold's Cove would make gas available for any uses in eastern Newfoundland and Labrador. Natural gas is being considered by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro as a replacement fuel for its generating plant at Holyrood.

Royal Newfoundland Regiment celebrates and commemorates

April 25th marks the 211th birthday of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment.

On this day in 1795, the first Royal Newfoundland Regiment was raised from residents of the then colony. It continued in existence until the 1860s when it was absorbed into the regiment manning the local garrison.

At the outbreak of war in 1914, the Newfoundland Regiment was formed and fought throughout the war in the Middle East and western Europe. The regiment's 1st battalion was almost wiped out at Beaumont Hamel July 1, 1916 and suffered heavy casualties at Monchy-le-Preux the following year. The regiment received the title "Royal" in 1917 after seeing action at Cambrai.

Disbanded in 1919, the regiment was reformed as a reserve infantry unit of the Canadian Army in 1949.

The Royal Newfoundland Regiment was the only North American unit to see action during the Gallipoli campaign (1915-1916). While the major Allied assault took place on April 25, 1915, the Newfoundlanders arrived on the peninsula the following September. It was at Gallipoli that the regiment suffered its first casualty in action. During the withdrawal in January 1916, the Newfoundland Regiment twice provided the covering force for Allied units.

April 25, also known as ANZAC Day, is also marked by the regiment in recognition of its part in the Gallipoli operation.

While acclimatizing in Egypt, members of the regiment earned the respect of Australian and New Zealand forces who were known for their rough and ready approach. Reportedly word soon spread after the Newfoundlanders' arrival that the ANZACs should watch out for the "guys with goats on their caps." This is a reference to the caribou emblem on the regimental capbadge, which under certain conditions could be mistaken for a goat.

Why columnists need editors

Bill Rowe's column in the Telegram on Saturday, April 22 offered some comment on the new biography of Pierre Trudeau, already out in French and due in English this June.

Based on the former prime minister's personal papers, the first of several volumes on Trudeau's life paints a curious and fascinating portrait of a young Quebecois, devout Roman Catholic and supporter of a future Quebecois nation on the shores of the St. Lawrence.

Bill made a few comments including these:

"It's from a new biography of Trudeau by two great friends and admirers. He had given them, Max and Monique Nemni, unfettered access to his personal papers and they staggered out of the archives, traumatized by the evidence they'd found, to produce this book..."

That sounds just a tad like this:

" Well, he didn't know Max and Monique Nemni, two energetic academics who carefully read all the material, and emerged stunned and horrified from their search. The Nemnis were actually Mr. Trudeau's personal friends and among his most unconditional admirers. "

Later on Rowe offers this sentence:

"Even at the age of 27, as a student in free-spirited Paris, he still felt constrained by orthodoxy, they say, to ask permission from the church to read books censured by the Vatican Index."

Now that definitely sounds familiar:

"Even at the age of 27, when he was a student in Paris, he would still ask the authorization of the church to read books that were a l'Index (condemned by the Vatican)."

Now here's the thing: while Rowe offered his own comments on Trudeau and the Nemnis' book, linking in his own support for Trudeau in 1968, there are a couple of sections of his column that sounded a bit too much like the column by Lysiane Gagnon of la presse. Gagnon's piece appeared in English in last Thursday's edition of the Globe and Mail.

I am reasonably certain that Lysiane Gagnon read the book whose title she gives as Trudeau: fils du Quebec, pere du Canada. She offers some general comment on the revelations in the book and the wider context of Quebec society in which Trudeau grew up.

For his part, Rowe does his usual job of piling on the unrestrained criticism once he gets past the summary of the Nemnis' book that one suspects was cribbed from Gagnon's work. "This prejudiced and politically stupid young man, this slavish conforming ideologue..." is typical of Rowe's over-the-top and dare one say inaccurate writing.

But I have a simple question: has Bill read the book yet?

Somehow, I doubt it very much. Certainly his column doesn't even contain the insight into the book's substance to be gleaned from reading an extract available online in L'actualite. Nor does it contain information that could be found in other places any time up to 10 days before Rowe published his column, places like la presse, le journal de Montreal, Radio Canada, le devoir, or Michel Vastel's column in l'actualitie. Oddly none contain the comments on the Nemnis that Gagnon's does - the bit about being shocked by their findings - and since Rowe took time off his political career to study French he should have enough facility with the language to have read more than the stuff in the Globe.

As a sign of the limited basis of his column, Rowe correctly translates the title as given in Gagnon's piece; but the full title -in l'actualite - includes the important words les annees du jeunesse: 1919-1944 - "The years of youth". of course, this is a key aspect of understanding how Trudeau changed from being a young man very much the product of the culture in which he was raised into a grown man of very different views.

The words are important to understanding how the Nemnis have portrayed the young man Trudeau before he left Quebec to study at Harvard and elsewhere outside Quebec. To do that, though, one would have had to have read more than Gagnon's column.

With additional information, Rowe might have been able to write more insightfully than he did; after all, his paragraphs on the 1968 federal leadership convention are throw-aways. Certainly nothing available so far in French or English suggests that this was, as Rowe describes it, a "tawdry story". Nor is it as secret a story as Rowe suggests. The anti-Semitic, corporatist politics of Quebec in the 1930s and 1940s is well known. It is surprising to see Trudeau engulfed in the ideology, but it is understandable. What Rowe gives us instead of insight is overly dramatic use of adjectives, perhaps to mask that he only knew what he'd gleaned from a column in Toronto's national newspaper.

What is remarkable in this emerging story - even with the revelations of Trudeau's beliefs as a child and young man - is that Trudeau preserved his papers and allowed someone to have unfettered access to them after his death. The transformation Rowe claims is remarkable - from collectivist to liberal - is actually less so. As Gagnon notes, some of the most virulent critics of Marxism are former Marxists. The more virulent critics of the church are former clerics. The willingness to let history, and others, judge from the original material, now that is astounding for any public figure.

This first volume suggests that the whole story of Pierre Trudeau to come from the Nemni's multi-volume work may prove much more compelling than whatever little Trudeau's supporters - like Rowe at the time - knew of him in 1968.

At the very least, though, an editor should have caught the bits of Bill's column that were a bit too close for comfort to something that appeared in the Globe. After all, we know the editors at the Telly read the Globe's editorial page faithfully. They might have even picked up on the possibility that Bill was riffing without enough information to make a decent column.

Bloggers do that sometimes; it's in the nature of the beast. But we can suck back our gaffes. Once they are in print, though, it's much harder to pull the words back, and that's why God invented editors.

Tim Powers: the importance of focus

On the Monday edition of Mike Duffy's panel of party strategists, the boys were discussing the Conservative policy of not lowering flags on Parliament Hill when Canadian Forces members are killed overseas.

In the middle of the chat, Duffy got word that in addition to the flag policy, the Conservatives were now also preventing media representatives from covering the return of military remains at Base Trenton as they have done in the recent past. That means that when the Airbus arrives from Afghanistan on Tuesday, news media won't be allowed to cover the arrival of the aircraft from inside the base perimeter and to have pictures of the caskets being received.

Then Tim Powers - the Newfoundlander representing the Conservatives - tossed in this nugget:

Absolutely. We know a thing or two about focus which you guys didn't but if I can get back to the issue of what Craig [Oliver] is reporting, I think there's also a matter here of sanctity and privacy which is important to the Prime Minister and I'm sure it's important to the families, and on the issue of the military.

I mean let's not forget to look at what these guys did. A lot of the challenges the military in Canada face in the field are from lack of equipment, lack of resources, and not enough personnel. That all happened on their [the Liberals] watch. I think a lot of this...I think a lot of this is distracting from the real challenges and I think our military are very supportive of our Prime Minister and respect the decisions he made. [Emphasis added]

Pardon me?

Mr. Powers is saying that these four soldiers were killed due to inadequate equipment, shortages of personnel and a general lack of resources. Then he adds that a discussion of proper respect for military deaths is somehow distracting from the real challenges faced by the military. Then he finishes with the flourish that the military are supportive of the prime minister and his decision, presumably about the flag.

It is unconscionable that Mr. Powers would somehow link the deaths of four soldiers in Afghanistan with the Conservative election talking point that the armed forces were starved of needed resources.

There is not a shred of evidence linking this incident with inadequate equipment, scarcity of resources or a shortage of personnel.

Not a jot or a tittle, to use a phrase John Crosbie loves.

To compound his offensive remarks, Mr. Powers then raises the issue of military support for the flag policy. The Canadian Forces, as the dutiful public servants its members are, will adhere to government policy. It is simply irrelevant whether or not the men and women of the Canadian Forces like the flag policy or loathe it. To claim that they support the Prime Minister politicizes the military in a way that is offensive; it is just as offensive for Mr. Powers to have also drawn attention to the fact that the Prime Minister's first overseas trip was to Afghanistan.

Mr. Powers' motivation is partisan, by the context of the remarks, and on both these aspects - the partisan claim about equipment and funding - and the partisan claim of support for the Harper administration by the military reduces not only the four dead soldiers but also the Canadian military to partisan pawns.

Such an approach was loathsome when Jean Chretien did it in 1993 and on subsequent occasions. It is loathsome when Mr. Harper's spokesman does it now.

Mr. Powers' talked of focus.

His focus was obviously, painfully wrong.

Rather than focusing on electioneering and the partisan defence of his party leader, Mr. Powers should have be focusing on the appropriate way of showing national respect for the men and women who each day risk their lives in the service of their country.

We have seen enough of this type posturing south of the border with President George Bush using the men and women of the American armed services as convenient campaign props.

Until now, this was the sort of crassness that Canadians had been spared.

Let us hope that Mr. Powers' remarks are not a sign of yet more tastelessness to come.

Afghanistan on an April Monday

1. For a poignant memoir of one soldier killed over the weekend, read Christie Blatchford's front-pager in today's Globe and Mail.

2. The Conservative's flag policy is appropriate. Let people mourn in private. The flag doesn't change the grief and pulling the flag up and down the staff - not the mast - will serve to lessen people's sensitivity to it.

3. The new Conservative plan to ban news media from Base Trenton to cover the arrival in Canada of the remains of Canadian soldiers is not appropriate or sensible. If there are concerns about the families having private moments of grief, then there are appropriate limitations that can be placed on what news media can shoot for stills or television.

However, a blanket ban that has the shooters huddled outside the main gate to the base taking pictures of any vehicle that might contain a casket makes for a likely spectacle that is just not fitting.

If the feds are worried about public reaction to our war dead, the feds are ensuring they'll have no influence over how the story gets covered. The Bush policy on this was short-sighted.

4. Meanwhile, as the politicos busily make a mockery of the Afghan mission - Tim Powers' comments on Mike Duffy on Monday are a subject for another - the men and women of the Canadian Forces will be soldiering on.

They'll mourn the dead and then get back to the job of making a difference in the lives of people half a world from home.

"They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old,
Age shall not weary them nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning
We will remember them."

This is just the one who will say it publicly

One local businessman is saying publicly what many others in the local oil and gas community are thinking or saying privately.

Instead, Hebron is on the shelf and the province will get no benefits at all, Harry Pride notes.

"It destroyed an industry that would give us 20, 25 years work," he said.

"We would have had 3,000 workers here -– they're all going somewhere else. People know that their career is going to be very short here, so now they're all on the Internet looking for a longer career, and they're welcomed like anything out west."

Pride said the province did not consider the repercussions of what would happen if it demanded too much.

Ellsworth big winner in city hall controversy

While former mayor Shannie Duff deserves credit for standing up to bullying mayor Andy Wells, the big winner in the whole controversy is newbie councillor Ron Ellsworth. [That's a RealPlayer link]

His comments on the issue of council operations have been thoughtful, sane and professional. Ellsworth is pushing his colleagues to do their homework before coming to meetings, to address issues not personalities and to stick to their plans like the city budget. He's also been willing to take a stand on issues without having to check to see which way the political wind is blowing.

If Wells doesn't stick around as mayor for any reason, Ellsworth should take a run at the city's top job. Much speculation around town has Ellsworth looking at provincial politics in 2007. There are plenty of good candidates in the St. John's area. Ellsworth's talents are needed to sort out the province's biggest city.

Ellsworth is still young. There's plenty of time for other things.

In the meantime, residents of St. John's will benefit from Ellsworth's common sense approach to governing. Let's hope he doesn't prematurely use his council seat as a springboard to provincial politics.

There's a job at city hall for him to do first.