Business Post publisher Craig Westcott's take on the oil industry and Danny Williams, subtitled, as Craig put it "Stuck in the middle with you."
The reaction to the speech has already been strong.
Undoubtedly it will be stronger.
The real political division in society is between authoritarians and libertarians.
29 March 2007
Inkless Wells on the Williams fracas
Paul Wells offers two thoughts on the issue:
1. His question of the day on what possible issues Stephen Harper might use to "hurt" Danny Williams.
2. A follow-on post listing the rest of the stuff the pugnacious Premier wants from Ottawa or needs help on from the feds.
Paul will get nasty e-mails.
1. His question of the day on what possible issues Stephen Harper might use to "hurt" Danny Williams.
2. A follow-on post listing the rest of the stuff the pugnacious Premier wants from Ottawa or needs help on from the feds.
Paul will get nasty e-mails.
28 March 2007
Why Danny's campaign will fail
John F. Kennedy said: "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country."
I say to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians: "Ask not what we can do for our country, because we have done enough. Let's ask our country what they can do for us."
Danny Williams, April 7, 2001
For a quarter of a million bucks, you'd think Danny Williams could do more with his print ads than a bunch of text on a crappy layout.
You'd think there'd be more than the obvious, namely that the federal Conservatives didn't do exactly what they promised on Equalization.
Inquiring minds, or even the ones who haven't already written Williams off as nothing more than a guy needing to have his political bile ducts surgically removed, would wonder how exactly Harper's decision has damaged Danny Williams and the province he leads.
Those who lost money in the income trust decision can point to their lost income.
They have numbers.
Hard facts.
Incontrovertible evidence of harm.
If Danny Williams had such evidence, he'd have used it. That he can only talk in vague terms - as he is wont to do on just about everything - suggests that he has no evidence.
That lack of evidence undermines the credibility of his argument.
Williams undermines his own argument further by making the statement that Newfoundland and Labrador does not need the federal government and its cash. If that's the case, then there is no need for Williams to be in High Dudgeon yet again. If the economy was relentlessly growing, then he'd be calmly getting on with the business of developing the provincial economy into the powerhouse it could be.
Logic is not Danny Williams long suit, evidently.
For everyone other than the faithful disciples of the Williams Church of Victimology, there are facts. Those facts find their way into articles like the latest John Ivison column in the National Post. The Globe did the same thing with its editorial last Saturday. Those facts make it plain that Williams' argument will have no traction where he would need it, namely among the crowd on the mainland.
For Williams' latest tantrum to have any political impact, he would need to do more than threaten to turn the seven Newfoundland and Labrador federal seats to a party other than the Conservatives. Williams simply has no political influence outside his own province. In fact, few provincial premiers from this place ever have. What Manitoban or British Columbian ever felt moved by the antics of a Brian Tobin or Brian Peckford or Frank Moores?
The only Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador to make a political impact outside his own province was Clyde Wells. That impact, during the Meech Lake constitutional fracas was built around a national Canadian argument. Wells' arguments against creating a special status for one province and in favour of meaningful reform like a triple-E senate applied as much to Ontarians, Albertans and Quebeckers as they did to the people in Goose Bay or Pasadena.
It should be remembered that Wells did not stay in a perpetual condition of irk. On other issues, such as economic development, social welfare reform, or fiscal responsibility, Wells could sometimes agree with the federal government. In some instances he disagreed with a federal policy, but while he could argue forcefully and passionately, Wells never did he resort to the sort of foot-stomping that is Williams' one trick. He persuaded - or attempted to persuade - with reason.
Consider as well, that by 1993 - about the same time in his first mandate as Williams is at right now - Wells' administration had produced an unprecedented economic development plan for the province. His administration had begun dramatic education reform, not merely to save money but to improve the quality of education to support long-term economic development. All this was done in a financial climate in which the provincial debt was the equal of the provincial gross domestic product, when all three of the province's economic engines were in decline simultaneously and the federal government's own financial resources were strained.
Taken all together, any argument that Wells could made was backed by substantive evidence of a responsible provincial government that was acting to address the province's many challenges. When he approached federal issues, Wells focused on equal and equitable treatment for all Canadians, especially Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Compare that to where Danny Williams sits today and one can easily see another reason why his latest tirade will fall on deaf ears across Canada and increasingly at home.
Three years into his first administration, Danny Williams can only talk of plans. Rather than encouraging new economic opportunities - as with Hibernia - Canadians from Cape Spear to the farthest tip of Vancouver Island can see Danny Williams turn away $14 billion in provincial government revenue from oil development for only the vaguest, and one suspects insubstantial, of reasons. Rather than fair and equitable treatment, Williams speaks of getting the most for his province, and implicitly, giving not even a tinker's damn about the rest of the country.
Ultimately, politics is about persuasion. Persuasive arguments are internally consistent, factually based and reasonably - even if passionately - delivered. Danny Williams' argument on Equalization has none of those qualities.
Those argument are framed to appeal to the audience. No aspect of Williams' argument, including the copy in his advertising, is aimed at the audience or audiences he needs to persuade if his whole campaign is to have any effect whatsoever.
Well, an effect beyond strengthening the cash flow of a few newspapers and an advertising agency and getting rid of some surplus cash near the end of the fiscal year.
-30-
Harper smacks backover Williams' ads
This is something Williams hasn't faced before: a federal government that bites back.
Breaking: Chief electoral officer packs it in
Chuck Furey has had enough.
Six months before the next provincial election and on the eve of the electoral office starting a massive enumeration program, the chief electoral officer is quitting.
Six months before the next provincial election and on the eve of the electoral office starting a massive enumeration program, the chief electoral officer is quitting.
Williams launches ad campaign against Harper
This will be remarkably ineffective except for the cash flow of the agency that got the contract to run the campaign.
This is like bringing a knife to a gun fight, or to put it clearly running an advertising campaign when it requires issues management/public relations skills.
Clue to the Premier: the word is "unequivocal".
Unfortunately, the Premier said this and the Globe quotes him verbatim: "It was a simple equivocal promise. And he broke it.”
If it was an equivocal promise, i.e. one that is "of uncertain nature or significance", then we'd find it hard thing to break. If we applied another meaning to equivocate, namely designed to mislead, then we'd expect that Harper's promise was something couldn't have been trusted in the first place.
This is like bringing a knife to a gun fight, or to put it clearly running an advertising campaign when it requires issues management/public relations skills.
Clue to the Premier: the word is "unequivocal".
Unfortunately, the Premier said this and the Globe quotes him verbatim: "It was a simple equivocal promise. And he broke it.”
If it was an equivocal promise, i.e. one that is "of uncertain nature or significance", then we'd find it hard thing to break. If we applied another meaning to equivocate, namely designed to mislead, then we'd expect that Harper's promise was something couldn't have been trusted in the first place.
Advice from three- year-olds
Former Martin speech scribe Scott Feschuk gives some advice to danny Williams on throwing tantrums. From Feschuk's Macleans blog.
Exploration slowdown offshore NL
From the National Post, another story on the decision by a consortium of oil companies to postpone further exploration in the Orphan basin until 2008.
The major reason for this decision is the availability of the rig Eirik Raude given other demands on the rig in the Gulf of Mexico. It isn't about the investment climate, as Paul Barnes of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers told the Post.
But, as ExxonMobil's Alan Jeffers notes, the experience in the Orphan Basin demonstrates that working offshore Newfoundland "really does require high levels of technical and financial capability to explore for and produce in those harsh environments."
The major reason for this decision is the availability of the rig Eirik Raude given other demands on the rig in the Gulf of Mexico. It isn't about the investment climate, as Paul Barnes of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers told the Post.
But, as ExxonMobil's Alan Jeffers notes, the experience in the Orphan Basin demonstrates that working offshore Newfoundland "really does require high levels of technical and financial capability to explore for and produce in those harsh environments."
27 March 2007
Ottawa and NS in Equalization slapfest
Ottawa will go to court against N.S. if necessary over Atlantic Accord: MacKay
27 march 2007
HALIFAX (CP) Nova Scotia's representative in the federal cabinet says Ottawa is prepared to go to court, if necessary, if his home province sues over having to abandon its offshore accord.
In question period on Tuesday, Peter MacKay defended his government's decision to offer Nova Scotia a new $1.46 billion equalization deal that offers an additional $79 million over last year.
However, the deal forces the province to set aside provisions of its cherished Atlantic accord, which allows it to keep oil and gas revenues without clawbacks in equalization payments.
In responding to a question from Liberal MP Robert Thibault over that tradeoff, MacKay said he will "continue to work with the province of Nova Scotia'' and hope to avoid legal action on the issue.
But if provincial lawyers head to court, MacKay said, "we will see them there.''
Nova Scotia's Tory government accepted Ottawa's recent equalization offer in his government's budget, but Finance Minister Michael Baker promised the province would use "every capacity,'' including potential legal action, to maintain the accord in the future.
Thibault and other Liberal MPs have made the issue a major focus of their questions in recent days in Parliament.
"The government is a poison pill. If we opt into the new formula we lose the accord and jeopardize the future prosperity of Nova Scotia. If we maintain the status quo we are shut out of new money for the people of Nova Scotia,'' he said during question period.
MacKay, the minister of Foreign Affairs, countered that "there must be an epidemic of grumpiness breaking out across the way.''
"The province of Nova Scotia does have options. It can take a very good deal for Nova Scotia, the Atlantic accord, or it can take an even better deal which is offered to the province in this budget, plus it has the option of going back to the accord after a period of time,'' he said.
"It is good news and more good news for the people of Nova Scotia and there will be more coming.''
27 march 2007
HALIFAX (CP) Nova Scotia's representative in the federal cabinet says Ottawa is prepared to go to court, if necessary, if his home province sues over having to abandon its offshore accord.
In question period on Tuesday, Peter MacKay defended his government's decision to offer Nova Scotia a new $1.46 billion equalization deal that offers an additional $79 million over last year.
However, the deal forces the province to set aside provisions of its cherished Atlantic accord, which allows it to keep oil and gas revenues without clawbacks in equalization payments.
In responding to a question from Liberal MP Robert Thibault over that tradeoff, MacKay said he will "continue to work with the province of Nova Scotia'' and hope to avoid legal action on the issue.
But if provincial lawyers head to court, MacKay said, "we will see them there.''
Nova Scotia's Tory government accepted Ottawa's recent equalization offer in his government's budget, but Finance Minister Michael Baker promised the province would use "every capacity,'' including potential legal action, to maintain the accord in the future.
Thibault and other Liberal MPs have made the issue a major focus of their questions in recent days in Parliament.
"The government is a poison pill. If we opt into the new formula we lose the accord and jeopardize the future prosperity of Nova Scotia. If we maintain the status quo we are shut out of new money for the people of Nova Scotia,'' he said during question period.
MacKay, the minister of Foreign Affairs, countered that "there must be an epidemic of grumpiness breaking out across the way.''
"The province of Nova Scotia does have options. It can take a very good deal for Nova Scotia, the Atlantic accord, or it can take an even better deal which is offered to the province in this budget, plus it has the option of going back to the accord after a period of time,'' he said.
"It is good news and more good news for the people of Nova Scotia and there will be more coming.''
Oil and gas: the impact of opportunities missed
1. From CBC television's Here and Now, this report by David Cochrane [ram file], as we come up on the first anniversary of the collapse of the Hebron negotiations.
2. Then there's a luncheon talk by The Business Post's Craig Westcott, Thursday March 29 at the Delta Hotel, St. John's, starting at 12:30 PM. Sponsored by NOIA. Title: "Weighing the cost of lost opportunities."
Interestingly enough Danny Williams spent part of question period in the legislature last week quoting from the Business Post about how wonderful things are in the local economy.
He'll probably be running around encouraging people to come out and hear what Craig has to say.
2. Then there's a luncheon talk by The Business Post's Craig Westcott, Thursday March 29 at the Delta Hotel, St. John's, starting at 12:30 PM. Sponsored by NOIA. Title: "Weighing the cost of lost opportunities."
Interestingly enough Danny Williams spent part of question period in the legislature last week quoting from the Business Post about how wonderful things are in the local economy.
He'll probably be running around encouraging people to come out and hear what Craig has to say.
Williams congratulates Charest
It's the neighbourly thing to do.
Premier Danny Williams made no observation - at least in the short news release - on the accuracy or inaccuracy of his previous comments on Quebec's supposed volatile provincial political climate.
Premier Danny Williams made no observation - at least in the short news release - on the accuracy or inaccuracy of his previous comments on Quebec's supposed volatile provincial political climate.
Cdn foreign spy agency on backburner
The Conservative promise to create a foreign intelligence agency for Canada has apparently slipped down the government's list of priorities, according to the Globe and Mail.
It's also supported by the legislation governing the security intelligence agency.
Moreover, CSIS [the Canadian Security Intelligence Agency] has convinced Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day that it is able to do more spying abroad than it has in the past without the trouble of asking for parliamentary approval to start up a new agency.That assessment is apparently supported by the Prime Minister's security advisor.
It's also supported by the legislation governing the security intelligence agency.
Charest hangs onto minority
Among the implications: Danny Williams will almost certainly be forced to work around Quebec and look at no profit or reduced profit.
Of course, Williams has already decided to do anything but sell power to Quebec. He's also said government is seriously considering deferring revenues (read sell power at cost or a miniscule profit) until at least 2041.
There will be much talk - as there has been already - of thinking in the long-term. That's just code for "We've boxed ourselves into a corner and the only way out is to spend your money, taxpayer."
If Joe Smallwood were alive today, he'd be focussed on 2041 too, just Dean MacDonald and Danny Williams are right now. He be calling the below cost power price a case of "deferred revenue".
There was the potential for a Lower Churchill development that made money.
It's been gone since the Premier rejected out-of-hand the joint Ontario/Quebec proposal.
Meanwhile, to get to some serious stuff on the Quebec general election:
1. Big Loser: the PQ.
2. The Big Loser: Jean Charest.
3. Meanwhile, across the river from Hull... expect the Harper minority government to look for a spring general election. There's no link. It's just a suggestion.
Of course, Williams has already decided to do anything but sell power to Quebec. He's also said government is seriously considering deferring revenues (read sell power at cost or a miniscule profit) until at least 2041.
There will be much talk - as there has been already - of thinking in the long-term. That's just code for "We've boxed ourselves into a corner and the only way out is to spend your money, taxpayer."
If Joe Smallwood were alive today, he'd be focussed on 2041 too, just Dean MacDonald and Danny Williams are right now. He be calling the below cost power price a case of "deferred revenue".
There was the potential for a Lower Churchill development that made money.
It's been gone since the Premier rejected out-of-hand the joint Ontario/Quebec proposal.
Meanwhile, to get to some serious stuff on the Quebec general election:
1. Big Loser: the PQ.
2. The Big Loser: Jean Charest.
3. Meanwhile, across the river from Hull... expect the Harper minority government to look for a spring general election. There's no link. It's just a suggestion.
26 March 2007
Danny Williams on Harper and Equalization
From CBC Radio Morning Show, Premier Danny Williams speaks with host Jeff Gilhooly.
Among Williams' choice comments: The Equalization formula with a cap was a case of federal bureaucrats convincing "weak-kneed" federal politicians to shaft Newfoundland and Labrador.
This has got to be the first time anyone accused Harper of being a wuss and keeping a straight face.
Among Williams' choice comments: The Equalization formula with a cap was a case of federal bureaucrats convincing "weak-kneed" federal politicians to shaft Newfoundland and Labrador.
This has got to be the first time anyone accused Harper of being a wuss and keeping a straight face.
25 March 2007
Responsible government not their concern
The Bloc-head mentality is spreading in Newfoundland and Labrador and it does so to our collective detriment.
A few years ago, then-Premier Roger Grimes suggested the way forward for the province lay with electing a group of members to the federal parliament (MPs) who had nothing as their goal save bringing back the maximum level of booty from Ottawa.
The same idea, now called electing "independent" MPs, is getting more support in the wake of the latest federal budget.
Proponents of this idea can only claim is that prime minister Stephen Harper "broke his promise" to remove non-renewable resource revenues from calculations of Equalization entitlements.
Not a single one - including Premier Danny Williams - has been able to state clearly and simply how the federal budget proposals will adversely affect Newfoundland and Labrador.
Not a one.
Of course, facts have never bothered the purveyors of the victim mythology in Newfoundland and Labrador politics. They charge ahead undaunted.
If Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were genuinely concerned for the betterment of their province, then they would reject out of hand the views of columnists like Bob Wakeham and Peter Jackson, both of the Telegram, for example.
Wakeham's effort is little more than series of hideously inaccurate and inappropriate references to Newfoundland and Labrador as a battered wife. It is devoid of anything substantive, unless one already is persuaded of the view that the people of this province are perennial victims, incapable of running their own government either in the province or as part of the federal government.
Jackson's effort is not a direct endorsement of the Bloc-head party but it does use the warmed over myths of victimization.
The problem with Jackson's comment on the 1985 Atlantic Accord is that it is completely wrong.
The 1985 agreement provided Newfoundland and Labrador with the ability to set and collect its own revenues from offshore oil as if it was on land and therefore entirely within provincial jurisdiction. The Accord provided the province with co-management rights and in most cases, control over development. Look at the Hebron and Hibernia South projects as proof that Newfoundland and Labrador controls offshore development.
The original deal also provided temporary declining Equalization offsets. The deal worked exactly as intended. The intended spirit was honoured in its entirety.
All this makes plain the hypocrisy of Wakeham's final sentences:
If Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were interested in the betterment of their province, they'd reject out-of-hand the tired presentations of journalists like Wakeham and Jackson.
After all, if Newfoundlanders and Labradorians want to stop being treated not just like sixth graders but like ignoramuses, why not start at home?
That would be the first move to recalling that in 1949, we gained responsible government. Too bad many opinion leaders in the province, politicians and journalists, seem bent on promoting the opposite form of government.
A few years ago, then-Premier Roger Grimes suggested the way forward for the province lay with electing a group of members to the federal parliament (MPs) who had nothing as their goal save bringing back the maximum level of booty from Ottawa.
The same idea, now called electing "independent" MPs, is getting more support in the wake of the latest federal budget.
Proponents of this idea can only claim is that prime minister Stephen Harper "broke his promise" to remove non-renewable resource revenues from calculations of Equalization entitlements.
Not a single one - including Premier Danny Williams - has been able to state clearly and simply how the federal budget proposals will adversely affect Newfoundland and Labrador.
Not a one.
Of course, facts have never bothered the purveyors of the victim mythology in Newfoundland and Labrador politics. They charge ahead undaunted.
If Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were genuinely concerned for the betterment of their province, then they would reject out of hand the views of columnists like Bob Wakeham and Peter Jackson, both of the Telegram, for example.
Wakeham's effort is little more than series of hideously inaccurate and inappropriate references to Newfoundland and Labrador as a battered wife. It is devoid of anything substantive, unless one already is persuaded of the view that the people of this province are perennial victims, incapable of running their own government either in the province or as part of the federal government.
Jackson's effort is not a direct endorsement of the Bloc-head party but it does use the warmed over myths of victimization.
In Mulroney’s day, keeping the Hibernia project afloat was a major battle in itself. When Gulf Canada pulled out of the Hibernia consortium in 1990, then-cabinet minister John Crosbie and others convinced Ottawa to take an 8.5 per cent equity share. This was achieved against a backdrop of relentless criticism of government involvement in such a high-risk project, most notably from West Coast oil analyst Ian Doig.
The subsequent Liberal government reaped the benefits of this inheritance while steadfastly refusing to restore the intended spirit of the Atlantic Accord, i.e., affording maximum benefits of offshore oil to the province without equalization clawbacks.
The problem with Jackson's comment on the 1985 Atlantic Accord is that it is completely wrong.
The 1985 agreement provided Newfoundland and Labrador with the ability to set and collect its own revenues from offshore oil as if it was on land and therefore entirely within provincial jurisdiction. The Accord provided the province with co-management rights and in most cases, control over development. Look at the Hebron and Hibernia South projects as proof that Newfoundland and Labrador controls offshore development.
The original deal also provided temporary declining Equalization offsets. The deal worked exactly as intended. The intended spirit was honoured in its entirety.
All this makes plain the hypocrisy of Wakeham's final sentences:
And, as well, letting the country know Newfoundlanders are quite capable of taking care of themselves.The entire basis of Wakeham's argument is that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians cannot take care of themselves. He absolves the provincial government - successively and of any political stripe - of having any responsibility for any decisions at all, let alone for running the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador.
That they’re not to be treated like sixth-graders.
That they know all about responsibility.
And integrity.
If Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were interested in the betterment of their province, they'd reject out-of-hand the tired presentations of journalists like Wakeham and Jackson.
After all, if Newfoundlanders and Labradorians want to stop being treated not just like sixth graders but like ignoramuses, why not start at home?
That would be the first move to recalling that in 1949, we gained responsible government. Too bad many opinion leaders in the province, politicians and journalists, seem bent on promoting the opposite form of government.
Separate or join Quebec: Rowe's idiocy knows no bounds
Mark Watton's got a decent take on Bill Rowe's latest anti-Confederate ramblings in the Telegram.
Rowe's talk about separation is just so much hot air.
Only a few short weeks ago Rowe was seriously arguing that since Newfoundland and Labrador has had such a hard time of it as a part of a federal state, instead the whole place should unite with Quebec and leave Canada.
Forget the leave Canada part, Rowe, who spends about as much time pissing on Quebec as he does at Ottawa seems to think the real answer to all the local woes would be to give up self-government entirely and be run from Quebec City.
Rowe is a former cabinet minister and Rhodes scholar.
And then people wonder why some of us despair for the state of our educational system and government.
Rowe's talk about separation is just so much hot air.
Only a few short weeks ago Rowe was seriously arguing that since Newfoundland and Labrador has had such a hard time of it as a part of a federal state, instead the whole place should unite with Quebec and leave Canada.
Forget the leave Canada part, Rowe, who spends about as much time pissing on Quebec as he does at Ottawa seems to think the real answer to all the local woes would be to give up self-government entirely and be run from Quebec City.
Rowe is a former cabinet minister and Rhodes scholar.
And then people wonder why some of us despair for the state of our educational system and government.
23 March 2007
Our man in a Blue Line cab
In the House of Assembly Thursday, opposition House leader Kelvin Parsons asked questions about the role being played by the provincial government's representative in Ottawa in developing a productive relationship with the federal government.
For the record, here's the response from intergovernmental affairs minister John Ottenheimer. The best thing Ottenheimer could come up with was that Fitz travelled around with visiting ministers.
On the back of the government business cards, it must read: "When in Ottawa, ride with Fitz in a Blue Line taxi."
A doctoral degree in history and the guy's a tour guide?
Surely goodness Ottenheimer could give us a better explanation than that. Then he would have avoided Parson's rejoinder - obviously scripted - about Dr. Feelgood's limousine service.
Incidentally, for those who are curious, Fitzgerald's phone number is listed in the government phone directory under the Premier's Office, not the intergovernmental affairs secretariat where bureaucrats normally work.
Fitz's job is obviously all political, so all that business about ducking interviews because he is a public servant are just a tad overdone.
For the record, here's the response from intergovernmental affairs minister John Ottenheimer. The best thing Ottenheimer could come up with was that Fitz travelled around with visiting ministers.
On the back of the government business cards, it must read: "When in Ottawa, ride with Fitz in a Blue Line taxi."
Ottenheimer: I have no idea, Mr. Speaker, where the hon. member gets his information. Dr. Fitzgerald plays a very significant role, a role of importance, representing the Office of the Premier, representing the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, and representing the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, in Ottawa.That's got be the most expensive taxi hailer on the planet.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, when any minister travels to Ottawa to meet with his or her federal counterpart, he is at all times accompanied by Dr. Fitzgerald. In fact, only two or three weeks ago I travelled to Ottawa. I met with three or four of my federal colleagues, and on each occasion I was accompanied by the good doctor; so, I say to the hon. member, what he is saying is completely irrelevant. It is not in any way representative of the truth. He plays a very significant role of importance on behalf of the people of this Province.
A doctoral degree in history and the guy's a tour guide?
Surely goodness Ottenheimer could give us a better explanation than that. Then he would have avoided Parson's rejoinder - obviously scripted - about Dr. Feelgood's limousine service.
Incidentally, for those who are curious, Fitzgerald's phone number is listed in the government phone directory under the Premier's Office, not the intergovernmental affairs secretariat where bureaucrats normally work.
Fitz's job is obviously all political, so all that business about ducking interviews because he is a public servant are just a tad overdone.
Williams set local oil patch back 25 years
That's the view of one local oil industry executive who wished to remain anonymous in comments in The Telegram.
In the House of Assembly, Danny Williams dismissed the executive's comments as cowardly, since the individual did not wish to be named.
If the individual had let his name be used, what are the odds Williams would have laucnhed into a personal attack on the guy?
No takers on that bet?
One offshore industry executive said the delay could cost hundreds of offshore jobs.The rest of the Moira Baird story is on the slowdown in drilling offshore Newfoundland the consequent job losses.
“It’s extremely disappointing,” said the executive, who did not want to be named.
“The net loss of jobs … could be up to 500 jobs.”
Those jobs include full-time rig crews, offshore supply boat crews, divers, well logging and testing personnel, weather observers and caterers.
“With no energy plan in place, no gas royalty regime in place, no Hibernia South, no Hebron and now no exploration activity — when are we going to see this industry develop?”
Another industry executive, who also didn’t want to be named, pegged the payroll loss of a rig, such as the Eirik Raude, at more than $1 million per month.
“It’s grossly disappointing.”
The executive also levelled criticism at Premier Danny Williams, saying he has set back the province’s offshore industry by 25 years.
That process started, said the executive, with the loss of the Hebron project and Hibernia South, and continues with the lack of a natural gas royalty regime to kick-start gas exploration by companies like ConnocoPhillips.
“As far as everyone is concerned globally, we’re not open for business. No one wants to deal with him,” said the executive.
“All he does is fight. The business community here is sick of it.”
In the House of Assembly, Danny Williams dismissed the executive's comments as cowardly, since the individual did not wish to be named.
If the individual had let his name be used, what are the odds Williams would have laucnhed into a personal attack on the guy?
No takers on that bet?
For the record: Danny Williams on federal provincial relations
It's amazing how times change.
Danny Williams used to believe that vicious personal attacks are no use.
From 2003, before he got elected, Danny Williams sang a very different tune from the one that has him branded today:
____________________________________________
Williams touts national trek: Similar Grimes' trip failed because premier 'didn't do his homework'
By: Barb Sweet
The Telegram (St. John's)
Saturday, October 11, 2003
Page: A1
If Tory Leader Danny Williams were premier, he would massage provincial-federal relations. But if that didn't work, he'd launch a national marketing campaign and try to get other premiers to back Newfoundland and Labrador's cause.
"If they're not going to be fair to us, then I would basically launch a national marketing campaign to let people know exactly what the story is in Newfoundland and Labrador, how there is unfairness and I would lobby the premiers right across the country," the election front-runner said in an interview this week.
SOUNDS FAMILIAR
But wait -- isn't that what Premier Roger Grimes tried and failed to do this past summer with his cross-Canada trek, trying to sell the province's case to his fellow premiers? Hasn't the province been there and done that?
Angered by the latest fisheries closure, Grimes vowed to push for a constitutional amendment to allow joint federal-provincial management of the fishery.
But it fizzled when the other premiers didn't seem all that interested and he agreed to work jointly on a "rebuilding and recovery" program for the cod, which fell short of his goal for joint management of fisheries in waters adjacent to the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Williams said in an interview this week that Grimes' problem was he took the wrong tack.
"Roger Grimes didn't do his homework. He picked up and said 'I'm going to go and see if I can't get constitutional reform.' What I would be doing is I would be talking to (Prince Edward Island Premier) Pat Binns and (Nova Scotia Premier) John Hamm and (New Brunswick Premier) Bernard Lord and (Ontario Premier) Dalton McGuinty and (Alberta Premier Ralph) Klein and say 'Look now, here's our situation, here's our case.' And I'd have the homework done in advance," Williams said.
"These are all premiers, they advocate for their own provinces, but I think they're fair and they can understand. It's easy for the federal government to stand back and take the Mother Ottawa approach and say 'Well, I'm going to be good to Ontario, I'm going to be good to Quebec and all the rest don't count.'"
But before he'd do all that, Williams is counting on a new regime under Paul Martin, Prime Minister Jean Chretien's uncrowned successor, to help smooth the waters. He's also planning on fostering a more congenial relationship with Ottawa and said he won't fight with the federal MPs from the province, regardless of their political stripe. [Emphasis added]
The Tory platform promises a Newfoundland and Labrador office of provincial-federal relations to be set up in Ottawa.
Williams blames Grimes for taking a hostile approach, waging war with MPs -- even his own Liberal counterparts like, federal cabinet minister Gerry Byrne -- as well as with Ottawa. [Emphasis added]
Williams would only go to war if Ottawa doesn't play ball.
"The politics of the personal attack doesn't work. I'm going to nurture -- if an MP happens to be a Tory or a Liberal or an NDP -- it's not going to make any difference to me. They're Newfoundlander and Labradorian representatives and we need to work together," Williams said. [Emphasis added]
He points to the all-party committee on the fishery, saying Grimes broke ranks and that's why the province didn't get Ottawa to change its mind on closing the Gulf and the northeast coast fishery.
Williams insists he's a better negotiator and would have gotten a better deal on the province's resources, such as oil, Voisey's Bay and the yet-to-be-completed Lower Churchill negotiations.
Williams' comments came in an interview about his infrastructure platform.
He's embarking on a lofty crusade to improve rural infrastructure, including roads, ferries, Internet and air links, the province's highways and sewage and drinking-water systems. The platform also calls for a fixed link across the Straight of Belle Isle. He also proposes to grapple with mounting school and hospital infrastructure woes that get placed on the backburner due to a system already taxed by program and service delivery demands.
Recent stories on hospital and school board submissions for capital repairs and upgrades revealed schools boards need $60 million to patch leaky roofs, repair rotting floors and cure air-quality problems. That list is getting compounded every year. In this fiscal year's budget, the province allocated a $3.5-million contingency fund for school maintenance and repairs and $3.3 million for capital construction.
Hospitals need $20 million for similar problems and that's just for this year. Each board, however, is getting just a handful of items on its list approved -- a fraction of what's needed.
Adequate infrastructure, Williams said, is key to bringing businesses and industry to Newfoundland, particularly rural Newfoundland.
"This government and the previous governments over the last 10-15 years have allowed our infrastructure to deteriorate to the point now where the job's getting much bigger to do," Williams said.
Like the Liberals, he's talking about using the provincial fuel tax to fix roads. But Williams is also counting on hammering out a new federal-provincial roads agreement and achieving a better equalization formula and an end to clawbacks from Ottawa to help fund the improvements. He would promise Martin if the clawback on the province's increasing revenues was eliminated, the funds would go directly into infrastructure.
"In other words, 'Paul Martin, if you can give us those funds, we'll put them directly into infrastructure. We won't put them into tax cuts, we won't put them into anything else. We will make a commitment to you and guarantee you that's where they'll go.'"
Other premiers have tried and failed to negotiate a better fiscal deal with Ottawa.
"If they don't accept the rational approach, based on planning and fairness, then we have to consider whether or not they're our true partners in Confederation, whether they are our friends, whether they are being reasonable with us," Williams said.
Danny Williams used to believe that vicious personal attacks are no use.
From 2003, before he got elected, Danny Williams sang a very different tune from the one that has him branded today:
____________________________________________
Williams touts national trek: Similar Grimes' trip failed because premier 'didn't do his homework'
By: Barb Sweet
The Telegram (St. John's)
Saturday, October 11, 2003
Page: A1
If Tory Leader Danny Williams were premier, he would massage provincial-federal relations. But if that didn't work, he'd launch a national marketing campaign and try to get other premiers to back Newfoundland and Labrador's cause.
"If they're not going to be fair to us, then I would basically launch a national marketing campaign to let people know exactly what the story is in Newfoundland and Labrador, how there is unfairness and I would lobby the premiers right across the country," the election front-runner said in an interview this week.
SOUNDS FAMILIAR
But wait -- isn't that what Premier Roger Grimes tried and failed to do this past summer with his cross-Canada trek, trying to sell the province's case to his fellow premiers? Hasn't the province been there and done that?
Angered by the latest fisheries closure, Grimes vowed to push for a constitutional amendment to allow joint federal-provincial management of the fishery.
But it fizzled when the other premiers didn't seem all that interested and he agreed to work jointly on a "rebuilding and recovery" program for the cod, which fell short of his goal for joint management of fisheries in waters adjacent to the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Williams said in an interview this week that Grimes' problem was he took the wrong tack.
"Roger Grimes didn't do his homework. He picked up and said 'I'm going to go and see if I can't get constitutional reform.' What I would be doing is I would be talking to (Prince Edward Island Premier) Pat Binns and (Nova Scotia Premier) John Hamm and (New Brunswick Premier) Bernard Lord and (Ontario Premier) Dalton McGuinty and (Alberta Premier Ralph) Klein and say 'Look now, here's our situation, here's our case.' And I'd have the homework done in advance," Williams said.
"These are all premiers, they advocate for their own provinces, but I think they're fair and they can understand. It's easy for the federal government to stand back and take the Mother Ottawa approach and say 'Well, I'm going to be good to Ontario, I'm going to be good to Quebec and all the rest don't count.'"
But before he'd do all that, Williams is counting on a new regime under Paul Martin, Prime Minister Jean Chretien's uncrowned successor, to help smooth the waters. He's also planning on fostering a more congenial relationship with Ottawa and said he won't fight with the federal MPs from the province, regardless of their political stripe. [Emphasis added]
The Tory platform promises a Newfoundland and Labrador office of provincial-federal relations to be set up in Ottawa.
Williams blames Grimes for taking a hostile approach, waging war with MPs -- even his own Liberal counterparts like, federal cabinet minister Gerry Byrne -- as well as with Ottawa. [Emphasis added]
Williams would only go to war if Ottawa doesn't play ball.
"The politics of the personal attack doesn't work. I'm going to nurture -- if an MP happens to be a Tory or a Liberal or an NDP -- it's not going to make any difference to me. They're Newfoundlander and Labradorian representatives and we need to work together," Williams said. [Emphasis added]
He points to the all-party committee on the fishery, saying Grimes broke ranks and that's why the province didn't get Ottawa to change its mind on closing the Gulf and the northeast coast fishery.
Williams insists he's a better negotiator and would have gotten a better deal on the province's resources, such as oil, Voisey's Bay and the yet-to-be-completed Lower Churchill negotiations.
Williams' comments came in an interview about his infrastructure platform.
He's embarking on a lofty crusade to improve rural infrastructure, including roads, ferries, Internet and air links, the province's highways and sewage and drinking-water systems. The platform also calls for a fixed link across the Straight of Belle Isle. He also proposes to grapple with mounting school and hospital infrastructure woes that get placed on the backburner due to a system already taxed by program and service delivery demands.
Recent stories on hospital and school board submissions for capital repairs and upgrades revealed schools boards need $60 million to patch leaky roofs, repair rotting floors and cure air-quality problems. That list is getting compounded every year. In this fiscal year's budget, the province allocated a $3.5-million contingency fund for school maintenance and repairs and $3.3 million for capital construction.
Hospitals need $20 million for similar problems and that's just for this year. Each board, however, is getting just a handful of items on its list approved -- a fraction of what's needed.
Adequate infrastructure, Williams said, is key to bringing businesses and industry to Newfoundland, particularly rural Newfoundland.
"This government and the previous governments over the last 10-15 years have allowed our infrastructure to deteriorate to the point now where the job's getting much bigger to do," Williams said.
Like the Liberals, he's talking about using the provincial fuel tax to fix roads. But Williams is also counting on hammering out a new federal-provincial roads agreement and achieving a better equalization formula and an end to clawbacks from Ottawa to help fund the improvements. He would promise Martin if the clawback on the province's increasing revenues was eliminated, the funds would go directly into infrastructure.
"In other words, 'Paul Martin, if you can give us those funds, we'll put them directly into infrastructure. We won't put them into tax cuts, we won't put them into anything else. We will make a commitment to you and guarantee you that's where they'll go.'"
Other premiers have tried and failed to negotiate a better fiscal deal with Ottawa.
"If they don't accept the rational approach, based on planning and fairness, then we have to consider whether or not they're our true partners in Confederation, whether they are our friends, whether they are being reasonable with us," Williams said.
NS joins Harper Equalization plan
The Nova Scotia government has opted to accept the Harper Equalization plan.
However this CBC story contains a glaring factual error that needs to be corrected.
The feds have given Nova Scotia a one year grace period in which to take the Equalization option that gives the province the greatest return.
Meanwhile in Newfoundland and Labrador, the provincial government continues to moan about the whole Equalization business without demonstrating that the province has lost anything at all. The radio call-ins shows are full of complaints and talk of separation but not a single caller so far - including the Premier's parliamentary secretary and several cabinet ministers - could make any factual statements.
However this CBC story contains a glaring factual error that needs to be corrected.
This means the province will no longer have control of offshore oil profits, but it said it chose the short-term federal funding to avoid tax increases and program cuts.Sheer bunk. The Nova Scotia government sets and collects its own offshore revenues. It controls them now and it will continue to control them as long as its accord with Ottawa (from the 1980s) remains in place.
The feds have given Nova Scotia a one year grace period in which to take the Equalization option that gives the province the greatest return.
Meanwhile in Newfoundland and Labrador, the provincial government continues to moan about the whole Equalization business without demonstrating that the province has lost anything at all. The radio call-ins shows are full of complaints and talk of separation but not a single caller so far - including the Premier's parliamentary secretary and several cabinet ministers - could make any factual statements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)