Some will get this.
Left: Albrecht Drurer, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
Right: Patch of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, United States Army. The Nightstalkers. "Nightstalkers Don't Quit."
Ralph Goodale is in town for the annual federal liberal caucus meeting. The Telegram grabbed him for an interview. [Photo, left, The Telegram/Rhonda Hayward]Shortly after, Williams yanked down the Canadian flag from the front of government buildings across the province in a protest that, even now, Goodale finds distasteful.On the deal as a whole:
"I thought then — and I still think today — that approach, that tactic, was unfortunate. I don’t agree on any occasion with any premier, whatever the issue might be, taking that particular slant to it and pulling down the flag," he said.
"Do I think it was the right deal? Yes I do," he says without hesitation.Read the rest. it's an interesting counterpoint to the false information spread local during the discussions and since.
"The problem was real, there was justice behind the provinces’ position and, as difficult as the negotiation was and as colourful as some of the tactics were, we had to keep our eye on the ball and work our way through it."
OTTAWA - Federal election watchdog William Corbett is "examining" disputed advertising expenses claimed by Conservative candidates in the last election. Elections Canada confirmed it referred the issue to Corbett last last April.From the Globe:
As Commissioner of Canada Elections, Corbett has the power to pass on cases to prosecutors.
Corbett's involvement indicates the potentially serious nature of the dispute between Elections Canada and the Conservatives over $1 million in advertising costs its candidates paid the party, after the party transferred the money to the candidates.
Violations of the Elections Act that Corbett enforces are subject to fines and imprisonment.
The Conservative Party would not comment on Corbett's involvement. The party says it is in full compliance with the Elections Act.
The Conservatives spent the maximum amount allowed by a political party during the 2006 campaign. In addition, they gave about $1.2-million to local candidates who had not spent their own personal maximum. The money was then given back to the party on the same day to buy ads in regional markets.
Elections Canada is locked in a court battle with 37 financial officers for candidates who want the government - which returns 60 per cent of the election expenses of candidates who get at least 10 per cent of the votes in their riding - to cover the expenditure.
The federal agency refused, arguing that the party, not the candidates, bought the advertising.
The provincial generic royalty regime produces two years of production at 1% of gross revenue , two at 2.5%, two at 5% and four at 7.5%. The Williams basic royalty, as presented in the provincial government news release of August 22, 2007 sets the basic royalty at a constant 1% for the period before simple payout.
As can be seen, the generic royalty regime's steady progression produces significantly more royalty revenue for the provincial treasury annually than does the flat rate approach during the assumed 10 period before the project attains simple payout.
Frauds on the governmentAside from fraud, the other charge common to all five charged so far is s. 122:
121. (1) Every one commits an offence who
(a) directly or indirectly
(i) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to an official or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of an official, or
(ii) being an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for himself or another person,
a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with
(iii) the transaction of business with or any matter of business relating to the government, or
(iv) a claim against Her Majesty or any benefit that Her Majesty is authorized or is entitled to bestow,
whether or not, in fact, the official is able to cooperate, render assistance, exercise influence or do or omit to do what is proposed, as the case may be;
(b) having dealings of any kind with the government, directly or indirectly pays a commission or reward to or confers an advantage or benefit of any kind on an employee or official of the government with which the dealings take place, or to any member of the employee’s or official’s family, or to anyone for the benefit of the employee or official, with respect to those dealings, unless the person has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government with which the dealings take place;
(c) being an official or employee of the government, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person, unless they have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs them or of which they are an official;
(d) having or pretending to have influence with the government or with a minister of the government or an official, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept, for themselves or another person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with
(i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or
(ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office;
(e) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to a minister of the government or an official, or to anyone for the benefit of a minister or an official, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence, or an act or omission, by that minister or official, in connection with
(i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or
(ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office; or
(f) having made a tender to obtain a contract with the government,
(i) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to another person who has made a tender, to a member of that person’s family or to another person for the benefit of that person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of the tender of that person, or
(ii) directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from another person who has made a tender a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person as consideration for the withdrawal of their own tender.
Contractor subscribing to election fund
(2) Every one commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain a contract with the government, or as a term of any such contract, whether express or implied, directly or indirectly subscribes or gives, or agrees to subscribe or give, to any person any valuable consideration
(a) for the purpose of promoting the election of a candidate or a class or party of candidates to Parliament or the legislature of a province; or
(b) with intent to influence or affect in any way the result of an election conducted for the purpose of electing persons to serve in Parliament or the legislature of a province.
Punishment
(3) Every one who commits an offence under this section is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 121; 2007, c. 13, s. 5.
Breach of trust by public officer
122. Every official who, in connection with the duties of his office, commits fraud or a breach of trust is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, whether or not the fraud or breach of trust would be an offence if it were committed in relation to a private person.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 111.
Well they know that since the guy with the short hair, 'stache, tight leathers, handcuffs and motorcycle cop boots in the airport is a real cop, it's time to take their indoor games to another locale.
Now when He had left speaking, He said unto Simon: "Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught."
And Simon answering said unto Him: "Master, we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing: nevertheless at Thy word I will let down the net."
And when they had this done, they enclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net brake.
Simon Lono Declares for Liberals in St. John's North
Simon Lono today declared his candidacy for the Liberal Party nomination in the provincial district of St. John's North.
"The people of St. John's North deserve strong, vigorous representation in the House of Assembly," said Lono. "They deserve more than the attitude that St. John's can take the hit in elder care, education and the economy."
This was not a decision taken lightly, Lono said. "It was not an easy choice; I have been thinking about this for a while. I'm running because I'm concerned about the direction the province going."
"The Williams government has neglected important issues and has misplaced priorities," said Lono. "They've taken no action to address the needs of our aging population. In education, they've decided to break up Memorial University without counting the cost to the public purse, the effect on post-secondary education or even if this is the best option for our students.
"As for the economy, we can't be satisfied to accept mere crumbs of information on a project as important to our future as Hebron; we need more information than government has revealed so far, so we can judge for ourselves. Secret deals are not acceptable."
Lono notes that it takes a strong representation to make the difference. "The people of St. John's North have had no voice. We have too many silent, passive members sitting on the government side of the House," he said. "This government has taken St. John's North for granted and it shows."
"Public service has always been important to me, and I know I can contribute energy and new ideas to this province as a member of the House of Assembly working for the people of St. John's North."-30-
Contact:
Simon Lono
689-0809
Simon@SimonLono.ca
"Look, we have to have greater control of our resources.' And if that means taking on the oil companies, then so be it. If it means taking on the federal government, then so be it."Control in this sense is a binary thing, basically. You either do or you don't.
"If I was living in Ontario and a government said we want to take over five per cent ownership of Chrysler Corporation, you'd be hard put not to vote for that government if you were New Democrat," he said.If Ontario already owned the cars, it would be a bizarre thing, and presumably, if we are talking New Democrats we might be wondering why they'd settle for only five percent.
But here's another thing that bothers me, Danny. Leave aside how much you've given up in royalties to get that ownership stake. Why make such a trade at all? After all, the royalties in question are paid on gross revenues -- whereas ownership in the project entitles you, not just to a share of revenues, but a share of the costs. These have already climbed, from an estimated $6-billion to ... well, no one seems to have a very clear idea what it will cost at this point.Food for thought, although the legions will find some reason to dismiss Andrew Coyne's common sense, typically by focusing on something other than disproving his common-sensical comments.
But let's say it's closer to $10-billion, all told. That 4.9% equity stake lets you -- or rather the taxpayers -- in for another $500-million in costs, against about $2.5-billion in revenues, if oil stays at US$70 a barrel, or $1.5-billion at $50. So your share of the profits, over the life of the project, are between $1-billion and $2-billion. If the same money could be collected, at considerably less risk, in the form of royalties, why the fixation on public ownership?
I know: it's to give the province "a window" on the industry. But at 4.9%, the province would have precious little say in the operation. And it's hard to see what sort of leverage it would have, as a shareholder, that it would not have as a regulator, or what information it would not be able to obtain from regulatory filings, legislative hearings and private talks. Indeed, there's something bizarre about the government paying for the right to participate in the extraction of a resource it already owns.
The RNC was asking for the public’s help with information about Murray’s whereabouts or his vehicle, described as a red 2005 Pontiac Montana with the licence plate HKP 544.In June, around the time of the anniversary of the scandal breaking, the provincial government announced it was launching a civil action against Murray seeking repayment of an undisclosed portion of the $4.0 million allegedly misspent.
He’s described as 53 years old, five-foot-nine, 210 pounds, balding with grey hair on the sides, and with blue eyes.
He was reportedly last seen leaving his St. John’s home, wearing a long-sleeved denim shirt, light blue jeans and white sneakers. Murray was reported missing by his family.
"The rationale behind these changes was the companies needed some downside protection if the price of oil went very, very low," Natural Resources Minister Kathy Dunderdale said.It's important to note, though, that the lowered royalty scheme in the province's concession essentially provides the protections sought by the oil companies in the first round of talks when they sought tax concessions. Those concessions were rejected at the time by the province.
"So, that was the trade off for us — to give them protection if oil prices really plummeted, to get a gain if prices were high, above $50. So, we traded off some risk on the low end for significant gains on the other end."
"I've indicated publicly before, when Mr. Grimes offered the more favourable royalty regime, that I wasn't in favour of that," Williams said.The Telegram story - headlined "Province concedes on early royalties" - has been picked up across the country. It appears in Cape Breton Post, and a CBC version is available internationally on the CBC website.
" We now have a situation where we have plus-$55 oil … so there's a lot of profit in the oil industry … and so we expect to get a good return," he said.
The Telegram
November 28, 2006
Voting window could widen to accommodate Alberta exodus
Rob Antle
The Telegram
The province may be losing its workers, but it's hoping not to lose their votes.
Elections officials are proposing changes that would allow voters to cast their ballots nearly two months in advance of the 2007 provincial election, to accommodate Newfoundlanders working out west.
"The idea is to try to make it as flexible and as open and as transparent (as possible), and to give everybody the full opportunity and the fair opportunity to cast their ballots," chief electoral officer Chuck Furey told The Telegram.
In 2004, the Williams administration passed legislation setting fixed election dates every four years. The next provincial election will be held Oct. 9, 2007.
By law, the premier must officially ask the lieutenant-governor to dissolve the legislature and drop the election writs a minimum of 21 days before polling day.
Currently, those who can't vote on election day can cast an absentee ballot - called a special ballot - during that 21-day time period.
Furey said his proposal would allow voters to cast those special ballots up to four weeks before the writ is officially dropped.
"We're trying to say, look, if you've got a fixed-date election, why are we limiting it to 21 days, if we have such a migratory and transient population now? They're coming and going - let's try to capture people and give them a full opportunity to vote by
adding that extra four weeks."
The proposal is currently awaiting a decision by the province.
By law, anyone over 18 can vote in a provincial election as long as they have a fixed address in Newfoundland and Labrador.
There are no official figures on how many transient workers commute to Alberta or other destinations for work while still maintaining a home in Newfoundland.
The Newfoundland and Labrador Statistics Agency does not compile such data, saying it would be nearly impossible to gather and maintain.
But there is ample anecdotal evidence confirming the trend.
An estimated 9,000 people attended an Alberta job fair held in St. John's last month.
Air Canada established a daily direct flight between St. John's and Fort Mc-Murray this year to meet the demand of workers travelling back and forth.
And Canadian North is operating weekly private charter flights linking Deer Lake, St. John's and northern Alberta.
Vincent Pratt, from the Triton area, is one of the commuters using that service.
In a recent interview with Transcontinental Media, Pratt estimated that more than half of the 2,000 people employed at his work camp in northern Alberta are from Newfoundland.
Net out-migration increased to more than 4,100 this year, according to provincial figures.
The most recent provincial population estimate is under 510,000, a drop of about 70,000 since 1991.
Are Ed and Simon, to give but two examples, diehard Liberals? Of course. To say otherwise is foolish. But to dismiss the points they make because they have a Liberal background is even more foolish. They are smart men with enough communications and policy wonk experience on them to choke a horse. They’re going to notice things that the average person, and the average journalist, might miss. To ignore what they have to say is silly. To question their desire to see Newfoundland thrive is idiotic. Their desire to see Newfoundland prosper is greater than their desire to see a Liberal government in power. Never doubt that.Dissent as they say, or even criticism is not treason.
Nfld. premier trying to avoid scrutiny of Voisey's deal - opposition
May 2002
St. John's, Nfld. (CP) -- The only thing standing in the way of an agreement to develop the fabled Voisey's Bay nickel mine is a signature from Newfoundland Premier Roger Grimes, the province's Conservative Opposition leader said Monday.
But Danny Williams said Grimes is stalling because he doesn't want to close the deal and face public scrutiny while the legislature is still sitting.
"Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can sense that a bad deal is about to be made," Williams told a news conference. "Why won't he debate it in the House of Assembly? What is he trying to hide?"
Grimes was out of the province Monday attending an oil industry conference in Houston. But the province's mines minister, Lloyd Matthews, confirmed talks with mining giant Inco Ltd. -- owners of the $4.3-billion mineral deposit -- were in their final stages, though the outcome remains unclear.
"Over the next several weeks, one way or the other, we should bring resolution and clarity as to whether or not there will be a deal," Matthews told the legislature.
Matthews said a number of key issues remain on the table, but no meetings are scheduled with Inco because the company is in the midst of negotiating the terms of benefit agreements with Labrador's main aboriginal groups, the Innu and Inuit.
Williams said while the premier and minister have been coy about discussing the prospects for a deal this spring, executives with Toronto-based Inco have been dropping hints at every opportunity.
Indeed, Inco chief executive Scott Hand has said he hopes construction can begin at the site in northern Labrador by next month.
Meanwhile, there are indications the company has already lined up a contract with the Quebec engineering firm SNC Lavalin, Williams told the legislature.
Earlier, Williams suggested the deal will be announced some time during the last two weeks of this month, after the legislature adjourns for the summer recess.
Wants Debate
Williams said the deal should be brought before the house for debate to ensure the province gets the best deal possible. But Grimes has already rejected that request on the grounds he is not obligated to submit such a business deal for legislative approval.
Grimes will try to avoid public scrutiny of the deal because the Liberal government will be forced to admit it has abandoned the tough stand taken by former Liberal premier Brian Tobin, Williams said.
Tobin won widespread public support when he insisted all the ore extracted from Voisey's Bay had to be processed in Newfoundland. He won two general elections by repeatedly declaring the province wouldn't give away its raw resources so that others could profit from processing the ore into finished nickel.-30-
All fired up: Opposition politicians expected to demand details of Voisey's Bay deal as House opens
Michael MacDonald (Canadian Press)
Monday, June 17, 2002
Opposition politicians will have one, simple question for Premier Roger Grimes this week when the Newfoundland and Labrador legislature holds a special debate on the Voisey's Bay mining project: Where's the legal text?
The question stems from the Liberal government's decision last week to sign a tentative, $2.9-billion development deal with Inco Ltd. based on a so-called statement of principles, rather than a legally binding commercial agreement.
"That's where the truth lies - the devil is in the details," said Ed Byrne, the Conservative house leader. "About 95 per cent of the details have yet to be negotiated."
During the debate, which starts Tuesday and culminates in a historic free vote Thursday, Conservative Leader Danny Williams will argue the final draft must be held up for public scrutiny.
Grimes has said the legal text will be drafted behind closed doors by a team of lawyers from Inco and the provincial government by Sept. 30, but it won't be up for debate.
The three-day debate on the statement of principles should provide skeptics with all the details they need, he added.
"There are some legitimate concerns, with people seeking a little more information," Grimes told The Telegram on the weekend. "They're looking to have a little better comfort level. ... I think people will have a greater level of comfort after the debate."
Scott Hand, Inco's chief executive, dismissed the Tories' demand for the legal text.
"The statement of principles is a very detailed document," he told reporters last week after speaking to the St. John's Board of Trade. "It really sets out all the commitments, guarantees and remedies required. ... The legal agreement will reflect that quite clearly."
But some observers aren't so sure.
"What about the final deal itself?" asked Peter Boswell, a political science professor at Memorial University. "Is that going to come before the house? If not, then that's why this whole thing is a charade."
Echoes of Charlottetown accord
Boswell said the political sparring over the Voisey's deal reminded him of the debate 10 years ago over the Charlottetown accord - another in a line of ill-fated attempts to bring Quebec into the constitutional fold.
The accord was rejected by 54 per cent of Canadians in a national referendum, but not before popular opinion forced the federal government to release a legal text.
"There's a lot of things in this statement of principles that are open to change," said Boswell.
"The free vote is almost like a public relations exercise. They're just going through motions."
Still, the debate in the House of Assembly could offer direction to the lawyers drafting the final documents, he said.
Too many loopholes: Williams
For example, Williams has suggested the statement of principles contains too many broad exemptions and escape clauses for Inco, which could lead to long delays in the project.
He zeroed in on something called the force majeure clause, which excuses the company from meeting its obligations if it is beset by shortages of supplies, accidents, breakdowns or inflated prices for raw material.
"I've looked at hundreds of these during the course of a legal career," said Williams, who worked as a high-profile lawyer for 30 years before he was acclaimed Tory leader last year.
"This is the weakest, broadest one I've ever seen. There's things in here that are ridiculous."
Provisions "normal"
Not to be outdone, Hand said he's seen more force majeure provisions than Williams has.
"I've been a lawyer for 32 years," he said.
"It's very normal. It's fundamental for financing. It doesn't eliminate our obligations. All it can do is suspend it for a little time."-30-