To comment or not to comment

From the Australian public relations blog, Better communications results, comes a timely post on the subject of comments on blogs.

Not surprisingly, opinions vary.

Equally unsurprising is the indication of a trend to be found on some local blogs for comments to turn into pointless, sometimes personally hostile comments by anonymous people.

There have been some examples of that at Bond Papers, especially in the posts by an essentially anonymous commenter on the post "The revenge of the newfies?" containing Benoit Aubin's recent L'actualite piece on the province.

If you want to see the sort of pseudo-flame war that can erupt, there's a good example locally from a blog run by a pseudonym who - himself - also keeps his profile closed and makes it pretty well impossible for most people to find out either his identity or an e-mail address where you could reach him to take up an issue privately. The big spurt of personal vitriol erupted in the late winter and early spring; he commented on the "Revenge" posting, incidentally, following the same tactic of launching a form of personal attack rather than deal with the post itself.

As a last point, let's take a clip from Dave Winer's view on the subject of comments:

..."The cool thing about blogs is that while they may be quiet, and it may be hard to find what you’re looking for, at least you can say what you think without being shouted down. This makes it possible for unpopular ideas to be expressed. And if you know history, the most important ideas often are the unpopular ones…. That’s what’s important about blogs, not that people can comment on your ideas. As long as they can start their own blog, there will be no shortage of places to comment.”

Comments are an issue, and how to handle them takes some consideration. Moderation is, to my mind, a form of peculiar censorship. In practice, it seems to turn that unpopular comments - i.e. ones that don't fawn over the blogger or essentially confirm their line of argument - never see the light of day.

At Bond Papers and Persuasion Business, the practice has been to require a blogger.com ID and an e-mail address as a way of forcing people to take responsibility for their own words. People who don't want to do that can go elsewhere and their comments - usually the pseudonymous, blocked profile types - will usually find their words deleted. This is especially the case when the comments turn out to be ad hominem nonsense. They remain in the e-mail in-basket, though, for future reference.

Comments can add significantly to a thread, such as Craig Welsh's questioning of the recent poll goosing post, or the opinion offered by another commenter - with a name but closed profile - on a thread about Hebron royalties.

In a post on Grenfell, strong opinion was voiced from what appeared to be an anonymous commenter. When challenged on that point, an e-mail appeared which identified the person as someone who has offered - as in the comments - thoughtful, strong opinions. The person took responsibility for his words and hence they remain available for all to see. He added significantly to the discussion.

At Bond Papers, there have always been comments even if the ability to comment on each post has been disabled. That's while the profile is open and an e-mail address is prominently displayed. Some of the most valuable, informed and sometimes highly critical comments have come from there. Productive discussions ensued and in one case, a scathing comment intended for publication with the thread came through e-mail; it went on the thread as the commenter intended originally intended and with the commenter's permission. Strong words and critical comment are not enough to get someone's words in the bin.

Comments on blogs are likely to be a hot topic in the upcoming election for two reasons:

1. Blogs have become a source of critical or alternative comment, something the Premier has made plain he doesn't like.

2. One tactic to counteract that would be deploying sock puppets - the anonymous ad hominem attackers - to disrupt the information flow. They are the modern version of the thugs sent to a rival meeting to start a fight.

Let's see what happens as the story unfolds.

-srbp-

[Cross posted to Persuasion Business]

Brave talk, but still meaningless blather

Natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale signed off on another extension to the White Rose oil field on Friday. Husky energy, the main partner in the project can now develop 24 million barrels of recoverable oil at a cost of $595 million.

Good news, considering there was much speculation that the provincial government would try and squeeze cash out of the lucrative development. White Rose's light, sweet crude is easier and cheaper to develop than Hebron.

Turns out the province is just going to settle on talking about possibly, theoretically maybe getting some extra cash or local benefits.

Don't bet on it.

If the financial discussions are not a specific condition of the development application amendment approval, there's pretty much Sweet Fanny Adams that Dunderdale can do. She says some brave bluster words, but consider Dunderdale to be full of so much hot air.

As Dunderdale told the Telegram:

"The proponents have chosen to proceed with this development, even though the fiscal and other terms haven’t been finalized.

"What we will have to ensure, as we continue our discussions around these satellite field developments, is that the province receives a fair return."

Right off the bat, "fair return" is the sort of meaningless phrase that Danny Williams and his minister's like to throw around. They never say what it means, which means that it can be anything they want it to.

Dunderdale and her boss add nary a nickle to the existing development over and above the lucrative generic royalty regime established in 1996? That's a "fair return".

The company agrees to do "whatever work is possible" here in the province, but with no obligation to do any fixed percentage or amount?

That's a "fair return" as well.

Vague words.

No possible way of defining it and measuring it.

Therefore, success or failure are impossible to determine.

It's the opposite of accountable.

In fact vague language like "fair return" is deliberately designed to promote unaccountability.

Second of all, no oil company in its right mind would develop a field - even an extension of one in development - unless it knew the costs of development were settled or could be predicted reasonably well. The idea Husky is going to figure out later what to pay the provincial government is simply ludicrous.

But it's an election season so the provincial government has to give it's goosed version of the facts. To reinforce what will quickly become the Hebron myth, Dunderdale is obliged to say the province is looking for all the things it won at Hebron.

Only difference is, at Hebron they held up approval to negotiate first.

On White Rose, Dunderdale and her boss don't have quite the same leverage.

They signed it away, up front.

-srbp-

"Hebron means money, research for Memorial"

From The Muse, student newspaper at Memorial University:

“The Faculty of Engineering has a particularly strong link with the oil and gas industry, so there are direct benefits that I expect would follow from the Hebron project. These include increased opportunities within our province for our co-op students, graduates, and alumni of the Faculty of Engineering,” said Dean of Engineering Ray Gosine.

According to Memorial’s Oil And Gas Development Partnership (OGDP), these job opportunities will trickle down to other facets of the community.

The initial phase of construction is less likely to employ MUN students, however there are many opportunities down the road, says Randolf Cooper, executive director of OGDP.

“It’s quite encouraging to look at the bigger picture and the long term. That’s where you start to break down a lot of stereotypes. … I think there may be just as many jobs for people with business degrees, as opposed to degrees from earth sciences or engineering,” he said.

“Some of it takes on aspects of the trickle down economy, by the time the money gets into circulation, there are certainly a lot of people in the hospitality business that are going to benefit.”

Director of OGDP Research, Ian Atkinson, agrees.

“Even though first oil is in 2015, there is an immediate economic boost when they commit to the project. They bring people in, and right away there’s a need for more housing and people are spending money,” he said.

It will also mean major research opportunities in the future, in all sorts of scientific disciplines.

“It remains very much a laboratory for Memorial,” said Cooper. “It certainly looks like oil is headed more and more towards arctic and harsh weather environment exploration.”

-srbp-

"Insert a simple clause"

Will there be such a simple clause in the Hebron agreement?

The Telegram
Friday, May 17, 2002, p. A4

Williams on Voisey's warpath

Deborah Thomas
The Telegram

Danny Williams is making it his personal mission to make sure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador don't get a raw Voisey's Bay deal.

The Opposition leader is calling on the Grimes government to include a clause in any Voisey's Bay deal to state the agreement must be ratified by the House of Assembly first.

No such clause exists now, and Williams fears Inco will take legal action if, after a debate in the House of Assembly, the government has to make changes to it.

"Our responsibility here, as members of the legislature, is to make sure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are protected, and the only way to do that is to see that deal," he said. "Such a simple clause will eliminate all legal risk."

Williams said the clause needs to be tight, fool-proof and clear, but also simply state that the House of Assembly must debate and approve it first. He's afraid a lawsuit could bankrupt the province.

"The premier does have a majority in this legislature. Why is he afraid of an open and a frank debate? Is he afraid there is going to be loopholes or flaws or problems with that deal?" he said.

-srbp-

Called at last. Called at last.

The provincial Progressive Conservatives were short candidates in two seats when voting started on August 20.

It wasn't from lack of trying. No one apparently has shown any interest in running in the Grit stronghold of Torngat Mountains.

Meanwhile, the presence of four good candidates in full campaign mode didn't seem to impress the party leader enough to call the nomination in the safe Tory seat of St. John's East, being vacated by the superlative gentleman, John Ottenheimer.

There's been speculation about some secret strategy but that is a smoke screen.

According to local political scuttlebutt, Dan was desperately trying to get his old buddy Dean to take the spot. Dean said no.

Then there was casting about for a Number 2.

Apparently, Valerie took a pass as well.

So now it's down to Ed Buckingham, Dave Crosbie and a couple of others to battle it out in the race that starts officially on September 17. The nomination opened officially at 5:00 PM on Friday and ends - surprisingly - on Sunday.

In the meantime, let's all ponder this one: someone votes early and writes Dean MacDonald on the ballot in St. John's East.

Since Deano was never a candidate for any party, how would that vote be counted?

-srbp-

Porn Talk

On Friday afternoon's show, Crap Talk host Bill Rowe asked political candidate Elvis Loveless if he was any relation to singer Linda Lovelace.

Singer, Bill?

Umm.

Not exactly a singer Bill but... oh never mind.

Linda Lovelace was just the star of one of the most well-known porno movies in history and probably the most profitable one in all cinema history.

The title of the movie, and Linda's particular skill, was the inspiration for the name given to the secret source Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein used to break the Watergate scandal.

After a break, Bill sheepishly explained that he'd actually meant singer Patty Loveless.

Pesky things those homonyms.

Ahhh. That explains it.

Quick save, there Mr. Producer

After all, if Bill had really been thinking quickly, he'd have tossed in the fact that singer Loveless has a song titled "I try to think about Elvis" whereas the actress Lovelace might have had some other connection to Elvis.

And then the eye-rolling would have started again across the network named for the Volvo Owners Club of Malaysia.

-srbp-

Pull the other one

vocm.com is carrying a story featuring comments from Corporate Research Associates president Don Mills on his company's latest poll results in Newfoundland and Labrador.

It includes this statement:

Mills says the timing of the Hebron announcement was 'impeccable' for the premier given the election is just weeks away.

Well, the timing was impeccable but it had little to do with the election, which, as pretty well everyone knows, has been underway since at least last June.

Nope.

Check the timing on when CRA was in the field.

August 9 to August 31.

The Hebron announcement came, quite suddenly, and quite inexplicably given that there was no final deal, on August 22.

Right smack in the middle of Mills' data collection.

Not like the first time this administration - or its predecessor for that matter - timed major government announcements to coincide with Mills' quarterly data collection.


Take a look at the graph at left. The blue line is the weekly number of news releases from the provincial government. The green spaces are the times CRA was in the field.

The provincial government knows when CRA is collecting data since the provincial government is a CRA client for the quarterly survey.

The coincidence of the peaks with the polling periods doesn't look random. In fact it's a bit hard to explain making a major announcement in August, for example, or a high volume of government releases in August when most people are on vacation.

It's harder to explain a quickie announcement of a huge oil deal before the deal is actually finalized. Election? Well, there was a whole block of time after Labour Day for that, especially the time when the election is on and people are focused on electioneering.

Impeccable timing, yes, but timed for the election?

Pull the other one, Don, it's got bells on it.

Telephone bells ringing with a pollster on the other end of the line.

-srbp-

Election Blogs

CBC's Mike Rossiter and David Cochrane will be on the campaign trail and keeping blogs.

The thought of these guys tapping out daily observations separate from their reports is not as strange as it might seem. It's a variation on what CBC did in 2003 with all its campaign reporters and Cochrane even posted a few things to his own experimental blog.

It'll make things interesting if, during the campaign, the Premier decides to take a swipe at those nefarious bloggers he seems to notice every once in a while.

Anyway, what exactly will these reporter blogs be called?

Ross-itations?

Cochrants?

Tales from the Crackberry?

Winne-blogo?

The possibilities are endless!

-srbp-

Another blog, a cut above

Writer.

Good writer.

Bright future.

Sheena Goodyear's Don't quote me on this

-srbp-

Standing by your man via Blackberry

The opposition parties want health minister Ross Wiseman to resign over problems in the province's health system.

Failing that, they'd like the Premier to end Wiseman's second career in heath care. (He used to be a human resources manager.)

Ok.

That's a pretty standard political cry.

Not surprisingly, the premier is standing behind his man Ross, as he said in a statement coming - presumably - over his comms director's Blackberry:

"He is an incredibly competent, conscientious and hard-working minister. He is dealing with a number of serious issues, many which started under the Liberal administration, and I have great faith in his abilities," Williams said.

Again, a pretty standard response.

But if the Premier really stood behind Wiseman he might have used his own voice and done it by deriding the opposition for yet another lame-assed, predictable pile of drivel.

As it stands, Wiseman got the same endorsement one imagines that Rona and Gordon got just before they were punted to new jobs.

-srbp-

Summer of Love: MHAs continue gifts of public money

Remember Tom Rideout's dance trying to explain away how he and all his colleagues in the House of Assembly misled the public on when the Green report was taking effect?

Remember his gift of $5000 of public money to a local charity just a few short weeks before Chief Justice Derek Green condemned the practice?

Remember the claim that the Progressive Conservative caucus had taken The Pledge and would not be handing out public money as gifts? It was a big part of the story on how - according to Rideout - today was today but tomorrow was October 9 and not June 15, the day after the Green bill was passed. The old rules can stay in place - even though we suggested something else to you already - because we have promised not to hand out public money as gifts to the public.

Turns out to have been a crock.

The gifts - always labelled "donations" - are just coming from a different pot than the one they used to come from.

Clayton Forsey, the Progressive Conservative MHA for Exploits, shows up in St. Alban's (not in his district) in August and is referred to in the local paper as handing out $500 "on behalf of" none other than Premier Danny Williams.

Then two weeks later, the local paper prints a correction saying that the "donation" - to a local fundraiser for a cancer centre - was actually from the provincial health department. The money came, but it was from the health department. Check the hard copy because Transcon hasn't updated thecoaster.ca for almost a month.

Delivered by Clayton Forsey, mind you and so obviously identified as a partisan. The money didn't come from the minister or even the deputy minister or even the head of the local health authority. Nope it came from visiting Tory back-bencher, like that was a secret.

Since when does any provincial line department give a "donation" to an event such as this in the first place let alone deliver a cheque by such an obviously partisan means?

Good cause, mind you but departments put up the capital to build cancer centres and staff them. They don't make "donations" to local fundraisers, especially through an MHA, Tory now or Liberals before. If the Liberals did it before, then it is no more right than Forsey and whoever of his buddies are doing it these days.

This one needs some investigation by someone. If there's one example, there's like more that never got picked up by the local weekly.

This little story is highly suspicious.

So suspicious in fact that it should get the attention of the Auditor General, not to mention members of the general public who have already been misled on this issue at least once before by members of the House of Assembly.

oh yeah and while we're at it, where did this grand come from? [By mid-day this link turned up dead for some unknown reason. google search "clayton forsey $1000" and it will re-appear. Check the "cached page" for the full story from August 20. if that doesn't work, try this link which seems to be a new page identity for this story.]

Someone should be taking official notice of these goings on. After all, it's not like this is the first time Forsey's been reported handing out public money, even before the Summer of Love officially kicked off.

-srbp-

Charest chief of staff and comms director leave

Two senior members of Jean Charest's staff have departed. Chief of staff Stephane Bertrand and communications director Michel Guitard.

Gitard's departure is effective September 14. The two are said to be passing the torch and leave the office voluntarily.

-srbp-

Deep Panuke approved

The Deep Panuke gas project offshore Nova Scotia passed another hurdle today with a decision from federal environment minister John Baird that the project "is not likely to cause any adverse environmental effects."

The project has now been referred to other regulatory authorities for further action. A project description can be found at the Nova Scotia offshore regulatory board website.

-srbp-

For Number One Daughter

who started Grade Four today, who is always full of enthusiasm and energy and who, each day, makes her family prouder (none prouder than her mother who is still a bit taller than she is).

-srbp-

For Number One Son...

who started Grade Nine today, who is in no danger of failing, and who makes his family prouder every day (none prouder than his father, who is still a bit taller than he is.)

-srbp-

Show me the oil money!

Here's another story on the Hebron deal from Embassy. The story discusses the recent Hebron announcement in the wider context of a policy debate in Alberta over royalty regimes.

There are some interesting comments in the story, coming from natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale.

"It [the first round of talks] fell off the rails around equity, super-royalties and secondary processing," Newfoundland Natural Resources Minister Kathy Dunderdale said of the negotiations in an interview Monday. "The premier [Danny Williams] said at the time we were prepared to let some things go, but not the equity or the super-royalties.

Not exactly.

Premier Williams made two different sets of three demands. In April 2005, he said the province was looking for two of the three of:

- better royalties (undefined);

- better local benefits; and,

- local processing.

The Premier took the refinery off the list as soon as a consortium announced they were exploring a second refinery for Placentia Bay.

A year later, the Premier had three different demands:

- better local benefits;

- a super-royalty, to kick in when oil traded above a certain price per barrel; and,

- an "equity" stake.

The super-royalty was never clearly defined; indeed, not much of the list was defined in any measurable way.

When the talks fell apart, there were essentially two issues:

1. The companies could not agree among themselves on the equity request, reduced apparently from 10% to 4.9% to avoid involving any management decision-making powers; and,

2. A request by the companies for tax concessions which the province was not willing to consider.

In the memorandum of understanding, the issues were resolved such that the companies got a royalty break in lieu of the other tax concessions. The province got two other items but the details of how those work are still secret.

That's what makes discussion of the equity stake in the context of the Embassy story a little odd. There are some references - including here at Bond - to operating a state-owned oil company as in other countries. In truth, the thing may turn out to be nothing more than shares handled by an operating company as with the Canada Hibernia Holding Company.

How the shares are handled and what the energy company turns out to be will affect the net value of the thing to the province as a whole. Notice that the minister refers to the vague concept of having a window on the industry from the standpoint of developers. It certainly isn't clear what that means and how it may benefit the province in any way at all.

-srbp-

Start Your Own Political Party

If there's one of these, then why do we need one of these?

The New Democratic Party is supposed to be the party of labour but now someone starting a labour party.

Hmmm.

Next thing you know someone will re-start the Newfoundland and Labrador Party, which is not to be confused with the Newfoundland and Labrador First Party.

Has anyone seen the Popular People's Front for the Liberation of Judea (Officials)?

-srbp-

The Zen of Blogs

Wise One: What, grasshopper, is the sound made by one head repeatedly hitting the computer desk?

Grasshopper: Shagged if I know, Boss. But the head might be banging after finding a serious story about a shortage of urologists in the province linked by Dave Barry's blog in the US, with the suggestion that "Canadian Urologist Shortage" would be a good name for a band?

This one comes with a gigantic doff of the bowler to the cbc.ca webninjas who tied their sites to Technorati.

To update that story, the official position of the regional health authority is that they won't be speaking publicly about concerns raised recently by a local urologist. His concerns led to the CBC story that led ultimately to Dave's World.

Lessons?

Well, Lesson One: just about anyone will find anything funny.

Lesson Two: if you just got the living daylights hauled out of you on a health issue when your media strategy was entirely reactive and didn't say a heckuva lot, then maybe it might time to think of a new concept in public relations besides "no comment".

That second lesson isn't for the comms people invovled - it's for the management types who think silence is an effective way to disseminate information.

-srbp-

The impact of new media

Update: link to fleetstreetpr.com fixed.

New media can be used for niceness or evil, to paraphrase Maxwell Smart.

How you interpret this example from Ontario's election campaign on a "Goodness" scale depends on which partisan side you take.

The one thing everyone will agree on is that new media had an impact - an apology was issued - even if it is a transient one.

From the other side, there are examples like this one poking at John Tory's Liberal counterpart Dalton McGuinty.

-srbp-

Deconfusing the royalty confusion

In Friday's National Post, Premier Danny Williams said:

With regards to criticism of modifications to the basic royalty, it is important to note that the change is the difference between 2.5% and 1% -- not between 7.5% and 1% as reported by Mr. Coyne -- in addition, we still maintain the 5%, and in some cases 7.5%, level of royalty once costs are recovered.

For those familiar with the provincial generic royalty regime, this would create some confusion since the situation described by the Premier is not how the existing generic royalty regime works.

The generic royalty regime provides for a basic royalty that increases from 1%, through 2.5%, 5% to a maximum of 7.5% depending on when the project achieves simple payout. Under provincial petroleum regulations, simple payout occurs when cumulative gross revenue and incidental revenue exceeds the sum of allowable pre-development costs, capital expenditures, operating expenditures and basic royalty paid.

After simple payout is achieved, the royalty paid is the greater of the basic royalty rate (assessed on gross revenue) or the net royalty rates of 20% and 10% after an allowed rate of return.

In order for the adjustment to basic royalty in the pre-payout phase to be the difference between "2.5% and 1%" - as the Premier states - the Hebron project would have to recover its eligible costs within the first two to three years of production or less. His comment assumes an extremely optimistic scenario.

The Premier referred to total costs of between $7 and $11 billion in the 22 August announcement. Taking that as the amount to be recovered (pre-development plus development plus operating expenses and royalties fixed at 1% annually), and given the scenarios contained in two previous Bond Papers preliminary assessments, cumulative gross revenue would exceed $7.0 billion after about three to four years.

At that point, the basic royalty under the generic regime would likely about 5.0%. Thus the difference between Williams' Hebron and the generic regime would be the difference between 1% (Williams) and 5% 9generic). If costs are higher and the time to simple payout is longer, then the generic regime would likely reach 7.5%.

At the same time the Premier said that : "in addition, we still maintain the 5%, and in some cases 7.5%, level of royalty once costs are recovered". This is correct, however, under the existing petroleum regulations, those rates would apply - and the province would collect that revenue - only in a situation where the basic royalty produced more revenue than the Tier 1 and Tier 2 net royalties. Presumably under the Williams regime, this would also include the Tier 3 royalty.

In other words, in a scenario where the basic royalty was paid at 5% or 7.5% after simple payout, none of the much higher rates on net royalty - including the Premier's new Tier 3 - would be paid. This point is explained by provincial government documents.

The royalty regime appears to have been adjusted for Hebron as indicated in the 22 Aug news to a flat 1% royalty due at the commencement of production. This replaces the generic regime that started at 1% and would likely have increased to 5% or more by the time of simple payout. At the same time, the regime under the proposed Williams' Hebron regime is, to paraphrase natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale, a decision to forego revenues (royalties) in the initial years of production for possible royalties in the later stages.

This is an understandable compromise given the cost issues in the project, but it does reduce the initial royalty accruing to the province likely by between 4% and 6.5%. Any revenue foregone in the initial phase of the project may be recovered subsequently but only as long as prices for oil stay above $50 per barrel for WTI (Tier 3 royalties apply). Again, depending on how the Tier 3 royalty works this may be an understandable compromise. Unfortunately there is insufficient information in the public domain to assess the potential performance of the Tier 3 royalty.

The revenue accruing to the energy company does not offset this royalty concession. in the initial stages of production, the provincial energy company will be recovering its own share of the development costs. it is also liable for operating expenses, provincial taxes, federal taxes and other costs.[Note: see below] Thus any revenue, it collects must be assessed on a net basis.
Royalties are received by the provincial government acting as the resource owner (100%), without any liabilities; the net and the gross are identical figures. The provincial government collects and retains 100% of royalties with no revenue from royalties accruing to the federal government.

-srbp-

Note: Under s. 41 of the 1985 Atlantic Accord, Crown corporations receive no exemptions or special treatment with respect to taxes and other payments to the federal and provincial Crowns.:

Crown corporations and agencies involved in oil and gas resource activities in the offshore area shall be subject to all taxes, royalties and levies.

As a result of the Hebron memorandum of understanding, the Government of Canada will collect revenues from the provincial government's share of overall revenues which it ordinarily would not collect. These come in the form of federal corporate taxes, for example.