The Law of Diminishing Visitor Returns

Since taking office, the Williams administration has boosted the tourism advertising budget from $6 million to $11 million annually.

Now for most of us, a tourist is someone who doesn't live in a place but who goes there to see the sights. Tourists are good because they bring new money into the local economy and spend it on accommodations, attractions, travel, food and souvenirs.

The current provincial administration is proud of the results their efforts have produced. As Mount Pearl North MHA Steve Kent put it:

In the past four years, non-resident visitors to this province have increased by about 15 per cent, contributing approximately $365 million annually to the provincial coffers. The total resident and non-resident tourism industry contributes about $840 million to the provincial economy each year.

Yes, that's right, non-resident visitors, the people most of us would regard as tourists, actually contributed only 43% of the total economic activity generated by the province's tourism industry.

Hmmmm.

Doubled tourism advertising budget.

Tourists - let's call them non-resident visitors or NRVs - only produced 43% of the "tourism" dollars in the economy.

And that's after we've doubled the provincial tourism advertising budget, which, as Kent crowed, has won all sorts of awards.

Let's take a look at the returns we are getting on our investment. We'll use statistics gleaned from a couple of provincial sources. You may find the results startling.

For the first table, let's look at the number of non-resident visitors (NRV), the advertising budget, the increase in the budget from the previous year and the total amount spent by the visitors, in millions of dollars.

Table 1	A. Non-resident visitors (NRV)	B. Tourism Advertising Budget ($ millions)	C. Budget increase from previous year ($ millions)	D. NRV Revenue ($ millions)
2003	424,401	$6.0	-	$300
2004	449,300	$7	1	$330
2005	469,600	$8	1	$336
2006	494,400	$10	2	$365
2007	469,200 (est)	$11	1	not avail

For the second table, let's do some simple math. Let's look at how much each NRV generated in the economy. Let's also look at how much the provincial government spent in order to attract each NRV to the province. The third column looks at the incremental changes, that is how much each new visitor costs to attract.

Table 2	A. Adv Budget/NRV	B. NRV$/Adv Budget	C. Budget increase/NRV increase	D. $ per non-resident visitor
2003	14.14	49.98	-	$706
2004	15.58	47.14	40.16	$734
2005	17.04	42.05	48.26	$715
2006	20.23	36.46	80.65	$738
2007	23.44	-	-

Observations: As you can see from Table 2, Column A, the provincial tourism advertising spending per visitor has climbed steadily from $14.14 per non-resident visitor to $23.44 in 2007. That's the last year for which we have a fair bit of information.

However, as you can see from Column B in that same table, the return on advertising investment per visitor has actually dropped by over $13.00 per non-resident visitor.

Yes, that's right. We are spending more per visitor to attract them, but the return per visitor is diminishing. [Corrected statement.]

In Column C, you can compare the cost of each new non-resident visitor compared to non-resident visitors overall. Where it took $20 per visitor to attract them in 2006, for example, each "new" visitor that year cost four times as much.

Now, just to be clear, that doesn't mean the same people keep coming back. What we are looking at is the change between the number of visitors the year before and the number attracted in the current year. If there are more in the current year, then the difference is "new".

In Column D you can see the average dollars spent per visitor. You can see a fluctuation year to year. Each visitor spends more on average now than he or she did four years ago, but the spending in 2006 is just 4% above what it was in 2003.

Now there are a few caveats, or warnings here.

First, we don't have the 2007 visitor stats yet. The year is only just over and the provincial officials haven't finished tabulating them all. Note, though, that preliminary estimates have the non-resident visitor numbers down from 2006. If the general trend holds, the dollars they spent will be down accordingly.

Second, the decline in visitors between 2006 and 2007 is not the result of a decreased advertising and marketing effort, at least if we measure by the amount of money spent. There are other factors - like rising costs of travel and the higher Canadian dollar - that likely made Newfoundland and Labrador somewhat less attractive to non-resident visitors than in previous years.

Just be cautious though: the diminishing returns started in the very first year, before the dollar changes cut in.

Third, we don't know exactly how the province defines "non-resident visitors". It's possible that some of what has been captured here actually reflects ex-patriate Newfoundlanders or Labradorians coming back for a short visit.

Overall, though and taking a look at these figures, it's not surprising that the provincial tourism effort appears to be shifting away from non-resident visitors and toward having residents stay home. When the tourism industry talks about increasing activity in the off-seasons of spring and fall, they are clearly seeing the results among locals. That explains why 57% of the total economic activity attributed to "tourists" in the last hear for which we have complete figures actually comes from people whose permanent residence is within the province.

And to think all of this started with a VOCM report back in late December, which in turn inspired a Bond Papers post. Tourism minister Clyde Jackman was encouraging people of the province to spend their tourism dollars at home this year. According to VOCM, Jackman said that in 2007 "local tourists comprised nearly 90 percent of the tourism business.".

With a bit of information, a little analysis and a tip of the hat to the Dominion's finest statistician, we may actually have uncovered a largely ignored story with tremendous implications.

And Steve Kent?

He's still wrong.

-srbp-

Where will the money go? The Hebron - Hydro connection

Yes, you've read it at Bond Papers before:  Hebron money will head to Labrador to underwrite the Lower Churchill development.

And yes, Danny Williams has been trying to lower expectations for the Lower Churchill.

And finance minister Tom Marshall has suddenly discovered the provincial debt as a problem that must be addressed.

But if you want to know where the finance minister - and possibly his cabinet colleagues - are thinking of spending money from oil and gas, look no further than a report from the Gander Beacon on budget consultations held in the central Newfoundland town.

The story is titled "Where will the money go?"

"So, we have to use the resources we have now to change our economy," Minster Marshall said. "The oil and gas money we should use towards hydro, to provide an economy when the oil and gas is gone, because it will all be gone one day. Hopefully, it will be a long time, but it will be gone." [Emphasis added]

See?  The debt clock is not about putting the budget focus on the massive public debt, well, at least no so the provincial government can pay it down.

Nope.

The debt clock is to discourage demands from the public to spend oil and gas money on things they might want to see it spent on.

That way, the provincial government can non-renewable resource revenues, all $2.0 billion of it this year alone, on things cabinet has already decided on.

Like using the cash from Hebron to pay for the Lower Churchill, even though there are no customers for the power, yet.

Bond Papers has been saying it for a while.

Just like Bond Papers pointed at the provincial debt and the lack of action from the current administration.

And once again, Tom Marshall has confirmed it.

-srbp-

Steve Kent: pure crap

His letter to the editor defending tourism spending in the province isn't online, but let's have a look at Steve Kent's explanation (Amended:  by request, we've removed the Kent letter that appeared in the Sunday Telegram.  It isn't available online.) of why the current administration's tourism spending is right on.

First, says Kent, we must look at all the awards the marketing campaign has won. "The number of awards that the campaign has received to date is a strong indication that it is drawing positive attention to the province."

Well, the campaign has won awards for its creative merit but that doesn't mean that it has had an impact on tourism traffic.

In that context, Kent mentions the province's logo, which, it should be noted be refers to as a "brand signature."  That's industry speak for what they used to call a logo but Danny Williams thought was a brand.

Also, in November the province's brand signature won a prestigious silver award from the London International Advertising Awards. The short animated television spot featuring the province's new logo won a silver statue in the television category. It was also named a finalist in the animation category.

Well, Bond Papers has already explained that Kent's claim is false.  Completely, totally utterly false.  The logo didn't win the award. The video won the award. But even if it was true, as with the awards won by the campaign it's also irrelevant.

The provincial government spends tourism advertising money to bring new people to the province, not help ad agencies fill up the "I Love Me" cabinets.

Second, Kent mentions a bunch of references to the province by prominent travel publications.  All good stuff, of course, but its the bums in airplane seats and feet on the ground that counts.

Third - measured by number of paragraphs - and after all that, that's when we get to the actual tourism stats which, oddly enough, don't figure prominently in a letter from cabinet-minister-wannabe trying to score points with his team.

In the past four years, non-resident visitors to this province have increased by about 15 per cent, contributing approximately $365 million annually to the provincial coffers. The total resident and non-resident tourism industry contributes about $840 million to the provincial economy each year.

Bond Papers has also torn that little piece of misleading information to shreds as well back in December:

The relative proportion of overall spending by locals has actually grown in the four years of the New Approach to tourism much faster than visitor spending.  In a May 2004 statement to the legislature,  former tourism minister and current Humber Valley resort general manager noted that visitors generated approximately $300 million in spending in 2003 out of total tourism spending in the province of $620 million.

In other words, over the four years from 2003 to 2006, overall "tourism" spending increased by $200 million but only $64 million  - 32% - of that new spending was related to visitors.  In the meantime, the tourism advertising budget  - supposedly aimed at bring new dollars into the economy through increased visitation- has increased from $6.0 million to $11.0 million.

Get it?  For all the money Kent is proud of spending, it really hasn't been all that successful at attracting people from outside the province to come here.  That's what most of us would expect a tourism campaign to do.  By far and away, the growth in tourism revenue in the province has come from people staying home, not from some massive increase - or even a reasonable increase - in new faces. 

Nope.

The provincial government has doubled the advertising budget and succeeded in getting more people to stay home.

There's a successful tourism strategy for you.

No wonder Kent didn't say much about it.

Reading Kent's letter is like reading a redraft of the Parrot Shop sketch:  "beautiful plumage, squire."

Nice.

But entirely irrelevant.

-srbp-

 

Williams lowers expectations for Lower Churchill...again

In an interview with The Telegram, Premier Danny Williams admits there are considerable hurdles to overcome in developing the Lower Churchill hydroelectric project. The story isn't available online.  [Amended;  by request, we've removed the article from the post. If it turns up online, we'll supply a link.]

Williams repeated his January estimate that the chances of the project going ahead are 50/50.

"Well, at best that would be late 2009," said Williams. "We're going through the environmental process. We're attempting to reach agreement with the Labrador Innu. I'm optimistic that can happen. (Then we'll
decide) what the nature of the project will be and get the financials in place and be ready to rock'n'roll."

Take that statement as being an admission the project is unlikely to proceed at all. The crucial element is project financing. If that isn't even being reviewed until 2009 - at the earliest - then it's a well as saying the project is not happening in the near future.

In the interview Williams exaggerates the development issues, referring to them as hurdles, and claiming that the hurdles are larger than on other mega-projects either under development or under consideration in the province. The other projects are all private sector ones.

The development issues aren't larger.

It all boils down to markets for the power and financing to make it happen.

In 2005, Williams rejected a joint project with Ontario and Quebec which would have seen both provinces purchase the power and assist in the financing and construction.

Williams rejected the proposal without explanation, inserting instead a so-called "go-it-alone" option which had not be evaluated by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro or government officials before it was publicly announced. However, even in announcing his own idea of having the provincial government build project on its own, he left the door open to equity partners.

Shortly after he went to the federal government looking for a loan guarantee, still insisting the provincial government would build the Lower Churchill project - estimated to cost between $6.0 and $9.0 billion - on its own.

Despite receiving no such commitment from Stephen Harper, Williams insisted Harper promised a loan guarantee and used it as part of his political feud with his fellow Conservative first minister.

Williams has announced only two potential customers for Lower Churchill power. The State of Rhode Island and Nova Scotia's Emera have signed separate memoranda of understanding committing to explore the possibility of purchasing Lower Churchill power.

Beyond that, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has had no serious discussions with potential external customers for the project's estimated 2800 megawatts. Even the plan to sell power to eastern Newfoundland - covering at least $2.0 billion of the total project cost - is contingent on the project going forward. That idea, floated by natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale just before last fall's provincial election seemed to confuse the radio host interviewing her at the time since she insisted the plan wouldn't increase electrical power rates on the Avalon peninsula.

The Lower Churchill project figured prominently in several campaign announcements both during last year's Summer of Love pre-election spending spree and in the energy plan campaign prop.

There are some factual errors in the Peter Walsh story. The Wells administration came close to a deal on the Lower Churchill in the early 1990s, however political issues at the time and changed economic circumstances scuttled the negotiations.

Brian Tobin used development on Churchill River as the start of a re-election campaign he started in 1998. Ultimately none of his promised development occurred.

Roger Grimes had a tentative deal to develop the Lower Churchill but it was scuttled by political opposition within his own caucus and cabinet, heightened by the dramatic resignation of Hydro chairman and Williams associate Dean Macdonald from the Hydro board.

Walsh also repeats a claim that the 1969 Churchill Falls deal has produced $19 billion in revenue for Hydro Quebec versus $1.0 billion for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Those figures are not substantiated by any factual analysis. It is, however, a popular myth.

-srbp-

Letter on student personal info leak contains misleading information

A draft letter Eastern School District plans to send parents of 28,000 children affected by a leaked of personal information contains at least one major factual error and includes misleading information.

The letter states:  "The computers are password protected, thus limiting the potential for unauthorized users to access this information."

Computer security experts have already said publicly that the passwords would provide a minor, temporary inconvenience to anyone wanting to find out what was behind the password.

As well, the letter repeats the contents of the news release issued earlier in the week by referring to the relatively low risk of someone using a student's personal information to access a student's medical file.

That really isn't the threat.  The potential exists for fraud against the medical care commission based on identity theft or of fraudulent prescriptions being passed in a student's name. The possibility of accessing a particular student's medical records remains relatively low.

The letter also refers to laptops being stolen for the hardware value, yet school district officials do not know who stole the computers in this case.  They are speculating.

The letter likely won't reach parents until Monday - eight days after the theft -  and four days after the letter was posted to the Internet by the school district.  It contains no new information and merely repeats the contents of the news release.

There's no explanation as to why it took the school district officials so long to cut and paste a letter to parents that contains nothing more than what had already been sent to hundreds of thousands of people unaffected by the incident, via the release.

In a release earlier this week, the district said it notified provincial government officials and the police about the theft and would begin notifying parents - at the end of the process - now that a news release had been issued and individuals and organizations, some of them not directly affected, had already been advised of the incident.

-srbp-

I knew Marilyn Monroe

Marilyn Monroe was a friend of mine.

And you, Ms. Lohan, are no Marilyn Monroe.

-srbp-

Come by Chance refinery owner studying expansion options

Harvest Energy has engaged SNC Lavalin to review three options aimed at expanding production capacity at a 30 year old medium sour crude refinery (API 29-30, 2.2 to 2.5% sulphur) at Come by Chance, Newfoundland, according to Reuters. 

The refinery currently process 115,000 barrels per day.  The options, each reportedly costed at around US$1.0 billion, would bring the capacity to at least 155,000 barrels per day.

The project would be sanctioned by late 2008 with completion by 2010/2011.

According to Reuters, Harvest Energy:

... is studying a major expansion of processing capacity, a project to convert about 30,000 barrels a day of low-value residual fuel oil into more valuable low-sulphur diesel or gasoline, as well as installation of new equipment that would allow it to process heavier grades of crude oil.

-srbp-

The Saturday Morning Funnies

1.  nottawa, as usual, with few words but devastating impact: a bunch of short snappers on Connie patronage appoints, Ralph Nader and asymmetrical federalism.

2. labradore, as usual with a few more words, but equally devastating impact:  Danny Williams record for keeping the legislature closed.

3.  Almost immediate update:  The current provincial administration seems to have problems with two things:  keeping personal records and keeping personal records private.

This idea from google would be awesome.

Except that no one in the provincial government knows what google is.

It's a bit of a local, inside joke, but follow the links and you'll get it.

Staff working for office of the Chief Information Officer were baffled last week trying to figure out how they could possibly fit health records on every resident of the province into google, left.

-srbp-

A mixed reaction

On the one hand, it's an awesome local-boy-made good story whereby a  - well - local boy created the largest helicopter company in the world.

It's rags-to-riches.

It's all sorts of other stuff that is worth celebrating and holding out as an example of what can be done when you put your mind to it.

Then, after his death, his family sold it and made a mint.

The family contributed mightily to the community in many ways and selling the company is as sound a business decision as the family made in building it.  CHC stands as an example of what local entrepreneurs can do.

But then on the other hand, it's kinda hard not to notice that the guy heralded as a "patriot" packed up his company and relocated it out of Newfoundland and Labrador. As a result, he deprived the provincial treasury of  untold millions in corporate tax revenue, personal income taxes of the headquarters employees and likely a few other bits of miscellaneous revenue.

There was nary a boo about it from the provincial banker at the time, Loyola Sullivan.  Nor was there boo from Sullivan's boss. 

Nope.

But when a supposedly evil telephone company, not previously owned by Danny Williams, did something supposedly evil to the provincial treasury, now that was another story.  Loyola Sullivan issued a news release about the impact Aliant's income trust restructure would have on the bank accounts of a province then only three years away from "have" status.

If we banned hypocrisy, some politicians would have nothing to say.

So bravo, progeny of Craig Dobbin and the share-holders of the now publicly traded CHC, for making a mint.

So bravo Craig for building a company up from nothing but a few provincial government contracts and parlaying it into being the largest helicopter outfit on the planet, bar none.

Look down from heaven and likely wince at the irony John Crosbie was right after all:  you can tell the Newfoundlanders in Heaven;  they're the only one's complaining what a crime it is they have to be "here" instead of "home". 

Yes, the hallmark of the great "patriot".  Discuss the glories of Newfoundland while you earn a living out west.

And as a last note in this rambling Saturday morning opener, let's try some trivia:

1. What was the name of Craig Dobbin's helicopter company, the one that started it all?
2. Where did he get the inspiration for the name?
3. What's the connection between that name and the Danny Williams logo (which the provincial government still thinks is a "brand")?

There are no prizes, yet but we'll likely soon start a serious set of contests with bondpapers giveaways.

-srbp-

T'Railway inspections completed; some bridges closed and re-opened over space of one to two days

The provincial environment department has finished inspections of 125 bridges and trestles along the former railway line and a number are closed until further notice.

Closed are:

1. Glide Brook
2. Middle Brook
3. Barry Brook
4. Fischells Brook
5. Robinsons River East
6. Robinsons River West
7. Flat Bay
8. Morris Brook
9. Codroy North

Mary Anne Brook and Black Duck Brook, closed earlier in the week are being re-opened.

Morris Brook was identified by Transport Canada inspectors as "gone', meaning the bridge had collapsed or been removed.

Glide Brook was previously identified by the province as having passed inspection.

Here's a comparison of the final provincial list and the 18 bridges identified by Transport Canada:

Serial	EnvCon	Transport Canada	Comments
1.	Robinson River East	Robinson River East	Closed by EnvCon
2.	Robinson River West		Closed by EnvCon
3.	Glide Brook		Closed by EnvCon, despite previously being inspected and cleared
4.	Middle Brook	Middle Brook	Closed by EnvCon
5.	Barry Brook	Barry Brook	Closed by EnvCon
6.	Fischells Brook	Fischells Brook	Closed by EnvCon
7.	Flat Bay		Closed by EnvCon
8.	Morris Brook	Morris Brook	Closed by EnvCon Noted as "gone" by TC
9.	Codroy Branch North	Codroy Branch North	Closed by EnvCon TC concerns on pipes and abutment;  opened by EnvCon
10.		Codroy Branch South	Opened by EnvCon
11.		Little River	Opened by EnvCon
12.		Bear Cove (Old Bridge)	Opened by EnvCon
13.		Robaires River East	Closed by EnvCon, 19 Feb 08 Opened by EnvCon, 20 Feb 08
14.		Howley River	Closed by EnvCon, 19 Feb 08 Opened by EnvCon, 20 Feb 08
15.		Mary Ann Brook	Closed by EnvCon, 19 Feb 08 Opened by EnvCon, 22 Feb 08
16.		North Brook	Opened by EnvCon
17.		Robinson Brook East	Opened by EnvCon
18.		Main East	Opened by EnvCon
19.		Journis Brook	Opened by EnvCon
20.		Eel Brook -	TC- deck gone Opened by EnvCon
21.		Wolfe Brook –	TC- abutments Opened by EnvCon
22.	Black Duck Brook		Closed by EnvCon, 19 Feb 08 Opened by EnvCon, 22 Feb 08
23.		Seal Cove-Indian Pond	Demolished by EnvCon following contact by TC, based on public complaint, summer 2007
24.	Stephenville Main Gut		Closed by provincial government, November 2006

 

The provincial government has not provided a clear reconciliation between the two and the series of releases this week have been confusing.  For example, the list of closed bridges issued on 22 February lists closed bridges in two different places.  Some bridges have been announced as closed by engineering inspection only to have the same bridges cleared and re-opened a day or two later by a "further assessment".

No explanation has been offered by the provincial government of the changes in engineering assessment of some structures over the space of one or two days.

At the same time, Transport Canada's list erroneously refers to Monis Brook, when it is actually Morris Brook.  TC's list also refers to Robinsons River East and Robinsons Brook East.

The provincial environment department still has to respond to Transport Canada's letter of 11 February which requested an action plan to deal with the 18 bridges it identified as being hazardous.  A Transport Canada spokesman told CBC Radio on Thursday that for some structures a signed clearance by a structural engineer will be required to clear the bridge under the Navigable Waters Protection Act.

-srbp-

Breast cancer numbers larger than previously announced

More than 1,000 women have been re-tested as part of the breast cancer testing scandal at Eastern Health and of those, 322 have died.

That's more than double the number previously announced.

The new figures come from a high-level government committee which was appointed last year to co-ordinate the provincial government's participation in the Cameron Inquiry.

Take a look at the scrum tape, posted with CBC's story on the government announcement.

Notice that reporters asked direct, relevant questions about the number deceased patients who were tested and what their test results showed. The reporters are asking more informed questions because they are more informed, but notice that neither health minister Ross Wiseman nor Eastern health's chief operations officer could answer the question.

Well, not that they couldn't answer the question.  They just wouldn't.  They decided that sorting out the answer to the commission to answer the reporters' question on a case by case basis.

Take a look at the terms of reference for the Cameron Inquiry, though and you won't see a direction to undertake such a detailed examination. Notice that when David Cochrane puts the hard question again about 12 minutes into the 15 minute session, Wiseman shifts his answer.  Now, Wiseman says, there is a process involved and that a certain update is being provided.  Additional detail will follow.

Those are two dramatically different answers.

One is that the information and analysis is for someone else to prepare.

The second is that we'll do that work next and there will be further updates as analysis is finished.

Bear in mind that this newser wasn't intended to release hard news about the revised death numbers.

Take a look at the official government news release.  As we've seen with the workers comp infosec leak, the news release is structured to bury hard information down the page. The news release wants to draw attention to the $2.3 million being spent to create organizations and policies that were - obviously - seriously flawed or previously didn't exist.

Watch Wiseman when he gets the question about patients.  He speaks about the impact on families and the desire to make sure that no one else goes through this kind of thing.

That it never happens again.

The standard Williams administration response once a problem is exposed.

You'd never know that Wiseman and his predecessors have been involved in this entire process since it was first discovered internally, let alone since it became public.

That's the conflict of interest that sits behind this newser and every other comment Wiseman makes about breast cancer screening. The Cameron Inquiry will be examining what Wiseman and his predecessors did in this matter.  He's being very careful about what he says publicly since he will likely have to deal with questions under oath at some point.  he's also likely to be deposed in the class action lawsuit that sits out there.

He's working to polish the public perception of him and the administration in advance of the legal work to come.  It's a nice - if a bit obvious - bit of litigation public relations.

And that Mr. Thompson they keep referring to in the scrum?  He's part of the issues management campaign as well.  The former top civil servant was sent in last May to run the health department and  - at the same time - to serve as secretary to cabinet for health issues management.

It's in that job - issues management related to Cameron and the breast cancer law suit - that led to the numbers released today.  Government is trying to figure out the extent of their liability.  And to some extent or other they are managing the flow of public information to put themselves in the best possible light.

Government has been kicked around a bit and they've started to counteract that.  There are new faces at Eastern Health, an old face returned from Environment and Conservation and a reportedly closer relationship between the top levels of government and Eastern Health's comms branch.  They've started to talk out radio interviews with sweet talk, for example, or inject the concern and compassionate face you saw Wiseman offering.  They want you to see Wiseman the fixer rather than the guy who bumbled his way through the announcement of the Cameron Inquiry by sticking Fred Kasirye out there as a sacrificial offering.

And it's that history of bumbling that makes you wonder:  has actually taken on outside counsel  - litigation or crisis PR experts - to help with the damage control.

You see, they might be doing this stuff on their own, but government's never shown an ability to polish a knob with quite this degree of subtlety.  They've usually resorted to shooting off a toe or two.

-srbp-

Just say no to another cable guy

Newbie councillor Ron Ellsworth wants to replace Doc O'Keefe as deputy mayor of St. John's.

Doc will be going after the mayor's chair to replace Andy Wells.

Okay.

Doc is probably best known lately for the entirely childish game of trying to wring an apology out of Ellsworth for something that wasn't even worth mentioning.

When O'Keefe isn't chasing his tail, he's talking about stuff like gas prices - which city council can do nothing about - or flip flopping on snow clearing.

Ron Ellsworth would be a fine replacement for Doc O'Keefe. 'Round these parts, the opinion used to be different, but the longer Ellsworth been in public view, the less impressive he's turned out to be. His lame-assed excuses during the now infamous secret salary raise caper turned out to closer to real attitude to public money.

Thus far on council, the Ward 4 fellow has shown himself to be a less than stellar performer. For a guy who keeps trying to play at being a fiscally responsible councillor, he turned into an apologist for pouring millions of public money into the Wells-Coombs Memorial Money Pit, a.k.a Mile One.

Ellsworth said that as a businessman he wouldn't drop a dime on the thing since it will never turn a profit. But as a councillor he's willing to pour millions of your tax dollars and mine into the loser. CBC has it right, if by "fiscally minded" they mean that Ellsworth doesn't mind overburdening the fiscal capacity of taxpayers with wasteful spending, like Mile One.

On that count alone, Ellsworth would show himself to be a fitting replacement for Doc as deputy mayor.

That is, it would be enough if we didn't know that Ron commissioned a poll a while back testing the waters for his real goal: a run at the mayor's chair.

CBC radio asked Ron about the poll.

Ron denied knowing anything about it.

Then a couple of days later he recovered his memory and fessed up.

Interesting in hindsight that Ellsworth, who is reputedly tight with the Premier, commissioned the poll on his own political future - and then fibbed about it - around the same time that the Public Service Commission posted ads looking for new public utilities commissioners and a chief executive officer.

That's the competition that ultimately went in the dustbin.

Andy Wells was subsequently appointed to the PUB's top job, sans the conveniently halted competition.

Anyway, to make sure there is no misunderstanding:

There's just no way Ron Ellsworth deserves to be re-elected as a councillor let alone deputy mayor.

His performance over the last year or so as a councillor has shown he's just like the majority on council. They have managed to leave the city in a fiscally-sorry, undemocratic state. He's shown his willingness to continue the bad practices of the past and he hasn't made any positive changes at the same time.

Fibbing about the poll and his scripted media interviews don't help persuade that Ellsworth is anything other than packaged.

The city needs a substantive change.

Andy Wells' departure started it.

Electing Ron Ellsworth as deputy mayor - let alone the prospect of His Worship the Doc - would demolish any chance of improving city council.

-srbp-

"It's an underlying attitude"

Indeed it is, or so the minister responsible for the status of women claims with respect to comments recently by federal fish minister Loyola Hearn.

"I think we have a clear example here of a government that does not respect women," Burke told reporters.

There's no question the Harper Conservatives run against the grain of typical Canadian attitudes toward women. But Burke is a Jane-come-lately to this view, given that she, her Boss and her cabinet and caucus colleagues campaigned to put Hearn and his friends into office in the last federal general election.

Let's not forget that, please.

If Burke and her associates hadn't voted against the wishes of the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in 2006, we wouldn't be having this political sideshow right now. She wouldn't be dragging airtime being a hypocrite. She'd be explaining why a school board in St. John's still hasn't notified parents directly affected by a massive information security theft involving their childrens' personal information.

But that would be to digress...

When it comes to underlying attitudes, though, progressive-thinking people in Newfoundland and Labrador might do well to ask Burke why she so heartily endorses a reactionary, pro-natalist policy that offers women a bounty for bearing children.

It's hard to imagine a more blatantly sexist policy announced by any recent Canadian government, other than the separatist Parti Quebecois.

It's also hard to argue with Burke's comment when she said "It's an underlying attitude." Comments are usually a guide to underlying attitudes.

The only problem for Burke is that the political mud she's flung at Loyola Hearn and Stephen Harper splashes back on Burke and her own colleagues for two reasons:

First because she and her friends helped put Harper and company in office last time despite evidence at the time of what she finds so objectionable now.

and...

Second, because she and her colleagues have at least one policy that is equally deserving of the same condemnation she's using against Hearn.

Not much we can do about it, though.

On the one hand, if we outlawed hypocrisy in public comments, some politicians wouldn't have anything to say.

But then on the other hand, comments usually betray an underlying attitude.

Turns out Burke was right, after all.

-srbp-

Info on 28,000 school children stolen from school board

This story takes on a whole different character when one of the children involved is yours.

Well, likely yours since four days after the theft, the school authorities have still not notified parents.

It takes on a whole different character when the story breaks four days after the incident.

It takes on another character altogether when the school board's first priority was everything but notifying parents.

"We have notified all authorities and school administrators and have also taken immediate action with our landlord at Atlantic Place to strengthen our physical security measures.”

As of this writing - 10:30 PM, four days after the theft - there has been no contact from the school board concerning my child.  There was no notification from his school.  Our family learned of this incident from news media.

And let's get this clear:  like all other recent thefts of personal information from provincial government computers (including people hired as consultants) this is an extremely serious matter. 

The delays in public notification as well as the bland assurances that all is well are not only unacceptable, they are entirely unsubstantiated by the facts of the matter. Sure there is concern, but evidently there was no sufficient concern prior to these series of thefts for government officials to double check their various information security and physical security policies.

Eastern School District's news release stated the following:

Eastern School District has consulted with the Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioner and MCP Commission. The stolen computers are password protected, thus limiting access to information. Additionally, the Eastern School District has been advised by the MCP Commission that access to individual medical records is not at risk.

Try a google search for "Windows password recovery".  You'll get a million or more hits for tips and software to help recover passwords from software like the software most likely used by the school board to manage bus schedules. The data in this instance was not encrypted. 

Limited access to information?

In a pig's eye.

Ask the people whose medical records were exposed to the Internet as a result of lax security policies at the workers compensation agency.

There are serious questions now about the physical security at school board offices since they obviously failed.

Since neither the school board officials nor police know who stole the laptops, they have no basis on which to provide an assessment of the likely personal security threat resulting from this incident. They can make a guess, develop a theory, but until the thieves are apprehended we simply have no idea what possibly will happen to the information.

Access to individual medical records may not be a risk, but armed with a prescription pad, a child's personal data and an MCP number, a druggie thief may be able to obtain prescriptions for a number of different drugs.

Of course, we have no way of knowing at this point what other information was on the computers since school board officials either aren't sure or they haven't disclosed it.

-srbp-

The answer is simple: it's polling time

“Why are they doing this? I think the answer is simple. Voting time is here again. And if that’s the case, let’s be careful where we mark our X.”

Employment minister Shawn Skinner, speaking to the St. John's Board of Trade Luncheon

20 Feb 2008

Since last weekend, Danny Williams and his cabinet ministers have been hammering away relentlessly at the federal government generally and federal regional minister Loyola Hearn in particular.

There has been no shortage of blatant hypocrisy, as in the Premier criticizing the practice of announcing announcements previously announced.

There has also been no shortage of the truly bizarre, such as the minister responsible for the status women chastising Hearn for a comment she never heard herself but received second or third hand.  Attacking anyone based on speculation is never an acceptable practice. It is even more reprehensible when the minister responsible for the status of women is part of a cabinet which has, as a matter of policy, reduced women to the status of brood mares.  There's a bootie call of $1000 to every women who bears a live child in this province, the whole policy based on the claim by the Premier that "we can't be a die-ing race."  [Edit;  run-on sentence]

Sexist?

You betcha.

A sign of a systemic set of attitudes about women and ethnicity that need to be stamped out? 

You tell me.

Shawn Skinner's comments noted above are especially worthy of note since they come from a fellow who not so long ago was talking about the need for co-operation with the feds, despite whatever political feuds were going on.  He was soundly and severely chastised for that, apparently and made to issue a humiliating public apology for what amounts to speaking simple truth to power.

They are also noteworthy because Skinner is himself part of an exercise that is not far removed from what he accuses Hearn of doing.

Right off the bat, let's confirm that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are smart enough to know a federal election is coming and that politicians are announcing money hither and yon as part of the run up to open campaigning.

They don't need Danny Williams and Shawn Skinner to point this out since, just last summer, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador were treated to Skinner and Williams doing exactly that.  Indeed they did so much of it that the pair, along with their cabinet colleagues are now faced with a set of public expectations that Williams, Skinner and the rest are now busily trying to tamp down.

At the same time, they are part of cabinet which is facing an ongoing series of bad news. 

-  Security leaks in the computer management system they built by recreating the Moores-era computer services agency renowned for its lack of service and efficiency. 

-  A public inquiry into breast cancer screening and the seemingly endless stream of own-goals being scored by officials despite (as a result of?) reputedly very high level political interventions on how to handle things. 

-  Scores of bridges and trestles in varying states of disrepair in a department whose minister admits that the department doesn't carry out regular inspections of them, a minister who also says she was surprised to learn of the problems despite the fact that her officials were aware of the problems as long ago as last summer.

-  An agreement to develop the Hebron offshore project which, despite the pre-election hype given to it last summer, seems to be unduly delayed for unspecified reasons.

There are other issues both local and province-wide to add to the whole mess.

So with all that, the one thing - the only thing - provincial cabinet ministers seem able to do is take swipes at Hearn.

Why are they doing this, you may ask mirroring Shawn Skinner?

The answer is simple;  it is polling season. 

Corporate Research Associates started in the field late last week, oddly at the same time that the slaps at Hearn started.

The current administration, which has always been unduly sensitive to fluctuations of polling, has nothing else to lay in front of the public.  Either that or their comms apparatus is overwhelmed with the string of problems that they have no time to devote to the usual, intense quarterly knob shining.

Turd polishing  - regarded as a useless activity equal to knob shining among PR professionals - is apparently taking priority.

Instead, the poll goosing crowd have taken to the only tool in their arsenal that might counteract the onslaught of "bad" news:  the attack on a foreign demon or a traitor.  They are hoping people will be distracted for a couple of weeks, that the news media will carry some suitable stories and maybe people will be feeling just a wee bit positively inclined towards the government when the CRA pollsters call.

There are public spending announcements - like road work all over the place - to supplement the effort but the core of the provincial government effort seems to be the distraction of poking at Hearn.

We'll know if it worked in a couple of weeks when CRA releases it's results.

But in the meantime, Skinner and his colleagues need not fear.  Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who historically vote anybody but Conservative in federal elections, don't need to be reminded to make their voting choices carefully.

And they don't need to be warned against politicians who come bearing gifts to court their support.

They don't need to be warned against that kind of cynical effort at vote manipulation.

They have had more than enough experience with it over the past four years from provincial politicians.

-srbp-

On the one hand. On the other hand.

A St. John's couple is struggling to find home care at an affordable price.

CBC broke the story, one that appears to be typical of other retired people:

An elderly St. John's couple says they could be forced into bankruptcy to get the home care they need.

Pensioner Patrick Connors, 78, and his wife of 55 years, Shirley, live on a combined monthly income of just $2,100.

But Connors said they would have to give up more than half of that — and go into debt — to qualify for government-managed home care.

Health minister Ross Wiseman acknowledged government has been aware of the problems with what he termed the "financial tool" for at least two years.

Wiseman, though, did not say he expected the policy to be changed, but said an announcement could be made later this year.

Until then, he said the Connors will have to work with Eastern Health officials to try to meet their home care needs.

So that's the one hand.

Hmmm.

Wiseman's boss told reporters last week in Corner Brook:

“People need to understand government cannot write a cheque for everything,” said Williams. “We can’t be all things to all people.”

“On the other hand, even in poor times, we have tried to do the best we could for people who were, for lack of a better term, in poorer positions.”

Uh huh.

How exactly are we supposed to reconcile those two positions?

Well, on the one hand...

But, on the other hand...

Bet this elderly gentleman and his wife don't feel like he's been getting a hand at all.

A finger maybe, but certainly not the whole hand.

-srbp-

Curiouser bridge stuff

Two of the T'Railway bridges announced yesterday as being closed have been opened after what the provincial government describes as "a further engineering assessment".

Didn't engineers do an on-site inspection the first time?

Here's what the provincial environment ministry said just 24 hours ago:

Deer Lake east to Gaff Topsails (13 structures)
All 13 structures have been inspected.  Eleven have been determined safe and are re-opened to the public.  Howley River and Mary Anne Brook were two of the 14 structures identified by Transport Canada. Engineers have determined they are to remain closed. [bold added]

Deer Lake west to Stephenville (16 structures)
All 16 structures have been inspected. Fourteen have been determined safe and are re-opened to the public. Robaires Brook was one of the 14 structures identified by Transport Canada and engineers have determined it is to remain closed. In addition, engineers have determined that the trestle at Black Duck Brook will remain closed.

Today, we get this:

Howley River and Robaires Brook have been determined safe, following a further engineering assessment, and are re-opened to the public.

Interestingly, these two bridges were identified by Transport Canada as being of concern.

So engineers determined the first time that the bridges would be closed. 

Why did they change their minds?

-srbp-

Announcing old government money, the provincial version

Provincial cabinet ministers apparently didn't like Loyola Hearn's announcement on 16 February of $1.5 million in ACOA money for redecking and other safety work on the T'Railway bridges.

Some have even gone so far as to suggest it was part of a federal plot.

Pish posh.

The provincial government announced its share of that same three way agreement on Monday, February 18. The provincial cash, like the federal cash, was committed in the budget from 2007. Neither announced it by agreement with the T'Railways council;  they were holding off to have a major event later this spring.  That story is in the Wednesday Telegram, although it isn't available online.

But if the provincial government felt a little off about Hearn's announcement they could have easily dealt with it in another way, rather than whine about Hearn's little publicity coup.  After all, tourism czar Clyde Jackman - himself a former environment and conversation minister  - was the lead provincial minister at the same convention Hearn attended.  Maybe he missed the reminder in his briefing note.

And it's not like this T'Railways bridge issue is new, either.

As the Telegram reported on Saturday, Transport Canada received complaints last summer about a bridge at Indian Pond in Seal Cove, Conception Bay.  They inspected and asked provincial officials to take action to repair or remove. 

The provincial government opted to remove the bridge.

Federal officials then began an inspection of 109 other sites in the province to determine which T'railways structures, if any, fell under the provisions of the Navigable Waters Act.  Of the 109, they found 42 that met the legislation's requirements.  Of those 42, 14 were of sufficient concern that the feds asked for a remediation plan.  They also noted four other specific structures about which their inspectors had some concern.

One of the bridges - at Morris Brook, erroneously called Monis Brook in one document  - had collapsed entirely. It was reported by Transport Canada as "gone".

-srbp-

The 18 + bridges/trestles

Update:  For a complete picture, cross-reference the list in this post with the bridges mentioned in the provincial government's Tuesday release.  You will see several discrepancies noted in an earlier Bond Papers post:

1.  Of the 18 bridges originally identified by Transport Canada

-  three have failed provincial government safety inspections (Howley River, Mary Ann(e) Brook and Robaires River East); and,

-  two have passed (Eel Brook appears to have had its decking replaced;  Stephenville Main East was passed but there is no indication of what TC originally found).

2.  The remainder have not yet been inspected.

3.  The provincial government Tuesday news release makes at least two mistakes:

-  It consistently, incorrectly refers to 14 bridges from Transport Canada when in fact there were 18 named specifically.  The release actually identifies 17 bridges as having been mentioned by TC.

-  It includes main Brook as a bridge mentioned by TC.  Main Brook is not on the 11 Feb Transport Canada list.

4.  Provincial inspections have found one additional problem bridge (Black Duck Brook).

5.  One bridge on the TC list is identified as "gone" meaning it doesn't exist.  The provincial release makes no notice of this.  It also does not explain why the T'Railways website lists 132 bridges and trestles while the department's news release refers to only 125.

Update, update:  The Telegram carried a list of the 14 bridges in its story on Saturday, 16 February.  When a link turns up, we'll post it.  Bond Papers obtained its information from another source.

Original post continues:

Bond Papers has obtained a list of the 18 bridges and trestles identified in a letter from Transport Canada to the provincial government as posing a hazard to the public.

Transport Canada officials noted that the list of bridges on non-navigable waters was not considered definitive. They referred to a significant number of structures inspected being in advanced state of disrepair. They also stated that they had not conducted a detailed structural analysis of the bridges and trestles.

Altogether, officials of the navigable waters protection program inspected 109 structures to determine which fell under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. They found 42 in total fell under the Act.

Transport Canada identified 18 which showed structural problems and requested the provincial environment department prepare a plan to repair or remove the structures as they posed a public hazard. Fourteen fell under the NWPA while four were not. The Monis Brook bridge is identified by Transport Canada as "gone".

The environment department closed all 132 bridges and trestles on the T'Railway entirely on its own initiative on February 14 and began its own program of inspections.

It is unclear from provincial government statements if all 132 bridges and trestles are being subjected to a detailed structural analysis or if that work is being confined to the 18 specified by Transport Canada.

The 18 bridges and trestles are:

1. Robinson River East
2. Middle Brook
3. Little River
4. Barry Brook
5. Bear Cove (Old Bridge)
6. Robaires River East
7. Codroy Branch South
8. Howley River
9. Mary Ann Brook
10. North Brook
11. Robinson Brook East
12. Main East
13. Fishells River
14. Journis Brook
15. Eel Brook - deck gone
16. Wolfe Brook – Abutments
17. Codroy Branch North – Multiple pipes abutment
18. Monis Brook – gone

A news release issued late Tuesday by environment minister Charlene Johnson and tourism minister Clyde Jackman (a former environment minister) erroneously refers to 14 bridges identified by Transport Canada as posing public safety issues.

The provincial government release indicates that Eel Brook has been cleared by provincial inspectors, however it is interesting to note that the Transport Canada inspection only noted the absence of decking for this structure. An ongoing decking project by the T'railways Council may have dealt with that issue after the federal inspection was completed.

The provincial government has closed Howley River, Mary Ann(e) Brook and Robaires River East, thereby confirming the Transport Canada engineers' assessment. As well, the province has closed Black Duck Brook bridge.

There is a discrepancy between the Transport Canada list and the provincial government's new release. The release states:

The trestles at Stephenville Main East and Main Brook were two of the structures identified by Transport Canada; however, engineers have determined them safe and they are re-opened to the public.

Main East is identified as structure number 12 in the list above. There is no mention at all of Main Brook in Transport Canada's February 11 correspondence.

-srbp-

Provgov inspectors keep 4 bridges closed; information in gov release incomplete

While the T'Railway website identifies 132 old bridges and trestles as comprising the linear park, a news release from the provincial environment and conservation department late Tuesday refers to only 125.

Of the 82 inspections reported as completed by provincial government engineers, 78 have been re-opened while four remain closed.

It is unclear from the provincial government news release if these four are part of the 18 that Transport Canada identified as being of concern or if they are new.  The release refers to 14 structures identified by Transport Canada but the total numbers mentioned in individual sections of the release and attributed to Transport Canada add up to 17.

At this time, bridges/trestles at Howley River, Mary Anne Brook, Robaires Brook (identified by Transport Canada) and Black Duck Brook remain closed.  Black Duck Brook was apparently not identified by Transport Canada.  Three of the bridges identified by Transport Canada have been cleared by the provincial inspections.

According to the news release 43 inspections have not been completed and those bridges/trestles remain closed.

-srbp-