Risky business: prov gov to increase public debt to pay for Hebron

Serial	Item	Description	Amount	Funding source
1.	Equity interest		$110 million	Paid from FY 2007 general revenue
2.	Capital  Expenditure	4.9% X $6.0 billion	$294 million	Increased public debt
3.	Operating Expenditure	4.9% X $10 billion	$490 million	Likely increased public debt,  at least until sometime after first oil
4.	Liability guarantee	Construction phase only	$250 million	Increased public debt?
5.	Sub-total	Sum 1 - 4	$1.193 billion
6.	Liability	Operational phase	Unknown	Increased public debt

 

Notes (Information on news release, plus media coverage):

• Capital expenditure (capex: construction phase costs) to be undertaken by subsidiary of Ener Corp - called OilCo in government materials - through borrowing guaranteed by public treasury.
• Actual capex is currently unknown, but estimated to be between $4.0 and $6.0 billion.
• The government backgrounder makes no mention of operations expenditures (opex: post first oil operating costs). Presumably these costs will be met through increased public debt.  (Government Ener Corp borrowing, with government guarantee.)
• Original equity interest purchased out of government general revenue. The most likely source of cash to meet all other costs is government-backed borrowing.
• Construction to begin "as early as" 2012 (Premier's remarks to media).  This is a minimum, not a maximum.  Construction may be delayed for currently unknown reasons.  Company representatives discussed firming up capex estimates over next few years.
• The term liability guarantee is unusual in the context of referring to a maximum cost of $250 million. It is unclear what this means. It does not necessarily mean that somehow OilCo and the provincial government have a limited liaibility for costs. If that was the case, then the backgrounder would have stated that the liability was limited to a maximum of $250 million.  This appears to be less an issue of liability than a promise that liability will be assumed/accepted by government, along with some associated fee, deposit or other sum that signifies the guarantee or a fee for providing the guarantee (Oilco to prov gov). 
• Whatever it is, the figure of $250 million is not the only amount associated with liability. The government backgrounder gives very little discussion of liability at all. For example, there is no discussion of liability exposure during the operational phase, for example.

-srbp- 

Buy this book. Feel good. Eat well. Help people.

Recipes of the Labrador

"It's a cookbook in aid of the Children's Wish Foundation of Canada put together by our volunteers in L'anse Au Loup. The cookbook is just $5.00 available at our office and includes many great recipes. The cost of postage and handling is $10.00 if you would like one mailed to you.

The cookbook is in memory of Paula Normore who passed away after a snowmobile accident at age 14."

"Our offices" would be the Children's Wish Foundation, Newfoundland and Labrador.

-srbp-

Hebron announcement notes

1.  ExxonMobil drove the bus.

Well, when it comes to project timings the big player called the shots.

The companies were ready to rumble in 2006 but the disagreement put this project firmly in the pile for sometime after 2012. 

ExxonMobil never wavered from that lead-time.

They confirmed it as recently as March.

2.  How much is that doggie in the window? 

Well, how much is a pig in a poke?

The Telegram and the Mighty Ceeb fell all over themselves today with the supposed cash value of the Hebron deal at $28 billion.  Aside:  Could David Cochrane have been any more excited today hosting "On the Go"? Second aside:  Yes, the Telly's been known to endorse big deals before.

That number is bogus, though, just as Cochrane and all the others well know since - like every other cash comparison figure and any cash valuation of this project (aside from construction costs) - the numbers are pulled from the nearest bodily orifice.

The $28 billion figure tossed around today assumes an average price of crude oil between 2018 (first oil) and 2043 (project termination) of US$112 or so per barrel.  Not even the oil companies are investing based on those sorts of airy-fairy projections.  

The $20 billion figure also tossed around on Wednesday used an assumed price of oil of US$87 over the same time period.

Wade Locke projected $10 billion over the same time span using an assumed price of US$50 a barrel.  And before anyone steps in to note the words super-royalty, let us all be reminded that the super-royalty applies only when oil remains above US$50 a barrel for West Texas Intermediate.

Do the math yourself. 

What is the average price of oil over the past 25 years?

What's been the usual price of oil over that time period, as opposed to the average price?

Now take another look at the Hebron projections.

Put it another way:  when the Hibernia deal was signed in September 1990, oil prices were as low as they could have been foreseen and were foreseen.  Within two years oil was at US$8 a barrel.  Only a few years earlier, it had been forecast to attain and stay above US$100 a barrel.

The project was assumed to be a total loser when it was started;  that is, the government never expected the project to hit payout.  As it is, Hibernia will generate in excess of $14 billion in provincial government revenues over its entire life span.  The government figures today deliberately low-balled Hibernia, Terra Nova and White Rose in order to hype the Hebron stock.

The project is going ahead;  that's good.  What it's worth to the provincial treasury will only be known at some distant point in the future.

3.  A Hebron exclusive they won't discuss.

Hebron is first oil project offshore Newfoundland and Labrador that will start construction four years after a development agreement was reached with the provincial government.

Hibernia, Terra Nova and White Rose all started construction within months of the signing.

4.  So how much work will be done in the province?

Safest bet is the bare minimum committed.

The provincial government negotiating team seems to have operated on the assumption that it didn't need to lock down all possible local construction  - an earlier political commitment - since the NLRC refinery and two other projects would be sucking up the labour pool at the same time.

By the time that assumption was proven to be pretty stunned, it was too late.

The gravity base and its associated piping will be done here, along with a few other bits of simple welding like the helideck, the lifeboat rigging and the flare boom.

By the time this project starts construction - some time after 2012 - there may well be a deepening of the current global labour shortage.  Any local construction workers currently in Alberta will be even more wedded to that economy than they are now making it unlikely the "homing pigeons" will be homing. Four years from now, the labour market locally will be smaller and older than it currently is.

Add it all together and you can see that it's highly likely some shipyard in Mississippi or Korea will be slamming the topsides together for Hebron.

5.  And what about the royalty regime?

Bond Papers already went through it, in spades:

•  The preliminary assessment
•  The second look (it didn't get better)
•  The lower royalty regime
• Wider implications  (As it turns out, the provincial government will be spending cash until 2018.  That's something that never occurred on a project before.  Oil production from the other projects will decline over the next decade, despite expansion of existing fields.  That means lower government revenues. At the same time, an aging population will cause increased pressure on health care spending. The whole thing makes for a difficult strategic mix, one made all the more problematic considering that revenues are tied to the price of oil which turn out to be much lower in the 2020s and 2030s than the assumptions used as the basis for this agreement)

-srbp-

"counter-spinning negativity"

Now, by any logical process, in order for there to be counter-spin, there has to be spin first.

This is not a chicken and egg thing;  very simply put, nothing can be counteracted unless it exists.

And you will likely recall that spin is another word for hype, bullshit and lies.

So if we take this phrase  - uttered by the Premier back in April - based on the meaning of the words, counter-spin would be a positive action in that it is intended to dispel hype, bullshit, lies, half-truths and other forms of misrepresentation and even outright deception contained in whatever spin existed in the first place.

Yet the positive action of dispelling falsehood is somehow negative?

What an odd notion.

And what a truly queer idea:  that a government so overwhelmingly popular might be somehow deflected from its mighty accomplishments by concerns for what must surely be  - given the almighty popularity of the government  - entirely without any impact at all.

-srbp-

Groundwork: The Hebron MOU deconstructed, as announced

To help in assessing the final Hebron deal, here are some notes drafted for a Bond Papers post last year:

Bottom line: Bond Papers said it about 18 months ago, and overall it remains true - a deal is good.

Both sides wanted it. The provincial government needed the deal, like they needed it 18 months ago. There are some implications of the delay as described below.

Even the memorandum of understanding takes a huge political monkey off Danny Williams' back.

The oil companies get to develop more oil than initially planned for about the same cost as originally proposed.

Much work needs to be done, especially on the local benefits package. The provincial government backgrounder contains conditional language that needs to be sorted out in the detailed negotiations.

As Williams said of Voisey's Bay, the detailed agreement are where the companies can find loopholes, escape hatches and off- ramps to avoid delivering on what they appear to have agreed to deliver.

Let's take a look at some specific issues.

1. Superlative language. Characteristically, the Premier and his energy minister used superlatives to praise their own memorandum of understanding.

Words like "tremendous", "historic" and "off the chart" were flowing easier than API 70 oil.

As a general rule, use of over-the-top language is an indicator of an insecurity in the announcement itself or an effort to offset some deficiencies. Hyperbole is a Danny Williams trademark.

2. What Danny originally asked for

Two of the three, depending on which April one considers.

- April 2005. [ram audio file] Better royalties, secondary processing i.e. a refinery, and better research and development funding.

- April 2006. Super-royalties, an "equity" stake, and better local benefits.

3. Equity. Total estimated cost: $360 to $660 million. 4.9%, costing $110 million plus an estimated $250 million of construction costs. The Premier also predicted an additional set of costs of some $2.0 to $6.0 billion over the 25 year life of the project; that would translate into additional costs from the equity position of $300 million.

Those costs must be recovered before the equity position yields any cash as net benefit to the provincial treasury.

Beyond that the province's energy company - that still exists only on paper - now holds a series of undisclosed risks and liabilities.

4. Larger field. The earlier negotiations involved only the Hebron field and its approximately 500 million barrels of heavy, sour crude. This project adds about 200 million barrels of light sweet crude in the Ben Nevis structure.

Ordinarily, this would add additional cash value to the project, but as noted below, the total projected revenue is not significantly better than that estimated for the earlier negotiation.

5. Tier 3 Royalties. Super-royalties that deliver a percentage based on oil above a certain dollar price? Not exactly.

What turned up in the news conference looks more like the Hibernia royalty regime.

From the official backgrounder:

The new super royalty for the province is an additional 6.5 per cent of net revenue at higher oil prices (>US$50 WTI/bbl) after net royalty payout;

From the Hibernia royalty regime:

The Net Royalty consists of a two tier profit sensitive royalty which becomes effective when Net Royalty Payout occurs.

• Tier 1

The Tier 1 Net Royalty is 30% of Net Revenue after a Return Allowance of 15% is achieved. Basic Royalty is a credit against this royalty. Therefore, the interest holders pay the higher of Basic Royalty or Tier 1 Net Royalty.

• Tier 2

The Tier 2 Net Royalty is 12.5% of Net Revenue after a Return Allowance of 18% plus the CPI is achieved. The Tier 2 Net Royalty is in addition to any other royalties payable.

Net royalty payout is "point in time when the costs related to a particular project are recovered plus a specified return allowance on those costs." A similar concept exists in the province's basic offshore royalty regime.

In all likelihood, the triggers to attain Tier Three royalties are such that they will not be achieved on Hebron until after other royalties have been triggered. There is no way to be certain since the language in the backgrounder is too vague to determine how the new Tier Three royalty relates to the rest of the royalty regime used for the Hebron negotiation.

One thing is certain: Tier Three royalties are only available after the project achieves simple payout. That means the possibility of collecting the additional revenue is contingent on the price of oil being above US$50 per barrel from the mid 2020s onward.

6. Other royalty regime changes. The provincial government's so-called generic royalty regime for offshore projects was developed in 1996. It clearly establishes the minimum royalty to be paid to the provincial government is 1% of gross revenue and increases progressively to 7.5% until simple payout occurs.

The backgrounder for the Hebron MOU refers to a change to royalty regime to "[p]rovide downside royalty protection by keeping the basic royalty rate at one per cent of gross revenue until project costs are recovered (i.e. simple payout)."

There is nothing in the provincial documentation to indicate why it would be necessary to introduce this new concept except that the progressive increase in the basic royalty rate is being eliminated.

As such, provincial government royalties will be a mere 1% until such time as the project achieves simple payout.

7. Revenues. The news release today provide a revenue estimate for the province of $16 billion over the 25 year lifespan of the Hebron project.

On the face of it, this figure appears to be nothing more than an adjustment to figures used by MUN economist Dr. Wade Locke that projected up to $10 billion, based on an assumed oil price of US$50 per barrel. Bond Papers noted this possibility in a pre-announcement post.

However, Locke did not anticipate a change to the basic royalty regime that reduces royalties to 1% during the entire pre-payout period.

There is also no indication from the Premier on the revenue flow anticipated from the equity position, thus, with the new lower royalty regime, this $16 billion is highly suspicious.

8. Research and Development. The commitment for $120 million over the 25 year lifespan of the project appears to be below the current standard set by the offshore regulatory board.

9. Timelines. The project may begin construction in 2010. This assumes that the complex negotiations for the development agreement are concluded successfully and quickly and that the development application to the offshore board is approved expeditiously.

-srbp-

When the last seam is welded, Part Deux

Here's another project that has proven more valuable in the hype than in the actual delivery of it, completed.

As with the second refinery and the natural gas terminal, Lower Churchill is something to believe only when the last seam on the last penstock is finished and the juice is actually flowing.

By the way, given that CRA is asking about "good corporate citizens" in its regional quarterly omnibus, this sort of story is well timed, dontcha think?  [Hint:  CRA polls in Nova Scotia at the same time as they poll in NL]

-srbp-

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

As we told you some time ago, the Hebron agreement was signed sometime last month but - for some completely inexplicable reason - the public announcement was postponed.

The mighty Ceeb is reporting it as if the deal itself may be signed this week and likely that's what they've been told via someone's clicking thumbs. Since the memorandum of understanding expires this week, having a deal at the last minute sounds more dramatic. It looks like it went right down to the wire wrestling every little concession and gain, when, truthfully, most of the time was spent with lawyers arguing about whether the sentence needed a comma or a semi-colon.

All pretty cut and dried since the deal in broad outline - jobs locally pouring concrete but not much else in local benefits - was done in the memorandum of understanding. Other fabrication work done locally will be minimal, most likely, if the MOU was any indication. Think not just Hibernia Light, but Terra Nova Light, but time will tell if the old crystal ball at Bond is right.

Anyways, beyond the need to ramp up the drama around the hebron thingy to try and draw some attention away from its potential shortcomings (what will the price of oil be in 2025, anyway, so we know if extra royalties cut in?) the real value of the Hebron thingy is its use in old-fashioned politics:

- There are two by-elections that clue up next week. yes, formal polling day is the 27th but we already know voting has been going on their under the farcical elections set-up in this province since before there were even candidates.

- Corporate Research Associates is in the field doing its quarterly survey work. Most of the questions are standard, but there are a bunch of interesting ones. Like most pressing problem facing Atlantic Canadians and which companies are the best corporate citizens. No sign of any obvious provincial government questions, at least in the versions reported to your humble e-scribbler.

Then again, in some quarters, CRA actually goes to the field with two separate polls. The common questions - the three CRA provincial politics ones reported in the media - are common to both. When CRA reports a sample of 800 some odd, that's a double poll month with the three public question results actually being glued together from two surveys rather than being reported as separate results.

Nothing says federal election like a politican handing out public cash.

Nothing says provincial politics like a bit of poll goosing and old-fashioned pork announcements.

Quick as that update: The Great Oracle of the Valley - a.k.a voice of he cabinet minister - has an online story that could have been clicked out by thumbs from the Hill. It contains all the elements: Announcement tomorrow. Deal reviewed by cabinet today (not mentioning the deal was done weeks ago). MOU expires on Thursday.

Ah, the drama of it all.

Ah for the old days when The Boss would drive into the parking lot on his way to The Hill and roll down the window so someone from the Oracle newsroom could stick a microphone through to record the latest utterances.

Here's a thought: if cabinet hasn't seen the deal at all until today, then what happens if one of them has a serious objection on a matter of substance, policy and/or principle?

-srbp-

Only sheer political genius...

would think of using Kevin O'Brien as the stunt dummy for a demonstration of "fall protection" gear.

Joe Clarke almost impaling himself on a bayonet while inspecting troops. 

Jean Chretien in a funny helmet.

Kevin O'Brien taking a header off a house in St. Thomas Line.

Freakin' brilliant.

-srbp-

The New Idiot Box

A few days ago, your humble e-scribbler was wandering through a second-hand book store he used to frequent in Kingston 20-odd years ago.

The city is roughly the size of St. John's but in the 1980s, the difference between the two cities could not have been more stark at least when it came to the number of book stores.  There used to be a half dozen new book stores and almost as many second-hand used book places along Princess Street, in the city's main shopping district downtown.

Today, it's down to an Indigo outlet with its trendiness, a locally-owned new-book store,  and another used store catering to a "higher-end" clientele. Down toward the bottom of the street, between Ben and Jerry's and a health food store, there's this tee shirt, a pair of jeans and comfortable sandals kinda place.

It's getting harder every year to stay open, according to the owner, as he filled out the receipt for a purchase. That comment started a chat about the changing reading habits of Kingstonians. The town is home to Queen's and the Royal Military College, giving the town a distinctly academic flavour.  The downtown shopping district, where all those bookstores used to be is in easy walking distance of the Queen's student ghetto housing and the cadets from RMC.

When comedy is trusted as news

From nyt.com, a profile of Jon Stewart and The Daily Show:

When Americans were asked in a 2007 poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press to name the journalist they most admired, Mr. Stewart, the fake news anchor, came in at No. 4, tied with the real news anchors Brian Williams and Tom Brokaw of NBC, Dan Rather of CBS and Anderson Cooper of CNN. And a study this year from the center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism concluded that “ ‘The Daily Show’ is clearly impacting American dialogue” and “getting people to think critically about the public square.”

-srbp-

Universal Translator revealed

When it comes to federal politics, reporters and other observers sometimes  misunderstand the words the Premier uses.

It's really very simple. 

Whenever he says "Newfoundland and Labrador" or "we", he means "Danny Williams".

That's it.

The confusion comes from the fact that most people do not consider the entire province, all its people and their collective interest to be the same thing nor do they believe it is embodied in one person.

By contrast, he does. 

As in words after the 2007 general election to the effect that "I believe in my heart and soul that I embody the heart and soul of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians."

It was a real "l'etat? C'est moi!" kinda moment.

So take a quote like this one:

"From a Green Shift perspective, as well, Newfoundland and Labrador is just basically waiting to see where all the cards are going to fall here."

On the face of it, this is a pretty ludicrous statement given that in the same scrum, the Premier said that "[t]his election is not going to be decided strictly on Green Shift."

He's right on that point.

The election isn't going to be decided on one issue.

And the Green Shift was never intended to be the silver bullet of the next federal election.

The Green Shift is a niche policy designed to move a certain type of voter. It won't appeal to everyone, but it will appeal to enough to make a difference here and there.  Coupled with other similar niche ideas, it could tip enough ridings to propel the Liberals to a minority or majority government.

The whole concept is taken from the Conservative strategy in 2005/06.

That's why the Connies fear it so much they are  apoplectic trying to make the Green Shift some vision of the apocalypse.

But if you go back and apply the universal translator to that quote, you can see that, in fact, Danny Williams is waiting to see how the field shapes up on policies before he endorses one party or any party.

Now the quote makes perfect sense.

That's what the Premier did in 2004.  He waited to see how the offers looked and he went with the one he liked.

He did it again in 2005/06, endorsing Stephen Harper and the Conservatives even though the Layton New Democrats said yes to every single thing the Premier asked for in his Letter to Santa 2005.

But here's the thing:  in both federal elections, the Premier's impact on voters even in Newfoundland and Labrador produced a marginal effect.

In 2004, he made it tough for the local volunteers to turn out for the Conservative brethren.  They lacked party workers, but the Conservatives who won, did so in usual Conservative seats.

Individual voters still turned out and voted federally for their own choice in a secret ballot, in many cases, despite what their provincial vote may have looked like or what the Premier wanted. 

In 2005/06, it became safe for provincial Tories not only to work on Connie campaigns but to run for them as well.

But don't forget one crucial point:  the resulting seat count was exactly the same as in 2004. There were changes in voter turn-out but the overall impact of the Premier's position and intervention was marginal at best.

So while Danny Williams may like to answer reporters questions about the next federal election, it's doubtful the federal Conservatives are taking him too seriously.  Aside from the impact in his own province, Danny Williams just doesn't travel well.  Sure there are people who crop up here and there saying lovely things about him, but - as with every other provincial premier since the dawn of time - he just doesn't carry much beyond his own province. 

That's because  - fundamentally - Danny Williams is not identified as speaking on national issues from a national perspective.  He's not even really speaking on a plane that connects with voters in Dauphin or Deseronto.

He's a niche player, with a niche impact. 

Like a Green Shift.

The only difference among the federal parties is that - rightly or wrongly - the federal Conservatives have taken the measure of the niche impact based on two kicks at the can in the recent past. 

The New Democrats seem to have missed the lessons.  So too have some of the local Liberals  - candidates and back roomers alike - who want to court Danny in the  belief his blessing will be all that is needed to change their fortunes.

But the Connies? 

They've decided the impact isn't enough to worry about, either locally or nationally.  To get the point, think about that famous Stephen Harper quote from October 2006 in Gander. 

You know.

The one that came only from the Premier himself.  Something like "We don't need Newfoundland and Labrador."

Apply the Universal Translator.

Now you understand why DW is so pissed.

-srbp-

An old Connie ploy

Create a dysfunctional situation where one didn't have to exist and then crusade to fix it.

It's a bit like backing a dodgy proposition which you, yourself, had previously rejected, and then crusading against the position you endorsed.

If this keeps up, Harper will pledge to change the rules on election spending so that something like the in-out scam never happens again.

Sheesh, where have we heard that one before?

-srbp-

Oil prices still on the decline

With some renewed strength in the American dollar, coupled with decreased demand, the price of crude oil for September delivery closed the week at US$111.

“The dollar is on fire again so that's causing people to re-evaluate everything,” said Phil Flynn, oil analyst at Alaron Trading Corp. in Chicago. “It means oil prices could fall dramatically. We could see prices get to double digits if this continues.”

An OPEC forecast of lower demand also put downward pressure on prices.

Newfoundland and Labrador finance department officials may not be sweating yet, but if the trend continues to the end of the year, their forecast average price of $87 might not hold up. 

Even if the provincial government skates through the current fiscal year, it may have to restrain spending over the next couple of years or - a more likely scenario - boost borrowing to fuel the spending spree.

-srbp-

Some in-out scheme highlights

While the conventional media have been fixated on the Connie's deliberate effort to undermine parliamentary committees by co-ordinating a refusal by witnesses to testify,  some details of the in-out scheme were entered by witnesses who did show up.

Here's one excerpt from the testimony of a former provincial cabinet minister.  Two other witnesses, from the campaign in random-Burin-St. Georges gave similar evidence:  money sent down from Ottawa on condition it be sent back a couple of days later. No sign that any national advertising ever appeared using the taglines of the local candidates.

Hon. Charles Hubbard: Where was the money spent?

Mr. Joe Goudie (Conservative candidate in Labrador; former provincial cabinet minister): We have no idea.

Again, I remind you and the honourable committee that I, personally, was not aware of this until after the campaign was completed and really, in any detail, not until the news report came out in April. The money was not spent by us.

    Mrs. Singleton [campaign manager]and Mr. Barnes were both.... More specifically, Mr. Barnes, my official agent, was directed by a gentleman, Mr. Hudson of the Conservative Party of Canada, to, once funds had been transferred to our account.... It was explained that 60% of that amount could then be claimed on our election return, which seemed unusual but nevertheless they were following directions, and that the amount of money transferred to our account would then have to be returned to the Conservative Party of Canada as soon as possible.

Hon. Charles Hubbard: To clarify, if you gave somebody $10,000 and wanted it back.... They could claim that $10,000 in the expense, which they didn't spend. Do you mean to tell me you'd get $6,000 back from the Government of Canada as a result?

Mr. Joe Goudie: As I understand it, that was the implication of the explanation. Yes.

Hon. Charles Hubbard: Where would that $6,000 eventually wind up?

Mr. Joe Goudie: In the campaign account, as far as I know. I know nothing other than that.

Hon. Charles Hubbard: It almost sounds, Mr. Goudie, like a very fast way of making money.

Mr. Joe Goudie: It sounds that way.

No wonder someone wanted to shift the media coverage to something other than testimony.

-srbp-

Big changes coming at Grand Falls paper mill

Changing global economic circumstances for the paper industry have been pressing on the industry in Newfoundland and Labrador for years.

The future of the AbitibiBowater mill at Grand Falls-Windsor, established in 1905, may be known as early as next week, according to CBC News.  This follows an extensive review within the newly merged paper company of all its assets.

There are a few things to bear in mind:

1. If the AbitibiBowater announcement comes next week either right before or right after the Hebron announcement it will likely be swamped by Hebron.  Stephenville wasn't a political crisis in the province because it happened out of easy camera range of the St. John's-based local media.  The story just won't register, especially if Hebron is a bright shiny object waved around to distract attention.
2. "AbitibiBowater manager Brad Pelley said that inside a year, the company has to turn the mill into an operation that's not losing money."  Now there's a quote that doesn't even come close to telling the story.  Despite whatever changes have been made at the GFW mill, surely to mercy, the mill is suddenly in better financial shape because of the heavy provincial government subsidies that flowed in the wake of the Stephenville closure.  Like $30 million of flow over two years to Corner Brook and GFW.
3. Will the provincial government be as combative and feisty about downsizing or machine closings at GFW as it has been in the past?  Here's another policy carryover from the Grimes crowd to Williams' crew: threaten legal action (like stripping all the company's timber licenses) if one of the two machines at GFW is closed, regardless of the economic costs. 

-srbp-

Serious lobster conservation projects in New Brunswick

Homarus Inc is just one example of what the Maritime Fishermen's Union is doing to improve lobster stocks in the waters around New Brunswick.

It's a non-profit collabrative effort of government, fishermen and the private sector aimed at several objectives:

1. Increase scientific knowledge surrounding lobster biology and habitat;
2. Provide an educational tool for raising awareness amongst stakeholders concerning the need for sustaining the resource, protecting the habitat and rehabilitating lobster stocks; and,
3. Introduce practical and effective approaches to enhancing lobster habitat and lobster stocks in our coastal waters.

A stand-alone corporation devoted to a single ocesan species with enormous economic value: now there's a direction the FFAW should be taking rather than clawing a paltry ten grand from the provincial government in order to have local lobster fishermen keep records of their catches.

-srbp-

And then there's the scandal at Tammany on Gower

This Telegram editorial should be enough to cause someone to intervene here - someone wake DaveDenine - or for the voters to turf out the entire crowd at City hall next time around.

Every one of them, including the newest of the noobs is implicated in the highly questionable act of firing the internal auditor.

-srbp-

So where's the in-out scam in the local headlines?

Odd, dontcha think, that the local media haven't done much with the Conservative party in-out advertising scheme during the last election?

This is a very large story with a large number of local players. For instance,

Cynthia Downey, who ran in Newfoundland, said her campaign could have made much better use of the $7,700 transferred by the party in and out of her account.

Logic would suggest the story would get some play in some of the local media, but so far it's meritted hardly a whisper.

For some unknown reason, the story has been bumped, sometimes in favour of bumpf.

-srbp-

Gas went up?

How much more evidence do we need that the petroleum products pricing office is a massive scam that must be ended?

Gasoline prices in Newfoundland and Labrador went up on Thursday.

Now gasoline sells as a commodity separately from crude, but still, there's something slightly perverse about a jump in retail prices at a time when prices for both commodities are declining across North America both on current sales and on futures.  At best, in the short term, prices are staying level, but except in very rare circumstances are they increasing in major centres.

Sure there was a jump yesterday, but the public utilities board's gas fixing scheme isn't sensitive enough to pick up a change a day before it's regular price adjustment.  Beyond that the futrues price for gasoline is about one dollar a gallon below current retail prices, even after the eight cent jump.

On top of that analysts don't expect that jump to last with the cotinued drop in American demand.

So what gives?

Essentially you have an entrenched bureaucracy which, if it does nothing else, will work hard to justify its existence. Take a look at the scheme's website and you won't see a definition of a positive public policy enefit there anywhere:  the board exists to enforce the Act that created it.  That's it.  Justifying that existence is pretty easy, but the justification only makes sense in the world of bureaucracy;  heck there's probably a buggy whip safety agency out there somewhere still enforcing its legislation.

Meanwhile, over on the political side, there isn't a single politican on the ogvernment benches will to tackle the issue.  The issue isn't important enough to merit attention by the Premier's office since, for the most part consumers haven't kicked up a fuss yet.

If it isn't being talked up on the voice of the cabinet minister, cabinet's can't hear it.

Maybe that's the key:  If people realised that the provincial government sets gasoline prices in Newfoundland and Labrador, then maybe they'd start pressing the provincial government to scrap the gasoline pricing fixing scheme.

If they started making that cry on the Great Oracle of the Valley, then just maybe there'd be some action.

Don't count on it though.  There are too many established political interests behind this scam to let it go that easily.

If publicly outcry was enough, the provincial government still wouldn't be pursuing its illegal policy on the Memorial University president, enabled by the board of regents.

-srbp-

Hunter-gatherers association reinvents lobster pot with prov gov cash

On the face of it, this looks like a great project: a bunch of provincial government cash to pay a bunch of lobster fishermen to track their catches.

"This project is an example of harvesters taking a direct role in the stewardship of the fishery and having input into the management of the resource," said the Honourable Trevor Taylor, acting Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. "As such, our government is pleased to approve funding for this initiative. This is important work because it is the most extensive attempt to date to profile lobster stocks."

Ummm.

Not exactly.

The fishermen involved in this provincial government project can't make any decisions about the lobster fishery.  They can't have any meaningful input on quotas, season or anything else.

That's because all they are going to do is write down in a notebook how many lobsters they landed (excluding the unofficial ones to be sold under the table later on), how big they were and so on.

Now while there is lots of talk about this whole thing being scientific, note that it is being run by the Fish, Food and Allied Workers Union.  That's right, the union which represents the people who will be getting the cash for making notes in a book.

There's no mention of Memorial University, the Marine Institute or any other crowd of scientists.

There's just the people who catch lobsters and their union.

Now for an example of fishermen having real control over their livelihood, take a look at the Eastport Marine Protected Area, now expanded to five sites along the northeast coast.

As for science, the whole approach in these lobster management areas is based on science.  It has been since they were established.

If the provincial fisheries department and the hunter-gatherers union really wanted to get interested in fisheries management, conservation and a scientifically based approach, they'd be working with the federal fisheries crowd. 

This provincial initiative doesn't look like anything significant.  It looks more like make-work in another guise or a political statement. 

After all, it's only $10,000.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Legacy Nature Trust already administered over half a million in federal cash on one study four years ago.

-srbp-