Reinventing the wheel and keeping it secret

According to a provincial government news release, the Premier announced something new today: the “Research & Development Corporation (RDC), a new Crown entity for improving the province’s research and development capacity.”

Problem One:  it isn’t new.

At some point in the distant past, the legislature passed the Research Council Act which created an agency to fund research and development.  The thing is old enough to be included in not only the 1990 consolidation of provincial statutes but in the 1970 one as well.

The purposes of the council, as established long ago, are to research into just about anything anyone can think of with respect to the local economy and society and to take whatever steps are necessary to support both the research and potentially the fruits of research.

Last December, the legislature passed a new bill to create a research and development council.  The new legislation isn’t in force by the way, so the announcement today was completely bogus on that front as well. 

But aside from those extra two words in the title, the new bill doesn’t do much that the old one didn’t.

Problem Two:   the research and development council act, passed in December, copies almost word for word the sections of the energy corporation bill and thereby that makes pretty well everything connected to the council exempt from the province’s open records laws based solely on the decision of the cabinet-appointed Rhodes scholar who runs the thing.

That isn’t sarcasm, incidentally.  The guy is yet another Rhodent appointed by the province’s chief Rhodes beneficiary.  

Public money – to the tune of $25 million is going in – but what happens to will remain a state secret.  Not only are the fruits of research to be hidden from the people who paid for it but the new corporation can hide just about everything related to its own operations.

The information and privacy commissioner and anyone else who would normally examine a secrecy decision by a government body are directed by this bill to uphold the corporation’s decision on keeping secrets.

The old corporation had a mandate to publish research results, incidentally, which is pretty much consistent with the idea of making ideas available so the private sector can develop them and make something out of them.  Academics publish the results of their research so their peers can either profit from it for their work or tear into it and find the flaws. 

Not so in the brave new world of the research and development council.

Everything will  be secret except for whatever trivial bits of information the people controlling this enterprise – cabinet appointees all – deign to tell the nasty little proles who are footing the bill.

The cabinet gets to appoint the chief executive officer and the staff hiring must all be approved by the minister.

But even though this new version of the research council legislation was just created last December – and the bill isn’t in force yet -  the government is already making amendments.  The government bill exempts the new entity entirely from the Corporations Act and gives cabinet the power to pick a name for the council (it went from being the Research and Development Council to a name to be chosen later). 

The tenure of board members has changed as well for some inexplicable reason. Here’s the December version of section 7(1):

7. (1) Members of the board shall be appointed for a term of 3 years but may be removed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council for cause.

Here’s the May version:

7. (1) Members of the board, whether appointed before or after this Act comes into force, shall be appointed for a term of up to 3 years but may be removed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council for cause.

Anyone want to venture what difference the change makes?

To help you out, here’s the provision of the bill under which the current members of the council were appointed (remember that the new bill isn’t in force yet):

4. (1) Members hold office for a period of 3 years from the date of their appointment.

What we have here is yet another example of policy recycling by an administration that has been surprisingly bereft of any original ideas since 2003.

On top of that we have a government which can’t seem to sort out its own legislation.  We had three versions of the energy corporation bill in each of three years and here again we have a piece of legislation that hasn’t even been proclaimed and yet is being altered already.  Both of those things suggest serious problems in the policy-making processes of government.

And if all that wasn’t bad enough, we have yet another example of a government that talks a great deal about openness, transparency and accountability but seems to do exactly the opposite.

Where is the novelty, where is the innovation in any of that?

What a way to start out what is supposedly a bold, new venture to come with some original ideas.

-srbp-

Government pollster in the field

You can tell Corporate research Associates – the provincial government pollster – is doing the quarterly omnibus.

1.  Yet another federal-provincial funding announcement.  (The second in three days)

2.  More public cash for a ski club in Labrador.

3.  Federal and provincial cash for aquaculture.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

-srbp-

Legislature to close early?

Don’t be surprised if the House of  Assembly shuts down suddenly later this week or early next week before the nurses’ job action starts.

After weeks of no activity, there’s been a sudden flurry of night sittings and extended hours that seem designed to clear off a few pieces of legislation so the House can close well before the original planned closure in mid-June.

The reason for closing early is simple:  there’s no way government could afford to have the House open with a nurses strike on the go at the same time the government’s pollster is in the field.  That’s right folks:  Corporate Research Associates is making its quarterly calls as we speak.

They can adjourn the sitting and then call it back later, if need be to send the nurses back to work suitably punished, as the Premier threatened today.  Rest assured though, the House wouldn’t be called back to vote on the bill to end a nurses strike until Don Mills’ people have stopped making their calls or have all but finished.

Never forget the extent to which provincial government pronouncements are driven at certain times of the year by the poll-goosing imperative. 

-srbp-

One thing you can count on…

If the nurses take any strike action, the provincial government will legislate them back to work with a vengeance.

Sure the Premier and finance minister have drawn a dozen lines in the sand and made countless threats all of which came to naught.

But when it comes to the point where the labour struggle is, this provincial government will use the power of the legislature to smash whatever it needs to smash in order to get its way.

Just ask the Abitibi workers who thought the expropriation bill was about helping them out and not about skimming off the cream of Abitibi’s assets for the Premier’s pet crown corporation.

Plus, they’ll change the current legislation to make sure that there is as little chance of a court challenge as possible.

But…

It’s hard to imagine that the provincial government would follow on one aspect of the Premier’s latest threats simply because it would only have the result of making an already tough labour environment even tougher:

"So, there'll be no standby increase, there'll be no shift differential increase, there'll be no educational leave. There will be no additional steps for nurses coming into the system, and there'll be no additional steps for nurses that are already in the system."

No educational leave?

No additional steps?  That would have the effect of making recruitment and retention even tougher even allowing for the union busting provisions government will take for themselves so they can cut one-off deals with individual nurses.

Then again, in the Great Game of Chicken that is government’s negotiations with the nurses, logic and sense just don’t apply.

-srbp-

Nose-puller alert: Frank and Brian never spoke after 1987

Via the National Post,  a description of a bit of Brian Mulroney’s testimony at the inquiry into the whole Airbus mess:

His relationship with Frank Moores, at one time a great friend, was “nonexistent” after 1987, when Moores trashed Mulroney’s government. “I simply severed communications with him completely.”

Does anyone else find it hard to believe that Brian Mulroney and Frank Moores didn’t speak – even once – during the period after 1987?

Like say, maybe around the time of Meech Lake?

Maybe September 1990?  Frank was here for the Hibernia signing but the poor old e-scribbler brain can’t recall if the Prime Minister at the time made the trip as well.

-srbp-

S-92 Q and A

While it is stamped for internal use only, CBC has posted an internal questions and answers document prepared for use by the oil company officials and Cougar for use at some meetings being organized with offshore workers prior to the resumption of helicopter flights to the three platforms.

The answers are straightforward and leave out information that is still subject to the Transportation Safety Board investigation of the S-92 crash two months ago.

Some answers stand out, though, like this one about gear box warning indications:

Q79. Has there ever been a Gear Box alarm incident before? How was it handled? Was anything different from this incident? Did it happen with the S-92A? (Questions 112, 45, 277)

A. In the entire global fleet of Sikorsky S-92A helicopters, there have been a
total of five incidences related to three types of gear box issues.  Two (including Cougar’s helicopter) related to filter bowl studs, two related to lube oil pump Vespel spline couplings, and one related to overfilling of lube oil. The change from titanium to steel studs as mandated by FAA directive has been completed. The Vespel spline couplings underwent a design improvement that was previously implemented.

or another on the 30 minute run dry issue:

Q81. There has been comments that the gear box should be able to
run dry for thirty minutes, if this is the case why did this not happen?  (Question 240)

A. Sikorsky states that there is no “30-minute run dry” regulatory requirement for civilian certified helicopters. The S-92AA main gearbox is fully certified, without waiver or exception, to the latest Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs), including Part 29 through Amendment 47. Sikorsky states that total loss of oil is considered an extremely remote event based on system design. Further,that for all gearbox failure modes that are not deemed as extremely remote, continued safe operation of the S-92A helicopter main gearbox has been demonstrated in excess of three hours running time. In the circumstance of total loss of lubrication, a “Land Immediately” instruction is directed.

-srbp-

Clarity

Here’s an old chestnut used to teach people about clear communication.  Your humble e-scribbler first came across it about a decade ago in an army staff officers’ course and it has turned up in several places since then.

What you are looking at is a picture of a note written by General George Custer at the Little Big Horn to one of his subordinates. 

Your challenge, should you chose to take it up, is to translate the scribbles.

What does the message say?

-srbp-

Public cash not enough

Teletech, a controversial American call centre operator, is pulling up stakes and leaving the province after only four years of its five year agreement.

Back when she was innovation minister, Kathy Dunderdale offered the company $1.1 million annually in wage subsidies for five years in order set up shop in Mount Pearl.  Controversy erupted when it turned out that the company had a string of labour relations lawsuits but Dunderdale’s department hadn’t noticed even though the suits are well documented on line.

Due diligence for dummies, Jack Harris called it at the time.  He meant “google”.  Harris was playing on Dunderdale’s love of meaningless phrases which came out in force as the minister faced pointed questions about her departments fairly obvious incompetence:

In another interview, the minister said that the outside companies hired to carry out the "due diligence piece" would not necessarily pick up these sorts of issues. So what were they looking for? Lint?

She also said this information turned up by reporters wouldn't have "negatively impacted" on government's decision, had it been known.

Observers will note that Dunderdale loves those meaningless phrases when she’s under pressure – as in this and countless other cases – and when she isn’t.  It seems, as we suspected back then, that Dunderdale thinks this blather makes it sound like she knows what she is talking about when she likely doesn’t.

Interesting that the company never had to operate a single day in the province without a cash infusion from government. 

Wonder where they are going next?

-srbp-

Trade deals and petards

The premier’s excuses for not participating in talks on a European trade deal just get more bizarre as time goes by.

First there was the whole idea that Stephen Harper can’t be trusted to look after Newfoundland and Labrador’s interests so the best solution – according to Danny Williams’ logic – is to let Stephen Harper look after Newfoundland and Labrador’s interests.

Then there was the whole idea of a side deal which, of course is impossible constitutionally, not to mention practically.  As a European Union spokesperson put it:

"The Government of Canada is the only government with the authority to conclude international treaties under the Canadian constitution, so our interlocutor and negotiating partner will be the government of Canada,"…

The spokesperson indicated she’d apparently met with Our man in a Blue Line Cab to talk about seals.

But apparently, nothing else.

Then there was the whole go-it-alone thing, which consisted of nothing more grand than sending Tom Hedderson off to talk to a few ambassadors in a hastily arranged series of meetings on seals.

Now there’s this little gem, from Question period in the House of Assembly on Monday:

So there are other bigger issues. There is also the whole issue of the Atlantic Accord and what is going to happen when European countries do business in Newfoundland and Labrador.

What issue is he talking about? 

Or more accurately, which Atlantic Accord?

The 2005 one – the only one he usually talks about – doesn’t have anything to do with Europeans or trade.

The 1985 one – the real one – establishes a local preference policy for Newfoundland and Labrador companies doing business offshore.  The only way to get rid of that would be for the federal and provincial governments to agree to eliminate it.  That’s because the deal can’t be amended unilaterally.

Well, it isn’t supposed to be amended unilaterally.

Under section 60 of the 1985 Accord, neither party could amend the enabling legislation unilaterally. Until 2007, no one thought they might.  Then Stephen Harper amended the offset provisions in a rather sneaky way.

But the really odd thing is that the provincial government did not raise a single objection  - beyond some generalised gum-flapping about Equalization - to the amendment of the 1985 deal. 

Not a one.

No letters of protest.

Nada.

To the contrary, when they opted for O’Brien 50 this past winter – and pocketed  Equalization cash in the process – they accepted the federal Conservative’s 2007 amendment as part of the deal.  In fact, as the premier has indicated recently, the provincial government decided at least as long ago as early 2008 to flip to O’Brien/50 in early 2009 in hopes of pocketing Equalization cash. Heck, they might have even signalled that privately at the time to the federal government.

So maybe the real reason the Premier is in a snit is because he’s worried that through all of this he’ll just be hoist by his own clever Equalization petard.  Rather than see the local preference rules of the 1985 deal preserved to the benefit of local companies, we’ll see them disappear.

That would go a long way to explaining the sudden about face the provincial government did on this deal back in February.  Maybe the feds made it clear that the local preference provisions of the 1985 deal were up for consideration and one of the things the feds could throw back in the Premier’s face was his own acceptance of the unilateral changes to the 1985 Atlantic Accord.  You can almost imagine the conversation:  “Danny, it doesn’t matter if you show up or not.  We can change the thing by ourselves if we have to – you just told us we could when you accepted the changes from 2007.”

Still, though, it doesn’t explain why he would sit on the sidelines rather than become personally involved.  After all, as he told the legislature: :[w]e are going to do what we have to do here to protect the interests of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and I could not care less what the rest of them do, I have to be quite honest with you.”

Well, to be quite honest with you, if the provincial government was really hell-bent on protecting Newfoundland and Labrador interests, the place to do that is at the table, inside the Canadian negotiating team.

Seal-bashing just doesn’t seem like a reason enough to turn down the invitation to sit on the team.  And like we’ve said before, if custodial management and shrimp tariffs are so important – and they are – the place to deal with those is at the negotiating table.

And look, if you really want to get a sense of how much is at stake for the province just look at what the Premier said himself in the legislature:

There are also a lot of very big, multinational, European companies that want to do business in Newfoundland and Labrador, because of our minerals, because of our oil and gas, because of our fishery, and we have to take the abuse from these hypocrites basically saying that we act in an inhumane and a barbarian manner, when they chase bulls through the streets in Spain, and matadors pierce bulls in a Roman type atmosphere, and we are out trying to earn a living.

So  - if we try and follow the Premier’s own logic – a vote by the European parliament that affects maybe a few million dollars that comes to the province from seal-bashing is way more important than billions in new economic development throughout Newfoundland and Labrador that would come from participating in the trade deal negotiations.

Okay.

That makes sense.

Not.

-srbp-

Inconvenient truths: voting math

From the House of Assembly and a discussion of the recent vote taken among the province’s nurses on a contract offer from the provincial government:

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, quite simply, a strike can be avoided if the nurses decide not to go on strike. It is my understanding that 80 per cent voted and that 63 per cent of those who voted, voted to have a strike. The math on that is 50.4 per cent, so one out of two nurses wants a strike and one out of two nurses do not want a strike.

He’s right.

That’s the way the numbers break out if you look at the total number of eligible voters.

Of course, that isn’t the way, the Premier and his supporters like to look at the results of the last provincial election. They’ll talk about things like the nearly 70% of the popular vote for the Provincial Conservatives.

Of course, as some people conveniently forget, only 60% of the electorate turned out to vote.

The math on that is 41.76%.

So…

you can fill in the rest.

-srbp-

No deal. No cash.

The lack of a deal with the federal government is holding up approval of projects eligible for the federal government’s economic stimulus spending.

The provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Manitoba, as well as the three territories, have yet to reach agreements with Ottawa on the program, although some contacted last week said agreements were imminent.

However, one official told The Globe and Mail that the deal with Alberta was delayed because the government in that province wants some of the previous money it allocated to infrastructure spending to count toward its one-third share of the program. Alberta feels it has spent substantially more on infrastructure than any other province and that their actions should be recognized. A federal official said Friday that the two governments have since reached an agreement in principle.

Maybe the provincial government has sorted that out in the meantime.  There’s not much else that could prompt a joint federal-provincial newser.

Lots o’ cash and cuddles update:  Turns out that there was a deal and that the federal government was quite happy to hold a giant news conference with both federal and provincial Conservatives attending.

But the cuddles didn’t stop with the newser.  Provincial Conservative public works minister Trevor Taylor even issued a ministerial statement on the cash, this being polling season and all.

-srbp-

Airborne misadventures, Part Deux

For those who enjoyed the video of paratroops exiting an aircraft in a less than proficient manner, here is another one to lighten up your day.

This one is “Airdrop mishaps” which – as the title suggests – is a string of things that went wrong in dropping equipment and supplies to soldiers.

There are flipped-over trucks, a LAPESed pallet that breaks open, spilling  its load all over hells half acre, a parachute deployment problem (it didn’t deploy until it was way too late) and  - a personal favourite – the vehicle that broke free of its restraining straps and started off down range on its own.

-srbp-

Well positioned, indeed

In the past year, Newfoundland and Labrador has shed 8,800 jobs.

That’s right.

There are almost 9,000 fewer people working this time in 2009 than there were at the same time in 2008.

CBC News is focusing only on the 2,800 dropped in one month – that is last month.

Fair enough, but that other number is staggering what with all the talk from the provincial government the past few months about the province being supposedly well positioned to weather the economic crisis and then emerge unscathed on the other side.

8,800 jobs shed in a year.

If you look at the figures from Statistics Canada you see that the figure is made up of almost equal numbers of full-time and part-time jobs. But, look a little harder and you’ll notice that in the part-time employment segment, the job loss amounts to 12.5% in a single 12 month period. 

Those people didn’t switch to full-time employment status nor did they leave the province, necessarily.

-srbp-

Sound familiar?

A bunch of politicians accused of living high on the public hog and getting into an argument about what the rules permit.

From Guido Fawkes:

Guido has been shouting about the Green Book Rule changes which came into force on April Fools Day - and politicians really do take us for fools. To stop all the rule breaking by MPs they came up with a clever solution. Scrap the rules!

Meanwhile, there is a hunt on for the person who leaked information on the story to the papers.

The Mother of Parliaments might wind up following the path taken in the Bow-Wow Parliament once the whole thing explodes.

We could loan them a Chief Justice who could sort the mess out quite nicely.

In the meantime, it might be interesting to find out if any of their cash from their spending scandal had been directed to paying party campaign expenses as has been the case here, albeit something the ruling party isn’t at all interested to see investigated with the same judicial vigour.

-srbp-

First oil and a new discovery

Chevron announced two milestones this week.

On Wednesday, the company achieved first oil on the  Tahiti field in the Gulf Of Mexico. production is expected to 125,000 barrels per day of oil and 70 million cubic feet of natural gas by the end of the year.

The Tahiti production platform, left, is located 305 kilometres south of New Orleans and sits in 1250 metres of water.

On Friday, Chevron announced it had struck oil in a well drilled offshore Congo.

Moho Nord Marine-4 was drilled to a total depth of 13,907 feet (4,239 meters) and proved a 535 foot (163 meter) column of high-quality oil flowing at 8,100 barrels per day.

The discovery follows two previous successful exploration wells, Moho Nord Marine-1 and 2, drilled in the permit area in 2007, and the positive appraisal well Moho Nord Marine-3 in 2008.

-srbp-

There’s more to this than a few seals

Given the origins of and the scope of the trade talks starting between Canada and the European Union, Danny Williams’ refusal to participate is even more bizarre than it first appeared.

Whatever is going on with the government party and its supporters – including voice of the cabinet minister crowd who seem obsessed with clubbing seals these days - it ain’t really about seals.

The provincial government seems intent on ignoring both the reality of the province’s dependence on trade with the United States and the growing concerns about American trade protectionism. Of the $13-plus billion in exports to the top 10 trading partners for the province, the United States consumed $10 billion or 77%.  The U.S. accounts for 70% of all Newfoundland and Labrador international exports.

This, from the Economist, says much:

You can see why Canada would want to lessen its dependence on America, which bought 75.5% of its exported goods last year and provided 63.4% of its imported ones. Yanked into recession by America, Canada worries that trade will suffer from protectionism (in the form of new Buy American provisions and country-of-origin labelling requirements on farm products) and Washington’s moves to toughen up border security.

The deal could open new markets for Canadian exports of agricultural, fish and forestry products in addition to fish, aerospace, automotive and other exports. 

The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is refusing to participate in the talks as part of the Canadian delegation.  The Premier claims it is because he doesn’t trust the Prime Minister to look after the province’s concerns about European opposition to the seal hunt, the push for custodial management of fisheries outside the 200 mile Canadian exclusive economic zone and impact of a EU shrimp tariff on Newfoundland and Labrador shrimp exports.

Since all those things are on the table plus a great deal more directly affecting the future of the provincial economy, it’s bizarre that the provincial government would leave all those issues entirely in the hands of someone they supposedly don’t trust.

Bizarre indeed.

 

 

-srbp-

What makes news? (Small Town News edition)

People wonder what it takes to get a story in the conventional media.

Virtually every public relations practitioner will be asked -  at least one thousand times over the course of a career - “what makes news?”

The conventional answers are sex, drugs, power, conflict/controversy, novelty, celebrity, bad weather and money.  There a bunch more but those will do for what we are talking about.

On top of that you have to add proximity.  Local news outlets usually don’t cover something that happened outside their area.  A car accident might make the news where it happened but it likely won’t be covered in the same state or province, let alone the same country.

All that is what makes it so bizarre to find that voice of the cabinet minister is pushing a story about some online “newspaper” in Thunder Bay, Ontario that carried an editorial/ news story praising Danny Williams.
Actually “online” is less accurate a term than “obscure”, at least for people who don’t live in Thunder Bay.  In fact, for most of us, Thunder Bay conjures up nothing more  edifying than that old joke about the only types of people who ever came out of Thunder Bay, one of which was a hockey player.

So somehow, the powers that be over at the province’s major radio outlet have determined that people across the province should be aware of the fact that one guy in Thunder Bay who runs a website has positive feelings about Danny Williams.

Whoopeee ding.

Now what are the odds, do you think, that the Saskatchewan equivalent of VOCM will run a story:  “PEI blogger lauds Brad Wall”.

Or maybe CHUM will carry word that “Antigonish e-mail whiz loves Dalton!”

And even to put it in a closer context – one assumes – might we expect British Columbia’s radio news giants to be heralding the online musings of NLPress about Gordon Campbell?

Somehow none of that seems even remotely likely.  Then again, it’s highly unusual for a news outlet to so favour the regime du jour in its programming that it can become known as “voice of the cabinet minister” and no one misses the joke. 

After all, are the guys running major news outlets anywhere else in the country so chummy with the local Power that Is that they take up a sea on the government’s oil and gas company board?  Highly unlikely.

But don’t take the word of a mere humble e-scribbler.  Just check the registry of companies and see who is sitting next to John Ottenheimer, Ken Marshall, Ed Martin and Glen Roebothan on the NALCOR Oil and Gas Co. board.

In pondering the curiosity of all this, we should not forget, of course, that the government’s polling firm will be in the field within the next day or so collecting their quarterly results.

Everyone knows this, including the crowd over at the Great Oracle of the Valley. They know full well that starting next week their call-in shows will be festooned with Tory politicians heralding the glories of their administration led by the Absolutely Splendiferous You Know Who. They’ve already started practicing in the House of Assembly, as labradore has noted. 

Even Hisself – who just launched a tirade about Steve Harper – will turn up at least once.  Last time he did one of the on air types asked Hisself about this poll goosing stuff. The Premier noted that the government pollster had started in the field the previous weekend and that, if he wanted to goose a poll, he’d have started the week before the polling started.

Which of course, he had already done last time.

And which of course he is doing yet again. 

-srbp-

How to tell when your position is wrong

When you are a political leader and your comments show you to be so far out of touch with the best interest of your province such that Stephen Harper looks sensible in comparison, then you know something is wrong.

Seriously wrong.

Like there’s a giant fireball in the sky above the place you’re heading and you can’t understand why all these cars are going the other way wrong.

Like you and a bunch of your drunken teenage friends go camping at Crystal Lake and you start making out with your girlfriend alone in a tent in the middle of the night and wonder where that machete came from sticking through the tent top wrong.

Topic:  the annual seal hunt, also known as March Madness (in this case in May) or as it has become, the platform by which every “C” list celebrity or celebrity wannabe seeks the public spotlight once again.

Issue:  The European Union voted to ban imports of seal products.

The Stephen Harper Comment: "If we were to make our trade relations with the European Union about only the sealing issue, we will never have any trading relations with the European Union because as we know this is a disagreement of long-standing," [Prime Minister Stephen] Harper said at a news conference.

The Danny Williams Comment:   "You know he's prepared to sacrifice Newfoundland and Labrador's interest in the interests of other issues for Canadians. And I think that's just dead wrong and it shows what this guy is all about," [Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams said].

Okay.

According to the provincial government’s own fact sheet,  “the sealing industry is worth $55 million” to the provincial economy. That was a figure for 2006.

In that same year, Newfoundland and Labrador did more than 10 times as much business with Germany and the United Kingdom combined as the total value of the seal fishery.

In 2006, exporters from Newfoundland and Labrador sold a heckuva lot more than seal pelts to European Union countries.  At that value, they shipped a heckuva lot more to European countries than the seal products they may have shipped through them.

In 2008, Germany alone accounted for $1.02 billion of Newfoundland and Labrador’s exports. According to CBC, total Canadian seal exports to the EU last year amounted to a measly $5.5 million.  That’s all Canada, not just Newfoundland and Labrador.

Get the idea?

Now just think – for one teensy second – about the implication of Danny Williams’ comment.  Apparently, the only issue of any consequence here for Danny Williams is the seal hunt and 10 times as much trade between our province and Europe and the chance to sort out some of the grievances doesn’t matter one jot or tittle.

Lest you think this remark is out of context consider that the provincial government earlier this year turned down the chance to work with an international trade mission aimed at increasing trade with European countries.

Why?

Because of the seal hunt, among a couple of other issues which would have been better addressed at the table rather than far away from it .Actually, if you follow the links you’ll see another classic Williams administration constantly-shifting-position, but let’s just go with the “No seal hunt, no play” position.

If there’s logic in the provincial government’s argument – as enunciated by Danny Williams  - it sure isn’t obvious. Apparently, the economic benefit to the provincial economy of increased trade with the Europeans isn’t something the provincial ministry could be bothered with. 

At this point, it’s hard to see how the provincial government is protecting provincial interests by launching into another tirade with anyone over seals when seals are only a tiny fraction of the overall provincial economic picture involved.

But seriously:

How can you tell your political position is crap?

When Stephen Harper sounds reasonable in comparison.

-srbp-

Updated – added sentences giving value  of seal exports to EU last year, according to CBC story.

Indy going under

Apparently, it has nothing to do with anything other than the trends in the market.

People don’t read newspapers evidently, especially ones that are following a fairly conventional advertising revenue approach.  As we know from the local experience even getting a massive weekly infusion of government cash doesn’t help.

Before the newspaper types get all incensed, your humble e-scribbler doesn’t think that newspapers are really going to die.  There’s a place for them in the news world of the future.

What needs to change is the information delivery model and the revenue model.

People just aren’t reading the conventional papers like they used to do, and as a consequence, the revenue is drying up from advertisers. 

Take a look across the United States and you will see bastions of the newspaper world  from Boston to San Francisco struggling to keep alive.

That’s a clue.

-srbp-

The Value of an Oxford education

"You see what's happening in countries like Denmark with the whale slaughters. We see other parts of the world where kangaroos are being culled by the hundreds of thousands, and yet they're after the seal harvest here in Newfoundland and Labrador," [Premier Danny Williams] said.

"So Europeans should have a good, hard look at themselves."

Europe = Denmark.

Okay.

Europe = Kangaroos.

Huh?

Evidently Williams didn’t read geography at  Oxford.

For the record, here’s Europe (the bit in yellow) and the place where kangaroos come from (Australia, shown in red). 

Not the same thing.

Kangaroos are found only in Australia.  There are no kangaroos in Europe, except in zoos but people aren’t allowed to bash them.

Your humble e-scribbler did not attend Oxford.

-srbp-