Elizabeth Towers Fire Inquiry – Intro/Commission

First Report

Public Enquiry into Release and Publication

of

Police Reports into Fire at Elizabeth Towers,

St. John’s

Submitted to His Honour the Lieutenant Governor

August 16th, 1979

His Honour Judge P. Lloyd Soper, D.C.J.

Commissioner

Introduction

This Enquiry was constituted under The Public Enquiry Act by the following Commission of appointment.

ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her Other Realms and Territories, QUEEN, Head of the Commonwealth,  Defender of the Faith.

Gordon A. Winter, Lieutenant-Governor
T. Alexander Hickman, Minister of Justice

COMMISSION TO:

HIS HONOUR JUDGE P, LLOYD SOPER
Judge of the District Court of Humber-St. George's Corner Brook, Newfoundland

GREETING:

WHEREAS it appears desirable and expedient in the public interest that an enquiry be held relating to certain matters respecting the release and publication of police reports concerning an investigation into a fire at Elizabeth Towers, St. John's, and for other matters pertaining thereto;

NOW KNOW YE that under and by virtue of The Public Enquiries Act, Chapter 314 of the Revised Statutes of Newfoundland, 1970, We, by and with the advice of Our Executive Council of Our Province of Newfoundland, reposing great trust and confidence in your knowledge, integrity and ability, have constituted and appointed and do by these Presents constitute and appoint you the said

P. LLOYD SOPER

to be a Commissioner to conduct an investigation into the matters following and to make such recommendations with regard to any and all of those matters and other matters connected therewith as you may think fit, that is to say

(1)    to enquire into and report upon all facts and circumstances relating to or having a bearing upon the publication of the contents of two confidential police reports dated June 7, 1978, and July 12, 1978, respectively, addressed to the Deputy Minister of Justice for the attention of the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to the investigation by the Department of Justice into the cause and origin of and possible responsibility for a fire at Elizabeth Towers Apartments, St. John's, on April 26, 1978, including but without prejudice to the foregoing generality

(a)  to determine and report upon all persons involved in or connected with the release, transmission, duplication, delivery and publication of the contents of the said reports;

(b)  to consider and report upon the justification, if any, for such release, transmission, duplication, delivery and publication by any of the persons referred to in paragraph (a) in the public good, in the interest of the administration of justice or otherwise as you deem fit; and

(c)    to enquire into and report upon what, in your opinion, any person referred to in paragraph (a) who came into possession of the said documents ought to have done with them either in the public interest, in the interest of the administration of justice or otherwise as you deem fit and what action, if any, should be taken against such person or persons.

(2)    to report as to whether, in your opinion, legislation, either by statute or by regulation, should prescribe for penalties for failure to maintain confidentiality of police reports in particular, and generally documents which are classified by the Crown as confidential, and if so

(a)  what penalties or sanctions should be imposed on police officers and other persons employed in the Public Service for breach of such confidentiality, and

(b)    without prejudicing the basic concepts of freedom of the press, whether persons, other than public servants, should be sanctioned and if so, what class of persons and to what extent.

(3)  to make such enquiry and to report upon any matter which you consider to be incidentally connected with any of the matters referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2).

AND WE DO by these Presents confer upon you, the said Commissioner, the power of summoning before you any witness or witnesses and of requiring all such witnesses to give evidence orally or in writing upon oath or solemn affirmation, and to produce such documents and things as you, the said Commissioner, may deem requisite to the full investigation of the matter which you are appointed to enquire into;

AND WE DO by these Presents authorize you, the said Commissioner, to adopt such procedure and methods as you, the said Commissioner, may from time to time deem expedient for the proper conduct of the enquiry and to sit at such times and places as you, the said Commissioner, may from time to time decide;

AND FURTHER, We require you, with as little delay as possible to report to us your findings upon the matters herein submitted for your consideration.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Newfoundland to be hereunto affixed.

WITNESS:  Our trusty and well beloved the Honourable Gordon Arnaud Winter, Officer of Our Order of Canada, Lieutenant-Governor in and for Our Province of Newfoundland.

AT OUR GOVERNMENT HOUSE in Our City of St. John's this 23rd day of February in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seventy-nine and in the Twenty-eighth year of Our Reign.

BY COMMAND,
Deputy Registrar General

At my request and in accordance with my recommendation His Honour the Lieutenant Governor in Council appointed Frederick R. Woolridge Esq., Q.C. of Corner Brook to be Commission Counsel and Paul Stapleton Esq., Barrister and Solicitor of St. John's to be Assistant Counsel and Secretary.  Hearings of the Commission had to be scheduled in order to accommodate prior judicial and professional commitments of myself as Commissioner and of Counsel. The first sittings took place in St. John's on Monday and Tuesday, April 2nd and 3rd, 1978, [See note below*] followed by further sittings on Monday and Tuesday, April 9th and 10th, At those sittings 21 witnesses gave sworn testimony.

On April 10th I adjourned the hearings to Wednesday, May 16th in order to provide ample opportunity for interested persons or groups to prepare briefs relating to the recommendations I was asked to make under Section 2 of the Terms of Reference. 

In order that the widest possible publicity might be given to my invitation for  briefs, the Secretary to the Commission placed advertisements in 13 newspapers in the Province. In addition, he wrote the following, inviting them to submit briefs:

• Royal Newfoundland Constabulary 
• Royal Canadian Mounted Police 
• Police Brotherhood [Editor’s note:  now the RNC Association] 
• Treasury Board 
• Newfoundland Association of Public Employees 
• Law Society of Newfoundland 
• Canadian Bar Association

At the hearing on May 16th I received a brief from Frederick J. Evans and another on behalf of the Criminal Justice Section of the Newfoundland Branch of the Canadian Bar Association,  I also received a letter on behalf of the Commanding Officer of "B" Division of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I do not know, nor can I conclude, whether the sparse response to the invitation for briefs indicates indifference to the subject matter or confidence in the Commissioner.  In any case, it means that recommendations may very well be based largely on my own research, with the assistance of Counsel. It also means that the recommendations will be submitted as a second part of my report.  The first part consists of my findings of fact.

Continued – The Elizabeth Towers Fire and Its Investigation

-srbp-

*  The year in this sentence is evidently wrong and is likely a simple typographical error. It should be 1979.  The fire at Elizabeth Towers took place on April 26, 1978.   Soper conducted his first hearings the following April.

Note on this edition:  Commissioner Soper submitted his original first report in 47 pages of typescript. The format of the pages is typical of the time.  Sections are denoted by underlining.  The first line of paragraphs is indented by about one inch in addition to being separated from the previous paragraph by double spaces. In the commission, some portions are flush right, some are centred and others are flush left. 

The title of statutes is not underlined although, by the convention of the time they should have been.

This edition is the result of scanning of the original typed pages.  Each scan was edited to correct any obvious errors in scanning (e.g.  “ray” in the scanned version instead of “my” in the original.)  Errors persist despite several edits.

Section titles are given in bold print and underlining.  As much as possible, all text is presented flush left.  This includes sections such as the numbered and lettered paragraphs in the commission which were indented in the original. Capitalization is as it was in the original.

Direct quotations from evidence given at the inquiry are are presented as in the original.  That is, they are denoted by quotation marks if the section is short and included in the body of a sentence.  In the case of lengthier excerpts, they are given indented and in italics.

There are no texts or tables.

Note on the Public Inquiries Act, RSN 1970, c. 314.  The Public Inquiries Act under which Soper received his commission continued through the statute revision in 1990.  A new inquires law passed the legislature swiftly in 2006, after the House of Assembly spending scandal broke, and received assent in December that year.  

Hibernia South newser

The consortium behind the Hibernia South project is expected to hold a news conference at the Delta Hotel in St. John’s at 11:30 AM, Tuesday, February 16. Sources indicate natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale will take part in the news conference.

No word on the details of the announcement but officials of the provincial government’s oil company are reportedly briefing opposition politicians at 8:45 AM.

The announcement may be about the start of construction.

In completely unrelated news, government pollster Corporate Research Associates is currently in the field.

-srbp-

Provincial Government Broadband Disaster

A mere two months after pumping up its broadband initiative on a federal government website, the provincial government announced Monday that:

Effective immediately, the Provincial Government will be re-examining its approach to improving the communications infrastructure …

The reason is buried  -  quel surprise  -  in a government news release issued Monday and called an '”update”:

Due to anticipated project costs escalating to more than half a billion dollars, the Provincial Government has cancelled the RFP [request for proposals].

The request for proposals dates back to late 2007 and was supposed to “build and manage an advanced communications network” that would connect “more than 1,000 facilities that include health care institutions, libraries, schools, and other [provincial government] offices.”

Connecting government offices was supposed to be one spinoff benefit from the highly controversial 2006 fibreoptic deal. Under the deal with three private-sector firms, the provincial government was supposed to purchase a quantity of fibreoptic cabling that would then allow government offices, schools and hospitals to be connected.

That provincial government system was supposed to allow private sector carriers to improve service in rural parts of the province.

According to innovation minister Shawn Skinner, the provincial government will start new talks with the tele-communications industry now that the request for proposals process failed after two years of talks.

There’s no word on how long those talks might take before there’s any sign of whether or not the provincial government’s plan can be salvaged.

-srbp-

Social media’s inadvertent funnies

Every now and then you get one of those automated e-mails that just hits you a wee bit funny.

Like the subject line from this one received today: “Lorraine Michael suggested you become a fan of Lorraine Michael...‏”.

One would hope she would like herself enough to recommend herself.

But a fan of yourself?

That seems a bit much even in these days of political personality cults.

-srbp-

Ineffective advertising

At a time when the population is getting smaller and the average age is rising steadily, it’s nice to know that the provincial government’s immigration office is hard at work trying to attract people to come to the province to live and work.

This ad turned up in a one-page flyer delivered free of charge to coffee shops and  fast food places.  It’s full of trivia, horoscopes and the like bordered by business-card size ads for local companies looking to advertise their wares.

Yes, you guessed it, this one is distributed in the metro St. John’s area.

And, only the metro St. John’s area.

Now odds are that an engineer  - for example - currently living and working in Mumbai who might be interested in adding his or her expertise to the province’s oil and gas industry isn’t likely to happen on the Topsail Road KFC whence came this example of the province’s immigration advertising cash at work.

Your humble e-scribbler is going out on a limb here to offer the view that this particular ad is unlikely to reach pretty well the entire target market for the immigration program.

It is a complete, total and utter waste of precious tax dollars.

So why – pray tell us – would some marketing genius with the provincial government drop the money to place this particular ad in a local lunch-counter flyer?

The answer certainly has nothing to do with boosting immigration.

Now if the ad were one aimed to raise awareness of the other Great Solution to the population crisis  - taxpayer’s cash for getting knocked up – there is a much better chance the ad might be read by someone interested in taking advantage of the bucks for breeding.

But it isn’t.

This one is aimed at people who might be thinking of leaving their home  - in Newfoundland and Labrador - and going to live and work  in -- you guessed it – Newfoundland and Labrador.

We may only hope and pray that other government advertising is placed with considerably more care and insight.

But in the meantime, how much public cash has already been poured into this kind of ineffective advertising?

-srbp-

Trivimania: the answers to our Premier quiz

Go back here for the questions. 

Remember that for all but the last question we excluded Premiers who held the office but who did not win a general election as party leader in order to get the job.

Here are the answers (quibbles are welcome):

1.  Oldest Premier at the time of his swearing in:  Danny Williams, age 54, followed by…

2.  The second Oldest Premier at the time of his swearing in:  Clyde Wells, who was 51.

3.  The Oldest Premier on leaving office:  Joe Smallwood,  left office aged 71 years and a bunch of days.  DW is already the second oldest and he’s still in the chair.  To beat Smallwood’s age record, he’d have to last until at least 2020.  Even then DW would have to stay another six years beyond that to match or better Smallwood’s 23 years in office.

4.  a.  District represented by the most Premiers:  Humber West, which has, at various times sent Joe Smallwood, Frank Moores, and lately Danny Williams to reign over us.

b.  Only Townie Premier since Confederation:  Danny Williams, who came into the world at St. John’s in August 1949.

5.  Premiers, in order of age at time of swearing in (including Tom Rideout, Roger Grimes and Beaton Tulk):

Beaton Tulk, Danny Williams, Clyde Wells, Roger Grimes, Joe Smallwood, Brian Tobin, Tom Rideout, Frank Moores, Brian Peckford.

-srbp-

Freedom from Information: Joint federal-provincial edition

Now you know things between the two Connies are good when they co-ordinate a joint freedom from information program on a national park/provincial park combo that actually doesn’t exist yet and then carefully control the release of information about it.

Now, a curious and enterprising body might well wonder, hey, what are the boundaries of these proposed protected areas, especially given that the national park would be the largest in Canada contained wholly within a province (as opposed to a territory)? which lands are included and which are excluded? how do the proposed protected areas relate to the newly-opened highway or to lands subject to Aboriginal land rights?

Apparently, however, there aren't that many curious and enterprising bodies.

Which is a good thing, because good luck finding such information from either the official provincial or federal eBumpf.

However, if you are really keen to see the long-awaited map, it is available.

On the website of National Geographic, a private organization located in another country.

The signs are there if you want to see them.

-srbp-

Deep Throats

Him:  “So, man like why do you call him Deep Throat?”

Me:  “Because you can’t say ratf*ck on television.”

_________________________________________________________________

Since the Watergate crisis, the term “Deep Throat” is synonymous with information leaked by a political source for varying motives.

The original Deep Throat is a character who fed information to Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward at the Washington Post for the work that eventually led to their book, All the President’s Men.

Supposedly it was a play on the idea of deep background – detailed briefings given legitimately to reporters but not for attribution – crossed with a porn film popular at the time. Deep Throat’s identity remained a mystery until about five years ago when he was identified as Mark Felt.

But deep throating in the political context has another name, one borrowed from military slang:

Ratf*ck.

Now in the military a ratf*ck comes from the idea that anyone who would screw over his own friends is a rat or that only a rat would stoop so low as to screw over his own kind. There’s an image in there as well in some definitions that conjures up the image of disease-riddled vermin picking over anything and everything to find something in it for themselves.  The origin and use of the word is open to wide-ranging debate, but still the idea of that the terms means is clear.

You will find people who use the term to describe just about any political trick, dirty or otherwise.

But in politics, about the lowest form of ratfuck would be the deep throat-style leak.  Not only is the information being passed along to sources who normally wouldn’t or shouldn’t have it, the person actually leaking it is trusted by the inside crew.  There’s something about the whole business that reeks of spies and double-agents.

The motivation for the leak might have some impact on how a leaker is viewed.  In Watergate, Deep Throat exposed an organized criminal gang that ran out of the one of the three major branches centre of the American federal government.  Few people would have difficulty with that leaker.

Even in that situation, though, there are people who would argue that any leak of information is a mark not only of fundamental disloyalty but of sinister behaviour in the process.  Rather than resign and then present the information openly, Deep Throat spoke only on the condition that his identity would be kept a secret until he died or decided to expose himself. That veil of secrecy lasted for decades.

In this case, the veil of secrecy over who screwed the Premier’s plans will likely last much longer than at Watergate.  

At the very best, the plan to slip away have the surgery and slip back was a high risk plan which was more likely to fail than not.  But in a place where even gigantic public policy stories don’t get reported by local news media, there’s a chance the whole thing might have gone down according to plan. 

Oddly enough, that very same quality on which the Premier’s plan rested may well wind up being the very thing that winds up working instead for his own, personal Deep Throat.

And while the Premier’s personality cult continues to blast away at all in sight – 1,2,3,4,5  - the Premier’s very own personal Deep Throat has slipped quietly back into the shadows.

Where he or she will safely remain.

Likely for ever.

-srbp-

Media strategy by Chris Crocker

It’s been the better part of two weeks now since it started and the Cultists are still bombing any available media outlet with the same line.

Yes, folks, it really is a media strategy that could only have been devised by Chris Crocker.

Amazing how these things just seem to  happen as if by magic, without any co-ordination at all.

-srbp-

CNLOPB advises operators of changes to search and rescue practices

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board announced today that it has received some early recommendations from Commissioner Robert Wells of the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry, which concern search and rescue practices.

Following a review of the recommendations, the Board advised operators of changes which are to be implemented.

The recommendations and the Board’s directions to operators are contained in  correspondence which is available on the Board’s website.

Update:

A key part of the letter from the Board to the offshore operators:

-srbp-

Credit where credit is due

You either get credit because you deserve it or you don’t.

Absolutely.

When it comes to the Atlantic Accord, it is unfortunate that the landmark agreement in the province’s history is suffering the fate of so many aspects of local history.  That’s right:  the Accord is becoming the stuff of myth on the one hand and general ignorance – for the most part – on the other.  Having its name appropriated for another, far less significant document is but one symptom of the problem.

Well, just to clear up any question about credit for negotiating the Accord, the best evidence is a photograph taken of the people directly responsible for that task.  That would be the provincial and federal negotiating teams along with the first ministers and energy ministers at the federal and provincial levels.

The woman seated in the front on the right is Pat Carney, then federal energy  minister and now a senator.

Now that you’ve noticed Pat, notice who isn’t in the picture.

What is it about Tories and eating their own?

Meanwhile, notice that this issue isn’t new by any means.  It cropped up in 2007 as well, as a result of public chatter about other, related issues.

Update:  Here’s the print story on which CBC radio is basing it’s news piece on Friday. The print story gives much more detail.  you really need the two to get a balanced account. The story is by Barbara Yaffee who some will remember from her days – back then – reporting from this end of the country. 

-srbp-

Not good enough for the big leagues

Bill Clinton had two stents surgically implanted in an artery on Thursday after complaining of chest pains two days ago.

Emergency surgery and the guy is a model of public disclosure even though, not holding elected office any more, he really isn’t obliged to say anything.  The public knows what happened – down to a description of the tiny devices – and they even know where the surgery took place.

Meanwhile a town councillor in the United Kingdom disclosed his recent bout of cardiac problems.

Meanwhile in Calgary, a local columnist  - and Ralph Klein’s former chief of staff - offers some clear-eyed observations on how another politician handled his own health issues:

None of that appeared to have been done. The whole thing was rushed, and a flustered deputy premier was pushed out in front of the cameras, ill-prepared, with no script and few answers. Not good enough for the big leagues. Having said all that, get well Danny, and remember to pay the bill.

Like the Oilers.

Notice the number of nasty comments from the brave souls who can’t even sign their own names.  Of course none of those comments could possibly be part of an orchestrated attack campaign.

-srbp-

Planted calls and personal threats against talk show host revealed

In an interview with Geoff Meeker, VOCM Open Line show host Randy Simms gave the text-book definition of a planted caller. 

Simms was describing his experience in the first couple of days after news broke that the Premier was in the United States for heart surgery. He rejected the idea the calls and e-mails were organized but then gave what is in essence the textbook definition of an orchestrated, partisan political campaign of intimidation aimed at local news media:

“…In many instances, they weren’t listening to the program, they don’t know what the question was that I asked, they haven’t read my column. But they are responding (anyway)… and a lot of them will respond and cc it to other offices, let’s say that.  And it’s done for a different motivation than engaging in legitimate democratic debate. But you get some of that, right?”

Simms also described the e-mail portion of the campaign:

Towards the end of the February 2 program, Simms referred to a bunch of emails he had received that day; messages that were vicious, insulting and mean-spirited.

“I don’t know why you would take the time to write an email, the sole purpose of which is to insult, to see if you can inflict some kind of emotional hurt. I don’t know why you would do that. That says more about you, than it does about me. …”

And if that wasn’t enough, Simms has also been subjected to personal threats:

““All of us, everybody, in any form of public life will have threats made against them. If you could read what has been said to me, about me, and of me, simply because we mentioned Danny Williams name and health care in the same sentence. I’ve had my life threatened. I’ve been threatened with being shot. I’ve been threatened with having my house burned down. We even had a guy come on Facebook yesterday and he actually said that Randy Simms should do us all a favour and hang himself in his basement. Now I ask you – These people… should these people be walking around free?”

The short answer is “no”.

It’s a criminal offence to make threats, and if Simms has been getting that type of stuff, the best thing to do is turn the information over the police.  Let them investigate and take appropriate action.  Some of these louts can be tracked down and when they’ve been rooted out, let them deal with the consequences.

No need to wonder any more if last Saturday’s analysis here at Bond Papers read too much into the current climate in Newfoundland and Labrador.

-srbp-

Government smears landmark agreement with false statements

The provincial government has tarnished the 25th anniversary of the Atlantic Accord by issuing a news release which contains false information:

In 2005, the Williams Government improved upon the benefits in the original Atlantic Accord by negotiating a new deal that retained a greater share of offshore revenues for the province. The new revenue-sharing arrangement reached between Premier Danny Williams and then Prime Minister Paul Martin resulted in Newfoundland and Labrador receiving 100 per cent of its offshore revenues for the first time, free from any clawbacks while an equalization-receiving province. he 2005 Accord enabled Newfoundland and Labrador to truly be the “principal beneficiary” of the petroleum resources off its shores. …[Emphasis added]

“The original Atlantic Accord has greatly assisted in the pursuit of long-term economic prosperity and self-reliance for Newfoundland and Labrador, and these benefits were secured and improved in 2005 when Premier Williams succeeded in convincing the Federal Government of the inequity Newfoundland and Labrador had endured for years in not receiving the full benefit of the exploitation of its offshore resources,” said Acting Premier Dunderdale.

All of that is completely false.

Provincial government officials should know it is utterly untrue false because they link to the text of the 2005 deal in the news release.  Here’s what the 2005 agreement says in plain English:

2. This document reflects an understanding between the Government of Canada and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador that:

• Newfoundland and Labrador already receives and will continue to receive 100 per cent of offshore resource revenues as if these resources were on land; [Emphasis added]

There were no changes to revenue-sharing spelled out in the 1985 Accord. Under the 1985 agreement the provincial government alone sets and receives all offshore oil government royalties. The federal government collects only what it would from any other industry in the way of business and personal taxes.  

Despite ludicrous claims at the time it was signed, the 2005 agreement delivered nothing more than a single $2.0 billion payment to the provincial government. 

That’s it.

The Equalization formula continued to work as it is supposed to work.  As forecast in 2005, the provincial stopped qualifying for Equalization payments in 2009. 

When that happened, the “clawback” described in today’s news release didn’t hit zero. Rather it became a full  - 100% - clawback of all offshore revenues.

The 2005 made no changes to any of the provisions of the 1985 agreement.

The 1985 Accord alone forms the basis for the current offshore oil industry and for current provincial prosperity. 

Here’s the way your humble e-scribbler laid it out in 2004/2005:

First, [under what became the 1985 Accord] the provincial government would gain the right to manage the offshore jointly with the federal government, particularly with respect to setting the mode of production. This had significant implications for local benefits, as evident from construction of the gravity-based system (GBS) for Hibernia.

Second, the provincial government gained the right to collect revenues from the resources as if they were on land. This established that the provincial government would determine its own revenues to be collected from offshore oil and gas development and production just as a province like Alberta is able to do. These revenues would, de facto, be treated as “own source” revenues like income tax, sales tax and other similar levies.

Third, the province as a whole would benefit from the development of local jobs. Mulroney committed that oil-related infrastructure would be sited in the province, where possible. This was no small matter. Mulroney’s letter [Brian Mulroney to Brian Peckford, 1984] contains strong language and conveys a deliberate intent on the part of the future Prime Minister to provide this province with significant job and business benefits. “Local job creation and labour development would be of paramount concern.”

Fourth, the province would benefit since the provincial government would not see a dollar-for-dollar loss of Equalization payments that would naturally result from growth in the government’s own-source revenues. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador would receive all of its own-source revenue, potentially a portion of any federal shares in the offshore, and as well, additional payments to offset any losses from Equalization.

The same general approach was taken by the Liberal administrations which preceded Mr. Mulroney. For example, the comprehensive proposal made by the Government of Canada in 1982 stated that “it is recognized that Newfoundland should enjoy the major share of the revenue that offshore resources are expected to generate…” and that “the people of the province would realize the greatest and the most direct benefits from the development of offshore oil and gas resources in terms of growth and income, jobs, opportunities for new businesses, and significant new provincial government revenues.”

The federal Liberal proposal on revenue sharing was linked inextricably to the overall performance of the provincial economy and hence may be taken as further evidence of the extent to which the federal government before 1984 viewed the benefits from the offshore to this province to be greater than just the sums flowing to the provincial government’s treasury.

While local job benefits merited two short paragraphs in the original Mulroney letter, both the Accord itself and the enabling legislation provide an elaborate structure aimed at managing local benefits. No one can underestimate the value of local industrial benefits to the province; nor can anyone easily dismiss the contention that the architects of the Atlantic Accord saw local industrial development as a significant factor in establishing this province as the principal beneficiary of offshore oil and gas development. [Paragraphing altered to improve readability]

-srbp-

Customer Service: Tammany Style

The thrust of comments made on CBC Radio this morning by the guy responsible for clearing the snow:

**  Yeah we buried the taxpayer’s driveway and then didn’t do anything about it for three days after the storm even after he called the right number and pointed out our mistake like we told him he should.

We showed up three days later by which time he’d dug himself out and the snow had melted a bit.

There was no real problem by then.

These things happen.

We have a gajillion miles of streets and if we responded to just one percent of the calls about driveways we’d never get anything done.

Now this driveway was hard to see, so maybe – and only maybe – if the taxpayer had taken it on himself at his own expense to mark the driveway somehow we might have avoided the problem.  There’s no guarantee though because we keep shifting the drivers around and they don’t always know the neighbourhoods.  **

Or words to that effect.

Absolutely amazing.

-srbp-

Up the Creek with Jackman and Rideout

And neither had a paddle to get anyone out of the mess which is the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Latest word is the Sullivan family – close Tory ties there or what? – cannot do any better a job running the fish plants they got from the smash-up of Fishery Products International than the crowd who ran FPI.

There is nothing new in any of the latest demands.  The Sullivans want to ship yellow-tail flounder to China because it can’t be processed profitably in this province. 

Mind you this is exactly what FPI did to subsidise the plants it used to own. Last going off, the fisheries minister of the day undertook a prosecution of FPI under the fish export regulations which  - like so much of government policy toward FPI - certainly had the stink of being politically-motivated and insubstantial all over it. 

Rather than bother commenting on the current demand from the company, let’s just review some of the recent history on this via some old posts. 

What you’ll quickly discover is that the current problems are essentially the same as the old ones.  In other words, fish minister Clyde Jackman is dead wrong if he thinks the problems fish minister Tom Rideout faced were different from the ones Jackman is facing today. 

You’ll also find their solutions today are going to look all too familiar as well. They are both up the same creek without anything that even looks like a paddle. The fish plant workers and fishermen who suffer as a result are farther up the same creek and they don’t even have a canoe.

And of course nothing at all will happen with any of it because the only man who apparently is allowed to make a decision in the current administration is currently laid up in hospital for another few weeks.

• June 2005:  “The tragedy of common-place thinking”
• November 2005:  “The return of Backuppable Tom”
• November 2005:  “The FPI-competitor myth and one of the real problems”
• March 2006:  “FPI, Tom Rideout and the future of the fishery”
• March 2006:  “Was Rideout asleep in the wheelhouse?”

-srbp-

Doing the Spandau Ballet

labradore highlights the bizarro world of local Cultists including one of the leading worshippers who – according to very poorly informed pundits and some misguided others – is considered as a potential leader of the Liberal Party.

-srbp-

Kiss it all good bye

Anyone hear any comments by the current St. John’s city councillors at how proud they were of the way the city looked in CBC’s Republic of Doyle?

Well, here’s what some of them told reporters, as presented in the Telegram:

“Republic of Doyle," a TV series that aired on CBC last week, received rave reviews from St. John's city councillors Monday.

"I didn't realize what a city I lived in, how beautiful it was," Coun. Gerry Colbert said. "When I look back on when I was a young fellow watching Magnum P. I., I used to say, 'God, I'd love to visit Hawaii, look at the shots of Hawaii, ' but I mean these shots, forget about the acting for a while, the shots that were taken were absolutely incredible."

Colbert said the show has gained popularity on the Internet and can be found on YouTube.

"We couldn't buy, in a million years, what that show gave us in one night," he said.

Mayor Dennis O'Keefe agreed that the city wouldn't be able to buy that kind of profile.

Coun. Debbie Hanlon and Coun. Sheilagh O'Leary also praised the show.

"It was fabulous, St. John's certainly looked gorgeous in it," Hanlon said.

"I was delighted," O'Leary said. "It was just fantastic."

Bet your last dollar that every single one of those councillors – except for Sheilagh O’Leary – is already sold on the idea of demolishing the downtown portion of St. John’s that provides much of the backdrop for the show.

You see every single city councillor – save O’Leary and maybe two others – is already on board with a plan by Fortis Properties to smash the existing municipal development plan and stick a 15 story high-rise on prime real estate on the waterfront.

It’s hard to imagine otherwise when you hear the mayor say absolutely asinine things like his line to local businessmen and women at a Rotary club that without development like Fortis is proposing, the city will have to rely on taxes to get its money.  

And if you listen to other councillors, it’s hard to imagine any of them standing in the way either.  There’ll be lots more talk about listening to the other side and about the need for development and progress.

That’s all just code for “I’ve already decided to vote for Fortis”. 

The crew at City Hall and their backers know how to talk out the clock.  They would like nothing better than an endless series of meetings and all sorts of hot air.  At the end, they’ll just vote the way they know right now that they will vote:  with Stan Marshall and his crowd.

Just remember what they did to people over the stadium, right down to the appeals farce.

Once the Fortis gig is done, then someone will file a proposal for the empty lot across Prescott Street from the current Fortis property.  This time they won’t try and conform to the old by-law like they sort-of did last time.  This time they’ll shoot for the stars.

And they’ll get that too.

Not long after there’ll be other plans. Other old buildings will be torn down because they are…well…old.

In place of these icky old things will rise the sort of architecture you see not in New York or Paris but in the true centres of modern civilization and culture.

Places like Mississauga or maybe Burlington.

Now this is not a lost cause by any stretch.  St. John’s city councillors are notoriously a pretty weak-kneed bunch. That’s why a few guys with imaginations as limited as their pockets are deep can win them over so easily.

But it’s going to take way more than a conversation or two in order to stop this proposal in its tracks.

Public meetings and letter writing won’t work much on them either. 

If people really don’t want to see the downtown turned into a carbon copy of a million other eyesores on the planet then they have to make it clear to each councillor that there is a huge political and maybe even a social or business price to be paid for what they are going to do. 

You see that’s the sort of stuff that is helping persuade them to vote with Fortis.  They are siding with their peeps.

So if you want them to shift positions, then sticking with their pals has to become painful.

Opponents of the plan need to consider some frank talk, some plain language.

Otherwise, kiss the whole of the downtown good bye and say hello to a cheap imitation of Scarborough.

-srbp-

Over and over and over, ‘til my tongue spirals out of my head…

That seems to be the mantra of government spending announcements for things like the Conception Bay South Bypass Road.

This is one recounted in this space last summer.

Well, now Terry French – since elevated to cabinet – is breaking the oft-announced and long delayed project down into its sub-components.  It’s no longer good enough just to announce a construction.  Now there has to be an announcement of the award of tenders to supply every bit of the sub-work.

In this case, it is the call for tenders for five kilometres of brush clearing.  Undoubtedly awarding the tender will get another release and then the felling of the first bit of scrub should be good for a photo op.

It all fits into the current Conservative philosophy – provincial and federal – of announcing announcements previously announced.  Makes it look like things are happening and that perception gets especially important four times a year.

Like say right now.

It’s February and the official government pollster is in the field.

-srbp-

Trivimania: the Premier Edition

Thursday, February 11, marks the 25th anniversary of a document that is second only to the Terms of Union in the profound transformation it caused in Newfoundland and Labrador in the past 100 years.

February 11 is the date on which the federal and provincial governments concluded the Atlantic Accord.  We aren’t talking about the one-time load of  “f” off money from 2005. 

Nope.

We are speaking here of the landmark federal-provincial agreement that is the underpinning of every single offshore oil penny that has ever come, bar none.   Were it not for the 1985 agreement, there would be no offshore oil industry in this province, at least not the way it is today.

But there’ll be more on that later in the week.

Today, let’s take a quick look at the lighter side of events like this.  Inevitably, they bring to mind the sorts of details, the tender morsels of information that only regular fans of Friday Cross Talk’s trivia show or jeopardy would bother to notice.

Who was Premier of Newfoundland – as the province was then called – in 1985?

Brian Peckford, of course.

Sadly, he is forgotten by too many people in our province, perhaps most surprisingly of all he is neglected – and has been savagely abused even - by the crowd who currently run the place.

But Brian stands out in another way.

Of all the post-Confederation Premiers who held the office as the result of a general election, Brian Peckford was the youngest person sworn into office as Premier.  He was just 37 years old in 1979.  He’d won the Progressive Conservative leadership and took office as Premier before the election, but unlike Roger Grimes, Beaton Tulk and Tom “43 days” Rideout, Peckford won his own mandate.

So here’s the rest of the trivia quiz for you.  Sorry, there are no prizes other than the satisfaction of knowing you are a fountain of seemingly useless information too.  And remember, we are excluding from our consideration those three post-Confed Premiers who didn’t win the job in a general election.

1.  We know Brian Peckford was the youngest, but which Premier was the oldest at the time he was sworn into office?

2.  Which Premier was second oldest at the time of swearing in?

3.  Which Premier was the oldest at the time he left office?

4.  a.  What provincial district has the distinction of being the one from which the most post-Confederation premiers have been elected?

b.  How many of those Premiers could be considered townies by place of birth? [To avoid any confusion, let’s restate this question to make it clear: Of the Premiers since Confederation, including Tulk, Grimes and Rideout, which one was born in St. John’s?  That is who is the only townie Premier since 1949?]

And finally,…

5.  If we take every single person sworn in as Premier (yes, including Grimes, Tulk and Rideout),  list them in order from oldest to youngest at the time he was sworn in.

Perhaps your humble e-scribbler can come up with some prizes to hand out for the next contest.

-srbp-