This is a short video recounting the American air strike against Libya in 1986.
The video mentions SA-3 Goa and SA-5 Gammon anti-aircraft missiles. Together with the much older SA-2 Guideline, they still formed the backbone of Libyan air defence.
Well, that is until the past 48 hours.
Taking out Libyan air defences was the first phase of coalition military action against Muammar Gaddafi’s forces. Aircraft and cruise missiles reportedly struck anti-aircraft missile sites and airfields.
- srbp -
From a pork-barrel almost appointment to a minister welcoming federal pork that never comes, this week the most popular posts are about Conservatives and patronage.
- srbp -
Ryan Cleary, former newspaper editor, former talk show host and former NDP candidate is considering another run at federal politics six months, after he packed it in as the New Democratic Party candidate in St. John’s South-Mount Pearl.
Cleary carried the orange banner in the 2008 federal election, lost that one, then took up a job hosting a late night talk show. Although the gab-fest was well suited to his talkative style, Cleary quit that gig to spend more time with his family and then sought the NDP nomination again.
Last October he gave that up to go back to journalism and now he is apparently considering an offer from the NDP to run again for them in St. John’s South-Mount Pearl.
Talk about on-again, off-again.
A campaign involving Cleary, Liberal incumbent Siobhan Coady and reputed Tory heavyweight Loyola Sullivan could turn out to be an interesting race. Cleary has the potential to split up the nationalist Conservative vote especially among local Conservatives who are still can’t get beyond the whole demon Harper thing.
In 2008, Danny Williams’ gang tried to drive the Tories to Coady. Four prominent members of his caucus, including Kathy Dunderdale and Paul Oram, went door-to-door for Coady. It didn’t work. The local Blue Crew that did turn out opted for Cleary, instead.
Cleary also might not be able to count on quit so much spill-over help from Jack Harris in St. John’s East. The darling of the East End will be in a tighter race of his own against Jerry Byrne.
As a result, Jack might not be able to give any serious help to the fellow some will soon be affectionately referring to as Yo-Yo Maw.
- srbp -
Scott Reid’s dissection of national politics could equally be a commentary on politics in Newfoundland and Labrador since 2003.
Here’s a taste:
We can begin with a Parliamentary Press Gallery that, increasingly, is dazzled by political tactics, bored by substance and disinterested in the awkward obligation of challenging authority. With too few exceptions — and one fewer with the sad passing of the Star's Jim Travers — reporters seem more interested in sounding like in-the-know party strategists than detached observers.
It is they, in particular, who tell us repeatedly that "no one cares." And all too frequently, there is little, if any, suggestion that part of the media's function is to serve as a check on abuse of authority. Put another way, if Woodward and Bernstein had followed the same method we sometimes witness in Ottawa, they would surely have shrugged off Deep Throat, explaining that no one cares about such a technical, complicated story and that, in any event, Nixon's triumph over McGovern rendered the matter moot.
- srbp -
Almost two years after your humble e-scribbler pointed out the blatant stupidity of the provincial government’s decision to boycott free trade talks, the provincial government is now sorting itself out.
The provincial government trade gang will switch from observers to participants at the upcoming trade talks between Canada and the European Union in April.
The old policy - supported unquestioningly by the same people who have now turned 180 degrees – was stupid because it jeopardized the existing and future economic interests of the province and left local industry to being left out of a new lucrative market.
What’s worse, the old, stupid policy threatened to increase the dependence of the local economy on on the American market. As a result, the provincial economy would become even more fragile than it had already grown as a result of seven years of backward economic policy by the provincial government.
It may have taken two years but the current crowd have finally figured it out.
- srbp -
Gary Kelly won the by-election for Corner Brook City council polling 987 votes. He topped a field of five candidates.
He ran a campaign with a significant presence in the social media and took to the streets of Corner Brook with his sign in hand, greeting pedestrians and waving to motorists. His effort was often the talk of the city throughout the campaign, and Wednesday evening the results proved its worth.
Expect to hear more about this guy in the future.
- srbp -
Our man in Menihek.
The Pavement Putin of the Permafrost.
Currently the Labrador affairs minister and reputedly wannabe Conservative candidate in the next federal election.
Well, he may not be seen anywhere other than the A&W in Goose Bay for breakfast but certainly no one has heard from him on a CBC story that the Department of National Defence isn’t interested in spending any more cash on sustaining the infrastructure at Goose Bay beyond what they need.
Funny that Hickey is so silent. In 2006, for example he was adamant that the fine people of Goose Bay could count on the promises of his political pals in Ottawa. Here’s what he said in the House of Assembly in April 2006:
Although there was some fearmongering [sic] going around the community and there were some moments there last week when people were not really sure, I want to commend the new Minister of National Defence, Minster Gordon O’Connor, for coming out publicly on Monday morning and reconfirming the commitment that he made to the people of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, that he made recently to Premier Williams in Ottawa, and the commitment that Prime Minister Harper made to our Province in a letter that he wrote to the Premier during the election. The commitment is there, Mr. Speaker, it is solid, 650 troops on the ground. We are going to see an army base there with an extra 100 support troops for a UAV squadron. This is fantastic news, Mr. Speaker, for the Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay and for the
District of Lake Melville.
Fantastic news of the glories to be delivered onto the fine people of the Big Land by John’s Big Friends.
Anything to the contrary was fear-mongering.
Five years later?
Fantastical nothingness.
In fact, the likelihood of the federal Conservatives delivering even the promise to promise something vaguely like they’ve been promising is so remote at this point that some of the local movers and shakers in Labrador are thinking about trying to press the federal Conservatives for the loan guarantee on Muskrat in lieu of the numerous lavish and thus far unfulfilled pledges to bring riches to Goose Bay via National Defence.
- srbp -
Environmental concerns are causing problems for a proposed electricity transmission line that could help carry Labrador electricity into the United States.
The Northern Pass project will carry electricity from Quebec into New Hampshire and on to the rest of New England.
Some local residents in New Hampshire are concerned that the proposed route will damage the state’s tourism industry.
John Harrington is a retired newspaper publisher. He told North Country Public Radio:
“What’s being threatened is the only thing we really have left, which is tourism. All for the convenience of people far to the south. And we’re going to wind up with this huge scar right down through the narrowest and most fragile part of New Hampshire.”
Then there’s the question of whether or not big hydro is actually green. Only Vermont currently accepts hydroelectricity from large dams as renewable and green and therefore eligible to count in state-mandated energy calculations. Most New England states require that a percentage of electricity in the state come from renewable, green energy sources. Both the American federal and some state governments also give cash incentives to renewable energy projects.
In some states, debate is already raging about the implications of renewable energy policies. In last fall’s gubernatorial campaign, incumbent Deval Patrick’s Republican challenger included support for big hydro as part of his campaign platform.
In Connecticut, Northeast utilities senior vice-president James Robb told a conference last November that without big hydro, “ it will be very challenging to meet those goals” of increasing the use of renewable energy sources to 25% of generation by 2025. Robb said that there are projects but many are uneconomical.
Still, the big hydro projects don’t meet existing guidelines.
The main concern regarding hydro is that the flooding resulting from dams causes leaves and other foliage to decompose, emitting methane, one of the worst greenhouse gases. The Canadian officials [at the November conference] argued that the water in their provinces is so cold that the leaves don’t decompose.
“I’m struggling here in New England with how New England is going to meet its renewable requirements. Without Quebec and Newfoundland & Labrador, you will struggle to hit that,” said Ed Martin, president and CEO of Nalcor Energy, which is based in the hydro- and wind-rich Newfoundland & Labrador. “Hydro is part of the mix that has to happen if you are going to meet the goals in New England.”
- srbp -
Usually when one is in a hole, it is a good idea to stop digging.
There may be exceptions to this rule, but for most occasions, when you can no longer see over the edge of the hole even on your tippee toes, best thing to do is lay the shovel down and start figuring out how to get out of the self-inflicted predicament.
If your friends are in a hole, then you can offer them a hand up out of the hole. Under no circumstances, though, should you start shovelling dirt in on top of them. Jumping in with them may be noble but it is never sensible and if you are in the hole, it is never wise to start pulling the shite back in around your own feet.
Evidently, someone forgot to explain this subtle bit of mystical political knowledge to Premier Kathy Dunderdale.
Instead, Premier (pro tempore) Dunderdale got hold of the Danny and Liz playbook, a portion of which Liz decided to continue this week in her ongoing campaign to destroy whatever shreds of her own dignity she might have left.
Remember that claim about not knowing about the appointment? Well, kiss that nose-puller goodbye when the evidence is unveiled. Elizabeth Matthews told the Telegram that in fact she had a copy of the order in council the Liberals released on Tuesday.
The she tried to turn the whole thing into a process story:
The job of vice-chair of the CNLOPB requires approval from the federal government and Matthews said she was not “informed in any official capacity” that she had been named to the board.
So she knew, but not officially and therefore she didn’t know.
Or did she?
Liz Matthews may well turn out to be the political progeny not of Danny Williams but of Tom “TimeLord” Rideout. Liz knew but didn’t know. Back in 2007, Tom wanted to explain that the Green report recommendations on allowances would come into effect tomorrow but in his world, tomorrow meant six months in the future, not the day after this one.
How in the name of heavens can anyone not wilfully and pathologically blinded by Danny-envy be surprised that the Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight, the crowd that brought you a low rent version of Doctor Who - Rideout, Hedderson and Marshall editions - and the Abitibi expropriation blunder couldn’t even handle a simple appointment to a board whether out of unfettered lust for patronage or a secret John-Turnerish promise to Danny?
Seriously.
Who is shocked by this?
Didn’t think so.
Unable to hide from the media any longer, the person who actually made the Elizabeth Matthews nomination made a few comments today. The result was, well, let’s just say that when she frigs up Kathy Dunderdale does not settle for half measures. She laid her shovel down alrightee and then dragged in a backhoe just to really bury herself.
Before going any further, let us remember that the core point Dunderdale could have used was simple: appointment’s not done yet. We’ll let you know when and if it is made. That is the same line Matthews could have used and it is the one Shawn Skinner could have tried.
There might have been a bit of a stink about patronage or potential pork-barrelling but it wouldn’t have been half as bad as day after day of the appointee and a senior minister saying things that they both ought to have known were bullshit and that could be shown to be bullshit fairly easily.
Think of it this way: they did not impeach Clinton for a quickie in the closet with a young woman a fraction of his age. They got him for insisting that he had not had sex with that woman and then engaging in some amateur lawyer bullshit about the definition of “is” in order to perpetuate the patently ridiculous denials.
So take a gander at the raw footage of Dunderdale talking to reporters.
Making it up as she goes along
Dunderdale claims there is a regulation requiring first a board appointment and then the second stage of a vice-chair nomination. She then claims that a letter conveys the official appointment.
Dunderdale knows or ought to know this is preposterous. There is no regulation governing the appointment. The Atlantic Accord implementation acts simply state that the nominee for vice chair needs the support of both the federal and provincial governments. If both governments agree on the nomination, a board appointment can follow in due course. Both governments can even agree whether it will be a federal, provincial or joint appointment.
Take a look at the order in council. It is clear that Matthews is appointed with effect from January 1 and that – in addition – cabinet put Matthews forward as a nominee for vice-chair subject to federal agreement. There’s even a reference to negotiating the salary for the vice chair’s job.
Simply put, Dunderdale is wrong. You have to be on the board if you are vice chair but you don’t have to be on the board before becoming vice chair.
Let’s go one step beyond. If, as Dunderdale claims, she never intended Matthews to sit on the board in any capacity other than as vice-chair, the order in council would have been written to say that. More likely, it would have followed the agreement and approved the appointment and salary as already agreed.
Dunderdale defends her nomination of Matthews because she believes the former Williams communications aide is a “strategic thinker” who is articulate. Clearly the events of the past couple of days speak to the contrary impression. Articulate strategic thinkers don’t usually default to easily disprovable crap as the first thought.
Dunderdale claims that the process is not secret, that it has to be straightforward and done in public. The events as they unfolded and Dunderdale’s own account of how things were supposed to happen make her claims about welcoming debate patently false.
Had things unfolded as Dunderdale intended, no one would have learned of the appointment until after it was copper-fastened, to use a hideous Dunderism. Michael Connors of NTV (or so it sounded like) made the point in a question that an appointment to the board announced in December would have sparked controversy. Indeed, it would have.
As for welcoming the chance to defend Matthews, it is almost laughable that both Matthews and Dunderdale talked about their willingness to defend the appointment only after Matthews quit the process and therefore made such a defence unnecessary.
People who genuinely believe they can win don’t quit. It’s that simple. Everything else is nonsense.
As for what really happened, the full story may never emerge. It is possible, for example, that Dunderdale – like her patron and water rights – got caught in a rather amateurish effort to engineer something for Matthews. Heck, maybe the same legal geniuses behind that fiasco and the expropriation cooked up this scheme with their less-than-perfect knowledge of the law and procedure.
Faced with a federal twin vice-chair who might well have wound up as the official replacement for Ruelokke, any other schemes about changing the board using Matthews may well have been scuttled.
Then again, the simple fact that Matthews blew her own feet off with her patently false claims on Friday, coupled with industry and political pushback made the appointment too stinky to survive the very debate Dunderdale supposedly welcomed. Dunderdale and Matthews can talk all the brave talk they want: fact is they lost.
The whole Matthews mess is almost too embarrassingly ridiculous to believe. Had it not unfolded in front of our eyes, anyone could reasonably reject it as too incredible to be true.
[But the fact is] you just cannot make this stuff up.
All we can do is wait to see what Dunderdale does next.
[Updated: corrected typos; subhead clarified; words added in square brackets to clarify sentence.]
- srbp -
Related:
A few of the people steadfastly supporting the provincial government’s pork-barrel attempt to get Elizabeth Matthews on the offshore regulatory board were left scratching their heads Tuesday evening. [changed verb tense]
Some are so perplexed trying to reconcile their stories with the facts that they are even calling for a public inquiry
The reason is simple. Yet another aspect of the story they have been spreading is blowing away in the face of facts.
The specific bit now boiling off faster than a Japanese reactors’ cooling water is the claim that Elizabeth Matthews didn’t know about her board appointment or that her appointment included a seat on the board, depending on how you interpret the comments.
On Friday, Matthews responded to a Liberal opposition news release that noted she was appointed to the offshore board on December 21 with effect from January 1, 2011. CBC provincial affairs reporter David Cochrane tweeted a series of comments on this, including comments about Matthews:
(March 11) “Where are you getting this from? Feds tell me her appt isn’t finalized at all…I spoke to Matthews directly. She says she is not on the board….EM says she has never been told of any appointment. Do Libs have draft letter never sent?…Skinner says they nominated EM in January…”.
Cochrane put Matthews’ comments to Shawn Skinner in a scrum on Monday. Skinner agreed that Matthews hadn’t been notified and that’s the story CBC ran with on Tuesday. Skinner also mentioned that the appointment needed an order in council but insisted that Matthews didn’t know about the appointment.
Well, the order in council clinches it:
If you look on the left-hand side of the document, you will see the list of people to whom officials of the cabinet secretariat distributed the order. “P” is the Premier. The Natural Resources and Public Service Secretariat deputy ministers got copies, as did the Attorney General, the Deputy Clerk of the Executive Council and the file.
And so did someone named E. Matthews.
Just so that everyone understands just how crucial this document is, understand that the order in council is one of the basic legal instruments of our system of government. You can find a handy definition of what an order in council is over at the Privy Council Office website along with a searchable database of these public documents.
To paraphrase, an order in council is a legal instrument made by the cabinet, called the Lieutenant Governor in Council, by powers given by a law or, less frequently, the royal prerogative. In most provinces, orders in council are made on the recommendation of the responsible minister and take legal effect only when signed by the Lieutenant Governor.
They don’t get back-dated. And they damn well don’t get left sitting idly around somewhere unattended. The people who handle these things are nothing if not diligent to the point of anal retentivism about making sure everything is done just so. That’s not a knock on them; to the contrary, the people in the Executive Council office are among the most trustworthy and responsible people anywhere on the planet.
They don’t shag up, as a rule.
And in this case, they’d have extra incentive not to make a mistake. As Shawn Skinner pointed out on Monday, these appointments belong entirely to the Premier. Kathy Dunderdale gets to make them just like her predecessor Danny Williams did. That isn’t what happened before 2003, by the way.
If Kathy picked Liz, then there’d be hell to pay if Liz did not know that she could start earning cash come the New Year.
Nor is it really plausible that Kathy Dunderdale, Shawn Skinner or any of their senior staff might have buggered up and not mentioned to Liz she had a seat on the board.
Nor is it likely that they thought one didn’t happen without the other. Shawn Skinner’s been pretty clear since Monday that they considered it a two-stage process, but stage one happened in December.
The order in council makes the appointment to the board first. Then it puts Matthews forward as a vice-chair, subject to federal approval. That’s what Skinner told reporters on Monday. As it turned out, the feds made a counter-offer to accept Matthews contingent on the province accepting a second vice-chair by federal appointment.
Nor is it likely David Cochrane either misunderstood what Matthews told him or made a fairly consistent mistake in conveying it via Twitter or anywhere else. Matthews relayed what he got and consistently put the comments to Skinner.
Now Liz may have misunderstood what was going on, but that’s a different – and entirely possible – thing.
For something like this, Matthews would have been entitled to attend any board meetings after January 1, 2011 and participate like any other member. The only thing that hadn’t been settled up to the time she bailed on the whole thing was the second part of the order. That is, the federal government had not agreed to her appointment to the vice-chair’s job.
But her board appointment on behalf of the province?
Full legal effect on December 21.
With Matthews’ decision to bail on the appointment, the whole vice-chair position at the board is up in the air. The idea of two vice-chairs appears to have been nothing more than an effort to have a federal appointee to offset Matthews.
With her appointment now dead, there’s an opportunity for both St. John’s and Ottawa to agree on an open competition to be followed by an appointment based on qualifications and merit.
If nothing else, it’s got to beat the hell out of yet another complete disaster - remember Andy Wells? - that its proponents have been forced to defend with what amount to claims of their own bungling and incompetence.
- srbp -
Last January, the Hebron partners said they’d be submitting their development plan for Hebron to the offshore board by the end of the year.
That would have been December 2010.
Now it’s March 2011 and there’s still no sign of it.
- srbp -
According to the cover story in the latest issue of Natural Resources magazine, the provincial government and representatives of the major oil companies are reviewing ways to increase exploration offshore.
Operators are presenting the government with a “suite” of proposals, according to [industry representative Paul] Barnes — many of them involving fiscal incentives, such as tax credits or royalty relief, that could spur increased exploration.
Barnes is quoted as saying that the talks are “high-level” likely meaning they involve the Premier and other senior cabinet ministers. The 2007 energy plan included a recommendation to establish a working group involving industry and the provincial government to develop “regulatory and fiscal measures” to promote exploration as well as what the document refers to as “other industry needs.”
One idea reportedly under consideration is a royalty break for dry exploration wells.
For example, companies already producing in the area may favour some type of incentive that’s royalty based. If they drill a well and come up dry, they could get royalty relief on current production. “If there’s some risk offset, that may encourage some additional exploration activity,” Barnes noted. He said there are similar royalty-relief holidays for deepwater exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, to help mitigate the cost of unsuccessful wells.
That’s a significant switch from earlier Conservative positions but it is consistent with what the Conservatives have done since they took office.
For example, before 2003, when oil prices were below US$30 a barrel, Danny Williams attacked any suggestion that the Hebron partners might need a flat one percent oil royalty in the early years of any Hebron project. Once in office, when oil prices tripled, he agreed to just just a windfall for the oil companies. The provincial government will lose hundreds of millions of dollars as a result, if oil prices remain above US$35 a barrel.
Other issues for the industry include continued uncertainty about the province’s oil royalty regime. The 2007 energy plan committed to scrap the existing one and replace it with a new approach. Four years later there’s no sign of work being done, let alone any progress.
In natural gas, the provincial government still doesn’t have a royalty regime. That’s despite the fact work on the rules started in 1997 and the 2007 energy plan outlined a draft royalty policy.
- srbp -
Elizabeth Matthews is bailing out of her controversial nomination to serve as vice-chair of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore petroleum Board.
It isn’t clear if she is also leaving her appointment to the board itself.
As CBC reports, Matthews is blaming the Opposition Liberals for politicising the entire matter. Matthews served as a communications director for the Liberal administration of Roger Grimes before she left quickly to work for Danny Williams in the Opposition office where he was infamous for slinging wild, political accusations. In another ironic twist, Matthews former boss said he got into politics because he was sick of all the patronage and corruption.
The big twist in the story appears to have come on Friday when the Liberals revealed a December 21 letter from natural resources minister Shawn Skinner to his federal counterpart appointing Matthews to the offshore with effect from 01 January 2011.
And then things went horribly wronger Update:
The Telegram has the full text of Matthews’ statement. For starters, try and find the clear statement where she says she is quitting her appointment. Then check and see if she has actually launched any defamation action given her references to defamation. This sounds suspiciously like John Hickey suing Roger Grimes for stuff Danny Williams said: a huge pile of smoke to cover the catastrophe everyone else sees.
If that wasn’t enough, note, among other things, the change in her title in the Premier’s Office from the bio sketch in the letter on the appointment – “Senior Policy Advisor” - to “a senior advisor”. There’s a huge difference in the two. That’s just the tip of that iceberg.
- srbp -
Flip back to the provincial government news release archive for last December and there’s one thing you won’t see: an announcement appointing Elizabeth Matthews to occupy a provincial seat on the offshore regulatory board.
That’s because they didn’t issue an announcement despite sending the federal government a letter advising the feds of the provincial appointment. You can find the letter online at the Official Opposition’s website. They got it from the provincial natural resources department.
In the second paragraph of the letter, natural resources minister Shawn Skinner also nominates Matthews as vice-chair of the offshore regulatory board. That’s something the federal government would have to agree to. Apparently they did but only on the condition that the province accept a federal second vice-chair.
One huge difference between the two vice-chairs, incidentally is that the federal one actually was a senior policy advisor in a previous life. The biographical sketch of Elizabeth Matthews was evidently written by someone in the latter stages of advanced pinochiosis. For example, the bio sketch talks about a re-negotiation of the Atlantic Accord. That never happened so it would be pretty hard for Matthews to have been involved in it at all, let alone at the level the writer claimed.
There’s a story in Saturday’s Telegram on this but sadly it isn’t online. The story includes some quotes from a bizarro news release Skinner issued on Friday, supposedly to correct information in the Liberal release that went out along with Skinner’s letter to the feds.
The bizarro thing is that he didn’t actually correct anything. Instead, Skinner confirmed what the Liberals said. he also did a bit of a nose-puller when he claimed that the provincial government had to appoint Matthews to the board in order to nominate her as vice chair.
Think of that as being a chicken-and-egg version. Before now, the federal and provincial governments could successfully agree on an appointment as vice-chair before making an announcement. The board seat was secondary. In this case, the provincial government apparently tried to push Matthews forward with a seat on the board and then tried to cut the deal on the vice-chair’s job.
Surprise. Surprise.
The feds didn’t play along and put forward their own nominee for a second spot in a “I’ll take yours but only if you take mine too” kinda deal.
Both bits of that – the provincial ploy and the federal counter - likely have a lot to do with the fact that Matthews is basically a patronage appointee with no relevant qualifications to take on the vice-chair’s job. She can’t really hold a candle to either the current or former chair and she’s outclassed experientially speaking by the guy she was supposedly replacing. Had the provincial government opted for a meritorious appointment perhaps with an open competition they might have found one of several qualified women from the province to take the job.
Word of Matthews’ appointment leaked out about three or four weeks ago in the province’s oil community. It caused a great deal of consternation. A few weeks after word started to spread, CBC’s David Cochrane reported it. He only gave the bare bones of the basic story though. Apparently CBC isn’t reporting the rest of these details as they’ve come to light. It will be interesting to see if anyone adds new details to the story this week or if this is really the end of the story.
- srbp -
Here’s the quote:
So you’ve got the only oil refinery processing Newfoundland crude owned by the South Korean government, while the other oil refineries in Eastern Canada process oil pumped from wells located halfway around the world.
That comes after a lengthy discussion about the Come by Chance oil refinery and where crude from the Newfoundland offshore goes.
Slight problem.
Come by Chance refines oil from Iraq, Venezuela and Russia. It doesn’t refine anything from the local offshore.
Certainly the company that owns the refinery could get oil from the local offshore if it wanted to use it. Some people like to spread a fable that the 1985 Atlantic Accord prevents it, along with prohibiting the construction of a new refinery in the province. But truth be told it merely puts some restrictions on refining Newfoundland offshore oil in Canada.
The oil companies ship their product to the United States because it is more profitable for them to do that. They take the oil they pump out of the ground and ship it to their refineries and sell the refined products in their gas stations across the Untied States.
D’uh!
Makes good economic sense.
Meanwhile, the crowd at Come by Chance buy cheaper heavy sour crude from places like Venezuela and Iraq and ship that into the United States. The stuff offshore Newfoundland is light, sweet crude, incidentally. Higher wholesale price but also easier to refine into more products. That means it is much more profitable in the longer run.
Someone at the Sun really needs to do some checking of those pesky facts.
- srbp -
Telegram editor Russell Wangersky maps out the new normal in federal and provincial politics in a devastating column titled “Lies, the new truths.”
Russell’s right on the solution to the problem: people have stop accepting what they are told at face value especially when it comes directly from people involved and who, in certain instances, have a vested interest in the story.
Do that and, among other things, you might avoid the gigantic embarrassment of tweeting “I just heard from her. This is a patently false rumour” only to have to suck the whole thing back minutes later when the thing turned out to be patently true.
- srbp -
- srbp -
Take a gander at this clip from a recent edition of CTV’s Power Play with Don Martin. It features an interview with Nancy Peckford, executive director of Equal Voice.
Nancy covers some of the issues involved at the federal level in getting more women in elected politics.
- srbp -
There’s a new commentary from an Ottawa-based think tank on the AbitibiBowater expropriation. The commentary is basically Brian Lee Crowley’s presentation to the Commons standing committee on international trade.
You can read the full text here. and below are four highlighted points:
“1. The Chapter 11 provisions of NAFTA provide no bar whatsoever to Canadian
governments acting in the public interest through law and regulation, but they
properly require that the government pay the legitimate costs associated with
their decisions, including compensating parties whose property is confiscated or
nationalized.
2. Paying compensation for expropriation is a matter of basic fairness and is a
fundamental principle in Canadian law, not just NAFTA.
3. As a country with huge investments in other jurisdictions, we benefit enormously from such investor protections in other countries, and failure to apply
such protections domestically would damage our credibility and harm Canadian
investors
4. The AbitibiBowater case points up a damaging inconsistency in Canada’s constitutional and legal framework whereby Canada has the treaty-making power
and, therefore, is responsible to ensure that we meet our treaty obligations; but
provinces are not bound to respect the NAFTA provisions. A mechanism can and
should be found to oblige provinces to take responsibility for their decisions and
prevent them from passing the costs of provincial decisions on to the federal taxpayer.”
There’s also a version of the presentation in a Troymedia piece called “Provinces behaving badly and what can be done about it”:
Governments in Canada have the right to take your house, farm, or factory, but the requirements of fairness and the Canadian democratic tradition normally subject that power to limits. Governments must compensate you if they take your property. Moreover they don’t get to set the price unilaterally; it must be done by an arm’s length agency and be subject to judicial review.
It was Newfoundland and Labrador’s decision to ignore these rules of decent behaviour that created the damage that federal taxpayers must now clean up.
If there is any kind of a democratic deficit in the AbitibiBowater decision, surely it is here: in a genuine democracy, voters should have to face the true costs of their decisions so that they can make a balanced assessment of the pros and cons. The current arrangements force innocent federal taxpayers, who have no hand in choosing provincial governments in other provinces, to nonetheless pay the tab for those governments’ bad behaviour. And that is practically the textbook definition of a perverse incentive.
- srbp -
