Newfoundland "I Hate Harper" Thread

[Disgruntled70sHab]

centrehice said:

princelh said:

Harper is no different than any other politician. Distort facts, make promises to get elected....then back-pedal like mad once in.

An example of the hypocrisy:

Military Jets Are Cheaper For Harper To Use?

What's the problem with NL shedding the "have-not" mantle and benefitting from their bounty, while sharing some of the surplus with the other have-nots? Another cylinder firing usually makes the engine perform better.

If provinces have the means to put themselves in the black with their own resources then that should be the priority before ordering them to share with the rest of the country.

Cheers.

[CentreHice]

disgruntled70shab said:

centrehice said:

princelh said:

Harper is no different than any other politician. Distort facts, make promises to get elected....then back-pedal like mad once in.

An example of the hypocrisy:

Military Jets Are Cheaper For Harper To Use?

What's the problem with NL shedding the "have-not" mantle and benefitting from their bounty, while sharing some of the surplus with the other have-nots? Another cylinder firing usually makes the engine perform better.

If provinces have the means to put themselves in the black with their own resources then that should be the priority before ordering them to share with the rest of the country.

Cheers.

Exactly.

All parents hope that their children end up resourceful/successful in supporting themselves and not relying on handouts and bailouts from Mom and Dad.

[Skilly]

disgruntled70shab said:

Yet, Frank McKenna was successful in getting business to New Brunswick. In fact, he encouraged small businesses and tried to lure big businesses to his province by dangling a provincal tax incentive (honestly don't know the details, just the surface). I think he once said, "best social program we have is a job." Amen!

I don't have the time right now to explain how this applies to Newfoundland Dis, but I will once I get home.

[MC Habber]

skilly said:

machabby said:

Is there any province, other than perhaps Ontario, that doesn't have a separatist undercurrent? It comes up in BC every once in a while, although I think there's a lot less support for the idea here than in Newfoundland. Part of that is geography.

Skilly complained about lack of representation in parliament, but Newfoundland has proportionally more representation than they do population. How much representation would be enough? Should every province be equal? Is Newfoundland a "distinct society?"

You are darn tootin' Newfoundland is a distinct society.

I agree with that, but you could probably point to a lot of distinct societies in Canada, so I'm not sure what it means.

Newfoundland has 1.6% of the population .... and they have 2.3% of the seats in parliament. In my book they both get rounded to 2%.

Every province be equal? Well isn't every citizen suppose to be treated equal?

I don't have a strong feeling on this issue, but I can see why people might think it unfair if that 1.6% of the population had as much power as the 40% that live in Ontario. Then Citizens of Nfld would be 25 times more "equal" than citizens of Ontario, because their votes would be that much more influential.

[Skilly]

machabby said:

skilly said:

You are darn tootin' Newfoundland is a distinct society.

I agree with that, but you could probably point to a lot of distinct societies in Canada, so I'm not sure what it means.

Newfoundland has 1.6% of the population .... and they have 2.3% of the seats in parliament. In my book they both get rounded to 2%.

Every province be equal? Well isn't every citizen suppose to be treated equal?

I don't have a strong feeling on this issue, but I can see why people might think it unfair if that 1.6% of the population had as much power as the 40% that live in Ontario. Then Citizens of Nfld would be 25 times more "equal" than citizens of Ontario, because their votes would be that much more influential.

We are not asking for voting power MC ... no one ever said that.

We ARE asking to be treated exactly the same as the oil industry in Alberta. Are we not allowed to have that benefit because of our population?

[MC Habber]

skilly said:

machabby said:

I agree with that, but you could probably point to a lot of distinct societies in Canada, so I'm not sure what it means.



I don't have a strong feeling on this issue, but I can see why people might think it unfair if that 1.6% of the population had as much power as the 40% that live in Ontario. Then Citizens of Nfld would be 25 times more "equal" than citizens of Ontario, because their votes would be that much more influential.

We are not asking for voting power MC ... no one ever said that.

We ARE asking to be treated exactly the same as the oil industry in Alberta. Are we not allowed to have that benefit because of our population?

I see now, and I totally agree. I misunderstood what you meant by "every province equal."

[Skilly]

skilly said:

disgruntled70shab said:

Yet, Frank McKenna was successful in getting business to New Brunswick. In fact, he encouraged small businesses and tried to lure big businesses to his province by dangling a provincal tax incentive (honestly don't know the details, just the surface). I think he once said, "best social program we have is a job." Amen!

I don't have the time right now to explain how this applies to Newfoundland Dis, but I will once I get home.

I have been thinking about this ... and I know that I will never be able to get my thoughts into a well thought out, articulate, piece of writing. But, the first thing that came to my mind when I read "the best social program we have is a job" was "what's a job going to do for us?"

Don't get me wrong. When your unemployment rate is 15%, well obviously jobs are apart of the solution ... but they are also apart of the problem here in Newfoundland.

For starters, Newfoundland is an island and Labrador is remote. It cost more for everything in Newfoundland, and businesses shy away from doing business in Newfoundland because they can process and manufacture everything easier and cheaper on the mainland. So they come here and offer jobs, like jobs will be the salvation for our economy. But this is not so.

Since the times of Joey Smallwood politicians have tried every little business scheme to get jobs here in Newfoundland. When every Joey was dropping in the polls, he would bring up some factory/business that was going to bring jobs to Newfoundlanders. We had chocolate factories, rubber boot factories, cucumber growing, etc ... all failures ... but the lure of jobs made people buy into it. In the early 1990's, it was construction jobs that companies came here to give us. The problem with construction jobs? They are seasonal, so they promote reliance on EI.

Yes jobs are good ... but the type of job is just as important. And more important is locking down royalties (something never done in Newfoundland history until the oil), and getting companies to process and manufacture our resources here in our province. They are still shipping ore out of Voisey's Bay to Sudbury. The only people getting rich off Voisey's Bay, is INCO and Sudbury. But businesses do not want to do that .. they salivate at our resources with dollar signs in their eyes, but when it is suggested that the process it here well they say they aren't going to develop the resources and hold us at ransom.

I am reminded of the old saying "Give me a fish and you will feed me, Show me to fish and you will feed me for a lifetime" .... in Newfoundland however that should be amended to "Give me a job and you will feed me, Process it here and you will feed us for generations"

[CentreHice]

Skilly, anyone living in a province in your situation would feel exactly the same way.

It's like finally winning the lottery and not seeing any benefit.

(Some lottery winners in Ontario can relate).....

[Disgruntled70sHab]

skilly said:

skilly said:

I don't have the time right now to explain how this applies to Newfoundland Dis, but I will once I get home.

I have been thinking about this ... and I know that I will never be able to get my thoughts into a well thought out, articulate, piece of writing. But, the first thing that came to my mind when I read "the best social program we have is a job" was "what's a job going to do for us?"

Don't get me wrong. When your unemployment rate is 15%, well obviously jobs are apart of the solution ... but they are also apart of the problem here in Newfoundland.

For starters, Newfoundland is an island and Labrador is remote. It cost more for everything in Newfoundland, and businesses shy away from doing business in Newfoundland because they can process and manufacture everything easier and cheaper on the mainland. So they come here and offer jobs, like jobs will be the salvation for our economy. But this is not so.

Since the times of Joey Smallwood politicians have tried every little business scheme to get jobs here in Newfoundland. When every Joey was dropping in the polls, he would bring up some factory/business that was going to bring jobs to Newfoundlanders. We had chocolate factories, rubber boot factories, cucumber growing, etc ... all failures ... but the lure of jobs made people buy into it. In the early 1990's, it was construction jobs that companies came here to give us. The problem with construction jobs? They are seasonal, so they promote reliance on EI.

Yes jobs are good ... but the type of job is just as important. And more important is locking down royalties (something never done in Newfoundland history until the oil), and getting companies to process and manufacture our resources here in our province. They are still shipping ore out of Voisey's Bay to Sudbury. The only people getting rich off Voisey's Bay, is INCO and Sudbury. But businesses do not want to do that .. they salivate at our resources with dollar signs in their eyes, but when it is suggested that the process it here well they say they aren't going to develop the resources and hold us at ransom.

I am reminded of the old saying "Give me a fish and you will feed me, Show me to fish and you will feed me for a lifetime" .... in Newfoundland however that should be amended to "Give me a job and you will feed me, Process it here and you will feed us for generations"

It's hard to relate to this, skilly. I think my family and I have been fortunate in that we've always had work to go to.

When I got back to Kingston for the second time in '91, neighbours were telling me the unemployment rate was upwards of 25% to 27%. Now, CV might be able to verify this because I don't have any hard statistics and he's been here a lot longer than me. But, there was also talk in the mid-to-late 90's of closing CFB Kingston. This was before the contract teaching jobs were deeply entrenched on the base but it still meant putting 420-odd people out of work. These are people who work mostly on the base in support positions. However, nowadays that has increased. The military school I work in employs a total of 1,000 people, which include a whack of civilian instructors also. Take that out of the community, which has been here since before Fort Henry was built in 1832, and there's a crisis.

They worked like hell to keep the base here and once they proved how much the base meant to the survival of the city, and the fact CFB Kingston could balance their own books, the base is still alive and one of the largest employers in the city.

There are other factors that keep Kingston going though. I met Mrs Dis when she was attending St. Lawrence College and there are very few pubs in town where you can't bump into a Queen's student. And when you add trourism into the post-secondary school mix, you'll see that Kingston is a very transient town. Lot's of come and goes I guess. But, it's the "come and goes" along with the base that keeps the city going.

Good thing too. We've had several major businesses pack up and leave in recent years. And with them leave the jobs. A lot of that can be blamed on a stoic city council that didn't know how to, or didn't want to promote big business (that's changed in recent years though). They even turned down a charity casino that would have brought American money into Kingston, and a plethora of jobs as well. It would have probably gone on the waterfront downtown, which would have revitalized the neglected downtown core.

In keeping with the thread, skilly, I don't know the solution for NFLD. But, I still maintain that a province should be permitted to balance their own economy before being ordered to share with the rest of the country.

Still, the only time I read of provincial politics is when I hear it from guys like you here on the board. Just as well though. Don't get the sanitized versions we read in the papers.

Thanks.

[franko]

All bark, no bite

Newfoundland premier Williams not the mad dog he seems to be

John Ivison, National Post

Danny Williams' latest tirade against the federal government resembles a dog barking at the moon.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Premier was on a media blitz yesterday that included an advertising campaign attacking Stephen Harper for breaking a promise he made over the federal equalization program. The ads slam the Prime Minister for including 50% of oil and gas revenues in the equalization formula in last week's budget and for including a fiscal cap that will see revenues clawed back by Ottawa if any province's fiscal capacity rises above that of Ontario. Skilly: I got the impression that (a) 100% of revenues were included, and that (b) it was a distinctly Newfoundland claw-back!

Any province that is, except Newfoundland and Labrador. It is protected by the Atlantic Accord agreement, struck by Paul Martin in 2005 after Mr. Williams ordered the Canadian flag be taken down in his province. Under the Accord, the cap does not apply to the province until the deal runs out in 2011-12. And that this became effective immediately.

At that point, if it is still receiving equalization (which it will be, unless it becomes so prosperous it is deemed a "have" province) and its debt servicing charges are not lower than those of four other provinces, the life of the deal will be extended through to 2019-20. Immediately, without reservation

More facts: In 2007-08, Newfoundland and Labrador will receive total transfers from Ottawa of $1.67-billion, or $3,296 per person — more per capita than Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia or even Quebec. In 2004-05, equalization as a percentage of provincial revenues was 14% — higher than Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia (Ontario and Alberta do not receive equalization). Maybe I’m wrong, but Newfoundland seems to be getting at the very least a fair share.

Some provinces can indeed cry foul on the new equalization formula. Lorne Calvert, the Saskatchewan premier, has an iron-clad case that the Prime Minister has not lived up to an election promise to his province.

But Mr. Williams' sweetheart deal with Ottawa is grandfathered. By any measure, this is not a province that is getting "shafted," to use the Premier's indecorous phrase. In fact, other Canadians, particularly Ontarians, might ask why they are subsidizing a province that has more ability to raise its own-source revenues than they do.

If Mr. Williams is not simply a mad dog — and the evidence is he is far more clever than the bellicose figure he cuts on television — why is he foaming about a revamped equalization formula that probably won't apply to his province for the next 13 years?

It will come as no surprise to learn that Mr. Williams is facing an election this October. The Premier is already at 73% in the polls and seems intent on matching Saddam Hussein's record of 100% of the vote in 2002. Beating up on the provincial Liberals is seen as kicking sand in the face of a 98-pound weakling, so Mr. Williams has targeted an adversary who allows him to play the aggrieved party. And he is playing his part with gusto.

The Premier doesn't need to muster up fake indignation in his dealings with the Prime Minister — animosity that apparently dates back to a meeting that was requested by Mr. Harper, and refused by Mr. Williams, when the former was leader of the Opposition.
Mr. Williams seems to revel in his threat that he will deliver Mr. Harper "a big goose egg" at the next election. Last night, he called on "women, the homeless and literacy groups" to join him in spreading the word that Mr. Harper's government is toxic.

The Premier may well be able to follow through on the threat. He understands that the public is moved more by mood than reason in Newfoundland and Labrador, where equalization is personal, not the dry formula it represents to other Canadians.

In the past, Newfoundland has sent strong ministers such as John Crosbie and Brian Tobin to Ottawa, and they have been able to fight the federal government's corner at home when the need has arisen. But the current batch have been ineffective in making the federal government's case. Of the three Tories from the province, Norm Doyle has already said he is not running again and Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn has equivocated, saying he will run if an election takes place "in the immediate future." It seems no one in Newfoundland and Labrador dares to challenge the orthodoxy that the province is getting a raw deal from Ottawa.

The silence has allowed Mr. Williams to employ the megaphone diplomacy that has proved so spectacularly unsuccessful when used in his dealings with Big Oil. In that case, hundreds of people who could have been working off the shores of their own province are currently catching flights to Alberta because the Premier has demanded a better deal on reserves. Mr. Williams is rapidly becoming the Hugo Chavez of the Rock, blaming Ottawa for every misfortune from rural poverty to Newfoundland fog. Unfortunately, this dog might bark, but it won't hunt. link

[Skilly]

Franko ... that is typical "mainland reporting, Newfoundland slamming, ala Margaret Wente" that we always see.

The problem is Harper promised the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that non-renewable resources would not be included AT ALL. No one in Newfoundland would argue with a cap if we had an unemployment rate that was on par with Ontario or Alberta, or if we had their populations. There is no one that knows the ins-ands-outs of the equalizations formula (and the 32 factors that affect fiscal capacity) .. but it is highly sensitive to population which makes Newfoundland seem richer than it is.

The new equalization formula (with the new money, Ottawa's money) means we give up the Atlantic Accord. We don't want to rely on Ottawa and their conditions no more than any province.

The old equalization formula (the one with the Accord), the one we agreed to when we signed the Accord had NO cap. Now the deal is changed and we have a cap on revenues. Once we exceed that cap (the 50/50 revenues was something, I believe, that the province was willing to stomach (not sure on that, but I believe they saw that coming).. but the Cap is a biggy) .. Ottawa claws back our money based on a formula and because of our population (and many other factors, granted) could be clawed back at a rate that would nullify any gains.

I ask again ... back in the mid 1900's, Alberta was allowed to build pipelines through other provinces and have their oil revenues completely sheltered until they got on their feet and prosperous. Why is it that Newfoundland can not be treated the same ?... we weren't allowed to build transmission lines through Quebec and now we aren't allowed to have our own oil revenues to get our province back on its legs.

People look at this as "Newfoundland is getting a fair shake" .... why is it that Newfoundland has to always settle for being given a fair shake and never given the deal they were promised or god-forbid given what is theirs to begin with?

[Disgruntled70sHab]

skilly said:

I have been thinking about this ... and I know that I will never be able to get my thoughts into a well thought out, articulate, piece of writing. But, the first thing that came to my mind when I read "the best social program we have is a job" was "what's a job going to do for us?"

Don't get me wrong. When your unemployment rate is 15%, well obviously jobs are apart of the solution ... but they are also apart of the problem here in Newfoundland.

For starters, Newfoundland is an island and Labrador is remote. It cost more for everything in Newfoundland, and businesses shy away from doing business in Newfoundland because they can process and manufacture everything easier and cheaper on the mainland. So they come here and offer jobs, like jobs will be the salvation for our economy. But this is not so.

Since the times of Joey Smallwood politicians have tried every little business scheme to get jobs here in Newfoundland. When every Joey was dropping in the polls, he would bring up some factory/business that was going to bring jobs to Newfoundlanders. We had chocolate factories, rubber boot factories, cucumber growing, etc ... all failures ... but the lure of jobs made people buy into it. In the early 1990's, it was construction jobs that companies came here to give us. The problem with construction jobs? They are seasonal, so they promote reliance on EI.

I'd include fishermen in this category as well, skilly. When I lived in PEI that EI became very important in the off-season. Moreso when you figure at least half of a lobster fisherman's take came in the first two years of the season. The rest of the season is not near as profitable and they still have to pay for fuel, hired help, etc.

Yes jobs are good ... but the type of job is just as important. And more important is locking down royalties (something never done in Newfoundland history until the oil), and getting companies to process and manufacture our resources here in our province. They are still shipping ore out of Voisey's Bay to Sudbury. The only people getting rich off Voisey's Bay, is INCO and Sudbury. But businesses do not want to do that .. they salivate at our resources with dollar signs in their eyes, but when it is suggested that the process it here well they say they aren't going to develop the resources and hold us at ransom.

I am reminded of the old saying "Give me a fish and you will feed me, Show me to fish and you will feed me for a lifetime" .... in Newfoundland however that should be amended to "Give me a job and you will feed me, Process it here and you will feed us for generations"

For conversation's sake. Let's say if NFLD was self sufficient with refineries and the works, you'd think this might be a cue for government subsidies for transport costs. However, it seems to work in reverse sometimes. Once the government sees a money-making opportunity they usually find a way to secure some of those revenues rather than support it.

Cheers.

[Skilly]

If Newfoundland was self-sufficient we could afford to give companies subsidies. As it is now, corporate taxes breaks are given ...but then you are taking money away from a depleted pocket.

The fishery is pretty much dead here now (... who did that? Oh yeah Ottawa ...) but it seems alot of people are working just to qualify for EI. That is sad .. but what Harper gave us with this budget, we are going to be stuck doing that for a long time, he basically is ensuring that Newfoundland always will need Ottawa to help us out. (and we dont want that)

I am a structural engineer. I have worked on contstruction sites all over this province, and come October you see the glint in worker's eyes as they know the winter is coming and they'll be home with their snowmobiles. Not everyone is like that, but it is their way of life now ... with the oil revenues firmly in our own hands we can grow industry ourselves and ensure more people are working year-round. That's my take anyway.

[Skilly]

franko said:

More facts: In 2007-08, Newfoundland and Labrador will receive total transfers from Ottawa of $1.67-billion, or $3,296 per person — more per capita than Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia or even Quebec. In 2004-05, equalization as a percentage of provincial revenues was 14% — higher than Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia (Ontario and Alberta do not receive equalization). Maybe I’m wrong, but Newfoundland seems to be getting at the very least a fair share.

I notice how it is not explained how that number is arrived at. Obviously equalization is included in that number (which is calculated per capita, so no way for us to be more than a province with more population unless our fiscal capacity is sooo bad, and if it is then give us the oil money and get us off equalization... and Ontario and Alberta do not get equalization, so the reporter is being cute there). Health transfers, which are in the Constitution (I believe) are in there (aren't they done per capita?) .. Obviously, there is some transfer that is in that number that in not done per-capita (and with our small population, well that means a big number) ... it wouldn't surprise me if the reporter included some the Accord Money (which was a lump sum payment but was intended for an 8 yr period, and that money is spent).

[princelh]

He's been a good PM, or at least better than his predecessors, but he's no different than the others.

Give him an opportunity to lead with a majority and more will get done. The fact of the matter is this. We had 13 years of Liberal majority government with nothing getting done. To get things done, you must tweak a few peoples egos and do what needs to be done for the greater good of all. With a minority, it is not possible, because once the opposition finds a niche to attack the government, they force the government to fall or compromise to their standards. What need to be done in this country? Equality for all. Help where help is needed. An end to hand outs for past indiscretions created by past governments. We spend too much time crying about the past and trying to fix a past discretion, instead of moving forward and making current and future citizens lives more livable.

On Newfoundland, give them the hand up that they need to make their citizens on an equal footing with the rest of Canada, but stop the entitlement programs that make the past problems prevalent to today.

Same goes with Quebec and the Native populations of this country.

[franko]

Thanks for the attempts at edification, Skilly.

I think the newspaper article was 1/2 right: your premier is using the federal uninitiatives as an election platform (can't blame him).

Newfoundland is getting what Alberta got in the 70s -- nice you have found a way to balance the books and get ahead -- give it to us. I think that would be the attitude of every federal government. Stay the course, but don't be so abrasive . . . you'll get more.

[Skilly]

franko said:

Thanks for the attempts at edification, Skilly.

I think the newspaper article was 1/2 right: your premier is using the federal uninitiatives as an election platform (can't blame him).

Newfoundland is getting what Alberta got in the 70s -- nice you have found a way to balance the books and get ahead -- give it to us. I think that would be the attitude of every federal government. Stay the course, but don't be so abrasive . . . you'll get more.

That is another part of the problem ..well for me anyway ... we have to negotiate to get our own resources.

I don't think people realize the dollar amounts involved in this. Nobody knows how much oil is out there, some people think there could be as much as Saudi Arabia, but conservative estimates have it at about 2.7 billion barrels of oil (and the estimate only goes up each year).

We are talking billions and billions ans billions of dollars, and each day that goes by where we are not the prinicple beneficiary of the resource is a day we can't get back (since it is non-renewable). Newfoundland would be a have province as early as next year or 2009, and giving money to the other provinces ..... but it seems the Federal Government and Media would rather Newfoundland keep taking hand-outs.

I am behind our premier's strong stance. We want what was promised to us, not "more" ... "more" is less than what was promised. It is a matter of principle with a man that has no principles. I was going to vote Conservative in the federal election, and Liberal in the provincial ..... now I have done a 180 ... it will be Liberal in the federal and PC in the provincial.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

skilly said:

That is another part of the problem ..well for me anyway ... we have to negotiate to get our own resources.

Not on for governments that champion lip service decentralization.

Cheers.

[princelh]

Can Newfoundland afford to finance all of the oil platforms and lay down the infrastructure to make it all work without help from outside of Newfoundland? If so, where will they get the money to finance it all? The answer is, from the federal government through transfer payments, mostly from other provinces and other Canadians. Newfoundland wants all of the money from the resources, off-shore, but wants other Canadians or other provinces to pay the majority of the bills, with no return on their investment. If Newfoundland had followed a smarter formula, then they wouldn't have been snookered by Quebec at Churchill Falls. I want Newfoundland to flourish, but not at my expense, since I've helped to send my tax dollars to that province for many decades. You should be grateful that many in the rest of Canada helped keep your hospitals open and keep your infrastructure intact, until you could use your resources to help yourself. Danny Williams is a self promoting demagogue who wants to extract the maximum with the least effort of the provincial government.

[insomnius]

So Leafs fan and a conservative.


I so live in a different universe.


Skilly - I agree with you pretty much completely save for a few small details. That much oil - especially for the last province to join the union - should be the province's to develop - however as has been observed in some of the more salient posts herein there are ways that neither Harper nor Williams have explored to make this a profitable venture for everyone.

[Skilly]

princelh said:

Can Newfoundland afford to finance all of the oil platforms and lay down the infrastructure to make it all work without help from outside of Newfoundland? If so, where will they get the money to finance it all? The answer is, from the federal government through transfer payments, mostly from other provinces and other Canadians. Newfoundland wants all of the money from the resources, off-shore, but wants other Canadians or other provinces to pay the majority of the bills, with no return on their investment. If Newfoundland had followed a smarter formula, then they wouldn't have been snookered by Quebec at Churchill Falls. I want Newfoundland to flourish, but not at my expense, since I've helped to send my tax dollars to that province for many decades. You should be grateful that many in the rest of Canada helped keep your hospitals open and keep your infrastructure intact, until you could use your resources to help yourself. Danny Williams is a self promoting demagogue who wants to extract the maximum with the least effort of the provincial government.

You know we could really get in to the contributions of Newfoundland, to the union, in the last 58 years (btw, today is Newfoundland birthday in Canada .... Whoopie), and you will see just the Churchill Falls contract alone Newfoundland has contributed more to the union politically and economically than they have gotten in return.

Let me ask you this. How did you finance your house? Did you go and drop $200,000 on the table? Of course not ... Newfoundland could use their resources as collateral just like everyone else. Also, Newfoundland could get the industry to come in and develop it, wouldn't cost us a cent then, just have a royalty payment to the province for the privilege of developing the resource.

But if that isn't feasible. Then let me ask you this? Where did Alberta get the money to start there oil industry? They weren't always well off, you know. But I forgot an Albertan is so much more important than a Newfoundlander.

*get's on knee's* ohhh thank-ya massa Canada .... the attitude spewed forth in your post reminds me of employers who treat their employees like dirt and tell them that they should be grateful to have a job, as they strip their contracts and benefits.

I may not agree with the perceived attitude our premier has now ... he isn't used to not getting his way, and he doesn't need the money or hassle of being premier (he is worth over $300 million dollars) .... so I got to think that he is doing what he feels is best for the province. If we lie back and take this horse-whipping then we get the same thing as the last 58 years, a few ha-pennies. If we agree to negotiate then we are agreeing to accept less than was promised. Do you think if this was oil in any other province (Quebec and westward, save for maybe Saskatchewan) we would be sitting here having this discuussion? There is no way ... they'd get what was agreed to, and no questions would be asked.

The problem is, that people have this perception of Newfoundland being a charity case, and that we must pay our dues, and never flourish in the union. That's the attitude (and totally erroneous) that will see us leave the union .... hopefully before we turn 60!

[HABsurd]

skilly said:

franko said:

Thanks for the attempts at edification, Skilly.

I think the newspaper article was 1/2 right: your premier is using the federal uninitiatives as an election platform (can't blame him).

Newfoundland is getting what Alberta got in the 70s -- nice you have found a way to balance the books and get ahead -- give it to us. I think that would be the attitude of every federal government. Stay the course, but don't be so abrasive . . . you'll get more.

That is another part of the problem ..well for me anyway ... we have to negotiate to get our own resources.

I don't think people realize the dollar amounts involved in this. Nobody knows how much oil is out there, some people think there could be as much as Saudi Arabia, but conservative estimates have it at about 2.7 billion barrels of oil (and the estimate only goes up each year).

We are talking billions and billions ans billions of dollars, and each day that goes by where we are not the prinicple beneficiary of the resource is a day we can't get back (since it is non-renewable). Newfoundland would be a have province as early as next year or 2009, and giving money to the other provinces ..... but it seems the Federal Government and Media would rather Newfoundland keep taking hand-outs.

Isn't this all moot?

Isn't the dollar amount zero because "Big Oil" has decided forego Hebron development for now.

As for Harper, while I am not a supported of his, I can see his perspective politically. After all, he watched Paul Martin pretzel himself trying to accomodate Danny Williams only to see less liberal seats in the last election. So why should Harper follow Martin? And don't say because it is the right thing to do. that ain't how Danny Williams thinks.

Why is it that all these entities have trouble negotiating with Danny Williams?

You might be interested in the following take on the situation in Newfoundland:

meekermedia.blogspot.com/2007/03/weighing-cost-of-lost-opportunities.html

[franko]

Wow! Where did you dig that up?

Danny Williams is another Joey Smallwood Gutsy.

[Skilly]

franko said:

Wow! Where did you dig that up?

Danny Williams is another Joey Smallwood Gutsy.

I wouldn't go so far .... Joey thought he was saving Canada. Danny cares for Newfoundland more.


Putting Newfoundland in its place

Yes, I criticized Danny Williams for taking down the Canadian flag, and only yesterday I said the reaction to Margaret Wente's "welfare ghetto" column had gotten out of hand. But that doesn't mean Newfoundlanders have no real grievances about the way we've been treated by the federal government, and the Churchill Falls fiasco is the biggest grievance of all.

It's often said that Newfoundlanders have no one to blame but themselves for Churchill Falls, because the Joey Smallwood government entered into a bad deal. You don't have to do much to convince me of Smallwood's economic illiteracy - indeed, many of our economic problems, especially our crippling reliance on statism and social programs, can be laid at his feet - but the fact is, Newfoundland had little choice in the matter. The federal government could have allowed a "corridor" through Quebec so Newfoundland could send its power to the American market, but for political reasons it chose not to. This editorial in The Globe and Mail, of all places, tells the disgusting story:

The federal government had the constitutional power to force a corridor through Quebec, as it had forced the laying of oil and gas pipelines from Alberta through Saskatchewan and Manitoba to Ontario. It had only to declare the project in the national interest, negotiate the route and compensate Quebeckers for expropriated land. But "only" is a loaded word. For one thing, the electricity would be going to the United States, not to other Canadians. For another, in the Quebec of the 1960s, separatist sentiment was stirring. Terrorists were planting bombs in mailboxes.

Cabot Martin, a senior policy adviser to Newfoundland premier Brian Peckford in the 1980s, wrote in 1996 that Mr. Smallwood once told him of a fateful drive to Ottawa to ask then-prime-minister Lester Pearson to force through a Quebec corridor. Mr. Martin paraphrased Mr. Smallwood's recollection: "And before I could say a word, Mr. Pearson said, 'Joe, I know why you are here and if you ask me I'll have to say yes; otherwise we would not really have a country. But I'm asking you not to ask me because we will not be able to keep the towers up." In other words, the prime minister feared sabotage in the heated political climate of Quebec, and felt unequal to the task of protecting such a corridor militarily. Mr. Smallwood returned to Newfoundland without asking.

Hydro-Québec played hardball in negotiating its terms for buying Churchill Falls' power. In part, it was covering itself; there was talk customers might turn to nuclear power, and oil, at $2 a barrel, was a competitive alternative. But it knew that without a corridor, Newfoundland was in a tight place; unless Hydro-Québec agreed to buy the power, Americans wouldn't buy the bonds necessary to finance the project. The 40-year contract Hydro-Québec insisted on, renewable automatically for 25 years, paid Newfoundland a low price for the Churchill power. Far from being linked to inflation, the price was due to fall during the final 25 years.

Newfoundland stood to receive millions of dollars from the deal, which helped Mr. Smallwood persuade the Newfoundland legislature to ratify the deal signed by the private developer Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corp. But Hydro-Québec has been able to resell the power for hundreds of millions a year, which has rightly stuck in Newfoundland's craw. A bad deal became awful when oil prices and inflation rose sharply and Hydro-Québec reaped the windfall as electricity prices climbed.
[...]
The fortune Quebec has received from the exploitation of a resource in Labrador can be counted as money leaving Newfoundland and going to the rest of Canada. However, it cannot be counted as money that Newfoundland would otherwise have received. The Quebec political reality is that Jean Lesage wasn't going to allow a corridor. The Newfoundland political reality is that Joey Smallwood, clinging to his dream, was not prepared to walk away from a bad deal, and saddled Newfoundland with a 65-year mistake. The Canadian political reality is that Lester Pearson, keen not to alienate Quebec, chose Quebec's side over Newfoundland's economic aspirations. And if Mr. Smallwood had not chosen Canada, he would have been no better off. [emphasis added]

The Globe editorialists actually spin this as an argument that Newfoundland would have been no better off had it not joined Canada, since an independent Newfoundland would have had even less luck in getting a power corridor. They may have a point, though whoever the Prime Minister of Newfoundland would have been at the time, he almost certainly would have been more competent than Smallwood. But the point remains: Newfoundland and Labrador had its best chance to escape the "welfare ghetto", and Ottawa blocked the gate.

Newfoundlanders didn't narrowly vote to jojn Canada so it could be a second-class province, but that's what happened, at least in this case. And we won't get over it any time soon.

[Skilly]

habdomen said:

skilly said:

That is another part of the problem ..well for me anyway ... we have to negotiate to get our own resources.

I don't think people realize the dollar amounts involved in this. Nobody knows how much oil is out there, some people think there could be as much as Saudi Arabia, but conservative estimates have it at about 2.7 billion barrels of oil (and the estimate only goes up each year).

We are talking billions and billions ans billions of dollars, and each day that goes by where we are not the prinicple beneficiary of the resource is a day we can't get back (since it is non-renewable). Newfoundland would be a have province as early as next year or 2009, and giving money to the other provinces ..... but it seems the Federal Government and Media would rather Newfoundland keep taking hand-outs.

Isn't this all moot?

Isn't the dollar amount zero because "Big Oil" has decided forego Hebron development for now.

As for Harper, while I am not a supported of his, I can see his perspective politically. After all, he watched Paul Martin pretzel himself trying to accomodate Danny Williams only to see less liberal seats in the last election. So why should Harper follow Martin? And don't say because it is the right thing to do. that ain't how Danny Williams thinks.

Why is it that all these entities have trouble negotiating with Danny Williams?

You might be interested in the following take on the situation in Newfoundland:

meekermedia.blogspot.com/2007/03/weighing-cost-of-lost-opportunities.html

No it is not all moot ... the oil is still there, and will stay there until we get a fair royalty benefit. That's the problem, no one wants to give Newfoundland royalties, just jobs.

[Skilly]

habdomen said:

skilly said:

That is another part of the problem ..well for me anyway ... we have to negotiate to get our own resources.

I don't think people realize the dollar amounts involved in this. Nobody knows how much oil is out there, some people think there could be as much as Saudi Arabia, but conservative estimates have it at about 2.7 billion barrels of oil (and the estimate only goes up each year).

We are talking billions and billions ans billions of dollars, and each day that goes by where we are not the prinicple beneficiary of the resource is a day we can't get back (since it is non-renewable). Newfoundland would be a have province as early as next year or 2009, and giving money to the other provinces ..... but it seems the Federal Government and Media would rather Newfoundland keep taking hand-outs.

Isn't this all moot?

Isn't the dollar amount zero because "Big Oil" has decided forego Hebron development for now.

As for Harper, while I am not a supported of his, I can see his perspective politically. After all, he watched Paul Martin pretzel himself trying to accomodate Danny Williams only to see less liberal seats in the last election. So why should Harper follow Martin? And don't say because it is the right thing to do. that ain't how Danny Williams thinks.

Why is it that all these entities have trouble negotiating with Danny Williams?

You might be interested in the following take on the situation in Newfoundland:

meekermedia.blogspot.com/2007/03/weighing-cost-of-lost-opportunities.html

Some things are true in that ... and some things are sour grapes.

Everyone thinks that it is ok to promise Newfoundland one thing, then renege on that promise, then say "hey let negotiate a worse deal" ... is that how things get done in this country now?

Actually, is wasn't even negotiated ... it was forced on us. I don't see Canada wanting to negotiate with us ... so Williams is really no different than Harper. I'd rather that, then a premier who would deal, just to get "something" ... that my friend was what Joey did.

[HABsurd]

skilly said:

habdomen said:

Isn't this all moot?

Isn't the dollar amount zero because "Big Oil" has decided forego Hebron development for now.

As for Harper, while I am not a supported of his, I can see his perspective politically. After all, he watched Paul Martin pretzel himself trying to accomodate Danny Williams only to see less liberal seats in the last election. So why should Harper follow Martin? And don't say because it is the right thing to do. that ain't how Danny Williams thinks.

Why is it that all these entities have trouble negotiating with Danny Williams?

You might be interested in the following take on the situation in Newfoundland:

meekermedia.blogspot.com/2007/03/weighing-cost-of-lost-opportunities.html

Some things are true in that ... and some things are sour grapes.

Everyone thinks that it is ok to promise Newfoundland one thing, then renege on that promise, then say "hey let negotiate a worse deal" ... is that how things get done in this country now?

Actually, is wasn't even negotiated ... it was forced on us. I don't see Canada wanting to negotiate with us ... so Williams is really no different than Harper. I'd rather that, then a premier who would deal, just to get "something" ... that my friend was what Joey did.

Look I am not going to defend Harper. But there seems to be a pattern here, I am speaking as an outsider, that Williams is not amiable to the usual give and take. it might work with a snivelling Paul Martin, but everyone else would rather not be bothered. Do you think Harper will suffer? As I pointed out, the liberals were not rewarded last election. Do you think "big oil" will suffer? They have plenty of opportunities to focus their attention.

I would think you would appreciate not burning your bridges.

[Skilly]

habdomen said:

skilly said:

Some things are true in that ... and some things are sour grapes.

Everyone thinks that it is ok to promise Newfoundland one thing, then renege on that promise, then say "hey let negotiate a worse deal" ... is that how things get done in this country now?

Actually, is wasn't even negotiated ... it was forced on us. I don't see Canada wanting to negotiate with us ... so Williams is really no different than Harper. I'd rather that, then a premier who would deal, just to get "something" ... that my friend was what Joey did.

Look I am not going to defend Harper. But there seems to be a pattern here, I am speaking as an outsider, that Williams is not amiable to the usual give and take. it might work with a snivelling Paul Martin, but everyone else would rather not be bothered. Do you think Harper will suffer? As I pointed out, the liberals were not rewarded last election. Do you think "big oil" will suffer? They have plenty of opportunities to focus their attention.

I would think you would appreciate not burning your bridges.

The oil is better in the ground/sea until we get the best deal for Newfoundland. The reason the deal with Hebron fell apart was, if I recall correctly, was because even though we got what appeared to be a good deal on the surface ... Chevron did not want to give us the royalty percentage we wanted, and on top of that they wanted huge tax breaks ... so in essense any money we got from the deal was practically lost in the tax breaks. I forget the numbers though.

I'd be the first to admit, it looks like our premier has himself in a catch-22. But, everytime we "deal" with Canada we get shafted. The prime minister wrote the people of this province 6 times, and told us he was against a cap on revenues, and he was in favour of excluding non-renewable resources in equalization. And on a seventh occasion, he rose in Parliament and accused the Liberals of making Newfoundland suffer the plight of being a perpetual have-not province by capping oil revenues.

Now he changes. One day, and god forbid he gets a majority and no one can stop him for four years, he'll break a promise to another province ....and maybe our premier will support ...but maybe he will also remember too.

[Skilly]

Newfoundland's Blossoming Separation Movement

By Myles Higgins
Thursday, June 30, 2005

Since Newfoundland and Labrador entered the Dominion of Canada in 1949, some in the province have questioned whether or not that decision was the right one. Fifty-six years later there are still many who wonder if, "the fix was in", so to speak, or "what would Newfoundland and Labrador be like today if we were an independent country again"?

For those too young to remember, there were two public votes on the subject of Confederation, not one. In the first vote the outcome did not see the population choose to join Canada. The ballot that year contained three options:

1) Confederation with Canada;

2) Responsible Government (Independence); and

3) Commission of Government,(Outside appointed rule).

The result of that vote was 44.6% for Responsible Government, 41.1% for Confederation and 14.3% for Commission of Government.

Although Responsible Government received the most votes, neither of the options had won a clear majority of public support, as a result, Commission of Government, the lowest in the poll, was dropped from the ballot and a second referendum was scheduled.

This time the result was 52.3% for Confederation and 47.7% for Responsible Government, hardly a resounding show of support. Factor in as well rumors of vote buying and ballot box tampering and the fact that a couple of ballot boxes turned up years later still unopened and uncounted. The table was set for decades of debate.

When you add it all up, the result is a situation where questioning the referendum result, and our place in Canada, has become a major pastime in the province.

Separatist rumblings have been growing in the province since the day the ballots were counted. Today you can see green white and pink Newfoundland Republic flags, which have become a symbol of separatist sentiment, flying from homes in all parts of the province. Lately, more and more people have been re-examining the contents of the Terms of Union itself. This document, signed by the governments of the province and the country, contains the official terms by which Newfoundland and Labrador’s union with Canada was formed.

Examination of the document from a legal perspective is an interesting exercise and even a cursory reading would lead one to believe that perhaps the federal government has not lived up to many of its obligations to the province as set out half a century ago.

Perhaps one of the most obvious situations is related to resource royalties in the province. Many people throughout Canada are familiar with recent changes to the Atlantic Accord which, which just passed through the senate yesterday, will see NL receive billions in revenues from offshore oil. What most people don’t realize however is that this accounts for less than 50% of the overall royalties, the remainder still goes into the federal purse. In addition to this, the province makes very little, if any revenue, from other natural resources like nickel, gold and iron ore, even though article 37 of the Terms of Union clearly states:

"All lands, mines, minerals, and royalties belonging to Newfoundland at the date of Union, and all sums then due or payable for such lands, mines, minerals, or royalties, shall belong to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador"

Another point clearly defined, this time in article 44 of the document, clearly states:

"Canada will provide for the maintenance in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador of appropriate reserve units of the Canadian defense forces, which will include the Newfoundland Regiment".

Currently this article is of major interest to many in the province. The town of Happy Valley Goose Bay is desparately struggling to convince the Canadian government that the military base at 5 Wing should be maintained and utilized by our own forces. As things stand today, it is clear that the spirit of this particular article is not being met. There are currently more McDonalds employees in this province than there are armed forces personnel. This might be fine if the province is attacked by the Hamburglar, but not so good if a foreign force decides Canada’s east coast would make a good entry portal to the rest of North America.

Article 32 of the act deals with the gulf ferry service. It states:

"Canada will maintain in accordance with the traffic offering a freight and passenger steamship service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques, which, on completion of a motor highway between Corner Brook and Port aux Basques, will include suitable provision for the carriage of motor vehicles"

As recently as a few years ago, Ottawa had been entertaining the notion of privatizing this ferry service, a service which provides the primary physical link between the province and the rest of the country. This ferry service is considered to be a part of the TCH itself yet just a few days ago it was prevented from running by protesting fishermen in Nova Scotia. The federal government did nothing to stop the protest. Would they have done something if a section of the TCH leading into one of the other provinces was blocked by a protest group for the best part of a day?

Another point of contention is article 31. This article encompasses most public services in the province and specifies that the government of Canada would assume responsibility for the following:

(a) the Newfoundland Railway, including steamship and other marine services;

(b) The Newfoundland Hotel, if requested by the Government of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador within six months from the date of Union:

(c) postal and publicly owned telecommunication services;

(d) civil aviation, including Gander Airport;

(e) customs and excise;

(f) defense;

(g) protection and encouragement of fisheries and operation of bait services;

(h) geological, topographical, geodetic, and hydrographic surveys;

(i) lighthouses, fog alarms, buoys, beacons, and other public works and services in aid of navigation and shipping;

(j) marine hospitals, quarantine, and the care of shipwrecked crews;

(k) the public radio broadcasting system; and

(I) other public services similar in kind to those provided at the date of Union for the people of Canada generally.

This article contains many key areas of concern to those in the province.

Section (a) clearly identifies the railway as being one of the services to be managed by the federal government after Confederation. As many in the province will remember, when it was decided by Ottawa that the running of this railway was no longer feasible, the government of the day was obligated to make reparations to the province for its retirement. In exchange for provincial agreement to dismantle rail services the federa l government instituted the "Roads for Rails" program. This saw money flow from Ottawa to improve the provinces road network in preparation for the loss of the railway.

Clearly the federal government at the time was fully aware of its obligations as set out in article 31 of the Terms of Union. But what about their obligations related to some of the other items identified in the same article?

Section (b) The Newfoundland hotel. This hotel was privatized years ago.

Section (c) Postal and Publicly owned telecommunications services. Currently most postal outlets are privately run in the province and in recent years, when some of these have shut down, the federal government has not stepped in to replace them and the provinces telecommunications systems are now privately run.

Section (d) Civil aviation, including Gander Airport. Civil aviation in the province is a private enterprise. Gander airport itself was sold by the federal government. What guarantee s or concessions did the province get for this breach of contract?

Section (f) defense. The level of defense, as addressed previously, is a clear issue in the province and one that could have a detrimental effect on the entire nation and the continent as a whole. It is clear that we are a nation who’s front door is wide open to anyone who would like to use it.

Section (g) protection and encouragement of fisheries and operation of bait services. This particular section is a sore point for many separatists and anyone else in the province who feels they have been wronged by Ottawa.

The argument people in the province are making is that Ottawa has not provided adequate protection or management of this valuable and renewable resource, and in fact, has mismanaged it to the point where the cod fishery, which was the backbone of Newfoundland’s economy at the time of confederation, is now dead. Rather than protect these stocks, Ottawa issued quota after quota to foreign fleets in exchange for auto plants, textile products and aerospace contracts in other parts of the country.

When the fishery was closed in 1992 income support for those displaced by the loss of the industry was provided to cover the 10 years it was expected to take for the stocks to rebuild. That time has come and gone and still there is no viable cod industry. In fact, the switch to other species like crab, at the encouragement of the federal government, has seen those stocks dwindle as well.

Section (i) lighthouses, fog alarms, buoys, beacons, and other public works and services in aid of navigation and shipping. This section clearly identifies, "works and services in aid of navigation and shipping", yet lighthouses have been closed and marine weather services have been moved out of the province to other locales. Every year the number of federal employees in the province becomes less and less.

There are many other examples like these throughout our short hist ory as a Canadian province, the list is a long one. Some feel that material and multiple breeches of contract have taken place and are continuing. The current feeling is that Ottawa should be pushed to rectify the situation so the province can become an equal partner in Confederation or that a case for nullification of the Terms of Union should be brought before the Supreme Court of Canada.

While there has always been a segment of the population who feel that we do not belong in this country, most would simply like to see the kind of fair and ethical treatment that is to be expected from a nation like Canada. Times were hard when the decision was made to become a part of the Dominion of Canada, but they were hard everywhere. The great depression had just ended a little over a decade before and Newfoundland was suffering from the fallout of WWII.

Times have changed a lot since then and as a result, it is difficult for many to believe that a Newfoundland and Labrador, which entered Canada with a financial surplus in 1949, is somehow better off fifty-six years later while running yearly deficits and staggering under an $11 billion debt.

[Cranky]

skilly said:

No it is not all moot ... the oil is still there, and will stay there until we get a fair royalty benefit. That's the problem, no one wants to give Newfoundland royalties, just jobs.

Poor NewFoundland, nobody wants to give it anything.....

Poor NewFoundland, ROC is conspiring agianst it.......

Poor Newfoundland always getting the shaft....

Why do you expect that oil companies should put billions and billions of dollars of risk and just hand you the profits? If they are "shafting" Newfoundland, why don't you just build your own oil platforms and push them out there to collect all that oil? If it's so easy and so cheap, why don't you do it yourselves?

As for manufacturing JOBS....it ain't going to happen. EVER. I went through the exercise 5 years ago. I looked at all the governments incentives, I looked at every angle possible and it was not going to work. It's an island whose inhabitants are demanding EQUAL pay to Ontariop and Quebec and yet are thousands of miles away from major markets. Do you have any idea what it costs to get product to Ontario/Quebec? Transportation costs were ridicilous and are far WORSE NOW.

Before you take me to task, find out what a trucking costs are to Toronto or New York versus getting a 66,000 pound container from ASIA. Do you know what it costs to get a truck from Quebec into Ontario? $700 for 85,000 pounds of product. Now, if you have a truck that has $50,000 of product of which $5,000 is labour, why would ANY businessman in his right mind want to go and spend an additional $4,000 to move his product into market?

Last but not least....

There are no human rights charters anywhere on this planet that guarantees people to have good paying jobs where they want them. My parent and I emigrated from Greece to come to Quebec for a BETTER living. I emigrated from Quebec to Ontario for a BETTER living. If the economy sucks where you live, you pick up and go where there is a better living.

We move to where the food is. We did it as apes, we did it as hominids, we did it as Neanderthals, we did it as Europeans and we are doing it TODAY. That's life. That's the way the ball bounces.

Honestly, all this "our fair share OR ELSE" victim mentality is getting old...really old. Even Quebec is giving up on it.