Where do the Federal Leaders Stand on Newfoundland and Labrador Issues?

Just prior to the Federal election campaign Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams sent a letter to the leaders of the Liberal, Conservative and NDP parties outlining 17 key priorities for the province and requesting each leader to identify their level of support for each.

Now, less than a week prior to the actual vote the responses have arrived and have been evaluated by the Provincial government.

It’s quite understandable that everyone doesn’t have the ample free time I do to waste by closely reviewing every dry, interminably long piece of drivel produced by politicians, so as always, I thought I’d help out with that problem. In an effort to ensure a well informed electorate, I’ve decided to save you the trouble and simply provide a synopsis of each issue and my understanding of the responses.

Of course my understanding of the content is open to interpretation as well and as such this is no substitute for reading the details yourself, but if you’re lazy, drunk or have attention deficit issues caused by a brain imbalance or too much alcohol, here is the straight story. The Coles notes version you might say.

By the way, EV = EVASIVE (and for our very special readers, YES = YES and NO = NO)

Cost shared early retirement program in fisheries: L – NO, C – NO, NDP – YES

Provide Northern Shrimp Allocation: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – YES

Custodial Management: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – YES

Use Cod Strategy not List cod as endangered: L – YES, C – YES, NDP –YES

Comprehensive Aquaculture Agreement: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – EV

Assist Lower Churchill development: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – EV

Sell Federal share of Hibernia to NL: L – NO, C – NO, NDP – YES
Federal Presence:
Part A: Re-instate Gander Weather Office: L – NO, C – YES, NDP – YES

Part B: Increase Federal presence in province: L – YES, C – YES, NDP - YES

Equalization Reform: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – YES

Cost share TLH: L – EV, C – YES, NDP – YES

Make 5 Wing Goose an operational requirement: L – NO, C – YES, NDP – EV

Create reserve at Sheshatshiu by June of 2006: L – YES, C – EV, NDP – EV

Stabilize Marine Atlantic services: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – EV

Bilateral cost share for economic development: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – YES

Ensure Fed. contracts for Marystown and Bull Arm: L – NO, C – NO, NDP – YES

Cost sharing waste management strategy: L – EV, C – EV, NDP – EV

Final Tally: Liberal: 5 NO, 3 YES and 9 Evasive answers
Final Tally: Conservative: 3 NO, 5 YES and 9 Evasive answers
Final Tally: NDP: 0 NO, 11 YES and 5 Evasive answers

Of course there’s some subtlety to each of the evasive answers that might allow one to interpret them as being either for or against the issues, but I thought it best to simply label those as EVASIVE and get it over with. We all know it doesn’t pay to read between the lines with political types and unless it’s spelled out what does it really mean?

In all fairness, some of the evasive answers may have been valid and perhaps the Premier himself should have been aware of potential problems prior to even asking. For example, how could anyone support a shrimp quota for a community until confirming and ensuring viability prior to allocating it? I believe it was moves like handing out quotas willy-nilly that helped lead us to the sorry state of a fishery we have today.

This leads to another interesting point. Some of the questions NDP leader Jack Layton responded affirmatively on should perhaps have elicited a more evasive answer, including the aforementioned question on the shrimp quotas. I guess it’s the age old adage, if you know you don’t have to deliver then saying yes is easy.

What does all of this mean to the average voter?

The first point of discussion is the NDP. Yes, they have provided the most pleasant and heart warming responses among all three parties, but since they won’t be forming the next government and have about as much chance of winning a seat in Newfoundland and Labrador as an angry seal protestor in March, they aren’t an option.

Second point, I guess each of us has our own priorities and these will no doubt sway our votes (at least it will sway the votes of the 30 or 40 percent of voters in the province with an open mind who aren’t just going to vote the way their Pappy’s Grand-Pappy did). For one person the Gander weather office may be the most important issue, in which case they should perhaps support their Conservative candidate. For another person the most important issue might be the Sheshatshi reserve, in which case they might vote Liberal.

Our Provincial government has already given their blessing in a statement from the Deputy Premier in which he said that the optimum result for this election (from a Newfoundland and Labrador perspective) would be a Conservative majority. He also said that a Conservative minority with the NDP holding the balance of power would not necessarily be such a bad thing either. That’s their opinion for what its worth.

What do I think? Well, since you asked I’ll tell you. I’ve already said that the NDP doesn’t stand a chance in hell (or in this province either) so I won’t be voting for them, even if I do like some of their platform planks. I also think anyone who votes Liberal in this election, especially after all of the scandals, insulting election ads and the contents of Paul Martin’s letter, should have their head examined by a top notch proctologist, publicly funded of course, none of those private proctologists for you. Other than that I’m pretty much on the fence.

What is my preference, minority or majority Conservative government?

I’m really not sure. On one hand, a minority government might help ensure that the NDP could get a few kicks at the cat with regard to the issues they claim to support in their letter, issues that the Conservatives were a little evasive on like federal ship building contracts for Bull Arm and Marystown. On the other hand, it might also mean that the Conservatives could be blocked from implementing some initiatives that the NDP were evasive on, like making 5 Wing Goose Bay a military operational requirement. It really is one dilly of a pickle we’re in down here don’t ya know!

I guess when it boils right down to it we all have to do a little soul searching and hard thinking before we step into that ballot box next Monday. Regardless of the outcome nationally, I will predict this much:

At the end of the day 45% of eligible voters in this province won’t even bother to go to the polls and of those who do, half will simply vote the way they and their family always have and at the end of the day the seat breakdown in Newfoundland and Labrador will look pretty much like it does today with the possible exception of the one that doesn’t have an incumbent.

Welcome to politics in Newfoundland and Labrador!