Canada considering international bases - Peter MacKay

According to recent comments from Defense Minister, Peter MacKay, Canada is reviewing possible sites for setting up bases around the world in an effort to better position the military to respond to international missions.

The Canadian Forces does "prudent planning," MacKay told reporters recently, taking into account its ability to participate in international missions.

"As we look out into the future what we obviously try to do is anticipate where and when we will be needed, but it's difficult with any certainty, to make those plans, without talking to other countries, without doing internal examinations," Mackay said.

I’m sure Mr. MacKay is correct when he says it’s difficult to say with certainty where the Canadian Forces will be needed but one place they are guaranteed to be needed going forward is right here at home. That’s not something that’s in question.

According to the Montreal newspaper Le Devoir the Canadian Forces is in the process of negotiating to set up bases under a program known as the Operational Support Hubs Network. They've reportedly already completed negotiations with Germany and Jamaica, and are in talks with Kuwait, Senegal, Kenya or Tanzania, Singapore and South Korea.

Meanwhile a fully capable and existing Canadian airbase in Labrador, 5-Wing Goose Bay, has been lying practically dormant for years. In spite of repeated promises over the past several election cycles to staff the base with a 650 person rapid response battalion and other services the airfield remains largely an unused appendage of DND.

Prior to the last election MacKay said that the Harper government is still behind its now 5 year old promise but with so much attention focused on Afghanistan he could not commit to when it would happen.

Mr. MacKay would have voters believe that with so much of government’s current focus directed at external military interventions in recent times little thought has been given to the need for the Defense Department to actually defend Canada itself, a position that rings hollow in Newfoundland & Labrador.

The refusal to provide military capacity at the base has left
a gaping hole in the nation’s defenses along the Eastern seaboard and at the Northern approaches.

As things now stand, any unidentified aircraft entering Canadian airspace from over the North Atlantic must be intercepted and investigated by aircraft scrambled from CFB Bagotville in Quebec. The additional flying time and distance required to perform that duty means Canadian jets must first touchdown at the idled Labrador base to refuel before they can complete their mission. An inefficient activity results in a loss of valuable response time to any potential threat.

Even with the less than stellar location of Bagotville, when it comes to coastal defense, in the summer of 2007, just over a year after Harper’s commitment to station 650 personnel at Goose Bay, then Minister of Defense, Gordon O’Connor announced 550 new personnel and spending of an additional $300 million dollars at the Bagotville base.

In his presentation O’Connor said, “Today’s announcement once again demonstrates this government’s commitment to further strengthening Canadian Forces units in Quebec, to make up for the previous government’s years of neglect.”

Nothing was announced for Goose Bay and it hasn’t been since then.

For years the people of Newfoundland & Labrador have been lobbying successive federal governments to make use of the valuable airbase with nothing to show for their efforts.

With the election of the Harper Conservatives in 2006 and in light of the PM’s public position on Arctic sovereignty it was hoped that the base would once again provide the sort of service its location allows. This has not been the case.

In successive elections the Conservative government has promised to ensure an integral role for Goose Bay only to back away from those promises once elected.
In the months preceding the most recent federal election one of Mr. Harper’s Ministers went so far as to tell the people of Newfoundland & Labrador that he was not aware of the province’s concerns for the status of the base. How that could even be possible he did not say although the question was asked.

While the people of Newfoundland & Labrador have pushed hard on the issue for longer than most care to remember it’s not clear where most Canadians stand on the status of the Labrador military base. After years of inaction at the site most probably don’t even know the asset exists, but they should.

If Prime Minister Harper is truly as concerned with Arctic sovereignty as he is telling Canadians then the public should be asking why he would continue to leave a perfectly serviceable airbase, at the gateway to the Eastern Arctic, mothballed for so long.

Most Canadians fully support our Armed forces and many can even get behind the actions the Canadian government has taken in foreign lands recently but perhaps it’s time for the government of Canada to realize that our armed forces are managed by the Department of Defense, not the Department of Offense.

Has Harper sold Dunderdale down the Churchill River?

Did Kathy Dunderdale and the PC caucus of Newfoundland & Labrador shoot themselves in the collective foot during the last federal election campaign, or will Stephen Harper repay the favour given him by the Premier, if not the NL voters, and honour his committment to back the Lower Churchill project?

If the Dunderdale government plans to ride a federal loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill into the next election they’ll need to have it signed, sealed and delivered before voters go to the polls. That might prove difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish before the October ballot with news out of Ottawa today that the guarantee will not be included in next week’s federal budget.

During the federal campaign Kathy Dunderdale threw the entire weight of her caucus behind Conservative candidates, even going so far as to appear at a Harper rally in St. John’s where the PM announced his backing for a “loan guarantee or equivalent financing”. Now, with the federal budget slated to be delivered next week it’s been revealed that the guarantee won’t be included.

A source inside government has told the media that the PM is still behind the deal and will make an announcement once negotiations are completed, but is that good enough for voters? Will that statement alone carry Dunderdale through the next election or is the public in Newfoundland and Labrador far too suspect of Stephen Harper to accept his assurances?

If the recent federal election returns were any indication it would appear that the latter is true. That could be very bad news for the Dunderdale government.

With no loan guarantee in place she had better hope the legacy of the William’s government provides her with enough momentum to overcome what could prove to be a gaping hole in her election platform.

According to a government source, "It (the guarantee) will be provisioned for and accounted for going forward but (while it won't be in the budget) it doesn't have to wait until the next budget to go into effect."

Perhaps this is true and Harper simply wants to avoid the huge fuss with Quebec that would surely come from highlighting the agreement in the federal budget. If that’s true however, and the guarantee doesn't require parliamentary approval, why is it that during the election campaign he told voters that in order to ensure the loan guarantee (or equivalent financing) a majority Conservative government would have to be elected. Otherwise, he said, the opposition parties might side with Quebec and vote against it.

Liberal MP, Gerry Byrne, (no doubt as much to score political points as get at the facts) has raised the issue in recent days as well. According to Byrne, “They were the ones that said it needed parliamentary approval. Now they're suggesting it's an order in council done by cabinet that can approve the Lower Churchill loan guarantee. So they're either lying now or they lied during the election campaign. The bottom line is we were misled."

Hard to argue with that logic regardless of the source.

Whether political rhetoric or not, Byrne also said he believes the government has no standing authority to offer such a loan guarantee without parliamentary approval.

"I've got a formal question presented today to the parliamentary budget officer to confirm or refute that understanding." he went on.

I'm sure many newfoundlanders & Labradorians will be interested in the response provided to Mr. Byrne's question.

Although the provincial government has said in the past that a loan guarantee (or equivalent funding) is not essential to development of the Lower Churchill project, such a guarantee would save provincial taxpayers hundreds of millions in interest expenditures.

With initial work on the project now underway money is already flowing out the door. The provincial legislature is now on summer break until the October election and the Canadian Parliament, once the budget is passed, will also be taking its summer break. Under those circumstances the odds of finalizing any sort of agreement before the next provincial election is low at best.

It’s a difficult situation the Dunderdale government must surely be considering after hearing this news today.

As Gerry Byrne pointed out today, the absence of Muskrat Falls in the budget should raise alarms, especially as the federal government has signalled it will include other campaign spending promises in the budget

One of those expenditures is the more than $2 Billion dollars in compensation to Quebec for implementing the HST many years ago. A promise widely seen during the campaign as Harper's way of placating Quebec over his Lower Churchill promise, making it even more concerning that the promise to Newfoundland & Labrador will be excluded from the budget while the one to Quebec is there front and center.

Election 2011 - Did principle trump pandering in Atlantic Canada?

“You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you just might find… you get what you need” – Rolling Stones

Perspectives change. Often those changes are quite dramatic.

A perfect example is the perspective of people in Newfoundland and Labrador who, like others across Canada, are parsing the structure of a vastly redefined post-election Parliament.

Before proceeding further I’d be remiss if I didn’t re-affirm my long standing and deeply held belief that adherence to principle is always far more important to the long term good than simply caving into external pressures or the temptation of seemingly self serving actions.

Principle should always trump personal gain, pandering and opportunism.

This is as true for individuals as it is for governments at any level.

When you make a promise you do everything in your power to keep it and when you believe you’re right you fight with everything you have to defend your position. End of sermon.

Those sentiments were clearly on display during the federal election as most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians once again refused to support Conservative party candidates. In fact, the only Harper candidate elected this time out was a newcomer to the political scene. One who barely eked out a win by a few hundred votes. By all accounts his victory came in spite of his party affiliation rather than because of it and was due to the stature of the man himself. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the Harper government.

The actions taken by voters in the Province are something all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians should take pride in today. It once again proves, regardless of what certain individuals in parts of Canada might say, that the people in Newfoundland and Labrador are fiercely principled and willing to stand by those principles, no matter the short term pain.

With that clearly said, we now must live with the choices made by a broader Canadian electorate. The odd yet somehow poetic result is that this time around, standing by a principled position may have placed the Province in a far better position than anyone could have imagined.

At the outset of the campaign nobody in Canada would have predicted the near implosion of the Bloc, that the Conservatives would win such a solid majority or that the NDP, thanks largely to Quebec frenzy, would form the official opposition with more than 100 seats in Parliament. These are the realities of Canada today and they may actually work in Newfoundland and Labrador’s favor.

With ABC remaining a factor, the election of Labrador’s Peter Penashue as the Province's single Conservative MP presents interesting possibilities going forward. Perhaps just as important is Quebec’s version of ABC that played out during the campaign. These separate actions by two long time adversaries could in fact have resulted in the best of many possible outcomes that might have developed on voting day.

Make no mistake, the history of Federal/Provincial relations hasn’t changed. Stephen Harper turned his back on a promise to exclude non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization formula and essentially gutted the intent of the Atlantic Accord a few years back. Both actions led to a loss of billions for Newfoundland and Labrador. Harper also failed to move on his promise to make 5 Wing Goose Bay an integral cog in the Canadian military.

Those are indisputable realities, but there might, just might mind you, be a better chance of Harper’s latest election promises being kept than there has been in the past, even after the province’s voters refused to let him to buy votes with those promises.

On the issues of a loan guarantee (or equivalent funding) for the Lower Churchill and an increased role for 5 Wing Goose Bay nothing is guaranteed but the possibilities are far brighter today than they were a few short weeks ago. In fact they have a better chance of coming to fruition now than they would if this election had resulted in a minority Parliament for either party.

With the Bloc no longer a major force in Ottawa and a majority firmly in hand, Mr. Harper will face little if any opposition to his Churchill Falls promise. Any excuse not to honor that promise will be difficult to sell.

During the campaign both the Liberals and NDP made similar promises in spite of Quebec’s vocal opposition to the project. One would hope all parties will stand by their commitments but with the NDP now serving as a voice for Quebec and the Liberals looking to rebuild support there, either party could easily succumb to an urge to curry favor in Quebec at the expense of Newfoundland and Labrador.

In a minority Parliament, or if either of today’s opposition parties had formed government, that reality could have been devastating for the Province. This isn’t the case in the current configuration.

Allowing the Conservatives an opportunity to slip their oversized foot ever so slightly through the door has sent the clear message that voters most surely remember the broken promises but some are willing to offer one last chance at redemption. If Mr. Harper is to have any hope of growing his party’s fortunes in the province the onus is now squarely on his shoulders to accept the opportunity provided.

After multiple elections, any chance of widespread Conservative gains in Quebec is a long shot at best. Mr. Harper knows his party’s future, beyond the current term, depends largely on an ability to retain and grow support in other regions, including Newfoundland and Labrador.

Most of Canada, with the exception of Quebec, supports the development of the Lower Churchill thanks to a growing awareness of the mistreatment Newfoundland and Labrador has suffered at the hands of Hydro Quebec. In addition the entire Atlantic region stands to benefit greatly from the Lower Churchill project and, as the last bastion of Liberal support these days, Conservative strategists must be eyeing the area with a glint of lust in their eyes.

While an ABC hangover may continue to reveal itself from time to time as long as Stephen Harper is party leader, the Conservatives surely realize that strong support for the Lower Churchill will go far in building loyalties throughout the region and help drive a stake into the heart of a critically wounded Liberal party.

The Lower Churchill project isn’t the only issue that has a better chance of being advanced under the current federal configuration.

While Stephen Harper’s newly minted Labrador MP, Peter Penashue, is a strong advocate for that project he’s also solidly behind growing the role for the airbase at 5 Wing Goose Bay. How much influence Mr. Penashue can bring to Ottawa remains to be seen but as Newfoundland and Labrador’s lone representative on the Conservative bench he is most certainly up for consideration in the new cabinet.

His chances of gaining a cabinet position may be enhanced in light of Harper’s campaign message - in fact his message for the past 3 years - that the Province would be better served electing someone who can fill a seat at the cabinet table. Once again, the time has come for Mr. Harper to walk the walk.

Simply having the good fortune of being elected as a member of the top finishing party isn’t the only thing Mr. Penashue brings to the table. He also brings a world of experience thanks to his years as a respected native leader and pivotal role in the successful negotiation of Innu agreements on Voisey’s Bay and the Lower Churchill.

When you consider the combination of such a strong proponent for Labrador development, including 5 Wing Goose Bay, and Mr. Harper’s long stated position on protecting Arctic sovereignty, the possibilities become clearer. This may in fact be one last chance to ensure the survival of 5 Wing. Time will tell.

On May third many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, like many Canadians, awoke to an election result very few expected. In direct opposition to the feelings of true blue Tories the first reaction of many was likely despair and disillusionment, but as they say, every cloud has a silver lining.

When life gives you lemons you make lemonade.

Issues remain that find the Harper government and the province of Newfoundland and Labrador miles apart. That hasn’t changed. Marine Atlantic and Fisheries management, among many others come to mind. Never the less, both the Lower Churchill and 5 Wing Goose Bay are two very important files for Newfoundland and Labrador.

After multiple broken promises, when Danny Williams first tapped into the sentiment of the electorate and pushed ahead with the ABC campaign Canadians wondered if he could deliver the Conservative goose egg he promised. He did, yet many believed the Province was only hurting itself as a result.

After sticking to their guns once again in 2011 the Province has proven, contrary to popular belief, that the electorate does indeed have a long memory. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador have provided a glimmer of opportunity for Mr. Harper to gain support in the Atlantic region at the same time offering one last gasp of life to the Liberal brand if he doesn't.

Today there isn't a politician across Canada, regardless of party stripe, who doubts for a second the Province's willingness to act on it's convictions going forward. At the end of the day that legacy may pay far bigger dividends than the previous 60 years of hat in hand politics ever did. If so ABC effect will far outweigh any short term lack of government representation the Province has experienced over the past few years.

Just as Mr. Harper forced his way into a majority government in large part due to solidly reading the possibility of wide spread Liberal/NDP vote splitting in Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador may have finally turned the corner on being bought off with crumbs and has managed navigate its way into the best of many possible election outcomes.

As election 2011 heated up, the parties, candidates and leaders pandered to anyone that they believed might help them win. The best part of the entire spectacle is that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador awoke to a new and potentially brighter reality without sacrificing their principles one iota in the process.

Election 2011 – Winners and Losers

Disclosure: The author is currently an undecided voter, is not affiliated with any political party and has, in the past, voted for candidates of the blue, red and orange stripe.

On Tuesday Canadians were afforded an opportunity to witness a rare event in Canadian politics, a campaigning politician, a party leader no less, being completely factual and honest on the national stage.

For those of you who might have missed this singular event or who were unfortunate enough to have witnessed the political spin that quickly followed, let me bring you up to speed.

During a one on one interview with the CBC’s Peter Mansbridge, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was asked about the possibility that a party forming government without gaining the most seats during an election.

The Liberal leader’s response was a rather lengthy, though timely civics lesson that went something like this.

“… (paraphrasing) The party winning the most seats will have an opportunity to form government and seek the confidence of the House of Commons. If the leader of that party is not able to gain this confidence he must visit the Governor General and, if the GG decides to approach another leader, should it be me, I would be prepared to…”

“ (direct quote) talk to Mr. Layton and or Mr. Duceppe -- or even Mr. Harper -- and say we have an issue and here's the plan that I want to put before Parliament, uh you know, this is the budget I would bring in and then we take it from there."

Mr. Ignatieff went on to affirm his earlier statements that under such circumstances, should he gain the confidence of the House he would not enter into any sort of formal coalition that would see members of another party sitting in government but would instead cooperate with the other parties as necessary going forward.

While potentially damaging for him politically, Mr. Ignatieff deserves a pat on the back for both is honesty and clear understanding of the Canadian Parliament.

This is precisely the way the system, developed over hundreds of years, is designed to work.

Unfortunately the incessant Conservative demonization of the word “coalition” in attack ad after attack ad, and directly by Mr. Harper, has led to self serving and baseless fear among a Canadian public largely ignorant of the rules of their own democracy.

For many months Mr. Harper and his Conservative party have been demonizing all opposition parties and doing a grave disservice to the Canadian public by misleading them about how their government actually functions.

With the campaign steaming ahead Mr. Harper’s latest message seems predicated on the belief that his party must form a majority or, should they gain a minority, it would lead to an “reckless coalition” seizing power in Ottawa. This is a position that flies in the face of a truly democratic process - a government chosen by the majority of a nation’s citizens.

If, as most of us have been taught, that the majority of the people should choose their government then which is more valid, a Conservative government supported by a minority of the voting public or a working cooperative that represents the choice of a majority of Canadians?

It’s an important question to ask considering that after the last election Mr. Harper formed government even though his members captured less than 40% of voter support.

It’s even more to the point when you factor in the reality that with less than 60% of the public going to the polls, in reality he formed government with the direct support of about 22%, or only 1 in 5, eligible voters.

Mr. Harper’s position is not only self serving but more than just a little presumptive.

Yes, the polls currently favor the Conservatives, but no matter what the polls or pundits might say, there is no guarantee that following the election the Conservatives will form a government at all.

During an election almost anything can happen, so why has the media bought into Conservative spin with story after story about coalitions? Why haven’t they instead asked Mr. Harper some very salient questions?

What will he do if his party fails win enough seats to form a minority, much less a majority government?

After the election, if his party fails to capture the most seats, and the Liberals or NDP form a minority government will he allow that party to govern? If not, and the party is unable to win the confidence of the House, would he, Mr. Harper, force another $300 million dollar election on the public or would he try, if asked by the GG, to work with the other parties to form government?

I ask these questions because I’m wondering if the Conservative’s convenient aversion to “coalitions” applies only to others or to themselves as well.

Since Mr. Harper has made this bogyman a central issue of his campaign it’s only reasonable for the public to know what his position is.

I realize the media is limited to 5 questions a day while following Mr. Harper’s campaign but this subject might be a good one to push. Why hasn’t it been?

A large swath of Canada’s electorate is turning away from their political obligation and becoming more apathetic with each passing campaign cycle. There are many reasons for this, but I believe a primary reason is the well founded belief that nobody can trust anything politicians say, especially during an election campaign. With this in mind, it’s truly sad that when a political leader is willing to speak the unvarnished truth, without spinning it for electoral advantage, he’s attacked and vilified.

In reality the only winners in any election are the 308 individual MPs who gain a seat in Parliament. Some of those will come from the Conservative ranks, others from the NDP, Liberal, Bloc and perhaps even the Green Party. The parties themselves do not win government but must seek the confidence of a majority of those 308 separate winners.

The saddest result of this utter disregard for the truth is that while no political party actually wins or loses the Canadian public most surely stands to lose the most.

Better a Broken Promise than None at All

Mark Twain once said, “Better a broken promise than none at all.”

I wonder about his philosophy.

With a federal election again sullying the picturesque landscape of Newfoundland & Labrador those promises are flying around faster than a poorly discarded grocery bag in a force 5 hurricane.

After decades of living under the thumb of Hydro Quebec (thanks to the now infamous Upper Churchill Power contract) and after being denied access on Quebec’s grid in an effort to market Lower Churchill power, Canada’s political Czars have finally seen fit to “promise” Newfoundland & Labrador a loan guarantee for development of a portion of the Lower Churchill river in partnership with Nova Scotia.

Or have they?

Let me start by apologizing for the length of the following but as much as the various political machines would like everyone to believe this is a simple matter, it most assuredly isn’t, thus the need to use far more than the 50 words or less the leaders of the parties are so expert at casting out.

To begin, just what have Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper actually promised?

After piecing together various comments from both men, their statements differ depending on where they’re campaigning and in which official language being used, here’s the result.

Michael Ignatieff likes the idea of co-operation between provinces and regions but… since he hasn’t seen all the details he’s only willing to say he stands behind the project and would likely support a loan guarantee.

This may be seen by devout Liberals as a promise but it’s a little too ambiguous to truly pass the smell test.

Speaking of undesirable odors, Mr. Ignatieff also said he would like to see the entire Lower Churchill project developed in future, not just the currently planned Muskrat Falls section. His belief is that other provinces, he specifically identified Quebec, should play a part in developing the remaining, and much more valuable, Gull Island portion of the river.

On this point I smell something very fishy indeed and not at all in Newfoundland & Labrador’s favor.

The question then becomes: After the election, should he win, do Michael Ignatieff’s words indicate that he might try to tie a possible loan guarantee to some form of agreement with Quebec on development of the Gull Island generating station?

After living with the fallout of the existing Upper Churchill contract nearly my entire life (with thirty years to go if I live well into my seventies) I have to wonder about statements like that. Remember it was Ottawa’s refusal to defend the Constitutional right of provinces to access markets that played such a big part in the existence of that one sided contract in the first place.

I shudder consider a scenario where Newfoundland and Labrador is locked into an arrangement that only permits hydro development on terms agreeable to Hydro Quebec and the Quebec government.

As for Mr. Harper, he’s said he’ll provide a loan guarantee, or equivalent funding, as long as the development meets certain criteria.

If (and only if) the project meets a test for financial feasibility, regional development value and greenhouse gas reductions will a loan guarantee be put forward.

On the surface those criterion sound perfectly reasonable but what exactly are the measurements of each and what constitutes a pass or a fail?

These non-specific criteria, though mana from Heaven to Conservative followers, are in fact an off ramp a two year old could drive an eighteen wheeler down.

Repeatedly when speaking about his “promise” Mr. Harper has also crowed about how much the project will mean for regional co-operation and for reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. He’s even spoken of the virtues of power produced in Newfoundland and Labrador serving as a replacement for dirty power generated in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. I don’t disagree with any of this but I’m quite struck and very concerned by something he has, almost intentionally it seems, not said.

Not once has Mr. Harper made any mention of Newfoundland & Labrador’s intention to sell excess power into the lucrative U.S. market.

The ability to reach those markets is what Quebec has denied to Newfoundland and Labrador for generations and it’s exactly what every politician in Quebec is railing against ever since Mr. Harper’s “promise” hit the news wires.

Could it be that the Harper Conservatives plan to use, as part of his mysterious approval criteria, the caveat that power generated by the Lower Churchill project, with federal assistance, can only be used to benefit Canada as a whole (read: only sold and used within Canada)?

Such a move would, of course, destroy Newfoundland and Labrador’s energy and financial aspirations and would guarantee that any power not purchased in the Atlantic region would inevitably flow to the end of the line, so to speak. Not into the U.S. at all, but into Quebec.

In such a scenario, any energy not required by the region and locked out of the U.S. market would be virtually worthless to everyone, with the exception of Quebec. A move like this would allow Hydro Quebec to scoop that power up at fire sale prices and re-sell it, inside Quebec boundaries of course, thus freeing up more of Hydro Quebec’s own power for sale elsewhere at a staggering profit.

There is no doubt any conditions of this sort would mean the law of supply and demand will benefit Quebec alone, certainly not Newfoundland & Labrador.

Do such scenarios sound a bit too dastardly for Michael Ignatieff or even for Stephen Harper to consider? Perhaps, but a similar approach isn’t without precedent.

A number of years back Ottawa pulled the same stunt when they sold the then bankrupt Come by Chance oil refinery, also situated in Newfoundland & Labrador. The people of the Province wanted the refinery back online and access to the jobs that would come with the sale. Ever the fair bunch that they are the feds agreed to a sale under the condition that beyond what oil would be produced for use in Newfoundland and Labrador, not one single solitary barrel would ever, ever, be sold inside Canada’s border. It never has and never can be.

At that time it was the Irving family screaming and being placated by Ottawa. What’s to stop Hydro Quebec from doing it this time around?

Adding to the mass confusion around these so called “promises” are statements made by characters other than the federal candidates themselves.

Bloc leader, Gilles Duceppe, has called these “promises” a slap in the face for Quebec and said Ottawa is using Quebec tax dollars to help Newfoundland and Labrador unfairly compete with Hydro Quebec.

Quebec Premier, Jean Charest, has said that it isn’t right for Ottawa to subsidize power rates in Newfoundland and Labrador since Ottawa never helped Quebec develop its power grid.

Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty, is screaming blue murder that Ontario tax dollars are being used to support Newfoundland and Labrador. As a result, he says, Ontario wants support from the feds for its projects, the price of which McGuinty will, “…determine later”.

As they say, never let the truth get in the way of a good lie.

Suppose for a moment that which ever party forms the next government actually keeps their promise to Newfoundland & Labrador, without locking the Province into a catastrophic agreement, what would that actually mean?

It means that regardless of what Mr. Duceppe, Charest or McGuinty say, a loan guarantee doesn’t actually require money from any federal taxpayers, no matter where they live. It's like a co-signature on a loan, nothing more.

Consider as well that while crying about subsidization more than 70% of the profits of Hydro Quebec (a provincial corporation) are a direct result of locked in 1960’s prices for energy Quebec resells at a monumental profit thanks to the afore mentioned Upper Churchill contract.

Even developed at the kind of lower interest rates a loan guarantee would bring Newfoundland and Labrador's Lower Churchill project could never come anywhere close to producing power as cheaply as Quebec is getting power from the Upper Churchill, so who is subsidizing whom?

Never mind as well that Quebec’s & Ontario’s grids are fully inside their respective Provinces while the proposed transmission system for the Lower Churchill would cross provincial boundaries and travel under the ocean, which is within federal jurisdiction. Ottawa should play a role.

Let’s also ignore the fact that with the borrowing power of both Ontario and Quebec, at least in the past, has been similar to that of the Federal government meaning loan guarantees of any kind would have had little if any benefit to either Province.


Add it all up and it’s one heck of a situation isn’t it?

So far Newfoundland and Labrador has received little more than weak election promises, no contract has been drafted and no passing or failing grades have been given to the project by Ottawa, yet look at the fuss.

If, even after all the concerns I’ve expressed so far, these promises are actually fulfilled in the end, Newfoundland and Labrador will only receive a loan guarantee which actually costs taxpayers nothing, zip, zero.

Well…

It’s here that I have to also admit to being guilty of not letting the truth get in the way of a good lie since I’m willing to wager my substantial penny collection that these “promises” will actually cost taxpayers a great deal, though they shouldn’t.

Just days after the “promises” were made, in order to placate the complainers, agreements have been made on the $2.2 billion dollars (of real taxpayer money) Quebec wants for introducing the HST decades ago.

It’s also been reported that Ottawa will help Quebec with building a new bridge. It’s not yet clear if this will be in the form of a loan guarantee or actual tax dollars but coincidentally the bridge project is valued at almost exactly the same $6 billion dollars or so the Lower Churchill project is expected to come in at.

I can’t wait to see what kind of goodies the Ontario government will milk the situation for over the coming weeks, especially after Mr. McGuinty’s statement that he’ll determine the value of what he wants later.

As I said at the start of this lengthy commentary, nothing is as simple as the political parties would have us believe.

In the end Newfoundland and Labrador may actually end up with nothing from the federal government, not even a simple signature, or perhaps worse, find itself locked into an agreement that destroys its financial future. Either way, you can hang your hat on the fact that Ontario and Quebec will surely benefit from the carrot now being dangled in front of voters in the Province.

As McGuinty, Charest and Duceppe have said in the past few days, this promise will cost a great deal of taxpayer dollars, but they failed to mention that Ontario and Quebec are the provinces that will receive those dollars, not Newfoundland and Labrador.

Based on the numbers being bandied about, by the time this election is over what should have been a free promise to provide a free loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill project will assuredly end up costing taxpayers far more than the entire Lower Churchill price tag itself, with not one penny going to the proponents of the project.

So, was Mark Twain correct when he said, “Better a broken promise than none at all.”?

I’m not convinced, but it’s pretty clear Mr. Twain didn’t spend much time in Canada.

How much does a Quebec stadium cost to build these days anway by the way? Hmmmmmm....

What Kind of Shell Game is Stephen Harper Playing?

What kind of shell game is Stephen Harper playing and why are the political elite in Newfoundland and Labrador willingly stepping up to be conned once again?

During the 2006 federal election Stephen Harper promised – in writing – that if elected his party would exclude revenues from non-renewable resources when calculating equalization payments to the Provinces of Canada. The logic being that since those revenues are finite they should be used to allow Provinces to diversify, pay down debt and grow their economies in preparation for the day when the resources run out. They should not be considered on the same footing as other types of revenue.

It was that commitment which paved the way for several Conservative MPs to be elected in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2006, including the now locally infamous Fabian Manning, who would later stand next to Stephen Harper in the House of Commons and laugh, clap and cheer (literally) as Mr. Harper ridiculed Newfoundland and Labrador over the issue claiming the Province wanted to “Have its cake and eat it to…”.

Even after signing a letter to the Provincial government of Newfoundland and Labrador to the effect, once elected, Mr. Harper walked away from his commitment.

So much for election promises, even ones in writing with a clear and distinct signature (sure looks like Stephen Harper’s to me).

Fast forward to the 2008 election and, thanks to the broken promise, the Province rallied behind Premier Danny Williams, leaving nothing but scorched earth at the feet of every Conservative MP who dared to stand with Stephen Harper. Not a single Conservative was sent to Ottawa, except that is for Fabian Manning who, after losing his election bid, was rewarded with a Senate Appointment (another broken promise by Harper who said he would not appoint senators). One can only surmise Mr. Manning’s appointment was Harper’s way of thanking Manning for his very public betrayal of constituents and his Province.

During that 2008 campaign every elected member of the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislature participated in the ABC (Anyone But Conservative) campaign that drove the Tories out, including all members of the local PC party. Some even campaigned along side Federal Liberal hopefuls, not the least of which was Newfoundland and Labrador’s new Premier, Kathy Dunderdale.

After the broken promises and public ridiculing that flowed directly from Mr. Harper’s commitment on non-renewable resource revenues, the 2010 election campaign has led to a resurgence in Newfoundland and Labrador, not of local politicians willing to stand up and fight, as was seen in 2008, but of the sort of pre-Danny Williams politicians the Province has been accustomed to for generations. The self serving spineless kind.

No worries about broken promises this time around, no siree. Now they all say "...this time is different".

This time Mr. Harper has said he’ll back a loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill hydro project. We don't have a signed agreement and never mind that a few hours before the big announcement on Thursday Mr. Harper told a crowd in Halifax that there was still a lot of details to be worked out and nothing was final, "...this time will be different".

Never the less, Danny Williams is barely out the door and suddenly we find Premier Dunderdale (remember her, she’s the one who walked the campaign trail at the side of a Liberal MP in 2008) is crowing about how great this deal will be for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Fabian Manning (yes, he’s back) has left the senate and is running in his old riding again. In fact former provincial politicians, former Williams' cabinet members no less, are tripping over each other in a scramble to get to the Harper trough in time for feeding.

They’re coming out of the woodwork, but for what?

Do they really believe that Stephen Harper will keep his promise, even after Quebec has publicly said, time and time again, that they do not want Ottawa to help with the development of the Lower Churchill Project?

Just this week Gilles Duceppe called it a slap in the face to Quebec.

I can picture what the next few months will bring, it won’t be only Fabian Manning standing in the House to cheer on Mr. Harper as he belittles NL over this latest commitment, it’ll be all the Conservative MPs the people of Newfoundland and Labrador might be foolish enough to send to Ottawa.

Here we are, barely a week into the 2010 election and, with Williams now out of the picture, the political hacks from Newfoundland and Labrador are once again showing their true colors, looking out for number one.

It’s too bad they can’t show a little intelligence and moral fibre. It might not serve their greed and avarice but it's something that might serve the Province far better.

At this point one can only hope the voters of Newfoundland and Labrador, if not the politicians, are willing to stand by their principles.

"Nobody’s paying attention so it doesn’t matter"

As Thomas Jefferson once said, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance".

Unfortunately, as individuals in nations such as Libya, Egypt and elsewhere offer up their lives for the opportunity to cast a ballot, in Canada we’ve very cunningly been led to a place where voting is something we avoid like the plague and the term “election” has become a dirty word.

Has Stephen Harper tossed aside the Jefferson approach to democracy in favor the Nixon playbook?

There are those who might be tempted to accuse this writer of crossing the line with such a statement but who is it that's actually crossed the line?

When, for example, did such self serving statements as, “…nobody’s paying attention so it doesn’t matter…” become a valid reason for rampant political acts of fraud, forgery and deceit?

I’m not sure anyone can actually pinpoint a specific date on the calendar, yet here we are.

I’ve been around long enough to know that politicians and parties have participated in underhanded acts since the dawn of time, but anyone who’s been following the Canadian political debate of late has witnessed a monumental shift from the age old secretive acts of deception to outright pride in the ability to pull a fast one.

Today the attitude appears to be that it’s OK as long as nobody notices.

As citizens we can waste our time blaming the politicians themselves if we choose but the reality, regardless of the level moral bankruptcy on display in Ottawa, is that most Canadians truly aren’t paying attention and the Nation’s leaders are getting away with it. In the dog eat dog world of politics those running for public office would be laughed out of their respective caucus rooms if they failed to take advantage of this fact and to promote this public inattention. It's sad but true.

The current attitued among Conservative party members can only be described as one of taking pride in their utter disrespect, even disdain, for every man, woman and child from sea to sea to sea.

There’s no doubt that all sides of the political spectrum are fully capable of underhanded acts, but anyone who has sat through even one interview with a Conservative MP, Senator, spin doctor or pundit lately will have lost count of the number of times they’ve been boldly told that “…nobody cares about it…” or “…it doesn’t matter because nobody is paying attention…”.

How sad is the state of our political system when a sitting government is comfortable relying on such platitudes without making even a feeble attempt to explain their actions?

In the past few months alone a sitting government Minister altered a document after it was signed off on by officials, 4 high ranking Conservative party members are facing criminal charges, Elections Canada and the courts have found the Conservative party guilty of nothing less than election fraud for “laundering” hundreds of thousands of dollars during the last election and the Speaker of the House has ruled against the government for refusing to provide financial information required by the Commons and for misleading Parliament.

Through it all, the only explanation offered by anyone on the Harper government payroll is to repeat the mantra of, “…nobody cares…” or “...it doesn’t matter because nobody is paying attention…”.

The saddest part about this shift in political tactics is that it’s actually working.

Clearly those who brush aside concerns about such reprehensible acts show how little respect they have for Canada’s political system, not to mention the public, but they are not wrong, at least when they say nobody is paying attention. People aren’t and as a result they are indeed getting away with it.

The attitude of today’s political elite allow them to downplay their illegal and/or immoral acts and serves the agenda of increasing the level of voter apathy across Canada. A reality that few can argue when you realize that during the last federal election slightly more than 58% of eligible voters actually went to the polls. The result: the Conservative Party formed government with only 37% support. Thanks to their ability to encourage their core supporters while reinforcing the feelings of apathy among those who don’t lean to the Right.

With the state of our political situation one might well expect voter turnout in the upcoming election to drop even lower. Not because nobody wants an election (another tag line popular in Conservative circles) but because the very act of disrespect that comprises the thrust of this article has, quite intentionally, left so many people with a bad taste in their mouths.

In this light, it’s not a stretch to say that the Conservative Party of Canada isn’t actually running a campaign against the Liberals, the NDP or the Bloc, but against the citizens of Canada.

(As a side note for readers in Newfoundland and Labrador, Fabian Manning has apparently decided to run for the seat in Avalon. You remember Fabian right? He's the one who, when last sent to Ottawa, stood beside PM Harper in the House of Commons cheering, laughing and clapping as the PM ridiculed the Province Manning was elected to represent over its demands that he live by his promises on the Atlantic Accord. Welcome back Fabian.)

Is Democracy Dead or Just on Life Support?

What’s happened to democracy in Canada? Is it still alive and kicking, on life support, or as many now believe, truly dead?

On the federal level we have a Prime Minister in office that believes he can simply dismiss the elected representatives of the people with a phone call any time the heat is too much for him. The public continues to rail against his undemocratic actions while the PM simply circles his hand picked team power brokers and does as he pleases.

It’s an attitude that has become more and more prevalent throughout politics in Canada. Examples of the growing belief by elected officials that they have “absolute” power can be found right across Canada and at all levels of government.

Take the example of the government of New Brunswick and its determined effort to sell off the provinces publicly owned power utility.

The Graham government in New Brunswick was elected on a platform that promised not to privatize NB Power. It was a platform plank that helped propel them into office. Now, in their first term of office the Premier and his Liberal caucus are hell bent on doing the exact opposite of what they were elected to do.

Tens of thousands of citizens have joined an online group opposing the sale and even though the group, on a per capita basis, is 6 times larger than one fighting the prorogation of Parliament, the Graham government is refusing to listen.

Protests are held on a daily basis at the Legislature and in front of MLA offices yet they refuse to listen.

Letters, emails, phone calls and public confrontations with members of the Graham government, by the hundreds, are happening daily yet they refuse to listen.

The volume of letters to local papers and the public opinion polls show that a vast majority of the public is opposed to the sale. Court challenges have been brought forward and native groups are seeking an injunction to stop the sale yet they still move forward with the planned sale.

What does that say about democracy other than sounding the death knell?

The Graham government is claiming they are not privatizing the utility because they are selling it to another crown corporation, even though that corporation is owned by the Quebec government, not the New Brunswick government. Clearly this is a case of quoting the letter of their platform over its clear intent”.

They are also claiming that their recent decision not to sell the transmission capacity is a case of them “listening to the people” but is it really? When you consider that they are not selling the poles but giving up all the capacity on those lines to Hydro-Quebec for eternity the self serving hair splitting taking place in New Brunswick is flagrant.

As with the proroguing of parliament, the actions of Premier Graham are clearly self serving. They are certainly not intended to serve the public interest.

In recent days elected MLAs in New Brunswick have even resorted to attacking the voting public to whom they should be answerable.

According to several witnesses, MLA Wally Stiles, a Cabinet Minister in the Graham government, told protestors outside his constituency office in Petitcodiac on Monday, “If you f--king a--holes think you are going to win this you had better think again! And I am f--king well going to run for the Liberal Party again!"

Stiles later got into an altercation with a resident in a local restaurant. The situation had to be brought under control by a retired RCMP officer who happened to be dining in the establishment at the time.

These sorts of incidents are becoming more and more prevalent among elected MLAs each day.

When the Stiles situation was brought to the attention of Premier Graham and members of his cabinet the only response came from Energy Minister, Jack Keir who, in addition to showing no concern about the actions of someone representing his government appeared to indicate that because this writer is a Newfoundlander I must be unemployed. Either that or when he said, “…Come on over, we'll see if we can help you land a job?” I have to wonder if he was actually offering me something to gain my silence?

Indeed, the sort of undemocratic and unprofessional actions we’ve seen in Ottawa lately are spreading like wildfire across the entire Country and it’s a slippery slope when those elected to office respond to their constituents, as both Premier Graham and his Energy Minister recently did, by saying they intend to do what they want regardless of the feelings of the public because:

“I'm not concerned. Politics wasn't a career for me.” – Minister Jack Keir

By Myles Higgins

Has Stephen Harper Outwitted Himself?

With an electoral axe about to fall in the Nation’s capital, or more accurately upon Stephen Harper’s political neck, Conservative strategists may have finally outwitted themselves in their hunger for national domination.

Faced with the prospect of a Liberal sponsored non-confidence vote the Conservatives are floating the idea of forcing Michael Ignatieff’s hand. They hope to do this by tabling a confidence bill of their own when the House resumes. The Conservatives believe this will allow them to set the agenda for the election and make it appear that Mr. Ignatieff, should he vote against the bill, is standing in the way of Canada's economic recovery.

Here’s how the diabolical plan is supposed to play out.

The Liberal party plans to table a non-confidence motion at their first opportunity – an opposition day in early October – the Conservatives on the other hand plan to table a ways and means bill on the first day the Commons reopens, September 15th. That bill would officially implement the hugely popular and much publicized “Home Renovation Tax Credit”, so many Canadians have already bought into spending countless millions in the process.

Conservative strategists believe that by forcing the Liberals to vote against that particular bill they can paint the opposition as killing the stimulus program, of damaging the economy and of costing individual taxpayers up to $1,300 in rebates many are counting on this spring.

As a purely political move it’s ingenious. The question is whether it will backfire.

Clearly Prime Minister Harper has no inhibitions when it comes to his political ambitions. This is nothing new. In previous years Mr. Harper has shown that he’s willing to ignore signed agreements by stripping money away from provincial coffers without so much as a second thought (consider the Atlantic Accord contract as an example).

Mr. Harper is now proving his willingness to not only pull a fast one when it comes to cryptic programs like equalization that are outside the understanding of the average voter but to reach directly into voter's pockets by gambling with tax refunds which many taxpayers have already spent thousands of dollars in the expectation of receiving.

I’m not so sure that’s a wise move on his part.

There’s an old saying that “all politics is local” and you can’t get much more local than a voter's back pocket.

The question for voters to ask themselves, should an election come to pass, is which political leader is truly the most harmful to the economy?

Think about it. If you’ve already spent thousands of dollars, believing that you would get a sizeable portion of that money back, are you more or less likely to curb your spending over the coming months now that you have been told you may never see a dime of what you were promised?

On the other hand, if you’ve yet to spend a penny on home renovations are you more or less likely to do so now that Mr. Harper has put the “Home Renovation Tax Credit” up for grabs in a self serving political game?

For most Canadians the answer to both of those questions is pretty clear.

So which leader is the most harmful to the economy?

Is it really, as Mr. Harper would have us to believe, Michael Ignatieff, a man most of us know very little about? Possibly.

Or is it the current Prime Minister, a man who, by using the “Home Renovation Tax Credit” as a self-serving political hammer may well have single handedly done more to stifle discretionary consumer spending than the economic downturn itself?

Remember, even if the opposition parties rise to the bait and kill the rebate bill, if even temporarily, it was Mr. Harper who self servingly put that program on the chopping block and raised the axe high into the air.

Patronage Plumbs Peddled for PM's Purposes

This morning I stumbled across an article from the “Hill Times” that immediately caught my attention and captivated my interest. The piece was about none other than Prime Minister Stephen Harper

The headline read, “Harper criticized for not 'taking care' of former MPs, top staffers”.

The author referenced Conservative MPs and staffers who are worried because, “...Mr. Harper demands loyalty … (but) he doesn't show the same loyalty when MPs lose an election or staffers leave their Parliament Hill jobs."

Apparently those loyalists are, "disappointed that he has failed to "take care" of them in their post-Parliamentary lives.”

I have to say I was left in total bewilderment after reading this.

I mean boo hoo for the party hacks moaning to this reporter but what's going on here?

First of all let me say I’m strongly believe that political patronage and the “old buddy” network is a major part of the problem we have with politics today. Anybody who chooses to run for office or to work for a political “machine” shouldn’t have any right to expect to be “taken care of” when the party ends. They do of course but that doesn't make it right.

Knowing how I feel about this I’m sure you can understand my confusion.

Politics in Canada has been an elitist and closed “scratch my back” system for decades and to hear that suddenly Stephen Harper, one of the most underhanded and self serving of the bunch, may have suddenly decided to do the right thing and give up the practice had me flabbergasted.

I mean wasn’t it Stephen Harper who claimed he would never appoint senators to that most golden of retirement homes, the Red Chamber?

Wasn't it also Stephen Harper who did just the opposite by appointing 18 of them?

Didn’t he thank Mike Duffy for his partisan service and support during the last election and for Duffy’s crucifixion of Stephane Dion after a botched Nova Scotia interview (an action by Duffy and NewsNet that was later described by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council as unethical)?

Didn’t Mr. Harper also send former Newfoundland and Labrador MP, Fabian Manning, to the red chamber after Manning was ridden out of town on a rail in his home Province? Wasn’t that a thank-you to Manning for standing next to the PM in the House of Commons, laughing and clapping as Mr. Harper callously stripped hundreds of millions from Newfoundland and Labrador and publicly ridiculed Mr. Manning’s home province?

Could the Stephen Harper I know and dislike have changed so much in such a short time that his party insiders and toadies were beginning to worry about their future expense accounts and "rolling around money"?

I was so confused. How could some reporter have identified a lack of political pork barreling and cronyism as a serious weakness in anyone but of all people, Stephen Harper?

Really?

What was I missing?

I mean here is a Prime Minister who has proven time and again that he is not to be trusted in any way, shape or form. For Stephen Harper breaking a promise or “sculpting the truth" is as natural as breathing. So my question was this: Had the Prime Minister suddenly turned over a new leaf or was he just proving to those in his inner circle what many of us already know, that he can’t be trusted?

It's something they all should have been aware of by now but in the rarified air of Ottawa clear vision is something often encountered.

Was it something else all together?

Did the Hill Times get boondoggled by the Harper media machine into running a story that might allow the Prime Minister to be viewed as the only one willing to “clean up dodge” even at the expense of his loyal minions?

The whole thing left all me with so many questions my head hurt and I believe (just for a moment) my morning muffin threatened to reappear from the depths.

What was I to say about this new information staring me in the face?

At first I almost thought that even though the Hill Times wasn’t very flattering to Mr. Harper (They seemed to view this lack of cronyism was a bad thing ) I might actually be forced to sit down to write something complimenary about the man.

My blood ran cold.

I nearly passed out from the stress.

But I was saved the horror of defending Mr. Harper's actions.

As I lowered by now tense frame over the keyboard and the blood slowly began to flow back into my head I suddenly realized what was really happening. It wasn’t that Stephen Harper had decided to do the right thing by turning his back on old school politics, it was just a case of the true nature of the man once again reaching the public eye.

I guess all the conflicting facts and my desire to see political cronyism done away with had clouded my judgment and overwhelmed my nervous system.

Think about it, Stephen Harper hasn’t actually done the right thing by deciding not to offer cushy jobs to his cronies on the taxpayer dime. Instead he’s been carefully weighing the market value of those around him and acting accordingly.

Those who have little future value to him, savagely loyal or not, must be removed and forgotten in the interest of the Harper "buddy" portfolio. In this way the limited number of valuable patronage positions available can be offered to those who have continued political or personal value.

I mean if Harper just gave away those plumb jobs as a thank-you to every Tom, Dick or Sparrow how would he be able to buy future influence inside Ottawa?

Consider this, were the onslaught of senatorial appointments really a political thank-you on the PM’s part or a way for him to meet his own self interests?

I admit that at first I thought they were nothing more than a taxpayer funded pat on the back but on reflection, and in light of this recent information I’ve been forced to look for another explanation and it isn’t hard to find one.

Just squeeze your eyes into tiny slits, forget you’re human or even a primate and try to think like Stephen Harper. I know it hurts but if you try real hard the answers will come.

For anyone afraid of having their personality or moral compass get stuck in Harper mode stop now and I'll tell you what I came up with.

Mind you I didn’t have the time, inclination or article room to research all the senate appointments made my this PM but in the case of Duffy and Manning the answer is simple.

Those appointments weren’t Harper’s way of thanking two political hacks for climbing into his back pocket they served a much more important purpose.

Duffy’s senate seat ensures that Mr. Harper has a very experienced and well connected media insider at his back pocket and at his beck and call whenever he needs to create some spin. And here’s the really interesting part, it’s not costing the Conservative party a cent because the taxpayers are footing the bill for Mr. Duffy’s enormous salary and golden perks.

As for Fabian Manning’s appointment, that ones a lot simpler and less forward looking.

Harper still has a major pissing contest underway with the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, Danny Williams, and he needed a way to retaliate against the Province for not electing a single Conservative during the last election. What better way to send a message to the Province and the Premier than to offer a highly publicized senate seat to the Province’s poster boy for “traitor of the decade”?

Can you say “slap in the face” Premier Williams? I bet you can.

Anyway, once the reality of the situation got a little clearer I slapped myself for being so politically naive and I felt much better, not for Canada which is still politically screwed, but about my personal well being.

My headache went away and things began to return to normal after a few minutes of deep breathing. It was then that another terrible thought occurred to me. What will happen after the next federal election?

According to the same “Hill Times” article that threw my morning into such turmoil, Mr. Harper may not always “take care” of his loyal supporters but the Liberal party has, “a fairly strong support network, not only political, but also corporate and academic” to help its loyalists.

Oh great. Once again we are faced with proof that the Canadian political system is nothing more than a joke. The banana republic of the North.

Now Canadians can either elect a ruling party that has no morals but which is pickier about feeding its loyalists at the trough or one that claims to have all the morals in the world while historically handing out patronage positions like Halloween candy.

Thank God we live in a democracy (well actually a democratic monarchy) where the public is free to decide which party had the best publicity machine leading up to election day.

Personally I think I’ll take next polling day. At least nobody will be able to blame me for “choosing” our next government.

Comparing Report Cards - Harper vs. Williams

This week Prime Minister Stephen Harper delivered his “report card” on the status of the federal stimulus spending. Ironically, Mr. Harper waxed poetic about how much money has been earmarked for specific projects, municipal leaders across the Country sat in stunned silence wondering where the money was.

Always one to turn a phrase to his advantage, during his address Stephen Harper was quite skillful in saying that money has identified for the many projects while knowing full well that approval and delivery are not the same thing.

What Mr. Harper intentionally failed to admit was that most cheques have not been cut and most tenders for development have not been issued because the money is still somewhere in the bowels of the Finance department tangled in red tape. Stimulus funding is wonderful stuff when it’s needed but it isn’t much good if the money doesn’t flow.

As much as the Prime Minister dislikes the place, perhaps Mr. Harper would do well to look toward the province of Newfoundland and Labrador if he wants to see how stimulus funding really works.

On the same day the Prime Minister delivered his report card to the Professor Ignatieff and the rest of Canada Newfoundland and Labrador Premier, Danny Williams, and several of his Ministers delivered an update of their own.

The Provincial infrastructure stimulus package included in the 2009/10 budget was set at $800 million dollars and just yesterday that amount doubled to $1.6 billion and the program extended to include the 2010/11 fiscal year as well.

The biggest difference between the Newfoundland and Labrador package and the one touted by Ottawa isn’t in the numbers or the duration but in the delivery.

Perhaps Provincial Transportation and Works Minister, Trevor Taylor, put it best when he said at yesterday’s press conference, “It's one thing to make unprecedented commitments but it's quite another to get this money flowing and projects tendered quickly and that's just what our government is doing."

"Right now our Tendering and Contracts Division is the busiest it has ever been. On average, at any given time, the Provincial Government has between 20 to 30 tenders in circulation. We currently have 107 tenders out, which is a record for this province."

"We are issuing and awarding our tenders earlier than ever before and we plan to maintain this aggressive tender schedule as long as the commodity and labour prices hold and the industry has the capacity to do the work. Also, we are duplicating the designs of many of our new schools and health care facilities which expedites the process and makes it more cost-efficient,” said Taylor.

While there is no doubt the economic downturn is affecting the Province, as it is the rest of Canada, with increased unemployment and a lower GDP there are some positive indications for improvement over the coming months.

Finance Minister, Jerome Kennedy noted that, "At a recent meeting of finance ministers across the country, the Federal Government indicated that Newfoundland and Labrador is now leading the rest of the country with stimulus flowing to the economy in 2009 and 2010 relative to our GDP."

"In addition, thus far this year, our province is leading the country in a number of economic indicators, including investment intentions, retail sales, labour income and urban housing starts," said Kennedy.

Perhaps one of the best features of the Newfoundland and Labrador stimulus package is that isn’t overly dependent on Ottawa to provide a share of the funding. 85% of the program’s funding will come from provincial coffers with the remaining 15% being shared by federal and municipal governments.

It’s a good thing there isn’t too much dependence on Ottawa. We all know where that has led the Province in the past. In this particular situation and at the speed federal infrastructure funding is flowing the recession is likely to be a distant memory by the time the first cheques go in the mail.

It’s really too bad Stephen Harper and Danny Williams aren’t on speaking terms or the PM might have picked up a few pointers on how to handle an economic crisis.

One Bad Apple Spoils the Bunch

Is it just me or are the semi-regular apologies being forced out of the Federal Conservative caucus wearing a little thin?

When will the people of Canada wake up and realize that the rot now being exposed among members of Parliament isn’t a problem with individuals alone. It also isn’t something that can be fixed with a forced and largely insincere apology. It’s a serious and dangerous attitude problem that is not only being condoned inside the Conservative Party of Canada but encouraged.

Today Natural Resources Minister, Lisa Raitt, delivered a teary eyed apology to the media after refusing to do so for days on end in the House of Commons. She finally apologized but only after mounting attacks from the opposition and most recently from numerous cancer patients who are rightly disgusted with her attitude and with the Prime Minister's acceptance of it.

With the support she’s been shown by the Prime Minister I’m surprised Minister Raitt apologized at all. In fact with the resounding praise heaped on her by her leader in the past two days I almost expected her to begin gunning down the elderly and infirm in the streets and hungrily lap their warm blood from the asphalt.

Seriously, it should be pretty obvious to anyone that this situation is just one more example of the rot that exists inside the Conservative Party of Canada. It's a sickness of the mind that is festering and growing with each passing day in power. The Raitt case is just the latest in a string of similarly disgusting pronouncements by Conservative Members of Parliament in recent years and I'll be very surprised if it's the last.

How many of us remember Saskatchewan Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski who turned up on a long lost video tape last year referring to homosexuals as “faggots with dirt under their fingernails who transmit diseases”.

Does anyone remember how Mr. Lukiwiski was dealt with inside the Conservative caucus? Probably not, because no action was ever taken to chastise the MP or to send a message to other members that this behaviour is unacceptable.

Once again, after a staged public apology all was forgiven and Mr. Lukiwski went back to work.

What about Conservative MP Gerry Ritz, the former Minister of Health, who laughingly joked during the listeria outbreak which caused a number of deaths across the Country, that eating tainted sandwich meats was, “like death by a thousand cuts, or should I say cold cuts”.

Ritz went on to express his hope that a newly announced death in PEI was one of his adversaries on the opposite side of the House. He was supported and backed to the hilt by Stephen Harper.

On a more recent note, in fact just this week, pit bull Conservative Transport Minister, John Baird, muttered publicly that the city of Toronto itself should “just F@#K OFF”. Once again, a quick apology seems to have satisfied the Prime Minister. No sanctions will be imposed, no resignation sought and, as a result, no message will be sent to other members of the Conservative caucus.

Is it any wonder that with the Prime Minister setting such a good example the rank and file are quite comfortable acting like self satisfied A-holes?

Consider that it was the Prime Minister himself who after bailing out GM, to the tune of more than $7 billion dollars in taxpayer money, said that anyone who lost their job in the forest industry should consider moving to Fort McMurray where there are plenty of jobs if they really want to work.

I’m not saying there aren’t serious attitude problems throughout Ottawa, regardless of which party an MP is a part of, in fact I'm sure of it, but when people work every day in an environment that condons and supports such behavior it does something to the mind. A sort of mob mentality develops and the worst behavior possible is bound to increase and spread.

I don't want an angry mob running loose in the streets of my town and I certainly don't want one running the Country.

The situation Minister Raitt finds herself in now rests as much on Mr. Harper’s shoulders as it does on her own.

Not to excuse her actions, but the comments made by the Minister, which include her musing about a potential bump to her political career and about taking all the credit for resolving a serious medical crisis affecting thousands of people across the Country, are a direct result of her environment and the attitude within it. She probably thought what she was saying was just fine based on her experiences inside the Conservative caucus.

On the tape Minister Raitt came across as quite comfortable with the shortage of medical isotopes and their effect on cancer and other diagnostic imaging tests. She seemed almost happy when referring to the problem as “sexy” because it dealt with “cancer” and “radioactive leaks”. This is not the attitude most of us expect from a Member of Parliament, but then again, it only takes one bad apple to spoil the bunch and when the worst rot of all exists in the biggest apple in the pile what hope is there for the entire crop?

Beware the Ides of March (or June or July or...)

Well thank goodness the rest of Canada, excluding Alberta perhaps, has finally begun to figure out what Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have known almost from day one.

Stephen Harper is not a national leader, in fact some might say he isn’t fit to run a third world sweat shop, let alone an entire Country.

Newfoundland and Labrador voters unceremoniously booted the Harper Conservatives off the island (sorry about the survivor reference Labrador but it was just too easy) during the last election by denying them a single seat in the Province. Now that the rest of Canada is starting to see the wisdom of that action its beginning to look more and more like the dark days of Stephen Harper will soon be over.

All the signs are there.

The Liberals under Michael Ignatieff are consistently trending higher in the polls as the weeks roll on. Mr. Harper himself can’t wait to race from international meeting to international meeting, far preferring life outside Canada to that inside the nation he so poorly leads. For most political junkies nothing underscores the end of a political career like massive travel expenses.

Even Conservative MPs and Ministers, who until recently had their mouths hermetically sealed by the PMO as a right of passage, have now begun to publicly disagree with and freely contradict their soon to be ex-leader. Could anything send a clearer message of Mr. Harper's future in politics?

All is not well at 24 Sussex Drive. Who knows, with any luck the packing may have already begun.

What was it Newfoundland and Labrador's Premier, Danny Williams, said after one broken Harper promise or another?

“He did it to us and he can do it to you (referring to the Canadian public)".

Those words might seem almost prophetic in hindsight, to anyone outside of Newfoundland and Labrador. Those inside the Province had already recognized what the man is like.

Or perhaps a better Williamsism might be his very public claim that, “I can assure you I’ll be around long enough to see the back of his (Harpers) head”.

It looks like Mr. Williams and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador will get their wish sooner rather than later now that Stephen Harper’s true persona is not only recognized in Newfoundland and Labrador but more so across the Country.

Failing to win a majority government the last time out, against a bumbling and ineffective Stephane Dion, certainly didn’t cement Mr. Harper’s support within his party, nor has his penchant for Liberal style spending in an effort to buy Quebec voters (those aren’t side deals folks they're just good politics). Add to this the mounting deficit and a very public attack on the Conservative party’s iconic Grand Poobah, Brian Mulroney, and it isn’t hard to see the writing on the wall for the PM.

Outside the party itself, Mr. Harper’s denial and later miraculous epiphany, thanks to his party’s near death experience, that an economic crisis actually does exist certainly didn’t help his chances of re-election.

His mean spirited and divisive approach to both politics and leadership has manifested itself so often and in such a manner right across the Country that there can be little doubt left about his self inflicted fate.

There are only three questions left for the Conservative party to answer:

Who will replace Mr. Harper?

When is the best time to do the nasty deed of decapitating him? (Figuratively of course, though Mulroney supporters in the party may wish it otherwise)

What approach will least harm the party brand? (In other words should their leader die the death of a thousand cuts or will he be permitted to quietly fall on his own sword?).

It’s all just a matter of time now. Once the decisions are made in some dark, dank and secluded back room of the evil empire it will be done quickly and decisively. If it isn't done, before the next election anyway, the electorate will make the party's decision for it and make them pay a price for their delay.

It’s a sad thing that it's taken so much time for Canadians to understand what Newfoundlanders and Labradorians figured out, and tried to tell them, a long time ago. At least they've finally begun to do so.

Political ideology and ambition aren’t necessarily a bad thing, within moderation, but when it comes to actually running the entire show you can’t survive forever by placing your personal agenda above all else or by pitting one group, one region and one individual against the other.

Sooner or later those who have been wronged or damaged by your actions will reach a certain critical mass where by they begin to outnumber those who have benefited from them. When that happens, the game’s over, as it surely is for Mr. Harper.

For the rest of us, perhaps unfortunately, Mr. Harper's pending political demise means one of two things:

Either the devil we know is better than the one we don’t, or he isn’t.

Only time will answer that question. Let’s all hope the majority of Canadians aren’t as slow to figure it out as they were on this go around.

Ottawa To Address Forestry Woes - Only Quebec Need Apply

When the auto sector ran into financial trouble Ottawa was there, Johnny on the spot, to lend a helping taxpayer funded hand.

When the manufacturing sector stumbled Ottawa was there to offer taxpayer funded bridge funding.

When the banking sector hit a brick wall Ottawa dug deep into taxpayer’s pockets faster than a Younge Street pickpocket.

When the forestry slipped under water, while mills closed in places like Newfoundland and Labrador, and while laid off workers were being denied their severance pay, all that could be heard in Ottawa was the sound of crickets chirping outside 24 Sussex Drive.

There are two things the federal government never turns a blind eye toward. In no particular order those are: Ontario and Quebec (actually those both equate to large numbers of federal votes and as such are really same thing).

Large scale manufacturers, auto makers and major banks all have one thing in common. They are, by and large, headquartered in the only important part of Canada, from the federal governments perspective.

Well it turns out that while the federal government was enjoying a collective snooze after patting itself on the back for all the tax money it’s doled out recently, and while 50,000 forestry related jobs were lost right across Canada (and I mean RIGHT ACROSS Canada, from BC all the way to NL, not just as far as NS) somebody forgot to tell the political elite that they should do something for that industry as well. It looks like somebody finally did.

Ottawa may have turned a blind eye to the problems in the forestry sector up to now but not any more.

I can almost hear the warnings now, “Come on, we’ve got to do something. Never mind that troublesome crowd who lost their jobs in places like Newfoundland and Labrador but come on, Quebec is also being hit. Quebec for God’s sake!!!”

Suddenly out of nowhere Ottawa has begun making a show of having an interest in the forestry sector.

A joint federal/Quebec panel (note, the involvement of only one province) has been setup to see what can be done to protect Canadian forestry jobs (in Quebec of course).

Ottawa has, according to one political figure, “…fostered an agreement with the government of Quebec…” to the tune of 100 million dollars in loan guarantees to be delivered by the Quebec government. No doubt this is just a small down payment with future installments to come in the near future. You can bet your last dollar (if you have any left after taxes) that it won’t just be Quebec taxpayers footing that bill either.

Calls are being made for Ottawa to offer tax credits to the forestry industry (similar to ones now being offered in the U.S.). Credits that will save companies like Abitibi millions of dollars a year.

Yes indeed. Quebec stands to lose nearly 10,000 jobs unless something is done quickly and, as Ottawa is wont to do, the squeaky wheels have begun turning as they get well greased once again.

Unfortunately Ottawa’s sudden interest in the forestry sector is too little, too late and certainly too Quebec focused to do anything for the 50,000 non-Quebecers who’ve already lost their jobs or the thousands more who will in the future (outside of Quebec that is).

Canada-France Dispute Leaves Two Cultures Caught in the Middle

In a letter sent to Premier Danny Williams this week, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Canada does not recognize France’s claim to a larger area of seabed around St. Pierre-Miquelon.

Harper informed the Premier that he has conveyed his position to French President Sarkozy, saying the maritime boundary between Canada and the French territory was settled in June 1992 after a decision by the International Court of Arbitration.

The reason for Mr. Harper’s letter is a French claim to the United Nations seeking an expanded economic zone that would allow them greater access to offshore resources.

Xavier Bowring, a member of a citizens group in St. Pierre says they are seeking a “new economic arrangement with Canada. We don’t want a war with Canada. We only want discussions, so we can have a piece of the resource — a piece of the pie.”

Like Newfoundland and Labrador itself the tiny French islands, with just 6000 residents, was hard hit by the 1992 cod moratorium but while their economy continues to flounder and die, the local residents — many of whom come from mixed St-Pierre-Newfoundland families — have watched Newfoundland and Labrador’s economy grow through offshore oil revenue.

St. Pierre-Miquelon’s offshore rights are confined to a small slice of territory just 2.5 miles wide and 200 long —— known locally as “the baguette.” An area that allows for very limited access to potential resources.

Islanders want either an enlarged French economic zone in which to exploit petroleum resources, or at least the right to share with Canada revenues from undersea natural gas finds that span across the tiny strip of seabed they have been allotted.

“Six thousand people cannot hurt the economy of Canada.”

“We don’t need much to live here and be in good economic health. We only want co-management of the resources around us — not simply those inside that ridiculous little baguette. Otherwise we won’t have a future here. This is our last chance.”

While some people in Newfoundland and Labrador may choose to view Stephen Harper’s letter to Premier Williams is a long overdue show of support for Newfoundland and Labrador my perspective on the subject is a different one completely.

The Harper government, in fact the Canadian government itself regardless of party stripe, could care less for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It’s the resources, not the people, that matter. It’s always been that way and it always will.

Make no mistake. The government of Canada isn’t taking a stand with France because they want to protect potential resource developments for the good of Newfoundland and Labrador but because of the benefits Canada itself reaps from those resources.

Newfoundland and Labrador, unfortunately in the view of some federal MPs, just happens to be in the area from which those petro-dollars flow.

I believe most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can fully understand and empathize with the plight the residents St. Pierre-Miquelon are facing. After all, the tiny area is a small island community (two islands actually), that have been largely dependent on the Atlantic cod fishery for centuries and are controlled by a Country that only recognizes them as an afterthought, if at all. This situation is nothing new to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to be sure.

For a myriad of reasons it’s actually too bad the seabed itself and the resources within them are controlled in Ottawa rather than in St. John’s. The St. Pierre-Miquelon situation simply being another one of those reasons.

This is not to say that the Provincial government would or should be willing to cede rights to those resources any more than Ottawa would but at least with Newfoundland and Labrador leading the discussion there might be more room for open dialogue and perhaps even a livable compromise between the two closely linked peoples who know and understand each other far, far better than Ottawa understands either of them, even the ones within its own borders.

Is The Mainstream Media Bias or Simply Negligent?

It’s a question I’ve been pondering more and more in recent years.

Examples of structural problems in today’s media are as easy to find these days as snowflakes on a January morning in Winnipeg.

Before Christmas television news outlets were all too willing to spoon feed the public snippets of Conservative MPs referring to a potential Liberal-NDP coalition as a “Coup” or calling the actions of the opposition “illegal” or “immoral”. They were far less willing to clarify those partisan words by informing the public that the position espoused was untrue, non-factual and an out and out lie.

The Canadian Parliamentary system is designed to permit exactly the sort of coalition that was being contemplated but unless the viewer had already informed him or herself of this fact the media was not about to take on that job.

Another example now being splashed across the front pages across Canada is the ongoing battle between Ottawa and Newfoundland & Labrador over the Atlantic Accord.

On the surface it might seem that a great deal of attention is being paid to this particular dust up but in realty very few of the facts have ever seen the light of day.

The act of ignoring the underlying facts of any news story in Canada today has become more than simply an annoying weakness of the media. It’s seemingly become a pre-requisite for every news agency and one that threatens the ability of the electorate to make informed decisions about the direction their Country takes on any issue.

With the introduction of the Harper “fiscal stimulus” package the gloves have once again come off between the Province and Ottawa. The attack dogs have been loosed on the Province’s population by Parliament Hill and predictably the Canadian media, in its never ending quest for an attention grabbing quote, even at the expense of the facts, has missed the point of the story entirely.

Every day another headline screams, “Danny Chavez is at it again”, referring of course to Newfoundland and Labrador Premier, Danny Williams. It’s a term that the media has happily adopted to compare the Premier to Venezuelan dictator, Hugo Chavez.

The fact that Mr. Williams is not a dictator at all but is in fact a duly elected leader in Canada who enjoys an 80% approval rating doesn’t seem to matter. The fact that his continued approval by the electorate means he is doing what his constituents expect him to do matter not. Instead of being depicted as a responsive leader, regardless of his approach to specific issues, he is tarred as a dictator.

The easy surface comparison sells papers. The truth doesn’t.

The television networks incessantly play clips of Mike Duffy, formerly one of their own who was recently awarded a Senate seat for his less than unbiased coverage during the last federal election, attacking two Premiers, NL’s Williams and PEI’s Ghiz for saying that the federal budget will have a damaging impact on the Province.

No attempt is made to find out if the claim is true or not. The attacks sell advertising time. The truth does not.

Pundits and editorialists are all too happy to perpetuate the biases and talking points of federal politicians as they rally to defend “all Canadians” from the greedy and demanding people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

One can only assume from their position that Canada’s 30 million souls are in extreme danger from the 500 thousand people in Newfoundland and Labrador, a place that it seems must not be a part of the Country if Canadians need to be defended from its actions.

The news media finds easy to preface every sentence related to the $1.6 Billion dollars involved in the dispute with the tag line, “according to Mr. Williams the federal budget will…”. It would be far harder and require much more effort to actually investigate whether the Province is truly being targeted by the Conservative government or not.

This approach to informing, or more accurately, misinforming the public tells us far more about the mainstream media itself than it does about any story they might be covering on a given day.

It tells us, or ought to tell us, that most reporters, editors and news managers are not in the business of reporting the facts but of producing a steady diet of ready to eat, easy to digest, fluff for the sole purpose of attracting a larger audience and, as a direct result, securing more of those lucrative advertising dollars that pay their salaries.

I challenge anyone who has followed the ongoing battle between Ottawa and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador over the past 3 governments (one Liberal and two Conservative) to think of a single mainstream news outlet, be it the Globe and Mail, National Post, CBC or CTV that has actually taken on the task of investigating the situation thoroughly and reporting the facts behind the headlines.

It isn’t easy is it?

Personally I can’t think of a single one that has been willing to move past the political rhetoric on both sides of the argument, go directly to the bean counting bureaucrats who manage the day to day operations of both the federal and provincial finance departments and actually investigate the story as most Canadians assume reporters are supposed to do.

Not one.

Instead these so called “news” agencies now serve as little more than a venue for the regurgitation of whatever they are told by politicians with a vested interest in the situation and, in the case of national media outlets, more often than not that means providing the public with a daily diet of spin provided by partisan staffers and Federal MPs.

Recently Newfoundland and Labrador MP, Judy Foote, who was the first “uncooperative” MP to be dubbed “the Newfoundland Six” by the media for their refusal to support the budget vote, sent me an email in which she summed up the struggle taking place inside the Liberal caucus and on Parliament hill generally over the Accord issue.

According to Ms. Foote, “One of the problems in Ottawa is getting people to understand the seriousness of the situation. I can talk until I am blue in the face…”

Her words belie her frustration.

When she sent that email, which was before Michael Ignatieff gave his Newfoundland and Labrador caucus a so called “free pass”, Ms. Foote was frustrated at a situation where she had been unable to make her fellow MPs understand that the legislation they were about to pass would have dire consequences for her Province and her people and set a bad precedent across the Country.

Ms Foote’s words also convey a general lack of knowledge within federal political circles, not only over the impact of the budget in the region, but of the Newfoundland and Labrador’s place in Canada.

With the media blindly relaying the uninformed position of federal political figures, is it any wonder Danny Williams could only find one Canadian Premier, from PEI, who was willing to stand up and support his Province’s position, a move that led to the political hatchet job delivered by Senator Duffy in is maiden address to the Red Chamber.

Perhaps American comedian and SNL Alumnus, Al Franken, said it the best when he said, “The biases the media has are much bigger than conservative or liberal. They're about getting ratings, about making money, about doing stories that are easy to cover.”

Those words do not just convey a problem within the media itself but foreshadow a situation that has the potential to affect the direction of the entire Nation.

Is it surprising that the general public across Canada has so easily adopted the misguided belief that the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador is acting as a dictator, that the people are simply greedy and that the Province wants to have their cake and eat it too?

It isn’t.

That’s a story far easier to deliver and for the public to digest than one that identifies the inequities, political games, partisanship, lies, propaganda and systemic unfairness that is an everyday reality of the Canadian federation today.

The stories making the headlines may be easy to accept and they may sell papers but do they really serve the best interests of the public who must ultimately make the decision on the direction their Country should take?