Ever since the idea of developing the lower Churchill project moved to the front burner I’ve been a strong advocate for a truly home grown project. The province should not only develop the lower Churchill itself but that it should do it in a way that allows the power is used at home and not simply sold across the border into Quebec, Ontario or the U.S.
If Newfoundland and Labrador is to have any hope of a future and of attracting major industrial investment it needs this energy to attract them. Selling the power outside the province just makes it easier for companies to setup shop elsewhere and continues the forced out-migration of our citizens. Aside from the need for industrial development here at home we also need this power to improve our environmental record and reduce greenhouse gasses for the benefit of all the world’s people.
Should the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador develop the lower Churchill for it’s own use?
How in the name of God, Allah or Mohammad can the government of Newfoundland and Labrador even consider doing anything else?
The province is in desperate need of power to fuel industrial growth. The entire province, especially the Labrador portion, is arguably one of the richest sources of raw materials on the continent, if not the planet itself. Currently much of the province's resources are exported for processing elsewhere. Why is this happening? The answer is simple. There is no available source of inexpensive and abundant power in the province that would enable smelters or other processing facilities to be built and efficiently run.
I say “no available source” because there is indeed abundant power and there always has been. Never the less, it's not available for use in Newfoundland and Labrador. Instead the power is being exported and used to fuel the economic engines of Quebec and beyond.
Can the province afford to make the same mistake with the Lower Churchill as it did with the Upper? Forget for a moment the bad financial deal that was signed in the past. The more critical issue is whether or not the province can afford to give up the potential industrial development and economic growth that would come from controlling and using a vast supply of power right here at home.
According to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, the province currently has a generating capacity of 7,289 megawatts for local use and for export. While our current needs are largely being met (with the exception of certain locations in Labrador and on the island) there is very little power available for growth and expansion. Hydro predicts that we will hit the proverbial wall and have difficulty even supplying our existing needs in less than 5 years. Capacity and cost issues are plain to see all around us. Some paper mills have been struggling with a limited availability of low cost power in recent years and this led directly to the closure of the mill in Stephenville. In a limited power environment, such as exists today, how can ayone expect major industries to setup shop here?
The lower Churchill project has the ability to produce 2,824 megawatts or an additional 40% above and beyond the capacity currently in place in the province.
Even though development estimates on the project run as high as $9 billion dollars, this is a bargain at the price.
It's been estimated that the Upper Churchill system has generated over $24 billion in profits since coming on line in 1972 (approximately 96% of those profits have gone to Quebec Hydro, 4 % to NL). The value of clean power continues to rise and it's a revenue stream that will never stop flowing. Although the Lower Churchill is only half the size of the upper Churchill project, the numbers are still staggering and once the initial outlay has been recovered, revenues from hydro power are free to flow faster than the river itself.
Financing should not be an issue in the current political environment. The provincial government is in better financial shape than it was in the 1970s, when the upper Churchill deal was signed. For that matter, it's in a better position than at any time since joining confederation, thanks to high oil revenues. It wouldn’t be a stretch to expect the federal government to cost share the project based on its green value. The situation simply requires the action of a provincial government that is willing to be aggressive in attracting industry partners who are looking to setup shop in a low cost energy market.
Canada has extremely large and difficult commitments to meet on the environment. The Lower Churchill project alone would allow the Country to meet nearly 10% of its initial Kyoto commitments (should Canada ever decide to move on that issue). This doesn’t even take into account the additional benefits to be gained by using most of the power in Labrador while directing less than 20% of it to the island. That 20% would allow the shut down the Holyrood oil fired generating facility, an environmental black eye for the entire province and the Country.
The Holyrood station burns an estimated 6,000 barrels of heavy crude per day in each of three units, for a total of 18,000 barrels per day. It also uses over 750,000 litres of sea water per minute for cooling and 900,000 litres of fresh water for make up purposes. In return for this environmental disaster the plant generates a paltry 490 megawatts of power. Shutting down this plant would not only help Ottawa meet its environmental challenges but imagine how much money could be saved if Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro didn’t have to buy 6.5 million barrels of oil a year at market prices in order to run the Holyrood plant?
Not only should the lower Churchill project be developed by the province and for the province, the power should be used to attract industry and improve environmental conditions right here at home. The only power that should ever be considered for external sale is any unusable over capacity that might exist and any over capacity should be viewed as a problem to be addressed and resolved as quickly as possible.
The timeline being considered for this project would see first power flow from the lower Churchill by 2014. This gives the province seven years to market the power potential and to attract energy hungry companies from around the globe. Companies that are likely to jump at the chance for access to clean, stable and reasonably priced power in an area with a readily available workforce.
The potential is staggering in proportion. No longer would raw ore need to be pulled from the earth only to be processed elsewhere. Smelters could be built in the province.
No longer would raw materials of any kind need to leave for processing. Factories and mills would be able to setup shop in the province.
Perhaps most importantly, no longer would our people need to migrate out of the province in order to find work. The work could come to us.
Retaining control of this power is not something that's nice to do. It's something that must be done for the province's very survival.
If the project is managed correctly, within a year or two of first power, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador could be in a position where it is experiencing impressive industrial growth.
Within a few years of first power, the province could find itself experiencing in-migration rather than out-migration.
Within a decade of first power the province could find itself with a booming oil industry that, although important, is only a small percentage of over all provincial revenues rather than its life’s blood. A life's blood that will one day run out.
Within three decades of first power the Upper Churchill contract will expire and the staggering revenues from that mega project, as well as the available power it contains, can begin to flow to it’s rightful owners.
In less than 50 years, less than the time the province has been a part of Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador might just experience a population explosion. Power brings industry, industry brings jobs, jobs bring wealth and wealth brings people. The migration of 1 or 2 million people into a province with a land mass the size of Newfoundland and Labrador would not be a problem, in fact it might be a god send.
Finally, you add to all of the benefits outlined above the ultimate benefit to our province. Massive in-migration would eventually equate an increased population and a larger population translates into additional seats on Parliament Hill. With those additional seats would come an entirely new kind of power altogether. A power that has been lacking for too long in Eastern Canada.
If your premier would stop blocking potential development deals (i.e. Hebron, Hibernia South,Voisey's Bay), then perhaps this province would be able to pull itself out of debt and destitution and start developing their own projects.
ReplyDeleteGet some real leadership.
Anon of March 05, 2007 You made a statement that started with "if your premier", and then you ended your statement with "perhaps this province".
ReplyDeleteAnon it appears that you live in this province so therefore the premier must be yours as well.
Patriot you are the author of a timely article. There isn't one point in it on which you will get an argument from me. And you summed it up very well when you stated "power brings industry, industry brings jobs, jobs bring wealth and wealth brings people". As Newfoundlanders and Labradorians we must stictly adhere to our firm belief that the Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Energy Project will not go ahead unless it is for use in Labrador to grow industries there, and of course if Labrador prospers so does the whole province, the same goes for the Newfoundland portion, if Newfoundland's resources are used to grow industry in the Newfoundland portion and Newfoundland prospers, again so does the whole province.
ReplyDeleteWould any politician dare to do a deal on the Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Energy project any differently than how you propose in your article? There is only one way to have it developed and that is for use in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador to create and fuel industry there. It would be suicidal for any politician to do it any other way.
ReplyDeleteWilliams is not, has been, or ever will be "my premier". I merely work in this pathetic place and commute between here and the U.K.
ReplyDeleteI just can't wrap my brain around the fact that in modern Canada there still exists such a backwards place as Newfoundland and Labrador.
And yes, (before you ask) I am a Canadian citizen.
To the previous Anon:
ReplyDeleteI guess if this place is so "backward" you just fit right in don't you? I have to ask myself why you work here. By your logic it must be because the place is just backward enough to provide you with a place of employment. I guess you just weren't good enough to gain employment in your homeland.
Anon of March 06, 2007 9:43 AM
ReplyDeleteOh you are like a lot of other people with Canadian passports. You are a Canadian of convenience, some place to escape to when the going gets rough in the U.K. or whichever place it happens to be.
I remember Canadians of convenience like you coming out of the woodwork during the Lebanon crisis. Apparently there were hundreds of thousands such passports given out freely by Canadian bureaucrats on our tax payers dollars over the past number of years. Isn't it strange they are valued more the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who brought so many resources into the country of Canada?
Anon of March 06, 2007 9:43 AM
ReplyDeleteAre you one of those Limeys, or are you a Limey at all, who sucked of the teat of the Newfoundland fishery to build up the robust economy that existed in England for the best part of 500 year?
*LOL*
ReplyDeleteWell then.
I guess it would be kind of boring now to admit that I am from good old Kitchener, Ontario.
I like the idea of being a "Limey" though haha.
I work here because this is where my boss has deemed I need to be at the moment. Don't worry though....my location tends to change a lot.
Kind of like all those Newfoundlanders who work in Alberta, yet live in NL right??
You think 2 million people would want to go to Newfoundland??? HAHA HAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA..........
ReplyDeleteHere is one that would love to come home.So ,make that 1,999,999.00 needed to fill that boat.As for people wanting to go to Nefoundland,and Labrador keep laughing ,I know many that would love to make the trip.As a matter of fact ,I truely belive that 2 million spots wouldn't be enough.
ReplyDeleteArtfull Dodger says.....
ReplyDeleteIn response to the gentleman from Kitchener Ontario, it is a shame that you look upon one of the provinces of your country in such a manner. Sadly though, it seems that there are still those who would agree with you.
May I suggest that you inform your employer that you feel you cannot in good conscience remain working in a place that deem to be beneath your standards, and request a transfer away from this place. If your employer does not wish to grant a transfer, you should consider doing the right thing (for your personal well being) and resign so that you may leave such an unbearable place.
I believe it is terrible that a human being be forced to put up with such circumstances and I would like to add my support to you, and encourage you to leave this retched place as soon as practicable.
Regards,
Artfull Dodger
Go back to Kitchener and then maybe you can get a job with Sudbury Nickel a company that utilizes one of this province's resource. A resource that should have been utilized in Labrador.
ReplyDeleteAahh your boss deemed that Newfoundland and Labrador is the province that you should work in at the moment, how pitiful that you would bring your prejudices with you? You are a really sick specimen.
Are you one of those Limeys, or are you a Limey at all, who sucked of the teat of the Newfoundland fishery to build up the robust economy that existed in England for the best part of 500 year?
ReplyDeleteNot content with believing that Newfoundland and Labrador single-provincely holds up the rest of Canada's current economy, Newfoundland nationalists now believe as well that they single-colony-ly held up Britain's historical economy as well?
Go back to Kitchener and then maybe you can get a job with Sudbury Nickel
ReplyDeleteThat would be one awful morning commute.
The person in question needs a long commute to get rid of his prejudiced thoughts. Why is this person here if he dislikes the place so much? No boss would subject such torture on me. How valuable must be the experience the person is getting from here? I wouldn't dare work in a place that I didn't care for. I would keep my distance.
ReplyDeleteNewfoundland and Labrador contributes much more to the economies of the rest of Canada than the rest of Canada contributes to Newfoundland and Labrador. I would like to know of one other renewable resource that is used in Canada to conduct bi-lateral trade other the fish. Also beause of that bi-lateral trade on the fish in our waters, the pressure that has been exerted there has caused so much stress to the fish stocks that they are under great duress. Also can you name for me one resource that is shipped into Newfoundland and Labrador that is as valuable as the renewable Upper Churchill Hydrolectric Energy which is shipped to Quebec or the non- renewable Voisey's Bay Nickel that is shipped to keep the cities of Sudbury, Ontario and Thompson, Manitoba percolating? I am talking dollar value here and the fact that two of these resources are classed as renewable. Matter of fact I can't think of one resource that comes back this way from any of the other provinces.
Also England built several towns and sustained them off the fish that grew in the Grand Banks waters of Newfoundland and Labrador. Bristol and Poole are two of those towns and since the Monarch of England funded the expedition to this part of the World 500 years ago you can be assured Buckingham Palace was a major recipient as well. Also I question what did we get in return from England? As far as I am concerned England treated this place awfully bad. I make the statement about England with a heavy heart since my ancestors originated from Dorset, England.
Wow! Such response for little old me.
ReplyDeleteAmid the cries of "go back to Kitchener!!" I think I detect some deeper issues?
Are you all really THAT sensitive??
You have lived here amongst us, please do not tell me that you haven't detected the issues that have us rattled. Of course, it is all about the resources that Newfoundland and Labrador was so well endowed with that aren't working very well in creating economies for the province and its people, but instead are working for other parts of Canada.
ReplyDeleteI know WJM will ask the question again whose problem is that? I will say not the ordinary Newfoundland and Labrador citizen but the politicians we were so unfortunate to have elected, both Federal and Provincial.
Newfoundland and Labrador contributes much more to the economies of the rest of Canada than the rest of Canada contributes to Newfoundland and Labrador.
ReplyDeleteWhat is your source for this statistic?
I would like to know of one other renewable resource that is used in Canada to conduct bi-lateral trade other the fish. Also beause of that bi-lateral trade on the fish in our waters, the pressure that has been exerted there has caused so much stress to the fish stocks that they are under great duress.
I would like to know, in respect of just ONE bi-lateral trade relationship: WHEN did Canada trade WHAT fish for WHAT other non-fish consideration, with WHICH country?
Also can you name for me one resource that is shipped into Newfoundland and Labrador that is as valuable as the renewable Upper Churchill Hydrolectric Energy which is shipped to Quebec or the non- renewable Voisey's Bay Nickel that is shipped to keep the cities of Sudbury, Ontario and Thompson, Manitoba percolating?
Any terrestrial resources that are "shipped" from the province ARE ONLY DONE SO BECAUSE THE PROVINCE AGREED TO IT.
Also England built several towns and sustained them off the fish that grew in the Grand Banks waters of Newfoundland and Labrador. Bristol and Poole are two of those towns
In a country of many tens of millions, with many cities much larger than Bristol or Poole, it is a very long stretch to say that Newfoundland built up the robust economy of England for 500 years.
Also I question what did we get in return from England?
Our institutions of government and law, for starters.
I know WJM will ask the question again whose problem is that?
ReplyDeleteThere is not one terrestrial resource in NL, which is shipped out, in any form, other than with the consent of the provincial government. Not one.
WJM
ReplyDeleteThe fish that has been used over the past 30 years by Canada for bi-lateral trade has been worth billions. There were once 4 countries fishing off our Grand Banks of Newfoundland and now there are many countries, from all over the world, which have been given quotas of our off shore fish by the Federal Government. I have an article from a local daily newspaper from two weeks ago which talked about the fish and the bi-lateral trade that is conducted on quotas of fish.
WJM we damn well paid for the institutions of government and law that were imported from England. Don't forget England took the fish and gave us nothing for 400 plus years, England let the people of this province exist here in deplorable conditions for all those years. England took, but it didn't give. It wasn't free; it was paid for with the fish and the settler’s blood, sweat and tears. And don't forget the percentage of men we lost in both wars defending England. It is still reported that both wars are events that Newfoundland and Labrador have never recovered from. Plus it is reported England traded Newfoundland and Labrador to pay off it $8 billion dollar war debt to Canada.
WJM you didn't give me one item, one commodity or resource that gets shipped back from any point in Canada or England or the world that is processed here in Newfoundland and Labrador to assist our economy. I will await and see if you can add any items to a list for me.
I can add to the list that gets shipped out of here: Fish, Hydroelectricity, Oil, and Minerals of different categories. All dug out of the ground or the sea and processed in some other place to create large economies with many jobs, thus augmenting large sections of towns or cities in the locations those commodities get utilized. It has been going on with fish for 500 years and the other commodities have been shipped out of here without processing ever since we joined Canada.
The fish that has been used over the past 30 years by Canada for bi-lateral trade has been worth billions.
ReplyDeleteHow many billions? Bi-lateral trade with which countries? What is the source of this information?
There were once 4 countries fishing off our Grand Banks of Newfoundland and now there are many countries, from all over the world, which have been given quotas of our off shore fish by the Federal Government.
Which countries? What did Canada receive as part of this "bi-lateral trade"?
I have an article from a local daily newspaper from two weeks ago which talked about the fish and the bi-lateral trade that is conducted on quotas of fish.
Which "local daily newspaper"? I'd like to look that article up myself. Was it the Jamie Baker article in the Telegram of February 11, 2007? If so, you really should re-read it carefully.
If it wasn't the Jamie Baker article of that date, can you provide some information on this clipping? The author or headline should suffice.
WJM we damn well paid for the institutions of government and law that were imported from England. Don't forget England took the fish and gave us nothing for 400 plus years
What do you mean "England took the fish"?
If there was no "taking" of fish, guess what? NEWFOUNDLAND WOULD NOT EXIST. Well, not as a populated place; the island wouldn't go anywhere.
It wasn't free; it was paid for with the fish and the settler’s blood, sweat and tears.
Spoken like a good Marxist.
And don't forget the percentage of men we lost in both wars defending England.
Don't plan to.
Plus it is reported England traded Newfoundland and Labrador to pay off it $8 billion dollar war debt to Canada.
You see, I always get suspicious whenever anyone uses a passive verb.
"It is reported" BY WHOM, WHEN, AND WHERE?
WJM you didn't give me one item, one commodity or resource that gets shipped back from any point in Canada or England or the world that is processed here in Newfoundland and Labrador to assist our economy.
"To assist our economy"? Economy is the product of business, not charity.
You want one? I've got many more than one:
Turbot and shrimp from Nunavut.
Pulpwood and hydro from Quebec. Yes, FROM QUEBEC.
Gold ore from Greenland.
Bentonite from the United States.
Crude oil from the Middle East.
Crab from Nova Scotia.
Fish from areas of the Gulf of St. Lawrence closer to Quebec than Newfoundland.
Funny you don't hear about that much in Newfoundland...
I can add to the list that gets shipped out of here:
Again with the passive voice: "gets shipped out of here".
Fish, Hydroelectricity, Oil, and Minerals of different categories. All dug out of the ground
Anything "dug out of the ground" is under PROVINCIAL jurisdiction.
Seriously.
If it gets dug out of the ground and "shipped", it's because the provincial government has agreed to it.
or the sea and processed in some other place to create large economies with many jobs, thus augmenting large sections of towns or cities in the locations those commodities get utilized.
Again with the passive: "get utilized".
Name some of these places.
It has been going on with fish for 500 years
"for 500 years"?
Are you Basque or Portuguese? And where was fish being shipped to BE PROCESSED 500 years ago? Or 400? Or 200? Or 100?
and the other commodities have been shipped out of here without processing ever since we joined Canada.
And before, too. Ever hear of Bell Island?
What's your point?
WJM the items you listed are paltry compared to the fish quotas taken by all the extra countries which have been added to the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. If you put a dollar figure on the scrappy items you listed, you will find it is paltry compared to the extra pressure on the fish, the hydroelectric energy, minerals and the oil that are being taken from this province's resources and exported to other areas to create economies. I would like to see the comparison in dollars. Can you imagine the industries directly and indirectly that the 5800 megawatts of hydroelectricity alone have been creating in Quebec for the past 35 plus years with another 30 plus years to go on the contract.
ReplyDeleteThere was a period of 450 years when only England, France, Portugal and Spain fished in our offshore waters. It is easier today to name the countries which are not fishing there. All because of international trade or bilateral trade as DFO likes to say. Canada would not allow those countries to come to its offshore waters otherwise.
I would like for you to produce a comparative dollar figure on what is exported out of Newfoundland and Labrador in the raw state and what is imported. What goes out of Newfoundland and Labrador will blow your mind. I know you will never do that because it would be to revealing.
WJM Please do not come back with generalities, I would like to see a dollar figure comparison and since you are, according to a one time poster, an employee of Ottawa that figure should be easy to come by for you, aaah how crazy of me to think that would be the case? Low grade transparency is a tool frequently used by Ottawa, isn't it? Sorry WJM!
I know of some of the resources that we export in a raw state and I know with the quality of those exports, that these high-quality exports would have to add billions of dollars to the economies of the places that they are exported to. The Upper Churchill hydroelectric energy alone can provide energy to 3,000,000 homes per year, just figure that one out, and that is just one on the list.
Shanker ,may I politley remind you who you are talking to .Mr WJM.The sky could be blue to everybody,but as long as Mr WJM ,and his merry bunch are told that the sky is pink,then "I'm sorry" you must be wrong,wrong,and wrong again,because in his eyes nobody but nobody Can be right "UNLESS" HIS BROTHER "GOD" COMES FROM THE HEAVEN'S ,and confirms it for him.
ReplyDeleteDo us a favour WJM ,go back to your blog and take your %#$@'en Med's buddy !!!!!!
Free Newfounland and Labrador !!!!
Tsk tsk. Somebody's got issues.
ReplyDeleteYou can blather all you want about what NL can and should do with its resources but until you can put your money where your mouth is ....it's all pointless.
Until your province become "business-friendly"...you are all screwed.
WJM the items you listed are paltry compared to the fish quotas taken by all the extra countries which have been added to the Grand Banks of Newfoundland.
ReplyDeleteName the countries.
If you put a dollar figure on the scrappy items
Scrappy?!?
The fish that Newfoundlanders take off Nunavut is many things, but "scrappy", it is not!
the hydroelectric energy, minerals and the oil that are being taken from this province's resources
Again with the passive voice.
What do you mean "being taken"?
Who is "taking" them?
and exported to other areas to create economies.
The phrase "create economies" sets of massive alarm bells that you don't actually know what an economy is.
I would like to see the comparison in dollars.
You haven't seen the comparison... yet you already know how the figures compare? Why then do you need a comparison?
Can you imagine the industries directly and indirectly that the 5800 megawatts of hydroelectricity alone have been creating in Quebec for the past 35 plus years with another 30 plus years to go on the contract.
What's so bad about that? Quebec bought it. Without Hydro-Quebec's investment, guess what? There would have been no Churchill Falls AT ALL.
There was a period of 450 years when only England, France, Portugal and Spain fished in our offshore waters.
Portugal, Spain, and England were absent from the field for a very long time. Spain and Portugal only came back in the 20th century.
The United States, and, you conveniently forget, Canada, fished in Newfoundland and Labrador during the 18th and 19th centuries.
Just as, it must be added, Newfoundland fished in Canadian waters before Confederation.
It is easier today to name the countries which are not fishing there.
Then please go ahead and do so.
All because of international trade or bilateral trade as DFO likes to say. Canada would not allow those countries to come to its offshore waters otherwise.
Bilateral trade WITH WHICH COUNTRIES?
What were the other products, besides fish, involved in this trade?
It is very curious that NO ONE has yet been able to answer these questions for me. That's a telling symptom of an urban myth.
I would like for you to produce a comparative dollar figure on what is exported out of Newfoundland and Labrador in the raw state and what is imported.
I would like for you to do the same, so we're even!
What goes out of Newfoundland and Labrador will blow your mind. I know you will never do that because it would be to revealing.
Name some examples of things which are exported IN A RAW STATE.
While you're at it, explain why it is that you aren't turning Labrador iron ore and nickel into toasters or Camaros. Who's stopping you?
WJM Please do not come back with generalities, I would like to see a dollar figure comparison
So would I.
You are confident in your assessment that Newfoundland is getting ripped off. You must have had something to back it up, surely? Or are you just making things up?
If you're not just making things up, post YOUR figures.
I know of some of the resources that we export in a raw state
Name them.
Name these resources.
NAME THEM.
The Upper Churchill hydroelectric energy alone can provide energy to 3,000,000 homes per year
There are fewer than 200,000 residences in all of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Assuming your "3,000,000" figure is correct, and assuming there was a cost-effective way to get so-called Upper Churchill power to every household in Newfoundland and Labrador... what would you do with the other 2,800,000+ homes worth of juice?
Free Newfounland and Labrador !!!!
ReplyDeleteYeah, Labrador needs to be freed from Newfoundland nationalists alright.... but who does Newfoundland need freeing from?
Just a few quick comments. First of all to the anon who hates it here, I can empathize with you. I hope your situation changes, there's nothing worse than being stuck in a place you don't like. I spent a couple of months in Toronto, met some nice people but hate the fog-like smog, just glad I don't have to breathe that air all the time.
ReplyDeleteTo anyone including Shanker, I've read a similiar reference to the "bi-lateral" trade for fish, in a number of different comments on different blogs. Sometimes I wish I worked in the History dept. or Gov. to dig for actual references to this.
If there is an actual reference that either directly shows
(i) an agreement between Canada and other countries regarding allowing foreigners to fish off NF in return for other trade deals, or industrial development
OR
(ii) some worded inference, or "understood" inference (which can easily be interpreted to mean a bi-lateral trade)
then could you list it? That idea gets mentioned alot, and it could be true. A backroom deal or understanding wouldn't be expected to have alot of paper trails perhaps. But one would think there ought to be some documents with wording to that effect. I don't know, but would love to see the evidence. Unfortunately newspapers can make the same claim, but it they don't list some authentic actual document, or any evidence, then it leaves doubt as to whether or not this claim is true. If it was mentioned on the Royal Commission Report, does it provide a source? Just wondering. Thanks.
Kodak
ReplyDeleteAbout 2 to 3 weeks ago there was an article in The Telegram where a reporter spoke to somebody from DFO. The person from DFO made reference to bilateral trade being carried out on the fish quotas. If you could contact The Telegram, I am sure you would be put in contact with the reporter who did the story. In the article the DFO personnel denied that a car plant was traded for fish, but that bilateral trade is conducted on fish quotas. With bilateral trade one should deduce that anything could be traded, even a car plant. And with Ottawa's practises of low grade transparency in its dealings who knows what DFO got in return for the fish quotas that were traded? DFO will have to be more specific. Some accounting must exist in the DFO offices that will reveal what DFO received in return for the fish quotas and maybe DFO will be willing to release the information that could be satisfactory to us. All we need is transparency.
Let us all have a cup of tea tonight to celebrate!
ReplyDeleteI listened to Newfoundland and Labrador Industry Minister Cathy Dunderdale today as she proudly told Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that we are about to receive our first ever shipment of outside ore and it is coming from Greenland to be processed in this province. Thank God after 58 years of exporting every resource that is dug out of our ground and out of our sea to be processed in some other location, we are getting our first ever shipment of outside ore to be processed here. That is after probably 40 years of Greenland fishing in our off-shore waters. I have heard Pohl from Denmark who has lived in Newfoundland and Labrador for 33 years chastising our government for letting our fish go so freely, without anything in return. Pohl, maybe my son, you have gotten your wish after all. Thanks Pohl for keeping the government's feet to the fire, maybe you made a difference.
About 2 to 3 weeks ago there was an article in The Telegram where a reporter spoke to somebody from DFO. The person from DFO made reference to bilateral trade being carried out on the fish quotas.
ReplyDelete"The person from DFO" did no such thing.
Go back and re-read that article.
If it was mentioned on the Royal Commission Report, does it provide a source?
ReplyDeleteI went through the Royal Commission report and studies... I couldn't find anything. Perhaps someone else might.
DFO said in the article I read that fish quotas are used for bilateral trade.
ReplyDeleteShanker, was it Joe Walsh who did the article? I have yet to read the whole RCR but have seen others reference quotes from say Vic Young on a "bi-lateral trade" that is often referred to. Has anyone ever contacted any of the authors of the Royal Commisson Report by any chance, to ask them what their proof of this is? Shanker, WJM or anyone, feel free give me a couple of names of someone who could actually say what documents might exist, with wording that either makes it clear or alludes to a trade like this. I will email a couple of people to ask about it, Joe Walsh is possible since he often writes fishery related issues.
ReplyDeleteThere very well may not be documents with this reference, however, that doesn't mean that deals weren't done in private meetings between Canadian official and foreigners. If so, then there are people who have some testimonial evidence to back up this claim about a "bi-lateral trade" involving the right to fish of Newfoundland. But there really needs to be paper proof or names of people who were alledgedly involved to say they were witness to any agreements, and then replay what was said. Something concrete be nice.
Kodak: No it wasn't Joe Walsh, but all one has to do is call The Telegram and ask what article has been written in the past 3 weeks that mentioned bi-lateral trade and fish.
ReplyDeleteDFO said in the article I read that fish quotas are used for bilateral trade.
ReplyDeleteNo, it said:
Canada did not trade fish for car plants, but the federal government has often used bilateral agreements with foreign nations to address fishery-related issues, according to a report commissioned by the federal government.
Furthermore:
The report soundly dismisses any trade conspiracy theory, including one oft-repeated story that the federal government and Korea worked out a deal in the mid-1990s to trade fish allocations off Newfoundland for an auto plant in central Canada.
"In fact, there were no allocations to Korea, nor did Canada conclude any bilateral agreements with that country," the report states. "Other stories have circulated about trading fish quotas for trade advantages elsewhere in Canada.
"Canadian officials deny these as far-fetched inventions."
The report says the only time Canada used fish allocations for trade interests was when it was of some benefit to the fishing industry or, to a lesser extent, Atlantic Canadian ports.
That's from:
Study scuttles 'secret deals' theory, Jamie Baker, The Telegram, February 11, 2007, p.A1.
Is this the same article? It's the only one that's been published on the subject lately.
WJM - It is the age of spin, we are spun by the spinners our politicians and bureaucrats, welcome to the spundustrial revolution. And WJM you are part of that spinner's group. Please do not spin us any more non-transparent stories. Please listen to Ira Bacen's six episode series archived on the Sunday Edition on CBC Radio and you will become more informed as to how governments operate with the spinning process.
ReplyDeleteIt is quite plain to see how the spinners spun the story. How in the hell did all those extra countries appear off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador fishing quotas of fish if Canada didn't get anything out of it? Ottawa would never allow all those countries to appear in it’s off shore waters using a resource "free of charge" unless it was getting something out of it. No never, not in a million years. How stupid does Ottawa think we are? For God's sake use your brains, why would Ottawa let a renewable resource be free for the taking, a resource of protein that the whole world is craving? Again how stupid do they think Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are?
Please do not spin us any more non-transparent stories.
ReplyDeleteIf you have an issue with "non-transparent stories", whatever that is supposed to mean, take it up with Jamie Baker and the Telegram.
It is quite plain to see how the spinners spun the story.
How?
If you want an "unspun" story, email Loyola Hearn and ask him for a copy of the Joseph Gough report. He'll send you one.
How in the hell did all those extra countries appear off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador fishing quotas of fish if Canada didn't get anything out of it?
What did Canada get out of it?
It's your thesis, not mine. Prove it: what did Canada get out of it, and from whom? Prove your case. That's your responsibility, not mine.
Ottawa would never allow all those countries to appear in it’s off shore waters using a resource "free of charge" unless it was getting something out of it.
What did "Ottawa" get out of it?
What? From whom? When?
It's your contention that this happened. Prove it, please.
Again how stupid do they think Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are?
You know what's stupid?
Believing things that people say on the radio, without checking the facts for yourself.
Really stupid.
What did Canada get, when, and from whom, in exchange for these "fisheries deals"?
It's your contention. Prove it.
Again how we are spun? Will these bureacrats however lowly give up trying to cover up for Ottawa? I am sick of it. Give it up, how many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians believe you? Forget about mainland Canadians, they do not know the difference. How do we expect them to with the low grade transparency? Plus they don't care as long as they get their agriculture and manufactured goods traded. It is as plain as the nose on one's face what has happend with our resources, especially the fish resource.
ReplyDeleteIt is sickening that a person would attempt to cover up for something as valuable as the fish resource that has been preyed upon by many nations, no doubt, with Ottawa's approval for so many years. How do those nations get the right to fish out there? It can only be with the agreement of Ottawa, how could all those nations appear off our coast otherwise? The waters are under Ottawa's jurisdiction. It just does not happen that countries appear off one's coast. There would be a foreign affairs debacle created if it wasn't with Ottawa's approval.
The answer again is in Ira Basen's series 'The spin series' archived on the Sunday Edition of CBC Radio. Please take the time to listen to the six episodes. You will find the answer there.
Again how we are spun? Will these bureacrats however lowly give up trying to cover up for Ottawa?
ReplyDeleteWhich "bureaucrats"?
Joseph Gough is not a "bureaucrat".
Give it up, how many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians believe you?
Facts are not democratic.
It doesn't matter how many people "believe" something; if it's not true, it's not true. Something false doesn't become true by virtue of sucking in lots of people who don't think about things critically.
Forget about mainland Canadians
Like in Labrador?
How do we expect them to with the low grade transparency?
What do you mean by "low grade transparency"?
There's another horrible Newfoundland Nationalist tendency: the habit of fixing on words and phrases that they don't even know the meaning of.
Plus they don't care as long as they get their agriculture and manufactured goods traded. It is as plain as the nose on one's face what has happend with our resources, especially the fish resource.
NAME ONE EXAMPLE.
NAME ONE.
WHAT WAS TRADED, WITH WHICH COUNTRY, FOR WHAT, WHEN?
NAME ONE OF THESE DEALS.
NAME ONE.
NAME A DEAL.
PROVIDE A SOURCE OF CONCRETE INFORMATION ON SUCH A DEAL.
JUST ONE.
It is sickening that a person would attempt to cover up for something as valuable as the fish resource that has been preyed upon by many nations, no doubt, with Ottawa's approval for so many years. How do those nations get the right to fish out there?
Under international agreements to which Canada is a part.
It can only be with the agreement of Ottawa, how could all those nations appear off our coast otherwise?
Define "off our coast". Thank you.
The waters are under Ottawa's jurisdiction.
No, not all of the waters are.
Please take the time to listen to the six episodes. You will find the answer there.
Please take the time to identify just ONE of these trade deals you are convinced exist.
I just reread a story that appeared in The Telegram September 12, 2006 of a Portuguese fishing magnate Antonio Silva Viera a self-styled buccaneer and the story is horrendous. The European Union calls him a pirate but he likes to refer to himself as a buccaneer. He doesn't obey any laws set down by governments. He refuses to respect fishing quotas and he says displaying valid documents is not for him and his fleet. He owns the most deep-sea fishing vessels in Portugal.
ReplyDeleteHe turns over 75 million euros with his operation and he's not even in the top 10 of the world's fish buccaneers.
He claims he has the right to change flags "when I like, depending on the circumstances and the fishing grounds" -- a practice he regards as "totally normal." He employs around 1000 people and claims his "empire" is self-sufficient. Silva Viera claims he has the freedom to make his own labour laws. He said "In my ships, I am the President of the Republic and it's me that make the employment contracts with my sailors!"
I cath extra, admits this 60 year old, his eyes shaded by RayBan sunglasses. To him, it's like breaking a speed limit on the higway just a little. "This is fish to eat. It's not contraband cigarettes or drugs," he says.
It is a very revealing story of the over fishing, by a modern day pirate who rather be called a buccaneer, that is going on in the world's oceans, but I will remind you if care about fish stocks and if you decide to read the story it will make your blood boil, so please if you have a propensity to have a stroke please do not read the story.
The title of the article is "Portuguese pirate blacklisted by EU"
It is a must read if you want to know what is going on in our fishing waters.
Will someone call the villiage Doctor,Please.I'm sure that someone said they lost the villiage Idiot.!!!!!!!! Were does this,WJM guy get his shit from,will the owner of this blog please BANN this %@#%$& retard????
ReplyDeleteFrom one anon to another: To anon , March 9th 5;11 p.m. Oh God, I laughed when I read your post.!!!Lost the ( by the way its village,) not VILLIAGE!!idiot???? Looks to me as if the idiot is alive and well ( only anonymous). Also I do believe the above idiot is in male form, as a female would be much too smart indeed to allow herself to be so upset by WJMs ( very well done) material. Can't seem to get over it yet, eh? WJM outdid you again!!!
ReplyDeleteIt is a must read if you want to know what is going on in our fishing waters.
ReplyDeleteWhat does it say about "trade deals" I wonder?
In the case of the article that was written in The Telegram on September 12, 2006 there was absolutely no guidance from anybody with that pirate. It was absolute piracy. That pirate says that he would be guided by nobody but himself and he wasn't according to the article. No man made law was ever stop him from doing what he was going to do. He said he flew whatever flag of convenience that was needed according to the ocean that he was fishing in. He is his own Republic. So here we have a resource that is so supposed to be protected by governments and in this particular case of which I quoted in The Telegram, this man runs amok in all the oceans with 1000 fishers and the largest Portuguese fishing fleet in the world. He doesn't like to refer to himself as a pirate; he would like to be referred to with a more romantic title of a buccaneer.
ReplyDeleteBut thank God for government everyone doesn't do that, because if so we would see the armed forces out there and that would be a great event if that was so. We all know Government has to to get its pound of flesh to operate and and that can only be extracted by government having some control in dispensing quotas, with the power it holds by having all the fish quotas under its wings. The fish quotas that are dispensed to foreign nations are what government conducts foreign trade with, and of course earns foreign affairs clout while doing so.
I have heard our politicians talk about this many times in the past that fish quotas are used by government for foreign affairs clout and international trade. Now that the ordinary citizen has caught on and is talking about it, these same politicians have had their lips sealed by the Federal Government. If they continue to do so there will be no political plums dispensed to them by the Federal Government. They are all slavering for the political plums like a senatorship, ambassadorship or directorships in many of the Canadian Corporations that are controlled by the financial largesse of the Federal Government. No politician will stand up for his province to destroy his/her chances of getting ahead in life financially him/herself. After all it wasn't the province's welfare they entered politics for in the first place; it was for their own well being. I am sorry I feel this way about politicians in the first place, but I am uttering the truth not only for myself but the majority of the electorate feel the same way about everything political these days in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteFrom one anon to another: To anon , March 9th 5;11 p.m. Oh God, I laughed when I read your post.!!!Lost the ( by the way its village,) not VILLIAGE!!idiot???? Looks to me as if the idiot is alive and well ( only anonymous). Also I do believe the above idiot is in male form, as a female would be much too smart indeed to allow herself to be so upset by WJMs ( very well done) material. Can't seem to get over it yet, eh? WJM outdid you again!!!
March 09, 2007 6:27 Pm
OH God ,you have to make light,and fun of this Ideology.If someone doesn't do it,the level of stupidity on this blog will rise to an all time high.As for my "spelling" ,and "grammer",well what can I say .I don't have all day to voice my opinion,and to re-hash old arguemnets(I work 55-60 hours a week).I belive that people are judged by thier actions and not by what they say.
But,there comes a time when a saying from my nan comes into my head.That I would like to share with you now .And that is ,"It is better for a man to shut his month and to let them think your a fool,then to open it and confirm it to the world"
We all know what has happened to Newfounland And Labrador.We all know the In-justice that has followed since our joining Canada.If the Governmnet of either side is so "just"why are thease crimes ,permitted to continue.No matter what the arguement is ,or who pokes fun at who,it comes down to one thing and one thing only .Who's pocket is the money going to .
Like I said ,judge me by what I do,and not as I say .In the case of the seal harvest or off-shore fishing or mineral rights ,its all the same.Look who is constantly pocketing the cash.Why do you need a Fifty-Thousand page re-port for.So we can sit down in our basement's ,and rip the report up and argue amongst ourselves,while the "Thief" runs off with the bag of Gold.
But, in regards to Mr WJM,let me finsih with this.If it smells like $@#% ,and it looks like $@#% ,and it even tastes like $@#% ,then hey ,guess what ,it must be $@#%.
Good luck with this guy Folks,there is only room for one "VILLIAGE" Idiot ,on this Blog,which makes my voice redundant.OH ,Gee ,I hope that I wrote that correctly and phrased it properly for you.
OH,by the way
" FREE NEWFOUNLAND AND LABRADOR "
The fish quotas that are dispensed to foreign nations are what government conducts foreign trade with, and of course earns foreign affairs clout while doing so.
ReplyDeleteI have heard our politicians talk about this many times in the past that fish quotas are used by government for foreign affairs clout and international trade.
Yes, I have heard that, too.
What I have NEVER heard, though, is anyone give particulars.
Trade with which countries?
What did Canada get in return?
When were these "deals" made?
Well -- actually, alleged particulars HAVE been given "wheat", "Hyundai plant"... but they are completely contradictory, and have never been backed up with any documentary evidence.
directorships in many of the Canadian Corporations that are controlled by the financial largesse of the Federal Government.
This may come as a shock to you, so...
... well, are you sitting down?
The government doesn't hand out directorships in corporations.
Oh, and please do name a corporation that is "controlled by the financial largesse of the Federal Government". Thanks!
but I am uttering the truth not only for myself but the majority of the electorate feel the same way about everything political these days in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
How do YOU know that YOU are uttering "the truth"?
Please, tell us all who are reading this: What "trade deals" did Canada make, using fish from off NL, with which countries, getting what in return, and when?
You say you KNOW this.
Show that you do.
I am uttering the truth as far as I know it, because I have heard Newfoundland and Labrador politicians come on news casts on the radio and say that quotas of fish were doled out by Ottawa for international trade and foreign affairs, also I saw one politician, as a guest, on a television show say the same thing. And he said that Ottawa has even doled out quotas to private citizens, 2 doctors, in the case of the words I heard him say, who no doubt performed some function to get certain politicians with influence elected.
ReplyDeleteIt would be better for you, the POSTER, who I am directing my words to; to come on side with your people and help to bring the province of Newfoundland and Labrador into the 21st century with flourishing economies than to see it floundering, since Newfoundland and Labrador has so many resources. Please stop taunting us here in this province on behalf of Ottawa. Stop It!! It is shocking that Ottawa would hire people to do such a thing or does Ottawa truly know that there are people on it's payroll perfornming such tasks.
I will ask any politician who reads this blog to bring this subject up to Ottawa. Why does it have people on its payroll, using our taxpayer’s money, who only want to destroy us? Why would Ottawa do such a thing? Isn't Ottawa in its acting role, as Mother to us, as well as the other 9 provinces and 2 territories supposed to be protecting us as well as her other charges? I will give Ottawa the benefit of the doubt. This subject needs to be audited. But nevertheless I cannot see the poster I am addressing doing this without Ottawa's approval. Whatever the situation, it is time it was brought to Ottawa's attention and it was investigated. I will not stop until it is.
I don't know the trade deals that were conducted, all I know is that I was told through the radio and television mediums, like many others that there were trade deals conducted on fish quotas. I do not have a sixth sense or ESP or I am not a seer, I cannot see through opaque substances, when the waters are cloudied through non-transparency, one cannot see what is in them. I wish that I had access to Ottawa's files on fish quotas, I would sift through them and give you the details of what got traded, if it is not in a mumble jumble form, such as the intricate and complex way that international trade and foreign affairs are conducted. Unfortunately I am not privy to any of these file, but I wish I were.
ReplyDeleteMarch 11th 8;38 a.m. anon. Do you even realize what you are asking? We are living in Canada . Thousands of people DIED for one of the rights for our people, a right and a freedom that you are asking to be denied to WJM. Just because he has an opinion differing from yours? Or well reasearched facts you don;t even try to understand? Come on-- be sensible for Gods sake. Even you must know better than that.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean researched facts, I see no facts put on this blog site by WJM? All he ever does is ask questions. I answer his questions with the FACT that I actually heard news reports from our politicians who said that quotas of fish were doled out to foreign nations. You know damn well if Canada gave out fish quotas, it is getting something back in return. Canada has a lot of two way trade going on, so the fish is part of it. Again WJM has never presented facts. Ottawa is too non-transparent for WJM to get facts. The closest thing to facts is the fact that our politicians have spoken on the subject and told us directly that fish is given out to foreign countries.
ReplyDeleteI will say that I think Senator George Baker would probably gladly give you some figures, he is one of our politicians I really appreciate, since he has given the news media more information over the years than any other politician. Also before the Hon. Loyola Hearn, Canada's present Fisheries Minister took over the portfolio covering the fishery, he told spoke out on matters concerning the fishery, and I heard him say that the fishery was tied up in international trade and foreign affairs, maybe you can contact him as well.
Big bad Ottawa again. Poor down-trodden Newfoundland.
ReplyDeleteThis is getting pretty old. Newfoundland--either get a clue, a backbone, do something productive, or shut up.
I am uttering the truth as far as I know it, because I have heard Newfoundland and Labrador politicians come on news casts on the radio and say that quotas of fish were doled out by Ottawa for international trade and foreign affairs, also I saw one politician, as a guest, on a television show say the same thing.
ReplyDeleteYes, and you have also heard many of those same politicians say that NL doesn't get 100% of its oil royalties. That is patently false, and, without evidence to back it up, so is the "trade deals" claim.
And he said that Ottawa has even doled out quotas to private citizens, 2 doctors, in the case of the words I heard him say
What does that have to do with "trade deals"?
who no doubt performed some function to get certain politicians with influence elected.
What does that have to do with "trade deals"?
help to bring the province of Newfoundland and Labrador into the 21st century with flourishing economies than to see it floundering
I would love to... but unfortunately most people seem to be devoted to Danny Williams' early 20th-century communist model of economic development.
since Newfoundland and Labrador has so many resources.
What do resources have to do with anything? And what's stopping anyone from making economic use of those resources?
Oh yeah -- Danny Williams is.
Please stop taunting us here in this province on behalf of Ottawa.
Whatever I'm doing, it's not on "behalf" of anyone. Nor is it "taunting" to demand people back up their claims with evidence.
Stop It!! It is shocking that Ottawa would hire people to do such a thing
They do?
Who?
Isn't Ottawa in its acting role, as Mother to us,
"Mother"?
Oy.
I will not stop until it is.
You do that.
I don't know the trade deals that were conducted, all I know is that I was told through the radio and television mediums
ReplyDeleteWhy do you uncritically and unquestioningly believe what people say on TV and radio?
like many others that there were trade deals conducted on fish quotas.
Yes, many people have said so.
No one, that I'm aware of, however, has been able to answer these questions:
WHEN were these "deals" made?
With WHICH countries?
WHAT did Canada receive in return by way of non-trade consideration?
I do not have a sixth sense or ESP or I am not a seer
Neither you, nor anyone else, does.
But you can obviously read and write English. Perhaps you can find information on these "trade deals" in the library or on the internet.
I wish that I had access to Ottawa's files on fish quotas
Have you asked for them? You should. How do you know you don't have "access"? Have you tried?
What do you mean researched facts, I see no facts put on this blog site by WJM? All he ever does is ask questions.
ReplyDeleteSomething which more people should be doing.
I answer his questions with the FACT that I actually heard news reports from our politicians who said that quotas of fish were doled out to foreign nations.
Yes, it's a fact they they'd said that there were "trade deals".
It's a fact that you heard that they said that there were "trade deals".
But that is NOT the same as saying there were "trade deals".
The first, as near as I can tell, is false witness.
The second, even if the first WAS true, is hearsay.
You know damn well if Canada gave out fish quotas, it is getting something back in return.
Why? Canada is OBLIGED, under international treaties to which it is a party, to allow other party countries to fish quotas which Canada isn't using.
Canada has a lot of two way trade going on, so the fish is part of it.
Yes it does, and is. But that does NOT prove that Canada has traded access to fish quotas for other trade considerations, unrelated to the fishery, in other provinces.
Again WJM has never presented facts.
Why should I? I'm not the one claiming that these "trade deals" were made.
The people who make that claim should produce the proof.
The closest thing to facts is the fact that our politicians have spoken on the subject and told us directly that fish is given out to foreign countries.
Something that is false doesn't become true by virtue of repetition.
I will say that I think Senator George Baker would probably gladly give you some figures
I'll ask him!
Also before the Hon. Loyola Hearn, Canada's present Fisheries Minister took over the portfolio covering the fishery, he told spoke out on matters concerning the fishery, and I heard him say that the fishery was tied up in international trade and foreign affairs, maybe you can contact him as well.
Already have. You should ask him, too!
WJM - That is how we find out information politicians tell us what is going on. It is their right to do so when it involves their jurisdiction. The countries Canada do trade with are the countries that get the fish. Canada does trade with many countries and they are the ones that are showing up in our waters. Those countries would never show up in our waters if Canada wasn't getting anything out of it. Please do not act like an idiot. You know damn well that those countries that are out there which weren't accoustomed to being out there before are the ones that are involved in the trade of fish quotas.
ReplyDeleteWJM - Why are you constantly trying to cover up Ottawa's dealings, in other words why are you muddying the waters or making things non-transparent ?
Again I heard Senator Baker say during one allotment of shrimp quotas a while back that Canada doled out 28 licences for Shrimp, most of them to foreign countries and two of which were for Canadian doctors.
I also heard Minister Loyola Hearn say before he became Fisheries Minister that international trade and foreign affairs were involved in fish quotas that Ottawa gave out. How much plainer do you want it WJM? I cannot give you the intricate details of which country got the quotas, I do not have that myself, but we have to believe what our politicians are telling us when they make such statements. They wouldn't dare say something that would make it bad for themselves. After all Ottawa has many plums in its patronage basket to. There are all types of goodies like senatorships, ambassadorships and directorships for being goods boys and girls.
Also Senator Baker wrote a couple of booklets on how the fishery was abused. I am sure you can also find those archived somewhere.
The countries Canada do trade with are the countries that get the fish. Canada does trade with many countries and they are the ones that are showing up in our waters.
ReplyDeleteCanada trades with pretty much every country on earth. Are there 200 countries fishing out there?
Those countries would never show up in our waters if Canada wasn't getting anything out of it.
WHAT, then, is Canada "getting out of it"?
What?
Be specific.
Please do not act like an idiot. You know damn well that those countries that are out there which weren't accoustomed to being out there before are the ones that are involved in the trade of fish quotas.
Trade of fish quotas FOR WHAT?
Why are you constantly trying to cover up Ottawa's dealings, in other words why are you muddying the waters or making things non-transparent?
I'm trying to UNCOVER them.
No one is able to answer my questions though: What did which countries trade with Canada for which fisheries quotas, when?
If someone could answer those questions, things would be UNcovered. I've tried to find the answers myself, but every book, article, or report I've ever been given as "proof" has been nothing of the sort.
Again I heard Senator Baker say during one allotment of shrimp quotas a while back that Canada doled out 28 licences for Shrimp, most of them to foreign countries and two of which were for Canadian doctors.
Here's a list of the northern shrimp licenses:
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/communic/fish_man/ifmpns-pgipcn/index_e.htm
Transparent as day.
Not one of them -- let alone "most of them" -- is held by a foreigner.
I also heard Minister Loyola Hearn say before he became Fisheries Minister that international trade and foreign affairs were involved in fish quotas that Ottawa gave out. How much plainer do you want it WJM?
A lot plainer than that, in fact, considering that Loyole Hearn now says the opposite thing!
I cannot give you the intricate details of which country got the quotas, I do not have that myself
Then why do you uncritically believe what other people say?
but we have to believe what our politicians are telling us when they make such statements. They wouldn't dare say something that would make it bad for themselves.
Oh, no?
After all Ottawa has many plums in its patronage basket to. There are all types of goodies like senatorships, ambassadorships and directorships for being goods boys and girls.
"Directorships"? In what? Can you name some examples of Ottawa doling out "Directorships"?
Also Senator Baker wrote a couple of booklets on how the fishery was abused. I am sure you can also find those archived somewhere.
I have them.
Nothing about "trade deals" though.
I can think of one former Premier of this province who had received many directorships in Canadian Corporations after his stint as Newfoundland and Labrador Premier and of course a number of years of being part of the Federal Government, even being Industry Minister of Canada at one point.
ReplyDeleteYes there were 28 Shrimp Licences given out in one season a while back, many of them were given to foreign nations, and two of which were given to Canadian doctors.
WJM you are certainly not as transparent as day in your writings to this blog. You never enlighten anybody on anything, all you do is ask questions. You muddy the waters on everything.
I can think of one former Premier of this province who had received many directorships in Canadian Corporations after his stint as Newfoundland and Labrador Premier and of course a number of years of being part of the Federal Government, even being Industry Minister of Canada at one point.
ReplyDeleteYip: Brian Tobin.
But the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT didn't give him directorships.
You may want to sit down before hearing this, but:
are you sitting down yet? Sit down.
The government doesn't give out corporate directorships. Government and corporations are separate entities.
Yes there were 28 Shrimp Licences given out in one season a while back
Which season?
many of them were given to foreign nations
To which foreign nations?
and two of which were given to Canadian doctors.
What are the names of these doctors?
And how does any of this prove the "trade deals" story?
You never enlighten anybody on anything, all you do is ask questions.
Someone has to.
What's the matter with asking questions? (Sorry, there I go again.)
If I had the answers, I wouldn't need to ask them.
And if YOU had the answers, that would shut me up pretty quickly.
You muddy the waters on everything.
No, the waters are already muddied.
Nothing clears muddy water like a good question.
No government doesn't give out Corporatate directorships but it is because of Government largesse to certain corporations that politicians, after their politicial career is over, are on the receiving end of directrships after the politicians are out out government office.
ReplyDeleteI think Senator Baker wrote those booklets to inform us of the atrocities that were and still are being carried out inside and outside the 200 mile limit. He wanted was to ask the question, who has jurisdiction over the fish resources that resides there and then who is allowing the atrocities he points out in his booklets to occur there?
ReplyDeleteNewfoundland and Labrador passed over that fish resource when we joined Canada for protection. It was supposed to be sustained and protected for present and future generations.
Canada has jurisdiction of the 200 mile limit and I am sure the waters that are immediately outside of the 200 mile limit it would also have a fair amount of say, so if there is piracy and over fishing being carried out there, we as Newfoundlander and Labradorian and Canadians would expect Canada to use its clout to see that anything adverse that would damage the fish stocks would be stopped immediately by Canada.
Who else would take due care of what lies within Ottawa's jurisdiction and just outside of it, in my estimation it would be Ottawa? Just as it would be another country's responsibility to take care what is inside its jurisdiction or just outside of it. Somebody has to act as the good steward to protect what belongs to all future generations.
I deduced that since Ottawa has so much foreign affairs and bilateral trade clout tied up in the waters in question, that Ottawa allows things to go unnoticed so as not to provoke trade or foreign affairs rows. Anything it can turn a blind eye to it does and as a result it is turning a blind eye to the extinction of the fish resource within its control. Thanks Senator Baker for writing such an eye opener booklet, it shocked me and it forced me to put my thinking cap and exercise my brain into asking a few questions of myself. It is too bad that all of our citizens, who should be acting as good stewards of the fish resource that Newfoundland and Labrador entrusted with Ottawa, are not doing the same.
Some of us would rather put a smoke screen up so as to allow such atrocities to continue until there can be no more atrocities perpetrated on that resource. You read me, it will be the end. What a sad day that will be. It won't be Senator Baker's fault, since he tried to tell us a good while ago what was happening to our fish resource.
This "WJM" Individual must have some issues with certain illegal drugs ,or maybe some underlying emotional issues.I'm starting to see why we have certain steryotypical views of Newfounland and Labrador around this country.Is he just a kid with a bad internet connection or does he seriosely think that his points have any merit to them .Could someone inform the moderator of this blog please that someone is going into the realm of stupidity .Thank you from Ontario.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest regret was that Senator Baker was appointed to the Senate at a time when one of our greatest politicians was doing his greatest work. When our wonderful politician, the Hon. George Baker was informing us of what was going on within the fishery through writing booklets, and informing us through news cast of how quotas of fish were meted out, with the large percentages going to foreign countries and even Canadian doctors, Ottawa put him in the Senate. His booklets told us of the atrocities that were perpetrated in our offshore waters within the 200 mile limit and outside, why did Ottawa suddenly shut him up by appointing him to the Senate?
ReplyDeleteHow are we to correct the wrongs of society when this sort of appointment is allowed to occur? You see those political plums should be eliminated; such appointments only serve to make things opaque or non transparent.
Once a good politician does her/his work that she/he was elected by the people to do, either the spin cycle is evoked by Ottawa to dispute what is said or the politician is put into another capacity with the government. It must stop; it has spelled havoc for Newfoundland and Labrador within Canada.
His booklets told us of the atrocities that were perpetrated in our offshore waters within the 200 mile limit and outside, why did Ottawa suddenly shut him up by appointing him to the Senate?
ReplyDeleteHe has an email address. You should email him and ask him for info on the "trade deals".