Reports today suggest Prime Minister Steven Harper may be planning a “rare meeting” with the provincial premiers to discuss globalization, competitiveness and the country's economic union.Now that's a novel idea. A PM actually consulting with the nation’s premiers face to face.
The lunch time meeting, tentatively set for June 2, is intended to give the Prime Minister an opportunity to discuss some key issues before attending a G8 summit in Germany the next day.
I remember when the PM and the premiers used to hold what was referred to as “First Ministers Conferences”. How they used to talk about a number of issues over a period of days. How they tried to work together to resolve issues and find a way forward. Ahhhh, the good old days. Can it be that in Mr. Harper’s Canada a two hour lunch is considered good enough and is all the time he can spare for the premiers?
Not much is likely to be accomplished at the meeting, if it even goes ahead, especially when you consider that one of the topics of discussion is the “country’s economic union”. In light of the fact that premier’s Williams - NL, Calvert - SK, McDonald - NS, Graham – NB and Campbell – BC are all more than a little upset about where the country is heading on that front, the conversation may be a little colourful to say the least.
According to reports, the meeting will be held behind closed doors (no kidding). I’m sure more than one Atlantic Canadian would love to be a fly on the wall during that little chat.
All kidding aside though, if the PM is actually willing to sit down with the premier’s for a couple of hours this might be a good time to make some sort of move to help resolve the standoff over equalization and the clearly significant problems contained in the new federal budget.
Let’s face it someone has to make the first move. The provinces affected are suffering the ill will of Ottawa on a daily basis and the conservative MPs from those provinces have a noose tightening around their necks more with each passing day. Even if Harper manages to build a little more support in Quebec before the next election, it won’t do him much good if he loses 15 or 16 seats as a result of the budget fiasco.
I’m not saying it’s time for the premiers to buckle on this, hell no. The pressure is on both levels of government at this point. What I’m saying is that a dialogue needs to start and a solution needs to be found that will satisfy the provinces affected while letting the provincial leaders and the PM save face in the public arena.
It’s already too late to save the careers of many Atlantic and Saskatchewan MPs. Those folks are little more than road kill at this point, but it may not be too late to mend some fences between the levels of government and find a way forward.
It won’t be an easy task, not by a long shot, and certainly not something that can be accomplished over a lunch time meeting. Perhaps however this rare face to face, closed door discussion, can serve as a starting point for both sides to make some moves that will allow them to find a workable solution.
Now all someone has to do is convince Steve to actually invite Danny to the luncheon so they can try to bury the hatchet and work this out.
By the way, when I say "bury the hatchet" I mean that in the best possible way but just in case, could someone please hide the knives and forks?
The only way the meeting will succeed is if Williams stays home to pout.
ReplyDeleteYet another idiotic one liner from the peanut gallery!
ReplyDeletePREMIER WILLIAMS HAS THE RIGHT TO POUT NAMELY:FISH, HYDROELECTRICITY ENERGY, MINERALS, OIL and EVERYTHING ELSE THAT GETS EXPORTED OUT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR TO ENHANCE THE ECONOMIES OF THE OTHER PROVINCES.
ReplyDeleteTHE LACK OF FEDERAL REGIONAL OFFICES, MILITARY, TRANSFERS FROM OTTAWA and EVERY OTHER TYPE OF ATTENTION THAT THE OTHER PROVINCES RECEIVE FROM OTTAWA THAT GIVE THE OTHER PROVINCES A GREAT BOOST TO THEIR ECONOMIES, BUT NOT OURS, GIVES PREMIER WILLIAMS THE RIGHT TO POUT, ESPECIALLY WHEN HE CANNOT GET A MEETING WITH OTTAWA TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUES.
PREMIER WILLIAMS YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO POUT ON MY DEAR. ALL THE POWER TO YOU FOR DOING SO.
To the anon with the stuck caps lock, should all those commodities be kept in the province and not exported at all or how should they be exported?
ReplyDeleteTHOSE RESOURCES SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROCESSED IN NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR AND SHIPPED TO MARKET. THOSE RESOURCES, WE SPEAK OFF, SHOULD BE CREATING PRIMARY, SECONDARY AND TERTIARY PROCESSING JOBS RIGHT HERE IN NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THAT WE WILL CREATE ECONOMIES IN NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR. NO DIFFERENT THAN HOW ANY OTHER PROVINCE OR COUNTRY BUILT THEIR ECONOMIES.
ReplyDeleteOFF COURSE, WE WOULD HAVE FOUND A MARKET BEFORE WE PROCESSED OUR RESOURCES TO HAVE EXORTED OUR PROCESSED RESOURCES TO. WE WOULD HAVE DONE THINGS IN ORDER.
NO MY CAPS LOCK ISN'T STUCK, I FIND IT FASTER TO TYPE WITH CAPS LOCK ON. PLEASE DO NOT LET SUCH A SMALL THING BOTHER YOUR FEDERALIST BRAIN. WE HAVE MUCH BIGGER OBSTACLES TO DEAL WITH!
The only instance where commodities should be shipped out of a province is when the province has more economy than it can service with the number of people who can work the jobs in the economies.
ReplyDeleteBut still you don't see Alberta or Ontario shipping out their commodities, if they don't have enough workers, they import immigrants with Ottawa's approval or steal the human resources from the other provinces, like Newfoundland and Labrador along with our resources/commodities.
The people of Newfoundland obviously have no clue about how resources are supposed to be managed, OR about imports/exports.
ReplyDeleteSuch simplistic statements as
"FISH, HYDROELECTRICITY ENERGY, MINERALS, OIL and EVERYTHING ELSE THAT GETS EXPORTED OUT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR TO ENHANCE THE ECONOMIES OF THE OTHER PROVINCE"
only goes to show that no one in NL has any idea of what they are doing or talking about.
And by the way, the caps thing is hard to read so I'm not going to bother reading "all caps" statements anymore.
Don't be so lazy and use proper grammar like the rest of the literate world.
Oh, we know the resources mentioned are all used for the benefit of the rest of Canada.
ReplyDeleteOnce in a while everyone makes a mistake in grammar.
All one has to do is listen to the National News Media and it won't take you too many sessions to detect it. CBC National Radio is noted for it. I have detected the wrong grammar being used by the most elitist of journalists.
Why do you always deride us for anything and everything. I say you because there is only one person to this blogsite who does it, and it is YOU.
Let's get the silly paranoid crap out of the way first: "Why do you always deride us for anything and everything."
ReplyDeleteSince no one knows who the anonymous person was who made the comment on grammar, there is no way to know who the "you" is, let alone figure out if that person derides "us" - whoever "us" is - and does it all the time.
There's more than a little paranoia in that staement and more than a little insecurity.
With that said, let's take a gander at the other responses to my straightforward question.
1. Here's one:
"The only instance where commodities should be shipped out of a province is when the province has more economy than it can service with the number of people who can work the jobs in the economies."
Well, right off, I have no idea what you mean by having more "economy". If I can figure out what you mean from the rest of your comment, it looks like you are saying that nothing should be shipped out of the province at all to anyone ever.
Ok.
So how do we get things that aren't produced in Newfoundland and Labrador?
If we don't sell goods and services, we don't have money to spend to buy things that aren't made here. Right?
2. Then there's the king/queen of capslockitis, who may or may not be the Open Line caller from before:
"those resources should have been processed in Newfoundland and Labrador and shipped to market. Those resources, we speak off, should be creating primary, secondary, and tertiary processing jobs right here..."
Ok.
So no iron ore or oil should leave the province unless it is in the form of cars, dishwashers, childrens' swing sets, shoes, eyeglasses, rubber boots, toys, airplanes or anything else.
Interesting idea.
Who pays to set up all these industries?
What about fish?
3. And then there's more of the capslockerup: "Off course, we would have found a market before we processed our resources to have exorted our processed resources to. We would have done things in order."
What happens if the market you talk about doesn't want to spend money for refined oil from NL, for example, when they can get it cheaper somewhere else?
What happens if the cost of getting all these products to market is so high that China and Japan and the United States can sell their stuff at half the price?
What do we do then?
Do other oil exporting regions or countries, for example, insist that everything be processed to the umpteenth degree before export?
ST. JOHN'S, N.L. (CP) - Premier Danny Williams says he will put his simmering feud with Ottawa aside and attend a planned meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper...
ReplyDeleteI bet if Steve starts choking on a chicken bone he won't be looking at Danny to get it out.
Ed you know what I mean. So enough said.
ReplyDelete"Ed you know what I mean. So enough said."
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately since no one can tell which anonymous you are, I have absolutely no idea which comment you are referring to.
Perhaps you'd like to make it just a bit more clear.
Bond Papers Rule!!!!
ReplyDeleteHi mrs Hollet!
ReplyDeleteThe only instance where commodities should be shipped out of a province is when the province has more economy than it can service with the number of people who can work the jobs in the economies.
ReplyDeleteNot only do you use economy in the plural, you use it as a collective concrete noun.
You have no idea what an economy is, do you?
anonymous, its not mrs bond papers its mrs starrigan. bond papers RULE.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm slow but I think I just figured out why Ed, Wallace and Simon have been spending so much time here.
ReplyDelete1) they know people are talking about things they (and their federal handlers) can't control
2) if you go to their sites you'll find dozens of articles with 2 maybe 3 comments in total.
I guess they got bored of playing to each other and nobody else.
Anyway, not to sidetrack the conversation, which is their ultimate goal, Hopefully some progress can be made in that meeting.
Tempers will no doubt be high but like any politician, as long as everyone can save face who cares as long as the outcome is the best it can be.
Ed, Wallace and Simon, give it up.
I don't know what you think you're going to accomplish. All you're doing is convincing people of the things you claim to be counter-acting.
It's a pitiful waste of federal tax dollars and a sad statement on your individual character
1) they know people are talking about things they (and their federal handlers) can't control
ReplyDeleteI don't have "handlers", "federal" or otherwise.
2) if you go to their sites
Which is labradore.blogspot.com. That's labradore.blogspot.com. Visit now, labradore.blogspot.com.
you'll find dozens of articles with 2 maybe 3 comments in total.
It's funny how anonymity fortifies the courage, eh?
But you ask people to at least sign their self-selected blogger handle, and the brave anonymice disappear.
Anyway, not to sidetrack the conversation, which is their ultimate goal,
How can you "sidetrack" a conversation?
A good conversation is ALL sidetrack.
I don't know what you think you're going to accomplish.
Then let me tell you:
The debunking of long-cherished myths.
An appreciation for facts.
A willingness to question things and think critically.
It's a pitiful waste of federal tax dollars and a sad statement on your individual character
How are federal tax dollars, or any other kind of tax dollars, being wasted, and by whom, "michael"?
And do you have a last name?
WJM said, "How are federal tax dollars, or any other kind of tax dollars, being wasted, and by whom, "michael"? And do you have a last name?"
ReplyDeleteBy Mclean as in Wallace J Mclean or aren't you on Todd Russell's payroll anymore (of course you are)
And yes, I do have a last name. Doesn't everyone?
Wally I can't believe you missed that, of course he as a last name. My god Wally how can you be such an a$$hole. Now we have crazy Eddy blabbing on about nothing, taking up more space than you on this blog. He's starting to be an even bigger a$$hole than you!!! I'm sure there's a circle jerk somewhere that you can both take part in. You both should try to stick to the topic when you post. BTW this topic is about the meeting of the PM and Premiers. Why not try to put together a decent comment or suggestion or observation or evaluation. We all know Ottwally is a huge a$$hole but Crazy Eddy is quickly becoming the a$$hole master. He asks way more questions than Ottawally. But I can't help but wonder why you haven't seemed to notice that people just aren't taking the bait as much any more. You guys are now useless a$$holes. I always thought that you couldn't get worse than being an a$$hole but you know, I was wrong, you could be a useless a$$hole. Well, it seems I just learned something new, thanks guys!!! You're awesome, but still useless a$$holes.
ReplyDeleteI don't know who posted the exclamation, "Bond Papers Rule!!!!", but sweet mother of God, what an incredibly funny a$$hole. Bond Papers Rule" that is probably the dumbest thing I have ever seen on a blog in my life. Bond Papers Rule, there are no words to describe how massively inaccurate that is. So was that posted by a relative or something. Maybe Crazy Eddy, Simple Simon and Ottawally should pack up and go hang out at the Bond Papers, because "Bond Papers Rule" LoL Hurry Hurry, all the cool kids are going ... We'll miss you so. But when something rules you can't say no. When you get there read the comments from some of the other enlightened people like Dr. Phil and Opra, I'm sure Larry King hangs out there on a regular basis. Yes folks by all means go check out the Bond Papers and drink in the wonder of their magnificence, did you know they rule? I'm laughing so hard here, I think I'm going to get sick.
By Mclean as in Wallace J Mclean or aren't you on Todd Russell's payroll anymore (of course you are)
ReplyDeleteHow are taxpayer's dollars being wasted?
And yes, I do have a last name. Doesn't everyone?
Not quite everyone; some cultures only have one name.
What's your last name?
"It's a pitiful waste of federal tax dollars and a sad statement on your individual character."
ReplyDeleteMichael, at what point do you actually intend to have something substantive and factual to contribute to any thread?
So far your comments have been aimed at attacking people personally, attempting to impart all sorts of evil or underhanded motives to them.
You do not have a shred of evidence for any of it.
The only sad statement on character being made is yours about your own character.
But if you are going to engage in this sort of underhanded smearing, at least have the courage to sign your name so all can know exactly who you are.
ah a new fart from the provincial proctologist, Starrigan, the useless little bent fir tree. Smells as bad as usual and still hung up on bums.... hmmmm, what does that say about his essence?
ReplyDelete"Crazy Eddy is quickly becoming the a$$hole master. He asks way more questions than Ottawally."
ReplyDeletewow starrigan. asking questions makes people a$$holes? you really have no capacity for independent thought do you?
Ed Hollett said: "So far your comments have been aimed at attacking people personally, attempting to impart all sorts of evil or underhanded motives to them."
ReplyDeleteand WJM said: "How are taxpayer's dollars being wasted?"
Talk a about a tag team.
Anyway, to answer both of you, Wally, why don't you answer the accusation clearly. Do you or do you not work for Todd Russell and/or the Liberals? Not a hard question, just look at your pay check. You've been accused of that many times but refuse to answer. The silence is deafening.
As for Ed, I'm not trying to make anyone look evil or underhanded. If someone is on a partisan payroll and they don't have the decency to share that when talking about the issues then perhaps your words are correct. "Evil" and "Underhanded" may have some validity.
Both Wally and Ed seem intent on knowing my last name. I'll tell you what. If Wally honestly tells me if he is working for a political group/person and Ed tells me where he got his degrees that he is so proud of, I'll release my last name. If you expect me to come clean the least you can do is the same.
Thanks for making my point for me, Michael.
ReplyDeleteThanks for making mine for me Ed.
ReplyDeleteYour turn Wally.
Check out "Towmie Bastard's" blog, Wally clammed up there also when he didn't have a comeback.
ReplyDeletethat should have been "Townie Bastard's" blog with an 'n' not an 'm'.
ReplyDeleteAnd what point would that be, Michael?
ReplyDeleteAll you've done is avoid a discussion of issues, resorting instead to innuendo.
My point being that both you and WJM expect people to take what you have to say as correct so I'm questioning your credibility.
ReplyDeleteWally refuses to admit that he is paid by partisan people. If he isn't then why would he not deny it outright.
You have claimed in the past to have certain university degrees that might help convince people that you are highly educated and might have a better grasp of the situation than the average joe.
If you indeed have those degrees why do you continue to refuse telling us where you got them? Are you not proud of your school?
Like I said, it calls into question the credibility of you both and you aren't helping your credibiltiy by not answering what should be simple questions for anyone who has nothing to hide.
I can tell you clearly that I don't work for any partisan organization or individual and I have some post secondary education but nothing that would be relevent to the issues talked about here.
See, it's not that hard.
Like I said, answer the questions openly and honestly (both you and Wally) and I'll tell you my last name.
I'm not trying to hide anything so why are you two?
Michael, don't waste your time on these 2. You're just playing into their hands. Wally has been an irritant on this blog for quite a while. Crazy Eddy is a relative new comer. You see Ottawally has no skill other than his questioning every statement. The guy is basically a one trick pony. People just started to ignore him over time because he really had nothing to contribute to this site. The "vested interests" that are paying Ottawally were obviously not getting enough for their money so they dug up Crazy Eddy. He likes to ask lots of questions too, but has the added talent of being more verbose. Not only is he good at asking stupid questions, he is also good at taking up lots of space. But he doesn't realize his evil plan is easily foiled by the mighty arrow key. Just goes to show how much of an a$$hole he is. BTW Ottawally is also a big a$$hole.
ReplyDeleteI'll save Ottawally and Crazy Eddy some time by asking "Who are these vested interests that you referred to?" See you've just been rendered useless.
wow. now michael is amazing me. a person can be "accused" of having a job? that says something about your work ethic, michael.
ReplyDeleteThe tag team liberal federalists watch each others back, they know who they are.
ReplyDeleteAnon of may 18, 2007 2:35 pm, deep down inside, you know michael has put forth good points. your snide remarks are a poor attempt at a diversion. You need to go and have a little get together with your federalist buddies in here and devise a better plan, we are onto you.
ReplyDeleteso now youre giving me a label. what makes you think i'm a federalist. the motto of anarchism is "question authority"
ReplyDeleteOkay, how about $hit disturber?
ReplyDelete$hit disturber works for an anarchist. not so much for a federalist. hard to label an anonymous poster tho isnt it - anonymous?
ReplyDeleteMichael, you've made this same claim elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteAs I noted in that thread, I have made no such claims about degrees, so if you have them, then please provide them.
You ignored that comment and simply transfer the same argument somewhere else. It doesn't get any stronger in a new place.
If you want to engage in a discussion of the issues then by all means do so. As I said in the other thread, since I have made no such claims, then there is nothing to address.
Deal with the arguments. Deal with the issues. You seem to have some difficulty with that.
Perhaps that should tell us as much as your repetition of unfounded comments already refuted and now refuted again.
inlight of the upcoming prem - pm meeting i haveta ask: how can the current provincial government claim moral superiority in relation to ottawa or anything/anyone else when they withheld important information about people's health because they were afraid of a lawsuit? how different is that from the government agencies and bodies that kept quiet about mount cashel because the department of social services and department of justice could be criticized? who was fighting for those newfoundland and labrador women with cancer last fall?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, to answer both of you, Wally, why don't you answer the accusation clearly. Do you or do you not work for Todd Russell and/or the Liberals?
ReplyDeleteWas never asked before, so I never denied the "accusation"!
Both Wally and Ed seem intent on knowing my last name. I'll tell you what. If Wally honestly tells me if he is working for a political group/person
A group, no. A person.
What's your name?
I'll save Ottawally and Crazy Eddy some time by asking "Who are these vested interests that you referred to?"
ReplyDeleteYou asked. Why didn't you answer?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSorry Wally, nice try but you conveniently left out part of that quote. You noted that I said, "Both Wally and Ed seem intent on knowing my last name. I'll tell you what. If Wally honestly tells me if he is working for a political group/person"
ReplyDeleteI did, but the rest of that sentence said, "and Ed tells me where he got his degrees"
You really shouldn't try to fool people like that Wally. Shame on you.
I'll tell you what, since Ed won't admit to claiming he has degrees he doesn't, (not that he did it on this site but he knows the truth) I don't feel obligated to give you my name.
I'll be a nice guy though. I'll make you a new deal. You can fill in for fast eddy. You've admitted working for a partisan person rather than a group so you tell me his name and I'll tell you my name.
Myles you really should control the riff raff in here.
FYI,
ReplyDeleteI usually don't delete posts unless there is a very good reason. The previous one was deleted by me at the request of the author who emailed me to say he was having trouble doing so.
I have taken his word that he was the poster and expect that he will correct the post as he said he would and then repost it. I have a copy so if this is not done I'll put it back up.
I don't want to run the risk of deleting a post if I'm not sure of who actually posted it but the explantion was reasonable and I'll expect the edited version soon.
Cheers
I'll tell you what, since Ed won't admit to claiming he has degrees he doesn't
ReplyDeleteWhich degrees did he claim to have which he doesn't?
When did he make this claim?