When Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams demanded a 4.9% equity stake in the long shelved Hebron oil field off the province’s coast it resulted in an end to negotiations. The companies involved walked away from the table, closed up offices in St. John’s and announced that no further discussions were taking place. Williams wanted too much they claimed.
At the time the industry blamed the Premier for wanting too much and one national paper compared him to South American dictator Hugo Chavez. At home he was hailed as a hero for standing up to big oil and ensuring that a fair return on the resource came to the province or as he said at the time, "the oil can stay in the ground."
The Hebron find was uncovered over 20 years ago and since that time the companies involved have sat on the field waiting for oil prices to rise. In the mean time, the people of the province have struggled through hard economic times that included the collapse of their main industry, fishing and the highest unemployment in the Country.
A few weeks ago Premier Williams announced that his government's long awaited provincial energy plan would be released prior to the election in October. In making that announcement Williams also let it be known that any oil projects developed after its release would be subject to a higher rate of return than the previously suggested 5%. With all signs showing the current government poised to win a landslide majority in the next election it seems the oil companies involved may have blinked in the showdown over Hebron.
During an investment conference held by petroleum producers, Petro-Canada executive vice-president Peter Kallos said, "We are hoping Hebron will go forward. We are in the middle of restarting those discussions."
According to a report in the Financial Post, Mr. Kallos would not say whether the partners want to lock up an agreement before the energy plan becomes effective.
"The authorities in Newfoundland are clearly hoping that this energy plan will make things happen. We are hoping that things will happen. I am optimistic," Mr. Kallos said.
"I think it's worth getting a deal and, as with any deal, it will be done when the time is right."
"The co-venturers have always remained open to the possibility that the project could proceed at a future date, but there are no negotiations taking place," said Chevron spokesman Dave Pommer.
The group has seen little good news in the past year, as other major oil-and-gas developments worth billions remained on hold over policy uncertainty.
If Williams ever invites you to a poker game you better decline. It might be your best bet.
ReplyDeleteEd Holett: I would like a further update on your thinking at the moment. You were the greatest proponent in the province against Premier Williams asking for an equity stake, now what is your opinion?
ReplyDeleteThe announcement today is merely the confirmation of talks to see if there is indeed a basis for discussion.
ReplyDeleteLet's see what happens, anon.
As I understand, the Premier threw olive branches all over the place this morning to all sorts of groups at NOIA including NOIA.
He received generally polite applause but nothing to write home about.
A lot of damage has been done in the past year to local - emphasis on local - oil industry, but nothing that can't be repaired with some skilful diplomacy.
Time will tell on all fronts. Certainly no one in the local oil patch will be taking out second mortgages on anything until a deal is signed sealed and delivered.
And for the record, anon, I am not an opponent of equity. I have criticised the provincial position for:
- complete lack of disclosure of goals and objectives, i.e. a lack of transparency; and,
- setting up a Crown corporation that has no clearly defined business objectives or mandate, and doing so twice in the space of a year;
IF Danny invited me to a poker game I would be there in a flash! he has lots of money for me to take!
ReplyDelete:D
Thanks Ed! We do need transparency. And I do have faith that Premier Williams knows what he is doing. But we all have to be vigilant, since we have learned that from our past. Let us keep on top of things for once in our lives. It is critical for our well being to do so.
ReplyDeleteanother fine article ,as always patriot .
ReplyDeleteAll we can ask for now is that things go slow and steady ,and we watch were we are stepping .
No more give aways.On anything.
Its isnt time to start packing the moving wagon just yet.But ,there are thousands of us watching.
I understan Andy Wells is going to have a chat with minister Lund today, at the luncheon.
ReplyDeleteAndy doesn't have "chats". If he has something to say he'll say it and anyone, including the minister, who tries to disagree (rightly or wrongly) will get an ear full.
ReplyDeleteKnowing Andy it could turn into an all out brawl. (God love him)
I'm with you on Andy, he doesn't have any trouble speaking his mind. There's no secret agenda with that man. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when he chats with the minister.
ReplyDeleteI can just imagine Andy tossing a garbage net over Lund.
ReplyDeleteIt appears he had trouble speaking his mind in the beginning, otherwise, how did everything pertaining to the administration of Oil in Newfoundland and Labrador end up in Halifax and Calgary? Or was Mr. Andy Wells the Mayor at the time? It could have been John Murphy? I am not sure who was acting Mayor when all that dirty business took place.
ReplyDeletehow did everything pertaining to the administration of Oil in Newfoundland and Labrador end up in Halifax and Calgary?
ReplyDeletePerhaps the same way the VBNC offices ended up in St. John's? Don't hear any townies complaining abou that, do you?
That Ottwally, always the a$$hole.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Mayor Andy Wells, Eighty Per cent (80 per cent) of Oil and Gas Activity in Atlantic Canada is attributable to the off-shore fields from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The question is do we have 80 per cent of the administration that is created as a result of that activity?
ReplyDeleteA Plain and Simple Question: Does the province of Newfoundland and Labrador have 80 per cent of the administration and jobs that result from that activity, can anybody answer that question?
I can answer a plain and simple question, (don't count on one from Ed though). Of course we don't have 80% of the administration and jobs that result from the activity. As usual it goes to the so called "capitol" of Atlantic canada, Halifax. People are made to believe that St. John's is akin to outer Mongolia. Don't they live in igloo's down their?
ReplyDeleteAlso the feds have a way of punishing NL for their upstartedness. Take a look at the equalization goings on. There were two appoaches, one was Danny standing up to Harper and demanding he not change the accord. The other approach was MacDonald, more subdued almost submissive, working on the side deal. Yes he was sneaky, keep your mouth shut and deal with the feds, indeed he would get a little side deal, screw NL. Harper tried the old divide and conquer trick. Problem is he screwed MacDonald in the end. But he did manage to suck him in, right down to the wire. Then MacDonald finally realized he wasn't getting anything, there was going to be no side deal. So all of his bluster was too little, too late. I've got to hand it to Harper, he played MacDonald for a fool right to the end. Had MacDonald stood up for equalization at the same time as Danny, and showed some backbone, we might have gotten somewhere with it. Look at how MacDonald is doing in the polls compared to Danny, that's quite a difference. Moral of the story is kick and scream you get nowhere with Harper. A calm rational, cooperative approach with Harper, and you still get nowhere. It's a lose - lose situation. Equalization was going to be stuffed down our throats regardless. Don't believe NL gets punished. Just watch where the federal goodies go in Atlantic canada over the next year.
Maybe Danny should make administrative jobs for NL part of his oil and gas deals.
Starrigan said...
ReplyDeleteThat Ottwally, always the a$$hole.
June 19, 2007 4:38 PM - the guys never has anything good to say about nothing does he starriagn.
you can say that again about who gets the goodies next year though.I bet that Ottawa will be giving danny the cold shoulder over stirring-up this batch of hornetts.
When Harper looks west he grins and sends it a smile .When he sees central canada,ontario,and quebec he rubs his hands with glee.When he sees N.B,P.E.I,and nova Scotia he sighs and pulls out his wallett.
And NOW he sees Newfounland and Labrador and breaks into a cold clamy sweat that sends a shiver of cold down his spine.The only province that he fears ,is too his east.
Well we certainly have canadas attention guys,now what are we going to do with it !
READ THIS AS IT APPEARED IN THE NATIONAL POST TODAY
ReplyDeleteGreed knows no bounds in Atlantic Canada
Lorne Gunter, National Post
Published: Tuesday, June 19, 2007
EDMONTON -OK fellow fiscal conservatives (and especially my fellow Albertans), sit down. I'm about to agree with Premier Dalton McGuinty that Ontario is getting the shaft in federal-provincial fiscal arrangements.
Yes, Albertans contribute more -- far more per capita -- than any other Canadians to transfer and equalization payments. Each man, woman and child in Alberta kicks in $3,000 a year to Confederation's interregional wealth transfer. Second-place Ontarians contribute $1,800.
But Alberta is at present in a much stronger fiscal position than Ontario. Alberta's "fiscal capacity" -- a province's ability to raise the money it needs to fund basic services -- is by any measure well above the national average, while Ontario's is slipping.
Email to a friend
Printer friendly
Font: ****Albertans personally, too, are much better off. At the beginning of the 1990s, Ontarians' per capita incomes, for instance, were 115% of the national average. Now that figure has slipped to 103% of the national average and is in danger this year or next of dipping below 100%. Albertans, by comparison are earning about 135%, or more.
I resent my Alberta being Confederation's cash cow, but I'd be even more upset if it were in Ontario's position.
It is entirely likely that within the next couple of years, Ontarians will be contributing to equalization payments to Atlantic provinces that have a greater "fiscal capacity" than there own.
Put simply, by 2008 or 2009, it is very likely Ontario will have ceased to be a "have" province in any meaningful sense. Meanwhile, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, with their burgeoning oil and gas revenues, will have ceased to be "have-nots." Yet because of the perverse rules (and politics) surrounding federal-provincial funding in Canada, Ontarians will still be sending huge chunks of their incomes to Ottawa each year so the federal government can continue to pour rich equalization payments into Atlantic coffers.
Consider this: When equalization began 50 years ago, the Atlantic provinces had per capita incomes around two-thirds that of the national average, while Ontario had incomes about one-quarter above -- a gap of about 50 points. Today, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have incomes over 90% of the national average, while (as I said above), Ontario's are at around 100%.
Instead of 50 points, the Ontario-Atlantic income gap today is less than 10 points. Yet federal transfers to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia -- equalization, plus health and social transfers-- now account for far more of those provinces' budgets than they did when the income gap was five times are large.
Even though Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have per capita incomes rapidly approaching Ontario levels, Newfoundland gets nearly 60% of its provincial budget from Ottawa and Nova Scotia nearly 40%, while Ontario gets less than 16%.
It's little wonder than that after all federal transfers are accounted for, Ontario is the least fiscally capable province in the country -- the least!
According to Halifax's Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, Ontario is third in fiscal capacity (behind Alberta and B.C.) "before equalization," but dead last after. As a result, as my colleague Andrew Coyne pointed out last week, "for 2007-08, Newfoundland's per capita revenues, equalization included, total $7,094, to Ontario's $6,631."
Ontario has 2.7 hospital beds per 1,000 population while PEI has 3.4, Nova Scotia 4.0 and New Brunswick 5.3. It has 30% fewer nurses per capita than the Atlantic-province average and significantly fewer doctors, too.
Remember all this when Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams or Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald clamour about Prime Minister Stephen Harper breaking the Atlantic Accord.
Harper did no such thing. He told the Atlantic provinces they could keep the Atlantic Accord, which shielded their new resource wealth from equalization calculations, or they could go with the new higher equalization in this spring's budget, but they would have to count 50% of their resource revenues. They could choose whatever was better for them, and they could switch back and forth between the two formulas each year to maximize their equalization.
To call that a broken promise is to take demagoguery to new heights.
Still, Harper's offer is not generous enough for Williams and MacDonald. They want all their resource income and the higher equalization.
There is no limit to their greed for cash from other provinces, from taxpayers who cannot reach them politically.
Both premiers have argued that since Alberta's resource wealth is not included in equalization payments, theirs should not be either.
But there is a critical difference: Alberta is not demanding equalization payments. Alberta is not insisting it should get extra funds from Ottawa even though it is booming. It is not, as Newfoundland and Nova Scotia are, insisting the rest of the country still treat it as if Albertans were poor when they are not.
If anything, Dalton McGuinty is being too polite. An Alberta premier in his position would be screaming bloody murder.
lgunter@shaw.ca
READ THIS AS IT APPEARED IN THE NATIONAL POST TODAY. Does it make your stomach churn. How did Ontario and Alberta get to their present day position of being rich, have provinces if it weren't for subsidies, transfer payments and other goodies that were transferred from the Ottawa Government from tax paypayers monies. And of course goodies being sold to the 'have not' provinces that were produced in the 'have provinces" with the resources, both natural and human, exported from the "have not" provinces.
ReplyDeleteGreed knows no bounds in Atlantic Canada
Lorne Gunter, National Post
Published: Tuesday, June 19, 2007
EDMONTON -OK fellow fiscal conservatives (and especially my fellow Albertans), sit down. I'm about to agree with Premier Dalton McGuinty that Ontario is getting the shaft in federal-provincial fiscal arrangements.
Yes, Albertans contribute more -- far more per capita -- than any other Canadians to transfer and equalization payments. Each man, woman and child in Alberta kicks in $3,000 a year to Confederation's interregional wealth transfer. Second-place Ontarians contribute $1,800.
But Alberta is at present in a much stronger fiscal position than Ontario. Alberta's "fiscal capacity" -- a province's ability to raise the money it needs to fund basic services -- is by any measure well above the national average, while Ontario's is slipping.
Email to a friend
Printer friendly
Font: ****Albertans personally, too, are much better off. At the beginning of the 1990s, Ontarians' per capita incomes, for instance, were 115% of the national average. Now that figure has slipped to 103% of the national average and is in danger this year or next of dipping below 100%. Albertans, by comparison are earning about 135%, or more.
I resent my Alberta being Confederation's cash cow, but I'd be even more upset if it were in Ontario's position.
It is entirely likely that within the next couple of years, Ontarians will be contributing to equalization payments to Atlantic provinces that have a greater "fiscal capacity" than there own.
Put simply, by 2008 or 2009, it is very likely Ontario will have ceased to be a "have" province in any meaningful sense. Meanwhile, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, with their burgeoning oil and gas revenues, will have ceased to be "have-nots." Yet because of the perverse rules (and politics) surrounding federal-provincial funding in Canada, Ontarians will still be sending huge chunks of their incomes to Ottawa each year so the federal government can continue to pour rich equalization payments into Atlantic coffers.
Consider this: When equalization began 50 years ago, the Atlantic provinces had per capita incomes around two-thirds that of the national average, while Ontario had incomes about one-quarter above -- a gap of about 50 points. Today, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have incomes over 90% of the national average, while (as I said above), Ontario's are at around 100%.
Instead of 50 points, the Ontario-Atlantic income gap today is less than 10 points. Yet federal transfers to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia -- equalization, plus health and social transfers-- now account for far more of those provinces' budgets than they did when the income gap was five times are large.
Even though Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have per capita incomes rapidly approaching Ontario levels, Newfoundland gets nearly 60% of its provincial budget from Ottawa and Nova Scotia nearly 40%, while Ontario gets less than 16%.
It's little wonder than that after all federal transfers are accounted for, Ontario is the least fiscally capable province in the country -- the least!
According to Halifax's Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, Ontario is third in fiscal capacity (behind Alberta and B.C.) "before equalization," but dead last after. As a result, as my colleague Andrew Coyne pointed out last week, "for 2007-08, Newfoundland's per capita revenues, equalization included, total $7,094, to Ontario's $6,631."
Ontario has 2.7 hospital beds per 1,000 population while PEI has 3.4, Nova Scotia 4.0 and New Brunswick 5.3. It has 30% fewer nurses per capita than the Atlantic-province average and significantly fewer doctors, too.
Remember all this when Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams or Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald clamour about Prime Minister Stephen Harper breaking the Atlantic Accord.
Harper did no such thing. He told the Atlantic provinces they could keep the Atlantic Accord, which shielded their new resource wealth from equalization calculations, or they could go with the new higher equalization in this spring's budget, but they would have to count 50% of their resource revenues. They could choose whatever was better for them, and they could switch back and forth between the two formulas each year to maximize their equalization.
To call that a broken promise is to take demagoguery to new heights.
Still, Harper's offer is not generous enough for Williams and MacDonald. They want all their resource income and the higher equalization.
There is no limit to their greed for cash from other provinces, from taxpayers who cannot reach them politically.
Both premiers have argued that since Alberta's resource wealth is not included in equalization payments, theirs should not be either.
But there is a critical difference: Alberta is not demanding equalization payments. Alberta is not insisting it should get extra funds from Ottawa even though it is booming. It is not, as Newfoundland and Nova Scotia are, insisting the rest of the country still treat it as if Albertans were poor when they are not.
If anything, Dalton McGuinty is being too polite. An Alberta premier in his position would be screaming bloody murder.
lgunter@shaw.ca
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAccording to provincial government figures, Ninety Eight Per cent (98 per cent) of mineral activity is attributable to mines and exploration projects in Labrador. The question is do we have 98 per cent of the administration that is created as a result of that activity?
ReplyDeleteA Plain and Simple Question: Does Labrador have 98 per cent of the administration and jobs that result from that activity, can anybody answer that question?
It does make my stomach turn.
ReplyDeleteAlberta was allowed to receive equalization payments while it developed their oil and gas infrastructure and now look where they are. Doing very well. It's amazing how smug this writer is and not only smug but ill informed. I'd have to say he's an even bigger a$$hole than Ottawally.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteits nice to see the hords of filthy liars and sleevens coming from the province of Alberta.Its seems this country is only grateful when they are capable of thieving,destroying ,and taking advantage of a province that has not had a bone toused to them in 58 years .
ReplyDeleteThis is the true defination of the term failed Liberial state.What other country in the would have given what this province has.This is the slug that canada has left in the barrel for us,and it appears that when it is our turn to go to the well ,the bucket seems to have a far greater price for usage.
What a sin to say that we have gotten involved in this sick liberail state.
We have moved our house folks to a nieghborhood i fear that does not want us.What should be done is a renewed discussion on the stae of this confederation.This is a farce,joke scam,or sick prank.what a true disapointment to have to call myself canadain...................I am so disjusted I can no longer type.
I am truely disappointed in my fellow canadains this day.A new low for canada.
"Alberta was allowed to receive equalization payments while it developed their oil and gas infrastructure and now look where they are."
ReplyDeleteAlberta collected Equalization from the time the program was created in 1957 until 1962.
The facts are presented very well in the "History of Equalization" link on the left hand nav bar of this blog.
Alberta has gotten where it is today by developing its oil industry and that was done without Equalization for the past 45 years.
The facts may be inconvenient for some, but they are as they are.
Hi all, The comment poste by anon June 19, at 9:26 Pm will be deleted in about 2 minutes (probably gone by the time you read this. I'll re-post his/her comments without the off colour language.
ReplyDeleteCome on folks, there's no need to throw the F word around like confetti.
As for myself, (for anyone who cares) I was supposed to be in Halifax today but couldn't fly out. No, it wasn't the No Fly list that got me it was the good old fog. I guess CSIS likes me more than mother nature does.
Anyway, please try to keep it clean even if it becomes difficult to keep it civilized.
cheers,
Myles
(I'll re-post the anon comment asap)
Hi all, The comment poste by anon June 19, at 9:26 Pm will be deleted in about 2 minutes (probably gone by the time you read this. I'll re-post his/her comments without the off colour language.
ReplyDeleteCome on folks, there's no need to throw the F word around like confetti.
As for myself, (for anyone who cares) I was supposed to be in Halifax today but couldn't fly out. No, it wasn't the No Fly list that got me it was the good old fog. I guess CSIS likes me more than mother nature does.
Anyway, please try to keep it clean even if it becomes difficult to keep it civilized.
cheers,
Myles
(I'll re-post the anon comment asap)
re-post (withoug off colour language)
ReplyDeleteAnon:
(expletive) RACIST (expletive)
OK lets take back the hydro ,the minerals the air-space,the oil,and see how far they can get .Its OK when the show is on the onter foot you (expletive) canadain bacon rapped piece of shit .who gets an oil refinery ,Ontario,and new brunswick,were is the oil coming from,newfoundland.
What the (expletive) are we doing in this shit-hole country ,(expletive)YOU-CANADA.
Thieving racist nazi hoard of inpregnated SOWS,I hope that your (expletive) country disolves into the shit it is.
June 19, 2007 9:26 PM
A Plain and Simple Question: Does Labrador have 98 per cent of the administration and jobs that result from that activity, can anybody answer that question?
ReplyDeleteNO WJM AND NEITHER DOES NEWFOUNDLAND. THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE IN DEBT $23,500 PER MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN THIS PROVINCE. WE EXPORTED OUR RESOURCES SO OTHER PROVINCES COULD PROSPER. HOW STUPID WAS THAT?
BY THE WAY EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN ONTARIO OWES JUST $2,000. EACH NEWFOUNDLANDER AND LABRADORIAN OWES 12 TIMES OTTAWAS DEBT.
LAST SENTENCE SHOULD READ
ReplyDeleteEACH NEWFOUNDLANDER AND LABRADORIAN OWES 12 TIMES ONTARIO'S DEBT.
Alberta was allowed to receive equalization payments while it developed their oil and gas infrastructure
ReplyDeleteAnd?
NL was "allowed" to receive equalization while it developed its iron ore industry, too.
It's one thing to say AB received equalization while it "developed" its oil and gas industry.
However, it's entirely another thing to say that Alberta collected oil and gas royalties, without any impact on its equalization entitlement. It's perfectly possible to collect oil and gas royalties, AND equalization, as long as those royalties don't put that province over the threshhold.
Was that the case?
and now look where they are. Doing very well.
Yip. And? They are doing well today because, well, because they are doing well. They have lots of own-source revenue coming in (and without the province owning equity, either! How's that possible??!?!). Whatever is causing Alberta to do well, it is NOT the fact that many decades ago they received equalization.
NO WJM AND NEITHER DOES NEWFOUNDLAND.
ReplyDeleteIf no part of Canada should have any jobs deriving in any way from any resource in Newfoundland, why should Newfoundland have any jobs deriving in any way from any resource in Labrador?
THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE IN DEBT $23,500 PER MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN THIS PROVINCE.
Is it? Who put a gun to our provincial government's head and forced it to leave beyond its means for decades?
WE EXPORTED OUR RESOURCES SO OTHER PROVINCES COULD PROSPER. HOW STUPID WAS THAT?
Which resources? Which provinces? Does no other province export resource? Does NL not receive ANY resources from anywhere else? What do resources have to do with prosperity, anyway?
opps!!!sorry!!!- June 19, 2007 9:26 PM
ReplyDeleteOH MY GOd .Mr Higgons could you please take that POST DOWN PLEASE,or at least have the Heart to PASS-Over the scretch BoTTle,with that thing hanging there.
ReplyDeleteJune 19, 2007 8:16 PM -this RAG smells like something was wippped-up with It.
Wow WJM your a$$oledness is beyond reproach.
ReplyDeleteEd, I'm just curious, for the 11th time:
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador should have fallow field legislation?
Give me a yes or a no.
a$$oledness
ReplyDeleteDefinition?
Fallow field legislation? Absolutely not. Nobody will ever drill another hole in the Shelf with that nonsense attached.
ReplyDeleteThe nonsense never stops, despite the facts that prove these statements false:
ReplyDelete"THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE IN DEBT $23,500 PER MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN THIS PROVINCE.WE EXPORTED OUR RESOURCES SO OTHER PROVINCES COULD PROSPER."
Putting in all caps doesn't make it any less untrue.
The provincial debt is a result of consistent overspending the provincial government, solely based on provincial government decisions.
It includes everything from failed economic ventures (and their loan guarantees) to just simply overspending each year on the annual budget.
NL did not export its resources so others could prosper. NL exported resources so it could prosper. If NL didn't export, i.e. trade with other places, it wouldn't survive.
The issues is much more complex than you imagine, Caps Lock, but then again, what else is new? You've been on this jag and have stuck to your simplistic view with the dogged determination that would make a cultist embarrassed.
Newfoundland and Labrador exported its resources because it didn't have any help from Ottawa to do otherwise. All the provinces like Ontario and Quebec have to do is put in a request for something and they have it PRONTO from Ottawa. We got the $2 billion payment for our Oil and Ontario asked for $5 billion and right away you know what happened. Quebec got a $700 million payment in the 2007 Budget, it immediately lowered taxes. Transfer payment to Ontario AND Quebec keep them going.
ReplyDeleteTake for instance, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, with all of their Federal Regional Offices and Military bases, lots of monies coming in to keep their economy robust, if they had the resources that Newfoundland and Labrador possessed, they, no doubt, would have built the infrastructure with Ottawa's help in their provinces, and they would have been the primary beneficiary of those resources. If N.S. or N.B had the Upper Churchill Hydroelectric Engery, you can bet your bottom dollar that Quebec would not have been the primary beneficiary. Don't try to spin stories, Ed, who are you always trying to impress? Is it the Federal Government? It is quite plain Ed that you are not working on behalf of Newfoundland and Labrador and its people. You seem to have a bad case of the 'ME SYNDROME'.
WJM will argue that Sudbury, Ontario and Thompson, Manitoba is the beneficiary of the Nickel Ore from Voisey's Bay, it is not refined here in Newfoundland and Labrador. He will argue that the Oil from our offshore goes to Imperial Oil in Nova Scotia and Irving Oil in New Brunswick for refining, it is obviously not refined in Newfoundland and Labrador. He will argue that the quotas of fish in Ottawa's stewardship, that were placed there by this province, are delved out to foreign nations, for sure they aren't all caught by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and processed here. He will argue that the Iron Ore from Labrador goes anywhere else but the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, I can't see any manufacturing of cars from that iron. You will see most of these arguments in the above threads if you would care to read back on this blogsite. It is sickening that we have people such as WJM supposedly working out of Ottawa and paid with our tax dollars making such statements? It is time for patronage to end. It causes so many problems for a province like Newfoundland and Labrador, which has so many resources but stills remains poor under the tutelage of Ottawa.
When a province is well endowed with infrastructure from Ottawa, that brings in big dollars to its economy, the province then has more money to employ its people, and when the infrastructe is put there by Ottawa, that is a big plus, WOW THAT IS EXPLOSIVE IN A POSITIVE WAY TO ANYONE'S ECONOMY: thus it can keep its debt down and the province then has more borrowing power to develop any resources it has that comes up for development.
"We got the $2 billion payment for our Oil and Ontario asked for $5 billion and right away you know what happened."
ReplyDelete"Quebec got a $700 million payment in the 2007 Budget, it immediately lowered taxes"
June 20, 2007 10:12 AM - please dont take this the wrong way ,but why use that as an excample.
I would rather say that when Ontario asked for 17.5 BILLION,yes ,you have read that right Folks,17.5 BILLION Dollars for the new transit lines that they really need becuase its going to "KNOCK OFF 1/2 Hour" commute for each commuter in the run of a week.They got the feds to pay 1/3 of the over-all price tag.
Could I get Mr Hollett to do the math on that please.He seems like a capable character.
Now were in the name of God does that make sence .And ,thats our tax dollars as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Just shows who who gets treated like what in this country .While Newfoundland and Labrador sit on the side-lines and wait for a fixed link that would benefit the entire atlantic region.
Absolutely disgraceful if you ask me .
As Always ,Patriot.
"No, it wasn't the No Fly list that got me it was the good old fog"If you could bottle some of that for me ,please,and send it to the mainland patriot.I wouldnt mind say ,aaaaaaaaaaawwww,i dont know .What say ,650 000.00 litre of the stuff .We could use it too cool off all the global warming.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to ask you patriot ,when you were away .Did you have the chance to taste the carrotts and turnip that came from the mainland.Next time you do ,just try to remmeber that .It was a shock for me when i had first noticed a "Newfie" carrot .lol.
All The Best .
nonymous said...
ReplyDeleteFallow field legislation? Absolutely not. Nobody will ever drill another hole in the Shelf with that nonsense attached.
June 20, 2007 2:56 AM - I would love to debate this point folks.Sheer and utter nonsence to say the least.
this individual really needs to go back and fllow someones excample .Either Norway or maybe even Alberta.
One of the anonys wrote:
ReplyDelete"When a province is well endowed with infrastructure from Ottawa, that brings in big dollars to its economy, the province then has more money to employ its people, and when the infrastructure is put there by Ottawa, that is a big plus, WOW THAT IS EXPLOSIVE IN A POSITIVE WAY TO ANYONE'S ECONOMY: thus it can keep its debt down and the province then has more borrowing power to develop any resources it has that comes up for development."
Ok. Well, if you argument holds true, we would expect that provinces with a big portion of federal spending would have lower per capita debt than Newfoundland and Labrador.
Basically, you are arguing that NL's debt is because NL didn't get all sorts of federal jobs and so on.
According to Stats Canada for 2006, of the provinces, the provinces with the highest per capita debt were, in order, :
NL, Quebec and NS. Now, you specifically mentioned NS and Quebec as two examples of provinces that got big federal spending.
How do you explain that? It certainly doesn't fit your argument at all. By your logic, Quebec and NS should have a very low debt, yet they have among the highest in the country.
You argument doesn't make sense.
The same anon also wrote:
"Transfer payment to Ontario AND Quebec keep them going."
That's a pretty interesting observation.
Historically, Newfoundland and Labrador has been the province most dependent on federal transfers. If you go back and look at the 1980s and into the 1990s, for example, about half of all the money the provincial government spent in any given year came from the federal government.
That was the highest in the country. Even today, the provincial government relies more heavily on federal transfers as a share of budget spending than a significant number of provinces.
Again, the facts just don't bear out your argument.
Of course, the facts obviously don't make any difference. You are saying the same things now you've said likely for years, even though over the past few weeks facts have been presented that show your conclusions are wrong.
Still, unfacts, such as the ones you present must be challenged. At some point, someone will get the point.
Premier Williams said:
ReplyDeleteI am especially pleased to report that after a brief but necessary hiatus of just over a year, we are progressing with formal discussions with the Hebron proponents to explore a way forward. These are not negotiations but, in fact, meetings to clarify our outstanding issues and are a true cause for optimism.
The companies are sharing concerns over costs which are increasing around the world. They are also updating us on possible scheduling opportunities and threats. At the same time we are continuing to share our thoughts on such issues as equity and royalties. The proponents fully understand that these are entrenched principles for our government and that these principles will be reinforced in our energy plan. They are clearly a condition precedent for moving forward.
In other words, talks about conditions under which talks might proceed.
June 20, 2007 10:54 AM
ReplyDeletecommunications consultant!!! So what or whom do you consult regarding communications in the province of newfoundland and Labrador.
Before I forget, Ed I have a question for you, 12th time:
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador should have fallow field legislation?
Or how about: ED, do you think there will be any new oil and gas discoveries off the coast of NL?
Still, unfacts, such as the ones you present must be challenged. At some point, someone will get the point.
ReplyDeleteJune 20, 2007 10:48 AM
debase.
Ed would you not agree that if Newfoundland and Labrador had the same number of Federal Regional Offices and Military bases and other Federal infrastructure here, would we not be better of economically?
ReplyDeleteThe facts are we have very little Federal infrastructure that brings in billions to the other provinces coffers. That has to give them somewhat of a financial security blanket. Don't be stunned!
ReplyDeleteIs that an unfact?
Ed: What are the benefits of the Auto Pact, the Federal Trasfer, Payments, Research and Development monies, etc., etc., to Ontario?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the above mentioned items are mostly what secures the Ontario economy.
Ed and WJM: Are you saying that the Nickel Ore being exported from Voisey's Bay is not propping up the economy of Sudbury, Ontario and Thomspson, Manitoba?
ReplyDeleteAnd also are you saying the 5800 mega watts of Hydroelectric Energy that flows from the Upper Churchill Energy Project, that Ottawa would not assist us in getting a corridor for to the markets to which they are needed for industry and are consumed, has not made and still is making Quebec Hydro a much richer and secure Crown Corporation?
By the way the William A Bennett (WAC Dam) in British Columbia only produces 2700 mega watts of power. That dam gets touted as a big project in BC, yet it produces less than half of what the Upper Churchill produces.
"What are the benefits of the Auto Pact, the Federal Trasfer, Payments, Research and Development monies, etc., etc., to Ontario?"
ReplyDeleteWhat the benefits of transfer payments to individuals, subsidies to the fishing industry, Hibernia investment, research and development money, roads and other infrastructure transfers, military bases, ACOA and its predecessors PLUS decades of having having the provincial government revenue coming from the federal government?
Every person who mentions the Autopact forgets to mention the decades of federal subsidy to the fishing industry in one form or another, not counting NCARP and TAGS at all. It was abolished in 2001. Federal subsidies to the fishing industry continue.
Some other anon wrote: "The facts are we have very little Federal infrastructure that brings in billions to the other provinces coffers. That has to give them somewhat of a financial security blanket."
The facts are that we have a considerable amount of what you call infrastructure. What you actually mean are federal jobs on the federal payroll. (WJM or someone else might have better stats on this than I do.)
What those jobs produce - and all they produce - are income taxes and sales taxes and so forth associated with any salary.
If we really want this province to prosper we would develop our economy. That's the route to generating real wealth.
But what you have to remember is that the entire argument presented by you or the other anon wasn't that federal jobs produced some benefit to a provincial economy, but that the lack of jobs here caused the massive provincial debt.
That obviously isn't the case.
Newfoundland and Labrador exported its resources because it didn't have any help from Ottawa to do otherwise. All the provinces like Ontario and Quebec have to do is put in a request for something and they have it PRONTO from Ottawa.
ReplyDeleteWhich monies did they get in "help from Ottawa" so they don't have to export their resources?
Take for instance, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, with all of their Federal Regional Offices and Military bases, lots of monies coming in to keep their economy robust
Where does that money come FROM?
I would rather say that when Ontario asked for 17.5 BILLION,yes ,you have read that right Folks,17.5 BILLION Dollars for the new transit lines that they really need becuase its going to "KNOCK OFF 1/2 Hour" commute for each commuter in the run of a week.They got the feds to pay 1/3 of the over-all price tag.
ReplyDeleteNo, Ontario has proposed spending $17.5-billion, and are calling on the federal government to pay 1/3 of the cost. The federal government hasn't said anything yet. In fact McGuinty has been complaining that the federal government "owes" Ontario, given federal money that's gone into the Pacific Gateway, Manitoba floodway, etc.
Sound familiar?
And how is McGuinty's call somehow bad, when the provincial government of Dannystan keeps passing the buck to Ottawa for spending on the Trans-Labrador Highway, Mealy Mountain Auditorium, etc.? 90% of the money ever spent on the TLH has been federal, but it's still not enough for Danny Williams. Isn't Labrador an integral part of the province? What a hypocrite.
Are you saying that the Nickel Ore being exported from Voisey's Bay is not propping up the economy of Sudbury, Ontario and Thomspson, Manitoba?
ReplyDeleteSure it is, temporarily.
Just as shrimp from Nova Scotia is propping up the economy of Newfoundland.
Just as turbot caught off Labrador, Nunavut, even Quebec, is propping up the economy of Newfoundland.
Just as pulpwood from PEI and Quebec is propping up the economy of Newfoundland.
Just as crude oil from the Middle East is propping up the economy of Newfoundland.
Just as gold ore from Greenland is propping up the economy of Newfoundland.
Why is it that resource flows are a political one-way street?
Why is it that nothing must ever leave the province, but you hypocritical Newfoundland nationalists have no problems with resources coming in?
And also are you saying the 5800 mega watts of Hydroelectric Energy that flows from the Upper Churchill Energy Project, that Ottawa would not assist us in getting a corridor for to the markets to which they are needed for industry and are consumed
So.... Ottawa should have "assisted" us export raw electricity?
By the way the William A Bennett (WAC Dam) in British Columbia only produces 2700 mega watts of power. That dam gets touted as a big project in BC, yet it produces less than half of what the Upper Churchill produces.
It's still big.
The facts are that we have a considerable amount of what you call infrastructure. What you actually mean are federal jobs on the federal payroll. (WJM or someone else might have better stats on this than I do.)
ReplyDeleteNL, with 1.5% of the Canadian population, has over 7,000 federal jobs, 1.9% of the national total, and the fourth-largest per-capita civil service presence in the country by number. It also has 1.7% of the civil service payroll, again, larger than its per-capita share of the population.
Quebec's share of the federal civil service (number and payroll) is lower than its share of the population. Ontario's is slightly higher, as you'd expect with the capital city being in Ontario.
Alberta has a disproportionately low share of the federal civil service, and it's doing OK.
What those jobs produce - and all they produce - are income taxes and sales taxes and so forth associated with any salary.
Better point: what do they consume?
Take your pick WJM - either one of the resources we export out of the province in the name of Oil, Hydroelectricity and even the Nickel Ore shipped to Sudbury, Ontario or Thompson,Manitoba, yes, one of the three Oil, Hydroelectricity, or Nickel will more than suffice from those puny little resources that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador gets in return.
ReplyDeleteWJM would you please do a little accounting before you post to this blog?
1. Oil = equates into billions
2. Hydroelectricity Energy equates into more than a billion
3. Nickel Ore equates into the hundreds of millions.
You can account all of those trivial little resources that come here from the other provinces and they will not add up to even one of the 3 resources I just listed above.
Answer the questions Ed and WJM that were put to you instead of using the rote pattern you are accustomed to using on this blogsite that is spinning words around the question.
ReplyDeleteThe questions were put to you in a plain and simple form and we all require a plain and simple answer. You thought you gave an answer but you didn't. How much longer are you both going to get paid for doing such a disservice to your province?
"Why is it that nothing must ever leave the province, but you hypocritical Newfoundland nationalists have no problems with resources coming in?"
ReplyDeleteBecause we are exporting people out of the province to do those jobs that should be done at home.In Labrador.
Dont speak for us WJM,we really dont need the villiage Idiot representing us .
And you argue and say that its newfoundlands fault that the upper churchill goes to Quebec .
Are you well enough to be working ,menatlly speaking of course.What a FOOL .Who is running this Blog.
The resources coming in are no more than 1 per cent of what goes out.
ReplyDeleteI am speaking of only the natural resources that go out of here. If we put a dollar figure on the human resources, it would be a different figure. Thanks for bringing that one to my attention, I was forgetting it momentarily.
It is a shocking shame what has happened to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador mostly perpetrated by the structure of Canada and mindset of the bureaucrats in Ottawa who thought and still think they can push anything over on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
There was a time we hadn't figured out the system and we didn't know the difference, but that was then and now we know the truth, so why do they keep trying to pull the same tricks over our eyes?
The time has long come and gone that the type of chicanery that was practiced should have stopped.
You people in Ottawa and the rest of Canada are looking like crooks and robbers at the moment, not only by the people in Newfoundland and Labrador but others in the rest of the world who follows this story. Why keep up such a charade?
I happened to be listening to the call in programs today whilst going about my business. Two items in particular were of interest.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, Sue Kelland Dyer called in and chastised the Premier, and I believe she made a valid point, the point being that the Premiers of both Nova Scotia ans Saskachewan had/were making presentations stating their cases the the senate. Sue was criticizing the premier for not making this provinces case to the senate, and it's valid question I say.
Secondly, Gerry Reid called in and made the accusation that the premier gave his feel good speech to NOIA vis-a-vis Hebron in order to help himself in October. Once again vintage Gerry Reid proving why the Liberals are in the basement.
1. Oil = equates into billions
ReplyDeleteYip, for the province, which receives most of the public revenues, and all of the royalties, from oil.
2. Hydroelectricity Energy equates into more than a billion
Yip; we could have sold it for more, but didn't.
3. Nickel Ore equates into the hundreds of millions.
No nickel ore leaves the province.
How much longer are you both going to get paid for doing such a disservice to your province?
ReplyDeleteThe premise of your question is flawed, since I don't get paid for that purpose by anyone. Your statements are libellous.
Because we are exporting people out of the province to do those jobs that should be done at home.
ReplyDeleteWhich is odd, because IOC can't get enough people for its mining operations; mineral industry suppliers and contractors in Lab West are going begging, but Newfoundlanders would rather work in Fort McMurray than in their own province. Why?
Dont speak for us WJM,we really dont need the villiage Idiot representing us .
I'm not representing you, since I'm not a member of your "us".
And you argue and say that its newfoundlands fault that the upper churchill goes to Quebec .
Yip. Whose fault do you think it is?
The hydro resource was entirely under provincial jurisdiction. The only way the transaction went the way it did, was because of provincial government decisions.
The resources coming in are no more than 1 per cent of what goes out.
ReplyDeleteYou've quantified that? Please provide your figures. Show your work.
It is a shocking shame what has happened to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador mostly perpetrated by the structure of Canada
What about the "structure of Canada" caused that?
and mindset of the bureaucrats in Ottawa who thought and still think they can push anything over on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
What do "bureaucrats in Ottawa" have to do with anything? In your answer, you may wish to make reference to the fact that forestry, minerals, and hydro are under exclusive PROVINCIAL jurisdiction, and that offshore oil and gas are under joint management, with the province collecting 100% of the royalties, and having veto power over any development.
You people in Ottawa and the rest of Canada are looking like crooks and robbers at the moment, not only by the people in Newfoundland and Labrador but others in the rest of the world who follows this story. Why keep up such a charade?
Are Newfoundlanders also "crooks and robbers" for their treatment of Labrador? Why or why not?
Secondly, Gerry Reid called in and made the accusation that the premier gave his feel good speech to NOIA vis-a-vis Hebron in order to help himself in October. Once again vintage Gerry Reid proving why the Liberals are in the basement.
ReplyDeleteGerry Reid is speaking the truth. That will be made clear in the fullness of time, say, by late 2008 or early 2009, when Danny Williams bails out.
Whichever descriptives could be used to describe WJM, "village idiot" would be one that would least apply. Why is it,Anon,you seem so upset about WJMs posts? Its not so neccessary to call him names Anon. If you understnd WJMs posts, you can see for yourself how well-researched they are. Its not even reasonable to be so harsh towards someone for having a different opinion from yours, or constructively "calling you out" on some issues.Try a little kindness, you will feel so much better.
ReplyDeleteDon't believe everything you hear (from the Premier's lips)
ReplyDeleteHe's lying. He wants to be re-elected. Are you all stunned??
wjm wrote
ReplyDeletebut Newfoundlanders would rather work in Fort McMurray than in their own province. Why,
maybe you could answer that question whay do you choose to live in Ottawa instead of Labrador.
Labrador's large Upper Churchill hydroelectric energy resource was grabbed by Quebec? Quebec would not allow the large mega wattage of hydroelectric power to be wielded across its province unless it had control. Prime Minister Pearson at the time would not even ask for permission.
ReplyDeleteThe Voisey's Bay Nickel seems to have had the same fate, but it was for two other provinces, Ontario and Manitoba. And the Oil which is exported from this province's waters go to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick for refining. It is like we are doomed by Canada's other siblings and the National Newspapers, the Globe and Mail and the National Post.
WJM please tell me what you know about both of these deals and the tragedy that resulted in this province as a result of some other province getting the fruits?
I agree with you Labrador got slaughtered there and so has the province as a whole because if the province was reaping the whole fruit from both of those deals, Labrador's highways would be paved with the best asphalt known to mankind, and no doubt we would not be shouldering a debt of $23,500 per man, woman and child in this province.
What do you really know about that WJM? It would be great if you could give us an accounting right here, because you do have my sympathy and so does the province as a whole, because it appears we cannot move forward with our resources with regard to processing in this province. It is like we are mired in a repeating time bubble. I can't explain it myself, but I think we do have to spew it out of our systems because we are all darn, good and angry about the goings on the occured in this province. No doubt some of it was because of the stupidity of our politicians and the fact we didn't have a friend in the Ottawa Government, since it defended its other charges.
Yes, shame on you anon for calling WJM the "village idiot". That kind of talk is simply just unfair. More pitty should be shown towards his diminished cranial capacity. Let's refer to him using the correct terminology, WJM is a huge a$$hole!
ReplyDelete1. Oil = equates into billions
ReplyDeleteYip, for the province, which receives most of the public revenues, and all of the royalties, from oil
debase
2.Labrador's large Upper Churchill hydroelectric energy resource was grabbed by Quebec? Quebec would not allow the large mega wattage of hydroelectric power to be wielded across its province unless it had control. Prime Minister Pearson at the time would not even ask for permission.
True
3. Why is it,Anon,you seem so upset about WJMs posts
True, because hes a Liar
4). Once again vintage Gerry Reid proving why the Liberals are in the basement.
True,because all liberails are normally liars.Its nature,they just cannot help themselves.
5.Anonymous said...
Don't believe everything you hear (from the Premier's lips)
He's lying. He wants to be re-elected. Are you all stunned??
June 20, 2007 4:57 PM
dase
6.And you argue and say that its newfoundlands fault that the upper churchill goes to Quebec .
Yip. Whose fault do you think it is?
debase
7.The hydro resource was entirely under provincial jurisdiction.
debase
8.Firstly, Sue Kelland Dyer called in and chastised the Premier, and I believe she made a valid point
True ,she normally does make sound solid points
9.The resources coming in are no more than 1 per cent of what goes out.
True
10.The premise of your question is flawed, since I don't get paid for that purpose by anyone. Your statements are libellous.
debase
11.You people in Ottawa and the rest of Canada are looking like crooks and robbers at the moment, not only by the people in Newfoundland and Labrador but others in the rest of the world who follows this story. Why keep up such a charade?
June 20, 2007 4:03 PM
truest statement on the sight
12.Answer the questions Ed and WJM that were put to you instead of using the rote pattern you are accustomed to using on this blogsite that is spinning words around the question.
True - because hes a LIAR
13.Are you saying that the Nickel Ore being exported from Voisey's Bay is not propping up the economy of Sudbury, Ontario and Thomspson, Manitoba?
Sure it is, temporarily.
debase - this proves my last stance
"So.... Ottawa should have "assisted" us export raw electricity?"
14.true - But they didnt.they didnt live up too Term29 either.
Starrigan said...
ReplyDeleteYes, shame on you anon for calling WJM the "village idiot". That kind of talk is simply just unfair. More pitty should be shown towards his diminished cranial capacity. Let's refer to him using the correct terminology, WJM is a huge a$$hole!
June 20, 2007 7:03 PM - starrigan,first of all ,Sir,and I use that term when I am talking to a "TRUE NEWFOUNDLANDER."
Pardon my typing ability.Im able but slow.Let me apologise first and formaost to you ,if I in anyway seemed that I was taking away anything that WJM deserved.
Wallace,your an A$$Hole ,buddy .
Sorry for the confusion ,starrigan.
June 20, 2007 6:01 PM - Question:
ReplyDeleteShit I have to drop the proxy for this one .
Answer the question BOOOoooOOOYYY!!!
C'mon ,my man,this has to be the best post of the day.Dont be a coward,brother .Throw Down & Answer the question for once.!!!
maybe you could answer that question whay do you choose to live in Ottawa instead of Labrador.
ReplyDeleteThe commute would be too long.
O.K WJM why don't you work in Labrador? Why do you prefer to work in Ottawa over Labrador.
ReplyDeleteLabrador's large Upper Churchill hydroelectric energy resource was grabbed by Quebec?
ReplyDeleteIs that a question?
Quebec would not allow the large mega wattage of hydroelectric power to be wielded across its province unless it had control.
No?
Prime Minister Pearson at the time would not even ask for permission.
Permission from whom to do what?
The Voisey's Bay Nickel seems to have had the same fate, but it was for two other provinces, Ontario and Manitoba.
Who authorized that?
Is that situation permanent?
And the Oil which is exported from this province's waters go to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick for refining.
It isn't much use unless it's refined. There's no law or policy stopping anyone from building a refinery in Newfoundland.
WJM please tell me what you know about both of these deals and the tragedy that resulted in this province as a result of some other province getting the fruits?
What deals?
I agree with you Labrador got slaughtered there and so has the province as a whole because if the province was reaping the whole fruit from both of those deals, Labrador's highways would be paved with the best asphalt known to mankind
The province is reaping the benefits: $200-million from Labrador mines this year. Why does Newfoundland still plead poverty, and pass the buck to Ottawa, when Labradorians ask for some of their own contribution to be spent in Labrador?
It would be great if you could give us an accounting right here
I'm not the one making outrageous claims.
WJM why don't you work in Labrador?
ReplyDeleteSomeone have a cool job offer?
Some posted a long list with comments. Let's tackle some of the better ones:
ReplyDelete1. Oil = equates into billions
Yip, for the province, which receives most of the public revenues, and all of the royalties, from oil.
Exactly.
2.Labrador's large Upper Churchill hydroelectric energy resource was grabbed by Quebec?
Quebec would not allow the large mega wattage of hydroelectric power to be wielded across its province unless it had control. Prime Minister Pearson at the time would not even ask for permission.
True
Pretty much false.
If you check Jason Churchill's paper for the 2002 Vic Young commission you can find an account of a series of discussions related to the Churchill Falls contract and the issue of a power corridor.
Several options were under consideration over time including a national power grid originally proposed in 1962(Quebec remained opposed), nationalising BRINCO, the so-called Anglo-Saxon route, a declaration of the project under s. 92 (10)c of the BNA Act(letter drafted but apparently never sent when negotiations with Hydro Q resumed), and the version of the story about an informal request to Pearson.
The only source for this latter story is Cabot Martin. While Cbhurchill accepts it, there is no other corrborating evidence for it. At the same time, Churchill - the only person to look at the issue in detail in recent times and with access to a great many documents - concludes: "It was Smallwood
who decided to either wait for a Quebec response, and/or not ask Pearson due to fears of the
consequences of his request to have the project declared in the national interest."
The issue of a power corridor arose again in the 1970s and the 1980s. SOme action was taken by the Government of Canada but for a number of reasons, nothing ever happened with the idea.
3. Why is it,Anon,you seem so upset about WJMs posts.
True, because he's a Liar.
Doubtful that WJM is a liar, but the anon who posted the comment is definitely a coward.
7.The hydro resource was entirely under provincial jurisdiction.
It is. 100% of it. Not sure what the anony-point was but the facts are the facts.
8.Firstly, Sue Kelland Dyer called in and chastised the Premier, and I believe she made a valid point.
True ,she normally does make sound solid points.
Insert the word "not" in between does and make and you have a true sentence.
9.The resources coming in are no more than 1 per cent of what goes out.
True
False, again. That one has already been dealt with using evidence.
12.Answer the questions Ed and WJM that were put to you instead of using the rote pattern you are accustomed to using on this blogsite that is spinning words around the question.
True - because hes a LIAR
False, yet again. The questions asked were answered repeatedly and in considerable detail. i accept no responsibility for starrigan's childish games or his inability to understand plain English.
As for the anonyslagger making the original comment, I can assure everyone that he or she is most definitely a coward.
Even the Great Oz couldn't fix the repeated anony-problem of cowardice.
13.Are you saying that the Nickel Ore being exported from Voisey's Bay is not propping up the economy of Sudbury, Ontario and Thomspson, Manitoba?
Sure it is, temporarily.
debase - this proves my last stance.
Not sure what the cowardly anon was driving at but the the temporarily statement is absolutely true.
"So.... Ottawa should have "assisted" us export raw electricity?"
14.true - But they didnt.they didnt live up too Term 29 either.
"Raw" electricity is a new concept and seems to be typical of the fantasy used by most of the anony-slaggers who post here.
Go back and check an authoritative source like Churchill and you can get the right answer.
WjM said
ReplyDeleteSomeone have a cool job offer?,.
IOC can't get enough people for its mining operations; mineral industry suppliers and contractors in Lab West are going begging.
I am not the one who referred to WJM as the "village idiot", but I very rarely agree with him.
ReplyDeleteI do think though that Labrador's resources were given away, instead of being utilized in this province, so that Labrador could have been provided with good infrastructure, such as highways and hospital services, and, of course, it would have helped keep the horrendous provincial debt down.
But the province's government was part and parcel of the giveaway of the resources in Labrador, and when they couldn't get a fair deal with Quebec during the negotiations process of the Upper Churchill Hydroelectricity, the deal should have been stopped when that knowledge came to light, or was the province forced into it? There are many questions to be answered on the Upper Churchill Hydroelectric Project. It was a sordid affair that saw Quebec Hydro being the beneficiary in a 72 year contract on the Upper Churchill Hydroelectric Energy Project. To think of what that could have provided for Labrador in infrastructure sickens me.
And, to think almost 40 years, later to let another resource from Labrador slip away to Sudbury, Ontario and Thompson, Manitoba, is too shocking to talk about. Are we stupid or what? And then the Oil from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador off shore waters going elsewhere to be refined puts the icing on the cake of stupidity. Those damn politicians have doomed us to purgatory, and to think nobody wants to take responsibility. Nobody wants to tell you why it had to be that way. Who was responsible for things happening that way? Why, after what happened to the Upper Churchill, did a contract get signed where we saw the Nickel ore get exported to other provinces to keep growing their economies? I want answers and nobody wants to give them to me.
We knew long before the Nickel resource left the province, some of us were crying out blue murder that it should not happen again. But the Federal Government, through Mr. Tobin threw up smoke screens by telling us, the vocal ones, don't worry there will not be one teaspoon of Nickel going out of Labrador. Somebody please tell me why things happened that way around here and why does everyone deny, deny that is what happened to our resources. When our politicians speak about the province's position in Canada, I don't hear them speak about the giveaways and how the other provinces are benefiting at Labrador's and Newfoundland's expense. Why? Are they afraid they are going to be tagged with the brand stupid if they bring it up? I don't know but I am demanding answers.
Also when Globe and Mail Columnists, such as Jeffrey Simpson writes about the province and its poor economic position, he never mentions the resources that are exported out of here, nor does he ever mention the fact there are very few high-paying Federal jobs here and no Federal Regional office or Military base situated in the province.
To Artful Dodger:
ReplyDeleteYou commented that Sue had wondered why the premier was not presenting his case in front of the senate. I don't know if he actually will, but news reports today on Newsworld and CTV Newsnet mentioned that they expect him to do just that later this week.
As for the announcement by Williams that Hebron talks were happening, that news originally came from an oil industry excutive, before the premier's speech. I guess that means Gerry thinks the oil industry is trying to help re-elect Danny Williams. Now there's a stretch.
1)Quebec would not allow the large mega wattage of hydroelectric power to be wielded across its province unless it had control. Prime Minister Pearson at the time would not even ask for permission.
ReplyDeleteTrue
Pretty much false.
debase-This is bending reality to the limit
2)Doubtful that WJM is a liar, but the anon who posted the comment is definitely a coward.
debase staments to instagate an arguement.
3)The resources coming in are no more than 1 per cent of what goes out.
False, again. That one has already been dealt with using evidence.
debase - evidence supplied by a governement that isnt recognized.
4)Not sure what the cowardly anon was driving at but the the temporarily statement is absolutely true.
debase - shows how spin doctors spin lies and more lies ,hoping that masses believe falsehoods,ie,tell a lie so many times he doesnt know when they are lieing or telling the truth .
5) But they didnt.they didnt live up too Term 29 either.
No comment here on how the federal govenement of canada lied about term29 ,so the liars in the forum dont bother to argue a fact that they cannot defend ,showing true cowardice.
6)Go back and check an authoritative source like Churchill and you can get the right answer.
Shows a complete misconceptioon of what is reality and truth ,hoping that no one would be brave enough to read it for themselves .
This is not 1940 Wallace,we are now educated by the best schools thru the western world.You and your ability to lie has not and will not stop the people from telling the truth .
If you yourself were educated you would have relised that by now .
"WJM said...
ReplyDeleteBecause we are exporting people out of the province to do those jobs that should be done at home.
Which is odd, because IOC can't get enough people for its mining operations; mineral industry suppliers and contractors in Lab West are going begging, but Newfoundlanders would rather work in Fort McMurray than in their own province. Why?
This is a complete and utter waste of time ,effort ,and human energy .
I want to tell everybody from Newfoundland not to listen to the RANTINGS of this madman.I live in Lab-West and can confirm that what he is saying is nothing but garbage.
We stand united with our fight with the fedaeral governement ,especailly over church-hill falls
June 20, 2007 8:44 PM
ReplyDeleteWJM,why can't you tell the truth like this person does .Follow this excample .
Let's leave aside the childish cowardly comments from debase, and deal with the rest.
ReplyDelete1)Quebec would not allow the large mega wattage of hydroelectric power to be wielded across its province unless it had control. Prime Minister Pearson at the time would not even ask for permission.
True
Pretty much false.
debase-This is bending reality to the limit.
Your delusions are only reality inside your own head. When evidence is presented, you offer nothing of substance to counter the argument.
That says it all.
3)The resources coming in are no more than 1 per cent of what goes out.
False, again. That one has already been dealt with using evidence.
debase - evidence supplied by a governement that isnt recognized.
Glad to know you reject the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
4)Not sure what the cowardly anon was driving at but the the temporarily statement is absolutely true.
debase - shows how spin doctors spin lies and more lies ,hoping that masses believe falsehoods,ie,tell a lie so many times he doesnt know when they are lieing or telling the truth .
That would pretty much cover the myths, fabrications and falsehoods you and others have been spreading. Say something often enough and people start to believe, even though the truth is something else.
You obviously are intimately acquainted with the concept since you like to practice it.
5) But they didnt.they didnt live up too Term 29 either.
No comment here on how the federal govenement of canada lied about term29 ,so the liars in the forum dont bother to argue a fact that they cannot defend ,showing true cowardice.
A lie would be to deliberately say something while knowing that the statement isn't true.
The term 29 racket was a disagreement about how one of the Terms of Union would apply.
Diefenbaker was wrong.
That doesn't make him a liar.
But by slagging anonymously, that would pretty much define a coward.
6)Go back and check an authoritative source like Churchill and you can get the right answer.
Shows a complete misconception of what is reality and truth ,hoping that no one would be brave enough to read it for themselves.
See the comment above on the difference between your delusions and where the rest of the universe lives.
This has been fun but since it is obviously a starrigan-like baiting session, consider that your fun has ended.
1)Your delusions are only reality inside your own head. When evidence is presented, you offer nothing of substance to counter the argument.
ReplyDeleteThat says it all.
And you have ,please,the kettle is calling me black.try leading by excample and living up to your own words liar.
2)Glad to know you reject the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I am not a federalist .canada is the thief in this story.come back to reality when your feeling better.
3)A lie would be to deliberately say something while knowing that the statement isn't true.
The term 29 racket was a disagreement about how one of the Terms of Union would apply.
Diefenbaker was wrong.
That doesn't make him a liar.
No but it makes you look like an idiot.Term29 should be read by you tonight instaed of wasting your time with me wallace.go educate yourself.
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-73-564-2885/politics_economy/nfld_confed/clip4
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/3330/constitution/1949ntu.htm
4)"See the comment above on the difference between your delusions and where the rest of the universe lives.
This has been fun but since it is obviously a starrigan-like baiting session, consider that your fun has ended."
It must be lonely when your off your meds .Thank God there is no one left in that part of canada to continue the Joke of an education that you have.It must be akward trying to make it in a world full of sane persons .
OH and if you see Myles around Wallce,ask him for some free writing classes .I can understand why you spend so much time here.your blog is so successfull you have to waste your time over here with all the rest of your federal smucks trying to learn whats going on in your province.Your so out of touch with the your own community you have to be told by a "REAL" writter,go get a life loser.
Now go get that B@%$# racist federlist Simion and Eddy ,so i can ripp then a new A-O.
Patheetic
OH My Pardon ,the last post ,that was you eddy .I cant tell you thief supporters from one another now.you all smell the same
ReplyDeleteAh well you know what they say.If it smells like S@#%$ and it looks Like S*%#@,then it must be S#@%.
Just like what spews from that thing you call a blog .Hey did I read that right .
O COMMENTS
another one in touch with his community.what a farce.
OH and I forgot,starrigan is right ,both of you are a$$holes.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteJune 20, 2007 8:44 PM
WJM,why can't you tell the truth like this person does .Follow this excample .
June 20, 2007 9:09 PM
Im still waiting for this to be answered.
Ed Hollett Do you feel satisfied with the number of federal regional jobs that have been allotted to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador?
ReplyDeleteEd Hollett Do you feel satisfied with what happened to the Upper Churchill Hydroelectric Energy Resource and Voisey Bay Nickel resource?
Ed Hollett: Do you feel that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador was treated equally within Canada?
Please send any correspondence directly to WJM at: ag737@freenet.carleton.ca
ReplyDeleteWE LOVE SUE WE LOVE SUE WE LOVE SUE WE LOVE SUE.
ReplyDeleteJust to let you federlist s%$# heads now.My posting from here will be letting up from now on.
Im sure those lieing liars ,ed,wallace,and that racist piece of federal s%@# simon will be happy to see me go.Im off to have my head re-educated by one of our Province "SOON TO BE" great leaders.
Sorry that I caused your blog so much trouble Mr Higgons.I ll be back to have a glance once in awhile ,but my posts will be in my own thoughts.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL,even the poor federalists . :)
OH and one last thing,..............if your email address gets LOGIC-BOMBED wallace ,its just me ,lol.:)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI don't have any experience in the mining field, sorry!
ReplyDeleteThis is not 1940 Wallace,we are now educated by the best schools thru the western world.You and your ability to lie has not and will not stop the people from telling the truth .
ReplyDeleteIf you yourself were educated you would have relised that by now .
I'm educated enough to know how to spell "realise", and to know that you don't put a space BEFORE a punctuation mark.
I live in Lab-West and can confirm that what he is saying is nothing but garbage.
ReplyDeleteWe stand united with our fight with the fedaeral governement ,especailly over church-hill falls
Someone who lives in Labrador West would know how to spell Churchill Falls.
What's "garbage" about what I said?
WJM,why can't you tell the truth like this person does .Follow this excample .
ReplyDeleteJune 20, 2007 9:09 PM
Im still waiting for this to be answered.
I always tell the truth. What "excample" am I supposed to follow, Greg?
Anonymous, if you are going to try and incite harassment, please leave someone else's address and phone number out of it.
ReplyDeleteMyles? You may wish to moderate that comment so that an innocent third party isn't dragged into the stupid abuse you allow to happen here.
The comment that included Wallace's address and phone number (both outdated apparently) has been deleted.
ReplyDeletePlease do not post anyone's personal contact information here folks. You have no idea what the potential for problems may be by providing the world with someone's address. Especially in this case where, according to Wally, it is an old address and some innocent person(s) live there now.
Let's all play nice. I realize Wally can be a bit of a pain in the A$$ but that's not reason to do something like this.
Patriot:
ReplyDeleteifd that's the way some people are going perhaps it's a clue that something must be done to get rid of the scurrilous anony-cowards.
They add nothing to the discussion at all and have now taken to a more aggressive form of intimidation.
it's your sandbox but surely it's obvious that some action is required beyond merely banning the word f***.
Ed Hollett Do you feel satisfied with the number of federal regional jobs that have been allotted to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador?
ReplyDeleteEd Hollett Do you feel satisfied with what happened to the Upper Churchill Hydroelectric Energy Resource and Voisey Bay Nickel resource?
Ed Hollett: Do you feel that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador was treated equally within Canada?
Some anonyposter wrote this a coupel of times:
ReplyDelete"Ed Hollett Do you feel satisfied with the number of federal regional jobs that have been allotted to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador?
Ed Hollett Do you feel satisfied with what happened to the Upper Churchill Hydroelectric Energy Resource and Voisey Bay Nickel resource?
Ed Hollett: Do you feel that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador was treated equally within Canada?"
Reveal your identity. I'll answer your questions.
pretty simple proposition.
It is the easy way out Ed. My identity should have no bearing on how you answer those questions, since the answers are pertinent to your actions on this blogsite.
ReplyDeleteI truly feel your answers would not concur with mine, nor the other 99.99999 per cent of the Newfoundland and Labrador population, who want things to change for the better right here in this province economically.
I suspect the questions are too direct and require a direct answer, that is reason you are not answering?
Well, actually, I am simply expecting you to behave with the same fundamental courtesy I am others extend by identifying yourself.
ReplyDeleteAs much as you expect an answer to your questions because the answers are supposedly pertinent to what you think my comments here are about, I consider it fundament that people know who you are.
I think it is fundamental as part of explaining your actions and comments.
"I truly feel your answers would not concur with mine, nor the other 99.99999 per cent of the Newfoundland and Labrador population, who want things to change for the better right here in this province economically."
Part of the problem right off the bat is that you are making assumptions both about my answers and about what others think.
The other false assumption you are making is that only your motives are aimed at changing things for the better.
Once you get rid of the unjustified believe in the moral superiority of whatever it is you believe, there might actually be a exchange of views and some common understanding.
The questions are not really direct, in that they are loaded with assumptions (as you made obvious with your reply).
Nonetheless, I will answer them....once you reveal your identity.
Now, be prepared. You will not get the answers you assume you are going to get. You will get the same straight answers you have received before to other questions. They likely won't accept most of your assumptions and premises but that doesn't mean they aren't being answered or answered directly.
It just means that your assumptions are wrong.
So, let's see if you can meet that simple requirement to start a meaningful exchange.
Baker to Move Budget Amendment
ReplyDeleteJune 21, 2007 VOCM
Senator George Baker will move an amendment in the Senate today to the federal government's Budget Bill. There has been an outcry that the Atlantic Accord agreements signed with this province and Nova Scotia shouldn't be subject to clawbacks under the equalization program contained in the federal budget. Baker says the amendment comes from former federal cabinet minister John Crosbie. Baker says the changes proposed in the budget are a grave injustice to this province and Nova Scotia. He says the budget provisions surrounding equalization and offshore oil and gas revenues violate existing legislation. Baker says this budget means more for this province than any other. Baker says he has the support of quite a few senators from both sides and he believes the vote on the amendment will be a close one.
Hi Ed,
ReplyDeleteYes, I do believe there is action, beyond just banning the F word required. That is why, when I see, or am aprised, of posts that threaten or as in one case, publish personal information, I delte them.
I don't agree with stopping freedom of speech no matter if someone feels the need to remain anonymous or not.
Like you said, it's my sandbox.
There are those who complain about the content of television programs and lobby to have them taken off the air. There are others who simply turn the channel if they don't wish to watch something they find offensive.
If you or anyone else doesn't like the posts on this site you have the option to change the channel.
Of course, the broadcaster is a bit different.
ReplyDeleteFor one thing, you presumably have a comments section to promote discussion. it is hard to have a discussion and a free exchange of ideas if you have the whole thing dominated (in number) by a bunch of people who do little more than hurl insults at people behind the cloak of anonymity.
telling me, even indirectly, to go somewhere else also seems to be a way of restricting the free speech you supposedly defend.
The issue also isn't as trivial as just saying a few naughty words.
Some of your anonymous correspondents have taken to making comments which would be actionable. They do it repeatedly. You make no effort to deal with it, yet you commented negatively on Lono.
If nothing else, it is hardly an inhibition of freedom of speech to expect that:
a. people identify themselves in some fashion and consistently use the same identifier; and that,
b. they refrain from personal attacks and insults let alone unsubstantiated ones.
As for your earlier editorial decision, I have to say I almost cracked up laughing that you removed one word and its variants yet still allow the most pernicious activity - the ad hominum attack - to carry on unfettered.
Mr. Hollett, you said
ReplyDelete"telling me, even indirectly, to go somewhere else also seems to be a way of restricting the free speech you supposedly defend."
I do not see how your free speech has been restricted on this blog. Now if Patriot deleted your post and banned you from posting on the blog, you would have a point. There are many discussion forums and blogs in which posters have been banned for a variety of reasons. I agree some pretty nasty remarks have been posted by certain individuals, and it is quite evident that you and WJM are a lightening rod for heated rebuttals, but I seriously doubt you or he are shrinking violets, in fact I have noticed that you can give it as well as take it.
It seems clear to me that Patriot has no intention of changing the format of this blog and I applaud him for sticking to his guns. In a perfect world, people would always carry on civil conversations but that is not how the real world works. The topics discussed here are mostly of a contentious nature and have posters lining up on opposite sides for pretty much all topics. I may not agree with all that you say, however I look forward to reading your posts in the future.
"In a perfect world, people would always carry on civil conversations but that is not how the real world works."
ReplyDeleteThere is a huge difference, dodger, between a civilized conversation, a heated exchange and the deliberate and persistent use of personal insults and smears.
All I have asked is that some effort be made to refrain the more extreme comments.
In the real world - in a variety of fora in the real world - there are all sorts of conventions and other means of holding people responsible for the comments they make.
That effort at accountability tends to diminish the sort of language that is designed to do nothing but defame and inflame.
It is not a matter of violets, shrinking or otherwise. It is a matter of deterring those who resort to what amounts to verbal thuggery so that we may continue to have sometimes heated discussion of contentious issues but keep those discussions on the issue and not the person.
Surely that is not so hard a point to grasp.
What do you have to hide?
ReplyDeleteJune 21, 2007 3:07 PM - Mr Hollett.Seeing that you wish too be civial ,I will asnswer your question. I remain anonymous for the protection of "My Identity."
Anyone ,including the owner of this Blog should be fully aware of the dangers of placing your name ,and identification on the internet.
I can assure you that not taking steps to protect yourself like some have dome here is very ,very ,dangerouse,in my expert opinoin.
Let me state that I in no way use what skills I have to hurt,intimidate,or willfully cause anybody strife or damage.
I in no way mean anybody from my home province any ill Intent.Thats just the kind of person I am .I dont know why,I just feel a kin-ship with anybody from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I know that some would say Im a "S%$@-Disturber,because I practise the skills of my trade on you ,but I apologise for that .
I would like to say that I offer my personal apolgy to you and to Mr Wallace for anything that I may have said to you in a foul way,but sometimes I like to lets "Loose" with a good RANT.
Being a fellow Newfoundlander Mr Hollett I would hope that you could understand.But,in my own defence ,sometimes getting a rise out of certain people is easy to accomplish.
I have said this to you befor Mr Higgons but thank-you for allowing me to particate in your discusions here on your Blog ,and I would like to wish each and everyone of you the best.
Bye ,Bye and God Bless.........
"keep her going starigan" lol
Ed I'm somewhat surprised to see you whine so to Myles. Why would you care is someone posts as anonymous. What they say is valid, just because a name is not associated with a comment or a question doesn't reduce it's pertinence. And what's a few nasty words, really. In one your posts recently you suggested some one was pulling something out of their orifice. You cheeky monkey. You were basically saying the same dirty thing just using different words. So maybe you should be banned? Let's have a vote, you'd be dead in the water in no time. (and take Ottawally with you)
ReplyDeleteAs Myles said, if you don't like this blog you have all the right in the world to change the channel. That's right you don't have to stay here. Exercise your right as a good blog citizen and go somewhere else. I hear there's a "Bond Papers" blog looking for people. From what I've been told there's plenty of bandwidth available over there. ( don't let the door hit you on the way out )
"I can assure you that not taking steps to protect yourself like some have dome here is very ,very ,dangerouse,in my expert opinoin."
ReplyDeleteSince we have no idea who you are, we also have no idea if you are an expert or are, as it would seem, just offering up a convenient excuse.
I think it is the latter.
So why exactly are you afraid of putting your name. Billions do it daily and nothing bad happens. What's the real reason you have chosen to hide your identity, anon?
As for starrigan you demonstrate once again you can't read and understand plain English. This is not an issue of a few naughty words. It is about the systematic program of verbal thuggery being practiced largely by you and by others. it is about the insults and ultimately about the deliberate falsehoods being spread that are designed solely to damage my reputation.
I am sure you endorse the practice since it is the only thing you have offered to the conversation. I am sure you would dismiss anyone who questions the practice since it forces you do actually apply some brain power and to be accountable for your comments and actions.
But hey, your entire pattern is designed to be unaccountable, isn't it?
Come on Ed, you love it. You probably get your kicks out of verbal abuse. You rascal.
ReplyDelete114 comments at web talk .
ReplyDelete0 comments at what papers.
who is in touch with the people of this province
Posting under a real name: 1.
ReplyDeletePosting anonymously: a whole bunch.
or maybe just a couple of people masquerading as others.
So what's your point, anon?
FREENET.CARLETON.CA ]
ReplyDeleteDomain Name: CARLETON.CA
Namespace: ICANN Country Code Top Level Domain - http://www.icann.org
TLD Info: Canada - http://www.iana.org/root-whois/ca.htm
Registry: Canadian Internet Registration Authority - http://www.cira.ca
Registrar: Internic.ca Corp. - http://www.internic.ca
Whois Server: whois.cira.ca
Name Server[from whois+dns, dns ip]: DNS1.CCS.CARLETON.CA 134.117.1.11
Name Server[from whois+dns, dns ip]: DNS2.CCS.CARLETON.CA 134.117.1.1
Name Server[whois+dns with ip] NS1.TEL-OTT.COM 142.46.197.226
Name Server[whois+dns with ip] NS2.TEL-OTT.COM 142.46.197.242
Updated Date: 18-Dec-2006
Creation Date: 11-Oct-2000
Expiration Date: 12-Jan-2008
Status: EXIST
[whois.cira.ca]
Status: EXIST
Registrar: Internic.ca Corp.
Registrar-no: 29
Registrant-no: 15188
Domaine-no: 15188
Subdomain: carleton.ca
Renewal-Date: 2008/01/12
Date-Approved: 2000/10/11
Date-Modified: 2006/12/18
Organization: Carleton University
Description: Carleton University is a degree granting academic
organization located in Ottawa, Ontario.
Admin-Name: Mia Goff
Admin-Title: .
Admin-Postal: Carleton University
CCS
Ottawa ON K1S 5B6 Canada
Admin-Phone: +1 613-520-2600x1502
Admin-Fax: +1 613-520-4448
Admin-Mailbox: mia_goff@carleton.ca
Tech-Name: Ardavan Tajbakhsh
Tech-Title: .
Tech-Postal: Carleton University
CCS
Ottawa ON K1S 5B6 Canada
Tech-Phone: +1 613-5200-2600x2510
Tech-Fax: +1 613-520-4448
Tech-Mailbox: ardavan_tajbakhsh@carleton.ca
NS1-Hostname: dns1.ccs.carleton.ca
NS1-Netaddress: 134.117.1.11
NS2-Hostname: dns2.ccs.carleton.ca
NS2-Netaddress: 134.117.1.1
NS3-Hostname: ns1.tel-ott.com
NS3-Netaddress: 142.46.197.226
NS4-Hostname: ns2.tel-ott.com
NS4-Netaddress: 142.46.197.242
NS5-Hostname:
NS5-Netaddress:
NS6-Hostname:
NS6-Netaddress:
Why is keeping your Identity to yourself so important Mr Hollett.
Well why dont you just ask your friend Mr Wallace.I believe in "the giving out of free excamples,B'ye" of why sometimes its just better to keep that door under your nose shut .
So like Canada Im not going to waste my time bothering you Mr Hollett ,Im going to bother something that is close to you and you can just be forced to sit back and watch.OH,and just because "YOU" dont know who I am ,doesnt make me some kind of anonymous idiot.
Live and learn buddy,the whole world is not like Newfoundland.I think you need to learn that lession.
I'll be gentle Myles .Im just going to cancel his gym membership and cancel his license.Something like that .Thats all .
who is in touch with the people of this province
ReplyDeleteThe people who will only post anonymously, for starters.
"Why is keeping your Identity to yourself so important Mr Hollett."
ReplyDeleteI don't keep my identity secret, so it isn't important to me.
What I find appalling ignorant are people - like you - who are cowards.
Yep.
Cowards.
You post whatever information that is supposed to be to prove whatever that is supposed to prove and yet you refuse to dintify yourself.
You skulk about and do all manner of slander and libel and yet you insist that no one can know who you are.
Wow. How truly brilliant.
Actually, stupid would be the word.
You have succeeded in giving me the e-mail addresses for two people who have nothing to do with anything here that I am aware of; one named Mia and the other Ardavan.
"I'll be gentle Myles .Im just going to cancel his gym membership and cancel his license.Something like that. Thats all."
You are making threats but the information you've given there doesn't tell anything other than give the background data on Carlton University.
One is named Mia and the other is Ardavan.
So here's the thing.
You are anonymous but you obviously aren't a idiot. Nope. You've succeeded in uttering yet one more threat that gives exactly the justification Myles would need to shut down anonymous comments.
I think that's just brilliant.
Thanks.
"one more threat that gives exactly the justification" - c'mon ed ,you dont have to be an a$$hole all your life ,c'mon over to the web page buddy and find out who I am ,lol,chicken shit!!!
ReplyDeleteOH ed,I have enough on wallace,how much did you sell out for .Or,was it the usual fee or they give you a bonus just for each name you got them .C'mon ed,do I have to get nside that mac you have .!!!!
Hi, Peter!
ReplyDeletePeter or Pius?
ReplyDeletec'mon wally ,be honest buddy ,I never started the name shit.And no its not Pius. DAMB NEWF,thats a nasty name to be calling folks,PIUS,tsk,tsk,tsk,!!!!Next thing ya know ,someones going to be shouting "Siege Heil" at Eddy ,Simon and yourself,and that wouldnt be nice would it Wally!!!!
ReplyDeleteTell me the truth Wally,if I left and we couldn't talk anymore in our little dirty ways ,you would miss me ,I know you would ,Ha Ha .!!!
Sure sounds like Pius.
ReplyDelete