Newfoundland & Labrador Shut out of Atlantic Gateway Initiative?

The more things change the more they stay the same in Newfoundland and Labrador, or more precisely, WITH Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada.

Based on a recent article in the St. John’s Telegram and from information provided by the Liberal MP from Humber-St. Barbe-Baie Verte, it appears the province may well be shut out of Billions of dollars in funding for the Atlantic Gateway project approved by Ottawa and the provinces nearly 4 years ago.

Excerpts from the St. John’s Telegram:

In October 2007, Trevor Taylor — then Newfoundland and Labrador’s minister of innovation, trade and rural development — signed an agreement with the three other Atlantic provinces and the federal government to develop the roads, railways and ports necessary to make the region a hub of international trade.

Peter MacKay, the Nova Scotia Member of Parliament and minister responsible for what was called the Atlantic Gateway, called the concept a “smarter approach.”

“Atlantic Canada has some very able people here now that are going to put their shoulder to the wheel and get the gateway rolling,” he said at the time.

“All four Atlantic provinces are working together, pulling together and moving in the same direction with the federal government.” (The italics added by Web Talk)

Three and a half years later, the gateway is rolling, with projects underway or approved, 17 in all, worth a total of $229.2 million. In New Brunswick: seven projects, $126.2 million. In Nova Scotia: six projects, $92.5 million. In Prince Edward Island: four projects, $10.5 million. In Newfoundland and Labrador: zero projects, zero dollars.

The list of projects funded through the Gateways and Board Crossings Fund, obtained Tuesday from Transport Canada through a request made by members of the standing committee on transportation, infrastructure and communities, lists the individual projects and their costs.

That includes $87.5 million to twin 55 kilometres of Route 1 in New Brunswick, $36.5 million to upgrade and expand cargo handling services at the Port of Halifax, and $4.5 million for Route 1 realignment and intersection installation on Prince Edward Island.

Gerry Byrne, the Liberal MP for Humber-St. Barbe-Baie Verte and a member of the standing committee, called Newfoundland and Labrador’s exclusion disturbing. He said he obtained the list when he and two other Liberal members of the committee requested an update on the strategy for the fund — which he said is about $800 million out of $2.1 billion in a broader fund that includes Ontario and Quebec.
…
The list of projects include airport work in Nova Scotia, P.E.I. and New Brunswick, announced late last month while the St. John’s Airport Authority’s 2009 request for help funding a new $25-million instrumentation landing system, which would help more planes land in foggy weather, has been unfulfilled.

Fraser Edison, chairman of the airport authority’s board of directors, said the economic benefits of getting the work done at the St. John’s airport should be clear, but they’ve been stymied for funding.

“As of today, nothing. No word whatsoever on it,” he said. “This would increase five per cent in the accessibility of the airport, and five per cent represents 70,000 passengers and 700 flights (a year).”

Likewise, the lack of roadwork approved is a sore spot for the Newfoundland and Labrador Road Builders’ Association, too.

Austin Sheppard, the association's business manager, says the province’s exclusion “leaves a sour taste.”

“I am heading off to meetings in Moncton in early May for the Atlantic Road Builders, and that’s one topic that always comes up for discussion,” he said.
The briefing notes from the deputy minister mentions federal commitments to Marine Atlantic, about $521 million, and Byrne says it seems as though the federal government considers that Newfoundland’s share of the Gateway fund.

“If that’s the case, that’s completely unacceptable. We have a constitutional right to that ferry service. The Atlantic Gateway funding is a discretionary program to build up Atlantic Canadian export capacity through improved transportation mechanisms,” he said.

“I think within the department they are actually building in the Marine Atlantic funding as Newfoundland and Labrador’s share. That’s not acceptable. … That ferry service is not a discretionary service of the government of Canada.”
…
Gerry Byrne: “Is it really the Maritime Gateway? Or is it the Atlantic Gateway?”

A Christmas Miracle Comes Early

It may not be Christmas quite yet but it seems a seasonal miracle has happened none the less thanks to a recent article in the National Post.

Who would have thought a national paper would actually side with Newfoundland and Labrador on any issue, let alone in its struggles with Quebec.

Enjoy the Post article, but don't expect to read too many like this one in the national papers. Remember, as far as most Canadians are concerned the Country's border ends at Halifax.

John Ivison: Quebec should be embarrassed by powerline protectionism

My office phone rang the other day and the conversation went something like this: “Hello, it’s Danny Williams here,” said a familiar voice.

“Er…hello, Premier.”

“I’m not very happy about today’s column, where you compared me to Robert Mugabe….”

“Er…no, Premier.”

I’d written about allegations of intimidation during the last election in the Newfoundland riding of Avalon, where it was suggested Mr. Williams’ Anyone But Conservative campaign had led to tactics more familiar to political campaigns in Zimbabwe than Canada .

According to Mr. Williams, the allegations are untrue “on my father’s grave”. I tried to substantiate the rumours during the campaign, with no success. So until someone comes forward with some proof, we must take the Premier at his word.

In any event, it proved an interesting, if tangential, aside to the real issue I’d been writing about – namely, Newfoundland and Labrador’s attempted purchase of the federal government’s stake in the Hibernia oil field and Ottawa’s potential investment in a sub-sea electricity transmission line from a putative Lower Churchill hydro-electric project to markets in the south and west.

The province’s electricity corporation, Nalcor, has applied for $375-million in federal funding to help pay for the multi-billion underwater transmission line.

The main lesson that readers should take away from this story is what a sorry admission of failure in Canadian federalism it represents. The obvious route to markets in Ontario and the U.S. for Lower Churchill’s power is overland through Quebec .

Hydro-Québec claims that upgrades of up to $3-billion would be required to transport power through the province. Quebec’s energy board, the Régie de l’énergie, has sided with its own power corporation against Nalcor, even though it was prepared to pay for “reasonable upgrades” and up to $200-million in annual tariffs. Needless to say, Mr. Williams unleashed a broadside when the decision was announced in May, protesting Quebec ’s “arrogance and discriminatory business practises”.

You won’t read this in this column very often, but Danny Williams has a point. The Régie decision is an insult to add to the considerable injury of the existing, long-term Churchill Falls contract, under which Newfoundland and Labrador is forced to sell power for a quarter of a cent per kilowatt hour and then watch Hydro-Québec resell it for up to 36 times that price.

Both situations are a disgrace but only one is within the federal government’s purview to change.

The National Energy Board, an independent regulatory body created by Ottawa , has jurisdiction over designated inter-provincial power lines by determination of the federal cabinet. No such lines have been designated, leaving the field to provincial regulators. But a government that genuinely believed in making the federation work more effectively, not to mention saving Canadian taxpayers billions of dollars, would demand that Quebec open up its transmission lines.

Contrast this mess to the situation in Europe where the much-maligned European Union has stepped in to remove barriers to cross-border exchanges in electricity. New regulations mean transmission system operators are obliged to take new generation and compensation is paid by the operators of the national transmission systems from which cross-border flows originate.

If 27 sovereign states can reach agreement on a system that forgoes protectionism and monopolistic market dominance, in exchange for more competition and lower consumer prices, why can’t Canada ? Quebecers should be embarrassed.

John Ivason - National Post

Williams Sets Record Straight at the National Post

As soon as the news hit the wires that the federal government had settled a NAFTA challenge from Abitib-Bowater over the expropriation of the assets in Newfoundland and Labrador pundits for the so called "national papers" coudn't wait to take another shot at NL and Danny Williams (or as they often refer to him, Danny Chavez, Village Idiot, or some other less than flattering term).

Today Premier Williams decided to set the record straight at the National Post. Here is what he had to say:

Danny Williams, Special to the National Post · Friday, Aug. 27, 2010

I am disappointed, yet not surprised, by the nasty attacks on me in the National Post ( "From Newfoundland, another tantrum," editorial; and "The Cuckoo of Corner Brook," by Peter Foster; both of Aug. 26). I certainly can take the criticism. Where I draw the line is at mean-spirited insinuations and inaccuracies about our province and its people.

In regard to the recent financial settlement between the Canadian government and Abitibi Inc., which resolved the company's NAFTA complaint, let me point out that Abitibi operated in our province for 100 years. After reaping untold millions in profits and also providing substantial employment for our hard working people, the company closed two mills, threw hundreds out of work, and walked away without even paying the severance these people were owed.

There is no doubt that the pulp-and-paper industry is facing difficult times globally. However, Abitibi broke its covenant with our government under the original terms of its operations in the province. We could not simply allow it to desert the workers while keeping rights to our timber, hydro and lands; valuable natural assets that were entrusted to this company based on certain terms and conditions. Our expropriation of those natural resources was the right thing to do for our people.

Additionally, I am compelled to respond to the following inaccuracies:

- From Peter Foster's Financial Post column: "[Williams] appeared to pull off a coup when the owners of Hebron-Ben Nevis offshore prospect ... returned [with] an agreement that included provincial participation and a 'super royalty' that kicked in if prices remained high...When oil price hit $147 a barrel in 2008, Williams looked like a hero. The oil price is now less than half of that."

Fact: Our super royalty kicks in when prices exceed $50 a barrel. Still seems pretty lucrative to me, despite Mr. Foster's further assertion that this was a "wealth destroying" game I had played.

- From the National Post's editorial: "The Premier's demands for super royalties from oil companies caused them to scale back development of the Hibernia South and Hebron offshore fields, which, in turn, caused the federal taxpayers to indirectly subsidize Newfoundland's budget for lost revenues."

Fact: What kind of logic does one use to say the federal government compensated us for projects that didn't even yet exist? Secondly, the paper fails to admit that because of our government's strong stance and ultimate success in these negotiations, both of these projects are proceeding as originally planned. These two projects alone will generate billions of dollars of revenue for Canada and all Canadians.

- From Peter Foster's Financial Post column of: "[Williams'] attempts to force oil companies to do expensive but unspecified R&Din the province led to a further request for NAFTA arbitration."

Fact: The referenced action was in fact taken by the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB). This is a joint federal/provincial board that operates at arm's length. The action was not taken by me or our government, but it certainly had our support.

- From the National Post's editorial, referring to the EU seal ban: "Ottawa had to play hardball with the EU to keep the meat, skins and byproducts flowing."

Fact: Despite best efforts, the EU ban actually proceeded -- though court action by the Inuit people of Canada has temporarily paused the ban, which we hope will result in a rethinking of the issue by the EU. In any case, I think all Canadians would be proud that our government defends our interests against other countries.

I will never apologize for fighting to protect our natural resources and for getting fair benefits for the people who own them, even if that means taking on big corporations.

Let me close by saying this: Upon completion of Newfoundland and Labrador's current oil and mineral projects, the result in net revenues after expenses will be in excess of $225-billion for Canada. Criticize when you must, but it is time for the Post to start recognizing the contribution made by our province to this country. I am heartened that ordinary Canadians are much more inclusive and generous of spirit, and acknowledge the contribution not just of Newfoundland and Labrador to the Canadian Federation, but indeed of all people, provinces and territories.

- Danny Williams is Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Ottawa Settles Abitibi NAFTA Challenge of NL Asset Expropriation

When Abitibi-Bowater closed its paper mill in Grand Falls-Windsor, Newfoundland and Labrador, in 2008 the provincial legislature immediately enacted legislation to expropriate the company’s assets in the province.

The move was made in an effort to ensure that Abitibi-Bowater did not retain control of land, timber, water and hydro generation rights it had been provided with under a 100 year old agreement that allowed the company to supply its logging and paper making activities in the province.

The provincial government, under the leadership of Premier Danny Williams, as well as many citizens, viewed the move as a necessary one to ensure that Abitibi-Bowater could not simply close its doors, throwing hundreds out of work, while continuing to tie up valuable resources that might be of use to other industries, or to use its power generation facilities to sell power in direct competition with the provincially owned utility.

At the time of expropriation the provincial government said it would pay Abitibi-Bowater fair market value for its buildings and infrastructure but not for the resource rights, which government maintained were directly to the mill staying open. The province said it would assess the environmental impacts left behind by the company and reduce any payment by the amount required to perform cleanup activities.

Although Abitibi-Bowater is often thought of as a Canadian company, with its corporate headquarters in Montreal, the company is in fact incorporated in Delaware.

Almost immediately Abitibi-Bowater launched a NAFTA challenge, essentially saying the Province had no right under the North American Free Trade Agreement to expropriate the property of a foreign owned corporation and seeking $500 million in compensation.

While the expropriation was conducted by a provincial government, Canadian provinces are not signatories to the NAFTA agreement, meaning the challenge landed squarely in the federal government’s lap.

Today, after nearly 2 years, the federal government has reached a settlement with the company valued at $130 million which is to be paid out after the company’s restructuring activities are complete and it emerges from bankruptcy protection.

At this point there has been no formal comment from the Newfoundland and Labrador government beyond a short statement saying, “we are pleased the matter is settled”.

It isn’t known at this point whether or not the province will help foot the bill but it has no obligation to do so since NAFTA is a federal agreement. Any payment from the province is unlikely however in light of the deep divisions between the Provincial Premier and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

EU Bans Seals, Ottawa Sits on Fence

In the wake of a vote in the European Parliament the government of Canada has once again proven itself a champion at political doublespeak and dereliction of its duty to Canadian citizens.

This morning the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly in favor of a ban on seal products, a move that has branded Canada internationally as being inhumane to the animals, will see many fishermen suffer financial hardship and may ultimately lead to the further decline or all out extinction of already threatened fish stocks in the region.

In response the Canadian government said it plans to challenge the EU ban at the World Trade Council (WTO). Unfortunately, the government of Canada, while talking tough at home, still plans to move forward on detailed Free Trade negotiations with the European Union.

Starting tomorrow Canadian representatives will be in Prague to begin detailed Free Trade talks with the EU and it has already been decided by the Canadian government that those talks will not include any discussion of the EU ban or its implications for Eastern Canada.

It’s clear from the position being taken by the government of Canada that they have no intention of doing anything beyond paying lip service to the demise of the an industry and a potential death blow to endangered fish stocks should predatory seal populations be allowed to increase unchecked.

By blustering and talking tough at home about a WTO challenge Ottawa hopes to silence those directly impacted by the unfair actions taken in the EU, actions spurred on by misleading anti-sealing propaganda, but on the international stage nothing has changed.

The government of Canada still plans to move forward with Free Trade talks and has no intention of actually standing up to protect Canadians who will not only see an important part of their annual income wiped out in the short term but may well lose their livelihoods completely if increased seal predation causes a further decline in commercial fish stocks.

40 of 100 Endangered Caribou Shot, No End to Hunt in Sight

Over the past several days approximately 45 Quebec Innu hunters have been in Labrador hunting caribou from the endangered Joir River herd. Before the hunt began the herd was estimated at a mere 100 remaining animals. Since entering the area wildlife officials estimate the hunters have killed 40 of those animals and are continuing in their hunt.

The Newfoundland and Labrador government has complained to the Quebec government about a group of Quebec hunters that is apparently killing caribou that belong to a threatened herd in southern Labrador.

The Joir River caribou are protected under both the Provincial Endangered Species Act and the Federal Species at Risk Act.

Conservation officials say the group is using high-powered rifles while firing from their snowmobiles.

Officials have been watching the killing from a helicopter but their attempts to land and end the slaughter have been met with threatening actions by the hunters.

To date neither Quebec, the home Province of the hunters who hail from the Romaine, St. Augustine and Natasquan bands, nor the Federal government has made any move to assist in protecting the animals or putting an end to this illegal hunt slaughter of the last remaining Joir River caribou.

Newfoundland and Labrador Minister Kathy Dunderdale says the killings are "senseless and unnecessary," considering that hunting is permitted of the much larger George River caribou herd in the same region.

"If this killing continues, we run the risk of losing the entire herd.”

"The Quebec Innu are fully aware of the regulations and why they are required, and this was reiterated directly to the hunting party by our officers," Dunderdale added.

"Our requests that they respect provincial and federal laws ... are being ignored."

Based on the lack of response by authorities it appears Newfoundland and Labrador’s requests are not only being ignored by the Innu hunters but by the Federal and Quebec governments as well.

Sealing the Fate of the Atlantic Seal Harvest

The following appeared in yesterday's Chronicle Herald and presents a clear case for why the anti-sealing movement and the planned EU ban on seal products is so ludicrous.

Unfortunately none of that matters. Regardless of what the article says about the federal government's position, because of a lack of any real action on their part, the anti-sealing movement is succeeding in its misguided quest. An EU ban will soon be going ahead.

Seals, science, sentimentality and 'brutality'
Chronicle Herald (Halifax)
By CHARLES W. MOORE
Thu. Mar 26 - 6:18 AM

The mock baton attack on a stuffed seal during an anti-sealing protest in Halifax on March 14 by a Metro Transit bus driver was a bit bizarre, and not professional behaviour for someone in his position while on duty, but I can empathize that the relentless and obnoxious stridency of anti-sealing activists is provocative incitement to extraordinary expressions of frustration.

I think many Atlantic Canadians, upon hearing of this incident, might join me in pumping a fist in the air with the sentiment, "Yes!"

As for demands that the man be charged by police for expressing his opinion, get a grip! He didn’t hurt anyone, not even the stuffed seal, damage anyone’s property, and in the past, anti-sealing groups themselves have staged much more graphic mock seal clubbings, complete with fake blood, in attempting to dramatize their point.

I was pleased to learn that the federal government thumbed its nose at anti-sealing factions, and a European Parliament committee recently voting to recommend a bill that would ban imports of seal products to the European Union, with Fisheries Minister Gail Shea last Friday increasing the allowable harvest quota for this year’s East Coast hunt by 55,000 to 338,200 seals, from last year’s 283,200, based not on emotionalism, but rather "the advice of scientists to ensure the seal population is maintained."

Sentimentality, in the form of sappy animal rights ideology, is all the anti-seal hunting movement and money machine are based on, with no scientific fact or conservation reality supporting their contentions that seals are either endangered or treated less humanely than livestock killed in slaughterhouses to stock supermarket shelves.

As the European Commission’s own ambassador to Canada, Dorian Prince, observed during an official visit to New Brunswick last year: "Most people in Europe live in urban centres far removed from hunting, whether in Newfoundland and Labrador, Russia, Greenland or Finland ... As we get further removed from the realities of agriculture and hunting and so on, we get more sentimental."

In the rational world, at least two compelling arguments support seal hunting in Atlantic Canada:

1) Seals are an abundant, valuable, and renewable resource in a fishery beleaguered by declining stocks of many traditional catch species.

When whitecoat seal hunting was terminated 22 years ago, there were an estimated two million seals off Canada’s east coast. Today, the federal Fisheries Department estimates those harp, grey and hooded seal herds number about 6.4 million animals.

2) Abundance of seals is not coincidental to stock declines of other species, and the seal population must be diminished if there is to be any hope of saving some currently threatened fish species.

The marine ecological balance is indisputably out of whack, but allowing one species whose natural predators (eg: sharks) no longer exist in numbers sufficient to sustain a healthy balance to proliferate unchecked is not going to improve things.

Aside from sentimental idiocy fostered by the cuteness of whitecoat seal pups (which, as noted, haven’t been hunted in Canada since 1987), there is no rational reason not to hunt seals, and bringing the seal population down from its current record levels is ecologically beneficial. Besides predation of vulnerable and valuable fish stocks, seals also damage fishing gear and are an incubator for worms that infest other species.

Of course, none of these logical conclusions will ever convince the fanatical animal rights zealots of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the Humane Society of the United States and the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) who routinely misrepresent facts, disseminate half-truths, use imagery calculated to press emotional buttons, and outright lies to gull well-meaning but ill-informed folks into their web of deceit and ideological extremism, diverting energy, attention and resources away from legitimate ecological and conservation issues toward what is essentially an animal rights hobby-horse and powerful lever for prying money out of the pockets of well-meaning but ill-informed urbanites.

According to Ottawa, sealing is an important source of employment for about 12,000 Canadians, and while fashion is of course one important market for seal products, just as it is for leather goods made from cowhide, seal meat is also a valuable source of food protein, and one of the richest and most bio-available sources of marine Omega-3 fatty acids for nutritional supplementation.

Seal oil supplements are 20 to 25 per cent richer in Omega-3 polyunsaturates, including docosapentaenoicacid (DPA), which is minimal to non-existent in fish oils.

Swiss psychologist Carl Gustav Jung once observed that "Sentimentality is a superstructure covering brutality."

"Brutality" is a term the anti-sealing crowd like to fling at hunters, but arguably real brutality characterizes those who would sacrifice the livelihoods and well-being of 12,000 sealers, their families and communities, by banning the harvest of a renewable resource currently experiencing a population explosion to the tune of 12 per cent annually.

Ottawa Sacrifices Atlantic Canada for EU Trade Relations

Canada is the European Union’s 11th most important trade partner.

The value of EU exports to Canada rose to nearly $42 Billion dollars in 2007. A roughly equivilent amount of Canadian exports entered the EU during the same period.

Value-added products such as machinery, transport equipment and chemicals made up 32% of the EU's imports from Canada. An additional 17.6 % of bilateral trade consisted of agricultural or energy-related products, as well, trade in services, particularly travel and transportation, is a growing area in the trade relationship.

Investment is also a particularly strong feature, with Canada as the third largest investor in the EU.

In 1976, Canada and the EU signed the first ever Framework Agreement for Commercial and Economic Cooperation between the EU and an industrialized country. The 1990 Transatlantic Declaration built on this agreement.

The EU and Canada meet in annual EU-Canada summits.

In addition, senior European Commission and Canadian Federal Government officials meet once a year in the Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC) to review the full range of issues relating to EU-Canada economic and trade relations.

The EU and Canada have signed a number of bilateral agreements designed to facilitate closer trade. These include agreements on cooperation between EU and Canadian customs administrators (1997), to combat fraud and to facilitate trade, and a Veterinary Agreement (1999) aiming to improve bilateral trade in live animals and animal products. A Wine and Spirits Agreement was signed in 2003.

Canada has recently expressed interest in a wider FTA (Free Trade Agreement) type agreement with the EU, and at their Summit in June 2007 the parties agreed to undertake a Joint Study to examine the existing barriers - especially non-tariff barriers - to the flow of goods, services and capital between the EU and Canada, and to estimate the potential benefits of removing such barriers.

At their Summit on 17th October, the EU and Canada agreed to "work together to define the scope of a deepened economic agreement and to establish the critical points for its successful conclusion".

During all of this the EU has continued to allow fishing vessels from its member nations to sail across the Atlantic in order to commercially harvest threatened fish stocks on the fringes of Canada’s 200 mile limit. They’ve done this while ensuring that harmful trade tariffs imposed against Atlantic Canadian shrimp imports to the EU remain in place.

On Monday, March 02, 2009, the European Union voted in favor of a complete ban on all humanely and harvest seal products from a fully sustainable Canadian seal harvest, a move that is almost sure to kill the industry and severely impact on low income families in rural Atlantic Canada.

The federal government of Canada, including Fisheries Minister Gail Shea, has since side stepped any questions put to them about imposing trade sanctions against the EU over their actions.

In the wake of this recent action by the EU, new trade talks between the EU and Canada are still slated to proceed as planned.

Newfoundland and Labrador - Canada's Forgotten Province

In what can only be described as a stroke of magnificent luck, earlier this week I found myself to be in possession of a very rare and cherished commodity, some free time.

This wonderful thing doesn’t come my way very often and after basking in its glow for a reasonable, yet limited, amount of time I found myself pacing the carpet and wondering what I to do with myself.

It was at that precise moment that my darting eyes fell upon a crumpled copy of a report written by the Leslie Harris Centre of Regional Policy that had been resting on the bookshelf for quite some time.

In a moment of weakness and desperation I decided to dust it off and give it a good read.

I don’t know whether that was a good idea or not.

I recall initially reading the report quite some time ago, and may have even commented on its contents at the time, but on re-reading it my long standing concerns about Newfoundland and Labrador’s position in Canada came flooding back like a tidal wave.

What had moments ago been a sea tranquility in my modest living room suddenly turned into an angry ocean roar between my ears. My blood pressure threatened to explode a very large vein in the middle of my forehead as my hand once again turned page after page.

Not to worry dear reader, it may not be a comfortable medical situation but it’s one that I’ve been all too used to experiencing over my years of doing what I do.

Never the less, here is the essence of what I read and what once again raised my Newfoundland temper.

The study, which was undertaken by the Harris Centre, covers the time period from 1981 to 2005 and as the final report clearly points out, when it comes to successive governments in Ottawa, regardless of their political stripe, their direction is always one of moving away from maintaining any presence in Newfoundland and Labrador and leaving Canada’s tenth province to sink or swim on its own.

The report clearly shows what so many in the province have said for a long time.

Where it differs from most of the coffee shop or kitchen table chatter is in clearly referencing the official numbers and statistics that prove the point.

An example of Ottawa’s abandonment of Newfoundland and Labrador can be found in the number of military personnel stationed in the province.

The report shows that even while supplying Canada with about 8% of its military personnel and roughly an equivilent percentage of its Afghan casualties, when it comes to maintaining a presence in Newfoundland and Labrador the numbers are far different.

The report states, “In 2005 there were approximately 86,000 military personnel in the Canadian forces (regular and reserve)…Surely strategic considerations should dominate...locational decisions. However consider…it (Newfoundland and Labrador) is the most easterly part of Canada; it has 17,500 kilometres of coastline; and it is adjacent to the North Atlantic Ocean and the huge area of associated waters that fall within the 200-mile limit. Moreover, its land mass is approximately three times larger than the three Maritime provinces combined. It has an apparent abundance of land that could be used for military training and exercises and ice-free ports on the south coast; in fact, Argentia was used as a major American naval base during World War II and several decades thereafter…”

“…since 1981 the number of (military) personnel has never exceeded 2,500…As of 2005, there were only approximately 1,400... Of those 1,400, the majority, approximately 900, were reservists. Thus, in 2005 only 500 regular military were stationed in the province. That is only 0.8% of Canada’s 62,000 regular forces.

The picture doesn’t get any better when you look at the federal presence on the civilian side of the equation either.

According to the Harris Centre report, “…there were fewer people employed by the federal government in 2005 than in 1981. The difference between the two is almost 25%. Over the same time, there was also a decline in federal government employment throughout Canada but that decline was 5%, a much smaller percentage reduction…”

The report says that between the years 1993 and 1999 federal employment in Newfoundland and Labrador fell by 30%. Recall that this reduction was undertaken at the same time that the disastrous effects of the federal cod moratorium were also in full swing and the provincial unemployment rate was at 20%.

“Since 1999 there has been no significant recovery in federal employment…However across the Country federal government employment has been increasing…Between 2000 and 2005, total federal government employment in the Country increased by 10%...” the report contends.

One of the key indicators of the federal government’s lack of interest in all things Newfoundland and Labrador can also be seen in the limited presence of senior level employees in the province, in other words employees with the power to make decisions and directly influence government policy on the national level.

The report found that the number of executive positions in the province was almost the same as the number found in Prince Edward Island even though Newfoundland and Labrador has four times the population. On the other side of that equation, Nova Scotia, with just twice the population of Newfoundland and Labrador has four times the number of senior federal staff.

The report contends that these numbers are the result of a federal mindset that sees the entire Atlantic region as a single entity and does not take into account the differing needs of each of the 4 provinces.

Overall, the number of senior positions in Newfoundland and Labrador make up only 1% of the overall number and that figure has been decreasing since ever since 1997.

As sad as these figures are, I’m sure they come as no surprise to anyone living in Newfoundland and Labrador.

One the most unfortunate things about the contents of the Harris report is the fact that since it was written very little has changed for the better. In fact most people will tell you that the number of federal employees in the province has only gotten worse in the intervening years.

Another very unfortunate occurrence, this one on a much more personal level, is that my eye even fell upon this particular document during such a rare period of tranquility in an otherwise hectic week.

Oh well, as they say, neither the good times nor the bad last forever, but the bad ones sure as hell feel like they do.

Are You on One of Big Brother's Lists?

The Ottawa Citizen is reporting today that several people of the Jewish faith are very concerned and perplexed at receiving an unexpected greeting card from the Prime Minister’s office.

According to the Citizen, when Michelle Kofman found a Rosh Hashanah greeting card from Prime Minister Stephen Harper in her mailbox last month, she was left with one puzzling question: How does he know I'm Jewish?

Ms. Kofman was one of several Jewish people who have expressed discomfort with the colourful greeting card sent out by the Prime Minister's Office. She is wondering how she got on the prime minister's mailing list and found it unsettling that the address line of the card included her middle name.

"The only time I use my full name is for government stuff -- social insurance number, driver's licence, passport," she said.

But Ms. Kofman said she is not a member of any Jewish organizations and, to her knowledge, isn't listed in any directories catering to the Jewish community.

"I don't belong to a synagogue and I don't give to Israel," said Ms. Kofman, who notes she is not a Conservative party supporter.

Josh Keshen, who also lives in Thornhill, said he was surprised by the card, addressed to his entire family.

"At first I was a little shocked," said Mr. Keshen, who works in the insurance industry. "It seemed very odd. How did they know my whole family is Jewish?"

He also doesn't think he is listed in any directories.

The same Rosh Hashanah greeting sent to Thornhill also went to at least one recipient in the riding of Winnipeg South Centre. She said it was possible she was listed in a Jewish directory at one time, but she wasn't certain.

"I didn't live through the Second World War, but I've read enough and heard enough to know that the thought of a list of Jewish people makes people cringe", said the Winnipeg recipient.

Though an unamed source denied that the PMO makes use of official government documents for such purposes, the cards have people wondering what information source Stephen Harper’s office is using to uncover such personal and detailed information about Canadian citizens. It also begs the question of who else might be on some as yet unknown list and for what purpose their name could be kept on file.

I believe it was Pastor Martin Niemoller who said of Germany’s government during the war years:

“First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew."

"Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist."

"Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist."

"Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.”