Don't Fire Erin O'Toole

 

Dear Conservative Party, please don't fire Erin O'Toole as your leader. 

Truth is, the election did not go as well as possible for the Conservatives, but it didn't go well for the Liberals, NDP or Greens. About the only party it went well for was People's Party of Canada - albeit with no seats to show given our outdated first past the post system of electing governments. That's the hard core truth. It was more of a statement to the old guard, the back room boys, the establishment. The message went something like this: "we no longer trust any of you.

If the Conservative Party wants to fire some folks, the very first person that should be fired is the one who told O'Toole to constantly hold his hands in a prayer position during the English language debate. Each time O'Toole brought his hands in this position it was as if he was pleading, or even praying, or simply being patronizing. In my humble opinion, the body language O'Toole used (which no doubt he was trained to use or failed to listen to advice not to use) throughout the debate made him look, well, weak. Wishy-washy. Somewhat disingenuous. This is where the house cleaning needs to start. 

Secondly, the campaign strategists ought to be fired. The failure to secure well-known and popular candidates in the Toronto area was disastrous. No disrespect intended, but people in Toronto and area seem to want candidates of national, or at least provincial prominence. A strong Toronto caucus they are sure would not be swept away for the regional interests of Quebec, the West or even the Atlantic provinces. The Liberals are famous for this recruiting. People like Ken Dryden or even most recently Adam van Koeverden. It's no secret to the rest of the country that Ontario, and especially Toronto, see themselves as the centre of the universe within Canada - they want representative that fulfil their egos accordingly. 

Thirdly, fire the strategists who believe campaigning as Liberals is better than campaigning as Conservatives. When Conservatives campaign as Liberals the electorate vote in the real Liberals every time - even if they are getting wiser and not giving them majorities. Conservative strategists were given the mother load of ammunition to use against Trudeau while still being able to represent their base faithfully. For example, Trudeau's father (the recent Trudeau junior was selected as Liberal leader and PM) helped craft and institutionalize the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which championed the rights of the individual over those of the the majority. It has become a part of who we are. The covid panic has helped throw those rights on the ash heap of history until the Supreme Court of Canada rules on them. What an opportunity the Conservatives had to take the mantle of "Defenders of the Charter". The Liberals, especially the "Trudeau Liberals", would be without their moral high ground. That would then be the Conservatives high ground - for a long time. 

Speaking of the Supreme Court, why did strategists not go after Trudeau in the debate with the following question: " Given the federal government has immediate access to the Supreme Court for constitutional references, why didn't the Liberals request a reference by the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of coerced vaccinations and "vaccine passports" before they endorsed and attacked people for not using them?" In order to gain the high ground you have to trap your enemy in the high questions. It paints them. It stains them. The perception lasts. In politics perception is reality. 

The sad truth for the Conservative Party is it is not thinking and acting like a machine with a purpose. It is not capturing the high ground, or setting the ground for battle, because it seems frozen in fear that it might somehow alienate this group or that. You should not be arrogant about your beliefs, but you can be firm in them - and people respect that more than wishy-washy pandering. People become sickened by this type of "tell them anything" approach, which is why Trudeau has had two consecutive minorities. He lied the first time around about changing the first past-the-post system, amongst other things, and now people view him as wishy-washy too. However, he is cutting big cheques to a lot of groups, as we saw just before the election, and those groups want to see the cash continuing to flow. They aren't with Trudeau on any high ground, and the Conservatives failed to grab any high ground, so there was no need to change the status quo - and they didn't. 

Looking ahead. Firstly, the Conservative Party needs to wrap its arms around Erin O'Toole and his family and give them the love. Rarely, if ever, have I witnessed a leader so genuinely disappointed in an election result as O'Toole displayed in his concession speech. Secondly, the party needs to realize that the Liberals have a lame duck leader now, and that in order to get rid of him the Liberals will have to firstly convince him to resign and hold a leadership race. That can be very destabilizing in a short period like the life of a minority government. It also opens up all kinds of potential negativity - internal or externally injected... Secondly, the Green Party will also be having a divisive leadership race, and to say their leader will go quietly into the night would be politically foolish. The NDP may also have some leadership challenges of their own. The Peoples Party, well, that appears to be completely reliant on Mr. Bernier's leadership. If the Conservative Party can restrain itself from an undisciplined assault on its leader, rally around the flag, and strategically prepare, it will be the party of order in the midst of instability.

Finally, Mr. O'Toole must change some things as well. He must drop the vision of the Conservative party. To say the Conservative Party was no longer the "party of your father" was foolish in the extreme. It was a direct insult to the majority of its base. Whoever gave him that line should be fired immediately, and sent directly to the Liberals. If it was him, well, change it or apply the same to himself. To gauge the damage of this tact simply refer back to the comments made by former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall on election night, wherein he not so subtly let the federal Conservative Party know that leaving traditional conservative values would more likely than not result in the base bolting to a new "Reform Party - like" scenario, and the subsequent death of the federal party - aka 2 seats after Mr. Mulroney's departure. I believe this analysis is spot on, and needs to be deeply understood by those that think they are smarter than every one else within the Party.

Trudeau is Inciting Hatred

Perhaps you were looking forward to the debate last week. Likely you were looking to measure the leaders up against each other during the debate. If you were like me, the one thing you were not expecting is for the Prime Minister of Canada to follow up the debate with vicious public attacks against identifiable groups in Canada. Canadian citizens. Your fellow Canadians. 

Trudeau, in a voice coated in contempt, publicly incited hatred, and potentially violence, against Canadians who oppose his agenda on vaccines, gun control, and abortion. He flippantly referred to the large crowds that haunted him through the campaign as "anti-vaxxer hoards". He has no basis for this characterization. First of all they aren't hoards. They're protesters and they are protesting him. A hoard will have torches and burn him at the stake. Obviously that was not their intent, so his use of the term "hoard" was clearly an attempt to smear these protesters and marginalize their criticisms of him and his government. As though they were somehow beneath him - not an unusual attitude with him. 

Secondly, what is an "anti-vaxxer"? Is that a person who won't get a covid shot, or is that a person who does not believe in any vaccinations? Or does that really matter. You see, in Canada we as citizens have the right to criticize and protest, yeas even in front of hospitals, as long as they are peaceful. That is guaranteed in the Charter his father helped create. Oh, and on that front, his father also helped to create Canada's hate speech laws.

In 1965, then Liberal Prime Minister Pearson, struck a special committee of seven individuals known as the Special Committee on Hate and Propaganda in Canada, commonly called the "Cohen Committee" after its chairman. Pierre Trudeau, then a professor at the University of Montreal, was a member of the committee. In 1966, the Committee filed its report to Parliament, which recommended legislation to combat hate speech. As a result, three new offences were added to the Canadian Criminal Code: advocating genocide; publicly inciting hatred in a way likely to lead to a breach of the peace; and willfully promoting hatred.

Fast forward to 2021, and Pierre Trudeau's son is directing hatred, ridicule and contempt toward Canadians who oppose his policies. He has poisoned the water much deeper than it was prior to his words. He is fanning the flames of hatred in a way that would make his father spin in his grave. Trudeau has resorted to the gutter of American divisionism. He is targeting Canadians for their beliefs and willfully inciting citizens against other citizens. Does the criminal code cover this kind of incitement to hatred? I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know. However, what we can be sure of is Trudeau's vicious marginalization of a section of our Canadian population will result in a deep, dark, and permanent stain - not just on him, but the true value of Canada in general.

After all, we cannot smugly sit on the sidelines anymore and thank God we are not in a country like the one below us, while our Prime Minister does the exact same practices that Donald Trump and Joe Biden (and their minions) did. Trudeau has thrown nitro on the fire for the sake of his pitiful self, and his agenda. In my 56 years of life as a Canadian, and observer of politics here for some 24 years, I can honestly say, with the exception of some local yocal halfwits in Newfoundland, that I have never witnessed such acts of hatred and deceit by a Canadian Prime Minister - or any Canadian politician for that matter. 

No matter the result of this election, this incitement of hatred must cease immediately, and Mr. Trudeau must atone for his actions with the loss of his job. I am a Conservative, and as such I'm obviously pulling for Erin O'Toole, and therefore could be considered bias on the topic. However, I am not. There is a blog here that calls out Mr. O'Toole for sounding too much like Donald Trump during his battle for the Conservative Party leadership. Thankfully he moderated that tone after his victory. The bottom-line is that yesterday Erin O'Toole attacked Justin Trudeau personally, which he intended to reflect on Trudeau's governance. He did not attack Canadians. He attacked Trudeau. Trudeau didn't attack O'Toole. Trudeau attacked Canadians who disagree with him. 

Whether you believe Trudeau committed hate crimes by attacking protesters with statements that were meant to attract hatred and contempt toward them or not, is academic in a sense. Trudeau has shown his true face for all to see. It should shock Canadians, but the Liberals have been busy marginalizing those who disagree with them for some time, so perhaps people have become numb to civility and rights. They do so at their own peril. 

Newfoundland and Labrador needs Crosby

Newfoundland is in a state. It had a very brief period of oil fueled hysteria, and then, as they say in Newfoundland: "the bottom fell outa her". It was sad really. Of course, the collapse of oil prices didn't just single out Newfoundland for financial mayhem - see Alberta, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, etc. The difference really is that these other places had great oil prices for a long period before the collapse, and were able to better sustain a price collapse. So, with a series of very poor financial decisions (see Muskrat Falls as an example), the collapse of the oil industry, and the corruption that runs rampant in the province, Newfoundland is in desperate need of a change in governing - that change could be Ches Crosbie.

Ches Crosbie is a very thoughtful, very successful lawyer from St. John's (okay he's a townie and a lawyer … so we'll have to look past that). His family is one of the most influential and wealthy families in Newfoundland (okay, we'll have to look past that as well). The difference with Ches Crosbie is that he is not a flashy egotist. That is a major difference - more than you might think. He is a reasoned man, and that is exactly what Newfoundland needs at this time.

Because Newfoundland is a place of very concentrated wealth, and very wide spread poverty, the provincial government there is used as a wealth distribution vehicle rather than an instrument of considered decisions. It is incredibly knee-jerking. The population is very susceptible to patronage, and panics when it thinks it may be out of favour for that patronage - in other words there are so few crumbs they will bare knuckle fight for them. That's the way they've been played for hundreds of years by the small establishment there, and the same remains true today.

Current premier, Liberal Dwight Ball, has the very appearance of the slick used car salesman from the movie "Fargo". Slicked up hair, and cowboy boots with his suits. His approach has been shockingly similar. He promised 3 inquiries on incidents that were very important to the people but failed to deliver on two: the Coleman/Humber Valley Paving scandal; and the Burton Winters tragedy (ironically both tied to Labrador). He promised to review construction of the infamous Muskrat Falls hydro dam. He didn't. He promised to manage the project better, and at last count it was 120% over budget - which puts those corrupt African dam projects to shame at their measly 65% average. He promised a democratic reform program, and just like Trudeau federally he broke it without shame. The people have every reason to reject the Liberal Party in this election.

So who should they vote to replace the disappointing Liberals? Well the NDP and NL Alliance rump parties are not an option. Newfoundland only has 40 seats up for grabs, but neither party could muster even that tiny number of candidates - not even close at less then 30%. They are not an option, and quite frankly they are a waste of a vote - with all due respect to the men and women who were brave enough to put their names forward to carry the respective banners. In addition, and perhaps even more importantly, the federal Liberals are on their way out after the callosal SNC Lavalin scandal. Newfoundland likes to have a close relationship with the feds when it needs money (like now), and it's hard to see that relationship happening with a Conservative government in Otta, and a Ball government in St. John's. That leaves the PC Party.

However, the PC Party was really the initial author of Newfoundland's current misfortune. As a governing party during the ten years or so that Newfoundland enjoyed oil prosperity the party was infused with corruption and cronyism. It spent every single cent of oil money it made, every single cent of regular taxation funds it raised, and then borrowed massively on top of that - a tradition the Liberals carried on with when they took over. The real question remains did the PC Party learn its lesson? Did the PC Party reform itself internally? The answer may be Ches Crosbie.

Crosbie, after all, is not a man of unlimited charisma. He is not the fire breathing dragon of say a Danny Williams. He is not the smooth, smiley Tobin or Ball type. He is not even the force of nature type like his father was. He is in fact his own man. A man who appears to value reason and sober thought over flash and dash. He is an intelligent man in his own right. This is exactly the kind of man Newfoundland needs at the helm to navigate the seas of financial disasters facing Newfoundland now - and in the future. The only question remaining is whether or not the PC Party has learned its lesson, or is it simply waiting at the trough to take its turn. Given the choice, and keeping in mind the very poor governance record of the Liberals, the balance leans toward Crosbie and the PCs. Whatever the election this week results in, it is very unlikely to be a major win for either side. A small majority is likely. That being said, and if the polls are right, Crosbie will be the benefactor of that choice.
 

Liberals Breaking Faith

What, exactly, does the Liberal Party in Newfoundland and Labrador think it's doing. In all seriousness. When the people of the province went to the polls just a few short months ago, they were promised a change in all the ways and means the PC Party had been governing. A short two months later and it seems those lessons have all been lost, and "creative manipulation" is the phrase of the day, because "leadership" sure isn't.

Let's start with the election itself. Now anyone with a calculator and a copy of the budget estimates for 2015 would know that the province's current deficit would be about $2 billion. Yet, when the Liberals finally got their wish, and were elected, they trot out Dwight Ball and Cathy Bennett with the deer in the head lights look saying "oh, nobody could have known it was this bad". What a load of you know what. The truth is, unless the Liberals have the stupidest research staff on record, that they just outright misled the public to get their hands on the reins of power. Simple as that. Obvious as the nose on your face.

Then Ball and company come up with the beauty of cutting 30% from all government spending. They have to they claim, otherwise the province will be done for. Well, that may be true, but during the election they sold the people on not cutting government. They were just going to "manage better". Again, referring back to the calculator analogy, they just outright misled the public and for the same reason.

Oh, but they are conducting some kind of "review" of Muskrat Falls. The problem is that Muskrat Falls doesn't need a review - it needs to be stopped. While in Opposition Ball and his now Justice Minister decried the lack of legal grounds for the Water Management Agreement that made the project even feasible. Now? Now they continue to go forward with it despite the challenge to it's fundamentals in the Quebec Superior Court, and my own action here in our Supreme Court to have the matter examined for its constitutionality. The very same reasons why the Liberals questioned it in Opposition. Now I find myself fighting them in the Appeal Court, rather than having them jointly requesting the Appeal Court examine the agreement. Their disingenuous ways certainly aren't all that sunny for sure.

Finally, we have the case of a female fire fighter being sexually bullied by her peers. Brenda Seymour, volunteer fire fighter and councilor for Spaniard's Bay, has been subjected to porn during an otherwise all-male training session, as well as sexual commentary during the same session. She fought against it for which she was ridiculed and bullied by members of her community. Her fellow fire fighters resigned enmass to protest her protest.  In other words, they circled the wagons to protect their own behinds, but they also tried to persecute the victim so to say. A small-minded, offensive action that matched the small-minded offensive treatment she suffered while in training. The story has made national news headlines.

The moral of the national story on Brenda Seymour is that Newfoundlanders are old fashioned bullies, sexist, and crazed enough to have their own children carry signs defending the men who refused to stand up for a fellow fire fighter being subjected to porn. An ugly and disgraceful mess. No doubt a time for a male Premier to stand up and show leadership right? Wrong. Ball disappeared into the wood work like Casper the friendly ghost, and instead had his female Finance Minister issue a memo saying "now-now boys, no porn during training". I twist the gist of it a bit, but you get the idea. The point is when leadership is required the Leader leads. That's not happening.

I suppose in some ways we shouldn't be surprised. Dwight Ball didn't exactly set the Liberal Party on fire when he became leader. Their was, and remains, no charisma in his bones. He's not that kind of leader, but what kind of leader is he then? The Liberal Party itself didn't set the province on fire with its visionary plan for the province. The opposite in fact was true. They weren't elected, the Tories were unceremoniously ejected. The Party, as a government, has just vanished into the weeds of the bureaucracy. It's readily apparent they don't have a clue about how to lead, or in fact how to govern. The 18 month public consultation on how the provincial deficits/debt can be tackled is a prime example. It almost reminds me of the PC's hiring a consultant to study if the government is hiring too many consultants. It's that ridiculous. And, that's the way they're looking - ridiculous.

All in all it looks like the Liberals might as well enjoy the next four years, because they're going to be a one term government. A one term government doomed to be mired in misery and ridicule as they pay the price of deceiving the electorate to gain those lofty heights of power. The price they will pay for breaking faith with the people.

It's Hard Being a Liberal Right Now

WHAT GOOD WILL IT BE FOR A MAN TO GAIN THE WORLD, YET FORFEIT HIS SOUL?

Normally, when your party is close to an electoral victory, a party supporter is quite happy with the state of affairs. That doesn't apply to me this time around. Back in 2011 when I joined the Newfoundland and Labrador Liberal Party it was a much different place. Back then a Liberal was a Liberal, was a Liberal. There were no Tories in sight. In fact there were very few Liberals in sight. It was the core supporters of the Liberals that came to meetings or conventions. A small core.The party rested somewhere around 14% in the polls.

Yet, it had soul. The people gathered had purpose and spirit. They were 100% against things like Muskrat Falls and duplicitous PC conduct. That was a principled group of people in it for the good fight. Today things are much different. It really began when Yvonne Jones decided suddenly, just before the 2011 election, to bolt and rather quickly become involved in federal politics in Labrador. There were plenty of rumours she had been offered a pay off to leave, but they were just rumours.

Then, with approximately 15 minutes left in the filing deadline, Brian Tobin faithful Kevin Aylward jumped into the race and filled Jone's place as leader.That was the first indication things were taking a backroom turn. Shortly afterwords a $10,000 a plate dinner in Toronto was set up by Tobin for Aylward to raise election funds. Mining interests in Labrador figured prominently, and their pitch for Muskrat Falls became a shove. Thereafter, the Liberal fight to halt Muskrat Falls began to whither.

Fast forward to today. Dwight Ball is now the leader, and with him has come an exclusive-type of leadership that centers on a very small circle within the party. Many Liberals, especially old-time Liberals, aren't happy with being virtually shut out of the Liberals "new vision" and campaign. There are whispers. Plenty of whispers. So many in fact that it has become hard to distinguish between genuine complaints of autocratic leadership, and not so upstanding attacks from internal leadership hopefuls like Bennett and Antle. Now of course all that will be denied from the highest mount, but it has become very real.

Layered upon the internal dissent of eternally ambitious people, is the stealth election campaign. Ball is doing his damnedest to dance around all the minefields laying before him. He hasn't been upfront with the people on the real state of the province's finances, even though an economics student with no access could clearly see the mess ahead. Instead, he has chosen to place power over honesty. Sad when you consider the people are jettisoning the PCs from power for the very same reason.

Yes, it's a sad state when the Liberal Party here is merely imitating the departing PCs. It's sad to see people like Paul Lane, disgraced stacker and fixer of on-line polls and radio shows, leave the PCs for the Liberals. It's harder yet to see him embraced. After all, wasn't he the most savage of all PC members and defenders? And that's just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. It's painful to watch the lawyers and law firms jockey for place within the Liberal Party. Down to a man (and woman), the vultures are circling for the crumbs that are left of what was an oil inheritance for the people of the province - now squandered.

Finally, as if by some Shakespearean twist, it was very painful to watch Ball offer empty promises, at best, during the last televised leaders debate. It had the aura of the future surrounding it. It had the leap of faith, even though you know full well there is nothing to have faith in, kind of feel to it. It had the "I'm taking power and I have no earthly idea how I'm going to fix this mess" kind of feel to it. It was disingenuous, and insulting to the intelligence.

Whatever the electoral result is come November 30th, one thing is crystal clear - there will be no Trudeau moment. The promise of a more just society isn't even on the cue cards, let alone the heart. There is no promise of "sunny ways". Nope, none of that. Instead there are tightly gripped jaw bones, fake smiles, red jackets, etc. You get the idea. The provincial Liberal Party, as it stands today, is a disheartening imitation of the PC machine it has ambitions to replace. Discarded are the lessons of the PC downfall by those that are tripping over themselves to grasp at the empty cookie jar. Man, it's hard being a Liberal right now.  

The Tyranny of the Majority

It seems that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are on the verge of breaking the old rule : "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results - Albert Einstein". Over and over again people vote en mass for one party, get royally betrayed and disillusioned, swap colours, and do it all over again for the other side. Each time huge majorities are given to the winning side, while the opposing side sits with a rump of 3-5 MHAs. The old saying is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Yet, here we go again.

According to all the polls the Liberals have between 70-80% of the decided vote. What that means is 40 seats for the Liberals, 0 seats for the NDP and ditto for the PCs. When that happens the Liberals must pick, from among their members, MHAs to sit as Opposition. Imagine that. We are just coming out of one of the darkest periods in oppressive government here, and yet we are prepared to set ourselves up for another.

Some of my fellow bloggers have railed against the NDP for bringing this matter to the public attention as an issue to consider when voting. Terms such as "fear mongering" are being thrown out there. Yet, isn't it just plain common sense? Of course it is. It's also good political strategy. Many people here say we want an effective opposition - just not from my District. That's another hang over issue from the political culture of "road politics" that still pervades the province's mentality.

The truth is the NDP are really the only party well suited for Opposition today. Firstly, and most importantly, they aren't the PCs. PC party politicians have been responsible for fiascoes ranging from massive overspending that's left the treasury bust, to unresolved questions over the killing of injured worker (and injured worker advocate) Don Dunphy in his home on Easter Sunday at the hands of Premier Paul Davis's good friend and bodyguard Sgt Joe Smyth of the RNC. They brought us Bill 29. They disallowed any meaningful public scrutiny of Nalcor. They created a financial albatross on Muskrat Falls. Just this year they committed to borrowing $2 billion to have a budgetary deficit of $1 Billion. Yet, as we all know, those figures were based on $63 barrel for oil. It's now $20 less than that. The list goes on and on and on.

Strangely, perhaps, it was the PCs own unbelievable arrogance that finally brought them down. It blinded them from seeing what they were doing was wrong. It led to an assault on the government by a few bloggers, and some local activists on radio shows and social media. A switch in the national political scene brought the death nail as Trudeau's arrival as Liberal leader 2 years ago marked the moment the decline began in a hurry. There is a lesson in that for Dwight Ball. It wasn't anything he did that brought an end to the Tory Tyranny. It was a combination of a hearts and minds war conducted by a few on the ground, and a final coup de grace with a switch in national fortunes. He would do well to commit that to the forefront of his memory.

With the PCs ruled out as Opposition, by any measure of common sense,  the NDP ought to be the default go to party. They are in some ways ideally suited given their roots in social activism and claim to represent the "working man". The next many years, let's just say the foreseeable future, this province is going to see public service cuts, spending cuts, and unemployment that it has not seen in decades - at the least. Given the way the PCs spent, and committed future funds, there is no realistic alternative. It will be a blood bath. A social voice is needed in those circumstances in any case. So, the need for an effective Opposition and an effective social voice should cause the people of the Province to elect at least a rump of an NDP Opposition - although somewhere around 10 or so seats would be better. The odds of this happening are in the hands of the NDP, and to some extent the Liberals. Ball ought to be cautioning people against a 40 seat landslide. I know that sounds politically iffy, but it also sounds statesmanlike and mature. The NDP ought to be selling the need for an effective Opposition, and one that is not responsible for the financial disaster unfolding in the Province. It's a no-brainer, right? I guess we will see if Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have learned much from the last 10 years, or whether they enjoy the tyranny of the majority - the absolute majority.

Death of the PC Empire in Newfoundland and Labrador

In 2011, when I left the Newfoundland Conservatives, their reign was supreme. A well oiled, impenetrable machine. A dynasty in the making. There was no other, and no other was in sight. Their popularity in the polls was hovering around 75%. They controlled all but 4 seats in the House of Assembly. It was a closed shop, and they went to great pains to keep it that way.

Four years later things have changed - sort of. In 2011 the Province had the worst, most oppressive access to information law in the country. Serious dissent now runs like the wind. People have become engaged and are forcing the political agenda in many ways. The PC Party has not. It simply has become worse at the tactics it used to suppress opposition and change in the Province. The people's core values have shifted, while the Party's tools of control remained entrenched in lip-service and really bad acting.

Four years later the Province has gone through five, count them five PC Party leaders - that must be a Canadian political record. Nothing remains of their "all-star cast" of Ministers that dominated the headlines of the Province. All that remains are the "Omega and the Alpha" - the "End and the Beginning". Current Premier Davis is the "end', and Stephen Kent hopes to be the "beginning". That is to say that while those forces that hovered within the PC Party shuffle over to the Liberal Party ever so quietly, people like Kent remain to be the caretakers that rebuild the PC Party after its defeat.

Yet, throughout its death spiral, the PC Party has operated itself as it operated the government - without accountability. There have been no lessons learned, because there has been no accountability rendered. There is a reason for that. Avoiding accountability of any type for actions has dominated Newfoundland politics, and in some ways Newfoundland culture for some time. What remains obvious to anyone who has been anywhere else, but cloaked within the political culture on the Island, is the immature way politics plays itself out here. Some have referred to it as "high-school politics". Others have been less generous. Whatever the case, it is the nature of the politics here that allows for a party like the PCs to do what they have done.

Let's call it the "It wasn't Me" mentality. It is always some other person, or organization, or province, or country's fault - never our own. To even suggest it was our own is to invite calls of "traitor". That's why politics here is referred to as "high school" or "immature", because adults take responsibility for their actions. The accountability allows them to grow and not repeat the same mistakes over, and over, while blaming others for all their short comings. The failure to accept criticism and mature is the birthplace of systemic immaturity. That's what we have here. The PC Party wasn't some kind of one-off government of despots. It was merely the latest reincarnation of a political culture that has refused to grow. It lies in the face of this place's 500 year existence.

The PC Party has not been able to change, because it doesn't know any other game. PCs aren't stupid. They aren't unusually corrupt. They are a product of their environment. The latest example being Davis's blaming of future cuts on the Liberals impending political victory. Ditto for his warnings to the Province's business community. "They will cut your jobs" he tells the unions. "They will take your customers money, and cause you to fail" he tells the St. John's Board of Trade. The reality is the actions of the PCs in power has left any future government no choice but to cut spending and jobs. Yet, Davis is already playing the "it wasn't me" card, and the election isn't even started yet. He is in fact laying the ground work for the same immature politics to continue a new cycle.

What we have here is not a "failure to communicate". What we have is a failure to learn. A failure to accept that: with great power comes great responsibility; accountability and accepting responsibility are the key stones of personal and systemic growth; and that public office is a sacred trust on behalf of your citizens. We see these things played out on TV and the Province's three radio shows every day of the year. They take different forms, and they involve different issues, but they are all related to the problems outlined above. Many suggest the Liberals will repeat the cycle, and be no different in their approach than the PCs were. In fact I would say that is the dominant opinion among people. What people fail to realize is the accountability for that lays with them. If no accountability is demanded for failings as they happen, then none will be voluntarily accepted. Therein lies the key.

So, while the PC Party twists in its death throws, and the Liberals quietly organize to take their place at the helm of power, it remains to be seen if either the people or the politicians have learned anything from their four year trial of fire. Time will tell.

The People's Turn in Canada

Tuesday night was the revenge of the average person in Alberta. A modern day political slaughter that saw the now former Premier resign both his seat and his leadership before all the votes were counted in his riding. A "socialist" NDP government swept out the corporate-obedient PC's leaving just two "conservative" governments in all the provinces of Canada - Saskatchewan and in name only Newfoundland and Labrador. The casualties are obvious, as is the trend, but what's behind it all. That is the question.

The first factor is alienation. Voter alienation. People alienation. The Conservative agenda, of no deficits run government as if it were a business, trace back to the early nineties and Preston Manning's Reform Party movement - coincidentally also born in Alberta. Prior to that, deficits were a matter of fact in Canadian politics, and social programs were one of the key things that we defined ourselves by. How we look after each other and the less fortunate in society. Paul Martin took the idea of running the country like a business, rather than as a country, to the federal scene. He chopped and chopped until the provinces were forced to do the same, and before we new it we had "business-government". People began to view this new way of things as responsible. They equated it to their own lives and their own finances. Before we knew it we had not just "business-politics", but also "business-families". The promise was that if we followed this path that our country and our lives would reach some sort of Utopian balance.

Unfortunately, to quote some nefarious politicians from here, "nothing could be further from the truth". After 25 years of the "Manning doctrine" the finances of the country are no better than they were. Our household problems and family issues have not improved. What we've really become is a country preoccupied with survival and cold at heart when it comes to our own. We have become "rationalizers" rather than "visionary". There is no more advancement toward a just society, but rather a down ward spiral of the dog eat dog society that is so prevalent in our neighbor to the south. A cold place, with a machine-like existence, and no purpose other than achieving some elusive economic paradise. 

That's ending in Canada though. The idea that our only worth as a country is to be measured by deficit or surplus each year is slowly uncoupling. Harper kind of gets this. His platform for re-election this year is dishing financial breaks to two specific groups - the so-called rich and the so-called middle class. He's targeting their desire to have more income, as if that could somehow improve their personal happiness, in an attempt to tempt people to achieving that "elusive economic paradise". He's trying to prove that the Manning doctrine is working, and that the country is really to be measured by its bottom line rather than its values. It's a formula that has been successful up to now since the dog days of Preston Manning. But, those days are coming to a quick end.

The PC's loss in Alberta was not about the decline in oil prices. The truth is the PC's have been falling in voter support in Alberta since Ralph Kline left. He was popular because he represented the bold, brash, free spirit of the Alberta people. The ones that followed merely tried to maintain a political system for the corporate elites in Alberta, while virtually ignoring the wishes of their own people. Until last night, Alberta dared not cross the Rubicon. It dared not fire the maintainers. Now the seal has been broken, and the "unthinkable" has happened. It happened in the last federal election in Quebec as well. The "anti-business", "pro-people" party, the NDP, created a wave. The Orange Wave or the Orange Crush - which ever you prefer. 

Why? Because people are sick of being treated as widgets. It's that simple. Sick of being measured by the dollar. Sick of seeing the sick and downtrodden marginalized as if they were more burden than their relative economic worth. Sick of being treated as a commodity. Sick of having their hopes for the future superficially addressed. The list goes on, but essentially, people are sick of insincere people treating them like means to an end. By rationalizing our society to an economic standard we have rationalized our humanness in kind. It is this fundamental fact that has resulted in Orange Waves. It's not that the NDP are somehow the in thing. It's that the other parties have been type-cast as purveyors of the status quo. Interchangeable. Indistinguishable. Preston Manning clones that people have become sick of. 

Will that people's revolt happen this year in our province's election? You can take that to the bank - pardon the pun. Will it be the Liberals, who now lead the polls, that take the government? That's still not a guaranteed thing. The PCs falling is, but their replacement isn't. A great deal of that depends on how the Liberals conduct themselves as the "people's party". Will they be believable as champions of the people rather than champions of the business elite? Right now that is very questionable. Very questionable in deed. Will the NDP rebound, catch momentum, and become those champions of the average person? That's still to be determined too. One thing seems certain from last night - Harper's/Manning's view of Canada is under attack, and the PM should be seeing the Alberta victory for what it is - the People's turn.

  

NL Budget 2015 - Practiced at the Art of Deception

There are two words that come to mind after reading budgetary estimates for 2015 in this province: election; and deception. Actually there is a third - tragic. For starters, the biggest bomb of all is that our actual budget deficit for 2015 is $2,092,867 billion. Not the $900 plus million that's being thrown about in the media. Here's how it breaks down:

Total revenue for 2015 is projected to be:                      $ 5,757,328 billion

Current Account Expenditures for 2015:                    -  $ 6,659,952 billion
Capital Account Expenditures for 2015:                     -  $ 1,143,743 billion

Need to borrow for 2015:                                               $ 2,092,867 billion

Now the politicians are saying that capital spending is not a part of the deficit, but the fact is that it is. The University of Calgary just issued its report stating they saw the deficit coming in at $1.8 billion, so they were actually a little light. The government here likes to deceive people by saying this or that isn't included. Like, for instance former premier and finance minister Marshall's statement that the money allocated to Natural Resources, and then reallocated to Nalcor each year for the last three years does not contribute to the deficit. Yet, his estimates each year clearly show the transfer from the General Revenue Fund to the Department of Natural Resources. That number factors into the expenditures of the department. That is how it's accounted for.

The truth, according to the government's own budget estimates is that fiscal 2014 saw a cash shortfall of  $ 1,051,798 billion. In other words, the total amount needed to borrow for last year, and this year is approximately $3.2 billion - which will go directly to our gross debt.

Speaking of gross debt, that is the total money we owe and are making debt payments on, 2015 will see it rise to $13, 889 billion. In 2003, before the oil money really started rolling in, that number was $8,932 billion. This year we will pay just over $770 million in interest charges/debt expenses. In 2003 that number was $520 million. Revenue this year is projected to be $5.7 billion. In 2003 it was $3.7 billion. The total budget expenses in 2015 is projected to be $8.2 billion. In 2003 it was 3.6 billion. So, in other words, after 12 years of oil, and over $20 billion of oil revenue brought in, we are spending over 200% more annually to run the affairs of the province,with revenue that has only increased 65%. That's shocking. That's catastrophic financially. It's called structural deficits with huge debt accumulations.

It's no wonder that Standard and Poors warned the provincial government last year to shed the weight of the public pension plans or face a credit downgrade. They knew the government was heading into massive deficit, therefore added debt, and in order to keep that rating we had to cut the pensions loose.  Still, you can expect a credit downgrade imminently at this rate.

Now to the politics. The utter sleazy politics of deceiving your own people to further your political hopes. The PCs have scheduled an HST increase of 2% effective January 1, 2016, or about two months after the next election. They've pledged not to replace 20% of the public service as it retires over the next 5 years... the next five years. They've committed to an all day kindergarten starting in 2016..2016. In other words, none of the big hits or programs start until AFTER the next election. That way, the PCs are serving a budget up they hope won't immediately affect the pocket books of voters - ie: re-election. The horrific truth is that no matter what government is elected in November, 2015, a financial disaster never seen in modern time Newfoundland and Labrador awaits. The Liberals have already said they will cancel the increase on election, but can they?

2016 will not be much better, and likely much worse for the province's finances and economy. We are on the cusp of a provincial recession as it is. Almost 30% of all employees in the province work for the provincial government. They likely compromise about 80% of the higher incomes here. Keep in mind that 30% of residents here are too poor to pay any income tax. The PC's have said the government will have to borrow $5 billion over the next 5 years. That's just an outright lie. Just for starters, the federal loan guarantee is only now starting to kick in for Muskrat Falls. That loan requirement is at least $5 billion, and many experts suggest it could reach $8 billion in additional borrowing beyond the $2.6 billion the province has invested in cash. In fact, the federal loan guarantee won't kick in until at least 35% of the total project cost is paid in cash by the province. That $5-* billion has to be paid within 2 years for the 2017 first power date to be met. Then there is the minimum $750 million investment in Hebron which must be paid upfront. And so it goes. Considering the government is spending $1 billion a year more than it brings in just to operate government - not including fancy projects like Muskrat Falls and Hebron -  the next government is looking at massive cuts. A 2% increase in the HST will only bring in about $300 million at the most - if the economy remains at the level it is.

Unfortunately, the economy won't be remaining where its at now. Construction and real estate are falling rapidly. Oil companies are scratching development projects as the international trade war with Eurasia begins to heat up. It's worth noting that Russia is the number one exporter of oil and natural gas in the world, not Saudi Arabia, and they can hit us hard. Expect that to happen as the BRIC countries solidify their oil for food and the like trade deals with Russia and China. None of this is being explained in any way to the people of the Province. The real truth is we had a window, a ten year window, to reap as much as we could from our oil. We didn't. We squandered it in a money-mad drunk fest. Now the party is over. Was Danny Williams the best premier this province has ever had? No. He was the worst premier this province ever had. His actions have caused irreparable harm to the place and the people. That is the truth. The numbers speak for themselves. Don't believe the deception spun by the entrails of the Williams government. Realize that as a people we have been deceived in an almost unimaginable way.

A Letter to the Premier

It's not often I would give advice to a PC member of this Province's government. In fact, a big part of me would be happy to see them all gone. However, that may not be good for our democracy in the long run. With the NDP flailing like near dead fish in the back of the boat, the political choices here have become uncomfortably narrow. Not only is a small or non-existent Opposition bad for the democracy of our province, it's also bad for the winning party - as Brian Mulroney found out. It's one thing to have the bragging rights to the "largest majority government ever", and quite another to satisfy all the egos that get swept in with it. Not everyone can be a cabinet minister, or parliamentary assistant, yet they all think they should.

So, in the spirit of the season, and bipartisan concern, here's a few words of advice for our erstwhile premier:

1. Drop Muskrat Falls like the dead dog it is. Use whatever excuse you want. It could be the court cases going through the system now with their impending damnation of the foolish actions of the Williams' administration. Be the bigger man. Own up to what every one else is already thinking. Put the people before your own ego. It's the ego that's killing you. Not yours specifically, but the ego hangover from the Williams' regime, the nagging egos of some of your long-time ministers, and back benchers. Be humble. Be contrite. Be honest. Stop the development for at least five years to get the Province's nightmarish financial and demographic position as righted as it can be. Do not govern with malice. Blaming Hydro-Quebec for everything is old. Everyone knows they're bastards, but nobody wants to sacrifice the Province or themselves on that alter. Stopping Muskrat Falls immediately is your only prayer.

2. Repeal Bill 29. It has come to symbolize that ego we spoke of above. The secrecy. The deception. The breach of trust. It is all the things that your government has been convicted of by the people, and for which you await sentencing. Even the press hate it, and that's never good for your business.

3. Ban corporate and union political donations. Restrict individual donations to $50.00 per person. The route of your entrapment is the dollars you take in and div out. So much so that one MLA, with uncommon courage in the legislature, commented publicly about a "stench of corruption". It's not news to us, but you could show leadership by addressing it.

4. Differentiate yourself from the past. Every time you say "our government has" you add another nail in the coffin. Guilt by association. People don't need to wonder if you are the same as the old crowd, because you tell them you are. While that kind of talk may get you a few slaps on the back by party hacks, those same hands, from those same people, will be thrusting that steel blade in your back the moment the party goes down in flames.

5. Know your limitations. You aren't super man, and there is nothing special about you. You aren't a visionary, and you don't inspire with your words. You are a retired cop who worked himself into the leadership, during an unprecedented party blood bath, and entering the kind of political hell that is not often realized by even the most deserving governments - which your's is of course. And you look that part. The glasses intended to portray a "smart premier" impression aren't going to do it for you, although it's a nice touch.

The only, and I mean the only, hope you have of saving ANY PC seats in the next election is to follow these simple words of advice. Are they difficult? Yes. But so is leadership. When Churchill's England was being bombed into oblivion, leadership was difficult. Freeing slaves in the US was difficult for Lincoln. Staring down Quebec separatists was difficult for Chretien. By way of example, the above steps are pretty tame. So, to save your party to the extent of opposition status, or perhaps even minority status, you need to show leadership on the things that matter. Not bike helmet legislation. Not this- that-or-the-other day proclamations. None of that. That only reinforces the idea that you've just "quit and stayed on". For what it's worth, in the spirit of democracy and bipartisanship, there it is. A few words of advice.

Liberal-ly speaking

I've been wanting to write this post for along time. How to say it? When to say it? The time seems right now. In 2011 I left the PC party as the government it represents was so corrupt I could no longer bare associating myself with it. Others will say it was poor sportsmanship. Some have suggested political opportunism, as if leaving a Party at 75% in the polls for a Party at 14% in the polls was opportunism. No, the real reason was as stated - principle. Then the poor old Liberals looked like a rag tag band of warriors at best. Fighting the good fight, but hopelessly outgunned by a PC machine flooded with corporate donations, and generally ridiculed by the provincial media. That was then and this is now.

Three years later, and five leaders later, the PC Party twists in its death throws as it desperately avoids the fate of all tyrants. Now, the Liberals are the top guns and the media ridicules the PC's. So is the circle of life I suppose. But, what does the Liberal Party hold for the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador when the inevitable election day comes next year?

My father was a life-long Liberal - to be sure. He campaigned to Liberal prime minister Louis St. Laurent for a unique Canadian flag. He submitted his own design for the same under Liberal Lester Pearson. He loved Pierre Trudeau. My family was a truly Liberal family. However, I've often wondered what he would make of the "modern" Liberals.

Gone are the days of the "Just Society", or important constitutional matters and nationhood. Gone is the focus on individual rights and freedoms. Missing in action is Canada as the friendly broker between combatants. Hopelessly ignored are the right of the Aboriginal peoples. All these things that once defined being Liberal have been discarded for "being a better Tory than the Tories". There is no word of a just society, or respect of the individual. There is primarily one focus - out doing the Tories as "managers of government". ie: who can spend the least. In an onslaught of extreme right wing ideology, the Liberal Party is now suffering an identity crisis. It is no longer what makes the Party Liberal. It's now about what makes the Party not Conservative. It has allowed its own identity to be dictated by its foe.

The provincial Liberal Party appears to be no different. Three years since 2011, and three leaders later, the Liberal Party's identity here is hardly distinguishable from that of the ruling PCs. Gone are the days of just three years ago when the Liberals stood in their place to fight Muskrat Falls tooth an nail. Gone is the determination to stop the project, and protect the average person from the impending financial assault the project necessarily would bring. Now it is simply a matter of managing the assault apparently. Barely visible among the Liberal candidates are the determined group that fought so hard to bring real change for the people. Real change being a definitive change to the corrupt political culture in the province, and the resulting responsible government that would bring. Instead, we have Nalcor bred candidates like Cathy Bennett (who has been promoted to Finance critic), and Grand Falls-Windsor Mayor Al Hawkins who the Tories appointed to Nalcor's Board only a short while ago. We have perennial establishment hangers on like Siobhan Coady ( big promoter of Alderon), formerly rabid PC and anti-Liberal Paul Lane, and so on and so on.

Instead of being the Party to transform Newfoundland and Labrador, the Liberal Party is looking much like the one it aims to replace. That may seem unduly harsh, and it may in fact be too harsh as the days are early, but the signs are not promising. It reminds me of the last election when, as a Liberal candidate, I found myself face to face with a salt of the earth man in the lower ends of Random Island. His main question to me: "Are you blue or red?". At the time I remember thinking surely their must be more on this man's mind than what colour my party is. Surely he must be concerned about the difference beyond the colour of our flags, but he wasn't. Perhaps therein was a pearl of wisdom.

With a now closing window before the next election, and by-election win tallies replacing serious vision, the question is are the Liberals to be any different than the Conservatives? Is it to be "Liberal Tory, same old story?" I don't know is the honest answer. My heart says no, but my brain is leaning yes. And, that really angers me. At a time in our history when we need a principled and visionary approach, the same old "pragmatism" appears to be reinventing itself. Where are the declarations on democratic reform by the Liberal Party? Where is the policy to eliminate the practice of corporate and union political donations that corrupt our democratic process? Where is the policy to determine how to halt Muskrat Falls until all the legalities are dealt with, not the least of which include: the Water Management Agreement; the Hydro-Quebec lawsuit; the Nunatsiavut lawsuits; and the Nunatukavut lawsuit. Where is the very real question of provincial debt and structural deficits? Where is the duty to our fishers. Where is a coherent, and humane approach to the fastest aging population in the western world - ours?

It's the silence that disturbs me. The silence and the familiarity of the actors entering the stage. Not many would expect the provincial Liberal Party to be "Trudeauesque". The federal Party isn't managing that yet. However, their should by now be a very clear vision toward the critical issues. The prevailing thought should not be: "silence is golden". The prevailing visual should not be a party consumed with winning, but rather a Party confident in winning based on its vision and principles - not on winning by default. Not winning, because we are not them. Not winning simply to replace one set of actors with another. The greatest betrayal of all is the Party that purports to be change, but simply carries on in the same manner - ie: Obama.

My hope and prayer is the Liberal Party defines itself, and commits itself, to being the agent of change that fundamentally improves the lives of its people - both politically and economically. Perhaps it is just that - a hope and a prayer.

The Benefit of the Doubt - Penashue

So the inevitable finally happened and Peter Penashue fell on his sword - resigning last week as both Minister and Member of Parliament. His faithful campaign manager, dutifully appointed to a plum post as director on the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB), followed suit and resigned his plum appointment. It appears to be an attempt to pre-empt the release by Elections Canada of its report into electoral fraud involving the Penashue's election as member for Labrador. Of course, we have all heard him blame the fiasco on a well-meaning, but inexperienced campaign manager. However, do the facts really back that claim?

To start with there is the story from Aboriginal Peoples Television Network(ATPN). They broke the story of the many inter-linked business interests of Peter Penashue's family surrounding Muskrat Falls, and senior executives of Pennecon Limited http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/11/29/penashue-faces-questions-over-family-business-ties-to-labrador-hydro-project/ . A sort of "common-law" marriage if you will.

Then there is Mr. Reginald Bowers - the "inexperienced but well meaning" campaign manager/business manager of Mr. Penashue's electoral endeavour. Bower may be many things, but inexperienced is not one of them. His CV includes a Bachelor of Commerce degree, a senior accountant for David G Curtis and Co., a comptroller for Woodward Group of Companies, and VP of Finance and Administration for Fahey Group of Companies. Not exactly someone with no ability when it comes to finances if you get my drift. When it comes to connections the Masonic Order is the place to be for many, and Bowers founded the Masonic Lodge #17 in Happy Valley Goose Bay. He was big when it came to the provincial PC's as well. According to his official bio, Bowers has been a director of the Lake Melville area PC Association since the early 1990's. He even pulled off a double term as a director on the Board of the College of the North Atlantic (a plum provincial political appointment), along with Gilbert Bennett of Nalcor Energy.

A quick look at the PC donors to the last provincial campaign in Lake Melville district reveals an almost completely corporate dependent campaign. A number of those donors are people that Bowers would have been involved with in one way or another - including Provincial Airlines. It would seem that the provincial PC machine in Lake Melville decided to get behind Penashue for his bid to go to Ottawa, and everyone fell into line.

Then in October, 2012 the CBC broke the story that Penashue's flights throughout the election had been illegally subsidized by Provincial Airlines. Then, the CBC wrote a story that:

" Six executives of Pennecon made donations to Penashue's 2011 campaign in the riding of Labrador, with the donations arriving just after he had been elected, according to Elections Canada records.

Chairman Ches Penney made a donation of $1,100, the same amount donated by several others at the company. Two donated $550 each. The limit for a personal donation during the 2011 campaign was $1,100."

Remember those late arriving donations.

The Innu Development Limited Corporation, run by Penashue's brother-in-law Paul Rich, chipped in a $25,000.00 interest free loan - which is illegal. In addition, CBC News calculated Penashue had overspent his campaign limit by about 21 per cent. Now Elections Canada has said there were a total of 28 unlawful donations. I use the words unlawful, and illegal, because the donations were in violation of the law - the Elections Act. Now Penashue is blaming Bowers, and Bowers is claiming ignorance. But are these excuses credible? No, they are not.

EXHIBIT ONE:

From the Huffington Post, July 24, 2012:
" Bowers wrote that he checked all expenses with Conservative Party advisers and Elections Canada "and somewhere I got the understanding that all travel within the riding was considered personal expense and not governed by the cap on expenses."

EXHIBIT TWO:

From the CBC, November 29, 2012:
" In a statement, Penashue's office said that his campaign staff had a full understanding of the rules.

"The minister was very clear during his campaign that no corporate donations would be accepted, and that donations to his campaign were to be personal donations made by individuals," the statement said.

Although the story is changing now to one of ignorance of the rules, it is clear from Bower's and Penashue's earlier statements to the press, when the story first broke, that they were both fully aware of the rules, and that corporate donations were not to be accepted. Given that, it is impossible for both to have signed the return not being aware that corporate gifts in kind were illegal and corporate donations were illegal.

It is also apparent that a cover up of those expenses was attempted. In particular, it is now known that a deposit slip from Pennecon was recorded by the campaign in the same amount that its executives were retroactively given receipts for. In other words, it appears the campaign attempted to whitewash the donation by Pennecon by issuing receipts to its executives. It is also worth questioning why Pennecon or its executives did not question receiving receipts for donations they did not make, or made and did not get a receipt for making.

The waters are murky with questions, but one that isn't in doubt is that everybody knew the rules, and some made deliberate attempts to circumvent them. No doubt the effort to get Penashue elected was of paramount concern to some people/corporations, but why? That will come out in the wash as they say, but here is an interesting nugget for you to chew on in the meantime.

IT STARTS LIKE THIS:

INNU/SNC-Lavalin Partnership

In February of 2008, SNC-Lavalin Inc. (SLI) entered into an agreement with Innu Development Limited Partnership (IDLP) to establish Innu/SLI Partnership, the purpose of which is to pursue engineering and project management opportunities for projects taking place on Innu lands and other areas of Labrador. Other business ventures jointly pursued include procurement, construction management services, power generation/transmission, industrial process, environmental services and architectural design. The intent of the relationship is to maximize benefits to the Innu People resulting from these projects. The partnership maintains and operates an office and related support infrastructure in Goose Bay.

IT GOES ON LIKE THIS:

Innu SNC Lavalin Inc.

Map data ©2013 Google - Terms of Use

Box 119
Sheshatshiu
NL
A0P 1M0
Contact(s): Brian Corbin
Mobile: 709-897-7601
Email: brian.corbin@snclavalin.com
Albert Williams
Email: albertwilliams@snclavalin.com
General partner:

BAE .Newplan Group Ltd.
1133 Topsoil Road,
Mount Pearl, NL A1N-5G2
Phone: 709-368-0118
Fax: 709-368-5410

Contact: Albert Williams
Email: albertwilliams@snclavalin.com

Innu partner: INNU DEVELOPMENT LTD. PARTNERSHIP
P/O Box 449,
Sheshatshiu, NL A0P 1M0
Phone: 709-497-3670
Fax: 709-497-3677
Core business:

1. Project management
2. Engineering Services

IT INVOLVES THIS:

Exhibit Title Prepared by Dat

CE-15 Rev.1 (Public)

Muskrat Falls Hydroelectric Project, MF 1010 – Review of

Variants SNC Lavalin March 2008

CE-16 Rev.1 (Public)

Muskrat Falls Hydroelectric Project, MF 1050 – Spillway

Design Review SNC Lavalin December 2007

CE-18 (Public)

Muskrat Falls Hydroelectric Project, MF 1250 – Numerical

Modeling of Muskrat Falls Structures SNC Lavalin May 2008

CE-19 (Public)

MF 1300 – Muskrat Falls 2010 Site Investigation, Volume

1 SNC Lavalin June 2011

CE-20 Rev.1 (Public)
MF 1310 – Muskrat Falls Site Access Review SNC Lavalin February 2011

IT CAUSES A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THIS:

http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2008/exec/0926n07agreement.pdf

In other words, while Penashue was busy negotiating the New Dawn Agreement on "behalf of the Innu people of Labrador" his organization already negotiated a side deal with SNC Lavalin who, at the time, were primary contractors in the development of the Lower Churchill, and had a business relationship with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. In fact, Penashue was in so many conflicts of interest it's hard to keep track of them all. Given SNC Lavalin's current international, and national disgrace over corporate corruption, and given the many links between it and the Innu, there are reasons for serious questions to be asked. However, the bottom line is Penashue negotiated and signed an agreement (the New Dawn Agreement) that cleared the way for members of his family, if not himself, to be greatly enriched - especially including the Impacts and Benefits Agreement.

Is Penashue an innocent victim of an incompetant manager? Does an innocent person place themselves in these types of conflicts? Do they try and cover them up when exposed by the media? Are they innocent if they admit they knew the rules and then broke them for their obvious benefit? There is nothing innocent about this story. It's an all too familiar politics. Should there be further investigations into the role of the Innu Nation, and its subsidiaries? Without a doubt. Were the Innu people of Labrador betrayed by the interests of their elite? That question could be answered in a full, and over due RCMP investigation of the operations of the Innu Nation, and most certainly its subsidiaries. For now it's just a question. Does Peter Penashue deserve the benefit of the doubt? Absolutely not. 

 

 

UPDATE

 Here is the complete list of original donors to Penashue's campaign. Thank you to those that provided it.

 

First List Submitted

 

 

 

Modified List (the scratched out are names ruled to be illegal and for which Penashue's campaign reimbursed the feds)