Politics as Usual

Politics as Usual

By: Ryan Young

When I decided to take a summer hiatus from all things politics, I made the decision because I found I was becoming a very angry person. Every time I checked the news or my social media feed there seemed to be another story revolving around arrogant MHA’s and/or incompetent ministers.  Anyone who knows me can attest to the fact that I am very far from a naturally angry person, so I decided to take a break to try to find some balance in my life.

The break did wonders for my spirit, but no matter how much I tried to avoid reading, writing, or talking about politics, it was damn near impossible to keep a blind eye to everything that has been happening in our provincial political whirlwind. Oh, to be a sheep…

A lot happened over the summer. So many stories to read and mull over. The biggest story of the summer may have been the cabinet shuffle that was triggered when Cathy Bennett decided that being finance minister was not what she thought it would be. Other than replacing her with former Speaker of the House, Tom Osborne, the shuffle didn’t really do much to encourage the public that things would improve much in her absence. After all, it is still all of the same monkey’s running the same circus.

Tom Osborne may be the only bright spot in the shuffle, promising a tax review and some possible relief to come from the more than 300 additional taxes and fees that his government brought in with their 2016 budget. Many applauded Osborne’s new position within cabinet, but he certainly has his work cut out for him in cleaning up the mess Bennett and Ball have left him.

Gerry Byrne was sworn in as the new fisheries minister and quickly took a hard line in front of the TV cameras, but the fishery is still very much in turmoil, and other than his TV tough talk, Byrne has not delivered anything concrete to convince fish harvesters and processors in this province that there is a future for them in this government’s plans. People want real answers and all Byrne has had to offer is platitudes. He certainly does not seem like the kind of minister that would be willing to go toe-to-toe with his former federal colleague in Ottawa, which unfortunately is exactly what our fishery needs. I wouldn’t expect any major action on the fisheries file unless Uncle Ottawa says so, and that is about as likely as Gerry Byrne speaking up when there are no TV cameras in the room.

Eddie Joyce has managed to allow a complete fiasco to unfold in the town of Witless Bay, where a former councillor was forced to resign from his position on council over fraudulent residency claims, and just a few weeks later was allowed to run again and be acclaimed to the new town council. Joyce assured residents that the issue would be resolved by the fall elections, and has yet to comment on the acclimation of the Witless Bay Town Council and allegations of election fraud being put forth by residents of the community. The town has not had a functioning council in months and one can only assume that the current goings-on will not be beneficial to the town, moving forward.

Dale Kirby has continued to prove that he has no trouble at all in abandoning the oath he swore when he became an MHA and a minister in cabinet. New childcare regulations have sparked the ire of the industry and an ongoing battle of words with school board trustees and concerned parents about the fate of Mobile Central High has put the minister back in the hot seat. Most recently, a post circulated on Facebook that showed a conversation between Kirby and a constituent who was asking legitimate questions about education for hearing impaired students. Kirby’s response was to block her. It really makes you wonder about the quality of our government when the premier offers “total confidence” in a man who would act this way in his position. Kirby has done nothing but create barriers and destroy professional relationships and yet he is still allowed to be in charge of decisions that directly affect our most valuable resource of all, our children. It really makes you scratch your head…

Oh, and then there is ole Dwight himself. The man, the legend. The premier who will probably be remembered as the worst of a very bad lot of grinning shyster’s who managed to play our eternal saviour complex just well enough to land himself in the premier’s chair. Since The Telegram revealed that 4.6 million hours have been billed by embedded contractors working for Nalcor, Ball has hinted for the first time that a Muskrat Falls inquiry could be in the works. The premier says he has reached out for advice on the terms of reference, but very few people that I have spoken with have confidence that the inquiry will have any teeth. The terms of reference need to very broad in scope and the inquiry needs to be run by someone with integrity and who has no connection to the current or previous administration. Likely the only way that will happen is if someone is brought in from outside the province, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for that either.

I could use many more examples, but what is the point? The media either ignores or can’t be bothered to do any real investigative journalism anymore, and we lap it up like fresh kibble after a week-long fast. The only truth that most people ever get to see is the filtered tidbits that they are fed daily, with no real insight into what is actually happening in our province. If the people ever want to see things change, they need to be the catalyst that start that change. Sadly, there seems to be little will outside of a handful of “known critics” and “nay-sayers” to actually drive any sort of meaningful change for our future. It often makes me wonder what it will take before people finally wake up and wonder how we let this happen. My prediction is that it will come for many right around the same time their electricity bills double to pay for Muskrat Falls. In the meantime, It’s all just politics as usual in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Venetian Blind Trusts

Venetian Blind Trusts

By: Ryan Young

It was revealed during estimates in the House of Assembly on Tuesday that the establishment of the premier’s blind trust left the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador on the hook for $42 900. This little tidbit came up when opposition members were questioning the government on expenses within the premier’s office, in particular, the amount that was listed under professional services.

Finance Minister Cathy Bennett was quick to point out that this is a long-established practice and provided a few details on the process. Any minister of the crown that has dealings that may be in a conflict of interest with the government must put their business holdings in a blind trust. The minister's work with the Chief Electoral Officer to establish the correct parameters regarding the blind trust and they approve any expenses that are deemed satisfactory. The minister pays for the expenses but is later reimbursed by the government and the cost is absorbed through their respective departments as “professional services.”

In this time of belt tightening it was surprising to hear that we pay for the establishment of these business trusts. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that blind trusts in this province have come under scrutiny. I’m sure that most of you are already thinking about the controversy surrounding the blind trust of former premier Danny Williams. While Williams was running the province, his blind trust (managed by his son-in-law) acquired 550 acres of land from the NL Housing Corporation at rock bottom prices. While no wrongdoing was ever proved, the situation did raise the issue of blind trusts in the public eye.  It is also worth noting that Williams took well over a year to put all his holdings in trust.

More recently, Dwight Ball was questioned on why it took him so long to establish his blind trust. Questions of conflict of interest first arose in April 2016 surrounding Ball’s stake in the senior’s residence, Sundara. By July, the trust had been established, but Ball had some curious comments for reporters who asked him for details:

“It’s called a blind trust for that reason.” Said Ball “And so the advice that I’ve been given, that the blind trust people that actually manage that — there’s a reason why it’s called a blind trust. For me to actually remove myself from my business interest, and put two people there that I would then publicly announce, would, I guess, the advice that I was given was, I guess, it wouldn’t be blind anymore, would it?”

It might have been nice if Ball had actually taken the time to look up the definition of a blind trust:

“A financial arrangement in which a person in public office gives the administration of private business interests to an independent trust in order to prevent conflict of interest. Under the trust, the owner does not know how the assets are managed.”

Being a “blind” trust has absolutely nothing to do with who knows who is managing the business interests and the fact that the premier didn’t know this is alarming. During the election campaign in 2015 Ball committed to being open and transparent when asked about blind trusts and promised to do whatever was necessary to strengthen legislation regarding conflicts of interest. Ball holds interests in at least 16 companies, several of which have involvement with government, which is why it is essential that he adheres to the guidelines outlined in legislation. Some people agree with the practice of using blind trusts, while others firmly believe that all government members should have to divest themselves of any business interests that put them in a conflict of interest before sitting in the legislature.

It is very hard to believe that a husband or a cousin or a son in law would be able to properly keep business dealings hidden and that no conversations will occur at family dinners or get togethers. While most people would agree that blind trusts are necessary to keep business dealings at arm's length from ministerial duties, many people feel they are little more than see-through “venetian blind trusts,” that sound good, but are not very effective at accomplishing their main goal or instilling confidence in the public that no back-door deals are being done to benefit business interests.

Back to the main point at hand, while it is great that Ball and his ministers have been able to get their holdings into their respective blind trusts, the fact that the taxpayer must foot the bill for the establishment of these trusts should be an outrage to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I’m sure that if Premier Ball wants to retain his business holdings, that the expenses related to establishing and administering his trust should be his responsibility. Nobody should begrudge the premier or any other minister for any success they have had in their personal careers, but when they made the choice to run for public life they should have accepted the costs of establishing their respective trusts as the cost of doing business.

After nearly a year and a half of hearing Dwight Ball talk about our dire financial situation, learning that we paid $42 900 to establish his blind trust is beyond bad optics. Ball spent over $200 000 out of his own pocket during the Liberal leadership campaign in 2013 but the overburdened taxpayer is expected to pick up the tab for his blind trust? It doesn’t sit well with this blogger and I’m willing to bet that it is not going to sit well with very many voters when the information gets out to the public.

While this may have been acceptable behaviour in the past, this government has made it very clear that times are tough and things need to change. Maybe before they close any libraries or raise any more fees they should look at how much money is being spent on absurd entitlements like this on the taxpayer’s dime. If Dwight Ball really wanted to be a leader, he would lead by example and pay back the $42 900. Anything less is an insult to all of the people who are being burdened with over 300 new taxes and fees and being told that we all need to do our part.

Budget 2017: Holding the Line

Budget 2017: Holding the Line

By: Ryan Young

After months of speculation and debate, Cathy Bennett delivered her second budget speech in the House of Assembly on Thursday. The large scale public sector layoffs that everyone was expecting did not materialize, and there was very little of anything to make headlines in this year’s budget speech. The deficit went down thanks to a rise in oil prices and production and the harsh revenue measures from budget 2016, but other than a few bright spots, the budget itself was pretty lackluster. Even the flagship peace offering, a decrease in the gas tax, was preempted by a seven cent rise at the pumps on Thursday. During it all, a small but boisterous crowd gathered on the front steps of Confederation building with food and music to let the government know that the people are still angry and they are not going away.

The really good news in the budget was that oil revenues were up, which along with the extra tax revenue, reduced the deficit from a projected $1.83 Billion to $1.1 Billion. The projected deficit for 2017-2018 is $778 million as long as oil prices hold steady. Oil production is expected to be slightly lower this year with a projected average price of $56 per barrel. Hebron will come online later this year but with an equity stake in the project, the province will not reap many benefits from that development in this fiscal year.

The gas tax reduction was the other big news in the budget, with the Liberals pledging to reduce the tax by 75% by the end of the year. The first reduction of 8.5 cents will come into effect June 1^st with an additional 4 cents coming off in December. The remaining tax will be evaluated before the fall fiscal update. Unfortunately for the Liberals, their good news piece of the budget was counteracted by a big bump in the prices at the pumps. In any case, the reduction of this tax is good news, even if the other 299 taxes and fees they raised in budget 2016 are still in place.

Some other good news items were included in Bennett's speech. Money for child care subsidies and raises for Early Childhood Educators are positive stop-gap investments in lieu of a new child care strategy for the province. New money was allocated for planning for the replacement of the Waterford Hospital and the penitentiary. Money was also added to the justice system, including $250 000 for free legal advice for sexual assault victims and more crown attorneys to help reduce caseloads. Federal monies for mental health and home care came down the pipes, and $500 000 will be spent to hire new student assistants for inclusive classrooms. Funding was also restored to the operational grant for libraries to keep the doors open until the EY report is complete.

Transfers to Nalcor will come in at around $485 million, which is significantly lower than the $1.3 Billion allocated in budget 2016. Nalcor has also been instructed to find $210 million in revenues by 2020 to help offset electricity rate increases. No specifics were given on how that would be accomplished, but both Bennett and Premier Ball offered assurances that rate mitigation is a priority for this government.

It was a budget that tried to get a little bit in for a lot of groups and it did a good job of doing that without ruffling too many feathers. The downside is that the budget left in limbo thousands of public sector employees who still have no idea how safe their jobs are. Minister Bennett stated that mass layoffs would not be her approach but that her government would continue to find efficiencies moving forward. That has many believing that instead of facing the hard criticism of big job cuts, that they will dole them out instead as a death by a thousand cuts. While many public employees were breathing a sigh of relief that they still have a job today, they are still in a position of uncertainty when it comes to planning for their short and long-term futures. That will likely mean another year of decreased consumer confidence which will continue to negatively affect the economy.

Very little was done in this budget to address government spending. Nearly $300 Million in spending reductions are planned although we don’t know exactly where those savings will come from. A wage freeze was also introduced for this fiscal year for all managers and non-unionized public employees. While the freeze itself will not offer much in the way of savings, it may be setting the tone for future negotiations between Bennett and union leaders.

The overall theme put forth by the government seems to be that their tough decisions are working and that we are turning a corner and need to stay the course. The reality, however, is that we are doing better because of the price of oil, and even the massive hardships that have been placed on the people of the province have made little difference to our bottom line. The Liberals claim to be on track to reach their target of a return to surplus by 2022, but that claim is based on assumptions that oil will continue to rise and bail us out from our grim situation.

While there are a few good things in this budget, it is mostly an exercise in smoke and mirrors designed to buy the government another year in the hopes that oil royalties will allow them to spend their way out of the people’s bad books. There is no obvious plan to address spending issues or our escalating provincial debt, and despite a little well intentioned money being spent, all they really have to show for their efforts are plans to make more plans. While few would argue that proper consultation is needed before a government acts, many are wondering when this government will stop consulting and start acting on what they heard. The solutions offered in this budget are band-aids at best and offer no indication of what this government’s plans are, beyond waiting for the price of oil to go up.

As benign as Budget 2017 seems to be, the devil will be in the details and it might be quite a while before the full effects are known. Instead of large scale cuts we should expect layoffs in dribs and drabs, but the final number will likely depend on how much the price of oil rises. Even after the rude awakening we just went through on the dangers of relying to heavily on oil royalties, the Liberals seem content to ride the wave and hope to utilize offshore revenues to offset all of the new taxes and fees. They keep promising us a plan but what they delivered was a hold-the-line budget that does nothing to address the real issues at play. I guess all we can do is pray to the great god of oil and hope that the prices can stay up until we have time to elect a government that does have a plan.

Spin to Win

Spin to Win

By: Ryan Young

The premier held another fancy event yesterday. As usual it was full of glossy graphics and plenty of pats on the back for a job well done. The occasion was a report on Phase 1 of “The Way Forward,” the Liberal roadmap designed to make people believe that our government has the slightest clue of what they are doing. The funniest thing is that someone in the premier’s office really thought that the information presented yesterday would actually impress the individuals and groups in attendance and instill confidence in the public at large.

What we learned from Premier Ball’s announcement was that after nearly a year and a half in power, and six months into “The Way Forward,” the Liberals have only managed to find a meagre $45 million dollars in savings. I wonder if that includes the cost of developing and marketing “The Way Forward” to the masses? Finance Minister Cathy Bennett promised that immense savings would come from the utilization of zero-based budgeting, but according to their own numbers they were only able to find $24 million dollars of government waste to trim. “The Way Forward” also pushes many of the government targets well into the future, some as far as 2025, without any definitive information about how they plan to meet them. There is plenty of fancy jargon, but when it comes to actual ideas and plans, “The Way Forward” leaves much to the imagination.

Phase 1 of “The Way Forward” was touted as a plan to reduce government costs, but despite all of the spin and hoopla from the government, it fell flat. With all of the extra taxes and fees that are burdening the population of this province, and job cuts likely coming in the very near future, $45 million is hardly enough to convince anyone that the government is willing to clean up its own house before looking for cuts elsewhere. Despite all of the pretty red checkmarks, very little has been accomplished so far, and there are little or no details on many of the initiatives that have been brought forth.

As James Mcleod pointed out in The Telegram, many of the things the Liberals are claiming as completed with red checkmarks are not entirely factual. For instance, the leased space savings they indicate at the very top of the report card was actually a move made by the school board months before “The Way Forward” was even released. In fact, out of the dozen red checkmarks on the section titled” “A More Efficient Public Sector,” the only two initiatives that actually showed real savings were the $24 million from zero-based budgeting and another $20-25 million from laying off core government management positions.

Phase 2 of “The Way Forward,” will focus on job creation and growth, and promises 14 000 person years of new employment, whatever that means. While new jobs should be a positive thing to announce, this ends up being just another example of the poor job being done in the government communications office. God forbid that they tell us how many actual jobs they plan to create or how they expect their plan to offset the predicted 20% unemployment in a few years. Instead we get 14 000 person years of employment. No matter how much the communications staff try to dress up the incompetence of their masters, people are not being fooled by fancy vocabularies and glossy brochures full of rhetoric and spin. For a government that is so out of touch with the common person, you would think they would try to communicate in a way that will allow voters to feel connected to them, but nope…14 000 person years of employment is the best they can come up with.

I’m sorry dear reader if I sound a little bitter, but in the age of fake news and alternative facts it is very difficult to sit back and watch this government spending our tax dollars on these asinine events designed to pat themselves on the back and make them look better in our eyes. People are tired of empty promises and endless spin, and a leader that can talk for hours without saying anything at all. They voted for a government that promised openness and transparency over and over again, but instead have become one of the most secretive and tight-lipped governments we have ever seen. People want the truth and a little hope, but instead they are constantly given the same old political runaround that has become so common that it is the only thing we have ever known.

Maybe the Liberal’s do have some real ideas on how they expect to meet all of the outcomes promised in “The Way Forward,” but why they would keep it all to themselves is beyond this bloggers comprehension. More likely, as it seems to the public, they are actually trying to keep up appearances and look competent, while they hope and pray for a return to high oil prices so that they can start spending money again and be all things to all people before the next election. The major problems with that strategy are:  1) According to all the best experts the price of oil will continue to hover around $60 a barrel for the foreseeable future, at least as long as the current Liberal reign. 2) People don’t want another spending spree with our oil revenues. They want a stable economy where oil royalties are a bonus and not the basis of our entire economic fortunes.

The people who are running the communications for the government on the hill would do well to take notice that all of their unique language and high priced promotional materials are falling on deaf ears and blind eyes. The time for political spin has passed, and with the Liberals having burned every bit of their political capital so early, they have no credibility left to convince people that their spin holds any weight. The people are ready for the openness and transparency they were promised and Dwight Ball would be wise to realize that no matter how much he smiles and talks in circles, that we are just not buying it anymore. It’s time for them change the narrative and try something radical and new. You know, like telling the truth… 

The Funeral March

The Funeral March

By: Ryan Young

When Education and Early Childhood Development Minister, Dale Kirby, publicly stated that any teacher cuts in this year’s budget would be made “over my dead body,” most people rolled their eyes at the ministers attempt to make it appear like he was finally ready to stand up for the children of Newfoundland and Labrador. The very next day, we learned that Mr. Kirby was already backtracking on that statement, and what he actually meant was that there would be no change to the teacher allocation formula, but that there was still a possibility of more job losses for teachers.

Of course, Kirby was not literally talking about his own dead body, he was talking about the death of his career. As a long -time advocate for education, Dale Kirby became known for being stubborn and voters had assumed that after four years on the opposition side criticizing education policies, that he would be a good man to get our system back on track. Nobody could have predicted that Kirby would quickly cut education in this province to the bone, a term that was a favourite of his when in opposition. He is already feeling the heat, and he knows that further cuts to education will certainly hasten the end of his time in our House of Assembly.

Nothing was spared in education last spring. Teacher cuts, busing cuts, library cuts, and child care cuts were all offered up as part of Cathy’s directive to trim 30% from each budget. The provincial child care budget alone took a 16% cut in funding, just months after Kirby had ridiculed former minister Clyde Jackman at a public child care forum where he promised investment, not cuts. I’m sure that everyone understands that the province is in a tough place, but when you make a career out of advocating for better education and then when you finally have the chance to make a difference, your first act is to make dramatic cuts, people are going to question your credibility. Kirby has continued to defend his actions by blaming the opposition whenever a serious question is asked of him and has refused to take responsibility for any actions or comments he has made. All of this has elevated him to the same level of disdain that people have for the premier and the finance minister.

If you read my last post, you would know that credibility is a big problem for our government. With the House of Assembly open again, the Liberals have continued to dodge questions and dance around the issues, all the while pointing the finger of blame back at the opposition side every single time a serious issue is raised. Dwight Ball continues to throw his own credibility under the bus by maintaining his Ed Martin story, and Cathy Bennett maintains that her fiduciary responsibility to Nalcor, a crown company owned by the people, trumps her responsibility to protect the people of the province by providing pertinent information to government about the corporation. If that was indeed the case legally, then why was Bennett ever appointed as a minister in the first place? How can we have a finance minister that stated publicly that her first responsibility is to the Nalcor board and not the people of this province that she was elected to represent?

Politics is a world built on trust. You don’t always have to make the most popular decisions, as long as the people feel that you are being honest with them. Governments in this province and elsewhere have quite often been able to get themselves out of trouble by coming clean with the people and providing a clear plan of action. For this government, it seems to be more about duck and cover and one-way communication. Trust does not seem to be a matter of concern as the tendency has been to not be honest until evidence is presented that forces them to acknowledge the truth. Even when faced with blatant facts, such as in the recent Auditor General’s report into Ed Martin’s severance, they continue to go with their own story, despite the fact that everyone in the province knows that they are not being honest.

Trust is something that when broken, is very hard to get back. Most governments realize this, and work very hard to ensure that those values shine through in their interaction with the people. In our case, government has failed at every turn to be upfront and honest, or to provide us with a clear plan of what their intentions are. The Way Forward is a lovely document, but one that is very short on details and facts, and even when they make announcements that sound positive, hard facts are always left out in favour of spin and fluff. Even after all of the public outrage and backtracks in the past year, they still can’t manage to come out and have a real conversation with the people about the issues.

Despite the millions spent in communications, it seems like every single time a government member opens their mouth, something comes out wrong. This is a tell-tale sign that the decision makers in this province are not in tune with the wants and the needs of the people of this province. People are tired of the same old political games. They want the real change they were promised and they want their elected officials to listen to them. Kirby’s “over my dead body” quip has been a gold mine for cartoonists, media, and bloggers, but it does raise the issue that there will likely be many “dead bodies” of political careers after the next election. Cue The Funeral March…

Validate and Prioritize

Validate and Prioritize

By: Ryan Young

Last week the government announced its 2017 pre-budget consultation schedule. Yes, that’s right, more expensive consultations, just so the government can say that they consulted with the people prior to bringing down their new budget next spring. I am all for consultation, as long as it is productive. That, however, would mean that the government actually listened to what the people were saying instead of cherry-picking a few ideas that suit their plans and presenting it as what the people said they want.

During the public sessions that were part of the Government Renewal Initiative that the Liberals began last fall, people were asked three questions:

1. Thinking of all of the things government spends your money on to provide the residents of the province with services, what are three things that could be stopped in order to save money?

2. Given the financial challenges facing our province, what three things do you think government could do to raise money (increase revenue)

3. How can government be more innovative or efficient to provide quality services at lower costs?

While the official results of these consultations are not due to be released until March, likely at the same time as the budget, these questions guided the direction of The Way Forward document that was released last fall. This year, people are now being asked to provide their input on the four main pillars of The Way Forward.

1. A more efficient public service

2. A stronger economic foundation

3. Better services

4. Better outcomes

Looking at the “Our Fiscal Future” road-map, the consultations happening next month are listed as “Validate and Prioritize” with the subheading as “Seek Public Feedback on Choices Presented.” That indeed seems to be what they are attempting to do by setting the events up with the four main questions for discussion. This will be the final phase of the renewal initiative before it is completed and incorporated into The Way Forward, and future Liberal budgets. Whether on not what people have to say will change anything in The Way Forward will remain to be seen, but this writer wont be holding his breath.

You can be sure that the last thing that these Liberal ministers and MHA’s want to do right now is to publicly engage with people across the province. Unfortunately for them, it is a necessary step for them to be able to complete their promise of public consultation, and so they will be able to fall back to the argument that they asked the people what they wanted when more “tough decisions” come down the pipe in subsequent budgets. For them it is all about the optics of it, but as we recently saw on the Prime Ministers optics tour, things can quickly backfire when you put arrogant politicians in a room with angry people who are directly suffering under their policies.

It will be interesting to see if there is any productive discussion at all or if the whole thing just turns into a long parade of people who want to air their grievances directly to government. I expect it will be a very tough tour for the Liberals who will be asked to publicly answer for their poor choices so far. Last time around people were still somewhat optimistic that they might actually have a say in the future of their province, but with the actions of this government over the past year, only the most partisan reds still share that view. The rest of us just see it as an exercise in futility and even more wasted taxpayer dollars. I really wish I could write with a less cynical view, but I can only work with what I am given. At the end of the day, Dwight, Cathy, and all the rest already have their minds made up and no matter what they hear from people over the next couple of weeks, it will be full steam ahead for The Way Forward.

If you are interested in attending a session, you can find the information here:

http://www.fin.gov.nl.ca/fin/budget/prebudget2017/index.html

The Twelve Rogues of Christmas XII - Cathy Bennett

The Twelve Rogues of Christmas XII - Cathy Bennett


Part 12 of the Twelve Rogues of Christmas takes a look at Windsor Lake MHA and Finance Minister Cathy Bennett

Click Here:

https://youtu.be/8gYljMNZu7w

A Year to Forget

A Year to Forget

By: Ryan Young

It’s hard to imagine that it has only been a year since Dwight Ball’s Liberal Party took the reigns of government in this province. After more than a decade of Tory rule, people were eager for a change. The Liberal 5-Point Plan that served as their 2015 election platform was very specific, as were the promises that Ball repeated day after day on the campaign trail. Unfortunately, it quickly became evident that things would be par for the course under Ball’s leadership, and he wasted little time in beginning to break his promises. As far as the residents of the province are concerned it is just Liberal, Tory, same old story.

One of Ball’s most enthusiastic campaign promises was to repeal the 2% increase to the HST. Ball crossed the province telling people that the HST was a job killer and that a Liberal government would eliminate the unfair Tory tax increase. Ball did in fact keep his promise to repeal the increase shortly after taking office, but that only lasted until the budget speech, when the 2% increase was reinstated, making the whole effort to repeal it in the first place a colossal waste of time, money, and resources. The premier and finance minister claimed that they had no idea how bad the financial situation of the problem really was. Many people are skeptical of that answer, but it has started to make more sense when you consider the many other decisions they have made since. Maybe they really are that stun’d that they couldn’t see the forest for the trees, even if every engaged citizen in the province knew that we were in a tougher spot than the PC’s were letting on. When you consider everything that has happened over the past year, stun’d certainly seems to fit.

There was absolutely no need for the Liberal’s to make so many outstanding promises that they knew they would not be able to keep. The electorate was so fed-up with the PC Party that the Liberal’s could have ran on a very thin platform and still would have cruised to an easy majority. Somehow, Ball and the campaign team thought that it would be a good idea to promise the province the moon, knowing all well that they would have to make tough decisions in the days ahead. I’m sure that Dwight thought that he could follow the Clyde Wells model and get the tough stuff out of the way early on and hope that people will forget by the end of four years. What I don’t think he or anyone else in government realized is that the political landscape has changed since the 1990’s. The internet and social media have changed the way we talk about politics, and leaders are no longer able to hide behind the mainstream media. People are more engaged than ever before and they want real change and not just more platitudes with no action.

That brings us up to the disaster that was Budget 2016. With all of the promises in the 5-Point Plan, there was very little to prepare people for the extreme measures that were presented by Cathy Bennett during her first budget speech. We all knew that the government would need to take some action, but for most people, Budget 2016 was just too much too fast. People reacted, and the government was caught off guard by unprecedented protests against the budget all across the province. The public pressure caused the Liberal’s to backtrack on several decisions, and people are still actively protesting the government and demanding that they listen to the concerns of the people.

Things got really heated over the #MakeMuskratRight protests, and the government again found themselves mired in controversy. With the premier out of the country, emotions raged and the camp at the Muskrat Falls camp was ultimately occupied by fed-up Labrador residents who wanted their voices heard. After a marathon twelve hour meeting with indigenous leaders, Ball went out of his way to say that the protests played no part in the agreement that they had reached. Many saw this as another kick in the face and an example of how foolish Ball can be when he opens his mouth. The Muskrat Falls issue is far from over, and Ball, as the minister responsible for Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, would be wise to make more than the four trips that he made to Labrador last year to talk about the issues.

As the old saying goes, the proof is in the pudding and we are seeing the effects of Budget 2016 all around us. Long-established businesses are closing, bankruptcies are up, housing starts are down, and unemployment is expected to hit a staggering 20% by the end of the current governing term. The biggest problem of all is that this government has not given us any indication that they have the slightest clue of how to get things under control. The Way Forward document is big on expectations but very thin on the details on how we will reach the very lofty targets that are outlined in its pages. There is no solid plan to address government spending and people have lost confidence that this government has what it takes to get the job done.

It has certainly been an eventful year and I am sure that Ball and Company are hoping that the next year will be a little smoother. Unfortunately for them, there is a large segment of the population that will be working hard to make sure that does not happen.The government has backed away from many of their controversial policy decisions and seem to be willing to fly through the next three years by the seat of their collective pants. When asked about what they are going to do, the best they can muster is a weak blaming of the Tories, but sooner or later they are going to have to stop blaming and start governing. 

You can be sure that the people of the province will continue to hold the Liberal's feet to the fire and it will be interesting to see how they will address the issues in the coming year. They don’t seem interested in listening to what stakeholders have to say, and they have proven repeatedly that they are not capable of making sound, long-sighted decisions, despite having had to repeal several of the decisions they made without adequate foresight or consultation. Just look to the levy and the library closures to prove that point.My advice for the future is to buckle up for the ride and get ready for another wild year of back-steps and misfires. I wish I could be more positive, but this rogue has to call it as he sees it. I just hope I will be here writing this time next year, instead of living up-along like so many others who are being forced to leave. Maybe Dwight is getting the Clyde Wells blueprint right after all...

Do We Need New Legislation for Question Period?

Do We Need New Legislation for Question Period?

By: Ryan Young

Most people don’t bother to watch the proceedings of the House of Assembly. They get highlights of the best exchanges during question period on the news. I envy these people, as they get to bypass the unavoidable rises in blood pressure and eye rolls that come from watching the spectacle on a daily basis.

It was our second premier, Frank Moores, that brought question period into our House of Assembly after his election in 1972. The idea was to bring more openness and transparency into the legislature. Although it did accomplish that goal to some extent, Moores always considered question period a colossal waste of time and avoided it whenever he could.

The idea behind question period is a good one. Opening the government up to questions about legislative issues seems like a no-brainier. It would be except for one thing, there is nothing in the legislation that requires a member to answer a question directly and/or truthfully. In fact, it is considered un-parliamentary to call another member a liar in the House of Assembly, or to question the truthfulness of their answers. Therefore, we often have opposition parties asking the same questions, over and over, but in a slightly different way.

To give you a better idea of what I am talking about, let me quote a couple of exchanges from the first day of the current sitting of the house. Let’s start with an exchange between Opposition House Leader Keith Hutchings and Finance Minister Cathy Bennett.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Quebec is receiving $10 billion in equalization while forecasting a $2 billion surplus. Nova Scotia is getting $1.7 billion; yet, Newfoundland is running a deficit and not seeing a penny in equalization.

I ask the Minister of Finance: Have you made any effort to advocate for equalization from the federal government for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud to stand in this House of Assembly and speak to the incredible work that our Premier and our colleagues on this side of the House of Assembly have been doing with our federal counterparts – successfully, I might add – to help lighten the burden of the financial situation that we're faced with in our province. 

Recently, there was an announcement of a $2.9 billion enhanced federal loan guarantee which will help reduce the costs associated with the Muskrat Falls Project, Mr. Speaker. In addition to that, we've seen actions that are very broad, including things like removing the tariffs from the boats that were purchased by the former administration without even considering the tariffs on those boats. 

We have been working very hard with our officials and colleagues in Ottawa and we will continue to do that. We will continue to bring back results. 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader. 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

The minister didn't indicate if she was advocating on behalf of Newfoundland and Labrador. All that she referenced in regard to funding from the federal government, we certainly applaud that, but there's a federal program under equalization that we should have access to. 

In her fiscal update, the minister talked – it wasn't a supplementary budget, it was an update. The minister herself acknowledged the unfairness of the current equalization program. 

So, I ask her again: Why are you not talking to the federal government about a fair share of equalization for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board. 

MS. C. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, not only are we advocating, but we're getting results. I just listed a large number of them, including a $2.9 billion loan guarantee that this government has been able to bring to fruition for the people of the province against the Muskrat Falls Project which is a huge success. 

When it comes to equalization, Mr. Speaker, I would remind the Member opposite that the equalization formula as it is implemented today was negotiated and agreed to by the former administration. 

As you can see, Mr. Hutchings asked very direct questions to the minister, but the minister responded in a round-about way that did not even remotely resemble an answer to the questions that he asked. Certainly, the Muskrat Falls loan guarantee is an important issue to discuss in the house, but Mr. Hutchings was asking direct questions about equalization. Unfortunately, this is not a rare incident. In fact, if you look through Hansard for any given day, you will be hard pressed to find an example of a government member directly answering a question from the opposition members.

Another example from question period on the second day of sitting came during an exchange between Opposition critic, David Brazil, and Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development, Dale Kirby.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East – Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

I ask the Minister of Education: What did the review of the library system cost the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, as Members of the House of Assembly will remember, last January all agencies, boards, commissions and departments of government were requested to try and find a certain amount of savings over a number of years. The provincial libraries board, in collaboration with the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, came up with a plan. In fact, they exceeded the goal, some might argue, in terms of finding savings.

There were five proposals that were worked on. There was one that was accepted. That was incorporated into the budget. Following that, there was significant amount of public feedback about the need to have further consultation with the public about those decisions and also there was an interest in having a consultant review the system.

So that's what we did. If I have additional time, I'll continue, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East – Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

The minister didn't answer, so I'll answer it for him. It was $187,000 for the contract, but that didn't include travel, it didn't include taxes, associated fees, stakeholder agreements and third-party surveys.

So can the minister tell me – I'm assuming a quarter of a million dollars to this point – exactly what it cost the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador to have consultations around libraries after you determined that you were going to cut 54 of those in this province? 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development. 

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

I appreciate the opportunity to continue. I don't know why the Member is asking me questions if he thinks he already knows the answer to them. 

After we listened to what people had to say, the feedback that they had provided, we used the consultant that was basically the agency of record to go out and do some work. It was a major undertaking that was done. There were 10 consultations that were held around the province; two in St. John's. Those concluded on November 8. 

There was a significant amount of opportunity for people to provide feedback. There was also an online form that people could provide feedback through. There was also a survey that people could provide feedback to. All that feedback is now going to be included into a final report, Mr. Speaker.

Again, we see a minister twice asked a direct question, and both times the minister talked around the issue without actually answering the question. Mr. Brazil asked for an exact cost to taxpayers for library consultations and Kirby just plain ignored the question and responded in the usual round-about manner. He didn’t answer the question. How can this be considered to be providing the people with an open and transparent account of governments activities? Is it any wonder that Moores called it a waste of time? Is it any wonder that Opposition Leader, Paul Davis asked almost 40 questions about Labrador hydro  developments in 3 days last week, trying to get a clear answer to his questions? I’m not saying that the opposition does not put forth some dumb questions from time to time, but it seems that you can ask until your face turns blue, but nobody is going to give an answer.

So, what can we do to make it better? We need to find a way to hold members of government accountable to the spirit of openness and transparency that question period was supposed to provide. I am not exactly sure what it would look like, but there must be a way to make our elected officials answer a damn question. It is a sad state of affairs that we even have to consider legislature to force politicians to answer questions, especially when they run their election campaigns on openness and transparency. It should be the foremost thing on the minds of every elected member. Unfortunately, as you can see from the examples above, this is not the case.

If our elected officials are not willing to be open and honest with us, then maybe we do need legislation to force them. People have grown tired of endless government spin and they want real answers for a change. The Liberals are not alone; this has been going on ever since Moores brought in Question Period more than 40 years ago. The difference is that people are more informed nowadays, and they don’t have to rely on the word of the premier or one of his ministers. They can find the information for themselves and bring it to the public eye. This is a very important change that politicians have not seemed to figure out yet, but they will learn the hard way. The people have made it clear that they are tired of business as usual, and as they say; the truth will always come out in the end.

Muskrat Accountability

Muskrat Accountability

By: Ryan Young

Here is a question I have to ask: If Muskrat Falls is so bad that everybody refuses to take accountability for it, why don’t we just scrap the whole damn thing? I am not the first person to point out the strangeness of many of the #MakeMuskratRight protesters saying that they don’t want the project stopped entirely. I am sure many people feel that we have too much invested to turn back now, but with the final cost likely to be double what we have already spent, and the questions surrounding the north spur and methylmercury, it is hard to justify the reasoning that we must forge ahead at any cost. None of our political parties are willing to take the bull by the horns and demand a real stop/go analysis of the project, and the Liberals and PC's seem to be entrenched in a never-ending game of who-done-it.

So, just who do we blame for the boondoggle that is Muskrat Falls? At the PC Annual General Meeting last weekend, we heard that their party was not responsible for the current issues with the project. This revelation was met with much eye-rolling and public scrutiny, as is to be expected. This was after all the party of Danny and Kathy, who were determined to push this project through no matter what the cost. For them to take such a stand is laughable, and none but the most partisan blues are buying it.

Whenever we ask the current Liberal government about it they shrug and remind us they didn’t sanction the project. This past weekend, some Liberal MHA’s were sharing a new website that mysteriously appeared at the height of public outrage at the Liberal inaction of the situation in Labrador, highlighting the Muskrat Falls timeline from 2005 until just before the Liberals took office in 2015.

www.thanksmuskrat.com is full of quotes from current and former PC’s, and appears to be a hyper-partisan attempt to shift the heat that the government has been taking back onto the Tories. While the Liberals will deny any involvement in the website, its timing and content would make that appear to be suspect at best. They think the people have forgotten who started this mess, but they are wrong. The people remember quite well, which is why the PC party was reduced to just 7 seats last November. The people know full well who got us here, but they also know that they elected a new government to make things right. This latest move forces us to question if this government is only there to point fingers or if they actually plan to make any meaningful changes to the Muskrat Falls project.

Then we have others who like to blame the NDP and anyone else that was not crying foul of Muskrat Falls from the very minute that the words came out of King Danny’s mouth. Those who would say that if you were not there opposing the project in 2010, you have no business opposing it now. That is a very weak argument considering the many revelations that have come to the public’s attention over the past year or two. When it became clear that Nalcor had not been honest with the people on several issues, we began to wonder what else they might be lying about.

So, who do we blame for this monstrosity of a pickle we have gotten ourselves into? Not many members of the media were printing negative stories about the project in the beginning. Most people were too happy to be finally getting a one-up on the Quebec boogeyman to take a real hard look at the economics or the environmental aspects of the project. Those who did were written off as nay-sayers with their own agendas. Ed Hollett, Clyde Wells’ former EA, was a legendary Danny Hater. Cabot Martin, Dave Vardy, and Des Sullivan were the disgruntled Peckford Tories who were shut out of Danny’s government, Brad Cabana was written off as a Danny hater and a crack-pot, and many others were dismissed and ignored. Despite what your opinions of any of these people might be, they have all contributed to the ongoing Muskrat Falls discussion and have been instrumental in bringing the realities of the project into the public eye. All of these people were largely ignored by the media and the public at large for years. It is only now that the facts about the project are finally emerging that we are collectively realizing what a mess we have gotten ourselves into, and that many of the so-called nay-sayers were right all along.

Over and over we were told to trust Nalcor’s world class experts and science. We were told that the project was the only one that made sense, and that we were on-track to bring Newfoundland and Labrador energy independence. The economy was doing very well at the time Muskrat was announced, and most people were too busy working and enjoying being a “have” province to pay close attention to the handful of people who were daring to go against Danny Williams. Nalcor assured us all that science was sound and that there would be no negative impacts from methylmercury, no safety issues from the north spur, and cost overruns would be minimal.

Former Nalcor CEO Ed Martin told us blatant lies about how the contracts were let for Muskrat Falls. He said that they had used fixed-price contracts, but then later denied that statement and told us that the contracts we not actually fixed at all. This is one of the major reasons that cost overruns have greatly increased since construction began. Neither Martin, nor Lower Churchill head, Gilbert Bennett have ever been involved in a project like this before, yet we were told time and again to blindly trust their leadership without any public transparency or government oversight. Earlier this year, Stan Marshall was brought in to bring the project back on track, but other than to tell us that Muskrat was a boondoggle, silent Stan has been nowhere to be seen. As the project encounters even more problems and costs continue to skyrocket, we are being asked to blindly trust Stan. Sound familiar?

We all know that the PC’s sanctioned this project and basically gave Nalcor a blank cheque and free reign to do as it saw fit. A total lack of government oversight on the project allowed unqualified leaders at Nalcor to let things spiral out of control with not nearly enough attention paid to the economics and environmental concerns. A questionable company, Astaldi, was brought in to construct the dam, and the entire construction process has been mired in delay and controversy right from the start. Yet, if you look at the PC twitter feeds, you would swear that they were never involved in the project at all. Unless of course you ask them if it is still a good project. Then they are quick to defend Danny’s legacy and blame the current Liberal mismanagement for all of the current issues at Muskrat Falls.

No doubt, the Tories have had an easy time in opposition, with new ammo being served up on a silver platter by government almost daily, but their time in the wilderness does not seem to have given them much time for contemplation on how they ended up swept from power last fall. If the PC party is really serious about renewal, a good place to start might be take a long, hard look at how they got where they are in the first place. The Tory arrogance that people were so fed up with leading up to the last election has not gone anywhere, and trying to shift the blame for Muskrat Falls to the Liberals is not earning them any points from anyone but their own partisans.

And where is Wade Locke these days? The MUN economist was long the PC’s champion “expert” in justifying the business case for sanctioning the project. Locke assured us that oil prices would remain at record highs long into the future, and that the only option to be considered was Muskrat Falls. The words “lowest cost option” were thrown around so much that they lost all meaning to anyone who was listening. When asked by Pete Soucy when the project would no longer be the best cost option, Locke put the number at about $8 Billion. You would think that statement should have raised more eyebrows. Surely they must have anticipated cost overruns in such a remote construction location. With a ceiling of $8 Billion, they were left with very little wiggle room from the start. Now that oil is trading at less than $50 a barrel and cost overruns have but the project at $12 Billion and growing, it would be nice to hear Mr. Locke tell us at what point it makes sense to pull the plug.

That brings us back around to our current Liberal government. Yes it is true that they voted against the sanctioning of the project, but don’t read too much into that. Voting against a majority government is what opposition parties do. The real litmus test came when the Liberals took over last fall and were handed the keys to the Muskrat castle. We were given lots of words like “oversight” and “accountability,” but we didn’t really see any of those things, or any changes to the project. Pulling the plug was never on the table for the Liberals, and neither was further clearing of the reservoir to mitigate against methylmercury concerns until the protests got so loud. Instead the government followed the same template as their predecessors and kept Nalcor firmly in the driver’s seat. Finance Minister (and former PC supporter) Cathy Bennett sat on the board of directors at Nalcor and was accused of conflicts of interest regarding business contracts related to Muskrat Falls. It comes as no surprise that despite her harsh words for Nalcor in the budget speech, that she and her colleagues in cabinet were quite content for the project to keep moving along, business as usual. Unfortunately for her and the rest of the Liberals, that didn’t happen, and we were left with the Ed Martin severance fiasco, the mass resignation of the Nalcor board, and the nationwide protests that our premier assured us had no bearing at all on governments decision.

The Ed Martin debacle was a golden opportunity for the Liberals to break Nalcor and Muskrat Falls wide open. They could have opened things up to the public and let us see the extent of the mismanagement at our crown energy corporation. They could have ensured that the public fully realized the mess that the project became under the PC’s and would have earned an enormous amount of political capital without having to take any ownership for Muskrat Falls. Instead they chose to bumble and delay, and make themselves look like they were trying to hide everything from the public. For several days, last spring, each time the premier opened his mouth, lies came out. Instead of taking a golden opportunity to come out swinging and throw the PC’s under the bus, they decided to take ownership of all that negativity, and put themselves in a very tough position.  It makes one wonder what, or who, they might be protecting?

That brings us right back to where we started. Who do we blame for Muskrat Falls? The answer is certainly not black and white, and the blame runs deep. Danny, Kathy and the PC’s part played their part, as did Nalcor and its board and executives. The Liberal and NDP opposition of the day didn’t do enough to bring science and evidence into their political opposition to the project. The people have been too trusting of government, Nalcor, and the media to bring them the facts about the project. And now, the current government has not provided any degree of acceptable leadership to restore the faith of the people in the reasoning for finishing this project. It is easy to point the finger of blame and find a target when it comes to Muskrat Falls, but now that it has become crystal clear that this government has no intentions of stopping the project altogether, we need to stop talking about blame and start talking about responsibility.

The premier can stand in front of the province and say that he did not sanction the project and that his government inherited this boondoggle, but at this point those things no longer matter. The day he was sworn in as premier, he took responsibility for Muskrat Falls, and it is his responsibility now to make sure the concerns of the people are heard. The poor planning and management has continued under the leadership of Ball and Marshall, and the premier has dithered on each and every issue he has encountered. This has caused him to keep getting backed into corners and appearing weak whenever there are questions about his leadership. What we need is for our government to tell us the truth and stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes on Muskrat Falls like the previous administration did for so long. It was this attitude that pushed the PC’s back into the political wilderness, and the way things are going, the Liberals are very likely in for a similar fate.

All the blame in the world cannot hide the fact that the Liberals hold the power now. They have the numbers and the science in their hands and they have had more than enough time to develop a real plan for Muskrat Falls. The premier can stand at the microphone and say that the protests had nothing to do with the recent agreement with indigenous leaders, but we all know that this government failed to act until they were backed into a corner, again. Even then, he was quick to point the finger of blame, and suggested that we were asking the wrong premier questions about Muskrat Falls. Well here is some advice for our premier. Real leadership is not about pointing fingers and ducking out back doors. It is about meeting problems head-on and making decisions, even when they are hard or unpopular. It is about engaging the people who are desperately seeking your leadership on important issues, even when you know they wont agree with you. And most importantly it is about standing up for what is right and good, and inspiring others to follow you and to believe in you.

Does Dwight Ball have what it takes to be a real leader? I won’t attempt to answer that, but I do know that our premier has done very little to inspire confidence in our people. How can we believe in him, when he has not done or said anything to give us something to believe in? At this point we are left to judge on the track record so far, and for that, the 20% approval ratings might be generous. It is time for our premier and our government to stop playing the blame game and to stand up and lead this province. We can no longer afford to look to our past, the time has come to start looking to the future. So please Mr. Premier, stop playing the blame game and start leading.

Mixed Signals & Fiscal Fidgeting

Mixed Signals & Fiscal Fidgeting

By: Ryan Young



Yesterday we saw the release of the provincial fall fiscal update from Finance Minister Cathy Bennett. Mrs. Bennett has certainly come a long way from her tough talk in Budget 2016. Despite harsh criticisms for her predecessors and even harsher budget measures imposed on the people, Bennett has softened considerably since the spring, and has apparently lost her appetite for fiscal solvency. Thanks to increased oil revenues and the massive tax grab that was Budget 2016, our provincial deficit has been reduced from $1.8 Billion, to just under $1.6 Billion. Not much was said about the Liberals magical plan to get spending under control, but we were promised a “vision statement” from the premier in the very near future. It seemed that Bennett was at odds with many of her previous statements about her economic plan, but as we all know, communication is not this governments strong suit.

Trying to follow government messaging since last November has been an adventure, to say the least. Remember when Dwight Ball called the HST a job killer and repealed the 2% hike, only to reinstate it in the budget just a few months later? Former Liberal insiders have said that Cathy was never happy with Dwight’s opposition to the HST hike, knowing full well that we would need the revenue that it would provide. But once Dwight walked out in front of the camera and denounced the action as a “job killer,” the rest of the crew had no choice but to go along for the ride. As we all know, they formed government on a campaign platform full of wistful promises and within six months, Dwight had to bring back the job killing HST hike.

Then there was also the issue of job cuts. Dwight Ball was very quick to declare every job safe under a new Liberal government, but shortly after taking office, Cathy was telling us that everything was on the table. When we finally got to the budget, there were 650 public sector jobs cut. Despite the public outcry and comparisons to “Clyde Lied,” Bennett assured us that action was necessary to get the fiscal situation under control and to expect more action in the fall. Her very words from the budget speech were:

“Given the seriousness and scope of the current and forecasted fiscal situation, a new approach is required that moves beyond the traditional single year budget efforts. Budget 2016 contains decisive actions, and will be followed by more actions in a supplemental budget later this fall in conjunction with the Fall Fiscal update.”

This, of course, had us all bracing for cuts. High priced consultants were brought in to assist with labor negotiations, and the people could almost hear the knives being sharpened on Confederation Hill. Cathy had already told us that the spring budget was about “revenue actions” and the fall would see new “expenditure actions,” so it was odd when Dwight told us over the summer that the fall budget was not about cuts, but about creating new sources of revenue for Newfoundlander’s and Labradorians. Then, in September they decided to scrap the fall budget altogether and go with a fiscal update.

All of this is great political jargon. The Liberals are masters at it. But when push came to shove, it the government had little stomach for facing more outrage and protests against more broken promises. I’m sure most people were quite happy to not have to endure any more cuts, but at the end of the day we are still left with a deficit of nearly $1.6 Billion, and no clear plan of how our government expects to deal with it. We were told that the premier finally has a vision, and that he is even going to tell us about it. They just won’t tell us when, although I fully expect it will be at the party AGM next weekend In Gander.

At this point in the game, I am not sure if our premier could gain back the trust of the people if he walked down over Long’s Hill with two burning tablets with a plan written by the big man himself. The repeated government gaffes and communication breakdowns have brought things to the point that even when this government does or says something good, it is greeted with cynicism and negativity. With this government’s entire first year being comprised of deception, backtracking, and continuously changing their own narrative on the fly, is it any wonder that approval ratings are the lowest in the country?

I often write negatively about this government, but so far they have not given me much of anything positive to write about. I want them to do better, because when they do better, we all do better. I want them to be able to create effective programs and do a better job of managing government spending. I want to believe that they have a plan in place to guide our province through this rough patch and back into prosperity. I am not an anti-liberal any more than I am an anti-pc or anti-ndp. I could care less about partisan politics. What I care about is results. If this government has a plan, I want to hear it. I think we have all endured enough buzz-words and slogans. The people are desperate for real change.

All the people of the province really want is for this government to engage us on our concerns, and tell us their plan for the future. We were promised that under their watch things would be done differently, but so far it has just business as usual. Unfortunately, they seem to think that governing is the same as an running an election campaign where you must keep your cards close to your chest. Nobody disagrees that this government came into power in a tough spot, but they have been quick to find every opportunity to dig that hole deeper and use up all their political capital on deception, reactionary policy making, and bad communication. Nobody knows what this government stands for, and they have been trying their hardest to keep us all in the dark. Sooner or later someone is going to have to figure out how to communicate with people. If not, it’s going to be a long few years until 2019. Cathy said the premier has a vision, I hope it starts with learning how to talk to the people.