Energy Plan Question (5)(a) and (b)

In 2003, Danny Williams, on the campaign trail in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, said:

"We will not develop the Lower Churchill unless the primary beneficiaries are Labradorians. You have my assurance on that."

In today's energy plan, Danny Williams says:

Labrador residents will be primary beneficiaries of the Lower Churchill project. Jobs and business activity from the construction and operation of the project are the first and most tangible benefits. A significant portion of the jobs and business spin-offs will occur naturally in Labrador. We will focus our efforts on maximizing benefits to Labrador through training and supplier development and will ensure that qualified Labrador residents have first consideration for employment on the project.

In addition to the significant construction benefits that will accrue to the people of Labrador from the Lower Churchill, the Provincial Government - with the input of people from all parts of Labrador - will also make investments now that will secure greater benefits from the project development (such as job training), help build a sustainable economy and continue to improve access to quality public services.

Curiously, while there is mention whatsoever of construction jobs, procurement, and business spinoffs, there is no mention of the revenues that would be generated by any future development of the so-called "Lower Churchill".

Question: given that it was the revenue split that was at the heart of the phoney war over the Atlantic Accord and its "principal beneficiary" clause, can Labrador and Labradorians truly be the "primary beneficiary" of the so-called Lower Churchill without securing 100% of the revenues, no clawbacks, no caps, no fine print, etc., etc.?

Or is "primary beneficiary" different from "principal beneficiary"?

If so, what are the points on which the two concepts differ?

Supplementary question, Mr. Speaker: where will the operations centre for the so-called "Lower Churchill" be? Will it be in Labrador, or, as is the case with Churchill Falls and Hydro-Quebec's northern stations, will operations be run by remote control from a comfortable office in a southern city somewhere?