That's a good question

The Danny Williams Re-Election Energy Plan says:

Previous agreements and regimes that govern our energy resources have not provided the province with a fair return on the use of our resources.

Our export focus will be on achieving direct access to both long and shorter-term customers in a number of markets, including Ontario, New Brunswick, Quebec, Nova Scotia, P.E.I., New England and New York. Achieving direct access is necessary to ensure we… secure a fair share of the economic upside potential of developments over the long term.

In The Mother of All Announcements the other week, Our Dear Premier also said:

"Determination and strength of conviction have been our guide, and today we have delivered a tremendous agreement for the people of the province, with a fair and reasonable return for our industry partners..."

It’s disappointing that Ed Byrne is no longer around, politically speaking, to ask important questions, like this one, that he asked as Opposition Leader in a July 14, 1999, press release:

It is not acceptable for the government to use terms like "full and fair share" without explaining what these words mean. Do they mean the same benefits the government promised in both the 1996 and 1999 elections, or has the government lessened its expectations? People have a right to full disclosure on issues that people feel are critical to our survival as a province.

On the other hand, perhaps it’s reason 3,976 that Our Dear Premier is happy to no longer have Ed Byrne to defend.

But you gotta wonder: if it wasn’t acceptable for the Liberal, Tobin, government to bandy around this undefined phrase… how is it acceptable for the Conservative, Williams one?

Oh, that Ed Byrne was still around to ask.

Oh, that anyone would.