"We can't allow things that are inaccurate to stand." — The Word of Our Dan, February 19, 2008.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

We have his assurance on that — whatever that is

As noted in the last posting, the "go it alone" approach on Our Dear Imaginary Lower Churchill project is utterly dependent on getting many hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government that we — or is that We — so earnestly desire to be morally and fiscally autonomous from.

Speaking of transmisson lines, Our Dear Environmental Filings propose transmitting power from Labrador to Newfoundland... but not within Labrador itself. The idea of an infrastructure fund for Labrador was the target of much Danny condescension and ridicule during the last provincial campaign. And in recent weeks, the Régime has made it clear that no region of the province can expect any special fiscal considerations just be virtue of being the host of any particular natural resource. While that message may be directed in the instant case at Grand Falls-Windsor, make no mistake: its real purpose is pour encourager les autres.

So, Labrador won't get any power from Labrador, and won't get any revenue from Labrador, and won't get any infrastructure by virtue of generating resource revenue for the provincial government; and really, other than being the location of the river, the dam, the cachement area, and most of the attendant environmental consequences, Labrador's connection to the Lower Churchill, in the eyes of Chairman Dan, would appear to be little more than some kind of crazy coincidence.

How'd all Our hydro get on Their river, anyway?

Perhaps the next time — polling season comes again in November, guys; mark your calendar — someone at the Telegram can ask Mr. Consistency...

"Sir, back in 2003, when you said, quote:
We will not develop the Lower Churchill unless the primary beneficiaries are Labradorians. You have my assurance on that.
what exactly did you have in mind? Could you name some of the specific ways — apart from access to power, infrastructure investment, or other fiscal considerations, since you have already soundly rejected all three of those options — by which you intend to make Labradorians the 'primary beneficiaries' of the Lower Churchill?"

Labels: ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home