Notes from a scrum (I)

Dear Leader tells reporters outside His Dear Speech earlier this week:

We indicated that this was not the preferred alternative, it never was the preferred alternative, however, there’s a significant dollar value attached to going the other route. Y’know, We feel that this is something the federal government should participate in, to assist in, because of the importance of the project. Now whether they, y’know, put their funds directly into that [i.e. “compensation” for having to build a shorter power line], or they put it generally into the project, in addition to providing some guarantees, We will have to see where it resolves.

It used to be that Our Dear “Go It Alone” plan for the so-called Lower Churchill involved two federal funding – what’s the word again? components? elements? oh, right – two pieces.

Piece the First, a federal subsidy for the transmission line from Gull Island to The Province, which, by necessary implication, means that the transmission line is not economically viable on its own merits unless Nalco(r) can externalize the costs.

And Piece the Second, a “guarantee” for construction of the power plant itself. (Now expressed as guarantees, plural.)

Now there’s a third – what’s the word again? right, a third “ask”.

The “Go It Alone” plan also asks the federal government to put some “it” into the project, generally.

It’s a good thing that We so fervently desire to cultivate greater cultural, financial and moral autonomy vis-à-vis Ottawa. It would be terrible to see how much federal involvement was demanded for the “Go It Alone” option if We weren’t standing on Our own two feet and (inaudible).

(And that’s on top of the strange vulnerability of the “Go It Alone” project to the whims of Hydro-Quebec.)

But hey, this corner has bashed this point to death already. Enough of that.

The really funny thing about this part of Our Dear Scrum is how it clinches the diagnosis of Our curiously specific aphasia.

You know, how the Fonz couldn’t admit he was wr-wr-wr-wrong?

Well, for some deep-rooted psycholinguistic reason, Our Dear language cortex won’t allow Our vocal bits to put the word “loan” in front of the word “guarantee”:

Item: "We're pleased that he's joined sides with the Conservatives in terms of providing a guarantee for the development of the Lower Churchill."

Item: Does your party support efforts to develop the hydro-power resources of the Lower Churchill River System for the primary benefit of Newfoundland and Labrador, including the provision of a Federal Government guarantee to proceed with the project?

Item: "We have a commitment from Stephen Harper on a guarantee for the Lower Churchill. He's broken one [promise]. He can possibly break a second one."

Item: Other commitments were also made by Stephen Harper that were not kept. 5-Wing Goose Bay; custodial management; a Lower Churchill guarantee and numerous others.