Paul Oram

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, March 26, 2007:

MR. ORAM: It completely boggles my mind when I hear anyone talk about the little deal that was done on equalization, the little deal that was done on our Atlantic Accord. It was a major deal and I give the Premier, I give this government, 100 per cent marks for making that happen to this Province.

Thank God, by the way, thank God that he did it before this new federal government got in, this new crowd that got in there, that said on a little bulletin here that my hon. colleague from St. John’s North just showed a few minutes ago, where they said they would absolutely make sure that they gave us 100 per cent of our Atlantic Accord. They said for sure they would not put a cap on it. They would not do any of that stuff. Now, all of a sudden, we are talking about a crowd now that says: Hold the phone, now. We just decided that this deal is just a little bit too good for Newfoundland and Labrador. We do not really want Newfoundland and Labrador to have a great deal like that. Sure, we want Newfoundland and Labrador to do okay, we would like them to do all right, but we are not going to give them what they need to do really, really, well. Therefore, because it is not hardly so good for Ontario, or because it is not hardly so good for some other province in Canada, we have to stop that. We cannot let that deal go through.

What a bunch of silliness. Then, to listen to people opposite almost - I will not they are, I will say almost - supporting that deal. Well, I cannot believe it. The fact of the matter is, the Prime Minister of Canada made a deal, made an agreement, and now he has decided that he is going to pull back from that deal, he is going to put a cap on it. He cannot let Newfoundland and Labrador do any better than anybody else in Canada, and that is very, very scary. I wonder who we are going to be able to trust in the new election. That is the question I have to ask.

John Hickey

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, May 27, 2008:

MR. HICKEY: I can say this, Mr. Speaker, having been involved in this particular file with the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs no later than yesterday in a teleconference with union officials in Ottawa, that our base in Goose Bay, I am sad to say, is in jeopardy under the Conservative Government in Ottawa. The regional minister, Minister Hearn, should be ashamed. He should be ashamed! Never has he set foot on Labrador soil, Mr. Speaker, since he has been a regional minister. Never set foot on Labrador soil, Mr. Speaker! The disdain that we are seeing on behalf of the federal government toward this Province is absolutely ridiculous, disgusting, I say, Mr. Speaker. The promises that we were made about the 650 troops, the UAV squadron, all gone out the window, just like the Atlantic Accord; another unkept promise by the Harper government. I can say to the people of this Province, that anybody who wants to support Stephen Harper and the Conservative government, they need to really take a serious check. Because I can tell you what, this federal government has done nothing for our bases in this Province. It has done nothing for the issues that surround us here in this Province, Mr. Speaker. I have to say, the hon. Loyola Hearn, in my view, is less than honourable by the fact that he has yet to step foot on Labrador soil.

Jerome Kennedy (II)

Two years ago today, Jerome Kennedy marked the 60th anniversary of Confederation:

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, today is a day that brings with it, for some, reminiscing, for others, celebration, and for others, disappointment. However, despite the efforts of Prime Minister Harper and his government, we will not give up. We will not be beaten down. We are a resilient and a tough people. That comes from living by this sea for 500 years and fishing off its coast, and we will continue to make our place.

Jerome Kennedy (I)

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, March 26, 2009:

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, approximately $383 million of the projected deficit for this fiscal year is related to the impact of stock market declines on the value of our pension funds.

More than half of this deficit, $414 million, can be attributed to the unilateral action of the Harper government to eliminate benefits under the 1985 Atlantic Accord.

The federal government, Mr. Speaker, in its recent budget, imposed a massive cut on just one province, and that province is ours, contravening a long-standing agreement they had made with Newfoundland and Labrador. We as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are outraged that, after working so hard to achieve a greater measure of fairness and self-reliance in this federation, we are now being punished for our initiative.

Were it not for the actions of the federal government and pension fund value declines, we would be forecasting a surplus.

ED Buckingham

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, March 19, 2008:

MR. BUCKINGHAM: The Progressive Conservative Party has, for all my years of involvement, represented the political beliefs that I hold. When it veered too far I made my views known and worked from within to make change.

In 1987, as President of the PC Association for St. John’s East, I rose on the floor of a provincial meeting to ask then Premier Peckford if he had a business plan, some projections, anything that I could bring back to the good people of St. John’s East to justify the sinkhole that was known as Sprung Greenhouse. The Premier of the day was somewhat indignant that anyone would make such a challenge and told all assembled, not only did he not have that information but we would just have to take his word for it. My response was to rise and say: Mr. Premier, with all due respect, sir, that just is not good enough. Political suicide for a young district president perhaps, for I would have been better off to say nothing perhaps also, but the important question is: Do I have any regrets for having so long ago on that sunny day in Lewisporte having stood up for what I believe? Mr. Chairman, I have none, but I am sure that had I said nothing I would be kicking myself to this very day. So the question became: What now? Does one leave the party? That seemed to be an easy choice, but it was my choice not to leave. Rather, I resolved to make St. John’s East a stronger district, more prepared for whomever the next PC candidate was. While the PC Party of the day may not have represented the full of my political value system, it held enough, and let me assure you, Mr. Chair, the alternative held none.

In October of 2003, the federal PC Party announced its attention to emerge with the Alliance Party of Canada. I let this development digest for about two weeks and was finally forced to realize that this turn of events not only caused me a great deal of discomfort, it made me nauseous.

On September 2, 2003, I resigned from the executive of St. John’s East, stating that this merger is the death knell of the political values that the PC Party has represented and Peter MacKay is pulling the rope. This time, Mr. Chair, the party left me and I am was not going to follow it.

Mr. Chair, while I am proud and anxious to be any part of an ABC campaign for the next federal election, and I fully support anyone who is willing to jump on this bandwagon which is being so well driven by our Premier, I stand in this House to contend that I was one of the first to lead this bandwagon out of the barn.

Mr. Chair, words are words, principles are principles, and as the Prime Minister has so clearly shown, words can be twisted and changed. Principles, however, can only be abandoned. Now some people have suggested that the federal government has no principles and this is a grossly unfair statement. The federal government does have principles. Unfortunately, they are principles any parent would be ashamed to pass on to their children.

Mr. Chair, the PC Party, my party, prides itself in being open and democratic. The recent election has only served to strengthen my faith, not only in this principle, but in this party’s resolve to enact the principle. This is a party and a leader who not only talks the talk, but walks to walk and insists that the democratic process should unfold as it should.

In just a few months my faith in what I believe this party represents, my faith in how I thought a new member would be treated, and my faith in this party’s overarching desire to choose improving the lives of every resident over political expediency has been rewarded. Any resident of this Province would be greatly heartened to be in our caucus room, as I witness the commitment of our members to this Province. Every government member has a full voice and that opinion is considered and considered fully. While it is fair to say that this accepting and opening - and I know that the hon. members opposite may have a problem with this. While it is fair to say that this opening and accepting environment stems directly from a leader who insists on it being thus, I also suggest this stems more directly from a party who would expect no less from its leader.

Missing person

On September 3, 2008, Danny Williams sent an email to his caucus, asking them to pledge their loyalty in his Holy Sacred War Against Canada. This email somehow made its way to the CBC, which posted it on its website – that link being wonky at best, here’s a more stable link to the full e-missive. This is a screen cap of the headers: Notice anything?

The email was sent on September 3, 2008. This was just days after the by-elections in Baie Verte–Springdale and Cape St. Francis, so most of the Kevin Kaukus were not yet officially Members of the House of Assembly, and didn’t have MHA email addresses.

Obviously, Danny Williams didn’t need to send an email to Danny Williams, because Danny Williams already knew where Danny Williams stood on Danny Williams’ Holy Sacred War Against Canada.

So that leaves just one Progressive Conservative MHA who is not in the to-line of the email. Just one.

See if you – not you, Ed Hollett, anyone else – can spot the missing member.

And having spotted the missing member, ask yourself: why might that particular member be missing from such a politically-charged email?

Bob Ridgley

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, March 26, 2007:

MR. RIDGLEY: All positive things for this Province. Instead, they have chosen to use the word confrontational and to imply some negative effect to the stand that is being taken by the Premier.

Madam Chair, even if we use the word confrontational, there are times that people have to be confronted. For example, we confront people in the courtroom. A person is confronted by the fact that he was seen at the scene of the crime holding the gun. He has to be confronted with that evidence.

Madam Chair, the Prime Minister of Canada has to be confronted with the fact that these are his words when he talks about: We will leave you with 100 per cent of your oil and gas revenues. These are the words of the Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, when he says: 100 per cent of your resources, no small print, no excuses, no caps. Once again, the Prime Minister needs to be confronted. If that is what confrontational means, I say let’s go for it. Let’s confront him with the fact that he said no small print, no excuses, no caps. And we have our three Conservative MPs up there who also need to be confronted. If that is what confrontational means, let’s confront them with the fact that they need to stand up for this Province and not say that nothing is being lost. Something is, in fact, being lost. Something will be lost a couple of years down the road.

[…]

MADAM CHAIR: I remind the hon. member that his speaking time has expired.

MR. RIDGLEY: … I believe the Member for Port de Grave stood up the other day and said - maybe I misheard him - that the population in his area was growing. I believe that is what he said. So it is not altogether black in the Province, Madam Chair, despite the rants and raves and the hollow yelling that I hear from across the floor. I would remind some of those who are yelling at me right now, it is always the hollow base drum that makes the loudest sound.

Tom Osborne

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, March 26, 2007:

MR. T. OSBORNE: Do you know why we should not be faced with having to make that decision? Because of the promise that the Prime Minister has made.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Chair, these are the words of Prime Minister Stephen Harper when he said, "This is a commitment that was made by me in my capacity as leader of the Canadian Alliance when I first arrived here and has it origins in the intentions of the Atlantic Accord signed by former Prime Minister Mulroney in the mid-1980s. These are longstanding commitments, our commitment to 100 % of non-renewable resource royalties. It was our commitment during the election, before the election, and it remains our commitment today."

Well, what happened, Mr. Chair, to his commitment, when you have a Province like Nova Scotia who has pulled out of the Atlantic Accord, and a Province like Newfoundland and Labrador who have to seriously consider our options? It is a broken promise.

Terry French

From the proceedings of the Bow-Wow Parliament, May 16, 2007:

MR. FRENCH:

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to read a Private Member’s motion and one that I do, I might add, with great regret and great disappointment. It is something, actually, that I remember - before I read it in, I will just have these few words.

When the federal election was on over the Christmas season, Mr. Speaker, of course during the Christmas season you have the privilege to see a lot more people than normal, you visit a lot of homes and a lot of places. One of the things that I ran into was people’s fear of Prime Minister Harper, their concern about him, the concern about some of his views.

Mr. Speaker, I was one of the people who looked these residents in the face, looked them straight in the eyes and told them: Look, there is one thing we can be assured of with Stephen Harper, he does what he says, number one; and number two, he is committed to removing non-renewable resources from the equalization formula. That was one of the things, unfortunately, that I boasted him up.

Mr. Speaker, I was one of the people who looked these residents in the face, looked them straight in the eyes and told them: Look, there is one thing we can be assured of with Stephen Harper, he does what he says, number one; and number two, he is committed to removing non-renewable resources from the equalization formula. That was one of the things, unfortunately, that I boasted him up. I thought that he would be a man of his word, Mr. Speaker. I am sad to say today that I am reading this Private Member’s motion in and explain some of the reasons why I made the statements I did to residents in my district, and in particular close friends of mine who had reservations about the current Prime Minister, and it was me who said to them: Look, he is removing non-renewable resources. This is significant to this Province. You cannot measure the value of it.

Unfortunate, that is not the case. He did not live up to his word. I guess it was people like me, a Conservative stalwart in this Province for as long as I have been able to vote, Mr. Speaker, probably it means more to people like me than it does the average citizen, because I was the one who promoted people like Stephen Harper, based on his word, and today I am saddened by what has transpired over the last number of months.

So, Mr. Speaker, in that debate there was no misunderstanding, there was no secret where he stood at the time, and what his opinion was. The scary part about this is that, if you talk to the Prime Minister today, and you hear him in media outlets, you will be convinced, by listening to him, that he kept his promise, that he kept his commitment to remove non-renewable resources from the equalization formula. Mr. Speaker, it is simply amazing, when we here in the Province simply know the difference.

Basically, what the Prime Minister has done, he has done three things to the people of this Province and I guess to the people of the country as a whole. He said that promises do not matter. That his promises do not count and certainly they cannot be relied upon. Mr. Speaker, that is a hard thing for a commander and chief of a country to be leading the people in this Province certainly down the garden path.