Showing posts with label Globe and Mail. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Globe and Mail. Show all posts

25 October 2016

Small town politics in the big city newspapers #nlpoli

The federal Liberals created a new process to pick judges for federal court appointments.  The process - as the Globe pointed out on Thursday - was to ensure they could ensure future appointments would be more reflective of the diversity of the country.

On Saturday,  the Globe editorial praised the recent announcement of a white, middle-aged man  - with no experience on the bench before taking a politically-soaked appointment to the trial division in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2001  - as the first appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada from the far eastern province.

This appointment, heralded widely in Newfoundland as recognition of the province's identity, was not a case of playing identity politics, according to the Globe editorialist.

And,  the appointment of yet another grey-haired white guy was an affirmation of the government's new diversity process in appointments.  This was a triumph of qualifications over political connections, the Globe stated emphatically even though there is no evidence that what the Globe said is true or that the person who wrote the editorial was not under duress, mentally impaired, or drunk at the time.

A vintage Globe performance all-'round, in other words.

The editorial is quite obviously the result of something other than an unbiased assessment of anything.

But is it the result of some connections between the Globe and the folks behind the appointment?

Or is it yet another case of the Toronto Globe passive-aggressively poking at the Toronto Star?

You see The Star featured a story on Friday about newly minted Supreme Court Justice Malcom Rowe's decision in R v. S.B, a 2016 case from the Court of Appeal in which Rowe wrote the decision for the court.

The three justices on the panel criticized the trial judge for allowing the defendant's lawyer to read to the jury sexually explicit texts between the complainant and her lover as well as the graphic transcript of a consensual sex tape she made with her husband.  The Star story explains that the "complainant alleged she’d been raped vaginally and anally by her husband, and assaulted several times. He was acquitted on all counts by a jury."

The three appeals justices diverged on the outcome while agreeing the trial judge had made serious errors.  Then Chief Justice Derek Green, the dissenting voice, felt a new trial was necessary since the jury might well have reached a different verdict were they not exposed to the evidence of her sexual that had been presented to them inappropriately.

Rowe and his colleague White disagreed.  “I have reached this conclusion with reluctance given the unfair manner in which the complainant was dealt with,” Rowe wrote for the majority. 

“Nonetheless, I am persuaded by counsel for the respondent that the complainant, by her untruthfulness and the inconsistencies in several areas of her testimony, gravely undermined her credibility.”

“I think, by and large, what (Rowe’s) decision shows is that the criminal justice system is really quite bankrupt when it comes to dealing with our huge social problem of sexual assault,” [University of Ottawa law professor Constance Backhouse told The Star], “I think it says more about that, than it does about Justice Rowe.”

And a couple of days earlier, the Star editorial pointed out  - no d'uh - that Rowe hardly stands an appointment that reflects diversity.

Seriously.  And this is what the Globe missed in its rush to endorse the political nonsense represented by Rowe's appointment. 

News and editorial opinion, as it seems, is like politics. It is nothing if it is not local.  And, as in this case, it is nothing but local hogwash circling the boots of people who consider themselves Canad'as elites. Why people ever thought the Globe was more than a small town newspaper written by and for people with a small-town mindset is amazing.

Why people outside Tronna put so much stock in anything in its pages is an even greater mystery.

-srbp-

Massive re-write:  29 May 2019

20 December 2010

The triumph of provincialism

In what would otherwise be highly risible, the Globe’s Jeff Simpson laments the triumph of parochial interests in Canada politics while using as an example a provincial politician whom he apparently admires yet who epitomised the attitude Jeff apparently finds so troubling.

Two things on this for now:

1.  Don’t worry: Jeff knows what risible means.

2.  This is yet further evidence of why people in Newfoundland and Labrador should pay no heed to things that appear in the Globe and Mail

It is just a newspaper.

- srbp -

29 November 2010

An Ibbitson Inanity Hat Trick

“Mr. Williams can take credit for negotiating the deals that led to Voisey’s Bay…”

That’s a pretty tough trick since the deals that led to the development were signed before Danny Williams took office in 2003 and he had nothing to do with them.

John must have fact-checked with Rex Murphy who recently had Williams in office in the late 1990s.

And, as with the rest of Ibbitson’s safari – population and math -  the remainder of this article is no more accurate.

- srbp -

28 November 2010

More Ibbitson Idiocy

From the same column in which the safari journalist from Toronto proved he could not count, labradore finds another factual claim that is – to say the least of it – wrong.

This time it is the myth that half the population of the province lives in or near St. John’s.

Anyone care to guess where John got the crap in the column?

- srbp -

28 November 2009

Bucking the NB Power Hysteria

Tom Adams and Brian Lee Crowley take a look at the NB power sale in this weeks Globe.  it’s worth the read if only since it ignores the hysteria being fomented by opponents of the deal including New Brunswick’s version of Talk Show Sue, none other than Danny Williams.

Not quite so useful a contribution to any understanding of the issue comes from Canada’s Ersatz George Will ©.

Jeff Simpson displays as appalling a level of ignorance about energy issues in Newfoundland and Labrador as his column on Friday showed about the province’s demographic issues.

Viewed from St. John's, the Hydro-Québec offer is part of a decades-long effort to prevent Newfoundland from being the principal beneficiary of Labrador's huge hydro potential. If N.B. Power falls into Hydro-Québec's hands, then the massive Quebec utility will geographically encircle Newfoundland.

Viewing the world from St. John’s but understanding the issues, your humble e-scribbler has a completely different view.  And so do plenty more. 

But Safari Jeff wouldn’t know that because he likely flew in, did the hob-nob stuff a columnist of his august stature does and then frigged off back to Toronto.

For those who missed it, you can find his demographic nonsense dissected at labradore.

In a nutshell, it goes like this.  Safari Jeff states in his lede that:

For the first time in almost four decades, the population of Newfoundland and Labrador has actually grown.

The reality is that Newfoundland and Labrador’s population has grown many times in the past four decades.

The "first time in almost four decades" claim is true... if you start counting your four decades in 1993.

Yep and that “viewed from” line should have included the words “by Danny Williams” right after “St. John’s”.

-srbp-

12 August 2009

More crap from the Globe

As usual, Christie Blatchford gets it right.

A front page story in the Tuesday Globe excoriates an Ottawa judge for remarks he didn’t make in the decision on the O’Brien influence peddling case. There’s another column that carries on with the same nonsense.

In his decision, Justice Douglas Cunningham assessed testimony from one Crown witness and found that the portion of her testimony on which the Crown was relying was not really central to the conversation she was having at the time. 

Even during the portion of the witness’ evidence led by the Crown, there were sufficient variations in the statement to raise questions about her recollections.  On top of that, the defence was able to demonstrate that, having had many significant events in her life at the time of her statement to police, the judge concluded that the witness’  “recollection of a brief, casual portion of her conversation is so imprecise that, through no fault of her own, I must assign it little weight”.

There is no reference by the judge to the sex of the witness or anything of the sort.  There is nothing but a straight-up factual synopsis of the evidence, which is what you’d expect from a judge.

And out that, the legion of professional Irks has launched into an incredible pile of nonsense.

Shame on Toronto’s national newspaper for giving such crap such prominence.

But, as usual, Christie got it right.

-srbp-

12 February 2009

The notional national media

Go to the Globe and Mail website.

Try and find a story from the February 11 edition by Rheal Seguin on a supposed border flap between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador.

You’ll to look a bit.  For some reason a story that was prominent is now buried away on the “Others” page instead of on the national politics section where it was.

The story is bogus.  There is no border dispute.  The matter was settled in 1927 and the Romaine river hydro-electric project isn’t even close to the 1927 boundary.  This is another of those Sasquatch hunter things about the Labrador border:  people keep hunting because they know it’s there but the only “proof” turns out to be fiction.

That’s because the border controversy, like the Sasquatch, is made up.

And the story is one of the problems when you drop into Newfoundland and Labrador every once in a while rather than pay attention to what is going on here on a regular basis.

You wind up hunting Sasquatch instead of looking at the case of a real undefined border – this one in the Gulf of St. Lawrence – which is impeding exploration for and development of oil and gas resources.

Meanwhile over at the National Post, a editorial on the latest federal transfer racket contains an astonishing amount of stuff that is not true.

Now Mr. Williams and his government have calculated that switching to the new formula would be better for the coming fiscal year — netting Newfoundland’s treasury and extra $1.3-billion to $1.6-billion — so they want to switch. However, in January’s budget, federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty eliminated that option.

Not so.

The amounts quoted were totals over three years, not one.

More importantly they are estimates.

The only figure that seems to be plausibly correct is about $400 million that won’t flow in 2009 but even that is based on:

  1. Estimates. 
  2. Projections based on current knowledge instead of the actual financial situation in February 2010 when Newfoundland and Labrador will chose which of two Equalization options it will pick for 2009.
  3. A set of choices that wouldn’t have existed at all if the current provincial government in Newfoundland and Labrador had gotten its way at any point in the recent past.

The National Post editorialist didn’t stop with those untruths.  It went farther with other things it actually labelled as true when they aren’t:

It’s true Mr. Flaherty and the Harper government eliminated the switching option without first consulting their colleagues in the Williams government. It is also true that this policy change only affects Newfoundland, even though the province is not singled out by name. And it is true the Harper government is tired of Mr. Williams and the constant bashing they take from him, all of which could lead to the conclusion that this is what Mr. Williams claims — an act of vengeance aimed at him and his province.

  1. It’s not really clear that the feds didn’t consult.  The provincial officials knew something was up in November last year.  What happened after that is a bit murky.
  2. The policy change affects all provinces receiving Equalization and provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador that are still affected by the program.  Ontario and Quebec aren’t going to draw as much from the federal teat as they would have under the program from 2008.  That’s been covered in other conventional news media.  Heck.  The changes are being made expressly to limit the impact on the program of having Ontario now drawing Equalization.

Now that last part – about being tired of the tirades  - is probably true. It’s quite the stretch though to go from that to suggest that this was a policy designed to screw over one province when the facts – as previously reported – show something else.

The relationship between the current provincial administration and the federal government – irrespective of political stripe – is dysfunctional.  It got that way as the result of a lot of hard work after 2003.  The dysfunction may be deliberate or it may be an accidental by-product of old-fashioned political posturing. That part doesn’t matter.  The fact is the dysfunction exists.

It can only change if the people  - it takes two to tango - who are causing or contributing to the dysfunction change their behaviour.

That change isn’t helped by newspapers that are notionally national printing bogus information as if it were fact.

-srbp-

21 December 2008

Something’s missing: Powers, Hydro, Danny, Abitibi and The Globe

Tim Powers is a well-known Conservative activist who, in his work-a-day, is a professional lobbyist.  As we’ve noted in this space before, he’s a smart guy and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro was well advised to retain his services to help deal with the federal government on Lower Churchill and the national electricity grid.

According to the lobbyist registry in Ottawa, Powers is still lobbying for Hydro, which is, it should be said, a provincial Crown corporation controlled entirely by the provincial government.  It is no more arms length from cabinet and the Premier’s Office than the natural resources ministry.

The lobbyist registration was just renewed a couple of months ago so it is pretty fresh and there’s no indication it has been suddenly cancelled.

That’s a good point to bear in mind when you read Tim’s comments over the past week on the AbitibiBowater expropriation.  Aside from anything else, he writes a regular blog over at the Globe and Mail.

Over the past week, Globe online readers have been getting comments like this, for example:

History provides a great guide into Newfoundland and this Premier's disdain for broken contracts, apparent or otherwise. Was anyone paying attention to the battle between Ottawa and Newfoundland over the Atlantic Accord?

Perhaps one of the reasons Newfoundland is now a "have" province because she does not sit quietly by and accept that a company can abandon its responsibilities regardless of global circumstances.

For those of us who were paying attention back in 2004/05, we know that there were no broken contracts involved, apparent or otherwise.  And that second bit really doesn’t make any sense since there is no evidence that the company involved- AbitibiBowater – has abandoned any responsibilities.  It’s decided to shut an expensive mill in the midst of global recession and in the face of tough financial times within the company. The mill has been operating for 103 years, with Abitibi running the thing since the 1970s.

That all might be a matter for debate for some people but there a subtext to this that just can’t be ignored and that has to do with the relationship between Powers, Hydro and Danny Williams.

The expropriations involved in last Tuesday’s sudden move by the provincial government involved hydroelectric generation.  The new custodian of those assets is the province’s energy corporation  - NACLOR - and its subsidiary, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. 

Subsidiary isn’t the right word, really.  The whole thing is so tightly interconnected, the directorates so tightly interlocked, that it is hard to distinguish one bit of NALCO Reborn form another unless you are a lawyer.  It’s so closely tied to the provincial cabinet that Danny Williams habitually makes all the major announcements for the company. This is not like a Norwegian Crown corporation; it’s more like a Nigerian one for the level of direction it receives from the political end.

At no point, does the Globe point out the connections and Powers doesn’t either, at least not as far as your humble e-scribbler can see.

And just so there’s no mistaking the role Powers’ client is playing in this whole expropriation, let us look no further than the words of Danny Williams himself.

The Premier said it in his statement announcing the unprecedented expropriation:

The Provincial Government will also be taking control of the power plants of Abitibi as without these power plants the hydro power would be wasted. Nalcor Energy will now manage this asset.

The Premier expanded on the point during Question Period the same day:

The Premier:  A good question, Your Honour.

The way that this has been constructed, I indicated in my remarks that the assets, particularly the water assets, would be managed by Nalcor Energy, because obviously Nalcor Energy are now the parent company of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, so our expertise lies at Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. They would be, obviously, the appropriate ones to move in and to oversee the water assets particularly and then also to work in partnership with Fortis and Enel on the two partnerships that are on the river. The assets themselves actually revert to the Crown, so the Crown, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, is actually standing behind this, so we would basically be repatriating our water rights and also repatriating our land and timber rights back to the Province.

If, at some point in time, on a go-forward basis, then for purposes of the efficient operation and management of the hydro assets, for want of a better term, then, in fact, an arrangement would be done with Nalcor, but the ultimate liability and the ultimate responsibility very clearly rests with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Something’s been missing this week from the Globe and Mail:  it’s the disclosure of this apparent conflict of interest.

-srbp-

09 April 2007

Laying the ground work for separation, one egg at a time

When he said anybody, Danny literally meant he'd take on anybody not acting in the best interests of Newfoundland and Labrador. [h/t to Offal News]