For the first time in a long time, there's the smell of fresh-cut grass. And warm rain, the kind you mind primarily in retrospect, when it soaks into some crease in your clothing and makes that fold untenable.
Right now, we're caught in the hierarchy of spring:?the point where the grass is green, and has been for a few weeks, but the trees have not quite burst their buds.
The juniper have changed shape, bulking up at the ends of their branches, but the balled-up buds haven't split and shed their thin brown skins to reveal the fine light-green fuzz of needles that are unbelievably soft to the touch.
Then, on Friday, suddenly it was snow again. Funny: snow in late fall, and maybe you get that quickening of the changing seasons. Snow in the spring, and your impression is that you can't wait for it to be gone. All of it the result of your point of view.
Point of view has quite the role in provincial politics these last few weeks, especially as it has to do with the interpretation of two different verdicts handed down in?Quebec.
One was a court ruling made about whether or not this province's environmental protection actions against AbitibiBowater should rank ahead of the company's business creditors as the company struggles to come out of creditor protection.
The other is a verdict from Quebec's energy regulator, which was dealing with a request by Nalcor to establish whether the energy company could move power from the proposed Lower Churchill project through Hydro-Quebec's power grid.
Neither decision came down the way this province's government would have preferred, and both have been, well, ridiculed by Premier Danny?Williams and other members of his government. In the Abitibi case, it's been petty and school-yardish enough that Williams made fun of the judge's name - meanwhile, cabinet ministers have taken that last refuge of scoundrels, suggesting haughtily that any true patriot must immediately take offence at the verdict.
In the case of the power regulator, the Regie?De l'Energie's decision was roundly condemned as yet another example of Quebecois arrogance and deceit, even before members of government had actually read anything more than the brief highlights they'd been supplied.
These are dangerous bandwagons.
Why? Because, no matter what else it is, the anti-Quebec campaign is a political one, and one that depends on public support to reach whatever unstated end it has.
The problem is that the verdicts in question have probably been read by fewer than 100 people in this province - yet scores are willing to comment on what they contain, and vent their spleen on the so-called calculated efforts of the Quebec officials involved.
In the AbitibiBowater case, the documents aren't hard to find. Unlike material held by our so-called open and accountable government, you can go right here -?http://documentcentre.eycan.com/eycm_library/Project%20Audi/English/Court%20Orders/Judgment
NewfoundlandMotionforDeclara
tion31Mar2010ENG.pdf - and read it for yourself.
(In another case involving Abitibi documents, our provincial government released information on environmental hazards at Abitibi sites only after those documents were posted online at the same site as the court verdict. The reason for withholding them? According to the provincial minister of environmental, Newfoundlanders aren't capable of understanding the contents of the documents, and might get unduly alarmed.)
I encourage you to go and read them, and ask yourself if it is anywhere near as unreasonable as it has been made out to be by the provincial government.
I've read it - it certainly follows Abitibi's logic, rather than the
arguments put forward by this province's legal representatives, but judgements usually do when they decide who's right, and who's not. The judge is particularly inflammatory in his comments at the end of the verdict, but his point is pretty clear: the province expropriated all of Abitibi's assets in the province, and now wants Abitibi to pay for something it doesn't own - something that was taken away while it was still an operating business not in creditor protection.
I understand where he's coming from. I also understand the province's position that the polluter should always pay.
What makes this case different is that the province expropriated all the rights of the polluter, and in the very expropriation legislation, said that Abitibi had to clean up what it had committed to cleaning up already. Sadly, the legislation didn't refer to their responsibility to clean up anything else before seizing all rights (and perhaps responsibilities) to the properties.
Now, my point of view might also have something to do with it. Another Telegram editor, Peter Jackson, has read the same verdict and feels that it is every bit as offensive as the provincial government maintains it is. I'll leave it to him to make his own point if he wishes.
My argument is that until you read it, you don't really get to judge.?And if you're willing to simply take a political interpretation as gospel, well, then you'll end up with what you deserve.
And the Regie's decision?
I don't read French well. I've had a look at the 129-page document, but I can't say I understand it completely. Eventually, there will be an English translation, and I'll read all of it. And then I'll make up my mind.
Because, in spite of what you're told, self-interest, one-sidedness and tunnel vision aren't magically exclusive to the Quebec judiciary.
Russell Wangersky is The Telegram's editorial page editor. He can be reached by e-mail at rwanger@thetelegram.com.
Through the glass darkly
-
- Published on May 15th, 2010
- Published on July 1st, 2010
-
Russell Wangersky
- Number of views : 324
- Rate
- Top of the page
Comments
-
- William Daniels
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:30:20
Danny is a master of whipping up emotions and starting fights to distact from what is really going on. Nothing but smoke and mirrors to deflect. This trick is really starting to get old.
-
- kelly
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:21:22
The stark reality is that our government, the current owner of the Mill, is a polluter under the defintion of 'persons responsible' in our own Environmental act.
-
- phil
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:20:13
All forestry companies have been raping Canada for 100 years and now there is nothing but herbicide sticken forests that look like dead plantations. You can rape the trees but you are not supposed to spray over 700'000 hectares of wildland every summer with glyphosates. You are killing all lifeforms. Check Google earth North eastern ontario. It's plain to see.The harm being done. Especially to our children. P.S. i don't think anyone can afford those aerial spray campains anymore. I don't see any chemical companies filing for bankruptcy. We'll I guess they havent thought of that yet!
-
- Ken
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:19:08
Well said as usual. In haste to grab the hydro many errors were made. This tribe did its best to push everything under the rug. They paid dearly for the silence. The MHA was given a cabinet post, the outspoken Mayor of Botwood landed a govt. job while the union was paid severance to keep the noise down. Ms Blunderdale then fired the contract security at the mill and she and Skinner gave the jobs to guess who? The union executive. These had to be the only govt jobs where there were no interviews or security checks. Skinner will now tell us they were contracted out to individuals but the fact remains that at every turn this govt is trying to keep the noise down in Central Nl. As for John Smith to say the workers were abused I can only say ' do it to me one more time, once is never enough;- you know the rest John. The union boys conspired with the Premier to end papermaking in Central and now this govt is using our tax dollars to pay everyone off. Even the local council there is silent expecting a few crumbs to come to the table. Its abuse all right but not the kind John was referring to.
-
- S
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:16:26
Government wants us to believe that the forces arrayed against the province (Que courts, regie, AbitibiBowater) are absurdly incompetent. Funny line of attack from those who find themselves with an abandoned mill on their hands.
-
- John Smith
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:14:54
The ..facts... Polly, are that Quebec has once again patted us on our head, tousled our hair, and has told us to go back home and do what we are told to do. As far as the AB situation the province would have been on the hook eventually anyway, the mess in Stevenville is still there five years later, and the mess in Buchanns is being cleaned up by us. That is the type of corporate citizen AB is, they come in, rape your resourses, abuse the workers, and pollute the enviroment with abandon, then leave the mess for someone else to deal with. The province tried to do what they could to save some of the timber and hydro rights from the abyss, and in their haste made an error. We have already seen that the Regis in PQ have blatantly lied about what the Williams gov. proposed to them, it is there in black and white for all to see. Quebec is a corrupt and ruthless regime, who play by a completely different set of rules then any other province in the country. They will never separate because they have it so good. They receive billions from the feds, get to utilize our currency, military, healtcare etc. yet are independant when it comes to law, or interprovincial cooperation. There is not another country on the planet that would put up with this kind of behavior, yet here we have the bloc in our house of parliment, unbelievable! We have to stop dealing with this corrutp regime, and thier patronrizing behavior towards us. The next time we should speak to Quebec is the night before the day in 2041 when we regain total control of the upper churchill, to tell them we are diverting power to our maritime link.
-
- Mark
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:14:24
You read the document yourself, and arrived at a conclusion different from the Premier's? The Khmer Dan is going to come and take away your glasses now.
-
- Polly
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:14:22
Why would the government want to confuse the individual with facts , when you can so easily whip the people of this province into a frenzy with highly charged hyperbole .
-
- With friends like Russell
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:13:10
It must be a good day when Wangersky gets to promote a whole bunch of interests near and dear to the heart of his Quebecois ownership and, at the same time, denigrate the government of this province. As for the dissenting view of Peter Jackson, we can only assume he didn't get the memo.
-
- Bones
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:11:36
Mr. Wangersky: If the governments expropriation of AB's assets absolves AB of any liability for cleanup, I would also submit that selling those assets to another party, quite possibly, another party outside the province or even Canada, would also absolve AB of any cleanup liability. Would you agree? The logic is obviously sound and it seems that AB, no matter what occurred, would ultimately be absolved of any cleanup liability. It sounds like a slippery slope to me. Can a corporation now count on selling a polluted property to escape cleanup liability OR can it default on some part of the agreement and have it taken away, also absolving them of cleanup liability? Precedent setting for sure.
-
- S
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:09:28
John Smith i can even begin to diagnose the bizarre paranoid political pathology you suffer from. A most strange complex of inferiority and persecution and envy. Pretty well on line with the Official Provincial Ideology.
-
- William Daniels
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:18:04
Danny is a master of whipping up emotions and starting fights to distact from what is really going on. Nothing but smoke and mirrors to deflect. This trick is really starting to get old.
-
- kelly
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:04:53
The stark reality is that our government, the current owner of the Mill, is a polluter under the defintion of 'persons responsible' in our own Environmental act.
-
- phil
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:02:48
All forestry companies have been raping Canada for 100 years and now there is nothing but herbicide sticken forests that look like dead plantations. You can rape the trees but you are not supposed to spray over 700'000 hectares of wildland every summer with glyphosates. You are killing all lifeforms. Check Google earth North eastern ontario. It's plain to see.The harm being done. Especially to our children. P.S. i don't think anyone can afford those aerial spray campains anymore. I don't see any chemical companies filing for bankruptcy. We'll I guess they havent thought of that yet!
-
- Ken
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:00:53
Well said as usual. In haste to grab the hydro many errors were made. This tribe did its best to push everything under the rug. They paid dearly for the silence. The MHA was given a cabinet post, the outspoken Mayor of Botwood landed a govt. job while the union was paid severance to keep the noise down. Ms Blunderdale then fired the contract security at the mill and she and Skinner gave the jobs to guess who? The union executive. These had to be the only govt jobs where there were no interviews or security checks. Skinner will now tell us they were contracted out to individuals but the fact remains that at every turn this govt is trying to keep the noise down in Central Nl. As for John Smith to say the workers were abused I can only say ' do it to me one more time, once is never enough;- you know the rest John. The union boys conspired with the Premier to end papermaking in Central and now this govt is using our tax dollars to pay everyone off. Even the local council there is silent expecting a few crumbs to come to the table. Its abuse all right but not the kind John was referring to.
-
- S
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:56:29
Government wants us to believe that the forces arrayed against the province (Que courts, regie, AbitibiBowater) are absurdly incompetent. Funny line of attack from those who find themselves with an abandoned mill on their hands.
-
- John Smith
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:54:05
The ..facts... Polly, are that Quebec has once again patted us on our head, tousled our hair, and has told us to go back home and do what we are told to do. As far as the AB situation the province would have been on the hook eventually anyway, the mess in Stevenville is still there five years later, and the mess in Buchanns is being cleaned up by us. That is the type of corporate citizen AB is, they come in, rape your resourses, abuse the workers, and pollute the enviroment with abandon, then leave the mess for someone else to deal with. The province tried to do what they could to save some of the timber and hydro rights from the abyss, and in their haste made an error. We have already seen that the Regis in PQ have blatantly lied about what the Williams gov. proposed to them, it is there in black and white for all to see. Quebec is a corrupt and ruthless regime, who play by a completely different set of rules then any other province in the country. They will never separate because they have it so good. They receive billions from the feds, get to utilize our currency, military, healtcare etc. yet are independant when it comes to law, or interprovincial cooperation. There is not another country on the planet that would put up with this kind of behavior, yet here we have the bloc in our house of parliment, unbelievable! We have to stop dealing with this corrutp regime, and thier patronrizing behavior towards us. The next time we should speak to Quebec is the night before the day in 2041 when we regain total control of the upper churchill, to tell them we are diverting power to our maritime link.
-
- Mark
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:53:18
You read the document yourself, and arrived at a conclusion different from the Premier's? The Khmer Dan is going to come and take away your glasses now.
-
- Polly
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:53:14
Why would the government want to confuse the individual with facts , when you can so easily whip the people of this province into a frenzy with highly charged hyperbole .
-
- With friends like Russell
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:50:57
It must be a good day when Wangersky gets to promote a whole bunch of interests near and dear to the heart of his Quebecois ownership and, at the same time, denigrate the government of this province. As for the dissenting view of Peter Jackson, we can only assume he didn't get the memo.
-
- Bones
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:48:14
Mr. Wangersky: If the governments expropriation of AB's assets absolves AB of any liability for cleanup, I would also submit that selling those assets to another party, quite possibly, another party outside the province or even Canada, would also absolve AB of any cleanup liability. Would you agree? The logic is obviously sound and it seems that AB, no matter what occurred, would ultimately be absolved of any cleanup liability. It sounds like a slippery slope to me. Can a corporation now count on selling a polluted property to escape cleanup liability OR can it default on some part of the agreement and have it taken away, also absolving them of cleanup liability? Precedent setting for sure.
-
- S
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:44:43
John Smith i can even begin to diagnose the bizarre paranoid political pathology you suffer from. A most strange complex of inferiority and persecution and envy. Pretty well on line with the Official Provincial Ideology.
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
