• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • John Smith
    January 10, 2012 - 20:27

    Yes maurice b'y your right, why would we ever need electricity here, why would we ever want to grow our economy, or look to the future. You are right Maurice, lets pull the covers up over our heads, and turn up the electric heat, forget about everything else. Just keep paying our ever increasing bills, watch the smoke billow from the stacks at holyrood, watch the rest of the coutry prosper...yeah, your right Maurice, why would we ever want a green never ending supply of energy...makes way too much sense.

  • Maurice E. Adams
    January 10, 2012 - 13:47

    Early on, this project was being sold, largely, on the basis that by doing Muskrat Falls we could get around Quebec for the sale of Labrador power. When that was shown for what it was, the argument shifted more so that we needed the power on the island. Now that that has been shown to be very questionable, the argument has shifted to that Labrador needs the power. Something smells. If Labrador needs the power, then why ship it to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia? There is no legitimate need for this project.

  • Calvin
    January 10, 2012 - 10:59

    Well said John Smith. People are fickle and gullible. The opposition says the deal is bad for Newfoundland, so it must be true. Rates are increasing 7.7% this year, and you are correct they have increased by over 60% in under 15 years. Rates are going to continue to climb. When oil starts to run out, rates will skyrocket. We have the money and the means to build the thing now, so it should be done. People need to ignore the fact that our bills will increase to pay for the construction of the hydro generating station and look to the future. But they wont, they will cry because of the gimme gimme gimme mentality of the common Newfoundlander, ignoring the extraordinary thing we could do right now for generations to come.

  • Tony Tory
    January 10, 2012 - 08:56

    I voted PC in the past 3 elections and would probably do it again if a election was held today but do not treat us like we are stupid Mr Kennedy and Wells. This is an important project for the province and the public needs information. I can honestly tell you that if my light bill has to double to pay for this project you guys are out of your minds. A public consultation process would bring more information to the taxpayers. Finally, don't you ever forget who appointed the members to the Public Utilities Board Mr. Kennedy. They are PC appointments that your crowd made and now appears cannot get the work done.

  • Willi Makit
    January 10, 2012 - 08:48

    In a decision of this magnitude that will commit us for decades, I'm confused by the false urgency that Kennedy is placing on it. What's the rush? It's not as if the river is going anywhere. What's that saying? Act in haste, repent at leisure.

  • Bill
    January 10, 2012 - 08:32

    Minister Kennedy is taking a page out of the Federal book as he is willing to push the consultations to the shortest possible timeframe so as to avoid any meaningful discussion. While I believe that the development of our hydro resources should be of the utmost priority, this Muskrat deal appears to be getting pushed through without the appropriate level of analysis and debate. And we all know that the debate in the House, if it ever opens, will be limited as Government has the majority power to limit debate.

  • Maurice Rogers
    January 10, 2012 - 08:14

    So they want in time for the Spring session, why? I'm sure they'd be quite happy to keep the house closed if they could.

  • lonenewfwolf
    January 10, 2012 - 08:03

    people need to consider the consequences of getting into these huge resource deals with so little financial leverage, public disclosure and legislative oversight. also, who may be waiting for it to go belly-up. gull island is a much larger project and the the obvious choice for backing is hydro quebec, snc-lavalin, ontario hydro etc. the project at muskrat will already double our public debt at the low-ball estimates, what will gull island cost and who will back it?

  • John Smith
    January 10, 2012 - 07:57

    What I don't understand is the fact that we have already had extensive public consultations. They had a group go to every nook and cranny in the province, from St. John's to Nain. Why would we want to go through that again? Why should the taxpayer have to foot the bill for yet more meetings with people who don't have a clue? People who don't want to understand the project. They only know they don't want it. They don't care that our bills have gone up by 60% since 1998, and will go up a further 7 % this summer, they went up 7%last summer. Nope, that doesn't matter. They don't care that there are no other viable methods besides Muskrat, especially for our tiny population, which makes gas and other methods non-sensical.They don't care that the deal with Emera has nothing to do with subsidizing power, but gives us a great opportunity to pay for a much needed connection to the mainland, with power we won't need for the immediate future. Nope, they don't care about any of that. Imagine if government came out in "98 and said ...by 2011 your bills will increase by 60%. There would be people going off the head. Yet, that has happened. Does anyone really think being tied to oil is the way to go. Keep buying oil for an aging polluting oil fired generator? Sure, if you want bills to go on forever going up. Or, we could have a development that will be green, provide stabal rates, provide a connection to the mainalnd, and allow us to make a small amout of money selling the excess till we have a need for it. Andy wells is posturing, and that's sad. Wade Locke has come out in support of the project, and he is having a meeting about the project next week to answer questions. How many times must we answer these questions? The naysayers will never, never, never be satisfied...that's just the way it is. Too bad.

  • Dosak
    January 10, 2012 - 07:40

    These articles about Nalcor are incredibly one sided. Why are we only hearing from the opposing forces against Nalcor. How about the telegram interviews some Nalcor reps to defend these bogus claims?