- Cyril Rogers
- February 02, 2012 - 10:15
The only outcome of a flawed analysis, based on one-sided and limited data, equals a flawed recommendation. The support of the MF project from MHI was inevitable, given the sources of its data. The only truly independent analysis, the Environmental Assessment Panel Review, turned the project down because of NALCOR's failure to prove its points. How quickly the government and NALCOR dismissed it but proudly proclaimed the reports from NAvigant and MHI, both based on NALCOR data. Even these supportive reports issued caveats because of the unreliability of the forcasting models. It's like boarding another fianancial Titanic without a lifeboat! The strident accusation, that all of the critics are partisan, is simply a reflection of the lack of a firm argument by the Premier and Minister Kennedy. It is a total red herring and yet another shining example of their arrogance! Reducing the critics to being "partisan" is the last fortress of the scoundral who has no real response and wants to deflect the issues. We need a statesmanlike approach here and the Premier and Minister Kennedy have reduced it to petty politics. Shame on them!
- February 02, 2012 - 08:39
Stunderdale is something else, We need a real leader not a follower
- Matthew Cleary
- February 02, 2012 - 07:37
"They mostly come out at night - mostly."