Liberals lay out their terms on Muskrat debate

Liberal Leader Dwight Ball has a lot to say about Muskrat Falls, and he wants a lot of time in the House of Assembly to say it.

Ball, flanked by Liberal House Leader Yvonne Jones, laid out a seven-point structure of how he wants to see the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric project debated.

The Liberal proposal includes time for politicians to question expert witnesses on the floor of the House, and daily sessions would run from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m.

The Liberals also want to see an hour-long question period during the debate.

Ball said they’ve been trying to sit down with the government and talk about the format of the House of Assembly special debate into Muskrat Falls and hasn’t had any response thus far.

Ball said in the format they’re proposing, the debate would probably last two weeks or more in the House of Assembly.

This all runs very much contrary to the signals coming from government thus far; Premier Kathy Dunderdale has said she’d like to see a debate modeled on the 2002 Voisey’s Bay special debate. That debate lasted three days in June of 2002.

Karma: - September 18, 2012 at 09:07:25

Seems like the Liebrals believe they are still in power and can dictate how things will go. Too bad for them but there's a new dictator in town and they're going to use the same old Liberal tricks against them.

Submit a comment

Confused: - September 17, 2012 at 21:07:53

I don't understand why people are against Muskrat Falls, it seems like the only good option for the province. Clearly Quebec is not going to cooperate with giving us a better deal on the Upper Churchill or allowing us to use their transmission lines to transport power from the Lower Churchill. For the advancement of renewable energy for the lifetime of the province with surplus being able to be sold we have to separate our fortunes from the greedy Quebecers. I dont care if it cost 10 billion to set up the infrastructure for transmission of energy, in 2041 we would get the Upper Churchill back and be able to do what we want with the available energy. It is long term vision not short term rise in energy bills that is the main point we need to imbrace. Also, having a energy transmission route to the US would allow other energy project (like tidal or wind energy) that now cannot be accommodated by our current system. I don't know why we are debating this at all, I would never vote for a party against an viable option to rid us from Quebec.

danny: - September 17, 2012 at 19:52:54

please mr ball dont start being a useless leader we need green power and we will get it with muskratt falls so dont follow in rodgers and misses jones footsteps and become a useless leader we need development lets go for it

Frank: - September 17, 2012 at 19:32:50

Look at those two. Desperate, I tell ya.

ITS ALL BULLSHIT: - September 17, 2012 at 18:22:13

little early for an april fools joke isn'it, the liberals lay out the terms to debate muskrat falls. i can't stop laughing. if its any thing like the terms a former liberal premier did with churchill falls, then forget it. either way the consumer will pay with rate increases. that muskrat falls BS as become a big joke !

DON II: - September 17, 2012 at 17:29:35

I hope that the Liberals and the NDP do a better job of debating the Muskrat Falls project than they did debating the expropriation of Abitibi. The Abitibi debate is when the opposition parties just dutifully showed up in the House of Assembly on direct orders from Danny and voted "AYE" and signed off on what became a real expropriation scandal and a violation of NAFTA that cost the Government of Canada $300 million to settle and saddled the Government of Newfoundland with a contaminated Paper Mill that it neither wanted or needed and for which it now must pay in excess of $150 million to clean up! I have never witnessed a real debate in the House of Assembly in Newfoundland even though I have been in the House through a number of so called debates. It appears that politicians in Newfoundland, who have lived and worked under various dictatorships that made all the decisions, don't or can't debate anything properly or deeply because they don't know how!

Graham: - September 17, 2012 at 17:14:26

Political Watcher...Just say where and when and I will be there. Thats exactly what the people of this Province need to do. This Dictatorship has to go

Too Funny

- September 18, 2012 at 09:09:49

"This Dictatorship has to go". Then what? Replace it with a Liberal or NDP dictatorship. Our system is described as one democratically elected dictatorships.

Fred Penner: - September 17, 2012 at 16:02:55

There has to be full disclosure of all relevant facts. However, I am not sure that politicans questioning expert witnesses is the best way to get to the relevant facts. In many cases, politicians are completely clueless and possess only the gift of gab and their insight stops at the end of their nose.

Cold Future: - September 17, 2012 at 16:02:06

Good luck with the debate;but it appears that the present PC government is hell bent on continuing with this money losing giveaway project which is guaranteed to put hardship on NL's fiscal situation and drive electricity rates unbearably high. We don't need the power and its not economically viable by a long shot. The same government os presently rebating 8 % on electricity rates - go figure?

Political Watcher: - September 17, 2012 at 15:59:04

If the deal is pushed through then I say we need our own version of an "Arab Spring". Everyone is this Province should take to the streets and shut the Province down.

16°C

The Telegram - News - Local

Liberals lay out their terms on Muskrat debate

Comments

Submit a comment

More

Newsletter

Death Notices and Obituaries

Recent Announcements

Power, Patrick

Tely Twitter

Sections

More

About

Our Network

List of sites within the network

Digital Transcontinental Information - Newspapers group