- April 08, 2013 - 13:00
with out attacking you as you request???? in your comments of I vote FOR me???? AND TO WHAT YOU VOTED FOR THE DOOR KNOCKING???? comment???? there is some thing to be seem about what you are as a bussiness man and the grey areas of law and you are not being attacked because you haven't expressed your controversial opinion here yet????
- a business man
- April 09, 2013 - 09:58
There is this thing. it is called a period. People use it to end a sentence. There also is a question mark, which is used to ask a questions. Knowing the difference is the key to writing properly. FYI. I would love to respond, but I just don't know how. Anyway, my life is based on the grey areas of the law. I use the grey areas of the law to conduct favourable business transactions, often at the expense of the other party. For example, buying a company, and then following the legal requirements when shutting down and moving south. And my law practice, like most law practices, is based on helping people using the grey areas of the law for their benefit. Look, the government routinely passes vague/grey laws, so that they can be interpreted by judges. The legal profession would not be so lucrative if the law was purely black and while. If you cannot understand that, they you likely have missed opportunities to make the law work for you.
- April 07, 2013 - 14:33
I think that is a pretty biased article from the President of NL's Federation of Labour. First, this province does not need to be welcomed to austerity - it is already familiar with it. Second, how come Lana Payne does not mention the excellent terms of collective agreements that sent public sector wages sky-rocketing in the first place? Yeah, we hear a lot about the 2,000 positions that will be terminated. What about the thousands more that saw their base pays jump by over 40% in the last ten years? Did anyone hear Lana Payne and other union leaders cry then? Sorry lady, but you need to take the bad with the good.
- Sick of being shafted.
- April 07, 2013 - 09:30
Thank You Mr. Lucien Beauregard! There was another Mr. Beauregard who gave us much the same information 5 or 6 years ago, I heard him speaking on CBC Radio coaching Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to go after what was rightfully theirs from the Upper Churchill. Yes, indeed, when will the province of Newfoundland and Labrador be treated the way the other provinces are treated in Canada? It seems though to me there is no point in going through the Supreme Court of Canada since that has been tried several times and the ruling was always in favor of the way Ottawa wants the ruling to go and that is to favor Quebec, despite the unconscionable contract. The courts should not be controlled by government's desires and biases, that has to stop. It also appears to me that we have been bought off by Ottawa with a loan guarantee on the Muskrat Falls that will cost Ottawa Zero dollars. The project will provide electricity for running industry in Nova Scotia; and only God knows where-else. Also many people are lined up to feed like Sharks of the construction of the Muskrat Falls Project and that is because of the corrupt way businesses are allowed to operate in Canada, without impunity. This deal will cost the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro consumer so much, that they will not only, NOT garner the benefits from the industrial jobs created, but also many of them will have to turn off their electricity and freeze in the dark because the electrical costs will be far too expensive for their budgets. Muskrat Falls is poised to bankrupt Newfoundland and Labrador with the proposed "cost over-runs". And that brings to my mind another question of "why cost-overruns", when so many Canadians are unemployed at the moment? It is an enigma, indeed! What an inequitable country we are dealing with, it sure is time for our politicians and our people to speak up!
- April 06, 2013 - 20:15
This woman needs an education.
- Lucien Beauregard
- April 06, 2013 - 16:16
Could you tell me what Newfoundland ans Labrador is waiting to claim the six billions$ Hydro-Québec owe you ? On November 30, 2009, Mr Ed Martin, President of Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation ( CFLCo ) and President and CEO of Nalcor Energy, announced that CFLCo had asked Hydro-Québec to enter into negotiations on the Upper Churchill Power Contract pricing. Because of Hydro-Quebec refusal, on February 23, 2010, CFLCo files a motion in Quebec Superior Court against Hydro-Quebec to address inequities in the 1969 Upper Churchill Power Contract pricing So, in fall 2013, 48 months after first request, accumulated capital and compound interest ( 100 millions per month and 14.4 % per year), Hydro-Quebec will have to pay to Newfoundland and Labrador almost 6 billions $. Quite enough to pay Muskrat power plant and transmission lines up to Nova Scotia. Lucien Beauregard, P.Eng Quebec
- Austerity is wrong
- April 06, 2013 - 13:20
Rant warning: How come it always ends up on the back of ordinary people, while the real waste goes on. Some people don't want living wages for the public sector because others don't anymore? Is it a race to the bottom? Meanwhile, millions are being wasted outsourcing services that could be done in house for 1/3 the cost, the confederation building upgrade is $41 million and climbing, Muskrat falls already resulted in a massive 600M funds transfer, the Labrador highway is eating up millions and on it goes. It is like slashing toilet paper because you can't afford the mortgage on the McMansion. Furthermore, we don't share in the windfall profits of oil swings, there is no income stabilization fund for the budget, no common sense in government (just ask any public sector employee). This (and most governments these days) only serve business interests and see the public as a nuisance and implement things like Bill 29 to keep the sheep in the dark.
- a business man
- April 07, 2013 - 10:48
Welcome to today's lesson in supply and demand. As people more more money, it becomes the case that there is too much money chasing too few goods. So, as a result, the price will go up to address the increased demand. On the other hand, as people make less money, there will be less money chasing the same amount of goods, so the price will go down because there is lower supply of money. What this means is that as one group of people makes more money, those who already make more money will see the value/purchasing power of their money drop. The result is that my money is worth more in the market when other people get less money because their money is taken out of the economy. So for that reason alone, I support the cutting of the jobs. I hope this makes sense. And don't attack me because I really haven' t expressed a controversial opinion here. For the record, I am okay with public sector wages because I support the work of public sector workers. I worked in the public sector for a brief point prior to law. I think the cuts should be made elsewhere, but I will not stand up for these workers when the reality is that their displacement is beneficial to me.
- April 06, 2013 - 11:53
Do the math.....One spot at ABE cost the taxpayer $50,000 per year per seat, Legal aid cost the taxpayer $250,000 per lawyer. The province is already broke. The estimates for the price of oil are already low. On Friday the price of Brent is less than estimated and we are 1 week into the new fiscal year. We have a bloted civil service who are paid at rates well beyond the industry average. There are too many civil servants and too many politicians. As a leader of the civil servants, Ms payne raises some good points but there is no more money.
- Pam D
- April 08, 2013 - 07:53
How did you come up with the ABE seat per year figure? The tuition at CNA is $726.00 per semester and about half that per intersession. That is no where near $ 50,000. I was an ABE student at CNA. I am two credits away from graduation and now I wonder what my future holds.
- April 06, 2013 - 10:28
Instructors, archivists, probation officers, sheriffs, lawyers, librarians may have priced themselves out of the market, as a province with the average wage of 30K in the private sector, public workers have expected too much when compared to the productive capacity of the province.
- April 06, 2013 - 08:40
Lana, this was not an austerity budget it was a realistic one. The government spending is out of control and needs to be reduced. The discussion should be on priorities and muskrat falls. You have publicly supported muskrat falls and offer no alternative to cutting spending. I do agree with you that personal income taxes need to be increased. However your recommendation to increase corporate taxes to the oil and mining companies is reckless. When you consider the provincial federal and royalty regimes on the offshore projects we need to be competitive. Everyone compares us to Norway. But there is a great difference. Newfoundland is a very expensive place to due business. A big part of this is the very inefficient union environment. You should be a big part of helping to solve this problem the of government has put us in, however you must first acknowledge the unsustainable level of government spending directed to the various parties u represent. Everyone has a role to ply in solving this fiscal mess.
- Pierre Neary
- April 06, 2013 - 08:38
Harper has gone so right that he can't see the horizon anymore.