Clear as mud

Russell
Russell Wangersky
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

There’s information, and then there’s confusion.

The provincial government is fond of saying that there has never been as much information released about a project as there has been about Muskrat Falls.

That, supposedly, is proof of how accountable the whole venture is.

Well, accountability isn’t just releasing a bunch of documents: it’s being clear about what they mean.

On Monday, the day before Christmas Eve, the provincial government released a series of orders-in-council — in other words, cabinet orders — made not this week or last week, but way back in late November.

There were 13 in all, and every one of them was in relation to Muskrat Falls.

Here’s just one, in its entirety.

“Under the authority of section 5.1 of the Electrical Power Control Act, 1994, the Lieutenant Governor in Council is pleased to direct the Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities to adopt a policy, subject to section 3, that:

1) Any expenditures, payments or compensation paid directly or indirectly by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, under an agreement or arrangement to which the Muskrat Falls Project Exemption Order applies, to:

a) a  LiL (Labrador-Island Link) Party,

b) a system operator in respect of a tariff for transmission services or ancillary services in respect of the LiL, that otherwise would have been made to a LiLParty, or

c) Muskrat Falls Corporation, in respect of:

i) electrical power and energy forecasted by Muskrat Falls Corporation and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to be delivered to, consumed by, or stored by or on behalf of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro for use within the province, whether or not such electrical power and energy is actually delivered, consumed, or stored within the province,

ii) greenhouse gas credits, transmission services and ancillary services, and

iii) obligations of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in addition to those in paragraphs (i) and (ii) to ensure the ability of Muskrat Falls Corporation and Labrador Transmission Corporation to meet their respective obligations under financing arrangements related to the construction and operation of Muskrat Falls and the LTA (Labrador Transmission Assets) shall be included as costs, expenses or allowances, without disallowance, reduction or alteration of those amounts, in Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro’s cost of service calculation in any rate application and rate setting process, so that those costs, expenses or allowances shall be recovered in full by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in Island interconnected rates charged to the appropriate classes of ratepayers;

2) The costs, expenses or allowances of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro described above, and the rates for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro established by the Board of Commissioners pursuant to the direction under section 1, shall not be subject to subsequent review, and shall persist without disallowance, reduction or alteration of those costs, expenses or allowances or rates, throughout any processes for any public utility, including Newfoundland Power Inc., or any other process under the Electrical Power Control Act, 1994 or the Public Utilities Act;

3) Notwithstanding sections 1 and 2, no amounts paid by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro described in those sections shall be included as costs, expenses or allowances in Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro’s cost of service calculation or in any rate application or rate setting process, and no such costs, expenses or allowances shall be recovered by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in rates:

a) where such amounts are directly attributable to the marketing or sale of electrical power and energy by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to persons located outside of the province on behalf of and for the benefit of Muskrat Falls Corporation and not Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro; and

b) in any event, in respect of each of Muskrat Falls, the LTA or the LiL, until such time as the project is commissioned or nearing commissioning and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is receiving services from such project.

4) In this Order in Council, terms shall have the same meaning ascribed to them in the Muskrat Falls Project Exemption Order.”

So there you go.

You can just feel the clarity and transparency in that one, can’t you? And there are 12 more.

Russell Wangersky is The Telegram’s

editorial page editor. He can be reached by email at rwanger@thetelegram.com.

Organizations: Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, Muskrat Falls, Labrador Transmission Assets Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities Labrador Transmission Newfoundland Power

Geographic location: Iceland

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Lucien Beauregard
    December 25, 2013 - 17:37

    Mr Russell Wangersky Editor of The Telegram St John’s, Newfoundland Reference: December 24, 2013 Your Article: Clear as Mud. Because of the 1999 Shareholder’s agreement, Hydro-Quebec will be able to extend the Churchill Falls contract beyond 2041…..Churchill Falls Contract will be probably extended for ever ! Because of Water Management Rights, Nalcor will never be able to operate efficiently the Muskrat Falls Power plant. So, there is only one way to clean up the MUD: Documents such as 1969 Churchill Falls Contract, the GWAC, the 1999 Shareholder’s agreement, the Water Management rights have to be cancelled. At least, it has to be revised and rewritten. Politely, respectfully, peacefully….! Newfoundlanders, all together, should tell Mrs. Pauline Marois, Premier of Quebec, that if it is not done within next few months, Churchill Falls might stop giving barely free energy to Hydro-Québec. That is the only one way to clean up the Mud. Lucien Beauregard, P.Eng Sainte Julie, Quebec.

  • Corporate Psycho
    December 25, 2013 - 15:52

    Omg.

  • Cyril Rogers
    December 25, 2013 - 12:42

    I hate to be a Scrooge during the Christmas season but it looks like the provincial government is acting like the Grinch. Unlike the Grinch, however, I see no sign of repentance when it comes to their realization of the damage they will do to the economy and to consumers in NL. All Orders-in-Council like this one are designed to circumvent the function of the House of Assembly and seemed timed for release AFTER the closure of the HOA. Not much opportunity there for the Opposition to question the intent and nature of these OIC's. Written in " legalise" they are anything but transparent and not open to any real scrutiny, given the time of their release. So much for openness and transparency!!

  • Dolf
    December 24, 2013 - 16:29

    Bloody control freaks. If I had my way the whole cabinet would be under lock & key...at HMP. Just an opinion.

  • Maurice E. Adams
    December 24, 2013 - 10:50

    And I am sure that the MHAs that voted for Muskrat Falls all fully grasp and understand what it is they have gotten NL rate/taxpayers into. All of this high cost, complex legalese is designed (not to protect ratepayers) but to protect the corporate entities who will be the principle beneficiaries of our resources --- and at a tremendous cost to NL rate/taxpayers, their children and grandchildren --- for decades to come. How can we have allowed this to happen, after our 40 year blunder with the Upper Churchill? This could not happen in a mature democracy.