Cheers & Jeers

Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Jeers: to misleading terms. Police are looking for suspects in the use of what is commonly referred to as the “date rape drug.” It’s a misnomer, of course, because nothing in these cases could be remotely referred to as a date. The RNC warned last week it is investigating a number of cases of sexual assault downtown, in which it’s believed women were administered drugs surreptitiously and then sexually assaulted. In all cases, the women were either in public or socializing when the believed drugs were slipped into their drinks or otherwise administered. Police say the debilitating drugs affect memory, making the investigations very challenging. Rendering a woman helpless and then sexually assaulting her is especially vile. Almost as vile is the tendency among some to blame the victim for lack of vigilance. As U.S. President Barack Obama emphasized last week, “rape is rape.” No qualification is necessary.

 

Cheers: to numbers. Decision Gate 3 numbers, to be exact. No set of figures has been more anticipated since Confederation ballots were being counted in 1948. Last week, Premier Kathy Dunderdale said the final cost estimates for the proposed Muskrat Falls project will be available by the end of the month. They were originally expected last spring. Since then, it’s been a long, hot summer of hot debate and endless speculation. The end of the month is Wednesday. Will we see them today? Tuesday? Or at the 11th hour? The suspense is suffocating. Once they’re unveiled, of course, the wrangling will ramp up even more. So it’s really only a new beginning for the Muskrat Falls showdown.

 

Jeers: to stormy weather: What do the names Gabrielle, Chantal, Igor and Leslie have in common? They’re all tropical storms and hurricanes that have hit Newfoundland hard in the past decade. Every year, it seems, the province has to brace for another big blow. Let’s be clear: we’re no strangers to facing the gale. Our history abounds with tales of ships and souls lost forever to the elements. But these southern swirls seem to be getting meaner every year. The latest one, Sandy, was predicted to have slammed into the eastern U.S. as of the weekend. Let’s hope we’re not in for another lashing.

 

Cheers: to opening democracy up to a broader electorate. According to The Canadian Press, the executive director of New Brunswick’s Progressive Conservative party used his dog’s name to vote online in the provincial Liberal leadership convention. Jean-Paul Soucy says he registered his dog “Pitou” — or puppy in English — to vote for one of the three candidates vying for the post Saturday. He says he wanted to test the Liberal voting system, but couldn’t use his own name because he’s a member of the Tory party. Soucy thought he would’ve been caught, but was surprised when a voting package arrived in the mail for his dog, including a PIN for voting online. He declined to say who he voted for. Looks like the Liberal party needs to … ahem … vet its registration process more closely.

Organizations: Canadian Press, Tory

Geographic location: U.S., Newfoundland, New Brunswick

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Jacklyn Adams
    October 29, 2012 - 18:44

    The government says its coming out with its muskrat falls info in a little while - and I say I would trust their info about as much as I would trust Conservative Catholic Patrick Hanlon to give us the correct information on women's reproductive issues.

  • Cyril Rogers
    October 29, 2012 - 14:13

    As usual, Maggy, you are spot on in your analysis of how this government operates. The total lack of transparency and the introduction of Bill 29, which was, in my opinion, designed to hide information that could be damaging to this project, gives me no comfort that we will get anything realistic from them. They are determined to conduct a slight-of-hand, no matter what we say and no matter what kinds of alternatives or legitimate concerns may arise. I fear we will not learn the truth about the actual viability of this project until it is too late and we are stuck with a monstrous financial blunder. If the decision could be reversed I would be less adamant in my opposition but the problem here is that we will never be able to go back once they sanction it. It is painfully obvious that the PC's have the blinders on, despite the fact that they are committing the people of this province to a project with severe financial implications...if they are wrong. That is why I feel we need a referendum AND a full review by the PUB.

  • Eli
    October 29, 2012 - 13:08

    The conditions set down for the Muskrat debate are vile! King, like Dunderdale and Kennedy is a coward, nothing else fits the lot.

  • Maggy Carter
    October 29, 2012 - 13:04

    Yes, we will soon have DG3 numbers for Muskrat Falls. Even before their release, however, the numbers are already suspect. Why? Well, when you have a project that government and its friends want so badly, you have to question whether the estimates have been deliberately skewed to minimize the cost and risk to taxpayers. If the public has become cynical, government will have no to blame but itself. Its behaviour from the outset has been reprehensible. Not only did it not come clean on the underlying assumptions, such as the primary intended market for the power, but indeed went to the other extreme of passing legislation to exempt NALCOR and government from having to answer pertinent questions. It deprived its own PUB the information necessary to review the project and it waged a campaign to discredit anyone who dared question its viability. Muskrat boosters - many with an axe to grind - will, of course, insist that the numbers have been crunched by professional engineers, accountants and financial experts whose integrity are beyond reproach. And for the most part I think that is true. What they would have us overlook however is that this project is so large, so complex, that the integration of data from many different sources is typically left to a very small group of senior managers. These people are well aware of the public skepticism surrounding this project and the determination of the NALCOR board and the premier to see it through. No doubt they have felt the pressure to pare down the price tag. But, of course, cost estimates are only that. The history of mega projects is replete with examples wherein 'as built' costs are typically one-third higher than those forecast. When it comes to publicly funded projects, the final costs are often much higher - sometimes double the forecasts. So it will be nice to have a revised set of numbers that the government regards as final, but we should be prepared for shock and awe when the actual tally is eventually presented to government and the taxpayer.

  • Maggy Carter
    October 29, 2012 - 13:03

    Yes, we will soon have DG3 numbers for Muskrat Falls. Even before their release, however, the numbers are already suspect. Why? Well, when you have a project that government and its friends want so badly, you have to question whether the estimates have been deliberately skewed to minimize the cost and risk to taxpayers. If the public has become cynical, government will have no to blame but itself. Its behaviour from the outset has been reprehensible. Not only did it not come clean on the underlying assumptions, such as the primary intended market for the power, but indeed went to the other extreme of passing legislation to exempt NALCOR and government from having to answer pertinent questions. It deprived its own PUB the information necessary to review the project and it waged a campaign to discredit anyone who dared question its viability. Muskrat boosters - many with an axe to grind - will, of course, insist that the numbers have been crunched by professional engineers, accountants and financial experts whose integrity are beyond reproach. And for the most part I think that is true. What they would have us overlook however is that this project is so large, so complex, that the integration of data from many different sources is typically left to a very small group of senior managers. These people are well aware of the public skepticism surrounding this project and the determination of the NALCOR board and the premier to see it through. No doubt they have felt the pressure to pare down the price tag. But, of course, cost estimates are only that. The history of mega projects is replete with examples wherein 'as built' costs are typically one-third higher than those forecast. When it comes to publicly funded projects, the final costs are often much higher - sometimes double the forecasts. So it will be nice to have a revised set of numbers that the government regards as final, but we should be prepared for shock and awe when the actual tally is eventually presented to government and the taxpayer.

  • David
    October 29, 2012 - 10:29

    You'd think that hooking up with other 'loose' strangers would be easy enough on George St....it always used to be the 'easiest' place in the North America to get laid. But now, St. John's lotharios seem to be so incompetent they've turned to drugging their prey?! If it wasn't so purely evil, it would be a Newfie Joke: As in: How ugly, stupid, lazy, and lacking in morals and self-esteem are Newfoundland men? .....

    • FR
      October 29, 2012 - 12:48

      I guess these guys don't like the challenge. They are sick.

  • Maurice E. Adams
    October 29, 2012 - 08:07

    HAVE YOUR SAY ---- Latest Muskrat Falls Poll Numbers:--- Sanction 7.5%........ Send issue for review by the PUB 7.5%............ Referendum 35%........... Referendum pending a full, comprehensive PUB review 50% (Go to www.vision2041.com to VOTE)