Even that assumption — as with all those that gave the project
its silver lining — may seem excessive. Madness? Delusion? On this first day,
at this Inquiry, at $12.7 billion and counting, we might wonder: who is asking?
That’s because the audience was mostly chairs. The place was virtually empty,
except for the usual bevy of blue suits and a few others.
 |
| Judge Richard LeBlanc |
The lawyers were seeking Standing for their clients: the right
to participate in the Inquiry. A few individuals, not yet lawyered up, waited
for the Commissioner to arrive. This minority included the Grand River Keepers,
the Labrador Land Protectors, Democracy Alert and the Concerned Citizens Coalition under whose
banner David Vardy, Ron Penney and this blogger had teamed up. Otherwise, a few
Commission staff, media, and a lone spectator gave the bare place some semblance
of occupancy.
The Session offered no opportunity for titillation; the public
must have known that.
Today would offer only the opportunity for procedural fairness
for the known suspects, the complicit, the deferential and the tangentially
involved. There was not even a hint that the Hearing presaged a far larger event.
The queue of blue merely constituted proof that private interests outnumbered
the public interest. It remains to be seen if they might cleverly outweigh it,
too.
After a short address from the businesslike Commissioner, the
proceedings got underway. I wondered if Judge LeBlanc thought, as I did, that
the Inquiry was the most important undertaking in NL history — at least since
Amulree, which presaged Government by Commission in 1934.
Billions having already been spent, it is doubtful that LeBlanc’s
role will entail a component of destiny, though some of the individuals he will
soon confront certainly helped hasten its arrival. The Judge rightly indicated that
he would not have time to assess our democratic deficit, but he must know that nothing
he could say will stop our determined rush into the abyss, anyway.
With titillation not on offer there was, however, a modicum of
intrigue — if one knew where to look for it. Waiting to be appraised was not
who sought Standing but under whose tent the parties had aggregated.
Danny Williams sought Standing under a group innocuously
called “Former Provincial Government Officials 2003–2015” which also included
former Premiers Tom Marshall and Paul Davis, and former Natural Resources
Ministers Sean Skinner and Derrick Dalley. In contrast, Kathy Dunderdale's application
suggested she was sharing her tent with no one.
Hadn’t Jerome Kennedy and Tom Marshall helped circumvent the
PUB — with her — when Dunderdale was Premier? Didn't they strategize to limit debate
in the Legislature and preside over the Sanction of the project, too? How had
Dunderdale distinguished herself from them, I wondered?
Dunderdale has been quiet: chastened, no doubt, by events that
have, since her dismissal, assumed monumental gravitas. Her most famous (and
banal) of platitudes, “if you got the juice, we got the use” — more braggadocio
than aphorism — now seems sillier than ever in an oversupplied North American
market of collapsed electricity prices.
But, then, she was never blamed for abusing the art of
rhetoric, was she? That may have been because she was always in competition with
one far more practiced — her predecessor — for whom self-aggrandizing bluster was paramount.
Still, I wondered if time has changed Dunderdale’s perspective.
What does she thinks now of the vortex of deception which she helped create? Does
she better understand the weight of Danny Williams’ millstone – the term "boondoggle"
an inapt ascription for something so ruinous?
Of course, such musings don’t excuse the mendacity that
oversaw “ring-fencing” of “isolated-island” and “inter-connected” options, the latter
given an untruthful advantage, even if the PUB was told to choose it anyway.
Perhaps the former Premier will unveil a “tell-all” narrative
with answers to our most urgent questions. What was the hurry for Sanction,
when an economy in overdrive was already looking to Ireland and Poland for
help? Why was Nalcor allowed to spend millions, inviting in the process a royal
screwing by Nova Scotia? Why the charade when the Water Management Agreement was
a fake?
Oh! If only Dunderdale were brave enough to put news on the
News!
But I digress.
The Government sought Standing in the Right of Her Majesty the
Queen. One might have thought that such a status would have assured protection
for all public servants — past and present — who played some role in the
project. But, evidently, not so.
For example, Julia Mullalay, former Clerk of the Executive
Council under Dunderdale, joined with that Premier's Deputy Minister of Natural
Resources, Charles Bown, who went on to chair both the fake and the strengthened
Oversight Committee. Robert Thomson, former Cabinet Clerk under Premier Danny
Williams, insisted on his own tent and took on lawyer Bern Coffey — also a
former Clerk — to represent him.
In a similar vein, lawyer Dan Simmonds was there to seek
Standing for Nalcor, but four former Nalcor Board Members — Ken Marshall, Leo
Abbass, Gerry Shortall and Tom Clift — wanted Standing all by themselves, too. Now, they
really must think that they are special! The Commissioner awarded them limited
Standing.
Then there was the “star” of the show, former Nalcor CEO Ed Martin,
who begs asking: will he deliver luminosity or just magnitude?
Martin’s lawyer, Harold Smith, dutifully followed him to the
podium and looked on, seemingly enthralled, as Martin displayed the skills of the
silver-tongued; the capacity evidently having eluded Smith even after a lengthy
legal career. On display was Martin’s ineluctable attraction to the absurd. As
if readying his response to a victim impact statement over the Muskrat debacle,
he again offered assurances that the $12.7 billion project would work out for
the province. Given Standing by the Judge, he quickly disappeared — with the
media. Only one reporter returned, giving
confirmation — like the nearly empty room — that not much has changed.
A little later, Dennis Browne, the Consumer Advocate to the
PUB, stepped forward on behalf of ratepayers, though confirmation of his status
will await a directive from the Provincial Cabinet; the authority governing his
current appointment, for matters before the PUB, being insufficient for this
Inquiry.
Likely no one saw any inconsistency: Government having applied
for, and receiving from the Commissioner, Standing for itself while it was expected
to authorize Standing for a third party, too!
A sober government would have deferred
or delegated such a matter to the Inquiry Judge. The Commissioner might, as a
result of such deference, chose to create a public interest advocate, one who has
taken no public stand on the project, and who is mandated to protect both
ratepayers and taxpayers.
Browne has credentials to be sure, including as a Muskrat
“naysayer”. But transparency demands means full disclosure. His
two Terms as Consumer Advocate occurred under Liberal Administrations. He is a
brother-in-law to the Inquiry’s star witness, former Nalcor CEO, Ed
Martin. Can he be a partisan, cross-examine Martin and represent ratepayers,
too?
The Concerned Citizens Coalition received full Standing from
the Commissioner. The status of other Groups has now been posted.
Impressions after the first day of the Inquiry?
That the Inquiry is a fact, alone, is confirmation that
Governments pushed hard enough will respond. Then, too, the Commissioner is a highly
regarded Judge in the legal community, earning the ascription competent and
hard working. Co-Counsel and Commission staff are thought to be top drawer. Essential
due process is underway.
Otherwise, the most important public examination of bad
decision-making in NL history has had an inauspicious start.
To me, that sounds pretty auspicious.
