THE BARD ON TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS

FILLING IN

They're filling in along the shore,

On mudflat, bog, and gravel bar.

At riverside and through the Bay

No buffer zones enforced today.

In many towns Municipal

In Provincial Parks or Federal

The excavators and big trucks

On Preserves are dumping muck.

ABACUS POLL CONTAINS CLEAR MESSAGE FOR LIBERALS

In June 2015, as a General Election beckoned, Abacus Data reported that only 3% of those polled perceived Muskrat Falls/electricity as “the most important issue facing NL”. Just 11% expressed concern over the deficit.  

The election gave vent to a public which had watched the P.C. Party languish in a succession of “amateur hours”. They ran the gamut from Dunderdale’s #DarkNL moment to Frank Coleman’s transparently self-serving attempt to become First Minister for all the wrong reasons. 

Tom Marshall left behind a legacy of deficits and not just those related to the Budget. There was the Humber Valley Paving affair and the charade of Muskrat Falls’ oversight.

FORTY QUESTIONS FOR THE INQUIRY JUDGE. PUBLIC SUPPORT SOUGHT.

David Vardy, Ron Penney and I have responded to the call of the Muskrat Falls Commission of Inquiry for submissions from the public on the interpretation of the Terms of Reference.

Our submission encourages the Commissioner to give the Terms of Reference a broad interpretation. It proposes a complete review of the project - one that provides full context for the public policy decision to announce and then sanction the project. It also seeks an investigation into matters relating to the management of the project and its long term effects on ratepayers and all the citizens of the province. 

MF INQUIRY: UNCERTAINTY THE FUEL OF SCEPTICS

If Judge Richard LeBlanc feels like he is being watched, perhaps he will delay judging the cynics until after he has judged Nalcor. 

Each decision taken by the Commission of Inquiry into the Muskrat Falls Project is understandably scrutinized as watchers assess whether the Commission is capable enough to undertake the enormous task for which it has signed on, and whether the Commission will be transparent enough to imbue public confidence in its mandate, procedures and processes. Arguably, perhaps, the Commission is already making decisions whose side-effect is enabling this result.  The Premier could have given the Inquiry a head start had he submitted a draft Terms of Reference (TOR) to the public and sought input. That job fell to Judge LeBlanc.

THE "MOONSHINE" LIST

The mainstream media likes to report the "Sunshine List". That's the one covering public servants earning $100,000 or more and who are employed with core government departments, agencies, boards and commissions including Crown Corporations. Some people believe the List serves a purpose beyond simply providing access to public information; that it gives transparency to decisions over which self-interested bureaucrats have too much influence.  

This Blog is also concerned about transparency. I suggest that public commentators who are paid consultants of the government should be added to the list or distinguished in a separate one. Therefore, I am proposing the "Moonshine" List. Why "Moonshine"? The liquid version often lacks clarity - like the consulting industry. "Moonlight" List was also a convincing option because "moonlight" is harder to catch than "sunshine", but like "moonshine" offers the assurance of an occasional glow.

THE MUSKRAT FALLS INQUIRY NEEDS YOU

Justice Richard LeBlanc has started the task of getting the Commission of Inquiry into the Muskrat Falls Project underway by allowing for the engagement of the public. Essentially, the Judge is asking for opinions with respect to the interpretation of the Terms of Reference (TOR). That outcome will govern the scope of the Inquiry.

This is an important phase. The Judge is doing what the Premier ought to have done.  But, unlike the Premier, Justice LeBlanc cannot alter or amend the TOR. He is, however, entitled to give them broad interpretation — as long as he does not overstep their parameters (over which he will exercise a Judge’s discretion). 

Anyone who has followed the Muskrat Falls saga will understand that the project’s origins, evolution and catastrophic failure required a complex web of political machinations, deals, contracts and relationships. Those who were poorly suited to the task, who were arrogant, who let ego or greed get the better of them, who were elected and were unwise or assumed a knowledge or a skill they didn’t possess, or who forgot to whom they owed fealty, will now be confronted with a Judge who will independently assess those decisions, their authors (some of them anyway), and the institutions that enabled them.

PUT NAPE DEAL AGAINST A “STUPID” TAX ON BUSINESS

How does the existential threat of insolvency get catapulted into questions about the “no-layoff” clause in NAPE’s new collective agreement and whether it will be embedded beyond the contract’s expiry date?

It is one thing for Gerry Earle to huff and puff and threaten retaliation if business organizations persist in criticizing a deal hatched with a hapless government. But the Board of Trade’s insertion of Howard Levitt, a labour lawyer, as if he were the embodiment of the province’s frustration over its fiscal mess, is tantamount to lunacy. 

The province’s debt crisis is not a collective bargaining issue. It is a leadership problem. The government is happy that most cannot distinguish between the two. It gives them cover for dither. 

THE BARD ASKS: WHO SETS THE RULES?

PRESELECTION

Could it be a new direction,

Or in effect a preelection?

Would we see a change in graft -

Taxpayers’ still to get the shaft?

Who sets rules for rules to craft?   

Who preselects the preselectors?

Academics or Corp. directors?

Or legal minds for fees to fill?

Or politicians at municipal till?

Bureaucrats with time to kill?

Special interests to top the Hill.

Who’s for good of common Will?  

John Tuach

January 26, 2018

LOOK WHAT'S ON OFFER IN THE DEMOCRACY COOKBOOK

The Democracy Cookbook, subtitled “Recipes to renew governance in Newfoundland and Labrador,” was spearheaded by Editors Alex Marland, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science, and Lisa Moore, Assistant Professor in the Department of English. It is a “collection of short and snappy, non-partisan opinion pieces authored by a cross-section of opinion leaders, academics, creative writers and other citizens.” 

This blogger feels fortunate to have made the latter category. As the editors suggest, the collection “brings together a wide variety of voices to speak to the matter of ‘fixing’ democratic governance in Newfoundland and Labrador…” Imagine that readers of the Uncle Gnarley Blog might have a view on a subject such as that!

AN EXCEPTIONAL CHIEF JUSTICE STEPS DOWN

When Derek Green, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, stepped down on December 1, 2017, the province’s judicial system received a signal that it was about to lose the contribution of “a great legal mind and jurist,” as Justice Minister Andrew Parsons acknowledged from the floor of the House of Assembly.

The opportunity to applaud Judge Green as an example of strong institutional leadership is too inviting to pass up. While this Blog spends far too much energy chastising others in positions of governmental and institutional leadership and pointing out their shortcomings, the system that governs the application of the rule of law has, by contrast, been managed in a way that exhibits intellectual depth, seriousness of purpose and unblemished integrity. 

With the government in a mess, and some of our institutions oblivious to their heightened obligations in the circumstance, it is reassuring that our judicial system — though far from perfect — is a beacon to the country and to the rest of the world.  Judge Green is surely one of the reasons such a claim is justified.