Tuesday Dec 16th

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is VOCM Open Line call seven oh nine two
seven three fifty two eleven or one triple eight five
ninety eight six two six of viewsing opinions of this
programmer not necessarily those of this station. The biggest conversation
in Newfoundland and Labrador starts now. Here's VOCM Open Line

(00:22):
host Paddy Daily. Well, all right and good morning to you.
Thank you so much for tuning into the program. It's Tuesday,
December the sixteenth. This is Open Line. I'm your host,
Patty Daily. David Williams, he's back at the Producer's Share
this morning. You will be speaking with David when you
pick up the phone to give us a call to
get into q AND on the air. If you're in
the Saint John's metro region, the number of the dialists
seven zero nine two seven three five two one one.

(00:45):
Elsewhere a toll free long distance one eight eight eight
five ninety VOCM, which is eighty six twenty six. All right,
so I see the new flannel.

Speaker 2 (00:53):
Labrador Soccer Association has now named the next class to
enter the Hall of Fame, four athletes and three builders.
The athletes Jay Bapstock, John Douglas, Ray Molloy and Susan Meriden.
On the builder side, John Bolland, Hilbert Beck and Paul Mullett.
Congratulations to all. And they're also going to confirm two
new members of the Soccer Association's Honor Roll of teams.
Of course, holy Cross Neutra holds Jubilee Trophy and Holy

(01:15):
Cross Kirby Group Challenge Cup. Of course, both gold medal
performances in the National Soccer Championships held here in Saint
John's in the fall. All right, and I see Softball
Canada winning farewell to Sean Cleary after an outstanding career
with the national men's team program. So he first joined
the men's team in twenty thirteen, competed in six consecutive
WBSC Men's Softball World Cups Bronzon seventeen and nineteen, silver,

(01:39):
twenty two goldan fifteen, won bronze medal at the twenty
twenty five World Games, bronze medals at the American Pan
American Championships, gold medal at the twenty fifteen Pan American Games.
And I think it's safe to say that Seawn Cleary
was one of, if not the very best higher softball
pitcher in the world. Amazing stuff. Congratulations to Sean. Okay,
spoke to this story yesterday, going to do it again

(02:01):
today as I'm meant to do. But this one's a
big deal and this is about doctor Neil Patterson out
on the West Coast. So if you heard the show yesterday,
know the basics of it. So he was incentivized to
come to the province, fell in love with rural new
filand Labrador, signed a two year salary contract to work
with a faundly care clinic in Stephenville. So the incentives

(02:21):
could be as much as two hundred thousand dollars. But
the problem for doctor Patterson and apparently others as well,
is he has not been paid his incentives as part
of the contractual arrangement between the doctor and new filand
Labador Health Services consequently the provincial government. So they go
on to say that or doctor Patterson says, even though
he was advised by NFL Health Services not to speak
to the media, he said, enough is enough, he said,

(02:43):
or the government says he's not classified as a full
time position with the found Care team because of his
time in the emergency room and hospital. Okay, the distinct
problem there is that he was asked to cover some
shifts at the hospital in the emergency room, so he
didn't just willy nilly, you know, do things to fly
in the face of his contract. And now consequently he's
saying if he doesn't get paid, he's going to leave.

(03:04):
He's going to fulfill his contract, but if he's not
paid and not made whole, he's going to leave. This
is a huge problem. It goes down to say that
he's not even sure who to talk to you about
this issue. So hopefully the government has heard this story
and is now going to act on it, because we
all know the quest to recruiter retaining doctors has proven
very problematic and if we further our problems with not

(03:26):
living up to our contract our contracts, then come on.
So somebody has heard this story on nl Health Services
or the Department of Health Community Services or the Premier himself.
And if what we hear from the presidents of the
Newfland Labrador Medical Association Cynthia Slade saying doctor Patterson is
not alone, so that's a level of respect that is
not going to keep doctors in this particular province. And

(03:48):
or what happens if doctors elsewhere in the country or
wherever here are these kinds of stories. They've read the
contract offers the incentives to work in the family Care
team and some world part of the province and say,
now they're not even paying the incentive out for trying
to split a hair about he's not practicing full time
in the family Care Team or the family Care clinic. Yeah,
because he was asked to cover other shifts and he

(04:10):
did popping in about eighty hours a week. So please
someone at NL Services send me an email say this
has been rectified. We've been in contact for doctor Patterson.
We're in the midst of making sure the incentives has
agreed to pound are paid. So that one's enough to
drive you, all right, And I must put this one
back on the front burner. And of course this will
be a concern to absolutely everybody. Is the forecast of

(04:33):
price of food according to candidate's Food Price Report. In
years past, the work done by the researchers that's compiled
and produced inside the Canada Food Price Report has been
pretty accurate. So they're talking about, yes again, another pending
increase in the price of foods between four and six percent.
Then you look at beef in particular, and I suppose
you can put chicken in here as well, maybe as

(04:54):
much a seven percent increase. The question that's being posed
to me oftentimes is what's anybody doing about it? That's
an excellent question. So there's other work that's been done,
whether it be by the competition, PU or or others,
about some of the potential solutions. Not an absolute fix
all in one fell swoop, but there are suggestions out
there about how we can cure some of these problems. So,

(05:17):
whether it be inside of competition, And then they talk
about the dwindling cattle sizes here in the country, there's
a lot of input cost conversation that probably leads to
some of that. Then it's the big corporations getting into
the megafarm business versus what used to be the family
owned and operated firm, which is virtually a thing of
the past. So there are things I think that can

(05:37):
be done. People continue to tell me that it's the
carbon industrial price that leads to all of these spikes.
All the information I can find that you can try
or attempt to verify says that might be responsible for
maybe one percent, so that even if one percent, it
is certainly better to see a seven percent increase would
be more of a relief at six, but that's not

(05:58):
the be all and end all. So governments do have
some leavers they can pull here. But when people send
me the email saying why aren't we hearing from politicians
on the governing side, it's easy to hear from opposition
politicians to latch onto this, and they should. Their role
as the opposition is important, so they are speaking to it.
Haven't heard a whole whole lot about governing parties about
what they think they might be able to do in

(06:20):
their own province. And 're on the federal front. But
there it is. Back out there on behalf of the listeners.
All right, let's keep going. So about a year ago
we were told that after years of quiet negotiations with
the Province of Quebec and Hydro Quebec, we had landed
on an Upper churchial memorandum of understanding. We've been talking

(06:41):
about it a lot, as we should, so when the
Liberals signed this, it's amazing to look back and think
what could have been done differently to put us in
a different place regarding the path to eventual definitive agreements.
The LeBlanc inquiry was clear this needed some level of
independent review and the chosen path by the then Liberal

(07:02):
government was the appointment of a three person what they
called an independent panel, and it got derailed pretty quickly
when Michael Wilson resigned from it Premier Wakem as part
of the campaign because the Liberals were kind of running
on the MoU and Premier Wakem was running in opposition
to it insofar as the creation of another level of
independent review. It went from a global corporation at sixty

(07:25):
days to now a politically appointed three person panel with
four and a half months. So let's take into it
a little bit. So the members of the committee, of course,
it's an important component of it and hard to question
into their background. Chris Huskelson, people in this provinces will
be familiar with him, and he's fourteen year tenure tenure
at Emera as part of the Maritime Link. That company

(07:46):
grew exponentially under hoskal Sin, so we know about him.
Then Guy Holborn, who's professor of business economics at the
Ivy School of Business at the University of Western Ontario,
he was already on the panel. And then Michael Wilson,
who left the panel. Eventually Premium wakened publicly disclosed his
resignation letter. Okay, so mister Wilson, I don't want to

(08:07):
put words in anybody's mouth, but mister Wilson had plenty
of concerns about the actual independence or the liberal meddling
in the panel's work, the narrow scope and the mandate
that he didn't think was satisfactory, so he left the panel.
I think it's also fair to say, and Mike Wilson,
if you're listening and wanted to hop on, please do.
I think it's also fair to say that mister Wilson

(08:27):
thought it was a bad deal. So there's going to
be plenty of people that think maybe some of the
outcome here is predetermined. I'm not going to go that
far because the scope has changed, so maybe that might
change the actual focus of negotiations, the identification of risks.
Here's one of the quotes, because this is about scope.
Under the terms of reference, the Independent Review Committee members

(08:48):
will be empowered to examine all relevant matter or issue
they deem necessary to answer the question is this MoU
best long term interests of the people of the new
Flanner Labrador. The Committee will also have the ability to
mission independent technical, financial, legal, and any other analysis they require,
and there is a terms of reference. If you go
to the government's web page hit News Releases, you'll get

(09:09):
this one, and the term of reference, which is published
in the Gazette can also be found. It's only nine
pages long, as it's not too much to dig into.
Also going to be able to conduct this review under
Part two of the Public Inquiries Act of two two
thousand and six, all right, So that certainly does broaden
the scope and the ability for them to get more
information that they deem necessary. That said, there will be

(09:30):
no public hearings, so that's sort of strange and not
a whole lot of change share other than the expanded scope. Obviously,
mister Wilson thinks it's worth his time, and he's got
a pretty impressive CV himself. So I guess because of
the approach taken in this what previous, we can cause
a truly independent review. Then this will change things, all right.

(09:51):
So they forecast this to cost maybe about a million dollars.
I don't think too many people will be too concerned
with that. Maybe there's going to be a lot of
people not too concerned with the timeline either. But as
much as there is a baked in distrust of the
Province of Quebec and Hydro Quebec that people sentiment down
this in large part may be based on that and
maybe that alone. So after the report is brought back

(10:13):
by April thirty to be debated in the House of Assembly,
then it's going to take some time after that for
the eventual referendum that apparently we're still going to have.
So then the sentiment is who cares about Quebec in
their timeline? Okay, I get where that comes from, but
you also have to consider whether or not you want
to hear this is that they're the other side of
the negotiating table. So you might want what's absolutely the

(10:37):
very best for us because I want that too. Why
wouldn't I live here? So yes, there's a difference in
the message though, make sure we're getting the best deal
possible versus who cares about what Quebec thinks? Unfortunate reality
is that's part of the conversation, and you know, I
don't think anybody in this province should feel like we
rush into a deal for the sake of based on

(10:57):
political timelines. But this is a commercial arrange. It's impossible
at this point to back the politics out of it,
but the whole who cares what compect things to me
just feels a bit wrongheaded because eventually they're either going
to sign on to what might be a renegotiated deal
where we might see additional upside for this province. I
don't know. I don't think anybody knows. But no matter what,

(11:19):
if it doesn't happen before the Party quebec Qua takeover,
there won't be a deal. And you might think that's fine,
and you might think that's okay, and a lot of
people just want this deal to go by the wayside anyway,
and it's starting to feel more and more like that
might be the outcome here. And I still think there's
reasonable questions to be asked about the veracity of a
binding public referendum. So if you want to take it on,

(11:40):
we can do it. But an interesting change into what
was one sixty days is now four and a half months,
and it's not going to be some big global organization.
And I'm not criticizing the background of Halbern or Wilson
or mister Husklson because they've got extremely impressive backgrounds professionally speaking,
and a diverse set of backgrounds well, so you want

(12:01):
to talk about it, I think we should. Okay, let's
keep going, all right, That one's going to take some
will to wrap my mind around. So tomorrow afternoon in court,
we're going to find out about the psychiatric assessment of
Mitchell Rose, thirty two year old man who has been
charged with a variety of crimes, including two counts of
attempted murder. Right off the bat, like most everybody, feel

(12:23):
absolutely terrible for the victims of these crimes. Horrific stuff,
no doubt about it. There's a lot to this. So
we'll go back to this systemic failure here. He was
once on a community involuntary mental health order as a
designation brought forward by psychiatrist, which has to be renewed
every six months, but unbeknownst to the family, the designation

(12:45):
was removed and that's part of this conversation. And yes,
the focus on the victims is paramount, but now we're
going to find out whether or not he's quote unquote
deemed fit to stand trial. There's a lot to this, Okay,
So there's all sorts of criticism coming towards how the
pardon of the Supreme Court of Canada has adjudicated this

(13:06):
the Supreme Court of Canada clarified that the test in
question a decision and decision earlier this year stressed the
importance of the accused person's autonomy at dignity in the
legal process, even if they're hurting their own defense. Quote,
the accused is not required to make decisions in their
best interests, but cannot be overwhelmed by delusions, hallucinations or
other symptoms of their mental disorder when making and communicating

(13:28):
these decisions. All right, So we've had some cases in
this province where people have been deemed fit to stand trial,
but eventually, after the legal proceedings were concluded, they were
found not criminally responsible. And there's a couple of noteworthy ones.
And nor So of course found not criminally responsible for
killing Marshall Raridon graham Vich is another one. It doesn't

(13:50):
mean they're off the hook and they walk away scott free.
That's not what found not criminally responsible means. Then there's
questions about where people should be, like for instance, when
and R and others were being assessed as to whether
or not they're fit to stand trial and then deemed
they were, they remained in hospital as opposed to a
jail cell. So I think there's a lot to this conversation.

(14:10):
But this is a process and a system failure discussion
as much as absolutely the focus on the victims, and
we hope that they're all recovering nicely and will recover
in full. But this is a very tricky case and
a very sad story from a variety of angles. You
can call me bleeding her at all you want, but
process and the system is not really a bleeding in

(14:33):
her conversation. The process and the system have consequences, and
this is one. So it's a big story, and we'll
find out tomorrow afternoon at two pm whether or not
mister Rose is going to stand trial, And by the
sounds of it and the rulings and some examples of
the past, it looks very much like he will be
sticking with the courts and this one. Boy oh boy.

(14:56):
A new report out there looking at the number of
murders in this problems between twenty twelve and tw twenty two,
fifty three homicides in full. In total. It found that
twenty three of those killings were related to violence at home.
Fourteen of those victims were killed by a current or
former partner. We talk about the prevalence of domestic violence,
inter partner, interpersonal and partner violence. But where do we

(15:20):
go from here? To know that out of fifty three homicides,
twenty three of those killings were related to violence at
the home. Fourteen victims killed why they're current or former partner.
Some pragmatic steps have been taken, you know Claire's Law,
special courts for domestic violence cases. There has been an
expansion of safe housing for victims. I think that numbers

(15:41):
was seventeen million dollars, But that is a number and
a report that knocked me off my feet. I don't
think I'm shocked or surprised, but those numbers are a
real wake up call for how the conversation proceeds in
the community and certainly at the government level anyway, been
going a long while here, very quick ones before we
get to all right, let's talk a little. Trade gets

(16:04):
a bit boring for some, but hey, it's part of
the Canadian economy. So this lady Kristin Hillman, who's Canada's
ambassador to the United States, she's going to step down
at ther end. She's also been the lead negotiator and
trade talks with the Americans. All right, So she's saying,
there's no real reason to think that Trump is going
to tear up COUSMA, the trilateral free trade deal between

(16:26):
Canada and the United States and Mexico. She goes on
to say, there is an enormous foundation that this is trilateral,
and I haven't heard any indication from the US side
they want to change that foundation. What the day prior,
US Trade Representative Jameson Greer said, they have floated the
potential for three separate trade deals or two separate trade

(16:47):
deals with Canada Mexico to replace KUZMTZ early is next year.
Our economic relationship with Canada is very, very different than
her economic relationship with Mexico, whether it be with the
goods that are traveling over the border and or labor
standards and labor situations. So which one is it? The
Americans say they're willing to walk away from a trilateral deal,
and now our ambassadors to the States are leading negotiators

(17:08):
saying there's no reason to think that that's the case. Well,
they're kind of saying it out loud that it is
absolutely the possibility as early as early in twenty twenty six. Okay,
I suppose I want to talk about Sint John's city budgets,
will do that, but very quickly. So yesterday, I mean,
I had seen the news as much as you had
about the murder of robber Rohiner and his wife, so

(17:33):
I didn't bring it up yesterday. And fair enough. Mister Rhiner,
of course, was a cinematic legend, and condonlences to his family.
The allegations there that they were murdered in their own home,
had their throats slashed by their own son, who has
a history of mental illness and drug addiction. So it's
all horrible. It's all so horrifically sad. So that happened,

(17:57):
and the young man has been booked from her and
we're waiting to see if he's going to be formally charged.
And then I was scrolling around yesterday afternoon and I
come upon someone had reposted something and it was a
I guess a post on truth social from the President
of the United States, Donald Trump, and it was for starts.

(18:23):
When I first saw it, I thought that can't be real,
because I've kind of convinced myself not to fall for
everything you see, because there's a lot of bogus information
out there and things that are simply made up, and
I thought, well, that can't be real. And then later on,
shortly after verified to be real. Of course, Ryner had
a lot of terrible things to say about Donald Trump.

(18:44):
He hated Donald Trump, okay, and the President. I mean
what they used to call the consoler in chief. His
reaction to the murders of mister Reiner and his wife
were bizarre, depraved? Why does anybody still applaud this kind
of stuff? Look, words matter. If Donald Trump hated Rob Ryner,

(19:06):
he also has the opportunity to say nothing, but he
made it about himself, which look number one. This whole
TDS Trump de arrangement syndrome stuff, which is basically an
Internet diagnosis, is lame no matter how you slice it.
He goes on to say, I tortured and struggling, but
once very talented movie director on comedy star has passed

(19:27):
away together with his wife Michelle, reportedly due to the
angry he cause others through his massive, unyielding and incurable
affliction with a mind crepting disease known as Trump deranged
in syndrome, sometimes referred to as TDS. He was known
to have driven people crazy by his raging obsession with
President Donald J. Trump, with his obvious paranoia reaching new
heights as the Trump administration surpassed allgalls. And look, there's

(19:52):
a reason why public discourse has turned so ugly. It's
because people in positions of authority, people in positions of leadership,
are doing it. If the President can say it and
get away with it, then of course others, including Canadians,
will say, well, if that's now acceptable practice behavior and commentary,

(20:13):
well of course I can do it. So it doesn't
matter if you support whatever policies you're talking about you support,
which is basically one truck pony, it's about immigration. Why
is this okay? And why are people applauding this? You know,
because there's the opportunity to say nothing. And then it's
the whole back and forth about what the left said
about Charlie Kirkstaith, what the right says about that for staturdays,

(20:36):
this whole left right thing is exhausting. But and I'll
get a bunch of crazy emails here this morning, because
I dare say anything negative about Donald Trump. But why
are we plotting this? Why is this all of a
sudden okay? And the whole Teds thing is so juvenile,
it's just too pathetic to even think about. So it's

(20:56):
just remarkable times where we are. And apparently that's okay.
We're on Twitter, we're viosim up the line, the follow
us there. Email addresses open on afosim dot com. When
we come back, let's have a great show that can
only work one way. That's you and the queue to
talk about whatever's on your mind. Don't go away, Welcome
back to the show. Let's beak it online number two.
Good morning said you're on the air.

Speaker 3 (21:17):
Good morning, Patty. I wish I was had happy things
to say, but we both know the announcements in the
news have brought us all a little bit closer to
the violence that's going on around the world. I could
speak volumes on it and about who did what and
what and where, but right now I'm just trying to

(21:37):
put out violence is not the answer. You know, Retaliation happen,
and people get upset and one person hits another person
and back and forth, and it never ends. So in
my own way, I have a little thing that I'm
doing and some other people are going to start doing,
and that is I'm putting a blue light in my
window to represent I'm not for violence. Violence is not

(22:00):
the answer, and we see this constantly here in Newfoundland
in terms of the violence in homes, the violence in
the community, all over the place. It's just to sit
there and note every single one would just spireless down further.

(22:21):
So I say, take the positive view and let's put
a violence. Let's put a light, a blue light in
the window symbolizing we don't support violence.

Speaker 2 (22:32):
Well as I say, you know, an eye for an eye,
but if that's going to be the god in principle,
then the whole world goes blind. I get the outrage
because what we saw in Bondai Beach and Australia is outrageous.
It's an active terror and it was a specifically targeted
group that was on the receiving end. So it's just
absolutely horrific. It's becoming all too common, which is why

(22:54):
you know, things like leadership and words matter, and the
tone of the temperament of how we discussed some of
the most contentious issues in the world has never been
more important. The world is a tinderbox and we see
it on display time and time again.

Speaker 3 (23:08):
Oh absolutely, I mean, the news brings it into our
homes every single day, and we hear about places all
around the world. I mean, I wish I could say that, yeah,
this is a single incident that is localized, or you know,
this is a one off, but it's not. It's been

(23:29):
happening for years, and we see it in our own
news and what's happening here in the province. We have
to change the conversation and you know, retaliation violence, you know,
and the more people that get up and say violence
is not the answer, all it can do is help.

Speaker 2 (23:53):
Yeah, and then you know, I hate to make references
to what I see on social media, but then you
see some people talking about we can't let that happen here.
I mean, it's the selective memories, it's the short memories,
or it's the purposeful dismissal of events that have happened.
I mean, the largest massacre of American Jews happened when
Donald Trump was first selected at the Synagogue of Pittsburgh

(24:14):
Tree of Life. I'm pretty sure it was called. So
we can't pretend that we're immune to these types of
things in this part of the world. You know, people say, well,
it's not like that here. Well, there's an underbelly of
it everywhere, including here. We can't pretend that we're all
of a sudden better than that. We're better than this,
we're better than that, because we are prone to and
we are not immune of.

Speaker 3 (24:34):
Absolutely. I mean, we see in our own country, and
we see what happened in Quebec not too long ago.
The violence that happened there. We see constantly either a
mosques or synagogues or temples of any sort because somebody
out there decided that they don't like the cut of

(24:54):
their jibs, and this is the way that they look
at it. Because we're being trained, as you said, social media,
the movies, the way people talk, you know, the I'm
looking I'm searching for the right word here, the posturing
of the politicians. It's just it's a spiraling event. And

(25:17):
unless we start, you know, signaling somewhere that we're not
for this, it's going to keep on going. Absolutely, And hence,
like I said, the blue Light campaign, if you want
to stop the violence, you know, it stops by making
a statement I don't believe in violence, and the blue

(25:38):
light is a symbol of that.

Speaker 2 (25:42):
Good And you said, I mean, sometimes you know, people
will think these issues are so big they're so out
of my control that you know, it's not not worth
my time or effort to do something. And that's a
popular sentiment inside some people's minds that you know, you
can't do it alone. But every positive effort or initiative
in this world has always started by one person taking
the torch and running with it. Right, So we can

(26:04):
do things, albeit very small in the big scheme of
things globally, But it's the thought, it's where the thoughts
are format, it's how we form our thoughts, and we're
the you know, we're the source of information that help
us form our thoughts. And it's become really difficult. Things
have just become so unbelievably toxic that it makes it
harder and harder to even engage in just straightforward conversations.

(26:26):
You know, I know, complex issues bring a lot of
emotional reaction, but that's why those conversations are probably the
most important to have.

Speaker 3 (26:35):
It's uncomfortable, but they have to be had. You know,
espousal violence, violence outside the clubs, downtown, out in the outports,
in the major cities, everywhere. You know, we're being told
by again, we're repeating ourselves, and it has to be repeated,

(26:57):
and that is you know the kids are learning today
from the game's social media influencers.

Speaker 4 (27:05):
It's all a negative view.

Speaker 3 (27:07):
And until we start showing positive side of things, showing
that you know, we can do differently. I mean we know. Listen,
I'm not diluded by saying that we have the utopian
society that can happen, but we can get damn close.

Speaker 2 (27:26):
Anyway, I certainly hope. So anything else this morning said.

Speaker 3 (27:30):
All the last things, just put a blue light in
your window. Tell everybody, look, I'm not for violence, and
it just goes across everybody. I don't care where you
were born, who you are, you know what your sentiments
are against violence, don't care who you are, just against violence.

Speaker 2 (27:50):
I appreciate your time, said, thanks for doing.

Speaker 3 (27:52):
It, Thank you, Patty for everything.

Speaker 2 (27:55):
Before we get to the break, let's get the line
number three. Rick here on the.

Speaker 5 (27:58):
Air, Competty.

Speaker 6 (28:00):
This is Rick.

Speaker 7 (28:01):
I just was driving through tops and I wanted to
pass on a bouquet to the guys from Light and
Power and all our first responders. Really, but there's a
telephone pole down there, and they got all the right
gear and they're out there in freezing cold and they
got that repair underway and the power is not shut

(28:22):
off here. That's the ultimate and dangerous work. They're flinging
high voltages around and everything like that. It's just so impressive,
and I just wanted to pass a thank you on
the light and power and all our guys here here.

Speaker 2 (28:35):
I'm with you a hundred percent, and I'm sure they
appreciate it.

Speaker 6 (28:37):
Rick.

Speaker 8 (28:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (28:39):
So anyway, watch out for him. When you're driving down
the road and you see those guys on the side
of the road.

Speaker 2 (28:44):
Slow down, please do. Thanks for doing this, Rick, appreciate it.
Got to you soon, you too, byebye, right all right, Yeah,
let's get a break in when we come back topic. Well,
that's up to you. Don't go away. Welcome back to
the pro Let's go to line number one, Glouring Saw.
You're on the air.

Speaker 9 (29:03):
Hi, good morning, Patty. I've just wanted to pick up
a bit on the conversation you've had you were having
before the break. I'm going to tell you this is
a very personal conversation we're going to have this morning,
one that is quite painful for me because as a
Canadian Jew or Jewish Canadian, whatever you want to say,

(29:27):
it is really overwhelming to keep having to go through,
even at this great distance from Australia, the idea that
Jews around the world are targets. And I certainly feel
safe here, I'm invisible. But it brings up so much

(29:55):
about what the hatred that comes that we expects online
in print media. All just people have to stop accepting
when they hear ugly racist, homophobic, anti Semitic, anti Islam,

(30:18):
all these kinds of things have to stop the conversation
and stand up and say enough. And for me, I
was born in the early nineteen fifties, so I grew
up at a time right after the Holocaust. I grew
up with my parents whispering about more and never told

(30:43):
me what it was about. Really what I came to
understand it was about helping refugees, Holocaust survivors settle into
a new life after the war, meeting people that had
the tattoos on their arms. This is all incredibly personal.
I never imagined that we would ever see what we're

(31:07):
seeing again. And I understand completely that part of the
wave of anti Semitism that we're seeing around the world
has a lot to do with international politics, particularly concerning
the state of Israel and Palestinian people. My response is

(31:32):
as a Jew, not an Israeli citizen, I don't have
the right to vote in Israel. I have my own
grievances with the current government of Israel. In the same
way that as Canadians we did not have the right
to vote in the American election that elected Donald Trump

(31:55):
and his cohorts.

Speaker 10 (31:57):
We have to live with.

Speaker 9 (32:00):
The repercussions of the decisions that the American people made.
And so I just asked that people really think about
what it feels like that just because you are a
certain race, a certain any particular group that's marginalized, what

(32:23):
that's like, and please stand up say no enough. Yeah,
it is overwhelming my parents again, growing up at the
time I did, my parents told me, oh no, after
the Holocaust, that had to be the end. You know,
surely to God people would have realized what this can

(32:46):
all lead to, because you know, it was mechanized factory death.
But apparently we have learned nothing. And it's not just
for Jews. It's a gain for people around the world
world who are minority populations.

Speaker 2 (33:03):
Yeah, I can speak with it. I cannot speak with
any authority about this topic, but you know, I can
read and see what's happening in some of the commentary
and the rest of the world, Like, for instance, I'm
sure things are ramping up on the anti Semitic front
about what people see in Gaza, you know, on the
West Bank. I know that's part of the conversation. But
to your point, there are Jewish people living in Israel

(33:25):
who are not onside with what they see the IDF doing.
So if that's the case, then maybe, just maybe we
can try to separate out what is military action from
the Jewish faith. Even some of the biggest Jewish communities
in the United States, notably in New York City, they
are saying the same thing you are. So we've got
this way of connecting the Jewish faith with the State

(33:45):
of Israel and their military when that is not what
the Jewish faith is. That's a country and a military.
And so if people are having their thoughts about Jewish
people ramped up and the hate being intensified because of
what they see in gaza's got to be away to
pragmatically separate the two. That is not the Jewish faith
that they're seeing. That's a military action that's actually put

(34:07):
forth by the State of Israel, which is not the
Jewish faith. But we can't seem to make those separations
in our minds. It might feel like the nuance, but
they are distinct separations.

Speaker 9 (34:17):
Well, Patty, I do have one response, which has to
do it to unravel the tangled not of the history
of how we got where we are, you know, from
prior before World War two to where we are now.
And again the history is very fraught with so many

(34:39):
different strands of misdeeds, and that all I can say is,
you know what, when you look at what happened in Sydney,
the attack in Sydney, and you know, you see the
video of the shooters on that bridge, it looked like

(35:05):
you know that old thing about it's like hitting shooting
fish in a barrel. That the ease with which the
people who perpetuated that attack they knew what they were doing,
it was so obvious. And I just think it's the

(35:30):
other thing again about the Gaza war was you know,
we can't forget that. You know again, how quickly historical
revisionism sets it, because regardless of Israel's response, there wouldn't
have been a war in Gaza that started in October
twenty twenty three had there not been an attack in Israel,

(35:54):
and yes we can go through the tit for attack.
I mean, that's what the whole history is rife with,
and there's just so much blame to go around. And
again how it depends just where in history you want
to start. But as a person, you know, living at

(36:14):
this moment, it's like it's it's just this feeling of
helplessness as well as truly, I'm just sort of I
never imagined life would unfold the way it has, and
I didn't think we were a bit smarter than we've

(36:35):
turned out to be. And I guess I just I'm
just asking each individual. You know what a fellow was
saying about the blue light in the window, and that's fine,
but I do want to take it one step further.
You know, in our conversations with people, as we walk
around and just live our lives, when we see something

(36:56):
that we know is wrong in terms of seeing being
in a public place and seeing one person push another
on the street, right, our tendancy is to just walk
by and potato throughout my business. No, it is our business,
all of us. So that's it.

Speaker 2 (37:19):
Shane. I appreciate making time for the show.

Speaker 9 (37:22):
Thank you, Bye bye.

Speaker 2 (37:25):
Yeah, okay, let's get a break in No, let me
come back. The gentleman who was a longtime executive director
at the Autism Society, Paul Walsh. We'retiring in about a week.
We'll have a chat with Paul right after this. Don't
go away. Welcome back to the show. Let's go to
Len number four SA. Good morning to whether it be
the current or soon to retire executive director at the
Autism Society. This Paul Wash Morning, Paul, you're on here.

Speaker 11 (37:45):
Good morning Patty, it's still current. I'm in my last
few days, but I wanted to give you a call,
but if I may, before we start that, I just
wanted to speak in support of my good friends at
LANSKI who called into you earlier today. I actually called
this morning. I would call him normally at the time
of year to wish him a happy Hanukah, but we
just had a chat about everything going on, and his

(38:10):
eloquence and his understanding that violence falls nothing for anyone
is just so amazing, given what he himself has been
through in his life and what members of his family
and friends have been through. And I can't for nothing
but support. And then, as I said to said, you

(38:31):
know if you ever need anyone to speak with, I'm
always here, and I would encourage anyone who knows of
someone who is in in equity deserving group that's facing
this kind of of hatred to reach out to them
and to offer your ear and support because it matters.
So I just wanted to say that before we begin.

Speaker 2 (38:50):
Yeah, and I suppose I absolutely should have wished both
he and shanea happy Hanuka, and it just completely slipped
my mind with the intensity of the topic. Spot Anyways,
that's my problem, that's my thoughts.

Speaker 11 (39:00):
Yeah, yeah, understandable for sure, but yeah, no, I do
retire at the end of the year after five years
the CEO of the Autism Society, and I wanted to
call in this morning to thank you uh and and
vo CM for all the support that you've offered. You've
always been there when there have been important issues to

(39:21):
talk about. Your your listeners have always been attuned to
what we're doing in the community and have provided great feedback.
Is we are an organization driven by autistic voices, and
we're here to elevate autistic voices. And I just wanted
to to offer my thanks for always being there and

(39:43):
always willing to engage with us and to and to listen.

Speaker 2 (39:48):
Well, happy to do it, and it's it's a complex issue.
And one of the phrases that someone used one time
that has always tuck with me is if you've met
one person with autism, you've met exactly one person with autism,
because the spectrum is so broad that it manifests itself
so differently for so many different individuals. So that's always
stuck with me. Now, it felt like we were getting

(40:10):
somewhere with the understanding of autism right across the spectrum
to you know, public discussions and understanding. I'm almost at empathy,
but that's not the right word, because you don't have
to empathize with someone with autism. They're an individual living
with autism. So now the conversation has changed again. A
lot of the forward strives seem to have been derailed

(40:31):
somewhat with some of the way autism is being discussed
at the political level lately. Paul, your thoughts, well.

Speaker 11 (40:36):
I think what we're hearing is more coming out of
down to health than it is anywhere else. And you know,
we've had to unfortunately speak about things that aren't factual,
like dial and all that kind of stuff recently, but
I know here in Newfoundland and Labrador, our Autism Awareness
and Understanding presentations are being more broadly received in the
education system and offices by different groups, and people are

(41:00):
really finding it's the program is designed by autistics and
really finding finding the information to be really useful. We
recently put first Responder uh gits for in the all
of the the search and rescue organizations across the province

(41:22):
and they've been through that training and you know they
those amazing volunteers are often the first point of encounter
with someone who's autistic. But to your point about if
you've met one person, I think that goes for everything
in life. Everyone is an individual and everyone has to
be looked at as a as a portrait of themselves,

(41:44):
and it's really important that we look at the individual
and not a do I try to create holistic solutions
for things that are just one size fits all, but
also not be always make sure that the solutions are
informed by those in this case with autism under the
principle of nothing about us without us, and to that phrase,

(42:07):
everything is about us because it's about the society. So
it's important that solutions being driven by the people and
not somebody sitting there saying, well, i'll tell you what's
good for you. I can tell you as a disabled
man myself, I'm sick of able bodied people telling me
what's good for me. So I think it's really important.
And I do believe in the fill and Labrador and

(42:28):
we do have great partnerships with the provincial government, and
we've had some recent meetings with the new government. Are
really optimistic about where things are going, that the attitudes
that you're seeing elsewhere aren't as pungent here as the
air elsewhere.

Speaker 2 (42:43):
Yeah, I guess my points on the phrase that sticks
with me is that the spectrum is just so broad,
from profoundly non viable to high function. Oh, we lost Paul.
We got to get Paul back. Thurished out conversation. I
don't know what happens Cerainly Wills and me. I do
want to wrap up the chat with Paul Walshso he's
done a good work at the Autism Society, so if
he's listening, well, we try to reconnect here. You know,

(43:05):
the conversation really felt like there was a lot of
positive forward momentum being had and and I get his
point is that, you know, a lot of the sideline
or side show stuff really has come from south of
the border, but that permeates into Canadian conversations. It just does.
I mean, we know to be true, it's really unfortunate

(43:27):
in many circumstances, but it is part of it. Okay,
So we got Paul back online number four. Paul, you're
back on the air.

Speaker 6 (43:32):
Yeah, sorry about that money. I don't know what.

Speaker 2 (43:34):
Happened to me neither, but welcome back to the show.
So there's still some things that, you know, ongoing improvements
still required, whether be access to healthcare, whether be access
to employment. We've made some positive forward momentum on those
fronts too, but still work to be done.

Speaker 6 (43:49):
Absolutely.

Speaker 11 (43:50):
And you know, one of the things that gives me
great comfort moving into my retirement is who's coming behind
me in my long term. Colleague Leah Ferrell is going
to become the new CEO, or has been appointed the
new CEO of the Autism Society, and she's been at
the forefront as director of advocacy about key issues around education,
about respit care, about diagnostic wait times which are still

(44:12):
way too long in the Saint John's area for a child.
You're still looking at three and a half years. Those
issues can have to continue. We've already met with Minster
responsible for Disabilities on that. They've been very open and
aware of the situation. But with Leah's leadership, I know

(44:33):
that we will continue to make strives in that way.

Speaker 2 (44:36):
Well, you know, we talked about some of these things
very much as provincial conversation what have you. But the
federal government just back in twenty twenty four launched a
new autism strategy. I don't know if that's the right
phrase for but it was something like the kind of
autism strategy which talked about a lot of things about
human rights based approach and evidence based approach and life
course approach. I think I'm rattling these off accurately. So

(44:58):
how helpful has that strategy on the national front bind
to public conversations at all?

Speaker 11 (45:04):
I think it's help I think it's helpful for public conversations.
And out of the national lossism strategy has come something
called the National Autism Network. Now I think that's great.
In fact, it's the local individual who though I know
well Tom Jackman who's on the board of that, who
is who is who has lived experience, And that's great, Uh,

(45:26):
I mean It's the great Canadian conundrum, Pat, you know,
is that a provincial responsibility or a federal responsibility And
theoretically it falls under health, which end of constitution is provincial.
So I'm not sure what impact the National Autism Strategy
will have other than anything that causes people to speak

(45:47):
about the issues that are faced by the community is
a good.

Speaker 2 (45:51):
Thing, absolutely, and you know a now that we're talking
about it. There was a couple of things that I
found of interest there. One was the creation i think,
based on the pub Public Health Agency of Canada to
talk about the Canadian Autistic Adult Needs Assessment Project, which
looks at every the economic inclusion, housing, access to a
bunch of services, employment, health care and otherwise. Time for

(46:13):
me to go back and revisit that. I think.

Speaker 11 (46:15):
Yeah, and the whole adult piece is really really important
and again is a big piece of our work here
because often because of when autism was first diagnosed to
New from Land and Labrador, people keep thinking children, children
and children. While children grow up and they become adults
and then they become seniors and we don't deal with
artistic adults very well. We don't have the services right
now to support them here or anywhere across the country,

(46:38):
and no one's addressed the issue of senior citizens entering
the entering say long term care, or any other aspect
of that part of their lives who are autistic. So
we need to be prepared for that. In fact, we
are engaging in some research around that right now. We
have a partnership with a researcher Memorial who's looking into

(46:59):
the needs brought to sixteen years of New flandon Larrador.
So it's important that we look at it from a
full lifespan perspective.

Speaker 2 (47:08):
I really appreciate your time over the years, Paul, and
the good work that you've done, and you're always welcome
on the program at your convenience.

Speaker 11 (47:14):
You never know you might hear from me.

Speaker 6 (47:15):
Again.

Speaker 11 (47:16):
I haven't been known to be the quietest person in
the world, so I look forward to the opportunity and
you have you and your family have a wonderful Christmas.

Speaker 2 (47:24):
Same to you, Paul, Thank you, sir, thank you, You're welcome.
Paul Walsh, outgoing CEO at the Autism Society. Let's get
a break to the news. Le'll make it back. A
ton of time left for you, don't away. Welcome back.
To the show. Let's go to LNE number eight. Take
you more to the Liberal member for exception by Espell
opposition cridit for energy in mind. So that's Fred Hutton.
Good morning, Fred, you're on the air.

Speaker 5 (47:45):
Good morning, Patty. How are you doing today?

Speaker 2 (47:47):
I'm okay, thank you. How about you?

Speaker 5 (47:49):
Not too bad?

Speaker 12 (47:50):
Trying to get into the Christmas mode here now, but
we've still got a little bit of work left to
do before we can put our pencils down for.

Speaker 2 (47:56):
A little while.

Speaker 12 (47:57):
I guess I wanted to give you a call this morning,
obviously to talk about this panel that the Premier announced yesterday,
the Oversight Committee, which quite frankly, I don't see much
difference there with the exception of obviously Chris Huskelson being
appointed as the chair, and I've got some concerns there,
but I mean, overall, it's just, you know, the Premier

(48:19):
said he was going to have a new and independent panel,
and I think it's neither. I mean, you know, we've
we've clearly stated as an opposition that you know, he
said leading up to this that they were going to
be panelists who were independent. Two of them are the
same who were on the original panel that were selected
by a liberal government last year, and you know the

(48:40):
difference now is Dennis Brown is out and Chris Huskilson
is in. One of the members who was returning Michael
Wilson as somebody who quit the panel and stated afterwards
and during the election campaign that he thought that the
MoU was an outright betrayal of the province and future generations.
So he's going into this with an obvious bias in

(49:00):
my opinion, the Premier said, And the Justice Minister, the
now Justice Minister said in the House last year during
the debate that if you're being paid, you can't be independent.

Speaker 5 (49:11):
Well, these folks are being paid.

Speaker 12 (49:14):
You know, we've already had independent reviews done, if you will,
by people who were paid JP Morgan, Steichman Elliott, the
law firm from Toronto Power Advisory. We had to other
law firms here locally looking at this. The Premier said
yesterday that mister Wilson, mister Hucklson have reputations that they
want to you know, protect, and that's part of their integrity.

(49:36):
I mean, obviously these other companies that I just referenced,
JP Morgan, Power Advisory and the law firms, they all
have reputations as well, and they all said it was
a good deal for both sides. And so I'm wondering
what the difference is here.

Speaker 5 (49:49):
In terms of.

Speaker 12 (49:52):
Trying to get an independent analysis. It doesn't seem any
different than what was already done.

Speaker 5 (49:57):
What it seems like to me is.

Speaker 12 (49:59):
That they're kicking this came down the road. We know
that there is this election coming in Quebec in October
and the government simply don't want to do a deal
with Quebec, and they're going to push it so far
that Quebec will either walk away or that there just
won't be enough time to do it, and they just
don't want to do a deal with Quebec.

Speaker 2 (50:16):
I don't know, But what's your issue with Chris hustles
And I would struggle with his name Huskleson.

Speaker 12 (50:23):
Yeah, So I mean he does have the connection to
to amer obviously, and the muskrat Falls deal. You know,
we know what situation that got our province into. They
got a pretty good deal out of it.

Speaker 6 (50:38):
I have I have no.

Speaker 12 (50:39):
Personal issue with mister Huxelson. He's you know, he's obviously
even very successful, But like his reputation, his independence is
no different than the independence and reputations of the other
people who've already.

Speaker 5 (50:53):
Been doing this. And you know the fair here again.

Speaker 12 (50:56):
Is that the clock is ticking and Premier Wakem has
said he doesn't want to be bound by any arbitrary timelines. Well,
he's ignoring the reality of the situation. And I heard
your preamble. You know, at the end of the day
there is going to be an election and if the
party QUEBECUAH get in and they've called this deal humiliating,
do you think that they're going to negotiate with us,

(51:18):
with Hydro and with Newfoundland and Labrador? Very doubtful, if
at all, well they may we'll lose that, we'll lose
that window. The window or the door is closing here
and we're running out of time. We're going to do
started out as a sixty day review, then it was
a ninety day review, then it was now it's one
hundred and thirty six days. That gets us to the
end of April. They're going to need a couple of
weeks to review it internally. Then we have to educate

(51:41):
the public about it so that they can decide on
what we'll likely to be up to twenty term sheets,
not a thirty seven page MoU But you know twenty
massive contracts related to these big projects that are going
to happen.

Speaker 5 (51:54):
It's not just Gull Island.

Speaker 12 (51:55):
It's the expansions to transmission lines and the refurbishing of
the existing eleven turbines.

Speaker 5 (52:00):
I mean, it's a big deal.

Speaker 12 (52:02):
And yes, people, after a while, we'll understand it and
figure it out whether or not that's a good deal.
Then there has to be a referendum and then we've
got to debate it in the House and vote on it.
Sure when we just don't have enough time, I don't
think that, which is why I think they've kicked the
can so far down the road.

Speaker 5 (52:15):
They don't want to do a deal with Quebec.

Speaker 2 (52:17):
But you know what, lumping Chris Huskelson in with the
Muskrat Falls conversation, I'm not so sure where you're going
with that, because, for my money, the lone bright spot
in the execution of Muscraft Falls was the maritime link,
built on time, on budget. So his responsibility inspires Muskrat Cause. Now,
I know there's some equity pieces that are not really
fully understood publicly, but you know, when it came to

(52:38):
Ameera's role with the maritime link. They execute it perfectly
time and you know, cost and budget absolutely right there
or budget.

Speaker 5 (52:46):
The only reason that exists.

Speaker 12 (52:48):
The only reason that exists is because at the time
the province decided to go it alone.

Speaker 5 (52:53):
And that again is ignoring.

Speaker 12 (52:54):
The geographical realities of this situation of where Churchill Falls
and Gull Island are located.

Speaker 5 (53:00):
It would have been cheaper to go the other way.

Speaker 12 (53:01):
Or maybe it wouldn't have We'll never know. Yeah, you
know that it got out of control. And again I've
said this before. I don't think Danny Williams or Kathy
Dunderdale or any of the people who signed off on
the original term sheets and sanctioning thought that this project
would end up costing our province five hundred million dollars
a year.

Speaker 5 (53:19):
I don't think they did.

Speaker 12 (53:20):
I don't think Joey Small would sign the Churchill Falls
Agreement in sixty nine thinking this as well.

Speaker 5 (53:24):
Who would do that?

Speaker 12 (53:25):
But we don't want to be in the position now
where we're going to forgot. Oh, the opportunity to make
seventeen billion dollars early on the twenty forty one agreement
and another two hundred and ten million billion sorry between
now and the fifty years of this agreement.

Speaker 2 (53:42):
Yeah, they current year. But of course Samara had nothing
to do with the provincial decision made here about gold alone.
We needed a partner on the other side. There was
only one game in town, nov schotial power. America did
benefit from it. Oh sure, but that's our doing. That
wasn't there doing. We brought in a partner because out
of necessity. But there are some changes here. As I
mentioned off the top, is you know, when mister Wilson

(54:03):
said he was resigning, he talked about the interference from
the government and the narrow scope narrow mandate, which has
changed practically speaking, because even if he used the Part
two of the Public Inquiries Act, even though there's no
public hearings, what they're now able to do is to
look outside the MoU and some of the quotes offered here.
So under the terms of reference, this new committee empowered

(54:24):
to examine any relevant matter or issue they deem necessary
to answer the question. Now they're going with the broadstroke
question of is it in the best long term interest
to the people of the province. But they're going to
be able to identify things that the MoU and the
last structure did not allow. Like I assume that relatively
vague reference looks at things like what happens if there's
a new SWSS energy corridor, what happens if there's a

(54:46):
different access to markets outside of j just Quebec itself,
What happens if the federal government gets involved with fast
tracking transmission projects and maybe even financial support for things
like that which was not available to the I'll call
it the old in the review panel. So that does
change the way that they can proceed here, right yep.

Speaker 12 (55:05):
And it changes the timeline on it too. And I
mean we've had reviews done by as I mentioned, JP
Morgan Power Advisory.

Speaker 5 (55:12):
These are folks who you know.

Speaker 12 (55:13):
JP Morgan is a huge international global company that deals
in trillions of dollars power advisory. That's all they've done
for the last twenty five or thirty years is do
these brokerages for hydroelectric power deals. That's what they do.
They staked their name and reputation on those. We had
a separate law firm from Ontario. Check the homework of

(55:35):
the two law firms down here that we're working on
behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. I just
think that you know, the timeframe on this is what
is going to cost us the deal. By the time
we get to the end of April, we're into the
beginning of May. Then before you know, the first or
second week of May, once the government gets it, they'll
want to review whatever recommendations come from this independent panel.

(55:57):
So called independent panel, I will say because because according
to what Tony Wakem and his team had said leading
up to this, this does not meet the criteria of
what they said. So it's they're not living up to
what they said they were going to do.

Speaker 2 (56:10):
But who would do this for free?

Speaker 12 (56:11):
Do you think JP Morgan is going to come to
Newfoundland Labrador spend months and months reviewing something, but they
stake their reputation on it, as would Power Advisory or
stike Man Elliot or mckinnis Cooper or Sterling Cooper.

Speaker 5 (56:22):
You know, this is what they This is what they do.

Speaker 12 (56:26):
They get paid for their work, for their knowledge, for
their expertise. And we're doing this again with two of
the same two of the three same members from the panel,
one who has already said that he thinks again that
this is an outright betrayal of the province and future generations.
So what's going to change between now and the end
of April. Besides, we're going to lose four and a

(56:47):
half months and then you got to and then once
this is all done there's no negotiations going on, then
they've got to go and start the negotiations again with Quebec.
The thirty seven page MU is one thing, but the
between twelve and twenty actual definitive agreements, the term contract,
the term sheets, that's what's going to take the time.
And the Premier has said he may want to do
some changes to it, and so as MS Froschett said

(57:09):
when she was here a couple of weeks ago, the
Energy Minister, well, if you're looking for changes, we're looking
for changes. We've been at this since December of twenty
twenty four when it was first signed at the rooms.
We convene the Emergency Debate for the entire week to
bring those specialists in, those experts in to talk about
what they had reviewed. Everybody had a chance to ask

(57:29):
them questions. I just think that this is kicking the
can further down the road to run out the clock
so that you know, maybe they just don't want to
do a deal with Quebec. The premier has said he'll
deal with Quebec or he'll deal with anybody. But you know,
we've been at this since nineteen sixty nine. We've been
through courts in the Supreme Court, the Superior Court, Quebec,
other court challenges and other attempts to do this by

(57:53):
success of premiers who've been.

Speaker 5 (57:54):
In office long enough.

Speaker 12 (57:56):
Some were out of office when decisions came back on
court cases and that they had initiated. It's just to me,
is going to be a missed opportunity of billions and
billions of dollars for Newfoundland and Labrador. And today Craig
Party is going to give a fiscal update and I'll
bet you that in that office over there today he's
wishing that he had a billion dollars as any government

(58:19):
in there, no matter what political stripe, would wish that
they had to deal with over the next seventeen years.
A billion a year for seventeen years. Well, that's not
exactly at the first prospect of thousands of jobs.

Speaker 2 (58:29):
It's on average billion between now and twenty forty one,
and it starts off far less than a billion dollars
but gets over billion dollars by the time you get
to forty one. But in fairness referencing the April deadline
is the election is going to be called at the
whim of Francois lea Goau, not of the Party of
quebec Qua. So if Legau wants this to happen, there
is time. They don't have to go to the polls
by law until October of next year, so there is

(58:50):
some wiggle room between April and October. But the part
of Quebecqua has been very clear this is not going
to proceed if they are successful, and they will be.
The polls are crystal clear in Quebec the coalition d
Avon Air and Legou are going to get collabored and
the predicamation. They may win a single seat, they may not.
But my point is that there's time after April. Like

(59:10):
I mean, I know that's been the proposed deadline for
retroactive benefits what have you, But in the reality of
October versus April, there is some additional time out there
for this to be concluded. And I think that's just
the factual points.

Speaker 12 (59:23):
View made sure that was when the term sheets and
the negotiations would have been concluded, and it wasn't a
firm fixed deadline.

Speaker 5 (59:33):
We set that as a date and obviously it could
have moved.

Speaker 6 (59:35):
It wasn't.

Speaker 12 (59:36):
It was never a deadline, but it was just a
timeframe that was going to be imposed. It was fifteen
sixteen months from the time basically that the MoU was
signed in December and then we had our debate in
June or January. Pardon me, but the difference now is
that there are no negotiations going on.

Speaker 5 (59:52):
They've stopped. They said that yesterday.

Speaker 12 (59:54):
That's just the technical, high level things that are going on.
But the actual you know, term sheets are not being
worked on now was paused. It was paused during the
election campaign here, as it should be because we were
in caretaker mode and you know, so we've lost two
months now, we're going to lose another four and a
half and you know, I just think if we if
the Premier is going to go forward with the referendum idea,

(01:00:16):
this is not going to be something that you can
just spell out in a thirty second ad. This is
going to take you know, a couple of months or
a month or so to educate people on so that
they can have, you know, a good opinion of it.
Than Okay, I don't want to do this deal because
I don't like Quebec because.

Speaker 5 (01:00:30):
Of nineteen sixty nine.

Speaker 12 (01:00:32):
If there's a good deal, and look, you know John
Hogan had said when he was premier that there would
have been a free vote in the legislature and that I,
as a sitting member, would get to vote. However, I want,
without being whipped by the party, to tow the line
as I think it should be the next time around
as well, you know, when and if we do get
a chance to vote on this, I don't want my

(01:00:53):
name tied to something for forty or fifty years. You
know that people are going to be begrudging, because I've
spent the last four years of my life almost begrudging
the deal that was done in nineteen sixty nine, and
covering this as a reporter now working in government, as
somebody who knows the wants and needs of people and
what this money could potentially do for us, and what

(01:01:14):
it could have done for us over the last fifty
years or fifty five years.

Speaker 5 (01:01:19):
I just don't want to see this.

Speaker 12 (01:01:21):
And look, it's impossible to remove politics from this, because
this never would have gotten to this point without the
political will of Quebec and of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Speaker 5 (01:01:30):
There was never an ability to reach that.

Speaker 12 (01:01:31):
We tried through the courts, it failed, and politically between
Lego and Fury they reached an agreement and we tried
to move forward with it. Here we are now, and
regardless of what the premier wants to think, there is
a deadline. There is a political deadline and that as
you just stated Patty in October, the Party of Quebec
Law will not be interested in doing any kind of

(01:01:53):
a deal for Newfoundland and Labrador. They've said, up humiliating.

Speaker 2 (01:01:55):
Sure, very quickly. I do have to get going. But
I appreciate the time, Sarrian you met and political will.
It was part and political will. It was also part
the need for power because Quebec has been turning away
industrial and commercial opportunities. And that's why there was so
called cap in hand. It wasn't about, you know, the
spirit of cooperation and collaboration. It was a distinct need
that Quebec had on the Churchill River as much as

(01:02:17):
anything else.

Speaker 12 (01:02:18):
Absolutely, like any deal you do.

Speaker 2 (01:02:20):
In life, yeah, Fred, I appreciate it.

Speaker 5 (01:02:22):
Some time something that somebody is selling something.

Speaker 2 (01:02:25):
I do have to get going, but I appreciate the call.

Speaker 5 (01:02:27):
And that's the negotiation.

Speaker 6 (01:02:28):
Patty.

Speaker 12 (01:02:29):
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your
your crew who work there with you at VOCM and
to all your listeners.

Speaker 2 (01:02:34):
Appreciate your time. Same to you and your family. Okay,
take care too too, coy bye. All right, let's get
a reagular this quick question. Won't Quebec need power after Abel?
They will, but I just think in the reality of
it all, if and when LEGO loses, which they will,
then the question will be, you know, will they wait
till twenty forty one for any of these further conversations

(01:02:56):
expansion on the Churchill River? There are rather options in
the world of power generation. Of course they favor a
hydro because they're a hydro company. But you know the deal.
Let's get a break and don't go away. Welcome back
to the show. Let's go to n number two. Say
you want to the Deputy mayor of the city Saint
John's and also the finance lead. That's Ron Ellsworth and
good morning Deputy Mayor Elsworth around the air.

Speaker 8 (01:03:13):
Good morning Patty, and thank you for having me on.

Speaker 2 (01:03:16):
Happy to have you on. So this year's budget over
three hundred and sixty five almost three hundred and sixty
six million dollars four point eight percent increase from the
previous year, and of course that's been offset by property
tax At the same time, you know, we're kind of
being told that we're proud as a council to be
able to keep the mill rates stable. But the fact
of the matter is my property taxes are still going up.

Speaker 13 (01:03:37):
So like our mispalis in the province and in Metro,
everybody's holding their line on.

Speaker 8 (01:03:43):
The mill rate itself.

Speaker 13 (01:03:45):
The assessed values and increase growth from assess values is
offsetting any increasing cost. In our case, we're seeing a
ten dollars water tax increase which goes to fully fund
water tax compliance letters from undred fifty to two hundred dollars.
Some of that funding will go to offset staffing well
help which will help in our development department, and tiving

(01:04:08):
fees at Dropping the Bay go from ninety two to
fifty to ninety four fifty.

Speaker 8 (01:04:12):
So the growth and the assessed values for residentials eight
point six million, commercials two point nine.

Speaker 13 (01:04:18):
What I've said to anybody I've talked to, including media
over the last few weeks, getting too averages and percentages
and all that kind of distort sale. It affects you,
the individual property owner. So what I've encouraged anybody and
everybody to do is go into City Saint John's website,
look up assessments. Look at your twenty twenty five six

(01:04:39):
twenty twenty five propery assessments. Look at your twenty twenty six.
Some will be down, some will be stable, some will
be up. Look at the change and then multiply that
by point zero zero nine to one and you'll get
the impact on your property attacks for twenty twenty six. Patty,
When you look at affordability, regardless if it's your home,

(01:05:00):
my home, city, whatever, you always try to balance out
what you're spending money on and what that gives you
for spending your money. And Council was clear to me
in May as lead for finance and direction to staff
was no mill rate increase. When we came back and
had discussions in August on revenue revenue generation and we

(01:05:21):
talked about assessed values, we were told to make it
work within those confines. And in doing so, you know,
we find, in my opinion and where I am, we
find balance in between increase in taxation and the maintaining
of services and programs, but also some enhancements in service
and programs.

Speaker 8 (01:05:42):
You look at Metrobus, if you look at the.

Speaker 13 (01:05:44):
Changes that are apping in January of twenty twenty six,
where we see the airportites Turvey Road peak route going
from sixty minutes to into thirty minutes. We see Route
twenty three which services to Staffanger, Drive Universe to the mall,
increase servicing. And then you see a new route that

(01:06:05):
services East Empire going to the Battery, which picks up
Montsio Road, Eastern Seals, Rainbow Riders and Potanical Garden which
was not service. We've had a lobby from that area
for a couple of years, marked in particular at Easter
Seals about having access to transit for his consumers but
also for his volunteer to get in an over there.

(01:06:28):
Saint John's Ports Entertainment, for example, we see that dropping
by another two hundred and fourteen thousand dollars, so it
says twenty twenty four it's been a million dollar drop
in the grant to Saint John's Ports Entertainment, all while
in twenty four to five Saint John's Sports Entertainment Convention
Center in particular, has created fifty nine million dollars of
economic impact delivering hotel rooms, food, beverage, spending and restaurants, bars, transportation,

(01:06:55):
all of the above, and that all takes investment.

Speaker 8 (01:06:59):
But also it's got to be balanced investment.

Speaker 2 (01:07:01):
So w Mary Elsworth, what is the grant to Saint
John's Ports and Entertainment even with the two hundred thousand
dollars reduction, So for twenty.

Speaker 13 (01:07:08):
Twenty six it will be five point two million, which
is down a million from twenty twenty four, down two
hundred and fourteen thousand from last year. So for those
who do not like Saint John's Sports Entertainment, I get
it they do not like it. For me, I've always
supported it being run properly and managed properly, and I
think we need to be appreciative of Steve Then being

(01:07:31):
the chaired aboard Brnmead and his team and what they've done.
When you look at the economic development that comes out
of Saint John's Sports and entertain alone, it's an investment
for our business community. It's an investment for quality of life,
is an investment for traffic, tourism, everything that happens around
that piece and that's an investment we make, and I

(01:07:52):
get it. Those who don't like it will never like it.
But when I see economic development a fifty nine million
for twenty four to twenty five, we anticipate between forty
eight and fifty million for twenty twenty six alone, obviously
something that I've driven by the Brier, the slate of
activities at the convention center, plus obviously with the regiment

(01:08:13):
and hockeyback. These are investments we make to try and
support our business community and trying to help them create
opportunities for employment and those kind of pieces.

Speaker 2 (01:08:23):
Right, I've never really fully understood the lack of willingness
to offload SAT sports and entertainment to a private sector company,
because they'd have the exact same motivation to have a
junior team in there, to have the rogues in there,
to have the Brier in there, to drive as much
activity as possible at the convention center. So I've never
understood why the thought is that if it wasn't known publicly,
that it wouldn't create the amount of jobs and revenue
that it does currently. Because if I was the business

(01:08:45):
owner who took it on, I would be doing everything
under the sun to create as many jobs, as many activities,
as many events, as many hotel nights as I possibly could.
So I've never really hurt fully understood the economic argument.
I do want to get through another few things before
we're not out of time, so we can talk about
what's in the budget. But there's something that's not in
the budget that's being picked up by many. We've seen

(01:09:07):
the surveys, whether it be by the Department of Justice
and the violent crime stats coming from Status Canada, and
even the sentiment amongst residents of Saint John's but feeling
less safe. Put no real focus on that in this budget.
So even a Mount Pearl, even though we're not sure
how they're going to spend the money that they've airmarked
for public safety, So why not some more investments there,
whether it be public lighting, whether it be with non

(01:09:27):
market housing, maybe some partnering with police entities for response
for mental health concerns, and all those types of determinants
of health. Social determinant of health, which can indeed have
a direct relationship with public safety, doesn't seem.

Speaker 13 (01:09:40):
To be here, So it's woman in different places in
the budget. I think my PERL allocates from like two
hundred thousand over five years for safer community. We are
just finishing up a multi year project with Defender Government
on the building safer communities where there's multiple investments made
into Thrive other organizations trying to deal with the mental

(01:10:03):
health the addictions issue. The reality is that is that
we have an issue not only in our city, adjoining
cities and the province and you know the mental health addictions.

Speaker 8 (01:10:15):
The Rancy.

Speaker 13 (01:10:18):
Great respect for the man and women on the front lines,
but we've had and Mayor Breen and Council of many
conversations on lobby the Roncy and when we did and
when they stepped up and put the foot patrols in
and around downtown, when they put the activity out there.
We've seen the games happening there, the special constants coming

(01:10:39):
in play. We were hoping that that will help put
some people on the ground and service the activities there.
I guess the question I guess for the general public, patty,
is do they want us to take on policing. If
they want to take us on policing, the numbers financial
piece we need to look at and figure out where
the revenue is going to come from to have policing.
When the errant See are responsible for the policing. The

(01:11:02):
province is responsible for the policing. We strongly advocate it.
We're at the table and we'll continue to be at
the table. We did the Downtown summit, which will continue on.
There'll be some information coming out in the new year
around that the pieces within the budget around security for
Abanonment Park for some areas down that way. That will
come back again in the spring because we've had some

(01:11:23):
challenges in those areas.

Speaker 6 (01:11:25):
You know, these are.

Speaker 13 (01:11:26):
Pieces that are out there. This is not a you know,
we're going to solve the problem by doing this. One
of the challenges air padding is we are one of
the few municipalities that are the services are being offered
by the provincial government with a backstopping that piece gathering
place those phenomenal works with us some others inviting people

(01:11:47):
in for practice or lunch and then kicking them out
the door to go where and do what. So, you know,
there's a failure there in the system where we're disconnecting
the needs and services of those that are struggling in
our community, and how that impacts the residence in our community.

Speaker 8 (01:12:03):
And how the individuals who are said and put at
the door, where do they go? What do they do?

Speaker 13 (01:12:09):
And that's really the gap that's missing that the province
the gap in place, and others, including ourselves need to
be at able to discussing how do we fill that gap.

Speaker 2 (01:12:18):
Yeah, I mean, and that's certainly part of it. But
then you know, very specific municipally driven programs for save
for instance, at Risk Youth, which is something that you know,
we kind of focus in on groups like Choices for
Youth to really backstop the bulk of that responsibility. Last one,
because I'm running out of time, where was the shortcoming
at Saint John's Regional Fire Department that required a seven
hundred and twenty eight thousand dollars increase in spending for

(01:12:41):
the fire department. I heard Mayor Breen makes some reference
to wildfires or what have you. So what specifically is
that additional money's for.

Speaker 13 (01:12:48):
So back at you for a second pack, because you're
raised and I want to speak to it. In building
safer communities, there was a grant given to a coalition
of community centers working with ASKS at Risk Youth. We
support all communities in their We support Community Center Alliance
in aging and reaching the community members and the youth
within community to do and support programs for them. So

(01:13:09):
there is a mechanism there for that. The seven and
twenty thousand we're talking about for the Saint John tries
and no fire, there was allocations there for equipment. There's
allocations there for protective gear. We've identified a deficiency in
maintenance and upkeep for the fire department.

Speaker 8 (01:13:26):
Which is now being addressed. And those are all the
mechanisms that need to be.

Speaker 13 (01:13:30):
In ployee to protect the men and women who provide
protection services for us on a regular basis.

Speaker 2 (01:13:36):
Appreciate the time this morning. I'll obviously think of more
to ask about into the future, but thanks for the
call this morning.

Speaker 13 (01:13:40):
Ron always and I'm always only phone call away, got
you appreciate your timing. Mirror Christmas and Appian account Holiday,
Appy Holidays for everybody.

Speaker 2 (01:13:47):
The very same, Thank you, Sir Anest god bye, Deputy Mary,
Ron elseworth. Lots to get into and of course maybe
not enough time there this morning. Let's get a break
and when we go back, there's a colorist's respond to
Fred Hutton, don't away, welcome back to the show. Let's
go line number one. Christ around the air.

Speaker 14 (01:14:04):
Hey Patty, how are you today.

Speaker 2 (01:14:05):
That's about it all. How about you?

Speaker 14 (01:14:07):
Oh good good. I want to respond to Fred. I
just don't know what side of his mouth I should
be responding to. I mean, that was a breathtaking call.
It's it's like Schrodinger's review panel. He's trying to tell
us that, you know, oh, they're not independent now, but
when we picked them to do the job, they were

(01:14:28):
going to be independent. He's trying to say that, you know,
we're going to miss our opportunity and provide a new
generation of shame to the province because we didn't learn
our lessons, but also we need to go as fast
as possible ignoring the lessons of the past. It's just
it's it was a real shameless call, Patty, And I'm

(01:14:51):
glad you pushed back on him, because, you know, because
they brought us here, and you know, they put us
into a position where we need to have the same
like we had these talks last year around Christmas, and
you know that was without an election, you know. Oh oh,

(01:15:11):
and of course you know, he's trying to thread the
needle between it being a done deal and then still
obviously huge amounts of specific details be worked out in
the term sheets. It's it's just all over the place.
It was such a brazen political good and nonsense that
he didn't even take time to address the new conditions

(01:15:34):
of the terms of reference. And they're really good. It's
a good document and I think we should all be
really happy about it.

Speaker 2 (01:15:42):
I read it, I mean as a starting or a
jumping off point. I'm just not entirely sure the thought
process behind how they structured the initial independent review panel,
because if they were going to be hamstrung to just
what's in the pages of an MoU with so many
other risks to highlight, to understand about the borrowing and

(01:16:02):
transmission authority and federal investment and a bunch of different
things that are being discussed actively being discussed, even from
the Prime Minister himself. So I just think that the
narrow scope really led to a bunch of distinct problems.
It's fair to say that there was analysis offered by
Power Advisory, JP, Morgan Chase and all the rest. Okay,
that's fine, but we just it always felt like there

(01:16:25):
was more that could have been done, and I never
understood as to why that was not going to get
done in that fashion, because I think people would have
been a little bit easier to watch the panel do
its work for us to have immediate resignation or very
quick resignation and highlights brought forward by mister Wilson. So,
but in fairness, he's not wrong with what Mike Wilson
has said in the past. I mean, he's even said

(01:16:47):
it on this show, so that does look his resume
speaks for itself. I have nothing bad to say about
Mike Wilson, but he's already offered his thoughts on the
MoU So I do think it's a pretty fair question
as to what going to change between his resignation and
his new appointment to this panel.

Speaker 14 (01:17:04):
Well, I mean, if if I'm being the most cynical
I could be, I'd have to say that the first
review panel was never a review panel. They had a
job which was to get this passed and to minimize
the oversight and to to just.

Speaker 13 (01:17:22):
Get the ball over the line.

Speaker 14 (01:17:24):
And I think obviously Mike Wilson saw that was happening
and wasn't going to have any part of it. And
you know, that's that's such a rare thing in this province.
We don't we don't have people that do that very
often at least and you know, the and getting into
the details of the term sheet, because again this is
all like, it's a practical thing that we should be

(01:17:46):
concerned about the practical implication. It's not the not the
politics of it all.

Speaker 2 (01:17:54):
This is a commercial arrangement, you know, but we have
made it a political how potato. But let me just
offer some comparisons and contrast here. So we know mister
Wilson's position honors and fair enough, and he was very
generous with his time on this program with information he
had sent me highlighting his concerns. But the same could
be said for how they structured the first panel. Dennis

(01:18:14):
Brown said it was a good deal before he was
appointed the chair. So we've just done a very hand
fitsed job trying to deal with something which has decades
long and billions of dollars worth of impact. Whether or
not it ever gets done, I have no earthly idea
at this stage. But it's just so bizarre and unfortunate
that we are where we are with what is such

(01:18:35):
an important commercial arrangement.

Speaker 14 (01:18:37):
And it seems quite clear from the Quebec side of
things that they that there is hostile negotiators and more
hostile negotiators. You know, they're you know, yes, it is
a good deal for Quebec. They need the power. Yes,
there is part of the deal that's good for us
because we get a bunch of cash. Now, like in

(01:18:58):
very broad strokes, I think that's, you know, the fairest
way to describe the deal. But once you start going
beyond the broad strokes it all you know, we're probably
giving away seventy five percent of the value of the
assets up there. But thankfully, the new terms of reference

(01:19:19):
have a whole bunch of very specific and boring questions
that are very well needed, things like water rights and
energy versus power, and scheduling and alternatives, you know, the
questions that everyone wanted to ask. And like I'm I've
asked a whole bunch of questions quite loudly over the
last year. And if this document wasn't good, I was

(01:19:41):
kind of I was a little excited to have another
fight on my hands, Patty. But it's a really good
document and I would hope the opposition would start to
look at it in good faith and say, Okay, this
is what's happening. How do we move forward in a
better and more productive manner. What does their future look like.

(01:20:01):
And the opposition has not done that to the moment.

Speaker 2 (01:20:05):
You know, you talk about things like people don't want
to vote for something that will end up being detrimental
to the province or whatever the case. We'd be look
between now and the end if this ever gets to
however many definitive agreements or term sheets. By the time
that expires, governments will have changed hands several times. And
I'm not so sure that we're going to hang the

(01:20:26):
hat of like we did with Joey Smallwood at the
Upper Churchill. With this expansion at the Upper and the
development of Gaul, I don't even think into the future
it's going to be looked at the same way. Are
people going to say, well, this is Tony Wakem's deal
or Andrew Fury's deal or whatever. I just don't think
that's to be true. And even if it is, I
couldn't care less. I could not care less if something

(01:20:48):
can be worked out which is going to be beneficial
to the province as best possible, because we have to remember,
if it's not mutually beneficial, there will be no agreement.
Regardless of what side of this fence that you happen
to be on. If we can do the best, Yes,
we possibly can. I couldn't care less if it was
negotiated and finalized by the Liberals or the Doors. I'm
just so far beyond that.

Speaker 14 (01:21:09):
I couldn't agree more. And you know, I won't take
too much of your time. I would like to take
a minute just to talk about, you know, will Quebec
walk away? And I understand all the negotiating parties in
Quebec are saying that they will, and it's just sooner
or later if they will. And I don't actually believe
that they're being very hard, very good negotiators, but they

(01:21:31):
are also out of power and they have failed to
build power over the last five years. Like we put
more firm power on our grid in a very expensive
way than they have as a percentage. We're crushing them
in firm power added to the grid. Fabia tried to
build a couple gig out the wind, didn't get it built,

(01:21:52):
headed off to Ottawa and the plan now is to
just build even more wind.

Speaker 2 (01:21:58):
Yeah, there's no reason to believe the party Quebec w'
walk away, though, I mean, it's hard to backpedal on.
This is a humiliation of the province. You know and
then all of a sudden, oh well upon further review,
because they're not the most rational crowd on the planet
to begin with. So I think there's a legitimate concern
about the part of Quebec wall, but that doesn't mean

(01:22:18):
we have to rush into anything, and I've never suggested that,
nor Dow I believe that to be true. There's no
sense making a bad deal for the sake of making
a deal. Chris, I'll give you the final thossils. I'm
late for the break again, Higer.

Speaker 14 (01:22:29):
Quebec is doing push pulling on how good nuclear power
is right now, yep, which is a political change, and
that's the cost that hasn't been put into all of this.
There's sense for kill a lot hour, but if Quebec
wants firm generation, they need either have natural gas or
nuclear power or work out a deal with us, and
only one of them comes with a political consequence.

Speaker 2 (01:22:50):
I appreciate the time, Chris, thanks for doing it.

Speaker 14 (01:22:53):
Thank you, Beatty.

Speaker 2 (01:22:53):
Welcome bye byet. Just get a break and don't go away.
Welcome back to the show. Let's go line number two.
Morning Tom, you're on the air.

Speaker 4 (01:23:00):
Good morning Patty.

Speaker 13 (01:23:03):
You.

Speaker 4 (01:23:04):
I'm good Patty. Before I get the viason from my call.
I just want to make one very quick comment on
the m saying, you know, I think I'm pretty well informed,
but most of the things that are on to go here.
But my question could have gonement is that if after
they do this review and this Pannel decides to recommend Joeyeah,
it's a deal, we should sign it, and then they

(01:23:26):
go to a vote and the ignoramuses like me say
no because quite honestly, I don't know if I could vote,
because I don't know enough about it to votes. And
I say no, and the majority of us say no,
where are we at? Then now I think this is crazy.
Get the bloody report, let the expert say a or

(01:23:47):
inn a, and let's move ahead. Because letting people like me,
who I think is pretty well informed, even both, it's
absolutely crazy.

Speaker 2 (01:23:57):
So well, I tend to think to them is a
bad idea simply because emotions will rule the vote. I mean,
if you hate the Liberals, you'll vote against it. If
you hate to Quebec, your vote against it. So I
get why people want to have their say, but let
me just throw this out there. There's been enough confusion
about a thirty seven page memorandum of understanding. Just imagine

(01:24:17):
what we're going to have to try to absorb when
there's as many as twenty definitive agreements that maybe make
up somewhere in the neighborhood what thirty thousand pages. So,
I mean, some of it would be hoighly technical, some
would be highly legal and maybe sort of irrelevant to
public sentiment and public benefit. But man, oh man, it's
already pretty complicated just with thirty seven pages.

Speaker 6 (01:24:39):
I know.

Speaker 4 (01:24:39):
So you know, I couldn't I just honestly couldn't vote.
I couldn't say hey or hey. You know, I'm like,
I think like you. I got to sit there and say,
the experts are going to make a decision. The experts
are going to say a Orna. And if they say, hey, Orna,
then let's go with it. And because like one of
your callers said previously, you know, we have to quebec
Bos out of this. Who we're going to sell her to,

(01:25:02):
that who we're going to give us the billions that
we're going to promise. I don't know anyway, fat the
reason I'm calling And I called Dave and he suggested
I speak.

Speaker 6 (01:25:10):
To you.

Speaker 4 (01:25:12):
Well, that I had to change my number and I
called Dave the same day. Here's my number. If anybody
called you, because we speak often. We I speak often,
but I got so many calls day and night from
people with issues, and you know, I don't want to
lighten the fact that people have issues, whether to do
with disability, save these plans or disability issues or or

(01:25:37):
all of the things that takes people with disabilities. But
you know, I'm getting called ten or eleven o'clock that night,
and man, you know, I just couldn't deal with it anymore.
So I had to change my phone number. So the
reason I'm calling you today is just to tell you that,
and tell anybody who's been trying to call me that
if they want to get me, they're going to have

(01:25:58):
to call the hub and then and I'll get a
number and call then, because you know, we're overdue for
a disability advocate, and it seems like everybody is treating
me like that person, and man, I just can't do it.
I can't. I don't mind thro out today speaking with people,
but come seventy eight nine o'clock at night, when I'm
sitting on my second martini, how do we know how

(01:26:19):
to say to somebody, so you know, if you've got
an issue, call the Hub and I'll try and get
you that way.

Speaker 2 (01:26:27):
Fair enough, And you know, the summary point, with all
the stories I hear, with all the conversations you've had,
it is pretty clear that a disabilities advocate office is
long overdue. It's a third of the population. They have
very specific questions and a champion in their corner with
an independent arms length relationship with government. Is time. If
the time it's coming, Premier Waken I said it is coming,

(01:26:48):
So that's very good.

Speaker 4 (01:26:51):
It is indeed good. So let's hope he does. You know,
in a final load, I'm here at Defficult Place today.
Most people will may be aware of some may not,
just that we at the hub of course, about all
the staff for the food services at Daffide Place. And
I'm here today because because Votary is having your lunch,
and so I come up to make sure and help

(01:27:11):
the girl carb some turkies and things. So hopefully they'll
have a good lunch and I'll get away and get
the rest of the afternoon do some other things. So
thanks for taking my call. I appreciate it, and I'll
bother you guys. Have a great Christmas because you probably
won't get to talk until the new year.

Speaker 2 (01:27:27):
I appreciate your time and wish you and yours merry
Christmas as well. Tom, thanks a lot. Thank you home
by one second, just add to cough. All right, let's
get a breaking let me come back, sell another hour
left for you. Do not go away.

Speaker 1 (01:27:42):
You were listening to a rebroadcast of VOCM Open Live.
Have your say by calling seven oh nine at two
seven three fifty two eleven or one triple eight five
ninety eight six two six and listen live weekday mornings
at nine am.

Speaker 2 (01:28:00):
Welcome back to the show. Let's go line number three.
Dave here on the air.

Speaker 6 (01:28:04):
Good morning, Patty, morning listening to your show. Started off
the morning actually listening to Premier Hogan writing on the potential.
I guess the problem of Premier WAKEM putting together this
team and taking a look at the MoU for what

(01:28:28):
it's worth. I for one, don't think we're anywhere near
the stages that we should even be looking at ANU.
But well, pretty obvious reasons that nobody's talking about. Patty.
First of all, we don't know what we're selling. We
have no idea. I sat with the Premier a couple

(01:28:49):
of weeks ago when I went to Saint John's. But
a group that basically made it aware that you're talking
about a much larger deal then what's written in this MoU.
But this MoU will limit us for our potential decisions
and our options in the future by the stuff that's

(01:29:12):
not written into it except under control the Lower Churchill
has no parameters written into this MoU except anything to
give Quebec the right of right of approval on anything
that we would decide to do above and beyond in
that area, such as along the lines of the Gull Island.

(01:29:32):
This type of deal Quebec would have the right to
refuse or approve. Now the talk of the ticking timeline
of what should happen should the party Quebec QUAI de
Back whatever get in in the next election, well I
think that should throw up the very first red flag
that anybody needs to hear. I heard Hutton on this

(01:29:55):
morning talking about we've been doing this since nineteen sixty nine.
I guess pushing that 's time to get a deal. Well,
here's why it's not time to get a deal. Premier
wakems forced into the review of this MoU and basically
under the guise of the Liberals saying, okay, get this
MoU in place so that we can move towards a

(01:30:15):
definitive agreement. And what's the sensinet We got nothing to
compare it to. We have nothing to compare it to.
The Liberals push it as the best deal. Oh yes, boy,
we gotta worry. We're gonna lose this. We'll potentially we've
got nothing to compare it to.

Speaker 2 (01:30:33):
Yeah, but what does that have to do? What does
that have to do with anything?

Speaker 8 (01:30:36):
Though?

Speaker 2 (01:30:36):
All the same, I mean, we've been trying to any deal,
so what.

Speaker 6 (01:30:40):
Does it have to do with anything? I mean, if
we if we're talking the best deal, it can't be
the only deal. Let's just look at the semantics of
the English language. All they're doing is politicking to try
and make people believe that this makes sense. We should
be looking before we do any deal on the Lower Churchill.
Two things should be done. We should remove the bias

(01:31:03):
from the process, and we should start a Labrador energy company,
the same idea as Neufland latent powered. But they do
here and what Hydro does here. Don't interrupt that at all.
Keep doing what you're doing. The beat us dowards of
our system and keep it going, keep us all with
the lights on. Any development that takes place in Labrador

(01:31:27):
for this new purpose shouldn't involve fifty years. But it
should also not involve any of the current players that
are making the decisions that lead to somebody jumping up
as quick as they are and saying, let's sign an
MoU with Quebec. You couldn't be farther farther away from reality.
We should be looking right now at a single qualitative

(01:31:50):
review of the entire potential of the Churchill Basin that
identifies all of the potential that's there. There's such a
things as the lobsticks to three hundred megawatts, Gull Island
with twenty two fifty dominion lake Manippi Lake. All of
this will be controlled one hundred percent without a current

(01:32:11):
agreement and give Quebec lots of time to develop it.
But Quebec doesn't have the time. It's ticking on them now.
They had to take on several power initiatives this past year.
They've got a charged an uncharged subsea line from Quebec
into New York to provide power for a deal that
they haven't even wrote yet Newfoundlanders don't need any MoU

(01:32:37):
at this point until they've had other deals. To look at, Patty,
if you were going out and you come to Mike
Carlott and then you come in, Patty Dalies here and
I'm saying, that deal right there, there's the price is
the best deal you'll ever get. Give me your check.
Would you be ready to hand over your check based
upon what I said about that deal and the rice

(01:33:00):
I put up? What benefit relies to you? What it
means to you. We could look at an augmented system
in the Churchill Basin now that goes above and beyond
the twelve thousand megawats that we've identified, augmented in terms
of other energy sources, be it maybe a small SMR
located back in the woods that you can run. That

(01:33:21):
you can augment the system. You don't need to worry
about low reservoir levels, you don't need to worry about
the draw down conditions in dry summers. These are the
type of guarantees that these big companies such as the
Microsoft's and others of this world are willing to pay
for to be part of. We don't need Quebec going

(01:33:42):
out and basically saying, well, they got no options there.
Reason we got no options in Newfoundland is because our partners,
the honorable ones that we're ready to sign a deal with,
now deny us an energy corridor. So it's not partners.
They're not looking to be a partner in any deal
in charch of false. What they're looking for is to

(01:34:02):
become the dictator under legal document. According to the rights
and according to the laws of Quebec. It's an unsolicited
deal that came from them before the forty one chimeout
of the deal that they got. Well, I can say
what you want to talk a deal on rejigging the

(01:34:23):
deal that's already there.

Speaker 11 (01:34:24):
Now.

Speaker 6 (01:34:24):
Fine. If there's any parts of this MoU that links
us to being once again beholding, which we have been
I heard said this morning by Hogan I think, and
now also by Hutton, we've been beholding since nineteen sixty nine. Well,
people now coming down expecting basically a referendum right after

(01:34:47):
the MoU process. No, if we're going to ever have
a referendum on this, it should be one. Ultimately, we've
had several deals to look at and there's several on
the table or whatever. They definitely reach an agreement and
it's ready to be signed into a deal. That's a
long ways off, and it's a long past the deadline
that Quebec has set for us to say that this
has got to be signed by April twenty six and

(01:35:09):
a deal in motion before their next election. If they're
that unstable in Quebec in terms of the recognition of
their needs for power or their needs to become what
I would call a cooperative partner, they're trying to ram
a deal down our troat with basically, here, sign this quick.
You're never getting another chense. You've got no other option.

(01:35:32):
That's what this is.

Speaker 2 (01:35:34):
Okay. To that point is if we're talking about options
because you tried to make the analogy of me going
to a car lot. The fact of the matter is
I do have options.

Speaker 6 (01:35:43):
But do we?

Speaker 2 (01:35:45):
I mean, is Hydro Quebec always going to be the customer?

Speaker 6 (01:35:49):
How do you know if we never looked well?

Speaker 2 (01:35:50):
I mean, okay, so one thing taking a.

Speaker 6 (01:35:53):
Deal patty that came to us from Quebec.

Speaker 2 (01:35:55):
Dave, hold on, this thing was written by them. Just
hold on a seconds. If I buy the car, I
can take it off the lot, right ye. If we
build additional power generating capacity on the Church of River,
notably at gal At some point there has to be
a customer for it, and that's two and twenty five megawatts.
I don't even know what you could put a laborage
or to consume all of that power. So the next

(01:36:15):
logical step would be how do you get it out
of there? So again we learned a lot of lessons
here at muskrat Falls. Muskrat for the most part, is
a transmission project as opposed to just a dam on
the Church of River. I mean inside what we currently
understand to be thirteen point five billion dollars. Every bit
of nine billion dollars of that is getting the power
out of there. So as much as people want to

(01:36:37):
avoid Quebec, it's also the reason we have muskrat Falls
is because we wanted to work around Quebec. Geographically speaking,
they're right there. So unless we have some sort of
plan to get the power out of there, I mean,
just think about it.

Speaker 6 (01:36:48):
I think the power has to come out of there.
Maybe some of it does. Maybe you find that subse cable.
I mean, there's certainly working for that. Part of the
group that I'm working with just finished laying down an
actual line that can handle eleven hundred and fifty megawatts.

Speaker 2 (01:37:03):
Okay, subsea line to wear to the northeastern United States,
for instance, and that big market. Yeah, okay, I mean
even the cost of the maritime link at one point
five billion dollars of a decade ago of money. Just
imagine trying to build. And that's why I founder of megawats.
Just imagine building one for say, to carry fifteen hundred
in today's dollars and triple and quadruple at least a distance. Man,

(01:37:27):
we do have to be honest about trying to get
power off the Churchill River at where it's going. Because
if we're spent eight or nine billion dollars to wheel
you know, what is it eight hundred and twenty four
firm And of course it's less than that, but by
the time it gets to the market, but that costs
US about nine million dollars to come down through the
long range mountains. And that's not even including the one
point five billion dollars that we didn't spend that the

(01:37:47):
Nova Scotians spend on it.

Speaker 6 (01:37:49):
So I get these are generations projects. Why not look
at something like probably subseed in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
Those were partners in potential projects in the past, and
then it's only a flicking. It's into the US. But
the fact of the matter is patty. Before we sign
any MoU that's been handed to us by Quebec, we

(01:38:10):
might want to remember that since nineteen sixty nine we
made seven trips to the courthouse to ask for fairness.
Nothing was ever shown to us. We spent since nineteen
sixty nine hoping to get to this day where we
would see the end of a bad deal and possibly
the creation of a good one. Well, I don't think

(01:38:32):
that's going to come on a document served to us
from Quebec which gives all of the control and the
power of this project to Quebec. There are nations around
this world, companies like Microsoft that are coming in that
could fund every bit of what has to happen in
Churchill Falls. And I can guarantee you that none of

(01:38:53):
those twelve thousand megawats that have been identified now would
even have to leave. We would offer actually off for
what would be a power cord or unlike anything else
on this continent, that can be augmented further, and we
could bring in things like AI all these data centers
without having to go to win and whatever else may
there is a case may be clean hydro electric power

(01:39:17):
and this is the way of the future, and they
haven't gotten near enough power to serve what's coming. We
don't need to ship nothing.

Speaker 2 (01:39:25):
Yeah, I think it's highly questionable the use of the
amount of power required for AI data centers to begin with.
That's just a personal note. And look, an industrial strategy
obviously has to be part and person with any consideration
of expansion at the upper or the development thatch call
or anything else under this on. Of course, that's got
to be part of the conversation, David, make for the breaker.
I appreciate your time.

Speaker 6 (01:39:45):
I appreciate yourson. Before we're ready to sign any deal, Patty,
we should understand what it is that we're putting up
for sale. We've undervalued it in the past. We're not undervalued.
Somebody else undervalued, but we have huge value. This is
the way forward and this is the next one hundred
year generational plan for this province.

Speaker 2 (01:40:02):
Appreciate the time, Thanks buddy, Thanks bye bye. Yeah, the
authority of a hydrogo back at goal. Look, I get it,
And people say, well, they're assuming the risk and then
the cost. There's still a lot of questions to be asked, sir,
no doubt about it. And that whole concept of industrial strategy.
Of course, for the love of God, we know some
of it. I mean, you just talked to the mining companies.

(01:40:25):
One are the things keeping away new investment. One of
the things keeping away some expansion is there's no power.
So can we satisfy the tens of billions of dollars
to go to loan at goal to satisfy any critical
mining expansion and or new developments. It's an aul lot
of power. Anyway, you want to talk about it, we
can do it. After this, don't go away, fuck it back,

(01:40:47):
let's go line number four, Cynthia, you're on the air.

Speaker 15 (01:40:51):
Hello, Patty, good morning. You're certainly having a fiery show
this morning. That's all right, Oh yeah, and you handle
it well.

Speaker 10 (01:41:00):
Thank you.

Speaker 15 (01:41:01):
Anyway, I just wanted to talk about listening to Fred Hutton,
listening to Daves, listening to a number of people politics.
Last year in January, they were given several days in
the House to ask questions and get answers. The president

(01:41:24):
government was in opposition at that time. They could not
come up with anything to get something straightened out, to
understand the MoU and to move on. So things got
set up with some very good people at the helm

(01:41:46):
in looking at the agreement and how we could get
things out of it and be the best for our province.
I think right now it's time to revert and open
the house again in January. Let the people who were
elected to govern govern and then we if they can

(01:42:14):
come to an agreement, we continue with the negotiations and
get things done with Quebec so that we the Province
of Newfoundland and Larva Door, and the people of Newfoundland
and Larva Door be able to see a lot of
value do things that can happen here in healthcare, in

(01:42:37):
schools and education, in roads and everything else. Let's get
things done waiting until the end of April, and then
Quebec has already told us if you want to change
things in there, we're going to want to change things.
That's going to take negotiating time and that's not going

(01:43:00):
to benefit the Province of Newfoundland in Labrador in getting
money that desperately need it here. And I think right
now it's time that the premiere open the house, get
people on the floor, allow whomever experts they want to

(01:43:24):
come in and discuss it and get things done, because
they're not giving a benefit to our province in what
they were elected to do, and that meant govern the province.
It's no good to ask me and everyone out here

(01:43:44):
in the province the vote on something that's going to
take a while to even educate us. That means that
we're not looking at the end of April. We're not
looking at the October. We're probably looking at a ten
years down the road to get that done where we
could have something in place right now.

Speaker 7 (01:44:07):
Thank you.

Speaker 15 (01:44:08):
I just wanted to have my rant on this as well.

Speaker 2 (01:44:12):
I appreciate it, and I appreciate making time for the show. Cynthia,
thank you very much.

Speaker 15 (01:44:17):
Paddy, have a wonderful day, and Merry Christmas to all.

Speaker 2 (01:44:20):
Merry Christmas to you as well. Thank you. Good bye, Okay,
bye bye those of you in the Quebe. I'm not
going to squeeze up against the news. Look, the conversation
about industrial strategy is obviously critically important. Then it's the
thought about it, and it's been floated several times. Charlie
Oliver's on the show not long ago talking about the

(01:44:40):
consideration for bringing what looks to be billions upon billions
of dollars of investments into artificial intelligence data centers. I
get it. They could be great customers. Labrador is uniquely
positioned to be the home of some of these big
data centers. There is still a conversation about, you know,
fiber optics and getting the the power out. But my

(01:45:03):
fundamental thoughts on it is there's an opportunity there. Of
course there is. But if we're talking about however much
power could be used for, for instance, the mining sector,
because if you look at what would be a return
on investment the amount of jobs for construction and ongoing
operations out of mine versus the ongoing the part of me,

(01:45:24):
the construction jobs for an AI data center and ongoing operations,
the return to me seems clearly advantageous. More so when
we talk about the minds and mining operations. I mean,
we're sitting on a treasure trove of critical minerals and
rare earth minerals in Labrador. That's where the future value
for how we use the power, whether it be from

(01:45:45):
the quadrupling of the Labrador Block three call block at
the upper which is over the course of decades I
know it's not right away, so I guess those are
the measures. Has anyone even entertained that exercise, And again
I've said this in the past, I'm going to stick
with it even when the independent review, which I'm not opposed.
So I think it's an excellent idea. We have to
be sure of what we're getting ourselves into here. But

(01:46:05):
it would also be helpful that couple of things, if
we had some understanding about what Michael Sabey had meant
when he said replacement costs versus this dealers twelve to
fourteen cents. What does that mean? That's a pretty important question.
Same thing if we did an evaluation, because you can
probably attract the Microsofts of the world to or Meta
of the world to come to Labrador, whether it be

(01:46:26):
w access to power and the cold temperatures all fair enough.
Just use let's just use some round numbers. If we
could bring operations like that to Labrador with the consumption
of pick a number, one thousand megawatts and do some
legitimate not cocktail macing cocktail napkin math, but some legitimate

(01:46:47):
analysis of what that might look like in so far
as jobs and expanded tax base, because there'll be no royalties.
You know what that might look like. Then I think
that just adds to the conversation. But we haven't done it,
and I think that's the responsibility of the government, whether
it be through there's members that are currently in government,
or senior bureaucrats or somebody. Because if we're talking about

(01:47:07):
comparisons and what it might look like if we do this,
what it might look like if we do that. To
Dave's point, we're comparing it against nothing. We're just analyzing
one document as opposed to what other opportunities might be there.
Are they real I don't know. Is someone going to
do the boring grunt work and give it something to
compare to allah? Bringing these big data centers Laborrador be

(01:47:29):
an interesting exercise. I don't have the brain power of
the time to do it, nor is my responsibility. So
someone at the government level, if you think there's all turnatips,
just paint us a picture with associated costs and what
the return might look like. That's all. Let's get a
break for the news. Don't go away.

Speaker 1 (01:47:44):
The Tim Power Show showing the conversation weekday afternoons at
four pm on your VOCM.

Speaker 2 (01:47:50):
Welcome back to the show. Let's go to LNE number five,
SYCA Mornings to the Ward for counselor here in the city.
That's Tom Davis, Tommy around the Air.

Speaker 10 (01:47:57):
Good morning morning, Happy Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Happy New Year
to everyone, and anything else that people happy holidays that
anybody else celebrates. Fair enough, So yesterday the City Saint
John's dropped your budget. I want to start with just
an overall, excuse me, generic observation, which is that there

(01:48:21):
seems to be a disconnect amongst many residents about the
fact that just because your municipality does not increase the
mill rate does not mean your taxes go up. And
if you look around, if your municipality's budget goes up
and how much they're spending, like say some of our
sister communities, then either there's been more buildings built or

(01:48:44):
more houses built, or your property values have gone up.
And therefore if they don't adjust the just the mill rate,
then they're absorbing the money. And it's coming from the
fact that the property values have gone up, which is
basically what's been happening all over the Avalon, especially the
Northeast Avalon, and that due to market conditions, everybody's homes

(01:49:05):
and buildings as well. In the commercial world, for the
most part, not everybody's but most people are going up
and going up pretty significantly. And like, for example, I've
seen social media thank elected officials for not increasing their
taxes in municipalities that I know that they've increased their
spending by in some cases seven percent. In the case

(01:49:26):
of Mount Pearl, they've increased their spending by seven percent,
which by default, on average, means that the businesses and
the residents in Maltpearol are spending are paying seven percent
more in property tax on the average. So I think
everybody needs to take a step back and also realize
that when your municipality increases its spending on the backs
of increased property values, that if those property values stop growing,

(01:49:52):
they're now relying on that revenue regardless, they're relying on
the revenue, and so that is going to directly mean
that your taxes will continue to go up, and the
next step would be mill rates if property values don't
increase continue increasing. And of course because the property that
your property value has got up value doesn't mean you
have any more money unless you sell your property. And
if you sell your property, well then you've got to
go buy another property, which most likely will cost you

(01:50:15):
more or the same. So it's you know, it frustrates
me a little bit that the residents aren't more upset
with the fact that all of us are spending more
money and ultimately money that they have to pay.

Speaker 2 (01:50:30):
Yep, yours surely falls into that category.

Speaker 10 (01:50:33):
So I did a cursory look around my ward and
looked and see how much people's property values went up
and by default, how much their property taxes would go up.
So for people's contexts, on average, in the city of
Saint John's property values went up eight percent. Now we
do it every two years our assessments, whereas everybody else

(01:50:54):
does it every year. But anyway, so I looked around
and up and come out terrace somewhere around on average
six to seven percent Vinium. I found one home I
didn't I didn't cherry pick, I didn't go looking for
one that was bigger. I randomly picked on streets. But Vininggum,
the one I picked on, went up fourteen point five percent,
University Avenue up twenty nine point one percent. Like, there's

(01:51:17):
someone who's got a very significant hit to their situation.
As we do know, cost of electures doing up to
seven percent in July. And people with this wind and
with this cold, people are readly going to get a
great you know, after Christmas gift from New Flan Power,
and you know that is real money. The three point
four percent people's food on average went up in twenty

(01:51:40):
twenty five, and they're projecting four to six percent in
twenty twenty six. On Maple, the one house I clicked
on Maple went up forty one percent. Their house went
up in value. Now this is a nice home, but
it went up in value by two hundred and twelve
thousand dollars. That family is going to pay nineteen hundred
and thirty seven more in property tack to the City

(01:52:00):
of Saint John's sister on downing one of fourteen percent,
Abraham up twenty seven point one percent, tune is court
up twenty seven percent, bills turn up fourteen point five percent.
So you know, and the thing is that fundamentally it's
very difficult. And I'm respectful of all my colleagues and
my staff, and I know it's very difficult. I mean,

(01:52:22):
the way I approach it is the ability of people
to afford not everybody, but a lot of people to
afford their lifestyles right now is coming to a crunch.
We know bankruptcies in Newfoundland were seven six percent increase
in bankruptcies for the last twelve months compared two point

(01:52:43):
seven percent for the country. We know people are hurting,
We know people are going week to week, and you know,
it's difficult when you're looking at a budget. You know,
we had a bunch of new counselors who you know,
a few only got elected a few weeks ago, you know,
and then you've got small businesses or businesses in general,
they're feeling the same squeezes of power and food cost,

(01:53:05):
the restaurants, food cost, labor costs, and we put commercial
taxes up. And again it's not that the commercial taxes
really went off, how much money we're getting from them
because the property value is going up on average three
point five percent, and then a small water tax increase.

Speaker 2 (01:53:22):
Right And just for the record, you did, indeed, I
guess I should confirm this. You did indeed vote against
this budget and the only member of council to do so.

Speaker 10 (01:53:32):
Correct, Yeah, And it's difficult being the one person. And
again I know it wasn't easy. We had some very
difficult conversations, and I will tell you every counselor cares,
every counselor sleep over it. It was very difficult, but
it's it's really hard to be to vote against something

(01:53:53):
when where that would then leave you If enough people did,
which would be almost an impossibility that you know, then
we'd be back at work today every day trying to
figure out how we could have at least reduced our
spending to the point. I mean, I didn't expect it
not to go up, but I think it's disingenuous to
say you don't. You haven't raised taxes because you haven't
adjusted mill rate, but you're absorbing every bit of the

(01:54:14):
property value increased. Like if the property values have gone
up six percent, well, then I guess our would budget
will pull up six percent. If it had all gone
down what we have done, well, we'd be talking about
mill rate increases, and then the conversation would have been different.
But it shouldn't be different. It should be the same,
So you know, you know, the thing is that what
most people aren't aware of is that since twenty twenty three,

(01:54:36):
the City of Saint John's has phraised the amount of
money that people are paying in taxes on average by
eighteen point eighty percent with this budget that just got passed,
and that's five hundred and sixty seven dollars extra every
every year on the average. Some people less, some people more.
Like I found homes and I was bouncing around that
the property value actually went down a little bit, So

(01:54:57):
not everybody is in the same boat. But I mean,
I just encourage people to be camm informed and to
speak out and to do it respectfully, because again, it's
a very complicated city with a lot of moving parts,
and you know, some of the suggestions I brought forward
would be very difficult to manage and implement in the

(01:55:19):
existing culture. But I really believe whether it's a provincial
or municipal level, and the family level and the business level,
we need to realize that we are living beyond our means.
When you look at the province, as we're all about
to find out this afternoon, probably twenty five plus percent
of every penny that gets paid out by the provinces borrowed,
Like that would be on salaries, that would be on

(01:55:41):
medical supplies, on electricity at Confederation Building. It's borrowed, like
we're borrowing money to pay operating costs. The municipalities have
to balance their budget with the exception of capital works.
So it should be obvious to people that you know
that if we keep increasing our what we're charging, then
sooner or later, less and less people can afford their homes.

(01:56:02):
And when you look at people's roofs and the cost
of doing a roof has gotten so expensive, it's very,
very difficult. And part of the reality I believe that
has to sink into the hearts and minds of all
of us is that we haven't fear how to do
more with less and probably settle for less, which is
very difficult. And yea, that is what I've been saying
for years.

Speaker 2 (01:56:20):
So very quickly before we were not out of time.
So where could the city have absorbed the increase of
four point eight percent? I mean, because you know, it's
one thing for us to do the mathematics on well
my properitt tack's going to be and I've done the
math and it's not encouraging. So where could the city
have absorbed that amount of money? Now that the budget
is what almost three undred and sixty six million dollars there.

Speaker 10 (01:56:41):
Are So the first thing is that there's the we
increase spending on a bunch of things, not just because
of inflation. So there's that, and you can justify them.
You can say snow clearing, you can say new fire trucks.
You know, you can say all these things are justified.
We're hiring a few more people. And again when you
look at them, there was they wanted to hire way

(01:57:02):
more and they got they reduced it down. What I
say is we have to accept the fact that there
is that. Maybe we couldn't have hired more people. That's difficult.
Maybe we were doing the kitty Vity slipway. It's a
million dollars. We salt and we snow clear the sherduice
path in Kelly's Brooke, which is in my ward. We

(01:57:24):
don't do it for any other place except for around Kenspond,
you know, money Pad Darn Park. We don't do it
like that's a couple hundred thousand dollars. You know, there's
there is there's positions that were filling maybe we couldn't
afford to fill. We've got a new asset replacement program
that I'm not saying it's arbitrary, but on some level,

(01:57:45):
when equipment get to a certain age, we replace it
it is and it's and it's kind of like set.
It's like, if it's this type of equipment at five years,
replace it. This is a new thing. This is this
new asset replacement. I question, that's not the way municipalities are.
Businesses do things, you know, they what they do is
they assess every piece of equipment. Look at the kilometers,

(01:58:05):
look at the shape it's in, look out, look at
its maintenance costs. We've stopped doing that because we've justified that.

Speaker 6 (01:58:10):
I you know what I believe in.

Speaker 10 (01:58:12):
It's and I say this respectful. We have great employees.
They care about the budget and I'll argue way more
probably than other government levels of government. They care about
the residents. But it's the mindset that we run the
city by, just like many households, just like many businesses.
It's the culture, it's the mindset. I really don't think
it's sustainable on the backs of consumers. And again there's

(01:58:37):
other things that I can't get into because it'd be
more confidential. But I believe there was an opportunity to
find some savings and we did not sell fighting. I mean,
there were savings once we got to the point that
we had to make a decision on the budget and
have these difficult conversations there. They're you know, we really
didn't seem to have a willingness to go back to
the drawing board. But again, I don't want to diminish it.

(01:58:59):
It's really hard. But if you accept the fact that
our province is living beyond, it means we have to
do difficult things. And that's what I hope we get
around to for next year's budget or we'll be having
the same conversation.

Speaker 2 (01:59:13):
Appreciate the time, Tom up to the break. We go,
take care ofyone YouTube by bye. All right, I found
break in the morning.

Speaker 6 (01:59:18):
I do not go away.

Speaker 2 (01:59:19):
Welcome back to the show. Let's go I number one.
Joshure on the air.

Speaker 16 (01:59:23):
Hey, how's it going, Patty?

Speaker 2 (01:59:24):
That's bad? How about you?

Speaker 16 (01:59:26):
I'm all right, not a ton of time here, so
I'll try and talk fast. Bit of pressure.

Speaker 3 (01:59:32):
So what's been going on.

Speaker 16 (01:59:33):
It's down on the west coast of Newfoundland and Kippen.
My grandmother and grandfather lived there. They're good people. They're
tax paying citizens. They go to church every Sunday. They've
paid their taxes and lived on the same property for
fifty five years. And the town has always plowed the property.
About five or six years ago, a neighbor inherited to property.

(01:59:55):
I guess an uncle or a grandfather. Someone died and
the woman moved back from Ontario. I won't list the
name of the individual, but she's a psychologist and she
also well, they came out with a waiver saying you've
got to sign this waiver to make sure no one's

(02:00:16):
lawn gets ruined if you want the lane plow. Now,
there's three houses on the lane, and actually four because
the town actually issued a permit for a guy with
a gradge to access off that lane. So technically it
should be the town's responsibility if they're issuing permits to
get onto this lane. Well, now if they're saying they're

(02:00:39):
doing it as the courtesy, so if they want to
keep doing it, the lady needs to sign a waiver.
The wady thinks that she owns all this property in
the area and has some beliefs of her own, but
she's been blocking this and I believe it's the landlock
my grandparents to try and force them out of their home.
My grandfather's eighty four years old and he's got all

(02:01:00):
and Parkinson's in a long story short, we need an
ambulance to be able to get down the road, and
the woman won't sign the waiver. I mean, the yard
is basically a hayfield. It's not a nice lawn by
any means. She's just doing this maliciously. And then so
she went and got herself a position on town council.
Now it's a small town. It's not like you needed
to get voted in. She was allocated basically because she

(02:01:22):
showed up. And it seems to me that she's made
some friends in there and they've been kind of blocking
this further and really railroading. I've called them very polite.
We've had several people people call them very polite. I
think a couple of them may have got rude eventually
because they were kind of getting rued to the individuals.
But you know, I went ahead and I phoned Holly

(02:01:43):
Walsh out out in corner Brook, which is the head
of the which is the head of the regional office.
Didn't get a whole lot of luck with her. And
then I phoned I think it's Chris Tibbs out in
Saint John's is supposed to be to the whole province,
and you know, let's call this what it is. It's corruption.

(02:02:05):
If there's someone going get an allocated a position at
town hall just to bully old people, which I did
look up, and this is against code of conduct for
anybody that's a psychologist to be bullying old people in
or outside of work. So you know, I might have
to take the steps in those regards as well. But

(02:02:28):
I'm really upset to the province, the head of the
town halls. He's telling me he can't fire anybody, he
can't look into it, there's nothing he can do. Well,
what's the point of his position if there's nothing he
can do. It seems pretty ridiculous to me. Now, we've
also called the mayor and had extensive chats with him
and the town manager. Justin no lot with any of

(02:02:51):
these people.

Speaker 6 (02:02:52):
And they.

Speaker 16 (02:02:55):
You don't almost have to hear me call in and
hear the reactions because it's so unbelieved, especially treating our
senior citizens like this. I don't think it's right at
all of it. And you know, this woman works as
a counselor for the Halapoo, and we have first nations
who hold their elders high above everything, and they're supposed

(02:03:15):
to be well respected people in the community. I mean,
I don't see any respect here for the elderly. I
don't see any respect for the rules and now so
they're trying to say in order to get them to
basically force their hand, then they want to do a
title search on the property. Now, after these accusations of

(02:03:36):
this woman owning this land and everything else, my grandparents
went out and got pre surveyed, even though it had
already been done. They hired a lawyer from pool Althouse.
The young fella. He ended up dying of a heart attack.
But basically all the information came out saying exactly it.
They've owned this land for fifty five years. These allegations
are out to launch.

Speaker 6 (02:03:56):
Now.

Speaker 16 (02:03:56):
I didn't want to bring in the fact of the
lady making the absurd allegations, but it kind of ties
in because of the fact that she went and got
a job allocated for at city Hall.

Speaker 3 (02:04:08):
And I basically I'm just running out of places to
turn on this.

Speaker 16 (02:04:12):
My only goal is to get this driveway plowed for
my poor grandmother and grandfather. But there's been all kinds
of harassment that have been sued out of this. A
relative of this individual smash in a car window at
a massage place, driving over the lawn, dumping fruit down
by the fence, trying to attract wildlife because she had

(02:04:36):
ended up getting squirrels up under her deck. I mean,
we got moose and stuff in the area, and there's
all these apples being dumped by the fence after she
realized it was attracting the squirrels in her place. I
don't know what to do, Patty, or where to turn.
I mean, I guess that's why I'm phoning you guys,
and I know we're coming to a close here, So

(02:04:57):
I had to skip some details and rush this through
as quick as I could. But I wanted to get
the best stage out there that what's been going on
with these with these town counselors.

Speaker 2 (02:05:12):
It's an excellent question. The best I can do at
this stage is to see if I can put some
query in front of them, possibly get an answer. But
things this fundamental needn't be this difficult.

Speaker 3 (02:05:24):
No, and it shouldn't.

Speaker 16 (02:05:25):
And I'll tell you this. If there's three grand that
needs to be paid for a land title search because
they don't know who owns the land, then the town
should be paying it. These people have paid their taxes
for fifty five years. I mean I heard the other
guys sounded pretty understanding at that other town hall that
was on here minute ago, and he was saying like
feeling bad that people were paying extra property tax and

(02:05:48):
stuff like this. I mean, that's not the case at all.
Their property tax did get increased and they are paying it,
and now they've.

Speaker 5 (02:05:55):
Had services removed.

Speaker 16 (02:05:57):
Why can't there be snow removal? And what really frust
trading part for me is Patty is what I called
this manager Justin and the other fella I think his
name is Paul, the mayor. I mean, don't quote me
on it, because we're rushed. I'm not as able to
be as prepped as I want it to be. But
why can't they pick up this three thousand dollars bill?

Speaker 2 (02:06:18):
It's a question I can put to them on your behalf.
Because we just cleared twelve o'clock, we've unfortunately run out
of time. Josh, appreciate your time, got it, no problem, Yeah,
I mean if we had more time, we take more time.
A very good show today, Big thanks twelve hands. We
will indeed pick up this conversation again for one morning
right here on VOCM and Big lndfm's open line hafter
the producer David Williams. I'm your host, Patty Daily. Have

(02:06:39):
yourself a safe, fun, happy day talking the morning. Bye
bye

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Tuesday Dec 16th

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

All Episodes

Tuesday Dec 16th

Stuff You Should Know