Tuesday Oct 7th

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 Host

(00:22):
Paddy Daily.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
Well, all right and good morning to you. Thank you
very much for tuning into the program. It's Tuesday, October
the seventh. This is Open Line. I'm your host, Patty Daily.
David Williams is the producer. You'll be speaking with David
when you pick up the phone and give us a
shout to get in the Q and on the air.
If you're in the Saint John's metro region, the number
of dialis seven zero nine two seven three five two
one one elsewhere total free long distance one eight eight

(00:46):
eight five ninety VOCM, which is eighty six twenty six.
So looking forward to some baseball tonight, Game three in
New York at in the Bronx at Yankee Stadium. The
Jays up two games. Former Cy Young winner Shane Bieber
on the bump. Vladdie really always looks really good against
the Yankees. But they've got production up and down the lineup,
so cautiously optimistic. We'll see what the night brings. Oh

(01:08):
I meant to mention this Yesterday another couple of wins
for the new Flann Regiment, of course, playing their inaugural
season in the Quebec Maritime Junior Hockey League. Local Ben
Vich got his first goal over the past weekend, so
congratulations to Ben. They wrap up their eight game home
so down with games Thursday and Friday do at Mary
Brown Center. And another hockey note, Edmunds one of our fans.
I guess breathe a sigh of relief. Superstar Connor McDavid

(01:29):
has re signed two year extension to stay in Edmonton
twelve and a half million per year. The consensus was
he was looking at fifteen million, so a bit of
a hometown reduced salary. Even at twelve and a half
million per year for twenty five mil. Not bad, but anyway,
we'll see. We try to bring forward some of the
scams every now and then, just in an effort to
try to protect our listeners from falling prey. This one

(01:51):
is I don't know, the source is interesting and the
issue itself is heartbreaking, so It was a social media
post written by the Gander International a warning people about
what they see in the terminal about people being catfished.
So what happens is, for the most part, seniors who
may be vulnerable and lonely, they meet someone online, exchange
all these messages building up to the hope to meet

(02:13):
each other face to face. Some seniors actually get milk
of a lot of money and they show up at
the airport in their Sunday finest just to find out
that person didn't even exist. So they call it catfishing,
and it's remarkable coming from the source. Of course, Gander
International Airport says they know they don't have any real
authority on this front, butt they were just sharing the warning.
Here's one are the quotes coming from the post. You

(02:33):
have to watch this woman come in and then go
to the airline staff with their ticket and say, look,
he's supposed to be here, but he's not. And then
it's evident the staff right away the ticket is not real.
It's not an itinerary, Gander spelled wrong. The flight number
doesn't exist. So they show up and then their heart
is broken and the staff have to wash and the
individual has to suffer through it themselves, so it's just
one more thing we got to keep an eye for.

(02:54):
Another quick note in the world of air travel, quietly
another hike for check bagging at west Jet. The numbers
are just wild. So for tickets purchase on or after
September sixteenth, prepaid first check bag fees now start at
forty dollars for economy passengers. Those who wait until checking
have to be charged at least sixty dollars. Last time

(03:14):
there was an increase. Of course, the Air Canada very
quickly followed soup, because why wouldn't they. You know, it's
conomist leading. When you go to book an airline ticket anyway,
you get the low discount fair, especially if you're flying
like Ultra Basic flying with west Jet, and then through
the airport improvement fees and the security fees and the
baggage fees, next thing you know you're paying way more
than you thought you would. I mean, the Competition Bureau

(03:36):
has spoken to this many times. But you know what
this has meant, of course, additional revenue for the airline.
Obviously they do run on pretty razorsin margins, but the
experience in the fuselage has gotten dramatically worse over the years.
When you're used to be able to check a bag,
then of course it wasn't a confusion. And the overwhelming
number of bags inside the aircraft itself. People have the
biggest carryology. You can possibly squeeze through that little frame

(03:59):
to see whether or not your carry out is still big,
big backpacks, computer bags and purses, and they're like no
room to put anything. Then the match scrambled to try
to get your bags recovered from the overhead bin. Anyway
West Jedish like the check baggage fee. Now you know, okay,
So let's dig back into this child and family poverty
report card brought forward by Choices for You with them

(04:20):
the Jimmy Pratt Foundation. So this is taken from twenty
twenty two tax filings, the twenty twenty census, looking at
a variety of things and dealing with more than one
hundred community organizations. Let's talk about the key findings one
more time, because they're really quite something. Twenty five percent
of children under six in this province live in poverty,
the highest recorded in Canada, four points higher than the

(04:41):
twenty one percent reported last year. Racialized children experience poverty
at thirty one percent. That's double the national average of
fifteen point five. Housing and food and security escalated rent, ever,
is in twenty three point one percent since twenty twenty,
and vacancy rates at historic lows. In the world of
rent look for landlords, overhead operating costs aren't significant, you know,

(05:02):
whether it be for insurance or otherwise. Mortgage traits have
come back to worth somewhat, but that increase of twenty
three point one percent since twenty twenty does beg the
question as to whether or not we should engage further
in the conversation regarding rent control. Not to make it
meaningless in the world of profit to be a landlord,
but this is out of control anyway, Let's keep going.

(05:23):
Twenty six percent of households reporter food insecurity. That's up
from nineteen percent in twenty eighteen. Families in rural and
indigenous communities face additional challenges due to transportation barriers, high
food prices, and of course, what they refer to as
systemic discrimination. Youth mental health indicators be twenty fifteen and
twenty twenty two. The proportion of youth are ready through
mental health as very good or excellent dropped by thirty

(05:46):
five percent compared to an average decline nationally of twenty
three percent. So they point to some things like the
expansion of the school lunch program, forty one million dollar
investment in a poverty reduction strategy over the course of
three years, grow three gift cardot pilot programs, what have you.
But those numbers are really unbelievable. Had a called yesterday

(06:07):
that put this concern back on the front burner, and
it's the Long Term Care Personal Care Home Report. I
had another look at it yesterday afternoon, around two hundred pages,
twenty three recommendations. Let's take into a couple of key
issues here. The report was first commissioned and undertaken back
in February twenty twenty three. We were told that sometime
in the fall of that year we'd have the report.

(06:27):
Not so much, it took a while. They used data
from over three thousand surveys looking at quality of life monitoring. Okay,
some poems provided more flexibility than others, but in general,
resident choice was very limited and the home environment was
very routine based and heavily focused on task based care
rather than resident centered care. They looked at the national

(06:48):
average and quality of life indicators like limiting falls, which
we're doing pretty well, improved physical functioning. They also talked
about the use of restraints, which I brought up many,
many times, and the potential inappropriate use of antipsychotic education.
They go into some key seven recommendations about quality of life,
improving the quality, choice and flexibility of meal plans wet

(07:10):
meals are eaten, along with the need for improved access
to actually meaningful activities and recreation programs. They talked into
things regarding separating couples upon entering the long term care
with different levels of care required. So I think it's important,
sitting in this chair doing this program, that we keep
these things out there. You know, they grab headlines, they
make some news, we get some comments, and the government

(07:32):
says we accept the recommendations. But far too often, whether
it be reports like this or reports from the Auditor
General's office, it gets one cycle through the news and
that's it. So we put it back out there. They
also talk about workplace more out amongst the staff below
a five out of ten rating, So, of course, what
does that result in high turnover? Burnout and when people

(07:52):
can't make their balance between work and life. Of course,
their home life suffers, so does the performance at the
job site or on the job. So put it back
out there also. I'm not so sure we're going to
get any calls on it, but I continually will put
education at the very top of my concerns here in
this province. Why academic outcomes and results have been on

(08:12):
the steady de client since two thousand and three. There
was a protest yesterday out in Gander talking about the
required supports inside the education system. So many children are
just falling through the cracks. There's no good reason as
to why either. So yes, the government has put forward
some forty million dollars to add four hundred additional professionals

(08:33):
to the ranks of student assistants and otherwise speech language
pathologists and the like. But if you involved one of
these protests yesterday or this protest out in Gander. So
they call themselves Families United for Student Success, a good one.
Here's one of the quotes coming from one of the organizers,
one that I happened to share. They're all kind of
related to each other, and we're talking about the issues

(08:54):
of regarding costs of living, healthcare system, what have you.
This person says they're all kind of related to each other.
And if we don't have a well educated workforce, we're
not going to have the doctors and nurses and all
the other allied health professionals that we need in the future.
One hundred percent, right, So anything in the education field,
please do bring it forward this morning, right. A couple

(09:14):
of the campaign promises, heard an interesting bunch of streeters
done on the morning show Russell Bowers here this morning.
People being asked, are you following the campaign? What do
you think about one party another hoo? Do you think
is the best leader? What was a common refrain with
some of the voices that we heard was, you know,
there's awful lot of promises out there, but the big
question is where's the money coming from. That's a pretty

(09:35):
good question. And a couple of the people that were
asked about whether or not they're following they say exactly that,
and that is a very very good question. And let's
see some of the more stecent promises. The PCs did
make any announcements that I saw yesterday. NDP are leaning
back in on reducing any of the provincial tax on electricity.
They're also saying that would be for it to electricity,
pro paint, oil and wood, which is different than some

(09:57):
of the pleasures in the past. Ers are talking about
establishing a major project's office and then specific references the
things like related to the Churchill Falls, MoU upgrades to
the power plant, hiring protocols for Gaull Island. So they
say this won't have a big impact on the budget
because people are already working in various departments that will
be brought into this major Project's office in an effort

(10:18):
to streamline projects approvals and the like. Okay, I'm not
so sure if this is going to work any differently,
But when they make reference to hiring protocols, I get
asked that question all the time. Look, there's a lot
to the protection of intellectual property, but yes, there's a
lot to the need and the want for people to
be able to go to work. How's it going to
work if and when things proceed on the Churchill River,

(10:42):
the hiring protocol, the benefits agreement that we saw at Muskrat.
We're told every time I ask the question, it'll be
the same for work to be done expanding the upper
Churchill and to work at gall Islands. Qualified INTU Nation
members first, then the rest of the Labrador, then the
rest of the island and the rest of the country
and the rest of the world. Is that going to
be the way it works. We'll see. And then of

(11:04):
course you're going to have to lean in on the
potential for bait in order to get greenlit. And we've
heard from mister Wakem and Trades and ll saying things
like if seventy percent of the top side's work is
not done here, there will be no deal. Now, of
course it'll always be up to a political consideration at
that point, but anyway you want to talk about it,
let's go Newfland Labator Hydro through the CEO and the

(11:26):
executive office and the board are now speaking out directly
about some of the points being raised by whether it
be the Group of nine Michael Wilson, who was originally
one of the three members of the oversight panel, Okay,
stick with the board here for a second. And they're
talking about a letter responding to a letter parted me
on it the second of October twenty twenty five from
the Group of nine. They're questioning the timing the board

(11:51):
question of the timing of October the second letter and
previous letters coupled with the fact that none of the
signatories have accepted numerous invitations to meet with Hydro leadership
who negotiated the MoU. The caretaker convention that allows Hydro
and the board to correct misinformation. The content in this
response reflects those public communication restrictions. They go on to
reiterate that Hydro leadership would be pleased with any or

(12:12):
all signatories to discuss their concerns to provide accurate, factual
information related to the MoU. On this one, I think
it would be great if folks with legitimate concerns, valid questions,
consternation issues regarding whether it be the term of the
deal or valuation at goal, or whatever the case may be,

(12:33):
it probably would be helpful to meet with those who
negotiated the contract. Number one. Then they point out a
variety of things regarding their availability. They say Hydran's executive
and the experts appeared four days in the hospital assembly,
answer questions for attendees, during four public webinars, completed, countless
media interviews, responses to media, hundreds of pages of documents
on a publicly available information portal, very speaking engagements, help briefings,

(12:57):
shared information that Okay so I do know that some
people that I speak to are completely opposed, but they
haven't read the MoU and I'm only dealing with this
this morning. It's not in an effort to say something
is good or bad. But when we read out the
group of nine concerns, when we read out concerns thankfully
shared by mister Wilson with me directly, they're pushing back

(13:17):
on some number one of the claim. And this is
specifically from the letter written by mister Wilson and also
the financial team at Hydro and their third party experts
that they refer to as JP Morgan Inflation adjustments the
present value of expected clash flows. Mister Wilson suggests that
the financial figures are not adjusted for inflation, which he
is misleading. In fact, says Hydro, the present value numbers

(13:41):
already include inflation throughout the discount rate we use. Therefore,
any additional adjustments for inflation will result in double counting.
In his published analysis, mister Wilson, in their estimation erroneously
makes those additional adjustments and therefore incorrectly derives lower than
expected value. And we will absolutely welcome mister Wilson to
come on and speak to what he is now seen
and heard from Hydro one more claim average annual inflation

(14:05):
assumption of three point eighty three percent. In mister Wilson's
analysis use an average annual inflation of three point eight
three percent based on historical data. They say that's not
relevant to the current deal. The current expected inflation rate
is approximately two percent based on the bank and candidate's
target rate, Conference, Board of Candidates forecasts, and other market indicators.
Then they talk about real rate of return and expected

(14:25):
net present value. They're claiming that the issue regarding the
present value are calculated thirty three point eight billion dollars.
There's a lot more to it, but let's keep the
conversation going and for anybody who has, you know, publicly
come out, whether it be former business leaders or current
business leaders, and former politicians, former members of the board

(14:48):
at Hydro, what have you. It would be great if
before long some of those offers of consultation and questions
to be asked directly of those who were in the
room negotiating the contract, because you know what, the end
result of this has been unscientific, Paul. There are more
people confused than there are people who feel like they're informed.

(15:08):
With the facts regarding this steal. Is it good or bad?
I'll leave it up to you. But there's available information
if you're so inclined, not only to go to our
chapter dot CA, read the MoU itself, you know, read
from the Group of nine, Go to Uncle Narley's blog,
go to the hydro website. Get all the information you
can so you can do your level best to be
as informed as possible. But there's a lot to it.

(15:29):
I don't pretend to understand the complexities of every moving part.
But there you go. A couple of quickies before we
get to you. So the Prime Minister is in Washington
today to meet with President Trump. I don't know what's
going to happen. I mean nobody does. There's going to
be a lot of theater, I assume, but I guess
the one hope as being told to the media from

(15:51):
sources inside the government, even just to try to get
an ease in the tariffs associated with steel and aluminum.
Even organizations and businesses in the States are looking for
that kind of relief as well. So we'll see what
becomes of it. And you know, the country, whether or
not you think it's a good idea. Drop some of
the reciprocal tariffs. I suppose, in an act of good faith,

(16:11):
drop the digital services tax, which was really in the
crosshairs of the president. So what can we expect today?
I have no earthly idea. Hopefully we can get to
some sort of more normal trade relations that have been
the key lynchpin of our intertwined economies for decades. So
the meeting's happening today. Just a quick interesting note that
I saw the corner of my eye this morning when

(16:33):
asked yesterday of the President if he was considering a
pardon for convicted child sex trafficker Glade Maxwell, and he
said he's open to talking to the DOJ about it.
She's convicted of not only being an accomplice but her
predator child sex trafficking. What anyway, a couple more you

(16:57):
want to take on those big issues, let's go, all right?
So two years ago today, tensions were escalated after the
terrorist organization Hamas attacked southern Israel, resulting in the death
of twelve hundred people and the taking of two hundred
and fifty one hostages. Since the war in Gaza, if

(17:18):
you want to call her ethnic cleansing or a genocide,
that's once again up to you for the sixty seven
thousand Palestinians have been killed seriously injured one hundred and
seventy thousand according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which you
can take with a grain of salt or whatever you
feel like doing. As in October the Second World, roughly
sixty percent of the buildings in the Gaza strip have
been destroyed or damaged. There's actual satellite imagery by research

(17:41):
that Orgon State to talk about exactly that. And you know,
we're told, well, the IDEF is doing their level best
to provide warnings and evacuation warnings, but it's kind of
easier said than done, you know, with the lack of
availability of even fuel or somewhere to go or the
capacity to get there. So what we've seen in the

(18:02):
last couple of years is head scratching and heartbreaking. And yes,
as I open up my commentary on it, the tensions
have not been just begun on the October the seventh
of two years ago. Decades of tensions have been escalated
by the actions of the terrorist organization Hamas. But we've
seen what's unfolded since then. If you want to take
it on, because it's a strict in conversation. I get

(18:22):
taken to the wood shed every time we bring it up.
But so be it very last one. So convoy organizers,
and we're talking about the three week protest in Ottawa
regarding a variety of things, COVID, COVID vaccinations, COVID restrictions,
and a variety of other things. So one of the

(18:43):
part two of the key organizers tomorrow Leach and Chris Barber,
they will learn their faith today in an Ontario court room.
They've both been convicted of mischief. Mister Barber's facing additional
to charge, basically encouraging others to follow suit and to
ignore court orders. The crown is looking for some pretty
high sentences seven years for miss Leach and eight years
for mister Barber. We'll find out today what's going to

(19:05):
happen there, but a lot of people in the country
will certainly be following along that one. We're on Twitter
or visim open lane, follow us there, email addresses open
on AVOCM dot com. When we come back, let's have
a great show that can only happen if you're in
the queue to talk about whatever's on your mind. Don't
go away, Welcome back to the show. It's begaing on
line number two. Sagmore to pauled in with Adelaide honey
and see we got to write button here. Good morning, Paul,
you're on the air. Hi, Patty, how are you great today?

(19:27):
Thank you? How about you?

Speaker 3 (19:29):
Good?

Speaker 4 (19:29):
Good?

Speaker 5 (19:30):
A long time since I've talked to you, but many
times we wanted to call in and you know, tell
you about the bees and this summer in general.

Speaker 3 (19:38):
But it's hard with a bee suit on, you know,
I do.

Speaker 2 (19:40):
And welcome back to the show. What's on your minds
for morning, Paul?

Speaker 3 (19:42):
Well, I was I was thinking a couple of things.

Speaker 5 (19:46):
We've we had a good summer as far as the
dry conditions that made it a bit difficult for nectar
flow and the production of honey. But the bees themselves
are doing really, really well.

Speaker 3 (19:57):
But what came to my mind last week.

Speaker 5 (20:00):
The Nature Conservancy of Canada received a grant of eighteen
hundred hectors from Dawntar And I don't know if you've
heard about that or not, or I haven't really hear
many people talking about it, I mean, but that was
such a great, a great accomplishment for them, and I
wanted to guess send them the congratulations for that. But

(20:21):
the other interesting thing that happened to us near here
this summer was there's a.

Speaker 3 (20:26):
Photographer, Perry J.

Speaker 5 (20:28):
Howlett, who's fantastic photographers, always taking pictures of wildlife, and
this summer, in between May and June, if you go
to his Facebook page, he actually got some great pictures.

Speaker 3 (20:40):
Of they're called great horned owls.

Speaker 5 (20:43):
And you know, you don't see that very often, you know,
in you know, having their young and you always here
at eagles what have you.

Speaker 3 (20:52):
But what was interesting.

Speaker 5 (20:54):
About it was he got all these great shots of
them and kind of did a little story of them
nesting and right through. So I went on and started
looking about grape horned owls and you know, why they're important,
why would we want them for ourselves? And then I
started talking about what do they eat? And of course
your favorite topic is rats, or one of the topics

(21:15):
that seem to come up there quite often is how
many rats there are. But I looked up about grain
horn owls and it's they can kill and consume twelve
hundred rats per year and that's just one owl. And
then I started looking at, you know, development in the
city and around and it seems like for some reason,

(21:37):
every time I go to a new development site, if
your driving by automatically, they remove all the forests. The
trees are gone. Then they dig right down to the
you know, to the bedrock, I guess, and they just
remove everything and there's not a tree. They basically limit
And so I'm wondering, you know, to the developers that

(21:58):
are out there that work on these different product if
there's a way, I know, I did it here with
our home on my own, to keep trees and keep
some areas in say, if they're developing a new subdivision,
can each yard, each backyard have maybe I don't know,
a ten x ten square of natural forests left there?

Speaker 3 (22:19):
Does everything have to be brought right.

Speaker 5 (22:21):
Down to the bedrock and removed, Because what's happening is
we're building a home for ourselves, but we're removing a
home for nature. And I guess over time, this is
what deforestation is, and loss of wetlands is completely removing
all that, you know. And I thought of those owls,

(22:41):
and I said, you know, we were removing all their habitat.
And then we're wondering where the rats are coming and
why we're having a problem with them. And one rat
can have one hundred young per year, So if those
owls are removing twelve hundred rats from the system, that's
a lot.

Speaker 3 (22:57):
Of rats, right, And then go ahead, Sorry.

Speaker 2 (23:01):
No, I'm going to look. I think you're right on
the money. What's interesting to me is, you know, I'm
not a developer, so you know, I think part of
the logic in removing all the vegetation, the trees and
otherwise is for ease of movement for construction equipment and personnel.
But it does lose sight of a couple of things
because just think about it, after they clear the land
and prep the land, they build the homes, then they

(23:23):
plant trees after they took the trees down. So there's
something counterintuitive to this. And you know, people say, oh,
you know the tree hugger pauled in same with me.
Possibly biodiversity is important for human health. It just simply
is whether we talk about clean air, clean water, sustainable
food systems, medicine, great horned owls and otherwise. So you know,

(23:47):
this is all not just about being a tree hugger.
There's all sorts of concerns with how we use land,
whether it be for agriculture and other forms of food production,
for housing, whatever the case we be. Because cleaning things out,
which includes the impact for how water flows, human health impacts.
So there's a lot to what you're saying, Paul, And
I don't know if we do a very good job

(24:07):
here in this country and think about it, even though
Canada has something like what ten percent of the world's
boreal for us, but we're creeping into urbanizing more and
more in this country and consequently losing more and more biodiversity.

Speaker 5 (24:21):
Yeah, and Patty, I'll be completely transparent. I mean, we
have two woodstoves. We would light fires all the time.
I'm not saying that it's got to be.

Speaker 3 (24:29):
All or nothing. You know, a balance, a balance like
right now. When we built our.

Speaker 5 (24:34):
Home, I basically we had a lot of trees on
the property and I started to basically they had to
raise our top soil up by two three feet.

Speaker 3 (24:46):
So I said, well, how could I save these trees?
So I said, I'll try.

Speaker 5 (24:48):
Something, and I took Sono tubes, basically wrap them around
the tree, put rocks in so that the ear would
still get to the trunk of the tree.

Speaker 3 (24:56):
And you know, all of those trees were saved.

Speaker 5 (24:58):
And there's some trees here that fifty sixty feet high
that because we did it. It's just I think a
lot of it is. And maybe a few of the developers,
the people that do this, can get on here talk
about how, you know, is there a possible way of
doing it so that we could save these trees and
save some of these areas because these areas are so important.

(25:21):
I don't think people are realizing, like the wetlands are
important because and a lot of times you mentioned about
sometimes a wetland has to be identified as a wetland,
but I know there's a lot of wetland around.

Speaker 3 (25:34):
That absorbs that moisture.

Speaker 5 (25:36):
And if you auto all of a sudden get water
in your.

Speaker 3 (25:38):
Basement or you have an issue, most likely because.

Speaker 5 (25:41):
Someone was filling in a wetland and causing it to overflow.

Speaker 4 (25:45):
Right.

Speaker 5 (25:45):
So I'm wondering if maybe the developers through you could
come on and reach out to a few developers who.

Speaker 3 (25:51):
Can say, yeah, we can do it.

Speaker 5 (25:53):
It might cost them more time is money, obviously, but
I'm looking at a way that even a small section
of the property on each home to have, you know,
like I said, ten by ten feet for everyone, that's
at least something you know what I mean to have
for the animals to have a place to go.

Speaker 2 (26:12):
Right, Yeah, there's a good reason where I'm not allowed
to build on a wetland when that's been designated as such.
And I hate splitting that hair, but that's unfortunately the
way the laws written. Look even just just think about it,
Like I could look up my window of can Mount
Terras and it was completely clear cut to build up
this subdivision. And now consequently the way water flows has
compromised the flow of water down the hill. So a

(26:34):
wetland is not only a carbon sink, but it controls
the flow of water. I mean water will go wherever
it wants without controls like wetlands and bogs and the
like to be part of that control, we're just setting
ourselves up a disaster. So there's a ton of what
you're talking about here this morning, and the developers are
welcome to come on. And yes there will be potentially
some additional cost, but with that comes biodiversity protection comes

(26:59):
beautiful case. I mean there's nothing quite like a mature
neighborhood who that has mature trees. I mean people seek
those things out when they go to purchase a home
or to buy a newly constructed home. These are all
part of the complications of protecting and finding the bounds.
Because i'd gradu made the point. You're not here saying
it's a zero sum game. It's more of a balance
question than it is winners and losers.

Speaker 5 (27:20):
And it'd be great to hear what the city. You know,
we're in the city of Saint John's Schools is part
of the city, and you know, where's the Like I
love the fact that they're going to plant a tree,
but the thing is, what can we do to protect the.

Speaker 3 (27:33):
Trees that are there now?

Speaker 5 (27:34):
Like, what's the city think, because they're the ones that
are doing a lot of the you know, planning and
zoning and everything else. So why not you know, enter
into a conversation where they can call in the developers
and colum let it, you know, Like I'd love to
know how the wetlands are being protected and how we're
leaving a little bit of nature in every backyard because

(27:57):
nature needs.

Speaker 3 (27:57):
A home, is what the message is.

Speaker 2 (28:00):
Absolutely, Paul, I really appreciate you making time for the
program again this morning and anything else before we say goodbye.

Speaker 3 (28:05):
No, that's great, Patty, thank you very much.

Speaker 2 (28:07):
Thank you bye bye, Okay, Paul did with Adelaide, Honey,
look that the balance question is an important one, which
is why even concepts of building up versus building out,
which is a protection of nature, it's also a protection
of your pocketbook. Building out and all the clear cutting
and the implications that Paul rightfully mentions also comes with
the additional expenses for the taxpayer, because then what you

(28:29):
got to build the roads, which then we have to
maintain and to clear the snow and add the salt.
We have to put in the water and the sewer
and the curbs, right and all these services that have
to be maintained into the future. So the building out
was once all the rage, and now we figured out
that's more expensive, and it comes with those lack of
balance regarding nature and the need for people to have
a place to lay their head. Let's take a break,

(28:51):
don't go away, welcome back to the show. Let's going
to let number one Jennifer around the airy Patty.

Speaker 6 (29:00):
My name is Jennifer white Way. I'm a member of
Protect and L and I am identify as Indigenous. I'm
one of the women who was arrested up on the
hill back in November on the boat while we were
in indigenous ceremony. Today I'm calling about what a huge
step backwards that day was in the name of reconciliation.

(29:25):
I'd just like to speak to how hypocritical it is
for the government year after year to stand up and
talk about commitments to truth and reconciliation, but on that
day when we were very clearly engaged in prayer and ceremony.
I'm not been a ceremonial holder now in a drum
carrier for over a decade. I've carried ceremony acrosss Island

(29:49):
on more than one occasion.

Speaker 7 (29:50):
On that day, I was.

Speaker 6 (29:51):
Dressed in my full regalia, which is my indigenous ceremonial
where we had a sign up that said we were
in ceremony and please respect that. So it was quite
obvious all we were doing that day and for the
government to decide to call the police to have us
arrested opposed to the security just observing what we were doing.

(30:14):
I mean, we weren't obstructing anyone from getting to work.

Speaker 8 (30:17):
There was no violence. It was completely peaceful.

Speaker 6 (30:20):
We were there that day in prayer. It's just such
a huge step back for reconciliation and the government continues
to say things, but their actions just aren't following through
with their words. To be completely honest, and I just
like to try and put some context into I know
a lot of people don't understand significance of ceremony, or

(30:43):
the protocol, or the significance of the drum. So that day,
when we were there, like I said, we were, we
were there in ceremony. And when you're doing Indigenous ceremony,
whether it's a talking circle or you're you're doing drum
ceremony or smudge ceremony, once you engage and that ceremony begins,

(31:04):
there is no protocol for it to be interrupted. For
it to stop, you have to, especially as a ceremony holder,
you have to engage in that ceremony until that ceremony
is complete. So for them to come and not only
interrupt the ceremony but completely pry those drums from our
hands and replace them with handcuffs was it was absolutely

(31:28):
disgusting to be completely honest and patty our drums. Just
to put it into context, our drums are how we pray.
So when we sing as Indigenous people, we are praying.
Our drums connect us to the land. They connect us
to the creator. We believe that the.

Speaker 8 (31:44):
Soul of the animal, that the hide issues, that they're
still within that drum. We also.

Speaker 6 (31:54):
When we're praying with our drums, it's yeah, when we're singing,
it is a form of prayer. And those drums are
an extension of the drum carrier themselves, and they're extremely sacred.
So if I have my drum, no one is to
actually even flip their hands like to touch the drum.

(32:16):
You have to ask permission to the drum carrier if
you can even touch the drum, because it's such a
sacred it's such a sacred piece of ceremony. So again,
for them to come and literally pry that drum from
my hand in red prayer is it's absolutely disgusting. And
for the government to make that choice to call the

(32:37):
police that day, it's just such a huge step backwards
for reconciliation.

Speaker 2 (32:42):
Jennifer, take this question as it's intended. Okay, So, had
the police simply waited for the drumming the prayer to
stop and then make the arrest, would that have been okay?

Speaker 8 (32:58):
Well if well, that's okay, So that's a good question
as far as interrupting Indigenous ceremony, it would have been
more appropriate.

Speaker 6 (33:09):
But I think that we were still covered underneath the
charter that day, So I don't think the rest should
have been made at all because I feel that we
were covered underneath the charter under our fundamental freedoms. So
I don't think the rest should have been made at
all that day. But I do think that they're making

(33:31):
the ris during ceremony was just a huge lap in
the face to Indigenous people and again a huge step backwards,
and their actions are just not following.

Speaker 2 (33:40):
Through what was the outcome of the court case.

Speaker 8 (33:43):
Actually, no, actually you can't recall sweetheart, because.

Speaker 6 (33:46):
It hasn't it hasn't been yet. So we actually have
a three day trial coming up in October. We would
love to have people show up to support us. That's
going to be October twentieth, twenty first, and twenty second.
So now, because we were on the hill that day
in prayer and ceremony, we are looking at a three
day trial. It certainly doesn't seem like the charges are

(34:09):
going to be dropped at this point.

Speaker 8 (34:10):
I mean, Patty, it's in a few weeks, so I
guess we'll have to wait and see what the works
decide that day. But I would like to.

Speaker 6 (34:17):
Put a plea out to people that when the politicians
are coming and knocking around on your door, you know,
ask them why why would the government rather have us arrested?

Speaker 8 (34:29):
And they just answer the questions, Patty. They've had three
years to answer these.

Speaker 6 (34:32):
Questions, and I mean if they don't have the answers,
and they then say that it's okay to not have
the answers, but it's not okay to meet us with
form letters over and over and over again and not
really address the issues of the people.

Speaker 8 (34:46):
This is a huge issue.

Speaker 2 (34:47):
And I appreciate you making time for the programs forning, Jennifer,
and thanks for reminding me when the three three day
trial is coming. I remember when you made your first
appearance in court and then I kind of lost track
of what was actually going on. Thank you for calling
this morning. Anything else you'd like to.

Speaker 8 (35:02):
Say, No, Petty, I'd just like to invite people out
to court that day. It would be really great to
have some supporters show up for us and just remember
to ask the politician so those important questions, you know,
why would they rather have us arrested? The answer the questions,
and thank you so much, Petty for all of these
being a voice for the people. I really appreciate it, and.

Speaker 2 (35:22):
I appreciate your time. Thank you, Thank you, Patty, Jennifer. Okay,
let's get to the break. So we've been speaking about questions, concerns,
and criticisms of the Upper Churchill Memorandum of Understanding since
the very onset. We do know that Michael Wilson was
one of the original members of the three person independent
oversight panel. He resigned. He's provided me with copious amounts

(35:43):
of information. New Flann labad Or Hydro and the board
have spoken out about some of the concerns brought forward
by mister Wilson. Michael Wilson in the queue. He's next,
don't go away, Welcome back to the show. As advertised,
Michael Wilson was once one of the original members of
the three person panel looking at independent overs of the
Upper Churchial MoU. He resigned with a letter on September
twenty first, and he joins US online number seven. Good morning, Michael,

(36:06):
you're on the air.

Speaker 4 (36:08):
Good morning Patty. How are you today?

Speaker 2 (36:09):
Very well? Thanks for asking how about you?

Speaker 4 (36:11):
I'm funny. Thanks, I would appreciate I didn't hear the
comments you made earlier. I was working outside and my
wife came out and said that perhaps I should come
in and respond, But would you mind sharing with me
what you said, because I'm not actually aware of what
the what the issue is, no problem.

Speaker 2 (36:29):
I'll put all what I said to you here this morning.
I really appreciate making time for the show. So this
is what Hydro is calling a fact checker statement that
they put out regarding points you made in your resignation
letter of September twenty first. Three top areas that I'd
like to discuss with you this morning are issues regarding inflation,
one about inflation on present value, one on expected cash flows,

(36:49):
and one on the annual assumption of three point eighty
three percent. Let's start there. They say, in your analysis,
you use that rate based on historical data. They go
on to say the rate is not relevant to the
current deal. The currently expected inflation rate is approximately two
percent based on the back of Canada's tiger right, the
Conference Board of Canada's forecasts and other market indicators. So
they're calling out your use of three point eight three

(37:09):
your thoughts.

Speaker 4 (37:11):
Okay, well, let me start from the beginning, Patty, as
you know I sent a letter of resignation to the government.
I made the twelve and I had no response, never
asked me what my concerns were. I clearly set out
my concerns about the impairment of independence, no response whatsoever.

(37:32):
You also know, and I have sent you, as you mentioned,
a significant amount of information where I prepared I think
now is four I think probably four detailed analysis, you know,
setting out you know, various implications and outcomes set out
in the MLU. And I've heard nothing from Hydro or

(37:55):
anyone else. So it's it's pretty interesting to me now
with it. You know, they're zeroing in on one particular
issue in one particular analysis. You know what, when I
wrote my initial analysis, I think I was pretty clear
that I hoped we'd be able to find negotiation get

(38:17):
to a better outcome, and uh, you know, for the province.
As time has gone on, it's very clear that that's
not likely going to happen. The m o U is
what it is, It's going to be turned into definite agreements,
and I think that as a travesty and a very
very unfortunate situation for the people of the province.

Speaker 2 (38:36):
Well, my initial concern with the terms of reference for
your oversight. The oversight panel was it was strictly only
what was included in the m o U versus other
moving targets like East West Energy corrid or federal government
involvement financially speaking, and a variety of other factors. So
before we get into inflation assertions, is when you talked
about the impairment of independence of the panel itself, can

(38:58):
you elaborate as to what that means?

Speaker 4 (39:01):
Well, it simply means the panels independence was impaired. That's
simply what it means. Now, I can't divulge to you
because of my nondisclosure agreement. Exactly why, and I said,
the government exactly why? You know, in three very clear,
clearly articulated reasons why the independence and I used the

(39:23):
word became impaired and wasn't impaired initially because I was
there and I was very independent. But as a result
of use my words very carefully information that were shared
with me, I very quickly concluded that the findings of
the panel, or in certainly my finals findings, wouldever mean

(39:47):
be public. That became ambudantly obvious to me, and that's
why I resigned. I wish I could tell you more
if the Premier would be so kind as to release
my letter of resignation. I think those reasons for impairment
were abundantly clear.

Speaker 2 (40:02):
So without betraying your NDA, because I don't want to
put you in any peril norm myself. So was there
intervention by the government and you don't need to be
specific intervention by the government after the panel was created
then consequently impairing the independence?

Speaker 4 (40:15):
Sorry did you say after the panel was created?

Speaker 2 (40:17):
Yeah, because you say it became apparent that the independence
was being impaired.

Speaker 4 (40:21):
Game impaired, and I believe what you just said to
be correct. Something happened that made me realize that the
independence was impaired and that the findings that we were
put in together would never see the light of day.

Speaker 9 (40:37):
Now.

Speaker 4 (40:37):
I can't see much more than that, and I hope
that's clear. I clearly understood. It's I'm limited to what
I can say, but I will say this that in
my view, the findings that were being gathered by the
processes we were going through would never see the light
of day. Now. If you want to look at if
anybody wants to look at the independent PAN report for

(41:01):
July it's on the i crop dot ca site. Go
read it and see what information you got from that.
You got nothing, And I foresaw. I foresaw that happening,
and I wanted to have no part of it, and
I resigned. I waited until the panel's report came out
because I was hoping I would be wrong. But when

(41:22):
the panel's report came out, it was abundantly clear that
they told the public nothing. Okay, So that's when I
decided that I had to take some action, and that's
when I issued my first analysis, which was based upon
publicly available information. And in that analysis, I clearly stated

(41:42):
that my objective was to challenge what had been said
publicly in an appropriate way, to foster a discussion and
inform discussion and hopefully get to a better outcome. That
unfortunately you're getting to a better outcome no longer seems
to be a possibility. And that's why now I am

(42:06):
certainly more forceful in saying this MoU as it is
right now is a disaster for the province. Unfortunately, it's
become an election issue, which, in my view and others
may disagree, should never be the case. This is way
too important in an issue it shouldn't be a part
of that issue. It should be an issue is addressed

(42:27):
by the people who are province after they have a
very clear understanding of exactly what that MoU means to
them and the future generations of this province. And I've
listened to some of the shows that you've put on,
and I congratulate you for keeping this issue alive. But
the reality is no one understands what they're being asked

(42:48):
to vote on, and that is a travesty and it's
very very unfortunate to.

Speaker 2 (42:53):
That end, mister Wilson. So I hear all these calls
for independent review. I mean that has been the rally
cry for the NDP, for the PCs, and this is
always going to be a political decision at some moment
in time. But independent review, if this panel was not acceptable,
what would give you? And I'm an other one to
proversial about would you have any call comfort in additional
layers of independent review? Let's you pick an entity Deloitte, Goldman, Sachs, whoever,

(43:18):
Because when I hear people say an independent review, that's
kind of meaningless to me unless we're highlighting specific concerns
with where the money comes from, highlighting risk trying to
decouple golf from the upper all those types of very
specific questions that we should be asking, But the vagaries
of independent review, I don't think they're getting us anywhere.
So do you think an independent review would have any

(43:39):
different outcome or feeling amongst the members of said panel
or a company if it was brought in?

Speaker 4 (43:45):
Well, you said a lot. I'm trying to digest that.

Speaker 2 (43:47):
Okay, let me go down.

Speaker 4 (43:50):
First of all, in one of the significant amount of
information I sent to you, I suggested what the public
should expect from an independent review, and I clearly set
that out. And what they should expect in the first
place is clarity. What is this deal all about? What
are these two pricing structures? And a lot of people

(44:10):
don't even realize there's two pricing structures. And the reason
that they don't realize there are two separate and distinct
pricing structures is because when ever anybody from Manufilent labor
Hydro is asked about pricing structures, they're always default to
the one that relates to the existing Churchill plant. They
will never talk about the other pricing structure, which basically

(44:33):
gives hydro quebec all the power from the new developments
at cost with no link whatsoever to market ever, and
that's never mentioned, but it's clearly set out in the
MoU for those who want to read it, and it's
very seldom referred to by anyone who responds to pricing

(44:54):
issues on from Manufilant, Labor or Hydro. Two separate pricings
structures with very different implications for the province, each with
through very very different challenges and issues. So that's the
first thing.

Speaker 2 (45:08):
Can I ask a question on that one? Those a
quick question on that one I understand and I've read
everything you've sent to me, is with the two pricing structures,
what does the possibility of a single pricing structure look
like when we're talking about a debt free cfl CO,
a long existing hydro development at the Opera Churchill, a
new construction at Goal with all the risk implications what

(45:29):
have you? So, how about a single pricing structure actually
work with two distinctly different beasts with transmission construction and
the existing dam with the Opera versus a new yet
to be developed goal.

Speaker 4 (45:42):
Patty, again, you've said a lot. I'm going to try
to digest that I'm not suggesting at all, this should
be a single pricing structure. I'm suggesting that the pricing
structures should be clearly explained to the public because there's
a lot of confusion. A lot of people I talk
to don't realize there are two pricing structures because it
has not been clearly explained. So let me just roll back.

(46:04):
What I was talking about was what people should expect
from an independent review. The first thing they should expect
is clarity, providing an understanding of exactly what this deal is.
And clearly the public right now do not understand it.
Hydro have not been able to articulate it. They've kept
so many numbers that we can get into if you wish,

(46:27):
the state of so many numbers, but absolutely no support.
They're not providing support for their numbers. They're not providing
support for the things that they say to the public.
So secondly, the first of all, an independent review should
provide some clarity of exactly what's going on here. And secondly,
they should be able to provide some analysis as to

(46:50):
the outcomes that the problems should expect. And right now
there's no clarity around that. And as you know, I
have not done interviews and I have not called into
your show because I didn't want to get into that
argument about what the MU is and isn't. I simply
wanted to provide information so that people could read it.

(47:12):
Albeit I know it's very complicated and it's very substantial,
but for those my hope was for those who really
were interested in it, they would take the time to
read those analysis so they'd be better informed and be
able to come to a better decision. So it's you know,
in the absence of an independent review, the public just
don't have a voice that they can trust that it

(47:36):
doesn't contain bias. If you go back to the muskrat
Falls report, one of the things that Justice Labank said
was listen, when you've got proponents out there, they have
an obvious bias. And one of the reports that was
produced by Professor Fieldberg I think his name is he said,

(47:57):
proponents will obviously the behaviors will include an optimism bias,
which means that they will accentuate the positive and underplay
the negative. And that's exactly what's happening here. We're not
getting it straight. We're getting at one sided view of
what this AMALU is and when other people and I
haven't called in. But when other people call in and say,

(48:18):
hang on, what about this, there're apused to be need
savers and you know, you know, et cetera. So it's
just so one sided and biased that you know, an
independent review is the only way, really you can say
this is independent. These there people who have no skin
in the game, not people who negotiate the deal, right,

(48:41):
because obviously anybody who negotiated a deal thinks us a
good deal, otherwise why would they put it forward. But
you need an independent view to say is it a
good deal? Is it the best deal? Hydro claim it
provides the maximum benefits. Well, it's very easy to demonstrate
that that's not true.

Speaker 2 (48:59):
Yeah, the exact same conversation that's happening in the prophecy Gouebec.
To bolster your point of built in bias because it's
nature of the beast, and unfortunately, so it's a political
hot potato when this should be viewed as a pathway.
Who are definitive agreement between Party A and Party B
the end, mister Wilson, not absurd. You want to comment

(49:19):
on that?

Speaker 4 (49:20):
I do, because that gets back to the bundling together
of these two contracts. Party A there's two parties here.
There's not party, ain't party B. Cfl CO is one
huge player here and c f Alco. Their negotiation should
have been a CFLCO should have negotiated a new contract

(49:42):
with their customers who include Hydro Quebec and New Plant
Labor or Hydro. The negotiating party should have been cfl
CO and they should have been very simple, we have
the power, how much you're going to pay for it?
And they should have been They should have negotiated as
close to market value is they could.

Speaker 2 (50:01):
Right, And I mean, I guess I should have said
the province. Yeah, I guess I should have said province
and Province be or utility at Utility be because it's important.

Speaker 4 (50:11):
The second part is the province at New Plant Labrador.
The province should have been negotiating with Hydro Quebec and
New Palant laboror Hydro because they are the proponents of
this new development, and the province had the responsibility to
make sure that the proponents of those new developments provided

(50:31):
the best opportunity of the province, including all of their alternatives.
So that you know, the negotiating parties weren't even correct
from the outset and that's why I said the negotiations
that the m y U first starts is structurally fought.
The wrong people are negotiating here.

Speaker 2 (50:47):
Mister Wilson, A quick question now that I have you,
either one of two requests I can ask it come up,
put you on hull, come back to speak to some
of the specifics from Hydro, or you can join us
another day because there's still so much more that I'd
like to talk about. Would you like to go on
hold or would you like to try another day?

Speaker 4 (51:02):
I know I'm on hold. I want to get this
out there. I'm tired of. I'm tired of. I'm tired
of this whole mess, and I want to get it
over with us. So I'm on hold.

Speaker 2 (51:12):
Okay, let's do exactly that. Michael Wilson's on whole time
for the news. Don't go away, welcome back. Let's rejoin
Michael Wilson on seven. Mister Wilson, you're back on the air.

Speaker 4 (51:22):
I am thank you, Patty. Where were we?

Speaker 2 (51:25):
Hard to say? There was a lot going on there.
The basic glass comment from you is that this MLU
and it's the current structure and the negotiating team should
have never been in place in the first place, or
something along those lines. I don't want to put words
in the moth.

Speaker 6 (51:37):
Now.

Speaker 4 (51:37):
What I was really trying to say was the structure
of the MoU is flawed because the negotiating parties should
have been In the first case, Cflco with its customers
to a cfo AO should have negotiated the highest bricy
could possibly get, as any commercial entity would. And the
second case, with respect to the new developments, it should
have been the problems of Newfoundland and negotiating with two

(52:00):
proponents who are coming together mutually to make a proposal
of the province, and the province should have negotiated with
Hydro Quebec and New Finland Amiral Hydro, not them negotiating
with each other. They were both proponents who both have
interest in this development. So put that to one side.

(52:20):
I was basically saying the negotiation or the MoU itself
is structurally flawed. And I think that's quite evident. Anyway,
let's move under the next point, if that's okay with you.

Speaker 2 (52:31):
Unless you have a question, No, that's okay. I do
have some questions. But where would you like to go next?

Speaker 4 (52:36):
Okay? So, as I was rolling forward, I started off
by saying, let our resignation no response. Now, after that,
as I mentioned, I put out, I think it's now
total of four detailed analysis, and in those analysis that
the key findings are totally separate and distinct from any

(52:56):
conversation about inflation or inflation rates. So, for example, I
said that, you know, providing hydro Quebec with a forty
percent perpetual interest in Gaull Island, regardless of the price,
which has never been substantiated or supported by an independent valuation.
Regardless of that, providing hydro Quebec with a perpetual interest

(53:18):
in gall Island is the same mistake we made in
nineteen sixty nine. And what given them a perpetual interest
in god Island means that forever, if it goes ahead, forever,
they will receive forty percent of the profits from gall Island. Now,
that means that even when the contract is ended and
let's say Newfoundland and Liberal Hydro or some third party

(53:40):
bias to power after twenty seventy five, hydro Quebec will
still get forty percent of the profit. They'll get forty
percent of the profit from Mount of Power forever. That's
just fundamentally wrong.

Speaker 2 (53:52):
Right, Hydro says combined ownership of all new developments approximately
sixty five percent of this province and al Hydro thirty
five percent. Hey, Q, hydro Kbec, how do we uncouple that?
What you said as accurate as far as I understand,
regarding perpetual for mistake at Call is how do we
decouple that from hydro Quebec assuming the risk and the

(54:13):
costs and the liabilities for construction at Call.

Speaker 4 (54:16):
Well, that's interesting because Hydrocbec do not assume all of that.

Speaker 3 (54:20):
Okay, But.

Speaker 4 (54:23):
In my analysis, and by the way, none of this
other than the inflation rate has been questioned. So the
reality is all of the costs for these new developments
will will be answered into the accounts of the various entities.
So the cost of the upgrade and the cost of
the uh, let's do that are part of it? The

(54:45):
upper anyway, they will both be accounted for in yeah,
alcol the expansion was the other part I was trying
to think of. Right, they will. They will be accounted
for in that antie and those costs will be amortized
over sixty five year period. This is in the MoU.

(55:06):
Anybody wants to read the MoU. It's what I'm saying
is factual. That means at the end of the fifty
year period, about twenty three percent of those costs, including
cost overruns, are still sitting in CFLCO to be paid
for by the future offt takers, whoever that may be.
The same is true for Gull Island. In the fact

(55:29):
sheet from and I'm working from memory here now, but
in the fact sheet from New from that Hydro, they
say Hydro Quebec will fund fund the cost overruns. That's
absolutely misleading. The cost over runs will not be funded
by Hydro Quebec at all. They will be accounted for
and the accounts of the joint venture and amortized over
a sixty five year period, and at the end of

(55:51):
the fifty year period, twenty three percent of those costs
will still be sitting there to be paid by the
future off takers, who could be Google or it could
be the Province of New Piland, Lamborohydro. So to say
that Quebec is funding this is absolutely incorrect. It's in
this statement.

Speaker 2 (56:07):
But isn't the cost over on exceptions or liabilities or risk.
Isn't that part of the power purchase agreement? As opposed
to just simply it is.

Speaker 4 (56:16):
You're absolutely right, it's factored into the power purchase agreement.
But the power purchase agreement only asked for fifty years.
The costs are being amortized over sixty five years Hydro,
so there's twenty three percent hangover there in the costs. Now, now, Patty,
we're getting down into the weeds. Okay, I'm not trying.

Speaker 2 (56:32):
To do that. I'm actually trying to benefit from the
information being shared here. And quick question with cfl CO
and relation to GOLL. My understanding is this is going
to lead to some ten, maybe twelve definitive agreements, establishment
of a new corporation involved with gall decoupled from cfl CO.
Is that not how this works?

Speaker 4 (56:51):
It is absolutely there's cfl CO, which owns and operates
the existing PLANTFO will be the entity in which the
upgrades and the expansions will be capitalized. And by the way,
that will be a result of one hundred percent debt.
So just stop think about that for a second. Right now,

(57:12):
we own sixty five percent i'll say sixty five percent
roughly of an entity which has no debt, and it's
probably worth This is just a guess maybe somewhere between
eighty two hundred billion dollars. Now that's just a guess.
Don't hold me accountable for that. But I've seen other
people's you know, calculations of that, and that seems to
be reasonable based upon the cost of what it's going

(57:34):
to be to build Goat Island. Okay, whatever the number is,
it's a big number. Now, new debt is being put
in that entity that we own sixty five percent off.
I say we because I'm talking collectively as the people
or the province. Okay, that new debt goes in there.
And the primary beneficiary of both the upgrade and expansion Quebec.

(58:01):
Now you can go and read the MRU, but how
the power has allocated them, et cetera. But they are
the primary beneficiary and the main reason it's being done,
as I understand it is to feed their peak needs,
you know, in the middle of January when everyone's got
their their heat on bust and they need power faster. Right,
there's very little benefit, if any, to the problems of

(58:23):
Newfoundland or to think us as rate payers and taxpayers. However,
the value, the leverage, it's been, the value that we
have in cf Alico of whatever numbered is fifty sixty
seventy one hundred billion dollars that's been leveraged to put
that debt in there. So all of a sudden, our
debt free company cf Alcol now has debt in there

(58:46):
of you know, six billion dollars and that debt is
being incurred primarily for the benefit of Newfoundland. Now what
do we get out of that? We get a fixed
eight to ten percent return, which is not index by
the way. It's fixed over the period. So we get
eight to ten percent return on the equity book we
put in and the team equity put in. And like

(59:08):
I said, now we're getting down of the reads. Batty,
I'm okay to go there if you can follow along
with me, I.

Speaker 2 (59:11):
Think, But isn't that return on equity based on tenure
bond deals from the Government of Canada, And isn't that.

Speaker 4 (59:17):
At all for the tenure That's that's again misnomer completely.
The tenure rate is is at eight to nine percent. Yeah, okay,
and okay, so you're right, I see where you're coming from.
So the eight percent basically is the existing bond rate

(59:39):
of three point six plus a bit of five percent
risk premium. So there you know, the eight to nine
percent is currently aligned with a five percent risk premium
on on the on the endity on the you know,
business side of it, we'll say, and a better three
point six percent you know Canada bond rate. But here's
the point, this is the more important point. It's not

(01:00:00):
about what it's based upon. It's the fact that we
get eight to nine percent through the duration of six
fifty years. Now it's not indexed. So what that means
is like a dollar today is worth I don't know
what it is exactly. I've got the nose in my
analysis somewhere something far less than that in twenty seventy five.

(01:00:23):
But that eight to ten percent is based upon our
initial equity. So that's like having an indexed pension. That's
like having a pension of ten thousand dollars in twenty
twenty five, and there'd be no indexing whatsoever for inflation
by the time twenty seventy or five rolls around or
twenty eighty five rolls around. Whatever. That's like worth five

(01:00:44):
hundred bucks. Yeah, and we don't get any benefit other
than a fixed rate of return on the fixed equity
we put in, and that there's no inflation in the
indexed indexing there whatsoever. So and this is on the
this is on the CFL new developments. The same is

(01:01:07):
true for Gaull Island. We put in X number of
dollars of equity and we get an annual return on
that of eight to nine percent. It's a fixed number
for the next In the case of Gull Island, it's
actually worse because it's fixed until twenty sixty five. So

(01:01:27):
we get a fixed payment from when the assets are
commissioned up to twenty sixty five, a fixed amount of
money that is not indexed. So, for example, I think
the numbers are basically, if you had ten thousand dollars
today and it's not indexed by the time it gets

(01:01:49):
to twenty sixty five, I think it's like worth three
and twenty bucks. That doesn't sound like a very good
deal to meet, Patty.

Speaker 2 (01:01:57):
I understand where you're coming from, and I'm only trying
to add questions that I think are relevant problem.

Speaker 4 (01:02:04):
I'm happy to answer your questions.

Speaker 2 (01:02:05):
Oh, I know you are, and I'm appreciating your time.
I'm always, you know, ruled by scheduled break times of
what have you, and I do have to get to
one right now, mister Wilson. I appreciate your generous allotment
of time this morning. Can we revisit this again in
a couple of days or whatever the case we be,
so I can carve out time so we can dig
into another couple of areas.

Speaker 4 (01:02:24):
I not like you know, I'm patty. I am absolutely exhausted. Well,
how about this dealing with this issue. I'm so frustrated
dealing with this issue that the people of this province
at being blindsided and continue to be blindsided. Like I
want to get it off my chest. I want to
get off my chest now. Okay, So if you can
accommodate me, I very much appreciate getting the message to

(01:02:46):
the people of New Toland now because they are the
people who have been forced to go to the polls
and make a decision on this and this is ridiculous
and I got to get I gotta get my points.

Speaker 2 (01:02:56):
Okay, So I can. Can I put you on hole
one more time? Because that's sort of how I uncovered Okay,
let's do that. How mister Wilson on hold, don't go away,
welcome back, Let's rejoin Mike Wilson on seven. Mike you're
back on the air.

Speaker 4 (01:03:05):
Thank you very much, Patty. So I was just thinking
through So I think we've pretty much talked through the
one pricing structure which relates to the c FLICO expansion
and upgrade. And I think we will also talk to

(01:03:26):
the pricing structure because it's the same as gall Island
that we only get a fixed ratid return and it's
not index, so you know, the value depreciates over time.
So let's move on.

Speaker 2 (01:03:35):
Okay, So that's a question about the expansion at the
upper first before we move so you talk about what
we get for how do we factor in the quadrupling
of the Labrador recall block two approximately twelve on O
mega watts, which if you ask people in lab West
is an important facet of this MU How do you
figure that or factor that into what we get from
the upper.

Speaker 4 (01:03:56):
Okay, Well that's an interesting point too because terms of
the allocation of power, I have no issue with with
with that. I mean, they can allocate that power whichever way.
You know, c f Alco agrees to allocate it with
its TWE customers. The thing about that is, and I
think the comment is, you know, we quadruple our access

(01:04:18):
to power. The issue with that, Patty is that take
that quadrupling takes place over thirty five years. We don't
get any power very very quickly, and I think I
can't remember the number now. I think it's like twenty
thirty before we get any power, and then twenty fifty
we get another two hundred and fifty megawatts, and then
twenty sixty we had another two hundred and fifty megawats.

(01:04:40):
So anybody who's mistakenly led to think that, you know,
assigning this deal all of a sudden is going to
create nineteen hundred megawatts of power for Labora West, again,
it is mistaken. They're not going to get it. It's
going to happen over a thirty five year period, which
again is not very often highlighted. When you asked this
question of someone from New Finland and Aborohydro, they'll say

(01:05:01):
we get quite ruble to power. They don't telling you
it takes thirty five years to get it.

Speaker 2 (01:05:06):
I have indeed spoken to that timeframe here on this
program in the past. I was just it was just
a very basic question about how do we factor that
into benefit analysis expansion at the opera. Okay, you picked
annet story. You want to talk about before we try
to figure this out.

Speaker 4 (01:05:21):
Okay, Well, I think because I you know, in my
first analysis I said, look, it's all about price, price
and price. So I'm just circling back to that, okay,
and I'm just walking you through it. The first price
was what's the price we're getting for a forty percent interest.
It's four point eight billion dollars. We've got no justification
that's anywhere close to what it's worth. The second area

(01:05:42):
of price we talked about that is the price we
get for the CF expansion and upgrade, and the price
we get for the for the power from gall Island.
So we talked about that. But the only I'm not
sure that I did say though, from those street pricing sources,
it's never ever living to market price. Never. It's always

(01:06:02):
linked to the cost. It's like a cost of service model.
And in one of my analysis I said, look, New
filand Labor or Hydro is treating Quebec like it's a
New Finland ratepayer. They're not treating it as an x
a buyer out of province that should be paying fair

(01:06:22):
market value. There, treating is like a New Finland ratepayer
who should be paid a cost. Completely wrong concept of
how a fair market value deal should work between two
commercial landitise not between a generative power in its customer,
which is legislative to be basically cost. I mean new
filand Laboral Hydro when they want to increase their rates,

(01:06:43):
they have to go to the pub and ask for
a rate increase because the pub is there to make
sure that Hydro's rates ares kept as low as possible
for the public. That's sort of what's going on here
with Hydro Quebec. The price is kept down as low
as possible and instead of being at market value, there's
a completely different concept here. Anyway. The point is that

(01:07:04):
from the CF expansion, from the CF upgrade and from
gull Island, there's no link to market price whatsoever. We
get a fixed return at the value which drops significantly
over time due to inflation. Now that's that. That's factual.
You can't dispute it. I'm not to send that out
in my analysis. And guess what Hydrov said nothing about that.

(01:07:28):
They choose to talk about a separate issue, which I
will get to you in a moment. Okay, now let's
move to the CF power. The renegotiated rate and Patty,
and I'm going to I'll speak to this specifically, but
I'll give you an analysis. First. Let's say that you
have a basement apartment in your home and you want

(01:07:51):
to rent it out to someone, and you check around,
and then the going price is somewhere between thirteen hundred
dollars a month and sixteen hundred dollars a month. You
get my analogy, there between thirteen thirteen cents, just sixteen
cents per pillo whatever, But it's the average price of
apartments or somewhere between thirteen and sixteen. You know, if

(01:08:11):
you're trying to gauge, like what yours is worth within
that range, and you, you know, you just say, you
know what, whatever, If I can get thirteen hundred, I'd
be happy. If I get sixteen hundred, i'd be happy.
But I'll take thirteen. And someone comes along and says, well,
i'll give you two hundred and seventy, and you are like, no, no, no, no,
no no, I'm not going to take two hundred and seventy.

(01:08:31):
It's worth at least thirteen, maybe more. And then that
someone says to you, well, how about I rented for
fifty years, and I'll give you thirteen thousand and five hundred.
Now that's a big number, thirteen thousand, five hundred for
a place that's only renting for thirteen hundred. What do
you say to that. You're going to say, I don't
think so, because that's still only two hundred and fifty

(01:08:52):
bucks or two hundred and seventy bucks a month. So no,
I'm not I'm not going to rent it to you that.
That's what's happening with the power we're selling from CF
the existing plant.

Speaker 2 (01:09:06):
Can I ask a question about market favuing because this
is one place where I admit to struggling because not
every market is created equal. I mean, Hydrocobec customers are
paying annualized average round eight cents per killo out hour,
and you know if they service an AI data center
at a commercial rate, or a mine expansion or electric
vehicle plant, or customers in the Northeastern United States like

(01:09:26):
Connecticut twenty five years at five cents per kill at hour.
That's where I struggle with market because the market is
different residential payers, commercial, industrial, the state's clearing house. So
how should I be thinking about market in so far
as price elasticity goes because it's never going to be
just one thing.

Speaker 4 (01:09:44):
Yeah, okay, so the best I understand what you're saying,
But the best indicator of a price of anything is
an alternative replacement. And I'll try to just up the
top of my head, I'll try to give you an example.
Say you go to Hickman Motors. You want to buy
a silver Ratto and a cost one hundred thousand bucks. Okay,

(01:10:07):
And you go down the road and you look at
a similar model Forward and a cost eighty five. Your
next best alternative is what determines what your perimeters are
going to be. You're either going to pay eighty five
for a Forward or one hundred for a Silver Ratto.

(01:10:30):
That's your two choices, and that's within that range. That's
the market. If you want a truck, one hundred and
fifty the truck, right, It's what I'm what I'm trying
to say to you is it's a replacement cost what
you could what your alternative is if you don't buy,
If you don't buy the silver Ratto, your alternative is

(01:10:51):
to pay your next best alternative. The market value here
is if Quebec don't buy the power from Cflco, they
have to build it, and if they build it, it's
going to cost them thirteen to sixteen cents to build it. Therefore,

(01:11:11):
their next best alternative is between thirteen to sixteen cents.
So anything they get that's less than thirteen six to
sixteen cents is it benefit to them?

Speaker 2 (01:11:21):
One more time, Michael, one more break, one more segment,
because I want to pick up on that replacement cost
because that's something Michael Savier said immediately upon return to Quebec.
But I do have a couple of specific questions. One
more time on hold.

Speaker 4 (01:11:33):
No problem, I'm here. I'm here for the day.

Speaker 2 (01:11:35):
Good Man. Here we go, Michael Wilson on hold, don't
go away. Welcome back. Let's return our conversation on line
seup with Michael Wilson. Michael, you're back on okay, thank you.
Replacement costs. Let me ask you a specific question. So,
Michael Savier and other executives that Hawydroe Kobek have said
replacement costs in and around thirteen sixteen cents. My question
to them would be, are they talking about having to

(01:11:56):
build the amount of hydro available or any alternative source
of energy? Because for those who use electrons to kill
a lot of hours. It's not about where it comes from,
it's how much it costs. So are they talking about
the inclusion of small nuclear, wind, solar, methane capture, or
anything on it that sort, or strictly hydro replacement.

Speaker 4 (01:12:13):
No. I well, I'm not one hundred percent sure because
I'm not inside his head, but I understand what he
meant was if we were to try to replace power
with a similar capacity attributes of the hydro power, because
all those are the things like wind, solar and nuculear,
they all have different issues and challenges, whereas hydro is

(01:12:36):
the pure source of energy, and that it's the storage capacity,
the size, the size of the reservoir. I mean, quite frankly,
there's nothing in North America. Perhaps in the world, I
don't know. I'm not an expert in that area, but
there's there's certainly nothing in North America that's that says
that the can generate the power and has the storage capacity,
et cetera. Of Churchill Falls. My understanding of his comment

(01:13:00):
is to replace something like Churchill Falls hydro in Quebec
at this point in time, their next best alternative is
somewhere we're being thirteen to sixteen cents, and that's very,
very indicative of what the market value is, because the
replacement cost is a huge indicator of what the value is.

(01:13:22):
In other words, that they don't buy it from Churchill
Falls right for two point seven cents. By the way,
if they don't buy it from Churchill Falls, to buy it,
to build it, it's going to cost him thirteen to
sixteen cents.

Speaker 2 (01:13:33):
Yeah. I think it's an important distinction because building hydro
is different than relying on our hybrid of inputs, you know,
whether it be all of the aforementioned alternatives. So we
invite the Michael Sabian. Of course he didn't take me
up on the pot anyway. That's that was one of
the key questions I had for him. Okay, where to next?

Speaker 4 (01:13:50):
Okay, So basically, as I was saying, I think we've
we've talked through the CF upgrade and expansion and gall
Island pricing structure at least as best I can, and
highlight of the fact, it's not related to market. It's
a fixed rative return that depreciates every year from now
un full twenty sixty five. Let's move on the Churchill

(01:14:12):
Falls and this is the issue we're just talking about.
I have put out an analysis which basically says, if you
look at Schedule G and how it's all it pays out,
and you look at the power that Hydro Quebec get
to pay two point seven cents. And I also in January,
when the president CEO of Hydro explained what five point

(01:14:36):
nine CeNSE is, she explained a methodology or a model
that would substantiate the five point nine cents. I actually
build that model. So I built that model and I
pushed it out there. It's there two models that are
out there. What I refer to is a Schedule G
model and the Williams model. They both support a price
of two point seven cents. Neither one of them supports

(01:14:57):
a price of five point nine cents. There's no support
being provided by a Hydro a five point nine cents.
It's just not there. It's a numbers that they put
in their fact sheet, but they have never produced a
formula or a structure that supports that number. I have
produced two that supports two point seven cents uncontested. They

(01:15:22):
didn't respond to that in their response to the Group
of nine letter. Okay, so what I'm basically saying is
we're getting two point seven cents. And we've just talked through,
and I appreciate you making the points and the clarity.
Hydro Quebec's replacement costas thirteen and sixteen cents. Why would
we sell something for two point seven cents when the

(01:15:44):
next best alternat for Quebec is thirteen to sixteen. And
that gets back to my analogy is why would you
rent your basement apartment for two hundred and seventy bucks
a month if it's worth thirteen to sixteen dollars a month.
You just wouldn't do it right now. But besides that,
and just to drive the point home, in the schedules

(01:16:04):
G model, the price starts at one point six cents. Now,
there's no relative connection whatsoever between a market price and
one point six cents, but it escalates to thirty seven
point two cents and twenty seventy five from here's the kicker.
Thirty seven point two cents in twenty seventy five discountered

(01:16:27):
at the rate they use in the MLU of five
point eighty two two percent, it's worth two point one
cents and twenty twenty four dollars. It sounds like a
big number. Thirty seven point five cents. Oh wow, we're
all going to be rich. But the twenty twenty four
comparative number is two point one cents. Now, let's look
at it the other way. In nineteen sixty nine, I

(01:16:51):
think the initial price first thuy to certain the initial
price was very close to three cents. Oh sorry, point
three cents. Point three cents. But if you roll that forward,
accounting for inflation between nineteen sixty nine and twenty twenty four,
that point three cents is now two point six cents. Okay,

(01:17:12):
you understand that. No issues, that's a straightforward calculation. So
in twenty seventy five, we will be selling power to
hydro Quebec at an equivalent price in twenty twenty four
for two point one cents when the price we sold

(01:17:33):
it to them in nineteen sixty nine, equivalent price in
twenty twenty four two point six cents. We're selling power
to Quebec at a lower price one hundred and six
years after the price was set in nineteen sixty nine.

Speaker 2 (01:17:49):
It's ludicrous in round numbers when they talk about seventeen building,
because people can talk about price for Killabot, mega watt,
what have you in the round numbers average billion dollars
year between now twenty four forty one. Then they look
down the path to twenty forty four at two billion,
twenty sixty to six billion. I think those are the
I mean nothing bite size about saying billion, but I

(01:18:10):
think in the overall scheme of things, price for kil
about hour mega watt is maybe lost on a lot
of folks versus X number of millions or billions, just
a quick when we talk about value for new developments
or return on new developments. This is one of the
points made by Hydro. Mister Wilson estimates return of twenty
point five billion on new developments. Our projection show were
return of forty seven point eight billion dollars. Mister Wistle's

(01:18:31):
estimates lack any supporting calculations to analyze for differences in conclusions.

Speaker 4 (01:18:35):
Your thoughts, well, I'm pretty sure that in all the
analysis I've done that I supported that number somewhere. I
can't tell you where exactly, but I'm sure supported. But
let me let me let me tell you another perspective
on it. When you look at that too, or on
twenty seven billion number they put out there, they come
down and they show an operating profit from the new developments. Well,

(01:19:02):
here's the confusing thing that they haven't clarified. As I
said to you, all those contracts from the new developments
are on a cost plus basis, and what that really
means is the revenue will equal the expenses, so the
profit will be zero. That's what cost plus means. Hydro
Quebec is not going to pay any more than the

(01:19:24):
cost to generate, which means that it cannot generate a profit.
Yet they say the profit is x and we get
sixty percent of it, but the MOAU doesn't support the
fact that there's going to be any profit as such.
What a support is in the cost build up that
hydro Quebec pay. There's a factor in there for the

(01:19:46):
return on our investment of eight to nine percent, which
is factored into the cost Quebec will pay the total cost.
The revenue will equal the total cost, and the profit
will be zero. So all we get from the expansion,
and I've already mentioned this earlier, all we get from
the expansion and the upgrade and Gull Island is a

(01:20:09):
fixed return on equity. There will not be any profit
generated through those contracts. That's not the way a cost
plus contract works. So I completely do not understand their comments.
And my twenty point five billion basically is I calculated,
and I know where I came up with a number,
and I'm sure it's out there somewhere. Maybe I sent

(01:20:31):
so much information in them they didn't have a chance
to look at it all. But basically what I did
was I said, okay, so what is the equity component
of each of these investments, and what do we get
on an annual basis at eight to nine percent? And
then I basically factored that and it comes up to,
like I think, twenty point five billion. So I put
that number out there. So I don't understand why they

(01:20:54):
haven't seen it, because it's out there. And I also
don't understand how in their summation of the twenty seven
billion that they can allow for a profit on a
contract which is designed to break even. It doesn't make sense.
And Patty, the thing about it is is that I
shouldn't be and nobody should be trying to work this out.

(01:21:15):
This information should be readily available and provided to the
public by a new fialanlal abd or hydro. I shouldn't
have to try to work it out, and that's why
there's such a lack of comparison of transparency here. They've
made statements and they put huge numbers on a piece
of paper without any supporting documentation as to how these

(01:21:36):
numbers are calculated. So anybody who's trying to understand the
MoU has to try to work at what the heck
they're talking about. So that's why there's a difference between
the twenty billion that I suggested was the return in
equity and the number that they suggest is a sixty
percent split of a profit, which a costplus contract doesn't exist.

(01:22:00):
So it's just confusing, And there are two numbers out there.
One of them is right, one of them is wrong.
But I've supported mine, but they haven't supported theirs.

Speaker 2 (01:22:08):
Is what you refer to as the discount right calculated
inside what hydro will refer to as the capital asset
pricing model, and then you talk about equity risk premiums
and all the other.

Speaker 4 (01:22:19):
Jargon that's getting pretty detectable. But the capital asset pricing
model basically is a way to try to determine what's
a reasonable discount rate. So let's talk about the discount
wait for a second, okay, because I think I've made
my points on the pricing issues, right, okay, So the
discount So first of all, what i'd say is everything
I just talked to you about, you know, the price

(01:22:42):
for gull Island, the price, the fixed return we get
on the new developments, the pricing numbers on whatever they're
all or sorry, the last one is determined. You think
a discount rate of eighty three percent. Now, when I

(01:23:04):
looked at these numbers, and I was trying to look
at them, where are where are our risks of the province?
And what I looked at was like, you know, a
five point eight to two percent discount rate over a
fifty year period. It's not very much when you look
at the fact that historical average rates of interest at
being three point eight three three percent. Like I live

(01:23:25):
through I'm seventy two years old and I lived through
inflation at twelve percent and interest rates at eighteen percent.
There's no there's no one has a crystal ball to
know what the inflation rate is going to be in
the future. But when you use a discount right like that,
what happens is the present value of all the future
payments gets locked in and at particular discount rate there's

(01:23:47):
there's no escape claws from that. It's locked in. It's
long term and that's what establishes the value. Now, if
inflation exceeds the expected rate in that five point eighty
three three percent or two percent whatever it is, right
three twenty three. Yeah, yeah, Well, if inflation actually exceeds
the estimate of inflation that's in that rate, we lose

(01:24:11):
and Quebec win because the future value of the money,
as inflation goes up or as the discount right should
go up, we would lose. But that discount weight is
set for the full fifty years.

Speaker 2 (01:24:25):
Yeah. I guess that's why out clauses in fifty one
and sixty one, I guess are part of this, and
whether or not they're achieved in a definitive agreement to
our contract remains to be seen. Mister Wilson, for starters,
I really appreciate making time for the show and the
information that you've shared with me. I do have to
get to the break. I don't know if you have
anything else that you'd like to say here this morning,
and I'll leave that to you.

Speaker 4 (01:24:45):
Well, you know what, there is a few things I'd
like to say, and it's in summary, right, is that
look unfortunately, and I think it's really unfortunate people are
being asked to make a decision on a m ORU
without your broken information. There's a lot of information that
Hydro should have provided to the public that they have

(01:25:05):
not done so, which creates a lot of confusion and
causes people like me to try to work it out,
which we shouldn't have to do. That's the first thing.
The second thing is, how can we be comfortable that
a forty percent interest in gull Island is only worth
four point eight billion? How can we be comfortable in

(01:25:28):
selling power to go back at two point seven cents
when the replacement cost is thirteen to sixteen cents? And
how can we be comfortable getting a return on the
new developments which depreciates over time and by the time
we actually get it's worth nothing are very very little.
How can we do that? How can we support an

(01:25:50):
MU that results in those three outcomes? Now, having said that,
there's a lot of other issues that a lot of
other people have raised, but you're very value valiicanncerns about
the control of the river right and about other aspects
of the MU, which I haven't touched on because I've
basically stuck to the pricing, and I think the pricing

(01:26:13):
is atrocious. And if people are being asked to vote
on this, they there would be very, very very careful
of voute have the cast or vote.

Speaker 2 (01:26:21):
Price cost value. I'll inherently link, but distinctly different. Michael,
really appreciate this this morning. Thank you very much.

Speaker 4 (01:26:28):
You're very welcome to a great day.

Speaker 2 (01:26:29):
You too, Bye bye, Let's take a break. I want
to come back. We can talk about whatever's on your mind.
Don't go away, welcome back to the program. Well, not
sure where to start with what was Understandably people asking me,
you know that was a awful lot of time eating up,
and that's true. You're absolutely right. The trek here, though,

(01:26:50):
is we've been told that a few things. We know
for sure. This is going to have implications and ramifications
of the problems for fifty sixty years. The concern are
so varied and many that it's hard to boil it,
you know, boil it down to very bite sized morsels
and compact time frames. So and yes, of course we
will afford the exact same amount of time to whether

(01:27:12):
it be Carl Smith or Jennifer Williams or Premier Hogan
or anybody else to speak to the specific concerns voiced
by Michael Wilson this morning and echoed by others, whether
we call it the group of nine and other people
who have chimed in same thing. For those who have
pend a letter in support of it, if they'd like
to take the opportunity to have their say here on
the show, they're also welcome. David. How we doing out there?
We got stuff, Okay, I'll just get us to the

(01:27:34):
news on time, because we gobbled up a lot of
time there with Miracle Wilson, and we really appreciate it. Look,
it's complicated and people are confused, and I think he
can throw me into the confused pile because there's just
so much to this. I'm glad we didn't get too
far into some of the more technical engineering type matters

(01:27:55):
versus focusing on price, cost value, future for forecasts, implication
of inflation, return on new developments, those types of things
which are the financial implications. Like one person said to
me in a note during that most recent break, thanks
for doing it, but I'm pretty confused. I just hope
we get it right. I think you know for me anyway,

(01:28:18):
the unfortunate complicating factor here is that it becomes very
quickly and highly politicized, and that's unavoidable. It's just part
of how things get done here in this country, in
this world. To separate out the politics would be you know, fools,
errand no one's going to be able to do that
in full. So the best we can try to provide

(01:28:38):
here is just analysis by people who understand what's going on,
and I've taken the time to do the work. As
complicated and as tedious, and as for some people, as
boring as it might be or seem, there's still a
lot to be fully fleshed out here. And whether it
be Michael Wilson or folks around the exact opposite side
of this conversation, including Jennifer Williams, who's most welcome to

(01:29:01):
join us, same thing with Carl Smith, whoever would like
to talk about it. And importantly, let me just reset
the show in saying when we come back from this
news break, which we're going to take right now, the
topic is up to you. It needn't be about the election,
it needn't be about the Upper Churchill, it needn't be
about anything specific that you think we talk about here
on the show. You'd like to elaborate if you want
to pick up the rope and go in a different

(01:29:23):
direction with a new topic from any angle like anything
under the sun is welcome conversation here on the program.
Let's take a break for the news. Don't go away.

Speaker 1 (01:29:31):
You were listening to a rebroadcast of VOCM Open Line.
Have your say by calling seven oh nine 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 (01:29:49):
Welcome back, Let's go to line number one. Good morning,
miss Hutchings, you're on the air.

Speaker 10 (01:29:55):
Good morning Patty and how are you not too bad?

Speaker 2 (01:29:57):
Thank you? How about you?

Speaker 10 (01:29:59):
Thanks and Fin? Thank you Rust, thank you for having
me out this morning. I'm going to talk about barriers
for disabled people in Labrador. Myself being a disabled person,
I lived with a neck and spinal cord injury for
some years. Despite my injury, I still have many abilities
and skills that I haven't been able to demonstrate or

(01:30:21):
showcase due to a lack of jobs available like work
placements for disabled individuals in my area of Goose Bay.
I have tried seeking employment locally under different associations related
to my injury, and going back as far as three

(01:30:44):
years ago, when I heard that there was agencies that
had job placements for individuals like myself or similar I
was denied at that time, not from any medical perspective,
but due to the fact that there was only funding

(01:31:06):
available for one employment opportunity like a job placement. And
they were disappointed because they really wanted to help me.
The people that are in these are so helpful. They're
very supportive and kind, and they know my plight. They
got to know me very well. They were trying their
best to like dig deeper to find out what could

(01:31:28):
be done, if anything. But meanwhile we discovered that in
other places in Canada, like for example, like where Saint
John's is close to us for disabled peoples in that area,
like the job placements are twenty plus like spots for

(01:31:50):
individuals who qualify. Other programs that are designed to get
people into the workforce have an age required and cap
off in order to be eligible, like for example, people
over the age of thirty are not eligible to apply
for me. It seems to be a bit of an

(01:32:11):
agism factor in that situation, and I'm going to just
go to some other things I investigated, like AMI Network
is a network, a Canadian network that showcases disabled people's
from all over Canada with different disabilities and are out

(01:32:31):
of them all different ages. And these people are supported
and funded by many other different agencies, so that this
is the disabled individuals' needs are met financially, physically, and socially.
They're not isolated.

Speaker 7 (01:32:50):
They are able to.

Speaker 10 (01:32:52):
Somewhat still be in their community in a sense of
like I'm putting something forward to help, you know, just
living my best in my mess and glad that I
can pay taxes and pay for my medicine and foods,
just to you know, have the rights that everyone else
that doesn't have a disability has. That's basically where I'm at.

(01:33:19):
And I was I just have one more thing to
stay and then I.

Speaker 2 (01:33:22):
Was just going to.

Speaker 10 (01:33:25):
Resent and whatever you could offer. I feel like there's
a significant lack of like social and financial support for
disabled people in Goose Bay, Laborador right now anyway, right
at this time, I wonder how many people are existing
in the same circumstances as I am, mean, currently being
married disabled, my husband has a disability. We don't have

(01:33:49):
medical benefits he works, but like I said, his job
comes with you know, restrictions because of his disability, like
his medical restrictions, you can't do certain things. So and
where we have a family, it's very difficult. We do
not have that any extra supplementation or help. We do

(01:34:09):
not qualify for the NLPDP based on minimal dollars. But
this is how it is. They have you know, these brackets,
financial brackets, and I don't. Even though I am a
disabled person under the government and I have Disability Tax Credit,
I do not a certificate. I do not receive any
like CDB or any sort of benefit. Due to the

(01:34:32):
length of time that I had this medical issue, I
didn't build up enough you know CPP and whatever benefits
as well. I just one final thing before I wait
for the golden words from you. I need to my
fellow people's here, Indigenous and non Indigenous people who have

(01:34:55):
many influential contacts within the government entity that address does
this matter. I would ask you please speak of this
just on behalf of all disabled laboratory and peoples so
we can all.

Speaker 7 (01:35:14):
Know what it's like to.

Speaker 10 (01:35:16):
Self care, be out there, be productive work, and get
out there in the workforce and not have to worry
about losing our home or other things, maybe due to
not being able to pay for all our medications and
if a surgery arrives out of nowhere unexpected costs that
we're not qualified for. That's basically that's all petty. That

(01:35:40):
what I'm going to put out there, and it's going
to leave it to you.

Speaker 2 (01:35:43):
Sure God. So you mentioned that you've reached out to
various organizations to assist and try to find employment. Can
you give us an idea of who you've been speaking with.

Speaker 10 (01:35:53):
Yes, I did want to give names and like way,
the Final Cord Injury Association as it retains to me
specific with this final core injury I'm living with that.
Those were the agencies that I focused and targeted on
for three years and unfortunately there despite all their attempts

(01:36:18):
and tries. It's the barrier of the big government funding.
It's not about the people not willing to help or
finding the jobs, it's the money isn't there, so they
can't put it forth to the entities that offer job placements,
that are willing to take people with disabilities. Because everyone's different,

(01:36:39):
some people may not need an assistant.

Speaker 7 (01:36:41):
To work with.

Speaker 10 (01:36:42):
Some disabled people may right.

Speaker 2 (01:36:44):
I have some other entities that you can reach out to. Okay, yeah,
So one, you know, when we talk about provincial and
federal government resources, there is a specific Office of Employment
Equity for Persons with Disabilities. So that's why at the
governmental level, and for instance, if you sent me an email,
I can reply with some links to make life easier.

(01:37:06):
And when we talk about community community based organizations, I'll
name three. One is simply the Coalition of Persons with
Disabilities as the umbrella organization as the advocate. But then
there's two other specifics that I think have been very
helpful to people. One is called Inclusion n L and
that they work directly with business, but they can help

(01:37:27):
connect you with a company that may indeed be hiring
persons with disabilities requiring different levels of support. And the
other one is called Empower n L E M P
O W E R n L. So Inclusion NL, Empower NL,
and the Office of Employment Equity for Persons with Disabilities.
Those three are three valuable resources that I think might
be able to help or at least point you in

(01:37:48):
the right direction.

Speaker 10 (01:37:49):
Well exactly because I was literally just stagnant where I
was and I thought, well, Okay, now it's time to
call the one that I know that knows every or
can get me what is out there and something to
work with.

Speaker 2 (01:38:03):
Yeah, so those three did you have a chance to
jump those down?

Speaker 10 (01:38:07):
I was You're so quick.

Speaker 11 (01:38:09):
I was trying.

Speaker 10 (01:38:10):
I put down abbreviation it's okay, No, no, no, I
put down the abbreviation cop WD. That was the coalition
of what was that?

Speaker 2 (01:38:19):
So if you just google up cod NL, cod dash NL,
that'll bring you to the Coalition's website.

Speaker 10 (01:38:24):
Oh god NL okay. And then there was Empower n
L and then.

Speaker 3 (01:38:29):
In clingson n L exactly.

Speaker 10 (01:38:32):
Ye, okay, great.

Speaker 2 (01:38:34):
You know this has been an unbelievably.

Speaker 10 (01:38:38):
World of knowledge Like this is great for me because yes,
in my situation currently, I'm just wanting to move forward
and stay positive and keep busy with knowing that there's
more out there and that I just haven't seen it yet.

Speaker 2 (01:38:54):
The best did yet to come, hopefully, so fingers crossed.
So if you try those different avenues, do me a favor,
get back to me and let me know if you've
had any success. If not, I'll try to get specific
contacts at places like Service Canada, which has some programs
maybe in the envelope of easter seals for instance. Spot

(01:39:14):
you try those three. They're the best three that off
the top of my head, and let me know how
it works out. And if you don't have any luck,
you get back to me and we'll pick it up
from there.

Speaker 10 (01:39:23):
Okay, thank you so much, and I thank you again
for your time, and God bless you out there. Stay
safe and healthy, take good care you Toobe, Missugings, good luck.
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:39:32):
But you welcome. Just think, make you back, gst, don't
go away, welcome back to the show. Let's go to
line number four. Many around the air.

Speaker 12 (01:39:41):
Yes, Patty, and what are you doing?

Speaker 2 (01:39:42):
I'm okay, I suppose you.

Speaker 12 (01:39:44):
Yeah, no, I haven't called in. But to be honest,
I I got fleu today. But like I'm having a
great deal difficulty during this election in trying to understand
what's going on with with them ou right, And you
know I feel on Churchill Falls because when we had

(01:40:06):
it before, my god, I was just about on every
single day. I don't know why, because I wouldn't have
the energy at this point, Patty, but I can't figure out.
And when mister Wilson came on this morning, I made
it made it clear to me. I had to call
up because I don't think we have enough information to

(01:40:28):
be honest to go to the pose and vote on this.
And I don't know. I don't think I think that
I was just telling David. I actually think what's going
to happen is people that don't understand it are probably
going to stay home. I wouldn't be one of them,
by the way, but there are people that they're not
going to vote and vote all if they don't know

(01:40:50):
what they're voting for, right, And that's my point. You
know that I'm really concerned because I do not think
we I don't no why it was an election issue anyway.
I don't know what we had to do, but we
should certainly be trying to get more information on this
before we're put in a position. Because my point on

(01:41:11):
it is we've lived with this deal, last deal, and
that's how we ever heard growing up was about this
bad deal, right, And the concern I have is that
if I went out and voted for it, that eventually
it's going to be found out it was not a
good deal. I'll always think that I was the one

(01:41:31):
who helped put this through, Right. You get my drift.

Speaker 2 (01:41:35):
Yeah, but you know what I'll say to that is
it wasn't me, it was the governing party. The Liberals
said that this is the number one topic for this election.
So yeah, but I don't know if that's true because
the people I talked to, I mean, they're all kind
of split. They're curious about the MoU. They understand the
long term implications, but they're voting with their pocketbook. They're

(01:41:56):
voting about cost of living, and that's just it's.

Speaker 12 (01:41:59):
Just Patty, that people are voting with their pocketbooks. But
this is to me, it's probably the most important issue
that we could ever have, you know, now, Patty, the
other thing lest election. I know what I mentioned was
that it would be a good thing if we could
get a close election. When I heard the poll the

(01:42:21):
other day sixty percent, I was thinking to myself, We're
never not even going to have an opposition in the House,
and what could be worse if at least when we
got someone in there that's an opposition parody or independent
or whatever, at least that we could bring things up

(01:42:43):
to the floor. Get I don't know if that poll
is right, because, to be honest, I already believe the
poll at sixty percent, because I think that was taken
in August anyway, and I'm not sure that helped anybody.

Speaker 13 (01:42:58):
Tell you.

Speaker 12 (01:42:58):
The truth it does is it makes it worse because
you think to yourself, well, we're not even going to
have an opposition, probably but hopefully it's not right. But
I just wanted to say, the worst thing we could
do is throw all the one parody into the house.
And last parody we add we never heard one thing

(01:43:21):
from our member, one thing, not a word in four years.
So I hope that we can at least, if not
an independent, you know, get some other parody. They have
a large number so that even if they had a
minority government, I think would be a good thing.

Speaker 2 (01:43:39):
Right, I take all the polls, you know, with the
associated grain of salt. It was in August. It was
a pretty small number of responds. I think was three
hundred and fifty six or three hundred and fifty seven.

Speaker 12 (01:43:50):
Yeah, And it's also Musfete falls was not mentioned in
that right, So I don't know how many people feel
the way I do about musfat falls. And because I
learned after that wasn't such a good deal either, And
but I was what I was going to say, is
Patty that with a little bit of information we got

(01:44:11):
and when mister Wilson came on, despite the fact I
couldn't couldn't fit, I was confused. I heard enough that
it made me really really want to say something on it. Anyway,
because I think the more people speak sout, and I'm
glad Patty that you do do let people talk out,

(01:44:33):
because you should hear both sides of the story anyway.

Speaker 2 (01:44:37):
Right, Yes, and again, in the interest of fairness and
in the interest of factor gathering, we're more than happy
to have Carl Smith or Jennifer Williams or whoever on.

Speaker 12 (01:44:51):
Because I don't disagree. I think you should have and
whoever wants to talk about it should be allowed to
come on, because I mean, normally one of those it
just wants to come out and down something right after bed.
And when it comes to Quebec, I get a sound
that is teaching in Quebec. Right, But I would like

(01:45:13):
to evade a bit more information. I don't think that
either one of us is going to pose knowing what
we're voting for, to be honest, and my concern, like
I say, is that a lot of people who don't know,
like myself all always vote because I vote every time, right,
But some people are probably going to say, well, I'm not.
I don't know if I might to vote for something

(01:45:34):
it couldfect me years end. Roll neck, you keep my drift.

Speaker 2 (01:45:40):
Yeah, like I'll admit pretty freely, I was the other
person on that call with mister Wilson, and I'm mind boggled.
I mean, I can only imagine what people how they
hear and digest that information. And some of it was
pretty technical, but I mean, if we don't talk about
things as most as best we can and hear the

(01:46:01):
point and counterpoint because we're not talking about opinion based
on things like price and costs and you know, values,
a bit more of an opinion generated topic. But anyway,
I'm still trying to digest what I heard.

Speaker 12 (01:46:14):
And I was, yeah, that's right. And we got about
a week left to did digest it, eh, And that
the one thing that the thing that bothered me, I
think the most on it, and that was weeks ago,
was when I found out that mister Wilson actually had
gone in July and we had not even known about
it till September. And when I see things like that,

(01:46:36):
I saw a lot of that going on in Musfat
Falls too, that people were doing things. I don't know
if it was Hydro, but I blamed something on Eydro
that they didn't weren't truthful. They were very with the facts.
They weren't telling people all there, right, So I had

(01:46:56):
no trust of Vidro and that probably his boy feel
the way I do right now, Right, Patty, I'm really
glad to be talking to you, my lot.

Speaker 2 (01:47:06):
I'm glad you called it. Appreciate your time.

Speaker 12 (01:47:08):
Yeah, you know, I think I think the world of you.

Speaker 2 (01:47:11):
Right, We've known each other a long time.

Speaker 12 (01:47:14):
Okay, bye, bye.

Speaker 2 (01:47:16):
I appreciate it many you take good care, all right,
good bye. Let's get one more for the news line
to Eddie around the air.

Speaker 7 (01:47:23):
Yeah, go ahead, Bettie. How are you today?

Speaker 2 (01:47:25):
Man? Top shelf you.

Speaker 7 (01:47:27):
Oh no bad? And the bottom shll come listen, Betty,
this can on you here now on mister Day. Yes,
they do a road mission, but listen. Okay, Now my
GSD comes in director battle. That's que right, So what
about my friends of mine?

Speaker 4 (01:47:47):
Uh?

Speaker 7 (01:47:47):
Gets it in the mail?

Speaker 8 (01:47:49):
All right?

Speaker 4 (01:47:50):
Now?

Speaker 7 (01:47:50):
The spokes come out in the mail, pride, So what's
the person to do? Do you know anything on it?
Did you hear any hally done with all your acknowledgy
and your technicalities and.

Speaker 2 (01:48:00):
Yeah, you know folks who have director Poscata. On the
third of October, folks who get it in the mail,
were told that you can go to the post office
with two pieces of ID and collect your GST check.
That's what we were told about kind of the post Oh.

Speaker 7 (01:48:13):
Thank you for leading me on right.

Speaker 10 (01:48:15):
Tell many people, I thank you, baddy.

Speaker 2 (01:48:17):
No problem at all. Now what I will say it
is make sure your buddies call their local post office
to see if they can speak with a live individual,
to make sure that they don't waste their time and go.

Speaker 13 (01:48:29):
Oh, thank you buddy. I'll make sure that.

Speaker 10 (01:48:32):
Ask you a question.

Speaker 14 (01:48:33):
Sure you think that a lot of people in Nuplan
got that disorder, that repeatable disorder? There does cay repeatable disorder?

Speaker 7 (01:48:46):
You repeat yourself four or five times on your on
your show, you know it, maintain the same topic over
and over and over. Me called repeatable repeatable disorder.

Speaker 2 (01:48:58):
I don't know. So are you saying that I repeat
myself a lot on the show? Is that what you're said?

Speaker 13 (01:49:02):
You?

Speaker 9 (01:49:03):
No?

Speaker 7 (01:49:03):
Not you, my buddy. Here some of your some of
your clients are bone in.

Speaker 2 (01:49:09):
That's true.

Speaker 7 (01:49:10):
But listen, Tosh, such a disease COD repeatable disorder. Anyhow, Bet,
do you have a nice day, Buddy?

Speaker 2 (01:49:21):
You too, Eddy? All the best? All right, man, let's
see here. Let's take a break. When we come back.
Norm wants to talk about disability benefit Admirlate's dispact response time.
Whatever you want to talk about, don't aware.

Speaker 1 (01:49:35):
Local news now a vo CM news update.

Speaker 10 (01:49:39):
This VOCM news is brought to you by Horizon Lamin.

Speaker 4 (01:49:44):
It's your local countertop manufacturer right here in Newfoundland.

Speaker 15 (01:49:49):
At eleven thirty, we have some sunshine. The temperature is
at seventeen in Saint John's. Good morning. I'm Sarah Strickland.
There were no injuries, but many residents are just placed
as the result of an apartment fire on sim Street
in Saint John's this morning. Crews were called to Hillcrest
Apartments around five point thirty this morning. Acting Platoon Chief

(01:50:11):
with the Saint John's Regional Fire Department, Robin Barrett says
crews were met by heavy smoke and flame when they
arrived on the scene. He says although everyone was safely
evacuated and accounted for the fire itself has proven to
be a stubborn one to put out.

Speaker 16 (01:50:27):
Yeah, so we're defensive now. So we have master streams,
that's the larger flow of water, and so we just
stopped those temporarily because as you can see, it's still
making some black smoke. So it's in the ceiling and
we can't get at it. So we just sent a
crew in there to the right and to try to
haul some ceilings and get at it so we can
extinguish it.

Speaker 15 (01:50:43):
The RNC is investigating the cause of the fire. Both
sides are digging in as the postal strike is well
into its second week, causing some to wonder where things
are going to be come the holidays. Very few pieces
of mail move last Christmas. The president of w Local
one twenty six, Mike McDonald, is calling on Premier John

(01:51:04):
Hogan to seek assurances from Ottawa and the Corporation regarding
the closure of post offices. Government has given Canada Post
authority to close rural post offices and install more community mailboxes,
options which had been off the table for years. McDonald
accuses the Corporation of living in the eighties and nineties.

Speaker 17 (01:51:24):
This is not our first rodeo, so to speak. You know,
we kind of we kind of see the games that
the corporation plays. But at this point, we need we
need the public. We need municipal officials and everybody to
kind of step in and talk about their public service
and how.

Speaker 3 (01:51:38):
Much they actually actually want it.

Speaker 17 (01:51:40):
Because we're in we're in dire straight to this point
in here in Newfoundland, seeing the MORATORI am on all
of those offices, that's a scary point. I think our
premier needs to get something in writing from Canada Post
that says none of those offices are going to be closed.

Speaker 15 (01:51:55):
Disney Plus is rolling out another pric increase in Canada.
The stream home to the Star Wars and Marvel franchises,
say the monthly cost of its commercial free streaming packages
is set to rized by three dollars in November. The
price for Disney's standard subscription with ad breaks will stay
at its current monthly price. The move comes as many

(01:52:17):
streaming companies try to push viewers to their lucrative ad
supported options, which cost less for subscribers but drive additional
revenue from commercial spots. Up next, I'll have your weather forecast.

Speaker 2 (01:52:31):
The Tim Power Show.

Speaker 1 (01:52:32):
Join the Conversation weekday afternoons at four pm on your VOCM.

Speaker 2 (01:52:37):
Welcome back to the show. Let's go to line number one.
Norm you're on the air.

Speaker 13 (01:52:41):
Oh, hello, good morning, Patty morning. You've got some interesting
characters on.

Speaker 2 (01:52:47):
The show this morning as usual.

Speaker 13 (01:52:49):
I know, yes, I just I wanted to if I may,
I wanted to just talk on two topics. Okay, okay,
So the first one as certainly, after many years of
advocacy and lobbying by whether it's families, individuals with disabilities, parents, associations,

(01:53:09):
all kinds of advocacy from the communities right across the country,
I certainly want to give a big shout out to
both the federal government and the provincial government for you know,
taking a step to move more closer to a guarantee
parent living income for individuals with the disability benefit, both

(01:53:32):
by the Feds and the province for sipiel for way
too long, so many of our people with disabilities and
many others have been living just on the margins with
regards to income support. So these are positive steps, and
I hope it's part of a plan to move forward
to a guarantee living income for all people, because there

(01:53:55):
are still thousands of seniors and many low income people
that are any stressed that stretched when it comes to
the dollars they received to try to live in the
in the ever changing world that we're in. It's that
I just wanted to say that, and I thank you
also to the government's m ajsmps whoever was involved.

Speaker 2 (01:54:18):
Okay, yeah, I mean there has been some improvements in
disability benefits in particular, like in this province, between the
FEDS and the province. You know, the disability benefit is
I mean it's not what it might need to be
for some, but up to four hundred dollars a month
with the new Fland Labador Disability Benefit, Canadian Disability Benefit
offers up to almost six hundred dollars a month. Then

(01:54:40):
there's the creation of the Disability Retirement Savings Plan up
twelve hundred dollars. So I mean, some positive moves on
that front front. We haven't had an honest debate in
this country about universal basic income. You know, there's been
some talk about it in the legislature here about people
age of sixty to sixty four, but everyone just says, well,
we're just going to make a bunch of people lazy. Look,

(01:55:02):
there's a lot of contributing factors to some of the
societal ills, and one of the most contributing, pardon me,
one of the most impactful is poverty. So I think
we just we deserve a better conversation rather than just
say it's great or it's gross, because there's a lot
in between.

Speaker 13 (01:55:16):
Yeah, no, exactly, And as they say, you know, this
is just one small step. In no doubt, I say,
it's a very complex matter involving a range of different issues.
It's certainly it's certainly positive. I know on behalf of
my son Stephen, who has an intellectual disability, and thousands
of others in the province. I mean, you know, prior

(01:55:36):
too long, so many people are just living on on
the age with just minimal, minimal income. And like you say,
the the plans that have been brought in by the province,
by the federal government also back the number of years
ago when Minister Flarerity, the Minister of Finance, brought in
the Registered Disability Plan federally and now the province has

(01:55:57):
brought one in. So these are all these are all
important steps along the way to trying to drive down
poverty into such a resource rich country.

Speaker 2 (01:56:08):
Absolutely absolutely, So that's that part. What else did you
want to talk about?

Speaker 13 (01:56:12):
Yes, I wanted to just a couple of minutes, just
to talk about the MoU and the Upper Churchill certainly
the whole of the Churchill River basin. I mean I've
tried to I've tried to listen and read and talk
to various individuals who have expertise and backgrounds in these areas. Certainly,

(01:56:32):
historically we all know, like our generation, our parents' generation,
others who lived under the umbrella or the cloud with
regards to the deal struck and then continued for over
fifty years on the Upper Churchill, and now we look
at various stemps have been made to change that. But
I just want to make a couple of points. I

(01:56:55):
truly believe that there hasn't been enough information shared. I
truly believe that we should look at an arms lent
expert panel of people who have the knowledge to be
able to review everything and to say is this the
best possible deal? Because I mean, at this present time,
I mean, we're amongst the highest paying consumers of electricity

(01:57:20):
in the country and it appears that when this, if
this gets done, Quebec and Quebec people will have amongst
the lowest rates of electric electrical bills and we will
be still saddled with amongst the hugest and the resources
are in our province. Too often, I feel too many

(01:57:40):
in government almost treat Labrador like a resource rich colony.
I could say a lot more on that, and maybe
at some other point I would come out and talk
on the prospecting side of things and our mineral resources.
But when we look at the Churchill Falls and the
upper Churchill like that power station, the dam and that
facility is the crown jewel of the Churchill River basin.

(01:58:04):
It produces power for negligible cost and certainly verified by
Hydro Quebec and many others that when they look at
all types of forms of energy going forward, Gull Island
and what's on that river basin is the least expensive
expensive project to go with. Right now in Quebec, they

(01:58:28):
are the government and hydrol Quebec are signing deals with
the various aluminum smelters companies for stable, very competitive, low
cost electricity going forward for decades. And it's almost like
I get a sense that they think this is very
well done deal, and where is the industrial strategy for

(01:58:52):
this province to look at that resource of power, low cost,
readily available going forward in partnership with the Aboriginal peoples,
the Inu and so on, to look at economic development
in Labrador and on this island. I mean, that's one
of the big concerns I have. I know there are

(01:59:14):
mining projects, maybe one or two presently in the pipeline
in Western Labrador, but if we just take out the
it's an insult to me as a Newfoundlander and Labrador
and that our Home Power Corporation is basically turning over
the management of a project like Gull Island to Hydro Quebec.

(01:59:34):
We have a lot of top notch engineers, a lot
of top notch trades people, management and so on at
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, and we should be controlling that.
And I think what we really need to do to
address to address the power situation for Western Labrador, if
we just look at upgrading the church Shill Falls Powerhouse,

(01:59:57):
putting in another turbine, that would certainly take care of
the power requirements in Western Labrador. From the mathematics and
homework I've done on it, I think that could be
taken out. Hydro could go to the markets to raise
the money to upgrade Churchill Falls Powerhouse and then build

(02:00:21):
a strategy around it, an industrial and economic strategy. Quebec
has eight or nine smelters of aluminum, ten thousand direct jobs,
thousands of indirect jobs. We don't make an aluminum pot
to boil an eggin you know where? Is like they
talk about all of this money and all these construction jobs,

(02:00:42):
but how many times have we been there on that
when the construction jobs are over? How many jobs are there?
How much secondary or tertiary processing. In Larbrador we have
vast copper, nickel, cobalt resources at Voise's Bay that needs
to be electric tide transmission lines to the coast to

(02:01:02):
the various communities in conjunction with the road that they
talk of working with nunatsiavut In, the Innu peoples in
southern Marbrador, southeastern we have world class rear earths looking
at secondary processing and creating products. I mean, the one
thing that I have great respect for Quebec and its

(02:01:22):
people and its government for is that they don't give
anything away. They squeeze every every opportunity that's economic out
of the resources that they have. But far too often
for ourselves. We sell ourselves short.

Speaker 2 (02:01:39):
I've been talking supply chain and critical minerals on the
show for as long as I can remember, and to
all continue to do so. Norm Before I get to
the break, any final quick thoughts before I have to go, No.

Speaker 13 (02:01:49):
I just support the idea that there should be an
arms Land expert panel. There should be a referendum. There
should be a lot more information shared once this panel
reviews it all. There's should be information sessions, it can
be discussion debates around the province. This is too important
to wrap it up in a twenty odd day election,

(02:02:09):
and the engagement with the Aboriginal people has got to
be front and center, just like they're doing in many
other areas, and bring them in either as equity partners,
whatever they feel that they'd like to be able to
get involved in. This could be so valuable in terms
of industrial and economic development in the province. So I'll
leave it at that, and I appreciate your time and
keep talking about critical minerals because without them, where.

Speaker 2 (02:02:32):
Are we appreciate this? Norm, thank you all the best,
said you too, But Bud, I found a break in
the morning, don't go ahead. Welcome back to the show.
Let's go line number one. Good morning, Kelly, you're on
the air.

Speaker 10 (02:02:43):
His Patty.

Speaker 18 (02:02:44):
I just wanted to call him this morning, very quickly.
I know you've got lots of people that got points
to make and your show is amazing again today. I
just wanted to say, this is that call in to
say thank you for you being the watchdog in our province,
and to say to Michael Wilson, we need more people
like him this issue with the Upper Church of what
the new memorandum of understanding is with Quebec.

Speaker 10 (02:03:05):
I'm really fearful of.

Speaker 18 (02:03:06):
What's happening, and I just think we need more tail meetings.
And when Norm calling in, he hit on every single
one of the points that I would like to make.
I'm not as articulate as articulate as that man is,
but I just want to say we don't have the
information that we need as new for Landers and Laboradorians.

Speaker 10 (02:03:23):
And thank you again, Patty for an amazing job.

Speaker 7 (02:03:25):
You're amazing.

Speaker 2 (02:03:26):
I appreciate that, Kelly. I also appreciate the perspective and
input from any caller on any issue, and certainly when
Michael Wilson really set off a bit of a firestorm
in my email inboxer today, I have to say, and
I appreciate his time, and I mean he's put in
the work. I mean you should see the amount of
documentation he has sent me. It's almost overwhelming. I've made

(02:03:47):
every effort to read every single bit of it.

Speaker 18 (02:03:50):
This whole deal is overwhelming, and we don't understand what's
going on. Our politicians have no clue but what's going
on with but's sign it all up and set off
our resources again. No, we need to protect what we own,
and we need to start by doing town hall meetings.
And why are we rushing this?

Speaker 8 (02:04:05):
Why rush this?

Speaker 10 (02:04:06):
This is just confusing the people.

Speaker 8 (02:04:08):
I want to make one more point.

Speaker 18 (02:04:09):
If Michael Wilson and people like Norm could come up
with Michael has all the statistics on it. These he's
going into the layers and layers of this, right. So
if he could come on your line every day and
take fifteen twenty minutes before this the election's over, and
just try to dig up what we all don't know,
that would be its starter. If he could do that
for us to be amazing. Just give you ten fifteen

(02:04:32):
minutes because we understand, like the gentleman who calling about
the disabilities, that's so important, especially when you have a
childish disabled right, so you know, we really need to
dig into this a little bit more. And I just
thank you again. I don't know what to say. I
just find it overwhelming that this is going through with
like a speedway and there's not enough information on it.

(02:04:54):
And I thank you again and Michael Wilson and people
like Norm for bringing up the points that are so important.

Speaker 2 (02:05:00):
And I'm glad they make time for the program. And
the same to you, Kelly, thank you for calling.

Speaker 10 (02:05:04):
You're welcome.

Speaker 8 (02:05:05):
You have a great day, you too.

Speaker 2 (02:05:06):
All right, bye bye bye bye. All right, So where
am I going here? Dave? As we run out of
time here, put up a few fingers. Three, let's say
good morning to Mike Teller on three. Mike, you're on
the air.

Speaker 9 (02:05:17):
Good morning, Patty. How are you?

Speaker 2 (02:05:19):
That's a bad quick question before we get code. Did
you jump into the provincial election for ay?

Speaker 9 (02:05:23):
No? I didn't. Okay, yeah, I'm taking taking the bow
from all politics for a little while.

Speaker 3 (02:05:28):
Good do you?

Speaker 2 (02:05:29):
What's on your mind's forning?

Speaker 9 (02:05:30):
Patty? I just want to say we've had some issues
with the Aimless Dispatch when it comes to the information
that they relate to the volunteer fire departments.

Speaker 3 (02:05:39):
We get a.

Speaker 9 (02:05:40):
Page on our pages from the aimless Dispatch and they
basically say, we have such and such a call for you.
Please call us back and get the address and more information.
And so that's fine, but there has been delays in
us being able to get hold of them. And one
of the last calls we had it was actually between

(02:06:00):
ten and fifteen minutes and all we were getting was
a busy signal. So we, you know, lucky that we
had some of the local amulets operators numbers. We figured
out exactly what was going on. But in the MCC
the ambless dispatch says tells us that it's their policy
not to release information on our paging system that could
identify a person because of potential privacy breach. But what

(02:06:23):
we tell them is, okay, find you put that out
on our paging system. We call back, get the information,
get the address. But yet we have to put it
out there on that same paging system so that the
rest of the department knows what's going on. So it's
red tape, is bureaucracy, it's a bit of fullishness, if
you ask me, Patty, Because we have to do what
they're saying as a privacy breach in order to get

(02:06:46):
the wheels rolling.

Speaker 2 (02:06:47):
Well, I thought that was the goal of centralizing the system,
is that notifications would be shared instantaneously.

Speaker 9 (02:06:54):
All we get told is that you know, there's a
potential cardiac arress, or that there's an MVC, or that
there's something and then we have to call them back
to get the information. Now nine one to one, when
they called, they'll give us all the information. But when
it comes from the ambulance dispects, we had to call
them back. And that's fine if you can get a
hold of them, but when you're talking about ten or
fifteen minutes, you know that's it's not necessary. It's not

(02:07:20):
the way it should be. And of course at the
end of the day, we're the ones that are getting
the flack because we're late showing up the scenes. But
if you don't know where you're going, it's hard to
get there.

Speaker 2 (02:07:28):
Absolutely. And you know, that's another conversation about civic addresses
in smaller communities, and there's a kit available from the government.
It's easy to get and it's easy to apply, and
I can't believe we haven't done that already. Anything else
while we happy. Mike defre sneak on one more.

Speaker 9 (02:07:42):
Yeah, the Fire Prevention Week is this week and we're
having an open house from nine to eleven, or sorry,
from seven to nine at the fire hall and New
West Valley the Central fire Hall, and we're having a
century friendly half an hour from six thirty to seven,
so everybody come out, meet the firefighter, see the gear,
see the new rescue vote that we purchased, and if

(02:08:02):
you like refreshments and we'll have a fun evening.

Speaker 2 (02:08:04):
Sounds about right. Appreciate the time, Mike, Thank you, sir,
You're welcome. Bye, bye bye. Does Sarah want to come
back on? Sarah if you're still listening, you want to
talk about transitional allowance, which I assume was to the
most recent behind closed doors vote amongst the cabinets who
give themselves an additional severance or what they like to
call a transitional allowance, which is very much soft pedaling

(02:08:26):
the issue, which one of these day you want me
to take. He's working something out here, all right here,
let's check in on the Twitter while Dave is sorting
out the final caller of the morning. We're VCM open line.
You know what they do follow us there. Email addresses
open on a fom dot com and plenty of those
flowing in here this morning. And again, some topics they

(02:08:46):
get a lot of focus, a lot of attention, and
fair enough and rightfully so, whether it be the Upper
Churchill or healthcare, whatever, but I always like to offer
that friendly reminder that, look, whatever you want to talk
about is something that were one hundred percent will in
the talk about here on the program. I think this
is the final word line Umber two BERNICI around the air.

Speaker 11 (02:09:04):
Yes, No, I was just wondering if there's summary you
can go to people can go that don't have direct
deposit to pick up their GST checks.

Speaker 2 (02:09:16):
Here's the advice I'm giving everybody is call your specific
post office directly if there's any staff on site there,
and ask me, if you bring two pieces of ID,
can you collect your GST check. I've heard it work
for some already, So that's the only piece of advice
I have.

Speaker 11 (02:09:33):
Okay, because I heard that there's supposed to be something
posted on social media about going somewhere on Wednesday.

Speaker 2 (02:09:46):
Yeah, there's some talk of that. I haven't heard that
officially confirmed yet, but as soon as I do, I'll
be happy to talk about it on the show because
I've seen a bunch of different ideas floated here. I
like there were suggestions that some Canada Post employees would
be back on the job like they did with the
mail in ballots send out GST checks. I've heard that
there's going to be a central location for a pickup,
but I can't get it. I can't see any confirmation yet,
but I'm looking.

Speaker 11 (02:10:07):
Okay, so if you find out something, would you be
able to give me a call back?

Speaker 2 (02:10:12):
No, you're gonna have to listen to the show every
single second of a pernice and I'll talk about it
on the air.

Speaker 11 (02:10:17):
Okay, then thank you, Oh you're welcome.

Speaker 2 (02:10:19):
All right, bye bye bye. Yeah, those things get complicated now.
It's not my position to ask why doesn't someone have
direct deposit. I don't know. This might be a variety
of reasons why people choose to not have it, but yeah,
the best bet hairs at Canada Posts. I think the
owner should be on Canada Post and the government itself
to give folks the information directly because for people who

(02:10:40):
qualify for a GST, many of them would really need
the GST check. All right, good show today, Big thanks
to all hands and yes we will indeed pick up
this conversation again tomor morning right here on VOCM and
big Land FM's Open Line on behalf of the producer
David Williams. I'm your host, Patty Daily. Have yourself a safe, fun,
happy day. We'll talk in the morning. Bye bye,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

.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 Oct 7th

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;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Tuesday Oct 7th

On Purpose with Jay Shetty