Feltham Rambles

After ABC comes D, as in divorce
Letter to the Editor - The Telegram, St. John's, NL

The consequences of our actions are what we all have to think through. The ABC policy, with which we are all now familiar, is a payback-time policy and will have long-term consequences for Newfoundland and Labrador, and for Canada.

I have great sympathy for it. Still, we have to consider the fallout if Stephen Harper wins a majority. He may gloat and think our premier will glower in defeat. It is more probable that our very courageous and astute premier, in a showdown corner, will call for a Quebec-style separation referendum. Many, many Newfoundlanders and Labrador-ians will support him.

Everyone should know, this is a national crisis. The unity of Canada is in grave danger. Clearly, Harper did not think through the consequences of his promises not kept. He is clearly adolescent. It's very negative for this province, and dangerous for Canada.

However, the ABC policy has many inevitable consequences that have not been thought through. This is a dangerous time for the province and the nation. Every vote should be carefully weighted. After ABC comes D, as in divorce.

Is that what Canada wants? Is that what Newfoundland and Labrador wants?

Brendan Foley
Portugal Cove-St. Philip's

Harper says Confederation brought N.L. into Canada - in 1867
14 hours ago

CUPIDS, N.L. — Prime Minister Stephen Harper says it was like a reunion when Newfoundland and Labrador became part of Canada - nearly a century before the province actually did.

During a funding announcement Thursday in Cupids, N.L., Harper told a crowd of about 100 that Canada became whole when the province joined the country 59 years ago.

Moments later, he said: "So when Newfoundland finally joined together with us in Confederation in 1867, we all say it was like a family reunion."

Newfoundland did not join Canada until 1949 after a very close referendum.

Some people in the province still debate the merits of Confederation, and whether Newfoundland has lost its economic independence after joining the country.

http://www.theindependent.ca/article.asp?AID=1626&ATID=2

By Ryan Cleary (St. John's)
The Independent
Friday, January 18, 2008

Now is as good a time as any to talk about the health of Canadian federalism, what with Steve and Danny beating the crap out of it.

If the two leaders were a married couple, they’d have each other killed or under a restraining order. That, or they’d be in divorce court; at the very least in counselling.

One year away from our diamond anniversary (60 years with a wedding knot wrapped around our neck), Newfoundland and Labrador and the Government of Canada can’t stay in the same room together for five minutes without flinging dishes and spitting insults. Our poor kids, what must they think of us at all?

Hard to believe the relationship has come to this when Canada has been so good to us.

Maybe we’re just ungrateful.

That’s not to say that federalism can’t work. It might work better if, say, our partner was the United States of America. A provincial minister of Fisheries once told me, off the record mind you, that there would be no trouble with foreign overfishing on the Grand Banks if we were the 51st state. All the good ol’ U.S. of A. would have to do to stop the rape of fish stocks (when we had more than a few half-starved guppies and stunted minnows) is park an aircraft carrier or two on the 200-mile limit and watch the fish pirates scurry back to their watery holes.

Truth be told, we don’t seem to care much about the fish ourselves. To answer John Crosbie’s long ago question — Who hears the fishes cry? — no one, that’s who.

Fisheries aside, there would be no problem with carting Labrador electricity across Quebec either if we hooked up with our southern neighbour. America could care less about appeasing La Belle Province. The Yanks would simply drop a cable down the Gulf of St. Lawrence — cost be damned — and tell Quebec to kiss its American arse, which, if my geography serves me correctly, would be the province of Ontario.

But then Ottawa doesn’t have the muscle mass of the Americans, or the desire to flex what little it does have for the sake of Newfoundland and Labrador. It was only this week that Danny broke his silence, revealing what he says the PM told him in late November: “‘I don’t need Newfoundland and Labrador at this point to win a future election.’”

That kind of statement was almost (but not quite) as stunned as Loyola Hearn comparing Ottawa to Santa, telling Danny he may get what he wants if he’s a good little b’y. “If you haven’t been a good boy, then it depends.”

Loyola strikes me as a half-wit elf, bumbling off just the kind of nonsensical statements to get Danny moving. He should have no trouble landing work as a motivational speaker when he exits politics.

To be fair, Steve denied making the remark, although he really doesn’t need us, not when we only have seven of 308 seats in Parliament.

The story of our Confederation life.

For Steve to actually say those words is another story. It’s almost as if Williams is the federalist and Harper is the anti-federalist.

It’s Williams who’s appealing to the Canadian federation, informing them of our particular plight, showing them how we can pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and actually strengthen the union.

It’s Steve who’s scorning the federation.

He could care less. He doesn’t appear interested in strengthening Canada so much as tightening the Conservative grip on power by catering to the provinces with the most votes. Promises be damned.

Clearly, from our East Coast perspective there’s a problem with Canadian federalism.

It’s not working for Newfoundland and Labrador. Not in terms of the fishery, or Labrador hydro, or federal jobs, or offshore oil, etc. When a federal promise is made, it’s never kept — not unless it benefits central Canada.

Danny constantly has his back to the wall when it comes to the federal government. That’s seen in some quarters as a strategy to keep the Tories high in the polls (we do so dearly love our fighting Newfoundlanders), but there’s more to it than that. The bitching never ends because there’s an endless list of grievances to bitch about. The question readers should ask themselves is if Williams’ passionate federalism doesn’t work now in trying to make the feds live up to black-and-white promises, cut and dry issues, when will it work?

The ABC (Anyone But Conservative) campaign is back on with the prime minister’s decision this week to basically tell Danny to screw off with the offshore horse he rode in on. If you think our place in Canada is bad now, wait until if and when the Conservatives are re-elected.

Is Canadian federalism working? My answer is no, not for us. The next question is whether the rest of Canada cares enough to make it work.

And if not federalism, then what?

ryan.cleary@theindependent.ca

"That term is unknown to us, certainly in Canada, and I can tell you that I've spoken to law enforcement people in the U.S. and they've never heard of it either so it would appear that it's a term that somebody came up with in a boardroom in Washington, D.C."