Monday, December 24, 2007

A Holiday Greeting

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Rob Moir and the Fundy Royal NDP would like to wish you all a very safe and happy holiday season.

May you value this important time with friends and family. We wish each and all a very Merry Christmas and look forward to a very prosperous and progressive 2008!

Saturday, December 8, 2007

Petitcodiac River Survey

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Hi one and all;

Please drop us a note if you have been called by Thinkwell Research for a survey regarding the proposed restoration of the Peticodiac River. We'd like to know what sort of questions they were asking and who hired them for this research.

Saturday, December 1, 2007

Mark Twain on War

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

For the first time in a very long while, Canada finds itself embroiled in war while celebrating Christmas. Mark Twain, a famous American writer wrote a very moving piece on the subject of war, called "The War Prayer." It was also made into an animated short (warning ... not necessarily for children). It certainly makes you think about what we ask for.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Another Demo

Hi all. These last few days have been busy what with the Throne Speech coming out. I find it amusing that "throne" is a euphamism for "toilet" but maybe that's just a lack of sleep.

Please consider attending the following event - I can't go as I am teaching classes.

From: Anne Robichaud [NBFL/FTTNB] []
Sent: November 28, 2007 9:56 AM
To: Anne Robichaud
Subject: Demonstration

Sisters and Brothers;

I am sending this message on behalf of CEP Local 689 of UPM in Miramichi.

They are organizing a demonstration in front of the Legislature this Friday at 10 a.m. They want the Department of Natural Resources to make a commitment to keep the harvested wood in the province.

They are asking for your support. Please join them this Friday [30 Nov.]and please pass on this message to your members.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Self-Sufficiency and the Status Quo

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

I sent this to the Telegraph Journal but thay haven't published it yet. Given today is the day for Graham's Throne speech, and his government's attitude toward UNBSJ, I thought I'd get it off my chest.

*Note: an edited version of this letter has since been published in the Tuesday, December 4th, edition of the Telegraph Journal, page A4.

I understand that the PSE Commission’s Report is just a report, and that while it has been received by the government, that does not mean that it has become government policy.

That said, please forgive me for being less-than-enthusiastic when Minister Doherty ‘appreciates’ all our hard work to defend the rights of southern New Brunswickers to have access to a university education, and even graces us with his assurance that there will remain a “university presence” in Saint John. (I can name my cat, “Dog” and invite you to my house to see a Dog, but it will still be a cat nonetheless.)

I am perplexed however at the continuous battle cry that “the status quo is not an option.” Apparently it is obvious to many that we can’t do things the same way.

Here’s what we were doing at UNBSJ, at least until this over-priced and ill-conceived report came in.

We were giving students an excellent education that was leading many of them to successful employment in a shifting economy. We were leading the charge on internationalizing our campus, thereby contributing to immigration and global diversity in southern New Brunswick. We were actively engaged in research that was useful to industry, the government, non-governmental organizations, and to academics. We, both faculty and students, were participating in community events, sharing our skills and interests throughout the region. We were leading the charge for transfer credits across similar institutions (both national and international) and between institutions of different types (e.g., combined university and college programs). We were efficient, because this was all done on a shoestring budget.

If my understanding of the self-sufficiency agenda is correct, isn’t what we were doing exactly what we should be doing? Perhaps what the government should realize is that UNBSJ’s status quo is exactly the option we want.

Monday, November 26, 2007

Fundy Royal NDP congratulates distinguished MP's

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

The Fundy Royal NDP Riding Association would like to acknowledge the accomplishments of Bill Blaikie, the soon-to-be retiring NDP MP from Elmwood-Transcona (Manitoba). Mr. Blaikie has been voted by members in the house as the "Best Parliamentarian" for the second year in a row in an annual MacLean's Magazine survey. In addition to this, Mr. Joe Comartin, NDP MP for Windsor—Tecumseh has been acknowledged as the "Most Knowledgeable" Member of Parliament, Mr. Charlie Angus, NDP MP for Timmins—James Bay was deemed to be the "Most Helpful", and Mr. Peter Stoffer, NDP MP for Sackville-Eastern Shore was selected as "Most Collegial". Mr. Comartin is in fact featured a few posts down in this blog, in a YouTube video from CBC's Politics With Don Newman, addressing the issue of youth crime against our own MP, Rob Moore (CPC), and we invite you to watch this video.

The fact that four of the six awards went to NDP MP's shows the commitment that our party representatives have in doing the job that we, the citizens, have sent them to perform. It is even more remarkable that the NDP received such praise from the 151 respondents, when there are currently 30 NDP MP's in the 308 Member House. This demonstrates the level of respect that the NDP has earned from its colleagues in other parties.

The members of the Fundy Royal Riding Association fully believe that Fundy Royal deserves representation worthy of its people. As Mr. Blaikie rightly states in the MacLean's interview, "They don't elect you so you can be in every event in the riding. They elect you to go to Parliament. This is where you punch in."

It is about time that Fundy Royal got its 'punch in' in Ottawa, as our voices are not being heard under the current Conservative government. We are confident that Rob Moir will follow in the examples provided by Mr. Blaikie, Mr. Comartin, Mr. Angus, and Mr. Stoffer when he is elected as the NDP MP in Fundy Royal.

Fundy Royal NDP Executive

Ask Questions

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

The following is an e-mail I recently sent out, asking about the federal government's decision to only do a limited Environmental Assessment of the proposed refinery. Given wind patterns, much of Fundy Royal will be subject to emissions. Even the City of Moncton has come out against this project. Mr. Coulter and Mr. Jeffrey both work in Environment Canada - Atlantic Branch.

Dear Mr. Coulter and Mr. Jeffrey;

Recently Federal Environment Minister, John Baird, decided that only the marine portion of the proposed oil refinery in Saint John, NB (aka "Project Eider Rock") would be subject to a Federal Review.

A number of people have asked for a Full Federal Panel Review of the entire operations of the proposed refinery. A A US House of Representatives Report on oil refineries identifies toxic air emissions of benzene, xylenes, methyl ethyl ketone, toluene, ethylbenzene, 2,2,4-trimethylpentane, hexane, cresols, MTBE, napthalene, and phenol, many of which are listed by Environment Canada on PSL1 and on PSL2. Likewise, particulate matter (PM) is emitted from oil refineries and makes PSL2. Of course, there are also VOCs, SOx, NOx, and greenhouse gases all of which are of significant environmental concern because of both ecosystem and human health effects.

I visted the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency's website and read through the document "How to Determine if the Act Applies" . Perhaps it is my lack of familiarity with the legislation, but I fail to see how Minister Baird could decide to call for anything less than a Review Panel.

Can either of you explain to me the reasoning that was used, when Minister Baird decided to limit the Federal government's involvement? Has he outlined his case, or is this the sort of decision left to the Minister's discretion?

I thank you in advance for your prompt reply.

Rob Moir

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Dark Day for Canada

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

I'm finding it hard to find hope these days.

Mr. Harper went to the Commonwealth meetings and yet again ignored the importance of climate change, obviously choosing to remain a relative of the 'Albertosaurus'. His representative in Fundy Royal, MP Rob Moore, seems to be lock-step with his leader as he squirms to find ways to avoid funding the restoration of the Petitcodiac. Likewise, John Baird (Minister of the Environment) has followed Mr. Harper's orders and rejected all calls for a Full Federal Panel Review of the impacts of the first new oil refinery in North America in 25 years ; see the Harvard Medical School's report to find out the full range of cancers caused by oil refineries, and recall that the prevailing winds will bring emissions across Fundy Royal.

The recent IPCC report clearly indicates scientific consensus over climate change and global warming. It's not the environmentalists, nor the NDP, nor the Liberals, nor Mr. Harper that form this reality ... no matter who [de]cries the case publicly.

Mr. Harper's only support in the anti-global warming cause is George W. Bush, now that Australian voters have seen the (compact flourescent) light and elected Labour leader Kevin Rudd as their new Prime Minister .

I'm teaching an Environmental Economics class this term, which I really enjoy. My students and I, however, have become jointly depressed over the possibilities of Canada to find a solution to our pollution woes. In my opinion, we should declare waste (or waste disposal services) to be a tradeable good, as this would require us to acknowledge the leakage of air pollution across provincial and international boundaries as a matter of federal concern and thus federal jurisdiction. At the same time, we HAVE to increase the public demand for a cleaner environment.

Without a change in the political regime, without a change in the fundamental realities underlying economics, I believe our future (not to mention the futures of our children and grandchildren) looks pretty bleak.

Do I think there's time? Yes! There's time to change your vote and there's time to change your footprint.

Please get started now!

Friday, November 23, 2007

Moore Blocks River Restoration

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

This appeared in the Moncton Times & Transcript (23 November 2007, D10)

I was excited to hear that the province has finally decided to go ahead and start work on restoring the Petitcodiac River to some of its former glory.

Sadly, it is the federal government that seems to want to hold up funding. As a resident in Fundy Royal, I was particularly dismayed to hear on CBC that MP Rob Moore may be part of the problem. Apparently his office is too busy to deal with the issue right now, according to the CBC report.

Mr. Moore was elected to represent all of the riding. The majority of the people in the area have spoken quite clearly on this issue and state that they want a restoration project to begin as soon as possible. The province has backed the issue.

It seems that Rob Moore is the only politician who has not come onside. Then again, Rob Moore is Mr. Harper's representative in Fundy Royal (and I always thought he was Fundy Royal's representative in Ottawa).

I guess that since Mr. Harper fails to find the environment a pressing issue in Canada, it is no surprise that Rob Moore sings the same tune in New Brunswick.

Rob Moir
Clifton Royal

Thursday, November 22, 2007

A Letter Exchange

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

The following 3 letters appeared in the Telegraph Journal. They highlight an important and fundamental difference in opinion regarding taxes. I see the taxes I pay as money the government can invest in Canada and Canadians. Others see taxes as just spending. What's your opinion?

Tax cuts will cause programs to suffer (TJ, 2 Nov.)

I teach economics at UNBSJ. In my courses, I use a smattering of Latin, including the phrase ceteris paribus - all other things being equal. Mr. Harper's tax-break treat is good for Canadians, ceteris paribus.

My problem is that all other things are not equal - the trick follows the treat. When Mr. Harper's government could still be called "new" they made significant tax cuts.

Months later we saw the "benefits" accruing from tax cuts: under-funded day care, dangerous overpasses, decreased funding for literacy (especially important in New Brunswick if we care about self-sufficiency), decreased funding for women's groups, decreased funding for environmental groups, a student summer work program in virtual collapse, nothing but political spin on issues of climate change, and a new equalization package that will cost New Brunswickers $1.1 billion, according to the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council.

I am in complete agreement with letter-writer David Beaudin (Telegraph-Journal, Nov. 1). We don't necessarily need tax cuts. What we need is a government that takes our taxes, treats them as an investment in our country, and then makes wise investment decisions that benefit all Canadians.

Clifton Royal

Tax cuts are the way to go (TJ, 6 Nov.)

I cannot allow Rob Moir's letter of Nov. 2 to go unchallenged.

He advocates against tax cuts on the idea that - (and I paraphrase) - 'government should take our taxes and make wise decisions that benefit all Canadians.' That is just another way of pushing the old socialist propaganda that government knows best how to spend taxpayers' hard earned money.

The fact is, whatever the government, the more money they have, the more they waste. If my money is to be wasted then I would like to do it myself.

Of course tax cuts are the way to go. Surpluses just mean that taxes are too high.

Thank goodness, after decades of tax and spend, we at last have a government that is prepared to return the money where it belongs, back to the taxpayer, with large amounts being used to reduce the debt that previous governments burdened us with.

As for the 'cuts' he mentions: in many cases more money is actually being spent on many of the causes, it is just not being spent on unnecessary offices and activists but on the real people in need. How overpasses suddenly became dangerous because of a tax cut I cannot imagine. Climate change? Well, the previous government signed Kyoto and then did absolutely nothing to follow through. Is that a better solution?

Saint John

Be wary of what follows tax cuts (15 Nov.)

I feel I should respond to Mr. Stone's letter (Nov. 6) as I believe he misread the intent of my piece.

I am not against tax cuts per se, and he may note that I actually suggest tax cuts in a Commentary article (Oct. 26). Nevertheless, we should be wary of what typically follows tax cuts.

Tax cuts combined with decreased investment in programs and infrastructure also lead to large surpluses.

Large surpluses on their own are not necessarily indicative of over taxation - they may represent under investment.

I do not rely on my own opinion as a source for this policy advice. The "Father of Capitalism," Adam Smith, recognized the need for a "sovereign" or government to co-ordinate investment in public projects for which the returns to an individual are too small, but the returns to society are large enough to warrant investment. Our transportation network is one such investment; investment in literacy, which promotes future business location in New Brunswick, is another.

My point isn't that we need to increase, decrease, or even maintain taxes, but rather we should be careful what such tax cuts lead to.

Ultimately we should demand that our government wisely invest our taxes to the betterment of our country. If the government cannot find wise investment opportunities, then it should rightfully return the money to Canadians.

Clifton Royal

Youth Crime

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

This Letter appeared in yesterday's Telegraph Journal. Mr. Moore's silence on the tragic death of Ashley Smith - a young NB woman who needed help, not incarceration - is distressing. Then, on Monday (Nov. 19), Mr. Moore was called-out by Don Newman on CBC Newsworld's "Politics". You can watch this video below.

If Mr. Harper's new youth crime bill is meant to "deter and denounce." Don Newman asks, who does the denouncing? Maybe one day we'll need to create an overpaid position for the "official denunciator" who will undoubtedly need a large office to prepare numerous denunciations.

Uncivilized to put youth behind bars

Rob Linke's article "Teen denied legal help" (Nov. 15) states that the testimony provided in the Ashley Smith case "elicited little comment" from Fundy Royal Conservative MP Rob Moore.

It seems that Moore is now willing to talk, and he did so on Monday night's edition of Politics with Don Newman on CBC. In speaking about potential Conservative amendments to the Youth Criminal Justice Act, Moore lauded the benefits of "deterrence and denunciation" in the sentencing of youth criminals.

The essence of his beliefs were very clear: he believes that youth belong behind bars to "pay" for their crimes.

I would suggest that Moore tell the family of Ashley Smith about the "benefits" of excessive sentences for youth criminals, and respond to the proven negative impacts that incarceration has on troubled and developing young minds.

It is frightening that our federal representative can be so out of touch with the values of Canadians that he can support such draconian policy changes to a system that is supposedly designed to protect and rehabilitate our most vulnerable youth.

The Conservative position supported by Rob Moore is a shameful assault on the very foundations of what makes Canada a so-called "civilized" country.


Golden Grove

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Meeting the Provincial Leader

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Today was a bit of a family day. Megan, Sam, Gwyneth and I welcomed Santa to town in Saint John. Generally things were quite joyous. I noticed that people were oddly quiet as the Irving Oil float went by. I was a bit put off when a church Christmas float went by with the message, "Support Our Troops." It just seems out of place when we are celebrating a birthday for the Prince of Peace.

Later I went to a meet & greet for the recently elected leader for the NB NDP - Roger Dugay ( A fair number of people were there. What struck me most was the age range - from highschool students to, shall we say, LONG time supporters. It was great to see the conversations that got started and the strategies developed. There's a real hunger out there for a party that represents PEOPLE and COMMUNITY. We're contemplating doing a leader's tour in Fundy Royal. Let me know your thoughts on this.

Now it's time to answer e-mails and hit the sack because I have to be up early to turn on the heat and clean up the church for a function tomorrow.

More on Afghanistan

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Today we were told of the deaths of two more Canadian soldiers and their interpreter in Afghanistan. Three other Canadian soldiers were injured. Please spare a few moments to think of their sacrifice and the sacrifice of their families. Think of the sacrifice made by all the people - civilian and combatants - involved in this war. If you pray, please pray for a peaceful end to this conflict soon.

See link to CBC article here

Photo from CBC
(Jacques Boissinot/Canadian Press)

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Thinking about Afghanistan

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

I sent this in as a reply to a commentary on CBC. I don't believe they read it on air.

Let me preface my reply with the comment that I deeply respect the men and women who, at the request of their government and by proxy their country, are serving in Afghanistan.

That said, I question our government’s justification for the mission.

First, the government justifies the mission using the words spoken by Afghan President Hamid Karzai on his visit to Canada. Access to Information has undeniably shown that President Karai’s speech was drafted by the Department of National Defence. While President Karzai said the words, the Department of National Defence put them in his mouth.

Second, the government regularly tells us of the horrid living conditions in Afghanistan. I do not doubt that this is the case; in fact, it is part of the reason I am working with a group to sponsor a family of Afghan refugees. Still, I question the altruism our government is trying to display when they justify the mission in this manner.

Within Canada, First Nations people live in Third World conditions on reserves. There’s a lack of access to clean drinking water, severely substandard housing, limited access to healthcare, chronic unemployment, limited educational opportunities, and extremely high suicide rates especially among young people. This is clear evidence of severe and systemic poverty.

If the motives for the mission were really altruistic, then surely the government of Canada would send our provincial reconstruction teams to the reserves to help out. Surely the Canadian government would be willing to spend something close to the $7.2 billion that we have already devoted to the military mission in Afghanistan. Even if Canada spent the $3.3 billion of the estimated incremental military cost of the Afghan mission, we would at least start addressing this problem occurring within our own country. In contrast, meeting the Kelowna Accord commitments would have cost about $5 billion and our Federal budget surplus this year will be close to $10 billion.

Unfortunately our government fails to see the hypocrisy in their message. When First Nations people rise up in protest, our government fights back rather than engage in meaningful discussion. We would not accept an occupying force entering Canada to deal with this injustice but our government argues that this is specifically what we must do in Afghanistan in the name of justice.

I, for one, cannot reconcile our position in Afghanistan as being purely altruistic as my government keeps trying to tell me. What then are the real reasons we are in Afghanistan?

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Opinion Piece

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Hi all;

This appeared in the Telegraph Journal on 26 October. 2007 (page A7). You can sign-up now at to get a free account which offers you electronic access and searching capabilities fo the Telegraph Journal, Daily Gleaner, and Times & Transcript.

Of taxes and tax cuts

Rob Moir Commentary
Published Friday October 26th, 2007
Appeared on page A7

It's interesting that Premier Graham's self-sufficiency vision requires so much "from-away" expert help to implement. The Post-Secondary Education report is one example (dare I say, fiasco). Now we hear that the Minister of Finance has turned to economists from outside the province to give advice on tax cutting. While we should welcome their expertise, sometimes you have to live here to "get it."

Our outside experts suggest we reduce the provincial corporate tax rate, currently set at 13 per cent, on our largest corporations. The experts argue that cutting the rate will attract corporations and contribute to economic growth.

What's missing in this picture? It is not just the tax rate that matters to our story; we must also consider our tax rate relative to other provinces.

At 13 per cent, New Brunswick is firmly in the middle of the pack across Canada. While we have a higher corporate tax rate than B.C., Alberta, Quebec, and a few of the territories, our rate is the lowest in the Maritimes and lower than Manitoba and Ontario.

Obviously low corporate tax rates are not the only determining factor in real economic growth. If it were, we should have a stronger economy than Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Manitoba. Moreover, suppose we cut our tax rate to attract business. Other provinces can do the same, and in the race to the bottom we lose tax revenues and important services best delivered by a government.

In order to win in this economy, we must effect real changes in the New Brunswick business climate.

First, we must invest in all levels of education throughout the province. To attract businesses, we need to have a literate population with skills that businesses want, a group of burgeoning entrepreneurs eager to look for new opportunities, and a cultural environment that respects tradition while laying the groundwork for us to explore the future.

Second, we must find ways to enhance competition throughout the province. There is no escaping the fact that our energy, forestry, transportation, manufacturing, and media industries are dominated by a few key players. Setting questions of the tax rate aside, a new business wants to know that it can expand if it sees opportunity.

Third, we should actively seek (perhaps even using short-term tax incentives) value-added businesses. Value-added businesses require labour. As a rule, workers either bring their families or start families if they feel their job is secure. As the population grows, we attract new business to service the growing population. This is the essence of the multiplier effect.

Finally, in my discussions with a number of small to medium businesses, one point has been made crystal clear. This province suffers from an excess of bureaucratic involvement.
I'm not saying all regulations are bad, but some regulations may need to be re-examined and perhaps eliminated. Strike a commission to identify the red tape, cut through it, and you directly reduce the cost of doing business in New Brunswick.

At the same time, the government must focus on closing corporate tax loopholes and the practise of giving large tax breaks to established corporations. This ensures that all corporations are paying their fair share. Moreover, it increases government revenues, permitting the government to invest in services which directly improve the quality of life in New Brunswick and attracts people and businesses to our province.

If the Minister of Finance is eager to embrace tax cuts right now - and given the surplus we most recently enjoyed, now might be a good time for tax cuts - the strongest argument can be made for a cut to the income tax rate on the lowest income bracket. Such a broad-based income tax cut would give more money to all New Brunswickers to spend as they choose. The Minister might also consider undoing the increase on corporate tax rates for small- to medium-sized businesses that was part of last-year's budget.

Putting more money into everyone's pockets and investing in businesses that are a proving ground for our up-and-coming entrepreneurs is a viable strategic goal for our self-sufficiency agenda.

Rob Moir is an economics professor at UNBSJ. In 2005-06, he ran as an NDP candidate in the federal riding of Fundy Royal. He lives on the Kingston Peninsula with his wife, Megan, and their two children, Sam and Gwyneth.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

A Letter to the Editor that Went Unpublished

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Sins of Omission

The Telegraph Journal has provided rather balanced coverage of public information sessions on the natural gas pipeline connecting the future LNG terminal in Saint John to the U.S. market. Opinions are indeed mixed as people weigh the benefits of increased employment and easement payments against the costs of lives disrupted and the potential for property devaluation.

That said I am very disheartened by a recent editorial decision by staff at the Telegraph Journal.

On 10 September 2007, oil and natural gas pipelines in Veracruz, Mexico were sabotaged. The resulting fires led to the evacuation of 12,000 people and two deaths due to heart attacks.

CBC, CTV and Global covered the story. Despite the sombre mood of the September 11 anniversary, both the Times & Transcript and the Daily Gleaner each provided significant coverage with photos. So too did the Globe and Mail, the National Post, the Halifax Chronicle Herald, the Toronto Star, the Hamilton Spectator, and I am sure most other newspapers across Canada.

The Telegraph Journal however, failed to devote even a few lines to the incident in the World Journal sidebar. I checked the paper on both September 11 and 12 and searched the newspaper website.

Why is it that the provincial newspaper, distributed in the very area where a high-pressure natural gas pipeline is routed and where a second oil refinery may be constructed, failed to cover such an important story? Do people know that the quantitative risk assessment of a pipeline through the City of Saint John, which was provided by Emera Brunswick Pipeline Limited and presented to the National Energy Board, failed to explicitly include terrorism and acts of sabotage in its calculations?

Sometimes the real story is contained in the stories we fail to tell.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Graham is a Report Freak

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Hi all;

The links below take you to my comments upon some of the many reports commissioned by his government.


Post-Secondary Education


A Quick Accounting

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Hi all;

It's been a while since I have posted. Not that I haven't been interested, but I went away in June and returned to get a new knee. I spent the summer recovering and trying to deal with the billions of reports Shawn Graham's government has thrown at us. Most recently, I've been fighting to keep UNBSJ alive. To be honest, it has been quite fun but a little wearing.

Some recent highlights:

1) I gave a panel presentation on the New Brunswick Economy to the Progressive Economics Forum at the Canadian Economics Association meetings in Halifax.

2) I was a keynote speaker at the New Brunswick Environmental Networks Annual meeting in Saint John. E-mail me at if you want my speaking notes.

3) I gave a panel presentation on the Economic Value of a Community University at a Public Forum held at Germain Street United Baptist Church, Saint John.

4) I got to introduce Jack Layton at the NB NDP Biennial Convention where we elected our new provincial leader, Roger Duguay.

5) I organized a Jack Layton passage to be read at the "Save UNBSJ Rally" held Oct. 13.

6) I wrote an emergency resolution calling upon the NB government to reject the Post-secondary Education Report in its entirety and instead invest in a strong student-focused public post-secondary education system consisting of both universities and colleges. The emergency resolution passed unanimously.

7) I just joined a group in Saint John that is working towards building stronger more progressive governments at the municipal level.

8) Just today, I was interviewed by CBC TV for national coverage of the Irving newspaper scandal (

We're working hard to bring a strong progressive view to Fundy Royal and New Brunswick. We need your help however. What issues interest you? How can we help? How can you help us? Let us know.


Thursday, May 31, 2007

Letter to Mr. Baird

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

** While the Refinery isn't in our riding, the environmental effects will be felt in our riding and around the globe. It is important that New Brunswickers take on a leadership role!

31 May 2007

To: The Hon. John Baird, Minister of the Environment
RE: Proposed new oil refinery in Saint John, NB (Project Eider Rock)

Dear Sir;

I am writing to express my concern regarding your decision to limit the federal government’s role in the Environmental Impact Assessment of the refinery Irving Oil proposes to construct in Saint John, New Brunswick. I am a resident in the outskirts of Saint John and I work in the city.

The Environment Ministry has decided to limit the scope of its involvement to a Full Federal Panel Review of the marine operations of the proposed refinery. While this is important and welcome news because of the risk increased shipping will have on the endangered right whale, it leaves out the environmental and health effects that will be felt by humans.

Local greenhouse gas emissions will increase tremendously with the operation of a second refinery. Estimates suggest that the existing refinery’s annual emissions are equivalent to putting 357,000 additional cars on the road. Given the increasing scientific evidence that anthropogenic-source greenhouse gas emissions are linked to climate change, it seems only prudent that the Federal Environment Ministry request the most stringent analysis of this proposal.

Oil refineries can severely impact human health. A 2002 Harvard Medical School report, Oil: A Life Cycle Analysis of its Health and Environmental Impacts (, lists a number of health concerns associated with oil refining. This list includes cancers of the lip, stomach, liver, pancreas, connective tissue, prostate, eye, brain, bone, lung and kidney, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, unspecified neoplasms, and leukemia in children (p. 28). Asthma and other respiratory ailments are of concern too. A Full Federal Panel Review of the entire operations of the proposed refinery is the only way to ensure that research in the public interest is conducted and presented in an open and public forum.

In conclusion, I ask that you revisit your decision to limit the federal government’s role in the assessment of the proposed new refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick. I strongly urge you to institute a Full Federal Panel Review of the entire proposed refinery’s operations.


Rob Moir (Associate Professor of Economics)

CC: The Right Hon. Stephen Harper, The Hon. Stéphan Dion, The Hon. Jack Layton, Mr. David McGuinty, Mr. Nathan Cullen, Mr. Rob Moore, Mr. Paul Zed

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Stephan Dion on CBC's "The Current"

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Liberal Leader, Stephan Dion was on the Current on May 10. After hearing him talk for a while, I sent in this comment.

Liberal Leader of the Opposition, Stephan Dion stated that climate change is still a relatively new phenomenon. I think it is important to note that back in 1983, NDP MP Simon de Jong questioned then-Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, the Hon. Jean Chrétien on green house gas emissions. In my opinion, the Liberals have had a long time to deal with climate change and GHG emissions. Climate change is not a new phenomenon; what's new is the Liberal Party's sudden dedication to the issue.

Saturday, April 28, 2007

A Very Busy Time

These are very busy times for me (Rob). Just a quick update on a few items and events.

1) Today (April 28) is the National Day of Mourning for Workers Killed or Injured on the Job. A ceremony will take place at the ILA Monument at the foot of King Street in Saint John - 11AM.
2) On May 1, a private members bill will be read in the NB Legislature requesting permission to grant an easement for a natural gas pipeline through Rockwood Park. People who do not want to see further legislated "breaks" for the Irvings need to submit a letter stating that they are against the private members bill to the Clerk of the Legislature (Ms. Loredana Catalli Sonier - by 12 noon on April 30.
3) On May 1, Peter Corbyn ( is presenting a live version of "An Inconvenient Truth" at the Hammond River Angling Association headquarters - 7pm. It would really help to have a strong NDP presence.
4) On April 27, Federal Environment Minister, John Baird, publicly endorsed the 2nd Oil Refinery in Saint John - CBC's "The Current". While he is entitled to his opinion, he potentially is the judge of any environmental impact assessment and necessarily should remain neutral. Those who wish to voice their complaint should drop him a line at 613-996-0984.
5) On May 5, comments regarding the NB government's draft guidelines for an environmental impact assessment of the 2nd Oil refinery are due ( - gov't draft; - Irving Oil's take; - Harvard Medical School's summary of the Oil Industry).

Good luck.

NDP Supporting the Conservatives?

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Many people have suggested that Jack Layton and the NDP supported Stephen Harper's party when we voted against a Liberal motion to recall the troops from Afghanistan at the end of the mission in February 2009.

Before I try to explain this odd event, let me clearly state that the NDP supports our soldiers but not the mission.

1) The NDP did not support Stephen Harper's party - we voted against the Liberal motion. We want withdrawal to begin immediately. The NDP did not support extending the mission to February 2009 in the first place (neither did Stephan Dion by the way).
2) The NDP has been consistent in its criticism of the Afghanistan mission.
3) As far as I understand, the Liberal motion was not a confidence motion. As such, even if it had passed, Stephen Harper and company could have ignored it just like they are ignoring Kyoto targets.
4) Now just suppose it had been a confidence motion and the 'newish' minority government lost the confidence of the House. A new election would have taken place and we could have seen the Liberals back in power. However, now the NDP would have supported the mission end-date of February 2009 and it would be hard to call for an earlier withdrawal.
5) In reality, on April 26, Jack Layton and the NDP tabled a motion to call for withdrawal to begin immediately.

For more on the War in Afghanistan and the NDP, please visit:

Before I let you go, I have one final point your may want to consider. We have been told that Canadians fight for peace ... we fight to build peaceful societies and we stand ready to fight in order to maintain peace. If this is true, why then is there no desk or committee for the study of peace in the Department of National Defense (

Monday, April 16, 2007

Upcoming Events

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

(1) Just a reminder of Wednesday (April 18) night's strategy/planning meeting at 7:30 p.m.
If you need directions, contact Pat Hanratty (

(2) Fundy Royal NDP is booked to serve breakfast at the Kingston Farmer's Market on May 5th (opening Saturday). The new dining hall seats about 120, so it promises to be a very busy day. We need as many volunteers as possible. Please show up early (7:30-8:00am) as we'll be the guinea pigs in this experiment.

Thursday, April 12, 2007


This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

By this morning, the bodies of 6 Canadian soldiers, killed on Easter Day, will have returned to Canada. While we are saddened by the loss of life wherever it occurs, these deaths are especially tragic because 3 of the soldiers are from New Brunswick and 5 were based in Base Gagetown. We should all set aside some time to remember these soldiers, and indeed all the Canadian soldiers, who have paid this ultimate sacrifice in service of our country. They deserve our deep honour and respect.

My thoughts and prayers go to these soldiers and their families in their time of grief. We should also remember all people touched by war and conflict. May we all find peace one day.

Friday, April 6, 2007

A Voice in Fundy Royal

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

It's time for Fundy Royal to be heard. It's time for New Brunswick to be heard.

Let's be honest - we want better jobs, higher pay, better schools, cheaper tuition rates, better opportunities for our children. But guess what? We won't have these things unless we get a say in our own resources. We won't be able to realize any of these dreams without generating new revenue sources for our province.

Last election, I raised the issue of the natural gas available in the McCully field outside of Sussex. We could have had an Energy Park. I can only speculate as to why my province didn't pursue such an idea (and my thoughts are very unnerving). I do know that my current MP - Rob Moore - heard me during the debates. He even ran a radio ad mentioning the issue towards the tail-end of the campaign. He won, flew off to Ottawa, and didn't say a word about it.

And here we are in 2007 shipping OUR natural gas to Boston! Now let's be fair, there will be an employment spike in the Sussex area - once the lateral pipeline is built, the workforce will increase by a little less than one overtime position.

We need a voice; a loud, carrying voice! Fundy Royal and New Brunswick needs to be represented by someone who will demand fair treatment.

If you think I brought some good ideas to the debates and the doors the last time around, just wait for what we have in store this time. See you on the hustings.

Rob Moir (Candidate)

Bank Vaults Bursting - Piggy Banks Empty

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Amazing ain't it - banks pulling in record profits year after year and yet charging us to deposit and withdraw the very cash we give them so they can make their profits. That's just not fair, no matter how you look at it. The Federal NDP has already proposed that banks remove ATM withdrawal fees (the Liberals balked at this while the Conservatives had a lunch with the bankers and asked them to look into it). Wait a sec ... this sounds like the NDP is promoting good old market interference!

But wait a second: (1) Banks profits are in the BILLIONS, (2) all bank service fees account for just 5% of bank revenues, and (3) banks in Britain operate without ATM withdrawl fees and still make handsome profits.

Don't let them tell you it can't be done!

So, where might we go from here?

This election, I decided to shift my mindset. I'm not just a candidate, I am a potential MP. And potential MPs propose legislation. So, here's my idea to help limit crippling credit-card interest rates.

In Canada, concerns over credit card interest rates have been expressed since 1993. The MacKay Report (1998) eventually led to the creation of the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada and changes to the Bank Act, but credit card rates still remain in the 11.5-19.5% range for the major cards, and over 20% for some store cards. While I agree that banks should be allowed to make money, it is not clear to me that these interest rates are at all competitive.

I think I have a solution, but I'd like your feedback. Suppose we created legislation which did not limit a card-issuing company's right to set an interest rate, but rather said that cardholders shall be permitted to save money with the card-issuing company at a rate equal to the charged interest rate less prime plus four percent. For instance, if my credit card charges me 18%, and prime is 6%, then I would have the right to deposit money onto my credit card at the rate of 8% (i.e., 18-(6+4) = 8). Higher interest rates on the card means higher interest rates regular working Canadians can earn on depositing to their cards. Lower interest rates lessen the chance that working Canadians will go into debt. I am not sure whether "prime plus four percent" is the best value, but I think you can see my point.

What do you think?

** recent issues for you to check out:

(1) VISA and Mastercards from major banks have a hidden penalty. Suppose you are a habitual full-payer; you pay your entire bill every month to avoid all interest charges. Now, just suppose you are one day late in your payment (e.g., the due date falls on a Sunday and your cheque clears on a Monday). Many cards now charge full interest for THE NEXT TWO MONTH'S CHARGES even if your payments are on time.

(2) Suppose you overpay your bill - just to make sure you aren't penalized for cases like number (1) above. Many of these same cards carry a flat $25 handling fee for overpayments.

Rob Moir (NDP Candidate)

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Cleaning Up

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

Well, I'm back from Ottawa and ready and raring to go. "Where have you been?" you might ask realizing that the NDP Breakthrough Conference occurred over a week ago. Well, first I had to catch up at work ... with tuition rates so high, I have to give students their money's worth. Then I just had to respond to our Provincial government's misguided attempts at self-sufficiency. See my personal letter at (and the provincial NDP's position). I also coordinated a group response from NB Economists calling for full cost accounting - see 29 march 2007 Telegraph Journal pages A1, A8 and the letter itself on page A4. I was also interviewed on CBC InfoAM- Fredericton.

So let's talk environment as this very well may be the issue that Harper chooses to go to the polls with. First, it is undeniable fact that the first party to bring global warming to national attention in Parliament was the NDP ... in 1983 - 24 years ago! Second, after tabling a woefully inadequate "Clean Air Act" (Google Frank Luntz and the Clear Skies Act proposed by George W. Bush, and realize that Harper contracted Frank Luntz to advise his governmet - again, confirm with Google) Harper and his cronies agreed to an all party committee to re-examine the act. Take a look at the 15 ammendments proposed by NDP-MP Nathan Cullen ( and realize that only the end to Big Oil/Big Gas subsidies was voted down (by the Conservatives, Liberals, and Bloc). Score one for all of us ordinary Canadians.

A February 2007 report authored by Friends of the Earth and Corporate Knights suggested that to even come close to meeting Canada’s Kyoto targets, we would have to spend $100 billion over 4 years. This is in line with the Stern report suggesting that if we started now, it would cost us about 1% of our annual GDP spent between now and 2012 to effect any change.

That's A LOT of money ... too costly you might say.

Don't let them tell you it can't be done!

Who remembers our last “crisis” which some later labelled a “fizzle?” The Y2K bug. In 1997, the Auditor General of Canada suggested that preparing for the millennium disaster would cost the Canadian economy between $30 billion and $50 billion. In 1999, cost overruns led the government to conclude that its own Y2K costs, estimated to be $1 billion in 1997, had multiplied to between $2.2 and $2.5 billion, in part because of inflationary pressures to hire a limited number of legacy programmers. Using these multipliers, we have a crisis cost between $66-$125 billion to be spent over a 2-3 year period. If we allow for a modest average inflation rate of 1.5% over this time, then costs can be estimated to be between $74-$141 billion in 2007 dollars.

Y2K was solved, not because it was a fizzle, but because we took real action with very real costs. These costs are not out-of-line with the $100 billion we need to spend between now and 2012 to do our small part for the environment. What’s the difference then? I think Y2K was easier to solve because the private sector perceived a direct effect to its bottom line and went to work investing the money necessary. Reinvesting in our environment is a public good and with that comes the free-rider problem and the attendant questions: Why should my business be first? Why should Canada be first? When will China do its part? Why do I have to buy a smaller car when my show-off neighbour has an SUV?

OK, so where might we start? There are many small things we can all do, from turning down thermostats, changing lightbulbs, walking/riding bikes, public transit, carpooling, etc.. Here in NB, you can look online to Efficiency New Brunswick ( But here's a bigger plan we can also implement while pursing energy conservation. New Brunswick has smart hard-working people, a lot of land, many sunny days, large spaces, fertile land, and the highest tides in the world. Suppose we partner with the federal government and set up a province-wide test for renewable energy production where we compare and contrast the efficiency of solar, biofuel, tidal, wind, and geothermal energy production/storage. Imagine ... New Brunswick as world leaders!

We did it once with our ship-building industry. We can do it again, and it works to benefit us all, not just a few elite. We don't have to buy into George W. Bush's hydrocarbon future (a future that many American's reject and very well may reject when Bush leaves office). We don't have to be the supplier for our neighbour's addiction. We can show real leadership on the environment.

Rob Moir (NDP Candidate)

Friday, March 16, 2007

This week's events...

Wow, was that ever a busy week. I just finished organizing a UNBSJ public lecture, "An Inconvenient Truth: Live" with Peter Corbyn ( as the presenter. Peter is one of 18 Canadians trained by Al Gore to present the slideshow central to the Oscar-winning documentary. He is the only Atlantic Canadian so trained. It was a great talk and an awesome community-building exercise.

Today (Friday), I leave for Ottawa and my second Breakthrough Conference. There I will meet with a number of other NDP candidates and officials (including our own interim leader and my good friend, Pat Hanratty) to plan and prepare for the next election, whenever it may be. I am going to find out how we are all going to win in Fundy Royal and send an NDP MP to Parliament next time around. We will build our sustainable community!
Unfortunately, my absence means I cannot attend an important event taking place, Saturday March 17. The Canadian Peace Alliance, the New Brunswick People for Peace, and the Saint John People for Peace are holding a rally to pull troops out of their military roles in Iraq and Afghanistan. Drop by Tapps Brewpub from 2-6pm for music (Debbie Adshade, Kim Blue, Karen Palmer, John MacLean, the Shaggy Dogs, and more) and an information session. For more info, please contact If you can go to the show, please say hello for me.

Sunday, March 4, 2007

Real Self-Sufficiency

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

As fortune would have it, I was able to coordinate a public talk at the University recently. Dr. Denis Roumestan of Justice & Equity, Inc., talked about the real changes taking place in Rwanda. A few short years ago, the world witnessed an horrific genocide in Rwanda – 1million killed in 100 days. Now, it seems Rwanda may be a bright light in democracy; actively encouraging and embracing a truly independent media, engaging in full accountability (all government books are open to public scrutiny, and elected officials and publicly appointed officials must sign documents outlining the progress they intend to make), a complete crackdown on corruption, recognition of the vital importance of the environment, the highest percentage of women in parliament (46% I believe), and a focus on development under Rwanda's terms.

Okay, but we're here in Fundy Royal, so what's that got to do with us? There are a number of issues as I see it. First, as the Make Poverty History campaign (a campaign I strongly support) points out, there is no real reason for abject poverty on this planet. Canada can and Canada should meet it's goal of 0.7 percent of GDP spent as foreign aid. Second, a recent Senate report suggests that CIDA's Africa strategy has failed. If we are going to turn this result around, then we need to invest in a country where development has real potential … and Rwanda seems to be such a place. As an economist, I see "sustainable development" as good for us all. I also know that people want to invest where returns are expected to be high.

Despite these lofty international objectives however, I think there is a deeper message for the people in Fundy Royal, and indeed for all New Brunswickers. Look at the democratic changes that I outline in the first paragraph. A free and independent media. Very few people in New Brusnwick would consider the Telegraph Journal, Times & Transcript, or the Daily Gleaner to reflect a free and independent media. Accountability in New Brunswick is laughable – although I do like Premier Graham's call to end party top-ups to premier's salaries. Accountability was one of Stephen Harper's goals, but he forgot his own message when he appointed his cabinet. Women in parliament … or legislature … or even on Saint John City Council? Forget it, and so too forget women's issues.

Most importantly, Rwanda wants to develop and Rwanda will develop, on Rwanda's terms. Premier Graham tells us, we'll be self-sufficient if only we cut down all our trees and get behind the Irving-NB Power push for an Energy Hub in Saint John. He invites us to comment upon the self-sufficiency documents, but without the benefits of public meetings. The combined efforts of the New Brunswick Government and the Irvings will have us self-sufficient in the near future – there will only be a few thousand of us, and we'll all be gasping for air, but we'll be self-sufficient.

Dr. Roumestan incorporated Justice & Equity here in New Brunswick. Bilingualism played a big role, but in my discussion with him he also said it was the people. We, all of us in New Brunswick, have a lot to offer. If we have a lot to offer to the world, then we certainly have a lot to offer Canada. Throughout Fundy Royal we have strong communities. This is our legacy and gift to the world.

If we work together, we can create a bright future of self-sufficiency on our own terms. Having travelled most of New Brunswick and throughout Fundy Royal, I see vibrant communities filled with people who care about their world. Let's build upon our strengths, let's learn from Rwanda, and become the self-sufficient, self-sustaining community we know we can be. If you want to contribute to a growing and democratic vision of New Brunswick, check out the following site:

Rob Moir

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Who's really looking green?

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

It should be seen as no coincidence that on this day, two separate news stories dominated the media in Fredericton and Ottawa respectively. At the Legislature, Premier Shawn Graham publicly stated that New Brunswick would not be living up to its Kyoto commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The province’s current emissions are at 47% of 1990 levels, and the Kyoto Protocol calls for a 6% reduction from 1990 levels by the year 2010. The opposition Conservatives were quick to criticize Graham’s autonomous plan for environmental action, and lauded the benefits of cooperative government initiatives to combat climate change.

This situation seems remarkably similar to the battle that has been waging in Ottawa since Stephen Harper’s Conservatives took a minority government in 2006. In fact, today Parliament passed the bill of Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez to reinstate the Federal government’s commitment to the Kyoto Protocol. This was the end result of the headstrong actions of a Conservative government that refused to live up to an agreement that 70% of Canadians support.

In New Brunswick the situation is exactly the same, except it is the Liberal government turning its back on an international agreement, with Conservatives taking the opposite view. How can Liberal and Conservative party members in this province truly support their own leaders, when the views of each branch of the party are so clearly divergent? This hypocrisy exposes both parties and their obvious lip-service to the environmental issue.

The NDP is the only party that has supported the Kyoto Protocol and is unwavering in its commitment to improving and preserving our environment. New Brunswick deserves a voice that will represent your true values and will not play political games of chess with the lives of our future generations.

Friday, February 9, 2007

Affordable Education - It only Makes Sense!

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

It is no mystery that rising student debt is coupled to rising tuition fees. The Fundy Royal NDP fully supports the students in their Day of Action for Accessible Post-Secondary Education.

While a post-secondary education benefits the student, it has an even greater impact across the economy. More education means greater productivity and greater civic responsibility both of which seem to be rare commodities in Canada today.

New Brunswick is especially hit hard with a declining population base, low government investment in post-secondary education, and some of the highest tuition rates in the country. Unfortunately, we have a provincial government interested in self-sufficiency that seems keen on studying the problem until it disappears, and a current Member of Parliament for Fundy Royal who actually voted against a free vote motion to lower student debt in the House of Commons.

What this province and this country needs is a comprehensive restructuring of post-secondary education which focuses on shaping the leaders, entrepreneurs, workers, and citizens of tomorrow. The NDP is the only party to act on this issue in response to the students' day of action. As a nation and as a province, we need to invest in post-secondary education and apprenticeship programmes.

Click to watch Jack Layton's statement on the Post-Secondary Education Act

Monday, February 5, 2007

Rob Moir Nominated as Candidate in Fundy Royal

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

As the tenuous Federal minority government heads closer to the next election call, the NDP became the first party to announce a candidate in the riding of Fundy Royal. Rob Moir ran in the 2006 election and achieved 21% of the vote, and is returning to build on the party's success in the riding. Upon accepting the nomination, Dr. Moir stated: "In 2006, we won because we showed people around the country that the NDP in New Brunswick and in Fundy Royal is a force to be reckoned with... In the last election, our riding achieved the highest increase in NDP vote in the province. [In this campaign] we will present working solutions and achievable visionary goals to the community and for the people of Fundy Royal."

Rob Moir is a Community activist and Associate Professor of Economics at UNB Saint John. He is a husband and proud father of two children, aged six and four, and lives on the Kingston Peninsula. He brings a wealth of political experience, having been a candidate in the 2006 campaign, as well as having presented as an NEB Intervenor in the Emera Brunswick Pipeline Corporation hearings. He currently sits as Vice President of the Atlantic Canada Economics Association and is an active volunteer for many organizations within Saint John and Fundy Royal, including the Saint John Human Development Council, the Teen Resource Centre, Kingston Peninsula Heritage Inc., the Clifton Royal Recreation Council and the Kingston Local Service District Advisory Council.

With the nomination of Dr. Moir, the New Democratic Party has demonstrated that they are committed to the people of Fundy Royal. The party is prepared to enact change and bring true accountability to government. Rob Moir’s team is providing a vision for sustainable communities, immediate environmental action, and a better future for all Canadians.

Monday, January 29, 2007

Credible Candidates?

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

In 2006, Prime Minister Harper's government announced the Clean Air Act which was greeted with thunderous silence by Canadians. Canadians want faster action on the environment. Harper shuffled his cabinet and then announced a series of tweaked versions of past-Liberal plans with an important twist; now they would be acted upon.

While this first step in environmental awareness on the part of Harper's government is good news, Canadians should still seriously question Harper's commitment to the environment. For instance, the Canadian Government's official website on Climate Change ( ) was last updated on June 30, 2006 at which time it was made "unavailable." Mr. Harper' commitment to the environment is just not credible.

Not to be outdone, new Liberal leader Stephane Dion suggested that Marc-Yvan Cote be allowed to regain his Liberal Party membership. Why does this matter? Mr. Cote was suspended from the Liberal party for life for distributing $120,000 in $100 bills to 12 Liberal Candidates during the sponsorship scandal. Mr. Dion is not credible on ethics and accountability.

When the next federal election comes about, Canadians would do well to look at the credibility of these two leaders and the parties they represent.

Premier Graham - an Environmental Convert ... Not!

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

On Jan. 29, 2007, Premier Graham claimed in a CBC interview that there's no conflict with his new-found environmental streak and his support for a second oil refinery. He argued that we are only meeting the growing demand for energy in New Brunswick. ...

With all due respect to Premier Graham, I must heartily disagree with his statement that while there are environmental effects to a second refinery, these effects must be balanced with the energy demands of New Brunswickers.

It is not at all clear to me that New Brunswick energy demand has grown at a rate that exceeds our productive capacity. The natural gas from the LNG plant will largely be shipped to the US Northeast. The natural gas from our own McCully Field outside of Sussex is being shipped to the US Northeast. The International Power Line from Point Lepreau will transport power to the US Northeast. The Irving Oil website claims that 58% of the refined product from the existing refinery is shipped to the US Northeast.

New Brunswick already exports all this power to the energy-hungry US Northeast because neither New Brunswickers nor Atlantic Canadians can use it all. So how is it that a second greenhouse gas-producing oil refinery can help meet the growing energy demands of New Brunswickers when we already produce more than we need?

In my opinion, Premier Graham's argument is based on spin rather than fact. The reality is, business and the government in New Brunswick are willing to trade environmental quality for short term profit. As long as New Brunswickers support such a tradeoff, New Brunswick will continue to be America's solution to its NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard) problem.

Rob Moir

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Fundy Royal Nomination Meeting Announcement

This is an Archived Post. Click here to visit the most recent content

We invite everyone to attend the Nomination meeting for the Fundy Royal NDP candidacy in the next Federal Election. The event will be held Sunday February 4th, at the Nauwigewauk Hall.

Memberships will be available at the event. We appreciate your continued support!

Driving directions:

From Moncton, exit Highway 1 at Hampton, right on Hall Rd., then left to William Bell Drive which becomes Highway 100. Continue through Nauwigewauk to Station loop Rd. Then right onto Darlings Island Road. The Hall is first building on right.

From Saint John, exit Highway 1 at Quispamsis-Nauwigewauk exit, follow rte 100 over Hammond River Bridge, and take next left, Station Loop Rd., left again at Darlings Island Road. The Hall is the first building on the right.