Fundy Royal

Letter in today's Times Transcript

2011-04-21T10:34:00.001-04:00

http://timestranscript.canadaeast.com/opinion/article/1399785

Will Mr. Moore fire his staffer?

To The Editor:

As the New Democratic Party candidate for Fundy Royal, I wish to correct errors in Conservative candidate Rob Moore's statements in the article 'Accusations fly in Fundy Royal,' published Tuesday, April 19, specifically regarding the attempted theft of a ballot box by one of his ministerial staffers.

Mr. Moore states that the Fundy Royal NDP media release of April 15 is "factually inaccurate" and that there was a claim that "there was a stolen ballot box."

I am not sure which release Mr. Moore is reading, because ours clearly states that his assistant, Mr. Michael Sona, attempted to take a ballot box - a fact confirmed by eye-witnesses in several media outlets, including the Globe and Mail and Macleans magazine.

That Mr. Moore, and his boss Mr. Harper are trying to deny this fact comes as no surprise to anyone who has seen the way this Conservative government operates.

This government is, after all, the first in Canadian history to be found in contempt of Parliament.

Despite Mr. Moore's protestations, this election was precipitated by the lack of respect his government has for our democratic system; a system that generations of Canadians have fought and died to defend.

This latest ballot box incident further demonstrates the contempt that this Conservative government has for democracy and for each and every voter across this country.

My question to Mr. Moore is a simple one: Do you condone the actions of your staffer in his attempt disenfranchise youth and disrupt the voting process, or, will you terminate his employment on behalf of all Canadians?

Darryl Pitre,

NDP Candidate,

Fundy Royal

We've moved our site!!!!

2011-04-18T19:37:00.003-04:00

We're now at www.FundyRoyalNDP.ca.

NDP’s Pitre to Cabinet Minister Moore: “Fire your ballot-stealing staffer now”

2011-04-15T23:52:00.001-04:00

RIVERVIEW – Fundy Royal New Democrat candidate Darryl Pitre demanded Friday that Conservative candidate Rob Moore immediately fire his Special Assistant, Michael Sona, the man who led a Conservative attack on an Elections Canada polling station at the University of Guelph on Thursday.

“I don’t know what country Mr. Moore thinks this is, but last I checked, party staffers don’t attack polling stations in this country. This isn’t Libya.” Pitre said. “The sacredness of the ballot box is something generations of Canadians have fought and died for.”

“If this punk Sona wants to steal ballot boxes, he should be locked up; and his boss, Mr. Moore should be sent to the EI office,” Pitre said.

Sona, an Ontario resident and former student at the University of Guelph, works as Mr. Moore’s Special Assistant responsible for Communications in the Department of Small Business and Tourism. Yesterday, he was reported to have tried to steal ballot box while he and other Conservative activists attempted to stop students from voting.

Pitre said, “I’ve got one question for Mr. Moore: Will you fire Mr. Sona, or do the people of Fundy Royal need to fire you first? I will be personally delivering a letter to Mr. Moore asking him this question, and I look forward to his response.”

-30-

For more information contact:

Darryl Pitre Campaign office: (506) 832-0004
darrylpitrendp@gmail.com

2011-03-22T07:52:00.003-04:00

We are now on Facebook, visit our page and become a 'fan' !

http://www.facebook.com/DarrylPitreNDP

Darryl Pitre nominated as the NDP Candidate for Fundy Royal

2011-03-17T14:32:00.005-04:00

On Sunday, February 27, 2011, Darryl Pitre was nominated as the NDP candidate for Fundy Royal.

Rob Moir has been nominated as the candidate for the Saint John riding.

Darryl's nomination speech can bee seen on YouTube!

A Media Opportunity

2009-06-22T08:54:00.002-04:00

Here's a copy of a letter to the editor I submitted to the Irving big-three papers and the Kings County Record. It is a reply to a seemingly innocuous Telegraph (a friend calls it the Tele-graft) Journal piece. Keep up the struggle.

Saturday’s Telegraph Journal mentions that the NDP’s polling numbers have increased significantly despite the fact that “most people could neither name nor recognize” party leader Roger Duguay (‘Poll has Liberal party trailing Tory rivals’; A2).

The print media in this province could easily rectify this democratic deficiency.

First, provide a profile of Mr. Duguay as he has received minimal media coverage. Second, provide Mr. Duguay and each of the party leaders with a monthly column in which they can explore issues they feel should be important to the public.

If we, as citizens of New Brunswick, are to perform our civic duty and participate in choosing good governments, we need to know where all the parties stand on a variety of issues. Moreover, we need to know our potential leaders. Print media can go a long way to strengthening our democracy by enhancing the public’s ability to make informed choices.

I hope the big three provincial English-language dailies see fit to contribute positively to the democratic process by giving all party leaders a forum for discussion.

Paying More Taxes

2009-06-22T08:43:00.006-04:00

Sorry folks. Keeping up with work, e-mails, and 2 blogs (join my Social and Environmental Justice Book Club at http://sejbooks.blogspot.com/) keeps me busy. Add a family into the mix, and not everything gets done. I saw Richard Smol's interesting post on the CBC website on "Why I should pay more taxes."

I too recognize the importance of paying taxes to build a functioning civil society. That's why I get so upset when neo-liberal ideologues like the Fraser Institute use the media to spread the notion of "Tax Freedom Day." Here are a few alternative names we could use:

Freedom from Public Healthcare Day

Freedom from Police Force Day

Freedom from Clean Water Day

Freedom from Environmental Regulation and Enforcement Day

Crumbling Bridges Day

Taxes pay for stuff we all use. Blame our governments for investing tax dollars unwisely, ask them to to account for their investments, but don't buy into the simplistic notion that "taxes are bad."

MP Rob Moore Fights Against Fundy Park Expansion

2009-05-21T13:10:00.003-04:00

Hi all;

Sorry to be away for so long. Catching up on work and my family life.

I saw that Mr. Moore decided to do the un-environmental thing and block expansion of Fundy National Park (http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/672405). As this Times & Transcript editorial points out, another anti-environmental move to (perhaps) protect some narrow special interest groups similar to his stance on the removal of the Petitcodiac Causeway (http://timestranscript.canadaeast.com/opinion/article/673885).

Anyway, here's a letter I sent in as a response.

Keep up the struggle.

-Rob

As a Fundy Royal constituent, I am all for westward expansion of Fundy National Park. The boundaries of the park would then contain a complete watershed and, as a province, we would secure a large undeveloped coastal area; something unique on the eastern seaboard.

The expansion of Fundy National Park is a wise move from an ecological standpoint. From a business perspective, an expanded park further secures one anchor of the Fundy Trail and provides a wonderful opportunity for low-environmental impact tourism (a growing niche market). Combine the two arguments, and you have a strong long-run economic argument for expansion.

I don’t know exactly who Mr. Rob Moore is listening to, but, from the conversations I have had, I have a very hard time believing that he’s listening to most of us.

NDP Economic Recovery Task Force headed to Fundy Royal!

2009-04-21T10:47:00.004-04:00

The Fundy Royal NDP is proud to welcome the NDP Agriculture and Food Security Critic, Alex Atamenenko to the riding on May 22, 2008.

Mr. Atamenenko is the Member of Parliament for British Columbia Southern Interior. He will be discussing issues relating to his Agriculture and Food Safety portfolio, as well as the NDP Task Force on the Economy. The event will take place at 7pm, at the All Season Inn, 1015 Main St., Sussex.

http://recovery.ndp.ca/taskforce
If you are a user of Facebook and wish to confirm your attendance (and invite others), click on this link: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/event.php?eid=71773834410&ref=mf

This NDP Task Force event is open to all concerned citizens, so feel free to attend.

We have a Prime Minister and Member of Parliament who don't know what to do in these economic times. You deserve better. And Fundy Royal deserves to be heard.

That's why we are gathering your best ideas to help Canada come out of this recession faster—and stronger.

Unlike Rob Moore and Mr. Harper, ordinary Canadians understand that this crisis is also an opportunity. A chance to remake Canada as a leader in the 21st century global economy. And whether it’s about rethinking manufacturing or clean energy, you have good ideas to make it happen.

The task force needs to hear your best ideas to beat the recession and make Canada stronger!

Coffee House and Concert, Saturday March 21st!

2009-03-09T17:38:00.005-04:00

The Fundy Royal NDP are proud to host talented entertainers Heckman and Downes as part of our post-election celebration "Hooray, we finished 2nd!" on March 21st at the Hammond River Angling Association building.

We invite everyone to come out and enjoy an evening of great music and friendship. Details of the event follow:

EVENT DETAILS

WHAT: HOORAY, WE FINISHED 2ND!!!
WHEN: SATURDAY MARCH 21, 2009 @ 7PM
WHERE: HAMMOND RIVER ANGLING ASSOCIATION BUILDING
10 Porter Rd Nauwigewauk, NB (SEE MAP)
WHO: MUSIC BY HECKMAN AND DOWNES
RSVP: fundyroyalndp@gmail.com
ADMISSION: $10

Forestry Policy is Crony Capitalism

2009-02-21T02:17:00.003-04:00

This letter to the editor appeared in four CanadaEast papers last week:

To the editor,

It is very hard to understand the Graham government's position on Crown land management for forestry.

With the way this government pushes for private-public partnerships, one would expect them to design policy that promotes a "purchase-from-private-woodlots-first" agenda for mills, which was the case under Richard Hatfield. Instead, Shawn Graham and the Liberals have decided to take my share (as a tax paying New Brunswicker) of Crown land wood, manage it in ways that seems at odds with a 2007 Federal Government survey ("Public views on forest management in New Brunswick: report from a provincial survey,") and use it to compete against the sale of wood from my woodlot and the private woodlots of a large number of New Brunswickers.

With the plan to decrease conservation areas and increase subsidies for sivilculture on Crown lands (having recently cut these subsidies for private woodlot owners), it is difficult to see the Graham government's plan as anything more than crony capitalism or corporate welfare.

Rob Moir

Clifton Royal

Jack Layton at UNB Fredericton this Monday!

2009-02-11T20:25:00.001-04:00

Federal NDP Leader Jack Layton will be visiting Fredericton, New Brunswick this coming Monday, February 16th. The event is hosted by Roger Duguay, leader of the New Brunswick New Democratic Party. The highlight of Mr. Layton's visit will be a public talk at the University of New Brunswick at 7pm in the Kent Auditorium of the Wu Conference Centre.

Mr. Layton's discussion will be focused on Canada's current economic downturn, and what needs to be done in order safe-guard and stimulate Canada's economy.

Event details:

Who: Jack Layton, Roger Duguay
What: An Evening With Jack Layton
Where: University of New Brunswick, Fredericton Campus - Wu Conference Centre, Kent Auditorium, 6 Duffie Drive.
When: Monday, February 16, 7pm

The Fundy Royal NDP team encourages all who are interested to take this rare opportunity to share time with a federal party Leader. We hope to see you there.

I am part of the 62% majority

2008-12-01T19:39:00.003-04:00

Hello friends and supporters,

Thank you once again for all your help and support on the campaign trail. For the first time ever, Rob Moir and the New Democrats finished 2nd in Fundy Royal. We all share a part in this breakthrough. We are humbled by your support, and remain committed to getting results for Fundy Royal throughout the next parliament.

On the trail, we spoke to people of all political stripes across the riding. We had the support of life long Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, and even the former Green Party candidate. All of us realize the challenges we face, and it was through this cooperation that we were able to run a strong campaign that had not been seen in this riding's history.

It is in this spirit of cooperation that we respond to the efforts of our leader, Jack Layton, and his counterpart Stephane Dion of the Liberals to form a government that truly represents the voice of Canadians. Mr. Harper and his Conservatives have failed Canada. They failed to put forward an economic plan for Canada.

Canada has a growing movement to replace the Harper Conservatives. On October 14, 62% of Canadians voted against Mr. Harper's agenda. As part of the 62%, we feel compelled to support any option that will better represent the majority of Canadians. We can put aside our partisan differences, just as the Rob Moir campaign did in October of this year, and work together as Canadians with progressive political views to give us the governance we deserve.

The next week promises to be interesting, but we are optimistic that change is coming. We need your help and support to make this positive change a reality.

The Fundy Royal NDP Team

Only one more day!

2008-10-13T22:58:00.001-04:00

Hello Friends;

This has been a wonderful ride - the whole team has performed extremely well. We now wait for the votes to roll in. The Elections Canada campaigning blackout starts with the opening of the polls tomorrow, so this will be the last message we're able to post online until the results come in.

But in advance of this last day, we do have one more favour to ask...

Please get your friends, family and neighbors out to vote!!!

We have really impressed a great number of people this campaign. We have the favored candidate on the CBC Riding Blog. We have the wholehearted support of the Green Candidate from the last election (Patty Donovan). We have a number of past Liberal campaign organizers actively working with us. We have met many long-time Progressive Conservatives who are supporting us. In addition, we are the preferred candidate for Fundy Royal on both http://voteforenvironment.ca and http://strategicvoting.ca/. Friendly newspaper reporters on the street are telling us that we have the campaign to watch!

Fundy Royal deserves a progressive voice in Ottawa - a voice that cares about the environment and about jobs. A voice for the hardworking people and communities in this great riding. A voice that has been there for local issues and will continue to be there, because Fundy Royal matters!

Join in the process. Spread the word to as many people as you can. Let's win this together!

Sincerely,

The Rob Moir Team.
www.robmoirndp.ca

Campaign - final days

2008-10-11T05:45:00.004-04:00

Wow, what a campaign this has been. Sorry to have missed blogging for a while. Things are a little crazy when you are a dad for two school-aged kids, a NEW dad (Toby's 6-weeks old today), and everybody in the riding seems to want a piece of you. But, it has been great fun and I have once again learnt a great great deal.

I'll do a highlights blog a little later, but here I want to speculate a little.

WE (and I use that word because We are a team) have a very real chance of WINNING!

"WHAT???!!!" you say.

Well, I can tell you that the Conservatives are worried - they have said as much to us at various debates and events. I can tell you that a number of progressive conservatives are shifting our way.

I can tell you that significant portions of the Liberal campaign machine throughout Fundy Royal have stepped away from their candidate and some are even actively and openly working with us.

I can tell you that the Green candidate from the last election, Patty Donovan, has given us her FULL endorsement (see the CBC's riding talk).

I can tell you that even the press is contacting us with a very positive sign of "word-on-the-street is ..." and they are talking about a win.

I can tell you that both "Strategic Voting" and "Vote for the Environment" have identified our campaign as the one to support.

This is going to be a hard-fought race to the end. Harper's support across the country is dropping drastically - their "do nothing" approach to the economy, the massive increase in cost of Afghanistan, their "do nothing " approach to the environment, their rampant corporatism, the fact that their local candidates are muzzled and cannot speak to local issues - it's all bad for them.

This leads to the Liberal rise based on a claim to sound fiscal management. I have one problem with this. What has gotten us into this massive economic turmoil - a lack of financial accountability, especially on loans. What bill did the Liberals vote as a block against - Bill C-29 "An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (accountability with respect to loans)"? Every other party supported it. So, the party that assures us it can solve our economic woes does not want more complete accountability with respects to loans? Seems odd to me.

Well, off to go door-to-door. I hope everyone has a very Happy Thanksgiving. Enjoy the special moments you have with your family.

Cheers,
rob

Catch the Fundy Royal debates on Rogers TV

2008-10-07T23:01:00.002-04:00

Hello everyone,

Be sure to catch Rob Moir take on incumbent Conservative Rob Moore as part of the Rogers Television debate series. You can see it on Cable 10 at the following times:

Saint John
Wednesday October 8, 10PM
Thursday October 9, 10PM
Friday October 10, 8PM
Saturday October 11, 6PM
Sunday October 12, 5PM

Moncton
Saturday October 10, 5PM
Sunday October 11, 5PM

Fredericton
Saturday October 10, 5PM
Sunday October 11, 5PM

Please forward this on to others in Fundy Royal!

The Rob Moir Team
www.robmoirndp.com

Cooperation and action can help economy

2008-10-04T13:13:00.003-04:00

Correction Notice: Original press release stated "layoffs will affect between 50 and 195 people", due to a misinterpretation of this Telegraph Journal article.The layoff will only affect up to 50 of Moosehead's 195 production employees. We apologize for this error.

UPDATE: Here are two more stories of New Brunswick companies affected by the slumping US economy.
http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/search/article/444702

http://timestranscript.canadaeast.com/search/article/444988

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Rob Moir, NDP Candidate for Fundy Royal and professor of economics, expresses optimism that cooperation on the economy is possible in light of the recent 'credit crunch' in the United States. While Mr. Harper is resistant to admit the impacts it will have on the Canadian economy, Moir remains confident that progressive minds can work together.

I n the English language debate, Stephen Harper said, "First, I'd like to say that Canada is not the U.S. The situation is very different from it; the basic fundamentals of our economy are strong. We have a surplus, a budget surplus, we have an economy that continues to create jobs, we're not experiencing a crisis in our financial system." I find that a bit hard to swallow," says Moir. "Just yesterday it was reported that Moosehead would introduce rotating lay-offs that will affect up to 50 people."

Moosehead blames the lay-offs, in part, upon reduced demand for premium beer in the United States as a consequence of that country's slowing economy. "To imply that we are insulated from what is happening in the U.S., our single largest trading partner, is at best misleading, and at worst, completely disingenuous," comments Moir, echoing New Democrat leader Jack Layton's retort to Mr. Harper, "Either you don't care or you're incompetent. Which is it?"

There is growing speculation that the credit crunch in the United States will in fact leak into Canada. While the Bank of Canada may lower interest rates in the near future, liquidity-strapped banks with questionable loans may be reluctant to lend, consumers may be reluctant to borrow and spend, and industry may be reluctant to invest.

"It is naive to think that within today's global economy, our country could somehow be isolated from the larger market," admits Moir. "But with co-operation and vision, we can work together to seek wise investment strategies and opportunities for growth that will cushion us from events in the United States. This will not happen, however, if our government ignores the obvious challenges we face as a nation."

Earlier in the week, New Democrat leader Jack Layton appealed to members of all parties to meet and discuss the economy. This commitment to cooperation is shared by his candidate in Fundy Royal. "What this country needs right now," comments Moir, "is trained progressive economists who understand the important productivity gains of prudent social investment, specifically at the local level. We need to get to work in Ottawa; hang up our political jackets at the door, and sit down together and do some very hard work."

Answers to Moncton Chamber of Commerce Questions

2008-09-30T16:31:00.004-04:00

The following are Rob Moir's written answers to the questions posed of him by the Moncton Chamber of Commerce at their all-candidates meeting today:

Will your party encourage the provinces to speed up the elimination of capital taxes?

Respectfully, I would suggest that the premise of this question is faulty. On a national scale, consider the recent KPMG study on business taxes and competitiveness (http://www.kpmg.ca/en/services/tax/2008special_report.html). In comparison to 10 other industrialized countries, Canada has the 3rd lowest total tax index for business – lower than traditional powerhouses like the US, UK, Japan, and Germany. Provincially, turn to the data used by Jack Mintz in our newly proposed tax system (http://www.gnb.ca/0162/New_Brunswick_Tax_System/Discussion_Paper-English.pdf). Compared to the rest of Canada, New Brunswick has the lowest or the 3rd lowest METR on capital and we hold a similar ranking when comparing the METR on all costs. We’re only behind Saskatchewan and Alberta.

We can’t simply conclude that taxes are the cause of slow business growth in this province, if this were the case, we’d be doing better than many other provinces (and we aren’t). I’d argue that in New Brunswick there are two problems – the first we talk about quietly and the second we won’t talk about at all.

(1) There’s a great deal of red tape and bureaucracy – regulations that are not only not harmonized (and I favour harmonizing to the higher standards because our companies can be regional and international leaders), but sometimes in direct conflict with each other.
(2) This is the 800-lb gorilla in the room – we have a very uncompetitive province, particularly because of a few big business interests and governments that work with them.

Both of these issues must be solved before we’d see much in the way of a gain from lower tax rates. Right now, simply lowering taxes will only favour incumbent enterprises and further reduce effective competition, thereby stunting economic growth (sustainable or otherwise).

As an economist, I would encourage lower tax rates on small-business, some form of tax rebate on new (especially environmentally-friendly) capital in small- and medium-sized businesses and startups, and targeted R&D tax credits that fit into provincial goals with a specific focus on alternative energy production as this is a rapidly growing market.

Does your party support the development of all economic energy sources in order provide a stable, diverse and flexible energy supply?

The New Democrats have a policy of emphasizing energy efficiency/productivity first. As an economist, I recommend to people the recent work of the McKinsey Global Institute (http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/reports/pdfs/Investing_Energy_Productivity/Investing_Energy_Productivity.pdf) where it is shown that the highest internal rate of return in energy investment is in energy efficiency/productivity (about 17%). I would also stress that we have a great, but underfunded, institution in Efficiency NB and it is headed by a great New Democrat – Elizabeth Weir.

As a party (but also as an economist) we would argue against expansion in the Athabasca tar sands without full environmental impact analysis. As Preston Manning points out, four barrels of fresh water are used to extract one barrel of oil. Whatever we do, we need full cost accounting. This includes complete environmental impact assessments of major projects with potential environmental impacts (e.g., a new oil refinery) – with funding for research in the public interest.

Personally, I am excited by the natural gas that we have in our province. I have worked with groups on the natural gas in the McCully field. The idea was to set up an Energy Park and create local jobs with our resources. There was no success there; I’ll happily discuss my ideas of why this happened at another time. So, instead of a thousand plus jobs employing people from Moncton, Saint John, and Fredericton, we got a pipeline spur that is managed with the labour of ½ of one overtime position. The fuel is now in Boston. BUT … there is exciting news on the horizon with mention of new finds of stranded natural gas. I see New Brunswick natural gas and energy efficiency investments as going a significant way to meeting both our job creation needs and environmental objectives.

Finally, I think we should ask for a significant federal investment into a province-wide project that would study Energy Production. This study would compare traditional sources we already have, emerging sources (e.g., natural gas, wood heat), and alternative sources (e.g., wind, tidal, solar-bio-hydrogen, HVDC, cellulosic bio-fuel, energy efficiency, etc.). This would make NB a national and world leader in Energy Studies, Energy R&D, and Energy Production. It might also kick-start new manufacturing and industry.

ON IMMIGRATION

As an individual, currently spearheading the sponsorship of a refugee family, I am becoming familiar with the immigration process. As a professor at UNBSJ, with very high international student enrolments, I know the problems associated with new immigrants trying to find work here.

Will your party review and streamline current processes to ensure that applications are processed within six to 12 months, starting with economic and business applicants?

This is directly out of the New Democrats’ platform: “Jack Layton and his team of New Democrats will [r]eview the point system used to assess new applications to match the reality of work in Canada, including specific provisions for blue-collar workers and tradespeople. …[i]ncrease financial support for the settlement process for new Canadians to assist with literacy, community integration and orientation, including bridging, mentorship, English-as-a-second-language (ESL) programs and resource service centres. … [s]ignificantly increase resources and support for immigration processes to reduce the huge and unacceptable backlogs that currently exist in processing applications, work to meet Canada’s target of annual immigration (1 percent of population), and establish firm targets for on-time completion of family class and spousal sponsorships.” There is little I can add.

Will your party work with the provinces and territories to develop national accreditation standards to evaluate foreign credentials, professional and trade qualifications, and certification in regulated and non-regulated occupations?

This is directly out of the New Democrats’ platform: “Jack Layton and his team of New Democrats will [a]ccelerate and streamline the recognition of foreign credentials, overseas degrees and previous employment experience in conjunction with provinces and licensing authorities.” I know this has been part of party policy for years.

Will your party work with the provinces and territories to develop innovative immigration policies, programs and processes necessary to increase the number of immigrants recruited (and more importantly) retained in our smaller regions.

A federal party can work with a provincial government when the provincial government agrees to federal involvement. Inasmuch as the provincial government would like to work on a strategy, I would be more than willing to work on the project. As I noted earlier, I have been involved in immigration issues for a few years and certainly see the benefits to New Brunswick of an immigration programme that includes smaller regions.

Will your party develop and implement an objective-based National Transportation Strategy?

Yes. The NDP has argued for a long time for a more comprehensive method of analyzing transportation (both travel and shipping). I for one would like to see greater integration between ships, rail, and trucks – ships for international shipping, rail for long-distance land-based travel, and trucks for short haul.

Within New Brunswick, I would like to explore the feasibility of light rail as a method of travel between the three major business centres in southern NB (i.e., Moncton, Saint John, and Fredericton) with a hub somewhere outside of Sussex.

Will your party invest the funds necessary to complete the Restoration of the Petitcodiac River – an important environmental initiative?

Yes. I have argued for the opening of the Petitcodiac before I ever entered the fray as a politician. It is a sensible thing to do. To date, the holdup from the federal government has been MP Rob Moore of Fundy Royal with support from MP Greg Thompson (a more senior cabinet minister in Mr. Harper’s government).
While this requires coordination with the provincial government, I view this as a critical issue and one that has been held up for far too long, throwing people’s lives – from both sides – into disarray.
I would expect that we can get money from an environmental grant, and infrastructure grant, and perhaps worker training grants.

What is your party’s strategy to address Literacy Issues?

As you are well aware, investing in children is a top priority of the New Democrats – just look at our costed platform. I have written a number of times on the issue of tax cutting without mentioning programme cuts. Indeed, with those tax cuts in the first part of Mr. Harper’s mandates, we saw programme cuts across Canada, and here in NB, including many of our literacy programmes.
The New Democrats see your tax dollars as a source of coordinated social investment. I personally see literacy, and more broadly education, as a very sensible investment. Why? Because it enhances productivity, thereby attracting new investment in higher-paying jobs, and it also enhances civic responsibility. Informed people are the cornerstone of a well-functioning democracy.
The New Democrats have long advocated that training of workers include a literacy component – it is a part of our platform.
On a related note, I would like to see CBC bring back Sesame Street or something similar. There seems to be little on public TV across Canada that focuses on issues like literacy and basic numeracy. Speaking as a parent, this would be a great asset.

Rob Moir to appear on CBC Maritime Noon Call-In Panel this Tuesday

2008-09-27T10:00:00.000-04:00

Rob Moir, an environmental economist and New Democrat Candidate in Fundy Royal will be part of the CBC Maritime Noon political panel/phone-in on Tuesday, Sept. 30th, from 1-2pm.

This week's topic:
Tuesday, September 30th : In the second of our election issue phone-ins : call with your questions about the parties' economic platforms and tell federal candidates from around the Maritimes which economic issue is most important for the next government.

Tune in to hear Rob answer questions on the economy and its link to the environment, and feel free to call in with your own questions. The other guests will be Scott Brison (Liberal, Kings-Hants), Kristen Rudderham (Conservative, Sydney NS), and Mary-Lou Babineau (Green, Fredericton).

Please pass this notice on to as many people as possible.

Thanks!

The Fundy Royal NDP Team.

Another Day on the Trail

2008-09-24T22:17:00.003-04:00

A pretty busy day today. Went in to the University to meet with the Washington Institute. This not-for-profit group provides some phenomenal opportunities for students to work in areas like international trade, energy policy, poverty reduction, and so on. It is a really great opportunity for students.

I met Mr. Moore at the ferry today - he was canvassing. He came to my car and jokingly asked for my vote. We had a nice chat for a few minutes, during which he commented on the fuel efficiency of my car. I just wish Mr. Harper would pay attention and do something to help all us regular people who are having to cope with high gas prices.

I heard Mr. Moore chat to the person behind me in the lineup. He started with a line like, "I'm Rob Moore, running against Rob Moir." He has that right - well, almost right. He's running against a whole team of us. There's a very large number of New Brunswickers (especially in Fundy Royal) that want to see a change. I can't do it, but WE can and WE will!

Thanks to everyone who is helping. If you want to help too, please talk to neighbours and friends about the momentum of our campaign. Point them to this blog or to the website (http://www.robmoirndp.ca). If you are really eager, and I hope you are, then please contact the office (506-832-0570) and find out how you can help. There are lawn signs to deliver, doors to knock on, and phone calls to make.

Another thing you can all do is participate in CBC's Riding Talk (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/riding/026/ridingtalk.html). Let's oust Mr. Moore and send a loud "NO" to Mr. Harper from Fundy Royal.

Good night everyone. Tomorrow is another exciting day.

Rob Moir raises warning flag over 'two-tiered' youth justice

2008-09-23T12:06:00.001-04:00

23 September 2008
Hampton, New Brunswick

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Fundy Royal New Democratic Party candidate Rob Moir is very concerned with Mr. Harper's recent proposals as part of his promise to "get tough" on youth crime. In an announcement this week, Harper stated that he wants to make it easier for courts to name young offenders.

"Mr. Harper suggests that 'name-and-shame' will lower youth crime," comments Moir, "but criminologists generally disagree. In the act of committing an offence, people rarely consider the consequences. Besides, we already have a Youth Criminal Justice Act that permits naming in certain cases."

Moir suggests that an increase the number of police officers, a renewed focus upon pro-active policing, and significant investment in the community - including youth programs and crime prevention strategies - is what is really needed. "Jack Layton and the New Democrats propose a solution that works, instead of one that fills jails with kids," says Moir.

Despite the questions he has of this policy and its potential effectiveness, a lesser-known caveat in the proposal has him perplexed. "The rules proposed by Mr. Harper would apply to 14 year-olds across Canada," notes Moir, "but to 16-year olds in Quebec."

Commentators speculate that this is because Mr. Harper wants to expand his caucus in vote-rich Quebec.

"Are we still one country?" asks Moir. "If Mr. Harper likes the more progressive views of Quebec on youth crime, then why not use Quebec as a model for the rest of the country; and while we're at it, why not implement their childcare program and their carbon trading system as well?"

Rob Moore, the Conservative candidate in Fundy Royal, was previously the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice. He would have known of this component of Mr. Harper's platform.

"I would like the public to know if Mr. Moore agrees with two-tiered youth justice." says Moir. "Does he agree with his leader in that there should be one set of rules for Quebec, and one for the rest of Canada? If so, why?"

See Related Story in today's Globe and Mail, "Harper pitches two-tier youth justice plan"

On the Trail

2008-09-20T06:59:00.003-04:00

Hi everyone. Sorry to have left the blog for so long. Things get kind of busy with 2 kids in school, a newborn in the house, a job at UNBSJ, and a campaign. That said, with the awesome team of volunteers we have, things are getting done.

There is a definite change in the air right now. People have seen my face on the signs and they have read my musings in the papers - I am a known quantity, not some radical upstart.

As a team, we have been here for local issues. Not because it is important to wave an orange banner, but because there is so much opportunity in this province and in this riding. I see it as the correct thing to do and, wearing my economists' hat, the efficient thing to do. Indeed, for many things in this world, it is a question of efficiency.

We have two opponents in this coming election.

1) Big Business: I'm sure we can all guess some of the bigger names in our province. As an economist, I have no problem with big business. I do have a problem with big business if it infiltrates government, tells people that we need less government, and then gets government to make it easier for big business to get bigger. If you think this is a bit "out there" consider the massive (some say it could cost in total, a TRILLION dollars) rescue package for US financial institutions. PRIVATIZED PROFIT and SOCIALIZED RISK. Right now, work in the Athabasca tar sands is phenomenally profitable (in part due to a complete lack of environmental regulation).

So why do already astronomically rich companies need to forgo BILLIONS in taxes so they can expand faster? This is exactly the gift Mr. Harper gave them while cutting funding for literacy, women, seniors, and veterans.

This isn't capitalism, socialism, communism, or pragmatism. This is neo-liberalism which I also see as rampant corporatism. It is BIG government run for the benefit of BIG and EXISTING corporations. It leaves labour, the self-employed, and small-to-medium business behind in the dust.

As I see it, we have to invest in our communities - hardworking families, farmers, foresters, fishermen, and our small businesses. These investments in our local economies will have larger payoffs in the long run.

2) Tradition: More here than anywhere else I have been, people vote by colour. Indeed, while covering the last federal election, CTV's Lloyd Robertson said, " ... look at the NDP in Fundy Royal - that's Canada's most conservative riding!"

As a candidate from a "non-traditional" party, it is my job to provide a credible alternative and a real reason to change. I know that my approach to economics has got people talking positively, so credibility is not an issue. I think change is absolutely needed in Fundy Royal, and in New Brunswick, because we know the old way is not working at the kitchen table so to speak. I mean, we have a government that is willing to increase taxes on the poor, give big corporate managers a tax break, and we'll still need to cut investment in social programmes. This is lunacy. It is a waste of taxpayers dollars and goes against the principles of investment in sustainable economic growth. Pardon my bluntness, but "Throw the bums - the corporate welfare bums - out!"

That's exactly what I am off to do today. Canvassing blitz in Quispamsis today. Next Saturday we'll do Hampton. Contact the office (832-0570 or info@robmoirndp.com) if you can help out.

In the meantime, please talk to your friends and neighbours. Let's seize this opportunity for positive change.

Rob Moir renews call for full panel EIA of 2nd refinery

2008-09-12T09:17:00.002-04:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
11 SEPTEMBER 2008

Kingston, New Brunswick

Rob Moir, environmental economist and candidate for the Fundy Royal New Democrats, is re-issuing his call for a Full Federal Panel Review of the environmental impacts of the entire operations of the proposed second oil refinery in Saint John. The federal government has agreed to study only the marine impacts.

"I know it is called 'Project Eider Rock'," states Moir, "but really it is just another big stinky oil refinery, and recent scientific studies confirm that."

Moir is referring to a 2008 study in the August volume of the Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association that was mentioned in last Saturday's Globe and Mail and on CBC radio yesterday (September 10). Using lasers to estimate fugitive emissions, the study shows that at an Alberta oil refinery half the size of the existing refinery in Saint John, smog-causing hydrocarbon emissions are about 15 times higher than those reported to government regulators, and cancer-linked benzene emissions are about 19 times higher.

"The existing refinery is twice the size of that studied," notes Moir, "and now there is a proposal to build a second one of equal size, but with virtually no federal assessment of the environmental impacts? Then we hear that the provincial government is not going to require Irving Oil to build in any carbon offsets for the new refinery. This is quite troubling!"

"Sure there are jobs - and big profits for the Irvings too," continues Moir, "but as you watch the fog creep up the Bay of Fundy, you realize that it is people in Fundy Royal and Moncton that will also pay the price in terms of healthcare costs, missed work days, and quality of life. People forget that the economy and the environment are a closed system – there is no trade-off."

Moir has asked for a Full Federal Panel Review in the past and followed up his request with complaints to both Environment Minister, Mr. Baird and directly to Environment Canada. "How can Environment Canada ignore its duty to trigger a full review," asks Moir, "when a number of a refinery's emissions appear on their Priority Substance Lists?"

An access to information request was filed by Moir to see documents pertaining to the Environment Minister's decision, but it was not pursued as the costs could have exceeded $1,000. "I can't afford that money as a private citizen, but surely as an MP I'd have better luck," notes Moir.

- 30 -

For more information please contact:

Pat Hanratty, Campaign Manager
(506) 647-1405

Rob Moir Campaign Office
1031 Main Street
Hampton, NB
(506) 832-0570

E-mail: info@robmoirndp.com
Web: www.robmoirndp.com

Tax Proposal Op Ed

2008-09-10T20:04:00.004-04:00

The Net Effect of New Brunswick’s Tax Proposals

Like many New Brunswickers, I am interested in the tax proposals released by Premier Graham’s government in the Tax Green Paper. I have now submitted my written comments to the government and can only hope that they take the time to consider them along with the many comments received from others. I would like to publicly raise one issue which has only received lip service to date.

A significant portion of the discussion paper outlines the predicted effects of a flat income tax. The authors repeatedly show that everyone who already pays income tax would pay less under either a flat tax or a two-part tax (see Tables 2 , 3, 6, and 7 in the discussion paper). While the discussion paper reads like a marketing pamphlet, making great fanfare of reduced income taxes, it is a very simple mathematical truth that if income is taxed at a lower rate then people pay less income tax.

With little supporting analysis, the discussion paper vaguely estimates that the combined income tax and corporate tax cuts will leave New Brunswick short close to a half-a-billion dollars on tax revenues. According to the discussion paper, this decline in tax revenues should be offset by an increase in tax revenues from other sources: $250 million from a 2% hike in the HST (as suggested by Frank McKenna), and $100 million from a carbon tax (as suggested by Jack Mintz) which will be placed on fuel, heating oil, and electricity.

The discussion paper suggests that the hike in HST is relatively small – “3¢ on a $1.50 coffee” – and implies it would be painless. This, I contend, is a political sleight of hand. It is like a used car salesman dropping the price of a car by $1,000 but then charging you $300 for each tire. The cost of the car increases by $200 overall … unless you can do without tires.

Statistics Canada has powerful software (SPSD/M) designed specifically to look at potential changes in taxes and transfers. While I have not had time to run the entire tax proposal through the software, I have had the chance to study the potential HST effects and the results are disturbing. For brevity I include only the income tax savings for a single tax filer – Table 2 (flat tax) and Table 6 (two-part tax) – as presented in the discussion paper. To these I add the predicted increase in HST payments and then identify the net tax bill.

Net Tax Payments for a Single Tax Filer

	Flat Income Tax			Two-Part Income Tax
Taxable Income	Income Tax Decrease (Table 2, p.15)	HST Increase	Net Tax Bill	Income Tax Decrease (Table 6, p.19)	HST Increase	Net Tax Bill
$15,000	-$20	+$210	+$190	-$21	+$210	+$189
$25,000	-$359	+$264	-$95	-$326	+$264	-$62
$40,000	-$522	+$405	-$117	-$452	+$405	-$47
$60,000	-$1,018	+$489	-$529	-$1,146	+$489	-$657
$100,000	-$3,160	+$644	-$2,516	-$2,938	+$644	-$2,294
$140,000	-$6,188	+$1,256	-$4,932	-$5,166	+$1,256	-$3,910

As a result of the HST increase, overall tax “savings” are smaller. Indeed, for single filers with incomes less than $60,000 the tax “savings” are downright modest and for the lowest income earners, the tax bill will likely increase. (For the sake of comparison, 50% of single income earners in New Brunswick earn less than $21,000 according to Statistics Canada.) On the other hand, if you are fortunate enough to earn more than $60,000 (as am I), then the tax savings are likely to be substantial.

Given travel and energy use has a relatively large fixed component that does not depend upon income the carbon tax proposed in the paper would likely continue to move us in the same direction.

These data raise two important questions. First, why haven’t the various tax proposals been subjected to complete analysis? Second, are the rather modest gains most New Brunswickers are likely to see worth the expenditure cuts that will necessarily follow from a $150 million loss in tax revenues?

At the very least, the government’s tax proposals should undergo complete analysis using state-of-the-art software like SPSD/M. Along with publishing the entire results of this analysis, Premier Graham’s government should also publicly present any proposed expenditure decreases, service delivery shifts (from public to private), and efficiency-enhancing activities that he might make as a consequence of the tax revenue loss.

Only with this information in hand can New Brunswickers make informed choices when considering the bold tax and transfer changes suggested in “A Discussion Paper on New Brunswick’s Tax System.”

Rob Moir is an economist who teaches and conducts research at UNB in Saint John. His larger commentary on the tax proposals can be requested at robmoir2@gmail.com.

A Joint Letter I Coordinated

2008-09-10T19:54:00.002-04:00

31 July 2008

To the Hon. Shawn Graham (Premier of New Brunswick) and the Hon. Victor Boudreau (Minister of Finance);

The New Brunswick Government has proposed a new tax and transfer structure for the Province involving significant change from the current system.

We, the undersigned economists from New Brunswick Universities strongly urge the Government to complete the following tasks before further consideration of such sweeping changes in provincial tax policies.

1. Conduct a comprehensive comparative examination (baseline versus variants) of the effect of the tax proposals on household disposable income using Statistics Canada’s Social Policy Simulation Database and Model which is specifically designed to test policy proposals of this nature, and to make public the results of these simulations.

2. Publish a revised version of A Discussion Paper on New Brunswick’s Tax System in such a way as to convey the combined effects of all proposed tax changes on the distribution of household income. For example, Tables 2 and 3 (p.15) and Tables 6 and 7 (p.19) discuss only personal income taxes but mention neither the HST increase, the proposed new carbon tax, nor any potential effects from changes to corporate tax rates.

3. Provide an analysis and empirical evidence from peer-reviewed sources discussing the predicted increase in the provincial tax base and provincial tax revenues resulting from the proposed tax policy changes.

4. Provide an analysis of the effect of the projected increase in the tax base upon equalization. For instance, does a $1 increase in tax revenues lead to a $1 decrease in equalization funding?

5. If analysis indicates a revenue decline, indicate how the Government proposes to deal with revenue shortfalls.

We believe that the above research will provide a clearer picture of the tax proposal and address some of the questions raised in recent public submissions.

Sincerely,

Dr. Rob Moir (Economics, UNB in Saint John; President of the Atlantic Canada Economics Association)
Dr. Rod Hill (Economics, UNB in Saint John)
Dr. Joan McFarland (Economics, Saint Thomas University)
Dr. Joe Ruggeri (Economics, UNB in Fredericton; Vaughan Chair in Regional Economics)
Professor Ron LeBlanc (Economics, Université de Moncton; Chair)
Dr. Michel Deslierres (Economics, Université de Moncton)
Dr. Stephen Law (Economics, Mount Allison University)
Dr. Andrew Secord (Economics, Saint Thomas University)
Dr. Ted McDonald (Economics, UNB in Fredericton)
Dr. Mike Farnworth (Economics, UNB in Fredericton)
Dr. Dev Gupta (Economics, Saint Thomas University)
Dr. Weiqiu Yu (Economics, UNB in Fredericton)
Dr. Tony Myatt (Economics, UNB in Fredericton)

CC : Mr. Jeannot Volpé (Leader of the Opposition), Mr. Roger Duguay (Leader of the NB NDP), Mr. Mike Milligan (Leader of the NB Green Party), Media Outlets

Gearing up for Ottawa

2008-09-10T18:51:00.002-04:00

Sorry to have been away for so long. First I got busy putting together a reply to that backwards tax proposal put together by the neo-liberal Liberals of New Brunswick. I loved the fact that most families would pay more in taxes overall so that the Irvings and their executives could pay less. I'll post a piece I wrote for the TJ in a few minutes or so. In any event, that took a while as I had to learn how to use some new software.

Then there was work on writing some papers for my daytime job as a prof and taking over as Acting Chair of the Social Science Department. Sneak a vacation day or two in there to spend with my family and that brings us to my big news.

On Aug 30, I became a dad for the third time. Little Tobias was born, and he is amazing. I swear I heard him say, "Dad, Mr. Harper is breaking his rules by calling an election. Please don't let him take over. Dad, please go change the world ... and my diaper."

So here we are, more prepared than ever before. People from all over the riding are calling for signs. Volunteers are coming at us from all directions. Expect to see a press release very soon. And that will be followed by another and another and another. We'll get our message out that the hardworking people of Fundy Royal - the families, the fishermen, foresters, and farmers, the small business owners - we all want our riding back. We want Ottawa to hear from Fundy Royal; we're sick-and-tired of following the latest wishes of Presi (oops) Prime Minister Harper.

So ... I invite you to stand up, take charge, and join in this campaign with everything you've got. I'm not looking to win, I'm looking for us to win!

Campaign launched!

2008-09-09T13:28:00.006-04:00

With the drop of the writ, Rob Moir and his team are busy getting results for you in Fundy Royal.

During the next five weeks, you can keep up to date with the campaign news and views by visiting our new website, www.robmoirndp.com.

In addition, you can drop by our campaign office at 1031 Main St in Hampton to help, or call us at (506) 832-0570.

Together, we can make Rob Moir our next MP!

Wind Energy Conference Ignored by Mr. Harper

2008-07-04T10:28:00.002-04:00

Submitted by a Fundy Royal NDP Volunteer

A news report today on News 88.9 caught my attention as I was driving home. It stated that the World Wind Energy Conference was being held this week in Kingston, Ontario. Private and public sector representatives from all over the world were attending the conference, which was being held in North America for the first time in history.

A quick look at the website at http://wwec2008.com/ shows that the conference is being hosted and heavily sponsored by the Ontario government, and is being attended by government officials from all over the world. Unfortunately, despite numerous invitations, not a single representative from Stephen Harper's Environment office chose to attend the conference, which was called to discuss "the role of community power in building a robust renewable energy industry and strategies [that] strengthen local project control and economic returns within the community."

The World Wind Energy Association is a forward-thinking organization that advocates global co-operation to deal with the challenges of wind power generation. Its mission statement can be found here: http://www.wwindea.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=23&Itemid=29. It is quite upsetting that when such an important and exciting event comes to Canada, our own federal government not only refuses to sponsor and promote the conference, but that it cannot even find the time to send a representative to discuss environmental issues with experts from around the world. This is especially disappointing due to the fact that the conference was called to discuss issues of community wind power generation, something that will make alternative energy more accessible and affordable to ordinary working families across the country.

As concerned Canadians, we must to hold Harper to task on his environmental record (or lack thereof). We cannot afford to have our voices ignored on the world stage in this critically important battle.

Comment to CBC's SHIFT

2008-06-17T07:45:00.002-04:00

On Tax Freedom Day

Over the last few days, the CBC has celebrated the Fraser Institute's "Tax Freedom Day."

I admit the name is catchy, but it disguises some real facts. How about instead we call it "Freedom from Firefighters Day," or "Road Repair Free Day," or "Freedom from Literacy Day." These are the services and programs that are provided through our taxes. Taxes pay for the investments we collectively make as Canadians. (Whether we invest wisely or not is a separate question.)

To see this point another way, why don't we create "Food Freedom Day" which would be the last day in the year that the typical Canadian family stops devoting it's hard-earned dollars toward food consumption (to spend on rides at the fair perhaps)?

I am not trying to argue that taxes should go up, down, or sideways, but I do feel it is important that we work to remove loaded language when it comes to taxes. If we do not, then we pave the way for successive governments come in and indiscriminately cut taxes, generally for those at the upper end of the income distribution, market it to us as a good thing (e.g., "tax relief"), and then have us each individually pay a greater amount for services. Our taxes fall, we pay an even greater amount to live, we thank our governments for the "relief," and we stare in wonder at our empty pocketbooks.

Then again, maybe we've already started down that road.

According to the Fraser Institute, New Brunswick is the second province in Canada to "arrive" at Tax Freedom Day - a few days behind Alberta. If I am wrong in my above analysis, then the NB government will conclude that while we may want to fiddle with taxes a bit, we do not need wholesale tax reform as proposed in their "Green Paper." However, if the real goal is just lower taxes (for lower taxes sake), then they will permit us a few weeks of "public input and consultation" and they will likely implement the middle-of-the-road ideas. We'll see.

Carleton Free Press

2008-06-02T19:08:00.003-04:00

Haven't posted in a while as I've been teaching during the spring term and getting a paper ready for the Canadian Economics Association meetings in Vancouver.

Here's a letter I sent off to the Irving papers ... again, doubt they'll publish it.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate retired Carleton University journalism professor Mr. Bob Rupert and Mr. Ken Langdon, editor and publisher respectively of the Carleton Free Press (Woodstock, New Brunswick). Their newspaper took home the prestigious Canadian Association of Journalists President's Award on May 24.

If we are to have any success in obtaining a goal of self-sufficiency, we must certainly celebrate the accomplishments of our small businesses. To all the employees at Carleton Free Press, congratulations!

This letter was inspired by the articles in the links below. The first is a really fun read (for New Brunswickers). I have also informed all 3 CBC Information Morning crews and News 88.9.

(1) http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/MediaNews/2008/05/26/5681061-sun.html

(2) http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/cityplus/story.html?id=68298201-c2d6-48ef-9b7e-01d04d739810

Pass it on!

Decommissioning fund is no panacea

2008-05-06T05:53:00.002-04:00

I sent this to the TJ in early May. So far, no action.

I was intrigued by Professor Lowe’s letter on safe uranium mining (28 April), especially his comments on decommissioning funding for uranium mines.

Quite by coincidence, I have been preparing for a talk on energy alternatives and was reading a paper entitled, “U.S. nuclear plant decommissioning funding adequacy …” This paper was written by D. Williams (an economics researcher in the U.S. Government Accountability Office) and was published in Energy Economics in 2007.

To quote his findings, “the initial decommissioning cost estimates have been cited by many industry observers as being far too low [and] [t]he tax-paying public, future ratepayers, and/or stockholders may be assessed for funding shortfalls.”

Furthermore “a small - but not inconsequential - number of the 222 funds show balances (and/or contributions) that are below, and some far below, their benchmark levels …” and “the risk is not inconsequential that [economic] conditions could be well below average, leading to large numbers of underfunded trust funds.”

The paper uses data up to 2004. We certainly know that economic conditions have been “below average” since then.

Granted, this is U.S. research, and it deals with the reactor, as opposed to the mining end of the nuclear power cycle, but the conclusion is clear that the simple existence of decommissioning funding is insufficient to safeguard the public from ultimately paying for cleanup.

My guess is that the nuclear industry is fairly similar both across nations and within the nuclear power cycle from mining to power generation and ultimately disposal. Until similar thorough research is conducted upon the health and management of decommissioning funding for the Canadian uranium mining industry, then our best bet is to err on the side of caution.

New Letter to the Editor re: "Lepreau 2"

2008-04-28T20:33:00.002-04:00

Published Monday April 28th, 2008
Appeared in the Saint John Telegraph Journal and the Fredericton Daily Gleaner

Use caution in nuclear decision

The Graham government seems to have its mind set on a second, preferably AECL-designed, nuclear reactor.

Jack Keir is quite bullish on the topic according to newspaper and radio reports. News coverage and independent consultant reports have cautioned that the decision to move forward depends upon the power demands of the New England market.

It seems that this demand is somewhat uncertain now and may get more uncertain in the future. As I was reading and listening to these stories, I have had a growing sense of déjà vu.

Wasn't there something in the recent past about the Lord government and NB Power moving forward without contracts in place - without really assessing the market?

Wasn't the Orimulsion fiasco a key election issue that propelled Graham to power and Keir into the minister's seat at the Department of Energy? Then again, maybe Graham wants to outperform Lord and do things bigger - if not exactly better.

ROB MOIR

NDP candidate for Fundy Royal

Natural Gas in NB

2008-04-11T01:11:00.003-04:00

I sent this to the 3 big Irving papers and the Kings County Record. I don't know if it will be published, but I wanted to share it.

I too share Ms. Whalen’s concerns over the storage of natural gas in salt caverns (Telegraph Journal, 10 April, Letters). Recent radio reports have suggested this storage option, but I wonder if people realize that the idea was publicly discussed by Corridor Resources at a Global Energy Conference held on 24 October 2007 in Miami?

Corridor’s presentation can be found at www.corridor.ca/downloads/investors/presentation-global-energy-conference-october-2007.pdf. If you look at page 27, you will notice a suggested gas pipeline from the McCully gas field to a salt cavern near Salt Springs. The gas pipeline seems to follow a similar route to the proposed brine line from the potash mine.

Perhaps more interesting is the proposed gas pipeline connecting Canaport LNG to the same salt cavern.

Are we witnessing a budding partnership between Corridor Resources and a company partially owned by Irving Oil? Could this be the reason two different provincial governments and Fundy Royal’s MP, Rob Moore, have failed to pursue the idea of an Energy Park in the Sussex area?

Suppose Corridor Resources is successful in finding the “several trillion cubic feet of [natural] gas” they suspect is in the Frederick Brook shale deposit near Elgin (Telegraph Journal, 2 April, B1). Can New Brunswickers look forward to producing cleaner power in a gas turbine co-generation plant? Can we get the jobs instead of exporting the gas to Boston and importing either value-added products or energy?

Open Letter to Garth Moore, President of PotashCorp

2008-04-08T17:43:00.001-04:00

PotashCorp,
Suite 500, 122 – 1st Avenue South,
Saskatoon,
SK S7K 7G3

7 April 2008

Dear Mr. Garth Moore (President, PCS Potash);

I address this Open Letter to you and ask that you share it with the identified company officials below.

As you know, most people in southern New Brunswick welcome the jobs your company has created here and, based on reliable news reports, find ourselves applauding both your company's financial success and generosity for groups such as the youth of Illinois. However we have a local concern – the people near your mine in Penobsquis who have lost access to safe clean water!

The belief exists that, in the absence of the mine, some residents in Penobsquis might still have the reliable water supply they enjoyed in the past.

I remind you of some public statements made recently either by PotashCorp or the government of New Brunswick.

• According to a New Brunswick government press release (20 July 2007), Premier Graham offered the new Potash mine (Picadilly) $35 million in royalty rate reductions over the next 20 years. A worldwide increase in demand for fertilizer to increase food and bio-fuel crop yields means that potash, a key fertilizer component, will increase in price. This means the rate reduction will likely rise in value.
• According to a 15 January 2008 PotashCorp news release, PotashCorp has been named one of Fortune Magazine's "top foreign stocks for 2008." The company points out that its shares have increased 5,600% since it went public in 1989.
• According to PotashCorp's 24 January 2008 news release, the company's net income exceeded $1.1 billion in 2007.
• On 29 January 2008, Jim Jubak, Microsoft Networks investment adviser ("the Web's most widely-read investing writer") reported, "On its [PotashCorp's] Jan 24. conference call, this fertilizer company said – and I have listened to this twice – that no company in the world will be more profitable over the next five years." (emphasis mine)
• PotashCorp issued a press release (29 January 2008) noting its $1.5 million donation to Youth Services of Glenview/Northbrook in Illinois.

PotashCorp's business success and its significant contribution to Glenview/Northbrook, Illinois is commendable but it is worrisome that approximately 50 households in the Penobsquis area now find themselves with water problems – tainted wells, empty wells, etc. Almost 8.5 million litres of brine are shipped from the mine each day while these hardworking people require trucks to deliver washing and drinking water to their homes.

There are numerous precedents for large companies seeing a community need to respond with a significant financial contribution to fix the problem. They do this because it is a 'quality of life' challenge for those affected and an opportunity for the company to give back to the community from which springs its wealth.

Having PotashCorp fund the installation of a municipal water system to homes in the affected communities would be just such an act of generosity. People in the Penobsquis and Sussex area who currently have water problems (or may develop them in the future), would be guaranteed access to safe, clean, and reliable drinking water into the future.

I trust that PotashCorp will see the benefits of embracing its corporate responsibility in this matter, as a healthy and supportive community can only enhance the success of your business.

Sincerely,

Rob Moir
Economist, NDP Candidate (Fundy Royal)
robmoirndp@gmail.com

CC (PotashCorp): William J. Doyle (President & CEO, PotashCorp), John Hewson (Manager, Sustainablity, PotashCorp)

CC (Government of New Brunswick): Premier Shawn Graham, Hon. Roland Haché (Minister of the Environment)

Media Copies: Telegraph Journal, Times & Transcript, Daily Gleaner, Kings County Record, Saskatoon Star Phoenix, Rogers Media (News 88.9, News 91.9), CBC Radio, Radio-Canada, Acadia Broadcasting (CHSJ-FM, The Wave FM), 590 CJCW Radio, The Globe and Mail, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

Take on the big banks and save money!

2008-04-03T22:14:00.003-04:00

If you are tired of paying exorbitant interest rates on your credit card debt, you're not alone. But there is relief. The Fundy Royal NDP wants you to know that you may be able to reduce your credit card interest rate, just by calling them. On the NDP website, you can check out our credit card fee reduction kit and give it a try for yourself!

The following CBC report shows just how well this approach works!

It raises the question: If it is so easy to reduce our interest rates, why are they so high in the first place?

It is for this reason that the NDP has been taking leadership on this issue by advocating for more consumer-friendly banking legislation, a cap on credit card interest rates, and an end to the unfair burden that it places on working families across the country.

- Fundy Royal NDP

True costs of uranium mining outweigh benefits

2008-04-02T17:40:00.000-04:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2 April 2008
Moncton, New Brunswick

Fundy Royal NDP candidate and economist Rob Moir was among the keynote speakers at Moncton's Public Awareness meeting to discuss the effects of test drilling and uranium mining on our health and ecosystem. Dr. Moir's presentation outlined the overall effects that uranium exploration and mining has on the economy.

Moir toasted the crowd with a glass of Moncton city water, and commenced by saying, "Thank you Moncton for keeping water public, and here's to keeping it free of radioactivity."

Dr. Moir went on to challenge the common notion that this development represents a choice between the environment and the economy. "The reality of the situation," says Moir, "is that this is a choice simply between short-term business profits and the environment." Moir contends that many of the economic costs of such projects are drawn out into the long term, and they persist well after the profits have been realized. Some of these costs include not only environmental damage, but long term health costs, ongoing cleanup efforts, and systemic reductions in property values. Unfortunately, these spillover costs are incurred by working people, businesses, and governments for generations.

Dr. Moir thanks members of the Conservation Council of New Brunswick for the invitation to speak at this function, and is encouraged by the strong turnout at the Capitol Theatre. "It is certainly promising to see so many people interested and involved with this issue. It is critically important at this time for citizens of Fundy Royal, New Brunswick, and Canada as a whole to work together and have our voices heard."

The Fundy Royal NDP invite you to sign the online petition below:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-uranium-mining-in-new-brunswick

Voting Records

2008-03-28T16:26:00.003-04:00

People, both NDP supporters and non-supporters, have told me they are upset with the NDP propping up the Harper government. They see Jack Layton as ineffectual and sometimes too cooperative with Harper.

This is a quick summary of the latest sitting of Parliament and votes cast. For greater detail, see this Edmonton Journal article (28 March 2008). There have been a total of 76 votes so far in this session.

	Avg # of Votes by MPs	Leader’s # of Votes	% Agreement with CONS
CONS	73	49	n/a
LIBS	49	33	60%+
BLOQ	71	73	41%
NDP	68	73	26%

The average voting rate for Liberal MPs is about 64.4% which is less than the 64.7% of eligible voters who felt called to vote in the last Federal Election.

Who is the Real Opposition?

If you count seats, I guess it is the Liberals.

However, when it comes to votes and voting record, the Real Opposition is the NDP!

If we want to tame Harper, if we want to build a Canada that works for average hardworking Canadians and their families, then next time around, vote NDP. We're always on the job!

Soaring Costs for Afghanistan

2008-03-26T13:04:00.002-04:00

On March 25 the Canadian Press reported that the Canadian military has been cleared to fire GPS-guided Excalibur artillery shells in Afghanistan.

These shells cost $150,000 each!

Each time the military fires one of these shells, they spend more than I paid altogether for my house and two slightly-used cars.

With a mounting death toll on all sides, decreased security, and insufficient and inefficient development aid, I think it is high time we stop and completely rethink how we approach this mission.

For more information:

This OXFAM article from Nov. 2007 is quite revealing as is their more recent (Jan. 2008) update.

Oh what a tangled web ...

2008-03-17T21:24:00.003-04:00

I think it is great that New Brunswick is finally getting around to suing 14 tobacco companies for the healthcare costs we have paid for over the years. I suspect that the basis for this lawsuit is the half-truths told to us for a long time about the dangers of cigarette smoking - at least that has been the basis for state- and province-wide lawsuits elsewhere.

But, it is here that our story gets a bit twisted.

The public relations campaign for Big Tobacco was handled, at least in part, by Hill & Knowlton. This campaign included issuing The Frank Statement and helping to organize the Council for Tobacco Research which was used to cast doubt on the many scientific papers that raised health concerns about smoking. (The Council for Tobacco Research closed in 1999.)

While this ancient history is being rehashed in our province, we seem to be headed down a similar path.

One of Hill & Knowlton's more recent clients is the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) which has focused on marketing nuclear power as the new "green" energy. Interestingly, a 1998 ruling by the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus in the United States has issued a warning to the NEI recommending that "water and air pollution claims be carefully qualified to avoid any potential for customer confusion, and that the broad, unqualified claims that nuclear energy is 'Environmentally Clean' or produces electricity 'without polluting the environment' be discontinued."

It is also interesting to note that one of the members for the pro-nuclear front group established by Hill & Knowlton is none other than Patrick Moore who made a pro-nuclear presentation in Saint John in early 2008.

When will we ever learn?

Letters to the Editor...

2008-03-13T12:34:00.003-04:00

The two following letters appeared in the March 13th edition of the Telegraph Journal in Saint John, NB.

Save the money wasted on reports

I suspect that the Graham government will one day be remembered as an era of rule by report. I am not sure how many will think that it was an era of 'good' rule however.

Many people predicted the general policy recommendations of the Post-Secondary Education report before it was officially released, even as a trial balloon. It would seem that recommending that we destroy universities and build polytechnics might be expected when one of the report's authors (Rick Miner) sits on the board of Polytechnics Canada.

While I have heard on his call-in sessions that Education Minister Lamrock is not interested in anecdotal evidence, I was told last summer that French immersion in general, and early French immersion in particular, was under threat from his office.

Half-a-year later the government receives a report that, contrary to respected evidence from across the nation, severely undermines French immersion in New Brunswick.

Then the government receives "Public Views on Forest Management in New Brunswick" which surveys people's opinions of the management of Crown lands. This report is about our land, and how we feel about it; so the Graham government permits one public presentation of the report's findings and cancels eight others.

If this government wants to rule by decree - not something that I support - then please save taxpayers the money you waste on reports that either reach the conclusion you've already come to, or provide information that you are unwilling to hear.

ROB MOIR
NDP candidate for Fundy Royal

_______________________________________________________________

Canadians want clean air, water

Canadians want action to protect our environment. We want clean air and water for our children and grandchildren. Unfortunately the Harper government isn't listening. A year ago, the Conservatives introduced their so-called Clean Air Act - a bill that would make the air dirtier.

The NDP convinced all parties to work together to re-write the bill.

The new Clean Air and Climate Change Act was supported by the majority of Parliament. When the government shelved the improved C-30, the NDP made a motion to bring the Bill back. That motion also was supported by a majority of this House.

Yet, now, months later, no action has been taken on this Bill. The NDP believes that Canadians can't wait any longer, and used their Opposition Day in the House of Commons on Monday to introduce a vote of non-confidence in the Harper government, for its refusal to bring the Clean Air and Climate Change Act back to the House. That motion was defeated with the help of the Liberals.

Millions of Canadians who sent Liberal MPs to Ottawa must be sorely disappointed to know that only ten Liberal MP's even voted on this motion.

All the others abstained, including each and every New Brunswick Liberal MP.

Why do Dion's Liberals continue to prop up the Harper government? Are no issues important enough for action? Not even the environment?

Only the NDP has been consistently determined to protect our environment and Canadian families.

Only the NDP has been serving as opposition.

ALICE FINNAMORE
(NDP Candidate for) Tobique-Mactaquac

Recent Letter - Cluster Munitions

2008-03-05T21:12:00.003-04:00

This was published in the March 4 Telegraph Journal.

Little mention of cluster munitions

There is little or no mention in the Canadian news of the recent Conference on Cluster Munitions that took place in Wellington, New Zealand (Feb. 18-22). Only CBC's "Overnight" show mentioned the conference as part of its Dutch Public Radio summary. In total, 82 nations including Canada signed a draft treaty to ban cluster munitions, as reported by Human Rights Watch. As the nation that led the charge to ban landmines around the world we should be proud of this recent accomplishment.

Still, we should note that Canada tried to weaken the draft treaty because of interoperability issues with the United States whose military uses cluster munitions in places like Afghanistan. The United States, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, and Russia were not party to the draft treaty.

I hope that when the treaty is signed in Dublin in May, the Canadian delegation can sign the document with confidence that defines a new-found Canadian independence in foreign relations. I also hope that there is more news coverage of the signing.

ROB MOIR

NDP candidate for Fundy Royal

Why Vote NDP?

2008-03-05T21:03:00.006-04:00

This comes from the Ottawa Sun.

Fri, February 29, 2008

There's always another option

Stephane Dion, recently U-Boated on YouTube, can be trusted on one point: To secure victory he is always ready to retreat.

Rick Mercer notwithstanding, what is the average non-comedian to make of Captain Collapse's latest battle whimper? -- "We'll find a way to not defeat the government and to express our disagreement with this budget."

So just how does one suck while also attempting to blow? By having a handful of Liberals vote against the budget while the rest abstain or stay in bed.

If a confidence vote is at one level the invitation to step outside and settle it in the parking lot, the Grits have signalled time after time that there is nothing on the political landscape worth fighting for, including the Afghanistan mission, the environment, the omnibus crime bill or the economic direction of the country.

I have a suggestion for giving the gutless Grits what they deserve. Who says they are the only government in waiting? There has been another party around since 1961 that has never been trusted to be the government of this country or even the Opposition, though in 1988 the NDP did win 43 seats. My proposal is this: Those hordes of urban voters who just can't stand the Conservatives should try a new option -- the NDP.

I have to laugh when callers to my program inveigh against the very possibility of giving the NDP some real power in Parliament. Most of them want to talk about the disastrous economic consequences of what the "socialists" would do. Without noting the party's commitment to balanced budgets, they talk about the mountains of debt that would pile up.

But wait? Wasn't it the Liberals under Pierre Trudeau who spent the numbers off the national credit card and attempted to breast-feed the nation from cradle to grave? Wasn't it the Conservatives under Brian Mulroney who pushed Canada toward fiscal meltdown in two terms of drop-dead financial profligacy? Never mind what the NDP might do. Think about what the traditional parties have done. By the latest calculations, Canadians are coughing up $18 million a day, every day, to pay the interest on the mountains of debt the so-called "responsible" parties have racked up.

Then there is the "Remember Ontario" refrain, a dour reference to Bob Rae's dubious stewardship of Confederation's former Big Kahuna. Surely because of what Bob Rae did to Ontario, surely the NDP must never be trusted to govern again. People who argue like that almost never want to talk about Roy Romanow, living proof that an NDP government can be every bit as fiscally responsible as anyone else, while still promoting the party's policies and values.

It bears remembering: Those enemies of the Common Sense Revolution may not have liked Mike Harris, but no one suggests that a Conservative must never again run the show at Queen's Park. Quebecers booted out Robert Bourassa with great gusto, then brought him back, and now have another Liberal calling the shots in Quebec City. A poor job rating does not bring eternal banishment to the traditional parties, so why should it to the NDP?

The list of NDP politicians that didn't ruin their provinces by winning power is long and not without some distinction: Dave Barrett, Mike Harcourt, Glen Clark, Alan Blakeney, Roy Romanow and Lorne Calvert. Gazooks, even Albertans once voted in the NDP as the official Opposition!

I ask you, is it really that scary to think of Jack Layton where Stephane Dion now sits showing the white feather? After all, at least the guy has a forward gear.

Official Opposition?

2008-03-05T08:04:00.002-04:00

This comes from the NDP website. While I knew that the Liberal Party had assisted Mr. Harper on some issues, I didn't realize the extent of the list:

Harper’s agenda: Kill NDP motion to ban cosmetic pesticides
Liberals helped by: Voting with Harper (16 May 2006)

Harper’s agenda: Extend the combat mission in Afghanistan from 2007 until 2009
Liberals helped by: Voting with Harper (17 May 2006)

Harper’s agenda: Permit replacement workers in federal workplaces
Liberals helped by: Voting with Harper (21 March 2007)

Harper’s agenda: Kill NDP motion for withdrawal from combat mission in Afghanistan
Liberals helped by: Voting with Harper. (30 April 2007)

Harper’s agenda: Kill NDP motion to restart study of electoral reform
Liberals helped by: Voting with Harper (2 May 2007)

Harper’s agenda: End Canada’s involvement in Kyoto
Liberals helped by: Abstaining (24 October 2007)

Harper’s agenda: Cut $5.3 billion a year from public services
Liberals helped by: Abstaining (31 October 2007)

Harper’s agenda: Stop a package to help the ailing manufacturing and forestry sector
Liberals helped by: Abstaining (14 November 2007)

Harper’s agenda: Put $50.5 billion in giveaways to profitable corporations ahead of child care, poverty alleviation and First Nations
Liberals helped by: Abstaining four times (4, 10 and 13 December 2007)

Harper’s agenda: Reinstate "security certificates" opposed by human rights advocates
Liberals helped by: Voting with Harper (6 February 2008)

Harper’s agenda: Link passage of crime bills to confidence in the government –
Liberals helped by: Abstained (12 February 2008)

Harper’s agenda: Have third budget adopted without bargaining with opposition parties
Liberals helped by: Ordering enough Liberal MPs to miss the vote to ensure its passage (4 March 2008)

Harper’s agenda: Extend Canada’s military role in Afghanistan until 2011
Liberals helped by: Negotiating an extension of Canada’s military role until 2011 (13 March 2008)

The full feature can be found here.

An Interesting Take on Afghanistan

2008-03-05T07:36:00.002-04:00

On March 1 an interesting article "The ugly truth in Afghanistan" appeared. It is lengthy, but quite a worthwhile read. I will include multiple links as the paper often removes story links after a while.

Here's a link
This link takes you to the G&M's text version of the article
Here's the Globe & Mail online link

Chalk River Fallout - Manufactured Crisis?

2008-03-05T07:23:00.002-04:00

The events at the Chalk River nuclear reactor seem to be nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt by a government to assume control of the nuclear industry in Canada. The firing of Linda Keen, the Executive Director of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, takes on a whole new meaning in light of this story.

Government inflated fear of medical isotope shortage

Backup supplies were readily available from reactors in Europe and South Africa

March 01, 2008

TORONTO STAR

Alan Kuperman

When Canada's Parliament overrode the country's top nuclear-safety regulator in December, ordering the restart of a nuclear reactor at Chalk River in the absence of documented safety upgrades to guard against a core meltdown, most Canadians assumed such emergency action was necessary to assure a continued supply of vital medical isotopes.

But this assumption was false – a canard employed to persuade legislators to sidestep the safety officials, thereby protecting the profits of a private Canadian company at the expense of risking a nuclear accident.

The company, MDS Nordion, now admits that prior to the emergency legislation of Dec. 12, it already was receiving backup isotope supplies from a South African producer, NTP.

Two days later, Nordion started receiving isotopes from Europe, another backup that it knew was on the way prior to Parliament's action.

Such facts were not reported at the time, which leaves only two possibilities: The information was withheld by Nordion or by the government.

In light of these revelations, Nordion now insists that all potential backup supplies were inadequate to satisfy customer demand without also restarting the National Research Universal reactor at Chalk River.

Says a Nordion spokesperson: "None of the other commercial isotope reactors have the ability to do more than increase their collective production capacity by 10 to 15 per cent in this type of an unplanned event. These producers collectively cannot mitigate this type of a precipitous event."

But this latest Nordion claim also is false, according to a definitive accounting of global isotope production capacity presented at an international conference in 2005 by Belgian scientists from one of the world's largest isotope producers, Institut National des Radioéléments.

The report documents that European and South African reactors typically operate well below capacity, which is why they together produce less than 60 per cent of world demand, while Nordion produces almost as much at a single reactor. But at peak operation, the non-Canadian reactors are capable of producing a collective 160 per cent of world demand.

In other words, these foreign sources can increase production not by a mere 10 to 15 per cent, as Nordion claims, but several-fold, sufficient to fully satisfy global demand even during a temporary Canadian shutdown.

Obviously, Nordion has grossly understated the foreign backup capacity, but it is equally important not to exaggerate it. Overseas facilities undergo planned and unplanned outages, so the peak capacity of non-Canadian reactors at any point in time could be somewhat less than 160 per cent of world demand. Still, under typical circumstances, they are able to satisfy global demand.

Of course, peak capacity cannot be sustained indefinitely. Therefore, a permanent shutdown of the NRU reactor at Chalk River, in the absence of new reactors, would adversely affect the global supply of medical isotopes.

But a short-term shutdown, such as the several weeks that were required to connect backup power to the NRU's emergency coolant pumps, could have been compensated for by a surge in operation of the foreign reactors.

Another concern is that overseas production could be constrained not only by availability of reactors but by the capacity of associated facilities that process irradiated uranium to extract the isotopes.

Typically, however, such facilities likewise operate well below peak capacity, so they too can surge in a crisis.

Finally, money affects production capacity. If a customer asks the operator of a reactor or a processing facility to operate overtime or during a scheduled vacation, it may have to pay extra for the privilege.

Nordion insists that it tried and failed to obtain isotopes from Europe during the NRU shutdown, but some European facilities actually were sitting idle. So the real obstacle may have been Nordion's unwillingness to pay a premium, rather than any alleged inadequacy of European capacity.

Last month, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission announced a jointly sponsored investigation of their actions.

Certainly an inquiry is warranted by a series of missteps:

AECL falsely assured regulators two years ago that safety upgrades were complete.

The shutdown of the reactor was not reported for 12 days to the responsible cabinet minister, who waited three more days to start addressing the issue.

The government then intervened heavy-handedly, waiving the requirement for a safety review and firing the official who had demanded it, even though the review would have delayed the restart by only two days, according to AECL's own estimates.

The proposed inquiry, however, hardly qualifies as independent or comprehensive: AECL is deeply implicated in the events; the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has been neutered by the demotion of its courageous president Linda Keen; and Nordion is strangely left out of the equation.

In light of the gravity of the public health, public safety and governance issues implicated by this scandal, a much deeper investigation is warranted by Canada's Parliament and independent watchdogs.

As the facts now appear, Ottawa quashed safety regulators to restart a potentially risky nuclear reactor, imperilling its citizens for the benefit of a private company, despite the availability of backup isotope supplies from abroad.

Canadian citizens have a right to know why.

Alan J. Kuperman is an assistant professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin, and a senior policy analyst at the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington, D.C.

Press Release - NDP candidate Rob Moir raises concern with Harper budget

2008-03-04T17:24:00.004-04:00

FUNDY ROYAL, NB
3 MARCH 2008

Fundy Royal NDP Candidate and economics professor, Rob Moir, expresses concern with the third budget of Mr. Harper's minority government. After considering the budget for a few days, he finds little in the document that helps ordinary hard-working Canadians.

"There's a great deal of 'flash-in-the pan' about this budget," notes Moir, "but the picture is not at all focused. Numbers are bandied about in an attempt to confound the issue, but these are not numbers that help ordinary Canadians who work so hard for their paycheques."

Many speculate this muted budget was designed as a challenge to the Liberal government to call for a new election. Unwilling to proceed to the polls, Liberal MPs have been caught in a contradictory stance, simultaneously criticizing the budget yet arguing that it contains the essence of any Liberal budget.

NDP Leader Jack Layton points out, "For every one dollar the 2008 Harper budget allocates in new spending, it spends six dollars in corporate tax giveaways. Yet this budget fails to train a single doctor, make a single prescription drug more affordable or build a single unit of affordable housing."

Dr. Moir outlines some of the key components and omissions of Mr. Harper's 'Liberal-light' budget as it relates to the people of Fundy Royal, and New Brunswick as a whole.

Poverty

The National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO) has denounced the budget noting that individuals earning $15,000 per year can expect $215 in reduced taxes in 2008-2009; while those earning $150,000 will pay $3,265 less in taxes.

"Mr. Harper has obviously forgotten our international committment to invest 0.7% of our gross national income toward the eradication of global poverty," says Moir. "We're talking 70¢ out of every $100. If Mr. Harper fails to see the humanity in this investment, then consider the returns from additional security and international goodwill."

A New Savings Plan

The budget offers Canadians the option contributing up to $5,000 annually in a registered savings account where interest, dividend, and capital gains income can grow tax-free.

"Let's look at the numbers," suggests Moir. "Suppose $5,000 is put away in an account that earns 5% - the interest accruing is $250. In the highest income bracket, this money would have been taxed at about 46%, which means a person saves just $115 in taxes. But, there's a more fundamental problem. As a professor with a self-employed wife and a young family, I know I can't afford to take advantage of this new savings vehicle; if I can't, I suspect few hard-working families can, given how much we're all feeling squeezed these days."

"This plan helps the rich escape from paying their fair share of taxes, increases the tax paid by the average Canadian family, and diminishes the services many Canadians use," states Moir.

Post-Secondary Education

Mr. Harper's budget pledges increases in scholarship funding and reforms to Registered Education Savings Plans. While these initiatives have merit, Dr. Moir contends that the budget ignores the root of the problem for Post-Secondary Education in Canada.

"Students gain security in scholarships and more flexible RESPs," he states, "but what they all need is an affordable education in the first place, and that simply means higher transfers to the provinces for post-secondary education."

Employment Insurance

The budget proposes the creation of a Canadian Employment Insurance Financing Board, a Crown corporation that will administer the EI program.

"I see the potential for improvements in the EI program by ensuring that surpluses are kept within the program," says Moir, "but I worry about what Mr. Harper might do to dismantle the program in the future. I see nothing in this budget for skills development, which we sorely need in New Brunswick with the struggles of the forestry industry. This need will continue once the 'boom-times' associated with Saint John's proposed energy hub are over."

Natural Resources & Agriculture

The entire forestry industry, so vital to the New Brunswick economy, will receive only $10 million over two years to promote sales overseas. It is not clear how fishermen and farmers in New Brunswick will fare under this budget.

"Dairy farmers in New Brunswick are rightfully concerned about Mr. Harper's past attacks on Canada's agricultural supply management system," comments Moir. "Who knows if he will come after the New Brunswick Milk Marketing Board?"

The Environment

Moir saves his largest criticism for the budget's environmental policy. He reminds people of the message of Sir Nicholas Stern, once Head of the Government Economic Service (UK) and past Chief Economist of the World Bank, that climate change is a serious economic issue with costs that quickly grow in the absence of any attempt to implement credible plans immediately.

"I like the new directed investments in R&D and the extension of the 50% capital cost allowance for the floundering manufacturing sector," says Moir, "but allowing firms in the oil sands in Alberta to write-off 100% of their capital costs immediately amounts to a transfer to Alberta (Mr. Harper's province), a subsidy to the super-wealthy, and a tax on the environment. The wealth goes to a few but all Canadians are forced to pay the environmental price. This just isn't fair to working people across the entire nation."

"Mr. Harper chooses to subsidize the Canadian nuclear power industry, which has been troubled of late, and to spend heavily on risky carbon sequestration research," argues Moir, "but invests nothing in energy conservation and can only afford to find money to research carbon taxes and emissions trading systems."

"Mr. Harper, I hope you are listening, because I might be able to save Canada $66 million or so," says Moir. "I worked in the McMaster Experimental Economics Lab, and that lab alone has produced 15 papers on the topic of emissions trading systems, including a 1999 paper I co-authored, 'A Laboratory Test of Canadian Proposals for an Emissions Trading Program.' The research is in; the systems work. What we need now is to begin implementation."

Recent Letter - David Wilkins

2008-03-02T09:24:00.001-04:00

This was published in the Daily Gleaner on February 20.

Distinctly un-Canadian

When U.S. ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins, says our Prime Minister is the most powerful person in the world, I think we are meant to believe this is a good thing.

I, for one, am not impressed by such a statement.

Exceptional power requires exceptional responsibility. It is irresponsible and irrational to invest so much power in one person.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper received his mandate because ordinary Canadians no longer trusted the Liberals. Harper promised accountability and a more transparent government.

Now, Harper carefully manages his party to limit communication and ensure most government media relations are handled through the Prime Minister Office.

Harper runs his government with a fear-and-intimidation management style.

Non-partisan groups, such as Democracy Watch, have repeatedly pointed out Harper's failing record on accountability.

Wilkins may be correct in stating Harper is the most powerful person in the world, but many Canadians would agree this is not good for the Canadian public.

Indeed, it is distinctly un-Canadian!

Rob Moir

Clifton Royal, N.B.

Recent Letter - US Troops in Canada

2008-03-02T09:20:00.001-04:00

This was published in the Telegraph Journal on 26 February. The line "Fundy Royal NDP candidate" was added by the paper.

What constitutes an emergency?

A Feb. 22 report in the Ottawa Citizen outlines an important change in Canadian sovereignty; on Feb. 14 the Canada and the United States "signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency."

On the face of it, this does not seem too alarming and could be seen as a formalization of relations between good neighbours. But, what exactly constitutes an emergency?

Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians asks in the original article, "Are we going to see (U.S.) troops on our soil for minor potential threats to a pipeline or a road?"

I wonder if this means American soldiers could be called into Canada if a labour dispute interrupted critical energy exports? Speculation aside, two issues are more immediately worrying. First, because the U.S. military refuses to let its soldiers come under foreign command, there is a question as to who will control these U.S. forces.

Second it seems that under Mr. Harper's regime such answers will be difficult to come by, for while the United States military posted information about the agreement almost immediately, neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian military have made an announcement.

I'm not sure what definitions of transparency and accountability Mr. Harper uses, but they certainly differ from mine.

ROB MOIR

Fundy Royal NDP candidate

Clifton Royal

A Recent Letter - Carbon Taxes

2008-03-02T09:18:00.004-04:00

This was published in the Telegraph Journal on 22 February and Daily Gleaner on 26 February.

Carbon taxes way to go

I was very excited to learn that British Columbia has followed through and introduced carbon taxes.

As a person who has done research in this area, I was excited to see off-setting tax cuts mentioned. Economists refer to this practice as tax-shifting.

Firms, public relations companies, right-wing think tanks and some governments often focus solely on the increase in costs associated with improved environmental quality. They fail to mention the significant damages caused by loosely regulated emissions: climate change; increased demands on our health-care system adding to wait times; reduced productivity; lower crop yields.

Moreover, by stressing carbon taxes as an additional cost or tax or consumer burden, these groups scare the average hard-working consumer who believes we already pay too much tax.

It is great to see B.C. provide a workable solution. Now, are our Premier Shawn Graham and Environment Minister Roland Hache listening or will they choose to ignore this important opportunity?

Science: Canada vs the U.S.

2008-02-24T19:29:00.002-04:00

This is a repost of an article from the science journal, Nature. The web reference is http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7181/full/451866a.html.

Nature 451, 866 (21 February 2008) | doi:10.1038/451866a; Published online 20 February 2008

Science in retreat

Canada has been scientifically healthy. Not so its government.

Comparisons of nations' scientific outputs over the years have shown that Canada's researchers have plenty to be proud of, consistently maintaining their country's position among the world's top ten (see, for example, Nature 430, 311–316; 2004). Alas, their government's track record is dismal by comparison.

When the Canadian government announced earlier this year that it was closing the office of the national science adviser, few in the country's science community were surprised. Science has long faced an uphill battle for recognition in Canada, but the slope became steeper when the Conservative government was elected in 2006.

The decision in 2004 by the then prime minister Paul Martin to appoint a scientist for independent, non-partisan advice on science and technology was a good one — in principle. Arthur Carty, the chemist who secured the position, duly relinquished his post as president of the National Research Council Canada, which he had revitalized.

But his new office was destined to fail. The budget was abysmal and the mandate was vague at best. After winning power from the Liberals, the Conservatives moved Carty's office away from the prime minister's offices to Industry Canada. In 2007, the government formed the 18-member Science, Technology and Innovation Council (STIC). Told that the government would no longer need a science adviser, Carty offered his resignation. From March, the STIC will provide policy advice and report on Canada's science and technology performance. It can be expected to be markedly less independent: although it is stocked with first-class scientists and entrepreneurs, several government administrators also hold seats.

Concerns can only be enhanced by the government's manifest disregard for science. Since prime minister Stephen Harper came to power, his government has been sceptical of the science on climate change and has backed away from Canada's Kyoto commitment. In January, it muzzled Environment Canada's scientists, ordering them to route all media enquires through Ottawa to control the agency's media message. Last week, the prime minister and members of the cabinet failed to attend a ceremony to honour the Canadian scientists who contributed to the international climate-change report that won a share of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

Harper sees himself as the leader of a 'global energy powerhouse' and is committing Canada to a fossil-fuel economy. More than 40 companies have a stake in mining and upgrading the bitumen from the oil sands in Alberta and churning out 1.2 million barrels a day. This activity generates three times as much greenhouse gas as conventional oil drilling. Emissions from Canada's oil and gas industry have risen by 42% since 1990.

There are deeper and more chronic problems for Canadian science. On the surface, funding for university-based research seems strong. The annual budgets for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council tripled and doubled, respectively, between 2000 and 2005. The government has also supported new science projects through government-created corporations such as Genome Canada and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, and has recruited and retained promising young scientists through the Canada Research Chairs programme.

But Genome Canada funds only half of the cost of a research project — scientists must seek the remaining cash from elsewhere. Last year, the CIHR was able to fund only 16% of the applications it received, and cut the budgets of successful applicants by a quarter, on average. And earlier this month, the country's top scientists and university officials warned that they were short of funds to operate multimillion-dollar big-science projects such as the Canadian Light Source synchrotron.

What's to be done? Canada has made good investments in its science infrastructure and its future research leaders. The present government might be dissolved after a vote of confidence next month, which could in itself lead to a change for the better. But in any circumstances, Canada's leading scientists can be public advocates, pointing to the examples of other countries in urging the government of the day to boost their country into a position of leadership rather than reluctant follower.

My Cat Died

2008-02-21T06:46:00.002-04:00

Sadly, last night, my cat died. His brother was eaten by some beastie almost two years ago.

It's hard to see a loved family member depart, but the dignity with which they handle death is inspiring.

We can learn from that dignity both in life and in death. Our agenda must not be self-gain, but all-gain, and we have to pursue this agenda with humility and determination. It isn't the fight that is fun, but the hope that we can make a better world that must form the core of our dignity.

"Courage, my friends; 'tis not too late to build a better world." - Tommy Douglas.

Indeed, courage, my friend, you helped to make this a better world. Thanks for the lesson.

Letter Exchange

2008-02-21T06:37:00.003-04:00

I won't publish the whole sordid story here, but the essence is that after nuclear-apologist and paid consultant, Patrick Moore, came to NB to spread some questionable advice/propaganda about nuclear power, I wrote a letter to the editor. I basically pointed out that Patrick Moore lacks credibility. At one point I said he does little to reconcile his figure of 60 dead with stats suggesting that the numbers may be in the hundreds of thousands. This was published in all of the 3 major Irving papers and the Irving-owned Kings County Record.

A Dr. Lowe (physicist from Etobicoke, ON) sent a reply to my letter which was published on Feb 19 in the Kings County Record. He (and the letter's headline) claimed Moore was right and Moir was wrong. Given this letter could almost be considered libelous - he's attacking my research credibility - I sent in a reply. We'll see if they publish it, but I include it below, because it has some links to data (sources that are pointed to) that discredit the argument that only 60 people died.

Moir replies (Published in the Kings County Record on February 26)

On Feb. 19, the Kings County Record presented a reply to a letter I wrote questioning one of the controversial statistics presented by pro-nuclear activist, Patrick Moore - that just 60 people died in the Chernobyl accident. At the risk of prolonging the debate, I felt it important that I should be allowed to reply as my credibility as a researcher has been brought to question.

As Dr. Lowe points out, the initial UN report claimed around 60 deaths. However, a 2005 report by the International Atomic Energy Association and the World Health Organization, both of which are UN organizations, increased that number officially to 4,000, and suggested there might be an additional 5,000 estimated deaths. Moreover, as reported in the April 2006 New Scientist, “Zhanat Carr, a radiation scientist with the WHO in Geneva, says the 5,000 deaths were omitted [from the 2005 report] because the report was a ‘political communications tool’.” In 2006, the WHO officially reported that there may be “up to 9,000 excess cancer deaths due to Chernobyl.”

Various groups criticize even this number of 9,000 because the WHO report only considered “Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine.” Indeed, significant parts of Europe also suffered from fallout.

Perhaps more convincing is the work of Dr. Richard L. Garwin, Philip D. Reed Senior Fellow for Science and Technology and IBM Fellow Emeritus, who has published more than 500 papers and been granted 45 U.S. patents. He has been involved in the design of nuclear weapons and is a reasoned proponent of the expansion of nuclear power. He certainly cannot be accused of being anti-nuclear power.

In the Letters section of Physics and Society (Jan. 1999) he explains that “even for low-level radiation, deaths due to cancer occur at a rate of … 400 per million person-rem” and with relatively unanimous agreement of an exposure of 600,000 persons, this amounts to early cancer deaths of about 24,000. He repeated this calculation in a speech to the Nuclear Control Institute, Washington DC in 2001.

It is also true that Greenpeace and scientists within Russia place the death toll due to early cancer and other illnesses between 100,000 and 500,000.

In my initial letter, I pointed out that it is difficult to ‘reconcile’ the claims of Patrick Moore with other research. I did not claim that other research is in fact correct as it is very difficult to tabulate death tolls in this situation. However, I still stand by my claim that Patrick Moore’s figure of 60 deaths (as stated in 2008) is difficult to reconcile with other evidence.

I absolutely disagree with Dr. Lowe’s assertion that “Dr. Moore is correct.” Even he claims to accept that there may be an additional 9,000 early cancer deaths. Under the new math, 9,000 is still significantly greater than 60. Indeed, given he is on the pro-nuclear side, one would reasonably have to accept Dr. Garwin’s calculation of 24,000 early cancer deaths as at least a minimum.

I may be an economist, but I am fundamentally a researcher. The data both cited and presented here was found and read in perhaps an hour and a half.

Finally, if I may be so bold, have people thought to question why a scientist in Etobicoke, ON finds it necessary to reply to a letter in the Kings County Record, published in Sussex, NB? While I welcome his attempt at criticism, I find it strange that “experts from away” need to come to New Brunswick’s aid.

Carbon Taxes

2008-02-21T06:33:00.004-04:00

Saw the piece in the Telegraph Journal yesterday (Feb 20) highlight the announcement of carbon taxes in BC. This is awesome news, not just because a government in Canada finally took the economist's advice, but because the BC government implemented tax-shifting as part of the program.

First they fought the issue of climate change. Now they fight the cost battle - it would be too much for us to deal with climate change, let your governments deal with the consequences.

I wrote a letter to the Irving papers highlighting the importance of tax-shifting. We'll see if it gets published.

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

Our latest media release...

2008-02-18T17:11:00.001-04:00

Rob Moir calls for action on NB 'Connecting the Dots' report

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
17 February 2008

Hampton, New Brunswick

The Fundy Royal NDP sees great promise in the recommendations made in "Connecting the Dots," a report by Child and Youth Advocate in New Brunswick, Bernard Richard. This report outlines strategies to help New Brunswick better assist both the families and the children who are considered to be at risk or dealing with complex needs.

"It is refreshing to see such a sensible plan put together in a non-partisan way," comments Rob Moir, NDP candidate for Fundy Royal, "I am very happy that Mr. Richard stresses the importance of community-based solutions."

"On CBC, I heard my friends, Donna and Greg Marquis, talk about the problems they have experienced finding services in our system for their mentally ill son, and I shake my head," says Moir. "It is unfair to so many families left alone to deal with such complex and costly problems. " Richard's report notes that some New Brunswick youth are sent to facilities in Maine at a price-tag in excess of $500,000 a year for behavioural health and educational services. While New Brunswick taxpayers pay for their care, the families of these youth are left to pay for any visits to the children.

The 48 recommendations of the report are broad and include: increasing political direction and accountability; the integration and improvement of services; the de-criminalization of certain conduct by youths with mental health disorders; providing tailor-made educational services and support for families and youths with complex needs; and closing the gap in services for youth aged 16 to 19.

The importance of this report was highlighted by the October 2007 death of a mentally ill New Brunswick teen, Ashley Smith, who died in a segregation cell of a federal prison in Kitchener, Ontario. The length of her journey in the criminal justice system was subsequently attributed in part to her mental health issues. "We see the horrors of mentally-ill people imprisoned in Bosnia, Yemen, Iraq, and Afghanistan and we think it barbaric; yet here in Canada, we have the same problem," notes Dr. Moir. A 2003 Human Rights Watch report noted that, at the time, there were three times as many mentally ill people in United States' prisons as there were patients in their mental hospitals.

Marianna Stack, President of the Elizabeth Fry Society of Saint John, NB, is also pleased with the publishing of this report, and states that her organization "has lobbied the Government of New Brunswick for over a decade to make changes, but as yet have not seen significant differences. We know prisons are not the answer."

"While I hope this report changes the way things happen in New Brunswick, I really think it should be acted upon in Ottawa. Ashley died in a federal prison in Ontario after being housed at a variety of institutions across the country. It is time for the Canadian government to show leadership and invest in fair treatment of our at-risk youth and those with mental health issues," concludes Moir.

- 30 -

Goin' Wood

2008-02-16T15:25:00.001-04:00

I sent this in as an Opinion Piece to the TJ.

Like many, I’ve been thinking of the Graham government’s devotion to phrases such as “self-sufficiency,” “transformational change,” and a non-optional status quo. How can I help it, when I hear them repeated so often?

Unlike most, I had these thoughts in the back of my mind while supervising my son’s birthday party with a dozen of his closest friends. Sam, my son, has reached the ripe-old age of eight and I’m sure many of you can just imagine the energy of those kids as we celebrated at the New Brunswick Museum.

Energy!

The energy hub concept is itself a hub of Graham’s self-sufficiency agenda.

I leaned over to my friend, who just happens to work at Lepreau, and jokingly said, “Perhaps NB Power should harvest all this energy instead of building Lepreau 2.” We talked of giant hamster wheels and rebuilding the sugar refinery so we’d have a source of fuel. Alternatively, we could direct our business to Ganongs. Such a scheme could increase the birth rate and contribute to the government’s population growth agenda.

Then we realized that pesky child labour laws and the fact that NB Power would likely charge parents for babysitting or providing an exercise facility caused us to scrap the idea.

As silly an idea as this is, it reflects some of the values our government says it cares about – think of new ways to get the job done without relying on outside resources.

This got me to thinking, what is wrong with wood?

We have seen a solid argument for wood energy put together in these pages by Roy MacMullin and Carl Duivenvoorden. We even have New Brunswick forestry research scientists like Peter Salonius and George Jenkins who can help us develop an in-house solution. I just thought I’d add an additional economic argument to the mix.

According to Statistics Canada, New Brunswick has approximately 300,000 residences. Approximately 50%, or 150,000 residences are heated primarily by electric heat.

Suppose the New Brunswick government purchased and installed a woodstove heating system for each of these residences. At a cost of approximately $3,000 per installation the cost to the government would be $450 million.

Because woodstove heat production takes place onsite, there is little energy loss due to transmission, thus contributing to high efficiency. As Rick Roth has mentioned (Jan. 25), pellet stoves or using briquettes limits emissions.

We could re-employ some of our forestry workers and help private woodlot owners. Maybe we would construct or expand pellet and briquette plants and develop woodstove manufacturing. Perhaps we could use some of Mr. Harper’s $30 million to begin the projects. Reducing our reliance on some of our fossil fuel-burning generation plants would also contribute to the government’s Climate Change Action Plan.

Now $450 million is not chump change, but it pales in comparison to the projected $6-7 billion cost of building Lepreau 2 and is likely significantly less than the cost of the risk assurance that the Graham government says it is willing to bear to see the project through. It is less than a third of the projected refurbishment cost of the existing Lepreau facility.

I am not saying that wood heat is the only solution; energy conservation must be at the heart of any solution. Nor do I think that direct government investment is the only method of delivery. Roy MacMullin has presented an interesting scheme (“Build a wood-fired energy market,” Jan. 19).

However, I think that the Graham government has blinded itself to anything but large-scale energy projects like LNG terminals, a new refinery, and new nuclear reactors. Indeed, both the Lord and Graham governments have completely overlooked the possibility of a natural gas co-generation plant near Sussex which would use New Brunswick gas and provide high-paying jobs to people already in the province. As far as we know, Corridor Resources is still open to the idea.

The government should take its own advice and develop a plan that is truly different from the status quo and that embraces change that truly develops the self-sufficiency of all New Brunswickers rather than the corporate few.

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.

A Powerful Harper

2008-02-16T15:23:00.002-04:00

This was submitted to the Irving papers this weekend. (Published in the Daily Gleaner Feb. 20)

When we read that U.S. ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins, thinks that the Canadian Prime Minister is the most powerful person in the world, as we did on the front page of the Telegraph Journal (15 Feb.), I think we are meant to believe that this is a good thing.

I, for one, am not as impressed by such a statement. Exceptional power requires exceptional responsibility. Given our failings as human beings, it is irresponsible and irrational to invest so much power in one person.

Mr. Harper received his mandate because ordinary Canadians no longer trusted the Liberals and their abuse of power. He ran a campaign that promised accountability and a more transparent government. Now, Mr. Harper carefully manages his party in order to limit government communication to the free press and to ensure that most government media relations are handled through the PMO.

Mr. Harper runs his government with a fear-and-intimidation management style - the firing of the president of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, Ms. Keen, and the absurd threat to mandate the speed with which Senate deals with the omnibus crime bill are but two recent examples. Non-partisan groups like Democracy Watch have repeatedly pointed out Mr. Harper’s failing record on accountability.

Mr. Wilkins may be correct in stating that Mr. Harper is the most powerful person in the world, but many Canadians would agree that this is not good for the Canadian public. Indeed, it is distinctly un-Canadian!

Peering into Afghanistan

2008-02-13T00:44:00.006-04:00

I submitted this to the 4 Irving papers. Let's see what happens. Hey - it was published on Feb 14, 15 and 16 in the various papers.

Moore's Afghan history is faulty

Afghanistan is a complex country and we are involved in a complex war. Charles Moore’s partisan attacks (‘Layton’s Afghan history is faulty,’ 7 Feb.) do very little to clarify the situation. ** I was prompted to this reply because of a letter to the editor on 12 February. ** He attacks Jack Layton’s position with vitriol but little research.

Mr. Moore notes that the Afghan defeat of the Soviets (1979-1989) was assisted by significant funding from the United States. This is indeed very true.

However, he fails to mention that the CIA used Kissinger-like tactics when it called upon Afghanis to engage in jihad against Soviet invaders, and so began the mujaheddin or ‘warriors of the Lord.’ This is documented in a 27 March 1995 article by Robert Friedman in New York Magazine (‘The CIA’s jihad’). This article draws a direct connection between the CIA’s tactics during the Soviet invasion and the presence of between 100 to 125 potential Islamic terrorists operating in the New York area in 1995 according to the district attorney’s office.

Mr. Moore ignores the fact that during the Soviet invasion, the U.S. supplied Afghanistan with violence-laden textbooks including primers “filled with talk of jihad and featur[ing] drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines.” This story was reported in 23 March 2002 in The Washington Post (‘From U.S., the ABC's of Jihad; Violent Soviet-Era Textbooks Complicate Afghan Education Efforts’). Some of these texts were still in use in 2002 and may still be in use today.

I cite these articles so that people can look them up. Neither the New York Magazine (often mistakenly referred to as the New Yorker in web references) nor the Washington Post is tremendously left-wing or particularly peacenik. However both of these sources present carefully researched articles.

Afghanistan is a truly complex country with a complex history. Likewise, the rise of current radical Islam is a complex issue created, in part, by past U.S. policy.

Poverty, political strife, human rights abuses, tribal conflict, war, drug exports, and a history of past political interference have built the Afghanistan of today. If our decision to enter into a war in Afghanistan was built on flimsy research like that provided by Mr. Moore, then we should have never gone in the first place.

Working both sides of the border

2008-02-09T07:58:00.001-04:00

My parents-in-law live in Raleigh, NC. Big NDP supporters in Canada but have to default to the radical wing of the Democrats in the US. Seems John has been busy there getting this letter into The News & Observer.

Reading “ID Rules to tighten Canadian border”, Jan. 18, I wonder if Mr. Chertoff is spending too much time worrying about what he'll be doing next year instead of thinking about his job.

Have any of his planners ever seen the Canadian border? It's impressively long and famously undefended. I don't understand why a terrorist who wanted to come from Canada would wait in line at an official crossing. I doubt if a terrorist would be upset to know that he was here illegally. Why would a terrorist bother to come through Canada, apart from the fact that it's a nice place to visit? The 911 terrorists came straight to America from overseas.

We're misusing resources tightening up the Canadian border. Osama and his friends must be amazed at all the stupid, expensive things he's scared us into doing. Of course we should be taking precautions. For example, we should be using every Arabic-speaking intelligence specialist we can find, not firing any who happen to be gay. And we should put resources into securing our ports, which are much more vulnerable to people trying to smuggle weapons.

If Mr. Chertoff is worried about what he'll be doing this time next year, he has a better grasp on reality than I give him credit for. Or if not, he may understand very well that reality is different if you have the right connections.

John Mainwaring,
Raleigh

Right on!

2008-02-09T07:52:00.000-04:00

A good friend wrote to me today about a new documentary, "Jesus Camp" which highlights the growth of fundamentalism in the US. What follows is my reply.

Hi John;

I've seen part of the movie and some documentaries on the topic. Pretty scary stuff.

I find it odd that we freak out about Islamic madras schools and claim they are a threat to the world when we foster the same thing in North America.

"You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye. Then you will see clearly to remove the piece of sawdust from another believer's eye." - Matthew 7:5.

The Oklahoma City bombing and the Unabomber clearly show the reality of homegrown, non-Islamic terrorism in the US.

Indeed, it seems lost to America that they invoked the concept of jihad, thereby creating the very thing they now feel called to destroy.

"The Soviet invasion of Kabul in December 1979, attracted the US towards the orthodox Islamic militia's role in forwarding the US policy, and which attracted considerable international attention and coverage in the popular press and academic circles of the time, in projecting what appeared then to be an American love affair with Islamism. It was, as the author points out, consummated in an alliance with the Islamist military dictator of Pakistan. In cooperation with Zia-ul-Haq's military intelligence services, with Saudi finance as well as with Pakistani logistical support, the CIA, managed in raising, training, equipping, paying and sending into battle a mercenary army of Islamist volunteers, against the Red Army in Afghanistan, terming it a 'jihad' or 'holy' war against the Soviets." (http://www.issi.org.pk/journal/2001_files/no_2/review/4r.htm)

"When will we ever learn?" - Pete Seeger.

For a good reflection on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "peace speech on Vietnam" (http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/058.html), see http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/opin/mlk03.html. I think it is quite appropriate.

Peace,

Rob

PS. Did I ever send you Harper's connections to the US religious right? If not, here are two links: http://dawn.thot.net/harperstiestousa/ and http://dawn.thot.net/ann-porter.html.

Submitted to TJ

2008-02-07T08:09:00.003-04:00

Hi all - another one, I'm not sure will be published. It was published 9 Feb. in the TJ and 12 Feb. in the King's County Record.

Equal coverage on nuclear debate

On Feb. 5, the Telegraph Journal wrote a long front page article on Dr. Patrick Moore and his support for the nuclear industry. Given the provincial interest in nuclear power and uranium mining, I attended his talk to see what he might have to say.

While he provides an interesting case and is quite obviously a polished speaker, a number of people were taken aback by his attack on climate change science. I found his stance interesting because if climate change is untrue then why don’t we continue to generate power using fossil fuel technology which is, by Dr. Moore’s admission, cheaper than nuclear? (For the record, I am convinced that current climate change is accelerated by human activity and I conduct research studying how economic methods can be used to reduce emissions and enhance cooperation.)

I was taken aback when he claimed that only 60 people died in the Chernobyl nuclear disaster when Russian scientists and officials claim the number is in the hundreds of thousands.

Perhaps most disturbing was the emphasis of his academic credentials and the “credentialization” of his current stance on nuclear power. Dr. Moore has absolutely zero peer-reviewed - the hallmark of scientific credibility - papers on the subject of nuclear power. After extensive research, I found that, including his thesis, Dr. Moore has exactly one peer-reviewed publication at all – his thesis!

To show fairness to the hardworking taxpayers of New Brunswick, all of our weekly newspapers should give equal coverage to an expert like Dr. Helen Caldicott (who visited New Brunswick recently) who opposes expansion of the nuclear industry. That way the taxpaying and rate-paying public is informed and can enter into meaningful debate.

Afghanistan - Mission?

2008-02-06T11:27:00.000-04:00

Shortly after the Manley report was released, a US report on Afghanistan painted a pretty grim picture of a nation teetering on the precipice of failed statehood and an American military machine that has given little attention to the mission.

People, and indeed the Manley report, have made much of this being a UN-approved mission, but professor of International Law, Francis Boyle points out that the UN security council permits actions to bring 9/11 criminals to justice preferably through extradition and the judicial system. Osgoode Hall law professor Michael Mandel says the mission has "a veneer of UN authority." (see Linda McQuaig, "Keep Pearson out of it" Toronto Star, 5 Feb 2008).

We have all read of the corruption in Hamid Karzai's government and the fact that there's been no decline in the abuse of women in Afghanistan. Today's news points to another failure of Harper's government to stand up for human, let alone Canadian, morals:

"It was only after weeks of international outrage that Canada's House of Commons, in response to a motion sponsored by NDP leader Jack Layton, unanimously voted on Monday to condemn a death sentence faced by an Afghan journalist.

About time, too, although the Harper government still hasn't had much to say about the case, at least not for the record." (see Antonia Zerbisias, "Afghan evils ignored at our peril" Toronto Star, 6 Feb 2008).

Harper's government doesn't know what it is doing in Afghanistan. It has covered-up and obfuscated our treatment of detainees. Harper's government has blamed the military for its own mistakes (e.g., Sandra Buckler). Worse, Harper has dragged Canada's good name around the world through the mud.

I don't think much of Manley's pre-conceived report, but I think a lot of Canadians are saying, on the "spectrum between utility and futility," Harper's government seems to be shifting things toward the futility end.

Let's stop listening to Harper's (or "lil' dubya's") rhetoric and spin, and instead stop fighting and create a truly Canadian mission for Afghanistan.

Peace and Peacekeeping

2008-01-30T23:00:00.000-04:00

I am proud of Canada's role as a peacekeeping nation. Yes, we have soldiers who (regrettably) understand how to fight a war, but our major role post-WWII has seemed to be in maintaining and even trying to create peace.

Why is it that when you go to the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces (DND/CF) website and click on the site map, you cannot find any mention of the word 'peace' and 'peacekeeping'?

I think this is something that needs correcting. DND/CF should have a Desk of Peace Studies or a Directorate of Peacekeeping.

Bad Branding

2008-01-30T22:57:00.001-04:00

Sent this in the to Telegraph Journal today. I don't know what will become of it. UPDATE: It was published 4 Feb. - hats off to the TJ.

Kudos to the Telegraph Journal and the university professors for clearly highlighting the Graham government’s branding exercise (‘Perfecting the mantra’, Jan. 30).

As an economists, I teach students that we make trade-offs. Failing to clearly define the meanings of terms such as “self-sufficiency” permits the government to sidestep the trade-off issue by allowing the public to self-define the term.

The same issue is being repeated in the City of Saint John. By labeling the proposed oil refinery, Project Eider Rock, the public is given the impression that we will get economic prosperity and a new nesting ground for ducks. This is a brilliant corporate branding exercise as it suggests there is no trade-off.

In reality, we are being asked to accept another big stinky oil refinery in return for about 5,000 short-term jobs and approximately 1,000 permanent jobs. Ducks are not part of the equation. In fact, duck habitat may be destroyed if there’s a tanker accident in the Bay of Fundy.

Is “The Big Stink” a trade-off the public is willing to make in order to create employment? Are we willing to sacrifice environmental quality, or our public healthcare system, or higher residential electricity rates, or lower wages, or a trade corridor, or higher tuition rates, in order to become “self-sufficient?”

It isn’t my job to answer these questions. It is my job, however, to make sure people understand the trade-offs they are being asked to make.

His Own Portrait Gallery

2008-01-29T16:51:00.001-04:00

This from today's Ottawa Citizen (http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=9c6b53f6-f0a2-4eca-93bb-559023144731&k=31826). Click on the link to see more pictures.

I don't think there's any more I can add.

Harper gallery leaves MPs speechless

Tucked in a cosy lobby of the House of Commons is an homage to the Tory leader, writes Tim Naumetz.

Tim Naumetz, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Citizens who really want a national portrait gallery in Ottawa can rest easy. The government already has one.

All you need to get in is a Commons security pass, a Conservative party membership and a keen desire to view exclusive pictures of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, exclusively.

Conservative MPs confirmed yesterday what Green party leader Elizabeth May and Macleans.ca blogger Kady O'Malley reported on their cyberspace sites.

The public won't get to see Stephen Harper's portrait gallery in the House of Commons, and these photos won't be on display there anyway: Mr. Harper and Taiwan's representative, Morris Chang, in Vietnamese silk tunics at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in November 2006...

Photograph by : Jim Young, Reuters

Photographs of Mr. Harper in various poses, at various sites, are hung throughout the private and cosy government lobby of the House of Commons.

Ms. May and Ms. O'Malley were surprised and a bit speechless when they saw the exhibit recently as guest Commons Speakers during a youth Parliament.

"When you walk in the door, all you see are pictures of Stephen Harper," said Ms. May

"I'd say between every window, in every available space of the wall, at eye level, every available space has a photo of Stephen Harper."

"You've got photos of Stephen Harper, but not of previous prime ministers," she added. "Photos of Stephen Harper in different costumes, in different settings, dressed as a fireman, in Hudson Bay looking for polar bears, meeting the Dalai Lama, even the portrait of the Queen had to have Stephen Harper, but in a candid, behind her."

A press aide to Mr. Harper said he would get back with an explanation, but didn't.

The exposition might not be too surprising, though.

The prime minister's official Christmas card last December portrayed Mr. Harper looking out a living room window adorned with 24 photographs, small to large, of Mr. Harper in various poses.

When the party last year unveiled its election campaign war room, Mr. Harper stared out from campaign posters on every wall.

NDP MP Paul Dewar, who has never seen the interior of the Conservative lobby room, made a joke based on Mr. Harper's admitted preference for running a tight ship and keeping an eye on things. "If you're ever wondering who's in charge, just look at the wall," said Mr. Dewar.

Liberal MP Mauril Bélanger said the Liberal lobby has always displayed portraits of previous prime ministers, even cabinet ministers.

One Conservative said the Harper photos have been up for at least three months.

Another, Calgary MP Deepak Obhrai, was a bit reluctant after question period to talk about the exhibit, possibly because another Tory, Secretary of State Jason Kenney, happened to be walking by just at that moment.

"Well, this is the Harper government," said Mr. Obhrai.

Stoffer in NB for victims of Agent Orange

2008-01-24T23:35:00.000-04:00

Once again, the Harper government has fallen short on one of its many promises to Canadians. Today NDP Member of Parliament and Veterans' Affairs critic Peter Stoffer was in Oromocto, along with representatives from the Canadian Agent Orange Association, to call out Harper's government on its failure to adequately compensate victims of the many toxic defoliants which were sprayed at CFB Gagetown.

It is interesting to note that the Minister of Veterans' Affairs, Greg Thompson, himself a New Brunswick MP, has made so little progress on this file given his comments in 2005 when he was in Opposition. Harper's inaction highlights the true agenda when it comes to the military - it's about war and the machines of war and not the people left behind after the fighting is over.

These victims, mostly former members of our armed forces and their families, deserve respect and dignity for their service and sacrifice to our country, yet Harper's government will not compensate them for the long term damages that they have suffered.

This is shameful! Thankfully an NDP MP takes up the torch when Harper and his government failed.

Save Money and the Environment

2008-01-24T08:39:00.000-04:00

Whenever I go to Saint John, I have to take the ferry.

People, I know it is cold in the winter and hot in the summer but when waiting in line and while travelling on the ferry please turn off your car. I've heard it said that it is cheaper to turn off your car than to idle for one minute.

If you can't think of the environment, at least think of your wallet (with gas at a $1+ a litre the annual savings are substantial).

Please stop idling at the ferries.

(I hope to have an update on this project in the next little while).

Again Afghanistan

2008-01-24T07:50:00.000-04:00

Today we hear of yet another Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan. Our thoughts are extended to both this soldier's at home family and military family, and to the many that grieve such a loss.

I have been told of a person in the area who at one point in his career found himself in Afghanistan teaching the freedom fighters from Afghanistan how to build IEDs in order to fight back the Russian army. Seems a little ironic. I hope to interview him one day soon.

Harper's hand-picked Afghanistan panel (led by the hawkish Manley who was the Liberal Deputy Prime Minister in Jean Chretien's government) has criticized the Canadian role in Afghanistan yet also called for an open-ended military committment to the effort.

It is the wrong war, led by people who, in my opinion, have a misguided sense of Canada. Indeed the men and women on the ground are doing their best to help a damaged and broken people, but our efforts are misplaced. While critics pan the idea of leaving Afghanistan, the real issue in my mind is should we have gone there in the first place? In my opinion, our motives for moving into Afghanistan were misguided (or largely guided by Bush and Cheney's policy - which is the same thing) so leaving is the responsible thing to do. Then we can refocus and ask some real questions. How should we deal with Afghanistan? Should we be expending our efforts in the Darfur region?

While Harper's government has generally done a poor job on the Afghanistan file (but a pretty good job at spinning the mission) there has been one small success. Today we find out that even Harper has to agree that Canadian-held Afghan detainees handed over to Afghani forces are subject to torture. Apparently a decision has finally been made to halt the transfer of Afghan detainees to local forces. This change in orders was made almost a month ago, but did not come to light until just recently as two human rights groups prepared to take Harper's government to court. I wonder how much money (some of it from taxpayers) was wasted on lawyers and filings when Harper could have made an announcement weeks ago?

Finally, I applaud the ethical stance of the many engineers who have quit their jobs because of the potential sale of MDA makers of the Canadarm (an uncle of mine worked on the original) to US-owned ATK. We are told that among the many military products ATK makes are cluster bombs, depleted uranium rounds, nuclear weapons, and land mines. I hope that Harper's government see's the light on this issue, but I worry that they may try to hide behind NAFTA or some other ruling to accomplish their ideological ends.

Now that I think of it, maybe we should start referring to Harper as "w" or "lil' dubya"!

Strike Back at Excess

2008-01-23T22:56:00.000-04:00

I pass on this suggestion from a friend. It is a very small way to get back at corporations that sell us stuff we don't need. I have never had a problem with this technique, but please experiment carefully.

Homemade Microwave Popcorn

1 bag of bulk popcorn
1 paper sandwich bag

Pour about 1 cm of popcorn kernels into the sandwich bag (so the bottom is just covered)
Fold down the top 1cm of the bag (to close the top)
Fold it down again
Dog-ear the two corners of the bag (this keeps the bag closed but not tightly sealed)
Place bag on its side in microwave and hit the Popcorn button (or pop as long as you would normally pop a regular bag of microwave popcorn)

Happy munching without weird noxious chemicals and without all the extra packaging.

Media release re: Refinery Proposal

2008-01-23T01:26:00.000-04:00

Fundy Royal NDP Candidate Rob Moir renews call for full Federal assessment of proposed 2nd oil refinery project

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

23 JANUARY 2008

The Fundy Royal NDP has reiterated its call for a full Federal Environmental Impact Assessment of the proposed 2nd oil refinery in Saint John. Prime Minister Harper's Minister of the Environment, John Baird, has refused to conduct the assessment - despite demands to do so from throughout the province. So far, Harper's decision has left the majority of the proposal under the complete discretion of Provincial environmental authorities. The federal government's ruling is currently the subject of a court case filed by Ecojustice (formerly the Sierra Legal Defence Fund).

This is irresponsible according to NDP Candidate and economist Rob Moir. "Premier Graham's Liberal Government has come out in support of the refinery project on several occasions. We cannot now expect this Liberal government to conduct an impartial review when it is so clearly behind the project as an integral part of its 'energy hub' concept," Moir explains. "A Federal assessment is required to provide oversight and objectivity to the process in order to alleviate some of these concerns."

Recent decisions by Graham's government have caused concern in the environmental community. "[NB Minister of Environment] Haché's weak response on the arsenic issue in Grand Lake, and the limited response of the Department of Environment to the recent improper transfer of pet coke incident in Saint John," cites Moir, "clearly indicate a weak environmental agenda."

The refinery will have significant environmental impacts on the Fundy Royal riding as well as the entire Atlantic region. "Fundy Royal residents are among the most affected by the residual pollution of the current refinery. They deserve to have a voice in any decision that is made," Moir says. "It is the Federal government's responsibility to ensure that all stakeholders are considered in such a review. In Fundy Royal and beyond, there are areas that will not see significant economic benefits from this new refinery - yet these residents are being forced to live with the environmental consequences."

"I've written to the Federal Government regarding the benzene, xylenes, methyl ethyl ketone, toluene, ethyl benzene, 2,2,4-trimethylpentane, hexane, cresols, MTBE, naphthalene, and phenol emissions that are continuously released into the air during the refining process," says Dr. Moir, "but have had little response. Many of these chemicals are listed as priority 'toxic' substances in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act of 1988," continues Moir. "I don't see how Environment Canada and the Federal Government can ignore their duties in this matter." Moir calls on our Federal elected members - specifically in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia - to stand up and represent the concerns of their constituents, rather than submit to the will of industry. "It is clearly in the best interest of all citizens that a full Federal Panel Review of all operations of any proposed refinery be conducted," concludes Moir. "It is the responsibility of our Members of Parliament to ensure the integrity of this process."

- #### -

The BUSINESS of Government

2008-01-20T07:34:00.000-04:00

I used to think that the primary reason for a government was to ensure that the welfare of its citizenry is provided for. Left or Right, dictator or democracy, the idea was that the government would somehow try to look out for the best interest of its citizenry.

Relectantly I have come to the opinion that many of our recent governments have adopted a role more akin to creative marketing. An agenda is developed and a marketing campaign is launched. This shift in government has tracked the development of neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism. [Please do not be sidetracked by "liberalism" and "conservatism" which have roots in political science, not popular terminology.]

I've spoken on the radio a few times about this issue.

We are seeing this reality take place in New Brunswick. There's a fair amount of information and speculation that the marketing firm Hill and Knowlton may have been hired by interests in our province to market the energy hub concept. While I am sure that this company has a number of successes, a quick "Googling" of their name will show that some of these so-called "successes" have been in areas that people would call questionable.

Take a look at the "self-sufficiency" agenda. What does it mean? Has the government ever sat down, carefully defined the concept, and provided clear and measurable criteria by which we can judge success? Or, has the government used the term over-and-over, launching it into public usage so we can define the term for ourselves? Once we've defined the term as individuals, this government will enact policy in the name of self-sufficiency, and we'll blindly follow along.

Consider this hypothetical example: A company makes it known that studies show bouncy and shiny hair is associated with business and relationship success; bouncy hair makes your head lighter which allows it to be carried higher, thereby projecting a self-assured outlook on life. It has been shown that success will follow. The company then waits two months before announcing a new shampoo, Lustrous Life, that will give your hair that bounce and shine you need.

You see what I mean.

We need to be "self-sufficient" and to undergo "transformational change" because "the status quo is not an option." This is right out of marketing 101. Watch our governments and see how often they use these buzz phrases. I wanted to, and maybe still will, send these into CBC's SHIFT as jargon phrases I wish could be flushed down the toilet.

I was inspired to write this down because of what I read in a recent issue of Utne Reader. They note that Hill and Knowlton have been called upon to globally market the nuclear power industry (and who is on the line to refurbish a nuclear power plant and build possible one or two more?). Suddenly "studies show" that additional nuclear power is the only possible solution to climate change and global warming. Studies are great, but be careful when they have not been subjected to peer-review. (Frank Luntz and others tried to discredit the idea of climate change and global warming with "studies" showing it wasn't true, and newspapers kept citing the existence of such "studies", but within the peer-reviewed literature, the evidence for climate change was virtually unanimous - despite what Bush and Harper wanted to believe.) (Luntz has advised Harper's party.)

Well, this is more of a rant than an essay with a purpose. However, these thoughts have led me to make the following personal resolution:

It is no longer Project Eider Rock (which would be a nice place for ducks to nest), or the second oil refinery (which makes the project neutral), but rather "A Big Stinky Oil Refinery" which we can shorten to "The Big Stink."

NB Woodlot Management

2008-01-20T07:14:00.000-04:00

I wrote this letter to the premier, not just because I am an interested citizen, but as a woodlot owner. While I stressed provincial issues, I think there is a very important federal role in the whole issue - we do not tax raw log exports. If Harper really wanted to help us, then rather than giving Canadians $1 billion after-the-fact ($30 million for NB), he'd work to limit raw log exports. That would stop a foreign-owned company from coming to Canada and cutting (Crown) wood here because its own government has put stringent and enforced harvesting practises at home. It would stop foreign-owned multinational companies from taking grants, loans, write-downs, and other government subsidies out of the hands of Canadians and then leaving (with the capital) when government sources of funds dry up. It would put New Brunswickers and Canadians back to work and contribute to a more reasonable woodlot management plan.

For those interested in the issue of forestry management and private woodlots, I'd recommend checking out the New Brunswick Federation of Woodlot Owners and The Conservation Council of New Brunswick.

28 Nov. 2007

Dear Premier Graham;

I am writing to you as a concerned private woodlot owner and as an economist. I am very worried about the management of our crown forests and the impact this is having upon private woodlot management and sustainability.

I find it deeply distressing, both as a private woodlot owner and as an economist, to see crown timber resources used to compete against private timber. Even more disturbing is the growing market power of timber buyers who are capitalizing on harvesting rights from crown land. The combination of a growing oligopsony in mills and competition from crown wood has severely hurt private woodlot owners.

Since early 2006 we saw mill closures resulting in the loss of 1.4 million m3 of milling capacity. In 2006-07, private woodlot harvest dropped to its lowest level in a decade – 1.3 million m3 – a drop of almost 524,000 m3 from last year. In the same period, Crown Land harvest increased to its highest level, 5.4 million m3 – an increase of about 882,000 m3. Thus, in a year where we saw mill capacity decrease by 1.4 million m3, we have witnessed a provincial net harvest increase of 358,000 m3, driven by increased Crown timber harvests. This is neither fair nor does it make economic sense. Indeed, when one recalls the lost mill capacity of this past year, one questions where all the extra harvest has even gone.

I feel it is important that your government, and all future governments, publicly recognize that all New Brunswickers, present and future, are co-owners of crown resources. As such, it is New Brunswickers that confer upon a government the right to manage these resources with public interest in mind. I remind you that since 1992, there has been a call upon the government to treat private wood as the primary source of wood fibre harvest with crown wood forming the residual supply. Moreover, the idea of equitable market access for private wood has been the policy of the Liberal Party of New Brunswick.

If your government is really interested in an agenda of self-sufficiency and sustainability, I strongly urge you to create a wood fibre market that has equitable access for both private and Crown Land wood fibre. I look forward to your government’s earliest response.

Sincerely,

__________________________
Dr. Rob Moir, Professor of Economics
NDP Candidate, Fundy Royal

CC: Jeannot Volpé (Leader of the Official Opposition), Roger Duguay (Leader of the New Brunswick NDP), Hon. Donald Arsenault (Minister of Natural Resources), Keith Ashfield (Natural Resource Critic), Hon. Roland Haché (Minister of the Environment), Wayne Steeves (Albert), Hon. Eugene McGinley (Grand Lake-Gagetown), Bev Harrison (Hampton-Kings), Bruce Northrup (Kings East), Hon. Wally Stiles (Petitcodiac), Hon. Mary Schryer (Quispamsis), Bruce Fitch (Riverview), Hon. Roly MacIntyre (Saint John East), Hon. Stuart Jamieson (Saint John Fundy), New Brunswick Federation of Woodlot Owners, SNB Wood Co-op Ltd.

Tragedy in Bathurst

2008-01-18T11:52:00.000-04:00

To the many affected by the recent tragic highway deaths in Bathurst, we grieve with you and for you. We hope through the pain that the celebration of life finds a way to continue as that is the best way we can honour those who have passed away.

Our deepest condolences.

Another Take on the Bailout

2008-01-18T11:45:00.000-04:00

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

I saw versions of Mr. Steeves letter regarding Harper's billion dollar bailout (enticement) in both the Telegraph Journal (Jan. 16) and the Times & Transcript (Jan. 17). I asked for his permission to post it on the blog and he sent me the original version which appears below with links.

To the editor:

Given the way Stephen Harper's billion dollar 'bail-out' for the forestry industry plays, I think I would prefer Gilles Duceppe as Prime Minister of Canada. At least, with Duceppe, everyone would know that he represents his own province's interests first. And Canada's second.

And I'm almost as angry with Shawn Graham and a variety of opposition federal Members of Parliament who are now pondering over whether to accept a bad deal (with a few bucks upfront) or to face really tough times (without the few bucks).

The Harper billion should be rejected. For a variety of reasons. Most of all, because it's as bad a deal for Canada and New Brunswick as anything that Brian Mulroney and Karlheinz Scheiber may (or may not) have dreamed up.

Unless I misunderstand the concept, the billion is supposed to alleviate the social and economic problems faced by 'one-industry' towns (especially forestry towns) faced with mill and plant closures. As such, I would think that resource communities in forestry-dependent provinces such as New Brunswick, Quebec, northern Ontario and British Columbia would be targeted for special attention. Instead, the deal rates the provinces on a 'by population basis. The Harper billion will be divided among the provinces by a 'per capita' formula.

Which means, among other things, that Alberta will get about three times as much money as New Brunswick. And almost as much as British Columbia.

Asked about this, Harper correctly pointed out that Alberta does have a forestry industry that is hurting. He failed to point out that Alberta's forestry centres such as Grande Prairie are not 'one-industry' burgs: they also have thriving economies reliant on both agriculture and oil and gas.

The Prime Minister also accurately noted that Alberta deserves money because it is becoming the front-line in the battle to stop the very real threat of the mountain lodgepine beetle. He failed to also note that, when (and if) Ottawa decides to kick in money for the battle
against the beetle, few Canadians would object if that money is spent where it belongs. In Alberta!

Which brings me to my main point. If this billion is supposed to help Canadians in need, it should be directed at the people who need it. The people of Dalhousie and Miramichi. Or Dryden and Fort Frances, Ontario. Or LaTuque, Quebec, and Port Alberni, British Columbia.

In other words, this federal money should be targeted at a specific problem It should not be handed over, with basically no strings attached, to provincial governments that 'can' (I am not saying will) spend it any bloody way they want.

Of course, my concerns are based on the premise that Harper is trying to help people in need. If that's his plan, it won't work.

If, in fact, his program is designed to encourage regional rivalries in a fractious nation while at the same time weakening federalism, I think he's bang-on.

I have my own theories. I've read his Montreal speech (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051213/elxn_harper_speech_text_051214/20051214/)
and his Alberta ''firewall' letter (www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/leadersparties/leaders/pdf/firewall.pdf ).

As I said, I think I would prefer Gilles Duceppe as Prime Minister. I wouldn't agree with him. But I don't think he would pretend that he had suddenly stopped being a separatist.

John Steeves
Sussex

Our "Mission"

2008-01-17T09:41:00.000-04:00

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

There's a whole lot I feel called to blog about these days, so expect a number of entries.

To date, 77 Canadian soldiers and one Canadian diplomat have sacrificed their lives for, what I believe to be, a misguided mission in Afghanistan. Countless more have been injured both physically and psychologically. While I blame two successive governments and a number of senior military staff for the wrongheadedness of our approach, I think our men and women on the ground our doing the best that they can given what they have been told to do. I'll happily chat over my reasoning if people are interested, but I want to comment on recent actions more close to home.

On 16 Jan. 2008, U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates was quoted by the Los Angeles Times as saying "I'm worried we're deploying [military advisors] that are not properly trained and I'm worried we have some military forces that don't know how to do counterinsurgency operations. ... Most of the European forces, NATO forces, are not trained in counterinsurgency; they were trained for the Fulda Gap [a region in Germany]."

77 people lost in a combat role in a war with tactics (mis)guided by the Bush administration against a force that is constantly recharged and refueled by Bush's unilateral and illegal war in Iraq, and Gates has the audacity to claim that our NATO troops, and consequently Canadian soldiers, aren't trained and aren't ready.

Can anyone be ready for the help of an "ally" who creates more of the "enemy"?

Worse yet, our own Defence Minister Peter MacKay has worked hard to excuse Gates' comments in the Canadian Press (Times & Transcript, 17 Jan. 2008, C1) arguing that Canada was not singled out as one of the NATO participants in Afghanistan. Given Prime Minister Harper's careful control of his Ministers' comments to the media, one can only link this comment back to Mr. Harper himself.

Why is Canada's foreign policy so dictated by the Bush regime, when it is a regime that is thankfully about to be turfed?

Mr. Bush and Mr. Harper, I am still a Canadian and proud to be one!

Media perceptions...

2008-01-15T17:05:00.000-04:00

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

Last night's episode of Politics with Don Newman on CBC Newsworld highlighted an all-too common issue related to the media coverage of the NDP in this country.

Jack Layton appeared as a guest on the show and had to answer to Newman's claim that there was a "rift" within the party regarding the "Harper Billion Dollar Offer" to the provinces. The Federal party's position is clear: This hand out is insignificant compared to the damage that Harper's corporate tax cuts and softwood lumber deal have had on our economy as a whole. The billion dollar bail-out only reinforces the NDP's belief that they have mismanaged the economy during their term, and they cannot be trusted to continue with this fiscal policy in the next budget, despite this $1 billion 'goodwill gesture'.

Unfortunately, this supposed "rift" arises because Manitoba Premier Gary Doer supports the handout. What the CBC (and other media outlets) are missing is that Gary Doer, as Premier of Manitoba is answering to those that elected him, the citizens of Manitoba. While there are certainly provincial arguments supporting and opposing his position, his decision is made from a completely different perspective than that of the Federal party. The National wing of the party looks at the net benefits received by all Canadians, not just an individual province.

This is common sense to the media, it seems, when the other two parties are involved. The recent "cozying up" of Shawn Graham and Harper goes unnoticed, or is even praised as "smart politicking". You do not see the media perpetuating a false agenda and highlighting a "rift" between the provincial and federal wings of the Liberal party. There is no criticism or questioning of Stephane Dion's leadership when a Liberal Premier supports a Harper initiative. For the most part, Provincial and Federal governments are viewed as largely separate entities, with only slight ties to their counterparts in other jurisdictions. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Newfoundland and Labrador, where Conservative premier Danny Williams is supporting the "ABC" (Anybody but Conservative) ticket in the upcoming Federal election.

This current issue regarding Doer and Layton's stances does not reflect any wedge in NDP unity, or a loosening of party solidarity, like the so-called "liberal" media would like to try and suggest. It is simply a case of "what is good for one is not in the best interests of all". It happens all the time, at all levels of government and in every party. The news media knows this, and has a duty to treat the NDP as it would the other parties, instead of manufacturing controversy and holding us to a different standard.

-FR NDP

Harper's Mini-Marshall Plan

2008-01-11T20:39:00.000-04:00

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

Happy New (Democratic) Year everybody! I trust that the holidays went well from you.

WARNING - Beware of eager Prime Minister's bearing gifts!

Yesterday, in a prelude to today's First Ministers' supper, Mr. Harper came to New Brunswick to announce a $1 billion package to help communities adjust to recent job losses. It makes sense to have the announcement in New Brunswick - Shawn Graham is busy trying to appease Harper in order to gain future favours, Graham is the chair of the First Ministers' group, and New Brunswick has been hit hard with significant losses in the forestry industry. Why Harper chose to make the announcement at a busy mill near Fredericton in Minister Greg Thompson's (CPC) riding when he could have gone to an impacted area in another part of the province, I don't know. I guess he had his reasons.

A billion dollars is a lot of money, but I have issues.

First, one would (and indeed, should) expect that our Prime Minister was well aware of the problem before it reached this level. With trusted advisors and his much-touted Economics degree behind him, couldn't he have seen the problem developing: what with the poorly handled softwood lumber deal, the monumental financial failure of US subprime mortgages, crisis in the asset-backed commercial paper throughout North America, a failure of US foreign policy, rising US government debt due to poor foreign and domestic policy, to mention a few? The rise in the Canadian dollar speaks not so much to the strength of the Canadian economy, but to economic decline in the US. Indeed, now key economists in the US are talking of recession. Given the importance of our exports to the US market and our government's almost-worship of all things American, the combination of a high dollar and a US recession will most certainly hurt our manufacturing and resource-export industries. In fact, we are now seeing an overall loss in jobs in both Canada and in New Brunswick (CBC Report). Why then, did Harper wait this long to formulate this "plan"?

Second, if this is really an issue about the Canadian economy, if Harper is really standing up for the regular people in Canada (recall the Tim Horton's versus Starbucks commentary), then he must realize that this is an economic issue and that the economy lasts longer than any one political party. Why then did he tie this adjustment spending to Opposition support of his spring budget? Why did he choose to wait to make this announcement the day before his supper with the First Ministers? I don't think it is reasonable to play politics with people's livelihoods!

Third, we should know that this is $1 billion for the whole economy including a fixed transfer of $10 million to each province and an additional transfer based on population - and this is spread over 3 years. New Brunswick may get $30 million over 3 years. I've read that the salary loss at the AbitibiBowater mill alone is $24 million annually. The salary losses in the auto industry in Ontario alone are probably more than $1 billion annually. More peculiar perhaps, is that booming Alberta will likely get more money than New Brunswick. (Then again, Mr. Harper is from Alberta, he has a lot of friends in the oil industry in Alberta, and he did sign the "Alberta First" letter in 2001 - which makes him Canada's first separatist Prime Minister by the way!)

I'm also concerned on a different level. New Brunswick has seen this sort of aimless bailout before. The temporary success has normally come from a significant transfer of resources to a large forestry company who set-up shop for as long as it can arrange for government help. It sounds a lot like McKenna's call-centre job creation strategy.

I had a discussion with a news producer today, and we both asked the same question, "If this money is for "retraining," then what exactly are we retraining people for?" Indeed, what is Harper's concept of the new-and-better Canadian economy, and more germane to us, what is Graham's idea? Saying we'll be "self-sufficient" and that we'll see strong growth in the north does not mean it will magically happen.

We need direction. Should we look at retraining and relocation as a method of dealing with the projected labour shortage in southern NB? If we really want to develop the north, why don't we consider sending some of the natural gas from Sussex northwards? Should the north look into tourism and eco-tourism? Can we use some of this funding to invest in literacy programs that saw funding cuts because of Harper's earlier decisions? Can the Natural Resource Minister sit down with the New Brunswick Federation of Woodlot Owners and workers from the forestry industry to see what plans might develop? Can we use this funding to provide tax breaks for individuals willing to invest in new community-based business initiatives?

We don't know, and Graham doesn't seem to want to tell us. Instead, we are told that some of the money Harper will give us (if only the Opposition supports him) may even be used to improve broadband internet access. Great news, except that at $40/month for service, it likely wouldn't be high on my list of necessary services if I had no job!

We want leaders, but we are infested with politicians. AHHHHHHH!

Other news:

Keep the members of STU Faculty and CUPE workers at NBCC in your thoughts as they walk the picket lines.

On an issue we raised a while ago, it seems that there will be a probe into the unfortunate death of Ashley Smith, a Moncton native whose death is linked to her time in an Ontario prison (CBC Report). We have to realize that prison is not necessarily the appropriate method of caring for people who suffer from mental illness.

A Holiday Greeting

2007-12-24T01:47:00.000-04:00

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!

Petitcodiac River Survey

2007-12-08T06:53:00.000-04:00

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.

Mark Twain on War

2007-12-01T11:56:00.000-04:00

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.

Another Demo

2007-11-28T20:58:00.000-04:00

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] [mailto:fttnbfl@nbnet.nb.ca]
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.

Self-Sufficiency and the Status Quo

2007-11-27T15:01:00.000-04:00

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.

Fundy Royal NDP congratulates distinguished MP's

2007-11-26T13:11:00.000-04:00

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

2007-11-26T10:35:00.000-04:00

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.

Sincerely,
Rob Moir

Dark Day for Canada

2007-11-24T22:56:00.001-04:00

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!

Moore Blocks River Restoration

2007-11-23T15:37:00.000-04:00

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

A Letter Exchange

2007-11-22T00:49:00.000-04:00

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.

ROB MOIR
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?

BRIAN STONE
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.

ROB MOIR
Clifton Royal

Youth Crime

2007-11-22T00:29:00.000-04:00

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.

MATTHEW BROWN

Golden Grove

Meeting the Provincial Leader

2007-11-17T23:16:00.001-04:00

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 (http://www.rogerduguay.ca/). 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

2007-11-17T23:09:00.000-04:00

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)

Thinking about Afghanistan

2007-11-13T08:14:00.000-04:00

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?

Opinion Piece

2007-10-28T12:50:00.000-04:00

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 http://canadaeast.com/ 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.

A Letter to the Editor that Went Unpublished

2007-10-24T19:55:00.000-04:00

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.

Graham is a Report Freak

2007-10-18T22:21:00.001-04:00

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.

Self-Sufficiency
http://www.gnb.ca/2026/BriefPDF/EnglishPDFBrief/RobMoir-EconomicsProfessor.pdf
http://www.gnb.ca/2026/BriefPDF/EnglishPDFBrief/RobertMoiretal.pdf

Post-Secondary Education
http://www.gnb.ca/cpse-ceps/EN/docs/Moir.pdf

cheers,
rob

A Quick Accounting

2007-10-18T21:58:00.000-04:00

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 robmoirndp@gmail.com 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 (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2007/10/09/nb-langdon-irving.html).

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.

Peace,
Rob

Letter to Mr. Baird

2007-05-31T10:24:00.000-04:00

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 (http://chge.med.harvard.edu/publications/documents/oilfullreport.pdf), 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.

Sincerely

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

Stephan Dion on CBC's "The Current"

2007-05-10T19:19:00.000-04:00

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.

A Very Busy Time

2007-04-28T00:46:00.000-04:00

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 - l.catalli.sonier@gnb.ca) by 12 noon on April 30.
3) On May 1, Peter Corbyn (http://www.petercorbyn.com) 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 (http://www.gnb.ca/0009/0377/0002/0005-e.asp - gov't draft; http://www.irvingoil.com/dloads/EIA.pdf - Irving Oil's take; http://chge.med.harvard.edu/publications/documents/oilfullreport.pdf - Harvard Medical School's summary of the Oil Industry).

Good luck.

NDP Supporting the Conservatives?

2007-04-28T00:17:00.000-04:00

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:

http://www.ndp.ca/page/5211

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 (http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/sitemap_e.asp#P)?

Upcoming Events

2007-04-16T12:24:00.000-04:00

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 (pnphanratty@hotmail.com).

(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.

Remembering

2007-04-12T05:13:00.000-04:00

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.

Fundy Royal

Letter in today's Times Transcript

We've moved our site!!!!

NDP’s Pitre to Cabinet Minister Moore: “Fire your ballot-stealing staffer now”

Darryl Pitre nominated as the NDP Candidate for Fundy Royal

A Media Opportunity

Paying More Taxes

MP Rob Moore Fights Against Fundy Park Expansion

NDP Economic Recovery Task Force headed to Fundy Royal!

Coffee House and Concert, Saturday March 21st!

Forestry Policy is Crony Capitalism

Jack Layton at UNB Fredericton this Monday!

I am part of the 62% majority

Only one more day!

Campaign - final days

Catch the Fundy Royal debates on Rogers TV

Cooperation and action can help economy

Answers to Moncton Chamber of Commerce Questions

Rob Moir to appear on CBC Maritime Noon Call-In Panel this Tuesday

Another Day on the Trail

Rob Moir raises warning flag over 'two-tiered' youth justice

On the Trail

Rob Moir renews call for full panel EIA of 2nd refinery

Tax Proposal Op Ed

A Joint Letter I Coordinated

Gearing up for Ottawa

Campaign launched!

Wind Energy Conference Ignored by Mr. Harper

Comment to CBC's SHIFT

Carleton Free Press

Decommissioning fund is no panacea

New Letter to the Editor re: "Lepreau 2"

Natural Gas in NB

Open Letter to Garth Moore, President of PotashCorp

Take on the big banks and save money!

True costs of uranium mining outweigh benefits

Voting Records

Soaring Costs for Afghanistan

Oh what a tangled web ...

Letters to the Editor...

Recent Letter - Cluster Munitions

Why Vote NDP?

Official Opposition?

An Interesting Take on Afghanistan

Chalk River Fallout - Manufactured Crisis?

Press Release - NDP candidate Rob Moir raises concern with Harper budget

Recent Letter - David Wilkins

Recent Letter - US Troops in Canada

A Recent Letter - Carbon Taxes

Science: Canada vs the U.S.

Editorial

Science in retreat

My Cat Died

Letter Exchange

Carbon Taxes

Our latest media release...

Goin' Wood

A Powerful Harper

Peering into Afghanistan

Working both sides of the border

Right on!

Submitted to TJ

Afghanistan - Mission?

Peace and Peacekeeping

Bad Branding

His Own Portrait Gallery

Harper gallery leaves MPs speechless

Tucked in a cosy lobby of the House of Commons is an homage to the Tory leader, writes Tim Naumetz.

Tim Naumetz, The Ottawa Citizen

The public won't get to see Stephen Harper's portrait gallery in the House of Commons, and these photos won't be on display there anyway: Mr. Harper and Taiwan's representative, Morris Chang, in Vietnamese silk tunics at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in November 2006...

Photograph by : Jim Young, Reuters

Stoffer in NB for victims of Agent Orange

Save Money and the Environment

Again Afghanistan

Strike Back at Excess

Media release re: Refinery Proposal

The BUSINESS of Government

NB Woodlot Management

Tragedy in Bathurst

Another Take on the Bailout