Tuesday, February 28, 2012

NOT DRINKING THE KOOL-AID

THE FOLLOWING LETTER WAS PRINTED IN TODAY'S TELEGRAM. THE AUTHOR WAS AFRAID TO USE HIS REAL NAME BECAUSE HE FEARED HIS JOB AND GOVERNMENT RETRIBUTION AGAINST FAMILY MEMBERS.

WELCOME TO DEMOCRACY IN NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR!

Our provincial government has set themselves up as proponent, developer and regulator, or judge, jury and executioner, for this project, and any time that happens, it’s worth looking at what’s behind the rush they seem to be in to get it done.
I don’t have any concerns about the viability of the project. After all, they (our provincial government) will raise the money on our backs and, because they also are the regulator, will determine how much it will cost us each month to pay off the loans and provide the rate of return (determined by them) to Nalcor. So, you see, no matter how much it costs to do the project or what the operating costs are, we (you and I) will foot the initial bill and we will then pay it off each month when we pay our hydro bill.
I also don’t have any issue with the technical feasibility of the project. I have every confidence in the engineers at Nalcor when they say we can do this.
“Here’s the rub; because they (our provincial government) have set themselves up in advance to make this project happen, they have taken great pains to make sure any issues or roadblocks are minimized or eliminated before they come up. For example, they have limited the options being considered to provide for our future energy needs to those that will reflect favourably on the one they have chosen. Why?
I will confess that, even after all of the debate and dialogue in the media, I am not convinced Muskrat Falls is the right solution for our future energy needs, but I am not convinced that it is not either.
I support former premier Brian Peckford’s view that our PUB simply does not have the expertise or mandate necessary to do a proper review of this project and we do need to refer this whole ball of wax to an independent panel of experts in the field to get a thorough and objective analysis done of all of the options for providing our future energy needs.
In the meantime, I’m not drinking the Kool-Aid we are being fed up to this point … it just doesn’t smell right.
AS FOR THOSE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVES WHO MIGHT NOT LIKE MY OPINION, COME AND GET ME, I WOULD RATHER SERVE FRENCH FRIES AT MACDONALDS THAN GIVE UP MY RIGHTS TO DEMOCRATIC ND REASONABLE FREE EXPRESSION.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is the rub. So many people trusted Danny Williams. Dunderdale and company have really made a mess of this project. So much so that even if it is a good project, people's trust has been eroded. We all want more time to make sure it is the right project. Why the rush? Stop ramming it down our throats!

Brad Cabana said...

Keep up the good and brave work Peter.

TerrMurp said...

Anonymous publications are cowardly and I am a little disgusted that the Telegram would hide under this 'reason' to deliver criticism on the project. Speak your mind, there are many ways to get your opinion out there and I respect the Telegram a lot less today for this.

Peter L. Whittle said...

I don't. I have wrestled with the issue of anonymous comments a great deal here at P&P.

In the past I have resorted to writing under a pseudonym for many of the same reasons expressed by the author, and those were in the days of the last Liberal Government. I will add that the editor of the paper was aware of my real name.

The issue pointed out by the author is real and genuine. People are worried about the repercussions of speaking in opposition to this project and the government. Naysayers are ruthlessly attacked in a a very personal way. There does not appear to be any room for discussing issues, the debate is personal, partisan and black and white.

Letters to the editor are, in effect, guest articles published to give the opinion pages greater range. They are selected for relevance and readability.

When you are faced with this type of dogmatic attack, anonymity allows for a healthy public discourse. There is, in fact, a rich history of anonymous contribution to the free flow of ideas in political vacuums.

Anonymous said...

My main complaint isn't so much the anonymity of posters, rather the vitriol, ignorance, and irrelevance of so much that is allowed to remain part of the comment stream.

Anonymous said...

I think you crossed the line into partisanship with these last few posts. Your Liberal colors are in full bloom!

Darell