DenyAsk

I am not quite sure who the new Leader of the PC Party, Ches Crosbie, is trying to impress with some of the positions taken in recent weeks. While he shares the well-known Crosbie name, he is coming up short in proving that he is his father's son. Regardless of the side of the partisan divide upon which one sits, John Crosbie, Ches' father, could be counted on to be forthright and to say publicly � in the Halls of Parliament and in the provincial and federal Cabinets � exactly what was on his mind. One example is often repeated in a CBC clip in which he is surrounded by a throng of frustrated fishers following the declaration of the Cod Moratorium. Crosbie the elder forthrightly answers one indignant protester: �I didn't take the goddamn fish out of the goddam ocean!� It is possible that John's ill-advised support for the Muskrat Falls project, late in his public career, inspires Ches to pull his punches. Likely, however, given the Crosbie family's history of politi...

�We just want to clarify, there is no way ratepayers in our province could pay or should pay for the burden of Muskrat Falls.�  T he province will be �separating the ratepayers from the Muskrat Falls debt.� It is a �tremendous burden� a debt issue, not a ratepayer issue.�  These are all direct quotes which the CBC attributed to the Premier in a by-election kick-off for Liberal Candidate, Paul Antle, in the District of Windsor Lake. What else did the Premier say? He said, � we are not looking at increasing taxes for people in Newfoundland and Labrador.� As others have asked, if both ratepayers and taxpayers will be spared responsibility for the $12.7 billion Muskrat Falls debt, who is going to pay? This Post is not seeking an answer to this question today, though the Saturday Telegram's follow-up to the story has Ball backtracking. The Premier indicated that his plan "does not require wholesale changes to the project's financial structure" requiring a transfer of deb...

Guest Post by PlanetNL PlanetNL13: Busting the Premier�s Numbers Again In PlanetNL12, an analysis of Government�s secretive two-tier declining rate scheme calculated the impact on three types of electricity customers.   The unfairness of such a rate scheme was made clear: the less electricity you use, the more steeply your Government wants you to pay for Muskrat.   This approach will tend to hit the many poor and working-class who struggle to pay their bills especially hard.   Meanwhile at the other end of the spectrum, the few who tend to have large high-energy homes will be pleased with little difference they�ll find on their power bill. How did Government and Nalcor keep this unexpected twist of rate design?   Well, they simply didn�t want to tell us and for about two years they carefully misled us. Elasticity and Load Forecasting Elasticity theory has been much discussed on this blogsite so regular readers know what it means.   In simple terms for newbies, w...

Guest Post by PlanetNL PlanetNL12: 18 c/KWh � Warning � Not Exactly as Advertised The last day of NL Hydro witness testimony at the General Rate Application hearings at the Public Utilities Board revealed a cruel and regressive plot twist.   A senior NL Hydro manager on the witness stand indicated that Government�s post-Muskrat mitigated rate target of 18 c/KWh was merely an average figure.   He said Hydro was already considering a rate design scheme that would be presented to the PUB in the coming months based on two-tier declining rates.   In other words, the first part of energy used will cost more than 18 c/KWh but the rest will be priced lower.   When all residential users are added up together, the increase will average out to a 55% over today�s rate. We won�t know Hydro�s exact details for a while, but a model is presented here that plainly shows not everyone will be hit equally.   A substantial number will be hit hard while a small number barely take a ...

My late brother, Brendan Sullivan, was one of the first opponents of Muskrat Falls and wrote a pre-sanction article employing the term �voodoo economics�.  It described a scheme contrived by Nalcor to lower power rates early in the project by back-loading the equity repayment onto future generations. His post of November 29, 2012 stands the test of time. He was efficient in his words of caution, too.  Brendan could see the project for what it was: economic smoke and mirrors.  This is part of his article: Now, almost 7 years after it was first used to describe the Muskrat Falls project, it is time to re-introduce the phrase that perfectly describes something far worse than a �boondoggle�. ______________________________________________________ voo�doo ec�o�nom�ics noun   An economic policy perceived as being unrealistic and ill-advised, especially a policy of maintaining or increasing levels of public spending  ____________________________________________________...

As NL Hydro looks for an illegitimate 6.5% rate increase � smoothing in advance of socking you in the kisser with a Muskrat-sized punch � Newfoundland Power (NP) has applied for a 1.2% increase also to take effect January 1, 2019. Electricity ratepayers are under assault at every turn.   The PUB has the best (legal) ammunition. It can say �no�. The public shouldn't get careless either just because the increase sought is smaller than Hydro�s. NP is attempting to establish a precedent. NP has always acted as if their shareholders� interests are divisible from the public interest. In some measure that is true, except NP has taken self-interest too far. It will say anything to be on-side with Nalcor and the government. It fears them and, in the process, disrespects the public. This has to change. The Company wants the PUB to approve the 1.2% rate increase just to bolster its return on assets, though it is already receiving a juicy 9.5% return on equity. It justifies the additional ret...