Wednesday, November 15, 2006


Has Danny sold his and our sole?

By supporting the federallies stand on bottom dragging on the high seas and by extension the 40% of the Grand Banks which lies outside the 200 mile limit. Nose Tail and Flemish cap Rise and Slope of NL's continental shelf.

To my mind the only reason I can figure Danny would support such a stand against a moratorium on Bottom dragging on the high seas, NT&FC. Is if he is going to get something in return from the federallies.

This arguement that we are afraid we will look like harpocrites and will be forced to ban bottom dragging on the 60% of our continental shelf inside the 200 mile limit has no basis and should be disregarded in it's entirety. Where is our soverignty over our own territory?

Why do we need to give away one resource, our most valuable renewable one at that for another? The fact is they are both or all our own resources and we should be the soul owner operator of our own resources.

Ah but the reality according to the Supreme Court of canada 3ON/3QC is that they aren't our own resources though because they are on the Grand Banks which we brought with us into this federation and will take out if and at this rate when we leave this Imperialistic/federation of ON/QC.

The question is what did danny trade for supporting the federallies?
East West power corridor?
8.5% fed ownership in Hibernia?
Fallow Field legislation?
Loan guarantees for developiong the Lower Churchill?
Funding for the completion of the TLH and hard top?
A fixed link across the Straite Jacket of Belle Isle?
Recognition of Danny's list of issues affecting NL?
Operationally Manned military base?
Increase in Federal presence and quality of presence?
Reduced ferry rates (toll) and improved service?

Resources are supposed to be solely owned and operate by the provinces, and by Ottawa having control and ownership of our resources they have to act in the best interest of the (MAJORITY) of canadians ON/QC by default even if it is detrimental to the province which depends on those resources for it's livilyhood. Ottawa is in a conflict of interest by having ownership and control of our or any provinces resources.

Why does Gus etchegary need to throw a red herring into this debate by bringing up seismic blasting? By having to muddy the waters with this totally separate issue it just goes to show how feeble and misinformed his arguements really are.

This isn't a shell game pun intended, this is our Raison D'etre and shouldn't be trifled with.

I'm not really surprised three of the federal parties don't support the call for a moratorium on the high seas seeing as Bombardier has gotten so many foreign contracts recently. Just recall what Spain threatened to do if canada didn't drop the Estaie affair turbot war. Spain threatened to cancel all bombadier contracts if it didn't go away and it did go away. Because it was in the best interest of the majority of canadians and seats 106 ON/75 QC even though it was to the detriment of the province which relied on that resource NL.

You've been hood winked danny and it will be your undoing. Mark my words. Even if you get all of the above mentioned concessions it won't make up for not supporting a moratorium on bottom dragging on the high seas NT& FC.

Update: US creates fish habitat Refuges. No Fish Swins alone like man stands alone we need biodiversity.
Resources are supposed to be solely owned and operate by the provinces,

They are.

and by Ottawa having control and ownership of our resources

Ottawa has no control or ownership over ANY provincial resource.
Hello Wallace J McLean

"Wallace McLean, who has worked in Labrador constituency office in Happy Valley-Goose Bay for seven years,"

How is Todd Russell Labrador's MP doing?

I saw him on CPAC the other day I see his public speaking hasn't improved any.
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]