
Set power rates at par with Quebec
Published Monday November 23rd, 2009


The Hydro-Québec CEO recently said that the New Brunswick government didn't try to negotiate lower residential power rates for New Brunswickers. It's been stated that this deal will save residential customers approximately $1,500 over the next five years; using fuzzy Liberal math, Frank Mckenna has been quoted as saying the savings could be as much as $500 per year, or $2,500 over five years.
In my case, the avoidance of the 3 per cent per year increase will save approximately $80 per year, or $416 over five years, not $1,500 or $2,500. In order to save $1,500 over five years through the avoidance of the 3 per cent yearly increase, one would have to be paying approximately $800 per month for power; in the Mckenna scenario one would have to be paying approximately $1,300 per month. I hope not too many of us are in that situation.
In my case, if we received power at the Quebec customer rate, 40 per cent below our current rate, my total five-year savings would be approximately $5,000 not $416. Do the math for yourselves. Take off 40 per cent from what you currently pay monthly to NB Power and multiply it by 60 to get your five-year savings. Can you imagine what that extra cash would mean to your family?
This deal is good for industry, which is great, but it leaves a lot to be desired for ordinary New Brunswickers. Imagine the positive impact on the economy if we had that extra cash to spend.
DONALD BOUDREAU
Fredericton
Hold hearings into power proposal
While I am not a member of the Conservative Party of New Brunswick and will not vote for their candidate in my riding, I am much more in agreement with their opposition to the proposed sale of NB Power to Hydro-Québec than the arguments put forward by Shawn Graham et al to justify it.
Before any signing is done, the arguments from all parties need to be debated by a committee of the legislature, with expert witnesses called, and its conclusions (with the reasons for them) made public.
Disposal of a major asset demands no less!
S. BRUCE BENTON
Oromocto
Debt reduction matters, too
Everybody is talking about the proposed power deal, but I did not hear too much about a debt of $4.75 billion which has to be paid by a mere 750,000 people. Conservative Leader David Alward has many opinions, but never seems to think of this massive debt.
The deal includes lower and stable rates for our citizens as well as for industry, which in turn will help our economy, but he is so busy complaining that these items are being ignored.
For paying off the debt, Quebec obtains valuable power lines and plants, but a larger consumer base might very well mean lower cost, which benefits not only our population but also our industry, which in turn will benefit us all. It seems that Premier Lord may have talked about a deal like this himself, which is a bit awkward for Alward.
Meanwhile, we enjoy spring-like weather and this month's power bill should be lower than the one last year in November.
JOOST VON WEILER
Quispamsis
Will N.B. rates boost U.S. prices?
Because of Article 605 of the Free Trade Agreement, Hydro-Québec cannot impose a higher price on American customers than it charges "domestically." The proposed new agreement with New Brunswick provides Quebec a convenient loophole.
The future ability to impose higher rates in New Brunswick will permit Hydro-Québec to impose similarly higher rates on American customers. We should be asking what these rates will be after five years. Will New Brunswick industry need to relocate to Quebec to stay competitive?
Ironically, this announcement coincides with former Parti Québécois premier Jacques Parizeau's launch of his popular new book on sovereignty. If Quebec ever "separates" things really get interesting. A state-owned and potentially hostile sovereign wealth fund would have a stranglehold on Atlantic Canada's energy infrastructure.
On the other hand, if Quebec were to separate, New Brunswick would no longer constitute a "domestic" market under NAFTA. Such a move would effectively kill the golden goose of differentially higher power prices for both New Brunswick and the States.
Who knows? Perhaps this deal will prove a boon to Canadian unity.
THOMAS MUELLER
Rothesay
Harper's Tories take the lead
The best is yet to come for Prime Minister Harper's Conservative government, and all indications point to the fact that he is flirting with a majority. In one of India's daily newspapers, Harper has eclipsed Obama, as his photograph adorns the front page, big and bold.
What length of time has Harper led a minority government? The time-line must be approaching or surpassing some type of world record. Canadians have forfeited an entire decade under Liberal rule, and it is time to shepherd the vessel on the proper course.
Canadians are beginning to appreciate the welcome change that is taking place incrementally, and my sense is that they concur with the overhauling of countless neglected items, which are now being tackled head-on. The difference being the Conservative Party engages policies and retains an exceptional leader, which shows they will remain at the forefront for the foreseeable future.
All indications are that Canadians are comfortable with this government, as individuals seek stability in these uncertain times. Opposition parties have not proposed any immeasurable ideas to improve or change the minds of Canadians.
Under-promising and over-delivering has been Harper's trump card. His "best to have and not need, contrary to need and not have" approach, validates his intrinsic worth to be "purely a masterful strategist."
RONALD YASCHUK
Quispamsis
Bring on values revolution
I would like to respond to your editorial on poverty. The fixes outlined in the article as far as they go are fine, but they are far from addressing the real problem. A true revolution in values would cast a critical look at the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth.
Any nation that spends more on armaments than on social programs is approaching spiritual death. Taking a spiritual perspective, the poor are a trust of God among us. An industrial and capitalistic age takes little account of this, and maximizing profits pays scant attention to the workers, who are ultimately responsible for creating the profits. It is essentially wage slavery when a worker must make a choice between heat or food.
All of this is well documented. We are living in a world that is split up by a dichotomous view of life - Liberal v. Conservative, socialist v. capitalist - all striving against one another toward a victory that cannot be sustained, but which guarantees poverty for the many losers, rather than toward unity and cooperation, sustained by the religious values of love, unity and trustworthyness.
How long will it take us to acknowledge our errors, I have no idea but I am certain it will happen. After we have finally left the carnage of war and unrest behind us mankind as a whole will face a glorious future!
KEITH ELDRIDGE
Sussex
Look for possible tax refund
As a point of interest, people who claimed capital gains on their income tax returns in the last three years (back to and including 2006) may be able to go back and reduce those gains and generate a tax refund.
To do that, you must currently hold investments that generate capital gains or losses or maybe you already have losses registered with the Canada Revenue Agency. Please be aware this would have to be done by Dec. 31, 2009 to include the 2006 income tax year. This may be of interest to those people who sold Bell Aliant Shares in 2006 to purchase Bell Aliant Trust Units.
DARLENE T. BONNER
Saint John
Criminals don't register guns
Re: "Gun debate is all smoke and no firepower"
Yet again, are we inundated by a left-wing nut and his completely ignorant opinion.
To suggest the Conservatives are being more permissive about the most dangerous item in the criminal's arsenal, his gun, shows the complete disconnect this type of radical activist has with reality.
I would like Max Wolfe to name me one, only one, Toronto gang-banger who has ever registered his gun, which in turn has prevented him from using it in the act of a crime.
TOBY SCHMID
Richmond Hill, Ont.


Disabled








Search Articles


Comments (17)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
If it wasn't for AECL's problem with the Pt.Lepreau refurbishment things would be a lot differnet. This is a one time event that shouldn't be used to skew the numbers.
I will pay all your debts, including your mortgage, credit card, everything. All you have to do in return is keep paying the same payments that you are paying today, for the rest of your life. Plus, after five years, I increase your payment by the cost of living every year. By the way, I will take on any new debt that is required to keep a roof over your head and charge you for it, forever. I forgot to tell you that you can't move out of your house, and when you die, your kids take over your payments for you. And when they die, their kids take over the payments, and so on.
Does this sound like you are "eliminating" your debt? P.T Barnum was right, there IS a sucker born every minute
And who has the Liberals and our professional media accused as being the king of secret agendas.. Harper of course.
When the media has a slow day, like no more torture stories, maybe they could rate parties on secret agendas. OF course most projects start out secret but in the end people should get to vote. The Cons may have played with selling NBP but decided it wasn't the right way to go. But if you're beating your wife, accuse your neighbor of beating his and that takes the attention away from you.
The liberals are good at that.
At 5% paying 200.00 per month at 5% the savings are 120 , 246, 378.30, 517.21, and 663.08 per year for a total of 1924.60. The good news is that 5th year savings of 663.08 goes forward every year after the 5th. If you insist on 3% it is 72, 146.16, 222.54, 301.22, 382.26 with a total of 1124.18. Still not bad. I don't think 5% is unreasonable if we want to pay off the debt.
PS. I am usually undecided at election time but I don't think that this will be a problem next election.