Earlier this year, I attended the Saint John-Fundy Progressive Conservative Nomination Convention, where Glen Savoie was chosen as our candidate for the 2010 provincial election.

Glen is one of the most dedicated candidates that I have ever met!  He is very smart, energetic, and engaging.  Most importantly, he is running for the right reasons – to fairly represent everyone in Saint John-Fundy!

Be sure to visit his new website to learn more about him and to follow the campaign:

Who is Glen Savoie?

Glen is 39 years old, and is married with children. His family is the focus of his life, and is the reason he is seeking a seat in the Legislature. Glen’s interest in politics began in 1987 while working on Bev Harrison’s campaign. He credits Bev for shaping his belief that politics can only best serve people when it is driven by passion, honesty, and integrity.

Glen graduated from the New Brunswick Community College in 2001 with a diploma in Computer Programming and Networking. He currently works as a Business Service Technician for Bell Aliant.

Glen’s wife, Mary, is a high school teacher. The challenges she faces daily in the classroom, as well as the work he does in the community with children, convinced him that the needs of the youth in New Brunswick are not being met. They are not being given the tools they need to succeed in the future.

Glen has been serving his community since the mid- 80’s through his work with young people in various sport activities. He is a fully certified martial arts instructor and continues to run a club where children learn how to be positive members of their community. He has coached little league baseball and soccer. His commitment to working with youth has blossomed into a desire to serve in a more diverse role.

Glen looks forward to serving the people of Saint John Fundy, and will work to restore the faith of the constituents by putting their needs first – for a change.

Interested in helping out?

• Click here to contact the campaign team!

Check out this great video encouraging people to vote in the 2010 Provincial Election:

The video may be taking a beating if you read the CBC comments; but, at least they are doing their part to get the message out!

As the video mentions, be sure to check out http://electionsnb.ca for all of the details.

Shawn Graham’s Liberals are running under the slogan “The Future Matters“.

They are hoping New Brunswickers will ignore their past mistakes; but, as the late poet and philosopher, George Santayana, famously wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it“.

That is why I am highlighting two critically important issues where Shawn Graham and the Liberal Party attempted to impose what they thought was best for us, while ignoring our thoughts and opinions, a clear trend that has been occurring since day one.

I’m hoping this serves as a reminder when people are making their final decisions on who to vote for on election day:

1) UNB Saint John

How can we be so quick to forget the 2007 report to reform post-secondary education , which included recommendations to turn UNB-SJ into a polytechnique?

Not a single Liberal MLA opposed the recommendations, which is terrible considering how many Saint John Liberal’s served in Shawn Grahams cabinet:

Gordon Fairweather, a former Tory MLA who left politics in 1977, took aim at Minister of Post-Secondary Education Ed Doherty, Supply and Services Minister Roly MacIntyre, Energy Minister Jack Keir, Minister of State for Housing Mary Schryer and Minister of Tourism and Parks Stuart Jamieson.

“I thought at least one or two of those five saviours of Saint John would step up to the plate and I’m astounded that we haven’t heard a single word from any of them,” Fairweather said in a report published Wednesday in the Saint John Telegraph-Journal.

Progressive Conservative MLA’s fought against the plan, pushing to have a decision made immediately:

The Conservatives have introduced a resolution in the legislature calling on the Liberal government to make a quick decision on the future of the University of New Brunswick Saint John.

“Why are you not standing up and fighting for the people of Saint John?” Conservative MLA Margaret-Ann Blaney asked the government side on Thursday.

The same resolution was previously passed unanimously by the university’s student union on Nov. 29 and asks the government to announce what the future holds for the school by the end of January.

The university’s administration has argued that the delay in determining the school’s future is having a serious impact on the enrolment numbers for next fall as students question if they’ll even have a university to go to in the city.

The Liberal government has promised the institution will continue to be called a university but has not yet guaranteed that it will keep its current programs or liberal arts focus.

And to top things off, Shawn Graham went on to accept an honorary degree from UNB, which many faculty members protested:

Robert Whitney, a history professor at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John, said roughly 100 current and retired faculty and staff members have signed a letter of objection to granting Graham an honorary degree and have sent it to David Stevenson, chair of the university’s board of governors.

Whitney said the decision is up to the board of governors, but from his perspective, the honour would be misdirected.

“The premier and his government sponsored a report which was clearly intended to restrict the access of higher education to many people in New Brunswick,” he said.

“For us, it just doesn’t seem to make sense that you would grant an honorary degree to someone who promoted policies that wanted to restrict people’s access to university education.”

2) NB Power For Sale

Once again, a very controversial issue was decided behind closed doors and forced upon the people in New Brunswick without any consultation!

This time the decision was to sell NB Power to Hydro Quebec:

Quebec and New Brunswick have reached a proposed deal that would see Hydro-Québec buy the majority of NB Power’s assets for $4.8 billion.

New Brunswick Premier Shawn Graham and Quebec Premier Jean Charest announced the historic deal in Fredericton on Thursday, concluding a week of speculation.

However, after the deal received much public opposition, the Liberal’s went and renegotiated the deal; however, they wouldn’t show the people in New Brunswick the deals of the plan:

Yves Gagnon, the K.C. Irving chair in sustainable development at the University of Moncton, was a critic of the original deal.

In October there was a text of the memorandum of understanding but without the text of the finalized agreement the energy expert said it will be difficult to properly assess the new deal.

“It’s going to be impossible for independent parties to analyze the value and the merits of this second deal with Hydro-Québec,” Gagnon said.

Gagnon said the first agreement also sounded good on the day it was announced but that changed as details emerged.

Progressive Conservative Leader David Alward asked the Liberal government to send the new deal to a legislative committee for further examination.

“The reality is with Plan B we already know there are shortcomings. Many of the same problems that existed with the first deal exist in the second deal,” Alward said.

Rumors of a caucus revolt over the proposal deal? Not if you ask Shawn Graham, every single Liberal MLA was backing the deal:

Graham told reporters on Monday at the opening of a new school that there had not been any caucus revolt.

When asked if the proposed deal had 100 per cent backing from the Liberal caucus, Graham replied: “Yes, very much so.”

Also, don’t let the spin fool you – only one Liberal MLA ever publicly came out against the sale of NB Power to Hydro Quebec, and this only occurred when the end of the deal was imminent!

Every Liberal MLA’s spent the majority of their time trying to sell the plan to us, even when they knew a majority of people were opposed to the deal:

The Liberal government is running into stiff opposition to its plan to sell NB Power, according to a new Leger Marketing poll.

The first public opinion poll on the deal was released on Monday and showed the deal is seen unfavourably by 60 per cent of New Brunswick residents, while only 22 per cent of respondents like the agreement.

Christian Bourque, vice-president of research at Leger Marketing, said the government is running into difficulty pitching the proposal to people.

“It’s only one in five New Brunswickers that are actually supporting the deal with Hydro-Québec,” Bourque said.

“And of those remaining 18 per cent who have not made up their mind yet, they’ll tend to sway with the majority, and that majority right now is saying no.”

The proposal deal also cost New Brunswick $8 Million Dollars, much of it was spent trying to convince us that it was a good deal:

New Brunswick Finance Minister Greg Byrne is defending the final $8-million cost of the botched deal to sell parts of NB Power to Hydro-Québec.

The Department of Finance released figures on Monday that added up the legal, accounting and public relations bills associated with the failed power deal.

Toronto-based law firm Olser Hoskin Harcourt, which acted as the deal’s lead negotiators, billed the provincial government $2.43 million.

Osler hired a series of other firms to help in the negotiations, which brought the total bill for legal and technical services to $4.82 million.

The New Brunswick government hired a series of public relations experts in an effort to sell the deal to the public.

Hill and Knowlton billed the provincial government for $892,000. The firm also handed out subcontracts to Bristol for $175,100 and Colour for $1.22 million.

Canada Post was paid $42,300 for postage for a household pamphlet that was distributed about the deal.

In total, taxpayers paid $2.33 million for communications and advertising.

Another major component of the final bill was for financial services.

Macquarie Capital Markets was paid $882,900 for third-party financial advice on the impact of the deal on New Brunswick power rates. A further $28,612 was paid to Morneau Sobeco for actuarial advice on pension issues stemming from the proposed deal.

The Future Matters?

Shawn Graham’s Liberals are not working in the best interests of the people of New Brunswick – they are working for the best interest of their friends like Atcon:

Last year, the New Brunswick government extended three different loan guarantees to Miramichi-based Atcon worth a combined $50 million. Those were on top of earlier loan guarantees and loans, which elevated the provincial government’s exposure to roughly $70 million.

We can expect more of the same if Shawn Graham is re-elected.

As for the slogan “The Future Matters” – yes, the future matters; but, so does the past.

If we fail to understand the past, we will all suffer the consequences – another four years of Shawn Graham.

On election day, stand up and say enough is enough!

Ever wonder how bad the financial situation is in New Brunswick?

The provincial debt is currently pegged at $8.3-billion – which is an increase of over $749-million since Shawn Graham has taken over and lead us down the road to self-sufficiency.

Meanwhile, like kids in the backseat of a car, we keep asking, “Are we there yet?”.

You can guess the response.

To make matters worse, the province’s auditor-general has projected the debt climbing another 33 per cent in the next four years!

That is why I was so glad to find this great article in today’s TJ on the debt issue (that seems to be getting ignored in the campaign):

David Bishop is spending his own money to convince government to stop spending everyone else’s.

The retired Quispamsis businessman is at the helm of a grassroots campaign that is aiming to make the provincial debt a central issue of the Sept. 27 election.

“I just really want to get a dialogue going,” said Bishop, who lives in Rothesay.

To spark a conversation about New Brunswick’s $8.2-billion debt, Bishop set up a 53-foot long tractor trailer near the Gondola Point intersection off Highway 1.

On the side of the trailer hangs a 22-foot by 8-foot banner, reading “We live within our means. Please tell Shawn Graham.”

The same message has been printed on bumper stickers and pamphlets that Bishop and other organizers have been passing around the province for the last few weeks.

Bishop said he isn’t affiliated with a political party and his message isn’t political in nature.

“It’s about starting a conversation.”

Read the full article here!

Big election news today that the New Brunswick Liberal Party paid the wife of former Premier Louis J. Robichaud $3,000 to campaign for Shawn Graham’s Liberals in the 2006 provincial election.

While it’s not surprising that you would need to be paid to be seen with Shawn Graham and his party, the real issue here is that the payment was not reported:

Robichaud said in an interview with CBC News that she “was paid a small amount” for campaigning in the 2006 election campaign, which saw Graham’s Liberals unseat then-premier Bernard Lord’s Tories in a tight election.

“They said you deserve it, you worked for the party, you deserve it, so I said that’s very nice, you know,” she said.

Robichaud said the fee was for campaign appearances with Graham, phone calls she made to party supporters and going door to door with candidates in the Moncton area.

“I think everybody is paid when they do some campaigning for the party,” she said.

Liberal election spending reports filed with Elections New Brunswick from 2006 show only three people were paid salaries, wages or benefits for a total of $4,500.

It’s very important that all election costs are recorded because there are quite strict rules around how much can be spent – and when!

This bombshell comes just one day before the writ is dropped to start the official 2010 provincial election campaign!

To add to the allegations, just this afternoon Jacques Poitras reported:

Volpe released what he says are handwritten receipts showing Libs paid Mme Robichaud $20,000 cash. She told me $3,000 cheque.

Expect to see this front and center for the rest of the week – especially because this isn’t the first time Robichaud has been in the news recently!  Just last week, the issue of MLA pensions was front and centre, and she was in the middle – collecting a monthly pension of $2,000 authorized by the Liberal Government even though she wasn’t eligible at the time.

Note: I can’t take credit for the term Widowgate, I first saw @the_problematic using the hashtag on Twitter!

After the recent mess with the Police building vote (for Peel Plaza), you would think that Council would be more inclined to think more about the ramifications to the taxpayers in the city!

The next messy vote coming up is around the parking garage that the city wants to build for Peel Plaza.

It sounds like a fine idea, except for the fact that this parking garage will cost  us (the taxpayers) every year that it operates:

Should common council approve a new garage for Carleton Street, the parking commission would own, operate and finance the structure.

To cover construction and operating costs, the commission would have to put about $300,000 of its annual surplus revenues into the project. The commission typically generates surpluses as part of its regular business of offering parking services in the city.

This means that we, as taxpayers, will be subsidizing people driving into the city center and parking for the day.

At least one Councillor can be counted on to represent us – Deputy Mayor Stephen Chase.

“Peel Plaza is going to be a sponge that will sop up all the available financial resources of the parking commission,” Chase said.

The deputy mayor said he’s opposed to the parking garage and plans to vote against it once the matter comes before common council. He said he’s not happy that taxpayers would have to spend $300,000 a year to subsidize a new parking structure.

“Everything about this project is like taking a round peg and trying to smash it into a square hole,” said Chase, who was also among three council members who voted against a $20.6-million police station. “It’s costing valuable revenue that could otherwise be spent on curbside services and recreational needs.”

Unfortunately, there are still those Councillors out there looking to make a name for themselves.

I’d typically advocate contacting them to let them know what you think; however, I’ve recently found that most don’t care what you think.

Until we can get the silent majority to stand up and fight, Peel Plaza is a done deal – one that we will be paying for many generations over.

After much public outrage over the costs of Peel Plaza, last week Council voted to go forward with the Police HQ component of Peel Plaza:

In one of the most contentious decisions of its mandate, common council voted Wednesday night to build a $20.6-million police station in the city centre.

After a two-hour debate in the council chamber, eight of the 11 politicians approved what will become a legacy project for the group of civic leaders.

Deputy Mayor Stephen Chase, Coun. Bill Farren and Coun. Patty Higgins were the only dissenters around the council table who argued the city could not afford the project, the most controversial component of Peel Plaza.

The threat of a property tax rate increase now looms over the municipality as city staff’s funding projections call for council to rein in spending or hike the rate.

Not that I am surprised that it was pushed through, given the quality of council; but, I am proud of the following three Councillors for standing up for taxpayers and voting against this deal:

You have earned my support (along with many others) for your stand!

I received a great email this weekend on the topic of Peel Plaza, and I’d like to share it with everyone!

Check it out, and let me know what you think:

The stench of Marsh Creek near the Post Office and by the brook on Bridge Street in the north end would lead tourists to believe we are still living in the days when people had to duck to avoid sewage being thrown out the window into the street. Do our Council members really have no sense of smell along with their deafness when it comes to hearing what Saint John citizens want done with our money?

We pay close to $1,000 a year to have third world quality water with known carcinogens delivered to us through our household taps, being sold to us as “drinking water”. It does not meet modern standards that are in place to protect us from waterborne diseases. Why?

A large number of “asleep at the switch” Council members would rather leave water treatment for another day in favour of building another revenue losing monument to their egos, Peel Plaza.

Ivan Court was on Tom Young’s show the other day saying the six bidders on Peel Plaza were Maritime contractors. Pomerleau, the low bidder is not a Maritime based company Mr. Court. This is from their website; “Since 1964, Pomerleau has been an important player in the construction industry. Today, the company leads the QUEBEC construction industry and is one of the top builders in Canada.”

Half truths equal lies and there have been so many lies told about the Peel Plaza project no right minded politician should want to be tarred with the broad brush strokes it will leave if it goes ahead. They need to get OUR priorities straight in their heads, not Staff’s and not their own!

Any Council member who votes in favour of Peel Plaza should be turfed out at the first opportunity. Let the Councillors know you will not vote for them if they put Peel Plaza ahead of clean safe drinking water and they don’t put an end to City wastewater being discharged untreated into our waterways before they do anything else.

Today’s Telegraph-Journal is reporting that a vote on the police station portion of Peel Plaza will take place soon:

Common council is preparing for a vote on a new police station uptown after the city received five qualified bids for the project, with the lowest bidder pegging construction costs at $20.6 million.

While the price tag may sound “low” compared to other numbers previously thrown around, it’s important to keep in mind that there are more components coming that will see the end costs soar to over $40 million dollars:

Deputy Mayor Stephen Chase said he has no plans to support a new police station when the vote takes place. He said while the bids are lower than estimates, the difference isn’t substantial, and even the lowest bid would make the project too expensive.

“I’m also concerned about cost overruns,” Chase said. “Just a 10 per cent cost overrun, which is typical on traditional city contracts, will do away with any percentage savings from the bid that came in lower.”

In addition, Chase said if a majority of council approves the police station, the politicians will likely have no choice but to approve the remaining projects, regardless of the price tags.

“Once you commit to the police station, you are committed to the other two. If the plaza and parking garage come in over budget, then you’re stuck with that,” he said.

Now, is the time to contact your councillors and let them know what you think about Peel Plaza!

Earlier today, I sent out the following email to the Mayor and all Councillors:

Vote NO to Peel Plaza

I am writing this letter to the Mayor and all Councillors to ask for you to vote against Peel Plaza.

The citizens of Saint John do have many issues and concerns; however, I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that a new police station is priority.  It also hasn’t been a factor for people moving to Saint John.

Council clearly identified its top priorities in 2009, and the document is easily available on the city’s website: http://www.saintjohn.ca/documents/Council%20Priorities.pdf; however, there is no mention of a need for a new police station.

It is clear that this is not a priority for residents.  It is clear that this was not identified as a priority of council in 2009.  Why then is this a high priority for certain individuals on council today?

The city cannot afford to pay for this without borrowing large sums of money or raising taxes.  Residents are strongly opposed to both of these options.

The only viable option left for those Councillors who want Peel Plaza is to pay for it themselves and leave us taxpayers out of it!

How are you getting the word out? Have you heard back from any Councillors?

Let me know!

Update:  My letter was printed in the Telegraph-Journal on the following Monday.

The Facebook Group “Stop Saint John Sprawl” is starting to get some media attention!

Today’s Telegraph-Journal featured an article “Facebook group fosters debate about planned highway expansion“:

SAINT JOHN – Smart cities grow up, not out, says Kurt Peacock, a Saint John civic activist and urban researcher.

Peacock, and fellow civic activist Shawn Peterson, are the administrators of a rapidly growing Facebook group called Stop Saint John Sprawl. The group, with close to 200 members, aims to create public debate about the planned Mackay Highway expansion and discuss the merits of smart and sustainable urban growth.

Plans to add two additional lanes to the Mackay Highway were unveiled in July of last year with the intention of improving traffic flow in and out of the city as part of the Route 1 Gateway Project.

The proposed expansion made headlines again this summer after Mayor Ivan Court publicly urged the province to reconsider.

Peacock said there was no public discussion surrounding the merits of the proposal, calling it “bad transportation policy.”

“There’s a maxim among transportation engineers that increasing highway capacity to combat congestion is like increasing your pant size to tackle obesity,” he said.

“It just does not work.”

Peacock referred to a report published by the provincial government outlining its goal of making Saint John a more sustainable city. He feels the planned expansion goes against a “more sustainable” Saint John and said it has little economic or environmental benefit for the city.

“That’s why we’ve created this group and we’re hoping in the weeks and months to come to challenge candidates for the New Brunswick legislature and find out quite simply, are they for or against urban sprawl,” he said.

The group is home to posts both for and against the proposed expansion, in addition to posted studies, reports and examples of how other cities have fared through highway expansions.

Peacock said studies done on cities such as Los Angeles, Atlanta and Toronto have proven that expanding highways can have a negative effect.

“They’re much less livable now than they were 20 or 30 years ago, largely because government invested in highways as opposed to investing in structures that people truly care about. Better schools. Better cultural facilities. Better sports and recreation,” he said, adding that the traffic problem on the highway is miniscule in comparison to larger metropolitan areas.

For Peacock and his fellow activists, the planned expansion goes against the concept of smart growth. The concept has become one of the central discussions in this year’s Plan SJ public forum.

Read the rest of this entry »