A Matter of Dollars and Sense

In recent weeks I have watched with trepidation and interest as oil prices have plummeted to historic lows. They may not have bottomed-out yet, but the ongoing social, political and economic tensions in the Middle East and Russia, for example, are definitely contributing to a continued downward trend. A trend, I might add, that is predicted to continue into 2016

The Newfoundland & Labrador government bases approximately 30 percent of its budget on fossil fuel revenues. As Jeffrey Simpson of the Globe and Mail recently noted when discussing Alberta, “local governments just keep basing budgets on volatile revenues that have a tendency to rise and fall”… without any control.

He continued by saying that there are many who believe that governments should be cutting waste – and that the real issue is a spending issue and not a revenue one. In other words, governments, like a family, should be spending within its means and have the foresight to plan for a rainy day…especially when approximately one-third of its income is precariously unpredictable.

So here we are – governments scrambling once again to address a significant shortfall in revenue. A shortfall that could easily be manageable if they adopted a different way of doing business.

In contrast to us, in oil-rich Norway every man woman and child became a theoretical millionaire at the beginning of 2014. The country’s oil fund – which collects taxes from oil profits and invests the money, mostly in stocks – exceeded $905 billion in 2014 and is expected to reach $1 trillion in 2015. Norway isn’t the only country in this enviable position. The United Arab Emirates’ fund is valued in excess of US $800 billion, Kuwait has about US $400 billion, and Russia has accumulated approximately US $180 billion.

This is all happening in Norway and other places at a time when our province has a net debt of approximately $11 billion… a debt that will probably grow in excess of $12 billion before the current crunch is over.

What is wrong with this picture? How can a country like Norway manage to guarantee its citizens’ prosperity for the future while we are drowning in debt? Should our governments set up some sort of sovereign wealth fund like the one in Norway? Should a percentage of all revenues from natural resources be legislated into a trust fund whereby it is protected from going into general revenue and being spent before it hits the bank?

The provincial government blames its deficit on the falling oil prices. Hibernia crude is selling for considerably less than it once did. But is this a good excuse? Norway has also had to deal with low oil prices over the years but has always found the “political” will to feed its rainy day fund rather than spend it on “more” infrastructure that will ultimately cost more to maintain in the future then to build in the first place.

As citizens, we have become greedy and that greed has translated into pressure on politicians, who, for better or for worse, need our support to keep their jobs. With this in mind, they feel, and have always felt, compelled to bow to a drunken, blow-out barn dance today rather than a string of small kitchen parties down the road. It is mostly about optics...and votes.

Had we set up a proper sovereign wealth fund years ago when the oil started flowing – or even draw higher royalties on current production – we could have paid off much of the debt by now and used that money, plus savings that we currently pay to finance our debt, to avoid future deficits. We would not be in a situation where knee-jerk decisions have to be made today to make ends meet tomorrow.

Oh, but we have solutions to the current crisis! Well…we do if we listen to the armchair pundits, the open line shows , and those with all the answers when being interviewed by the media. Cut the size of government, they say - reduce the size of the House of Assembly, reduce the number of cabinet members, lay-off civil servants, amalgamate government agencies... Oh, but when you are doing all this ‘necessary’ cutting, don’t touch health care or education or social services or transportation, or transfers to municipalities…and ‘don’t’ raise taxes.

Where will oil prices be in two years? The point is no one knows, according to Jeffrey Simpson, so why depend so heavily on the unknowable? How can any responsible government take the risk ‘again’ to budget on the volatile price of a commodity over which it has absolutely no control but upon which it has consistently bet so heavily, and sometimes so wrongly?

Winston Churchill once said that we should never let a good crisis go to waste. If that is the case then the current government, or the one that succeeds it, has an opportunity to learn from the current crisis and make sound political and economic decisions for the future.

Where should we begin? A great place to start might be to build all future budgets on $50/barrel oil and invest any excess oil revenues into a sovereign wealth fund... while also paying down on the provincial debt – that is costing us 12% ($800M+/-) of total revenue to finance. Build it into the current legislation - make it law, so that future politicians are never again given a blank cheque to spend like drunken sailors. 

It is simple economics – working with less dollars and more sense. 

The Fierce Urgency of Now

Martin Luther King Jr. stood in the shadow of the Lincoln Memorial 50 years ago and compelled a nation to examine its conscience and, at long last, take action against the injustices of his time. America, he said, could no longer afford the luxury of administering itself "the tranquilizing drug of gradualism," but, rather, recognize "the fierce urgency of now."

A half a century later, many believe that the most enduring aspect of Dr. King's sermon was its optimism. Although he was extremely critical of white America for that defaulted check, he said he "refused to believe that the bank of justice was bankrupt.” As bleak as the future may have appeared at the time, he saw only promise.

There are many issues, mishaps and calamities that arise on a day-to-day basis, both domestically and internationally, that tax our ability to embrace optimism the way that Dr. King did. It truly appears to be a gift that either consoles the unenlightened or energizes the informed. Either way, it appears to work for some.

A few weeks ago I watched from my perch as another storm of epic proportions devastated the Philippines with the fury of its unyielding power and overwhelming wrath. A reminder, maybe, that Mother Nature was giving us yet another nudge.

The Suzuki Foundation, among others, have proposed in recent years that an increase in global average temperatures greater than 2 C above pre-industrial levels will result in further melting of glaciers and Arctic ice, continued rising sea levels, more frequent and extreme weather events, difficulties for global agriculture and changes in plant and animal life, including extinctions. Scientist from all over the world are saying that we'll likely exceed that threshold soon unless we choose to act now.

This means a strong, concerted global effort to combat climate change is necessary to protect the health of our economies, our communities, our children and our future. That will cost us, but the price will be far less than doing nothing. Governments of almost 200 countries agree that global average temperature increases must be kept below 2 C to avoid catastrophic warming. Research indicates it's possible to limit warming below that threshold if far-reaching action is taken.

The reasons to act go beyond averting the worst impacts of climate change, according to The Suzuki Foundation. Fossil fuels are an incredibly valuable resource that can be used for making everything from medical supplies to computer keyboards. Extracting them in haste to satisfy corporate greed and balance government budgets and wastefully burning them to propel everything from a chainsaw to a SUV will inevitably ensure we run out sooner rather than later. The resource is neither endless nor renewable.

Working collectively to meet “science-based” (as opposed to industry-based) targets to cut global warming pollution and create clean, renewable energy solutions will allow us to use our remaining fossil fuel reserves more wisely and create lasting jobs and economic opportunities.

Shifting to cleaner energy sources to minimize fossil fuel consumption will also reduce pollution and the environmental damage that comes with extracting coal, oil and gas and, subsequently, improve the health of people, communities and ecosystems.

Some of the leading environmental scientists of our time have been telling us for years that there is no time to delay. Governments and industry have been telling us for years to relax and not worry. Unprecedented environmental destruction in countries like Japan, Haiti, the Philippines and the United States is a clear sign that the clock is speeding up.

Globally, to keep global temperature levels below 2 C, fossil fuel extraction and consumption will have to be reduced by 60-80%. Not a plausible option for governments and oil companies who are interested in the here and now. Definitely not an option for Middle Eastern countries that control in excess of 80% of global reserves.

Such a reduction will inevitably have a short-term economic impact on an oil-producing province like ours but a positive impact on the environment overall. On the upside, it could mean longer-term sustainability for newly discovered reserves that normally have a short-term lifespan. After all, what is the hurry?

My question is somewhat rhetorical as you may have guessed. It is all about maximizing return on investment. Governments and industry, regardless of location, have an interest in the politics of profits as opposed to the practicality of environmental standards. 

It is in everyone’s best interest to pre-emptively embark on a revolutionary change that will lead the globe away from oil dependency rather than drag our feet and suffer the irrevocable ramifications of becoming dependent on a diminishing resource. Herein lies the problem, however…the reason for “the hurry”.

Heaven forbid, huh, that an Islander would shun the riches of the oil industry. Well, I am not, really…I am simply suggesting that we increase the shelf life of the resources that we have, strategically maximize the profit margins, and, subsequently, contribute in a more meaningful way to a greener planet.

As Archbishop Desmond Tutu once said when asked why he could remain so optimistic with all the serious issues that he had seen in his life, he said, “I am not optimistic, I am simply a prisoner of hope.” I guess we can all relate to that.

To Reykjavik with Envy

To Reykjavik with Envy

Reykjavik, Iceland is bustling again according to most reports. Restaurants and shops in the Icelandic capital are humming with energy.  “A stunning reversal from just four years ago, when the country reached the point of financial meltdown”, according to a recent article by Asher Schechtert, an international consultant based in the US.

As we sat and watched many of the world’s financial markets collapse in 2008, Iceland's banking system crumpled under the strain. The króna, Iceland's national currency, plummeted in value and thousands of Icelanders lost their life savings overnight as national protest became commonplace.

At the time Iceland was reduced to an international bailout and its prime minister prayed for divine intervention. With business seeming totally destroyed, Iceland looked poised to return to its historical roots.

In four short years, riddled with international incidences and political and financial conflicts with the UK and the Netherlands, Iceland is clawing its way back from the abyss. In the process it has been forced to rediscover its roots and return to one of its traditional values – modesty.

They are also currently in the process of building a new constitution and replacing a modified one adopted in 1944 when they separated from Denmark.  Icelanders are reinventing themselves and redefining who they had become. According to Schechtert, “the luxury automobiles are becoming a thing of the past as Hummers and the like are being replaced with more practical Volkswagens and luxury yachts have been replaced by fishermen's dinghies. The lost finance industry jobs have been replaced with more economically productive work. The fishermen and sailors who were enticed to leave the country's traditional industries in favor of more profitable financial professions have now returned in large numbers to their previous fields of employment. During the last four years, Icelanders have gone back to the basics and back to the ocean, and many them are happy about that transition.”

I realize that the rise, fall and recovery of the Iceland economic, political and social fabric are topics for doctoral dissertations and academic studies – not an editorial essay.  It can be as complex as the galaxy or as simple as the nose on our face.  In the beginning, I suppose, everything is simple – it is when we intervene and makes things better that everything goes to hell in a hand basket.    

My rationale for bringing it up you ask? Well, I visited Iceland in the mid-90s when their economy was in full flight and their Nordic lifestyle and their survival instinct was the envy of nations.  As much as I was enthralled with the mystery of the Island…I was also absorbed by the vibrancy of the people – and I was enchanted by their sense of place.

As Lisa Moore noted in a 2005 CBC documentary Hard Rock & Water, Iceland and Newfoundland & Labrador share much more than their rugged appearance.  We are isolated. We are similar in size. The fishery is/has been an important economic generator.  We are fiercely independent. Our culture runs deep.

Unlike Iceland, Newfoundland & Labrador has fared relatively well in recent years with increasing focus on mining, the offshore, and the tourism industry.  Unlike us, Iceland has few resources with the exception of cod, and to a lesser extent tourism. It also has a population that boasts a 99% literacy rate and appear fiercely loyal to their homeland.  Again, the rise, fall and recovery of the Icelandic economy are topics for scholars… My query today is more specifically related to our own piece of ruggedness on the eastern edge of the North American continent.

The question has been bantered about by many in recent weeks as to why a resource rich, self-professed ‘have’ province like Newfoundland & Labrador is cash poor these days.  Government is blaming it on the world economy and the negative impact that it is having on commodity prices. Others are pointing fingers at government and blaming our predicament on poor fiscal planning. Regardless of the reason… according to government we are spending more money (expenses) than we are generating (revenue) which results in debt (deficit).

A rather unbelievable turn of events ... so unbelievable, in fact, that I am not even sure it is true. I don't think there is any real concern where the province is heading financially. Leading economists suggest that we will be back to surplus within 3-4 years.  As well, if truth be known, there already exist surplus funds to cover the operating deficit for this year and next. The Premier is forecasting challenges for the next two years but projecting a balanced budget before the next provincial election. This government may well be viewing the current "short-term" fiscal crunch as an opportunity to implement "long-term" sweeping changes across the province. An example of how poor politics adversely affect good governance...

I am not suggesting that sweeping changes are not necessary…but changes have to be implemented in coordination with strategic and long-term fiscal planning that is void of petty politics. Anything less will simply result in more of the same.

Regardless of how it is viewed and irrespective of which party is in power…this province has historically been governed through the lens of a political prism. Successive governments appear not to realize that infrastructure and human resource spending is not a one-time investment but a long-term expense that consumes an ever-increasing percentage of our annual budget.

The moral of my tirade you ask! Spend like drunken sailors and we will surely wake up hung over and broke. In that light, it appears that we have been staggering for some time… and, unlike Iceland, void of the intestinal fortitude to change our ways.

Politics: An Optical Illusion

Most things in nature are the way they are for a reason; evolution is a demanding master. Fall colors, however, seem to be an exception. They are not (to my knowledge, at least) adaptive; that is, they do not help plants to survive, they are merely artifacts of leaf senescence, part of an orderly shutting-down of plants for the winter.  Fall colors are a wondrous coincidence! 

People don't think much about leaves until autumn. Then, for a brief time, we revel in the multitude of colors that emerge from what was previously a plain green background. Of course, there were subtleties of shade and texture in the greenery that surrounded us all summer, but after the first flush of green in the spring, we quickly grow accustomed to the green backdrop of plant leaves and focus our attention elsewhere. 

But when days shorten and grow crisper, leaves come into their own, though it is only in death that they finally attract our attention. As the gold, yellows, reds and browns of autumn emerge we come to realize the diversity of the plants that once made up the summer greenery. For a few short weeks before winter's white coat arrives, Mother Nature shrugs off her dowdy greens, throws fashion sense to the wind and bursts forth with a season ending explosion of color. And then we get out the rakes! 

Attractive fall coloration is not limited to trees and shrubs, however…  It is also the time of year when societal norms kick into gear and the smell of barbecue on a warm summer evening or a campfire sending cinders in a starlit sky are parked in our memory banks. Fall has a myriad of indicators…school buses, Thanksgiving, Halloween, and politicians freshly seasoned with Montreal Steak Spice and premonitions of a brighter tomorrow. The season never fails to deliver…

As sure as summer is a distant memory we can also be assured that our fall and winter will be riddled with political rhetoric and public debate about ‘hot button’ issues that, in recent years at least, have become a rite of passage in Newfoundland & Labrador.  Assuredly, Muskrat Falls will continue to generate a political firefight as will the decline in government revenues and increase in budget deficit

I am, admittedly, a political junkie and a lifelong student of the political process. Most of my attention is focused on international politics such as the theatrics provided by the American presidential race, or the absurdity of perpetual conflict in the Middle East, or the dynamics at play in the European Union. 

By virtue of the fact that I am a Canadian, I also follow the goings-on in Ottawa out of sheer necessity as opposed to absolute interest. The same holds true for provincial politics since both equate to the excitement of watching paint dry.  That is not a criticism…simply an observation!

Occasionally, someone comes along and adds a little excitement to the wake. Pierre Trudeau comes to mind, as does local politicians like Joe Smallwood, John Crosbie, Brian Peckford and Danny Williams. All were predictably unpredictable!

Today, for whatever reason, our political leaders appear downright boring! It may be as much to do with media accessibility as opposed to personality but, nonetheless, they seldom demand the same attention or generate the same buzz as their predecessors. 

Kathy Dunderdale, for instance, has three years left in her mandate and unless her advisors completely reinvent her message and choreograph her delivery style we will probably see her poll numbers continue to drop. Politics is, after all, more about optics then it is about substance and, optically speaking, the polls are indicative of what people are seeing and hearing. It is what it is! 

Although early days, and much can change between now and the next election,  Dunderdale does not epitomize a Premier who will be fighting another election in 2015. She appears more at peace with her own demeanor and comfortable with the legacy of being the first elected female premier in Canadian history. In two years she will have also had the opportunity to see several major initiatives come to fruition.

She appears more comfortable with the substance of her message then with the public portrayal of her character. In politics, more often than not, the public likes ‘spit n polish’ and Dunderdale has failed to perfect the shine. That doesn’t necessarily mean she won’t deliver the goods!

The Progressive Party of Newfoundland and Labrador will, in all likelihood, be challenged by two opposition parties who will have redefined themselves by the end of 2014. The Liberals have a history of bouncing back! The New Democrats have conceivably ignited a cinder in many regions of the province and continue to mobilize grassroots electorate who have always had one foot left of the political center.

Key players to keep an eye on over the next two years include; Kathy Dunderdale, Dean MacDonald, Siobhan Coady, Lorraine Michael, Tom Osbourne, and Jerome Kennedy. You can write your own headlines… Mine have already been written!

Most things in politics are the way they are for a reason; evolution is a demanding master! As the blue, red and orange colors of politics emerge we come to realize the diversity of the people that surface for a moment in time and then pass through the revolving door.

For the Health of It

Well, if we live we gotta grow old baby

And I know how you are gonna be

Your feet are already a little chilly baby

And you are getting a little cold to me

The reality of aging is something that we often inadvertently park in the back of our minds in the hope that it may never happen. It does happen, however, and with it come a myriad of challenges and issues that are predominantly associated with the passage of time.  Increased longevity and declining fertility is undoubtedly leading us into uncharted waters.

Population aging is occurring in both developed and developing countries and although we are seeing that trend in North America…. neither Canada nor the United States are among the countries with the highest share of seniors according to the United Nations. Japan, Portugal, Italy, Germany, Sweden and others currently top that list and are projected to continue doing so for the next 40 years

According to research, North Americans spend more on health care, yet are sicker than most other people in the world. We suffer from higher incidences of cancer, lung disease and a host of other diseases and despite massive expenditures on medical treatments and drugs we appear to be sick more than ever before in our history.  Why have all those ‘miracle drugs’ that have been manufactured and promoted by pharmaceutical companies neither prevented nor cured the most common diseases in this country?

The answer, according to Madison Cavanaugh, author and medical researcher: Disease is big business. Pharmaceutical companies are raking in trillions of dollars to address health issues so there is no real incentive on their part to promote better health.  They are the most profitable industry in the world, enjoying average profit margins of 30,000% to 50,000% on drugs over the cost of raw materials. They are purported to have reached markups as high as 569,000%. Why would they want us to be well?

According to Cavanaugh, the pharmaceutical industry has more to gain when people are sick than when they are well. Therefore, they manufacture drugs that only relieve symptoms but do not cure disease.  We have been led to believe that whenever we are sick all we have to do is pop a pill to feel better and that is exactly what most people do.

One can do a quick search and readily find skeptics who believe that fictitious diseases are “invented” all the time by the pharmaceutical industry for no other reason than to sell prescription drugs. Just think about the array of new diseases that you hear of today that were unheard of only 10-20 years ago. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prime example – a condition usually brought about by the overconsumption of refined sugar, junk food and soft drinks by children. Rather than curb the source of the problem have we simply assisted pharmaceutical companies in becoming more wealthy by purchasing their revolutionary drug Ritalin to address the condition?

Is it coincidental that most of us, particularly in North America, have been categorized as having at least one kind of disorder? All too frequently many of us are taking one drug after another to counter the adverse effects of other drugs that are, in all likelihood, doing nothing that a healthy lifestyle wouldn’t do in the first place. Have we been conditioned to believe that pharmaceutical drugs are the answer to all our aches and pains while some of the healthiest people on the planet continue to embrace wholistic lifestyles and healthy living?

Recently, I have accepted what I had inadvertently parked in the back of my mind for years – the fact that I,  like all of us, am growing older. Not a bad thing I suppose…considering the alternative! 

Not unlike most families, serious illness has also burden my own in recent years…and with it a realization that the pharmaceutical frenzy has embraced us by the throat and is legally beating us to death… not to mention robbing us blind.

It is abundantly clear that we have drugs for everything…but predominantly as a means of treating symptoms of an illness as opposed to addressing the root causes.  We have entered  an era of perpetual dependency where many must choose between a drug cocktail and a healthy dinner.  Ironically, we have essentially become what society has shunned for years…

Got a headache? Well, pop a pill man… Don’t bother taking a brisk walk – the fresh air might kill you…

I’ll get your meds when your tummy aches

Build you a fire if the furnace breaks

I wanna make you smile whenever you’re sad

Carry you around when your arthritis is bad

Oh baby, it could be so nice growing old with you…

(B.B. King)

Politics and the English Language

"Politics and the English Language" (1946) is an essay by George Orwell criticizing "ugly and inaccurate" contemporary written English.

Orwell said that political prose was formed "to make lies sound truthful, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." Orwell believed that, because this writing was intended to hide the truth rather than express it, the language used was necessarily vague or meaningless. This unclear prose was a "contagion" which had spread even to those who had no intent to hide the truth, and it concealed a writer's thoughts from himself and others.

In our time, political rhetoric is largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the defense of Peter McKay to joy ride in a search and rescue helicopter, the support of the Minister of the Treasury Board to extravagantly spend on the G8/G20 Toronto Summit in 2010, or the continuance of debate as to whether Canada’s Armed Forces should be engaged in military combat or be predominantly a peace-keeping corp, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too pathetic for most people to face.

Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Every year somewhere around the globe, tens of thousands of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the head: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.

As the late comedian George Carlin once wrote, nobody really questions anything anymore… people are too fat, too happy and too prosperous for their own good. Everyone’s got a cell phone that’ll make pancakes and a computer that can scratch their arse. Why would they bother spending valuable time trying to figure out what politicians are saying or not saying?
Carlin is also the guy who said that he did not complain about politicians. “Everybody complains about politicians, everybody says they suck”, he said. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don’t fall off the turnip truck. They don’t pass through a membrane from another reality. They are a product of our own creativity or, as was the case in the last federal election, a product of Quebec’s complete complacency with the democratic process. Their slogan was – I am so sick and tired of being sick and tired…. so they chinch the rafters of the House of Commons with gum chewing, giggly and inexperienced teenagers. Théâtre de l'Absurde…

Speaking of protest… we experienced our own fringe movement in Newfoundland and Labrador during the last election. Some argue that it was a protest against the incumbent government while others attribute it to the “orange wave” that spread across the country last spring. Regardless of reason, it was refreshing to see a challenge from the far left of the political spectrum. It was probably the first provincial election in our history where all three political parties rightfully deserved to claim some degree of victory.

The aftermath of any election also brings an element of defeat to the victor. By virtue of their candidacy most politicians have aspirations of not only being elected to the House of Assembly but being selected to cabinet if they are on the government side. They seldom stray far from their telephones on the eve of a new cabinet being unveiled. They definitely feel the sting of rejection when the phone never rings.

To make matters worse for aspiring cabinet ministers this time around, Premier Dunderdale also made a choice to exhibit self-discipline and demonstrate prudent management in an era of economic restraints by reducing the size of cabinet. Presumably, she has drawn down on what she considers to be the very best that her caucus has to offer. Evidently, experienced ministers trumped ambitious backbenchers who, in some cases, are returning for their second or third term.
With the exception of Alberta where the incumbent conservatives have reigned forever, or in Quebec where anything is possible or nothing is impossible, historical trends in this province might suggest that a transition is possible in four years. The NDP already smell change and the Liberals smell blood. In due course, Dunderdale will smell dissent as dunce arses and idle minds contemplate their futures on the back benches. It has happen before!

Across the province the NDP have built their foundation from the grassroots up – one vote at a time. There is no sense of entitlement here… simply a philosophical determination to reach out and make a difference. The Liberals on the other hand seem more interested in a quick fix as they sack one leader after another and redecorate the corner office for the coming of the messiah.

In the meanwhile, as new games begin, I am content to savour the thought of four years under a socially conscious, sincere and pragmatic premier. Kathy Dunderdale brings a renewed energy to the office, a new focus on making a difference for all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. She has an opportunity to build on the firm foundation left by her predecessor while heeding the howling beyond the boundaries of the Northeast Avalon. The critics are right…she is no Danny Williams but that may not be a bad thing!

“New Ways in an Old Continuity”

The World Commission on Environment and Development declared in 1987 that “Sustainable development should meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. It implies a process of change in which the use of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development, and the structure of organizations reflect both the present and future needs. Based on the tenets of equity and sound stewardship, it also implies wiser and more productive use of existing human, financial, and natural resources. Simply put, qualitative improvements over quantitative expansion.

Activities that are socially sustainable should also be more people focused and responsive to human needs. Normally, asking people what they need, rather than telling them what they can have will lead to development strategies that are more widely supported and provide benefits to a greater number of people. This can only work, however, if people accept that change is inevitable and embrace it as a potential means to keep their community and region viable.

Focussing on options that simultaneously promote cultural, economic, environmental, and social gain is the key to avoiding past mistakes. Developing a new vision of the future - one that is not only economically secure but is also culturally and environmentally restorative, is pivotal to the development process and must never be far from the minds of those affiliated with community rebuilding, restructuring, or development.

As pointed out by the Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation in 2005, “laissez faire development approaches can ruin rural communities and their quality of life. Without better consultation and planning, the well-being of rural communities is, and will continue to be, at the mercy of random development, ad hoc initiatives and, at best, short-term economic success”.

For almost twenty years I have been repeatedly saying that overcoming entrenched problems in rural regions of the Province requires developing a culture of innovation and learning. Old responses and behaviors will keep a community stuck with old problems. To move beyond the comfort zone of familiar ideas, our communities must engage people in new ways to process and stimulate new ideas.

Exposure to new and innovative ideas and a raised awareness of a community’s need for new direction is an essential first step in any development process. Providing learning opportunities that both expand a community’s vision and dispenses concrete knowledge of successful practices is absolutely essential.

Shorefast Foundation, a Canadian registered charity working with the people on Fogo Island and Change Islands, may well be an excellent example of my premise. The backbone of this foundation is built on a set of principles that support the inherent qualities and strengths and character of the people in the community. They focus on the importance of roots and heritage… and that looking at what has formed us in the past is essential to building a strong future. It believes there is a future for rural communities and that future is built on innovation, resilience, optimism and the ability to adapt.

The reality is that they may not be able to accurately forecast the future but they feel that they have some responsibility for it. In order to take that responsibility seriously they appear to have considered the implications of current development initiatives and how they may impact future sustainability.

Historically, we have often under-estimated the importance of long-term thinking on effective planning in this province. Essentially, we have been driven by short-term projects as a means of addressing immediate, day-to-day needs. I am not convinced that much has changed in that respect, but the insightful and opportunistic attitude of Zita Cobb, Shorefast co-founder and native Fogo Islander, has captured the attention of politicians and bureaucrats as she endeavours to turn Fogo Island into a magnet for the arts and a retreat for wealthy world travellers.

Shorefast Foundation has strategically set a conservative target for the number of tourist it needs to attract annually (one for every inhabitant living on the islands) to turn a profit. Considering there are well over 10 million people around the globe who are classified as U.S. dollar millionaires it should not be difficult to generate a marketing scheme to satisfy its principles, attract eco-friendly clientele, and still protect the overall integrity of the local environment.

Cobb sees realistic opportunity on this eastern edge of barren rock jutting into an endless ocean. Not the kind of opportunity, maybe, that Skipper Douglas Payne dreams about as he sits silently at the base of Brimstone Head. Although both are married by heritage and history and culture and family, they represent two different generations that have simply been connected by heritage. One looks back and longs for what use to be while the other looks beyond the horizon and dreams of “finding new ways in an old continuity”.