OK. It's 4 am and I am in my brother's office in Miramichi. We have been sleeping out in a tent at Sheephouse Falls - an hour from nowhere. After 6 hours in the tent and freezing our arses, we have taken a reprieve before going back out for breakfast over the fire.

Any hoo.

Angus Reid has published info on the Corporate Research Associates poll that shows 47 per cent of respondents in NB would vote for the Liberals in the next legislative election, up seven points since September. 34 per cent of respondents would support the Tories in the next ballot, while 12 per cent would vote for the New Democratic Party of Allison Brewer.

Maybe it's time for Shawn Graham to tell us his plan for the economy so we can begin to 'debate' it.

Cuz it looks like he might sit in the big chair real soon.

Premier Lord said in October that New Brunswick in 2005 would see the best job growth in 30 years. He talks ad nauseum about all the prosperity he has bestowed on New Brunswick. His sentiments are echoed by Al Hogan at the Times and Transcript.

However, this is not the view of the economics group at the Bank of Montreal. They just updated their provincial forecast tables yesterday. Here's some of their predictions:

*Job growth in 2005 will be the worst in Canada along with Newfoundland - actually it will be a decline in jobs. Those 'pesky' job figures again :-)

*Real GDP growth has and will (forecasted) underperform the Canadian average from 2003 to 2010. So much for the Prosperity Plan goal of reducing the GDP per capita gap (unless we continue to lose significant population).

*The unemployment rate will remain third highest in Canada until 2010.

*Retail sales growth will underperform the national average until 2010.

Prosperity abounds! Break out the champagne!

http://www.bmo.com/economic/regular/regtable.html

Metro joins ranks of major centres
Statistics Canada listing will have numerous advantages for Moncton area
By Mary Moszynski
Times & Transcript Staff

Moncton's presence as a major business player on the national stage will receive a major boost in 2006 as Statistics Canada will officially recognize the city as a metropolitan in the upcoming census.

Planning for next year's census is underway and following the compilation of the statistics, a new, more detailed sketch of Moncton will be available than in past censuses.

That's because this is the first year, under Statistics Canada's terms, that Moncton will be officially recognized as a Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) rather than a census agglomeration. "It's something that Moncton has been lobbying for quite some time," said Ian Moore, a manager in the geography division of Statistics Canada.


I count this among one of the few contributions that I made to the Greater Moncton area. To be sure my role was undoubtedly minimal but I spent a lot of time making the case to convert Moncton from a CA to a CMA. I battled with one of Statistics Canada's top statisticians - more accurately I locked him in a room and we rolled up our sleeves. I got the issue raised by Senator Robertson on the floor of Canada's Senate. I lobbied hard.

And they changed the threshold for the definition of a CMA area which means that Moncton is included.

You see, being a CMA means being listed as part of Canada's top urban areas. It means much more frequent reporting of relevant data. It provides companies looking to locate here with much more up to date information on the community.

I got interested in this when a leading consultant from the US told me that his clients only look at 'metro' areas when they are considering expansion.

Well, we are now a 'metro', folks.

You're welcome.

I was talking with a colleague the other day and we got into a lively debate about Equalization - the federal program that provides additional funding to provinces that do not generate enough taxes locally to ensure their public services meet some basic standard (that's a paraphrase).

He was suggesting that Equalization is a legitimate program and that wealth sharing should be a component in any civilized society. And I agreed.

Where we disagreed is on the perception of Equalization across the board. If you read this blog on a fairly consistent basis, you will know that I report on how 'Equalization' is perceived across Canada.

Bernard Lord, his provincial counterparts and the majority of the public in Atl. Canada believe that Equalization is not only a legitimate transfer of wealth but also a Constitutional right. We have as much 'right' to our share of Alberta's wealth as they do. This is, after all, a country.

But that is increasingly becoming out of synch with the rest of Canada (except old faithful, the Toronto Star). Every think tank you can imagine as well as most of the national economics columnists (Ibbitson, et. al) define Equalization in a totally different way saying that 'Atlantic Canada is hooked on Equalization'. That it is sucking the economic life out of AC. That we are dependent on this welfare. And even more disturbing in the last two years led by McGuity and the Ontario Centre for Competitiveness and Prosperity the new thinking is that Equalization is a drain on Ontario's prosperity. And don't forget our old pal Mike Harris who equated Nova Scotia getting to keep its offshore gas royalties with the 'welfare bum' who wins the lottery and wants to keep his welfare cheque.

So to me there is a teensy weensy difference between a "Constitutionally guaranteed wealth distribution model that ensures consistency of public services across the country" and a productivity draining, welfare-type, dependancy model that threatens the future of not only Atlantic Canada but also the stronger economies.

Now, my opinion is that wealth sharing is part of what a country is. To me NB is to Alberta as Hinton is to Alberta. That, in many ways, is what governments do - transfer wealth - up and down socioeconomic levels (rich to poor), across interest groups (Aboriginals, Maritimers) and within jursidictions (southern Ontario to northern Ontario).

I, quite frankly, would like to have a national policy on the sharing of natural resources revenues (like Iraq). I realize I have just blown any hope of ever becoming a politician but I don't care. If we perceived our natural resources as benefitting all of Canada and not just one or two provinces, we would be acting more like a country.

But barring that (which will never happen), I think we need to rethink Equalization in terms of growing the economy - not just sustaining basic public services. Because there will come a day and I think in the next 10-15 years where there will be overwhelming pressure to cut the Equalization system to the bone. New Brunswick's population continues to decline while the province's budgets increase on pace with the growing provinces. Eventualy, someone is going to say enough.

That's why we need to get the economy growing. We need to reduce our dependancy on Equalization. We need some economic sovereignty so that Alberta and Ontario won't be dictating our future.

I have written on this subject in the past but I think it is well worth repeating as we head into a new year.

One of the only policy initiatives from the McKenna era that worked was his focus on attracting new business investment into the province. He envisioned and then sold the notion of New Brunswick becoming the 'back office' for North American business. His vision was that customer service functions, accounting services, IT development, etc. could be done here cheaper and better than in the large urban markets.

And he had some success with this vision. By my count there are close to 20,000 people working in this functions today that have employers that are based in Toronto, Chicago and beyond.

But many people, including Donald Savoie, have pointed out that the actual number of net new jobs during McKenna's tenure was not overly impressive. In fact, New Brunswick's employment growth was significantly below the national average during his tenure.

I would point out that there were steep declines in other sectors during the recession of the early 1990s and the aftershocks of Federal job cuts, etc. and that without this badly needed external business investment New Brunswick would have looked more like Newfoundland during that period.

But the fact remains that overall McKenna was not able to achieve his vision. And India picked up the ball and is now the 'offshore' version of what McKenna was striving for. In that country, there are literally several hundred thousands of workers doing customer service, software development, market research, medical transcription services, etc. for North American companies.

Now, New Brunswick needs to position itself as a 'nearshore' version of India. Not nearly as 'cheap' but closer, more secure and with great talent. But I'll leave that for another day.

The point is that McKenna failed on two points: 1) not putting enough emphasis on 'product development' and 2) not inculcating his vision into the ranks of the economic development department and indeed across all of government.

I'll start with point 2) first.

Ask anyone who remembers economic development from the early to mid 1990s and they will tell you it was the McKenna show. He was the sales guy. He got deals done. He was the closer. His office generated and worked hundreds of sales leads directly from the 2nd floor of the Centennial Building. The Department of Economic Development at the time played a support role - they were brought in to structure incentive programs - but essentially it was the McKenna show.

So when he left - so did the infrastructure.

I said back then and I'll say today that what we needed was 20 McKenna's (you know, the whole Jesus and his disciples model) - spread throughout government. And a top sales team indoctrinated in McKennaism.

The government in Ireland changed hands 4-5 times during the Irish miracle that led to that country leading the globe in foreign investment for something like 18 of 22 years in a row. Despite the changes in government, the focus on attracting industry did not waver.

Now you can call Premier Lord's call in 1999 for a 'made in New Brunswick' solution to economic development (a renouncement of McKennaism) - political opportunism. You can call it political immaturity. But the bottom line is that there was very little infrastructure left to convince him otherwise.

So, my advise is this. Neo-McKennaists realize the strategic importance of a Premier. He/she must cast the vision and provide tireless leadership. But he/she must also spend time training up dozens of mini-McKennaists and making this ideology pervasive across the government and into the communities. This must transcend political party and be embedded in the culture of government and community development - it is definitely not there today.

On point 1).

With the 'call centre' sector, McKenna had an excellent 'product'. Bilingual labour, lots of it, lots of empty buildings with cheap rent and great telecom with NBTel. Sure, he had to do some great sales efforts but the underlying value proposition was very strong.

This is not the case with other sectors. They tried plastics in the 1990s. That failed. They tried textiles in Northern NB. That underwhelmed. They tried online learning. That sputtered and all but failed.

The point here is that just like any organization, economic development needs to be nurtured. We need to carve out a unique value proposition - one that would be compelling to industry. Then we need to put on the McKenna hat and sell, sell, sell.

But if you are trying to sell Yugos and you are competing with areas that make Ladas for much cheaper - you will fail.

So, if we want to attract online learning (e-learning) companies, we need to step back and ask ourselves what infrastructure needs to be nurtured to make us attractive to this industry? Do we need to train 5,000 teachers as experts in online instruction? Do we need to teach specific IT skills? Do we need to establish a world-class e-Learning R&D centre in the province? Do we need to partner with a few top e-Learning providers and attract them here as anchor tenants in this industry?

And we need to do this with other sectors where we deem we have some advantage.

So, to sum up neo-McKennaism involves creating a culture in government and the communities that is open to and realizes the strategic importance of opening up NB to global investment. It involves having dozens if not hundreds of McKennas throughout the province. And it involves picking a few key sectors where we have some advantage (and that are growing) and building a solid infrastructure around them that would be attractive to global industry.

The Telegraph Journal is reporting that Stephen Harper will unveil his strategy for Atlantic Canada early in the new year. The article states:

Even Atlantic Conservatives complained following the 2004 federal election that their new party had failed to explain clearly on the campaign trail what a Harper-led government would mean to the region - particularly to boost its economy.

Now, how much do you want to bet the Conservative strategy will include things like 'tax breaks' for small business and maybe a little 'training' for small business and it might even take a page from the Liberals and talk about 'innovation'. No doubt it will tackle a few head on issues that have been annoyances to specific constituencies in this region.

Does anyone actually believe the Tories will unveil a platform designed to support the attraction of global business investment into Atlantic Canada? I severely doubt it. The provincial party doesn't have that as part of its platform so why should the federal party?

Wouldn't it be neat if Stephen Harper stated that Atlantic Canada has too long been cut off from foreign investment? - the same investment that has stimulated strong economic growth in BC, Ontario and Quebec - yes, even Alberta has attracted billions in investment in recent years.

But, no, that would require thinking just a bit outside the box.

If Stephen Harper would pledge to partner with the province to create a network of global offices promoting New Brunswick, if he would set up a specific fund in partnership with the province designed specifically to attract foreign investment, if he would pledge to work with the province to develop targeted infrastructure to support the growth of 3 or 4 key growth sectors, he would get my vote.

But he won't.

And I'll be left voting for the candidate that I 'like' the most - knowing full well that we will get the same old, tired approach to economic development that has left Atlantic Canada with a declining population, declining traditional industries, significant out-migration of talent and more.

Oh well. At least the two main parties are pledging to support the auto sector in Ontario.....

That should ensure a steady stream of Equalization to this region.

It was announced just before Christmas that the Lord government would be investing $250 million into the forestry industry over the next five years. That's on top of the $67 million to reopen the pulp mill in Nackawic.

$317 million to support the forestry sector.

Now I don't have a problem with this incentive program. I feel, however, that somebody needs to point out that this won't create any new jobs it's only to sustain the industry we have (keep it from falling deeper. Wouldn't it be neat if the government put $300 million into creating new jobs? Economic development is so politicized in this province. The government hires a world-reknowned forestry expert from Scandanavia to recommend a sustainable forestry model. The Scandanavians are experts at managing their forests. The consultant tables his report and environmentalists kick and scream so the government backs away from the 'sustainable' model. The industry continues to suffer and gets a massive bailout. Politics keeps the government from implementing a sustainable (and industry supported) model and politics dictates a $250M bailout.

But, interestingly, there is no political impetus to create new jobs in new industries in New Brunswick communities.

So we don't do it.

This week's Macleans has a segment entitled 'We give it six months' referring to thing that won't last six months in the opinion of the newly renovated magazine editors. For example, the Stephen Harper/Jack Layton marriage or the treaty between David Letterman and Oprah Winfrey.

Also in this illustrious list is our Premier, Bernard Lord. Apparently, Macleans only gives him 'six months' and in their description they say 'six months may be a generous estimate'.

Now I don't know if they are speaking literally or metaphorically but you have to wonder how a politician can fall from grace so quickly. Just 12-18 months ago he was the great white hope for the Tory party now everyone from the Globe's Simpson to the Star's Hebert to Macleans is dissing him.

34% approval rating in New Brunswick (the Tory party) and now losing the national lustre.

Kinda makes one feel sad for one time next Great One.

But timing is everything in politics and his time might still come.

What do the USA, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany and the UK have in common?

They all rank higher than Canada in the latest Deloitte Competitiveness Index (DCI) which ranks countries on what it views as the main factors behind wealth creation: innovation, enterprise, investment and macroeconomic data.

Some of you will undoubtedly find this overkill but I'll post it anyway. The attached chart shows the estimated population of all U.S. states and Canadian provinces for 2005 and their estimated growth since 2004. New Brunswick's population performance from 2004-2005 was 55th out of 60 with Newfoundland and Saskatchewan performing worse (NB had a slight population decline) and those small rural states with no clustering and 'critical mass' (you know - the rationale why Ontario, Alberta and BC continue to dominate Canada's population growth) - New York and Massachusetts.

In fact, the point I want to make is that there is no correlation in the US between the population size of a state and its population growth over time. In fact, there is fairly large correlation between small states and population growth. Arizona, with 2% of the US population has been growing at a population rate of between 3% and 4% per year for over 15 years. New Brunswick, with 2.5% of Canada's population is in decline.

The reason I say all this is that the standard, party line among economists and 'experts' in Canada is that Canada's large urban provinces grow because they have scale, critical mass, etc. That may be true but New Mexico, Utah, Idaho, Delaware and Oregon have all been growing faster than Ontario - with populations much smaller than New Brunswick (as a percentage of the total US population).

No, the reality is that in economic development terms, in a well functioning economy labour and capital will move around a country to exploit unique niches (lower cost envirionments, particular local advantages) and this will put pressure on the areas that underperform to make positive changes (like cutting 99 different taxes in New York state). But in Canada, we have a dysfunctional economy from a development perspective - since 1975 growth has been concentrated into a few small urban centres.

It would be interesting to see the reaction in Ontario and British Columbia if Canada's Utahs and Idahos and Oregons (NB, NS and PEI) actually beat the pants off those two provinces for a sustained period of time.

Talk about upsetting the apple cart.

Did you know that there is natural gas out near Sussex in the McCully field? There is and in fact, the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan has been using that gas for its local operation for several years. Now a new study estimates that there are "proved and probable sales gas reserves of 119.3 billion cubic feet could be recovered from current and future wells drilled in the evaluation area".

Now you will just have to trust me on this. That a fair amount of gas. Not by Alberta standards and not by offshore Nova Scotia standards but if they recover and sell all that gas it should generate a fairly good revenue stream to the province from royalties.

So the heat is on to get a 30 km lateral pipeline built to connect this gas to the distribution system to be sold on the open market most likely in the US.

Now, the executive director of the local economic development agency in Sussex had an idea. He knew that the economic spinoff benefits to the local community of this project were going to be minimal. The royalties go to the province. The actual field is not within local municipal boundaries so no real property tax benefits. The engineers and field workers were more than likely living in Moncton. So aside from a few more bucks spent in the local restaurants and gas stations he realized there would be no real benefit to the local community.

So he had an idea. Why not set up an industrial park near the site that would attract manufacturers and other large users of natural gas? His reasoning was that if they could attract one or two large users (like the potash corp.), the producer of the gas would have less incentive to invest millions into a 30km lateral pipeline. Or, like the potash corp itself, another large user or two might actually take a stake in the project.

There were some compelling business case reasons why this made sense at least at a high level. First, the local gas could've been made available with any transmission costs - shaving something like 30% of the cost. Second, the producer wouldn't need to spend millions on a lateral pipeline - presumably reducing the cost structure somewhat. Third, if the province wanted to there could be flexibility in its royalty structure to attract business. All in all, the gas out there for industrial users could have been considerably cheaper.

Potential anchor projects? Small natural gas fired energy plant. A large manufacturer with co-generation capacity. My favorite - a specialty fuels manufacturing plant (jet fuel, etc.) made from natural gas and shipped by truck.

Now I haven't followed this closely in recent months but I gather from the paper today and from the lack of any news on the other project - that it is probably dead.

Just another good idea with no collective will to even try.

And for you energy industry experts reading this, I realize there are a number of serious challenges with this whole approach but I still think that it was an innovative idea that deserved a fair hearing. An idea that could have been floated to the jet fuel manufacturers or the producers of power (not NB Power) or to a few large manufacturers.

But no, let's ship it all to New England. Take our pittance. Buy a few more MRIs and watch our population decline. And while we're at it why not have some beer and popcorn?

I now have an appreciation for what journalists covering the legislature have to deal with on a daily basis. There is almost a separate vocabulary the politicians use that intricately mixes non-answers, vague denials, double speak and teeth gritting irony. It's pretty intoxicating but you finish reading this stuff without learning much.

By the way, I have been reading the hansard from the NB legislature and that's what I am talking about.

But I wanted to point out a mini-speech given by Premier Lord in one of his answers:

To use the word of the Leader of the Opposition, who likes to use the word "realize" this afternoon, what the Leader of the Opposition must realize is that the money the government uses comes from taxpayers. He must realize that the government cannot just use tax dollars to prop up businesses when it does not make sense. Too much of that has been done in the past. Too often, the taxpayers have been left holding the bill. That is why the approach that we have taken as a government is a realistic and reasonable, but very aggressive, approach. It has yielded better results than ever before, more jobs than ever before, lower unemployment than before, higher wages than before, and better economic conditions in all regions of New Brunswick. We will continue on this path, and we will work with all the companies that want to invest in New Brunswick.


The Premier is obviously the Lord of the Spin Doctors. He whips off these statements without even hesitating when there is almost no justifiable proof of his comments. But they sure sound nice.

For example, he says they have been 'very aggressive' in their approach to economic development. Huh? Not even wet behind the ears journalists would buy this. He says his economic development policies have 'yeilded better results than ever before'. Huh?

New Brunswick has among the highest rates of unemployment in North America and the differential with the Canadian average is as high today as six years ago.

It has lead to 'better economic conditions in all regions of New Brunswick'. Has he ever been to these 'regions'? I'll say one thing on this. New Brunswick's population - using the government's own data has been stagnant or declining since the Premier came to power. At the same time we know that Moncton has added something like 10-15k population in that time frame. Fredericton has also grown its population. So, by definition, the rest of New Brunswick has dropped by 20k or 25k or more (we won't know until 2007 for sure) - in some communities this drop has been much more noticable. Ask the mayors of Northern New Brunswick if 'all regions' have 'better economic conditions'. They just announced today they are banding together to take on the government on these issues.

The polls tell a different story, Mr. Premier.

If you have been following my blog, you will know that I occasionally report on the status of Frank McKenna's political ambitions.

Frank McKenna, head of a business lobbying group in Liverpool, England, that is.

Yes, old Frank is tired of his position as a diplomat trying to bridge the gap between two communities that have been fighting for years. He now wants to make a difference by getting involved directly in politics.

As the Mayor of Liverpool, England.

We always knew that Frank would get back in. That politics was in the blood. That his business leanings can not overcome his political amibitions.

Way to go, Frank. Give 'em heck.

The following is a table of the jobs that are expected to grow the fastest in the US from 2004-2014. These estimates were published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Almost all of the job categories are either health, IT or education related.

Some enterprising province should jump all over this and align education strategies to workforce needs. Some enteprising province is going to figure out a way to benefit from the massive rise in the health care industry. Some enterprising province is going to become a destination for specialized health care services and attract people from all over North America - creating thousands of jobs in the continent's first health care services cluster.

Maybe?

Nah.

The local media this morning is reporting that residential electricity customers won't have to pay as big an increase for power next year as NB Power predicted in October The Public Utilities Board ruled on Wednesday that industrial users will have to pay a larger part of the average 11 per cent increase NB Power is seeking in 2006-2007 and residential users should pay less.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I just bought this summer a big old maison in downtown Moncton. My electricity costs are absolutely shocking (no pun intended) but I can't help but think this ruling may hamper economic development.

One of the cost areas that manufacturers look at closely when evaluating a community is energy costs. I have watched over the past 15 years as our industrial and commercial power rates have steadily risen from one of the best in Canada to now one of the worst.

Maybe we don't realize how much we are reliant on manufacturing in this province. Well, let me remind you that manufacturing jobs in Greater Moncton alone grew by over 50% from 1991 to 2001. Other areas of the province such as Bathurst-Campbellton are even more reliant on manufacturing.

So hammering industrial users may be a great political decision but maybe not a good policy decision.

I don't know this for sure. Maybe manufacturers will absorb these increases. Maybe there will be grumbling but no real negative impact.

It will save me about $400/year - more than the measly income tax cut a couple of years ago - my pocket book is relieved - but my head tells me this is another ominous warning sign for the economic future of our province.

And I would gladly pay that $400 more per year if I thought it would contribute to fixing our economic problems.

Ok, a bunch of you have lamented the lack of discourse in the blogosphere related to economic development in this fine province. So, by popular demand, I have compiled a little list of blogs in cyberspace that at least touch on the issues that we are talking about here. Bookmark and add your voice to the debate. I urge you to add any more that you might know of that I have not come across.

Atlantic Canada First
http://atlantic-first.localintheknow.com/
Alec Bruce is a journalist and writes about economic issues and he has an edge that you just might enjoy (if you read mine on a semi regular basis). Here's a quote from a recent blog:

After years of speculation, the Lord government has finally unveiled the central plank of its long-term economic development agenda: timidity.

Bruce'll keep the pols on their toes, je pense.


Atlantic Insight, by southeast New Brunswick's W.E.(Bill) Belliveau
http://www.atlanticinsight.com/
I don't know Bill but I know his brothers and they are a bright and witty bunch. On occasion in his print column, he has been known to rebuke and reward those who make good decisions related to the economy.

Local Moncton Web - David Jonah
http://monctonlocal.blogspot.com/
David is my 'old man of the mountain' imparting great wisdom every time we converse. 99% of the time he is right on the money and his blog is probably more on the tangible side than mine.

The Sorry Centrist - Anonymous
http://sorrycentrist.blogspot.com/
Politically focused, the Sorry Centrist will delve into economic issues on occasion. I think he is trying to influence the Tory masses to get smarter about ED in New Brunswick.


New Brunswick Politics - Anonymous
http://politicsnb.blogspot.com/
Seems to be Saint John-centric and Liberal leaning but does provide coverage of economic issues when the intersect with politics. Watch out, though. Some pretty savage commentary on the curent NB administration once in a while.

Charles LeBlanc ADHD Activist
http://oldmaison.blogspot.com/
Mr. LeBlanc's stated mission is to raise awareness of ADHD in New Brunswick but he has morphed the blog into a personal tirade against our Premier. I include it here because I am told it's the most read NB-based blog. In addition, there are always neat photoshopped images of our Premier in awkward situations.

Vive New Brunswick - Anonymous
http://www.vivenewbrunswick.com/
Not exactly a blog but it does get updated on a regular basis. Interesting commentary on economic issues from the left.

Julie Bélanger's blog (en francais)
http://www.juliebelanger.com/
I don't know who she is but I like her style. For anglos, punch her stuff through the Google translator - you'll get the message.


Please let me know what I am missing!

PS - no political or paid partisan blogs, please. I'm looking for the community of bloggers that want to address the economic malaise that has dominated this province for decades.

The biggest move, by far, that the Conservative government has made in their seven years in power was the elimination of the toll highway. That cost us $600 million in capital and somthing like $60 million per year in lost revenue and increased interest payments.

I hammered this drum alot saying that this decision was among the worst they made as it relegated northern New Brunswick to two-lane highways for at least another 20 years when if he hadn't made that bonehead move, we would be paving the fourlanes to the Acadian Peninsula as I pen this blog (that's my opinion) opening up that region to increased potential.

Well, now it looks like at least a few NBers agree. According to a new poll in the TJ today the top failure of the Premier is considered to be health care followed by - you guessed it - eliminating the toll highway.

Sometimes, I am not as dumb as I look (let's put that whole Saint John Harbour prediction out to pasture).

PS - Why is the TJ commissioning polls on how people view the Premier and publishing mostly negative findings? Maybe Al Hogan over at the T&T should commission a poll and publish good findings - just for balance.

I have talked a lot about Research in Motion and other investment projects into Nova Scotia lately but we shouldn't forget the Europeans.

Last week, Swiss-based conglomerate Xstrata PLC agreed to partner on the development of the coal industry in Cape Breton and today, Petroplus International B.V., of The Netherlands and Keltic Petrochemicals Inc. announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding to advance development of the liquefied natural gas project at Goldboro, Nova Scotia.

Both these projects will mean hundreds of millions in foreign investment into Nova Scotia.

Don't look now but Nova Scotia has quietly pulled away from New Brunswick on almost every economic indicator. And the several thousand jobs announced as a result of these mega projects in recent weeks should set the table for strong economic growth in 2006-2007.

Don't worry. We are still ahead of Newfoundland and Labrador.