ES RR Aye nn = sna ete natn tin men 4 - Weekly Record, July 27, 1988 — OPINION for the record © Scene from the Ridge by Nancy Perkins For those who saw the two news reports on T.V. this past week on Tumbler Ridge, the end result was most likely the same for all. Namely a sick, uneasy feeling in the pit of the stomach. If we want to be kind to CBC regarding the expose on the people and attitudes of Tumbler Ridge, we could say they were trying to show the viewer how unsettling and disquieting the uncertainty of coal negotiations has been to the people who must live under its shadow. The end result should provide the rest of the world, and perhaps even the Japanese, with a sympathetic attitude towards our plight. However, | find it difficult to view the CBC with anything more than a distrustful eye. It looked more like a simple, well-edited, and often taken-out-of-context piece of work, setting out to bash Tumbler Ridge, with the closing thought being “We told you so.” The follow-up story the second night was on Southeast Coal versus Northeast Coal. This story left the impression that the overproduction of coal in the world, which resulted in lower world prices, is the direct result of Northeast Coal coming on-stream. It was also suggested that Northeast Coal is responsible for the loss of sales and jobs in the South. : There are some interesting statistics that, if told in conjunction with the news report, would allow the viewer to see the true bias of those reporting. First, during the early 1980s, the world added an extra 27 million tonnes of metallurgical coal to its capacity. Only 7 million tonnes of this coal comes from Northeast Coal. During the same period that Northeast Coal came on line, more Southeast and Alberta coal also came on line with a capacity of 6.2 million tonnes. This figure is remarkably close to Northeast’s total capacity. The three mines making up the extra 6.2 million are Gregg River, Green Hills, and Crows Nest Resources. It makes one wonder why it is always Northeast Coal that is singled out as the bad guy. There is still more than 50 percent of that so-called world increase in coal capacity that is being produced in foreign countries. : Going back to the issue of the presumed loss of Southeast Coal jobs and sales: this again is a fallacy. Southeast Coal has increased their sales since 1982 by an astounding 33 percent. | wish | could say as much for Northeast Coal. Yes, there has been a loss of jobs in the Southeast Coal sector. However, this is not directly related to Northeast Coal. The reason for the job loss is that Southeast Coal has become much more efficient in their production of coal. Specifically, Fording Coal was recently awarded the prestigious Mining Productivity Award. They have accom- plished every company’s dream: to double their coal production per person working. But should we in the North be blamed for their “job well done” in production? If Northeast Coal had not come on line, it would have meant another few mines in Australia, or Korea, or somewhere else. The Japanese are always working towards having more coal available in the world than needed. It’s good strategy, and it’s always worked for them. After reviewing all the statistics and information, | keep wondering why the news media persist in bantering about such obvious falsehoods. Are they hoping to fuel the flames enough to start a battle of Northeast Coal versus Southeast Coal? : John Sanders, QCL, said this is something we must all guard against. Northeast Coal does not want to fight with Southeast Coal, but rather to get on with the work at hand. Despite what the media says, we are just one small player in this game. There are many others, from many different countries. More will soon come on line. = _ _ The Japanese, the ones who don't want to pay our price, are already encouraging another large Australian com- pany to develop yet another coal mine. In the case of coal negotiations, however, it just may be that they waited too long to play their cards. The world price of coal is on the upswing, and this shows just why they got into Northeast Coal in the first place. They wanted to protect themselves from a world price they thought would be much higher than it is. They were prime players in the game of Northeast Coal. They wanted it or it never would have come on line. | think these points, over and above their contract to pay a specific price, will play an important part in the decision that will come down. POOLE?....| HAVE THE MR. PREMIER ON THE LINE... THERE ARE SOME FOREIGN KNOW F i CAN USE HIS forthe Record Dear editor: If you are alarmed at what the prospect of the “‘free’’ trade agreement with the United States entails, join with all Canada at 6 p.m. your time, September 6, 1988, in sounding your car horn. Let Ottawa—and even Washington—hear the din ‘‘these quiet, placid Canadians’’ can raise when they realize they are losing the right to control their own oil, gas and electricity supplies; to control their own water resources; to determine trade policies; to fix foreign investment policies; to choose social programmes, including health care, that Canadians prefer over massive military programmes, as well as to be assured of any guaranteed share in the automobile industry— all these among many others. Anyone who has the slightest doubt about what is actually happening in these and numerous other areas should read, If You Love This Country, a collection of very short articles written by 46 great Canadians; assembled by Laurier LaPierre and published by McMillan and Stewart. If you are against the free trade arrangement, the undersigned, self-appointed committee of one is asking you to take these three simple steps: Send this message to at least six friends; ask each one to do the same—in all haste, before it is too late; take part with courage in at least one phone-in programme, even if it is just to remind people to ‘‘remember the 6th of September’’ and sound your horn long and loud. Betty Baldry (for Canada, Blow your horn) Frank M.P. Prince George - _ Peace River k by Frank Oberle, MP Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States, was once quoted as saying that ‘‘banking establish- ments are more dangerous than standing armies.’’ I certainly wouldn’t go that far in my assessment of our Canadian banking system, but people are becoming more and more dissatisfied with the way they are being treated by the banks, particularly with the indiscrimin- ate increase in fees and service charges. I could understand this situation better if the financial institutions were suffering, but their rate of return is at its highest level in more than 10 years. This prompted my colleague, Paul McCrossan, to Oberle _introduce a private member’s bill in the House of Commons, and the Commons Finance Committee held a series of hearings on bank service charges, in which all sides of the issue were explored. As a result, the banks have agreed voluntarily to: *End fees charged to a person who deposits a cheque that bounces, regardless of the cheque’s value. eEnd fees for closing an account open for more than 90 days. eEnd fees for accounts that fall below a minimum balance. eEnd fees for any transaction resulting from a bank error. :