Article content NDP Leader Jim Dinn is looking forward to debating the new Churchill Falls deal at the House of Assembly on Sept. 14. Photo by Nicholas Mercer/The TelegramArticle contentLABRADOR CONCERNSArticle contentThe Liberal and the NDP aren’t the only groups with their own set of concerns about this new Churchill Falls deal.Article contentThe Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay announced that they will not be supporting any development of Gull Island or the upper Churchill until they get a clear picture of the guarantees expected to come their way.Article contentNamely, addressing the major infrastructure, social and environmental impacts these projects will expectedly have in the region.Article contentAs a hub at the centre of these developments, Happy Valley-Goose Bay will be the one most impacted.Article content“Happy Valley–Goose Bay is at the heart of any future development on the Churchill River, and the town must be recognized as a major stakeholder in this process,” wrote Mayor Bert Pomeroy in a prepared statement on Aug. 18. “Large‑scale projects cannot succeed if our community is left without the resources and capacity needed to support growth, protect residents, and plan for the future.”Article contentArticle contentBefore signing off on anything, Pomeroy and his town are looking for an expansion to the municipal water supply, waste management planning, improvements to local water and sewer, and an upgrade to emergency-response infrastructure.Article contentNot having the adequate municipal infrastructure involved could lead to something akin to the early stages of Muskrat Falls, which is something Happy Valley-Goose Bay would like to avoid.Article content“Announcements are an important first step, but for projects of this scale, the town needs written guarantees, clear timelines, and secured investments before it can consider offering support,” wrote Pomeroy. “We want development that strengthens Labrador and supports our community.”Article contentBROKEN PROMISESArticle contentWhile Happy Valley-Goose Bay is looking for some guarantees from the provincial government, the NDP is still scolding the Conservatives on what they’re calling broken promises.Article contentOf course, they’re referring to the government’s decision to forego a referendum on the new deal, something promised in last year’s election campaign, as well as making the members of the independent review of committee and the data they used to influence the report available for scrutiny.Article contentArticle contentSince it was announced on Aug. 17, Dinn said they’ve since learned that the deadline for finalizing the new deal is March 31, 2027, which means it was possible to hold a referendum.Article contentHe is happy, however, about having the chance to debate the public agreement.Article content“Holding a special debate in the House of Assembly and having an independent oversight committee on the MOU and the work after the deal is signed are imperative to understanding the enormity of this decision and its impact on the future of the province,” wrote Dinn.Article contentWith the long list of questions Hogan and Dinn both have with this new deal, that doesn’t necessarily mean a vote in the opposite direction is coming.Article contentInstead, there’s still more to learn and digest from the deal ahead of that special sitting of the House in September.Article content“It’s a great deal for great opportunity for our province and for Quebec and for the country as a whole,” said Hogan. “We’ll make our decision based on what we hear over the next couple of weeks and during the course of the debate.Article content“Look, we can’t lock ourselves into 1969 again.”Article content
The Liberal and NDP parties in NL raise questions about new Churchill Falls deal
