https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies

‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 48 others

Need I say PURE D BULLSHIT?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled

Methinks NB Power's lawyers should have read my email by now N'esy Pas?

AND My account has been banned until Dec 1st

https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/05/joi-scientific-gamble-necessary-to-help.html

#cdnpoli #nbpoli

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-joi-committee-1.5344197

---------- Original message ----------
From: "MinFinance / FinanceMin (FIN)" <fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 18:05:59 +0000
Subject: RE: YO Chuck Thompson Need I say PURE D BULLSHIT to you CBC
people and Premeir Higgs and his cohorts AGAIN?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments.

Le ministère des Finances accuse réception de votre correspondance
électronique. Soyez assuré(e) que nous apprécions recevoir vos
commentaires.

---------- Original message ----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 18:05:56 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Chuck Thompson Need I say PURE D BULLSHIT
to you CBC people and Premeir Higgs and his cohorts AGAIN?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.

You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.

There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.

Thanks again for your email.
______

Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.

Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.

Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.

Merci encore pour votre courriel.

---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:05:48 -0300
Subject: YO Chuck Thompson Need I say PURE D BULLSHIT to you CBC
people and Premeir Higgs and his cohorts AGAIN?
To: vicky@joiscientific.com, wharrison@nbpower.com,
mike.holland@gnb.ca, David.Coon@gnb.ca, Traver@joiscientific.com,
Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca,
news@kingscorecord.com, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
steve.murphy@ctv.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com,
kris.austin@gnb.ca, brian.gallant@gnb.ca, blaine.higgs@gnb.ca,
pm@pm.gc.ca, rick.desaulniers@gnb.ca, michelle.conroy@gnb.ca,
megan.mitton@gnb.ca, kedgwickriver@gmail.com, kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca,
greg.byrne@gnb.ca, premier@gnb.ca,
Diane.Lebouthillier@cra-arc.gc.ca, Diane.Lebouthillier@parl.gc.ca,

bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca, Bill.Morneau@canada.ca,
Bill.Blair@cra-arc.gc.ca, Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca,
Catherine.Tait@cbc.ca, Chuck.Thompson@cbc.ca,
sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.ca, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov, boris.johnson.mp@parliament.uk,
Tim.RICHARDSON@gnb.ca, Paul.Martin@gnb.ca, Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca,
serge.rousselle@gnb.ca
Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
jesse@viafoura.com, Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
kathleen.roussel@ppsc-sppc.gc.ca, Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca,
mcu@justice.gc.ca, hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Kevin.Vickers@gnb.ca,
Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, premier@ontario.ca, PREMIER@gov.ns.ca,
Roger.Brown@fredericton.ca, martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca,
macpherson.don@dailygleaner.com, macklamoureux@gmail.com,
karissa.donkin@cbc.ca, barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, gthomas@nbpower.com

I was the first person to post a comment in this article and people did read my words before they went "POOF"

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-joi-committee-1.5344197

NB Power defends Joi Scientific licence in face of scrutiny from MLAs

Utility CEO Gaëtan Thomas says technology still has ‘potential,’ but will decide its future in months ahead

Karissa Donkin · CBC News · Posted: Nov 01, 2019 11:56 AM AT

NB Power CEO Gaëtan Thomas posed with Joi Scientific executives Robert Koeneman and Traver Kennedy on a beach in Cape Canaveral, Florida. The utility has a multi-million-dollar licensing agreement with Joi Scientific. (Joi Scientific)

NB Power's CEO is defending the utility's decision to spend millions of dollars to license secret hydrogen technology from a Florida startup, saying it still has "potential."

Joi Scientific claims to have found a way to efficiently generate hydrogen electricity from seawater, which would be a major scientific breakthrough.

The utility spent $13 million Cdn, with $6.7 million from the province's Regional Development Corporation, to license the technology.

But earlier this week, CBC News reported that Joi Scientific told shareholders this past summer that its technology wasn't working as previously described.

Appearing before the standing committee on Crown corporations on Friday, NB Power CEO Gaëtan Thomas said the utility shouldn't have set expectations when it said it would develop a demonstration unit in 2020.

"If the project proves out and it can be scaled, we'll continue," Thomas said.

"But right now, we're spending minimal investment, and we're looking with other partners to actually come to that determination."

He would not name any of those partners.

Thomas said the decision on Joi Scientific could come as early as the end of this calendar year or, at the latest, by the end of the fiscal year.

"Obviously, if it doesn't prove out, we'll have to walk away and we'll be the first to come and tell that," he said, promising to be transparent about the decision.

While Thomas wasn't specific on what the utility is spending its "minimal investment" on at Joi, he confirmed NB Power is still running a lab in Florida to work with Joi Scientific.

NB Power spent more than $74,000 on costs associated with the lab between Jan. 1, 2018, and May 15, 2019, according to information CBC News has obtained through access to information.

Chair says technology will take time

Thomas faced a barrage of questions about Joi Scientific at the committee hearings on Friday.
People's Alliance Leader Kris Austin described the Joi Scientific licence as "a Hail Mary roulette game," while Green Party Leader David Coon called it "high stakes gambling" with public money.

Thomas defended the decision, saying he would have put his own money into it if he could have done so.

Joi Scientific received a $13 million licensing fee from NB Power, with $6.7 million from the the Regional Development Corporation. (Karissa Donkin/CBC)

NB Power executives have previously told the Energy and Utilities Board that it's possible it will lose money in the Joi Scientific partnership, but it will be costlier if the utility doesn't find an alternative fuel source for the Belledune generating station.

"At the end of the day, we believe we did the right thing," Thomas said on Friday.

NB Power board chair Ed Barrett also doubled down on Joi Scientific, saying the technology still holds promise.

"But we are of the view this is going to take time," Barrett said.

"So many times have I observed in my history in private-sector business that you get right to the point of breakthrough and you step away, when if you'd stayed just a little bit longer, you'd begin to see some evidence of it. And that, in my view, is kind of where we are."

Some assumptions made

A former employee who spoke to CBC News has said Joi Scientific's claims of 200 per cent efficiency are "impossible."

At best, the former employee said the company could report 20 per cent efficiency.

Thomas disputed that on Friday, saying the utility has results that are higher than the numbers quoted by CBC News, but would not say what level of efficiency was achieved.
"So it depends who you believe," he said.

Thomas later said there was a test that showed 20 per cent efficiency, "but the system was not optimized."

Austin asked whether Thomas could name any of the scientific institutions or experts who have tested Joi Scientific's technology, but Thomas said some institutions do not want to be named when they do testing, noting they would be "hounded" for their results.

Joi Scientific, a company with a multi-million-dollar NB Power partnership, discovered it's been calculating power incorrectly, CBC News has learned. (Karissa Donkin/CBC)

We did the due diligence," Thomas said.

"We had independent validation and measurements, but there were parts that could not be measured. Some assumptions had been made. We're now back into an area where it's still promising but not to the same levels as we initially thought."

This past summer, Joi Scientific CEO Traver Kennedy revealed to shareholders that Joi had been calculating power incorrectly.

Since June, the company has been using a new method to do its power calculations, Kennedy said in a conference call with shareholders, according to a record obtained by CBC News.

"The results have been both consistent and disappointing," Kennedy told shareholders on the call.

"We've come to learn that the power measurements coming into our circuitry and going all the way back to the wall fundamentally show our current Hydrogen 2.0 technology has poor system efficiencies."

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices

171 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.

Shawn Tabor
This is the same thing that has been happening for many years, the money is gone and the taxpayers are on the hook for it. There is no accountability again and again. This is what has to be addressed, but again this will never happened, I wonder when this will ever stop, a perfect storm is brewing. We as a province have made more folks rich on the backs of taxpayers period. Is this the game. Too funny.

David Amos

Reply to @Shawn Tabor: Ask your Brother and his Green Party buddies why I didn't find it funny that I was not even worth knowing

David Amos

Reply to @David Amos: Methinks the Green Party Leader has a convenient memory N'esy Pas?

NB Power could escape Liberal-promised rate freeze thanks to unlikely source
Robert Jones · CBC News · Posted: Oct 12, 2018 6:00 AM AT

Johnny Horton
This is not Salem.

We live in a country of innocent until proven guilty, we also live in a country where justice is applied to sll those guilty and not just the current punching buddy.

How about before anyone’s head rolls, we find out the full story, how much was their lead and how much was following orders.

Is thst really too much to ask for in this province. Apparently so. Sadly,

Greg Smith

Reply to @Johnny Horton: oh look it’s Johny “Irving Shill” Horton here with another great explanation about how corporate oligarchs deserve to be above the law.

David Amos

Reply to @Greg Smith: Methinks its interesting that you feel free to use my description of the spin doctor yet you don't know what I am talking about N'esy Pas?

David Amos
Methinks Minister Holland and Bruce Northrup may enjoy a little Deja Vu N'esy Pas?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-joi-scientific-risk-iron-plant-emissions-carbon-tax-1.5149763

David Amos
Reply to @David Amos: Methinks some folks may notice lots of words went "Poof" there as well N'esy Pas?

Steve Cohen
Obvious from today's article that NB Power's upper management is in full damage control mode. I am so glad the bottom fell out of the JOI partnership before Thomas retires in April. He can wear it until then.

Johnny Horton

Reply to @Steve Cohen:
People generally only drop names when it helps them,
Not when it will severely hurt them and their reputation...

Steve Cohen

Reply to @Johnny Horton: or on the day when "every dog gets his day"

David Amos

Reply to @Steve Cohen: Methinks everybody in the knows why I would like that day to be named after the Court Jester in me. April 1st, 2003 was the day the US Secret Service came to my home in the middle of the night with a herd of local cops with the knowledge and assent of the RCMP. When the Yankees threatened to take me to Cuba because of false allegations of a presidential threat made against me by a judge I had argued in court that very day, I shook my head. When I showed them some judgements I had received before the War in Iraq began and tried to give some police surveillance wiretap tapes of the mob to the Feds they ran away. Trust that I called and had a long talk with Madame Longo the General Counsel of the RCMP first thing in the following morning. Two days later the Secret Service came back without the cops and apologized. I trust that my political foes would be quick to claim that I am not clever enough to make this story up N'esy Pas?

Johnny Horton
Reply to @Steve Cohen:
Most people are smart enough to keep their nose clean and stay well under the radar of authorities.

Greg Smith
Reply to @David Amos: No, David, nobody ever had a sweet clue what you’re going on about. Just another on brand self-aggrandizing tirade that you’re known for.

Johnny Horton

Some people just believe everyone is out to get them. It’d rsfely true,

David Amos

Reply to @Greg Smith: BS

David Amos
Methinks we should have no doubt that Norm Betts knew somebody who knew somebody who knew somebody but the Chair Mr Barrett forgot to mention that they both know me N'esy Pas?

David Amos
Methinks many of my political foes who got my emails today are tuning into CBC in order to listen to Shift right now N'esy Pas?

Johnny Horton

Reply to @David Amos:
Well those political foes actually had the support of the voters and got elected.

David Amos
Methinks everybody "in the know" understands why I sent another email N'esy Pas?

Johnny Horton

Reply to @David Amos:
Another email that will change nothing...

John Haigh
Fire this clown and let him go work for Joi full-time.

Lou Bell

Reply to @John Haigh: I believe he already resigned ! Saw this comin' and had to GET OUT OF DODGE ASAP !!

David Raymond Amos

For the PUBLIC RECORD I Welcomed Mr Haigh Back to the Circus then posted the words of what NB Power's lawyer had said about me exactly 2 very long years ago The words came directly from the EUB transcript of a public hearing. The Comments were as follows properly broken up to fit within CBC's format Clearly one of Higg's spin doctors read my comments before they went "Poof" along with my account in CBC for another month or so N'esy Pas?

Lou Bell

Reply to @David Raymond Amos: So you were recognized as being insignificant to the process. Not very flattering I must say .

David Amos

Reply to @Lou Bell: Oh My MY

Your account has been banned until December 1, 2019. Reason: We have banned this account for 30 because we believe it is in violation of our Terms of Use, specifically long, off-topic posts. For more information, please visit: http://cbc.ca/submissions .

IN THE MATTER OF an application by New Brunswick Power Corporation for approval of the schedules of the rates for the fiscal year commencing April 1, 2018.

held at the Delta Hotel Saint John, New Brunswick, on October 31, 2017.

BEFORE: Raymond Gorman, Q.C. - Chairman

Francois Beaulieu - Vice-Chairman

Michael Costello - Member

NB Energy and Utilities Board

- Counsel - Ms. Ellen Desmond, Q.C.

- Staff - John Lawton

..............................................................

CHAIRMAN: Good morning, everyone. This is a pre-hearing conference of the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board in connection with Matter 375, which is a general rate application by New Brunswick Power Corporation pursuant to section 1.03 of the Electricity Act and a request for approval of a capital project consisting of the procurement and deployment of advanced metering infrastructure, usually known as AMI, in the amount of $122.7 million. We have simultaneous translation available today. I believe the translation devices have been placed at all of your seats and I am told that channel 1 will provide English and channel 2 will provide French.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: Essentiellement ce que le président

Indiquait c’est on est ici relativement en conférence

préalable et puis vous avez accès à une traduction

simultanée. La fréquence numéro 1 est pour les

anglophones e la fréquence numéro 2 est

pour les francophones. Et pus si vous désirez adressée le

tribunal dans la langue française, on vous demande de le

faire.

Merci.

CHAIRMAN: So at this time I will take the appearances from the people who have indicated they wish to participate in this pre-hearing conference. So first of all, the applicant, N.B. Power Corporation?

MR. FUREY: Good morning, Mr. Chair, John Furey for New Brunswick Power Corporation. I am accompanied this morning at counsel table by Stephen Russell.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Furey. David Amos? Mr. Amos, did you put your microphone on?

MR. AMOS: Here.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Enbridge Gas New Brunswick?

MR. VOLPE: Good morning, Mr. Chair. Paul Volpe, Enbridge Gas New Brunswick.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Volpe. Gerald Bourque?

MR. BOURQUE: Gerald Bourque is here.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bourque. J.D. Irving, Limited?

MR. STEWART: Christopher Stewart, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Stewart. New Clear Free Solutions?

MR. ROUSE: Good morning, Mr. Chair. Chris Rouse, for the record.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Rouse. Roger Richard?

MR. RICHARD: Oui, je suis Richard.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Sussex Sharing Club? Not here today. Utilities Municipal?

MR. STOLL: Good morning, Mr. Chair. It is Mr. Stoll. With me is Mr. Garrett and Ms. Kelly.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Stoll. Utilities Municipal? Sorry, Public Intervenor?

MS. BLACK: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Heather Black.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. Black. New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board?

MS. DESMOND: Good morning, Mr. Chair. Ellen Desmond and from Board Staff, John Lawton.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. Desmond. So today's pre-hearing conference will deal with the normal issues that we deal with at pre-hearing conferences, generally is the hearing schedule and process. But as well we have requests for intervenor status from eight different entities and we have an objection to one of those requests for intervenor status and that is the status of Mr. Amos. So I think that before we get into the schedule, I think it would be useful to go through the requests for intervenor status. I am just going to wait here a moment.

All right, i guess the sound system has been fixed. So we are on the request for intervenor status. The Public Intervenor of course is deemed to be a party pursuant to Section 49.3 of the EUB Act. And then we have requests for intervenor status from David Amos, Enbridge Gas New Brunswick, Gerald Bourque, J.D. Irving, Limited, New Clear Free Solutions, Roger Richard, Sussex Sharing Club and Utilities Municipal. And as I had indicated, the Board received a written objection to the intervention of Mr. Amos.

So, Mr. Furey, do you have any issue with any of the other registered participants today?

MR. FUREY: No, we don't, Mr. Chair, and the only additional comment I would make around that is that we recognize that not every proposed intervenor has necessarily complied perfectly with the provisions of Rule 3.2.4, but those that have not that we don't object to, we have a general understanding already of the issues that they would bring to the proceeding.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The Board has in fact reviewed the requests that we have received for intervenor status. One of the -- one of the issues that you raise with respect to Mr. Amos is that he has not indicated in his form -- in his registration form the reason for his intervention. And in reviewing them, I note that the only other form where I see that is the form filled out by Mr. Bourque. So at this stage I just want -- Mr. Bourque perhaps -- you know, you may not have understood that on these intervenor requests that it's intended that you would indicate why you want intervenor status, what issues you would be raising at the hearing. Would you be able to provide that information at this time? I appreciate it's not on your form.

MR. BOURQUE: Well I'm not very versed in all these procedures and I was coming to learn what was going on, and I was -- if there is issues that come up that I don't agree with, I certainly will speak on it, but I don't have anything prepared ahead of time.

CHAIRMAN: So are you a customer of NB Power and what rate class -- if so, what rate class would you, you know, purport to represent at this hearing?

MR. BOURQUE: I'm a customer of NB Power and I'm just a resident and -- yes.

CHAIRMAN: So is your intervention with respect to residential customers or is it broader than that?

MR. BOURQUE: I'm basically representing myself and -- yes.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. Thank you.

MR. BOURQUE: Thank you.

CHAIRMAN: So, Mr. Amos, before we get into the discussion with respect to your status as intervenor, because there has been an objection filed, again your intervenor request does not set out the reasons for your request to be an intervenor. So just like I have put those questions to Mr. Bourque, could you perhaps just expand upon the rate class that perhaps you are a customer in and what perspective you would bring to this hearing?

MR. AMOS: Mr. Gorman, I just became aware of this motion as I entered this room. I'm just starting to read it now. I request time to study it before I argue it. With that said, as I said in the last hearing, residential class ratepayer, the reason I'm intervening in this matter is because of my two friends here. Both have concerns with these rate increases. My friend Roger in particular has to do with the smart meters and Gerald with the expenses and the debts incurred by NB Power. Both of these fellows are not familiar with how court processes work and they asked me to help them with this matter. I was done with you -- 357 and preparing to sue you, sir. I said I will help them intervene because of his concerns about smart meters, his concerns about the debts involving site meters and other things, and my concerns about the severe lack of ethics of all the officers of the court in this room. Mr. Furey is familiar with me when he worked for the attorney General.

Now in the last hearing that I was at I was invited to a meeting in a boardroom of Stewart McKelvey, the very people that appear to have filed this motion, saying I don't know my business. At this meeting I wasn't allowed to share what was said, although all the intervenors, including Hugh Segal's associate, listened in --

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, if I could just interrupt for a moment --

MR. AMOS: It has to do with ratepayers --

CHAIRMAN: No, no. Excuse me, please.

MR. AMOS: -- and site --

CHAIRMAN: Please, Mr. Amos --

MR. AMOS: Your question is site meters, sir.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, could you just hold back your remarks for a moment.

MR. AMOS: I'm reading this motion. I'm much offended.

CHAIRMAN: Look, before we get to the motion, all I have asked you is for you --

MR. AMOS: Site meters, sir.

CHAIRMAN: Sorry?

MR. AMOS: Site meters. $122 million and then the write-off of the existing meters. I believe that's in the mandate of this, correct?

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So you are saying that you are intending to intervene in this proceeding because of the --

MR. AMOS: I'm watching you, sir. You are at the end of your term February 1st. Jack Keir appointed you ten years ago February 1st. I wonder --

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, I'm --

MR. AMOS: -- who the next Chair is going to be.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, could you try to stay on topic here. The question --

MR. AMOS: I'm checking your integrity in helping my friends with their concerns about the expenses of NB Power in site meters.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So, Mr. Amos, are you telling me that your intervention would be around the advanced meter infrastructure? Is that the reason that you want to intervene?

MR. AMOS: And the rate increase in and of itself is unnecessary.

CHAIRMAN: Okay.

MR. AMOS: I have many reasons --

CHAIRMAN: Okay. Could I --

MR. AMOS: -- but I think it's a matter for another court after reading this motion. They mentioned the Federal Court of Appeal. You must be aware of me in the Federal Court, right?

CHAIRMAN: Sir, that's the matter --

MR. AMOS: Have you read this motion?

CHAIRMAN: -- that we are now discussing. Sir, that's not what we are talking about right now.

MR. AMOS: Well that's what I'm talking about.

CHAIRMAN: I want to know the reason for your intervention and you have said --

MR. AMOS: Site meters and this rate increase and the write down of the current meters.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So you have indicated that you are here because you want to assist --

MR. AMOS: Are you double-talking? That's exactly what I said. It's on the record. I'm here because I take offence to the deal with -- what is it, Siemens -- for 122 million and then the cost of installing these meters so that the ratepayers will have to pay more during certain times of the day when they use a dryer when Mr. Furey decides it's not proper.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So --

MR. AMOS: He forgets who owns NB Power. We do. You too. We are the ratepayers. As I said in the last hearing, you should protect your own interest, Mr. Gorman.

CHAIRMAN: So, Mr. Amos, we are going to set aside the issue of whether or not you will be an intervenor to give you an opportunity to read that material. I understand that it would have been served electronically on all parties, at least that's the rule. Mr. Furey, can you --

MR. AMOS: I never saw it until this morning.

CHAIRMAN: Can you confirm that it would have been sent to an email address provided by Mr. Amos?

MR. FUREY: That's correct, Mr. Chair. It was sent yesterday morning to the distribution list in this proceeding including Mr. Amos' email that he had provided.

CHAIRMAN: Okay.

MR. AMOS: I need to remind Mr. Furey that he used to work for the Attorney General when I served NB Power in 2006. He and I spoke personally in 2005.

CHAIRMAN: So, Mr. Amos, we are not going to hear that immediately. The documentation -- I think most of it is documentation that you previously filed, so I'm assuming that you are --

MR. AMOS: I'm glad to argue every single word that I filed in 357.

CHAIRMAN: So I'm assuming that you are familiar with that. It's the --

MR. AMOS: I'm very familiar with every word that I filed.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, if I gave you 20 minutes to read that, is that enough time?

MR. AMOS: 20 minutes? Could you argue that document in 20 minutes? Let me take 20 minutes to study it but I don't know what you guys are talking about in the meantime I should pay attention to.

CHAIRMAN: So I think what we will do is we will set that aside for a moment and we will move on to scheduling and we will come back to that.

MR. AMOS: Because I want to pay attention to every word you are saying this morning.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, we are going to set this issue aside for now, then we are going to have a break and I'm going to give you an opportunity to have a look at it. But my point is that the vast majority of the material that was filed was material that came from you. So I assume you are familiar with that part of it.

MR. AMOS: Let me back up. When I first introduced myself on a pre-hearing for 357, I was opposing a former public intervenor wanting to get on the gravy train again. I explained myself when I introduced myself at that, that every lawyer in the room should know who I was, including you. I sent you emails where I sent you emails ten years ago. That said, I know who I am. I was there to oppose a former public intervenor wanting to get paid by his own assistant. I opposed that. I can speak on my behalf, Gerald can speak on his behalf, Roger can speak on his behalf. Why should anybody be paid?

After that I was invited by NB Power, Mr. Furey, to a secret meeting to discuss this. They wanted to pick my brains to see what my issues were. And we couldn't disclose what was said in the room.

I clearly stated what my issues were, conflict of interest by law firms. Good example. The people that filed this motion today, JDI, Stewart McKelvey, are also employed by NB Power to litigate to collect for Lepreau. That's conflict of interest. And then we have McInnes and Cooper and then we have and then we have and then we have.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos --

MR. AMOS: So I asked all these questions in confidence. They said it's a matter for the hearing. So then we go to have a hearing and you cancel the hearing so I can't ask the questions. I said fine, we will see you in another court. Then my friends asked me for my assistance over this rate increase and site meters in particular and the rate increase in general. I said fine, I will let you guys do the talking and I will advise you because you are not familiar. Any time that I decide to speak I will because I have a right to. But since you people want to attack me, I'm all for it, but I need to study what you are up to first.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. Mr. Amos, I'm going to cut you off there. So on the request for intervenor status we are going to grant intervenor status to Enbridge Gas New Brunswick, Gerald Bourque, J.D. Irving, Limited, New Clear Free Solutions, Roger Richard, Sussex Sharing Club and Utilities Municipal were the PIs already indicated as deemed to be a party pursuant to Section 49.3 of the EUB Act. And, Mr. Amos, we will set aside your request to be an intervenor until we have dealt with other matters and we will come back to that a little bit later and I will give you an opportunity to review the material that you would not be familiar with.

MR. AMOS: I thank you for that.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Amos, do you have a preference on a start date between the 5th or the 12th of February?

MR. AMOS: No preference at all. Whatever suits NB Power.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. And in terms of the length of the hearing, do you have a -- you have to turn your microphone on -- any preference or any comment on the --

MR. AMOS: No. Whatever suits the Board and NB Power and the other intervenors suits me.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So turning then to the objection to Mr. Amos being named as an intervenor or becoming an intervenor in this matter -- all right. So, Mr. Furey, we have looked at your notice of objection to the intervenor request and if I may attempt to summarize it, it really relies on two grounds, and I think the first three paragraphs in your notice of objection deal with Rule 3.2.2 of the Rules of Procedure indicating the party must demonstrate a substantial interest in the proceeding and an intent to participate actively and responsibly. And so there is a responsibility there to show what their interest is. The second part of your objection here deals with the requirement to participate responsibly.

With respect to the first part of your objection, Mr. Amos this morning clarified, you know, the basis of what his interest is in the proceeding and essentially how that interest justified the granting of intervenor status. Do you have anything further to say on that aspect of it or is essentially most of the objection -- certainly by volume here most of the objection seems to be on the contention here that perhaps he may not participate responsibly.

MR. FUREY: Yes. That would be the focus of my submissions here this morning.

CHAIRMAN: And would you agree that Mr. Amos has in fact essentially fulfilled the obligations of the first part of what had been your objection?

MR. FUREY: I would.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So with respect to the duty to participate responsibly, you filed documentation which has been provided to all the parties and the Board of course has read it, as I'm sure others have. Do you -- I guess it's your objection. So is there anything that you want to highlight here or anything further you want to add?

MR. FUREY: Yes. If I might have a few minutes to do that, I would appreciate it, Mr. Chair.

So I mean, I guess the starting point is what -- what is the requirement -- what is the content of the requirement to participate in a responsible fashion, and the rules don't -- don't give us any further guidance on that. But I would suggest that the content of that requirement is that it is an obligation of an intervenor to raise issues that are relevant to the jurisdiction of the Board in the proceeding and not issues that are extraneous or completely unrelated, and to do so -- while recognizing that we are in an adversarial process, to do so in a respectful and civil fashion. And our submission is that the material on which we rely, which is all Mr. Amos' -- either all of Mr. Amos' documents or the transcript of a motion that was argued on October 5th of this year demonstrates I would say quite clearly that Mr. Amos is not capable of that type of reasonable participation in the process.

And generally, and I said this in paragraph 5 of the notice of the objection -- generally a review of Mr. Amos' documents discloses a pattern of behaviour that is confrontational in nature and is characterized by unsubstantiated allegations of unethical or illegal behaviour by various political figures, judges, lawyers, law enforcement officials.

I think it's worth noting that Mr. Amos' own documents show that he has, on at least one occasion and perhaps two, been banned or barred from the grounds of the New Brunswick Legislative Assembly on the basis of harassment of MLAs, officers and staff of the Legislative Assembly. Having been so barred, he brought a complaint against the members of the Fredericton City police force to the Police Commission, that was subsequently dismissed, relating to their involvement in barring him from the Legislative Assembly.

I am going to spend a little time, Mr. Chair, with respect to Mr. Amos' complaint against Judge Henrik Tonning to the New Brunswick Judicial Council, and that appears at appendix D of the objection. And in particular two pages in, there is an affidavit that Mr. Amos submitted in a provincial court case. And in that affidavit -- and I'm going to very quickly move through this -- at paragraph 9 he first deals with Prosecutor James McAvity and he indicates that Prosecutor McAvity should have been questioned as to his malice and/or competence. So he is questioning the malice and competence of the Crown Prosecutor. He goes on to say he certainly would not wish the likes of Ms. Gallagher defending his rights or interests before the court. At paragraph 22 he states, it appears to me that not only are the actions of David Lutz malicious, but they are fraudulent as well. In my opinion he has no right to practice law for a fee but in fact he should be in jail. And at paragraph 31 he speaks of a response he got from the RCMP External Review Committee which he viewed was predictable and unsatisfactory.

And just to go back to the beginning of that appendix, the initial complaint on the first page of that appendix, at the end of the -- at the end of the first -- second full paragraph, Mr. Amos makes it clear in his complaint that he is referring to proceedings in order to cover up the wrongful acts of the court and David Lutz. In the next paragraph he points out that he is already complaining about Brad Green and his conduct. Now at that time Brad Green would have been Attorney General.

So I wanted to take a moment to point those out because that is the pattern of Mr. Amos' involvement in legal proceedings. It is to question the ethical or legal behaviour of virtually every lawyer or decision maker involved in the proceeding. That is his pattern. It continues. If you go to the next exhibit, or next appendix, Appendix F, is a direction obviously from a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal to the Appeal Registry. Please advise the parties that Mr. Amos has the right to submit a brief summary not to exceed five pages, to explain the exact conflict that in his view arises in this matter with any of the judges assigned to this appeal and to submit any additional documents that are relevant to the issue.

So in an ongoing -- and this is dated June 8th 2017 -- in an ongoing action or appeal in the Federal Court of Appeal, Mr. Amos is alleging conflict of the judges assigned to the appeal. And that pattern continues, I would submit, in the present -- in his appearances before this Board. The final appendix, Appendix I, to the notice of objection is a copy of the transcript of the hearing of Mr. Amos' motion in Matter 357. And I think it's useful to remember that that motion was a motion to deal with the timing of the hearing of Matter 357. The Board had previously granted NB Power's application or motion to adjourn the proceeding on terms and Mr. Amos essentially wanted that reheard. So not something that you would regard as a contentious matter being the timing of the hearing.

But Mr. Amos' comments to the Board on that occasion again can only be characterized as confrontational. I reviewed the transcript several times before today. There is not really an argument in there that was germane to the issue of the timing of the hearing. There was a lot of extraneous material. And at the conclusion of his remarks, and I have specifically placed this in the notice of objection, when the Board Chair asked Mr. Amos if he had anything further to say, his reply was essentially to suggest to the Board Chair, and I will read what he said.

Yes. Can you think of one good reason why I don't sue you, Mr. Gorman? You have my documents. Do you understand what are on file in your Board? Do you not see where I am already in federal court suing the Queen? Did I not properly introduce myself before you allowed me to be an intervenor? Did I not explain my issues to this Board in no uncertain terms on June 15th? And he is referring to an email that he had sent to a number of parties on June 15th.

I think we can expect, and we have seen it again here this morning, we can expect more of the same, arguments unrelated to the issue before the Board presented in a confrontational manner, which will, I would suggest to you, eventually turn to actions in other courts. The pattern is that when Mr. Amos runs against a lawyer who acts against him, runs against a decision-maker who doesn't agree with him, then that issue is relitigated in other courts. And while I think the standard here is simply one of is Mr. Amos likely to participate in a reasonable fashion, I do think it's useful to compare the situation to situations where courts have dealt with so-called vexatious litigants.

So I am not suggesting that that's the standard that be applied here -- that's not the standard to be applied here. But I did submit to the Board yesterday afternoon a copy of a decision of Mr. Justice Morrison. It's a very recent decision in which he dealt with an issue of determination of a vexatious litigant. And at page -- the page numbering is a little weird in this document. I am looking at paragraph 34 of the decision. It's on what's referred to as page 68, but it's paragraph 34 of the decision. And Mr. Justice Morrison noted that counsel on that hearing were unable to provide him with any New Brunswick cases considering the concept of a vexatious litigant, but they were able to refer him to an Ontario decision in Lang Michener Lash Johnston v Fabian. And in that case, there is an outlining of the factors to be considered in determining whether or not a party meets the threshold of a vexatious litigant. And I won't go through all of them, there are seven principles set out there, but (d) in my view is of particular application here.

And Justice Henry said, it is a general characteristic of vexatious proceedings that grounds and issues raised tend to be rolled forward into subsequent actions and repeated and supplemented, often with actions brought against the lawyers who have acted for or against the litigant in earlier proceedings.

And that's precisely Mr. Amos' pattern in the documents that he, himself, has disclosed to the Board. While he has here this morning indicated to the Board that his interest revolves around issues of AMI in particular, and the expenses and capital associated with the AMI, I submit he is not capable of putting those positions forward in a cogent, respectful, reasonable manner. His own history demonstrates that and his conduct before this Board to date confirms it.

And so while we are reluctant to make a request of this nature -- I mean, we have had many lay participants in my time before the Board. Mr. Rouse is here with us again this year. I have never had any doubt about the issue that Mr. Rouse wanted to talk about. He has always been very clear. Mr. Hickey has been with us in the past. Mr. Smith, on behalf of the Sussex Sharing Club is with us. I have no doubt as to what the issue Mr. Smith wants to raise. All have -- while there certainly have been some adversarial proceedings around those interventions, all have proceeded in a respectful fashion. And so while it is not a step that we like to take, my submission is that it is in the public interest not to permit Mr. Amos to participate as an intervenor. He will delay and frustrate this Board, and he will harass the participants -- other participants in the proceeding. He will cause unnecessary aggravation and probably expense. And so for those reasons, Mr. Chair, we submit that he not be granted intervenor status.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Furey. So, Mr. Amos, now you were provided this morning with an hour to review Mr. Furey's documents that he filed with the Board, and I think it was three or four pages of documents. The balance of documents were ones that you had filed in the past. So you have had an opportunity to review his submission?

MR. AMOS: Absolutely.

CHAIRMAN: And you, of course, heard Mr. Furey's comments that he has just concluded. So you know what the issue is that he raises?

MR. AMOS: I heard every word he said.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. So do you have a -- do you have some comments about what he is asking for?

MR. AMOS: Yes, Mr. Gorman, I do. First off, I am grateful that he filed my documents in this matter. However, he shouldn't cherry pick. If he is going to file my documents, he should file all that he has received. But dealing with the exhibits that he has filed, he has now made a federal case out of a 2 percent rate hike. I remind Mr. Furey that murder is a capital crime and when he worked for the Attorney General of New Brunswick in 2004, who was Brad Green, his boss received evidence of murder. Brad Green acknowledged it. He now sits on the bench of the Court of Appeal.

Anyway, I had ran for Parliament in 2004, the 38th Parliament against a member of your Board, John Herron. That was when it was the Public Utilities Board. David Young, who worked for another Crown Corporation, who is a senior advisor to your Board now, I believe got fired because I complained of him, because he wouldn't allow me to speak on the radio and give me equal time as my political opponents, just like Mr. Furey doesn't want me to speak before the Board today, even though I am a stakeholder in this hearing. He has no more standing here than I do, other than he collects a big pay cheque that my taxpayer funds are paying. But as an officer of the court, he is obliged to uphold the law. He filed my documents in this matter. I did not. He did. Then he says I am vexatious. I am surprised he didn't call me frivolous as well. The Crown usually calls me that. I understand the term, vexatious. He is the man who is vexatious.

In the 357 Matter, if we go first things first, there is a transcript, which I have uploaded, you can review it or I can read it to you. You asked me why I was intervening. Exhibit A of his documents, I didn't know who Mr. Furey was. I had no idea what lawyers or what was going on in 357, except on June 14th I heard on the radio Mr. Hyslop had a motion before this Board in a pre-hearing to be paid to help his assistant. I saw red. I remembered Mr. Hyslop from the PUB. I remember Mr. Hyslop when I ran in Saint John Harbour, while he run against Abe LeBlanc. I remember I was intervening in an NEB hearing and arguing Cedric Haines of NB Power while he worked for the Attorney General. I remember talking to him about murdered Indians. That said, all I had issues with was Mr. Hyslop wanting paid again. I had checked from CBC and some years he was paid like $700,000. I had issues with him in 2006. David Young wouldn't let me speak before the PUB Board even in a public hearing. So I had to send a farmer. That said, I am asking Hyslop, you are the Public Intervenor, what do you know of my concerns? I had concerns about the refurbishment of Lepreau, Coleson Cove. If you go on Charles LeBlanc's blog from April of 2006, you can even see I was dealing with a lawyer named Richard Costello -- same last name as you, sir -- who worked for McInnes Cooper, who was hired by Venezuela to check with the PUB as to when a pipeline went from the Irving refinery to Coleson Cove. I wanted to know about that too. So I talked to Mr. Costello. The email between Mr. Costello and I is still in Charles LeBlanc's blog from 2006.

While I was running for Parliament in Fredericton, and I doubt that Mr. Furey voted for me, I was running against Andy Scott, Minister of Indian Affairs and he worked for the Attorney General for Indian Affairs. Now I went to high school with Andy Scott. Barb Baird used to be Brad Green's boss. I went to high school with her too. Now I don't know if you guys know who I am, but many people in this neck of the woods do. My brother-in-law's law firm partner helped Peter MacKay merge with Mr. Harper's party. When I sued Americans over taxation and about improper tax accountants like KPMG, Grant Thornton, ringing any bells? That was in 2002. I am glad he brought up the Department of Homeland Security. Those are the guys that tried to take me to Cuba in 2003 after I started winning lawsuits. You are right, I sue people that don't do their job. Particularly, the people that are well paid to act in our best interests. I file whistle-blower forms with the U.S. tax man and they try to arrest me. You are right, I sue them. A lawyer calls me a liar, well he better check my work before he goes too far.

Anyway, NB Power, they have a mandate to uphold. It's a Crown corporation. David Alward, 2013 comes out with a new Act. Got to follow the Act, fellows. Now this hearing 357 was supposed to be within three years. Now I don't know -- I don't pretend to know something I don't. All I heard was Hyslop wanted on the gravy train. I took issue with that. I email the guy that speaks for the Chairman of the Board. I have spoke personally to Ed Barrett, personally. I have spoken to Mr. Scott, his assistant. He has a very funny voice mail. Mr. Scott loves hearing me speak on the radio and on television. Mr. Scott was the guy I knew had the ear of the Chairman. Now I served Derek Burney, who used to work with Mr. Mulroney, just like his partner, Hugh Segal, right. I had served Derek Burney my stuff after I ran for Parliament in 2006, got a signature. Why would I do that? Because NB Power had hired Simpson Bartlett & Thatcher in New York to sue Venezuela. Do you realize that Robert Mueller's lawyer comes from Simpson Bartlett & Thatcher? Are you realizing what's going on? Have you read the emails I sent you? He talks about me in federal court on June 8th. You are right I was in federal court, May 24th. Have you reviewed the documents I filed in federal court since that time?

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, I am going to interrupt you for a moment.

MR. AMOS: Murder is a capital crime, sir.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, the issue that Mr. Furey raises --

MR. AMOS: Is that I am vexatious.

CHAIRMAN: Well he says that he is reluctant to make this objection, but he -- in his view, he says you are not capable of putting positions forward in a cogent manner. You are not --

MR. AMOS: Are you saying that?

CHAIRMAN: -- you are not speaking to the issue, which -- can I --

MR. AMOS: All right. Am I -- am I a person born and raised in this province?

CHAIRMAN: The issue here --

MR. AMOS: Did I run for Parliament five times?

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, it would be appreciated --

MR. AMOS: Are you aware of why I am barred? He brought it up.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, it would be appreciated if you would just listen for a moment. So the issue here is whether or not you can stick to the issues that have to be dealt with in this particular matter, which is a general rate application. We are dealing with the spending --

MR. AMOS: Have you read the filings in this matter?

CHAIRMAN: Sir, would you just wait till I finish, please?

MR. AMOS: No, I am arguing him and you. You are on his side clearly. Now your Vice-Chair will probably have the job in February, used to work for City Hall. Do you remember Mr. Nugent and I, sir?

CHAIRMAN: Sir, do you want to provide us with your --

MR. AMOS: You have many of my documents that he did not file. I sent them to you by email. Do you remember receiving the emails from me in 2007, sir?

CHAIRMAN: So one of the things that Mr. Furey says is --

MR. AMOS: Do you remember when Jack Keir appointed you? I introduced myself to you then.

CHAIRMAN: Sir, excuse me, but one of the things he says is you are not able to react in a --

MR. AMOS: You can't answer a question.

CHAIRMAN: -- in a respectful fashion and you are not paying attention to the protocol here today.

MR. AMOS: All right. Let me ask you a question, sir?

CHAIRMAN: No, that's not what we are here for.

MR. AMOS: Have you understood one word I have said any time we have met?

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, do you have anything to add to the record with respect to your respectful participation in this matter, in this process? Mr. Furey says that you don't have the ability to stay on topic.

MR. AMOS: Are you saying that?

CHAIRMAN: I am telling you what the argument is that has

been put forward.

MR. AMOS: I know what he said. I am asking you?

CHAIRMAN: And the argument that has been put forward is you don't have the ability to --

MR. AMOS: I heard what he said. I told you that.

CHAIRMAN: -- stay on topic and to act in a respectful manner.

MR. AMOS: All right.

CHAIRMAN: Can you give me any information on that issue?

CHAIRMAN: You are the Chairman of the Board. This is not your decision solely. There is a Vice-Chair and another man. One man is an accountant and the other a lawyer. Now I don't know if the other two fellows read my documents. I certainly hope that they did. The man who is a chartered accountant should understand about Kevin Dancy and I. He should certainly have understood what I am doing in federal court. Now I thanked him for filing documents, but one interesting document he brought up in particular was the man I went to college with, Henrik Tonning. He is a personal friend of mine.

Now if he had read that entire affidavit, I had been summoned to the court by a lawyer to file an affidavit. He failed to mention that. But Henrik Tonning and I were once very good friends. That affidavit that he just put in this matter no longer exists in provincial court. That's fraud practiced against me by the court. Yes, I have contempt against officers of the court that fail to uphold the law. Yes, I do not hesitate in suing lawyers. I have sued more lawyers, and law firms, and attorney generals than probably anyone else on the planet. I am before the federal court right now and you guys will be mentioned in my next lawsuit that will be filed by Christmas. Thank you for making it a federal matter. That said my two friends have standing in this matter as much as I do. You work for us.

I have my rights to my opinion and I don't have to suffer insults. Ms. Harrison signed this document. I wonder if she has even read it, but I consider it her insult. He is merely her lawyer. Now his name is Furey. I served Brian Furey in Newfoundland. He was President of the Law Society in Newfoundland. I served George Furey, he is Speaker of the Senate. He is from Newfoundland. I know where this is going, federal court. As I told you, you are not a court. And if you want to argue my documents, we will argue before a judge that I do not have a conflict of interest with.

Now I have a bone to pick with many judges in federal court and a lot in the Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick, but not all. And not every judge or every lawyer is a crook. Some of them are actually friends of mine. Only problem I have with them is they think I can't pull this off. That the system is just too powerful. Well could be. Call me crazy if you wish, I can be as crazy as I want to be. How do you explain my having FBI wiretap tapes of the mob and three weeks after he mentioned about me being in federal court, the outgoing Commissioner of the R.C.M.P. said beware of the mob. Bob Paulson said that. And I am the guy with all the tapes. You got a huge ethical dilemma, sir. You are an accountant. You don't. You do. You are probably the next Chair.

You can do with me what you will. I will still advise my friends about their concerns about this 2 percent rate hike and his concerns about meters we don't need. They are ratepayers. They have the right to their opinion and they have the right to have me for a friend and take my counsel whether you want to argue me or not. Now he can insult me. You haven't yet. I was grateful on the 14th when I emailed Bob Scott. I didn't email Ms. Harrison. I emailed David Young, who I knew, your senior advisor. And I emailed Bob Scott, the guy who likes to make fun of me. Ed Barrett's spokesperson. I did not think I could intervene in 357. The nice lady acting as Clerk said what, would you like to intervene? I said what, can I? She said well the hearings haven't started yet. It's up to the Board. It was a surprise to me. I wasn't looking to intervene. And I said sure, I would love to. I love to argue lawyers. It was Mr. Hyslop that was my target. That said I come, I give the nice lady my intervenor form. Mr. Furey sees no problem with me. He has a problem with my friend, because he is a leader of a political party, but you guys have no problem allowing David Coon to be an intervenor and he is a seated MLA. That said, it is what it is. You guys allowed me to intervene with exactly the same information verbatim that I did this time. It was the same document. That said, you allowed me. I was grateful. When I introduced myself, he more or less quoted me. Anyway I can -- you can review the transcript or I can read it into the record in this matter, but I was grateful and I said -- well let me read it, I should put it in the record then.

This is from the transcript of the 15th after you were done with my friend, Mr. Bourque. Chairman -- this is page 7, line 21 of the transcript, June 15th. Chairman. Thank you. I don't see anything similar on Mr. Amos' intervenor request. So Mr. Amos, just to clarify you -- clarify, you are also requesting to intervene personally on behalf of an organization? That was your question. Page 8, line 1. I am here in my own name, speaking on my own interests in this matter. And most of the other intervenors and their lawyers know exactly who I am and why I am here. And I emailed them -- I emailed Mr. Toner, Mr. Hyslop. I emailed Bob Scott. I didn't know who Mr. Furey was from a hole in the wall, right. Well, Mr. Amos, are you a ratepayer of NB Power? Mr. Amos: I was born and raised in this province. I have paid my share of power bills and taxes that support this Board and NB Power. I have issues with NB Power and this Board.

And I was speaking mainly of John Herron, the guy I ran against in 2004, and David Young, your senior advisor. I didn't know you. Didn't know the rest of you.

So your intervention though is in relation to the rate design application? My interest in this matter, I stand and speak only for myself. No Public Intervenor appointed by the Province or this Board speaks for me. I speak for myself. Now the lady is the Public Intervenor, she is with McInnes Cooper, same law firm as Richard Costello. The same law firm as Len Hoyt, the guy that picked the Cabinet. He is also the lawyer for Enbridge. I see a little conflict of interest going there. I see NB Power hires Stewart McKelvey to litigate over Lepreau problems and yet the same law firm is hired by J.D. Irving to muscle this Board to get Mr. Irving wants. He brought up Mr. Hickey. I have talked to Mr. Hickey for hours. Mr. Hickey has some pretty serious issues.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, please hear me out. We have listened to you now for 20 minutes or so, still haven't heard your response to how you can participate in this proceeding in a respectful manner and stick to the issues. The issue here really is whether or not you will stick to the issues if you are granted intervenor status and whether or not you will act in a respectful manner. I need to have your response to that issue. Everything else you have talked about is off topic.

MR. AMOS: You just interrupted me, sir. Now I was respectful the whole time any matter in this. Mr. Hyslop, you asked for submissions, I gave submissions. You guys made the decision. Mr. Hyslop wasn't allowed his pay cheque. Then I thought I was done. He and Mr. Russell invited me to a hearing at a Stewart McKelvey boardroom to talk to Mr. Todd about his report --

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, I am sorry, I am going to have to interrupt again. You are not talking --

MR. AMOS: You are interrupting me because you don't want me on -- to put this on the record.

CHAIRMAN: -- you are not talking about --

MR. AMOS: I am trying to address your question.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, I am directing you to talk about this -- the issue before us --

MR. AMOS: I am telling you my answer.

CHAIRMAN: -- in this matter?

MR. AMOS: I am telling you my answer. I was invited to a hearing, Chatham House Rule, so to speak, nothing leaves the room. Mr. Furey and Mr. Russell -- Mr. Furey wanted me to talk to him before this meeting. I saw NB Power on my websites downloading my documents. I go to this hearing. I am saying to Mr. Russell, where is Mr. Furey? He don't call. He don't write. I am not going to sign any disclosure document, right. Don't allow me in the room if there is something you think I am going to spill the beans on. I talked to Mr. Todd before he came from Toronto. That said, they picked my brain at the hearing. I say conflict of interest, McInnes Cooper, Stewart McKelvey, et cetera, et cetera. I want to know things having to do with 20 percent equity, where they arrived at that number, what the equity was? Now I had many questions in confidence. Mr. Todd -- I am asking Mr. Russell these questions -- Mr. Todd keeps interrupting me and says that's a matter for a hearing. I said fine, I will ask the hearing -- I will ask before a hearing. So then after that, Mr. Furey files a motion kill the hearing.

CHAIRMAN: So, Mr. Amos, one --

MR. AMOS: Kill the hearing.

CHAIRMAN: -- Mr. Amos --

MR. AMOS: You are the guy who killed the hearing.

CHAIRMAN: -- Mr. Amos, one last time I am going to give you an opportunity to address the issue of how you can participate in a respectful and responsible manner. If you don't want to talk about that topic, then we will take an adjournment and we will consider the request that Mr. Furey has made.

MR. AMOS: Have I been disrespectful to this Board?

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Amos, can you stick to --

MR. AMOS: Have I been disrespectful to this Board?

CHAIRMAN: -- sir -- sir, can -- sir, would you -- you have interrupted constantly and I would like you to --

MR. AMOS: All right.

CHAIRMAN: -- do you --

MR. AMOS: I will leave it in your hands.

CHAIRMAN: -- do you have anything --

MR. AMOS: You decide.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you. All right. We will take a brief recess.

(Recess)

CHAIRMAN: All right. I will now give the decision of the Board on this matter.

Mr. Amos seeks intervenor status in Matter 375. NB Power objects to his intervention claiming his conduct during the hearing of a motion in Matter 357 was confrontational and that his arguments lacked any connection to the issues before the Board. The Board agrees with that assessment.

In the present matter, Mr. Amos was given ample opportunity to put forward a case that would support a respectful and responsible intervention. He failed to do so, rolling forward issues raised in Matter 357 and not addressing the issue before us today.

Mr. Amos states that the interests he would bring before the Board are those raised by Mr. Bourque and Mr. Richard. The Board is satisfied that those two intervenors can adequately represent those issues. In addition, those issues will undoubtedly be addressed by the Public Intervenor and others.

The Board finds on a balance of probability that Mr. Amos will not participate in this matter in a respectful and responsible manner. As a result, the Board will exercise its discretion and refuse intervenor status to Mr. Amos. Intervention is encouraged but it must be responsible.

Mr. Amos may participate in the public session which date will be announced shortly. But again he is reminded that any presentation must be done in a respectful and responsible manner.

Finally, Mr. Amos had indicated that he wished to assist his two colleagues that are sitting with him today. And certainly the Board has no issue with that at all. But Mr. Amos will have no status at the hearing in terms of cross-examination or making any argument.

So that is the decision of this Panel with respect to the status of Mr. Amos.

Are there any other issues to deal with today? There being no other issues, then we will adjourn.

(Adjourned)

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Methinks NB Power's lawyers should have read my email by now N'esy Pas?

---------- Original message ----------
From: Diane.Lebouthillier@parl.gc.ca
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 13:56:44 +0000
Subject: Réponse automatique : A little Deja Vu for Joi Scientific,
the CBC, the RCMP, the CRA, KPMG, NB Power, Mikey Holland and his
political pals David Coon et al
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com

Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable Diane Lebouthillier, députée de
Gaspésie-Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine. Votre courriel sera lu avec soin et
recevra toute l'attention voulue.

Si votre courriel porte sur une demande ou un commentaire concernant
l'Agence du Revenu du Canada (ARC), sachez que votre correspondance a
été acheminée au cabinet de la ministre du Revenu national. Toute
l'attention nécessaire y sera accordée et le suivi approprié sera
effectué par son cabinet dans les meilleurs délais.

Si votre courriel porte sur une demande de rencontre ou une invitation
à une activité particulière, nous tenons à vous assurer que votre
demande a été notée et transmise à notre adjointe à l'agenda.

***************************

Thank you for writing to the Honourable Diane Lebouthillier, member of
parliament for Gaspésie-Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine. Your email will be
read with care and will receive every consideration.

If your email is about a concern or a comment related to the Canada
Revenue Agency (CRA), please note that your correspondence has been
forwarded to the Office of the Minister of National Revenue. Your
email is receiving necessary consideration and the appropriate
follow-up will be made by the Minister's Office as soon as possible.

If your email relates to a meeting request or an invitation to a
specific event, please be assured that your request has been noted and
sent to our scheduling assistant.

---------- Original message ----------
From: "MinFinance / FinanceMin (FIN)" <fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 13:56:51 +0000
Subject: RE: A little Deja Vu for Joi Scientific, the CBC, the RCMP,
the CRA, KPMG, NB Power, Mikey Holland and his political pals David
Coon et al
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments.

Le ministère des Finances accuse réception de votre correspondance
électronique. Soyez assuré(e) que nous apprécions recevoir vos
commentaires.

---------- Original message ----------
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 13:56:44 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: A little Deja Vu for Joi Scientific, the
CBC, the RCMP, the CRA, KPMG, NB Power, Mikey Holland and his
political pals David Coon et al
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.

You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.

There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.

Thanks again for your email.
______

Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.

Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.

Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.

Merci encore pour votre courriel.

---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 10:56:40 -0300
Subject: A little Deja Vu for Joi Scientific, the CBC, the RCMP, the CRA, KPMG,
NB Power, Mikey Holland and his political pals David Coon et al
To: vicky@joiscientific.com, wharrison@nbpower.com,
mike.holland@gnb.ca, David.Coon@gnb.ca, Traver@joiscientific.com,
Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca,
news@kingscorecord.com, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
steve.murphy@ctv.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com,
kris.austin@gnb.ca, brian.gallant@gnb.ca, blaine.higgs@gnb.ca,
pm@pm.gc.ca, rick.desaulniers@gnb.ca, michelle.conroy@gnb.ca,
megan.mitton@gnb.ca, kedgwickriver@gmail.com,
kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca, premier@gnb.ca,
Diane.Lebouthillier@cra-arc.gc.ca, Diane.Lebouthillier@parl.gc.ca,

bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca, Bill.Morneau@canada.ca,
Bill.Blair@cra-arc.gc.ca, Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca, kathleen.roussel@ppsc-sppc.gc.ca,
Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Kevin.Vickers@gnb.ca,
Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, premier@ontario.ca, PREMIER@gov.ns.ca,
Roger.Brown@fredericton.ca, martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca,
barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
gthomas@nbpower.com

http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/03/stop-nb-power-deal-with-mysterious.html

Friday, 1 March 2019

Stop NB Power deal with mysterious Florida startup, Green leader says

---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 13:11:05 -0400
Subject: Re Joi Scientific, David Coon and NB Power We just talked
Correct Ms Harris?
To: vicky@joiscientific.com, wharrison@nbpower.com,
mike.holland@gnb.ca, David.Coon@gnb.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com, Traver@joiscientific.com,
Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, David.Akin@globalnews.ca,
news@kingscorecord.com, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
steve.murphy@ctv.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com,
kris.austin@gnb.ca, brian.gallant@gnb.ca, blaine.higgs@gnb.ca,
pm@pm.gc.ca

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-florida-start-up-1.5037917

Stop NB Power deal with mysterious Florida startup, Green leader says

Clean-energy company says its 'major' technology has to stay secret for now
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Mar 01, 2019 6:00 AM AT

---------- Original message ----------
From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 17:11:12 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Re Joi Scientific, David Coon and NB Power
We just talked Correct Ms Harris?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>

Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.

If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
support, please contact our Customer Service department at
1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.com

If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
publiceditor@globeandmail.com<mailto:publiceditor@globeandmail.com>

Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com

This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
press releases.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/joi-scientific-technology-update-1.5340245

Joi Scientific technology NB Power poured millions into doesn't work

Test results for company with $13M NB Power partnership were
'disappointing,' CEO said
Karissa Donkin, Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Oct 31, 2019 6:00 AM AT

450 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.

David Raymond Amos
Here is a little Deja Vu for Higgy et al and NB Power's lawyers in particular

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-florida-start-up-1.5037917

Methinks it ain't Rocket Science to Google my name and Joi Scientific
in order to see the entire email and who else got it N'esy Pas?

1 Mar 2019 13:11:05 -0400
Subject: Re Joi Scientific, David Coon and NB Power We just talked
Correct Ms Harris?

David Raymond Amos
Methinks Minister Mikey Holland's ears are burning right now or my
name ain't "Just Dave" Anyone can Google "Harper and Bankers" if they
don't get my jokes about the circus in Fredericton and Ottawa N'esy
Pas?

Trevis L. Kingston
P.T. Barnum said it most clearly: " There's a sucker born every minute."
People who gamble away others money... are jailed.
Yet politicians always seem to hold a "Get out of jail... free" card.
Time to remove those cards from the deck...

David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Trevis L. Kingston: P. T. Barnum never said that Why would a
wise man insult his customers? Some say that he did say "People want
to see a circus so you give them a circus" Methinks Higgy and Holland
et all follow that reasoning as they continue to support NB Power
wanting to borrow a 100 million bucks for not so smart meters N'esy
Pas?

Johnny Horton
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
Clearly you Never shopped at Mazuccas eh?

David Raymond Amos
Surprise Surprise Surprise

Terry Tibbs
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
No surprise, other than NB Power CEO Gaëtan Thomas needing a new pair
of glasses (because he claims to have actually seen this working),
nothing new in NB, the rich get richer, and the poor just a little bit
poorer.

Terry Tibbs
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
What do you figure? Link this up with the Liberal government of the
time, mention again we are throwing a few million up north to improve
ports, and the stage is set for an election.

David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Terry Tibbs: Please enjoy a little Deja Vu

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-smart-meter-application-eub-1.5156867

David Peters
Full scale, public audit of NB Power.

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Reply to @David Peters: Need I say that I have been screaming that for
years because everybody knows that the KPMG audits of NB Power are Pure
D BS N'es Pas?

Anyone can read all the documents and the transcripts from the Public
records of the EUB

Here is a little of what was said during a PUBLIC Hearing eactly 2
years ago today

New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board
Commission de L'Energie et des Services Publics N.-B.

PARTICIPANTS - Matter 375

IN THE MATTER OF an application by New Brunswick Power Corporation for
approval of the schedules of the rates for the fiscal year commencing
April 1, 2018.

held at the Delta Hotel Saint John, New Brunswick, on October 31, 2017.

MS. DESMOND: Good morning, Mr. Chair. Ellen Desmond and from Board
Staff, John Lawton.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. Desmond. So today's pre-hearing conference
will deal with the normal issues that we deal with at pre-hearing
conferences, generally is the hearing schedule and process. But as
well we have requests for intervenor status from eight different
entities and we have an objection to one of those requests for
intervenor status and that is the status of Mr. Amos. So I think that
before we get into the schedule, I think it would be useful to go
through the requests for intervenor status. I am just going to wait
here a moment.

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Reply to @David Raymond Amos: Continued

All right, i guess the sound system has been fixed. So we are on the
request for intervenor status. The Public Intervenor of course is
deemed to be a party pursuant to Section 49.3 of the EUB Act. And then
we have requests for intervenor status from David Amos, Enbridge Gas
New Brunswick, Gerald Bourque, J.D. Irving, Limited, New Clear Free
Solutions, Roger Richard, Sussex Sharing Club and Utilities Municipal.
And as I had indicated, the Board received a written objection to the
intervention of Mr. Amos.
So, Mr. Furey, do you have any issue with any of the other registered
participants today?
MR. FUREY: No, we don't, Mr. Chair, and the only additional comment I
would make around that is that we recognize that not every proposed
intervenor has necessarily complied perfectly with the provisions of
Rule 3.2.4, but those that have not that we don't object to, we have a
general understanding already of the issues that they would bring to
the proceeding.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The Board has in fact reviewed the requests that
we have received for intervenor status. One of the -- one of the
issues that you raise with respect to Mr. Amos is that he has not
indicated in his form -- in his registration form the reason for his
intervention. And in reviewing them, I note that the only other form
where I see that is the form filled out by Mr. Bourque. So at this
stage I just want -- Mr. Bourque perhaps -- you know, you may not have
understood that on these intervenor requests that it's intended that
you would indicate why you want intervenor status, what issues you
would be raising at the hearing. Would you be able to provide that
information at this time? I appreciate it's not on your form.

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies

‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 48 others
Methinks nobody can deny that I told off the EUB and their many cohorts during the Public Session in Fat Fred City before the latest circus began N'esy Pas?

https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/05/joi-scientific-gamble-necessary-to-help.html

#cdnpoli #nbpoli

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-joi-scientific-risk-iron-plant-emissions-carbon-tax-1.5149763

Joi Scientific gamble necessary to help cap carbon tax bill: NB Power

107 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.

Al Clark
What comes out of the bull's anterior orifice.....

Marguerite Deschamps

Reply to @Al Clark: you!

Bernard McIntyre

Reply to @Al Clark: I guess some people can say what they want to while others can't . big brother is watching.

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Bernard McIntyre: True

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Methinks it must be a slow "news" day because Murphy said this nonsense last Tuesday N'esy Pas?

Bernard McIntyre

Reply to @David Amos: Well come to the circus. Prohibited for saying the same the same as other people and not as bad as others,

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Bernard McIntyre: "Well come to the circus"

I should welcome you to the circus as well. I suspect that you must be aware I was barred as an intervener again but I went anyway in order to assist my friend Roger Richard. Furthermore nobody can deny that I told off the EUB and their many cohorts during the the Public Session in Fat Fred City before the latest circus began Anyone can download the questionable transcripts from the public records of the EUB Methinks its a small wonder that we can't get the recordings of the hearings like CBC can N'esy Pas?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @David Amos: These documents can be sourced from the records of the 375 Matter Day 1 of the very long hearing was 02/07/2018

http://www.nbeub.ca/opt/M/browserecord.php?-action=browse&-recid=560

02/09/2018 Hearing - Day 3

Page 601

VICE-CHAIRMAN: I was a bit surprised when I heard this morning and
yesterday that you are entering into a contract at the end of February
and is that with respect to the purchase of the smart meters?

MS. CLARK: That's correct.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: So how can you enter into a contract without the
firm approval of this Board, if we are going to approve or not the
AMI? How prudent is that?

MS. CLARK: So we are at the end stages of the contract in terms of
just the final terms and conditions, but we have been very clear that
we -- with the vendor -- and they recognize that, because we also have
Nova Scotia Power, who is part of our consortium, who also needs Board
approval. So should we not get -- this is conditional on EUB
approval. So should we not get EUB approval, the contract would not
proceed.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now there was discussion yesterday, I think it was
with Mr. Stoll regarding time of use and time based pricing, and so I
went through the evidence this morning, and in your main evidence, and
I think one of the objective of having the AMI going forward to a time
of use price structure -- rate structure. So am I understanding that
correctly?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @David Amos:

MS. CLARK: That is correct. And in the evidence, we did answer an
interrogatory on that and you will see that AMI is an enabler for time
varying rates in the Energy Smart NB Plan. And we did have time
varying rates included in our investment rationale. We took it out,
because we couldn't -- we couldn't pinpoint without more detail as to
what those time varying rates may be and the benefit of those, so we
took them out of the investment rationale at this point in time, but
certainly it's something that we are looking at in the future.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: So the fundamental question here is that the Board
should heard -- or hear Matter 357 before approving the AMI? So if we
don't approve time of use, that basically what will happen with your
AMI, I mean it's -- if we don't approve the time of use, which we are
going to hear next year, how can we proceed in approving the AMI
before we look at the rate structure?

MS. CLARK: As we have talked about in our investment rationale,
there are a number of other benefits to both the customer and to the
utility over and above time varying rates that we believe are
important for the utility and for the movement forward of our Energy
Smart New Brunswick plan. Many of those benefits accrue to the
customer. And many of those benefits accrue to the utility and
ultimately the customer. So even if we were not to move in the
direction of time varying rates, we believe that the investment
rationale supports the AMI installation based on the other investment
-- or based on the other benefits that it provides.

Shawn McShane

Reply to @David Amos: There will be no benefit to the customer just as there is no benefit to the customer with NB Power CEO giving $13 million to his company in Florida.

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Shawn McShane: Methinks 122 million for smart meters is not chump change Furthermore nobody has seen the contract with Shediac yet N'esy Pas?

Joseph Vacher
This is such a joke - admit you made a terrible mistake, and move on

Shawn McShane

Reply to @Marguerite Deschamps: You pay NB Power bill too.

Marguerite Deschamps

Reply to @Shawn McShane: how do you know? I could be off the grid.

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled

Reply to @Marguerite Deschamps: Methinks you are definitely off your rocker N'esy Pas?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Marguerite Deschamps: Why else would your comment go "Poof" before I could enjoy reading it?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @David Amos: Too Too Funny My reply is now gone even after I got several likes

Paul Bourgoin
New Brunswick, when it comes to marketing the sale of our NB energy, the electricity should be non-negotiable for everybody so industry pays the same as other industries and home owners the same thing bringing an end to Political behind closed doors sweetheart deals. NB Power CEO and the board cannot secretly lower the established NB Power electricity prices.

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Paul Bourgoin: Methinks you missed the boat about the increases in the various rates for this year because the last day of the public hearing is tomorrow However you should pay close attention to the 357 Matter that many lawyers agree will be ongoing within the EUB for years N'esy Pas?

Shawn McShane
"Green technology" as in how green is your money when converted to United States Dollars at Gaëtan Thomas company in Florida...

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Shawn McShane: Methinks you should not forget the mininukes N'esy Pas?

Roy Nichol
There's a new angle on greenwashing. We've done something imprudent, let's say we had to take the risk in the name of clean energy and climate change ... just do not mention there are plenty of proved clean energy sources that could be deployed with certainty that would actually produce energy today.

Mark (Junkman) George

Reply to @Roy Nicholl:

I am simply in awe. I would like to know how it feels to gamble $13 million? Has to be a bit of a "rush", doesn't it Gaëtan ?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Mark (Junkman) George: Methinks the "rush" is over and Gaëtan is regretting it bigtime about now N'esy Pas?

Greg Miller
With degrees in science I have trouble buying this "new technology" although the process has been investigated for decades. I wish them every success; however, don't be fooled -- if this process is implemented successfully don't think for a moment that your electric bills will go down!

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Greg Miller: "if this process is implemented successfully don't think for a moment that your electric bills will go down"

I Wholeheartedly Agree Sir

Matthew Smith
good enough for me; I'll just go out and buy lottery tickets with the money for next month's power bill ...

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Matthew Smith: I had to prepay an estimated NB Power Bill for a couple months before they would take a chance with me and hook me up. Methinks its a rather huge insult that NB Power will gamble with our assets with Yankees while not trusting its own stakeholders N'esy Pas?

Mario Doucet
Quebec pays no carbon taxes.

John Pokiok

Reply to @Mario Doucet: that's because all of their power is produced by damming rivers and using water to produce power that's green renewable energy. They don't use coal oil or nuclear like NB.

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Reply to @John Pokiok: True

John Pokiok
I wish they used $13 million and fix the musquavash power dam and put it back online that is clean hydro energy it would be lot better spent money than this.

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @John Pokiok: Me Too

Anne Bérubé
Paying carton tax on a fuel fill-up is going to have precisely no effect on emissions. Why on earth people still thinking it makes a difference? Gee, are you still going to work, grocery stores, malls, etc? Wake up people, there are other ways than giving your money to Justin Trudeau at the Gofundmycarbontax.ca!!!

Marc Martin
Reply to @Anne Bérubé: Andrew Sheer said he would remove the tax but put in on industries which will increase anything anyways.

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Reply to @Marc Martin: Cry me another river

Al Clark
I remember this argument happening once before when GNB was dumping money into a clearly failed company to the tune of 80 million. A five year old could see what was going to result. Oh don't worry, it's just a LOAN many said. Then, the ultra predictable happened. The money mysteriously disappeared. Now , many years later, the star of the show is sitting at his old desk like a quarter billion didn't happen. Great work if you can get it. Hoot and holler all you want, it's a done deal. Deja vu.

Shawn McShane
Reply to @Al Clark: Welcome to the circus.

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @Shawn McShane: Methinks you finally understand why I have been saying that for so long N'esy Pas?

Daryl Doucette
" It would be costlier to do nothing". Could some one please explain how losing $ 13,000,000 is " costlier" than not losing $ 13,000,000 ?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @daryl doucette: Methinks the NB Power CFO Darren Murphy does not know how to give a straight answer and keep his job N'esy Pas?

David White

Anyone remember Theranos?

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @David White: Better yet does anyone remember my comments before the last election?

Here is one example about the iron plant mentioned in this article

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/maritime-iron-belledune-plant-gallant-1.4721336

David Raymond Amos

Content disabled
Reply to @David Amos: "Maritime Iron CEO Greg McKenzie could not be reached for comment Friday."

However he bragged of this not long ago

"Maritime Iron Enters into LOI with Mi’gmaq Communities and MTI

Toronto, Ontario (April 25, 2019) – Maritime Iron Inc. (“Maritime Iron” or the “Company”) a privately-owned Canadian development company advancing a merchant pig iron production facility in New Brunswick, Canada, is pleased to announce that it has entered into a Letter of Intent with the Mi’gmaq communities of Oinpegitjoig (Pabineau First Nation), Ugpi’ganjig (Eel River Bar) (the “First Nation Communities”) and Mi’gmawe’l Tplu’taqnn Inc (“MTI”).

The purpose of the Letter of Intent is to assist in the development of a framework for several agreements and understandings to be undertaken between the parties.

“Maritime Iron has continued to build a strong relationship with MTI and the Chief’s and Staff of the First Nation Communities. We have held numerous meetings over the past two years which has led us to this point.” said Greg McKenzie, Chairman and CEO of Maritime Iron. “Maritime Iron will continue to approach consultation with an open mind and conduct our business with integrity while dealing in good faith with First Nations. Maritime Iron’s approach to consultation is undertaken in a spirit of mutual respect and trust.”

The parties have agreed that the ‘Relationship, Engagement and Consultation Protocol’ signed by the Belledune Port Authority, First Nation Communities, and MTI on May 31, 2018 will guide and direct the activities of the parties. The Belledune Port Authority has delegated their authority under the protocol agreement to Maritime Iron."

Joi Scientific gamble necessary to help cap carbon tax bill: NB Power

Utility's clean-energy venture seemingly at odds with proposed iron-ore plant

Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: May 27, 2019 6:00 AM AT

NB Power paid $13 million to Florida-based Joi Scientific for the licensing fee for unproven clean-energy technology. (Michael Heenan/CBC)

NB Power has told the province's energy regulator that the utility's exposure to carbon pricing forces it to explore new technologies that carry financial risk, including an unproven process to convert seawater into hydrogen energy.

Utility officials told the Energy and Utilities Board that while it's possible NB Power will lose money in its partnership with Joi Scientific, it would be even costlier to do nothing.

But they were not able to answer questions about the financial health of the Florida start-up, which has received $13 million from NB Power.

"It is very early stages," chief financial officer Darren Murphy said during questioning by an EUB lawyer at a hearing last week. "I can't speak directly to that particular company."

Science behind NB Power's hydrogen venture too good to be true, critic says

CBC Investigates
NB Power CEO confident Joi Scientific investigations 'will go away'

Murphy described the $13-million payment to Joi — a licensing fee for what the company says is its zero-carbon-emissions technology — as "a small amount" that may help NB Power avoid a much larger carbon tax bill.

"We have got some significant challenges, one of those challenges being carbon and what is the implication to that," Murphy said, pegging the utility's future carbon price bill as $80-90 million per year if it doesn't cut emissions.

"We need to explore every opportunity to mitigate and minimize this carbon impact on the ratepayers of New Brunswick.

NB Power CFO Darren Murphy said the agreement with Joi was partly to mitigate the effect of carbon pricing on ratepayers. (Robert Jones/CBC)

But Murphy couldn't say whether Joi, which claims to have discovered a new method to extract energy from seawater, is financially viable.

Nor was Murphy able to say what kind of increase in greenhouse gas emissions would come from another initiative: a proposed iron-ore processing plant linked to the Belledune generating station.

"I know that there is some ongoing dialogue to try to appreciate the implications of a facility like that," Murphy said.

Maritime Iron Inc., has acknowledged that its plant would lead to more carbon dioxide emissions in the province.

Proposed Belledune iron ore project already a recipient of taxpayer help

That leaves NB Power in the position of pursuing one partnership that may increase emissions — while justifying another by pointing to the need to reduce them.

NB Power must find a new fuel source for its coal-powered Belledune generating station by 2030, when a federal coal phaseout takes effect. That forces it to look at new technologies, Murphy said.

Joi Scientific has kept its potentially groundbreaking but unproven technology a secret.

NB Power's $13-million licensing fee to Joi Scientific will give it exclusive rights to first use of the unproven technology, which the company has so far refused to describe publicly or submit for peer-reviewed studies.

The plan is to use the technology to partly power Belledune or a network of smaller generators.
If it works, NB Power can sell the rights to other power utilities and keep a share of the profits. Some energy experts and scientists say Joi's claims are too good to be true.

Recognizing the risk

Half of the $13-million licensing fee came from taxpayers through the province's Regional Development Corporation and half came from NB Power's own research and development budget.

Murphy said the utility recognizes that such spending "will not always turn out with a positive outcome and there will be some need to invest some amount of money that ultimately may not pan out."

He said that's why NB Power uses what it calls a "gating process" to "put boundaries around how much should you put at risk before deciding that this is not a venture that is going to play out."

NB Power CEO Gaëtan Thomas was given a seat on Joi's board of directors. (Jon Collicott/CBC)

NB Power CEO Gaëtan Thomas was given a seat on the Joi board of directors "so we could have greater insights as to the organization's operations, its viability, all those kinds of things," Murphy told the EUB.

Even so, he said he was not able to "speak directly" to Joi's financial health.

Hold judgment, asks Joi CEO

In a recent interview with CBC News, Joi CEO Traver Kennedy pointed to what he said was his long career in the software and clean-energy sector.

"I think that while there's often suspicion of corporations and corporate greed and corporate activity, the fact is, I think the track record of my career should speak somewhat to wanting to do good in the world and wanting to create value for people," he said.

"So in that sense, I would ask that people hold their judgment of me until we have gotten this to market."

Energy Minister Mike Holland said on a recent CBC New New Brunswick Political Panel podcast that he hopes the Joi project bears fruit, but he wants to "get to the bottom of" how the deal will work.

PODCAST
'This reeks': MLAs want accountability on NB Power's hydrogen venture

At last week's hearing, EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond asked Murphy why NB Power didn't leave the development of new technologies to private-sector investors, rather than putting ratepayers' money at risk.

"It would be nice if we could leave it to others to come up with solutions," Murphy answered. "The others don't have the risk NB Power has."

He said the utility "can't get out from under" that risk.

EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond questioned why NB Power didn't leave the development of new technologies to private-sector investors. (CBC)

When Desmond suggested that Nova Scotia Power is facing "similar risks," Murphy noted that province signed an offset agreement with the federal government that avoided the imposition of the federal carbon tax.

Rather than negotiate such a deal, the previous Liberal government of New Brunswick decided to adopt the federal carbon-pricing plan for industry.

The new Progressive Conservative government is now developing an alternative plan, but until Ottawa approves it, "we continue to carry that risk and need to be at least working away at trying to mitigate it," Murphy said.

Impact of iron plant unclear

The Maritime Iron plant was announced by then-premier Brian Gallant in June 2018, just weeks before the start of the provincial election campaign.

CBC News later revealed that Gallant's government had started shelling out $625,000 in taxpayer money in 2015-16 for "pre-feasibility studies" for the plant. The company received another $91,699 from the province in 2017-18.

Former premier Brian Gallant said in June 2018 the $1-billion plant in Belledune would create 1,000 short-term jobs and more than 200 permanent jobs. (Serge Bouchard/CBC)

Gallant and the company said at the time that while the iron plant would generate new emissions, using some of its gas byproduct at NB Power's Belledune plan would reduce its coal use and emissions.

But Murphy was unable to tell the EUB what the net emissions impacts would be. "Personally, I don't know what those are," he said.

He said ultimately Maritime Iron, not NB Power, "has a big responsibility to research and understand how their facility will be treated from an emissions perspective."

As opposition leader, Premier Blaine Higgs pointed to the Liberal subsidies for Maritime Iron to rebut Gallant's criticism that the PCs lacked a plan on emissions.

"I wouldn't be putting government money into one of the largest emitting plants possible," he said.

Last summer, the company said there would be more details of its emissions impact when it filed its environment impact assessment application. As of Friday, it has not registered for an assessment.

Maritime Iron CEO Greg McKenzie could not be reached for comment Friday.

About the Author

Jacques Poitras

Provincial Affairs reporter

Jacques Poitras has been CBC's provincial affairs reporter in New Brunswick since 2000. Raised in Moncton, he also produces the CBC political podcast Spin Reduxit.

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices

David Raymond Amos Round 3

Monday 27 May 2019

Joi Scientific gamble necessary to help cap carbon tax bill: NB Power

NB Power defends Joi Scientific licence in face of scrutiny from MLAs

Utility CEO Gaëtan Thomas says technology still has ‘potential,’ but will decide its future in months ahead

Chair says technology will take time

Some assumptions made

Joi Scientific gamble necessary to help cap carbon tax bill: NB Power

Joi Scientific gamble necessary to help cap carbon tax bill: NB Power

Utility's clean-energy venture seemingly at odds with proposed iron-ore plant

Recognizing the risk

Hold judgment, asks Joi CEO

Impact of iron plant unclear

About the Author

No comments:

Post a Comment