March 10, 2010
February 25, 2010
“Ontario will have the highest electricity rates in North America”
Parker Gallant is quite disturbed by the most recent annual report from Hydro One, Ontario’s government-owned electrical transmission corporation:
No major media reported on Hydro One’s annual statement to “investors,” as the company puts it, even though the report is a dog’s breakfast of warning signs and bizarre trends that spell trouble.
[. . .]
As debt rises, Hydro One’s debt-to-equity ratio weakened from 1.71:1 to 1.91:1. It borrows money to pay for capital costs surrounding the province’s Green Energy Act and puts the company at risk of a debt ratings downgrade, which will drive borrowing costs up.
Return on equity is down to 8.7% from 9.7% in 2008, indicating an overall decline in the value of the company. Return on assets fell to 3% from 3.5%. As a result, the dividend payment to the province was $188-million, down 27.4%. But the CEO says the company is “on target.”
Even though revenues and costs are rising, and profit falling, Hydro One handles less electricity — 139.2 terawatts, a decline of 6.4%. The cost of distribution per terawatt was up by 14.9%. Operations and maintenance costs keep rising as power transmitted declines. The number of employees rose 7.7%. Since 2002, when the company had 3,933 employees to distribute 153.2 terawatts, total employment has jumped 38% to 4,400 to distribute 9% less power. Are these additional 1500 staff working in the field or at head office working on rate increase applications?
December 10, 2009
On a cosmic scale, this is still a bad idea
In the last Ontario Wine Review for 2009, Michael has a short rant on a rant-worthy topic:
South Africa has tar; Chile has mint; Australia, eucalyptus; Ontario: baby-poo . . . It’s quite possible that next time you wander into an Ontario winery you may be confronted by a ‘child-friendly-winery’ thanks to a website called JustTheFactsBaby.com. Now who really thinks having toddlers (or infants) along in a winery is a good idea? Honestly? There are so many reasons why not that I’m surprised that somebody has actually deemed this to be a good idea. For Godsakes, where’s MADD when you need them? I don’t have time to argue this one out again, especially in this short-rant forum, so I’ll begin here with my top three reasons and then you can input your views to me in an email. #1 — With all the talk about, and new laws against, drinking and driving and the safety of people and children on the road (heck you can’t smoke in a car with your child), I’m shocked somebody would offer up this idea that mom should get out there and sample wine with junior in tow (Is this the newest version of the Rolling Stones “Mother’s Little Helper”?) #2 — Who amongst us really wants to see toddlers running around playing tag in and amongst the bottles of wine and stemware displays; can you say ‘disaster waiting to happen’. #3 — With the whole world turning politically correct and wanting to include more people in more places, wineries should still be a sanctuary for adults. There are so many kid-centric and family oriented things to do in this world, shouldn’t a winery be a bastion where adults can congregate and still talk about adult things without hearing, “I’m sorry, did junior bump into you, I’m sure that won’t stain, at home we use …”
November 13, 2009
Virginia to privatize their state-run liquor stores?
Katherine Mangu-Ward on the prospect of Virginia selling off their state-owned liquor stores:
Virginia is one of 18 states where the government is the monopoly rumrunner. Supermarkets, gourmet shops, and corner stores are all forbidden to sell liquor. But Bob McDonnell, the newly-elected Republican governor, has promised to end the monopoly on liquor sales in the Old Dominion.
This bold gesture isn’t because McDonnell is an especially thoroughgoing libertarian; there are plenty of other areas where he’d like to see more state involvement in the private lives of citizens, not less. This isn’t a 12-step program to help the commonwealth go cold turkey on alcohol money either. McDonnell has no intention of letting Virginia’s bottle-based income fall below its current levels of more than $100 million a year. In fact, part of the reason McDonnell is considering privatization at all is that he is looking for cash to spend on transportation infrastructure. He predicts that selling off the state’s 334 liquor stores to private players and gathering licensing fees from more private sellers will bring in $500 million in the short run, while leaving long-run income intact. (The Washington Post remains unconvinced, noting that McDonnell’s figures may be too optimistic.)
But no matter what the political and budgetary machinations, Virginians are unlikely to wind up paying more for their rotgut, and they are very likely to wind up with a better selection and a relatively skeeze-free shopping experience. Commonwealth officials can focus on governing a large landmass without having to fuss with the details of running a liquor empire. And the move may even represent a net gain for the state budget in the future when the state sheds responsibility for ABC employee benefits and pensions, and starts bringing in real estate and other tax revenue from the privatized stores.
I’ve written about Ontario’s LCBO and the (dim) hopes of privatization at the old blog. In 2004, there was a brief flurry of discussion on privatizing the LCBO:
For those of you who don’t live in Ontario, the LCBO is the government-run monopoly provider of almost all alcoholic beverages except beer and wine, which are sold through the Brewers Retail, now operating under the name “The Beer Store” and through individual winery-owned wine stores, respectively. Both the LCBO and the Brewers Retail were set up after the repeal of prohibition in Ontario to control the sale and distribution of alcohol in the province. The LCBO is government-owned, while the Brewers Retail is owned by the major breweries (Labatt, Molson, & Sleeman).
A few elections ago, the Ontario government under Premier Mike Harris started talking about getting the government out of the liquor business. The LCBO, which up until that point had operated like a sluggish version of the Post Office, suddenly had plenty of incentive to try appealing to their customers. Until the threat of privatization, the LCBO was notorious for poor service, lousy retail practices, and surly staff. Until the 1980’s, many LCBO outlets were run exactly like a warehouse: you didn’t actually get to see what was for sale, you only had a grubby list of current stock from which to write down your selections on pick tickets, which were then (eventually) filled by the staff.
If the intent was to make buying a bottle of wine feel grubby, seamy, and uncomfortable, they were masters of the craft. No shopper freshly arrived from behind the Iron Curtain would fail to recognize the atmosphere in an old LCBO outlet.
During the 1980’s, most LCBO stores finally became self-service, which required some attempt by the staff to stock shelves, mop the floors, and generally behave a bit more like a normal retail operation. It took quite some time for the atmosphere to become any more congenial or welcoming, as the staff were all unionized and most had worked there for years under the old regime — you might almost say that they had to die off and be replaced by younger employees who didn’t remember the “good old days”.
To return to the early 1990’s, the LCBO had gone through massive changes (from their own point of view), but were still far behind the times. The threat of being sold to the private sector seems to have operated as a massive injection of adrenalin to the corporate heart: the LCBO suddenly became serious about serving the customer, expanding their services, making themselves more customer-friendly and providing their staff with proper training.
In the end, the Tory government decided that they preferred the direct stream of profits from the LCBO monopoly and backed away from their privatization plans. To my amazement (and probably that of most impartial observers), the LCBO did not immediately fall back into their bad old habits: they continued the modernization that had already taken them so far from their roots.
Today, the LCBO is almost unrecognizable as the Stalinist bureaucracy of the 1960s and 70s. Their staff are generally friendly, helpful, and (mirabile dictu) know far more about their products than ever before.
All that being said, I still am happy to hear that the current government is talking about privatization again. The LCBO is better than it used to be, and continues to improve, but they are still a monopoly provider with little real competition. I don’t pretend that a badly run sale might well end up (in the short-to-medium term) reducing the variety of alcoholic products for sale in Ontario, but having competing retailing channels would (in the long term) produce a healthier market with the competitors striving to attract more customers by better service, wider selection or even (dare we say it) lower prices.
Of course, 2005 came and went, with no movement in the direction of privatization, and it won’t happen under the current provincial government. The revenue stream is still too good for the province to give up.
November 12, 2009
Hoping for a rational decision from the Wine Council of Ontario
Michael Pinkus thinks there’s going to be a good chance that the bait-and-switch mechanism known as “Cellared in Canada” wine will be forced to adopt accurate labelling:
There’s a new chair over at the Wine Council, and while I don’t want to pat him on the back quite yet, or give him all the credit, he is making some sense. Why should the Wine Council of ONTARIO be lobbying for wines that aren’t 100% Ontario product? The answer is as plain and simple as you believe it is: they shouldn’t; and that’s why it’s nice to see the Wine Council finally putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with the right number (for those on the wine council reading this, and still not getting it, the right number is 4; as in the Wine Council should stand 4 Ontario wines only). Now this is only a “proposal” and one that will be voted on November 17 (which, if approved, does not take effect until April 1, 2010). I strongly urge the Wine Council of Ontario to adopt this proposal, and let the makers of Cellared product fight their own battles, instead of lumping their interests in with the other 70+ wineries you represent who can’t make ANY Cellared product. For the record, the only 7 wineries (by my count) making CiC wines are Jackson-Triggs, Peller, Pillitteri, Colio, Pelee Island, Kittling Ridge and Magnotta, and if they were smart they’d take a page out of the Gabe Magnotta book of labeling. You might have noticed that Magnotta has faired pretty well through this whole Cellared in Canada issue, in fact they’ve come out unscathed in this whole mess. That’s because they have their labeling done right. Need a refresher on their labels? Visit a Magnotta retail outlet near you. Those big bold letters that spell out other countries tells the consumer exactly where the grapes/wines comes from — so simple it’s ingenious, and honest.
Might I also offer the Wine Council another little piece of advice: the idea floated recently about including fruit wineries and those that make 100% Ontario wine, but not necessarily VQA wines, is also a good one. You are the Wine Council of ONTARIO, you should speak for all the wineries of Ontario. Speaking as one voice is much better and more productive than the cacophony of many and maybe, just maybe, more can be accomplished and achieved as an all encompassing unit. The right track for Ontario’s wineries starts on November 17 . . . will the Wine Council finally take on the role of an Ontario wine group — we’ll have to wait and see, I for one remain hopeful.
November 5, 2009
Background on those “Cellared in Canada” wines
In his November Frugal Oenophile newsletter, Richard Best looks at the evolution of that blight on the Ontario wine industry, the “Cellared in Canada” designation:
For some time (since 1973 in fact), Ontario wineries have been allowed to import juice or wine from other countries and then bottle it as their own. Bottles containing mostly foreign wine were originally labeled Product of Canada. Then in 1993 Product of Canada was replaced by Cellared in Canada (CIC). So, what you’ve been reading and hearing about lately is that people don’t get it, and that in an effort to support the local wine industry, they’ve been buying CIC wines and unknowingly underwriting wine factories in California, Chile and elsewhere.
Why Did This Come About
In the beginning, Niagara had thousands of hectares of north American Labrusca grapes the likes of Concord and Niagara and even one called President (“President Champagne” anyone?) When better grapes came along, the Ontario government encouraged growers to grub up their Labrusca vines and replant with French-American hybrids, mostly Vidal, Seyval Blanc, Marechal Foch, and Baco Noir. Then in 1989 the government launched another grubbing up program when some die-hard wineries started planting European Vinifera grapes: Chardonnay, the Cabernets, and especially Riesling. (It’s interesting to note that government experts insisted for decades that Vinifera vines could never succeed in Ontario.)
So, what do you do when you’ve ripped out your vineyard and now must wait 3-5 years to harvest grapes? The simplest solution is to allow wineries to import even more wine with which to “extend” their remaining harvest. Now, the original plan was to phase out the imported wine, with a “sunset” in the year 2000. But by then a few large wineries had shifted their business plan from Canadian fine wine to cheap and cheerful jug wines (but without the jug, at least). It’s pretty hard to change a law that has allowed a few companies to grow rich and dominate the market, so the plan was carved in stone . . . soapstone, as it turns out.
In 1993, when Canada signed the Free Trade Agreement, Ontario put a cap on the entire wine business. Only wineries establish before NAFTA would be allowed to import wine for blending. Moreover, only these wineries could own multiple site licenses. So we now have a two-tiered system: wineries that can do pretty much what they want, and those that can do little more than pay the bills.
It’s hard to pretend that it’s a level playing field for the domestic wine producers when there clearly are two distinct classes enshrined in law.
To subscribe to Richard’s newsletter, send him an email at frugalwine@sympatico.ca with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject line.
October 30, 2009
“Then we seize Canadian power plants near Niagara Falls, so they freeze in the dark”
OMG! US invasion plans target Halifax, Montreal, Winnipeg . . . and Sudbury?
The United States government does have a plan to invade Canada. It’s a 94-page document called “Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan — Red,” with the word SECRET stamped on the cover. It’s a bold plan, a bodacious plan, a step-by-step plan to invade, seize and annex our neighbor to the north. It goes like this:
First, we send a joint Army-Navy overseas force to capture the port city of Halifax, cutting the Canadians off from their British allies.
Then we seize Canadian power plants near Niagara Falls, so they freeze in the dark.
Then the U.S. Army invades on three fronts — marching from Vermont to take Montreal and Quebec, charging out of North Dakota to grab the railroad center at Winnipeg, and storming out of the Midwest to capture the strategic nickel mines of Ontario.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy seizes the Great Lakes and blockades Canada’s Atlantic and Pacific ports.
At that point, it’s only a matter of time before we bring these Molson-swigging, maple-mongering Zamboni drivers to their knees! Or, as the official planners wrote, stating their objective in bold capital letters: “ULTIMATELY TO GAIN COMPLETE CONTROL.”
Old news indeed, but still of historical interest. The plans in the other direction were held in Defence Scheme No. 1:
Lt. Colonel Brown himself did reconnaissance for the plan, along with other lieutenant-colonels, all in plainclothes. These missions took place from 1921 and 1926. As historian Pierre Berton noted in his book Marching as to War, these investigations had “a zany flavour about it, reminiscent of the silent comedies of the day.” To illustrate this, Berton quoted from Brown’s reports, in which Brown recorded, among other things, that in Burlington, Vermont the people were “affable” and thus unusual for Americans; that Americans drink significantly less alcohol than Canadians (this was during Prohibition), and that upon pointing out that to Americans, one responded “My God! I’d go for a glass of beer. I’m going to ‘Canady’ to get some more”; that the people of Vermont would only be serious soldiers “if aroused”; and that many Americans might be sympathetic with the British cause.
October 17, 2009
Niagara’s wines
Richard Best was at the last Cuvée event and had these observations (in his Frugal Oenophile Wine Newsletter) about the current and potential values coming from Ontario’s wineries in the Niagara peninsula:
Niagara has the perfect terroir for Gamay, and yet only one Gamay appeared at this tasting. Every Gamay I’ve had from Niagara has easily bettered its counterparts from Beaujolais, and at a much better price. Attention grape growers: Please plant more Gamay.
Despite the hype and rumours, Niagara is still a bit of a way from consistently producing world-class Pinot Noir. There are occasional stellar wines, but too often I find Ontario Pinot underpowered, almost skeletal, and disappointingly tasteless.
Cabernet is still hit-and-miss. Our climate may be too cold, and the growing season is definitely too short to always ripen this demanding grape. It can be done, but ripe Cab in Niagara is the exception, not the rule.
An interesting marker for Niagara Chardonnay is “skunk”. Like cat’s pee in Sauv Blanc, coal oil in Riesling and barnyard in Pinot, a bit of skunk in a high quality Chard is quite appealing.
Speaking of Chard, Niagara is a great Chardonnay region. Not good; not very good; GREAT. Our winemakers routinely turn out Chardonnay that rivals the best in the world, and they do it year after year.
I certainly agree with Richard on the Gamay: I’ve never had a Beaujolais that was better than Chateau des Charmes’ Gamay Droit (in any vintage). He’s also spot-on with the Pinot observations, as there have been some amazing Pinot Noir values, but it’s still not consistently great . . . Flat Rock and Cave Springs seem to be able to produce the most consistent quality at the moment.
Ontario Cabernet Franc, with the slightly earlier harvest time, is more likely to be fully ripe than the Cabernet Sauvignon, especially in a year like this, with only a brief hot spell at the end of the growing season. With Cabernet blends and Meritages, you do tend to get what you pay for, at least in the $15-$30 range . . . there’s not much available under that price that’s worth the money. Kacaba, Strewn, and Daniel Lenko have some excellent wine (although Lenko tends to be at the higher end of the price scale).
Even though it’s out of style, I still love well-oaked Chardonnay. There’s something magical about what oak does to good quality Chardonnay grapes. I’m not fond of unoaked Chardonnay, but put that same grape juice into oak barrels and I’m interested. Most of the wineries in Niagara and on the Beamsville Bench can produce excellent Chardonnay pretty much every year. You can’t go too far wrong . . . and perhaps because it’s common, the wineries don’t mark up the price as much as they sometimes do with their Cabernet-based wines.
To subscribe to Richard’s newsletter, send an email to “newsletter@frugal-wine.com” with the word “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line.
October 8, 2009
QotD: Toronto as the centre of the universe
In the words of former Ontario Premier David Peterson, who hailed from London, Canadian unity work this way:
The thing that keeps this great country together is that everyone hates Ontario; and the thing that keeps Ontario together is that everyone hates Toronto; and the thing that keeps Toronto together is that everyone hates Bay Street.
Toronto hating is an established Canadian tradition. Even back in the day when Montreal was Canada’s commercial capital, it could never prudence Hogtown level bile. Montrealers were just too much fun. That unique Toronto combination of smugness and earnestness — we’re better than you, just watch us be better than you — only exacerbated the envy of Toronto’s astonishing economic pre-eminence. If you can’t see the CN Tower on a good day, well buddy, you’re nowhere that matters.
Publius, “Love Thy Torontonian As Thy Self”, Gods of the Copybook Headings, 2009-10-07
August 21, 2009
Stratford: Canada’s gayest town?
It’s definitely the slow news season: the Ottawa Sun summarizes an article in Outlooks magazine entitled “The Gayest Small Town in Canada”:
Travel editor Randall Shirley came to see a show or two and met with some of Stratford’s prominent gay and lesbian residents and business owners, some of whom were featured in the article.
The piece — “The Gayest Small Town in Canada” — appears in the July/August edition in print and online. The national magazine is geared toward the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered (GLBT) population.
Shirley wasn’t surprised to find a relatively large gay and lesbian community in the southwestern Ontario city of 30,000, but what did surprise him was the openness he found there.
“Growing up in a small town myself, I know how difficult it could be. I was just really surprised at how open they are about it,” he said from his Vancouver home.
He noted the artistic community connected to the theatre is a draw for GBLT visitors but Stratford is unique because it’s in the middle of a rural area.
Okay, perhaps Ottawa is far enough removed from Stratford that this might come as a surprise to Sun readers, but really? Stratford has two industries: pig farming and the Festival. Historically, the theatre has been one of the few areas where being gay was not an automatic career-destroyer. Stratford’s theatre industry is huge for the town … it literally put the place on the map. Put these facts together, and you’re surprised that the town is gay friendly (or, at the very least, nowhere near as gay-hostile as a typical small town in a rural area)?
July 22, 2009
Lottery winner receives extra prize
A recent lottery winner in Ontario got an extra on top of the multi-million dollar cheque: a free arrest:
Some guys have all the luck.
That’s what Barry Shell of Brampton likely thought Monday when he went to pick up his nearly $4.4 million jackpot at Ontario Lottery and Gaming headquarters on Dundas St. W.
But after a smiling Shell, 45, had posed for an OLG photo holding his cheque for $4,377,298, he was arrested outside the building on outstanding criminal charges and taken into police custody.
The most interesting part, however, was this statement from the lottery officials:
Asked how a lottery win could result in the discovery of outstanding warrants, Rui Brum from OLG said last night: “A rigorous investigation process is followed any time a prize is claimed.
“Any flags that are raised are immediately forwarded to the OPP Bureau attached to the AGCO (the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario) for further investigation.”
H/T to Jon, who said “come to attention in the media or in some other way, and the state starts looking into you.”
July 10, 2009
Sunken 1812 vessel may be HMS Wolfe
An interesting article in the Ottawa Citizen about a recently discovered wreck near Kingston, which may be the remains of HMS Wolfe:
A team of divers is set to plunge into Lake Ontario near Kingston, Ont., next week in a bid to confirm the discovery of a legendary Canadian-built ship from the War of 1812, the HMS Wolfe.
In collaboration with marine archeologists from Parks Canada, the divers plan to take detailed measurements, drawings and photographs of a sunken wooden sailing vessel that appears to match the size and last known location of the famous 32-metre sloop: the flagship of British naval commander James Yeo and star of a dramatic 1813 battle west of Toronto that helped thwart the U.S. invasion of Canada.
The suspected discovery comes just three years before the 200th anniversary of the war, adding urgency to the efforts to identify a possible new showcase relic for bi-national commemoration activities.
(Cross-posted to the old blog: http://bolditalic.com/quotulatiousness_archive/005570.html.)