www.nationnews.com Thursday 23, January-2003 by PETER MORGAN

When canvassing house-to-house one occasionally meets a citizen who declares forthrightly: “I en votin’.” He asserts that all political parties are the same and goes onto express some very uncomplimentary remarks about politicians in general.

Well, that’s the price of free speech! In general terms there can be no argument – all the candidates are men and women of good intent offering services to their fellow citizens even though, being human, some live up to their promises and some don’t. Where the comparison is not so true is in the comparative policies and programmes offered by each party most of which, unfortunately, have to wait for the publication of manifestoes which are usually held back until a couple of weeks before polling for fear of back-raising – the present Government has been very adept at pinching some of the progressive ideas of the NDP, for example: Team For The Times was Richie’s slogan!

But there are some very apparent differences in policy which don’t have to be held back. One is in tourism. The reasons for opposition to present ineffective policies are legion and have been aired but more instances keep popping up.

The Prime Minister and Minister of Finance is adamant about continuing the GEMS project and quite determined to throw good money after bad. He was recently quoted in the Press as declaring:”We cannot afford to have lands at Dover, Eastry House, Needham’s Point and Paradise Beach idle.”

That is a contention with which we all agree – the difference is whether those developments are going to be undertaken by private enterprise or Government since the first three listed are Government-owned properties. Prime Minister, Government has no business in business – not any government in any country – not any type of business. The whole ethos of people working for a government-owned enterprise and that of a private business is the difference between chalk and cheese.

One example should suffice. Which privately run business approximately the same size as GEMS and with the same financial problems would have paid $75 000 per annum for a box at Kensington? One would have thought that if anyone understood this it would be Mr Arthur, not only because of his academic qualifications but because of his Jamaican experience.

In Mr Michael Manley’s early term in office a number of Jamaican hotels were in financial trouble. The government took them over to keep people employed. They were not expected to make a profit – just try and break even.

Consequently, they chopped prices to get customers and so undermined neighbouring hotels which had mortgages and other financial obligations to meet. So they, too, collapsed. In fairness, perhaps that was before Mr Arthur’s time.

The other policy difference would be in the organisation of the administration of tourism. There is no difference today from that of the first Tourist Board in 1958 except for some big titles and Lotto salaries. The top management has no more qualifications or experience in the business of tourism than the first manager had at the time and, consequently, is given no more authority.

We need to organise for the 21st century. It is hoped, for instance, that the new marketing committee will bring some logical planning to that subject.

Another example. In addition to the major markets of the United States, Canada and Britain, there are secondary markets which offer good prospects from time to time dependent upon air services, the state of their economy and other factors. One such is Venezuela which, at one time, was a very important summer season market.

Quite obviously, it would be a waste of time and money to promote in that country under present circumstances. Another is Continental Europe offering various options. However, there is no scheduled airline service from the continent to Barbados – just occasional charters or a change of planes in London.

The sick man of Europe at this time is Germany with high unemployment and a seriously ailing economy. Yet the chairman of the Barbados Tourism Authority (BTA), has stated that the BTA “is looking forward to a recovery in 2003 in arrivals from Germany”. That must mean substantial promotional expenditure.

This will likely bring some additional visitors but the question arises as to whether that investment might not bring far better returns in many another market. Again, the difference in thinking between a government representative and that of a businessman in weighing options.

So, while the selection of candidates is the present focus of attention, a thoughtful person would want to take the proposed policies and programmes into account when the time comes.

www.nj.com Thursday, January 23, 2003 By Michaelangelo Conte Journal staff writer

WEST NEW YORK - U.S. Customs agents intercepted 35 pounds of heroin hidden in a shipment of handbags bound for West New York, U.S. Customs officials said yesterday.

On Friday customs agents arrested Rafic Nahle, 41, of Brooklyn, and Nelson Pulecio-Barrera, 33, of Plainfield, when agents followed the handbags to their destination at Venise Verde LTDA, a company Nahle recently started on Bergenline Avenue at 55th Street, officials said. Try Our Classifieds

The men are charged with conspiracy to import and distribute heroin, and if convicted could face life in prison, officials said.

The heroin, which has a $3.3 million "street value," arrived at JFK International Airport on Jan. 11 and was hidden in-between the cardboard lining of a shipment of 90 leather purses in 12 crates, officials said. The shipment came from Venezuela via Miami, officials said.

U.S. Customs agents allowed the shipment to be delivered to West New York. They arrested the two men at the Bergenline location, officials said.

Last year, U.S. Customs agents working in "Operation Tonquista" broke up a narcotics smuggling ring which recruited "mules" from Memorial High School in West New York and used them to smuggle drugs in their stomachs from South America, officials said.

"Operation Tonquista" resulted in the arrest of 60 people and the seizure of 220 pounds of heroine, officials said.

Michaelangelo Conte can be reached at mconte@jjournal.com.

canadaeast.com Lord BY KATHY KAUFIELD Telegraph-Journal

New Brunswickers will pay more for electricity starting this spring, but ratepayers will have to wait a little longer to find out how much power rates will increase.

Premier Bernard Lord confirmed Wednesday that NB Power plans to hike its rates.

"Sure the rates will go up next (fiscal) year, but it will be a very reasonable increase next (fiscal) year," Mr. Lord said. "That's what we expect. That's what we've been informed of the plans being put in place by NB Power."

NB Power spokesman Jeffrey Carleton wouldn't confirm the rate hike, but he said the corporation will make an announcement as early as this week about its rates.

He also suggested that if there is an increase, it won't be more than a 3-per-cent hike, a move that would require NB Power to appear before the Public Utilities Board for approval.

"When we look at rates, the model in the past certainly has been modest, minimal rate increases that have a minimal impact on our customers, especially our industrial customers," he said.

He said previous rate increases in recent years haven't been high enough to require an application to the PUB.

"That's been our model in the past and remember our objective is to keep our rates competitive within this region," he said.

But he added that NB Power is facing significant cost increases. "NB Power is certainly facing significant cost pressures in our operations, specifically with regards to fuels, heavy fuel oil, converting Dalhousie to heavy fuel oil from Orimulsion," Mr. Carleton said. "Our water resources are significantly lower because of the lack of rainfall and that causes you to use more heavy fuel oil which has gone up in price."

He said typically rate increases come into effect at the beginning of the fiscal year.

"We are certainly aware that our industrial customers and our business customers as they do their business planning and their cost planning need to know what their energy costs are going to be," he said. In the legislature Wednesday, Opposition Leader Shawn Graham questioned Premier Lord on the government's plans to restructure NB Power and to seek private investment in Coleson Cove and Point Lepreau.

Next week, the government will finally introduce long-awaited changes to the Electricity Act that will set out the legislative framework governing any private sector investment in Coleson Cove and Point Lepreau. The act will restructure NB Power into a central holding company with four subsidiaries - generation, distribution, nuclear and transmission. Legislative changes will also allow large industrial users and municipal utilities such as Saint John Energy to purchase power directly from outside sources by April.

Mr. Graham said he's concerned the changes to NB Power will result in rate shock for New Brunswick's electricity consumers.

He said once NB Power is restructured, the province will no longer guarantee its loans and will charge the corporation taxes. As well, any private companies that invest in Coleson Cove or Point Lepreau will want a "maximum" rate of return on their investments. "All these factors combined mean that rates are going up," Mr. Graham said after Question Period.

He said New Brunswickers should be concerned about it, especially since they are also facing high gas prices, skyrocketing auto insurance rates and rising inflation rates.

"Our current Conservative government under Bernard Lord just doesn't seem to realize how difficult it is for New Brunswickers to get by day to day," Mr. Graham said. "The premier is trying to downplay the fact that rates are going up but for anyone living on limited income in this province, any increase will have an impact on their daily ability to survive."

Mr. Graham said some experts predict rates could increase as much as 20 per cent once NB Power restructures. Mr. Lord said that is "completely ridiculous."

The premier described the increase as "reasonable and fair." He pointed out that the average power rate increase since his government took office is 50 per cent less than the average rate increase when the Liberals were in office.

Mr. Graham pressed the premier for details about possible private sector investment in Coleson Cove and Point Lepreau. He wanted to know how much private control the government will accept in those two generating stations.

As far as Coleson Cove, the province wants to share the risk of the $750-million project to convert the 1,000-megawatt plant to burn Orimulsion, a cheap fuel from Venezuela.

"Are you prepared to give up on Coleson Cove, our largest generator, to big business?" Mr. Graham asked the premier.

Mr. Lord said the legislation introduced next week will clearly define what private sector investment the government will accept in NB Power.

"It will be clear the limits that are set as to what the government can do and how much equity participation we can seek in NB Power, precisely on the generation side because we have been clear that there is no plans with regards to transmission and distribution," Mr. Lord said outside the House.

The premier said negotiations are on-going with the private sector over Coleson Cove. He said it's too early to say how close the government is to hammering out a deal on that project, but if one does come together, it will happen in a matter of "weeks."

"We want a deal that works for the people of New Brunswick and we want a deal that's good for the ratepayers and the taxpayer, so our standard is quite high," Mr. Lord said. "We don't want a deal at all costs. We want an investment where there's shared risk, where the private sector assumes a fair share of the risk, that will help us reduce the risk to the taxpayers of the province. If we get that situation, we will have an agreement and if we don't, we won't."

Mr. Lord said the changes coming to NB Power will help ensure New Brunswickers pay competitive and fair power rates and the government will only accept the private sector equity participation in NB Power "if it makes sense for the people of New Brunswick."

Reach our reporter kaufield.kathy@nbpub.com

business.iafrica.com Posted Tue, 21 Jan 2003

Tokyo and Osaka remain the world's most expensive cities, while political turmoil and weaker currencies have put Zimbabwe's capital Harare and South American cities in the cheapest list, a new report has found.

London has dropped a couple of notches from a year ago to seventh place, although it remains the most expensive city in the European Union, with Oslo jumping to third costliest overall, overtaking Hong Kong which fell to fourth, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) said in the report received in Singapore.

New York, the most expensive city in North America, fell to 11th place overall from 10th place last year.

"All euro-zone cities have become comparatively more expensive over the past year as the currency has strengthened — and as prices were hiked during the changeover to euro notes and coins," it said.

On the other end of the spectrum, cities located in countries mired in political and economic turmoil saw their cost of living indices plunge.

Harare, the co-host of the upcoming Cricket World Cup, is now the cheapest city in the world, ranking 134th this year after falling 63 notches from its year 2002 ranking of 71st, EIU said.

Buenos Aires in Argentina fell 109 places to number 130 in the rankings following the collapse of its currency.

"Other South American cities such as Caracas in Venezuela and Montevideo in Uruguay are also big fallers," it said.

Caracas, crippled by a general strike aimed at toppling President Hugo Chavez, dropped 53 notches to rank 109th. Montevideo plunged 75 places to rank 121st.

New York and Chicago, in 11th and 13th places overall, are the most expensive North American cities, while Atlanta is the cheapest among the American cities covered by the poll.

Tokyo, Osaka, Hong Kong and Singapore remained the cosliest cities in Asia. Seoul rose to 13th overall worldwide from being number 21 due to a strengthening of its currency.

In Asia, Indian cities offer the best bargains with New Delhi and Bombay the cheapest.

"Australian cities all rose in the rankings, due to relatively high inflation and a strengthening Australian dollar. Sydney is the most expensive and Adelaide the cheapest," the statement said.

New Zealand cities have also become costlier, EIU said.

Libreville in Gabon is the most expensive city in Africa, followed by Abidjan in the Ivory Coast.

Tel Aviv is the most expensive in the Middle East "although a weakening shekel (currency) saw it become relatively cheaper in 2002."

Tehran is the cheapest city in the Middle East and the second cheapest in the world.

AFP

www.vheadline.com Posted: Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 2:28:59 AM By: Robert Rudnicki

Opposition leaders have expressed their anger at the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) ruling that blocks the planned February 2 consultative referendum, which the opposition called for in November last year.

Primero Justicia deputy Julio Borges slammed the decision as a sign that "the government doesn't car about the will of the people, it only cares about staying in power ... today there is a dictatorship in Venezuela."

Meanwhile, Coordinadora Democratica negotiator Timoteo Zambrano complained that "this is a demonstration of the political control the government has in the TSJ, "it is unfair ... the government is just blocking all democratic avenues."

The opposition is now believed to be taking a little time to consider what its next steps will be, although it now seems that the only realistic option, other than waiting for the August referendum the government is proposing, is to seek a constitutional amendment that would permit an early general election, as was proposed by former US President Jimmy Carter.

Executive Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel called on the whole nation to respect the TSJ ruling, while expressing doubt that the referendum would ever materialize.