hollowayplasteringandstucco.com

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Two protesters in the United States who are associated with the ‘Tar Sands Blockade’ were arrested Monday after they barricaded themselves inside a portion of the Keystone Oil Pipeline under construction in Winona, Texas. TransCanada, which owns the pipeline, stopped construction once the protest began.

“TransCanada Corporation didn’t bother to ask the people of this neighborhood if they wanted to have millions of gallons of poisonous tar sands pumped through their backyards,” said one of the protesters inside the pipeline, Matt Almonte in a statement posted to the group’s website. “This multinational corporation has bullied landowners and expropriated homes to fatten its bottom line”, added Almonte. Glen Collins, the second protester said, “I’m barricading this pipe with Tar Sands Blockade today to say loud and clear to the extraction industry that our communities and the resources we depend on for survival are not collateral damage.”

According to their website www.tarsandsblockade.org, Almonte and Collins entered the pipeline prior to about 7:30 a.m. local time. They went 25 feet into the pipeline and took with them two barrels filled with cement, weighing 600 pounds each and locked themselves in between them. At around noon, police on scene entered the section of pipe, only to emerge a few minutes later without the protesters. At 12:30, after an ambulance arrived on scene, police once again entered the pipe and began to pull on one of the barrels. They were successfully removed and both Almonte and Collins were arrested. A short time later a third protester, identified as Isabel Indigo Brooks, was also arrested.

In a statement to Wikinews, spokesperson for TransCanada Grady Semmens called the incident “unfortunate” saying, “This project is about supplying Canadian and American oil to U.S. refineries, pushing out more expensive crude oil from foreign regimes that do not support American values of freedom and common sense — Libya, Venezuela and the Middle East.” He also confirmed that construction was halted and staff members were “instructed to stand down and stop all work until local law enforcement resolved [the] situation”.

“It is unfortunate these protestors are trying to keep thousands of Americans from the jobs they depend on to provide for their families. This project is important not only to thousands of workers but also to Americans in general,” added Semmens.

Construction on portions of the pipeline were halted in January when the White House denied permits for it to be finished. “This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people,” said President Barack Obama in January.

The portion of the pipeline affected by the protesters is part of the ‘Gulf Coast Pipeline Project’ that is to be about 485 miles long and consist of a “36-inch crude oil pipeline beginning in Cushing, Oklahoma and extending south to Nederland, Texas”, says TransCanada on their website.

Monday, November 26, 2007

In the 18 months since Andrea Muizelaar was crowned winner of the reality TV series Canada’s Next Top Model, her life has been a complete whirlwind. From working in a dollar store in her hometown of Whitby, Ontario, to modeling haute couture in Toronto, she had reached her dream of becoming a true Top Model.

But at what cost? Unknown to casual television viewers, Muizelaar had been enveloped in the eating disorder anorexia nervosa, which inevitably became too much for her to bear. She gave up modeling and moved back to Whitby, where she sought treatment for her disorder, re-entered college, and now works at a bank. Where is she now? Happy and healthy, she says.

Recently Andrea Muizelaar sat down with Wikinews reporter Mike Halterman in a candid interview that stretched to nearly two hours, as she told all about her hopes and aspirations, her battle with anorexia, and just what really happened on Canada’s Next Top Model.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Tim Hortons, a popular Canadian express coffee and doughnut chain, has announced that they will be co-branding with another popular chain, Cold Stone Creamery, an American ice cream parlor chain.

The deal includes a total of 100 new stores, at CA$121,690 (US$100,000) each. Each company will have 50 stores that they will build as, or convert into, dual-operation franchises. Each of the 50 stores will offer menus from each company and be located in 7 states, mostly in the Northeastern U.S..

Executives at Tim Hortons believe that mixing the two together is perfect because Tim Hortons makes most of their profit in the morning, while the Creameries are more popular in the evening. The idea proved successful when tested for three months in Rhode Island, in two different stores.

“We’re very excited about the complementary daypart piece. It’s something unique in what we see from a co-branding perspective,” said Tim Hortons chief of operations, David Clanachan. Construction has already started and stores are expected to open in May.

Tim Hortons was founded by Canadian ice hockey player Tim Horton. The first store opened in Hamilton, Ontario in 1964. In July of 2007, there were over 2,700 locations in Canada and 500 in the U.S.. Cold Stone Creamery was founded in 1988 in Scottsdale, Arizona. There are over 1,400 operation, in locations such as Japan, South Korea and the U.S..

Wednesday, August 31, 2005

A state of emergency has been enacted in New Orleans in the U.S. state of Louisiana today, after the devastating Hurricane Katrina made landfall on Monday. There were earlier erroneous reports by the news media that martial law had been imposed. Mayor Ray Nagin fears that there may be “thousands” of fatalities in his city alone.

Many hospital staff are struggling without power and supplies. As many as 2,500 patients from hospitals in Orleans Parish were to be evacuated, according to US Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, but where they could be sent was still uncertain.

Looters are roaming the city and have already ransacked the city’s upscale shopping district on Canal Street. They have been seen on news reports carrying huge bags of stolen goods. Governor Kathleen Blanco announced plans to completely shut down New Orleans and move everybody left there out of the area. A rescue helicopter was shot at, temporarily halting all rescue operations.

Former mayor Marc Morial summed up his view by saying; “We’ve lost our city, I fear it’s potentially like Pompeii.”

Two of the city’s levees on Lake Ponchartrain failed; one with a football-field size breach.Emergency workers dropped sandbags from helicopters into the levee’s breaches,but the water kept coming.

“It appears that now the bowl is beginning to fill — not rapidly but slowly,” said Walter Maestri, an emergency operations manager. New floods swept through the center of New Orleans and water now covers 80 percent of the city with broken gas lines feeding raging fires. In some locations the water is now at a depth of 20 feet (six meters).

The famous French Quarter, initially less affected by flooding, finally also succumbed.

“Get out of town if you can.” said Ed Freytag, a city worker at the temporary City Hall complex. “We’re damn close right now to that worst-case scenario,” said Dave Cohen, a local radio host.

For those that were staying in the Superdome, officials have begun moving them to the long-vacant Astrodome in Houston, Texas.

Saturday, March 12, 2005

In a vote of 74-25 last Thursday, the US Senate passed a measure that would change bankruptcy laws, making it harder for individuals seeking relief from their debt burden to avoid repayment. Almost twenty Democrats joined Republicans, who currently hold a majority of the seats in the US Senate, in passing the bill.

Lobbyists for credit card companies and financial services firms have worked for the bill during the last two administrations. A similar measure passed both the Senate and House during the previous administration, but then President Bill Clinton pocket-vetoed the measure in 2000.

Democrats sought to soften the bill by allowing bankruptcy filers to negotiate directly with lenders for relief, but the amendments were defeated by the Republican-controlled Senate. Proponents of the bill claim the rise of bankruptcy filings to nearly 1.5 million a year shows that abusers of credit use the filings to shield themselves from irresponsible practices.

“There has been an explosion of bankruptcy,” said Iowa Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley, the bill’s sponsor. “We preserve the principle of a fresh start, but we also establish a principle that if you have the ability to repay some of your debt, you are not going to get off scot-free.” However, Massachusetts Democratic Sen., Edward M. Kennedy said, “This legislation makes the bankruptcy courts of the United States the collection agency for the credit-card industry.”

The bill impacts a broad spectrum of bankruptcy law, but the most significant impact is on personal bankruptcy filings. Individuals who get behind in repaying credit card debt face high interest charges and stiff late payment fees. By only meeting minimum payment requirements, borrowers remit to the lender over the life of the loan an amount in interest and other fees that can far exceed the value of the principal balance of the loan. This can put consumers who run up high balances on various cards at financial risk of default. Critics of the bill blame these aggressive lending practices as a contributing factor in the rising trend of bankruptcy filings from 1996.

The proposed bill doesn’t only affect debtors with credit card debt.

It also affects debtors who have run up large medical bills.

Patients with a past medical history that disqualifies them from full medical coverage, can easily find themselves facing insurmountable medical bills after just a short stay in the hospital. These individuals will no longer be able to get a fresh start after these personal disasters, and will be forced to live in poverty until they can pay off their medical bills as part of their Chapter 13 filing. (Prior to this bill, they would have been able to file Chapter 7, completely discharging their debt.)

Chapter 7, which accounts for 70% of bankruptcy filings, allows individuals to eliminate most non-secured debts after liquidating assets, with the notable exemption of one’s principle residence in most states. The Senate passed bill would change Chapter 7 eligibility by applying a means-test, where those with a median income higher than the state average would be required to file under Chapter 13 provisions. Under Chapter 13 protection, an individual’s debt is not forgiven; rather it is restructured for payment under more lenient terms.

This was the first major overhaul of federal bankruptcy law in many years.

Under the old bankruptcy law, a personal bankruptcy attorney could not be held financially responsible for his clients mendacity. Under the new bankruptcy law, the bankruptcy attorney is responsible for his client’s lies to the Court about his assets and the bankruptcy attorney and his insurance carrier can be held responsible by the Bankruptcy Court.

The result is that personal bankruptcy attorneys (this does not apply to corporate bankruptcy attorneys) are likely to flee the personal bankruptcy field when the new law takes effect. Their insurance companies will not offer the sort of coverage that they would need to continue to practice.

So when consumers need to file personal bankruptcy under the new law, they will be unlikely to find a bankruptcy attorney to represent them. Consumers will have to file pro se: such consumers will be likely to fail due to the complexity of the law.

The bottom line is that the field of personal bankruptcy law as a practice area of law will cease to exist when the new bankruptcy law takes effect, and consumers will be unable to secure legal counsel and so consumers will lose what legal protections counsel now affords them.

Under the new bankruptcy law about one half million Americans will be forest to pay for at lest 5 years on longer they will be held in servitude as chattel they will be completely subservient to a dominating influence of the company that holds the loan. Their loan will be put on the market for sale for profit. The people will be forced to work harder. People who fail to go to court will have a arrest warrant made out in their name and people who refuseto pay. They will be subject to fines and or jail. About fifty thousand Americans will punished by a fine and or about three thousand Americans every year will go to jail under the new bankruptcy law. For some people this will be a third strike they will be put in jail for life.

The bill has the support of President Bush, and its passage in the House sometime next month seems likely. If enacted into law, lending companies will recover more money on what otherwise would be written off as bad loans. Those persons of median and higher income seeking relief would be required to file under Chapter 13 status and pay up to $100 per month under court imposed conditions. It is expected the proposed changes would cause a sharp increase in filings before the new law could take effect.

Sunday, September 5, 2010

The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem), the regulator of the electricity and gas markets in Great Britain, has launched an investigation into four of the largest British energy suppliers over suspicions that they not be complying with face-to-face and telephone sales regulations. The four organisations facing scrutiny could be fined up to 10% of their annual turnover if it is found that they are breaking sales regulations. Scottish Power, npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and EDF Energy are all to face questioning by the organisation.

Ofgem has urged customers of the four companies to alert the energy regulator, “if they are concerned about the sales approach any domestic suppliers have taken when selling energy contracts, either face-to-face or by telephone,” according to a statement. “As part of the investigation process Ofgem will examine any evidence of non-compliance and consider whether there are grounds for exercising enforcement powers.”

New regulations on sales tactics by energy suppliers were recently introduced, and, Ofgem has said, energy suppliers must be “proactive in preventing misselling to customers both face to face and over the phone. Also, if suppliers are selling contracts face to face they must provide customers with an estimate before any sales are concluded. In most circumstances customers should also receive a comparison of the supplier’s offer with their current deal.” Only one in five consumers consider energy suppliers to be trustworthy, and 61% of people feel intimidated by doorstep sales people from energy companies. According to the organisation Consumer Focus, “complaints have declined since new rules came into effect this year, but suppliers still seem to be flouting the rules. Some customers are still being given misleading quotes and information, which leave them worse off when they switch provider.”

The newspaper The Guardian has reported that “householders are reporting that sales agents working for the energy suppliers are giving them misleading information and quotes which leave them worse off when they switch supplier.” Consumer Focus has said that if energy companies continue to break the rules, they could be banned from doorstep-selling completely. The report goes on to say that “new figures from helpline Consumer Direct show that while the number of complaints has fallen since last year, about 200 cases of mis-selling are being reported each month.” However, Scottish Power said it insists on “the highest standards possible for all of our sales agents”, and npower told the Financial Times that it was “confident that the processes we have in place mean that we comply with our regulatory obligations”. EDF added that it was “fully compliant with all obligations regarding sales of energy contracts”.

According to the regulator, the obligations are serious and must be followed by energy supplies, or they will face “tougher sanctions than those available under more general consumer protection law.” Ofgem has published a guide advising consumers what they should do should an energy salesperson contact them in person of by telephone. Improper sales tactics are still common in the industry—in 2008 an Ofgem investigation found that 48% of gas customers and 42% of electricity customers were worse off after switching supplier on the doorstep. Npower was fined £1.8 million in 2008 by the organisation, and Ofgem insists that they are “committed to taking action” over improper sales activities by energy companies. “Suppliers have existing obligations to detect and prevent misselling and new licence conditions were brought in following our probe to further increase protection for customers,” said Andrew Wright, a Senior Partner of the regulator. “We expect all suppliers to comply with these tougher obligations but if our investigations find otherwise we will take strong action.”

Head of energy at Consumer Focus, Audrey Gallacher, called the investigation “a welcome step … to address years of customers getting a bad deal on energy prices on their doorstep. While many doorstep sales people will do a good job, the pay and rewards system continues to encourage mis-selling, despite years of regulation and voluntary initiatives. If better advice for customers and enforcement of the tougher rules doesn’t end the flagrant abuse of this form of selling the big question will be whether it should be completely banned.” Christine McGourty, director of Energy UK, which represents the leading gas and electricity companies, said that “the companies involved will collaborate with the Ofgem investigation and are awaiting further details from the regulator. Any sales agent in breach of the code will be struck off the approved energy sales register.” Which? chief executive, Peter Vicary-Smith, has said he considers the situation “shocking”, saying that the investigation “will do nothing to improve consumer trust in energy suppliers. We’re pleased that Ofgem has promised tough measures against any firms guilty of mis-selling. We hope it uses this opportunity to tighten rules around telesales so they are in line with those for face to face sales.”

SNP Westminster Energy spokesperson Mike Weir MP, however, said that the investigation “does nothing to tackle the real problem of fuel prices which leave many Scots facing great difficulty in heating their homes … Rather than tinkering around the edges Ofgem should be looking at how to reduce prices for vulnerable households.” Gareth Kloet, Head of Utilities at Confused.com, one of the UK’s biggest and most popular price comparison services, also welcomed the inquiry. “It is unacceptable for energy companies to mislead customers like this,” he said, adding that Confused.com has previously “urged energy providers to either stop the practice of doorstep selling or make it very clear to households that better deals are available online. There is no reason why door-to-door salesmen can’t show people online deals and even help households switch to them.”

“Our research reveals customers could end up paying £167 more than they need to as door-to-door salesmen are unable to offer the discounts that are applied online. The changes that have been made to date are a welcome addition to safeguard customers; however this review has been much needed for a long time. Hopefully it will mark the end of customers being overcharged and missold,” Kloet continued. “Our message to energy consumers remains the same: they should shop around online to make sure they’re getting the best deal possible and turn these salesmen away.”