PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad, CMC – Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley has accused a small leadership clique of “hijacking” West Indies cricket and argues that unless fundamental changes are made in the area of governance, the region will continue to languish behind the rest of the cricketing world. The outspoken regional leader, who in the past has been critical of the West Indies Cricket Board’s management of the sport, said the issue of ownership also remained a critical issue in the resolution of the crisis facing the game in the Caribbean. “Caribbean cricket has been hijacked by a small clique of people who are hell bent on destroying Caribbean cricket and my position [is], unless the question is answered as to who owns that asset, we’re spinning top in mud,” Rowley told morning television show in his home country. “In Pakistan and in Australia that question has been answered and new arrangements were put in place and they rebuilt their team under new arrangements. “We’re being told in the West Indies – and I was told to my face along with my colleague the Prime Minister of Grenada [Dr Keith Mitchell] that you (CARICOM) have no say in this. This is West Indies Cricket Inc. and it is their shareholders they have to please.” He added: “I don’t know who the shareholders are but what I do know, is that unless there are drastic changes to the current arrangements, West Indies cricket will never get back where we expect it to be.” West Indies cricket has been in the doldrums for nearly two decades now, plagued by poor results on the field and player tensions with the WICB, and occasionally player strikes. The Test team currently sits in the nether regions of the international rankings at number eight while the one-day team is ninth, behind sides like Bangladesh and Pakistan. That lowly rank caused them to miss out on qualification for this year’s Champions Trophy and unless they can creep into the top seven in the world by September 30, they will also miss out on automatic qualification for the 2019 World Cup. With the game immersed in conflict, a Governance Review Panel chaired by UWI Cave Hill principal, Professor Eudine Barriteau and commissioned by regional nation grouping, CARICOM, recommended the “immediate dissolution” of the WICB in a 2015 report, arguing the body’s governance structure was “obsolete” and “anachronistic”. The report called for the “appointment of an interim board whose structure and composition will be radically different from the now proven, obsolete governance framework.” However, the WICB was quick to reject the report, labelling the proposal as an “unnecessary and intrusive demand. Since then, CARICOM and the WICB have remained at odds over the way forward. Rowley pointed out that the decline of Caribbean cricket was underscored by the state of first class cricket, which has ceased to be attractive to the public.
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) needs to better reflect the dairy-farm incomes lost to tariff retaliation when it calculates its next round of trade mitigation payments, the said today.In a letter sent Tuesday to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, National Milk Producers Federation Chairman and dairy farmer Randy Mooney cited four studies illustrating that milk producers have experienced more than $1 billion in lost income since May, when the retaliatory tariffs were first placed on dairy goods in response to U.S. levies on foreign products. In contrast, the first round of USDA trade mitigation payments, announced in August, allocated only $127 million to dairy farmers.“We are ever-grateful for your advocacy on agricultural trade, which is crucial to the economic health of our industry,” wrote Mooney, who operates Mooney Dairy in Rogersville, Missouri, with his wife, Jan. “However, our members are greatly concerned about the level of aid that was provided in the initial effort.”The letter details four analyses, including two independent studies using sophisticated economic modeling, that each show losses to dairy producers far above USDA’s initial payment level.NMPF analyzed the CME dairy futures-based milk prices through the end of 2018, based on the settlement prices in late May, just before retaliatory tariffs were announced, with those same prices after tariffs had been thoroughly incorporated into market expectations. The expected impact of the retaliation may result in roughly $1.5 billion in lost revenue for producers during the second half of 2018.USDA’s own monthly World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) showed a drop in its forecast milk prices for the full 2018 calendar year of $0.70/cwt., after the imposition of the tariffs. The WASDE estimate amounts to a loss in dairy farm income of $1.5 billion for the year.An Informa Agribusiness Consulting study estimated that the tariffs would lower U.S. dairy farm income by $1.5 billion for the full year 2018.The Center for North American Studies at Texas A&M University, estimated an annual loss of $1.17 billion.“These estimates show that farmer losses from the tariffs will notably exceed $1 billion in 2018,” Mooney wrote. “Significant income losses will continue” if tariffs imposed by Mexico and China — two of the largest dairy export markets for the United States — remain in place.Perdue has said a second trade mitigation payment to producers may be made this year, after additional calculations of farmer losses.“We are eager to work with you on a plan that better reflects the struggles dairy producers across the country have faced due to the tariffs,” Mooney wrote. “Thank you for considering the critical implications of these trade challenges for us as dairy farmers and cooperative owners.”
Related Posts Tags:#Analysis#start A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting 2010 is over half over, which makes it a good time to reflect on the year so far and revise your startup’s plans – if necessary, of course – for the year ahead. Are you on target? Have your targets changed? And if so, have you adjusted course to compensate?Mark MacLeod posted his thoughts on the midyear point on the Startup CFO blog today, noting that it can be difficult for startups to establish accurate targets. Even so, he notes, there are two schools of thoughts when it comes to targets. The first: you set the targets, now stick with them. The second: if you can’t meet the targets, it only makes sense to adjust.If you’ve determined that, indeed, your targets need adjusting, MacLeod suggests the following: Diagnose: “Hold a post mortem,” he writes, “ideally involving much or all of your team.” What went wrong? Were the targets unreasonable? If so, why were they set in the first place? If the targets were reasonable, why weren’t they attained? What can be done about that?Reset: Now that you have new insights into your performance, you can set new targets – making sure that your investors support them, of course.Communicate: After you’ve reviewed your year-to-date performance, make sure you share that diagnosis with your whole team. Explain not only what the new targets are, but why the targets are changing.Partial Mulligan: If employees’ compensation is tied to meeting targets, MacLeod argues that “resetting targets should not be the equivalent of a Mulligan. You need to retain some incentive to hit the new targets, but unless your diagnosis tells you that the targets were flawed to begin with, there should be consequences (in terms of reduced incentive) as a result of lowering your targets.”Revising your targets may involve slight tweaks or it might mean major upheaval. As Chris Dixon writes on the subject of pivoting, “You aren’t throwing away what you’ve learned or the good things you’ve built. You are keeping your strong leg grounded and adjusting your weak leg to move in a new direction.” 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market audrey watters
[This blog has been edited to correct some information on Tripolymer Foam. I continue to wish for greater transparency in the manufacturing industry. -Alex Wilson]In recent columns, we’ve looked at cellulose insulation as well as fiberglass and other batt insulation materials. The other option for filling wall and ceiling cavities is foam insulation that is sprayed into the cavity. There are several such materials that are used for this application, all installed by professional insulation contractors.Polyurethane is by far the most common foam-in-place insulation material used for homes, but there are several quite different formulations. Closed-cell polyurethane has been around for decades, though the ingredients have changed considerably in the past 15 years as ozone-damaging blowing agents were replaced with safer chemicals. The polyurethane is sprayed into the wall or ceiling cavity as a liquid (much like spray paint), and as the components mix they instantly expand, foaming to create the insulation. The material fully cures in a few hours to form a quite hard, high-density (2 pound per cubic foot) material. In a wall cavity, enough material is typically used to expand to several inches thickness, but not so much that the foam bulges beyond the inner face of the framing. Closed-cell polyurethane insulates to between R-5.8 and R-6.8 per inch—a considerably higher insulating value than any other cavity-fill insulation.Polyurethane insulation is also available in an open-cell formulation. The Canadian company Icynene pioneered this material and is one of the leading producers; Demilec is another. The foam is installed in a similar fashion as closed-cell foam, except that the lower-density foam is usually sprayed so that it fully fills or slightly overfills the cavity—and then the extra is shaved off flush with the inner face of the framing using a specialized tool. The cured foam has a density of about a half-pound per cubic foot and insulates to between R-3.6 and 3.8 per inch. Open-cell polyurethane uses a lot less raw material than closed-cell polyurethane, and it is usually installed to fully fill the cavity, so the overall energy performance is often fairly comparable. It is also available in a more slowly expanding formulation that can be poured into a wall cavity—so it can be used for retrofitting uninsulated finished walls.Several manufacturers offer biobased formulations of polyurethane insulation in which a portion of one of the polyurethane components is derived from soybean oil, rather than petroleum hydrocarbons. Biobased materials are attractive environmentally because they are renewable, but they also have the unintended negative consequence of raising food prices.Spray polyurethane insulation, whether closed-cell or open-cell, provides an excellent air seal. If properly installed, it contributes to a very airtight house. In fact, most professionals feel that a separate air/vapor barrier is unneccessary, because the foam will block almost all air and moisture flow on its own.Besides polyurethane, there are several other foam-in-place insulation materials. One of these, known as Tripolymer foam, is used primarily to fill concrete blocks in commercial construction. It is made from foamed phenol-urea formaldehyde, so it may release some hazardous formaldehyde into the building—but apparently less than an older formulation of urea-formaldehyde foam insulation (UFFI) that resulted in very significant formaldehyde offgassing.Finally, there is a foam-in-place, cementitious insulation, Air Krete, that is made from magnesium oxide (derived from seawater) and ceramic talc mined in upstate New York. Air Krete is totally fireproof, mold-resistant, and does not offgas any volatile chemicals, so it is popular among people suffering from chemical sensitivity. Unfortunately, there are few trained installers, so it may be expensive to use this alternative. (The closest installer to Brattleboro is Eco-Safe Insulation in Northfield, VT, near Montpelier; 802-485-9119.) Other than availability, the biggest problem with Air Krete is that the cured foam is fairly fragile; if exposed to frequent vibration, such as along a busy highway, the foam can begin to disintegrate, reducing its performance. The manufacturer is working to solve this problem.Whatever the type of cavity insulation used in a house, it is important to remember that it is part of a system. Next week we’ll look at rigid boardstock insulation that can be used along with cavity-fill materials to achieve extremely well-insulated walls and roofs.
Twitter Advertisement Facebook Google+: http://www.google.com/+telefilmcanadaFacebook:[EN] http://www.facebook.com/telefilmcanada[FR] http://www.facebook.com/TelefilmCanad…Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/telefilm_canada The micro-budget film Werewolf (formely Train Whistle Does Not Blow) was just selected in the Discovery program at #TIFF16. Here’s what director Ashley McKenzie and producer Nelson MacDonald had to say about their first feature film shot in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia.————————————————————————Be sure to thumbs up the video, add it to your playlist or favorites, and leave a comment. / Ne manquez pas de vous abonner à notre chaîne, d’aimer notre vidéo, de l’ajouter à votre sélection ou à vos favoris et d’inscrire un commentaire.Stay tuned and follow the Telefilm Canada community: / Gardez l’œil ouvert et suivez la communauté de Téléfilm Canada : LEAVE A REPLY Cancel replyLog in to leave a comment Advertisement Login/Register With: Advertisement
One of the on-reserve homes flooded intentionally in 2011.Kathleen MartensAPTN NewsA multi-million dollar flood settlement has stalled after some evacuees claim people are making false claims to get money they don’t deserve, APTN News has learned.Lawyer Sabrina Lombardi said a Court of Queen’s Bench judge will be asked later this month to reopen the application process for compensation for personal property.The step is needed to determine who is a real claimant and who is not, Lombardi confirmed in a telephone interview from McKenzie Lake law firm in Toronto.“We will tell the court we hoped the payments would be starting to flow by now but we’ve had this hiccup,” she explained.“The class members were very concerned that…there were people…that maybe either weren’t proper members of the four First Nations or weren’t really ever residing on reserve.”The $90-million settlement won from the Manitoba and federal governments was to be distributed by the end of 2018 but now Lombardi said that won’t happen until the spring of 2019.“It’s not necessarily true that everybody that put forward a claim is eligible,” she said.“The two criteria they had to show was membership in one of the four First Nations and the fact that they resided in Manitoba in 2011.”The delay affects up to 7,000 people from Pinaymootang (Fairford), Little Saskatchewan, Dauphin River and Lake St. Martin, she said.People in those communities had their lives disrupted – and some remain in limbo – after the Manitoba government diverted floodwater to spare more serious damage in the nearby capital of Winnipeg.Area farmland and lakefront cottages were also destroyed.Flood victims sued the provincial and federal governments for damages after compensation was denied.The settlement was approved by a judge in January 2018 and applies to personal belongings – not communal property like housing, infrastructure and land.Compensation for those larger community losses is still being discussed.“Until we can determine who is, in fact, eligible to receive the money we obviously can’t dole it out,” Lombardi added, “and so we’re going back to the court.“There’s a large number of people whose claims aren’t complete enough to make a determination on.”She said a judge will be asked to approve the move that will ask claimants to re-submit claim forms and supporting documents.Eligible adults would receive “disruption payments” of between $42,000 and $67,000 while children would get 10 per cent of that.Still, being asked to wait longer is more hardship for flood victims, said Grant Louis of Little Saskatchewan.“People are still affected by this flood,” he said, listing problems like “sickness, poverty, depression, loneliness and addiction.“Low-income families are stressing and these payments would really help out.”Lombardi didn’t know how many claims were fake but said claimants would see more money in the end because of interest accruing on the money in the email@example.com