BC Hydro

Neither fair nor balanced

Perhaps Postmedia has not reported accurately on BC Hydro’s financial affairs because their newspapers do not employ anyone with inclination and skills needed to to do more than rewrite press releases.


In the article B.C.’s credit rating at risk as Hydro’s debt grows, Rob Shaw identified Moody’s as “a top investment firm.” That is an inaccurate portrayal of a company that describes itself as a “provider of credit ratings.”  Whether it can be described as a “top”company of any sort is doubtful.

Last week, Bloomberg News reported that Moody’s agreed to pay over $1.1 billion (CAN) in penalties to the U.S. Justice Department and 21 states because of inflated ratings on American securities. In 2016, Bloomberg reported Moody’s had been hit with a $1.9 million (CAN) penalty after Hong Kong regulators found the rating agency had failed to provide sufficient explanations for its judgments and had not ensured the accuracy of its claims.

The Council on Foreign Relations reported that Moody’s, with two other American agencies, was accused of:

…exacerbating the financial crisis and defrauding investors by offering overly favorable evaluations of insolvent financial institutions and approving extremely risky mortgage-related securities.

In Europe, the Big Three garnered further controversy over their sovereign debt ratings…

Critics believe that because issuers of debt pay the rating companies, rather than the users of reports, there is a built-in conflict of interest. From 2011 to 2016, the BC Government and BC Hydro paid Moody’s at least $2.9 million for services. Can a company with questionable ethics, directed by deceitful politicians, be trusted to put public interest before private?

Vancouver Sun readers get no accurate information about Moody’s and its relationship with the Liberal government. They do though get happy talk quotes from the Premier, the Jobs Minister and the Finance Minister. Shaw provides further good news with this misinformation:

…Hydro been forced to borrow $3.8 billion since 1992 to pay government a mandatory annual dividend that it was unable afford, and is expected to borrow another $852 million over the next three years as well.

The government has promised to start weaning itself off the dividend in 2018, a move that Moody’s noted would be positive. The corporation’s 10-year rates plan will help pay off much of its regulatory account as well, said Moody’s…”

One problem with repeating government talking points is that they are often inaccurate. For example, from Shaw’s words, one might assume that BC Hydro paid $3.8 billion in dividends to the province since 1992. In fact, dividends total $6.6 billion since 1990. In addition, during that time, the utility paid a further $12.2 billion to governments (primarily the province) for water rentals and grants in lieu of taxes.

Since 1990, while the electric company was writing cheques to governments, its term debt increased $12.7 billion. Even a middle school student could calculate that BC Hydro would be almost free of debt had it not been required to pay a total of $18.8 billion as taxes and dividends.

I suspect that Shaw and his Press Gallery colleagues would be unwilling to wager real money on the promise of the Liberal Government “weaning itself off dividends” or BC Hydro comfortably expensing its $7.3 billion of intangible assets and deferred costs. (Note: the province has already required a dividend accrual of $259 million in the first half of fiscal year 2017.)

With mounting losses, declining consumption, soft markets for surplus power, $58.3 billion committed to high cost private power and a massive capital spending plan, only BC Liberals and their minions can see anything positive on the horizon for BC Hydro.

Categories: BC Hydro

Tagged as: , ,

8 replies »

  1. Perhaps the reason Postmedia lays off BC HYDRO is they have a MUTUAL MASTURBATION AGREEMENT with the CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM PRODUCERS (for detaild and a copy write me at rafe@rafeonline.com) and they have given the BC Liberals even better than a free ride ever since.

    When the hell are we all going to wake up? Before May I hope! HAVEN’T YOU HAD ENOUGH YET?


  2. In my mind Mr. Shaw gave up the right to be considered a serious journalist when he penned this insult to the craft:


    Nothing he’s done since, including the piece at hand has changed my mind. Including the practice he seems to have adopted from his deanish mentor on how to snarl by curling his lip just enough to conceal the fact he has no teeth.

    His editor Harold Munro appears to be happy with his work; a fact that should be considered when subscription decisions are made.


    • Shaw once did good work so I imagine current comforts require that traditional journalism be set aside for public relations. I remember the Sun’s acting business editor, after a misleading piece of “analysis,” told me that he didn’t have “expert understanding of provincial finances.” Of course, that didn’t stop him from rewording a government press release.

      That, unfortunately, is the state of newspapers today. Instead of talented and fearless journalists like business writer David Baines, we get people who are waiting for the next buy-out offer or searching for favours from groups they cover.


Leave a Reply to R Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s