Today in the House of Assembly, Premier Tony Wakeham admitted he does not know the identities of the so-called “expert advisors” relied on throughout the so-called independent report on the Churchill Falls Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
During Question Period on May 25, Official Opposition Leader John Hogan, KC, pressed the Premier multiple times to disclose who these advisors are, what qualifications they hold, and what role they played in shaping the report’s conclusions. Despite repeated questioning, the Premier failed to provide any names, credentials, or details. More astonishingly, the Premier actually admitted that he does not know the identity or even the credentials of the so-called experts, and instead trusts his hand-picked panel’s conclusions without knowing the basics.
The report references consultations with experts and with approximately 350 individuals and groups. Yet neither the Premier nor the members of his hand-picked review panel have provided any transparency about who these individuals are, how they are qualified, or how their input was assessed. The Premier has also failed to make the panelists available to the media, so they cannot be asked about their reliance on unidentified experts.
“The Premier is touting a report featuring opinions of so-called experts and he has no idea who they are. Is this how he makes all of his decisions? He is basing his decisions without knowing where the information came from and expecting the public to just trust him,” says Hogan.
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians deserve transparency and accountability, especially on a matter as significant as the future development of the Churchill River and the long-term economic future of the province. Instead, the Premier continues to ask the public to blindly trust a process that lacks openness and credibility.
The government has repeatedly described the review process as “independent,” yet has refused to provide basic information about the advisors, methodologies, and consultations relied upon to reach its conclusions. The refusal to disclose these details only raises further questions about the integrity and objectivity of the report.
This stands in stark contrast to the approach taken during the 2025 MOU debate under the Liberal government. At that time, the experts were named and made publicly available for questions from the media and all MHAs. Their credentials, analysis and assumptions were open to examination and transparency.
If the Premier truly has confidence in the report and the recommendations being advanced, he should have no problem identifying the experts behind it and allowing Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to judge their credibility for themselves.
The Official Opposition will continue demanding answers and accountability on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
-30-