Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Slowing economies will force entente on climate, energy, food, Harper says

CAMPBELL CLARK

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 2:27 AM EST 03/07/08

The world's recession fears and thirst for energy will move Europeans and others closer to Canada's position on climate change: PM ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    So Canada will agree to a Warner-Lieberman type plan that the US is likely to support next year, regardless of who wins the US election.

    Some people have been saying this for weeks (ie ...me).

    Dion was a supporter of the WL initiative in the states, and it kills him that Harper gets to be the guy to sign on.

    Dion was reduced to proposing a Carbon Tax (which in his heart he dislikes) simply to differ from Harper. What else can Dion do...say 'I think Harper's long term plan makes sense'???

    Dion's mistake was not forcing an election over Afstan in the spring.

    He just might have won that election, and it could have been him spouting the talking points about sensible co-operation with the US re GHG instaed of Harper.

    Now he's forced to campaign for a plan the he himself rejected repeatedly.

    Smart guy; horrible political instincts.
  2. Federico Pena from Calgary, Canada writes: How can the leader of a minority government pass off his do-nothing environmental policy, which carries little favour among the country's populace, as being 'Canada's position'?

    Oh, and here's something to be proud of: The Europeans will be no better than us now because they too are fannying out in the face of political pressures. Hurray! We've successfully lowered the bar.

    Let's dump this embarrassing farce of a so-called government before they completely alienate us from the rest of the world.
  3. Andre Carrel from salmo, Canada writes: Oh yes, France and its advance nuclear power generation infrastructure, the EU's auto industry with their fuel efficient cars, the high speed rail network throughout France, Germany and smaller western European countries, and the significant solar and wind power installations in Germany and Denmark, these countries have been waiting for Canada to illuminate the way for them on how to care for the economy and the environment. Illusions of grandeur is what I would call it.
  4. Rick C from Canada writes: '(Mr. Harper's) critics, however, argue that he has allied Canada with the U.S. in insisting that any successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions must bind major developing countries like China and India to restrictive targets.'

    IF you believe that anthropogenic global warming is occuring at the rate and to the extreme consequences the alarmists are predicting the PM's position is the only logical one that is logical.

    The Pembina Institute estimates GHG emissions from the oilsands operations will increase from the current 60 MT to between 110-140 MT by 2020.

    Those estimates include no credits for carbon sequestering or the inevitable addition of nuclear power in Ft. Mac; but for sh!ts and giggles lets use them anyway.

    China...by 2020...is currently projected to increase GHG emissions by 1200 MT. From 6000 to 7200 MT total.

    The oilsands increase....50-80 MT.

    China...1200 MT.

    The rhetoric suggests mankind is facing the worst disaster of all time...

    ...and the politicians and enviro extremists think we should focus on 6% of the increase and give a pass to 94% of the problem.

    Right...

    ...maybe I should trim a hang nail the next time my leg is cut off.
  5. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    People diss Harper for insisting that all major emitters agree to restrictions. He was Bush's lapdog in Bali, what an embarrassment, etc.

    However, Obama is on record as saying that China and India must sign on.

    Also, Rudd (the guy who replaced famous Bush-poodle Howard) has said the same. He even said it in Bali, after making a show of signing Kyoto.

    Now Merckel is supporting this position.

    Harper, then Rudd, then Obama, then Merckel.

    Sounds like a neocon hugfest to me.....
  6. Rick C from Canada writes: Andre Carrel from salmo:

    Yeah except for the fact France is going broke, Germany is going broke, and the carbon taxes seem to simply be lining the pockets of a select few (think Al Gore types) without actually reducing GHG emissions.
  7. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Rick C:-- Not sure where you get your numbers, but at least until very recently, Germany's real GDP growth was increasing. Her 2007 rate of growth matched Canada's. France's was a tad lower, but roughly the same as the U.S.'s is now. I suppose it depends on your definition of 'going broke'. By the way, Big Oil profits are lining the pockets of a select few, too, and they certainly aren't doing much about GHG.
  8. jack sprat from Canada writes: Lets remember Dion is not saying anything different, however, he proposes to SHIFT income taxes to make up for some of these economic changes.

    The Economist magazine and leading Economist of the TD bank agree with Dion.

    Why doesn't our 'economist' PM?
  9. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Realism vs. idealism. It just doesn't make sense for us to hurt ourselves, our economy, if the biggest polluters aren't on board. Oh, I suppose it does to the idealistic lefties, but I'm sure glad THEY aren't governing Canada!
  10. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    Dion's shift is a hail-mary to try to deflect attention from what's really happening re global GHG agreements.

    The writing is on the wall--there will be a North American plan which Harper and Obama/McCain sign next spring. It will be a modified cap and trade.

    In principle, Dion has always favored a C&T, but has no choice but to propose something different (which he unequivically dissed repeatedly).

    Dion's only chance is to topple Harper before the US election. If he manges to win, he will sign the NA plan with the US instead of Harper. He won't have any trouble 'modifying' his current shift to make this happen.

    It's a long shot for Dion, but it's also his only chance.

    If Harper inks a deal with the new US president, then Dion will be completely irrelevant.
  11. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Spicy, Dion has been completely irrelevent since he took over as leader of the Liberals.
  12. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    Don--

    I know. But he is a fairly smart guy, and I suspect he is doing his best.

    However, I think his real window was the Afstan extension. He missed it....
  13. martha stewart from Canada writes: I think that Harper's prediction is correct. Reality is predictable. Real indisputable economic concerns now trump predictions of questionable possible environmental concerns later.

    A starving environmentalist would kill and eat the last Spotted Owl.

    A starving Paul Watson would club and eat a baby seal.

    A starving Dion probably wouldn't be able to decide what to do, and would starve.
  14. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Doc,

    Granted, he's a smart guy, and granted, he's doing his best, but his best is just nowhere near good enough. He's too idealistic in his thinking, he's saddled with past indiscretions of the Liberal party, he doesn't have the confidence of a huge part of his party, he doesn't communicate well, and, the Cons ads showing him as inept have worked.

    Yeah, his best chance would probably have been on A'stan vote, but at best MIGHT have seen him with a minority gov't....and that wouldn't have lasted long.

    He's just not the man for the times.
  15. jack sprat from Canada writes: Spicy, a cap and trade prices carbon. Harper said in a speech in England that $65/ton was a good number. His own committee also stated that such a number would not cause much harm to the economy. Cap and trade will also result in a 'tax on everything'. He also has no income tax reductions either to pay for the increased prices that will result. It will fly in the face of what he is saying now. How can he price carbon is one speech and then slam Dion and then later put a price on carbon. He is undoubtedly hoping for a Canadian election before he presents a plan. He cannot be seen as pricing carbon. If he does propose cap and trade or any pricing of carbon, Dion's plan gains some credibility and since he offers big tax reductions......whose plan would you go for. Even Margaret suggested in her post that the economic issues will be important. As soon as Harper prices carbon...what will he do tax wise? And don't think Obama will soon forget Harpers Naftagate on Obama. Everyone knows that directives came through the PMO and I expect that to have an effect on Harper. Note that harper has still not offered any plan or alternative. he just continues questioning the lib plan. And he refuses to debate the specifics against his own 'plan'. Give it some time and I believe it will get interesting.
  16. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    martha--

    'A starving environmentalist would kill and eat the last Spotted Owl.

    A starving Paul Watson would club and eat a baby seal.

    A starving Dion probably wouldn't be able to decide what to do, and would starve.'

    Very funny!!

    Don--

    People will wax poetic about Dion's principles once he's gone. In fact, I think his Carbon-Tax Barbecue circuit this summer is more of a 'farewell tour' than a serious attempt to make people agree to his plan.

    He's campaigning for a benign legacy; he just might win that campaign.

    A real one for the PMO?? I seriously doubt it will even be close.
  17. jack sprat from Canada writes: Also, there is no doubt that such pricing of carbon works. I have already seen in calgary that the city is cutting lawns in public areas less often (I think to save Diesel fuel). Other savings initiatives are underway also. I see more places opting for CNG vehicles than Diesel vehicles, etc, etc.

    So if pricing carbon works, and harper and Dion both price carbon....I will take the one that cuts my income taxes every time.

    And again I note, the Economist magazine and Don Drummond agree with that and they have much more credibility than either Harper or Dion.
  18. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    Harper and Baird have been making noises about a co-operative US-Canada cap-and-trade plan for over a year.

    You mention the speech in England.

    Baird also talked about it in Bali.

    Unfortunately, the media were too busy dissing Baird re which cocktail parties he attended, or which youth groups he avoided, or how he was a Bush lapdog.

    Maybe that's why you missed it.

    The CPC 'plan' has about as much 'substance' (if not more) than Dion's.

    However, if you get your information from this site, you might miss it.
  19. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    Don't get too excited about Dion's plan and the 'tax break'.

    Do the math.

    If you can afford accomodation, a computer, and an internet provider you will not be too happy about your 'break'. It won't amount to much compared to what you pay out.

    Anyway, given that our economies are so enmeshed, we need a cooperative plan with the US.

    They are going C&T. So are we. Even if Dion becomes PM later this year. It's 90% done.
  20. jack sprat from Canada writes: Spicy, a cap and trade will price carbon and harper will have trouble with that. Baird hypes an intensity based system that uses 2006 as a base year. That is not a plan and secondly, it allows massive increases in emissions especially from the oil sands.

    Thats a plan?

    I call BS
  21. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    It's clear that you are severely underinformed about the issue and are now resorting to profanity to make a point.

    I was happy to have a dialogue with you, but you've revealed your intentions. Have a nice night.
  22. jack sprat from Canada writes: Spicy,

    Actually its a good amount for me, more than for a lot of rich others. And besides its much better than increased prices and no tax decrease. Thats what Harper will face.

    To quote a US doc on proposed cap and trade....a price of 40/ton for carbon is most likely. It will raise all prices of electricity (20%), nat gas (12%). this with no offsetting tax reductions or research credits etc. etc.

    How does Harper do that when he trashes Dions plan as a tax on everything. the cap and trade is theame with no tax reductions or other comprehensive startegies to encourage research.

    In a direct comparsion Dion's plan is superior. I am not a lib but a believer that we must do something to slow climate change and the human effects on gloabl warming. I do believe the plan offered by Dion when compared to Harper's plan or cap and trade is a better option.
  23. jack sprat from Canada writes: Underinformed.....hahahaha. I seriously doubt that. I just can read a detailed plan from one party and no plan (or intensity based plan) from Harper. Perhaps you should get off the Con talking points and read a few things yourself.

    Here in Cowtown BS is not profanity, especially at Stampede time.
  24. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    You're not helping yourself.

    'Con talking points'?

    Coming from a guy that's botching Dion's talking points, that's rather funny.

    BTW--If you like Dion's plan, make your maximum contribution to him. Seriously.
  25. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    Since you are advocating for Dion, answer a few questions:

    If a plan takes in 14 billion in Carbon Tax, but only returns 9 billion in IT breaks, is it truly 'revenue neutral'?

    If you take that 5 billion 'surplus', and spend it on social programs instead of carbon-efficiency initiatives, is it honest to call it a 'green' plan?

    If Dion wanted to raise 5 billion for social programs, why doesn't he simply raise the GST by one point, and maintain the integrity of the green shift?

    How high will gas prices rise from production costs? Dion says there will be no tcarbon tax on gas, but the excise tax amounts to about $40 bucks a ton anyway, and all prepump stages will be subject to the CT.

    Is claiming that there will be 'no tax on gas' intellectually honest?

    How does Dion's plan actually reduce GHG? By how much? How will this be measured, especially since inflation is already forcing consumer restraint?

    Answer these, sprat, then maybe you can tell me why you like his plan so much.
  26. jack sprat from Canada writes: spicy i don't even know dions points but the FACTS are clear:

    a cap and trade will price carbon - looks like $40/ton
    that will lead to price increases, same as what harper argues against the green shift plan
    Harper has no tax breaks
    Lib plan starts at a $10/ton carbon price with no price increase on gasoline. A cap and trade will see an increase in gasoline prices.

    Sorry to ruin your night with facts.

    I simply point out it will be interesting to see how Harper will defend himself if carbon is priced....at all. Undoubtedly it will be one is a tax and his isn't. Will people believe him?
  27. jack sprat from Canada writes: Finally, in a review of the vaguaries of Harper's plan vs. green shift here is the summary:

    'That's why Ottawa needs to adopt a national strategy. And since Harper talks vaguely about cap-and-trade without real caps, Dion's approach is the more serious of the two.'

    Nuff said, right there.
  28. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    I need to see my question list answered.

    Also add another:

    Why is there no IT reduction in the top bracket? That would be a better way to improve productivity. As it stands, once your earnings hit the top magin (which isn't far off from an average urban income), your IT savings are maxed out. Does this make economic sense?
  29. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    Sprat--

    I believe you are quoting Lawrence Martin from last weekend.

    You're using HIM as an authority?? Too funny....
  30. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    Gotta go, sprat--

    Thanks for the fun.

    If you were planning on citing Jeffrey Simpson to bolster your position (in addition to LM), save it til next time..

    Nite
  31. Geoffrey May from Canada writes: Harper supports climate change .Harper supports higher energy costs . Harper doesn'r care about world food prices.Harper needs to be retired.
  32. Steven Koning from Bloomfield, ON, Canada writes: Didn't anyone read the article in yesterday's report on Business which quoted from a study which shows that doing nothing for 250 years gives a better outcome than to follow the Gore model?
  33. George S from Toronto, Canada writes: I wish that Harper would put some money where his mouth is. If he really wanted to combat both green house gasses and our energy needs he would pump lots of money into public transit. Not only more buses but electric types of rail such as streetcar, LRT, and subway varieties. This would greatly help us Canadians get to our different works but would also provide work to build and operate. I think commuter rail needs some serious investment as well to make it competitive with air travel for short flights and the private automobile. Rail is what originally held this country together and I hope that we respect its importance for our future also.
  34. Steve Just Steve, That's All from Canada writes: Geoffrey May from Canada writes: Harper supports climate change .Harper supports higher energy costs . Harper doesn'r care about world food prices.Harper needs to be retired.

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

    What a witty, insightful and informative post. Clearly, a towering intellect.

    Please do regale us with more of your penetrating insights.
  35. Steve Just Steve, That's All from Canada writes: Spicy Doc nailed it. The green-shaft will never happen.

    Either:

    1. Dion wins a minority; he 'shifts' his policy once again and signs on with the USA C&T deal.

    2. Dion wins nothing and is dumped. Either way, no green-shaft.

    It's all feel-good BS for the gullible.
  36. Liberals steal from hardworking.... from Canada writes: Steve Just Steve, That's All from Canada writes:

    It's all feel-good BS for the gullible.

    Posted 03/07/08 at 6:16 AM EDT
    ========

    Meanwhile Harper just feeds us BS with a few lawsuits to stifle free speech thrown in. YAY CPC!!!
  37. Steve Just Steve, That's All from Canada writes: Liberals steal from hardworking.... from Canada writes: Steve Just Steve, That's All from Canada writes:

    It's all feel-good BS for the gullible.

    Posted 03/07/08 at 6:16 AM EDT
    ========

    Meanwhile Harper just feeds us BS with a few lawsuits to stifle free speech thrown in. YAY CPC!!!

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Ya, whatever. The other parties have been known to litigate and spew BS as well so take that for what you will.

    The POINT I was trying to make is that the green-shaft is a non-starter. It's purpose is to try to embarass the government and nothing more.

    I contend that Dion has NO intention of implementing this plan of his.
    (He's stated on record many times that he's strongly opposed to a carbon tax).
  38. P. M. from Ottawa, Canada writes: I would trust Mr. Harper, who is an economist to guide us through rough economic times over Dion who just wants to tax us more.
  39. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Canada's position a la Harper: Sit on your Bum and wait for the Americans to take the lead (in three or four years; once they get a round to it)

    Colonial mentality at it's finest.

    Dion's Carbon tax is inflationary, and on top of already soaring energy costs, is simply the wrong policy. Most agree that the Yanks will opt for a hard Cap and Trade system, and there is absolutely no reason we can't get out in front on this issue.
    There is a perfectly workable program ready to gp Mr. Harper. Talk to Jack Layton.
  40. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Come on Kenny....THINK man! Get out ahead of the Americans? A country of 30 odd million vs a country of 300 odd million? Our biggest trading partner? You really think we can 'lead' them?

    If we were to 'get out ahead' as you suggest, then they don't come on board....Ooops! Backtrack, bigtime, or lose out. It's not colonial mentality to follow the US, just reality, and acting in Canada's best interests.
  41. Big Wayne Kerr from Canada writes: Liberals steal from hardworking( You're not the real LS, a$$) 'Meanwhile Harper just feeds us BS with a few lawsuits to stifle free speech'

    Since when did free speech include the right to make harmful unfounded irresponsible criminal allegations? The libz are gettign what they deserve, well almost. They deserve to be disbanded and some of them jailed, actually.
  42. scott thomas from Canada writes: No offense, Harpo, but the Canadian economy is your responsibility. Making a mess of it (and why is this a surprise, given Flighty's performance in Harris' Ontario, running cumulative hidden deficits while undergoing economic expansion) is also your responsibility. Using your mess as an excuse to degrade the environment further is like a vandal claiming that the damaged goods aren't worth that much anymore, so no big deal.
  43. M Warren from Ottawa, Canada writes: We do not need more taxes; the solution will have to be more extreme than that. We need to empty the cities, nationalize industry, collectivize agriculture, and stand our ground. The military should be strengthened, but trained in defensive insurgency to protect the Canadian Homeland. Canada should produce everything it uses itself, and develop a policy independent of every nation on earth. It is better to die on our feet as Canadians than to live on our knees as 'hewers of wood and drawers of water' for the multinationals, as this government is quickly forcing us to do.
  44. Jeffrey Hallow from Canada writes: Newsflash: Both Obama AND McCain support climate change measures, much tougher ones then Harper believes in.

    Come January Canada will be forced to comply with measures whether we have them here or not, since the US will enforce them if we want to sell them oil. Which means Canada will be the only Western country not taking any real action on climate change pretty soon.
  45. pole cat from Canada writes: Lol dion winning a minority hes lucky if he gets a seat,dont expect an election until 2009 october.
  46. Mike Quinlan from Gatineau QC, Canada writes: I get a kick out of all this my economist is better than yours crap.
    Folks there is a reason it is known as the dismal science.
  47. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Good Morning Don. If a Cap and Trade is right, we should go with it. Most agree that the US will go that way eventually, and the market will determine the Carbon price anyway (That's how C&T works.)

    There is enough flexibility in the system to accomodate a Continental pricing strategy if that is in Canada's best interests.

    Following the 'leader is a great policy.... for lemmings.
  48. John Doucette from manotick, Canada writes: So many idiots with aliases in one place.
  49. Is there anybody out there? from Canary Islands, Canada writes: The pregnant wig is unintelligible.
  50. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Kenneth.... at this point we only 'think' that's the system the US will go with. There's also, I understand, a strong possibility they won't go with anything for awhile.... until China and India are willing to come on board. So, for us to do it now, would just be hurting our industries, and our trade. They have enough problems at the moment, just don't need more thrown their way.

    Unless you're prepared to have even more people out of work, needing support from those still working, thus necessitating even higher taxes. NOT a good scenario...unless one's an idealist lefty.
  51. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: France and Germany are both running deficits of somewhat over 3% of GDP. Compare that to the 'massive' US deficits of about 1% of GDP. Europe ain't doing so great.
  52. Green Milos from Canada writes: 'Climate change' is so 2003. Move on. Turn the page.
  53. G Chan from Canada writes: >>>

    Who said this?

    June 1997
    'Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let's start up with a compliment. ... your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.

    First, facts about Canada. Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it. Canadians make no connection between the fact that they are a Northern European welfare state and the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States.'

    <<<
  54. G Chan from Canada writes: >>>

    BushAdministration's HalliburtonCentric PetroGreased policies has decimated American economy.

    Our AlbertaCentric PetroGreased PM has taken a similiar tack.
    Rather than be on top of the world sitting on treasure of BlackGold,
    we are following, destined to failure, because our PM has failed
    rest of Canada.

    For a conservative government whose forte is supposedly business,
    Canada has dropped from 2nd place in 2007 to 7th place in 2008
    as the best country for business.

    #1Denmark 2Ireland 3Finland 4US 5UK 6Sweden 7Canada

    By its own metric, this government has failed.
    It should rightly be kicked out, but not likely to be ...
    because,

    the money that greased the palms,
    will keep cranking up the cost of fossil fuel,
    playing/preying on spectre of extortionary costs.

    HowSimple, HowEffective, HowPurseFulfilling!

    >>>
  55. Old Sam Dark and Dirty from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: jack sprat from Canada writes: Lets remember Dion is not saying anything different, however, he proposes to SHIFT income taxes to make up for some of these economic changes.

    The Economist magazine and leading Economist of the TD bank agree with Dion.

    Why doesn't our 'economist' PM.........

    Because Dion is Lying.

    The tax SHIFT is really going to be a tax SHAFT to the middle class in this country. We are the people that will pay the highest proportion of this Carbon Tax and get the least amount of Income tax back.

    Also the people on fixed income in this country that actually pay very little income tax or none at all will be hit very hard...when you have a fixed income and ever increasing cost to live it is very hard to make ends meet.

    When seniors are paying more to heat their homes and to buy their food and medicine and take a cab or bus or drive their car who is going to help them out? Dion? I doubt it.
  56. Green Milos from Canada writes: Truth hurts doesn't it G Chan?
  57. Stan L from Canada writes: Our PM is a follower and not a leader it's a simple as that....what's his plan? Oh you can argue about cap and trade and all of the bafflegab that comes out of his office, but the plan is simply to wait....wait so we can do what the US is doing (becuase everyone know if the US is doing it it must be good for Canada....LOL) Climate change is our issue to be solved in a way that is good for Canada, waiting for the US or delaying becuase of some made up excuse that if all countries are not on board, it's no good for us to start anything is irresponsible, lacks vision, leadership......his actions are not worthy of the office he holds.
  58. G Chan from Canada writes: >>>

    Green Milos from Canada writes: 'Truth hurts doesn't it G Chan?'

    G Chan says,
    if the truth you refer to is the statement
    that the PM has failed Canada ...
    yes it hurts because many/most Canadians will be hurt
    by the directions and actions taken by this current government.

    >>>
  59. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Jack Sprat. Dion's tax shaft would be devestating to lower, fixed income seniors.

    Grey Heads....get out and vote next election...NOT Liberal.... you have the power to pull the plug on Dion's nonsense!
  60. Wendy Stone from Kitchener, Canada writes: WHAT? Help me here. How will paying more for gasoline at the pumps and paying more for food and the subsequent recession that follows ... how, exactly, will this lead more people around the world to decide that burning more fossil fuels and heating up the planet even more is a good thing (especially since heating up the planet even more will result in even more of an economic crisis in areas that get flooded or have droughts?)?????????????????????????
  61. Green Milos from Canada writes: G Chan from Canada writes:
    if the truth you refer to is the statement
    that the PM has failed Canada ...
    yes it hurts because many/most Canadians will be hurt
    by the directions and actions taken by this current government.

    _____________-
    Are you trying to write in haiku? If you are, you suck at it. If you're trying to make a point, you suck at that too. In 1997 Canada was a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the words. This government is in the process of fixing it. Now, if you want to be taxed to hell, get mugged by a guy who'll be out on the street tomorrow and pay a carbon tax on bananas you're going to hate Canada. Now quit your whining and get to work.
  62. Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Stan L. Spoken like a true idealistic, unrealistic Dipper! :-) Jacky boy would be proud of you :-)
  63. Stan L from Canada writes: Don Adams, The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Stan L. Spoken like a true idealistic, unrealistic Dipper! :-) Jacky boy would be proud of you :-)

    Yeah Don, fiddling while Rome burned worked well for Nero too.....maybe Harper will get lucky......
  64. Scare Crow from Canada writes: M Warren from Ottawa, Canada writes: We do not need more taxes; the solution will have to be more extreme than that. We need to empty the cities, nationalize industry, collectivize agriculture, and stand our ground. The military should be strengthened, but trained in defensive insurgency to protect the Canadian Homeland. Canada should produce everything it uses itself, and develop a policy independent of every nation on earth. It is better to die on our feet as Canadians than to live on our knees as 'hewers of wood and drawers of water' for the multinationals, as this government is quickly forcing us to do.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Wow Warren, You just advocated Juche - That is North Korea's term for self -reliance. and yes you were right when you say we will die as the nokors were starving with the threat of wide-spread famine that they have to ask the South and other countries for aid.
  65. Cognitively Cogitative from Con-job, Canada writes: Best way to insure there will be no international climate plan: Demand that China and India have the same goals. The west is the example that China and India are looking to when they want cars for their many, many people. The west needs to provide a new example and say 'here, we're changing, you can (and must) too.' Obviously Harper is not serious about this issue. It should be noted to all who have forgotten, Harper was a denier of the effects humans have on climate change shortly before he won office. He works for the tar sands corporations.
  66. Big Wayne Kerr from Kumbaya, Canada writes: G Chan 'the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States.'

    You didn't think any of those things were problems, Chan?

    Mike Quinlan 'there is a reason it is known as the dismal science. '

    That's true, do you know what it is?
  67. Grant Bowen from New West, BC, Canada writes: everyone agrees we need the BRIC countries on side. But to do nothing because they won't play along is childish.
  68. Greg Out West from Canada writes: Green Milos from Canada writes: 'Climate change' is so 2003. Move on. Turn the page.
    ------------------------------------------------------------It's like the clothes in my closet. They were out of fashion 20 years ago but I won't through them out hoping that some day they'll be cool again. It's the same for the liberals and the green shaft. Gee maybe one day people all over the world will get stupid again and our plan just may have a chance to tax the sh!t out of everyone. Let the good times roll on the corrupt ship liberal.
  69. David Griffith from NS, Canada writes: Rick C from Canada writes:'...The rhetoric suggests mankind is facing the worst disaster of all time...

    ...and the politicians and enviro extremists think we should focus on 6% of the increase and give a pass to 94% of the problem.

    Right...

    ...maybe I should trim a hang nail the next time my leg is cut off'
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Excellent post, Rick C. Seems at a time when the world is in peril, those very Liberal supporters and Save-the-Earth types are actually more concerned with saving the PARTY, i.e. Dion's skin, than the Earth itsself. 6% of 'saving the world' vs 94% of it. Thats bad, bad math, Liberals. So after you 'save' that 6%, are you going to locate that little oasis, put up a nice fence (well, maybe a dome) and live out yours days there, happy, knowing YOU are immune to that nasty 94% that the rest of world permitted to exist? Will you feel proud? All warm inside, while the remainder of the planet rots before your eyes?
  70. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Those who insist on supporting the foot-dragging tactics of attempting to get India and China onboard clearly don't understand economics.

    The vast majority of the products these nations produce go to the western world. If therefore we change western regulations and requirements for imports, the world's factory floor will HAVE to change.

    Ipso facto.

    The reality is that pollution and energy use need to be controlled. As the #1 drivers for their creation the principle demands we lead by example.

    Given the obvious shortage of oil these days it hardly seems like we need any more incentive than we already have.
  71. A Canuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: It is funny how this country works...we get majority Liberal governments that tax us to death, spends on futile pet projects and basically do nothing to advance Canada's strenght in the world and then once in a while, we are fortunate enough to get a Conservative government that instill long lasting beneficial policies and then gets kicked out again...we are fortunate to have Harper in charge right now...VERY fortunate.
  72. jack sprat from Canada writes: Spicy, Why do people like the pplan? It returns money to them. It also cuts business taxes which will also slopw any inflationary effects to a degree. Remember, any cap and trade will have at last a $40/ton price immediately and Harper has NO tax breaks to mitigate any of the effects. As far as $5 billion surplus.....if one actuallty reads the Shift plan, go to page 43 and tell me where you see anyof this 'surplus'. All revenues are accounted for in tax shift programs. Programs to mitigate some of the effects of some price increases that will occur. Harper says price increases will occur (20% to electricity and 12% to natural gas at $40/ton carbon price) in his Turn the Corner plan but has nothing to offset these inflationary effects. Nothing for business, nothing for those in rural areas, nothing for seniors. Just use your 2% cut in GST. How much will it reduce.....that remains to be seen, but the plan itself raises awareness and measurements will have to take place. The other question is how much will Harpers plan reduce? He spews some numbers but has never given specifics on a cap and trade other than saying he likes $65/ton carbon price. So in both cases we will need to find out but the Economist and expert economists agree that it is teh right way to start, better than the Turn the Corner Plan. Spicy, you still have yet to explain why the Economist would agree with Dion and not harper. And remember, seniors, low income Canadians are far worse under the Harper cap and trade model because THERE ARE NO TAX BREAKS. Yet prices 'on everything' will rise faster. Should higher incomes get a better break, yes, I would like that and hopefully we can see a change there. BUT remember, under Turn the Corner you get no break. And small business and corporations get a break. The Shift raises no additonal revenues. It gives all the amount back in income tax breaks. The Harpo plan has more inflationary effects with no tax breaks.
  73. Dakota K from Canada writes: And the myth of man-made climate change continues....who will pay back all the billions of wasted dollars when we finally discover this whole global climate change industry is a farce? Carbon dioxide does not lead to temperature change, temperature change leads to changes in carbon dioxide!
  74. David Griffith from NS, Canada writes: jack sprat from Canada writes: . The Shift raises no additonal revenues. It gives all the amount back in income tax breaks...
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And you seriously BELIEVE that, LOL? Let me guess. You read that in Grimm's Fairy Tales.

    Who was it that said 'a sucker is born every minute...'?
  75. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: A Canuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: '...It is funny how this country works...we get majority Liberal governments that tax us to death, spends on futile pet projects and basically do nothing to advance Canada's strenght in the world...'

    What in the world are you talking about?

    Neither Trudeau nor Mulroney did us any favours in the spending department. Both spent like drunken soldiers.

    Michael Wilson and Paul Martin however saw the coming trends of services and used this to bolster the Canadian economy through the GST.

    During Harper's short tenure he's spent like Trudeau/Mulroney and cut back the gains made by Wilson/Martin.

    Any rational analysis of the situation shows that it is not party that matters so much as the personal character of the individuals in charge and their tendency to pander or not-pander for votes.

    Harper's an unmitigated disaster, and as a redtory I cannot vote for someone so irresponsible as this man, who has proven that his quest for a majority overrides all other considerations.
  76. J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Dakota K; And Santa Clause leads to the development of Christmas. Thanks for coming out.
  77. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Dakota K from Canada writes: And the myth of man-made climate change continues....who will pay back all the billions of wasted dollars when we finally discover this whole global climate change industry is a farce? Carbon dioxide does not lead to temperature change, temperature change leads to changes in carbon dioxide!
    =======================

    First of all, no economy ever suffered from reducing pollution and increasing the efficiency and sustainability of technology. In fact, it's the exact opposite. Like the space program this technology shift will prove the most productive thing done in the early 21st century.

    Secondly, CO2 is most assuredly a greenhouse gas and is not a debatable point. The only debatable point is its prominence in the list of factors that alter earth's climate, of which there are many.
  78. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Kenneth Yurchuk:-- I am really not sure how you can state that a cap-and-trade system will have no inflationary effect, but that a carbon tax will. Both, as Jack Sprat capably argued, tax carbon. Only in NDP thinking would taxing major emitters have no effect on 'working families'. In any case, as one financial analyst proposed yesterday on BBC World News, we now have an inflationary psychology. There is no need for a real cause for inflation when the expectation that prices will rise serves the same purpose. Mr. Harper's insinuation that he commands the compromise position to which the U.S. and EU are gravitating is laughable in its self-aggrandizement.
  79. David Griffith from NS, Canada writes: Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes:
    ...During Harper's short tenure he's spent like Trudeau/Mulroney and cut back the gains made by Wilson/Martin...
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Indeed. That evil Harper actually CUTTING taxes for the already overtaxed population. What was he thinking? That I might want that money? Unreal. Thank heavens we have politicians like Dion who are ready to tax us even more, since as we all know, Liberal governments are so much MORE qualified at spending our hard-earned dollars than we silly citizens are. I don't knopw about you, but heck, I can WAIT for the next new Canadian tax. So exciting!
  80. Big Wayne Kerr from Kumbaya, Canada writes: PK while CO2 like H20 is a 'greenhouse' gas, neither of them are pollution.
    Wasting resources attempting to reduce emissions of a clean harmless , even helpful trace gas is insane, especially when those same finite resources are diverted from reducing actual harmful pollution.
  81. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: David Griffith from NS, Canada writes: '...That evil Harper actually CUTTING taxes for the already overtaxed population. What was he thinking?...'

    Not too much apparently given that he ignored all the most prominent economists in the country to cut THE WRONG TAX just to garner votes that never materialized.

    Conservatives sacrificed a lot to get the GST in place because it was the right thing to do. Harper merely revealed his deep cynicism and lack of moral fibre by reversing our gains.

    Tax spending not income. It's pretty simple really.

    Instead he spends like a liberal and erodes 30 years of conservative gains in a mere two years.

    Defend that all you like.
  82. Greg Van Zandt from Canada writes: Meanwhile greenhouse gasses have fallen since the CPC came to power while they rose by 28% under the Libs.
  83. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    sprat--

    You still doing that 'Hey look, Dion's giving us a tax-cut!' nonsense?

    Sheesh.

    PS--You didn't answer any of the important questions, like how skimming CT revenue and spending it on social programs reduces GHG.

    Funny how the revenue skimmed for his pet projects is the same as would happen with a 1% GST hike.

    Care to explain why Dion doesn't simply promise to raise the GST by 1%?

    Wouldn't that be the honest thing to do?

    It wouldn't have anything to do with what Marzolini told him in St John's, would it?
  84. Brian Sexsmith from Toronto, Canada writes: I think Andre Carrel is correct. It is unlikely that European countries will abandon their many accomplishments and progressive efforts in order to sit back with Canada and see what the Americans will do. But that is the definition of Conservative leadership - no need to set an example - just follow the U.S.
  85. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Big Wayne Kerr from Kumbaya, Canada writes: PK while CO2 like H20 is a 'greenhouse' gas, neither of them are pollution.
    ===================

    Water vapour is the active component in making weather. Ever hear of the lake effect? On a global scale water vapour cause MODERATION of temperature. Water vapour either absorbs OR radiates heat depending on the situation. It's why the earth is neither a baked Alaska nor an iceball.

    Atmospheric CO2 on the otherhand (ie. the stuff that gets up into the troposphere) is not available to plants and traps heat literally like a greenhouse rather than having the moderating effect of water vapour.
  86. Rick C from Canada writes: Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes:

    'Not too much apparently given that he ignored all the most prominent economists in the country to cut THE WRONG TAX just to garner votes that never materialized.'

    Phil that argument is getting pretty old.

    The difference between a GST and an income tax cut is about $20/yr for the average Canadian. Some do slightly better with a GST cut; others with a income tax cut.

    The GST cut was a political move; even Conservative MPs have said so.

    However the suggestion that cutting the GST was bad is ridiculous.
  87. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Greg Van Zandt from Canada writes: Meanwhile greenhouse gasses have fallen since the CPC came to power while they rose by 28% under the Libs.
    =====

    Our GHGs have risen every year for decades. If what you mean is that they didn't rise as quickly under the conservatives, then you may be right, but then they've only had two years so far eh?

    There's a double edge sword for you Greg. Either Harper's been in power long enough for you to claim the good with the bad or not.

    You can't have it both ways.
  88. Big Wayne Kerr from Kumbaya, Canada writes: Phil King

    'Water vapour is the active component in making weather. ' and also a greenhouse gas that works in exactly the same way as CO2. - except it is responsible for the vast majority of the greenhouse effect of our atmosphere that makes our planet habitable, together with the small contribution of the trace CO2.
  89. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Rick C from Canada writes: '...The GST cut was a political move; even Conservative MPs have said so. However the suggestion that cutting the GST was bad is ridiculous...'

    No Rick, it isn't. What the CPC did was reduce taxpayer capacity to chose when they pay taxes and to whom while increasing government control over spending decisions.

    You're just making excuses for the horse you put your money on.

    If conservatives of all people won't stand up for the principle of something, then who the heck will?
  90. L Harder from Canada writes: Martha, your comments about economy vs environment are outdated.

    With oil going through the roof, economies need to scramble for less expensive alternatives and increased efficiencies. This will also happen to make our economy greener.

    Harper like complacency will result in huge fall back in the economy as oil reaches higher. He needs to force through the changes that give people an alternative to oil and be hard at work throwing out the regulatory boondoggles that support an obsolete technology. There is lots of work to prepare for the economic shock and governments are sitting on their hands.
  91. Rick C from Canada writes: Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: 'Those who insist on supporting the foot-dragging tactics of attempting to get India and China onboard clearly don't understand economics.'

    No offense but if you buy the apocalyptic warnings of the enviro extremists then not getting China and India on board is pure stupidity.

    Projected GHG emission increases by 2020:

    Alberta oilsands: 50 - 80 MT

    China: 1200 MT

    India: ~700 MT

    The problem that has been identified is excess GHG emissions; alarmists like Al Gore talk like the end of the world is imminent...

    ...and yet they suggest exempting countries that will account for over 97% of global increases in the next 12 years.

    It doesn't get more disingenous than that.
  92. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Big Wayne Kerr from Kumbaya, Canada writes: 'Water vapour is the active component in making weather. ' and also a greenhouse gas that works in exactly the same way as CO2. - except it is responsible for the vast majority of the greenhouse effect of our atmosphere that makes our planet habitable, together with the small contribution of the trace CO2...'
    ==========
    In trying to claim similarity you're missing the obvious differences between these two. Water vapour travels throughout the entire system gathering and radiating heat. CO2 does no such thing.

    The amount of water vapour in the system is relative. Once CO2 is in the atmosphere however, the only way to get rid of it on a meaningful scale is photosynthesis.

    Water vapour is the central mechanism by which the earth regulates its temperature. On the otherhand the earth has spent a few billion years reducing the amount of CO2 in the system.

    The two are most decidedly NOT the same thing.
    • Posted 03/07/08 at 10:45 A