Harper's New Coat of Paint

Excuse my extended (near 2 week) absence from blogging, I had A LOT of catching up to do on things post-election. But hopefully I should be able to keep it up now at least a few times a week from here on in. So with my return comes a review of the new Harper cabinet (see the full list of ministers below).

The Good:
- More women in cabinet, 11 out of 37 isn’t a record but it’s a massive improvement on the 7 out of 30 when Harper first came to power.
- Gary Lunn demoted. While Harper will never admit Lunn was a terrible minister and that firing Linda Keen was a mistake, at least this is an implicit recognition of that.
- John Baird demoted. As likely the worst and most partisan environment minister in history, few will be sad to see him out of that portfolio. Not that transport is a good fit for him either (especially if he’s still taking pointers from his friend Jim “we’re not in the pothole business” Flaherty) but at least he’s been knocked down the ladder in terms of profile.
- Leona Aglukkaq as Health Minister. Few had predicted this, but it’s a good choice, she was Health Minister in the Nunavut government so she’s obviously got the background. She also makes for the first female Health Minister I believe since Diane Marleau in the Chretien government.
- Lawrence Cannon at Foreign Affairs. Not really great, but Harper didn’t exactly have a strong hand to choose from, so probably there wasn’t anybody better he could have picked and at least Cannon has cabinet experience (Quebec Liberals) beyond this government.
- Larger cabinet. Yes it does cost more money, but at this time we need competent government and while I’m obviously not so sure we’ll get that with this government, overloading a smaller cabinet with work would not have helped matters at this crucial time. If Harper doesn’t start delegating matters the country will suffer.

The Bad:
- Ontario bashing, over the top partisanship and misnagement is rewarded by Stephen Harper
- “Ontario is the last place to invest” Flaherty stays where he is after turning a $12 billion surplus into a virtually certain deficit
- “small man of Confederation” Peter Van Loan is promoted to Public Safety
- Tony Clement is given Industry which I guess depending on who you talk is either lower, about the same, or higher in health in profile, but rumours were this is what Tony wanted and after the job he did at his old post (joking about listeriosis and being AWOL during the crisis, calling doctors unethical for supporting Insite, and failing to meet promises on wait times) anything but a demotion was undeserved.
- Gerry Ritz kept at Agriculture after badly mismanaging the listeriosis crisis. He deserved to be fired before the revelations of his jokes on the matter and it’s an absolute shame that as the crisis continues to unravel that he remains at the helm. It’s friends before country for Harper as I’ve said before.
- Jason Kenney (king of smear), now manages our immigration system. With the massive powers now invested in this minister through recent immigration changes this is scary indeed.
- Stockwell Day at Trade. This will be huge important with a new U.S. administration especially if it’s Obama. Day was not the right man for this job, too partisan and it’s not clear to me what background he has for this position. Someone more middle of the road with experience in negotiation would have been more appropriate.
- Chuck Strahl keeps his post at Indian Affairs. I think it’s about time for the Harper government to put a fresh face in there with a new start with Aboriginal Peoples. Their results on this file to date (notwithstanding the extremely important and overdue residential schools apology) and the lack of any new approach offered to them by this party in the last election have been disappointing to say the least.

Overall:
With the economy being the main issue right now, I have to say it doesn’t inspire confidence to see the main economic portfolios of Finance, Industry, and Infrastructure going to the Harris crew who wrecked Ontario's finances (and are only getting started on the nation's), while Trade goes to Stockwell Day who seems ill-suited for this incredibly delicate post.

Harper said the economy will be his main focus over the next year and on that basis he’s failed in his first task in assembling a team to deal primarily with the current crisis. While there were some improvements (though the extra women in cabinet will only be meaningful if Harper actually gives them a voice and doesn't continue to run a one-man show), I have to say on the whole this is a disappointment as Harper has been unable to recognize which ministers were doing poorly (with a couple exceptions) and instead rewarded them by keeping them in their high profile posts or even worse promoting them. Meanwhile, he has also promoted the most partisan members of his last cabinet at a time when all parties need to work togther.

The failure to learn from mistakes and to reward his loyal friends over doing what’s best for the country will ultimately be a contributor to Harper’s downfall.

--------------------------------------------------------
The Cabinet List:
- Jim Flaherty - Minister of Finance
- Lawrence Cannon - Minister of Foreign Affairs
- Tony Clement - Minister of Industry
- Stockwell Day - Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway
- Leona Aglukkaq - Minister of Health
- Jim Prentice - Minister of the Environment
- John Baird - Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities
- Robert Nicholson - Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
- Jason Kenney - Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism
- Gerry Ritz - Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board - Chuck Strahl - Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and
- Peter MacKay - Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway
- Peter Van Loan - Minister of Public Safety
- Christian Paradis - Minister of Public Works and Government Services
- Vic Toews - President of the Treasury Board
- Rona Ambrose - Minister of Labour
- Diane Finley - Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development
- Bev J. Oda - Minister of International Cooperation
- Josée Verner - Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister for La Francophonie
- Jay D. Hill - Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
- James Moore - Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
- Lisa Raitt - Minister of Natural Resources
- Gail Shea - Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
- Jean-Pierre Blackburn - Minister of National Revenue and Minister of State(Agriculture)
- Greg Thompson - Minister of Veterans Affairs
- Marjory LeBreton - Leader of the Government in the Senate and Minister of State (Seniors)
- Gary Lunn - Minister of State (Sport)
- Gordon O’Connor - Minister of State and Chief Government Whip
- Helena Guergis - Minister of State (Status of Women)
- Diane Ablonczy - Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism)
- Rob Merrifield - Minister of State (Transport)
- Lynne Yelich - Minister of State (Western Economic Diversification)
- Steven Fletcher - Minister of State (Democratic Reform)
- Gary Goodyear - Minister of State (Science and Technology)
- Denis Lebel - Minister of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)
- Keith Ashfield - Minister of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)
- Peter Kent - Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)

Recommend this Post

Still Waiting…But I’m Not Holding My Breath

It’s now been over two weeks since the Green Shift was launched and much to the chagrin of the opponents of this plan I’m still waiting for some things to happen…
- Still waiting to see the FIRST respected non-partisan affiliated economist to say the Green Shift will be bad for the Canadian economy. Perhaps Stephen Harper should stop calling himself an economist…
- Still waiting to see the FIRST respected non-partisan affiliated environmental group to say the Green Shift won’t likely result in significant decreases in greenhouse gas emissions. Perhaps the NDP should clue in...
- Still waiting for John Baird (you know our Environment Minister) to make his FIRST public comments on the Green Shift plan. After losing all credibility with the rest of the world, I guess Baird has lost credibility with his own party as well. Either that or Baird knows well enough that his party is wrong on the Green Shift and can't bring himself to parrot the Conservative talking points.
- Still waiting to see the FIRST sign of real global leadership from Stephen Harper on climate change. Harper's "you first" attitude is driving Canada's reputation down the toilet
- Still waiting for the FIRST public poll that shows that public support for the Liberals has been hurt by the Green Shift like all the naysayers claimed it would. Guess Canadians are a lot smarter than the pundits gave them credit.
- Still waiting for the alliance of Liberal Premiers to come out against this plan like had been predicted…
- Still waiting for anything to be up on the NDP website about the Green Shift SINCE the plan was released (the release they put out before the plan was released on taxing the poor was completely debunked and not even Layton parrots those talking points anymore). I guess the cat has caught the NDP’s tongue…I saw Layton on CTV’s Question Period and all he could say was that he feared the Green Shift wouldn’t reduce emissions (which no environmental group agrees with him on) and that Stephen Harper’s comments about the plan were unbecoming and wrong. I can see Jack is struggling here…
- Still waiting for Jack Layton to explain how his cap-and-trade plan can be implemented “right now” as he claims. Do you know who is in government right now Jack? Do you know how cap-and-trade fared in Europe? You’ll get a real effective cap-and-trade system (like the one the Liberals proposed over a year ago that includes absolute targets) with a Liberal government, no sooner, that’s just reality.
- Still waiting for Jack Layton to acknowledge that he is completely off-side with the entire environmental community with his criticisms of the Green Shift (when confronted with this on QP all he said was basically “I like debate” but couldn’t name any groups that support his view of the Green Shift). The best approach is going to be implementing the Green Shift as soon as possible and then working to set up an effective cap-and-trade system. That’s what the Liberals have proposed and what everyone who is serious about the environment agrees on. The NDP would rather we dither and even then only want to tackle half the problem (GHG emissions from big business, but not from individuals).
- Still waiting for Stephen Harper to stop cowering from a debate with Stephane Dion on climate change. With Harper even afraid now to debate Dion in Calgary it's obvious to everyone that Harper knows he's got nothing intelligent to say or propose himself on the environment.

Something tells me I should stop waiting for all these things to happen… In the meantime I’ll continue to be glad to be supporting a plan that all the experts, and an ever growing cross-partisan coalition, agree is the best plan for our environment and economy.

While the NDP and Conservatives remain in denial about this plan, Stephane Dion will continue to be the only adult in this debate telling Canadians how it’s well past time for Canada to show leadership on this issue and how he'll get the job done.

At the G8 conference in Japan this upcoming week (July 7-9) I think it will be made painfully clear why Canada needs a leader like Stephane Dion as our Prime Minister.


UPDATE: There’s been a Baird sighting! He’s come out of hiding to remind us why he's been kept hidden all this time. Thanks John for lending even more credibility to those economists who are most supportive of the Green Shift! I guess it was too good to be true to expect Baird to remain in hibernation forever (though the Conservatives may soon regret that they let him out), but still waiting for all the rest of these things to happen...

Recommend this Post

Conservative Party of Canada: Lying and Proud of It!

So when B.C. implements a revenue neutral tax shift John Baird goes to pains to say its not at odds with what the federal government is doing and says the tax shift “works for British Columbia”, but when Stephane Dion proposes something similar (and in a way that doesn’t add any new gas taxes unlike Campbell), it’s all a TAX TRICK! It’s a TAX ON EVERYTHING! You can’t walk across the street anymore without evil Stephane Dion taxing you for it if he had his way. I’m curious how a tax on EVERYTHING would really work, I hope to hear more.

Seriously they can’t even attack this without resorting to outlandish lies. This will work well in the debates I’m sure.

Then there is the timeline of "dirty tricks":
- 1917: Income taxes instituted. What a dirty trick let’s abolish them! Yet you raised them in your first budget and right now they sit exactly where they were when you came into office.
- 1932: Gas taxes instituted. Let’s abolish them! Oh wait you said you’d keep them as they are and they were important for funding infrastructure.
- 1941: Employment insurance instituted. Let’s abolish that too! Seriously though they are criticizing the EI surplus at the SAME TIME as they are DEFENDING it before the Supreme Court of Canada. If the Government of Canada lost that case it could owe as much $55 Billion: plunging Canada far into debt. Great way to undermine your own case Conservative Party!
- 1991: The GST! The people who put that into place were such liars! Oh wait a minute.... And every living breathing economist (including Stephen Harper privately I’m sure) agrees it is better to cut income taxes than the GST.
- 2004: The McGuinty health tax! Perhaps they should have mentioned that it was thanks to the likes of Baird, Flaherty and Clement that it was necessary and McGuinty won a larger majority after putting it in place.
- 2008: Gordon Campbell institutes a revenue neutral carbon tax in BC. Income taxes are cut to offset new taxes on carbon emissions. Plan receives widespread approval from economists, environmentalists, and even from the federal government.

Oh that last one wasn’t there? Curious that they felt the need to include McGuinty’s health tax and attack Ontario again but wouldn’t include Gordon Campbell’s filthy “tax trick”. I wonder why? Is it because this entire campaign is predicated on a lie? British Columbians know at least first hand that a revenue neutral tax shift can work and even Conservatives like John Baird gave faint praise to it. But these Conservatives have never been consistent, they’ve always been about just mindless attacks.

By the time the election actually comes (I think we can win now, but I think Liberals will wait till the fall and will win then) Conservatives will have thrown everything they had at this away and will have nothing left for the campaign.

Once Dion actually reveals his plan the Conservatives will be exposed as nothing but a party that wasted millions on a bunch of lies and juvenile attacks.

I’m still waiting on that first positive ad two and a half years later….You’d think a real leader could come up with something positive to say about himself by now don’t you?

Recommend this Post

How to Make Enemies and Irritate People

Leaked from the PMO comes a new guidebook for everyone who always wanted to have more enemies and get on people’s nerves but wasn’t sure of the best way to do it. Now experts Stephen Harper, John Baird and Jim Flaherty will show you how! From wars with the press, discouraging investment in pesky provinces, picking fights on the world stage, to every witty insult you could ever fling your opponents way, this book has it all! Even includes more up to date advice on how when you have no plans to accomplish anything worthwhile of your own in life you can slam anyone who does! If you love knocking people down or your lifelong goal is to have as many enemies as possible then this guidebook is for you!

Already those who have gotten an advance copy have been raving…..

“Best read in years. Chapter 2 on linking on your opponents to terrorists brought a tear to my eye”
- Dick Cheney, United States Vice-President

“Really Stephen learned all this from me”
- Brian Mulroney, Former Prime Minister

“I am so so proud of how these guys have conducted themselves in Ottawa. I have to say I don’t feel sad about leaving public office as long as these guys are carrying on my legacy”
- Mike Harris, Former Ontario Premier

“Wars with the press and the Premiers, meddling in U.S. elections, muzzling a weak caucus, and daily character assassination in the House of Commons, reading this reminds me why it has been so hard to leave these great guys behind. Truly class acts.”
- Ian Brodie, outgoing Chief of Staff to Stephen Harper

“This guidebook is gold. Once again we see how Harper is playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers. The way I see it the more enemies Harper makes the closer he is to a majority!”
- Stephen Taylor, Conservative blogger

“I was thrilled to see the brilliance of my ‘small man of Confederation’ comment finally explained to me”
- Peter Van Loan, Conservative Party of Canada House Leader and Minister of Democratic Renewal

“My Question Period playbook finally laid out to all! Now the masses will finally understand!”
- Pierre Poilievre, Conservative Party of Canada MP

“It’s a shame the Liberals made the Conservatives do all these terrible things. Stephane Dion should be apologizing to Canadians for making the Conservatives act this way.”
- Jack Layton, NDP leader

“This will serve as an invaluable resource in my quest to be the leader of the free world. I thought Bush had great ideas for my campaign, but wow these guys can’t be topped!”
- John McCain, United States Republican Party Presidential Nominee

“I look forward to working for these guys in Ottawa – if you thought they were mean before, just wait for part 2!”
- Guy Giorno, incoming Chief of Staff to Stephen Harper and former Chief of Staff to Mike Harris

It's destined to be a best seller!

Recommend this Post

Conservatives Failing Canadians on Economic Policy

While the NDP are throwing in the towel on environmental policy, from the very beginning, the Conservatives abandoned their principles on what they know is sound economic policy in favour of trying to win extra votes. However, Conservative disregard for good policy is only getting worse with their latest attacks on tax shifting.

Many economists are solidly behind the idea of tax shifting - it rewards work and investment, it lowers the tax burden where it matters most and it punishes behavior that has a real cost to the environment. Economists agree that this is the best way to address climate change while having sound economic policy at the same time. Conservatives may say "well we don't care what economists think!", well you sure do when it suits you - Conservatives have quoted Jack Mintz (who it seems has contributed most of the ideas of the tax shifting plan) before to defend corporate tax cuts and have used whatever economist they could find that ever criticized something Stephane Dion said and then put the economist's quotes on their website.

Yet why do Conservatives oppose tax shifting? Because in their view everything proposed by a Liberal must be condemned and because they don't really care about the environment or sound economic policy - all that matters to them is staying in power.

In the end tax shifting isn't a strictly Liberal idea though, it was proposed by an economist (not known to be a very left-wing field) and the idea of putting a price on carbon has been embraced by staunch conservatives such as Preston Manning and Andrew Coyne, not to mention the Economist magazine (known for having a right-wing bent). Not to mention the Conservatives have frequently praised Gordon Campbell as a model Premier, yet it is Campbell who has implemented a carbon tax-shifting plan (that sounds quite similar to what the Liberal policy is shaping up to be) and John Baird paid Campbell's tax shifting approach a mild compliment saying it might work in BC. There was certainly no strong criticism of the Campbell plan, yet now something similar is proposed at the federal level and Conservatives are pretending it would be end of the world? How do Conservatives explain these contradictions?

Well by distortions and dishonesty that's how. They will refer to the past and say the greenhouse gas emissions went up (even though intensity went dramatically down and the Conservative environmental plan only has intensity targets) as if somehow that discredits the plan, they will claim the policy will raise the price of gas at the pump when it won't, and they will use whatever other scare tactics they can think of. In fact the willful distortions have already started, as we have Baird saying it's a "gas tax increase" and Marvin Tweed (maybe he's next in line as their spokesman) saying it's a "new massive gas tax". I guess this is all they have.

Conservatives will continue to distract and distort, but they certainly won't try to explain why economists and other staunch conservatives back a tax shifting plan and yet they don't.

When the Liberal policy is actually presented Conservatives will have to explain why they spent so long misleading Canadians instead of actually presenting a real plan to help our economy and our environment.

In the end it will be clear that Conservatives are more interested in attacking the Liberals than putting forth sound economic policy. It was the case with the GST cuts that no one believes is sound economic policy and in the end very few Canadians have saved money off it, as retailers just increased their prices to compensate. Stupid policy but they thought it would be good to club the Liberals with. They have even risked bringing us into deficit just so they could run an ad saying Dion would raise the GST. Again more about scare mongering than saving our economy. The same is true with this their vicious opposition to a tax shifting plan.

Conservatives have always been poor economic managers, Brian Mulroney and Mike Harris being the worst recent examples, but few have been as reckless in their economic policy as this Conservative government. They spent the cupboard bare, have no plan for the economy and expect Canadians to believe we can trust them in a recession?

The Liberal record is clear - we fixed a Conservative mess and ushered in the strongest economy in decades. Canadians will see that record matched up against the Conservative one in the next election. Fiscal responsibility is now a Liberal bedrock and it never has been for Harper's Conservatives. Though it is now time to match fiscal responsibility with environmental responsibility, but it's important to do it in a way that's best for the economy.

That's what the Liberals are proposing and that's why economists and small-c conservatives support it. It's using market mechanisms to help our economy and the planet and anyone who is environmentally conscious will have MORE money in their pocket and that I think is really the bottom line for many voters.

So the message to soft Conservative voters (no point wasting time on those who don't believe in climate change and the hardcore partisans) in the next election will be clear: The Conservative party doesn't know how to manage the economy and only pretend to care about the environment. If you want solid economic managers who will use solid market mechanisms to be a world leader on combating climate change then the only party that will get the job done is the Liberal Party.

Recommend this Post

Congratulations Stockwell Day!!!

You've been voted most likely to be investigated!! This may yet be Day's most monumental victory to date! Honourable mention goes to John "you first" Baird, who finished just one vote behind.

For those Conservative MPs who might feel let down they didn't win this time you may be consoled by knowing that at least one person out there thought you were worthy of being the next Conservative to come under investigation. Keep up the good work and you may yet just be that Conservative.

And to be fair not every Conservative had a chance to be validated by my readers in this poll, so maybe, just maybe, it will be another Conservative who gets the honour of an RCMP, ethics commissioner or other watchdog investigation (Scott notes that Minister of Agriculture Gerry Ritz may get the honour).

Either way I don't think we will have to wait long to find out who it will be.

For the record here were the results (I should note that it was disappointing to see many more votes in this poll than in an earlier poll about which colour sheme this blog should adopt - makes me wonder what the world is coming to - people need to get their priorities straight here!):

Who Will be the Next Conservative to be Subject to a Formal Investigation (by the Ethics Commissioner, RCMP, Elections Canada, etc…)

Stockwell Day - 22%
John Baird – 20%
Stephen Harper – 12%
Gary Lunn – 7%
Jean-Pierre Blackburn – 12%
Pierre Poilievre – 8%
Jim Prentice – 8%
Lawrence Cannon – 3%

Recommend this Post

More Clear Evidence the Cons Environmental Plan is a Sham & What Liberals Can Do

As if we needed much more evidence that the Conservative plan was a sham, but this report just adds more to the pile. On its surface the report may not seem positive but I think this report says quite a lot of why the Conservative plan will never work and that the Liberals accomplished a lot more than the typical narrative (or the media) ever gives them credit for. As well, in the spirit of this and Earth Week that is behind us, I'd like to give my thoughts on how I think the Liberals can own the environment issue in the next election (as I said earlier, we need to keep the pressure on In and Out but can't let other issues that play to our strengths fall off the radar).

So first the report. Of course it notes something we already knew, emissions went up over the course of the Liberals time in office. It's not something to be proud of, but it was never an easy task and greater progress was definitely made during the latter years of Liberal government. But this report does make clear one clear accomplishment: "greenhouse gases emitted per unit of economic activity declined 18 per cent."

Now this has been noted before, but not widely reported (and sadly the media paid little attention to that aspect of the report nonetheless), but I don't think Liberals should forget this fact as it poses two problems for the Conservatives: One, how do you claim the Liberals have a poor record on the environment when your own party's plan is based entirely on intensity targets? Two, doesn't the Stats Canada report clearly show that intensity targets are NOT sufficient for bringing absolute reductions in emissions Conservatives claim their plan will accomplish?

Can any Conservative answer these two questions?

Now this brings me to the larger issue. Liberals haven't been talking as much about the environment much lately and largely ingored this latest report. Even though the Conservatives are mired in scandal it doesn't mean we can't be reminding Canadians that the Conservatives have completely dropped the ball on the environment as well. And in return we need to be hitting back hard against the Conservative myth that the Liberals did nothing on the environment. In a way we missed an opportunity with this report (though it won't matter in the long run), but here's what I think the Liberals can do going forward and in the next election to ensure we do own this issue in the minds of Canadians. The issue won't go away so we have to be taking it on as strongly as possible (though of course while also keeping the heat on the Conservatives over their various ongoing scandals). So really this can be accomplished by three simple things, two of which the Liberals can be doing more of now and the third will have to wait for an election.

1. Consistently defend the Liberal record on the environment and Stephane Dion's record in particular. Some Liberals just don't talk much about their record on the environment, but I think it's absolutely crucial to not let Conservatives define that record for Canadians. I think the two videos below are a good start in casting the Liberal record (and Stephane Dion's) in a more accurate light, but we'll need to see more of this in an election campaign.






While the argument can be accepted that not enough was done to bring emissions below 1990 levels no Liberal should ever accept the argument that the Liberals did nothing or they didn't take global warming far more seriously than the Conservatives. In particular, it is well established that Stephane Dion in particular was an Environment Minister that was widely praised by many environmental groups, including by Elizabeth May herself (as a member of the Sierra Club) BEFORE she was even a politician. Stephane Dion had an instrumental role in bringing down the greenest budget in Canadian history in 2005, had a strong plan that would have definitely gone long way towards meeting Kyoto targets (had it not been scrapped by Conservatives) and he played a leadingl role in establishing an international consensus at the Montreal conference that was still a very important first step towards having a new global plan for global warming post-Kyoto. There's also evidence that emissions stabilized under Dion's years as minister. Therefore, let no NDP or Conservative or Bloc party member claim Dion was a do-nothing Environment minister. I think Elizabeth May sums it up well: "'If they try to say he was anything other than a very strong environment minister, they're making it up.''

Also one thing is clear about the overall Liberal record (and the latest Statscan report solidifies this): emissions went DOWN over the Liberal years in government at least in terms of intensity. Conservatives cannot put forth a plan based solely on intensity targets and claim that is all that's needed and then turn around and say the Liberals have a bad record when Liberals met strong intensity targets during their term in office. Liberals have now moved beyond intensity targets to realizing they won't be enough going forward but it only goes to show that they are more serious about addressing global warming than are the Conservatives. The Conservative plan had its place before (and its exactly what the Liberals were accomplishing), but we need to go much farther now. We now know that when you just bring down bring down emissions in terms of intensity emissions can still easily go up in absolute terms (which is the reality of 1990 to 2005). Which brings me to the second point.

2. Keep up the Attack on the Conservative Environmental Plan and Remind Canadians of the Bali Embarrassment. The plan is completely ineadequate for meaningfully decreasing emissions. Almost every independent group has assailed the Conservative plan noting how it won't even come close to decreasing emissions by 20% in absolute terms from 2006 levels (not to mention that that's still quite far from the Kyoto targets of 6% below 1990 levels). I haven't heard Liberals talk much about the Conservative plan in recent months but I hope that in the campaign they highlight the Conservative plan as the scam that it is and all the time they wasted in dealing with this issue (as they scrapped Liberals plans, did nothing for a year and then just re-instated them). It definitely helps when the plan has been so universally slammed, even by groups that are often friendly to Conservatives (like C.D. Howe) see here, here, here, here. This quote really says it all:

Baird has rejected all criticism of his government's plan from independent research groups, economists and environmentalists, insisting he would stick with a plan to limit the growth of pollution from large industries instead of forcing them to make absolute reductions in their greenhouse gas emissions.

Now their joke of a plan isn't even their only blunder on the environment as Liberals can't let Conservatives off the hook for much they embarrassed Canada on the world stage at Bali. Really Canada has never fared so badly in an international forum: We were tied for the lead in fossil of the day of awards (and had the most first place finishes), we won the fossil of year award, we saw Harper pasted in ads right alongside fellow obstructers Japan and the USA, Baird skipped most meetings and Canada was essentially condemned by the head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) . Never has Canada been so isolated in its stance on a major issue. When the final declaration was agreed upon even the USA signed on before Canada did (who only did so once Baird realized that Canada and Russia were the only hold-outs). It was simply an absolute disgrace for Canada on the world stage on an issue that is slowly becoming the most important for Canadians. Dion was smart to go to Bali and meet with many dignitaries and show that Canadians don’t actually support the approach Baird brought to Bali and I was impressed by how much blogging he did (http://www.liberal.ca/baliblog) while he was there (unfortunately the media didn’t give much coverage to his blog though). The "you first" attitude Baird put forth at Bali is only a plan that guarantees failure and Canada can do better and Dion would do better. I hope Liberals have an ad in the can that reminds Canadians about this debacle and that contrasts it with Dion's leadership in Montreal. So the Conservatives have been abysmal on the environment but the Liberals can't truly own the environment issue without....

3. Putting Forth a Comprehensive Plan to Make a Canada a World Leader on the Environment. The Carbon Budget was an absolutely excellent start and already puts Liberals miles ahead of the Conservatives. The plan was widely praised by environmental groups (contrast that with the Conservative plan), but we need to go farther with a more comprehensive plan. I'm confident that such a plan is in the works (that could incorporate tax shifting, plans to encourage more green homes, etc..), I just hope that it is detailed enough so that environmental groups and Canadians at large will clearly see how the plan will get us to large absolute reductions in emissions while also being immune to criticisms that it will severely damage the economy (therefore it should be as thoroughly costed as possible and also have some economists that back it up). I think Canadians would much rather as taking on global warming as aggressively as the EU and not as weakly as the Americans, but I believe Dion will bring forth a plan that will take us in that direction we need to go.

I'm not one of those Liberals who believes we need to release our platform before an election (I don't know the last politician that benefited from that), so I don't mind waiting but I do think it's essential that the Liberals own the environment issue if they are going to win the next election. The environment isn't on the radar as much now as it was but I think it will be one of the main issues in the next campaign and Liberals need to be ready. If the Liberals are prepared to defend their record, not afraid to take the Conservatives to task on their environmental record, and put forth an extremely strong environmental plan then I'm certain Canadians will reward them for it.

Recommend this Post

Poll: Who Do You Think Will be the Next Conservative to be Investigated?

In the spirit of the last post, I'd like to know what you think, who will be the next Conservative to be investigated? You can vote in the top right hand corner of this blog. Feel free to indicate in the comments what you think they might be investigated for and or even feel free to remind us what investigations are already under way for many of these fine Conservatives.

Is there a Conservative you think is next in line not listed? Feel free to nominate them in the comments.

Maybe it will be Van Loan, or Diane Finley, or Rob Anders or maybe there will be another investigation that names more than a dozen Conservatives all at once (like for "In and Out"). We shall see.

UPDATE: See who won!

Recommend this Post