News

Enviros Wary of Campbell's Plans

Secret, conflicting climate change actions hurt support.

By Tom Barrett, 3 Jun 2008, TheTyee.ca

Gordon Campbell

BC Premier Campbell: carbon tax soft sell?

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

[Editor's note: This is the first of a three-part series on the politics of climate change in B.C.]

Environmentalists see plenty of room for improvement in the B.C. government's climate change plans.

Although the relationship between eco-groups and the government is generally painted as a love-in, the environmental movement still sees lots of flaws in Gordon Campbell's Liberals.

Last week, the legislature wound up a sitting that saw several historic climate change bills passed. We asked some environmentalists how the government and opposition had performed.

They gave the government high marks for recognizing the significance of the problem, but lower marks for developing a coherent plan to fight global warming.

The Liberals were given credit for introducing North America's first comprehensive carbon tax, but were criticized for a lack of consultation and the absence of an apparent overall strategy.

And the environmentalists were particularly disturbed by government policies that run counter to the goal of reducing greenhouse gases.

'More needs to be done'

Ian Bruce, of the David Suzuki Foundation, gave the government credit for a significant shift in priorities in recent years.

He praised the government's carbon tax and the adoption of California vehicle emissions standards.

"Certainly there's been some progress there, but there's lots more that needs to be done," Bruce said.

What we haven't seen, he said, is a comprehensive plan showing how the government intends to achieve its ambitious overall greenhouse gas emission targets.

The carbon tax, important as it is, is just one tool to reach those targets, Bruce said.

"The B.C. government has yet to show the blueprint and the entire toolbox that it is using to reduce greenhouse gases," he said.

"They've had sufficient time to come out with a plan showing how to reduce emissions."

Such a plan would help start a conversation with British Columbians on how to reach the government's goals, he said. It would show how the government intends to work with key players and how households and industry fit into the reduction strategy.

And it would show how policies such as cap and trade are going to fit into the mix.

The government needs to reconcile its targets with some of its other projects, like the push to build more highways, Bruce said.

"Providing more green options such as better transit service would seem to be the priority versus spending billions of dollars now on expanding highways," Bruce said.

People 'need to buy in'

Andrea Reimer, of the Wilderness Committee, gave the Liberals an "A" for embracing change, but a "C" for consultation and public education.

And she handed out "the biggest possible 'F' for continuing to not only pursue, but accelerate, emission-causing activities like oil and gas exploration."

"On balance it's a 'C,'" she said. "It has some very wonderful things and some very crappy things."

The Liberals' awakening to climate change as an issue is inspiring, Reimer said. Not so the government's approach to implementing change.

Consultation is important, she said, because "these are big changes and people need to buy into them."

'Baffling' oil and gas policies

Reimer called the government's commitment to boosting the greenhouse gas-spewing oil and gas industry "baffling."

"It's really hard to reconcile one set of their actions, the cutting edge stuff, which seems quite genuine, with their emissions-causing activities. It's not just ongoing, it's really accelerating."

Kevin Washbrook, of Voters Taking Action on Climate Change, agreed with Reimer, saying that "overall it's a mixture of cutting-edge leadership and aggressive expansion of status quo emissions-producing mega-projects.

"It's a real mixed bag."

He praised the carbon tax, calling it "unique in North America."

"Some people say it's the best in the world," he said. "As far as we're concerned, the tax is transparent, it's well laid out, it's well defined, it's quite an open piece of work.

He said his group would have preferred a higher tax, but said he understands why the government chose to set it relatively low and increase it gradually.

And he said the Liberals have been "really smart" to hold out against calls from northern and Interior communities for exemptions.

However, Washbrook said he believes local governments and agencies such as school boards and health authorities should be receiving help from Victoria to cut emissions and thereby lower their carbon taxes.

"I wouldn't say [government should] provide exemptions for those agencies, but make sure they have some sort of source of funding to make sure they can reduce their emissions."

Campbell accused of soft sell

Washbrook also criticized Premier Gordon Campbell for not selling the carbon tax.

"I think Campbell needs to own this policy if he wants it to be a success," Washbrook said.

He noted that Campbell refused to mention the tax when he spoke recently to a gathering of northern mayors.

"It's hard to interpret that as not being arrogant," Washbrook said, adding that the premier should at least have acknowledged that he has heard the complaints about the tax.

He also questioned the other big plank of the government's climate change strategy so far, cap and trade.

The legislation that enabled the cap and trade system is vague and leaves many important questions about the system unanswered, he said.

At the same time, he noted, the regional cap and trade regime that B.C. has joined, the Western Climate Initiative, has greenhouse gas reduction targets of only 15 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020.

That's much less ambitious than B.C.'s goal of a 33 per cent reduction below 2007 levels by 2020.

"Where is the difference going to come from?" Washbrook asked.

Unless the government explains the apparent gap, he said, it leaves itself open to arguments that it is punishing ordinary people through the carbon tax while giving a break to big emitters, who would fall under cap and trade.

"You can look at that and say the NDP's got a point here."

Secrecy slammed

If the government doesn't address the valid concerns around its climate change legislation, it risks having its goals eroded by future governments, Washbrook said.

"These are some of the biggest pieces of legislation that we're going to see in years in terms of confronting the climate crisis here in B.C. and the government owes it to all British Columbians to roll this out in a really big tent fashion," he said.

"No secrecy, full public consultation, making sure all relevant concerns are addressed."

Washbrook was also critical of the government's clean fuels legislation, designed to increase the use of biofuels to five per cent of all fuels sold in the province.

The bill came out just as concerns were beginning to emerge about ethanol being linked to food shortages, Washbrook noted.

"Hopefully, when they get to the regulations there won't be any mandated requirements for ethanol," he said. "It doesn't show any flexibility. You'd expect this government to be a bit more nimble than that in terms of addressing these things as they arise."

He was also critical of the government's Gateway program.

"Most people I talk to think Gateway is a complete contradiction to the ambitious emission goals they have," he said.

Will carbon tax grow?

Susan Howatt, of Sierra Club B.C., praised the carbon tax, calling it something her group has been advocating for as long as it's been around.

"These are pretty exciting, heady times," she said.

Bringing in the tax took a lot of courage and implementing it won't be easy, she said.

The tax will lower the cost of green technology and increase the cost of polluting, she said.

"And that's just the direction we have to go."

Howatt said she sympathizes with northerners, but noted that Statistics Canada data indicate that northerners have much shorter commutes than people in the Lower Mainland.

The carbon tax, she said, "can't be an opt in or opt out process. We're all in this together."

The current legislation, however, does not go beyond 2012, Howatt noted. The government needs to give some indication of where tax levels will go after that, she said.

She praised the Campbell government for responding to criticism that the cap and trade legislation created "a wall of secrecy" around corporate greenhouse gas emissions.

Like other environmentalists, Howatt gave the government low marks for its continuing subsidies to the oil and gas industry.

The government should phase out subsidies to carbon-emitting fossil fuel industries and adopt a "broader, more holistic energy strategy" with a greater emphasis on conservation and reducing demand, she said.

Down to the details

Matt Horne, of the Pembina Institute, praised the Liberals for bringing in some important pieces of legislation, especially the carbon tax, but added that there are problems with the details.

He agreed with Howatt that the government should explain what will happen to the carbon tax after its first five years.

"We haven't seen a clear commitment to what the schedule of increases will be or even if it will be increasing beyond 2012," Horne said. Most economic modelling suggests that the tax will have to go much higher to be effective, he said.

And the cap and trade legislation doesn't answer any of the key questions about what the scheme will look like or what level of reductions will be sought.

Said Horne: "We don't feel yet that the policies that they've introduced match the ambition of the targets."

Tomorrow: the NDP report card from environmental groups.

Related Tyee stories:

[Tyee]

Tom Barrett is a contributing editor to The Tyee with a focus on global warming policy and politics. You can reach him here.

32 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • Luke Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Billions In Annual Provincial Revenue????

    Quote:
    Andrea Reimer, of the Wilderness Committee, gave the Liberals an "A" for embracing change, but a "C" for consultation and public education.

    And she handed out "the biggest possible 'F' for continuing to not only pursue, but accelerate, emission-causing activities like oil and gas exploration."

    Firstly, BC is not self-sufficient in oil and not much is found in northeast BC. Where is the gasoline for BC vehicles mostly coming from?

    Alberta tar sands.

    BC is known for its natural gas, which is a clean burning fuel. How do people heat their homes during the winter???

    How does Andrea Reimer heat her home during the winter????

    More importantly, every year $ 5 billion is invested in natural gas exploration in northeast BC.

    On top of that, $1.2 billion went into provincial coffers during the last fiscal year for crown natural gas (mostly) leases.

    Furthermore, $billions$ also go into provincial coffers annually for natural gas royalties.

    And we should stop natural gas production/exploration in BC?

    Where else is the money gonna come from for improved social services, education, health care, and infrastructure?????

  • Frank

    3 years ago

    Luke [DELETED]

    Quote:
    Where else is the money gonna come from for improved social services, education, health care, and infrastructure?????

    Um, hate to be a nag but you're on record as being against improving those things.

    In fact, an argument could easily be made many of those things were better run when there was less natural gas revenue.

  • Luke Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Frank...

    Quote:
    Where else is the money gonna come from for improved social services, education, health care, and infrastructure?????

    Um, hate to be a nag but you're on record as being against improving those things.

    Ohhh Frank... you're spinning tonight. You're smarter than that... ;)

    What's wrong???

  • Frank

    3 years ago

    My [DELETED] friend

    Quote:
    What's wrong???

    Its "pretend to be a Liberal" night here.

  • Frank

    3 years ago

    By the way

    Speaking of spin, [DELETED] 4 hours without [DELETED] BC Report or Business Examiner. I miss their quotes, especially hard-nosed, just the facts ma'am, reporting like this :

    Quote:
    Driven by NDP apparatchiks, environmentalists and a BC Hydro union, the anti-IPP crowd has called for a moratorium on all private power development.

    Takes my breath away it does.

  • brian gough

    3 years ago

    He can`t square that circle

    I admit that gas and oil exploration(flaring goes with it) is important as well coal is important,so is big industry its good for the economy.

    Premier CAMPBELL can`t have it both ways,thats been my point all along,gateway,SFPR,highways go for it just don`t claim to be an enviromentalist.

    Shelve the carbon tax,scrap the cap and trade shell game and be honest! OOPS

    Secrecy,well if your a flim flam artist secrecy is your only weapon.

    Hydrogen highway will never happen,it takes 5 times the energy to create hydrogen then what you get out of it.

    Ethanol won`t work,a million more people coming here with a carbon footprint,I could go on but you get my point,Campbell is tricky,hes got the whole province thinking green while he has been selling bc green treasure under our noses.

    Last item,I believe the enviros have been playing CAMPBELL,they got their dole and now their gonna go at him,PREMIER CAMPBELL is stuck between a rock and a hard place!

  • Grumpy

    3 years ago

    Beware of Liberals claiming to be environmentalists

    Campbell is not an environmentalist nor does he give a damn about the environment. The Carbon Tax is a swindle, a tax scheme conceived to build more SkyTrain. This SkyTrain tax is needed because building with SkyTrain is like solving your daily commute by buying a Hummer.

    Harken back to the early 80's and the TTC's ART study and one finds that one can build up to 10 times more LRT for the same capacity! Or look at Gerald Fox's 80's study, "A Comparison of AGT systems and LRT", which found SkyTrain light-metro systems to be not just more expensive to build, they were more expensive to operate than light rail as well!

    Only Vancouver builds with SkyTrain light-metro and the only people real happy with the Carbon Tax is Bombardier Inc. the sole owners of the proprietary SkyTrain system.

    The Carbon Tax is a swindle, designed to further rob the taxpayer of his hard earned cash, to pay for obsolete transit systems that look nice to open but fail to impact our transit woes.

    Campbell 'green'? No, this guy is as dirty as carbon black!

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Northerners don't need sympathy.

    What we need is to be separate from the carpet baggers running the province in the sole interests of the urban south. Enough already and you can take the Suzuki Institute with you.

  • realisticman

    3 years ago

    Whowouldathunkit?

    I guess those wonderful nordic countries, Iceland and Norway have had enuff of the enviros too:

    Quote:
    BBC June 2, 2008

    Icelandic and Norwegian companies have begun exporting whalemeat to Japan.

    About 60 tonnes of meat from fin whales caught in the 2006 Icelandic hunt was reportedly sent with a much smaller amount of minke meat from Norway.

    The fin whale is listed as Endangered on the internationally recognised Red List of Threatened Species.

    Crawford Kilian recently wrote:

    Quote:
    In fact, countries like Iceland and Japan don't seem to have many really poor people. That's because taxes support a solid infrastructure of housing, education and health care.

    ..and now, again, whale meat.

  • Van Isle

    3 years ago

    The enviromentists are just

    The enviromentists are just starting to become sceptical of Gordo's 'Green Plan"? Even our own village idiot has known since the beginning that Gordo doesn't have a 'Green cell' in his body and never will. It's obvious, that the enviros and the people who think that Gord's Green tax is a great idea, are not paying attention.

  • Frank

    3 years ago

    realisticman

    You're supporting the killing of whales for the market in Japan??

  • seth

    3 years ago

    Gordo's rean agenda

    The environmentalists seem to believe in the inherent goodness of man including even against all evidence el Gordo and his gang.

    This odious gang of thieves use these silly people to justify more recycling of the great unwashed taxes into the hands of the various giant corporations that fund them.

    60% of the new gas tax goes straight to big corps as tax reductions. Bill Tielman has a series of articles demonstrating this.

  • brian gough

    3 years ago

    The environuts are getting to be annoying

    In reading the above story it is quite clear to me that the green groups are out of touch(or wealthy)

    They talk about 7.5 cents as not enough tax! What about after 2012,what about more tax and more tax,the way oil continues to rise if it were to reach 3.00 a liter they would be calling for more tax!
    The technology will come and when it does bcers will buy in,no one uses 8 track stereo anymore!
    Anyone can be radical with bad ideas,heres one--No one can move to bc if their carbon footprint isn`t zero--No animal farming because animals produce methane (everyone must become vegetarians)
    No fertilizers to be used on farms because the process of producing nitrogen is a giant greenhouse gas emiter!
    HOW about all enviromentalists are banned from entering operating,or using any motorized items,they must walk,swim,row,or flap their wings to get anywhere!

  • morechatter

    3 years ago

    Don't hold your breath

    We built this city with roads and gas stations etc and its the life we live, and it takes fuel to keep it going. So what are we to quit living? So far no one has come up with any kind of feasible plan to help save the air we breath. I could understand the tax if the economy was different but we are living in an Olympic city were costs are already way out there. So now struggling families will have to pass on life's necessities like food, etc because of ever increasing costs of fuel and rent which gets passed onto the consumer. This tax is like telling everyone to hold there breath because fuel is that important to how cities function and increasing the costs of doing business is a very, very bad plan at this time. I give the whole lot an F for being foolish and only creating more problems instead of viable solutions to help safe our planet for future generations.

  • tricia58

    3 years ago

    Carbon Tax and Secrecy

    I am not sure why I read this and groups seem surprised by the secrecy around long term plans. Does anyone really think Campbell has long term plans how to cut emissions? Right now he is expressing concerns about enviroment because that is what sells him in the polls. That is why what he is doing is full of contradictions.
    The carbon tax if used right would be good idea. The idea it is revenue neutral is a smoke screen. Maybe to the government income it is neutral but to the struggling families it is not. Big business who most benefits from that. We pay carbon tax and big business gets big tax cuts.
    The carbon tax should be used to bring back grants that once existed to make homes and cars more efficient. Give us grants from that money to upgrade furnaces, windows, hot water heaters, cars etc. Give us grants to instal solar panels on roofs or if have room and wind to instal windmills.
    I see this carbon tax as another money grab from the lowest earners.

  • Romeogolf

    3 years ago

    Breathe easier

    Quote:
    So far no one has come up with any kind of feasible plan to help save the air we breath [sic]. I could understand the tax if the economy was different...

    Wrong. It's called the Livable Region Strategic Plan which has been around since 1996! The problem is that the soon-to-be-former suburbs didn't pay a lot of attention to it. Nor did provincial and federal governments get very serious about making sure these people had adequate transportation choices. Consequently, there are a lot of SOV cars out there greatly contributing to the 40% of the Lower Mainland's greenhouse gas emissions that come from transportation.

    A carbon tax needs to be understood for what it has to be -- a pricing mechanism for the cost of human activity on the environment. The greater the cost to the environment, the greater the cost of that behaviour. Therefore, unsustainable activity will be curtailed.

    Until now, this cost has been externalized. Therefore, it is not sufficiently linked to the market; in fact, we get the perverse situation that an environmental disaster is a positive addition to GDP! As Ed Deak will tell you, costs can't be externalized, only re-allocated. This is a necessary step in making sure our economy (and our economics) is different -- sustainable.

  • City Person

    3 years ago

    Next Spring

    Quote:
    Washbrook also criticized Premier Gordon Campbell for not selling the carbon tax.

    That will happen at election time.

    Quote:
    Does anyone really think Campbell has long term plans how to cut emissions?

    At least there is a plan. BC has the first carbon tax in North America. It takes political guts to do that. I haven't seen it with any other party in BC.

    Every journey starts with the first step and this one is going to be a long and difficult one. We are talking about changing 50 years of lifestyle.

  • NicS

    3 years ago

    How Green is your governement?

    tricia58 is absolutely right:

    Quote:
    Right now he is expressing concerns about enviroment because that is what sells him in the polls.

    Campbell has lined up all the so-called experts on climate change to help him make us think he has the climate change issue, and by default environmental issues as well, under control. He even has The New Car Dealers of BC (NCD)on board at an event at The Vancouver Board of Trade(VBT) next week. Their respective introductions of "name dropped experts" are complete with insincere attempts to make themselves look like knights in shining environmental armour.

    And all this at a time in our history and the world's when our whole transportation infrastructure is falling down all around us. American used car lots refusing to take anymore SUVs on their lots, Transit use up dramatically all over North America, Airlines going bankrupt and refused credit by their fuel suppliers, and I could go on, but whats the point. Its so obvious. Again as tricia58 put it:

    Quote:
    That is why what he is doing is full of contradictions.

    All the green washing in the world will not make these guys green and as for the so called experts, well only time will tell whether their efforts are sincere or sincerly taken and whether anyone will consider them experts in their chosen fields in the future.

    The introductions are insultingly full of spin and green washback that is so lame I could not reprint it on the Tyee, but feel free to go to their respective x-rated sites.

  • brian gough

    3 years ago

    It takes guts

    It takes guts to have the highest child poverty rate in canada.(5 staight years)

    It takes guts to subsidize big oil and gas to the tune of 700 million dollars over 2 years.

    It takes guts to close schools,bail on seniors,sell BC RAIL,sell our rivers,destroy our wild salmon.

    It takes guts to break the law with dui,tear up legal contracts(heu,bcgeu)it takes guts to reneg on new hospitals.

    It takes guts to stand up and tell tales with your fingers crossed behind your back!

  • jimmy_laroux

    3 years ago

    City Person: Quote:At least

    City Person:

    Quote:
    At least there is a plan. BC has the first carbon tax in North America. It takes political guts to do that.

    You really think so? Why?

    Quote:
    Every journey starts with the first step and this one is going to be a long and difficult one. We are talking about changing 50 years of lifestyle.

    Haha! Have I got a bridge for you to buy!

    http://www.gatewayprogram.bc.ca/

    What do you think this is going to do to GHG emissions in the Lower Mainland?

    I see one heavily stage-managed and well publicised step forward, ten steps back.

  • jimmy_laroux

    3 years ago

    It takes guts :)

    Awesome, brian gough!

  • realisticman

    3 years ago

    i look Forward

    to the next provincial campaign. Can we expect that the NDP will suggest repealing the CO2 tax, lowering the tax on fuels and telling the Sierra Club, The Pembina Institute, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Wilderness Committee, the Voters Taking Action on Climate Change group and all the environmentalists that they should take a hike? No pun intended.

  • electric_bicyclist

    3 years ago

    When are we going to do something instead of just complaining

    Yet another criticism of politicans??

    I'm with the French on this issue -- don't discuss politics in mixed company.

    Do we really need yet another article on the Liberals or Conservatives and how they're wrecking the environment?

    Don't just stand there, buy something.

    There are people (the one in a million) who are ACTUALLY CHANGING their vehicles - for example, modifying their vehicles with a Hydrogen Booster to get double the mileage. IMO, if you're not actually changing your "hardware", you're not really changing 'everything' that you can.

    For example:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-zkZFjet9w

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVkQeFBe3w0

    http://www.livevideo.com/video/0A525AA946C943AA8198FD6585D5B698/hydro-4000-and-the-like-what.aspx

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH6wwRnadTs

    Can you explain why most people are interested in going to yet another symposium or cafe lecture yet don't actually modify their vehicles, to double or triple their mileage (MPG), like the TV station in Florida?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FD1KLIZCAQ

    So, please tell me, after you see these video clips, why you're not modifying your car or truck with a Hydrogen Booster or HHO generator?

    Rob

  • brian gough

    3 years ago

    That last video was suspect

    What kind of vehicle is a PALM(who makes it) and 9 miles to the gallon seems a little suspect to me?

    After installing that device gas mileage is up to 16 miles per gallon (that vehicle should get 16 miles per gallon without that device.

    I read somewhere about the army experimenting with vapourized fuel to increse mileage but it turned out to be futile,all though it worked somewhat apparently it burned up cylinders and other parts rendering the experiment useless.

    If you save some money but have to pay 50dollars per hour for someone to rebuild your motor every year?

    Don`t you think the truck manufacturers would install these devices on new trucks rather than close down all the truck plants in canada and the USA

    Just curious,not critcism

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    Smoke and mirrors....

    The author writes, praisng Campbell with faint damns....., :

    "Although the relationship between eco-groups and the government is generally painted as a love-in, the environmental movement still sees lots of flaws in Gordon Campbell's Liberals."

    "Love-in"? HAH! I'd call it a buy-out. As long as enviros can carry on their unwinnable war with Big Oil in tandem with the equally unwinnable war against CO2 induced GW, they've got it made for grants and donations well into the forseeble future.

    Re Carbon taxes, you hit the nail square on the head, jimmy_laroux with :

    "I see one heavily stage-managed and well publicised step forward, ten steps back."

    Yup. Suits Gordo just fine.

  • KWD

    3 years ago

    gate keeping

    That the Liberals have just introduced a bill to cut CO2 emissions, and the public and (by the sounds of it) most enviros think it’s cutting edge, shows just how well the MSM has kept the enviro-issue gates closed and the public in the dark.

    Concern and action by those paying attention to human activity, air quality and their relationship to climate, has been around for as long as I can remember. Along with a host of assorted air quality control technologies, it’s the reason for catalytic converters, industrial “scrubbers” and acid rain reduction.

    The cost of gasoline has increased nearly 50% in an incredibly short time. Does anyone seriously believe that tacking another 2.5% on that cost will be the reason for CO2 reduction?

    Because our economy was built on easy access to cheap energy skyrocketing fuel costs will force folks to take a close look at absolutely every aspect of their existence; not just altering driving habits or leisure time activities. Because the vast majority of folks are stuck with wages and incomes hammered by inflation they will be forced to curtail activities that are highly energy (gasoline) dependant and the levels of atmospheric CO2 (produced by burning petroleum products) will fall.

    As much as politicians and some enviros want you to believe otherwise, the drop in CO2 will not be related to recently introduced carbon taxes.

    The Liberal government’s decision to introduce climate change bills at this time is pure politics: win voter confidence by pretending to be doing something while continuing to exacerbate the problem.

  • City Person

    3 years ago

    Good points

    KWD, what we are seeing here is a threat to people's lifestyles. This is the real fear here. It means that the Ford F-350 is no longer attainable for many for whom it was before. How many people actually need said F-350? Very few.

    The average person needs 300 square feet to live in but we commonly see three or four times that in Canada. It is all about cheap energy which ain't cheap anymore.

    We have had a long run of low interest rates and cheap energy. One has ended and one is about to end. If I had an F-350 with a $40,000 note on it and a 3,000 square foot house with half a million owing and had an income of $6000 a month net, I would be darned mad.

    It is all about materialism. A family of four can easily live in $3000 a month if they have a sustainable lifestyle. That means rejection of nonsense such as Canucks tickets, Ford F-350s, alcohol, tobacco. huge homes and packaged food.

    And of course, the drop in CO2 has nothing to do with the new Carbon Tax. It will be caused by market forces. Oil consumption in the USA is down 2.9% over a year ago. That is purely market driven.

  • snert

    3 years ago

    An arbitrary line.

    Quote:
    It is all about materialism. A family of four can easily live in $3000 a month if they have a sustainable lifestyle. That means rejection of nonsense such as Canucks tickets, Ford F-350s, alcohol, tobacco. huge homes and packaged food.

    That's an arbitrary line that you are drawing, City Person. It in not one persons right or responsibility, for that matter, to tell another where they should stop spending their resources or just which lifestyle they should be living. The reality is that there is no right or wrong. We will run out of resources sooner or later in any event.

    Just what is the alternative to materialism? I don't believe that their is a meaningful one.

  • SharingIsGood

    3 years ago

    tax the workers give to the rich

    Campbell's Green plan:

    Tax the poor to death, wait 6 months, and they will be laying dead and green in the streets.

    Campbell's carbon tax takes money from working families and gives it to oil companies, banks, and big business in general. Yeah, The average working Janes and Joes have lots of money salted away in these Blue chip companies. These companies really need tax payer help. Perhaps if Campbell taxed WallMart and the other retailers at a reasonable rate, then they wouldn't be spending so much energy to ship things from Asia and Latin America. Perhaps they would purchase things made in Canada for resale. Then maybe some longterm Canadian-grown manufacturing jobs could settle in here. We don't need outside investment for it either.

    2007 Fortune 500 list of the richest companies:

    1: Walmart
    2-10 oil-and gas and automobile companies
    11-22 General Electric, banks, oil, insurance and car companies.

    http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2007/full_list/

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    On sinning

    Quite clearly, SIG, Campbell and his acolytes here on TYEE know it is politically safe to blame us peons for CO2 forced GW. It follows, of course, that we should be taxed for this.

    I find it sad that outfits like Suzuki's, which purport to represent us "little guys" (or maybe their only little guy is an FN?), should be onside with the neocons.

    Obviously, they think anyone who drives a car is a sinner and should be penalised for it.

    Now repeat after me, SIG, "Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa....."

  • SharingIsGood

    3 years ago

    Verily, vos culpae, sayeth the Gord

    I confess, I am a sinner, and I engage in blastpheme when I question the ways of the kindly and all-knowing Gord. The planet's problems are my fault and most likely the faults of my bretheren who would dare (like me) drive 6000 km in a year - year after year. Mea Culpa...

    In case you missed The Gord Giveth some years back from Vancouveriste:

    http://www.vancouveriste.com/2007/05/03/the-gord-giveth/

    It is worth the click for all who need a laugh.

  • lynn

    3 years ago

    Definitely worth the click

    My Gord, that's a great link, SIG. Thanks!

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.