What's this guys name? Stephen Harris? Jim Harper?
As Harpers' only reason for runing is to be Prime Minister so Harris' reason for leading the Greens is to take as many votes away from the NDP as possible in order to prevent them from gaining any seats. I suggest that the people who would normally vote for this party swithch their vote to whomever in this election then have the party turf this guy and get back to the grass roots.

Jim Harris is a very good speaker and motivator.

Jim Harris was also a one-time stauch PC conservative party organizer, motivator and low-level leader. He knew that rising to the top of a smaller party was easier than a larger one. He knew that to do it would not take much $$$ or effort. He knew that once 'in charge' of the Greens (because of their party by-laws) he could stay there for a fairly long time since they do not have annual leadership reviews, nor any 'impeachment' mechanisms.

Time to vote independant.

Interesting, but it will not change my vote. I think that the NDP are scared of the Green Party, because protest votes mostly went their way, until the Reform Party came into being. To day the NDP are a joke and they do not have a clue why!

The NDP, has become 'special interest' party catering to fringe wing-nuts and the voter knows this well. The wing-nuts have turned the NDP into a politcally correct party, that only support politically correct positions. The NDP is just plain boring and lack no new ideas at all!

The Liberals have more of a century of politcal corruptness to inspire them and the Conservatives are mere Liberal 'wannabees'. Just waiting to feed off the trough.

Canada is doomed and maybe the BQ will achieve the desired result, by bringing this whole corrupt house of cards crashing down!

Voting Green is the only option here, unless BC has a viable seperatist party. Hopefuly one is coming to us soon!

As Barnum observed "there is a sucker born every minute" and you will see them voting Liberal, Conservative, and the NDP.

I'm voting for the Green Party of Canada, not for Jim Harris. Leaders come and go, but the underlying need for the GPC remains.

HAHAHA
You guys don't get it. The Green Party is more orwellian and undemocratic than the larger parties in Canada.

I emailed Dawn Black, the NDP candidate for New West-Coquitlam, last weekend. I asked what her position was on the Port Mann Bridge/Freeway expansion. I haven't gotten an answer yet. If I don't get one, I'll be voting for someone else.

Interesting piece on the Green Party of Canada last week on the tube. I wasn`t aware that Jim Harris is a motivational speaker for the corporate world. I can now see why they aren`t that Green. If we want Green vote NDP.

Assuming the allegations made against the Green party in this article are true, and nobody seems to be disputing them, then isn't a vote for the Green really a vote for Harper?

Its unfortunate most of the electorate is so unengaged and refuses to do even basic researach into the parties they vote for.

Karl Rover, you're not going to vote NDP because Dawn Black hasn't given you her position on the Port Mann expansion?? Surely there must be more than one factor determining who you are going to vote for? What's your position on Canada's involvement in Iraq, missle defence, free trade, medicare, education... think these issues may be important to consider when casting your vote??

Lets not get caught up in campaign promises and single event issues. Examine the parties policies and past performance. The only real wasted vote is the uniformed vote.

Hey Karl Rover, why don't you let Dawn Black respond before jumping to conclusions over the issue. Try calling the campaign office, or showing up? Dawn's campaign is run by unpaid volunteers, give'em a chance here.

Hey, pkelly, I haven't jumped to a conclusion. I stated that I emailed in a question nearly a week ago, and still haven't gotten an answer. My phone # was on the email.

Yes, I'm perfectly willing to give them a chance. That's why I took the trouble to ask Dawn's opinion on a very important issue. As I said, if I don't get an answer, I'll vote for someone else.

No, I do not accept the idea that I should automatically vote for someone because they are listed on the ballot as an NDP candidate.

A vote for the greens is a vote for a better world. One without parties, one without pluralistic policies, and one with speakers that motivate you rather than merely depress you.

A vote for the greens, is a vote to complain about whichever party gains power, because you know it surely won't be the one you vote for.

A vote for the greens is a vote for change, and knowing that you're $1.75 will be appreciated and not spent on feel good TV commercials.

A vote for the greens won't encourage them.

The NDP Party is a party of the walking dead, really, they offer nothing new, just same old same old.

I used to vote NDP, but they no longer represent my politcal views! Who to vote?

Voting Green may give a message to the rest thay there are a numerous portion of the population who are hugely ubhappy with the status quo and are not politcal zombies. If the Greens get more than 10% of the popular vote, alarm bells will sound in the big 3 parties headquarters!

The problem with the NDP is they still live in the 20th century. Make that early 20th century.
Example: the NDP candidate in Outremont, PQ is a rabid admirer of Fidel Castro. Mass peasant murders, poets starving in jail, he loves it all as he unabashedly admitted on French TV last Sunday. Talk about Harper being "scary" because he wants to allow Parliament a free vote on gay marriage.

Anyway, if youre pissed off at the two big parties, and you're not a blood-thirsty leftist nut, the Greens start looking ok, even if their internal democratics suck, as the article suggests.

The allegations ARE NOT TRUE

Jim Harris is the best thing that has happened to the Federal Green Party. He has increased the vote dramatically [and will do so again].

He is not authoritarian in the slightest, I've worked with him closely here in Vancouver. He's the only federal leader that visited my co-op during the last election. I could not vote Green federally under the previous leader Jim is positive step in the best direction for the party and for Canadians who believe the environment is the major issue in this election.

The Greens continue to bridge the gap between right and left and this rightfully has both sides of the political spectrum concerned. There is no reason on this Earth people on the left own the franchise on environmental issues - people on the right are just as concerned.

Murray Dobbin is an NDP shill. He is always going on about the other parties but never writes anything negative about the NDP. Considering many NDPers blame the Greens for splitting the vote and keeping them from gaining extra seats it is no surprise that here Murray is again writing such an article. The Greens are not perfect, but which party is?

Murray it is time to come out of your NDP closet. Be a man like Rafe and admit who you support before you write another one-sided column for the world to read!

Why Murray Dobbin Should Come Out of the Closet
canadiandemocraticmovement.ca/displayarticle791.html

What a load of bs on this thread.

rkewen, so an NDPer admires Fidel. Better to admire a guy that has outlived his usefulness rather than admire the other boys from that area and those times like Pinochet, the right-wing leaders of Guatamala and El Salvador and their death squads or the military dictators of Brazil and Argentina or Reagan's contras who chopped off people's arms but I doubt that matters to you.

Grumpy thinks the NDP is dead, even though they get 4 times the vote of the Greens, so he's going to vote for a party with no platform and a dictator as leader. The Liberals are quaking with fear over losing that vote I'm sure. Falls right into line with his calls for a military coup on another thread.

rockerbiff thinks the Greens bridge the gap between the right and left. Actually, they bridge all gaps between everybody because they have no platform so they can make it up as they go along, promising everything to everyone with bland rhetoric that covers all bases.

dangrice thinks voting Green will lead to a better world but can't say why. We agree, I can't say why either.

and Karl Rover decides who to vote for federally based on a bridge and an email.

My faith in democracy is restored.

Well, in Victoria, Ariel Lade is probably one of the green candidates.
Very smart guy. I am pretty sure that he would be a good mp for victoria if he got elected.
I think people would be best advised to go to all candidate meetings and actually see the men and women who are going to represent them. And make your choice on that basis.
Because your vote isnt supposed to be for a pawn for the leader, it is supposed to be to elect someone to represent your interests in parliament. If you do that, you might get someone like Cadman representing you. Someone who does not blindly follow the path laid down by the choosing one.

Frank, if you read my second line, I did say why. If you can't read, I apologise.

I'd like to see some Green Party members in Parliament. Harris need not necessarily be among those elected.

We need some environmentalist voices in Canada's Parliament, regardless of whether the current leader has some personal or professional peccadillos or not.

I hope we end up with some form of proportional rep. so Green MPs can assume a rightful place in Ottawa.

I also like Layton's NDP on many issues.

I'm afraid Dobbin's hatchet job on Harris isn't entirely dissimilar in intent to this week's Macleans 3 pronged attack on Svend Robinson (and by extension the NDP) for his "transgressions".

Memo to Macleans: Where were you guys when Gordo ran for re-election last time? Svend is unfit, but Premier Drunko, speeding while blotto in Hawaii,a weaving menace, is responsible and fit for office? Why weren't you screaming about Gordo Drunko then?

Macleans evidently does not want the NDP to hold the balance of power.

F'ing propaganda rag now, Macleans.

somedumbguy, Murray has always been an NDP shill. Why do you have a problem with that?

Hear ye hear ye, Michael Campbell is a Conservative shill, Fazil Mihlar is a Conservative shill, Jon Ferry is a Conservative shill, Diane Francis is a Conservative shill, Andrew Coyne is a Conservative shill.

Yet none of them have a tagline at the bottom of their columns saying "I'm a Conservative shill"

I read your second line dangrice, and no offence, but voting Green is no more a vote to complain than voting Conservative, NDP, Bloc or for an independent.

All I see is the NDP's fear of the Green Party and indeed they are dead men walking. The CCF/NDP have been around since the 1930's yest they cannot manage but a handful of seats. The Greens are the new boys on the block and it will be a while before before they garner any seats.

The NDP must reinvent itself and rid itself of its many special interrest groups, which infect it like a plague, if not, the NDP will slowly dissolve. Svend running and the rest of the old guard in the NDP, is boring everyone to death.

Sorry, but the Green Party deserves a kick at the can!

Why would the NDP fear the Green party? That a fraction of 4% of the vote left because of the word "green"? Ya, we'll try to recover from that crippling loss.

Do you know how many parties have come and gone since the CCF-NDP was formed? Is there any reason to believe the Greens won't be one of them?

As for special interest groups, is that the best you can do, trot out a line that the NDP has been criticised for for 50 years? Can't the NDP's critics join the 21st century and find something new to complain about? Talk about boring. Every party has regular supporters and every party wants to keep those supporters.

Except the Greens, they don't have any real support and seem to exist solely to provide Harris with a paycheque, a buck seventy-five at a time.

On the basis of what? Deserves a chance to do what? No support and no platform equals no chance.

Good debate so far!

Whether you agree with everything in the article or not at least it gets a good discussion going.
I personally know and like Murray. He has always been a good person to work with on international trade issues. However, I do agree that thetyee.ca needs some articles critical of the NDP. There have been articles critical of the Conservatives, Liberals and now the Greens.

I'm a former Green and a candidate from three federal elections in Richmond. If my friend runs for the Greens in my former riding (I live overseas so I must vote where I last resided) I will vote for him! He is definitely Green and he has fought Jim Harris' autocratic governing style for the last few years.

Ultimately we as citizens need to be positive and to vote for people not parties! Who do you think would best represent your riding? Who helps their constituents when they need help?
We must end voting for...
"The lesser of two evils!" or
"The evil of (two or more) lessers!"

Kevan Hudson
formerly Richmond, BC

And I'll give you that Frank. I personally support having reforms that allow Green candidates to get elected, only if to bring an original voice to our representative chambers. I still will vote for the person and encourage that foremost.

I'm generally pretty impressed with most green candidates, generally they are younger, idealistic individuals who are university educated and highly skilled. Some are entrepreneurs, others educators and researches, and almost always people with a lot more optimism than even the star candidates of the majors parties.

While the Green party has a platform, and whether it is conservative or a ndp vote taker is almost irrelevant. Its so nascent, that even if we had proportional representation, it would still be a minor player for at least an election or two.

The Green party can be summed up in one word, which is sustainability.

What this exactly means is something that should be discussed, and voting Green is a way you address this if you don't believe the LCNs are focussing enough on it. Is it political sustainability, and an invigorated democracy (pr-rep, increased local decision making)? Is it investing in a new technolooies to give our industries a lead in increasing productivity and reducing reliance on depletable energy sources. Is it financial sustainability and debt reduction, or is global sustainability, and meeting basic human needs, today and a hundred years from now.

Unfortunately, we get party leaders who concentrate to much on wanting to govern today, and very little on representing us for tomorrow.

The Green Party is not likely to fade away any time soon - not as long as the planet continues to face serious environmental threats.
Think such threats are likely to disappear in the foreseeable? They are likely to greatly worsen before getting any better.

Therefore there will from now on always be a place for the Green Party to represent environ. issues.

A historical circle to consider:

Greenpeace began in BC, it went on to become a worldwide phenomenon, inspiring formation and development of the Green movement/Green Party in Europe. The Green Party has become ingrained in Europe, winning seats in parliaments regularly, becoming an essential part of the political landscape. There's no reason to think
the Green political movement won't come full circle back to Canada, in the form of a growing Green political presence here.

Once Canada follows Europe's lead and adopts proportional rep., we will then see Greens in Cdn. parliaments election after election, giving voice to env. issues. pushing the other parties to address them.

About Macleans ... say what you will, Macleans has just published Paul Wells on the topic of rotten lousy polls which either don't exist or didn't do ethical research -- yet have publicly declared that NDP support is sliding. (Remember the blatantly biased -- 12 evocative questions before being asked for answers -- anti-NDP poll by the Globe and Mail, published on the eve of the last B.C. provincial election.)

We'll be waiting a long, long time to see that kind of investigative report in CanWest news.

I certainly agree with Bob999, first on the need for a proportional representation electoral system, AND on the rightful place of the Greens in that new arrangement. Though I am of the view that the Greens represent a small "c" conservative view of class politics and economics, and even "green issues", they have actually kicked off and carried the ball to here on this proportional representation issue. And no doubt they have a desirable and legitimate role to play in the future politics of the nation.

That said, proportional representation is likely to lead to an explosion of heretofore repressed and closeted ideas, views, and political movements, locked in the FPTP prison system. Which is precisely what the country needs, in my view, to revitalize our politics and to open up new opportunities for alliances and the further "social transformation/democratization" of our economic system, national and State political structures.

We are going to need that energy and dynamism, in order to stand up to the aggressive present and future pressures coming from the US Empire to our south. (They are likely to feel even greater "lust" for us and our resources, post their eventual defeat in Iraq, and maybe throughout the Middle East.) And to shore up our capabilities on "all fronts", and our independent national development to be able to resist them coveting and securing by legal/lopsided trade agreement means or foul, what are our national/natural resources and way of life.

All of this together is what makes the securing of a national, truly "proportional representation system" so important. And overcoming our national divisions/hostilities between the Aboriginal nation, the Quebecois nation and ourselves, the Anglo nation. On this latter we need a historic compromise, agreed to by all parties.

This country is already far slid south and under "effective" US control, especially economically, which politics tends to soon and "effectively" follow, and especially if push comes to shove. Soon it will be too late, if it is not turned around.

Oh Coyote: usually I take on your thoughts so easily, but this one sticks in my throat. The Greens (as I see them) would never stand firmly for Canada against U.S. intrusions. Quite the opposite, I think.

Another thing. In my younger day, I'd have leapt on board an organization purporting to be worldwide and environmental. But now, for the Green brand of politics, I see that "worldwide" is just another name for Corporate Globalization.

Sidebar to the same topic: CBC Newsworld recently gave time to the leaders and platforms of the various small political parties in Canada. The most attractive, honest, clear-thinking, compelling leader of the lot was the guy who heads up the Communist Party of Canada (the original C.P.C.). He'd out-class that Green-guy Jim Harris any day. The moral of this? Damned if I know ... except that it's very difficult to decide on where to "park the vote" except by doing some study of one's own.

And so when Green-Jim preaches what he thinks we want to hear, he's mouthing empty words. His day job is conducting Motivational seminars for corporate leaders. That's no way to reach an understanding of how Canadians think and feel ... but it's a good way of implanting self-serving ideas onto corporate agendas.

Run, Coyote. Run, I tell ya ...

Well, Frank, I'm sorry that you don't believe that a billion-dollar project that would have a huge negative impact on our quality of life (particularly air quality) should be an election issue.

Fortunately, you don't speak for the entire NDP on this. Peter Julian, Bill Siksay, Libby Davies, David Chudnovsky, and Shane Simpson have come out against this project.

However, when I went to Dawn Black's web page, I couln't find anything about this issue. So, I took the trouble to find out what she has to say about it. I'm still waiting for an answer.

Perhaps a more appropriate title for Dobbin's piece would be "Why some of the NDP aren't very green".

Wow, these greenies certainly flame easily.

The sad thing is they simply don't know or won't acknowledge that all they represent in Canada is a free parking spot for former progressive conservatives and a dishevelled pack of unmanageable dreamers who can be manipulated by snake oil (movivational speakers) dealers.

Grumpy, you sound like a grumpy old man. Perhaps you could outline all these special interests who have chased you away from the NPD.

Are you talking about Greenpeace's support for the NDP or the Sierra Club's support for the NDP?

Hey, with Harris as leader, will the Greens now be getting support from the corporate sector?

Rockerbiff, please don't play that old bridging the gap saw again. It's pathetic and truly makes you sound far more naive than I think you are.

It must have been a thrill to have your national party leader in your own co-op last election. But if the others had shown up what are the chances you would have cooperated with any of them?

This election is far too important to be wasted by vote splitting. We have had more effective government over the past year only because feet could be held to the fire.

Give Stephen Harper's Conservatives a majority and watch what happens to the environment folks.

A Green vote is a vote lost to the cause of progress in Canada.

I'm with Hargrove this time. Be strategic. Keep the right, whether its the neo-con gang of Harper's or the red tories in green jeans away from power.

allan, thats rather cynical. So what do you do when your NDP candidates a flake?

Also, you say the Green Party is "free parking spot for former progressive conservatives and a dishevelled pack of unmanageable dreamers" and then you accuse them of vote splitting. Well, whose votes are they splitting? Would you rather red tories run back into the arms of the socons?

...red tories in green jeans...

Very good, Allan. :-)

I support the Green Party, and i can safely say I am not a former Tory of any colour or creed.

As for BC Mary's wild pot driven (by the name) idea that Greens would not fight for Canada is laughable at best, stupid at worst. I like many Greens belong to the Council of Canadians, I have educated myself to the realities of our trade deals and I have been both pepper-sprayed and tear-gassed voicing my opinion on the matter. The NDP is not the only party with people looking out for Canadian sovereignty. NDP misnomer if I ever heard one...

Oh, I wouldn't read too, too much into my acknowledging that the Greens have made a contribution and earned a place on the Canadian political spectrum. I think the Liberals and Conservatives likewise. (Though I wouldn't be unhappy if they withered away over time either.) Which certainly doesn't mean I would vote for them. I even have trouble voting NDP. :-) And this election would consider voting Liberal or Green over Conservative, if that was the only "realistic" choice. (These big C Conservatives are so far out to the right, they are beyond the pale-, for me. They are trying to hide it in this election, but they are in reality The Amerikan Party in Canada. Just listen to their strongest supporters here, starting with Ron Erwin and his buddies.)

The Greens are more harmless, at least, and no threat to democracy or the nation, that I can determine-, and divide the conservative vote at least. (More even than they take from the NDP. Though they are a dog's breakfast mixed crew.) In my view, they have a legitimate place in the political debate in this country and the social/class scheme of things. (On the road to eliminating social classes from society. :-)

We need more voices and ideas in the political process and institutions of the nation, in my view, including the Communist Party of Canada and other groupings of the Left.

I want to see a more varied and vibrant debate, and approach to problem solving in the politics of the nation, each grouping, large or small starting from a basis of equality, opportunity to be heard and debate, participate in the electoral process, and be "proportionally" represented in our legislature and parliament. Just like I want workers, communities and consumer/public interests to have an opportunity to participate in the management and direction decision making of our great economic institutions.

More choice and democracy, not the status quo or less.

Heh, The Greens as the new kids on the block? They've been around since 1983 in Canada. I don't see it as a big deal that Murray Dobbin is pro-NDP, so what? Everyone knows that, this shouldn't cause problems in looking at the points he's raising. The Greens on this thread should be giving clear reasons why their party is good. Instead, they've been doing nothing but attacking Murray as a shill and giving ambigious proclaimations about the Greens greatness. I'm still unconvinced about the Greens and probably always will. Go NDP go.

somedumbguy wrote:

What a rotten thing to say, dumbguy. What exactly does "pot driven (by the name)" mean, anyway?

Try to imagine, if you can, Maude Barlow (leader of Council of Canadians) making it her day job to run Motivational Seminars for Corporations ... it just isn't logical, is it?

Then think about Corporate Globalization, making products out of the water we need for life, the seeds we need to grow our food ... and then come back here and try to convince us that Green-Jim's Greens care about protecting the environment.

somedumbguy, the Port Mann bridge is definitely something I think about when voting in municipal elections. I wish we could direct vote for the GVRD. Its also an important issue at the provincial level, but federally? Come on. Federally, its the economy, its health care, its pensions, the military, foreign policy etc.

BC Mary, I love this quote. I feel the same way. Canada needs a real green party in the same way it needs a real labour party and a real farmer's party.

dangrice, I agree with much of what you said. And you know from past discussions I support electoral reform and want the Greens involved in the debates.

And if this were true, and I imagine it is for many of the Green party's supporters they'd get a lot more moral support from many of us on the left who believe in the same thing.
However, I can only go by what I see, that the Green label has been hijacked by a Conservative, there is no sustainability in corporate tax cuts and removing regulations.

Okay, so now The Tyee has slammed the Conservatives, Liberals and Greens.
I can hardly wait for their critique of The Toronto NDP.
I'm sure it's coming soon. Perhaps we could get David Shipwreck to write it.

Coyote: any party whose leader aligns himelf with corporations by Motivational Means, is not, not, not "more harmless ..."

Green-Jim is actually training aspiring CEOs. Green-Jim is sanctioned by the Old Corporate Boys. Green-Jim would never in this life be sanctioned by those old walruses if he weren't exactly what the bosses, the oligarchy wants of our world. As such, he makes the Canadian Green Party a real threat to the kind of democracy that includes all people, including the poor, the weak, the unemployed.

Can't you hear the echoes of Preston Manning, for goshsakes?

Ron E, I think the Tyee has some NDP-bad stories in the archive but they're waiting for the Globe and Mail, National Post, Province and Sun to first write something positive about the NDP.

Did any of you hear about Green candidate Roy Whyte in Surrey-Whalley and the flap he caused when he said he was for twinning the Port Mann bridge?

The Greens have progressives of all stripes.

BC Mary - I made the connection based on BC's biggest export - Mary-J - and your monikor. Your wild accusation that Greens wouldn't stand for Canada is so far off base. Again I point to Roy Whyte who won the nomination in Surrey-North for the Greens. He works for the CDM, who fight for Canadian sovereignty. The party is full of such people. Just because Harris chooses for an occupation to talk to corporations and their leaders, doesn't mean he will bend over like a leaf in the wind for what they want when it comes to destroying our nation. I also presume you think most corporations are evil entities - which not all are of course.

A party, its supporters, and those that run for them, are not always a die-cut of the party leader. Are all NDP flakes like Layton? Are all Cons American firsters like Harper? Are all liberals wishy-washy corporate talking heads like Martin? Of course not so don't generalize.

Something about your finger-wagging, self-righteous lecture reminds me of Preston Manning and Stockwell Day.

And yes, I do believe that an organization elects the person who reflects their hopes.

I'm pleased to learn that you feel that most corporations are "not all ... evil entities." There's a ringing endorsement if ever I heard one.

But in your urge to sanctify Green-Jim, your notion doesn't hold up that he himself cannot be an uber-corporate guru even though he's being paid by Old Corporate Boys to bring their young bloods along into positions of corporate profit-making.

Is he hiring himself out under false pretenses, then?

Would you like to provide a list of the past 50 corporations he has motivated? This thread is, after all, about "Greens Aren't Greens," remember.

Coyote and I are in agreement on the need for
proportional rep and some Green voices in Parliament, as well as many other new voices that can more easily emerge under a prop rep system. I can hardly wait for prop rep to be adopted!

If I didn't find it offensive, I might find it amusing the way some here choose to demonize the Green movement.

Is it that some rich capitalists may have donated some money to Green initiatives along the way? Well, so what if they have?

Perhaps in certain either/or world views,
anyone who is a rich capitalist, is by definition, without conscience or care about anything but themselves and money. Yet even some of capitalism's stars seem to belie the "evil capitalist" stereotype.
George Soros comes to mind. Even Warren Buffett.

There are certainly enough evil capitalists around, but it does not seem far fetched to me that there are some, successful in the business world, who also happen to have a conscience, and who believe corporations need to be made accountable via strong environmental legislation.

Many folks, exposed to the natural world at an early age, respond by imprinting a deep bond with that world, even as far as to feel a
spirituality and sacredness found there. These aren't new age latte sipper ideas. This type of experience is as old as humankind. A resurgence
of such an orientation is very welcome, in my view.

A person whose own nature so responds to the natural world , is not necessarily likely to abandon such feelings just because they may go on to become successful business folk.

Thus, it does not surprise me that some very rich individuals are serious supporters of environmental causes. It would surprise me if there weren't such individuals!

Environmental issues cross all political,ideological,
religious, ethnic, national, and other boundaries, in the sense that the state of the environment affects EVERYONE.

Although I've not been active in the Green Party, I attended their first public organizing meeting at the Vanc. Museum in the early 80s. Those initial founders, Adriane Carr was one, were disgruntled former NDP activists, who finally realized at the time that the BC NDP
had little or no interest in seriously addressing environmental issues in BC.

In fact, the NDP powers that be, of the time, went out of their way to stop votes on environmental initiatives on the floor at conventions.
The NDP made sure environmental activists were made unwelcome and were suppressed.

The BC Greens were founded, not by a cabal of
mysterious capitalists with secret agendas, but by socialists who had environmental concerns who became disenchanted with an NDP that marginalized and ostracised them, an NDP then in bed with Forest Unions who were in bed with the Forest Industry, as far as indefensible forestry practises were concerned.

The Greens secretly allied with corporate greed?...Sorry,I think you have them confused with the BC New Democrats...

The Green movement/Party has been well established in Europe for years now. I've seen no serious evidence of secret alliances with
corporate greed meisters, or corruption of the Green party.

I smell wacko conspiracy theories/propaganda from certain NDPers, some conservatives, and others who prefer to see marginalization of environmental voices.

If the Green movement happens to attract some from the socialist camp and also some from
a capitalist camp, this merely shows that people of all ideologies can and do have consciences and a belief in social and corporate responsibility.

The health of the environment affects everyone,
regardless of their beliefs.
It shouldn't surprise, that concern about the environment is felt by people across all spectrums, and that people across spectrums can support Green goals.

You conspiracy theorists/propagandists should be ashamed!

Bob999: For gosh sakes, this is in the bio of Green-Jim, leader of the Green Party. Talk about conspiracy theories ... you think I could make this stuff up??

As for needing them in the Great Debate we'll have someday about the kind of society we want, sure, it's as OK to have the Greens as it is to have the Communist Party of Canada (puh-leeze don't go into knee-jerk conniptions over that now.

All I ask is that Green-Jim be honest. Most environmentalists spend their days either immersed in the great outdoors or studying to become informed about the great outdoors. Green-Jim does not.

Green-Jim spends his days training Corporate C.E.O.s and has presumably spent his days immersed within corporations, rising to a great rank within corporations, and is exquisitely well-informed about how to get the best profits from corporations ... therefore, is qualified to do Motivational Corporate Seminars. Smell the woodsmoke.

I didn't make this up, Bob999. Don't be so hysterical. Why don't you spend some of that energy making the Green Party into an environmentally concerned party again as it was, I understand, in the beginning.

mary again - so what if he even spoke with Ford Canada! What he does for work and what he would do if elected can be two different things.

In fact I would rather have someone who works with corporations representing me than someone who wants to do away with them out of preconceived notions.

The Green Party is not the leader. What is so hard to figure out there? The Greens are volunteers, the people that donate to them, those that help write the platform, those that run for them. A party is more than the person at the top. I will vote Green, and let it be known, I don't much care for Harris, but I see more than what Dobbin places before my eyes - and so should you.

NDP supporters claim to be progressive thinkers, yet most have regressive thought processes.

Sorry forgot to add - Mary, have you sat in on one of Harris's motivational sessions with the corporate heads? No, you have not, so how do you know what is being said?

If I worked for a corporation in a senior position, by your own accounts I should automatically be discounted offhand because of that. That is silly irrational thinking at its worst.

I am not here to defend Harris. But I will defend those like me who will support the Greens for what THEY as a GROUP will do, what they have been doing, and for what they have already done.

This silly connection that because Harris speaks with corporations, makes the Greens not green is absurd!

BTW - I dislike Stockwell Day but I am a huge Manning fan. What Manning and the original Reform party stood for was great. You see, unlike some ndpers here who discount an entire party because of one person, I can see good with the bad.

I am just somedumbguy, but I admit I can't comprehend the closed mind of some NDP fanatics. And sorry to say, but when your mind becomes irrational and thus starts making weird and wild connections, fanatic is a rather apt term.

Look, the Greens have been taken over by Conservatives and Libertarians. That's fine, however, they are relying on their former reputation as a progressive party to grab votes from the left. They are deceiving the public. Otherwise, they have every right to exist and there is nothing better I'd like than to see them with a few seats so they get more exposure. When the provincial greens ran a student who had no intentions on campaigning and was writing her finals, and did so to syphon votes from the NDP, and when this happened in a time where people are actually being killed by Campbell's policies and the environment is being trashed, well, they don't have my respect to put it mildly.

The Greens would be long gone in BC if the BC Liberal types didn't support them covertly to grab votes from the left. They do not deserve as much press as they get for one thing. Carr looked into the camera and said, 'there is no difference btween the Liberals and the NDP'. (paraphrasing) Lied right in our faces.

The NDP faults and all, are truly the only progressive party we have and to stop the bleeding out of our whole way of life we must vote NDP.

I am not surprised you like "vote for STV because the East thinks your too stupid to understand it" Preston Manning.

Yes, lie to the public for more votes about their being no difference bwtwn the Liberals and the NDP, upset our voting system in support of a really inferior one, but that's okay. The hell with the province and the hell with the country as long as a Green gets in.

I'm especially not defending Jim Harris, leader of the Greens, Mary. You should know that by now, good woman. But the Greens are, in my read, no less a mixed bag than are the NDP, the Liberals, the Communists, or any other conglomeration of people. Indeed, while in the end one does have to judge parties by the voices of the leaders and their platforms, within the current electoral system, at a rank and file person to person level, it's been my experience, one is best not to judge a person too quickly (which I still often do), or too much by the political labels they choose to hang on themselves. All parties and movements of people have their good, sincere and idealist people, but also their "flawed", obsessively ambitious and opportunist persons. (And outright sociopaths.)

My experience simply is that people and groups tend to be more complex than our labels suggest or allow-, sometimes, if not very often.

So, while I have my problems with Jim Harris and the Greens, like I do with much of the leadership of the NDP, I take a different attitude to Green members per se, and have met and recognize many progressive and sincere folks amongst them, and competing trends, as there are within all movements, some with which I identify and some which I do not. And I know from previous experience, one finds that in just about every political party out there-, though indeed, some more than others. Serious social Conservatives and fascists, like serious Stalinists are outside my tolerance zone, 99.9% of the time.

The FPTP system has tended to create and uphold a lot of artificially created and rigid attitudes, rooted in the social class system of capitalism, not really very democratic procedures and structures (tightly controlled by leaders) leading to not very democratic, highly manipulated leadership and policy outcomes, in all political groupings. My hope is that a proportional representation system will begin to break that down by enhancing democracy and democratic opportunity, leading to a whole lot of new ideas and alliance creation in order to form new governance models and possibilities-, across many reasonably compatible ideological, party and policy lines.

If you detect a distrust here of ALL political parties and heirarchical structures, you are right. You then see into the essence of the direction in which "I", speaking only for myself, want to go over time, and subject to opportunity.

And that doesn't mean that I don't recognize that there are groups and parties within the current system that I am closer to and have more in common with than others. For I indeed do. To which I tend to bend at federal and provincial election times.

redrivergirl only reinforces what i said about ndp fanatics and their inability to add 2 + 2 to get 4.

Covert funding, stolen ndp votes, taken over by Cons, and the ndp the only progressive part... wow what a leap!

Votes are not stolen, they are earned. So think about your suggestion about that student. If people will knowingly vote for someone who is not really serious over another party, what does that say about the parties they DID NOT vote for?

This is not the first time we have seen ndpers claim votes belong to them or should go their way to stop the big bad liberals in BC. Sorry to say, but people are free to vote as they want, its called a free and fair democracy. Do something to earn them rather than claim them as your own.

The Greens unlike any other party in Canada both provincially and federally have been gaining votes from all parties and from a broad spectrum of voters. That speaks volumnes, as you see as i just said, they went out and earned them.

i don't own a Conservative membership, never have. i like some of their ideas, just like i like some ndp ones, some communist ones and even some liberal ones, but that does not make me one of them!

This whole Green scare is only telling me and over half a million other Canadians last election that our time is coming. For first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then they elect you. We are on step three, only one more to go!

ndpers i must ask you, why the paranoia? The Conservatives and liberals are losing votes to us to, but they have not jumped off the deep end attacking us. What has you so worried? If you think you are losing votes - which you are - because of some nefarious reasons, i suggest you take a cold hard long look in the mirror and ask not what is wrong with the Greens, but rather "what is wrong with us!"

oops i meant to say 'think about that STATEMENT', sorry i was thinking of my exams.

Mary,

In my town, the major employer, the local mill's owner is one of the major contributors to the NDP, so I'm told by some elected people in the NDP here. And one of the things this dude did on taking over the mill, early in the "restraint" and "de-unionization" process in the province, was convince his employees that unless they gave up their trade union, he would have to shut the mill down.

When the employees recently reconsidered their getting rid of the union, because of a number grievances and irritants, the same veiled threat went mysteriously around. The union was turned down again.

The NDP has its share of charlatans and get in on the business class, lawyers, small businessmen and cosy relationships between its politicos and Big Money too. Glen Clark, as I immediately recall, went right from the Premier's Office, into a lucrative "management" position with one of the biggest corporate names in B.C., Jimmy Pattison. :-)

Now, does that reflect on all NDPers? I don't think so. On the "party" maybe, but not individual, honest and sincere NDPers.

Votes are earned when the party is truthful about their platform. If the party deliberately encourages the public to believe something that is no longer so, or lies as Ms Carr did, then those votes that went to her party are hardly earned, but are indeed stolen.
Therefore, it says nothing about the party they didn't vote for.

Coyote, yes, this is true. My complaint with the Greens is not that they are different, or varied. It is that their platform, what they really stand for appears to have been appropriated and they are capitalizing on their former reputation. At least the NDP are for the most part who they say they are. At least when comparing all the others, at least.

Don't compare Euro-Greens to Canada-Greens. The only similarity is the name.

So what environmental organizations have actually endorsed the Greens and not the NDP?

And, as far as what the news implied, the young woman running did not reveal what she was doing until the media found out.

K.Rover:

It's been my experience with MPs and MP wannabes that they will use snail mail to reply. It's a way of determining whether e-mails are legitimate. I e-mailed Gary Lunn
http://www.garylunn.ca/
asking about whether the LAV III was adequate as a combat military vehicle, when Pte. Woodfield got killed in a roll over in Afghanistan
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051202/woodfield_memorial_051202/20051202?hub=TopStories
and it took several weeks for a non-commital written reply.
Patience, good sir!

I wonder how many former NDP supporters like me took the hint from Glen Clark after he
declared Greenpeace to be "the enemies of BC",
and then he proceeded to unravel all the progress that had been made under Harcourt on environmental issues.

I'd been duped into voting for Clark's NDP, which turned out to be no better than the Libs, as Adriane Carr so accurately noted, at least on environmental issues.

Just as Adriane discovered in the early 80s, the NDP had little interest in environmentally progressive policies. This was again the case under Clark. He insulted and betrayed all environmentalists who had supported his party,
and told them all basically to f*** off.

Well, that's just what I and many others did! And vowed not to support the NDP again, at least not any time soon. I have proudly voted Green ever since.

Why should I trust a party that forced out a progressive leader (Harcourt) to install a thug like Clark? And why should I think "it will be different next time"?

I agree with somedumbguy that there's more than a whiff of paranoia in some of the posts here.
The Green Party may now attract people with an environmental conscience from a variety of social/economic ideologies.Good!Everyone's welcome to help fight for sane gov't policies on CO2 emissions, and a hundred other important issues. So, this means they've been "taken over" by the dreaded libertarians and conservatives? (What's your evidence, red river girl? You demand links and quotes from colin. If you're going to make incendiary accusations, where's your evidence that the Greens are now a front for a right wing agenda?).

Besides the paranoia, it's incredibly insulting
to the environmental movement to make such allegations.

As I mentioned, the BC Greens were founded by fed up NDP socialists. One of those socialist founders is the current leader. I'd love to see polling done in BC and across Canada as to the ideological bent of Green Party members, to help clear up these questions in no uncertain terms.

I doubt very much that right wingers comprise
anywhere close to a majority in the Green Party.That left leaners still make up the bulk of the party, would be my estimation.

A movement and a party is much bigger than one guy (especially a guy who likely won't even win a seat). If Harris turns out to be a KKK member and axe murderer it would be disconcerting, but would hardly discredit the movement. To this extent Harris is a red herring, or as some would prefer "a blue herring".

Is there evidence in Europe that elected Greens have been working secretly for right wing causes ?(To revive the National Socialist Party and the SS, perhaps? And maybe a try out a few concentration camps? - well, Bush maybe beat them to that already...)

Since I like Layton, I was leaning NDP again after many years, but after reading the insults
against Greens on this thread, I think it would be more fitting as an answer to you conspiracy peddlers, that I vote Green party, a most deserving party, again in January.

Thanks for helping me make up my mind.

Apples and oranges, Coyote. The mill owner is not the NDP leader, nor does he represent its platform or its roots. The corporate mill owner is indeed playing a false, manipulative game to get his own advantage -- much as I think Green-Jim is doing.

Glen Clark went to work for the Pattison group after he left government. How does this affect the electoral process?

Those two examples aren't comparable to a party leader in an election campaign who is IMO making a false claim of environmentalism.

Too tired to respond completely, Bobb. Start with this link as a background.

http://www.dsp.org.au/dsp/lmgreens.htm

google eco-libertarian

I will provide others. For now I'll say, that when I requested a link, it was for an assertion about a well known fact (regarding wmd) that was untrue and contrary to any reputable reporting source. My comments are based on my observations and also on the words of some Greens themselves who do not deny they are Libertarian.

And, as well, perhaps re-reading the article on which we are commenting would help.

You know, I am a feminist of my own definition, reasonably well educated, reasonably creative, reasonably 'privilaged' person who despairs at the state of 'our mother', the earth, (I really do, I feel how poisoned it is becoming and it saddens me greatly, plus I don't think it can take much more without destroying all of us) can't bear the suffering of animals and so don't eat them etc. Shouldn't I be a Green Party voter? I'm not. And, it's because of what appears to be a yucky 'something' a 'right wing' something running through it. Combined with little discernable differences in tactics from the BC Liberals which did nothing to impress me. We are in crisis and need to vote for the party that has a chance on putting the breaks on what is happening to our society. We need to care about people too.

Again, the Greens have every right to be who they are. Just be open about it.

Please don't bash libertarians. We will keep out of your business and we hope you keep out of ours.

Because some of us make unflattering remarks about the present-day rightwing, anti-Green Green Party, Bobb999 thinks he ought to vote Green! What warped logic is that? Doesn't he think the Green Party should actually be compelled to be GREEN? I do! A strong Green Party that was actually Green would be wonderful! Instead, today's Green Party thinks that ISO 2000 (or whatever it is now) is adequate enough incentive for industries to live up to environmental laws. Ha! ISO is media-savvy PR, but it's gutless and environmentally wimpy--and certainly un-enforced. I worked in the most polluting industrial setting in BC, and it always passed ISO certification, while toxins flowed unfettered into the ocean. Bobb999 may still feel antipathy for Glen Clark (who hasn't run for anything in years), but he can't logically make the jump that New Democrats are anti-environmentalist. That logic is like that of a woman I know who believes fervently in equal rights, yet votes Conservative because she didn't like the gun registry law. Like why not just cut your nose off to spite your face? Better that than waste your vote!

Enough already! We have three major political parties. Too hot, too cold and just right. We shouldn't need a fourth (non of the above) to further dilute our dillusion that we live in a functioning democracy.

Except that the "just right" party is rife with corruption.

Thanks for the link red river girl.
It appears well researched, but it's nearly 10 years old, and has no information on the current Euro Greens, or what's happened in 10 years!

Even Dobbin's piece describes the current Euro Greens as having a socially progressive platform nowadays.

It's an int'l movement. If the Cdn. Green Party
has signed on to the Charter of the Global Greens, and if, as Dobbin suggests, Harris is not living up to it, the rank and file aren't likely to tolerate such a lapse for long. If Green members actually stop believing that Harris represents Green values, he will be dumped sooner or later (hopefully sooner).

I say everyone with a genuine environmental conscience should be welcome in a Green Party, as I mentioned earlier. I can even live with a sprinkling of libertarians! I maintain that social progressives (who founded the BC Greens and who are still at the helm) will predominate, which is how it has shaken out with the Euro and BC Greens of today.

Anyway, if I vote Green, I'm not voting for Harris. I'm voting for a BC Green who happens to be running federally. I should find out more about my local candidate.

Here's a reason for you, as an NDP voter with a environmental bent, to be glad there's a Green Party: A strong Green Party acts as pressure on the NDP pushing them to lean Green, which is what you say you want of the NDP.

I agree with you that I too would prefer to see Layton's NDP, a people party, wield a balance of power in the next gov't (I'd be happy to see an NDP majority - plus lots of Greens - if it were only possible)...but ,unlike you, I also want to see the Green Party maintain and grow a presence (and continue to qualify for their $1.75 a head). If Layton's NDP is strong on environmental issues, the Greens can likely take some credit for pushing them in that direction. This is a reason why we need a strong organized Green presence.

The installation of Glen Clark showed how your preferred party can (provincially, at least), at the drop of a writ, completely abandon environmental stewardship as an aim, and betray the environmental cause. How can YOU then trust them to represent your stands on these issues when you saw that this can occur? There seems more evidence the NDP is untrustworthy than that the Greens are, in my view.

Marysue:
If I vote Green in '06, I won't be doing an about face. I've voted Green ever since Glen Clark. I was considering doing an about face and supporting Layton's party, but
the attacks against Greens I've read at the Tyee have simply persuaded me that my "Plan A" was preferable all along, that the Green Party deserves support against an onslaught of fear mongering.

I read this article By Mr. D and was not shocked by the obvious attack on the Greens and support for the NPD. I was however shocked to hear that this is a respected author.

These are two entirely different political parties. The Greens are unlike any of the old-line parties, and draws votes from the entire spectrum. 30% from center-left, 30% from ppl who would otherwise not vote, and 40% from center-left.

The well known Sierra report showed at the time that the Greens and the NDP had great environmental policies, but awarded the NDP a slightly higher grade based on the extent of their platform. The Greens had very little funding at that time, and deserves respect for putting together a solid platform without the research teams and think tanks that were available to the other parties. In, fact,the Greens have a great platform, and has seen parties borrowing ideas from them. I think all the parties should steal from the Greens platform.

Sure the NDP is focussed on many of the same issues as the Greens are, but they are coming from different directions, and the Greens just plain make sense to me.

Go to their website, find your candidate, contact them,and find out the real story on this wonderfull political force.

Cameron

BTW:

Q.: Who is likely to be pro choice, in favour of gay marriage, against a Christian right agenda of "Christianizing" public institutions, against the Iraq war, against abuses of human and privacy rights by gov'ts,
is in favour of ending the war on drugs and is for treating drugs as a medical, not legal problem, and some of whom also support strong environmental protections....?
A: libertarians! I'll take a Green libertarian any day over a Bush Republican.Libertarians are
often progressive on issues. They just have an extreme phobia about public spending, however,
which is where their "mean streak" becomes apparent.

lol, Dan Grice.

Yikes, I have so many spelling errors on things like their and your. geesh.

Okay, I would have less of a problem with the greens if our world were not in such crisis. Platform is one thing, an actual chance to govern and thus mitigate some of the regressive and disasterous policies enacted by Campbell etal, is another. We are in crisis. We needed to get rid of Campbell during the last election. To not recognize that seems to me rather odd. It's kind of like stitching a small gash in someone's leg and neglecting their main artery that is gushing blood with every heart beat. It doesn't make any sense. And, the patient is going to die.

I am not denying there are good people in the green party. And, yes the greens drew from all spectrums (but, here in Canada most people think it is a left and green party they don't know the environmental policy plan has changed into GB's) and the article posted discusses how that center politik allowed the right wing to take over.

Murray, I agree that their are huge problems within the Green Party but you cant paint the whole party with the leaders brush. Furthermore to insist that the other parties would not stand such a thing is ridiculous. I seem to remember none other than your friend Maude Barlow being harrassed out of the Liberal Party. She talks about it in her documentary "Democracy a la Maude" as one of her reasons for choosing activism over public office. Perhaps we have collectively forgoten the patronage appointments, parliamentary vote buying, parachuted candidates, stolen money, etc, etc etc.

The Conservative Party does not even exist if you ask David Orchird. Peter Mackay broke his their deal and has formed the un-holy alliance that so many red tories did not want. They had no policy convention before the last election. They became a party through mail in ballots, isn't Orchird still fighting this in court?

From what I hear the Bloc Parliamentarians have to run everything they say through Giles Duceppe.

The NDP has a long history of shmering its own members, playing dirty and stacking votes. They still haven't fully dealt with the imbalance of power within the party. Furthermore the connections between those within the party and the horribly fucked up behind the scenes control tactics, manipulation, questionable finances, lack of audits, and an assortment of other activities of the Canadian Federation of Students is enough to make anyone with a shred of morality think twice about playing ball with these guys. I love Jack, Libby, Ed, Svend and others within the party for what they have done for Canada but we need to stop talking about parties as if they were people. It is the people themselves that need to be talked about.

Im not the worlds biggest fan of Jim Harris's but I also recognize that he saved the party from falling apart. The party might be top down but I can tell you that as a Green Party candidate I have plenty of freedom to have my own perspective and no one is telling me what to say which im sure is not the case in the other parties. People should look at who they are voting for in their riding not just the party. This Party based voting is disresptectful to the candidates and does nothing to help democracy. If we cannot even take the time to figure out who we are voting for and not just their party brand we are little more than electoral consumers not citizens participating in self governence. You could vote for a candidate from any party and get someone pro war, anti abortion, against gay marriage there are all kinds in all parties.

All large and powerful institutions need to be transparent and accountable. None of these parties or their large institutional investors whether they be corporations or unions is exempt from this. It is way too simplistic to simply say the Green Party is a mess and no one else would put up with it.

I understand that you are limited in the breadth of your story because of the need for concision but if you are going to perscribe a rememdy please do so in a fair fashion. I think it is fantastic that you bring these facts to light. Democracy depends on information. The problem is that you did not fairly represent the true nature of the political landscape.

The Greens have a lot of potential to do good work in the same way that the European Greens do. It is a party without the baggage and vested interests that the other parties have. The Greens can have a impact on the debate. Unfortunately I think Jack Layton is held back by his party which seems to be far less progressive than he is.They can pull the other candidates in positive directions and help give Jack and others the licence to be themselves. Their is a lot more to elections than the final vote count. Their is the setting of the agenda and the importance of the public dialouge. The Greens need to not pander for votes and run from their base. This is a broad base and potentialy a realy good place to have an honest and drawn out debate over tactics and ideas. Good luck to all of us.

somedumbguy wrote: "The Green Party is not the leader. What is so hard to figure out there? The Greens are volunteers, the people that donate to them, those that help write the platform, those that run for them. A party is more than the person at the top."

The problem, somedumbguy, is that *this* party _is_ just the person at the top. That's a key part of what Murray is writing about. Your argument that a party is a multifaceted thing is based on your observations of other parties. It is precisely because it is not true of the Green Party of Canada that I and others are so critical of the party.

Look at what you describe a party has having:

Volunteers? The party has no local organization outside a half-dozen ridings, and becomes invisible between elections.

Donors? The party has no sustaining donor base. If you subtract off a few donations of $50,000+, you are left with a few thousands dollars in donations. The party survives almost entirely on its public subvention.

Those who write the platform? In most parties, platforms emerge from conventions, through a democratic process in which policies can be debated and amended. In Jim Harris's Green Party, if the leader doesn't like a policy, he has it changed.

Candidates? In most parties, to become a candidate you have to contest a nomination and demonstrate support with the local membership. Ultimately, the local branch of the party chooses the candidates. Harris believes it is the role of the leader to hand-pick each and every candidate: the 308 Green Party candidates are nothing but agents of the leader.

This is not how things work in other Canadian parties, and I don't believe there is a place for it in Canadian democracy.

--

Bobb999 wrote: "Why should I trust a party that forced out a progressive leader (Harcourt) to install a thug like Clark?"

That is a tough question, Bobb. But if that's your bottom line, why would you trust a party that forced out a progressive leader like Stuart Parker to install a thug like Carr? Why would you trust a party that forced out an entire progressive council to install a thug like Jim Harris?

Is the Green Party perfect? No. Which of the perfect parties do you favour? The Greens actually have a number of policies, and those policies provide for more positive environmental changes than all of the other parties combined, by far.

If Jim Harris is a red-Tory, what of it? The Greens are about saving the earth from our industrial influences, not about creating another ideologically dogmatic fringe party. If the Green Party is not welcoming to Canadians of all political stripe, they are never going to grow and therefore never have any influence. By criticising Harris for being a conservative, are you not really slamming inclusiveness? If all the Greens do is run around trying to negatively force-slam businesses to adopt absolutely environmentally-positive changes they will never attract the votes of anyone but the most radical of voters. At best, they would never grow any larger than the NDP (something the NDP is only now starting to get). Harris apparently understands the mindset of corporate leaders and would like to use that to advance change. Is that likely to be less effective than holding sit-ins in the their boardrooms?

Holding a gun to people's heads to force them to become "environmental" is useless and will only alienate. The small-stick approach that Harris appears to favour will be far more effective at fostering attitudes that will engender real, lasting changes. Yes, they will need to be accelerated, but we have to start somewhere.

Rather than attacking, we might well be encouraging this sort of pragmatism and cooperation, things are that are obviously quite lacking in our conventionally accepted political climate.

Well said bontano. I am a Green Party candidate, and I see the logic in my party. Let's work together, not pick eachother apart.

I try to do everything in my life according to a few key principles; tolerance, openmindedness, hope, and patience. If it doesn't fit with these, then it's probably not worth doing.

There's no behind the scenes story with the Green Party - we are simply here in Canada's best interests. We are neither left nor right - we are forward. Lately the media and many independant reporters have been trying to dig up as much dirt as they can on us, but they all fall short on anything substantial, because we are a solid party with a solid platform.

I welcome a debate from anyone who'd like to respond regarding the Green Party in general. Please go to the Green Party website, view candidates (all of whom are in this for the cause and are volunteering their honest efforts) hunt me down, and send me an email. I ask only for you to enter into a discussion with an open mind.

Cameron Wigmore

bontano wrote: By criticising Harris for being a conservative, are you not really slamming inclusiveness?

No, in fact exactly the reverse. I have no problem with the fact that there are fiscal conservatives in the Green Party. When I was active with the party, I routinely worked side by side with people who had quite different views from mine on a whole range of issues, nuclear power and drug policy being two that spring to mind.

The problem I have with the conservatives in the Green Party is not that they are fiscal conservatives, but that *they* don't tolerate and work together with others. There is simply no room for dissent within the GPC, GPBC or GPO, and no democratic means for progressive members (who might well constitute the majority within the party) to express themselves.

When you write that Green Party policies "provide for more positive environmental changes than all of the other parties combined, by far", on what are you basing that statement? Greenpeace and the Sierra Club both disagreed with you -- they found that the NDP policies were slightly better, and the Bloc policies about as good, as the Green Party policies.

I would submit that your belief is that the Green Party policies simply _must_ be greener than those of the other parties because, well, because they are _called_ the "Green" Party. That's exactly the belief we are trying to get people to shake.

Why don't I start a party called "The Natural Party of Government"? Would you believe it was the the most natural party of government, just because it was called that?

Good point, Julian West. Nor is the Red Sea, red or the Black Sea, black. :-)

It takes more than a word to make anything so. The Liberal party is hardly liberal anymore, it's liberalness totally non-existent provincially. The Conservative Party of Canada has no intention whatsoever of conserving Canada, it just sneers at this country. And the New Democrats are hardly new anymore though some would say they have forgotten some of their better old ideas.

Julian, I can see that you've been soured on ppl who are small c and/or big C conservatives, and I hope you can see past any previous experience you had with ppl so as to move forward with our hopefully mutually agreed purpose - to improve the quality of life for Canadians while creating a sustainable economy in part through ecological preservation. I sure hope I'm not the only one here working on this (lol).

You said, "...that *they* don't tolerate and work together with others. There is simply no room for dissent within the GPC, GPBC or GPO, and no democratic means for progressive members (who might well constitute the majority within the party) to express themselves..."

Really? This is a serious claim. I don't know if I can just take that statement as fact, given that you stated you have a problem with conservatives. I myself will not label myself as conservative or other. I am green, and the Green Party is, of course, green.

Regarding the Sierra report, the Greens were given a grade on par with the NDP and Bloc. The NDP was slightly higher, as I understand, because they simply has more money to fund think tanks and create extensive policies regarding environmental issues. The Green Party at the time had limited funds, but currently has created a very comprehensive and detailed platform.

It seems strange to me that NDPers would be seemingly so against the Greens. You can continue to support your party if you like, and hopefully you'll give the Greens a chance to prove themselves.

Seroiusly, I think we'd do well to support each other in our efforts, instead of trying to prove who's better or worse. We're different and that's O.K.

Cameron

hmmm, these people who claim that the Greens select all their candidates is rather funny and so off base, not to mention not based on fact.

I voted two weeks ago at a Surrey riding to nominate a candidate out of three total choices. Sure sounds like a nomination contest like any other party! Harris was not there holding a gun to our heads telling us who to select.

Enough of the lies already. Have candidates been placed in ridings to help cover them all? You bet, but every other party this election has seen events take place that are exactly square if you catch my drift. So to say this is an exclusive Green event is a lie of the highest order.

somedumbguy wrote "Enough of the lies already". Why would I lie about the Green Party when (1) lies would quickly be rebutted, and (2) there's plenty I can say about the party without lying ?

I didn't say that nomination contests were never held. I'm sure there have been numerous contested nominations, perhaps as many as 20 or 30. And, in fact, since half of the total GPC membership is concentrated into perhaps 10 active ridings, most members of the party will have had the same experience as you had, of seeing a contested nomination. They don't see the hundreds of other ridings where there is no nomination.

What I said is that Harris believes that it is the role of the leader within the party to select the candidates. How do I know that I'm not lying when I say that? Because Harris told me so.

I guess the candidate who was nominated in your riding met with the approval of the leader. Most will -- not least because those potential candidates who would be vetoed have, like me, mostly left the party. But make not mistake, if he doesn't approve of the local candidate, Harris will have no qualms about refusing to sign the nomination papers. This actually happened last year, right here in B.C.

I'm not sure where to begin. How do you spell "Grass Roots Party", Murray Dubbin? Gee Whiz, I guess it must be true that the Green Party is in it for the money because you said so!
I guess a political platform to reduce health care expenses through awareness and revamped FDA regulations to get Canadians healthy again and save alot of money by erasing huge numbers on the expense column caused by stupidity, just aren't rational enough for you.

Maybe you just didn't think it through when you declared a political party still in budding stages, one that doesn't need a leader that runs it "top down" or restrains from diluting less than two million through 308 members because the pie is too small to split and the next minority government is also likely to fall within four years.

Anyone can criticize the Liberals (like Jack) for a 24% increase in greenhouse gases. In case noone has noticed, our multi-billion dollar surpluses are there because we're selling oil and gas full tilt. The NDP can hype it up all they want, but... bay street knows, the average Canadian knows, and so do the Greens.

Are you suggesting that this "so called ragtag bunch of misfits" would actually be willing to break all international laws and turn off the taps, force us all to go broke and get squashed in the international community trade arena with radical environmental policies? C'mon.

If all you can do is print Bias, Murray, it means you should start looking for another job.

Sorry. brain ... "FDA regulations" ... ?

And "our multi-billion dollar surpluses are there because we're selling oil and gas full tilt ... Bay Street knows ... and so do the Greens."

How green is that? Corporate globalism at its finest.

Dobbin should be ashamed of himself. I took me a long time due to the sheer number of inaccuracies in his clomun, but I have a very long, and thorough rebuttal post:

http://section15.blogspot.com/2005/12/closet-dipper-dobbin-smears-greens-yet.html

I've followed this string,glad to see all the interest in our political process. Brain,I'd like to have you on my debating team anyday. Seems a few bewildered souls naively believe reiteration and trying to get in the last word here will make them right! I don't know Mr.Dobbin, butit seems his sources were mainly "disgruntled" former GREENs,
wonderful thing about our democracy is they get to have their say as do all commentors in this string.

I gather Mr. Dobbin is op/ed and not obliged to be impartial,so one can dismiss most of his personal opining as mostly harmless.

The fact that Jim is a motivational speaker does not preclude him from being GREEN or a party leader.Has anyone who decries him found anything to link him with the "evil empire" of CEO'S?
Read one of his books?

There is some unrest in our party,I suspect it is true of some others as well.Right now we'll take all the press we can get ,and settle our differences as the scholars and polite people
most of us are,in the proper forum.

You may wish it was so but it isn't. As many of us have pointed out above we wish the Greens well in the future when and if they really do become a "green" party.

I agree, but I joined this discussion after a bunch of NDP bashing by those calling themselves Greens.

Anyway, I support electoral reform because it'll bring new voices, including the greens, to the discussion. I just hope when you get there you've dropped the "from across the political spectrum" mantra and have decided where you stand because political parties can't please everyone and its good to know ahead of time where the priorities are.

Like it or not, people look at the party leaders for the answers to these questions. When Layton, Martin or Harper speak, they speak for the party. I don't get to say "oh that's just Jack, we don't mean it".

To diehard socialists, the Greens represent counter-revolutionaries, the worst enemy of all! I find the NDP laughable for exactly the reason Grumpy states above. The have no concept of taking responsibility for their electoral failures.

Grumpy, you are one astude observer. Hell, even Broadbent and Schrier are running yet again, not to mention Waddell the Wattle. Yet they continue to lose election after election.

Obviously WM, you haven't looked at McMartin's history of the federal Liberals in BC since WW2. I suggest you guys look in your own mirror as to why you generally finish 3rd here. We might not do to well but we do better than thee.

Mark said...
"Dobbin should be ashamed of himself. I took me a long time due to the sheer number of inaccuracies in his clomun, but I have a very long, and thorough rebuttal post:

http://section15.blogspot.com/2005/...greens-yet.html

Great link!

novascotiagreen said...
"Seems a few bewildered souls naively believe reiteration and trying to get in the last word here will make them right! I don't know Mr.Dobbin, butit seems his sources were mainly "disgruntled" former GREENs,
wonderful thing about our democracy is they get to have their say as do all commentors in this string.

I gather Mr. Dobbin is op/ed and not obliged to be impartial,so one can dismiss most of his personal opining as mostly harmless.

The fact that Jim is a motivational speaker does not preclude him from being GREEN or a party leader.Has anyone who decries him found anything to link him with the "evil empire" of CEO'S?
Read one of his books?

There is some unrest in our party,I suspect it is true of some others as well.Right now we'll take all the press we can get ,and settle our differences as the scholars and polite people
most of us are,in the proper forum."

Well said.

This is a great thread, and I'm done for now. Thanks all for your input.

Cameron

As for Grumpy he supports BC separation, military coups and the Green party.

Well, we get to see a lot of righteous condemnation of Dobbin for this piece

Sadly it never gets past the "he's biased" whines.

Someone offered that the greens are not corporates but just plain ordinary folks who volunteer.

Hitler's National Socialist Party was filled with just plain volunteers too. It's my understand most lynching parties were usually staffed by volunteers, as are hazing.

Some companies get employees to work free overtime and they call it volunteering.

Honourable, I'm sure!

I'll bet you could hide any atrocity known to mankind behind the friendly image of volunteers. Oh and by the way, I do suspect all parties depend on volunteers.

That rational to explain how great the Greens are is about as useful as the other whopper I've seen somewhere on this page that the greens are Green.

Coyote, that's a sad little line you toss out about the anonymous mill employer in your community. What's the hesitation to name names?

After all you obviously had no qualms jumping all over Glen Clark like a BCTV news reporters with a telephoto lense and a politically active police snitch.

You then compress time frames over his departure and suggest somewhat darkly that he had already sold out to Jim Pattison before he left politics.

I'm surprised you didn't mention the cabin deck, the back porch or any of the other Vancouver Province-BCTV bullshit that was spread about Clark.

Perhaps you forgot Coyote, but the provincial Liberals were not able to get a judge to convict him.

Raise the level a bit. You are starting to act and sound like Ron E and Working Wonk who are camped here to toss cow pies because neither are capable of presenting a factual statement.

I remain convince the Greens are a party of overly naive lost souls and a growing number of red tories.

If someone thinks Harris's motivational sessions for corporate leaders is just a job
and doesn't reflect his political beliefs, they are either desperate or extremely naive.

He marches to their drummer and I would doubt he give's farmed salmon's ass about working families.

Quite frankly, Dobbin's piece clearly reflects the bent of Tyee, but unlike most MSM, the Tyee has never claimed to a home to everyone.

I realize the Sun, Globe etc., etc. do purport to offer all views to everyone, but I prefer the Tyee's upfront honesty far more.

.

ROFLMAO! Not at you, Mary, but Tyee. :-D

Anyway Mary, I disagree, but clearly you see more in the NDP than I do. We shall have to disagree on this issue.

I've actually come to the reluctant conclusion to vote NDP again, in my particular community with a sitting Conservative and the NDP otherwise having the only chance to beat him. The Conservatives need to be obliterated. Then the others in order of rank. or at least reduced in influence. :-)

Other than that, were we talking either a sitting Liberal or New Democrat, challenged only by the other, I would as quickly vote Green. The Greens being somewhere sandwiched between the Democrats and the Libs, all of them within a hair's thickness of each other, such as to make it difficult to determine who is righter or lefter of the other.

I mean, my view, they are all playing the same game around platform differences which really want to, more or less, be one and the same, while retaining "some" artificial "differential edge", and are, plumping for capitalism all, one with a slightly green bent around a Progressive Conservative pole doing a strip tease, the other advocates a "somewhat" human face and breast implants on the corporate capitalism upon which they are all fundamentally agreed, whilst the ruling one is playing all sides against the "middle" from its cheeky place actually sleeping with its corporate lover the others all want, and would do if they were in the same ruling position. And really, we all know it. Or should-, again in my view.

Ta, ta dahlings. I'm outta here to attend to "man stuff" for the next week or so. :-)

(David and Dawn really are sweethearts. Priggish but... :-D )

Here's to a minority government, either Liberal or NDP, with whoever is not, holding the balance of power. The NDP and the Greens perhaps getting an even split of the Conservative seats, who will ideally get zip, zero, nada.

Then in the ensuing disillusionment thereafter and the gathering takeover of the country by the US Empire, which nobody in governance has the jam to deal with, a "serious left" movement suddenly emerges and sweeps to power, defends the nation and begins to radically democratize all aspects of "the system" and "transform" capitalism into a more egalitarian social arrangement over time.

Shortly thereafter, of course, under the influence of radical social changes sweeping Canada and Latin America, the citizens of The US Empire initiate similar processes of social and democratic change, and if not a new world is born, at least a new western hemisphere. :-)

Big dreams cost the same as little ones.

A Merry Winter Solstice!

Just thinking...ever notice the similarity between the logo of the Green Party of Canada, and that of British Petroleum...looks like a large yellow dahlia on a green background...hmmmm.
visit http://www.bp.com/home.do?categoryId=1

And, Defeat to the US Empire Coalition in Iraq and Afghanistan!

Wow Allen, you take the prize for taking a concept to the extreme. Green volunteers as compared to Nazis.

Sorry, but I would not even know where to begin, and besides, why bother?

So what was Rafe's piece - a non-reflection then?

Doesn't mean a thing. Ontario and to a lesser extent Quebec decide federal elections.

Allan said:

"Well, we get to see a lot of righteous condemnation of Dobbin for this piece Sadly it never gets past the "he's biased" whines."

Missed my link, which deconstructs Dobbin's disinformation totally?

http://section15.blogspot.com/2005/12/closet-dipper-dobbin-smears-greens-yet.html

"Someone offered that the greens are not corporates but just plain ordinary folks who volunteer.

Hitler's National Socialist Party was filled with just plain volunteers too. It's my understand most lynching parties were usually staffed by volunteers, as are hazing."

Well, there goes the thread.

The Greens got compared to Nazis. Someone sew this thread up.

Sumdumbguy and Mark ought to go back and read the second sentence of my posting. It's sums the both of you up quite well.

Just to clarify. I was not comparing the Nazis to the Greens, Conservatives, Liberals NDP or any other party.

I was simply trying to indicate to some of you Greenies who think because you have volunteers in your party the Greens are somehow special.

No comparisons there other than the first one I talked about in this latest post, the one about my second sentence.

Mark, I seldom read the Vancouver Sun and never, absolutely never stick my face in either the Province or the National Post for the same reason I would be highly unlikely to read your no-doubt, balanced response on some unbalanced blog.

Get a hold of yourself man, you spew Green Party mumbo-jumbo and then try to sneak a mention of your blog on the Tyee.

Shame on you. Take out an ad or get some of your more flush former PC members of your party to pay for it.

Somehow your trying to get a free ride for your blog on the shirttails of the Tyee while attacking Dobbin for bias is simply toooo much.

Shame on you. Quit acting so cheesy and buy and ad.

Oh. I was apparently serving troll food. Sorry about that everyone.

For those interested in constructive discussion, should I post my rebuttal here? It's rather large: Eleven pages, single line at 12 point.

I'm from Victoria, BC, lived in Toronto for three years, and now reside in central Alberta, going on five years. The Greens are a real option for Canada. I see this from the west coast perspective, the prairie point of view, and the southern Ontario war zone reality. Our votes do count, and it's not just Ontario that decides elections. We all do.

The bottom line is that Jim Harris is a great leader, the Green Party of Canada has a great platform, and Canada is starting to see that it needs a party that will really do something.

Cam

Murray Dobbin's criticism of Harris isn't likely to alter how I vote even if I don't like all I read and some of it I already know. I do think the Green party needs more people getting involved to create that party. That it is drawing disaffected Tories and NDPers is what is actually exciting about it. My only beef with article is that Murray Dobbin should have quoted Greens who have left the party in this article.

For NDP researchers out there, I left the NDP as I strongly dislike Layton and the reality by which he came to be elected as leader. I have also been sickened by the provincial NDP's fascination with leader cults (Clark with his boot on the table in caucas meetings), its election of a Liberal as leader, and increasingly fed up with James and her inability to lead an opposition. Further the federal NDP has a bad habit of attacking its own, and its best, for fear of loosing the odd union or Christian voter. If I was in a riding where NDP might win, for the sake of Canada I might vote NDP. I am not, so I think my vote will remain Green.

Coming from Newfoundland and Labrador, I considered voting Green until they decided to cancell the seal hunt as one of their policies.

Click the links for more and to see the negative impact on their campaign in Newfoundland

http://www.cbc.ca/nl/story/nf_green_sealing_20051206.html

and

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/13/green-seal051213.html

It's too bad really, because the Greens had lots of potential.

Sounds horrible: Red tories, former progressive conservatives. (Looked at Harris' bio, former is as of 1985) Just for curiosity, what negative policies do red tories generally advocate. Eco-capitalism as opposed to state socialism? Is the problem that socialists are afraid that the progressive vote, as well as the soft center could actually look beyond the class revolt, and find a middle road. That the fiscons would join forces with the enviros, and the solibs, and leave both the religious socons & unionist socomms on the fringes....

Hello y'all!

Great debate, but at times the cheap shots make me wonder...
Why do we spend so much time arguing with each other when we probably agree on many issues?

I know Murray Dobbin as we worked in the Council of Canadians together and on the Greg Palast Tour in Vancouver. I also know Julian West from my early days in the Greens in the 1990s.
I have worked with NDPers, Red Tories and left-leaning Liberals on many issues. One of my best friends has been an NDP candidate in North Vancouver (Martin Stuible) and two other friends of mine are NDP councillors in Richmond (Linda Barnes and Harold Steves).

Ultimately, change comes through community activism! And we do this by working with people from other parties or ideological backgrounds. To be quite frank I have found what I call "Party Animals" to be the worst. They are people who spend all their time doing political party work and they support their leader/leadership no matter what dumb-ass things they do. I have met these type of people in all parties. Usually I can't work with these people. They remind me of sheep!
"My leader is great...baaaa...baaaa..."

Let's be honest. The Green Party is not perfect! Yes, you heard it from a seven time Green candidate. But, the NDP has its faults too! I'm sorry, but some of the NDPers here throw criticism around, but can't accept it when we talk about the NDP.

Lastly, if you think any political party will change the world I think...

1) ...you have smoked too much really good BC Bud.
2) ...you need to be sentenced to some communtiy service for awhile.
3) ...you are in a Matrix induced dreamworld.
4) ...you are either Glen Clark, Christy Clark, a Lieberal hack or a Christian fundamentalist from America.

Have a good week!

Kevan Hudson
Former Green hack and current Enviro fundi

Kevan Hudson is right. Lets suppose you were the leader of an environmental party and you wanted to make all the difference in the world. Just pick a party. It doesn't have to be Green. Pick any party. Any environmental party, or party who even claimed that they were environmentally conscious. Who in their right mind is going to turn off the oil and gas taps, violate international trade laws with our majority owned foreign interests, get sanctioned up the ying yang, lose 10's of billions in Canadian revenue, run up deficeits like Mulroney and still expect to hold a job? It's not just political suicide... its a revolution on your hands even if you have a majority. Sure, it sounds corporate, but... do we have a choice? This one is going to take some time.

My point is, B.C. Mary... we can talk about putting money back into social programs all we want, but... were is the money going to come from when we stop selling oil and gas? And thats assuming in a big way that any Federal government actually could without going to war over it.
And the real problem IS CO2. Bio diesel and gas isn't going to cut it. Hydrogen cells? No stations. The worst part about it is that at some point, we'll have to stop regardless. We have renewable energy in geothermal, tides, wind, solar (and no one is looking refractive)... we have alternatives, ways to generate renewable energy to electricity and then to cars with biodiesel for the payloads, but no ones listening and we can't even get beyond whether or not it should be public or private initiatives...

We have a Republican Government down south that has done just about everything wrong with every choice they've made. They are way past picking fights in the middle east for oil, or living up to the Republican slogan, "Just vote for the Republicans. They're good for business." They've lost 25% of their manufacturing industry to globalization over 5 years. The U.S. trade deficit was 197 billion dollars over the last 3 months. They've borrowed more than what our entire Federal defeceit is over 9 months, with a population that is only 10 times our own. We've struggled with high debt since the 80's. Does anyone think the U.S. can even sustain what they have now?

U.S. interest rates with no election year excuses, spiralling unsustainable red ink, a looming currency crisis from it all, no leadership whatsoever in putting out an energy policy that tries to in any way restrict oil consumption... the states has the highest debt of any nation in the world and continues to live on a credit card. We're in a bubble, folks, and its going to be nasty when it pops, because 85% of our trade is North South. Environmental or no, there are certain things that are already beyond our control.

And this article is biased? Of course! It's not even in remotely in touch and sad to say, neither are most people.

Well, it would appear Elections Canada folks are looking into the Green Party's spending practices thanks to he means by which Mr. Harris took over the party.

At least that's the ghist of a Globe&Mail article this morning. Page A-2

Apparently allegations have been raised by a number of ex-party officials and staff. And the appears to been suggestions that Harris and coherts purposely targetted the Green Party to take advantage of the new financing available to parties based on the number of votes they receive.

The party went from pauper to millionaire thanks to the new election rules.

Shocking, shocking, don't you think. Here's this former Tory whose business partners were Tories and Alliance backroom guys.

I'm going to speculate here that if you could hijack a party like the Greens you could then damage other progressive parties (say the NDP), quite easily by attacking them.

Of course, that's silly because the Greens have never said a bad word about the NDP, have they?

According to the article, the best curious Green Party members could get when looking into party finances was a watered down report that rounded costs off in the &1,000s.

Reports of campaign supporters flown in from across the country to attend leadership functions put on by Harris sparked some interest from traditional Green members who normally sent their leader around on a Greyhound or in the back of a borrowed van.

Earth to Brain, there is no easy way to remove ourselves from the clutches of that gang to the south and yes, some things will certainly seem "beyond our control", but unless we move away from the suicidal course that lunatic nation is on we are doomed.

Your argument would have us capitulating to the Cheneys and Bushes of the world on the vague hopes that the world can outlive that breed of whacko.

If you hadn't noticed, we're already into our third generation of Ugly American Bushes in positions of too much power and their breeding like rabbits.

Actually when I attempt to reread your post, it makes absolutely no sense at all as you throw your hands ups in defeat and suggest we settle for a slower death by cooperating with those crazies.

The only thing beyond our control is our inability to look beyond the friggin $ as the deciding factor.

Put your investment portfolio aside for a moment and think things like fresh air, clean water, educating children, filling bellies.

That's the currency the great majority of us 6 billion or so earth residents are looking to profit on.

More and more of us are fully aware there is going to be a great big "pop" one of these days. No news there.

But the longer you and others continue praying at the altar of the greenback, the bigger that pop is going to be.

I think in a few areas its flawed - so what if the Sierra Club doesn't deem it green enough? They have a totally dysfunctional board from what I know of them so they are hardly a gold standard on who's green.

I'd make the greens more green sure, but they are still the most green by far. Its a great start though. I'd like to toll all the urban highways to have more public transit, and massively tax polluting energy in exchange for cutting taxes to raise the same money.

>Green Party leader Jim Harris, a former Tory and a motivational speaker for large corporations, is again preoccupied with running as many candidates as possible (he ran candidates in all 308 ridings in 2004).

Hard to be a serious national player if you don't field in all ridings, and the more votes the more money for the party gets and greater chance of forcing the party into the debates so I have to say getting 308 ridings full is a huge priority.

But its welcome to see this kind of an attack piece. It means the Green Party has finally arrived on the scene and is now a threat which has brought out the mud slinging opposition any party that is deemed a threat will attract.

tovey said

Sorry tovey but much as I'd like to see a real Green party and would like to hear their voice both provincially and federally, there is no evidence behind what you claim.

Some of the Greens on here seem to realize we don't have to hate each other just because we're in different parties but others disagree.

As I said above, I'm happy to support electoral reform which would get Greens into the Leg and maybe eventually Parliament and I can certainly foresee a time when NDP and Greens vote together on some issues.

Having said all that, from what I see of the party the Greens simply aren't ready at the present time, they need a more engaging leader for one. The only time I see Harris is when he's demanding to be included in the debates or because of questions raised about where the money is going.

If the Greens are going to move forward they need to decide whether to keep the party name "Green" and back it up or switch to the "Eco-Conservatives". Either way, they need a real platform and a better leader.

As for being a threat to the NDP, again, as I said above, a fraction of 4% and no signs of growth is not scary to any of the major parties. Sure there's lots of uninformed souls who think voting Green will save the whales but that doesn't seem to be translating into electoral growth. Perhaps too many expect an actual "green" platform. Until the Greens have rebuilt themselves they're on the same path as all the other parties that got some support and disappeared from the radar after a few elections.

As it is now the Greens can't even outpoll the National Party of the 90's and are in no danger of actually winning a seat anywhere in Canada.

Who's the 'greenest' of them all? Well, that would be me, and more than a few others, but we don't have a chance at forming government. So, it doesn't matter.

Also, the Greens aren't the 'greenest' as their plan is to throw money to industry.

Anyway, Brain, as a pundit said, if you took the billions spent on the war in Iraq, (8 billion Haliburtan can't account for apparently) and spent it on alternative and clean energy, the oil issue would be over.

We're just being fleeced, that's all.

Adriane Carr is a "thug"?

No, I don't think so. See a psychiatrist, Julian. Make an appointment today.

I'm presuming you prefer to keep people employed rather than protect the seals.

If the seal hunt continues and the coming boycotts gather strength the east coast will be losing more than seal murdering jobs.

You never really considered voting Green because you don't care about the environment, if you did you would support the seal ban.

The Greens don't want people voting for the party who drive hummers and advocate killing seals.

Click the links for more and to see the negative impact on their campaign in Newfoundland [snip]

It's too bad really, because the Greens had lots of potential.

To Julian West - why would the NDP trust you ?

Apparently they don't since you did not get the nomination in the last election.

Rockerbiff: It is true, and well known, that I sought an NDP nomination unsuccessfully. That puts me in pretty good company, if I may say so: Judy Darcy didn't get her nomination. Raj Sihota didn't get hers. Do you think the NDP doesn't trust these people?

I find your question both bizarre and revealing. You seem to think that "the NDP" (or "the Liberals" or "the Green Party") is some kind of group mind with its own consciousness and ability to make decisions. In fact, the NDP is just an association of individuals, each with their own wants, needs and opinions. Some of those people did, indeed, think that I was the best candidate for this constituency and donated their time and money to my campaign. Some of those people came out to the nomination meeting and voted for me. A larger number voted for my opponent, who is now a fine NDP MLA.

Why, in your mind, does it have to be the case that everyone who comes in second (or third, or fourth) is "not trusted"? This is a democracy. Do you believe that people in Esquimalt don't trust Randall Garrison, because he lost to Keith Martin? Do you believe that people in Toronto don't trust Dennis Mills, because he lost to Jack Layton?

Rockerbiff, please elaborate a bit on the Green Party plan to ban the seal hunt.

Specifically, does the plan also cover the Arctic and, if so, what food suppliments and alternative clothing would a Green government provide Inuit people who depend on seal as a source of protein and protection from the harsh winter elements?

Also, are you wearing synthetic booties these days or have you moved over to Dutch clogs?

Finally, could you please talk to your leader Harris and get him to make a firm public statement about just how terrible Hummers are on the environment.

Ask him if he will specifically slam the Hummer's manufacturer for being a corporate porker (I'm sure he can do it in a motivational, uplifting way), just to reassure us transit uers he is really on our side.

Frank, I could just a easily exchange "Green" for "NDP" in your post. I remind you they have never been close to forming a federal government and have not polled more than 20 percent in decades.

WM, which post are you referring to? Not sure which one you could switch "Green" for "NDP" in.

The NDP polls 4 to 5 times the level at which the Greens do and have formed provincial governments as far back as WW2 and consistently since, there's a world of difference. The Greens are more comparable to parties than have gone nowhere like the National Party, the Cdn Action Party etc.

Wow! It looks like there are some people that are feeling very threatened by the Green Party. Living in fear is not healthy. Get over it. There are some much more dangerous agendas at play. The Lies and Cons would push us further down the slippery slope of extinction while the NDP hasn't quite made it to the 21st century yet.

Let's face it, the Greens aren't going to be forming a majority government, but as a thought experiement, what if a few got elected. I believe they would be strong voices for social and environmental change. They would advance the most crucial topic of all - ecological integrity. For without a healthy environment health costs will rise while the economy falters. We only have one planet! Short term gain = long term pain. Anyone who can't see beyond their own selfish interests should receive free medical treatment.
This article is a farce and Dobbin should be soundly chastized for such a shoddy piece.

M

Bang on. My view. Parties, in the current social, class and political climate seem to be an unavoidable necessity, but phuck! Unavoidable evil? There does have to be a better way though, out there in time and space somewhere.

Maybe it's just that where we all are in time, development and level of understanding makes us all more than a tad crazy in the noggin.

My "pary experience" (Communist Party-, original version.) was not unlike as you described. Good writing.

Thanks Coyote!

I'm not surprised that you agree with me. Your thinking on parties is the same as me.
I often ran as a candidate not to win, but to raise issues no other party or person would.

The funny thing is that in every federal election I ran (1993,1997,2001) I always had Reform Party members cheering me on and agreeing with me (sometimes more than their candidate). Especially in the debates! What did I learn from this? That I'm a Reformer at heart? NO! It's that we must start voting for what we believe in and not the lesser of evils! Or we should get involved in community issues and groups in order to bring about the change we want to see!

I have blocked delegates at the WTO in Seattle (1999), protested at APEC in 1997 and been pepper sprayed, stopped Royal Dutch Shell Oil from contracts etc. in BC (as part of the Ogoni Solidairty Network), stopped toxic waste from coming to Richmond, and done many other actions. All of these brought change and were far more effective than an election!

I forgot to mention that I did some work with Nick Loenen (former Socred MLA) in Richmond and conservative Chinese-Canadians too (part of Team Richmond in 1999).

I know it sounds like I'm bragging...but all of the above just illustrates my point!

I will always have hope!

And watch Bulworth, Bob Roberts, Team America, Family Guy, Simpsons...for some good ole political humour and fun!

Kevan Hudson
Suncheon, South Korea

IS DOBBIN ACCURATE?

Those who believe Dobbin's article to be strictly factual need to read the rebuttal posted (as a link) earlier by "Mark". It carefully corrects a great many factual innaccuracies of Dobbin, on important points.

Mark has been an "eye witness" to the inner workings of the G. Party, and if you read his piece it's apparent he knows whereof he speaks.

He also points out that Dobbin's article is largely a rehash of a Globe article Dobbin wrote last year - also with many inaccuracies.
It appears that in the interim, Dobbin was made aware of those inaccuracies of fact - yet HE CHOSE TO REPEAT DEMONSTRABLY FALSE ASSERTIONS a 2ND TIME!

This suggests Dobbin is dishonest,having little intention to "inform" readers. Instead, his intention is to spread propaganda by using many false assertions about the party and Harris.

If you think Bush's White House has an endless supply of falsehoods to spew forth... well, Mr. Dobbin appears to have an equal, if not larger supply of canards he pulls out of his B.S. bag!

Kevan: You rock!!

Allen: read it twice. You are already saying everything I've already said, except for one thing. Extremes don't work unless the voice is unanimous and strong and we are already out of time!
Look at what has happened to those who voiced the truth, however extreme it was. Look at history. When Jesus tried it, the Romans took him out back and killed him. When his friends tried it, they killed them too. (52 million over 300 years) When that didn't work, they controlled them with Jesus's own words (well... some of them).
And its funny how history repeats itself, but my point is, "When in Rome, do what the Romans do" but do it smartly. Look at the true potential for geothermal in the markets for private or crown alone! (and don't give me some bull about the exploitation of resources or selling out. As you said, our bellies need to be full) There is nothing stopping anyone from using the systems we already have in place to get clean energy results, whether it is business or government.
We don't have to overthrow emperors with revolutions or shake up the markets with extreme plans to kill the sales of oil or gas. The systems we need are already in place! All we have to is vote, and compete with the superior business plans that already exist!!! Participate!!!
And if you think my precious stock portfolio supports lost causes, think again. What about the 250 million dollar wind farm IPO? Do you not know that banks are crying for us become involved and participate with the solutions that are sound? Some people that work at banks, are actually human beings and the smart ones know what is sustainable and what isn't. Environmentalists don't fail with their efforts at home with their kids and home practice. They fail with their efforts outside the front gate.
As for the Green experiment being a waste of time, look at history. Plenty of people thought the NDP was a waste of time, or the Reform or Alliance, or democracy for that matter. the seed to the Greens is sound. And sure, there'll be fallout from all those extremes. There'll be growing pains. All it will take for this party to flourish is a high profile candidate with credibility to throw in their hat to make this party a true force. Do you think David Suzuki would lose if he ran? Look at the what Belinda Stronach did for the PC's (and why she left)
As for how lame this article really is... compare it with something real, like "Playing Climate catch up" and its a no contest.
Note: click onto "balloons".

rockerbiff:

Don't you think "seal murderers" is a bit extreme. With that logic someone who catches a fish is a fish murderer, someone who kills a chicken is a chicken murderer. Good thing we don't have the death penalty here otherwise that chair would be constantly on the go with all these "murderers" around.

I disagree with your assumption that if you support the seal hunt than you are against the environment. Tell that to the many environmentalists here in Newfoundland who support the seal hunt and they would be quite insulted. In fact, just about everyone here support the seal hunt, because they know what is really is.

To be more specific, if you are from Newfoundland, you will realize that the seal hunt is an an important way to supplement many people's income especially those in the outports. The seal hunt has been ongoing for hundreds of years and is done in the most part humanely, other than by the rare individual. Of course, organizations like the IWF and PETA will tell you about the one person who might be breaking the rules and not tell you about the 100 who are doing it right. They gather millions in donations from people around the world that don't know the situation here in Newfoundland but are manipulated by these group's propaganda and skewering of the truth.

If the seal hunt was ever completely banned, than I suggest that the killing of chickens and cows should be banned as well. And in actually fact, chickens and cows are treated much more inhumanely than seals...just ask a chicken who is force fed with tubes...of course, chickens don't look as cute as adorable little baby seals so people don't care. And by the way, sealers are not allowed to kill baby seals, only the adults, though if you looked at a IWF propaganda film you would think that the baby seals are what the sealers go after first.

So for those who are against the seal hunt but are perfectly happy to enjoy their chicken or steak suppers, in my opinion, those people are hypocrites.

And here is a couple of quotes from high profiles Greens in Newfoundland who were not happy about the seal hunt policy of the Greens.

From Lori-Ann Martino, perhaps the highest profile organizer of the Greens in Newfoundland

"This is a terrible strategy," said Martino, who feels the Green party is attempting to recruit voters who are morally opposed to the seal hunt but may not be informed about it.

"I have put so much work personally in distancing Newfoundland from that generic, stereotypical view [which] completely overrides the complexity of the issue … and the economic importance and cultural importance" of the hunt," Martino said.

From Jane McGillivray, a Happy Valley-Goose Bay medical doctor and environmentalist. She was the Green candidate for labrador but dropped out of the race after the Greens released their seal hunt policy.

"The party needs to mature in such as way that it reflects the fact that there are regional differences," she said.

"I don't see the Green party standing up and banning feed lots in southern Ontario, which are clearly contributing to all sorts of greenhouse gases and in fact are very inhumane in terms of the way pigs are treated and cows are treated."

Note: Both quotes have been taken from the CBC articles that I noted in an earlier posting.

Brane, I might have read it twice, but then I noticed he was thanking Coyote for another stretcher and it reminded me that I had asked that wily old guy to clean up some of the stuff he was throwing around at Glen Clark yesterday.

Actually, I was a bit suprised to see Coyote's latest post because just minutes after I asked him to respond yesterday, he posted and offered only an "I'm outa here for 10 days" promise while overlooking or..., my request completely.

Now he's back, so there's still hope.

All that I can say about Kevan's comments and his own self-described history of failed political action is that it's quite telling he isn't in this country continuing his personal dream of getting elected to something.

In fact, he is about as far as he can get from his Green roots, it would seem to me.

But then, on the other hand, I suppose a "you rock" from the Brane has as much currency as an endorsement at a nomination meeting.

Having said all that, I must note that your fellow Greenie, the Rockerbiff seems to have skipped town as well when it comes to answering my queries.

I will thank rovik (above), for refreshing our memories of that stinky little mess your party has ceated for itself out along the north Atlantic ice-flows.

On the off-chance that Rockerbiff has actually fled town, perhaps you could answer my questions to what the Inuit ought to eat and dress in if seal are now taboo after being chewed on for several millenia without any real indegestion.

I'm really thinking of personally suggesting they switch to the Urban-based Fuzzy-headed Strident Environmental Authoritarian as perhaps a new culinary delight for those long winter months.

As you will know, there is absolutely no shortage of them and given their ability to puff themselves up into gargantuous, noisy forms, harvesting them should be as simple as turning on a light and poking them with a darning needle.

I certainly hope you too will not be racing away any time soon or I fear I'll be left here blathering to the Elliots, Ronnies and that Working Guy.

They deserve better.

As far as I can tell the ban only applies to the Seal Hunt on the East Coast and does not delve in to Inuit rights to hunt and fish. However, since First Nations and Inuit rights rank high in the Green Party, I'd be pretty well lay odds that we would support their right to fish and hunt for sustinence.

Jim Harris did actually make a definitive statement on CBC's The National town hall meeting with Peter Mansbridge last week, Jim encouraged Hummer owners not to vote Green !!! Jim drives a Toyota Prius when not on the campaign trail.

As for Rovik's statements about the seal hunt being humane, the American Humane Society do not believe so, neither does the Sea Sheperd Society. How humane is it to whack an animal over the head with a 6 foot club with a spike on the end ?

In the same way I feel we should not have Orcas in captivity we should also not be whacking seals over the head in order to supply some tart a fix for her fur fetish.

Specifically, does the plan also cover the Arctic and, if so, what food suppliments and alternative clothing would a Green government provide Inuit people who depend on seal as a source of protein and protection from the harsh winter elements?

Finally, could you please talk to your leader Harris and get him to make a firm public statement about just how terrible Hummers are on the environment.

Ask him if he will specifically slam the Hummer's manufacturer for being a corporate porker (I'm sure he can do it in a motivational, uplifting way), just to reassure us transit uers he is really on our side.

And what is the deal with all these re-edits in the original article.

Editors please let us know what has been changed - was it for legal concerns or accuracy ?

Thanks for restoring my faith in your continued presence Rockerbiff.

However, I do wonder if you have ever bought a used car without at least first kicking the tires or looking at the colour of the engine oil.

I say that because your assurances that "I'd pretty well lay odds that we would support their right to fish and hunt for sustenance" sounds very similar to the used auto guys claim that his used cars were drivn only by little-old ladies who always had the servicing done on time."

So if you could perhaps come up with a few official receipts or quotes or anything more solid than "I'd pretty well lay odds . . ", it might
go some way to reassure many Canadians your party is even aware of life outside the urban concrete bunkers.

Might even get you a vote north of 60, but whatever you do, don't mention Greenpeace up there or you'll be sent packing.

To Rovik: "Seal murderers" is a bit strong for language, true. (and then again, maybe it isn't) But the issue isn't seal hunts. It's overfishing and pollution. Sorry, but killing seals isn't going to bring back the minnows that the Europeans and Japanese are taking out of our waters.

Everyone here knows the logic. Seals and whales eat the fish, polar bears and walrus's eat the seals and fish, mother natures predators keep it all in check... except for all of the unbalanced humans out there. We kill them all for our dinner plate and kicks and after knowing what we all know... especially when we define the difference between murdering and killing, (its motive) is it necessary? I didn't hear the Apostles creaming out on animals when they saw the light as stewards of the lands.
And why? Preytell, isn't anyone putting a realistic timeline on sealhunts if they were ever necessary to begin with? We ignore fish for a while, they come back, the seals come back, keep the fish in check but the schools get larger and keep coming back, the seals are kept in check when the polar bears and walrus's come back, but this takes time.

I suppose if all we can think about is today's empty pockets, its easy to see that tommarrows pockets won't be filled either and the problems won't go away until we realize what made our pockets empty to begin with. Call it obvservation of the obvious.

To Rockerbiff:
In a very small defence for 6 foot bats and spikes... I'd rather see humans act "Humane" (can I call it that without a disgusting look on my face?) with it all over in a second than to see a seal flogged to death with a million blows by toothpick.
In no defence and total agreement, I'd much rather not see it at all. To me, its just another human tactic of backloading the blame of low fish stocks on everything else in nature instead of our own unnatural selves.

And that so called self projecting egotistical name choice of mine sure flushes them out, too, eh boys and girls? It might have been so, if I didn't choose it with this precisely in mind.

To Allan: What is it that you've done with your life that's so special for the environments we live in? I hope you can give me a "its a work in progress" answer so I can let your sarcasm slide. Or let me guess. You don't have the time for it.

Rockerbiff:

Actually seal hunt is just as humane and often more humane then what other animals such as pigs, cows and chickens have to put up with.

Here is a link to a report done by Fisheries and Oceans Canada

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/misc/seal_briefing_e.htm

Here is a few excerpts from it regarding the humane issue.

"Numerous organizations have studied the hunting methods used in the Canadian seal hunt and they have found them to be humane."

"The hunting methods presently used were studied by the Royal Commission on Seals and Sealing in Canada and they found that the clubbing of seals, when properly performed is at least as humane as, and often more humane than, the killing methods used in commercial slaughterhouses, which are accepted by the majority of the public."

"Methods used to kill seals in Canada were found to be generally more humane than the shooting of animals for sport. The Commission also found that no methods of killing which have come to their notice, other than clubbing or shooting, achieve acceptable standards of humaneness."

"In September 2002, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) issued a Special Report on Animal Welfare and the Harp Seal Hunt in Atlantic Canada."

"The conclusion of the CVMA study is that virtually all seals taken during the hunt (98 per cent) are killed in an acceptably humane manner."

I wouldn't put too much credence in organizations such as the Sea Shepard Society for they are believed to twist the truth to the uninformed to gather millions in donations. Many of these donaters never know the other side of the story.

And Rockerbiff, just curious, do you eat any hamburgers, have the scattered chicken dinner or eat a scattered pork chop or two? Again, just curious.

The Brain:

There are others reasons for the seal hunt other then the one you mentioned.

Again quoting from the report:

"The seal hunt is an economically viable activity and is not subsidized by the government of Canada."

"The commercial seal hunt in Atlantic Canada in 2004 was the source of more than $16.5 million in direct revenue from the sale of product. This is up from the estimated $13 million value for 2003 but down from the estimated value of $21 million in 2002."

The seal meat is eaten by many Newfoundlanders and others from around the world and the flippers are considered a delicacy. Omega 3 pills are also made from the seals though I have heard that some claim that there are dangers from possible PCB contamination but I don't know how true this is or isn't. Basically what I am saying is it's just not for the fur.

The sealers who do this don't drive around in Hummers. They do this to supplement their fishing and are often seasonal workers. They are by no means rich from it and I would say most don't approach the wealth of an average Albertan family. Sealing provides much needed monies to many of the outports in which help keep the outports alive.

Brain, please, please, please, don't take my good humour for cynicism.

That is if you are not talking about my comments on the Inuit. If you have been to the north or read anything about the Inuit lifestyle you'd know the importance of seal harvesting.

As Rovik notes right above, it's all about Omega 3 fats, which are abundant in sealmeat.

In fact, I'd go as far as to say seal are probable the most important food source there is in the north for human and animals, part of a great circle that has been uninterupted seemingly forever, until we, the great white wisdom bestowers took over.

My questions were certainly serious because I see your party wants to ban sealing on the east coast and I want to know if that stretches up the east coast to say Nunavit where thousands of kilometres of coastline along Baffin Island are part of the Inuit's kitchen.

Rockerbiff's assurances aside, the issue needs clarity.

Why are you so opposed to that?

BTW, thank you for spelling my name correctly this time and if you'll notice I returned the favour.

Oh, and you're right. I am a work in progress, but like most of us I assume my greatest contribution will be when I stop consuming.

Interesting debate but largely a waste of time, with all due repsect.

Dobbin's allegations about the "Green" Party are fairly accurate. Handles like Mark and Rockerbiff sound exactly like the usual bombastic con artists I have dealt with in the past who fly the so-called "Green” Party banner.

The fact is practically all of the "Green" Party's positions on economics, ecology and democracy are carbon copied from long established NDP resolutions and policies which it then falsely claims to own. Yet when you ask their candidates to define these in practical terms, you end up getting dumb looks and a bunch of rehearsed rhetoric about how they aren't like anyone else.

In BC, the organization clearly serves as a vote-rigging front group of convenience for the BC Liberals by spouting off a bunch of NDP-sounding slogans without explaining what they mean in order to try to take votes from the NDP and make it easier for the Liberals to win.

It has been reported on web sites, like Rabble.ca and other local media that some wealthy Liberal supporters donate generously to the "Green" party purely for this purpose—with several proudly admitting that is the goal.

Federally, the party appears to fill the same roll: confuse the center-left electorate with a bunch of rhetoric, attack the credible organizations (like the NDP), and bust up the vote.

Jim Harris is doing Corporate Canada and its dictatorial, unsustainable rape-and-run agenda a lot of good in the name of sustainability and saving the planet.

The best term for this type of politics is FRAUD.

Hello y'all!

Thanks for the compliments Brain!
Hi Allan!
Sorry, if it seems like I'm always picking on Glen Clark, but I really don't like him. Why?
He called environmentalists the enemies of BC, he concentrated even more power into the premier's office, and he joined up with Jim Pattison after he left politics.
Now, on the positive side (lest it look like I'm NDP bashing) I did like Mike Harcourt as Premier. I have even met him several times (after he left politics) and I have been impressed. I also liked Ujjal Dosanjh. Heck, two balanced budgets and no cutbacks! Gotta like that! Gordo and Martin haven't accomplished that feat!

Allan, I assume you were joking when you said "my failed accomplishments". Am I correct?
I would say I have often tasted victory when involved in community actions. But maybe the time difference is resulting in my misunderstanding (I'm on Asian time), or I need to smoke some good BC Bud again!

Am I far from my BC and Green roots? Yes, but life is about change and learning. I'm a high school teacher and I found that the chance to get a good job in Asia was too good to turn down. I work at a university. I get the same pay as a high school teacher, but my taxes are lower and my housing is free! Maybe I will return as a rich Lieberal voting yuppie! NOT!!!

However, I have been honoured to learn another language and culture (Korean), to make friends in other Asian countries too (China, Japan, Vietnam) and to travel around this region. My understanding of the world around me has improved! I don't regret coming here!

Now, I'm contributing monthly donations to several groups back home and writing emails to politicians. Yes, I miss all the activism but...

On the plus side Vancouver is a very Asian influenced city and well...my understanding of Asian culture is much better!

The days of the George W. Bushes and Paul Martins will end soon. People who are able to adapt, to change and who are able to collaborate will be the drivers of the future!

So treating people in each party in a poor way will not solve any of our problems! Example..the post by tyeefan.
Yes, all current and past Green candidates are dumb!? I think you should read the earlier posts and see that many Greens/ex-Greens can be very thoughtful too!
But I guess the NDP has a monopoly on intelligence and progressive politics!
PS: I'm not saying that Murray doesn't have some important criticisms in his article. I agree with much of what he says.

Kevan Hudson

Kevan, I can't really disagree with much of what you say.

I would encourage you to take this up with tyeefan and perhaps he will clarify what he means.

As for your disappointment Glen Clark "joined up" with Jimmy Pattison, what can I say?

You only show your parrot-like foolishness to repeat that canard. It's like saying all Americans are whackos because their president is or because Coyote said it first.

I really hope you don't try to slide facts out in that fashion when you are working as a teacher.

Anyway, it's my understanding he took a salaried job to help feed his family, hardly "joining up" with a multi-billionaire unless working in one of his grocery stores makes you a leper as well.

BTW, I was referring to you own personal record at running, not your volunteer work for others, which I admit is commendable. Grow some more skin though Kevan.

As long as Jimmy keeps Glen away from Pattison's budgets, can he really do that much harm?

Hi Allan!

Yes, I agree that just because Glen Clark joined the Pattison Group does not mean he is doing a Darth Vader (aka Anakin Skywalker).
And no I will not talk about the back porch. I agree that he got a bum rap on that. BCTV and the BC Lieberals certainly drove that issue.

However, I had two other points of contention with Mr. Clark. Both of them are far more important than working with the Pattison Group.

When one looks back it's too bad that Mike Harcourt didn't stay on as Premier. Was he perfect? No, but he was willing to compromise and to listen to other people. Though his poor bashing was in poor taste.
Nonetheless, after the 1996 election campaign he was a poor premier in my opinion.

On the plus side you'll be happy to know that I'm only teaching English. So no need to slide out the facts in a poor fashion! LOL

Also, my skin is very thick...whoops...oh my god! I'm bleeding! It's like a scene out of Monty Python and the Holy Grail (the black knight). Blood everywhere! LOL

Lastly, I have a craving for crackers while I'm bleeding to death!

Kevan Hudson..wants a cracker! Kevan wants a cracker! caw.....caw....

Kevan, I'm at a bit of a loss here on your fixation with Glen Clark.

Now that you confirm you were simply parrotting the ever illusive Coyote (his tracks were spotted on another Tyee thread this morning), about Clark's taking a day job with Pattison, your stance gets even foggier.

Now you say there are even darker issues regarding Glen Clark that you still haven't dealt with and apparently they are so deeply embedded in our psyche you are unable to elaborate on them for us.

Your only means of expressing this hostility, anger, confusion or whatever, is to latch onto the silly mutterings of others who try in vain to once again do Clark in even though the courts, the public and even a few Liberals will admit he is innocent.

We can't help you if you can't tell us what it is.

Look, I love it when politicians are skewered for something they did, but you and Coyote can't continue living in that dreamworld.

Lest I overplay it here, Glen Clark is not running in this federal election either.

Besides, this article is on the shortcomings of your Green Party, so let's just move along a little here and stay on topic.

I think the guy's name is Harris, may even be related to Mike the guy who made Walkerton Ontario water famous.

I'm beginning to think someone sent you a little baggy of that BC stuff for Xmas and you've gone ahead and opened it a few days early.

Naughty, naughty Kevan.

Excellent news out of the US today, concerning the US state to our north!

The US Senate has blocked a bill that would have opened the Alaska Wildlife Refuge to extensive oil drilling, which could have threatened Cdn. wildlife as well! It was a bit dicey, because the same bill passed in the House of Reps this week.

The US has an ethically questionable system whereby unpopular bills are often tacked on to more popular bills for voting purposes. In this case the Alaska bill was tacked on to a bill to approve military spending, forcing members to vote on both measures at the same time: all or none. The sneaks failed this time!

I'm often happily surprised when sanity and ethics prevail (in this case,over certain over-powerful monied interests :specifically, Bush's oil baron pals) in the US government!

I posted this sometime ago on another GReen Party story, but I feel it is worth repeating it:
I was a member of the GReen party for about a year. In the words of the woman in the office, Margot/ or Margie, the difference between the GReen party and the Tories is the environm,ent and that the GReen party is more to the right than the Tories.
So you all go figure.!

Well, we're in BC. I don't know where Margie is (I'm not even sure what planet she's on).
Our BC Green Party leader is Adriane Carr who was and is a socialist, a former NDPer.
The original BC Green Party (which happened to be the first Green Party in Cda.) was formed by a small group of dissatisfied socialists, including Carr, who believed in a socialism with a strong environmental conscience.

BC's Green Party is left of center, even if they might have attracted some capitalists with consciences along the way. I have no problem with this. I personally would prefer to see a capitalism with an environmental conscience. Anyone who advocates for this is doing a service to his/her community, even if they might put a different label than "socialist" on their lapel. They are still progressives in a very important sense.

So, have any of you guru's of politics actually gone and had a good look at the Green's website...oh ya, forget, that's all just a bunch of propaganda.

What's all this nonsense about no platform?! I have it in my hot little hand and would be happy to answer any questions if anyone can come up with a wise one! If you can all keep your pants on for a couple more weeks I'm sure you'll find that elusive little link.

And can we get past the left, right crap? If any of you really understood the green movement you would know that it trancends all of that. It's about sustainability and rebuilding community. "Slow down, scale down, decentralize, democratize".

Can you get your heads around that?

Don't even get me started on Dobbin. Damn lies and propoganda.
Out.

Hi Allan!

Sorry, I'm not trying to make you flame out.

I did say that I have some sympathy with Glen Clark. I think (as you probably do too) that the whole issue of the back porch was a joke. As I said, BCTV and the Lieberals drove that non-issue.
I'm not criticing Mr. Clark for that. Yes, he was innocent!

As I mentioned in a previous post:
1) He (Glen Clark) concentrated more power into the Premier's office. Gordon Campbell has even gone further in centralizing power into the Premier's Office. Yes, I would say that Gordo is much much worse than Glen Clark.
On a related note...this is the same thing that Jim Harris is doing in the Green Party. Mr. Harris is centralizing more power into the leadership. And I agree with Murray that this is not good!
2) Glen Clark called environmentalists "The enemies of BC". His scapegoating of all environmentalists was poor judgement.

On the plus side Premier Clark did not make any huge cutbacks like Gordon Campbell.

To summarize...

Jim Harris - BAD!
Glen Clark - BAD TOO..but not the back porch!
Gordon Campbell - VERY VERY BAD!
George W. Bush - EVIL!
Smoking Weed in Asia - VERY STUPID!

Kevan Hudson
"The Gordon Campbell is Worse than Glen Clark Club" Overseas Chapter

PS: If my friend doesn't run for the Greens I will probably vote NDP in Delta-Richmond East. I will never vote Lieberal or Conservative unless I'm a rotting corpse!

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.

After 20 years we're finally at stage 3. But will eventual victory be Pyrrhic?

Are the Greens perfect?

No.

Do we have the time left to argue about who's greener? Is there enough time for the Greens, or those with Green principles, to enact change before its too late?

It's too close to call. The North Pacific is warmer, emaciated corpses of auklets and murrelets are washing up on shore by the thousands, herring and oolichans are disappearing and coho fail to return to the Georgia Basin.

NASA scientists say 2005 was the warmest year to date.

It don't matter what the political stripe: vote for the Greenest candidate, all the rest is just noise.

Former BC Boy, I don't have any issue with your summary and although I have never been to Asia, I can appreciate the stupidity in your final item.

We almost lost our first ever gold medal in 'boarding to that and the poor guy claimed he was simply an innocent caught in the drift of second-hand smoke.

Sort of an occupational hazard for budding athletes up around Whistler, I think he implied.

Anyway, I quite enjoyed the stuff you tossed Kevan and hope I didn't seem to be blowing fire out my tailpipe.

My humour is sometimes well cloaked.

It's good you stay attuned to the nuances here.

I am not Glen Clark's greatest fan, but I won't hesitate to defend the guy from the continuing slings and arrows of those who opt to continue defying fact.

But then I'm guilty (on many counts) of referring to our present premier as "that drunk", which, although factual in a historic sense probably only fits when I speak of his lust for power today.

My sense of Clark is that he was a decade too immature for his ambitions, but whether you like Jimmy Pattison or not, the guy did see much to be appreciated in Clark.

And I doubt anyone has ever got much of a free ride out of that old used car salesmen.

peefer, your absolutely right on the big issue.

But the "Green" name thing is a problem.

Because of my Highland heritage (generations ago), I can get worked up when when a hear a really cheesey McDonald's ad.

It's not so much the gruel they serve (I've had haggis too), but their appropriation of a good family name and their willingness to sue anyone, even real McDonalds, who try using it.

So yes, may the most green win and may truth return to advertizing.

You speak it true, Peefer. Go in peace.

Hello everyone!

Sorry Allan! Too much kimchi and not enough sleep. I think I missed a little of your humour...but I'm also thinking too much of warm beaches in Vietnam (starting Monday)!

To sum up...the debate overall was good!

At least none of those crazy poisonious stupid frothing at the mouth neo-cons didn't interrupt this thread!

There sense of humour...is...OK?...well...non- existent!
I hope they find it one day!

Merry Christmas
Happy Holidays
Happy New Year!
Get drunk and party dudes and dudettes!

Kevan Hudson
Snowy South Korea

Don't tell me the Green Party bashing is actually working! From a new Ipsos Reid poll, conducted by phone Dec 20 - 22:

"In B.C., however, the Liberals are gaining -- rising from 33 per cent to 40 per cent. They have won most of those intended votes from the Green party (down to five per cent from eight per cent) and from the Tories (down from 33 per cent to 30 per cent.)"

It should be noted this Ipsos poll also claims that nationally the Conservatives have pulled ahead, and would likely form a Conservative minority gov't if the vote were held today!

But here's where it gets funny (ha ha and peculiar):
A Strategic Counsel poll taken over the same 3 days, Dec.20 - 22, finds a diametrically opposed result , claiming the Libs are now gaining and it's the Libs who'd form a Lib minority again!

Conclusion: Take these polls with a large
boulder of salt.

The Greens have a lot of potential to do good work in the same way that the European Greens do.
Yes, like support the war in Yugoslavia, like allowing Nato to bomb Kosovo and Macedonia with Depleted Uranium, like allowing nuclear materials from France to sent to Easter germany. Tritin had the gal to try to explain it away. Let's continue: the greens in germany did a lot of "good", like supporting nuclear energy and not approaching the issue by phasing it out, but by let the plants stand, or by allowing german companies to send hazardous wastes to romania and bulgaria... Yes you all get the drift... Carr has a lot in common with Joshus Fisher... like a pea on a pod... they are green all right and I am Santa n Claus ...LOL