Tzepo simply holding up her end of the deal...

EDITED FOR UNVERIFIABLE ALLEGATIONS. -- TYEE EDITOR

Luke

"The foregoing represents the mother of all flip-flops."

Nope, that has to go to you. You just defended the carbon tax whereas in the past (and not as far in the past as your quote from Feb 2008) you've said you don't like it.

Response to Suzuki EDITED FOR LEGAL CONCERNS

Politico: If a publication refused to publish this for legal reasons, please do not put The Tyee at risk by posting it here. -- Tyee moderator

Lukey micro hydro

How nice to see Lukey in the Sky back with his mantra about Manitoba and Glen Clark's Microhydro. I guess the party is getting desperate when they send him out

Neither Glen Clark not Manitoba Hydro signed must export contracts for 40 years at 12 cents a kwh. The current spot rate is 2 cents and with new gen nuke/solar tech its unlikely to get much higher.

Take it away

Take our salmon away through misguided political/corporate direction, take away our rivers through unplanned IPP sellouts, take away our local influence through Bill 30 and the people take away the political power from the governing party.
Pretty basic stuff, in BC anyway.

Councillor Eckhard Zeidler
Resort Municipality of Whistler, BC

EDITED FOR LEGAL CONCERNS -- TYEE MODERATOR

Hmmm?
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/BC-Politics/2009/04/15/SuzukiChairLiberalSupporter/

Alexandra Morton

Thank you! Alexandra.

Gabe

Have you read bill 27?

I suggest you do.

G West

Waving a piece of legislation around and hinting at doom doesn't make decisions any easier. I know what's in the bill.

Whistler

Interesting to see that a representative of the most unsustainable community in the province is criticizing environmental policy.

The Harriet Nahanee Memorial Drive

Perhaps the habit the left has for eating their young stems from their refusal to confront their sordid past. There's that little matter of tens of millions of innocent Russians cattle-carred into their GULAG death camp system for a start. And let's not forget that nasty Ukranian famine.

Talk about guilty money . . .

But don't get me wrong, the new Harriet Nahanee Memorial Drive through the former Eagleridge Bluffs is a dream to drive.

Speaking of hate fests, the use of native privilege in the neocon age is something I've been harping on for quite sometime. Berman thinks we have "a moral duty" to turn the crown lands and resources over to their tribal rulership immediately.

Lest we forget - the first thing the indigenous peoples did when the European traders and their Chinese employees showed up was hunt the sea otter to near extinction for them. The populations have never recovered and that's the first hole that was punched into coastal rainforest ecosystems.

And didn't the largest environmental protests in Canada happen under the NDP watch when they adopted the BC Forest Alliance's Wise Use plan to log Clayoquot Sound?

There's no going back.

Gabe

Then, in all fairness and logic - and understanding the inelastic nature of the demand curve for gasoline - why would you support it?

Further, why would you pretend that an exercise is money-spinning smoke and mirrors is environmentally valid.

I doubt you have read the bill and I'm certain you haven't read the regulations - knowing what's 'in' a bill is not the same thing as reading it and understanding its implications and operation.

As much as I hate CEO government I would have supported the Campbell Tax if it did any of the things that similar carbon taxes in Europe do. This farce does none of them – it is utterly useless and ordinary sensible people know it. They will not be hoodwinked by folks with agendas.

The bill is a fraud - the minister didn't even read the regulations before she signed them.

Furthermore, the bill was rushed into into legislation after a directive from the Premier's Office - like most BC Liberal legislation, the objective of pleasing certain members of the CEO's staff is far more important than the ideal of creating good, effective, equitable and constitutional laws.

If you care to do a little research into the way this government does business I urge you to do some research into the forging of the BC CROWN COUNSEL AGREEMENT.

You do understand what an inelastic demand curve is, don’t you?

Janie Jones

Did you really write this?

"Perhaps the habit the left has for eating their young stems from their refusal to confront their sordid past. There's that little matter of tens of millions of innocent Russians cattle-carred into their GULAG death camp system for a start. And let's not forget that nasty Ukranian famine. Talk about guilty money . "

That sounds like someone still living in the MaCarthy era and looking under their bed for communists every night. It maybe the kind of rhetoric that WAC often alluded to with his "Socialist hordes at the gates"

I wish I could remember who said: "Give a poor man food and they call me a saint. Ask why he is poor and they call me a communist." You can substitute any number of disadvantaged persons for the word "poor".

Luke

A paid dinner at the Vancouver convention center?

Like everything Gordon Campbell says and does is a "media con"

In anylizing the voters a pattern emerges......

Public sector unions=NDP

Seniors=NDP

Working class=NDP

ferry riders=NDP

Health sectoe=NDP

Minimum wage earners=NDP

ROR=NDP

Salmon lovers=NDP

Poor families=NDP

The youth=NDP

Campbell`s campaign is highly scripted,organized,planned,manipulated with full BC Liberals membership "strongly"invited

60% of the voters know what we have to do-----Latest polls=Dead heat.......

Dead heat = NDP victory

KevinC

"but I don't suppose the CCF got much respect when they were the new kids on the block, either."

The difference is that the CCF won a lot of seats and even became the government of Saskatchewan within a short time after starting up.

The Greens record of futility goes back decades.

Of course there's nothing wrong with that, perhaps this is the year they break through. I'm just saying there isn't much of a comparison to be made with the results of the CCF.

bontano

"Uh, hello... criticising James for her opportunistic carbon tax position and complimenting Campbell for doing one thing progressive can hardly be called "supporting the Liberal government".

We said - that. The old guard rigid NDP don't like people that speak up do they?

Nevertheless, I disagree with you on the other point about disaster. There are many, middle-class small and individual business people and workers that are quite pleased with the way the Liberals are managing the province.

license to pollute

when are we going to call the 'carbon tax' what it really is: a license to pollute.
Just nother cost of doing business, like hiring mercenary soldiers to protect the overseas executives and put down the uppity locals, floating palettes of cash to grease palms and buy weapons for the local warlords, etc.
Meanwhile, just another day of business as usual, another day where 82,000,000 barrels of oil will be consumed.

Whether their stance is pro- or anti-carbon tax, i fear most everyone with a job will vote for Gordon Campbell.

Sorry Wilfrid

My connections tell me just the opposite; every ordinary working guy and gal out there - that happens to be the same folks who can't afford to live in Kits or Pt Grey or False Creek - and who would love to have some alternatives to polluting in order to get too and from work in the downtown - realize with clarity that the CEO couldn't care a lick about choices for them.

The only choices the CEO cares about relate to tee-off times for Marty Zlotnik and the rest of his friends at the University Gold Club.

And that's really too bad, Marty was a friend of mine once upon a time - and in those days he actually cared about important things - like standing up for what's right and speaking truth to power.

But, there's one thing you are correct about, the CEO deserves to be bashed for about 30 issues - not just the one that the purblind enviromentalists (who are, once again, mistaken) are keying on.

Berman's lies probably hurt

Berman's lies probably hurt the NDP...Global BC made this big news when it happened yet no big news when the facts came out.

As for Suzuki, I lost any respect I had for him.

Alexandra Morton

You are my hero.......

By the way,I used a little subtle influence,and Alexandra Morton did a great interview this afternoon on the John Malcolm show........

Alexandra was passionate,truthful,a real biologist,,,,,,,,,

http://www.cknw.com/stationshared/audiovault.aspx

Cheers-Eyes Wide Open

Cue-up 3.00 pm---Fast forward to 3.15 pm ish

A shameful ploy to get votes.

That was Gordon Campbell's introduction of a tax that does nothing but make life more expensive for people - unless you are rich and can still drive your Hummer. A cynical, shameful political, opportunistic stunt. Just like assuring everyone he would not sell BC Rail. What part of that don't you naive Greenies understand?

Beers

Response to Suzuki EDITED FOR LEGAL CONCERNS
politico 16 hours ago

Politico: If a publication refused to publish this for legal reasons, please do not put The Tyee at risk by posting it here. -Tyee moderator

Had you read the piece you would have realized how ridiculous the "legal" concerns were.

Anywhooooo........

no great force

So I hear Berman's all keen to sit on the Liberator's post-election Green Energy Advisory Task Force. I'm sure this will be more demockracy in action, making decisions behind closed doors.

Hmmm, the initials of this hand-picked group would be GE followed by ATF. Popular? Maybe they will use the acronym GREATFORCE, since we already know everyone else at the table will have substantial financial and political investments riding on MORE MORE MORE Power, Upwardly mobile power of Liberal insiders and environmental outsiders. Kleptocrats. and these brats don't like to hear the word "no". We are just nimbies and deniers to them. They will ram their carbon technofixes and their growth agendas down our bleeding throats, all the while claiming they are saving the planet for our children. Eat your Green Fascism and shut up.

Ptooey! I won't swallow it. and don't ever try to feed me that simulated salmon substance either.

G West

Easy there, G - didn't say I supported the Liberal carbon tax. I differentiate between the idea of a carbon tax and the Lib's potentially flawed implementation.

As long as we have one, we might as well improve its workings rather than discarding it outright. I'd like to see the tax hit $150/tonne with resulting revenues funding light and high-speed rail throughout the province. If Sweden can cope at $150+, why can't we?

If Carole James had said "Look, the carbon tax is broken, and here's how we'll fix it" I might be thinking there's more going on in the NDP back room than self-righteous, reactionary blather.

By the way, since you've apparently decided that I must not understand the concept of an inelastic demand curve, what was the point of throwing the term out there?

If you want to make a point and you aren't sure your audience will understand your reasoning, provide some context.

Basic courtesy wouldn't hurt either.

Gabe

Print is a blunt medium - there was nothing discourteous about my post.

I asked if you'd read the legislation and it was pretty clear from your response that you hadn't.

As for courtesy and tact, I'd say your 'attack' mode lacked a considerable amount of both - and, if you'll look again, I think you'll find I was both courteous and respectful in my initial response.

As to any opportunity to change and improve the tax, I suggest you study the debates on Bill 27 in Hansard and you'll find the thing was not debated at all and was rushed through the house in an afternoon.

The BCLiberals under the CEO aren't interested in debate and they certainly will not countenance amendments to their legislation. The fact that they couldn't care less for the process of creating legislation is evident every time they bring their sullen asses into the Legislature - it's the one time that someone from the PAB isn't able to ride shotgun for them.

As for the inelasticity of demand for goods like gasoline and cigarettes, you wouldn't have written this if you understood the concept:

"....was come up with a single good idea - the carbon tax."

Gabe....LOL

You want Carole James to say "hey,the Campbell gas/tax isn`t working,we want to raise it 10 fold and cancel all the rebates!"

And what do you think Canwest,Jaccard and Campbell would say about that.......

It would go something like this,the NDP policy is going to cost 500 thousand jobs,destroy the economy..........

The only one believing Campbell`s gas/tax is effective is Campbell and Jaccard.....

Gabe,if gas is 1.00$ per litre or a 1.10$ per litre are you going to change your ways?
Is Baldrey,Palmer,Kinsella,Good,Joe the plumber,anybody,is anybody doing anything diffrent because of the Campbell gas tax?

I would like anyone here to say TRUTHFULLY that they have changed their life because of the carbon tax.......

I will start off......"I am still pollutting,I am still defiling the enviroment,there is still no transit where I live and I have the same 10 year old vehicle"

IMO--The Carbon/gas tax doesn`t do anything.........

No carbon tax on our exported coal,exported natural gas...........

Canada is 1.9% of world pollution---

BC is 0.20% of world pollution......

So all this gobbily goop about BC, IF BC met it`s 2020 target of a 33% reduction our BC share of world pollution would 0.14% of the world`s pollution.........

With a million people coming to BC by 2020 we will never reach the target....with a useless carbon tax we will never reach the target.........
If you believe in Global warming/climate change,unless India/China is on board with capped emissions(lowered emissions),it all matters not.
Fuel was 50 cents a litre higher last year,without the carbon tax,those bridges were still gridlock..........

As for Campbell`s useless,bullshit,not working gas tax,stick it in your stink hole Campbell,go lie to Wilfred or whoever else will believe you......

Cheers-Eyes Wide OPEN

rac...

Both from a public policy and political perspective you may be onto something.

In fact Surrey mayor Dianne Watts (a potential future leader of the Libs) and Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson (who also supports the carbon tax) apparently are going to make a motion in that regard at a Metro Vancouver mayor's meeting on Monday.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Metro+Vancouver+mayors+want+carbon+millions+transit/1519951/story.html

Perhaps, in the future, the carbon tax doesn't need to be revenue neutral after-all. Lower income folks don't have the income levels to afford a vehicle and gasoline in any event.

And the middle/upper income demographics don't need the carbon tax rebate cheques.

So the carbon tax can potentially be massaged from a revenue-neutral tax to a revenue generator for transit.

And the NDP has boxed themselves in politically in that regard.

A vote for the Greens

in this election is a vote for the Campbell Liberals. The Greens peaked in the last campaign and in this one aren't even running candidates in many, many ridings. It seems their only thing this time around is to push the STV. Don't waste your vote people. We can't afford four more years of this totally destructive government.

Luke.......

In Gordon Campbell`s BC you say....."Low income people can`t afford a car or gasoline"

You are a.............!!!!!!!!!!

Great article about Gregor Robertson and Dianne Watts........

The mayors want ALL the Campbell gas tax,all the money,all that is collected to be spread around the province for infrastructure.

Great idea,the mayors state " The carbon tax in it`s present form is useless"

And I couldn`t agree more, so Luke,when is Gordon Campbell going to cancel the tax breaks for his corporate freinds,when will Gordon Campbell tell all BCers that NO ONE is getting a tax cut,all GAS TAX collected will be directed towards Transit and light rail all over the province........

Go ahead Campbell,CANCEL ALL CARBON/GAS TAX refunds and tax breaks........

We all want to hear Campbell cancel those tax cuts!

Does he have a computer yet?

"NDP President Jeff Fox said the following in the wake of the Ray Lam resignation: “Most British Columbians don’t understand Facebook as a social networking tool. I come from a different generation and I don’t fully understand Facebook.”

How off the mark is he? Well according to Facebook, there are over 1.3 million Facebook users over 18 years of age in British Columbia alone.

Of those users, nearly 100,000 are over 55 years of age."

http://bc-election.com

Right on.

And I love you, G West.

If all goes well, a Green

If all goes well, a Green might get elected around the time hell freezes over.Some of their ideas seem ill thought out so maybe it will not even happen when hell does freeze over

Baloney Luke

The whole principle of the Campbell Tax is revenue neutrality - remember - maybe you need to read Bill 27 too.....

If the CEO hadn't been in such a hurry drafting the stupid thing and ramming it through the legislature in an afternoon then you might have a point - the mayor's certainly do - and they'd do well to make their case now to the lady who's going to be Premier elect on May 12.

Campbell is done like dinner - his little friend patrick the K is so desperate he has nothing left but threats of SLAP suits.

What a joke!

for the lack of sensible alternatives

I will be voting for the Green party this time around. DPL will be pleased to know that few people I have voted for in the 40 years I have voted have been elected. I will, however be happy to tell the grandkids that I never voted SOCRED and never supported this Liberal version with the cupie doll premier who took most of the trees and all of the salmon out of existence in a very short time.
(Yeah I know it's not all due to Campbell - the NDP must also have harvested timber and the liberals generally should not be allowed to own a chainsaw let alone attempt to fall timber. TimberWest and W.F.P. have all these "Feller Bunchers" and "Hoe Chuckers" for hire anyway so why would you be out there gathering your own firewood?)
When the Yanks brought back a Bush for the umpteenth time I thought dreary thoughts and got (OK I'll say it: got depressed)
Then they found themselves an Obama
Please
Vote these dingalings out

R/M old man....

Have you seen the unemployment and bankruptcy figures for the last few months? Is that Campbell & Co.'s idea to "Keep BC Strong"?

Just one example:
http://www.journalofcommerce.com/article/id33443

R/W old man....

Yes Rick I saw that. I saw this too in the report you mention. When there is rapid growth one will often find rapid declines too.

"In percentage terms, this industry (construction) had the fastest employment growth from January to October 2008 and has since experienced the steepest decline,” said the report."

Did you also see this?

April 16, 2009
"Spring brings new signs of life in housing market

According to the CREA report, the largest monthly increases in activity were in British Columbia, at 13.6 per cent, and Ontario, at 10.5 per cent."

http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090415.whomesales0415/BNStory/Business/home

This too:

"April 21, 2009
Campbell helped open a $20 million planer mill for West Fraser Timber, which has emerged as the largest producer of softwood lumber in Canada and one of the largest in the world, surpassing even giant Weyerhaeuser and Canfor Corp."

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Campbell+offers+hope+forestry+workers/1520036/story.html

This too:

April 20, 2009
Hawthorne Gold is building British Columbia’s next gold producer.

"In a market fraught with uncertainties, investors usually favour mining companies with advanced stage, near-production assets. Interest is particularly high for those with gold projects preferably in friendly jurisdictions. Canadian Venture and OTC Bulletin Board listed Hawthorne Gold Corporation (TSX.V: HGC, OTCBB: HWTHF) has two advanced stage gold projects in British Columbia and is expected to be in production by the end of 2009."

http://proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/1318/hawthorne-gold-is-building-british-columbias-next-gold-producer-1318.html

Keeping BC Strong.

hyperbole destroys credibility

Had she not signed her name to that email, I would have never had guessed that it was penned by someone that considers themselves a researcher and scientist.

Her assertions in the email and on CKNW were silly and without any basis. Her argument appears to be--
Gordon Campbell has the means to destroy all life (lifesystems) in BC and is using them.
Within four years all the wild Salmon in BC will be gone because of him.
Then all the trees in BC will die.

I dare her to present this argument before a peer reviewed scientific journal.

In that short interview and email, she has lost all credibility as a scientist and researcher. The email was purposefully shrill and unprofessional. Nice way to destroy the green movement. Say stupid things in public.

The shrill tone of the email suggests she has no faith in her skills as an ecologist/biologist and has fallen from her stature as a lead scientist in the green movement to competing with Raif Mair for the the role of providing hyperbole.

Read the literature and go with Berman and Suzuki. Greenhouse is a significant threat to Salmon in BC, the science is in on that. It follows then that Campbell has showed leadership by exploring real on the ground alternatives including RoR and the Carbon Tax.

Sitting on our hands and holding meetings, otherwise known as a moratorium, is classic NDP. Sorry to hurt your ideology but we should all abondon Carol James and the NDP, they simply don't get it. Berman is right to send them a message good on her.

NDP response

Dear David et al:

I was very concerned with the NDP's apparent downgrading of environmental issues in favour of big union economics, and wrote them recently saying I could not support a party that rejects the carbon tax. However, as your report this morning ("Furious Rebuke to Suzuki...") states, the alternative, or the major alternative, the Liberals, have consistently played fast and loose with the environment--to wit: the Gateway project, oil and gas subsidies, fish farm licenses, run of river power projects.

I thought you might be interested in the response from the NDP party, and include excerpts (because posts are limited to 3000 characters) here:

"Thank you for your input. The carbon tax is a difficult issue for some voters, but there are a few things that are quite apparent: it hasn't had any effect in reducing consumption, it has the deepest financial effect on the poorest in BC, and it is merely green window-dressing on an otherwise environmentally bankrupt Liberal agenda. Fuel consumption has actually increased by 4% in BC since the tax was imposed. Additionally, the money collected under the BC Liberals is not dedicated to environmental programs. It goes straight into general revenue and is spent on oil and gas subsidies and coal-bed methane developments that actually increase carbon emissions.

That's why our party has chosen a different approach: a cap-and-trade system that has been endorsed by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, a highly respected federal advisory group. We will also heavily invest in transit, new technologies and green infrastructure. We will heavily tax natural gas flaring, which accounts for 13% of carbon emissions in the province....

Many voters are following the lead of several environmental groups in calling for the NDP to support the carbon tax. Interestingly, all of those groups also support a cap-and-trade system, and some have actively promoted it. In March of this year the David Suzuki Foundation and the Pembina Institute published a paper outlining their recommendations for establishing an effective cap-and-trade system, recommendations that we have taken onboard.

In addition to this, several high profile environmental groups (Western Canada Wilderness Committee and the Sierra Club of BC) have stated their support for the other aspects of our environmental platform, while there has been no support for the rest of the Liberals’ environmental plans. WCWC called our promise to keep BC Hydro in public hands “our best tool for fighting climate change." The Sierra Club of BC stated that “the [NDP’s] hard-cap on greenhouse gas emissions by industrial polluters is probably essential to reach the province's target of emissions reductions by 2020.”

Regards,

Brenton Walters
Policy and Correspondence Coordinator
BC NDP

R/M old man....

Gee! Campbell didn't mention anyting except continued growth and prosperity at least until 2011. He didn't mention anything about steep declines. Whatever happened?

skeptical Green: You raise an excellent point on Hyperbole

And it should be a lesson to everyone.

However, the hyperbole, shrillness and unprofessional nature of Alexandra Morton's comments are no less so than comments made by people who say we are all doomed by carbon dioxide production.

So, are you telling us that Alexandra Morton's hyperbole is unacceptable but yours is OK?

I submit this thought to you and the Tyee readership:

If we don't reject hyperbole... we are all doomed!

Skeptical Green?

So Berman and Suzuki are right and the entire state of California is wrong?

WOW!

RickW That is how the "system" works

Berman, Suzuki and others are the "anointed" ones who we must prostrate ourselves and our our thinking abilities to.

If we "dare" disagree with them or their positions, well, the entire weight of their organizations (businesses) will come crashing down upon us.

There is not room for disagreement. No dissent.

And especially: No Thinking For Yourselves!

These acts of subversion will threaten the Eco-Organization's business model.

I attended an all candidates

I attended an all candidates forum last night in Castlegar. We even had the candidate for the communist party on the panel.

The Green Party Candidate had the same view point and solutions to problems that the NDP candidate had on every issue except the carbon tax. The Green Party suggests that we need both a cap and trade and a carbon tax meaning both parties are actually not that far apart on the issue.

I agree the Green Party has every right to exist, but at a time like this when the environment is being raped and pillaged by the Liberals, why would you vote them? Is it not the primary objective of all the opposition parties to remove the Liberals from office?

Sometimes you have to consider the bigger picture and join forces with a group you may not be 100% comfortable with to get rid of the creep who is destroying our province.

Its been said over and over again; I know its an affront to the Greens, and I apologize to their supporters, but voting Green without STV in place is a vote for Campbell.

WearsaTutu For Premier!

"As for Campbell`s useless,bullshit,not working gas tax,stick it in your stink hole Campbell,go lie to Wilfred or whoever else will believe you......

I just had to quote you!

Enviro Org and succession

Why is it that Enviro group leaders expect to be the organization's leadership for their nlifetime?

Do they not agree that succession takes place in nature and should take place in their 'green' org too?

Do all the staff, volunteers, canvassers, consultants, advisors at Suzuki Foundation, Forets Ethics, Pembina Inst. agree with their leaders.

No wonder turnover and suicide are enviro 'job' hazards!

"Berman, Suzuki and others are the "anointed" ones who we must prostrate ourselves and our our thinking abilities to.

If we "dare" disagree with them or their positions, well, the entire weight of their organizations (businesses) will come crashing down upon us.

There is not room for disagreement. No dissent.

And especially: No Thinking For Yourselves!

SO FIND ANOTHER ENV. ORG. to support

Good luck David and Tsemporah (is that fish in batter? LOL!) defending the Fiberals the next 4 years!!!!

RickW old man....

_ http://tiny.cc/dp7ga

Cap and Trade?

It's risky.

http://prorev.com/2009/01/british-cap-trade-turns-into-scam.html

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1208/1208captrade.htm

Cap and Trade doesn't remove any CO2, it allows things to stay the same by trading credits.

http://www.chicagoclimateexchange.com/

The trading costs money and therefore causes inflation.

r/man

"Cap and Trade doesn't remove any CO2, it allows things to stay the same by trading credits."

It also means you can sell credits you don't need thereby creating an incentive to reduce emissions.

It also means gov't can reduce the total of credits available.

Whatever

"Nice way to destroy the green movement. Say stupid things in public."

LOL, Berman and Suzuki have already chartered that bus.

"It follows then that Campbell has showed leadership by exploring real on the ground alternatives including RoR and the Carbon Tax."

What is the salary at the P.A.B.? Wrecking habitat in order to sell the power to California is too un-green even for California.

As for the carbon tax, emissions went up.

BC is No. 1, again!

Green Provincial Report 2009

http://www.corporateknights.ca/

Well freebear, that is the whole point isn't it?

When an organization, of any kind, fails to evolve by recognizing new realities, or adjusting to new findings, or serving the interests of the very people it purports to serve, then one would expect it to go into a state of decline and ultimately disappear.

However, it is incumbent upon the membership to bring about this change within the organization, and failing to do so, the membership should then naturally migrate to an assemblage of people with more similar interests and motivations.

There are two problems with this just described "perfect world".

First, the people at the top of the organizations are funded and supported by "larger, non-local, interests", and thus the leadership, if you can call it that, are not really responsive to the local population.

Second, people tend to identify themselves with their cause or brand. Greenpeace is an identity brand no different form Coke or Pepsi being an identity brand. Thus, if you consider yourself to be a "Greenpeacer" or "Free Market Liberal" or "Al Gore Admirer", then any information that is detrimental to your brand is rejected rather than analyzed.

So, freebear, if only people would move on to support organizations that evolve to better represent their concerns. We would all be better off for it.

Frank

I'm surprised that you and the NDP would be happy with BC trading carbon credits through the Chicago exchange.

http://www.chicagoclimateexchange.com/

Jeffrey Simpson today

"Last week, the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy showed how to improve Canada's record: Create a national cap-and-trade system for emissions, covering all sectors of the economy, not just the big emitters. The scheme would set a price for carbon over time, the only way to reduce emissions. We know it's the only way because all the other "solutions" have failed.

The Harper government, however, has no interest in trying to develop such a national scheme. The Conservatives have largely abandoned key parts of their previous (and inadequate) policies, waiting for Washington to decide how it will reduce emissions - at which point the government will petition to join the American effort."

BC - GREENest Province in Canada

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090422.wrenvironment22art21062/BNStory/National/home

The timing of this finding is certainly fortuitous.

Damn Libs... they need to be booted out of office.

The Corporate Knights

Are the same idiots who gave Brian Mulroney an award as Canada's 'greenest' prime minister.

Did they have Lizzy May on the judging panel this time too lukie?

GWEST

Always the cynic, huh.

"Contributors
Laura Telford, Ph.D. Executive Director, Canadian Organic Growers
Gillian Walker, Water Resource Analyst, Environment Canada [NCR]
Edit Petrovic, Senior Manager, Labour Market Information, ECO Canada
Richard Turle, Environment Canada
Sonia Parent, Media Relations Officer, Natural Resources Canada
Barbara Omolewa, Program Officer, New Housing Initiatives, Office of Energy Efficiency
Ken Elsey, Executive Director, Canadian Energy Efficiency Alliance
Monika Patel, Program Officer, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Canada
Jody Lownds, Environmental Rights Campaigner, Friends of the Earth
Alyson Hazlett, Data Dissemination Officer, Statistics Canada
Patrick Gerard, Senior Media Relations Office, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Clarissa Morawski, Principal, CM Consulting
Maria Kelleher, Principal, RIS International"

Go on West, tell us how stupid you think these people are. Or were they all bought?

Corporate Knights - Ed Broadbent

Yuppers, former national NDP leader Ed Broadbent is an idiot. :D

nice to hear your voice

Dr. Alexander. I'd (personally) rephrase your comment "...if only people would move on to support organizations that evolve to better represent their concerns. We would all be better off for it." to say: if only people would create organizations that better represent our common concerns... Like it or not, we appear to all be in this together...

Just one other point about hyperbole (maybe two): Alexandra Morton has been speaking the voice of rigorous science for some years now, without apparent effect/affect.I think there is room in the debate for the human voice...the voice of pain, fear, loss (or joy, hope, regeneration. I guess my overarching thesis would be it is going to take a lot of different voices to recreate our world.

Do you know what a member emeritus is?

It's an honourary distinction - means absolutely nothing. Like an honourary LLB - you know the kind of thing luke.

Just like a green award from a bunch of corporate hangers on for Brian Mulroney - the most corrupt prime minister since Sir John A MacDonald - means nothing.

I hope the greenest PM is enjoying his time in the 'sun' these days luke.

R/MAN

Pretty stupid - just like Lizzy May was when she voted for BM the PM as the greenest 'anything' - I think she was confused by all the clover leafs at the Irish summit with Ronnie Reagan.

By the way, did you catch Paul Krugman on Erin go broke the other day?

Someone like you who posted volumes about the Irish miracle here at Tyee a few months ago shouldn't miss it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/opinion/20krugman.html?_r=4

Maybe we'll all be 'irish' soon!

Most important sentence in the article

Rumours continue to fly that environmental funders in the United States are pushing hard to ensure that B.C. becomes the first North America jurisdiction to implement a carbon tax.

As T. C. Douglas used to say, "He who pays the piper calls the tune". If "environmental funders" want something done, environmental organizations and environmentalists who are funded are going to be doing it. That's how the world works.

I have said before that the basic economic principle at work here is the fact that everyone needs to service their mortgages and car loans, and that includes high-profile environmental personalities just as much as it does the ordinary working person. In the case of the high-profile personalities, there can be little doubt that the mortgages and loans are on a much grander scale, but the basic principle still applies.

Environmental activists do not work for God and their paycheques are not signed by Mother Nature. They have a duty to their donor base that cannot be avoided.

I would be really happy if Bill Tieleman could come up with some more detail on just who those "funders" are, and what kind of demands they have made. And it would be interesting to hear if the American funders decided to support the B.C. Liberals because they like the carbon tax so much, ... or if it's the other way around!

G West

How about the rest of the team? Will your apology be forthcoming toute-de-suite? We doubt it. Do you think they all eat skewered babies for breakfast just like Gordo?

I'll look around for some bad news. I know that's what really makes you happy.

PEI the worst

Yep, according to Corporate Knights the home of Anne of Green Gables is an environmental disaster.

Forget the fact it has little to no industry, no huge cities, the CK rates it as the worst province in Canada. That means lower than Alberta for those scoring at home.

The study has no credibility.

r/man

"I'll look around for some bad news"

Try looking at the unemployment and bankruptcy stats.

Tieleman...

That would be none other than former BC NDP premier Dan Miller.

Again, that would be none other than the NDP...

And then just a few years back:

http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090422.WBcampbellblog20090422110614/WBStory/WBcampbellblog

With all of these flip flops... that gets me wondering... what does the BC NDP really stand for?

Coincidence?

The timing of this finding is certainly fortuitous.

Is it really just pure, raw, coincidence that this report came out during the B.C. election, and just happens to give B.C. the top spot? Is that believable?

Just who are "Corporate Knights"? Is that a business interest?

Sound like a bunch of Media Monitors too

Not an honest scientist among 'em - pretty much on a par with the panel that voted for BM the PM....

You shouldn't have any difficulty finding bad news dude - but why bother, you just ignore it anyway.

And Frank, you're right, what was PEI's score?

30 odd percent wasn't it?

Utterly bogus exercise in media BS and spin - maybe they could tow PEI through the NW Passage (now that it's nearly ice free) and hook it up to the south end of Vancouver Island.

Would that make it green?

Luke S. - Do you make any attempt to be serious?

Do the people at your law firm take your statements seriously, or do they just roll their eyes everytime Luke starts to talk?

There is a difference between small scale run of the river projects and some of the projects which have been proposed. People can easily be in favour of the smaller scale ones and worried about the bigger projects.

Luke

Buddy, take a pill, you're now posting 'blog' entries....this is getting ridiculous - 24/7 polls was bad enough but now you're cutting and pasting from a 'blog'!

jeez how the 'mighty' have fallen - even the R/man doesn't stoop to that level.

VivianLea, I agree with your thesis

There are painful, despondent, fearful, panic-stricken, warning, illustrative and explanatory voices everywhere. Yet, they go unheard or relatively so. I would put Morton's voice in the relatively-so category as she has clearly made a clarion call for the dangers of farmed salmon for a great number of years with inaction and being ignored as her reward.

On the other hand, there are the lecturing and hectoring voices. These voices seem to come from people like Berman, Suzuki and Gore.

The voices of Morton and those like her are clearly sincere. The voices of Berman, Suzuki and Gore? Something entirely different.

GWest

Just look at the provinces. BC, Ontario and Alberta are the "greenest". I guess if PEI had tar sands they'd jump to #1.

PROVINCE SCORE*
British Columbia 69
Ontario 67
Alberta 55
Nova Scotia 53
Saskatchewan 50
Quebec 49
Manitoba 46
New Brunswick 40
Newfoundland 38
Prince Edward Island 32

Rod Smelser...

It would certainly help if ya got your facts straight. ;)

Micro hydro IPP's - individual projects are all relatively small. Current NDP policy... no, nada, nyet. You should know that or does the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows NDP constituency association have a different policy? :)

Wrong on both counts again, Budd.

Luke which of the people you mention ..

..related at one time to the NDP, Dan Miller, Gordon Wilson actually approved "rampant" ROR for power sales to the U.S and which of them actually said that BC Hydro should buy it at market value to sell back to the taxpayer? You quote of selected information which rarely ever makes any connection to the issue they way you think. Are your initials BH by any chance?

What does Luke stand for?

Defends the carbon tax yet claims not to like it.

Says he doesn't like Harper yet supports a party totally dependent on Conservative voters.

Claims the NDP is both evil and sanctimonious yet defends both Campbell's DUI and his inaction on senior's care and the homeless.

Says a scandal involving the RCMP, BC Rail, CN and public dollars going to Liberal insiders is the same as a James admission she smoked pot in the 1970's.

I think its fair to say that Luke's principles are whatever Campbell says they are today.

Wrong on both counts again, Budd.

This from a man who is, admittedly with good justification, unwilling to identify himself. You really don't have even a minimal sense of humour or irony, do you?

Some of the run of the river projects, such as the Bute Inlet project, are very large, not "micro hydro" as you put it. Calling for a moratorium on all IPPs until procedures can be rectified sounds like a rational move. Do you have a personal objection to that?

I find your silly tone kind of funny in a way, but it's disturbing to think that clients of your law company are getting their wills written and their corporation documents prepared by someone who has a kind of junior high school approach to everything.

If you're now saying you don't work for a law company, fine. Previously you implied that you did, or were at least well versed in the law, meaning either a lawyer or para-legal.

Certainly a Mind Bender...

Leave the comedy routine to Yuk Yuk's Comedy Club guys. LOL... I'm almost falling off my chair here. :D

Now back to Suzuki, Berman and the environemnt. ;)

Luke

Its okay that you can't explain the fact you contradict yourself, I think its just a matter of us remembering that so that we can keep your hyperbole in perspective. When we know you don't believe what you're saying either we don't have to ask ourselves how anyone can think that way.

Now back to Suzuki, Berman and the environemnt. ;)

Leave the comedy routine to Yuk Yuk's Comedy Club guys. LOL... I'm almost falling off my chair here. :D

You're pretty funny, alright. Do the people at your office laugh with you? Or is it something else?

I noticed something on the Straight site. An essay by David Suzuki had attracted by a single comment. Are people no longer interested in what he has to say?

No Joke: Salmon can't survive 4 more years of the Libs

Stating that the salmon won't survive another 4 years of the Liberals is far from fear mongering. Sure, there have been many pressures over the years that have brought our salmon to their current state of decline, but nothing like the fish farms we have now. The science is in and Pink Salmon will be extinct within a couple generations unless we remove the farms from their path. Other species aren't as well studied, but they're being hit just as hard.

I've met and talked with both Suzuki and Berman, and I've worked alongside Alexandra. I respect them all, but if you want uncompromised integrity, scientific objectivity, and real leadership and courage to act on things that NEED to be changed, then Alex stands out from the crowd. I'll stand by her side any day.

Voters don't know the other issues

The problem with Suzuki and Berman condemning the NDP's opposition to the carbon tax is that this is the only thing people are hearing. Unfortunately with most people the environment still follows far behind things like the economy and the recent spate of crime. We can’t look at this one issue and not highlight the others.

Gordo's tax and his few million dollars in climate change initiatives is wonderful, but where do we see in the news any talk of the massive subsidies in the oil and gas sector that blow these out of the water?

Some groups are talking about these things, but they aren't pressing for it to get into the media, so it's not showing up and most people have no idea. All they see is that the Liberals Carbon Tax is good, the NDPs opposition to it is bad (and little talk of their proposed cap-and-trade system), and nothing else. That says to them, the environmental movement supports these guys, and not them.

Sure, let’s congratulate Gordo on his tax, but at the same time, let’s make sure everyone understands the implications in a complete collapse of our wild salmon on our ecosystems and economy, let’s make sure they know the info on run of river and IPPs, let’s make sure they hear about oil tankers on our rough coast and the oil spills that will statistically happen every 7 years. Let's talk about the folly of gateway and the need for massive investments in a comprehensive transit system.

Let's talk about the last 10% of old growth forest on Vancouver Island that is being cut against even the forestry workers opposition at the direction of industry and government. Let's hear about our lack of endangered species legislation, the reinstated grizzly bear hunt, and targeted destruction of spotted owl habitat. And let's hear about attempts to build massive resource extraction projects such as coal bed methane in the Sacred Headwaters, and mountain top coal removal in the Flathead, all against scientific expertise, local opinion, and the rights of first nations on whose territories these things are happening.

If we talk about all of these things, I'm happy to say boo to the NDP on their carbon tax stance, and congrats to the Libs. But if BCers by and large have no idea of the other policies that affect our environment and climate, then we'd sure as hell better not mislead them.

Whatever you end up voting, at least know all of the issues. And let’s not forget to support BC-STV, so we can hold our politicians accountable.

Come what may, its not green.

I've been saying in this space for some time now, and giving examples, that the mainstream environmental movement is corrupted by the politicians. Just have a look at amendments to the MBCA-CEPA in 2004.

Elizabeth May and the Sierra Club played a terrible role in collusion with the Martin (see shipowner type) gov't. Ms. May has already given up the Federal Green Party in the election, she has given up strong protection for migratory birds just to appease the Federal Libs and she would give up the rest of Canadians for a seat in the Senate.

I'm not surprised by the Gucci Suzuki. Enviro's today have nice shiny offices and even got boardroom tables.

Tieleman F**ked up

What this article is actually about is Tieleman's desperate need to get himself out of the glue. He's messed up, and probably cost the NDP the election.

Let's remember here that Mr. Tieleman was a lead personality in attacking the carbon tax, from a classic glen clark ndp perspective.

So they proposed an alternative: cap and trade. Never mind that this alternative arose from the right. Never mind that the "trade" part isn't working in the EU, and down south was only agreed to by Obama as a compromise.

It *could* work - if it also applied to consumer's use of energy. The NDP's concept doesn't. It only applies to the "industrial polluters" - about 1/3 of BC's output. The other 2/3 is consumers and transportation.

A viable cap and trade program, like Obama's, would also apply to consumer and transport fuel use. That forces the price of those fuels up, and in the long term, their usage down. In other words, a well-designed cap & trade program or carbon tax both have exactly the same outcome at the consumer level. It's only how transparent they are that differs, and how stable the cost put on carbon emmissions is. Cap & trade usually fails in the stability dept.

Posters who claim that closer-to-god rural ndp supporters can't have no "options", miss two key points: vehicle choice makes a huge difference, and that the tax/cap work by applying pressure that changes *long term* choices when capital goods (vehicles, appliances, homes, renovation, machinery) are replaced.

Regulation won't cut it. The price of energy needs to go up, or it won't work. That's just reality. The NDP has chosen to take a craven route on the subject, and lie to their supporters.

Re Tieleman and his ilk in the NDP, I think they have never really accepted the importance of the issue. They're greenwashers at best, who hoped to knock the enviros within the NDP down a peg along the way. Stand up for "real working BC'rs", a phrase just as bigoted as "taxpayers" - what happened to "citizens"? The NDP union-bubbas live! They've still got it!

Guess what? That's suicide for the NDP. You've split the enviros into factions in an agonizing debate, good for you!

Maybe the NDP could never have won anyways. We'll never know now how close it may have been if Tieleman hadn't suckered them into this. But what's obvious is the loss will be by double-digits now.

Bruce You miss the point

The Campbell TAX Does NOTHING - it spins money and excludes major polluters; it was created out of whole cloth in less than a month, it is ill-considered, rammed through the legislature without either debate or amendment. It is a disastrously bad law that has been pumped by the marketing arm of the provincial government into an enormous bloated balloon of a joke.

I've been told by good authority that the minister never even saw the regulations until they were presented for her signature.

Like her obvious discomfiture at having to tell the truth about her powerlessness to assist on behalf of the Cambie merchants, she was embarrassedly out of the loop from the beginning - this turkey was hatched and still born on Jessica McDonald's desk.

It has done nothing to reduce GHG and will do nothing to change behavior - for a variety of reasons...all of which I'm tired of demonstrating.

Tieleman currently has NO status in the NDP and the suggestion that he had anything to do with the program to attack the tax is absurd...the green washing is all on the government side and the only people who ought to apologize are the self-appointed enviro-saviors like Jim Hoggan and his ilk…This morning Gordon Campbell flubbed the chance to change that today when he told the mayors of the lower mainland and Fraser Valley that he would not use the money collected from the tax to support transit. It revealed, once and for all, that the only objective the man had from the beginning was another tax give-away to his friends and corporate enablers.

The man is a fool and British Columbians, if they vote for him, are bigger fools.

The Campbell Tax is just one of about 50 excellent reasons NOT to vote for the CEO.

I won't trouble you with the rest of them.

If the people of BC are so stupid as to swallow hook, line and sinker - as certain commenters here seem to have done - then God help us all.

GWest, your arguments about

GWest, your arguments about the ineffectiveness of carbon pricing are simply wrong. An example:

>Then, in all fairness and logic - and understanding the inelastic nature of the demand curve for gasoline - why would you support it?

Please explain then, why SUV sales collapsed last year. Or why oil consumption for north america has knees in the curve at each of the oil shocks.

Consumers do respond to price increases in energy, but they either do it very slowly as they replace capital-goods like cars or renovate their homes, or only in response to large increases.

Re Tieleman, whether or not he has "status" within the NDP is irrelevant. His thinking and the NDPs appear to be in tight concert. Causation/correlation, who cares which?

Re the NDP vs Campbell, I actually do believe Campbell is personally sincere on the issue. I don't think he's accepted what's required, or he'd have fired Kevin Falcon by now. So really, that's neither here nor there. I doubt any party on the right will act effectively in CO2 emmission reduction in the short term.

The trouble is they're learning, at least a bit, but the NDP has shown that it isn't. The problem here is not what the Libs are doing or thinking. It's that the NDP has shown enviros what it will be like in government - the "axe the tax" campaign just about has a sneer on its face at enviros. It promises another round of glen clark, but with a weaker leader.

bruce

"Please explain then, why SUV sales collapsed last year. "

Umm, because of BC's premier Campbell adding 2 cents a litre in gas taxes to the 15 cents already there?

Is that the reason people in Wisconsin bought fewer SUV's?

Or was it because of gas (with taxes) hitting $1.50 a litre and millions of people losing their jobs and millions more worried about it happening to them?

One thing I can't figure out is why didn't the collapse in SUV sales prevent emissions from rising here in BC?

Is there any oil produced anywhere that isn't being used? You can have carbon taxes, transit taxes, gas taxes up to your neck and it won't make one bit of difference, all the oil that can be produced will be, someone will be willing to pay for it somewhere.

We will use the same amount of oil no matter what the cost because we'll simply use all of it and the same amount of emissions will be produced.

But if you think Campbell is "smart" and "sincere" then by all means vote for him. You'll just have to put up with people on the Left asking why you sacrificed rivers and other habitat just so you would feel less guilty about gassing up.

>Umm, because of BC's

>Umm, because of BC's premier Campbell adding 2 cents a litre in gas taxes...?

My comment was on the elasticity of the demand curve for gasoline, not on the carbon tax. Obviously it will have to be much higher in future to have a big impact in itself.

>One thing I can't figure out is why didn't the collapse in SUV sales prevent emissions from rising here in BC?

Because it will take a decade for the vehicle fleet mix to shift significantly? Or do you go out and buy a new car every 6 months?

>all the oil that can be produced will be...

And yet the tar sands projects are now being slowed down. As is much exploration elsewhere.

Oil production and price goes in wild cycles, but the fact is that it is a market commodity, with responses at both the supply and demand end.

Your arguments are just variations on "if we don't someone else will", a grade-school level error in ethical thinking.

Bruce

"Because it will take a decade for the vehicle fleet mix to shift significantly"

But nobody likes spending lots of money on gas unnecessarily, we buy what we need to buy. If that's a gas powered truck or a bio-diesel powered truck or an electric truck we'll still buy the cheapest to run truck that still does the job we need it to do.

"And yet the tar sands projects are now being slowed down. As is much exploration elsewhere."

But they're not being shut down and that's because as long as tar sands production is legal they know they can sell the stuff eventually, they'll just wait for the price to go up.

"Your arguments are just variations on "if we don't someone else will""

And yet its still so true.

And once the tar sands have been pumped out we can all switch to electric cars using BC's rivers to power our trucks.

GWest, you say, "Tieleman

GWest, you say, "Tieleman currently has NO status in the NDP and the suggestion that he had anything to do with the program to attack the tax is absurd...".

Yet Bill himself says, "Meanwhile, if you do oppose the unfair B.C. gas tax, you can join more than 9,000 others on my "Axe The BC Gas Tax" Facebook protest group. "

What a co-incidence.

"James launches campaign to axe the gas tax
June 17, 2008

NDP LEADER SAYS B.C. NEEDS REAL CLIMATE CHANGE SOLUTIONS
KELOWNA - New Democrat leader Carole James today launched a campaign to "Axe the Gas Tax" and called on Gordon Campbell to recall the legislature to implement real climate change solutions.

"At a time when average families are struggling with record high gas prices Gordon Campbell is hitting consumers with a gas tax that is unfair and won't work," said James. "New Democrats are joining British Columbians to fight back, visiting communities across B.C, to call on the Campbell government to axe the tax."

An online petition is posted at http://AxeTheGasTax.ca ."

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:yM81PvA0TdwJ:www.bcndp.ca/node/262+James+Launches+Campaign+to+Axe+the+Gas+Tax&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk

G West, quote:
"If the people of BC are so stupid as to swallow hook, line and sinker - as certain commenters here seem to have done - then God help us all."

By the way, GWest, the voters are never stupid. One shouldn't demean them.

>But nobody likes spending

>But nobody likes spending lots of money on gas unnecessarily, we buy what we need to buy.

That's complete nonsense. If people can afford it (and even if they can't, as we've seen) they buy a house and vehicle that fill the last 1% of use it might see. Even if they only put something in the bed of the truck once a month, and it'd be cheaper to rent a truck for that one day, they'll get the truck if they can. Makes them feel powerful, it's a status symbol.

>And once the tar sands have been pumped out we can all switch to electric cars using BC's rivers to power our trucks.

1) Pickup trucks have too much aerodynamic drag to get good range out of any forseeable battery technology.

2) So you're in favour of the doubling of BC Hydro rates and extreme conservation required to make room for charging all those vehicles?

3) If we put all the tar sand and heavy oil carbon into the atmosphere, we're finished. Go look up how panicked climate scientists are getting. They're now talking about 2 deg C being unavoidable, and an increasing chance of 7 degrees. That's global population collapse territory - almost no viable agriculture and an extinction event on the level of the permian thermal maximum.

Bruce...

You hit the nail on the head politically.

I've seen the same game plan before.

1. In 1986, the Socreds were low in the polls and along comes Vander Zalm with his right-wing populism.

The Socreds bump up in the polls as a result of VZ's populism before the Socreds are back in the basement politically.

2. In 1995, the NDP was low in the polls and along comes Clark with his left-wing populism. Tieleman was his communications strategist.

The NDP bumps up in the polls as a result of Clark's populism before the NDP are back in the basement politically.

Rinse, wash, and repeat.

3. In 2008, the NDP had been languishing in the cellar politically, down as much as 18%.

While the NDP approved of a carbon tax at their 2007 convention, they also saw a self-preserving opportunity for some populism. Not James per se, but the "Axe the Tax" campaign, esp. when gas prices hit $1.50/litre last July.

And Tieleman was right there again egging the "Axe the Tax" campaign along, even putting up a Facebook page thereto.

Voila. By November, 2008 Mustel had the NDP within 2 points of the Libs (down from an 18% spread).

The problem is... such "populism" sometimes only has a 3 - 6 month political shelf life.

And in each and every one of these "populist" instances the "populists" eventually find themselves again in the political cellar.

And that's the situation that James and the BC NDP find themselves in today.

Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Bruce

"That's complete nonsense. ... Makes them feel powerful, it's a status symbol."

So the millions of trucks on the road are nothing more than status symbols. Please get your leader to say that on tv. I'm sure that will go over really well.

"So you're in favour of the doubling of BC Hydro rates and extreme conservation required to make room for charging all those vehicles?"

What? Are you saying you aren't in favour of electric vehicles?

"If we put all the tar sand and heavy oil carbon into the atmosphere, we're finished."

Gee, I said the same thing on here only 2 years ago in an argument with Truman Green and mopled.

"Go look up how panicked climate scientists are getting. They're now talking about 2 deg C being unavoidable, and an increasing chance of 7 degrees."

Yet every drop of oil in the tar sands that can be pulled out of the ground will be.

"That's global population collapse territory - almost no viable agriculture and an extinction event on the level of the permian thermal maximum."

On the bright side BC's emissions will do down and I can already hear Kevin Falcon claiming that he's fixed the congestion problem.

Luke

"1. In 1986"

In 1986 you were still in grade-school.

"Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

Which is why you will vote the same way every time and for the same policies eh?

>So the millions of trucks

>So the millions of trucks on the road are nothing more than status symbols. Please get your leader to say that on tv. I'm sure that will go over really well.

Yet it's true. Most of those pickups and SUVs, not to mention huge suburban homes, are status symbols and not much more. It's part and parcel with the economic collapse's root causes. The financial sector made it possible, but as the saying goes, you can't con an honest man.

Leadership would be telling people as politely and palatably as possible that we're all part of the problem, we've all screwed up, and we all have to change. We are overextended in many areas.

There are no leaders that are _Leaders_ to my eyes. There is nobody to vote for without feeling burned after, or just throwing away my vote symbolically. That's what has people pissed off. But it doesn't even matter - the NDP's going to lose anyways, because their tacticians appear to be clarkites.

>Which is why you will vote

>Which is why you will vote the same way every time and for the same policies eh?

Get real. You are arguing with people who have probably voted NDP or Green (when pissed at the NDP) their whole lives. That's why it was such a bonehead move.

Bruce

"But it doesn't even matter - the NDP's going to lose anyways, because their tacticians appear to be clarkites."

Actually if they were "clarkites" they'd win. After all the NDP always lose except when they had Clark. The province is full of defeated NDP candidates and leaders, its always been thus.

"Most of those pickups and SUVs, not to mention huge suburban homes, are status symbols and not much more."

Well, that isn't true but if your mind is made up all I can say is I hope a Liberal says that out loud.

Realisticman

THE VOTERS ARE NEVER STUPID (realisticman) - Can I frame that and put on the shelf right beside the bookcase where I keep my copy of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich?

I take it I don't have to spell out chapter and verse of the democratic rise to power of a certain Adolph Hitler?

The voters are often stupid - in this province unbelievably and serially so.

Bruce:
I think you'll find I answered your questions on another thread - you can find my response(s) there - other than what Frank has already written - not much else is needed. The Campbell Tax is a farce as it sits and anyone who supports it is either a fool or naive.

Oh, one thing, Gordon Campbell is a sociopath - he doesn't have a sincere bone in his body - the only thing he understands is his own pleasure and the fawning attention he gets from his friends who pull his strings.

Bruce

"Get real. You are arguing with people who have probably voted NDP or Green (when pissed at the NDP) their whole lives."

No I'm not. The comment you quoted was directed at "Luke". The clue as to how I know that is that I said "Luke" in the post's title box.

As for Luke's politics, he has already told us who he votes for and although you may be surprised, it isn't Green or NDP.

"That's why it was such a bonehead move."

What?

GWest

"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich?"

William Shirer? Great book.

If you get a deal on frames GWest I'd like to put that quote next to my copy of "On the Take" and a number of other books.

>The Campbell Tax is a farce

>The Campbell Tax is a farce as it sits and anyone who supports it is either a fool or naive.

As structured, yes. But as I've said, the problem is not what campbell has done, it's the NDP's response in demonizing the whole concept of consumer-level carbon taxation.

>"That's why it was such a bonehead move."

You have lost a huge segment of educated urban voters. The election is already over. As I keep saying, it's not even that they'd vote on the one issue. It's the way it was done.

>Oh, one thing, Gordon Campbell is a sociopath - he doesn't have a sincere bone in his body...

It's always possible, I think Ms Berman and several other key enviros I've met are NPD's. Who else other than a cluster-B personality disorder wants to be at the head of a campaign or party? They're useful monsters, every side has 'em.

>The voters are often stupid - in this province unbelievably and serially so.

Paraprasing, I'd love to see an NDP spokesperson stand up and say that. Yet it's true, as are my statements about consumer behavior.

It's like the NDP decided to reduce drunk driving penalties and reduce taxes on beer. You fanboys are just rationalizing it, probably to excuse your personal behavior as well. I'm supposed to have faith in that kind of leadership?

BTW, Luke's "I've seen the same game plan before." is spot on, no matter who he votes for. Clark only won one election with that shite, and just barely.

You know, maybe I'm pissed

You know, maybe I'm pissed off because the NDP took the cheap shot, and is *still* so weak this round that they'll lose anyways. So the stab in the back was for nothing. If I thought they'd win it might be half understandable. But this was just divisive joke.

Bruce

"Clark only won one election with that shite, and just barely."

He was part of the team that won the election before that too. Two of the measly 3 times the NDP has ever won.

"You fanboys are just rationalizing it, probably to excuse your personal behavior as well"

Just to be clear. What personal behaviour is that?

"You have lost a huge segment of educated urban voters. The election is already over."

The election is not over, the people still have to vote. However if you mean the NDP had a chance and now they don't because of their stance on regressive taxation you should try and build your argument on past polls. The NDP never showed any sustained levels of support that would threaten the Liberals at any time in the last 4 years.

Ergo, James has lost nothing.

Bruce

"and is *still* so weak this round that they'll lose anyways."

As I just said in my last post, there was no collection of polls in the last 4 years that put the NDP ahead so of course they'd "lose anyway". NDP "fanboys" like me are well aware of the politics of BC and so we aren't surprised nor disappointed when the voters GWest says are "stupid" keep voting for the same thing.

"So the stab in the back was for nothing."

If you feel you were stabbed in the back imagine how I would have felt if they had reversed themselves on decades old principles going back to Woodsworth and Douglas and supported Fraser Institute type regressive taxation.

>Just to be clear. What

>Just to be clear. What personal behaviour is that?

90% of the time when people defend vehicle choice and the base load of their home, it's out of personal interests. Everybody thinks their own wants are really "needs".

>Ergo, James has lost nothing.

And gained nothing, so why sell out? There was plently of scope to criticize and propose a workable alternative. They did not. They sold out for *nothing*.

>nd supported Fraser

>nd supported Fraser Institute type regressive taxation.

If that's such a core principle, why weren't the PST and MSP premiums shifted into income tax during the two terms of NDP leadership?

The carbon tax was implemented badly but it could have been *fixed*: just balance out the income tax compensation better, and show how the revenue would go into urban transit and rural home improvement rebates.

Bruce

"90% of the time when people defend vehicle choice and the base load of their home, it's out of personal interests."

Guilty as charged. But then I can afford it and Campbell's carbon tax is aimed only at getting the poor to change their habits, not me. After all, the point of regressive taxation is to lighten the overall tax load for upper income earners which, to quote Leonard Cohen, "everybody knows".

Its like when you and a buddy have to run from a bear, you don't have to be faster than the bear, you only have to be faster than your buddy. Which is the same principle that the Campbell carbon tax is based on.

"And gained nothing, so why sell out?"

She didn't sell out. She decided, much to her credit, to forego the siren song of people that wouldn't vote for her no matter what she did and instead stick to the NDP's historical position on regressive taxation.

Bruce

"If that's such a core principle, why weren't the PST and MSP premiums shifted into income tax during the two terms of NDP leadership?"

A lot of us asked the same question. We didn't expect much out of Harcourt but I did expect Clark and Macphail to get rid of MSP premiums. Definitely an opportunity lost.

I haven't lost anything Bruce

I expect that the party I support will tell the truth - at least most of the time and the NDP has a much better record on that account than all the other parties combined.

I opposed the Campbell Tax - (it's not really a carbon tax at all - if you care to look you can find much of that argument of mine, including citations of the sections of Bill 27 that are pertinent, on various Tyee comment threads in the archives) - from the beginning - long before it was debated (for all of one afternoon) in the legislature and before every attempt at amendment by the NDP was rejected.

If you think a money laundering tax that benefits the wealthy and penalizes the working man and the poor is a good idea then you should ignore every other mindless and anti-democratic, elitist and exclusionary, selfish and corporation-centred thing this human stain of a government has done and vote them back into power.

Their methods and their philosophy of selling public assets to foreigners, making special deals for their friends, keeping the minimum wage low and rewarding the wealthy with more money and tax breaks while they ignore the homeless, neglect children, the sick, the old and the handicapped will not, apparently, be enough to convince you to vote for someone else.

I clearly can't convince you. And you’d pretend to save the environment while the society around you rots on the vine.

Be my guest. Campbell has just told us today he's still not interested in fixing the tax - I trust you missed that development from our 'sincere' great leader too.

Frank

"If you get a deal on frames GWest I'd like to put that quote next to my copy of "On the Take" and a number of other books."

It should slot right in next to Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine". She who is one of the Statement Signatories on Power Up Canada. You know, those that support the Liberal's Carbon Tax.

I'm sure you and Garth have signed 1st edition copies.

G West

"Campbell has just told us today he's still not interested in fixing the tax -"

The question was whether he would change it to devote a chunk to transit and since the vast majority of transit is in the Lower Mainland this would deprive the people in the centre and north of BC from a fair distribution of the funds, it would therefore become inflationary too.

r/man

"I'm sure you and Garth have signed 1st edition copies."

You'd be wrong, I haven't read it.

"She who is one of the Statement Signatories on Power Up Canada. You know, those that support the Liberal's Carbon Tax."

I expect there will be a lot of people on that list that won't still be there a year from now now that Berman has shown where she stands.

Thanks Bruce

Your comments were enlightening.

I know where the usual suspects in the comments section stand. The vitriol they cast on one another is what turns me away from getting more involved in politics, other than simply voting. It always seems so partisan and devolves into ad hominem attacks.

I'm voting Green, simply to show my support. I would vote NDP if I could be convinced that they will take strong action on the environment, but I don't think their membership will allow it.

But more importantly, I'm voting STV to shake this up. Hopefully a future coalition will be able to move away from BC's ever-swinging left-right pendulum.

Haven't read it either

But you know something funny, I was at an event on Friday where her father-in-law was speaking and he went from that meeting to an appearance with Carole James.

I guess I don't have to tell you who he was supporting.

By the way that wasn't the answer the CEO gave at all (but of course we know HE never tells the truth, so who cares) - in fact, he said he wouldn't tamper with the tax because it is revenue neutral...

We all know what that means.

It accomplishes nothing in terms of addressing GHG and siphons money from the poor and working poor into the pockets of Campbell, Zlotnik, Peter Brown and their fellow-travellers. Of course he won't change it - just like he won't answer a single question about the fact that he has spent all his political life facilitating the transfer of public assets from the people to his handlers and puppet-masters.

Voters who care only for themselves and their own personal self-aggrandizement love Gordon Campbell. And that’s not surprising – but it does say something about their ‘character’. However, that's a problem for his supporters, not for me.

Trent

Maybe you should look at what Bruce has to say on this story before you make up your mind.
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/BC-Politics/2009/04/22/Campbell-Mayors-No-Carbon-Tax-Transit/

Is that Ian Bruce by any chance?

Guess what? That's suicide for the NDP. You've split the enviros into factions in an agonizing debate, good for you!

I am going to take a wild guess that this is Ian Bruce of the DSF.

My theory is that Liberal and senior ENGO strategists planned this environmental clash some years ago. Partly they were furious with Jack Layton over the Clean Air Act, and partly they were furious about the DSF tax audits, which they blamed on Layton as well as Harper because they bought the Liberal line that Layton put Harper in power.

At the provincial level, ENGOs generally have put heavy pressure on the NDP to do two things. Support an unpopular Liberal policy, the carbon tax, and oppose a popular one, expanding the highway and freeway system. Coupled with these angry and vituperative excoriations coming from Suzuki and Berman, that's just not a coincidence.

I don't always agree with Bill Tieleman, but it's always nice to watch when he draws blood. Tell all the staff at the DSF to take a look at the Georgia Straight site and see how many comments Suzuki's latest article has attracted. He's being virtually ignored.

Uh-huh

"Hopefully a future coalition will be able to move away from BC's ever-swinging left-right pendulum."

Actually I've heard that a future election will be too late, unless we vote for the carbon tax now all will be lost.

So vote Campbell and save the world.

A little bit paranoid?

>I am going to take a wild guess that this is Ian Bruce of the DSF.

Nope. My real name's not even bruce. But I have worked with both the NDP and the Greens.

>Support an unpopular Liberal policy, the carbon tax, and oppose a popular one, expanding the highway and freeway system.

Because those are the policy positions that will make sense for people a generation from now. Whether or not your average SUV owner commuting in from his house an hour out in the burbs agrees is irrelevant to whether it's the right policy. We live in a democracy because it's the least worst system, not because polls are a good way to govern.

If you see the most glaringly basic enviro viewpoint as some kind of conspiracy, you're really out of touch with urban planning & climate change as issues.

The fact is that the NDP can only just barely win in this province. That means they need the tent to be as large as possible. Instead, they're more comfortable alienating urban enviros.

Maybe I'm just bitter because as a tech worker, your hero glen clark completely removed all my labour code protections. Well, except for the requirement that we be allowed 36 hours in a 7 day period to sleep. Combine that with the way EI manages to only be available for your "real working BC man", and the 3rd rate treatment of enviro issues...not good.

Why should I trust you? After all, we weren't going to vote for the NDP, right? The trouble is the NDP core are so often wrong about that. You *decided* to alienate many of us, by going to hard after what you imagine to be your base. It didn't have to happen.

..and yes I know EI is

..and yes I know EI is federal policy. There's a whole mentality though, which the NDP in BC fully supports: two classes of people, rich developers and the "working man" or "working woman". The party's attitudes to the rest are at worst sneering and at best - well, Mr Blackberry's mostly came across as annoying and clueless...

More cafe latte than anything

Because those are the policy positions that will make sense for people a generation from now. Whether or not your average SUV owner commuting in from his house an hour out in the burbs agrees is irrelevant to whether it's the right policy.

I think this pitch is much more cafe-latte, urban-poseur, political fashion statement than environmentalism or sensible urban planning. Are you seriously trying to tell me that they're aren't wealthy people living in the $600 and up per square foot condos in Yaletown and Coal Harbour who don't have cars that burn at least as much gas as any pickup or sport utility? What kind of fuel economy do you think a high powered Benz or Beemer gets?

As for changes to the BC Employment Standards Act, I do recall them, and I agree they were a problem, or at least could be a problem. But the industry demanded them, and there were no employee organizations to speak up to the contrary.

>I think this pitch is much

>I think this pitch is much more cafe-latte, urban-poseur, political fashion statement...

There we go, look we can both stereotype! A large number of people really do, not posing, make choices about where and how they live so they don't need to own 2 cars per family or commute 3 hours a day. It just means trading car payments and gas $ for higher rent. Your attitude seems to say that by virtue of making that choice, their opinions are not realistic or valid. Yet by their - our - choices, we have proven the choice is valid!

The *average* gap in per-capita emmissions between people living in apartments/condos or traditional-density neighbourhoods (such as Victoria's core) is huge. It really does make more of a difference than any other single thing.

>But the industry demanded them, and there were no employee organizations to speak up to the contrary.

But the *NDP* did it, the NDP!!!! Can you imagine them stripping the labour code protection off any other non-unionized group of workers?

The *average* gap... [vs new

The *average* gap... [vs new suburbs]

Bruce

"Because those are the policy positions that will make sense for people a generation from now."

That's your hope and that's fine but it hasn't worked yet and won't work in the future because the carbon tax is in essence a license to pollute. Nothing more.

"If you see the most glaringly basic enviro viewpoint as some kind of conspiracy..."

Actually, when I see the carbon tax taking priority over offshore drilling, forests, rivers, grizzlies etc I do.

"The fact is that the NDP can only just barely win in this province. That means they need the tent to be as large as possible."

The NDP is already too big a tent. Like the federal Liberals any leader is sure to alienate some within the party because the people at one end of the party don't have a lot in common with those at the other end. The provincial "Reform Party" under Campbell on the other hand doesn't have this problem. They can be much more ideological because their base is big enough to win no matter what the NDP does.

"Instead, they're more comfortable alienating urban enviros."

I think you mean that instead we try to keep the base happy rather than try to appeal to a small segment of the population that would find a reason to turn their back on us regardless of how much we bend over to try to please them.

"Why should I trust you? After all, we weren't going to vote for the NDP, right? The trouble is the NDP core are so often wrong about that."

No, we're not. Polls show that James was not ahead of Campbell in the polls before her stance on the carbon tax anyway.

"You *decided* to alienate many of us, by going to hard after what you imagine to be your base. It didn't have to happen"

I think it did, the NDP will win more seats without the pro-carbon tax vote than it would have with because those people already have a party to vote for, the Liberals and therefore wouldn't have voted NDP.

What I don't understand, BRUCE

Is this:

You argue against voting for the NDP for what seem to you to be valid reasons; I think those reasons are bogus given the nature of the Campbell Tax you're at such pains to defend, but, leaving that aside for a moment, you also write this:

I agree completely about the BC Liberals. They're the partly of developers and corrupt landlords. (poster- Bruce)

Seems to me, since there are only two parties with a chance to form government in this election and under the current rules that YOU have a bit of a dilemma on your hands.

Vote for a corrupt BC Liberal Government or an NDP one with a new leader who says her government will take a new approach to, among other things: poverty, homelessness, transit, power generation, the forest industry, education, jobs and affordable housing, and corruption....oh and by the way, she's agreed to get rid of a tax you yourself admit is useless as a method of addressing GHG. Useless because of the inelastic demand curve for gasoline and useless because it spins money rather than spending it on green and non-polluting undertakings…all of which you’ve acknowledged.

I just don't see the problem. If you want to close your eyes and put the x beside Gordon Campbell you're free to do so - but don't pretend it is either sensible, logical or in keeping with your own philosophy of good government.

If the NDP doesn't win this election, it won't be because they didn't have a program to address the current malaise, it'll be because a lot of voters who ought to know better have made a decision ever they don't really believe in.

I think you need to ask yourself why. Because your attitude seems schizophrenic to me – and I say that with no disrespect or anger.

James shoots NDP in foot

"Axe the tax" is worse than the usual unprincipled opportunism we expect from politicians: it has alienated many voters who are otherwise sympathetic to the NDP. A truly stupid move by Carole James and her advisers; far better would have been a pledge to keep the tax and restructure it. After the Campbell win on May 12, there will still be something to cheer about in the unlikely event that STV passes. But more probable is a Campbell victory combined with another defeat for STV, thus killing proportional representation of any kind for a generation. It seems to me it will then be imperative to bang the heads of the Greens and New Democrats into a merger: the Green Democrats. But this would require that the NDP reinvent itself as a party of principle. Fat chance?

carbon technofix

Why wait for silly season: Nobel scientists funded by the Freezer Institute have just discovered that combining CO2 with shredded legal paper and pink slips under extreme political pressure and low voltage produces a form of crude protein that can be fed to farmed Atlantic salmon.

Our worries are over folks!

The Zeroids are out of a job flying all over the planet attending climate conferences, the festering fish farms can be relocated to the parking lots in back of the Legislature, the pinheads can go back to driving their monster SUV's over a double-wide Port Mann without any guilt tax, and our magnificent coastal fiords don't need to be trussed up in transmission bondage rituals by the heartless sadists at General Electric.

Oh happy day....!

My opinion

IMO, those who purport to be Greenies but who say they will vote for Campbell anyway are obvious poseurs looking to split the vote.

There is NO other way of regarding them, except as phonies.

What's worse than unprincipled opportunism? Losing votes!

mijnheer
"Axe the tax" is worse than the usual unprincipled opportunism we expect from politicians: it has alienated many voters who are otherwise sympathetic to the NDP.

So there you have it folks. The one thing in politics that's worse than unprincipled opportunism is losing votes.

My conclusion? mijnheer works in the same bureau as Luke S.

mijnheer

"It seems to me it will then be imperative to bang the heads of the Greens and New Democrats into a merger: the Green Democrats. But this would require that the NDP reinvent itself as a party of principle. Fat chance?"

A party of principle? We already are, even when it means we lose because we don't jump on the latest bandwagon. Other parties should be as principled.

There is no chance I'm going to abandon the principles of Tommy Douglas and embrace those of Tzeporah Berman instead.

Douglas was voted "Greatest Canadian", Berman will be remembered as another "Patrick Moore", a corporate shill.

I consider myself an enviro and I'm more than comfy in the NDP. If the Greens need a dance partner to beat up on the disadvantaged in the name of ideology then they can merge with the Liberals.

Four more years

To give Suzuki and friends more credit that they probably deserve, perhaps they really are acting out of a SOMETHING ANYTHING! panic, and are trying to strongarm the NDP into a different position. However I would expect that they would have far more political acumen than to make that attempt during an election, so I have to assume they mean to do all they can to defeat the NDP, either because they think they can force the Liberals to make the tax actually work, or for some of the more nefarious reasons that have been suggested by others.
I know a Suzuki follower who has actually decided to vote Liberal because of his position, because "nothing is more important than climate change".
Today in the Island Tides, Christa has pointed out that almost all of the provinces are ready to sign a deal that will impose TILMA-like enforcement on the AIT. For those who know how trade deals are tied to everything from the environment to food security and democratic rights, this is the most frightening information that has come out during the whole election.
When supposed allies lose sight of a picture this big, despair becomes one's biggest enemy. I intend to battle mine by sending a note of congratulations to Suzuki and friends on every approriate ocassion should the Liberals get a third term.

4gen8

"I intend to battle mine by sending a note of congratulations to Suzuki and friends on every approriate ocassion should the Liberals get a third term."

We had the same idea, I'm going to spend the next 4 years on here congratulating anti-NDP enviros.

Cold comfort

Here Here. Although I don't write off this election yet. But a good strategy should the worst transpire. We can arrange weekly letter-writing campaigns!

Hmmmmmm......

Berman's email:

"I just spoke with the Minister who said that given our concerns that we have been raising etc they have committed... to creating a new green energy advisory task force..."

Golly gee, I wonder who's going to be on that board?