How I 'Demonized' David Suzuki
And the screaming-mad results.
Fighting words.
Arrogance diminishes wisdom.
-Arabian proverb
Last week, I discovered that the nature of things can be extremely unpleasant when you challenge the wisdom of the arrogant.
I was attending a reception when suddenly the host of CBC TV's The Nature Of Things was in my face.
"I want to talk to you!" a red-faced and agitated David Suzuki said, finger pointing at my chest.
"You have no right to demonize me!" he yelled, causing people around us to back away.
How did I manage to "demonize" the internationally known celebrity scientist?
Pen is mightier than the sword
Apparently it's not that hard. All I did was write a column in 24 hours and online at The Tyee on April 22 saying that Suzuki, Tzeporah Berman and other environmentalists had launched a "well timed attack" on the New Democratic Party over its opposition to the BC Liberal carbon tax as the provincial election began.
Here's what Suzuki said, April 17: "If [B.C. Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell] goes down because of axe the tax, the repercussions are the carbon tax will be toxic for future politicians. No politician will raise it. That's why environmentalists are so upset."
I wrote: "Neither Suzuki nor Berman have yet endorsed Campbell outright but they knew their assault would hurt the NDP and help the BC Liberals."
Scientific assault
Hardly rocket science, but perhaps Suzuki was more upset that I quoted Alexandra Morton, the respected biologist who is fighting BC Liberal expansion of fish farms that destroy wild salmon with sea lice.
"As the living systems of this part of the world are under the final assault by the BC Liberal government, you make headlines. You seem to have no idea of what Gordon Campbell is bringing down on us," Morton wrote to Suzuki and others in an open letter.
Morton's first angry response to Suzuki was followed by another less-publicized but equally strong criticism.
"What concerns me is the larger enviro groups have become an unelected bureaucracy that consults no one," Morton wrote. "Both the recent Great Bear Rainforest announcement and the incredibly stupid headline threatening to Punish Carole James are two points on a continuum which seem aptly explained below."
'Do or die'
"Clearly everyone has figured out this election is do or die for our province and while we can create change, we can't do it if the environmental bureaucracy supports Gordon Campbell. You guys have made our job nearly impossible," she said.
"The folks doing this no doubt think this is the way to save earth, but unless they are blind they know others have already thrown their weight in the opposite direction. And so this tack of greening Gordon Campbell is going to produce a standstill. You folks who are supporting Campbell have not factored in the power that the rest of us have and that will negate your own results," Morton wrote.
"Salmon farms in B.C. are a thing of the past, as they do not even own their fish now, but they are sitting pretty under a green umbrella and weathering this storm in comfort and with Campbell elected they will metastasize and don't think for a second that the wild salmon can take this forever," Morton concluded.
In my own column, I also argued that Suzuki and others were assisting a BC Liberal government that: "Promotes offshore oil and gas drilling, privatized rivers and streams for power projects, slashed wildlife protection, ended a ban on trophy hunting for grizzly bears and offers hundreds of millions in tax incentives for fossil fuel exploration."
Green allies
But Suzuki didn't see it that way, obviously. "I've always been an ally of the NDP!" Suzuki claimed.
"No you haven't," I replied, noting his endorsement of Campbell's unfair gas tax and several other facts.
Certainly if Suzuki has been an "ally" of the B.C. NDP, there's no sign of it through personal financial contributions -- none were made in Suzuki's name in the 2005 election year.
Nor in this election did Suzuki endorse the NDP's Mel Lehan, a well-known environmental supporter who challenged Premier Gordon Campbell in his own riding.
And as I reminded Suzuki, back in 1996 he played word games when Jim Green, the former city councillor, ran against Campbell in Vancouver-Point Grey, saying only that he would be "voting Green" in the election, an obvious sop to the Green Party.
It's 'mutual'
After more of Suzuki yelling and me responding calmly but pointedly, he tried to put me in my place.
"I don't give a shit about you..." Suzuki almost screamed.
"Then that's completely mutual," I interrupted before the great man could say more.
Suzuki spluttered, threw up his hands and rushed away, leaving the event immediately.
Ironically, the reception was for a book about conducting good public relations -- something Suzuki clearly has yet to learn.
Related Tyee stories
- Furious Rebuke to Suzuki, Berman
Salmon advocate Alexandra Morton enraged at support for BC Libs. - World's Fudged Budget Capital
That's B.C., thanks to Campbell's flagrantly false forecasts during election. - Fight for Our Fish!
Now is the critical time to rise to the defence of salmon habitat.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
G West
09-06-2009
No kidding!
"I don't give a shit about you..." Suzuki almost screamed.
Wonderful repartee, stunning logic, marvellous way to make friends and influence people.
Why is it that nominally intelligent people behave badly and subvert their own message so frequently?
Still, with those attitudes, he really DOES belong in the Campbell tent.
Frank
09-06-2009
Suzuki
I always liked Suzuki. But when the rubber hit the road he sided with the Liberals against the NDP and re-elected Campbell.
Well, you can't have it both ways, you're either in the tent or you're not. Suzuki made his choice and I wish him and Berman the best of luck with their corporate allies.
I'll continue to make automatic monthly donations to the WCWC instead.
Grumpy
09-06-2009
David Suzuki.............
....... is well past his "best before date" and is beginning to stink.
His support for the corporate Campbell is nothing more than protecting his organization's 'revenue stream'.
David, your done ...... time to call it quits, no one is listening to you anymore.
Sylphid
09-06-2009
Demonization
Mr. Tieleman, you have your own demons to answer for. The right wing of this province only slightly outnumbers the left, yet due to our voting system they get 100% of all political power, and will for the foreseeable future.
We had a chance to try something better, but due in part to your relentless attacks the referendum on STV was defeated. You, sir, have guaranteed the Liberals all the power in this province for as long as they care to keep it.
Had STV passed, future governments would have likely contained more then enough MLAs from across various parties (NDP/Green) to bring in stronger green legislation.
Luke Skywalker
09-06-2009
With Friends Like These...
Speaking about "well-timed attacks"... The big eye-openers were both Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson and former NDP Premier Mike Harcourt also coming out in support of the carbon tax.
.... And Harcourt's public support was just days before the May 12 election.
With friends like these... who needs enemies? ;)
verso
09-06-2009
...
I used to have a lot of respect for Suzuki and was willing to overlook his meddling during the last election (after my initial disappointment). Upon reading this, however, my estimation of the man has dropped considerably. He seems to believe he is beyond reproach.
Rod Smelser
09-06-2009
A lot of this started at the Federal level
I personally have good reason to believe that a lot of David Suzuki's close relationship to the Liberals actually began at the Federal level, and was then bumped down to the Provincial scene.
To make a long story short, when the Harper Conservatives brought in their Clean Air Act, Jack Layton and Nathan Cullen decided to work for amendments rather than bringing down the government, and forcing an early election. Suzuki was furious, principally because Layton decided on this strategy without clearing it with Suzuki first!
Suzuki supported Elizabeth May for the leadership of the national Green Party on the understanding that she would simply be a stalking horse for the Liberals, as she was.
Provincially it was an easy move to extend the Liberal linkup to Campbell, many of whose principal operatives are the same people as toil for the LPC in BC. In addition, Campbell appeared likely to win in any event because of either a strong economy or a recession (nice story in itself, there!) and because the media and the opinion-makers were all onside as usual, and because of all the Olympics/Best Place on Earth hype. So, why not get on a winning team and gain some patron, ... er, ... I mean, ... {heh, heh} ... ah, .... access to policy making! You know, like environmental policy!
NicS
09-06-2009
Congratulations to you all
for having made Suzuki's intended or otherwise support of Gordon Campbell such an issue that David has blown another gasket. I know numerous 'former' contributors to Suzuki's organizations who have sent letters requesting that they no longer be solicited by him.
Word on the street is that there is now an internal split in DSF around these issues.
Lets see, one down and two to go. Berman and Pembina may prove to be more difficult.
gaulois
09-06-2009
Making mistakes
Allright Suzuki was more on the ball in the past and times has obviously worn down his good mind.
Dear Mr. Tieleman: your work on the BC Rail scam has been similarly outstanding to Suzuki's earlier work. Now should a loudmouth (or pen) soil it 'cause you have messed it big times IMO on your position on STV? There is this thing called "respect" ... even when someone makes a big mistake!
Did not the NDP deserve the beating that they took on the basis of this environment issue that they totally messed up too???
Grumpy
09-06-2009
NiCS...........
....... the same rumors about financial starvation has also hit Grumpy's ears. It seems that not everyone has been taken in by the carbon/gas tax scam and some previous 'big donors' have walked.
I do know of one group who is benefiting from 'donation change' and they need it.
For too long 'fat cat' environmental organizations have been siphoning huge sums of money and doing little with it.
Let's hope D.S. rows off into a carbon/gas tax sunset!
blackie
09-06-2009
This is funny
David Suzuki and his environmental colleagues have had long careers demonizing those who disagree with them, and they've largely escaped intact because no one in the media ever applied any rigorous analysis to their principles and beliefs.
Now there's a schizm, and the demonizing has become internal -- and they can't take it. This is what happens when the extremists mellow, and decide that maybe the other guys aren't completely out to lunch after all. Their friends turn on them, and its vicious. Suzuki sees himself as an environmental god; how dare Tielmann say anything bad about him!
What a great soap opera.
ME2
09-06-2009
"Whom the Gods would destroy, they first give power"
I think Suzuki is more to be pitied for being human than rebuked for being arrogant.
IMO, Suzuki has fallen prey to the Messianic Complex in which upon gaining power, one attracts to onesself an army of sychophants who for one reason or another, offer constant praise and hang upon one's every word.
In such a milieu it becomes very difficult to follow a true path, to sort out which advice is truly impartial and which isn't, for NO-ONE can do without trustable advice and constructive criticism.
Suzuki has lost his way, and that is a pity, for he is truly a sincere man.
touchwood
09-06-2009
suzuki should sue DSF for ruining his image
It is clear the two aspects of David Suzuki the capricious professor and the corporate funded enviro-ish PR initiative are operating without a full corpus callosum between them. The organization owns and uses Suzuki's identity to promote corporate exploitation and David, just like Doctor Jeckyl, is cluelessly waking up with a hangover and egg on his face. The Suzuki organization's shameless PR championing of development for 1,000 BC watersheds to greedwash a tiny amount of California's humungous escalating electricity diet is simply insulting to our long standing taboo against alluvial zone exploitation and profit oriented export power development. These developments add a huge risk to our climate distressed and faltering BC ecosystems. Suzuki's enormous personal credibility was liquidated simply to promote a corporate account and swing the election for the IPP's who have bought a lease on Campbell's liquidation team for the next four years. Suzuki pretends he doesn't know what was done in his name and he is going to have to really practice his cranky absent minded geezer schtick if he hopes to convince anyone that he hasn't finally sold out our environment.
Amor de Cosmos
09-06-2009
Suzuki is a British Columbian Hero
Suzuki is a British Columbian hero. The folly in Tielman's (and the NDP's) position is summed up in the following passage:
"I've always been an ally of the NDP!" Suzuki claimed. "No you haven't," I replied, noting his endorsement of Campbell's unfair gas tax and several other facts."
That position essentially implies that you can't be an NDP supporter and support a universal price on carbon.
I really believe that British Columbians are just dying for an entirely new kind of politics in this province. Screw Canwest. The James leadership deserved to pay a political price for choosing an ill-considered and entirely political "axe the tax" campaign even though it split the progressive movement and made a universal price on carbon toxic.
All politics aside, my point is that Suzuk's is a British Columbian treasure (though he has his faults I'm sure); and the NDP should not be in the business of making him look bad for cheap political points. I particularly thank Suzuki for his role in protecting South Morseby Island and Gwaii Hanaas, Valhalla Park, the Carmanah and Walbran Valleys, the mighty Kitlope, the Stein Valley, the Stikine, the Khutzameteen, the mighty Tatshenshini, Goat Range, the Upper Granby, and many others that I'm not even aware of.
ReeferMadness
09-06-2009
What a cheap attack
Is Bill Tieleman campaigning for the role of NDP Attack Dog in Chief? What other explanation is possible for this piece of drivel? It's clearly intended to embarrass and discredit Dr. Suzuki. Whatever Suzuki did or didn't say (and we only have Tieleman's word for what happened), who is served by this?
I know that for many supporters, the NDP is more akin to a religion than a political party. I've found that even the mildest criticism can bring a wave of flame responses.
You all need to understand that Suzuki is a scientist, not a politician. He speaks the truth as he sees it, not as it best fits a political campaign. He believes that a carbon tax is a core component of any serious plan to fight climate change. He thought that if the NDP were successful with their "axe the tax" campaign, it would deter other politicians in other jurisdictions. Did he hurt the NDP? Perhaps, but I don't believe that was his intention.
If you want to blame someone, blame Carole James and her team for playing cheap politics with the environment.
Finally, maybe a few of you might dig up some substantiation for your comments like:
"PR championing of development for 1,000 BC watersheds"
"Suzuki has fallen prey to the Messianic Complex"
"His support for the corporate Campbell"
George Bush popularized polarization politics with statements such as "you're for us or against us" but I find that nobody lives it quite like NDP supporters.
peasant43
09-06-2009
Corparate Bill creating conflict
More Corporate Bill and his sensationalism. Always a good guy and a bad guy in his stories. Surely sweeter too when he's the good guy. Nice and simple for the ignorant masses he cares so much for. My God he's saved us from STV and Suzuki in a month.
"When men who are indifferent to you affect a more than ordinary interest for your regard, you should be cautious..."
Erasumus
Grumpy
09-06-2009
The folly of the carbon/gas tax
When will the 'great unwashed' understand they have been duped by the master of deception. THE CARBON TAX IS A GAS TAX!
If you truly want to reduce carbon emissions and pollution, one must provide an alternative to the car. Gordo hasn't, in fact he is doing the opposite, he is building more highways to increase road capacity which will increase pollution and carbon emissions!
Suzuki and Berman have been duped, the gullible media has been duped, and most people who support the carbon/gas tax has been duped.
There is no and I repeat no effort in reducing car use. The $6 billion SkyTrain, has at best taken 6,000 cars off the road - peanuts as Portland's much cheaper LRT system has taken at least 30,000 cars off the road!
Gordo's pet RAV/Canada line project may force more cars onto the roads than take off!
David Suzuki is a higher purpose person who has got it wrong and refused to admit he has got it wrong.
G West
09-06-2009
The NDP can't make Suzuki 'look' bad
He's done THAT to himself, in spades.
Please, Amor, tell us why the Campbell Tax is a good idea.
And don't forget to mention that the current research in economics indicates that, to be effective, the Campbell Tax would have to be, at minimum, about one dollar per litre.
Demand for gasoline is inelastic at normal prices - just as it was for tobacco.
And remember, all those sin taxes on cigarettes didn't affect consumption much for a generation...after which most of the heavy smokers were dead.
If we're going to save the planet, a 'revenue neutral' phony Campbell tax will never cut it - no matter what you hear from your favourite GENETICIST.
buccaneer bay
09-06-2009
Up yours Suzuki!
Perhaps Suzuki is upset over fishfarms?......
Here there is an experimental closed containment fish farm trial happening........
And Alexdra Morton and others are keeping a close eye on..............
And what does the second biggest loser in the Campbell goverment have to say (Ron Cantelon minister of aquaculture)about the closed containment experiment.....
" We don`t even know of any identifiable problems with salmon farms"
Read it here......
http://www2.canada.com/courierisland/news/story.html?id=c23f-44d3-891e-84dc4e91abt2
Rod Smelser
09-06-2009
A few Reefers too many!
ReeferMadness
You all need to understand that Suzuki is a scientist, not a politician. He speaks the truth as he sees it, not as it best fits a political campaign.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Reefer, I think you're consuming too much of the product! David Suzuki has not worked as a scientist for years. He's a broadcaster. As for being non-political, that's a stretch. It's like saying the Fraser Institute doesn't play the game of politics. Advocacy is what his Foundation does, that's why its donors fund it to the tune of six million a year.
And like any political leader, David Suzuki has a duty to represent his donors. His claim to be getting all his input from "science" is a claim made for public consumption. It's funny to see his sycophants lapping up the media lines when these same people would have no trouble dismissing similar claims from political parties.
Rod Smelser
09-06-2009
Which Govt protected these areas?
I particularly thank Suzuki for his role in protecting South Morseby Island and Gwaii Hanaas, Valhalla Park, the Carmanah and Walbran Valleys, the mighty Kitlope, the Stein Valley, the Stikine, the Khutzameteen, the mighty Tatshenshini, Goat Range, the Upper Granby, and many others that I'm not even aware of.
I assume these areas are now either parks or other protected areas. Which Govt placed these areas under public stewardship?
Luke Skywalker
09-06-2009
No Kidding...
reefermadness:
And to think that the BC NDP, at their own 2007 convention, APPROVED of the same carbon tax. Nutty!!!!
No kidding "reefer"... the NDP turns on, as well as devours, ther own. More nuttiness!!!!
First they will go after Suzuki... then Berman.... then Robertson... then Harcourt!!!!
I can't help but think that the script here has certain bizarre similarities to that of German Protestant Martin Niemöller during the 1930's:
1. First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Socialist.
2. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Trade Unionist.
3. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.
4. Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.
Methinks that Tieleman shouldn't write an article about his silly interface with Suzuki.
Most respectable folk would keep such personal dialogue to themselves unless there is an ulterior motive. ;)
The knives are out and the NDP blood-letting has just begun.
Stay tuned folks!!
nechakogal
09-06-2009
Dissing Suzuki
I wasn't going to comment, but I can't help myself. So, let me get this straight, Suzuki wasn't allowed to express his opinions because it might hurt the NDP? So I, and my fellow citizens, would have supported the NDP and voted for them if Suzuki hadn't given his opinion of their stance on the carbon tax?
Get a life Teileman. Only a spin doctor would try to spin this one. And why is it spin doctors are so certain none of us can think for ourselves? Well, I've got one for you!
I hereby charge that Tieleman and his ilk are determined to weaken democracy by keeping a two party, first past the post system in place. Declining voter turnout is my evidence! Take that and smoke it in Cuba!
VivianLea Doubt
09-06-2009
and right back at a cheap attack...
ReeferMadness, you want "substantiation" for comments here, yet you declare this:
"What other explanation is possible for this piece of drivel? It's clearly intended to embarrass and discredit Dr. Suzuki."
I have no need to defend Tieleman - he'll do that himself. Why don't y'all ask him why he wrote this?
However, I would say that Suzuki's actions speak for themselves, regardless of what Mr. T writes.
Frank
09-06-2009
midnightsimon, Amor de Cosmos and Reefer
Thanks for re-electing Campbell. I hope you don't mind if I bring this up the first time I hear any of you complain about our current gov't.
Frank
09-06-2009
Luke
I know its a fantasy of mine but I'll say it anyway, get your facts straight for once.
The NDP didn't "go after" any of your "victims". They went after the NDP so from now we'll treat them like we do you.
And that includes Reefer, Amor and midnight.
Luke Skywalker
09-06-2009
Frank...
Let's start with the BC NDP principle at the 2007 convention whereby they APPROVED a BC carbon tax. YES the same one!!!
Ya know... the same carbon tax supported by Suzuki, Berman, Robertson, and Harcourt, among others????
Teileman led the way with his "Axe the Tax" campaign last year, thinking it was good BC NDP "politics". Let's increase our support in the polls kinda stuff.
Ya know, let's grab power and forget about our principles.
And the BC NDP brains trust thought "Hey, that's a great idea... let's jump on board the band-wagon"! Forget about what the delegates at the BC NDP convention approved.
That's what Tieleman does for a livin'... "communications strategist".
BC NDP principles be damned. But whatever. ;)
Lottsa more examples like that.
ReeferMadness
09-06-2009
Understand first and then criticize
Not everyone who is against the NDP is for the Liberals. And not everyone who criticizes certain NDP policies is against the NDP. There are people that don't see politics as a "my party - right or wrong" team sport.
I have never seen Suzuki or the DSF say anything to endorse the Liberals or their policies. WRT the carbon tax, he simply criticized the NDP for playing politics with environmental issues. If any of you have any actual quotes from Suzuki or the DSF supporting the Liberals or their policies, let's hear them.
This anti-environmentalist sentiment that Tieleman is whipping up will ultimately hurt the NDP.
G West - no matter what Suzuki said, Bill isn't making himself look good by writing this. Bill isn't responsible for what Suzuki does but he is responsible for what he writes. And what it says about him isn't nice.
Wilfred Laurier
09-06-2009
Good Work, Bill
Bill Tieleman=NDP and everybody knows it. Suzuki is an icon of the enviro movement. Doing a piece like this is a really good way to get greenies to vote NDP, isn't it, Bill?
This will really improve your already slim chance of forming a government, won't it Bill? Brilliant politics, Bill!
God, for a guy who thinks he is so smart, this article was pretty dumb, wasn't it Bill?
Frank
09-06-2009
ReeferMadness
"Not everyone who is against the NDP is for the Liberals."
If that's the case and you're not a supporter of either the Libs or the NDP then why complain about the NDP on here? In other words, what's it to you what the NDP does?
"I have never seen Suzuki or the DSF say anything to endorse the Liberals or their policies."
Oh please, in front of the media he criticized the NDP for not supporting a Campbell policy. That's a pretty clear public statement. If he felt he was quoted inaccurately then why did he not go after CanWest or CKNW and instead went after Bill T?
"WRT the carbon tax, he simply criticized the NDP for playing politics with environmental issues."
The last time I checked environmental issues are political.
G West
09-06-2009
I disagree reefer
Bill is a journalist - of course he's going to report this - people have a right to know their idols have feet of clay.
As for the foundation, I guess you don't know Jim Hoggan.
Check him out.
Luke Skywalker
09-06-2009
Frank...
That was also an NDP policy endorsed by delegates at the 2007 NDP convention. Or do ya have a failing memory? :D
Forget about Suzuki for a moment.
I still haven't heard ya stab Harcourt in the back yet for signing a letter in the media, just days before the election, endorsing the same carbon tax.
Harcourt criticizing the NDP along the same lines as Suzuki.
What's up with that?
Amor de Cosmos
09-06-2009
Moving forward...
I, too, am disappointed with all the apparent misunderstanding.
What's wrong with saying that there is and was no need to attack Dr. Suzuki? It's not an endorsement of the particular structure of Campbell's carbon tax nor of his government. It's a criticism of the NDPs priorities and principles in pushing "axe the tax" at the top of their literature and for attacking, even personally, anyone who spoke out in support of a price on carbon. That included Suzuki, Harcourt, Robertson, and a lot of average Joes like me. We get the politics - they just don't make any sense.
Talk about child poverty. Yes, the NDP should have been talking more about child poverty. I see Linda Reid floated into another term.
But what's wrong with encouraging a more principled and participatory NDP? What's wrong with encouraging a more positive NDP? What's wrong with encouraging a more forward-looking, honest, and progressive NDP? There are, after all, some good MLAs and a few fresh faces.
Again, is it really true that one cannot be a New Democrat and support a price on carbon at the same time? Isn't that the gig Mr. Tielman is pushing here, along with divisive personal attacks? Is the line drawn that sharp? Are the politics worth it? Are they necessary, helpful, inclusive, or even remotely progressive?
A lot of people are disengaged from politics for a reason. The NDP needs to widen its tent.
New Democrats at this point should be looking forwards and not backwards in order to attract more candidates and members. Pissing on David Suzuki, however, is neither a pragmatic nor principled place to start.
Chris H
09-06-2009
Campbell used Suzuki brilliantly
Campbell travelled around the province quoting Suzuki`s endorsement of his Carbon Tax as proof that the Liberals were now environmentally friendly. The BC Liberals used The Suzuki Foundation to help win the election ... period. By allowing that to happen, the Suzuki Foundation was giving their implicit endorsement.
The difference between Bill and David Suzuki is that Bill has always been against STV. He has never been silent on that. For whatever reason, David Suzuki was silent on the negative environmental practices of the Liberals for the past eight years. I pick Bill as the principled one here.
Frank
09-06-2009
Amor
First, if Bill's record of events is correct, Suzuki came at him, not vice versa. Also, Bill T nor Carole James held a press conference to denounce David Suzuki's position on anything. Mr Suzuki on the other felt no compunction about doing so to the NDP. Fact is, he pushed the NDP and was obviously surprised to have them push back.
"The NDP needs to widen its tent."
How is adopting the policies of the other two parties "widening the tent"? What's wrong with giving voters an actual choice instead of the same policies but different leaders?
Besides, the election results don't show a decline in NDP support relative to the other parties. Much as some fervently wish they did.
"But what's wrong with encouraging a more principled and participatory NDP? What's wrong with encouraging a more positive NDP? What's wrong with encouraging a more forward-looking, honest, and progressive NDP?"
Because apparently the above is only satisfied if the NDP support a carbon tax. As if the party can't be "principled" or "positive" etc if it doesn't support the Campbell carbon tax.
"and for attacking, even personally, anyone who spoke out in support of a price on carbon. "
Who did the NDP attack that didn't attack the NDP?
wayfarer
09-06-2009
Context is important
I want to highlight a point made by Amor de Cosmos, because I think it's a key point:
"I've always been an ally of the NDP!" Suzuki claimed. "No you haven't," I replied, noting his endorsement of Campbell's unfair gas tax and several other facts."
That position essentially implies that you can't be an NDP supporter and support a universal price on carbon.
So very true. This is the going vintage of NDP post-election sour grapes, and it sounds familar, don't it? GW Bush's - "You're with us, or against us." You support the carbon tax, you're an enemy of the NDP and a Campbell supporter.
Consider the context of Bill's not so intrepid piece of journalism above. It is based on a private, albeit emotionally charged, one-on-one exchange at a social gathering, of which we only have Bill's excerpts. I'll grant Bill the benefit of doubt and believe every word and accounting of the exchange to be true. Regardless, this smacks of a miserable bit of gossip, grudge-based reporting. I wonder how many times Bill has lost his cool in the privacy of a social gathering, or in the context of a one-on-one private exchange? I can only imagine the types of niceties Tieleman is capable of. And you know what? I should not be privy to those sorts of private communiques - such information is none of my business as a reader of newspapers. It's a private conversation, never intended for public consumption. Does Bill have the right to expose Suzuki's outburst? Hell ya, as long as it's not libelous. But is it ethically sound journalism to expose such quips, using them to craft a column that has all the markings of vengeance and ridicule of author's opponent. I think not.
This is a dirty, unprofessional bit of journalism and I'm sad to see it on an otherwise fantastic online magazine.
Let's not forget who we are dissing here. A provincial, and national icon:
Suzuki is the recipient of Canada’s most prestigious award, the Order of Canada Officer (1976) upgraded to Companion status in (2006), the Order of British Columbia (1995), UNESCO’s Kalinga Prize for science (1986) and a long list of Canadian and international honours.
In 2004, Suzuki was nominated as one of the top ten "Greatest Canadians" by viewers of the CBC. In the final vote he finished fifth and therefore ranked as the greatest living Canadian. Suzuki said that his own vote was for Tommy Douglas who was the eventual winner. (ah, the irony, eh Bill?...)
In 2006, David Suzuki was the recipient of the Bradford Washburn Award presented at the Museum of Science in Boston, Massachusetts.
Not to mention the 22 honourary degrees Dr. Suzuki has been awarded for his work and dedication to science and the environment.
Yet, his position on the carbon tax suddenly makes him NDP enemy number #1!?
Who are you, Tieleman, but a noisy little flea biting at ankles of a giant, hoping to make a name for yourself in taking down a cultural hero to the proverbial mat.
Frank
09-06-2009
wayfarer
"You support the carbon tax, you're an enemy of the NDP and a Campbell supporter."
And if we don't the NDP is an "enemy of the environment" and a supporter of global warming.
It was the enviros that chose the "you're with us or against us" tact, we simply decided that if that's the dividing line then so be it. The NDP didn't ask to be attacked but I doubt it will lay down and die and allow itself to be taken over by people that have given up on the Green Party.
"Suzuki said that his own vote was for Tommy Douglas who was the eventual winner."
That is ironic considering Suzuki would have held a press conference endorsing Patterson unless Tommy agreed to raise the price of purple gas.
Rod Smelser
09-06-2009
wayfarer: Something's dirty alright
wayfarer
This is a dirty, unprofessional bit of journalism and I'm sad to see it on an otherwise fantastic online magazine.
False. There's nothing underhanded, dirty, or unprofessional about Tieleman's column whatsoever. You're making this up and you know it. If you want examples of dirty, unprofessional reporting, think how the media treated mathematician Julian West last fall, destroying his candidacy with a twelve year old story, embroidered by an extraordinarily questionable, obviously lawyered press release from two hardened Green party politicos.
Let's not forget who we are dissing here. A provincial, and national icon:
Suzuki is the recipient of Canada’s most prestigious award, the Order of Canada Officer (1976) upgraded to Companion status in (2006), the Order of British Columbia (1995), UNESCO’s Kalinga Prize for science (1986) and a long list of Canadian and international honours.
An icon, is he? Other DSF sycophants have tried to claim he's a practicing scientist, rather than a career broadcaster. I guess you're doing that bit of flim flam one better, eh?
When I looked at the DSF site today, I couldn't help but notice how it's dedicated to promoting and enhancing one man's reputation as much as to environmental issues. Perhaps you got this list of honours there, ... or perhaps you're one of the Foundation's very highly remunerated staff, ... or just one of its loyal, unpaid disciples out in the countryside, dutifully circulating the company line in exchange for ... what, exactly?
ReeferMadness
10-06-2009
Bill's a Journalist???
G West - spare me. Also, spare me the crap about Bill only wanting to inform the people. This is politics in its lowest form. It's despicable.
Bill is doing for the NDP now what he did for them as president of No STV. He's doing the dirty work so that Carole James and others who "officially" speak for the party don't have dirt on their hands.
Frank, Dr. Suzuki did not criticize "for not supporting a Campbell policy." He criticized them for not supporting a carbon tax. The NDP claimed to not like the carbon tax because it was unfair and ineffective. They could have proposed changes but instead they played cheap politics.
My advice to the NDP: If you like the results of this election, just keep on doing what you're doing.
Frank
10-06-2009
ReeferMadness
Did you frequent these forums during the election campaign? Or the CBC and CanWest ones?
The Liberals don't criticize their leader or his policies during the campaign. It doesn't matter if he's got a DUI, a BC Rail scandal before the courts, 6 years of highest child poverty etc. All of that is swept under the rug and not one negative thing is mentioned. It allows their party to focus on the enemy instead of spending their time fighting fires within their own ranks. And it works.
So-called NDP "supporters" on the other hand decided that during the campaign is a great time to attack the leader because of her gender policies, her stance on the carbon tax, her lack of business acumen etc.
In my opinion the NDP doesn't need people who think a campaign is the time to attack their own leader. In fact, I think the NDP would do better if those "supporters" would go support someone else. Because their attacks do more damage when they come from within the tent than they would from outside it.
"Frank, Dr. Suzuki did not criticize "for not supporting a Campbell policy." He criticized them for not supporting a carbon tax."
Its the same thing. The carbon tax wasn't handed down to BC by God, it is a Campbell policy.
"The NDP claimed to not like the carbon tax because it was unfair and ineffective. They could have proposed changes but instead they played cheap politics."
Its not the NDP's job to fix Liberal ideas. The onus is on those who dream it up to find the time to fix it and make it palatable to those of us who think its a bad idea.
Frank
10-06-2009
ReeferMadness
"My advice to the NDP: If you like the results of this election, just keep on doing what you're doing."
And my advice to enviros is if you liked the results of this election then keep attacking the NDP and supporting the Liberals.
I'm sure "super-natural BC" must be doing great under Campbell and you have 4 more years of great policy ideas to look forward to.
alive
10-06-2009
a legend in his own mind?
Just like Diefenbaker was, we now have a Suzuki who takes himself all too seriously!
The media loves to create heroes, and people suck it up.
In fact they are all merely people with faults and hang-ups.
If Tieleman and Suzuki need to exchange words, perhaps it is good for both of them to learn that they are not universally adored?
speedo
10-06-2009
this is news?
I'm trying to figure out why anyone should care about your internecine squabbling. Or why the Tyee would publish it. Or why I read it and am now commenting on it.
Sloooooooow news day.
MichaelT
10-06-2009
Gossip sells. And generates
Gossip sells. And generates much light and heat. So many comments...for so little.
Rob_
10-06-2009
I don't get why people can't
I don't get why people can't understand that someone might support a carbon tax but not support the liberal party.
I know many people who supported a carbon tax but still held their nose and voted NDP or voted Green. Don't know many who voted Liberal.
Unfortunately Bill Teilman and the NDP strategists made a huge mistake with their "ax the tax" campaign and now they are trying to pass the blame for their mistake.
As others have pointed out there are many problems with Campbell's Carbon Tax but the NDP should have had a "change the tax" campaign not an "ax the tax" campaign.
And for all those that continue to call this a "gas tax"....gasoline accounts for less than a quarter of fossil-fuel emissions subject to the carbon tax. More than 75 per cent of the carbon tax revenue will come from other fossil fuels, including coal, coke, diesel, and natural gas.
Frank
10-06-2009
Rob_
"I don't get why people can't understand that someone might support a carbon tax but not support the liberal party."
Attacking the NDP during the campaign over it IS supporting the liberal party.
"As others have pointed out there are many problems with Campbell's Carbon Tax but the NDP should have had a "change the tax" campaign not an "ax the tax" campaign."
Besides the fact the tax isn't the NDP's baby and they want nothing to do with it?
Well then, why didn't Suzuki and Berman use their press conferences to attack the Liberals and demand the tax be changed to something more palatable? Could it be because they're fine with the way it is?
politico
10-06-2009
Few actually get it
It amazes me what has gone on in BC in the last number of months.
A handful of self-appointed, celebrity enviro-ish leaders hi-jacked an entire movement and sold it out to forward the agenda of the most antithetical governance of the environment we have ever experienced.
Suzuki's outrage is a direct result of the blowback. People are pissed off, really pissed off at this hollyhocked enviro-ish self indulgent crowd.
The fact is that Gregor and his attack dogs (Horter, Berman, Dauncey and all the other wanna be Suzuki's) have been outed and the result is ugly and may even sideline Gregor's aspirations of being an NDP Premier as those inside the Party are extremely pissed off that these guys would so quickly turn on their own (even during an election)and they have lost all credibility.
Of course Robertson could easily move on and become a hood ornament for the Libs in a future attempt at the big chair but his chances with the NDP are, at least as a result of their behaviour in the last election, abysmal. However if actually does something worthy with the mayors office in the next couple years he could claw his way out of this deep dark green hole.
LeftRightLeft
10-06-2009
More Tieleman Nonsense
In total agreement with Reefer, Nechakogal, etc... Tieleman's only raison d'etre is to maintain the status quo in BC politics - i.e., to keep an exclusive cadre of ultra-partisan, cut-throat apparatchiks at the centre of the game by constantly playing personality politics, when more disciplined discussion of ideas would serve us all better.
Attacking someone with as prestigious a career and significant an impact as Suzuki in such a manner is disrespectful at best. I'd be upset if I were Suzuki as well... his organization's (and his personal) biggest single issues is climate change, and there was a completely incoherent approach to this by the NDP. I know dozens of researchers in the field who didn't vote NDP because of their climate change "policy." So what if Suzuki is a bit of a blowhard and control freak now...?!?!
Wouldn't it be refreshing, just once, for a political party - say the NDP in this case - to say "Yes, we actually agree with the government on the carbon tax, but we disagree with them on run-of-river, finfish aquaculture, etc..."
And guess what kind of political systems foster this kind of compromise and negotiation...? First past the post???? WRONG!!
Bill - you were wrong on STV, wrong on the carbon tax (stop saying "unfair gas tax" - the election is over and you lost) and now wrong on Suzuki, Berman, Jaccard, and others who know energy markets and climate change policy better than you. Get back to the thing that got you your day job: writing about actual public policy ideas for a better future.
freebear
10-06-2009
It is about Suzuki not Tielman!
STV (yes, Tielman sold out on this one) is another matter! Suzuki never commented on STV didn he?
The story is that David is feeling the effects/pressures of his endorsement of the SYMBOLIC (re: ineffective) Carbon Tax while not speaking out about other environmental issues important to citizens of BC.
Arguing politics (NDP vs. Libs; Us vs. Them) is a useless exercise; especially when the politicalm differences are still nested in the growth paradigm/mantra!
I await the coming 'shocks' to knock some sense into our collective heads!
freebear
10-06-2009
...political differences...
I meant to say!
rac
10-06-2009
Incompetence at its Worse
It was the NDP that made the mistake of making the Carbon Tax the focus of the campaign with their silly Axe the Tax message. It was really a dumb. They are just lucky that they were not sued by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation:). I could not vote for any party that would make such a stupid move. By their incompetence with this, they really did not seem ready to govern. Even worse, the bright spark operatives that came up with this would have become senior advisors in an NDP government.
The NDP really needs to clean house and get some competent people working for them or else the results will be the same the next election. We need a real alternative to the Libs and right now, the NDP are not it.
Frank
10-06-2009
From the NDP win in Nova Scotia...
"Thanks largely to the weakness of the Green party, the NDP has also been able to embrace such eco-unfriendly positions as cutting energy taxes while dismissing outright the environmentally popular idea of a carbon tax to cut consumption."
Rob_
10-06-2009
GWest
GWest wrote in response to me:
"More pity you then because the Campbell Tax is not a carbon tax"
Not sure what you mean here? Why is it not a carbon tax?
"I[sic] hasn't reduced GHG one single tonne in the 11+ months it has been in effect..."
Probably right.
Because the carbon tax is too low. Sweden has a carbon tax that is ten times as large as ours and their emissions have fallen.
The problem is not with the concept of a carbon tax. It is with the implementation of the tax.
The mistake the NDP made was asking to "axe the tax" instead of "raise the rate" and "provide alternatives."
- Suzuki and others have pointed out that the tax was not high enough.
- Suzuki and others have been quite critical of the provincial government not providing alternatives for fossil fuels (such as transit instead of highway building)
- Suzuki and others were quite critical of the Liberals other policies such as fish farms
Rod Smelser
10-06-2009
How will it look come early July?
rac
It was the NDP that made the mistake of making the Carbon Tax the focus of the campaign with their silly Axe the Tax message. It was really a dumb. ...
Obviously, the point rac is making is not about climate change or carbon pricing policies, but about electoral gamesmanship. BC politics, and to some degree Federal Liberal politics, is what this entire exercise has been about.
Just how "dumb" is opposition to this tax going to sound in a few weeks time when the tax rises just as summer driving season arrives and prices are going up? What will commercial press columnists like the Globe's Gary Mason be opining then?
Rod Smelser
10-06-2009
Rob_: Not True!
- Suzuki and others have been quite critical of the provincial government not providing alternatives for fossil fuels (such as transit instead of highway building)
- Suzuki and others were quite critical of the Liberals other policies such as fish farms
The DSF has carefully pulled its punchs on these issues, being always careful in press releases and public statements to state only their opposition to the particular project or industry, never to allow the commentary to extend to recommendations on which party to vote for or even so much as a reminder as to which party is responsible for these policies.
Grumpy
10-06-2009
Good old Canadian mind set.......
..... want to solve a problem? Tax the hell out of the poor but don't change a thing!
More and more I am beginning to think that most academics and bureaucrats are so incompetent that they can't get a job in the real world so universities and the massive federal/provincial/municipal bureaucracies are nothing more than welfare for the so called elites.
bun
10-06-2009
Suzuki has been like that all his life
Everyone, Dr. Suzuki has _always_ been like that, since well before he ever became famous. For things he is passionate about, he can lose it. Just ask around to anyone who has dealt with him, going back to UBC days almost 40 years ago. It is sad, but we all have our crosses to bear.
His explosive temper did not prevent him from doing all the great work he has done, nor will it diminish his ability to do more.
So to everyone accusing him of being to big for his britches or passed his 'best buy' date, or other sentiments of that ilk, you do not know what you are talking about. This is simply an account of a man with a bad temper. Sad and true, but not newsworthy otherwise.
ReeferMadness
10-06-2009
Do facts matter?
It doesn't seem to matter that nobody here has presented any evidence that Suzuki or the DSF has endorsed the Liberals or the Liberal policy. He criticized the NDP for an opportunistic campaign slogan which he feared would permanently poison the notion of carbon taxes.
Get over yourselves!! Not everyone who fails to genuflect before the NDP altar is a shill for the Liberals. In fact, this has nothing to do with the Liberals. It has everything to do with the NDP's own failed policies.
And it's not like Suzuki was the only enviro to criticize the NDP. The Conservation Voters of BC endorsed "anyone but Carole" in Victoria-Beacon Hill, writing this:
"Due to the New Democrats’ failure to be leaders in promoting real solutions to global warming we cannot endorse any NDP incumbents that were members of this past caucus. We believe the party needs new leadership and new voices that take a more urgent, principled and collaborative approach to meeting the challenges of climate change." Pretty damning stuff.
So if you want to blame someone for NDP failures, blame your leaders and blame yourselves. Don't blame Dr. Suzuki.
ReeferMadness
10-06-2009
Link for above
http://www.conservationvoters.ca/endorsements/
Rob_
10-06-2009
"The DSF has ... always
"The DSF has ... always careful in press releases and public statements to state only their opposition to the particular project or industry, never to allow the commentary to extend to recommendations on which party to vote for or even so much as a reminder as to which party is responsible for these policies."
Duh, of course. Because they are registered Charity. They are prohibited from endorsing a particualr party.
Same goes for most other enviro and social justice NGOs.
And I didn't make any claims about the DSF. I made claims about Suzuki the man. When he is not officially speaking for the Foundation he is much more candid in his criticism of governments.
In the last speech I heard him give (just a few days ago), he repeatedly called Harper a "liar." And the speech before that at the Projecting Change Film Fest he gave a pretty passionate rant criticizing both the Federal and Provincial government's on their fishing policy.
Anyone who thinks Suzuki "supports" the Liberals obviously hasn't heard him speak lately.
Tieleman
11-06-2009
Bill Tieleman responds to comments
Thanks for the huge volume of posts here - quite an interesting and useful debate.
A few points should be made clear by me.
First, nobody likes sore losers - Single Transferable Vote advocates shouldn't try mixing STV and Suzuki in this context. That debate was lost on May 12 - or otherwise argue it somewhere else. My role as NO STV president may aggravate you but it has nothing to do with this.
Second, simply endlessly repeating that the NDP "suffered" in the election for opposing the Campbell gas tax won't make it true. So here's part of what one of BC's most prominent carbon tax supporters - professor Mark Jaccard - said in the Vancouver Sun on May 20:
"During British Columbia's election campaign and in post-election analysis, media commentators have lauded Gordon Campbell's carbon tax as a "political masterstoke" while panning Carole James's anti-tax campaign as 'not so bright.'
I think the evidence says otherwise. I think Campbell won the election in spite of the carbon tax, not because of it, and that James almost rode a brilliant strategy to an upset victory in an election that would otherwise not have been close.
Media pundits seem to forget that throughout 2007 the Liberals were a popular government on cruise-control, with a polling lead ranging from 12 to 18 per cent over the New Democratic Party.
With the election just over a year away, NDP prospects looked dismal -- until the Liberals launched the carbon tax in February 2008.
Although earlier statements suggested they would support a carbon tax, James and the NDP quickly recognized this political gift from Campbell. Within months they launched their axe-the-tax campaign, focusing on its perceived unfairness to rural, northern, suburban and coastal residents and linking the policy to Campbell's 'arrogant and uncaring personality.'
By November, in an amazing reversal of fortune, polls placed the NDP at parity with the Liberals."
If you want to argue the carbon tax cost the NDP the election come up with a much better case and refute Jaccard's views. Start with the fact that the NDP percentage went up and the Green Party's down.
...continued
Tieleman
11-06-2009
Bill Tieleman continues reply
Third, Suzuki has repeatedly publicly criticized the NDP about opposing the gas tax while refusing to take equally strong and public positions about any of the BC Liberal environmental disasters, particularly fish farms.
Fourth, if Suzuki has - as he claims - been an "ally of the NDP" why has he also not made strong statements supporting a $10 minimum wage, Grant's Law, the run-of-river moratorium, opposing removing municipal regulation of IPPs, etc, etc.
Fifth, to a series of comments about my interaction with Suzuki. He approached me at an event of about 125 people we were both invited to. Suzuki initiated the exchange, not me, and was shouting from the start. He also disparaged another person not there and I've declined to repeat that, in fairness, as well as both of us saying some other things.
I never raised my voice at any time, never swore and never provoked Suzuki other than disagreeing with his position.
My account is correct - I have no reason to make this stuff up! But there were many people around me who saw the incident and spoke with me immediately afterward.
Sixth, a private exchange is one where both people agree or implicitly understand it to be between them. Someone approaching me yelling, swearing and being insulting in a public place is never in confidence!
Seventh, I don't act for the NDP, though it's clear I support them generally. I opposed the gas tax months before the NDP and my Facebook protest group quickly grew to nearly 10,000 members. The NDP position remains the correct one in my view and I doubt any other provincial government will follow the BC Liberal gas tax lead.
We need a solution that is seen as fair to everyone and is not politicized - the BC Liberal approach is neither.
Lastly, I agree that Suzuki has done many good things for science and the environment over the year - it's unfortunate that his bad behaviour towards me and apparently many others in the past so discredits his accomplishments.
puppyg
11-06-2009
Fiddling
All this is fiddling while Rome burns. Alexandra Morton has the clearest (and perhaps sincerest) voice on what is unfolding in the natural world (read 'Game over').
Dr. Suzuki was a force and, it seems, no longer is. He was amply rewarded for his contributions and I remain grateful for all his wake-up calls over the years, however much they have gone unheeded.
So what if Suzuki has succumbed to the lure of legacy? So what if the BC electorate has chosen, in Mr. Campbell, a particularly hideous form of the Destructor? The momentum of human enterprise on Earth is unstoppable.
Mother!
Ian Hanington
11-06-2009
Please do some research, Bill
You write:
------
Third, Suzuki has repeatedly publicly criticized the NDP about opposing the gas tax while refusing to take equally strong and public positions about any of the BC Liberal environmental disasters, particularly fish farms.
Fourth, if Suzuki has - as he claims - been an "ally of the NDP" why has he also not made strong statements supporting a $10 minimum wage, Grant's Law, the run-of-river moratorium, opposing removing municipal regulation of IPPs, etc, etc.
-------
First, Suzuki and DSF have been leaders on the aquaculture issue and have worked long and hard with the Coastal Alliance for Aquaculture Reform and with Alexandra Morton on this issue for years. We have even published reports detailing how closed-containment solutions can be applied. It would only take a brief look at the DSF website to see this. DSF and David have also talked a lot about run-of-river power, and have one of the most rational, science-based positions on this.
Minimum wage and Grant's law are important issues, but they aren't environmental issues. We can't take on everything.
Maybe the media hasn't reported as much about David's and DSF's positions on these other issues, but they are all a matter of public record.
Ian Hanington
Communications specialist
David Suzuki Foundation
Luke Skywalker
11-06-2009
NEWSFLASH... Carole James Now SUPPORTS the Carbon Tax!!! :D
Lo and behold Carole James has done another flip-flop. So much for principles. ;)
I guess that Suzuki, Harcourt, and Robertson were right all along.
I also guess that all of the anti-carbon tax posters here are now gonna have to find a new political anti-carbon tax party. :D
http://www.cknw.com/Channels/Reg/NewsLocal/Story.aspx?ID=1102304
To funny! :D
wayfarer
11-06-2009
Too little, too late
Carole James: "now it's our job to make that [carbon] tax more effective and more fair," she said. "That's the work we'll be doing." (CP News)
If she had said this about a year ago, she may well be sitting as premier right now, because she would have deflected what turned out to be a major wedge issue for the NDP.
This one comment by the NDP leader sums up concisely where the New Democrats went wrong, and the misguided leadership that led them there.
I'm actually looking forward to having both the government and the opposition working together to make the carbon tax a better, stronger green initiative. This is a good news story for the environment.
G-West, Rod, Bill Tieleman et al, I look forward to future, constructive debate on how we can all support Carole in helping to make this carbon tax better and stronger!
'Nuff said.
ME2
11-06-2009
Political "environmentalism"
As I recall, when the debate about the carbon tax first got underway and it was pointed out that it accomplished nothing real, the main supportive argument became that it's political success here - we being the first - would stand as a beacon to bring the rest of the world onside.
Well, although we've yet to see any proof of the tax's efficacy, it remains to be seen if and how many other jurisdictions will now see it as a safe vote-getting political tool to prove they are "doing something" about GW.