- Ms Kaye is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Axe the Gas Tax Won Votes for NDP
So why is leader James dropping the issue?
And here come more gas price hikes.
I think [Gordon] Campbell won the election in spite of the carbon tax, not because of it, and that [Carole] James almost rode a brilliant strategy to an upset victory in an election that would otherwise not have been close. -- Professor Mark Jaccard, carbon tax supporter
Since the May 12 provincial election, many columnists, political pundits and observers have all argued the New Democratic Party was badly hurt by its plan to eliminate the B.C. Liberals' carbon tax.
Some have even suggested the NDP lost the election because of its gas tax position, saying it cost the party the environmental votes needed to win.
For example, the Victoria Times-Colonist editorialized on June 13 that: "The party's silly campaign to axe the carbon tax was a dud."
But all the evidence indicates exactly the opposite -- the NDP gained votes and had a fighting chance of winning the election because of its anti-carbon tax policy.
So with Premier Gordon Campbell about to raise the carbon tax on July 1 by 1.2 cents a litre on gasoline and 1.3 cents on heating fuel, it's worth looking at what really happened.
Why the axe was sharp
Mark Jaccard is one of the few who got it right, all the more noteworthy because he is a strong advocate of the carbon tax and criticized the NDP when it opposed the B.C. Liberals' introduction of an initial 2.4 cent a litre gas tax in February 2008.
The reasons why "axe the tax" made sense are simple -- one, the gas tax was an unpopular idea for most voters and two, a majority of those who felt it was their biggest issue actually voted NDP.
Ipsos Reid exit polls of voters showed that the carbon tax was "very important" to 26% of those surveyed -- and of those, 57 per cent voted NDP, 25 per cent B.C. Liberal and 13 per cent Green Party.
And polling last year by Ipsos Reid found a majority of supporters of every party, including Greens, opposed the carbon tax, while an exclusive 24 hours poll by Strategic Communications showed 73 per cent did not believe it would be revenue neutral and 71 per cent disagreed with the government sending out $100 "climate action dividend" cheques to British Columbians.
Economic miscalculations
No, the NDP's real problem in this election was obvious from the start -- Ipsos Reid reports that 60 per cent of voters felt economic issues were very important -- yet the party avoided meaningfully addressing B.C.'s number one concern.
It could also be expected that if some NDP voters were very opposed to the party's position on the carbon tax they would vote Green to protest.
But in fact that Green Party vote dropped one percent while the NDP vote went up 0.6 percent and the B.C. Liberals stayed the same. And the fledgling B.C. Conservative Party, which also strongly opposed the gas tax, took two percent of the vote with only 24 candidates running.
Jaccard rightly points out the NDP were 12 to 18 per cent behind the B.C. Liberals throughout 2007 and only got ahead in November 2008 after launching the axe the tax campaign earlier that year.
So it's easy to see why Jaccard concluded that: "Pundits are now concluding that because James lost the election and because it cost her some votes, her anti-tax campaign was dumb politics. This is faulty logic... My guess is that it provided a significant net gain relative to where the NDP stood in 2007."
James drops a winner
Like it or hate it, the NDP position on the carbon tax was the right one for them to take -- and it almost paid off with an election win.
What's bizarre now is NDP leader Carole James' decision last week to drop her party's fight and try to make "that tax more effective and more fair" -- just before it goes up again!
And if you agree with me that the gas tax is unfair and ineffective -- join over 9,000 others at my Facebook protest group by going to www.facebook.com and search for Axe The BC Gas Tax.
Related Tyee stories:
- Jaccard Rebuts Carbon Tax Critics
Advisor to premier claims it's world-class policy. - BC's carbon tax kerfuffle goes global
- Beyond the Carbon Tax
Two enviros argue it's 'fluff' and 'blackmail' and no real fix for climate change.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
- BC snuffs out AirCare test program
- AFN national chief Shawn Atleo to launch re-election bid
- Citizens group releases video to fight undead Bill C-30
- Conservative MP says he might vote against budget, then 'clarifies' his position
- Genetically modified plants won't take root with councillors in Richmond, BC
- Hundreds at Vancouver rally to support Quebec students
- Could Fort Mac become an eco-tourist hotspot?
- Rick Hansen's Man in Motion anniversary tour concludes in Vancouver
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Who Mowed Down the Premier?
- Canada's Economy, Deconstructed (by a 12 year-old)
- Death in Remand: a Tyee Inquiry
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Death In Remand: 'A Gut Feeling'
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Alberta Fills Pipes with Corrosive Denial
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- How Our Immune Systems Exaggerate Fear
- BC biotech company seeks approval for GM apple
- What's Behind BC's Doors?
- Death in Remand: A Jail Crammed with Risk
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- What's Behind BC's Doors?
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Should You Run from that Medical Test?
- 'The Dictator'
- Death in Remand: Stacked Deck
- 'Moonrise Kingdom'
- Tyee Builders Tally: Amazing!
- Double lung recipient dances on Ellen show
- ISS astronauts grab DragonX space capsule by the tail with Canada Arm
- Metro Vancouver gas prices peak at record levels
- Ottawa posts $9-billion deficit in March despite pledge to avoid spending spree
- BC phases out AirCare to focus on fighting bigger vehicle emissions
- Tsunami senors to be dropped into deep sea off of Vancouver Island
- Student groups file court challenge against Quebec protest law
- ...while on the streets, pirates and ninjas put aside mutual animosity to join student protests
85
Login or register to post comments
Grumpy
2 years ago
Again, ad nauseum............
.........the carbon tax is a gas tax in drag. It is Campbell's hedge against the upcoming RAV/Canada Line fiasco.
The Carbon/gas tax has not reduced gas consumption, nor has it reduced car use and all one can say it is another Campbell tax on the poor.
Jaccard, like Suzuki are media mavens, who have accomplished very little and with joining the Liberals and supporting their tax and spend policies, have become legends in their own minds.
The mainstream media have shown their collective incompetence reporting on Campbell's gas tax and jumped on the carbon tax bandwagon, showing the public at large that the media can be bought and sold like any other merchandise.
In a time of peak oil and global warming, Gordon Campbell & Co., Jaccard and Suzuki have failed in presenting workable solutions and fell back onto the old tried and true Canadianism, "when in doubt, tax the hell out of the poor"!
rac
2 years ago
Axe the Tax Axed
Just a few months late Bill. Last summer, when gas prices were high, Axe the Tax might have had some traction but it is really hard to make the case that it was a positive in the election. As you know, the number of people voting for all the parties plummeted. If Axe the Tax was a benefit for the NDP, all those angry people should have voted for them. Instead, people just didn't vote.
Axe the Tax just sounds like pure political opportunism dreamt up by some bright spark fresh out of student council. The slogan itself turned off a lot of supporters.
Anyway, it is axed so we can move on now. Finally, a month late, the NDP is finally getting some good advice.
rac
2 years ago
Carbon Tax is Fair but Needs Fixing
Grumpy,
No one really knows anything about carbon taxes ever claimed the carbon tax would decrease CO2 emissions from the start. It needs to be raised significantly to have an impact. While Campbell has committed to raising it somewhat, it needs to be raised even more. It does make sense to start low and give people a chance to adjust and for options such as public transit to be in place by the time the tax gets high enough to hurt.
That is one of the reasons why the revenue in Metro Vancouver should be used to fund public transit.
Regarding the impact on the poor, well, people that are really poor don't have high carbon emissions while the emissions for the rich tend to be around 10 times higher than the average person.
wayfarer
2 years ago
Bill's folly
Some nice selective reasoning, Bill.
You cite Jaccard on one point of analysis (election numbers), yet conveniently neglect his broader position on why a carbon tax is progressive and needed in the fight against climate change.
You base your numbers on one Ipsos-Reid exit poll and a Strategic Communications poll (isn't that the firm run by your pal and fellow NDP carbon tax opponent David Schreck?),
TYEE EDITOR'S NOTE: Schreck is not connected to Strategic Communications
deducing: "But all the evidence indicates...." You don't think all the evidence should include - lowest voter turnout in BC election history?
Your entire article, thematically, represent the essence of why Carole James' strategy was wrong all along: aside from a late fall blip, voters would see right through it as a cynical bid to win votes, rather than a principled position on taxation.
You don't even pretend in your article to argue the merits of carbon taxation. Your prime concern is whether it's an issue that can win elections.
Carole James' decision last week to abandon the NDP axe is not the least bit bizarre to those of us on the left who happen to be environmentalists. Axe-the-tax, despite skewed assessment, was but a wedge issue, one cheered on by Gordon Campbell with utter glee.
James has risen above partisan NDP hackery and realized that while initially it may have had some sex appeal, in the long-run axe-the-tax is a wedge that gets driven deeper into the party, therefore a vote divider.
There were any number of ways the NDP could have supported the general principle of a carbon tax, yet opposed Campbell's version, which would have left the party some outs with environmentalists.
The big story in this past election, which you completely neglect, was the pitiful low voter turnout, and, in the absence of a viable opposition, a yawning, resigned endorsement of the status quo.
Bill, you need to wake up and smell the emissions. The world has changed. We have these urgent issues now called climate change and peak oil. You need to find a way to incorporate green thinking into your old school labour-socialist paradigm. I see no such thinking exhibited in your attacks on the carbon tax, your attacks on David Suzuki and attacks on your own NDP leader - Ms. James. I can hear the faint echoes of laughter from the Liberal cabinet offices.
Bravo!
mcdull
2 years ago
NDP
Well I agree the axe the ntax was the right thing the wishy washy NDP need to smarten up. Now it sounds like they will no longer speak on IPP's or enviromental issues. The small steps we are trying to take for a Vancouver Island First party will bear fruit one day. THe target will be the liberal MLAQ's and the wishy washy NDP MLA's. so it will be pick and choose where to run a Candidate.
David C.
2 years ago
Bill, you're wrong...
.... Yes, the NDP's percentage of the vote went up. But it's overall vote went down by about 80,000 votes, despite increased population growth. Had the NDP won those votes they would've won the election. While I don't know whether or not all of them were disaffected environmentalists who couldn't bring themselves to vote Liberal or Green, obviously since the NDP's "Axe the Tax" policy didn't bring them out so it didn't really help them.
I think the party's new policy of fighting for a "fair and effective" Carbon Tax is more of a winner. By "Axing the Tax" they simply looked anti-environment and obviously wern't able to eat into the Liberal vote from 2005, since the overall spread between the two parties was almost the same.
In any case, what you fail to note is that a Cap and Trade policy is a Carbon Tax that simply hides the cost. But since the large producers will simply pass their costs onto the consumer the average person will still have to pay more with a Cap and Trade policy in place.
Grumpy
2 years ago
I see the Liberal tax and spend trolls................
..............are busy rewriting history. Liberals love the carbon tax because it hits the poor hard and Campbell Liberals hate the poor and will do anything to keep them in poverty.
Campbell has not reduced taxes per se, rather he has decreased taxes while greatly increasing user fees. But with the RAV/Canada Line numbers dodgy to say the least and the cost for Gateway increasing, Campbell needed a new revenue source, so he created the carbon tax.
With support of Eco-unfriendly environmentalists like Jaccard and Suzuki on his side and a very compliant media, Campbell sold the new tax to the public. In Canada everything can be solved by creating new and punitive taxes.
The Carbon tax is a tarted up gas tax and has done nothing to help global warming. But eh, this is Canada and we love to be taxed to death!
dave49
2 years ago
Rural-urban divide
The carbon tax is a very cunning device that fulfills many objectives. Winning public support to cloak a neocon economic agenda and 'scooping' the opposition parties are just two.
I'm convinced that the Liberals polled and market researched heavily, were aware of the rural-urban divide, and figured they could ride it out in their favour. It was a successful gamble.
The reality is two-fold: only a small number of people thought the NDP stance (axe the tax) was important enough to vote NDP and a poor campaign by the NDP caused a small but significant number of tradition supporters to stay home and not vote.
The involvement of the Suzuki Foundation and Tzeporah Berman's Power Up in supporting both the carbon tax and run-of-river independent power was a wild card we have not seen before. Liberal market research and polling could have hinted at it. However, it certainly helped discredit the "axe the tax" part of the NDP platform.
alive
2 years ago
Oh really?
"people that are really poor don't have high carbon emissions "
Wrong, poor peple often have to travel to more than one job every day, and since time is of the essence, then instead of spending hours trying for a bus-connections, they have to drive or loose their jobs.
Also poor people often live in old housing and have to keep it warm; they are not the ones who can go snowbirding for a few months when it gets really cold here.
Finally people who can afford an expensive car can also afford the tax on gas, not so the poor, so your arguments do not hold water.
HawkEyes
2 years ago
Professor?
Not pretending to be a "Doctor" this time?
...Striving for humble, are we?
"I think [Gordon] Campbell won the election in spite of the carbon tax, not because of it, and that [Carole] James almost rode a brilliant strategy to an upset victory in an election that would otherwise not have been close."
I'd like to know how much he paid for that; it was certainly worth it to get this in exchange. It's this kind of reporting that wastes time to perpetuate status quo; it's this kind of reporting that drives people away from politics. If the above statement tells me anything, it is that the winners are still in campaign mode. Why??
Where is the "cap and trade" Jackars?
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
Carbon Tax and Port Mann-Hwy 1
I have said it so many times before, without achieving the slightest impact, that I may as well say it again. The position of the well-financed ENGOs in favour of Liberal Premier Gordon M. Campbell's carbon tax, and in favour of former national Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's Green Shift, needs to be seen in the context of the equally vehement opposition of these groups to Gateway, specifically Port Mann-Hwy 1.
Viewed from an NDP point of view the party was been strongly urged for several years to do two things. Support an unpopular Liberal policy, the carbon tax, and oppose a popular one, expanding Canada's highway and freeway system. This is not a coincidence. It's the whole key to the extraordinarily clever political game worked up by top Liberal strategists in close conjunction with their allies in the ENGO industry and academia as well.
Whenever I point out this non-coincidental pair of policy recommendations coming from the ENGO industry, I get a response from their true-believer disciples and sophisticated groupies to the effect that this positioning is simply what these environmental "experts" honestly and sincerely believe is needed, and that there is no political trickery or strategy involved. Needless to say that's an utterly laughable proposition. But it's also a clever bit of camouflage, in that it conceals the cynical calculations involved behind a consistent smokescreen of self-proclaimed idealism.
When Carole James wisely refused to take the bait in either of these traps, she was vehemently denounced in cheesy op-ed pieces, supposedly written by university professors but more likely penned by provincial Public Affairs Bureau propagandists. The smear lines of "dishonest" and "opportunist" had a demoralizing impact which can be seen in the extraordinarily low voter turnout.
There is no doubt that the saliency around the gas tax issue will ebb and flow with oil prices and with the general economic situation. I would look for renewed interest in this area in the next month as crude prices have risen and the carbon tax and Translink taxes are about to do so as well.
Carole James obviously believes that with the government having won another majority a shotgun approach of holus-bolus opposition, rhetorically urging the re-electerd Liberals to drop the tax outright, is going to fall on deaf ears. However, if the strategy is to rifle in on specific weaknesses and inequities the chances of successfully prodding the government to move are increased, especially if some "experts" who support a carbon tax approach are, as they say they are, "progressives" who want to fund more public transit and building retrofits and the like, to avoid extracting resources from health and education programs, and to be fair to rural residents who have and will have no public transit alternatives.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
Two more things
Does anyone ever wonder what the reaction of university economists who supported a carbon tax in an open letter to former Finance Minister Carol Taylor would have been if the NDP had said, "Yes, and it needs to be higher to be truly effective." From experience, I know damn well what it would have been. These same economists would have said "That's the NDP's hard core socialist and union roots talking. They're just a high tax, anti-business party that will discourage capital investment."
Does anyone ever wonder why the best financed ENGO in B.C. has a policy of adamantly refusing any and all donations from governments and from organized labour, but is open to donations from businesses and corporations? What does this say about that organization's basic political orientation? Maybe one of their disciples or groupies can help me out with this. I am struggling so hard to see the answer.
Stump
2 years ago
Who Can Stand In The Way
when there's a dollar to be made.
"But we killed all our firstborn
And we slashed and we burned
And we sold off the paddocks
And we raped and we gouged
On the wings of a six-pack
Will we ever learn?"
-Midnight Oil
Blue Camas
2 years ago
Axe the Tax LOST this vote
Well Bill, I can confirm for you that the cynical Axe the Tax ploy lost the NDP at least one vote.
We simply have to have some means of assigning real cost to pollution and a revenue-neutral-carbon-tax (RNCT?) is simply the best and fairest way to do it. Cap and Trade will come eventually but it seems very likely to be even more complex and probably less effective.
Personally, I have been a life long NDP supporter, so much so that I found that I was unable to switch my vote to the Liberal/Socreds, but for the first time in 30 years of voting in provincial elections, I simply could not cast a vote for the NDP either.
Having recently attended the Decoding Carbon Pricing conference I also have to remind you that not all pollsters appear to agree with your conclusion about the "Carbon Tax"(RNCT?!) impact. Vaughn Palmer concluded that the only impact was in one riding (Vancouver Fairview) which the NDP lost, and Environics noted a 10 point rise in support for the Carbon Tax since the election, as well as an "integrity" bonus for the Liberals and penalty for the NDP during the election.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
PICS an agency of the BC Liberal Govt
Blue Camas
Having recently attended the Decoding Carbon Pricing conference ...
Would that be this event:
http://www.pics.uvic.ca/carbon_pricing.php
I believe the sponsoring organization, the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, is an agency of the BC Liberal Government, is it not?
I would note that among their program advisors are Profs Olewiler and Robinson who signed an op-ed piece during the election excoriating Carol James and the NDP, a piece that I believe was probably written in the Public Affairs Bureau and then simply signed by the academics.
http://www.pics.uvic.ca/governance.php
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Debunking+myths+about+carbon/1532132/story.html
Wilfred Laurier
2 years ago
What are you smoking?
Bill, I know you have brown and orange underwear, but what are you smoking? The NDP LOST THE ELECTION. Lost. Did not win. Get it? The carbon tax issue was not a winner. That is why Carole dumped it.
Sure, a few votes were picked up but the percentage did not rise due to population gain. You are getting desperate, Bill.
Grumpy, it is TWO CENTS A LITRE. Compared to year ago, gasoline is 40 cents CHEAPER now. Every live body in the province got a $100 cheque for an offset. In my case it was $400. Heck, I pay $1000 a year for gasoline so I got almost five months free.
Absurdity rules at the Tyee.
Stump
2 years ago
"Every live body in the
"Every live body in the province got a $100 cheque for an offset. In my case it was $400. Heck, I pay $1000 a year for gasoline so I got almost five months free."
Which pretty much proves the point that everyone ends up subsidizing car users' free ride at taxpayers expense.
Stump
2 years ago
"Every live body in the
"Every live body in the province got a $100 cheque for an offset. In my case it was $400. Heck, I pay $1000 a year for gasoline so I got almost five months free."
Which pretty much proves the point that everyone ends up subsidizing car users' free ride at taxpayers' expense.
realisticman
2 years ago
Rod
"The Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions was officially established by the University of Victoria Senate (7 March 2008)"
It's is taxpayer financed but hardly an an agency of the BC Liberal Government.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
"realistic:man: Check their website
realisticman
It's is taxpayer financed but hardly an an agency of the BC Liberal Government.
So there are agencies exclusively financed by government that are not public bodies, are not agencies of the Crown? An interesting theory.
From the same webpage as your quote:
BC Premier Gordon Campbell announced on January 25 that his government will seek legislative approval for $94.5 million to create the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions (PICS), to be hosted and led by the University of Victoria in collaboration with the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University and the University of Northern British Columbia.
The Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions was officially established by the University of Victoria Senate (7 March 2008) and Board of Governors (11 March 2008). The transfer letter and the funding for PICS were received from the British Columbia Ministry of Environment on 31 March. The funding consists of the $90M endowment as well as $4.5M in operational funding for the first year of PICS.
http://www.pics.uvic.ca/brochure.php
Also, several of the directors and advisers are members of the Premier's Climate Action group or are senior Liberal Govt bureaucrats (James Mack, Bob Elton, Cheryl Slusarchuk, and Graham Whitmarsh).
http://www.pics.uvic.ca/governance.php
Wilfred Laurier
2 years ago
Again, True
Absolutely, the tax payers subsadise car owners. They've been doing it ever since the car came into existence. The same can be said for horses, too, btw.
The way to get people out of cars is make it cost more, pure and simple. This can be done in a variety of ways, such as an annual tailpipe CO2 levy as in Europe, displacement taxes on purchase, a carbon tax, road tolls or a combination of some or all.
But look at the public reaction to any of the above. People cry blue murder at even the slightest mention of any of the above. Why? Well, because it is threat to lifestyle which is the biggest threat of all. A friend of mine is single, lives in Burnaby near Deer Lake and drives a Dodge Ram 2500. It's his God given right and he's going to ferociously oppose anything that puts that in jeopardy.
seth
2 years ago
Carbon tax nitwits and plots
Actually Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman writing in the New York times, debunked completely the carbon tax claptrap and showed the NDP's Cap and Trade to be far superior. Of course the Gordo had paid shill so called economist Jarrard from some mickey mouse college on his side. But you Greenies bowing to your seemingly insatiable desire to destroy the planet while talking incessantly about saving it, voted BCLiberal (or Green same thing)so Gordo could build a great big pipeline and supertanker port to send tar sands oil and CO2 to China. Now thats Greenie thinking for ya.
Ten years from now when the oceans are going in the tank and the permafrost is spewing methane you Greenie morons will still be yacking away about carbon tax, when for that entire time we could have actually been doing that massive balls up effort to necessary to shut down GHG usage.
Unfortunately, elections are not won on issues but on TeeVee personalities and perceptions of leadership - Carol James has neither. The BCLiberals cynically gave orders to the Neocon media to pump up
this issue, then purchased a few environmentalists to spout the horsepucky solely as a vehicle to expose Carole James as the loser she was. Carol James grew more and more sidetracked and more and more shrill leaving the economy - Gordo's Achilles heel - completely alone as an issue exactly as the BCLiberals intended. How the NDP expected to win with a leader who obviously couldn't take charge of scout troop, with the personality of a wet dishrag, and the inability to win a street fight with even bloated old Bill Good was beyond comprehension.
Thats why people stayed home - face down ass up - waiting for Gordo to get to around them.
Stump
2 years ago
Hey Seth
You may have some great points, but when you call entire groups of people morons or use epithets such as Greenie all you do is increase the divide. Since we're imagining the future, perhaps you could envision a dialogue where respectful debate allows us all to find common ground and move forward?
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
Wilfred, bloggers don't have any real friends
Wilfred Laurier
A friend of mine is single, lives in Burnaby near Deer Lake and drives a Dodge Ram 2500. It's his God given right and he's going to ferociously oppose anything that puts that in jeopardy.
Really, Wilfred, who are you kidding with this non-anecdote? Bloggers don't have any real friends, haven't you heard? The "friends" they claims to have are invented on the spur of the moment, imaginary creatures mocked up to make an argument, to finish one more post before coffee break or lunch.
BTW, ... if this imaginary man were married and had childred, would that be different?
Oh, ... and one more thing, Wilfred. Where do you live and what kind of vehicle do you drive?
Just me
2 years ago
Carbon tax the poor
Every problem once was a solution. The carbon tax already is a problem because it so perfectly has polluted the search for solutions to climate change, so cleverly has separated "leading" environmental advocates from the social-justice movement.
What's wrong with the carbon tax is that it is a flat tax, i.e.: once again a tax that throws the burden of solving climate change on those with the least input and the least resources to pay.
Remember Steve Forbes, ultra-nerdy, ultra-right billionaire U.S. presidential hopeful? Mr. Flat Tax, because flat taxes keep the born-rich rich. That's most of what you need to know about regressive flat taxes.
The carbon tax perpetuates the myth that everyone equally contributes to climate change. Yes, everyone contributes, but not equally, because really so very few of us are insiders in the corporate and political decision-making that creates climate change.
It is regrettable that now the NDP will drop "axe the tax" not as bad policy but as bad optics.
It is much more regrettable that urban environmentalists, who already have the options of dedicated bicycle paths and multibillion-dollar transit systems, have so flamboyantly opted for a neo-liberal "tax the poor" solution to be imposed on those without such an embarrassment of riches.
Of course, we need tax policies to curb climate change and encourage conservationist behaviour. Cap and trade is one such policy that happens also to put the focus on institutional polluters rather than those end-users who simply must live with whatever limited options are presented them.
settebello
2 years ago
Grumpy is Right
The so-called carbon tax is little more than another regressive revenue raising tax that was enacted on a feeble environmental pretext. The whole concept of a carbon tax is supposed to effect a reduction in consumption of petroleum products, or at least lessen the increase in consumption. It is clear that it has not done the former, and there is no convincing evidence that it has done the latter.
There are many things that Carole James has been associated with that justify criticism. Opposing a half-baked environmental tax regime is not one of them.
Luke Skywalker
2 years ago
Just me...
The problem with that hypothesis is that institutional polluters will eventually pass on the tax to end-users.
It's still a zero-sum game.
As I stated in another thread, the BC NDP already had a carbon tax within their platform.
Except that it was non-transparent and hidden. Just like the hidden federal MST was replaced by the transparent GST.
And that reference was in the BC NDP's own environment platform:
So if ya pay a transparent carbon tax at the pumps (the GST model) or pay an indirect hidden carbon tax at the pumps (the MST model), at the end of the day BC consumers would still be paying for an NDP hidden carbon tax.
A cost to the consumer is still "a cost to the consumer" no matter how one slices and dices the same. ;)
buccaneer bay
2 years ago
Axe the tax........
Helped the NDP,the NDP lost the election..........
But,it wasn`t the carbon tax,run of river,minimum wage,price of beer,it wasn`t any of those things,what lost the NDP the election was.........
A fucking corrupt media,Campbell bought off the media,all the media,here are a few examples of a corrupt media.......
The Fraser institute claimed the raising of minimum wage would cost anywhere between 8 to 51 thousand jobs,wow,what a massive spread yet the media,cknw/sun/province/global/ctv/shaw everyone of those reported ONLY the higher figure and reported them as factual,rather than the bullshit it was....
Jaccard lied about 60 thousound jobs lost if you charged oil n gas for gas flaring,more bullshit the media reported as factual....
The beer,the media,including a dedicated column from Miachael Smyth about the beer...said that the price of beer would go up 3.00$ per 6 pack,bullshit,the fact of the matter is reducing the discount for SOME LIQUOR outfits from 16% to 10% would of increased the price of beer from SOME CITY BEER n WINE stores by.........
50 cents a 6 pack,thats the facts jack,not 3.00$ per 6 pack, 50 cents.....yet the media,all the media repeated the lies,the bullshit,if you don`t believe me let me explain how it works.......
The discount--lets say the price of a case of beer is 20.00$ in a goverment liquor store,beer and wine stores(in the city) were getting a 16% discount off of that 20.00$ price,that discount works out to a 3.20$ dicount per CASE of beer,well if you lowered the dicount to 10%,the discount would be 2.00$ per case of beer,so the difference would be 50 to 60 cents per 6 pack............
Not 3.00$ per 6 pack,yet the media,Michael Smyth,the sun/province/cknw/and the beer and wine stores ran ..........
FULL PAGE ADS ALL THROUGH THE PROVINCE CLAIMING 3.00$ per 6 pack(false advertising)
Gordon Campbell could have stated that Carole James was Glen Clarks sister and the media would of printed/reported it without questioning the validity of the claim............
Tieleman,I agree with SOME of your stories,and I agree with the carbon tax claim(only idiots believe Campbell`s tax is effective)but..........
The MEDIA HIJACKED the ELECTION and it`s as simple as that.......
Go blow it out your stink hole Michael Smyth and Canwest/cknw/........
Cheers-Eyes Wide Open
G West
2 years ago
Baloney
The only people lying about the Campbell Tax are Campbell and the environmental thugs.
They claim that a revenue neutral tax will do something positive for the environment; it won't, it simply spins money to Campbell's friends.
The only positive carbon fighting program in BC is the 'scrap it' program - and it's mostly to help Campbell's friends in the New Car Dealers Association.
However, people scrapping cars can choose to use their payments to join a car coop or to buy a bike.
And those are truly 'green' options - all the rest of the Campbell Tax pander payment is garbage.
Including the fact that two of the worst polluters - airlines and cruise ships - go scot free.
Blue Camas
2 years ago
Decoding Carbon Pricing
Rod, Realisticman - thanks for commenting on "Axe the Tax LOST this Vote"...
Yes, the conference began with a big thank-you to the Provincial Government for the $94 Million to start and fund PICS. Generous funding to be sure, but the cynic in me noted that such public announcements might also make it more difficult to withdraw this funding.
http://www.pics.uvic.ca/carbon_pricing.php
is indeed the correct link to info on the conference.
The speaker list is posted there now. You'll find many names who are not dependant on funding from this provincial government.
Keep checking the link too - hopefully you will soon also be able to download the presentations. I am particularily interested in reviewing that of the Deputy Minister of Finance. Marc Lee also provided important analysis on fairness for people of all income levels. Gray Taylor's speech alone was worth the price of admission.
Unfortunately, the truly amazingly diverse and knowledgable commentary from the attendees will be harder to obtain, but I understand that at least some of it may be available soon at http://go-beyond.ca/ .
Frank
2 years ago
Lost voters
The percentage of eligible voters showing up to vote has been declining for decades.
The Greens and Liberals lost a higher percentage of their voters than the NDP (the Libs lost over 100,000 and the Greens fell from 161,000 to 134,000).
Ergo, there is no reason to believe the NDP stance on the carbon tax turned off 80,000 voters.
For all we know a lot of voters may have died in the last 4 years and they aren't being replaced by people who think voting is important.
So why is it even brought up? Because the fall in actual NDP voters is the only stat in the province that those who want the carbon tax can point to as "proving" they're right. Everything else says otherwise so they conveniently ignore all other stats.
Wilfred Laurier
2 years ago
No, he didn't
"Actually Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman writing in the New York times, debunked completely the carbon tax claptrap and showed the NDP's Cap and Trade to be far superior"
Go actually read the article. You will find the above statement incorrect.
Wilfred Laurier
2 years ago
Krugam's Article
Hardly "completely debunks carbon taxes."
By my reading, Krugman hardly "completely debunks" carbon taxes. More accurately he states that cap and trade is easier to verify than a carbon tax.
Not that it really matters. Carole is now in favour of a carbon tax and she lost the election. The rancor that my mention of my friend's Dodge Ram provoked in one poster's case makes my point exactly. Oh, and my car emits 120g/km of CO2.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/opinion/18krugman.html?scp=2&sq=carbon+tax&st=nyt
rac
2 years ago
Axe the Tax Axed
Frank
The premise of the article is "Axe the Tax Won Votes for the NDP". This is obviously not true as the number of the votes for the NDP decreased. The only statement that might be true is "Axe the Tax Lead to a Minor Decrease in the Number of Votes the NDP Lost as Compared to the Other Parties".
Anyway, the debate is now trivial. The NDP lost the election so it really doesn't matter if the Carbon Tax got them a few votes or not. On top of that, I have spoken to NDP candidates who have said that Axe the Tax cost them major votes.
Lastly, Axe the Tax is dead, so obviously going forward, the NDP does not think it is a winner.
dave49
2 years ago
How do you measure the impact?
How do you measure the impact of the carbon tax? After reading the article at the link below, I can see any debate about the benefits or failures of the carbon tax will probably be inconclusive. It will be like the whole global warming debate, with parties taking sides according to their respective interests.
Carbon tax no cash cow in its first year
DERRICK PENNER,VANCOUVER SUN, JUNE 10, 2009
http://www.vancouversun.com/Technology/Carbon+cash+first+year/1680872/story.html
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
BC Finance ADM Glen Armstrong
Blue Camas
I am particularily interested in reviewing that of the Deputy Minister of Finance.
I assume you mean the ADM of BC Finance, Glen Armstrong, who has been creditted with writing Bill 37, the BC carbon tax legislation.
Did any of the conference participants, such as Marc Lee for example, comment in any way, shape or form on Michael Ignatieff's clear and categorical rejection of any form of carbon tax? The reason I mention Marc Lee in this context is because he was very critical of the NDP, both federally and provincially here in BC, for not getting behind Dion's Green Shift or Premier Gordon M. Campbell's carbon tax.
Blue Camas
2 years ago
ADM and $38 million "bonus"
Rod -
Yes, Assistant Deputy Minister Anderson spoke about the details of implementing the Carbon Tax.
We were told that in the first year the Ministry of Finance actually took in $38 million LESS than was paid back to taxpayers.
The ADM had many slides explaining this.
Apparently under the current approach, the money must be paid out in the same year it is taken in. Admirable from a fairness perspective, but perhaps it would be easier to be accurate if they reimbursed the year after?
rac
2 years ago
For it Before He Was Against It
Ignatieff was for it before he was against it:
http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ed009175-7814-44f0-aa99-327a4209a259
His most recent statements don't say that it is a bad idea, they just don't want to take what they perceive is a political risk.
http://www.loleegreen.com/2009/05/liberal-party-leader-ignatieff-says-no-to-carbon-tax-in-next-federal-election/
“I made it very clear in a press conference on Sunday that we do not propose to go into the next election with a carbon tax, period."
This is really quite a
Blue Camas
2 years ago
Carbon Pricing and Ignatieff
The only comments about Michael Ignatieff that I recall were from Jeffrey Simpson.
Briefly "the carbon tax will not be repeated soon in Canada because... (Harper never wanted it and still doesn't and)... Ignatieff saw what it did to Dion".
The main thrust of Marc Lee's presentation was how carbon taxation affects different income levels.
Dave Thompson
2 years ago
Axe the flacks
One non-sequiteur after another. And a use of statistics that would make Mark Twain laugh.
If the carbon tax is "unfair and ineffective" that's a great reason to work toward making it fair and effective.
That's the new policy direction of the NDP. And it's a good policy.
Axe the tax was dumb policy and dumb politics.
Good on James for dumping it.
RickW
2 years ago
Luke "Just Me" Skywalker
Of course it will! BUT -- at least the end user (the consumer) will see just what the cost of things are, instead of having the real costs smothered by layers of what amounts to subsidies (not applying a tax IS a subsidy, after all).
When people see what the real costs are, instead of businesses' penchant of externalizing costs (with the overt help of most governments, through their selective taxation processes), there WILL be a tax revolt.
So, using the pathetic excuse that the end user pays for everything in the end as some sort of club to continue smothering the real cost of goods, only plays into the hands of the very people who want to keep the public quiescent.
Are you one of those, Luke?
lynn
2 years ago
The "campaign" forges on........
HawkEyes, we may not agree on Jolie but this is a great observation of yours :
"If the above statement tells me anything, it is that the winners are still in campaign mode. Why??"
G West
2 years ago
It's not a carbon tax
It's a money laundry....nothing more and nothing less.
It can't be 'improved' and it should be disrespected and scorned by every British Columbian with a brain.
IT's time to flood your MLA with letters, emails and phone calls to the effect that the time has come for the people to take back the commons; to begin to care about their fellow citizens, the children in care, the children and families of poverty and to stop playing silly games with tax revenues which should not be collected for a premier's self-aggrandizement and solipsistic pleasure.
IT's long past time for citizens to say we've had enough of the Campbell garbage - enough of corporate welfare - enough lies.
IT’s time to tell Campbell, more than anything, that he’s no longer wanted on the voyage.
G West
2 years ago
Rod
Glen Armstrong had nothing to do with writing Bill 37.
Frank
2 years ago
rac
A few votes? On April 7th Mustel predicted they would get 35% of the vote. That means they gained roughly 100,000 votes between April 7th and May 12th. Considering that only 1.5 million votes were cast, gaining 100,000 of them in just 5 weeks seems like a pretty good showing.
Which of course means the campaign strategy was excellent.
The only drawback is that it still wasn't enough as they started 17% back. Too bad the NDP hadn't come out swinging earlier and too bad the media spent over a week publicizing the enviro campaign against the NDP. But of course that press conference was a calculated political move which has paid off handsomely for Suzuki and Berman's corporate backers.
With the NDP now abandoning the strategy that got them those 100,000 votes they will no doubt lose them and will not gain any support from the enviros who already have two parties to support.
In politics, three is a crowd and the NDP will learn that soon enough. Meanwhile I'm sure another party will "discover" the half the population that doesn't support the carbon tax. Much to the detriment of the NDP.
buccaneer bay
2 years ago
The NDP`s mistake was........
Axe the carbon tax should of been number 2 on their platform........
Number 1 item on their election platform should of been........
"Gordon Campbell is a PROVEN LIAR and LAW BREAKER"
Why nibble around the edges,tell it the way it is,the ad campaign that said Campbell killed your grandma or ate your children,not quite true but........
maybe an ad like.......
Campbell deficated on your grandma`s grave or Campbell can`t be trusted,just ask his pretend wife!
P.S. wasn`t that a beautiful sight,5.00pm rush hour and the golden ears bridge had 10 cars on it.........
I guess we know why Translink has guaranteed millions per month in tolls and why Translink needs an extra 150 million per year,just to maintain present service.......
Wow,and the golden ears bridge is free for a month.......
Cheers
rac
2 years ago
Axe the Tax Axed Again and Again and Again
Well, for one thing, Axe the Tax was around long before April 7th, so there is no way that it was responsible for any gain the NDP had.
Secondly, I suspect any gains had more to do with the crappy campaign the Libs ran rather than anything the NDP did right.
Given that there are fixed election dates, the fact that in a recession, they were so far behind to begin with was really pathetic.
Lastly, with your comment, "But of course that press conference was a calculated political move which has paid off handsomely for Suzuki and Berman's corporate backers.", you are basically saying that Axe the Tax cost them the election.
ReeferMadness
2 years ago
Another piece of dross from the mouth that roared
Does the Tyee really need to print more dronings from a failed political commentator?
Tieleman repeats Jaccard's assertions that the 'axe the tax' campaign helped the NDP. The trouble is that neither of them actually have any proof of this.
But the real problem is that Tieleman obviously views public policy only in light of its ability to win elections. Bill, it takes integrity to stand up for an unpopular idea. Come back when you find some.
morechatter
2 years ago
Carbon Makes the World Go Round
http://www.calgaryherald.com/Technology/Ottawa+reveals+carbon+strategy/1684723/story.html
BC will have its fill as it least in Alberta they already have a similar scheme. Not like in BC.
If James wants to Keep the Tax, why not use it to start replacing Government vehicles with electric? Along with environmental programs that would encourage innovation and research as taxing the carbon dollar is just more waste, about 2.5 Billion as its what makes the dollar go round, carbon.
Frank
2 years ago
rac
"Well, for one thing, Axe the Tax was around long before April 7th, so there is no way that it was responsible for any gain the NDP had."
That might be true. I guess we'll find out if that support holds now that James has changed her mind about it. Perhaps when her support falls back to the low 30's she'll resurrect "axe the tax".
"Secondly, I suspect any gains had more to do with the crappy campaign the Libs ran rather than anything the NDP did right."
Actually, all I heard from our media was that the Libs ran a good campaign and the NDP ran a bad one. Which iof course doesn't explain how the NDP gained 100,000 voters in 5 weeks.
"Given that there are fixed election dates, the fact that in a recession, they were so far behind to begin with was really pathetic."
Yep, but this is BC. In the early 80's the Socreds ran the economy into the ground and won a majority in the next election under Vander Zalm.
"Lastly, with your comment ... you are basically saying that Axe the Tax cost them the election."
How so? You'll have to connect that dot for me because I don't see it.
Besides, you just claimed in your first sentence that "axe the tax" had no effect.
Frank
2 years ago
ReeferMadness
"Tieleman repeats Jaccard's assertions that the 'axe the tax' campaign helped the NDP. The trouble is that neither of them actually have any proof of this."
I assume you have proof that the reverse is true?
morechatter
2 years ago
Dammed If they Do, and Dammed If they Don't
Rob Smelser sums it up. As no matter what someone has to say there is going to be a negative spin on it. What do you do with that? You don't.
I liked it when the NDP all got together and they all seemed in high spirits and a committed team with their Axe the Tax Campaign in full gear. When I see the Liberals its a one man show who holds forums to get your input just before sticking it to you.
There will be a price to pay, a very big price and its not all dollar signs I'm certain of that.
The Liberals, under Campbell rule, a Government not to be trusted are in power with a majority Government. That defies logic especially when the economy is in a recession and BC is in a deficit for 2008.
Tieleman
2 years ago
Tieleman responds to Blue Camas, others
Lots of heat but let's shed some light.
The Environics poll had a tiny sample of 250 British Columbians and was released at the "Decoding Carbon Pricing" conference!
I won't belittle Environics but a poll of this small size has by their estimation a +/- of 6.2%.
Their release reads:
"In British Columbia, close to half (48%) of residents now say they strongly or somewhat support the tax on all carbon-based fuels used by consumers and businesses in the province as a way to encourage reductions in greenhouse gas emissions which cause climate change, compared with an almost equal proportion (47%) who oppose it."
"These findings reflect increased support since last July (shortly after the tax came into effect) when only 40 percent expressed support versus 56 percent who opposed it. Current support for the tax is close to, but not quite fully back to the level achieved in February 2008 soon after the measure was first announced by the B.C. government (but not yet implemented)."
In other words, the margin of error is almost equal to the change measured. Ouch.
And the "support" they say was achieved in February 2008 is meaningless since it soon disappeared anyway.
Then there's the way the question was formulated. Quoting again:
"Question Wording (B.C.):
As you may know, British Columbia now has a tax on all carbon based fuels used by consumers and businesses in the province, as a way to encourage reductions in greenhouse gas emissions generated in the province. This tax is currently 2.5 cents per litre, and will rise gradually to 7.2 cents per litre by the year 2012.
This tax is “revenue neutral” which means the same amount raised through this tax each year is refunded – by law - to taxpayers in the form of lower personal income and corporate taxes.
Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose this carbon tax for B.C.?"
I seriously question the wording here, particularly the "revenue neutral" section.
But regardless, there are other polls, some of which I noted above, with larger sample sizes and different results.
The key point made by the Ipsos exit poll is again that for most people the carbon tax wasn't that important and for those it was - 57% voted NDP.
Anecdotal evidence is just that.
morechatter
2 years ago
Campbell and Crew do Carbon
And its Global News as the most shot at face is all over the tube and print. What's the response from the public? Could you change that channel, I can't stand that creeps face,...!
I thought it made for some pretty good campaign material as some of Mr. Campbell's expressions where priceless.
As I certain he also is!
Scrap the tax, and next the NDP needs to get hooked up with a bankrupt media mogul while doing the OLYMPICS and Province. And lets see what a bankrupt media mogul can contribute to a NDP campaign if you get the spin on it.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
"Axe the Tax Axed Again and Again and Again" = WHAT?
rac
Well, for one thing, Axe the Tax was around long before April 7th, so there is no way that it was responsible for any gain the NDP had.
A non-sequiter.
Secondly, I suspect any gains had more to do with the crappy campaign the Libs ran rather than anything the NDP did right.
I thought it was the NDP that ran the crappy campaign according to environmentalists.
Given that there are fixed election dates, the fact that in a recession, they were so far behind to begin with was really pathetic.
One good point that I agree with. It's really too bad when a momemt of lucidity interrupts an otherwise amusing post.
Lastly, with your comment, "But of course that press conference was a calculated political move which has paid off handsomely for Suzuki and Berman's corporate backers.", you are basically saying that Axe the Tax cost them the election.
Another non-sequiter, though a rather more convoluted one.
You know, Richard, we're all well aware that cycle commuters believe passionately that God is on their side, and they on his, no matter which side of the sidewalk they're riding on at the time. But the rest of us know that's just not necessarily so. He may simply have refused to buy them a Mercedes Benz.
wayfarer
2 years ago
Bill Tieleman spinning out of control
Tieleman,
You are spinning your own spin now. You're above response makes absolutely no sense. You are mired in a mucky quagmire of self-spin - for what? To prove to the world that you were always right about Axe the Tax? I see so much ego in your articles and so little humility.
It's over. You and your party lost on the carbon tax. You can keep spinning the numbers, but you approach a point where it becomes counter-productive. By continuing to grind an axe, ad nauseaum, you now risk more than alienating green NDPers; you now risk alienating rank and file party supporters. You've already done so by calling Carole (and her allies) on the carpet in such a public fashion. You want to shovel salt in the NDP wound by directing people to your little Facebook campaign, keep on truckin'. But, you might consider stepping back to consider the broader utilitarian goals at stake, i.e., the BC NDP's prospects for rebuilding and reinventing itself. Is it really worth it? Even if you truly believe the carbon tax is as unjust as you say - is it really worth the risk of splintering the NDP into even more factions?
Stump
2 years ago
play nice
"You know, Richard, we're all well aware that cycle commuters believe passionately that God is on their side, and they on his, no matter which side of the sidewalk they're riding on at the time."
We're all well aware that you have a hate-on for cyclists Rod. There's no need to display your irrational distaste at every opportunity.
G West
2 years ago
reefer, rac, wayfarer
You're shooting the messenger again.
How come?
Why can't you just deal with the issues, make your argument and leave it at that.
The way you so easily descend into ad hominem attacks makes me think you don't really have an argument at all.
Tieleman has presented an argument - instead of responding all you do is spin your tires and throw mud.
Frank
2 years ago
wayfarer
"It's over. You and your party lost on the carbon tax."
An allegation you can't even begin to prove. As you have no numbers to back that up. Instead we're simply to take your say-so.
"Even if you truly believe the carbon tax is as unjust as you say - is it really worth the risk of splintering the NDP into even more factions?"
That ship has already sailed. Pro-carbon tax people damned the NDP during an election campaign. Therefore they've demonstrated they're not worth being in an alliance with.
Good riddance.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
Hardly
Stump
We're all well aware that you have a hate-on for cyclists Rod. There's no need to display your irrational distaste at every opportunity.
Hardly. But I do object to those cyclists who don't show elementary courtesy towards pedestrians in crosswalks, and on sidewalks. There's a lot of that, and some of the professional cyclists, such as bike couriers, are among the worst offenders.
Last week I was nearly flattened at the corner of Pender and Richards by a cyclist proceeding at full tilte east on Pender several seconds after the signal had changed and we had a WALK sign. If I had been simply watching the signal, instead of looking to my left, I wouldn't be here right now.
Stump
2 years ago
that's unfortunate but...
what does it have to do with RAC's comments or the gas tax? You made a completely unrelated, snide comment and I'm calling you on it, that's all.
If I had a dime for every pedestrian who DIDN'T look both ways before jaywalking I'd have a whole lot of much nicer bikes. If I had a penny for every driver who exhibited rude, dangerous behaviours, those bikes would be stored on my own private South Pacific Island. But, again, it's not relevant, so why don't we skip the usual degenerative trend and aim higher?
ReeferMadness
2 years ago
G West - why are we so hard on the messenger?
Oh, poor Bill. Just because he used his Tyee editorials as a bully pulpit to go after his political enemies doesn't make him a fair target right?
It's actually pretty simple. You go after the messenger when there's no message, just a political attack . Bill managed to find someone out there who agrees with him on the carbon tax. Is that news? That this guy has no real evidence is obviously beside the point.
But I again point to the fact that Bill doesn't even make a pretense of caring whether the carbon tax works or not. It's all about how the issue contributed to the NDP's election results. I know this is difficult for some to get their minds around but not everyone equates the good of the province directly to the electoral success of one party.
Bill - get over yourself. Find something more substantive to write about or get some therapy.
To the editors of the Tyee - Do you want to be a serious alternative news source or the political junkie's version of the National Enquirer ?
wayfarer
2 years ago
Frank
I said:
"It's over. You and your party lost on the carbon tax."
You said:
An allegation you can't even begin to prove. As you have no numbers to back that up.
What other proof do you need other than the Carole James losing the election amid the worst voter turnout in BC election history? The NDP staked their election on this issue and LOST. This isn't about mathematical proofs or skewed exit polls. It's about reality, and you need a serious reality check.
I said:
"Even if you truly believe the carbon tax is as unjust as you say - is it really worth the risk of splintering the NDP into even more factions?"
You said"
Pro-carbon tax people damned the NDP during an election campaign. Therefore they've demonstrated they're not worth being in an alliance with.
So the answer is yes, you are willing to stake the future of your party on a single issue, one that Carole James has since shown pragmatic flexibility and compromise on?
The tradition of the left in Canada continues. In-fighting and navel-gazing to to the point of self-destruction.
Frank
2 years ago
wayfarer
In other words the NDP lost the election over the carbon tax because you say so.
In your world there were no other issues, no other reasons for people voting one way or the other. It was only about the carbon tax.
No wonder no one buys your logic.
And the NDP future is not being staked on a single issue, its being staked on issues other than the carbon tax.
The NDP is stronger without right-wing carbon tax supporters. Try and accept that.
wayfarer
2 years ago
Frank
"In other words the NDP lost the election over the carbon tax because you say so."
No, because the electorate said so. I hardly have that much influence or power.
Yes, there were other issues and reasons that brought the NDP down, but you seem incapable of appreciating those nuances.
"The NDP is stronger without right-wing carbon tax supporters."
Really?? And since when are supporters of the carbon tax necessarily right-wing? Since you said so? Apparently your own leader, Carole James, disagrees with you. And that's something you will need to try and accept.
Frank
2 years ago
wayfarer
The electorate didn't say so. If you had bothered to go to the voting booth you would have seen there is no question asking why you vote one way or the other.
Instead, we have things like seasonal polling done by various firms and which often ask questions besides the one about which party people are most likely to support. The trend in these polls shows that NDP support increased when they decided to not support the carbon tax. But of course you don't believe their data trends.
And we also have exit polls which you say are skewed.
We also have the election itself which showed the NDP getting 41.5% of the vote. We also have data showing the Greens and Liberals lost more voters than the NDP. But of course you ignore that too.
Instead all you have is your declaration that the NDP's stance against the carbon tax was why they lost the election while conveniently ignoring the fact that parties that supported the carbon tax lost voters since 2005 and, unlike the NDP, lost the share of the popular vote that polling suggested they had.
"Really?? And since when are supporters of the carbon tax necessarily right-wing? Since you said so?"
Regressive taxation such as flat taxes have been supported by large numbers of right-wing think tanks and parties and party candidates over the years across North America. If you want examples I will dig them up.
"Apparently your own leader, Carole James, disagrees with you."
We'll see.
But the key is you call her "my leader" and refer to the NDP as "your party".
I don't know who you support but I think you should spend your time worrying about them and less worrying about a party you don't support.
G West
2 years ago
Nope
Completely untrue.
Far more than Bill Tieleman has done certain posters here have tried tirelessly to try and get the ad hominem attacks stopped and to get you guys to address the facts that:
a) there is no economic consensus on the value of carbon taxes over cap and trade; and
b) there is no evidence whatever that the Campbell Tax, which is NOT A CARBON TAX, has done anything for the environment, further;
c) the Campbell Tax cannot even be discussed without addressing its central feature - revenue neutrality.
In fact, all you and your compatriots ever do here and elsewhere is scream and hold your hands over your ears.
That's what I'm talking about and once again you refuse to address your own behavior while throwing mud at others.
One can only ask why.
If my children behaved this way I'd give them a time out in their room.
G West
2 years ago
Further
I posted James's statement about the Campbell Tax last week - she never said or implied that she supports it.
Why do you continually trot out this blatant lie?
wayfarer
2 years ago
Frank
"Instead all you have is your declaration that the NDP's stance against the carbon tax was why they lost the election..."
Frank, if you re-read my comments on this issue, I don't claim this. I believe the NDP's position on the carbon tax was ideologically misguided and said policy ended creating a rift in the party, alienating environmental NDP supporter (not all of whom are NDP members), which was a significant factor in the election, but not the only factor.
My main point to you and Bill and others unwilling to let go of this issue is that it's now moot, especially since Carole James has conceded. Sure, I expect a leadership change before 2013, so it's quite possible a new leader will rekindle the Axe the Tax torch, but that would be a political death sentence, in my view. More importantly, it would be morally wrong. Bill's numbers are skewed insofar as they fail to account for the record low voter turnout. Statistics don't often lie, but they can mislead.
Bill wants to keep flogging this dead horse via the Tyee and his Facebook campaign. Carole James, Rob Fleming and most of her shadow cabinet want to simply move forward and accept the tax is here to stay, pledge to make it more effective and fair. If anything, this bit of pragmatism is a vote winner in the future.
In answer to your curiosity about my affiliations. Right now I hold no card for any party. I once held an NDP membership, but became quickly disillusioned in 1993 with Harcourt's famous province-wide televised address in which he lashed out against "welfare cheats, deadbeats and varmints" - and the regressive welfare reforms that followed. There were other reasons in years later, but that's another matter.
If the NDP shows a bit of foresight and moral gumption on the issues related to the climate change and peak oil emergencies, they can easily win people like me back. I'm certainly more encouraged by James new pragmatism than I am by your dogmatism.
Have a nice day.
Frank
2 years ago
wayfarer
"Frank, if you re-read my comments on this issue, I don't claim this. I believe the NDP's position on the carbon tax was ideologically misguided and said policy ended creating a rift in the party, alienating environmental NDP supporter (not all of whom are NDP members), which was a significant factor in the election, but not the only factor."
I agree with most of this except for the "ideologicially misguided" part. If anything I think the NDP was ideologically consistent by not supporting the tax.
"My main point to you and Bill and others unwilling to let go of this issue is that it's now moot, especially since Carole James has conceded."
Did you let it go when James was against it?
"it's quite possible a new leader will rekindle the Axe the Tax torch, but that would be a political death sentence"
I disagree. Not enough people support a carbon tax and of those that do they don't show up at the voting booth. I'm basing that statement on the showing of the Green Party.
"More importantly, it would be morally wrong."
And this is the crux of the matter and why I keep arguing it. It is not morally wrong to oppose a tax of any kind that hits poor people more than rich people. In fact, I think its morally wrong of you to support it. No matter how many elections Campbell wins it doesn't mean his policies are morally right.
"Bill's numbers are skewed insofar as they fail to account for the record low voter turnout."
The low voter turnout supports mine and Bill's argument. The Libs and Greens lost more voters than the NDP did.
"I once held an NDP membership, but became quickly disillusioned in 1993 with Harcourt's famous province-wide televised address in which he lashed out against "welfare cheats, deadbeats and varmints" - and the regressive welfare reforms that followed."
I can understand that. Its why I don't consider Mike Harcourt as someone I would bother defending on here. The best I can say about him was that he was better than Bill Bennett.
"If the NDP shows a bit of foresight and moral gumption on the issues related to the climate change and peak oil emergencies, they can easily win people like me back."
Again, there's not enough of you to make up for the supporters we'd lose. People who are worried about other things besides climate change. And as the past election demonstrated even when you do support a party chances are you won't show up on voting day.
lynn
2 years ago
foggy weather
As she's demonstrated with her latest "compromise" on the carbon tax, by doing so, James once again confuses the issue instead of bringing focus to it.
If you want the public to know what you stand for, make it clear....in clear and simple language.... and in behavior that follows through.
I agreed with her original stand.....
and now who knows where this is going?
Basically, I don't think the NDP could go wrong if they adhered to a policy of non-co-operation with the Campbell Liberals.
Nothing good has come... or will come from the traitorous actions of the BCLiberals.
The BC in their case stands for "Before the Courts".
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
rac: Biking a big part of his schtick
Stump
what does it have to do with RAC's comments or the gas tax? You made a completely unrelated, snide comment and I'm calling you on it, that's all.
Well, keep calling! Biking is a big part of Richard's (rac's) schtick, and I think it is relevant to his presentations on the issue of a carbon tax versus cap and trade.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
wayfarer: Jack Layton said so
Really?? And since when are supporters of the carbon tax necessarily right-wing? Since you said so?
At a BBQ in Mission last summer, Jack Layton was asked why the NDP wasn't supporting a carbon tax. He answered that the Federal Caucus had looked at the options, cap and trade versus a retail tax, and decided that cap and trade was the prefered method. He stated that much of the growing support for consumer targetted carbon taxes was coming from oil companies and "right wing economists". While he did not specifically name Prof Mark Jaccard of SFU, I believe that's who he had in mind, but I may be wrong about that.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
wayfarer: Why the psuedo religious approach?
... so it's quite possible a new leader will rekindle the Axe the Tax torch, but that would be a political death sentence, in my view. More importantly, it would be morally wrong.
"Morally wrong"? Morally? Since when did a tax policy debate become an issue of morality? Why the psuedo religious approach?
When I read phrases like that, I have to wonder if the environmental Elmer Gantrys haven't succeeded in debasing this discussion beyond the point of no return.
Stump
2 years ago
biking and tax
"I think it is relevant to his presentations on the issue of a carbon tax versus cap and trade."
Really? In what way?
Ian Hanington
2 years ago
Carbon tax AND cap and trade
Most people who really understand the issue, and who understand the seriousness of global warming, agree that both carbon taxes and cap and trade are required to adequately price carbon emissions. It appears to be the approach that both elected parties in B.C., as well as the Green Party, have accepted.
Ian Hanington
The David Suzuki Foundation
Frank
2 years ago
Ian
Your foundation campaigned against the Liberal's only opposition, I hope you're as satisfied with Campbell's cabinet appointments as you are with his environmental record.
Sidney Ball
2 years ago
Take Back Your NDP!
Despite what the likes of Rot Smelsbad, Ginchy West and Spinny Bill Spieleman would have you believe, the NDP is not a party of reactionary rednecks – although the tent has been big enough to include them, along with the truly progressive (and green) democratic socialists. It’s just that, with the stink these guys have been layin’ down lately, a lot of us are just sayin’, you know, it’s time to
Take Back Your NDP!
G West
2 years ago
Ian
Then why is Suzuki supporting the Campbell Tax?
It's not a Carbon Tax - it's a money laundry - it does nothing but suck up money (taking nothing at all from airlines and cruise ships) and spews it back out every year in a legislatively fickle and administratively complex and costly way to Gordon Campbell's friends at the high end of the income ladder.
You know this Ian - and so, surely, does David,
I think his umbrage at Bill Tieleman the other week was a clear demonstration of his own discomfiture with his, and your, untenable position....
You people supported Campbell, a man who can't handle the reins of power, doesn't know a thing about cooperation and conciliation, ignored his own Attorney-General's advice on numerous legal matters and is been responsible for more retrograde measures relative to social policy than any other government in this province since the end of the second world war.
I'm surprised you're still holding your head up in public - you should be embarrassed.
The fact is, if you understand the issue so incompletely as to fail to realize what you've done, there is little hope at all for the future...and none whatsoever from a large block of so-called 'green' opinion.
Nothing is going to happen to address global warming under Campbell - the idiots who supported his alienating tax now have only themselves to blame.
It global warming requires critical action within the next ten years I'd say your actions have made that program even less likely to reach a positive conclusion.
G West
2 years ago
Sidney Ball
Kindly refrain from the offensive personal comments and make a case for the efficacy of the Campbell Tax.
Those who resort to ad hominem name calling generally reveal little more than their own lack of logic and understanding.
Thanks for proving that one more time!
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
Sidney Ball: Get off your ass and do something
Sidney Ball
... the truly progressive (and green) democratic socialists. It’s just that, with the stink these guys have been layin’ down lately, a lot of us are just sayin’, you know, it’s time to
Take Back Your NDP!
Sidney, I dare you to get off your ass and do just that. In fact, I dare you to get off your ass and do anything.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
They are both parts of the same secular religion
Stump
Really? In what way?
The cyclist identity and the green identity are two sides of the same political coin. They're integral parts of a certain kind of Vancouver political fashion statement.
Rod Smelser
2 years ago
Ian Hannington: Why is your superior "ashamed" of Carole James
Your recent post ends with the statement that both major parties in BC support carbon pricing policies your Foundation deems appropriate. If that is the case, why did Dr David Suzuki say he was "ashamed" of Carole James in a speech in Nanaimo last September?
http://www.bcliberals.com/?section_id=1575§ion_copy_id=13373
http://www.bcyl.ca/r12.470.0.shtml
VivianLea Doubt
2 years ago
Ian Hanington
I believe you are being disingenuous again...
"Most people who really understand the issue, and who understand the seriousness of global warming, agree that both carbon taxes and cap and trade are required to adequately price carbon emissions."
I guess that depends on how you define those people that "really understand". There is widespread concensus in the scientific/academic community about the seriousness of global warming, but there is no such concensus about how to best tackle it in meaningful ways, and there is much disagreement about whether pricing carbon emissions is a legitimate tool to do so. It has been widely studied and reported that the effect is much greater on the poor than on others, and this is a concern for many. For the Suzukis of the world, why they just purchase carbon offsets.
I have no difficulty with you putting forward your viewpoint here, but for my part I would advise you to make solid arguments for your position, and not resort to claiming an expertise that is superior to all others.
Stump
2 years ago
ditto ditto
"I have no difficulty with you putting forward your viewpoint here, but for my part I would advise you to make solid arguments for your position, and not resort to claiming an expertise that is superior to all others."
Glad to see I wasn't the only one who found this rather patronizing. I don't need an economics degree to read a thermometer or understand the seriousness of climate change.