Dion - "I am a trustworthy person"

Lily-white Stephane Dion, the model of self-professed integrity, reiterates his plan to vote against the Throne Speech if a new session of Parliament is started in the fall (Election is possible, Dion warns).

This of course could force an election if the other two parties join him. If strict adherence to Kyoto becomes the pivotal issue, then I don't see how the NDP or Bloc could avoid this action and still maintain their own credibility.

Kaptain Kyoto assures us that we can trust him:

"I never broke my word in 11 years in politics," Mr. Dion said. "I am a trustworthy person ... I want to destroy the sense of cynicism that no politician will stick to his or her word. I always did it. I don't over-commit and when I'm committing, I will deliver. It's the message this whole caucus will carry."

Never mind that the previous (Liberal) government's record on greenhouse gas emissions under the stewardship of then Environment Minister Stephane Dion was abysmal.

As Dion continues his 'Yeah-but-you can-trust-me-now' tour, he assures Nova Scotia and Newfoundland that "he would respect offshore revenue deals with Nova Scotia and Newfoundland even though, as the New Democrats pointed out, he strongly opposed such agreements when he was a cabinet minister."


CNEWS reports that Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald is prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt (Dion forced to defend previous opposition to offshore deals for N.L. and N.S.) - H/T CBL.

Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams of course welcomes him with open arms since 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'; whatever he may have said or done in the past.


Of course, Stephane Dion is not the only politician who said one thing in the past and then appeared to change course when it was deemed politically expedient.

Stephen Harper himself once called Kyoto a 'socialist scheme' before having his apparent climate change conversion (although the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive concepts).

But Stephane Dion is trying to paint himself as some kind of guileless pillar of integrity; a politician who would never break his word.

That is an oxymoron in politics, and anyone who believes otherwise is a fool.

* * * *

Related: Actually, Dion should get with the program. There could be a backlash developing, which is causing current thinking to be a bit more flexible with Kyoto targets and objectives. Check out Terence Corcoran's Cool Summits.

Could Stephen Harper have been right all along?

* * * *

Wednesday Update: Newfoundland Premier leaves Liberal leader out on a limb.

Double McGuinty Smackdown

This was sweet: (QP, Hansard - Friday, April 20, 2007)


Mr. David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, now the country knows that the Minister of the Environment is trying to scare Canadians with a report based on bogus assumptions and extreme views of the Kyoto accord.

But the minister's actions we now know were far more devious than that. He claimed that five independent economists support his report, but that is not true. Don Drummond supposedly was a supporter, but now we find out his support was only
grudging. David Keith, the Calgary researcher, said: “I think the report overstates the difficulty of implementing policies in the short term”.

Why did this minister ask for expert opinions, but only used what suited his brazenly partisan purposes?

Hon. John Baird (Minister of the Environment, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, we tabled a report yesterday before the committee, a report that set out the implications of a private member's bill brought forward by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party has been very clear. It does not believe that implementing the protocol would cost anything. It is a Kyoto without any price.

If it were so easy to do, if there were no price, no cost to Canadian industry, why is the member's own brother begging us not to bring in car emission standards in the province of Ontario?

Heh.

Wanted: Straight Talk on Kyoto

I am growing weary of the massive propaganda ploys from both sides of the Kyoto divide. Canadians want the facts; not political spin or self-serving obfuscation from lobby groups with major vested interests.

John Baird's gloomy forecast of what complete Kyoto compliance would actually mean is probably a worst-case scenario. David McGuinty accuses Baird of ignoring the economic benefits of green technology development.

I would really like to see some actual figures from both sides, and have them analyzed by a group of truly objective and non-partisan third parties (if there is such a thing).

Buzz Hargrove may be on the right track with his op-ed in today's Financial Post (Kyoto Impossible). Of course he has a stake in the success of the auto sector, so his bias is obvious. However he does advocate for a cleaner environment, as I expect we all do.

Even the Globe is taking a moderate stand in this controversy in today's editorial, Those Kyoto Costs:

...The opposition MPs, led by the Liberals, have let crass politics trump their policy judgment. The federal government cannot and should not take such drastic action to meet Kyoto goals.

None of this lets Ottawa off the hook. Global warming is real. The Tories have a duty to produce a substantive package of market-based policies that would foster real reductions, albeit at a slower pace. But the federal government cannot destroy Canada to save it.

Deliberate fear-mongering from either side is not acceptable. Canadians want the truth. We deserve nothing less.

* * * *

Update: In case you're interested, there's a parallel discussion going on at Jack's Newswatch.

And at Canadian Blue Lemons, Brian slams the 'deniers of the deniers'. Boy I wish I had thought of that one.

Dr. Roy reports that Buzz calls Harper and Bush too green!

Environment Canada update here.

Mike Duffy Update: David Suzuki is telling us that we Canadians all want action now. Thank you, David. I didn't know that. It's great to have someone from the Nanny State do your thinking and talking for you.


Saturday Update: Andrew Coyne - Listen to Baird: This Wolf may be Real.

Dion Wants to increase your Hydro Bill

John Ivison's column in today's National Post mirrors my thoughts on Stephane Dion's "Green Investment Account" proposal (Dion's naivete on display).

His scheme is intended to make the polluters pay, but guess what? The buck stops at the person staring back at you in the mirror.

The new plan would mean polluting industries could see their top-line expenses grow by $2.5-billion a year if they miss their emission targets.

Canadians who scoff at pleas of poverty from the oil and gas industry may be less smug when they learn the electricity industry is already contemplating passing on the estimated $1-billion in annual extra costs to consumers.

"Sure we would," said Hans Konow, president of the Canadian Electricity Association. "This is added cost that would be passed through."

This will just end up being another behemoth Liberal boondoggle, designed to line the pockets of everyone except you and me. The irony is that it doesn't even necessarily guarantee results in terms of reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Jason Kenney calls this plan a 'lemon'.

The Liberal party sure picked one.

* * * *

More at Political Staples - Because there is only one payer.

Changing the Channel

I have been negligent about environmental posting lately.

Lorrie Goldstein has been following this topic with a very balanced approach, and quite often with a great deal of humour.

Today's column, "Dion's Top Ten Kyoto Excuses", playfully suggests what might happen if Dion should become the next Prime Minister (gasp!), and have to follow Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez's private member's bill on fulfilling Kyoto obligations. Lorrie brilliantly explains how Dion would weasel out of the edit.

As mentioned in an earlier post, the Kyoto bill was probably one of Dion's dumber moves.

And he will regret his Pyrrhic victory sooner or later.

* * * *

Friday Update: Excellent column by Colby Cosh in the Post - Two Kinds of Revolutionaries.

Enviro-Socialist Hypocrisy

Peter Foster's excellent FP editorial (The Living Come First) puts forward an interesting view on the current popularity of the Kyoto Kult, and the underlying enviro-socialism that drives it.

Sir Nicholas Stern, according to Foster, particularly tends to espouse the concern for the future generations:

The alleged ethical trump card in the enviro-socialist stance is that the market has no way of accounting for the fate of people a hundred or two hundred years hence (although it seems to have done a bang-up job in the past two hundred). Future generations "lack representation." To discount the future -- by this account -- is to cheapen the lives of the unborn.

Stern suggests that the unborn should have equal "weights" with present generations. "Are there any persuasive ethical arguments," it asks, "for discrimination by birth date?" Well, abortion certainly seems to be one, since mothers have by definition to be born before their babies. But in fact we need not get into the thorny ethics of the "Right to Life," since this is not a matter of the living taking precedence over a fetus, but of the bizarre notion that the living should not take precedence over those who have not even been--and may never be--conceived.

The main precondition for the prosperity of future generations is the health of present generations. Enviro-socialism seeks to turn this obvious logic on its head. But the notion that the present might sacrifice itself to the collective future is bizarre. By impoverishing ourselves we necessarily impoverish our descendents, and make them less equipped to deal with any challenges they might face (and we also further impoverish the present poor, contrary to the redistributionist fantasies of Kyoto).

I'm not sure that I agree with everything Foster says in the editorial, but it is a fascinating read.

The irony, as he points out as an aside, is that all this concern for the unborn seems to ignore the present reality of abortion.

But of course, in a world view where humans are the supreme culprits, I suppose that abortion is simply another tool with which to offer sacrifices to Mother Earth.

* * * *

Update - More Enviro-Socialist Hypocrisy:

Lorrie Goldstein - Let 'em live like Common People.


Toronto Sun Letters :

Do as they say?

I was somewhat disenchanted to learn that two champions for global warming control have not been practising what they preach. My day started poorly by learning that David Suzuki's entourage of seven are touring the country in a bus with 40 seats. Later, to my dismay, I learned that Al Gore showed up to his Toronto engagement in a gas-gulping limousine. What message are we to take from this?

Grant Kelly

Angus

* * * *

Great post at Officially Screwed, "Suzuki Paying for Salvation...". The post itself is worth the read, and then in comments we have one reader referring to "Kooky Suzuki" which gave me a chuckle, and another gives a link to one awesome debunking site: A Dog Named Kyoto. I could spend the whole day reading that blog!


Tom Brodbeck - Suck it up, Suzuki!

Saturday Update: Suzuki lashes out at Alberta premier.

Show me the money

Joseph C. Ben-Ami seems to be another Doubting Thomas.

He questions David Suzuki's claim that "corporations have not been interested in funding us".

Oops! He also calls him a "Global Warming Charlatan". I'm pretty sure that is considered to be blasphemy in the Church of Kyotology.

* * * *

And more Glo-Bull Warming info from Rachel Marsden - My Own Inconvenient Truth.

I've found a couple more Doubting Thomas' here and here. Their penance will be to take the bus to the hospital for any health emergencies.

Let's Rework those Ads

That nasty K-word keeps popping in the media.

In fact the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein has not only mentioned Kyoto in today's Point of View - "McGuinty's Green Smoke Screen", but also in his own column featuring the Top Ten Problems with the Kyoto accord (The Kyoto Horror Show).

Sheila Copps throws in her own two cents worth as well (Kyoto Cost Tories Dearly).

The Ontario Government's disingenuous attempt to portray itself as Kyoto compliant is a topic I'll leave for another day.

Copp's piece on the other hand, smacks of everything that causes the public to become cynical about politics, as she urges the government to support opposition's Kyoto bill:

Why not take a leap of faith and support Kyoto targets? Even if the requisite tonne reduction is not met, politics is about perception.

And there, my friends, is Liberal-think unplugged. Ugh.

Lorrie Goldstein has put together an incredibly insightful list of reasons why the Kyoto targets are flawed and unrealistic. Most have to do with the fact that non-signatory countries produce far greater greenhouse gas emissions than we do.

Copps says, "By standing up as the only party against Kyoto, the Tories were strangely out of step with the House of Commons and the country."

But Goldstein counters:

Finally, do Canadians support Kyoto? Our national media seem to think so, based largely on a recent Globe/Strategic Counsel poll, which asked people whether we should "try" to achieve our Kyoto targets. That received a 63% to 30% favourable response. But surely, Canadians believe we should "try" to do many things. Whether we're willing to make unfair sacrifices in a doomed effort, is the real question.

Interestingly, when The Strategic Counsel asked the same people if they supported charging "significantly higher prices" for gasoline and heating their homes -- a far more relevant question -- the vote was 64% to 34% against.

A CanWest/Innovative Research poll which was in the field at almost the same time as The Strategic Counsel, found about seven in 10 respondents agreed with the statement: "I don't care whether the new federal government implements Kyoto or not, so long as they take real action to make our environment better." Hmmm.

So, Canadians appear to support Kyoto, but when asked to put their money where their mouths are, they start jumping off the bandwagon.

I would go further and agree with the Globe's Jeffrey Simpson, that Canadians have been indoctrinated with the erroneous message that "Kyoto equals concern about climate change".

So here is my (once again) free and unsolicited advice, this time for Stephen Harper and the CPC. Drop those attack ads right now. Replace them with ads showing the real facts about the effects of Kyoto; both in terms of unrealistic targets and the possible effects on the economy. Lay out a pragmatic plan to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions in Canada.

Expose the opposition and Kyoto for the shams that they are; but show me - don't tell me.

* * * *

Great link to Lorne Gunter's latest column at Political Staples - The Problem is Bigger than That. Edmonton Journal - Dion Paints Himself into Green Corner.

Some hilarious stuff here about 'Greenie' - Officially Screwed and SDA.

Monday Update: Check out Uncommon Truths - Another poll gone horribly ungreen...

Stubborn Dr. Did Little

Stephane Dion is digging in his heels on the Terror Vote (H/T National Newswatch).

Kate also notes that his is losing the support of Liberal media regarding Kyoto.

Ah well, at least we have Ralph's assurances that Stephane is smarter and more sincere than Stephen Harper.

And you can always trust Ralph Goodale, right?

Kyoto Bill Lives

Tories fail to kill opposition Kyoto bill (CTV).

What next? If the government fails to act on this bill, which will likely pass with only the government opposing it, will there be a vote of non-confidence? How close are we to an election?

BTW, Buzz Hargrove is warning against the current Kyoto deadlines, especially in light of today's devastating news from Chrysler:

Buzz Hargrove, president of the Canadian Autoworkers Workers, does not expect any government to try to implement Kyoto according to current deadlines.

"It would be devastating for the whole community, anybody that signed on," he said. "It's not even a remote possibility. No prime minister in any one of the parties in the House of Commons is going to bring in any kind of regulation that says we have to do that. It would be suicidal for our economy.

"If somebody were to come out tomorrow and say you have to reach the objective that was laid out initially immediately you'd almost have to shut down every major industry in the country from oil and gas to the airlines to the auto industry and that just doesn't make sense."

Mr. Hargrove advocates a revision of Kyoto deadlines.

Is that an option?

* * * *

Update: Bill passes third reading.

Check out Robert Fife's link at the right hand side. He interviews Constitutional Expert Nelson Wiseman who says that it is 'virtually impossible to implement Kyoto.' He says that the government can no more do that than halt a blizzard.

BTW, Robert Fife does not seem to be a big fan of an unelected Senate. I like this guy!

New Update: We are 'very likely' going to be in an election soon.


Friday Update: John Ivison - Milliken refuses to show Tories the money. "...Speaker Peter Milliken, veered dangerously close to overt partisanship by letting the vote go ahead..."

Memories of DDT

Today Lorrie Goldstein likens the global warming hysteria to the knee-jerk reaction against DDT, which ended up causing millions of deaths in malaria-plagued third world countries.

His column Greens Aren't Always Good, Lorrie makes some pithy observations:

Global warming and the Kyoto accord are the crack cocaine of trendy causes for opportunistic politicians and chic environmentalists.

Since fighting man-made global warming involves "saving the planet," or so they tell us, it is the King Kong of all environmental crusades.

Of course, the fact we have been warned in the past by this crowd that life as we know it was about to end over everything from "the population bomb" to "global cooling," and that we survived, is now ignored.

Too many environmentalists know only one way of talking about these issues -- hysterically -- which has led to disaster in the past.

In this context, the history of the pesticide DDT is instructive...

Lorrie goes on to draw similarities to the two events and how even some respected environmentalists caution against jumping on the hysteria bandwagon.


The subject of DDT came up during a somewhat heated discussion in comments a while back in my post The Question Refuser Witch-hunt, so this column may be of particular interest to those involved.

* * * *

Update: Check out Charles Adler - "Canadians Driving Away from Kyoto"; H/T National Newswatch.

In a recent interview I did with the boss at Decima research, I asked the question,
What percentage of voters really think of the environment as their number one issue. The answer was nineteen percent. That means fewer than one in five. How does that small ratio get turned into the story that it is the country's most important issue.

Indeed.


Also, another Kyoto reality-check from Peter Worthington here.

Brilliant solution to the Kyoto problem here!

And if you were ever in doubt as to how much the PPG manipulates the message, check this out!

Tom Brodbeck weighs in - Give Global Warming Skeptics Their Say. Great rant against MSM. Quite refreshing!

Brodbeck again - Hysteria Blocks Debate.

More Kyotology

The Blogging Tories have done a great job today highlighting the articles in MSM that are poking holes at Kyoto.

One of my favourites is the Post's front page exposé on the religious fervour of Kyoto. I had noted this myself several weeks ago:

...The second reason why I believe this is such a hot topic today is that there is a huge spiritual void that the worship of the environment and earth serves to fill; especially by those who have abandoned traditional religion.

Today Joseph Brean of the Post discusses Davil Orrell's new book 'Apollo's Arrow', which exposes the "religious nature of modern environmentalism." David Suzuki and Al Gore are likened to saints or prophets. As PTBC notes, the article is well worth the read.

Contrast this with a Second Opinion piece in today's Record, which was written in response to the Record's anti-Kyoto stand from a few days ago. The writer cites Gore right on cue. The whole piece is written as a Churchhillesque call to environmental arms:

Let us remember what previous generations did when collectively they turned the impossible into the possible.

Another convert for Kyotology.

* * * *

Semi-related tidbit: From the Star - Is Susan Delacourt now becoming a Dion denier?

This is totally awesome!!! (H/T Neo Conservative in comments).

This is really funny!!!

Kyoto Kops

From Canadian Press - "The legislation forces the government to submit its plan for perusal within 60 days by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy.

The government would also need to set annual emissions targets, publish an annual climate-change progress report, and establish jail sentences or fines for people and business that break the law."


Meanwhile, the National Post is savaging Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez ("The Folly of Kyoto"):

Mr. Rodriguez's bill is naive in the extreme. It would consign us all to freezing together in the unemployed darkness. And despite all this sacrifice, it wouldn't even do any good against global warming...

The Liberals were in charge of the Kyoto file for over eight years. During that time, our greenhouse gas emissions went from 12% above 1990 levels to more than 30% above. From 1998 onward, the Liberals spent over $6-billion on environmental initiatives. But as former environment commissioner Johanne Gelinas said in her final report last fall, much of that money could not be accounted for, and none of the spending produced any measurable improvement in Canada's emissions. The Liberals -- including then-environment minister Stephane Dion -- could never figure out a way to reduce emissions, or even slow their growth...

Now for crass political gain, the opposition parties seem set to saddle the Tories with Pablo Rodriguez's pie-in-the-sky bill, and perhaps start a recession in the process. When the next election comes, voters should remember who set Canada down this road.

Sorry about the 'cut-and-paste' post today, but I'd sure love to hear your reaction to these two items.

Tail wagging the dog all the way to the polls

Today in the headlines of the National Post, we see the inherent problem with minority governments (Kyoto Bill May Force Election).

All three opposition parties are planning to support the imminent passage of a Liberal private member's bill which would "legally require the Conservative government to abide by the Kyoto protocol's short-term targets". Bill C-288 "calls on Canada to meet its Kyoto commitment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 6% below 1990 levels by 2012."

Constitutional experts say the implications of passing the bill could see Prime Minister Stephen Harper forced to choose between implementing measures to meet Kyoto targets he has called unrealistic or calling a general election.

(...)

The Conservatives fought the bill as it proceeded through successive readings, claiming that if it were passed it would require new spending, something a private member's bill cannot initiate. However, [Liberal] Speaker of the House Peter Milliken ruled yesterday that the bill does not constitute spending for a new and distinct purpose and can proceed to final reading.

So now the Government's hand may be forced. If it attempts to meet these targets, the economy could be seriously affected; a possibility that even Liberal buddy Buzz Hargrove cautions against:

"If somebody were to come out tomorrow and say you have to reach the objective that was laid out initially immediately, you'd almost have to shut down every major industry in the country from oil and gas to the airlines to the auto industry and that just doesn't make sense," he said.

And it makes even less sense in light of the recent bad news from Daimler Chrysler.

The Post cites Patrick Monahan, dean of Osgoode Hall Law School as warning that "the bill, if passed, would legally bind the government to meet its Kyoto obligations."

Therefore, since the government cannot realistically achieve these goals, it may be forced to call an election over the issue.


Personally, I think the opposition will have a lot of 'plainin' to do about why they forced the government's hand on such a contentious and confusing issue that is replete with so-called expert opinion on both sides.

The NDP is likely less than enthusiastic about this charade, since polls suggest that they are losing support to the Greens and Liberals. However, on an ideological basis, they have no choice but to back the bill.

It's clear that the opposition parties are playing a game of political blackmail on the backs of the Canadian taxpayers.



But here is the most telling line of all from the Post article:

Mr. Rodriguez said he is not suggesting how the Conservatives should meet the Kyoto targets. "They are in power. They wanted to run the country, so they have to take the responsibility," he said.

In other words, 'we three opposition parties will dictate to the government what to do, and then when they fail, the Natural Governing Party will be back in power.'

Thus, we see the fatal flaw of a minority government. I hope that Canadians see through the ruse and reward Stephen Harper with a strong majority government which he so rightly deserves.

Then perhaps we can finally get something of significance done in Ottawa, instead of all this political posturing.

* * * *

Updates: Here's the view from the other side of the fence.

-Just listening to QP now. Igghead is asking questions like why is the government scaring Canadians about the economic effects of Kyoto? Perhaps he should ask pal Buzz that question.


-Great letter in today's Post:

It was an interesting week in Canadian politics as the majority of federal MPs voted to continue support for the universally acknowledged to be unachievable Kyoto accord, which remains supported by the majority of Canadians, though the contents of the accord are understood by almost no one...a perfect combination of the dishonesty and opportunism of opposition MPs, and the intellectual apathy and indifference of the Canadian people.

Very well said, Iain G. Foulds of Spruce Grove, Alberta.

Great post by Olaf here, with an interesting debate in comments.

Stephane, you are in such trouble

The local Liberal-leaning Torstar spawn has finally seen through the smoke and mirrors.

Glad I didn't cancel my subscription.

Defining Dion

My recent post asking if Dion is Prime Minister material ended up being a long aggregate of scathing MSM criticism against him. Perhaps the most damning of all was that of the Ottawa Citizen's Randall Denley.

Everything about Dion seems soft, from his handshake to his policies. His appearance at the Citizen editorial board Friday confirmed the fears I had when the Liberals chose him as their leader. Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

That seems a bit harsh, but I think Dion failed to define himself at a critical time after the leadership convention. The CPC was only too happy to do that for him with the recent ad campaign.

Jean Lapierre, recently released from the bondage of caucus, suggests the same:

While the new leader has his party united solidly behind him, Mr. Lapierre cautions that Mr. Dion missed an early opportunity to sell himself across Canada and notes with some alarm that making the environment the critical theme of the campaign could fail.

"The mistake the Liberals are making on the environment is to say Harper is doing everything the Liberals were going to do. I don't understand why they're taking credit for what he's done. Where's the wedge to win votes?"

Some might suggest that the CPC party is running scared; that the ad campaign is evidence of desperation. I think it is brilliant strategy that will crystallize for the Canadian public what MSM already suspects - Stephane Dion defines the Peter Principle.

As an environment minister, his performance was uninspiring at best. Now as accidental leader of the LPC, he is attempting to attach every issue to his devotion to Mother Earth. He may sincerely believe this, but it almost approaches a religious fervour. With the CPC becoming born-again environmentalists, his one trick-pony approach has been usurped. John Baird is emerging as the new Guardian of Gaia, thereby freeing up Harper to deal with Canada's other pressing concerns.

Stephane Dion is still wearing his academic rose-coloured glasses, while Harper's reality vision is crystal clear. Being a Prime Minister requires an ability to juggle various complex files and concerns at the same time. The position demands someone who can think on their feet; speak clearly without stumbling either in content or delivery. An effective Prime Minister must be able to inspire confidence and competence.

And when a traditionally liberal-biased media can no longer hide the truth, even the LPC must be starting to realize that their sparkling new firecracker of a leader is actually a disappointing dud.

* * * *

Update: I need your help. I just finished reading an article in the Record by Geoffrey Stevens, who teaches political science at Wilfrid Laurier University and the University of Guelph. His op-ed, "Conservative attacks ads are a sign of fear", gives his very partisan POV why the ads are a mistake. Here is the part that bothers me though:

On the face of it, it seems absurd to spend good money (most of it taxpayers' in this age of public subsidies to parties and tax credits for contributors) to attack the opposition in political peacetime. There is no election in progress and none on the horizon, although accidents can always happen.

Is that true? Is most of the ad campaign really financed by the taxpayer? Because that seems to be what he is saying. Does anyone have the facts here? I would love to call him up on it if he's wrong. Thanks.

* * * *

Update: So Dion's little motion passed (that sounds somewhat vulgar..) So what does that mean? Why did Parliament waste time on this, since it is not binding?

Liberals a Little Late to Kyoto Party (H/T National Newswatch):

...To see Dion attack the Harper Conservatives over Kyoto is to witness hypocrisy practised at an advanced level. He knows that the Conservatives are vulnerable on this file, that public concern about climate change may be at an all-time high and that, if he wants to be prime minister, the Liberals must outflank the Greens and NDP in verbalizing the type of environmental outrage that can translate into votes...

And the Vancouver Sun has something to say about Dion's lust for power...

The 'Question Refuser' Witch-hunt

The Toronto Sun's Lorrie Goldstein has discovered a new phenomenon in our current hysterical global warming fixation (Laughing at Global Warming):

I'm sorry. I know global warming is a serious subject, particularly with the release of the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

But at some point in many big stories, mass hysteria takes over and the subject, no matter how serious, "jumps the shark" as they say on TV.

For me, that moment happened last week while reading a story in the Globe and Mail and coming across this hilarious nugget.

"As Conservative MPs emerged from their weekly caucus meeting in Ottawa, reporters asked whether they believe that increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are causing global warming. Most refused to answer the question directly."

Good gawd! Has it come to this? Are not just global warming "deniers," as Stephane Dion calls them, but mere global warming "refusers to answer the question directly" to be hunted down, as we once did witches?

He then goes on to imagine himself as an MP being questioned by the pressing media. The result is not only brilliant, but also extremely informative and well-balanced.

His imaginary press gallery encounter makes the point that MP's shouldn't allow themselves to be intimidated and goaded into making rash statements regarding this very complex issue.

However, the latest IPCC report does indeed seem to be inducing a kind of paranoia among those zealots in the Church of Kyotology.

And as Lorrie suggested, they may have finally jumped the shark in terms of credibility.

* * * *

Update: Is it just me, or does this report send chills up and down your spine too?

PARIS -- Fear of runaway global warming pushed 46 countries to line up Saturday behind France's bid for a new environmental body that could single out - and perhaps police - nations that abuse the Earth.

Notice the capital on the word "Earth"? And the word "police"?

One world environmental socialism is coming, folks. Open your eyes.


And with another reality check, Rex Murphy's 'inconvenient' comment from the other night is now available here.

* * * *

The great Mark Steyn has also nailed it today. (H/T to The Strong Conservative)

Canadian Blue Lemons: Goldstein on Global Warming.

* * * *

Monday Update: This is worth a read - A Prospectus for Big Government by Lorne Gunter. (The tail is wagging the dog)

Also, Canadian Blue Lemons re: Fraser Institute Report.

A Voice of Sanity at the Globe

I was going to tack this onto end of the 'Sky is Falling' post, but I think it deserves a spotlight of its own - Margaret Wente in an on-line Q & A about global warming.

H/T SDA and Halls of Macadamia. I have a warning from Blogger about a scheduled outage soon, so perhaps we can discuss this later.

* * * *

BIG UPDATE: Another voice of sanity at the Globe!! Yikes. Are they all Kyoto-deniers there?

The Politics and Religion of Kyoto

Once again the Toronto Sun's Lorrie Goldstein provides balanced and valuable insight today regarding the Kyoto controversy - Debunking Hot Hysteria. Of particular interest to me:

In fact, predicting climate change and forecasting weather are different issues. Unfortunately, too many politicians, environmental activists and media who often have a political agenda to ram through the Kyoto accord, are deliberately blurring this important distinction.

This is understandable because the UN treaty is highly controversial.

Many Kyoto critics charge it is more concerned with transferring wealth from the First World to the Third World than seriously reducing man-made greenhouse gases.

So is it possible that Kyoto is actually a form of enforced U.N. global tithing for the benefit of 'developing countries' such as China who are let off the hook?

To be sure there is a lot of hysteria and political twisting of 'facts' at the polar opposites (sorry) of the debate, but I suspect the increased focus goes deeper than that.

Why all the hype right now? Why is this such a crisis today and supposedly on the minds of Canadians more than the threat of terrorism, inadequate health care or poverty?

First of all, I would suggest that MSM has a lot to do with it. Unsubstantiated or exaggerated claims are often made by junk-scientists and used by MSM as an enticement to sell their product. Repetition is used to reinforce the belief. Environmental fear sells papers, encourages people to watch propaganda on television, the internet and in the cinema.

Of course, environmental lobbyists and green industries have a vested interest too. But it's not all about the money.


The second reason why I believe this is such a hot topic today is that there is a huge spiritual void that the worship of the environment and earth serves to fill; especially by those who have abandoned traditional religion.

To be sure most Christians, Jews, Muslims and followers of other faiths have a respect for the earth as a gift from their God and believe in the importance of being good stewards, but for some people, the earth has become their god.

M.I.T. Professor Richard Lindzen articulated this concept quite eloquently in a speech given at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.:

"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?"

"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply go back to treating it as a matter of religious belief..."

Once a person becomes a believer of global warming, "you never have to defend this belief except to claim that you are supported by all scientists -- except for a handful of corrupted heretics..."

"The research and support for research depends on the alarm," Lindzen told CNSNews.com following his speech. "The research itself often is very good, but by the time it gets through the filter of environmental advocates and the press innocent things begin to sound just as though they are the end of the world.

This all seems to dovetail well with a letter in today's Sun:

Green doom

Re "The New Pornographers (Lorrie Goldstein, Jan. 7): I've always been amazed by the fact that if someone stands on a street corner and preaches apocalyptic doom, many consider that to be a sign of mental illness. However, if one preaches apocalyptic doom, but does it within the confines of environmental concern, this is deemed as being honourable and compassionate. Strange days indeed.

Indeed. Better pull out your Kyoto bible and bow to High Priest Suzuki.

Is global warming - or to use the new buzz word climate change actually occurring? I don't see how that can possibly be disputed or denied. However the relevant question is to what degree are man-made greenhouse gas emissions responsible and what can we do about that in practical terms?

I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in between the hype and self-interest at both ends - possibly in that middle ground that Colby Cosh suggests where climate change can be seen as a rational probability requiring thoughtful consideration and policy development, but not necessarily mandating a panicky, paranoid reaction.

That goal would especially not be well-served by joining the Kyoto Kult.


Update: Kate points out a disturbing POV from the Weather Channel - "Sing from the Same Hymn Book". Stripping the Kyoto heretics - it fits in perfectly with my religion analogy.

Debunk - Part Deux

Continuing on with the Kyoto theme...

Tuesday's Financial Post carried a similar story adjacent to the article by Peiser. In "Climate action would be suicidal", FP columnist Peter Foster gives his reasons for the lack of substance in Kyoto, which you can read for yourself.

Here is the interesting part:

...Kyoto was just one draconian step towards a much more draconian future.

It is hard to understand why the Conservatives do not hammer away at these facts. Instead, in the face of an alleged tsunami of public concern, matched only by public ignorance, the Conservatives have now allegedly "gone green." They are "consulting" with radical, unelected environmental NGOs. But then what can they do? There is an election coming and its most important feature may be that Canadians are enjoying unseasonally mild weather even as it is being used to scare them to death.

So the government is being held hostage to the political will of Jack Layton and the environmentalists; even more so now with Wajid Khan's move to the Tories having the net result of needing only the cooperation of the NDP to hold the balance of power (reinforced by Lapierre's recent resignation).

Climate change is an alleged "collective action" problem. That is, there is no point in doing anything unless every major or developing industrial power on earth signs on, and -- more importantly -- keeps to its commitments. Which they wouldn't. As it is, the absence of China and India from Kyoto -- nations likely destined to be this century's largest carbon emitters -- was one of the reasons why the United States wisely refused to sign on.

In any event, the nations that did sign on to Kyoto are almost all struggling to meet their targets. They have succeeded only in imposing even more deadweight bureaucracy...

"Deadweight bureaucracy" - The kind of thing that lefties love. Lots of unionized jobs feeding at the trough of the public purse.

Today's Post carries a column by Colby Cosh stating the case for a reasonable middle ground. We also have a couple of articles in the FP. Foster again talks about "hysteria over climate change" in Europe's Masterplan, and Lawrence Solomon talks about a theory of a 'crash' coming in the climate boom-bust cycle (Will the Sun Cool Us?).



All of which begs the question - Why did all this seemingly factual opposition suddenly come out of the media woodwork? My guess is that Canadian business is suddenly worrying that Harper's steady course to the centre is actually now veering far left; which should be a concern for us all.

And if Harper is moving far left, God help Canada.

* * * *

Update: Excellent debate going on about Kyoto at The Prairie Wrangler: Should Canada Drop Kyoto?

And speaking of the environment, Hargrove slams Layton over tough emission standards (SDA) - "It's Not Easy Being Green". Reminds me of a quote from the previous post - "a fundamental conflict between economic realism and environmental idealism".

Saturday Update: Dark Blue Tory - Kyoto's garbage...end of story.

And a few choice lines from a Sun reader (I don't agree with the whole letter, but this part is great):

Kudos to Lorrie Goldstein for prying off the lid of what is probably the biggest scam in the world, the Kyoto Protocol, or what I call the Wizard of Oz(one). This treaty is actually a giant wealth redistribution scheme, socialism on a global scale that taxes wealthy, industrialized countries by forcing them to buy carbon emission credits from poorer countries through a virtual (phony) carbon market, while not reducing the world's pollution by one single molecule. In other words, we pay other countries to make and take our garbage. Also, Kyoto will actually accelerate globalization by encouraging companies to move their factories from highly-regulated Canada to mass-polluter countries like India and China; thus lowering our standard of living. In effect it's socialism disguised as science by our environistas. No wonder Dion, Duceppe, and Layton love it...