Did the Conservatives pick a Dud?

[hobbyguy]

Being against something is not a proposal, it is just chucking peanuts.

Fine, Scheer is against a national carbon tax. BUT what is his proposal to strengthen Canadian environmental performance? Umm, er, ummm....

[The Green Barbarian]

Being against something is not a proposal, it is just chucking peanuts.

That's insanely stupid. Being against fascism or communism is a position. The Canadian Army wasn't chucking peanuts in World War 2.

Fine, Scheer is against a national carbon tax. BUT what is his proposal to strengthen Canadian environmental performance? Umm, er, ummm....

What the hell does that even mean? "Strengthen Canadian environment performance"?? What kind of idiotic phraseology is that? Build pipelines, get oil to market. Strengthen our economy! Putting in carbon taxes and allowing boneheads like Catherine McKenna hundreds of millions of dollars to waste on "fighting" fairy tales is not strengthening anything. It is stealing money from the poor and middle class and handing it to the elites. It does nothing to "help" the environment. Appealing to morons who think this is something "helping" our environment helps nothing.

One thing I strongly disagree with Scheer on is that he is still committed to those insanely stupid Paris Accords. One of the few smart things Trump did was to pull out of that gross nonsense. Just the dumbest possible agreement ever created by man. I realize though that he has to say that he is still committed, as those crazy enough to accuse him of "chucking peanuts" on this issue would attack him mercilessly if he said he was pulling out, even though it is the right thing to do.

[hobbyguy]

Rational position from a conservationist perspective:

1. Don't build the NGP
2. Build Energy East - or if not able, build the TMX.
3. Strengthen environmental protections, including hazardous goods transport regulations, marine safety etc.
4. Promote efficient production and use of fossil fuels where necessary. A carbon tax - Pigovian tax - is one way to do that.

But I agree a Pigovian tax is a blunt instrument. So, rather than use a Pigovian tax, what does Andrew Scheer propose? Nothing?

If you don't offer a better solution, then you are no better than the ding dong NDP standing there shouting "Nooooo".

Andrew Scheer takes an anti-tax stance in general. Fine and dandy, if that's your perspective. Good populism, but it also sounds rather NDPish - "you can have everything you want for free". Sooo... how are you going to balance the books Andrew? What are you going to cut in order to reduce taxes? Be honest - run on that package of reduced services and tax cuts. But no, Scheer just wants the upside... and that's disingenuous.

[The Green Barbarian]

Rational position from a conservationist perspective:

1. Don't build the NGP
2. Build Energy East - or if not able, build the TMX.
3. Strengthen environmental protections, including hazardous goods transport regulations, marine safety etc.

Can agree with this though I would build #1, if it ran to Rupert.

4. Promote efficient production and use of fossil fuels where necessary. A carbon tax - Pigovian tax - is one way to do that.

Sure, promote it, somehow, but stop hurting the poor and the middle class with idiotic taxes that do nothing. Taxes are a last resort, because they are just so unfair and horrible.

But I agree a Pigovian tax is a blunt instrument. So, rather than use a Pigovian tax, what does Andrew Scheer propose? Nothing?

Sorry, but you are creating a problem that needs no real solution, because for some reason it matters to you. I don't care if the Conservatives shout NO to problems that don't really exist in the first place.

Andrew Scheer takes an anti-tax stance in general. Fine and dandy, if that's your perspective.

It's the stance of anyone with a brain.

Good populism, but it also sounds rather NDPish - "you can have everything you want for free".

I disagree.

Sooo... how are you going to balance the books Andrew? What are you going to cut in order to reduce taxes? Be honest - run on that package of reduced services and tax cuts. But no, Scheer just wants the upside... and that's disingenuous.

And to me it seems disingenuous to claim that if you cut some of the brainless drunken sailor spending that the Liberals are engaging in right now would lead to "reduced services". Take away McKenna's $500 million "Green" slush fund and boom, there's a whole lot of money right there.

http://business.financialpost.com/pmn/b ... use-gasses

[hobbyguy]

^^ GB - eventually we have to transition away from fossil fuels.

That has as much to do with other pragmatic concerns as it does the overblown Gore position.

NOx pollutants for one (shown to be definite carcinogens) - which are largely produced from burning fossil fuel fuels. The fact that fossil fuels are a finite resource and eventually we will run out. Yes, right now because of tight oil fracking it appears that there is lots, but that tight oil is masking an overall situation where the economically available supplies will be unable to meet demand.

Politically, fossil fuels are supporting some pretty unsavory places. Iran, Syria - just to name a couple. I personally don't like the fact that our western democracies are buying large volumes of oil that supports countries that would love to destroy our democracies. Which is partly why I saw Energy East as the real priority, with export pipelines in general as all second tier choices. Given that the phony "environmentalist" paid propagandists and permanent protestors killed Energy East - then the TMX is the best of the remaining options. The NGP was a dead duck and a very poor choice from a conservation perspective, but the TMX does no further damage.

So we can either sit our duffs and watch the world pass us by, or we can look to the future and invest in real solutions and potential future solutions. If you actually look at where the "Green" money from the feds is going, much of it goes to mass transit - which is both a benefit to people and reduces our fossil fuel use. I recognize that we use fossil fuels (displacing exports from unsavory countries) to pay for such things as mass transit.

I think our politicians have done us a disservice by not expressing, or even having, a bold and aspirational set of goals for the future.

The stupid NDP have no way forward at all and have totally lost the plot with their LEAP idiot faction that does more harm than good.

The Liberals have been too wishy washy. They should have said "you want mass transit/"green" infrastructure"? Fine, you can have that, and you will get it from a oilsands fund of federal money - and to get that, we need the TMX. No TMX, no mass transit funding. Then see how fast the idiots like demovictions Derek and bicycle Gregor change their tune. The way the Liberals have approached it, there is no downside for idiot like Corrigan, Robertson, and the grandest idiot of all Heyman. You want the benefits of being Canadian do you? Then behave like Canadians, not idiotic little nimbys.

The Conservatives and Scheer are not offering anything. Just saying "Nooo" to the environmental concerns of Canadians. They, and Scheer, are missing a great opportunity. Put a real comprehensive plan out there, not "let's go back to the 1990s". Instead, all we see is "Noooo" from Scheer.

So we have the three main parties offering either "Nooo" (NDP/LEAP Singh/Heyman style) or "Nooo" plan at all (Conservative Scheer style) or "wishy washy" muddle Liberal style.

I get why the Liberals are stuck on "wishy-washy". The NEP wasn't quite right and they are afraid of a similar "problem" - but dang it all the NEP would have given us the equivalent or better than Energy East.

I don't think Canadians are afraid of serious plans for the future, but our politicians certainly seem to be. The whole lot of them!

[The Green Barbarian]

^^ GB - eventually we have to transition away from fossil fuels.

Great - giving people like Catherine McKenna $500 million to funnel to her elite buddies isn't going to stop that.

The Conservatives and Scheer are not offering anything. Just saying "Nooo" to the environmental concerns of Canadians. They, and Scheer, are missing a great opportunity. Put a real comprehensive plan out there, not "let's go back to the 1990s". Instead, all we see is "Noooo" from Scheer.

Sorry, but you just keep making this crap up, and it is just partisan rhetoric and nonsense. What is a "real and comprehensive" plan to elitist enviros who want to jam the man-made climate change fairy tale down our throats? How many billions have to be wasted to satisfy your latte-sipping desires?? How many poor and middle class have to be exploited with idiotic taxes?? How many hundreds of millions have to be funneled into idiotic "green ideas" that help no one? Why does saying "YESSS!" to stupidity and waste satisfy you and your urges to waste money on nonsense?? Why is this "great opportunity" to rape, rob and pillage the Canadian treasury so important to you??? Because it sure disgusts me.

I don't think Canadians are afraid of serious plans for the future, but our politicians certainly seem to be. The whole lot of them!

I don't think Canadians are either, but they do know enough to want to see a cost/benefit analysis. When the twin boneheads Trudeau and McKenna can just offer ums and ahs and deflections when asked for such a reasonable request we know that the cost does not provide any benefit. And that's why there has to be a better way, one where taxpayers aren't constantly fleeced in the name of an unproven boogey-man.

[bob vernon]

Pipeline debate heating up. Scheer incredibly silent.

Crickets chirping around him. His strategy is to let the NDP in BC and Alberta and the federal Liberals to destroy each other and somehow scoop up the issue later. Much later. Like Harper he's just not giving leadership. Just dithering, smiling and wrinkling his forehead in a way that just shows how insecure he is.

[The Green Barbarian]

Pipeline debate heating up. Scheer incredibly silent.

Crickets chirping around him. His strategy is to let the NDP in BC and Alberta and the federal Liberals to destroy each other and somehow scoop up the issue later. Much later. Like Harper he's just not giving leadership. Just dithering, smiling and wrinkling his forehead in a way that just shows how insecure he is.

more lies from the lunatic left. What else is new. Scheer isn't the PM, so there's not much he can do, other than call out our rubbber-spined PM to get off his duff and do something, along with his clueless "Climate Change" minister McKenna. You have already been caught out lying about Harper, and now you are lying about Scheer. A lot of desperation in the Liberal camp these days, and rightly so. The Liberals have been weighed, measured, and found wanting.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4131996/kind ... ew-scheer/

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/04/0 ... _23406792/

[Jmfva]

I personally don't care if the guy is a plumber or has 9 doctorates. I only care if he understands the issues. While I have been critical of Trudeau in many respects, I will never criticize his experience or lack thereof to do the job as PM. Drama teacher, insurance salesman, or lawyer, it doesn't matter to me.

If Green didn't focus on this like all the other sore loser conservatives his posts would be cut in half. It is his favorite line. Obsessed with demeaning the profession of school teacher, and never focusing on experience in parliament. Broken record much.

[Jmfva]

^^ GB - eventually we have to transition away from fossil fuels.

Great - giving people like Catherine McKenna $500 million to funnel to her elite buddies isn't going to stop that.

The Conservatives and Scheer are not offering anything. Just saying "Nooo" to the environmental concerns of Canadians. They, and Scheer, are missing a great opportunity. Put a real comprehensive plan out there, not "let's go back to the 1990s". Instead, all we see is "Noooo" from Scheer.

Sorry, but you just keep making this crap up, and it is just partisan rhetoric and nonsense. What is a "real and comprehensive" plan to elitist enviros who want to jam the man-made climate change fairy tale down our throats? How many billions have to be wasted to satisfy your latte-sipping desires?? How many poor and middle class have to be exploited with idiotic taxes?? How many hundreds of millions have to be funneled into idiotic "green ideas" that help no one? Why does saying "YESSS!" to stupidity and waste satisfy you and your urges to waste money on nonsense?? Why is this "great opportunity" to rape, rob and pillage the Canadian treasury so important to you??? Because it sure disgusts me.

I don't think Canadians are afraid of serious plans for the future, but our politicians certainly seem to be. The whole lot of them!

I don't think Canadians are either, but they do know enough to want to see a cost/benefit analysis. When the twin boneheads Trudeau and McKenna can just offer ums and ahs and deflections when asked for such a reasonable request we know that the cost does not provide any benefit. And that's why there has to be a better way, one where taxpayers aren't constantly fleeced in the name of an unproven boogey-man.

Unproven boogey man?

what?

[Jflem1983]

I personally don't care if the guy is a plumber or has 9 doctorates. I only care if he understands the issues. While I have been critical of Trudeau in many respects, I will never criticize his experience or lack thereof to do the job as PM. Drama teacher, insurance salesman, or lawyer, it doesn't matter to me.

If Green didn't focus on this like all the other sore loser conservatives his posts would be cut in half. It is his favorite line. Obsessed with demeaning the profession of school teacher, and never focusing on experience in parliament. Broken record much.

My reform school had its own parliment with speakers and a PM. Opposition parties etc.

Does that make me PM material. Lol.

[Merry]

I tend to agree with hobbyguy that all three of our Leaders are not doing a particularly good job of leading. It never ceases to amaze me that, from all the millions of available Canadians, we have wound up with 3 such weak Leaders. Clearly our political system is broken.

When it comes to climate change, I do believe it is real. The evidence is all around me. However, whether it is part of a natural cycle, or human caused, is open to debate. I suspect the truth is that BOTH those factors are playing a role, although I've not seen any hard evidence to support that position. But regardless, surely we can all agree that enacting laws aimed at cleaning up and protecting our environment are a good thing. Nobody wants to live in a sewer.

That said, I believe our energies should be going into ensuring Governments enact legislation to make sure companies operate in as environmentally sound manner as possible, and that enough funds are available to clean up any environmental accidents that may happen. Effective enforcement should be in place, and violators should be punished both swiftly and in such a way as to provide a deterrent to others.

We all need to work, to provide a roof over our heads and food on our tables. So shutting down all industry in the name of saving the environment is not realistic. Enacting better laws to make sure that all industry operates in the most environmentally sound way possible is an achievable goal but, without enforcement or suitably large penalties, such legislation is meaningless.

I've lived long enough to see all kinds of poor environmental practices overlooked, and laws that are on the books not enforced. I've also seen cases where companies have been successfully prosecuted for not following good environmental practices, only to see the punishment be so weak it provides absolutely no kind of deterrent to others. Rather than focusing on trying to shut down industries such as the oil sands, the protestors would be better occupied focusing on our weak environmental enforcement practices. For example, how is it that the largest dam break in Canadian History was not followed up with any kind of punishment for a single one of the folks involved? How can that be? We hardly even hear about the Mount Polly dam break any more, and the company has returned to business as usual. THAT bothers me far more than some hypothetical spill near Vancouver that's never happened.

If the devastation caused by the Mount Polley dam break had happened in a more populated area, heads would have rolled. As it is, it all got "swept under the rug and forgotten". And all those protestors down in Burnaby were nowhere in sight.

The Ministry knew that the dam was overfull, and the "beach" designed to protect it was non existent. WHY didn't they order the mine be shut down until the problem was resolved? I'll tell you why - political interference from a Party that received a lot of it's funding from a guy who owned a large share in the mine. What that debacle taught me is that we need laws to prevent such political interference. So, if Governments truly want to "save our environment" I suggest such laws would be a good place to start. And all those who are currently protesting in the name of our environment should be lobbying our Governments to do just that, instead of focusing so much on only one issue.

This is an area where Scheer could step up to the plate, and turn the current political climate to his advantage by proposing such laws and helping us move into a new, environmentally sensitive future where making money is important, but not the "be all and end all" when it comes to policy decisions. I agree with hobbyguy that Scheer needs to move away from 90's thinking, and chart a new course for Canada, one that really WILL help protect the environment rather than the Liberal's useless carbon tax that only PRETENDS to protect the environment.

[hobbyguy]

I do think that the carbon tax will do something, but not anything that couldn't be done other ways. The carbon tax in BC has reduced per capita emissions somewhat, but now the BC NDP/LEAP have turned it into just another tax grab.

However, there have been enough other factors that effectiveness of the BC carbon tax is muddled, and less that what it appears. Things like mandating high efficiency gas furnaces have probably actually accomplished as much or more, especially when combined with the higher automobile fuel efficiency standards out of the US (that spilled over).

There are ways to approach the entire issue that are both more effective and of greater benefit.

I wonder when any of the pols will have the guts to even open up a conversation about the newer and safe generations of nuclear power. We will need more power in the future, whether for battery EVs or for (hopefully) hydrogen HVs. Nuclear is a good option for that - run at max efficiency and during low demand time periods divert the power to hydrogen production....

How about more parks and wilderness preserves? etc.

So its not like Scheer couldn't come up with a forward looking package to sell. Does he have the guts for it? Or will he choose the "muddle along and chuck peanuts" route?

[Jmfva]

My reform school had its own parliment with speakers and a PM. Opposition parties etc.

Does that make me PM material. Lol.

no, not at all.

[Glacier]

I do think that the carbon tax will do something, but not anything that couldn't be done other ways. The carbon tax in BC has reduced per capita emissions somewhat, but now the BC NDP/LEAP have turned it into just another tax grab.

Actually, it was the RECESSION of 08/09 that reduced emissions. Since then emissions went back up even as the carbon tax continues to rise...