The debate about whether global warming is a crock or a catastrophe will get steamier this week as the Harper Administration unveils its long-awaited green plan. I cannot tell you tonight exactly when that will be, but Rona Ambrose’s office told mine earlier today there will be a lock-up in advance of the release.
On the Hill, dudes, lock-ups are reserved for big news. They are also designed so that media flakes (are there any other kinds these days?) are forced to sit in a locked room for several hours reading actual documents, instead of just trolling for three-second sound bites. If it’s really important news, there are even sandwiches in there.
So, it’s coming. And today in Question Period two of the players in this enviro drama sat about fifty feet from each other, but directly in their mutual line of vision. On the floor of the House of Commons was Ambrose the environment minister, who the opposition pilloried for months, thinking she was an attractive Alberta lightweight they could trample. But Ambrose, so far at least, has stood her ground like a linebacker and gained a big following within the Conservative caucus.
Above her and looking on from the public gallery was Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party. Unlike the petite, angular, cool, brunette and impeccable Ambrose, May exudes an earth-motherliness punctuated by flying blonde hair, black glasses, an uninhibited laugh and lots of touching. It’s an interesting study in contrasts. Does it set the scene for conflict?
May insists no, as I bring her into the foyer of the House – forbidden territory, since she is not an elected MP – for an interview with MPtv. She says she’d be only too happy to congratulate Ambrose on a knock-out climate change strategy document, but quickly adds that she doesn’t expect to be doing so. I find the woman to be sharp, engaging and surprisingly political, weaving in anti-Conservative messages that seem to go deep beyond the environmental file. She’s also a networker, taking full advantage of my delivering her to this sacred spot to buttonhole Liberal environment critic John Godfrey and try to catch the eye of some of the media gods.
May is clearly frustrated that while she leads a national party with federal funding and candidates in every riding, she likely will not be part of any leaders’ debate in the next election or, for that matter, be taken seriously enough by these reporters milling around. So, this week is as crucial to her as it is to Ambrose. The stakes are enormous for both of them, just as they are for Canadians.
As I have stated, climate change is a defining issue, and this is a landmark time for a generational government. Either we will rise to the challenge, or we will not. Those scribes sitting in the lockup will be reading about mandatory emission levels, permission-based production, mandated clean air, water and renewable energy targets, the fostering of green technology and a strategy of sustainable development, or they’ll read about voluntary targets, an absolute increase in greenhouse gases, the economic supremacy of the oil sands and industry consultations.
A new green plan was not one of the government’s vaunted five priorities. It was not even a campaign promise, with the environment relegated to a trashing of Kyoto and a practical tax credit to get people on the train and the bus. But in politics a week’s a long time and eight months is almost a life. Now global warming is household stuff. An administration born of tax cuts and tough-love crime bills must react with conviction.
Unexpected, perhaps. But utterly unavoidable. And a moment now looking for a heroine.
99 comments ↓
Pollution control must be our focus, it has helped immensely since the 70’s and as technology improves we can look forward to negligible pollution in the future.
The Kyoto accord is not about pollution control – it is supposed to be an attempt to regulate a naturally occuring gas in the atmosphere.
Future historians will look back on Kyoto and immediately see the accord for what it is – a back door attempt by the usual suspects to control free enterprise and government. Such controls have always been a massive failure and brought economic ruin – Kyoto would be no different.
I’m a little pessimistic. Increasingly I believe we’re a society in favour of taking action on issues, in the abstract, however as soon as it becomes clear that sacrifice/costs will be involved our committment flies out the window. Poltitians sell easy solutions, the media have made being a “victim” pretty trendy and any issue that doesn’t make for easy reading is gone in a couple of days.
Maybe I deserve to be locked up, but I will go out on a limb and say:
“After Stephen Harper steps down as Prime Minister in say 15 years,
I would support Rona Ambrose for Prime Minister!!!
[...] nship I’m offering up this idea to the Green Party and its supporters. After reading this post by Garth Turner it struck me how unreasonable it is that the leader of the Green Part [...]
Jerry, while it is most attractive to think Mr. Harper as a PM for 15 years, I think our democracy needs at least 2 strong political parties. The pendulum needs a balance.
Jerry,
The false prince is not going to be Prime Minister in 15 months let alone 15 years.
36% will not give the cons a majority, and if Steve does not deliver a majority in the next election (which I firmly believe he will not) then the knives will be out for him.
Garth, I saw your comments on income trusts this morning in the Montreal Gazette, and as usual you are bang on. We need to stop this complete conversion to trusts before our entire corporate tax structure implodes and we are left with only individuals paying the freight.
Since it is clear that there will be no election until at least the spring, I hope you can take a few weeks in January to head deep into Quebec and work on your French, I know it will be prime budget influence time, but we need to have you in fighting form once the pretender to the thrown is gone.
Have a great week.
Ray
Sorry, I had not yet seen the G&M article this morning, 32% against a party that does nt even have a leader.
“Either we will rise to the challenge, or we will not”
I disagree…this is not an either/or……it is that type of statement Garth that places Rona in a can’t win scenario…..please keep that in mind when you frantically seek out the microphones……don’t fry your own……
“Stood her ground like a linebacker”… What a tremendous joke. She’s sat there and parrotted the same two sentences until they’ve worn a grove in the back of her throat. She stood there and refused to give an answer to any of the questioned possed to her.
If she’s gained a big following it’s because she’s hit the stair master more often than going to briefings which the hill times reports of climate change she didn’t bother with.
Ambrose is a journalism major vs. May whose devoted a good part of her life to the cause of the environment. It’s going to be a fucking knockout that will make the “Million Dollar Baby” look like glancing blow.
If any of you took the time out from repeating theo-con rhetoric you might have the slightest clue about the kind of threat that global warming, not pollution, is. It’s scary, like the cold war, was scary.
Blahg – with 9% of the vote and a candidate in every riding the Greens are certainly entitled to be at the debates. Much more so then the BQ.
Oh yeah, it’s gonna be a bit tough for Harper to be PM for 15 years (pardon me while piss myself laughing) with only 32% of the vote. No liberal leader and all the theo-cons do is slip-slip-slip in the polls. Not that it is suprising. People tend disagree with a gov’t that wants to undermine their rights (See Dangerous Offender’s burden of prove on the accused). What were you guys thinking? Oh, that’s right, you weren’t. You let God do your thinking for you as we all know God’s talk a good game of peace and love but in practice he tends to be a smite first and ask questions later type of diety. Haven’t you ever wondered why God needs an entourage that carries flaming swords?
I’m relieved that we’re not hearing the word “Kyoto” anymore from anybody…not even mentioned once during the Liberal Leadership debate…could it be that even the left-leaning people are finally “getting it” about what a piece of crap Kyoto is (was) or are the NDPers still hanging onto this ridiculous idea? Maybe there’s hope yet…
I agree with above poster, no matter how good our Clean Air Act is the usual suspects (especially the media!!) won’t like it because they have already made up their (narrow little) minds.
Catherine
“while it is most attractive to think Mr. Harper as a PM for 15 years
I think it is most attractive to think of Rona as Prime Minister
(beauty is in the eye of the beholder! everybody on this site knows she is “pretty” thanks to frankie!)
“2 strong political parties. The pendulum needs a balance.”
1 is enough as smell isn’t everything –> Liebeals stink
“Today in Question Period allegations arose that the former LIEberal government made many last-minute patronage appointments before their lyin’ thievin’ cheatin’ scandal-ridden corruption-prone Librano syndicate got rightfully ousted by Canadian voters.” http://www.canoe.ca/mb2/messages/cnewsf/12749.html
–> no values http://www.liberalvalues.ca/
So balance will be achieved. http://www.conservative.ca/EN/1141/
RIGHT vs wrong (sorry – LEFT)
Fifteen years of an intelligent, thoughtful, rational, methodical, sensible prime minister – hmmm, yes, I can enjoy 15 years of Stephen Harper’s government. One can only hope. I think the guy is terrific – no hyperbole, no BS, no sound bites and he keeps the press where they belong. I think the guy is great.
Andrew Coyne, as usual, says it best:
”Seven months into the Liberal leadership race, the party has at last found its voice. No longer divided and despondent, party members have rallied around a positive, optimistic vision of the country, a message of hope they will take to the Canadian public in the next election. And the message is: We forgive you.
To be sure, Canadians deeply disappointed the party last time out. After 13 years of Liberal rule, they seemed to have forgotten why they had voted for the Liberals in the first place. The public appeared dangerously out of touch, as if they believed they had the presumptive right to elect whomever they please. Clearly, they had lost their way.
But that was then. In the interim, the public have had a chance to do some serious rethinking. They’ve engaged in a bit of soul-searching, and perhaps shaken off some of that arrogance the Liberals found so trying.”
As for the polls, once the leaderless Liberals choose a King, either lefties will be hopping on the Dippers wagon or righties will abandon ship on mass to the Conservatives. That will be an interesting poll!!
Polls mean NOTHING..they are created by the media to “make news” and the questions are geared toward the answers they are looking for and are not at all representative of the reality of the voting public.
As global warming has now become the newest “cause-celebre” of the left, it’s no wonder that their voices have become shrill as teh new Clean Air Act gets closer to introduction in the house. They are afraid that the public will be able to recognize all of the benefits of this legislation while they, in turn, refuse to see all aspects of this issue (i.e. how the trend is already starting to reverse itself and how the environmentalists are already changing their tune and calling it “climate change”).
As always, fear will be used to try and “shape” public opinion, just as was done in the last election campaign. Unfortunately, they get a huge amount of help in diseminating this fear by our Liberal-leaning (biased) media but I am still confident that most Canadians are smarter enough to see through all of the fear tactics and will choose to become informed on their own!!
Charley – if you want to be smart why don’t you actually look into the science of climate change. That’s right, change, not warming or cooling, change. That’s what the people who actually do the research call it. At the University of Toronto, they have a Centre for Global Climate change and they seem to think it’s a real problem.
If anyone can be accused of taking up the “cause-celebre”, it’s the theo-cons. They weren’t interested in doing anything except slashing the budget on environmental programs until they realized they were losing votes because of their inaction.
And if it’s true, why do you think the media is left leaning? Does it sell more papers? If so, why do you think. Is that because the more literate lean left? Hmmmm?
What fun this fishing is!
Catching a leftist “sucker” every time I cast!
Although the term “public opinion” is widely used to imply a unanimous viewpoint, it should be pointed out that members of the public hold diverse opinions on any issue and that each issue usually interests only a certain segment of the population. Even within a group where members share definite views on some matter, they do so with varying intensity. Moreover, in Canada, pockets of opinion have tended to be based on regional considerations; issues concerning the forest industry or fisheries, for example, obviously evoke more sharply defined opinions in some areas of the country than in others. Not only are there great differences in the amount of knowledge each individual possesses, opinions may also be internally contradictory and some, especially those on moral or social matters (e.g., abortion, capital punishment) may be generated more by emotional reactions than by rational assessments.
Opinions are likely to be more transient and dynamic than attitudes and values. At best, an opinion poll therefore constitutes a snapshot of many viewpoints held by a segment of the population at a given time. Indeed, one prominent pollster warns that “the way in which one deals with information gleaned through public opinion polls must be conditionalized through a sensitivity to the limitations of the information which is being measured,” and that “the activities of the pollster must always be understood as a combination of science and art.”
When two or more pollsters are seeking essentially the same information yet produce different results, doubts naturally arise about their methodology. The chosen sample or sub-samples, the way a question is worded, the range of possible responses available, the sequence of the questions asked, the length of the survey, the degree to which respondents are telling the truth, etc. can account for such discrepancies, as can the faithfulness with which questioners pursue their task. One should not be blind to the possibility that interviewers occasionally “make up their interviews or to substitute easy to contact individuals for members of the sample group they were supposed to reach but found it difficult to do so.” A most important consideration is how “undecided” responses in a survey are reported.
In very many polls a large percentage of respondents answer questions by saying they “don’t know,” or are “undecided” or they “won’t say.” It is not unusual for 20, 30, or even 40 per cent of a sample to make such a reply. Yet Gallup and most other pollsters round up the total in published figures to 100 per cent as though every one had given a specific positive reply. They may mention that a certain proportion was undecided but when they give the figures of how the vote breaks down, say in a pre-election contest, they give figures…which total 100 per cent.
Bring on the election, the only poll that counts!
32%….maybe my predicition of 5 more months of the Mule Skinner was a little off the mark. Let’s see, a new Liberal leader the beginning of December….CPC at 32%…..who’s up for a January election.
They haven’t learned a thing
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=fd38f99b-675c-41f1-8ede-2d7949d1fa61
After nine months in opposition, the party offers little evidence that it has learned anything from the experience. The leadership race, which many had anticipated would be a chance for the party to rethink some of its traditional assumptions, has instead merely confirmed Liberals in the belief that, fundamentally, nothing has changed. The Conservatives may be in power for the moment, but it is clear the Grits view this as a temporary inconvenience.
Fully 81% of Liberals surveyed in a recent Strategic Counsel poll said they expected to be back in power at the next election. Liberals, Susan Delacourt reports in the Toronto Star, “feel they’re finally getting their game back. And a faint, though still elusive, scent of power is wafting around them again.” At last week’s leadership debate, she writes, it was clear: “[T]he federal Liberals aren’t interested in electing an opposition leader.”
Well, no. That’s what opposition parties do. And the Liberals aren’t in opposition. They’re on holiday. So there’s no need to invest much thought, say, in how to spur Canada’s moribund productivity growth, or to question whether Canadian content regulations have any relevance in the age of the Internet. All that is required is to find the right leader, and ride that pony all the way to office.
Certainly that was the mood in the hall during the debate. As platitude followed platitude, each candidate emphasizing how right the party was about gun controls, how much they agreed on Kyoto, how awful that man George Bush was, the audience cheered and clapped their approval, in that way that people do when they want to signal how very closed their minds are.
It fell to Scott Brison, at the end of the debate, to remind them that no one had said a word about the economy. And while Gerard Kennedy took up the cause of party “renewal” (read: cleaning up our act) in his closing statement — since it was not one of the themes organizers deemed worthy of formal debate — you got the feeling this was not a message party activists wanted to hear. Much nearer the mark was Stephane Dion: “Liberals, we need to get back to power as soon as possible.”
Well, all right, but how? What are the issues the party is going to make its own? Health care? No one’s so much as mentioned it in the campaign. Afghanistan? The party has no position, or none that differs in the essentials from the Conservatives. The environment? After what they did, or didn’t do, on Kyoto? Quebec? The front-runner, Michael Ignatieff, has endorsed the provocative idea that the province should be recognized as a “nation” in the Constitution. The others have demurred, but no one has made an issue of a proposal they must know is toxic in the rest of the country.
Which region is it that will form the basis of the next Liberal majority? The West? Don’t make me laugh. Quebec? A grand total of 3,700 votes were reportedly cast across the province in last month’s leadership ballot — and that’s including the dead. Ontario, perhaps, assuming the party is led by someone whose first and last names are not Bob and Rae.
Now who makes the most sense? The left socialist posters above or those that are RIGHT!
Sorry to have read the news Garth. I think that suspending you is a little over the top. You are very right to have your own opinion on matters and not just tow the Conservative party line. Wish you all the best and hope it has a desired outcome for you in the end. Regards
Just caught Garth Turner’s ejection from the Conservative Caucus on the CBC news. Must say that I am not surprised. Being independent in spirit is a badge of honour for a Parliamentarian, and ejecting an independent spirit is quite an admission of incompetence for a federal party.
Don’t take it personally, Garth, and keep working for all Canadians, even us non-partisan ones.
Mr. Turner, now that you`ve been expelled from the Conservative Caucus you could do the Cdn voters an immeasurable service be joining the Green Party rather than sitting as an independent. This would give the Greens a legitimate opportunity to join the national leaders debate during the next federal election.
Still feel passionate about the Harper Conservative cause today Garth?
Oh Oh….
“OTTAWA (CP) – Maverick MP Garth Turner has been suspended from the Conservative government caucus.
Government House leader Rahim Jaffer says the outspoken Turner was ousted on the recommendation of the party’s Ontario caucus after he made one too many attacks on the prime minister and too often violated caucus confidentiality. “
Ray Hall……smoke another one…..false prince…..where do you get your material?……twit
I just saw the news, screw him and his continual back stabbing ways.
You are the best MP in the house of commons, it might be time to go a little green.
The Mule Skinner? That must be a bank joke. Only the teller laughs.
Garth, you got to be asking yourself how far from the pack have some of your readers strayed?
Isn’t it interesting that a party that was founded on a ‘grassroots’ and ‘listen to the people’ foundation has now given the boot to the one guy that was doing just that. Garth, I’ve taken alot of shots at you over the past few months (and a whole lot more at the Mule Skinner)but I think if you were running in my riding, I just might have held my nose and voted Conservative. Looks like that will never be an option now….pity.
As for future plans, what will it be…the Libs or the Greens…or Independant forever…..
Here is what was just posted at 680 News:
Garth Turner suspended from Conservative caucus
October 18, 2006 – 12:52 pm
By: 680News staff
Toronto – Conservative MP Garth Turner has been suspended from the Conservative caucus.
The suspension was levied after Turner repeatedly criticized the Prime Minister.
The MP from Halton has a blog and is a former Toronto Sun columnist.
It’s not clear if there is a specific incident that triggered the suspension — but his gripes have included the fact he was originally assigned a basement office with no view.
The story is a bit “off the mark” re: reasons and light on what went down… So what happens now???
Cheers
David Fisher
Email sent to the CPC:
I have made several donations to my local riding association over the last year or so, based on the strength of my local MP. Unfortunately, it appears today you have chosen to suspend him.
If this is not rectified to my satisfaction, you have lost not only my financial support, but also my vote.
Yours sincerely,
Ed Brooks
Well, we all saw it coming, and now the conservatives have lost another seat… not just in the short term, but even if Garth doesn’t run, do you really think Halton voters will vote for a CPC candidate when it is obvious the CPC has no intention of listening to us?
Personally, I hope Garth runs again, either as an independent or in some other party, and to be honest, I like what one other person from Halton said, that it would be great if he went to the Green Party just to get them on the floor, and I’m sure with his connections he could push to get them in the debates, too. I mean really, agree or disagree with their platform, if the Bloc can get invited to all the national debates, why not the Greens?
Garth – just heard the news about your suspension from the party. Can’t understand why the PC’s would want to dump what little representation that they had in the GTA. I like the PM’s response that he just learned of the suspension this afternoon when he’s obviously known about it for months.
Well, I guess now you won’t have to face any more punishment for any future statements you make.
Ed, the vote is in, its an indeterminate suspension, don’t hold your breath.
To William Hane, Theo-Con?!?
It is funny to see how the left wraps themselves up in the tolerance banner but spit out some of the most bigoted tripe I have ever seen. Not all Conservatives are Religious but last I checked God was not outlawed or banned anywhere but the most Communist of Countries.
Harper is an idiot, a liar and a thief. No unique amongst politicians, of course, but Harper is far worse than most. “Baby Bush” has been reneging and squirreling out of promises since the start (equalization quickly comes to mind), and he’ll suffer for it in the next election. I don’t feel sorry for him either, but I do feel sorry for the conservatives who elected him leader.
Climate change is real, and it is the no. 1 environmental issue facing the globe. Go to Nunavut, talk to the Inuit, and see what’s happening up there. It’s a human rights issue. We should be planning for mitigation and adaptation, instead of bullshitting about it all day long. Major Canadian cities like Halifax, St. John’s, Vancouver, and Montreal are going to see good portions of their city under water in the not too distant future. We can’t stop the warming (we can slow it down), but we can plan to mitigate and adapt to the negative conseqences. The lack of foresight and planning is disturbing.
We’re waiting with baited breath, Mr. Turner! Nothing to lose now, tell us what you really think.
PS: Many commentors are doing a disservice to one of the few reputable centre-right open forums in Canada. Please edit your comments for ad hominem barbs.
Ambrose is a pawn in the harper game. Honestly, she is a blonde that changed her hair color to brunette to avoid the blonde jokes.
Oh and like Harper did not know about this. Give your heads a shake. As a halton resident, I will not be voting for Harper. The CPC will not allow its membership to speak freely. Which as everyone knows, is our right as Canadians. I guess harper has forgotten about that small point.
I think red would be a better colour than green. Either way you actually, and technically, don’t have to cross the floor. Tough choice for a man with an unbridled no nonsense approach to Canada’s issues.BTW I am a life long card carrying Liberal – who apprecieates your work ethic and loyalty to rational thought on public policy.
Well Mr. Turner, it looks like the cracks are starting to show in the shakey foundation of the resident dictator wanna be.
It’s too bad that the few politicians who want to stick to the goals that got them elected often get railroaded by the party machine.
I really think you should look at joining the Green Party. Think of the opportunities to get your voice heard. I see flashbacks of Deborah Grey landing a beach head.
“Ambrose is a pawn in the harper game. Honestly, she is a blonde that changed her hair color to brunette to avoid the blonde jokes.”
Ah Peter…I see you too understand….
As for Paul M….and the Mule Skinner…have I ever directed you to this photo before….
http://www.breadwithcircus.com/harper.jpg
And I wonder where he got the idea for that outfit from…
http://www.tocquevillian.com/media/CowboyBush.jpg
Not hard to see why he’s know as the Mule Skinner now is it…
Garth, I think I know why they threw you out…it was that ‘linebacker’ reference to ‘Pretty Blonde Rona’.
We all know she prefers to think of herself as a ‘wide receiver’
I’m quite tolerent of differing opinions, so long as they can be proved.
While God can’t be disproved, neither can Zeus.
I am absolutely intolerant of people who chose to abandon reason in favour of comforting fantasy with zero proof.
Theo-cons deserve zero tolerance for ideas that prejudice them against ideas that don’t jive with their religion (See gay marriage).
I see that Garth has felt the wrath of the conformists/reformists.
“Garth Turner will respond shortly to today’s momentous events.”
mo·men·tous Pronunciation (m-mnts)
adj.
Of utmost importance; of outstanding significance or consequence:
Fairly incosequential I would say!
in·con·se·quen·tial Pronunciation (n-kns-kwnshl, nkn-)
adj.
1. Lacking importance.
I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
Garth, sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?
Good to see you will be on TV again in a short time. That is what you enjoy. You should try it full time! You might really help people in that venue. You could shoot from the “lip” and not hurt anybody, atleast not people you should be supporting. Look for somewhere else to “help”.
He said it best: “The ten most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help you’.†— Ronald Reagan
Global warming is not a partisan issue. I attended the UN Urban Forum conference here in Vancouver and trust me the rest of the world is working on the issue. North America is being left behind. 240 U.S. mayors have signed on to Kyoto. Change will never happen with politicians. The people are way ahead of the government. Global warming will not go away. I don’t expect politicians from the “oil patch” to be progressive about global warming when the oil & gas industry are their supporters, and 40% of greenhouse gas emissions come from Alberta. As for Rona Ambrose being prime minister – be real guys – she is just a bit of eye candy that has no substance. Elizabeth May has “balls” which is what we need in this age of “denial”.
Anyone who say’s that Ambrose should be PM is thinking with the wrong brain.
“Global warming is like the SuperBowl: Every year the hype gets bigger, but the game is often a letdown.”
Aahhh…..One Elizabeth is enouhg!
We’ve all heard about people having guts or balls. But do you really know the difference between them? In an effort to keep you informed, the definition for each is listed below…
GUTS – is arriving home late after a night out with the guys, being met by your wife with a broom, and having the guts to ask: “Are you still cleaning, or are you flying somewhere?”
BALLS – is coming home late after a night out with the guys, smelling of perfume and beer, lipstick on your collar, slapping your wife on the butt and having the balls to say: “You’re next.”
I hope this clears up any confusion on the subject. In reality there isn’t much difference since either one will ultimately result in death.
Global warming is the main threat that people talk about since. Kyoto is not about climate change. Kyoto is about setting targets in order to reduce the green house (warming) effect of gases like carbon dioxide.
Does anyone have any reasonable proof of global warming? I and others have been searching for it and have not yet found it. I have looked on several forums and tried hundreds of google searches to no avail. They all point to news articles and no studies. The best I could find were ice core data, but that is of limited use since 2 cores meters apart can yield vastly different data.
The crux of the argument is that “the errors inherent in the world weather station temperature records and in the data sets now relied upon by those who wish to prove global warming (all of which are inconsistent avareges except a few such as the US which shows a cooling trend), the really bad data is what makes [Richard] the most sceptical of any claim that the world is getting much warmer today than it was half a century ago.”
John M Reynolds
Garth,
I was sorry, but not surprised to hear the the CP had thrown you out of the gang today.
Sorry because I believe that more MP’s should stand their ground and speak with true conviction instead of hiding behind the political correctness that is crippling western democracy.
Not Surprised because as a life long Conservative, I have finally withdrawn my support and dropped my membership as I cannot support the pitiful excuse for Conservatism that is evident in today’s party.
Whilst I do not agree with your stand on the SSM issue, I can respect the fact that you have polled your constituents before deciding what to do. I do however, whole heartedly agree with your stance on the environment and on spending. This country needs real leadership that will step up to the issues that threaten our world, not some fancily worded document that seeks to shirk any tangible near term action in favour of long term strategy when the govenment of the day (just like the Fiberals before them with Kyoto) knows they will be out of power before the day to implement arrives.
Good luck in the future, I hope the community sticks with you. Oh, and if you know any other good outspoken MP’s like yourself, please send one down to Burlington as I think Mike Wallace is a waste of space!
Frank, Are you sure Rona is not a tight end?
Jerry On,
Let me guess – a “red neck” from Alberta. Elizabeth May is a lawyer and Rona Ambrose wouldn’t dare to debate with her. Why do you think Rona never shows up for science conferences. She is confused and has total disregard for the facts and critical elements of Kyoto and climate issues. Check the Green Party of Canada’s website today – a reality check of Ambrose’s address to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development on October 5, 2006.
Better yet read the Weather Makers and Oil Sands Fever by the Pembina Institute in Alberta (which were given to MP’s to read over summer break in order to prepare for the debate).
This issue will not go away. Speak to people in the Arctic where it rained this year in January instead of July. You don’t need to convice them. The facts will bear themselves out.
This spell of “global warming” began just before the glaciers began their retreat following the last ice age.To try and blame mankind for the warming period is more evidence of the same egotistical attitude that looks to the multitudes of galaxies and says we are the only intelligent life in the universe. We’re not all that big or powerful. Climate change was going on when we got here and will still be going on when we leave.
Good on you Garth, make it stick in the next house of commons non-confidence vote, fast to kick you out, faster to kick out the neo-cons, neo-Christians, Thatcherites, fascists, gun huggers, racists, and the other ham strung idiots the party acquired with the merger with Reform and Alliance. What a freakin’ mess.
The Conservative rep said Harper didn’t about this?
I have some serious doubts about that.
Now Harper will have to come clean on this.
Did he know about this or not?
Garth,
This is the first time I have visited your site. I decided to see what you had to say and what others were saying about you after todays unfortunate announcement. From the comments I have read it is evident that you have support from your constituents and that alone makes your ousting from the caucus unfortunate. It doesn’t surprise me though since Harper is determined to keep his ducks in a row. (It must irke Albert MP Myron Johnson to have to keep his mouth shut.) Anyway, I digress, my point is that this government is very affraid of the comments that may result from some of the MP’s elected who have extreme views and although you do not seem to be one of them your independence is a threat. Harper is not looking for thoughtful people, just bums in seats who will keep their ideas to themselves. All the best to you sir.
Any one thinking that Ambrose should be PM has no brains.
Elizabeth Eakin
I couldn’t find that bit on the website you were talking about http://www.communist-party.ca/ oh well probably not missing much.
“I attended the UN (there is part of the problem) Urban Forum”
“I don’t expect politicians from the “oil patch†to be progressive about global warming”
I am not going to site all the evidence from >b>scientists that have nothing to do with the oil industry here. Check back on some of my post’s over the last month.
Nothing wrong with “eye candy “ when she is as smart as Rona is!
I suppose you are just a pretty skirt, well I don’t know you, so let’s just say skirt fron what “pink necked” part of Canada I don’t know.
————————————————-
Whether or not humans are causing global warming is still an open question. In fact it is one of the greatest earth science research questions in history.
Begun in 1990, the U.S. Global Change Research Program has spent about $40 billion looking for the human footprint in global warming. The jury is still out. The problem is that we now know that the earth warms and cools naturally, so how do we identify the human influence?
To begin with, the earth appears to have warmed over the last century or so, by one degree Fahrenheit. During this period atmospheric carbon dioxide levels rose steadily. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, so it seems natural to conclude that the CO2 rise caused the temperature rise. This seems simple enough but as soon as one looks closely this picture falls apart and the hard science begins.
For example, while the CO2 levels rose steadily, the global temperature actually went down for the middle third of the last century. Scientists predicted a coming ice age. This shows that rising CO2 levels do not necessarily cause rising temperatures. The CO2 went up but the temperature went down.
Then too, it is now generally accepted that the temperature increase in the first third of the century was due to increased solar input, not increasing CO2. We now know that the sun varies over time. This shows that rising temperatures are not necessarily caused by rising CO2 levels. The temperature went up but not because of CO2.
It is possible that the temperature rise of the last 25 years is due to rising CO2. However it has to be explained why the steady rise of CO2 over more than a century waited until the last 25 years to show up? Moreover, some parts of he earth are cooling, not warming. Others, especially parts of the Arctic, are warming very rapidly. This is inconsistent with being caused by the gradual CO2 rise.
We also know now that it may have been just as warm a thousand years ago, and maybe a lot warmer 5,000 years ago, when there was no CO2 increase. Twenty-five years of research has taught us a lot about natural global warming, but this has only made the picture more complicated. In most cases we do not know why this natural warming occurs.
There are many theories and counter theories regarding all of these issues, and many more issues as well. The result is an incredibly complex and expensive program of scientific research. Today there are three schools of scientific thought on global warming. The first holds that humans are causing the recent warming. The second is that most, if not all, of the warming is natural. The third school is the skeptics who say we really do not know what is happening, and will not know until we understand natural climate change. Among these schools there is a loud scientific debate. Whether humans are causing global warming is anybody’s guess at this point.
May we have our $40 billion back now???
Global Warming has become a euphemism for a political agenda. There is Socialism, Capitalism and Global Warmingism.
http://magic-city-news.com/printer_5888.shtml
The real obstacle to moving Canada forward on the road to reducing, not reducing growth of, GHG emissions is Alberta.
Alberta is in the position where Texas was at not long after the turn of the last century. The incredible wealth built up there led to virtually unchecked power.
What we need is both federal and provincial governments who take this issue seriously. If you think about it, Harper *ought* to be the right person to turn things around. Those on the hard right in the West love him; its long past time for Alberta, and all big carbon fuels producers and consumers, including certain sectors Ontario is in love with, to take some tough love.
Don’t hold your breath.
Ms. Eakin. It appears you also have disregard for the facts and critical elements of Kyoto. Lets begin with the largest developing nation that are not signatories. Kyoto will have no effect on their output whereas technology will. Cost is the reason more use of solar panels as an example has not taken place because polluting developing nations have no incentive to manufacture them, yet we complain about exporting jobs. Initiatives like this are not even a critical element of Kyoto. Moving on to the carbon credit program, a critical element. How will sending $50m to Russia make a difference in Canada when investing it in Canada (it is Cdn tax dollars) would produce the same global reduction while at the same time be a benefit to Canadians whose money it is. Then there`s the issue of the people that are involved in the Kyoto carbon credit program. They are the same people that set up and participated in the UN oil for food scam that starved a million Iraqi children. Why would you trust them not to pull off another scam, after all the UN still hasn`t dealt with it? I could go on but the fact is Kyoto was dead in the water years ago. What we need are global incentives which as it happens I agree with you, neither the Conservatives, Liberals or the NDP are capable of.
From an Ex-Tory and now Green (call me a Turquoise) I Hope to see you in the Green party ….
Now that would be a landmark decision!
I think you will find the policies are aligned well with your thoughts and despite the various parts of the party there is a large number … maybe a majority of fiscally conservative members.
Come aboard …. You would be a hero, would legitimize the party, you could help make a difference with climate change, make great strides for participative politics and you would still have the freedom to express your views.
Oh yes .. and one more thing… by being the first Green Party MP you would give the Green Party the seat in parliament that would allow Elizabeth May to be part of the debates in the next election. Now that would be an achievement that would change the course of history in Canada.
I have never been to this website-was curious about Garth Turner. I will not be returning however, there are too many angry, abusive men who have “issues”. Obviously some women in your lives have “hurt you”. Get some therapy and get “over it”.
Garth, it is great to hear an astute, lifelong conservative, refer to climate change as a defining issue.
For those still thinking there is a “debate” on whether human activities are injuring the climate. Here is an excerpt from the Dec. 04 edition of Science Magazine.
“The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC’s purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (3). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth’s climate is being affected by human activities: “Human activities … are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents … that absorb or scatter radiant energy. … [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations” [p. 21 in (4)].
IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members’ expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: “Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth’s atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise” [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: “The IPCC’s conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue” [p. 3 in (5)].â€
(Anyone interested in more info on this, check out http://acoach4u.com/coachblog.html)
Thanks for keeping the interests of your constituents front and centre Garth.
And good luck in the weeks ahead.
The alliance is getting rid of the the real conservatives. The hidden agenda is coming out.
Garth, The understanding I had was each MP was allowed a “Free Vote” in the House, except on money issues. It was understood that Harper needed to keep his MP’s in line, i.e. Randy White, etc because he needed to be in the centre – not the far right. The fact he was pillored by the press previously is the reason he is tight on control, IMHO. However, democracy means freedom of thought and speech. If, all and I mean ALL MP’s were able to represent their constituents and not an ideology -it would make for better governing,IMHO. People are far more aware and astute since the Americans invaded Iraq and more concerned then in many years. The ousting of yourself from cabinent would have been over – the Kyoto message and Ambrose as its representative. As a study in human behavior it would seem you have been formidably angry with what you perceive as injustices to the populace. As a voice of one now in the House – you are replacing others before you, such as Debra Grey, etc. I wish you well. Also, should CMHC be sold off – as read earlier – there will be a massive outcry. That gave the people hope – plus it is a cash cow for the gov’t at large. As a prairie raised, now BC resident,I understand the need for people to be informed – there is nothing to fear, but fear itself. Wishing you well in your “Chosen” vocation.
Mr turner I had a difficult time deciding if you were a Member of Parliament or a news reporter. I think you picked the wrong profession.
The debate about global warming is over. I hope we all go our to watch ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ when it comes out on DVD next month.
Further, Kyoto can work, and we can strengthen our economy by conserving our ecology.
Garth, there are many who think you’re a good guy, and although I don’t know much about you, I must say good luck to you and keep fighting the good fight.
I’m sure we’ll speak with eachother one day.
Cheers,
Cameron Wigmore
Alberta Rep, Federal Council
Green Party of Canada
It is only a matter of time before Kyoto is revealed as one of the biggest economic swindles in history perpetrated by the eco-loonies. It is purely an economic lever aimed at reducing the productivity of the wealthier western nations for an absolutely minimal (even that overstates it) change in climate. Pure bunk, with absolutely NO justification why Canada should cripple its economy for the phoniest of all “feel good” initiatives. Why else did the US Senate veto it dead at 100 to none?
And if Kyoto had even a fraction of truth to it, why on earth would we sign on for crippling carbon taxes, when the world’s biggest GHG emitters (Russia, China, & the US) decline and our contribution was less than 5% of the world’s total? How much hit to our GDP would it take to convince us this was the dumbest deal ever signed? Sheesh, even the Europeans are backpedalling on it.
William Hane – you might wish to do some research before trotting out the usual chicken-little eco doomlines. The eco-cultists only recently adopted the name “global warming” when the shrieking warnings of the ’70s/’80s (A NEW ICE AGE IS UPON US!!) fizzled, and the benefit of this new moniker was it allowed ‘em keep from changing bumper stickers every decade or so.
Think Kyoto & the global warming shriekfest is still legit? Google the “hockey stick curve” for more interesting info on the “science” of global warming research. Ditto, look at the global warming “trends”; you might notice timelines are carefully chosen to indicate warming trends, when in reality there is either no change when times are viewed for a longer period, or – in some locales – temperatures have actually dropped over time. Find a room full of doomcrying scientists supporting Kyoto & you’ll find at least that many who think it’s garbage.
The beauty of “global warming” theory is no matter what goes on with the climate, it’s all due to “global warming”. Warmest winter in 30 years? Blame global warming. COLDEST WINTER IN 30 years? Ditto. Hurricane Katrina? What else? More or less rain this summer? Who ya gonna call? Get rear-ended by some bonehead using his cell phone on the way to work? Hey, why not?
And for any pie-in-the-sky’ers or environmental idealists who actually think environmentalists have mankind or the planet foremost in their collective mind, just remember this is the lot that have essentially condoned the malaria-related deaths of at least 30,000,000 in Africa with their unconscionable ban on DDT.
Kyoto? Not nearly dead enough.
mhb23re
(email is above u/name at google webmail service)
Bye Lizzy
abusive men ?????????????
” I don’t expect politicians from the “oil patch†to be progressive about global warming when the oil & gas industry are their supporters, and 40% of greenhouse gas emissions come from Alberta. As for Rona Ambrose being prime minister – be real guys – she is just a bit of eye candy that has no substance.
You are to funny! Here is a towel!
Cameron Wigmore
“watch ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ ”
How many truths are unknown by you Cameron?
AL GORE certainly left lot’s out! The former Vice President left out many truths that are inconvenient for his argument. Here are just 25 of them.
1. Carbon Dioxide’s Effect on Temperature. The relationship between global temperature and carbon dioxide (CO2), on which the entire scare is founded, is not linear http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/05/climate-sensitivity-and-editorial.html. Every molecule of CO2 added to the atmosphere contributes less to warming than the previous one. The book’s graph on p. 66-67 is seriously misleading. Moreover, even the historical levels of CO2 shown on the graph are disputed. Evidence from plant fossil-remains suggest that there was as much CO2 in the atmosphere about 11,000 years ago as there is today.
2. Kilimanjaro. The snows of Kilimanjaro are melting not because of global warming but because of a local climate shift that began 100 years ago. The authors of a report http://www.geo.umass.edu/faculty/bradley/kaser2004.pdf in the International Journal of Climatology “develop a new concept for investigating the retreat of Kilimanjaro’s glaciers, based on the physical understanding of glacier–climate interactions.†They note that, “The concept considers the peculiarities of the mountain and implies that climatological processes other than air temperature control the ice recession in a direct manner. A drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic conditions are likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro.â€
3. Glaciers. Glaciers around the world have been receding at around the same pace for over 100 years. Research http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0603118103v1 published by the National Academy of Sciences last week indicates that the Peruvian glacier on p. 53-53 probably disappeared a few thousand years ago.
4. The Medieval Warm Period. Al Gore says that the “hockey stick†graph that shows temperatures remarkably steady for the last 1,000 years has been validated, and ridicules the concept of a “medieval warm period.†That’s not the case. Last year, a team of leading paleoclimatologists said http://www.wsl.ch/staff/jan.esper/publications/QSR_Esper_2005.pdf, “When matching existing temperature reconstructions…the timeseries display a reasonably coherent picture of major climatic episodes: ‘Medieval Warm Period,’ ‘Little Ice Age’ and ‘Recent Warming.’†They go on to conclude, “So what would it mean, if the reconstructions indicate a larger…or smaller…temperature amplitude? We suggest that the former situation, i.e. enhanced variability during pre-industrial times, would result in a redistribution of weight towards the role of natural factors in forcing temperature changes, thereby relatively devaluing the impact of anthropogenic emissions and affecting future temperature predictions.â€
5. The Hottest Year. Satellite temperature measurements say that 2005 wasn’t the hottest year on record — 1998 was — and that temperatures have been stable since 2001 (p.73).
6. Heat Waves. The summer heat wave that struck Europe in 2003 was caused by an atmospheric pressure anomaly; it had nothing to do with global warming. As the United Nations Environment Program reported in September 2003, “This extreme wheather [sic] was caused by an anti-cyclone firmly anchored over the western European land mass holding back the rain-bearing depressions that usually enter the continent from the Atlantic ocean. This situation was exceptional in the extended length of time (over 20 days) during which it conveyed very hot dry air up from south of the Mediterranean.â€
7. Record Temperatures. Record temperatures — hot and cold — are set every day around the world; that’s the nature of records. Statistically, any given place will see four record high temperatures set every year. There is evidence that daytime high temperatures are staying about the same as for the last few decades, but nighttime lows are gradually rising. Global warming might be more properly called, “Global less cooling.†(On this, see Patrick J. Michaels book, Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media.)
8. Hurricanes. There is no overall global trend of hurricane-force storms getting stronger that has anything to do with temperature. A recent study http://www.wsl.ch/staff/jan.esper/publications/QSR_Esper_2005.pdf in Geophysical Research Letters found: “The data indicate a large increasing trend in tropical cyclone intensity and longevity for the North Atlantic basin and a considerable decreasing trend for the Northeast Pacific. All other basins showed small trends, and there has been no significant change in global net tropical cyclone activity. There has been a small increase in global Category 4–5 hurricanes from the period 1986–1995 to the period 1996–2005. Most of this increase is likely due to improved observational technology. These findings indicate that other important factors govern intensity and frequency of tropical cyclones besides SSTs [sea surface temperatures].â€
9. Tornadoes. Records for numbers of tornadoes are set because we can now record more of the smaller tornadoes (see, for instance, the Tornado FAQ at Weather Underground http://www.wunderground.com/tornadoFAQ.asp).
10. European Flooding. European flooding is not new (p. 107). Similar flooding happened in 2003. Research from Michael Mudelsee and colleagues from the University of Leipzig published in Nature (Sept. 11, 2003) looked at data reaching as far back as 1021 (for the Elbe) and 1269 (for the Oder). They concluded that there is no upward trend in the incidence of extreme flooding in this region of central Europe.
11. Shrinking Lakes. Scientists investigating the disappearance of Lake Chad (p.116) found that most of it was due to human overuse of water. “The lake’s decline probably has nothing to do with global warming, report the two scientists, who based their findings on computer models and satellite imagery made available by NASA. They attribute the situation instead to human actions related to climate variation, compounded by the ever increasing demands of an expanding population†(“Shrinking African Lake Offers Lesson on Finite Resources http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/04/0426_lakechadshrinks.html,†National Geographic, April 26, 2001). Lake Chad is also a very shallow lake that has shrunk considerably throughout human history.
12. Polar Bears. Polar bears are not becoming endangered. A leading Canadian polar bear biologist wrote recently http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146433819696&call_pageid=970599119419, “Climate change is having an effect on the west Hudson population of polar bears, but really, there is no need to panic. Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear (sic) to be affected at present.â€
13. The Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream, the ocean conveyor belt, is not at risk of shutting off in the North Atlantic (p. 150). Carl Wunsch of MIT wrote to the journal Nature in 2004 to say, “The only way to produce an ocean circulation without a Gulf Stream is either to turn off the wind system, or to stop the Earth’s rotation, or bothâ€
14. Invasive Species. Gore’s worries about the effect of warming on species ignore evolution. With the new earlier caterpillar season in the Netherlands, an evolutionary advantage is given to birds that can hatch their eggs earlier than the rest. That’s how nature works. Also, “invasive species†naturally extend their range when climate changes. As for the pine beetle given as an example of invasive species, Rob Scagel, a forest microclimate specialist in British Columbia, said http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=d0235a70-33f1-45b3-803b-829b1b3542ef&rfp=dta, “The MPB (mountain pine beetle) is a species native to this part of North America and is always present. The MPB epidemic started as comparatively small outbreaks and through forest management inaction got completely out of hand.â€
15. Species Loss. When it comes to species loss, the figures given on p. 163 are based on extreme guesswork, as the late Julian Simon pointed out http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Norton/NORTON03.txt. We have documentary evidence of only just over 1,000 extinctions since 1600 (see, for instance, Bjørn Lomborg’s The Skeptical Environmentalist, p. 250).
16. Coral Reefs. Coral reefs have been around for over 500 million years. This means that they have survived through long periods with much higher temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations than today.
17. Malaria and other Infectious Diseases. Leading disease scientists contend that climate change plays only a minor role in the spread of emerging infectious diseases. In “Global Warming and Malaria: A Call for Accuracy†(The Lancet, June 2004), nine leading malariologists criticized models linking global warming to increased malaria spread as “misleading†and “display[ing] a lack of knowledge†of the subject.
18. Antarctic Ice. There is controversy over whether the Antarctic ice sheet is thinning or thickening. Recent scientific studies have shown a thickening in the interior at the same time as increased melting along the coastlines. Temperatures in the interior are generally decreasing. The Antarctic Peninsula, where the Larsen-B ice shelf broke up (p. 181) is not representative of what is happening in the rest of Antarctica. Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, Professor Emeritus of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, acknowledges http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm, “Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems.†According to a forthcoming report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, climate models based on anthropogenic forcing cannot explain the anomalous warming of the Antarctic Peninsula; thus, something natural is at work.
19. Greenland Climate. Greenland was warmer in the 1920s and 1930s than it is now. A recent study by Dr. Peter Chylek of the University of California, Riverside, addressed the question of whether man is directly responsible for recent warming: “An important question is to what extent can the current (1995-2005) temperature increase in Greenland coastal regions be interpreted as evidence of man-induced global warming? Although there has been a considerable temperature increase during the last decade (1995 to 2005) a similar increase and at a faster rate occurred during the early part of the 20th century (1920 to 1930) when carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases could not be a cause. The Greenland warming of 1920 to 1930 demonstrates that a high concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not a necessary condition for period of warming to arise. The observed 1995-2005 temperature increase seems to be within a natural variability of Greenland climate.†(Petr Chylek et al., Geophysical Research Letters, 13 June 2006.)
20. Sea Level Rise. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change does not forecast sea-level rises of “18 to 20 feet.†Rather, it says, “We project a sea level rise of 0.09 to 0.88 m for 1990 to 2100, with a central value of 0.48 m. The central value gives an average rate of 2.2 to 4.4 times the rate over the 20th century…It is now widely agreed that major loss of grounded ice and accelerated sea level rise are very unlikely during the 21st century.†Al Gore’s suggestions of much more are therefore extremely alarmist.
21. Population. Al Gore worries about population growth; Gore does not suggest a solution. Fertility in the developed world is stable or decreasing. The plain fact is that we are not going to reduce population back down to 2 billion or fewer in the foreseeable future. In the meantime, the population in the developing world requires a significant increase in its standard of living to reduce the threats of premature and infant mortality, disease, and hunger. In The Undercover Economist, Tim Harford writes, “If we are honest, then, the argument that trade leads to economic growth, which leads to climate change, leads us then to a stark conclusion: we should cut our trade links to make sure that the Chinese, Indians and Africans stay poor. The question is whether any environmental catastrophe, even severe climate change, could possibly inflict the same terrible human cost as keeping three or four billion people in poverty. To ask that question is to answer it.â€
22. Energy Generation. A specific example of this is Gore’s acknowledgement that 30 percent of global CO2 emissions come from wood fires used for cooking (p. 227). If we introduced affordable, coal-fired power generation into South Asia and Africa we could reduce this considerably and save over 1.6 million lives a year. This is the sort of solution that Gore does not even consider.
23. Carbon-Emissions Trading. The European Carbon Exchange Market, touted as “effective†on p. 252, has crashed http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,05328.cfm.
24. The “Scientific Consensus.†On the supposed “scientific consensusâ€: Dr. Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California, San Diego, (p. 262) did not examine a “large random sample†of scientific articles. She got her search terms wrong and thought she was looking at all the articles when in fact she was looking at only 928 out of about 12,000 articles on “climate change.†Dr. Benny Peiser, of Liverpool John Moores University in England, was unable to replicate her study. He says http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/Oreskes-abstracts.htm, “As I have stressed repeatedly http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/NationalPost.htm, the whole data set includes only 13 abstracts (~1%) that explicitly endorse what Oreskes has called the ‘consensus view.’ In fact, the vast majority of abstracts does (sic) not mention anthropogenic climate change. Moreover — and despite attempts to deny this fact — a handful of abstracts actually questions the view that human activities are the main driving force of ‘the observed warming over the last 50 years.’†In addition, a recent survey of scientists following the same methodology as one published in 1996 found that about 30 percent of scientists disagreed to some extent or another with the contention that “climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes.†Less than 10 percent “strongly agreed†with the statement. Details of both the survey and the failed attempt to replicate the Oreskes study can be found here http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/Scienceletter.htm.
25. Economic Costs. Even if the study Gore cites is right (p. 280-281), the United States will still emit massive amounts of CO2 after all the measures it outlines have been realized. Getting emissions down to the paltry levels needed to stabilize CO2 in the atmosphere would require, in Gore’s own words, “a wrenching transformation†of our way of life. This cannot be done easily or without significant cost. The Kyoto Protocol, which Gore enthusiastically supports, would avert less than a tenth of a degree of warming in the next fifty years and would cost up to $400 billion a year to the U.S. All of the current proposals in Congress would cost the economy significant amounts, making us all poorer, with all that that entails for human health and welfare, while doing nothing http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,04617.cfm to stop global warming.
Finally, Gore quotes Winston Churchill (p. 100) — but he should read what Churchill said when he was asked what qualities a politician requires: “The ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.â€
MHB, I hope you’re an openminded person who will go see the movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’.
By the way Garth, I enjoy your writing style and look forward to reading more.
A reply to the last post…
What really bugs me is that disinformation is still being spread.
Surfing around the news stories on Ambrose dropping the ball on the new Green Plan – er, I mean green ‘approach’…
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Canada/2006/10/05/1956267-sun.html
…I ended up in a western standard comment thread where the consensus was that climate change science was a joke and that we’d need to ‘buck up’ and forget about Kyoto’ or trying to stop ‘progress’. Blew me away.
http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2006/10/kyoto_lets_keep.html
Last coment there linked to http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=3
Oh, right – Climate Crisis Cancelled.
But here’s the real story:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Friends_of_Science
“…In the August 12th, 2006 Globe and Mail feature, The Friends of Science were exposed as being a front group for the oil industry…”
http://desmogblog-com.bryght.net/pm-harpers-fishing-buddy-behind-kyoto-attack-group
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=5630fd43-a2f6-453c-be0a-1fdb67ffbb4d&p=2
Some of these cats out here really blow me away, believing what they want to and ingnoring ‘inconvenient truths’.In the end I have no idea how to graft a new idea onto a closed mind.
It really bugs me that we see these idiots saying global warming doesn’t exist especially when all the signs are there. But even if global warming doesn’t exist, the crap that we are putting into the air needs to be dealt with. We BREATH IT PEOPLE! IT’S OUR SURVIVAL!!
It also bothers me that Ontario is looking towards nuclear. WTF!!!? We have wind power, solar, microhydro, etc. and we’re gonna consider nuclear? Don’t give me the junk about cost of these alternatives, etc. It’s CLEAN! We have so many possibilities in Canada with our vast land! As for cost… the government needs to make it readily available and create more market demand to lower costs. Actually, the demand is there. People want an alternative. I heard on the CBC about Germany planning to go totally on renewable energy in less than 40 years thanks to a plan developed by a German politician. This same politician said Canada could go totally renewable in LESS THAN 5 YEARS!!! He’s appauled at our government’s attitude. So… what is wrong with our government or the rest of North America for that matter? Everyone of us has some sort of connection to a child and are we going to be giving them a world where we need gas masks or for that matter… any world at all?! The lobby groups can go to hell as far as I’m concerned. Their interest is financial and what is the point of money if the world is no more or we have to now deal with more cancers, etc. Speaking of financial, I live across the street from Manulife and can see their parking garage from my front yard. It kills me as to how many cars come out with ONE passenger. Where’s the car pooling? What about commuters? In this day of technology, do employees really need to go to the office everyday? All of them are contributing to our serious pollution problem.
One last point in regards to the environment…Please… go get the movie “Who Killed the Electric Car?”… we are 10 YEARS BEHIND THANKS TO GOVERNMENT, POLITICS, LOBBISTS, AND AUTO COMPANIES!!! There are alternatives and we need to speak up.
Thank you Garth. The issue of climate change transcends left-right politics. There is overwhelming evidence and a strong scientific consensus that climate change is real. Those with various vested interests continue to try to propagate doubt and misinformation, even though their arguments have been disproved time and time again, but slowly I think the truth is coming through. It is not egotistical to think that we cause climate change; rather, it is egotistical to assume that we can endlessly exploit the Earth’s resources while showing no respect for the fragile band of atmosphere that makes all life possible. Thank you for making a personal sacrifice that will push this issue into the news. Climate change will eventually render all other issues irrelevant. -PukeGreen.com
Garth :
I warned you right after the election that this crew would intriduce all Reform/Alliance policies and that you would be extremely unhappy .
All they own is the name Progressive in actual fact they are regressive in the the extreme .
Harpo is a liar and a cheat and a ,very,
stupid person .
Hasn’t a clue what it is to be a ,real, Canadian .
Can’t wait for the election when the neo-Nazi’s are reduced to 50,seats and lose status as the official opposition .
From a liberal…
Harper has done more in the past few months than the past 12 years of liberal dictatorship. I am more impressed with the Conservatives than I thought I would be.
Then again, I am not sure you can trust any of them.
Much public confusion surrounds the issue of global warming. Some scientists say yes it’s happening because of our use of fossil fuels, some say it’s happening as a natural occurrence, and some say it’s not happening at all. The average person hardly knows what to think, being pulled this way one day, and in another direction the next.
There was much hand wringing and lamenting regarding the future costs of the Accord, but apparently many world governments DO believe the science and developed the political will to pay the price and head off climatic calamity, and so had our previous government.
The facts are that our incredible dependance on fossil fuels have changed the very air that we breathe, and this is just the start. As other less developed nations catch up, what method of fueling their progress will they be using but the cheapest available!
We HAVE to do something. Either by finding ways to use fossil fuels more efficiently, or by developing cost effective replacements to fossil fuels.
For my part..I’ve been using a product since April that claims to reduce my vehicle emissions by nearly 60% by burning the gas more efficiently, but I’ve been using mainly because it saves me on fuel costs (because with four kids to feed my PRIMARY concern is the bottom line). I used to fill up every 7 days or so, and now fill up every 10 days or so. That’s 3 fills a month instead of 4.
Imagine what a breath of fresh air it would be if every vehicle in Canada produced 60% less emissions, and if consumption were even reduced by just 10-15%?
Well for me it’s not imaginary..it’s a reality!
a24ksuccess@yahoo.ca
I find the comments on Ambrose and May’s physical appearance totally irrelevant.
Why is it that men in politics have to attack how women look? It really takes away from the debate at hand and makes the man sound pompous and uneducated.
Cheri
“Ambrose is a pawn in the harper game. Honestly, she is a blonde that changed her hair color to brunette to avoid the blonde jokes.
By Peter on 10.18.06 3:08 pm”
Go Green Garth! I think that’s a great idea!!!
I came over here, like many, because of the news stories. I’m a Canadian living in Germany. My eyes were opened wide when I moved here in December. Canadians are far behind Europe in environmental concern. Here (in Germany) everything is recycled except for food waste. Lights in apartment building hallways are either on a timer or have motion detectors and are not left burning 24/7. Germany now has more windmills than Holland. Despite temperatures reaching higher than 40 degrees this summer, it is very rare to find air conditioning outside of shopping facilities. Of course, with a population of over 80 million in a country smaller than the province of Ontario they must take care of their environment. But Canada has such a beautiful environment now, is it really so impossible to consider keeping it as pristine as possible for future generations to enjoy? I’m not a Conservative, nor a Green Party supporter. Just someone who was shocked to learn how wasteful she really was.
[...] out her. Turner Blog entry for Oct 17 … The stakes posted by Garth Turner on [...]
I would like to say good for you Garth. First off you were standing up for your constituents views rather than towing the party line. Harper scares me, a mini Bush without a nuke.
As for this environmental debate here on this forum, I would like to know what peoples credentials are in the area of Earth science before they give their theories. How many on this board have ever done a study on anything to do with the environment. It’s sad the right has been fed BS for generations, and unfortunately most dont have the education to really decipher through it. To anyone who thinks climate change and global warming and being tough on the environment aren’t priorities….well write books like David Suzuki, critique his theories scientifically, teach graduate level courses in the subject….but one thing it will take more than grade seven education to do it.
I applaud grant, its about time somebody put the tyranny in its place. Let Elizabeth May speak….the greens have earned their voice, and it is most definitely time for a change. Once again Mr. Turner good for you, its rare a politician does the right thing.
You got what you deserved. You can now join the Green Party and only dream about getting elected in the next election. Better still you can start up your own environmental group, get millions of dollars in funds from various government departments and scare your Halton constituents to death about global warming. Maybe Harper will donate to your cause.
Hello:
You are your own person! IT is unfortunate that the PC party doesn’t see the need to listen and accept positive criticism from within and without the caucus. It would appear that it does not value DISCUSSION, DEBATE,and COMPROMISE. Everyday, paul Martin’s words echo to me “SH’s Canada is not my Canada!” I think SH’s Canada is a communist dictatorship…I hie the Canadian public will have the opportunity to see this during the next election… getting things done is not the same as getting things done well!!!!
Enjoy your day, your week, your term as I think your constituents will support you. Usually you get more done when you are on the inside but in this case I think you will get more done as an independent…with a voice and no party line to echo.
I looked on as the news about you enfolded yesterday with tremendous glee … and I had to wonder WHY you are a conservative MP (obviously you are not to have spoken your views so freely and in direct oppositon to your present party leader) Your views are much more NDP – like, or even Green party – like and I applaud you taking a stand against a government that can only be seen as a puppet of the George Bush ’s Judy and Punch War on the World Show. I so hope this minority government is taken down soon. And people like you, need to be in the winning party!
[...] obal climate change and the need to combat it. You can read here his latest blog entry on the subject. He has the best MP web site I’ve seen so far [...]
Garth, I read in the Globe and Mail this morning that you may be considering Green Party, I think it’s about time that we had some Green Party MP’s. With the support running nationally at over 5% (sometimes close to 10%)…it’s really a shame that we don’t have any members in the Parliament representing about half a million of Canadians…Good Luck!!!
P
Congratulations Mr. Turner on your integrity. I am what used to be known as a liberal, but have had no party to support for many years. As a result I vote for the candidate who I feel will best represent the traditional Canadian values of honour, decency, fairness and tolerance. Political parties have outgrown their usefullness. The confrontational approach gets us nowhere. It’s time we grew up and learned to cooperate.
jm
Jerry On,
So let me get this straight-if you are not a Conservative you are a “pinko” – you must be quite elderly from the McCarthy era, the “red threat”. I don’t wear a pink skirt because I cycle to work. Comparing Rona Ambrose and Elizabeth May’s “looks”! You don’t hear women say Harper looks like he is ready to deliver or that Stephan Dion is “hot”. Grow up guys! This is the 20th century.
Way to go Garth for bucking Harper’s quest for mindless adherance to his extreme party line. Government IS about the people and not the party. There should be no place at the helm of Canada for him and his would be dare I say, Alliance type puppeteers. All I can say is thank God he doesn’t have majority.
It is only hoped that this matter may help to open some currently closed Conservative minds in the electorate to the dangers this government poses. Then hopefully they’ll be kicked to the curb at the first opportunity.
[...] , we do. Turner Blog entry for Oct 17 … The stakes posted by Garth Turner on [...]
Headline today – “TROUBLE GRIPS TORIES†– Globe & Mail. This is clearly an editor gone wild, trying to trump up a simple story of one MP gone bad into a national scandal. Garth wanted this from day one. He has a far better chance of re-election as an independant than as a Conservative in his neck of the woods. I predict this power hungry egomaniac will study which way the wind is blowing before deciding which party to jump to. The sad thing is, it didn’t have to be this way Garth. You coulda’ been a star. You coulda’ been a contender. You chose loose lips on a tight ship.
First the Conservatives denied that the Earth was warming. Then they changed their minds and said, “OK maybe it is warming but it is all part of a natural cycle, humans aren’t to blame.” Then they finally faced up to reality and admitted that humans are causing it, but they claim we can’t reduce our emissions or else it will ruin our Economy.
Wake up you idiots! Climate change is the biggest threat that the world has ever faced! Dealing with the consequences (drought, flooding, starvation, war) will be much more costly than the alternatives which are energy efficiency, public transit and renewable energy.
If the rest of you Conservatives reading this had any vision for the future you would join Garth and leave the party voluntarily. What the Conservatives are doing is bad for Canada and the rest of the world.
I don’t think Mr. Turner did himself a service by criticising the policies and decisions his party made every step of the way. Perhaps in this day of so many people making poor choices and exhibiting behaviour to go along with them, it would have been more productive to take the high road and work with his party in private to help inform them of his concerns. To publicly divide a party like he was so intent on, teaches children and adults everywhere that when you disagree you can be uncaring about the whole in order to satisfy the few. How refreshing it would be to adopt a policy of civility and work as one rather then trying to prove you are a renegade because it makes you look strong and principled. Truly strong and principled people don’t need to grandstand to prove it. They work behind the scenes to improve situations rather then inflaming them so the media has news to report. Conservatives have lost a good man that was talented and well spoken because he didn’t know how to work within the boundaries. I sadly regret that.
I love this…this is great…can’t wait to read more..
And sweetie, you’re too smart for the Conservatives..!! Get out ..join the Green…!!
Just read your blog. Frankly it was thin, I wish I were as thin. ‘Maybe not.’
I don’t know what it is about conseratives, but you can’t seem to get away from hemlines, hairdos of female politicians. About Ambrose, she sounds tough, intelligent, and for sure in the oil sympathy pocket.
May from what I’ve seen of her on the news, and Rick Mercer’s show, strikes me as a gadfly bent on a mission with a growing following. Also has a generous sense of humour.
From what I’ve seen of politicians so far, I have to agree with that clip, Politians like diapers…
So be a thorn in the Government’s side, it has too few.
Best wishes
Roger
Roger,
Good to see there is a male on this site that is “grown up” – thinks with his head and not his “crotch”. I have never seen this site but if this is what Conservatives are about, let me out of here. This definitely is not a party that would attract intelligent, informed women.
One more cynical piece of proposed policy, aimed at getting votes. Another proposal that sounds important, decisive, but it’s all pretence, much ado about nothing. That’s the way Harper tries to garner enough votes to get a majority; that’s what it is all about.
OI have yet to see any prooof of global warming. I have put out a challenge for people to provide me with either a link to a study, preferably with data, or simply name the study, where it was published and who did it, so I can go check it out at the university’s library. An Australian climate scientist, Richard in my last post, has been looking for proof. Actually it was originally his challenge. I have put more info on the http://greycanada.blogspot.com/2006/10/still-no-global-warming-proof.html page.
Climate change is real. It has been real for millions of years. The wrost event so far was 70,000 years ago when global cooling almost wiped out the human population according to recent DNA studies. The problem with the climate studies so far is that they are based on weather station data that is not reliable. Satallite data do not indicate significant global warming. Have any studies been done that prove the global greenhouse effect, thus global warming exists?
John M Reynolds