Category Archives: liberal party

Yay for Democracy Part I

conservative party, democracy and good government, green party, liberal party, ndp, polls

Two days ago I asked you to be skeptical of any political party that has a death-bed conversion to the world of environmental sanity. Yesterday, Decima released a poll that proves once again that every single Canadian not only reads my blog, but also does everything I say.

The poll’s most encouraging finding? You’re not buying it.

A new poll suggests Canadians view all the major federal political parties with a lot of skepticism when it comes to environmental policy.The survey by Decima Research, provided to The Canadian Press, found that respondents by a four-to-one margin see recent Conservative green announcements as being driven by public opinion, not genuine commitment.

Oh, and guess what else:

When Decima asked how respondents would vote if the environment was the only issue in the next election, the Green Party led with 24 per cent support. The Conservatives and Liberals were essentially tied, 17-16, while the NDP attracted just 10 per cent support and the Bloc Quebecois only four per cent.

I don’t expect the environment to be the only issue in the next election, but it’s a pretty darned important one. (As in, “if you don’t have a planet, then, well….”) Onward and upward.

“Why would we do this?”

climate crisis, ecology, liberal party

There’s a feature story in today’s Globe and Mail about Dr. Gordon McBean, one of Canada’s top climatologists. Dr. McBean briefed the federal Liberal cabinet on climate change in 2002. He told them then — five years ago — that the Kyoto targets were only a first step, and that much deeper reductions in carbon emissions were needed. He also explained that climate change could mean “surging sea levels, more frequent violent storms, severe heat waves and droughts,” but added that it would be decades before the effects of any action would be noticeable.

At least one Minister was appalled. “And there will be nothing for us between now and the next election?” the minister asked. “Why would we do this?”

“You do it for your grandchildren,” Dr. McBean replied. (Fortunately for the Minister, and unfortunately for us, Dr. McBean isn’t naming names.)

That story is yet another illustration of why Canadians should be very cautious when considering the born-again policy positions of political parties claiming to have seen the light. In most cases, I suspect, all they’ve really seen are polling numbers.

Also in today’s Globe, Preston Manning argues that politicians must not do to the environment what they did to health care: produce nothing but “sterile, destructive, polarized debate,” that succeeds only in convincing the public that “their No. 1 public-policy concern cannot be resolved by political processes and institutions, and that politics is part of the health-care problem, not part of the solution.” (The fact that Preston Manning is now sounding reasonable is a good demonstration of, 1) how far off-side Stephen Harper is, and 2) how much nicer, smarter, and productive politicians are once they’ve gone through parliamentary detox.)

Keeping that in mind, I suggest there are three things people should ask themselves when assessing which party has the best environmental approach:

  1. Do they have staying power? Do you believe the party is actually committed to addressing the planetary crisis, or will their resolve melt if our next winter happens to be a cold one?
  2. Do they have the best solutions? This is different than asking if they appear to care the most, or if they have the best TV commercials. The benefit of living in a country that’s fallen so far behind on environmental leadership is that there are lots of proven solutions that can be borrowed from other jurisdictions.
  3. Do they understand how different issues are interrelated? Not just the way that the environment is linked to health and economy (though that’s important), but also how climate change relates to resource depletion, toxicity, ocean health, agribusiness, peak oil, etc. Be very skeptical of any party with an environmental platform that claims to be able to solve the climate crisis without addressing these other issues.

Today is Parliament’s first day back. Here’s to hoping they achieve at least the bare minimum.

Wrath of Khan

conservative party, democracy and good government, foreign affairs, liberal party

Back in August, I supported Bill Graham’s decision to allow Wajid Khan to serve as a special adviser to Stephen Harper on the Middle East and Afghanistan, arguing that “we need more cross-party cooperation and dialogue, not less — especially in a minority government situation.”

In the wake of Khan’s defection to the Conservatives, I stand by that principal. In fact, the CBC reports that it was Stéphane Dion’s insistence that Khan pick a side that forced the move. Dion also made a statement to the Liberal website, saying, “I was never comfortable with Mr. Khan serving as an adviser to a Conservative Prime Minister, as Mr. Khan has done since August of last year.” Other Liberal MPs had “questioned how Khan would balance his allegiance to the party with his new role as an adviser to the prime minister.”

The fact that the obvious answer, “he’ll do whatever he thinks is best for the country,” didn’t seem obvious doesn’t speak well to our MPs’ assessments of each other’s motives. (Nor, unfortunately, of Dion’s.)

That being said, Khan’s assessment that “the best leader for Canada is the man who now has the job” isn’t doing much for my opinion of him either.

Some Advice

conservative party, green party, liberal party, ndp

The two campaigns in the London North Centre by election that went negative were the Conservative campaign (which went negative on the Liberals) and the NDP campaign (which went negative on the Greens). It’s no coincidence that those campaigns finished third and fourth, behind the positive campaigns of the Liberals and the Green Party.

I bring this up because late last night the NDP sent out an email to their supporters (and moles like me). The first paragraph read:

There’s a new Liberal leader but it’s the same old Liberal party. After 13 years of broken promises and corruption, the Liberals have picked themselves a new front man. Their choice – an out of touch academic who spent 10 years in a scandal ridden cabinet and who’s record as Environment Minister was condemned by environmentalists and the Environment Commissioner. Liberal arrogance – some things never change.

The second paragraph — ready for this? — was as follows:

Today Jack Layton offered his congratulations to Stéphane Dion, saying that he looked forward to debating the new leader in Parliament to get things done for today’s families.

The second paragraph loses some of its sincerity coming after the first, doesn’t it? Listen folks, we’re not going to accomplish anything by being close-minded, mean, and partisan beyond reason. And if that isn’t enough, Canadians increasingly won’t vote for these kinds of politicians and parties. The London North Centre result showed that.

If I were in charge of the NDP’s messaging, I’d turn the venom down a shade, or risk being poisoned by it.