Home » Posts tagged 'canadian federal election'

Tag Archives: canadian federal election

Canadian industry is ‘addicted to fossil fuels,’ but the Green Party can change that, says Elizabeth May

September 28, 2019

Canadian industry is ‘addicted to fossil fuels,’ but the Green Party can change that, says Elizabeth May

Goal isn’t to come up with something politically palatable, it’s to secure future: May

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May joins climate change activists and students as they gather in Calgary for a protest and ‘die-in,’ on the steps of the Calgary Municipal Building in Calgary on Friday, Sept. 20, 2019. (Dave Chidley/Canadian Press)

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May says Canadians want action on climate change, but are stymied by living in a society “hardwired to fossil fuel use.”

“It’s very hard for an individual to take action in a system that’s still subsidising fossil fuels, that’s still promoting the idea that we can expand the oil sands,” May told The Current’s interim host Laura Lynch.

She said that what’s needed is leadership and programs that help and encourage people to make sustainable choices, such as putting solar panels on their roofs, or plugging in their cars rather than stopping at the gas station.

“These are really good choices for the future, but almost impossible for the individual to do … against a structure in society that says we’re addicted to fossil fuels, and we think that’s just fine,” she said.

“It’s not fine. We have to stop doing it.”

On Wednesday, May told CBC News she wouldn’t prop up a minority government that moves forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

If the Green Party wins enough seats, May said they could hold “the balance of responsibility” to tell the bigger parties “we won’t let you get past the very first confidence vote, unless we see absolute evidence, a change in our target, a commitment to real action.”

She stressed that her party is more interested in securing a sustainable future for the planet than advancing its own political power.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

As Election Nears, Canada’s Biggest Oil Firm Is Noticeably Quiet

August 28, 2019

As Election Nears, Canada’s Biggest Oil Firm Is Noticeably Quiet

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer says he’s Canada’s energy ‘champion.’ Yet he opposes climate policy Suncor supports.

Mark Little is the CEO of Suncor, the biggest oilsands firm in Canada which, awkwardly for some federal political parties, supports strong government policy on climate change. Photo by Jeff McIntosh, the Canadian Press.

As we race towards a federal election that will determine if and how Canada responds to the climate emergency, one central player is noticeably absent.

Suncor is without a doubt the biggest and most influential oilsands company in the country. Contrary to what you might think, however, it has a more aggressive position on climate action than federal Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer. While Scheer promises to scrap Canada’s national carbon price as soon he gets into office, Suncor argues the Liberal policy should stay.

“We have and continue to support the Pan-Canadian Framework as a path forward to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” Nathan Maycher, Suncor’s director of climate change and sustainability integration, told The Tyee in an email.

In 2017, the company employed 12,381 people, brought in over $32 billion in revenue and produced roughly 1.2 million barrels of bitumen per day, which is over one-third of the industry’s total output, according to research from the Corporate Mapping Project.

Yet when three major oilsands producers — Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., Cenovus Energy and MEG Energy Corp. — ran an “open letter to Canadians” in 30 newspapers this July arguing that “shutting down Canada’s oil industry will have little impact on global [emissions] targets,” Suncor stayed silent. And the company’s CEO Mark Little doesn’t appear to be involved with an effort by small and mid-level Calgary oil and gas executives to get Scheer elected prime minister this October.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Canadian Election: A Study in Values

October 31, 2015

Canadian Election: A Study in Values

Those who work on climate change were both chuffed and chagrined by its role in Canada’s federal election campaign, which peaked last week with the victory of Liberal leader Justin Trudeau and defeat of Conservative incumbent Stephen Harper.

“The environment” – a catch-all concept that often encompasses concern about climate change – consistently ranked close to economy and healthcare on voters’ list of top priorities. Oilsands and climate change issues took up nearly a quarter of the first leaders debate, commanding more than twice the airtime they did in 2011. Several media outlets ran editorials calling on all parties to take a strong stance on reducing GHG emissions or put a price on carbon. To quote professor and commentator George Hoberg, “energy and environmental issues have become central to Canadian electoral politics.”

Despite all of this, climate change didn’t have a significant impact on the election’s outcome. Fundamentally this was a campaign about values where action on global warming was bundled into a broader set of aspirations and ideas that Canadians said yes to last Monday.

The election of Canada’s new prime minister is an important case study in the powerful potential of values-based messaging. Where the Conservative campaign sought to preserve the status quo and motivate voters with threats of an unstable or unsafe future, the Liberal campaign (and to a different extent, the New Democrats) mobilized Canadians with a vision of change centred on honesty, inclusion and fairness.

Of course, the timing couldn’t have been better. Much has been said about why Canadians’ were ready to bid farewell to one of their longer-standing leaders – corruption, fiscal mismanagement, deepening degrees of intolerance and an overt contempt for basic democratic principles being among them.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Trust Trudeau? I’ll Wait and See

October 23, 2015

Trust Trudeau? I’ll Wait and See

Canada’s young prince promises ‘real change.’ I can’t help but be wary.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

Like many Canadians, I want to trust the Liberals, but I don’t enjoy having to trust them. Photo by Mario Jean.

How are we feeling about the new Canadian Camelot? Justin Trudeau is young, movie star handsome, and projects the confident hope of his famous pedigree. All of North America seems swept up in the romance of his remarkable moment, and of course there are obvious reasons to celebrate.

Like 70 per cent of the voting public, I am savouring the end of the Stephen Harper era as one might relish being released from a Turkish prison. His insidious regime edged us toward a mean and narrow vision of Canada that was becoming almost unrecognizable.

While the Tory defeat was decisive by pundit standards, many of us hoped for more of a Mulroneyesque wipeout worthy of Harper’s jagged hubris. Alas, the Conservatives were only wounded and may re-emerge under new leadership as a political force more familiar and somewhat less toxic to our country.

Trudeau and his team no doubt ran a masterful campaign, but I fear the victorious Liberals might take the wrong lessons from Monday night. Like all political partisans, Liberal supporters are apt to confound what is good for their party with what is best for our nation.

Will they embrace meaningful changes to our antiquated voting system now that they have again hit the electoral jackpot? The Liberal party has enjoyed fully 16 “majority” governments since Confederation, while only three represented an actual majority of votes.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

What Your New Liberal Majority Government Means for Climate, Environment, Science and Transparency

October 20, 2015

What Your New Liberal Majority Government Means for Climate, Environment, Science and Transparency

Holy smokes.

Polls are in and Canadians across the country are expressing surprise at the strong win for the federal Liberal party.

While there’s much ink to be spilled over former Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s reign, he’s likely locked in a bathroom now, so we’ll save that for another, less change-y time.

Canada, you have a new Prime Minister. I would say ‘go home, you’re drunk.’ But don’t, because you’re not. This is actually happening.

But wait, what is actually happening? We have a new majority government. Before the fun gets away with us, let’s do a quick reality check for what the Liberal Party and incoming Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have been promising all y’all on some of our top DeSmog Canada topics: climate, environment, science and transparency.

Justin Trudeau’s Liberals on Climate

On the issue of Canada’s climate commitments for the UN climate summit this fall in Paris, the Liberal platform is underdeveloped. On the campaign trail last week party leader Justin Trudeau told the CBC he would not commit to specific emissions targets.

“Everybody has thrown out numbers and different targets, and what they’re going to do and what is going to happen,” Trudeau said.

“What we need is not ambitious political targets. What we need is an ambitious plan to reduce our emissions in the country.”

The federal Conservative party promised to reduce emissions by 30 per cent from 2005 levels by 2050, a target that has been roundly criticized as weak. Others have pointed out the Conservative plan made no mention of the Alberta oilsands, the fastest growing source of emissions in Canada.

Although the Liberals don’t have a specific plan yet, the party has promised to establish a new climate change framework by February 2016 that includes an eventual phase out of fossil fuel subsidies. The plan will also include investment in climate resilience, clean technology and low-carbon infrastructure.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Should everyone vote?

October 19, 2015

Should everyone vote?

It’s election time in Canada, and as usual ad campaigns on TV, radio, print, and even Facebook are urging “everyone” to vote. But is that such a good thing?

To ask it another way: Is it really a good thing to tell people who are ignorant of law (so they don’t know which proposed policies are illegal), and/or ignorant of economics (so they don’t know what the actual outcomes of proposed policies will be), and/or ignorant of political science (so they don’t know which proposed policies are politically feasible with the actual people and institutions we already have)?

If politics is serious business, shouldn’t people have more than causal understanding law, economics, and political science before voting? How are people supposed to judge platforms otherwise–by what “feels right”?

Imagine you’re on a panel to choose a team of rocket scientists to send a spaceship to Mars. But let’s say you’re ignorant of the general laws of physics, the specific laws of rocket science, and the knowledge of project management knowledge of how different teams of engineers are supposed to work together.

How would you judge which engineers to hire?

By what the engineers merely say they’ll do? That doesn’t work, since you have absolutely no framework for what is and isn’t physically possible. They might be suggesting breaking the laws of physics but you’d have no idea.

By what the engineers have done in the past isn’t a good metric either. Sure they may have sent a rocket to space before, but what if they did it really economically and wasted a lot fuel and other resources? They may have also had a rocket blow up mid flight–but what if they didn’t even expect the rocket to ignite and so it was a great feat of engineering that it went up at all?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Harper’s Revolutionary Foreign Policy

October 15, 2015

Harper’s Revolutionary Foreign Policy

Bellicose words, pandering flip flops, just one aim: Win votes at home.

Shredded by vote-driven strategy, Canada’s foreign policy has no real conservative agenda, no moral centre. Canadian flag image via Shutterstock.

No Canadian prime minister has put his personal stamp on foreign affairs more than Stephen Harper. And no prime minister has parted so radically from the national traditions of the past.

Canada used to play the role of a noble and sometimes self-serving Boy Scout abroad. The nation brokered peace deals, elevated the status of women, fought international poverty, championed arms control, and shared critical science.

It practiced real diplomacy and in the process, as former prime minister Joe Clark wrote in How We Lead, the nation became a “reliable, respected and responsible” global partner that built “concentric circles of influence on issues from defence, to development, to conciliation, to trade.”

There were blind spots, of course. The nation often ignored the abuses of Canada’s mining industry abroad and championed secret trade deals that have given unfettered power to corporations.

But the Boy Scout is long gone and a bully has taken its place. The Harper government practices “megaphone diplomacy” and flits from one outrageous rhetorical outburst to another.

One day Harper harangues Vladimir Putin as a common criminal, while the next day his Tory minions compare Iran to Nazi Germany. Canada has morphed from the reasoned voice of a middle power to a brittle fear monger that is now the first to close embassies, cut off dialogue and impose sanctions.

At the same time the Harper government can ignore the Syrian refugee crisis, because as Harper routinely suggests, many of these people might be terrorists or God forbid, homeless Muslims.

At first glance, much of this bombast (The Globe and Mail ridiculously calls it “muscular”) might seem totally incoherent and inconsistent, and you’d be right.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Canadian Elections: Cover-Up and Steal (Again)

October 8, 2015

The Canadian Elections: Cover-Up and Steal (Again)

Canadians are within a few days of stopping or allowing the Harper regime to continue to destroy the democracy and life fabric of Canada. But the dots are taboo to connect. The PR-led opposition has joined the corporate media in a public stage ritual of forgetting. The endless lies, election cheats, and bullying abuses through nine years of PMO civil destruction go scot free.

The Harper regime has cheated or stole every election. Yet not even the Conservative robo-call fraud to deprive up to 500,000 citizens of their votes in the 2011 election has been raised in the official campaign. No-one on stage remembers any of it back to the first Harper theft of power in 2006, featuring the Harper-RCMP deal to falsely accuse the Liberal Finance Minister Ralph Goodale in criminal investigation just prior to the election. Nor is Harper’s violation of his own Election Act in calling the 2008 election and its massive illegal spending on attacks ads filling the airwaves with public hate just before the vote. All has been proven off the campaign stage, but all has been silenced on it. The regime’s near-daily record of lies, scandals and violations has gone the memory hole of the electoral campaign, with $54 million on hand for attack ads.

Nothing sticks because public information is repressed in every form by the Harper PMO, the corporate media publish only transient details and flattering pictures, and the mainstream parties silently submit to the rule of amnesia. Yet every destruction tracks back to the Mafia-like despotism of the Harper PMO whose rule of fear, division, lies, character assassination and public sector dismantling runs free with no connection on stage. Even as I write, Harper tells more public lies that “there are no cuts at the CBC” and that “marijuana is far more dangerous than tobacco’.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Campaign cone of silence descends on Saudi Arabia arms deal: Neil Macdonald

October 2, 2015

Campaign cone of silence descends on Saudi Arabia arms deal: Neil Macdonald

Warning: this article contains strong language and imagery

The definition of a “campaign issue” is elusive. Generally, it has to do with the self-interest of politicians and the reporters who cover them.

If the former think advancing a subject might mean more votes, they declare that “the people of Canada are concerned.” Journalists then decide whether it’ll sell papers, to use an old term. If the subject clears both bars, it’s a campaign issue.

That entire process took place with remarkable speed last week. The subject of Canadian arms sales to Saudi Arabia was raised, became an issue and died, all within about 24 hours.

The revenant Bloc Quebecois leader, Gilles Duceppe, who has suddenly taken a great interest in anything pertaining to radical Islam, kicked things off during the French-language leaders’ debate last Thursday.

“As we combat ISIS,” he asked Stephen Harper, “We must realize that its ideology was financed and promoted by Saudi Arabia, and we are sending billions worth of arms to Saudi Arabia.

“Would it not be sensible to say that’s enough, we’re stopping arms sales to Saudi Arabia? Wouldn’t that be logical, given our fight with ISIS?”

Harper, a man who has portrayed his government’s foreign policy as more principled and less susceptible to the power of the almighty dollar than other governments, basically replied that there’s a lot of money at stake and thousands of jobs in London, Ont.

The contract to export $15 billion worth of armoured vehicles to the Saudis, he noted, is the largest in Canadian history.

Cancelling it would only punish Canadian workers, he said, and besides, the contract is “support for an ally.”

“Yes, Saudi Arabia is a great ally,” snorted Duceppe. “Wonderful. I’ve taken note.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Let Me Be Clear: Fact Checking Leaders on Foreign Policy

September 30, 2015

Let Me Be Clear: Fact Checking Leaders on Foreign Policy

A civil debate, sure. But civility, it seems, doesn’t always encourage truthfulness.

The fourth debate in this election “season” — a campaign as long as some places in Canada go without snow — was rather polite compared to the first two English debates.

It was clear host Munk Debates wanted a civil conversation among gentlemen, where the moderator held court and didn’t let the leaders shout over one another. The audience laughed and clapped as though there was a flashing sign telling them to do so, and even booed Liberal leader Justin Trudeau for speaking over Conservative leader Stephen Harper. Apparently they’re sticklers for manners, too.

Civility doesn’t equal truthiness, however, and it turns out there were some whopper-sized statements in last night’s foreign policy debate. As per form, we picked one statement per leader to debunk.

Thomas Mulcair: “It’s very difficult to see how Canada’s superior interests were being served when Prime Minister Harper said to President Obama that it was ‘a complete no brainer’ — those were his exact words — that the Americans had to approve Keystone XL. I know that Keystone XL represents the export of 40,000 Canadian jobs because Mr. Harper told the Americans so.”

The NDP leader’s first sentence is misleading. Speaking to reporters in New York at the opening of the United Nations General Assembly in 2011, Harper told an American reporter that approving the Keystone XL pipeline, which would ship raw bitumen from Alberta to Nebraska, would be a “no brainer.” He could have said this to Obama in a private conversation, but in public he said it to a reporter.

The second sentence is false, with a caveat. Keystone won’t “export” jobs to the United States. Mulcair could be referring to the fact that exporting raw bitumen means American refineries get to refine the product, rather than a Canadian facility. But the 40,000 jobs number comes from a U.S. state department report, and the majority are either temporary positions or they already exist.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

How Saudi Arabia, and a $15B armoured vehicle deal, became an election issue

September 26, 2015

How Saudi Arabia, and a $15B armoured vehicle deal, became an election issue

Government says contract will create and sustain 3,000 jobs

Niqabs, the economy, national unity — all issues that predictably came up in Thursday night’s French-language debate.

But few had forecast that Canada’s relations with Saudi Arabia, and specifically, a multibillion-dollar contract to sell armoured vehicles to the country, would erupt as an issue. It made for one of the more interesting exchanges of the night, and a reprieve for debate watchers tiring of the party leaders covering the same old ground.

The issue of whether Canada should be involved in such a deal with a country with a poor human rights record carried forward Friday. Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, as he did the night before, defended the $15-billion deal that Canada helped secure last year, under which the London, Ont.-based manufacturer General Dynamics Land Systems will sell armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia.

At a campaign stop in Rivière-du-Loup, Que., Harper was asked whether he was putting Canadian jobs ahead of human rights concerns.

“As I’ve said in the debate, it’s frankly all of our partners and allies who were pursuing that contract, not just Canada. So this is a deal frankly with a country, and notwithstanding its human rights violations, which are significant, this is a contract with a country that is an ally in the fighting against the Islamic State. A contract that any one of our allies would have signed,” he said.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

On the economy, politicians debate, central bankers decide

September 18, 2015

On the economy, politicians debate, central bankers decide

Bank of Canada pushing stimulus; Conservatives, NDP talking austerity. Go figure

The idea that a prime minister is the “steward of the economy” is a convenient bit of fiction, co-created by politicians and the journalists who cover them.

It was an explicit theme of last night’s leaders’ debate; at one point, the moderator actually asked NDP leader Tom Mulcair “why should the electorate hand the national economy over to you?”

This notion is convenient to prime ministers because of their need to appear in charge of everything; convenient to opposition leaders, who need to assign blame for everything; and convenient to those journalists who thrive on reductive, easily digestible notions that smell like truisms.

In reality, though, a prime minister gets to decide how federal spending is allocated, and federal spending accounts for roughly 15 per cent of the $1.8-trillion Canadian economy.

Actually, even that is too sweeping: the prime minister decides how a portion of that 15 per cent is spent.
Most federal spending is structurally entrenched (entitlement programs, equalization payments, transfers to provinces, etc.) or politically entrenched.

Enter Stephen Poloz

Still, there is one Canadian official who probably does deserve the steward-of-the-economy title. It’s almost his job description, but you won’t hear much about him during this campaign, because he isn’t running for election, and because most people have only a dim understanding of what he does. He went unmentioned in last night’s economic debate.

But Bank of Canada governor Stephen Poloz not only has the unilateral power to change the financial circumstances of almost every Canadian tomorrow, he is almost certainly considering at the moment whether he should use it.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Why Oil As An Election Issue Is Bad News For Canada

August 21, 2015

Why Oil As An Election Issue Is Bad News For Canada

When oil becomes an election issue it is rarely good news.

After Joe Clark’s minority PC government was defeated in 1979 over gasoline taxes in a budget, the subsequent Liberal administration introduced the National Energy Program. In 2008, Ed Stelmach’s Alberta PCs campaigned on the New Royalty Framework and won big. Earlier this year Alberta’s new NDP government promised higher corporate taxes and a royalty review if elected. The taxes became law July 1 and royalties will hopefully be clear soon.

Historically, the issue has been revenue; producers are excessively profitable, consumers should pay less and government must collect more. Taxes and royalties have gone up and down but, eventually, industry has been left with sufficient cashflow to maintain and grow the business. However, on multiple occasions, levies were raised first then cut later only because of devastating economic outcomes.

Oilfield services (OFS) is usually the first casualty of major energy policy changes. Often OFS job losses and bankruptcies provide clear signals policies are damaging. But as a key stakeholder, OFS has yet to figure out how to prevent the damage.

The essence of the oil sands debate this election is whether output should be allowed to grow. Some don’t want oil sands produced at all. NDP leader Thomas Mulcair, currently leading or tied in public opinion polls, is avoiding being this clear, preferring to dodge and weave on major pipeline projects.

While the outcome won’t be known until the votes are counted on October 19, there is good reason to be concerned whether this giant economic driver of the modern Canadian economy will grow at past levels anytime soon, if ever.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

How Leadnow Will Push Strategic Voting to Defeat Tories

August 11, 2015

How Leadnow Will Push Strategic Voting to Defeat Tories

To avoid splits, organization asks supporters: ‘Vote with your head, not just your heart.’

On the opening afternoon of the Vancouver Folk Festival, a young woman wearing a purple Leadnow T-shirt approached folkies at the event’s main gate and asked them to sign The Pledge.

As the melancholic voice of folk legend Richard Thompson drifted through Jericho Park from a nearby workshop, Rachel Tetrault invited festival arrivals to join Leadnow’s “Vote Together” campaign to defeat Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.

Leadnow, which is modelled on the American liberal-left activist group MoveOn.org, is promoting the idea of strategic voting to defeat the Tories. Leadnow’s pledge asks people to vote for the local candidate — New Democrat, Liberal, even Green — who has the best chance to defeat the Tory candidate in their riding.

Later that night at Jericho Park, a roar of approval erupted when an emcee suggested that this could be the last Vancouver Folk Festival with Harper as prime minister. About 200 “folkies” signed the Leadnow pledge that late July weekend, joining the approximately 40,000 people who have committed to the group’s strategic voting strategy across Canada.

“I do feel that people we talked to at the festival — traditional NDP’ers and some Liberal supporters — are willing to consider voting for another party if that candidate could beat the Conservatives,” said Tetrault, who was hired by Leadnow to help organize its voting campaign.

The 27-year-old activist said that non-Conservative voters she’s met want to “make their vote count” and are frustrated that division on the liberal-left has handed victory to the Tories over the past three elections.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Spin Cycle: Will all of the oilsands be developed?

August 11, 2015

Spin Cycle: Will all of the oilsands be developed?

Toronto Centre NDP candidate not the only one to suggest some oilsands ‘may have to be left in the ground’

“A lot of the oilsands oil may have to stay in the ground.”

— NDP candidate Linda McQuaig on CBC News Network’s Power & Politics

Alberta’s oilsands seem to always be a contentious issue both nationally and internationally. It was likely only a matter of time before it became a hot topic on the federal campaign trail. Comments by an NDP candidate for the riding of Toronto Centre are causing a stir and putting the spotlight on Alberta’s bitumen.

Linda McQuaig, a well-known author and journalist, told a panel discussion on CBC News Network’s Power & Politics Friday that for Canada to meet its climate change targets much of the oilsands may have to be left in the ground.

The Spin

McQuaig didn’t mention any specific climate change targets that Canada has pledged to achieve, but instead spoke about reaching Canada’s future environmental goals.

“We’ll know that better once we properly put in place a climate change accountability system of some kind,” she told host Rosemary Barton. “And… once we have a proper review process for our environmental projects like pipelines.”

McQuaig later tweeted that “NDP policy is sustainable development, overseen by strong (environmental) review process,” a policy NDP Leader Tom Mulcair expanded upon in response to questions Monday.

The counter-spin

The Conservatives wasted no time in jumping on the NDP and claiming the party wants to shut down the oil industry and introduce new taxes. Conservative Leader Stephen Harper accused the NDP of having a “not-so hidden agenda,” saying it “is consistently against the development of our resources and our economy.”

McQuaig’s comments spurred Michelle Rempel, Conservative candidate for Calgary Nose Hill, to accuse the NDP of proposing a moratorium on the oilsands, which would kill jobs at a time of instability in the oil sector.

Stranded assets?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: canadian federal election

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

The Spin

The counter-spin

Stranded assets?

Post navigation

Latest Posts