Three Perspectives on the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference

Environment Minister Jim Prentice is going out of his way this week to lower expectations for the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen this December.

Citing Canada's "faster-growing population and energy-intensive industrial structure", Prentice is continuing to insist that Canada should not be held to the same standards as, say, Japan or the E.U. when it comes to emission targets. Moreover, he is presenting something of a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum regarding Canada's plan, or lack thereof:

... Ottawa will not release its detailed climate-change plan, including its proposed emissions caps on large emitters such as oil sands and power plants, until there is more clarity on how the United States intends to proceed in global climate-change talks in Copenhagen in December, and on what an international treaty would look like, the minister added.

“Copenhagen is a very significant factor in how matters will be approached continentally, and how matters will be approached domestically,” he said.

Farewell to the King

While we were waiting for a compatriot to retrieve her Convention badge from her hotel room this evening, who should appear in the lobby but Stephane Dion! We all shook his hand and, when we realized how inadequate that was, gave him a hug and tried to tell him how much we all appreciated his leadership and how much he meant to us. One said that he was the reason she became a Liberal. Somehow we managed to avoid tears.

Then he thanked us but said he had to go back to his room to get something before leaving to catch his plane, and headed back up the escalator.



The worst part is, he was all alone.

Farewell, Monsieur Dion.

Dion

Wow. Well. That was... unexpected. And given the whole host of lousy options currently available, I think this may have been the best choice he could have made. At least now we will have some continuity, and Dion and his supporters might continue to have a voice in the renewal process.

I keep thinking back to a scene in the movie 'Serpico'. Serpico has been branded a traitor by his fellow officers for exposing corruption, but he insists on staying on the job. He is called to make an arrest at a sleezy apartment, and as he knocks on the door he realizes that the cops who are supposed to have his back have suddenly vanished.

Then he gets shot in the face.

The way Stephane Dion has been treated by the Liberal Party establishment from day one is appalling. Whatever Dion's shortcomings, they could have easily been overcome if he had had the unqualified support of his caucus and staff. He did not, and those 'anonymous Liberal insiders' made damned sure that everyone knew that he did not. They never wanted him, and were apparently willing to wreck the party in order to replace him with another corporatist Martin clone.

And now they will reap the rewards for their short sighted power tactics.

Welcome to your Kerry years.

Quote of the Day

Say what you like about Canadian Cynic, whenever PSA blesses us with a post, all ye take heed.

And the Liberals, they stood by like a pack of wet dogs, shivering and licking their own hinds, trembling from the cold, confusion and fear. Pity poor Stephane Dion, a decent enough guy stuffed into the wrong place at the wrong time and doomed to wear the blame for the wave of failure that is rising before him. He is a smart, decent fellow. In this climate, where we are infected by the same contagious stupidity that is endemic in America, the worst thing for a party leader is to be smart and decent. That equals weakness in the new political math. A brave and powerful political ape will scream and hurl great armloads of feces and recline on a bed of enemy skulls to drink toasts to himself. Dion is a lost man waiting to discover his fate. While Stephen Harper is a scalding douche telling the biggest lie, most often until it begins to find belief in the TV thickened skulls of the electorate. Welcome children of Karl Rove, we are your dupes, victims and patsies.

Another voice, crying out in the wilderness.

Watch closely - this is us in another four to eight years.

There is a devastating and bloody evisceration of Sarah Palin in the upcoming issue of Rolling Stone. It was written soon after her debut at the Republican National Convention and so fails to account for the bloom coming off that particular rose in recent days. But the language is delicious and the criticism of both her and the America that loves her - merciless.

I'll skip to the end:

...Sure, Barack Obama might be every bit as much a slick piece of imageering as Sarah Palin. The difference is in what the image represents. The Obama image represents tolerance, intelligence, education, patience with the notion of compromise and negotiation, and a willingness to stare ugly facts right in the face, all qualities we're actually going to need in government if we're going to get out of this huge mess we're in.

Here's what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins "Country First" buttons on his man titties and chants "U-S-A! U-S-A!" at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.

The truly disgusting thing about Sarah Palin isn't that she's totally unqualified, or a religious zealot, or married to a secessionist, or unable to educate her own daughter about sex, or a fake conservative who raised taxes and horked up earmark millions every chance she got. No, the most disgusting thing about her is what she says about us: that you can ram us in the ass for eight solid years, and we'll not only thank you for your trouble, we'll sign you up for eight more years, if only you promise to stroke us in the right spot for a few hours around election time.

Democracy doesn't require a whole lot of work of its citizens, but it requires some: It requires taking a good look outside once in a while, and considering the bad news and what it might mean, and making the occasional tough choice, and soberly taking stock of what your real interests are.

This is a very different thing from shopping, which involves passively letting sitcoms melt your brain all day long and then jumping straight into the TV screen to buy a Southern Style Chicken Sandwich because the slob singing "I'm Lovin' It!" during the commercial break looks just like you. The joy of being a consumer is that it doesn't require thought, responsibility, self-awareness or shame: All you have to do is obey the first urge that gurgles up from your stomach. And then obey the next. And the next. And the next.

And when it comes time to vote, all you have to do is put your Country First — just like that lady on TV who reminds you of your cousin. U-S-A, baby. U-S-A! U-S-A!

I bring this to your attention, not to further mock Sarah Palin (and no, I haven't seen tonight's Vice-Presidential debate yet, although I did tape it), but to encourage you to see the pathetic mockery of the democratic process currently unfolding in the U.S. as the logical extrapolation of our own.

Read that excerpt again, and imagine for a moment that he is talking, not about the obviously superficial, celebrity-driven U.S. election, but about our own. Think about the fact that incidentals like policy and integrity have at long last become totally irrelevant in our current discourse, supplanted by telegenics and charisma and dog whistles, and whichever politician is best at convincing you that they're "just like you".

I'm sorry, but I don't want a Prime Minister who is "just like me". If I did, I'd run myself. I want someone who has a a broader perspective, with a better understanding of how government and economics work, and who is smarter than me (and I've got a pretty kick-ass IQ).

I don't give a rat's ass if you have a hunting license or a brood of kids or if you play piano or wear sweater vests. I want to know that you have great ideas, and a vision for this country that approximates mine, and a solid, practical plan for how to get us there.

I've said it before - if Stephane Dion, for all his intellect and ideals and bold, forward-looking vision turns out to be unelectable in this country simply because he has a heavy accent, it will say more about us than it does about him. Gods help us all.

Holy Birdshit, Batman!

Geez, try to take a day off from blogging and just look what happens!

We got news of the Pooping Puffin yesterday morning at Garth Turner's campaign office shortly after Esther arrived, checked her email, and we suddenly heard her scream "OH MY GOD!!" from her office.

At first we thought the screen capture had to be a joke - something someone had Photochopped and tried to fob off to make the Liberals look dumb. There was certainly not sign of poop on the actual website any more, and who could believe that Mr. Iron Fist of Doom would ever have allowed such a juvenile piece of poop to see the light of day? But then I ran across K-K-K-Katie's sneering reference to it at SDA and I knew that it was really, truly true.

Best news I'd heard all day.

Oddly, after all the fuss and bother over pooping puffins, there is still one detail of this repulsive piece of web art that has gone virtually unnoticed:



FYI for you non-hunting types: that's not a shotgun, or any other type of gun one would ever use for hunting - puffins or anything else.

That, my friends, is Michael Ignatieff holding a military assault rifle. Much like the type of weapon that Kimveer Gill used in his rampage at Dawson College. Much like the ones the Quebec coroner in the case recently recommended, and Dion agreed, should be banned.

Interesting.

The Green Shift Shift, Sarah Palin... and Kitties!

I was thrilled to hear that Stephane Dion and the Liberals have listened to the legitimate concerns of farmers, fishers and truckers, and come up with a way to help them bear the costs of the Green Shift by giving them subsidies for equipment and technology to help them actually reduce their emissions. And all within the financial leeway already built into the Green Shift plan.

Win, win - right?

Pulease.

..................

I am getting seriously fed up with all the "You hate her because she has a vagina" crap coming out of the Republican Party. I got news for you guys - we hate her because she's a religious right-wingnut with a gun fetish and a propensity for using her powers for evil.

How about this. Every time someone criticizes Sarah Palin, let's apply a little test and ask ourselves, "Would [X] be an issue if she were a man?" Let's try it, shall we?

Would the fact that she's anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage be an issue if she were male? Of course it would!
The fact that she's being investigated for abuse of power? Oh yeah.
The fact that she tried to have a librarian fired for not removing 'offensive' books from the library? You betcha.
The fact that she's a supporter of abstinence-only education who now has an unwed pregnant teenaged daughter? Rightly or wrongly, yes. Absolutely.

Even this would still be funny if she were a man. Ok, maybe not quite as funny...



In fact, the only person who seems to be treating Palin any differently because she is a woman is John McCain. Because if she were a man, would McCain have even considered picking her? Uh...

Oh, and check out the shenanigans on Wikipedia today:



Heh.

....................

And just for fun, here's my cat Max watching a YouTube video called "The Kittens discover the crack under the door":

If I Ran the Campaign...

Politics is my favourite spectator sport. I find it far more entertaining than... well, sports. So, in the tradition of armchair quarterbacks everywhere, here are a few suggestions for the Liberal campaign team.

Pay attention, boys.

1) Stick to the high road.
Dion's dignity is one of his best attributes ("I'm a big boy" was the best line ever), so let Harper and his minions rant and spew and taunt all they like. It just makes them look like assholes. Not to say you can't rightly point out the many, many failings of his government and his policies - just make sure you don't get personal. Except for Danny Williams. He can be your Insult Dog.

2) Use your Grassroots and NetRoots.
Learn from Obama. Use every tool you have to engage people and keep them engaged. In fact, you should have had a big, obvious button on your 'Green Shift' website from the first day you launched it where people could register for 'updates' or 'Green Shift News' or something - and then used those contacts for fundraising. Do it. DO IT NOW.

3) Make lemonade.
I know, you're still mourning the loss of all those millions from your Corporate Overlords. Get over it, and turn it to your advantage - as in, "Yes, we used to be under the financial thumb of the corporate establishment, but now... we're not!" (you're not, right?) And give Dion more self-deprecating jokes. I wish I could remember the one where he apologized for his "Australian accent" - it was hilarious.

4) Use your proxies.
The country is full of people who are pissed off at the Conservatives. Let them have at it so you can stay above the fray. Like Danny Williams. Or how about all those Canadian celebrities who testified against C-10? I'm sure Sarah Polley and Paul Gross and all their friends would be more than happy to put together an ad reminding everyone about just how badly Harper has screwed the arts & entertainment industry. Same with supporters of the Wheat Board. Or those CMA members that Tony insulted. They don't have to support you - just remind people of what Harper hath wrought.

5) Work the regions.
Nationally, you guys look bad. But the Maritimes have a long list of their own grievances against the Conservatives. Quebec has a bunch of Bloc seats up for bid, and most of them are really unhappy about arts cuts and Afghanistan. The arts cuts will play in Ontario too, as will food safety deregulation. There, you need to woo both NDPers who think you're no different from the Cons, and old PCers like my dad who are fed up with Harper but not ready to vote Liberal yet. The Prairies... well, do what you can. And in BC (or at least, urban BC) you have the arts cuts plus those insulting 'junkie' flyers.

6) Above all, have a plan, and a vision.
Not a plan to get elected - a plan for what you're going to do after you are. The 'Green Shift' is a start. Now we need to see the rest of it, front and centre. No band-aids. No lollipops. No envelopes of cash. A solid, integrated, bold plan to help us weather the coming storms and emerge with a resilient, transformed economy and a renewed social contract. And a vision of Canada like the one the Liberals talk about but never manage to quite bring about. Progressive. Compassionate. Prosperous. Generous. Trusted and respected on the world stage. Supportive of its citizens at home.

You guys can manage all that, right?

This Just Keeps Getting Better

Harper must have woken up this morning, checked the headlines and wondered, "Is it too late to change my mind?"

Canada squeaks past recession as GDP rebounds

OTTAWA -- Canada's economy limped ahead in the second quarter barely enough to avoid the first recession in 17 years, recording the thinnest of gains after a much worse winter quarter than previously believed.

But with Statistics Canada sharply revising downward it's first quarter tally on gross domestic product to a negative 0.8 per cent, the modest 0.3 per cent gain in the March-June period meant that the economy actually contracted during the first six months of 2008.

It constitutes the worst performance by the economy since 1991...

.....


Ottawa wanted U.S. to accept more lenient meat inspection regime

OTTAWA — The Canadian government strongly opposed tougher U.S. rules to prevent listeria and lobbied the United States to accept Canada's more lenient standards, internal documents reveal.

Briefing notes prepared by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for an April 7, 2006, meeting with the board of directors of the Canadian Meat Council outline how both industry and the Canadian government were frustrated with the increased precautions the United States was demanding.

Specifically, Canada opposed daily inspection visits and the testing of finished products for Listeria monocytogenes.

.....


Walkerton mayor calls for public inquiry on listeria outbreak

OTTAWA — The Mayor of Walkerton, Ont. is calling for a public inquiry into the outbreak of listeria, saying he cannot believe lessons failed to be learned from the tainted water tragedy that killed seven people in May 2000.

Mayor Charlie Bagnato released a statement today decrying the current outbreak as “outrageous” and noting that some of the cabinet ministers who were in the Ontario government in 2000 are now in the federal cabinet.

.....

Tories' arts cuts spark ire in Quebec

The recent Conservative cuts to arts and culture have done what neither the pursuit of the unpopular Afghan war nor the demise of the Kyoto Protocol had accomplished: wake up a sleeping Quebec giant that is now gathering strength for a show of force in the upcoming election campaign.

In the swift-changing Quebec political narrative, the controversy is shaping up to offer the Liberals their best chance to rise from the dead in the province. By putting the axe to a host of cultural programs on the eve of a probable campaign, Stephen Harper's Conservatives may have given Stéphane Dion the kiss of life in Quebec.

Let's see... the Liberals need seats in Ontario, Quebec and BC. All three have active arts, film and television industries. All three have suffered listeriosis cases. Ontario and Quebec are already feeling the effects of a looming recession. Ontario remembers Walkerton. Quebec is full of disenchanted ex-Bloc voters looking for a new home.

Oh, yeah - and urban BCers haven't been reacting at all well to those Conservative ten-percenters about the nasty "junkies". Or to Tony Clement's asinine comments about safe injection sites.

If Dion just keeps picking at those sores while presenting a clear, comprehensive plan to lead us in a new direction, I think the results might just surprise everyone. Then again, anything can happen in 36 days. That's why politics is my favourite sport!

____________________

BTW, I found this comment by Harper to be very interesting...

The most common definition of a recession is two consecutive quarters of shrinking economic output, but Mr. Harper said this wouldn't worry him because it would only be a "technical recession," while Canada's outlook is strong.

"Even if it's true, I don't think it's a real recession. ... There are job losses, but overall employment is pretty stable."

... especially when you compare it to this statement by John McCain's top economic advisor:

"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession," he said, noting that growth has held up at about 1 percent despite all the publicity over losing jobs to India, China, illegal immigration, housing and credit problems and record oil prices. "We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet."

Don't worry. Be happy.

The Speech, McCain's Veep, and... oh yeah, Canada

I had to work last night, so not only did I miss Garth's 'Volunteer Appreciation Pizza Party' (grr!), I missed The Big Speech in Denver and had to watch it online. Which was no easy task given that MSNBC's link was either broken or badly overwhelmed, and CNN's feed is choppy and just sucks. Thank you, CTV!

Here's one of my many favourite parts:

"I know there are those who dismiss such beliefs as happy talk. They claim that our insistence on something larger, something firmer, and more honest in our public life is just a Trojan horse for higher taxes and the abandonment of traditional values.

And that's to be expected, because if you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters.

If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things.

And you know what? It's worked before, because it feeds into the cynicism we all have about government. When Washington doesn't work, all its promises seem empty. If your hopes have been dashed again and again, then it's best to stop hoping and settle for what you already know.

I get it. I realize that I am not the likeliest candidate for this office. I don't fit the typical pedigree, and I haven't spent my career in the halls of Washington.

But I stand before you tonight because all across America something is stirring. What the naysayers don't understand is that this election has never been about me; it's about you."

I think I said that already...

_________________________

Ever since Obama picked an old white guy for his running mate, I've been joking that McCain will have to pick a young black guy now.

I almost got it right...



You've GOT to be kidding. Does McCain honestly believe that there are really that many disaffected Hillarites out there just waiting to cast their vote for anyone in a tangerine pants suit? Apparently so.

[oh, gods - some Republican pundit just implied that Big Joe Biden might be forced to tone it down and be less of a "bully" if you put him in a room with a woman. Borf.]

Of course it's not ALL about her gender. Perish the thought. She's not just fiscally conservative - she's rabidly pro-life, she's an avid member of the NRA, and she's strongly in favour of the death penalty. [Edit: Missed one - she's also a Creationist.]

Mmmm... red meat for the base...

Here are a few choice quotes from the woman who probably has a better than even chance of becoming president if McCain wins:

As for the prospect of her being vice president, Palin told Kudlow that she could not answer the question of whether she wanted the job “until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day. I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here….”

About the birth of her son with Down' syndrome when she was 44:

"When we first heard, it was kind of confusing,"

"Children are the most precious and promising ingredient in this mixed-up world you live in down there on Earth. Trig is no different, except he has one extra chromosome."

And on the death penalty:

During one debate before the primary, Palin said she was in favor of capital punishment in especially heinous cases such as the murder of a child. "My goodness, hang 'em up, yeah,” she said.

Oh, yes - and she has a degree in communications and journalism. I look forward to reading her blog.

______________________

Back in the REAL race, Harper is now trying to paint Dion as a lefty:

"He is certainly the Liberal leader who's taken his party furthest to the left, at least since [former prime minister] Pierre Trudeau"

I certainly hope so! In fact, I think the Liberals should be running that quote in big, bold letters in Toronto, Vancouver, and every riding where left-wing Liberals are tempted to vote NDP, thinking that Dion is just another Paul Martin.

New Voicemail Message at Stornoway:

You've reached the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. I'm sorry, Mr. Dion can't answer your imperious summons right now. Please fuck off and try your call again.

Dion / Turner Show: Video #1

Here's the question I asked Mr. Dion during the Blogstravaganza portion of the program:



And here are couple more that I didn't get a chance to ask but would like to at some point:

1) Philosophically, would you say that your vision of Liberalism is closer to that of Pierre Trudeau or Paul Martin? And no, you can't say "both".

2) Conservative governments on both sides of the border appear to have made it their mission to reduce tax revenues to the point where government can barely function. Do you plan to increase government revenues in order to restore social programs and the public sector, and if so, how?

Watch This Space

Today's the big day here in Sprawlville! The Great Green Shift Road Show and Turner Town Hall Shindig is coming to Halton, and yours truly will be there with bells on, bringing you the live(ish) play-by-play and (possibly next day) video coverage.

Ok, so Kady O'Malley I ain't, but I'll do my level best.

As if I won't have enough to do juggling laptop, still camera and camcorder, praying the Wi-Fi holds out while I desperately try to film and type at the same time... I have also volunteered to be the event's Official Blogger Wrangler. Yes, Garth Turner in his infinite wisdom has invited every rabble-rouser and miscreant who frequents his blog's blood-soaked comments section to c'mon down and hang out with Mr. Dion a while before the main event.

They still haven't responded to my requisition for cattle prods and a Taser.



Oh, and I have to pick up the pipe and drape this morning. Can't forget.

It should be an interesting event, if only to see how many members of the "Garth is the Anti-Christ" anti-fan club actually show up. Some have been making a lot of noise about staging a protest, but I suspect that actually being invited to attend might have taken a bit of the wind out of their sails. But it sure would be entertaining.

For everyone else, if you are anywhere near St. Vlod's in north Oakville tonight around 7:30, please drop by. Or at least, try to get there at least an hour early and fight your way through the crowds to stake out some standing room along the back wall. No matter what your political inclinations might be, everybody really is welcome to come and ask whatever questions you might have.

Come see me. I'll be the one with the lasso.

The Green Shift: Questions and Comments

I've been cruising around the blogosphere trying to find legitimate arguments against the Liberal 'Green Shift' plan. It hasn't been easy, let me tell you. Even my buddy Raph has been reduced to comments like this:

Laugh. Out. Freaking. Loud.

$60 in inflation? That's it? Come on Jennifer, you know you are too intelligent to buy that. Can you see a massive carbon tax contributing a mere $5 extra per month to your spending? $5 a day more like.

I may have been a little... short with him in response. But at least he has an excuse - he doesn't actually believe in all this global warming crap anyway.

The LOL thing seems to be a common theme, BTW. Even the Conservative radio ads (which, of course, were written before any of them actually read the plan) are just two people laughing at Dion and his crazy 'Tax On Everything'. As my husband put it so well, their entire argument amounts to nothing more than, "Yeah? Well, you smell!"

There have been a couple of exceptions, mostly from the Progressive end of the pool. JimBobby will be happy to tell you exactly why the Liberal plan is ok but the Green plan is WAY better. And John Murney is very concerned about how this will affect Saskatchewan - it's people, its energy industry, and its hopes of ever electing another Liberal. Ever.

Even in that case, there are assumptions being made that are either a) patently incorrect, or b) unclear from the text posted on the website. Most of the obvious fallacies have to do with the notion that gasoline will be taxed under this scheme, so I'll say it slowly for the hard of hearing: NO. NEW. TAXES. ON. GASOLINE.

As for the rest, yes, there are questions. Questions I'd like the answer to. Here are a few:

1) At what point in the chain will the carbon tax be charged? It sounds like it is going to be charged to the end user of the oil, gas, coal, etc., but it isn't entirely clear. Murney quotes an editorial that claims the refineries are going to have to pay for the gasoline they produce, but I don't believe that's true. Is it?

2) There is a mention of a Carbon Tariff on imports in the plan, but it's all a little vague. One would think that adding a carbon tax to domestic products would only make cheap imports shipped from thousands of miles away that much more attractive - unless the carbon emitted through their shipping and manufacture was also taxed or tariffed. Will this be done, or is it just a suggestion?

3) What about Dion's 'Carbon Budget', unveiled over a year ago in this very town? Does the Green Shift replace that plan or complement it? If the latter, would the $20-$30 levy on the excess CO2 from large emitters be instead of, or in addition to, the carbon tax?

4) How exactly did they arrive at the estimate of $60 - $240 per year per household in increased consumer costs? (excluding home heating, propane and other direct fossil fuel purchases) In my brief debate/cat fight with Raph, I made some attempt to figure out exactly what those added costs might be based on the fact that the average Canadian has a carbon footprint of about 20 tonnes/person/year and stripping out gasoline and home heating. Even for me with my tiny impoverished footprint it still worked out to more, although still much less than the tax savings. What formula are they using?

Happily, I ran into Garth Turner at the Milton Strawberry Festival yesterday and managed to get a couple of answers before we were so rudely interrupted by the bagpipes. I should have the video up sometime Monday.

The Great Green Shift Debate

"So, what do you think?", my husband asked.

I told him I hadn't checked all the details, but from what I heard from Dion's speech, it sounded pretty good.

He disagreed. He is convinced that Liberals' 'Green Shift' plan is going to cost us a fortune, especially when the gas bill comes, and he didn't believe me when I told him that almost all of these tax credits were going to be refundable. Which is important for us, given that we are both mostly self-employed and so our taxable income is as close to nothing as we can make it.

So today I checked the details.

First, I did that little "Calculate Your Benefit" thing, and based on our income last year we'd be saving about $1900/year, or $160/month. Looking more closely at the specific tax credits and benefits, it looks pretty accurate, and would certainly be more if we have a good year.

Then I tried to figure out what this all would cost us - and just a suggestion, but the Libs might want to consider putting a "Carbon Cost Calculator" on there as well.

First the gas bill. We live in an old, rickety, poorly-insulated little house, so we go through somewhat more than the 3,000-3,500 ft.cu./year mentioned in the handbook, but even accounting for that we'd only be spending an extra $6.60/month in year 1, and $26.50/month in year 4. But hey, if we actually got off our asses and put plastic film on all the windows in the winter like we keep talking about but never do, we'd save a bundle.

Oh, look - that's exactly the kind of thing this plan is designed to encourage people to do. Fancy that!

On top of that, the handbook acknowledges that most people will incur added costs related to increased transportation, electricity, food and other price increases passed on by business and industry. They estimate these added costs to amount to about $60/year/household in year 1, up to $240/yr in year 4.

Even assuming they are grossly low-balling it, I can't see how it would exceed the money we would save and/or get back in tax credits.

So, yeah. Looks good, for us anyway. I even played with the calculator to figure out the tax savings for my parents, my sister-in-law, etc, and it all looks pretty straightforward: the tax savings exceed the predicted costs.

Still, I don't want to be schmuck. So I wandered over to the Conservative Party website to check out their numbers. Surely they've had their math wizards all over this thing for the past day and a half, happily dissecting the Liberals' hopelessly flawed calculations and exposing the real costs to Canadians.

Meh. Not so much.

Aside from some broad claims about everybody and everything getting taxed with this plan, there was no reference to the offset tax credits other than to dismiss them as "a trick".

No evidence. No specifics about what they think the real costs will be, or why they dispute the claims that the carbon tax will be 'revenue neutral'. No numbers. No debate. Just mockery.

Oh, and they're calling Dion an "elitist". How very Republican of them.

Bill C-484: The Rogues Gallery

By now you probably know that the 'Unborn Victim of Crime Act' narrowly passed its first vote in Parliament yesterday and has gone on to committee. Much to my disgust, Stephane Dion was glaringly absent from the vote. Why? It seems he was too busy attending his wife's fancy schmancy International Women's Week soiree.

Oh, the sickening sweet stench of irony.

Thankfully, Garth Turner voted against the bill. Otherwise I don't think I'd ever be able to SPEAK to him again, let alone vote for him. But even he went through some changes over this and had to actually do his homework to get past the snow job that Epp and his anti-abortion buddies have been pushing, trying to pretend that none of this has anything to do with abortion.

For those of you who still don't get it, Dave at The Beav does his usual brilliant job of explaining why it does - slowly, in small words so you can follow along.

While Epp might be speaking truthfully when he suggests that this amendment would not be used to prosecute women or doctors in the case of an abortion, (although I don't for a minute believe that's the case), he has neatly avoided discussing the one thing that would plant a ticking bomb in Canadian law.

A definition.

The long title of the bill, according to my lawyer friend, contains the time bomb. (emphasis mine)

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (injuring or causing the death of an unborn child while committing an offence)

There's the bomb.

Epp and his gang of anti-choice crusaders regularly refer to the bill by its short title, Unborn Victims of Crime Act, quietly sidestepping the clarity of intent in the long title. If it wasn't so underhanded it would be ingenious.

If this bill moves out the House and goes to committee the amendment will require more than just the rewording of section 238 of the Criminal Code. It will require a written definition of an unborn child.

The current offence specifies "in the act of birth".

It is the definition this crowd is attempting to insert into the Criminal Code. By doing so, if this bill goes anywhere other than the garbage bin, they will have provided a counter argument to the Supreme Court decision in Tremblay v. Daigle in which the court specified that a fetus has no status as a "person" under the common law.

Get it now? Epp can put all the 'provisions' he likes into his bill to preclude its being used directly to prosecute cases of voluntary abortion, but the fact remains that it will provide a legal precedent for the recognition of a fetus as a person with inherent rights, and thus unravel all the legal arguments supporting a woman's right to choose.

And that, as we know, is the whole point.

Now for The List.

There has been a list making the rounds on various blogs today of Liberal MPs who voted in favour of C-484 yesterday, as well as those who were no-shows (including their illustrious leader). It seems to have originated on Rabble.ca. On close examination, I found several errors in this list that need to be corrected before anyone goes harassing the wrong people. Specifically,

- Gord Brown is a Conservative, not a Liberal
- Liberal John Maloney also voted 'yea'
- Scott Simms did vote, and he voted 'nay'

The corrected list, based on Hansard, is as follows:

LIBERALS VOTING 'YEA':
Raymond Bonin; John Cannis; Hon. Raymond Chan; Hon. Roy Cullen; Sukh Dhaliwal; Hon. Albina Guarnieri; Hon. Charles Hubbard; Hon. Jim Karygiannis; Derek Lee; Hon. Lawrence MacAulay; Hon. Gurbax Malhi; John Maloney; Hon. John McKay; Hon. Joe McGuire; Hon. Dan McTeague; Hon. Shawn Murphy; Massimo Pacetti; Francis Scarpaleggia; Hon. Raymond Simard; Lloyd St. Amand; Paul Steckle; Paul Szabo; Hon. Robert Thibault; Alan Tonks; Roger Valley; Tom Wappel; Borys Wrzesnewskyj

LIBERALS ABSENT:
Stéphane Dion; Bryon Wilfert; Joe Volpe; Hon. Paul Martin (who is always absent); Nancy Karetak-Lindell; Hon. Mark Eyking; Ujjal Dosanjh; Denis Coderre; Brenda Chamberlain; Gerry Byrne

And then there was the NDP's Peter Stoffer, who broke ranks with his party to vote 'yea'.

Phone numbers and email addresses for most can be found here.

I found a couple of interesting things when I was going though this list. One is that all six Scarborough MPs (all Liberals) voted in favour of the bill. Weird. Apparently Scarborough is a hotbed of crypto-conservatism.

Another curiosity is that almost all of these names are also found on the list of Liberals who voted against same-sex marriage back in the day. This suggested to me that most of them are probably anti-choice as well, and are therefore not likely to be swayed by evidence that C-484 might re-criminalize abortion.

Then I found a better indication of their positions on abortion here.

I would suggest that those who wish to write to MPs on this list focus their efforts on those who are pro-choice or undecided who may have simply been fooled by the 'just protecting pregnant women, nothing to do with abortion here' rhetoric.

Don't yell at them. Educate them. Explain it to them. Convince them that there is more going on here than meets they eye, and that they have an obligation to consider all the ramifications if they allow this Trojan Horse bill to become law.

Of Red Dogs and Radicals

It looks like I'm going to lose another bet.

The last time I put money on the outcome of anything political was about 28 years ago when I bet my little sister ten bucks that the Americans couldn't possibly be stupid enough to elect a creepy, geriatric, uber-conservative warmonger as President.

This time I bet my husband twenty bucks that we'd see a spring election. Sigh.

Despite all the shrieking and wailing from the progressive blogosphere yesterday, there is just no getting around the fact that this is a budget the Liberals simply cannot vote against. If they did, the Conservatives would just spend the next thirty-six days asking why Dion brought on an election by voting against his own policies.

This is, of course, precisely the intended result - just as it was when Harper suddenly softened his stance on Afghanistan and adopted what was essentially the Liberal position. Unfortunately, he has only been able to do this because the Liberals themselves have drifted so close to the centre that they are in mortal danger of tipping over to the right.

When the Reformers killed the Progressive Conservative Party and stole their identity, they left a vacuum in the centre-right, so it would seem only natural that the Liberals be drawn in that direction. Unfortunately, that leaves a vacuum on the centre-left, resulting in the entire ship listing dangerously to starboard.

As an old Trudeau girl with leftist leanings, I find this shift alarming. But many Liberals with far more influence than I see this as a good thing. I'm sure my ex-PC MP does.

This strategy of playing the middle in order to broaden the base has been used for years by the centrist wing of the Democratic Party in the U.S., popularly known as the Blue Dog Democrats (or sometimes as 'Bush Dogs'). It seems like a sensible strategy on the face of it, especially if your main goal is to get re-elected. However, in the U.S. it led to the unsightly spectacle of House and Senate Democrats continuing to vote in favour of billions in Iraq war funding and unlimited extensions of the Patriot Act, despite holding a majority in both houses.

It took a while, but the level of disgust among the party's grassroots at this sort of unprincipled political pandering seems to have finally risen sufficiently to bite centrist Hillary Clinton in the ass. Unfortunately, it took eight years of George W. Bush to get them there.

From all accounts, Stephane Dion is no Blue Dog - or in this case, Red Dog. He's a principled progressive with a clear vision of what he wants Canada to be. But whatever his principles may be, he doesn't yet have enough support from the party's grassroots or the old guard to make a firm stand on anything, least of all the party's position in the political spectrum. And that may be just the way the Liberal Red Dogs like it.

From my comfy spot in the cheap seats, I would say that Dion's biggest tactical error this week wasn't Afghanistan or the budget, both of which were carefully engineered to be unassailable. No, his only legitimate shot at triggering an election would have been to allow the Senate to thumb it's nose at Harper's arbitrary deadline on passing his omnibus crime legislation. Why? Because it would have put the responsibility and the blame squarely in Stephen Harper's court.

Conventional wisdom is that nobody wanted to trigger an election over a fight between the House and the Senate, and that the obvious impropriety and possible constitutional violation in Harper's demand that the Senate bend to the will of the House would be completely lost on most Canadians.

I disagree.

Despite decades of western Reform propaganda, the fact remains that the average Canadian's principal complaint against the Senate is that it is redundant - merely a rubber stamp to legislation already passed by the House. By showing a little spine and refusing to be bullied into passing some deeply flawed crime legislation transparently based on failed U.S. policies, the Senate would have been seen to be doing its job, and would have been admired for doing so.

You can blame the Liberal party establishment for allowing Stephen Harper to back them into a corner over Afghanistan and the budget. The Liberal abstentions in the Senate yesterday rest squarely on Stephane Dion's shoulders.