Buckdog

Trust me... as a former Green, who was on the Federal Council, who also works in the oil patch, Ms. May hasn't let the oil companies off the hook.

If anything, her messaging is usually anti-oil and anti-Conservative which pretty much alienates the entire province of Alberta... where the Greens had their highest strength.

I say had because the Greens will be trounced out here whenever the next election is held.

I watched her interview today and she slammed Jack Layton and the NDP three separate times WITHOUT once mentioning the obscene windfall profits that the oil companies are currently swimming in!

She is so quick to stand with the Libs on just about everything, there is almost no point in having a Green party!

If you tax the oil companies they will simply pass the cost on to the consumer. The reason a tax is better than a cap, all comes down to costs of implementation and the ability to game the system. A carbon tax is both easier to implement and more difficult (though not impossible) to game.

What is needed is a change in behavior and a carbon tax is a great way to achieve that. As for it being regressive, that all depends on how it is implemented and how the accompanied tax cuts are constructed. Suffice to say that it shouldn't be very tough to implement such a tax in a manner that is fully progressive.

Meanwhile the cost of producing oil into gasoline has not had any major increase other than the rise in the price of oil. Bottom line is that the multi-nationals continue to shovel billions of obscene profits into their accounts quarterly - and the Libs want to tax a family that needs to get to work, kids to daycare and school, etc.!

Dion's concept is going to go over like a lead balloon with the public and will likely ensure a Harper majority.

Because the Liberal Party of Canada and the Green Party of Canada are prepared to allow the oil companies to gouge and profiteer WHILE AT THE SAME TIME increase taxes to working families ... they are going to pay a huge price electorally. (And they should!)

"She is so quick to stand with the Libs on just about everything, there is almost no point in having a Green party!"

The point IS to drive voters to the Liberal Party--it's the Think Twice Coalition redux!

Ever since she starting her part as a pawn in the Liberal game, May has tossed her commitment to the environment under the bus. Consider:

1) Endorsed Dion - Mr "We didn't get it done" on Kyoto as the best PM.

2) Endorsed Stelmach's intensity-target based GHG plan.

3) Said nothing as Liberals kept Harper in power over a Throne Speech that repudiated Kyoto.

4) Said nothing as Liberals kept Harper in power over an NDP confidence motion repudiating Conservative inaction on the environment.

4) Publicly endorsed the Canadian Council of Chief Executives' environment plan -- a plan that (surprise, surprise) is based on a carbon tax for the rest of us and tax cuts for business.

Paul Wells may be the only working journo in Ottawa who calls May's role in partisan politics it is: Dion's "auxiliary backup party leader".

If the current inflated taxes on fuel did not slow demand, why would one conclude that cap and trade schemes(scams) would slow demand. Everyone knows that costs are passed on to the consumers; in the end, the poor shall suffer most.

Elizabeth May, friend of big oil. Good luck with that. Oh, and May has never spoke about retrofitting homes, using government assistance, even though she has herself been audited under the government rebate program.

Is this the plan? Savage one of Canada's most well respected environmentalists, a woman who went on a 17 day hunger strike over the Sydney Tar Ponds, the former head of the Sierra Club, people are going to try and frame her as letting off big oil. Wowsers.

Buckdog, did you go ballistic when Harper and Layton had those meetings after the 2006 election, discussing how to squeeze the Liberals? How did you feel about that unholy alliance, or was that just smart politics? It's finally comin around...

Steve ... May's nose is so close to Dion's butt it is shocking! If she were such a 'saint' in the environmental arena, she wouldn't be selling the soul of the Green Party to the bloody Liberals. Give your head as shake dude!

May has NOT said ONE WORD on the obscene profits Big Oil is raking in! Her silence is deafening! She wants to tax families just trying to get to work and their kids to school - not ONE WORD ON OIL PROFITS!

May is no lily white environmental saint! She is an opportunistic politician and everyone but you (and a few others) can see it!

As usual, your anti-Green rant is out to lunch. May routinely talks about taking away the huge subsidies that oil companies get to make their record profits.

"She is an opportunistic politician and everyone but you (and a few others) can see it!"

Actually, it just seems to be NDP supporters and those sympathetic to the NDP. Everyone? Who needs a head shake? Like I said before, good luck with May the friend of big oil.

If you tax the oil companies they will simply pass the cost on to the consumer.

How will they do that when they don't control the price of oil? If you hit oil producers with a $10/barrel tax on oil for instance, they can't raise the price of oil by $10.

BINGO Robert!! The Conservatives LOVE Big Oil. The Liberals and the Green act as if they aren't part of the carbon equation. Libs & Greens are going to put the burden onto working Canadians!

Whooee! Jack was interviewed on CTV and he didn't mention the death penalty. Does that mean he's pro- death penalty? Taking someone to task for what they didn't say is not really a strong argument. Especially, if you're trying to say Elizabeth May is in the pocket of big oil. That is patently absurd and the only thing you have to back it up is something she didn't say.

Green Party policy calls for assessing the true environmental costs of various industries and taxing them accordingly. Elizabeth May should not be required to list off every single part of Green Party Policy every time she's interviewed on TV.

Unlike the Grits, the Greens want an immediate renegotiation of NAFTA. Unlike the Grits, the Greens are calling for an immediate moratorium on tar sands development. Unlike the Grits, the Greens are opposed to nuclear energy development and uranium mining. Unlike the Grits, the Greens are for full legalization and taxation of marijuana. Unlike the Grits, the Greens are opposed to SPP.

The Greens are in it for the long haul. We know dang well we ain't gonna form a government anytime soon. We're not simply chasing votes and we're certainly not letting big oil off the hook.

JB

"The Greens are in it for the long haul."
Then tell May to stop acting like a regional director of the Liberal Party of Canada. Tell her to stop attacking the NDP as she kisses Dion's political ass! If Elizabeth May is just going to be a cheerleader for the Liberal Party, what the hell is your reason for existing???????

I thought I outlined a few reasons for the Green Party's existence in my third paragraph where I mentioned a number of key differences between the Greens and the Liberals. I'll also point out that, barring any new deals, Greens are going to be running against Liberals in 306 ridings in the next election.

The Greens know we won't be seeing PM Elizabeth May soon or ever. The prospect of a Harper majority is one of the worst things that could happen to environmentalism in Canada.

Dion adopted a long time Green Party policy. He flippety-flopped, alright. He was somehow convinced to change his mind and accept what environmentalists, economists and the Green Party have been saying for years.

Now, that Dion has embraced Green Party policy, would you have Elizabeth May denounce him for it? Renounce our policy? When someone changes their mind and admits they were wrong but now they're coming over to your way of thinking, what should be the appropriate response?

These are two people who are on the same page wrt carbon tax. You can interpret it as cheerleading if you want. The cheerleading I'm doing is for sound, effective policy. The Greens have it and Jack's welcome to adopt it, too. If he does, I can guarantee Elizabeth will have nice things to say about him, too.

JB

"The prospect of a Harper majority is one of the worst things that could happen to environmentalism in Canada. "
The Liberals do more than anyone to keep Harper in power. Elizabeth is ususally too busy praising the Libs to ever mention this key political reality.
Meanwhile the New Democrats are fighting the Conservatives daily and Elizabeth decides she needs to kick the NDP in the shins!

I suppose I can chalk this up to political inexperience ... but I am not that kind.

May is doing more to kill the Green Party of Canada than anyone else in the nation.

I know some Greens here in Saskatchewan - a couple have roots in the Liberals but most are basically social democrats who are not that crazy about the direction May is taking by praising the same Liberals who are allowing Harper to do whatever he wants.

Time to get priorities straight.

Time to get priorities straight.

I reckon the biggest priority for us treehuggers is savin' ol' Mother Earth. A recent poll asked which party Canadians felt were best able to deal with environmental issues. 30% chose the Greens. 17% chose the Liberals. 16% chose the Cons and only 10% chose the NDP.

The NDP is out of step with Canadians and is considered least able to manage the environment file.

I ain't a Dion cheerleader. I do give him credit for flip-floppin' and adopting Green policy. He apparently knows good policy when he sees it and he can also see that Canadians trust the Greens on this issue.

Now that the Liberals have adopted Green policy and the NDP is standing in teh way of progress, what would you expect from Elizabeth May? She's hardly going to lay praise on Layton for his obstructionism. All Layton stand to gain by opposing a carbon tax is more years of inaction on the environment. This stand is a vote loser for Layton. He's being criticized because he's wrong.

Carbon taxes and cap-and-trade are working together to help Europeans and Scandinavians meet their Kyoto targets. Why is jack only willing to use one tool in the tool box. The Greens are for sector by sector cap-and-trade, btw, used alongside a carbon tax.

JB

WELL JB ... LOTS OF ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND OTHERS DISAGREE WITH YOU!!!

“Carbon taxes shift the tax burden from the richest to the poorest families. Lower and middle income Canadian families spend $5,000 to $8,000 per year on energy. Since most of their energy purchases are not discretionary, this eats up a large portion of their disposable incomes. Wealthy families typically spend $8,000 to $12,000 per year on energy, 30% to 50% of which is discretionary, representing a small share of wealthy-family disposable income.”
- Aldyen Donnelly, President, Greenhouse Emissions Management Consortium, National Post, 31 October 2008


“Using the proceeds to provide income tax cuts is problematic, because a carbon tax will be regressive – the people most adversely affected by a carbon tax are the poor. And they pay very little income tax.”
– economist Marc Lee, Progressive Economics Forum, 25 September 2007

“Carbon tax is the most regressive form of taxation, the lowest-income households will bear a disproportionate share of the tax burden.”
- Harvey Enchin, Vancouver Sun, 2 May 2008

“In short, the B.C. carbon tax is regressive, shifting ever more of the province’s tax burden onto working people, while reducing taxes on corporations. It will do nothing to cut emissions or slow global warming.”
– Editorial, Canadian Dimension, May/June 2008

(A carbon tax proposal) “is unfair to people on fixed incomes (like the elderly) and the poor (who have to heat their homes and buy food, too), and is therefore profoundly un-Liberal.”
– Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella, warrenkinsella.com, 15 May 2008

And another thing ... all of the crap from Cherniak and other Liberal boosters that the poor will benefit from a 'reduction in income tax' to equal out their increased heating costs is bloody nonsense! Liberal taxation alchemy!

And even if a subsidy of some sort were provided to the poor, the technicalities of implementing it would come months or years after seniors and low income families had to stop eating in order to heat their homes!

Why oh why are the Mayists and the Dionists so DETERMINED to bring hardship and financial hurt to the lower middle class and poor in this nation!!!!

...seniors and low income families had to stop eating in order to heat their homes!

Surely, you must agree that this scare mongering is a bit OTT.

Harper, when asked about conservation initiatives said "We can't ask Canadians to heat their homes one-third less." The next week, the Con's re-introduced the Liberal EnerSave Home Insulation plan, designed to reduce heating fuel consumption by 30%.

These sort of over the top predictions of doom and gloom and starvation and freezing in the dark are just too exaggerated for belief. You don't advance your credibility on the environment with such claims.

BTW, people really are starving in the world. 24,000 per day. When we talk about low income people who cannot afford food, we shouldn't be raising the unlikely spectre of an uncaring and callous Canadian government that allows its citizens to starve. Millions are starving to death, now. We should be talking about the 1 billion earthlings who are trying to survive on less than $2 a day. The lack of cheap gas for the trip to McDonald's is a champagne problem.

"How will they do that when they don't control the price of oil? If you hit oil producers with a $10/barrel tax on oil for instance, they can't raise the price of oil by $10."

Ten a barrel? Check your figures. Now you`re in dark territory because the profit margins of oil companies are in line with any other industry. Record profits simply do not indicate the true value of those profits, for a start. Raise your GST by 10%. That would cover all aspects of the petroleum industry; why stop at the raw material? Besides, all your government officials could give themselves a healthy pay raise.

Liberals think throwing money at problems solves them, and your remark illustrates this ideology. Just what poor Canadians need:Arising Loonie and tax increases. That`ll take care of "them people eh?