Sunday, May 25, 2008

Liberal Green Alliance Pays Off For Liberals

NDP Leader Jack Layton's opposition to a carbon tax shows he's more interested in hurting the Liberals than helping the environment, says Green Party Leader Elizabeth May.

At last, someone to speak the obvious truths!


Stephen said...

The 'pay-off' is a pro-Liberal quote from Elizabeth May on CTV?

Strategic genius!

Anonymous said...

BCL: isn't this really a dog bites man story. Lizzie has been in the hip pocket of LPC since before she ran as GPC leader. In fact she is the ultimate manchurian candidate for the Libs. I feel sorry for the Greens and if you listen to what is being said about the Ottawa West EDA problems and check out the GPC bloggers you would know that for all the Jimbobby's and his earth mother lizzie adoration there are a fair number of GPCers who feel like May is selling herself and her party down the river.

In terms of the carbon tax vs the cap and trade. Let's all be honest - they are BOTH viable environmental approaches. Where they differ is their impact on poor and working class folks.

Farnwide and his neighbour are chatting about geothermal heating. Great. Glad they have enough cash to even contemplate the option. These are not the folks that are going to be hurt by a carbon tax. It is the single mother struggling to commute to her job and pay for day care and who will now face higher gas, heating and fuel costs that will be hurt.

Wait - I know. LPC is now saying that maybe the tax won't be on gas or heating costs. This then brings us back to Lizzie and the enviro benefits to carbon tax. I can say that my carbon footprint is made up primarily of my gas and heating/cooling costs. If the tax isn't on gas or heating/cooling (or will simply replace existing excise tax) how will the carbon tax really benefit the environment MORE than a cap and trade system that has a hard cap on carbon generating industries. Industry that emits at least 50% of our carbon emissions.

So Lizzie is backing a party with a carbon reduction plan that likely won't do much to push people to reduce their most significant emissions. If I were a GPC supporter, I would be pretty pissed off.

If you read the GPC blogs that are supportive of the carbon tax, they are still talking about it as if it will include gas and heating. They may not be as pleased when they see the final plan. Blowback can be a bitch BLC.

leftdog said...

It looks like May wants to be like Dion and allow the big multi-nationals off the hook with their OBSCENE windfall oil profits, while they tax Joe & Mary Average who merely want to conduct their day to day family activities. May has bought into Dion's taxation alchemy that will somehow magically give Joe & Mary a break in taxes in other areas .... (okay ....!

Not one word from Elizabeth May on taxing the crap out of these windfall corporate profits from Big Oil and finding a way to help Canadians do the retro fitting that is necessary to cut down on individual carbon emissions!

May is so completely in the pocket of the Liberals who seem to remain in the corner with Shell, Esso, Gulf etc. etc etc as they rake in $BILLION$ in record profits every minute of every day!

Way to go Dion - Way to go May!!!


Ti-Guy said...

Dipper doldrums and Marxist malaise. This too shall pass.

Steve V said...

"Farnwide and his neighbour are chatting about geothermal heating. Great. Glad they have enough cash to even contemplate the option."

Hey dipshit, did you miss the part about borrowing the money?? It was simply a real world example, using an average middle class family, to show how a shift might make the move economically feasible. It wasn't a commentary on people with fixed income, but I frankly resent your elitist tone in dismissing a practical example. Fucking stooge.

Steve V said...

I apologize for the language, but I took that comment as though I'm sitting around, drinking my latte (never had one), cash to spare, deciding what to do. The only reason I brought up my neighbor, it was a good example of your run of the mill middle class family trying to make a good ecological decision, trying to "walk the walk". Any plan does need to address fixed income people, people that might not be able to get a loan, or don't own property. I get that, and let's hope there is some consideration.