Why have the Conservatives DELAYED the release of their regulatory component of their environmental plan until AFTER the election?
Can someone point me to the COSTS of the Conservative plan, any independent analysis that demonstrates HOW the Liberal plan is drastically more harmful to the economy?
If Dion's plan will result in a 6 dollar head of lettuce as you party argues, how much will it be once the Conservative plan is implemented?
While you are at, if you are going after the big emitters, and you already admit an impact "that isn't trivial", won't that unfairly target regions of the country who are reliant on these dirty forms of energy from said big emitters, for home heating and such? You know, like those poor Atlantic Canadians who use oil and coal?
Minister Baird, why is it that your own national roundtable doesn't believe that you will achieve your targets, full of loopholes, double counting, really an exaggeration?
I understand what the Conservatives are arguing about their plan, but just for reference, could you point me to ONE organization, economist, environmental group, domestic or international, that has supported your plan as credible? Just ONE, how hard could that be?
I know what you guys are saying about Dion's evil plan to rape the Canadian economy, but if that's true, why are so many economists, who generally favor policies that actually are GOOD for economy on board with his "trick"? And, if these economists have it wrong, then why did the government hire many of these same people to do work for Environment Canada? Is it government practice to hire incompetents?
Just a few thoughts on what people should really be asking, as opposed to allowing people with a NOTHING plan, that they are now HIDING the nothingness, to spew their nonsense without being held accoutable.
6 comments:
I hope Liberals come out of this week's meeting with clear strategy and firm, clear talking points to explain Liberal objectives for the country and clear arguments against continued Conservative rule. They need to be ready to address the public - and media - at any time with those points in mind. That is particularly true of the Green Shift, but it goes far beyond that. The economy in general, Conservative mismanagement of critical files, etc, the whole deck.
I still think the Liberals make it too easy for the media to run with their own narrative. They can't stop all of that, but they can strive to forcefully insert their own stamp on what this election means at every opportunity.
If not, the media will be only to happy to fill in the blanks and formulate their own headlines.
____________
Off topic a bit, I have a question. Are the by-elections actually canceled at this point or does that all hinge on having an official election call by Monday?
Is there any chance Harper just won't call an election, and polls will open on Monday morning for the by-elections?
Bizarre as it sounds, I just can't shake the feeling it is a possibility. Maybe Harper wants to sneak a win out of the by-elections by convincing everyone - except his base - that they aren't happening. It seems unlikely, but it doesn't seem impossible. All this talk of a fall election has probably ended any momentum or activity on the scheduled by-elections, which weren't going so well for his team.
But they do have a good get out the vote effort. Are they hoping to catch everyone else flat-footed?
joseph
I wouldn't put anything past them, but I can't see it now, that is just too opportunistic for words.
The Liberals need to quit defending the Green Shift and go aggressively at the Conservative hypocrisy. They don't have a plan, and even if you allow that they do, it is being hidden and already admits to the same sort of costs you accuse of the Liberals. We don't have to take any shit from the Conservatives on this file, we should be the aggressors, we should be pointing the fingers, we should be telling the media to get it's act together, Canadians deserve an honest debate.
A serious question - Dion and Liberals were swearing up and down that the plan was revenue neutral. OK - exactly where is this extra $1 billion mentioned today coming from? Is it coming from a partial reallocation of the $15.5 billion the new plan is supposed to collect? If so, then is the plan now not revenue neutral? -- this is the biggest complaint/argument Conservatives have had about the revenue neutral promise - if all or even a portion the funds are available for allocating at the will of the Liberals (and open to change as politics demand), then it is simply another new tax with Liberals deciding how much to give to which groups with no connection between amount spent and amount taxed. If elected and the plan implemented, we can have absolutely no assurance that more "tweaking" won't occur; more adjustments to favour Liberal friendly groups; more changes to buy votes from special interest groups etc. Exactly how does this differ from every other tax revenue source?
ron
I'll get back to you guys, as soon as you release your plan. Why do we have to play this game, when your party has nothing to counter, except "we'll let you in once this pesky election is over"? Why are you guys hiding the cost of your plan?
For clarification, because our plan is OUT THERE, the money was already in the plan, it was a contingency.
Anyways, back to your NOTHINGNESS.
Those modifications and listening to agricultural groups has apparently paid off: Bob Friesen - the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, has apparently announced in Winnipeg he's running for the Liberals. That's big.
Big indeed.
Post a Comment