Canada’s PM pilloried over climate-change shuffle; rich nations urged to ante up

Wed, 2007-11-28 12:37Bill Miller
Bill Miller's picture

Canada’s PM pilloried over climate-change shuffle; rich nations urged to ante up

Criticism just keeps pouring in.

A United Nations report, native leaders, wildlife officials and the David Suzuki Foundation have all taken issue with Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s maneuver last weekend blocking agreement on binding greenhouse emissions targets. Pressure is mounting for Harper to atone when negotiations on a successor to Kyoto convene next month in Bali.

Developed countries have created global warming, but people in the world's poorest countries are going to suffer the consequences, says the UN 2007 Human Development Report.

As a result, Canada and other developed countries must back their promises to combat climate change by not only slashing greenhouse gas emissions but also providing $86 billion by 2015 to help the world's poor adapt to global warming.

Papa Seck of Senegal, one of the authors of the report, said although Canada has signed and ratified Kyoto it is “not living up to it … and it's the world's poor who are going to suffer the consequences.”

Another UN official, director Kate White of the UN Association in Canada, said if all countries emitted greenhouse gases at the same level as Canada the world would be nearly 800 per cent above levels considered sustainable.

The UN study wasn't the only critic of Prime Minister Harper and Canada: Native leaders joined those from the South Pacific to press for firm targets for reducing emissions; The World Wildlife Federation criticized the “intensity-based” targets pushed by Canada, which would reduce the rate of emissions but allow for continued growth in absolute terms; and The David Suzuki Foundation warned of growing threats to the world's polar bear population.

With a new PM at the helm in Australia and a lame-duck U.S. President Bush staging photo opportunities at the White House with arch-critic Al Gore , Harper is rapidly losing his former allies. That could leave him standing all alone at Bali, in the same political corner he painted himself into years ago.

Comments

Question:

What do the following have in common?

“A United Nations report, native leaders, wildlife officials and the David Suzuki Foundation”

Answer:

Not a single one of them has been elected to public office by Canadian voters and taxpayers, nor do they have any authority or mandate to dictate Canadian public policy.

Just thought I’d mention it.

And as for Stephen Harper and the CPC being “pilloried” (by anyone who actually counts, that is):

“Federal Conservatives gain support: poll
Published: Saturday, November 10, 2007
TORONTO (Reuters) - The Conservatives powered ahead in an opinion poll released on Saturday, reaching their highest level of popular support since the 2006 federal election with figures that could give them a majority government.

The poll, by Ipsos Reid for the CanWest group of newspapers, shows the Conservatives with 42 percent support, up from 39 percent a week ago.

That is well above the 28 percent for the opposition Liberals, or the 15 percent for the left-wing New Democrats.”

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=87321c0e-1358-466f-aa2b-0d260148fdb5&k=36850

If that’s being “pilloried”, then I’m all for it.

What do scientists and David Suzuki enjoy that the federal government doesn’t when it comes to environmental issues?

The trust of the Canadian public.

Your analysis of public opinion is very superficial.

“What do scientists and David Suzuki enjoy that the federal government doesn’t when it comes to environmental issues?
The trust of the Canadian public.”

You’re joking, right?

Scientists - 77%

Environmentalists - 62%

David Suzuki - 50%

Federal government - 23%

Replicated results twice this year alone.  

Not shocking in terms of the numbers, and the reply was dare I say a well served ace.

Although I do wish we could trust our elected representatives to actually represent the electorate in these matters. The 23% figure that trusts the gov’t on environmental issues suggests to me that 77% of the population is appalled at the behaviour of our glorious leader at the Commonwealth Conference. David Suzuki has a higher credibility rating on the subject – let’s send him to represent Canada! (I can picture Rob-from-ND going apoplectic over this one! Can hardly WAIT to see what he comes back with!!!)

David Suzuki could run for government. More indicative is the poor democratic support the Green Party receives every election. If Canadians really, truly wanted drastic action on the environment, Green votes would go WAY up. But it never does. Because at present, Canadians will not allow ANY elected leader to impose drastic measures on AGW. Possibly in the future, but not at present.

“The 23% figure that trusts the gov’t on environmental issues suggests to me that 77% of the population is appalled at the behaviour of our glorious leader at the Commonwealth Conference.”

Oh yes, appalled – and outraged even! LOL! Keep dreaming, Fern Mackenzie, realtor in Idaho. My guess is that his popular support has increased.

“David Suzuki has a higher credibility rating on the subject – let’s send him to represent Canada!”

Sure. He can take his his giant luxury rockstar diesel tour bus again. That ought to be good for his credibility.

“Can hardly WAIT to see what he comes back with!!!”

You can “hardly wait”, any more than you can hardly follow your own advice about not responding to my posts. This is in keeping with your feeble and irresolute character.

That’s what I thought. Couldn’t resist, though. Bye, Rob.

“National poll: who do you trust on enviro issues?”

And yet, when given the choice, Canadians increasingly support the policies of Stephen Harper and the CPC.

Of course people will respond that they “trust” someone like Suzuki, since he is in absolutely no position to affect public policy, nor is he ever likely to be.

Although you never cite the source of your statistics, such vapid polls are a dime a dozen. It is in the same class of asking whether people like ice cream and puppies.

Canadians increasingly support the policies of Stephen Harper and the CPC. False, Rob from North Dakota. Don’t know much about Canadians, do you?

The faulty reasoning which follows anti-democratic ideologues like Harper and Bush is a constant theme . When a majority of citizens didn’t vote for them, the majority is contemptuously dismissed as irrelevant. Indeed, citizens views and opinions are systematically ignored by these regimes. It is the defining nature of their desire to impose narrow views on society. However, whenever it is convenient, quoting an opinion poll will be done with great flourish. Suddenly the citizens matter. One day they matter, most days they don’t. When this tack is taken, the only logic at work is convenience and self interest. Which is no principle at all. Thus, the reasoning should be dismissed.

“The faulty reasoning which follows anti-democratic ideologues like Harper and Bush is a constant theme .”

This may be a “constant theme”, or, more precisely, a droning chant – but only for hard-bitten leftwingers.

Pray, tell us, how exactly are Harper and Bush “anti-democratic”? Did they achieve office through violent revolution, regicide, or a coupe d’etat? I’m pretty sure not. And certainly Harper is enjoying increasing support from the electorate, if polls are any indication.

Or is the term “anti-democratic” just another empty phrase you throw out whenever democracy doesn’t favour your particular brand of ideology? Why don’t you just claim Bush and Harper are running “fascist police states”, as your type are wont to do.

Naomi Wolf’s “Fascist America, in 10 Easy Steps”:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/24/708/

US has followed many of them. Canada has followed some, such as attempting to control the press.

One I think she missed is politicizing the justice system.

Rob the troll writes:
…And certainly Harper is enjoying increasing support from the electorate, if polls are any indication…

False. You are going by an Ipsos Reid poll, which is not all that trustworthy. Harper could only get a majority if he cheated, which would be in keeping with his tendency to imitate Bush in all things.

Naomi Wolf’s “Fascist America, in 10 Easy Steps”????

S-N-O-R-E.

www.commondreams.org ???

ROFLMAO

Originally published in The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0„2064157,00.html

If I seldom respond to one of VJ’s comments, it’s because after reading them I’m unable to type – being left weak with laughter.

Good Lord, what a flake …

TROLL

And a troll who can’t read.

I just read Naomi Wolf’s “…in 10 Easy Steps”.
Scared the hell out of me!
I always knew the Bush crowd had been busy; but, until someone put all the details in plain view, I hadn’t realized how deep the rot has gone.
But, unless Bush can pull a rabbit out of a hat and repeal the 22nd Amendment…the world will soon be rid of him.

The thing about Bush is he’s a sitting duck, as well as a lame one. He is SO awful he invites this kind of thing. But I think that Wolf is a bit off the mark – Bush is too stupid for this kind of subtlety. It’s the folks in the background guiding him along who should get the credit.

Awhile back I was having a look at Pax Americana, and it hit me that I could make an excellent case for Bush being the anti-Christ (no, I don’t believe in that sort of thing, but some very highly placed people DO!). As I got into it, though, I realized that it isn’t Bush, it’s Rumsfeld & the guys at Project for the New American Century (http://www.newamericancentury.org/index.html). If you want to get the hell scared out of you, Tom, have a look at these folks!

As for 10 Easy Steps etc, again, it’s the boys in the back. All they have to do is get themselves a stupid or easily manipulated president, and away they go!

Throwing the “baby” out means nothing unless the bathwater goes with him…

I think you’re getting your Naomi’s confused: this is Naomi Wolf we’re talking about here.