Edited on Sat Jun-24-06 04:59 PM by V. Kid
...cause she just might get it. If we really did have another election, on climate change, the Cons would be in trouble. Granted, we're not because of this:
The New Democrats and the Bloc attempted to table a motion calling for Ambrose’s resignation in the Commons environment committee, earlier this week, but the Liberals blocked it from going through after the Conservatives threatened to make it a confidence vote that could trigger a fall election.Which probably means, that even if the vote were to make it to the house, on a Private Members bill or something, that the Liberals would have enough people miss the vote, or enough people vote against it, to allow it to fail sort of like the way the Afghanistan mission was extended.
There was a really intresting report, that essentially said that:
A report released yesterday that shows how Canada could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 60 per cent by 2050, while developing a market for environmental expertise, should be must reading for Prime Minister Stephen Harper if he wants a "made-in-Canada" solution to climate change.
The report by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy says the keys to reaching that target are more efficient energy use and emitting less carbon in the production of energy. It proposes to do this with existing or emerging technology.
The report lists several means that would make it possible to achieve a 60-per-cent decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from current levels. The largest is energy efficiency and conservation. It would deploy most known measures. With housing, for instance, they include updated insulation, heating, cooling and lighting, and the movement of 71 per cent of Canadians by 2050 to apartments, condominiums or row-housing. These have higher densities, meaning less need for private vehicles.So if Harper and crew want to sit back and fight this, and if the Liberals want to twist in the wind on this, fine. But the reality exists.
Here's a link to the London Free Press citing the report:
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Opinion/Editorials/2006/06/22/1646623.htmlNow before anyone mentions it, I know full well that the Liberals are having a leadership convention. But if they as a collective group felt strongly enough about the enviroment, and felt that they'd do a better job defending it, they'd say to the Conservatives that they too are willing to force an election over it, even if Bill Grahame has to lead them. If you believe in something enough, you'll take the hard road to get there. Of course I doubt they do. There have been examples of party's fighting an election campaign and a leadership campaign at the same time. Of course they haven't always been pretty for the party in the short term, but with
An Inconvenient Truth out in the theatres, and with this being a huge achillies heel for the current government, the Liberals ought not to be so bloody chicken. Besides I don't think the Conservatives would be willing to go to the polls, and as such the opposition parties would get what they want, Ambrose shuffled or resigned, and the government embaressed on a key issue. And if we did go to the polls, the three opposition parties would constantly drum beat about the enviroment and the Conservatives incomptence on it, and as such considering the way in which we would go to such an election, the enviroment
would be the issue.