Harper at G8 - 2007

[jdobbin]

Is it cross-atlantic when China and India, who are 2 of the most polluting countries, are given passes on acting on climate change. Isn't China a signatory to Kyoto? I believe so.

China and India signed but were not required to meet the mandate at this time. The thinking was the industrialized nations were the biggest emitters and would invest in the technologies and standards to reduce emissions and India and China would benefit from the technology to follow suit.

Now Harper is saying China and India have to be included or Canada won't do anything.

While it may be beneficial to set a timetable for India and China, it is not helpful that Harper is stalling.

Countries that have ratified.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kyoto_P...on_map_2005.png

[BC_chick]

Kyoto is all about talking the talk. It doesn't matter what you do. It's what you say that is the most important thing.

France and Germany are both doing great with meeting the Kyoto targets, but it's no use if other western nations aren't on board.

Oh, and I don't see how China and India negate Canada's responsibilities.

Wouldn't a better approach to the China/India situation be to pressure the world community to not let them off the hook in Kyoto, while at the same time doing your own part in reducing green-house emmissions instead throwing your hands up in the air and saying nobody should do anything unless China and India do their part?

[BC_chick]

I think Harper is still not convinced. His response has been that it impossible for Canada to do anything so it won't.

I agree that he's not convinced of the science behind GW.

If you sincerely believe we are the main contributors of GW, you would be trying to bring India and China on board while doing your part.... not using them as an excuse to get yourself off the hook.

[Michael Bluth]

Wouldn't a better approach to the China/India situation be to pressure the world community to not let them off the hook in Kyoto, while at the same time doing your own part in reducing green-house emmissions instead throwing your hands up in the air and saying nobody should do anything unless China and India do their part?

False premise.

Kyoto is not the only way to deal with climate change.

It is patently inacurrate to say Canada and the use have thrown up their hands and said "nobody should do anything unless China and India do their part".

If you want an honest debate...

[capricorn]

Is it cross-atlantic when China and India, who are 2 of the most polluting countries, are given passes on acting on climate change. Isn't China a signatory to Kyoto? I believe so.

Wow, could your response be any more irrelevant?

Scott was making global-warming a political issue in which he denied the science behind it and implied that the such views are nothing but nonsense from the left. I argued that the difference of opinion in the science of global-warming is not a right/left issue, but if anything, a cross-Atlantic issue given that Sarkozy and Merkel would fall into the "lefty hogwash" category under Scott's definition.

Where you got the idea that I'm defending China or India's role in Kyoto, I have no idea.

Sorry I butted into your 2-way conversation.

I do agree climate change is not a right-left issue, although some do try to make it such.

[BC_chick]

It is patently inacurrate to say Canada and the use have thrown up their hands and said "nobody should do anything unless China and India do their part".

If you want an honest debate...

50 by 50 IS doing nothing.

[Michael Bluth]

50 by 50 IS doing nothing.

Care to offer a little more analysis than that?

Or is Kyoto truly the holy grail to such an extent that you can dismiss the plan in six words.

[BC_chick]

Care to offer a little more analysis than that?

Or is Kyoto truly the holy grail to such an extent that you can dismiss the plan in six words.

I've already explained Michael, two or three times, I'm not sure why you're having such difficulty with this.

I'm saying that Kyoto is not garbage, European countries are doing great in meeting the targets, some are even ahead of schedule.

I'm saying that if someone is actually convinced of the science behind GW and believes the repercussions that scientists say await us, they would not use China as an excuse to do nothing. If anything, they would be trying their best to get Canada to do its part WHILE AT THE SAME TIME trying to put more pressure on those two developing countries.

I'm saying that 50 by 50 is doing nothing because as we have repeatedly been told by the scientific community, we have about 10 years left before the effects become irreversible.

It's 2007, do the math.

[Michael Bluth]

I'm saying that if someone is actually convinced on the science behind GW and believes the repercussions that scientists say await us, they would not use China as an excuse to do nothing.

I'm saying that both Canada and the United States are both doing something.

If you are really so blind to believe they are doing NOTHING than somebody can't have a rational debate with you.

Here are some of the things they have done on the environment.

ecoENERGY Retrofit grants;

National standards for lighting efficiency;

Tax Credit for Public Transit Passes;

ecoTrustfund funding for porjects in all proinces and territories.

[BC_chick]

I repeat:

I'm saying that 50 by 50 is doing nothing because as we have repeatedly been told by the scientific community, we have about 10 years left before the effects become irreversible.

It's 2007, do the math.

No matter how much you throw out Harper's talking points (I'm starting to see Figleaf's point about the possibility of you being a paid poster), the fact remains that 50 by 50 is doing NOTHING for fighting GW.

[Michael Bluth]

I repeat.

All of the following are things that are being done now.

ecoENERGY Retrofit grants;

National standards for lighting efficiency;

Tax Credit for Public Transit Passes;

ecoTrustfund funding for porjects in all proinces and territories.

[BC_chick]

I edited and added to my post... I've already addressed your "initiatives."

No matter how much you throw out Harper's talking points (I'm starting to see Figleaf's point about the possibility of you being a paid poster), the fact remains that 50 by 50 is doing NOTHING for fighting GW.

It's 2007, we have ten years left. Do the math.

[geoffrey]

BC Chick, the 50% wouldn't be on the night of December 31, 2049.

It's real progress. We had absolutely none until Harper was elected, and now we'll get a little. He really came across as a leader at the G8, he's obviously quite well respected by his European counter parts to be able to broker a deal that included the US who came in absolutely refusing any agreement.

I haven't been a huge Harper fan, but I think his G8 experience and all that was accomplished there is top notch.

The new free-trade agreement, though a sidenote and not really the G8, is another great thing for Canada.

This has been a good week IMO for the CPC. They look good on the environment (actually doing something, the Liberals now look really foolish when you have even Merkel supporting Harper's stance).

Dion agrees that we can never reach Kyoto. Take it one step further and we can easily see it's Dion's and his Liberal predecessor's fault that we won't.

Why are you so eager to trust them, again?

[BC_chick]

BC Chick, the 50% wouldn't be on the night of December 31, 2049.

It's real progress. We had absolutely none until Harper was elected, and now we'll get a little. He really came across as a leader at the G8, he's obviously quite well respected by his European counter parts to be able to broker a deal that included the US who came in absolutely refusing any agreement.

I haven't been a huge Harper fan, but I think his G8 experience and all that was accomplished there is top notch.

The new free-trade agreement, though a sidenote and not really the G8, is another great thing for Canada.

This has been a good week IMO for the CPC. They look good on the environment (actually doing something, the Liberals now look really foolish when you have even Merkel supporting Harper's stance).

Dion agrees that we can never reach Kyoto. Take it one step further and we can easily see it's Dion's and his Liberal predecessor's fault that we won't.

Why are you so eager to trust them, again?

I find it very ironic that when it's time to argue that Dion has ruined the LPC, he's is a lefty who has moved away from core LPC ideas as espoused by Chretien/Martin Liberals. Yet when it's time to discredit him on environmental issues, the LPC is one continuous line with no beginning and no ending from Chretien to Dion.

Which is it? Is Dion different than Chretien/Martin or is he the same? I tend to agree that he's different as you have repeatedly stated yourself on other threads. That's why I trust him on this.

As for Harper's stance, neither the questionable attribution of him being a "leader" (very subjective term if you ask me), nor the questioning of the Liberal handling of the environmental profile under the former leadership, address the fact that 50 by 50 is garbage.

[Michael Bluth]

Which is it? Is Dion different than Chretien/Martin or is he the same? I tend to agree that he's different as you have repeatedly stated yourself on other threads. That's why I trust him on this.

It varies issue by issue.

As Environment Minister that's where he should have made his most significant contribution. He didn't get it done.

That's why I don't trust him on the environment.

[BC_chick]

As Environment Minister that's where he should have made his most significant contribution. He didn't get it done.

He was environment minister for a whole eight months.

PS, what happened to your defense of 50 by 50?

[geoffrey]

He was environment minister for a whole eight months.

How long did he sit at the cabinet table?

Don't you agree that Baird has done way more in his 8 months than Dion did in his? We have a plan, an international agreement that includes the world largest polluter... and my favourite, legislation that punishes companies for emitting asthma and cancer causing real pollution into the air.

Wow. Dion did.... what??? Salvaged a document that his own party had no intention of doing anything on.

Whoop de do.

It's tough to argue with results.

[Michael Bluth]

He was environment minister for a whole eight months.

PS, what happened to your defense of 50 by 50?

So Dion gets a pass because he wasn't environment minister for long enough?

Did he do anything in those eight months.

Never tried to defend 50 by 50. Bring up specific points and I'll discuss them. Nice attempt at changing the topic though.

[BC_chick]

Don't you agree that Baird has done way more in his 8 months than Dion did in his? We have a plan, an international agreement that includes the world largest polluter... and my favourite, legislation that punishes companies for emitting asthma and cancer causing real pollution into the air.

Wow. Dion did.... what??? Salvaged a document that his own party had no intention of doing anything on.

Wow, how we forget. Even Bob Mills, conservative critic on the environment touted Dion's plans and expressed happiness at his new directions he was taking compared to Anderson.

[BC_chick]

He was environment minister for a whole eight months.

PS, what happened to your defense of 50 by 50?

So Dion gets a pass because he wasn't environment minister for long enough?

Did he do anything in those eight months.

Never tried to defend 50 by 50. Bring up specific points and I'll discuss them. Nice attempt at changing the topic though.

He had many initiatives which were being braced as bold and new by opposition critics and the media alike. He didn't get a chance to work on any of them.

As for you not defending 50 by 50, LOL!

Sure, all that throwing out the talking points was what exactly?

I was the one who kept pointing out to you that there is no connection.

[geoffrey]

Wow, how we forget. Even Bob Mills, conservative critic on the environment touted Dion's plans and expressed happiness at his new directions he was taking compared to Anderson.

How we forget how much worse Anderson was than anyone that's ever been in that position. Dion was an improvement, but from terrible to terrible with an happy ideology.

[Michael Bluth]

As for you not defending 50 by 50, LOL!

Sure, all that throwing out the talking points was what exactly?

I was the one who kept pointing out to you that there is no connection.

You keep focusing on 50/50 because you can't refute the positive steps the Government has taken on climate change.

They are more than talking points. They are a list of more accomplishments then Dion actually got done.

Instead of recognizing the Conservative's accomplishments you dismiss them and try and avoid recognizing their solid work. No facts. No truth. No debate.

[ScottSA]

May I remind you that Sarkozy and Merkel are both conservatives who support Kyoto and are not global-warming deniers. In fact, Bush and Harper are the two exceptions amongst all G8 nations, so if anything.... it's a cross-Atlantic "political silliness," it has nothing to do with right vs. left.

I think Harper is still not convinced. His response has been that it impossible for Canada to do anything so it won't.

Harper may be simply riding this CO2 foolishness for political reasons. God willing, he will ever remain a heretic.

[BC_chick]

You keep focusing on 50/50 because you can't refute the positive steps the Government has taken on climate change.

They are more than talking points. They are a list of more accomplishments then Dion actually got done.

Of course, Dion's eight months as environmental minister, along with the conservative initiatives that have been put forth by CPC party, should exempt Harper of any criticism I may have about his 50 by 50 plan.

How could I have thought otherwise.

[Michael Bluth]

Of course, Dion's eight months as environmental minister, along with the conservative initiatives that have been put forth by CPC party, should exempt Harper of any criticism I may have about his 50 by 50 plan.

How could I have thought otherwise.

Your only criticism of 50 by 50 is it is "doing nothing".

CDo you think you could come up with something a little more substantial?

If I say. No, 50 by 50 is "doing something" I have put in exactly the same amount of effort and added as much to the debate as you have.