Steve shows who's team he's on

[Higgly]

Steve has just re-affirmed his commitment to the George Bush protocol for the environment and has stated that the Kyoto protocol is now "outdated".

The George Bush environmental priocotol, adopted by Canada, the US, and Ausaralia as well as (no surprise here) China and India, states that signatories can set their own targets and that they do not have to meet those targets.

Good old Steve. You go boy.

[bush_cheney2004]

Steve has just re-affirmed his commitment to the George Bush protocol for the environment and has stated that the Kyoto protocol is now "outdated".

Hardly....the USA pronounced Kyschmoto dead-on-arrival way before President Bush was ever elected.

Vote Summary

Question: On the Resolution (s.res.98 )

Vote Number: 205 Vote

Date: July 25, 1997, 11:37 AM

Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Resolution Agreed to Measure Number: S.Res. 98

Measure Title: A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the conditions for the United States becoming a signatory to any international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Vote Counts: YEAs 95 NAYs 0 Not Voting 5

[sharkman]

Steve has just re-affirmed his commitment to the George Bush protocol for the environment and has stated that the Kyoto protocol is now "outdated".

The George Bush environmental priocotol, adopted by Canada, the US, and Ausaralia as well as (no surprise here) China and India, states that signatories can set their own targets and that they do not have to meet those targets.

Good old Steve. You go boy.

Also a much better response than what our previous government came up with under Chretien, which was to sign Kyoto, sing the praises of Kyoto FOR OVER A DECADE while completely ignoring its goals and targets since any twit could tell it was unrealistic.

[Higgly]

Hardly....the USA pronounced Kyschmoto dead-on-arrival way before President Bush was ever elected.

Vote Summary

Question: On the Resolution (s.res.98 )

Vote Number: 205 Vote

Date: July 25, 1997, 11:37 AM

Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Resolution Agreed to Measure Number: S.Res. 98

Measure Title: A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the conditions for the United States becoming a signatory to any international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Vote Counts: YEAs 95 NAYs 0 Not Voting 5

What is in place now comes from the Bush "government". I didn't say anyhting about how Kyoto got rejected.

[Higgly]

Also a much better response than what our previous government came up with under Chretien, which was to sign Kyoto, sing the praises of Kyoto FOR OVER A DECADE while completely ignoring its goals and targets since any twit could tell it was unrealistic.

Kyoto at least had goals and was a widely accepted protocol. The Bush protocol is just putting lipstick on a pig.

[bush_cheney2004]

What is in place now comes from the Bush "government". I didn't say anyhting about how Kyoto got rejected.

Nonsense...there is no such thing as a Bush "government". What is in place now results from the current and prior administrations, as well as the US Congress and state governments. While Canada was screwing around with Liberal lip service to their ratified Kyoto obligations, the USA actually reduced emissions growth rate. How embarrasing!

Edited September 26, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[betsy]

While Canada was screwing around with Liberal lip service to their ratified Kyoto obligations, the USA actually reduced emissions growth rate. How embarrasing!

All the more embarrassing was when Liberal Martin decided to use it for his politicking and had the audacity to scold the USA about it!

[geoffrey]

Put it this way. Let's say Kyoto cuts emissions 25% by 2020. Just as a number.

It's much better to set a lower target like say, 20%, to get the US and India and China onboard than it is for all the rest of the world to cut at 25%.

The US is so far and above the rest as a major polluter. Any agreement without them is wasting time. Offering a lower target may actually cut more GHG across the world if it results in adding signatories to the agreement. If Harper can get the US on board, he will rival Mulroney in doing great things for Canada's environmental future.

That's a big if though.

[Bonam]

A treaty is nothing more than ink on paper unless the country in question actually works to fulfill it, much like we saw with Kyoto. A treaty that leaves the decisions up to the country in question is much more likely to actually be fulfilled than one that seeks to impose draconian restrictions from without.

Anyway, I'm not worried about GHGs any more. The technology is there to eliminate reliance on carbohydrate burning energy sources. Oil will run out or get more expensive and we'll start large scale switching over to other forms of energy within the next few decades, regardless of the politics of global warming at this point. The free market will take care of it for us.

[M.Dancer]

Hardly....the USA pronounced Kyschmoto dead-on-arrival way before President Bush was ever elected.

Vote Summary

I always knew that Harper was a Clintonite.....even from the body shapes they share.

[old_bold&cold]

Why do people all have to think that just because we are not going with Kyoto that we are then following the American way of reducing emmissons? Harper has set out what he and his party felt were standards that they say will meet or exceed targets set for the future, 2050 to be exact. It does not follow the USA, as they do not really have a set plan, but they have had some success reducing emmissions. This was way better then the Liberals did with Kyoto in the time they were in power. Harpers plan is a step in the right direction and will meet the emmissions targets in the time frame of the issue. It is only the extreme environmentalits that say it must be done quicker and it must be done till it hurst us to do so. These self flagellating envirmentalists will not be quiet for anything less then painful efforts being made. Harpers plan is less painful and it will be able to meet targets. Maybe not in the way kyoto did, but in a way that is planned and workable.

As far as him being on side with the USA goes, I would think that just because they both will by voluntary means meet reduction goals, that does not mean they are one and the same. I think Harper is on his own team if anything and he is trying to get others to come on board as well. Bush is just too engrossed with Iraq and other things to really be pushing things, and it is the house of representatives and senate in the USA that really has this battle with emmissions in their pot. They may agree with much of the Harper initiative, but I am sure they will make what ever tweaks they want to make, and call it their own. I blame Bush for many things, and I beleive rightfully so, but I can not really lay the USA environmental issues at his feet, as that is one area he really is not responsible for.

[Higgly]

So if the Liberals didn't get results right away, it's because they are no good, but if the Conservatives don't get results right away, it's because it would hurt the economy.