97 Replies to “YNoKyoto”

  2. What about Elizabeth May who flew to Copenhagen to plaster her own country then came back to the country she criticized to sit in HOC to make bed with the NDP.
    She should be very upset that the Kyoto is dead.
    What bothers me is Obama who continues neglect his people of jobs.

  3. CGH, excellent post and I, among other posters, have wrote this many times on this subject. I am amazed at so-called CPC supporters constantly writing “Maybe Harper has done all this but not this”. As stated Harper is a master tactician and his incremental moves seem to achieve all our goals.
    The left is deeply entrenched in every facet of our society as Rob Ford is finding out in Toronto and the recent Liberal election highlighted with zero PC seats. Quietly undoing the mess they have made takes hard work and a focus on the long view.

  4. Reading the comments at the bottom of the CTV story was encouraging. Most Canadians get it. Kyoto is a scam and always was a scam. It’s real purpose was to transfer wealth from productive economies to the non-productive ones. Canadians as a whole seem to have caught up to SDA followers who for years have urged Canada to abandon Kyoto. Now if the Tories would just take the next logical step and stop all funds going to combat non-existent global warming.
    Humans cannot direct or control climate. We can only adapt.

  5. DanBC: “I still don’t like “loans” to third world messes.”
    I’m not much fond of them either. But I will betcha dollars to nickels that there’s no new money here. Most likely it’s simply the usual CIDA budget, only this time it’s in the form of loans, not GRANTS. You might in fact consider this a form of cutback in useless foreign aid very thinly disguised under the rubric of “climate change”. Peter Kent said this was coming quite some months ago, so it’s a double win.
    And remember, CIDA loans and grants are not without strings. Even the Liberals made these countries take them in Canadian goods and services, so they were never a total loss.
    Dave: “Quietly undoing the mess they have made takes hard work and a focus on the long view.”
    Amen, brother. And the congregation should repeat this excellent phrase many, many, many times.
    “I am amazed at so-called CPC supporters constantly writing “Maybe Harper has done all this but not this”.”
    Amen again. Every political movement has its snivelers who want all their candy RIGHT NOW. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and it wasn’t burned down in a day either. It’s all about time, tactics and opportunity.

  6. I’m not sure the headline and text support what was actually stated; Canada will not extend the Kyoto accord. I am surprised that there was any plan to do that, I thought the accord was already dead. Chretien simply signed an agreement with abitrary targets, ones slightly higher than the Americans were proposing, that was how much thought he put into it. In the end Clinton and Gore never submitted the treaty, as the Senate had been pretty clear on their intentions. They passed a anti-Kyoto resolution 97-0. This demonstrated the absurdity of Chretien’s accord, that Canada could meet targets the US was not bound by.
    Nobody should weep over the end this foolish accord.

  7. I’m thinking that the timing of CBC “attacks” by Sun media and the gov’t…are directly correlated to the announcement of the the Kyoto pullout. Hmmm…just thinkin’…conservatives are becoming more media savvy and more strategic in their thinking…this is a good thing.
    Now to tackle the next step…getting rid of the leftists in our universities…perhaps a massive cut in funding is in order and a link to a page that notes university majors that actually have higher employment possibilities… http://graphicsweb.wsj.com/documents/NILF1111/#term=
    We need to move our society back to right where logic and common sense reign.

  8. I am amazed at so-called CPC supporters constantly writing “Maybe Harper has done all this but not this”. As stated Harper is a master tactician and his incremental moves seem to achieve all our goals.
    The left is deeply entrenched in every facet of our society as Rob Ford is finding out in Toronto and the recent Liberal election highlighted with zero PC seats. Quietly undoing the mess they have made takes hard work and a focus on the long view.
    Posted by: dave at November 28, 2011 9:50 AM
    Harper’s only accomplishment that is worthy of praise is getting a majority…and even that has as much to do with the utter fecklessness of the Liberals/Ignatieff as it has with any great skills of the CPC.
    Dismantling the CWB, Gun Registry,Kyoto, etc., is relatively easy with a majority in both houses…it has very little to do with master tactics.
    So applaud if you wish. But don’t let the noise drown out the promises Harper made in back 2006 to give us property rights.
    Remember, the Socialsts will be back in power someday – maybe sooner than you wish. And probably the only thing that would give them second thoughts about coming up with another gun registry or a Wheat Board (or a host of other commie schemes)would be the potential obstacles posed by effective Property Rights provisions in The Charter.
    Oh, and while St. Stephen is out slaying those toothless dragons, let’s not pretend that our fiscal situation is exactly in ‘blue chip’ territority.

  9. Jamie MacMaster The only thing to consider here is the alternative had the coalition of the left siezed power in 2008. For one thing a carbon tax like the one Australia has put in place but more intrusive.

  10. The fund is expected to grow over the next eight years to eventually distribute about $100 billion a year. However, it is still unclear where all of that money will come from and how it will be distributed. http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20111127/durban-south-africa-slimate-conference-setup-111127/#ixzz1f18XtoYI
    What a misleading Statement.. We all know that GORE and all his fella gangsters get all the money. It’s the worthless science that has wasted
    billions of R&D.
    Actual Science is a “process”, a process that AGW does not share. The childish methods practiced by Jones & Mann was to ignore Science

  11. Martin, there’s actually a bit more to that. Kyoto has two principal divisions: COP – Conference of the Protocol; and MOP – Members of the Protocol. The first is all those nations which have ratified the UNFCCC – the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is the umbrella agreement and consists of nothing but meaningless platitudes. The second are those which have ratified the Kyoto Protocol, which excludes the United States. Together the Kyoto negotiating process is known as COP/MOP.
    Canada is indicating that it’s withdrawing from MOP. It may sound like a trivial distinction, but diplomatically it’s an earthquake. If just one more major emitter withdraws, Kyoto will no longer represent 55% of global emissions and thus be null and void for all.
    It means that Canada is renouncing any role on the Kyoto emissions trading mechanisms, a clear signal to industry that the government will not impose restrictions or penalties for ANY CO2 emissions. This is a huge confidence booster to utilities and steel manufacturers and a host of others.
    And the best bit? Canada can claim in Washington that it’s merely moving into alignment with the United States, no doubt giving fits to large parts of the Obama administration.
    Canada’s withdrawal may well encourage Russia to follow suit, given that the Euros have said they’re not going to buy “hot air”.
    So yes, this is a big, big brick coming out of the Kyoto wall, coming as it does right on top of Climategate 2.0.
    And all just in time for Durban.
    Best Christmas ever.

  12. “It’s time for a few of you to admit that PMSH is smarter and tougher than you are.”
    No problem there,cgh,that’s why HE’s PM and I’m NOT!
    🙂
    Anything Harper does should be driven by US,with as much fanfare as possible,short of “occupying” cities like the lefty crowd,as we’re too busy earning a living.
    Harper can then claim it’s what the voters demanded, when the Left starts their inevitable howling in outrage. Can’t wait to see the usual suspects in the MSM on this one today!
    As for property rights,JM,what is the criteria for inserting the same in our Great Blessed Charter?
    If I remember correctly,it’s been set up so that it’s almost impossible to make any changes in it. Does there not have to be complete agreement with every MLA in every Province in Canada for any change or addition? I’m thinking of Elijah Harper and the “feather” in the Manitoba legislature years ago.
    Or am I mistaken.
    But again, thanks and congratulations to the PM for all he’s done in a very short time in the majority.

  13. Jamie MacMaster The only thing to consider here is the alternative had the coalition of the left siezed power in 2008. For one thing a carbon tax like the one Australia has put in place but more intrusive.
    Posted by: nold at November 28, 2011 11:23 AM
    The ‘only’ thing? Really?
    Boy, sometimes I’m so glad there’s folks around who’ll keep me on the straight and narrow…

  14. As for property rights,JM,what is the criteria for inserting the same in our Great Blessed Charter?
    Posted by: dmorris at November 28, 2011 11:48 AM
    Probably the same criteria that existed back in 2006 when Harper said he was going to do it.

  15. We want it all.
    We want it all.
    We want it all.
    And we want it now.
    That the song you’ve been listening to, Jamie?

  16. pm@pm.gc.ca
    That is Mr. Harper’s Email address. I suggest you send him a thank you note. That is how we will keep him doing what we want him to do.
    This is a good day.

  17. We want it all.
    And we want it now.
    That the song you’ve been listening to, Jamie?
    set you free at November 28, 2011 12:12 PM
    Nope. I don’t listen much to songs, politicians…or their cheering sections. Been around too long for that.

  19. Jamie, Harper voiced support for including property rights in our constitution, but he has also said he would not re-open the constitution. I hope the stars align one day so we can have property rights in our constitution.
    How did we ever get duped into omitting it?

  20. Jamie, Harper voiced support for including property rights in our constitution, but he has also said he would not re-open the constitution. I hope the stars align one day so we can have property rights in our constitution.
    How did we ever get duped into omitting it?
    Posted by: Rick at November 28, 2011 12:30 PM
    And how did the population ever get duped into believing that the constitutional route is the only way to protect their lands from greedy, callous governments?
    There is absolutely nothing preventing the federal government from bringing in legislation that protects citizens from government transgressions onto private property.

  21. One might consider for just a moment that unfortunately, we have never had property rights in Canada. One example; when grain markets were essentially nationalized in 1943 the Winnipeg Grain industry tried redress in the courts and lost every time. Jamie you’re a smart guy; explain to us the process that will occur to give us property rights.

  23. If one were to accept the IPCC’s figures (a pretty big “if”) each tonne of carbon dioxide emissions will lead to a global temperature change of 0.0000000000015 degrees Celsius. (1.5E-12)
    Therefore, had Canada met its Kyoto target, global temperature increase would have been averted by 0.000243 degrees C.
    Kyoto, despite all the noise, is a ridiculously trivial agreement.

  24. Property rights? The clueless halfwit Trudeau created the worst constitution known to man and we’ve been struggling with it ever since. The absence of representation by population in the constitution is the worst stupidity. To get my universally recognized democratic rights as an Albertan becomes a political issue, not a guarantee.
    No-one will ever reopen the constitution unless a unanymous proposal comes forth. Any re-opening would be swamped by deafening whining coming out of Quebec.

  25. The main point I neglected:
    In a parliamentary democracy “the will of parliament” reigns supreme. The courts are always loath to overrule the House of Commons. For example; today in parliament the majority CPC is reading into law for the third and final time a law allowing farmers a choice on how to market their grain. That could just as easily be overturned by a future government. See how that works; any law simply declaring property rights could be simply written over in the next parliament.

  26. Nold, Writing a law guaranteeing property rights gives a future government the ability to write a new law taking it away. Property rights are inherent in the rights of free people, so no government can grant or remove them.
    The Wheat Board is different animal. I can’t imagine a future NDP/Liberal government would re-instate it. It would likely not pass its first constitutional test.

  27. Rick, I agree with your position, except for your second sentence. There are no inherent rights; there are only the rights you fight for and defend. Rights are something that any government must be forced to comply with. Thomas Jefferson addressed this point a couple of centuries ago, as did a group of barons at Runnymede in the 12th century.

  28. See how that works; any law simply declaring property rights could be simply written over in the next parliament.
    Posted by: nold at November 28, 2011 1:37 PM
    Any law declaring anything could be overturned by any government with a majority.
    Yet laws get passed every day in parliaments across this land. So the possibility of having a law scrapped down the road is obviously no excuse for not implementing it.
    But governments do so

  29. CGH, You said it better than I could: “There are no inherent rights; there are only the rights you fight for and defend”.
    While there are a myraid of laws affirming our property rights, those laws can simply be reversed by the government of the day. The constitution needs to guarantee those rights to protect us from government tyranny.

  30. Harper is like a fox. He lets the public get stirred up than acts. That way where not relying on Government to do the job we as citizens ought to be about.
    It instills pride in the fact we are doing it, not some political hacks.
    It also distances Harper from recriminations from the left , because its grass roots, not politics by fiat.

  32. Jamie, well certainly a property rights law can be passed into law by parliament but without any guaranteed standing in our constitution, what would be the point? Furthermore I just can’t imagine what a law with these kinds of restraints would look like. Remember legislation passed today cannot bind a future government.

  33. The timing is crucial. Under Kyoto, Canada agreed to certain results (which were, of course, impossible to achieve); if we are still party to the agreement at the end of the defined period (end of 2012), we will be in violation (not that there are any real penalties, but we would look like liars on the international stage).
    We are allowed to bow out of the agreement by notification (in writing) any time prior to a year before the end of the defined period; that makes Dec 31/11 the cutoff point. Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition has been trying to spread the word.
    Today, though, news services are reporting that Peter Kent will neither confirm or deny the withdrawal. Time to send some more letters and emails, quickly.

  34. Rick: “The constitution needs to guarantee those rights to protect us from government tyranny.”
    Yes indeed. And a constitution must be difficult for any government to change. And governments must be watched carefully to ensure that they do not try to amend or ignore them. The US has a magnificent constitution in many respects, but its citizens have allowed themselves to be stampeded by fear into accepting restrictions and intrusions on their rights. There is probably no greater truncation of the constitution than that done by Homeland Security.

  35. Jamie, well certainly a property rights law can be passed into law by parliament but without any guaranteed standing in our constitution, what would be the point? Furthermore I just can’t imagine what a law with these kinds of restraints would look like. Remember legislation passed today cannot bind a future government.
    Posted by: nold at November 28, 2011 4:56 PM
    I’ll try this again.
    No law has any “guaranteed” standing…whether it is designed to protect property, polar bears, or prositutes.
    What would be the point? To have a law that protects property rights…at least until we have government that has the ability to sell the message that Canadians deserve to have those rights protected by The Charter.
    You can’t imagine what such a law would look like? I can. Easily.
    4 or 5 simple concepts:
    (a) No entry without warrant
    (b) No land-use restrictions without adequate notice
    (c) Onus on government to prove the necessity of the restriction
    (d) Legal costs of landowner paid by gov’t
    (e) In the event the courts determine the restriction is required – full and timely compensation (taking into account devaluation and income loss)to the landowner as determined by a panel of peers.

  37. You get the last word Jamie, but say “you should be on the radio….then I could turn you off”. I stole that line from a 1936 Eddie Cantor/Ethel Merman movie, Strike Me Pink.

  38. Mao Stlong* Lepolt.
    Kyoto** not dead.
    …-
    “Agriculture Ministry: No Dog for Dinner”
    “The Ministry of Agriculture on November 24 clarified a set of new regulations that critics originally feared had legalized the eating of cats and dogs
    For a while, the Ministry of Agriculture was in the doghouse, after releasing regulations that some criticized as legalizing the consumption of cats and dogs.
    Now, the agricultural ministry has clarified the new rules, saying they are aimed at promoting public health and animal welfare, and do not in fact legalize cat and dog meat.”
    http://english.caixin.cn/2011-11-28/100332080.html
    *Liberal leader Bob Rae’s uncle Maurice Strong.
    **arrfff: urlm.in/kcxg

  39. Jamie, I was going to dispute your point about a property protection law (vs in the constitution), but then saw your 5 simple concepts. They seem very sensible and specific so I support them.

  40. But I still think the NDP and Green Party should be able to attend on the Canadian taxpayers dollar (sarc and rotflmao!)

  41. Jamie your 5 points sound an awful lot like points that already exist in our legal system. What’s new there?

  42. Jamie your 5 points sound an awful lot like points that already exist in our legal system. What’s new there?
    Posted by: rroe at November 28, 2011 8:05 PM
    Really?
    Then you’ll have no problem showing us just where those points are.
    We’ll wait for you.

  43. Dave writes:
    As stated Harper is a master tactician and his incremental moves seem to achieve all our goals.
    At the risk of sounding pedantic, I have to disagree with this statement as PMSH is a master strategist, not a tactician. Tactics involves a very short time scale and attention to minutia whereas strategy involves a long time scale and concentration on global matters. PMSH has shown himself very adept as a strategist whereas the moonbat opposition tends to reflexive short-term responses and has no ability to think of the long-term implications of their actions.

  44. Wow!!! Can I move up there? We still have almost a year until our next election and the shinanigans that go on are maddening! I’d LOVE to have someone do half the good that Harper is doing! At this point, I love to have our president go on a lavish vacation, on our dime, for the rest of his term — as long as he does NOTHING more!!!

  45. Flo….you are quite welcome to move up here…just make sure you tell our Immigration you are 1)female,2)lesbian,3)a muzzie supporter,and 4)you will be applying for welfare ASAP.
    DO NOT tell them you are willing to work to support yourself and family,you believe in freedom and free speech,you support Israel,and that the Loser(Obama) is an a**hole.
    This is not sarcastic,this is the way our leftie beauracy works.

  46. You have no idea how much Canada’s refusal to sign onto that scam warms my heart!
    Since you guys seem to have the world’s only supply of common sense at the moment, I am inclined to agree with Flo.

  47. “Watch for a S-storm from the Left over this. And not once will the vast majority of the MSM once mention Climategate. Doing so simply does not fit into their narrative.” Robert W.
    Never mind just the committed Left, Robert W. We cannot even hope for, evidently, total support from what bills itself as a Conservative voice for Canada, The National Post. In Monday’s edition, Post reporter Trish Audette filed a story datelined Edmonton, on Peter Kent’s first announcement that Canada would possibly pull out of Kyoto. Whether the reporter or the copy editor did it, I don’t know — But every reference to ethical oil was within quote marks. Even the head read – Alberta oil ‘legitimate resource,’ Kent says. These quote marks clearly mock Kent’s words – setting out “ethical” as if it’s just his and Big Oil’s opinion. The Post’s handling of the story is insulting to we Westerners, say I. We expect more from our so-called “conservative” National Post whose Tuesday editorial page clearly supported Canada’s pulling out of Kyoto. I think that the copy editor who handled Audette’s Edmonton story should be asked to “go across the street” to The Globe and Mail, or to The Toronto Star if he, or she, is politically at odds with the Post’s editorial position. Perhaps my opinion be called petty, but I believe we’ve got to start pushing back (punch back) against the Leftist control over this country’s Toronto-centric Main Street Media and its slurs.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation