Full text of Peter Mansbridge's interview with Stephen Harper
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
I've got little guns, medium sized guns, and big guns........
Simple questions;
Do you think Harper should have ignored his training?
What do you think he should have done?
What do you think you would have done?
Have you ever been in a violent confrontation?
Seems to me you are the one that does not wish to discuss the matter.
As a tax payer, I expect that the PM will be protected. This line of questioning about a closet is assinine, imo.
Of course it is ridiculous.
But Waldo just wants to heap derision and scorn without any thought or reflection, and I'm not letting him get away with it.
Currently, Waldo appears to be hiding in his own little closet, avoiding any disturbing questions.......
Anyway, I asked the Librarian if they had the new book about tiny p e n i s e s. She said "I don't think it's in yet." I said, "Yes, that's the one."
in the face of critical pummeling, it's taken the PMO short-pants kids 6 whole weeks to come up with that lil' nugget... it's really getting circulation for the Great Closet Leader these last few days! :mrgreen: Colby, it was a pretty big closet with a lot of room for others - was no one else worthy... to share the closet?
Now Sonny, just because I let you get away with your obnoxious little scam twice does not mean I was lacking all the ammunition necessary to blow your silly little scorn-fest out of the water.
And defelection is not going to save you.
Simple questions;
Do you think Harper should have ignored his training?
What do you think he should have done?
What do you think you would have done?
Have you ever been in a violent confrontation?
Answer the questions.....and we will continue our little chat.
Otherwise, your yapping is without impact, or basis. Just the blather of a pis sant.
Oh, and as you know, it is Colpy, not Colby.
Still having trouble with that reading thing I see......
and then there's the exchange where Harper flat out lies:
Mansbridge Q: You also said, "We owe it to future generations, we as Canada. When you’re linking climate change to greenhouse gas emissions, we owe it to future generations to do whatever we can to address this world problem. We should make a substantial contribution to confronting this challenge. Talking the talk doesn’t work anymore. It’s time to walk the walk." Have we done any of those things?
Harper A: Yeah. Look, for the first time in history, this country actually has GHD emissions that have been falling.
Mansbridge Q: Will we make our targets of 2020?
Harper A: We’ve got more work to do but our emissions are falling.
Mansbridge Q: Most people think we can’t make those targets.
Harper A: You know, previous government had, anybody can go around talking about targets. What’s the actual results. Ours have been going down.
Harper says... repeatedly says, Canada's emission are going down. Environment Canada begs to differ: outside of the emissions drop associated with the recession that all countries experienced, Canada's emissions have now picked back up and are projected to increase:Harper A: Yeah. Look, for the first time in history, this country actually has GHD emissions that have been falling.
Mansbridge Q: Will we make our targets of 2020?
Harper A: We’ve got more work to do but our emissions are falling.
Mansbridge Q: Most people think we can’t make those targets.
Harper A: You know, previous government had, anybody can go around talking about targets. What’s the actual results. Ours have been going down.
Harper says... repeatedly says, Canada's emission are going down. Per her Fall 2014 audit, Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Julie Gelfand, begs to differ: (per PressProgress):
- The government has no specific plan to meet its greenhouse gas emission reduction target -- meaning that Canada won't come close to meeting its Copenhagen Accord target to cut emissions to 17% below 2005 level by 2020; this watered down target was established in 2009 after the government withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol.
- Eight years ago, the government promised to introduce regulations to limit emissions from the oil and gas sector, the fastest growing emitter, but has yet to do so (although apparently draft regulations exist but have not yet been released to the public). This means that by 2020, greenhouse gas production in the sector is estimated to be 27 megatonnes higher than it was in 2012. In other words, the government's touted "sector-by-sector" approach has been a failure.
- The federal government doesn't know what Environment Canada's monitoring role will be after March 2015 under the Canada-Alberta Joint Oil Sands Monitoring program.
Evan Solomon interviewing Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Julie Gelfand versus Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, Colin Carrie..... Carrie because, per norm, Harper Conservatives can't trust the actual Minister of the Environment, Leona Aglukkaq, in talking with the media!
Who is Spinning the Facts?
and then there's the exchange where Harper flat out lies:Mansbridge Q: You also said, "We owe it to future generations, we as Canada. When you’re linking climate change to greenhouse gas emissions, we owe it to future generations to do whatever we can to address this world problem. We should make a substantial contribution to confronting this challenge. Talking the talk doesn’t work anymore. It’s time to walk the walk." Have we done any of those things?Harper says... repeatedly says, Canada's emission are going down. Environment Canada begs to differ: outside of the emissions drop associated with the recession that all countries experienced, Canada's emissions have now picked back up and are projected to increase:
Harper A: Yeah. Look, for the first time in history, this country actually has GHD emissions that have been falling.
Mansbridge Q: Will we make our targets of 2020?
Harper A: We’ve got more work to do but our emissions are falling.
Mansbridge Q: Most people think we can’t make those targets.
Harper A: You know, previous government had, anybody can go around talking about targets. What’s the actual results. Ours have been going down.
Harper says... repeatedly says, Canada's emission are going down. Per her Fall 2014 audit, Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Julie Gelfand, begs to differ: (per PressProgress):
- The government has no specific plan to meet its greenhouse gas emission reduction target -- meaning that Canada won't come close to meeting its Copenhagen Accord target to cut emissions to 17% below 2005 level by 2020; this watered down target was established in 2009 after the government withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol.
- Eight years ago, the government promised to introduce regulations to limit emissions from the oil and gas sector, the fastest growing emitter, but has yet to do so (although apparently draft regulations exist but have not yet been released to the public). This means that by 2020, greenhouse gas production in the sector is estimated to be 27 megatonnes higher than it was in 2012. In other words, the government's touted "sector-by-sector" approach has been a failure.
- The federal government doesn't know what Environment Canada's monitoring role will be after March 2015 under the Canada-Alberta Joint Oil Sands Monitoring program.
Evan Solomon interviewing Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Julie Gelfand versus Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, Colin Carrie..... Carrie because, per norm, Harper Conservatives can't trust the actual Minister of the Environment, Leona Aglukkaq, in talking with the media!
Who is Spinning the Facts?
STILL having trouble with that Reading Comprehension thing, aren't you?
Oh, and BTW, it is 2014........if you look at the graph you so conveniently provided......emissions are falling.
Now, pay attention, read very slowly......then maybe you have a prayer.....
"Yeah. Look, for the first time in history, this country actually has GHD emissions that have been falling."
That is absolutely true. They may not continue falling, but Harper spoke the truth.
You know, you should really get someone to explain these complicated things like tense, the English language, the meaning of words.......you would be a lot less apt to make a fool of yourself.
You see, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, as I understand that you are handicapped in these areas.........if you were actually competent, I would have had to reply with a heading something like this:
Waldo flat out lies:
Last edited:
Colpy, are you a graph eyeballer? :mrgreen: Are you basing all your blowhardy blustering bravado on your eyeball interpretation of that graph? For what it's worth (which is nothing), I've added you an eyeballing visual aid to that graphic, as below:
of course, Colpy, you presuming upon "absolute by eyeball" is stooopid! When I stated Harper flat out lied that was based on the purposeful refusal of his government to release 2013 GHG emission levels. We're now days away from 2015 and the National GHG Inventory Report for 2013 still has not been released (following tradition, this report would have been released in early summer 2014)... equally, all manner of related 2013 data associated with that report can't yet be found on either the NRCAN or StatsCan websites... as is normally the case. Media has covered the absence of this report on several fronts; equally, questions about this missing data/report have been asked within Parliament. Harper is certainly aware of this coverage/questioning concerning the absence of this 2013 emissions data.
where's the 2013 data, where the 2013 report, hey Colpy? Notwithstanding Colpy, Harper has repeatedly been taking credit for provincial initiatives; the relative emission reduction contributions of the provinces versus the federal government is heavily skewed toward the reductions provinces have been making... this somewhat aligns with your own earlier acknowledgement that Harper has been missing in action concerning a national energy strategy! I'll quote your own words for accuracy, if you'd like.
now Colpy, where's the 2013 data, where the 2013 report? Well Colpy, speculation has it that the data/report is being held back because Canada (B.C. and federal levels) got "caught" inaccurately estimating "fugitive emissions" from oil/gas... per Environment Canada: "Fugitive emissions are defined as uncontrolled releases of gases from industrial activities, other than releases that are Venting Emissions or Flaring Emissions"
- per Climate Action Tracker updates (a collaborative initiative of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Climate Analytics, and Ecofys):
so ya Colpy... Harper is well aware of this issue... is well aware his government departments have not released the long overdue 2013 data/report on GHG emissions. So ya Colpy... Harper flat out lies: - Canada’s reported fugitive emissions could be substantially underestimated according to latest scientific findings.This could increase the emissions gap by 31-207 MtCO2 eq/a in 2020 – 5-35% of their 1990 emissions.
- In June 2012, the Province of British Columbia (B.C.) released its ‘Greenhouse Gas Report 2010’ with a detailed analysis of current sectoral emissions levels and trends. In the recent inventory report, methane fugitive emissions from oil and natural gas are estimated at 2.2 MtCO2eq for 2010, which represents a share of 0.45% of total gas production. Recent studies have reported that fugitive emissions from natural gas from the point of extraction to final destination lie within the range of 2 to 9% of total production (Tollefson, 2013, Alvarez et al, 2012, Pétron et al, 2012).
B.C.’s total gas production in 2010 was 35 billion m3, so that, according to recent findings on the share of fugitive emissions, somewhere between 9-44 MtCO2eq of methane was released. Numbers reported in the B.C. inventory report are below even the low end of this range, pointing to an inadequate accounting methodology. More importantly, this suggests that current GHG emissions in British Columbia are 16-70% above the levels currently reported.
- A close look at fugitive emissions at the national level reveals that Canada’s national methodological approach may also be inadequate. Given the national production of approximately 189 billion m3 of natural gas in 2011, the expected amount of methane released into the atmosphere should lie within 52 and 236 MtCO2eq according to the recent findings. The reported amount of fugitive natural gas emissions is, however, 24 MtCO2eq, less than 50% of the low-end of the range
B.C.’s total gas production in 2010 was 35 billion m3, so that, according to recent findings on the share of fugitive emissions, somewhere between 9-44 MtCO2eq of methane was released. Numbers reported in the B.C. inventory report are below even the low end of this range, pointing to an inadequate accounting methodology. More importantly, this suggests that current GHG emissions in British Columbia are 16-70% above the levels currently reported.
- A close look at fugitive emissions at the national level reveals that Canada’s national methodological approach may also be inadequate. Given the national production of approximately 189 billion m3 of natural gas in 2011, the expected amount of methane released into the atmosphere should lie within 52 and 236 MtCO2eq according to the recent findings. The reported amount of fugitive natural gas emissions is, however, 24 MtCO2eq, less than 50% of the low-end of the range
(Colpy... you sure you wanna take on the big dog here? :mrgreen
Colpy, are you a graph eyeballer? :mrgreen: Are you basing all your blowhardy blustering bravado on your eyeball interpretation of that graph? For what it's worth (which is nothing), I've added you an eyeballing visual aid to that graphic, as below:
of course, Colpy, you presuming upon "absolute by eyeball" is stooopid! When I stated Harper flat out lied that was based on the purposeful refusal of his government to release 2013 GHG emission levels. We're now days away from 2015 and the National GHG Inventory Report for 2013 still has not been released (following tradition, this report would have been released in early summer 2014)... equally, all manner of related 2013 data associated with that report can't yet be found on either the NRCAN or StatsCan websites... as is normally the case. Media has covered the absence of this report on several fronts; equally, questions about this missing data/report have been asked within Parliament. Harper is certainly aware of this coverage/questioning concerning the absence of this 2013 emissions data.
where's the 2013 data, where the 2013 report, hey Colpy? Notwithstanding Colpy, Harper has repeatedly been taking credit for provincial initiatives; the relative emission reduction contributions of the provinces versus the federal government is heavily skewed toward the reductions provinces have been making... this somewhat aligns with your own earlier acknowledgement that Harper has been missing in action concerning a national energy strategy! I'll quote your own words for accuracy, if you'd like.
now Colpy, where's the 2013 data, where the 2013 report? Well Colpy, speculation has it that the data/report is being held back because Canada (B.C. and federal levels) got "caught" inaccurately estimating "fugitive emissions" from oil/gas... per Environment Canada: "Fugitive emissions are defined as uncontrolled releases of gases from industrial activities, other than releases that are Venting Emissions or Flaring Emissions"- per Climate Action Tracker updates (a collaborative initiative of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Climate Analytics, and Ecofys):so ya Colpy... Harper is well aware of this issue... is well aware his government departments have not released the long overdue 2013 data/report on GHG emissions. So ya Colpy... Harper flat out lies:- Canada’s reported fugitive emissions could be substantially underestimated according to latest scientific findings.This could increase the emissions gap by 31-207 MtCO2 eq/a in 2020 – 5-35% of their 1990 emissions.- In June 2012, the Province of British Columbia (B.C.) released its ‘Greenhouse Gas Report 2010’ with a detailed analysis of current sectoral emissions levels and trends. In the recent inventory report, methane fugitive emissions from oil and natural gas are estimated at 2.2 MtCO2eq for 2010, which represents a share of 0.45% of total gas production. Recent studies have reported that fugitive emissions from natural gas from the point of extraction to final destination lie within the range of 2 to 9% of total production (Tollefson, 2013, Alvarez et al, 2012, Pétron et al, 2012).
B.C.’s total gas production in 2010 was 35 billion m3, so that, according to recent findings on the share of fugitive emissions, somewhere between 9-44 MtCO2eq of methane was released. Numbers reported in the B.C. inventory report are below even the low end of this range, pointing to an inadequate accounting methodology. More importantly, this suggests that current GHG emissions in British Columbia are 16-70% above the levels currently reported.
- A close look at fugitive emissions at the national level reveals that Canada’s national methodological approach may also be inadequate. Given the national production of approximately 189 billion m3 of natural gas in 2011, the expected amount of methane released into the atmosphere should lie within 52 and 236 MtCO2eq according to the recent findings. The reported amount of fugitive natural gas emissions is, however, 24 MtCO2eq, less than 50% of the low-end of the range
(Colpy... you sure you wanna take on the big dog here? :mrgreen
Unlike Colpy, I will not say you are lying, I will call it being purposely misleading. You have stated that there are no new hard numbers. No report has been released. Therefore any numbers anyone else is reporting, any graphs drawn, are all speculation. They are not hard facts. The same with the BC article you quoted. It is full of should and suggests. Again, it is all speculation. Harpers statement that levels HAVE been falling is completely correct at this time. When the new report is finally released, and if it shows levels are climbing, then Harper will not be able to make that statement any more. Until that time, his statement is accurate and any and all bullshyte like the above is pure speculation.
so even though:
- there's a known problem with how Canada has been under-reporting it's fugitive emissions,
- the Harper government refuses to release the 2013 emission figures,
- the Harper government refuses to provide a reason on why it is delaying the release of the 2013 emission figures,
- you speak to "no new hard numbers" released... you acknowledge it
I'm the one misleading here? Purposely misleading in spite of the comprehensive references I've provided in regards fugitive emissions. Me? In April of 2014, the Harper government released the following report (as available on the UNFCCC website): Canada’s Sixth National Report on Climate Change 2014 ... even though it's released in 'mid 2014' it only includes data references to 2011, as this following graphic details: after the drop in emissions that all countries experienced in association with the recession, one could suggest there has been a "stable" leveling. And yet you suggest I'm misleading... purposely misleading? - the Harper government refuses to release the 2013 emission figures,
- the Harper government refuses to provide a reason on why it is delaying the release of the 2013 emission figures,
- you speak to "no new hard numbers" released... you acknowledge it
What figures are you relying upon to so ConBot-like, be willing to simply accept Harper's repeated statements that Canada's emissions have been falling? When you see the relative emissions stability in those recent years (in the above graphic) and compare that to the fugitive emissions reference I provided, you should appreciate just how significant that fugitive emission under-reporting is... even without speaking to the B.C. provincial under-reporting, just at the federal level, again:
- A close look at fugitive emissions at the national level reveals that Canada’s national methodological approach may also be inadequate. Given the national production of approximately 189 billion m3 of natural gas in 2011, the expected amount of methane released into the atmosphere should lie within 52 and 236 MtCO2eq according to the recent findings. The reported amount of fugitive natural gas emissions is, however, 24 MtCO2eq, less than 50% of the low-end of the range
Last edited:
Colpy, are you a graph eyeballer? :mrgreen: Are you basing all your blowhardy blustering bravado on your eyeball interpretation of that graph? For what it's worth (which is nothing), I've added you an eyeballing visual aid to that graphic, as below:
of course, Colpy, you presuming upon "absolute by eyeball" is stooopid! When I stated Harper flat out lied that was based on the purposeful refusal of his government to release 2013 GHG emission levels. We're now days away from 2015 and the National GHG Inventory Report for 2013 still has not been released (following tradition, this report would have been released in early summer 2014)... equally, all manner of related 2013 data associated with that report can't yet be found on either the NRCAN or StatsCan websites... as is normally the case. Media has covered the absence of this report on several fronts; equally, questions about this missing data/report have been asked within Parliament. Harper is certainly aware of this coverage/questioning concerning the absence of this 2013 emissions data.
where's the 2013 data, where the 2013 report, hey Colpy? Notwithstanding Colpy, Harper has repeatedly been taking credit for provincial initiatives; the relative emission reduction contributions of the provinces versus the federal government is heavily skewed toward the reductions provinces have been making... this somewhat aligns with your own earlier acknowledgement that Harper has been missing in action concerning a national energy strategy! I'll quote your own words for accuracy, if you'd like.
now Colpy, where's the 2013 data, where the 2013 report? Well Colpy, speculation has it that the data/report is being held back because Canada (B.C. and federal levels) got "caught" inaccurately estimating "fugitive emissions" from oil/gas... per Environment Canada: "Fugitive emissions are defined as uncontrolled releases of gases from industrial activities, other than releases that are Venting Emissions or Flaring Emissions"- per Climate Action Tracker updates (a collaborative initiative of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Climate Analytics, and Ecofys):so ya Colpy... Harper is well aware of this issue... is well aware his government departments have not released the long overdue 2013 data/report on GHG emissions. So ya Colpy... Harper flat out lies:- Canada’s reported fugitive emissions could be substantially underestimated according to latest scientific findings.This could increase the emissions gap by 31-207 MtCO2 eq/a in 2020 – 5-35% of their 1990 emissions.- In June 2012, the Province of British Columbia (B.C.) released its ‘Greenhouse Gas Report 2010’ with a detailed analysis of current sectoral emissions levels and trends. In the recent inventory report, methane fugitive emissions from oil and natural gas are estimated at 2.2 MtCO2eq for 2010, which represents a share of 0.45% of total gas production. Recent studies have reported that fugitive emissions from natural gas from the point of extraction to final destination lie within the range of 2 to 9% of total production (Tollefson, 2013, Alvarez et al, 2012, Pétron et al, 2012).
B.C.’s total gas production in 2010 was 35 billion m3, so that, according to recent findings on the share of fugitive emissions, somewhere between 9-44 MtCO2eq of methane was released. Numbers reported in the B.C. inventory report are below even the low end of this range, pointing to an inadequate accounting methodology. More importantly, this suggests that current GHG emissions in British Columbia are 16-70% above the levels currently reported.
- A close look at fugitive emissions at the national level reveals that Canada’s national methodological approach may also be inadequate. Given the national production of approximately 189 billion m3 of natural gas in 2011, the expected amount of methane released into the atmosphere should lie within 52 and 236 MtCO2eq according to the recent findings. The reported amount of fugitive natural gas emissions is, however, 24 MtCO2eq, less than 50% of the low-end of the range
(Colpy... you sure you wanna take on the big dog here? :mrgreen
You're the big dog??? lol
Really. Ahh...not having the report is not an indicator of his truthfulness.
If you want to accuse someone of lying, you need to be able to show that is true.
You have so far failed miserably in that attempt.
Better bring out some bigger dogs, this one just got spanked with a rolled-up newspaper
...on as PM for FOUR MORE YEARS!!
yabut Colpy... you accused me of lying... what's the basis for your accusation?
yabut Colpy... you accept the repeated statements from your boy Harper that "Canada's emissions have been falling... what's the basis for your acceptance of Harper's statements?
