CDN Election 2019
- Thread starter Ocean Breeze
- Start date
So the liberal press is trying to deflect from Trudeau’s many faults . No one cares about that sh-t .
Which faggy photo??
They both look pretty gay to me..
I was thinking of the top, but I definitely see your point. The shit that he's conceited about raises another question!
NP View: Canada needs a Conservative government
nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/np-view-canada-needs-a-conservative-governmentThere was a telling moment on the campaign trail just days ago. Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau was asked if he had any regrets about his four years in power. Trudeau answered, in part, that Canadians “find ourselves more polarized, more divided in this election than in 2015. I wonder how, or if, I could have made sure we were pulling Canadians together?”
It was a revealing answer. Trudeau is certainly right that Canadians are divided today. He may indeed genuinely wonder if he could have done more to help. But his answer doesn’t contain a hint, not even the faintest glimmer, of any understanding that he himself shares some responsibility for the discord — not because of helpful things he could have done but didn’t, but because of the harmful things he and his party have done. Trudeau is a man much better able to apologize for the failures of those long dead than recognize where his own conduct has fallen short.
And he has fallen short. History tells us that Trudeau, elected in 2015 with a strong majority mandate and promising a sunnier kind of politics, should be facing an easy re-election campaign. The economy is, in general terms, good. The country is not beset by war or economic crises. In times like these, Canadians tend to stick with their leaders, yet Trudeau is fighting for his political survival.
Canadians have clearly tired of his brand of politics — all preening theatrics, all the time, even as embarrassing scandals and broken promises accumulate.
Canada deserves better, because better is, after all, always possible. Our democracy permits us the chance to choose a new leader when the current one falls short of even his own stated ideals, as Trudeau repeatedly has. This is one of those moments — and the choice is clear. Canadians should elect Andrew Scheer and a Conservative majority government.
Scheer needed some time to hit his stride on the campaign trail. He also has taken too long to answer some questions about his past positions, to his own disadvantage. But Scheer and the Conservatives are offering up a desperately needed change from the status quo. They are proposing a modest degree of fiscal restraint, bringing the federal budget back to balance in five years. They’re proposing a tax cut for the lowest income bracket and an aggressive effort to reduce red tape and regulatory burdens for businesses.
Their proposed national energy corridor, though short on details, offers Canadians a chance to finally break the logjams of delayed approvals that have hobbled our energy sector and strained the unity of our federation. The Conservative climate change plan rightly recognizes that Canada’s contribution to carbon emissions is but a tiny fraction of the global total, and that it is technology, not rhetoric, that will allow us to gradually reduce our reliance on fossil fuels while still enjoying a high standard of living.
Fundamentally, in stark contrast to the incumbent Liberals, the Conservatives recognize that sound fiscal management is an unavoidable precondition for growing an innovative and productive economy.
But what the Conservatives are offering most of all is a break with the selfish, often preposterous leadership Canadians have seen these past four years. Trudeau is a recognized talent at political branding and optics — his government has been a highly polished PR machine, and the man himself, as he recently admitted in rather awkward circumstances, has a weakness for costumes and pageantry. This doesn’t only include his personal dress, and an awful habit of donning blackface makeup, but also his political career — Trudeau’s Liberals have shown themselves to be absolutely shameless in their willingness to promise one thing while delivering another. And they don’t seem to realize that Canadians have noticed.
The repeated reversals are well known and need no thorough recounting here. But regardless of the specifics of any one proposal, the Liberals ought to have known how corrosive to public faith in our institutions their flagrant breaking of central planks of their election campaign would be. The same is true of his warring with the provinces, particularly Ontario and Alberta, despite his pledge for a more harmonious federation. And there are his pledges of reconciliation with Indigenous Canadians: When he wasn’t sarcastically thanking entirely justified Indigenous protesters from mercury-poisoned Grassy Narrows for their donation to the Liberal party as they were thrown out of an exclusive fundraising event, to much laughter from the assembled party elite, he was sacking his Indigenous justice minister and attorney general when she rightly refused to abuse her authority to cut a Liberal-friendly construction conglomerate a deal over their legal troubles. Trudeau explicitly promised a brief dip into deficits — to combat an economic slowdown that never really materialized — followed by a return to balance this year. In fact, the country is still in the red, and the Liberals have no realistic plan to balance in the medium term — and that’s assuming all goes well. In today’s tense geopolitical environment, that’s hardly a safe bet.
And speaking of geopolitics, has anyone asked the United States, Europe, Russia or China if “Canada’s back”? Has anyone asked the Kurds? Outside of the odd global soirée, Canada’s presence on the world stage, and influence even with key allies, is virtually nil.
Life is good in Canada. But we cannot accept as a given that it always will be. The world does not owe us our prosperity and security.
Our many blessings will be squandered without effective management and prudent, realistic plans, rooted in respect for free markets and a proper role of a limited government, to foster our prosperity and unity at home while confidently confronting challenges abroad.
The Conservatives and Andrew Scheer have a realistic plan to do this, grounded in an understanding of what governments can and should do.
Justin Trudeau, for his part, has his record — not that he’s dared run on it.
The choice is clear. Canada needs a Conservative government.
It was a revealing answer. Trudeau is certainly right that Canadians are divided today. He may indeed genuinely wonder if he could have done more to help. But his answer doesn’t contain a hint, not even the faintest glimmer, of any understanding that he himself shares some responsibility for the discord — not because of helpful things he could have done but didn’t, but because of the harmful things he and his party have done. Trudeau is a man much better able to apologize for the failures of those long dead than recognize where his own conduct has fallen short.
And he has fallen short. History tells us that Trudeau, elected in 2015 with a strong majority mandate and promising a sunnier kind of politics, should be facing an easy re-election campaign. The economy is, in general terms, good. The country is not beset by war or economic crises. In times like these, Canadians tend to stick with their leaders, yet Trudeau is fighting for his political survival.
Canadians have clearly tired of his brand of politics — all preening theatrics, all the time, even as embarrassing scandals and broken promises accumulate.
Canada deserves better, because better is, after all, always possible. Our democracy permits us the chance to choose a new leader when the current one falls short of even his own stated ideals, as Trudeau repeatedly has. This is one of those moments — and the choice is clear. Canadians should elect Andrew Scheer and a Conservative majority government.
Scheer needed some time to hit his stride on the campaign trail. He also has taken too long to answer some questions about his past positions, to his own disadvantage. But Scheer and the Conservatives are offering up a desperately needed change from the status quo. They are proposing a modest degree of fiscal restraint, bringing the federal budget back to balance in five years. They’re proposing a tax cut for the lowest income bracket and an aggressive effort to reduce red tape and regulatory burdens for businesses.
Their proposed national energy corridor, though short on details, offers Canadians a chance to finally break the logjams of delayed approvals that have hobbled our energy sector and strained the unity of our federation. The Conservative climate change plan rightly recognizes that Canada’s contribution to carbon emissions is but a tiny fraction of the global total, and that it is technology, not rhetoric, that will allow us to gradually reduce our reliance on fossil fuels while still enjoying a high standard of living.
Fundamentally, in stark contrast to the incumbent Liberals, the Conservatives recognize that sound fiscal management is an unavoidable precondition for growing an innovative and productive economy.
But what the Conservatives are offering most of all is a break with the selfish, often preposterous leadership Canadians have seen these past four years. Trudeau is a recognized talent at political branding and optics — his government has been a highly polished PR machine, and the man himself, as he recently admitted in rather awkward circumstances, has a weakness for costumes and pageantry. This doesn’t only include his personal dress, and an awful habit of donning blackface makeup, but also his political career — Trudeau’s Liberals have shown themselves to be absolutely shameless in their willingness to promise one thing while delivering another. And they don’t seem to realize that Canadians have noticed.
The repeated reversals are well known and need no thorough recounting here. But regardless of the specifics of any one proposal, the Liberals ought to have known how corrosive to public faith in our institutions their flagrant breaking of central planks of their election campaign would be. The same is true of his warring with the provinces, particularly Ontario and Alberta, despite his pledge for a more harmonious federation. And there are his pledges of reconciliation with Indigenous Canadians: When he wasn’t sarcastically thanking entirely justified Indigenous protesters from mercury-poisoned Grassy Narrows for their donation to the Liberal party as they were thrown out of an exclusive fundraising event, to much laughter from the assembled party elite, he was sacking his Indigenous justice minister and attorney general when she rightly refused to abuse her authority to cut a Liberal-friendly construction conglomerate a deal over their legal troubles. Trudeau explicitly promised a brief dip into deficits — to combat an economic slowdown that never really materialized — followed by a return to balance this year. In fact, the country is still in the red, and the Liberals have no realistic plan to balance in the medium term — and that’s assuming all goes well. In today’s tense geopolitical environment, that’s hardly a safe bet.
And speaking of geopolitics, has anyone asked the United States, Europe, Russia or China if “Canada’s back”? Has anyone asked the Kurds? Outside of the odd global soirée, Canada’s presence on the world stage, and influence even with key allies, is virtually nil.
Life is good in Canada. But we cannot accept as a given that it always will be. The world does not owe us our prosperity and security.
Our many blessings will be squandered without effective management and prudent, realistic plans, rooted in respect for free markets and a proper role of a limited government, to foster our prosperity and unity at home while confidently confronting challenges abroad.
The Conservatives and Andrew Scheer have a realistic plan to do this, grounded in an understanding of what governments can and should do.
Justin Trudeau, for his part, has his record — not that he’s dared run on it.
The choice is clear. Canada needs a Conservative government.
Justin is totally obsessed with HIS OWN view of his perceived self importance. Very vain little man!
Justin is completely obsessed with Stephen Harper, JLM.........I've come to believe that Mr Harper has taken up what space is left in the Pinocchio's head after all the bullshit stuffed in there by Geppetto - nothing else explains the fact that though not running in this election and not being the leader of our party, Mr Harper still plays an inordinately large role in the little potato's fantasy life.
Sad that.................and really really telling.
BREAKING NEWS!!!
The Conservatives Win a Majority!!
Snowflakes (like Cannuck) riot and go in melt down mode..
This election will be like Trump.. nobody took him serious, polls were wrong, now he is President..
Canadians are not stupid.. most of the Provinces are red.. the country will be RED Oct 21st.
TRUMP EFFECT CANADA 1
When Donald Trump was elected, only one of Canada‘s 10 provinces was conservative
Today - thanks to Donald Trump. Remember Blue is good in Canada. Canadians are all in. In October of 2019, Canada flips back to a conservative Prime Minister. Patriots in the US showed us the way. Most important – you prayed for us. Please continue to do so
WE LIVE IN HOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The future of generations yet unborn in this country ................................
DEPEND on what you say being RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our idiot Boy is the point man for the LIE-beral party...........
but THE PARTY MADE HIM WHAT HE IS...............
and gave him his influence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The LIE-beral party is a DANGER TO CANADA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And LIE-berals will REMAIN A DANGER even after the idiot Boy is GONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kinda like the Trumpite's with Hillary. You know they have no vision for the future when all they can talk about is the past
Well gosh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What do you expect Our idiot Boy to talk about anyway??????????
He certainly CANNOT BOAST about his RECORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Every time he tells us about our booming economy he gets LAUGHED AT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And then he gets asked what will happen to our economy after we do the FACE PLANT ............................
straight into the DEBT WALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the idiot Boy DOES NOT KNOW what will happen because he is so ILL INFORMED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
About everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Remember - Our idiot Boy DOES NOT read newspapers and magazines and thus........................
he is as CLUELESS about reality as Greta - the Swedish Linda Blair!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our idiot Boy RELIES on others to tell him when important stuff occurs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The idiot Boy is OUT OF THE LOOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And grasping at straws and has FORGOTTEN he wants to ban them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Unlikely new pipelines will be built under Bill C-69, star Liberal candidate says, contradicting party claims
OTTAWA — A star Liberal candidate and environmentalist says it is unlikely any new pipelines will be built under the government’s new project assessment legislation, contradicting a long-held claim by Ottawa that the new regime would not hinder expansion plans put forward by the oil and gas industry.
In an interview with the National Post, Montreal candidate Steven Guilbeault said changes under the controversial Bill C-69, which expanded the review process for major projects like hydro dams and nuclear plants, would likely bar any major new pipelines from being built due to their contribution to higher greenhouse gas emissions.
Bill C-69, dubbed the “no more pipelines bill” by pro-industry groups, calls on regulators to consider the upstream emissions of a project in the context of Canada’s plan to meet its 2030 Paris targets. The new Impact Assessment Act (IAA) became law in June.
“I think that now that we have a real evaluation and impact assessment for projects, we will come to the conclusion that many of these projects are incompatible with the goals we have for 2030,” Guilbeault said.
The comments from Guilbeault, a candidate in the Montreal riding of Laurier—Sainte-Marie, runs counter to a claim by the Liberal government that the bill would both account for national greenhouse gas emissions while also allowing new oil expansion projects to move ahead. It is part of a broader position taken by Liberal leader Justin Trudeau since 2015, which espouses that environmental stewardship need not run counter to economic priorities in the fossil fuel industry.
Guilbeault was recruited to the Liberal Party by Gerald Butts, the former principal secretary to Trudeau, and is among a number of new candidates who could have sway within a Liberal government should they win Monday’s election.
Guilbeault, who cofounded Montreal advocacy group Équiterre, is among the most prominent environmental advocates in Canada, and has a long history of civil disobedience that promotes action on climate change.
Bill C-69 created an uproar in oil-dependent provinces, namely Alberta, who viewed the legislation as a direct attack on their leading industry. In a months-long fight against the bill, a number of Conservative and Independent senators sought to put forward more than 100 industry-friendly amendments, including changes that would eliminate the need for regulators to consider the climate change impacts of a project.
Environment Minister Catherine McKenna ultimately rejected the amendments.
The legislation essentially widens the scope of project reviews, taking into consideration greenhouse gas emissions tied to projects, allowing more people to partake in public hearings, and creating an “early stage” review process to help pinpoint opposition to proposed developments.
Environmental groups, for their part, argue that the bill does not go far enough to restrict GHG-intensive projects. Many were critical of a decision by Ottawa to not subject certain oilsands projects to federal environmental assessments.
Some industry groups including the Mining Association of Canada essentially supported the bill, proposing only a few amendments.
But frustrations have been growing in Alberta and other provinces over the oil industry’s failure over the last decade to build major pipelines like Trans Mountain or Northern Gateway, which has in turn depressed prices for Canadian crude.
The bill, along with Bill C-48, which put into legislation a ban on oil tankers docking on the northern half of British Columbia’s coast, have helped inflame deep-lying resentments in the province. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney launched his promised legal challenge against the bill in September, saying it was “about respect for the fundamental law of the land, the constitution of Canada.”
Conservative leader Andrew Scheer has said he would repeal Bill C-69 if his government wins power this election.
A spokesperson for Guilbeault’s campaign did not directly clarify his comments, but only said in a written response that regulatory changes during the Harper government “eroded public trust” in the review process for major projects.
Guilbeault has received plenty of media attention over the last year after he announced he would run for the Liberals, which some viewed as a contradiction after Ottawa purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline in 2018, causing dismay in the environmental community.
nationalpost.com/news/unlikely-new-pipelines-will-be-built-under-bill-c-69-star-liberal-candidate-says-contradicting-party-claims?video_autoplay=true
OTTAWA — A star Liberal candidate and environmentalist says it is unlikely any new pipelines will be built under the government’s new project assessment legislation, contradicting a long-held claim by Ottawa that the new regime would not hinder expansion plans put forward by the oil and gas industry.
In an interview with the National Post, Montreal candidate Steven Guilbeault said changes under the controversial Bill C-69, which expanded the review process for major projects like hydro dams and nuclear plants, would likely bar any major new pipelines from being built due to their contribution to higher greenhouse gas emissions.
Bill C-69, dubbed the “no more pipelines bill” by pro-industry groups, calls on regulators to consider the upstream emissions of a project in the context of Canada’s plan to meet its 2030 Paris targets. The new Impact Assessment Act (IAA) became law in June.
“I think that now that we have a real evaluation and impact assessment for projects, we will come to the conclusion that many of these projects are incompatible with the goals we have for 2030,” Guilbeault said.
The comments from Guilbeault, a candidate in the Montreal riding of Laurier—Sainte-Marie, runs counter to a claim by the Liberal government that the bill would both account for national greenhouse gas emissions while also allowing new oil expansion projects to move ahead. It is part of a broader position taken by Liberal leader Justin Trudeau since 2015, which espouses that environmental stewardship need not run counter to economic priorities in the fossil fuel industry.
Guilbeault was recruited to the Liberal Party by Gerald Butts, the former principal secretary to Trudeau, and is among a number of new candidates who could have sway within a Liberal government should they win Monday’s election.
Guilbeault, who cofounded Montreal advocacy group Équiterre, is among the most prominent environmental advocates in Canada, and has a long history of civil disobedience that promotes action on climate change.
Bill C-69 created an uproar in oil-dependent provinces, namely Alberta, who viewed the legislation as a direct attack on their leading industry. In a months-long fight against the bill, a number of Conservative and Independent senators sought to put forward more than 100 industry-friendly amendments, including changes that would eliminate the need for regulators to consider the climate change impacts of a project.
Environment Minister Catherine McKenna ultimately rejected the amendments.
The legislation essentially widens the scope of project reviews, taking into consideration greenhouse gas emissions tied to projects, allowing more people to partake in public hearings, and creating an “early stage” review process to help pinpoint opposition to proposed developments.
Environmental groups, for their part, argue that the bill does not go far enough to restrict GHG-intensive projects. Many were critical of a decision by Ottawa to not subject certain oilsands projects to federal environmental assessments.
Some industry groups including the Mining Association of Canada essentially supported the bill, proposing only a few amendments.
But frustrations have been growing in Alberta and other provinces over the oil industry’s failure over the last decade to build major pipelines like Trans Mountain or Northern Gateway, which has in turn depressed prices for Canadian crude.
The bill, along with Bill C-48, which put into legislation a ban on oil tankers docking on the northern half of British Columbia’s coast, have helped inflame deep-lying resentments in the province. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney launched his promised legal challenge against the bill in September, saying it was “about respect for the fundamental law of the land, the constitution of Canada.”
Conservative leader Andrew Scheer has said he would repeal Bill C-69 if his government wins power this election.
A spokesperson for Guilbeault’s campaign did not directly clarify his comments, but only said in a written response that regulatory changes during the Harper government “eroded public trust” in the review process for major projects.
Guilbeault has received plenty of media attention over the last year after he announced he would run for the Liberals, which some viewed as a contradiction after Ottawa purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline in 2018, causing dismay in the environmental community.
nationalpost.com/news/unlikely-new-pipelines-will-be-built-under-bill-c-69-star-liberal-candidate-says-contradicting-party-claims?video_autoplay=true
Evolution of the green Tories: Conservatives in B.C. fight to convince voters they are eco-friendly
PARKSVILLE — Like most candidates running for office on Vancouver Island, Byron Horner spends a lot of time talking about the environment. His campaign promises to put a tighter squeeze on heavy polluters, invest in offshore spill response, and implement a national recycling program.
Just one hitch: he’s a Conservative.
For some, the notion of an eco-friendly Tory might present an absurd paradox — especially here on the island, where environmentalism can seem more a religious devotion than simple political preference. But Horner’s riding of Courtenay—Alberni, which divides the island between north and south, overlaps with what has long been a Conservative stronghold.
Conservative MP James Lunney had represented the region for many years since 2004, part of a long list of right-leaning politicians that stretch back to the 80s. North of Courtenay—Alberni, Conservative candidate Shelley Downey is in the running to win the sprawling riding in the northern half of the island, which has long been a tight race between Conservatives and the NDP (the Liberals have not won a seat north of Victoria for decades).
“People here tend to be a little greener than the average Conservative member,” says Horner, who lives in the small city of Parksville along the eastern coast of the island.
Horner himself was executive producer of the Great Bear Rainforest documentary, narrated by Canadian movie star Ryan Reynolds, which sought to raise awareness about extinction threats in the highly sensitive habitat.
The region around Parksville, unlike the urbanized south, has a long history of industrial activity, particularly forestry. Labourers wearing Carhartt jackets drive heavy work trucks. Equipment rental yards and fish bait shops dot the town’s outer limits. A pub near the town’s main road goes by the name Rod & Gun.
“Locals know this, but there is a perception among others that the island is all Green, it’s la-la land, it’s the Left Coast — all of that kind of stuff,” Horner says from his campaign office, across the street from the Georgia Strait.
The campaign by Horner, who claims to be among the “next generation” of Conservatives who make the environment a priority, points to a growing divide within small-c conservative circles over whether the party needs to adopt more stringent policies as a way to win over younger, more eco-minded voters. The party’s opposition to carbon taxes — widely viewed as an inherently conservative policy — has already turned off many voters in the region.
Several Conservative candidates who spoke to the National Post acknowledge that running as a Conservative on Vancouver Island is tough business, particularly amid rising anxieties over climate change.
“Sometimes I get snickers at the door,” says Richard Caron, Conservative candidate in Victoria. He adds, however, that some residents take a more pragmatic view that involves “making sure the economy stays strong in conjunction with the environment.”
Gord Johns, the NDP incumbent in Courtenay—Alberni, scoffs at the notion of Conservative candidates running on environmentally conscious platforms. A majority government under Stephen Harper has left deep distrust of the party in the riding, he says.
“They were invisible when it came to the environment,” says Johns.
The previous Harper government slashed $100 million in funding to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in 2013, including to the Coast Guard, which helps protect against ecological mishaps. Some voters claim the Conservatives did little to clean up the many abandoned sea vessels moored around the island, which have created safety hazards and blocked fishing routes, straining the patience of locals.
Most of all, Conservative opponents say voters express concern over the party’s climate plan, which has been dismissed by some as not going far enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Johns notes the cuts to the Coast Guard, a failure to address GHG emissions, and the snubbing of First Nations as reasons for the distrust (Horner himself mentions cuts to the Coast Guard unprompted).
“People don’t have amnesia here, they’re being constantly reminded of the failure of the Conservatives to stand up for coastal British Columbians,” Johns says.
The Conservatives under leader Andrew Scheer have been staunchly opposed to the Liberal carbon tax, and have promised to repeal the policy on their first day in office, should they win the election (such a move would have no impact in B.C., where a provincial carbon tax has already been in place for years).
The party has long pushed back against policies that would rapidly reduce GHG emissions in Canada, arguing that other major polluters including the U.S., China, and India would continue to belch out the majority of the world’s emissions regardless. Even under Liberal leader Justin Trudeau’s economy-wide carbon tax, Canada is still set to miss its 2030 Paris targets by a sizeable margin.
Still, economists and environmentalists roundly lambasted the Conservative’s climate plan when it was released this summer. Mark Jaccard, a professor at Simon Fraser University, estimated that emissions under the Conservative plan would actually rise.
The plan involves a slight lowering of the threshold for heavy emitters who pay taxes on carbon emissions, a tax credit for energy friendly home retrofits, and a tax cut on incomes generated from clean energy technologies.
It also includes a $250-million fund that would invest $1 in clean technologies for every $4 invested by the private sector.
Conservatives say the fund would differ from the Liberal’s $600-million clean tech fund because it would be managed by the private sector, though few details of the fund are laid out in the plan.
Some conservationist-minded Conservatives claim that opposition parties have wrongly pigeon-holed the party as being anti-environment.
“In politics perception is everything, and the perception of Conservatives as people who don’t care about conservation is something that I don’t understand, and has frustrated me,” said Robert Sopuck, a long-time Conservative MP from Manitoba, who helped author the Conservative environment plan.
Sopuck sat on both the fisheries and environment committees during his time in office, and has won awards from a provincial wildlife federation for his conservation efforts. He is retiring from office this year.
He says that recent concerns over GHG emissions has overshadowed other, more tangible, ecological issues that are of more concern to voters: waning fish stocks, invasive species, rising extinction rates, wetlands losses and declining water quality.
“Climate change killed conservation,” he says. “Almost the entire suite of conservation issues in this country have been forgotten because all we talk about is CO2 emissions.”
Years of decline in the island’s forestry industry could help bolster Conservative candidates, who have taken a more explicitly industry-friendly position than their opponents. Downey, who is running in North Island—Powell River, said GHG emissions are important to her voters, but many are more interested in policies that don’t threaten industry of any kind.
“I’ve heard some people say they will vote Green because that would be the best way to look after the environment, but they’re looking at the issue one way, not at the whole picture,” she says.
Downey is running against NDP incumbent Rachel Blaney, who in 2015 became just the second NDP candidate to win in the riding since 1997.
For Horner and others, convincing outsiders of their environmental credibility is likely to prove an uphill battle. Horner goes as far as to distance the Tories from the former Harper government — a position that is unlikely to receive widespread support within the party.
“We have a leader who never served in the previous government’s Cabinet,” he says of Scheer.
Horner serves as president of Vancouver-based CopperLion Capital, a firm that oversees investments on behalf of Kyle Washington, son of American billionaire Dennis Washington, who owns stakes in Canadian assets including two diamond mines in the North and a barge logistics firm. He is a staunch supporter of the Conservative climate plan, but likens the need to promote a more environment-friendly message to a pragmatic business decision.
“Political parties are selling a product,” he says. “I’m a businessperson—if you don’t adapt to what the marketplace is wanting, your product is not going to sell and you’re going to close your doors,” Horner says.
“I think we’ve learned, and I think we’ve evolved as a party.”
nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/on-the-eco-friendly
PARKSVILLE — Like most candidates running for office on Vancouver Island, Byron Horner spends a lot of time talking about the environment. His campaign promises to put a tighter squeeze on heavy polluters, invest in offshore spill response, and implement a national recycling program.
Just one hitch: he’s a Conservative.
For some, the notion of an eco-friendly Tory might present an absurd paradox — especially here on the island, where environmentalism can seem more a religious devotion than simple political preference. But Horner’s riding of Courtenay—Alberni, which divides the island between north and south, overlaps with what has long been a Conservative stronghold.
Conservative MP James Lunney had represented the region for many years since 2004, part of a long list of right-leaning politicians that stretch back to the 80s. North of Courtenay—Alberni, Conservative candidate Shelley Downey is in the running to win the sprawling riding in the northern half of the island, which has long been a tight race between Conservatives and the NDP (the Liberals have not won a seat north of Victoria for decades).
“People here tend to be a little greener than the average Conservative member,” says Horner, who lives in the small city of Parksville along the eastern coast of the island.
Horner himself was executive producer of the Great Bear Rainforest documentary, narrated by Canadian movie star Ryan Reynolds, which sought to raise awareness about extinction threats in the highly sensitive habitat.
The region around Parksville, unlike the urbanized south, has a long history of industrial activity, particularly forestry. Labourers wearing Carhartt jackets drive heavy work trucks. Equipment rental yards and fish bait shops dot the town’s outer limits. A pub near the town’s main road goes by the name Rod & Gun.
“Locals know this, but there is a perception among others that the island is all Green, it’s la-la land, it’s the Left Coast — all of that kind of stuff,” Horner says from his campaign office, across the street from the Georgia Strait.
The campaign by Horner, who claims to be among the “next generation” of Conservatives who make the environment a priority, points to a growing divide within small-c conservative circles over whether the party needs to adopt more stringent policies as a way to win over younger, more eco-minded voters. The party’s opposition to carbon taxes — widely viewed as an inherently conservative policy — has already turned off many voters in the region.
Several Conservative candidates who spoke to the National Post acknowledge that running as a Conservative on Vancouver Island is tough business, particularly amid rising anxieties over climate change.
“Sometimes I get snickers at the door,” says Richard Caron, Conservative candidate in Victoria. He adds, however, that some residents take a more pragmatic view that involves “making sure the economy stays strong in conjunction with the environment.”
Gord Johns, the NDP incumbent in Courtenay—Alberni, scoffs at the notion of Conservative candidates running on environmentally conscious platforms. A majority government under Stephen Harper has left deep distrust of the party in the riding, he says.
“They were invisible when it came to the environment,” says Johns.
The previous Harper government slashed $100 million in funding to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in 2013, including to the Coast Guard, which helps protect against ecological mishaps. Some voters claim the Conservatives did little to clean up the many abandoned sea vessels moored around the island, which have created safety hazards and blocked fishing routes, straining the patience of locals.
Most of all, Conservative opponents say voters express concern over the party’s climate plan, which has been dismissed by some as not going far enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Johns notes the cuts to the Coast Guard, a failure to address GHG emissions, and the snubbing of First Nations as reasons for the distrust (Horner himself mentions cuts to the Coast Guard unprompted).
“People don’t have amnesia here, they’re being constantly reminded of the failure of the Conservatives to stand up for coastal British Columbians,” Johns says.
The Conservatives under leader Andrew Scheer have been staunchly opposed to the Liberal carbon tax, and have promised to repeal the policy on their first day in office, should they win the election (such a move would have no impact in B.C., where a provincial carbon tax has already been in place for years).
The party has long pushed back against policies that would rapidly reduce GHG emissions in Canada, arguing that other major polluters including the U.S., China, and India would continue to belch out the majority of the world’s emissions regardless. Even under Liberal leader Justin Trudeau’s economy-wide carbon tax, Canada is still set to miss its 2030 Paris targets by a sizeable margin.
Still, economists and environmentalists roundly lambasted the Conservative’s climate plan when it was released this summer. Mark Jaccard, a professor at Simon Fraser University, estimated that emissions under the Conservative plan would actually rise.
The plan involves a slight lowering of the threshold for heavy emitters who pay taxes on carbon emissions, a tax credit for energy friendly home retrofits, and a tax cut on incomes generated from clean energy technologies.
It also includes a $250-million fund that would invest $1 in clean technologies for every $4 invested by the private sector.
Conservatives say the fund would differ from the Liberal’s $600-million clean tech fund because it would be managed by the private sector, though few details of the fund are laid out in the plan.
Some conservationist-minded Conservatives claim that opposition parties have wrongly pigeon-holed the party as being anti-environment.
“In politics perception is everything, and the perception of Conservatives as people who don’t care about conservation is something that I don’t understand, and has frustrated me,” said Robert Sopuck, a long-time Conservative MP from Manitoba, who helped author the Conservative environment plan.
Sopuck sat on both the fisheries and environment committees during his time in office, and has won awards from a provincial wildlife federation for his conservation efforts. He is retiring from office this year.
He says that recent concerns over GHG emissions has overshadowed other, more tangible, ecological issues that are of more concern to voters: waning fish stocks, invasive species, rising extinction rates, wetlands losses and declining water quality.
“Climate change killed conservation,” he says. “Almost the entire suite of conservation issues in this country have been forgotten because all we talk about is CO2 emissions.”
Years of decline in the island’s forestry industry could help bolster Conservative candidates, who have taken a more explicitly industry-friendly position than their opponents. Downey, who is running in North Island—Powell River, said GHG emissions are important to her voters, but many are more interested in policies that don’t threaten industry of any kind.
“I’ve heard some people say they will vote Green because that would be the best way to look after the environment, but they’re looking at the issue one way, not at the whole picture,” she says.
Downey is running against NDP incumbent Rachel Blaney, who in 2015 became just the second NDP candidate to win in the riding since 1997.
For Horner and others, convincing outsiders of their environmental credibility is likely to prove an uphill battle. Horner goes as far as to distance the Tories from the former Harper government — a position that is unlikely to receive widespread support within the party.
“We have a leader who never served in the previous government’s Cabinet,” he says of Scheer.
Horner serves as president of Vancouver-based CopperLion Capital, a firm that oversees investments on behalf of Kyle Washington, son of American billionaire Dennis Washington, who owns stakes in Canadian assets including two diamond mines in the North and a barge logistics firm. He is a staunch supporter of the Conservative climate plan, but likens the need to promote a more environment-friendly message to a pragmatic business decision.
“Political parties are selling a product,” he says. “I’m a businessperson—if you don’t adapt to what the marketplace is wanting, your product is not going to sell and you’re going to close your doors,” Horner says.
“I think we’ve learned, and I think we’ve evolved as a party.”
nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/on-the-eco-friendly
Canada needs a Conservative government
https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/np-view-canada-needs-a-conservative-government
Yep.
https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/np-view-canada-needs-a-conservative-government
Yep.
We know this will rile up the Liberals but we know that Trump will work with Scheer to get things done. Just saying.
