Ambrose dares opposition to force election on climate change

[tuvor]

OTTAWA — Environment Minister Rona Ambrose is daring opposition parties to bring down the minority Conservative government and fight an election campaign on the issue of climate change.

“I say, ‘Bring it on,’” Ambrose said Thursday in the House of Commons, responding to a question from the Bloc Quebecois. “Our government, in four months, is miles better than the 13-year Liberal record and the non-record of the Bloc.”

While the New Democrats have accused her of ducking her responsibilities and giving up on the international Kyoto protocol on climate change, Ambrose said her government is working on reducing greenhouse emissions.

“This government has never rejected Kyoto. We have never pulled out of Kyoto. We are working within the Kyoto protocol,” she said before the House rose for its summer break. “What we are doing is putting a reasonable, achievable, affordable domestic plan in place that will ensure that the mess that the Liberals made out of Kyoto over the last 13 years will be addressed and we will make a success out of our made-in-Canada plan.”

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=d067766d-40aa-4886-a939-aaefa36937de&k=73396

[ClusterFreak]

1. I think we can expect more of this kind of thing as well...

You know, "Oh yeah? Well, bring down the government! I dare ya!"

Kind of like a Canadian neo-con version of the old Robert Conrad commercials, where he dares people to knock the battery off his shoulder.

Governance through childish bullying.

[Canuckistanian]

2. I'd do it just to take that smug grin off her face

And what's this shit about Kyoto? Cancelling the Energuide program helps global warming... how again?

[enigmatic]

3. She's worthless

Pretty face, not much else.

[V. Kid]

5. As bad as it sounds...

...that's Harper's rationale for appointing her. He doesn't take the environment seriously, so why not get someone nice looking to explain the spin to the public while the serious ministers go about continuing the status quo.

[enigmatic]

6. yep

I work in her riding and got a chance to meet her; she's pretty much an empty shell.

[V. Kid]

4. You know she ought to be careful for saying bring it on...

...cause she just might get it. If we really did have another election, on climate change, the Cons would be in trouble. Granted, we're not because of this:

The New Democrats and the Bloc attempted to table a motion calling for Ambrose’s resignation in the Commons environment committee, earlier this week, but the Liberals blocked it from going through after the Conservatives threatened to make it a confidence vote that could trigger a fall election.

Which probably means, that even if the vote were to make it to the house, on a Private Members bill or something, that the Liberals would have enough people miss the vote, or enough people vote against it, to allow it to fail sort of like the way the Afghanistan mission was extended.

There was a really intresting report, that essentially said that:

A report released yesterday that shows how Canada could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 60 per cent by 2050, while developing a market for environmental expertise, should be must reading for Prime Minister Stephen Harper if he wants a "made-in-Canada" solution to climate change.

The report by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy says the keys to reaching that target are more efficient energy use and emitting less carbon in the production of energy. It proposes to do this with existing or emerging technology.

The report lists several means that would make it possible to achieve a 60-per-cent decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from current levels. The largest is energy efficiency and conservation. It would deploy most known measures. With housing, for instance, they include updated insulation, heating, cooling and lighting, and the movement of 71 per cent of Canadians by 2050 to apartments, condominiums or row-housing. These have higher densities, meaning less need for private vehicles.

So if Harper and crew want to sit back and fight this, and if the Liberals want to twist in the wind on this, fine. But the reality exists.

Here's a link to the London Free Press citing the report:

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Opinion/Editorials/2006/06/22/1646623.html

Now before anyone mentions it, I know full well that the Liberals are having a leadership convention. But if they as a collective group felt strongly enough about the enviroment, and felt that they'd do a better job defending it, they'd say to the Conservatives that they too are willing to force an election over it, even if Bill Grahame has to lead them. If you believe in something enough, you'll take the hard road to get there. Of course I doubt they do. There have been examples of party's fighting an election campaign and a leadership campaign at the same time. Of course they haven't always been pretty for the party in the short term, but with An Inconvenient Truth out in the theatres, and with this being a huge achillies heel for the current government, the Liberals ought not to be so bloody chicken. Besides I don't think the Conservatives would be willing to go to the polls, and as such the opposition parties would get what they want, Ambrose shuffled or resigned, and the government embaressed on a key issue. And if we did go to the polls, the three opposition parties would constantly drum beat about the enviroment and the Conservatives incomptence on it, and as such considering the way in which we would go to such an election, the enviroment would be the issue.

[IntravenousDemilo]

8. I for one would not be too upset at the prospect of a PM Bill Graham.

I mean, what would happen if by some stroke of luck the Liberals were to win a general election before their leadership convention?

[daleo]

7. I don't know if using Bushian language is smart (Bring it on). n/t