Vote Conservative to avoid Liberal “Cap & Trade” carbon tax

The Liberal Party of Canada leader, Michael Ignatieff and former PMs Jean Chretien and Paul Martin were out campaigning this weekend.  Same old, same old. Just seeing them reminds Canadians of Chretien’s dithering in the lead up to the 1995 Quebec referendum.

The “Yes vote” came in at 49.44% while the “No vote” was 50.56%. Winning with just over a half of a percentage point and Ignatieff has the gall to now say Canadians have nothing to fear from the separatists!!  

Plus, let’s not forget the Liberal promises in 1993 to cancel the GST as soon as they were elected. Remember the “we will axe the tax” ads. Plus, Chretien said over and over that a Liberal government would bring new accountability to Ottawa.

Well, they certainly did, didn’t they? First they didn’t cancel the GST. Second, as we know now, they were the most corrupt government in Canadian history with the Sponsorship Scandal.

Now, fast forward to the 2011 federal campaign. On page 46 of Red Book # 2, it clearly states that if elected, by hook or by crook, the Liberals would implement a “Cap and Trade” system — the Greenshift and a carbon tax by another name. Can you say another tax rip off in the making — particularly given the extent the theory of man caused global warming has been debunked!

Yet, do we hear Liberals defend the science or explain how their system would work and what it would cost the economy and people? No, just as with the signing of the Kyoto Accord, they simply try to change the subject. In this instance, the former PMs are out campaigning trying to change the subject to health care.

Once again, dithering and sneaky.  To suggest that, as Finance Minister, Paul Martin didn’t reduce health care transfers to the provinces is an outright fabrication and he has to know it. Once again, its Chretien and Martin’s: “Ah shucks, don’t worry, be happy!”  

Well, let’s not let the subject change and remember their history — that Liberals promise one thing during an election campaign and deliver quite another afterwards.  Think I am exaggerating? Not a chance.

As Lorrie Goldstein says in yesterdays Toronto Sun, the LPOC’s “Cap and Trade” proposal is so reckless, it could bankrupt the oil industries in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland/Labrador, as well as the car manufacturing business in Ontario. Meaning, it could undermine how well the economy has done under the Conservatives.

How well have the Conservatives done? Check out what a majority Conservative government can do for the country, as well as what the Harper government accomplished while in government.

Put succinctly, under the Harper Conservatives, they sure weren’t perfect. No government is because they are made up of human beings. But, the country saw economic gains over six quarters and 500,000 new jobs created.

Obviously then, much is at stake in this election. To the undecided or those who have voted Liberal their entire lives, on May 2nd vote for truth, stability and continued economic growth by voting for your local Conservative candidate in the hopes there will be enough seats won to form a Conservative majority government.

5 thoughts on “Vote Conservative to avoid Liberal “Cap & Trade” carbon tax

  1. I am puzzled why this proposal has not received more discussion in the campaign. The Green Energy Shift was pretty thoroughly rejected in the 2008 election, not least by Iggy himself.Carbon trading programs have not worked anywhere they have been set up. The Chicago exchange for carbon trading folded last year. Such climate change legislation is DOA in the US Senate. How do Liberals suppose Canada could implement a plan independently?
    I suspect they haven’t thought it through, anymore than they did for Kyoto.
    Green Energy schemes have unintended consequences, as any Ontario resident can attest to. I think the Liberals are very vulnerable on this idea, especially in Ontario.


  2. Maybe because this is still hanging around:

    I played devil’s advocate with this on BLY yesterday and all I got was that Baird and Kent had declared Cap and Trade was dead and the impression that what was I doing bringing this up. Sorry, this policy is either still around and NOT DEAD, or the Cons better make it so, publicly. They better, because my vote is hanging on it!

    Why page 46 of the Red Book is not front and center and used as a hammer to get the needed votes in Ontario for a majority, where they need them (who are experiencing McGuinty’s Green Dream)is beyond me.

    The silence is deafening from the Cons on this, so they better get moving on it! If Cap and Trade is dead then prove it.

    Check out page 14 of the article:

    “………..In addition, the need for sufficient liquidity in the emission trading market was considered in the design of the compliance mechanisms. A flourishing emissions trading system will help to keep the overall cost of emissions down, both for industry and the economy as a whole.”

    That sounds like Capa and Trade to me and unless the Cons recind this policy, publicly, they don’t get my vote! I stay home!

    Liberal or Conservative or Coalition government doesn’t make any difference to this voter – they’re all the same on this subject.


  3. jt — That document is old hat. Once on the Internet it stays there. There are lots of documents like that. The public service loves to upset people like you. I don’t have time to dig up sources but I remember all this when I was doing the accomplishment list. As I recall, Jim Prentice resigned shortly after Baird said it was dead and that any agreement would have to be on the basis of what the US did.

    Really, your vote depends on it? And, the choices are?

    My advice is never ever vote on the basis of a single issue because, like faith-based funding in Ontario, you will cut off your nose to spite your face.

    I seem to recall how angry you were about the income trust thing too or was that someone else?

    Look, even partisans need to hold the Conservatives’ feet to the fire. But, in this global marketplace, there is no way the whole topic of global warming can be ignored when the US slaps on tarrifs and penalties. It may not be caused my humans but it may still be a reality.

    Anyway, governments have to think both locally and globally for investment and job creation to be successful.

    But, hey, you know that already!

    Anyway, I’m not spending any more time on a document that isn’t current and as the public service would like you to believe. Meaning, as I said at the start of this comment, my bet is that there are hundreds of those kinds of documents on the web to make sure the Conservatives are held to a minority.


  4. Pingback: Smiling Jack the Economic Kneecapper | Blue Like You

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.