Operation hard right turn
Now is the time.
Hard right turn for legislation in the HoC.
The libs want to distance themselves from the NDP and appear centrist.
They still however have a bevy of far left MP's in caucus that will rebel if Iggy tries it.
The budget is the time to push them.
Make the libs die by a thousand budget cuts.
Labels: Conservative majority
the party logo on government cheques
First point: this was just plain stupid. Though not on the level of Adscam, its where the narrative starts. So don't do this anymore okay. Show up, do the glad handing, cut the ribbons, pose for the photo-op....but please do not hand out the cheque with the party logo on it.
Second point:
This is for the PMO's office if you guys are doing a Google search on this subject. Changing the channel on this is very easy. Table a motion in the HoC to end the political subsidy. Right now the relations between the liberals, the NDP and the Bloc make a coalition agreement impossible, that means if the government goes down
there will be an election. That means whoever is last out of the gate saying how their party will vote gets the blame for an election. That means means the last guy will come out with some logic as to why their party will support the government, or alternatively scramble around trying to find some cover that they had no choice,
the problem of course is that if the vote is on stopping tax payer funding to political parties it makes the parties voting against such a measure look greedy. Which takes the air out of their current attack and puts the target on them for the duration of the campaign. Kind of hard to vote against such a measure when the liberals just spent the most of this week crying scandal over the party logo. Regardless, it provides an easy segue to the story that writes itself, and gives the pundit industry a boost as every one of them will have their mug on any panel anywhere to talk about a possible election.
The crux of it is that if this was tabled, Iggy will have a bitch of a time keeping caucus solidarity between the guys sharpening the knives pushing for an election (chreteinites), and the other faction that wants to avoid one to maintain some claim to fiscally responsible managers of the economy (martinites).
Like I said, changes the channel, and gives the media something intriging to report.
Other bits:
- The Noble committee has officially jumped the shark.
- Lizzie May is going to destroy the Green party, my quandry is figuring out if this is a bad thing or a good thing.
- Trying to muzzle Fox is a very bad idea, just bumps their numbers and makes it look like the other guys are in the tank for the big O
- Just a thought, if the networks are complaining about the cable companies airing their programming without paying for it, take them to small claims. After watching you guys trash conservatives for so long, asking for more public support (new taxes) is a bit rich.
- Iggy, the green shift didn't work last time, it won't work this time. The problem is that particular platform has been framed as the "liberals tax on everything", we don't intend on letting the voters forget that.
Labels: Conservative majority
Talking point on Foreign policy
I've mentioned in a previous post that that paragon of liberal propaganda the Toronto Star is less supportive of the current leader of the LPC than the party itself.
Case in point
The explanation may lie in who he is. His specialty is not domestic politics but foreign policy, on which he's on the wrong side of Canadians (having backed both the Afghan and Iraq wars, "coercive interrogation," excessive executive power, American imperialism, etc.).He is like John Kerry in 2004, unable to shed the burden of having backed George W. Bush. Given the clarity of Canadians on much of post-9/11 politics, Ignatieff is even less likely to win as Harper Lite than Kerry could as Bush Lite.Which brings me to the point, of what direction the parties have on foreign policy...and that niggling little problem I keep coming back to that the LPC still hasn't addressed.
The Conservative approach is that we need to keep our borders strong, and here is the crucial point, recognized internationally.
The NDP is the same boilerplate its always been, get out of (
insert international agreement here) and join the (
insert left wing cause here).The Bloc approach is too easy and reinforces a fact that they will never form a government. Whatever is in the interests of Quebec (going to have to do some work to burst that rhetorical bubble soon).
The liberals.....well unfortunately the liberals don't really have a specific policy or platform other than to say what a great guy Lester Pearson was. If you take the Toronto Star columnists word for it, the LPC has a policy, but the guy leading the party is some Bush clone that hasn't the skill set or the roots to really be believed when he expounds on it.
The lesson learned here is that foreign policy is based on a nations ability to project its influence internationally.
So ask yourself, what action or policy would make other nations sit up and take notice when you make your way on stage?
The one that comes to my mind is the example of the US carrier fleet.
Can't say which US president said it (may have been Clinton) but the statement was that if there was some crisis somewhere the pres would ask "where are the carriers?".
The fact that a nation is able to "express" its wishes beyond its borders in this way is an impressive thing, but the wherewithal to build up a carrier fleet much less man it, is beyond the capabilities of a nation of 33 million let alone our tax base....its unrealistic.
So that leaves us restricted to acting within our borders or in concert with those nations that reflect our nations values.....our closet neighbour comes to mind as the one nation we would be closest to in foreign policy, if its beneficial for them its going to benefit us. Add the grain of salt that I'm specifically responding to foreign policy.
The other factor would be our reputation to deal in good faith. One administration (or its members) not openly mocking another would be a good thing, so if a certain party has a history of being warm and fuzzy to a country one day but dissing them when they think they are not paying attention probably isn't going to to be taken as an honest broker. The fact is that our closest neighbour / trading partner is a superpower, and we need to choose wisely when we are going to object to their acts or deeds.
But I digress, just because I'm drifting.
Foreign policy should be based on doing those things that enhance and strengthen your nations legitimacy internationally. The framing of which should also be cognizant of three pillars.
- International recognition of you borders.
- Capability to maintain and protect your territory.
- The population's willingness to recognize and obey your laws
It stands to reason that if it came to the crunch, our success or failure may hinge on whether we have the US at our back....*cough*arctic territorial dispute*cough*
I guess my point is this, the conservative foreign policy is a willingness to work with other partners, but when required to go it alone has done so in a way that is not confrontational. They also understand that global agreements to be global must include all the global players equally.
The liberal policy, which is ambiguous, is based on two points; glorify Lester Pearson, and appeasement of terrorists. Seriously, the position the liberals take is totally dependant on the audience at that particular moment, so there isn't anything they really believe in other than whats fashionable at the moment (i.e.:Kyoto accord).
But its not going to matter apparently as the left leaning faction of the liberal party (the ones that will drift into the NDP the longer Ignatieff stays around) will never believe whats coming out of Ignatieff's mouth when he speaks about the one subject he's supposed to be an expert on because of his past....or as our TORSTAR editorialist suggests, Micheal Ignatieff was for the Afghan mission before he was against it.
Labels: Conservative majority
Liberal party is out to lunch...still
These guys obviously have not adjusted to the outcome of the last two elections.
Everybody has been screaming to them to present some policy, and in response they talk about generalities and fall back on the "scary Harper" (tm).
I've seen this script before, let me tell you about one of the first times.
In primary school around grade five, the class gets a visit from the primary school guidance councillor. Now if you haven't encountered this individual before (lucky you) I'll present a perspective to give you an idea. Generally speaking they have a world view that to be kind is described as highly idealistic. They tended to mimic all the Trudeaupian drivel that was fashionable at the time and expound on generalities, but rarely gave any guidance. Point was that, when kids are that age they tend to be impressionable and we didn't have the internet around to fact check as quickly as we should have.
But I digress.
Ms. "Happy-cheery" would dazzle us with some great sounding thoughts about how wonderfully successful everyone would become if we all just got a university degree....never talked about who was going to shovel the excrement or keep the plumbing working, because that was for the "trades" and well...it wasn't as well paying as the "careers" university grads could get.
What was missing from Happy-cheery's pep talk was the pertinent details....like was there a down side to any of this. Perhaps a bit of perspective about the working hours if you became the entry level guy in the engineering department? No? Or perhaps that niggling little detail that doctors don't just deliver babies they also oversee the end of life as well and have to deliver bad news. Of course never having had to perform any actual work...except maybe that stint as bar staff at the student pub...these folks that where now tasked with helping young minds think about what comes after school never really talked about the fact that after school comes work, paying for the things that we take for granted (home, food, clothes, taxes), and about the most important fact that life is not, and never will be fair.
In their mind, life was suppose to be their version of fair.
But back to the good ol L P C.
This is the same type of social engineers that used to go from school to school telling youngsters that everything in life came "no money down because your education is paid by the government" so don't think about it.
The problem with the great schemes is that money doesn't just fall out of the sky, and even university grad's pay taxes...nor do they work for free (which by the way includes doctors so that means health care is never free...another story for another time).
So if the liberals want to be so kind as to divulge how they intend on paying for the grand scheme other than finding more unique ways to dig into Canadians pockets (carbon tax?)they should be honest enough to say so. At this point its either they have no idea and they are just throwing out terms to see what sticks or they do know and won't tell.
Not doing so does allow one thing to happen.
The other parties will fill in the blanks, that you can take to the bank.
Here's what we do know.
Iggy will agree to a coalition with the Bloc if it means forming a government.
He will implement a carbon tax, but won't campaign on it.
They will punish the oil sands with punitive taxes (NEP II). They may want to duct tape Mark Holland's mouth asap.
They will never tell us which 12 riding's in Quebec got the dirty money.
I threw that last one in after Leblanc started talking about how the liberals want to bring in legislation to fight white collar crime. Pot, meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot.
Ironic in that Leblanc used to work in Chretien's inner circle isn't it?
Lastly, it would also be helpful if they did something about Kinsella....well actually as a conservative I hope they don't...as he is a liability that will take the libs off message. And if there are as many in the LPC that hold a grudge against him for "helping" Bucky Dither's for losing the government side of the house, ditching him asap is the only advise that makes sense....but please don't as I really do want a conservative majority.
In closing. I find in highly unlikely this advise will be heeded, much less read, due mostly to the fact that the traffic here is light to non-existent. It would only be by luck that it gets read at all, greater long odds that the hypothetical reader is of the left persuasion.
So unless you libs want to invoke a wave of scripted ridicule, you may want to provide details about how you want to make us the most well educated country, without the constitution being violated education being a provincial jurisdiction and all.
Frankly though I've seen this script before, it was BS before and its BS now.
Get new ideas or get lost.
BTW
I'll throw one "bone" to the dogs. Come the next election one question will be asked that will hit the opposition like a well placed kick to the crotch.
Does the treasury as it is currently sufficiently funded to pay for your plan?
Will you have to raise taxes?
Will you be cutting funding, and on what program?
And if the treasury is currently in good condition, what does that say about your claims about the current governments handling of the government finances? If you claim the treasury in in bad shape, tell me what program gets cut or what taxes get raised.
Its that simple, all it requires is to divulge the details of your plan.
Don't tell us and you guys wear the scary secret agenda label.
Labels: Conservative majority
Mr Harper I've got an idea
Now I doubt highly that anyone in the PMO or in cabinet, let alone anyone in caucus will read this, but here goes.
With the agenda that Obama is implementing, now would be a great time to start this economic stimulus plan.
Go out there and proclaim that "Canada is open for business."
Let the world know that when the big capital flight starts, Canada will be a safe haven.
Addendum
I'm going to add this to my header page. I'm hoping it catches on.
Labels: Conservative majority, principles and idealism
Oops
Looks like they should have checked with the lawyers before they launched their
not an election campaign. It looks like the owners of the Green Shift name are concerned about their integrity taking a hit if affiliated with the LPC.....like the LPC was somehow a group you don't want to be connected with.
"For us to take this further [against the Liberals], it's a David and Goliath
problem," Wright said. "We're fine on our own, without any political
affiliation. We've done everything to build our name on trust and
integrity."
...Moving right along....
Lets ask the question, just who would have to pay this carbon tax?
Here's
one answer.
"In this case, that would be either Ontario consumers or provincial
taxpayers who would be zapped for more than $1 billion a year, an increase of at
least 20% in the operating costs of the utility, including its nuclear and
hydro-electric facilities. "
A subtext to this is that when the election does come Harper will campaign on tax cuts and
no new taxes.
Labels: Conservative majority
A debt of thanks to Stephane Dion
With this new liberal GST* tax platform, Dion has just ensured a Harper majority.
*Green Shift Tax Bring it on.
Labels: Conservative majority
Mulroney and Schreiber
I know I should be concerned over this but for some reason my gut is telling me there are a lot of major news outlets with pre-written templates ready to go .....some of them may have been sitting around for a few years.
And all of it based on the statement of a guy facing criminal charges in Germany.
Imagine the rage the media and the opposition liberals will go into if Harper rags the puck long enough for Schreiber's extradition to go through and then hands the matter over to the RCMP?
I think I'm going to enjoy watching this.
Here's why.
The only way there can be an election is if the liberals believe they can put Harper on the defensive. If they believe this business over Airbus has any traction you bet the liberals will find their testicles in time for the next nonconfidence measure.
Think of the timing.
Harper has said he's going to get an independent third party to advice the government on how best to proceed, but no timeline.
Today Harper is reintroducing his senate reform bill with the understanding that when the NDP introduces its referendum bill it gets the governments support, a bill that is guaranteed to be held up in the senate if not returned to the commons altogether (read liberal obstruction to change).
Harper then has his opportunity to put the question of confidence to the house on an issue the liberals will feel safe opposing if they believe the M-S issue has legs.
Going forward in speculation, I presume that the day before the nonconfidence motion, Harper will make a decision on the issue that will take it out of play. It could be an inquiry, handing the matter over to the RCMP to investigate, or saying this is Schreibers feeble attempt to stay in Canada to avoid prosecution and that no action by the government is neccessary as this has nothing to do with the current adminstration.
I'm betting on the last possible outcome as it would leave the liberals holding the deciding votes on whether there will be an election or not, and having made statements to the effect they would be bring the government down it would do irrepairable damage if they sat on their hands again.
The beauty of it is that unlike Adscam this issue has nothing to do with the current government, so the liberals chosing this issue (and certain media outlets) to run a campaign on will be responded to with "last time we checked Mr Mulroney was not on the ballot" read witch hunt.
The media and the liberals have made careers out of attacking Mr Mulroney, its time they gave it a rest....but I know they won't being creatures of habit and all that.
Labels: Conservative majority, senate reform, useful idiots
Its about policy
This is just to clear one misconception up.
The current troubles the liberals are facing isn't so much about Dion, he's the symptom.
Its about policy, you have none. Or at least none other than power at all costs and being the natural governing party.
As long as you tenacously cling to the first you will be ineffective in oppostion.
And because of the second you will now do everything to avoid an election including abandoning any principle you may have had or said you had.
Now the chickens come home to roost.
When you have no policy, no leader, and there is no issue you will go to the mat on, you basically have no reason for existence other than just another lobby group on Parliament Hill.
So here's some advise....
-1- Get rid of the delegated process of chosing your leader
-2- Policy, get some and then stand by them, no matter what.
-3- Ditch the "establishment" from the party, these guys are about power (see one and two).
-4- Move into the present, its not 1967 anymore.
but you won't listen, so look forward to many more conservative governments in the future.
The other choice is to pull the plug and leave Dion's legacy as the last liberal leader.
Labels: Conservative majority
Latest update on the catch 22
Looks like the liberals are finding out too late that their much vaunted coup last spring getting
Pablo's private members bill passed is going to push them into an election they cannot afford to fight both figuratively, financially, and physically.
And unless its not clear I'll explain it again.
The opposition parties must oppose the throne speech if it states the Kyoto targets cannot be reached by the Kyoto deadline. Especially Dion will have to make possibly the worst decision of his life to give his party more time to prepare, or let his pride get the best of him.
I'm counting on his pride, he is after all a liberal.
Start the countdown for a press release from Lizzy May saying the deal is off.
Labels: Conservative majority, kyoto, May's little green monster, useful idiots
The Ontario Provincial election
Observations:
- The big issue that the liberals don't want to talk about is law enforcement.
- Dalton McGuinty was suppose to be at the leaders debate but I'll be damned if it wasn't Paul Martin standing in for him, that pledge to ban handguns was reminiscent of a pledge to eliminate the NWSC.
- The school funding issue is unfolding as it should with questions starting to arise about the hypocrisy of how if McGuinty is against funding for faith based schools, but says its OK to fund catholic faith based schools.
- The liberal war room must be getting scared, they are using WK"s "secret agenda" attack. Hate to break it to them but this isn't a campaign where you can vilify another part of the province without alienating a hell of a lot of voters, and secondly John Tory is not Stockwell Day. Warren, don't give up your day job.
- Oct 8 is going to be rather interesting around Caledonia. If violence erupts, expect Dalton to blame it all on someone else. Somehow though I get the feeling that the OPP rank and file might be getting tired of being jerked around and forced to do their job with one hand tied around their cajones. If something happens that day I wonder if any top ranking OPP will respond to any orders to stand by?
- The liberals are letting their arrogance get the best of them. If they where smart they would can the talk of majority.
- The MMP thing? I'm voting against it, why should we entrench a system whereby the party leaders get to award a seat in the legislature to party hacks...sounds like the senate to me, no thanks. If you want PR it has to be by riding, rather than a candidate winning poll by poll, use an aggregate of the total vote in the riding, then impose a voter turnout threshold. If the total voter turnout for the riding is say less than 40% (or whatever percentage is agreed to) that riding is redistributed to neighbouring riding's or to the neighbouring riding that had the highest voter turnout. That is how you achieve a goal of higher participation, which was the whole point of the exercise wasn't it? Right now folks don't see face any consequences by not participating, the incentive of retaining not only your vote but of the parties having one less seat in the house would motivate quite a few folks to come out not just during elections but to join a political party as well.
- John Tory doesn't have to win to keep his job, but Dalton must to keep his. Hint: There's a fellow with the initials JK that still has his eyes on the big chair.
- The defining moment may come as a result of the events unfolding in Caledonia. But the last thing the liberals should have done is threaten CHCH for running that story. Dalton is in trouble.
Labels: Conservative majority
The byelection thing
The post results navel gazing has begun with both the left and right putting spin or explaination out to their hearts content. Here's mine:
- It wouldn't have mattered a bit who the liberal leader was, the liberal option is either not clear due to the party policy of appease everyone, offend no one, or not dissimilar from the other leftwing parties. That makes them a purely leftwing party where small-l liberals don't feel comfortable.
- Predicting the next election is going to be a lot tougher due to the fact that Harper's options just increased. The liberals will be torn between supporting the current government until they can get their party back in contention or they will arrange a coup (which involves losing an election and letting Harper win) so they can ditch a sitting leader(....isn't that how they got Martin?). Right now the liberal party is split between blue liberals and orange liberals. They both want power, but they are arguing over how to get there. If I was Jack Layton I'd be campaigning on a platform of uniting liberal's under one banner.
- Take a good look at the crew supporting the NDP in Outremont. These are Quebec liberals. If there was ever a group of fair weather friends they would be it. The minute the liberals ditch Dion they will reconsider where they send their support to, however if its anyone but a Quebecer, they'll be where they are right now. Watch for Justin Trudeau to make his move for the big chair. I am hoping he does, Harper will get a majority if Justin is coronated liberal leader.
What a great day to be a conservative.
Labels: Conservative majority
Start the countdown to the next election
And so the game begins. This is the precursor of events to come....at least with regard to the next federal election.....or forcing the Kyoto crowd to run up the white flag.
The Liberals, NDP and Bloc Quebecois pushed through the Kyoto Implementation Act last June, a law that says the government must submit a "Climate Change Plan'' for meeting the requirements under the international agreement within 60 days. The "plan'' it published Tuesday repeats the argument that trying to meet Kyoto by 2012 would wreak economic disaster on the Canadian economy. It estimates astronomical gas-price hikes and catastrophic job losses.At the end of the article was the part that says the liberals are still not getting it.
""They have no intention of being bound or honouring the obligations of Kyoto," McGuinty said. "They've been perfectly clear on this even before arriving in government.''"
Gee, you think?
McGuinty while he was so intent on grandstanding seems to miss the point that only the government can table legislation that involves spending and by making this statement McGuinty has made it clear the liberals are going to table a nonconfidence motion over this. The problem is that going into an election over this the opposition parties all (Lib, NDP, Bloc, and Green) are going to be restricted to a platform (no matter what they publish) of higher taxes, draconian legislation, and a lower standard of living. At the very least the best the oppositin can hope for under those conditions is that their core support just sits on their hands next election.
The other part they missed is that its hard to make a case against global warming in the middle of winter.
But the best part of all this is if the opposition cannot succeed in bringing down the Harper government over this their credibility will be destroyed. Its one thing to back off on a threat its quite another when you've invested so much on that one issue. The point is that if the opposition forces a nonconfidence motion on this they have to follow through....Harper knows the opposition can't backdown without seriously losing face with its hard core kook fringe.
For those scratching their head wondering how this is could be a bad case scenario for the lib-left its simple. The lib-left has always taken a non-position, when the issue is for or against with no mushy middle, we win they lose. They need that middle ground. In this case they lost it the day that private members bill was tabled. For them its impose the Kyoto protocol no matter what it costs
there is no other way, for the conservative government its do what you can how you can without turning the country into an economic basketcase.
I still give the following possible scenario as a plausible occurance.
The scene; election stop in the 905 area. When each leader comes to the place they get asked this question:
"Would your government impose the Kyoto protocol no matter what the consequences"?
The answer from the opposition cannot be anything other than yes, due to the fact that the reason the election was called was that all opposition parties tabled legislation that was suppose to force the government to impose Kyoto, the n/c motion was tabled because they refused to accept the governments plan that won't. All Harper has to say is that people have a right to earn a living and not have the crap taxed out them over a UN protocol.
If its still not understood, try this. Campainging on a platform of taxes, onerous legislation, and lower standard of living is not the liberal way. They like something for everyone platforms that paint a rosy picture. This private members bill is all about bad news. That means Harper gets the good news platform.
Update:
Looks like the Bloc is staking its position early this time they don't get holding the bag when the nonconfidence motion comes to the floor.
"
While Layton said his party would pursue other legislative options in Parliament, the Bloc Quebecois hinted that it might turn the matter of Canada's Kyoto targets into a confidence issue that could bring down the minority Conservative government and force an election in the fall"
Further in the article it states that Dion will be making a public statement on Thursday (today) to make the liberal position more clear. I predict that Dion doesn't want to be the last one to have to decide to support a nonconfidence motion over this mainly so the liberals don't get the blame for bringing forward the motion or be in the unpleasant position of supporting the government to avoid an election they can't afford.
Next update will be more info on Climateforchange.
Labels: Conservative majority, kyoto
Dalton's sudden apparent hard right turn
With McGuinty making all these funding announcements for law and order programs, it would appear that he's out to secure the right wing vote.
However, I'm waiting for an enterprising media type to corner him on the following question to prove the move is for real and not just another promise to be broken after the election.
"Mr McGuinty how much of a budget deficit is the province running today?"
This is the problem question for Dalton as it has been his talking point that the reason he had to raise taxes was because the conservatives hid the size of the deficit.
So are any of those "fair and balanced" media outlets ready to drop this one on McGuinty's lap?
And when you do please don't let him off the hook when he starts laying the blame elsewhere. If he's spending millions on law and order, or cricket clubs, it all comes from the tax payer. Last I heard Ontario still has a deficit, why won't the liberals get that under control before beggaring the tax payers to buy their vote?
Labels: Conservative majority
When you think of the liberal party
As a premise to the title, I offer the recent poll from the Beaver naming Trudeau the worst Canadian.
But I digress.
Here's the rhetorical question again.
When you think of the liberal party (federal and provincial) are the first things that come to mind peace, order, and good government?
Or is it, elitism, entitlement, and illegal activities?
Labels: Conservative majority
Two clues as to why the liberals are stuck in purgatory
These two commentaries
link 1link 2indicate why it won't matter who leads them right now they'll still not get back to power unless they wrest control of the parties agenda from the left wing kook fringe.
Stop saying capitalism is bad, that you want to tax the hell out of everyday Canadians, advocating free lunch economic policies, and yelling kyoto or death.
Labels: Conservative majority
The next thing the Harper government should put on its agenda.
With the revelations coming out recently about the workings of the RCMP, (pension mismanagement, Air India, AG report) the Harper government can easily put reforming the RCMP on its "to do" list.
I'd also like to know why the current LG of Ontario Bartleman (sp?) has kept his mouth shut for so long?
Labels: Conservative majority
Here it comes
Looks like Harper's strategy to make the election about the effects of Kyoto are coming to fruitition.
link"Robert Fife, CTV's Ottawa bureau chief, is reporting the following details from the study, which he said has been backed by independent economists:The economy would shrink by 4.2 per cent if Kyoto is implemented. "It says it will cause a recession on par with the 1981-82 recession." Job losses will total 275,000 by 2009 Electricity costs will jump by 50 per cent by 2010 Gasoline costs will jump by 60 per cent almost immediately, and Home heating oil will double."
Yep, and with the opposition parties falling over themselves to be "Kyoto, just Kyoto, and nothign but Kyoto" it will be hard for them to worm their way out of that corner without changing startegy halfway through the campaign.
Labels: Conservative majority, Global tax regime, kyoto
Harper will soon get his excuse to call a confidence motion
Proof Dion has the Martin gang working for him."Dion is calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to endorse the revised version of the Clean Air Act including its plan to have
a carbon budget for Canada that will help the country honour its Kyoto commitments."
Smooth move exlax. You and every opposition party leader is beating the Kyoto drum so loud you can't see the conservatives defining you as being Kyoto and only about Kyoto.
"Mr Dion can you explain how a global tax regime reduces green house gas?"
Labels: Conservative majority, Global tax regime, kyoto
