Well, what a day in Committee. Lot's of drama, good behaviour, less than exemplary behaviour and all in all, pretty heady stuff for political junkies.
Schreiber? No, that is not the committee I'm speaking of. I will speak to what went on there, but later.
No, the Committee I'm speaking of was the Environment Committee, where once again John Baird made an absolute ass of himself and insulted every Canadian who cares to pay attention to his baffle-gab.
He once again gave a misleading power point presentation that said absolutely nothing, but clearly showed that this Government is going to Bali with one motive, and one motive only. That is to derail the summit using misleading information. This government is determined to dismantle all the tools that the Kyoto protocol gave the International community.
To my way of thinking, so far, they sadly have been successful. I do not think that the world has held to the courage of it's convictions. I understand that certain forums require consensus, but perhaps it's time to review that protocol and shine a light on the dissenters.
So what happened at Committee? Baird blustered, the Lib's pointed out that Baird had misquoted not only Gore, but Achim Steiner UNEP Executive Director . Baird spun and denied of course. The Lib's went on to point out that not one economist, not one environmental group nor one scientist has endorsed the Con plan. Baird said something like, you can always look at the naysayers. Huh? (btw, what is this man on? His ability to spew nonsense at the speed of sound is truly disconcerting.) Bottom line, NO ONE on the planet supports you. Baird is okay with that.
The Bloc then brought up a news wire item (that I cannot find yet), I think from the UN that denounced the Con position. Baird shrugged it off, he hadn't seen it.
The NDP reiterated the Lib point that they have no endorsement then went on to ask good questions. I do like Cullen the NDP member on this file because I see him as committed as are the Lib's and the Bloc. Cullen makes me nuts often with his reference to the Lib's and inaction, etc., etc. (Yes the Lib's didn't do enough but, the fact is that they the NDP voted the Lib government down when reg's were finally going to happen after years of the con's shooting them down...don't get me started.) Anyway, Cullen went on to ask good questions. The Lib's started with credibility and Cullen expanded on it. He asked how many regulations this government has passed, how many GHG'S have been reduced, do you have an economic assessment for Canada vis a vis your plan and who has validated your program? Zero was the non answer we received.
The Con's? Why even bother? No questions really, just lavish praise on current non-action and disgusting misinformation about the previous government.
Baird went on, through questioning to quite clearly blow smoke into the room. He purposely confused hard targets with intensity based. John Godfrey, (Lib), asked how on earth could he go to Bali and insist that other countries commit to hard targets when Canada is not.
The long and short or it, Baird exposed his lingo. Hard targets is a phrase that Baird often throws out. He interprets that as anything that could be manipulated in a power point presentation as real, but it's myth.
I do not know who is behind the spin, but I suggest they are genius. Nothing, I repeat nothing, that Baird said today even remotely touched on what we are facing in terms of climate change.
In the end, predictably, the Con's moved a motion to congratulate this government and wish them well in Bali. GAG!
After much procedural wrangling, that motion was supposed to be debated, but the Con's filibustered, again, but this time it was against...themselves!
Hello, do you guys know how ridiculous you look? You sound like your sycophants on the BT aggregator. Who is leading who here? I cannot see the difference.
The opposition walked out and broke quorum and rightly so.
Two years of bluster from this government has only produced hot air and no tangible plan. Nothing, nada. Media are great at reporting announcements, but if there was even one honest media rep there, (the chairs were bare), I beg you to tell the truth of what you saw today.
I doubt that will happen, everyone was on the Scheiber story.
Shiny objects do not move this country forward.
Committee's on Parliament Hill deserve more attention and Canadians deserve more information.
For the record, I doubt this post will resonate, ie, not garner comments. Fair enough, but to me, that's a truly sad commentary.
Update: This is a Leader.
Update 2: Well said.