Green Party of Canada News

Publication Source:  North County Public Radio Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Brian Mann

For decades, Canada has enjoyed a reputation as one of the greenest, most environmentally progressive societies in the world. But that image has been rattled recently by debates over Canadian oil development and plans to build the massive Keystone XL oil pipeline to the US. Last year, Canada withdrew from the Kyoto climate treaty, sparking anger from environmental groups.

Brian Mann sat down last week to talk with Elizabeth May, former head of Canada's Sierra Club and now the leader of her country's Green Party. May says Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper has led Canada down a dangerous path when it comes to the energy and environment. But she also says Canada's image as a green leader has been unraveling for decades.

OTTAWA - Elizabeth May, MP Saanich-Gulf Islands and Leader of the Green Party, today held a press conference  in the Charles Lynch Press Theatre to celebrate the 7th Anniversary of the Kyoto Protocol coming into force – and to set the record straight on the prime minister’s anti-Kyoto, Axis-of-Oil agenda. 

“This should be a day to celebrate the fact that seven years ago humanity began to act together to prevent the grave dangers caused by increased greenhouse gas emissions,” said May.  “But the prime minister’s plan to pull out of Kyoto, in spite of the accord`s support by most Canadians, makes it a day of mourning instead.

“Our international reputation is tragically diminished.  This week, Brazil, South Africa, China, and India condemned Canada for its decision to withdraw, saying it ‘seriously’ brings into question our credibility in dealing with the very real threat of climate change.

In regard to the withdrawal from Kyoto, Environment Minister Peter Kent has stated that, if it remains, Canada risks having to pay $14 billion in compliance costs for not achieving its Kyoto targets.

“This is spin, designed to confuse Canadians,” said May.  “Hypothetically, if we were to decide we wanted to meet the 2012 target Harper repudiated back in 2006, when he cancelled all programmes to reach the Kyoto target, it would only be possible through buying credits.  These credits might cost the $14 billion Kent has claimed, but no one in their right mind would demand such a thing, and there is nothing in the Kyoto Protocol to force Canada to spend a dime.”

“Prime Minister Harper and his cabinet are playing fast and loose with the facts in order to convince Canadians that developing the oil sands, one of the world’s largest polluters, and allowing state enterprises of China to own and export bitumen crude production is good for our country.

“They claim that this won`t really hurt Canada’s national security and the already-overheated atmosphere, but let’s look at reality.”

Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver stated in the House on February 14 that:  “We should be proud of the fact that greenhouse gas emissions (in the oil sands) have been reduced by 30 percent over the last 10 years.” In fact, in 2005, the Pembina Institute reported that the oil sands released 37 megatonnes of GHGs, compared with 23 megatonnes in 2000.

Also, since the level of production is set to significantly increase, Environment Canada has predicted that GHG emissions will triple from 30 million tonnes in 2005 to 92 million tonnes in 2020. 

If the Minister meant to say per barrel emissions have gone down, he was correct until recently. In 2010, even the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers admitted that per barrel GHG emissions rose by two percent over 2009 levels due to the increase of in situ production. That same year, total emissions increased by 14 percent. 

Last year, the Harper Conservatives had to admit that they deliberately left out data from their annual UN inventory indicating that oil sands emissions had gone up. 

At the same time, Minister Oliver told the House of Commons that the oil sands industry will create “$3 trillion in economic activity”, generating “hundreds of billions of dollars for government services to Canadians ... and over 700,000 jobs a year over the next 25 years.”

“Are we to believe that China is investing in Canada for altruistic reasons?” asked May.  “We know that Sinopec purchased almost 10 percent of Syncrude, giving it a veto on that company’s right to keep jobs in Canada.  The Enbridge-China pipeline-and-tanker scheme will provide some temporary construction jobs, but it`s designed to take refining jobs from Canada.  Keystone XL, if it goes through, will do the same.

 “Experts have testified in committee that this approach has already been harmful to Canadian refineries, which have lost 10,000 jobs since 1989. So it sounds like the jobs and the profits will be leaving the country.

“Canadians need to know the truth about Kyoto and the Axis of Oil, and pressure the prime minister to stop the fiction.  One final distortion is that we are already out of Kyoto. Not true. We have only filed a legal notice of intent to withdraw.  It won’t take legal effect until December 2012.  Let’s cancel that notice and start being responsible global citizens.”

Greens are urging Canadians to go http://keepkyoto.ca/ to sign up and keep Canada in Kyoto.

 

Contact Information:
Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

Publication Source:  The Ottawa Citizen Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Terry Glavin

Well, there we have it, on the record, and in writing, and in Hansard, and in the very regulations of the Investment Canada Act. And it took only a couple of awkward questions from Elizabeth May, the sole Green Party MP in the House of Commons, to draw it out. Which is what she did last night in the House.

Special thanks are also owed to Conservative MP Mike Lake, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry (Edmonton – Mill Woods – Beaumont) for making it clear yesterday, during Adjournment Proceedings, that the September 2009 amendments and regulations to the Investment Canada Act have established the following:

Canada is now a country where Dear Leader gets to decide what “national security” is. Dear Leader gets to decide what the words “national security” mean. He even gets to decide what a “threat” to national security is, and even what the word “threat” means. And Dear Leader is not to be troubled by any legal “definitions” or criteria in making his decisions, which he is empowered to make by the seat of his pants, and for whatever purpose he likes, without even having to explain himself.

Publication Source:  Postmedia News Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Jeff Davis

The Tories have to tone down their 'Kafka-esque' demonization of environmentalists, Green Party leader Elizabeth May says.

"I think that under the terms (Prime Minister Stephen) Harper and his cabinet members have been using in the House of Commons, I am now condemned as against Canada, as a radical, as an enemy and I suppose as a suspected future terrorist," May told reporters Thursday.

"Once you start describing political opponents as enemies, we're in real trouble," she continued. "It's very Kafka-esque."

OTTAWA -- Too many politicians, business leaders and media pundits are setting up a false choice between economics, human rights, and the environment. The fact is there is no need to choose. Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada and MP for Saanich-Gulf Islands continues to plead for sanity from our Canadian leadership.  May stated, “The economy, the environment, and human rights are mutually interdependent. They must go hand in hand if we are to have a vibrant and healthy economy that is sustainable.”

While expanding and diversifying our trading partners is commendable, we must also consider the costs. Giving away our resources at basement prices and strings attached, with little value added, is short-sighted.  May added, “We can build our economy without selling out the future of our children.”

Recent European events where citizens are opposed to necessary austerity are bringing about questions as to how democracy and a healthy economy can co-exist.

Jean-Luc Cooke, Small Business Critic for the Green Party of Canada, responded, “The Greek debt is a result of irresponsible leaders and self-centered businesses who do not want to pay for essential services.  An economy where trillions of dollars run to the most profitable investments without any cost linked to undesirable consequences, such as pure speculation, human rights abuses, and disregard for aboriginal peoples and the environment, is doomed to implode.”

“Economic self-interest should be tempered with a regulatory framework including capital requirements for debt risks, a Tobin Tax for speculation, and a tax to compensate for and clean up the damage done to the environment.  Canada needs to pay attention and learn from the Greek situation,” continued Cooke.

The Green Party points to the overheated oil sands and the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline as economic decision making out of step with the need to protect Canadian jobs and the environment.  Exporting raw resources to Asia will have more costs than benefits for Canada, including environmental degradation of air, land and water and further disrespect to First Nations.  The Green Party is alarmed that Prime Minister Harper has repeated numerous times that a pipeline will go ahead regardless of what the majority of Canadians want. 

“We do not want trade at all costs, but costed trade,” concluded Cooke.

Media Contact: 
Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

Publication Source:  Ottawa Citizen Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Elizabeth May

Re: For-profit doesn't equal evil, Feb. 10.

The Citizen editorial accusing opponents of the Brewster Glacier Discovery Walk of hysteria misses the mark and trivializes a serious concern.

Our national parks are the highest and most rigorous levels of conservation values recognized by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. The National Parks Act makes the protection of ecological integrity a core value of our system. Never before has a private company been allowed to alter the natural features of a park to draw visitors to any area outside of a town site. The fact that a private corporation will be running a concession to allow visitors to our park the privilege of walking along an imposed structure, no matter how lovely the view, is a violation of the core principles of our parks. In a similar case, the British Columbia court ruled that only alterations necessary to protect a park should be allowed - and that was a case of a provincial park with less stringent conservation requirements.

I have enjoyed private tours, including by Brewster, through our parks. I have had the great privilege of travelling by private rafting company down Yukon rivers. The fact it was a for-profit company that made it possible does not offend parks values. It would offend those values if they installed Disney-like mechanized wildlife to enhance the visitor experience. This decision is a mistake.

Elizabeth May, MP, Saanich-Gulf Islands Leader, Green Party of Canada

OTTAWA -- The Harper Conservatives are making a bid to have all committee business conducted in secret. Widely considered a test run for all committees, tomorrow  the Official Languages committee will vote on a motion to conduct all future committee business in camera.  The motion was introduced by Costas Menegakis (Richmond Hill, Ont., CPC).  The Government Operations and Estimates committee gave notice of a similar motion sponsored by Mike Wallace (Burlington, Ont., CPC).

In camera (meaning in private, from the Latin for ‘in chamber’) committee meetings are in secret. All debate is out of the public eye. Up until now, committee meetings have been open to the public, except for subjects requiring confidentiality.  Once the committee is in camera, the minutes only record approved decisions; any defeated motions do not appear on any public transcript. Parliamentary privilege ensures that opposition members cannot speak publicly about in camera sessions; even the agenda is secret.

“Apparently, the Harper Conservatives dislike public accountability. They limit debate in the House and now they intend to make all committee deliberations secret.  This is breathtakingly undemocratic,” said May.

In camera meetings are usually held so that committee members can consider a draft report, deal with administrative matters and plan ahead, hear a background briefing, or deal with sensitive issues such as national security. Often, a committee that has several items on its agenda will hold part of a meeting in public and part in camera.

“With their majority muscle, the Conservatives can pass whatever they want in committees and now they want to do so in secret. The Harper Conservatives are running roughshod over past parliamentary practice and convention and doing away with any pretence of democracy,” said May.

Prior to the introduction of these motions, the Conservatives had drastically increased the use of the in camerarule to conduct various routine items of business in camera, particularly when opposition members introduce a motion that the Conservatives do not like. 

“What prevented such authoritarian abuse of the in camera rule in the past was governments’ respect for precedents of parliamentary convention.  The Harper Conservatives are now using these egregious procedural loopholes to effect a system of total and complete closure and control.  Opposition motions disappear in camera and never see the light of day again,” said May. 

“Canadians have a right to know what committees are debating and what positions are being taken, as well as to hear the witnesses.  A government that cared about accountability would be trying to maximize the ability of the public to be informed about committee business.  Making committee business top secret is as bizarre as it is anti-democratic,” said May.

 

Media Contact:
Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

OTTAWA -- Lorraine Rekmans, Aboriginal Affairs Critic for the Green Party of Canada, is appalled at the treatment being given to Indigenous language speakers at the Joint Review Panel hearings on the Enbridge Northern Gateway project.  “There is a critical need to respect and accommodate Indigenous participation in hearings on pipeline development.  The pipeline has grave potential for negative impact on First Nations land and their voice is essential.”

While many First Nations have presented at the hearings, their voices are not properly materializing in the official published transcript.  Instead, translators are inserting placeholders indicating ‘native word’, an inaccurate and disrespectful label.  This is despite the offer of several First Nations to provide translation assistance.

“The significance and legality of the right to present in your original language, as well as the need to preserve, and respect Indigenous languages, cannot be overstated,” said Rekmans.  “If the panel was sincere about including oral Aboriginal traditional knowledge, these gross mistranslations in the transcripts would not be allowed to occur.”

Presentations are not being recorded in the original language, such that translations have to suffice. 

“Translations are an inadequate manner to capture the concepts presented by Aboriginal speakers, especially about such complex issues as relationships to the land.  But, they are not even attempting a high quality translation.  Frankly, the level of apathy regarding the accuracy of the official transcript is alarming,” said Rekmans. “One wonders if the need for speed is becoming foremost.  How the panel can base their decision on these deficient transcripts is inconceivable—they won’t even know what was said.”

The official transcript is riddled with this placeholder ‘native word’ which, as rabble.ca writer Tyler McCreary points out, is not respectful of the different languages being used.  He says, “People do not speak "native" any more than they speak "European" or "Asian." People speak unique languages. They speak English and French, which likely the panel would recognize, as well as Dakelh and Wet'suwet'en languages, which apparently the panel cannot even recognize as distinct languages.”

“The panel must rectify these defects in the transcripts and improve their efforts moving forward,” said Rekmans.

 

Media Contact: 
Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

I have watched in disbelief as the Member for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, Conservative Larry Miller, has emerged unscathed from not once, but twice, in debate comparing the previous Liberal government and the gun registry to Adolf Hitler.  His “apology” in the House in which he referred to Hitler as “that evil guy” was so convoluted that Justin Trudeau quipped, “I think he just apologized to Hitler for using his name.” Out of the House on a local radio programme he claimed his remarks were historically valid – which they were not, but that’s another story.

One reason for my disbelief was that I was at the receiving end of a pummelling from Stephen Harper, John Baird and others for quoting George Monbiot’s comments on Canada’s reputation in the world in terms of our abdication of responsibility to act to address the climate crisis. 

It was back in 2007, and I was repeatedly attacked on the floor of the House, where I (obviously as a non-elected leader) had no opportunity to defend myself.  The remarks were entirely different.  Unlike Miller, I never mentioned Hitler, nor did I compare any Canadian political entity to Hitler or Nazis. 

I quoted Monbiot directly as saying: “In the eyes of history, John Howard (then PM of Australia), George Bush and Stephen Harper will be viewed as more culpable (for their failure to act on the climate crisis) than Neville Chamberlain.” 

For this, there was a firestorm unleashed to attack me, although the real target was Stéphane Dion who had agreed shortly before to respect the parliamentary custom of leader’s courtesy in relation to my riding.

Stephen Harper attacked Dion, demanding he condemn me, claiming I had diminished “the Holocaust and using Nazi analogies are inappropriate.”

John Baird boomed, “The invoking of the Nazi era by the Green party leader in order to score some political points is insensitive to those who lived through this dark time… These comments are deeply offensive.”

It was absurd, and spun completely out of control for weeks.

So here we are, five years later, and the name Adolf Hitler was used twice in the house in prepared speech. The fact it was in a written speech suggests to me it had advance approval from PMO.

I am not holding my breath for Harper and Baird to denounce one of their own.  Unlike my non-comparison to Hitler (it’s a stretch to say Monbiot compared the Nazi threat to the climate crisis, but there sure was no suggestion of anyone being equated with Nazis), Miller directly attacked the previous government as being the equivalent of Adolf Hitler.

And the ensuing tumult is short-lived and snuffed out by the same spin-machine that unleashed holy hell on me in 2007.

Publication Source:  The Halifax Chronicle-Herald Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Editorial

How else to explain the disgraceful episode last week during which Elizabeth May was denied the privilege to speak, ironically on the subject of free speech?

Picture the scene. Members of other parties had just wrapped up their tributes to playwright Vaclav Havel, the late Czech dissident-turned-president. Ms. May tried to take her turn. As the sole Green MP, she does not benefit from official party status and needs the unanimous consent of the House to proceed. But instantaneous objections arose from the Conservative benches, so Ms. May was forced to sit down, literally speechless.

There are few issues as close to our core values as pensions.  We have universal health care and its place as a core Canadian value is indisputable.  Our shared commitment to ensuring that Canadians have the income support required to live our retirement years in vitality and good health is a close second in sacred responsibilities of governments.  Clearly, more needs to be done.  Too many seniors, particularly too many women, live in poverty.  Nevertheless, Old Age Security, Guaranteed Income Supplement and the Canada Pension Plan were never mooted as a target for new policies by Stephen Harper in the recent election, except to commit to greater levels of support.

Following the memorable historical plunge from a high place experienced by former PM Brian Mulroney over threats to alter our pension plans (“Good bye Charlie Brown”), I can only imagine the shock of Conservative backbenchers at home in Ottawa when their boss stepped out on the ledge in Davos.  

The contradictions flew back and forth, (the Conservatives spin machine claimed media was incorrectly interpreting his remarks, and then clarifications ensued that pensions would be changed.  Each contradiction was prefaced with “let me be clear.”). 

As the dust settles, it seems increasingly clear that Budget 2012 will include a change in which retirement age shifts from 65 to 67.  I had a more or less clear reply from Minister responsible for Seniors, Alice Wong, on this point when I put the question to her in the House.  The only real question about Harper’s intent remaining is whether the changes will be sudden or gradual and over what period of time.  My bet is that the budget will tell 50 year olds to be prepared to work another 17 years.

The question we should be asking is: is this necessary?  The Parliamentary Budget Officer says “no.”  The PBO report issued February 8 states that, having off-loaded 2 % of health care costs on the provinces, Ottawa has room to absorb the bump created be retiring baby boomers.  In fact, the PBO report says we can increase OAS.

Some commentators are wondering why Stephen Harper would risk changing basic entitlements to OAS.  Many assume he both protects his base and keeps his election promises.  This might be a good time for the seniors who lost their savings with Harper’s reversal on taxing income trusts (Halloween 2006) to brief those counting on retirement at 65.  We can push back and protect Old Age Security.  It is time to mobilize. This is no time to retire from activism. 

Originally published in the CARP publication CARP OnlineAction

OTTAWA -- Canadians have historically held human rights as one of our most important and cherished values.  The recent downplaying of basic human rights for excuses of justice, trade and security is cause for alarm.  The latest and most disturbing is the decision to look the other way at torture. 

Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada (MP for SGI) stated, “Canadians do not want to legitimize torture under any circumstance.  The Conservative government is out of step with the values of Canadians.” 

This latest barrage on Human Rights reverses a previous Conservative policy, which once insisted the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) would discard information if there was any inkling it might be tainted.  They are now encouraged to use this information, even if it is obtained via torture.  Equally alarming is the admission that such information would not only be shared with Canadian police, but that CSIS would pass it to relevant foreign agencies as well. Amnesty International Canada decried the action saying, “Information obtained under torture has no place in the justice system, full stop.”

A federal inquiry by Justice Dennis O’Connor into the Maher Arar torture affair recommended in 2006 that policies include specific directions “aimed at eliminating any possible Canadian complicity in torture, avoiding the risk of other human rights abuses and ensuring accountability.”

According to the December 2010 directive, the government expects the spy service to “make the protection of life and property its overriding priority.”  It also states that in “exceptional circumstances,” where there is a threat to human life or public safety, urgency may require CSIS to “share the most complete information available at the time with relevant authorities, including information based on intelligence provided by foreign agencies that may have been derived from the use of torture or mistreatment.” 

Green Human Rights Critic Joe Foster commented, “If property is an overriding priority, that would explain overlooking abuses of Canadian mining companies and the push for trade, regardless of humans rights concerns.”  He continued, “What about those being tortured, whether they be innocent or not? What about the threat to their human life?  Our values towards basic human rights are being eroded.  One can only surmise that the Prime Minister now condones torture if it provides the information he wants.”

“Canadian law enforcement and security agencies should focus on getting rid of information that bears the taint of torture, not on carving out exceptions for when it can be used,” said Alex Neve, Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada.

“If we are to remain a civilized nation, then there is never justification for torture,” said Foster.

 

Media Contact:

Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

Ottawa -- BC Greens together with their federal counterparts in the Green Party of Canada are solidly opposed to the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline and the associated increase in tanker traffic.  “There is no benefit to BC, the risks are simply too great and it punts real action on climate change several decades out - to beyond the point at which we need to cap and start reducing emissions and transition to a low carbon economy,” said BC Green Leader Jane Sterk.

“The BC government is presumably too knowledgeable to fall for any spin that promises economic benefit.  If a spill were to happen, the economic fallout would be devastating.  The vast majority, more than 80% of BC citizens, support the 40-year ban on supertankers on our coast and oppose Enbrige's demands to put hundreds of tankers a year in some of the most dangerous waters on earth. They will not be fooled by a slick sales pitch,” said Federal Green Leader Elizabeth May, Member of Parliament for the BC seat of Saanich-Gulf Islands.

“We saw the same strategy with the so-called climate change prosperity propaganda.  Instead of having a real conversation about whether these short-term unsustainable projects are in the national interest, the risks are simply glossed over,” said May.  “This cynical strategy of promising jobs and riches is particularly insulting to First Nations who should not have to yet again face the choice of trading away their rights for empty promises.”

“The assumption is that Alberta has the right to pipe bitumen across BC.  While Alberta reaps short term benefits, our province would carry the environmental risk, and we are not willing to do that.  Instead what we need is a national policy to determine what is right for the country as a whole,” said Sterk.

 

-30-

 

Media Contact: 
Green Party of Canada
Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

 

Green Party of BC
Rebecca Helps
execdirector@greenparty.bc.ca
250-590-4537

Publication Source:  The Vancouver Sun Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Derek Abma

Green Party leader Elizabeth May thinks so. Looking back on it now, she said some of the rhetoric used against free trade with the U.S. was overblown. But she did say the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — which it evolved into when Mexico became part of it— has deteriorated Canada's ability to manage its own affairs.

She pointed to Chapter 11 of NAFTA, which has been used by private companies to challenge regulations passed by various levels of government if the company feels its investments have been compromised by a certain policy. If such a provision were applied to Canada's arrangement with China, it could result in an oppressive regime having veto power over elected officials in Canada on domestic affairs, she argued.

"It's another leap altogether to have enterprises owned by the government of China — with their executives appointed by the Communist Party of China — to have the ability to sue any town or city or province or federal government decision that they didn't like," May said.

Prime Minister’s Focus on Money and Markets Ignores Issues of Energy and National Security, Human Rights, Syria, and More

Ottawa -- Elizabeth May, Green Party MP for Saanich-Gulf Islands and Leader of the Green Party of Canada, held a media conference in Ottawa today to outline her serious concerns about the federal government’s growing dependence on foreign money and influence in the oil sands and elsewhere – especially in light of Stephen Harper’s tour of China.

“We are being told that the Harper government’s almost-desperate attempts to lure foreign money to Canada is business as usual, bringing needed investment, but there is much more at stake which requires public discussion,” said May.  “In fact, what I now call the China-Harper Axis of Oil has so many negative repercussions; I have had to prepare a short list, including everything from job loss to Syria.

“Canadians simply cannot and should not make the dramatic economic and social shifts Harper is aggressively orchestrating without more information.”

1)           The oil and gas sector already has nearly two times the amount of foreign investment compared to the average in other areas of our economy with twice the percentage of profits leaving Canada. 

2)           Concerning Chinese oil sands investments, estimates vary because of the lack of transparency, but it’s at least $12 billion and as much as $20 billion.  State-owned Sinopec, China`s second-largest oil producer and top refiner, is part of a consortium that has provided about $100 million to fund the Enbridge pipeline-and-tanker scheme`s regulatory and development costs in exchange for guaranteed shipment on the pipeline and an equity stake.

3)           During the 2008 federal election campaign, Stephen Harper promised he wouldn’t export raw crude to countries with weaker environmental standards than Canada, protecting Canadian jobs.  With the Enbridge pipeline-and-tanker proposal, it has been estimated that more than 26,000 jobs will be lost because the bitumen will be refined in China, not Canada.

4)           Not only jobs will be lost, but energy security and even national sovereignty are at stake.  As Anthony Campbell, former head of the Intelligence Assessment Secretariat of the Privy Council Office, has pointed out:  “We are sitting ducks.”  We are losing our ability to control the oil sands and our energy future.  For example, when China’s state-owned enterprise Sinopec bought minority shares in Syncrude in 2010, it got the right to veto any Syncrude decision to keep jobs, upgrading, and refining in Canada. (See Terry Glavin’s article, Defenceless, in the Ottawa Citizen, Saturday, February 4.)

5)           Even Enbridge has admitted that its pipeline will be of no benefit to Canada if it doesn’t secure the so-called “Asian Premium” – a higher crude price.  Economist and former CEO of the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, Robyn Allan stated in her submission to the National Energy Board Joint Review Panel:  “The upshot is that Canadian refinery demand ... will have its market price determined as if the transactions for Canadian crude oil supply and demand take place in the Asian market.”  This will mean, says Allan, “a decrease in family purchasing power, higher prices for industries who use oil as an input ... a decline in real GDP, decline in government revenues, increase in inflation and an increase in interest rates and further appreciation of the Canadian dollar.”

6)           Canada will slowly become a petro state with all the negatives we’ve witnessed around the world.  Journalist Andrew Nikiforuk has written that Canada is moving in that direction.  He warns:  “Oil exporting nations, which run on oil loot instead of taxes, don`t function like real governments because over time they come to represent hydrocarbons the way plantation economies once championed slaveholders. Ultimately, most petro states, from Russia to Saudi Arabia, fear dissent, transparency, fair markets and good governance.”

7)           The absurdity of so-called “Ethical Oil” is made transparent when you consider our increased, unquestioning partnership with China.  After all, China is also working closely with Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.  This fact also makes a mockery of any government concerns about “foreign” influence among opponents of the Enbridge/China pipeline.

 

Now, I’d like to ask some questions:

1)      When China has access to more and more of our crude oil, it will be able to provide jobs and produce cheaper consumer goods for its people.  Why isn’t Harper doing for Canada what the Chinese government is doing for China?

2)      How can Canada raise issues like human rights abuses in China and elsewhere when so many of our future development eggs are in the Chinese basket?  How can we strongly and credibly criticize China for its refusal to support the UN Resolution on Syria, for example?

3)      Of course, the background to all my concerns is the fact that the planet is warming almost visibly.  The PM's position in Durban was to reject the one legally binding instrument, the Kyoto Protocol, insisting we would only join in to an agreement that included China.  China, already having done more on climate change than Canada, insisted it would only take on targets if and when countries, such as Canada, signed up for a second commitment period under Kyoto.  Is the PM using his trip to China to take a substantial step to global climate action by committing to China that we will withdraw our letter of intent to withdraw from Kyoto?

4)      Finally, I remember the time when Trudeau created Petro-Canada and its office in Calgary was referred to as Red Square.  Some Canadians were upset by Trudeau’s moves to nationalize our oil resources, but at least the nation that would have benefitted was Canada. Now, instead of Petro-Canada, it’s Petro-China, and instead of Ottawa nationalizing the Canadian oil and gas industry, it’s Beijing doing the nationalizing.

-30-

 

Media Contact: 
Rebecca Harrison
media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916

I am so grateful to all of the citizen of Saanich-Gulf Islands who came out (in some nasty weather to boot) for my first MP availability sessions throughout the riding. I held office-hour opportunities on each of the Gulf Islands for people who wanted some time with me one-on-one to review specific issues, as well as eight evening Town Hall meetings on the Islands and three on the Saanich Peninsula. All told, about 600 people took advantage of the opportunity. Democracy is alive and well in our community!

While the issues raised varied from one area to another, the number one issue in each community was the threat posed by the Enbridge supertanker scheme. British Columbians by a margin of 70-80% object to lifting the 40–year oil tanker ban on our coastlines. Constituents have my unalterable commitment to protect our fisheries and tourism industries, and our coastlines from the threat of oil tankers. The controversy created by the Prime Minister’s recent comments and the open letter from his Natural Resources Minister were frequently mentioned at the Town Halls.

The next most frequently raised concern was our health care system and particularly the Prime Minister’s latest ‘take it or leave it’ offer to the provinces. As well the following were discussed frequently, if not in every session:

• the threat to the wild salmon fishery posed by farmed salmon and evidence of suppression of information revealed in the Cohen Commission;
• issues related to First Nations rights and the ongoing unacceptable level of neglect for basic housing, health care and education;
• the question of how to deal with the legal, medical, and ethical questions relating to assisted suicide;
• the Kyoto Protocol and Canada’s actions in Durban at COP17;
• the omnibus crime bill and the use of mandatory minimum sentences;
• the challenges to local farmers;
• the F-35 fighter jets;
• the increasingly militaristic talk regarding Iran;
• fairness to our Veterans and ending the claw-back of their pensions;
• questions about why I voted against the continued bombing of Libya back in June; and
• pension issues and how to get pension increases to ordinary Canadians (and take an MP pension cut too!).

Of course, there were a number of very specific local concerns. Mayne Island residents, for example, have been victims of a very poorly planned and even more poorly executed Canada Post change in postal addresses that has left many residents without mail for months, and drove the local Canada Post staff to quit in desperation. People on the Gulf Islands also complained about BC Ferry issues (which are provincial issues, but for which I will do what I can).

Responses to the Mail-out Newsletter

Prior to the series of meetings, prompted by widespread public concerns, I had dedicated my January newsletter to in-depth coverage of economic, energy policy, jobs and environmental issues. In the mailed-out newsletter, I had asked for feedback from citizens in Saanich-Gulf Islands (given the mail delivery problem, not very useful for Mayne Island!). Below are some results (1 was ‘not important’, and 5 was ‘very important’).

In descending order, the average score for each issue was as follows:

1. Health Care 4.16,
2. Environmental Protection 4.02,
3. Economy and Job Creation 3.90,
4. Climate Change 3.81,
5. Education 3.78,
6. Food Security 3.78,
7. Oil Tankers 3.61,
8. Fish Farms 3.46,
9. Cost of Drugs 3.20,
10. Crime Prevention 3.08,
11. Tax Issues 2.99,
12. Peacekeeping 2.84, and
13. International Development 2.74.

Our next sessions will be in late June. In the meantime, to meet with me, contact 250-657-2000.

Publication Source:  Victoria Times Colonist Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Jack Knox

Seems odd then that just as police were showing off the 159 guns seized from a Saanich home, Green party leader Elizabeth May was rising in the House of Commons this week to fight a desperate rearguard action to save the registry.

Alas for Saanich-Gulf Islands MP May and the police who see the registry as a public safety issue, the data bank is about to be collapsed, its gun-ownership records shredded.

Publication Source:  Epoch Times Source Link:  View the full original article >> Author:  Matthew Little

China’s totalitarian regime will be able to sue Canada over lost profits resulting from stricter environmental controls or other regulatory changes under a foreign investor protection agreement Stephen Harper announced during his current trip to China.

The ramifications of the agreement were detailed for reporters Thursday by Green MP and party leader Elizabeth May. May said Chinese state investment in Canada’s oil sands (sometimes referred to as tar sands) and the new deal that Harper hopes to finalize after review by Parliament will open Canada to significant foreign influence by the Chinese regime.

OTTAWA -- The Green Party of Canada is deeply concerned about the situation in the Maldives and calls on Canada to exert diplomatic pressure to avoid further violence and work for a peaceful resolution.  Maldives President Nasheed was placed under house arrest after a military coup and has since resigned his post in order to avoid any bloodshed. 

“President Nasheed spoke eloquently for action on the climate change crisis in Copenhagen.  He truly cares about the future of the planet.  Canada should do all it can to ensure his safety and an end to the recent violence in his country,” said Green Leader Elizabeth May (Saanich-Gulf Islands).

The low-lying island nation is at risk of being swamped by rising sea levels due to climate change.  President Nasheed was an outspoken advocate for decreasing global greenhouse gas emissions and the Maldives had pledged to become a carbon-neutral nation. 

Media Contact >>

Ottawa -- Currently, Elizabeth May, MP Saanich-Gulf Islands, is forcing standing votes on opposition amendments to Bill C-19, in co-operation with Bloc Quebecois and NDP members. This action is being taken to emphasize the fact that all Members of Parliament, duly elected by a majority of their constituents, have a right to be recognized and heard in the House of Commons.

Unfortunately, this was not the case yesterday when Ms. May was prevented from paying tribute to Vaclav Havel who, ironically, was dedicated to the struggle for and protection of democratic rights.

Ms. May's protest action is also in response to the systematic silencing of MPs since the Conservative Party gained their coveted majority government."We have to take every opportunity which the rules of the House offer to show Canadians that their valued democratic rights are being curtailed almost daily in what was once a House where varying opinions were respected and heard."

MEDIA CONTACT:
Rebecca Harrison
 media@greenparty.ca
613-614-4916