the blog quebecois

I think this bill should be branded with the Liberal name. The CPC should from now on always refer to the "Liberal Kyoto Law".

To comply with the Liberal Kyoto Law we will have to raise th GST to 10%...

The following coal fired power plants will have to be shut down due to the Liberal Kyoto Law.....

And on and on. I want to see this bill nailed to the Liberals backs like a sign that says - Kick Me.

There's a reason that Harper won't do that - Brand Power. Kyoto as acquired a name recognition among Canadians that most politicians would kill for. If Harper allows this to be the differentiating issue between the Conservatives and Liberals, then the Liberals own the Brand. While the Conservatives will have to explain in long paragraphs explaining the actions that the government is taking on the file, the Liberals will simply have to say "I'm pro-Kyoto and he's anti-Kyoto. Simple and Clear Branding works everytime. What the Conservatives really need is an alternate buzzword, such as an alternate international treaty to add pro- to, sort of like anti-abortion activists attempt to brand themselves as "pro-life" instead of "anti-choice". Unfortunately, there is not serious alternate treaty - Kyoto is pretty much it.

On another note, the more I look at the Bill, the more brilliant it appears. I'm not sure how Pablo knew the long term strategic advantages of this act when he wrote it back in May 2006. First of all, it divides the Conservatives from the votes they want to get to win a majority (Ontario, Quebec) from their base in Western Canada (excluding cities with the exception of Alberta). Given the choice, Harper made the politically correct move in placating his base (having learned from Mulroney's error) at the expense of losing a piece of the middle ground. Secondly, the provisions of the Act will keep the environment on the public agenda clear into 2008. As stated in S. 5, after 60 days after the bill comes into effect, about May, Baird will have to present a report and present a plan. Then 120 days after that, about September, Baird will have to present another report. Then, Baird will have to repeat this process every year before May 31. If Baird releases a report, it gives an opening for the opposition parties to attack the lack of progress, more and more of which will be increasing due to the actions of the Conservative gov't then the actions of past Liberal governments. If at any point, Baird refuses to release a report, then the Liberals will claim that he's breaking the law (which would technically be true), opening the government up for embarrasing litigation. Also, the opposition parties can use a failure to report as justification for a non-confidence motion and then go through the election claiming that the Conservatives broke the law (which would again be technically true and thus free from libel suits). No matter where the Conservatives turn on this, they're cornered repeatedly on an issue that they want to shied away. All in all, it is an incredibly brilliant strategic move. I'm not sure how Harper can counter this. He could push for an election before the senate passes it but he's stuck waiting for the upcoming Quebec election.

Scott's analysis hinges on one flawed presumption: that Kyoto is the first and last word on environmental reform.

This idea has never had much resonance with the voting public: if Harper presents another idea that they find credible (and doable), then the power of this particular tool is lost.

Harper can also point to the voting record on this particular act, saying that this is exactly the kind of "unworkable" law that the Liberals have a habit of enacting, in the place of action.

A trap for the Tories? More like a coyote trap, I think.

I'm with the Fanthom on this.

There was a poll conducted a few weeks ago asking about Kyoto...If my memory is correct, some 59% of Canadians surveyed said that they don't care if it's under Kyoto or not as long as some progress is made.

We also have to remember that during the last election campaign, in the leaders debate it was mentionned that although Kyoto was ratified, Canada's emmissions went up more than the unsignatory USA...Could some of the above poll result stem from that?
I hope so.

Scott reminds me of CTV politial pundit Bob Fife--hyperactive spin cycle, no substance.

The Kyoto plan will be decidedly broken down for Canadians when the election comes...Scott neglects to consider Harper's brilliance--he has outshined the hapless Liberals in so many ways and he will have a chance to demonstrate how pathetic and inane this Kyoto protocol is.

Bring on the election--Scott will cry in his beer (don't try to sound like a bipartisan on this Mister--you are more Liberal than Mother Theresa was a nun).