Crusade against environmentalists

More evidence the Canadian PM believes the “Green Dragon” mythology coming out of the Cornwall Alliance.

Hammer blows appear to be falling to environmental protection every few weeks in Canada, meted out by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his inner circle. On February 6, government announced that the Canada Revenue Agency would carry out aggressive new audits on seven of the leading environmental organizations in Canada – and no other non-profit bodies. Then there's fish farms. The $26-million, 1,100-page Cohen Commission report, three years in the making, recommended a moratorium on new open net-cage fish farms. As if that none of that ever happened, Stephen Harper quietly opened the floodgates for a massive increase in fish farm installations in January. A few months ago, Stephen Harper finally outlined the plans for destroying large swaths of research evidence contained in libraries belong to the federal Department of Fisheries and oceans. The dumpsters are filling now, and scavengers trucking away what they can scrounge. What drives this incomprehensible war on the environment by the country’s political leader -- a war that has led William Rees, co-founder of the "ecological footprint" concept, to declare Stephen Harper guilty of "ecocide"? Harper is a devout Christian. Many declared Christians would be astonished and dismayed by Harper's hostility toward environmental protection, because faith groups of all kinds, both inside and outside the Christian community, have been at the forefront of conservation efforts in every part of the world. The recently elected Pope Francis, among many others, has emphasized this spiritual responsibility.
There a very good chance that it's Harpers brand of religious extremism that is behind his actions.

The results of a telephone poll were recently published by our little free weekly news rag here in West Kelowna, B.C.
Apparently 59% (that’s FIFTY NINE PERCENT) of respondents believe that Global Warming is a hoax.
In British Columbia, Canada.
In 2014.
I’m saddened, but I can’t say I’m really surprised.
TFS

The truly unsettling thing is that's what Canada is basing it's environmental policies on under the Harper government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_policy_of_the_Harper_government
Since 2006, the Canadian Conservative Party government led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper has adopted few and gutted many environmental laws and policies dealing with rising greenhouse emissions, pollution problems and climate change.[1] The Conservatives have also made significant budget cuts at Environment Canada, leading to criticism that it is undermining the ability of departmental staff to enforce remaining environmental laws.[2] The Conservatives have also restricted the ability of government scientists to speak to the public, the media, and even other scientists, leading to criticism that they are trying to limit the debate on environmental issues by "silencing scientists"
This is all based on the ideology and almost certainly on the religious beliefs of a man who's also worked very hard in the last decade to undermine the democratic process here, being caught repeated violating the law and acting against the basic principles our Parliamentary democracy depends on to be open and fair.
Doesn't Canada have anything like our First Amendment guaranteeing free speech? How can a purportedly democratic government keep a segment of the population (or even an individual) from speaking their mind? If this is legal in Canada, I'm shocked. I had no idea our neighbor to the North had this kind of dictatorial control over its people. Lois
The results of a telephone poll were recently published by our little free weekly news rag here in West Kelowna, B.C. Apparently 59% (that's FIFTY NINE PERCENT) of respondents believe that Global Warming is a hoax. In British Columbia, Canada. In 2014. I'm saddened, but I can't say I'm really surprised. TFS
Are people who believe it is NOT a hoax allowed to say so without repercussions from the government? Lois
Are people who believe it is NOT a hoax allowed to say so without repercussions from the government? Lois
Not on a national level, politicians like Stephan Dion who did so as part of his official platform are viciously attacked in Parliament and the press by the conservative government who we now know had no intention of any real environmental protection. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=dfba5705-77b9-475d-80a2-283ebe50e5f5
Stéphane Dion had barely finished his acceptance speech at the Liberal leadership convention in Montreal when the Conservatives unleashed their first attack ad. Their aim was to define Mr. Dion as a leader before he had a chance to define himself. That was December 2006, and the Conservative barrage has been unrelenting: Dion the Ditherer, Dion the Green Taxgrabber, Dion the Out-of-Touch professor, Dion the Weak Leader. "Dion," chant the Conservative commercials. "Not Worth the Risk." And the ads are accompanied by a devastating image: Mr. Dion caught in a Gallic shrug with an expression on his face that seems to say: "I haven't a clue what I'm talking about."
Millions were spent to destroy the image of a man we now know probably conflicted with Stephen Harper's religious beliefs. The Harper government has also used Revenue Canada to attack environmental groups. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/7-environmental-charities-face-canada-revenue-agency-audits-1.2526330
The Canada Revenue Agency is currently conducting extensive audits on some of Canada's most prominent environmental groups to determine if they comply with guidelines that restrict political advocacy, CBC News has learned. If the CRA rules that the groups exceeded those limits, their charitable status could be revoked, which would effectively shut them down. Many of the groups are among the Conservative government's fiercest critics. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty signalled clearly in his budget of 2012 that political activity of these groups would be closely monitored and he allocated $8 million to the effort. The environmental organizations believe they have been targeted with the goal of silencing their criticism. “We’re concerned about what appears to be an increase in audits around political activity and in particular around environmental organizations," said Marcel Lauzière, president of Imagine Canada, an umbrella organization for charities. “There’s a big chill out there with what charities can and cannot do."
We have an ideologically based government with some of the worst policies in the history of this country, anyone who thinks Canada is still a moderate and modern country under the Harper government is living in the past.
Are people who believe it is NOT a hoax allowed to say so without repercussions from the government? Lois
Not on a national level, politicians like Stephan Dion who did so as part of his official platform are viciously attacked in Parliament and the press by the conservative government who we now know had no intention of any real environmental protection. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=dfba5705-77b9-475d-80a2-283ebe50e5f5
Stéphane Dion had barely finished his acceptance speech at the Liberal leadership convention in Montreal when the Conservatives unleashed their first attack ad. Their aim was to define Mr. Dion as a leader before he had a chance to define himself. That was December 2006, and the Conservative barrage has been unrelenting: Dion the Ditherer, Dion the Green Taxgrabber, Dion the Out-of-Touch professor, Dion the Weak Leader. "Dion," chant the Conservative commercials. "Not Worth the Risk." And the ads are accompanied by a devastating image: Mr. Dion caught in a Gallic shrug with an expression on his face that seems to say: "I haven't a clue what I'm talking about."
Millions were spent to destroy the image of a man we now know probably conflicted with Stephen Harper's religious beliefs. The Harper government has also used Revenue Canada to attack environmental groups. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/7-environmental-charities-face-canada-revenue-agency-audits-1.2526330
The Canada Revenue Agency is currently conducting extensive audits on some of Canada's most prominent environmental groups to determine if they comply with guidelines that restrict political advocacy, CBC News has learned. If the CRA rules that the groups exceeded those limits, their charitable status could be revoked, which would effectively shut them down. Many of the groups are among the Conservative government's fiercest critics. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty signalled clearly in his budget of 2012 that political activity of these groups would be closely monitored and he allocated $8 million to the effort. The environmental organizations believe they have been targeted with the goal of silencing their criticism. “We’re concerned about what appears to be an increase in audits around political activity and in particular around environmental organizations," said Marcel Lauzière, president of Imagine Canada, an umbrella organization for charities. “There’s a big chill out there with what charities can and cannot do."
We have an ideologically based government with some of the worst policies in the history of this country, anyone who thinks Canada is still a moderate and modern country under the Harper government is living in the past. I'm sorry to hear that. It's a sad turn of events. Lois

It’s very frustrating for the millions of people that don’t support the conservative government, because of our system Harper doesn’t need a majority of Canadians to support him, just enough to have more MPs than all the opposition.
And the Harper government has consistently used illegal and unethical tactics to build the “support” needed to get into power.
In the last election the conservative party compiled an extensive list of voters who stated an intention to vote for other parties. This list was then used on election day to mass call thousands of people and posing as Elections Canada inform them falsely that their polling station had changed location. This illegal campaign has been traced back to conservative campaign offices, computers and in some cases individuals…and yet Stephen Harper and his religiously motivated and highly destructive agenda is still in office.
Hitchens was right about the evil that can be done by true believers of a religious apocalypse and we’re seeing that play out on our national stage, it’s been distressing for me from day one when the first act that Harper did was go into a riding that had just voted in a Liberal candidate and invite that man into his government and cabinet. That would be like a Democrat being elected to the Senate and immediately switching to the Republican party.

I knew David Emerson back when I was in government and have followed his career with interest. That he is a very capable person is beyond argument. What is arguable is the morality of making this change, especially since he's not able to say that he didn't like the way his party was acting. It is one thing to act on principle - or least say that's your reason - but quite another to deal yourself into a new party and a cabinet post with no reason but personal greed. Mr. Emerson isn't the first in Canadian politics to do so - in fact, it almost seems to be the fashion these days. Famous men have done this - Gladstone and Churchill to name two. Mr. Emerson has stamped himself as very competent, but politically immoral.
Right off the bat the new PM signalled that he had no respect for the will of voters or the Parliamentary system he was supposed to be a responsible steward of. And it's just gone downhill from there.
It's very frustrating for the millions of people that don't support the conservative government, because of our system Harper doesn't need a majority of Canadians to support him, just enough to have more MPs than all the opposition. And the Harper government has consistently used illegal and unethical tactics to build the "support" needed to get into power. In the last election the conservative party compiled an extensive list of voters who stated an intention to vote for other parties. This list was then used on election day to mass call thousands of people and posing as Elections Canada inform them falsely that their polling station had changed location. This illegal campaign has been traced back to conservative campaign offices, computers and in some cases individuals...and yet Stephen Harper and his religiously motivated and highly destructive agenda is still in office. Hitchens was right about the evil that can be done by true believers of a religious apocalypse and we're seeing that play out on our national stage, it's been distressing for me from day one when the first act that Harper did was go into a riding that had just voted in a Liberal candidate and invite that man into his government and cabinet. That would be like a Democrat being elected to the Senate and immediately switching to the Republican party. http://thetyee.ca/Views/2006/02/07/EmersonJump/
I knew David Emerson back when I was in government and have followed his career with interest. That he is a very capable person is beyond argument. What is arguable is the morality of making this change, especially since he's not able to say that he didn't like the way his party was acting. It is one thing to act on principle - or least say that's your reason - but quite another to deal yourself into a new party and a cabinet post with no reason but personal greed. Mr. Emerson isn't the first in Canadian politics to do so - in fact, it almost seems to be the fashion these days. Famous men have done this - Gladstone and Churchill to name two. Mr. Emerson has stamped himself as very competent, but politically immoral.
Right off the bat the new PM signalled that he had no respect for the will of voters or the Parliamentary system he was supposed to be a responsible steward of. And it's just gone downhill from there.
I've often thought the US would be better off with a parliamentary system. I see it has a downside. But I suppose there is no perfect system of democracy. They are all flawed--just better than all the rest, as Churchill said. Lois

Wow, I wouldn’t have thought Canada would be so regressive. I thought Ted Cruz was an aberration, as far as Canadians go. Well maybe when Texas eventually emerges from its political Dark Ages, Cruz will be motivated to return to his true homeland.

Wow, I wouldn't have thought Canada would be so regressive. I thought Ted Cruz was an aberration, as far as Canadians go. Well maybe when Texas eventually emerges from its political Dark Ages, Cruz will be motivated to return to his true homeland.
Canada itself is a progressive nation, for most of our history the Liberal party has been the natural governing party. Canadian domestic and international polices have been moderate and included things like Lester Pearson's Nobel Peace Prize. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1957/pearson-facts.html Universal health care, social supports systems and respect for minorities has been of major importance here even if applied imperfectly as with the First Nations. But the sovereignty issue has created deep political divides in the nation and this is what a radical far right movement that started out as the Reform party has used to first get into a minority government then essentially stage a slow moving coup. Without the deep divide between French and the rest of Canada this most likely wouldn't be happening, most Canadians identified as moderates before the Harper government seized power. This is the country where Greenpeace was created and where David Suzuki is a national hero, he's listed at #5 for all time greatest Canadian. And yet the Harper governments acts like people like Suzuki and Tommy Douglas don't or didn't exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greatest_Canadian It says a lot about Canadians that a man who brought us universal health care is the considered the greatest Canadian ever. While I don't hate Harper- that too isn't really the Canadian way- I find his fanaticism and contempt for life to be deeply disgusting.

Well, it is good that Canada has not lost all of its progressiveness. It is interesting what you suggest about your Reform Party’s rise to power due to divisions with the French Canadians. I see a parallel, in a way, with our Tea Party’s rise in influence, as I believe that racism (subconscious or not) has been a strong underlying factor in the rise of that faction. If we had not elected a black President, I doubt that the Tea Party would have ever amounted to anything of particular influence.

But speaking of Ted Cruz, could you guys please come get him and take him home? He promised his constituents that he was going to renounce his Canadian citizenship. But in order to do that, my understanding is that he must submit proof to the Canadian government that he is, legitimately, a citizen of another country (i.e., the U.S.). Since he (AFAIK) has still not been able to do that, it may be that he is not and never was a legitimate citizen of the U.S.
Thus, I think he should be Canada’s responsibility. So again, PLEASE, come get him before he does any more damage down here.
BTW, President Obama has been referred to, by some, as the Deporter in Chief. I think Cruz should be high on the deportation list. (I know this is fantasy on my part, but, really, it sounds like he would fit in well with your Reform Party.)

But speaking of Ted Cruz, could you guys please come get him and take him home? He promised his constituents that he was going to renounce his Canadian citizenship. But in order to do that, my understanding is that he must submit proof to the Canadian government that he is, legitimately, a citizen of another country (i.e., the U.S.). Since he (AFAIK) has still not been able to do that, it may be that he is not and never was a legitimate citizen of the U.S. Thus, I think he should be Canada's responsibility. So again, PLEASE, come get him before he does any more damage down here. BTW, President Obama has been referred to, by some, as the Deporter in Chief. I think Cruz should be high on the deportation list. (I know this is fantasy on my part, but, really, it sounds like he would fit in well with your Reform Party.)
"I'm sorry, Canada has reached it smugness limited at this time, please make this application at a later date.":-)

Looks like the Harper government has been spying on environmental and democracy groups here as well.
http://desmog.ca/2013/11/20/day-i-found-out-canadian-government-was-spying-me

I read the news in the Vancouver Observer. There, front and centre, was the name of the organization I worked for until recently: Dogwood Initiative. My colleagues and I had been wary of being spied on for a long time, but having it confirmed still took the wind out of me. I told my parents about the article over dinner. They’re retired school teachers who lived in northern Alberta for 35 years before moving to Victoria. I asked them: “Did you know the Canadian government is spending your tax dollars to spy on your daughter?" Then I told them how one of the events detailed in e-mails from Richard Garber, the National Energy Board’s “Group Leader of Security," was a workshop in a Kelowna church run by one of my close friends and colleagues, Celine Trojand (who’s about the most warm-hearted person you could ever meet). About 30 people, mostly retirees, attended to learn about storytelling, theory of change and creative sign-making (cue the scary music). In the e-mails, Garber marshals security and intelligence operations between government operations and private interests and notes that his security team has consulted with Canada’s spying agency, CSIS. To add insult to injury, another set of documents show CSIS and the RCMP have been inviting oil executives to secret classified briefings at CSIS headquarters in Ottawa, in what The Guardian describes as “unprecedented surveillance and intelligence sharing with companies."
It makes it pretty clear who's in power in Canada, and it isn't the public.
For speaking up for the public interest and speaking out against the export of raw bitumen through the Great Bear Rainforest, hundreds of people like me have been called radicals and painted as enemies of the state, as somehow un-Canadian. That last bit is what hits me in the gut. I love my country. And in my eyes, there isn’t anything much more patriotic than fighting for the interests of Canadian citizens. I’ve argued that after 25 years of oilsands development, Albertans should have something to show for it — not be facing budget crises and closing hospital beds; that Albertans aren’t collecting a fair share of resource revenues; that we should develop resources at a responsible pace that doesn’t cause rampant inflation, undermining Canadians’ quality of life and hurting other sectors of the economy; that we should prioritize Canadian energy security (half of Canada is currently dependent on foreign oil). And I’ve agreed with the Alberta Federation of Labour that exporting raw bitumen and 50,000 jobs to China doesn’t make sense for Canadians
I feel the same way, I'm not a citizen of Enbridge or the Untied states of BP, but that's how we're being treated now. And if you speak out against what's going on mouthpieces from industry accuse you of being unpatriotic.
"I'm sorry, Canada has reached it smugness limited at this time, please make this application at a later date.":-)
That's not fair. If Ted Cruz can't denounce his Canadian citizenship, because of Canadian laws that require him to first prove his legal status as a citizen of another country (i.e., the US), which he apparently can't, then he should be your responsibility. Due to the damage he is inflicting, politically, your refusal to take him back, could be grounds for war, or at least a major lawsuit. If we have to keep Cruz, we should, at least, get reparations. Just take him back. Make him live with the French Canadians, if you want.
That's not fair. If Ted Cruz can't denounce his Canadian citizenship, because of Canadian laws that require him to first prove his legal status as a citizen of another country (i.e., the US), which he apparently can't, then he should be your responsibility. Due to the damage he is inflicting, politically, your refusal to take him back, could be grounds for war, or at least a major lawsuit. If we have to keep Cruz, we should, at least, get reparations. Just take him back. Make him live with the French Canadians, if you want.
Bring it on buddy, we have reinforced igloo fallout shelters. Just please hurry, they're melting due to global warming.:-) I'm also pretty sure that if we forced Ted Cruz on Quebec they would separate from Confederation this time, the guy is toxic.
That's not fair. If Ted Cruz can't denounce his Canadian citizenship, because of Canadian laws that require him to first prove his legal status as a citizen of another country (i.e., the US), which he apparently can't, then he should be your responsibility. Due to the damage he is inflicting, politically, your refusal to take him back, could be grounds for war, or at least a major lawsuit. If we have to keep Cruz, we should, at least, get reparations. Just take him back. Make him live with the French Canadians, if you want.
Bring it on buddy, we have reinforced igloo fallout shelters. Just please hurry, they're melting due to global warming.:-) I'm also pretty sure that if we forced Ted Cruz on Quebec they would separate from Confederation this time, the guy is toxic. If that is your attitude, expect to hear from our attorneys. Anyway, due to AGW, our Manifest Destiny has extended to annexing the northern territory, that extends to, what used to be the Arctic, as part of the continental United States. Anyone, up there, who doesn't speak English, should begin making arrangements to move back to France.