Friday, March 12, 2010

February Averages

Time to look at February's polling. Twelve national polls were taken during this month (seven more than last month), totalling about 26,060 interviews. Here are the results we get at the national level, with the difference from last month's average in brackets.

Conservatives - 32.8% (+0.4)
Liberals - 30.8% (+0.7)
New Democrats - 16.2% (-0.1)
Greens - 9.8% (-0.1)
Bloc Quebecois - 8.9% (-0.6)

The Conservatives manage a tiny rebound, but it pales in comparison to their 4.4-point loss in January. The Liberals also make a small gain, but this is a gain of almost three points compared to December's result. The NDP hardly moves at all, but they would much prefer to be at around 2008's 18%. The Bloc drops, but it is more important to look at the Quebec number. The Greens drop a little, but it is still a 1.6-point gain since December. It is quite astonishing to see such a close race between the Tories and the Liberals at such a low number.

The seat projection for these results is as follows, with the difference from last month in brackets:

Conservatives - 121 (-2)
Liberals - 109 (+6)
Bloc Quebecois - 49 (-2)
New Democrats - 29 (-2)
Greens - 0 (unchanged)

Only a loss of two seats for the Conservatives, though they were at 140 seats in December. The Liberals are up six seats, when they were only at 86 seats in December. The NDP is down two more (after being down one in January), while the Bloc is down two after gaining one.The regional results, with difference from last month in brackets:

BRITISH COLUMBIA (12 polls - about 3,010 people)

Conservatives - 34.3% (+0.8)
Liberals - 26.3% (+0.1)
New Democrats - 24.5% (-0.6)
Greens - 12.7% (-0.3)

The Conservatives manage to tread water and make a small gain, but they are still more than four points lower than their December level. The Liberals remain stable, which is good considering their level of support. The NDP drops a little, but this is a drop of almost two points in two months. The Greens seem to always be taking steps backwards and forwards in this province, losing ground this month.

ALBERTA (11 polls - about 2,270 people)

Conservatives - 54.4% (-0.6)
Liberals - 21.2% (+2.7)
New Democrats - 10.6% (-0.3)
Greens - 10.6% (-0.7)

The Conservatives continue to slip in the province. The Liberals, meanwhile, make a large gain - this trend in Alberta can't be ignored. The NDP broke the Conservative sweep in 2008, and the Liberals look like they will continue to block that sweep in 2010-11. The NDP slips a little, while the Greens slip a little more.

PRAIRIES (11 polls - about 1,650 people)

Conservatives - 47.0% (-0.4)
New Democrats - 21.7% (-1.9)
Liberals - 21.3% (+2.2)
Greens - 8.9% (+0.4)

The Conservatives drop a little, but this is more than five points of losses since December. The Liberals are up, a gain of more than three points in two months. What is going on in the west? The NDP has dropped about two points, erasing their January gains. The Greens are up a point in two months.

In all, the Conservatives take 66 seats in the West. The Liberals win 18 and the NDP win 11.

ONTARIO (12 polls - about 8,740 people)

Liberals - 38.1% (+0.9)
Conservatives - 34.9% (-0.2)
New Democrats - 15.3% (-0.2)
Greens - 10.6% (unchanged)

The Liberals are up almost a point, marking gains of almost four points over the last two months. After losing four points in January, this is a small drop for the Tories, but worrisome for them nevertheless. The same goes for the NDP, who lost one point in January and now another small loss in February. The Greens remain stable.

The Liberals win 53 seats, the Tories win 41, and the NDP takes 12.

QUEBEC (12 polls - about 5,820 people)

Bloc Quebecois - 36.4% (-1.4)
Liberals - 26.5% (+0.9)
Conservatives - 16.4% (+0.5)
New Democrats - 11.0% (-0.9)
Greens - 8.3% (+1.3)

The Bloc takes a relatively large step backwards, but the trend seems to have been that every loss is made-up by a gain the next month. We'll see if that trend holds in March. The Liberals make a decent little gain, up a full point since December. The Conservatives make a small gain, but are still down more than two points since December. The NDP is down, erasing their gains from January, while the Greens are up almost two points since December.

The Bloc wins 49 seats while the Liberals win 18. The Conservatives are reduced to six and the NDP win two.

ATLANTIC CANADA (12 polls - about 1,860 people)

Liberals - 37.5% (+1.7)
Conservatives - 30.9% (+0.9)
New Democrats - 23.1% (-3.2)
Greens - 7.5% (+1.0)

The Liberals are up, marking almost six points of gains since December. The Conservatives make a decent gain, but that is still more than four points of losses in two months. The NDP is down big here, almost six points in all in two months. The Greens are up a little for another month.

The Liberals dominate with 20 seats, while the Conservatives (eight) and NDP (four) split the rest.The Conservatives are starting to re-gain their balance, with gains in Atlantic Canada, Quebec, and British Columbia. But they are modest gains when compared to the huge losses they've suffered, and they are still down in Ontario, the Prairies, and Alberta. While those two last regions are still safe, something has to be done in Ontario.

The Liberals continue to make gains, which they have done in every region of the country. They are re-establishing themselves in Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada (their bread and butter), and are even making inroads in British Columbia and Alberta. In other words, they are heading in the right direction.

The NDP had a very rough month in February, losing ground in every part of the country. Their large losses in Atlantic Canada and the Prairies are troublesome. They seem to be suffering from the Liberal re-bound as much as the Conservatives have been.

The Bloc sees a drop equal to the gains made by the Liberals and the Conservatives, which is a source of worry for them. But, they still hold a good lead over the Liberals and will be able to take advantage of the Conservative drop.

With a loss in British Columbia and stability in Ontario, the Greens are not closer to electing their first MP.


  1. The conservatives need to answer the following questions regarding the latest conservative-soft-on-crime scandals.

    Scandal 1:

    Slap on the wrist to conservative MP regarding drunk-driving - cocaine possesion.

    Scandal 2:

    Terrorist activity from a conservative MP trying to breach airport security.

    Who did the conservatives speak with in order to have the sentence in scandal 1 reduced to 'nothing'?

    What promises were made and to whom to have these charges dropped?

    Were there any conservative-brown-envelopes (a former conservative PM creation) handed to any sitting judges to have charges tossed?

    Would the terrorist activity be taken seriously if the person was not white for scandal 2?

    What phone calls were placed, when, and to whom, to have said terrorist activity tossed out so quickly??

    These questions need to be answered now. Otherwise the conservatives need to step down immediately.

    Why am I the only one brave enough to pose these questions??

    Why are conservative posters so quick to dismiss these questions and shoot the messanger posing these tough questions? Does this imply that they know I am correct and have no chance of proving me wrong?

  2. Josh you're effectively spamming. These questions were asked and answered on a previous thread.

    1) LIBERAL AG of Ontario has a lot to answer for. Jaffer's sentence should have included substantial community service. Typical soft on crime Liberals.

    Sounds like the charges were dropped because of the LIBERAL charter.

    2) Terrorist activity ?

    That's both laughable and pretty damn insulting to all the Canadians who died on Sept. 11th.

    Yelling at somebody behind the counter is NOT a terrorist activity.

  3. I would stop asking them if I got actual answers.

    You've provided me with, as expected from you based on your stellar track-record, talking points straight from the PMO.

    There's a difference with answering something and actually providing a logical answer.

    For example, the answer to 'what's 2+2" is 4. Just because someone answers "9" doesn't mean it's right.

    So until I get actual logical answers to this latest of many conservative 'do-as-I-say-and-not-as-I-do' situations, I will keep posting them.

    Unlike you, I'm brave enough to post these difficult questions.

  4. There is no evidence of federal intereference in the Jaffer case. If anyone is to answer for Jaffer's light sentence it is the Ontario judicial system.

  5. If you want to try to off-load the blame onto the Ontario judicial system - what about the Jim Flaherty was AG of Ontario for many years and he appointed both the judge in the Jaffer whitewash as well as the crown prosecutor. His hands are all over this.

    Guergis should also be charged with assault and hate-speech for her comments about PEI. Its nice that she tries to slough it of as just "reacting emotionally". She is in cabinet and is privy to state secrets etc... what if she "acts emotionally" again and says something that endangers our troops??? She is a menace to society and needs to be kept away from any position where she might be given sensitive information that she might blurt out in her next emotional rage.

  6. Dl the judge has nothing to do with anything. The deal was reached without any involvement from him whatsoever.

    And any decision made by a crown prosecuter is the responsibility of the current AG, who is a Liberal.

    And what on earth are you talking about ?

    Hate speech ? Assault ?

    You're imagining events that never happened.

    BTW What state secrets do you see from the position of STATUS OF WOMEN ?

  7. But hey i'm glad to argue this giant distraction with you!

    Meanwhile gov't assets are being sold off, free trade agreements are being signed, restrictions on foriegn ownership of broadcasting, telecom, uranium, and potash are being removed, and the civil service is being cut.

    Lefty socialist paradise Rome is burning because 29 Liberals won't show up for work after hypocritically complaining about prorogation.

    And this is the best you can do ??

    Tell me if anyone locates Ignatieff's spine.

  8. Shadow, honest answer please:

    Imagine you're at the airport and a belligerent middle-eastern man begins causing a huge fuss, "“literally banging and kicking on the glass at the security doors,” ... When they reached security, she [he] ran through the metal detectors ... setting off the bells. “She [he] took her boots off and she threw them” at a security official ... berating them the whole time."


    Josh is obviously going way too far in calling it terrorist activity; but wouldn't you be outraged if the man wasn't detained or arrested ... and actually allowed onto your flight? Again, be honest and non-partisan, please.

  9. SK nobody has verified a word you said.

    Here's what we know:

    An airport employee who was not personally involved in the incident but witnessed it wrote a letter to Liberal MP Wayne Easter.

    Nobody filed a formal complaint.

    Nobody followed proper channels.

    Ok so its whistleblower ? Then why not go to the press instead of a Liberal MP ??

    Sounds like somebody with a partisan axe to grind blew Geurgis yelling at some woman behind the counter WAY out of proportion.

  10. I haven't heard her deny any of the story.

    I think that the ballot question in the next election is which party best reflects their values. The values that the Tory party represents are best reflected in people like Helena Guergis and Rahim Jaffer. They are the heart and soul of the Conservative Party of Canada and they encapsulate everything that party represents.

    BTW: I think the Tories should bring in a law calling for a mandatory minimum life sentence for drug users who refuse to reveal who their dealers are. Someone obviously sold cocaine to the Jaffer/Guergis household - I think that until one of those two gives that name to the RCMP - they should both be placed in solitary confinement.

  11. LEts see the security tapes from the PEI airport.

    Then we will know.

    If that happens

    Shadow brace yourself.

  12. All security tapes would have been destroyed by now.

    They're only kept for so long before being recorded over.

    Clearly this issue was never serious enough for somebody to file an official complaint, in which case the tapes would have been saved.

    Sounds like uninformed, untrue gossip from a partisan Liberal airport employee with an axe to grind.

  13. Ira - There is no evidence that thre was no federal interference.

    Peter - I'm posing the difficult questions so we can get to the bottom of this. Shadow is simply replying with talking points. Just because he is doing that, doesn't mean I need to be silenced.

    DL - It's the tip of the ice-berg isn't it. Could this be a classic case of conservative 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours'?? Was this a pay-back for being appointed by the conservatives??

    SK - The last time someone acted in this manner they were tasered to death.

    I will bravely continue to pose these questions regardless of how badly and desperate the cons are in their want to silence me.

  14. Josh:

    "I'm posing the difficult questions so we can get to the bottom of this. "

    No you aren't, you are just trying to score cheap political points the same as Shadow.

    A pox on both your houses !

  15. Josh, if you want to post potentially libelous comments, start your own blog and do so.

  16. Shadow: But hey i'm glad to argue this giant distraction with you!

    Meanwhile...[lots of real issues, not even including detainees]

    And this is the best you can do ??

    Golly. I agree completely with Shadow. Mark this day!

  17. Josh - Really?

    There's no evidence that I'm not the King of Spain. Does that mean you should take the possibility seriously?

    I do think the Conservatives would be well served by removing Helena Guergis from caucus. She's a loose cannon, and she's dangerous.

  18. 29 Liberal MP's who don't show up for work and for fear of an election and you repeat "Time is UP"!

    You guys are funny.

    Instead of demanding an answer from us bloggers look in the mirror!

    2008 150 year record broken in lowest pop support. 3 months ago in four contests, not a single Liberal was sent to Parliament. Yikes!

    Ladies those are the facts.

    Canadians don't trust Liberals to form government and the Jack Layton saved you from yourself in 2009.

    Tissues are on the left.

  19. Eric

    For Gawds sake can we not get them to knock off the "Flame Wars" ??

    If they want a place to "Flame away" I can provide that.

  20. Mirror please!
    Sorry, I can't keep giving you mirrors. Stop looking at them and they will stop breaking.

    This is my second post on this thread.
    On February 27, you said When your party becomes a credible threat in the actual Ballot box again, let me know. Nobody has let you know, so why are you back here? Why did you lie?

    First @19:40 was factual including Election results.
    And how is that germane to the topic "February Averages"? You can try to change the channel all you want, but the uncensored documents remain withheld.

    An inquiry should be called on how 40% of the LPOC failed to show up to vote against the budget after their publicity on January 25, 2009 at taxpayers expense.
    Great. I agree. You can call the inquiry into the detainee scandal at the same time.

  21. Guys, go back and read through this thread. Slowly. With deep breaths after each post. And then think of what they look like to anybody who wasn't the author.

    Not a pretty thought.

    Can we all calm down and back off?

  22. Looks like the BTs win again. Yet another blog slowly being turned into a poisoned well. They do have a handbook on disrupting discussion, you know, just like the CPC MPs do.

  23. Liberal:
    "Yet another blog slowly being turned into a poisoned well."

    Yes they do. I'm happy to offer them another venue. Delphi membership is free.

    Tired of the "Flame Wars" om here.

  24. John,

    have you looked this site

    great detail.

    Do you have any thoughts on why Nik Nanos Polling has only recorded the Green above 8% in March 2009 (past 12 months)while most others capture them at 9-10%?

    Do you think prompting makes a difference via polling?

  25. Liberal Supporter why hasn't Derek Lee's motion been put forward ?

    I keep hearing the Liberal party has nothing to hide.

    And yet they've folded like a cheap suit, Derek Lee's motion hasn't been introduced, and we're never going to know the truth.

    Could it be that you might have a problem with Michael Ignatieff's leadership on this issue ?

    Could it be that your party has something to hide ?

  26. Could it be that you might have a problem with Michael Ignatieff's leadership on this issue ?

    No they have a major problem with Harpo's leadership.

    He has threatened dissolution if they present the motion and they can't afford an election right now.

  27. Peter if a party refuses to stand up for its priniciples then they don't exist.

    When 29 Liberals stayed home from voting on the budget they lost all credibility when complaining about BOTH the budget AND prorogation.

    When Derek Lee refused to introduce his motion they lost all credibility when talking about democracy, the soverignty of parliament, and the rule of law.

    If my legal interpretation was the same as the Liberals i'd be howling with outrage right now.

    I'd go to the barricades. I'd want to fight door to door in a campaign.

    And yet nothing.

    I guess democracy, as the Liberals define it, is less important then self interest.

  28. No Sympathy for hissy fit !!

  29. Peter,

    The liberals have called for an inquiry into the Afghan detainee transfer handover from the start of the mission in Afghanistan.

    The conservatives have refused.

    When the Liberals suggested to have some committee members sworn in as members of the privy council, and view unredacted documents in camera.

    The conservatives have refused.

    When parliament ordered all unredacted documents to the commitee re parliamentary supremacy.

    The conservatives have refused (on a phoney excuse of national security)

    When Michael Ignatiedd suggested last fall it was time to bring Harper down, and have an election?

    The conservatives crucified him.

    Now he is trying to make parliament work, and work with the government on these issues.

    The conservatives call him a wuss.

    Shadow, if you are so bloody hungry for an election OK.

    I say bring one on.

    Let Harper dissolve parliament, because he doesn't want to hand over documents as ordered.

    Let him explain to the Canadian people why he won't do that, and why we need an election over it.

    The conservatives are like the NDP,
    an irresponsible, foolish and ignorant party.

    You are nothing but a CPC apologist who never discusses issues, but just tows a CPC line.

    Frankly you are boring.

  30. 49

    "Let Harper dissolve parliament, because he doesn't want to hand over documents as ordered.

    Let him explain to the Canadian people why he won't do that, and why we need an election over it.

    But that would be an admission that the Tories are NOT God!! Unacceptable !

  31. Peter,

    I will say it again just in case Shadow did not understnad it from the other 500 times it was said.

    One party is calling for an inquiry from the start of the mission in Afghanistan. (THE START)

    One party is stone walling.

    One party is trying to disrupt the committees work.

    Shadow can you take a guess which one that is?

    One party is saying they have nothing to hide and is willing to put their money where their mouth is.

    One party is not. Shadow take a guess which one that is.

    Last fall Ignatieff was an opportunist for seeking an election.

    Which party called him an opportunist and crucified him.

    Shadow take a guess who that was.

    Now he's trying to make it all work.

    Which party is calling him a wuss.

    Shadow take another guess.

    The contradictions, and downright falsehoods, from the CPC are astounding.

    Shadow if the CPC, has nothing to hide thet have one very simple way to prove it.

    Take one guess big boy on how they can do that.

  32. Shadow,

    Your comments about the charter on a previous thread were riduculous.

    You really have no understanding of the charter do you?

    Go back and re read your statement.

    As for Ignatieff, yes there will be some who question his decisions.

    That is normal and healthy in an open and inclusive party.

    Should we be robots and blindly follow the leader.

    Take a guess who I am referring to

  33. 49 steps you're retreating with a capital R, folding like a cheap suit.

    I mean c'mon, you guys are NOT a serious party anymore.

    This is WORSE than Dion. I can't take you seriously on prorogation, on the budget, or on the detainee issue.

    What specifically are you refering to about my comments on the charter ?

    Using the notwithstanding clause to ban the Nijab ? Its perfectly doable.

    Not sure where i'm being "ridiculous" or showing a lack of "understanding.

    Perhaps you could articulate your thoughts instead of throwing out insults ?

  34. Don't hate the person asking the difficult questions.

    Hate the fact that these difficult questions need to be asked.

    Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. Something conservatives using talking points will never understand.

  35. Peter said...

    More of the usual bafflegab I see. He is beyond hope.

    Note the use of "talking points" !!


    Pe-duh, every single statement 49 Steps stated is backed by fact.

    Can you disprove any of what he just said, or are you simply pulling a-shadow and using a counter-talking-point arguement.

    There is a difference with talking-points, and fact.

    Unfortunately for the con-bots, they are incapable of telling the difference.

  36. Josh

    That post to 49 was in reference to one by Shadow.

    It supports 49's position !! 'Sheesh !!

  37. 49 steps are you upset that your party has been totally discredited on budgetary issue, on prorogation, and on the detainee issue ?

    I know I would be.

    I guess all that high minded rhetoric was meaningless after all.

    So much for standing up for Canadian democracy.

    The saying used to be "Dion is NOT a leader".

    Now it is "The Liberals are NOT a party".

    Seriously, replace Iggy or go join the NDP, Greens, or BQ.

    You cannot talk such utter nonsense for months and months and then fold like a cheap suit.

    Either you were lying then when you said you were standing up for Canadian democracy and the supremacy of parliament or you are lying now.

  38. So much for the rules of conduct.

    Congrats people, I've been visiting these boards for some time, and have yet to see them decend into the pit of bile and venom, that this one has become.

    You're #1, You're #1.

    49 Steps,

    You are the biggest disappointment to me as I've seen you have rational discussions before.

    Before you lay this at Shadows feet, I'd suggest you go and look at who set the tone for this with the very first comment.


    We are all suitibly impressed with your bravery...
    if not your modestity, civility or intellegence.

    You can stop taking about your tremendous courage now.
    It's unbecoming.


    Lotta respect for you dude.

    If we want to have good discussions, where moderates such as Earl, John, Volkov, and myself will feel welcome, I'd suggest that we respect the rules of conduct, laid out recently by Eric, to the best of our abilities.

    Can someone help me out by reprinting that policy?

  39. 49 steps the Liberal party no longer exists.

    Of the 77 members there are about 20 or so who lean to the right. Some of them voted against Ujjal Dosangh's initial motion to compell the production of documents, others are threatening to vote against Derek Lee's motion which is why it hasn't been introduced (as it would fail).

    Some will cross the floor and sit with the CPC. Others will retire once they have their pensions and get lucrative private sector jobs.

    The remaining 55+ members will join the NDP-Liberal coalition once Bob Rae comes to power and unites the left.

    Going forward we will now have a classic Left-Right divide in this country.

    Liberal Party. RIP.

  40. Rex Murphy on Guergis and Jaffer, and how they reflect badly on the Conservatives.

  41. I'm not ready to throw Guergis overboard yet.

    Yes her blow up was unfortunate but I believe no laws were broken and no formal complaints were filed. Being rude is not a crime.

    And she has apologized. And she was under extreme emotional stress given what's happening in her life.

    I'm ready to move on. This story will die down and be another Wafer Gate. She can keep her file as far as i'm concerned.

    In a few more years maybe she'll have mellowed out a bit, her husband's life will be back on track, and she'll be ready for a more substantive file.

    As Rex Murphy himself says, she is a bright star in the cabinet.

  42. If you post is not part of a discussion, but rather a personal attack on someone else, it will be deleted.

    Please, for the love of god, stop. You're wasting my time.


  43. Shadow,

    I'm not suggesting that she should step down.

    I'm willing to give her a second chance.

    If she ever pulls anything like this again...
    She should be put out of cabinet with extreme prejudice.

    On a bit of a different note, I've noticed a certain rot that has crept into the party.

    The heavy-handedness in Calgary-West, buying peoples votes with taxpayer money, and a certain "entitled to entitlements" type attitude in some cases.

    That is something else that I feel should be confronted, and expelled, with extreme prejudice.

  44. "And she has apologized. And she was under extreme emotional stress given what's happening in her life."

    If she is under such EXTREME EMOTIONAL STRESS then I suggest she resign from cabinet. There are certain things that people under EXTREME EMOTIONAL STRESS should think twice about doing - like flying a passenger airplane, performing brain surgery and being one of the 30 people who runs the country by virtue of being in cabinet. What if her EXTREME EMOTIONAL STRESS causes her to blurt out state secrets that she is privy to as a cabinet minister and it endangers the lives of troops in Afghanistan??

    BTW: For there to have been cocaine in the Jaffer/Guergis car - someone had to have bought it from someone. Shouldn't they cooperate with the police and give the name and contact information of their drug dealer so that person can be arrested??

  45. CanadianSense: Do you have any thoughts on why Nik Nanos Polling has only recorded the Green above 8% in March 2009 (past 12 months)while most others capture them at 9-10%?

    Do you think prompting makes a difference via polling?

    Prompting definitely makes a difference. This blog is a rarefied bubble of political awareness. Of course, when voters step into the booth they are prompted.

    I've pontificated on this point before, but a poll doesn't actually predict voting numbers; it reports preferences. The largest difference between those two arises because many people don't vote. That's influenced (among other things) by demographics (where probability of voting increases with age) and GOTV (Get Out the Vote) election machinery.

    Green preferences are skewed young and Green campaigns are still maturing, so historically the Green vote has come in below polling numbers. (This was exacerbated in 2008 by the strategic voting mixed message, but that will not happen again.) Tories are at the other end of the spectrum: the voters skew old with a mature machine to find them and drag them to the polls.

    This is an observation, not a whine. The discrepancy between what people want and what they get is a problem to be solved by the Green Party. Green principles actually resonate very well with older voters, but the message needs to be delivered better. Also, Green Machines need to grow at all levels.

    So is Nik Nanos right and are the other pollsters wrong? I don't think so, for two reasons.

    First, even if the Nanos numbers are accurate, I believe they're answering the wrong question. I'd rather know what voters think instead of what they would do if a hypothetical election were held tomorrow. Others may reasonably differ on this point.

    Second, "past performance is no guarantee of future results". Green political capabilities are steadily maturing. I don't think the poll/election results gap will disappear entirely in the near future, but I expect it to decrease significantly in the next election.

    We should know by Hallowe'en...

  46. John,

    thanks for clearing up a few points.

    The range by others has them polling much higher than 2008.

    As I mentioned earlier my view of votes being parked and the timezones mistake out west I have a difficulty with a breakthrough without tanking from the other progessive parties in the left.

    The demographic 18-24 is probably the lowest in % in ballot turnout and does not make a significant portion of our population. (Agreed?)

    In 2008 some believe the losses of young voters made a difference, but a study shows the older demographics 25-44 suffered a double digit drop 10% (I linked to it earlier)

    You mentioned the Green won't participate with strategic voting again but do you think labeling critics of a Cap & Trade, tax policy as "deniers" appropriate for debate?

    Is the science settled and no debate the position of the Green party?

  47. CanadianSense:
    As I mentioned earlier my view of votes being parked and the timezones mistake out west I have a difficulty with a breakthrough without tanking from the other progessive parties in the left.

    Be careful about labelling the Green Party as "left". It has an overlap in Eastern Ontario with the Carleton Landowners Association.

    The demographic 18-24 is probably the lowest in % in ballot turnout and does not make a significant portion of our population. (Agreed?)

    Yes and no, respectively.


    You mentioned the Green won't participate with strategic voting again but do you think labeling critics of a Cap & Trade, tax policy as "deniers" appropriate for debate?

    The Green Party platform is unchanged: a tax shift to carbon is far preferable to Cap and Trade. Cap and Trade is... dumb. It's 21st century papal indugences. Tax shifting to carbon has been the target of a Dion-centric smear job, but it makes fundamental economic and business sense.

    Is the science settled and no debate the position of the Green party?

    Science is never settled. There will always be uncertainty. There’s no "scientific consensus" in my family as to how fast our car will go, either. Is it 150 km/h? 160 km/h? More? I’m happy to remain in doubt; I’m not going to head onto the highway and sit there with the pedal to the metal.

    We do have complete consensus on one point, though: the car will go far above the speed limit. Dangerously far above. And that sums up climate change uncertainty today. The lower error bar is way above a safe situation.

    I won't debate global warming on this blog to avoid pushing it hopelessly off-topic. (I know: that happened a long time ago.) However, I am an anthropogenic global warming skeptic. That means that I read papers with all views and the responses to those papers and the responses to the responses to as many layers as it takes to run out of new information. I'm willing to discuss the topic with anybody elsewhere, but only if they're willing to put the same effort into it.

    I apply the term "denier" to somebody who reads the National Post and climate deceiver web sites, but not RealClimate and similar science-based sites. (Yes, I visit all types of sites, but prefer to go to the peer-reviewed papers themselves.)

    To directly answer your question, the Green Party recognizes that the seriousness of AGW was determined long ago. The debate is now about how to deal with it immediately in a practical way.

  48. --- "Be careful about labelling the Green Party as "left". It has an overlap in Eastern Ontario with the Carleton Landowners Association."

    Those separatists?!

  49. John,

    Erics right, I wouldn't be too proud of that association.

    I, as someone who will likely vote PC next election here in Ontario, look at those yahoos with a leary eye.

    I'm not saying Hillier is not likable, or sometimes amusing, but I have real trouble finding him a credible MPP.

    The Ontario PCs in general right now are a bit of a circus right now.

    Hudak better step up soon, and show a statesman-like side.

  50. AJR79, I find nothing to disagree with in your comments.

  51. Good article today by Andrew Potter on our "Last Surge" in Afghanistan.

  52. John,

    I watched a debate with E. May and she did not express those views. She has taken a much more radical view of us skeptics who think pushing paper in Europena/Chicago exchange for large companies is just another ponzi scheme.

  53. CanadianSense: I watched a debate with E. May and she did not express those views. She has taken a much more radical view of us skeptics who think pushing paper in Europena/Chicago exchange for large companies is just another ponzi scheme.

    No contradiction there. Cap-and-trade is silly. Tax shifting to carbon is where we'll eventually end up.

    Being skeptical about cap-and-trade is worlds apart from refusing to believe that AGW is real. The best that can be said about cap-and-trade is that it's better than doing nothing at all. However, if it delays effective measures from being taken, it has negative value.

  54. The reason cap and trade was suggested is that it actually worked for CFCs. The Montreal Protocol brought in cap and trade for CFCs and the result was removing CFCs from production. Those that fixed their processes first benefited by trading their credits to those who were slower off the mark. But for the slow ones, the economic decision was simple, pay less by fixing their own process.

    Due to the CFC cap and trade speeding the phaseout of CFCs, it is claimed the ozone layer is now recovering. Now there are said to be problems with the substitutes for CFCs, supposedly some are actually worse. But this does not negate the fact that cap and trade worked in this instance. I recall at the time, the same kind of rhetoric we hear now, that the CFC ban would ruin the economy. Of course it didn't. I took an old refrigerator to the dump, and was charged a CFC removal fee and had to drop it in a special pen for refrigerators because some guy comes and removes the CFCs in an approved way. The CFC removal fee was the ruinous amount of fifteen dollars.

    However, cap and trade for carbon dioxide is much more difficult, if possible to work at all. The CFCs were made by a small number of companies, and CFCs are an artificial compound not found in nature so there can be no confusion between natural and human sources. While for CO2, there is an ongoing carbon cycle where plants fix CO2 (removing it from the air) and then animals consume the plants releasing the CO2 back into the air, maintaining a balance. Superimposed on that is humans releasing, over a period of a few hundred years, CO2 that was fixed over a period of millions of years. That excess CO2 is the source of the imbalance. Oceans absorb huge amounts of CO2, which has greatly mitigated the effect so far, but they are said to be reaching a saturation point.

    Cap and trade was a short term measure in the CFC market that allowed the companies involved to work together to change their processes, and ensure any company that chose to do nothing did not benefit from their inaction.

    The reason I supported the Kyoto Protocol was that it too would create a financial incentive to reduce CO2 emissions. But the focus was quickly moved to "sending money to Russia" which is one possible consequence of continued inaction. The objective is not to send money elsewhere, but instead to invest in building the technologies. Nobody should be buying credits, it is only the consequence of doing nothing.

    As long as there is no direct cost for emitting CO2, it will not be reduced until some other technology supplants it. That technology would be a long time coming, since it would have to compete with a 100 year old established infrastructure which has huge economies of scale.

    Consider the timeline for the fossil fuel burning systems replacing the previous technology. Steam engines existed 2,000 years ago, yet it took most of that 20,00 years, well into the 20th century, before steam and petrol based engines supplanted horse power. Even then, the "deniers" of the day passed laws that required automobiles to be preceded by a man carrying a red flag so as not to frighten horses.

    Unfortunately, if atmospheric CO2 levels continue to rise and the theory of that causing a greenhouse effect continues to hold, we don't really have 2,000 years for the next technology to supplant the CO2 system by normal laissez faire market processes.


    I am not sure what debate you were watching and I should have linked munk. In my opinion if you look at the video and the numbers that shifted you will see us skeptics have zero problem with realistic solutions regarding cleaning up pollution and enviromental problems we can fix.

    Some estimates we need to spend 10-14 billion to fix our sewage clean water. Quebec has 33 serious issues including dumping into St. Lawrence.

    I do NOT believe for one second we can get other countries to stop dumping or use fossil fuels either.

    China and India will never buy in and blaming the federal gov't for 2% of the global emmissions is just plain silly.

    Canada does not matter in comparison to the larger countries (US China India for pollution use of fossil fuels)

    I don't share we can control the climate on the scale necessary to do what those computer models suggest and AGW Gore/Suzuki end of the world narrative.

    I think the advocates left the basic rules of science years ago behind to fearmonger and get millions for funding.

  56. Cap And Trade has been a disaster in the only big area to use it for CO2

    The EU has it and it has proven to be nothing but a Big Scam.

    However the EU's Alternative Energy thrust has worked very well.

    So go to a Carbon Tax with incentives for alternatives and you have the best of both worlds.

  57. Instead of adding taxes, why not remove the subsidy for the behaviour we don't like.

    Lawyers special interests groups will find way to get special dispensation. Look at American Coal, German auto manufacturing each have special deals now to discount the unfair burden from their competitors.

    The Political forces in Ottawa demanded we save those local auto jobs.

    My approach is leave more money at source earning it (my wallet)

    If Quebec want to fund invitro, buy NS hydro let the QC population pay for it through provincial taxes.

  58. Just don't switch to wind power!!

    It kills far, far more birds than those ducks who died in the oil sands.

    Wind corridors are natural bird migration routes. Where the wind is fastest, its easiest for them to travel.

    Honestly though Canada's emmissions are so small that any changes we make would be utterly inconsequential to the climate.

    Why bother ?

  59. Lacobucci terms of reference are an outrage !

    Note the calls for Ignatieff to resign in the comments section.

  60. CanadianSense: In my opinion if you look at the video and the numbers that shifted you will see us skeptics have zero problem with realistic solutions regarding cleaning up pollution and enviromental problems we can fix.

    [If I were wise I'd move this discussion elsewhere now. But I'll have one shot only at it.]

    Again, I don't accept this use of the term "skeptic". That implies reviewing evidence for all claims, not just deniers'.

    But that's a minor point. The real problem is the phrase, "enviromental problems we can fix". Global warming is a problem we can't afford not to fix. Ignoring it is far more expensive--and catastrophic.

    Yes, people with dark skins in other countries will feel the brunt of AGW much sooner and more harshly than us. Older Canadians may manage to die off before it really strikes home here. But anyone who believes in morality can't sit back and let the planet cook.

    The real solutions are there; George Monbiot's Heat is a good introduction and David MacKay's online book Sustainable Energy – without the hot air nicely quantifies what needs to be done.

    What's unrealistic is the ostrich approach. Our grandchildren won't accept "I didn't know" as an excuse.

  61. John the economics of this are not completely clear. This statement strikes me as speculative:

    "Global warming is a problem we can't afford not to fix. Ignoring it is far more expensive--and catastrophic."

    I've actually read economists who's models say that its less expensive to ADAPT to climate change then to try and stop it.

    Remember, Greenland was once lush forest. Its not as though the planet is going to "cook" or "die".

    If anything its going to be heaven for farmers and plants, which breathe C02 after all!

  62. John,

    So if I remain unconvinced of politicans from all stripes in fixing it you lay a guilt trip about my grandchildren and brownskinned people.

    John, save the guilt or victim card for someone else.

    The drowning Polar bears melting ice caps fearmongering does not work with me.

    I have said local problems first, we have set aside $5 billion on an annual basis for foreign aid.

    My priorities of fixing our own backyard problems did not suggest cutting off help.

  63. 49

    From Shadow;
    Note the calls for Ignatieff to resign in the comments section.

    But of course he doesn't mention just how badly Harper is slashed in that comments section. Even the Tory trolls are losing and being assaulted viciously on there !!

  64. Peter,

    Yes that is very true.

    If Shadow would like some directions, I could give him some.

    There are quite a few comment sections all over the net ripping Stephen Harper to shreds.

    For anybody who needs directions just let me know.

  65. Shadow and CS,

    I was wondering if you guys had an opinion on the effects of sinking a shitload of CO2 in our Oceans, thereby de-basing, and eventually acidifying them.

    What might the effects on marine life be, and should man take steps to avoid it if possible?

  66. John,

    From a lay skeptics point of view, I have a question.

    Do you believe that tree-ring growth is a good proxy for global or hemispheric temperature before 1960, but not after?

    I've taken glances around trying to find a convincing answer to this, and I've yet to encounter one.

    This is what I'm talking about.

    Oh, and if Eric would rather this not be discussed here, I'm sure he'll lets us know.

    I think it's wonderfully off topic myself, and wouldn't mind picking your brain a little.

  67. If the discussion is civil, by all means discuss it.

  68. AJR79,

    Interesting you asked only two posters. Let's see where this game leads.

    1) Do you support the plan to place windmills on migratory paths of birds?

    2) Landowners are having their property rights taken away by government for these giant fans without fair compensation. Do you agree government should continue to push ahead to install giant fans on ANY land including disputed 'treaty land' ?

    3) Can you list (links) the countries where the use of giant fans reduced the use of fossil fuel?

    Having fun yet?

    a) At how much cost?
    b) Did hydro rates go up? By how much?
    c) Are large companies being given special deals?
    d) Are those countries making money on those giant fans or they subsidizing the large energy suppliers with much higher mill rates for an extended period?

    Your Co2 acid killing Nemo question?

    Having lived through the fearmongering of the ice age, Global warming doomsayers in the last 30 year, I can't say I am suprised we have shifted the goalposts to climate change.

    My concern is based on cleaning up pollution in Canada as the higher priority with our limited tax dollars, capping our Foreign Aid to five billion.

    We need to clean our great lakes, stop dumping raw sewage into our water and upgrade our own domestic infrastructure pegged as high as $ 14 billion for safe drinking water.

    I will not be scared into supporting any political party that wants to raise taxes for saving the planet ponzi schemes.

    How do you propose to stop China, India, other countries from making decisions that don't follow your "Planet Saving Agenda"?

    Will you commit our troops, enviromental carbon police to enforce it?

    Can you link the source to provide proof all the data, computer models have been released to a group outside the peer review group tainted by climategate?

    Thanks again.

  69. Not to get too scatterbrained, but this is pretty big news.

    Canada may have an experiment to watch in the U.K, to help us make better decisions on reforming our own senate.

    Like that'll ever happen.

  70. CS

    I think you have answered my question.

    You have been fooled before, and therefore are not concerned about it at all.

    I also see you have mistaken me for a proponent of windpower.
    I'm not.

    I also asked a question of John, if you had bothered to notice, so your persecution complex is moot.

    I agree that there are many pressing environmental issue beyond our oceans, but it is something that is shared around the world, and must be preserved.

    Once marine life goes, it won't come back.

    Don't be confused by snakeoil salesmen, into thinking this is a black and white issue.

    You don't have to think in a false dicotomy of "The end in nigh" chicken littles, and "Co2 is good for plants, and therefore good" ostrichs.

    The truth is somewhere in the middle, as usual.

  71. Time to show off my Andrew Coyne festish again.

    Here he is today, still basking in the post-olympic glow.

    Any excuse to be a patriot.

    This fantastic article about the damaged credibility of the CRU, and how it difficult it is to separate the science, from the activism, for the layman.

    It's been on the front page at the Macleans website since January... for good reason.

  72. AJ

    My apology if it came across snarky, it is my style (or failing).

    Priorities we can't do it ALL with limited tax resources.

    I won't argue the science as I am not qualified.

    I will stick to geo-political realities and how examples in history invalidates the one size fits all Agenda.

    I have ZERO confidence in the U.N. and the dictators of the world working on your AGENDA.

    Mine is much smaller but requires Canadians to lead by example with cleaning up their own backyard.

    Why can't the "progressives" in Canada get together, create a single solution they can get elected on? Call it Lindgreenloc (Lib,NDP,Green,Bloc). I am told roughly 60%+ are interested in spending Billions on the Green Agenda.

    That would be a great ballot choice vs CPC.

  73. CS

    Check out California which has several massive wind farms in the mountain passes. Wind never stops blowing there apparently. While it might not have stopped their consumption of fossil fuels it has really slowed down the rate of increase.

  74. Canadian Sense,

    "Why can't the progressives in Canada get together"

    I am just a little curious

    Is the CPC non progressive.

    What part of the platform of the CPC is non progressive.

    Are all policies of the CPC non progressive.

    Please explain in detail, about these non progressive policies of the CPC.

    Do all non progressive voters in Canada automatically vote CPC.

    Your thoughts on these matters would be very much appreciated.

    Thank You

  75. Peter,

    While I believe that wind power may be viable in SOME areas, CS does raise some valid concerns.

    1)The congruence of wind corridors, and migratory bird patterns.

    2)Land owners rights

    3)The high cost per kwH.

    4)I'll throw in the unreliability of the wind, and the lack of capacity to store power produced by wind, and the long distances some of these "farms" will need to transmit from.

    Lots of disadvantages are inherent in this technology IMO, and it will never produce enough power, efficiently enough, to even come close to making good CO2 reductions.

    My solution... Nukes, and lots of em.

  76. AJR79

    We are supposed to play nice in the sand box.

    I think you know what I mean.

  77. 49,

    You'll have to help me out a bit more, as I'm not sure what you're talking about.

    I was talking about, the pros and cons, of windpower.

    I don't see where I stopped "playing nice", or went ad hominem.


    BTW, Have you checked out Californias defict problems?

  78. California, Greece, Quebec can you find a pattern?

  79. AJR79: Do you believe that tree-ring growth is a good proxy for global or hemispheric temperature before 1960, but not after?

    That is indeed an interesting point. It's science, and it's complicated. The effect reported by Briffa et al. back in 1998 has only been observed near the treeline; most trees don't show it.

    So in the general case the answer is "no", but for a subset of trees the answer is "yes". The causes are not clear, but D'Arrigo et al. 2008 surveys the hypotheses.

    For pre-1960 data, the tree-ring proxy data agrees very well with other proxies and with temperature measurement records. With appropriate caveats as to geographic applicability and the like, dendrochronology provides excellent data.

    Some denier is guaranteed to squawk about the uncertainty here. Bill McKibben wrote a very insightful article in which he observes that the great mass of evidence on climate change actually helps deniers. If you have a three-page report, it won't be overwhelming and it's unlikely to have many mistakes. Three thousand pages (the length of the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)? That pretty much guarantees you'll get something wrong. In this case nothing's even wrong; in some specific cases there's behaviour we don't understand yet.

    That's not a reason to pretend AGW doesn't exist.

  80. Hi AJR79 let me address the acidification of oceans question.

    Every time there is a change in environment there is, obviously, many species that die off and others that emerge.

    I believe I saw a study that identified species of shell fish that would flourish in the new environment because they are capable of building thicker shells. Other organisms can't and the acid dissolves their shells.

    But the relevent questions I would ask are:

    1) Will the ocean become so acidic that life can't survive ?

    2) Will the shift in PH occur so quickly that there isn't time for adapation and evolution to occur ?

    My take on it is that ocean acidification and climate change are greatly exagerated if they are happening at all.

    I'm in the "do nothing" camp. We're probably going to run out of hydrocarbons in the next 50-100 years anyways. We'll gradually switch to cleaner energy as technology emerges.

    If the climate warms 2 or 3 or heck even 5 degrees who cares. Its been much, much warmer in the past.

    Adaptation is less expensive then stopping industrial society.

  81. Hi Peter and 49 steps I think you guys missed my point when I said look at the comments asking Iggy to resign as leader.

    Kory Teneycke was speaking at the Manning confab in Ottawa recently and said that when you analyze messaging and media coverage you should break it down into four catagories:

    Us on Us, Us on Them, Them on Us, and Them on Them.

    CBC commenters ravaging Harper fits in the "Them on Us" catagory. Its irrelevent. Its a lefty organization with lefty commenters so its to be expected.

    Why the calls for Iggy to step down are so noticable and important to flag are because they come from the "Them on Them" catagory.

    If Iggy doesn't find a spine and use his opposition day this week to pass Derek Lee's motion the left is going to go into open revolt.

    There's just no way he can get away with not taking this to its logical conclusion.

    He opened the can of worms, he opened pandora's box and frankly he can't stop now.

  82. Shadow,

    WHO exactly is calling on Ignatieff to resign?

    Please provide me with the info you have.

    And no I do not have a criminal record, and I have never been in trouble with the law.

    I did get a speeding ticket once.

  83. If Iggy doesn't find a spine and use his opposition day this week to pass Derek Lee's motion the left is going to go into open revolt.

    There's just no way he can get away with not taking this to its logical conclusion.

    He opened the can of worms, he opened pandora's box and frankly he can't stop now
    You forgot to mention Cotler crossing the floor again. Or did you leave that out this time, after I resoundingly refuted that canard back in January?


  84. Shadow,

    Are you just talking about comments in newspapers?

    Are you talking about comments on blogs?

    Are the conservatives desperately flailing around trying to divert attention away from, the AFghan detainee scandal.

    And there refusal to hand over unredacted documents, and recognize parliamentary supremacy.

    As for comments, man on man I can point you to a whole shit load of Anti Harper comments.

    If that is what you are basing this on that is lame.

    Come on you can do better than that.

  85. California, Greece, Quebec can you find a pattern?

    No because you are trying to SPIN something that has NO connection.

    California's fiscal problems are due to the stupidity and avarice of the California conservatives. Greece is due to the plain stupidity on all sides by the ruling classes.

    Quebec needs to control it's desires.

  86. 49
    "WHO exactly is calling on Ignatieff to resign?"

    Harpo & Co of course and idiots like Shadow.

    And of course this paean of irrelevance and wishful thinking. Quoting Kory Teneycke is like quoting the Arch Devil. You can't get further right than he is.

  87. Peter,

    Do you have any idea what Shadow is talking about.

    WHO is calling on Ignatieff to resign?

    Is this just a bunch of comments from blogs.

    Maybe he read it in the National Post YAWN

    Is this a plan hatched by the CPC to divert attention away from the Afghan detainee scandal.

  88. Ouch, I guess the issue of Ignatieff being turfed out by Bob Rae is a touchy issue.

    Let's consult actual factual evidence. We know from a recent poll that Ignatieff's Liberals are the MOST DIVIDED major party, with Ignatieff getting the lowest level of support when party members are asked if they should change their leader.

    Now for last couple months we've been hearing about how democracy itself is at sake. The rhetoric got very heated and out of hand, including comments on this very board.

    How does Ignatieff walk away from that ? It would make Dion's weakness and lack of leadership look like nothing. Biggest cave in in history.

    If Derek Lee's motion is not introduced and passed progressives are going to go into open revolt.

    I don't see how Ignatieff could stay on as leader. I really don't.

  89. "California, Greece, Quebec can you find a pattern?"


    High levels of public sector unionization that have driven wages and benefits out of balance with the private sector.

    High rates of taxation.

    High gov't spending as a % of GDP.

  90. Liberal Supporter why are you yawning ?

    You've been the most vocal here about getting to the bottom of these war crimes.

    If Ignatieff walks away from this are you really going to defend him ?

    Do you have principles or are you a committed partisan ?

    How can you just walk away from an issue that you've spent three months talking about like it was the most important thing in the world ??

  91. Shadow,

    It is not a touchy issue at all.

    You gave a beautiful non answer.

    You did not give me one credible name on who is calling on Ignatieff to resign.

    If you can not do that then I suggest you stop spreading unsubstantiated CPC spin.

    Shadow it does no credit to you.

  92. 49 steps let me clarify.

    From what little I read of liberal bloggers and commentators nobody is calling on Iggy to resign YET.

    Its a threat to no longer support him if he doesn't go to the wall on the detainee issue.

    I have seen this particular construct pop up a lot lately:

    'If Ignatieff doesn't introduce Derek Lee's motion he should resign and let us choose a leader who will.'

    I guess the real test is whether you guys actually believe in any of the stuff you've been saying for three months.

    Do you 49 steps ??

    Is everything you've writen been about principle or about politics and which is more important to you ?

  93. Hi all, I'm in beautiful and sweltering Costa Rica right now, posting just to correct Shadow's shady assumptions about the Liberal support for Ignatieff.

    What bloggers say in Liblogs is not an accurate thermometer for Iggy's support. Ekos, HD, or whatever polling is also not an accurate thermometer for Iggy's support among the party's organization.

    I won't lie to you. Back in September, there was a lot of speculation about getting rid of Ignatieff. But we pulled ourselves together, we're going into another conference, and Iggy now has an excellent and efficient team behind him. The party's organization is rock solid in support for Ignatieff. Rock solid. And those are the people that count in terms of "leadership coups" - not some random Dipper-lite blogger.

    Ignatieff is here to stay, and become Canada's 23rd Prime Minister. Get used to it.

  94. Ouch, I guess the issue of Ignatieff being turfed out by Bob Rae is a touchy issue.
    No, it's the CPC trolls attempting to spread lies that is a touchy issue. We're a bit touchy about liars, that's all.

    Let's consult actual factual evidence. We know from a recent poll that Ignatieff's Liberals are the MOST DIVIDED major party, with Ignatieff getting the lowest level of support when party members are asked if they should change their leader.
    We know nothing factual from polls. That is the whole premise of this blog!

    Now for last couple months we've been hearing about how democracy itself is at sake. The rhetoric got very heated and out of hand, including comments on this very board.
    Is that an admission from you?

    How does Ignatieff walk away from that ? It would make Dion's weakness and lack of leadership look like nothing. Biggest cave in in history.
    Who is walking away? I thought you were all full of admiration for Harper the master strategist. Ever heard of keeping one's powder dry?

    If Derek Lee's motion is not introduced and passed progressives are going to go into open revolt.
    You already asserted that. That does not make it so.

    I don't see how Ignatieff could stay on as leader. I really don't.
    No, you simply wish he would go away. He won't.

    Despite your endless attempts at baiting, the question remains: What did Messrs Harper and Mackay know, when did they know it and what did they do about it? The uncensored documents could clear this up, or they may prove incriminating.

    You can attempt to dictate the ways in which the detainee scandal will be dealt with, and naturally you will dictate ways that you hope will somehow let Harper gain a majority, but you don't get to dictate how the opposition proceeds.

    You can try to make a bizarre absolute case, which is similar to one like "if you really cared about global warming, you would kill yourself to stop your carbon emissions", but it doesn't mean you will prevail. Your sneering that standing on principle is possible only by following your bizarre absolute dictates is laughable.

  95. Shadow,

    Now you are moving the goal posts.

    "Not resign yet"

    Tchat is not what you said.

    You said notice the comment section calling on Ignatieff to resign.

    Go back and re read your statements.

    That means you can not provide one credible name calling on Ignatieff to resign.

    You are spreading unsubstantiated CPC spin.

    Frankly, I am a little surprised.

    After stating so unequivocally,
    that there were calls for Ignatieff to resign.

    As for this all plays out, we don't know yet.

    Do you have a pipeline into LPOC

    We don't know what is going to happen.

    Again I will ask you one simple question.

    If the CPC has nothing to hide, why will they not hand over the documents as ordered by parliament.

    Why the delay, and stall.

  96. Liberal Supporter why are you yawning ?
    Because your attempts to change the channel are predictable and boring.

    You've been the most vocal here about getting to the bottom of these war crimes.
    If you say so.

    If Ignatieff walks away from this are you really going to defend him ?
    How is he walking away? I didn't see the memo where the who matter has been dropped.

    Do you have principles or are you a committed partisan ?
    I'm still not beating my wife.

    How can you just walk away from an issue that you've spent three months talking about like it was the most important thing in the world ??
    Nobody is walking away. They're just not taking the bait based on your bizarre absolute premise.

  97. ou are spreading unsubstantiated CPC spin.

    Frankly, I am a little surprised
    You must be new here. Did you know there is another 49 Steps that has been commenting here for some time (jk)?

  98. 49

    "Is this a plan hatched by the CPC to divert attention away from the Afghan detainee scandal."

    Sure it is. Take a look at the figures in Eric's survey of the polls. If they hold then the Libs+NDP can take over Govt. And Harpo knows this hence the trolls are dispatched to spread discord. I say ignore Shadow and his ilk.

  99. LS

    Not new

    Same person

    I am surprised, because Shadow was so unequivocal, in his statements about calls for Igantieff's resignation.

    I thought this time he had something rather than his usual CPC spin

    Know I know he doesn't

    And he never will

  100. Funny I have not seen any calls for Iggy's resignation in the press. Why would he resign?

    Also Peter if the polls today are to believed the Lobs and NDP would outnumber the CPC so what? Liberals like Iggy and Volkov want no part of a coalition. Don't you think that an election would have some impact on poll numbers. It is a pipe dream.

  101. Hi Earl,

    Where have you been?

    If it is Ok I will jump in.

    As i stated to you before, if the Liberals and the NDP, have more seats than the conservatives, and command the confidence of the house, I do not mind cooperation with them.

    Not a formal coalition.

    I think that will be the LPOC position IMHO

    Yes campaigns do matter and do make a difference.

    As for the Ignatieff resignation, Shadow was saying there were calls for him to step down.

    AS usual he could not come up with one credible name.

    Earl, I wish to give you a compliment.

    You are a credit to the CPC

  102. "Liberals like Iggy and Volkov want no part of a coalition."

    We have had cooperative minority Govts in the past, no reason to expect we can't again !!

    Well, just to point out, Peter, my friend, when you're talking about having the Liberals govern with NDP support over the Conservatives on the basis that combined they have more seats than the Con. plurality, it isn't a far jump to reach the word "coalition," or at the very least, "Accord," which we all know won't happen, because Layton wants to put his party *in* government, not just supporting it.

    Oh, and he is absolutely right - no coalition for me. I like Dippers, I work with Dippers, and I'm even helping one to get elected municipally - but I will not link arms and sing jolly socialist songs all the way to Queen's Park or Parliament hill with them.

  103. "having the Liberals govern with NDP support over the Conservatives on the basis that combined they have more seats than the Con. plurality, it isn't a far jump to reach the word "coalition," "

    I'll give you one example, Pearson and Douglas. If that word coalition had been heard by either all Hell would have broken loose!!

    The word "coalition" was used first by the Tories to trash the Dion arrangement. Ever since then any suggestion that two of the opposition parties might agree brings out "coalition" again. In fact I've heard their spokesperson use it just to describe the opposition !

    Don't use it. The Tories with their extreme spin machine have managed to turn it into real toxic thing.

  104. Shadow,

    There are quite a few liberals her on the board tonight.

    Did you notice any discord.

    Did you notice any of us calling on Ignatieff to resign.

    Did you notice none of us are unhappy with our party.

    No Sir we all seem like a bunch of happy liberals.

    Solid in support of our party and our leader.

    Sorry to dissapoint you.

    I guess you will have to report back to CPC headquarters, that liberals are not as unhappy and divided as the CPC thought.

    We are all DESPERATE to get rid of Stephen Harper

    Thank you for the laugh


  105. 49 steps its you who needs to go back and read what I said.

    I linked to a CBC article and then pointed out that in the comments section there were people asking Iggy to resign.

    Go read some of the 758 comments yourself.

    People are getting really, really impatient.

    People want an inquiry, people think Derek Lee's motion is "overdue", people are willing to fight an election over this.

    If Iggy backs down there's going to be hoards of angry left wing activists leaving the Liberal party in droves.

  106. 49 steps, also it appears the Liberals here tonight are still under the impression that Derek Lee's motion is going to go ahead.

    I can assure you it is not.

    Everybody on the Liberal side has backed down, folding like a cheap suit.

    Seriously 40% of the Liberal caucus skipped the budget votes. I can't take anything you guys said about prorogation and the economy seriously anymore.

    If Derek Lee's motion isn't passed I won't be able to take anything you guys have said over these past three months about the detainee issue seriously.

    Detainees, prorogation, the budget - all the big issues and the Liberals are AWOL.

    But hey! At least you're holding Rahim Jaffer's feet to the fire.

  107. Shadow,

    I am going to point out a very painful truth to you, because I don't think you ever noticed it before.

    Liberals don't care what you think. or what you say.

    If you think liberals are going to turn on our party, for the likes of yours, keep dreaming.

  108. Peter what happened to the supremacy of parliament ?

    What happened to getting to the bottom of those war crimes, of Harper being in contempt ?

    He's either in contempt or he isn't.

    If he is then introduce Derek Lee's motion first thing monday morning.

  109. 49 steps I don't expect Liberals to vote CPC or NDP.

    I expect them to stay home like they did last election.

    If 40% of your caucus doesn't show up to vote why should people show up to vote Liberal ?

    If Iggy spends 3 months going on about contempt of parliament, about parliament being soveriegn, and about getting to the bottom of war crimes and then folds like a cheap suit I see no reason why the average Liberal voter sitting at home should bother to turn up at the polls.

  110. Shadow,

    You don't take liberals seriously.

    We are not a real party.

    Thank you

    Coming from you I will wear that as my personal badge of honour.

  111. Peter it is 100% nessecary.

    The original order has been ignored by the gov't. Its worthless and unenforceable.

    A contempt of parliament motion needs to be introduced and passed, one that instructs the sargeant at arms to forceably obtain the documents himself.

    Either the Liberal party has surrendered or they will pass Derek Lee's motion.

    We're all waiting ...

  112. Shadow,

    You seem pretty certain about what Liberal voters are going to do in the next election.

    Tell me how many CPC voters are going to stay home?

    Stephen Harper pretty much threw any principle he had out the window.

    Why let's go through the list

    1. Fiscal responsibility

    2. Triple E Senate

    3. Accountability

    4. Open and transparent government

    5. Giving individual MPs more say

    6. Fixed election dates

    7. Divesting power from the PMO

    Now with that stellar record to run on I know if I was a CPC voter I just couldn't wait to run out and vote CPC


    Cut out the personal attacks and insults or I WILL put all comments on moderation until the quality and maturity of the posters has improved.

    Is that clear?

  114. 49 steps the CPC did see a decline in total votes last cycle.

    For the very reasons you just pointed out.

    The decline from the Liberals, however, was much, much larger.

    With 40% of the caucus skipping work and Iggy backing down on the detainee issue i'm going to project that 40% of Liberal voters will stay home.

  115. Peter as I said, Ujall Dosangh's motion asks that Harper hand over the documents.

    Harper has ignored it.

    Its now worthless and unenforceable. Completely meaningless from a legal perspective.

    What's required now is a further motion finding the CPC in contempt of the first motion.

    Anyone who serious believes in the detainee issue will support a motion such as the one Derek Lee has proposed.

    Will you ?

  116. Peter I'm hardly a Tory Troll and would you stop swearing! I'm sure the Tories will make the public is very aware of the possibility of a coalition or working arrangement between the opposition parties in the next election campaign. Because I happen to be pro CPC doesn't make me a Troll anymore than you are a Liberal troll. Grow up!

  117. Shadow,

    I am going to point out another painful truth.

    Just because you say so doesn't make it so.

    You can keep repeating it over, and over, and over again.

    Doesn't mean it's true.

    Stephen Harper threw any principle he had out the window.

    I am going to give you a piece of friendly advice.

    Why don't you put all your time and energy into worrying about the CPC.

    Me thinks at the end of the day they will have more problems than the liberals.

  118. Peter, stop with the personal attacks.

  119. Ok Peter please explain to me what parliamentary mechanism will be used to get those documents given the fact that Harper has stated he'll ignore the first motion ?

    Ask nicely ?

    Complain a lot ?

  120. "
    Peter I'm hardly a Tory Troll "

    Sorry but if the Foo Shits !

  121. 49 steps I have stated facts. If you want to dispute any of them i'll be happy to provide evidence to back them up.

    1) Raw vote totals for the Liberals fell substantially from '06 to '08 while only falling slightly for the CPC.

    2) 40% of the Liberal caucus skipped budgetary votes leaving 3 million Canadians without representation in the house of commons.

  122. Sorry Eric but when rational discussion is punctuated by vomited and recycled "talking points" I get really pissed off.

    Get him to stop and we can all get on with proper discussion. All Shadow gives is regurgitated "talking points" and that is NOT discussion.

    But it is what he's paid for !

  123. While I don't like his style, he is at least discussing politics, and he doesn't make it personal. You can just his ignore his talking points. Calling him a paid blogger and swearing all the time is annoying, and I'm asking you to stop.

  124. Calling him a paid blogger and swearing all the time is annoying, and I'm asking you to stop.

    So the truth upsets you?? Figures.


  125. "he is at least discussing politics,"

    Absolutely he is NOT

    He's vomiting PMO "talking points" !! That's all.

  126. Shadow,

    That is all fine and dandy.

    Great you can provide the statistics.

    I know the liberal vote fell from 06 to 08

    So what

    That does not tell us what is going to happen in the next election.

    A lot of liberals were unhappy with Dion and the green shift.

    Now with that decision we increased the strength of Stephen Harper's hand.

    Lightning will not strike twice.

    I am telling you quite honestly that the thought of having Stephen Harper as PM makes a lot of liberal voters vomit.

    They will not make that mistake again.

    You are underestimating the personal revulsion a lot of people have for Stephen Harper.

    He is wearing thin.

    You can keep repeating the same things over and over, it doesn't matter.

    Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

  127. Peter you still haven't addressed how parliament is going to get those documents w/o an additional motion being put forward.

  128. 49 steps a lot of Liberals are unhappy with Ignatieff too.

    As I said, refer to that recent leadership poll showing him have much less support amongst his own party then Harper does.

    And if he backs down on this detainee issue after spending three months on it how is that going to work ?

    Will it:

    A) Increase Liberal turnout


    B) Decreasee Liberal turnout

  129. Shadow, Earl, AJR79, John

    My earier post about the Green Agenda is imperiled as I see it going forward as future spending is going to be capped in 2011 and reductions in spending in the priority of voter polled vs taxes to slay deficit.

    I am also not a fan of going big in nuke until we resolve the cost over runs!

    Here is a nice little tidbit on the AGW tale:

    On Feb. 1, 2010, The Guardian reported that Doug Keenan’s E&E paper “may yet result in a significant revision of a scientific paper that is still cited by the UN’s top climate science body. [...] The [CRU] emails suggest that [Phil Jones] helped to cover up flaws in temperature data from China that underpinned his research on the strength of recent global warming. The Guardian has learned that crucial data obtained by American scientists from Chinese collaborators cannot be verified because documents containing them no longer exist. And what data is available suggests that the findings are fundamentally flawed.”

    Read more:

  130. Hey CS did you see Iggy is taking a week long break from parliament ?

    For a "listening tour". But I thought it was impossible to work if you weren't sitting in parliament.

    Wasn't that the complaint during prorogation ?


    As for nuclear I think its a great option for the US.

    For Canada I see nothing wrong with more hydro and a better energy grid.

  131. Shadow,

    as you may be aware I have agreed with the Liberal bloggers on moving ahead with the Derek Lee motion.

    In November 2009, I said they should not extend confidence in the gov't if they believe Colvin and the reasons regarding their "super duper" we are above the laws we passed.

    I am interested in seeing this matter come to its natural conclusion with the opposition flexes their muscle in voting contempt, or no confidence.

    The Liberals in Montreal can hope the train or take a flight to vote on their opposition day.

  132. CS the opposition is being given 3 days this week.

    One for each party I think.

    I'm starting to think that the NDP might call Iggy's bluff and use their opposition day to put forward something like Derek Lee's motion.

    The CPC will defeat the motion and the matter will be closed. How?

    With the help of about 20 or so abstaining Liberals, including Ignatieff who won't be in the house this week.

    Iggy spending 3 months on this issue and then he goes on vacation and lets the issue die.

    Its getting really, really hard to take the guy seriously.

  133. CanadianSense: On Feb. 1, 2010, The Guardian reported...

    To demonstrate true "skeptic" credentials, I suggest also pointing out this.

    There's nothing behind the allegations. They're a collection of fabrications. And that was some truly sloppy Guardian reporting.

    Oh, and the journal Energy & Environment which Peiser co-edits, and which published Wang's allegations? It's not in the ISI peer-reviewed journal listing. Or Journal Citation Reports. Or very many places at all. That's because of its peer-review process, or the lack thereof. The editor of the journal, Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, did her doctorate on international relations. She states, "I’m definitely a political scientist.”

    If we're going to stray on this blog, I suggest that we at least stick to climate science. Fair enough?

  134. John your earlier blogger George Monibot wrote this....those of us who seek to explain its implications and call for action must demand the highest possible standards from the people whose work we promote, and condemn any failures to release data or admit and rectify mistakes. We do no one any favours – least of all ourselves – by wasting our time promoting false claims.

    Instead of attacking or correcting everyone else (did not attack the belief in AGW) just the people behind it who are being investigated for their actions.

  135. Shadow,

    the Liberals allowed the NDP off the hook by signalling they were not going to vote against the budget without conditions.

    Jack was quiet when he had to vote against the Bloc and Liberals in the Fall. Do you remember how the tone changed in parliament?

    I don't think any of the opposition partis are prepared to fight another campaign.

    May is using the threat of an election to avoid her leadership contest.

    Ignatieff did against Rae with the support of the back office boys.

    Regarding high level names within the Liberal who have openly attacked the leadership of Ignatieff in delivering the goods for Quebec or the party.

    Denis Coderre, Janine Krieber, Nancy Charest.

    It looks like some Quebec Liberals are pushing him out.

  136. CS

    The problem is Rae isn't the answer.

    Too much "baggage" for one. Rae days etc.

    Need a new "champion" in waiting and I don't really see one yet.

  137. History and facts do not belong to a political party.

    Adapt or die.

    Bob Rae, Mike Harris were both dealt the hand they were given by the Federal Liberals and made choices.

    I live in Ontario, former York South Weston riding voted for Rae was my city councillor, MP, MPP+Premier, , John Nunizata, councillor, MP Liberals. Harris, Rae made mistakes and were punished by which groups when they were asked to make concessions?

    Harris had his plan before winning laid out and did not suprise anyone. He said he would make cuts.

    What political party is rolling over to give secret, sweetheart deals to stay in power?

    Look at David Millar Toronto on garbage strike, for what?

    The Federal Liberals decided massive cuts to transfers in Health, Education, Social Services was the route to tackle the debt.

    They also raised taxes during recessions, reduced eligibility to EI, ripped $ 50 Billion from EI fund in order to transfer to general services.

    Their approach to the Bloc, Quebec? In 2000 they held 36 seats, now?

    This is not Dion, meanie TV ads, Adscam excuse time.

    The NDP, right of centre parties got their act together and adapted.

    The ballot box reflects other political parties have changed.

    We have had regional voting blocks for decades, pull out a map.

    Francophone, rural ridings Bloc. Liberals (Van, Toronto, Anglo Montreal) What is the % for the Liberals of their 77 seats in the three largest cities?

    I don't think shuffling chairs on the Liberal Party is the solution.
    The PC,Reform, Alliance,CFC are gone. (Dustbin)

    The NDP, Greens since 2000 have progressive support, improved to 25%* 2008 in popular support.

    In 2000 NDP/Green popular support was 9%*.

    *rounding error approx.

  138. 49

    "The House of Commons is, of course, in no way estopped from further action by the Iacobucci gambit; with an hour's notice, it could proceed to debate whether defying the production order is, indeed, a breach of privilege whenever it chooses to do so, provided the speaker concurs. It is, however, bound by the will -- or lack thereof -- of its members.

    So far, Liberal MP Derek Lee, who is pretty much universally acknowledged as the resident expert on parliament's most rarely used powers has been silent; the New Democrats, meanwhile, have set a deadline of March 19th to comply with the demand of the House or face the consequences."

    Today's Kady O'Malley

  139. So the CBC article requires the Speaker to cooperate with question of privilege?

    The Liberals are waiting for NDP threat?

    When does the Montreal March break road trip end?

    Why the stalling, the opp's either have "super duper" powers or don't.

    Why are they trusting the war criminals in gov't who are hiding stuff still?

  140. "So the CBC article requires the Speaker to cooperate with question of privilege?"

    Actually I think it is more a question of scheduling than anything else. The Speaker having allowed the motion to be presented and passed can't say no now.

    "Why are they trusting the war criminals in gov't who are hiding stuff still?"

    Wish I had an answer unless it's fear of dissolution? But somehow that doesn't really make sense as they could crucify the Govt if it dissolved rather than release.

  141. Peter,

    I read the article.

    CS The question was posed to me not you.

    We are discussing parliamentary supremacy, and privilege. If you had bothered to take the time you would have known that.

    The rules on the board dictate me to be civil with you.

    You are completely off topic, once again.

    I get that you have a problem with the LPOC.

    Instead of woorying about the Montreal conference, why don't you concern yourself with Flaherty's trip to Tim Horton's by jet.

    How about the 100 million dollars the CPC, is spending of taxpayer dollars to advertise the EAP.

    How about the respect for international law and human rights.

    How about the deficit.

    How about the appointing of senators, after a promise not to.

    I could give you a lot more to ponder, but I feel that is enough for today.

  142. It sounds like you agree with my assertion this dog wont hunt.

    Enough barking. Less teeth and more bite!

    The opposition are stalling in exerting their super duper powers and forcing this "lying weasel dictatorial gov't" that they repeatedly clam they don't trust.

    The question remains on the majority of MP who are in progressive left.

    How can they get up every morning look in the mirror, keep voting in support of supply bills for a government they don't trust?

    A) Don't trust us to punish the bad guys in the ballot box?

  143. I'm getting good at making predictions !

    Ok so like I said, the Liberals have backed down.

    Their opposition day motion was to end 10 percenters to save 10 million dollars. Which is actually a good idea.

    And as I further predicted its now the NDP who are calling the Liberals bluff and standing up for parliamentary supremacy.

    So NDP will introduce the motion and it'll fail because enough Liberals will abstain.

    Its get really, really hard to take the Liberals seriously since they keep backing down on everything they claim to believe in.

  144. Shadow,

    Thank you

    You must have a lovely crystal ball

    LS put it quite aptly yesterday,
    you keep your powder dry.

    Just because you make an assertion, doesn't make it true.

    There will be twists and turns, why don't you just wait to see what is going to happen.

    You seem to know quite a bit about LPOC strategy.

    I thought CPC was your field of expertise.

  145. All prorogation long the Liberals on this board were telling me how it would be the NDP voting for the budget.

    I said nope, some Liberals will stay home.

    If 40% of the Liberal caucus doesn't show up for work on a huge issue like the budget what makes you think they'll show up for work on a minor issue like the documents ?

  146. 49

    "what makes you think they'll show up for work on a minor issue like the documents ?"

    Therein neatly betraying his real bias and paid status, eh?

  147. The facts:

    NDP has issued an ultimatum of March 19th to the CPC to hand over the documents or else.

    Liberals have said nothing.

  148. 49

    Well let's see?

    Increase the RCMP by 2500 last year
    Result? None hired

    Plants processing meat for the US market get?
    Daily inspection

    Plants processing meat only for Canada get?
    Weekly Inspection.

    Additional inspectors hired, not through their training yet, so current inspectors working a lot of overtime.

    Digital economy??
    All broadband funding removed !

    They certainly justify our support ??

  149. Peter,

    All good points.

    Now Shadow will be on asking us his usual CPC questions.

    He is a master of baiting.

    I have decided to let things play out.

    I trust my party.

    Just because you make assertions, it doesn't make it true.

    Just because you say things over, and over, and over again also doesn't make it true.

    Shadow, over to you mate

  150. 49 steps i'm happy to let time justify my statements.

    Do you want to make a prediction about whether the Liberals will support the NDP when the March 19th deadline passes ?

  151. Shadow,

    I am not into the prediction business.

    Thank you for your invitation to do so though, very kind.

    Peter, You gotta ease up a little on Earl.

    He really is a good guy.

  152. 49
    "Peter, You gotta ease up a little on Earl."

    I disagree, I detect exactly the same as Shadow. Paid Troll !!

    Sorry but that's my opinion. He'll have to prove otherwise !

  153. No, Peter, you have to prove such a ridiculous accusation. Don't make it again unless you can.

  154. Peter,

    To be fair

    We are partisans are we not?

    We are Liberals, and we come at issues from that view point.

    Earl is CPC

    I respect that

    He might look at us as "Paid Trolls"

  155. Eric

    "No, Peter, you have to prove such a ridiculous accusation. Don't make it again unless you can."

    When Tom Clark on CTV's Power Play is openly talking about PAID bloggers from the PMO I think my point is made!!

    When somebody keeps using reworded "talking points" the case is made IMO !!

  156. No, it is not made. It is not difficult to regurgitate talking points and you don't need to be paid to do it.

    Every party has their own partisan here that follows the party line. Shadow is no different.

    Just drop it, okay? Argue with his talking points instead of just calling him stupid.

  157. Peter,

    Eric is right.

    I agree Shadow can be annoying.

    I don't know, we probably annoy him as well.

    You can't make accusations without proof.

    If you don't like something Shadow is saying, why don't you ignore him.

    After all that shows better than anything else that you don't even care enough about his points to respond.

    Shadow is a baiter, don't take the bait.

    As for Earl,

    Peter I have to take issue with you.

    Earl is an honest straight shhoter.

    He does not use talking points, and discusses issues quite well.

    I consider him to be a wise sage.

    He deserves the utmost respect from everyone on this board at all times.


COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.