babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » national news   » Rest of Canada provinces oppose Kyoto Accord

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Rest of Canada provinces oppose Kyoto Accord
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 16 February 2002 03:44 AM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
HellOOO, Ralph Klein embarrasses PM on Team Canada jaunt

Now, why oh why have the two NDP governments signed this letter


From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 16 February 2002 03:58 AM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That's what I was wondering. Looks like Québec's got the only near-decent government left. You know the country's in a bad place when you start considering becoming a Québec separatist... and you live in the Soo...
From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 16 February 2002 10:37 AM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
provincial: adj. Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.

Yep. Sounds about right.

More and more and more, I realize the provincial governments are far, far too powerful; and that the radical neo-liberal revolutionary right has taken advantage of this imbalance to impose an agenda offensive to most Canadians.


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 16 February 2002 11:10 AM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
....this may also explain why the Quebec National Assembly has proven to be the exception to the rule.
From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 16 February 2002 03:01 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Has anybody verified if all the provincial governments have signed that letter or if Klein is just fulla shit?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 16 February 2002 03:13 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
provincial: adj. Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.

Yep. Sounds about right.


I think perhaps, if Klein's not bullshitting, it would be a good idea to write Lorne Calvert and Gary Doer to grill them about this letter, as well as the territorial leaders (I just can't imagine why they would sign this- they've got the most to lose if Kyoto doesn't go ahead). All the rest, I would have expected this from. Maybe not Grimes, Binns and Lord, but it doesn't take that much of a stretch of the imagination to picture them selling out.


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
John I. Fleming
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1846

posted 16 February 2002 03:15 PM      Profile for John I. Fleming        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Dr.

I would imagine that if any Premier didn't sign the apparent letter, he would have spoken up.


From: Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 16 February 2002 03:52 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The premiers say the emission reductions will penalize
energy-producing provinces; cost industry billions of
dollars; and make Canada uncompetitive.

Translation? Let's look it up in the greedygreedyselfishneocon>English dictionary...
Ah! Here it is!

quote:
Without exploiting the oil beneath Alberta for every damn penny it's worth, there's no damn way we can make our agenda work! People will find out tax cuts come at a cost!!! Fuck the environment! I want my stinkin' TAX CUT!

What does Mikey have to say?

quote:
I thought I heard the
PM say the Kyoto agreement, as it is, isn't ready to
sign. How can you be in favour of something when you
don't know what it is?

Gee, Mikey, why don't you tell us? You're the expert after all...

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 17 February 2002 11:05 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sounds like Harris exposed Chretien's hypocracy on Kyoto.

Everybody supports Kyoto when they don't know what it is?

Sounds like the U.S. was just being honest when they withdrew their support.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 17 February 2002 03:39 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Everybody supports Kyoto when they don't know what it is?

Sounds like the U.S. was just being honest when they withdrew their support.


Actually, we do know what the Kyoto accord is, and what it entails. Chrétien was just saying he's not in full support of everything in it. Well tough shit, Jean- sign the damn thing, ignore those SOB's we call premiers, and actually IMPLEMENT it this time! Otherwise, you're in for a rough ride during the rest of your term...


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 17 February 2002 05:44 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Actually, we do know what the Kyoto accord is, and what it entails. Chrétien was just saying he's not in full support of everything in it.

Sounds more like Bush every day.

quote:

Well tough shit, Jean- sign the damn thing, ignore those SOB's we call premiers,

Would those be the democratically elected premiers who represent every political party and those who elected them except Quebec?

quote:
and actually IMPLEMENT it this time! Otherwise, you're in for a rough ride during the rest of your term...

Like the same rough ride the 9 premiers who represent all political parties will be in. C'mon meades do you think Chretien is worried about public opinion at all? Besides its looking like the majority of the public isn't willing to pay the costs of Kyoto. And this is even though it is drastically biased towards Canada by allowing to use its forests for Credits.

Now I understand more why the U.S. pulled out of an agreement that was far more biased against it than while favoring Canada. Hell Canada doesn't even fully support it.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 17 February 2002 05:58 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Would those be the democratically elected premiers who represent every political party
and those who elected them except Quebec?

The federal government is just as democratically elected as the provincial governments- If they don't want to pay attention to the provinces, they don't have to- the only people they need to concern themselves with are the constituents- not some power hungry stiffs that meet once a year. Unfortunately, the feds don't even pay attention to them...

quote:
Besides its
looking like the majority of the public isn't willing to pay the costs of Kyoto.

Really? I'd like to know where you're looking.

[ February 17, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 17 February 2002 08:08 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You do realize that the constituents of the provincial and federal goverment are the same people, right???

My point is that the U.S. rejection of Kyoto is looking less and less unilateral. It seems like signing on to this deal was simply superficial and lacked substance.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 February 2002 08:14 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
You do realize that the constituents of the provincial and federal goverment are the same people, right???

You do realize that this is complete nonsense, right???

What I mean is, provincial premiers (I'm looking at you, Ralph Klein, Gordon Campbell, Mike Harris) are even deeper in the pockets of Big Industry, and beholden to neo-conservative theologians, than the federal government. Alarming, but true.

There's nothing more provincial than a provincial premier.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 17 February 2002 08:23 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So Jean Chretien and his Gagliano crew have proven their not beholden to corporate interests here??

And you talk about me speaking nonsense????

Chretien is supporting an agreement I believe he will never sign on to. THis makes him deceptive and a showboat. The only difference is that Bush is being honest rather than backing out at the last minute.

We'll talk when Kyoto is finalized. We'll talk if it is signed at all Or how much its watered down.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 17 February 2002 08:25 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
You do realize that the constituents of the provincial and federal goverment are the
same people, right???

You do realize the two levels of government have different jurisdictions, right???

They're elected by the same people but for different reasons. Also, the federal government was elected more recently than most provincial governments, so even if they were elected for the same purposes, one could argue Jean Chrétien better represents Ontarians than Mike Harris.

Either way, the whole electoral process for both levels is fundamentally flawed, and saying any of them represent so-and-so better or worse, or what-have-you, is just plain naïve.


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
tygger woods
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2235

posted 17 February 2002 09:09 PM      Profile for tygger woods     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What if Suzuki and all the others are just plain wrong. What if the earth has natural cycles of temperature that have nothing to do with man's activities? We'll have wasted a ton of cash for nothing.
From: terrace | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
sherpafish
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1568

posted 17 February 2002 09:13 PM      Profile for sherpafish   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The only reply is, what if they're not wrong. (And on other threads posters have supplied facts figures and charts to back up their claims)
Then what do we lose.
You feel free to experiment on your own, but I think humans can't gain substanance off of heaps of stock-piled cash. *****(edited to remove offensive name-calling).

[ February 17, 2002: Message edited by: sherpafish ]


From: intra-crainial razor dust | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 17 February 2002 09:14 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't know, couldn't those heaps of cash be used to make it better for the billions that are here now??
From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
sherpafish
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1568

posted 17 February 2002 09:18 PM      Profile for sherpafish   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes, by doing things that improve the quality of everyone's life (globaly), like enforcing sustainable emmisions in Canada (to start with) perhaps? Give me a second and I'll link to a Bio-Diesel site.

[ February 17, 2002: Message edited by: sherpafish ]


From: intra-crainial razor dust | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 17 February 2002 09:33 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sorry but its not my point. Instead of trying to solve problems we disagree on, why don't we dedicate those resources on ones we agree on. Knock 'em off one at a time.
From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 17 February 2002 09:42 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Because if "we're" right (oh, and btw, most of the scientific community is behind "us"), and we collectively do nothing because there's a few nay-sayers would rather continue polluting and padding pockets, then it'll be too late to act when everyone starts agreeing (if that ever happens).

Also, water levels are the least of our worries, really- what about air and water quality? Pollution doesn't exactly help that. These are undeniable health hazards, and are directly linked to pollution. Sure, the ice caps may be melting for other reasons, but for crissakes, I'd think the lot of you wouldn't be so loony as to suggest we should abandon the Kyoto protocol simply because ONE of the many, many concerns is "iffy".

[ February 17, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
sherpafish
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1568

posted 17 February 2002 11:11 PM      Profile for sherpafish   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Instead of trying to solve problems we disagree on, why don't we dedicate those resources on ones we agree on.

I don't agree with the War on Terrorism(TM). Let's stop that action too.
We all have different priorities, Markbo, some are more creative than others. We have energy options that don't kill us in the long term. You tell me why we aren't using them.

From: intra-crainial razor dust | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca