Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderball
There's definitely an air of opportunism... but of course there's always the threat that if the CPC make gains, but no majority, and Dion is replaced by a capable, social moderate/fiscal conservative liberal with an ounce of charisma, it could all be for nothing, and another election would be forthcoming with less positive forecasts.
I'll probably vote conservative indefinitely, but now more than ever. Since Trudeau, I've had a general understanding that the Liberals, however slimy they may be and incongruent their views are with my own, would not entertain policy that would run the country into the ground or decimate any one region, regardless of which region. I can not say that about the Dion Liberals, and obviously the NDP and the Greens. A 4% drop in GDP is simply catastrophic, and anyone who proposes policy that willingly slices even a (liberally estimated minimum) 1% off economic output should be nowhere near government. Even Chretien and Martin would agree (off the record of course).
Harper is really betting it all that the blue liberals in BC, Quebec and Ontario feel the same way.
|
I can certainly see your point here. If anything I would call myself a "blue" Liberal. I think that the polling in Alberta shows that while we all tend to think that the governments (both provincially and federally) are not doing enough to protect the environment, we are all still protective of the oil sands and the economy that comes with them.
I think that this is a hard question to detail any plan for though, and there are a lot of "what ifs". But what would happen to our economy based on the oil sands if a political movement came into being in the United States that simply said they would not use "dirty oil"? I don't think that this can be ignored. Kennedy stood up and said in ten years they would put a man on the moon...which to me was a far more daunting task then being free of dirty oil within the same time period and they accomplished that goal.
For Canada to sit back and just roll along as it because countries like China are not changing is foolish; the infrastructure to sell to China and India is not as extensive as it is for our neighbours to the south, and simply put, not in place. Rather than taking an attitude of
"we'll find other markets" or "they will never be able to break their reliance" what we should be doing is taking steps to be able to say "this oil is going through the strongest and most effective environmental controls in the world. We know that there is a world beyond oil and we are working on that as well, but in the meantime we are making sure that the impact on the environment is as small as possible."
As a fiscal conservative myself, if this meant that a 1% drop in growth took place in the short-term, but it preserved or even created a long-term competitive advantage then I would be willing to consider this option.
My other point here is that its an option. I am still waiting to see what the CPC option is though...which on the most important issue in years appears to be nothing but attacking the other plans as invalid.