And Now Its a Reality: Harper Officially Shuffles His Cabinet

[RedHot25]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

One of the worst kept secrets - re: Rona Ambrose - is now official, as she is no longer in the environment portfolio. She now takes over (surprise, surprise) intergovernmental affairs.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveiled a newly expanded cabinet Thursday, moving Rona Ambrose out of her environment portfolio as he tries to recover political ground lost in the debate on climate change.
Thirteen, including five new ministers, were involved in the shuffle as Harper moved to overhaul his minority government with the threat of a looming spring election.

....

Meanwhile, John Baird leaves his post with the Treasury Board to take over the increasingly important environment portfolio.
In other significant changes, Robert Nicholson moves from government House leader to justice minister; Monte Solberg gives up the immigration portfolio to become human resources minister; and Vic Toews leaves his justice post to become Treasury Board president.
Peter Van Loan has become House leader while Senator Marjory LeBreton has taken on the post of secretary of state for seniors in addition to her current role as leader of the government in the Senate.

...

And looks generally like Harper is staying with the same agenda for the upcoming session:

The prime minister said in a statement that the government will pursue an active agenda for 2007 that will include:

• Presentation of a budget that controls spending, lowers taxes, and offers provinces a fair deal to restore fiscal balance;
• Cracking down on crime;
• Working to make Canada's institutions more accountable;
• Standing up for the nation's interests on the world stage; and
• Action to protect the environment and health of Canadians.

[Slava]

"We've clearly determined that we need to do more on the environment,'' he told a news conference.

OUCH! Rona Ambrose can't like that shot....maybe if Baird shows up for a few meetings he can hold this role for over a year....

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Slava

maybe if Baird shows up for a few meetings he can hold this role for over a year....

No doubt! Ambrose just wouldn't show up to any meetings, including international proceedings in which she held a very important role (due to Dion under the Liberals). She was a joke, and I wonder if she did ANYTHING at all during her brief run as Environmental minister.

I work for DFAIT and my area is environment (specifically Climate Change) and every single meeting that she was supposed to attend, she didn't. She didn't attend the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is the convention responsible for the Kyoto Protocol, or the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. These are two main international proceedings that even during the high-end segment when government officials and ambassadors were present, she didn't even show up. It looked really bad for Canada.

Way to go Harper! Actually, this and the whole trusts issue... I am really starting to like this guy.

[mykalberta]

I think the reason she didnt show for the Framework convention was simple, the Cons arent intending on keeping Kyoto commitments in their present form se she likely would have gotten ganged up on there.

As per the Sustainable Development, I thought there was a vote in the house durring that time. I agree she should have been at this one.

The Cons Environment problems stem from the fact that it simply isnt that high on the priority list - their focus in that area is less green house gas reductions more smog provention/health spending.

Rona's problem was she didnt seem to be able to handle the attcks from across the floor.

MYK

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

No doubt! Ambrose just wouldn't show up to any meetings, including international proceedings in which she held a very important role (due to Dion under the Liberals). She was a joke, and I wonder if she did ANYTHING at all during her brief run as Environmental minister.
. . . .

Way to go Harper! Actually, this and the whole trusts issue... I am really starting to like this guy.

Way to go Harper!????

Ambrose was Harper's Environment Minister, not some independant agent. Harper set the agenda for his cabinet, and part of his agenda was obviously to ignore the international community when it came to the environment and climate change; the fact that Ambrose was skipping all these meetings was well known to everyone, and was more of a reflection of Harper than Ambrose, so any ire you feel over the Governments actions and policies toward the environment should be directed as such.

[Bertuzzied]

I want Rob Anders in there somewhere. I'm sure he can bring down the government in a month.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I think the reason she didnt show for the Framework convention was simple, the Cons arent intending on keeping Kyoto commitments in their present form se she likely would have gotten ganged up on there.

As per the Sustainable Development, I thought there was a vote in the house durring that time. I agree she should have been at this one.

The Cons Environment problems stem from the fact that it simply isnt that high on the priority list - their focus in that area is less green house gas reductions more smog provention/health spending.

Rona's problem was she didnt seem to be able to handle the attcks from across the floor.

MYK

The thing is, the UNFCCC is 10 days long, and the Commission on Sustainable Development is 14 days long, that took place when the House was adjourned for the Summer. In my mind, there is absolutely no reason why she couldn't have at least showed up for even a day.

I recall last year's UNFCCC that was held in Montreal. During the conference, the government lost confidence in the house - I would say that was a pretty important vote, yet Dion, Martin and other notables still played a huge part in that conference. Granted, it's Montreal and relatively close, but the Commission was in New York, which is an hour flight from Ottawa.

I am talking about simple inter-departmental meetings as well, she just wouldn't show up. Often times, cancelling the same day as the meeting. She was a joke, and I am not sure why Harper is even giving her a second chance on the cabinet.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Way to go Harper!????

Ambrose was Harper's Environment Minister, not some independant agent. Harper set the agenda for his cabinet, and part of his agenda was obviously to ignore the international community when it came to the environment and climate change; the fact that Ambrose was skipping all these meetings was well known to everyone, and was more of a reflection of Harper than Ambrose, so any ire you feel over the Governments actions and policies toward the environment should be directed as such.

No, I'm talking about simple interdepartmental meetings that she just wouldn't show up for that she should've attended, as per her portfolio. Her Deputy Minister did all the work, which is very undemocratic since he is not an elected official - but really isn't a problem for me as I hate the Conservatives and would rather have the Deputy Minister do the work anyway.

I want to know, what exactly she has been doing for the last 11 months.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Kobatuzzied

I want Rob Anders in there somewhere. I'm sure he can bring down the government in a month.

I couldn't agree more! More Rob Anders and more Myron Thompson would make question period so much fun! I thought that Stockwell would tank, but since they've kept him off the jet-ski he has just been his usual robotic self and not said anything too stupid.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Kobatuzzied

I want Rob Anders in there somewhere. I'm sure he can bring down the government in a month.

Well its not Anders, but Jason Kenney is making an appearnace... (in a junior role):

Five MPs were sworn in as new junior ministers:

• Alberta's Jason Kenney as secretary of state for multiculturalism and Canadian identity

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by Slava

"We've clearly determined that we need to do more on the environment,'' he told a news conference.

OUCH! Rona Ambrose can't like that shot....maybe if Baird shows up for a few meetings he can hold this role for over a year....

So you do more by appointing the guy who singlehandedly killed light rail in his hometown? That's how you do more for the environment? Appoint a ######bag to a role like that because he's your wife's gay escort?

[Bobblehead]

Working to make Canada's institutions more accountable;

That one makes me laugh after the whole Rob Anders nomination issue.
Add to that on Dec.21 the CPC revised it's report to Elections Canada for 2005, admitting to Harper(among others) exceeded donation limits.

Accountability is still lacking.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

The thing is, the UNFCCC is 10 days long, and the Commission on Sustainable Development is 14 days long, that took place when the House was adjourned for the Summer. In my mind, there is absolutely no reason why she couldn't have at least showed up for even a day.

I recall last year's UNFCCC that was held in Montreal. During the conference, the government lost confidence in the house - I would say that was a pretty important vote, yet Dion, Martin and other notables still played a huge part in that conference. Granted, it's Montreal and relatively close, but the Commission was in New York, which is an hour flight from Ottawa.

I am talking about simple inter-departmental meetings as well, she just wouldn't show up. Often times, cancelling the same day as the meeting. She was a joke, and I am not sure why Harper is even giving her a second chance on the cabinet.

The Liberals played a huge part in that conference not because they care about the enviro, but because a vote was upcoming and the easiest way for the Libs to win is to be seen as superior to the NDP on NDP ideas. If the Enviro ever becomes a "go to the poles" type of issue like taxes, crime, etc then the cons will pay it more attention.

The reason Harper is saying all this mumbo jumbo about a better environment policy is because the Liberals have been able to monopolize an issue that the NDP has championed. The cons know that the soft NDP will vote Liberal if they see they have a chance to win so the Cons come up with an enviro policy to take some media attention away form the Libs - they also ask for the NDP's help with their Clean Air Act in a political move that can only be called brilliant - buoys the NDP and doesnt hurt the cons, and is seen as a "crossing party lines move" which always plays well.

Canada should be a 2 Party system with the Libs and Cons fightining it out with the NDP there to provide the environmental policy as that is their baby. The cons and libs can deal with everything else but the NDP should be given the environmental keys.

MYK

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

The Liberals played a huge part in that conference not because they care about the enviro, but because a vote was upcoming and the easiest way for the Libs to win is to be seen as superior to the NDP on NDP ideas. If the Enviro ever becomes a "go to the poles" type of issue like taxes, crime, etc then the cons will pay it more attention.

The reason Harper is saying all this mumbo jumbo about a better environment policy is because the Liberals have been able to monopolize an issue that the NDP has championed. The cons know that the soft NDP will vote Liberal if they see they have a chance to win so the Cons come up with an enviro policy to take some media attention away form the Libs - they also ask for the NDP's help with their Clean Air Act in a political move that can only be called brilliant - buoys the NDP and doesnt hurt the cons, and is seen as a "crossing party lines move" which always plays well.

Canada should be a 2 Party system with the Libs and Cons fightining it out with the NDP there to provide the environmental policy as that is their baby. The cons and libs can deal with everything else but the NDP should be given the environmental keys.

MYK

This really has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I'll take the bait anyway.

First off, the location of the UNFCCC is not arbitrarily picked out of a hat, the Liberal's had to make a bid to host the conference, and I believe (but I could be wrong...) that the location is known years before the actual convention. I am under the impression that it was under the Chretien government where plans were put in place to have the international conference in Canada. I really do not think the reason why the Liberal's hosted the convention was because of the minority government situation at all - it was planned much prior to that.

Secondly, if the environment was not worth any kind of votes or time, why would Harper make this shuffle in the first place, let alone burn one of his own cabinet minister's in his original statement "We've clearly determined that we need to do more on the environment," ? The reality is that the environment is becoming more and more important, both politically and in reality, and as I recall Climate Change was a pretty important part of the last federal election. You can sit there and deny the existance of Climate Change or refuse to acknowledge the huge amount of time and resources that is being thrown at environmental concerns, let alone the huge amount of attention it gets in the House and in the media - but obviously, that doesn't make it true. In reality, you have 1 in 5 Canadians voting for the NDP, and 1 in 20 voting for the Green Party... seems like just because it's not one of your priorities, doesn't mean it's not a Canadian priority.

Some might think that electing the former Environmental minister as the new leader of the Liberal Party might reflect the outstanding job Dion did with his portfolio. I tend to agree, I know he did an outstanding job. Who cares if the Liberals have been able to monopolize on this issue, it's not a "go to the polls" issue, right? Again, if environmental issues weren't important, why are the Conservatives making a clean air act? Or working with the NDP on the issue? You seem to be unwilling to accept reality, but contradicting yourself in the same statement.

You're also typecasting the NDP as a solely environmental party, which environmentally they are the most conscious (including the Greens) but that is far from the only issue of importance to them. Are you forgetting why in the first place the last federal election took place? It was because of Health-Care. You clearly have no idea what the NDP have installed in this country, but their environmental policy is far from being their only baby. To create a two-party system in a party system is anything but democratic, and to do what you're suggesting, making the NDP an environmental NGO is laughable. What about the Bloc? I'm sure that will appease Quebec... ha ha ha, hillarious. That could single-handedly break up this country. You're forgetting that the minority of Canadians voted for the Conservatives, and if we had proportional representation, the house would look much different, including 5% of MPS representing the Green party.

The NDP has always consistantly gotten results in this country by being a balance of power in the house during minority situations. By working with the Conservatives, they are insuring that they are getting their say in terms of environmental policies. Trust me, if the NDP is not happy with the Clean Air Act, they will not vote for it.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

If the Enviro ever becomes a "go to the poles" type of issue like taxes, crime, etc then the cons will pay it more attention.

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Secondly, if the environment was not worth any kind of votes or time, why would Harper make this shuffle in the first place, let alone burn one of his own cabinet minister's in his original statement "We've clearly determined that we need to do more on the environment," ? The reality is that the environment is becoming more and more important, both politically and in reality, and as I recall Climate Change was a pretty important part of the last federal election. You can sit there and deny the existance of Climate Change or refuse to acknowledge the huge amount of time and resources that is being thrown at environmental concerns, let alone the huge amount of attention it gets in the House and in the media - but obviously, that doesn't make it true. In reality, you have 1 in 5 Canadians voting for the NDP, and 1 in 20 voting for the Green Party... .

I think that the environment is ramping up to be a significant area of interest again...and this is reflected in politicians attention to it.

There is a scholar - Kathryn Harrison - who looks at this type of stuff, and she proposes that in regards to the environment, the federal government steps up its role/becomes more assertive and involved when public interest, opinion, etc becomes hightened. That way they can be viewed as "doing something, and addressing the needs of Canadians".

When the environment isn't capturing the interest of Canadians, then you see the feds retreat and return to their traditional role of taking a secondary role in the environment and its regulation...instead letting the provinces run the particular show.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

I think that the environment is ramping up to be a significant area of interest again...and this is reflected in politicians attention to it.

There is a scholar - Kathryn Harrison - who looks at this type of stuff, and she proposes that in regards to the environment, the federal government steps up its role/becomes more assertive and involved when public interest, opinion, etc becomes hightened. That way they can be viewed as "doing something, and addressing the needs of Canadians".

When the environment isn't capturing the interest of Canadians, then you see the feds retreat and return to their traditional role of taking a secondary role in the environment and its regulation...instead letting the provinces run the particular show.

I think I've heard of Kathryn Harrison, is she based out of Carlton Universtiy?

But, this makes complete sense. It just makes sense politically to appease as many voters as possible. I don't think you can find many liberal democracies that currently are not making some sort of progressive policies towards environmentalism, it's a sign of the times really.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I think I've heard of Kathryn Harrison, is she based out of Carlton Universtiy?

But, this makes complete sense. It just makes sense politically to appease as many voters as possible. I don't think you can find many liberal democracies that currently are not making some sort of progressive policies towards environmentalism, it's a sign of the times really.

I think that she is from UBC...here one second...

yup I was right: http://www.politics.ubc.ca/index.php?id=2466

she has a lot of stuff on environmental topics; she may be one source to consider for anyone interested in environmental topics.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Slava

"We've clearly determined that we need to do more on the environment,'' he told a news conference.

OUCH! Rona Ambrose can't like that shot....maybe if Baird shows up for a few meetings he can hold this role for over a year....

Originally Posted by fotze

WHOA! He actually said that? I have never heard a politician slam a fellow party member/cabinet person like that (even though I am sure he approved the 'plan' before it was released). That is a bitch slap that has rarely been done in Canadian politics....

Ha, yup, in fact this is what he said...

But Harper claimed Ambrose accomplished more in one year than the previous Liberal government did in 13 years. However, he conceded work on the environment was far from complete.
"We've clearly determined that we need to do more on the environment,'' he told a news conference.
"We recognize that, particularly when it comes to clean air and climate change, that Canadians expect a lot more.''


And...

"You find when you make one or two changes you find, by necessity you must make others. ... we felt we had to make some changes to make sure we had the people in the portfolios that were most suited to them," Harper said

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

I think that she is from UBC...here one second...

yup I was right: http://www.politics.ubc.ca/index.php?id=2466

she has a lot of stuff on environmental topics; she may be one source to consider for anyone interested in environmental topics.

Cool. Thanks!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

So you do more by appointing the guy who singlehandedly killed light rail in his hometown? That's how you do more for the environment? Appoint a ######bag to a role like that because he's your wife's gay escort?

I don't think much of Baird either, nor any of the other conservatives when it comes to the environment (or a lot of other issues). Basically they seem t think that its money or environmental policy as if the two are opposed.

It's particularly pathetic though when you're touted as a "star" cabinet minister and such and you lose the portfolio within a year.

Baird really has no more qualification to run the portfolio (that I'm aware of), but at least Harper didn't appoint another unelected senator to fill the role.