New poll: Harper - Conservatives headed for third place next election?

[CaptainCrunch]

Or targets the Oil sands but doesn't touch Ontario's manufacturing segment.

[RyZ]

That's my issue as well. I'm not huge on the Conservatives getting in at all, but they are the only group of the big 3 that isn't going to take a sledgehammer to the Alberta economy to prop up mainly Quebec and Ontario.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Or targets the Oil sands but doesn't touch Ontario's manufacturing segment.

That's what you get from the case-by-case regulation that favored by the current government.

[Slava]

Have you guys actually listened to what the Liberals have proposed regarding energy and the oil sands or are you just relying on the past? Trudeau has come to Alberta many times, and the Liberals ran really well in Ft. McMurray in the last by election. Pretty sure that wasn't because they were pitching anything stupid regarding the oil sands or Alberta.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Slava

Have you guys actually listened to what the Liberals have proposed regarding energy and the oil sands or are you just relying on the past? Trudeau has come to Alberta many times, and the Liberals ran really well in Ft. McMurray in the last by election. Pretty sure that wasn't because they were pitching anything stupid regarding the oil sands or Alberta.

Actually, I have listened very closely to Trudeau. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth on the oilsands, and it only adds to my concerns.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Actually, I have listened very closely to Trudeau. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth on the oilsands, and it only adds to my concerns.

Can you give me an example? I have heard basically nothing against the oil sands.

[killer_carlson]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle17910145/

Trudeau "supports" the oilsands but wants to add regulations to their carbon outputs through an environmental regulatory scheme (aka a way for the Feds to take a cut of profits and send down east).

Note that he doesn't have any of the same "support" for Ontario based high carbon emitting manufacturing centers, or any other environmental issue.

There are scant details, only talking out of both sides. He wants to support the oilsands, but limit their growth through a yet to be detailed regulatory scheme and grab a chunk of revenue.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

With Trudeau my fear is that there will be a wealth re-distribution in the country, but it will not be through transfer payments. It will be done through an environmental tax which focuses only on specific pollutions or industries, and ignores others. Example, carbon emissions but ignores water pollution in the great lakes.

That's actually something that's a much broader problem. Even a fair, global agreement on carbon could lead to substitutions into other pollutants if they are not addressed by the same agreement, but creating a global agreement that addresses those possible substitutions (and other externalities) is rather impractical.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle17910145/

Trudeau "supports" the oilsands but wants to add regulations to their carbon outputs through an environmental regulatory scheme (aka a way for the Feds to take a cut of profits and send down east).

Note that he doesn't have any of the same "support" for Ontario based high carbon emitting manufacturing centers, or any other environmental issue.

There are scant details, only talking out of both sides. He wants to support the oilsands, but limit their growth through a yet to be detailed regulatory scheme and grab a chunk of revenue.

A Liberal government would adopt a national climate policy – in collaboration with the provinces – that would target both consumers and industry, including regulations aimed at limiting greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands, he said.

That's quite a leap you made there.

[Slava]

I actually think this is where the CPC has a problem as well. The US and China just signed a big agreement and it would probably behoove Canada to make some major gains in this area. Prentice (yes, provincially) has started the push for environmental regulations yet growth of the oil sands. I completely agree with as the overall approach. Why can't we do both?

[killer_carlson]

The point is this: If it's about the environment, make it about the environment - not just one industry. Make it balanced across the country, across different forms of pollution.

But I have no confidence that it is about the environment. It is more about wealth re-distribution, and targeting Alberta's oil sands sector.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

The point is this: If it's about the environment, make it about the environment - not just one industry. Make it balanced across the country, across different forms of pollution.

But I have no confidence that it is about the environment. It is more about wealth re-distribution, and targeting Alberta's oil sands sector.

I don't disagree, except that you're basing this on ancient history. Trudeau supports things like the pipelines for example, save for Northern Gateway. That doesn't signal an end to oil sands at all. It signals smart and thoughtful expansion, which is exactly what we need to move towards.

[killer_carlson]

I didn't say he was anti-oilsands. He wants to take a chunk of the revenues through the guise of the environment.

His position on pipelines is also two-faced. He has the bumper sticker headline about being in support, but his "conditions" usually require consensus of environmentalists and first nations, which we know are not going to come. Many environmental groups have radicalized and will accept nothing but a shut down of the industry, thereby making their support impossible. And many First Nation groups have adopted similar positions.

Trudeau is wanting the headline but placing his support on conditions which will be impossible without leadership at the federal level identifying the economy as the priority.

And again, part of the middle ground in this is the environment - as a whole, and not just one industry in wealthy province(es)

[Slava]

I think you and I agree on more than we disagree on. I obviously has a somewhat vested interest in not seeing Alberta disadvantaged, and I completely agree that the environmentalists have become ridiculous in some cases. I consider myself an environmentalist, but I shudder to use that label for myself because of the connotations.

The other issues here are two-fold though. Like it or not, the first-Nations and environmentalists have some say here. When pipelines go through their land, it's just part of the game. You could force the issue, but that will likely lead to more problems.

The other issue is the point of pricing carbon. It's really a case of what's the most effective way to do that, and the CPC has just missed the boat. I think we will see a reversal of their policy on that point, or at least it wouldn't surprise me.

[killer_carlson]

I agree. It's a better conversation over a drink and nachos anyways.

The frustrating thing for me is that I'm not thrilled with the performance of the CPC, but there are no alternatives for my support which are remotely palatable.

I think had Garneau won, or someone for the Libs more intellectually capable that we would see more alternatives and compel the CPC to do more. But it just isnt the case. Not only do we have Trudeau, we see guys like Garneau damage their own brand by supporting Trudeau's more ridiculous stances and having to constantly cover for him.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't think anyone would deny that there are serious environmental consequences in the Alberta oil industry, as there is in various types of resource extraction industries. The extent of the environmental impacts is debatable, but the fact exists that other nations in the world are concerned about it and it affects our nation's economic and trade relationships, as well as our reputation. It really does impact the nation as a whole and our policy needs to reflect that.

The trick is to implement policy and action that has minimal effect on Alberta's economy while placating the domestic and global concerns about our oil industry. This might take as much charisma as it does actual policy though.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I agree. It's a better conversation over a drink and nachos anyways.

The frustrating thing for me is that I'm not thrilled with the performance of the CPC, but there are no alternatives for my support which are remotely palatable.

I think had Garneau won, or someone for the Libs more intellectually capable that we would see more alternatives and compel the CPC to do more. But it just isnt the case. Not only do we have Trudeau, we see guys like Garneau damage their own brand by supporting Trudeau's more ridiculous stances and having to constantly cover for him.

This, I have tremendous respect for Garneau and there was a pretty good possibility that he could swing my vote over the the Liberals in the next election because I respect his resume and his intellect and his determination.

With Trudeau and especially his idiocy there's almost no chance of that happening.

I still feel that in the upcoming election that Trudeau's handlers are terrified of a debate between Justin on one side and a desperate Mulcair and a Harper that's relishing the opportunity to go after Justin on the other.

[Azure]

Is the omnibus crime law still in place? If so, I'm voting Liberal.

The oil sands are a moot point. The Liberals won't do that much to damage it, and IMO, we are falling behind in terms of finding practical solutions to reducing our carbon footprint.

Yes I know China/India are going to burn this planet down regardless of what we do, but we have enough smart people in this country that can come up with a way to clean up the oilsands without screwing everyone over.

The carbon capture and storage coal plant in Sask is a great example. Not saying it is THE solution, but it is a hell of a start.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

This, I have tremendous respect for Garneau and there was a pretty good possibility that he could swing my vote over the the Liberals in the next election because I respect his resume and his intellect and his determination.

With Trudeau and especially his idiocy there's almost no chance of that happening.

I still feel that in the upcoming election that Trudeau's handlers are terrified of a debate between Justin on one side and a desperate Mulcair and a Harper that's relishing the opportunity to go after Justin on the other.

Its somewhat amusing because while the CPC keeps saying 'wait until he opens his mouth' it's been what, 2 years? They have very little to point to as terrible things he has said. Trudeau hasn't said or done anything worse than Mulcair or Harper, and the last attack ads weren't well received.

I have no idea whether Trudeau can handle himself in a debate. The leaders are all in Parliament though and face off daily. Can one of them land a knockout blow? Doubtful. For the most part the supporters are convinced that their guy was amazing and the others were adequate at best.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

I thought it might be worth resurrecting this thread as I think things are a bit in flux right now. For the first time in over 6 months, Harper's Tories can say that they led in a poll: an Abacus survey released the 23rd had them up 34% to 33%. In addition, Angus Reid has the parties tied at 34, a gain of 4 since their last federal poll. Is this a trend shifting back in Harper's direction, or just a temporary blip? We will have to see in 2015.

For the polling year in review, this article isn't bad:
http://www.threehundredeight.com/?m=1