In October 2002, St. Catharines Liberal environment critic, M.P.P. Jim Bradley, was booted out of the Legislature for heckling the Ernie Eves' Conservatives, alleging they were "hiding" hundreds of Kyoto documents. Bradley claimed these "secret" files would show that the impact upon Ontario of implementing Kyoto "is not going to be as dire as they have suggested." (Globe and Mail, Nov. 19, 2002) Bradley blustered: "We know that your government is not telling the whole story." (Brantford Expositor, Oct. 23, 2002) A St. Catharines Standard editorial (Nov. 20,2002) called upon Premier Eves "to open the doors and windows and let the sunshine in."
Is anyone today, in 2007, calling to "let the sunshine in" on the failed policies of Ontario's Premier Dalton McGuinty? Are his now-governing Liberals, who for four years fibbed like Pinocchio, "telling the whole story"?
What documents have the Grits hidden, concealing Kyoto's economic impact upon Ontarians? Could it be that, contrary to the histrionics of the Al Gore and David Suzuki traveling salvation shows, the apocalypse is not now? Could it be that not implementing Kyoto is not "going to be as dire as they have suggested"?
Bradley dismissed Kyoto-skeptic experts as "rogue scientists". (Brock Press, Nov. 19, 2002, story by Susan Kerwin), yet, what are Bradley's own scientific credentials? Is this guy fit to pontificate on the science of climate change? In 2002, as Bradley shrieked about his alleged Kyoto "secret" documents, what actual science was Bradley basing his beliefs on at the time - the Mann "hockey-stick" graph, since discredited? Should we believe a "pipsqueak" politician like Bradley, as Ralph Klein once described him (St.Catharines Standard, Oct. 23, 2002); or, should we believe scientists around the world (lovingly known as 'deniers') who question the climate models, methodology and data interpretations used by fear-inducing, pro-Kyoto tax-grabbers? For example, renowned French
scientist Dr. Claude Allègre has stated, as have many others, that there is no basis for saying that the "science is settled." (National Post, Mar. 2, 2007) Patrick Moore, former Greenpeace president, said "Gore and Suzuki will have to eat major crow" over their insistence that man-made global warming is scientifically settled. (Roy Green show, CHML, Mar. 21, 2007)
The CBC's Fifth Estate (first week of June 2007, you know, when frost was forecast for southern Ontario) tried its best to discredit Canadian climatology professor Tim Ball (who questions the man-made co2 hysterics of the Gor-zuki crowd), referring to him as a "so-called expert". Some hack in the show by the name of Jim Hoggan, apparently funded by someone from the environmental movement, said with innuendo about Dr. Ball's credentials: "Most of these guys that you see quoted aren't climate scientists. Some of them do have Phd's and they have a science background, but they're not doing science, they're doing PR. They don't have scientific papers that were published." Funny, this CBC smear-job didn't question the supposed credentials of PR/entertainers Suzuki and Gore! Are they qualified climatologists? Has anyone seen Suzuki or Gore debate the man-is-the-cause-of-climate-change topic, rather than preach about it? Ball would give 'it's-settled-Suzuki' a run for his money. It must be nice to have fifth columnists from your old employer help slime your adversaries.
By the way, did you see how David Suzuki, with dozens of cameras in tow, just happened to slither out of the crowd just in time to 'accidentally' bump into John Baird at the Toronto home show several months ago? Talk about PR! Then around mid June 2007, we see Suzuki in TV commercials startling people on their front porches as he takes the liberty of screwing new bulbs into their porchlights. How quaint. Another commercial shows a startled homeowner discovering Suzuki slithering around in his basement, fiddling around with a fridge. That's just creepy - call the police.
Internet-inventor Gore's Nashville estate consumes huge amounts of utilities. The Goracle justifies his extravagant 'carbon footprint' by claiming he buys carbon-offsets (emission-credits) from a tax-exempt investment management company - of which he is the chair and founding partner! A zinc mine on Gore's property, from which he had earned nearly $800,000, "was one of the worst polluters in the state before it was shut down in 2003." (National Post, Mar. 22, 2007) Appearing before a Washington environmental committee, Gore was asked if he would take a personal ethics pledge to "consume no more energy than the average American household by March 21, 2008." (National Post, Mar.24, 2007) Gore refused to make the pledge, yet in his crockumentary docu-ganda (in the Oscar science-fiction category, wasn't it?) An Inconvenient Truth, Gore asks us: "Are you ready to change the way you live?" Gore's hysteric film conveniently manufactures truths such as the seas will rise up to 6 meters because of supposed man-made warming, yet even the United Nation's own chicken-little alarmists only predict a rise no more than 40 cm. A British film The Great Climate Change Swindle gives an interesting alternative perspective to the Goracle's spin. Try to find it.
It was disheartening to read that Suzuki, Mr. Greenpants personified, once told a reporter to f-off. Maybe the Suze should take his own advice. How many pure, innocent icebergs have melted because of the emissions from his jets and buses as he peddles his ecophobia across our land? Typical Suzuki climate hyperbole: the cost of not doing anything will cost more than WWI and WWII put together. Whaaat!? (National Post, Feb.20, 2007)
For years, Stephane Bumbledore Dion and his federal Liberals - even with a majority - preached, but did nothing about Kyoto, while Canada's emissions rose more than in the U.S., which had pragmatically decided not to participate. Former Prime Minister Jean Chrètien "signed us up to the Kyoto Climate Control Treaty, but by his own admission, did not even read it," wrote Jerri Gendraeau. (Windsor Star, Nov.8, 2003) Former Chrètien advisor Eddie Goldenberg admitted Liberals knew that Kyoto targets couldn't reasonably be met. (Windsor Star, Feb. 24, 2007). The Federal Environment Commissioner issued an audit in Sept. 2006 reporting the Liberal's failings: they spent $6 BILLION on climate change projects from 1997 to 2006, without coordination or planning, resulting in a crisis. (Winnipeg Free Press, Sept. 29, 2006)
The Toronto Sun's Alan Findlay wrote in "Fed Grits knew Kyoto targets unfeasible?" (Sept.13, 2007) : "Federal bureaucrats began questioning whether Canada could meet its Kyoto Protocol committments even before the Conservatives took power early last year, according to a ministerial briefing obtained by Sun Media...The document is dated Feb.3, 2006 only days before Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet was sworn in after the Conservatives' January election victory. Less than two months earlier, former Liberal environment minister Stephane Dion hosted a major international conference on climate change and the Kyoto accord. A spokesman for Environment Minister John Baird said the presentation clearly shows the Liberals were aware before they lost power that the Kyoto committment they signed was impossible."
McGuinty not only broke his major 2002 Kyoto pledge to close all of Ontario's coal-fired plants, but has since exempted proposed nuclear plants from environmental reviews. Ontario's Environment Commission reported in Oct. 2006 that McGuinty's Liberals have drastically neglected and mismanaged environmental protection. The Sierra Club gave Ontario's Grit
government an 'F' on climate change in 2006.
Bradley smugly once called former premier Mike Harris' environmental initiatives "laughable" (Welland Tribune, Oct. 22, 1999), but in 2007, it was Greenpeace calling the meager climate-change funding in the budget of Bradley's Liberal party "laughable". (St. Catharines Standard, Mar. 23, 2007)
What exactly is the expense of implementing Kyoto? In 2002, when Bradley was badgering the Eves government with his 'secret files' stunt, Eves, responsibly and cautiously, asked that Liberal Ottawa show its plan for implementing Kyoto without costing the province thousands of jobs. (Why didn't Bradley badger Chrètien for his secret Kyoto files?) Chrètien's Liberals did not provide details on the economic impact of Kyoto upon Ontario then, nor have McGuinty's Liberals since. In 2002, an Edmonton paper wrote Chrètien "maintained that a detailed plan for achieving the accord's emissions-reduction target is not possible and not necessary."
(Edmonton Journal, Nov.27, 2002) Details...plans...costs? Who needs 'em?!!
McGuinty, who once bragged (really): "Clean air in Ontario...that's our job" (Toronto Star, Oct. 5, 2006), gave General Motors millions to build gas-guzzlers, which couldn't be sold in Ontario if we enacted California emission standards. With typical Liberal hypocrisy, McGuinty said he "will not abide in any effort on the part of the national government to unduly impose greenhouse gas emission reductions on the province of Ontario at the expense of our auto sector." (Vancouver Province, Oct.10, 2006)
Look at that - a Liberal afraid of Kyoto hardcaps, while Liberals demand hardcaps from Harper at the G8... precious stuff, Dalton.
This is the same 'not-in-my-backyard' McGuinty who traveled (not by bicycle, though) to Washington in 2004 urging the U.S. to be more aggressive in cleaning its air. This from the premier whose province exports thousands of "500-hp Kyoto Anti-Christs" (as Charles Adler calls 'em) to the U.S. McGuinty should be careful what he wishes for - the U.S. certainly could be more aggressive in cleaning their air: they could stop buying Ontario-made gas-hogs. When Ernie Eves reasonably tried to seek Kyoto details from Chretien in 2002, Jim Bradley bizarrely branded Eves as a "spokesperson for the polluters." (Globe and Mail, Oct.22, 2002) It's now clear that Bradley's description actually fits his own leader, McGuinty.
In 2002, the Canadian Auto Workers unanimously called for Chretien to ratify Kyoto, while their leader, Buzz (Basil) Hargrove said: "Kyoto will clearly be good for the economy, not bad", and: "the C.A.W. rejects the false choice that has been set up by the corporate lobbyists, between protecting our jobs and protecting the environment." (Canadian Newswire, Dec.9, 2002)
Fast forward to 2007: suddenly Buzz, who once said "We are supportive of Kyoto. It's good for the country" (National Post, Feb.26, 2005) is all-abuzz with the realization that the "insanity" of the environmental movement is now the biggest threat to Canadian automotive jobs. (National Post, Apr.14, 2007) D'oh, Homer!
What was Hargrove thinking in 2002, when he bought that old 1997 Kyoto Protocol clunker from snake-oil salesman Chretien at the Liberal dealership? Though he claims he's against offshore imports, he eagerly bought this Liberal lemon. Now that the test-drive has become bumpy, and that heady new-policy-smell is gone (along with the jobs Eves had warned about), what does Hargrove want, a recall?
When Hargrove says "I've got a message for the politicians: stop playing politics with the environment," (National Post, April 14, 2007) he should ask himself why he campaigns for the Liberal politicians who did nothing but play games with the the environment! By Jun.7, 2007 Hargrove was openly campaigning for his clean air hypocrite buddy McGuinty.
Hargrove strangely claimed he still supports Kyoto only if industries are allowed flexible timetables for compliance, but then, that's not really 'Kyoto' at all, is it? It becomes more of a, well, made-in-Canada solution; not at all like the hard-core-Kyoto dogma now peddled by Liberals, Greens, and the NDP, but more like what Conservatives have been emphasizing all along. Recently, even Liberal leader Dion dismissed Hargrove's plea to extend the period for tightening auto-emission regulations as "not acceptable"! (Toronto Star, Feb.17, 2007) Yet bizarrely, Hargrove targets Prime Minister Stephen Harper for Kyoto, while wooing and waving hands with enviro-poseur-extraordinaire, "clean-air" McGuinty!!
Hargrove, who also played huggy-bear with former Liberal leader Paul Martin, has now had some kind of epiphany: he says that honouring our Kyoto commitments would be "suicidal for our economy...you'd almost have to shut down every major industry in the country." (Windsor Star, Feb. 24, 2007) WHAT? Hargrove says: "We stand to lose 150,000 jobs in our auto industry if the insanity of this environmental movement is allowed to continue." (St. Catharines Standard, Apr.14, 2007) WHAT? 150,000 jobs lost to Kyoto? Tell that to St. Catharines Liberal Jim Bradley.
Where on earth was Hargrove when Conservatives were correctly warning of the same consequences years earlier? Under his leadership, the C.A.W. lobbied for Kyoto, instead of asking 'no-plan' Chretien for answers. Who's really the one "playing politics" and making "false choices"? Hargrove, once green himself, now views better emission-standards as a threat, as does "clean-air" McGuinty. Kyoto was "good for the country" then; now Hargrove is suddenly worried about a link between Kyoto and job losses!
Maybe Hargrove should heed the words of his buddy Paul Martin, who said "there...is such a thing as a global conscience and now is the time to listen to it." (Montreal Gazette, Dec.10, 2005). Hargrove made his bed...and was hoisted on his own petard. He abandoned/was kicked out of the NDP, scorned the Conservatives, and was conned by the Liberal's Kyoto charade...maybe his membership will finally wise up and trade him in.
Not only did Chrysler lay off thousands of autoworkers in February 2007, it's reportedly planning to import Chinese-made vehicles to Canada. Why do Kyodiots expect us to sacrifice jobs and to spend untold billions of our tax-dollars buying overseas emission credits, when that money could be spent on made-in-Canada eco-solutions, and on now-forgotten former priorities such as, oh, yeah... health-care? The same crowd who once hissed that free trade constituted a foreign infringement on parliamentary independence, has no qualms giving it away to some U.N. pseudo-science based social-engineering construct. The same anti-globalization crowd thinks nothing of bowing to Kyoto imperialists.
When asked during his last campaign whether Ontario could afford his outlandishly naive plan to close all our coal-fired plants by 2007, Dalton McGuinty's smugly evasive retort then was: "Can we afford not to?" Now, in 2007, McGuinty is AGAIN re hashing the same old lies/promises about closing the coal plants. Recently, his brother David McGuinty, the Liberal federal environmental critic, said that the costs to individual Canadians of implementing Kyoto were "impossible for me to know right now. I don't know the fiscals or the data"!!! (National Post, Feb.8, 2007) The same Liberals who signed Kyoto in 1997, and ratified it in 2002, now admit in 2007 that they "don't know the fiscals or the data"?!?! Are they kidding?! Were these Liberals incompetent then, or are they lying now?
What an inconvenient truth that must be for Jim Bradley, who acted as Kyoto's midwife in Ontario. He rode to power accusing others of keeping Kyoto secrets, the real costs of which he and his party conveniently have left unanswered. (Just believe us, trust us, have faith...we wouldn't lie, bla, bla, bla...)
Maybe it was Bradley who was "not telling the whole story" about the Kyoto mess he helped get Ontario into.
Let's hear Jim Bradley's libretto trying to explain to his Liberal cousin Hargrove how the prospect of "150,000" lost jobs is "not going to be as dire" as Hargrove suggests it will be!! We can only imagine what a tragi-comedic parody of Abbott and Costello's 'Who's-on-first' that ironic conversation would be.
Rex Murphy quipped that Kyoto is Japanese for 'inexplicable'. It truly will be inexplicable if the doors and windows in Queen's Park, as well as Ottawa, aren't soon opened to air out the toxic odour of Liberal duplicity.