Wait, there are rumours circulating that have nothing to do with Guy Giorno and the coming purge at PMO?

Good one for Byers, he’s a great commentator, and his book “Intent for a Nation” was fantastic!

The one thing I’ll never forget about Byers — and Andrew Coyne might remember this — is that he once went on Mansbridge’s At Issue panel and said that Westerners (or something to that effect) wouldn’t care two bits if Toronto was blown up in a terrorist attack.

Now, it’s one thing for a leftist academic to say something like this. It might be another for someone running for political office. I dunno. Then again, maybe even this kind of bashing of Toronto is politically advantageous. Who knows?

Byers is by far the harshest and most credible critic of Harper foreign policy. This is great news for Layton and bad news for Harper.

Dennis is thinking of the same thing as Paul Wells — that is Byers argument two years back that Canadians were made of sturdier stuff than to dispair for long over a terror attack. He’s probably right. Recall that Londoners were out drinking at pubs the night of the Tube bombings.

Byer’s attack on the carbon tax is tough to refute. Who but Liberals would say that Canadians aren’t doing enough for the environment while the tar sands grows more out of control each day?

You know, the Liberals have looked pretty shaky over the past few months, but they also have a great selection of big names with big resumes, and the Green Shift is – I think – going to resonate pretty well.

Well enough, at least, that a party that wants to disagree is going to have to put up a counter-proposal. The Tories basically already know this, I think, but the NDP apparently have no clue. Recent events indicate their counter-proposal is yelling, “noooOOOOoooOOooooOOooooooo!”

I don’t think that really gets you votes. “Solutions for Canadians” is the same empty bloviating we’ve heard from Mr Jack for five years now.

Last time around the election circuit, didn’t the NDP say something about how they wanted to “work” instead of succumbing to partisanship? They get played by the Conservatives on the one side in exchange for easily-forgotten hat-tips (e.g., the Committee of the Whole for the residential schools apology), and on the other, looking like unprincipled hacks trying to lamely gnaw at the Liberal party base.

Byers is the kind of candidate the Liberals want and need.

Like Thomas Mulcair in Outremont, it is more evidence of quality candidates measuring up the options and cutting the Dion Liberals loose.

As already noted, Byers–an academic who has spend at considerable effort understanding climate change and the arctic–studied both Dion’s carbon tax and Layton’s cap and trade.

He made an educated decision that: a) Dion’s plan gives no measurable reductions in pollution b) Layton’s plan does.

In the battle between Harper’s do nothing approach and Dion’s tax cut cockamainie, Byers has signalled there is a third option worth considering. One that the EU, most of the G8, Australia and both US presidential candidates consider to be the most effective way to cut pollution. One that actually might get the job done.

How refreshing.

Charles,

Don’t forget that Dion ran Jocelyn Coulon in Outremount by-election that Thomas Muclair won, which defeats your ‘evidence’ that ‘quality candidates’ are passing up Dion’s Liberals.

And please go easy on the getting the job done rhetoric, the NDP and some of it’s supporters are starting to freak me out. Here’s a sample of BC NDPs complaints against Gordon Cambells Carbon Tax, found in their ‘Framework for Real Climate Action.pdf’.

“Climate Change is not stuff of spy novels. But the Campbell Liberals seem to think so. They consulted only with a secret list of hand-picked insiders.”

Aaron Wherry has posted the transcript (BTC: ‘It wouldn’t be the end of the world’) of Byers on CBC’s At Issue that posters referred to above.

Waynes world…

By the my NDP friends, I support Michael Byers seeking to become a candidate for the NDP and I might add, I think he would be a welcome change from Hedy Fry. I just take issue with his statement on the Liberals proposed Carbon Tax.

“I just take issue with his statement on the Liberals proposed Carbon Tax.”

I don’t think he has much choice. Are there any NDP candidates or MPs who will openly say that a carbon tax and cap and trade are simply two ways of pricing carbon, both are good, and Canada would benefit enormously by implementing one or both as soon as possible? I.e. something along the lines that Dion said after the NDP announced their cap and trade. I imagine the NDP will come around to this, as there is pressure from environmental groups, but I haven’t seen it happening yet.

Blues Clair,

There are alot ifs and buts in the Suzuki myth buster propaganda. They want to push the tax up $75 per tonne. Make sure every knows that one when they read it.

This tax is a shame. It is painted “green” but is a neo-liberal tax shift to consumption.

Quimby, how is a carbon tax anymore a shift to consumption tax than cap and trade? There is no magic here — an industry will respond to the extra costs whether it is cap and trade or carbon tax. Both will hit consumers as consumption costs.

$75/ton is equivalent to a cap and trade that sets reasonably ambitious goals. One can argue about exactly how gradually Canada should approach this, but I think the NDP, Green and Liberal parties will all agree that we want to get to the stage where we are aiming for substantial reductions from 1990 GHG emission levels. When we do, $75 ton is not going to be out of line no matter which system (or systems) we are using to price carbon.