Bleary eyed but very energized by the results and looking forward to a chance to spar with Link and have the sweet reason and objective insight of Lisa, we had a great time on air.
This was the first time Link and I met each other, not surprising given the distance between us in philosophy. We enjoyed each other’s company and it reminded me of the years I spend on the CBC Radio Political Panel as the Progressive Conservative “mouth” (not mouthpiece I hasten to add).
In those days I used to spar with fellow lawyer Sheila Greckol of the NDP, now she sits as a Court of Queen’s Bench Justice. This time with Link it was the same kind of “serious fun” but with the other end of the political spectrum.
Yesterday Link sent me his “take” on the Stelmach victory and the following e-mail that indicates he enjoyed the “encounter” as much as I did:
Ken:
It was good to meet you, and to discover that behind all those bizarre, knee-jerk, politically correct, left-wing, lopsided, ill-informed opinions you publish you're actually a very likable individual.
Here's my take on the Stelmach victory. It differs somewhat from the one on your Blog.
I'll put you on our weekly distribution list if you like. Do you like?
Link"
The Commentary he referenced is not yet posted on his website but will be soon I expect. When it is, I will debunk it for you all!
I look forward to reading the weekly updates from the left brain of the “right-minded” (sic) Link Byfield. This exchange proves once again dogs and cats can live together, provided they have enough space between them.
Ken,
ReplyDeleteI laughed out loud when I read this post. I find it funny that a guy like Stelmach - who started out as one of the Deep Six fiscal conservatives - is apparently not conservative enough for the Byfield crew and their ideological descendant Ezra Levant. I guess with them, it was "Morton or Bust".
P.S. For all of Ezra's rantings against how weak a choice Stelmach is for Premier, he sure enjoyed the Stawnichy sausage served at one of Ed's last birthday BBQs hosted at the Legislature.
One more thing. I think you and I both know where Link is going to say Stelmach's win came from. Answer: Morton.
ReplyDeleteThe Morton crew has been repeating this idea over and over with the sonorance of a Gregorian chant.
I suspect we will continue to hear it until the 15th.
Of course Link likes you, Ken - what's not to like?
ReplyDeleteAs you said during the campaign, people can disagree without being disagreeable.
I'm sure he appreciates the quality of your thought, that he'll take your debunking with good grace, and that he'll cheerfully return the favour whenever he has the chance:)
He's basically going to make his case that (1) Morton was instrumental in Stelmach's win and, therefore, deserves strong consideration for a senior and influential cabinet position and (2) The lefties came out in carloads.
ReplyDeleteThis argument will not be very difficult to make.
My prediction: intergovernmental affairs. This is consistent with Stelmach's hardline statements towards the federal government.
Ken, it must burn your heart to know that Morton is going to have a huge say in AB politics for some time to come.
I agree people can disagree without being disagreeable, I find though that identifying myself as a non-Tory has made my posts invisible. Might have to start my own blog for some dialogue...
ReplyDeleteeric,
ReplyDeleteIntergovernmental Affairs would be a double-edged sword for Ed. It is an area that Ted would certainly be passionate about, and he would have much to offer. However, I think the problem is that (1) Ted thinks he knows everything about this ministry and would be less likely to take advice from his bureaucrats, and (2) with not having held a cabinet position before, he may be too quick to offer his own personal views on some pretty sensitive issues, when he needs to communicate the views of a Stelmach government.
Anon, that is a good point. Having said that, what portfolio would Stelmach give Ted? It has to be important and influential, or Ed can face the obvious risks.
ReplyDeleteThat would be pretty exciting if Dion were to become PM. Dion proposes mandatory emission caps - although it would probably take 10 years to figure out how much emissions each for each region and each province.
ReplyDeleteDion was given the "fossil of the year" award for good reason. Emissions went up over 35% during his reign. Where was the mandatory cap then?
I'd love to see Dion try to push AB into regulating the oil industry on emissions.
Emissions went up 35% during his reign? Incorrect statement. He was Environment Minister for one year. They did not go up 35% in one year! The real fossils are those who pretend there isn't a problem and refuse to even contemplate action. At least Dion acknowledges that it is a problem. That's the first step. Of course coming up with a plan, and getting people to comply is going to be excruciatingly difficult. I've never heard anybody who supports Kyoto suggest anything different. In fact, I think the point of Kyoto is to start the dialogue.
ReplyDeleteThx AP for pointing out the context inaccuracy in Eric's 35% figure re: Dion.
ReplyDeleteThe issue frenzy that was started by Chretien signing Kyoto without consultation was well founded at one level only...the lack of prior consultation and notice.
Alberta's energy industy and the provincial government went on a full court press for months over the economic disaster they said that Kyoto would cause in Alberta.
The GOA argued for emission intensity level measurements and not to stop the economic growth that absolute emission levels would stifle.
Then one day Rick George the CEO of Suncor said that they had figured in the real cost of Kyoto to them and it was about $.15 per barrel and the cost could be absorbed.
Within days the industry lobby folded and within a month the Martin Liberal government was in Calgary. They quickly negotiated intensity emission levels with all the big emitters in Alberta, which is exactly what they wanted in the first place.
The emissions levels are already set for Alberta's big emitter industry player and it has been a done deal for quite a while.
The whole problem with Kyoto is that it CANNOT be met without spending billions of dollars. Although Cdns care about the environment (including myself), I may not be willing to shell out so much cash.
ReplyDeleteSorry, EMISSIONS WENT UP 35% WHILE THE LIBERALS WERE IN POWER.
"Then one day Rick George the CEO of Suncor said that they had figured in the real cost of Kyoto to them and it was about $.15 per barrel and the cost could be absorbed."
If that was the case, then Kyoto myself as well as any oil business in Canada would be on board. Having said that, does this make since? This would only be a few million dollars off a company's bottom line.
Ken, now you are distorting the facts. Yes, intensity based emissions targets are in place in Alberta. This means that given a certain level of output only so much greenhouse gases can be admitted. However, there is no absolute cap on emissions - the industry can grow at any rate and the total amount of gases will continue to rise.
Dion, on the other hand, proposes a mandatory absolute cap. THIS is needed to actually meet Kyoto. The problem is painfully obvious: if the cap is set where it needs to be, the growth of industry in AB must necessarily slow down.
Ken, was I incorrect in stating that you're making it sound that the libs are trying to enforce mandatory caps rather than intensity-based caps? If it's an intensity-based cap (i.e. like Bush's policy in the US), there is no problem for AB.
I don't think Kyoto is the compete answer but it sure helped change consciousness, which is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteI think we have a much larger and more pressing set of questions around climate change than the "he said/she said" political rhetoric.
I don't see any reason why Alberta would not be invovled as a world leader in the area.
The "blame the Liberals" for the 35% increase in emissions is a red herring. I do not think they did enough to bring about the necessary change in consciousness when they should have. But lets move on!
Can we get past the politics of blame and into some serious engagment on addressing climate change ... for a change (sic)?
"I don't think Kyoto is the compete answer but it sure helped change consciousness, which is a good thing."
ReplyDeleteKen, I completely agree with that statement. It's certainly on the national agenda now. It's too bad that many think that the government should solve the problem. I know many "environmentally concerned citizens" who drive SUVs, etc.
Well Ken, when you are championing Dion's ideas on the environment, surely you don't think we should disregard his previous record. I agree - let's stop the spin, but I thought my point on the mandatory versus intensity based targets was substantive.