Archives

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

How the Conservatives will justify falling on amended Bill C-30. Its a “money” bill.

I wondered how the Conservatives would possibly try and justify declaring the newly revised Bill C-30 as a motion of non-confidence. Well, I think we have a hint of it tonight… the Conservatives may claim this is now is a money bill.. because, well…its supposedly a tax on industry.. and therefore money is involved.. very brilliant logic:

At least one Tory MP slammed the revised clean air act as a multibillion-dollar tax on industry, potentially making it a money bill that would spark a confidence vote.

That’s pretty convoluted logic… but the Tories need something to justify falling on this.

I want to give kudos to all 3 opposition parties for finally working together and finally adding teeth to this bill. All 3 opposition parties have amendments in this new bill. Let’s see what the new Clean Air Act does:

— Hard targets for industry on cutting greenhouse gas emissions rather than ones based on the level of industrial output.

— A $20 levy charged for every tonne of greenhouse gas emissions a company produces above its limit. The levy, which would rise over time, would go into a green account that the company could access to make technological improvements to their efficiency.

— Adherence to the Kyoto Accord and the reduction levels it prescribed.

— Participation in an international carbon-trading system.

Remember, the original bill had no targets to be set til 2025 at the earliest (check out the environmental Tory clock on the bottom right for the current date under the old Bill C-30), and had little if any enforcement guidelines.

Despite all that, John Baird still had the gall to come out and say this laughable quote:

“We’re going to look at taking time to look at the entirety of the changes they’ve made. I can tell you I’m not happy. They’ve weakened the bill, not strengthened it.”

Uh.. ok, John.. whatever you say. Of all the things John could have said, that was probably the dumbest of the quotes he could have come up with. Better get a new spin-doctor John. The opposition parties put forward 50 amendments.

Fifty.

5-0.

How many did the Tories come up with?

A big fat goose-egg.

They had no intention of ever seeing this passed. They even objected to the name being changed for the revised bill (Its now known as the Clean Air and Climate-change Act).

More Tory grumbling.. which I am highlighting because it shows how completely unhappy they are over this sudden turn of events:

“This piece of legislation is flawed,” (Tory MP Brian) Jean said. “It is not a good bill in substance — this is about politics and not about cleaning the air for Canadians.” …Baird directed all his criticism of the bill at Dion and the Liberals. The proposal for a levy on business that surpass their emissions targets is taken straight out of a Liberal policy proposal..

Stephane Dion said the Tories should stop crying and climb on board:

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said he hoped the Tories would bring themselves to ultimately support it.. “They wanted a new act, they have one now, so they can’t possibly postpone action anymore,” Dion said.

..while the BQ and NDP were also being complimentary:

The Bloc Quebecois and NDP portrayed what happened in the committee differently, lauding a spirit of co-operation between the parties. “There was all kinds of skepticism that anything positive could come out of it and now what we have is one of the best legislation, pieces of legislation that Canadians could possibly put together,” said NDP Leader Jack Layton. “Let’s hope that the prime minister will respect the work that was done and find a way to make sure that it’s implemented.”

Hear, hear Jack. I couldnt agree more. Let’s see if the Tories try to fall on this.. or worse, try to kill it by not allowing it to come forward for a vote. What a PR diaster that would be either way – falling on a tough new environmental bill and running as the only party against the environment.

7 comments to How the Conservatives will justify falling on amended Bill C-30. Its a “money” bill.

  • Gee Wilson.. you’ve suddenly stopped lauding how the NDP and Tories were working together to amend this Clean Air Act bill.. I wonder why that would be. Now its the BC targets you’re lauding?

    You guys are screwed on this. You got outmaneuvered.

  • wilson61

    Baird is to announce industry targets after the break. IMO, look for something similar to the BC plan that got rave reviews, with 2020 targets.

    Cons could then put forth ‘report motions’ to match the soon to be announced targets,
    put back in the air quality annual reporting clauses removed by the committee,
    and motion to replace ‘international’ with ‘domestic’ carbon trading….

    While the house debates about 50 new report motions, the Cons continue to govern, set enviro targets, programs and policy (outside the CAA).

  • “How many did the Tories come up with?

    A big fat goose-egg.”

    Ummmm, why would the government want to amend its own legislation?

  • [quote comment=”2932″]One thing however… After the budget vote, Harper crossed the floor, went up to Duceppe, shook his hand and told him there would be no election this spring, according to La Presse yesterday. One of their columnists interpreted this as Harper giving Duceppe the green light to explore running for the PQ leadership since he wouldn’t have to worry about an impending federal election campaign.

    I’m just saying…[/quote]

    Well.. then you have John Reynolds threatening an election if the Liberals don’t pass the Conservative’s ‘stalled’ crime bills, so I trust Harper’s word about as far as I can throw him.

  • Confidence, schmofidence. The government didn’t put a “recommendation” from the Governor General when it introduced the bill into the House, and it can’t do so retroactively. Therefore, it’s not a confidence vote. If PMS tries to engineer an election on a flimsy interpretation of convention, he may be in for a rude awakening.

    And besides, if I recall correctly, the old “Blue Book” specified that even if a money bill was defeated (and this is not one) it had to be followed up by a specific non-confidence vote in the Commons. Clearly another broken promise or betrayal of principles.

  • One thing however… After the budget vote, Harper crossed the floor, went up to Duceppe, shook his hand and told him there would be no election this spring, according to La Presse yesterday. One of their columnists interpreted this as Harper giving Duceppe the green light to explore running for the PQ leadership since he wouldn’t have to worry about an impending federal election campaign.

    I’m just saying…

  • This is really putting the lie to the Tories. They’ve been crowing that they are for protecting the environment. Well, now we have a chance to see them walk the talk. Somehow, I don’t think they will.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.