|

Dear Mulcair: Connect your short term oil goals with energy transformation

Byoliveridley

NDP leader Thomas Mulcair has finally listened to the legions of Globe and Mail comment thread participants (and some other people, of course!) who repeatedly urge policy makers and oil companies to build a pipeline West -> East. I believe Bob Rae has talked about this idea approvingly as well. Why? Because Western Canada exports oil at a “discount”, and Eastern Canada pays “full price” from non-Canadian sources.

In a speech to the Canadian Club of Toronto at the Royal York Hotel, the federal NDP leader gave his clearest sign of support yet for the notion of a West to East pipeline that would allow producers to receive higher prices for their crude oil.

The NDP leader’s speech also repeated his concern that western energy developers are not paying the full cost of the environmental consequences of their projects. He said this is leading to an artificially high Canadian dollar, which hurts other sectors of the economy.

Mulcair wants East-West Pipeline

The full text of his comments can be seen at iPolitics and has much more than Globe and Mail Report (it wouldn’t have fanned the flames otherwise).

Mulcair spoke about this pipeline, he also talked a lot about income inequality, robust government, and making polluters pay. He talked about strengthening environmental safeguards, ending fossil fuel subsidies and more.

What he didn’t say: That tackling climate change requires a fundamental transformation of our system.

Sometimes, what is not said is more important than what is said.

If this proposal to use Canadian oil more “judiciously” by building a short-term closed supply chain is just part of a clear plan to go to a renewables and demand-reduction based energy transformation, propose away. We do need to hold both these truths in our heads at once: The tarsands are a big source of short-term revenue feeding our fossil fuel based culture, and unchecked climate change will kill many. It isn’t possible to cut fossil fuel use to zero next year, but it is imperative to cut emissions from fossil fuel use to near zero in the medium-term. Any policy that makes sense within that main objective should be looked at on its merits, but ending fossil fuel emissions soon HAS to be a cornerstone of any progressive energy policy, the crisis demands no less.

So Mr Mulcair, propose oil pipelines if you wish, it may make for good short-term politics (read comments below the article), and who knows, maybe even tolerable policy. But remember to frame it as part of the necessary energy transformation. Politics is messy, and lasting change requires a broad coalition, don’t alienate progressive supporters right away.

 

Similar Posts

  • It’s not the policy, it’s the racism

    Byoliveridley

    Articles on people of colour and voting patterns in the recent US election don’t touch on the racist rhetoric that the right has used for years. People of colour are frequent recipients of racist actions against them and the right’s use of racist language is completely internalized into their discourse and worldview. Just look at what Bill O’Reilly said post election:

    “Obama wins because it’s not a traditional America anymore. The white establishment is the minority. People want things.”

    The republican party thinks hispanics are not part of a traditional America. People of colour tend to notice these things. Obama has deported way more hispanic people than Bush ever did, and has not used his executive discretion to slow down enforcement till the DREAM act deferrals. But the democratic party has not been captured by the ugly racism that pervades  anti-immigrant rhetoric in the US.

    So, change positions all you want, and help pass real immigration legislation that helps the millions of Americans living a difficult undocumented life get documented. But, the right needs more than that. It needs to convince its supporters that racism is unacceptable and to punish, not reward people for saying racist things and acting in racist ways.

    The attorney general of Utah, Mark Shurtleff, a conservative Republican, said he was part of an “education campaign” to persuade Republican officials that “they need to reject the run-’em-out, deport-’em, enforcement-only approach that people think is the only voice of the Republican Party.”

    Republicans Reconsider Positions on Immigration

    Update: Mitt Romney’s post election statements where he labels everyone other than White people “special interest groups” are yet more evidence.

    Photo courtesy Lorenzolambertino photostream used under a creative commons licence.

  • |

    Tamil MPs play hardball for LTTE

    Byoliveridley

    Members of Parliament from Tamil Nadu will have to resign if the Centre does not come forward to ensure a ceasefire in Sri Lanka within two weeks, according to a resolution adopted at an all-party meet chaired by Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi on Tuesday.

    Asked if this meant Ministers in the Union Cabinet and MPs in the Rajya Sabha would resign in the event of the ceasefire not happening in two weeks, Mr. Karunanidhi told The Hindu that he meant that all MPs would tender their resignation. “Ministers are MPs first, are they not?” he asked.

    via The Hindu : Front Page : T.N. MPs to quit if Centre fails to ensure ceasefire

    As Malini Parthasarathy points out in her editorial, this sudden increase in rhetoric coming from the DMK and other Tamil parties seems to coincide with an apparent impending military breakthrough by the Sri Lankan army. Why apparent? Because the only sources of news are the SL army and the LTTE, and neither, are, shall we say, neutral! Overt support for the LTTE has been absent since the late ’80s and especially since Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination, so the timing most definitely reeks of LTTE’s covert influence on the Tamil parties in Tamil Nadu. This would be a good time for the LTTE to get some breathing room and regroup.

    The Central government would become a minority if this threat was carried out. Which is why the Sri Lankan envoy was summoned and India’s “concerns” were addressed, whatever that means.

    I think that the LTTE is a band of ruthless terrorists who should disappear from the face of this Earth. They have systematically eradicated moderate Tamils in their bid to be the only Tamil voice. Additionally, they have killed many civilians, Tamil, Sinhalese and Indian over the course of their bloody insurgency. The Sri Lankan army and polity, of course, are guilty of mass genocide and human rights themselves. But, they have the power of the nation state behind them and smell a final victory. I don’t seem them stopping now.

    How is this going to end? Not very well for the central government, who will lose quite a bit of support after only recently surviving a confidence vote. Not too well for the millions of civilians caught in the conflict, who will bear the brunt of increasing desperation on both sides of the war. Will the LTTE ask for a negotiated ceasefire if things get too hot for them? Probably. Will the Tamils of Northern Sri Lanka ever get the autonomy they so deserve? Not if the Sri Lankan government sees itself as being in a position of strength. So, why was this war fought? I don’t know. But, I don’t believe in war, so there…

    As a great believer in the educational power of fiction, I heartily recommend Love Marriage, a story set in the Sri Lankan tamil community, tells the history from the tamil side. You can read a Q&A with the author at the always excellent Sepia Mutiny.

  • |

    Two differing views on the Pakistani Army

    Byoliveridley

    Apparently, this blog is now all Pakistan all the time. But these two articles caught my eye this morning, the first one from a writing fellow in the U.S.

    The Pakistani military, as is the case with most armed forces in the Muslim world, is the citadel of the country’s modernity, its most significant secular institution and protector not only of the modern nation state but the idea of the nation state itself.

    The case for standing by Musharraf. – By Lee Smith – Slate Magazine

    And this one from an ex-Pakistan army cadet and current reporter for the BBC Urdu service.

    Within months there were other changes: evenings socializing to music and mocktails were replaced by Koran study sessions. Buses were provided for cadets who wanted to attend civilian religious congregations. Within months, our rather depressing but secular academy was turned into a zealous, thriving madrassa where missing your daily prayers was a crime far worse than missing the morning drill.It is this crop of military officers that now runs the country. General Musharraf heads this army, and is very reluctant to let go.

    Pakistan’s General Anarchy – New York Times

    Now who’s right, I wonder? The guy who’s from Pakistan and was actually in the army when it was transforming from a secular to a religious organization, or a writing fellow who despite an impressive Arab resume does not actually know any Urdu.

    It’s Western “experts” like these that fuel this idea of Musharraf being some kind of secular bastion against anarchy in Pakistan. It’s under Zia ul-Haq and Musharraf that the Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan made greater inroads because the Pakistan intelligence service (ISI) and the army are full of people who support and propagate extremist agendas.

    Tags: , ,

  • Doonesbury and "Situational Science"

    Byoliveridley

    db070114.jpg

    Image courtesy Doonesbury

    Situational science is about respecting both sides of a scientific argument, not just the one supported by facts.

    But, Doonesbury is to kind to assume that the people making these arguments actually believe them. This is not really about actually believing in the “controversy”. It’s just a well orchestrated set of PR campaigns to keep the status quo going. All hail the Plutocracy Protectionary Principle

  • Obama and the race/identity vote

    Byoliveridley

    I support Obama because he’s skinny, brown, liberal, young, and of course, the whole name thing. He’s the closest in American politics to me, and I identify with him quite a bit. By the same token, how the hell is he going to win a general election?

    It’s the first US election in which a white person is going to have to choose between someone of her race and someone who does not look like her, talk like him, has a funny name and is most definitely African American in identity and behavior. Call me the cynical product of an Indian upbringing where caste/religion/community plays such a vital and unsubtle part in politics, but when faced with this kind of choice where one of the choices is not someone you can identify with at all, I don’t see it happening. There’s a reason why the undecided vote’s always flipping to Clinton at the eve of every primary, it’s all about racial identity, I’m afraid.

    Many white people see in McCain their ornery grandfather (the one who always talks about the war – McCain reminds me of Abe Simpson, the resemblance is uncanny) or uncle, or something like that, someone they can identify with. What is Obama, but an outsider? The undecideds will tend to flip to the known quantity (vaguely senile and ill tempered older relative who used to be something) as opposed to the unknown (urbane, educated, intelligent, yet vaguely threatening black man).

    Younger people, especially the college educated young can identify more with Obama because they have at least a couple of black friends, and see plenty of intelligent young black men in their peer circles. It’s all about identity and what you base it on. The idealism and energy he brings is also much better received by a younger audience. The older you get, the less likely it is that you’ve interacted with someone whom Obama can represent in racial/identity demographic. Which is why Clinton’s performance is always better among the older voters.

    There, my pessimism is on record, McCain in a squeaker in November, though I’d love to be proved wrong.

    Note: I am assuming that this silly extended primary will eventually go to Obama, Clinton has no shot, sorry.

    Probably my first ever link free post, but hey, isn’t that what blogging’s all about? This was written in the aftermath of the Pennsylvania primary where everything that was predicted happened: Obama won the “urban” and young vote, Clinton won the rural and white vote, this just presages the general election.

    PS: Obama’s at least 5 inches taller than McCain and quite a bit better looking. The taller, better looking man usually wins the election. But both choices have always been white, so what happens now? I think identity still triumphs.

  • Corporate tax cuts, solutions to credit crisis top PM's agenda

    Byoliveridley

    The Conservative tally and their wins in all regions of the country will give them enough power in the Commons to press ahead with their economic agenda, which, among other things, includes $50 billion in corporate tax cuts and possibly big-buck solutions to easing the credit crunch. The party also promised in the campaign to enact a tougher crime package aimed at young offenders in particular.

    Corporate tax cuts, solutions to credit crisis top PM’s agenda

    Yes more tax cuts is always the answer, and lock up the kids!! Don’t pay any attention to crumbling infrastructure, or increasing homelessness or the inadequacy of funding for the healthcare system. Just cut taxes for the rich, worked out very well for our Southern neighbours!

    Under the current system, the Conservatives will need to really screw up to lose power. They are the only right of centre party in the country, and under our unrepresentative and unresponsive system, one will need a big percentage point swing towards the Liberal, or a complete collapse of the NDP, or the other way around to change the reality. Alternatively, a split in the conservative vote as existed till a few years back.

    My neighbouring riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands is clear indication of vote splitting, and other major problems with our election system. The conservative candidate won by about 2500 votes with the Green Party candidate drawing 6500 votes and the skinny dipping candidate who pulled out of the election, but did not withdraw his name won 3500 votes, how about that! Atleast voter turnout was more than 50%.

    We need any system other than a first past the post I can win with 60% of the electorate voting against me system.

4 Comments

Comments are closed.