canada to possibly hold a vote on the kyoto acord

i just caught on ctv news net that stevan harper is trying to inishiate a vote on wether or not to scrap the kyoto acord. it was equated to the gun registry program, that went way over projected finantual cost. it also had little if no effect on gun crimes.

this is a step forward in canadian politics. the canadian public was not consulted when the accord was signed. while we should cut down on pollutants and better our wildlife protection, we should not be held to an arbatrary contract, that states what goals we MUST achive.

i aplaud the initutive to call a vote. hopefuly the government does the right thing and gets rid of it. i personaly have always found it much easyer to work towards a soulution without a preverbial gun to my head.

It's not a vote on Kyoto per se, the Liberals tried to embed it into a bill in which the Conservatives didn't like and the NDP didn't like each for completely different reasons. Not sure what the Conservatives beef was but the NDP wanted a bill into itself, not an afterthought addition...We signed onto Kyoto we should abide by it. The majority of Canadians still support it btw. 60+ %.

As for the gun control comment since it was signed the number of crimes with guns involed has dropped by half over 9000 incidents in 1992 to around 4000 in 2004, I'll try to find the link saw it on a documentary last night on CBC newsworld about Crime in Canada. But that is a whole nuther thread.

Another thing Harper is trying to save face since he has made himself look like a fool, by supporting the Liberal Budget and by appeasing the moderates in his party(instead of marginalizing them, he doesn't want the Right Wing alliance to break up....yet again) he is in a very tricky situation and he could be forced to do some things he may not otherwise do

[edit on 31-3-2005 by sardion2000]

drogo, Steven Harper and the Conservative Party are looking out for Alberta. Alberta's wealth is largely industry based and will stand to lose profit from the kyoto accord.

Canada has already signed on to Kyoto.
There is nothing to vote for now, we're comitted.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper said Thursday his party will vote against the omnibus budget bill if the government includes in it an amendment to control greenhouse gas emissions.

This is not a vote for or against Kyoto it is the Conservative being opposed to the federal government's plan to use its budget bill to help meet Canada's Kyoto Protocol targets. Even the enviromently conscious NDP is against the use of the budget bill to control green house gases.
If the majority of MPs are against the budget bill then there will be a vote of no confidence and a new Federal Election will have to be held.
NDP leader Jack Layton says that it is a stratagy of the Liberal Party to cause a new Federal Election. He says this is a strategy to push aside the Funding Scandal.

As for the Kyoto accord it self it only demands that Canada reduce it's green house emissions by 6%. The accord is not arbitrary. If we do not reach our goals then we have to pay credit to those countries that do. Because polluting is profitable this credit payment is nessasary. Those countrys that do good get credit by those countries that still chose to profit by polluting.

A public vote for things like Kyoto? What would be the point of electing political representatives to parlement then? The MPs are suposed to represent thier seat. We vote in federal elections to choose MPs to represent us and vote on things like Kyoto.


EDIT: Here is a link you might like to read on the subject.
Ottawa- Election Around The Corner?

[edit on 31/3/2005 by Umbrax]

like i said i caught it on ctv news net. i havent seen a shot on the news yet so you may be right. too bad realy we should just scrap it compleatly. why should we pay out money if we can't meet it, if we don't we don't. i am not saying we should not cut back polutants but it should be on our own not because some compleate morons signed some assinine treaty.

the one site showed a wonderfull picture of the lakeshore coal power generation plant. personaly i think it should be shut down. i see on the way home from work everyday in the summer the polution it causes. that nasty yellowish haze over toronto comes from it. if you drive down the 410 just follw the haze it goes right down the two stacks every time. the problem is we have nothing to replace it. we are constantly being told we have to cut down power usage as it is so we realy can not loose that source. we need to either come up with a new method of power generation or build a new nuke plant. hydro should not even be considdered, as it destroys good land. but untill we have something we can't shut it down.

i can't say i am over fond of nuke reactors either but it is the best we have at the moment even though it causes heat polution in the lake amognst other things. instead of giveing out money to other countries because of some insane treaty that never should have been signed in the first place. i would think a far superior idea would be to spend money on reserching a better, cleaner way to produce electricity. then putting it to use. we could also put money into reserching better carberators and fuel injectors as well as engine performance and exhaust systoms. why should we throw good money away in such a useless gesture as called for by the treaty?

even if the government was to fine companies as to how well they cut down polutants that would be useless. all companies would do is raise their prices to recover it, that solves nothing. besides global warming is just another myth to scare the public. just like the hole in the ozone layer was. mabe instad of funding bogus reserch like that we could better spend the money on real reserch into real ways to cut down polution and the replanting of areas destroyed by logging.

[edit on 31-3-2005 by drogo]

too bad realy we should just scrap it compleatly. why should we pay out money if we can't meet it, if we don't we don't.

I do not think that is an option, scapping it that is. Not sure of the specifics of the actual treaty(still reading up on it)but it could cost us GeoPolitically if we back out now.

the one site showed a wonderfull picture of the lakeshore coal power generation plant. personaly i think it should be shut down.

Ugg that plant causes me sooo many breathing problems in the summer its not funny ... I'm an Asthmatic btw so I really feel it and usually have to take refuge in an Air Conditioned house all day ..

i can't say i am over fond of nuke reactors either but it is the best we have at the moment even though it causes heat polution in the lake amognst other things.

Yeah I'm not fond of Darlington at all. Did you know they built it on a Fault? Inactive atm but who knows what with all the geological activity recently.... I support underground facilities but unfortunately that would be cost prohibitive(at least at the depths I'm talking about heh) I guess it could be a good stopgap measure until when? Everything we do is a stopgap measure...

i would think a far superior idea would be to spend money on reserching a better, cleaner way to produce electricity. then putting it to use. we could also put money into reserching better carberators and fuel injectors as well as engine performance and exhaust systoms.

Kyoto I agree is inadequete but it can spark certain industries from dormant holding pattern(like Wind, Tidal and Geothermal) to a Booming industry sort of what the Solar Industry is undergoing right now. Kyoto caused a boom in Solar installations around the world, the Installed capacity grew by 62 % in 2004. Even treaties such as this can have a positive impact on R&D spending.

Check out this link
www.pbs.org...
very interesting PBS documentary about lots of new technologies being developed right now. Think about it for a second, Kyoto + High Oil + Nanotechnology = ??? Fill in the blanks after you watch these series of documentaries. The point being if there is a financial advantage to go Green so to speak, then buy some Alt Energy stocks