Another "Decade of Deception"
From the CBC's Liberal-friendly headlines, "Martin announces $1-billion water cleanup" - Sat. Jan. 07, 2006
But when you read the details, the $1-billion pledge is spread over 10 years, over 3 provinces and over 5 initiatives!
So why stop there? Why not announce a $3 billion dollar investment over 30 years, and then run the headlines, "Martin announces $3-billion cleanup"? Or make it over 100 years and headline "Martin announces $10-billion cleanup".
This is also now a favourite Ontario Liberal tactic as well ... making big headlines out of extrapolated small annual expenditures into the next millennium. Great strategy. By the time the lie has been finally consummated after a decade, half of the electorate has died or moved, the other half have long-forgotten, and the guys who made the promises in the first place are living on tax-funded pensions.
Will CBC's Neil MacDonald "Reality Check" these guys? I doubt it.
Anything beyond the longest-possible mandate (5 years) is completely dishonest electioneering.
But then, given the Liberals' recent history, that IS the ballot question, isn't it.
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Friday, January 06, 2006
I DON”T UNDERSTAND
Jan. 6, 2006
At this point (January 6th) in the 2006 Canadian election campaign, the Conservatives have done surprisingly well, surpassing expectations, clearly spelling out a planned and coherent platform in an organized fashion and with a vision clearly in mind. The Liberal campaign, on the other hand, appears to be about little more than getting re-elected, and Mr. Martin and the panicking back-room appear to be ready and willing to say, or do literally anything if they feel it might get them four more years in office.
But why on earth do they think they have earned the right to another four years, and why would anyone with an ounce of reason, or common sense of decency, holding commonly-held values in a civilized democracy voluntarily give them that right one more time?
Ask yourself how many “Number One Priorities” Paul Martin has claimed to own in the past 12 months. There can only be one “number one” can’t there? He has one for each audience, and one for each sound bite. The man is shameless.
Quick, in 30 seconds, list just one important accomplishment of lasting value to most Canadians by Paul Martin and his Liberals in the past 12 months. If you somehow managed to identify one, in another 30 seconds, list one more. Hmmm. Two years, and what do we have to show besides scandal, corruption, ineptitude, disappointment, arrogance, entitlement, rhetoric, deception, broken promises and a government clearly adrift?
Paul Martin claims to have not known about the pillaging of the Sponsorship Program in Quebec during his years as Canada’s Finance Minister and as Quebec’s most important Cabinet Minister behind Chretien himself. This from the same man, who, as Chair of Canada Steamship Lines, was obviously astute enough to ensure that his ships were registered in offshore tax havens where he could avoid paying Canadian tax rates, you know … the taxes that support his so-called “Canadian Values”.
Either he is not telling the truth, he has "forgotten", or we have had at our financial helm a man who has to have been one of the most lax and, in my personal opinion, negligent CFOs anywhere in the world. Such a performance (overseeing the theft and misuse of hundreds of millions of our tax dollars on his watch) by any corporate CFO would certainly get him fired, and perhaps more.
Martin claims to be the architect of our good financial performance. Yet he has reportedly racked up accumulated surpluses in our E.I. plan of nearly $48 billion on his watch. Those are "premiums" that were not spent on E.I., but were taken from you and me under false pretenses. That number increased another $2B this year.
That is job-killing money that is being taken from employers and employees for (supposedly) one purpose (funding unemployment programs for those who lose their jobs) and then funneling it into general revenues to be spent however Liberals see fit to spend it. We’ve all heard and read the litany of corruption and neglect … and the hits just keep on coming as this campaign unfolds.
As such, that $48+ billion surplus was, in fact, a tax on employment, not a “premium” as claimed, and should be clearly identified as such by the "Prime Minister of integrity".
In reality, Mr. Martin’s “surpluses” have come as a result of his gutting medicare, his slashing of transfers to the provinces, and as a result of his massive over-taxation of the E.I. plan … not because of any magical financial genius.
Now, to win votes in Toronto, Paul Martin wants to ban handguns. Apparently he has suddenly found religion on this front also … another “number one priority”.
Forget that they are already effectively “banned” in Canada and have been since 1934. Forget that the homicide rate from handguns is already falling, and has been for a long time. Forget that the $2B already spent on an ineffective gun registry has clearly done nothing to stop gunfights on Yonge Street, and … forget that the goons and thugs doing the shooting don’t register their guns or obtain them legally in any case. That’s why they are called CRIMINALS.
Forgetting all of that, IF Paul Martin, in his heart of hearts, honestly believed that banning handguns would stop the shootings in Toronto (and other handgun-related deaths in Canada), why has he waited until the 11th hour of a failing election campaign in 2006 to make the pledge, when, as Prime Minister for the past two years, he could have done I it at any time, and presumably saved hundreds of “needless” murders?
If you buy this hogwash, then you MUST accept that the deaths of handgun murder victims in the past two years fall squarely in Mr. Martin’s lap as a result of his unwillingness to act and ban handguns immediately upon the day he took office based on his sincere beliefs or evidence that it would save lives.
Give me a break. It’s his JOB he wants to save. Nothing more.
Martin’s promise is just one more cheap political ploy to win votes in Toronto. Martin, and his misguided “I feel your pain”, touchy-feely cheerleader, Toronto Mayor David Miller, apparently think that banning target shooting on handgun ranges in Dryden, Ontario, Flin Flon, Manitoba, Yorkton, Saskatchewan and Ft. St James, BC will stop gang-bangers at Jane and Finch in the centre of the whole universe from blowing each other away in increasing numbers, along with innocent bystanders.
Perhaps these social engineering geniuses need to look at little closer at Rudi Guiliani’s get-tough, zero-tolerance model in New York (which has WORKED SPECTACULARLY!) instead of trying to outdo each other as the bleeding heart, no-limit-to-tolerance poster boys for continuing to flog a failed social model to death.
When you continue to make the wrong diagnosis, you shouldn’t expect your prescribed cure to work, and when you keep doing more of the same, you shouldn’t be shocked when you keep getting more of the same result. THAT is why Toronto has a problem. It is NOT a “gun problem”. It is a gangster and drugs problem, and a lack of respect and values problem.
I could go on. There was the HRDC mess, with over $1B wasted in unaccounted spending from within the HRDC department, with much of it reportedly going to boondoggles in Liberal ridings. Who was the Finance Minister who oversaw this waste and irresponsibility?
There is our castrated military, hitch-hiking our way into battle in the back seat of our big brother’s airplanes with green camouflage for desert warfare, helicopters that won’t stay in the air and rusting used submarines that don’t work.
There is our previously proud medicare system starved into Soviet-style immobility and depersonalized mediocrity by the very same Finance Minister, who, as Prime Minister now claims to be the champion of “Canadian Values” and who would have us believe that he alone will save, protect and enhance medical care, (as he personally reportedly receives care at a private clinic). He has a very public record, and I, for one, do not believe or trust him, or his party.
He promised today to spend $7B on education (a provincial responsibility by the way) if we re-elect him and his Liberals, … but then he made virtually the same promise ($8 B) on June 4, 2004, and he failed to keep it.
Remember all of his “Number One Priorities”? Why would anyone believe a single word that comes out of his mouth?? I see his lips moving and all I hear anymore is “wah wah wah wah wah”!
He has gone out of his way, in his shameless quest for votes, to alienate our largest and most important trading partner. Before you jump on his bandwagon in blind nationalistic fervor, think for a minute about where the money for your job comes from. Who is our (your) single biggest customer?
If you, or the companies you work for, manufacture goods or provide services to our friends next door, that is your job and your livelihood that he his gambling with. How long can you live without your job? Who will pay for your children’s education and that fancy “Canadian Values” medicare system if you don’t have a job? Ask Paul Martin as he grovels for votes.
This election has been an ongoing showcase for the, by-now, inbred genetic arrogance, ignorance, and sense of entitlement of the Liberal Party of Canada. I invite you to visit and read the archives of Stephen Taylor’s blog at www.stephentaylor.ca (and others … forget the mainstream media, who have been left far behind in this election). The litany of apparent back-room corner cutting, rule breaking, skimming of public funds for partisan purposes, and insensitive remarks by Liberal insiders shows the true heart of what these Liberals have become.
I am a huge believer in term limits, and in my opinion, the “best-past” due date has long since come and gone on this gang. They need to be flushed, and the septic tank needs to be emptied. They need to do hard-time in opposition purgatory for a deep cleansing, some serious soul-searching, some mass firings and new recruitment of ideas and people. This sorry bunch is about as devoid of ideas and vision and common decency as any government I have witnessed in my lifetime.
So I cannot understand why, when I read the polls, that some 1/3 of decided voters (41% in Ontario … UN-FRICKIN’-BELIEVABLE!!) still believe these guys should be given the right to govern yet again. It makes me wonder how far they would have to go to lose that right for this "enlightened" 30%. Savage beatings? Mass murder? Human sacrifice? Death squads?
Plundering the public purse to the tune of billions of dollars obviously isn’t bad enough. Wasting billions more clearly didn’t do it. Failing to keep promises, breaking promises, and making misguided, ill-conceived and cynical, politically-driven promises apparently isn’t bad enough either.
I don’t understand those Iraqis who apparently miss the good ol’ days of ruler-for-life Saddam Hussein. I have never understood the abused housewife who repeatedly returns to her abusive spouse for more beatings. And I cannot understand for the life of me why any Canadian with even a basic education and one ounce of self-respect would give this bunch another chance, let alone 1/3 of you. We might as well just hand your Liberals the power-for-life to which they are obviously entitled, accept their arrogant dictatorship, hand over our money, and skip all of this dumb election stuff. Elections … what a waste eh?
Under the Liberals, insiders can plunder the public purse, they can ignore rules with impunity, they can treat the people they are supposed to serve with disrespect, arrogance and rudeness, and they apparently still have the blessing of roughly 1/3 of Canadians.
(From the movie, “Animal House”) … “Thank you sir, may I have another!”
I DON”T UNDERSTAND. I REALLY DON’T UNDERSTAND!
Jan. 6, 2006
At this point (January 6th) in the 2006 Canadian election campaign, the Conservatives have done surprisingly well, surpassing expectations, clearly spelling out a planned and coherent platform in an organized fashion and with a vision clearly in mind. The Liberal campaign, on the other hand, appears to be about little more than getting re-elected, and Mr. Martin and the panicking back-room appear to be ready and willing to say, or do literally anything if they feel it might get them four more years in office.
But why on earth do they think they have earned the right to another four years, and why would anyone with an ounce of reason, or common sense of decency, holding commonly-held values in a civilized democracy voluntarily give them that right one more time?
Ask yourself how many “Number One Priorities” Paul Martin has claimed to own in the past 12 months. There can only be one “number one” can’t there? He has one for each audience, and one for each sound bite. The man is shameless.
Quick, in 30 seconds, list just one important accomplishment of lasting value to most Canadians by Paul Martin and his Liberals in the past 12 months. If you somehow managed to identify one, in another 30 seconds, list one more. Hmmm. Two years, and what do we have to show besides scandal, corruption, ineptitude, disappointment, arrogance, entitlement, rhetoric, deception, broken promises and a government clearly adrift?
Paul Martin claims to have not known about the pillaging of the Sponsorship Program in Quebec during his years as Canada’s Finance Minister and as Quebec’s most important Cabinet Minister behind Chretien himself. This from the same man, who, as Chair of Canada Steamship Lines, was obviously astute enough to ensure that his ships were registered in offshore tax havens where he could avoid paying Canadian tax rates, you know … the taxes that support his so-called “Canadian Values”.
Either he is not telling the truth, he has "forgotten", or we have had at our financial helm a man who has to have been one of the most lax and, in my personal opinion, negligent CFOs anywhere in the world. Such a performance (overseeing the theft and misuse of hundreds of millions of our tax dollars on his watch) by any corporate CFO would certainly get him fired, and perhaps more.
Martin claims to be the architect of our good financial performance. Yet he has reportedly racked up accumulated surpluses in our E.I. plan of nearly $48 billion on his watch. Those are "premiums" that were not spent on E.I., but were taken from you and me under false pretenses. That number increased another $2B this year.
That is job-killing money that is being taken from employers and employees for (supposedly) one purpose (funding unemployment programs for those who lose their jobs) and then funneling it into general revenues to be spent however Liberals see fit to spend it. We’ve all heard and read the litany of corruption and neglect … and the hits just keep on coming as this campaign unfolds.
As such, that $48+ billion surplus was, in fact, a tax on employment, not a “premium” as claimed, and should be clearly identified as such by the "Prime Minister of integrity".
In reality, Mr. Martin’s “surpluses” have come as a result of his gutting medicare, his slashing of transfers to the provinces, and as a result of his massive over-taxation of the E.I. plan … not because of any magical financial genius.
Now, to win votes in Toronto, Paul Martin wants to ban handguns. Apparently he has suddenly found religion on this front also … another “number one priority”.
Forget that they are already effectively “banned” in Canada and have been since 1934. Forget that the homicide rate from handguns is already falling, and has been for a long time. Forget that the $2B already spent on an ineffective gun registry has clearly done nothing to stop gunfights on Yonge Street, and … forget that the goons and thugs doing the shooting don’t register their guns or obtain them legally in any case. That’s why they are called CRIMINALS.
Forgetting all of that, IF Paul Martin, in his heart of hearts, honestly believed that banning handguns would stop the shootings in Toronto (and other handgun-related deaths in Canada), why has he waited until the 11th hour of a failing election campaign in 2006 to make the pledge, when, as Prime Minister for the past two years, he could have done I it at any time, and presumably saved hundreds of “needless” murders?
If you buy this hogwash, then you MUST accept that the deaths of handgun murder victims in the past two years fall squarely in Mr. Martin’s lap as a result of his unwillingness to act and ban handguns immediately upon the day he took office based on his sincere beliefs or evidence that it would save lives.
Give me a break. It’s his JOB he wants to save. Nothing more.
Martin’s promise is just one more cheap political ploy to win votes in Toronto. Martin, and his misguided “I feel your pain”, touchy-feely cheerleader, Toronto Mayor David Miller, apparently think that banning target shooting on handgun ranges in Dryden, Ontario, Flin Flon, Manitoba, Yorkton, Saskatchewan and Ft. St James, BC will stop gang-bangers at Jane and Finch in the centre of the whole universe from blowing each other away in increasing numbers, along with innocent bystanders.
Perhaps these social engineering geniuses need to look at little closer at Rudi Guiliani’s get-tough, zero-tolerance model in New York (which has WORKED SPECTACULARLY!) instead of trying to outdo each other as the bleeding heart, no-limit-to-tolerance poster boys for continuing to flog a failed social model to death.
When you continue to make the wrong diagnosis, you shouldn’t expect your prescribed cure to work, and when you keep doing more of the same, you shouldn’t be shocked when you keep getting more of the same result. THAT is why Toronto has a problem. It is NOT a “gun problem”. It is a gangster and drugs problem, and a lack of respect and values problem.
I could go on. There was the HRDC mess, with over $1B wasted in unaccounted spending from within the HRDC department, with much of it reportedly going to boondoggles in Liberal ridings. Who was the Finance Minister who oversaw this waste and irresponsibility?
There is our castrated military, hitch-hiking our way into battle in the back seat of our big brother’s airplanes with green camouflage for desert warfare, helicopters that won’t stay in the air and rusting used submarines that don’t work.
There is our previously proud medicare system starved into Soviet-style immobility and depersonalized mediocrity by the very same Finance Minister, who, as Prime Minister now claims to be the champion of “Canadian Values” and who would have us believe that he alone will save, protect and enhance medical care, (as he personally reportedly receives care at a private clinic). He has a very public record, and I, for one, do not believe or trust him, or his party.
He promised today to spend $7B on education (a provincial responsibility by the way) if we re-elect him and his Liberals, … but then he made virtually the same promise ($8 B) on June 4, 2004, and he failed to keep it.
Remember all of his “Number One Priorities”? Why would anyone believe a single word that comes out of his mouth?? I see his lips moving and all I hear anymore is “wah wah wah wah wah”!
He has gone out of his way, in his shameless quest for votes, to alienate our largest and most important trading partner. Before you jump on his bandwagon in blind nationalistic fervor, think for a minute about where the money for your job comes from. Who is our (your) single biggest customer?
If you, or the companies you work for, manufacture goods or provide services to our friends next door, that is your job and your livelihood that he his gambling with. How long can you live without your job? Who will pay for your children’s education and that fancy “Canadian Values” medicare system if you don’t have a job? Ask Paul Martin as he grovels for votes.
This election has been an ongoing showcase for the, by-now, inbred genetic arrogance, ignorance, and sense of entitlement of the Liberal Party of Canada. I invite you to visit and read the archives of Stephen Taylor’s blog at www.stephentaylor.ca (and others … forget the mainstream media, who have been left far behind in this election). The litany of apparent back-room corner cutting, rule breaking, skimming of public funds for partisan purposes, and insensitive remarks by Liberal insiders shows the true heart of what these Liberals have become.
I am a huge believer in term limits, and in my opinion, the “best-past” due date has long since come and gone on this gang. They need to be flushed, and the septic tank needs to be emptied. They need to do hard-time in opposition purgatory for a deep cleansing, some serious soul-searching, some mass firings and new recruitment of ideas and people. This sorry bunch is about as devoid of ideas and vision and common decency as any government I have witnessed in my lifetime.
So I cannot understand why, when I read the polls, that some 1/3 of decided voters (41% in Ontario … UN-FRICKIN’-BELIEVABLE!!) still believe these guys should be given the right to govern yet again. It makes me wonder how far they would have to go to lose that right for this "enlightened" 30%. Savage beatings? Mass murder? Human sacrifice? Death squads?
Plundering the public purse to the tune of billions of dollars obviously isn’t bad enough. Wasting billions more clearly didn’t do it. Failing to keep promises, breaking promises, and making misguided, ill-conceived and cynical, politically-driven promises apparently isn’t bad enough either.
I don’t understand those Iraqis who apparently miss the good ol’ days of ruler-for-life Saddam Hussein. I have never understood the abused housewife who repeatedly returns to her abusive spouse for more beatings. And I cannot understand for the life of me why any Canadian with even a basic education and one ounce of self-respect would give this bunch another chance, let alone 1/3 of you. We might as well just hand your Liberals the power-for-life to which they are obviously entitled, accept their arrogant dictatorship, hand over our money, and skip all of this dumb election stuff. Elections … what a waste eh?
Under the Liberals, insiders can plunder the public purse, they can ignore rules with impunity, they can treat the people they are supposed to serve with disrespect, arrogance and rudeness, and they apparently still have the blessing of roughly 1/3 of Canadians.
(From the movie, “Animal House”) … “Thank you sir, may I have another!”
I DON”T UNDERSTAND. I REALLY DON’T UNDERSTAND!
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Re: What choice does Ontario really have?
In a Dec. 10, 2005 editorial in the Toronto Star, columnist Ian Urquhart makes his supposed case for nuclear power as Ontario's preferred option by a process of elimination. While I normally wouldn't bother to comment on a commentator, this one deserves rebuttal because Ian seems to be supporting the McGuinty government's thought process (spin ??!) on how my electrical energy will be supplied for the next 40 years.
This decision has huge ramifications for Ontario in terms of our future economic competitiveness, jobs, prosperity and the subsequent taxes required to fund our social programs. Hopefully it isn't merely the slavish pursuit of an ill-conceived election promise. Of course not ... right?!!
While McGuinty has promised "public consultation" before proceeding, Urquhart has smartly noted, "the consultation process is just eyewash". (true to form!)
My comments to Ian follow:
_______________________________________________________________
Re: What choice does Ontario really have?
Good big-picture question to ask, but I don't follow the logic in your apparent answer at all. It seems quite flawed.
First: "What about "clean coal" technology? The environmentalists say that is an oxymoron".
My point, so what? a) Environmentalists are just one group with one particular point of view, and b) they don't like nuclear either, so if you are prepared to dismiss their condemnation of nuclear, I am more than willing to reject their criticism of clean coal. Clean coal is a very viable option, and the plants are already there. They just have to be converted. The only thing stopping it is a very short-sighted and ill-conceived Liberal election promise (one they actually plan to keep ... for a change!).
Second: "But doubt has recently been cast on this (natural gas) supposed advantage as NIMBYism has forced cancellation or delay of proposed gas-fired plants in the Greater Toronto Area."
And a nuclear plant near the centre of the whole universe won't raise howls of protest?? C'mon Ian. Give your head a shake. Somebody needs to slap the collective city of Toronto in the side of the head as the most dysfunctional collection of irresponsible humans in Canada. They refuse to deal with their own garbage. They don't want pollution, but they sure love the jobs it creates. They have fostered "diversity" but now don't want to deal with some problems it has created. They want "world-class" amenities but scream about their taxes. They want power, but they don't want coal, gas, nuclear, oil, wind mills (kills birds and destroys the view). Obviously I reject this argument too. To be blunt ... screw their NIMBY concerns. Do whatever needs to be done, and, by the way, natural gas in their back yard IS an option.
Next, you say, "There are proposals in the works to import power from new dams planned in Manitoba and Labrador. But while the power itself would be relatively cheap, the cost of new transmission lines would be formidable".
More than $40 billion??! Negotiations between first nations, and three governments are not road blocks. They are how you do business in the real world. This argument doesn't preclude hydro power at all. It is another very viable option with costs associated, just like nuclear.
Next, on wind power: "But 95 per cent of this potential is north of the 50th parallel — too far from market."
Further than Labrador and Manitoba?? Still sounds like one good option to me ... with costs. But then, your inevitable conclusion (nuclear) has a $40 billion price tag, remember?!
And the final argument that brings you to nuclear? "The concern is that, if we were to increase rates more rapidly, it would be at the cost of tens of thousands of jobs in the manufacturing sector, particularly energy-intensive industries like paper, steel and chemicals."
And how about that $40 billion price tag Ian? Who is going to pay for that? You, and me, and those very industries you have highlighted that create the jobs that create the wealth that creates the taxes that Dalton McGuinty so covets.
Hmmm, I think you may have just disproved your thesis. You might want to re-examine all of those options a lot more carefully, and not be so quick to accept the preachings of a few vested interests and special interest groups before you dismiss them.
I believe everything should honestly be on the table, and that the solution should be a mix of regional solutions that make economic sense, including some clean coal, some natural gas, some windmills, some hydro and even gerbils on a treadmill if that's what it takes to keep our province competitive in an increasingly competitive world. McGuinty and his politics are dead wrong on this one.
Nuclear power is certainly one option, but one with huge financial costs, serious security issues, prodigious maintenance costs, and very serious challenges on the disposal and security of extremely toxic waste.
Good topic. Nice review. Flawed conclusion.
In a Dec. 10, 2005 editorial in the Toronto Star, columnist Ian Urquhart makes his supposed case for nuclear power as Ontario's preferred option by a process of elimination. While I normally wouldn't bother to comment on a commentator, this one deserves rebuttal because Ian seems to be supporting the McGuinty government's thought process (spin ??!) on how my electrical energy will be supplied for the next 40 years.
This decision has huge ramifications for Ontario in terms of our future economic competitiveness, jobs, prosperity and the subsequent taxes required to fund our social programs. Hopefully it isn't merely the slavish pursuit of an ill-conceived election promise. Of course not ... right?!!
While McGuinty has promised "public consultation" before proceeding, Urquhart has smartly noted, "the consultation process is just eyewash". (true to form!)
My comments to Ian follow:
_______________________________________________________________
Re: What choice does Ontario really have?
Good big-picture question to ask, but I don't follow the logic in your apparent answer at all. It seems quite flawed.
First: "What about "clean coal" technology? The environmentalists say that is an oxymoron".
My point, so what? a) Environmentalists are just one group with one particular point of view, and b) they don't like nuclear either, so if you are prepared to dismiss their condemnation of nuclear, I am more than willing to reject their criticism of clean coal. Clean coal is a very viable option, and the plants are already there. They just have to be converted. The only thing stopping it is a very short-sighted and ill-conceived Liberal election promise (one they actually plan to keep ... for a change!).
Second: "But doubt has recently been cast on this (natural gas) supposed advantage as NIMBYism has forced cancellation or delay of proposed gas-fired plants in the Greater Toronto Area."
And a nuclear plant near the centre of the whole universe won't raise howls of protest?? C'mon Ian. Give your head a shake. Somebody needs to slap the collective city of Toronto in the side of the head as the most dysfunctional collection of irresponsible humans in Canada. They refuse to deal with their own garbage. They don't want pollution, but they sure love the jobs it creates. They have fostered "diversity" but now don't want to deal with some problems it has created. They want "world-class" amenities but scream about their taxes. They want power, but they don't want coal, gas, nuclear, oil, wind mills (kills birds and destroys the view). Obviously I reject this argument too. To be blunt ... screw their NIMBY concerns. Do whatever needs to be done, and, by the way, natural gas in their back yard IS an option.
Next, you say, "There are proposals in the works to import power from new dams planned in Manitoba and Labrador. But while the power itself would be relatively cheap, the cost of new transmission lines would be formidable".
More than $40 billion??! Negotiations between first nations, and three governments are not road blocks. They are how you do business in the real world. This argument doesn't preclude hydro power at all. It is another very viable option with costs associated, just like nuclear.
Next, on wind power: "But 95 per cent of this potential is north of the 50th parallel — too far from market."
Further than Labrador and Manitoba?? Still sounds like one good option to me ... with costs. But then, your inevitable conclusion (nuclear) has a $40 billion price tag, remember?!
And the final argument that brings you to nuclear? "The concern is that, if we were to increase rates more rapidly, it would be at the cost of tens of thousands of jobs in the manufacturing sector, particularly energy-intensive industries like paper, steel and chemicals."
And how about that $40 billion price tag Ian? Who is going to pay for that? You, and me, and those very industries you have highlighted that create the jobs that create the wealth that creates the taxes that Dalton McGuinty so covets.
Hmmm, I think you may have just disproved your thesis. You might want to re-examine all of those options a lot more carefully, and not be so quick to accept the preachings of a few vested interests and special interest groups before you dismiss them.
I believe everything should honestly be on the table, and that the solution should be a mix of regional solutions that make economic sense, including some clean coal, some natural gas, some windmills, some hydro and even gerbils on a treadmill if that's what it takes to keep our province competitive in an increasingly competitive world. McGuinty and his politics are dead wrong on this one.
Nuclear power is certainly one option, but one with huge financial costs, serious security issues, prodigious maintenance costs, and very serious challenges on the disposal and security of extremely toxic waste.
Good topic. Nice review. Flawed conclusion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
