How Canadian Political Opinion Polls Skew Results: Leading Questions and False and Misleading Contexts

If you have wondered about the credibility of Canadian opinion polls, the Probit online poll on Canadian federal politics sent to me on June 13, 2012, and in which I participated, offers an excellent example as to why the credibility of surveys are suspect.  

The Probit survey had very many questions about Trudeau's image - distracting attention, as Trudeau himself would want it --  from his policy content to superficial/airhead responses/options  along the lines of image-specific adjectives/anecdotes such as "hopeful," "interested," excited," and "curious" coupled with other end of image spectrum terms such as "angry" and "resentful."  If leading questions are those which tell the respondent what's important, this survey fits the bill. There were no questions on policy statements to-date from Trudeau  - most of Trudeau's policy statement thus far from Trudeau are similar to those of Harper. http://willdubitsky.blogspot.ca/2013/04/canada-now-has-2-conservative-parties_29.html  

For me, the closest on the Probit lists of response choices for the Trudeau questions was  "disinterested," an image related term which does not accurately represent my point of view - not everyone who responds to a Probit survey is an airhead!  Nothing on the lists related to substance such as offering a response choice pertaining to Trudeau's very conservative policies, very similar to those of the Conservative Party, on the Senate, guns, wealth distribution, corporate taxes, trade with China and Nexen, health, Keystone, the environment, and EI.  

In other words, with the list of choices provided by Probit regarding the Trudeau image, it was not possible to reflect my opinion because this should not be about picking a winner for Canadian Idol  but rather should be about the ideas, credibility and competence of someone who wants to be Prime Minister. 

Further on numbers of questions per party/leader, Harper made it to second place for the numbers of Probit questions about his government. In last place for numbers of Probit questions, was Mulcair.  The numbers of questions on each party constitutes not so subliminal messages regarding the importance of each of the political options.  

In addition to the aforementioned nonsense, there were questions that demonstrated an appalling ignorance on the part of the Probit people who crafted the questions.  In this regard, one question asked whether one's preference is for a focus on the "environmental damage from energy development and pipelines" or for focus representing "a strong preference for a government that was more excited about the jobs created by energy development and pipelines." .  This is a factually inaccurate/misleading and partisan leading question as Harper would pose it. To be more specific, the facts are that 1) green energy sectors are high job creation sectors and among the fastest growing sectors in the world and 2) the numbers of jobs created for a given level of investment are several times higher for clean energy development when compared with fossil fuel sector development. -- There were 5 million jobs in the rapidly growing clean tech sectors in 2011; with China in the lead with 1.6 million jobs; with the US in second place with about 400,000 jobs in these sectors in 2011; with over 500 US wind tech manufacturing facilities and with wind power being the US largest new source of electrical power in 2012; with a 13% annual increase in jobs in the US solar sector to reach 119,000 jobs in the this sector in 2012; with Germany at 372,000 jobs in the renewable energy sectors in 2011; with $67.7 billion and $42.2 billion invested in clean tech sectors in China and the US respectively in 2012 ; and with 20% of US venture capital activity invested in the clean tech sectors in 2011 and 2012.  Simply because Canada is not a full participant in these growth sectors --thanks to Conservative policies -- is not an excuse for the extraordinary ignorance/denial of Probit.

Another leading question asked if one favours a socially progressive and fiscally conservative model.  This is a tired old Liberal Party of Canada cliché that Liberals like, but as a motherhood statement, it means nothing. As such it is another leading question. I do not know of any party that calls itself socially regressive or fiscally irresponsible. Are the Conservatives fiscally conservative on F-35 jets?  Are Trudeau and Harper fiscally conservative because they both believe in our extraordinarily low corporate taxes, tax rates that have contributed tremendously to government debt while $600B lay dormant in corporate liquidity in 2012? 

Having participated in many online surveys, I can confirm that the aforementioned Probit poll is not an exception to the rule.

 

Will Dubitsky

willdubitsky@gmail.com

Developing Canada's Clean Techs Sectors: WTO Decision on Local Content

Recently the World Trade Organization ruled against Ontario in an Appeal decision regarding complaints from Japan and the European Union concerning the Ontario content eligibility requirements under Ontario's Green Energy Act.  The content exigencies in question link approvals of clean energy projects to the development of Ontario's clean energy technology manufacturing sectors.

This ruling stands in contrast with the "US model" for which the $70B invested the US green economy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), and covering the years 2009 to 2011, was subject to a Buy American Provision. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/recovery/buy_american_provision.html  Thanks to these investments coupled with the US content rules, 1) there are now 500 wind tech manufacturing plants in the US; 2) the largest new source of electrical power generation in the US in 2012 was wind energy; 3) 20% of US venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 was invested in the US clean tech sectors; and 4) there were 119,000 employed in the US solar sector in 2012.

The US cash grants, 30% Investment Tax Credit for solar projects and  2.2 cents/kWh Production Tax Credit for wind projects have survived the post ARRA years, post 2011, but are no longer as well-financed as the 2 good years.

Regarding the implications of the WTO ruling for Ontario, under the Ontario Green Energy Act, Ontario has Feed-in-Tariff rates - the price above market rates which are offered to winning bidders for Ontario renewable energy production sites.  These FIT rates, at 13.5 cents/kWh for wind and 34.7 cents/kWh for large solar projects, are content conditional to the effect that solar and wind projects must have 60% and 50% Ontario content respectively.

The content stipulations have given rise to an emerging Ontario clean tech industry base in the province that includes a Siemens blade plant in Tillsonburg; a CS Wind turbine tower plant in Windsor; a GE turbine hub plant in Peterborough; TSP's turbine tower facility in Thorold; the Enercon wind turbine electric components and tower facilities in the Niagara region; and the solar manufacturing plants, Siliken in Windsor and Centennial Global in Kingston.  Other manufacturing facilities are in the planning stages such as the REpower turbine blade plant.

For somewhat similar reasons, Quebec nascent wind technology industrial base is the result of provincial content requirements. The first 1000 MW Request for Proposals (RFP) had a 60% Gaspésian content requirement and the second RFP for 2000 MW had 60% Quebec and 30% Gaspesian content requirements.  Wind tech manufacturers that have set up shop in Quebec include LM blades in Gaspé; Marmen towers in Trois-Rivières and Matane; VCI nacelles in Matane; Enercon towers and switch gears in Matane; REpower/Woodward convertors in New Richmond; and Fabrication Delta towers in St-Siméon.

In response to the WTO decision, a federal government committed to developing Canada's clean tech sectors would intervene to assist these provinces and perhaps establish a national program in this regard. -- Of course we cannot count on the Conservatives for such action.

One option to go around the WTO ruling is to focus new projects on community-led initiatives.  Under this community-led option, the national government might set up a green infrastructure program that includes manufacturing facilities and the construction of renewable energy production sites.  http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/05/ontario-loses-wto-appeal-what-happens-next

 Will Dubitsky
willdubitsky@gmail.com

 

Wakeboats: The "Hummers" on our Lakes (Updated July 8, 2013)

Wakeboats: The "Hummers" on our Lakes

Just how insane is having wakeboats on our lakes can be expressed in relative terms.  Their HP ranges can go from 330HP to 555HP. http://www.malibuboats.com/boats/  http://www.moomba.com/mobiuslsv/  This is about the same range of HP offered on Volvo tractor-trailer trucks, 325HP to 550HP. http://www.volvotrucks.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/VTNA_Tree/ILF/Products/Powertrain/power_ratings_050510.pdf

Why do they need so much HP? Well for one thing, they have ballasts in the 1500lb to 2000lb range.  These ballasts are what weighs down these boats to cause those exceptionally high waves that not only generate shoreline erosion but also damage docks. 

Furthermore, the combination of the powerful waves bringing shoreline nutrients into the lake and the turbidity caused by their propellers- turbidity which can go down to a length of 9 metres and stay around for 24 hours --contribute to the proliferation of algae.

As for the less tangible merits of peace and quiet on what would otherwise be a peaceful weekend afternoon, one can forget about it when the wakeboats are out in force.  Even at slow speeds, these boats generate high waves, the noise of the waves and the boats combined making reading a newspaper on the dock a real challenge.  Here it is important to note that snowmobiles were banned from the St-Faustin (Québec Laurentides, near Mont-Tremblant) portion of the Parc-Linéaire, in part, because of noise pollution, a judicial precedent.

Then there's the matter of climate change. This May 2013, the planet has reached a most undesirable level of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere, 400 parts per million, heading us into greater frequency and intensity of extreme weather situations and accelerated desertification in Africa.  Those who's wakeboats can burn over 60 litres for one hour's use are obviously not too concerned about this.

On smog related emissions, the US Environmental Protection Agency noted that marine engines being are "among the highest contributors of hydrocarbons (HC) and oxide of nitrogen (NOx)emissions. HC and NOx emissions contribute to ground-level ozone, which irritates the respiratory system causing chest pain and lung inflammation."  http://www.epa.gov/otaq/documents/420f13006.pdf.

Working on Legislative Solutions

This brings us to the matter as to what we can do about these nuisances.  To begin the current legislative context is as follows.

First, under the Canada Shipping Act, a municipality can submit a request to the federal government for a new regulation concerning safety, the environment and/or a public interest matter but the process is long, up to 5 years, and the existing legislation is not well-adapted to address considerations pertaining to protection of the environment. In effect, in keeping with the Canada Shipping Act encouragement of non-regulatory solutions, a municipality must try a non-regularity social contract with users of the water body concerned for a period of 2 years. Subsequently, only if the municipality claims that after the trial period, it still wants to have a regulatory solution, can the Government of Canada act upon the municipality's request.

Second, up until the legislative revisions by the Conservatives, The Fisheries Act was the key legislation to provide protection for marine life and habitat.  But the new Fisheries Act  regulations stipulate that only commercial, First Nations and recreational fish can be protected -- and this limited protection does not apply to marine habitats.

Against this background, what is required is an overhaul of both of the aforementioned Acts that includes linking them in such a way so that, environmental degradation attributable to certain types of motorized boats, could be used as a basis for imposing effective and binding restrictions on the boats concerned within a reasonable time frame.

That said, with the Conservatives in power until 2015, the overhaul of the two Acts would have to come after the next federal election 2015.  This means that those who want to see legislative changes of the type described here, would operate with a time line to the effect that their innovative proposals for legislative changes would be finalized by 2015.

To achieve these goals, it is clear that, if each small Laurentian community acts on its own,  it would be difficult for any given community to have the attention it wants for its proposals. 

However, since the legislative context is Canada-wide, a more effective approach would be that of establishing inter-municipal alliances across the Laurentians, Quebec and/or with other provinces.  This group approach could be enhanced by including supportive stakeholders such as the Conseil regional de l'environnement, MRCs/regional municipalities, elected representatives of both the federal and provincial governments and others interested in backing a multi-stakeholder approach.  

This multi-stakeholder approach would ensure that their recommendations on legislative changes would get the attention it deserves. Equally important it makes good sense for communities to be open to a cross fertilization of ideas and expertise among communities and stakeholders, given the common legislative challenges and goals.

Accordingly, I invite you to write to me at willdubitsky@gmail.com to share your thoughts or get information on other communities interested in an inter-municipal multi-stakeholder approach to addressing the matter of wakeboats, the "Hummers" on or lakes.

Ombudsman Radio-Canada: l'Intégrité et l'arrière garde

Bonjour Pierre Tourangeau

(I am bilingual, watch RDI 7 days a week, but have difficulty writing in French)

On the panel segment of Le Téléjournal, May 16, 2013, in reference to the BC election, Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin made it clear that the BC Liberals won because of their strong message on the economy and belittled the environmental messages of the NDP suggesting that this is not a prominent consideration when people vote -- the economy trumps over the environment.

While these journalists are entitled to their perspectives, one does expect a little integrity.  Since the NDP got 39% of the vote and the Greens got 8% of the votes,  the pro-environment votes, 47% of the total, were more numerous  than the Liberal votes at 44%, or about 50,000 votes more than the Liberals.  In other words, the so-called views of Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin were factually incorrect and the factual  story is the split in the environmental vote resulted in the victory of the Liberals.

100 years ago, the majority establishment view was that women cannot  be equal in the workplace, 75 years ago the right to abortion was unthinkable for most Canadians, 50 years ago gay rights and marriage was belittled by the majority of the followers of public opinion and today this same arrière-garde belittles references to the environment as an important public issue.

I don't expect Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin to know that the clean technology sectors are among the strongest growth and job creating sectors in the world today, that there were 1.6 million people working in these sectors in China in 2011 and 372,000 employed in these sectors in the same year in Germany, more than the German auto industry.  Nor do I expect them to know that wind energy was the largest source of new electrical power generation in the US in 2012 or that 20% of the US venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 was invested in the clean tech sectors,  there are now over 500 wind technology manufacturing facilities in the US , 119,000 currently employed in the US solar sector and California is expected to have 1 million employed in the clean tech sectors by 2020.

The arrière-garde always defends a vision of a future that will be the same as the past and belittles indications of any new economic social and environmental orders.   In contrast, the avant-garde promotes a vision, which as Wayne Gretzky might put it, focuses on , "where the puck is going."

I am not saying that Radio-Canada should not have representatives of the arrière-garde.  But I do expect integrity.  And on this score Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin are sadly lacking, time after time.  RDI/Radio-Canada, true to its integrity standards, must ensure that panel members meet these standards or be replaced.

Will Dubitsky

FIPA: CANADA CHINA AGREEMENT ON TRADE ( Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Act) (Updated June 14, 2013)

Part 1: Clean Tech Trade Wars: US and European Union versus China

Canada is shooting itself in the foot with the China-Canada trade agreement - the Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Act (FIPA).   Specifically, a little known stipulation in the China- Canada trade agreement risks torpedoing the development of a Canadian clean energy technology sectors.   This stipulation calls for no commercial barriers on environmental technologies.  Why is this dangerous? 

Well, with Canada's clean tech sectors are still very much in an embryonic stage,  FIPA, as it presently stands, would impose severe limitations on Canada's potential participation in the phenomenal growth of global clean technology sectors, because of the massive and highly subsidized dumping of Chinese clean technologies on global markets. More precisely, while the 1) US response to this dumping has been to impose trade tariffs running from 31% to 250% on solar tech imports from China along with tariffs of 45% to 71% on imports of Chinese wind turbine towers;  and 2) the European Commission in June 2013 announced provisional tariffs on imports of Chinese solar products averaging 47%;  Canada is the only country dumb enough to accept, via the FIPA, a guaranteed exemption for environmental technologies from commercial barriers. 

In the US, the action taken by the US Dept. of Commerce in Fall 2012 followed 1) the bankruptcies of 4 US solar firms; 2) complaints filed by The Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM), representing 11,000 US workers and 150 US companies; and 3) complaints filed by the US’ Wind Tower Trade Coalition representing 4 US wind tower manufacturers. 

With 119,000 jobs in the US solar sector in 2012 -- a 13.2% increase over 2011-- and 75,000 in the US wind sector in 2011, the US wanted to take swift action to address unfair trade practices affecting sectors experiencing solid growth in these difficult economic times. 

In Europe, the European Commission (EC) took action on complaints from EU ProSun, a group representing 20 EU solar companies and the majority of European solar industrial capacity.  In May 2013, the EC issued a "warning shot" by indicating it might open fair trade probes into Chinese mobile telecom equipment and in June 2013 the EC announced provisional tariffs on solar imports from China, stating that the dumping by China's solar firms "caused thousands of Europeans to lose their jobs, and 60 European factory closures of which 30 were in Germany alone”. 

For Europe, the job stakes are especially high in that Europe's clean tech sectors represented 1.1 million jobs in 2011, 372,000 jobs in Germany alone. In effect, “illegal dumping” below the cost of production allowed China to capture more than 80% of the EU solar energy market “from virtually zero” only a few years ago.

Accordingly, beginning June 6, 2013, the EC tariffs came into effect at a reduced rate of 11.8% for 2 months with the game plan being that, in the event of failed negotiations with China, the full provisional rate would be ramped up to an average of 47.6% with the high end at 67.9% for the next 4 months. Subsequently, the EC would decide as to whether it would make the tariffs permanent

In parallel, BSW, Germany's solar trade association is reviewing a trade case against China.  

Notwithstanding the Europe's sabre rattling, it appears that the majority of European nations, Germany in particular, would prefer a negotiated settlement over trade wars.

China, for its part, initiated its counter offensive, in July 2012, when it launched a WTO anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations into allegedly unfair low priced US and South Korean polysilicon exports to China.  Polysilicon is a key raw material for solar panels and 44% of the polysilicon used by Chinese solar manufacturers comes from the US.  

As well,  China registered a complaint to the WTO to the effect that $7.3B worth of Chinese renewable energy products have been subject to US tariffs in recent years, contrary to WTO rules. China also launched own probe into subsidies of 4 US states and found they violate WTO rules.

The irony in all this, is that largely due to US polysilicon exports to China, the US had a $1.6B clean tech trade surplus with China in 2011.   Specifically, when polysilicon, PV production machines and solar materials are factored in, the US held a $913M solar trade surplus over China in 2011. 

Regarding China's response to the EC's June 2103 tariff initiatives, China’s polysilicon producers have called on Beijing to launch an anti-dumping investigation into European polysilicon imports, and urged Beijing to retaliate.

To add some colour to China's sabre rattling, China has also indicated it would investigate the dumping of European wines in China.  China did, however, acknowledge that Europe provided for a 2 month period of reduced tariffs.

Over the long run, however, Chinese manufacturers will likely to have an advantage in trade wars because of generous cheap financing, lower production costs, scales of production which lower total costs, and an ability to refine silicon, make wafers and cells and build modules, as well as, or better than, any other group of manufacturers.

 

Part2: The Origins of Massive Dumping: Generous Financing and Surplus Manufacturing Capacity 

The massive dumping of Chinese clean tech products on global markets is a consequence of two factors,  1) extraordinarily generous financing and 2) excess domestic manufacturing capacity.
 
Generous Financing
China's state subsidization flows in so many successive chunks of billions of dollars that it is difficult to keep track of it all.

In recent years, the Chinese Development Bank (CDB) committed $45B over 5 years for the development and deployment of smart grid technologies.  – Smart grid technologies are essential for integrating massive amounts of intermittent energy sources --- such as wind and solar energy --- by storing energy during low demand/excess supply periods, and redeploying stored energy, as required.  The CDB also contributed substantially to the $34B invested in 2010 in China's solar sector.  Not long ago, the CDB announced $15B for the wind energy sector. 

As for state financial assistance for clean tech manufacturers, no other nation can afford to come anywhere close to China .   Goldwind and Ming Yang are cases in point.  Goldwind, the state-owned and largest wind turbine manufacturer in China, and 4th in the world, recently got $6B from the CDB to finance facility and international business development.  Ming Yang, a smaller turbine manufacturer, acquired $5B from the CDB for loans and credit facilities for the period 2011 and 2015 to prepare the way to enter international markets. 

In the solar sector, China's solar photovoltaic  (PV) manufacturers now represent 50% of the global PV market, up from 1% as recently as 2004. 

Finally, on a grander scale, it is worth noting that in August 2012, China's State Council announced it will spend $372B for the period leading up to 2015 on emissions reduction, energy efficiency and pollution control. http://www.ibtimes.com/china-spend-372-billion-reduce-pollution-encourage-energy-efficiency-759575 

Surplus Manufacturing Capacity
The second factor contributing to massive dumping of Chinese clean energy technologies on international markets is surplus manufacturing capacity.  In short, in the rush to develop clean energy manufacturing capacity and construct renewable energy production sites, China "forgot" to increase its transmission capacity to accommodate the new sources of clean energy production. 

The consequences of the transmission bottleneck was that  30% and 20% of China's wind production capacity was not connected in 2011 and 2012 respectively.

With 25% of wind farm capacity not connected to the grid in China's northern windiest provinces, much of China's wind farm development is now happening in provinces with lower wind speeds, and lower feed in tariffs, but higher local consumption. 
 

To remedy the situation, China will build 19 ultra high voltage lines, but one of the  first two lines  is not projected to be ready until late 2013 and the other sometime in 2014.  The line slated for completion in 2014, to connect Hami in Xinjiang province in west to the central city of Zhengzhou, will be 2000km long and have a transmission capacity of 8000 MW.
 

Official projections aside, few observers expect the excess manufacturing capacity problem to be resolved soon, with many predicting that the situation will worsen before it gets better.  The Chinese Wind Energy Association estimated that there was enough extra wind energy produced in 2011— but not supplied — to power 3 million homes.
 

For the interim catch up period, China's National Energy Administration has been curtailing the development of new clean power production sites by as much as 40%, imposing restrictions on both the scale and pace of wind farm development.  

Compounding these barriers to domestic market growth and accentuating manufacturing overcapacity, the major grid operators, all state-owned --such as State Grid and China Southern Power Grid -- are refusing to purchase all renewables.  These operators are regarded as inefficient, slow to change and troublesome for regulators on matters of compliance. 
 

Part 3: Conclusion

China's cheap financing and temporary manufacturing overcapacity regarding China's clean tech sectors have created the perfect cocktail for dumping.   

The US has acted assertively to address this problem with tariffs even though solar panel related polysilcon exports to China have resulted in a clean energy tech trade surplus in favour of the US.   

The European Union has come up with provisional tariffs on solar imports from China averaging 47.6%.

Only Canada - without any major clean energy tech exports to China  --  is prepared to jeopardize the development of its own clean energy technology industries by accommodating, within the framework of  the proposed Canada-China feed trade agreement, China's wish that environmental technologies be exempt from any commercial barriers.   

And this Canadian accommodation comes before Canada has had a chance to develop a green technologies industrial base --  largely thanks to disinvestment policies of the Conservatives. -- Worth keeping in mind here that the US and the Europeans have been acting on behalf of strong existing industrial bases which they want to see continuing to expand as the migration to a green economy intensifies.

 It may be that Harper has no idea of the implications of the environmental clauses in FIPA. 

Will Dubitsky updated 14/06/13

willdubitsky@gmail.com

CANADA NOW HAS 2 CONSERVATIVE PARTIES: A VERY SCARY STORY (Updated July 30, 2013)

With so many eagerly awaiting the end of the anti-democratic, unaccountable Harper regime, some seem to be inclined to support any alternative that may stand a chance for replacing the Cons in 2015, after the next federal election.  But maybe we should take a pause to think this through just a little more.  Canadian Idol Trudeau, though he hasn't said that much so far, has already shown that he shares many of the policy positions of Harper.  This is where things get scary.
 

But with Duffy, Wallin, Wright and Harb making the news, it might seem that now is a good time to call attention to Trudeau not believing in a need for changing the Senate status quo. For Trudeau, it's just a matter of choosing good Senators, that is to say, that the Senate would be improved if Trudeau got to choose Liberal Senators instead of Harper choosing Con Senators.  -- But this is merely a small stuff distractions from the frightening resemblances between Trudeau and Harper. 

The Extraordinary Similarities between Harper and Trudeau

Indeed there are extraordinary similarities between Harper and Trudeau on tax fairness; trade; guns; health, sustainable development and participation in the global migration to a green economy;  tar sands and the Kinder Morgan and Keystone XL pipelines; Employment Insurance; an oversized ego; equal opportunity social inclusion/justice; and other matters.   Consider the following:

The Middle Class, Corporate Taxes, Health Care and Trade with China

Regarding the middle class, Trudeau claims to be their champion.  Sound good so far?
Well, never before in the history of Canada have inequalities among Canadians been more pronounced.  Thanks to the corporate tax cuts initiated by the Liberals and accelerated by the Conservatives, those with power and money - especially the petroleum industry and the banks - are sitting on $600 billion in liquidity.  The Conservatives tell us we must tighten our belts,  young people have to accept low wages and precarious jobs, our cities are clogged for lack of investment in sustainable transit alternatives, etc., because the Conservatives tell us the cupboard is bare.

Yet, Justin Trudeau, self-proclaimed champion of the middle class, has said he will not raise corporate taxes.  When push comes to shove, Liberals like Conservatives, always cede to money and power. http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique-canadienne/201304/11/01-4639753-justin-trudeau-ramener-les-quebecois-vers-la-gouvernance-du-pays.php

Regarding health care, Justin Trudeau thinks there are no money problems associated with health care, just management challenges.  This position is necessary because.....Trudeau would lead a government short of revenues thanks to the lowest corporate taxes among the G8!  Conservatives couldn't agree more. The Cons plan on cutting health care funding within 3 years. So much for caring about the middle class! Very scary!

But there is much more middle class stuff that makes the celebrity Prince Trudeau a scary prospect.  A case in point is Justin Trudeau favoured the sale of Nexen to state-controlled Chinese interests because he said it would pave the way to free trade with China which would pave the way to more prosperity for the middle class,  The Conservatives have said the same thing.  Yet the North American Free Trade Agreement has been around for a long time and middle class revenues/wages are stagnating or going down. -- The middle class is being hollowed out.  The required fixes are internal/domestic.

Regarding the aforementioned proposed Canada-China trade agreement, in response to massive dumping on global markets by China's clean tech industry, the US has imposed trade tariffs running from 31% to 250% on solar tech imports from China along with tariffs of 45% to 71% on imports of Chinese wind turbine towers; 2) the European Commission is considering tariffs averaging 47% on solar tech imports for China, and 3) Canada is the only country dumb enough to accept, under the proposed China-Canada agreement, a guaranteed exemption for environmental technologies from commercial barriers. 

Guns: An Integral Part of Canadian Culture

On guns, Justin Trudeau thinks that guns are an integral part of Canadian culture and that the gun registry was ineffective.  Stephen Harper has similar views.  This, despite the fact that the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs supported the gun registry 1) as an effective tool for police in the line of duty and 2) regarding the development of evidence related to judicial proceedings. 

Environment, Submission to the Fossil Fuel Lobby, Tar Sands, Kinder Morgan and Keystone
Then there's the matter of the environment. Trudeau and Harper say they favour sustainable development but the legacies of both of their parties suggest otherwise.  Prior to their defeat, the Liberals had several climate change action plans. They all failed to do the job, because when you got down to the details, their plans were concessions to money and power.  Jean Chrétien promised the petroleum industry that, in the event of a price on carbon, there would be a very affordable ceiling on the price of carbon.  Stéphane Dion came out with his billions for a Climate Fund just before the Martin government was defeated, a fund that would have the government pay the largest emitters to reduce their respective emissions or invest in carbon offsets.  In other words, the more one emits, the more the government would subsidize - a pay the polluter principle rather than the polluter pays.  No wonder Canada's emission levels spiked upwards during the Liberal reign!

Thanks to Conservatives'  narrow focus on accommodating the fossil fuel lobby, Canada is one the rare developed nations that is not a full participant in one of the greatest job creation sectors of our times, the clean tech sectors. China had 1.6 million jobs, and Germany 372,000 jobs, in the clean tech sectors in 2011.  Today, there are over 500 wind tech manufacturing facilities in the US; wind energy was the largest source of new electrical power generation in the US in 2012; the US solar sector employed 119,000 Americans in 2012; and 20% of US venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 went towards the US clean tech sectors.  Yet Canada is barely participating in green economy and, the few advancements that are being made, are thanks to provincial policies

What can we expect from Trudeau on environmental matters? Don't get your hopes up. Justin Trudeau has already ceded to power and money by being very vague on environmental matters so as not to offend anyone.    Following the forked tongue Jean Chrétien model, Boy King Trudeau supports the Keystone pipeline and the expansion of the Kinder Morgan pipeline to Vancouver (to export tar sands oil to Asia) while saying he is a champion of the environment, even though the emissions associated with the tar sands related production for these pipelines would negate any of the Trudeau's nebulous motherhood notions of being on the side of the environment. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11/20/trudeau-northern-gateway-asia-oil_n_2167695.html

Poor Sense of Priorities: Pot Over the Lac-Mégantic Tragedy
More recently, Trudeau has shown his true colours on priorities with the July 2013 refusal of the Conservatives and Liberals to interrupt their summer break for the purpose of holding sessions of the Parliamentary committee on Transport to look into the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster that left 47 people dead.  One doesn't need to await the report of the Transportation Safety Board to figure out that the Transport Canada approval of the Montreal Maine and Atlantic Railway request to have only one person operate a train with 72 wagons of dangerous cargo was a stupid decision.   Former Transport Canada employees have said that, under the Harper regime, safety has taken a back seat to corporate profits.--The odds of the tragedy ever happening with 2 people in charge of the train would have been very minimal. But Trudeau thinks the top message for the lazy hazy days of summer is about legalizing pot.  Glad to see he has got his priorities right. Out to get the Twitter vote? Very scary indeed!

Employment Insurance

It was the Liberals who started gutting Employment Insurance and the Conservatives have merely followed through.  Justin Trudeau must be counting on the short memory of Canadians

Other Matters: Oversized Ego
Multimillionaire Trudeau thinks it's OK to take money from charities in exchange for his princely charm.   Harper also has a big ego, so big that he need not consult his Ministers.  Rather the Prime Minister's Office is in charge of giving Harper Ministers their respective marching orders.

Wrap-up

Wrapping up, juggling complex issues such as taxation fairness, equal opportunity and participation in the global migration to a green economy, health care, day care etc. requires well-thought out synergistic policies with depth.  But both Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau prefer to operate on sound bite levels or clichés on such matters.  Harper answers all tough questions with "but it's the economy."  As for Trudeau, he simply repeats his aforementioned mantra that he is for the middle class without any references as to what he would do now that income inequalities have reached an historic high and corporate tax revenues aren't sufficient to do anything meaningful for the middle class.

 

Unfortunately, you won't see much of the above-mentioned criticisms in the media.  With very few exceptions, journalists are not interested in the policy details or comparative analyses. The majority of English newspapers in Canada are very partisan and represent, first and foremost, corporate Canada, money and power.  Canadians were criticized by some journalists for falling for a superficial image of the Justin Trudeau brand, but the reasons for this can, in part, be found in the lack of depth by the journalists making such criticisms.

Once again, the Liberals are presenting themselves as the best ones to address their own poor legacy.

Canada now has 2 Conservative parties as Mr. Harper worries about dividing the right.

Very scary story!  Spread the word.

Will Dubitsky, updated 30/07/2013

willdubitsky@gmail.com