Gary Doer defends Alberta oilsands

Genstrike, I would so much wish you to rephrase your thought without attacking Fidel or remind. It's not necessary, it's diversionary, it adds nothing to this important political discussion. I know you've had to endure Doer for 10 years, but we had to endure him in the NDP and prior to that in the union movement for far longer. At least you can feel some vindication in the arguments you've made by pointing to where this character has ended up.

If anyone is being persistent in baiting you remind, just install the ignore script. It's in the rabble reactions forum.

I'm not an expert on energy, so it's difficult for me to say. I think the way the NDP looks it, there have been billions and billions of dollars in oil and gas profits that were siphoned out of Canada along with the oil and gas. Some countries put Canada to shame wrt to sovereign wealth funds accumulated from their oil exports over the years. Some of that money should have been invested in r&d'ing renewable and sustainable energy technologies. Other rich countries are way ahead of Canada as far as energy conservations and efficiency, and alternative energy are concerned. Personally, I don't think there is one WOW! alternative technology but a combination of approaches will be necessary for a generation or two until such time as nuclear fuel cycle can be completed and that technology made safe and reliable. Or perhaps the second-rate wind and tidal power will become permament alternatives. Scientists say that the sun produces all the energy we need and if harnessed effectively by either solar radiation collectors or our own powerful reactors, there should be plenty of energy for everyone for a very long time. But technological advances take time and money. The profit motive and so-called free markets for energy have been working against us by what I can see.

Fidel

You are correct, that we should visit NAFTA.

From my understanding the Mr. Doer and his NDP government has been planning for new oil and gas fields in southern Manitoba for several years now. 

Thanks for expounding on your thoughts Fidel. I'm not an energy expert either. The Harper government seems to be putting a lot of eggs in the carbon sequestration basket. If it's even seriously feasible, it will take many years to develop. In my mind, sequestration presumes continued growth of greenhouse gases - why not if you can just bury the stuff some time in the future? Yet more reasons not to seriously develop alternative energy production and infrastructure and continue to gobble up and destroy huge tracts of territory. Does the NDP have a position on carbon sequestration? The Green Party supports it. My suspicious gut feeling tells me that it's a huge scam. Can't Canada make do with the projects that are already underway in order to sustain demand? 

I don't usually side with capitalist economists, but Jeffrey Sachs, a Harvard trained economist has an excellent article somewhere on the web. He says relying on cap and trade and other market gimmicks for reducing CO2 is folly. The answer is to invest in the future with massive spending on r&d for renewable energy technologies. Cap and trade and other gimmicks are like holding our breath and waiting for the problem to go away. We need real solutions, and the NDP says more or less the same thing. The NDP does support cap and trade, but Layton and the NDP also are calling for massive investments in green economy, research and development. Green technologies could represent made in Canada innovation, which all economists agree is vital to any country's prospects for increasing economic productivity as well as future standard of living. We've lollygagged our way through this old world economy exporting fossil fuels for too long and nothing in the kitty for a rainy day. And now it's raining cats.

You're missing the point. Doer was praised to the skies by Layton on his appointment as ambassador. Now that Doer is going to be shilling in Washington for the big oil companies who are raping the Canadian environment, Layton will have to distance himself and the party from Doer. It is Layton, not babblers, who has chosen to hold Doer out as a shining example of the best the NDP has to offer.

As the Canwest article notes, Doer "earned a reputation in Manitoba as a national leader on climate change." Don't you think a man with such a reputation should be held to a higher standard on issues like the tar sands?

And if you think that criticizing Doer for what he has already said about the tar sands is "jumping to conclusions" then you are letting your party loyalty trump your own better judgment. 

remind:

"Actually, try rereading my posts, this time for clarity, I make no claims regarding Doer at all, the only thing pising me off is attempts to somehow suggest that what he does implicates the federal NDP and their supporters in some way.

All the while knowing pulling such nonsensical shit, is just going to create a brouhaha, is a just of big piss off, too. It is deliberate malice as far as I can see."

I see it more, remind, as coming from and being applauded by frustrated folks who are devoid of ideas for corrective action. And it is a damned shame to be reduced to a venue for bitter infighting by frustrated, otherwise well-meaning people because of it. New Democrats are an easy mark for snipers. But I guess to divert learned opinion here, we'd have to paint targets on the neo-cons who are laughing at our fratricidal ways.

Right on. I'm frankly shocked by this sycophantic 'my party (NDP), right or wrong' attitude that I'm seeing in a few posts here and elsewhere.

And the easiest course of action is the one from a purely moralistic position. 

Actually defining what ANY political party should be proposing for the Tar Patch, for instance, is out of bounds for the frustrated in attack mode. And of course, the critic has never had to assume a creative role in the theatre of the absurd.

An example of a "damn the torpedoes" proposal for positive action (beyond carping):

From a recent discussion on economics in a related thread - "Okay, but the Canadian situation in 2009, with distinct differences in position between East and West (they are two economies in conflict with one another, the Tar Patch benefits from a loonie on par with the greenback, the industrial exporting sectors require a loonie at about .85 cents to the greenback) , is not to be settled immediately by replicating 1930s Spain.

This observer is ready to say to hell with the Tar Patch (knowing full well the political implications of that postion) because of its complete lack of concern for anything or anyone out of the fossil fuel loop. Surely the rest of Canada could be brought to understand the need to get serious with them, for environmental reasons, the fate of the grandkids, weighing more importantly than the harm being done to the domestic economy."

I would only add that the completely impractical but moral tone of that recommendation fits exactly with the tone of this thread. (But it proposes something.)

And even the frustrated, apparently partyless, hue to the line about not proposing anything hereabouts, not just the Great Misled.

Doer is just a great example of how right the NDP is willing to move in order to get to power and it is illustrative that Layton holds him up as the ideal NDP leader and representative.  Until Canada gets a party with roots outside of the current clique leading all of our major parties, electoral politics in Canada is mostly a waste of energy and at best a matter of trying to make the system as deadlocked and unworkable as possible.

Far too easy, in my opinion. Yet the official babble fanbase™ seems wholly unconcerned.

I think the proof will be not what Doer does while he is Canada's ambassador to the U.S., (that's completely predictable) but rather what he does after his term is finished.

Similar things were said about Stephen Lewis when Brian Mulroney appointed him Canada's ambassador to the United Nations.

But, during his term at the UN, I suppose Lewis developed all kinds of contacts etc. that enabled him to do alot of excellent work after he left that post.

I've heard Lewis joke that he's "probably the only person in Canada who owe's Brian Mulroney a favour".

He forgot Ed Broadbent.

Back to Doer. I had little use for his economic or social or labour policies. It should not be forgotten, however, that in earlier years in office, Doer was one of the most vocal proponents of Kyoto - not just in words, but even in some policy measures and in his dealings with U.S. state governors. Manitoba and Québec were the two provinces that had carried the torch while the federal Liberal government was extinguishing it through neglect - and finally Harper drowned it.

Doer appeared to be an environmental leader next to NDP-ruled Saskatchewan, for example, where GHG emissions grew by well over 60 percent since 1990, leading to the highest per-capita emissions in Canada.

I'm not sure how recently Doer's discourse started to change, nor why - perhaps others here have more familiarity. Nor would I blame the Manitoba NDP for foolishness uttered by its ex-leader. Doer is clearly speaking for Harper now, and nothing different should be expected. I just think Jack Layton should be careful in his praise and call things by their true name, regardless of nostalgia.