Conservative blogger Stephen Taylor has some sources in the Prime Minister’s Office that many of us in the Parliamentary Press Gallery spend years cultivating — often without success. Taylor’s sources were dead right on Wajid Khan’s crossing and were also pretty good on the cabinet shuffle.
So with that preface, I point you again at Stephen’s site for his latest scoop on a settlement between the federal government and Maher Arar.
Peter Harder, the deputy minister at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, has resigned, my colleague Robert Fife is about to report on CTV Newsnet.
Harder was rumoured to be one of those in line for the job of Clerk of the Privy Council, Canada’s top civil service. That job eventually went to Kevin Lynch.
Here is the text of Harder’s departure letter, which was distributed to the department today:
Earlier this month, I indicated to the Prime Minister my intention to resign from the Public Service of Canada, effective March 2, 2007.
Over the past sixteen years, it has been my distinct pleasure to have worked, as Deputy Minister, with five Prime Ministers, twelve ministers, six clerks and countless dedicated public servants in six departments.
I have particularly enjoyed my now almost four years as Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and am extremely proud to have had the opportunity to work with you all. Your dedication, professionalism and commitment to Canada has both inspired me and been the foundation of the transformation our department is undertaking.
However, after twenty-nine years of public service, I feel it is time to move on to new challenges.
I leave knowing that our minister, and the government as a whole, will continue to be well served by the leadership team and all employees of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
I thank you for your friendship and wish you all good things.
I’ve been using BlogJet 1.6.2 to post to this blog and others whenever I’m working on my Windows XP machine. It’s a reliable, stable, if bare-bones product. On my Mac, I’ve been using Ecto. It’s got some features that are different from BlogJet. I’ve been waiting for a stable new release of both apps that allowed me to post here and to my other blog. BlogJet 2.0, out today, apparently has that feature. Anyone given BlogJet 2.0 a whirl yet?
I’m downloading and installing it now so, if all works out well, this will be my last post using BlogJet 1.x.
Want to help with the news? I’m looking for a Microsoft Access (2003) wizard who can help me crunch a bit of data. Contact me any way you want. My contact details are always here. Thanks!
Page A13 of tomorrow’s Washington Post will contain an article by their man in Canada, Doug Struck, headlined: “In Reversal, Canada's Conservatives Embrace Environmental Concerns”.
Here’s some selected grafs:
TORONTO, Jan. 21 — Canada's Conservative Party government, faced with a strong public demand for action on climate change, is scrambling to rebuild environmental programs that it dismantled last year and offer new initiatives.
Two ministers for Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government on Sunday announced the allocation of $26 million previously pledged to help preserve the giant Great Bear Rainforest in British Columbia and unveiled a program to encourage homeowners and businesses to make their buildings more energy efficient.…
Harper's government is trying to show its resolve on global warming after the opposition Liberal Party elected a leader, Stéphane Dion, who pledged to make global warming the top issue, a stance that a majority of Canadians agree with, according to opinion polls.
Harper fired his environmental minister this month and offered plans last week to boost alternative energy sources and conservation. But many of the programs were simply different versions of those advanced by the previous Liberal government and scrapped during the elimination of many Liberal programs when Harper presented his budget last spring.
“Why did we have to wait a year until Stephen Harper has his back against the political wall until we get old copycat versions of Liberal programs?” Dave Martin, an energy analyst with Greenpeace Canada, said in an interview. “Despite the greenwashing, it's not clear to me that Stephen Harper really intends to take strong action on climate change.” …
[Read the rest of the story]
Teacher has baby early so hubby can watch Bears
PALOS HEIGHTS, Ill. — Nine months pregnant and married to a fervent Bears fan with tickets to Sunday's NFC Championship Game, Colleen Pavelka didn't want to risk going into labor during the game against the New Orleans Saints.
Due to give birth on Monday, Pavelka's doctor told her Friday she could induce labor early. She opted for the Friday delivery. . .
Saskatchewan Finance Minister Andrew Thompson is mighty peeved that his province has been guaranteed zero dollars in federal transfer payments next year. Alberta, B.C. and Ontario — the ‘have’ provinces — are also guaranteed ‘zero’ dollars in transfer payments. Thompson was on CTV’s Question Period this morning. Here’s the exchange between Thompson and co-host Craig Oliver:
CRAIG OLIVER: Those of us who've spent a certain number of years in Saskatchewan in our lives probably never thought we'd see the day when Saskatchewan would be considered one of the rich provinces. No longer a have not province. And that is, along with Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario. However, the province there isn't at all happy about this because it has meant that the federal government has cut off their equalization. And to come up with that formula, they've included the money Saskatchewan is getting from its natural resources. We're joined now by Andrew Thompson, who is the Finance Minister of the province. So, what's the problem? I mean some people would say you should be happy that you're no longer a have-not.
ANDREW THOMPSON: We're happy. We're happy being a have province. Our concern is that the Prime Minister is breaking his word and not keeping his promise to the Saskatchewan people, which was to take the non-renewable natural resource, these resource that will deplete over a generation. He's including them in the equalization formula. Taking the money out of Saskatchewan and spending it elsewhere. All we're saying is let's spend that money that's generated in Saskatchewan in Saskatchewan so we can change our economy so we become a true have province.
OLIVER: So you're getting nothing, but Quebec is getting something like $2 billion [more]. They also have an energy sector in terms of hydro power. Do you feel that you are being discriminated against or there's favouritism being shown to Quebec for obvious political reasons?
THOMPSON: I think our fear is that this is what it will be seen as, is that they're going to use the western oil money to essentially buy votes in Quebec. We all know that this is a government very fixated on how it can get re-elected. They believe that they can take the votes in the western part of the country for granted, and they're obviously focused on how they can gain more seats in other provinces, Ontario and Quebec. The concern that we have is we have a very clear promise from the Prime Minister that he would not do this. Now he and Minister Flaherty appear to be reneging on it . . .
OLIVER: The danger being, let's be clear about this, that in the western provinces, the old anger starts against Quebec getting all kinds of breaks that the west isn't getting again.
THOMPSON: I think the bigger concern is that the old anger against Ottawa will start again. We've seen this before. Trudeau tried this with the national energy program. We tried this. This was the fight Lougheed had with them a generation ago. Chretien managed to find a way to do it with these equalization agreements, and Harper seems quite happy to be continuing on. This is not what Stephen Harper promised Canadians, and especially not what he promised western Canadians.
OLIVER: At one point the Conservatives were doing quite well in Saskatchewan. They want to do well there again. Do you believe this is going to hurt their chances in your province?
THOMPSON: I can tell you voters are mad. They're very angry about it. In the last election, when we looked at the three parties' programs, our NDP government said the best deal for Saskatchewan is the one the Conservatives were offering. We said that publicly. They made a big deal out of it. Now they're reneging on it. And I can tell you my sense is voters are mad about this, and it may well cost them seats in Saskatchewan and in the west.
Now, earlier in the show, Jane Taber had interviewed Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Here’s that’s exchange:
TABER: You have informed the provinces that you're going to boost, for instance, Quebec's share by one billion dollars and, while Saskatchewan, for instance, is now a have province, you have said, and it's not going to get any equalization money at all, which, of course, is angering Saskatchewan. Are you showing favouritism? Is your government showing favouritism to Quebec because you need the votes there?
FLAHERTY: No, not at all, and you know I was kind of surprised at the reaction of some of my colleagues, Finance Ministers in Canada, to this, because they know that all this letter was that I sent out earlier in the week before I came to China was a letter saying here's the floor for equalization. Here's legally all we can pay this year until we get the budget and so on and new authorization. They wanted to know that. They asked me for that at our meeting in Vancouver on December 15th, so they now have the floor. That's not the end of the story. That's the floor for equalization this year, as I made very clear in my letter to all of them. But I think it also should be remembered that one of the goals of equalization, one of the good things is for have not provinces to become have provinces. And when they became have provinces, that's actually something to celebrate rather than to feel poorly about.
TABER: Well I don't think your counterpart in Saskatchewan, Andrew Thompson, is actually celebrating right now, Mr. Flaherty. He's going to
be on after this interview. What do you say to [him]?FLAHERTY: Andrew and I have some vigorous discussions about this issue, as he does with his colleagues in the other provinces. There is not consensus among the provinces on the issue, and at the end of the day, in the absence of consensus, it's the constitutional responsibility of the government of Canada to make determinations about equalization and to make sure that that happens equitably across Canada. I think we all agree, fundamentally, as Canadians that we want reasonably comparable social services across Canada. And I think that's fundamental that all of us join in that commitment, and then we have to sort out how that works best on a principled long-term basis, not on an ad-hoc as to be changed basis every year.
TABER: Okay. You don't think then, you don't agree with my assessment, or some peoples' assessment that there's, there's favouritism being shown to Quebec with this one billion dollar boost?
FLAHERTY: No, absolutely not. And I think one thing that is a reality in Canada is that Quebec is in the have not, the receiving category with respect to equalization, and the population of Quebec is quite large, sowhen you multiply the number on a per capita basis in Quebec, the number, of course, is quite large because Quebec has a substantial population, the largest population among the equalization-receiving provinces.
An hour or so ago in Toronto, Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn announced his government’s EcoEnergy Efficiency Initiative, a plan to give homeowners, industry, and business financial assistance to improve energy efficiency. The Tories will spend $300–million over four years on this.
The Liberals had a program up and running called Energuide. It was a plan to give homeowners only financial assistance to improve energy efficiency. The Liberals were set to spend $225–million over four years when they lost the government.
The Conservatives immediately cancelled Energuide even though the Environment Commissioner indicated that this was about the only Liberal program that was seemed to getting value for money so far as its stated goals went. The Environment Commissioner reported that, as of March, 2006, the Energuide program had helped retrofit 49,000 homes and achieved greenhouse gas emission reductions of abouut 700,000 tonnes.
Today, the Conservatives announced that in April, almost exactly a year after cancelling the Liberal plan to subsidize energy retrofits, Canadians can apply again for energy retrofit subsidies.
Here are the Liberals, Oct. 21, 2003: “Under this initiative, the average incentive to Canadians who make qualified energy-efficiency improvements to their homes is expected to be about $1,000.”
And here are the Conservatives, Jan. 21, 2007: “The average grant is expected to be more than $1,000 and will yield an average 30 percent reduction in energy use and costs.”
Yesterday on the West Coast, Prime Minister Harper announced a 10–year, $1.48–billion plan to support projects using renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass, and tidal.
The Prime Minister was asked by my colleague in Vancouver Todd Battis and other reporters if his announcement was a lot like the programs the Liberals had to support renewable energies but which were suspended as soon as the Conservatives took office.
To Battis, Harper said: “I see Mr. Dion keeps talking about an election. If he chooses to force one, I'll be very comfortable comparing our record of action on the environment with his record of inaction on the environment.”
Harper also said: “We obviously know the previous government was not reducing emissions. A lot of the programs they had in place didn't have that effect. Or quite frankly had never got put in place.”
Well, it’s certainly true that, overall, Canada was producing a heckuva lot more greenhouse gas emissions when the Liberals left office last January than when Jean Chretien became prime minister in 1993. But it’s just as correct to say that, when it came to support for renewable energy, particularly wind power, the Liberals had “made progress”, according to Canada’s Environment Commissioner.
The Liberals had a plan called the Wind Power Production Initiative (WPPI and known in eco circles was ‘whippy’). They had another program in place since 1997 called Renewable Energy Development Initiative (REDI) for non-wind renewable energy projects. A policy advisor at the Minister of Natural Resources indicates that for those who prepared business plans to apply for subsidies under the Liberal WPPI or REDI will likely not have to change a word to qualify for the same size subsidy — a penny a kilowatt hour — through the Conservative plan announced yesterday. In other words, all the Conservatives did was to roll WPPI and REDI together into a single program.
In Budget 2005, WPPI was allocated $200–million over 5 years (budget years 2005–06 to 2009–10) and a total of $920–million over 15 years and a program called Renewable Power Production Initiative was allocated $97–million over five years for a total of $297 million over five years.
The Conservatives did not provide details on how much they expected to spend each year over the same five year period because they have budgeted $1.48–billion to be paid out over 10 years for projects constructed over the next four years. The goal of the Conservative plan is to generate 4,000 megawatts of electricity from renewable energy projects. The Liberal WPPI plan had as its goal the generation of 4,000 MW of electricity from wind power alone. Yesterday, NRCAN officials confirmed that they expect their plan to generate about 3,000 MW from wind — 1,000 MW less than the Liberals. The Conservatives aim to fund projects that will create about 400 MW from biomass and the the balance, another 500 MW, from a combination of small-hydro, tidal, solar and others.
So to the very last point the Prime Minister makes — that some programs “never got put in place” — is not completely correct and even less correct if the PM is referring only to renewable energy programs.
In fact, WPPI was so much “in place” that many had been calling on Harper to reinstate the WPPI program because it was so effective. And it wasn’t just the usual crowd of ‘greenies’ calling for WPPI to come back. Here’s Chuck Szmurlo, a vice-president for energy giant Enbridge Inc., testifying in front of MPs last October said: “The Wind Power Production Incentive was a well-designed and well understood fiscal measure which was successful in stimulating investment in wind power. Enbridge alone has investment commitments for 271 megawatts of wind power together with our joint venture partners. I believe that the government should restore the Wind Power Production Incentive program to maintain a positive investment climate for wind power.”
Now the Prime Minister also said “the previous governnment was not reducing emissions”. I suppose that depends on how you look at it. While it is certainly true that, overall, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions had grown significantly during the period when Prime Ministers Chretien and Martin were in charge, there were some programs — and WPPI is one of them — that were reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Canada’s environment commissioner Johane Gelinas — she works with the Auditor-General and reports straight to Parliament — looked at the WPPI program in her most recent audit and found that, as of March 31, 2006, a total of $21.3-million had been spent on WPPI projects. She notes that WPPI had, as its goal, the reduction of 900,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions and appeared to be well on its way to that goal – having helped cut greenhouse gas emissions by 360,000 tonnes. The Conservatives, incidentally, did not specific a target, measured in tonnes, for greenhouse gas reductions with their renewables plan, though I asked for that number several times on Friday.
“We found broad-based support for the [WPPI] program and clear statements from provincial governments, companies and utilities about WPPI's influence on their decisions to invest in or support wind power projects,” Gelinas wrote in her report to Parliament.
We can now, apparently, add the Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party to that list of “broad-based support” for the wind power program designed and instituted by the previous Liberal government.
Couldn’t resist sharing this strip from Aaron Johnson’s “What the Duck?”. Those who’ve been involved in the ‘citizen journalism’ and “are bloggers journalists” debate will surely get a chuckle.
(Tip of the toque to Canadian Journalist!)
