The farce and the press gallery -

The farce and the press gallery


The Conservative party has issued a release in response to Thomas Mulcair’s deferring to the press gallery. Apparently Mr. Mulcair is trying to “co-opt journalists” into defending his cap-and-trade proposal.

It’s a sad fact that Mulcair thinks the media will protect his economic policies from being scrutinised, and that he will be able to get away with a carbon tax scheme that will raise the price of everything including gas, groceries and electricity.

Conservatives will not hesitate to tell the facts to Canadians about carbon taxes even if Mulcair thinks and hopes he can avoid the media scrutiny which the economic program of the Leader of the Opposition ought to attract.

At the risk of being co-opted, here, again, are the reasons why the current Conservative position is farcical. And here is Jim Prentice explicitly endorsing a price on carbon in a speech in 2009.

And here is Stephen Gordon’s guide to carbon pricing.


The farce and the press gallery

  1. Hang on….the Conservative position on the Environment has been farcical since 2006 and NOW the press thinks it’s a good idea to call him out on that? There has been alternative after alternative proposed by all parties and NOW the press thinks it’s time to provide some counter to what Harper says? hasn’t Mulcair actually inadvertently co-opted you in any regard with this approach?

  2. I am not sure the word “fact” means what the conservatives say it means.

  3. I surely do not remember Andrew Coyne calling the Conservatives liars in a national media platform when Dion announced the Green Shift. I remember lots of giddy posts about Oily the Splot, but no actual explanations to readers about the policy. Maybe media has just become sickened by seeing this over and over and are now responding, or maybe they just liked watching the Liberals flail with a policy that, in the long run, we all know we are going to have to adopt. I appreciate Aaron’s (and other media members) attempts to show what a “farce” their rhetoric is, but that support did not materialize a few years back. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I recall Dion getting one hell of a rough ride on this stuff — remember that Duffy interview on CTV, where he was made to look a fool.

    • If Dion was made to look like a fool, then that must have been Reality TV.

    • Crickets even now. Oh, we get the punditi muttering and harrumphing about
      the “unseemly” style of gummint we’re stuck with but we have to look far and
      wide to find any discussion … let alone critique … of the actual policy content
      and what it may mean for how people actually live their lives.
      Personally, I assume silence means agreement.

  4. Speaking of media scrutiny, why is the focus on what the NDP or any other Opposition Party might or might not do about climate change? Shouldn’t the scrutiny be on the government? It would be charitable to call this government’s approach on climate change “inaction” since it has been rather active in undermining Canada’s reputation internationally instead of performing on emissions reductions.