Green Party - Don Valley East

Election Wrap up - Don Valley East

2008-10-18T11:28:00.002-05:00

Hello everyone,

First of all thank you so much for all your support. Thanks to those who spoke words of encouragement and expressed wishes of luck even if they were not voting Green. Thanks to the volunteers who delivered flyers and were great, thanks to those who had a lawn sign which also helped the cause and of course in this election we had 4 times as many brochures distributed in Don Valley East as last election (almost 19,000) thanks to those who donated money.

In the riding of Don Valley East the Green Party - we - increased our vote by 1051 more votes than last election, or an increase of 61% with a total of 2,765 votes or 7.2% of the vote.

All the other parties in the riding had a decrease in the number of votes: the conservatives were down 360 votes, the NDP were down 479 and the Liberals were down 5,336. Even though the number of registered voters was up by 2,474 to a total of 70,840, the total number of votes cast was down 4,836 to a total of 38,577.

To me this means a) the conservatives are not making any progress in this riding and b) Liberals did not vote in droves likely because of their distaste for their leader and possibly the carbon tax.

The increase in the green vote certainly did not come all from the NDP - I suspect that it came from all 3 parties which is normal.

Provincially we are up to 8% or 411444 and nationally up to 6.8% or 940747 (as of 2:33 a.m. with more polls to report in still). Voter turn out was dismal at less than 60%.

So what happens next?

The Liberals will elect a new leader and drop the carbon tax (my predictions) and as such Global Warming will go on the back burner while the elected parties try to find their path through the economic turbulence we are likely to see over the next couple of years. The Liberal problems are not like the Conservative problems after Mulroney when people were sick of all the scandals. The Liberals are not going anywhere. They'll be back and competitive in the next election.

Jack Layton will be emboldened by his success - though frankly I don't see a lot more growth for the NDP. I suspect they have peaked because next election the Liberals will be much stronger.

The Conservatives taste a majority but I don't see much more growth for them either. Harper is still a neoconservative (IMHO - in my humble opinion) and Canadians don't want that. They will try and buy Quebec again - likely with huge spending on the arts. They will pour money into the military at the expense of social programs (before Harper put more money into the military we already had the 7th largest military budget in the world - contrary to popular belief our military was not being short changed - if you want more details on this let me know). Harper will try and woo more of the 905 and even 416/514/604 with more focus on new immigrants to this country.

Conservatives will face a tough time trying to keep the budget balanced so they'll likely do what Flarety did when he was Minister of Finance while in Ontario - be creative with the numbers. The election in/out scandal will hit the Conservatives as well which ties over from the last election. So it is not going to be an easy time for the conservatives and the opposition parties should be able to force some issues since no one wants to go back to another election.

And the Greens?

We again continued our strong upward trend. No we did not get a seat. We are now hoping that there are bi-elections between now and next election so Elizabeth can run, win a seat and we can be on the debate again. The debate helped the Green cause immensely.

and there is so much unfinished business:

Global warming - I don't see anything happening with this until other countries - U.S. and E.U. put trade sanctions on us forcing us to take action. Obama will get elected and will take action on this and we will have to follow suit.

Poverty - Given the economic times we are facing the parties in power will say we don't have the money to solve this even though providing affordable housing (one of the major causes of poverty in Canada) would be a benefit to the economy.

Health care will continue its current path with no real focus on prevention and incidents of cancer will rise (as a percentage).

The economy will continue to shed manufacturing jobs (700 more announced at Daimler yesterday), with no emphasis on long term well paying green jobs but more hand outs for companies like Ford to make cars no one wants to buy. The only thinking saving us is the now low Canadian dollar.

So given all this the need for the Green Party will only increase and we will keep on building and we will elect members and we will eventually get a majority. Like I said tonight - the 2006 election was one about anger - anger against the Liberals, anger against all parties for calling an election at Christmas. This election was one about fear - Fear of the Harper Neo-cons and fear about the economy.

When an election becomes about hope - hope to end poverty, hope to reduce and end the occurrence of cancer, hope for a life where we work to live rather than live to work and of course hope for this planet - when the election is about hope - Greens will not send one MP to Ottawa - nor 5 nor 8 - we will send 308 MPs and build a Canada that will be the envy of the world and because we are Canadians we will turn to the rest of the world and teach them how to be as great as we are.

Free electricity...

2008-10-10T16:29:00.003-05:00

This is neat - Want to reduce your energy costs? Check this out! Click on the link above.

Politician in Action

2008-10-10T13:23:00.007-05:00

On August 19th 2007, an oil tanker off the coast of Australia split in two, dumping 20,000 tons of crude oil. This is a spoof on politician's reaction to it. This is funny and sadly not that far from the way some see these things. Click on play below to see the interview.

Upcoming Events

2008-09-25T07:33:00.002-05:00

Wednesday October 1st - 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. THE BRIDGE ENGLISH CLUB SEMINAR WITH The GREEN PARTY - Seminar for members - Place: 1200 Eglinton Ave.E.,Suite 502

***

Thursday October 2, 10:45 a.m. Donview Middle School - Grade 6

***

Thursday, October 2 - Televised Leaders debate - Featuring Elizabeth May

****

Monday October 6th - 2:30 - Donway Place/Don Mills Seniors' Apartments - 8 The Donway East - This is for the residents of the apartments.

****

Tuesday - October 7 at 7 pm to 9 pm. Oriole Community Centre 2975 Don Mills Road - Sponsored by "Better Beginnings Now"

****

Wednesday October 8 - Bayview Glen School - 275 Duncan - Grade 5 class

*****

October 8 - 7:00 PM - 9:00 p.m. - Victoria Village Community Association

88 Sweeney - Victoria Village School - Gym

***

October 14th, 2008 - Election Day - Go Vote!

***

Completed Events

***
Friday September 26 2:00 p.m. - Emmanuel Luthern Church - 1684 Victoria Park. All Candidates Debate for the residents.

****

Recent Converts to Global Warming

2008-09-22T05:56:00.002-05:00

Almost all scientists now agree global warming exists and is caused by man.

Sir David Attenborough of the nature film series fame is a recent convert.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/05/sir_david_atten_1.php

Michael Shermer is the founder of the skeptic society and writer for scientific American he and he now says the results all irrefutable.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-flipping-point

Frank Luntz who is a pollster (sued by the Conservatives I might add), says that you have to ask the question in such a way such that you get the answer you want.
- He was responsible for the memo to the U.S. government coaching them on how to conufes the issue of global warming. At the time he was a synic of global warming. He now accepts the science.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/06/frank_luntz_acc.php

Power Corrupts

2008-09-09T09:32:00.000-05:00

It is no surprise to me that Elizabeth May and the Green Party have not been allowed in the televised debates. History has shown that once people have a taste of power, they are easily hooked and loathe to let it go... and these guys have been hooked for a long time.

Letting Elizabeth in the debate would be bad for everyone - except of course Canadians. The Bloq already is struggling since their very reason for existence - separation from Canada - is falling out of favour with the people of Quebec. The NDP too have lost their way and Jack Layton is more interested in well ... Jack Layton than the environment, social issues or democracy.

As for Harper, he realizes that the Greens are not just taking NDP and Liberal votes but are also taking Red Tory votes. In the London Central and Guelph bi-elections we had close 2 people races between Liberals and Greens. The only way that could have happened is if we took Conservative votes.

My understanding is that in the 2 general elections, since the Alliance party consumed the Progressive Conservative party, the no longer progressive Conservatives have yet to get as many votes in a general election as they did when the Alliance and PCs were separate entities. This has to be troubling for Harper.

Harpers assertions that Dion and May are a team with the same platform are of course absurd. Truth and integrity and leadership are all words that Harper uses but to paraphrase Inigo Montoya in "The Princess Bride" - He keeps using those words but I don't think they mean what he thinks they mean." I am sure we will have many more examples of this as the election unfolds.

global warming/ The Conservatives and the Environment

2006-10-18T12:30:00.000-05:00

Hi Everyone,

We all know that in the last election the conservative platform ranked last of all 5 parties with a score of 31 out of 108 when it came to the environment. Of course we (Greens) were ranked first at 91.

Those that were at the all candidates debate at Don Mills Collegiate, were also treated to the uncomfortable site of the conservative candidate thumbing wildly through his "conservative standard answer guide" when asked a fairly routine environmental question. (It was about mass exporting water to the U.S.).

It seems that they have not learned a whole lot since then. Check out the latest from the environment minister to below. If our lives did not depend on someone getting their act together, this would be mildly amusing.

The most moving Global warming ad I have seen is a man talking about how Global warming will not affect him and in the background as he talks, you hear a train getting closer and closer. At the end he concludes it wont affect him and he steps off the tracks. And behind him on the tracks directly in front of the oncoming train - is a young girl....

Could we be wrong about Global warming? - Yes - In spite of the preponderance of scientific studies and evidence supporting that a) global warming exists and b) we are causing it - we could be wrong. If we are wrong and do something about it anyway- hey the world ends up being a better place to live. If we are right and do nothing about it, it is conceivable that the balance could be tipped so far in the direction of global warming that the earth will not be able to readjust and cool down and it will get hotter and hotter until the atmosphere and water burn away.

Ladies and gentleman - I do my best to focus on other issues besides the environment such as electoral reform and tax reform. I am NOT a tree hugger - but I Like trees. I am not a vegetarian - but I do like animals - I grew up on a farm. This is one environmental issue I feel strong about because it affects us all.

We need to take whatever actions we can individually - change to those fancy light bulbs, buy a hybrid car the next time we need to buy a car, install solar panels on your house, discuss this with other people you know. Don't try and convince them - Just get them talking about it.

Buying less stuff would help as well - Keep in mind China is now opening one new coal plant every 4 days - [If anyone can confirm this figure for me I'd appreciate it - seems high to me] and coal is the number 1 Green House Gas problem - not cars though cars are a problem. We all have to work together.

All the best!

Wayne Clements

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Green Party of Canada [mailto:media@greenparty.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 11:46 AM
To: wayne@bswi.com
Subject: Reality Check: Ambrose versus the facts

Donate- Join - Contact Us - Subscribe
News Release
For Immediate Release
Reality Check: Ambrose versus the facts
Environment Minister's testimony contains eight major mistakes: one every seven minutes.

Wednesday, 18 October, 2006

The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, addressed the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development on Thursday, October 5, 2006 on the merits of her government's expected plan to address air pollution and global climate change.

Unfortunately, Minister Ambrose's statements reveal frequent confusion, misinterpretation, and total disregard for the facts and critical elements of Kyoto and Climate issues. To prepare for her expected announcement on Thursday, October 18, 2006, the Green Party is issuing the following Reality Check.

Ambrose claim 1:
"I would like to thank the environment commissioner for her report. Our government accepts all of her recommendations."

Reality Check:

The Commissioner's report called for the Government to continue progress to meet Kyoto targets:

"Canadians should be able to expect their federal government to stay the course until lasting solutions are found." (p. 15)

Minister Ambrose's testimony clearly stated a refusal to meet those targets.

Ambrose claim 2:
"I said very clearly at that time that it is impossible for Canada to reach its Kyoto targets. As the environment commissioner stated, we need new targets. This does not mean an abandonment of Kyoto. In fact, Canada works very closely within the Kyoto process and the Kyoto Protocol with our international partners to move forward, to look beyond what the next stage of Kyoto will be beyond 2012."

And in response to Bloq Environment Critic Bernard Bigras, Minister Ambrose said:

"What I will say is that our government has never stated we would abandon Kyoto and has never stated we will not participate in the Kyoto Protocol process. What we have stated is that we need new targets."

Reality Check:

The Commissioner's report did not call for new targets. It is not clear from the Commissioner's testimony at the Environment Committee that Mme Gelinas intended to suggest a different finding than anything stated in her official report. The reality is that the targets are Canada's legally binding commitment.

It is false to claim that the Harper government has not abandoned Kyoto. A decision to ignore the legally binding targets is exactly that. The fact that Canada still shows up at meetings, and, until next month as President of the UN Climate Change Conference, is merely a sign of monumental hypocrisy bordering on sabotage.

Ambrose claim 3:
"I'll tell you what a clean development expert said at the Institute for Policy Studies. She said that because of the lack of accountability around these kinds of projects, which by the way involve firms that are being paid by project participants--the project participants themselves are developers for the projects and also their own inspectors. You're giving a negative response. She said, ‘You're creating all kinds of incentives for corruption'."

And in response to a question from Conservative MP Luc Harvey:

"Daphne Wysham, who is the clean development mechanism expert, said that, ‘You're creating all kinds of incentives for corruption', in giving a negative response."

Reality Check:

The clean development mechanism (CDM) expert, Daphne Wysham, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, made the following statement in response to Minister Ambrose's misuse of IPS research:

"I am horrified that my statement criticizing the CDM has been interpreted by Canada's Environment Minister as justification for not living up to the terms of the Kyoto Protocol. We absolutely need a vehicle for both curbing emissions in the North and providing resources for clean energy in the south. The CDM may be flawed, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater will set us back decades at a time when action to reduce greenhouse gases is urgently needed. Canada must not violate its legally binding Kyoto commitments."

Thanks to John Godfrey, Liberal Environment Critic, this matter was put before the House on October 6, 2006, although Minister Ambrose was not present to provide an answer.

Ambrose claim 4:
"The European Union market crashed only a few months ago, and hundreds of millions of euros and taxpayers' money in European governments were lost."

"So what I will reiterate is that our government will not take those kinds of risks with taxpayers' money. We will not use taxpayers' money to trade credits, to buy credits, or to set up an artificial market for credit trading."

And in response to Bloc Quebecois Environment Critic, Bernard Bigras:

"In the European market in particular we've seen a recent crash that caused losses of hundreds of millions of euros and dollars to taxpayers and governments in Europe, and we will not embark on a risk like that with taxpayers' money."

Reality Check:

There was no “crash” of the European Union carbon market. There was a price adjustment. As any party that claims to understand the functioning of markets should understand, sometimes the market will re-adjust the price. The EU carbon market did so recently. No taxpayer funds were lost. The EU carbon market is driven by the private sector.

According to Climate Action Network Europe, governments do not contribute directly to the emissions trading market so no government money was “lost”. The value of the EU emissions trading market dropped last spring in response to incomplete data, but it did not crash. As Ambrose notes, the market is new and the current Phase I (2005 - 2007) is a pilot phase designed to ensure smooth operation during Phase II (2008 – 2012). The value of Phase II credits did not drop to the extent of the Phase I credits.

Ambrose claim 5:
To a friendly question from Conservative MP Mark Warawa, who asked:

"Early on, when you shared that we're not going to be able to meet those targets, you said that we would have to shut down every train, plane, and automobile. Just how close were we to meeting our targets, and what did you mean by that?"

Ambrose replied:

"I asked the department early on to brief me on the opportunities for us to meet our targets and what that would mean. It would mean that we would have to shut down the majority of industry in Canada to be able to make that commitment, if we made that commitment here at home."....

"What that would entail, just to give you a specific example, is that would mean that electricity prices in British Columbia would increase by 40%, electricity prices in Ontario would increase by 65%, and natural gas prices would increase by over 300% in Alberta and over $130% [sic] in Ontario. These are the kinds of impacts of forcing the 6% target on Canada's industry today through a regulatory framework, which is exactly what Bill C-288 that was passed in the House last night entails."

Reality Check:

It is critical that Canadians understand the rhetorical devises being used by Minister Ambrose to create public fear of Kyoto's implications.

In every case she sets out an unpalatable, painful and unnecessarily damaging approach. Each of her examples represents what would happen if a government ignored doing the 500 or so useful measures that distribute the economic impact of carbon reductions, create new opportunities for new industries as the Green Party GP Squared approach would do, and instead did what no rational policy maker would ever do: take one area of the economy and wring out all 30% of reductions from that one sector. No fuel substitutions or energy efficiencies allowed.

For example, her colleague put to her her initial scaremongering of “shutting down every train, plane, and automobile.”

This should have been explained as a piece of clever prevarication. With 30% of greenhouse gases coming from Canada's transportation sector, Ambrose suggested the only way to reach Kyoto would be to take every plane out of the sky, every car and truck off the roads and to stop every train in its tracks. Yes, if we did that we'd reach Kyoto targets, but no sane government would choose a painful method to reach Kyoto when economically rational and sensible approaches remain untried. Clever rhetorical devise, but not true.

Similarly, she added a new piece of scaremongering on October 5th, that prices for natural gas and electricity would spike. This would be true only if these sectors were the only ones to be engaged in meeting the targets, and solely through domestic action, and of course, leaving those cars, trucks, planes, alone.

Ambrose claim 6:
"I can give you some examples of the money that was spent on international credits. I have in front of me a list representing at least $100 million that was used to purchase international credits. "

"I can go through the list and share it with you: $5 million went to the Canada-China consortium; $3.7 million to the State Development Planning Commission in China; $2 million to the State Power Corporation of China; $2.5 million to Global Investment Management for Panama; and $375,000 to Paraguay...."

"I could go on: $5 million was spent through the Asian Development Bank to be paid to the People's Republic, the Ministry of Science and Technology in China; $4.2 million through the World Bank to be paid to the regional areas of China, India, and other Asian countries; $2.3 million to the South Pacific; $3 million to Bangladesh; another $2 million to the State Power Corporation of China; $1.5 million to the Government of India."

"I could go on and on. There are hundreds of millions of dollars in the purchase of international credits ..."

Reality Check:

Thanks to Sun media this outrageous misrepresentation has received media attention. Despite Minister Ambrose's claim that $100 million in international credits have been purchased, in fact, none have. Not one penny has been spent on international credits.

The list from which she was reading was a list of Canadian International Development Agency projects (CIDA). CIDA has a climate change program. It is nothing but a positive step to have aided developing countries embrace low carbon technologies. It would be even better to see more projects within the clean development mechanism (CDM).

Following the Green Party Press Conference September 14, 2006 Minister Ambrose said her government had not yet decided whether or not to keep Canada's funding commitment to the Secretariat for the CDM. Her demonizing of CDM before the Committee makes it appear unlikely that the Harper government will fulfill the very modest $1.5 million pledge made by Canada at the COP11 meeting within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) last December 2005.

It will be important to pursue this point to see if the Harper Government is ready to commit to funding CDM.

Ambrose claim 7:
In replying to Stéphane Dion, Liberal MP:

"I think it's very important for you to send that signal that it's important for us to continue to work with our international partners, but to also recognize that the target by your government is not achievable."

Reality Check:

Former Environment Minister Stéphane Dion has not said the target is unachievable. In committee, Mr. Dion attempted to get his view on the record by way of point of order. Clearly Mr. Dion believes Canada can in fact reach its Kyoto targets.

Ambrose claim 8:
"I also indicated, as you know, that we do not have proper reporting and monitoring mechanisms in Canada right now for air quality objectives. We do not have national standards or national objectives because we do not have a national framework."

"This will be the first time the federal government will embark on a comprehensive approach from a national perspective to dealing with the issue of air pollution and greenhouse gases. It is an ambitious achievement, and it's an ambitious agenda."

Reality Check:

Canada already has the legislative framework in place to properly regulate emissions through the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). Contrary to Minister Ambrose's claims, Canada has had effective pollution legislation dating back to the 1970s when the federal government passed Canada's first act regulating harmful pollutants.

A team of environmental lawyers who obtained a copy of the Conservative government's expected Clean Air Act said expected amendments to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act do little to reduce air pollution and may even weaken the federal government's ability to regulate emissions.

In addition, the Sierra Club of Canada says the leaked copy of the bill does not enhance federal authority to control air pollution, greenhouse gases or reporting, enforcement, auditing and monitoring. The provisions of the bill, in fact, could delay important action to reduce emissions by allowing the provinces the option to opt out of CEPA regulations.

For more information:
Camille Labchuk
Media Relations
613-882-4761
clabchuk@greenparty.ca

Authorized by the Chief Agent of the Green Party of Canada
Information: media@greenparty.ca

Enviro Friendly Energy

2006-09-06T23:34:00.000-05:00

(thanks to Rene Chaudhuri for submitting this article)

Ontario Ignoring Two Darlingtons-worth of Environmentally-Friendly Energy
(Toronto: August 17, 2006)

Combined Heat and Power Plants an Untapped Alternative to Coal, Nuclear Power - Today, as the Ontario Power Authority closes the bidding on no more than a modest 1,000 megawatts of new electricity supply from combined heat and power plants, WWF-Canada expressed dismay that the province is failing to tap into thousands more megawatts of this environmentally friendly ‘recycled’ energy.

Combined heat and power (CHP), also known as co-generation, refers to installing specialized turbines to capture and ‘recycle’ the waste heat produced by industrial or commercial operations to produce electricity. Many of Ontario’s large and medium-sized industries are candidates for co-generation, which would allow them to use a waste (heat) to avoid purchasing huge amounts of electricity, and potentially sell electricity into the grid, while cleaning up the air and reducing fossil fuel pollution that causes global warming.

WWF-Canada called on the Ontario government to more aggressively pursue combined heat and power plants at facilities such as paper or steel mills, chemical and petroleum refineries, smelters, food processing plants, pipeline compressor stations, cement kilns and car manufacturing plants, as an alternative to coal and nuclear plants.

“Big industries use huge amounts of energy and often produce huge amounts of waste heat which they could be using to generate electricity,” said Keith Stewart, manager of WWF-Canada’s climate change campaign. “Recycling waste energy will help their bottom lines while helping to clean up our air and protect the climate.”

Approximately 2,000 MW of electricity is already produced at CHP facilities in Ontario (out of a total generating capacity of 30,000 MW). A government-commissioned report found that the technical potential for this kind of ‘recycled’ power is over 16,000 MW, and industry experts estimate that at least 9,000 MW are cost effective now. Yet the government’s 20-year electricity plan, released on June 13 2006, limits CHP development between now and 2025 to 1,000 MW.

To capture this potential, WWF-Canada called on the Ontario government to:

Ø Eliminate the 1,000 MW limit on combined heat and power projects, and instead pursue all cost-effective projects.
Ø Pay a fair price for electricity from CHP, including recognition of its environmental benefits and reduced transmission costs. .
Ø Remove policy barriers to CHP such as costly grid connection charges and staffing requirements.

“Instead of investing tens of billions in nuclear plants and pumping out millions more tonnes of pollutants from dirty coal plants, the McGuinty government should pursue the cleaner, faster and cheaper options, including getting ‘double-duty’ electricity from energy already being used at existing industries,” said Stewart.

Combined heat and power, along with dramatically cutting energy waste and investing in green power sources such as wind and water power, is the quickest, cheapest and most reliable way to end Ontario’s dependence on dirty coal and dangerous, debt-plagued nuclear plants. Details regarding CHP’s potential were laid out in a report released last month by the David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, Ontario Clean Air Alliance, Pembina Institute, Sierra Club of Canada and WWF-Canada.

For more information:

Dr. Keith Stewart
Manager, Climate Change Campaign
WWF-Canada
416-489-4567 ext. 7257 or 416-985-5936 (cellular)
kstewart@wwfcanada.org

New Find: Pine Trees as old as Dinosaurs

2006-09-06T21:56:00.000-05:00

(with thanks to Rene Chaudhuri - Don Valley East)

"Ancient pine shown to be from the age of dinosaurs", by Marita Black

An ancient pine tree discovered in Sydney's "back yard" and hailed as one of the botanical finds of the century has been confirmed by ANU researchers and colleagues to belong to a new genus of plants previously known only as fossils from the dinosaur era.

The grove of around 40 pine trees was found last year by an officer from the National Parks and Wildlife Service at the bottom of a deep gorge, in the Wollemi National Park of the Blue Mountains. The tree, informally named "Wollemi Pine", was identified as belonging to the Araucariaceae family whose
members also include the New Zealand Kauri, New Norfolk Pine and the Queensland Hoop Pine. However the new tree failed to fit into either of the living two genera of the family, so the search began for possible relatives from the fossil record.

Dr Mike Macphail of the newly formed Division of Archaeology and Natural History in the ANU's Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies (RSPAS), was enlisted to examine pollen from the Wollemi Pine with the aim of ientifying and comparing it with other fossil pollen types. Other experts at the Australian Geological Survey Organisation (AGSO) and the Royal Botanic Gardens in Sydney were studying other aspects of the tree, such as the leaves and cones.

Before pollen from the Wollemi Pine became available, the closest match to the species in the fossil record were leaves of a conifer called Araucariodies, preserved in 50-65 million year old sediments in New Zealand and Tasmania. Dr. Mcphail found the pollen to be a match to a fossil pollen type first described
in Victoria in the early 1960s and now known to have occurred up to 90 million years ago. This means that the Wollemi Pine would have been part of the landscape when dinosaurs roamed.

Fossil pollen and spores are often used to provide a history for living plants. The age and location of fossil pollens allow species to be traced over time and place, building up an evolutionary framework. Pollen is a reliable marker to look for as it produced by plants in vast amounts and survives very well
over time due to the strength of its cell wall. The appearance of pollen from different plants is also very distinctive which means that precise identification is often possible.

Thanks to petroleum exploration data, the Wollemi Pine has a well-established fossil history. It is thought to have been moderately common in rainforest up to around 30 million years ago, growing in Tasmania, at Bega and Bombala and around a meteor impact crater near Perth. The most recent specimens have been found in two million year old sediments in Bass Strait.

It is quite remarkable that the Wollemi Pine has been able to survive 90 million years on Australian soil, through periods of major global warming and cooling. Over this time, the Australian continent has "drifted" from a position adjacent to Antarctica to its modern position next to Asia.

"Why the Wollemi Pine has survived in apparently only one of many similar gorges in the Blue Mountains is a mystery," said Dr Macphail. "Long-term protection from fire and drought due to the rugged landscape and reduced competition from other plants due to infertile soils would not have been unhelpful in the recent past."

Unfortunately it appears that humans now pose the greatest threat to the survival of this ancient plant. Despite attempts to protect the grove's location, unauthorised visits have taken place.

Presenter: Jerry Coleby-Williams [08/10/2005]

Jerry profiles the ancient and remarkable Wollemi Pine

This is a story about one of the world's rarest and most ancient tree species. Incredibly, it narrowly escaped extinction, yet it will soon be offered to home gardeners so we can grow our own.

It’s a wollemi pine, a member of the Araucaria family, which also includes the kauri, bunya, hoop and Norfolk Island pines. It's a conifer, but a very curious one.

In 1994 we only knew them from fossils, but a chance discovery in a rugged gorge in the Blue Mountains, about 200 kilometres west of Sydney, revealed a grove of these ancient plants dating back 200 million years.

Mount Annan Botanic Gardens in south western Sydney is undertaking groundbreaking research into these plants. This includes looking after a conservation collection of the entire wollemi pine species. The gardens holds a clone of each of the 100 or so known plants to exist in the wild.

Wollemi pine world authority, Patricia Meagher, says there are many reasons to want one of these plants. “It's got wonderful leaves, very glossy, quite fine, and ferny looking, with a nice structure. In winter and autumn the plants develop a resin cap on the branches as protection from the cold and dry.

“The plants also have wonderful bubbly bark when they get older - in about 15 years you'd have good thick, bubbly bark.

“It’s possible to tell the age of branches on the trees by the leaf shape. Watch for the growth phase of long leaves and then small leaves and then long leaves in the middle and then small leaves. Each is a year's growth. So it’s possible to tell how well the tree is growing and the age of any branch by looking at the amount of growth phases on it. The branches are temporary and are eventually dropped.

“The natural architecture of the tree should be used to horticultural advantage. These plants can be used as pot plants and as small trees in the garden, and naturally as a large tree. Because it's a rainforest tree, it also grows well indoors, so it can be used as a pot plant inside.”

Patricia says, horticulturally, we have reached the jackpot. This plant has so many features for a home gardener . “Scientifically, every single time we've looked at the tree to learn anything about it, we've discovered something new and very unusual.”

She says the trees are quite fast growers. They are slow at first while getting their root systems organised, but then grow half a metre to nearly a metre a year. So they power along.

Patricia agrees the wollemi pine has generated lots of interest. “I'm fascinated by it and I know lots of scientists and horticulturists are amazed. But I'm astounded by the interest of the general public,” she said.

I'm completely sympathetic with people who find it fascinating because it comes from the age of dinosaurs, and has been around for 200 million years. There are few left in the wild….but it grows within 200 kilometres of Sydney - one of the most thoroughly botanically explored areas of the country. It's more Australian than Sydney Harbour Bridge and it just reeks with charisma.

Growing a plant that's almost extinct is not that hard. Provide an acid or neutral soil, dig in plenty of compost and it loves food and water. It grows anywhere you can grow its cousin, the Norfolk Island pine, and it will reach about 20 metres in 50 years and 30 metres in 100 years.

The wollemi pine will be a terrific plant for the home garden. You might want to plant it for its rarity or perhaps because it's a unique example of plant evolution. They're a long lived tree so you could well be planting a family heirloom. But the reason I'd plant one of these trees is to have a living connection with the age of dinosaurs.

If you're keen to get your own wollemi pine, a collector's edition will be auctioned in a few weeks. Otherwise, in April next year, it will be available from nurseries.

****

Further information:
The Wollemi pine collector’s auction is at 3pm Sunday October 23 at the Royal Botanic Gardens Sydney. Catalogues are available online at www.wollemipine.com email auction@wollemipine.com

--------------------------------

There's a nice website profiling the tree. Cut and paste the following site:

All about Money

2006-07-27T11:59:00.000-05:00

Hi Everyone,

I hope everyone is having a great summer. I will be doing a series of emails over the next month or so on different topics. As always I look forward to your comments. This will also be posted on my blog www.wayneclements.blogspot.com.

For those of you who are Green Party members I hope to see you at the Annual General meeting in Ottawa this August. For those of you who are members and won't be going to Ottawa, you should have received ballots in the mail to elect a new Green Party leader, new Council members and to vote on certain constitutional amendments. These must be mailed in (postmarked no later than) August 4th.

For those of you who are not yet Green Party members we need you to sign up (go to www.greenparty.ca). Yearly membership is free with a $ 10.00 (non-election time) donation. Being a member allows you to vote for Council Members as indicated above and allows you to participate at the local level as well.

It looks like the Conservatives are going to reduce the amount each person can contribute on a yearly basis, likely because the Liberals have many donors who contribute $ 5,000.00 while most donors for the Conservatives contribute on average $ 200.00. (In the last election Conservatives raised more money than the Liberals by a 2 to 1 margin, more than the NDP by a 4 to 1 margin and the Green Party by about … 20 or more to 1.). Rasing money is not one of our strong points.

Fall Election?

It looks more and more like we will have a Federal Election in the fall (I'd say over 50% chance now). Harper has set a fixed election date for 2009 and he also said in the spring of 2006 that he would have an election within the year. He constantly says that he could not do what he wanted to do (i.e. implement the legislation he prommised in his last election) because he doesn’t have a majority. The Liberal's are still headless and recent events have removed their leadership campaign from the headlines and perhaps even the consciousness of the Canadian Public. The only reason not to have an election in the fall is that people may already have reached their political contribution limit for the year and that there may be some backlash saying this election call was opportunistic.

Lebanon Evacuation

Harper's recent decision to fly home from Paris via Cypress bringing back a plan load of stranded Canadians is playing very well in the media and is further diminishing the "fear" that was in the minds of Canadians of a Harper led Conservative majority.

I think it is a good thing that he did this. Political gesture or not, it was the right thing to do. In general, this situation highlights how unprepared the government is for such events however and that is not just a Conservative issue but also a Liberal issue who was in power for many years prior and in my mind the ambassadors we have in those countries. Go figure we have a war in the middle east - what a surprise? Extensive evacuation plans should have been drafted years in advance and updated annually. I hope that the government remedies this in the future so this situation is not repeated.

Conservative Spring 2006 Budget - All show little substance

I know the Conservative budget is now old news but I did want to say a few things about it. How is it that the Liberal's and NDP conveniently missed the vote in parliament allowing the budget to pass through without debate and without amendments? [The Bloq actually were supporting the budget so we can't count them]. Either they are both incredibly inept or … or I don't know or what.. I hesitate to call it a conspiracy of the parties in opposition not to challenge the budget.. I think I'll stay with inept.

The budget is designed to be all show. It does focus on Harper's 5 priorities as promised though much of that is cut back.
As Jeffrey Simpson said in the Globe and Mail: "This Conservative minority government is determined to win a majority by highly visible, tightly targeted, largely ineffectual but politically attractive policies, and will worry later, after winning a majority, about the big issues on which the country's future economic and social welfare depends. So popcorn and candy now; steak and potatoes later."
The budget offers short term comfort and does not look toward increasing productivity or prosperity in the long term. The budget puts $ 200 million into R and D which is our future and $ 2 billion into farm subsidies - Forsake the long term for the short term.

Keep in mind the Conservative platform 2006 says they will cut $ 22.5 billion from federal expenses but we wont see that until they have a majority. They have said they will find $ 2 billion over the next year - per this budget.

Good News in the Budget

Post secondary students who received bursaries and scholarships were taxed on amounts above $ 3,000.00. With the budget these are now fully exempt. There are also tax breaks for students to buy text books. [Of course some provinces deduct the amount a student receives in this way from any grants or loans they provide (claw back) and a tax credit for books only helps you if you pay taxes which many students don't.

GST

GST notes: The GST in its current incarnation is a really dumb tax in that it taxes the good and the bad equally. So books and feminine products are taxed, the same as doughnuts (bought individually but not if you buy more than 5 of course - who thought that one up?). The GST was brought in by the Conservatives in 1991 to replace the MST (manufacturer's sales tax) which was a necessary step for free trade. The government is still (after 15 years) dealing with trying to implement a new computer system to replace the old system that was cobbled together in 18 months when the GST was first introduced by the Conservatives.

Reducing the GST:

It costs the same to collect the GST regardless of the GST rate. So it costs the same to collect 5% or 6% GST as it does 7%.

GST accounts for 15% of government revenues - a 1% cut will cost the government about $ 4.35 billion in revenue per year. (E.I. Premiums account for almost 10% of revenues, Corporate Income tax 15% and Personal Income tax 45%).

Many companies will not reduce their prices to reflect the lower GST so the companies will benefit not the consumer.

Most countries around the world are reducing income taxes and raising consumption taxes. Reducing the GST goes against this trend.

To help pay for the GST reduction, the lowest tax rate increased from 15% to 15.5%.

Cutting income taxes is better than cutting the GST, because people only benefit from GST cuts when they spend whereas people benefit from income taxes cuts whether they save, invest or spend.

The GST may increase consumption because things are "cheaper" but many of those benefits will be lost on the Canadian economy because they will be spend on imports.

The Best thing about the GST cut is that it looks good - so cutting GST is perhaps good politics but not good economics.

Family Allowance Payment

$ 100.00 (taxable) per month per child to families with kids up to 6 years of age is another move that sounds good and certainly appeals to the typical Conservative supporter but again is not really that helpful. My biggest problem with it, is this again represents government not appreciating they are spending our money. Money that we worked hard for and give to them through taxes so they can use it wisely (well we can all hope). I think there are many people who do not need this money and therefore should not get it. How many people noticed that their day care rates went up after the budget?

Spending More Money

The Conservative budget represents an increase in spending over the Liberals - in fact $ 16.7 billion more than the last Liberal budget. The only reason the Conservatives can do this is because of huge unexpected revenues of $ 4 to 5 billion per year thanks in large part to high oil and gas prices. Remember the 2004 election where Harper promised to cap increased taxes on gas once it surpassed 80 cents a litre? You did not see that in the 2006 election because he needs that extra revenue.

The finance department has for decades fought to simplify the tax system by applying broad based rather than target taxes and tax cuts. The Conservatives have reversed this trend with credits for enrolling kids in sports and transit passes etc. All things that sound good but in reality do very little and the cost to administer these programs are likely more than the benefit that those targeted would receive. These are all moves to buy a majority government and really don't have anything to do with long term prosperity for Canadians. In fact, the Conservatives and Liberals have been keen to keep on spending money as fast as revenues increased to the point where the 2006 budget is about $ 50 billion more per year than it was when the first surplus was declared by Paul Martin. When the economy decides to slow or go into a recession - which we know will happen at some point - all this focus on more spending and not paying down the $ 500 billion debt will catch up to us and if you thought Paul Martin could cut programs wait till you see what Mike Harris I mean a Ralph Klein I mean a Steven Harper Government can do.

The Environment

The budget has almost nothing in it for the environment or global warming. One small paragraph out of a 25 page document. There is a tax credit for those who already take transit however it is unlikely this pittance will be enough to get people to switch to public transit. I don't have a huge problem with some of the funding being taken away from Kyoto since I don't think the Liberals were getting very far with it anyway. I do have a problem that they cut R and D - this is a huge problem. 30% of the Green houses gases generated in Canada now come from Alberta where it takes the equivalent of 1 barrel of energy to get 2 barrels of oil. [Total GHG are up 24% since 1990.] They are using coal to separate the oil from the sand. Burning coal is why Canada's Green House Gases are up with respect to the U.S. and because much of the Conservative support comes from Alberta you are not going to see the Conservatives do much about this.

The Conservatives propose instead a "made in Canada plan" to reduce smog - as if the plans to meet Kyoto were made elsewhere. Keep in mind that most countries that signed Kyoto have met their targets or are on their way to meeting their targets by the 2012 deadline.

The Green Solution

OK so I have spent the last few paragraphs saying how the Conservative's are buying the next election which by the way the Liberal's tried to do as well. So what would the Green Party do different? I personally would like to see a cap on spending at least until the debt is paid off. So if we cap spending at say $ 180 billion per year, we work to improve how efficient that money is being spent and any surpluses go to paying down the debt and reducing taxes. I believe there is already more than enough money in the system to do what we need to do. The Green Party would look at long term solutions - not just what will help us to win the next election. Specifically the Green Party would reform the tax system (slowly so as not to adversely affect the economy). The Green Party would like to see all income tax ended and replaced with a Green consumption tax. While this is not likely to happen at least not in the near future, it is the way most countries in the world are moving. The consumption tax would tax polluting products and unsustainable practices such as mining. We can easily add taxes to the mining of commodities in Canada and let the countries that are buying up our resources (China and so forth) pay for our social programs. This is deceptively simple but very effective.

Questions - let me know.

Upcoming issues will deal with the Green Party Leadership election, Global warming and more.

May 2006 Newsletter

2006-06-04T18:18:00.000-05:00

Thank you! I'd like to start by thanking all the people who supported the green Party in the last federal campaign with their vote, their words of encouragement, putting a Green Party sign on their lawn and by making donations of time and/or money. It was a huge success thanks to you. I also want to thank all who voted Green or otherwise because all of our votes are important. Thank you so much.

Election Results - The poll by poll results are now out and the results were quite gratifying for the Green Party. Nationally we are up over 14%, provincially up 16% and in Don Valley East up almost 50%. In Don Valley East, we got the highest number of votes in the poll where I live. In the surrounding polls where I was personally able to knock on doors we did very well and this was followed by the polls where we had flyers delivered. To me this means the flyer we used (which was packed with info.) was well received and that the more people know we exist the more votes we will get. We could only get flyers out to about 4,000 people (out of 40,000) due to a shortage of money, people power and experience, all things we hope to improve on in our next election.

Other Green Election Successes - The Green Party received 665,940 votes nationally, up almost 100,000 votes from the prior election. We had 8 ridings with over 10% of the vote; up from 3 the previous election. 10% is an important marker because candidates that reach that level will have 50% of the ridings campaign expenses reimbursed by the government. We had one riding that placed second and two ridings that placed 3rd. Most importantly all the polling companies asked specifically about the Green Party when polling though many still displayed the results as other.

What do the election results mean for the Green Party? To me it means that the 2004 election where we did so well with over half a million voters is not a fluke and that there are many Canadians that firmly believe that the policies of the Green Party are a viable alternative to what is being offered by the other parties. In fact the other parties are borrowing/stealing/adopting our policy as their own and this is good news for all Canadians. The number of votes also gives us more leverage to pressure the private companies to let the Green Party be part of the televised debate.

Wasted Votes - There was much discussion about whether a vote for the Green Party or any party other than the only two parties who currently had a chance at a majority was a "wasted" vote. First thing is that any party that gets over 2% of the national vote, gets $ 1.75 per vote per year from the Federal government paid quarterly until the next election. Second thing is the more votes for the Green Party the more the other parties are going to change their policy to get those votes. Under our current system any ridings that tend to vote the same way all the time (ours for example), you could say that a vote for any other party is a wasted vote and that is why we need to change our system - so every vote counts.

Democracy in Canada - The only 3 countries in the western world that use our "first past the post system" are The U.K., The U.S. and Canada. All other countries have changed to a more democratic form of proportional representation where every vote counts. Check out "fairvotecanada.org". Currently Canada ranks 109th out of 163 countries in terms of voter turnout. In Ontario in 2000, 2.3 million voters elected 100 Liberals, while the other 2.2 million voters only elected 3 MPs. The Ontario Provincial government has announced the formation of a citizen's assembly to assess other voting alternatives. If the assembly recommends a new voting system, the proposal will go a referendum to be held before or in conjunction with the next provincial election in 2007. There are 5 other provinces now looking at reforming the electoral system.

What is Proportional Representation? There are many forms of P.R. At its purest it means that you take all the votes for the country and the seats are given to parties based on their percentage of the vote. So if the Green party got 10% of the vote nationally, they would get 10% of 308 seats or 30-31 seats in Parliament. The people that fill these seats typically come from a list that the party supplies and makes public before the vote. The Green Party would like to see a mixed system which is a combination of our current system, so 1/3 of the Members of Parliament are elected to represent a riding like they are now and the other 2/3s are elected based on the percentage of popular vote.

What are the advantages of P.R.? Under P.R. governments, every vote counts so the government better reflects the votes cast by the people, you tend to have more females elected (a dismal 21% of MPs in Canada are female) and you get a higher voter turnout. Bills that are passed tend to be better thought out because there is input from more than party and policies are less partisan. Currently if a party has a majority, they do not have to and often don't listen to any input from the opposition, even when it is constructive.

Do you not get more unstable governments with P.R.? This is a common scare tactic by those that wish to maintain the status quo. The system does mean that majorities are rare and that coalitions need to be formed. Italy and Israel are often used as examples of what is bad about P.R. however they are only 2 of over 75 countries and don't reflect how P.R. is implemented by most countries. If you look at the other 70 or so countries using P.R. you will find that the average time between elections is similar to those using first past the post systems. So you get better, stable government.

Ok - enough on that topic already - lets move on… Locally...
Raccoons disappearing? We live in a townhouse on a ravine and I noticed last year that there were fewer raccoons than the past and this year even fewer. They are a pain because they are very clever at opening garbage cans and if we are not extra careful with our garbage the little bandits leave us with a mess to clean up. One of our neighbours is concerned that someone is poisoning the raccoons and showed me some fish that she found laid out in the ravine, that seems to have been injected with something (smelled like linseed oil). While this is ONLY conjecture at this point please be careful allowing your pets to run free etc. This is in the Valleywoods and Brookbanks area.

Cleaning up the neighbourhood. We all live here and its up to all of us to keep it looking presentable. Setting the example for your kids is the best thing you can do - i.e. don't litter. Also if you have a few minutes, volunteer your kids, grab a garbage bag and find a place that no one seems to be looking after and pick up the garbage. Not exciting or glamorous but if everyone does a little it makes a big difference.

Internet - Protect your Kids - The best way to protect your kids is to keep the computers out of their rooms and in an open area. Make sure you talk to them about the risks. Any other ideas? Send them to me so I can include them in the next issue.

Identity Theft - How to protect yourself. The first thing is shred your bills/personal information. Another is to get a credit card with a low limit to use online so even if it is stolen your exposure is minimal.

Cancer - In Canada, the odds for getting cancer are almost 40% now and closing in on 50%. About 1/3 of those will die from cancer. This does NOT have to be.
Yes there are things that we can do to prevent cancer (see www.ontario.cancer.ca) but there are other things that must be done including getting the cancer causing pollution out of the air and water and soil where we grow our food. This will help us stay healthy and is the only way to keep health care costs down so we have a viable health care system. The current health care system - private or public is not viable.

Green Party Elections - There is a mandatory election of a Green Party Leader every 2 years at the federal Level - not just a review. In August there will be a policy convention in Ottawa, part of which includes the election of the Green Party Leader. I hope that many of you will join the party and vote by mail or in person. If there is any policy you want changed or added we need your input there as well.

Energy - Provincially there is a big discussion on our future in terms of power. It looks like the government has chosen to go nuclear. Nuclear does not give off green house gases but we are left with toxic waste and the uranium mines are also toxic. In addition while the cost of operating a nuclear plant is not too high (relatively), it becomes very expensive once you include actual costs and decommissioning of the plants when they are no longer useful (25 to 35 years). At present we are paying off $20 billion dollars of debt which resulted from cost over runs when building nuclear plants. We are better offer focusing on conservation and renewable energy.

Harper - I was disappointed with the appointments of a non-elected person and Emerson to cabinet. I am glad Harper went to Afghanistan but am not convinced that is the best use of our resources especially when in another department we are cutting aid to Afghanistan. It looks good on the surface but makes no sense. To pay for the GST he has already stopped an income tax cut that was coming and is cutting other programs including 40% cuts to climate change programs the worst of which is that he is cutting research in this area. Ontario is still bleeding manufacturing jobs and I have seen no plan (from any level of government) to resolve this.

Currently Being Discussed on the Green Party List Serve - Energy, Climate Change, the Middle East - various topics, Kyoto, the Seal hunt, US Canada Relations - those interested I suggest you create a g-mail account and join. E-mail me for more details.

I am out of room - I wanted to make this only one page long (front and back) and I know I have exceeded that so I'll stop here. If you do not want this delivered to your door please call me at 416-805-9296 or e-mail me at wayne@bswi.com and I will remove you from the delivery list for the next 12 months or until the next election. If you prefer to receive this by email please let me know that as well. Let me know what topics you want covered in the next edition. If you have friends or family that would like to see this in another language, let me know and I will see what I can do to accommodate. Your thoughts, ideas and support are vital to our future.

Please feel free to circulate this on to others. Wishing you and your family all the best!

Sierra Club of Canada ranks Green Party # 1

2006-01-17T20:40:00.000-05:00

The Sierra Club also said we were responsbile in getting our platform out early, so people had time to examine it and that our policy was much more thorough.

The Conservatives ranked below the Bloq, way down the list.

Live CFRB Commercial - 1 minute aired 4:20 Jan 17, 2006

2006-01-17T20:04:00.000-05:00

The platforms of the status quo parties are designed to win votes but not to solve problems for the long term . Their economic policy depends on the economy continuing to grow and that is not realistic. As the dollar rises and more manufacturing jobs are lost the status quo parties will be forced to reneg on their promises, cut social programs or go into more debt. Similarly get tough on crime policy sounds good but when you look at the facts it does not prevent crime. If it did we would feel safer in the U.S. then in Canada.
Green Party policy balances the economy, social programs and the environment with strong focus on long term solutions that are sustainable economically.
Canada needs to hear more from the Green Party. The Green Party was again shut out of the televised debates,, even though we had over half a million votes last election and even though we have a candidate in every riding. Votes for the Green Party will tell the 5 private media companies that you want to hear from another voice in the next election. Truly stand up for Canada and democracy and vote green on January 23rd.

Speech to LINC school

2006-01-06T12:43:00.001-05:00

On December 20th I attended my first all candidates panel at a LINC school in the Beaches-East York riding (filling in for Jim Harris who was traveling the country). Thank you to Michael for organizing this. Here is the text of my speech - sorry that it is point form. If I get a chance I will edit it...

- introduction

- I will answer your questions as honestly and as specifically as I can and if I cant answer them I will follow up with answers to Michael if thats ok

- you have a very good riding here with very strong candidates Maria Minna Federal Member of Parliament, Marilyn Churley Provincial Member of Parliament, Peter Conroy business person and you have the leader of the Green Party
- you have choice every election very important that you look at the candidate and what the party stands for

- How many have heard of the green party?

- without boring you too much I want to give you a quick lesson of who the green party is

- The first Green Party New Zealand in 1970 35 years later there are Green Parties in over 100 countries around the world

- Africa (Egypt and South Africa),
- Asia (China, Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Iran)
- Europe (Russia)
- North America
- South America (Costa Rica, Brazil, Chile)

there are green members in governing coalitions in Mexico, New Zealand, Italy, Germany and France with members elected in over 30 countries around the world in BC 12 Greens were just elected to city council.

In Canada almost 600,000 people voted for the Green Party in the last election and we are going to do even better in this election

Why is that? Why are so many people voting green?

David Suzuki seminar -
- air travels, within 1 year someone on the other side of the world will be breathing the same air

- if I pollute the air here I pollute the air there, the environment knows no boundaries

- one person polluting, 2 people 3 (invite them) up we have long ago surpassed the planets ability to clean up after us not based on number of people by the way NA- more than 100 times someone from India

And that leads us to one thing that is very important to the green party

The Green Party recognizes the fact that there is only one earth and that we all have to live together as neighbours on this planet.

- so the green party stands for environment not because its a nice thing to do but because our lives your life and my life, the air we breath, the water we drink the food we eat depends on it without a healthy environment we can have no health

- the green party is about more than the environment it is about social justice

When I grew up I watched on TV, commercials for organizations that raised money for food and other things for poor countries. Canada is richer even then we were at that time. Yet those commercials are still on TV why are people starving no one argues there is enough food.

But it gets worse in 1989 all the parties adopted a resolution to end poverty in Canada by the year 2000. In 2005 there are more children being raised in Canada poverty then in 1989 over 1,1 million people people that depend on food banks to get by

The Green Party finds this and many other social issues totally unacceptable.

The Green Party is also fiscally responsible. Many of us own and operate small business and we do not like wasting money.

The Green Party believes that all the social woes that Canada faces can be solved in a responsibly financial manner. Not heavier taxes but not cutting taxes either.

And there is one more thing that the Green Party stands for that separates us from any of the other parties here.

The Green Party thinks long term not just about what can we do to get elected but what decisions can we make today so that our children and grand children will have healthy and happy life.

In fact we think with 7 generations in mind. This is based on the Iroquois way of thinking in that we can only know our generation, 3 in the past and 3 in the future.

Election 2006 - Green Party TV Commercial on Rogers

2006-01-06T12:05:00.000-05:00

17 days to go.... and so many things happening. The full list of events is at the bottom my other website www.wayneclements.ca under the section "What's new".

I do have to say a big thank you to Rogers for providing all candidates with the opportunity to a) make the commercial on their premises and b) airing the commercial on their station 4 times (once in prime time) all at no charge. Particularly I want to thank Carol Bruce and her staff at Rogers who helped with this project for doing such a great job.

Of course we all know that one of the objectives of this campaign is for the Green Party to get 1 million or more votes so that the 5 executives that decide who gets on the National Televised Debates MUST put us on the next debate. We know that once the Reform and Bloq were on the debate - they got seats so I suspect there is some pressure not to let us on.

Stay strong - vote Green for a country we can all be proud of.

Here is the commercial I did for Rogers - It will be on 4 times. I was nervous but I think I did a reasonable job for my first time. Let me know you think about what I said.

Here is what I had planned to say...

Hi, my name is Wayne Clements and I am your Green Party Candidate for Don Valley East.

The Green party was the choice of almost 600,000 Canadians in the last election and will be the choice of almost 1,000,000 Canadians on January 23rd.

Who is voting Green?

People from all walks of life, every age group, and ethnic diversity, are now voting GREEN.

People who in the past have voted Liberal or Conservative or NDP are voting Green.

Why is that? What is it about the Green Party that people are finding so attractive?

The Green Party offers an achievable vision of hope for Canadians.

The Green Party stands for strong social programs, with national standards. How does this differ from the other parties? We believe that these standards are best met with decisions made and implemented at the local level. We believe in decentralization because we all know that those closest to a problem have the best idea of what it takes to solve a problem.

A vote for Green is for a government who is financially responsible. Other parties are talking about tax cuts in hopes of luring you to vote for them Â at what cost? The money has to come from somewhere. Will it be more cuts to health care? To education? Have we not already gone through that? The tax cuts are based on short term thinking which is what devastated our health care system and education system in the first place.

The Green Party believes that Canadians pay enough taxes and that there is enough money in the system now to solve most if not all of our social problems. It is a matter of spending money more wisely, with the long term in mind.

The Green Party thinks long term so that we have a good place to live now and it remains a good place to live for our children and grandchildren. Green Party policy is developed by people like you Â people at the front lines and not people in ivory towers that are disconnected from what is really going on. I invite you to go to the Green Party website. www.greenparty.ca or call me at 416-564-5003 to find out more. The website is www.greenparty.ca and the telephone number is 416-564-5003.

On January 23rd vote for the Green Party.

What is the cost of Low Prices

2005-12-07T07:46:00.000-05:00

Are low prices always a good thing?

I received the following e-mail from my niece...

John Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6am. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG). He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA). After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) and continued his search for a good paying CANADIAN JOB. At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in CANADA....

Here is my response.

Your email Colleen is quite valid. In fact over the past year Canada has lost over 100,000 manufacturing jobs due to the weak US dollar (not the strong Canadian dollar) and to increased competition from countries that have lower wage rates, usually no benefits and no health or environmental safeguards.

Canadian manufacturing was insulated by a weak Canadian dollar so manufacturing did not have to become more productive and now companies can't retool and increase productivity fast enough. Economists have been worried about that for years and now it is coming to reality.

The unemployment rate in Canada is at its lowest level in 30 years because a) the housing sector is still booming because of low interest rates and b) because the manufacturing jobs were replaced by lower paying service jobs.

Once interest rates go up (they went up again yesterday), the housing market will cool off rapidly. In the GTA most people are carrying a $ 200.000 mortgage. A 1% increase in the interest rate will result in increased monthly payments of about $ 166.00 per month - not too bad but if the rate goes up by 4% (which is possible), this would be over $ 600.00 per month which would force many into bankruptcy.

The rising price of oil will only make this problem worse because many people commute great distances to work. The price of oil is not going to go down much further because a) the economy seems to have been able to absorb the high price and not collapse so there is no incentive for OPEC to drop the price b) demand for oil by North America is still increasing and demand for oil in China and India is exploding (as manufacturing shifts there) and something that has not been a factor is that there is a finite supply of oil in the ground.

While there are some who would argue we have lots of oil - these people are getting fewer and fewer. Oil takes 150 million years to make. We started using oil in earnest 100 years ago and have used about 1 trillion barrels of oil. Best estimates are that we have 2 trillion barrels left. We are at the point where most of the easy to access oil has been used (Iraq being the last source of easy to access oil) and at the point where we are now we are using oil faster then we are finding new sources of oil. New found oil is under the sea, mixed with sand (Alberta) and under the Arctic.

Cheap oil is certainly gone - Extracting oil from the tar sands takes 1 barrel for every 3 (or is it 2) produced. Plus it takes a great deal of water to separate the oil from the sand and the level of most rivers that are used for this have lowered considerably because the glaciers are disappearing (faster now because of global warming).

Wal-Mart is the poster child for all that it is wrong with major corporations and globalization - and for good reason. It is 4 times bigger than home depot its closest competitor. It employs 1 out of 115 people in the U.S., accounts for 10% of the U.S trade imbalance with China, has sales of $ 288 billion (roughly twice the budget of the Government of Canada) , contributes hugely to urban sprawl since each store needs about 20 acres of land and most people have to drive to get there, and forces wage rates down in the retail industry...and that is just for starters.

Wal-Mart sets up a store and immediately local businesses start to close up shop. Wal-Mart is a very efficient machine. People go there because they think its cheap (and it often is) and that you get more variety. Wal-Mart carries many lines but you get less selection then you would have if those 20 specialty stores that use to sell that product had stayed open.

So what price is this low cost? Wal-Mart has been able to keep the unions out which means we have an entire class of working poor - Barely above minimum wage. This causes downward pressure on labour costs because in order to compete with Wal-Mart on price they can only pay low wages. So when you have a class of working poor who has to pick up the social costs - well we all do - crime increases, medical costs increase etc.

Bypass the bidding process....

2005-11-11T11:22:00.000-05:00

"We have neglected our military for so long that now we are in a crises and we are going to resolve this by bypassing normal purchasing procedures." Bidding may be bypassed in $ 12.2 billion military deal - see Globe and Mail - November 10th - see Nov 16 update at the end of this post...

Adscam would likely not have happened if everyone followed the rules that exist today and existed when all that happened but I guess some take longer to learn things than others.

Chief of Defence staff Rick Hillier wants to fast track the procurement of 50 military aircraft because the need is so urgent. The normal process takes years. If this fast tracking is allowed to happen a) it shows the Liberals have not learned anything and b) the Canadian aerospace and defence industry could lose the biggest defence procurement contracts in a generation.

This at a time when the high Canadian dollar is costing Canada well paying manufacturing jobs and the only thing keeping the economy moving is the low interest rates which are fueling housing development.

They meet to discuss this on Monday November 14th - Call your MP please.

November 16th - Update - General Hillier presented his plan to cabinet ministers on Monday which outlined very specific requirements, within a very short time frame for delivery (3 years). These requirements can be met by Italy's Alenia C-27J SaR and the U.S.-made Hercules transport plane and Chinook helicopter. While other companies may bid on the project it is unlikely any would be able to meet the 3 year time frame because they would have to develop the aircraft. This would mean Canadian companies would be shut out of the process.

In business, when there is an RFQ (Request For Quotation), issued, there is often a company that has helped to write the specifications for the RFQ. If that company happens to have connections to or actually be one of the companies that will be part of the "fair" bidding process and may end up supplying the good or service, they often slant the specifications in their favour so only they can fully meet the criteria thereby eliminating the competition and allowing them to charge a higher price.

This may or may not have happened here, but it certainly does not look good and you would think that the Liberals would want to look as fair and unbiased as possible.

General Hillier says it is vital we push this through as quickly as possible. Too bad. Since when is this country run by Generals? The General says that our troops in Afghanistan need them. Oh really? First of all what are they doing now without them? Second of all, if the troops are not equipped to do their job now (and the aircraft are 3 years away) maybe we should just bring them home or change their objective? Thirdly, if these are tailored to the work we are now doing in Afghanistan, who says we will be doing the same work in 3 years when they are ready or 20 years when we are somewhere else?

To my knowledge (and I am certainly not an aircraft engineer so correct me if I am wrong), there is no reason that a Canadian company such as Bombardier could not make these planes, given enough time. Would a 6 year delivery be that much worse than a 3 year, if it meant the products were made in Canada, by Canadians?

[After all we just guaranteed a 1.5 billion dollar loan to Air Canada so they could buy planes from Bombardier. (August 2004). We also provide Bombardier loans at very low interest rates in order to win other business around the world, a practice that has been ruled as unfair by the World Trade Organization..But I digress].

As of now the decision has been postponed till after the election - make sure you ask the Liberals about this during the election.

Alaska oil drilling plans stopped - for now

2005-11-11T06:40:00.000-05:00

Since George Bush took office, there has been extreme pressure to solve the U.S.'s oil problems by finding and developing more "local" oil reserves. To achieve this, the Bush government has given billions of dollars to U.S. oil firms to be spent on local exploration.

The problem is even if the company's do find more, it will not be nearly enough to offset their reliance on off shore oil. "Peak Oil" which is the time when oil is consumed at a faster rate then it can be found, was arrived at in the U.S. back in the 1970s when there was a big push on local reserves as a result of the formation of OPEC.

However these companies want more money from the government and have pointed to Alaska as their best source of new oil and of course their best bet there happens to be in the centre of an Alaskan wildlife refuge.

As of now they have stopped the plans to drill in this area. For now. Expect the pressure to continue. It is interesting that there are some Pro Bush people pointing to this as evidence that Bush is not so bad for the environment. In my view a) this is only a temporary reprieve and b) doing many things that are bad for the environment and not doing 1 bad thing for the environment is not something to be proud of.

The real solution and where money should be spend is decreasing our need on energy. How do we use less? Using LED Christmas lights, using a more fuel efficient vehicle, encouraging the shipment of goods by rail, encouraging more local manufacturing so goods don't have to be transported so far...the list goes on. We have the answers - we just have to start using them.

Chemicals in our bodies

2005-11-09T13:38:00.000-05:00

Chemical concentrations - From Globe and Mail - November 9th, 2005.

Robert Bateman (artist) was tested along with 10 other volunteers. Each provided a blood sample which was examined for chemicals. Bateman lives in B.C. on Saltspring Island and eats organic food. The conclusion of the report is that we are all full of dangerous, cancer causing pollutants.

The blood of 11 volunteers was tested for 88 toxic chemicals. The person with the highest level of pollutants comes from a Cree Community in Northern Quebec. Younger people tended to have less of the pollutant PCB which was banned in 1977 which indicates legislation works.

HEALTH........................ # of..........Average per..............Robert
EFFECT .......................chemicals ..Volunteer ...Range..Bateman
Carcinogen ........................41 .............28.......... 18-36 ........32
Hormone disruption...........27 .............18............ 13-24....... 19
Respiratory toxicant..........21............. 15............ 12-18........ 16
Reproductive toxicant...... 21..............15.......... ..12-18 ........16
Reproductive/
Developmental toxicant... 53............. 38 ............28-46..... 42

SOURCE: ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE CANADA

The new report, titled "Toxic Nation: A Report on Pollution in Canadians," is the first to try and determine how many man made chemicals are ending up in average citizens. The report was written by Environmental Defence Canada, a Toronto-based environmental health group.

http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/

Poll - NOv 7, 2005

2005-11-08T14:10:00.000-05:00

How would Canadians vote if an election were held today? (nov 7, 2005) - Greens are on track for a million votes.

......................... Nov. 7 results. 2004 results
Liberal ......................35% ...............37%
Conservative ............28% ................30%
NDP .........................16% ................16%
Bloc Québécois. .......13% .................12%
Green Party ..............8% .................4%

Voting plans by region today

.............Bloc Québécois Conservative Liberal NDP Green Party
Quebec ............50% ........5% ..........30% ........9% ..............6%
Rest of Canada* ..............36% ........37% ........18% ............8%
Ontario ............................31% ........44% ........18%...... ......7%
West ................................42% ........25% ........20% ..........12%

Voting plans by region in 2004 election

Quebec .................49% .........9% ........34% .........5% ..........3%
Rest of Canada* ....................37% ......38% .........19%.......5%
Ontario..................................32% ......45% ........18% ..........4%
West .....................................45% ......28% .........21% ..........4%

SOURCE: THE STRATEGIC COUNSEL

* Everywhere except Quebec NOTE: Numbers may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Ballistic Missile Defence - no thanks

2005-11-05T17:54:00.000-05:00

Ballistic Missile Defence - Maclean's Magazine - November 7, 2005 "Secure Canada or Else"

In this issue Maclean's interviewed Elinor Sloan, a former defence analyst who now teaches international relations at Carleton University. Ms. Sloan has an upcoming book entitled "Security and Defence in the Terrorist Era."

Sloan believes that we need to be a part of the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) initiative. BMD is basically shooting down one missile with another. She goes on to describe BMD as a two step process - detection (intelligence) and response. Because things happen so fast Sloan believes that it makes sense for the U.S. to keep its detection and response capability in the same room. Then goes on to say if we are not in the same room, they would have to go outside the room to tell us what is happening.

I have difficulty reaching the same conclusion that she does. First BMD is very difficult to do reliably and many of the so called successful tests in the past turned out to have been rigged. The technology is still unproven and rumoured to take trillions of dollars to perfect if at all.

Second I am not sure if Sloan is being figurative or literal when she speaks of being in the same room. Surely they have a functioning telephone and before any action would be taken the President of the United States would be called. She must be speaking figuratively.

Lets assume we do join with the U.S. and we are in the "same" room. Imagine a missile strike from a rogue nation (North Korea, Iran, Iraq - they pulled theirs our of hiding). The path of the missile would likely pass over Canada en route to the United States. Sloan would (if I interpret her correctly and am more than willing to be corrected) believes that if we are in the same room the U.S. would discuss blowing up this missile with Canada.

Is there any one who can imagine the U.S. asking any other country if they can use whatever technology they have at their disposal to defend themselves? If the best time to intercept this missile is over the ocean, over Vancouver or any other place the U.S. will do it regardless of whether we are in the same room or not.

I believe that being part of the BMD will cost us a great of money; money that can best be spent elsewhere - equipping our armed forces for emergency and peacekeeping missions, improving the health care system, ending child hunger in Canada or maybe even reducing income taxes. [Liberal spending is up $ 40 billion per year since their first surplus 7 years ago].

Sloan also believes we should set up a 500-man rapid response force that can be deployed any where in the country in the event of a crisis, so the U.S. does not do it for us. She admits that it may take an event like the recent bombings in London for this to happen.

What if we took the money meant for BMD and for this 500-man task force that hopefully we would never use anyway and use that money to make sure that immigrants and their children get a better start in their new life in this great country? Judging by the events in London this would be a very good use of money.

Let me hear your thoughts.