Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Dion confirms what MHF said about the greenshift.

Stephane Dion has confirmed what Martha Hall Findlay had earlier stated about green shift and its dubious claims of reducing CO2 emissions.

"Findlay said it's impossible to calculate the emission reduction numbers at this point, "because energy prices have gone up so much, we don't know how the shift will affect consumption," she said."

Dion at a speaking engagement in New Brunswick: "He also said they know this plan will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but can't say for sure by how much until they see how industry reacts once it's implemented."

Oh, and just how does Dion think industry will react?

"When asked if those companies will simply pass the costs along to the customer, he said that's likely in the beginning, but will change as companies invest in greener technology to pay less tax."

Sure it will Stephane; because there are plenty of reasons for industry to invest their own money to reduce taxes that are already being passed on to someone else.

Lots of incentive in that plan isn't there?

Update: Dion puts his foot in his mouth again. "Mr. Dion said he would only put $3-billion of each annual surplus toward the debt, making any additional surplus available for spending priorities that may come up as a result of the green shift." h/t KerPlonka

Spending priorities as a result of the green shift? Wasn't this plan promised to be revenue neutral?


Anonymous said...

Ah yes, industry will just go to market and trade the milk cow for some magic green beans.

Calgary Junkie said...

Dion is contradicting himself. Here is what he told Vancouver's Bill Good on Mon. July 14, 10 am here. At around the 12 minute mark, Dion says:

“… this is for the fourth year of the plan, we are expecting to have about 15 billion of revenue through the carbon tax, and it will allow us to come with these tax cuts, that will be very significant. And these numbers have not been contested, we take it from an economist, Jack Mintz, who came with a strong modellization, and it has been accepted as robust numbers, regarding the revenue we will have after the fourth year, 15 billion dollars”

So nine days ago, Dion was bragging about this model by Jack Mintz, with its uncontested, robust numbers that projected revenue (and therefore energy consumption) after four years.

And now Dion says he can't say for sure how much his plan will reduce GHGs ?

C'mon Dion, stick to one story. Either you have a robust model, or you don't.

Powell lucas said...

Of course the Nutty Professor and the Liberals can't provide an answer on how much their tax grab will reduce greenhouse emmissions. While they were formulating this goofy idea they spent most of their time calculating how much they could squeeze out of the taxpayer and where they could waste it...not on the results it would produce.

caz said...

He NEVER had ANY intention of addressing greenhouse gasses. He had no intention of doing it when he signed onto KYOTO either. Simply can't trust a thing they say...EVER...They LIE as easily as we breathe. There's only one hidden agenda and it's theirs. No I'll take that back. The Liberals truly believe we serfs are too stupid to realize that this is a cash transfer period. They boast about it openly and think we're all agreeing with them.Being from Alberta..I find it terribly insulting that they think us SO STUPID that we would go along with this without revolting. Those from the East who think this is a great opportunity will be very sorry that they opened this pandora's box...again. Believe it!!