Just a couple of things that happened at the summit in Copenhagen that leave me wondering.
How is it that Jack Layton, the guy rallying against the HST because the increase in taxes will harm families, can be in favour of the proposed fund of upwards of 200 billion dollars collected from the 'developed' countries (including about 30 billion from Canada) ? Wouldn't taking 30 billion dollars from Canadians and their families be a much greater burden than the HST would?
Was Al Gore trying to make sure that the "Gore effect" did not happen again when he called for the world leader to meet in Mexico in July rather than the proposed date in late fall? I mean what are the odds that it would snow in Mexico City in July?
Why did the PM get such a rough ride from the same media and lefty environmentalists who were falling all over themselves praising Obama? Hasn't the PM said on numerous occasions that our AGW policies would mirror those taken by the US? But in the press Obama = good and Harper = bad, even if they have the exact same goals for CO2 reductions.
Why is it that Canada who responsible for only 2% of the worlds total CO2 emissions gets all sorts of grief when China, currently responsible for 22% of those emissions, gets treated with kid gloves? Even more interesting is that in the last few years China has increased its emissions by about 10% a year, or in more simple terms they have increased their yearly output a total equal to our total output. Yup Canada is the problem. More fossil awards please.
And lastly where were Ignatieff and the Liberals? We know that if Dion was still leader he would have went to Copenhagen, so why didn't Ignatieff go?
Oh I almost forgot, what about the science?
pt2, pt3, pt4