Let’s start 2010 with renewed hope and confidence
By MPP Toby Barrett

The holiday season is, for most of us, a time for a break from work or at least a break from our regular routine – a time for family and friends, for presents, turkey, ham and those delicious leftovers.

I wish to quote H.M. Queen Elizabeth II, from her Majesty’s 2007 Christmas Speech: “The Christmas story also draws attention to all those people who are on the edge of society – people who feel cut off and disadvantaged; people who, for one reason or another, are not able to enjoy the full benefits of living in a civilized and law-abiding community.”

I apply our Queen’s message to a Caledonia couple – Dave Brown and Dana Chatwell – whom I consider neighbours to us all in the riding. Their court testimony describing three-and-a-half years of hell, living adjacent to Caledonia’s Douglas Creek Estates subdivision, gives pause to consider the permanency of our “civilized and law-abiding community”.

Before Christmas, I was one of four Ontario Opposition members to spend two nights in the Ontario Legislature to back the call for public hearings on McGuinty’s infamous Harmonized Sales Tax. After months of petitions, demonstrations, letter writing campaigns and more, it was unfortunate that the government’s refusal to listen left some of us with no other avenue but to filibuster. Regardless, the McGuinty government rammed the HST through.

November marked nine months of inaction on US Steel by the province. When workers were sidelined in March, I formerly questioned the government when they would act, and I was told they would talk to union and management. As 1,300 steelworkers sit at home and the local economy continues to cripple, I am not aware of any action by Mr. McGuinty.
Since 2006, DCE and the remaining house have been occupied and barricaded under the flag of the Mohawk Warriors. This is an organization described by the OPP as ‘…a lawless group, usually armed, with a reputation akin to the Hell’s Angels’.” The FOI discovery that bills from DCE were being paid by Ontario taxpayers was disheartening. Many see this government as condoning actions of militant law-breakers through this funding.

Over the past six years Mr. McGuinty has also turned a blind eye to illegal smoke shacks along Highway 6. Given 50 per cent of all tobacco sales are illegal, I introduced the Tobacco Tax Reduction Act that called for a one-third reduction in Ontario tobacco taxes in order to shut down the illegal market – on the understanding Ottawa would follow suit. The McGuinty government shot down my bill.

The night before Halloween -- Devil’s Night – I attended a rally in Windsor protesting the eHealth scandal. Two hundred people marched with signs reading, ‘where is the money’ and ‘we want our money back’.

In the wake of the billion dollar eHealth scandal and the $3 billion HST, the McGuinty government announced Ontario’s 2009/2010 deficit may ring in at a record $24.7 billion. The Finance Minister called for a leaner and meaner government. That came as cold comfort to those who had already lost their jobs, lost their government training programs, or their local emergency department.

Wherever these words find you, and in whatever circumstances, I want to wish you all the best in the coming year. Let’s hope we can go into the New Year with renewed hope and confidence.

It’s now been 57 years of global warming debate
-by MPP Toby Barrett

This past month saw global leaders emerge from international negotiations in Copenhagen on the best approaches to dealing with an issue that we’ve been talking about since 1953. A while back a friend drew my attention to a May 15, 1953 Globe and Mail headline of that year, ‘Carbon Dioxide in Air Making World Warmer’. Since that time the debate has been heating up on and off, on how best to approach climate changes and the impact of 6.8 billion humans.

Days of wrangling and arguing in Denmark – while many continue to question the veracity of ‘climate gate’ and the ‘hockey stick’ graph – did result in a deal of sorts, albeit non-legal and non-binding.  The deal announced by the United States, China, India, Brazil and South Africa talks of tens of billions a year to developing countries, reforestation and limiting the temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius. No greenhouse gas reduction targets were set.

Described by some as better than nothing, the Copenhagen deal opens the door for further negotiations, and transparent reporting.  And, in contrast to Kyoto, it will involve developing countries.

When it comes to international regulatory schemes, beyond the traditional command and control, two approaches vie for favour in dealing with global warming: a carbon tax vs. cap and trade.

While both systems go about placing a price on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses to affect both industry and consumer behaviour, there are some key differences.

According to Canada’s National Roundtable on Environment and the Environment:

“A Cap and Trade System is also known as a “tradeable allowance system,” a cap-and-trade policy that involves setting the annual level of emissions by issuing emission permits (allowances). If individual emitters produce more emissions than they have permits, they can purchase additional permits. Governments can fix the level of emissions (providing quantity certainty) by choosing the number of permits to issue, but the price of permits will be set by the market, and is thus uncertain.”

In contrast, the Roundtable describes a carbon tax as, “a policy instrument that sets a per-unit charge on emissions. Typically the system involves a tax on fuels that emit carbon dioxide when burned and on other greenhouse gas emissions. A schedule for future tax rates would be established, sending a long-range price signal to the economy. The tax thus provides price certainty but lea

ves the annual level of emissions reductions uncertain.”
Here in Ontario, I have reported how the province’s decision to introduce cap and trade legislation has missed the mark on many counts. There seems to be little sense creating a local law to a global problem. Doing so handcuffs Ontario industry with further cost, regulation and inherent competitive disadvantage. National and international leaders are negotiating answers that will be much more effective in both result and competitive fairness across the board.

The current Ontario government has garnered something of a track record in making environmental announcements that have little impact save for further hampering our manufacturers in the end. A clear example of this rests in the failure of this government to look into any investments whatsoever into carbon dioxide capture and storage.

With Copenhagen now behind us, and government leaders across the globe back home hammering out strategies, we can look forward to continued debate on an issue we’ve been wrangling with for over 50 years.