this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
42 points (97.7% liked)

Canada

7230 readers
339 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Even just the NDP would probably be a step in the right direction.

Hell, I'll just be happy if we avoid electing the CPC and smol PP.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The whole "let's vote with the Cons to take the carbon tax off all home heating" is a big red flag.

The Liberals fucked up with their exemption. And the NDP leadership seemed to think doubling down on the fuckup was reasonable.

The right approach would be doubling down on incentives to get people off heating oil (as the Liberal proposal does), rather than undermining climate policy.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ehhhhhh, poll numbers as bad as they are, I'll take whatever compromise helps keep the Cons out of power.

The way I see hit, small concession -> better chance at another Lib/NDP government to enact more climate change policy. As the alternative is watching the Cons burn the planet to the ground, I'll take that compromise. I don't love it but I also don't love the fact so many people are ready to vote Con. Sadly, I don't get to choose the world I'm in, just how I react to it.

[–] saigot@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not a small concession. As the article points out it's Canada's third highest source of ghg (13%).

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My understanding is that the exemption is for homes heated with oil. The 13% to which you are referring includes ALL buildings and ALL heating methods (gas, electric and oil.)

So that concession is much smaller.

And of course, even if the concession were for the entire 13% who do you think will cut emissions more next government, a Liberal/NDP coalition (or either on their own) or the Conservatives?

[–] saigot@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The 13% is for heating homes through any means. The current exemption is for oil (8% of homes). The exemption that the conservativesproposed and NDP supported is for all heating. I'm not quite sure how commercial and industrial buildings are effected by this so that's a good point., and of course our electricity isn't 100% green yet.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

At least as far as I can tell, the 13% is for all buildings, not just residential. From the article:

Buildings make up another major source of emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from buildings accounted for 13 per cent of Canada's total emissions in 2021

But the larger point is that even if this exemption were for the entire 13%, as recent polling has the Conservatives winning a majority I'd say any of that exemption is worth keeping the Conservatives out of power, if only so the climate has a fighting chance. That exemption would hurt a lot the environment a lot less than the "drill baby drill" motto of the Conservative party.

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

It's ABC.

With the Liberals being the status quo. NDP would actually move the government left (out of centre, but not by much). Greens need to be able to have a consistent message across their party to be taken seriously. Something they lacked in the last election.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

It's sad that we all seem to have so many levels of "ah hell, I'll take that then" mental compromises.