Garth and the Greens
Well all the kerfuffle around Garth Turner's expulsion from the Conservative party and speculation about what he's going to do has led me to take a closer look at the Green Party.
I'll admit, Elizabeth May had already piqued my interest in the party but I hadn't taken a really good look at the party and their policy platform. Well, I had a couple of hours to spare this morning and decided to take a read through it (you can Word or pdf copies here). In the past, I saw the Greens a single issue party and that was the way their platform was based. But I have to admit, they have done a pretty good job of applying their principles to develop a well-thought out and coherent policy platform. Of course I don't agree with all of it, but then again I've never seen a single party platform that I completely agreed with (although the BPofC platform comes pretty close).
However, there is one part of the platform I have some rather serious concerns with. That would be their proposal to shift more of our freight shipping from trucks and over to rail. I can see and agree with the argument against trucks but I don't know if it is economically feasible to switch. Guess it's the fiscal conservativeness in me coming out but the money that would be needed to improve our rail lines to handle this increase would have to be astronomical. Guess we'll have to wait and see what Canadians are willing to pay for.
What does this all have to do with Garth? Well, as many of you know, Elizabeth May extended an offer to him to join the Green Party. If he takes her up on the offer, that would then allow May to participate in the leader's debate before the next election. This would allow the Green's to finally be able to get their message to general public and introduce some fresh ideas into the political discussion occurring amongst the electorate. To quote Martha Stewart, "and that's a good thing".
I'll admit, Elizabeth May had already piqued my interest in the party but I hadn't taken a really good look at the party and their policy platform. Well, I had a couple of hours to spare this morning and decided to take a read through it (you can Word or pdf copies here). In the past, I saw the Greens a single issue party and that was the way their platform was based. But I have to admit, they have done a pretty good job of applying their principles to develop a well-thought out and coherent policy platform. Of course I don't agree with all of it, but then again I've never seen a single party platform that I completely agreed with (although the BPofC platform comes pretty close).
However, there is one part of the platform I have some rather serious concerns with. That would be their proposal to shift more of our freight shipping from trucks and over to rail. I can see and agree with the argument against trucks but I don't know if it is economically feasible to switch. Guess it's the fiscal conservativeness in me coming out but the money that would be needed to improve our rail lines to handle this increase would have to be astronomical. Guess we'll have to wait and see what Canadians are willing to pay for.
What does this all have to do with Garth? Well, as many of you know, Elizabeth May extended an offer to him to join the Green Party. If he takes her up on the offer, that would then allow May to participate in the leader's debate before the next election. This would allow the Green's to finally be able to get their message to general public and introduce some fresh ideas into the political discussion occurring amongst the electorate. To quote Martha Stewart, "and that's a good thing".
UPDATE:
National Newswatch is reporting that Garth has decided to join the Greens (ht Dante). However, it was an anonymous tip and neither Garth nor Elizabteh May has confirmed the report so far.
UPDATE:
Garth Turner has announced he won't be joining the Green Party for now, but wouldn't rule out doing so in the future (ht to Robert).
Tags:
posted by Daz at 1:09 p.m.
2 Comments:
Even if Garth doesn't join the Greens, that doesn't mean May can't debate. There's no formal requirement for a party to have a member, in order to debate on TV with the other leaders. In fact, more parties that are registered should be given national airtime on CBC the public broadcaster.
saskboy,
I agree with you. Getting more parties involved in the debate would be much better. But the current agreement between the networks broadcasting the debate is that to be involved in the leaders debate, you must have a sitting MP. And the Greens don't currently have one. Unless she wins in the London by-election, in which case this Garth issue could be a moot point.
Post a Comment
<< Home