Angry in the Great White North

a heat-seeking missile in the Conservative arsenal

David Suzuki, owner of two homes, including a huge estate on a gorgeous BC island, says Canadians want to spend more money on his issues:

Environment crusader David Suzuki says ordinary Canadians are far ahead of politicians when it comes to fighting climate change -- and that they're ready and willing to pay for it.

Fresh from a cross-Canada tour in which he heard from thousands of people in more than 40 cities, Suzuki told CTV's Question Period on Sunday that Canadians are ready for a carbon tax that would punish those who waste energy and reward those who conserve.

"We met over 30,000 Canadians. They recorded over 500 personal statements about what they would do if they were minister for the environment," Suzuki told Question Period co-host Craig Oliver.

"And I'm telling you, they want carbon taxes."

So does that mean 500 Canadians said they wanted to pay more taxes, or higher prices for goods and services driven by carbon taxes forced upon corporations and manufacturers? Some fraction of that 500? Just what sort of numbers is he talking about.

Angus Reid is running an online survey, and though the number of respondents is not specified, the balance of opinion is exactly the opposite of what Suzuki states:

When asked if the priority ought to be lowering taxes or combatting climate change, two-to-one the choice was lowering taxes. And of the one-third who would prefer to combat climate change, it is not clear how many of them are only interested in fighting climate change if it meant no change to taxation levels. I think it's safe to assume some will indeed back off of combatting climate change if it means paying more money in taxes, directly or indirectly.

Maybe Canadians just figure Suzuki and his kind just make no sense:

Suzuki, other environmentalists and opposition members also say the Tory study is flawed because it doesn't take into account the benefits of cutting emissions -- such as reduced energy costs and a more stable climate.

Canada contributes something like 2% of the total global CO₂ emissions. Of course, carbon dioxide pales in comparison to the Number One green house gas, water vapour. Some computer models suggest a positive feedback loop (more CO₂ leads to more water vapur), but then those models require CO₂ well beyond anything that human industrial activity is ever likely to create.

Moreover, the overwhelming effect of water vapour makes the trivial changes to CO₂ envisioned by Kyoto utterly irrelevant to driving climactic activity.

So how could Canada's 2% contribution to a negligible green house gas possible matter? And why would we trash our economy through carbon taxes to make a negligible difference to a negligible contribution to a negligible gas? A more stable climate? Come on -- tells us another one.

Presumably, the 500 people who spoke to Suzuki were fans of Suzuki. They probably don't drive cars, eat organically grown molds, and weave their own clothes out of unsmoked hemp, so a carbon tax is a non-event for them. But for the rest of us? Angus Reid is measuring that opinion, and it suggests that David Suzuki needs to go on another exhaust-spewing drive on a luxury touring bus to understand what Canadians really think.

Maybe he ought to seek out Canadians at working long hours in offices and budgeting for diapers at Wal-Mart, instead of just relying on the fanboys who sought him out. I bet they'd give him an earful about more taxes.

Check out what Canadian bloggers have written about David Suzuki
Results will open in a new window.