IEA begins to accept the reality of Peak Oil

Global oil supply will peak in 2020, says IEA

With investment collapsing in the oil patch, the International Energy Agency (IEA) is now predicting that conventional crude output could plateau by 2020.

As much as the discussion of peak oil has now penetrated into the mainstream media in recent years, it still seems to have very little traction with the general public.

Prices have collapsed in recent months, so many consumers have been breathing a sigh of relief. The cost of that long commute has been halved since July '08 and fingers are as firmly as ever gripped around the steering wheel. Inevitably, these lower prices will be a part of encouraging increased consumption. Of course, as this ultimately starts to "fuel" the economy to "recovery" increased demand will face the wall of diminishing supply, and the upward price spiral will start again.

For those who are thinking long term, now is the time to be developing a post carbon world, not waiting until there is precious little carbon to burn.

Economics cannot overcome geologic reality. We may already have reached a peak of squeezing, at most, 87 million barrels per day out of our sad planet.

This Shouldn't Be About Who Shouts the Loudest or Has the Biggest Advertising Budget

If Stephen Harper's blustery performance in the House yesterday is any indication, the Conservatives apparently want to boil the Coalition debate down to who can shout the loudest. He once again is showing his true colours. The sign 'I am a Consensus Building Democrat' is not one that would hang easily around Mr. Harper's neck without evoking laughter. It is one thing to hold firm to your beliefs. We all have that right in a democracy. But to bluster and berate as he has sunk to is not impressive.

Making derogatory comments that the coalition partners have made a 'deal with the devil' by aligning themselves with 'separatists', may play well to his core constituency, but whether he likes it or not, these 'separatists' were duly elected by more than 1.3 million Quebecers. Mr. Harper may disagree with their view regarding Quebec's future within Canada, as I do, but tossing insulting hand grenades at whomever you disagree with is not helpful and shows an unseemly amount of disrespect from the Right Honourable Prime Minister of Canada.

Mr. Harper, show some respect for those who disagree with you. I urge you to call off the attack dogs. To those in the coalition, I urge you to not sink to Mr. Harper's level.

It's Too Bad...

That so many of the participants in this current Canadian political dilemma see it in an "us versus them" perspective.

We all are in this together. We all want the same thing. We want a safe and secure place to raise a family. We need to know that our parents are well looked after, and that our children are safe when they go to the park. That is what we all want.

We need to know that not only our family, but our friends and neighbours are properly fed and have adequate housing, and access to a good education.

We have so much to learn about sharing power, and listening to those who do not agree with us. Let's work on getting wth that program.

Responding to the Critics of the Coalition

I find it is interesting to listen to the unfolding debate regarding the current Canadian political situation. There is virtual universal condemnation of the heavy handed politically motivated "economic update statement" made by the the Conservatives last Thursday. There has been serious questioning of the judgment of Stephen Harper. Randall Denley of the Ottawa Citizen deemed it "one of the dumbest stunts in the history of Canadian politics". It is hard to imagine that if Harper had the power to wind the clock back a week that he wouldn't want to tweek that "economic update statement" just a bit. Looks like it is too late to put that genie back in the bottle. (Or, Jack back in the box.)

Now, however, there is serious criticism being leveled at those of the Liberals, New Democrats and the Bloq who have negotiated the terms of a proposed coalition government. Much of it, I don't necessarily disagree with. John Geiger, The Globe & Mail editorial board editor views Stephane Dion as

...a guy who could not control his own party, pretending that he can now control a government populated with his former political enemies in the NDP, propped up by separatists — the very people that Mr. Dion entered public life to defeat. Now he's going to give them legitimacy, he's going to also give them more power in Ottawa than they have ever enjoyed. More smart, yes. But this isn't smart. This is dumb.

He further opines that:

...if Mr. Dion becomes prime minister, he's only going to be there for a few months. And to accomplish that, he has had to enter a pact with union-beholden social democrats and separatists. Mr. Dion lacks the moral authority to form a government.

He characterizes the proposed coalition as

...inherently unstable. These three leaders have been at each others throats throughout their political lives. They have no common policies, only a common interest in attaining power through the back door. No matter what their agreement states, it seems highly doubtful that a Prime Minister Dion could keep this together for long, nor is there much hope that Mr. Dion could deliver the kind of leadership required during such uncertain times. That's the point: it's time for leadership in Ottawa, and since the incumbent prime minister and opposition leader are incapable of providing it, we need look elsewhere.

It is this final sentence that leads to the recommendation of the G&M that Harper resign. And the chances of that happening? I can see the headline now;

Harper Resigns! Leaderless Conservatives Beg Canadian Public For Time!

It is true that the Coalition proposes to install a lame duck leader as Prime Minister responsible for governing what may be a rickety coalition. Some have characterized it as akin to "herding cats." But, whether we like it or not, they represent a majority of the Members of Parliament that we elected less than two months ago. It is unfortunate for Stephen Harper and his supporters (which numbered just under 38% of the electorate in our recent election) that he is apparently about to lose the confidence of the House. He, and the rest of us will now have to deal with the consequences of his ill thought out "economic update statement" of last Thursday.

Ultimately, while we can argue ad nauseam about the viability of the proposed coalition and whether or not it would be the correct path for the country, there is no disputing the right of those making the proposal to do so under our current parliamentary system. If it goes ahead it will be a very difficult process. My hope is that if it does proceed, that those involved will truly start to behave like consensus builders who seek to find what unites us rather than hyper partisan politicians whose primary goal is to find what issues divide us so that they can exploit it for there own political gain.

The only alternative to the coalition proposal is more of the same from Stephen Harper and the Conservatives. Does anyone honestly believe that they will ever evolve into a group that truly understands that for a minority parliament to work, it requires compromise and communication with your opposition? Can anyone foresee a time when they would would be able to regain the trust of the current opposition? I think this is why people such as Bob Rae are saying "There is no going back." The trust was broken, and the opposition is now intent on changing the face of parliament. Call it a power grab, call it partisan politics, isn't that the game the Conservatives have been playing all along? The real question is, will anything change if this new group comes to power? That will be the real test.

Reflecting the Will of the People

To suggest that only having a Conservative government in power somehow reflects the 'will of the people', as Stephen Harper would have us believe, is quite a stretch. The Conservatives, with support of less than 38% of those who chose to vote, were, as a result of the traditions of our parliamentary democracy, rightfully given the first opportunity to form a government. Such a government however, only remains in place so long as it has the confidence of the House.

When Stephen Harper points out that "Canadians didn't elect Stephane Dion to be Prime Minister of Canada", he is correct. However, Canadians didn't elect Stephen Harper either. We don't have a Presidential system in this country. We don't elect the Prime Minister, we elect Members of Parliament who in turn choose the leader of the country. Apparently, a majority of our MPs are choosing Stephane Dion.

Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are treading on very dangerous ground when they try to whip up sentiment that the proposed coalition is "an affront to the democratic will of Canadians". They may not like it, but they need to understand that this is how parliamentary democracy works. If this coalition does become the government, it will be far more reflective of the "will of the people" than the less than 38% of the electorate that the Conservatives represent.

Greg Sorbara Says It Well

An historic opportunity to put Canada ahead of partisanship

Here is an excerpt of Greg Sorbara's comments directed at the federal Liberals.

For the federal Liberal caucus members, they must come together and create something larger than each, something larger than three very talented colleagues among them – Michael Ignatieff, Dominic LeBlanc, and Bob Rae – who must set aside personal goals in the short run and assume a shared responsibility at this critical moment in concert with Mr. Dion. These four are thoughtful Canadians very capable of a sense of doing the right thing that we need so desperately at this moment.

The Liberal caucus must choose both a process and outcome worthy of the short term moment at hand, with concurrent concern for its future, and the nation's, in mind. They must opt for stability, integrity, humility and respected and respectful collective leadership.

Regarding a more permanent expression of leadership, my Federal cousins need to construct a process and plan, along with a historically composed Cabinet that must serve our nervous nation with calm and strategic intellect. Over the next number of months, their work must be free of distractions of a personal and political nature if a promising accord of fiscally prudent and progressive decisions are to be made and set in motion.

Another reasoned voiced from "the others". Yes, if all involved in contemplating the removal of Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from office can heed the call to rise above partisanship and walk the talk of true leadership, this could work. The big fear is that no sooner will they form the government, but that the silly name calling and quest for power driven infighting will begin yet again. I can only hope that the likes of Jack Layton, Michael Ignatieff, Bob Rae, Stephane Dion and others who may be at the helm of this collaborative effort are really listening to what people like Greg Sorbara are saying. The last election result did provide them with the legitimacy to act as a coalition. Behaving as a coalition, however, requires quite a different skill set from behaving as a majority government. It requires ongoing compromise within as well as with those on the opposing bench.

Can those Liberals questing for power within the Party (are you listening Bob, Iggy and Dominic?) put asside their aspiration and understand that there are larger issues at stake? Can they park their egos somewhere?

Once Again, Denley Nails It

Now is the time to lead the country, not pick fights

As I've said before, I don't always agree with Denley, but he nails Harper to the wall on this one.

What in the world motivated Prime Minister Stephen Harper to bring his own government to the brink of defeat? Is he bored? Did he bet one of his colleagues that he could find a way to exhume Liberal leader Stéphane Dion and make him prime minister?

Harper's retraction of his pointlessly antagonistic plan to stop public financing of political parties puts an end to what will long be remembered as one of the dumbest stunts in the history of Canadian politics. Consider it. The guy wins an increased minority and everything is cruising along as he says the right things about the economy, until he comes up with virtually the only issue that could possibly unite the three opposition parties. Then, Harper dares his opponents to defeat his government over political party financing, something that matters not a whit to the average Canadian.