Strategic decisions

I'll weigh in somewhat late on the question of how the opposition parties can best deal with the Cons' seeming repudiation of the rewritten C-30. From what I've seen, the debate has largely evolved into two camps: the "bring 'em down now!" camp, and the one looking to pressure the Cons into changing their mind; it shouldn't come as much surprise that I'm in the latter group.

But I'm not sure anybody's quite put into detail how the options break down. So let's take a few minutes to review the possible outcomes.

If the opposition parties team up to bring down the Cons immediately, the obvious result is to bring to an end the legislative process which has produced the current C-30. And what's worse, the election itself could also weaken the opposition's hand in trying to push for improved legislation: the Cons would far too likely simply declare the issue dead based on a claim that voters had endorsed their existing "plan".

So what about trying to work within the current Parliament instead? The best possible outcome would be for the Cons to decide to put C-30 forward in its current amended form. And while it's far from certain, such an outcome is easily more likely to come about if the opposition parties put up a united front as they did in agreeing to the bill to begin with.

Even if the Cons refuse to deal with all of C-30 as currently amended, there's also the option of working to try to win Con agreement on the most important parts of it. And the Cons are already sending some signals in that direction:

"Well obviously our preference would be to move forward with the clean air act. One of the challenges is that the Liberals put a plan, put an amendment in it that would basically allow industry an unlimited license to pollute," Baird said.

He hoped the government could work with the opposition parties and "salvage big chunks" of the bill.

Of course, this being Baird, he couldn't demonstrate any interest in cooperation without misrepresenting the nature of the opposition's existing work. But the opposition parties should be able to pressure the Cons to go public with the "big chunks" of the bill that they still agree with, and suggest wording to toughen the legislation if they honestly think genuinely tougher measures are needed.

It's worth noting the threat of an imminent confidence vote might eventually be needed to get the Cons to play along with either of the two above scenarios. And if the Cons refused to blink at that point, then the downside result would be exactly what the "bring-'em-down" side is advocating as the first and only option.

Moreover, there's no reason why even a successful effort to pass C-30 (whether as currently or amended or with additional small tweaks) couldn't then be followed by a confidence motion on another issue. The result then would be to achieve every benefit of bringing down the Cons, with the added bonus that the opposition parties would have won a much-needed victory on the environmental front first.

Naturally, there's bound to be some difference of opinion on the left as to when it's most appropriate to bring down the Cons - just as different Cons presumably have differing calculations about when to seek a majority. But for those looking for the best option to get something done on the environment, there's no reason to throw out all the work that's been done on C-30 in order to roll the dice at the polls.