Thursday Morning Links

- The Cons' international failings have dominated the news lately, it's worth keeping in mind the damage they're doing at home as well - such as the latest phase of their plan to sell off as much as they can push out the door.

- Meanwhile, the NDP offers up another worthwhile idea of the type that tends to get ignored on the federal scene, with Alex Atamanenko proposing a plan for food safety and security.

- James Moore is getting duly slammed for his attacks on anybody interested in fair copyright - including with the new tagline above from Charlie Angus. But it's particularly worth pointing out that the main object of the Cons' "radical extremist" label was being cited by the Cons themselves as the leading authority on copyright just last year.

- Finally, Alice at the Pundits' Guide has added another piece to the puzzle in analyzing the operations of federal parties and candidates. For now, go read her post on riding-level returns and finances - but the new information will be particularly useful in tracking the resources of riding associations in specific ridings over time.

Unresponsive

It takes some effort for an answer in question period to stand out from the Cons' usual litany of substance-free partisan blather. But Mark Warawa managed it yesterday:

Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, the Americans are spending millions of dollars on a feasibility study to build a hydroelectric dam at Shanker's Bend on the Similkameen River. An 80 metre dam, if built, would flood 7,200 hectares in Canada.

The Okanagan Alliance of First Nations and the Regional District of Okanagan Similkameen have stated their opposition as has the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.

Will the minister notify the U.S. government that Canada is opposed to this project and will he insist that the government of British Columbia do the same?

Mr. Mark Warawa (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, as the member well knows, this government is committed to a cleaner environment. We have invested $1 billion in green infrastructure, $300 million for eco-energy retrofits, and $1 billion for clean energy projects and carbon capture and storage.

Wherever we look this government is taking action on the environment. I encourage the member to support the budget.

Now, Warawa's answer is useless enough on its face. But it looks all the more so when placed in context.

Remember after all that the Cons are now trying to claim that their environmental plan is supposed to follow from what the U.S. administration is doing. Which would seem to give them an awfully good reason to pay attention themselves to what's happening south of the border. But their second-in-command on the environment is apparently completely unaware of the issues raised by the U.S.' plans on the one subject where the two countries are supposedly in agreement.

What's more, having been presented with an issue which would obviously demand follow-up one way or another, Warawa didn't even pay lip service to the prospect of looking into the matter. Instead, his answer offers about the strongest indication possible that the Cons are completely unwilling to deal with legitimate questions by doing anything but filibustering with their own PR material - whether or not it has anything to do with the topic at hand. And that may say more about the Cons' fitness for government than any substantive response ever could.

(Edit: fixed wording.)

On termination

It's a huge plus to see that Alex Atamanenko's bill to ban terminator seeds is receiving a substantial amount of grassroots support. But I have to wonder about the apparent target for the e-mail campaign:

The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) is working hard to make sure that Terminator seeds are never field-tested or commercialized in Canada.

Step one – Send an instant email to the Prime Minister and ask him to make this bill law. Go to this website.

Step two – Ask your friends to do their part by sending them this email.

It's fair enough to note that the bill would pass most easily if it was able to win Con support. But am I missing some reason why the bill's supporters seem to be entirely overlooking the possibility of a joint opposition effort to pass the bill even if the Cons won't play along?