TORONTO, Aug. 16, 2006 -- Ontario's Chief Election Officer confirmed today that the writ of election has been issued for the Parkdale-High Park by-election to be held on Sept. 14, 2006.

All Canadian citizens who reside in Parkdale-High Park and who will be 18 years of age or older on Election Day, Sept. 14, 2006, are qualified to vote.

Key dates during the election period include:

Addition of names to the Voters List	Aug. 17 to Sept. 13
Proxy Voting Applications submitted	Aug. 17 to Sept. 13
Certificates to Vote issued	Aug. 17 to Sept. 13
Nomination of Candidates	Aug. 24 to 2:00 p.m. on Aug. 31
Community Registration Day	Aug. 26
Notice of Registration cards mailed	Aug. 29
Returning Office Advance Polls	Sept. 2 and Sept. 4 to 8
Area Advance Polls	Sept. 6 to 8
Election Day	Sept. 14

Further information can be obtained from the Elections Ontario website at www.electionsontario.on.ca or by contacting the Parkdale-High Park returning office at 1 866 532-3159.

Elections Ontario is the non-partisan agency responsible for administering provincial elections, by-elections and referenda.

Elections Ontario Media Relations:
(416) 212-6186 / 1 866 252-2152
media@electionsontario.on.ca

The Parkdale-High Park Green Party of Canada Association members have accepted the following EDA Constitution (requires Acrobat Reader):

Read our Spring 2006 Newsletter to get the latest news on what's going on in Parkdale-High Park.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Campaign brochures landed in the mailboxes of many Parkdale-High Park residents today. In this last week of campaigning, candidates know it's critical to make an impact. While several parties claim to make environmental issues a priority, a quick look at the method and means of printing these brochures only helps compound the fact that the Green Party does more toward a sustainable environment than any other party.

Parkdale-High Park Green Party candidate Rob Rishchynski ensures his campaign is living up to the environmental standards that often defines his party. "Our campaign materials are produced using recycled papers and waterless printing processes. All campaign lawn signs are collected and re-used."

In an added boost to the party today, The Sierra Club of Canada rated the Greens' platform highest among all five parties in its commitment to the environment. "The Green Party really improved its platform since the 2004 election, with a greater sophistication in its policy... it has the strongest set of recommendations for environment and sustainability", said Elizabeth May, Executive Director of the Sierra Club of Canada.

No other party appears to have a comprehensive strategy for reaching its environmental goals. Nor, in the case of Parkdale-High Park, has any other candidate but Rishchynski paid attention to the little things that matter, like ISO 14001 certified printing, energy conservation and using recycled materials.

Rishchynski knows it's these very things that will make an impact with residents and business owners in the community, and he's certain his party can offer real solutions for the environment while improving Canada's economic outlook.

Click here for a copy of the brochure.

To keep up-to-date on our campaign activities, read our fifth election update message.

Rob has had very positive feedback from the ideas he has presented through the All Candidates' Debates. So much so that we thought it was a great idea when it was suggested to us to make the text of his comments available.

Rob's opening remarks.
Rob's closing remarks.

The following links are from the Parkdale-High Park all-candidates' debate sponsored by the Swansea Area Ratepayers' Association.

Rob's opening remarks.
Rob's closing remarks.

The Green Party of Canada has released it's platform for the 2006 Federal Election. You can download it here.

To keep up-to-date on our campaign ctivities, read our third election update messaage.

To keep up-to-date on our campaign ctivities, read our second election update messaage.

Check out an interview with Rob Rishchynski on the west-end arts web site Gadzooks.

To find out what new with the 2006 Federal Campaign, see our first election update messaage.

The Parkdale-High Park Greens are happy to announce that Rob Rishchynski has unanamously won the nomination and will be the Green Party candidate for Parkdale-High Park EDA in the 2006 federal election.

Go Rob!!

The first email newsletter from the Parkdale-High Park Greens is now available on this site. Sign up for our email newsletters to receive future newsletters by email.

...This is the first national poll where the Greens appear in fourth place, ahead of the Bloc. In August 2006, the Green party chose its new leader in a national convention. Sierra Club of Canada head Elizabeth May defeated deputy leader David Chernushenko and four-time candidate Jim Fannon with 65.34 per cent of the vote.

Earlier this month, May discussed some of the party’s priorities, saying, "It’s very critical that we be participants in the leaders’ debate. (…) We can elect seats in the next election, and I expect we will. What we need are very credible candidates, people whose reputations are impeccable, and who run real campaigns based on issues."

Read more....

By ELIZABETH MAY

Prime Minister Stephen Harper appears to want to take the reins from his Environment Minister, Rona Ambrose. Messages are being circulated, saying that the Kyoto file has moved up to the Prime Minister's Office and that Environment Canada bureaucrats are less and less "in the loop."

This would be good news if the Prime Minister were prepared to act on the recommendations of the recent report of the Commissioner for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Johanne Gélinas. Those recommendations made it clear that pursuing a coherent climate change plan was "one of the greatest challenges of our time."

"First and foremost, the government needs to clearly state how it intends to reconcile the need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions against expected growth in the oil and gas sector," Ms. Gélinas wrote.

Yesterday, however, having raised expectations of a substantive announcement, Prime Minister Harper essentially repeated what Minister Ambrose told the House Environment Committee last week. The government will introduce new legislation, the "Clean Air Act," designed to target smog, but not greenhouse gases.

It is true that Canada's regulation of air quality lags behind other nations. Canada allows sulphur dioxide at concentrations of 115 parts per million, while the European Union allows 48 ppm and Australia permits 80. However, there is no need for new legislation to accomplish what an existing act could do very easily. The Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) is the right tool. While a new government may enjoy the political and media boost of making new law, it is unnecessary, potentially costly, will impose years of delay and is likely to create a federal-provincial conflict for no benefit.

Regulating to reduce the precursors of smog, as well as to reduce serious neuro-toxic contamination with mercury, is possible within the CEPA.

Nevertheless, while regulating to reduce these contaminants is worthwhile, their presence in the atmosphere is directly related to the burning of fossil fuels. Taking steps to meet our Kyoto targets for reducing reliance on fossil fuels would reduce these contaminants too.

The Harper government appears intent on designing a program to reduce contaminants that create smog, without curtailing fossil fuel use. Such a policy will be doomed to failure. Individual catalytic converters and scrubbers can reduce contaminants per unit of production, but if the number of smokestacks and number of cars continues to rise, air quality will not improve overall. Furthermore, a failure to confront the climate crisis, directly and soon, will result in more extreme heat conditions. The more 30-degree days that Canadians experience, the more smog days will occur.

Canadians will not be tricked into thinking cleaner air can be delivered while the use of fossil fuels continues unabated.

Mr. Harper's public musings on the nature of his government's much anticipated Green Plan 2, are not reassuring. In an interview in Le Devoir, the Prime Minister minimized the need to act to deal with the threat posed by the looming climate crisis by describing the science as "evolving."

That is, of course, true. Science has now evolved to reflect a consensus that action is urgently required. Britain's Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, said on Sept. 21, "Our climate is becoming more unstable. The scientific evidence is overwhelming." She went on to say, "Professor John Holdren, the newly elected President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science summed up pretty well where the scientific consensus now is. He said: 'We are not talking any more about what climate models say might happen in the future. We are experiencing dangerous human disruption of the global climate and we are going to experience more'."

Does the Prime Minister accept this understanding of the science? Or is his use of the word "evolving" a cover for a rejection of the science? Is he prepared to stand with President George W. Bush and break Canada's Kyoto promise to the world?

The clear warning of the Environment Commissioner's report must be heeded. It is urgent that the Canadian government actually set real targets, with measurable objectives and put in place the resources to deliver on those goals. Cleaning the air through reduced greenhouse-gas emissions makes ecological, health and economic sense. Recent history makes it clear that purely voluntary efforts do not work. Recent history also demonstrates that policies must be consistently applied. It is not possible to reduce greenhouse gases while providing massive subsidies to expanding the production to the planet's most carbon-intensive oil -- crude from the Athabasca tar sands.

Will the new Conservative government keep its head buried in the tar sands, or will it come up for air?

Elizabeth May is Leader of the Green Party of Canada.

Stop bias against Green party
Environmentalists should be welcomed to political table, says Tom Axworthy
Sep. 24, 2006. 01:00 AM
TOM AXWORTHY

It is time the Canadian political and media establishments stop discriminating against the Green party and the ethic it represents. If we are serious about preserving the planet and if we care about fair play, Canadians must demand the Greens be welcomed to the political table. Read more...

Leader May turn Canada Green
Durham Region News

Sep 5, 2006

The next federal election could be a few years off but has already become just a little more interesting with last month's choice of Elizabeth May as Green Party leader. Read more...

New leader of Greens sees inroads in Quebec
Jane Taber
Senior Political Writer

OTTAWA -- Elizabeth May, the media-savvy environmentalist elected this weekend as the Green Party's new national leader, says she speaks better French than Stephen Harper and boldly predicted breakthroughs in Quebec in the next election.

Read more...

May wins Green Party leadership
Canadian Press

Ottawa -- Green party members chose a high-profile newcomer given to splashy activism at a leadership convention Saturday.

Long-time activist Elizabeth May, a former Sierra Club executive director, won by a decisive victory over environmental consultant David Chernushenko, a business-friendly party stalwart in the mould of departing leader Jim Harris.

Read more...

Quebec unveils carbon tax
Province hopes levy on oil and gas firms will put $1.2-billion toward its Kyoto goals

Rheal Seguin

From Friday's Globe and Mail

QUEBEC -- Quebec plans to adopt tough vehicle emissions standards and will become the first province to levy a "carbon tax" on oil and gas companies as part of an ambitious plan to fight global warming.

The tax will raise about $200-million a year over six years, provincial government officials said yesterday, and will finance a $1.2-billion Green Fund to make reductions in greenhouse gas emissions called for under the international Kyoto accord.

Environmental groups welcomed the measures, but a petroleum industry spokesman said the tax will be passed on to consumers.

Quebec Premier Jean Charest and Environment Minister Claude Bechard said that from 2006 to 2012, the province will tax oil and gas companies for hydrocarbon products sold in bulk to retailers -- non-renewable fossil fuels such as heavy oil, gas, natural gas and propane.

The Quebec Energy Board has been asked to work out tax rates and other details, such as a sliding scale in which heavy oil used to heat homes might be taxed at a higher rate than less polluting natural gas.

The Green Fund would be used to finance projects such as improvements to public transportation, education about emission cuts and ways to make buildings more energy efficient. Quebec already has the lowest levels of greenhouse gas emissions in the country.

A carbon tax could prove politically divisive, however. Liberal MP and leadership contender Michael Ignatieff was criticized by members of his own party after he merely floated the idea.

Quebec's plan also calls for new vehicles sold after 2010 to produce less greenhouse gases. Tough standards similar to those enforced in California will apply to cars and trucks sold in Quebec. California has adopted stiff energy-efficiency standards, which between 2009 and 2016 will reduce greenhouse gas emissions produced by new cars and light trucks by 25 per cent to 30 per cent.

Manufacturers of vehicles sold in Quebec will have to install equipment to ensure that they meet the tougher emission controls, which could mean higher prices for the province's consumers.

"We want to be the leaders in Canada. 2010 is the objective we have set to impose the California standard," Mr. Béchard said. "Kyoto is not a dream; it is possible to achieve."

Along with Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec has vowed to implement the Kyoto accord even if the federal government drops out. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said the Kyoto goal of a 6-per-cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 may not be possible.

Mr. Charest said that in addition to the new tax, Quebec needs $328-million from Ottawa to meet the Kyoto targets. He noted that Ottawa has promised to give Ontario money for its efforts to fight global warming.

Oil and gas companies were quick to point out that the carbon tax will be passed on to consumers. Neither government officials nor company officials would speculate how much that will mean at the gas pump.

"There is no doubt that consumers will pay more for the measures," said Carol Montreuil, a spokesman for the Canadian Institute of Petroleum Products. "We are talking about $200-million, and in one way or another, this money will have to come out of the pockets of consumers. . . . You can't expect an industry to absorb an additional $200-million cost."

Mr. Bechard called the oil industry's reaction "odious." Mr. Charest noted that that the aluminum industry has reduced greenhouse gases and that other energy companies such as Hydro-Quebec have introduced energy-efficiency measures without passing the costs on.

"It is high time [oil companies] play by the same rules as everyone else," Mr. Charest said. "This represents a great opportunity for the oil producers. If they don't see it that way I'd regret that. They'd be totally wrong. They will be on the wrong side of this issue."

Environmentalists applauded the Quebec government plan and urged other provinces to follow suit.

"This is an excellent move," Greenpeace spokesman Steven Guilbeault said. "The time has come for oil companies to pay for the pollution they cause related to climate change. It would be outrageous for oil companies who make billions of dollars in profit to have consumers pay the bill."

Environmentalists have long supported a carbon tax, saying it would discourage the use of fossil fuels while raising money for environmental uses. But it is strongly opposed in the Alberta oil patch.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers said this week it continues to oppose any tax that singles out the oil and gas industry. Pierre Alvarez, president of the association, also noted that several senior ministers in the previous Liberal government had explicitly ruled out imposing a carbon tax.

With reports from Bill Curry, Patrick Brethour and CP

The Globe and Mail is running a series of articles called Toxic Shock. These articles look at the everyday use of chemicals and the growing concern over evidence that these chemicals are increasingly found in humans and the environment.

• Toxic shock, Part 1: Canada's chemical reaction
• Toxic shock, Part 2: Coming to terms with perils of non-stick products
• Toxic shock, Part 3: Ottawa plans to snuff out flame retardants
• Toxic Shock, Part 4: Are plastic products coated in peril?
• Toxic Shock, Part 5: Want a full-time job? Live chemical-free

"The Green Party really improved its platform since the 2004 election, with a greater sophistication in its policy recommendations. For the first time, it has the strongest set of recommendations for environment and sustainability."

Read the release on the Sierra Club of Canada web site.

When one considers the sorry state of our environment and the fact that 16 U.S. states and 56 other nations have adopted a "green amendment" to their constitutions, it is apparent that the Green Party of Canada's recent promise to amend the Charter "to enshrine the right of future Canadians to ... breathable air and drinkable water" deserves serious debate at the very least.

Read more...

Passing what he called "a rite of political passage," Green Party Leader Jim Harris spoke Thursday to the Empire Club of Canada in an effort to bridge the traditional gap between economic interests and ecological concerns.

Read more...

Let's give the Greens some respect
By JOHN IBBITSON
Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page A8

Jim Harris has pulled it off. He is the leader of Canada's fifth party.

Mr. Harris launched the Green Party of Canada's election campaign in Toronto yesterday. Today, he dips his toe in the Atlantic in St. John's. Tomorrow, it's Charlottetown; Saturday, Montreal; Sunday, New Brunswick. That, folks, is an honest-to-gosh national tour.

In the 2000 election, the Green Party ran candidates in 111 ridings and garnered 1 per cent of the vote. Last year, it ran candidates in all 308 ridings and took 4.3 per cent of the vote.

That strong showing entitled the Greens to $1-million in federal funding to spend on this election. The party has gone from having one part-time employee to 15 full-time employees, not counting campaign staff. And Mr. Harris -- by day, a motivational speaker and management consultant -- has embarked on a full eight-week national tour.

This time out, the party dreams of doubling its popular support and electing at least one MP. That's a tall order for a party that receives virtually no coverage from the print or broadcast media. But the Greens could easily push their vote past 5 per cent, which, in countries that employ proportional representation, is often the cut-off point for party status. In a PR-based House of Commons, it would entitle them to 15 seats.

This steady climb in popular support for the Greens drives the NDP to distraction. Granted, some portion of the Green vote comes from "none of the above" voters. But more of it can be found among those disenchanted with the NDP, which proclaims a Green agenda but whose ties to organized labour (the Steelworkers are no tree-huggers) and whose record in provincial government invites skepticism among many committed environmentalists.

Intriguingly, the Green Party is also attractive to right-wing environmentalists. (Yes, they do exist.) Mr. Harris was himself a Progressive Conservative before he and his Ontario supporters launched a putsch against the party's B.C.-based old guard in 2003. Mr. Harris and his coterie now have a lock on the organization, although many traditional Greens, including former leader Joan Russow, have denounced his leadership.

The new Greens favour balanced budgets and reduced income taxes, to be paid for by steep new taxes on gasoline and other non-renewable resources. Details have not yet been released, but the party says that a middle-income taxpayer who used public transit would enjoy a tax saving; someone who drives a Hummer to work, however, should probably not vote Green.

Under a Green government, cities would have to convert taxi fleets to hybrid vehicles to qualify for federal grants. The party would use the Constitution's notwithstanding clause, if necessary, to prevent parallel private health care. And Greens want to consolidate all postsecondary education funding into a single financial-aid program geared to low-income university students.

"We consider ourselves fiscally responsible, socially progressive and committed to environmental sustainability," Mr. Harris said in an interview, "so we pull in people from all parts of the old left/right spectrum."

Because the party's vote is scattered across the country, rather than concentrated in a few ridings, it remains highly unlikely that the Greens will win a seat, although they could do well in ridings on Vancouver Island. For this reason, the television networks have once again refused Mr. Harris standing in the leaders debates.

Mr. Harris wonders what it's going to take before the mainstream media start to give his party respect. It's a fair question. The Greens have a platform that will appeal to many voters, a national organization, a decent budget and the support of somewhere between 4 per cent and 9 per cent of voters, depending on the poll. And they have achieved that with virtually no TV or print coverage.

Perhaps it's time that the gatekeepers in the media started giving the fifth party the respect that it has already demonstrated it deserves.

The Edmonton Journal
Published: Friday, December 02, 2005

...In 2004, Harris made a compelling argument for inclusion, leading with the fact his party was fielding candidates in all 308 ridings. He also argued that the Greens were consistently polling at five per cent or higher.

This year, the Greens can top that list of reasons with their 2004 result: 583,000 votes, good for 4.3 per cent of the popular vote and the best showing in party history.

While that endorsement, spread out nationally, did not win the Greens a single seat anywhere in Canada, it did push them past a different threshold. By earning more than two per cent of the vote, they cleared the new Elections Canada benchmark for a $1.75-per-vote subsidy.

This has given them more than $1 million from taxpayers for their election war chest. More than that, however, it has established them more firmly as a legitimate party in the political landscape, and has set them apart from the rest of the class of "fringe" parties like Communists, Marijuana and Christian Heritage, none of whom got more than 0.3 per cent of the vote.

The Elections Canada benchmark should be the one the TV networks choose for debate participation, rather than the traditional rule that each leader must represent a party with elected MPs...

The Green Party of Canada regrets that Canadians are being forced into a needless Christmas election for purely partisan reasons, said leader Jim Harris today. But he says the Green Party is nonetheless ready to fight for what Canadians want in every riding across the country. (read more...)

From the Winnipeg Free Press.
Published: Sunday, October 9, 2005

...So what is the Green Party? From what I can tell, it is a coalition of people who are socially moderate and fiscally green. By the latter, I mean that many in the Green Party want to leave the left-right paradigm behind. They do so in recognition that we can only win the war for the environment through a combination of the selflessness of the Left and the encouragement of human ingenuity fostered by the Right.