One Half of Environmental Group to Give Up Charity Status

ForestEthics, an environmental group with offices in San Francisco, CA, Bellingham, WA, and Vancouver, BC, is splitting into two parts:

  • ForestEthics Advocacy
  • ForestEthics Solutions

According to their press release, they are doing this “to strike back against the government’s crackdown on charitable environmental groups”.
An examination of the main website of ForestEthics’ “Ways To Give” page reveals this:
ForestEthicsDonation.JPG
Section 6.2 of the Canada Revenue Agency’s 2003-09-02 policy is well worth a read. There was no mention in the ForestEthics press release whether the cumulative portion of past donations which was used by donors to reduce their taxes will be refunded to the Government of Canada.
h/t Maz2

Why we tossed them

Arrogance.

Today, the 30th anniversary of the charter is going virtually unmarked by the federal government, with Prime Minister Stephen Harper suggesting the lack of enthusiasm is due to sensitivity over the lingering “divisions” caused by patriation.
“It will always be like that,” Chretien told The Canadian Press. “They have a culture of grievance over it, not looking at the facts.”

Liberals telling people to get over it. Now, what does that remind me of.

We Don’t Need No Stinking Giant Fans

Telegraph;

Sources said ministers are prepared to block major developments of onshore wind turbines under the new Localism Act that came into force last month.
They are also ready to reduce the £400 million per year in funding that goes to wind farms under the Renewable Obligation Certificate subsidy.
The moves would be popular with the dozens Conservative MPs fighting against new wind developments in their constituencies.
In the letter sent to Downing Street in February, more than 101 MPs sais they have become “more and more concerned” about government “support for onshore wind energy production”.

via Quixote’s Last Stand

Tony Blair’s Britain

Where the foxes caper unmolested, the government packs your school lunch and we are all dhimmis now;

A university is considering ending the sale of alcohol on campus due to concerns from Muslim students.
London Metropolitan University could take action because a ‘high percentage’ of its students thought drinking was ‘immoral’, according to its vice chancellor.
Professor Malcolm Gillies raised the prospect of an alcohol-free campus after gauging the changing values from the influx of new students.
He said it would be unwise to ‘cling’ to a ‘nostalgic’ view where the vast majority wanted alcohol to be available and instead take account of diverging views.

h/t ella

Are Alberta PCs Going After the Anti-Elderly Vote?

One might have concluded that Alberta MLA Thomas Lukaszuk’s confrontation with an elderly, dying Edmonton homeowner was bad enough. But in an apparent effort to top his antics, Premier Alison Redford has been attacking former Premier Ralph Klein, who “is in a nursing home with a serious form of rapidly progressing frontal-lobe dementia. He’s quite ill and virtually incapable of forming words.”
Perhaps we’re too dumb to recognize a brilliant political strategy at work here. Maybe the secret to success of any election campaign is to appeal to that faction of the electorate that enjoys seeing seniors in ill-health getting picked on?!
h/t Syncrodox
Related: Monte Solberg isn’t so convinced that Redford & co. are the geniuses they claim they are.
Update: Jason Kenney chimes in.

Somebody Get David Suzuki a Box of Kleenex

In her latest column, Margaret Wente outlines why David Suzuki is so upset. Here’s an excerpt:

In fact, Mr. Suzuki believes the movement has been going backward for 20 years: “We didn’t sell the right message.” Instead of arguing that environmental responsibility could co-exist with economic growth, he thinks, in effect, that the movement should have argued that we must abandon the quest for economic growth altogether. “We thought if we stop this dam, if we stop this clear-cutting, that’s a great success. But we didn’t deal with the underlying destructiveness, which was the mindset that attacked the forest or wanted to build the dam.”

Earth to Dave and his ilk: Perhaps not smearing your opponents and avoiding all debate with them might not have been the best idea? Perhaps outright lying about the facts might not have been so smart either? Perhaps walking the talk rather than being an eco-hypocrite might have been advisable?
Ezra Levant sums up the abject failure that has been Suzuki’s crusade against progress:

Navigation