Conservative Candidate a No Show for the Burlington Environmental Group Debate

By Pepper Parr

September 9th, 2021

BURLINGTON, ON

The Conservative Party candidate did not participate in the Burlington debate.

 

The Halton Environmental Network held virtual debates last night for each of the ridings within the Regional boundaries.

 

While the focus was the environment the debate covered almost everything you could think of  and then some.

Nick Page spoke eloquently and with more passion that usually seen in Burlington debates.

Chris Cullis did just as well for the Green Party.

MP Karina Gould had an incredible grasp on just what the Liberal government had done for the city.  She was spitting out numbers at quite a pace.

Emily Brown didn’t make it to the debate.  No word on why at this point.

The debates are well worth the time if yo need to think through where your vote should go.

When they are available online we’ll let you know

 

Return to the Front page
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

17 comments to Conservative Candidate a No Show for the Burlington Environmental Group Debate

  • Phillip Wooster

    BTW, Barker, the tooth fairy and Santa Claus have far more credibility than Justin Trudeau and Karina Gould.

  • Charlie Neilson

    Will admit that I have not followed the local campaign very closely to date. It does however appear to me that Emily Brown is taking the same route as our Premier of Ontario, Mr. Ford….and that is to stay in the shadows, don’t get cornered into actually answering the tough questions and to take a position which limits her to critiquing the current government……while offering little! Got Ford elected! Perhaps she could focus on a ‘Buck a Beer’!

    • Diane Knox

      Well Sept 20th you will vote to Elect a representative for the Next 4 Years to guide us through the worst Health crisis since 1918–a time before Universal Public FREE Health Care- even if you choose to not follow the Science on Vaccinations and their elimination of killers-cripplers -Smallpox, Polio, Measles and now Covid.. and Global warming /Coastal Issues (we live by a Lake), and Fossil fuels etc. etc.

      Ducking the many issues might be a good tactic now at an Election Time–but when elected who will be there to to Pay back all those taxes we have given, who will show up to support the the needs of ALL calls for Help message in your local riding?

      Vote Informed on issues, know their patterns of response–skip the adds, the blame game debates, read their platform and VOTE

  • Diane Knox

    This topic is High on all Age groups in this Election. We see it, we feel it, and we breathe it and we care. Covid & the Economy has sent a Curve to thinking, plans and delayed many things. But this issue is long term and inter generational. It’s too bad that the PC’s have no plans and are focused on a wedge issue of Why an Election Now. Is it because they don’t know what they stand for yet? Even their Blue signs have gone Dark Navy.

    • Denise W.

      Everything is generational. I would like to have the regular covid briefings again. But somebody stopped them for the election. So sheeple would think about global warming. I would like to have a third shot, such as other countries are doing, But the sheeple are told it is not necessary. I would like to hear that 35 million pfizer shots have been ordered with staggered delivery dates to match our consumption rate. And when able, phased into a better formulation for the variants. Taxes are too high but raising them more will be a graveyard spiral for the economy. Making people pay even more tax is not the solution to increasing tax revenue. We need to get the economy running again. And yes, that means our petro business’ , amongst many others that have been savaged by taxation, “brain-drain” or the whole company moving south.

      Canada can only affect a very small part of the problem. Laudable and altruistic, thinking that we can fix the world. But we cannot. And should not try to the extent that it harms our country. Do our bit, yes. But that is it. The real big polluters are showing no signs of slowing down. Our own sacrifices should be measured and reasonable.

      We have so much more to worry about then global warming. Foreign trade, foreign relations, our GDP, our military, our fishing fleets, our coast guard, our steel business and heavy industry. Focusing primarily on environment…. big mistake. We have a whole country to run and it is serious business. And has been woefully mismanaged for too long. And that is the problem that needs fixing.

  • Denise W.

    I didn’t even consider listening to it. Look who organized it.
    National leadership of Canada has far more important issues to deal with. To suggest that global warming initiatives with pie in the sky promises should be front and center suggests the focus is being taken off the hard issues. Which I believe we would now be better served with a PM that sees and can act on serious issues in a credible manner.

    • David Barker

      Are you serious? So you don’t believe there is a connection between mankind’s abuse of this planet and the extreme weather patterns (forest fires, droughts, floods, ultra high temperatures etc.) we are now seeing here in Canada and around the world (with hurricanes/typhoons thrown in for good measure)?

  • Lynn Crosby

    She doesn’t do interviews with you, or the 905er (it seems no CPC candidate will speak publicly on their platform), doesn’t show up for a debate on what is surely the most important issue of our times, doesn’t respond on her social media accounts though the gun lobby brigade comes out in force to attack any critics. I imagine she’s at the Chamber debate now talking about her background and sport shooting, but boy I can’t imagine why citizens would think this is good enough. I was hoping for a good alternative this election. We don’t have one. I will end up voting for the party that isn’t the gun lobby, the anti-abortion, the climate change deniers, the O’Toole flip-flop party. And whichever right-wing groups threw rocks at our PM, that pretty much had the effect on many people of supporting the person getting pelted.

    Oh and this just in, sounds like Emily doesn’t support vaccination based on her remarks at the Chamber debate just now??? “People should choose their own medical treatments.” Well isn’t that just the cherry on top. Why am I reminded of MAGA every time I look at this party?

    • Dania

      I was one of the constituents attacked on social media by numerous pro-gun accounts after questioning her affiliation with the CCFR and its support of conceal and carry as well as reversing the 2020 gun/weapon ban passed by the liberals shortly after the Nova Scotia shootings. One of those accounts was a chapter of the NRA. What stake does an American Gun Association have in our Burlington riding? Why would they even be paying attention to this? Ask yourself that question before voting. I was also sent threatening private messages, one from a Canadian account that was pro-gun, anti-vax, anti-mask, anti-lockdown, and so on, and one from an American account that was similar and connected to an NRA account. I reported both. Why are they following her and coming to her defense? I chose not to share the actual messages publicly because these people have guns and I am far too intelligent to put myself at risk.

  • David Barker

    She is employing the same playback as McKenna did in 2018, which is do not expose oneself to unscripted events.

    Do you really want to vote for someone that shows such distain towards constituents.

  • Carol Victor

    Is it any surprise that Emily Brown, the Conservative did not show? What could she possibly add to the conversation?

    • Phillip Wooster

      Unfortunately I tried to log into the debate but somehow couldn’t connect. I wonder if this was a problem for Emily? Disappointing that she wasn’t there. I was disappointed too that I couldn’t join, I would have liked to hear Karina explain why the Liberals didn’t meet a single emissions target that she & Trudeau set. Oh, wait, she didn’t?

      • David Barker

        Well it should be easier for the PCs to hit their targets as they are setting them so, so much lower than the Liberals, NDP, and Greens. There’s something to be proud of – low goals !

        Naive to think one of the candidates really wanted to connect and participate in the debate that he/she would not somehow have been facilitated by the organizers. If you really believe it might have been because of technical issues, I guess you believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus. What? You do? Oh sorry. LOL

        • Phillip Wooster

          I would remind Mr. Barker that when the 30% reduction in carbon emissions was set initially by the Harper government–after a great deal of consultation with experts and the provinces, that target was adopted by his hero, Trudeau. However, between 2015 and 2019, carbon emissions ROSE in Canada from 723mt to 730mt. Justin, the climate change warrior, talked a good game and failed to deliver results, typical of so many of his policies.

          And then earlier this year, Justin–WITHOUT CONSULTATION, decided that he would unilaterally raise his carbon reduction goal to 40-45% by 2030–a self-aggrandizing statement, as most of Trudeau’s statements are, without any thought of how this target was going to be achieved but most importantly, without any consideration of the serious costs imposed on the Canadian economy.

          And what will be achieved? The answer is ZERO! By 2030, emissions will not fall. WHY?
          Carbon emissions and global warming are GLOBAL PROBLEMS. The world’s worst polluter, China, will increase its coal consumption by 1 billion tonnes by the year 2030 as it brings 300+ coal-fired electricity generators on stream by 2030, resulting in an increase in carbon emissions of 3 times Canada’s total emissions, and that’s using the Chinese data which is notoriously unreliable.

          Does that mean Canada should do nothing? No, we should try to reduce our carbon emissions but not at the cost of economic growth and not at the cost of our standard of living. What Mr. Trudeau is proposing is rather like p*ssing into a very strong wind–while initially you may feel some relief that is tempered by looking down and realizing your pants are very wet.

          The bottom line–Trudeau’s failure to meet a single carbon reduction target proves that although he loves talking climate as a wedge issue, when it comes to achieving any success he is a total failure.

          • David Barker

            I’m sorry Mr. Wooster. Setting lower goals, lowering the bar just so you can say you hit a target does no one any good.

            But let’s here what Emily Brown and the other Halron region PC candidates have to say on the subject. No wait! Tgat’s not possible because none turned up for any of the debates. Shameful !

    • Bob

      So David Barker, you’re saying that being disingenuous with your goals is a better solution to climate change than setting realistic and achievable goals?
      Perhaps Trudeau and the LIEberals should just say they’re going for 100% reduction. Never will be achievable, but what the hay, Top that O’Tooole.

Leave a Reply