Go Blue Jays (and Eliz May!)

Happy Labour Day weekend!  This is my first blog post ever, so a big hello (actually, it's my best chance for a dress rehearsal since I have exactly 0 - yep, that's zero! – followers so far :)  

Yesterday (September 5), the Toronto Star ran a wry little story about federal political party leaders NOT being welcome at any more Toronto Blue Jays' games this season. Why? Because the three games attended recently by Canada's male party leaders were all lost by the BJs, who are otherwise making a terrific run attempting to win their first American League pennant in 22 years. 

So, in a letter to the Star editor, here was my suggestion:  

Dear Editor: Re Federal Party Leaders Blamed for Blue Jays Bad Luck (Sat. Sept 5)

Maybe this is just a guy thing. I think the BJs should risk it by inviting Elizabeth May to attend a game, since she's apparently not considered a real party leader by the boys' club still running politics in Canada. And if they win that one, she'd probably have enough cachet to be invited to all the other leaders' debates taking place without her, and asked to toss the first pitch at the World Series opener in TO come October. Go Jays!

Tongue-in-cheek (well, sort of :) letters to the editor aside, I think it's terrible that the Globe and Mail (with partners Google and CPAC), the Munk Debates and others are leaving the Green Party leader out of the picture, especially as she knows far more about climate change (including its colossal economic impacts) than any of the others, and Canadians need to hear her perspective. (If you missed the Maclean's debate in early August, which did include Ms May, you can catch it on YouTube here.)

Even if you can't stomach frightening environmental and social justice scenarios about how climate change will affect your kids and grandchildren, you might consider looking at a big US bank's assessment of the economic costs. In a report released earlier this month, Citibank says - this is huge! - that not acting on climate change will have a $44 trillion negative impact on the worldwide economy by 2060. The much more palatable news is that taking action to cut carbon pollution and slow global warming will result in 'a positive return on investment'. 

There you go. Aside from all the other compelling reasons to act on climate, turns out it makes huge economic sense too, and Citibank isn't the first corporation or biz organization to say so. Big question though: Will the Globe and Mail have the courage to put climate squarely up front as perhaps the biggest economic issue of our time at its leaders' debate on the economy September 17 ?

Here's a suggestion for action: Email Globe and Mail Editor David Walmsley (dwalmsley@globeandmail.com), asking the Globe and its partners to include Elizabeth May in the Sept 17 debate. If you need more fodder for your email, Maclean's offers Five Non-Partisan Reasons Elizabeth May belongs in all the debates, including this one:  "No one can call BS or challenge her colleagues’ performance with more authority than May, a crucial skill, given the fact that climate change, greenhouse gas emissions targets, the state of the oil sands and pipeline construction/approvals are hot-button election issues. One example last Thursday {August 6}: May’s relentless, ultimately unsuccessful, attempt to get Thomas Mulcair to nail down his position on Kinder Morgan." 

Cheers, Liz

PS. If and when you do read this, please know all comments will be most welcome...unless - and until - climate denier trolls start to swarm all over the page.