New York City, January 18, 2006.

This article is prompted by an article “Stephen Harper’s Canada?” posted on on January 17, 2006, on GLOBEANDMAIL.com The article is subtitled - “Just look at John Howard’s Australia.”

We have this month gone through the AP6 meeting in Sydney, and I witnessed how the Canadian Conservative Party managed to subvert the Montreal Conference in December 2005 by pulling the plug from under the Canadian Liberal Party, and in effect from under the Canadian National Government at a time that the world was looking at Canada. www.SustainabiliTank.info has several articles on these topics. We even predicted that after the Conservative takeover of Canada’s Government, it can be expected that AP6 will be turned into an AP7 with Canada joining the US, and Australia, in a Conservative pro-oil&coal brotherhood. Who knows, Canada may even eventually brake up and parts of Canada will join the US.

The Globe and Mail of Toronto came out today backing the Canadian Conservative Party. The article says basically that the Canadian Conservatives of Stephen Harper are acting the same way as John Howard’s Australian Liberal Party. Now please forget the difference in names of the parties, in effect the two parties have in common the backing of the fossil fuels industry - be this oil or coal. In effect, what the pro-Conservatives article does not say is that both parties are very similar to the Conservative wing of the US Republican Party. Now we get to the point - the three parties - the Republicans in the US, the Liberals in Australia, and the Conservatives in Canada - purport to have a very similar ideology and in effect act in very similar ways. Is here also a dream come true for those wanting to re-enact some sort of post-colonial British union?

We will now let the article written by by Mr. Greg Burns, an Australian, speak for itself:

Following upon the Australian-Canadian-Election article of above, it is interesting to say what the Canadian Liberal Party, most probably outgoing Prime Minister, Paul Martin, has to say. He is very blunt in his evaluation of the situation. He is warning that Mr. Stephen Harper “would turn the country into a bastion for a US-style extreme right” - and he is probably right. CNN.com points out that The Globe and Mail has taken “Martin to task for having spoken in a debate on Monday against personal attacks and drive-by-smears.” The truth is that both sides use smear tactics in these elections, but the Liberals know to say that the Conservatives got some of their funding from interests south of the border. Economically, Canada has it now better then ever, Martin is campaigning on his record of having decreased taxes and tamed a yawning budget deficit in the mid-1990s. But all of this will be to no avail in face of a fallange backed by industry that wants to dismantle some of the social structure, and decrease taxes even further.

Canada’s Greens see up to a million votes but no seats. They are shut out of a realistic stab at seats by a first-past-the-post electoral system which means that the winner needs a simple majority, like in the US, to be elected - no proportional representation in Canada’s elections. They hope for a 6% protest vote, and may end up acting like Canadian Naderites - helping the Conservatives by siphoning off votes from the Liberals. Tindal, the Green Party candidate for Toronto Centre said: “People sometimes tell me that they think the Greens have the best ideas, but they don’t feel like they can vote for us. And when people don’t feel they can vote for the best ideas, our democracy is in serious trouble.”

Last time the Greens picked 583,00 votes and won no seats (this time probably about one million); the Liberals 4.950.000 votes and 135 seats; and the Conservatives (the favorites this time) 3.990.000 votes and 99 seats.

What a difference between the Canadian Liberals, and the Australian so called Liberals, who are the most conservative party to have ruled Australia.