{"id":144,"date":"2008-09-12T07:47:20","date_gmt":"2008-09-12T12:47:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/election08.cusjc.ca\/?p=144"},"modified":"2008-09-12T10:18:59","modified_gmt":"2008-09-12T15:18:59","slug":"libs-losing-green-shift-battle-in-the-media","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cusjc.ca\/?p=144","title":{"rendered":"Libs losing Green Shift battle in the media"},"content":{"rendered":"

Paul Adams<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Liberals are losing their battle to define their own Green Shift plan in the media. The plan aims at cutting greenhouse gas emissions through carbon taxes, but a critical element in the architecture of the plan is the offsetting tax cuts to individuals and businesses. The Liberals even promise the Auditor-General will be brought in to certify that the Green Shift is “revenue neutral” — i.e., gives every cent it takes in carbon taxes back in tax relief of some kind.<\/p>\n

On CBC’s\u00a0World Report\u00a0<\/a>this morning, the Green Shift was twice described as a “carbon tax” — once in the intro and once more in the item. Although the story dealt with a “calculator” on the Liberals’ website that supposedly allows an individual to figure out how the tax and offsets would affect them, the plan was never clearly explained. If you didn’t already know about the offsets, this item would not have enlightened you.<\/p>\n

The Ottawa Citizen\u00a0<\/a>ran a story today about Stephen Harper’s attack on the plan that, although sympathetic in tone to the Green Shift, refers to it as “Mr. Dion’s proposal for a carbon tax”. Nowhere in the story is there any mention of the tax offsets.<\/p>\n

In its front page story today,Dion’s Green Plan Would “Wreak Havoc”,\u00a0<\/a>the Globe does a better job. The offsets are mentioned only in the last few graphs (after the turn), but there is a large graphic that clearly spells out the taxes as well as the offsets.<\/p>\n

One supposes that the Liberals hoped the name “Green Shift” name itself would convey the message, but it doesn’t. A “tax” is a tax — everyone understands that. A “shift” can mean anything. The “Green Shift” name will only convey the full meaning of the plan once people already understand it, which most still do not do.\u00a0<\/p>\n

There are, of course, examples of reporters struggling to be fair to a complex plan, but Green Shift is falling foul of three intersecting forces:<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n