My experience at the all-candidates' debate in Keady recently convinced me that Dick Hibma, the Green party candidate, is the man I should vote for.
I was angry when some of the political parties tried to exclude Elizabeth May from the national televised debates. That failed attempt made me sit up and pay attention during this election.
So I drove from my home in the south of our riding up to Keady to see our local candidates in action, and I'm glad I did.
The Conservative, Liberal and NDP candidates were about what I expected -lots of references to party platforms, lots of promises and lots of criticisms of the other parties. But Hibma avoided these tired and predictable political habits.
Instead he offered practical ideas
and a positive attitude. He is willing to work with members from any party to get things done for the people he hopes to represent. How refreshing!

Read the full story here

Once again, we in the riding of Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound have the chance to make a real difference in the political scenery. Our Green party candidate, Dick Hibma, represents positive change that is long overdue.

Read the full story here

An open letter to the leaders of Canada’s federal political parties from economists teaching in Canadian colleges and universities

The press release and the list of signatories (more than 230 and counting) are over here. Here's the letter:
One of the few issues on which most economists agree is the need for public policy to protect the environment. Why so much agreement? Because in the absence of policy, individuals generally don’t take the environmental consequences of their actions into account, and the result is “market failure” and excessive levels of pollution. Environmental degradation diminishes the quality of life for all of us. And without a healthy environment, we can’t sustain a healthy economy. We, the undersigned, have therefore joined together to express our shared views on effective policies to address climate change.
We are non-partisan and will undoubtedly be supporting different parties in this election. Our goal is not to criticize or praise one party or another, but rather to offer our collective views, as economists, to help inform public debate on these matters at a critical time – during a federal election campaign.
What Needs to be Done
While Canada clearly cannot solve the climate change problem on its own, we need to do our part, and this requires immediate and substantive action by our federal government. We make this statement fully acknowledging the importance of other issues to Canadian voters, such as the turmoil in financial markets and our military involvement in Afghanistan. But climate scientists state that we bear the costs of our lack of action on carbon reduction on a daily basis, and within a few decades the impacts of climate change could be truly catastrophic—unless we take action now. Even those who are not quite convinced by today's scientific evidence need to consider the costs of not acting now. If they turn out to be wrong, and we wait for complete certainty, it will be too late.
All the major political parties have stated that they understand the need to act on carbon emissions. The question then becomes what action to take. Any action (including inaction) will have substantial economic consequences and , thus, economics lies at the heart of the debate on climate change.
With this letter, we hope to help put the debate on a more solid economic foundation by offering the following set of principles upon which we believe climate change policy should be founded.
1.
Canada needs to act on climate change now.
2. Any substantive action will involve economic costs. Any effective carbon-reduction policy will necessarily entail changing the way we live and do business. All forms of regulation, taxes, or markets for the exchange of emission permits that have a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions will affect the prices of carbon-intensive goods.
3. These economic impacts cannot be an excuse for inaction. Climate scientists are clear on the costs of inaction, and that these costs will accumulate well beyond the current business cycle, possibly at an accelerating rate. Active and effective climate change policy should be seen as an investment that will yield pay-offs for ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. Given the need to act, the question then becomes which policies would obtain the carbon reduction goals we establish with the lowest cost and greatest level of fairness.
4. Pricing carbon is the best approach from an economic perspective. Approaches to reaching any particular climate change goal that involve pricing carbon, such as carbon taxes and cap and trade systems, involve less economic damage to businesses and families than the alternatives. Carbon pricing is good for several reasons:
1. Pricing allows each business and family to choose the response that is best and most efficient for them. Firms and families will differ greatly in the options they have for reducing their use of carbon, as well as in the value they place on carbon-generating activities. Price mechanisms give everyone the incentive to reduce their carbon use, but to do so to the degree and in the way that is best for them. This is the main reason that pricing policies are the lowest-cost way to meet our climate change goals.
2. Pricing induces innovation. As the price of carbon increases, users of carbon intensive goods will demand alternatives. This will induce innovations in the goods and services that are produced, how those goods and services are produced, and the way people live. By moving relatively early in terms of climate policy, Canada has an opportunity to innovate and sell new technologies to the rest of the world.
3. Carbon is almost certainly under-priced right now. In a fully efficient price system, the price we pay for a product would reflect the full costs of producing and using it, including the costs to the environment. Prices do not currently reflect those environmental costs. When carbon is under-priced, consumers and businesses tend to use too much of it. Policies that increase the price of carbon provide the proper incentives for consumers and businesses when they are making their investment and consumption decisions.
5. Regulation tends to be the most expensive way to meet a given climate change goal. Under regulation, businesses and consumers are mandated to take particular actions related to carbon use (e.g., use a particular technology or stay under mandated levels with no option to trade carbon emission rights). As a result, they are not given the choice of adjusting in the way that is best for them. Regulation therefore increases the costs of achieving carbon reduction compared to when pricing mechanisms such as a carbon tax or a cap and trade system are used. Furthermore, while regulations imposed on firms may appear to be so far removed from the typical consumer that they might think they will not bear these costs, this is not true. Those increased costs will be passed on to consumers due to normal market forces. There may be circumstances when regulation is the appropriate policy tool, but in most cases it is the most economically damaging.
6. A carbon tax has the advantage of providing certainty in the price of carbon. Under a carbon tax, a charge is added to the sale of all fuels according to the carbon emitted when they are used. With a well-designed carbon tax strategy, the tax will be introduced gradually and increased in pre-announced increments until the environmental target is reached . This provides investors with a degree of certainty that is good for business, and allows consumers to make adjustments knowing what is coming. The exact impact of the price increase on the quantity of carbon emitted can be predicted, although with some margin of error. A carbon tax thus involves choosing price certainty but accepting some uncertainty in total carbon emissions.
7. A cap and trade system provides certainty on the quantity of carbon emitted, but not on the price of carbon and can be a highly complex policy to implement. In a cap and trade system, an upper limit (cap) is set on carbon emissions, usually for a particular industry. The government must then make a decision about whether to auction the permits (known as allowances), requiring each firm to buy enough allowances to cover its total emissions. Normal market forces then determine the price of these allowances such that supply equals demand. A cap and trade system with auctioned allowances then acts much like a carbon tax. The price cannot, however, be predicted in advance. Alternatively, the government can issue allowances to firms without charge, then open up the market for trading. In this situation, there is both the uncertainty about the price and potential for significant problems to emerge in the market based on how the allowances are initially allocated. The Emission Trading System in the European Union began by distributing too many allowances and as a result the price fell to close to zero, rendering the policy ineffective. Thus, while a cap and trade system can in principle be equivalent to a carbon tax in terms of its ultimate impacts on the price and quantity of carbon, and will generally give more certainty in meeting environmental targets if the allowances are properly chosen, the price uncertainty in the cap and trade system generally implies a worse environment for long-range decision-making on the part of businesses and consumers.
8. Policies that impose costs on producers (big or small) affect consumers. Some voters seem to think that policies like cap and trade, which apply directly to producers, have less impact on the prices they face than carbon taxes, where the impact can be seen immediately. In fact, voters would do better to assume that all such policies would, ultimately, affect the prices they pay. Indeed, since the goal of these policies is to change what we buy, policies applied to producers must affect the prices faced by consumers if they are to meet environmental goals. The argument that a policy capable of reducing carbon emissions will only affect producers is without economic merit.
9. Price mechanisms can be regressive and our policy should address this. Like most taxes on goods and services that are widely consumed, carbon pricing will have a larger negative effect on lower income Canadian families than others. As we have stated, the same is true of regulation since regulation also raises costs of production and those increased costs will ultimately show up in higher prices. Thus, whatever policy is used, a complete policy should include some element of redistribution to address the impacts it will have on the least well off in our society. Not only will the costs to consumers ultimately be lower under a carbon tax or auctioned emission permits, these latter policies also have the potential to bring revenue into the government that can be used to help offset any inordinate hardship experienced among the least well-off. This is not true of regulatory approaches, or of a cap and trade system in which the allowances are allocated without charge to emitters.
10. A pricing mechanism can allow other taxes to be reduced and provide an opportunity to improve the tax system. With the revenue brought in from a carbon tax or from auctioning the allowances in a cap and trade system, governments can provide general cuts in income and/or corporate taxes. Such systems can be “tax neutral”, meaning the increased burden of the carbon taxes is exactly offset by tax reductions elsewhere, but this result will depend on the details of the particular policy adopted. Under such a plan, lighter carbon users will tend to pay lower taxes overall, while heavier polluters will pay more, corresponding to their greater negative effects on the environment. At the same time, all individuals will continue to have an incentive to reduce their carbon emissions when prices include the cost of their carbon usage. If the tax redesign is done thoughtfully, Canada could move toward an overall tax system, which imposes fewer burdens on the economy and, as a result, leads to a more productive economy for all Canadians.
In closing, we ask you, the leaders of Canada’s major political parties, to immediately begin a substantive public debate, grounded in the generally accepted economic principles outlined above, on the best ways to address climate change. Our collective future is truly in your hands.

Hibma, a former three-term Owen Sound city councillor, comes across as a thoughtful man, offering measured and careful responses to questions. Even when residents tell him he's "head and shoulders above the other candidates," Hibma marks them down only as "weak" Green supporters -- a cautious response to flattering words.
Hibma fields questions about where he stands on Afghanistan (he wants to clarify the mission and set clearer goals), the economy (he says a strong economy is directly linked to sound environmental policies).
Then there's the all-encompassing, "What's the Green party about, anyway?"

Read the full story here

A poll conducted by Oracle Research released October 6th shows a huge number of voters in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound remain undecided with seven days to go before election day.This group of voters will determine the outcome of the election.  With Larry Miller at 38% and the Green Party candidate Dick Hibma at 22%, it is clearly now a two-way contest.  One in five voters in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound are still undecided.  Voters who want a change have not chosen who will get their support. "Now those voters can feel confident in voting Green. Together we can have a vision of hope and local economic prosperity in Bruce-Grey, " says Hibma.

The Green Party will be a contender again in the Oct. 14 federal election in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound.Before a capacity crowd of more than 300 people at Thursday’s all-candidates meeting at the Harry Lumley Bayshore Community Centre in Owen Sound, Green candidate Dick Hibma did all he needed to maintain the growth of his party’s appeal to area voters.Hibma spoke effectively and to the point, at times eloquently, about the need for change in Canadian society.Hibma, a former Owen Sound city councillor and long-time chairman of the association of conservation authorities in Ontario, Hibma kept it simple and inspirational during a meeting in which the our other candidates dealt mainly in party platform detail and cross-party critiques.“Our history is built on wood, coal and oil,” Hibma said during his opening remarks. “I would suggest that our future is built on democracy and leadership and vision. That future is one that responds to challenges like rising fuel costs, like plant closings and a response to those challenges with positive thinking and working toward solutions.” Read the full story here. 

There was common ground among the participants in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound’s first all-candidates meeting of the 2008 federal election campaign.
Partisanship was also evident in the proceedings Thursday night at the Harry Lumley Bayshore Community Centre in Owen Sound.

There were a number of instances Thursday when the candidates were on the same page. Noble and Hibma agreed that the return of rail service to the area is something long overdue. “Good ideas have no colour,” Hibma told Noble. “We’ll work together on that one.”

The federal election campaign for the Bruce Grey Owen Sound riding is in full swing. It was standing room only at the Bayshore Community Centre in Owen Sound. Many residents were able to ask questions on the several issues facing our nation from: the economy to health care to the environment.

Green Party Candidate Dick Hibma he feels the public will be looking at
which candidate is the best leader to represent their riding.

Hibma says it's time for the politicians to take the great ideas from the riding and make them happen.

Some parties seek out candidates that are on fire but 100 Greens in Ontario's Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound riding just nominated one that is radioactive. Dick Hibma, a three term Owen Sound city councilor and chairman of Conservation Ontario also happens to be an employee of Bruce (Nuclear) Power.
Hibma said that his job at a nuclear plant may trouble some party members but I believe the issue is much bigger than that. His nomination goes to the fundamental nature of our party, especially considering that he beat out a more conventional Green candidate who walked the talk.

Green party candidate Dick Hibma purchased carbon offsets for the estimated five tonnes of carbon he and his campaign team will use in their efforts to get him elected in the Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound riding.
“We are going to walk-the-walk in this campaign,” said Hibma. “This is the kind of action you can expect from the Green party in Parliament.”
For this campaign, Green party offsets are being invested in third-party verified sustainable energy projects. The offsets are being used to reduce emissions by retrofitting inefficient buildings in central Canada.

The Green Party of Canada today released its complete election platform, a plan that looks forward to an equitable society with a thriving, clean economy.

The plan, fully costed by an independent economist, focuses on the Green Tax Shift, which will use money from taxes on greenhouse gas emissions and toxic pollutants - the things we don't want - and use the money to support what we do want, such as good jobs, tax cuts for individuals and businesses, poverty reduction, and measures to help companies lead Canada into the post-carbon economy

The Green Party candidate for Bruce-Grey-Owen-Sound is out with a new challenge.
Dick Hibma has announced he will purchase carbon offsets for the five tonnes of carbon he predicts he will generate during this federal election campaign.
And Hibma says he's challenging other candidates in the riding to acknowledge that something needs to be done to minimize their carbon footprint.

Read the the full story

Dick Hibma, local Green Party candidate, visited Meaford last week to speak to voters and Green Party supporters before the upcoming election.

Green party candidate Dick Hibma officially opened a downtown campaign office Monday, vowing to use the party's growing momentum in the Bruce-Grey- Owen Sound riding to get elected.
"There is an enormous appetite for Green party policies in this riding. I think we can make some very serious inroads and win this riding," Hibma said shortly after using gardening shears to cut a green, hand-woven ribbon made of common reed, an invasive plant taken from the Kelso Beach area.
"Realistically I think I have a very good chance (of getting elected).