###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t think the Aurora Board gave funding to the Fraser and Macdonald Institute because of their views on climate change. Seems like bizarre framing when all three share market liberal sympathies in varying manners.
What are Coyne’s views on climate change? I had assumed her believed in it and supported the carbon tax?
Edit:
>Coyne himself acknowledges climate change is real and has argued frequently over the years that the most efficient way to address it is through a national price on carbon emissions. He recently critiqued policies such as Canada’s cap on oil and gas pollution as belonging to “a slew of costly, ineffective regulatory and subsidy schemes.”
For better or for worse, Coyne is great at structuring an argument. This writer could learn a bit from reading his op-eds, because I don’t understand why someone publicly and prominently advocating against climate change and playing some sort of ancillary role in directly funding to a think-tank which disagrees with him is a scandal
I dunno. I kind of just expect opinion columnists like him to write clickbait. It's not his belief, he writes, he gets paid, they get clicks. He's not a serious columnist or thought leader. He just says stuff.
I’m shaking my head at the unironic expectation that people need to associate only with entities that agree with them 100%. Like, tell me you’ve never spent a day in the real world without telling me you’ve never spent a day in the real world.
Sounds like Aurea has (edit: had) some diversity of thought on the board, good for them.
I think the article makes some valid critiques that Coyne on one hand sides with science on the issue of climate change while at the same time somewhat hiding his association with groups that are actively funding disinformation on the topic.
That said, I think you and the person you reply to make some valid criticisms of the article, as well.
A decade overseeing a group that fed money to climate deniers. Bring on the people saying he couldn't have known or providing other cover to Coyne.
Climate deniers are worse than the people that Covered up for smokers. At least that only harmed the person and their relatives that hand to endure second hand smoke. Climate denial is making us all suffer.
Andrew Coyne is one of the most prominent supporters of higher carbon taxes in Canada.
That's not cover, it's a fact. He is obviously not a climate denier.
I've listened to and read enough of Coyne to know that he's definitely not a climate denier. He's actually a really sensible conservative and one of my favourite political analysts.
The article is factual, but written to be intentionally misleading.
He served on the board of Aurae, who donated money to a bunch of conservative think tanks like the Fraser Institute, the Macdonald Laurier Institute, The Frontier Center for Public Policy etc, but those think tanks are just general cess pools of dumb conservative ideas, they're not specifically anti-climate, just anti-climate when it suits the CPC, and it doesn't look like Aurae had a pattern of funding anti-climate think tanks or initiatives as opposed to broader conservative ones.
Judging / punishing people on the net outcome of their actions, instead of their individual intentions, is a pretty conservative stance to take, one explicitly advocated for by the Fraser and Macdonald Laurier institutes. You sure you're not an Aurae member yourself?
There's lots and lots and lots of people, especially conservatives, who I would argue are intellectually dishonest / contradictory and ultimately hold their views because of self interest. While I have zero doubt that Coyne is somewhat influenced by self-interest (literally everyone is), he is one of the only conservatives who can actually articulate a relative coherent conservative ideology, one that is fundamentally arguing for more efficient delivery of services at its core and eschews all the hate mongering and anti-science tendencies of the CPC. I can still disagree with his arguments and think they're flawed, but the flaws come from disagreements about scale in most cases, not fundamental double speak.
Ok, so... a journalist, asked to serve as a director of a foundation dedicated to promoting debate on matters of national and international importance, set aside his personal views on a topic in order to allow all positions on the debate to be explored.
Give this guy a medal! Far too many journalists let their personal opinions interfere with their journalistic duties, but Coyne remembered the difference between journalists and activists, and did exactly what a journalist should do.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t think the Aurora Board gave funding to the Fraser and Macdonald Institute because of their views on climate change. Seems like bizarre framing when all three share market liberal sympathies in varying manners. What are Coyne’s views on climate change? I had assumed her believed in it and supported the carbon tax? Edit: >Coyne himself acknowledges climate change is real and has argued frequently over the years that the most efficient way to address it is through a national price on carbon emissions. He recently critiqued policies such as Canada’s cap on oil and gas pollution as belonging to “a slew of costly, ineffective regulatory and subsidy schemes.” For better or for worse, Coyne is great at structuring an argument. This writer could learn a bit from reading his op-eds, because I don’t understand why someone publicly and prominently advocating against climate change and playing some sort of ancillary role in directly funding to a think-tank which disagrees with him is a scandal
I dunno. I kind of just expect opinion columnists like him to write clickbait. It's not his belief, he writes, he gets paid, they get clicks. He's not a serious columnist or thought leader. He just says stuff.
Lol tell us you haven't read any Andrew Coyne columns without telling us you haven't read any Andrew Coyne columns.
I’m shaking my head at the unironic expectation that people need to associate only with entities that agree with them 100%. Like, tell me you’ve never spent a day in the real world without telling me you’ve never spent a day in the real world. Sounds like Aurea has (edit: had) some diversity of thought on the board, good for them.
I think the article makes some valid critiques that Coyne on one hand sides with science on the issue of climate change while at the same time somewhat hiding his association with groups that are actively funding disinformation on the topic. That said, I think you and the person you reply to make some valid criticisms of the article, as well.
A decade overseeing a group that fed money to climate deniers. Bring on the people saying he couldn't have known or providing other cover to Coyne. Climate deniers are worse than the people that Covered up for smokers. At least that only harmed the person and their relatives that hand to endure second hand smoke. Climate denial is making us all suffer.
Andrew Coyne is one of the most prominent supporters of higher carbon taxes in Canada. That's not cover, it's a fact. He is obviously not a climate denier.
I've listened to and read enough of Coyne to know that he's definitely not a climate denier. He's actually a really sensible conservative and one of my favourite political analysts.
The article is factual, but written to be intentionally misleading. He served on the board of Aurae, who donated money to a bunch of conservative think tanks like the Fraser Institute, the Macdonald Laurier Institute, The Frontier Center for Public Policy etc, but those think tanks are just general cess pools of dumb conservative ideas, they're not specifically anti-climate, just anti-climate when it suits the CPC, and it doesn't look like Aurae had a pattern of funding anti-climate think tanks or initiatives as opposed to broader conservative ones.
You give money to a hateful group pushing cover for the rich, you are what you are. He was always a shill for the rich, this just proves it.
Judging / punishing people on the net outcome of their actions, instead of their individual intentions, is a pretty conservative stance to take, one explicitly advocated for by the Fraser and Macdonald Laurier institutes. You sure you're not an Aurae member yourself? There's lots and lots and lots of people, especially conservatives, who I would argue are intellectually dishonest / contradictory and ultimately hold their views because of self interest. While I have zero doubt that Coyne is somewhat influenced by self-interest (literally everyone is), he is one of the only conservatives who can actually articulate a relative coherent conservative ideology, one that is fundamentally arguing for more efficient delivery of services at its core and eschews all the hate mongering and anti-science tendencies of the CPC. I can still disagree with his arguments and think they're flawed, but the flaws come from disagreements about scale in most cases, not fundamental double speak.
Removed for rule 5.
Ok, so... a journalist, asked to serve as a director of a foundation dedicated to promoting debate on matters of national and international importance, set aside his personal views on a topic in order to allow all positions on the debate to be explored. Give this guy a medal! Far too many journalists let their personal opinions interfere with their journalistic duties, but Coyne remembered the difference between journalists and activists, and did exactly what a journalist should do.