Canada's Tories Taking Wrong Tack on Climate Change

Whistler Question/Canada
July 1, 2006

In the past few years, Canadian industry have trotted out a series of skeptics who either expressed doubts about whether climate change was happening or that government-imposed mandatory targets for industry were the answer.

And true enough, Canada's record on greenhouse-gas-emissions reductions under the former Liberal government in Ottawa was abysmal — not even measuring up to the record of the United States, which wasn't then and isn't now a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol.

These days, as Canadians get ready to celebrate the country's 139th birthday, the debate rages across the country over what's the best approach to reducing the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. But it seems nobody in government —not Prime Minister Stephen Harper nor Environment Minister Rona Ambrose — denies the evidence showing that climate change is happening, and that the human inhabitants of Planet Earth can act to slow or even reverse its effects.

What's most unfortunate is that, as all this hot air is being emitted by those involved in the debate, climate change appears to be accelerating.

As mentioned above, the record shows that the Liberals' approach to meeting Canada's Kyoto targets wasn't showing much in the way of results, so a “new” approach in Ottawa is required.

However, we need to remember that although we've come nowhere close to meeting targets in the past, it's still possible to do worse. And in our view, the current Tory approach — scrapping both mandatory industry targets and programs aimed at engaging ordinary citizens in the fight against climate change — is likely to lead Canada further downward into the abyss.

This week, the federal Liberals issued a “reality check” that slammed the Tory government for its plan to scrap the One-Tonne Challenge and EnerGuide programs in spite of advice from departmental officials that the programs were “engaging citizens” and were as “fundamental” to addressing climate change as were measures taken against large industrial polluters.

In our view, the Harper government's approach to these programs is analogous to throwing out the baby with the bathwater. We understand the desire to review and try to fix what's wrong, but why reinvent the wheel just because it happens to have been created by your predecessors? True enough, as Dr. David Suzuki points out, some of those who took advantage of the EnerGuide program — which provided tax breaks to those who purchased energy-efficient appliances —would have purchased those appliances anyway, with or without the financial incentive. But scrapping such a program sends the message that it's OK to buy energy-sapping models as long as you can afford the added cost. It's a step in the wrong direction.

On the industrial front, does Ms. Ambrose really believe voluntary targets for industry will result in greenhouse-gas reductions? Sure, the Liberals' approach wasn't working — but mostly because it wasn't tough enough on polluters. Again, some adjustments to Canada's approach are in order, but don't scrap the whole thing just because it isn't the Tory way.

Last week, the Government of Quebec released its own climate-change plan, and it's a far cry from the laissez-fair approach being taken by the Feds. It includes a target to reduce emissions by 1.5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. It also includes a new, mandatory building code that is expected to improve energy efficiency in buildings by 25 per cent. Most notably, it requires that all vehicles sold in Quebec meet the fuel-efficiency requirements of those sold in California, which has the toughest emissions and fuel-efficiency standards in North America.

Canada's energy- and fuel-efficiency standards need to be strengthened, and the approach being taken by Quebec is a laudable one. It's certainly far more progressive than the approach being taken by Mr. Charest's Tory buddies in Ottawa.