The Harper government loses vote in Parliament on Kyoto commitments

[Kiraly]

The Harper government loses vote in Parliament on Kyoto commitments

With mounting criticism from international leaders over Canada's new position on climate change, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority government suffered its first major defeat in Parliament, losing a vote on the country's commitments on greenhouse gas reduction spelled out in the Kyoto accord. Opposition parties teamed up to defeat the Conservatives 169-125 on the motion introduced by the Bloc Quebecois. It calls on the government to respect its international Kyoto protocol objective to reduce greenhouse gases by 6% below 1990 levels. Meantime, Environment Minister Rona Ambrose, right, was facing criticism from her German counterpart at an international climate change conference in Bonn.

How do the opposition parties suggest we reach this near impossible objective?

6% below 1990 levels? This is simply not realistic.

I would love to see a detailed plan of what would need to be done for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to this level.

I think it would open the eyes of many Canadians.

[shoop]

The irony of this vote is how any Liberal MP could vote for the motion.

The Liberals paid lip service to Kyoto but didn't do much to actually meet the targets. Oh, excuse me there was the "One-ton challenge". Whatever...

Calling this a "major defeat" is a little bit of hyperbole.

I would love to see a detailed plan of what would need to be done for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to this level.

I think it would open the eyes of many Canadians.

[TopHat]

I agree, it is not a major defeat but I think the one tonne challange was a little helpful, maybe a little unrealistic. Overall I dropped my eco-footprint probably a couple hectres. There should be a better attemt made at trying though.

[Wilber]

I'm sure there were, are Liberals who were, are committed to Kyoto but it sure wasn't, isn't their leadership. It was, is all show and politics for them. At least our present government doesn't try to perpetuate the lie that we can actually meet our Kyoto commitments.

[Nocrap]

I'm sure there were, are Liberals who were, are committed to Kyoto but it sure wasn't, isn't their leadership. It was, is all show and politics for them. At least our present government doesn't try to perpetuate the lie that we can actually meet our Kyoto commitments.

Yes, yes and yes.

Did anyone see Rona Ambrose on the Mercer Report? She was only asked to tap a tree for maple syrup 'Ewww...I'm the Environmental Minister...I can't hurt a tree'. Of course the major polluting of the Alberta Tar Sands she's fine with.

What a disgrace for women everywhere.

[margrace]

A lot of our young people saw the one tonne advertizements, I know that some of my Grandchildren did and they are environmentaly conscience. Instead of raising a bunch of kids that are taught to look down on others it would behove some of us to think of all Canadian Children's futures.

[scribblet]

The irony of this vote is how any Liberal MP could vote for the motion.

The Liberals paid lip service to Kyoto but didn't do much to actually meet the targets. Oh, excuse me there was the "One-ton challenge". Whatever...

Calling this a "major defeat" is a little bit of hyperbole.

I would love to see a detailed plan of what would need to be done for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to this level.

I think it would open the eyes of many Canadians.

Ambrose has more credibility than most Liberals, if people think the liberals were doing will, why are emissions increasing.

The Liberals made grand promises and gave grander speeches while achieving nothing.

At least Ambrose has the gumption to tell it like it is; Canada did nothing and cannot achieve Kyoto goals. And why should we pay China or Russia to continue polluting.

I'm proud that we finally have a gov't with its head out of the enviromental sand. With Rona Ambrose now in charge, maybe we can find a more sensible and workable solution to the problem.

Credibility- the quality, capability or power to elicit belief - something to liberals managed to give the appearance of having, but don't actually have. They made great speeches but achieved nothing, at least Ambrose will try to meet more realistic goals.

[Technocrat]

Kyoto and Afganistan have illustrated something funny as of late in Canadian Politics.

CPC arguing that Canada must honor its international commitments to Nato and stay in Afganistan for 2 more years.

Apparently our definition of 'international commitment' is pretty fluid. Kyoto is an international commitment and yet it is being tossed aside for... nothing.... great plan.

I spoke with my brother yesterday, environment canada had everything ready to go for Kyoto they were just waiting for the green light to impliment. Now all of the planning and programs that were ready to start reducing emmissions were scrapped, save for the largest industrial emmitters.

Personally I think that abandoning Kyoto is a shortsighted move. Its really screwed Canada's credibility the next time we come to the table looking to make international agreements.

[Kiraly]

Kyoto and Afganistan have illustrated something funny as of late in Canadian Politics.

CPC arguing that Canada must honor its international commitments to Nato and stay in Afganistan for 2 more years.

Apparently our definition of 'international commitment' is pretty fluid. Kyoto is an international commitment and yet it is being tossed aside for... nothing.... great plan.

Difference is one can be kept, the other, realistically cannot.

I spoke with my brother yesterday, environment canada had everything ready to go for Kyoto they were just waiting for the green light to impliment. Now all of the planning and programs that were ready to start reducing emmissions were scrapped, save for the largest industrial emmitters.

Care to elaborate how these programs were going to help us drastically reduce our emissions?

Personally I think that abandoning Kyoto is a shortsighted move. Its really screwed Canada's credibility the next time we come to the table looking to make international agreements.

I think Canada loses credibility when it criticizes a country that is doing a better job then it in cutting its emissions.

[August1991]

A lot of our young people saw the one tonne advertizements, I know that some of my Grandchildren did and they are environmentaly conscience. Instead of raising a bunch of kids that are taught to look down on others it would behove some of us to think of all Canadian Children's futures.

Margrace, the problem with the Liberal CO2 policy was that when all is said and done, it amounted to an advertising campaign. (One could argue that the Liberal solution to any problem was an advertising campaign, but I digress.)

Canada can reduce its CO2 emissions, and it can probably reduce them in ways that are not too costly. For the most part, these methods would be invisible to most Canadians just as few of us know anything about, or need to know anything about, most industrial processes.

Environment protection will not occur through Grade Six kids drawing pictures of the world and having their "awareness raised".

[geoffrey]

I still haven't heard anyone from the anti-CPC stance on Kyoto side tell me what exactly Kyoto has accomplished since it was signed in both Canada and in the world?

The Asia-Pacific Partnership is a much better treaty for greenhouse gas emissions, as it actually involves real emitters instead of just a collection of minor powers. The targets are acheivable, unlike Kyoto, without any major economic damage. Without acheivable targets, you'll never see any improvement.

Exactly like Kyoto. Our country has polluted more since we've signed it.

So please, left-wing people, enlighten me on all that Kyoto has done for Canada and the world?

[Kiraly]

So please, left-wing people, enlighten me on all that Kyoto has done for Canada and the world?

I'm still waiting to hear from the pro-Kyoto contingent what needs to be done to reduce our emissions to 6% below 1990 levels.

[Kiraly]

...the problem with the Liberal CO2 policy was that when all is said and done, it amounted to an advertising campaign. (One could argue that the Liberal solution to any problem was an advertising campaign, but I digress.)

I think the Liberals realize that it will do almost nothing to solve the problem...

...however, it does give the appearance that they are doing something.

[Hicksey]

I think that vote was all Ottawa politics and not based at all in reality.

After all what person would vote to extend a flawed protocol that not even the party that signed it thought was worth seriously implementing.

I don't know Harper's actual plan is the best, but I agree with him that we are better off with a homegrown solution.

As long as polluters can keep buying polution credits we all lose. I submit that anyone really concerned with the environment should trumpet a "made in Canada" solution that can be tailored to balance the need for major environmental reform with the need for not necessarily low but reasonable energy prices, but with an eye not just to cleaning the air, but also significant progress toward cleaner water and less polution in the ground. IMO Canada can do even better than Kyoto with a solution of our own that is conducive to both environmental and economic success. I think the biggest secret to it is to make environmentally friendly solution the cheaper solution. Right now the environmentally friendly choices are expensive enough that they are out of reach financially to many people. Part of paying the true cost of the energy we use should be a financial reward for choosing environmentally friendly solutions and subsequently a penalty for solutions not as friendly.

[Argus]

So please, left-wing people, enlighten me on all that Kyoto has done for Canada and the world?

I'm still waiting to hear from the pro-Kyoto contingent what needs to be done to reduce our emissions to 6% below 1990 levels.

There is no physical way of doing that. The only possible way we could "honour our commitments" would be to buy environment credits off third world countries for hundreds of millions of dollars. This, of course, does absolutely zilch to improve air quality, but it solves, legalistically, the problem of meeting our targets.

[Rue]

Kyoto and Afganistan have illustrated something funny as of late in Canadian Politics.

CPC arguing that Canada must honor its international commitments to Nato and stay in Afganistan for 2 more years.

Apparently our definition of 'international commitment' is pretty fluid. Kyoto is an international commitment and yet it is being tossed aside for... nothing.... great plan.

Excellent point. The problem is if you are Mr. Harper and want to be George Bush the Second, such inconsistencies aren't a problem.

[Kiraly]

There is no physical way of doing that. The only possible way we could "honour our commitments" would be to buy environment credits off third world countries for hundreds of millions of dollars. This, of course, does absolutely zilch to improve air quality, but it solves, legalistically, the problem of meeting our targets.

Exactly.

Buying a Costa Rican forest or investing in dilapidated Russian factories will do nothing to lower emissions. This I cannot support.

I wonder how many realize that this is how the previous government intended to fulfull its Kyoto commitment.