Opposition forces Kyoto bill,

[Leafless]

Now what will the Conservatives do?

PM Harper pushing the ignore button could set the Kyoto friendly Liberals off in a tizzy.

http://www.570news.com/news/national/artic...ontent=n021473A

[noahbody]

Now what will the Conservatives do?

PM Harper pushing the ignore button could set the Kyoto friendly Liberals off in a tizzy.

http://www.570news.com/news/national/artic...ontent=n021473A

Sticking with our Liberal commitments means giving money away to other countries that don't have the same circumstances. A) How does that benefit the environment? How much will it affect the economy C) Since the top 5 contributers are hydo and they'll pass on any fines or costs to customers, how much will my utilities bill go up?

[geoffrey]

Time to call an election. The in-reality leaderless Liberals don't stand a chance if the CPC can spin this right. Most Canadian's with a brain in their head understand that sending billions and billions of our dollars to China and Russia for them to build coal plants is not doing dick all for the environment.

It's the CPC majority to lose when the other 3 parties are so hell bent on destroying Canada's wealth for no actual change in international emissions. Today was a terrible day for our future.

[Leafless]

Most Canadian's with a brain in their head understand that sending billions and billions of our dollars to China and Russia for them to build coal plants is not doing dick all for the environment.

This could be a topic in itself.

Do Canadians have a brain in their head.

The automotive industry is a good example what happens when you don't buy domestically produced automobiles which equates to thousands of lost jobs in the automotive industry. Pertaining to our economy this is like Canadians shooting themselves in the foot.

And the same thing will basically apply to Kyoto, one way or the other the economy will feel the pinch again resulting in lost jobs and again Canadians shooting themselves in the foot.

PM Harper had it right initially and that is to improve our air quality here in Canada.

[geoffrey]

PM Harper had it right initially and that is to improve our air quality here in Canada.

Agreed. That's where it should have ended.

The Clean Air Act was weak, and needed to be improved. But outside of the current Kyoto framework.

Canadian's need to be educated on what Kyoto exactly is, and how the rest of the world is surely laughing at us for signed such a lopsided agreement. Russia essientially met their targets before it was ratified, because all of their Soviet industry collapsed after the 1990 start point. They actually have a margin to increase emissions and still get Canada's money, which they are planning on doing.

Then the African countries that have numerous development exceptions, which are obviously needed, but not at our expense. The ONLY country that is to be disadvantaged enourmously or has to bare any real cost is Canada, and our cost is massive. There is no recognition that most of our CO2 is produced in producing the raw materials that Europe and the US upgrade and sell worldwide. Nothing.

It's a awful, flawed social transfer program. When Canadians get this, either today or 10 years from now, they'll crucify those that put us in this position.

When Dion makes decisions like this, you've got to wonder which of his citizen nations he's truly supporting.

[Keepitsimple]

Now that it's come to a head, let's see if our mainstream media can give a balanced account of what it actually means to meet our targets by 2012. Anyone can see from reading this Blog and others that knowledgable people overwhelmingly acknowledge that the targets can't be met. The BC government just announced what the papers call an aggressive environment plan that will see them reduce their GHG by one-third by 2020. That doesn't come close to meeting Kyoto's 2012 date - and that's just BC - not dirty Ontario and Alberta. So mainstream media - poop or get off the pot.

[geoffrey]

Even Mr. Dion doesn't believe he can meet Kyoto... or at least that's what he thought a few months ago. Perhaps the weak kneed leader bowed to pressure from the radical wing of his party:

"In 2008, I will be part of Kyoto, but I will say to the world I don't think I will make it. Everyone is saying target, target. But ... it is to be more than to reach a target. It's to change the economy. It's to have resource productivity, energy efficiency when we know that energy will be the next crisis for the economy of the world." (National Post, July 1, 2006)

[jdobbin]

The automotive industry is a good example what happens when you don't buy domestically produced automobiles which equates to thousands of lost jobs in the automotive industry. Pertaining to our economy this is like Canadians shooting themselves in the foot.

So you buy a domestic cars even when they are crappy?

[Wilber]

Mr Dion is going to have to explain how he is going to reduce CO2 emissions by 30% in less than 5 years or send billions of the peoples money to other countries to pay for credits. I can hardly wait.

[jdobbin]

Time to call an election. The in-reality leaderless Liberals don't stand a chance if the CPC can spin this right. Most Canadian's with a brain in their head understand that sending billions and billions of our dollars to China and Russia for them to build coal plants is not doing dick all for the environment.

It's the CPC majority to lose when the other 3 parties are so hell bent on destroying Canada's wealth for no actual change in international emissions. Today was a terrible day for our future.

Perhaps it is time for an election.

I certainly don't think the Liberal plans for the environment was great but many people are still not convinced the Tories really believe in global warming anyway.

The next 60 days will tell.

[Wilber]

I think there will be. By presenting and passing a bill that commits the government to a schedule that all know is not attainable without destroying the economy, one has to wonder what the Liberals really believe in. They had ten years to reduce emissions by 5%, instead they increased by 25%. Now they want them reduced by 30% in 5 years. Too bad the country will have to go to the poles over a fairy tale.

[Riverwind]

Now they want them reduced by 30% in 5 years. Too bad the country will have to go to the poles over a fairy tale.

The stupid irony is that even if we met that target (i.e. reduce them by 30% in 5 years) we still would not meet our kyoto obligations because the kyoto obligations are based on a 4 year average starting in 2008. Meeting Kyoto would require that we _significantly_ exceed the target of 6% under the 1990 levels in 2012 in order to make up the higher emissions in the short term. I am not sure of the exact forumula but if you assume we are at least 20% over the target at the end of 2008 then we could have to exceed the target by at least 20% in 2012.

[August1991]

By presenting and passing a bill that commits the government to a schedule that all know is not attainable without destroying the economy, one has to wonder what the Liberals really believe in. They had ten years to reduce emissions by 5%, instead they increased by 25%. Now they want them reduced by 30% in 5 years. Too bad the country will have to go to the poles over a fairy tale.

God knows where this bill we lead us but I have to wonder like Baird, why didn't Rodriques introduce this private member's bill a year or so ago when Dion was environment minister? Or do the Liberals only care about a plan and not whether the plan is feasible or ever implemented?

This is playing politics and if the oppositrion pursues it, the whole thing could blow up in their faces.

I think someone will blink before it leads to an election.

[geoffrey]

The next 60 days will tell.

Budget is in March right?

The stupid irony is that even if we met that target (i.e. reduce them by 30% in 5 years) we still would not meet our kyoto obligations because the kyoto obligations are based on a 4 year average starting in 2008. Meeting Kyoto would require that we _significantly_ exceed the target of 6% under the 1990 levels in 2012 in order to make up the higher emissions in the short term. I am not sure of the exact forumula but if you assume we are at least 20% over the target at the end of 2008 then we could have to exceed the target by at least 20% in 2012.

That's even more disturbing. Either Harper will go to the polls over this, or he's going to bite to hold on to power a little longer. I haven't been impressed thus far, but I really think Harper has the sense not to have his name attached to the economic downfall of Canada.

[jdobbin]

Budget is in March right?

I think so. I don't think the Tories want to have an election if things start turning poorly in Afghanistan. The U.S. today said they are diverting troops there because their own generals think there could be a rise again as soon as the passes through the mountains are clear. A fall election may see the Tories down significantly in the polls on that issue alone.

The private members bill is as much to put the NDP's feet to the fire as it is the Tories.

Once the election is called, it won't be just the environment that is the issue.

Personally, I don't see much changing at the moment. Could be another minority. Which party, I don't know.

I don't think you can't say that the Tories don't want it though. I think they want to roll the dice despite weak polls.

[geoffrey]

Personally, I don't see much changing at the moment. Could be another minority. Which party, I don't know.

I don't think you can't say that the Tories don't want it though. I think they want to roll the dice despite weak polls.

I want another Tory minority so that we can give Harper the boot, and bring in someone electable for majority... hmmm eyeing you Mr. Lord.

[hiti]

The facts are:

*When comparable figures are used, pollution in Canada in 2002 actually decreased 13 per cent from 1998 levels.

*Emissions of sulphur oxides, which cause acid rain and smog decreased by 50 per cent.

*Emissions from toxic substances lead, mercury, cadmium and dioxins and furans dropped by 65 to 75 per cent from 1990 to 2003.

*In the chemical sector, annual releases of toxic substances have been reduced by two thirds since 1992, down to 1,100 tonnes from 3,400 tonnes.

*Since the 1970s Canada has reduced its mercury release by 90 per cent and more reductions are expected.

According to internal government documents, had the Conservatives not scrapped Project Green, Canada would have met 80 per cent of its Kyoto targets two years before the deadline.

Last May, 2006 at the UN Conference on Climate Change in Bonn, leaked documents revealed the Conservatives had instructed Canadian officials to deliberately undermine the current Kyoto regime and stall any progress beyond 2012, reversing Canada’s Kyoto position in favour of the Bush Administration’s position of voluntary, non-binding targets.

Now Canada ranks dead last among members of the G8 industrialized countries when it comes to keeping a pledge made last year to fight climate change by reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, according to a report prepared by researchers at the University of Toronto.

Canada has "no plan" to cut its emissions in the short or long term, and could have rising output of the gases blamed for global warming under the Conservatives' Clean Air Act because the legislation doesn't cap releases, the report said.

Steve Harper, you didn't get it done.

[FTA Lawyer]

I find it remarkable that so many "legal experts" are coming out to say in a very simplistic and summary way that the government must follow a law passed by Parliament...otherwise there will be lawsuits...

Look, I'm no expert on Kyoto, but I can tell you that the law imports reasonableness standards in almost every area, and legal obligations may be "binding" but nevertheless unenforceable. Consider a fanciful example...

Let's say that the opposition parties pushed through a bill and made a law compelling the federal government to paint the entire sky over Canada red and white with maple-leaf accents. So long as all Parliamentary procedure is followed and the vote is valid, then the law is, as these "experts" have been saying, binding.

For the government to refuse to paint the entire sky over Canada red and white with maple-leaf accents would be unlawful, contempt of Parliament or akin to a "coup" as the Liberals have suggested.

Notwithstanding all of that, the law compelling the federal government to paint the entire sky over Canada red and white with maple-leaf accents would be unenforceable. It's literally impossible to do.

So, if meeting Kyoto targets as required by the present bill working its way into law is impossible, then the law is meaningless and the only consequence facing the CPC for ignoring it will be an election. And I suspect that the CPC has it figured that things will go their way if they get to explain to Canadians that the only reason they're going to the polls is because the opposition forced them into having to ignore a law that was impossible to comply with.

By and large Canadians want to take the environment issue very seriously, but not with reckless abandon. If one looks at B.C.'s recent announcement...and put it into context as the CBC reported as possibly being the most aggressive plan in all of North America...and if trying to comply with this new bill / law would mean going way beyond the B.C. proposal, I think most Canadians will start to see it for the partisan publicity stunt that it is.

FTA

[Argus]

The facts are:

*When comparable figures are used, pollution in Canada in 2002 actually decreased 13 per cent from 1998 levels.

*Emissions of sulphur oxides, which cause acid rain and smog decreased by 50 per cent.

*Emissions from toxic substances lead, mercury, cadmium and dioxins and furans dropped by 65 to 75 per cent from 1990 to 2003.

*In the chemical sector, annual releases of toxic substances have been reduced by two thirds since 1992, down to 1,100 tonnes from 3,400 tonnes.

*Since the 1970s Canada has reduced its mercury release by 90 per cent and more reductions are expected.

According to internal government documents, had the Conservatives not scrapped Project Green, Canada would have met 80 per cent of its Kyoto targets two years before the deadline.

Says WHO?

[Argus]

Now what will the Conservatives do?

PM Harper pushing the ignore button could set the Kyoto friendly Liberals off in a tizzy.

http://www.570news.com/news/national/artic...ontent=n021473A

It's a remarkable example of small men in the opposition playing to the ignorance of Canadians before a friendly media which makes little effort to point out their hypocrisy and dishonesty.

As I have noted before, none of the opposition parties have any plan in place to meet Kyoto. Nor are they offering up anything but vague suggestions along that line. I'm going to go further and say that if there was an election, their "plans" would get no more specific. They will not tell you what to do to make Kyoto because they don't want Canadians to realize just how difficult it would be and how great the cost. None will call for hard caps on auto emissions, because that will cost them votes. None will demand hard caps in any particular industries - except, perhaps, the ones in areas where they have chance of winning election. None will say anything about exporting money abroad to buy carbon credits. None will say how much in incentives and tax breaks their government would be willing to spend, nor what the results of such a plan or incentive would be.

There is no way to meet Kyoto without crashing the economy and spending tens of billions. They all know this. The media knows this. But most Canadians do not know this and the media and opposition are determined they remain in ignorance. The level of dishonesty and hypocrisy from the opposition is enough to make you gag.

[scribblet]

Maybe he'll put forward a quick budget with lots of tax cuts during the 60 day period mentioned in the private members bill. Then the opposition will have to bring down the gov't, thus forcing a vote, give the CPC a majority then they can trash this pathetic bill

[White Doors]

*When comparable figures are used, pollution in Canada in 2002 actually decreased 13 per cent from 1998 levels.

*Emissions of sulphur oxides, which cause acid rain and smog decreased by 50 per cent.

*Emissions from toxic substances lead, mercury, cadmium and dioxins and furans dropped by 65 to 75 per cent from 1990 to 2003.

*In the chemical sector, annual releases of toxic substances have been reduced by two thirds since 1992, down to 1,100 tonnes from 3,400 tonnes.

*Since the 1970s Canada has reduced its mercury release by 90 per cent and more reductions are expected.

According to internal government documents, had the Conservatives not scrapped Project Green, Canada would have met 80 per cent of its Kyoto targets two years before the deadline.

Well that's great hiti. I am glad this is the case. Too bad that this has absolutely ZERO to do with 'GHG's and our Kyoto agrements. Kyoto is NOT about pollution. It is about CO2.

It is also too bad that there are people like you who clearly still do not know this.

[Keepitsimple]

The facts are:

*When comparable figures are used, pollution in Canada in 2002 actually decreased 13 per cent from 1998 levels.

*Emissions of sulphur oxides, which cause acid rain and smog decreased by 50 per cent.

*Emissions from toxic substances lead, mercury, cadmium and dioxins and furans dropped by 65 to 75 per cent from 1990 to 2003.

*In the chemical sector, annual releases of toxic substances have been reduced by two thirds since 1992, down to 1,100 tonnes from 3,400 tonnes.

*Since the 1970s Canada has reduced its mercury release by 90 per cent and more reductions are expected.

According to internal government documents, had the Conservatives not scrapped Project Green, Canada would have met 80 per cent of its Kyoto targets two years before the deadline.

Last May, 2006 at the UN Conference on Climate Change in Bonn, leaked documents revealed the Conservatives had instructed Canadian officials to deliberately undermine the current Kyoto regime and stall any progress beyond 2012, reversing Canada’s Kyoto position in favour of the Bush Administration’s position of voluntary, non-binding targets.

Now Canada ranks dead last among members of the G8 industrialized countries when it comes to keeping a pledge made last year to fight climate change by reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, according to a report prepared by researchers at the University of Toronto.

Canada has "no plan" to cut its emissions in the short or long term, and could have rising output of the gases blamed for global warming under the Conservatives' Clean Air Act because the legislation doesn't cap releases, the report said.

Steve Harper, you didn't get it done.

Please supply a link to a credible source to back up your surprising claims.

[Wilber]

The facts are:

*When comparable figures are used, pollution in Canada in 2002 actually decreased 13 per cent from 1998 levels.

*Emissions of sulphur oxides, which cause acid rain and smog decreased by 50 per cent.

*Emissions from toxic substances lead, mercury, cadmium and dioxins and furans dropped by 65 to 75 per cent from 1990 to 2003.

*In the chemical sector, annual releases of toxic substances have been reduced by two thirds since 1992, down to 1,100 tonnes from 3,400 tonnes.

*Since the 1970s Canada has reduced its mercury release by 90 per cent and more reductions are expected.

Even if they are facts, none of them have anything to do the Kyoto Accord.

According to internal government documents, had the Conservatives not scrapped Project Green, Canada would have met 80 per cent of its Kyoto targets two years before the deadline.

So why didn't the Liberals do it?

[Catchme]

The facts are:

*When comparable figures are used, pollution in Canada in 2002 actually decreased 13 per cent from 1998 levels.

*Emissions of sulphur oxides, which cause acid rain and smog decreased by 50 per cent.

*Emissions from toxic substances lead, mercury, cadmium and dioxins and furans dropped by 65 to 75 per cent from 1990 to 2003.

*In the chemical sector, annual releases of toxic substances have been reduced by two thirds since 1992, down to 1,100 tonnes from 3,400 tonnes.

*Since the 1970s Canada has reduced its mercury release by 90 per cent and more reductions are expected.

Even if they are facts, none of them have anything to do the Kyoto Accord.

According to internal government documents, had the Conservatives not scrapped Project Green, Canada would have met 80 per cent of its Kyoto targets two years before the deadline.

So why didn't the Liberals do it?

Apparently they were doing it, or Canada would NOT have been going to meet 80% of its targets 2 years before the deadline. Though I would like to see a link, oh here is the link, Hiti appears to be dead on with her cited facts

So, from this factual aspect, the Conservatives shutting it down for the last year + are the ones who have set us behind.

Then Harper today said he refuses to go green as it will affect our economy.

Something strange and troubling is happening in the national capital. A minority government behaving like a majority is creating an alternate universe where weak is strong and the will of Parliament is merely a suggestion.

Confirmation of Ottawa's new order is found in the current and bizarre confrontation over the Kyoto Protocol.

Having already decided that this country's international treaty commitments aren't binding on his government, Stephen Harper is now signalling the same who-cares attitude to domestic law. Conservatives are simply dismissing a bill that gives the administration 60 days to announce plans to reach Canada's 2012 Kyoto goals.

After tossing obstacle after obstacle in the bill's 10-month path through Parliament, the prime minister's operatives now compare it to reversing the laws of gravity while darkly warning that the targets are now so far out of range that firing at them now would mark the economy as ground zero.

Like most Big Lies, there's a little truth in those.

More lies by Harper

The economy won't be effected. What he is saying is that the oil patch will be affected. It won't be. Was watching Canadian AM this morning about the oil patch being in fact the world's largest supply of accessable oil. With reserves into the trillions of barrels. The fact is they want to get that oil as cheap as possible with no concern for the environment. Can't have emission caps, would cut into the record profit margins and all that to make the oil patch environmentally friendly. Too bad.

The fact is they will want that oil NO MATTER WHAT. If they have to go green they will, they just do not want to. With Harper in government they are safe, and we all now know that.