Liberals and the backlash....

Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:

No, just plain better.

The Clean Air Act had short-term (beginning in 2010 when Liberal-negotiated voluntary standards with industry expire), medium-term and long-term targets, unlike the Liberal plan which was, basically, no plan.

The targets to be met between 2025 and 2050, for example, far exceed Canada's Kyoto commitments. Of course, it wasn't "Kyoto" by name, so all the Liberals who harped Kyoto as an opportunity to do nothing while creating the illusion of action all cried bloody murder, as there may finally be some regulation of the Ontario manufacturing industries from which their constituents draw their jobs, and from whom the Liberals draw their votes.

Of course he had a plan:
http://www.nben.ca/environews/media/med ... c/dion.pdf

What we do not have is a common course and one chart to get the country where it needs to go related to the environment and the economy. How can we do this? I would make the following suggestion: one important step could be a series of permanent, on-going, sector sustainability tables that would bring together stakeholders from across the private and public secorts, NGOs and other key elements of Canadian society, as necessary. Each one would address a specific industry sector, such as chemicals, oil and gas, auto manufacturing or forestry. Each would include representatives from the entire valude chain of the secor, including small and medium-sized businesses, financial sector representatives, consumer grous and other non-governmental organizations. For example, you cannot address auotmobile issues by talking to manufacturers alone. You have to talk to the parts suppliers, the design teams, the sales force, the auto recycling industry, and others.

These tables would build on the lessons and successes of roundtables that have addressed specific issues affecting the economy and the environment but they would have a much broader mandate: to improve environmental performance, the overall competitiveness of the secor, and the health of Canadians and of our planet. They would be asked to identify ambitious environmental objectives on the broadest range of issues, with clear strategies and timeframes for action, including specific interim targets, and ways to recognize and reward leaders - in effect, driving a race to the top.

What we need are concrete results. not paperwork. To this end, it would be helpful if governments provide, at the outside each sector sustainability table the set of policies and targets they intend to implement and. with an open mind would consider all compelling reasons to proceed otherwise according to scientific evidence, comparative assessments of leading nations or other pertinent considerations.

And the One-Tonne challenge was doing precisely what, other than padding Rick Mercer's pocketbook?

How good a job did it really do in promoting public awareness? Greenhouse gases still rose after its inception.

The One-Tonne Challenge was a bad idea. What should have been done was mandatory regulation of greenhouse gases, not a wishy-washy voluntary program. But I agree that it was better than having nothing at all.

Are you guessing ? They fell in 2004 with respect to residential energy consumption, which was the area wher it looked to make changes:
Total greenhouse gases from residential energy sources was 81.1Mt in 2003 and 76.7Mt in 2004.

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/corporate/statis ... cfm?attr=0

the 2005 data is not available.

And again, the rate at which greenhouse gases have grown has remained lower than the rate at which the economy has grown. You cons will be treading a fine line if you try to pull that one when the next greenhouse gas inventory is published. With the expansion of the tar sands, the rest of canada has to work much harder to keep those numbers down.

Auditor to blast Liberals on environment spending

CTV.ca News Staff

The Auditor-General's Office is set to unveil a report that will level criticism at Liberal spending on environmental programs by the end of the month, according to a report.

The report is expected to be released Sept. 28, The Globe and Mail reported Thursday.

"The content will be extremely critical of how money and programs were handled," a non-partisan source familiar with some of the report's findings told the newspaper.

The source told The Globe the critique will take aim at actions at Environment Canada under former minister Stephane Dion.

Dion, currently a Liberal leadership candidate, has made environmental policy a fundamental pillar of his platform.

Dion's spokesman Andre Lamarre told The Globe that the former minister had already addressed problems with earlier Liberal policy last year.

The source also said the audit will take aim at the environmental programs under Dion's predecessor David Anderson.

There had been speculation that the Conservative government would announce a sweeping environment strategy, tentatively dubbed Green Plan II, before Parliament returned on Monday.

But that timeline has been pushed back.

The Conservatives' chief government whip, Jay Hill, told The Globe that Environment Minister Rona Ambrose is planning to introduce a clean-air act in late September or early October.

But Hill said he was not aware of any plan to unveil the Tory environmental strategy around the same time as the release of the Auditor-General's report.

Earlier this month, the federal Conservatives confirmed they are cancelling a $1.5 million pledge by the previous Liberal government to help developing countries cut greenhouse emissions under the rules of the Kyoto Protocol.

The money would have gone to the treaty's clean development mechanism, which allows industrialized countries to earn credits by investing in emissions-cutting projects in the Third World.

Meanwhile, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May expressed her dismay that Ottawa would not be honouring the commitment.

"Nineteen years ago today, the world gathered in Montreal, under the auspices of the United Nations, to negotiate a protocol to protect all life on earth. The Montreal Protocol worked. Ozone depleting chemicals are being banned and phased out thanks to this agreement. Canada's global reputation for strong international environmental policy largely stems from this era," May said in her first news conference since becoming Green Party leader.

"In the last few weeks alone, the Harper government has broken promise after promise to the world. Our Kyoto commitments are critical and urgent, yet no plan exists to meet them."

Even if the measures contained in the previous government's 2005 plan had been fully implemented, it is difficult to say whether the projected emission reductions would have been enough to meet our Kyoto obligations. In the fullness of time, some measures may have contributed. Yet, in certain sectors, the measures are not up to the task of meeting the Kyoto obligations. For example, the transportation and industry sectors account for the majority of Canada's emissions—78 percent—but emission reduction measures we examined are not expected to bring emissions below 1990 levels. At best, they might only slow the rate of growth. Given Canada's strong economic growth, especially in energy production, meeting our Kyoto target would arguably have been a challenge even if bolder action had been taken earlier.

...

Since 1997, the government has announced over $6 billion in funding for initiatives on climate change. However, it does not yet have an effective government-wide system to track expenditures, performance, and results on its climate change programs. As a result, the government does not have the necessary tools for effective management, nor can it provide Parliamentarians with an accurate government-wide picture on spending and results they have requested.

On the whole, the government's response to climate change is not a good story. At a government-wide level, our audits revealed inadequate leadership, planning, and performance. To date, the approach has lacked foresight and direction and has created confusion and uncertainty for those trying to deal with it. Many of the weaknesses identified in our audits are of the government's own making. It has not been effective in leading and deciding on many of the key areas under its control. Change is needed.

-Canada will not meet its Kyoto targets;
-Canada’s climate change initiatives were poorly designed and loosely implemented;
-Monitoring and fiscal reporting of these programs were weak ; and
-Key portions of the Liberal plan were “shrouded in secrecy”.

IGNATIEFF: We didn’t get it done (on the environment).

DION: This is unfair. You don’t know what you speak about. You don’t know what you speak about. Do you think it’s easy to make priorities?

DOMINIC LEBLANC: Mr. Ignatieff?

DRYDEN: Stephane, the point is that we didn’t get it done. It’s not anybody individually. We didn’t get it done collectively.

I think we can scream and yell about greenhouse gases all we want, but the fact reamains they will never truly be reversed until we have a major technology change in the world (not just Canada) towards alternative fuels and energy sources.

You want to solve this issue, start by developing hybred cars and trucks that are useful, not shit boxes like smart cars. Build me a H3 SUV, or Chey Tahoe with 300 hp, can tow 6000 lbs, haul lumber, a wife teenaged kids with hockey gear. Then build millions of them and sell them all over the world. I would love to buy it and drive up and down the road in front of ESSO laughing all day.

The enviormernt is a very important issue, by Kyoto is crap. We fuss about it because it is the "in thing" right now. We cannot strangle our economy with Kyoto.

As for the CPC cutting socal programs GOOD, CUT MORE!!. There is a major shortage of workers in Alta right now, how can anybody in that prov be on welfare. Here's a social program, spend the $$ on relocating welfare recipients to Alta to WORK. We will pay for their bus,train or plane tickets, give them $$ for first & last to get them set up in apratments, a few $$ to buy their first groceries and necessities to start a new household until their first paycheque comes in, then your on your own.

Why does every issue in the country have to be solved by yet another gov't program. You can't find daycare in your town/city, SOUNDS TO ME LIKE AN EXCELLENT BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY!!! Start a dacare servce, just like Henr Ford started a car business. The only Gov't offices I want to see in my city is the police station, fire hall, city hall, highway maint dept and a militayr base if one is in the area.