Like many interested observers, I was shocked at the
size of the Liberal victory in our Canadian election. I was confident in a Liberal minority but had
no clue that the Liberals would end up with a majority. From an environmental
perspective the new Liberal majority government should definitely be a step up
over the previous Harper government’s anti-science, laissez-faire on the
environment agenda. That being said, I am strongly of the belief that a lot of
what I have read in the last several days about the Liberals and their environmental
policies represent projection on the part of observers rather than an accurate
reflection of Liberal policy.
To clarify, one problem with elections campaigns is that the people involved often incorrectly read into their
candidates features and characteristics that are not actually part of that candidate’s
platform. As such, my concern is that many environmentalists have been reading their
personal desires into the Liberal victory. Throughout the last couple years Justin
Trudeau has been viewed by many as the “anti-Harper”. He is
clearly cut from a very different mold than the outgoing Prime Minister. Mr.
Trudeau is viewed as happy and outgoing while Mr. Harper has been seen as dour
and secretive. But these personality differences do not make Mr. Trudeau a
polar opposite to Mr. Harper. Mr. Trudeau is not the Ying to Mr Harper’s Yang.
Rather, Mr. Trudeau is an entirely independent being with his own hopes, needs
and desires. To be clear, Mr. Harper’s environmental and science policies could,
at best, be considered regressive and as a consequence, the new Liberal government
will definitely represent a step forward for the environmental cause in Canada.
That being said, I would suggest that my friends in the environmental movement
spend a little bit of time reading the Liberal policy documents before they get
too excited about the next five years.
The first thing I will point out is that while the
environmental community views Mr. Trudeau as a potential environment-first Prime
Minister, the Liberal policy platform is a little less supportive of that title. A look at the “Platform”
section of the Liberal election web site has 106 topics of which I count six
that would represent “environmental” priorities and as the business adage goes “too
many priorities means no priorities”. A look
at the Liberal policy
backgrounders also does not bode well for “environment-first” title. Of the
29 detailed policy backgrounders presented on their web site only two address
topics related to the environment.
The first “protecting
our oceans” provides some solid red meat for the environmental cause. It clearly states that a Liberal government will reinstate monies for
ocean science and monitoring. It also provides hope that the recent shredding
of the Fisheries Act will be
reversed. Finally the document pretty much rings the death knell for the Northern
Gateway pipeline as it says that a Liberal government would enact the North
Coast crude oil tanker ban. Under that blanket prohibition the Northern Gateway
would only really be possible if David
Black’s Kitimat refinery were brought online to refine the crude oil/dilbit
prior to shipping.
The second platform document is bigger than the first
but is surprisingly light on substance. The document is titled “A
New Plan for Canada’s Environment and Economy” and deals with six major
themes:
• Taking Action on Climate
Change
• Investing in Clean
Technologies
• Creating Clean
Jobs and Investment
• Restoring
Credibility to Environmental Assessments • Preserving and Promoting our National Parks
• Protecting out Freshwater and Oceans
As the old
expression goes, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the problem with the
document, as is often the case in environmental policy, is in the details, or
lack thereof. The “Action on Climate Change” reads as surprisingly non-committal
on the action front. It has a lot about communication, and working together
with various levels of governments and NGOs but has very few identifiable
deliverables. It includes a “portfolio of actions” while describing few strong
commitments (it does include a very important commitment to phase out subsidies
for the fossil fuel industry). Surprisingly, I cannot for the life of me find a
detailed policy document that includes any mention of the “Low Carbon Economy
Trust” which some have mentioned
but few can describe.
The Liberal’s “Investment in Clean Technologies” details
a pretty paltry additional $300 million a year directed towards various industrial
sectors. The wording of this section is sufficiently vague that it could range
from a terrific tool to enhance the prospects of cutting-edge companies to a
political slush fund like many of the regional
development agencies used to buy votes for the last several decades.
The “Creating Clean Jobs and Investments” section is simply
standard boilerplate that could be drawn from almost every environmental policy document
ever written. It does, curiously, include a section on protection of marine
environments which is sorely needed, especially on our West Coast.
For the pipeline opponents, the “Restoring Credibility
to Environmental Assessments” sounds like a great section. Interestingly enough
the section does include this interesting piece of wording:
We
will explore, consult, and work collaboratively to move towards a system where
federal environmental assessments of projects include an analysis of upstream
impacts and the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the projects being
assessed.
This text could be something straight out of a Sierra
Club Report or it could be a standard requirement for a risk assessment depending on how you interpret the word "resulting". Environmentalists surely read it like the Sierra Club would have us do. The only problem with this interpretation is that it undermines the
whole concept that emissions are calculated on where fossil fuels are consumed
not on where they are produced. Using the logic proposed I could easily develop
a process by which Canada could meet its Kyoto targets overnight. Since the Sierra Club version of the methodology blames the producer of the energy, not the consumer, Canada could
go to zero CO2 emissions simply by importing all our fossil fuels
from outside our borders. No need to adapt our industry; no need to stop idling
our cars or insulate our houses; since the consumer’s pattern of use doesn’t
count towards their emissions we would all be free and clear. Oddly enough that
is not how the rest of the world views the problem. In International venues/agreements producers of fossil fuels are only expected to
account for the energy used to generate the fossil fuels not the CO2
generated when the fossil fuels are burnt at the other end. I would suggest that any plan to change
environmental assessments in this manner is bound to fail international muster.
The final two points involving the protection of our
parks, freshwater and oceans are strong policies I would love to see implemented
ASAP.
Going back to the earlier point in this post, the
problem with the Liberal agenda is that the environment represents such a miniscule
proportion of it. Only 2 of 29 policy documents discuss the environment and the
amount of money earmarked for the environment is miniscule when compared to
other priorities. The $300 million dollars for innovation and investment is
barely more than the amount the Liberals have allotted in additional
funding for the CBC. That should pretty
much tell you where we, environmentalists, fit in this new order.
To be clear, I look forward to the next few
years from an environmental perspective. I was strongly opposed to how the
Harper government stripped away protection for Canada’s waterways and shredded
much of our environmental research infrastructure. It is my hope that Mr.
Trudeau will reverse many of those decisions/laws. That being said, I cannot
simply assume that Mr. Trudeau is going to be an environment-first Prime
Minister and suggest that my colleagues in the environmental movement who assume
otherwise are in for a bad shock.
Dear Buyer/ Buyer mandate
ReplyDeleteWe currently have Available FOB Rotterdam/Hosuton for JP54,D2, D6, JetA1 with good and workable procedure, whereby buyer will dip test in seller tank with proof of product.
Kindly Contact us via (anatolyvyacheslavoil@mail.ru) for SCO as soon as possible, so we can move to the next step.
Regards
Anatoly Vyacheslav
Email: anatolyvyacheslavoil@mail.ru
anatolyvyacheslavoil@yandex.ru
skype:anatolyvyacheslavoil