Grits' Kyoto Plan Would Have Worked!

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Today, The Honourable John Godfrey, P.C., M.P., the Member for Don Valley West and the Intergovernmental Affairs Critic for Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition is drawing attention to a report from the C.D. Howe Institute, which contends that the strategy that the previous Government of Canada had introduced would have brought Canada within eighty per cent of its targets under the Kyoto Accord.

However, under the leadership of The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P., the Member for Calgary Southwest and the Prime Minister of Canada, the present Government of Canada has ended many of the programs that had been associated with the Accord, and is reported to wish to opt Canada into the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which does not set targets for its member nations.

The report from the C.D. Howe Institute indicates that Canada could have reduced its emissions under the plans of the previous Government by up to 92.5 mega-tonnes; however, under the new strategy advocated by the Conservative Party of Canada, the report contends that Canada's emissions would be reduced by only 2-4 mega-tonnes.

From the information that The Honourable Rona Ambrose, P.C., M.P., the Member for Edmonton—Spruce Grove and the Minister of the Environment has presented the nation through her responses in the House of Commons, one must conclude that the Government has no major strategy whatsoever in relation to combatting climate change. Our Prime Minister, himself, questions the science of climate change, and his actions have led me to believe that he does not see any danger to this phenomenon.

Click here to read the entire statement.
Cliquetez içi pour lire le communiqué entier.


:?: Sources
1. Click here for the Web site of the Liberal Party of Canada.
 

Karlin

Council Member
Jun 27, 2004
1,275
2
38
You are absolutely correct in saying that PM Harper has no plans to combat global warming.

He has the opinion that climate change is not a threat, and that money and time spent on it is a waste, an uneccessary hardship for corporate interests.

Rona Ambrose is a total sell out to the fossil fools.She has no mind whatsoever, anymore.

The Financial Post published a full page letter to PM Harper, extolling his virtues for igonring the global warming threat.

Global Warming Denial is a big lobby in Canada and the USA, heavily funded by Exxon. They really believe their own sh*t on this don't they?
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Liberal plan to cut greenhouse emissions was a dud, researchers say
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OTTAWA (CP) - The Liberals' $12-billion plan to implement the Kyoto Protocol over seven years would have been largely ineffective, says an as-yet unpublished report by the C.D. Howe Institute.

The report, marked "do not cite or circulate," was written before the current government axed Project Green, as the plan was dubbed, and may have been a factor in the Conservatives' decision to scrap it.

Project Green largely relied on voluntary measures and incentives which have been shown not to work, says the study, which sarcastically calls the package "Project Dream."

"This policy approach will fail dramatically to meet national objectives and yet will entail a substantial cost," says the report, whose lead author is Mark Jaccard of Simon Fraser University.

The study was written in April and obtained by The Canadian Press on the weekend. It is finally expected to be made public this week.

The report says Project Green would have cost $12 billion by 2012, with much of that money being spent outside Canada.

It would have reduced emissions by 175 megatonnes compared with a business-as-usual scenario, far short of the 230 to 300 Mt. reduction required to meet Canada's Kyoto target.

Efforts like the One Tonne Challenge advertising campaign, which urged individuals to reduce their own greenhouse emissions through lifestyle changes, have "negligible effect," says the study.

"The policy approach of Canada since 1990 and continued with Project Green is clearly ineffective in causing the disconnection of GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from the economic output that must take place if these emissions are to be reduced and their atmospheric concentrations stabilized at low risk levels."

Canada's domestic emissions remain on a path that would miss its Kyoto target by at least 270 Mt. in 2010, equivalent to almost a 30 per cent emissions gap, the study says.

"Indeed, the policy approach epitomized by Project Green allows emissions to continue to grow at close to their BAU (business-as-usual) rate."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper could use the report to buttress his claims about the ineffectiveness of the Liberal plan, but he probably won't like the alternatives it recommends.

The most effective policy would likely be a gradually rising tax on greenhouse gas emissions, combined with reductions in other taxes to ensure no net tax increase, says the report.

The main Conservative response to climate change so far has been to make transit passes tax deductible, which experts say will have little effect on emissions.

Louise Comeau of the Vancouver-based Sage Climate Project said many of the criticisms in the report are valid but Project Green was not a total wash.

She said a 175 Mt. cut in emissions would have been a start, adding that the plan had always been presented as a work in progress.

Comeau said the real importance of the report is its call for tough regulations and tax changes to prevent greenhouse emissions.

©The Canadian Press, 2006

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/NationalNewsArticle.htm?src=n052821A.xml
 

bluealberta

Council Member
Apr 19, 2005
2,004
0
36
Proud to be in Alberta
Hank C said:
Liberal plan to cut greenhouse emissions was a dud, researchers say
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OTTAWA (CP) - The Liberals' $12-billion plan to implement the Kyoto Protocol over seven years would have been largely ineffective, says an as-yet unpublished report by the C.D. Howe Institute.

The report, marked "do not cite or circulate," was written before the current government axed Project Green, as the plan was dubbed, and may have been a factor in the Conservatives' decision to scrap it.

Project Green largely relied on voluntary measures and incentives which have been shown not to work, says the study, which sarcastically calls the package "Project Dream."

"This policy approach will fail dramatically to meet national objectives and yet will entail a substantial cost," says the report, whose lead author is Mark Jaccard of Simon Fraser University.

The study was written in April and obtained by The Canadian Press on the weekend. It is finally expected to be made public this week.

The report says Project Green would have cost $12 billion by 2012, with much of that money being spent outside Canada.

It would have reduced emissions by 175 megatonnes compared with a business-as-usual scenario, far short of the 230 to 300 Mt. reduction required to meet Canada's Kyoto target.

Efforts like the One Tonne Challenge advertising campaign, which urged individuals to reduce their own greenhouse emissions through lifestyle changes, have "negligible effect," says the study.

"The policy approach of Canada since 1990 and continued with Project Green is clearly ineffective in causing the disconnection of GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from the economic output that must take place if these emissions are to be reduced and their atmospheric concentrations stabilized at low risk levels."

Canada's domestic emissions remain on a path that would miss its Kyoto target by at least 270 Mt. in 2010, equivalent to almost a 30 per cent emissions gap, the study says.

"Indeed, the policy approach epitomized by Project Green allows emissions to continue to grow at close to their BAU (business-as-usual) rate."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper could use the report to buttress his claims about the ineffectiveness of the Liberal plan, but he probably won't like the alternatives it recommends.

The most effective policy would likely be a gradually rising tax on greenhouse gas emissions, combined with reductions in other taxes to ensure no net tax increase, says the report.

The main Conservative response to climate change so far has been to make transit passes tax deductible, which experts say will have little effect on emissions.

Louise Comeau of the Vancouver-based Sage Climate Project said many of the criticisms in the report are valid but Project Green was not a total wash.

She said a 175 Mt. cut in emissions would have been a start, adding that the plan had always been presented as a work in progress.

Comeau said the real importance of the report is its call for tough regulations and tax changes to prevent greenhouse emissions.

©The Canadian Press, 2006

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/NationalNewsArticle.htm?src=n052821A.xml

I was wondering what report Five had referred to, because this is the report I saw in every paper I read today. I would suggest that the CD Howe report says the Liberal plan was an expensive and abject failure, despite what a defeated Liberal minister and now elected Liberal opposition member says.

Simply put, the Libs Kyoto plan did not, and would not work, so lets move on to something else that may have a chance. With the US, Canada, Australia, etc. all joining the same group, it appears to me that a lot of industrialized nations are moving in the same direction, which can only be good for the supposed problem of global warming.
 

JonB2004

Council Member
Mar 10, 2006
1,188
0
36
RE: Grits' Kyoto Plan Wou

I didn't like the Kyoto Accord because of the fact that the previous government was giving out our tax dollars to other countries so that they could cut their greenhouse gas emmisions.

I like the Conservatives idea of making a made-in-Canada plan, but I don't like the fact that they haven't come up with one yet. At least they could of kept with the Kyoto Accord until they made the plan, even if we have to keep giving money to other countries.
 

bluealberta

Council Member
Apr 19, 2005
2,004
0
36
Proud to be in Alberta
Re: RE: Grits' Kyoto Plan Wou

JonB2004 said:
I didn't like the Kyoto Accord because of the fact that the previous government was giving out our tax dollars to other countries so that they could cut their greenhouse gas emmisions.

I like the Conservatives idea of making a made-in-Canada plan, but I don't like the fact that they haven't come up with one yet. At least they could of kept with the Kyoto Accord until they made the plan, even if we have to keep giving money to other countries.

Right on, Jon. IMO, the Kyoto plan was simply a wealth transfer scheme. I ask anyone, how is buying credits from Russia going to reduce emissions in Canada? What is a credit? How do you use a credit?

As far as Harper et al not having a plan, I would suggest some patience, they have only been in power for four months, the Libs were given 13 years. Harper has been true to his word so far, and has actually made decisions based on information and the support of the populace, as evidenced by the rise in the polls. I think he and his government will give this issue the serious consideration most are looking for, and will make a decision at that time. Unlike Chretien, who committed us to Kyoto without even telling his officials at the time, who were as surprised as anyone. Better to take time to make a logical decision than to make a decision that will come back to haunt the decision maker. Like Chretien and Martin, who knew full well that Kyoto would not work, but was a great sound bite, and Suzuki liked it.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Right on, Jon. IMO, the Kyoto plan was simply a wealth transfer scheme.

And to Liberals, that's called working....for who it remains to be seen.
 

Vicious

Electoral Member
May 12, 2006
293
4
18
Ontario, Sadly
FiveParadox said:
...would have brought Canada within eighty per cent of its targets under the Kyoto Accord.

This is the best statement. This is how Liberals measure success? Getting within 80% of their goal?
 

bluealberta

Council Member
Apr 19, 2005
2,004
0
36
Proud to be in Alberta
Vicious said:
FiveParadox said:
...would have brought Canada within eighty per cent of its targets under the Kyoto Accord.

This is the best statement. This is how Liberals measure success? Getting within 80% of their goal?

Yeah, well, when you have a former PM who says: "So a few million were stolen, who cares?", I guess you can be forgiven for being a bit mathematically challenged. And the most important word int hat statement is "...would have..". Geez, they still want to take credit for something that might have happened at some indeterminate point in the future. Typical.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
I think it's sort of funny how some of the statements above make it sound as though some members are offended at the thought that admitting that any left-wing, progressive, or Liberal plan could ever do a shred of good for Canada. In terms of the statement quoted above (which, by the way, was taken out of context, and the rest of the post was ignored), the report projected emission reductions up to 2010, and the Kyoto targets were set for 2012; after meeting the target by eighty per cent by 2010, it's quite possible that the remaining twenty per cent could have been covered in those last two years.

Let's be open-minded, please?

I openly admit that the previous Government of Canada was an abject failure in relation to the implementation of the Accord. However, that does not mean that the premise of the Accord, itself, is also a failure. If this Government of Canada would attempt to implement the Accord and meet their targets on their own terms, then we could have done a good job.

Instead, we have no plan for the environment.

Ms. Ambrose should simply resign, she doesn't have a portfolio.

The only thing she's done so far is attempt to sabotage other nations' Kyoto commitments.
 

Vicious

Electoral Member
May 12, 2006
293
4
18
Ontario, Sadly
Re: RE: Grits' Kyoto Plan Would Have Worked!

FiveParadox said:
I think it's sort of funny how some of the statements above make it sound as though some members are offended at the thought that admitting that any left-wing, progressive, or Liberal plan could ever do a shred of good for Canada. In terms of the statement quoted above (which, by the way, was taken out of context, and the rest of the post was ignored), the report projected emission reductions up to 2010, and the Kyoto targets were set for 2012; after meeting the target by eighty per cent by 2010, it's quite possible that the remaining twenty per cent could have been covered in those last two years.

Apologies, it appears I misread the intent of your opening paragraph. It sounded like a success would have been claimed by missing the mark by 80%.

However a plan not actioned is just as good as no plan at all.

FiveParadox said:
Let's be open-minded, please?

I openly admit that the previous Government of Canada was an abject failure in relation to the implementation of the Accord. However, that does not mean that the premise of the Accord, itself, is also a failure. If this Government of Canada would attempt to implement the Accord and meet their targets on their own terms, then we could have done a good job.

You are quite right. the previous government was a failure on this issue . They talked a good talk, weilded a mighty pen to sign the agreement, but then planned to spend your money on credits instead of doing the hard lifting to change anything. The accord itself is a failure for another reason; because it exclude the biggest polluters by design.

FiveParadox said:
Instead, we have no plan for the environment.

So Kyoto is the environment. Come swim in lake Ontario. Or maybe out on the beaches of downtown Vancouver. Tell me how Kyoto is gonna clean it up?

FiveParadox said:
Ms. Ambrose should simply resign, she doesn't have a portfolio.

The only thing she's done so far is attempt to sabotage other nations' Kyoto commitments.

Did you hear that crashing sound? That was your mind closing.

I would agree with you if she were minister for implementing Kyoto. She's not. If Kyoto dies, she's still got lots of work to do.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Vicious, I have watched the coverage of the Commons quite attenatively indeed, and Ms. Ambrose has done nothing for the environment in Canada. Her statements amount, paraphrased, to "We may have a plan in the future, but neither the Commons, nor the people of Canada, have a right to know about it."
 

Lineman

No sparks please
Feb 27, 2006
452
7
18
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Until it doesn't require shelling out 2 bucks to save 1 none of us will "do our part". It all boils down to the family budget. Do I buy the regular Highlander for $30k or the hybrid Highlander for $40k. Do I spend $10k on solar panels to suplement my heating so I can save $500 over the year. Being green isn't financially do-able, yet! (And it doesn't matter who is in power.)
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
I think everyone has a point. It would of been nice if the Torys had a "Made in Canada" plan ready to impliment while we scrapped Kyoto, but on the same token I don't see the need in keeping unreachable goals just to please the Europeans and sit on some invisible high horse.
 

BitWhys

what green dots?
Apr 5, 2006
3,157
15
38
the grits have point blank accused Ambrose of standing in the house last year and claiming the tories had a plan. not a plan to plan. a plan. she hasn't denied it. anyone got that one?

Not that I'm a huge fan of CD Howe, but they released the study yesterday(pdf).
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=98309f13-0045-4f5f-a5e6-da4700610116&p=1

OTTAWA - Conclusions by a top-level gathering on Kyoto indicate Canada has much greater backing for its stand on the climate-change accord than reported, with wide support for Ottawa's refusal to set new emissions targets until current pollution-reduction efforts have been assessed.

Ottawa won the unanimous support of developed countries at the conference in Bonn, Germany, for its reluctance to set new targets for the post-2012 period. It also received backing from several countries in arguing there should be no new commitments for countries like Canada until major polluters such as China and India sign up for their own targets.

Rona Ambrose, the Environment Minister, said yesterday the international support is a sign Canada is playing a leadership role on Kyoto, rather than trying to sabotage it, as critics contend.

Ms. Ambrose, who chaired the conference, said there was widespread support for a two-year assessment period.

"The direction we gave the group facilitated the opportunity for us to stay at the table and for a lot of other people to stay at the table.... We recognized from a lot of the work I did behind the scenes leading up to Bonn that our international partners needed us to say that as well. That's why there was no dissension between all the developed countries."

Environmental groups and the opposition parties have complained Canada isolated itself by acknowledging it cannot meet the targets agreed to by the previous Liberal government. The Liberals pledged to reduce emissions by 6% below 1990 levels by 2012, but were unable to meet the pledge -- instead, current emissions are 35% above that level. Nonetheless, critics called on Ms. Ambrose to step down from chairing a process in which, they said, she did not believe.

:lol:


Well, well....common sense prevails again.

So that's 1 for common sense 0 for Liberals.
 

bluealberta

Council Member
Apr 19, 2005
2,004
0
36
Proud to be in Alberta
Jay said:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=98309f13-0045-4f5f-a5e6-da4700610116&p=1

OTTAWA - Conclusions by a top-level gathering on Kyoto indicate Canada has much greater backing for its stand on the climate-change accord than reported, with wide support for Ottawa's refusal to set new emissions targets until current pollution-reduction efforts have been assessed.

Ottawa won the unanimous support of developed countries at the conference in Bonn, Germany, for its reluctance to set new targets for the post-2012 period. It also received backing from several countries in arguing there should be no new commitments for countries like Canada until major polluters such as China and India sign up for their own targets.

Rona Ambrose, the Environment Minister, said yesterday the international support is a sign Canada is playing a leadership role on Kyoto, rather than trying to sabotage it, as critics contend.

Ms. Ambrose, who chaired the conference, said there was widespread support for a two-year assessment period.

"The direction we gave the group facilitated the opportunity for us to stay at the table and for a lot of other people to stay at the table.... We recognized from a lot of the work I did behind the scenes leading up to Bonn that our international partners needed us to say that as well. That's why there was no dissension between all the developed countries."

Environmental groups and the opposition parties have complained Canada isolated itself by acknowledging it cannot meet the targets agreed to by the previous Liberal government. The Liberals pledged to reduce emissions by 6% below 1990 levels by 2012, but were unable to meet the pledge -- instead, current emissions are 35% above that level. Nonetheless, critics called on Ms. Ambrose to step down from chairing a process in which, they said, she did not believe.

:lol:


Well, well....common sense prevails again.

So that's 1 for common sense 0 for Liberals.

I was just about to post that myself. With respect to Fiveparadox, may I gently suggest you reconsider your previous statements about Ms. Ambrose not having a portfolio? It appears to me that more and more, countries who signed onto Kyoto simply because it made a good sound bite have finally realized the error of their ways, and now maybe they will all look for real and viable solutions.........solutions to a supposed problem, which is far from being a proven problem.