Canada cannot afford to fall behind in the next industrial revolution
February 23, 2007
Stéphane Dion
Last week, a bill by Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez calling on the Conservative government to meet Canada's Kyoto targets was passed by the House of Commons.
This bill requires the Conservatives to propose a plan to meet the challenge set by the Kyoto targets or to provide an accounting to the House on why those targets will not be met. Needless to say, the Conservatives voted against the bill.
This is a government that fails to see the economic possibilities presented by the transformational change that is required to combat climate change. Canada is faced with a choice, one that will affect the lives and prosperity of future generations: lead or be left behind in the next industrial revolution.
During the industrial revolution of the 19th century, Canada used its tremendous natural resources to help build a network of railways across the country, realizing the rewards. During the industrial revolution of the 20th century, we again used our skills and resources to play a leading role, reaping the benefits with the prosperity we enjoy today.
The next industrial revolution will revolve around the quest for sustainability, and it has already begun. Caught in a vise of undeniable factors – population growth, the industrialization of China and India, and blistering proof of climate change – countries around the world are beginning to recognize the enormous economic cost of inaction.
Already, banks and insurers are pushing companies to act. In the United States, 13 major public pension agencies, with more than a trillion dollars of holdings, have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to require corporate disclosure of global warming risks.
In Britain, the London-based Carbon Disclosure Project, with investors worth $10 trillion, is pushing companies directly to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.
Major companies like Shell, British Petroleum and Dow Chemical are taking notice, adjusting their production models to reduce emissions and energy consumption, and increasing their competitive advantage at the same time.
The U.S. Congress is moving ahead with legislation to cap greenhouse gas emissions while at the state level the movement is quicker still. California has already capped emissions, New England states have formed a Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to co-ordinate their efforts.
Even our emerging competitors are moving ahead of us: China has committed to investing 1.3 per cent of its Gross Domestic Product in environmental technologies and set a target to cut pollution by 10 per cent by 2010. Beijing realizes it cannot continue with its current model of development, and is investing in the technology it needs to change course. It cannot be long before Brazil and India follow suit.
Faced with this whirlwind of change around us, Canada does not have the luxury of standing still. We either act, using our Kyoto commitment to spur companies to innovate, or we do nothing, and suffer the economic consequences.
This is not a choice between the environment and the economy. It was the Liberal party that put Canada's fiscal house in order, and it is Liberals who can be counted on for the sustained commitment needed to meet the environmental challenges ahead of us in a way that enhances, not hampers, our economic prosperity.
The previous Liberal government's plan laid the foundation for positive action to fight climate change in Canada and us on the path to meet our Kyoto commitments. Upon coming into office, the Conservatives dismantled the plan, stalled the momentum, denied the existence of climate change and proposed legislation they now admit was a failure. By any measure, a year has been wasted.
The Conservative government is wrong to use fear to excuse inaction. The government's own studies belie Environment Minister John Baird's doomsday prophecies. According to a 2001 report by Industry Canada, the cost of meeting our Kyoto targets would be no more than 1 per cent of Canada's GDP. The recent Stern Review on the Economic Costs of Climate Change, commissioned by the British government, confirms that finding.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his environment minister seem to be hampered by a particularly low opinion of the ingenuity and skill of Canadians. They should look again. At the corporate level and in their personal lives, Canadians are making great strides toward a sustainable economy. What is lacking is the support of their government.
Preparing for the sustainable economy, and escaping the economic costs of inaction, requires a comprehensive plan, something Harper has not provided. One is urgently needed.
The Rodriguez bill gave the Conservative government 60 days to come up with such a plan, and to prepare our economy to succeed in the global race for sustainability. A generation of Canadian innovators awaits their response. But we need to move quickly, because the next industrial revolution is happening now, and the world will not wait for our answer.
Liberal party leader Stéphane Dion is Leader of the Official Opposition.
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/184813
February 23, 2007
Stéphane Dion
Last week, a bill by Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez calling on the Conservative government to meet Canada's Kyoto targets was passed by the House of Commons.
This bill requires the Conservatives to propose a plan to meet the challenge set by the Kyoto targets or to provide an accounting to the House on why those targets will not be met. Needless to say, the Conservatives voted against the bill.
This is a government that fails to see the economic possibilities presented by the transformational change that is required to combat climate change. Canada is faced with a choice, one that will affect the lives and prosperity of future generations: lead or be left behind in the next industrial revolution.
During the industrial revolution of the 19th century, Canada used its tremendous natural resources to help build a network of railways across the country, realizing the rewards. During the industrial revolution of the 20th century, we again used our skills and resources to play a leading role, reaping the benefits with the prosperity we enjoy today.
The next industrial revolution will revolve around the quest for sustainability, and it has already begun. Caught in a vise of undeniable factors – population growth, the industrialization of China and India, and blistering proof of climate change – countries around the world are beginning to recognize the enormous economic cost of inaction.
Already, banks and insurers are pushing companies to act. In the United States, 13 major public pension agencies, with more than a trillion dollars of holdings, have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to require corporate disclosure of global warming risks.
In Britain, the London-based Carbon Disclosure Project, with investors worth $10 trillion, is pushing companies directly to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.
Major companies like Shell, British Petroleum and Dow Chemical are taking notice, adjusting their production models to reduce emissions and energy consumption, and increasing their competitive advantage at the same time.
The U.S. Congress is moving ahead with legislation to cap greenhouse gas emissions while at the state level the movement is quicker still. California has already capped emissions, New England states have formed a Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to co-ordinate their efforts.
Even our emerging competitors are moving ahead of us: China has committed to investing 1.3 per cent of its Gross Domestic Product in environmental technologies and set a target to cut pollution by 10 per cent by 2010. Beijing realizes it cannot continue with its current model of development, and is investing in the technology it needs to change course. It cannot be long before Brazil and India follow suit.
Faced with this whirlwind of change around us, Canada does not have the luxury of standing still. We either act, using our Kyoto commitment to spur companies to innovate, or we do nothing, and suffer the economic consequences.
This is not a choice between the environment and the economy. It was the Liberal party that put Canada's fiscal house in order, and it is Liberals who can be counted on for the sustained commitment needed to meet the environmental challenges ahead of us in a way that enhances, not hampers, our economic prosperity.
The previous Liberal government's plan laid the foundation for positive action to fight climate change in Canada and us on the path to meet our Kyoto commitments. Upon coming into office, the Conservatives dismantled the plan, stalled the momentum, denied the existence of climate change and proposed legislation they now admit was a failure. By any measure, a year has been wasted.
The Conservative government is wrong to use fear to excuse inaction. The government's own studies belie Environment Minister John Baird's doomsday prophecies. According to a 2001 report by Industry Canada, the cost of meeting our Kyoto targets would be no more than 1 per cent of Canada's GDP. The recent Stern Review on the Economic Costs of Climate Change, commissioned by the British government, confirms that finding.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his environment minister seem to be hampered by a particularly low opinion of the ingenuity and skill of Canadians. They should look again. At the corporate level and in their personal lives, Canadians are making great strides toward a sustainable economy. What is lacking is the support of their government.
Preparing for the sustainable economy, and escaping the economic costs of inaction, requires a comprehensive plan, something Harper has not provided. One is urgently needed.
The Rodriguez bill gave the Conservative government 60 days to come up with such a plan, and to prepare our economy to succeed in the global race for sustainability. A generation of Canadian innovators awaits their response. But we need to move quickly, because the next industrial revolution is happening now, and the world will not wait for our answer.
Liberal party leader Stéphane Dion is Leader of the Official Opposition.
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/184813
