French PM wants to hit Canada with carbon tax

BILL CURRY


OTTAWA -- The Prime Minister of France is urging the European Union to impose a punitive import tax on goods from countries such as Canada that refuse to sign on to a tougher second phase of the global warming deal. Dominique de Villepin said countries that do not commit to new targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions should not be allowed to benefit by avoiding the costs associated with reducing global warming. He said France would make specific proposals for the European Union to discuss in the new year.
Environment Minister Rona Ambrose was not aware of the details of the French proposal, a spokesman said, but opposition MPs said it shows Canada is increasingly viewed as an environmental laggard on the world stage. An international law expert said such a tax would probably be rejected by the World Trade Organization because rules prevent foreign products from being treated differently from domestic ones.

But a spokesman for the French embassy in Ottawa said he was confident European Union lawyers could overcome that. The controversy comes as Canada faces criticism from Europe in particular for its acknowledgment that it will not meet its 2012 targets under the Kyoto Protocol for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. It also comes on the heels of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision to cancel a Canada-EU summit scheduled for Nov. 27 in Finland, where the Europeans planned to discuss climate change.
Liberal MP John Godfrey said the French proposal is generating discussion behind the scenes in Nairobi, Kenya, where world leaders are discussing a second phase to the Kyoto Protocol that would begin in 2012.
"I don't know, frankly, how seriously to take it," Mr. Godfrey said from Nairobi, noting that France is in an election year. He said it does show French politicians feel climate change is so important to voters that they would accept new import taxes.

NDP Leader Jack Layton seized on the French plan, describing it as a "wake-up call" to Mr. Harper.
"There are clearly some countries that are beginning to understand that the impacts of catastrophic climate change are so serious that truly extraordinary measures are going to have to be taken," he said.
Speaking Monday, the French Prime Minister expressed concern about the negotiations taking place in Nairobi. His tax proposal was presented as a way of getting hesitant countries on side. "Europe has to use all its weight to stand up to this sort of environmental dumping," Mr. de Villepin said, according to a text of his speech provided by the French embassy. "I would like us to study now with our European partners the principle of a carbon tax on the import of industrial products from countries that refuse to commit themselves to the Kyoto Protocol after 2012."

France has recently used new taxes for international issues. In July, the country imposed a departure tax at its airports to fund foreign aid and persuaded several European Union countries to follow suit.
Canada is one of 35 countries that ratified the Kyoto Protocol and made specific commitments to reduce greenhouse gases between 2008 and 2012. The thinking at the time was that those developed countries would set the example. The second phase was expected to involve deeper cuts for them, while other countries such as China would take on targets for the first time.

However, at a Kyoto-related meeting in Bonn in May, Canada adopted a new negotiating position by opposing tougher targets in the second phase. Canadian environmentalists and opposition leaders have been criticizing the Conservative government and Ms. Ambrose for continuing to chair Kyoto negotiations over the past year when it has acknowledged Canada will not meet its targets in the first phase. Ms. Ambrose's spokesman, Bob Klager, said yesterday the minister believes "there has been progress to date on the process for moving forward post-2012 and she's looking forward to furthering discussions this week." University of Ottawa law professor Errol Mendes, an international law expert who until June was a senior policy adviser in the Privy Council Office, said Mr. de Villepin's proposal would be rejected by the World Trade Organization.

"I think it's a non-starter," he said. "If you can't stop importations made even with child labour, because the WTO rules prohibits importation rules based on the means of production, I don't think this is going to go anywhere." But he said Canada could be challenged in the International Court of Justice for having signed an international treaty and then opting not to meet its commitments. The professor speculated that a country such as the Maldives, the Indian Ocean island nation that could be flooded if sea levels rise due to global warming, could take Canada to court. Canada's exports to France totalled $2.5-billion in 2005, compared with $5-billion in French sales to Canada. Canada's main exports include uranium, scallops, frozen lobster, mustard seed, dried lentils and newsprint. The aeronautics industry is a major source of trade, particularly with Quebec, and is the largest area of imports to Canada.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../TPStory/Front

I heard about this one today ITN. Frankly, I'ld like to hit good'ol' Dom with a frozen baguet. Is it too late to send France a bill for WWII?

I must admit, I'm having second thoughts about not supporting the accord. What with, only 30 nations being bound by it out of the 135 that signed on. No there is nothing wrong with it at all.

Could someone explain how Saudi Arabia is a developing Nation, to me?

Maybe they'd like a bill for the hundreds of thousands of British Empire troops they murdered in world war one?.

Sorry, I was watching a program on this the other day, I didn't realise that "charge men aimlessly, while murdering hundreds of thousands as long as we kill more than the germans" wasn't a British tactic. Apparently we like to be a wee bit strategic about our murderation (is that a word?, it is now!).

Some times I do ask why we ever signed peace terms with em, whats it got us eh?, world war one? two? crimean?.....just not worth it.

Bloody french....did you know after the British Commonwealth and the US liberating their country, they veto'd britain's entry into europe?...thats thanks for ya!!.

The UN lists countries as developed or developing based on soemthing called the Human Development Index. The criteria takes things like life expectancy, literacy, education and standards of living into consideration. There are low, medium and high brackets. High is anything between 1-0.80, medium is 0.79 -0.5, and low anything 0.49 and under. Afghanistan and Iraq are on the not ranked list.

I think all nations should have to cut emissions by the same rules, regardless of how developed they are. Technically wouldn't it be easier to develop a country with new efficient technology, rather than letting them grow using old dirty technology, then have to switch their economies to a cleaner more efficient model? How hard or expensive will it be to nations like China and India to cut back once they overtake North American economies?

That was pretty much my point in three threads now Ton.

There are tooooo many examptions and way tooooo much room for big business to exploit the "developing" nations to the detrimant of there ecology and our wallets.

Sorry, he's right, one sniff of the Garlic-smelling-surrender-monkeys and I get abit well........wound up sorry...please continue

LOL, Daz, I like your distinctly British look at things.

Now, now chief, it's a "distincly English" look on things, the Scots and the Welsh love the French, they might as well be them.

Someone should tell the French PM to just concerntrate on watching how his whole country is losing it's language.

It will just cost them more to listen to Rita McNeill. You know they have to. They're addicted.

Anyone see the French Military Rifle on eBay? It's never been shot and only dropped once!

Does france need to send a bill to united states for their independance??

There we go again with the french being coward, guys it is time to realize that the most chicken/cowards peoples in this planet, are the anglo-saxon, no doubt about it, if you want proof, i'll give it to you.

Why don't you provide us with proof of something interesting.... like the existence of aliens, the where abouts of the holy grail or the Colonel's secret ingredients.

Cripes, I'm still laughing. Sometimes truth is funnier than fiction.

Who cares about aliens? not me, who cares about religions?? not me

Good grief. Beware of the French!!

Ummm, logic, and I use that term loosly. The US at the time the French aided them in gaining their independance, were richly rewarded and paid in full, for the weapons and supplies that they SOLD, the US.

So no, they do not need to send the bill, if you look closely at the bottom, you will see the "PAID IN FULL" stamp.

I could say, perhaps the US should send them a bill for their services in WWII(LWF). But then you'ld just ask if the French should send the US a bill, for the recipe for Freedom Toast.

My apologies, distinctly English, then it is.

Sorry, I just saw on a webpage someone writing "she sings the British national anthem so well", which one's that then eh?, flower of scotland?, Ode to Wales?, or God save the queen.....shocking.


Although I think you missed Vietnam, I know us Brits had the sense to stay out of that little debackle (although the US sunk our economy....again because we didn't "even send a brass band"..it's all true, Harold McMillian n co)...I think we know who's fault that was.

nah America's debt to France has been paid back in full......and then some

Instead of imposing a tax on canadian goods ,can we just send them Quebec?

Hi there,

We are that now complaining that we must respect the targets established by the Kyoto protocol. It clearly say that the failure of signatories countries to meet the goal to reduce the emissions below the 90's level would be billed on us. We can clearly recognized the problem that Kyoto pose to nations not able to reduce it's emissions.

I need to comment that we could use everything we will lose anyways in innovations in technology, this would then be useful to acheive futur targets.

We specifically need to underline that Mr. Harper plan to attack air pollution is bound to failure. The winds from the U.S. (never signed) sends tons of chemical byproducts and "Air pollution" as he call it in the air. As I know that you cannot extinguishe a fire without soaking the ashes, let's just say that our neighbors are far from closing their dirty business up North to move it somewhere else...

France is now right in willing to impose mesures to "force" the Canadian government to "LISTEN TO IT'S CITIZENS".

Mr. Harper, it's wrong to say we can't when we can. Annyways we have to reduce even more to compensate for our neighbor. (Just kidding, the U.S. will one day realise that it's too late)

Let's propose to bend a rule of the protocol: being able to invest so we dont pay foreign countries for their, we must say stupid "CO2 credits". We have 1000's of cheep ways to invest in GREEN technology, let's fund that...

John Muff

First of all,who has a lack of intelligence to name somethning like "freedom toast?? and what is it? never heard of that crappy name.


Second of all, maybe france should bring back the liberty statue, apperently americans doesnt even know what it means.

And just for your own information, us wasnt alone to save the french during WW2, the world must say a great thank to the russian and the whole coalition.

That is a good idea, to give quebec back to the french.