No-Confidence Vote in Canada Threatens U.N. Meeting

[unclepercy]

By CLIFFORD KRAUSS

Published: November 27, 2005

OTTAWA, Nov. 23 - Monday was supposed to be the day Canada took the reins of international environmental leadership, playing host to a United Nations climate change conference in Montreal to begin a critical round of negotiations to decide how the world will confront global warming in the coming decades.

But now Monday is also the day that Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberal Party government is expected to fall in a no-confidence vote in the House of Commons. Many of the Canadian cabinet ministers and other members of Parliament who were supposed to attend the conference will now be scurrying to the campaign trail instead.

"It's the nightmare scenario that environmental activists around the world have been hoping would be avoided," said Elizabeth May, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada. Speaking of Stephane Dion, the country's environment minister - the chairman of the conference as well as a major political player in the battleground province of Quebec - Ms. May said, "He is bound to be just a tad distracted."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/27/international/americas/27canada.html

**********************************************************************************

The conclusion of the article infers that Canada is unfit to host such a meeting since they are among the worst offenders. OK,
could someone explain how a no-confidence vote in the House of Commons affects this? Remember, I can read, but I am trying to understand Canadian politics. I don't understand this connection.
Thanks.

Uncle

 

[I think not]

Considering that the Liberals will win again, I don't see anyway it affects the UN meeting.

 

[Reverend Blair]

It is unlikely that it really affects the meeting at all, Uncle. As to how environmental initiatives, specifically climate change in this case, are affected by Canadian politics, the important thing isn't really the meeting, but this: "The conclusion of the article infers that Canada is unfit to host such a meeting since they are among the worst offenders."

The big fear in the environmental community is that our internal politics will cause us to show a lack of leadership not just in the reality of our programs and our record, but that we won't even pay the lip service that we traditionally have. While our record sucks at actually doing anything, largely because we let corporations set government policies, we have traditionally talked a pretty good game and gotten other nations to do better.

Of course the other fear is the anti-science minions of the radical right will win this election and we'll move towards telling the same kinds of lies as the Bush regime does south of the border.

 

[bevvyd]

We may be an offender but at least we recognize that and are actively working towards finding solutions, unlike other countries.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: No-Confidence Vote in

I'm not convinced that our leaders recognise that, Bevvyd. The Liberals actually have a worse environmental record than Mulroney had, and our official opposition is still refusing to listen to scientfic consensus in favour of a few yahoos emplyed by the oil industry.

We do have some great ideas though, and other countries that have listened to those ideas have done pretty well by implementing them.