Canada hasn't even formalized its climate change plan yet. But already, Europeans don't like what they see in Harper's approach to environmental policy. That might have a lot to do with Ottawa's decision to put its name behind the Asia Pacific Partnership, the proverbial tie that binds the globe's climate-change renegades and doesn't include any European countries. Scratch that; it has everything to do with the APP.

There won't be a formal announcement until this coming October, but Stephen Harper's made it very clear he's only got eyes for the so-called "anti-Kyoto club." Even though it regroups the world's biggest emissions-producing countries - the U.S., China and India, along with Australia, Japan and South Korean - the APP is seen as a subversive entity among the world's Kyoto boosters. Unlike its predecessor, the APP contains no caps on emissions. In fact, it doesn't actually force its members to do much of anything at all. Instead, it focuses on the voluntary development of cleaner technologies and its charter even suggests climate change may not be as urgent as people have made it out to be: "development and poverty eradication are urgent and overriding goals internationally." While the slight at their cause is no doubt a rub to environmentalists, it's the Partnership's reluctance to impose hard caps on emissions that has them up in arms.

"If you don't have timetables and penalties, you don't do it," says John Bennet, the executive director of Climateforchange.ca, on APP's reluctance to impose hard caps on greenhouse gas emissions. "The speed limit on the 401 is 100 clicks, but if there's no policeman there,everyone's going to do 150. You're not serious about this unless you take on a hard target that actually hurts to make it."

The perception that the Harper government hasn't been serious in addressing climate change has been a thorn in its side since it first tried to tackle the issue. Former environment minister Rona Ambrose was abruptly dropped from cabinet after environmentalists and opposition parties mercilessly attacked her green plan that included putting off emissions reductions until 2025. Since then, Harper's had Conservative pit bull John Baird manning the controls at Environment Canada. But it doesn't seem to have done much good as far as the public's perception is concerned.

A recent poll commissioned by Climateforchange.ca found Harper's conversion from staunch opponent of environmental regulation to front-line defender of all things green somewhat dubious. Sixty-eight per cent of respondents didn't think there was anything more behind than a mad dash for Canada's increasingly climate-conscious voters. While Harper's alliance with the world's two most prominent opponents of Kyoto - Australia and the U.S. - doesn't seem like it will do much to change things, it's worth looking at exactly where those two countries stand with respect to emissions.

Australia, for one, has actually made significant strides towards achieving Kyoto targets, in spite of prime minister John Howard's decision to forgo the protocol altogether. Its greenhouse gas emissions are on track to be nine per cent above 1990 levels by 2012 - still above Kyoto's six per cent target, but considerably better than the 25 per cent above 1990 levels they would have been had no measures been taken at all. By contrast, Canada's emissions currently were 27 per cent above 1990 levels in 2004.

Even the U.S. has a better emissions reduction track record than Canada, with emissions in 2004 a comparatively scant 16 per cent above 1990 levels. And while George Bush has long been regarded as the crown prince of the anti-environment movement, like Harper, he too has undertaken to a green-tinted makeover. During this week's summit into global climate change policy in Washington, Bush said "strong and transparent" mechanisms were needed to measure progress on emissions reduction, while also calling for "each nation [to] design its own separate strategies for making progress toward achieving" long-term targets.

The problem, environmentalists point out, is that even if Australia and the U.S. have enjoyed more success in cutting(or, at the very least, controlling)emissions than Canada has, there's little to indicate any of it had to do with the APP. Because it doesn't enforce strict targets, there's no reason to believe member countries will take any significant measures to cut emissions in the future. In fact, they fear the APP may just be a smoke-and-mirrors act designed to divert attention from Kyoto targets.

"Having another forum [outside Kyoto] to discuss climate change is not a big deal," says Dale Marshall, a policy analyst for the David Suzuki Foundation. "But if it's intended to be something that Canada can point at should the Kyoto process break down, then it shows a clear intent to undermine what's happening under the UN."

Harper certainly has his work cut out for him if he hopes to convince Canadians of his credibility on the environmental file. He is, after all, the man who once referred to the Kyoto Protocol as a "job-killing, economy-destroying" "socialist scheme." And, for better or worse, his opinion doesn't seem to have changed all that much; only the words are different. Harper told a UN summit earlier in the week he still principally views emissions reductions as a balancing act involving "environmental protection [and] economic growth." If the budget surplus is any indication, the growth end of things is doing just fine. What remains to be seen is how far Harper will be willing to tilt the scales the other way.

Print Article    Send to a Friend    Write a letter to the editor

Digg this Stumble It!   Post to del.icio.us Seed Newsvine   Share on Facebook Technorati links