Harper treats climate change as a public-relations problem
Letter to the Editor by Eric Walton, GPC candidate and president of the Kingston Greens
Re: the story "Never repeat Kyoto: PM" (Nov. 26).
In calling for a new and better climate-change treaty that includes emissions-reduction targets for China and India, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is misrepresenting the existing United Nations-brokered climate-change accord process formalized in Kyoto, Japan.
China and India both signed the Kyoto Protocol on the understanding it would follow the successful model of the Montreal Protocol on protection of the ozone layer. In stage one, the developed industrialized nations that had created most of the man-made greenhouse-gas emissions problem would first demonstrate good faith and genuine progress in reducing emissions, and then, in round two of the negotiations, emissions-reduction targets would include the developing countries that had originally signed the Kyoto Accord.
This is what the next round of climate-change talks beginning next week in Bali are all about. Notwithstanding Harper's attempt to imply this is a fresh start, these talks are simply the continuation of the original Kyoto Accord process. Given the miserable performance of many developed countries in meeting their first emission-reduction targets, developing countries were wise to watch and see if developed countries would, in fact, walk the talk. Canada was one nation that did not.
This is also why, in my view, the Kyoto Accord is a success even in instances where national governments failed to design and execute effective emissions- reduction strategies. Kyoto, with its hard emissions targets, holds these governments accountable to their electorates for their poor performance. In effect, some national climate-change strategies will first need to renew their political leadership to be effective.
It is no wonder that Harper is so eagerly promoting "aspirational" emission-reduction targets. He has continuously opposed effective action on climate change while in opposition and continues to do so as prime minister. Without hard emission-reduction targets against which to measure performance over time, he and his government will be less accountable for outcomes and, therefore, more able to manage the climate-change issue as a public-relations problem rather than the real threat it represents to our nation's economic health, biodiversity and quality of life.
This is foreign policy leadership that is both disingenuous and dangerous.
Eric Walton
International Affairs Critic
Green Party of Canada
Kingston