From Clean Air to Climate Change, Or Not
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE SAGA OF BILL C-30: FROM CLEAN AIR TO CLIMATE CHANGE, OR NOT Elizabeth May The environment was nowhere to be seen among the top five priorities of the Harper government when it came into office last year, but public opinion soon forced global warming and climate change onto the agenda. Yet the government’s initial version of its clean air bill was so badly bungled that Prime Minister Harper gratefully accepted NDP leader Jack Layton’s offer to refer it to a special committee of the House. In January, Harper also shuffled the embattled Rona Ambrose off the firing line and brought in the combative John Baird as Environment Minister. “The saga of Bill C-30,” writes Green Party leader Elizabeth May in this update, “is a long way from resolved.” She concludes that “climate is very likely to remain an election issue.” L’environnement ne figurait nulle part parmi les cinq priorités du nouveau gouvernement Harper. Mais l’opinion publique a bientôt contraint celui-ci à intégrer le réchauffement et les changements climatiques à son programme. Cela dit, la version initiale du projet de loi sur l’assainissement de l’air était si bâclée que le premier ministre a volontiers accepté l’offre du chef du NPD, Jack Layton, de renvoyer le tout à un comité spécial de la Chambre des communes. En janvier, Stephen Harper a aussi retiré de la ligne de feu une Rona Ambrose assiégée, la remplaçant au ministère de l’Environnement par le combatif John Baird. « La saga du projet de loi C-30 est loin d’être terminée », écrit la dirigeante du Parti vert, Elizabeth May, selon qui le « climat constituera vraisemblablement un enjeu électoral ». t is a saga. A story of love and betrayal; of heroics and summary of environmental positions of all major parties scandal; of a fight to the death for the future of the plan- published the Saturday before election day.) Sixty-four per- I et. It is at least the story of an overwrought and oversold cent of Canadians voted for parties that supported Kyoto, piece of legislation called Bill C-30, The Clean Air Act. and no doubt many of those who voted Conservative did so The Harper government came to power pledging to give even though they also favoured implementation of Kyoto. priority to five things. Its demi-decimal determination did Learning from 2004, the Conservative statements were not include any actions for the environment. Nothing was murky on the party’s commitment to action on climate said that suggested the Harper government would do more change. Lacking any media scrutiny or traction in the cam- than allow its first environment minister, the bright and paign, the difference between supporting a “made-in- badly used Rona Ambrose, to try to dance fast enough that Canada plan for greenhouse gas emission reductions” and no one would notice that Canada’s commitment to action pursuing Kyoto was far too nuanced for voters who support- on climate change was a thing of the past. ed Harper to be dubbed anti-Kyoto. The climate issue had been invisible in the 2006 election Ambrose kept up a steady stream of deeply opaque rhet- campaign. The announcement by Stephen Harper that a oric. On CTV’s Question Period on May 21, 2006, Ambrose’s future Conservative government would feel free to ignore tap-dancing performance included the following mind- legally binding targets in the Kyoto Protocol was made late numbing monologue: in the campaign, in an offhand way to a French-language Our strategy is to help the international community to reporter for Canadian Press in Halifax. It was virtually reach a consensus on climate change. We want to see ignored by the major national newspapers. (Only the Toronto everyone at the table. It’s a crucial time in the talks in Star gave it a front-page reference. It was invisible in the Bonn right now. It’s a crucial time for climate change, Globe and Mail, not even rating a mention in the Globe’s the climate change international debate, and Canada 42 OPTIONS POLITIQUES MAI 2007 The saga of Bill C-30: from clean air to climate change, or not has come to the table with a to the Mulroney Green Plan of the early would emerge soon. The Prime belief and a position that we 1990s. Revisiting the Green Plan, Minister promised a Clean Air Act, but need to see everyone at the brought forward by then environment provided no details. He took a swipe at table. We need to emerge from minister Jean Charest, would have been Kyoto, bragging that his new plan was these talks with a comprehen- a good foundation for Harper’s environ- not developed in an “exotic location.” sive and an inclusive approach mental policy. Much that was good in He dragged Environment Minister that includes all countries. that plan had been lost through Liberal Rona Ambrose, Natural Resources That is what that document budget cut-backs and neglect. Minister Gary Lunn and Health Minister Tony Clement to The public was not deluded by the doublespeak, and Prime Vancouver, where they par- Minister Harper and his inner team realized an environmental ticipated in the press confer- initiative was required. By summer, the Harper government ence without being allowed to speak. As Don Martin was making noises about a new initiative to tackle clean air. quipped in the National The first touted effort was described as “Green Plan 2.” This Post, they filled the role usu- raised hopes of a serious follow-up to the Mulroney Green ally played by potted palms, Plan of the early 1990s. Revisiting the Green Plan, brought arrayed in a tasteful semi- circle behind their boss. forward by Environment Minister Jean Charest, would have By the time Minister been a good foundation for Harper’s environmental policy. Ambrose announced the Much that was good in that plan had been lost through Clean Air Act, at a briefing Liberal budget cutbacks and neglect. interrupted by a fire alarm in Centre Block, allowing shows, and actually that docu- For example, the cancellation of reporters a breath of actual fresh air as ment, Jane, was a draft docu- the State of the Environment report, Ambrose stumbled through her pres- ment that ended up being our launched by the Mulroney government entation, it was the most overhyped public document that’s posted and cancelled by the Chrétien govern- legislation in Canadian environmental on the United Nations website. ment, reduced fundamental informa- law history. This alone is really quite So we’ve always been transpar- tion that guided policy. This report an accomplishment, Canadian green ent about how we feel. The relied on solid data collection, much of rhetoric usually exceeding substance. Prime Minister has been clear which has also been cancelled, to pull Rather than being a new Act, it was, that we feel very strongly that together an authoritative, publicly in fact, a set of amendments to Canada’s all countries have to contribute accessible report on Canadian progress existing Canadian Environmental Protection to this global problem. And in meeting environmental indicators. Act. That Act had in 1986, when first Canada’s ready to contribute When it was cancelled, Alberta com- unveiled, been described by the environ- and we want to see all coun- mentator Andrew Nikiforuk compared ment minister as the strongest environ- tries at the table. it to a blind man selling his guide dog mental law in the Western hemisphere. It as a cost-cutting measure. wasn’t, but it was surely more than ade- eciphering the above requires That said, it must be noted that quate, without amendment, to meet the D recourse to the ultimate authori- the Mulroney Green Plan has stated goals of Minister Ambrose and ty in bafflegab and nonsense, Lewis increased in lustre particularly in hind- Prime Minister Harper. Carroll. For a plain explanation of sight due to the poor performance of Harper’s climate policy, viewers might governments since. The reality is that hen revealed, Bill C-30 was cer- as well have heard “Twas brillig and the first Green Plan was more a fund W tainly underwhelming. It was, the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in than a plan. as noted, not a new piece of legisla- the wabe.” A revised and updated Green Plan tion, but a set of amendments to the The public was not deluded by the 2 would have been a sensible approach, existing CEPA. doublespeak, and Prime Minister but as the weeks wore by, Ambrose, In addition to the legislative Harper and his inner team realized an appearing before a parliamentary com- amendments, there was also a notice of environmental initiative was required. mittee, began the process of lowering intent to regulate. It was in the notice of By summer, the Harper government expectations. It would not, she said, be intent that the Harper government’s first was making noises about a new initia- as much a “plan” as an “approach.” and, to this date, only greenhouse gas tive to tackle clean air. The first touted In Vancouver, in early October, the reduction target was revealed. While effort was described as “Green Plan 2.” Prime Minister assembled a photo op Kyoto targets are set against a 1990 base- This raised hopes of a serious follow-up in which he announced that a new bill line of emissions, the Harper POLICY OPTIONS 43 MAY 2007 Elizabeth May government moved into a unique ronmental damage. In that context, acceptable and that anything that stance, gauging emissions reductions greenhouse gases met the definition of moved GHGs to speedy regulation was against 2003 levels.