« Back to Home Page

Sign up for the 3p daily dispatch:

Canada’s Climate Change Accountability Act Killed By Conservative Senate

Richard Levangie | Thursday November 18th, 2010 | 12 Comments

At each of the last three climate summits, Canada has been deemed the world’s Colossal Fossil — the country that has done more to sabotage an international climate agreement than any other. After events yesterday, it’s almost a foregone conclusion that Canada will retain its title in 2010 at COP-16, and the world will pay the price, especially the developing nations that can least afford it.

In a move that is unprecedented in Canada’s parliamentary system, the unelected Senate has subverted the will of the House of Commons by killing legislation that would have set medium- and long-term greenhouse gas reduction targets that have been vetted by climate scientists as not only attainable, but necessary.

A private members bill — the Climate Change Accountability Act (C-311) — had passed the House of Commons in the spring, despite every effort by the minority government to derail it. As required, it was then sent to the upper chamber for study and final approval. The Senate occasionally delays legislation, but for the first time in Canadian history, a Conservative majority killed the bill outright with a little procedural sleight-of-hand. While experts believe that the methods deployed are not illegal, they do fly in the face of 143 years of parliamentary tradition.

“This was one of the most undemocratic acts that we have ever seen in the Parliament of Canada,” said Jack Layton, New Democratic Party leader. “To take power that doesn’t rightfully belong to them to kill a bill that has been adopted by a majority of the House of Commons representing a majority of Canadians is as wrong as it gets when it comes to democracy in this country.”

The irony is that the Conservatives came to power promising to reform the Senate. Prime Minister Stephen Harper had campaigned fiercely against the unelected legislative body’s ability to slow legislation, which he claimed thwarted the will of elected Members of Parliament. Yet after an election victory, Harper quickly reversed course, and appointed dozens of Conservative senators to what is often called a “chamber of sober second thought.”

No thought went into this defeat. It was pure politics. Senate leaders noted that a number of key opposition senators were missing, and voted to defeat C-311, which called for greenhouse gases to be cut 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.

Harper doesn’t see a future for clean technologies, and believes that the Climate Change Accountability Act will bankrupt the country.

“It sets irresponsible targets, doesn’t lay out any measure of achieving them other than [...] by shutting down sections of the Canadian economy and throwing hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of people out of work,” Harper said. “Of course, we will never support such legislation.”

That plays well to his base, but public opinion polls consistently rate global warming as a real concern for most Canadians. Yet most don’t seem to realize that not only is Canada a laggard when it comes to global warming, it’s an international saboteur.

Canada has had a minority Conservative government for since 2006, and it won’t surprise anyone to learn that global warming isn’t high on the Conservative agenda. Their power base is oil-rich Alberta, home of the infamous tar sands, and they have been enacting policies which ensure that Canada will be trapped in a fossil fuel economy for years to come.

Harper doesn’t even believe that global warming is real, and once described it as a socialist construct to extract money from wealthy nations. His government’s position on global warming has tarnished Canada’s reputation abroad, transforming the country from a respected middle power to an international pariah. Proof of the animosity now being directed at Canada came earlier in the fall when — for the first time in history — the country was denied a seat on the UN Security Council. Last year, several nations drafted a motion to have Canada expelled from the Commonwealth for its global warming intransigence.

Canada will arrive at COP-16 with the same policy that it brought in 2009.  At Copenhagen, Canada pledged to cut its GHG emissions by 17% by 2020, using 2005 as a baseline. That sounds fine, but the devil is in the details. Most nations have chosen to use 1990 as a baseline for measuring emission cuts. If the Conservatives under Harper had deemed that baseline acceptable, Canada’s emissions will actually be about three percent higher in 2020 than in 1990.

More than likely, they’ll be much higher than that, since Canada hasn’t taken any significant steps to cut its carbon out put with the sole exception of following the US lead on CAFE standards.

“This reckless approach to climate change must stop. Global warming is an urgent problem that requires urgent solutions,” says Graham Saul, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada. “Stephen Harper has done what he always promised never to do — use unelected officials to counter the will of Parliament and the Canadian public.

“As we head into the United Nations climate talks in Cancun later this month, it is unacceptable that Canada’s only climate change legislation has been defeated after years of majority support from our elected members of parliament and their constituents.”

Clare Demerse — of the non-partisan Pembina Institute — was equally shocked by the defeat.

“It would have been difficult to watch the Senate defeat this groundbreaking legislation under any circumstances. But to see it lost in this way is even tougher: C-311 was defeated without any debate, without the chance to call a single witness to explain what it offered, and at a moment when key supporters of the bill happened to be away from the Senate.

“I think that Canadians deserved better.”


▼▼▼      12 Comments     ▼▼▼

Newsletter Signup
  • Meme Mine

    Drop the CO2 and we carry on. Nothing changes. Be a Green Denier and put this irresponsible era of environMENTALism behind us.

    Ahhhhh! And I WANTED to pay a tax on the air to make the weather colder and to lower the seas.

  • Kim

    I’m not a Senate-hater, I actually think having an unelected body as a place of sober second thought is important. That said, in a perfect world I’d like to see the Senate be constituted as a non-partisan body in order to keep things like this from happening. How climate change became an issue of politics instead of scientific fact is beyond me. And if the Harper government would just realize that there is money to be made in environmentally sustainable business decisions, we’d all be in a better place.

  • http://www.one-blue-marble.com Richard Levangie

    Kim —

    I’m not a Senate hater either. And I have no doubt that if the Act had passed, Harper simply would have ignored it.

    Our government isn’t playing by the rules — and this is just the most recent in a long list of transgressions, as you know — but I still would have enjoyed a symbolic victory. It would have sent a message of solidarity to the world that Canada is willing to join the fight once we replace the Conservatives with a party that places some value in science and progress.

    Thanks for the comment!

  • John

    When I first read the headline, I thought, “man, what in the world could the US Senate be up to now?”

    It’s a shame the conservatives have hijacked the Canadian government for so long, carving up what I take is a beautiful country.

  • Orkneygal

    The overwhelming paleoclimate evidence from around the globe is that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), the Roman Warm Period and the Minoan Warming were synchronous, world wide and much warmer than today.

    However, the MWP deniers, such as the IPCC, US EPA, CSIRO and the UK’s MET Office, will never admit the existence of the MWP because it means that their religious-like belief in AGW is exposed for the steaming pile of junk science that it truly is.

    In total, climate change is complex and not well understood.

    But this part is simple.

    Since the world was warmer when CO2 levels were lower, CO2 cannot be the earth’s temperature regulator. There must be other factors.

    In the past, the Earth was warmer than it is today; before the social and industrial advances that have made modern people the healthiest and most prosperous in history. MWP deniers want us to believe that plant friendly and life giving CO2 is a bad thing to better advance their meglomanical desire to both boss around the developed world and further impoverish the poor while pocketing a lot of taxpayer money along the way.

    Useless, misguided attempts to control carbon are not the answer to the ever changing climate.There is only one answer to changes in climate that has ever worked for humanity.

    That is adaptation.

    One of the many links to the overwhelming Paleoclimate evidence of the global nature of the MWP is below.

    http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/mwpp.php

    More information

    http://www.c3headlines.com/temperature-charts-historical-proxies.html

  • http://www.one-blue-marble.com Richard Levangie

    Orkneygal — You REALLY need to look up the term astroturfing. It began with the tobacco industry, and is now used by big oil to fight the transition to a low-carbon economy. In a nutshell, big corporations pay lobbyists money to set up faux institutes that spread misinformation, and that’s what the links you posted are.

    Here’s an astroturfing primer: http://one-blue-marble.com/climate-change-denial-industry.html

    And here’s a great link to common misconceptions, from a reputable science magazine written by climate scientists. You’ll find answers to all of your talking points, including a link which explains that the MWP wasn’t nearly as warm as it is now.

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462-climate-change-a-guide-for-the-perplexed.html

    As for “CO2 Science” — it’s a front group for oil companies.

    http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_the_Study_of_Carbon_Dioxide_and_Global_Change

  • wilbert

    No Big deal here.. The Debate was over what? 10 some years ago and Canada is finally catching up. The Only ones upset are the ones wanting more tax payer funded research.
    ” value in science and progress. ”
    Example please?

  • Aerin

    global warming as a socialist construct? I’m not sure George W. even went that far…

    (actually he might have. but you take my point.)

  • Rosencrentz

    Thank goodness that we have a Prime Minister with some common sense.
    Canada has spent over $8 Billion dollars on “climate change”, and has obviously done plenty !
    I live in Wpg, and it is -19 right now and if we hadnt “invested” that $8 Billion dollars over the last 8 years , I am advised that it would be -19 right now!
    Put $8 Billion into any one of the following ( community centers, low income earners, poverty, single parents needing aid, housing, food banks) and then tell me what difference that would make!
    Canada has spent the $8 Billion and there is nothing to show for it, except Liberal and Conservative think tanks have gotten millions and millions to do “research” into climate change. So typical! No cost/benefit at all !

  • Lorraine Heffler

    ROSENCRENTZ — you’re confusing weather with climate.
    Might I suggest you read these articles.

    http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagid=54192

  • Stephen Parrish

    Orkneygal: I believe in the increasingly overwhelming evidence for AGW, but not “to better advance (my) meglomanical desire to both boss around the developed world and further impoverish the poor while pocketing a lot of taxpayer money along the way.”