Ragging the Puck

As a guy who grew up in Wales playing rugby, North American sports metaphors need some repeating for them to sink in.

Luckily, that's precisely what's happening with the phrase "ragging the puck" - and all on the climate file.

I think federal Liberal environment critic David McGuinty started it in this article when he accused the Harper government of wanting to kill time on doing anything on global warming pollution until after the next election.

Then, incredibly, Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall goes to DC to tell US lawmakers that they need to "rag the puck a bit" on their global warming legislation so that it doesn't impact the Canadian fossil fuel industry, much of which is now in his home province - a reason why Saskatchewan has the highest per capita emissions in the country, ahead of even Alberta.

And finally the Toronto Star weighs in with an editorial accusing the Harper government of "ragging the puck" in the hopes that another country will scuttle the Copenhagen climate talks, letting Harper off the hook since his government doesn't really want to do anything anyway.

All this stands out for me since recently US Energy Secretary Stephen Chu also latched onto a hockey metaphor, quoting Gretsky by saying the US wants to be "where the puck is going to be" on clean energy. As a result, the US is leaving Canada in the dust on investing in the creation of new jobs in the next industrial revolution, de-carbonizing the economy.

So, what's it going to be Canada? The ploy of staying in our own end and trying to hang onto the puck by desperately defending the Tar Sands? Or, seeking to get out there and score goals by recognizing that our competitors are moving ahead on the clean energy economy, and we'd better catch up?

And, would it wreck the hockey metaphor to point out the ice is melting?

Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence

Iggy Creates Green Daylight

Significant daylight is starting to show between the federal Liberals and the Harper government on the environment. With his second major environmental speech today (the first was in Vancouver some weeks ago), Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff continued to flesh out how his party would do things differently, including the welcome promise to pass a federal Clean Energy Act.

Significant pieces of that daylight are:

• While Harper repeatedly says he'll be the last to move on global warming (is it America or China he's hiding behind today?), and when he does do something it will fall far short of what scientists are telling us is needed, Ignatieff says that Canada will move ahead regardless, as a leader should, and base reductions on scientific facts.
• While Harper lets the ecoEnergy program run out of money, incredibly hobbling Canada in the ongoing green industrial revolution now underway, Ignatieff is pledging the most significant investment in renewables the country has ever seen.
• While Harper refuses to rule out giving special treatment to the tar sands so that it can continue to increase its pollution at a time when we need to dramatically reduce it, Ignatieff is pledging a cap and trade system for Canada that covers all industries ("no exceptions") and is equitable across the country.

Harper is clearly starting to feel the heat on global warming, despite once questioning the science, by announcing today he'll go to Copenhagen after all. When he gets there though, he'll show up with no plan, weak targets, and a track record that clearly says to the world "I don't care."

We welcome even more daylight from the Liberals in the weeks and months to come. We also welcome more collaboration with the other opposition parties who, to their credit, have been saying strong things on climate change for a long time already. And, ultimately, we welcome an about-face by Harper himself so that either he or another Prime Minister is able to credibly tell the world at some point that "Canada does care."

Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence

Harper's Climate Isolation

Stephen Harper has made the political calculation that he can simply weather the criticism for being such a climate laggard. But, seemingly by the hour he appears more and more isolated - going against other countries, against the provinces, and against public opinion.

Yesterday, the Government of Quebec just slammed Ottawa for not doing enough as it laid out its own 2020 targets that go well beyond those of Harper.

Today, the Government of Ontario is telling Ottawa that the progress it is making shutting coal plants cannot be squandered by increases in tar sands pollution.

And, since Harper's favourite line these days is that he simply can't stop tar sands polluters until he knows what the Americans are doing, word comes that the U.S. is ready to show up in Copenhagen with a target to table - not a great target, but an indicator that they are moving, and so Harper's argument is a false one.

All this comes on the heels of a new poll showing four out of five Canadians are embarassed by Canada's lousy climate record.

Harper's government looks increasingly isolated on this issue, ignoring the plight of Canada's kids as the inheritors of a deteriorating atmosphere, and also ignoring that the next indusrial revolution - decarbonizing the economy - is already underway, with Canada bringing up the rear.

Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence

They Care About Kids, They Really Do

A bit of irony - or is that tragedy?

Apparently the federal government really cares about the future of our kids on a warming planet. That's the message from the action centre they've set up here.

Imitation being the best form of flattery, maybe they are noticing the kids related campaigns we're running here and here.

Of course, if the federal government actually did anything to reduce emissions, rather than pressing its foot ever harder on epanding the pollution spewing tar sands, it may actually be believable.

So, as others have pointed out, the best use of the government's action centre is to send Mr. Harper himself an e-postcard, calling the government out on its hypocrisy.

Matt Price
Program Manager
Envrionmental Defence

Yesterday's Men (and Margaret Wente)

There is perhaps some hope that both Rex Murphy and Margaret Wente are publishing book versions of their columns. Hope, that is, that this is the kind of thing you do near the end of your career.

For what unites these two columnists, beyond their being printed in the Globe and Mail, is their use of being contrarian in order to stay relevant - which is so much easier than working hard at research, truly independent opinions ("y" as opposed to "not x"), or asking the right questions.

Both columnists continue to repeatedly beat up on those who would try to do anything about global warming, with Murphy still loudly denying the global scientific consensus on global warming and refusing to apologize when proven wrong.

This intentional ignorance on both of their parts in fact tells you what you need to know about all of their writing, not just on global warming. That you, a non scientist, would dispute millions of hours of scientific research pointing in the same direction, just to be a contrarian that people take notice of, colours everything you say. Why should anyone go along with you on any other issue if you propose to be so willfully wrong on this one? The truth, in this equation, doesn't matter as much as being noticed.

If there is a silver lining here, it's that Murphy and Wente are symbolic of a generation now passing by its prime. You rarely come across climate deniers under 50 years old, partly due to education, and partly due to the social stigma in younger circles associated with selling such egregious untruths to the public.

Climate deniers are yesterday's men - and they are mostly men, other than Ms. Wente. Unfortunately, they still have some years left of providing cover to the do-nothings now holding sway in Ottawa. Let's just hope that the newer generation of columnists will work harder at uncovering the truth, before it's too late.

Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence

Who are we getting tough on again?

As the party of law and order, the Conservatives need always to be getting tough on somebody.

Remember when it was all about getting tough on polluters? First it was Rona Ambrose getting tough on polluters, and then it was John Baird.

Of course, neither actually did anything of the sort.

Now enter Jim Prentice. He's no longer threatening to get tough on polluters, but in fact threatening to get tough on other countries who say we should get tough on polluters.

Take that, sinking Maldives! Or, about time somebody put all those African countries in their place when they are complaining about crop failures caused by global warming.

Getting tough on the poorest and most vulnerable on the planet so that the tar sands can expand? Is that the new Canadian way?

Matt Price
Policy Director
Environmental Defence

An antidote to the surreal?

The Tyee has published today's post here:

http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2009/11/02/GlobalWarmingAd/