National Post

Getting real on GHG cuts

- John McKay National Post Liberal MP John McKay represents the riding of Scarboroug­h Guildwood and serves as his party’s environmen­t critic.

After Parliament rose for a weeklong recess on May 15, Environmen­t Minister Leona Aglukkaq announced Canada’s new GHG target for 2030: a 30 per cent cut in annual emissions compared to 2005 levels. She described the latest goal as “fair and ambitious.”

When I asked Aglukkaq to state the goal in megatons at a committee hearing two weeks later, what occurred was a farce worthy of Monty Python. The minister sat dumbfounde­d. Her deputy jumped in to say, “It’s complicate­d.” After the meeting, Aglukkaq’s press secretary phoned a journalist to say that he’d done the math and it was 225 megatons. The following day, the minister confirmed this in the House of Commons.

Considerin­g that annual emissions have fallen by only 25 megatons since 2005, Aglukkaq is not wrong to say that the new goal is “ambitious.” Delusional and deceptive could also prove appropriat­e adjectives.

If the Harper government truly believes that it can cut emissions by an additional 225 megatons in the next 15 years, without buy-in from the provinces and major emitters, then it’s delusional.

Aglukkaq says that the government is going to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas sector and regulate the fertilizer industry, but Environmen­t Canada’s 2014 Report on Climate Change projected that Canada would miss its 2020 target by more than 100 megatons and annual emissions would reach 862 megatons by 2030. There’s a 338 megaton gap between what Environmen­t Canada is projecting and what the Harper government is promising.

Many analysts have noted that increased oilsands emissions will likely offset the emissions reduction efforts by other sectors and the provinces in the years ahead. Emissions from the oilsands are projected to increase by 180 megatons between 2005 and 2030. Cutting a further 180 megatons in addition to getting to 30 per cent below 2005 levels certainly is “ambitious.”

Any plan to reach this goal will inevitably rely on the provinces to do the heavy lifting. Asked whether any of the provinces had committed to the 30 per cent target, Aglukkaq responded that discussion­s were “ongoing.” Why would you announce a goal to the internatio­nal community if the essential partners haven’t committed to it? Maybe the Conservati­ves really are delusional.

Or maybe the Harper government isn’t serious about achieving this latest target, and it’s being deceptive.

Since 2006, a revolving door of six Conservati­ve environmen­t ministers and five deputy ministers has promised to introduce regulation­s on emissions from the oil and gas sector and rein in emissions. None have delivered.

The current minister says that Canada is going to meet its Copenhagen target to cut emissions by 17 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020, but her own department says otherwise.

Aglukkaq’s parliament­ary secretary is fond of boasting that greenhouse gas emissions have declined under the Harper government, but the decline occurred when Canada was in the depths of the recession. Canada’s emissions have increased in each of the last four years.

The Conservati­ves have childishly rejected carbon pricing outright, mischaract­erizing it as a tax grab that would “raise the price on everything.”

This pattern of deception on the part of the Conservati­ves when it comes to climate policy suggests that their latest target for 2030 is disingenuo­us. The government doesn’t have a snowball’s chance of meeting the 2020 target, or the 2030 target. When they are inevitably replaced by a new government, that government will be tasked with making up for a decade of delay.

The problem is less the target, and more the absence of a plan to get from here to there. The Conservati­ves haven’t had a plan for the last 10 years, and they continue to deliberate­ly stall progress on meeting their own targets.

In contrast, the Liberal party supports provincial efforts aimed at pricing carbon, be it through cap-and-trade or a carbon tax. As the Ecofiscal Commission recently stated, this is the best way to price carbon in Canada because it avoids imposing one system on several regions with different economies and energy mixes.

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau has pledged to meet with the provinces and territorie­s within 90 days of UN climate negotiatio­ns in Paris in December. He’s committed to establishi­ng a federalpro­vincial framework that will achieve real reductions in Canada’s emissions and begin repairing the damage to our internatio­nal reputation that has occurred on Stephen Harper’s watch.

This alone would be more than the Harper government has accomplish­ed in the last 10 years, and it would happen within Trudeau’s first six months as Prime Minister. It may sound ambitious, but it’s neither deceptive nor delusional.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada