We need dialogue, not polarized rhetoric, on climate change

The time has come to ask ourselves how oil and gas industry reductions can be achieved in a way that’s fair and equitable

At the Glasgow COP26 summit, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubled down on the commitment he had made during the election campaign, pledging that Canada would cap and then reduce oil and gas industry greenhouse gas emissions.

This is a significant change in Liberal government policy. Until recently, there was no specific focus on reducing oil and gas emissions; in fact, quite the reverse — Trudeau bought a pipeline to help Alberta get its product to market. However, the prime minister’s thinking has changed.

As a result, Ottawa and Alberta are now on a collision course.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenny called the appointment of environmentalist Steven Guilbeault as federal minister of environment “problematic” and expressed fears Ottawa would “end up killing hundreds of thousands of jobs.” In response to Trudeau’s Glasgow pledge, Kenney complained that Alberta had not been consulted.

Canada cannot achieve its climate policy goals unless there is a significant reduction in oil and gas industry emissions in the fossil-fuel exporting provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador, but primarily Alberta).

The problem, though, is that unlike making cuts in other sectors such as transportation, where the cost is spread roughly evenly throughout the country, oil and gas emissions are geographically concentrated. Those provinces, and in particular Alberta, may feel they are being asked to pay a price from which other provinces are exempt.

The prime minister is right, we have to make those cuts in oil and gas industry emissions in order to achieve our 2030 and 2050 targets. Given that, how can we avoid a deepening of regional conflicts? We suggest the answer is a new national dialogue on how the cost of the reductions can be equitably shared across the country.

Many will argue Alberta got rich selling its oil and so now should pay the price of reductions by itself.

Others will argue Alberta has shared that wealth through federal equalization payments and so Ottawa should take on the full reduction cost.

If that dialogue is left to governments, we will see nothing but polarized rhetoric. Accordingly, we suggest the job be turned over to Canadian citizens. We recommend that the Net-zero Advisory Body, with approval and funding from the federal minister of environment and climate change, create a forum for citizens from across Canada to share views and search for consensus on how the oil and gas industry can make the necessary cuts without imposing undue harm on some parts of the country. If kept small and manageable, a citizens’ forum could be created and do its work over a six-month period. Rather than a wide-ranging mandate on all aspects of oil and gas industry reductions, it would focus only on this key question: How can the necessary oil and gas industry reductions be achieved in a way which is seen by all Canadians as fair and equitable?

The time has come to facilitate discussion across our country, to find a plan that will achieve our reduction targets without doing unacceptable harm to the national fabric which holds us together.