Where is our Made In Canada (MIC) Plan to deal with climate change and pollution? That’s the question every Canadian should be demanding from their Conservative MPs. Prime Minister Harper in the Spring canceled the One Ton Challenge ads, and EnerGuide program, and his ministers told us that we had to wait until Fall 2006 before they’d be ready to announce alternative government initiatives to curb air pollution. The Minister of the Environment Rona Ambrose has since expressed disdain toward both Quebecers’ view of the environment, and toward the Kyoto Accord. But aside from a loose promise to now wait until 2010 to control vehicle emissions, there is no action!
The technology to have clean/cleaner running vehicles is on the road right now, so they can’t say further work needs to go into the technology to roll it out. The government only has to say “thou shalt meet these X emission standards for Y vehicles by 2008, or you pay a tax of $5000 per unit to deal with pollution issues”. It’s up to government to make decisions that consumers can not make because of other manipulation and realities in the current design of the transportation system.
This lack of action is absurd behaviour from a party that languished in opposition for years, and still has no plan to tackle the urgent and ongoing problems with air quality that are killing Canadians right now! The Green Party has generously offered their environment platform to the Conservatives for them to implement it instead, and still there is no Conservative MIC Plan.
It’s as I strongly suspected and hinted at in September, but reserved judgment until now — the Conservatives have no intention to deal with companies and individuals that are using outdated technologies to make profit while killing everyone with pollution. It’s simply business as usual for them, and alarming changes to our climate and air quality are simply facts for them to ignore until the air is so bad that even healthy people suffer noticeably. Well, Fall has arrived and the Conservative’s plan has not, so now it’s time to bring out the heavy criticism of the Conservatives MIA Made in Canada environment plan. In this case MIA doesn’t stand for Missing In Action, it’s “Made in America”.
From their platform take note the word they used was “plan”. They didn’t say they planned to make a plan, they implied they had one.:
A cleaner, healthier environment
For all the Liberal talk about the environment, they have done nothing to clean up the environment here in Canada. They sign ambitious international treaties and send money to foreign governments for hot air credits, but can’t seem to get anything done to help people here at home.
A Conservative government will implement a “made-in-Canada” plan focused on ensuring future generations enjoy clean air, clean water, clean land, and clean energy here in Canada.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Develop a Clean Air Act to legislate the reduction of smog-causing pollutants such as Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulphur Dioxide (SO2), and particulate matter.
• Address the issue of greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), with a made-in-Canada plan, emphasising new technologies, developed in concert with the provinces and in coordination with other major industrial countries. [more...]
What have the Conservatives cleaned up in their 9 months of government? (*crickets chirping*)
- In May they cut EnerGuide.
- They promised to stall with industries reluctant to stop polluting.
- They owe us an $800 tax credit to encourage us to improve our homes.
- They’ve ignored a comprehensive MIC environment plan thrust at them by a party also committed to removal of red tape, and adjustment of taxes to control pollution.
BigCityLib has more thoughts. Odiyya has thorough analysis.
Tags: Ambrose environment Conservatives EnerGuide Green Party
@hotmail.com
![[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]](http://www.efc.ca/images/efcfreet.gif)
Soulfood | 04-Oct-06 at 11:11 pm | Permalink
OK, I’m going to stand up for the Conservatives.
I think you all need to realize that the environment is our problem, not the governments. Sorry, but those big businesses are what funds the party and supports them in government. Expecting the government to suddenly turn on its supporters is something that is just never going to happen.
Maybe what we need is a non-governmental agency that works with companies to show them why being environmentally friendly is a good thing and what the benefits are for companies.
Maybe more people in their own communities need to take action to get their neighbours to be more environmentally friendly.
I think the problem is that we rely on the government too much and maybe we need to start being accountable for our own actions. So what if they cancelled the One Tonne Challenge. Take the challenge on yourself and start encouraging your neighbours. Just because the government stopped telling you to be environmental doesn’t mean they don’t want you to be. They just want your money to go towards things like ensuring all Canadian are fed. I think while there is accountability for the government, the government also has the right to expectations of the public. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t step up to the plate and take action ourselves to solve the problems we see in front of us.
Stop whining to the government and go do something yourself.
Saskboy | 04-Oct-06 at 11:24 pm | Permalink
Even the Conservatives say they are standing up for Canada. Why do their actions deserve to have you defending them?
“I think you all need to realize that the environment is our problem, not the governments.”
I think you need to realize that the government officially represents us. Our problems ARE the government’s problems to deal with.
“Maybe what we need is a non-governmental agency that works with companies to show them why being environmentally friendly is a good thing and what the benefits are for companies.”
Why is this going to happen? Where’s the money to be made in lobbying businesses? Why are people supposed to be able to follow through on the One Ton Challenge, but businesses need hordes of lobbyists holding their hand through changes you claim are both good for the environment and bottom line. If it’s so straight forward, why aren’t they changing as of yesterday? More importantly, if it’s so good to change to sustainable methods [which it is], what’s wrong with smacking companies that don’t?
“Take the challenge on yourself and start encouraging your neighbours.
Stop whining to the government and go do something yourself. ”
Do you mean like how I have a compost box available to my neighbours, and put on over 520km so far this year on my bicycle for commuting purposes? I also consider holding flawed Conservative policies up for ridicule and debate is something positive for the environment, although admittedly in a less direct way.
Soulfood | 04-Oct-06 at 11:43 pm | Permalink
And here I come back with more retorts:
“I think you need to realize that the government officially represents us. Our problems ARE the government’s problems to deal with.”
That’s like saying that when marriage starts falling apart I should blame the government for that problem. They can’t be in charge of all our problems. It’s not logistically possible. We have to take on responsibility ourselves.
“Where’s the money to be made in lobbying businesses?”
I never said a lobby group. I said a non-governmental agency. I’m talking about a for-profit business, like a consulting agency. The fact is, being environmental doesn’t directly impact the bottom line and that’s why companies aren’t jumping to do it. This type of company would go to corporations and let them know the positives (in a quote) and would then help them achieve those goals to obtain those rewards (for a cost). There are otehr things such as social responsibility that will impact the bottom line, but it’s indirect and that is why companies aren’t jumping to do it.
And the fact is, I know you and me and my family and probably your family are doing a great job. I walk everywhere, use public transit, recycle, everything. We need to start encouraging others to do so. Maybe you don’t recycle at work. Get a recycling program started. People will see how easy it is and start doing it at home and it will just balloon from there.
Yeah, raising this debate is great, but talking isn’t doing. Sorry, but actions speak louder than words, and I really think that your biking speaks a lot louder than holding up flaws of a government. Take the responsibility to do your small part because it will balloon and make a larger difference in the world as a whole.
Pilot | 04-Oct-06 at 11:51 pm | Permalink
Holy crap… I officially am not related to Soulfood anymore… anyone that stupid can’t be my sister.
By allowing commerce to set the rules we allow a lawless society. Just as we depend on police to prevent people from committing violent murder, we should depend on legislation to and lawmakers to protect our lives and health from pollution. Not to mention that funding provided by the government helps the less fortunate contribute to climate change.
The largest polluters in the industrialized world are not you and me, it’s the big businesses that produce our products. If it were up to them there would be no controls because it’s cheaper, Soulfood as a Commerce graduate, you should understand the logic in that.
ANYWAYS.. enough bashing Soulfood… too easy.
To agree with SaskBoy, I’d like to add the following. The Conservative government in addition to cutting environmental programs has recently also cut funding to the tune of a billion plus dollars, then within days complained about the inefficiencies of the Liberal environmental plans. Well guys, if they did so bad, you’re doing worse. I actually ordered the One Tonne Challenge book and made many changes in my home and living style because of it. I’ve done sweet f++kall from your programs. Why not take that big surplus you have and put Canada at the forefront of the environmental movement. It only makes sense, we are the home to the worlds most famous environmentalist, David Suzuki.
I suppose I can take some comfort in the fact that the ‘Tories have so pissed off everyone that they don’t stand a chance in hell of winning another election for another 12 years.
And there goes my plans for my next post on “Untitled”
Soulfood | 05-Oct-06 at 12:02 am | Permalink
As a Commerce grad I realize that big business is not all about the bottom line. The most successful companies in the world are the ones that think about social responsibility, including environmental controls. And that is where I think you are wrong. I’ve done a LOT of case studies on companies and I can tell you that the perception the average person has of big business is wrong. Yes, profit is important, as it is the shareholders who you are working for. However, you also have to think about stakeholders, which include your customers and employees for examples and they need to have a positive perception of your company for profits to come. So, if you are not socially responsible, your share price is going to suffer, which displeases the shareholders.
Thus, increase social responsbility, increase customer base, increase profits. It’s all about marginal gains, not gross, so if the cost of social responsibility is less than the profit from a new customer, than it is worthwhile and that is what today’s successful companies realize.
And I just want to comment on relying on the government. Everyone needs to realize that Canada is an extremely expensive country to run than most, simply because of logistics. The fact that we are the 2nd largest country in the world works against us. We have such a large area to maintain, yet such a small tax base to fund it. You need to realize that the government can no longer support everything. And they’re using the word “surplus” but that does not mean the money is sitting around. That’s just a budget word, it has nothing to do with actuals.
Pilot | 05-Oct-06 at 12:22 am | Permalink
OK first I’d like to reply on your comment about debate vs. action. (You posted while I was). Obviously both Saskboy and I DO act, I don’t even own an incandecent light or a car anymore, and Saskboy has made his declarations as to what he does. Without public outcry, the government would run willy nilly, oing what they want. Look at the United States. Through clever media manipulation the Bush government has turned the public eye away from it’s recently passed legislation on suspending parts of the Magna Carta, in particular Habius Corpus or the prohibition of the use of torture. It seems odd that within a day of that bill being passed, the scandal involving Mark Foley (which the GOP has known about for over a year) breaks.
Same goes here. We’re walking the walk and talking the talk. When the government is not doing their jobs correctly, the responsibility lies in the hands of the people to call the government out. Just because they call elections when they want to doesn’t mean the people are without power… that’s why people protest, that’s why there’s riots. If you think the lawmakers don’t see those people getting tear gassed, you’re wrong.
As to Canada being so large, yes it does present challenges, but it also presents opportunity. We have untold resources and if the Conservative government didn’t have their heads so far up their asses they would
a) not sell out their own companies trying to make a buck (softwood lumber deal anyone?)
b) WOULD PUT ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS IN PLACE TO PROTECT OUR INVALUABLE NATURAL RESOURCES SO THAT WE CAN AFFORD TO MAINTAIN OUR MASSIVE LANDMASS.
As to your thoughts on corporate responsibility, yes, y ou’re right there are some very responsible corporations. General Electric, British Petroleum, Honda, and many others have made very positive headway in this specific field. But what about the General Motors, Wal-Marts, Enron’s, and others that have done the opposite. Even with government laws they manage to screw over everyone they see at every turn. A few good apples doesn’t protect the bunch… but a few bad ones can spoil it.
If the companies are left in charge of making the rules, then they will affect public perception to be that there is no real problem.. them people like me and Saskboy are viewed as crackpots who don’t know what their talking about. Even though we read more than the headlines.
Right Soulfood?
Saskboy | 05-Oct-06 at 10:08 am | Permalink
“We have to take on responsibility ourselves.”
I don’t see how I’m to take on responsibility for GM not providing the option of vehicles that get 50MPG when its technically so easy for them to offer, and impossible for me alone to compell them?
“I’m talking about a for-profit business, like a consulting agency.”
And if there were regulations requiring business to stop killing us with their pollution, they’d have a reason to go out and hire those consultants, other than suddenly growing a heart and wanting to be socially responsible.
“Sorry, but actions speak louder than words.”
That’s why I follow up my words with action. And I’m encourging people to also take action through both my elected leaders and by telling others how our elected leaders are currently failing us. One vote makes a difference, but convincing dozens of others to vote with you makes a movement.
Pilot, “And there goes my plans for my next post on “Untitled” “
What do you mean? If you meant you can’t use your rant as a blog post, I use my comments on other blogs as the bulk of my blog’s content quite often. It saves writing the same thing twice, and I get more readers here than elsewhere usually.
—
Soulfood “big business is not all about the bottom line. The most successful companies in the world are the ones that think about social responsibility, including environmental controls.”
Unfortunately not all businesses share that sense of responsibility. Some are created with nothing else in mind than to rape the land and investors of their potential (ie. Enron, Bre-X), and they ignore the environmental costs because they don’t plan to be around long enough to clean up after themselves, and some people get very rich while leaving a toxic pool behind. Or they may hire from a country with defacto indentured servants/slaves.
Walmart is among the most successful companies in the world, yet they sell all kinds of products with packaging well beyond what is needed to contain or protect the product within. That’s waste and marketing manipulation, pure and simple. They show a company can be socially unresponsible, and still be highly profitable (successful) because they have enough money devoted to advertising and market control.
“Canada is an extremely expensive country to run than most, simply because of logistics. “
Yet the government lets private companies rip up the most efficient and lowest energy transport systems where the initial installation costs have already been offset (ie. railways). The provincial government also closes local services (ie. elevators, schools, hospitals) which increases infrastructure, pollution, and travel costs. And Municipalities allow building of pedestrian/cyclist inaccessible communities. It’s 2006, and Yorkton has a Walmart with no sidewalks, bus route, or bike lane going to it from at least the north and west approaches joining the bulk of the city [and probably no east access either for the houses over that way]. How else than by car or parachute can someone shop at Walmart? And if you parachute in, the helicopter fee to get out is insane, and more polluting than a car! :-)
Pilot, “If the companies are left in charge of making the rules, then they will affect public perception to be that there is no real problem.. them people like me and Saskboy are viewed as crackpots who don’t know what their talking about. Even though we read more than the headlines.”
Bravo, well said. They have billions of dollars to put their lies and manipulations on TV, while we only have a few dozen readers who may or may not read what we write in a given day, and YouTube (which won’t last). Our relatively small audience isn’t indicative of the validity of our position.
rose | 06-Oct-06 at 1:26 pm | Permalink
The largest proportion of greenhouse gases comes from industry. Can’t really argue with that. Personal use doesn’t account for even close to the same amount of pollutants. So, personal responsibility, while I believe is very important, will only put a vague dent in the problem. Even changing Canadian consumers’ demand for the product (fuel) won’t do a thing, since there are plenty of developing countries willing to take what we don’t want. So basically, the only way it would work is to regulate industry. And as if the Conservatives would EVER do that.
EX-NDIP | 09-Oct-06 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
Rose . . . . CO2 is not a polutant . . . most CO2 is created naturally, volcanos, decay, oceans, etc. . . . human activities only make up a small percentage like 10 or 15%. CO2 is plant food. Scientists don’t agree even if CO2 causes anything but trees to grow faster. The world has warmed up 1 degree F in the last 100 years . . . glaciers in Greenland and Antartica are growing. The polar bears are multiplying, the huricanes are fewer . . . only Algor is coming unglued.
Kyoto is about wealth-transfer . . . nothin else . . . just send money . . . everything will work out . . . how do I get on the list . . . I could use a few million bucks for my polution credits!!!
Saskboy | 10-Oct-06 at 12:59 am | Permalink
ExNDIP, read Rose’s comment. There’s no mention there of CO2 specifically, so what are you talking about? It appears you’re erecting a strawman.
As for the “truthiness” of the rest of your opinions on global warming and its effects, we have a good idea of where they are coming from, and why.
You think that Kyoto is about wealth transfer? Well the system we have now is about wealth transfer too, and unless you are already rich, the odds of the wealth being transferred to you, is 95% against you.