By: Maude Barlow
Calgary Herald,
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Version française
This week, the Harper government proved once again that it is completely out of sync with the Canadian public.
In Nairobi, environmental groups joined forces with opposition MPs and Quebec's environment minister to show the world that Canadians disapprove of the Harper government's "made in Canada" solution to climate change. As the Conservative government struggles to save face before the international community, it is not gaining much sympathy from the Canadian public.
An Environics poll last week revealed that the environment was the second most important issue to Canadians, right behind health care. In contrast, Canada-U.S. relations was fairly low on the priority list for the majority of Canadians.
Ironically, it is the Harper government's emphasis on Canada-U.S. relations that is at the heart of Canada's failure to meet Kyoto targets. Kyoto or no Kyoto, Canada cannot commit to an effective strategy to address climate change unless our government is willing to substantially change our relationship with the U.S.
Canadian energy is consumed primarily by the U.S. Canada signed away significant control over energy when it agreed to a proportional sharing clause under the North American Free Trade Agreement. Under this clause, Canada cannot cut exports to the U.S. no matter what the state of our energy supplies, unless it cuts the same proportion of supplies to Canadians. As a result, Canada now exports 70 per cent of our oil to the U.S. while importing 60 per cent of what we consume from other countries. We cannot cut back on the production of fossil fuels for the U.S. market.
Now, the Security and Prosperity Partnership threatens to take it to another level. This agreement is the real motivation behind the Conservative government's position on climate change. Their so-called "made in Canada" strategy is made for the U.S. Energy integration is a key element of the deep integration agenda enshrined in the SPP and signed by Canada, the U.S. and Mexico in March 2005.
One of the SPP's recommendations is a "continental energy and natural resources pact." This would mean granting U.S. investors greater access to our energy supplies by creating an integrated marketplace -- something for which the Bush administration and the energy industry have been pushing.
At a meeting in Boston two weeks ago, Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn told energy industry executives, "I want you to know that the Canadian government will do everything we can to support you."
Supporting the U.S. energy industry means Canada cannot introduce tough measures aimed at reducing greenhouse gases. The Alberta oilsands, a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, are more than 50 per cent U.S.-owned, with companies such as Exxon Mobil holding huge shares in the stalled Mackenzie Valley natural gas pipeline and offshore oil drilling in the Maritimes. The overwhelming U.S. ownership of Canadian oil and gas is what the U.S. refers to as "energy security."
Energy integration and an effective Canadian environmental strategy that would meet our Kyoto targets are mutually exclusive priorities. Either we continue to integrate our energy policy with the U.S. for their interests alone, or we get serious about greenhouse gases by creating a real "made in Canada" renewable energy plan. We cannot have them both.
Poll after poll has shown where Canadians stand on Kyoto. If Stephen Harper has his priorities upside down, it is because he has been taking direction from the Bush administration and the energy industry.
Attempting to address climate change without addressing our relationship with the U.S. is futile. Until we can create a "made in Canada" strategy to maintain control over our own energy resources, we will remain tied to a North American energy plan that will put U.S. interests first and the environment last.
Maude Barlow is the national chairwoman of the Council of Canadians and author of 15 books including Too Close for Comfort: Canada's Future within Fortress North America.
