Canadian parliament backs Kyoto ratification plan

[DinoDoc]

OTTAWA, Dec 10 (Reuters) - The Canadian Parliament voted on Tuesday to support government plans to ratify the Kyoto protocol on cutting greenhouse gases, overriding opponents who say the treaty will hurt Canada's economy.

The 195-77 vote by the House of Commons lower chamber has no binding power on the government of Prime Minister Jean Chretien. But it reflects his government's determination to press ahead with speedy ratification, in stark contrast to the position in the United States, which opposes the pact.

Chretien said on Tuesday he intended to ratify the treaty do so by the end of the year.

The vote puts Canada squarely at odds with the United States, which walked away from the Kyoto treaty last year on the grounds it would damage the U.S. economy. Critics say it would be suicide for Canadian firms to commit to the costly process of cutting emissions when U.S. competitors did not.

The outcome of the vote was never in question since Chretien had ordered legislators from his ruling Liberal Party to support the government. Two of the four opposition parties also backed the idea.

"It's really excellent, a good indication of the wishes of the country and the Canadian people," a beaming Environment Minister David Anderson told reporters after the vote.

The Kyoto debate now moves to the government's plans to implement the accord, which obliges Canada to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 6 percent from 1990 levels by 2012.

If no action is taken, Canadian emissions by 2010 are predicted to be 33 percent above the 1990 level.

Industry groups and several provinces, particularly energy-rich Alberta, say cutting greenhouse gases by the amount required under the accord would cause serious economic damage.

Ottawa, which has already softened its plan to implement Kyoto, said on Monday it would cap the amount that businesses would have to pay to meet their targets. Opposition parties said this could cost billions of dollars and business groups complain the plan is too vague.

The opposition Canadian Alliance party, its heartland in Alberta, blasted the ratification plan as "a gross mistake for Canada" and said the cap could cost billions, given what it called Ottawa's appalling record of financial mismanagement.

"It's an incredibly stupid decision and without precedent to adopt an international accord with potentially enormous economic ramifications for this country and to do so without a plan," said Alliance leader Stephen Harper.

"Already with the rhetoric we have a significant investment chill in some parts of this economy."

Even some members of Chretien's cabinet are unhappy. Federal Health Minister Anne McLellan, who comes from Alberta, had criticized the government's handling of the debate but in the end she voted to support ratification. About a dozen Liberal legislators missed the vote.

So what do you think? How stiff is the opposition in Alberta and will thier be any problems enforcing the treaty because of it?

[Gatekeeper]

Can the United States look forward to eventually adding a former Canadian province or two?



Gatekeeper

[notyoueither]

If the only opposition were in Alberta, it would not matter. We would be over-ruled by a vast majority of the country.

However, there is growing opposition outside of Alberta. What remains to be seen is if a lame duck PM can force the issue through when senior cabinet ministers have misgivings. Not to mention the provinces of Alberta, Ontario, and maybe Quebec.

In a queer development, the Premier of Alberta dropped legal opposition to the accord beacuse... 'Chretein's replacement might be more reasonable' or something like that.

The only thing I can say for sure is there is more and horse feathers flying around about this issue.

[mrboo123]

I wonder why the Libers got there wish???

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Finally a step in the right direction. Canada should show the US how its done.

[DanS]

[The Mad Monk]

You mean, how to force through an unpopular, panicky measure because it will make you look good in the international press?

[DanS]

Oh wait. We don't want Canada to appear like a unilateralist!

[Asher]

The outcome of the vote was never in question since Chretien had ordered legislators from his ruling Liberal Party to support the government.

Sweet, glorious democracy.

He even got Liberal MPs from Alberta, like Anne McLellan, to vote for it if they wanted to keep their jobs -- even though something like 72% of the people in her riding oppose it.

[Seeker]

If only we could seperate the good reform ideas like recall from the rest of their crap.

You should not be doing something that the overwhelming majority of your constituents oppose, it really puts the lie to representative democracy.

Let's face it, 'write a letter to your MP' is a joke. We have an elected (kinda) dictatorship.

[Tingkai]

Sanity has prevailed with this victory of democracy against the special interests of big business. The majority of Canadians wanted Kyoto ratified and thankfully it was ratified.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Sanity has prevailed with this victory of democracy against the special interests of big business. The majority of Canadians wanted Kyoto ratified and thankfully it was ratified.

Hmm.

It's a victory of democracy when Chretien orders his party to ratify it, against their constituents wishes?

The majority of Canadains want Kyoto, when the last poll result showed support nationwide at 44% for it and dropping fast?

Very interesting.

[Asher]

http://www.ipsos-reid.com/media/act_...021108-3tb.pdf

Page 2:

As you may know, the Kyoto Accord or Protocol is an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Under this agreement, Canada has committed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 6 percent below 1990 levels by the period from 2008 to 2012. The Government of Canada is currently considering ratifying the agreement, thereby making it binding on our country. Thinking of the Kyoto Protocol as it now stands, how do you think the Government of Canada should proceed ?

Withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol and develop a made-in-Canada plans for reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions: 49%
Ratify Kyoto: 43%
Do nothing: 1%
Don't know: 7%

[notyoueither]

Yes Asher, but those who do not agree are selfish, uncaring people. Therefore, they don't count.

[Gatekeeper]

Does this mean more Canadian jobs might come to the States? Y'know, businesses fleeing onerous new measures imposed on them to comply w/Kyoto?

I bet they're more likely to go to China or India, nations with el cheapo labor costs, few environmental restrictions and, above all, aren't affected period by Kyoto.

Guess that's what happens when a supposed global environmental accord like Kyoto actually only applies to a patchwork of nations, leaving nice big "Pollute here!" areas open.

Gatekeeper

[Asher]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Does this mean more Canadian jobs might come to the States? Y'know, businesses fleeing onerous new measures imposed on them to comply w/Kyoto?

Not necessarily the States, but so far we've already lost a couple thousand jobs in Alberta when some oil companies decided the uncertainty behind Kyoto was too big of a risk, and invested in Africa rather than Alberta.

And now that it's been ratified, much of the future Tarsands development has been put on indefinite hold.

All we're doing is reducing pollution coming from Canada and moving it to other nations, but too many people don't want to wake up and see that and really want to believe they're making the world a lot better for their children.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Asher

Not necessarily the States, but so far we've already lost a couple thousand jobs in Alberta when some oil companies decided the uncertainty behind Kyoto was too big of a risk, and invested in Africa rather than Alberta.

And now that it's been ratified, much of the future Tarsands development has been put on indefinite hold.

All we're doing is reducing pollution coming from Canada and moving it to other nations, but too many people don't want to wake up and see that and really want to believe they're making the world a lot better for their children.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

How in the world did the developing nations opt out of Kyoto's mandates? I believe this is why the US Senate voted 99-0 against Kyoto.

[notyoueither]

They didn't agree to abide by them?

100-NIL! on myself.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
http://www.ipsos-reid.com/media/act_...021108-3tb.pdf

Thanks Asher for providing evidence showing the majority of Canadians support Kyoto.

The poll question:
As you may know, the Kyoto Protocol on climate change requires Canada to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases to 6 percent below what they were in 1990 over the next 10 years. This means that Canada
would have to reduce its current emissions by about 20 percent to meet its target. Based on what you have seen, read or heard, do you personally support or oppose implementing the Kyoto Protocol ?


Support Kyoto: 74 per cent
Oppose Kyoto: 19 per cent



The poll also shows that the anti-Kyoto groups are attracting a lot of confused people. About 25 per cent of the people who oppose ratification of Kyoto also support it.

Go figure.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Does this mean more Canadian jobs might come to the States? Y'know, businesses fleeing onerous new measures imposed on them to comply w/Kyoto?

Isn't it great. The companies that pollute a lot will move to the States. You better hope for lots of jobs because you'll need to finance the cost of cleaning up after these companies and the cost of paying for health care for illnesses caused by pollution.

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
I bet they're more likely to go to China or India, nations with el cheapo labor costs, few environmental restrictions and, above all, aren't affected period by Kyoto.

No, it is much safer to operate in the states, particularly places that have gutted their environmental protection laws.

Going to China and India means putting up with corruption, uncertainty caused by fickle governments and so on.

The companies that need to use el cheapo labour left a long time ago.

[mrboo123]

Originally posted by Seeker
If only we could seperate the good reform ideas like recall from the rest of their crap.

You should not be doing something that the overwhelming majority of your constituents oppose, it really puts the lie to representative democracy.

Let's face it, 'write a letter to your MP' is a joke. We have an elected (kinda) dictatorship.

I agree with ever word you said, expect 'write a letter to your MP' he sends us a stuff to sing out to mail to him, but, its always pointless...

Originally posted by Tingkai

Support Kyoto: 74 per cent
Oppose Kyoto: 19 per cent

Eastern Basterd (if your bron in the west, I'll be damn!) that dosen't really count, because around 90% of the yes vote is eastern, and 80% for no is western!

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by 123john321
that dosen't really count, because around 90% of the yes vote is eastern, and 80% for no is western!

A majority of westerners support Kyoto, 58 per cent according to this poll.

[Asher]

Tingkai: The first page assumes there is no domestic plan.

The second page clearly shows more Canadians prefer a domestic plan over Kyoto, which is what Alberta proposed.

So you can quit your dancing and start thinking about it any time.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
A majority of westerners support Kyoto, 58 per cent according to this poll.

Support is 40% in Alberta if we assume there is no domestic plan alternative, 25% if we have a domestic alternative.

You're letting the environmentalists in BC push up your figure.

BTW: Are you ignoring my response to your "victory for democracy" comment because you know it's hardly a victory for democracy when Chretien orders his party to do things against constiuent's wishes?

[Ozz]

Once the Kyoto Protocol is in, then we can slap on the
Kyoto tariffs on all the non-signing backwards countries.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
Tingkai: The first page assumes there is no domestic plan.

The second page clearly shows more Canadians prefer a domestic plan over Kyoto, which is what Alberta proposed.

Aren't you tired of always been wrong? This is the third or fourth time you have been wrong in the past couple of days.

Once again you distort information.

The second page does not "clearly" show any indication that Canadians prefer a domestic plan. The split is 49-43, but with a 3 per cent error margin, this could mean that 46 per cent oppose the domestic plan while 46 per cent support the idea. A tie.

So the results are so close on this particular question that the results are not clear.

What is clear is that a vast majority of Canadians support Kyoto and that support did not change between October and September.

So ratification was a clear victory for democracy.

[Seeker]

My beef was with the MP not representing her consituency, it seems the national support is unclear or something?

My view on Kyoto:

I think climate change is for real. It think the world should do something about it.

But I also think that Canada doesn't produce a big chunk of global emissions, and why start doing it if none of the really significant emitters are going to go along?

Brownie points?

[Jon Miller]

umm, you know that the pollution that Kyoto acts against is global, right?

what we (and th eother nations that don't ratify) do will effect you (in regards to greenhouse gasses)

Jon Miller

[Ozz]

Originally posted by Seeker
why start doing it if none of the really significant emitters are going to go along?

Brownie points?

Cause we can slap tariffs on emitters (unfair trade) and maybe get some trade going with the EU, as we won't be effected by Kyoto tariffs. (if we can delouse ourselves of GM that is)

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Aren't you tired of always been wrong? This is the third or fourth time you have been wrong in the past couple of days.

Once again you distort information.

The second page does not "clearly" show any indication that Canadians prefer a domestic plan. The split is 49-43, but with a 3 per cent error margin, this could mean that 46 per cent oppose the domestic plan while 46 per cent support the idea. A tie.

Still, Tingkai, the chances of both being off by 3 percent to the point of making it a tie is not very helpful.

You're subconciously doing this or you're intentionally doing it, either way I hope you know how obvious it is to anyone reading it.

Canadians prefer a domestic plan to Kyoto. Ratifying Kyoto due to King Jean's orders is not only not an example of democracy like you claim, but it also doesn't reflect the true will of the nation which want a domestic plan.

Don't even bother with your pathetic "what ifs" regarding margin of error making it a tie in some extremely unlikely circumstance.

So ratification was a clear victory for democracy.

Again...how does Chretien ordering his government to ratify it against their particular constituent's wishes establish a victory for democracy?

Further, when more people prefer a domestic plan to Kyoto, why is it a victory when Chretien pushes forward Kyoto in a hurried rush?

You're intentionally forgetting about or ignoring crucial pieces of information: The first page of the poll you keep blindly citing states that, in the absence of a made-in-Canada solution, most people would support Kyoto in Canada (although most oppose it in Alberta). But that's just not the case -- the 2nd poll is clearly more relevant, which says given the option of a domestic plan, Canadians would prefer a domestic plan to Kyoto.

If you'd stop ignoring that perhaps we could have a serious discussion. Or maybe you don't want to think that hard because it ruins your mental image of how much difference Kyoto is going to make?

As for your "always being wrong" comments -- give me a break. You're the one in here spouting off how Chretien's dictatorship is a victory for democracy and most people want Kyoto, when more people want a domestic plan than Kyoto.

It's all about ignoring what you don't like with you, isn't it?