Judging by the turnover rate alone, it's clear that being
Stephen Harper's environment minister isn't easy for anyone. But for the newest
recruit, Thornhill MP Peter Kent, the assignment might be even tougher than
usual. That's because Minister Kent took the job just as new U.S. regulations
are shining a spotlight on our government's inaction on climate change.
Ever since Barack Obama took office, Stephen Harper's
government has maintained that we need to harmonize our climate change policies
with the U.S. approach. Earlier this month, the first-ever U.S. regulations on
industrial greenhouse gas pollution went into effect, covering new facilities. And
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has already announced further phases,
to limit emissions from existing oil refineries and power plants. The EPA's
approach faces tough political and legal challenges, but the Obama
Administration has vowed to protect the agency's ability to regulate.
If you're hoping for a "harmonized" Canadian equivalent to this
effort, prepare to be disappointed. Minister Kent has already ruled out
matching the U.S. approach. Instead, he said he'll achieve the same outcome — but
left the key question of how he plans to do so up to the imagination.
Our brand-new environment minister clearly needs some more convincing
answers, fast. We see three ways he could choose to proceed.
The first and best option would be to show bold leadership.
Let's call this choice "Captain Canuck," because it requires stepping out from
behind the U.S. and crafting a strong climate plan of our own. Canada already
has a 2020 target for reducing greenhouse gases, albeit one that falls short of
a fair share of the global effort. But it's a target on paper only for now — the
government's current policies won't come close to reaching it.
Captain Canuck would publish a credible plan to hit his
government's target and get to work implementing it. In the process, he would create
clean energy jobs and spur innovation.
Economic studies show that Canada would continue to enjoy
strong economic growth while cutting its greenhouse gas pollution, even if we move
faster than the United States. Some sectors might need targeted protection if
they're truly vulnerable to international competition, but a well-designed
policy could accommodate this until the U.S. caught up.
Just in case you have trouble picturing the new Environment
Minister in a superhero suit, let's consider a second option. This one casts
Canada as an eager U.S. follower, so we'll call it "Copycat."
Canada's first-ever federal greenhouse gas regulations could
be considered an example of the Copycat strategy in action. Former minister Jim
Prentice held a news conference within minutes of the U.S. announcement of
vehicle regulations to state that Canada would adopt the same approach. But
because Canadians have traditionally chosen more efficient vehicles than
Americans do, the U.S. standard doesn't mean as much here. In fact, according
to Pembina's analysis, the regulations may not require anything more than
"business as usual" until 2016.
The Copycat approach raises a few other problems, too. The
U.S. doesn't have an oil sands industry, so following the U.S. sector-by-sector
risks letting our fastest-growing source of greenhouse gas pollution off the
hook. If U.S. action isn't strong enough, Canada would miss its own target. And
U.S. legislators and regulators rarely design policy with Canada's needs uppermost
in their minds.
Despite its serious shortcomings, the Copycat approach would
still better than the third option: "Foot Dragger."
A Foot-Dragger strategy would see the federal government
announce plans to harmonize with the U.S., but then hope that ambitious climate
action in the U.S. never materializes. If the U.S. does act, a Foot Dragger
would find excuses why it makes no sense to harmonize this one time. For a Foot Dragger, climate change just isn't a
serious problem, and expanding the oil sands industry is a top priority.
Of course the U.S. matters when setting climate policy in
our far smaller, export-oriented economy. But it's not the only thing that
matters. The advice of scientists, the views of Canadian citizens, and the
economic analysis that says we can prosper while cleaning up our energy system
should matter too.
If Stephen Harper's government says it's aligned with the
U.S., that has to mean following them when they act, not just when they fail to
act. But Canada can do better than playing Robin to the U.S.'s Batman: we can
choose to design and implement the policies we need to meet our goals. That's
what serious countries do in response to important challenges.
We haven't seen a lot of bold leadership on global warming
from federal governments in Canada, and Peter Kent's first few days on the job don't
offer much hope that this has changed. But maybe our new Environment Minister will
surprise us all by finding the courage to try on that Captain Canuck suit.
Clare Demerse is the
associate director of climate change at the Pembina Institute, a national sustainable
energy think tank.
