POZNAN, POLAND — To understand the UN climate meetings that wrapped up last week in Poznan, Poland, you have to start by going back a year.
The 2007 edition of the annual talks, held in Bali, were a make-or-break session that succeeded in launching a two-year negotiation for the next global climate deal. Canada's obstructive behaviour there came under fire from UN officials, other countries' negotiators, and the world's environmentalists.
A year later, Canada has a new environment minister, and the U.S. has elected a new president who has vowed to tackle the challenge of "a planet in peril." But at what should be the halfway point of negotiations on a new global deal, it's as if we'd never left the beaches of Bali.
Not only did the negotiations fail to progress much beyond the Bali "roadmap," but Canada was once again accused of blocking progress on the crucial question of targets for industrialized countries.
In Poznan, those countries were expected to build on Bali's conclusions by working towards a group target for emission cuts aligned with the scientific assessment of what is needed to avoid dangerous climate change. Canada's current 2020 target falls far short of the range that scientists say is necessary.
As the negotiations began, South Africa—widely-acknowledged to be one of the most constructive countries at the table—singled out four countries, including Canada, for their refusal to set targets that align with the science. A few days later, the French head of delegation confirmed that Canada opposed including the science-based targets in the negotiation text.
And a new assessment of countries' performance in tackling climate change ranked Canada 56th of the 57 countries evaluated, placing us behind the United States and ahead only of Saudi Arabia.
To say the least, it wasn't easy being a Canadian in Poznan.
It's true that Canada was not the only laggard: even with the Bush administration largely silenced by Obama's election, Japan and Russia gave Canada a run for its money as the least helpful industrialized country at the table. But Canada's position was particularly frustrating given the massive support for climate action shown by Canadians.
Recent polling commissioned by environmental and faith organizations found 78 per cent support among Canadians for basing our climate targets on the science, even if that means "some cost" to the economy. And 83 per cent expressed support for Canada taking "strong action on global warming without waiting for other countries."
Right now that scenario looks unlikely. In light of the climate commitments already made in Europe, the plans announced by Barack Obama and the groundbreaking policies some developing countries have adopted, Canada is much more likely to be left behind.
And new economic modelling analysis commissioned by the Pembina Institute and the David Suzuki Foundation shows that Canada is fully capable of reaching an emissions target based on science—while growing our economy and adding 1.2 million new jobs by 2020.
In the hallways of meetings like this one, Canadian observers are sometimes asked why our government is so unwilling to act.
Some of us point to Alberta's oilsands, and that's almost certainly part of the explanation. Canada's lack of ambition may also come from the belief, expressed by Jim Prentice in his first speech as environment minister, that we can't afford to "aggravate an already weakening economy in the name of environmental progress."
That old-school approach is increasingly seen as misleading, and not just by environmentalists. For example, a communiqué released after a finance ministers' meeting in Warsaw last week noted that many countries are tackling the economic and climate challenges together, "through higher public investment in low carbon projects."
Sadly, that's not the kind of thinking you hear from our government—yet. But despite our terrible track record, it's not too late for Canada to get it right on climate change.
As a new and influential minister, Prentice can make a fresh start.
Step one is to state clearly that Canada will do its fair share in tackling climate change in line with scientific recommendations. Step two is putting in place the regulations and making the public investments to reach that goal. The needs are urgent, and the time is short.
Last month, Prentice spoke about Canada's "willingness to be a leader in addressing this global environmental challenge" of climate change. If he's serious, now is the time: Canada's poor performance in Poznan means that we will have to take meaningful action quickly to restore some of our battered credibility before the global negotiations enter the home stretch next year.
Clare Demerse is a senior policy analyst in the Climate Change Program at the Pembina Institute, a sustainable energy think tank.
