Canada formally withdraws from the Kyoto Protocol, but at what cost?
Richard Persaud
Contributor
Early in December, it was announced that Canada was the first nation to formally withdraw from the Kyoto protocol. Environment Minister Peter Kent claimed this decision would save Canada an estimated $14-billion, an amount that is still under debate by NDP environment critic Megan Leslie.
While there is criticism one can make about the Kyoto Protocol—some see it as an economic nuisance to those who feel it is a defective attempt to reduce greenhouse gases—something far more disturbing emerges from Kent’s excuse for leaving Kyoto.
Kent argues that the decision was made because Canada—which produces less than two per cent of global carbon emissions—is forced to lower its greenhouse gases, while China—which accounts for 23 per cent of global carbon emissions—is not required to lower its greenhouse gasses under the Kyoto Protocol.
In other words, Kent’s argument simply is: if China is not participating in this, why should Canada? A great philosophy to follow.
It is true that China contributes more than any other nation to the degradation of the environment; however, this does not make Kyoto irrelevant.
There are many things worth our while which the People’s Republic of China does not participate in (human rights, for example) and while it may be profitable to abdicate human rights, it is not logical to abdicate human rights.
On a federal level the Harper government has no serious plan to deal with any environmental degradation facing Canada—from deforestation to city congestion—the environment takes a back seat to the economy, and it shows. From 1990 to 2010 the European Union as a whole saw its carbon emissions drop by seven percent, the United States saw their carbon emissions grow by five per cent, but that was nothing compared to Canada whose emissions increased by 20 per cent.
Mr. Kent may try to justify leaving Kyoto based on the $14-billion Canada would have to pay in penalties but such acts only pardon Canada from its international responsibilities. Rather then address the issue at hand, the conservative government has conspired in an act of fear mongering, letting Canadians know that if they did not leave, they would have a huge debt to pay. The reality is Canada knew what the penalties were before signing on to the accord. Not only that, due to the structure of the accord there are many ways to readjust the penalties to significantly lower the cost.
Like NDP environment critic Megan Leslie says, the reality is Canada’s actions resemble those of a lethargic student who is failing a course. Rather than improving their work habit and taking initiative they justify dropping the class. The question is: how many classes can Canada afford to drop before it fails its duties, not only to the international community but to the environment?
