Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, after announcing his cabinet, was asked why so many women were included.
“Because it’s 2015,” he replied. He didn’t need to say more. It was the right thing to do. The time had come. The point had been made and it reverberated around the globe. The example had been set.
Unfortunately, Trudeau missed another opportunity to demonstrate that we have to do things differently in other areas in his recent approval of two pipelines. The pipelines will take one million barrels of oil to market each day, adding 23 to 28 million tonnes of carbon emissions every year.
If Canada, one of the richest countries in the world, cannot afford to leave fossil fuels in the ground, how can we expect lesser-developed nations to take a low-impact path to development? Here was an opportunity for global leadership on an issue of critical importance for this and subsequent generations. Trudeau blew it.
The recent Paris agreement signalled that global governments understood climate change and agreed to limit temperature rise to “well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.” Each of the more than 115 signatory countries, of which Canada is one, has to make a plan to deliver on this target.
Unfortunately, our record on delivering on international commitments is poor. On the predecessor to the Paris agreement, the Kyoto Protocol, Canada agreed to reduce emissions by six per cent by 2012 compared to 1990 levels. We missed the target by about 36 per cent, a world record and a national disgrace. Canada withdrew from the agreement rather than pay the rest of the world the $14 billion we owed in carbon credits.
If we can disregard such legally binding commitments, there is little hope that Canada will contribute to the voluntary requests of the Paris accord.
The recent pipeline decisions confirm this direction. Here was our chance to make amends to the world for our gluttony in being leaders in per capita carbon-dioxide emissions. We didn’t take it.
Since the decision, there has been talk of “balancing” the economy and the environment. Allowing tanker traffic to increase dramatically through the Salish Sea would be an example. The government feels that with improved measures, accidents will not occur, and if they do, then cleanup will be swift and effective.
I disagree, but accept that this is the kind of “balance” that governments seek.
However, the decision to add 28 million tonnes of greenhouse gases every year is fundamentally different. This decision is not just about us, it’s about the whole world and future generations.
It’s not about an isolated environmental “problem,” but about a phenomenon so severe and irreversible that to get it wrong would be catastrophic for generations to come.
It’s about making a statement about the right things to do. The major global problem is climate change, and instead of addressing the problem, Canada is making it worse.
The International Energy Authority warned in 2011 that even with current fossil-fuel infrastructure, catastrophic warming would result. The only choice, they warned, was to dismantle existing infrastructure.
The choice for Trudeau should have been framed first in terms of the environmentally sound choice — dismantle existing oil infrastructure and invest in clean-energy alternatives.
The second, or “balanced” choice, would have been to build no new infrastructure.
The third choice, and the one taken, was to commit to an oil-based future. There is no balance in this.
Instead, let Canada show other so-called oil-rich states that now is the time to do things differently. Let’s demonstrate to underdeveloped countries that we are ready to contribute to their development by re-aligning our own course. Let’s accept our responsibilities to future generations and not weaken the life-support system of the planet any more than we have done already.
When will we have the courage to say “No”? When will a Canadian prime minister, when asked about such a decision, be able to say “because it’s 2016” and everyone will understand and stand tall? It’s simply the right thing to do and the clock is ticking.
Philip Dearden is a professor in the department of geography at the University of Victoria and co-author of Environmental Change and Challenge: A Canadian Perspective published by Oxford University Press.
