Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


UN questions Canada’s new climate change plan. Add them to Bairds attack list.

I guess we can add the UN to the growing list of people or organizations that Baird will soon be coming out and attacking for not thinking his plan is up to snuff:

Canada’s “less ambitious” climate-change plan cannot guarantee that greenhouse gas emissions will actually go down, says the head of the international body that oversees the Kyoto treaty. Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, questioned the assertion that with tough enough intensity targets, an absolute reduction would occur….Mr. de Boer suggested there is some confusion over how Canada intends to live up to the Kyoto Protocol, which it signed in 1997… Another United Nations official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said there’s a sense of alarm in the agency that Canada’s reluctance to try to meet the Kyoto targets will encourage other countries to shirk the treaty. “Canada is perceived to be a role model for the United States. If Canada throws up its hands and says there’s no point, it has a negative rub off for the U.S.,” the official said.

So let’s see… yesterday it was Liberals, Dion, environmentalists, Al Gore, and (for whatever reason) the EU that Baird took turns at attacking or blaming. So I guess there should be a statement tomorrow attacking the UN now as well from Baird or his office.

As for the 2nd part, I can already tell the UN that the current Conservative government doesn’t care at all whether their attitude encourages other countries – and particularly not the US – to shirk Kyoto or not. They are ideological brothers, and are both probably actively encouraging each other to stick it to Kyoto as much as possible. Why else do you think Canada is signaling it wants to join that little group of nations (which the US is a member of) that would prefer emissions targets to be voluntary?


5 comments to UN questions Canada’s new climate change plan. Add them to Bairds attack list.

  • Kevin sez – “The thing I don’t get is all the talk of economic doom and gloom by the government…”

    It’s all about doom and gloom for the Alberta oil industry, not the general economy.

  • Whooee! I was loafin’ on the couch Sunday an’ flipped over to CPAC. They were runnin’ an April 11 speech by Arnold Schwartzenegger at Georgetown U. I ain’t a fan of Republicans or of action movie heros but, dang-it-all, Arnold was sure talkin’ sense.

    I’m wonderin’ about whether maybe we could take a lesson. California is leadin’ the way in the USA, despite the obstructions and disinformation campaign from Washington. Ontariariario could do the same here but it ain’t. Ginty’s lightbulb plan come out just a little before Baird’s but Ginty’s sure as hell missin’ the boat on alternative energy. We’re about to embark on a new era of nuclear power plant building and expansion to the tune of about $50 billion.

    You’d think guys like Baird an’ Harpoon would take a better look at a conservative idol like Arnie. If Arnie pans Baird’s so-called plan, I hope PitBullBoy goes on the attack. In a pit bull vs terminator slugfest, I’ll bet on the guy who drives a hydrogen-powered Hummer.


  • I missed the EU, I’ll have to google that. Good for the UN.

  • The thing I don’t get is all the talk of economic doom and gloom by the government — every year we do nothing, is another year of missed opportunity to deal with something we will inevitably have to deal with. Does the government think that some other country is going to pick up the slack for us?

    California has been reducing energy consumption for over the 30 years and they’re the 6th largest economy in the world. I’ve put together a quick hit list of facts if you ever have the pleasure of having to argue with the doom and gloom/economic dinosaur crowd:

    6th largest economy in the world.
    $1.6 trillion GDP, representing 17% of the entire US GDP. Canada is the 10th largest at $1.1 trillion GDP
    576,000 new jobs in the last 3 years.
    $576,000 (strangely enough) is the median house price.

    Since the mid-70’s California has reduced C02 emissions by 30% compared to the rest of the US, while Canada’s emissions have increased by 30% since 1990.
    California is the 3rd lowest per-capita energy consumer in the US.
    Per capita energy consumption is 33% below the US national average.
    Average family pays $800 less for energy compared to the rest of the US.

  • knb

    I saw this earlier and just shook my head. We are becoming a laughing stock. Baird and his crew just keep blurting out the same lies over and over again, expecting them to stick I guess. It’s beyond arrogant to though, to see him tell Suzuki and others, that his plan is “the most aggresive in the world, etc.” I really wonder what enables people to that.

    Surely this charade cannot sustain itself. You cannot have the entire environmental community telling you the plan is bad, while you insist they are all wrong and the plan is spectacular.

    On your second point though, I’m seriously concerned. Apparently the UN said that by not trying to meet Kyoto targets, Canada is opting out of Kyoto, de facto. I worried that was the plan and there was no desire to renew next year. I think it was May who suggested this possibility.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.