Strengthening the weakest link in the climate chain

The Bali Conference is intended to produce a road map for negotiations to prevent the planet falling off a carbon emission-created cliff. It is about navigating through a minefield of national interest issues, innate political caution and diplomatic obfuscation in search of the common goal.

The recalcitrant parties here are the developed nations of the US, Japan and Canada. They are engaged in a game of me-first you-first with developing nations such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa which at first sight looks vaguely ridiculous. It threatens to stall progress as none of this alliance of inconvenience will accept the negotiation range of 25-40% targets for developed countries to be set as the parameters for negotiation without developing country committment.

Then one considers the Canadian predicament. Canada is the silver medallist behind tiny Austria for Kyoto non-compliance, a staggering 34% above its emissions target (6% reduction on 1990). Amazingly, given Howard's constant refrain of how Kyoto would damage industry, Australia would not even be in the same weight division as its northern cousin. Herein lies the root of the problem. Canada is actually being sued
by its own Friends of the Earth NGO for breach of its Kyoto committments. Interestingly, New Zealand is almost as lagging in its targets, having paid a rather large fine for its breaches. This has not deterred Helen Clark's push for binding targets.

Perhaps Canada may need to be bailed out - it is now so manifestly out of whack with developed country emissions it should almost be treated as a special case for the sake of getting a viable agreement. Canada could argue that countries like Spain got cover for their Kyoto sins from emissions being calculated under the EU umbrella. Canada has no friends to help it out here.

Compunding the difficulties is the fact that Canada has two provincial delegations, Ontario and Quebec, which are at Bali and embarrassed by Ottawa's position. What's more, they represent two-thirds of the population, namely the ones not directly responsible for most of the greenhouse pollution.

Canada's former Liberal government clearly took its eye off the ball and has committed the environmental equivalent of letting the chip fat skip out of the deep fryer. Instead of trying to quell the flames, the Tories have tried to evacuate the building and wait to collect on the fire insurance.

A target of 25%, the minimum demanded by the negotiation range, amounts to a 53% cut in emissions (on a severe upward trajectory) within thirteen years. Ouch. Methinks this seriously constitutes some recognition, albeit through gritted teeth, that Canada be allowed to chart a course towards a long term goal rather than the 25% range.

In an earlier post, Peregrine proposed that a successor instrument to Kyoto should include differed emissions targets for developing countries and a package of preliminary measures for developing countries. Canada should be read the Riot Act vis-a-vis its non-compliance and forced to sign up for afforestation, renewable energy and energy efficiency targets. It should also make a hefty contribution to the fund to cover the costs of climate amelioration in the developing world. Only then should the international community agree to place it in its own special box, with differed targets. Chastened by being put back on its international training wheels, it should be offered an incentive for participation towards binding targets in the near future.