Members Area
Log in | Become a Member
Organization access | Register your group

Weather: Montreal, March 19th 2010 / 14°C / Partly cloudy / Wind: 30 Km/h / Humidity: 44 %

National Columnist

Harper going to Copenhagen despite himself

by Richard Cléroux
View all articles from Richard Cléroux
Article online since November 27th 2009, 16:36
Read all 4 comments about this article / Comment on this article

Harper going to Copenhagen despite himself

Stephen Harper

View all pictures

Harper going to Copenhagen despite himself

It wasn’t in his plans.

The last thing Prime Minister Stephen Harper wanted to do was to attend the big United Nations summit on climate change.

That means trying to figure out how to cut greenhouse gas emissions from Harper’s beloved Alberta oil sands and having to explain it to those big multinational oil companies. Not his idea of a good time.

But with 65 % of the world’s leaders in attendance and U.S. President Barak Obama announcing this week that he’s going and so is Chinese prime minister Wen Jiabao, Harper did not have much choice if he wants to be respected by the big boys.

Policitians from the entire worold will be trying to draft a new climate-change agreement to replace the Kyoto Accord which expires in 2012.

But don’t expect Harper to do very much at the summit, certainly not lead the way as Canada used to do at environmental conferences.

Harper has been going around saying it is unlikely that there will be an agreement. That’s even before the talks begin. Great positive attitude!

He won’t say what Canada’s position will be, but he promises he’ll be doing whatever the Americans say, because he believes it makes sense to have a lock-step environmental policy with the United States, since that’s who buys Canada’s oil and gas exports.

Most of the Canadian oil companies are American-owned anyhow, and for them it’s easier to follow U.S. energy policies. Some even run their Canadian oil operations out of New York and Texas.

Harper has steadfastly refused to sign any climate-change agreement limiting greenhouse gases unless poorer nations make the same kind of commitment as Canada is being asked. That would drive them into the poorhouse, they say, so they haven’t signed, and since they haven’t, Harper also refuses to sign. Convenient stalemate for all concerned.

Meanwhile the planet continues to heat up, the ice cap is melting, the Canadian Arctic will soon be international waters and some Pacific nations will sink below the waves just about the time we reach Harper’s target date of 2050. So get yourself water wings.

Any climate change agreement would deal Harper’s beloved Alberta tar sands a hard blow by forcing them to eliminate tonnes of carbon they’ve been pumping out into the atmosphere. Not a prospect they relish.

The announcement of Harper’s change of mind about attending Copenhagen came at the exact same moment that Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was announcing his own climate-change policy in Quebec City.

Coincidence?” I think not. The Harper “spin doctors” are masters at stealing Ignatieff’s thunder every time he has a major announcement. He still hasn’t figured it out.

In his usual put-you-to-sleep monotone Ignatieff promised that a Liberal government would hold the global warming increase to no more than two degrees Celsius until the year 2020.

Secondly he would institute a cap-and-trade system, basically the same kind of policy as Harper and the New Democrats talk about., except that Harper is talking about making it voluntary for oil companies and is aiming at the year 2050.

Not a blessed word about the “carbon tax” of his predecessor, Stéphane Dion, That died last January and Ignatieff is not about to bring it back.

Ignatieff was asked what he thought of Harper going to Copenhagen.

“He’s being dragged there by the U.S. president,” replied Ignatieff.

Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe was less kind.

“Both of them (Harper and Ignatieff) have said they won’t touch the tar sands.” For Duceppe, that says it all.

As for Harper at the summit, Duceppe replied: “He’s not going as prime minister; he’s going as the business agent for the oil companies.”

Ouch!

Send this text to a friend

Print this article

Comment on this article

Linked photos

Your comments

PatriciaAnne Hennessey

Comment online since December 6th 2009
Dear Richard: Perhaps you've heard of Climategate? Stephen Harper should spend as little time in Copenhgen as possible, promise nothing and sign nothing. Water wings forsooth! That doesn't even bear discussion. Please educate yourself and write what is really going on.

philip Brown

Comment online since November 29th 2009
Harper was able to convince world leaders that if everyone doesnot get involved the Canadian economy is not going to be the whipping-boy for environmentalists. It is nice to see Duceppe act so self-righteous here, does any ever question about the environmental damage and loss of wildlife habitat caused on thousands of square miles by the flood plains for Quebec Hydo.

David McGruer

Comment online since November 28th 2009
Richard, you may not have studied the actual, original research of scientists on this subject, but I have spent a great deal of time in the past three years doing so. While I do not have a climate science background, I do have a science background and completed a research masters degree at McGill University, studying not only the broad science subjects such as math, physics, chemistry and biology but research methods, statistics, data presentation and in particular the rational critique of published research.

Like all too many writers, you repeat the platitudes of the climate alarmists that have created so much panic where only clear thinking is called for. All that is needed for a trained, rational mind is to actually examine the science and the myths of man-made global warming are quickly swept away.

You said "Meanwhile the planet continues to heat up, the ice cap is melting, the Canadian Arctic will soon be international waters and some Pacific nations will sink below the waves just about the time we reach Harper’s target date of 2050." I'll quickly look at each claim.

The planet does not continue to heat up but has been cooling since about 1998. Solar activity goes in cycles and the sun has calmed in this period so naturally the Earth and all the planets are experiencing cooling. Please read the research of Svensmark, Shaviv and others for more on solar cycles and climate effects.

While the northern floating ice has seen some melting (although it has since cooled again at a rapid rate), this may be due to changing ocean currents and undersea volcanoes that have been active. At the same time, Greenland and the Antarctic have seen an increase in their land based mass of snow and ice.

You fret about flooding of islands (please see data from the National Tidal Facility in Adelaide regarding sea level at the island of Tuvalu). Maybe you are not aware that the continents and all land masses are constantly in motion in all three dimensions. They move in north-south and east-west directions as the continental plates continue to move as they have done since Earth's creation. Some plates are rising while others are falling. In addition, some parts of the world are rising and others falling as the planet continues its adjustment from the end of the last ice age not so many thousands of years ago. The land mass in some areas like Ottawa that were recently under hundreds or thousands of feet of glaciers is still rebounding from the release of the gigantic mass of ice that sat upon it for tens of thousands of years. Sea levels have risen about 120 feet since the peak of the last ice age and this process is mostly complete but slowly continuing. Please see the studies of Fleming et al. 1998, Fleming 2000, & Milne et al. 2005.

Perhaps you would like to interview Dr. Tad Murty, (former senior research scientist, fisheries and oceans, Canada), Dr. Ian Clark (paleoclimatologist, Department Earth Sciences, University Ottawa), Dr. Jan Veizer, (professor emeritus, University Ottawa), Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski (physicist, UN Scientific Committee) or Dr. Richard Lindzen (Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, MIT) among others before you write again about how man's activities override the many natural influences on climate.

Prime Minister Harper is indeed acting with pure political expediency with even the smallest participation in talks about controlling the climate. He used to have a clear and science-based position on this subject and appears to have hidden it for the sake of elections. For this I am truly disappointed and will freely criticize him. I believe he is doing the right thing by not committing to the destruction of more of Canadians' hard-earned wealth through carbon dioxide trading scams, the wrecking of industries and businesses through harmful regulation and subsidization of inefficient so-called alternative energy schemes. I think he knows the truth about the climate but is using the frenzy for political gain while actually committing to little or no action. I'd prefer he came out and spoke the truth like Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic, but at least he is not dragging our economy into the gutter like Obama, Dion, Bush, Clinton, Gore and others have tried to do.

Dennis Jaques, M.Sc.

Comment online since November 27th 2009
Mr. Cleroux, Anthropogenic global warming is a myth and carbon dioxide "cap-and-trade" will do nothing to effect the earth's climate except extort taxes from the working people of the world and transfer that money from private hands intp various governmetn coffers (not to mention the commissions extorted by such as Al Gore, Maurice Strong etc., Mr. Harper's position, as you have sated ahead of time: "But don’t expect Harper to do very much at the summit, certainly not lead the way as Canada used to do at environmental conferences." will actually be a positive move.

To do nothing to stimulate a fallacious anti-global warming policy is what the working people of the world need to avoid huge tax and price increases. The poor of the world will be hardest hit if a global cap-and-trade" tax extortion scheme is operated by corrupt U.N. organizations, World Bank or the Carbin TAding MArkets established by Strong, Gore, Obama (when with the Joyce Foundation) and others.

I suggest you read the many excellent scientific papers from the "2009 Conference on Climate Change" held in March in New York City. These will open your eyes to the lack of truth by the global warming scare-mongerers. (Also, please not Dr. Tim Ball's discussion about the revelations of data-manipulation and distortions perpetrated by the Climate Research Unit in East Anglia, England.) Seek the full truth in your reporting and you will be doing yourself and humanity a great service. Continue to blabber nonsense like your above article and you become part of the problem.