Why Can't We Just Get Along-Canada's Green Plan

John Baird and the Canadian Conservative government recently announced their new and improved Green Plan. Designed to replace the previous plan proposed by former Environment Minister Rona Ambrose, the plan looks to go a little further to satisfy a Canadian commitment to reduce GHG emissions. Without getting hung up with too many gory details of the plan I wanted to look at some of the politics and economic impact behind the plan.

It has been suggested that up thousands of jobs could be lost as a result of fixed emission reduction targets on industry. I will preface that I am no economist, my only experience being a C- in Micro Economics on my way to a BA in History, and a blundering 2nd attempt at the same subject during my MBA. Environmental Minister John Baird has suggested that an economic hit of $8Billion annually will occur in Canada up until 2020. Keeping my limitations in mind, some other economic 'Heavyweights' have also weighed in on the subject:

- Buzz Hargrove, president of the Canadian Auto Workers, was quoted: "Thankfully, they didn't harm the industry any further, we can live with the announcement that was made today."
-Nexen CEO Charlie Fischer believes that a lack of certainty of the government plans threatens to undermine expansion of future oilsands projects.

-David Suzuki weighed in with his own take to the economic subject. "I think they're willing to suck it in and accept that they're going to have to pay more but they want it to be fair. The thing I hear over and over again is: 'Some sectors in Canada are getting a softer ride, and why should we as consumers have to pay when, say, the tar sands or the auto sector are not being asked to meet their obligations as well?' "

All of this posturing and quoting makes me think of Rodney King's famous quip from the LA Riots, "can't we all just get along?" Of course both ends of the political spectrum are going to argue that this plan goes too far or does not go far enough. Seeing this reminds me of some sage advice my father told me about politics when I was a kid. As a rule he said, if a politician makes a statement or policy that pisses off both sides equally, it is probably the right decision.

The fact of the matter is that is about bloody time that Canada does something. We have been dithering between two governments that can’t get it together enough to reduce emissions. Most Canadians (excluding Albertans) now agree with the bulk of the scientists that climate change is real and at least partly cause by humans. A strong argument can be made that Canada’s overall emission level pales in comparison to our neighbors to the South or developing countries such as India or China. I compare our symbolic commitment to that of our commitment to economic, military and poverty relief around the globe. As a first world nation, Canada must be a clear leader in the direction we want to see the world take. As magnificent as it sounds, certain people around the globe do still respect Canada and look to it in some small part for direction on matters of importance.

In the end though, perhaps the most important argument against the naysayer is the consequence of being wrong. The argument that we will fall into some economic peril-which I do not believe, does not hold up against the whole end of the world argument. As a founder of an environmental software company focusing on GHG emission, I have the threat of economic misery and embarrassment to face. That’s still better than the end of existence for me or my kids-if I had kids.

Economically, Canada does face the risk of a slowing manufacturing economy-which has been slowing for years, and a decline in Oil Sands output. As an investor in some of these companies, that is something that affects my pocketbook. However the lack of direction over an issue that I see as inevitable, allows us to miss the proverbial boat on other areas that could create jobs and improve the economy. There will absolutely be a G8 nation that leads the way on technology to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions. Assuming the inevitability of it all, why shouldn’t Canada lead the way? Large multinationals like BP got this 5 years ago.

To finish with one more cliché, there are no such things as problems, only solutions. Let’s get to work finding them, and allow Canada to be a leader.