This post was co-written with Tria Donaldson of the Canadian Youth Delegation to the UNFCCC in Copenhagen.
Today is the first day of the UN Climate Change Negotiations, and the Canadian Delegation starts it with the typical flair. No surprises coming from Canada, just the same ol’ COP-blocking. In today’s briefing meeting with the Canadian Delegation, the lead Canadian negotiator, Michael Martin, had some interesting things to say. After Martin said that Canada will not change its emission reduction targets of 20% below 2006 levels by 2020 (unacceptable), he said “Fundamentally, we believe that what Canada is proposing to do is ambitious.”
I wonder what definition of ambitious he is familiar with?
Let’s recap what Canada is proposing:
- a 3 per cent reductions target below 1990 levels (Canada orginally committed to 6% below 1990 levels, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is asking for 25-40% reductions)
- No action plan to achieve this 3 per cent reduction
- We are one of the only countries opposing a 1990 base line level, and instead are insisting that we use a 2006 baseline – a year with huge economic activity and higher emissions than 1990
- Even developing countries have more ambitious targets than us (India: 20-25 per cent, Indonesia 26 per cent, Brazil 28 per cent)
-The US has climate legislation in the house, targets much more ambitious then ours, and invests 14 times more in renewable energy development
Does that sound ambituous to you?
Canadian Youth Delegate, Thea Whitman, with Canadian lead negotiater, Michael Martin.
If ambituous means expanding the Tar Sands as fast as possible–then Yes, that is “ambituos.”
If ambitious means pointing the finger at countries like China and India, who have not historically contributed to the planet’s greenhouse atmosphere to the same extent as industrialized countries like Canada–then Yes! That is ambituous.
If ambituous means blocking negotiations and continuously receiving Colossal Fossil awards–then Yes! That is ambituous.
If ambituous means jeopardizing people’s health, water security, food security, and atmosphere–then Yes! That is ambituous.
If ambituous means putting people’s lives and homes at risk. Then Yes! That is ambituous.
After the first day of the UN Climate Change negotiations, it is incredibly clear that the Canadian delegation is not willing to negotiate. Then why did they come? Youth in Canada have said that Canada either needs to lead, follow the leaders, or get out of the way. The Canadian Delegation is not willing to negotiate, lead, follow, or get out of the way. As a youth living in Canada, that means they are NOT welcome here. Copenhagen is an opportunity to create a legally-binding treaty that will ensure a safe and just future for all people, especially those communities and people hardest hit by climate change. If Canada cannot contribute, do not travel overseas, contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, and make a silly attempt to fool the world. The Canadian Delegation have played this game for far too long, and it is no time for games.
1 Response to “Canada Is “Ambitious” Like Peanut Brittle Is Soft On The Teeth”