Upon every election, Canadians throughout North America are introduced to worthwhile promises by politicians and their respective parties in hopes of not only uniting voters for a specific cause, but to collect enough votes to occupy the federal government position. I think that sums up the federal election process pretty well. A staple topic within these promises, as we continue to witness the global deterioration of our Earth’s health, has undoubtedly been climate policy and Canada’s role within a domestic and global context.
However, while the topic of climate change was first tackled by global leaders during the 1980s, Canadian efforts of mitigating industrial and corporate harm done to the environment have almost receded to absolute redundancy (MacNeil 2019, p. 9). I mean, let's have a look at when the climate crisis was legitimately approached by our Canadian-elected leaders. Approaching the end of the Mulroney (PC) government’s term, climate change mandates were first implemented during 1988 (MacNeil 2019, p. 9). While Mulroney’s government seemed fit for the job, and while they had successfully persuaded multiple parliamentary members of supporting environmental protectionist legislation such as the Environmental Assessment Act, in comparison to today, I struggle to accept that governments such as that of the Harper administration or even the current-Trudeau administration have invested nearly as much time and effort as their predecessor. Despite the increasing access to resources and the rapid development of renewable energy technology, it is clear the climate policy in Canada isn’t a matter of funding or voter opinion, but rather, who’s got the best bid in terms of paying off the nation’s top industrial exports (MacNeil 2019, p. 10).
Let’s have a look at the Harper and Trudeau years. With regard to the former, Harper’s government was beyond successful at doing everything but building off of the foundation the Mulroney government had built for Canada in both a domestic and global context. Rather than further developing current and new legislation and mandates to limit and protect Canadian environmental assets, the Harper governments’ implementation of the Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act served to take Canada several years back with regards to its climate policy progress (MacNeil 2019, p. 25). By doing so, Harper’s government essentially removed all restrictions of industries such as that of the energy and fishing industries, thus optimizing the extractive potential for said groups to capitalize off of Canada’s natural resources (MacNeil 2019, p. 25, 26). However, Harpers’ disastrous efforts don’t tally up here. Aside from pulling Canada of the well-known Kyoto protocol (international treaty aiming for signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), in the years following, Harper’s government had successfully and categorically delegitimized Canadian-based environmental groups, ultimately allowing the federal government to radically defund them and place strict measures on their operational activities (MacNeil 2019, p. 26). While I’ve barely skimmed the surface, it’s clear that Harper’s government has fulfilled its duty to Canadians and voters with its corporate-fueled policy implementation tactics.
On the other hand, Trudeau’s government, while on paper may seem like the poster-boy for progressives and one of Canada’s only opportunities of retaining its ranking in the global arena for climate policy efforts, it’s fallen down a rather alternative rabbit hole in comparison to its PC counterpart. The CanadianUpon every election, Canadians throughout North America are introduced to worthwhile promises by politicians and their respective parties in hopes of not only uniting voters for a specific cause, but to collect enough votes to occupy the federal government position. I think that sums up the federal election process pretty well. A staple topic within these promises, as we continue to witness the global deterioration of our Earth’s health, has undoubtedly been climate policy and Canada’s role within a domestic and global context.
However, while the topic of climate change was first tackled by global leaders during the 1980s, Canadian efforts of mitigating industrial and corporate harm done to the environment have almost receded to absolute redundancy (MacNeil 2019, p. 9). I mean, let's have a look at when the climate crisis was legitimately approached by our Canadian-elected leaders. Approaching the end of the Mulroney (PC) government’s term, climate change mandates were first implemented during 1988 (MacNeil 2019, p. 9). While Mulroney’s government seemed fit for the job, and while they had successfully persuaded multiple parliamentary members of supporting environmental protectionist legislation such as the Environmental Assessment Act, in comparison to today, I struggle to accept that governments such as that of the Harper administration or even the current-Trudeau administration have invested nearly as much time and effort as their predecessor. Despite the increasing access to resources and the rapid development of renewable energy technology, it is clear the climate policy in Canada isn’t a matter of funding or voter opinion, but rather, who’s got the best bid in terms of paying off the nation’s top industrial exports (MacNeil 2019, p. 10).
Let’s have a look at the Harper and Trudeau years. With regard to the former, Harper’s government was beyond successful at doing everything but building off of the foundation the Mulroney government had built for Canada in both a domestic and global context. Rather than further developing current and new legislation and mandates to limit and protect Canadian environmental assets, the Harper governments’ implementation of the Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act served to take Canada several years back with regards to its climate policy progress (MacNeil 2019, p. 25). By doing so, Harper’s government essentially removed all restrictions of industries such as that of the energy and fishing industries, thus optimizing the extractive potential for said groups to capitalize off of Canada’s natural resources (MacNeil 2019, p. 25, 26). However, Harpers’ disastrous efforts don’t tally up here. Aside from pulling Canada of the well-known Kyoto protocol (international treaty aiming for signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), in the years following, Harper’s government had successfully and categorically delegitimized Canadian-based environmental groups, ultimately allowing the federal government to radically defund them and place strict measures on their operational activities (MacNeil 2019, p. 26). While I’ve barely skimmed the surface, it’s clear that Harper’s government has fulfilled its duty to Canadians and voters with its corporate-fueled policy implementation tactics.
On the other hand, Trudeau’s government, while on paper may seem like the poster-boy for progressives and one of Canada’s only opportunities of retaining its ranking in the global arena for climate policy efforts, it’s fallen down a rather alternative rabbit hole in comparison to its PC counterpart. The Canadian Liberal party, notorious for its consistent fallouts on its promises, was elected in 2015 with the hopes of environmentalists and Canadians soaring through the roof as they believed the environmental turmoil Harper’s PC government had put them through was finally over. To an extent, their hopes were justified and met. Immediately, Trudeu’s government implemented several climate change policies including that of increased funding to the UN’s Green Climate Fund, the elimination of Federal fossil fuel subsidies, and the upholding of Canada’s global emission levels (MacNeil 2019, p. 35). While Trudeau’s liberal government held power in primarily all of the Canadian provinces with the exception of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, its failure of having said states sign onto its ‘Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change’ introduced a series of uncalculated mishaps. As Trudeau’s government attempted to exchange carbon prices for an oil pipeline (Kinder Morgan pipeline), British Columbia’s NDP premier, John Horgan, made the final call of preventing the project from taking place. As a result, not only did Trudeau’s plans fall through, but the pro-climate premiers who had initially endorsed Trudeau’s plans had also been replaced with more conservative figures, who in turn, have also impeded and tarnished Trudeau efforts of further developing Canada’s climate strategy.
So, what’s there to take from this? On one hand, the two competing powers in Canada–PC and Liberal–have been in a constant cycle of blaming their predecessors and each other for Canada’s poor climate strategy performance. While both parties have acknowledged the previous mishaps, and have committed to providing long-term solutions, one has completely disregarded the promises it has made–Harper government (PC)–while the other–Trudeau government (Lib.)–has faced rather harsh criticism and a series of barriers from its provincial counterparts as it strives to uphold its promises. It’s safe to say that while climate change is a serious issue on the minds of many voters, climate policy as a political project has become a field of corporate and industrial interests. Perhaps a future of NDP or Green federalism will voice the concerns of Canadians and strive to successfully meet their demands? Liberal party, notorious for its consistent fallouts on its promises, was elected in 2015 with the hopes of environmentalists and Canadians soaring through the roof as they believed the environmental turmoil Harper’s PC government had put them through was finally over. To an extent, their hopes were justified and met. Immediately, Trudeu’s government implemented several climate change policies including that of increased funding to the UN’s Green Climate Fund, the elimination of Federal fossil fuel subsidies, and the upholding of Canada’s global emission levels (MacNeil 2019, p. 35). While Trudeau’s liberal government held power in primarily all of the Canadian provinces with the exception of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, its failure of having said states sign onto its ‘Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change’ introduced a series of uncalculated mishaps. As Trudeau’s government attempted to exchange carbon prices for an oil pipeline (Kinder Morgan pipeline), British Columbia’s NDP premier, John Horgan, made the final call of preventing the project from taking place. As a result, not only did Trudeau’s plans fall through, but the pro-climate premiers who had initially endorsed Trudeau’s plans had also been replaced with more conservative figures, who in turn, have also impeded and tarnished Trudeau efforts of further developing Canada’s climate strategy.
By: Jordan Salehi
Comments