From:
http://www.nationalpost.com/commenta...EFFB-47EE-880A
-32A681B39E68

Where's the Kyoto plan?

National Post

Monday, June 30, 2003

Last December, the federal government rammed the Kyoto global "climate
change" treaty through the House of Commons. Around that time, several
provinces -- Alberta, B.C., Ontario, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland --
pointed out that Ottawa had no plan for Kyoto implementation. Ottawa never
clearly explained how it proposed to reduce our so-called "greenhouse gas"
emissions by 240 megatonnes by 2010, per the treaty's requirements, without
hurting the economy. The lack of a firm government plan made it very
difficult to precisely cost out Kyoto's effect on Canada, because no one
knew what policy measures Ottawa would use to implement it. The Canadian
Manufacturers and Exporters, for example, claimed Kyoto could kill 450,000
jobs by 2010. A Canadian Taxpayers Federation study (written by economist
Ross McKitrick) projected that Kyoto could cost the average Canadian family
$2,700 annually by the same year.

The dissenting premiers demanded Ottawa consult with them on how to build a
"made-in-Canada" approach to the alleged problem of climate change. The
Liberals accused the skeptics of acting in bad faith and trying to delay the
treaty's ratification. On Dec. 16, the House passed the treaty over their
protests.

Ottawa's rashness has returned to haunt it. More than six months later, it
still has not published a Kyoto implementation plan. That's because the
accord sits mired in a four-way tug-of-war between Environment Canada,
Natural Resources Canada, the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council
Office. There's also talk of bringing Industry Canada and Finance Canada
into the mix. The result is political paralysis. Too many cooks have spoiled
the Kyoto broth. As Paul Martin, candidate for the Liberal leadership,
observed in May, "What they did was to simply ratify Kyoto without a plan,
then start to work on it. You see where we are ... we still don't have a
plan."

And we still have no idea how Ottawa will craft policy to implement the
treaty. Perhaps Val Mellesmoen, a spokeswoman for Alberta's Minister of
Energy, Lorne Taylor, expressed it best: "If there's a plan, there's nothing
we can see."

There's been just one significant development in the Kyoto file since its
passage, and it isn't pretty. An unseemly backroom fight has erupted in
Ottawa over how the $1.7-billion allotted by the federal government for
Kyoto-related programs will be divided. The ethanol lobby, for example,
wants $400-million. Some members of the federal Cabinet want to use the
money to pay Canadian homeowners rebates of $1,000 for any energy-efficient
house renovations they undertake. This secret budget allocation process
sounds more like a scramble for political pork than a sober assessment of
where the money might best be spent -- or even if it needs to be spent at
all.

When Kyoto became law, the radical environmentalists and their allies like
Environment Minister David Anderson crowed with glee. "The debate on whether
we should ratify is over," he gloated after the vote in the House. Today,
it's time for Kyoto's opponents to gloat. By rushing to implement Kyoto
without a plan, and then drifting ever since, Ottawa has delivered the
treaty's skeptics a golden opportunity to forcefully restate their case. On
June 4, for example, the Financial Post published an open letter from 40
prominent scientists to Paul Martin. The letter urged Mr. Martin to support
a "go-slow" approach to Kyoto implementation, pending a review of the
suspect science behind the accord. The premiers who opposed Ottawa's
top-down approach to climate change management should take a hint from this.
They should let Ottawa know that a re-examination of the federal
government's case for Kyoto by non-governmental climate specialists is a
pre-condition for their co-operation in helping Ottawa implement the treaty.
Sorry, Mr. Anderson -- thanks to your six months of fumbling around, the
debate over whether we should embrace this job-killing accord has found new
life.

"Dr. Convection" <Convection@convection.ca> wrote in message news:<%F%Na.370457$3C2.10146814@news3.calgary.shaw .ca>...
> From:
> http://www.nationalpost.com/commenta...EFFB-47EE-880A
> -32A681B39E68
>
> Where's the Kyoto plan?
>
> National Post
>
> Monday, June 30, 2003
>
> Last December, the federal government rammed the Kyoto global "climate
> change" treaty through the House of Commons. Around that time, several
> provinces -- Alberta, B.C., Ontario, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland --
> pointed out that Ottawa had no plan for Kyoto implementation. Ottawa never
> clearly explained how it proposed to reduce our so-called "greenhouse gas"
> emissions by 240 megatonnes by 2010, per the treaty's requirements, without
> hurting the economy. The lack of a firm government plan made it very
> difficult to precisely cost out Kyoto's effect on Canada, because no one
> knew what policy measures Ottawa would use to implement it. The Canadian
> Manufacturers and Exporters, for example, claimed Kyoto could kill 450,000
> jobs by 2010. A Canadian Taxpayers Federation study (written by economist
> Ross McKitrick) projected that Kyoto could cost the average Canadian family
> $2,700 annually by the same year.
"Dr. Convection" <Convection@convection.ca> wrote in message news:<6_7Oa.376900$ro6.9158640@news2.calgary.shaw. ca>...
> Is the Kyoto Protocol a Threat to the Global Food Supply?

EEEK. EEEK! If Kyoto passes we're all gonna die! The sky is falling!
The sky is falling! Run for the hills -- Kyoto is coming!!!!