Kyoto Protocol: Canada's Kent Says Accord Is 'The Past' But Refuses To Confirm Withdrawal

Kyoto Protocol Canada Peter Kent

First Posted: 11/28/11 10:57 AM ET Updated: 11/30/11 10:00 AM ET

OTTAWA - Ripping up the Kyoto Accord may ready Canada for a bruising at international climate talks in South Africa this week but allows it to avoid a black eye down the road, observers said Monday.

Environment Minister Peter Kent refused to confirm or deny reports Canada is walking away from the 1997 agreement that bound 37 industrial countries to limit carbon emissions over a five-year period.

With those commitments expiring next year, the Durban talks centre on finding a new international agreement on combating climate change.

Many environmental groups, developing countries and the European Union want the negotiations to lead to a new version of Kyoto.

Canada, Japan and Russia aren't on board, angling instead for a new deal to bring all emitting countries under the same set of rules, including emerging economies such as China, India and Brazil.

"Kyoto is in the past," Kent said Monday.

But if the Conservative government didn't formally pull out of the agreement now, Canada would be haunted by that past.

After the expiration of the five-year targets, all countries that are party to the protocol will be assessed for how well they fared in a pledge to reduce emissions by six per cent below 1990 levels.

"There would be a public finding, an official finding to the effect that Canada has not met its international commitment," said Jutta Brunnee, a law professor at the University of Toronto.

"And that I think is what the government is wanting to avoid."

After being elected in 2006, the Harper government stated it had no intention of complying with Kyoto, arguing it was too ambitious and not applied fairly.

Canada has since set its own target of cutting emissions by 17 per cent by 2020 over 2005 levels.

CTV reported that Canada had set Dec. 23 as the date it will announce it's pulling out of Kyoto for good.

The withdrawal would also be a finale to a frenzied fall session for the Conservatives, who've sought to fast-track a number of bills, including controversial measures such as the end of the wheat board and several crime bills, in order to have a clean slate in the new year.

Canada would be considered officially out of the treaty a year later, mere days before the five-year deadline for compliance in December 2012.

"Basically it would get them off of the hook with minimal consequence given that they failed to meet targets during the first commitment period," said Hannah McKinnon of Climate Action Network Canada.

"The Canadian government is looking for every escape possible to avoid the consequences of inaction in the face of dangerous climate change and to ensure they can expand the tar sands as projected," she added.

Canada's withdrawal would likely have little effect on the Durban negotiations, said Alden Meyer of the Washington-based Union of Concerned Scientists.

But Meyer said a withdrawal would allow Canada to continue to be a negotiator on the future of the protocol "watering down the treaty and wrecking the job of the rest of us."

Doubts about the Kyoto deal were one reason the EU was conditioning its acceptance of new commitments on an agreement in Durban from China, India and other major emitting countries that they will adopt legally binding commitments by 2015.

Brunnee said Canada should have pulled out of Kyoto sooner.

"The reason they haven't so far, it was politically sensitive and it would have been not a popular move to get out of Kyoto," she said.

"Now I think that's easier because it looks as if there's not going to be an immediate Kyoto successor and everyone is looking for a slightly different approach. It's politically much easier to get out."

Kent was pressed by reporters several times earlier Monday as to whether the government was in fact staying in Kyoto. He refused to answer. He was also asked why he couldn't answer.

"This isn't the day. This is not the time to make an announcement," he told a news conference called to extend funding to the government's clean-air regulatory agenda.

The government had set aside $252 million over two years in the 2011 budget for the agenda and announced Monday it's adding more money and time to bring the commitment to $600.8 million over five years.

Refusing to say whether or not Canada will remain in Kyoto means Canada is in South Africa in bad faith, the opposition charged.

"The presence of the environment minister in Durban is a total charade," said NDP MP Peter Julian.

"He is going to go there, he is going to filibuster, he is going to act like an environmental vandal."

Liberal Leader Bob Rae said whether or not Kyoto was worth extending was beside the point.

"It's that the way we do business with other countries is to be up front and honest and straightforward and I don't find that the government's meeting this standard by saying we're not going to announce anything until the 23rd," he said.

— with files from The Associated Press

TWITTER REACTS
FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

Filed by Michael Bolen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 108
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ascoli
06:07 AM on 11/29/2011
It's sad and embarrassing to be Canadian these day.
Goddam conservative mentalities.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tnanimation
08:59 PM on 11/28/2011
Peter Kent is by far the very worst Environment Minister that Canada has ever had, even worse than the cavalcade of feckless ministers under Brian Mulroney.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
08:53 PM on 11/28/2011
Its funny to see the big banner tweets from Ms May. She's so far down the food chain she needs a booster-seat to eat roadkill.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
08:41 PM on 11/28/2011
If I was PM I wouldn't even send anybody to Durban. The EU have been trying to jerk us around on every trade deal under the sun for the last 5 years. They just drool over the prospect of pointing their fingers at us just to score points with the folks back home. I say ignore the whole thing.Koyoto expires next year and untill we can get China and the US onboard with some kind of agreement its all pretty much a big stroke-fest anyway. We should remain above the fray.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DirkNeptune
I love raspberry pie, damn it.
08:24 PM on 11/28/2011
What's worse, global warming or having someone like "Canada Stan" infect this website with his repetitious one-sided, generally fact-free rants and gibes?

My vote is for global warming as mankind's very existence hangs in the balance.

Sadly though, this is one situation where Canada Stan himself -- if he's true to his Conservative ideology -- would say the correct answer is "Canada Stan."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
08:43 PM on 11/28/2011
I'm with ya on the raspberry pie.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tnanimation
09:01 PM on 11/28/2011
Wow! I thought I was the only one who noticed out good buddy "Canada Stan". I don't even read his replies to my posts anymore.
04:42 PM on 11/28/2011
The reason we are pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol is because unlike the convention, the Protocol commits us to the promises that we discussed in the convention. The Harper government is all lip service until we actually have to do something to change the world. Again cower to Big Industry and keep the money rolling in until we take our last breath of clean Canadian air, and our last sip of unpolluted Canadian water. Won't be long.
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
06:34 PM on 11/28/2011
Please explain how the Kyoto treaty would reduce pollution.
06:48 PM on 11/28/2011
The convention opened up the conversation, the protocol commits us to those targets agreed to in the conversation. One less car would reduce pollution, and before you comment about my liberal ideals please take note I have drilled for oil and gas all over North America and the Middle East. Please explain how our current path is not going to destroy our planet and leave us sick and eventually extinct. Money isn't everything when you don't have access to clean water or air.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whistlejackett
Niki Ashton for NDP
04:36 PM on 11/28/2011
It's time to sabotage the Tar Sands. Blow it up.
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
06:35 PM on 11/28/2011
Why?
How much C02 do the oil sand add?
Are there coal plants in China that emit more C02 than all the oil sands operations combined?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whistlejackett
Niki Ashton for NDP
06:48 PM on 11/28/2011
What matters is that some one has to start some where. Your sand box theory will accomplish nothing. Throwing things at each other never settles nothing.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
haddanuff
Progressives think 'We' while cons think "Me"
04:25 PM on 11/28/2011
Normally, I wouldn't care what the 39% zombies think, but when they insist on crapping in the corn flakes that we ALL have to eat from, it's time to cuff 'em alongside the head.
03:43 PM on 11/28/2011
The Scam is unwinding......
03:42 PM on 11/28/2011
Kyoto is a deal that shows everything wrong with governments. Double standards no allowance for climate or distance . Al Gore and the ecoidiots should go back to inventing a new internet rather then this tax scam. Carbon tax makes no sense when they make claims that are physically impossible like an airplane creates x tons of carbon per flight. If you look at who's involved all crooks. Gotta love the standards for India and China. Its wrong and good riddance especially for a cold climate country like Canada.
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
03:59 PM on 11/28/2011
Maybe Gore can invent an Econet!?
03:34 PM on 11/28/2011
Showing leadership in getting out of this hoax, the emperor has no clothes folks. 100's of billions already wasted on this scam while people starve, its disgusting, all to line politicians pockets.
photo
Felix99
Born to be mild!!!!
06:32 PM on 11/28/2011
Since the conservatives have never shown leadership, except in a negative sense, I wonder what you are speaking of!! If it's climate change, so be it!!! I would hesitate to call it a scam, since if it continues, it will destroy most if not all of us!!! And since the cons are doing nothing about it, there has been nothing spent to avert it, certainly not the 100's of billions you speak of.
07:06 PM on 11/28/2011
Canada has spent over $9 billion feeding the monster, you research it, recent report that EU almost $300Billion just on trading scams and the US over $100B. Lots of money, where did it go? A lot is in Swiss bank accounts...

This scam should have been stopped 8-10 years ago
photo
OhioYippieHippie
Go VEGAN & ORGANIC
07:42 PM on 11/28/2011
people can eat carbon? can you eat war? wait can you actually eat poverty?
07:54 PM on 11/28/2011
Lets see... send $2000 to a swiss bank account or spend it on food!

Can you eat someone elses Swiss bank account filled with your money taken from you?

If you have the money would you be able to buy food?

CO2 is actually used in food production, it is pumped into greenhouses and makes plants grow faster and produce more FOOD.
CO2 is GREAT and it is not a pollutant any more than oxygen is
03:24 PM on 11/28/2011
Words cannot express how embarrassed I am of Canada these days. We've gone from being an international leader on environmental issues, to deferring domestic policy decisions on climate change to the US, to actively torpedoing international agreements.

While Kyoto may not have been perfect (notably due to the US' failure to get behind it - linked to the denialism going on down there) it was a start. The developing world routinely asks "why should we reduce our emissions if you won't". Sooner or later, someone is going to have to step up and lead by example. Apparently, it won't be us.
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
04:01 PM on 11/28/2011
Well, use a few words and explain how Kyoto would have reduced emissions....

It wasn't just not perfect, it would have increased pollution, not reduced it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
The Canadian
Stop Harper
03:20 PM on 11/28/2011
I wouldn't mind Harper and his cronies saying that they think Kyoto is wrong and won't solve any issues, as long as they had some meaningful plan of their own to address emission-reductions. But it's obvious they have ABSOLUTELY nothing in mind as a counter-proposal to addressing climate change.

In fact, Harper is just expressing here in Canada the same impulse we are seeing in the United States, where the Republicans have made destroying the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a top priority because they say the EPA kills jobs by enforcing regulations to stop environmental damage..

Harper and the rightwing have zero intentions to protect the environment. It is inexplicably that anyone with children, like Harper, doesn't seem to give a damn over the future of the planet, preferring instead to pander to big corporations and the ultra-rich who are willing to put profit above all else.
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
04:02 PM on 11/28/2011
Wanna explain how bankrupting our clean factories while giving the much higher polluting factories in China would have helped the environment?
photo
OhioYippieHippie
Go VEGAN & ORGANIC
07:44 PM on 11/28/2011
WHERE IS YOUR NORTH POLE GOING SIR?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rob Vann
02:53 PM on 11/28/2011
Interestin­g to watch Peter Kent on the CBC today struggling hard to look composed while spinning this issue. I can't imagine how anyone could sink to this level and still show his face in public. The disconnect between what he was thinking..­. and saying was sooo obvious..
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:45 PM on 11/28/2011
No surprise there. This is certainly endorsed by the U.S. who own a considerable share of tar sands development. Canadians never had any say in how quickly our oil reserves would be exploited, and something tells me those Canadians against this exploitation would balk if their standard of living were no longer heavily subsidized by the tar sands even though they are against it in principle. Our current lifestyle is heavily funded by our exploitation of natural resources. We're not really a manufacturing country. The problem is we're going to extremes because of U.S. demand for oil and really mucking up our land and our reputation in the process. There must be a happy middle somewhere.