Kent's Climate Change Speech Disrupted By Protest

Peter Kent Protest Climate Change

First Posted: 12/07/11 10:10 AM ET Updated: 12/07/11 11:22 AM ET

Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent’s opening address on Wednesday at the UN climate change conference in Durban, South Africa, in which he affirmed that Canada would not make a second commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, was disrupted by six young people who stood and delivered a protest message.

The six members of the Canadian Youth Delegation stood as Kent began his speech and turned their backs, revealing the message “Turn Your back on Canada” on their T-shirts.

The youth delegates said they received an ovation from the crowd but were escorted out by security and had their accreditation revoked.

"Our so-called environment minister entered these talks by going on record that he would be defending the tarsands. I have yet to hear him say that he's here to defend my future," said James Hutt, one of the youth delegates who participated in the action, in a statement from the group.

In his speech, Kent said “Kyoto, for Canada, is in the past."

“Our position has long been clear: We support a new international climate change agreement that includes commitments from all major emitters. That is the only way we are going to achieve real reductions and real results,” he said.

“For Canada, the Kyoto Protocol is not where the solution lies — it is an agreement that covers fewer than 30 per cent of global emissions."

Canada won't obstruct a deal on a second phase of the Kyoto Protocol, Kent has said, but he hopes to see a new agreement that includes major emitters like China and India in 2015 rather than 2020, "because we do feel we need to get the major emitters into the tent sooner and not later."

Kent told delegates they should forget Kyoto and focus on a series of agreements reached last year in Mexico.

He said the Cancun agreements are more realistic, more comprehensive and will be more effective than Kyoto.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol expires at the end of next year, and countries such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa are pressuring wealthy countries like Canada to extend their commitments.

Green climate fund debated
Also on Wednesday, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that despite tighter budgets in many countries, contributing money to fight climate change was "an imperative. We have to do it." The mobilization of $100 billion a year, much of it to be channelled through a new Green Climate Fund, is a central issue at the 194-nation climate conference.

The U.S. has blocked suggestions of a levy on international shipping and aviation. It opposes suggestions by a high-ranking panel to impose a tax of $25 for every tonne of carbon emissions.

U.S. lead negotiator Todd Stern said Wednesday that most of the money for green projects should come from private investments.

With files from The Associated Press and The Canadian Press

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent’s opening address on Wednesday at the UN climate change conference in Durban, South Africa, in which he affirmed that Canada would not make a second commitme...
Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent’s opening address on Wednesday at the UN climate change conference in Durban, South Africa, in which he affirmed that Canada would not make a second commitme...
Filed by Ron Nurwisah  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 107
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
BlackbirdHighway
Brawndo's got electrolites!
05:25 PM on 12/14/2011
Wow, some people are on here commenting 24/7. It looks like they must get paid to do that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
12:20 PM on 12/08/2011
Follow the money, the UN wants 100 billion a year.
My my, think of the fun they could have with that!
photo
gallon
Those who fail to remember history are, um
09:28 PM on 12/08/2011
Follow the money. Big Energy wants only to rake in a few more trillion in pure profit. Why worry about the climate, right? That is way off in the future, right. These environmental interests stand to make money off this and we can't have that, right?

Well, foghorn?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:00 AM on 12/08/2011
Anyone figure out what an annex 1 country is yet?
Or an annex 2 country?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
07:27 PM on 12/08/2011
Anyone figure out why CanadaStan keeps asking stupid questions yet?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Katmandu01
08:08 PM on 12/08/2011
Obviously, you see many glaring faults with the Kyoto Accord as it exists and I won't disagree that it is deeply flawed on many levels. So please share with us what sort of treaty intended to significantly reduce CO2 emissions on a global scale you would consider to be fair and effective. I'm sure that withing the 250 word limit here you can outline the kind of agreement that you would advocate.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:26 AM on 12/08/2011
Green-peacers....please sit down. Over the past years and years, Green-peacers have not responded to issues with mature and long-term alternatives.

Who knows? In the future... it will be incorrect and against the law to kill a mouse because they are so cute! ...and therefore mouse-coat-making should not be permitted! I am going to be cold!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
12:40 AM on 12/08/2011
Once again, an irrelevancy from those who are unable to deal with the scientific facts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
12:11 PM on 12/08/2011
Facts are good?
What are the facts on which countries that have reduceded emissions under the Kyoto farce?

Are you able to name one of them yet?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
B Wood
11:36 AM on 12/08/2011
Ah! so the intelligent approach is to stick your head in the sands (pun intended)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
10:20 PM on 12/07/2011
I suggest these guys, and the opposition in Canada start making it very difficult for this regressive Government, who puts short term, very dirty profits, over a sustainable future.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:02 AM on 12/08/2011
The opposition?
Sorry bub, all the opposition parties are without leaders.

Is the US still using that dirty Californian oil?
It has a larger carbon footprint than the oil from the oil sands.

And I'm still waiting for you to name the countries that reduced emissions under the Kyoto treaty, you keep claiming there are many, but can't seem to name any.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
B Wood
11:39 AM on 12/08/2011
I see you are still posting this lie. Are you related to Lyndsey Graham????
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
silverwolf13
I know that I do not know.
10:52 PM on 12/08/2011
You make a good point that most countries have not kept their Kyoto commitments. But why do you then argue that it is pointless to reduce emissions?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
07:12 PM on 12/07/2011
Here is a simple question for all of those people criticising Canada over their Kyoto stance:

What is Canada's position on this?

Do any of you actually know?
What is Canada proposing?
What are your criticisms of that?

Kinda stupid to be slagging them if you don't even know what they are proposing, right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
10:21 PM on 12/07/2011
But you're still an AGW denier, aren't you Stan?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:16 PM on 12/07/2011
No, I'm an AGW skeptic, but that is immaterial.
A treaty that increases pollution is a bad idea all around, and the Kyoto treaty would increase pollution, not reduce it.

I happen to know what Canada's position is, do you?
How much money are they offering developing countries?
Do you have any idea?
Does Canada want all polluters involved in a new agreement?

These are some things you should research before coming to a conclusion, correct?
Or are facts and reality a bad thing?
01:55 AM on 12/08/2011
Stan, you may know what the Harper Governments (tm) stand on Kyoto specifically and the enviornment generally is, but you have no idea what Canadian's as a whole think. Be it the tar-sands rebranding, the "threats" regarding the pipeline (we'll ship to Asia and to hell with what BC wants), fracking and the damages we are all becoming aware of, or even the lightbulb bs, the majority of Canadians know there must be better ways than a fast buck and low corporate taxes to build an equitable and healthy future for your kids too. Harper and Co. lies. Peter Kent is a former talking head who is capable of nothing else and is huge embarrassment. Kudos to those kids who stood up and spoke out for most of us. Canada should be criticised, loudly and often...on Kyoto and too many other issues.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:06 AM on 12/08/2011
Gibberish,
Did you miss the election on May 2nd?

I very rarely meet anyone who actually believes the AGW nonsense anymore, and no on can explain how the Kytoto treaty would reduce emissions anyhow.

Would you like to take a crack at that?
Explain how Kyoto would reduce emissions please.
The sad fact is that it would increase pollution and C02 emissions, so how is that good for the children?

Speaking of fast bucks, the UN wants 100 billion a year for this scam.
Follow the money....?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lulex
Made in Canada
06:18 PM on 12/07/2011
Want to get the scoop on how bad things are in Canada? Visit http://www.operationmaple.com/

It's a new website exposing political corruption and big oil's influence behind Parliament doors. Awesome site.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:17 PM on 12/07/2011
Read Ethical Oil to see just how corrupt Greenpeace is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
12:23 AM on 12/08/2011
I just did, and it's an oxymoron.
photo
john frodo
armchair expert
03:53 PM on 12/07/2011
Thanks Kids at least some Canadians care about the future.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:18 PM on 12/07/2011
What is Canada's position?
This American
An end to all this nonsense
12:27 AM on 12/11/2011
What is interesting here is that the people who are criticizing Canada's position without a clue as to what that position is, are not even a little bit ashamed that they have exposed themselves as mere parrots with access to a keyboard.
03:48 PM on 12/07/2011
Peter Kent is right. Kyoto did nothing to improve the world's environment. It simply exported emissions from signatory countries to non signatory countries in a ridiculous shell game
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
10:22 PM on 12/07/2011
Not that Canada or the US actually reduced their emissions. Obviously those two countries, and some others, want to abrogate their responsibility for emissions, by blaming the developing world.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:19 PM on 12/07/2011
List the countries that reduced pollution and C02 emissions under Kyoto.
While you're at it, list the countries that were REQUIRED to reduce their C02 emissions under the Kyoto farce.
09:34 AM on 12/08/2011
When we talk about "developing countries" I assume we are referring to the BRICS nations since no other country is big enough industrially to really matter. To refer to these countries as "developing" is delusional. China in particular is a predatory mercantile machine using currency manipulation, intellectual property theft, protectionist barriers and, yes, an atrocious environmental record to literally steal prosperity from the rest of the world. Every time we buy a product with "Made in China" on the label we are personally a part of the problem. The answer is not to beat ourselves up over Canada's position. The answer is to cage the Chinese lion masquerading as a "developing nation"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:37 PM on 12/07/2011
CanadaStan, I know you wouldn't listen to what I asked of you. But I'd really appreciate it if you watched today's show on www.democracynow.org.

Whether you believe they are union-funded or not, please watch just the 1-hour of today's show.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
11:20 PM on 12/07/2011
Sorry bub, Pachauri is a fraud and a farce, anyone quoting him is an idiot.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
12:27 AM on 12/08/2011
You could be talking about Canada, couldn't you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:31 AM on 12/08/2011
Is that why the Daily Telegraph had to apologize to him for lying about him in the paper?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
01:20 PM on 12/07/2011
The QUESTION THAT HAS NO ANSWER!

How would the Kyoto treaty reduce pollution and C02 emissions?

Why can't any green ever answer that simple question?
You guys must have thought about that at least a little bit, haven't you?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lbsaltzman
Permaculture and Sustainability
02:14 PM on 12/07/2011
Kyoto actually isn't strong enough, so in a weird sense I agree with you. We should have mandatory reductions in the use of fossil fuels that grow stricter over time. That must be accompanied by massive conservation and the switch to renewable energy.
photo
john frodo
armchair expert
03:54 PM on 12/07/2011
Kyoto did cut emissions, Canada did not but others did. It was a test of faith for China, and we failed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
07:04 PM on 12/07/2011
Really?
Who cut emissions?
Name the countries please.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
01:11 PM on 12/07/2011
Oh look, a socialist wealth redistribution scheme!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeWebster
Always happy.
10:23 PM on 12/07/2011
Oh look, a fact free poster, wishing to support the dirty oil profits of his home country.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
12:15 PM on 12/08/2011
The oil sands oil has a smaller carbon footprint than California's oil, so who is wishing for dirty oil?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ProgressiveCDN
A Progressive Moderate
12:02 PM on 12/07/2011
You've gotta hand it to them! These Cons have learnt from their American brothers, the great art of double-speak.... O yea, we want to cut down emmissions and make "realistic" goals. O no, Kyoto was a waste of time even if China joins in. We're not interested... What's the alternative? A non-binding measure agreed to in Cancun.. How sad our leadership is..

Bravo to these young Canadians! -- I hope the world knows our government only speaks for 38% of our people, if that. Canadian Progressives Unite!! We cant keep fighting ourselves just to hand the Cons power.... NDP - Liberal understanding is required.

Read More: http://liberallibra.wordpress.com/2011/08/03/liberals-the-ndp/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
01:14 PM on 12/07/2011
How will a treaty that only involves 30% of the countries, and those are the ones with the cleaner industry already, reduce pollution?
Won't increasing the costs to them simply result in more production moving to the higher polluting factories in China?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lbsaltzman
Permaculture and Sustainability
02:15 PM on 12/07/2011
You have to start somewhere. I am sure we would all like to see much stronger action taken but for Canada to walk away from this as they are is a disgrace.
photo
john frodo
armchair expert
03:54 PM on 12/07/2011
Its most countries 192, quit spinning.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:31 AM on 12/08/2011
I believe someone's global eye-glasses are significantly dirtied by flying politicized manure!
Need a non-politicized hanky?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ProgressiveCDN
A Progressive Moderate
12:02 PM on 12/08/2011
the idea is to be political.. I'm not sure what your point is.
The Cons are destroying the Canadian identity.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cariboofly
Aye, Ready, Aye & Semper Fi
11:29 AM on 12/07/2011
This is an obvious and thoughtful move by Canada. In addition to the major polluters of the world being EXEMPT, further "conditions" added to the "New Kyoto" would require developed nations to pay huge "Climate Change Compensation" to under-developed countries that claim to be affected by climate change. That's IN ADDITION to the foreign aid programs we already provide.
This "Global Warming Guilt Trip" gets pretty old, pretty fast and the UN trying to blackmail developed nations for extra cash is the killer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
11:25 AM on 12/07/2011
We are all doomed sooner or later. Little guys can't talk and here in Canada it is getting closer to little guys can't go out doors. Whether Canada is right or wrong the feeling I get without the numbers is the concern to maintain the environmental satibility is not in the interests of economic powers. for those emerging economies they see what we do, they like what we have, and they are bound and determined to get there. That's the rub. No vision and no desire to work togerther. The demise of Earth is on the horizon.