Friday, February 17, 2006


New Environment Minister Rona Ambrose is set to succeed Stephane Dion at the UN as president of The Conference of Parties, which will oversee further implementation of Kyoto. How can Ambrose assume this important role, when she is on record criticizing the Accord she will oversee:
But despite the appointment, Ambrose did nothing to diminish the perception that the Conservatives aren't committed to the agreement.

"We are a signatory to 59 international agreements that I'm learning about all the time and a lot of them we're very active in," said Ambrose, an MP from Edmonton.

"On Kyoto, I will tell you that our government and our prime minister is very clear that there has to be a direct benefit to the Canadian environment and potentially to Canadian commercial investment in clean-air technology."

Ambrose said the government will pursue elements of the Kyoto protocol that fit within her mandate to focus on domestic air pollution.

The use of emissions credits under Kyoto to offset over-production of greenhouse gases is a problem for Ambrose.

"There will not be opportunities under this government, unlike the previous government, to purchase hot-air credits and allow Canadian companies to pollute on Canadian soil," she said.

Harper allowing Ambrose to replace Dion is akin to the American administration appointing John Bolton as U.N ambassador, despite his clear contempt for the organization. What will other nations think of a key player who isn't committed to the process? Mixed messages anyone? How will someone who is clearly in bed with Alberta oil and gas approach these issues in good faith?

Despite all the hot air about "domestic solutions", Ambrose's agenda is clear- don't allow any treaty that threatens Alberta's energy sector. Under the guise of a flawed emissions credit program, Ambrose will pull us out of the Kyoto Accord, which is why putting her in this important role is such a cynical move.


Lumo said...

What will other nations say? That she's cool. I can only speak on behalf of the U.S., the Czech Republic, and the European Union. Not sure about the other nations. ;-) What I say about her is here: -carbon-and-hockey-team.html

The first story of this article could lead the reader to an incorrect conclusion that the citizens of Edmonton are crazy people who protest against the hypothetical death of ice-hockey caused by global warming by playing it in minus 23 degrees Celsius. That would be very unfair and kind of strange given the fact that Edmonton is in Alberta.

Let me choose another random citizen of Edmonton, namely Rona Ambrose.

She definitely thinks that the international treaties to curb the emissions are wrong. Why is her opinion so interesting? Well, it's because now she's not only the new environment minister of Canada but she has also become the #1 person to oversee the Kyoto protocol in the United Nations. That's encouraging because she is probably the first leader of the Kyoto protocol ever who realizes that the protocol is bullshit.

We see some progress in the U.N. if a male, ugly, left-wing, confused sociologist is replaced by a female, attractive, right-wing, bright political scientist. Massachusetts Hall must be cited for the comparison of the academic fields. ;-) On the other hand, when I say that Rona Ambrose is female, I should also add that the feminists disagree and consider Ms Ambrose to be an old white man.

She's not the only one among her collaborators who fails to support Kyoto. Monte Solberg, the Canadian immigration minister, is a blogger and a self-described radical environmentalist who wants to clear the air etc. (like me). But on his blog, he explains, in a very entertaining way, how the Canadian economy must be stopped but they will still be short of the targets. More precisely, Mr. Solberg has recycled some calculations of another surprisingly attractive old white man, Licia Corbella.

Steve V said...


What silliness, your argument about one particular day recording minus 23 degrees. Is this how pathetic the anti-global warming crowd has become? Why not a discussion of the last month, instead of cherry picking a day to suit your warped sensibilities.

Seriously, the magnitude of evidence and the growing consensus of "credible" sources is so overwhelming that those that dispute global warming look like the "earth is flat crowd". Thanks for the link, it provided a good laugh and a clear example of the power of delusion. Cheers.