Just when you thought John Baird had successfully undermined whatever credibility he had left in Bali, he has the audacity to lament his own deeds. The following qualifies as the single most ridiculous story I have read, not to mention the most hypocritical:Canada helped gut some of the substance from a world climate-change deal and then expressed regret Saturday when the final agreement was ultimately watered down even more than it had hoped.
But he expressed regret that the agreement was almost completely stripped of any reference to numbers and targets which would have been the starting point for the discussion.
"We were naturally disappointed in the language that weakened and watered down the agreement," Baird said.
In a separate agreement among Kyoto signatories, Baird was among the few voices calling for the 2020 targets to be removed.
Expressed regret? Canada has consistently resisted references to hard targets at EVERY SINGLE international gathering, since they've taken office. Mr. "Aspirational Targets" actually has the sheer gall to feign disappointment that the text was watered down. From all accounts, domestic or foreign, Canada has fought tooth and nail to remove hard targets. The duplicity is clearly exposed when you consider that Canada argued against hard targets within the Kyoto delegations. That objective fact makes the regret all the more astounding on the final text, for all delegations.
It is laughable spin for Baird to argue that he wanted more, when the UNIVERSAL opinion pegged Canada as obstructionist, instrumental in wanting to waterdown any declaration. The theater of the absurd on full display, Baird pisses on the flowers, then sheds a tear when they wilt. Unbelievable.
16 comments:
That has been Baird's strategy all along. To cry in public and stab in private. His hope (and his master's as well) is that enough Canadians (say in the high 30 percent range) only pay attention to the crying in public.
Maybe the strategy lies with the provinces.
It was reported that some provinces find any international enviro program unconstitutional, as the enviro is a shared file.
So in the end, it is your premier that will decide what your province is actually going to do to combat climate change.
You folks in Ontario have no say in Alberta enviro policy.
As it should be.
"You folks in Ontario have no say in Alberta enviro policy.
As it should be."
You just contradicted yourself when you said it was shared jurisdiction. How surprising.
Alberta's enviro policy? Yeah, Alberta can have jurisdiction over its environmental activities the very minute it manages to keep all the pollution it creates in Alberta - permanently. Contrary to what they may believe, they're releasing that carbon into the atmosphere and that they don't own. Albortions!
Yup. Baird's real enough to make us puke with patriotic zeal.
Greg:
Right on!
Baird has been working this tactic all along to get a meaningless agreement, and now that he's got what he wanted, he's insulting everyone's intelligence by claiming that he tried to get a stronger agreement.
He's more than hypocritical, he's a lying POS.
Maybe the strategy lies with the provinces.
It was reported that some provinces find any international enviro program unconstitutional, as the enviro is a shared file.
Well, if you really believe that, Wilson (and aren't just spinning and rationalising, as you always do), why doesn't Baird and the rest of the Harpies just say that candidly? Why put us through this kabuki on the taxpayer's dime? Seems kind of inefficient and wasteful, don't you think?
You're as big a liar as Baird is.
"You folks in Ontario have no say in Alberta enviro policy.
As it should be.'
There is a little case called the Friends of the Oldman River that went before the SCC some time ago. In that case the SCC held the federal government had an obligation to do an environmental assessment of the proposed dam, even though the dam itself fell within provincial jurisdiction. This is because the environment affects all Canadians, and as such falls within federal jurisdiction.
In case you do not know, this was an Alberta case, and the federal government that was refusing to do the environmental assessment was Mr. Green himself- Brian Mulroney.
Gayle,
We all knew who emerged as the hero of the Oldman River movement. The ex-Tory who became the Queen of the Green Party of Canada, Elizabeth May.
Baird feeling a little lonely - perhaps
Sassy,
Not at all. Baird might come back to Ottawa International Airport, wave a piece of paper, and say "Peace in Our Time".
It is appeasement in the first degree. Watering an agreement on fighting climate change so the US can sign on board. Expect comparisons between Baird and Neville Chamberlain coming from Elizabeth May and others.
sassy
I love this part:
" After a failed attempt to block an agreement, Canada found itself isolated at the Bali conference Saturday and grudgingly accepted a new accord to set a target of 25 to 40 per cent for cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions by wealthy countries by the end of the next decade.
Environment Minister John Baird spoke against the ambitious target, but found himself virtually alone. Only Russia supported him – so he withdrew his objection, sparking a lengthy burst of applause from other countries."
Steve: Environment Minister John Baird spoke against the ambitious target, but found himself virtually alone. Only Russia supported him – so he withdrew his objection, sparking a lengthy burst of applause from other countries."
Here's the irony. Haperites are applauding him too. (the usual suspects over my way)
In other words, the spin has begun. Baird's being viewed as the hero of the conference.
I don't get it. It would appear that Harperites are best at supporting contradiction and hypocrisy.
Steve,
Baird came back with what Canada went to Bali for.
If you recall:
-comprehensive targets (read binding for all)
-2050 targets (not 2020)
-deforestation planning for tropical countries
-2009 negotiation timelines on the details.
All those are significant positive commitments, and also KNOWN as the Canadian position before going to Bali.
You can't spin that.
Before Bali, would you have accepted the above?
Tomm
"Baird came back with what Canada went to Bali for."
If that were true, then why did Baird express "disappointment" and use the word "watered down"?
Steve,
Baird's a politician. Why does any politician feign an emotion?
Go back through my comments at earlier (pre-Bali) posts and you will see that what Canada agreed to was ultimately what they went to Bali seeking.
Tomm
Post a Comment