INSIGHT: Canada Maps Out New Position on Kyoto Protocol

By Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment Canada

{Editor's Note: Canadian Environment Minister Rona Ambrose delivered these remarks on Clean Air Day, June 7, 2006 at the Canadian Club, Ottawa. She serves in the Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, which took office February 6, 2006. Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol on December 17, 2002.}

OTTAWA, Ontario, Canada, June 21, 2006 (ENS) - It’s been around 120 days since I was appointed to be Minister of the Environment. It’s a privilege I do not take lightly and a responsibility I do not underestimate. I thought I’d share with you some of my thoughts and experiences.

One of those experiences which has been most challenging but extremely fulfilling has been presiding as the Chair over the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

In essence, I am presiding over the process that is presently examining certain questions and challenges around the global effort to address climate change. Questions such as “what has worked and not worked with the first phase of the Kyoto Protocol? What can we do to broaden our efforts? How can we include countries and initiatives that are outside of the Kyoto Protocol? How do we address the impasse between developing and developed countries as we move forward? In other words, what are the common challenges we are facing and what are the common solutions we can share with one another when it comes to addressing climate change, but most importantly where do we go from here?

What has emerged out of our last meeting in Bonn is a consensus that how and where we go from here will determine our opportunity to move towards a truly global approach. How we move towards a more inclusive solution that involves all countries and considers a multitude of initiatives means we have to engage one another in ways we have never done in the past.

When I was appointed to this position I was new to this process – I arrived without the preconceived notions and the silo mentality that exists all too often in this debate. I now know what an advantage it is to approach these challenges without preconceived notions and without the fear to question the status quo and how important that has become in determining our ability as a country to lead this challenging debate.

Canadian Environment Rona Ambrose is a Member of Parliament representing the Alberta constituency of Edmonton–Spruce Grove. (Photo courtesy Rona Ambrose)

Because one of the largest challenges facing Kyoto is what has not worked – this debate has become so polarized by skepticism and political ideology that countries were afraid to even suggest they may not meet their targets. That somehow if we admit that some things are not working while others are, means we are abandoning Kyoto.

Some would like to position Kyoto as a simplistic, zero sum game, an all or nothing debate, an answer to the question “are you in or are you out?”

This lack of substantive recognition for the reality of what is happening in the global dialogue on climate change and clean air has the ability to undermine Canada’s opportunity to lead the world in a more inclusive discussion on climate change.

But we have not allowed these voices to silence Canada’s will to lead the world in an urgent, transparent, honest debate about the challenges that we and our international partners are facing when it comes to finding a truly global solution to climate change.

We are all involved in a work in progress, it is an evolution of an idea that is finding form in various responses to an environmental challenge we are all facing together.

So we became the first and only country to publicly state that we know we will not reach our Kyoto targets. This was met by controversy. But we will not be the last.

However, no one that follows this debate in any serious manner was surprised to find out that after years of no action on climate change, meeting the onerous targets negotiated under the Liberals was not a reality.

Some environmental groups stated this was akin to a complete abandonment of Kyoto – which is ludicrous.

To our international partners who find themselves in our situation, it came as a relief and an acknowledgement that when we face these challenges together it doesn’t mean that all is lost or that we’ve given up the fight. This was clearly the first big hurdle we have overcome to move this debate beyond the first phase of Kyoto.

Emissions spew from the stack of the Grand Lake-4 coal-fired power plant in New Brunswick. (Photo courtesy NB Power)

I asked myself how can anyone who cares about addressing climate change knowing full well all of the complexities and challenges of this issue possibly criticize any initiative by any individual, municipality, province, country or groups of countries in their efforts to reduce greenhouse gases? That came as a surprise to me at first but now that I am involved I see clearly that this kind of territoriality is driven by self serving politics and self righteousness.

There is no one size fits all solution.

Fortunately, what we do have, however, is a global consensus emerging on this issue, and we should make every effort to encourage that to emerge – not point fingers at one another and suggest that one initiative is somehow better than another initiative.

It is not an “are you in or are you out” game or an “Are you with us or are you against us” paradigm. That is unproductive and it is undermining our attempts to find ways to incorporate broad participation on this issue.

Kyoto is not the only game in town – The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change includes countries outside of Kyoto such as the United States and Australia, the G8 +5 is a dialogue involving the world’s largest emitters.

Yesterday, I had my second visit from the UK, with the Deputy Prime Minister of the UK who for the second time invited Canada to join the G8+5 dialogue on climate change in a more meaningful way.

The Asia Pacific Partnership is a new, also very powerful group of countries which has emerged, also made up of the world’s largest emitters. It is a public private partnership focused on clean technology development and deployment. Both Australia and the United States have asked Canada to consider joining.

Regional, national, and continental frameworks are emerging all over the world to address climate change. All of these have their challenges and their opportunities. But none of these should be discounted, undermined or dismissed.

The first workshop of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) dialogue on long-term cooperative action to address climate change by enhancing implementation of the Convention. (From left: John Hay, UNFCCC Media Liaison; Richard Kinley, Officer-in-Charge, UNFCCC Secretariat; Rona Ambrose, Canadian Environment Minister; and Sigmar Gabriel, German Environment Minister. May 15, 2006. (Photo courtesy Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB))

In Bonn we succeeded in beginning to break down those silos and begin a dialogue between Kyoto and non-Kyoto countries. In fact, this inclusive dialogue is now being chaired by Australia.

I also arrive without the preconceived notion that the United States is the enemy of climate change. In the past, Kyoto has been used a vehicle to attack the United States. We saw that in Montreal during the last election when the Liberals invited [former President] Bill Clinton to swoop in on a Kyoto meeting to bash the bush government.

What many people don’t know is that the Americans had a delegation at that meeting and that stunt did nothing to help get the Americans on board. While the Americans may be arriving late to this debate and while their key driver may be energy security, they are arriving in a fast and furious manner – investing billions in climate change science and almost 15 billion in renewable energy.

Engaging the Americans is key to a successful long term global solution. We are engaging the Americans actively on this issue and that has not gone unnoticed.

Our partners within the Kyoto Protocol have expressed their hope that Canada’s unique relationship with the United States will be helpful to facilitate the dialogue between the key initiatives that are emerging to address climate change.

There are many people in this debate who think they hold the moral high ground, but when you scratch below the surface, I can tell you that no one really does. We’re in this together and tearing each other down will accomplish nothing for the environment.

We should be very proud of our success along with the United Nations and our international partners in challenging the status quo and some of the entrenched mentality. This is the only way we will ensure that territoriality and politics does not hinder this process from moving forward, and we should not underestimate our ability as Canadians to build bridges to broaden the participation of new initiatives and involve new countries.

The issues I have just mentioned are issues I have no question will be addressed by the developed world. I have complete faith that we will find a path forward that is inclusive and that will involve broad participation.

The real challenge is still ahead of us for Kyoto – it is the question that was not answered in Bonn and is still on our plates for our next meeting in Nairobi. And that is the impasse that has emerged between developed and developing nations.

In Bonn the developed countries reached a consensus that they would not take on further commitments until the developing nations also considered commitments or targets. The developing nations reached a consensus and held firmly to the position that they will not take on such commitments.

This is problematic for two reasons. First, the next phase of Kyoto hinges on the need for both sides to give – developed countries need to take on commitments in order for developing countries to do the same. Unfortunately, both sides are skeptical of the other's willingness to follow through.

Second, countries like China, Brazil and India are considered developing nations under Kyoto. But no one will argue that they are economic superpowers – so developed countries who are taking on targets want the question answered, “Why should I take on new more stringent targets that will potentially make me less economically competitive in the short term when a country I am directly competing with economically will not take on that same commitment?”

This will be the crux of the debate in Kyoto for the next few years. The answer, I believe, lies in a compromise that has been put forward by Canada.

Canadian Environment Minister Rona Ambrose at the Kyoto Protocol meeting in Bonn, Germany, May 15, 2006. (Photo courtesy ENB)

Canada also put forward a compromise position that any future approaches to new targets for developed countries should reflect a country’s specific national circumstances – considerations such as the nature of a country’s economy and energy sources. This may provide countries with the flexibility to remain involved and the opportunity to bridge this impasse.

Again, there is no one size fits all approach. Both of our suggestions have received wide support from the United Nations and our international partners and will be considered at our next meeting in Nairobi. Finding a compromise does not mean turning your back on the original intent of this agreement, it means recognizing the challenges that have emerged, facing them head on and moving forward in a realistic and constructive manner.

It was suggested to me by some that I quietly move through this process, that my role should be merely as cheerleader, never to question, never to challenge. But that also means that nothing ever happens and nothing ever changes.

By being transparent about the challenges Canada is facing we have the opportunity to put in place a domestic solution which will contribute to our international efforts instead of pretending that signing an international agreement means we’ve done our part internationally.

My message to you, on Clean Air Day, is that the Government of Canada is working towards a “Made-in-Canada” approach to deliver real change and real results for all Canadians, in our common campaign to clean up our air and to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

{Editor's Note: A section of Ambrose's remarks on domestic policy was removed for space considerations. View her entire speech at: http://www.ec.gc.ca/minister/speeches/2006/060607_s_e.htm.}