Politicians and the Environmental Bandwagon... Who are they kidding?

Warning: the following commentary may be considered 'opinionated'...

The environment is changing, most can admit to that even if they don't want to admit to the 'Armageddon' of environment collapse that some conservationists have been warning for years. So our options are fairly straightforward. We can either do something about it, or not.

Lately, it seems that a slew of politicians and celebrities are waking up to the idea that may-be we might want to keep some of that Arctic ice shelf around, and not just for those cute little polar bears. When one picks up the newspaper, one can see the pretty picture of our premier shaking hands with David Suzuki, and hear Al Gore commend him on his revolutionary goals to reduce BC carbon emissions. In Ottawa, Harper has recently been quoted as saying he wants Canada to be
"a world leader in the fight against global warming and the development of clean energy."

Hooray!!! Yippee!!! It seems our politicians are jumping on the 'Environmental Bandwagon'...

Or are they?

A recent article in the Georgia Straight by Charlie Smith suggested we all might want to take a closer look at Campbell's objectives and consider the fact that last year the Liberal parties' policies were considered the most 'brown' of all provinces. (I personally prefer the fact that the Liberal Campaign's number one contributor is the BC Automobile Association, hmmm...)

As to Harpers objectives, as the article states:

"Uh, too late. While our politicians dithered over climate change, other countries went about inventing, marketing and selling green technologies. Most of the giant windmills that increasingly dot our countryside come from Germany....

A majority of the fuel-efficient, or hybrid, cars nosing their way onto Canadian streets are Japanese. California companies are pioneering solar technology, green building codes and sustainable farming methods. And, while we continue to experiment with carbon capture and storage, as Harper mentioned, so do other countries.
We, an "energy superpower," have been too busy making money on fossil fuels to care much about alternatives....

Nor are innovation, or the changes required to make our economy sustainable, likely to accelerate on Harper's watch, despite his change in tone. His government's regulations for large emitters have been widely described as timid -- a leisurely stroll toward an unverifiable 60-per-cent reduction in real emissions by 2050, when Harper is long gone. This is the model he recommended to his fellow APEC members, who had the courtesy not to smirk.

Yet for them, for anyone befuddled by a complex topic, Harper may sound plausible. What he is doing, along with retooling Liberal notions, is trying to reframe the climate debate, implying that the Kyoto accord is some wildly impractical, job-crushing monster on one side, while fossilized climate-deniers and corporate polluters occupy the other extreme.

He positions himself in the middle, the champion of "balance" -- of "realistic benchmarks," market-driven solutions, a global gentlemen's voluntary agreement to behave sustainably, rather than crude arbitrary targets."

What's that? Kyoto? Did you say it might actually cost us something to clean up our mess? The future of the world? No way, I'm not paying for that, it's not my problem. I'd much rather you just lower my taxes please...

A McGill Biology professor, Joe Rasmussen, commented on a recent debate over water trade, Kyoto and GMO's:

“You can see the questions on the Kyoto Agreement are not really answered by most parties. Today, most major parties platforms are more centered towards tax cuts than environmental issues. They think that’s what attracts voters the most. Only the Green party’s platforms are more centered towards environmental protection. They know they are not going to get elected. It’s ironic that a hundred years ago, environment protection was an important issue [in North America] during the election. Look at today’s election. The society kind of degenerated,” he observed...

“I’m worried but at the same time optimistic. My first question approaching this election is: “Is it acceptable to accept the principle that the only way to solve environment problems is to get richer? So after we can clean up the mess we made?”