This blog was originally published in Professor Mark Winfield’s blog.

Yesterday’s announcement by federal environment minister Peter Kent of Canada’s intention to formally withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol marks the country’s lowest point in the forty year history of modern global environmental diplomacy. The protocol, which Canada signed in 1997 and ratified in 2002, committed Canada to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 6 per cent relative to their 1990 levels by the 2008-2012 period.

Kent rolled out a familiar chain of justifications for Canada’s action – that Canada’s original targets were unreachable, that it was really the fault of the previous Liberal governments for failing to implement effective emission reduction strategies and that action by Canada was pointless unless the United States and rapidly developing economies like China and India were also subject to binding emission targets.

This blog was originally published in Professor Mark Winfield’s blog.

December 9, 2011

The Editors
The Globe and Mail
444 Front St.
Toronto, Ontario

Re: “Green spendthrifts” (December 9, 2011)

Dear Sir or Madam,

The Ontario Auditor-General’s Report on Ontario’s Green Energy Act seems to me more a more a case of an outright hopping the fence into policy than “mission creep” (Radwanski, December 7). There are longstanding debates about how far auditor-generals should stray into matters of policy, but one thing is certain, that if you are going to go there then you need to do it well.

Unfortunately the Auditor-General’s report fails badly on that front, and in doing so does more to inflame the debate about Ontario’s Green Energy Act than inform it. Indeed, at times the report seems more a recitation of every compliant (however dubious) that has ever been made against the legislation than a meaningful analysis.

This blog was originally published in Professor Mark Winfield’s blog. 

Last week’s Speech from the Throne and Fall Economic Statement from Dalton McGuinty’s minority government contained a mix of good and bad news for those concerned about green energy and environmental sustainability.

The Throne Speech re-iterated the government’s commitment to the Green Energy Act, noting that “Your government remains fully committed to clean energy and the 50,000 new, good jobs in one of the world’s fastest-growing economic sectors. These jobs are being created by its Green Energy Act in communities across Ontario.” That said, the review of the Green Energy Act FIT program launched on October 31st will almost certainly result in significant reductions to the FIT rates for solar projects, particularly the popular micofit program, where 99 per cent of the approved projects have been solar. The directions of other changes to the program remain to be seen.

This blog was originally published in Professor Mark Winfield’s blog.

Re-elected Premier Dalton McGuinty’s new cabinet was sworn-in on October 20. At this stage it looks, on the whole, like good news for environmental issues. Veteran Jim Bradley, who as environment minister from 1985-1990 in the government of David Peterson transformed the ministry from a relatively minor player within the province government to a major centre of influence, returns to the environment portfolio. Bradley put a solid but unspectacular performance in the previous McGuinty government as Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing – it is unclear if he is intended to continue in that mode at the Ministry of the Environment or whether his appointment might signal a return to a more activist agenda.

The appointment of the extremely capable Kathleen Wynne as Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing would seem likely to cement the progressive directions on land-use planning in southern Ontario that were established during John Gerretsen’s tenure in the portfolio, including the Greenbelt and reforms to the Planning Act, under the first McGuinty government.

This blog was originally published in Professor Mark Winfield’s bog.

Ontario environmentalists have generally been breathing a sigh of relief over the re-election of the McGuinty government, with its implication of the continuation of the Feed-in Tariff system under the Green Energy Act, and more general avoidance of the major retreat by the province on environmental matters that would almost certainly have accompanied a PC victory. However, as I noted in my previous blog, even with the re-election of the Liberals, the possibility of some sort of retrenchment on the environment, particularly in light of the province’s fiscal situation cannot be ruled out. In fact, I am increasingly of the view that a major restructuring in the province’s approach to environment and natural resources management is likely, most probably through the 2012 budget. Such a development would not be unprecedented – recall the 1996 federal Liberal Program Review budget that followed the relatively progressive 1993 “Red Book” platform.