Sparring officials to delay Kyoto proposals
Environment Minister Stéphane Dion's effort to have a $10-billion Kyoto implementation plan in place by April 4 is in jeopardy because of a battle between his officials and those in Natural Resources Canada over the effectiveness of proposals to cut greenhouse gases.
The plan is already overdue, given that the Kyoto Protocol on climate change became international law Feb. 16, and Mr. Dion now has set April 4 as the new deadline for making an announcement, government sources say.
Two important elements of a Kyoto implementation were nailed down in the past three days:
-- After a lengthy cabinet debate, Finance Minister Ralph Goodale and other ministers in the minority Liberal government agreed to include controversial amendments to environmental protection laws as part of the omnibus budget-implementation bill that will be debated in the coming weeks. It's a controversial move, however, and has the opposition vowing that the bill could be defeated, forcing an election.
Advertisements
-- Meanwhile, Natural Resources Minister John Efford announced on Wednesday that the government had reached a voluntary agreement with auto makers on steps to improve fuel efficiency for new vehicles, and thus reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Details are to be announced soon.
But still unresolved, officials say, are the vast differences in the estimates produced by the Environment and Natural Resources bureaucracies as to whether Canada can meet its Kyoto targets for cutting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse emissions  and still keep the cost under $10-billion.
The $10-billion figure is already twice what Mr. Goodale announced in February's federal budget.
The Kyoto target for Canada is to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 270 megatonnes between now and 2012.
Environment Canada's draft implementation plan has Canada reaching that target. But analysts for Natural Resources Canada say the country can probably achieve reductions of only about 131 megatonnes.
Asked to outline the economic and other technical assumptions behind Environment Canada's numbers, departmental spokesman Sébastien Bois said the government will produce its figures when the implementation plan is rolled out "in coming weeks."
Mr. Bois also dismissed the Natural Resources Canada numbers as "rumours and speculation."
But Natural Resources officials say their colleagues at Environment have greatly underestimated the cost of new measures to capture the carbon that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere during the production of energy.
Moreover, they say Environment Canada is being overoptimistic in calculating the ability of Ontario to phase out coal-fired electrical generation plants by instead purchasing power from Manitoba and Quebec.
Natural Resources officials also warn of "staggering" costs of administering a fund that will reward projects that cut energy use and greenhouse-gas emissions.
For Canada to meet its Kyoto commitments, they say, the country will have to spend at least $1.7-billion a year more than Environment Canada is figuring on. This is money that would be spent overseas on "international credits" from foreign enterprises that have done better than required under Kyoto in cutting emissions.
The $1.7-billion estimate assumes credits could be purchased at $10 for each one-tonne reduction. Some economic analysts say the cost of credits could be substantially higher.
The Liberal government is already sensitive to the Conservatives' charge that the credit-purchase system is simply "buying foreign hot air."
Officials in the two departments are expected to continue their efforts to reconcile the vastly different sets of numbers next week while the House of Commons is in recess and most politicians will be out of town.
But some officials are skeptical that they will be able to square the circle before April 4, the deadline Mr. Dion is pushing.
A draft "Project Green" rollout communications plan has already been prepared, one source said. One of its key messages is to "demonstrate government unity."
The Canadian Conservative Party plans to reject the federal budget. A recently amended provision allowing the government to control greenhouse gas emissions is "completely unacceptable," says its leader Stephen Harper.

Harper said Thursday his party plans to vote against the omnibus budget bill if it includes the amendment to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. It would add greenhouse gas emissions to the list of controlled substances, allowing the Canadian government to regulate those emissions, he contends. "This is an attempt by the government to get unlimited power to impose multimillion-dollar fines on any basis, without any parliamentary approval or discussion, whatsoever." Harper said.

The controversial amendment was introduced after a lengthy cabinet debate between Finance Minister Ralph Goodale and others.

When the budget was tabled last month, Harper initially said his party would support the bill. He now says the party will oppose it unless the Liberal government removes the amendment. Environment Minister Stéphane Dion, who is attempting to have a $10 million Kyoto implementation plan in place by April 4, said he would be "very, very pleased" to fight an election over climate change.

The NDP and Bloc Québécois have both said they will oppose the bill. The Liberal Party of Canada has 133 seats, so its defeat seems certain if all four parties hold their positions.

Both the NDP and the Bloc also accuse the Liberal party of trying to tack the Kyoto amendment onto the bill without sufficient debate.

Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe said that he was not satisfied with a number of provisions in the bill. “First of all it's not enough on Kyoto. We don't know the plan, we didn't discuss the plan," Duceppe said. “I'm ready to have an election any time if this is what they want."

NDP leader, Jack Layton, said "The Liberals are playing games with the environment. Paul Martin doesn't care about the Kyoto plan. He cares about playing politics and that is what's going on here."

It will be up to Prime Minister Paul Martin whether a defeat triggers an election.