Susan Riley . Waiting for Churchill

Susan Riley, May 2, 2008, The Ottawa Citizen -- Y ou can already foresee what could become a key theme in the next election: the Liberals champion a carbon tax and the Conservatives accuse them of punishing consumers, attacking resource-rich Alberta, stifling Newfoundland's fledgling boom and up-ending the Ontario economy just as it edges towards recession.

These arguments - hinted at in Question Period this week - are either bogus, short-sighted, or, for anyone who believes that climate crisis is urgent, dangerously irresponsible. They are also a textbook example of the old politics, perfected by the Harper team, based on fanning fear, provoking divisions and parroting shopworn ideological certainties. If they prevail, we could end up not only with a Conservative majority, but a deteriorating environment and a weakening economy.

But it will take coherence and courage for Liberals (or anyone else) to sell tough environmental measures because of a vexing contradiction: much of our recent prosperity depends on the booming fossil fuel sector, which is also, of course, the source of escalating greenhouse gas emissions tied to climate change. Are we ready to tie the hand that feeds us?

Add to that poisonous regional tensions. Any move to limit growth in the oil industry, through taxes or other means, will be portrayed as another attack on western Canada by the self-interested centre. Meanwhile, Ontario wonders how its struggling car sector will survive new green regulation. As for Newfoundland, it is within months of becoming a "have" province on the strength of off-shore oil. Talk about arriving at a party just as they're closing the bar.

These realities -- along with the refusal of our largest trading partner to restrict emissions -- has led to decades-long policy paralysis on climate change. Thanks to Jean Chrétien's delays, Paul Martin's indecision, and Stephen Harper's outright skepticism, Canada has morphed from good guy to gremlin on the international environmental stage. All the while, the money has been rolling in.

But departing Liberal MP John Godfrey, an historian and long-time green advocate, believes that growing energy scarcity -- manifested in escalating prices at the gas pump and the supermarket -- along with the climate crisis, are setting the stage for a radical shift. He believes Canadians are ready "for an adult conversation" on tackling climate change and the sacrifices and opportunities involved.

The opportunities are well known: for decades, our politicians have been touting green technologies as an export opportunity. Millions have been poured into research, prototypes and pilot projects (recently for carbon capture and storage), but the much-advertised technological revolution is always imminent, never quite realized. Meanwhile, countries like Denmark, Sweden and Germany are imposing limits on greenhouse emissions, becoming wind and solar powerhouses, experimenting with carbon taxes and still flourishing economically.

The sacrifices - changing our habits, paying more for energy, slowing down or halting further oil sands development, job losses in some regions and sectors - will be harder to sell, especially in the gathering economic gloom. This will require, says Godfrey, exceptional political leadership - as evidenced in Barack Obama's recent frank discussion of race, or Winston Churchill's defiance of the Nazis in the Second World War. Today's challenge, says Godfrey, is to "confront the paradox that we are making a lot of money from (oil) scarcity," but to abandon the easy course for a more sustainable future. "This is our World War Two and our political leaders will be tested. Someone's going to be Churchill, someone's going to be Chamberlain."

A carbon tax has the political virtue of being simple to understand - it attaches a price to fossil fuels - but the disadvantage of being easy to attack as a job-killing, federal tax grab. In fact, the Liberal plan will likely be modeled on the recent British Columbia initiative, which is revenue neutral (and has been mostly well-received). That means money raised in carbon taxes is returned to taxpayers in lower income taxes, or directed to energy-saving alternatives. This so-called "tax shifting" - moving to a system that rewards sustainable investment, rather than unclean energy - has long been advocated by the Green Party.

If history is a guide, the Liberal carbon plan risks being too mild, rather than too tough -- but whatever is advanced will be ridiculed by Tories, who still believe maintaining the status quo is an option. (It will also be attacked by New Democrats, who don't want a tax that could unfairly target poor and rural Canadians, or, worse, make Liberals look good.) To prevail, Stéphane Dion will need rock-solid resolve and clarity.

You can't miss the obsession with trivia, the intellectual barrenness that has overtaken Parliament, while bold action on climate change is desperately overdue. We'll see if voters are ready for what Godfrey calls "the Churchill moment" - a sharp departure from exhausted shibboleths.