News and views from SA Canada Harper’s Environmental Deficit
2010Barry Weisleder 2010-04Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 9 →
The words are the paper's own, from its digital file; the division into articles was made by machine, so a box or caption can end up inside the article next to it.
Scan page 9
operating budgets, which entails cutting federal ser vices and jobs, and possibly cancelling negotiated wage hikes. The only federal department that will see an increase is the military, which in 2008 was prom ised an annual 2 per cent boost.
While there’s no new money for job creation, work ers will pay higher employment insurance premiums. Absent is any aid for seniors living in poverty, any na tional child-care programme, or any boost for social housing construction—indeed, the latter will be cut. Air travellers will shell out more in security charges on round-trip flights.
In sharp contrast is a $47 billion tax break for busi ness. Tory Finance Minister Jim Flaherty bragged to MP s that Canada would have “the lowest corporate income tax rate in the G7 by 2012.” No wonder Ottawa has record-high deficits and debt. In the play book of capitalist governments, red ink is just a convenient ex cuse to cut public services, de-regulate business, and make working people pay for the global crisis we did not create.
But the worst news was in the fine print. Budget 2010 is overwhelmingly negative on the environmen tal front. It contains no action to fight climate change and no efforts to create green jobs. Instead, its primary focus is on facilitating and accelerating the operations of the oil and gas industry.
In a dramatic move, the Budget takes environmental assessments for energy projects away from the Envi ronmental Assessment Agency and turns responsibili ty over to the industry-friendly National Energy Board (NEB) or the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). The close relationship between the NEB and the oil and gas industries, combined with the ability of the Minister of Natural Resources to appoint up to six temporary members, would seriously diminish Can ada’s environmental protections. The CNSC has also been criticized for a lack of independence following the politically motivated firing of former Chair Linda Keen over the medical isotope crisis.
It also fails to renew the ecoENERGY for Renewable Power program, which provided a production incen tive for renewable electricity of one cent per kilowatt, despite the fact that 90% of wind power development in Canada has occurred since its inception.
The budget confirms that the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science will not receive additional funding to continue its vital research, thus wasting expertise and resources that took years to develop. The Foundation’s numerous projects at uni versities across the country, which are seen as key to understanding the dynamics and implications of cli mate change, are already being dismantled. Young sci entists, trained at substantial taxpayers’ expense, have begun leaving the country in search of work.
After a one-year increase of $105 million, Environ ment Canada will have $53 million cut from its bud get over three years in a strategic review that includes a proposal to end all Environment Canada reporting that is not required by law.
While it offers no systematic plan to reduce green house gases and effectively ends major federal invest ment in renewable energy, the Budget does contain a few eco-tokens. It sets aside $100 million over four years for a Next Generation Renewable Power Initia tive to advance clean energy technologies in the for estry sector—less than 1/7th of the $750 million that the industry asked for, and too small to make a signifi cant impact.
The Budget also contains an additional top up of $80 million for the popular ecoENERGY Retrofit-Homes program, which provides home and property owners with grants up to $5000 per unit to offset the cost of making energy efficiency improvements.
On the conservation front, the Budget provides $8 million per year to protect the Great Lakes and cover administrative costs pertaining to international wa ters agreements, but offers no long-term action plan to safeguard Canada’s waters and watersheds. It con tains no funding to extend the Federal Response to the Mountain Pine Beetle Infestation in British Columbia.
Natural Resources Canada will suffer a $100 mil lion cut over the next three years, making it one of the hardest-hit departments. The Budget also sets aside $11 million to accelerate the Northern regulatory re view process for resource projects, in keeping with the Speech from the Throne’s theme of dismantling the “daunting maze” of regulations faced by industry. In addition, a 15% tax credit for mineral exploration was extended for one year.
In terms of the nuclear industry, the budget recon firms that CANDU (Canada Deuterium Uranium reac tor), the commercial side of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, will be sold in the course of restructuring and it provides $300 million for operations in 20102011, much of which is to cover losses incurred during botched retrofits and repairs to the Chalk River, On tario, facility. Last year’s spending on AECL ended up being more than double what was budgeted, raising questions about what the final figure will be this year.
Finally, the cap on foreign aid spending at 2010-2011 levels will likely impact Ottawa’s willingness to pay its share of the $10-billion-a-year international fund agreed upon at Copenhagen to assist poorer countries in reducing emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change. Harper’s deadly environmental deficit is soaring out of sight. n now is hardly an unforeseen emergency.
But it gets worse. The Executive con ducted a mail-in ballot vote of the 257 members of the ONDP Provincial Council on this issue—instead of bringing it to a debate and vote at the next council meet ing in May. Problems with a site book ing could have been overcome; there are many unionized, spacious, available hotels in southern Ontario. Finally, the number of councillors who actually voted (95-23, with no scrutineers present from those opposed to the cancellation) would not constitute a quorum at a properly convened provincial council meeting.
While the Executive is ploughing ahead, it may face a shit storm in May. As the So cialist Caucus has often observed, if the NDP wants to overcome the capitalist democratic deficit, both in terms of for eign and domestic affairs, it must first get its own house in order. n SOCIALIST ACTION APRIL 2010 9