We are hearing that there will be new text released tonight at a high level meeting of ministers that will become the basis for negotiations next week. Discussions here suggest that this text may enshrine the Copenhagen Accord and indicate a shift away from the legally binding emission reductions under the Kyoto Protocol. The voluntary targets under the Copenhagen Accord threaten to bring about a 4-5 degree rise in temperatures which spells disaster for much of the world.

We’re already reaching out and meeting with Canadian and international allies to see what can be done to dissuade this potential outcome from this evening.

Unfortunately, the comments of our negotiator Guy Saint-Jacques at a morning briefing with NGOs suggest that the new text may very well be along these lines.

In response to numerous questions regarding yesterday’s news that Canada ‘cannot’ sign a second commitment period, Saint-Jacque (reflecting, of course, the Harper government position), spoke about progress towards a ‘new, single agreement.’

Here are some key reasons for this position based on what I understood from today’s meeting:

* There is little progress towards major emitters like the U.S. and China joining the Kyoto Protocol including make commitments under a second period of emission reduction commitments.
* U.S. and China are major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Since they are not under the Kyoto Protocol, there are public pressures in Annex 1 countries (developing countries signed on to Kyoto) about why other countries are not subjected to the same rules.
* No one including Canada wants to “kill Kyoto” Canada is continuing to participate in negotiations in certain areas under Kyoto such as LULUCF (Land Use, Land-use Change and Forestry – a way of offsetting emissions by planting/managing trees or reducing deforestation).

Here are some key reasons, drawing on the positions of the Council of Canadians and points raised by other Canadians at today’s meeting, why this is the wrong direction.

* The Ad Hoc Working Group for Long-Term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA) was created to compliment the Kyoto Protocol. Progress can be made under the LCA towards long-term goals that includes countries that are not currently committed under the Kyoto Protocol, while countries that are under the Protocol, commit to a second period.
* Given the potential under the LCA, the concern about public pressures and differences in rules sounds a lot more like a race to the bottom (weaker targets) then a race to lead the way on achieving deep emission reductions – an objective that should be driving these negotiations.
* Quick fact: Canadians emit 3 times more GHGs per capita than China.
* In walking away from a second commitment period, Canada is helping to kill Kyoto. While the Protocol may continue to exist, helping to lead a charge away from legally binding emission cuts under Kyoto is akin to ripping out the heart of the agreement and leaving behind a limp body. There will be a gap between the end of the first period (in 2012) of the Kyoto Protocol and whenever this new agreement is affirmed – and however long (and if) it becomes legally binding.

Undoubtedly there will be more to report on this soon. In the meantime, why not consider a call to your federal MP and inquire whether they are aware that Canada is helping to kill Kyoto?

The climate crisis is real and it is serious. Canada’s 17 percent emission reduction target (when compared to 1990 levels, it amounts to 2.5 percent rise) by 2020 is not ambitious. Demands by developing countries for 40 to 50 percent cuts by 2020 (compared to 1990 levels) are in line with recent science that affirms climate change is accelerating faster than predicted.

Canadians deserve better – the world deserves better.

Andrea Harden-Donahue, Energy and Climate Justice Campaigner, Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org