IBS

WHEN the Conservatives formed a minority government a little over a year ago, green issues were not a priority. But, ever since, as voters have grown increasingly keen on doing something about the environment, the Tories have been scrambling for a compelling policy. It is a difficult trick to pull off. Their core supporters, and industry in the energy-rich western provinces, are the least convinced of the need for immediate steps to tackle climate change.

The Tories’ first effort, which set modest and distant targets, was shelved after criticism from opposition politicians and environmentalists. But a new plan, announced this week, may have legs. It sets a goal of cutting emissions of greenhouse gases by 20%, by 2020, and air pollutants from industry by half, by 2015. It also lays the groundwork for emissions trading in Canada, and seeks to reverse—within three years—the steady upward climb of gases linked to global warming.

John Baird, the environment minister, reckons the new Canadian policy is “one of the most aggressive...in the world.” That is hyperbole. Last year Canada produced an estimated 781 megatonnes of greenhouse gases, and it is certain to miss its Kyoto target of cutting them to 563 megatonnes by 2012. Even if the new plan manages to hit its own targets, Canada will be emitting 630 megatonnes a year by 2020. Even that may be too optimistic.

The new limits for industry are based on the intensity of emissions per unit of production, rather than a hard cap on total emissions. That leaves open the possibility, if production grows enough, that total emissions could yet go up. There are a lot of blanks in the policy, and more than a whiff of wishful thinking, for example on what other, local, programmes may achieve. Stéphane Dion, leader of the opposition Liberals, calls the government plan “a scam.”

Yet the Liberals themselves are in a shaky position on this issue. They ruled for nearly 13 years, signed the Kyoto protocol, but did almost nothing to meet its requirements. Mr Baird is venturing where the previous government dared not: setting mandatory, rather than voluntary, targets and warning voters they could pay as much as C$8 billion ($7.2billion, or 0.5% of GDP) a year, for example for pricier electricity and home appliances. A technology fund, to which companies can contribute in lieu of cutting emissions, has the virtue of creating a pool of money to encourage greener processes. It and a plan to provide credits to early movers, who have already cleaned up their act, should help keep industry sweet. Initial corporate grumbles rather than outrage suggests this is the case.

The three federal opposition parties—the Liberals, Bloc Québécois and New Democratic Party—may yet try to scupper the government’s plan. Sensing a chance to put the Conservatives, at best reluctant greens, on the spot, all three opposition leaders are vigorously waving eco-banners. A fourth—the leader of the Green Party—is sniping from the wings. The opposition parties are backing rival legislation that calls for meeting the Kyoto commitments, something Mr Baird says would throw the economy into deep recession, not least because there is little time remaining. His plan, he says, won’t have such dire consequences.

This posturing will continue as long as voters keep telling pollsters that tackling climate change is now an urgent matter. However, public opinion is fickle. The last time Canadians were this concerned about the environment was in the late 1980s following disasters at Bhopal in India, Chernobyl in Ukraine, and the oil slick from the Exxon Valdez in Prince William Sound, in Alaska. That concern was short-lived, says Stephen Hazell of the Sierra Club of Canada, a green group. Others contend that the issue is here to stay, pointing to the growing chorus of scientists, economists, and even corporate leaders who demand action. One pollster, Frank Graves, suggests that Canadians now connect the environment to a broader “security ethic” that includes terrorism, global pandemics and organised crime—threats which resonate all too strongly with ageing, fearful baby boomers.