Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Quote; challenge

by Paul Wells on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 4:17pm - 60 Comments

The Quote: From Stephen Harper’s scrum today in front of New York City Hall. Transcript provided by the Prime Minister’s Office.

STEPHEN HARPER: …And tonight, the Secretary General of the United Nations is hosting a dinner on climate change. As you know, our position is very clear. We want to see an effective, a new effective international accord, one that includes all the major emitters of greenhouse gases. And of course we’re working very closely with the Obama Administration on a truly continental approach.

And we think that’s going well but we’ll share those views and those perspectives (inaudible).

QUESTION: The critics are asking if Canada is on the sidelines in climate change.

STEPHEN HARPER: Well, you know, I think Canada’s come a long way from where we were. As you know, the previous government signed an international climate change agreement and then decided it wouldn’t implement it. So that’s the situation we have.

No, I think that Canada is working very closely with the United States, which makes sense because we’re an integrated, we don’t just share an environmental air space, but we’re in an integrated economy. So we think that effective climate change action has to be (inaudible) continentally and we’re working very closely with the Obama Administration on that. We’ve got very similar target, very similar approaches and obviously we’ll be working closely with them as opposed to before and after Copenhagen.

The Challenge:

Can anybody find any record of any official of the Obama administration, in Washington or any U.S. setting, mentioning the U.S. government’s close work with Canada on a continental plan for climate-change action?

Bonus points for any evidence that any American has mentioned this close work in any setting where there was not actually a visiting Canadian standing beside the speaker, smiling expectantly.

Tags: climate change, It's top secret, Stephen Harper

More by Paul Wells

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"As you know, our position is very clear. We want to see an effective, a new effective international accord, one that includes all the major emitters of greenhouse gases."

Clear as mud. Who doesn't want to see an 'effective' accord? I can think of lots of other adjectives that could fit in there also but they don't add up to a plan.

Copenhagen Accord is not long for this world, I reckon.

I don't have time to participate in challenge, Paul, but I am curious about it. Do you think no negotiations are taking place or is this a sincere challenge? If no American quotes can be found, does that mean negotiations aren't happening?

And the bonus point question: how likely is it that American officials will mention their talks with the Canadians to French or Indonesian media?
http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

This is not a statement from an official, but evidence of collaboration:

US AND CANADA PETITION IMO TO CREATE EMISSIONS CONTROL AREA AROUND THEIR COASTLINES

The US and Canada submitted a joint proposal to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on 27 March 2009, requesting that specific areas of their coastal waters be designated an Emissions Control Area (ECA). The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), which announced the submission, indicated that, by 2020, the ECA designation could prevent between 3,700 and 8,300 premature deaths annually, and avoid approximately 3.4 million instances of respiratory ailments, such as asthma, by reducing by 96% the sulfur in ships’ fuels, as well as cut emissions of PM by 85% and NOx by 80%. The IMO is expected to begin reviewing the proposal in July.

http://www.iisd.ca/media/climate_atmosphere.htm
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

from the above article:

""I think to the extent that Canada and the United States can collaborate on ways that we can sequester carbon, capture greenhouse gases before they're emitted into the atmosphere, that's going to be good for everybody," Obama added."
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

I've found this: Obama discussing his continental approach to climate change with his continental neighbour, Angela Merkel:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

Am I the only one who is a bit uneasy that the Americans are looking to Germany to "execute the process" of off-loading prisoners from Guantanamo?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

Here's Obama's Asian continental approach to climate change:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/world/28strateg…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

But of course, continental approaches begin at home. In Chile.

http://www.america.gov/st/texttrans-english/2009/…
Jonathan

There's a fair bit here:

http://www.epa.gov/international/regions/na/canad…

It's all related, but I don't see much labelled "climate change" in particular, although an interested reporter might email Pete Christich (contact info at bottom of page).
http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

Hillary Clinton and Lawrence Cannon on a Great Lakes water quality initiative:

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2009/2009-06-1…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

Climate change….

http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

They did mention climate change in there…

When the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement was first signed in 1972, the major issue was phosphorus over-enrichment. The agreement was updated in 1978, when the major issue was ridding the Great Lakes of persistent toxic substances.

The pact was amended in 1987, when new annexes focusing on nonpoint sources of contaminants in groundwater and sediment as well as airborne toxic substances were added.

Now, the threat of climate change and other problems have emerged to make another renegotiation necessary, the officials said.

Lord Kitchener's Own

LOL,

The words "climate change" happening to appear somewhere in some tangential relation to the topic actually being discussed hardly counts as evidence of "the U.S. government’s close work with Canada on a continental plan for climate-change action".

I mean the phrase "over-enrichment" appears too, am I to conclude that this is evidence that Cannon and Clinton spent a lot of time in their meetings discussing the U.S. government’s close work with Canada on a continental plan for corporate executive pay structures?

Lord Kitchener's Own

Not related to climate change really though, for the record.

Per Arvidson

"We could have saved the world but we were too cheap"

Kurt Vonnegut (R.I.P.)

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

"We could have saved future generations some serious coin but we were too greedy."

This generation, and the last.

wilson

hmmm, guess that tidy link thing is needed, however,
add to the link after -93df
-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1
Foreigner

Question for the Harper sycophants providing links: Did you know of any examples of "close work" before this post, or did this post cause you to go looking for examples? And supplementary: did you read your own links?

Jonathan

Not to put too fine a point on it, but only an idiot would think that the search for knowledge somehow implies the searcher must have a partisan motive.

I'm not especially fond of Harper, and I think Wells' is making a (correct) point, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to bother looking to see if my point-of-view is correct or not. After all, if I didn't at least look, I'd be speaking from ignorance, and personally I don't like it when people do that.

I suppose your mileage may vary.
DPT

If they didn't does that make the quotes unusable or false? Furthermore, in your little Liberal echo chamber is everyone who tries to factually support an argument or in this case answer a challenge, qualify as a sycophant? And finally, what does that make you?

Foreigner

Someone who knows Harper's done dick all about climate change.

even flow

STEPHEN HARPER: Well, you know, I think Canada’s come a long way from where we were. As you know, the previous government signed an international climate change agreement and then decided it wouldn’t implement it. So that’s the situation we have.

What the hell does that mean? So we have come along way without doing nothing?

And people bitch about Ignatieff being disingenuous!

kcm

Harper didn't bother to add [why would he] that he played some part in that Liberal failure to act on Kyoto. Certainly if you listen to David Anderson [ E. minister] you get some idea of how much the Conservatives helped the oil industries push-back on any kind of implementation. Of course this doesn't absolve the Liberal govt of the day from its responsibility to lead on this issue. It merely adds to the long list of sanctimonious, hypocritical positions Harper has held in his political career.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

It means exactly what it says.. we've come a long way from where we were. Before we promised and didn't do. Now we don't even promise. See.. that's progress!

What? He didn't say in which direction.

Greg

It means we voted in a Conservative minority, rather than a Liberal minority, government.

Blammo

Is this *another* example of Harper slagging his domestic opponents to foreign media AGAIN?

Norman Spector

From today's National Post, by Terry Breese, charge d'affaires at the U. S. embassy in Ottawa.____"Ultimately, a climate change agreement must be about not only limiting carbon emissions but about providing a pathway for sustainable development. Clean energy development is the only sustainable way forward.____The United States and Canada are already working together to achieve these goals. In February 2009, President Obama and Prime Minister Stephen Harper set out an ambitious plan for our countries to begin building a new low-carbon energy economy together. Central to that vision is the Clean Energy Dialogue, which was created to enhance collaboration on the development of clean energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change.____Last Wednesday, in Washington, D. C., the President and Prime Minister received an initial Action Plan on the Clean Energy Dialogue, laying out next steps that will support our climate change objectives and put North America on a pathway to a low carbon economy. Together, we can build a cleaner, stronger and more prosperous North America while contributing to the global climate change effort.____http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.ht… __

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

For that matter, just google "Clean Energy Dialogue".
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

For that matter, just google "Clean Energy Dialogue".

What was Wells' point?

Bonnie N

On climate change with our US friends…

We are so screwed. It does not matter what we think should be done – it's already done.

I have to say I understand but this is bad news to make life better in a Canadian context.

Remember the passionate speech of the leader of the Maldives? What do we say to him and his people? Sorry, the west is in – tar sands and all that jazz. It's just so cynical and greedy.

Maybe that's the point. There will not be a breakthrough because leaders play to the issue but don't commit to the issue.There is no agreement between the US and Canada on climate change – just an agreement to build a pipeline between the tarsands and the US.

I don't speak for Wells but my "research" made me sit up and get mad at all that I cannot change.

Foreigner

Today. And in The National Post where no one will ever see it.

Norman Spector

Lots of people have seen it: I linked Breese's piece on my blog today, and it's been on the globe and mail home page all day

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-visi…

Foreigner

I repeat. No one will ever see it.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

Do you have lucid days, too?
Norman Spector

One thing we've learned today is that Paul doesn't read Canwest's flagship paper!
http://coyne kc

It has rather er…declined in quality since the departure of messrs Wells and Coyne. I suspect some of their old readership is over here these days.
Pablo

I use to read it but now it is the new Globe and mail. It has become post the talking points from the PM office. The last article I saw was the one by Jane T. about the comercial's background.
BTW is there going to be the fallow up article on where the PM's sweater was manufactured.

kcm

Are we ordinary Canadians ever going to see this "ambitious plan"? Or is a "clean energy dialogue" merely a synonyme for – more talk?

Dick Richards

WAIT, hold on! Norman Spector reads the other guy? That must be a blow for the Globe and Mail?

Kyle

Jim Prentice has clearly and repeatedly stated that the two countries' Cap and Trade schemes willbe developed seperately but that he hopes at some point they can be integrated. So there's really no reason that a US official would comment on a continental plan that doesn't exist and isn't being worked towards.

Here's the fist Prentice Story that came up in my google search:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601130&a…

I imagine this is probably a case of the Prime Minister not reading the briefing note from his Environment Minister rather than a deliberate attempt to create the impression that the two countries are developing their plans in unison.
Tom A

"As you know, the previous government signed an international climate change agreement and then decided it wouldn’t implement it."

That's a lie. We all know that whatever the immediately-previous government's faults were, "deciding" was not among them.

The previous government signed an international climate change agreement and then dithered as a new leader tried to be all things to all people, eventually decided to list CO2 as a pollutant and use existing pollution control legislation to begin capping, was mocked for this decision by the speaker of this statement, and was rather soon thereafter defeated on a non-confidence vote moved by the speaker of this statement.
Bill D, Cat

Picture challenge ! Needs a caption .

hosertohoosier

This is not a caption, but the red sweater is a good look for Ignatieff.
http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

This is almost as good as the Hasty Pudding Parade

http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Norman Spector:
ya did not read the challenge methinks
"in Washington or any U.S. setting"

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

The chargé d'affaires at the US Embassy does not qualify as a US setting? Wow. Tough crowd

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I believe Mr. Wells is wondering if the kindergarten teacher is really all that fired up about crayons when not talking to the kids.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

LOL…did you create that one, or does it come from "Quotable Quotes" or something similar?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

That one was my own, but glad you liked it!

http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Last time I checked, the US Embassy was in Canada and the National Post was a Canadian newspaper.
Sorry, I know that reality has a liberal bias and that using facts is fighting tough. It is simply not fair, as your programming cannot cope with such inputs.

And thanks Jack (below) – your reply was far more succinct and more apropos.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Last time I checked, the US Embassy was in Canada and the National Post was a Canadian newspaper.
Sorry, I know that reality has a liberal bias and that using facts is fighting tough. It is simply not fair, as your programming cannot cope with such inputs.

And thanks Jack – your reply was far more succinct and more apropos.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PoliticalPundit PoliticalPundit

Stephen Harper is acting on the climate change issue as the Governor of the 51st state — Canada — of the United States of America. Governor Harper has the same input — no more and perhaps a little bit less — into the discussions over the US climate change policy as any one of the 50 governors of the United States.
Governor Harper acted the same way on the issue of bailing out the US car manufacturers with their branch plants in Canada. He waited anxioulsy for Washington to set its policy of a massive bailout and then, ready aye ready, he bailed out their Ontario branch plants.
Governor Harper's decision to speak to his Canadian Reform/Alliance/PC constituencies in the 51st state – Canada — via US television networks tell Canadians everything they need to know about his preference for everything American. Last time he mislead his American audience and shored up his Reform Alliance core by misleading them about Ottawa's role in health care. He categorically denied that Ottawa played any role in health care and stated that health care was and would remain an exclusive provincial responsibility.
Even Harper's more relaxed style of delivery this time around borrowed heavily from Obama's style of delivery!! He was less stiff and grinned continually at his host! Harper need not fear any trenchant questions from his US television hosts because they have no knowledge or understanding of Canadian politics or even where the US 51st state is located!!
Governor Harper's Republicanism-lite is refreshing for beleaguered and battered US Republicans who were driven from office after Bush's two terms in which Bush systematically destroyed the US's high standing in international affairs and its domestic economy. US Republicans feel that if Governor Harper can hold the fort there is hope for them to return to White House and to regain control of Congress in 2012!

Mike514

So your answer to Paul's question would be a simple no, then?

Bill Simpson

But we know that Harper doesn't even accept the premises of global warming (I doubt if Prentice or Baird do either) so all of his statements are just a smokescreen for inaction. Nothing that he says carries any meaning. He is simply playing for time.

I don't see why Inkless is pursuing this line of inquiry.
Alan

Does this count:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2009/2009-08-1…

The article has statements like:
"The North American leaders said they believe their shared vision for a low-carbon North America…"
Jonathan

The three leaders [Obama, Harper, Calderon] share a commitment to tackling climate change and embracing clean energy technologies. The summit will give us the opportunity to advance that work with an eye towards making progress here in North America and setting the stage for further progress in Copenhagen later this year.

- National Security Advisor General James Jones, August 7, 2009 press briefing (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Press-… in Washington

You might deduct points since Jones was briefing the media on Obama's upcoming trip to Guadalajara (and Harper was going to be in attendance there) but I believe this qualifies for both of your questions.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32876728/ns/us_news-e…

More of a ten foot pole vibe here, but I suppose it could sort of count.
Bonnie N

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1c8499e4-8de1-11de-93df…

Oh I am sure this counts the Tarsands pipeline to the US announced by Hillary Clinton in August of this year.

Yippee this is a very sound environmental path to reducing GHG's for both the US and Canada.

What a strategy…
Old School Liberal

Doubleplusbonus if you can find any evidence anywhere that this collaboration has resulted in a "made in Canada" solution to climate change as Harper promised us.
Anon

There you go again, Inkless, taking Harper's words seriously again. When are you guys going to learn?

The guy's busy job-hunting. Leave him alone.
wilson

''…the Alberta Clipper, a 1,000-mile pipeline designed to carry up to 800,000 barrels a day of fuel from Canada’s vast oil sands. But the State Department said greenhouse-gas emissions are best addressed through each country’s domestic policies and a strong international agreement….''

your link is broken
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1c8499e4-8de1-11de-93df…