What can we learn from the way our leaders handled the Second World War and what they are doing with COVID-19 to inform our approach to the climate emergency?
Linda McQuaig reviews A Good War1 by Seth Klein who issued a compelling call to arms and presents an inspiring vision of a possible response in Canada to the climate crisis. While the world continues to fast-forward on a path to catastrophe for humankind—and there is really only about a decade left to change course—the CBC blithely insists on maintaining some silly notion of journalistic objectivity—as if it were dealing with a topic for which there are competing biases that must be weighed. This is a perfect example of what Seth Klein calls “the new climate denialism,” in his powerful and important new book: A Good War: Mobilizing Canada for the Climate Emergency.
Under the old climate denialism political leaders and business commentators simply denied the scientific facts of global warming. Under the new denialism, political leaders and business types claim they understand and accept the science. But they remain in denial when it comes to action, imposing measures that are far short of what’s needed if we are actually going to deal with the looming disaster. Another factor behind this timidity is the reluctance of today’s leaders to confront Big Oil and its bombastic political supporters, particularly in Alberta. This fossil fuel lobby makes the argument that, by itself, Canada has little power to reduce global emissions, and, since some other countries aren’t doing their share, why should we compromise our economic prosperity to do our part? In fact, as Klein shows, similar arguments applied during the war: fighting Nazism required a worldwide effort, and Canada was only one small participant, unable to achieve much on its own. Even the United States wasn’t involved until 1942. The threat no doubt felt quite removed from Canadian shores.2Seth Klein, an adjunct professor with Simon Fraser University’s urban studies program and the former B.C. director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, writes that the federal and provincial governments still don’t treat climate change as an emergency.
They need to show leadership and draw lessons from history. Nicholas Stern, author of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, has said governments should be spending two per cent of their GDP on climate-mitigation efforts, which in Canadian terms would be about $50 billion per year.
That means the Trudeau government isn’t merely spending a little less than it should in the face of the climate emergency. It is spending less by a massive order of magnitude.
But in response to the climate emergency, we have seen nothing of this sort. In contrast to C.D. Howe’s wartime creations, the Trudeau government has established two new Crown corporations during its time in office – the Canada Infrastructure Bank (which has thus far accomplished very little), and the Trans Mountain Corporation (an ill-advised decision that makes all Canadians the owners of a 60-year-old oil pipeline). If our government really saw the climate emergency as an emergency, it would quickly conduct an inventory of our conversion needs to determine how many heat pumps, solar arrays, wind farms, electric buses, etc. we will need to electrify virtually everything and end our reliance on fossil fuels. Then, it would establish a new generation of Crown corporations to ensure those items are manufactured and deployed at the requisite scale. It should also create an audacious new federal transfer program – I recommend a $20-40 billion annual Climate Emergency Just Transition transfer program – to catapult climate infrastructure spending and worker retraining in every province.3
Klein asserts that If our current leaders believe we face a climate emergency, then they need to act and speak like it’s an emergency. That is what our leaders did in the Second World War and what they are doing with COVID-19. The climate emergency demands that same level of response.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment