by Mark MacGillivray
You know, much as I’d like to trash the Conservatives for their emissions plan, this has already been pretty effectively done by David Suzuki, The Green Party of Canada and others.
What I’d like to focus on are the rhetorical tools being used by both sides to either sell or pan the Turning the Corner Emissions Plan.
The Plan:
The plan, basically, is attempting to reduce greenhouse gases by 18 percent by 2010, and 150 million tonnes by 2020, significantly lower than the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol.
It is interesting how the rhetorical devices are being used to paint the Conservatives as the ones pursuing the ‘middle path’ which simultaneously lambastes Liberals and industry as inactive and paints environmentalists as extremists. Despite any misgivings one might have regarding the appropriateness of this action, you got to give the Conservative government credit in not pulling punches when it comes to defining the terms of the debate: either your are Lazy like industry or Liberals, or you’re a radical environmentalist. If you’re anyone else, you’re with us, on the Middle Ground.
According to a speech by Environment Minister John Baird:
“This is a real plan, a plan we can reach. … Our plan strikes the balance between the perfection that some environmentalists may be seeking and the status quo that some in industry seek to protect.”
“This plan does meet Kyoto, if today was 1997. I didn’t decide to do nothing in 1997. I can’t take responsibility for 10 lost years.”
The problem with this ‘middle ground’ argument is that it smacks of a false compromise. By portraying industry and environmentalists as diametrically opposed, Baird seeks to stregthen the appeal of his plan.
He fails to take into account how envrionmentalists and industry have worked well together to protect the environment, to secure an industry’s future (i.e. selective logging practices) and even help industry increase their profit margins.
(more…)