ELECTION 2006 – Where To Put Your Green Vote

By Paul Henderson  

A recent poll suggested that health and education top the issues of importance for voters in the January 2006 federal election. That means taxes, ethics, the economy, all are less important. And what about the environment? Well, in the Toronto Star coverage of that poll, the environment wasn’t even mentioned. Yet the environment really underlies all the issues.  

Without a stiff regulatory environment on air and water pollution, tax incentives and other encouragements for those purchasing hybrid vehicles or installing alternative energy systems, and so on, the health of Canadians will suffer.

Declining health from smog and incremental toxic poisoning will wreak havoc with the education system as teachers and students are increasingly absent and distracted with asthma and other chronic and acute health problems. Not to mention the damage environmental illnesses can and will increasingly cost the economy from employee absenteeism and skyrocketing public health costs.

If we keep cutting corporate taxes — as the Conservatives suggest — without regulating their  environmentally destructive actions, then the further externalization of environmental destruction by companies will be harder and harder to pay for out of shrinking public coffers.

Taxes, health, education, the economy; all are dependant to some degree on a healthy environment, making this issue of key importance on election day in January.

So the big question is, which parties have the best environmental policies and priorities? Arguably the best policies aren’t even the most important factor if they’re not acted on. For example, let’s say the Liberals win another minority, but they have lots of great ideas that they never get around to implementing because they are distracted by other pressing issues.

We’ll take a brief look at who is the greenest, and who is ready to green up government. For a brief comment on all four parties Vitality asked Douglas Macdonald, an environmental policy expert and senior lecturer at University of Toronto, for his opinion.

• A summary of their policy: "Go Green or Go Home"

They’ve got Green in their name and their very founding is based on environmental protection. The Green Party is the hardest to peg in terms of left or right, and therefore they make many traditional left-leaning environmentalists nervous. For example, they favour a reduction in personal income taxes, they believe government should be smaller, and they aren’t afraid of deregulation. Not necessarily bad things. Some members – including federal Green Party leader Jim Harris – are even ex-Conservatives from the business community.

Having said all that, they certainly are the greenest, and they often focus on large issues of system redesign rather than band-aids. An example is health care. Not many politicians link health care with the environment as often as they should, but Jim Harris has said that to address the cancer epidemic in Canada we need to look at root causes. In an interview with Manitoba right wing think tank Frontier Centre for Public Policy he said, “We know what causes cancer, it’s carcinogens in our air, in our water, in our food. Wouldn’t it be better to stop those carcinogens from getting into our air, water and food rather than to allow that, and then get cancer, and then to spend more money treating cancer?” Imagine Paul Martin saying that.

Some important Green Party environmental policies include:

• increasing fuel taxes – excluding biodiesel and ethanol - by 10 cents per litre, phased in over three years.

• removing tax breaks on pesticides

• develop renewable energy sources to phase out fossil fuel and nuclear power within 50 years

• establish a special five-year tax break on energy efficiency retrofits in commercial and residential buildings

• promote alternatives to wood as sources of paper such as hemp and kenaf

• rescind all uranium-mining permits and prohibit the export of fissionable nuclear material

• Best Green policy Vitality readers should take note of? “Reduce release of carcinogens, mutagens, neurotoxins, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals into the food chain.”

According to University of Toronto's professor Douglas Macdonald, the Greens are a bit of an “odd duck” in that they promote market mechanisms, while pushing green policy. The bottom line? “They pose a problem for the NDP, splitting the left/environmental vote, just as Alliance split Conservative vote.”

However, all in all the Greens are probably the greenest. Even though they will likely get no seats again, the Liberals and NDP keep stealing their ideas, which means their very existence is greening up government, according to William Kemp, alternative energy expert and author of $mart Power: An urban guide to renewable energy and efficiency.

“I have reviewed and commented on the Green Party Platform,” Kemp tells Vitality. “I can say that they have done the best job of all the parties. While the Greens will not form the next government, the more votes that move in that direction provide a bulletin board to the other parties as to what the temperament of Canadians is moving towards.”

• Best local candidate? Jim Harris is running in Beaches-East York, but this is an example of how the Greens may take away from NDP victories. The off-the-radar Maria Minna is the Liberal incumbent facing off against the tenacious and popular NDP MPP Marilyn Churley who is making the jump to federal politics. Other than Harris, the best candidate could be you as the Greens are still looking for candidates so they can field a full slate as they did in 2004. The best bet for federal Greens is Andrew Lewis in the riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands in B.C. In the 2004 election he got over 10,000 votes, (16.7%), the highest in Canada.

NDP (4 trees out of 5)

• A summary of their policy: "The Liberals Blow Hot Air, We’re There to Cool Them Down."

The NDP arguably has the most well thought out environmental policy and given that they might again wield some power in government, a vote for this progressive party is a green vote that may actually force some direct change. While the NDP ran on a strong environmental platform in 2004, their history as a party in provinces such as B.C. and Ontario “is not markedly better than other parties,” according to Douglas Macdonald, however he added: “If we have another minority government, with NDP supporting Liberals, they certainly will push Liberals toward greener policy.”

Some NDP policies worth mentioning:

• use the sale of Ottawa’s 19% stake in Petro Canada as collateral to borrow capital for a new Crown corporation for renewable energy

• establish centres in solar, tidal, wind, and geothermal power across Canada.

• apply the polluter pay principle

• create markets for Canada’s green energy businesses, particularly solar energy, through the building retrofit program

• maintain the moratorium on oil and gas exploration off the Pacific coast and in the Great Lakes

• make emission targets mandatory for all manufacturers selling cars in Canada, not voluntary

• provide GST rebates on greener cars

• support farmers who try to reduce pesticide and antibiotic dependence

• Best NDP policy Vitality readers should take note of? “Back municipalities in legal battles with chemical corporations after attempting to limit pesticide use in their community.”

Basically the NDP are the most reasonable place to put your green vote. And with a charismatic leader, they are the most electable as well.

• Best local candidate? Well of course Jack in Toronto-Danforth is the obvious one. But in the riding right next door in Beaches-East York, long-time MPP Marilyn Churley brings her tenacious spirit and stellar record as opposition in provincial politics against lacklustre 12-year MP and Chretien loyalist, Maria Minna.

Liberals (3 trees out of 5)

A summary of their policy: “What are they doing over there? That looks good . . . maybe we should do that too.”

The Liberals overall are not too bad and have done some good things of late. Mainly, that’s because they steal good policy from greener folks. But again, as Bill Kemp says, the more green votes to the the Green Party, the more the Liberals are greening up while in power. They are increasingly urged greener by an electorate that demands it, by the NDP coalition, and in turn by the Green Party’s pilferred policies.

But at the end of the day, the Liberals are just way too cozy with big business to force any substantive regulatory requirements on Bay Street. Paul Martin himself headed a company in an environmentally destructive industry.

In 1993 they were elected on an environmentally strong platform, but they did little to implement it. “Chretien had a death-bed conversion in 2002 when he ratified Kyoto as one of his legacy policies,” according to Douglas Macdonald.

However, “the Martin government since 2003 has made little headway on the major issue of climate change,” Macdonald says. “They promised up to $10 billion in new technology and other spending, but has to date failed to implement the commitment in the 2002 federal government climate plan to bring in legally-binding requirements for industry to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

“The basic problem they face, like all federal governments, is that environmental regulation is done by the provinces. They are currently trying to negotiate with the provinces and regulate industries, but with little success on either file.”

Some Liberal enviro policies include:

• a plan to boost the use of wind energy under a three-part plan

• boost the number of wind power projects under the Wind Power Production Initiative (WPPI) from its current 1,000 megawatts, to a target of 4,000 megawatts.

• $1 billion over five years to cut greenhouse gases

• Best policy Vitality readers should take note of? $200 million to boost wind energy (if it ever comes to fruition).

Best local candidate? John Godfrey, Federal Minister of State (Infrastructure and Communities), and Don Valley West incumbent. This guy gets it more than any other Liberal with serious influence in Ottawa. He is very concerned about urban sprawl, and after Hurricane Katrina, Godfrey suggested the ridiculous social policy focus on maintaining cheap oil should be turned on its head. He is genuinely concerned about environmental issues from the large scene, down to the local, and he sees the connection between funding transit and global warming and hurricanes: “We've got to connect all those dots for people.”

Conservative Party (1 tree out of 5)

A summary of their policy: “Cut down the trees, pave the ground, build a Wal-Mart, cut their taxes, then sit back and let market forces improve the corporate record on the environment”

At least the Conservatives don’t seem to lie much. They wear their disregard and disinterest in protecting the air and water and soil like a badge. If the Conservatives get in power, Canada will bow out of Kyoto and join the national environmentally destructive ranks of the United States.

Given the conservative penchant for cutting taxes and using reductions in taxes as incentives, there is certainly potential here if they remove their collective heads from the sand and see the benefits of Natural Capitalism. Many of the greenest things we can do are arguably very conservative and fiscally motivated. Look at the jobs created and boost to the economy with the steel industry in Germany. They aren’t just building BMWs, they’re building wind turbines, and business is good. William Kemp himself teaches about how to save and make money with renewable energy and efficiency.

In the 2004 election the Conservatives said they wouldn’t act on climate change, but instead on urban smog, but they never explained why, according to Macdonald.

“Nothing they have said since gives confidence they would act on the issue in an effective manner,” he said.

Some policies of note:

• taking decisive action to legislate caps on smog-causing pollutants

• review all environment and energy initiatives including Kyoto Accord

• promote alternative energy, and transitional fuels

• Best policy (one of the few positive policies) that Vitality readers should take note of? “Introduce tax credits for public transit users.”

Not that Winnipeg right wing thing tank Frontier Centre for Public Policy speaks for the Conservative Party, but both organizations are certainly singing from the same songbook. And to give you an idea of how out of synch with reality right-wingers are, here are just two key points from an FCPP paper from October, 2005 entitled An Environmental Policy for the 21st Century.

“It [the new approach] entails abandonment of the precautionary principle and the use instead of rational cost/benefit analysis.”

As if the precautionary principle hadn’t been abandoned enough. And, even more offensive to environmentalists:

“A key element in the new approach is a healthy appreciation for the environmental benefits of wealth creation.”

Yes, more wealth equals more SUVs equals environmental benefit. Welcome to conservative math. However, it will just take one or two Conservative candidates to figure this stuff out and get right-wingers to green up.

Best local candidate? Looking for environmental policy in the Conservative Party, or a green PC candidate in the GTA, is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Too hard, and not worth the effort.