Although Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s speech on Thursday in Davos was received well, many of the delegates that I spoke with told me they thought Harper’s vision was too blinkered.
With the conspicuous exception of global warming, Harper acknowledged that many challenges face the world, but told delegates that the two most appropriate arenas for discussion and decision making are the G8 and the G20. He described the latter as “the world’s premier forum for economic cooperation.” And each country should be guided by “enlightened self-interest” and a better “attitude.”
But the mood in Davos is that the planet is facing urgent, complicated, 21st century problems, and we need to craft 21st century systems to develop the answers. We should involve all of our planet’s best talent in the solution-seeking process, including the private sector, civil society and individual citizens.
Doubtless Harper placed emphasis on the G8 and G20 because this year’s meetings will occur in Canada and he is the Chair. But that doesn’t mean he should be indifferent to the enormous contributions that could be made by others, or closed to the exciting new approaches to solving global problems.
Following last year’s World Economic Forum at Davos, many delegates went on to participate in the Forum’s Global Redesign Initiative in meetings around the world. The Initiative brought together diverse stakeholders to develop fresh solutions to the many challenges facing our small and fragile planet. Much of this year’s Forum was devoted to discussing the proposals developed by the Initiative.
The Initiative itself was driven by the belief of Forum members that our international collaborative processes are tired and too constrained to meet current needs. In Davos, the failed Copenhagen global-warming conference was frequently cited by delegates as a metaphor for the inadequacy of existing processes. To be sure, no one is suggesting that nation states do not need to sit down and hammer out accords. But many Davos delegates believe that such meetings, while necessary, are by themselves insufficient to grapple with the thorny issues confronting us.
Davos delegates feel all issues on the global agenda should be addressed in a systemic, integrated and strategic way, and are frustrated many government leaders aren’t embracing this view.
Had Harper come a day earlier, he would have heard French President Nicolas Sarkozy deliver a withering critique of how the planet’s issues are managed today. “From the moment we accepted the idea that the market was always right and that no other opposing factors need be taken into account, globalization skidded out of control,” Sarkozy said. Many systems in the world, including capitalism, were in serious need of reform. “Each of us must hold the conviction that the world of tomorrow cannot be the same as the world of yesterday.” A text of Sarkozy’s remarks can be seen here.
While Harper promotes the notion of enlightened self-interest, that got us nowhere in Copenhagen. And the irony of Harper’s remarks is that many here think one country with needing a better “attitude” on climate change is Canada. And it is an uphill battle for Canada to turn around its reputation as “the dirty old man of the climate world.”
In fact Harper further damaged Canada’s reputation on this issue, and undermined his approach to global cooperation in a panel discussion after his speech. When questioned about Canada’s position he said that countries needed to take into account the economic costs of being green. To be sure Canada, as an energy producer has more complex issues than European countries. But some in the audience were disturbed by the remark.
Liberal MP Scott Brison said to me that Prime Minister Harper was “the only leader at Davos who didn’t understand the opportunities for economic growth and jobs in becoming a green nation. Environmental laggards will become economic laggards in the emerging global carbon-constrained green economy.”
Yes the G8 and G20 meetings will be important and they may even make some progress on climate change. But today there are collaborations involving millions of people, along with governments, private companies and civil society organizations that are actually doing something about climate change. Government leaders need to listen to fresh thinking about how to harness this power, rather than relying on old approaches that have the world stalled.
We should keep in mind that Harper's strongest support base is in Alberta, home of the oil sands, where every single riding was won by a conservative. Harper's remarks at Davos make it very clear that is looking out for Alberta's ability to sustain a healthy profit in the energy industry.
According to http://www.ecoaction.gc.ca: “The Governments of Canada and Alberta are investing more than $850 million in clean energy technologies that will dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and generate high-quality jobs for Canadians.”
Perhaps Harper should have emphasized this investment in green energy, rather than defending against the costs of going green.
There is probably far more opportunity for Canada to become a world leader in developing the oil sands than there is in developing European like “green nation” policies.
Some Europeans might not have listened to Harper's anti-green comments at Davos, but they will certainly be listening later this year if they are attending the G8 and G20 when Harper is the chair.
Garin,
From an investment standpoint Canada is being vastly outspent by most developed countries. Added to that is the fact that sequestration technologies are far more speculative than others that could make a significant contribution (battery technologies, geothermal, wind etc.).
I'm not sure of the intention of your comments about the tarsands but Harper's exclusive focus on them is more than blinkered it's blind. It turns us back in time to becoming hewers of wood and drawers of water. We need a strategy that creates higher value jobs. There is still opportunity even many areas of tech. Pulse Energy, Zenn, Rapid Electric Vehicles and others are examples of Canadian companies that are bringing innovative green solutions to market.
I'd love to see Canada become a leader in the field of Electric Vehicles, and other green energy initiatives, but I don't think that we should be limiting the potential of the oil sands because Alberta is the cash cow that can provide the profit needed to finance green innovation for generations to come.
I don't think that Harper's strategy is blind, he is clearly looking out for Canada's “enlightened self-interest” and our most profitable industry. I want Canada to be a powerful leader in the world, and I see the most potential for increasing Canadian power by encouraging the development and profitability of the oil sands.
The United States has a profound need for oil and I would rather that oil come from Alberta than from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, or anywhere else. Innovation is important, but also very risky, and the Canadian government is in a deficit position right now. I'd rather the Canadian government not be taking risks when there are healthy cash cows that should be milked.
Once the Government has raked in several more billion dollars from oil profits and eradicated the deficit then I think we will be in a better position to invest into innovative green technologies such as those that you mentioned.