Article content continued

Is Paris different? Possibly. For the first time ever, we are told, there is a critical mass of leaders of major economies worldwide who believe hydrocarbon-based energy must be gradually phased out if we are to avoid catastrophic warming by century’s end and beyond.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley’s recently unveiled climate-change strategy, though it marks a huge new level of government intervention in the economy, is actually a breath of fresh air, simply because it is honest. It admits by its structure that consumer behaviour, and not the supposed depredations of Big Oil or any other industry, is the nub of the matter.

It’s fair to say the Trudeau government has so far been shrewd, if not particularly ambitious, in tackling this issue. Rather than announce sweeping new targets for reductions, a la Kyoto, it has done the opposite, saying any fresh targets will come 90 days after the Paris summit, following consultations with the provinces. It’s clear already the Liberals wish to avoid at almost any cost the pitfalls of over-promising and under-delivering, here. It’s also clear they’ve decided to borrow some of Stephen Harper’s decentralizing philosophy and have the provinces lead. The last thing Ottawa needs is, say, Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall, mounting a crusade against federal intrusiveness.

The Prime Minister and cabinet would do well to remember this, though: Dion’s politically ruinous carbon-tax strategy, the Green Shift of 2008, was honest, too. It went into the ditch because neither the leader nor his party could explain it, let alone sell it. If they hope to galvanize Canadians to make financial sacrifices and support rather than punish a government that sanctions higher fuel costs, they at some point will need to persuade the very many people who are neither climate doomsayers nor “deniers,” but simply confused.