Last night in Quebec City, Mr. Dion said some of the people who drafted his clean-air policy were the same people who co-authored the Suzuki Foundation document.
"You are making a big thing out of nothing," he said. "The attribution is now there. The same people who worked on the two plans made the same proposals. I didn't know it was going to be that way in the Suzuki paper and that's why it happened that way. The important thing is that it is an excellent policy for the people."
For the sake of argument, let's take Dion at his word. So who were the co-authors of the Suzuki report?
Here's the list:
- David R Boyd
Well, that makes it simple.
Boyd and Dion go way back to August 2004:
Sustainability Within a Generation [by David R Boyd, arguing that Canada has to be more like Sweden] has had an impact since Suzuki presented it to the prime minister [Paul Martin] while Boyd paddled with the whales in February. Soon thereafter, Martin mentioned the report on CBC Radio. In June, Environment Canada began penning its project of the same name, and Stephane Dion, the federal environment minister, met with Boyd in August.
"The government has finally smelled the coffee in terms of sustainability," says Boyd. "They've acknowledged there's a problem and they agree that Canada needs to be a world leader. The question now is how to get there."
Boyd will be an integral part of that journey. At Dion's request, he has detailed how he sees Canada taking part in "the next industrial revolution." Last month, in his first speech as environment minister, Dion echoed Boyd's ideas, stating that "a new industrial revolution is happening, one in which environmental sustainability is the foundation of economic growth."
Although excited by the government's response, Boyd says he plans to keep the heat on. "Politicians are like amoebas, they just respond to heat and light and pressure," he says with a laugh, then turns serious.
Given Boyd's influence over the amoeba-like Stephane Dion (Boyd's opinion, not mine), perhaps it comes as no surprise that the two documents are the same. They were published a week apart, so it's likely Boyd wrote both at the same time. A few too many cut-and-pastes, and the cat was out of the bag. Now we know that Stephane Dion, as prime minister, plans to hand the environment ministry over to Boyd and the David Suzuki Foundation.
What I'd like to know is why I had to figure this out. Stephane Dion could have simple said, "My plan was drafted by my good friend and long-time advisor, David R Boyd, the same person who wrote the Suzuki Foundation report. I endorse both documents."
Perhaps Stephane Dion knows that some of Boyd's prescriptions might be unpopular to Canadians looking forward to lower tax burdens under the Conservatives:
In its search for a cure, Unnatural Law [by David R Boyd] argues that Canada should look to Sweden for environmental leadership. In the past 25 years, Sweden has adopted a variety of innovative policies. These include taxes on waste and the sulphur content of fossil fuels, the adoption of water meters in homes and “fee-bates” for reducing nitrogen oxide emissions from the energy industry. Fee-bates mean that companies are charged a fee for nitrogen oxide emissions, and then given a rebate tied to the quantity of energy they produce.
As part of his prescription, Boyd suggests that Canada needs to do more than implement new environmental laws if this country is to attack the “root” causes of environmental degradation: consumption and overpopulation. On consumption, Canada needs to undergo “dematerialization,” a process that decouples economic growth and the use of resources. On the population issue, Canada should work to reduce poverty in the developing world by increasing development assistance, forgiving Third World debt and working to change trade rules that favour developed countries.
I'm not looking forward to being dematerialized. I bet if you ask most Canadians, they would not like to be told that the government is going to take away their stuff, lay more regulations on Canada's diminishing industrial base, raise everyone's taxes, and hand money over to other countries, in particular, third-world kleptocracies. We already know these are elements of Dion's plan:
Liberal leadership candidate Stephane Dion is making the fight against global warming a central plank in his campaign, unveiling a plan today that could spend up to $10-billion to goad Canada into swiftly curbing emissions.
He says his package could put Canada back on track to meet its greenhouse-gas reduction commitments under the controversial Kyoto accord -- but only if the Liberals are able to win office by early 2007.
Mr. Dion's plan includes new taxes to help curb consumption, but he declined to reveal them yesterday.
Given what Boyd wants us to do, I suppose it makes sense for Dion to keep Boyd in the shadows.
Pretty clever thinking for an amoeba.
Update: Now that I think about it, this theory actually explains something that has bothered me. The spokesperson for the David Suzuki Foundation as much as admitted that the Dion plan copied elements from the Foundation's report. But Pierre Sadik said they were pleased. I thought that odd. An operation like that depends on membership and donations, so the people there ought to be very sensitive to being given full credit for any ideas they come up with. But what if the Foundation was already deeply involved in making the Dion plan via Boyd? What if they also wanted to keep that relationship quiet, at least for now, for fear of spooking Blue Liberals who would like to support Stephane Dion but are wary of radicalization of the Liberal Party.
