Home > News > 2007 > News Release

For release: November 23, 2007

Canada blocking Commonwealth global warming agreement

(Ottawa) - Canada is derailing progress towards a joint Commonwealth statement on climate change by refusing to accept “further binding commitments by developed countries,” the Climate Action Network-Réseau action climat Canada (CAN-RAC) has learned.

According to well-placed Commonwealth officials at the meeting in Kampala, Uganda, Canada stands virtually alone in opposing the joint declaration. Of the 53 countries at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, only Canada and Australia refuse to endorse the joint position.

Prime Minister Harper is representing Canada at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), which runs from November 23 to 26. The two main agenda items are climate change and the question of democracy in Pakistan. The Commonwealth meeting comes just two weeks before a crucial UN climate negotiation gets underway in Bali, Indonesia.

CAN-RAC has learned that Canada is refusing to accept “further binding commitments by developed countries” unless developing countries accept “further binding commitments” of their own.

Canada's position appears to violate a fundamental principle of the Kyoto Protocol, which states that countries have “common but differentiated responsibilities” for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This means that developed countries like Canada, which have higher per-capita emissions, more per-capita wealth and a greater share of historical responsibility for global warming, must take the lead in reducing emissions.

“Canada's position is completely out of step with its responsibilities to the world and with the urgency of climate change,” said Graham Saul, Climate Action Network. “As a Canadian, I'm ashamed that my government has become a barrier to progress on the world stage.”

“Canada's government has abandoned its responsibilities under Kyoto and the UN climate convention,” said Emilie Moorhouse, Sierra Club of Canada. “As a result, it has virtually zero credibility in asking developing countries to take on new responsibilities of their own.”

- 30 -