John Baird's gloomy forecast of what complete Kyoto compliance would actually mean is probably a worst-case scenario. David McGuinty accuses Baird of ignoring the economic benefits of green technology development.
I would really like to see some actual figures from both sides, and have them analyzed by a group of truly objective and non-partisan third parties (if there is such a thing).
Buzz Hargrove may be on the right track with his op-ed in today's Financial Post (Kyoto Impossible). Of course he has a stake in the success of the auto sector, so his bias is obvious. However he does advocate for a cleaner environment, as I expect we all do.
Even the Globe is taking a moderate stand in this controversy in today's editorial, Those Kyoto Costs:
...The opposition MPs, led by the Liberals, have let crass politics trump their policy judgment. The federal government cannot and should not take such drastic action to meet Kyoto goals.
None of this lets Ottawa off the hook. Global warming is real. The Tories have a duty to produce a substantive package of market-based policies that would foster real reductions, albeit at a slower pace. But the federal government cannot destroy Canada to save it.
Deliberate fear-mongering from either side is not acceptable. Canadians want the truth. We deserve nothing less.
* * * *
Environment Canada update here.
Mike Duffy Update: David Suzuki is telling us that we Canadians all want action now. Thank you, David. I didn't know that. It's great to have someone from the Nanny State do your thinking and talking for you.
Saturday Update: Andrew Coyne - Listen to Baird: This Wolf may be Real.