The True North Strong and Free

“In Canada we have two seasons—six months of winter and six months of poor snowmobile weather!”

Although the crisis on Wall Street and the resumption of the “culture wars” would provide fine American-centric topics for a column, this week I have decided to return to my roots and discuss my home country, a place known to the left as an egalitarian paradise, to the right as a socialist hell-hole, but to most simply as America’s hat—the proud nation of Canada. The reason why I began this column with a joke about the weather was because we Canadians—to a much greater degree than our southern neighbors—care deeply about the weather specifically and the environment in general. As “aboot” 5 percent of you already know, Canada is in the midst of an election campaign, pitting the governing Conservatives against the opposition Liberals—think Republicans versus Democrats, except with more flannel. While the two presidential hopefuls in the United States mention global warming in passing throughout their campaigns, in Canada environmental issues closely trail the yearly maple syrup harvest as one of the top issues on the minds of voters.

Despite the fact that most Americans think of Canada as that quiet cousin with a funny accent, the Great White North is actually a politically tumultuous country, having seen three elections in the past four years. This time, the major issue of contention is the Liberals’ “Green Shift” plan, which would cut taxes for individuals and corporations while increasing them for companies with operations that emit greenhouse gases. Canada is the United States’ largest supplier of oil, and Americans should care about this proposal since these new taxes are likely to reduce Canadian oil development—although they should increase polar bear sightings for Americans cruising around Alaska. This is an extremely important issue, because as the United States is sending billions of dollars to oil regimes that oppress their own people and sponsor terrorism against the West, Canada—which has the world’s second largest oil reserves—is on the brink of hamstringing the industry in order to cut down on its 2 percent contribution to global greenhouse gases.

More than anything else, this situation is an example of how cooperation between the United States and Canada has the potential to be more constructive than either country is when it acts alone. I agree that climate change is real and that action needs to be taken by governments to stem the problem. The solution, however, is not the heavy-handed tax being considered by Canada, but rather the cap-and-trade system being advocated by Senators Obama and McCain—I believe this system should be extended to include Canada in a bilateral market. A joint carbon market would be advantageous for several reasons. The first is that while Canadians are considerably more well-mannered than their southern counterparts, they pollute just as much on a per capita basis—some attribute this to the great move-away from moose-based transport in the 1960s, whereas others note that without indoor heating, the country is inhospitable to human life for half of the year. Either way, the point remains that this similarity would foster cooperation, because the starting point for both countries is more or less the same.

Another reason why such a plan would be in the best interests of Canadians is because it would actually allow Canada to participate in a meaningful plan to combat climate change. As much as they want to protect their majestic ice flows, Canadians have to contend with the harsh reality that they are only responsible for 2 percent of global emissions, meaning that they effectively have no ability to stop global warming alone. The United States, on the other hand, has the capability to tackle climate change in both absolute and proportional terms, because of its greater size, warmer climate, and service-based economy. This is arguably the best reason in favor of a common carbon market. The United States already imports over 2 million barrels of oil per day from Canada, and that figure is likely to increase with the development of the Athabasca Oil Sands in northern Alberta, a process that unfortunately involves an extraction process that produces more emissions than conventional oil sources do. By sharing a market, Canadian resource firms will be able to buy pollution credits from American service businesses that have a relatively easier time innovating because they have more flexibility in their operations. Such a regime would be beneficial for both countries, because Canadian oil companies would not be forced to pay a punitive tax while the United States could both ensure an increasing supply of Canadian oil and keep greenhouse gases in check.

Just as economics and security necessitated Canadian-American cooperation in the 20th century, so too will climate change in the 21st. Canada and the United States are more than just allies, they are friends, and it is that connection that will ultimately enable the two countries to accomplish more together than either could alone. Climate change is a big issue, but the Cold War showed just how well Canada and the United States can work together—that’s right Sarah Palin, we can see Russia from our houses too!

Jon Hollander is a Columbia college junior majoring in economics. Reasonably Right runs alternate Wednesdays. Opinion@columbiaspectator.com">Opinion@columbiaspectator.com