On misappropriation

The Cons have done their best to pretend that valid critiques of the Libs' failure to act on climate change somehow support a conclusion that it's simply not worth bothering to do anything meaningful. But at least one expert cited by Rona Ambrose is less than pleased to be cited in support of the Cons' painfully slow approach:

Daphne Wysham, a fellow from the Institute for Policy Studies, said Ambrose is using her think tank's criticism of the Clean Development Mechanism to abandon Canada's responsibility to live up to its commitment under the international agreement.

"I'm horrified by that," Wysham said in a phone interview. "I certainly don't want to see Canada pulling out, did not want to the U.S. pulling out. We want to see Kyoto strengthened."

Ambrose made reference to the think tank on Thursday during a parliamentary committee arguing that the mechanism, which allows countries to get credits for investments in developing nations to reduce emissions, had no accountability...

"There is a lot of evidence now about the lack of accountability around these kinds of products," Ambrose told the committee. "I'll tell you what a clean development expert said at the Institute for Policy Studies...(She) said 'you're creating all kinds of incentives for corruption.'"

Wysham admitted she criticized the mechanism, but explained that she was urging countries to develop alternatives to make more effective progress in the fight to reduce greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that cause climate change...

"In the meantime, Canada should absolutely be shooting for their emission targets reduction at home," Wysham said. "It's no excuse if you're saying we can't trust the system abroad. Let's see you put your money where your mouth is at home."

Needless to say, it doesn't look likely that the Cons will want to highlight Wysham's actual position anytime soon. But in the absence of anybody more credible than Tim Ball willing to back their refusal to take broad-based action, it's only a matter of time before the Cons once again try to base their argument on sources who abhor the Cons' actual philosophy. And hopefully Canadians will pay enough attention to that pattern to recognize that the Cons simply lack any honest rationale for their continued neglect.