On pointless fights

The CP reports that the Cons have predictably chosen to respond to the Kyoto Implementation Act by serving up more excuses rather than any new ideas. But a more interesting report also went public today which confirms that the Cons have known all along just how implausible and misguided they were in criticizing the legislation:

A newly released federal analysis of the impact of Canada's international climate change obligations suggests senior government experts were at odds with Environment Minister John Baird's doom and gloom warnings that the Kyoto Protocol would provoke an economic disaster.

The four-page briefing note for the minister, a clause-by-clause analysis of legislation introduced by Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez, said that the Kyoto Implementation Act would be a "major challenge" that could also force massive federal investments overseas. But it said nothing to support Baird's warnings that the law could lead to massive job losses, rising energy prices and a recession...

The Environment Canada briefing note said the legislation included "useful" recommendations to ensure openness, by forcing the government to produce progress reports that would be reviewed by the federal environment commissioner, including an initial plan that would be due this week, 60 days after the legislation was adopted...

John Bennett, an environmentalist and spokesperson for ClimateforChange.ca, said the analysis demonstrates that the government may have forced its bureaucrats to help Baird produce a report to demolish the Kyoto agreement with statistics that were "made to order."

"They ordered the work done to prove their point," Bennett said in a phone interview on Tuesday. "Still, this government continued to ridicule this bill after they had received it, [when] they definitely could have worked with it."

Of course, John Baird figured to be even less likely than most of the Cons to actually work with a positive suggestion rather than staying in attack mode. And today's non-plan for non-compliance is less than surprising in reflecting the Cons' continued unwillingness to work with the Kyoto Implementation Act even now that it's become the law of the land.

But what the briefing notes make clear is that in this case, as in so many others, the Cons had far better advice in front of them than what they chose instead to follow. And their decision to continue kicking and screaming against even a bill based primarily on some measure of the accountability which the Cons once claimed to value offers yet another reason why the Cons' judgment can't be trusted.

Update: Steve has more.