Shifting sands

The Cons' spin on Jim Prentice's visit to Washington has been that avoiding any mention of the tar sands represents a success. But for those worried that this means the Cons are actually getting anywhere in throwing the Obama administration off track in dealing with climate change, it's worth keeping in mind just what it was that the Cons originally had planned.

Remember that in the wake of Obama's election, the Cons initially tried to push Obama into developing a common cap-and-trade scheme which would actually include an exemption for tar-sands emissions. Or in other words, the Cons' initial goal was to make sure that the tar sands would be treated more generously than any other North American industry.

From what I can tell, there's no indication that the ultimate result will be anything close to that outcome. Instead, the U.S. debate appears to be between treating the oil sands like any other energy source (which would presumably mean that they'd only be able to operate if they're feasible under a cap-and-trade system), and actually singling them out for uniquely strict treatment based on their environmental effects.

Moreover, with Obama moving on his own to establish a cap-and-trade system which doesn't appear to include any loopholes like the one proposed for the tar sands, the odds of the Cons forcing one into a continental deal later on would look to be remote at best. And that goes doubly given how difficult it would be for Harper to try to bask in Obama's glow if he holds out from a common cap-and-trade system.

Of course, the Cons aren't about to admit defeat any more on this issue than any other. And it's still worth keeping an eye out for any attempts to move back toward the original position. But for now, the result looks to be a failure for the Cons' attempt to grant the tar sands a get-out-of-emission-reductions-free card - and a greater prospect of eventual success for those of us who want to see an effective cap and trade system put in place.