Canada’s capacity in the here and now

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has done it again, this time at the Commonwealth Conference in Kampala, Uganda.

He has held the line on the idea we’re not going to give up our industrial development while our major competitors – China, India and the United States – enjoy full reign.

Harper wants an across-the board agreement, with everyone being equally responsible.

Mind you, the likelihood of that ever happening is slim to zilch.

It’s a healthy thing to have a prime minister careful with his verbal cheques. In fact, he has the right stuff on the international scene – as mean as cat piss and wouldn’t give you the sleeves off his vest; he should be made an honorary Pictonian.

From personal observation – coming from Trenton, the birthplace of steel in Canada – I know we have to be careful what we give away, particularly if it’s strategic heavy and primary industrial capability. As well, I’ve witnessed the closure of the Canard Poultry plant and its job losses.

We have to curb more wasteful and frivolous consumerism, and become more energy and resource efficient, but we can’t afford to give up strategic industries and production means to cut down our carbon footprint for rather dubious returns.

Bear with me as I go into my familiar spiel: despite what you’ll see in and around Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and some other centres, and some well-remunerated neighbourhoods in points in between; we are a poor, developing, rural country. We’ll be just that until the northern municipal boundaries of Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver and other cities reach the tree line.

We’re just not that big a player on the industrial or environmental scene.

As well, in our climate – and I trust, even with global warming – we don’t have the luxury of weathering things out during the cold season by living in a tent or under a bridge.

If we lose industry, we lose the psychology of that sector and aptitude for its maintenance and growth.

The Westray mine disaster that cost 26 lives in Pictou County in May, 1992, was due in large part to waiting too long to resume coal harvesting on that particular seam. There was greed and incompetence on the part of mine and government officials, but the fact time had erased knowledge of the seam and the specific needs of safety weighs heavily as well. Miner and author Bob Hoegg – the one person who studied and knew the Foord seam intensely - was consulted and listened to, only after the explosion.

This caution also goes out to agriculture: if we lose any sector of agriculture and then seek to revive it years down the road, we could leave people open to injury or death. The industry uses a lot of chemicals and heavy equipment – a minefield of danger.