Pulling a green seat up to world table

At least the concern has been raised, and the debate engaged.

This month’s G8 session in Tokyo moved the issue of global warming and greenhouse gas emissions to the front burner. It has to be considered a major success.

Though there are climatic patterns in the mix, no one can seriously think human carbon use doesn’t grossly aggravate such phenomenon.

Some in high places in the United States deny all of this, but those at the other end of the political spectrum were turning blind eyes to obvious rends in the canvas, too.

As Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper pointed out, we can’t take the economy out of the global warming issue.

Many in Canada forget economic factors have to be considered when dealing with greenhouse gas emission reduction. Mind you, the current petrol price crisis seems to be a cruel reminder of our economic vulnerability and the need for cautious action. Folks are belatedly remembering the fact work is paramount in socio-economic survival. Yes, it’s about jobs: no work, no life.

Regardless of any effort, it’s going to take a while before our industry can be wired and tooled to be green. People have to work and eat between economies.

A major global problem, though it is now on the table for discussion, is the so-called emerging world – India and China and their thousands of years of civilization, as well as Russia and Brazil – were overlooked when it came time to apply reduction compliance pressure. Political correctness, perhaps, and even that old disease of the western left, misplaced guilt; have caused these blind spots.

Well, nearly $1.50 for a litre of gas certainly clears up perceptions.

The new powers were given too much leeway by the Kyoto Accord. Now, they are on notice: well overdue.

Sure, the current communiqué from the G8 has shades of the late comic George Carlin in it – there are no start times or set level values to be cut – but it’s a start for next year’s global environmental talks. It reinforces pressure on G8 members to act. Now they’ve fingered somebody else, they have to toe the line.

As for expanding the G8: possibly. There has to be an element of longevity, stability and permanence within each member state. The concept of the G8 also includes the factor of democracy, or at least progress toward it.

A country like Saudi Arabia, regardless of current oil wealth, doesn’t have a hope in hell of membership. Transient oil wealth isn’t enough, and democratic growth isn’t a factor.

Russia is already in, for all intents and purposes, while India appears to be a star candidate, with size, democracy and rapid industrial growth.

A problem exists with China because of its communist system. It depends on what you mean by democracy and how it’s delivered: through political plurality or within a single-party. After all, the same party has run Japan for decades, though the country has other political parties.

Speaking of Japan, its leadership would be expected to oppose Chinese membership – at least until China catches on and supports a Japanese permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council.

Something we Canadians have to consider in terms of economic size and clout, if Arnold’s California were ever to become independent, or even considered such: the resulting country would bounce our sorry arses off the roster some quick – stable democracy or not.