Theresa Boyle
Toronto Star
December 11, 2002

Sarnia businessman Ray Curran considers his city to be a "mini-Alberta" and, like that province, it stands to be hurt by the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, he contends.

"Sarnia is the centre of the oil and chemical industry of Ontario. We’ve got the Shells, we’ve got the Imperial Oils. And we feel that Kyoto is zeroing in on that segment," laments Curran, an outspoken critic of the accord and head of labour relations for the Sarnia Construction Association.

"We will see a stagnation of growth, which will eventually mean fewer jobs in the area," he frets, contemplating what his city will look like in 2012 when the accord is fully implemented.

"How will we compete in the future when we have the added costs of emission reductions and our competitors south of the border do not?" he asks, arguing that there will be fewer incentives for new businesses to set up shop in Ontario.

Curran’s questions echo Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s: What’s the cost of implementation? How is it going to affect us?

Tom Adams of Energy Probe says bluntly that the answers depend on whether Canada takes the smart or stupid approach to implementation.

"If we go at it smart, the impact could well be improvement in the economy. If we go at it stupidly, we could make ourselves noticeably poorer," he warns.

The "smart approach" would be to promote efforts that counter urban sprawl. Adams likes the "smart growth" theory that advocates building cities up rather than out, and could include increasing the number of toll roads to discourage people from using their cars. There would also be economies of density to be had, he notes, like lower infrastructure costs for such services as water, sewage, gas and electricity.

Ontario Environment Minister Chris Stockwell shrugs when asked about the impact of Kyoto. "I don’t think the federal government has a lot of intention of implementing Kyoto," he says

". . . If you cap the costs then you’re not going to actually implement the protocol."