In the segment of the first leaders’ debate of the election campaign devoted to environmental issues, last Thursday evening, Pierre Bruneau asked the following question: “What sacrifices are you going to ask of the population?” Asked in this way, the question reflects a great lack of understanding of the issues and solutions to the climate and biodiversity crises.
First, by using the word “sacrifices”, Pierre Bruneau suggests to viewers that changing our habits to adopt a more sober and more responsible way of life is painful and painful. Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois corrected the situation, specifying that the lifestyle changes that we must make to fight against climate change can have benefits. For example, by investing massively in public and active transportation and by reducing the number of cars on the roads, we improve air quality and we live in a more pleasant environment.
We should add that the structural changes demanded of governments by environmental groups and citizen movements such as Mères au front, aim precisely to facilitate the adoption of new, less polluting behaviors and to remove the weight of the transition from the shoulders of individuals. In this sense, if we wanted to talk about sacrifices, the question should have been asked as follows: Given the seriousness of the climate and biodiversity crises, what measures do you intend to put in place so that citizens have fewer individual sacrifices? to do ?
The other pernicious aspect of the question is that it implies that we have the choice to make sacrifices or not, and that the chief or the chief who will emerge as the winner of the question is the one who will require the least.
Scientists around the world tell us that our way of life is unsustainable for the planet and that we must reduce our dependence on overconsumption and fossil fuels. These changes are inevitable if we are to do our fair share to limit global warming to 1.5°C and hope to leave a viable planet for our children.
We can summarize the work of the experts by presenting two options: either we start as soon as possible, that is to say now, since we are thirty years behind schedule, and we initiate a planned and intelligent transition, by making of thoughtful society, in particular by distinguishing between what is essential and what is less so. It can be a unifying and stimulating social project, led by a leader who inspires.
The other option is continuity, continuity of the ostrich, of shoveling forward, continuity of denial and infinite growth on a planet of limited resources. With this option, changes to our habits will still occur, but in a brutal and forced way. They will be brought about by shortages, pandemics, crop failures, droughts, floods and heat waves which will be more frequent and intense, conflicts over scarce resources, climate refugees, suffering, injuries and the dead. Nearly half of the world’s population is vulnerable and our own children will not be immune.
Since the experts tell us that there is still time to act, that every fraction of a degree avoided will make a difference, that every ton of CO2 not emitted counts, we absolutely need a courageous and ambitious government to first provide fair and honest information, then to steer this necessary and responsible transition, and so that the “sacrifices” demanded of the population are fewer. In the words of Climate Action Network Canada’s National Policy Director, Caroline Brouillette, in News “Undermining the credibility of climate action because people are ‘not ready’ to adopt it is nothing more than a convenient excuse to cover up a total failure of political leadership. »
Let’s hope that next Thursday’s debate on Radio-Canada, more space will be given to environmental issues, since the climate crisis is the greatest challenge that humanity has ever known. It affects our mental and physical health, our economy, our agriculture, workers, the cost of living, our infrastructure, the tourism industry, it affects our present and the future of our children.
We also hope that the questions asked will allow us to recognize courage and political leadership, to make a better choice at the polls on October 3rd.