Consider, first, the issue of binding emissions targets. Canada says that a successful agreement absolutely must include binding targets for ‘all major emitters.’ This definitely includes the United States and China, and may include others. At the same time, Canada has walked away from the binding commitments it accepted at Kyoto. Taken to court by Friends of the Earth, they are arguing that they do not see the Kyoto commitments as actually binding. Major emitters who adopt binding commitments in the way Canada has will find them easy to honour.

Secondly, there is the question of unilateral versus coordinated action. On the one hand, Canada is making demands of other major emitters: suggesting that Canada will only go further in our own actions if others come along. On the other hand, Canada is arguing that our existing domestic mitigation plan is already sufficient to achieve the environmental outcomes we want. If we have already done as far as we are willing to go unilaterally, we aren’t actually negotiating and our demand that others accept binding targets has no substance.