<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tomorrow Today Canada Blog</title>
	<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog</link>
	<description>How Canada Can Make a World of Difference</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 20:03:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Making your vote count</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=25</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=25#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Uncategorized</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=25</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This election seems to have many Canadians scratching their heads: What’s it about? Who to vote for?  Why vote at all?  The answers to these questions depend on whether you think the environment – and more particularly taking action on climate change right now – really matters.
Let’s put this election in its real context:  We [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">This election seems to have many Canadians scratching their heads: What’s it about? Who to vote for?  Why vote at all?  The answers to these questions depend on whether you think the environment – and more particularly taking action on climate change right now – really matters.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Let’s put this election in its real context:  We are currently facing the greatest threat to the liveability of our planet in human civilization.  Scientists like NASA’s James Hansen are telling us that our carbon emissions are already well into the red zone.  Other scientists are warning us about the relentless build-up of toxics in our environment and the snowballing extinction of species.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">So it’s time to discuss something more substantive than which party has the best TV ads.  It’s time to talk about how we are going to remake Canada’s approach to living sustainably. It’s time to talk about how we are going to keep the natural world that is the foundation of our prosperity healthy and functioning.  It’s a big subject, but it is also one that we should expect any party that wants to form a government to have some big ideas about.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font size="3"><font face="Calibri">As the people who think, eat and breathe environmental issues on a daily basis, we have plenty to say about what Canada could be doing better and what it needs to be doing right now.  We’ve put these ideas down in a document called <em>Tomorrow Today: How Canada can make a world of difference</em> (available at tomorrowtodaycanada.ca).  It’s a call to action and an agenda for how to transform our country from an environmental laggard – ranked 28<sup>th</sup> out of 29 developed countries by the OECD on a survey of key environmental indicators – to being a world leader.  </font></font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Let’s be clear: There are big changes coming, whether we are ready or not.   Unchecked climate change will devastate our environment and dramatically reshape our world.  A continuing loss of biodiversity is going to leave us more and more vulnerable to sudden and radical shifts in natural systems.  And continuing to dump toxins and pollutants into our atmosphere and waterways is going to leave us scrambling to cope with the massive health and economic impacts of dirty air and water.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">So, as the politicians like to say, we need to get ahead of the curve.  We need to make the transition to a more sustainable economy by recognizing the false (in fact, insane) economy of allowing companies to freely pollute.  We need to protect far more of our forests, waters and wetlands because they are immensely valuable assets &#8212; assets most countries can only dream of once possessing &#8212; instead of treating them as an endless source of cheap resources.  And we need to recognize that we have the world-leading wealth, resources and know- how to be global leaders in sustainability – all we need is the will.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">The place to start is with addressing climate change.  Climate change essentially takes all of our other environmental problems and puts them in overdrive.  So it is time for Canada to demonstrate some seriousness on this issue by putting a price on greenhouse gas emissions: a minimum of $30 a tonne (CO<sup>2</sup> or equivalent) by 2009 rising to $75 a tonne by 2020.   This would be a powerful signal sent across our society about the need to act now on getting our wasteful and polluting energy practices under control, to increase our productivity and efficiency, and to be innovators in developing new low-carbon technologies.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">A number of provinces are already moving forward along these lines.  B.C. has introduced a modest carbon tax, Quebec has some carbon pricing and Ontario is gearing up for carbon cap and trade through the Western Climate Initiative.  But these efforts will be much more effective coupled with strong federal laws and policies that make it clear that <em>we</em> <em>will</em> act on our international commitments to reduce our emissions and that we understand the immense benefits of moving to a green economy in a planned and controlled manner, instead of in panicked response to a growing wave of environmental disasters.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Canadian voters get this.  They have told pollsters again and again that they believe action on the environment and the economy is not incompatible.  In fact, more and more, Canadians recognize that economic and environmental issues are really two sides of the same coin.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">So don’t flip a coin when it comes time to vote.  Ask your candidates if they have a roadmap for a prosperous, sustainable future for this country.  Show them <em>Tomorrow Today</em> and challenge them to respond.  Let’s make this an election about an issue that matters – who can provide the leadership to take this country through some of the biggest challenges we have ever faced to a greener fu<strong>t</strong>ure.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3"> </font></p>
<p></span><span lang="EN-US"><font size="3"><font face="Calibri">.  </font></font></span>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=25</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cities Cap Bottled Water</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=24</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=24#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>water</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=24</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[


    
The battle over bottled water is on, and cities and town across Canada are leading the way, turning the tide on water bottlers.  They are small victories, but quickly adding up.
The latest municipality to catch the wave, at the time of writing this, was Waterloo Region in southern Ontario.  But earlier [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><meta content="Word.Document" name="ProgId" /><meta content="Microsoft Word 12" name="Generator" /><meta content="Microsoft Word 12" name="Originator" /></p>
<link rel="File-List" />
<link rel="themeData" />
<link rel="colorSchemeMapping" /><style>   <!--  /* Font Definitions */  @font-face 	{font-family:"Cambria Math"; 	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:roman; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face 	{font-family:Calibri; 	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:swiss; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;}  /* Style Definitions */  p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal 	{mso-style-unhide:no; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	margin-top:0cm; 	margin-right:0cm; 	margin-bottom:10.0pt; 	margin-left:0cm; 	line-height:115%; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:11.0pt; 	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; 	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-ansi-language:EN-US; 	mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} .MsoChpDefault 	{mso-style-type:export-only; 	mso-default-props:yes; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;} @page Section1 	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt; 	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt; 	mso-header-margin:36.0pt; 	mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; 	mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 	{page:Section1;} --> </style><br />
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">The battle over bottled water is on, and cities and town across Canada are leading the way, turning the tide on water bottlers.  They are small victories, but quickly adding up.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">The latest municipality to catch the wave, at the time of writing this, was Waterloo Region in southern Ontario.  But earlier this summer the City of London, Ontario passed a resolution to restrict the sale of bottled water at public facilities.  St. John’s Newfoundland, Nelson B.C. and others have passed similar restrictions and cities and towns across the country are considering the same, including Toronto later this fall.   </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">While the move to restrict the sale of bottled water by municipalities is largely symbolic, it sends a great message.  It promotes sustainable living.  It underlines a commitment to the environment, reducing resource consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and waste.  It puts faith back into municipal water systems.  It protects local sources of water.  And it promotes cost-effective government operations.  </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">If the environmental, health and economic arguments against bottled water are not clear, visit <a href="http://www.insidethebottle.org/" target="_blank">www.insidethebottle.org</a>.   We really need to commend the dedicated people at the Polaris Institute (<a href="http://www.polarisinstitute.org/" target="_blank">www.polarisinstitute.org</a>) for holding the hands of municipal law makers as they travelled these turbulent waters. The bottled water industry is nothing to scoff at.  They are the heavy hitters of the beverage community.  Coke, Pepsi, Nestle.  These guys have been influencing governments for a long time and they make big waves with their deep pockets.  Good thing we know how to surf!  </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">Criticism has been minimal, but beverage company executives have been showing up to council meetings to plead their case.  While sales at many of these venues are miniscule for most water bottlers, they know this is could end up being a big loss for them.  It’s the first domino to fall and they know it.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">We need all cities and towns to use their influence.  Get your community on board.  Call or write your councillors. Fill your reusable bottle with tap water and leave the bottled water on the shelf.  </span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%">Mike Layton, Environmental Defence</span>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=24</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Can an Election Today Get Us Ahead Tomorrow?</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=23</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=23#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:54:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Uncategorized</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=23</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With it all but certain now that Canadians are heading into a federal election this fall, it will be critical for every voter to ask themselves - &#8220;with my vote today, what will we achieve in environmental security tomorrow?&#8221;
Our report &#8220;Tomorrow Today: How Canada can make a world of difference&#8221;  www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca outlines concrete actions [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With it all but certain now that Canadians are heading into a federal election this fall, it will be critical for every voter to ask themselves - &#8220;with my vote today, what will we achieve in environmental security tomorrow?&#8221;</p>
<p>Our report &#8220;Tomorrow Today: How Canada can make a world of difference&#8221;  <a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca">www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca</a> outlines concrete actions the new government could focus on to ensure we significantly reduce our greenhouse gas pollution, produce and use energy more wisely, protect our wild spaces, fresh water and oceans, and reduce our exposure toxic substances.All of these actions will result in a much better tomorrow.</p>
<p>The question is, will NDP&#8217;s Jack Layton, the Conservatives&#8217; Steven Harper, the Liberals&#8217; Stephane Dion, the Bloc&#8217;s Gilles Duceppe and the Green&#8217;s Elizabeth May step up to make real and meaningful commitments during the election campaign that will address the major environmental challenges we face in Canada?</p>
<p>We have made it as easy as possible for all parties to incorporate the recommended actions in &#8220;Tomorrow Today&#8221; first into their platforms and then in action when they are sitting in the House. With eleven major environmental organizations representing thousands and thousands of members across Canada, and decades of experience in analyzing and finding solutions to environmental problems, we are very confident these are the right actions for Canada now.</p>
<p>There is no excuse. Every party in this election should have a robust platform on environmental action, and Tomorrow Today makes it that much easier.</p>
<p>Marlo Raynolds</p>
<p>Executive Director, Pembina Institute
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=23</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The poo-lluted shark that’s closing Ontario beaches</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=21</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=21#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:44:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>water</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=21</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We’re having some strange weather this summer in southern Ontario.  Record rainfalls.  Localized flooding.  Reports of Tornadoes.  All this after near record snowfalls this winter. While most of this has done great things for my garden, the extreme weather events are wreaking havoc on lakes and rivers, and have briefly closed beaches in cities across [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">We’re having some strange weather this summer in southern Ontario.  </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.canada.com/globaltv/ontario/story.html?id=65794621-e634-4d5b-8e9e-0ef91a99f47f"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Record rainfalls</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">.  </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/414527"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Localized flooding</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">.  Reports of </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080608/tornado_follow_080609"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Tornadoes</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">.  All this after </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/326805"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">near record snowfalls</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">this winter. While most of this has done great things for my garden, the extreme weather events are wreaking havoc on lakes and rivers, and have briefly closed beaches in cities across Ontario, including Ottawa and Toronto. </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">This is why people don’t think they can enjoy beaches in our communities. Every once and a while a big storm event washes nasty chemicals and bacteria into the swimming areas, and the influx of water kicks up pollutants settled on the lake and riverbeds causing folks to run from the water.  Even if nature quickly deals with the problem naturally, our perceptions are often much more resistant to change and we stay away in fear.     </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">And this is only the beginning.  If climate change experts are right, then we can expect sever storms events to become more common and beach closures to be more frequent.  More severe storms bring intense rains. Intense rains over short periods of time contribute to higher levels of pollution into our waterways.  More pollution means increased health threats and fewer days at the beach. </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">It’s sad really. The one place (<em>the beach</em>) where most children experience one of Canada’s vast natural resources (<em>freshwater</em>) is being ruined by another one of nature’s most important gifts (<em>rain</em>).  But it’s not nature’s fault.  We are the ones contributing to the pollution and keeping our kids out of the water.  We’ve destroyed the natural flow of things and without action, the problem will only get worse.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">And where is our government?  Last week in Ontario, </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080724.winfrastructureupdate0724/BNStory/GlobeSportsBasketball/"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">a huge new infrastructure deal with the federal government</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">was announced that does not mention critical wastewater and stormwater repairs and improvements.   </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Action must be taken to protect our water and beaches, and limit closures that ruin summer days and our chance to bond with our rivers and lakes.  We can all do things at </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.riversides.org/rainguide/riversides_hgr.php?cat=2"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">home</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> that can help, but governments need to make the big investments and laws that will have a lasting impact.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Check with a local health authority to see if a beach is safe for swimming, or check out  </span><span lang="EN-US"><a href="http://www.blueflag.ca/"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">www.blueflag.ca</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> for a Blue Flag beach near you.  Blue Flag is the international standard for sustainable beaches tracking not only water quality, but the protection of natural ecosystems and providing onsite services and gives us one examples of how communities are working together to protect our beaches.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal">
<p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal" class="MsoNormal">Mike Layton - Project Coordinator, Environmental Defence</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=21</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Toxic Chemicals in Products: Federal Action Needed</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=20</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=20#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 01:54:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>toxics</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=20</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite the upsurge in public concern for environmental and health issues, Canada has one of the western world’s most outdated systems for controlling toxic chemicals in consumer products.  And an increasing amount of the toxic load in our bodies comes from everyday household items like vinyl shower curtains, plastic baby bottles and reusable water bottles, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Despite the upsurge in public concern for environmental and health issues, Canada has one of the western world’s most outdated systems for controlling toxic chemicals in consumer products.  And an increasing amount of the toxic load in our bodies comes from everyday household items like <a href="http://www.toxicnation.ca/node/17"><font color="#800080">vinyl shower curtains</font></a><a href="http://www.toxicnation.ca/files/toxicnation/guides/Toxic_Nation_Guide_to_BPA_Apr_08.pdf"><font color="#800080">, plastic baby bottles and reusable water bottles</font></a>, consumer electronics, and </font><a href="http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/pressroom/viewnews.php?id=382"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#800080" size="3">non-stick cookware</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Passed in 1968, the <em>Hazardous Products Act</em> was scarcely talked about in recent months when lead was found in alarming levels in children’s toys, or when chemicals that pose developmental risks for children were found in plastic baby bottles.  Yet this law is the federal government’s preferred legal tool for dealing with toxins in consumer goods.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">It’s easy to see why few wanted to talk about what the government could do under the Act.  Unlike Europe and the United States, Canada doesn’t even have the power to issue a mandatory recall of a product.  The government is restricted to asking companies nicely, or issuing often invisible warnings to consumers.  These voluntary measures usually follow more decisive action that has already been taken in other countries.  </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">In the United States, if a company is made aware of a hazard in one of its products, there is a legal requirement to notify the government.  Companies in Canada have no such obligation.  </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Fines in Canada are in the range of $5,000 &#8212; barely petty cash for major manufacturers and importers.  U.S. fines for similar infractions are $1 million, and in Europe, fines can be up to 5 percent of a company’s revenues.  </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">The government’s new <em>Consumer Product Safety Act</em> would fill many of these regulatory gaps, providing the power to issue recalls and raising fines to a maximum of $5 million.  It would require manufacturers and importers to track information about how and where their goods are produced, and report problems they are made aware of.  And it would introduce a new general safety requirement, prohibiting the marketing of a product that is “a danger to human health or safety.”</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">The bill is a significant improvement to Canada’s antiquated regime for regulating toxic chemicals, but it could go much further in protecting human health.  </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">While it introduces a range of new tools, there is no requirement for the government to actually use these tools.  In a properly functioning public health protection system, when a problem comes to light with a product on the market, there should be an obligation on the government to inform consumers and to remove or restrict the product.  Under the new law, government <em>may</em> do this, but there is nothing to <em>require</em> them to.  Think about it &#8212; if the government is made aware of a toxic chemical in a children’s toy, there would be no legal requirement for them to even make people aware of it.  Sure, there would be political consequences if the government is found to have been sitting on the information, but this after-the-fact accountability relies on the government and industry getting caught.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Perhaps most importantly, the law provides little new information for consumers on potentially toxic product ingredients.  In Europe, as well as U.S. states such as California and Vermont, manufacturers must label products if they contain toxic ingredients like carcinogens or endocrine disruptors.  For many products in Canada, it is impossible to know what’s inside even if you know what you’re looking for.  Some industries voluntarily disclose some ingredients in their products, but such voluntary schemes are notoriously ineffective, providing only partial coverage of the market, and lacking independent monitoring.  </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Canada needs a new law to deal with the threats posed by harmful chemicals in consumer products.  The current one, written before the summer of love, just doesn’t cut it.  </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">The Conservatives’ new bill is long overdue.  Parliament should strengthen it further and pass it before the next election.  It seems we only get this chance once every four decades.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3" /></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Aaron Freeman</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Policy Director</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Environmental Defence</font>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=20</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tax or Trade? With the right price, both will drive down carbon pollution</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=19</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=19#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:22:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>climate</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=19</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you’ve been following the carbon pricing discussion in the media, you may have the impression that there’s a battle raging in Canada between “cap-and-trade” systems and carbon taxes, with political parties and media pundits choosing one side or the other.
From our perspective, this “battle” is more a question of rhetoric than reality, because the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you’ve been following the carbon pricing discussion in the media, you may have the impression that there’s a battle raging in Canada between “cap-and-trade” systems and carbon taxes, with political parties and media pundits choosing one side or the other.</p>
<p>From our perspective, this “battle” is more a question of rhetoric than reality, because the two options are actually quite similar. Either approach can work well if it’s well-designed, and both can fail if they’re not. In fact, some jurisdictions (Norway and British Columbia are two examples) plan to implement both carbon taxes and cap-and-trade systems, combining the two in an effective and complimentary hybrid approach.</p>
<p>Pembina’s backgrounder Carbon Taxes: Key Issues, Key Questions [<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/pubs.pembina.org/reports/carbontaxfactsheetv2.pdf" target="_blank">pubs.pembina.org/reports/carbontaxfactsheetv2.pdf</a>] provides an accessible summary of the “tax or trade” question.</p>
<p>In a nutshell, our conclusion is the environmental and economic effects of a carbon price depend on the emissions price, the sectors it covers, and the way that any revenues the system generates are used. Arguably, those questions matter much more than the choice of cap-and-trade or carbon taxes.</p>
<p>You may have already come across a few myths about carbon pricing. For example, it is sometimes said that a carbon tax is “for consumers”, because it applies to fuels like gasoline and home heating fuel, while cap-and-trade is “for industry”. But that’s not necessarily the case. Consider British Columbia’s carbon tax: as of July 2008, British Columbians will pay a tax on emissions from burning fossil fuels that starts at $10/tonne and rises to $30/tonne by 2012. The BC tax will apply to 70% of the province’s total greenhouse gas pollution, including emissions from industrial facilities, buildings, homes, cars and trucks. And consumers are likely to be involved even if governments opt for a cap-and-trade system that applies only to heavy industry: experience in Europe has shown that some industrial sectors are able to pass cost increases from cap-and-trade on to consumers.</p>
<p>Another questionable assumption is that “polluters can just buy their way” out of a carbon tax. That’s true, but polluters can also “buy their way out” under a cap-and-trade system by paying for emission allowances rather than cutting emissions in their own operations. What matters more is that, in both cases, polluters have a direct incentive to take all available actions to cut emissions wherever these actions cost less than the price on emissions.</p>
<p><em><strong>Our view</strong></em><br />
Based on the best currently-available economic analysis, we believe that Canada needs a price on emissions of at least $30/tonne immediately, at least $50/tonne by 2015 and at least <strong>$75/tonne by 2020</strong> to do its part in reducing greenhouse gas pollution [<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/pubs.pembina.org/reports/GBC-CarbonPricing.pdf" target="_blank">pubs.pembina.org/reports/GBC-CarbonPricing.pdf</a>] [<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/" target="_blank">www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/</a>]. This price should be applied broadly in the Canadian economy, either through a carbon tax, a cap-and-trade system, or a combination of the two. Where cap-and-trade is used, we support the auctioning of all allowances.<br />
For more information, please see our primer on carbon pricing at <a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/pubs.pembina.org/reports/carbon-pricing-Canada.pdf" target="_blank">pubs.pembina.org/reports/carbon-pricing-Canada.pdf</a>.<br />
Marlo Raynolds</p>
<p>Executive Director, Pembina Institute</p>
<p><a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.pembina.org" target="_blank">www.pembina.org</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=19</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tax what we burn, not what we earn: carbon pricing the only way to get serious about fighting global warming</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=18</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=18#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:20:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>climate</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=18</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With the release of the Liberal team&#8217;s carbon tax (thegreenshift.ca/default_e.aspx), finally the debate about putting a price on carbon dioxide pollution has hit the mainstream.
For years the environmental movement (www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca) and academic economists (www.emrg.sfu.ca/sustainablefossilfuels/)(www.cdhowe.org) (www.sustainableprosperity.ca/) have been saying the only way we will seriously reduce pollution is by putting a price on it - with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the release of the Liberal team&#8217;s carbon tax (<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/thegreenshift.ca/default_e.aspx">thegreenshift.ca/default_e.aspx</a>), finally the debate about putting a price on carbon dioxide pollution has hit the mainstream.</p>
<p>For years the environmental movement (<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca">www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca</a>) and academic economists (<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.emrg.sfu.ca/sustainablefossilfuels/">www.emrg.sfu.ca/sustainablefossilfuels/</a>)(<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.cdhowe.org" target="_blank">www.cdhowe.org</a>) (<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.sustainableprosperity.ca/" target="_blank">www.sustainableprosperity.ca/</a>) have been saying the only way we will seriously reduce pollution is by putting a price on it - with a price in place the market will drive innovation and action to get pollution out of our economy.</p>
<p>Over the past year we have even seen industry including the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.ceocouncil.ca" target="_blank">www.ceocouncil.ca</a> &#8212; search for &#8220;carbon price&#8221;) get behind pricing carbon dioxide pollution. Why? Because they too know we have to tackle pollution and having a clear price signal is the only way. Provincially we have British Columbia showing real leadership on this file with their carbon tax. Finally the debate is happening in federal politics.</p>
<p>Critical to any carbon pricing system is that it ensures we help protect individuals on low and fixed incomes who are often facing energy poverty.</p>
<p>I think the best quote I have heard this week on this issue is: &#8220;let&#8217;s tax what we burn, not what we earn&#8221;. No matter which government is in power federally and provincially, it&#8217;s time to tax what we don&#8217;t want - pollution; and reduce the taxes on what we do want - employment, savings and earnings.</p>
<p>Can we please just get on with it.</p>
<p>Marlo Raynolds<br />
Executive Director, Pembina Institute (<a href="http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/wp-admin/www.pembina.org" target="_blank">www.pembina.org</a>)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=18</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Time to take a time-out on tar sands&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=17</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=17#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:24:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>climate</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=17</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today we released a report called &#8220;Upgrader Alley&#8221; which looks at the potential scale of environmental impacts due to a massive expansion in upgrading capacity for the tar sands in the Edmonton area (http://www.pembina.org/pub/1654). It is quite shocking to realize just how much of a scar developing the tar sands at the current pace is [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today we released a report called &#8220;<strong>Upgrader Alley</strong>&#8221; which looks at the potential scale of environmental impacts due to a massive expansion in upgrading capacity for the tar sands in the Edmonton area (<strong><a href="http://www.pembina.org/pub/1654">http://www.pembina.org/pub/1654</a></strong>). It is quite shocking to realize just how much of a scar developing the tar sands at the current pace is going to leave in Alberta and the impact it will have on Canada&#8217;s international reputation. One of the principles we outlined in our &#8220;Tomorrow Today&#8221; report (<strong><a href="http://www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca">http://www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca</a></strong>) was &#8220;<em>Good global citizenship</em>&#8221; - it is time we started acting on this.<br />
If we are truly going to solve the cumulative environmental impacts of the oil sands, it is time to put a pause on approving further projects. The current slate of approved projects will keep the economy rolling for at least the next 5 years, so let&#8217;s take a time-out and put the right systems in place to actually protect the land, water, air and climate.</p>
<p>Marlo Raynolds</p>
<p>Executive Director, Pembina Institute
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=17</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meeting Canada’s international obligations on climate change</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=16</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=16#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 14:32:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>climate</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=16</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an article in yesterday’s Globe and Mail, columnist Jeffrey Simpson wrote about how Canada has the worst record of any country that signed Kyoto Protocol. 
It’s easy to understand why Canada is being singled out for criticism. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has abandoned Canada’s commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and has shown an aversion [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">In an article in yesterday’s Globe and Mail, columnist Jeffrey Simpson </font><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080521.wcosimp21/BNStory/specialComment/home"><font face="Calibri" color="#0000ff" size="3">wrote</font></a><font face="Calibri" size="3"> about how Canada has the worst record of any country that signed Kyoto Protocol. </font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">It’s easy to understand why Canada is being singled out for criticism. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has abandoned Canada’s commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and has shown an aversion to real caps on emissions. He is also refusing to take on new commitments unless developing countries like China and India take on binding targets.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">It&#8217;s an extremely unjust position.</font></span><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3"><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3"> </font></span></font></span><font face="Calibri" size="3"><span lang="EN-US" /><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">You can&#8217;t ask poorer nations to shoulder the burden and do just as much as wealthy nations, especially when we caused the problem.</font></span><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri"><font size="3"> </font><span lang="EN-US"><font size="3">Wealthy countries can afford to develop the technologies that will help us cut our emissions. Without cooperation, technology and incentives, developing countries will be left to make the same mistakes that were made in rich countries.</font></span></font></span></font><font face="Calibri" size="3"><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-US" /><span lang="EN-US"><font size="3">Besides, countries like China and India are included in the Kyoto Protocol. Developing countries were exempt from reductions in the first phase of the Protocol but they will begin to take on commitments in the second phase, which begins after 2012.</font></span> </font></span><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri"> </font></span><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">As the chart below shows, China’s emissions per person are only about one quarter that of Canada, while India’s are less than one tenth. Over 150 million Chinese and 350 million Indians survive on less than one dollar per day. Both countries lack adequate housing, schools and hospitals for most of their people, and meeting the needs of their people will require their emissions to rise further, and much further if they try to follow in the fossil-fueled footsteps of countries like Canada. The best way to convince these countries to take another path, is for us in the rich countries to lead the way.</font></span></font></span><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3"><img title="Per capita emissions" alt="Per capita emissions" src="http://www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/images/percapita.jpg" /></font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians want a comparable lifestyle and have the same consumer choices as citizens of the rich industrialized countries. By pointing the finger at their emissions before changing our own ways we are essentially saying they should continue to live in poverty so that we can enjoy our air conditioning, SUVs and big-screen TVs.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Little wonder many people in these countries think the climate change issue is a way for industrialized countries to protect their secure position by pulling the ladder up after them, and denying the developing world the chance to share the world’s limited resources. Clearly something more than finger-pointing is required to convince these countries to shift to a low-emission development path.</font></span></p>
<p></font></span><strong><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri">The way forward<br />
</font></span></strong><font size="3"><font face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-US">Canada</span><span lang="EN-US"> can start by meeting its international obligations. In 1992, Canada signed the UN Climate Convention which required rich industrialized countries like Canada to:</span></font></font></p>
<ul>
<li><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Take the lead by reducing its own emissions – the amount was later agreed in the Kyoto Protocol</font></span></li>
<li><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Ensure financial support and transfer of technologies to developing countries to help them control their own emissions</font></span></li>
<li><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Support developing countries in adapting to the impacts of climate change</font></span></li>
</ul>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">So what would Canada have to do if it took its international responsibilities seriously?</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font size="3"><font face="Calibri">The key is to set ambitious emissions reduction targets (at least 25% below 1990 levels by 2020) and then do what it takes to meet these targets, starting with putting a price on greenhouse gas emissions. Investments must shift from polluting, inefficient technologies into highly efficient clean technologies. Once we start this process, the rest will follow. With the right policies, Canada can become a leader in key technologies like renewable energy, green buildings and decentralized, smart electrical generation and distribution systems. By becoming leaders in developing and using these technologies, Canada can show the world that an affluent, comfortable lifestyle is possible without costing the earth, and thus convince developing countries to avoid the mistakes we made and follow a low-emission development path.  </font></font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">And the best news is that if we can get global emissions moving downward fast enough, we can avoid the most catastrophic impacts around the world, so that adaption to the impacts is manageable and the costs affordable.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">There are strong signs that Canadians are ready to move in this direction. Some provinces are moving ahead with capping their emissions and putting a price on pollution.  A recent </font><a href="http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=9fcde30f-a8fc-4b8e-a9ba-de5e1e78b51d"><font face="Calibri" color="#0000ff" size="3">Harris/Decima poll</font></a><font face="Calibri" size="3"> said that 90 per cent of those in British Columbia disagree with the argument that Canada should do nothing to reduce emissions unless big emitting countries such as China and India do as well.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">And in the coming year U.S. climate policy is likely to shift sharply under a new President, leaving Canada completely isolated. With the negotiations heating up for a new global agreement under the Climate Convention and the Kyoto Protocol next year in Copenhagen, there is no better time than now for Canada to start living up to the expectations of Canadians and its international responsibilities.</font></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3"> Peter Robinson</font></span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><font face="Calibri" size="3">CEO, David Suzuki Foundation</font></span><span lang="EN-US" /><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US" /><span lang="EN-US"> </p>
<p></span></font> 
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=16</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>You Are What You Eat. The Questions Is: WHAT Are You Eating?</title>
		<link>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=14</link>
		<comments>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=14#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 19:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Genetically Engineered (GE) Food</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?p=14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At three meals a day you would think we would have a better read on what we are eating and feeding to our kids, but in fact a lot of the ingredients remain a mystery. Sadly that sits well with the agriculture industry and some of our elected representatives.
Agriculture is estimated to contribute over 7% [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">At three meals a day you would think we would have a better read on what we are eating and feeding to our kids, but in fact a lot of the ingredients remain a mystery. Sadly that sits well with the agriculture industry and some of our elected representatives.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Agriculture is estimated to contribute over </font><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/recent/agriculture-and-climate-change"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">7% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> not including the energy footprint from bringing lamb from New Zealand or asparagus from Chile. Growing concerns of a </font><a href="http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/37/10813"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">cancer epidemic</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> are often related to the massive dowsing of herbicides and pesticides used in food production before the product hits our tables. Genetically engineered (GE) food with its unknown health effects, </font><a href="http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Quebec_Famous_Lakes_Teeming_With_Blue_Green_Algae_999.html"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">fertilizer use choking our lakes and streams</font></a><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><strong> </strong>and an increasingly globalized food chain amount to a complex problem in need of some complex solutions.</font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">But one of the easiest ways to make changes in production and consumption habits is to give consumers the information they need to make informed decisions. This is as true for cucumbers and cereal as it is for cars and washing machines. </font><a href="http://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/fuelpgm/label/page2.htm"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Gasoline efficiency information</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> and energy consumption labelling on household appliances (</font><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Energy Star</font><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">) allows buyers to compare products and make greener decisions. We don’t have that choice with food because there is limited labelling. What makes this worse is that we only buy a car or washing machine every 10 years or so but we consume food, day in and day out. </font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Like automobile and appliance manufacturers before them, agri-industry is fighting tooth and nail to prevent labelling from expanding because it suits their purposes to keep consumers in the dark, and information vague – if the choice is simply between which apple is reddest, they need to excel at only one variable. Once we begin to provide consumers with more information, there are more variables the industry must manage in order to win over the informed consumer.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">What if consumers were routinely provided with information about where a fruit was grown, the carbon footprint to get it to market, the use of pesticides and genetic engineering? Consumers could begin to make informed choices on environmental impact and family health criterion. Extraordinary! And UNACCEPTABLE.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Companies like </font><a href="http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/secret062305.cfm"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Monsanto</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> work hard to keep food and agriculture information from consumers – vagueness about the food we eat helps them sell their herbicides and GE seeds to farmers. They lobby politicians hard on this and are aggressive to a fault.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Last week our </font><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/campaigns/parliament-denies-canadians-ma"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">federal parliament voted against</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> mandatory labeling of GE ingredients in our food. (“Mandatory” labelling is key here, we have had voluntary labelling since 2004 but not a single voluntary label on GE food has been applied to date). Despite the fact that polling shows that the </font><a href="http://www.safe-food.org/-issue/polls.html"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">vast majority of Canadians</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> want labelling of GE ingredients in our food, Conservative and Liberal MP’s banded together to defeat the bill. Despite the fact that there is little or no independent research on the long term health impacts of GE food, that over 70% of the food you eat may have GE ingredients and that over 40 countries worldwide now have mandatory labelling of GE products (some have outright bans on GE production), the majority of MPs voted <u>against</u> their constituents’ views and took the side of Monsanto and Bayer corporations instead. </font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Consumers want mandatory labeling</font><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/IndustryInfo/wireStory?id=4242356"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">, industry does not</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">. Regardless of whether you are concerned about GE food safety or not, surely MPs should support the concept that consumers have a <ins cite="mailto:bruce" datetime="2008-05-13T13:43"><a href="http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/mediareleaselist/0,3208,3172_1328207547_355376_langId-en,00.html">right to know</a></ins> what is in their food. What is the problem with knowing?</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Improved labelling of the food we eat is a relatively simple solution in a sea of complex problems and solutions. Miraculously, some of our politicians failed even the simplest tests when they chose Monsanto over their constituents.</font></p>
<p>Bruce Cox<br />
Executive Director<br />
Greenpeace Canada
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://tomorrowtodaycanada.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=14</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
