English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-11-23 06:40:16 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment Global Warming

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071122/queen_uganda_071123/20071123?hub=TopStories

2007-11-23 06:49:28 · update #1

Sorry guys.Behold,the missing link!

2007-11-23 06:50:41 · update #2

5 answers

Harper, TEH PWN0RZ AND TEH UBER HAX! Not being swayed by political motives.
Cause Canada, US (Bill Clinton even) and Australia are smarter than drinking the KoolAid.
Even Al Gore and Bill didn't sign Kyoto. AL GORE! That just proves it is a lie and a money driven sham.

2007-11-23 15:07:41 · answer #1 · answered by fw_gadget 2 · 0 1

What? Do you mean the Kyoto protocol? If so that's Australia and the US.

Kyoto doesn't require any major changes, it's mainly symbolic. It seems to be the first step in establishing the UN as the organisation that regulates fossil fuel usage by all the countries of the world

The US and Australia arn't keen on that idea. In the US, it would be politically contentious to grant the UN authority to make rules governing US industry. Australia has perhaps 200 years worth of coal supply and the government is not too keen on being told that we can't use it.

(edit) The missing link makes all the difference.

Canada and Australia have 'energy economies' and have the most to lose by accepting emmissions targets.
Most people care about the environment, but most people care about money more than they care about the environment. Most of the members of the UN (and the British Commonwealth of nations) are worried about the price of oil and whether anything can be done to stop the price going up and up. Getting the entire world to cut consumption of oil will help keep the price of oil from rising out of control.

2007-11-23 06:47:41 · answer #2 · answered by Ben O 6 · 0 0

I'm not sure but it seems a good recipe for political suicide. The Australian Prime Minsiter, John Howard, has just been given the boot in an election that was dominated by the environment. Perhaps he should have listened to the electorate who have, for a long time, been demanding that Australia take a more pro-active role in facing up to climate change.

One of Mr Rudd (the new PM's) manifesto promises was to sign the Kyoto Protocol, this will leave the US as the only major country in the world not to have signed it.

* Technically, at the time of writing, John Howard is still the PM as not all the results are yet in. However, it's almost a statistical impossibility for Howard to remain as PM and he's already conceded defeat and welcomed Rudd as the new PM.

2007-11-24 06:58:55 · answer #3 · answered by Trevor 7 · 0 0

I'd like to answer with, "Because they'd like to maintain their economies at a functioning level", but I don't know to which climate change deal you're referring...

2007-11-23 06:47:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

they do not have socialist governments.

2007-11-23 07:32:37 · answer #5 · answered by frank S 5 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers