I guess what Conservatives were really saying was that when it came to GHG emissions and climate change, Canada would have a "Made in Connecticut" policy.
The CBC reports on the outcome of the meetings in Copenhagen here and note this part in particular:
...the agreement is not binding and does not set new greenhouse-gas reduction targets. Instead, countries are to set their own emission-reduction commitments, which would not be legally binding.
And as all those world leaders head back to their individual countries to develop their individual policies, our own illustrious leader has made it pretty clear that our government intends to sit back and let the U.S. government set policy for us. This means that our approach to this issue will be entirely determined by the same legislative process that has turned health care reform into what Keith Olbermann recently described as an "animated corpse." It means that the final shape of Canada's role in meeting the challenge posed by catastrophic climate change will be determined by the individual who holds that all important, filibuster-breaking 60th vote in the United States Senate.
In short: if you wish to have some influence on the policy governing Canada's approach to climate change, you can address your campaign contributions to Joe Lieberman.
Aw, this just isn't fair. I spent all day yesterday trekking back and forth between bad news about Lieberman and worse news about Jason Kenney.
So today I have to think Lieberman-Harper/Prentice.
Who elected Joe Lieberman Master of the Universe?
Might I respectfully suggest that if you want to influence US policy on anything that you direct your donations to opponents of (or a pot labeled anybody but) Lieberman.
We are now officially a satellite country of the U.S. No more pretense. No more lying to ourselves. Harper's next step? Statehood for Alberta.
As sad as this outcome appears, i wonder how much emissions would be driven down by withdrawing all NATO troops from Afghanistan. Warfare is certainly a major contributor. It isn't often mentioned, but less war = less emissions. I suppose Conservative heads would explode before accepting that reality.