Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson is on Day 9 or so of his China visit. In an interview with Anthony Germain in Shanghai, he was asked whether he doesn’t have foresee difficulties working with an authoritarian regime like China. The mayor said no, going on to give a relatively bland answer about making connections with people.
Then, unsolicited, he went on to praise the way the Chinese get things done on the environmental front in comparison with democracies. My story on this here.
41 responses so far ↓
1 MB // Sep 14, 2010 at 3:13 pm
Compared to the Harper government, the Chinese communist government is like the Greenpeace board when it comes to the development of alternative energy.
That’s in spite of their coal fired power plants which exist on ever more tenuous foundations as international carbon tariffs are contemplated, and as they put increasingly meaningful resources into developing green technology.
Canada releases 360% more emissions per capita than China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
2 Dan Cooper // Sep 14, 2010 at 3:47 pm
The government of the PRC has made some orders and decisions that on their face are positive, and presumably have kept things from being as bad as they could be there in terms of pollution. (Of course, they’ve made others that make things worse, since they have competing interests, such as economic development to stave off a coup or revolution. When I lived in the PRC, the pollution was often incredibly bad, even in our smallish-by-PRC-standards, business and tourism oriented city.)
However, to praise the efficiency of authoritarianism while ignoring its intrinsic downsides (e.g. arbitrary arrests, executions and appropriations; corrupt officialdom and nepotism…), which not only generally mitigate or eliminate the “benefits,” but are in and of themselves brutal and inhuman, is ridiculous and unworthy of a democratically elected politician. To do so “unsolicited” should be unthinkable.
3 spartikus // Sep 14, 2010 at 4:01 pm
What Dan Cooper said.
4 The Fourth Horseman // Sep 14, 2010 at 4:22 pm
Ditto.
5 mezzanine // Sep 14, 2010 at 4:40 pm
@DC, S, FH, I think that you are missing the context of what Robertson was saying:
“”You can be critical of lots of regimes around the world and you can question how worthwhile democracy is in a lot of countries right now which frankly are ignoring the biggest crisis in the history of our species with climate,” said Mr. Robertson. “That’s where you see the Chinese government taking radical, dramatic action in investing in turning the ship around and you don’t see that in Western governments right now, democratically elected, because they’re afraid.”
Mr. Robertson’s statements echo those of former London mayor Ken Livingstone, who told a Vancouver audience in 2009 that politicians have become risk-averse and it takes a bold leader with strong powers to be able to make real change to help save the environment.
“The progress in China, where they don’t have to worry about elections, is quite breathtaking,” said the flamboyant left-wing mayor who introduced the idea of vehicle fees for cars entering central London.”"
Obviously, we can’t emulate china, but I agree with Mr. Robertson’s sentiment. America has been fighting ‘addiction to foreign oil’ since Carter and we can see how successful that has become. How we can get there in a democracy is the bigger question.
6 rf // Sep 14, 2010 at 4:41 pm
MB,
I guess by your logic we should put North Korea on a pedestal!
Did they reduce their emissions by 75% by slaughtering 75% of the population? Way to go KJ-il!
Canada flatlines on per capita emissions with slow population growth. China more than doubles emissions and adds 10 times more people than Canada even has, but you think it’s a worthy piece of data to criticize Canada (and the Harper government only?) about?
What a load of emissions.
7 Bill // Sep 14, 2010 at 5:00 pm
mezzanine,
Ken Livingstone’s view of elections are probably colored by the fact the voters punted him from office in 2008. We can only hope it is something else Mayor Robertson shares with Ken after the next election.
8 landlord // Sep 14, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Say what you like about Hitler, but he sure knew how to clean up streams and rivers and preserve critical wetland habitat. And, despite the bombing, there was never a single scrap of litter from one end of Berlin to the other.
9 The Fourth Horseman // Sep 14, 2010 at 5:02 pm
Yes, Mezzanine.
As noted by our Mayor and the former Mayor of London, Canada does have messy things to deal with, like elections.
However, before becoming enamoured of the idea of throwing people in jail or forcing old ladies out of their homes in order “to get things done”—as they have done and continue to do in China—how about our local and national politicians having the jam to tell us what is really happening, instead of painting a pretty picture (lies) IN ORDER TO GET ELECTED.
By the way, I note that many Mainland Chinese (very tough people who do try to put up a fight against their totalaritarian masters, regardless of the picture presented to our gullible Mayor) are happily coming to settle in Vancouver. I wonder if they will exercise their right to vote?
Stay tuned…
10 gmgw // Sep 14, 2010 at 5:12 pm
Tell it to the Tibetans, Gregor.
gmgw
11 Diderottoo // Sep 14, 2010 at 5:19 pm
Commerce is as a heaven whose sun is trustworthiness and whose moon is truthfullness. Bha u llah . Gregor has done the truth telling part. But the Chinese need to work on the trustworthiness part, as those of us who remember melamine in baby formula and dog food, lead in children’s toys, and other serious breaches of trust remember.
12 Fred // Sep 14, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Gregor is just channeling his inner Trudeau – you know the dilettante millionaire that thought the mass murdering Cuban regime and its vaunted leader Fidel were the coolest thing ever.
Trudeau is probably rolling in his grave now that Fidel has actually admitted his infliction of Communism on Cuba, inflicted from the guns of his goons, was a tragic error.
Speaking of tragic errors, we have Gregor telling us how cool dictatorships can be.
13 Dave // Sep 14, 2010 at 8:49 pm
Oh yes that bastion of the environmental movement China.
MMMMMM I seem to recall a massive enviromental project (with much international condemnation)which dammed the Yanktze, displaced tens of thousands of people, altered landscape, stripped the landscape…. all in the name of producing more electricity.. the supposed green energy source.
Perhaps the mayor should visit factories that are poisining the environment and killing kids and residents in the process. Or where they “recycle” our computer waste, or perhaps he could check out the factories next to rivers were the water is so toxic it has an odd hue like mud… or perhaps the sweatshops where doors are locked and workers are kept in dimly lit rooms making whatever is cheaper for the likes of Wal Mart.
Yes Communism is just as bad as Captialism when it comes to abuse of people and the environment..
Abuse of our planet is not confined to greedy running dogs of capital imperialism.
14 jesse // Sep 14, 2010 at 9:17 pm
Well unfortunately, Mr. Robertson must wait to “get things done” after he builds up enough political capital like was done under Cretien, Klein, and, until recently, Campbell.
Until then I wish him the best of luck in the next election, at whichever level of government he chooses to run at.
15 Sean // Sep 14, 2010 at 10:50 pm
I take Gregor’s sentiment less as an endorsement of the PRC’s methods and more as a wistful lament on the issues facing democracies. The West faces many problems that elected governments seem to loath to tackle, from reducing dependence on fossil fuels (necessary for so many more reasons than just global warming) to the the United States’ refusal to come to grips with its debt problem.
Totalitarianism isn’t the best answer to these problems – what we desperately need is an informed, rational electorate that can take the long view, combined real leadership that can inspire and motivate. Let’s hope that’s not too much to ask for.
16 ThinkOutsideABox // Sep 14, 2010 at 10:56 pm
“Democracy cubed.”
(nervous laughter)
17 The Fourth Horseman // Sep 14, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Wistful lament. Excuse me while I disgorge my dinner.
Here’s what tomorrow’s Globe+Mail editrial has to say about this fiasco:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/carried-away-by-communism/article1707606/
You will note, Sean, that the Globe mentions China’s ongoing reliance on coal. As well as it’s stymying of the Copenhagen conference on climate change. I needn’t mention the continued growth and reliance of automobiles in the new, environmentally sensitive China. Oddly, they are replacing bicycles…
That’s what putting up a few windmills does for you—and then you can sell that pap to gullibale Western politicians.
18 Morven // Sep 15, 2010 at 7:44 am
The ordinary citizen (and there are probably many who read this blog) might well be entitled to conclude that the subtext of these unfortunate remarks by the Mayor in China is that if the citizens did not keep making objections to bike lanes, out of character building developments and otherwise exercising their democratic rights, we could transform Vancouver into the greenest city anywhere.
Or so it would appear.
In my non-urban encounters with environmental activists, the ones who usually got nothing accomplished were the ones who were characterised as coercive utopians who had limited regard for the rights of others to object or complain. The utopians simply put everyone’s back up and fomented resistance to any change.
My question for the Mayor and Vision. Are you falling into this same camp?
-30-
19 Chris Keam // Sep 15, 2010 at 8:31 am
“I needn’t mention the continued growth and reliance of automobiles in the new, environmentally sensitive China. Oddly, they are replacing bicycles…”
There’s no argument that China is facing the same problems all countries are dealing with in regard to the proliferation of automobile use in urban areas and its attendant ills. But those issues are being dealt with by the government and I don’t think it’s accurate to suggest they are ‘replacing’ bikes with cars. If anything, they are trying to stem that tide.
“With about 50,000 public bikes and more bike-friendly streets, we hope to see 23 percent of people living in Beijing commute by bike by 2015,” he said. (Wang Yongqing, vice-chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) Beijing Committe)
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2010-08/23/content_11189673.htm
20 landlord // Sep 15, 2010 at 8:36 am
Of course, in China ALL the bloggers are paid by the government. All the journalists too. In fact everyone is, as long as they do as they are told.
“Consultative Conference”. Don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
21 mezzanine // Sep 15, 2010 at 8:46 am
This was an interesting post from the infrastructurist, focus on the last paragraph:
“Just how big is China getting? At this point, the country has 60 cities with a population of 1 million or more. By comparison, Europe today has only 35 cities with one million or more inhabitants.
All that growth will require a near-incomprehensible infrastructure explosion, which will include massive investments in housing, transportation, water, and energy systems. In the next 20 years, McKinsey estimates that China will build around 50,000 skyscrapers and literally millions of apartment buildings, as well as thousands of hospitals and universities, 170 new mass-transit systems, and hundreds of thousands of parks, schools, fire stations, and community centers.
All of which places China in a unique position: They need to innovate or, essentially die. These cities must be built with levels of efficiency and sustainability that has never before been achieved. There simply is no other option. As for the rest of us — well, in thirty years we may be looking to China to teach us how to build a “modern” city.”"
http://www.infrastructurist.com/2010/07/15/just-how-huge-is-chinas-growth-staggeringly-huge/
22 Dan Cooper // Sep 15, 2010 at 9:31 am
@mezzanine (quoting M. Robertson, who said): “You can question how worthwhile democracy is in a lot of countries right now.”
I disagree. And the 0verriding “context” of his statements (Sean also take note, as I quote you below) was that M. Robertson was on an official government visit to the PRC. If he were speaking in Vancouver or London, his words might be taken as a “wistful lament,” but as he was in fact speaking in Shanghai, his words cannot but be interpreted as, “an endorsement of the PRC’s methods.”
Well, frankly, I suspect he was just running his mouth without thinking. But what do I know?
Oh landlord, #8 was so good, but then came silly #20. *sigh* Actually, the great majority of people in the PRC, bloggers and all, are very much not employed or paid by the government. The PRC has an oligarchic government, controlled by a party that for historical and publicity reasons continues to call itself “Communist.” However, its economic system is now pretty thoroughly capitalist on the level at which the average person functions (albeit some parts of the economy are “managed,” and people in the government and their families own a highly disproportionate amount of the wealth). Even governmental services such as health care and education are generally not free.
23 Dan Cooper // Sep 15, 2010 at 9:54 am
Again @Mezannine: It will indeed be interesting to see where China is in 30 years time, and we had better wish them success on many fronts. I certainly do!
Then again, I wouldn’t recommend taking eyes off of other places like the Indian sub-continent, Brazil, the entire region where Asia, Europe and Africa intersect…and for that matter the US, for example in regard to large desert cities like Phoenix that are using water at unsustainable rates. Challenges could probably arise from unexpected directions, and China could end up far from unique. In my opinion, and to edit your phrase above, a lot of people in a lot of places are going to need to “innovate, migrate, kill or die.”
24 Paul Smith // Sep 15, 2010 at 10:03 am
Well, the Chinese government has enforced a one child policy. Reducing the number of people on the planet is likely the best way to address climate change. Can’t see a government in a democracy implementing that.
25 Morven // Sep 15, 2010 at 10:50 am
During the 1950’s and 1960’s, I can remember various academics and well wishers in the UK who would go on trips to the (then) Soviet Union.
Some would come back extolling the superior environmental protection in the workers paradise and lamenting the inefficiencies of the democratic system (I heard them lecture on the topic)
The message never rang true.
Fast forward to the collapse of the Soviet Union and it suddenly emerged that the Soviets had along subsumed environmental protection, by and large, to the five year plan and were significantly worse at protection than the poor democracies (the Soviets just locked up protestors).
Fast forward to Shanghai today and a prudent politician (there are some) would be alert to being sold a bill of goods by the host. Just because the streets are full of bicycles does not mean there is adequate environmental protection (but I am being picky).
-30-
26 gmgw // Sep 15, 2010 at 2:10 pm
@Chris Keam:
“With about 50,000 public bikes and more bike-friendly streets, we hope to see 23 percent of people living in Beijing commute by bike by 2015,” he said. (Wang Yongqing, vice-chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) Beijing Committe)
Which is undoubtedly a substantially lower percentage than those who commuted by bike in Beijing 35 years ago. As in any rapidly industrializing society, for most of the newly upwardly mobile citizens of urban China, the car is one of the premier symbols of personal and economic success. By all accounts they’re flying out the doors of the dealerships. Wang’s statement reflects the typical pattern of hypocrisy displayed by the Chinese government over the past 20 years– having well and truly let the capitalist genie out of the bottle, they’ve spent the time since frantically trying to persuade it to operate according to strictly imposed conditions. Unfortunately genies are capricious, strong-willed and self-indulgent creatures. I think in the case of car ownership, the Chinese government has created a monster it will have one hell of a time getting under control. And an awful lot of urban China’s increasingly polluted air drifts north over the Pole to guess where…
gmgw
27 MB // Sep 15, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Getting back to emissions and the Chinese economy, here’s what Richard Heinberg says about China’s immediate future:
>> China’s economy is still growing rapidly, at the astonishing rate of 8 to 10 percent per year. That means it is more than doubling in size every ten years. Indeed, China consumes more than twice as much coal as it did a decade ago—the same with iron ore and oil. That nation now has four times as many highways as it did, and almost five times as many cars. How long this can go on is anyone’s guess. But surely not many more doublings in consumption rates can occur before China has used up its key resources.
>> For what it’s worth, my forecast is for China’s continuing boom to be very short-lived. As I argued in my recent book Blackout, there are hard limits to China’s coal supplies (the world as a whole will experience peak coal consumption within the next two decades, but China will get there sooner than most other countries because of its extraordinary consumption rate—currently three times that of the U.S.). Since China has no viable short-term alternatives to coal to fuel its industrial machine, by 2020 or so (and possibly much sooner) that country will have joined the rest of the world in a process of economic contraction that will continue until levels of consumption can be maintained by renewable resources harvested at sustainable rates.
In the meantime, China has been making huge investments in renewable energy:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/26/china-invests-solar-power-renewable-energy-environment
And yes, rf, Dan, Sparti and gmgw, the commies that run the country drink the blood of their victims and slurp the dripping entrails of pigs (so does Anthony Bourdain, but that’s another topic), but in all likelihood we’ll still be buying solar PV panels, windmills and electrical generator parts from a very healthy Chinese green economy instead of making our own.
People who try to convert the Chinese leaders, or gleefully point out their vast sins, have always failed to change anything. But we shouldn’t stop our own thought processes and learn to develop a Canadian green economy despite the lack of human rights in China. The effort so far has been pathetic.
28 MB // Sep 15, 2010 at 4:16 pm
Here’s the link to Heinberg’s piece:
http://richardheinberg.com/220-peak-everything
29 spartikus // Sep 15, 2010 at 4:52 pm
People who try to convert the Chinese leaders, or gleefully point out their vast sins, have always failed to change anything.
Completely true. But we’re not trying to change the Chinese here – the subject at hand is a Canadian politician expressing admiration for an authoritarian system. Even if said authoritarian system sets out policy goals you and I might agree with. Even if we are hypocritical little consumers who purchase sneakers made by slave labour.
30 Morven // Sep 15, 2010 at 4:57 pm
The Financial Times of London terms China a Market Leninist country. This neatly captures the Chinese adaptability that is hard to export to the west.
We can learn important lessons from the Chinese but they are not always of practical value. So beware of the comfortable impressions that come from brief tours.
-30-
31 Chris Keam // Sep 15, 2010 at 5:00 pm
@GMGW
Landlord implied the Chinese gov’t is encouraging car ownership. I pointed out the opposite is probably more accurate at this time. That’s about the extent of it. I don’t think it’s hypocrisy to recognize one may have made an error and then try to address it. I suppose that makes me a Commie apologist, but I was only interested in pointing out that China, much like South Korea, Dubai, and lots of other countries around the world, is attempting to address auto congestion, and sees automobiles in urban areas as a problem overall, rather than a solution.
@MB
I met Anthony Bourdain once. Super nice guy.
32 landlord // Sep 15, 2010 at 5:44 pm
@ Chris : “2009 was an astonishing year for car sales in China. A combination of reduced tax on low fuel consumption cars, and subsidies to rural dwellers to buy vehicles, resulted in a surge in purchases.In 2001, when China’s per capita GDP passed the $1000 mark, households had already started to purchase cars. The number of family cars purchases each year from 2003 -2007 was 1.78m, 2m, 2.93m, 4.11m, and 4.93m – around a 1m increase every year. In 2008, per capita GDP passed the $3000 mark. According to the normal progression, the number of family cars sold should have reached 6m. But because of the financial crisis, only 5.5m were sold.
In 2009, according to the normal progression, 7m cars should have been sold, and in 2010 8m. But, because of subsidies to buy and pent up demand from 2008, the number of cars sold in 2009 was 8.5m. That means in 2009, 0.5m cars that should have been sold in 2008 were sold late, and 1m cars that should have been sold in 2010 were sold early. Adding it up, we predict car sales in 2010 of 7m.”
[http://www.chinatranslated.com/?p=766]
33 Chris Keam // Sep 15, 2010 at 5:52 pm
Gosh, Landlord I had no idea they are selling a lot of cars in China. Oops, did I say ‘had no idea’? I meant, ‘am perfectly aware’. Pesky typos.
34 landlord // Sep 15, 2010 at 6:23 pm
You miss the point .
Chris #31 : “Landlord implied the Chinese gov’t is encouraging car ownership. I pointed out the opposite is probably more accurate at this time.”
landlord #32 : “reduced tax on low fuel consumption cars, and subsidies to rural dwellers to buy vehicles”.
35 solitary man // Sep 15, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Lets see, the current levels of per-capita car ownership (# per 1000 people)
USA – 765
Canada – 568
China – between 35 and 128 (depending on the source)
China have a long way to go to catch up selling 8m cars a year. And the fact that China is leading the pack in R&D for electric cars is actually a good sign before the burgeoning middle class of China reaches the insane levels of North America in terms of car consumption.
They are reaching for the gold ring of consumerism as those in Canada/US have been doing for the last 100 years.
36 Chris Keam // Sep 15, 2010 at 6:33 pm
“Global automakers seeking to offset lagging sales elsewhere have benefited hugely from China’s fast-growing market, where sales this year are expected to rise by about 20 percent.
That’s perceptibly slower than the 45 percent growth in 2009, and officials are warning that manufacturers may have ramped up production too much as they rushed to keep up with the boom in sales earlier this year.
Over the weekend, Chen Bin of the National Development & Reform Commission, China’s planning agency, told an industry conference that the government plans to act to discourage manufacturers expanding further.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100907/ap_on_bi_ge/as_china_auto_sales
37 Dan Cooper // Sep 16, 2010 at 11:47 am
@MB:
“And yes, rf, Dan, Sparti and gmgw, the commies that run the country drink the blood of their victims”
*ahem* Note, I said above that they are not commies, but “Commies.” There’s a difference! I will agree that it’s fair metaphorically to say that like most “Commies” (and “Capitalists,” “Democrats,” “Republicans,” “Monarchists,” “Religious Leaders,” or what have you) they are inclined to drink both the blood of their own citizens and whoever else’s they can obtain. Some leaders do this more and some less, and to different groups in varying degrees; my impression is that authoritarian governments tend to drink more domestically, while democratic ones tend to drink more abroad. Individual milage, of course, varies.
“In all likelihood we’ll still be buying solar PV panels, windmills and electrical generator parts from a very healthy Chinese green economy instead of making our own.”
And the Japanese will be running the world. Oops, sorry, that was the theory in the 80′s. Back to your point, I would say it’s possible, but on the other hand everything could change completely.
“People who try to convert the Chinese leaders, or gleefully point out their vast sins, have always failed to change anything.”
The PRC’s leadership has massively changed positions over time, is changing now, and will probably continue to change. Presumably they are affected in this by various factors….
“But we shouldn’t stop our own thought processes and learn to develop a Canadian green economy despite the lack of human rights in China.”
Very true.
38 gmgw // Sep 16, 2010 at 3:25 pm
@MB:
I’ve never used the word “commie” in a non-sarcastic sense in my entire life. Hence your comment baffles me.
@Chris K:
Your comments by Chen Bin nicely illustrate one of my main points: “OK, come on out of that bottle, genie, you’re free! ….Hey, hold on there! Just ’cause you’re free doesn’t mean we’re going to allow you to do whatever the hell you like!”
No wonder the Chinese government is so afraid of democratic reform.
gmgw
39 Adam // Sep 17, 2010 at 7:55 am
The fact is that the Chinese socialist system is proving far more effective than western capitalist democracy. If they see pollution as a problem, they just direct billions of dollars of investment into clean energy research and development. If they want to build high speed rail, they tell their banks to open their wallets and the state companys build more rail line than the rest of the world combined.
It’s not like in our so called democracy we really control anything as individuals. When was the last time you made a political decision? In China, they might not have “political freedom” but they have more individual freedom than we do in Canada. I know from having lived there for a year, and paying regular visits. The fact is that most people are happy with the party, despite what the Epoch Times and the Falon Gong might want you to believe.
40 Adam // Sep 17, 2010 at 8:01 am
Yes, they are selling cars in China, and many other goods too. The people are just emerging from poverty, and for the first time they have the ability to buy things that the rest of the developed world has been buying on a mass scale for the past 70+ years. How can anyone legitimately say that such progress is a bad thing, if they themselves are unwilling to endure the same ban on consumerism?
It is not as if the majority of people in China are going to own vehicals. Public transportation is much better in China and improving daily. The government also taxes cars a lot, and is directing investment into electric cars. But the idea that Chinese should not be able to buy cars because it might hurt the environment, while the rest of us in Canada, US and Europe continue driving more than ever, that is hypocracy.
41 Bill McCreery // Sep 17, 2010 at 10:12 am
@ Lonely 35.
“….China is leading the pack in R&D for electric cars is actually a good sign ….”.
There’s a critical missing link to date in the sparks car push. Apparently we’ll need is it 3 or 5 more Site ‘C’ dams just to feed all those e-cars just in the Lower Mainland. Those ‘Sites’ don’t exist. Perhaps his Worship has the solutions – moonbeam photovoltaic skins for e-cars.
If the e-car goes both the Chinese & we will likely be using coal fired generators to wind them up if we’re not careful. Note, there is a net energy loss in using one energy form to create another & in the case of electricity another loss in it’s transmission & storage.
Research is continuing so maybe the missing link will be found. Until then proceed with caution.
Leave a Comment