By Don White.

My previous article drew parallels between global and Canadian responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and the looming environmental crises. But similarities are not the only distinctive aspects; there are also important differences.

One difference is that Canadian politicians (for the most part) have stood together developing and implementing policy and strategies for dealing with the novel coronavirus. We’ve seen unprecedented cooperation between governments and opposition, between Ottawa and provinces, and within provinces as well. But not for the predicted climate change and ecological collapse. Disagreements dominate even though predictions of those threats are increasing dire, and public concern is becoming increasingly mainstream and is steadily ramping up.

Although governments have faced up to COVID-19, they lack the same will and consensus to develop and implement effective, environmentally sustaining, economic policies. They – and we – continue defaulting to our problematic, outdated economic systems, systems which are increasingly acknowledged to be inadequate for existing realities. That knee-jerking does more than affect our industries. It hamstrings us as individuals. That’s the second crucial difference.

As individuals, we are less sure of the effective value of our actions for staying personally safe under climate change than under COVID-19. To stay safe in the pandemic, we all know what we can and need to do. But what environmental actions are effectively equivalent to wearing masks, washing our hands frequently, and maintaining social distances? Recycle single use plastic bags? Get an e-bike when our neighbours all drive SUVs?

The reason for our uncertainty points to the third key difference between why we have worked together to counter the pandemic and why we have failed to act effectively and in unison for climate change. The difference is the presence/absence of trustworthy, galvanizing leadership.

Most British Columbians (and pundits elsewhere) have few doubts that the key to BC’s success in keeping COVID-19 numbers low is the presence of Dr. Bonnie Henry. Her availability to us in frequent briefings, her experience and expertise, her empathy and willingness to listen, and her compassionate encouragement are amazingly successful. She believes in us; we believe in her. And so we go.

Unfortunately, for the climate and ecological crises, we have no such trusted individual. Not federally, not provincially, not even locally. That makes all the difference. Lacking effective leadership, we lack consensus and fail to take effective action. We remain stalled and do little. We continuously fail to enact and apply countermeasures for minimizing species loss and rising global temperatures. In terms of the impact curves of environmental crises, we resemble the COVID-19 records of the US and Brazil.

As a leader, Bonnie Henry’s influence extends two ways. She informs both the public and government of the latest science-based evidence and thinking. She tells us, as individuals, what we need to do, and she convinces her own government and minister to develop and implement the most effective policies. This two-way leadership is of huge significance. And to the immense credit of Premier Horgan and Minister Dix, they have recognized Henry’s knowledge and abilities and have allowed her to drive the program.

One conclusion seems inescapable: we need a “Bonny Henry” to help us deal with climate change and ecological collapse. If we want to be equally effective in dealing with those coming crises, we need an equally informed, compassionate, and ultimately believable expert to direct the actions of the public and those who govern us. We need that person to galvanize our actions on the environment the same way Dr. Henry has done for the pandemic.

That need seems pretty clear. But is there a a local angle? There appear to be more than sufficient reasons for arguing that may be necessarily the case.

Given (1) the distance of Ottawa and Victoria from Nanaimo, (2) the tendency of higher governments to override the priorities of particular locales, (3) the lack of effective regional voices in all higher levels of government, and, consequently, (4) that all global sustainability is based on local action, starting locally with this initiative is probably wise, if not crucial.

Nanaimo City Council has declared its recognition of the existing climate emergency. It has endorsed doing what it can to constrain its negative effects. They are as much in need of a “Bonny Henry” as we are. The question is how to put that leadership in place. Since we’ll all be affected by whether we own and and address this problem, it is a conundrum for everyone.