Sixteen multi-stakeholder "Issues Tables" were created under the National Climate Change Process to identify and assess greenhouse gas reduction options within Canada, as follow-up action to the December 1997 Kyoto Protocol. If ratified, the protocol will commit Canada to reducing greenhouse gases by six per cent below 1990 levels for the period 2008-2012. 

The Toronto Hoof and Cycle Courier Coalition was invited to the Transportation Table's stakeholders meeting in Toronto on February 17, 2000. We made the following oral and written presentations.
 

TRANSPORTATION TABLE ADDRESS #1

February 17, 2000, Toronto Ontario
 

Given the list of invited stakeholders, we may again be dismissed as nothing more than poor relations at this get-together. We are the first to admit that our contribution to Canada’s transport industry is a highly specialized one - our focus being limited to the immediate, in-town, small-package market. We never have to address the weight, volume, or distance demands that regularly face you, our more ambitious cousins.

Still, as truly legitimate members of this family, we deeply appreciate the opportunity to share our trench-level perspective on today’s salient issue - the environmentally sustainable transportation of Canadians and their goods.

Here, we feel we have much to offer, as we represent the only branch of the shipping industry that has actually achieved that ideal goal of virtually zero emissions. And the members of our guild have been quietly providing this pristine service for more than two decades, now. We would suggest that any further expansion of the non-motorized sector of this industry would benefit all components of an integrated, more ecologically responsible transportation strategy.

Proactive measures to enlarge our sphere of operation, as well as the implementation of weather-proofed, pedal or even foot-powered freight-ferrying vehicles (rickshaws), are just two of the logical, cost effective measures, that are, in our view, immediately doable. These sorts of simple, low-tech solutions, combined with a front-loaded, user-pay, tariff system for primetime downtown freight deliveries, would drastically reduce the perceived needs and desires that continue to encourage motor vehicle drivers, to choke the very life out of our urban centers.

Cleaner fuels, the use of more fuel-efficient vehicles and further user-friendly improvements to our increasingly delicate, publicly-subsidized transit network – all are common sense measures aimed at reducing our society’s irresponsible dependence upon an automotive privilege that must be re-evaluated in light of its real-cost damage to the common good. The continued welfare all of world’s children depends largely upon our ability to admit and to overcome this most damaging and pervasive of social addictions.
   
The achievement of such a goal will require major adjustments in not only how our society moves, but why we move, as well. It will demand of every citizen, corporate or otherwise, an honest self-appraisal of the impact, that one’s personal and professional activity visits upon our increasingly fragile little planet.

Is all of our scurrying about as satisfying as we have been led to believe?

Now, despite the radical anarchistic bike messenger stereotype, we are not here to point fingers. We fully realize that on the surface, our member’s hands seem relatively clean in regard to this issue. If the truth were told however, most of our troops are city dwellers, and therefore depend largely on motorized segments of the transportation industry to provide the many necessities of life, available to the green-minded downtown resident. I may walk home carrying my groceries in a knapsack, but how do these goods get to the supermarket in the first place?

It would therefore be hypocritical of us to take an adversarial stance in this debate. We would much prefer to deconstruct traditional disagreements that only serve to exacerbate the problems at hand, and offer whatever insight and assistance that the rest of the industry might deem useful.    

That said, we strongly believe that much of the irrational and self-destructive behavior evidenced by the driving community is directly attributable to two highly influential sources. 

The first, not surprisingly, is the auto industry itself. Motivated primarily by the bottom line, these corporate giants flood the media with misleading images that perpetuate a carefully scripted mythology, aimed at coercing buyers into their respective camps. Thinly veiled innuendo promising autonomy, security, sexual gratification, elevated social status, etc – all are traditional ploys that have helped to define our auto-dependant age. 

Nowadays they are even trying to convince us that “Everyone needs a mini-van”, but if questioned as to why they are producing larger, less fuel-efficient machines, industry representatives will readily tell you that they are merely responding to the demands of the market. Of course, they often fail to mention that they have created that market with billions of dollars in manipulative campaigns that despite claims to the contrary, are promoting a detriment to the common interests of the majority. 

A disturbing industry trend focuses on an attempt to create the impression that there exists a privileged upper class that is “built for drivers”, but it is yet another campaign that could really backfire, presenting auto-makers with much more pressing financial concerns. Legal action aimed at having the automobile declared a dangerous product along the lines of tobacco or fire-arms, would greatly increase the possibility of governmentally imposed constraints being attached to the production and marketing of such vehicles. 

After all, given the environmental havoc they wreak and coupled with the carnage on our highways, how hard could it be to convince a few truly ethical judges that these products are indeed dangerous. Especially when used in the way that the manufacturers suggest in stunt driver styled commercials, (notwithstanding the small print disclaimers.) 

Remember too, that big tobacco’s downfall was triggered in part by the use of cartoon character, Joe Camel. The courts concluded that one purpose of such ads had been to impose a brand affiliation on potential customers whose youth barred them by law, from using the advertised product. One has to wonder, given this scenario, just what fate might await those responsible for the animated commercial that replaces the three little pigs brick house, with that new symbol of security for today’s youth, another mini-van.
   
As some of you may remember, another incredibly misguided automobile ad was removed from the airwaves last year after our organization complained. An offensive tag line promoted car sales at the expense of the environment, by questioning both the reliability and even the sanity of our membership, to wit, ”Why trust lunatic couriers when you can drive it yourself.” 

In response to this unprovoked attack, we called upon the industry to voluntarily reassess the ethics of their advertising practices. Quite frankly, we were amazed that such a multinational giant would be stupid enough to wantonly mistreat an already vulnerable little industry like ours. Especially since our efforts help to raise their corporate image by helping to reduce overall urban auto emission levels. Since little or no improvement in these advertising standards seems evident, we humbly take this opportunity to echo last year’s plea.

The second powerful body that experience has convinced us is largely responsible for this country’s reputation as the world’s worst per capita green house gas emitting nation leaves us in an even more alarming quandary than the auto business does.

For the past eighteen years, members of our little guild have fought an exhausting battle with a seemingly ignorant, arrogant and vindictive arm of our federal bureaucracy- the Agency formerly known as RevCan. We have been dragged through three federal court appearances as well as being subjected to countless in-house interrogations by the sadly flat, unenlightened minions operating the newly re-organized Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. And despite a Federal Court of Appeal’s three-judge unanimous agreement with our argument that food is fuel for the enviro-friendly courier and should be taxed accordingly, the Taxman continues to persecute those who raised and pressed the argument. 

Throughout this odyssey, vehemently repeated requests for assistance have effectively gone unheeded in the governmental halls of Toronto, Ontario and tragically Canada as well. Consequently, the very real plight of one segment of our hard-working poor has been systemically ignored, despite the incontrovertible fact that again, we alone actually achieve the stated goals of this very conference. Our membership accomplishes this feat daily, through personal sacrifice – both physical as well as financial. If, as we believe, that we are all in this together, we can ask nothing more…or less, of anyone in this room.
 

TRANSPORTATION TABLE ADDRESS #2