Auditably (un-)"sustainable"

Re the very recent Auditor General's report:

[from http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/c20071000c_e.html]:

"As [the commissioner's] report indicates this year, many of the significant weaknesses that have been noted over the past decade persist. It is clear that the strategies are not helping or encouraging departments to take environmental issues into account, as was envisioned when the government set the process in motion in 1995.

The ambition and momentum that existed in the early stages of the government's sustainable development strategy initiative has faded. In our view, the preparation and tabling of the strategies have become little more than a mechanical exercise, required to fulfill a statutory obligation. Departments may be meeting the letter of the law with their strategies but most are certainly not responding to the spirit of it.

The fact that sustainable development strategies have not achieved their intended purpose has been a major disappointment. For the most part, senior managers in departments have not demonstrated that they take the strategies seriously, and few, if any, parliamentary committees have considered them."

[But..]

"Overall, we have concluded that the [environmental] petitions process is a good news story. Although it is not always possible to attribute specific government action to any one source, both petitioners and department officials told us they believe that petitions have had an impact on the government's management of certain environment and sustainable development issues."

[Still...]

"In summary, we can find little, if any, evidence that sustainable development strategies are serving the purpose for which they were introduced."
"If these strategies are to help the government implement sustainable development, something must be changed."
--------------

Thus the just attraction of many Canadians to GPC. It seems we need to initiate a flood of "environmental petitions" via the Auditor's office, as well as have elected Greens to the Commons & Senate.

After so many years hearing these terms from others' mouths, it is time for Greens to seek less rubbery rhetoric. The standard definition (via the Brundtland Commission):

""sustainable development" means development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs".

For various resaons, I do at least prefer the French, "développement durable", although by now it must also be tired terminology. Please see as well my comment at http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/3053#comment-2275 esp. towards the end.

Daryl Vernon
York Centre
(home of one of the most disappointing explicit "sustainability" projects of all, PDP, Downsview (national urban) Park, where sustainability mostly has come to mean circular shifting around of sustaining moneys, with not too much to show for > a decade, straddling Liberal & Conservative regimes...)