Skip to main content

Green Party leader Elizabeth May walks to the train as she departs Toronto on Friday April 8, 2011.Frank Gunn

In 2011, to paraphrase Kermit, it's not as easy being green. One of the interesting sub-plots in this election is the question of what will become of the Green Party.

Among the troubles that beset the Liberal Party in the 2008 campaign was the 941,000 votes that ended up in the Green Party column. Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion was campaigning heavily on his Green Shift policies, and he could scarcely afford that failure to bring environmentally focused voters over to his side.

It may seem like the 2008 campaign was just a short time ago, but much has changed when it comes to the environment as an election issue.

Obviously, the world economy has gone through a wrenching upheaval - financial markets have collapsed, unemployment's gone up, and bread and butter have become the priority. The economy may have improved in Canada but that hasn't produced a renaissance in populist environmentalism, for several reasons.

First, lots of voters see more evidence all the time of individuals, companies and governments making green strides:

- The shift towards fuel-efficient and hybrid-type vehicles by North American auto manufacturers is just one example, but very visible one

- Greener packaging and more organic produce in shopping centres and grocery stores

- More recycling, new waste-to-energy technologies and investments in solar, wind, and other lower-impact energy solutions

- Corporations taking up sustainability policies, aiming to be more careful with resources, energy and water

- Commercial real estate and residential projects emphasizing lower-impact living and working

I'm not making an argument as to whether these efforts are enough. But if voters used to think almost nothing was being done to help the environment, its pretty near impossible for them to think that anymore.

Second, environmentalism in 2008 was heavily influenced by the contrails of the Kyoto Accord and the anticipation of the next round of talks towards a global climate agreement, with the prospect of carbon trading becoming a major economic influence as well. The decibel level of this debate is so low right now, it's almost inaudible.

Third, support for the Green Party last election was partly about frustration with all the other alternatives. But the amount of frustration is down, and the direction of what remains is different. Today, both the Conservative and Liberal brands aren't in peak condition, but hostility levels are relatively low compared to 2008.

And the biggest game-changer in 2011? Jack Layton as a magnet for voters looking for something else. Voting NDP didn't strike many people as sensible when global financial markets seemed headed for ruin - but that was then, this is now.

Finally, the growth of the Green Party in the run-up to 2008 was a news story, one that propelled Elizabeth May onto the televised leaders debates. The last few years have seen little change in Green Party support - and arguably some evidence of softening - contributing to less news coverage, and no podium with the other leaders.

All of these headwinds are facing the Green Party in this election, and it's hard to identify any countervailing favourable influences. Ms. May is an effective spokesperson and a tenacious campaigner, but conditions this time around are a far cry from 2008.

Follow related authors and topics

Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Interact with The Globe