Strathmere Group Declarations # 5 and # 6

Declaration target # 5 

Declare a moratorium on industrial fishing and development in the Arctic Ocean until there is a comprehensive scientific analysis incorporating the newest information on climate change impacts and until there is a system for integrated, precautionary ecosystem-based management of industrial activities.

AND

Declaration target # 6

Work cooperatively with all Arctic countries and Peoples to curb all sources of pollution of the Arctic, including from land-based sources

Both of those “Declarations” committed to by the “Strathmere Group” and their 21 US cousins back in June 2009 were focused on the Arctic; ocean and  lands so, we will look at them together.

Back in June 2019 when Jonathon Wilkinson was Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard he tabled Bill C-68 declared as the “modernized Fisheries Act and it passed Parliament June 20, 2019.  Needless to say, he was pleased and made the statement: “Our government is working hard to protect fish and fish habitat from coast-to-coast-to-coast, and the modernized Fisheries Act will do just that.” Wilkinson was also quoted stating: “It raises the bar in making sure that decision-making is based on science and evidence.”

Co-incidentally Bill C-48 sponsored by Marc Garneau, MP for Westmount Quebec and, Minister of Transport, also received 3rd reading the following day on June 21, 2019. The latter Bill was an Act regulating vessels transporting crude oil from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia’s north coast. The Bill killed any hopes of either the Northern Gateway Pipeline or the “Eagle Spirit Energy Corridor, which would run from the oil sands across Indigenous lands to BC’s northern coast, along with Indigenous peoples’ hopes for a better economic future” from proceeding!

It seems odd while these two Liberal Ministers are so concerned about the fossil fuel sector and its potential damage to the eco-system, they basically ignored the continued dumping of raw sewage by cities along the St. Lawrence River like LongueuilMontreal and Quebec City!  Collectively those three cities reported dumping about 8 billion litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence River! 

Apparently marine life in the St. Lawrence River is not important but “potential” oil spills off of BC’s north coast will protect marine life as will no commercial fishing in part of the Arctic Ocean!

Many of us recall the happenstance related to the Newfoundland cod stock collapse and it is interesting to know one of the causes was “foreign overfishing”!  An extensive report from 2002 noted: “Canadian media and government public relations people often cite foreign overfishing as the primary cause of the “fishing out” of the north Atlantic cod stocks. Many nations took fish off the coast of Newfoundland, including Spain, Portugal, other countries of the European Community (EC), the former Soviet Union, Japan, and Korea.”  The report also noted: “There can be little doubt that foreign overfishing was a contributing factor in the cod stock collapse, and that the capitalist dynamics that were at work in Canada were all too similar for the foreign vessels and companies. But all of the blame cannot be put there, no matter how easy it is to do.”  Bad management by the Ministry is also cited as a cause in the report reflecting the moratorium placed on them on July 2, 1992 by the Honourable John Crosbie that has never been lifted since being imposed!

From all appearances commercial fishing to any great extent has never occurred in the Arctic Ocean and Bill C-68 will presumably preserve that observation for Canada’s commercial fishing fleet.

Along with the passing of Bill C-68 back on October 3, 2018 a legally binding international agreement was signed by Canada, Norway, Russia, the United States, China, Iceland, Japan, Korea, the European Union and Denmark.  The agreement will reputedly protect the Central Arctic Ocean from “unregulated fishing”. The agreement was reported as becoming law on June 18, 2021 so that particular section of the Arctic Ocean (three million square kilometres) will presumably be regulated.

Should one wonder why China was included it’s not because they fish, commercially, in the Arctic Ocean but perhaps because according to an article penned in August 2020 noted: “Estimates of the total size of China’s global fishing fleet vary widely. By some calculations, China has anywhere from 200,000 to 800,000 fishing boats, accounting for nearly half of the world’s fishing activity.“  The article went on to state: “China is not only the world’s biggest seafood exporter, the country’s population also accounts for more than a third of all fish consumption worldwide.

One should wonder, why would China agree to sign the agreement? 

In response to the foregoing question, one should note Canada has been extremely slow in building infrastructure to support our northern territories so without roads, railways or ports any developments of new mines, etc. are extremely costly so little development has taken place.  Suddenly back on August 13, 2019 Marc Garneau, Minister of Transport announced a project: “$21.5 million to complete preparatory work necessary for the first phase of construction of the Grays Bay Road and Port Project. The proposed 230 kilometre all-season road would be the first road to connect Nunavut to the rest of Canada.“  That particular project, co-incidentally, was seen as the means to cash in on opening of the Arctic which was something China had attempted to accomplish back in 2011 via a Chinese company (MMG Limited) whose principal shareholder was the Chinese government.  At that time MMG backed away as the cost of the roads and port made it too costly! As noted in an article in the Walrus on January 4, 2021, “The vast mineral deposits of zinc and copper near Izok Lake, in the Northwest Territories, lay glittering but ultimately untouchable“ until Garneau’s pledge. Shortly after than pledge by Garneau, Mr. G. Gao, CEO of MMG in a press release said;  “On behalf of MMG, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the Canadian government for their support and funding,”.

The Walrus article goes on to note “CHINA’S GROWING INTEREST in the Canadian Arctic, one of the least defended regions on earth, has been a calculated move. In 2013, de­spite not being one of the eight Arctic nations, China gained official observer status at the Arctic Council, an intergov­ernmental forum, and later declared it­self a “near­-Arctic state”—a phrase that seems to ignore the 5,000 kilometres between its northern­most point and the Arc­tic Circle.

It seems ironic Garneau’s Bill C-48 designed to halt Canadian fossil fuel exports was passed just two months earlier before he turned around and catered to Chinese interests. 

It seems apparent the Strathmere Group partially attained their aim for Declaration # 5 but not in its entirety so it is only a “passing grade”.

Based on the foregoing happenings (so well reported by the Walrus), the current Liberal government, by catering to the whims of the CCP looks likely to allow the creation of mining projects for those minerals desired by China. That being the case one should expect, at the least, a modicum of pollution to occur in the Arctic meaning Declaration # 6 will be destined to fall into the Strathmere Groups first fail category.

The Circular Economy will Take “Peoplekind”* Down the Drain

Robert Hornung, CEO of CanREA (Canadian Renewable Energy Association) on July 26, 2021 posted an article on their website titled “Taking Charge” and one of the early claims made in the article was:

A growing number of corporations are prioritizing the reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions within their environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategies and taking steps to ensure the electricity they use is generated by non-emitting sources, like wind and solar energy.”

The article doesn’t explain the reasons why those corporations are taking those steps but anyone following politics is aware; numerous “developed world” governments are passing acts or regulating emissions that put a price on them.  Those actions raise the cost of what corporations produce and suddenly the products they manufacture are no longer competitive with products produced in countries not imposing costs. Those countries like, Brazil, Russia China, India, South Africa, (BRICS country members) etc. will either produce similar products with lower prices or will attract those corporations. That means corporations will move to those locations and shut their manufacturing plants in countries like Canada who have imposed both a “carbon tax” rising to $170/ton by 2030 and another tax referenced as the “clean fuel standard”.  We should be confident those imposed costs will mean less jobs in Canada and other developed countries.

The CanREA article pushing wind, solar and battery storage, appeared before Ontario experienced a number of hot days in August which could have resulted in rolling blackouts or brownouts had we not had sufficient gas plants at the ready. The 5,500 MW (approximately) of wind capacity in Ontario went for a holiday.  Likewise the UK also recently experienced the failure of their 24.1 GW capacity of industrial wind turbines and were even forced to fire up one of their coal plants to avoid blackouts joining up with gas plants that provided 46.5% of their energy needs.

 Looking at the World Bank’s “Carbon Price Dashboard” Canada stands out as a country that has implemented emissions pricing well beyond other countries around the world. One should wonder “why” when our emissions are a miniscule 1.6% of global emissions and less than our percentage of global GDP (gross domestic product) of 1.9%.

Also worth mentioning is that China, a BRICS member, has basically stated they “won’t be bullied into going green” at the upcoming COP 26 conference in Glasgow. In 2018 the five BRICS countries accounted for 42% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with China the number one emitter globally at 28% but they produced only 17.4% of global GDP in 2020.  Based on the foregoing Canada is almost twice as emissions efficient as China but apparently the eco-warriors, politicians and those multi-billionaires like Bloomberg, Fink, Gates and the former Governor of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada, Mark Carney, in conjunction with the WEF (World Economic Forum) want more! The latter fully support the concept of mankind causing global warming and the reputed upcoming “climate pandemic” in the hopes of becoming wealthier!  The rest of us, based on what the WEF tell us will succumb to their forecast of; “by 2030 You’ll own nothing And you’ll be happy”! One should assume the Board of Trustees of the WEF including luminaries like Al Gore, Mark Carney, Laurence Fink and our current Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland and others including Michael Bloomberg, Bill Gates, etc. will be the ones owning everything.

The WEF supports the “circular economy” which they claim; “promotes the elimination of waste and the continual safe use of natural resources, offers an alternative that can yield up to $4.5 trillion in economic benefits to 2030.”

Hmm, one should surmise, based on their short video telling us all how we will own nothing but be happy, whose pockets will be lined with the $4.5 trillion they claim will come from the forecasted “economic benefits.”

The other question is where will that $4,5 trillion come from?  We should suspect much of it will be created by the cost of purported “low-carbon energy”.

The International Energy Agency estimates that global investment in low-carbon energy will have to increase 2½ times by 2030 from its current level of about $620 billion a year to meet targets in the Paris climate agreement.”  If one does the quick math on the IEA’s estimate it amounts to about $13 trillion for the next 9 years. One should suspect the $13 trillion will come from the pockets of those who “will own nothing”!

Those investments In low-carbon energy are happening and gaining speed as large pension funds like the CPPI, asset management firms such as  BlackRock, Brookfield, etc. etc. invest our money in renewable energy in increasing ways as the Washington Post reported earlier this year.  

What the foregoing seems to magnify is the elites of the world coupled with the eco-warriors are sold on the “circular economy” and are intent on seeing the rest of us “peoplekind” head “down the drain”!

*A word created by Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

Strathmere Group Part 5 (A) the Final Chapter and Declarations 1,2,3,4,5 and 6

Collaboration Amongst the US and Canadian Eco-Warrior Charities

The time has come to have a hard look at the joint “Declaration” and the seven (7) objectives of the 12 Canadian and 21 U.S. “Environmental and Conservation Leadersto determine their success in meeting their objectives when they signed it back on June 2, 2009.  We will examine each of the goals in order of their appearance in the original letter.   Those will be done one at a time and added to this article every few days in order to keep each review down to a two- or three-minute read.

Before reviewing the goals, here is a quick look at the lead-in of the letter.

Eco-Warriors pontificating on North American Ingenuity:

North American ingenuity can protect our deteriorating atmosphere, grow manufacturing jobs in harnessing wind and solar energy, improve our security by reducing our dependence on oil, minimize climate change’s drastic impact on human and natural communities, and protect our fragile natural areas such as the Arctic and the Boreal Forest.”

Ontarians were told by Premier McGuinty and his Energy Minister, the GEA (Green Energy Act) would focus on “harnessing wind and solar energy” and would create 50,000 jobs while only increasing electricity rates 1%.  Coincidently the GEA was introduced in the Legislature February 23, 2009 and received third reading later that year.  We know how that turned out as electricity rates climbed by over 100%!  As the Fraser Institute pointed out: “Alas, those benefits also proved illusory: the government now admits the 50,000 jobs claim was not based on any formal analysis; that most of these green jobs would be temporary, and the estimate didn’t account for the jobs that would be killed by escalating electricity costs under the GEA.”

Now on the issue of reducing our dependence on oil it is worth noting that since the signing of the “Declaration”, Canadian domestic sale of petroleum was 1.66 million barrels per day in 2009 and in 2019 was 1.8 million barrels per day for an increase of 8.4%. 

The two objectives to “grow manufacturing jobs” and “reducing our dependence on oil” fell flat so how did they do on their 7 objectives as posted in: Strathmere Group Part 5 of this series?

Declaration target # 1:

Show bold leadership on the world stage, especially leading up to the Copenhagen climate meeting, and within each country through addressing climate change head-on.

Well recent history disclosed the Copenhagen Summit failed to produce a binding agreement when it occurred in 2009. The conference produced the Copenhagen Accord agreed to by a few of the big players; China, the US, India, Brazil and South Africa but the accord was not binding, didn’t set emissions reduction targets so in effect was a failure although the 21 U.S. ENGO no doubt saw it as a win. 

Now if one fast forwards to the Paris Accord occurring shortly after the Trudeau led Liberal Party received their majority in Parliament in late 2015, Canada sent 383 people to the conference.  That was more than the U.S., Australia and the UK together sent! PM Trudeau was amongst the 383 and at the Accord declared: “Canada is back, my good friends”. One should suspect some of those travelling to Paris on the taxpayer’s dime (Gerald Butts was one) were associated with the 12 Canadian ENGO who signed the declaration. No doubt they had spent time since 2009 lobbying various government bureaucrats and politicians since the Harper led government had backed off of any commitments at the Copenhagen Summit. 

Needless to say, the 12 ENGO achieved their first “Declaration” albeit, later than planned!

Declaration target # 2:

Incorporate climate science into policy and permitting decisions affecting natural resource management in order to best ensure that wildlife and natural systems can survive in a warming world.

It is fundamental to ENGO they allude to; a desire to, “Incorporate climate science” in the never-ending diatribe they push in the “reports” and “studies” they churn out to spur politicians to adopt their beliefs. Examining the authors of the reports to seek their credentials on “climate science” is often a futile time-consumer and most reports fail to actually identify “authors”. Two reports caught my eye! The first is titled “Green Stimulus” by unknown authors at the Pembina Institute (founder of the Strathmere Group) dated March 30, 2020 at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. It pushes a “Green Transformation Program” to “decarbonize” the oil and gas sector and hand out money to retrain the workers. The report pushes “renewables” as the answer to our electricity needs and suggests we improve our transmission system to the U.S. as they will reputedly want to buy that renewable energy.  Had the author(s) bothered to research Ontario they would have discovered the generation of electricity from renewables is most often surplus to demand and exported at a cost to Ontarians of almost $2 billion annually. 

The second report was prepared by six ENGO and five are Strathmere Group members including: Ecojustice, CAN/RAC, Equiterre, Environmental Defence and Pembina.  It was issued May 2020 and titled, “A New Canadian Climate Accountability Act”.  As its title implies; a new “Act” should be created to deal with GHG ie; emissions!  The bulk of the contributors to the “report” were “expert” lawyers and nowhere in the report are hints of the costs. They want the legislation to set targets for 2030 and 2050 with five-year reviews aligned with the Paris Accord.  The report mentions “carbon budget” 200 times but provides no estimate of costs.  The only mention of “jobs” in the report suggests they will be created by “adaptation”!  

The proposed “Act” has happened with the introduction and passage of the “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act”  in the House of Commons by Johnathon Wilkinson, Minister of the Environment and Climate Change.  From all appearances the Act presented is almost a carbon copy (pun intended) of the one suggested by those ENGO in the aforementioned “report”! Interestingly a quote from the report stated: “The alternate path — which limits the global average temperature rise to “well below 2°C” – would transform the health of a child born today for the better, all the way through its life.” Wilkinson’s related quote on his ACT starts with how “science” says we must achieve “net-zero emissions” and goes on to say: “This achievement is necessary to ensure our kids and grandkids can live in a world with cleaner air and water and to ensure our businesses maintain and gain a competitive edge by producing the low-carbon products the world wants to buy, well into the future.”

Based on the foregoing it is apparent the Strathmere Group have been successful in the creation of the proposed Act.  The Trudeau governments time in office running the country also saw them pass other acts such as Bill C-69 and Bill C-48.  Those Acts are also aimed at containing and reducing Canada’s oil and gas sector along with the extraction of minerals in mining operations.

Once again, we should recognize the 12 Strathmere Group ENGO delivered on their second declaration!

Declaration target # 3:

Declare a moratorium on expansion of tar sands development and halt further approval of infrastructure that would lock us into using dirty liquid fuels from sources such as tar sands, oil shale and liquid coal.

As pointed out in “Declaration target # 2”, the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau didn’t pass a full moratorium on expansion of the oil sands (a deviation of “tar” per the Strathmere Group) development, however, what the Liberal Party did was pass two Acts to create a tsunami of difficulties for any company attempting an expansion!  The “Acts” and their outcomes are defined as follows:

Bill C-69 is an Act: “to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.”

Critics of Bill C-69 argued; it would create more red tape in efforts to bring Canadian oil to market and Alberta’s Premier dubbed it the “No More Pipelines Bill.” Several Conservative premiers, provincial energy ministers, senators and MPs warned the legislation would repel energy investors and rob oil-rich regions like Alberta of the ability to benefit from their resources. The results emanating from Bill C-69 as noted by EnergyNow, had the effect of seeing capital expenditures in the oil and gas extraction sector in Canada fall from $76.1 billion in 2014 to $33.3 billion (a drop of 56.2%) in 2019.  StatCan also reported in December 2020 noting: “Following a 52% drop in the second quarter, capital expenditures in the oil and gas extraction industries increased 11% to $4.5 billion in the third quarter. Year-to-date spending totaled $17.1 billion, a 34% decline over the first three quarters of 2019.” Bill C-69 was passed in June 2019. “

The second Act, Bill C-48 received Royal Assent June 21, 2019 and is defined as; “An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia’s north coast”. 

The Bill C-48 Act appears responsible for a couple of major events including Kinder Morgan’s abrupt exit from Canada at the taxpayer’s expense as they faced many illegal blockades (seemingly allowed by the RCMP, who are federally controlled) and were forced to cease construction of the Trans Mountain pipeline on numerous occasions. The Trudeau Liberals wound up purchasing Kinder Morgan’s Canadian assets for $4.5 billion.  The cost to complete the pipeline expansion has (as of February 2020) increased from $7.4 billion to $12.6 billion meaning taxpayers are stuck with added taxpayer debt of $17.1 billion.

The second event that occurred was related to Enbridge’s plan for the Northern Gateway pipeline which the Trudeau led Liberals halted, prior to passage of Bill C-48!  The Northern Gateway pipeline was on the radar screen of ENGO as they pushed the plan to ban tanker traffic on the northwest Pacific coast. The mandate letter dated November 12, 2015 from Trudeau to the Minister of Transport stated: “Formalize a moratorium on crude oil tanker traffic on British Columbia’s North Coast, working in collaboration with the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to develop an approach.” 

Needless to say, the WWF, a Strathmere Group member where Gerald Butts previously resided as President and CEO were delighted!  David Miller (former Mayor of Toronto), who succeeded Butts as President, published an article on November 23, 2015 shouting out: “The moratorium is something to celebrate, and puts a major hurdle in front of Enbridge’s plans for the region.”  Miller also went on to state: “It’s now crucial that we push towards the next stage: a legislated ban on all oil tanker traffic in the region.

Bill C-48 followed and even though the Senate’s transport committee voted in May 2019 to recommend the bill not move forward and presented a report to the Senate as a whole that asked them to endorse the recommendation that the bill be defeated”, it passed.

One should surmise the passage of Bill C-69 and Bill C-48 were successful at the goal of halting any significant expansion of the “tar sands” so, the Strathmere Group once again can brag about their success in meeting their third “declaration”!

Declaration target # 4:

Strengthen investments in renewable energy and in energy efficiency and conservation through creating new clean energy jobs and increasing prosperity through new technologies.

This “declaration” went on to state: “energy security is best achieved through investment in the cleanest available energy and through ending our dependence on fossil fuels.”

Needless to say, Ontario ratepayers are well aware this particular “declaration” had already started to unfold prior to the signing of the joint letter in Washington on June 2, 2009.  Gerald Butts, one of the signatures on the joint declaration as the CEO of the WWF-Canada (World Wildlife Fund) was instrumental in the creation of the GEGEA (Green Energy and Green Economy Act) in Ontario.  The Act received third reading and royal ascent on May 14, 2009 almost a month before the “joint declaration” was signed. An excellent article by Terence Corcoran of the Financial Post from five years ago noted: “Prior to the 2007 election, Butts was a McGuinty insider. After the election, he became McGuinty’s principal adviser. As one of his biographical notes describes it, Butts “was intimately involved in all of the government’s significant environmental initiatives, from the Greenbelt and Boreal Conservation plan to the coal phase-out and toxic reduction strategy.”

What followed was spelled out in the Ontario Auditor General’s press release of December 2015 disclosing the cost of renewable contracts under the GEGEA was $37 billion to the end of 2014 and would cost another $133 billion up to the end of the contracts. To add fuel to the fire Ontario’s Liberal Party, under Kathleen Wynne, on January 1, 2017 launched their “cap & trade” program joining Quebec and BC.  The foregoing may have occurred because PM Justin Trudeau had announced in early October 2016, he would impose a price on carbon beginning in 2018 if any provinces didn’t have one.  At that time Gerald Butts was his Principal Secretary and viewed as his puppet master.  Again, as we in Ontario know, when the Ford government was elected, he cancelled Wynne’s “cap & trade” program! 

In early 2017 the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change was issued and recommended a carbon tax starting at $10/ton on January 1, 2018 increasing by $10 each year to a maximum of $50 per ton. The Framework only loosely focused on achieving “net-zero” targeting only “new buildings”.  Suddenly on December 11, 2020 with the country in a Covid-19 lockdown Trudeau and his new Environment Minister, Jonathon Wilkinson announced the carbon tax would be expanded to $170 ton to wean us all off of “fossil fuels”. The pretext was it was being done so Canada could meet its Paris Agreement targets.

The impact of raising the tax to that level was spelled out in a Fraser Institute report which noted: “In this study, we present an analysis using a large empirical model of the Canadian economy that indicates that the tax will have substantial negative impacts, including a 1.8% decline in Gross Domestic Product and the net loss of about 184,000 jobs, even after taking account of jobs created by new government spending and household rebates of the carbon charges. The drop in GDP works out to about $1,540 in current dollars per employed person.” The report forecasted the carbon tax of $170/ton would create additional debt of $22 billion and noted almost 50% of the job losses (78.000) would be in Ontario.

To top things off when Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland tabled her budget on April 19, 2021 it was full of spending plans aimed at supporting renewable energy and ending fossil fuel use. The budget contained $17 billion in spending plans and tax relief measures including $5 billion for the “Net Zero Accelerator” additional to the $3 billion previously committed! The $8 billion seems aimed at large emitting companies like those in the steel and cement business.  Another $4.4 billion was earmarked to “retrofit” residential buildings.  Also included were generous tax breaks (50% for 10 years) for companies manufacturing electric vehicles, (NB: They and the Ontario government handed Ford $590 million of our tax dollars a year ago for EV manufacturing at their Oakville plant), solar panels and presumably the world’s largest wind turbine blades at 107 metres long to a Quebec company who just received $25 million! 

The Trudeau led government also on June 29, 2021 announced they were speeding up the goal to have every light duty vehicle sold by 2035 to be “zero emissions” vehicles rather than 2040.  The Minister of Transport, Alghabra has already handed out $600 million of our tax dollars as rebates to those purchasing EV and now wants more!

It seems pretty clear the Strathmere Group, with the leadership of Gerald Butts in respect to this particular declaration, will brag they have been successful at achieving it. It was done with great pain to taxpayers, ratepayers, Canadian families and our business community with an emphasis on small and medium sized companies who due to the financial effects of escalating costs lost their competitiveness or moved to a more welcoming community.  

What they actually accomplished was neither the creation of “clean energy jobs” or increased “prosperity”!

Declaration target # 5 

Declare a moratorium on industrial fishing and development in the Arctic Ocean until there is a comprehensive scientific analysis incorporating the newest information on climate change impacts and until there is a system for integrated, precautionary ecosystem-based management of industrial activities.

AND

Declaration target # 6

Work cooperatively with all Arctic countries and Peoples to curb all sources of pollution of the Arctic, including from land-based sources

Both of those “Declarations” committed to by the “Strathmere Group” and their 21 US cousins back in June 2009 were focused on the Arctic; ocean and  lands so, we will look at them together.

Back in June 2019 when Jonathon Wilkinson was Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard he tabled Bill C-68 declared as the “modernized Fisheries Act and it passed Parliament June 20, 2019.  Needless to say, he was pleased and made the statement: “Our government is working hard to protect fish and fish habitat from coast-to-coast-to-coast, and the modernized Fisheries Act will do just that.” Wilkinson was also quoted stating: “It raises the bar in making sure that decision-making is based on science and evidence.”

Co-incidentally Bill C-48 sponsored by Marc Garneau, MP for Westmount Quebec and, Minister of Transport, also received 3rd reading the following day on June 21, 2019. The latter Bill was an Act regulating vessels transporting crude oil from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia’s north coast. The Bill killed any hopes of either the Northern Gateway Pipeline or the “Eagle Spirit Energy Corridor, which would run from the oil sands across Indigenous lands to BC’s northern coast, along with Indigenous peoples’ hopes for a better economic future” from proceeding!

It seems odd while these two Liberal Ministers are so concerned about the fossil fuel sector and its potential damage to the eco-system, they basically ignored the continued dumping of raw sewage by cities along the St. Lawrence River like LongueuilMontreal and Quebec City!  Collectively those three cities reported dumping about 8 billion litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence River! 

Apparently marine life in the St. Lawrence River is not important but “potential” oil spills off of BC’s north coast will protect marine life as will no commercial fishing in part of the Arctic Ocean!

Many of us recall the happenstance related to the Newfoundland cod stock collapse and it is interesting to know one of the causes was “foreign overfishing”!  An extensive report from 2002 noted: “Canadian media and government public relations people often cite foreign overfishing as the primary cause of the “fishing out” of the north Atlantic cod stocks. Many nations took fish off the coast of Newfoundland, including Spain, Portugal, other countries of the European Community (EC), the former Soviet Union, Japan, and Korea.”  The report also noted: “There can be little doubt that foreign overfishing was a contributing factor in the cod stock collapse, and that the capitalist dynamics that were at work in Canada were all too similar for the foreign vessels and companies. But all of the blame cannot be put there, no matter how easy it is to do.”  Bad management by the Ministry is also cited as a cause in the report reflecting the moratorium placed on them on July 2, 1992 by the Honourable John Crosbie that has never been lifted since being imposed!

From all appearances commercial fishing to any great extent has never occurred in the Arctic Ocean and Bill C-68 will presumably preserve that observation for Canada’s commercial fishing fleet.

Along with the passing of Bill C-68 back on October 3, 2018 a legally binding international agreement was signed by Canada, Norway, Russia, the United States, China, Iceland, Japan, Korea, the European Union and Denmark.  The agreement will reputedly protect the Central Arctic Ocean from “unregulated fishing”. The agreement was reported as becoming law on June 18, 2021 so that particular section of the Arctic Ocean (three million square kilometres) will presumably be regulated.

Should one wonder why China was included it’s not because they fish, commercially, in the Arctic Ocean but perhaps because according to an article penned in August 2020 noted: “Estimates of the total size of China’s global fishing fleet vary widely. By some calculations, China has anywhere from 200,000 to 800,000 fishing boats, accounting for nearly half of the world’s fishing activity.“  The article went on to state: “China is not only the world’s biggest seafood exporter, the country’s population also accounts for more than a third of all fish consumption worldwide.

One should wonder, why would China agree to sign the agreement? 

In response to the foregoing question, one should note Canada has been extremely slow in building infrastructure to support our northern territories so without roads, railways or ports any developments of new mines, etc. are extremely costly so little development has taken place.  Suddenly back on August 13, 2019 Marc Garneau, Minister of Transport announced a project: “$21.5 million to complete preparatory work necessary for the first phase of construction of the Grays Bay Road and Port Project. The proposed 230 kilometre all-season road would be the first road to connect Nunavut to the rest of Canada.“  That particular project, co-incidentally, was seen as the means to cash in on opening of the Arctic which was something China had attempted to accomplish back in 2011 via a Chinese company (MMG Limited) whose principal shareholder was the Chinese government.  At that time MMG backed away as the cost of the roads and port made it too costly! As noted in an article in the Walrus on January 4, 2021, “The vast mineral deposits of zinc and copper near Izok Lake, in the Northwest Territories, lay glittering but ultimately untouchable“ until Garneau’s pledge. Shortly after than pledge by Garneau, Mr. G. Gao, CEO of MMG in a press release said;  “On behalf of MMG, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the Canadian government for their support and funding,”.

The Walrus article goes on to note “CHINA’S GROWING INTEREST in the Canadian Arctic, one of the least defended regions on earth, has been a calculated move. In 2013, de­spite not being one of the eight Arctic nations, China gained official observer status at the Arctic Council, an intergov­ernmental forum, and later declared it­self a “near­-Arctic state”—a phrase that seems to ignore the 5,000 kilometres between its northern­most point and the Arc­tic Circle.

It seems ironic Garneau’s Bill C-48 designed to halt Canadian fossil fuel exports was passed just two months earlier before he turned around and catered to Chinese interests. 

It seems apparent the Strathmere Group partially attained their aim for Declaration # 5 but not in its entirety so it is only a “passing grade”.

Based on the foregoing happenings (so well reported by the Walrus), the current Liberal government, by catering to the whims of the CCP looks likely to allow the creation of mining projects for those minerals desired by China. That being the case one should expect, at the least, a modicum of pollution to occur in the Arctic meaning Declaration # 6 will be destined to fall into the Strathmere Groups first fail category.

NB:  The final Declaration # 7 and the associated appraisal of it will be posted in the next few days.

Friends of Science posts Video of my Part 1 of the Mark Carney(val) Series

Michelle Sterling of Friends of Science took a liking to my first article about Mark Carney and his unbridled interest in altering common economic theory for climate change adaptation.  Michelle liked it so much she posted a YouTube video on their site.  She has done a great job at conveying the messages I was trying hard to put down in written form which made the article somewhat lengthy.

You can tune into the video and watch it here:

Visiting FOS website can also be an interesting exercise with lots of great articles and observations including lots of videos disputing the eco-warrior claims and their site is here:

https://friendsofscience.org/

The Mark Carney[val] is in Full Bloom[berg] Part 2

Part 1 of this series briefly reviewed Mark Carney and some of the many creations he played a hand in developing or where he takes part in; including biased organizations such as the WEF (World Economic Forum) where he is a trustee or as the UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance. The institutions and his creations are focused on altering the climate by using financial modeling.  The modeling seeks to either get the world to embrace socialism, globalism or perhaps communism and is cited as “The Great Reset’.  The WEF’s focus on “The Great Reset” tells us by 2030 “you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy” and puts the Carney push in perspective.  The WEF just doesn’t tell us who will own everything?

The goal of The Great Reset and Carney’s role in it seems focused on using his credentials as former Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England to convince the global financial community (central banks) to adapt the concept which will make the super-rich richer and the middle class poorer!

Just a few days ago the Washington Post carried an article titled; “Why Big Central Banks Are Becoming Climate Warriors” which carried the following comments related to Carney: “In 2015, former Bank of England governor Mark Carney raised an alarm about the “tragedy” of climate change and warned specifically about “re-pricing” events. That includes physical damage that destroys the value of assets (such as waterfront properties), imposes new liabilities on companies (as shown by California utility giant PG&E Corp.’s wildfire-driven bankruptcy) or sharply raises insurance prices. Another risk is a sudden slump in the value of certain assets because of drastic government action to combat climate change, like the introduction of a steep carbon tax or regulations that keep fossil fuels in the ground. “The speed at which such re-pricing occurs is uncertain and could be decisive for financial stability,” Carney said.” The Post didn’t fact check Carney’s claims as the article was a product of Bloomberg L.P. which is part of Carney’s friend/associate, Michael Bloomberg’s empire.

Is it any wonder why a September 2020 Gallop poll showed 27% have “not very much” trust and 33% “none at all” in the US mass media!

The focus of the super-rich is on “climate change” and a reduction of those nasty CO 2 emissions which keep the world functioning by generating food for us humans and all plant and animal life.  Here in Canada rumours have circulated that Carney would run for the Liberal Party in the next election. That rumour has been dispelled as he recently tweeted he wouldn’t run in the next election! 

His tweet explaining why said: “Climate change is the most important issue on the planet. I made commitments to @antonioguterres & @BorisJohnson to help make sure @COP26 is successful this November. As a goalie, I know you don’t skate off the ice in the 3rd period of a must-win game.” You might if the other team offered to double or triple your pay which I suspect would be the opposite for Carney if he agreed to run for parliament with no guarantee he would win. He would have to forego what he currently receives for the over fifteen plus titles and positions he currently holds to avoid a conflict of interest.

The reduction of emissions he claims are needed will reputedly be created by central banks regulating financial institutions to ensure they price in climate change risk when regulating financial companies. Those institutions will be regulated to both invest and/or lend money to borrowers with sustainability goals! This will be accomplished by instituting “carbon taxes” on all of mankind’s consumption driving up the price of everything. Companies will be required to offset their emissions by purchasing “carbon offsets” which is where the big money will be made at the expense of the consumer.

A recent article in the Financial Times headlined: Carney calls for ‘$100bn a year’ global carbon offset market quotes him saying;“The demand for this is going to be huge, because we have this big shift. More and more companies-and it will be a tsunami by Glasgow-will have net zero emissions plans,” said Mr. Carney. 

Bloomberg Green ran a recent article about a top U.S. seller of “carbon offsets”, Nature Conservancy which noted they were reputedly selling meaningless carbon credits to clients such as “JPMorgan Chase & Co., BlackRock Inc., and Walt Disney Co., which use them to claim large reductions in their own publicly reported emissions.” The article went on to state; “In 2020, companies purchased more than 93 million carbon credits, equivalent to the pollution from 20 million cars in a year.“ An article from GreenBiz on June 14, 2021 claimed: “Carbon offset prices on average stand at just $3-5 per metric ton of CO2 at present, with experts fearing that prices are far below the level required” meaning to reach Carney’s suggested $100bn a year they would have to increase by more than 300 times their current level.

The foregoing raises the question; why has the Trudeau led Liberal Party imposed a cost of C$170/tonne by 2030 when the market is currently trading at only US $3/5.00 per tonne? The current levy on Canadians is currently C$40/tonne or about 10 times the current market rate!

Needless to say, one of the Carney creations; Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM) recently morphed into Project Carbon, a Voluntary Carbon Marketplace pilot consisting (so far) of  CIBC, Itaú Unibanco, National Australia Bank and NatWest Group. They seek others to join them! Their stated aim, after claiming, “Corporations worldwide are using carbon offsets as a tool to implement their climate action strategies.” is “to support a thriving global marketplace for quality carbon offsets with clear and consistent pricing and standards and will provide a valuable pathway for our clients in their efforts to achieve a net zero goal.”  Presumably those “quality carbon offsets” are unlike those being sold by Nature Conservancy as noted above.

Just a presumption on my part but I suspect the real aim is to profit from the Carney creation and should all governments raise their “carbon tax” to Canadian levels their aim will be achievable.  No wonder another of his tweets stated “I fully support @JustinTrudeau & the @liberalparty and will do everything I can to help.”

It seems obvious Carney’s claim that “Climate change is the most important issue on the planet” is his narrative to fool the masses and Bloomberg L.P. aids the process via the media. His focus is clearly on consolidating wealth among the super-rich and that he joins the club!

The rest of us will own nothing and we will be happy!

Clean Energy is in the eye of the Beholder

It was interesting to note two articles appearing on the same day (June 23, 2021) had wildly conflicting information on the benefits and harm of eliminating fossil fuels in the electricity generating sector.  The article in the Financial Post was headlined: “Canada’s clean energy push to create more than 200,000 jobs by 2030: reportand cited a new dispatch from Clean Energy Canada (CEC) of Simon Fraser University (SFU) and Navius Research, an outgrowth of SFU and Professor Mark Jaccard. Professor Jaccard is full blown in his belief the world is doomed unless we achieve “net-zero” emissions and was cited in a CBC article stating: “Fossil fuels are wonderful except for destroying the planet“. 

It is fascinating the eco-warriors, in the CEC report, use data on a continuing basis that is impossible to verify. As an example, the CEC report suggests “Canada’s clean energy sector already employs 430,500 people—more than the entire real estate sector—and by 2030, that number is projected to grow almost 50% to 639,200 under the federal government’s new climate plan.” The foregoing 430,500 (already employed) appears to be a number picked out of a hat as the Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario back in December 2020 issued a “policy brief” and in it noted; “electric power, generation power and transmission” employed 104,315 people in 2019. So, one should ask, where are those 430,500 people, actually employed?  One example the CEC report suggests is; “Jobs in electric vehicle technology are on track to grow 39% per year, with 184,000 people set to be employed in the industry in 2030—a 26-fold increase over 2020.”

According to Unifor as of August 2020 current employment in the Canadian automotive industry is “129,000 people in Canada, in vehicle assembly (44,000) as well as body and trailer (13,000) and parts manufacturing (72,000). Factoring in various other auto-dependent jobs and workplaces, some estimates peg the overall number of direct jobs at over 188,000”! Apparently, according to CEC and Navius, it is a foregone conclusion 184,000 jobs in 2030 somehow translates to a 26-fold increase over 188,000 in 2020 instead of a loss of 4,000 jobs! The foregoing should remind all Ontario ratepayers how, when former Ontario Energy Minister, George Smitherman, responded to a question in the Ontario legislature as to how the Green Energy Act would create 50,000 jobs said; “Across the landscape of these investments, we feel quite confident that 50,000 jobs will be created.” As we Ontarians know those jobs never materialized but electricity rates inceased well over 100%!

The second article on June 23rd in the National Post was titled: ‘Solar trash tsunami’: How solar power is driving a looming environmental crisis.   The article spelled out; the problem with solar panels as it turns out, is significant!  The article notes: “Put simply, we can expect a lot more solar panel waste within the next decade than we are prepared for,” wrote a team led by Calgary-based supply chain researcher Serasu Duran in a pre-publication paper.” The study tried to estimate the tonnage of solar panels set to hit landfills and warned if the solar industry doesn’t get a handle on its trash problem, “we may soon face the dark side of renewable energy.” IREA (The International Renewable Energy Agency) in 2016, noted by 2050 the world would need to deal with up to 78 million tonnes of solar panel trash. In order to wrap your mind around that; consider the City of Toronto manages more than 786,000 tonnes of residential waste each year (1% of what IREA estimate solar panel waste will be) and in 2020 diverted 413,673 tonnes of residential waste from landfill through several programs. Solar panels are not part of that diversion!

The report from Duran suggests IREA’s number is a vast underestimate because it assumed the world’s existing solar panels would remain bolted to roofs for 30 years but they estimate millions of people will replace those panels to install cheaper and more efficient ones. The report suggests by 2030 solar waste could be 50 times higher then IREA’s estimate which would equate to about 39 million tonnes.

Perhaps what the CEC report suggests is the 200,000 jobs “clean energy” will reputedly create by 2030 may be related to recycling solar panels.  Perhaps some of those jobs will also be involved in grinding up IWT (industrial wind turbines) blades that are each 120 feet or longer so the fiberglass, etc. can be mixed with cement rather than being dumped in landfills as they are currently. 

The report by Duran, et al, in a recent review of their research for the Harvard Business Review suggests “the solar industry could be generating 2.5 tonnes of waste for every tonne of solar panel it installs”.

The foregoing may require CEC and Navius Research to revise their report as more jobs will be needed to recycle that increased solar panel trash and grind up those wind turbine blades!

Now we know the real value of what the eco-warriors claim is “clean energy”!

Ecojustice Lost in Court

Ecojustice challenged the Alberta, Allen Inquiry, into the “Tarsands Campaign” and recently lost in court. The organizations and individuals behind the campaign were many of those I have connected in a recent article. At the same time, I noted how they obtained tax dollars in their efforts to push their “climate change” concept and to shut down Canada’s oil and gas industry. The article’s long title is “Canadian Institute for Climate Choices, Smart Prosperity Institute, Ecojustice, The Natural Step, and the University of Ottawa interdisciplinary Environment Institute all connect to Stewart Elgie and several other Eco-Warriors” and was posted June 7, 2021.

Friends of Science has utilized some of the material from the aforementioned article in their recent YouTube post.  Watch the video to get a view on how the eco-warriors were and are continuing to shut down the inquiry perhaps because they will be exposed?

ENERGY EVOLUTION: OTTAWA’S COMMUNITY ENERGY TRANSITION STRATEGY

City of Ottawa plans to spend $57.4 Billion to get to net-zero by 2050 and Carney is helping them

On April 24, 2019 the City of Ottawa passed a motion declaring a “climate emergency” and only two councilors voted against it.  Interestingly one of the “No” votes came from Rick Chiarelli, 2nd cousin of Bob Chiarelli, former Ontario Minister of Energy who during his term of service was a big fan of renewable energy which caused electricity prices to rise over 100% in the province.

Passage of the motion led to the appointment of councilor Scott Moffat as Chair of the City’s Standing Committee on Environmental Protection, Water and Waste Management. Moffat presumably accepted the position with his belief in the reputed and upcoming “climate emergency” motion he supported.

As an outgrowth of the “climate emergency” declaration, the Ottawa Community Foundation (OCF), a registered charity with assets of $178 million (CRA 2019 filing) launched the Ottawa Climate Action Fund (OCAF).  The official launch occurred May 14, 2021 and was moderated by Diana Fox Carney, who happens to be Mark Carney’s wife. 

As yet another coincidence, it was earlier announced on May 3, 2021, by Eurasia Group, “the world’s leading political risk research and consulting firm” (their claim), that “Diana Fox Carney, a widely respected expert on global climate and energy policy, will be joining as a senior advisor. At Eurasia Group, Fox Carney will work closely with Vice Chairman Gerald Butts, who helped negotiate the Paris Climate Agreement, to bolster the firm’s growing climate and energy practice. Most Canadians and particularly Ontarians will recognize the “Butts” name as it was he who; “behind the scenes”, influenced former Ontario Premier, McGuinty in the creation of the GEGEA (Green Energy and Green Economy Act) driving up electricity prices in the push for wind and solar generation.

On the launch day of May 14, 2021 the OCAF issued a press release announcing a: “$21.7M investment from the Government of Canada to bring Carbon Down and Community Up“.  As one would expect the press release carried words of wonder from Ministers Seamus O’Regan and Catherine McKenna on how those tax dollars would help save the world from the climate emergency while creating jobs and making life better for our kids and grandkids.

The City of Ottawa’s plan to get to net-zero by 2050 consists of 101 pages and starts with a “Thank You to Our Partners”. The report states; “The city extends its sincere thanks and appreciation to almost 200 public and private stakeholders representing more than 90 organizations” in discussions and technical workshops! One of those listed is Pollution Probe (a charity) who have been pushing environmental issues for several decades.  The interesting issue in respect to the City of Ottawa’s plan is it appears to have been created by Pollution Probe. When you link to the plan in PDF format it suggests it was PP’s creation not the City!  Also interesting is in the list of OCAF’s appointed advisors one finds an individual by the name of Chris Henderson.  If one looks at Pollution Probe 2020 GALA webpage the moderator for one of the sessions was Chris Henderson.  Coincidental, or is Ottawa’s “net-zero” plan a creation of PP rather than City officials?

The official OCAF online launch with Diana Carney as moderator took place on the same day (May 14, 2021) as the $21.7 million in tax dollars were announced.  The video recording of the launch is just over one hour and included presenters; Seamus O’Regan, Catherine McKenna and a few others including Councilor Moffat!  O’Regan waxed on about temperatures last winter being 10 degrees higher than normal in Labrador as a sign of the climate emergency but if he bothered to investigate history, he would have noted average winter temperatures in Goose Bay, where he grew up, vary by as much as 30 degrees from a low of -30 C to 0 C in January. Ottawa MP McKenna screeched she want’s Ottawa to be the greenest capital ever!

Reverting to the PP plan it is interesting to see the following:  “Financial analysis indicates that cumulative community-wide investments from 2020 to 2050 total $57.4 billion with a present value of $31.8 billion.” To put that in perspective the $21.7 million taxpayer dollars just awarded to the City is 0.4% of the investments reputedly needed and those investments are 14.5 times the City’s current annual budget of $3.94 billion. As one should suspect the plan recommends complete electrification of everything and utilizing renewable energy in the form of solar and wind (lowest power density of energy sources).  From the plan: 

The model indicates that the minimum results required to meet the 100% scenario under the electricity sector are:

• Solar photovoltaic (PV) reaches 1,060 MW by 2050 (approximately 36 km2 of solar PV47 mostly on rooftops)

• Wind generation reaches 3,218 MW by 2050 (approximately 710 large scale turbines)”

The proposal to have 1060 MW of solar panels (40% of what Ontario currently has) and 3,218 MW of wind turbines (60% of what Ontario has currently) to supply Ottawa with the power needed to achieve net-zero by 2050 is a dream Ontarians have already suffered though. Residents in Ottawa should get ready for electricity prices to more than double every 10 years.

The 101-page plan says absolutely nothing about the toxic elements in those 1060 MW of solar panels that will require disposal in 15/20 years when they reach their end of life and need to be removed from the 36 square kilometers of rooftops they will cover.  Interestingly enough, many will have to be removed and replaced before we even reach 2050.

The same concern should be considered in respect to those “710 large scale turbines” whose life cycle is about the same as solar panels and will be 160 metres in height as compared to the 98 metre height of the Peace Tower. I presume Catherine McKenna would welcome solar panels on her roof and one of those industrial wind turbines near or at her residence if she really wants Ottawa to be “the greenest capital ever”.

The OEB yearbook of Distributors for 2019 indicates the hourly peak demand for Hydro Ottawa in the summer was 1,348 MW and winter peak was 1,257 MW, By 2050 or sooner those peaks will double or triple. What that could mean is residents and businesses will be faced with rolling blackouts similar to those experienced by California, Southern Australia and were partially to blame for the Texas blackout. Those three regions have opted for unreliable and intermittent wind and solar generation although Texas hasn’t gone quite as far as California and SA have.

Those of us in the rest of Ontario should insist Hydro Ottawa be disconnected from the grid to ensure only the City of Ottawa is affected by blackouts or brownouts in the future.  Let them spend the $57.4 billion but only use the tax dollars generated by those living in Ottawa and the rest of us can sit back and watch what happens when politicians are eventually accused of harming those who voted for them.

Cabal of climate change fear-mongers cash in.

Once again I was invited to be on Sauga Radio 960 AM where Marc Patrone and I discussed my recent article about the “climate change” cabal of unelected warriors who seem to control the politicians the rest of us elected. We touched on a few other related topics that talked about the costs of the folly they profess.

You can tune in to the June 8, 2021 podcast here at 1:20:45 to hear the full conversation:

Podcasts

Or if you are a subcriber to NEWSTALK CANADA you can listen here;

https://newstalkcanada.com/?page_id=2527

Canadian Institute for Climate Choices, Smart Prosperity Institute, Ecojustice, The Natural Step, and the University of Ottawa interdisciplinary Environment Institute all connect to Stewart Elgie and several other Eco-Warriors

The Canadian Institute for Climate Choices (CICC) is an outgrowth of a $20 million award by Catherine McKenna when she was Minister of the Environment and Climate Change (MoECC).  The award was granted to the Pan-Canadian Expert Collaboration (P-CEC) a group of 21 familiar “climate change” advocates which morphed into the CICC. The P-CEC was explored by the writer in a series of six (6) articles disclosing who they were, how they were connected and how they were funded.  The first in the series was posted November 11, 2019 and the final one December 15, 2019.

When the contract was awarded the $20 million allocated to the winning group by Minister McKenna was to be utilized over five years. The CICC’s  annual report for 2020-2021 indicates they used $4.7 million of the award and 52% went towards compensation and 21% for external research.  Beyond that, there are no specific details in the “annual report”.  Needless to say, the CICC have churned out many reports since their founding reflecting on the usual cadre of eco-warrior concerns such as; climate change, global warming, emissions and of course net-zero.

CICC reputedly has 25 Staff led by Kathy Bardswick, formerly CEO of the Co-Operators Group where, as CEO she led them to be “the first Canadian Insurance company signatory to the UN Principles of Sustainable Insurance, being a member of the UN Inquiry into a Sustainable Financial System”.  

CICC has Stewart Elgie as a “Expert” panelist along with several other recognizable climate change advocates like Blair Feltmate, Mark Jaccard, etc. Bardswick recently retired as Founding President of CICC and her post has been taken over by none other than Rick Smith, a former CEO of Environmental Defence. Smith is a close associate of Bruce Lourie whom yours truly has written extensively about due to his influence with the former Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty and creation of the GEA which drove up electricity prices in the province by over 100%.  If one looks at the CICC Board Members one will note Lourie is one of the chosen as is Chis Ragan.  Ragan was Chair of the Ecofiscal Commission and Stewart Elgie was a Commissioner.  Bruce Lourie sat on Ecofiscal’s Advisory Board.  The Ecofiscal Commission recommended; emissions should be priced at $210/tonne in order to achieve Canada’s commitment to the Paris Accord. One should notice Ecofiscal’s recommendation is not much higher than current Minister, Jonathon Wilkinson of the MoECC is taking us with the price to reach $170/tonne by 2030.

Elgie’s biography on CICC describes his awe-inspiring career to this point (sarcasm intended) by noting: “Prof. Elgie started his career as an environmental lawyer in Alaska, litigating over the Valdez oil spill. He returned to Canada and founded Ecojustice, now Canada’s largest non-profit environmental law organization”. The bio goes on to say Elgie “is also the founder and chair of Smart Prosperity, Canada’s major green economy think tank and policy-research network.” and “is a professor of law and economics at the University of Ottawa and director of the University’s interdisciplinary Environment Institute.”

Elgie easily made the Ontario “Sunshine list for 2020 but, it doesn’t disclose what he gets from Ecojustice or the Smart Prosperity Institute where he sits as the “Executive Chair”. Elgie, as a “professor” earned $203,528.72 according to the 2020 Sunshine list.  A quick review of Ecojustice’s Oct. 31, 2020 financials disclosed this note: “As a result of COVID-19, Ecojustice Canada Society took advantage of government assistance programs in place, resulting in the recognition of $382,225 of revenue relating to the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy in the year which is included in other revenue.” What a kind gesture by Canadian taxpayers to toss almost $400K at a charity whose intentions are to shut down all fossil fuel generation and consumption in Canada which will inevitability create more energy poverty.

The Smart Prosperity Institute which Elgie founded is within the University of Ottawa and includes at least five government “Funders” so presumably receives lots of taxpayer dollars however, they don’t disclose or publish financial statements.  Reviewing the Federal government’s search websites for grants and contracts however does disclose two contracts awarded in 2020 and 2121 for approximately $86K and one grant in 2020 for $380K.

Another charitable institution; The Natural Step, Canada, (an arm of an international group) are going full bore on “climate change”.  They have Elgie listed as a Member of the Board, along with Lorne Johnson, VP, Ivey Foundation and a Board member. Coincidentally Bruce Lourie is President of the Ivey Foundation. A quick review of Federal Government contracts discloses; The Natural Step received four contracts with a value of about $110K over the past few years and four grants of about $775K. When one looks at the CRA filings for The Natural Step they fail to disclose the foregoing facts about receiving those funds from the Federal Government.  As a result, I reported the information to the CRA but I seriously doubt the CRA will actually admonish them.

Now, let’s have a quick look at the CICC’s latest report; “THE HEALTH COSTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE“! It’s a totally scary document to anyone who has not followed the tripe about fossil fuels and how CO2 emissions will cause “peoplekind” to be expunged from the face of the Earth. Funnily enough this document says nothing about those emissions! If you search for CO2 you get zero hits and if you search for “global warming” you get only 4 hits however if you search for “climate change” you get 382 hits! It begs the question is “global warming” no longer an issue. The following is one excerpt that suggests the climate activists are trying their best to alter the landscape perhaps because they are having difficulty trying to prove their cause and justify their government funding?

As ground-level ozone increases, so do deaths and healthcare costs. Unless action is taken, future healthcare costs of ozone exposure could increase to one quarter of current healthcare costs linked to cancer. The costs of death and lost quality of life are even greater—we estimate these costs will be $86 billion per year by mid-century and $250 billion per year by the end of the century.” So, the CICC “experts” think their skillsets are sufficient to make a 79-year forecast! Inflated egos are rife in the CICC!

The report rambles on about “wildfires” “floods” “heatwaves” and increased deaths from heat and “mental health” but avoids attacking carbon emissions or blaming “global warming. The report says nothing about less deaths from the cold except to state “we have not tried to estimate the effects of climate change on cold-related mortality and morbidity in this study.” 

The report also states: “Not accounting for climate change, the direct costs of mental illness in Canada are expected to grow to some $291 billion per year by 2041 (a 590 per cent increase), with cumulative costs over that 30-year period reaching more than $2.3 trillionIt goes on to state: “Even if climate change only moderately increases rates of mental illness, this could be among the costliest climate-related health impacts for Canada.”

What the foregoing extraction from the report suggests is this taxpayer funded organization with the reputed numerous “experts” presumably involved in producing it have no confidence in what they have been pushing for the past few decades. The cost of “mental health” they suggest, has been exacerbated by their flogging “peoplekinds” reputed influence on raising earth’s temperature through the use of fossil fuels.  The time has come to defund these misdirected “expertly” dominated soothsayers!  As Greta might say:  “How dare you”!

In summarizing the foregoing it’s obvious the cabal of “climate change” experts are directing politicians to do what they want, not to save the world from a future pandemic, but simply to keep the money coming to support their “the sky is falling” indulgence.  

As a taxpayer I suggest “once bitten, twice shy” so let’s turn off the tap!