Woke banks all in on ‘reset’, carbon exchange ripoff

Marc Patrone of Sauga 960 AM had me on his show today to follow up on my recent article which was related to how the Canadian banks like TD and RBC have joined in with financial institutions around the world to push the concept of ESG (environmental, social and governance) concept conceived by the WEF (World Economic Forum) and loved by all the various UN bureaucracies.

While Marc and I did talk about that we also covered other related ground such as CO2 emissions, net-zero by 2050, science (he had a great clip of Steve Koonin) and the general failure of the main stream media in putting out all the facts and actually doing some investigative reporting.

You can listen to the May 5, 2021 podcast on SAUGA 960 AM starting at 50.45 here:

https://sauga960am.ca/podcasts/

Or if you are a subscriber to NEWSTALK CANADA you can listen here:

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

TD Bank goes full bore with ESG

Several months ago I penned an article about the Royal Bank of Canada and their push to be seen as ESG (environmental, social and governance) compliant.  ESG is a concept pushed by the WEF (World Economic Forum) principally to get the world to halt “Runaway climate change, environmental degradation and social inequality”.  The concept has been endorsed by all the major international audit firms (Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PwC)!  Presumably they see the opportunity to increase auditing charges by creating math formulae much different than the basic math one would expect to be applied in a financial audit!

ESG is fully endorsed by others who will benefit financially such as Bloombergs, and some former central bank governors such as Canada’s very own, Mark Carney. Certainly, most Canadians are aware that our PM, Justin Trudeau and his Minister of the Environment, Jonathon Wilkinson are big on the E. and the S. of ESG but the Covid-19 pandemic has demonstrated their complete failure on “G” ie: Governance! 

At the time I penned the above noted article I had no reason to believe other Canadian banks had jumped into the fray however I was alerted to the fact that none other than my former employer, TD Bank, was an enthusiastic supporter of the ESG concept. 

Following up; led to the discovery TD had issued their initial ESG report titled, “Adapting with Purpose 2020 Environmental, Social and Governance Report “.  The report was 112 pages whereas their 2020 Financial report was only 91 pages. It almost appears as if TD’s management ranks shareholders below “climate change” advocates!

Looking through the report is interesting if one starts with a simple word search.  When searching “ESG” you get 400 hits, searching “environmental” the hits are 216, “sustainable” garners 150 and “governance” 177.  Repetition for emphasis perhaps?  The words “climate change” generates 80 appearances but net-zero only brings 3 references.  The report devotes page 109 of the report to just “Acronyms” which number 79 and 7 (including the UNIPCC) of them are devoted to UN (United Nations) initiatives.  Naturally the WEF amongst many others are included.

The press release announcing TD’s commitment to net-zero emissions by 2050 was upsetting as they have accepted the belief; CO2 emissions are a climate control knob.  It was also upsetting because their one and only endorsement was from none other than Bruce Lourie of the IVEY Foundation a CRA charity where he has sat as President since early 2005.  Under his guidance the Ivey Foundation has been dedicated to eliminating fossil fuels as their “vision” suggests: “Ivey’s Economy and Environment program supports Canada’s transition to a sustainable economy by identifying opportunities to enhance resource efficiency, foster innovation and advance the field of sustainable finance.”  I wrote a series of articles* about Lourie many years ago pointing out his ability to influence politicians while enriching the numerous entities he created or strongly influenced, frequently with our tax dollars.

If one searches Government Grants it is surprising a charitable foundation with over $100 million in net assets would actually apply for a grant but an “Ivey Foundation” search netted two grants totaling $37,500. One for $7,500 was granted when Catherine McKenna was Minister of the Environment and Climate Change and the other $30,000 grant came from the Minister of Natural Resources when Jim Carr was in charge. It is worth remembering Bruce Lourie played a major role in Ontario under the McGuinty/Wynne Liberals as he and Gerald Butts were very influential in getting them to pass the GEA. The GEA was reputedly going to create 50,000 jobs and as then Energy Minister, George Smitherman stated; would only raise electricity rates 1%. Ontario’s ratepayers know how that turned out! 

Lourie and Butts are both members of the “Task Force for a Resilient Recovery” and the Ivey Foundation is one of its funders.  A prior article outlined their close relationship and even how they, together with our current PM, Justin Trudeau, were together for a seven day canoe trip back in 2003.

What TD Bank is doing will alienate TD’s clients in Western Canada, those dependent on fossil fuels in numerous businesses here in Ontario, etc. including petrochemicals, refining, plastic manufacturing (including health related products), mining, infrastructure projects, farming, etc. etc.

It is truly ironic TD have also released a report suggesting; “Three-quarters of oil and gas sector could be displaced in move to cut emissions“. It almost appears TD’s Chief Economist, Beata Caranci, penned the report in support of the ESG push knowing TD will be partially responsible as many of the jobs affected will be TD customers and many of the companies cutting those jobs will also be customers. One of the conclusions in the report notes: “The clean energy transition represents an enormous economic opportunity to redefine and reinvigorate the Canadian energy sector and become established as a globally competitive leader in a net zero world.” Ms. Caranci’s report suggests the science is settled and fails to cite any opposing scientific studies to those touted by the WEF or those pushing the narrative that mankind can somehow control earth’s temperature! I also fail to see how that will “reinvigorate the Canadian energy sector” in any way!  This belief that the “science is settled” so we must act does not bode well for the bank or its shareholders. 

As a former employee and current shareholder my message to TD’s executive is; “rethink your position”!  Fossil fuels are not the control knob for global warming and are essential to Canada’s needs and the rest of the world, no matter what philosopher Bruce Lourie or his ilk tell you.

*This was the last in the series but a Google search of “Bruce Lourie’s Spider web” will show others.

Charities are not what they appear to be

Merriam-Webster’s first definition of the word charity* is: “generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering”. Most Canadians have probably wondered since the “WE Charity” scandal broke, how that definition fits into the CRA’s granting of charitable status to applicants and then how they administer them from that point. 

Well, presumably to put our minds at ease, the CRA recently released a “Report on the Charities Program 2018 to 2020” and they applaud themselves.  As an example, the Director General, Tony Manconi in his overview noted the Charities Directorate: “aims to promote compliance with the charity-related income tax legislation and regulations in order to support charitable giving and development of the sector, while protecting charities and the public from abuse.”

The foregoing is to suggest we taxpayers should relax as those within the CRA are managing the charities really well, but are they? 

From all appearances the MSM totally ignored the CRA report as a search for responses to it suggests the only parties who even looked at it were a couple of law firms and a few charities.  

Should one scan the following chart which provides the sources of revenue flowing to charities over the “annual average” of the years 2016 to 2018 it is rather shocking to note 86.6% ($183.9 billion) was labelled as “Revenue from Government”. A cursory look at some of the CRA charities labeled “universities” or “hospitals” suggest this is where the bulk of that “Government Revenue” flowed. The CRA’s report notes as of the end of 2019 there were still 4975 “Public Foundations” down from 5027 in 2018.

Curiosity piqued; an examination of The Governing Council of the University of Toronto’s CRA filings followed which led to the discovery over the five years of their filed reports they had received $5.157 billion collectively from Federal, Provincial and Municipal governments.  They have 61 people on the “Governing Council” and 10 of them (probably many more) have incomes exceeding $350K per annum.  A look at the Ontario “Sunshine list” for “universities” show 10 of the top 20 names on the list were U. of T. employees with the lowest earning almost $458K in 2019.

U. of T. employees reputedly number about 15,600 operating on three campuses and the April 30, 2020 CRA filing indicates total compensation of $2.3 billion which suggests average income of $147K per employee and represented about 65% of U. of T’s gross revenue of $3.54 billion.

Some of the $1,043 million U. of T. received in their year-ended April 30, 2020 from the various governments (paid by taxpayers) flows to University of Toronto Asset Management Corporation (UTAM) established in April 2000. UTAM have responsibility to manage three U. of T. pools of funds which are; the Long Term Capital Appreciation Pool (assets from endowments) of $3.2 billion, the Expendable Funds Investment Pool (short-term working capital) of $2.5 billion and the University of Toronto Master Trust (Pension Fund) of $5.6 billion. So UTAM were managing (as of December 31, 2019) assets of $11.4 billion much of which us kindly taxpayers contributed over the years. 

Further, and as a matter of interest, UTAM have gone full blown ESG (environmental, social and governance) signing up to the UN PRI (principles for responsible investment) back in December 2016. They have obviously bought into the new economic theories pushed by the WEF and many others including our former Bank of Canada governor, Mark Carney!  They even have a picture of industrial wind turbines on the website to augment their belief in ESG. No doubt, if UTAM come up short and unable to generate sufficient revenue in their management of the pension fund the university will go hat in hand to the various government bodies and seek more of our private sector tax dollars!

Now, returning to the CRA report another interesting disclosure was the fact charities as of December 31, 2020 had filed over 91,000 applications for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) and almost all of them were approved.  That resulted in another $2.4 billion of tax dollars flowing to charities (with employees such as U. of T.) and one should imagine many of those dollars flowed to the lower paid employees within the various universities, colleges, and other public sector charities as well as to many environmental groups such as WWF, Pembina Foundation, Environmental Defence, etc. etc.

Canada is in need of new legislation in respect to charities in order to meet the true definition of what a charity really is. 

The public is being abused despite the rhetoric from the Director General!

*To be clear I am a member of a charity but it is a “not for profit” so doesn’t issue tax receipts and has no paid employees but we do our best to help the needy and contribute to the community!

We should wonder, does the term, “net-zero” reference the future cash available for us to pay to heat and eat during Canada’s cold winters?

Canada’s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, Jonathon Wilkinson, a few days ago made the announcement that he has chosen his “Net-Zero Advisory Body” and it is reputedly filled with individuals with “a diverse range of expertise in science, business, labour, policy-making, rural economic development, and Indigenous governance.”  Their Mandate; “is to identify pathways to help Canada achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.”

Looking back to December 2020 when Wilkinson released his; “A Healthy Environment and a Healthy Economy” report, one would note it stated; “The Government is proposing to increase the carbon price by $15 per year, starting in 2023, rising to $170 per tonne of carbon pollution in 2030. The increasing price will make cleaner options more affordable and discourage pollution-intensive investments.” 

It certainly appears based on the foregoing claim, increasing the carbon price (tax) would drive emissions down so why does Wilkinson believe increasing bureaucracy with “prejudiced” advisors will somehow add value? Is the “$170/tonne carbon tax”, that will inflict economic pain on all Canadian’s, somehow (in his “Rhodes Scholar” mind) insufficient?  Wilkinson’s Ministry reported: “Over the long term, Canada’s economy has grown more rapidly than its GHG emissions: the emissions intensity for the entire economy (GHG per Gross Domestic Product [GDP]) has declined by 36% since 1990 and 20% since 2005.” The Ministry also noted; “Canada represented approximately 1.6% of global GHG emissions in 2016”. It is worth noting the foregoing occurred before we had a carbon tax!

To make matters worse and add more costs to Canadian households the announced imposition of the CFS (Clean Fuel Standard) with separate requirements for liquid, gaseous and solid fossil fuels will add $1,395.00 in additional annual costs to the average Canadian household based on a study by the Canadian Energy Research Institute.

Both the “carbon tax” increase and the “CFS” were added to Liberal plans meant to reduce and eventually negate Canada’s 1.6% of global GHG emissions. Now, there appears to be further plans to negatively impact the Canadian economy via more tax related issues to achieve that goal.

One of those is associated with the recent Biden/Trudeau chat which suggested the possible implementation of “carbon adjustment fees or quotas on goods coming from countries “that are failing to meet their climate and environmental obligations.” What the foregoing implies is cheap imports from countries like China, India, Vietnam, Brazil, etc. will suddenly attract an import tariff raising the import costs of products from those countries and impact the ability of households to purchase them.  One should expect the foregoing would result in those countries retaliating; meaning they would impose tariffs on imports from Canada, thereby reducing our trade, the associated economic activity and the jobs resulting from that trade.

What followed from the Biden/Trudeau virtual meeting was another meeting the following day between John Kerry and Jonathan Wilkinson and one of the major issues they focused on was; “things like working on vehicle emission standards for Canada and the U.S., again, looking to see how we can accelerate work to both enhance the energy efficiency of the existing types of vehicles that are being sold, but also to look at how we can accelerate the deployment of zero-emission technologies,”. One must assume the reflection suggested in Wilkinson’s remark, references electric vehicles (EV) and some of that EV production will be coming to Canada! Thanks to the generosity of all of Canada’s and Ontario taxpayers who are anteing up $590 million for Ford’s Oakville plant, 3,000 of the current 3,400 jobs at that plant will be saved at a cost of approximately $200K per job to produce electric vehicles.

To top things off the Federal government will also hand out a $5K “incentive” if you purchase an eligible EV and should you be a Quebec resident they will top that up with another $8K and if a BC resident they will add another $5K.                                                                                                                          We Canadian taxpayers are truly generous in our efforts to save the world from “climate change” thanks to the dolts we reward with our votes come election time!   As one of those whose tax dollars they are using to achieve “net-zero” by 2050 I am dubious I will live to see that day. I would suggest I am one of the many, including those who are blithely writing the cheques, who, at that time, will be shocked to realize our elimination of Canada’s 1.6% of emissions to achieve “net-zero” had no effect on climate change

PS:  To all who have read the article, I would recommend you watch a 1 hour and 13-minute documentary released in 2007 called: The Great Global Warming Swindle.   

UN “Experts“ claim they have Climate Crisis Answers and our political leaders believe them

When the Covid-19 Pandemic is finally behind us, the next crisis may be a lot worse if one believes UN experts who continue to forecast, “The Climate Crisis”!

A recent UN missive stated: “Rising temperatures are fueling environmental degradation, natural disasters, weather extremes, food and water insecurity, economic disruption, conflict, and terrorism. Sea levels are rising, the Arctic is melting, coral reefs are dying, oceans are acidifying, and forests are burning. It is clear that business as usual is not good enough. As the infinite cost of climate change reaches irreversible highs, now is the time for bold collective action.

The article goes on to make other egregious claims such as: “No continent is left untouched, with heatwaves, droughts, typhoons, and hurricanes causing mass destruction around the world.“ Have they have been listening to Greta Thunberg or she has listened to them?

The UN missive suggests life will be totally calamitous and much worse than the Covid-19 pandemic unless we take “bold collective action”!   

The article also claims: “Glaciers and ice sheets in polar and mountain regions are already melting faster than ever, causing sea levels to rise. Almost two-thirds of the world’s cities with populations of over five million are located in areas at risk of sea level rise and almost 40 per cent of the world’s population live within 100 km of a coast. If no action is taken, entire districts of New York, Shanghai, Abu Dhabi, Osaka, Rio de Janeiro, and many other cities could find themselves underwater within our lifetimes, displacing millions of people.“ The article does state; “science tells us that climate change is irrefutable, it also tells us that it is not too late to stem the tide.”  It sure sounds scary but remember, “it is not too late to stem the tide” but one should suspect; it will have a price!  

This is not the first time UN experts have made dire predictions. A UN “expert” in an article in the AP headlined: “U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked” also warned of upcoming doom. “As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations,” and went on to note “governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.” The foregoing article appeared in the Associated Press June 29, 1989 which is over thirty-one years ago!

So, thirty-one years have passed since the UN’s 1989 warning, yet the “climate crisis” is still upon us!  Those UN experts simply keep repeating their claims and our politicians and the MSM believe it, much like “chicken little” believed, “the sky is falling”!  Those “experts” enjoy being beneficiaries of our tax dollars so will keep repeating their lies as long as our political leaders keep believing them and force us lowly taxpayers to cough up the money for their continuing false claims. Those “experts” don’t only occupy the halls of the UN as we also have many in Canada who enjoy the benefits of our tax dollars via “charitable status” ENGO, government grants and government contracts! 

The time has come for voters in the World’s democracies to wake up to the “climate crisis spin” and stop electing the stream of gullible politicians who bow down to the spin-masters at the UN and in our own backyards.