Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

FELDSTED – The issue before the Supreme Court was one of jurisdiction -- it should have been about the arbitrary implementation of taxation laws


I am working my way through the Supreme Court decision on the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (GGPPA) and am dismayed by the Court’s bland acceptance that Canada is facing an existential threat to human life. Four hundred pages take time to read and digest. My initial reaction is below.  


Our federal government is not tasked with configuring Canada to ward off unproven theories on global warming. The threat is not existential; the plan to combat global warming is.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) consists of 195 members, of which about 25% are true democracies. The original Kyoto Accord was a blatant attempt to shift large amounts of capital from industrialized nations to have-not nations. For many reasons, the Accord failed.

There is no peer-reviewed, validated science to link industrialized nations and global warming or climate change. The Michael Mann models and projections were discredited, and the IPCC response has been to ignore this embarrassment.

Climate change is not an existential threat. Our climate has been evolving for all of recorded history. We go through long-term heating and cooling cycles. The IPCC took a fragment of that experience, distorted the data and predicted dramatic changes that have not taken place over the past three decades.

There is no analysis of the cost-benefit to Canada and Canadians. No matter what the IPCC holds forth, our federal government is obliged to conduct an ongoing study of the effects of reducing carbon emissions on Canada.

The GGPPA was made law in 2018. COVID-19 has had a highly destructive effect on our economy. Factors in play in 2018 are very different today. Carbon taxing will hurt our economic recovery, which is not acceptable.

The IPCC Paris Accord involves having some industrialized nations reducing carbon emissions for the benefit of all. That is a spurious approach as carbon emissions are not confined to the borders of emitting countries. Emissions from China and India affect Canada’s air, land and water quality, and we are powerless to stop that.

No matter how punishing the federal carbon pricing scheme is, the federal government cannot ensure that Canadians will not suffer the effects of climate change.

The federal government seized the authority to impose carbon taxes on Canadians without first proving that such a tax is needed or that such a tax is in the best long-term interests of Canada and Canadians. That is not democratic governance.

The issue before the Supreme Court was one of jurisdiction. It should have been about the arbitrary implementation of taxation laws without federal accountability, openness and transparency.

We don’t face a threat from carbon because our government says so. Without carbon, there will be no life on this planet.

Government regulation of carbon emissions is a far greater threat to life on our planet than climate change will ever be.

 

John Feldsted … is a political commentator, consultant, and strategist. He makes his home in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...
Post a Comment
Read more

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...
1 comment
Read more

Labels

Show more