National
Federal government touts climate ‘crisis’ without sufficient supporting evidence
From the Fraser Institute
Canada is, we are told, in a climate crisis. “Climate action can’t wait,” said Prime Minister Trudeau. “Together, we will beat this crisis while creating a green economy and new middle-class jobs for Canadians.” In a Guardian article, federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said “the science is clear” that the “climate crisis is the biggest single threat we face as a global community.” And of course, the government’s new “Raising the Bar” campaign is very alarming, particularly the stuff about droughts and floods.
But have we seen significant increases in weather extremes? Is the strength of evidence sufficient to justify the panic-mongering language of a “climate crisis?” In a nutshell, no.
Let’s start with drought. The vaunted UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) asserted “medium confidence” that increased drought has been observed across the globe. And in the Royal Society, one of oldest scientific academies on Earth, an international research team dug into the data only to find that in the “vast majority of the world, trends in meteorological drought duration and magnitude are not statistically significant, with the exception of some small regions of Africa and South America, which is also where data uncertainty is greater” concluding that “trends in meteorological drought severity in the last few decades are not observed globally based on precipitation data, and very few areas are showing changes in the severity of meteorological droughts.” Finally, according to the International Energy Agency, drought severity in Canada from 2000 to 2020 was only slightly above the global average.
Well, but what about floods?
Canada has plenty of those. The IPCC report finds it “likely” that heavy precipitation events (a major cause of flooding) have increased globally, at least over land areas with good data. The report has less confidence in places such as Africa and South America where we’re reminded the people are at higher risk from climate change because they’re poorer and less likely to adapt. But a 2017 report of the United States Global Climate Research Project found that while “detectable changes in some classes of flood frequency have occurred in parts of the United States” there’s no “significant connection of increased riverine flooding to human-induced climate change, and the timing of any emergence of a future detectable anthropogenic change in flooding is unclear.” Further, a recent UN report found with “high confidence” that “streamflow trends since 1950 are not statistically significant in most of the world’s largest rivers, while flood frequency and extreme streamflow have increased in some regions.” Does that sounds like a crisis?
The Trudeau government’s climate rhetoric has steadily ratcheted up over years, and settled on the panic-inducing language of “crisis.” We must follow government’s energy-diet, live smaller, less prosperous lives in less space, with less travel, and less, well, everything. Of course, the crisis rhetoric allows for no doubts, being absolutist in its claims that we are—right now—experiencing major increases in natural disasters fuelled by human-sourced greenhouse gas emissions.
But clearly, the scientific literature on extreme weather does not support this rhetoric. The actual data on extreme weather is scant, fragmented, contradictory and in all ways uncertain. It’s certainly not rigorous enough to justify the kind of exaggerated certainty Ottawa asserts nor the induction of climate panic.
Author:
The Great Enlightment Buddhist Academy, PEI
Prince Edward Island’s government has formally asked the RCMP to investigate allegations of foreign interference and money laundering tied to Buddhist-affiliated organizations operating in the province — an escalation that follows The Bureau’s reporting and last week’s press conference on Parliament Hill calling for a federal public inquiry.
In a letter sent today to RCMP Commissioner Michael Duheme, Premier Rob Lantz and Minister of Housing Cory Deagle urge federal authorities to “review any evidence available, engage with the individuals who have made these claims, and conduct an investigation into any wrongdoing.” A companion letter was sent to FINTRAC, asking Canada’s financial intelligence unit to assess whether regulatory action is warranted.
The government move comes a week after The Bureau reported on findings presented at an October 8 news conference tied to the book Canada Under Siege: How P.E.I. Became a Forward Operating Base for the Chinese Communist Party.
In a following op-ed, co-author Garry Clement said the press conference had “set down a marker: Canada has entered a new era of contestation — over influence, sovereignty, and the integrity of its democratic institutions.” In related coverage by CBC, representatives of the religious groups have denied any links to the Chinese Communist Party or any improper dealings.
Clement and co-authors argued that the allegations demand “action, reform, and reckoning,” and called for a federal public inquiry with full powers — an appeal joined by former Solicitor General and long-time P.E.I. MP Wayne Easter, who urged an inquiry capable of compelling testimony and documents.
The Bureau also revealed a development that stunned Islanders: a response subpoenaed by P.E.I. lawmakers showed that an anticipated 2016–2018 Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (IRAC) investigation into Buddhist-linked land holdings was never completed. A January 26, 2018 letter from IRAC’s appointed counsel notified firms representing the groups that the section 15 probe “has ended,” without public findings or any explanation of who ordered the closure or why. The disclosure raised fresh questions about oversight and potential conflicts, and now forms part of the backdrop to the province’s formal request for federal action.
The Bureau contacted IRAC last week with questions related to the agency’s management, including counsel relationships and prior positions within P.E.I. legal networks. New developments on this breaking story will be reported.
Today’s letter to RCMP Commissioner Duheme from the P.E.I. government explicitly references the October 8 statements by a former Solicitor General of Canada and a former RCMP Superintendent, noting it was “suggested that information exists that could provide grounds for a criminal investigation.” The Premier further flags assertions that P.E.I. has been used as “a forward operating base for the Chinese Communist Party,” calling the claim “serious” and stating it must be examined by federal agencies to determine whether any factual basis exists.
The province also points to what it describes as a newly mandated and ongoing investigation by IRAC into land holdings “associated with some of the same entities referenced in the public allegations,” using powers expanded in 2022 under the Lands Protection Act. Any findings with criminal or national-security implications, the letter says, will be referred to federal authorities.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Lee Harding
Ottawa’s Major Projects Office is a fix for a mess the Liberals created—where approval now hinges on politics, not merit.
They are repeating their same old tricks, dressing up political favouritism as progress instead of cutting barriers for everyone
On Sept. 11, the Prime Minister’s Office announced five projects being examined by its Major Projects Office, all with the potential to be fast-tracked for approval and to get financial help. However, no one should get too excited. This is only a bad effort at fixing what government wrecked.
During the Trudeau years, and since, the Liberals have created a regulatory environment so daunting that companies need a trump card to get anything done. That’s why the Major Projects Office (MPO) exists.
“The MPO will work to fast-track nation-building projects by streamlining regulatory assessment and approvals and helping to structure financing, in close partnership with provinces, territories, Indigenous Peoples and private investors,” explains a government press release.
Canadians must not be fooled. A better solution would be to create a regulatory and tax environment where these projects can meet market demand through private investment. We don’t have that in Canada, which is why money has fled the country and our GDP growth per capita is near zero.
Instead of this less politicized and more even-handed approach, the Liberals have found a way to make their cabinet the only gatekeepers able to usher someone past the impossible process they created. Then, having done so, they can brag about what “they” got done.
The Fraser Institute has called out this system for its potential to incentivize bribes and kickbacks. The Liberals have such a track record of handing out projects and even judicial positions to their friends that such scenarios become easier to believe. Innumerable business groups will be kissing up to the Liberals just to get anything major done.
The government has created the need for more of itself, and it is following up in every way it can. Already, the federal government has set up offices across Canada for people to apply for such projects. Really? Anyone with enough dollars to pursue a major project can fly to Ottawa to make their pitch.
No, this is as much about the show as it is about results—and probably much more. It is all too reminiscent of another big-sounding, mostly ineffective program the Liberal government rolled out in 2017. They announced a $950-million Innovation Superclusters Initiative “designed to help strengthen Canada’s most promising clusters … while positioning Canadian firms for global leadership.”
That program allowed any company in the world to participate, with winners getting matching dollars from taxpayers for their proposals. (But all for the good of Canada, we were told.) More than 50 applications were made for these sweepstakes, which included more than 1,000 businesses and 350 other participants. In Trudeau Liberal fashion, every applicant had to articulate how their proposal would increase female jobs and leadership and encourage diversity in the long term.
The entire process was like one big Dragon’s Den series. The Liberals trotted out a list of contestants full of nice-sounding possibilities, with maximum hype and minimal reality. Late in the process, Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry Navdeep Bains picked the nine finalists himself (all based in cities with a Liberal MP), from which five would be chosen.
The alleged premise was to leverage local and regional commercial clusters, but that soon proved ridiculous. The “Clean, Low-energy, Effective and Remediated Supercluster” purported to power clean growth in mining in Ontario, Quebec and Vancouver. Not to be outdone, the “Mobility Systems and Technologies for the 21st Century Supercluster” included all three of these locations, plus Atlantic Canada. They were only clustered by their tendency to vote Liberal.
Today, the MPO repeats this virtue-signalling, politicking, drawn-out, tax-dollar-spending drama. The Red Chris Mine expansion in northwest British Columbia is one of the proposals under consideration. It would be done in conjunction with the Indigenous Tahltan Nation and is supposed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 70 per cent. That’s right up the Liberal alley.
Meanwhile, the project is somehow part of a proposed Northwest Critical Conservation Corridor that would cordon off an area the size of Greece from development. Is this economic growth or economic prohibition? This approach is more like the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 than it is nation-building. And it is more like the World Economic Forum’s “stakeholder capitalism” approach than it is free enterprise.
At least there are two gems among the five proposals. One is to expand capacity at the Port of Montreal, and another is to expand the Canada LNG facility in Kitimat, B.C. Both have a market case and clear economic benefits.
Even here, Canadians must ask themselves, why must the government use a bulldozer to get past the red tape it created? Why not cut the tape for everyone? The Liberals deserve little credit for knocking down a door they barred themselves.
Lee Harding is a research fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Utah Republican Senator Planning To Attend Big Globalist Climate Shindig Despite Trump’s Energy Policies
Number of young people identifying as ‘transgender’ declines sharply: report
Local, Online, and Booming: The Business Shift Happening Across Alberta
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
-
Alberta24 hours ago
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
-
Business2 days ago“Nation Building,” Liberal Style: We’re Fixing a Sewer, You’re Welcome, Canada
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoLong-Distance Field Goals Have Flipped The Field. Will The NFL Panic?
-
Alberta2 days agoThe Technical Pitfalls and Political Perils of “Decarbonized” Oil
-
International24 hours agoDaughter convinces healthy father to die in double assisted suicide with mother
-
Business2 days agoFormer Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships
-
Alberta2 days agoEnbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline
-
Business15 hours ago‘Taxation Without Representation’: Trump Admin Battles UN Over Global Carbon Tax