Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Feds move target for net-zero grid back 15 years. Western provinces say it’s not of their business

Published

7 minute read

From Resource Works

“These latest measures fail to recognize provinces have jurisdiction over the development and management of electricity. The federal regulations are duplicative, inefficient, and add to costs.”

The federal government has clarified its clean-energy goal for a net-zero power grid.

Its final Clean Electricity Regulations target a net-zero grid across the country by 2050. But didn’t Ottawa previously, in August 2023, set a goal of 2035?

Certainly, one leading environmental group declared: “The federal government has committed to achieving zero-emissions electricity by 2035.”

And a law firm that analyses energy matters told followers in August 2023: “Government of Canada releases draft Clean Electricity Regulations aimed at achieving net-zero emissions from Canada’s electricity grid by 2035.”

What Ottawa said in August 2023 was this: “The proposed regulations would set performance standards that would ensure that the sector achieves significant transformation by 2035, so that a robust foundation of clean electricity is available to power the electric technologies (e.g., electric transportation) needed to support Canada’s transition to a net-zero GHG emissions economy by 2050.”

Announcing that 2035 goal was a case of fuzzy wording, according to Energy Minister Jonathan Wilkinson. He said Ottawa could have been more precise in its language and context around what exactly the 2035 target referred to.

He now says: “2035 was really having a plan as to how you were going to reduce emissions to be able to get to a net-zero economy by 2050… Perhaps we were not as precise with our language as we should have been.”

Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault issued an update in February 2024: “All G7 countries, including Canada and the United States, have committed to transitioning to a net-zero electricity grid as a foundational measure to help achieve low-carbon economies by 2050.”

And he now says: “We knew from the get-go, from where we are to where we need to be, we couldn’t get there in 10 years… It was always our intention that we want to see things happening before 2035. But that we wouldn’t be able to get to a decarbonized grid before 2050.”

Whatever they said, meant, clarified, updated, and/or corrected, the new regulations face opposition and a court challenge from Alberta, for one.

Premier Danielle Smith criticized the latest regulations as unconstitutional, arguing they seek to regulate an area of provincial jurisdiction.

“After years of watching the federal government gaslight Canadians about the feasibility of achieving a net-zero power grid by 2030, we are gratified to see Ottawa finally admit that the Government of Alberta’s plan to achieve a carbon-neutral power grid by 2050 is a more responsible, affordable, and realistic target.

“That said, the federal government’s finalized electricity regulations remain entirely unconstitutional as they seek to regulate in an area of exclusive provincial jurisdiction. They also require generators to meet unreasonable and unattainable federally mandated interim targets beginning in 2035, which will still make electricity unaffordable for Canadian families.

“Alberta will therefore be preparing an immediate court challenge of these electricity regulations.”

Saskatchewan’s government said in a news release that it will simply not comply with the new regulations.

“Our government unequivocally rejects federal intrusion into our exclusive provincial jurisdiction over the electricity system.

“Saskatchewan will prioritize maintaining an affordable and reliable electricity grid to support our regional needs and growth. The federal Clean Electricity Regulations are unconstitutional, unaffordable, unachievable, and Saskatchewan cannot, and will not, comply with them.”

The Business Council of BC slammed the new federal regulations on multiple grounds: constitutionality, jeopardizing the reliability of electricity delivery, higher costs for businesses and households, limiting investment, regional inequities, technological limitations, and risks to greenhouse-gas management.

“These latest measures fail to recognize provinces have jurisdiction over the development and management of electricity. The federal regulations are duplicative, inefficient, and add to costs.”

And: “It is important to recognize that Canada’s combined electricity systems are already 84% non-emitting, and that electricity represents less than 10% of Canada’s total emissions. The sector has made more progress in reducing emissions than any other sector in the country over the past two decades.

“We urge the government to set aside these new regulations and work collaboratively with the electricity sector to develop a more balanced approach that respects provincial roles and will not risk undermining investment and driving up costs. The path to a cleaner energy system requires cooperation, not regulation.”

The latest announcement from Ottawa includes these statements:

  • “Federal analyses find that the Regulations have no impact on electricity rates for the vast majority of Canadians, and in some cases, will even have a slightly positive impact on rates. Independent third-party expert modelling substantiates federal analysis that the Regulations are feasible.
  • “To ensure rates are affordable for Canadian families over the coming decade, the federal government is investing $60 billion to support the electricity sector.
  • “The adoption of efficient electric appliances, vehicles, and heat pumps presents an enormous opportunity for families to save money on their energy bills.
  • “In the shift to clean electricity, 84% of households are expected to spend less on their monthly energy costs, when accounting for the over $60 billion in federal clean electricity incentives. This could lead to $15 billion in total energy-related savings for Canadians by 2035.”

All subject to clarification, updating, and/or correction—and Alberta’s promised court case.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Canadian official keeping Parliament closed is a member of Trudeau’s family foundation

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

“How is there no conflict of interest with Mary Simon, especially? This is very similar to Freeland sitting on the WEF board?”

Canada’s governor general, who is keeping Parliament closed on behalf of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, is a member of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, an organization named after Justin’s father that was founded in part by his family.  

According to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation website, Governor General of Canada Mary Simon, who has been keeping Parliament suspended at the request of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, is a mentor for the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.  

The website lists Simon as a “champion of the social, economic, and human rights of Canadian Inuit people, she shares with the Foundation community the experience she acquired in senior leadership positions in various land claims organizations.”  

The Trudeau Foundation labels itself as “an independent and non-partisan charity established in 2001 as a living memorial to the former prime minister.” However, the foundation is under investigation after it received a large donation alleged to be connected to the Chinese Communist Party. 

Simon now serves as Canada’s Governor General, the federal representative of the Canadian monarch. As such, Trudeau’s request to suspend Parliament to allow for a Liberal leadership race was approved by Simon before taking affect. 

Parliament has now been closed for over a month, since January 6, and is scheduled to remain closed until March 24, despite calls from both Canadians and politicians to reopen the legislature.  

Currently, Canada is unable to fully address issues facing Canadians, including U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff threats. Regardless of this, Trudeau has refused to reopen Parliament, a decision enabled by Simon.  

Many online have pointed out that Simon’s role in the Foundation could cause conflict of interest when dealing with Trudeau.  

“Friendly reminder that the Governor General of Canada, Mary Simon, is a member of the Trudeau Foundation,” one user wrote on X. “Has any Member of Parliament raised this as an issue of conflict of interest?”  

“The Trudeau foundation along with Trudeau must be investigated,” another declared. 

“How is there no conflict of interest with Mary Simon, especially? This is very similar to Freeland sitting on the WEF board?” he questioned.  

In addition to being a mentor for the Trudeau foundation, records reveal that the Trudeau government increased Simon’s 2025 salary to $378,000 following the $15,200 increase. Simon’s salary has increased by $49,300 since she took office in 2021.   

“Can anyone in government explain how Canadians are getting more value from the governor general, because her taxpayer-funded salary just increased by more than $1,200 a month,” Canadian Taxpayer Federation Federal Director Franco Terrazzano said.  

Continue Reading

Business

Republican senator details millions USAID spent on LGBT activism, terrorist groups

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Expenditures include $2 million for “sex change” operations in Guatemala, $20 million for a Sesame Street-type children’s show in Iraq, $7.9 million to train media in Sri Lanka not to use “gendered” language, $1.5 million for LGBT activism in Jamaica, $3.9 million for LGBT activism in Macedonia, and even $10 million for meals for the Nusra front, an al-Qaeda-linked terrorist group in Syria.

U.S. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) took to the Senate floor to detail just some of ways the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has been using American taxpayer dollars without the public’s knowledge or approval, making the case that it more than vindicates the Trump administration’s foreign aid freeze.

The Trump State Department recently issued a 90-day freeze on foreign aid disbursed through USAID, citing millions in waste and ideologically-biased programs. With exceptions for certain food programs and military aid to Israel and Egypt, the pause is meant to give the administration time to conduct a more thorough review of foreign aid to determine what permanent cuts should be made.

On February 6, Kennedy highlighted several examples of USAID funding uncovered by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) advisory group, which dramatically contrast with the popular assumption that USAID merely offers help to the poor and sick around the world.

Musk “found that USAID gave money to support electric vehicles in Vietnam—our money, taxpayer money,” Kennedy said. “He found that USAID gave money to a transgender clinic in India. I didn’t know that. I bet you the American people didn’t know that.

“He found that USAID gave $1.5 million to a Serbian LGBTQ group,” he continued. “They got $1.5 million to ‘advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities.’ What else did Mr. Musk find that my colleagues don’t want to talk about?”

Other expenditures include $2 million for “sex change” operations in Guatemala, $20 million for a Sesame Street-type children’s show in Iraq, $7.9 million to train media in Sri Lanka not to use “gendered” language, $1.5 million for LGBT activism in Jamaica, $3.9 million for LGBT activism in Macedonia, and even $10 million for meals for the Nusra front, an al-Qaeda-linked terrorist group in Syria.

“We’re not talking Cub Scout troops here,” Kennedy said of $122 million that USAID distributed to groups linked to terrorism, including “organizations in Gaza controlled by Hamas […] Why? Why? Why aren’t my colleagues talking about that? Can anyone answer that? Recipients of the money they found have, quote, ‘called for their lands to be cleansed from the impurity of Jews.’ That’s who we’re giving foreign aid to?”

“This has been going on for a week,” Kennedy told his colleagues. “People have been screaming like they’re part of a prison riot. ‘Oh, my God, look at what Musk is doing. He’s looking at the spending.’ And I’ve listened to people talk about the process and debate whether it’s constitutional and discuss how many lawyers can dance on the head of a pen. But you know what? I haven’t heard one single person who’s upset with President Trump or Mr. Musk talk about what he’s found.”

“Now, I am not saying everything that USAID does is wasted, but I am saying a lot of it is—a h-ll of a lot of it is—and we ought to be on the floor of this United States Senate thanking Mr. Musk, and we ought to be asking him to go through every agency and look at everybody’s budget—everybody’s budget,” the senator said.

Continue Reading

Trending

X