Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Energy

Petition endorsed by MP Leslyn Lewis urges government to take Canada out of UN and WHO

Published

6 minute read

Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis has endorsed a petition demanding the federal government withdraw from the United Nations (U.N.) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

The petition states “Canada’s agreement to participate in the UN/WHO comprehensive “Agenda 2030″ undermines national sovereignty and personal autonomy”.

Initiated October 10, the petition will be available on the House of Commons website until February 2024 (you can read it below).

The petition asks Parliament to “Urgently implement Canada’s expeditious withdrawal from the U.N. and all of its subsidiary organizations, including WHO”. It goes on to allege participating in the U.N.’s Agenda 2030 undermines Canadian sovereignty. Agenda 2030 is the U.N.’s plan to end poverty and hunger, promote equality, and take “urgent action on climate change” through “Sustainable Development Goals” or SDGs.

While many of the 91 declarations in Agenda 2030 sound perfectly reasonable, others are the source f major concern and suspicion.  Examples causing distress include declaration 28 and declaration 31.

Declaration 28 states “We commit to making fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services… individuals must contribute to changing unsustainable consumption and production patterns.” Obviously there has never been a national discussion confirming that Canadians believe consumption and production patterns are ‘unsustainable’. Needless to say if Canadians were forced to reduce consumption patterns, all Canadians and Canadian owned businesses would be profoundly impacted.

Meanwhile, Declaration 31 is a major concern for the Canadian energy sector and anyone concerned with both the availability and the cost of energy. Declaration 31 urges governments to follow international direction, stating “We acknowledge that the UNFCCC is the primary international intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change.”

At the UN Climate Conference in Dubai, UAE later this year, the UNFCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) will promote dropping efforts to replace dirty coal production with much cleaner solutions like Canadian LNG in favour of “fast-tracking the energy transition and slashing emissions before 2030.”

Just over one week since this petition was opened (Oct. 10), it’s closing in on 40,000 signatures.  Canadians have until February 7, 2024 to sign it.

With support from at least five other citizens and at least one sitting MP, any Canadian can bring a petition to Canada’s House of Commons. 

If more than 500 people sign a petition it will be presented to the House of Commons for official government response.

 ——-

From The Parliament of Canada

e-4623 (Foreign affairs)

E-petition
Initiated by Doug Porter from Burnaby, British Columbia

Original language of petition: English

Petition to the House of Commons in Parliament assembled

Whereas:
  • Canada’s membership in the United Nations (UN) and its subsidiary organizations, (e.g. World Health Organization (WHO)), imposes negative consequences on the people of Canada, far outweighing any benefits;
  • Canada’s agreement to participate in the UN/WHO comprehensive “Agenda 2030” undermines national sovereignty and personal autonomy;
  • Agenda 2030 and its operational “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDG), Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), UN Judicial Review, International Health Regulations (IHR), One Health and similar programs are being rapidly implemented, absent the awareness and consent of the People or their elected representatives;
  • SDGs have negative impacts on potentially every aspect of life, including religious and cultural values, familial relations, education, nutrition, child development, property rights, economic and agricultural productivity, transportation, travel, health, informed consent, privacy and physical autonomy;
  • Under the CSE (Comprehensive Sexuality Education), publicly funded educational institutions are damaging children while concealing information from parents. Normalization of sexual values and activities with regard to children are endorsed and enforced, beginning at birth;
  • Agenda 2030 and secretly negotiated amendments to the IHR (International Health Regulations) could likely impose unacceptable, intrusive universal surveillance, violating the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and
  • These sweeping impacts on public and private life serve the interests of UN/WHO and unelected private entities (e.g. World Economic Forum, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, International Planned Parenthood Federation, etc.), while diminishing the health rights and freedom of Canadians.
We, the undersigned, Citizens and Residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to Urgently implement Canada’s expeditious withdrawal from the UN and all of its subsidiary organizations, including WHO.
Open for signature October 10, 2023, at 8:42 a.m. (EDT)
Closed for signature February 7, 2024, at 8:42 a.m. (EDT)
Photo - Leslyn Lewis
Haldimand—Norfolk
Conservative Caucus
Ontario

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

Daily Caller

Trump’s Energy Secretary Issues Dire Warning To Globalists About Green Energy Lunacy

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

During a 12-minute video appearance at the 2025 Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) Conference held in London, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright told the audience that “Net zero by 2050 “is a sinister goal.”

That is a bold statement, especially given that it was delivered to an audience sitting in the United Kingdom, where both major political parties that have traditionally governed the country – the Conservative “Tories” and the far-left Labour Party – have spent the past decade pushing their country to meet its net zero goals as if it were a matter of religious faith. Regardless of the obvious negative economic and social consequences that have been heaped upon UK citizens, and equally obvious futility of the entire effort, leaders of both parties have kept the country on this ruinous path.

As Wright went on to point out, net zero by 2050 is “both unachievable by any practical means, but the aggressive pursuit of it…has not delivered any benefits, but it’s delivered tremendous costs.” This is objectively true, the most painful example being the rapid deindustrialization of the formerly strong British economy and the accompanying rapacious condemnation of thousands of acres of arable lands to become home to huge wind and solar installations.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

As Wright points out, “no one’s going to make an energy-intensive product in the United Kingdom anymore.” A clear object lesson in that reality came in September when venerable steelmaker Tata Steel shut down the last existing steelmaking plant in the UK.

Climate zealots in both major parties celebrated that event, but we must ask what there really is to celebrate? Sure, the Labour politicos get to virtue signal about the elimination of X tons of carbon dioxide emissions, but in a global sense, that’s meaningless. The UK still needs steel – the only difference now is that the steel that used to be made by highly-paid workers in domestic mills will now be imported steel made by poverty waged workers in Pakistan, China and other mainly Asian countries.

Meanwhile, the emissions created by making the steel in those other countries with lower environmental regulations will be far larger than from steel that used to be made in the UK. As Wright pointed out at the ARC conference, “This is not energy transition. This is lunacy.”

He isn’t wrong.

On Feb. 13, the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) published a report showing that construction of new coal-fired power plants in China reached a ten-year high in 2024. CREA finds that “China approved 66.7 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power capacity in 2024, with approvals picking up in the second half after a slower start to the year.” It all belies the favored narrative on the political left that China is leading the world in converting its power systems to renewables. In reality, the expansion of its coal sector may actually be accelerating again.

That renewed Chinese focus on expanding its coal power fleet is driven in large part by the zealous focus by globalist leaders in the UK and other western countries – Germany is another great example – on deindustrializing their own economies to satisfy their obsession over atmospheric plant food.

The making of steel and other heavy industrial processes requires reliable, affordable power generation that runs 24 hours every day, 7 days every week. Whether politicians like it or not, coal is the fuel that most reliably and consistently meets all those tests.

Thus, if China and other Asian nations are destined to inherit all the heavy industries being killed off by virtue signaling Western nations, they will need many more coal power plants to power them. This really isn’t complicated.

Meanwhile, the UK can no longer manufacture its own steel or myriad other industrial products that are essential to modern human existence. If the Labour government continues its policy of condemning vast swaths of British farmland to house more and more wind and solar sites, the kingdom will soon no longer be able to even feed its people.

All to satisfy this odd religious dogma based on an obsession over plant food. Lunacy, indeed.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Continue Reading

Energy

Federal Government Suddenly Reverses on Critical Minerals – Over Three Years Too Late – MP Greg McLean

Published on

From Energy Now

By Calgary MP Greg McLean

Government in Full Reverse

Canada-U.S. Trade Relations is obviously the most pressing issue facing Canadians today.

It’s important to remember how we arrived at this point, but also to question the sincerity of the Liberal Ministers and leadership contenders who are now posing solutions, such as:

  • We need to diversify our resource trade
  • We need to build pipelines and infrastructure to get our exports to tidewater
  • We need to streamline our regulatory burden that stands in the way of development
  • We need to halt the escalating carbon tax
  • We need to reverse the capital gains tax increase

The Liberals are turning themselves inside out on the policy choices they have made over nine years, and put Canada in a precarious economic position vis-à-vis our trade position.

If you believe what they are saying now, these Liberal Ministers and leadership contenders are saying that Canada needs EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what they have delivered over these past nine years.

I can’t comment on whether these NEW Liberal policy positions completely lack sincerity, or whether they are the result of a ‘deathbed conversion’, but nine years of moving in the exact opposite direction to their new words has led Canada to where it is today – and that is nine lost years for Canadians, our prosperity, and our role in a complex world.

Below is another example of a specific morphing of a Liberal policy – to the one I helped put forth – 3 ½ years ago – regarding Canada’s policy on critical minerals.


Minister Late to Critical Mineral Strategy

Here’s a gem of wisdom from December’s Fall Economic Statement:

Canada will work with the United States and other likeminded partners to address the impacts of non-market policies and practices that unduly distort critical mineral prices.  This includes ensuring that market participants recognize the value of critical minerals produced responsibly, with due regard for high environmental standards and labour practices.

Then, on January 16th, the following from Canada’s Natural Resource Minister, Jonathan Wilkinson:

During a panel discussion in Washington on Wednesday, Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson proposed that enforcing a floor on metals prices could be “one of the centerpieces of the conversations we would then be having at the G7” summit later this year.

Western nations have long warned that China’s dominance in everything from nickel to lithium has let the country’s producers flood the market with supply, thereby keeping prices artificially low for competitors. Wilkinson has touted price floors as a way to combat that market control.

What a great idea!

Here’s the relevant excerpt from June, 2021, from a dissenting report on the Natural Resources Committee, when I served as my party’s critic, in contrast to the government’s critical minerals approach at that time:

Recommendation 4: Coordinate with our allies to establish a dedicated supply stock of critical minerals, possibly through a physical storage and floor pricing mechanism for visibility and pricing purposes.

Excerpt: Canada is too small of a market to undertake this effort on its own, but it can play a key role with its longstanding leadership as the mining jurisdiction of choice in the world. Canada’s pre-eminent role as a financing jurisdiction for international mining is well understood. Although we are at the early stages of losing this historical leadership to Australia, acting quickly to solidify Canada’s leadership will be a strong signal. Australia and Europe have already established critical mineral strategies to offset the dominance of the market that China has exerted. At the very least, Canada’s coordination needs to include the United States, and probably Mexico (through CUSMA), as the ongoing funding of a critical mineral supply may require backstopping developments with a price amelioration mechanism. In essence, a floor price to ensure the protection of critical mineral developments from manipulating price volatility – and which has held back developments, or caused the insolvency of several of these developments, due to non-transparent world market pricing mechanisms. … Establishing a steady supply of these critical minerals will lead to more value-added opportunities, in conjunction with our trade partners.

FULL REPORT

Conservative Dissenting Recommendations

My question to the Minister:  ‘What took you so long?’

This approach was presented three and a half years ago – and the Government chose to ignore it then.  

No surprise now, perhaps, as we’ve seen this Minister flip-flop on so many of the nonsense policies he’s put forth or acquiesced in at Cabinet:

  • The Clean Electricity Regulations (still opaque)
  • Canada’ role in shipping hydrocarbons to the world
  • Building energy infrastructure

To say nothing of the various Cabinet decisions he has been a part of that have led to Canada’s current weak negotiating position with our allies.  We effectively have not had a Minister of Natural Resources under his tenure.

Nothing topped it off more succinctly than his speech at the World Petroleum Show, held in Calgary in September 2023, when his remarks on behalf of the Government of Canada left industry participants around the world questioning whether the Minister was ‘tone-deaf’ or if, in fact, he knew anything about natural resources.

It seems his move to the position I promoted – three and a half years ago – shows that he’s finally listening and learning (or un-learning his previous narratives, perhaps)– but it’s quite late in the day.  Time and our future have been wasted.

Continue Reading

Trending

X