Dan McTeague

Well, we are in quite the pickle.

In nine plus years as prime minister, Justin Trudeau has waged a multi-front war on the consumption and production of hydrocarbon energy, and, with that, on our economy, our quality of life, and our cost of living.

Trudeau zealously pursued and implemented anti-energy policies, most infamously the consumer Carbon Tax, but let’s not forget his so-called ”Clean Fuel” regulations; his Industrial Carbon Tax; his proposed emissions caps; his Electric Vehicle subsidies and mandates; Bill C-59, which bans businesses from touting the environmental positives of their work if it doesn’t meet a government-approved standard; and various other pieces of legislation which make the construction of new pipelines nearly impossible and significantly reduces our ability to sell our oil and gas overseas.

Every one of these policies can be traced back to the pernicious Net Zero ideology which informs them, and in which Trudeau and his bosom buddies — Gerald Butts, Steven Guilbeault, Mark Carney, etc — remain true believers.

And yet, despite those policies contributing to his party’s collapsing poll numbers and Trudeau’s unceremonious ouster, the Liberals are on the verge of naming as his replacement Mark Carney, one of the very Trudeau consiglieri who got us into this mess in the first place!

Now, Carney is currently doing everything in his power to downplay and dance around those aspects of his career which voters might find objectionable. He’s making quite a habit of it, in fact. And on the energy file, he’s being especially misleading, walking back his long-time support of the Carbon Tax — he’s said it has “served a purpose up until now” — and claiming that he intends to repeal it, while finding other ways to “make polluters pay.”

This is nonsense. In fact, Carney is a Carbon Tax superfan, and, if you listen to him closely, his actual critique of the Trudeau tax isn’t that it has made it more expensive to heat our homes, gas up our cars, and pay for our groceries (which it has.) It’s that it is too visible to voters. His vow to “make polluters pay” means, in fact, that he intends to “beef up” Trudeau’s less discussed Industrial Carbon Tax, targeting businesses, which will ultimately pass the cost down to consumers.

He’s even discussed enacting a Carbon tariff, which would apply to trade with countries which don’t adopt the onerous Net Zero policies which he wants to force on Canada.

That’s just who Mark Carney is.

And, unfortunately, Donald Trump’s tariff threats have provoked a “rally round the flag” sentiment, enabling the Liberals to close the polling gap with the Conservatives, with some polls currently showing them neck-and-neck. Which is to say, there is a possibility that, whenever we get around to having an election, anti-American animus could keep the Liberals in power, and propel Carney to the top job in our government.

This is, in a word, madness.

Let us not forget that it was the Liberals’ policies — especially their assault on our “golden goose,” the natural resource sector — which left us in such a precarious fiscal state that Trudeau felt the need to fly to Mar-a-Lago and tell the newly elected president that a tariff would “kill” our economy. That’s what provoked Trump’s “51st state” crack in the first place.

Access to U.S. markets will always be important for Canadian prosperity — they, by leaps and bounds, are our largest trading partner, after all — but without the Net Zero nonsense, we could have been an energy superpower, providing an alternative source of oil and natural gas for those countries leary about relying for energy on less-environmentally conscious, human-rights-abusing petrostates. We could have filled the void created by Russia, when they made themselves a pariah state in Europe by invading Ukraine.

In short, we might have been set up to negotiate with the Trump Administration from a position of strength. Instead, we’re proposing to double-down on Net Zero, pledging allegiance to a program which will make us less competitive and more likely to be steamrolled by major powers, including the U.S. but also (and less frequently mentioned) China.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face! And all in the name of nationalism.

Here’s hoping we wise up and change course while there’s still time. Because, in the words of America’s greatest philosopher, Yogi Berra, “It’s getting late early.”

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy.

Support Dan’s Work to Keep Canadian Energy Affordable!

Canadians for Affordable Energy is run by Dan McTeague, former MP and founder of Gas Wizard. We stand up and fight for more affordable energy.

Donate Now

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

This study, along with scores of others conducted in recent years, explodes the media-enforced narrative that so-called ‘gender transition’ procedures are beneficial for the gender-confused.

A study published in the Oxford Journal of Sexual Medicine found that undergoing so-called “sex change” surgery, far from reducing depression rates among the gender dysphoric, substantially increased rates not only of depression, but of anxiety, suicidal ideation, and substance use disorders. 

Males who underwent transgender surgery had a depression rate of 25.4 percent, compared to 11.5 percent in those who did not have surgery. Likewise, females who underwent surgery had a depression rate of 22.9 percent, compared to 14.6 percent in those who did not. 

The study notes that males undergoing “feminizing” surgeries demonstrated a particularly high risk for depression and substance use disorders. 

“From 107,583 patients, matched cohorts demonstrated that those undergoing surgery were at significantly higher risk for depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and substance use disorders than those without surgery,” the researchers found.  

Rather than concluding that so-called “gender affirming” surgery is a dangerous, unnecessary practice that should be discontinued because it puts patients’ lives at risk, the researchers instead suggest that that their findings show a need for “gender-sensitive mental health support following gender-affirming surgery to address post-surgical psychological risks.” 

Exploding the myth  

This study, along with scores of others conducted in recent years, explodes the media-enforced narrative that so-called “gender transition” procedures are beneficial or even “necessary” for the happiness and well-being of the gender-confused.  

A significant body of evidence now shows that “affirming” gender confusion carries serious harms, especially when done with impressionable children who lack the mental development, emotional maturity, and life experience to consider the long-term ramifications of the decisions being pushed on them or full knowledge about the long-term effects of life-altering, physically transformative, and often irreversible surgical and chemical procedures. 

Studies find that more than 80 percent of children suffering gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence and that “transition” procedures fail to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide – and even exacerbate it, including by reinforcing their confusion and neglecting the actual root causes of their mental strife.  

Many oft-ignored detransitioners attest to the physical and mental harm of reinforcing gender confusion as well as to the bias and negligence of the medical establishment on the subject, many of whom take an activist approach to their profession and begin cases with a predetermined conclusion in favor of “transitioning.” 

Last year, a massive, peer-reviewed study provided unequivocal evidence that those who undergo so-called “gender reassignment” surgery put themselves at a vastly increased risk of suicide – an astounding 12 times that of the general population.  

The giant study, “involving 56 United States healthcare organizations and over 90 million patients,” analyzed data collected over a 20-year period, from February 2003 to February 2023, examining “suicide attempts, death, self-harm, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) within five years of the index event.”   

The researchers compared the experiences of persons aged 18-60 who visited hospital emergency rooms and who had previously undergone “transition” surgery with those who visited emergency rooms without having undergone transgender surgery: A stunning 3.47 percent of those who had surgically “transitioned” were treated for suicide attempts, versus 0.29 percent for non-“transitioned” patients.    

The authors of the study, like those of the one just published in the Oxford Journal of Sexual Medicine, sidestepped the obvious conclusion that attempts to surgically “transition” the gender-confused are both dangerous and futile.   

Instead they concluded: “Gender-affirming [sic] surgery is significantly associated with elevated suicide attempt risks, underlining the necessity for comprehensive post-procedure psychiatric support.” 

In 2016, The New Atlantis, A Journal of Technology and Society, produced a landmark report offering a summary and an up-to-date explanation of research on “sexual orientation and gender identity” from the biological, psychological, and social sciences, covering nearly 200 peer-reviewed studies.  

“The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that a person might be ‘a man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’ — is not supported by scientific evidence,” according to experts Lawrence S. Mayer, M.B., M.S., Ph.D, scholar-in-residence in the Department of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University, and Paul R. McHugh, M.D., professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.  

According to their report, the vast body of scientific evidence tells a different story from the one most have been told through mainstream media. “Sexual identity” or “sexual orientation” are so commonly used that they go unquestioned and are perceived to have been derived from biological or medical science, but they are not. These terms are merely expressions of desire, behavior, and identity, all of which are fluid and may change over time. Additionally, “gay,” “lesbian,” and “transgender” are not scientific terms. People who suffer from homosexual inclinations and/or gender confusion are not separate species of human beings. 

The only thing that science actually tells us is that we are born either male or female. 

One young man, Yarden Silveira, was so distraught after “sex change” surgery that he committed suicide in 2021.    

Before taking his own life, Yarden wrote:  

I wish I never listened to the medical and psychiatric community when they told me it was possible to change my sex. What a lie. Very dangerous and unethical. Sex reassignment [sic] surgery is a hit and miss type of surgery, but they don’t tell you that. They never do. And maybe if I didn’t have autism, maybe if my brain wasn’t so defective, I would have caught on before it was too late…   

This is what I get for messing with nature… I just wanted friendship and love. I wanted life to be easier. I wanted to be a woman since I was 15. I wish I had the knowledge that I have today. I was a confused kid with no identity. I wish I could have done everything different, but it’s too late now. I’m royally screwed…  

The Transgender Ideology and its lies, along with the pro-gay media, medical and psychiatric community, have killed me. The feminization of America will continue to produce outcomes like mine. It wasn’t my fault for failing. Everyone failed me, my death shouldn’t surprise anyone.