English/French

Enough with the climate fear-mongering

Nathaniel Erskine-Smith/Ian MacAlpine/Whig-Standard
Nga: Nathaniel Erskine-Smith

On Monday evening the House of Commons held an “emergency” session.

The issue was of such urgency they could not wait another day, could not hold it off another week or month or even relegate it to a committee.

What was this urgent issue?

Well’, it’s true there are pressing concerns out there that require quick action.

The City of Toronto, for example, has been plagued with gun violence. Too many people are dying.

There are still First Nations communities that are on boil water advisories. It’s a shame that in a developed nation such as Canada, these conditions persist.

Then there are people still crossing illegally into Canada daily at Roxham Road, straining our resources and undermining trust in our previously renowned immigration system.

No, it was none of this. It was climate change.

The “emergency” session was first proposed by Toronto-area Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith. He was inspired by the latest United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that said countries such as Canada will need to cut their emissions almost in half within the next 12 years to prevent catastrophe.

“We need an emergency debate in Parliament to response to this report, and to ensure that our country takes immediate action to meet our international, intergenerational, and moral obligation to do our part tackling climate change,” Erskine-Smith wrote in a letter to Speaker Geoff Regan.

He was supported in this request by Green leader Elizabeth May, NDP MP Guy Caron and others.

Rather than suggest Smith put the fear-mongering antics aside, Regan indulged him. So Parliamentarians had the chance to do basically what they’ve been doing for a number of years already – ranting that disaster will befall us if we don’t act soon.

Here’s the problem. That “action” they want? It’s all focused on one thing. The federal Liberal’s regressive, job-killing carbon tax, which is for some reason presented as the catch-all solution to imminent doom.

Here’s the bigger problem. That UN report doesn’t believe $50 per tonne is a sufficient carbon tax. It recommends a minimum of $135 per tonne and as much as $5,500 per tonne. (No, that last figure is not a typo.)

Should we be stewards of our environment? You bet. But this sort of fear-mongering doesn’t help the environment or Canadians.

Source: Torontosun. com