A commentary by the leader of the People’s Party of Canada and MP for the Quebec riding of Beauce.
This is the second in a series of commentaries about climate change from Canada’s main political parties; they are being published daily this week.
Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government has spent billions of dollars at home and abroad to fight global warming — or “climate change” as it is now called, to account for every natural weather event and its opposite.
To lower greenhouse gas emissions, the government has imposed a carbon tax, other taxes and countless regulations. It subsidizes inefficient and costly “green technology,” and it is blocking the development of oil resources crucial to our prosperity.
Other parties offer the same kind of solutions. Elizabeth May’s Green Party is willing to kill economic development and impose drastic reductions in our standard of living to fight climate change. Canada, however, is only responsible for 1.6 per cent of total greenhouse gas emissions. Even if the Canadian economy was completely shut down, it would make no difference to the world’s climate.
Andrew Scheer says he will kill the Liberals’ carbon tax, but will replace it with another type of tax on large emitters that will have the same kind of effect. He also agrees with the UN’s Paris Accord emission reduction targets, and wants to help other countries achieve their targets.
It is an undisputed fact that the world’s climate has always changed and will continue to change. Until 12,000 years ago, much of Canada was under ice, and it is thanks to natural climate change that we can live here today.
There is, however, no scientific consensus on the theory that CO2 produced by human activity is causing dangerous global warming today or will in the future, and that the world is facing environmental catastrophes unless these emissions are drastically reduced.
Many renowned scientists continue to challenge this theory.
Climate change alarmism is based on flawed models that have consistently failed at correctly predicting the future.
None of the cataclysmic predictions that have been made about the climate since the 1970s have come true. No new ice age. No steady warming in direct relation with increases in CO2 levels. No disappearance of polar ice caps. No exceptional rise in ocean levels. No abnormal increase in catastrophic weather events. No widespread crop failure and famine.
In fact, CO2 is beneficial for agriculture and there has recently been a measurable “greening” of the world in part thanks to higher levels. Despite what global-warming propaganda claims, CO2 is not a pollutant. It is an essential ingredient for life on Earth and needed for plant growth.
The policy debate about global warming is not grounded on science anymore.
It has been hijacked by proponents of big government who are using crude propaganda techniques to impose their views. They publicly ridicule and harass anyone who expresses doubt. They make exaggerated claims to scare people. They even manipulate schoolchildren, getting them to pressure their parents and to demonstrate in the streets.
Given the uncertainties over the scientific basis of global warming, and the certainties about the huge costs of measures designed to fight it, there is no compelling reason to jeopardize our prosperity with more government interventions.
A People’s Party government would withdraw from the Paris Accord and abandon unrealistic greenhouse-gas emission reduction targets.
It would stop sending billions of dollars to developing countries to help them reduce their emissions. This money is better spent here in Canada on practical solutions to make our air, water and soil cleaner, including bringing clean drinking water to remote First Nations communities.
It would abolish the Liberal government’s carbon tax and leave it to provincial governments to adopt programs to reduce emissions if they want to. As well as abolish subsidies for green technology and let private players develop profitable and efficient alternatives.
And finally, a People’s Party government would invest in adaptation strategies if problems arise as a result of any natural climate change.
It’s not rational to base policies on panic and on alarmism, or spend billions of dollars on the basis of flawed models trying to predict the climate decades from now.
We should instead focus on realistic and practical solution to improve our environment. The People’s Party is the only party offering this prudent approach.