Liberal Cabinet Needs Intervention

Commentary

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet will benefit from the intervention as they appear to need expert help on their relentless behavior.

I offer this proposal with caution rather than surprise. Because they are ready to do what they have done to the oil and gas sector to the agricultural industry. This causes farmers to go out of business, raise food prices, damage the economy and worsen the region. Tensions reduce the ability to feed millions of hungry people during a global food emergency.

Since 2015, the free government’s relentless hostility towards the resource industry has led to soaring energy prices, relentless tax increases, debilitating regulations, pipeline project failures, energy security compromises, and intensified western alienation. Has undermined our ability to help turn our attention to Vladimirputin. ..

The latest assault is a new cap on oil and gas emissions.

For horrific symmetry and, on the surface, for the same reason, Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibaud mandates a 30 percent reduction in nitrous oxide emissions in fertilizers.

According to the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, claiming absolute reductions rather than strength-based reductions will reduce canola and wheat revenues by $ 840 million annually and reduce the profits of 2,000 acres of farmers by about $ 40,000. ..

It will also fail to meet the Federal Reserve’s goal of expanding Canada’s agricultural exports from $ 55 billion in 2015 to more than $ 85 billion by 2025. This is very disappointing because of the 323 million people or the risk of suffering from severe food insecurity. To the World Food Program.

The main problem for importers (not Canadian farmers) is that global food prices in May this year were 23 percent higher than last year. Clearly, the mandated reduction in fertilizer use goes against the UN’s goal of eliminating global hunger by 2030.

Ignoring the disaster and the European energy crisis is global warming, even though Trudeau can’t do anything about it by reducing domestic emissions, which is only 1.5% of the world’s total. We clearly believe that it is justified by the threat of its existence.

His dizzying enthusiasm does not allow for a balanced debate about more effective and less costly alternatives to reducing emissions, such as investing in clean technology and developing nuclear energy. ..

In addition, it provides short savings on the best strategies for protecting Canadians from the effects of global warming and extreme weather, namely coordinated federal, state, and local mitigation programs.

Trudeau’s persistence is obsessive.

His interest in climate emergencies has turned into a moral and quasi-religious obligation to disagree and justify policy, regardless of harm to Canadians or people around the world. Perhaps in the case of political consumption, the only acceptable evidence of success is the reduction of domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, rather than the impact on the relevant measure, net global emissions.

In addition, it ignores the fundamental changes in thinking that are occurring in Europe (and elsewhere) that are desperate for fossil fuels, including fossil fuels. Coal to avoid power outages and mitigate soaring energy prices. They also recognize that intermittent wind and sunlight alone cannot save the day, given the current limitations of storage technology.

Finally, it is very unlikely that Net Zero will be achieved in a Canadian or globally set time frame, and all knowledgeable governments know it (after all, they will not be able to achieve each of the goals they set. We do not publicly acknowledge the indisputable reality.

People react violently when government control deliberately threatens their livelihoods. After all, why do politicians whose personal lifestyles hypocritically contradict their censorship are not personally affected by the narrow call for sacrifice, and why they do not bear the disproportionate burden? Isn’t it?

The recent Dutch truck convoy (some with the Canadian flag) speaks to the despair of Dutch farmers at stake due to environmental reprimands.

It is not easy to predict that voters in developed countries, especially the working class and the poor, will not allow policies that deliberately rampage governments to expose them to inflation, terrible taxes and power outages.

Citizens of developing countries like Sri Lanka have accused widespread hunger and affordable cooking gas and fuel, and political leaders accused of talking about renewable energy as irrelevant as a matter of course. Overturn.

Reality bites into any delusion that the elite may have.

The International Renewable Energy Agency has set the cost of climate change measures at $ 131 trillion by 2050. It is doubtful that developed countries are ready to pay most of their extraordinary amounts, or that autonomous regions and developing countries are interested in improving the morals of Western democracy.

In Canada, that number is about $ 2 trillion over 30 years, about the same size as GDP, or $ 60-80 billion a year, according to RBC. Its enormous costs will come at the cost of social welfare and brutal tax increases.

At some point, green policy becomes too damaging to society and the individuals they are alleged to save. It’s now, but all the signs are that our government didn’t receive the notes.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.