All Manner Of Excuses

 

In the debased environment that now constitutes our politics, our 'leaders' can without a doubt justify just about anything they do as being in the national interest. For example, if you are Mark Carney, you can explain the proposal to sell out our public infrastructure, (i.e., airports) by saying that it will unlock value, the funds derived from which can be repurposed for 'national' projects. 

The next item on Carney's hit list seems to be climate-change mitigation. It is being widely reported that, in order to placate Alberta (an oxymoronic concept if I have ever heard one) he is about to gut that emission standards for that province's oil giants.

Ottawa and Alberta are close to finalizing a new accord on industrial carbon pricing that would result in the fee going up to $130 a tonne by 2040, two government sources, one federal and one provincial, said Tuesday.

The problem is that this is a severe departure from one arranged under the Trudeau government.

An industrial carbon price is a critical element of Canada’s climate change strategy and, under the previous Liberal government, it was projected to contribute to significant reductions in emissions. However, if cabinet approves the new deal struck with Alberta, that price will be far less stringent than the $170-by-2030 charge announced by Mr. Trudeau.

If the federal cabinet approves the plan to raise the industrial carbon price only to $130 per tonne by 2040, analysis from the Canadian Climate Institute suggests it will result in “little to no emissions reductions in heavy industry.”

While on the subject of paying obeisance to the private sector, it is interesting to note that Mark Carney's strategy to double Canada's electricity generation seems to omit any renewables other than hydro:

In a speech Saturday at the Global Progress Action Summit in Toronto, ... [Carney said]: 

“We need a willingness to use — it can be sometimes hard to accept — we need a willingness to use all sources of energy, including some gas and all technologies beyond conventional renewables,” he said, listing nuclear, hydro, small modular reactors, carbon capture, and geothermal energy sources.

Why no mention of solar and wind as energy sources? Indeed, in all of the projects thus far approved by the government to "build Canada Strong," I am unaware of any federal support for either of those technologies. Could one of the reasons be they don't sufficiently enrich corporate coffers?

And finally, if you can forgive the rather discursive quality of this post, I see that our prime minister is mulling over more opportunities for private sector enrichment.

Buried deep in the pages of a discussion paper released Friday — one of two published for swift 30-day public consultations — is the announcement that the government is open to and seeking a report on the potential amalgamation of certain unnamed “key ports” in Canada and “divestiture” of others.

It comes two weeks after the federal budget revealed Ottawa is looking at privatizing airports as the Carney government pledges to maximize the value of assets for Canadians, streamline operations, and sets its eyes on the creation of a $25-billion sovereign wealth fund.

While no further details have been released, the trend is clear. My late father-in-law had a favourite saying: "Socialism for the rich, free enterprise for everyone else." Considering what seems to be on the prime minister's mind these days, selling off infrastructure that has been built and maintained by the Canadian taxpayer certainly underscores the truth of his observation.