The Climate Year In Review

Go ahead. Tell me that climate change is an unproven theory.



Meanwhile, if you live here in Ontario, 2019 will likely prove at least as depressing as the second part of 2018 has been:

In the midst of this season of giving, a precious treasure is being taken from Ontarians; the hard-won tools that protect our environment are being stolen in broad daylight by a provincial government that claims the need to do this to fight “red tape” and make Ontario “Open for Business.”

It has taken Ontario’s current provincial government remarkably little time to sweep away an array of laws and policies that are crucial to the protection of Ontario’s natural environment and farmland. It took decades of discussion by previous Ontario governments, academics and other experts for these environmental safeguards to be finally put into place.

The heart and soul of the Environmental Bill of Rights Act is the oversight provided by the creation of an independent environmental commissioner. A bill to cut “red tape” strips the commissioner of many of her powers and much of her independence.

Similarly, the Greenbelt Protection Act, intended to give permanent protection to this area, became law in 2004 after decades of studies, planning and debate. The act was intended to give permanent protection to an ecosystem of forests, streams and farmland surrounding the Golden Horseshoe. Less than six months after their election, the Ford government has introduced legislation that opens the door to development within the Greenbelt.

It has also taken decades for governments, including Ontario’s, to accept that harmful climate change is real and to take action to slow its acceleration. Ontario’s cap-and-trade program was introduced less than two years ago by the former Liberal government.

By July of this year, the Ford government had repealed those regulations and quickly replaced them with a scheme which the environment commissioner considers only a fraction as effective as the one it replaced.

If this were a movie, it would be called How Doug Ford Stole Christmas.

The effects of the Grinch’s theft of Christmas presents were at least limited to inhabitants of the small village of Whoville. The same cannot be said of Doug Ford’s theft of some of our most precious gifts of a clean and healthy environment. The harm will be felt throughout Ontario by both present and future generations. Nor is there any evidence that the eventual redemption of Dr. Seuss’ Grinch will be replicated by Ontario’s Grinch. This movie is not likely to have a happy ending.

John Swaigen, Toronto

Payment Is Now Due

For those who don't want to be saddled with additional costs such as carbon taxes to battle climate change, may I humbly suggest that the price of doing nothing is even greater, as the following amply illustrates.

Start the video at the 4:15 mark:



Clearly, payment has come due.

On Demagogues Debasing Language

“[The English language] becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts... if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”

― George Orwell, Politics and the English Language

The language sins of politicians are many, but there is surely a special place in hell for those whose distortions, lies and hyperbole ultimately render words meaningless. Such are the sins of demagogues like Donald Trump and Doug Ford.

While a single post cannot hope to address all the complexities of language abuse, I'd like to offer a very limited exploration of why language is so regularly debased today, especially by the aforementioned culprits:

1 - Neither Donald Trump nor Doug Ford is very bright. As Orwell said, our language becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish. The truth of this is readily apparent if, for example, one notes the fondness with which Donald Trump abuses the mother tongue.

Trump uses a pretty small working vocabulary. This doesn’t seem to be a conscious strategy, though it works as well as if it had been. Much was made during primary season of the way in which reading-level algorithms (unreliable though they are) found his speeches pitched at fourth-grade level, ie the comprehension of an average nine-year-old.

The workhorses of his rhetoric are charged but empty adjectives and adverbs. Things are “great”, “wonderful”, “amazing”, “the best”, or they’re “crooked”, “fake”, “unfair”, “failing”. He sprinkles intensifiers liberally: “a very, very, very amazing man, a great, great developer”.

Concisely put, the simple language mirrors a simple mind or, as the NYT succinctly put it, Trump has the intellectual depth of a coat of paint.

Like Donald Trump, Doug Ford's language reveals a paucity of intellectual heft, a fact reflected in his use of hyperboles, absolutes and superlatives. Consider his statement about chum Ron Taverner (found at the two-minute mark on the linked video):

"There's never been a more popular police officer in this province than Ron Taverner..."

"The front-line police officers, the OPP, are more excited than anyone. They're looking forward to actually having a commissioner that actually cares about the front-line people."

He will be the best commissioner that the OPP has ever seen."

And then there is this whopper:

He also praised Taverner as “a cop’s cop” and insisted OPP officers have been ringing his phone off the hook.

Sadly, people like Ford and Trump, as I wrote in a recent post, are oblivious to their limitations, instead fancying themselves to be the smartest person in the room. This delusion prompts them to make the kinds of statements that invite only ridicule and dismissal from discerning minds, while having a totally different effect on their base of supporters.

2 - A coincident fact is that supporters of demagogues tend to like language that is simple and direct. It helps to solidify their world as one of absolutes, either good or bad, black or white. Real thinking entails hard work, but because we tend to be a rather lazy species, when a politician offers the 'answers' without requiring any cerebration, many will readily swallow the Kool-Aid. A world of absolutes can be very comforting, and helps to demonstrate that the demagogue is 'a man of the people.'

Consider the above examples in this light: "great",“amazing”, “the best”. "He will be the best commissioner that the OPP has ever seen." There is no room for doubt in such language, is there?

And unfortunately, it can be very effective. In his 2016 book, “Enough Said: What’s Gone Wrong with the Language of Politics?”, Mark Thompson examined effect of Donald Trump's fractured pronouncements:

“Trump’s appeal as a presidential candidate depends significantly on the belief that he is a truth-teller who will have nothing to do with the conventional language of politics,” warning that:

“We shouldn’t confuse anti-rhetorical ‘truth telling’ with actually telling the truth. One of the advantages of this positioning is that once listeners are convinced that you’re not trying to deceive them in the manner of a regular politician, they may switch off the critical faculties they usually apply to political speech and forgive you any amount of exaggeration, contradiction, or offensiveness. And if establishment rivals or the media criticize you, your supporters may dismiss that as spin.”

Without doubt, this analysis is equally applicable to Mr. Ford's acolytes, who show cult-like to their man, despite his manifest incompetence, an incompetence that Martin Regg Cohn addresses at some length in his column today:

Our embattled premier is uniquely accursed because he is so often the author of his own misfortune. At year-end, Ford keeps running the ball into his own end zone — colliding with allies, trampling on teammates, fumbling at every turn, blinded by hubris.

Unquestionably, my post barely scratches the surface of how demagogues abuse language. Clearly, however, an informed awareness is the best defence against such debasement succeeding, but that awareness can only come with an engaged and thinking electorate, the greatest enemy of people like Doug Ford and Donald Trump.

Is The List Another Piece Of Fiction From Doug Ford?

My guess is "yes'"

“I could sit here and give you all the items that weren’t accurate in that letter and there’s endless ones. I could give you a list of all the Police (Services) Act that was broken throughout that whole letter, but none of you want to report on that,” Ford said, blasting the media for being “a little slanted” in its coverage.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

H/t Theo Moudakis

Meanwhile, Martin Regg Cohn reminds us why Doug Ford is not fit to lead the province:

Never mind, for now, the potential misdirection of law enforcement and miscarriage of justice as the premier’s office rammed the appointment through, potentially skewing or shielding him (if not others) from future police probes.

Forget, for a moment, that no one stood up to him in cabinet — not the chief law officer of the Crown, Attorney General Caroline Mulroney; nor the minister of community safety, Sylvia Jones, who supposedly oversees policing; never Greg Rickford, the minister ostensibly responsible for Indigenous affairs.

Spare a thought, instead, for those most affected by Ford’s manipulation of the OPP if his latest gambit works.

Think of our Indigenous peoples.

At the very time Ford tried to foist Taverner onto Ontario’s biggest police force — North America’s third-largest — Ontarians were learning about the recurring racism (politely and technically described as “systemic racism”) in the Thunder Bay police force in recent years. Why would Ford perpetuate that kind of disconnect by installing as commissioner a crony from Etobicoke with no feel or familiarity for the issue that overlays OPP challenges?

And Star letter-writers weigh in on the fiasco that is the Ford government:

Doug Ford governance

Looks like this consists of making up two lists: one of all the people and institutions that he has a grudge against, so that he can pass legislation and take steps to get even with them; and another of all the people he considers as friends, so that he can offer them choice, unqualified appointments.

John Marsh, Scarborough

I wish to comment on the impending appointment of Ron Taverner as the commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police, and to express my dismay at the way Premier Doug Ford and Nipissing MPP Vic Fedeli and the government you lead continue to sacrifice integrity to ego and reason to expediency.

It is my perception that one of you is not smart enough to know the difference between self-gratification and the common good. That the one who knows better — Fedeli — continues to stand by and take no principled stance is breathtakingly shameful.

Please do something to stop the Ontario Provincial Police and every fine thing that they stand for in this province from being dragged to the sleazy level of political cronyism that you and your government inhabit.

Perhaps one of you even has the courage to pick up the telephone to speak with an actual average citizen in this province about this very compelling issue.

Frank Petruzella, North Bay

The government of Ontario may be exceedingly weak, but the vox populi is still strong, the latter something to be very thankful for at this and any other time of the year.

What They Don't Know Can Hurt Us All

My good friend Dave, who lives in Winnipeg, has a very keen mind and makes it a steady practice to be well-informed about public matters. Consequently, at times he is overwhelmed by the political corruption and ineptitude that, as a citizen, he must bear witness to. Sometimes, in a sardonic moment when confronted with and seized by especially egregious examples of said shortcomings, he says to me, "Lorne, I wish I had been born an idiot!"

I empathize with how he feels, but while both Dave and I know that ignorance can be bliss, we also are acutely aware it can be dangerously destructive, especially when that ignorance exists in high office.

One of the most distressing aspects of contending with people's significant educational and intellectual limitations is that all too frequently, they think they are the smartest person in the room. For such individuals, problems are easily defined, and solutions simple. All the time others spend on lengthy and detailed analysis is time wasted to such people. In the best of situations, the espousal of such misplaced arrogance is limited to family and friends; in the worst, it infects government, and you wind up with ones led by the likes of Donald Trump and Doug Ford, both of whom regard themselves, no doubt, as brilliant, but who others see as manifestly incapable of heading a hot dog stand, let alone a government.

And so we find ourselves in Ontario led by a buffoonish premier, Doug "Backroom Dealer" Ford, taking the province down a path of national ridicule and lost opportunity. It can only get worse.

Happily, there are still those souls (notably outside of government or in the opposition ranks) unwilling to turn a blind eye, resolutely insisting upon a public accounting. Rob Ferguson writes:

The odds are against Toronto police veteran Ron Taverner ever being able to effectively lead the OPP because controversy over his friendship with Premier Doug Ford has done irreversible damage, policing experts say.

Concerns about potential conflicts of interest will always linger, several law enforcement sources said Sunday.

“You’re not doing any favours putting him in that job,” former RCMP commissioner Bob Paulson told the Star, echoing remarks from others in the field.

“I don’t see how this can be fixed,” said a retired senior police executive who requested anonymity to speak freely.

“If there’s any perception of a linkage like the pictures of him arm-in-arm with Premier Ford, how is the public ever going to have confidence?”

The fact that Taverner has temporarily stepped aside should be the occasion of only limited relief. Until his appointment as the new OPP Commissioner is unequivocally quashed, there is still public peril:

Should the appointment proceed, “he’s going to have trouble, subject to the members of the OPP looking over his shoulders wondering about every inquiry he might make,” Paulson predicted.

Because the OPP conducts investigations of politicians, (the gas plant investigation is one well-know instance) any hint of an unseemly relationship with those in power is anathema to public confidence:

“There’s investigations into the government, into the bureaucracy or into departments, things that if they’re not the government that the government would surely want to know and be able to manage,” Paulson said.

“The government knowing about things in advance is not a good idea, particularly in those kinds of investigations. Because then you get into all sorts of shenanigans of tainting evidence and tainting your investigation.”

Michael Armstrong, a retired chief superintendent of the OPP’s organized crime division, had this to say:

“One thing I took out of being in a leadership position is people want to look up to you. Don’t be somebody that they’re making jokes about. They want you to be the person they can look up to and aspire to be.”

I don't envy what lies ahead for the OPP's reputation, practices and morale should Taverner ultimately become commissioner. But I worry more about what such an appointment will do to the people of Ontario. And it will just be more evidence that they elected a man wholly unfit to lead this province in any but a downward direction.

Why Are We Complacent On Climate Change?

That is the question posed in this Global News report, which offers some interesting insights on the issue. My only quibble with it is that too much emphasis is put on climmate change being a far-off problem when, in fact, it is on our collective doorsteps right now.