Paris climate change deal brings calls to action from Canadians

While Canada’s environment minister applauds the newly approved “Paris agreement” on climate change, some say that merely signing the pact isn’t enough.


Minister of the Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna speaks at Canada 20/20 in Ottawa November 20, 2015. (Photograph by Blair Gable)While Canada’s environment minister applauds the newly approved “Paris agreement” on climate change, some say that merely signing the pact isn’t enough.

Nearly 200 countries agreed to a deal on Saturday — it asks all countries to limit their greenhouse gas emissions for the first time.

The agreement limits temperature rise to two degrees Celsius.

On Twitter, Catherine McKenna writes that she’s proud to be part of the agreement, saying it makes history and is “for our children.”

However both NDP leader Tom Mulcair and World Wildlife Fund Canada say merely approving the agreement isn’t enough.

Related: Behind the scenes with Canada’s lead climate conference negotiator

They say the Canadian government must act to reduce fossil fuel emissions.

The Conservative Party did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the agreement.

Related: Why the Tories must shake an association with climate change skepticism 

Erin Flanagan, the federal policy director of Pembina Institute, says the federal government should establish a climate change plan quickly.

She said provincial commitments won’t be enough to reduce emissions, but the agreement “ 1/8underscores 3/8 a powerful global transition away from high-carbon fossil fuels.”


Paris climate change deal brings calls to action from Canadians

  1. In Hamilton, the steel industry lobbied for its own demised in the 1980s and then didn’t retrain. I don’t really understand the latter result being a secure Wpg-ger. And apparently without its proud history Wpg could’ve wound up worse than SK upon past contractions. ANd aluminum need lots of hydro power, so Quebec’s future is secure here. Where I am now, no one will just take cash and rent to me. Apparently it is the same effect 1/4 as strong. When you make a living lobbying for something irrational, you don’t like alternative tenants (from outside the city without a FT job). So for anyone with brains that wants a place to be respected to immigrate to…really, a 3 month rent deposit would take care of their insecurities.

    • Accelerated depreciation is not, and never has been, a subsidy. Your oh-so-erudite blog has failed to differentiate between the two.

      A capital expense deducted from taxable income today is not available to be deducted from income in future years, resulting in a wash as far as tax paid is concerned. A subsidy represents a net transfer of wealth to the recipient. No net transfer means the subsidy doesn’t exist.

      • Along with tax deductions not being a subsidy, governments net huge amounts of tax and royalty revenue from the production of carbon energy sources, including coal. Wind and solar generate no net income sources, which makes for a double hit to government revenues when you advocate for the end of carbon.
        The question then begging to be asked of the warmists, who are invariably fans of big and expensive government, is which services and departments are you going to nominate for dismantling in order to match the drop in revenues that you are advocating for? It’s a fair question.
        It’s also vital to differentiate between a “call for action” on climate, and the imposition of a policy that has been chosen by self-styled elites very much against the will of the public.
        If it were truly a “call to action”, then it would strictly be left up to the citizenry to take whatever steps they see fit to address the so-called climate crisis with no legislative penalties and punitive taxes.
        The problem is that the warmists do not want that freedom of choice to exist under any circumstance.

  2. The Paris “agreement” is basically the outline of the plan that Stephen Harper argued for in Copenhagen.

    i.e. That all emitters, including China and India, must be in the deal, and have targets.

    So what Harper was called a fossil for five years ago, all the world leaders are now being called “heros”.

    • No biggie…….

      the “agreement” is just another gabfest document that doesn’t really call for any binding targets, or commitments. It is your basic “feel good” document, that these idiots can take back to their respective countries, with the claim to have saved the world. That way, in the years ahead when NOTHING changes, they can say, “see…..our plan worked, and we saved the world”

      it’s all smoke and mirrors, and if the climate is changing, it has nothing to do with humans. It has to do with that big ball of burning hydrogen in the sky, and there is nothing we could do to change it if it was happening (again).

Sign in to comment.