Canadian Contractor
News

Bernier and the Peoples Party of Canada break from Global Warming orthodoxy

"Climate change alarmism is based on flawed models that have consistently failed at correctly predicting the future."


Print this page

September 25, 2019 by canadiancontractor

Where Global Warming is concerned and the attendant policies that affect the housing industry, the Liberal, Green and NDP parties remain firmly in the alarmist camp. In each case, there is a significant mitigating policy action proposed to avoid climate catastrophe. The Progressive Conservatives are milder in their policy, but still hold to the GW orthodoxy that the planet is under threat from too much fossil fuel use.

The new People’s Party of Canada’s (PPC) is a noteworthy departure from the popular narrative so pervasive today. It goes so far as to call concerns regarding the burning of fossil fuels “alarmism” and suggests Canada should withdraw from the Paris Accord, the global innitiative to reduce greenhouse gases being promulgated by the IPCC and the UN.

There is good reason to believe the PPC party would end the slow policy march towards Net Zero housing infrastructure (the Liberals want complete conversion to Net Zero for Canada by 2050) that is so popular with current political thinking.

Here is their policy statement, found on the official PPC website:

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.

Our Plan

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 will:

  • Withdraw from the Paris Accord and abandon unrealistic greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
  • Stop sending billions of dollars to developing countries to help them reduce their emissions.
  • Abolish the Liberal government’s carbon tax and leave it to provincial governments to adopt programs to reduce emissions if they want to.
  • Abolish subsidies for green technology and let private players develop profitable and efficient alternatives.
  • Invest in adaptation strategies if problems arise as a result of any natural climate change.
  • Prioritize implementing practical solutions to make Canada’s air, water and soil cleaner, including bringing clean drinking water to remote First Nations communities.

 


canadiancontractor

canadiancontractor

Canadian Contractor is the independent voice of residential renovators and home builders everywhere in Canada.
All posts by

Print this page



Related

Have your say:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

9 Comments » for Bernier and the Peoples Party of Canada break from Global Warming orthodoxy
  1. Ben Polley says:

    Sigh.

    He certainly has found territory for himself by being the only “leader” without regard for science. Might be good niche politics but it is bad for science, human progress and of course, the planet on which we live.

    I can agree with his one point – scientists have repeatedly been wrong with their predictions about the impacts of a changing climate. Invariably, they have UNDERpredicted the speed, intensity and devastating consequences of its impact. The principle of the tipping point and the runaway/flywheel effect of each cumulative, incremental change, is showing just how underprepared we are for the uncharted future that political pretenders like him are trying to lead us to.

    • Robert Koci says:

      Ah, Ben. I was hoping you would show up! I would argue exactly the opposite—that the science is much stronger in favour of deniers. My latest favourite is Patrick Moore, founder of Greenpeace, in a video here: Patrick Moore

      • Ben Polley says:

        Hi Rob. You may need a parallel political publication, if each you and I were to offer all of our respective thoughts! 😉 You will of course find some individuals to support your argument – several billion of us on the planet, there will always be outliers – , though on this matter at least, your opinion rebuffed by 98% of actual climate scientists (forgive me if it is actually 97 or 99% – I am also not a scientist). Deniers have moved to a strategy of Delayers, which allows them to avoid the conflict of hard evidence and hard science…but still pushes us to having to deal with the real problem when it gets ever more expensive to do so. I recall in 2003 when the Green Party pushed for all coal fired electrical generating plants to be closed (pressure which led to the Liberals doing that several yrs later) – the Ontario Medical Assoc, which is no bastion of small ‘l’ liberal thought, argued that doing so would eliminate hospitalization of 3,000 (mostly infirm, asthma sufferers, elderly) annually. However such externalized costs of the ordinary, damaging way of doing business, don’t seem to ever factor into Cons equations. Which baffles me since small ‘c’ conservatives should be all about spending the least to get the best outcome…the OMA demonstrated the savings would be greater than the potential increase in electrial rates, to say nothing about the real, personal, health outcomes for people. Externalized costs are hard to see so easy to ignore. Since it is the end of the week, I want to head into the weekend on a lighter note though, so will leave you with a favourite link of my own by Joel Pett: https://www.art.com/products/p48724986237-sa-i10958434/joel-pett-climate-summit-what-if-it-s-a-big-hoax-and-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing.htm?upi=Q1BO4FQ0. Would love to see this cartoon in the next print issue!

  2. Peter Walker says:

    The PPC platform is definitely scary. I feel for the generations that follow us already. As one of my friends (who is Minister of Public Works in government and has to deal with such issues)…. “Climate change is real, and I have the receipts to prove it.”

  3. Mark Mitchell says:

    Good read Rob. I am truly flummoxed as well by people who believe that giving money to politicians will change the weather in a country that emits less than 2% of the world’s CO2, and is already a net carbon sink, due to our vast forests and low population. The reality is people are free to build net zero homes if they want, and to buy EV’s ( that only pollute where they make the batteries, not where they are driven), and do anything else they want to if they think its going to change the climate. As soon as governments get involved it becomes an industry, leading to govt grants, jobs, and pay-offs, which is why the climate hysteria was created in the first place. Lets just relax, pollute as little as possible, recycle as much as possible, and send little Greta to a therapist to get help for her psychosis.
    How dare you!

    • Mark Mitchell says:

      By the way, I’m out supporting my local PPC candidate tonight, putting up signs and such. Barrie had a Reform party politician in the ’90’s, its time for a PPC member

      • Robert Koci says:

        As an nonobjective observer, I am thrilled. I think Bernier has it right: the science is not settled on Global Warming and until it is, there is no point spending a lot of money to mitigate something that may or may not be a problem.