Political Change in Canada

March 24, 2025 rjdavison

OPPS-31 – Political Change in Canada Download PDF

OPPS-31 Note, this post is political, and statements made (that are not based on empirical data) are the opinion of the author. The two frontrunners in the race for Prime Minister of Canada are both putting themselves forward as agents of change. Only one of those parties will bring home that change. The other party has made some cosmetic changes to the “team” but not necessarily their ideologies.

#climatechange #delaythegreen #globalwarming #showusthedata

The Liberal Party of Canada has been in charge since November 5^th, 2015, when Justin Trudeau defeated the Conservative Party’s Stephen Harper and formed a majority government. Since that time, he has led Canada (with the NDP’s Jagmeet Singh’s help through his subsequent minority governments) to the third worst GDP/capita growth rate (0.6%) of our 30 country OECD peer group. The prospects for the future are even worse (last place at 0.78%/year to 2060). Both frontrunners are correct, we do need change.

So, what does change look like in the Liberal party? Not much difference at the top. They have traded one ideolog, Justin Trudeau for another, Mark Carney. You might be able to argue there is change, if their ideologies were different, but they are not. Professor Craig A. Carter described the change as “Whereas Trudeau believed that whatever the climate emergency cult told him was true, Carney was one of the ones telling him what was true. Trudeau is a cult member; Carney is the cult leader”. Mark Carney was a key advisor to Justin Trudeau and is fully onboard with all Justin Trudeau’s UN/WEF inspired goals. Mark Carney (the true globalist he is) was a foundation board member at the World Economic Forum (WEF), was the UN’s Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance and he helped found and run the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ, currently under investigation by the US government). Mark Carney is all in on Net Zero and will not suddenly walk away from those goals just because we have an election coming up. Were he to win, he will very likely quickly double down on every unnecessary, expensive “green” policy he can imagine. Ask Great Britain how that turned out for them!

To be fair, Carney has reduced the consumer Carbon Tax to zero, but that can only be considered temporary since the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act has not been repealed. That still also leaves a carbon tax on high emitters that will no doubt increase and will still be paid for by the consumers/taxpayers. Carney is cut from the same cloth as Justin, but he might better be described as Justin on steroids when it comes to implementing the UN/WEF global objectives. Those anemic GDP numbers mentioned earlier will look good compared to Canada’s status when we reach Net Zero (assuming that we can). Mark Carney (as Trudeau’s economic advisor) played a major role in achieving those poor GDP results. Was Mark Carney also responsible for Justin’s notions that budgets will balance themselves, there is no business case for LNG (but there is for hydrogen), the economy should be left to the bankers, and we do not need gold reserves (nor resource development)?

Following the Net Zero dogma will financially cripple Canada (and the world). And for what? Assuming that Net Zero is achieved, the temperature rise averted would be roughly 0.28 °C using the IPCC “science” (i.e.: unsubstantiated positive water vapour feedback) or just 0.07 °C using CO₂’s theoretical warming properties. Canada’s share, a negligible 0.001 to 0.004 °C. So, technically no measurable improvement. But there must be some financial improvement, right? Not according to Canada’s Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO). Their analysis concludes that Canada’s GDP growth would only be 6.6% ($140 billion) lower at the turn of the century if we were to do nothing about ‘Climate Change’. Full global Paris Accord compliance would reduce those damages by 0.8% ($17 billion). Assuming Canadian taxpayer’s increase climate change commitments to $30 billion per annum (currently ±$20 billion), we would spend $2.43 trillion by the end of the century. Our ‘Climate Change’ savings would be just $0.66 trillion. Those numbers (discounted at 3%) would be $909 billion and $127 billion respectively. We will be wasting $1.77 trillion ($0.78 trillion, discounted at 3%), assuming the IPCC science is correct.

Applying the same logic to a Net Zero scenario, yields the following results. Total expenditures have been forecasted to be as high as $5.2 trillion ($208 billion per annum until 2050). Discounted at 3%, $3.62 trillion. Total ‘Climate Change’ savings are now $3.64 trillion ($696 billion, discounted at 3%). The money wasted is now $1.56 trillion ($2.92 trillion discounted at 3%). The undiscounted number is higher because we will be spending massive amounts of money now to save smaller amounts in the distant future. This analysis does not factor in the costs to maintain Net Zero after 2050. Those costs will be significant (and required) to achieve the full $3.64 trillion ‘Climate Change’ savings. Every 15 to 20 years, the wind/solar facilities, battery, EV, etc. must be replaced (assuming the supply chains are available). The expenditures go up, the savings are the same. The end result, the wasted dollars are increased in parallel with the extra maintenance expenditures. There is some discussion along these lines in my OPPS-22 – Parliamentary Budget Office – GDP & Climate and OPPS-23 – PBO – Trudeau’s Business Acumen posts. My next post will include more detail on the above analysis.

Getting back to the political change, swapping Trudeau out for Carney does not change the underlying ideology. However, substituting the UN/WEF/EU cult member (Justin) for one of the UN/WEF/EU cult leaders (Carney) is problematic, given Carney’s much higher profile and direct connections in those organizations. Carney has not abandoned his role as an elite globalist (publicly or privately).

With respect to the Liberal Party team (the new Cabinet and chief Carney aids), there are at best just cosmetic changes. The number of Ministers has been reduced from 39 to 23, but only 3 new faces have been added to Cabinet. Carney’s top aides consist of Trudeau’s cast-off cabinet Ministers, Marco Mendicino and David Lametti. As usual Gerald Butts is lurking in the background. Brian Lilley has a few things to say about these individuals is a recent Toronto Sun article, “Carney puts together a new team of Trudeau has-beens”. Maybe Klaus and his WEF could update us on how much Cabinet penetration still persists in Canada?

The players on the Liberal side have effectively not changed and neither have their ideologies. They may have recognized that public opinions have changed, and they can no longer ignore our energy, food, and economic security issues, but the underlying ideologies will always work their way back to the surface. The path to an unelected, unaccountable, one world, totalitarian government might be put on hold, but their goals remain, without real change. There is no evidence that the Liberal Party is even contemplating real change. The Carney Liberal Party is still placing an emissions, a de facto production cap on our oil and gas industry. Canada will be the only major hydrocarbon producing country following that strategy. Making Canada les competitive and much poorer! We are becoming irrelevant, when we should be one of richest countries on this planet (financially, technologically, and socially).

As I have said before, that does not let the Conservatives (and Poilievre) off the hook. They have some great policies (Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) exports, pipeline access to new markets and energy efficiency/conservation), but they are still, sadly, committed to Net Zero (a physically unattainable ideology that will do little to help the planet’s climate, economic, and/or environmental situations). The opposite is very likely true. We are headed towards economic suicide, lower standards of living, and severe restrictions on our freedoms. A dystopian reality, not Mark Carney’s Net Zero utopia.