Why did Canada's Prime Minister visit the United Nations this week? It wasn't for the right reason...

climate change denialThere are over 31,000 lakes in Canada larger than three square kilometers. 9% of Canada’s total area is made up of freshwater. Canada also has 1.3 billion acres of boreal forest which soaks up 22% of the total carbon stored on the earth’s land surface. Crazy… Eh?

It’s just too bad our Conservative Government could care less. It’s hard to say if our leaders are climate change deniers per se, but they’re most definitely in denial in regards to doing something about it.

I have ranted time and time again over the last eight long frustrating years about Canada’s tar sands expansion, the defunding of the experimental lakes and other environmental science endeavors, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s effective gagging of Canadian scientists and so on.

Let’s face it, if you are an environmentalist living in Canada, the past decade has been one embarrassment after another. This past week is no exception.

Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets in New York to protest government inaction on climate change this past weekend. While I was both surprised and impressed at Canada’s media coverage of the event, I was disappointed in Canada’s participation in the UN Climate Summit that followed.

Where is Prime Minister Stephen Harper this week? Why he’s in New York of course. But if you were waiting for a mind melting speech on climate change, you’ll be waiting a long time. Even though he’s in the city, he decided to pass on the Climate Summit just like the other big polluters like China, India and Russia.

Harper sent Canada’s Environment Minister, Leona Aglukkaq instead. During her sub-par Climate Summit speech she said “We are not waiting to act. We are taking decisive action to ensure Canada remains a leader and contributes its part to this global cause.” She added “What we’ve moved on is the two largest emitters in Canada related to the electricity sector as well as the transportation sector.”

During her speech, Aglukkaq did not mention oil or gas one time. Not one time. Just freakin’ slipped her mind. Never mind the fact that 25% of Canada’s emissions come from oil and gas production. A percentage that is sure to increase as the tar sands expand.

Obama, climate change denialSo, why was Stephen Harper in New York if not to address the world on climate change? He was invited by the United States to give a speech before the UN Security Council on ISIS. Yes, Harper would rather pass on the opportunity to address the UN about the climate change fight we are barely involved in, preferring instead to address the UN about a fight with ISIS that Canada is barely involved in.

Meanwhile, back at home, the parliamentary secretary to Leona Aglukkaq said on Monday that Canada’s Conservative government is “a world leader in addressing climate change.” That’s like saying the Republican Party is a world leader on helping the poor.

Among developed nations, Canada ranks 3rd among the worst polluters of carbon dioxide emissions in the world (per capita). Canada lags behind only Australia and the United States. While the Aussies and Yankees have started to see emissions go down the past few years, we Canucks are still seeing emissions rise.

I suppose Harper’s trip to New York this time around was more productive than his trip last September when he told a Business Council to tell Obama that “Canada would not take no for an answer” on the Keystone XL pipeline. Luckily Obama has yet to say yes.

I can’t help but shake the feeling my country has become as useless as the American Congress. We talk very little and do even less.


  1. The Extinction of the Human Race started as a resource … which would be used to replace whale oil lamp fuel..that..was discovered in Pennsylvania. ..the utilization of petroleum is integrated into every facet of Modern Living. . The addition of profit to the mix has caused an overabundance of a material which should be regulated in proportion to its disadvantages
    . ..Oil $$$$ will mask the eventual environmental disasters which are nearing the point of no return.. Canada has an abundance of toxic materials that are profitable. .and a government which neglects to address the danger..Sad for Mankind in the end…Oil $$$$ Trumps Common Sense in Every Country… 🙁

  2. um yea, sorry to inform you but those who identify as conservative Republicans are significantly more likely to contribute their time and money to help the poor than those who identify as liberal Democrats. see the difference is between those who actively work to help others and those who would rather just pay a few extra tax dollars and not have to deal with it.

    As for Canada’s climate policies i have no clue. but the current reality is ISIS is a direct threat to the western world and one we can actually do something about. whereas there is little evidence to show that even if we ceased all carbon output “climate change” would cease or even slow in the slightest.

    • Spoken like a true conservative. What exactly are republicans doing to help the poor? providing tax cuts for the rich? ISIS is not a direct threat to the western world, they are barely a threat to the Assad Regime in Syria. And the National Center for Atmospheric Research finds that a 70 percent cut in emissions should stabilize temperatures at a mark not too much higher than today.

      • a “should” that is based on the assumption that our activities are the direct cause of the temperature change rather than a catalyst for an event that was going to happen regardless. We have only been lucky as a species to have developed in age of moderate climate for the most part.

        And if you are looking to legislation as an example of charity you are looking in all the wrong places. When you have no choice but to give the money to the government who then distributes it to the poor the money has zero meaning and the act is worthless. There are many studies to show people who are conservatives (even more so conservative Christians) are much more likely to volunteer and give money to charity than any other demographic.

        Your comment about the rich is so full of spite that it is practically searing my comp screen. Maybe you should care less about what the rich have and you don’t and care for others in your community.

        And yes, ISIS is a major threat. hell they are more of a threat than most countries since they have American equipment and weaponry we so foolishly left behind and intact. but aside for their combat weaponry they also have far more numbers than most other terrorist organizations and many of the solders have military training. what no one really wants to talk about are the thousands of people from the U.S., U.K., and Canada who are going to fight for ISIS. These militants are less terrorists and more like a conventional army at this point. they have such overwhelming military force that they have no need to resort to bombings they just roll in with our tanks and APC’s and wipe everyone out. It is only a matter of time before they decide to attack the west again and considering how many they have from our countries it would not be hard for them to slip someone in.

Leave a Comment