Lethbridge Herald: Therapeutic moralism flaunted as environmentalism

Several years ago, I was in a car accident and suffered severe whiplash. I was told I needed physical therapy to heal and regain the full function of my neck. Though the treatment was uncomfortable and even painful at times, I saw positive results so I kept going.

People are usually willing to keep doing something, even if its painful, as long as it produces the desired outcome.

The carbon tax went up by 25 per cent yesterday. It was April Fools, but the devastating impact of this tax is no joke! Canadians will pay extra for gas, home heating, food, and so much more.

No doubt, it makes some Canadians feel good to know they’re “doing their part” to save the planet.

I don’t blame them.

Millions of dollars have been spent on environmental campaigns with a single agenda: to end the use of fossil fuels.

The impetus for this type of action is varied. There are links to alternative energy corporations and green technology investors who get a huge economic bump from the government cheques they collect. Meanwhile, environmental ideologues get a morality boost from eating plant-based meat and driving electric vehicles to work.

There is a growing agenda to persuade the Canadian people into adopting certain behaviours with the promised reward of reducing emissions and protecting against climate change. The approach is moralistic, rather than practical.

We’ve been told oil and gas are bad, plastics should be banned, pipelines should be blocked, electric cars should be purchased, a price should be placed on carbon, and taxes should be increased.

Without studying whether the promised effect is being achieved, we get on board.

Are we doing what we’re told because it’s making an impact, or because it makes us feel better regardless of the outcome?

Are we truly stewarding Canada’s land, water, and air? Or are we simply marching dutifully?

If we are forced to change how we live, evidence of the desired outcomes should be provided. When it comes to the federal carbon tax, the government has failed to do this. In fact, on the contrary, carbon emissions continue to climb.

In other words, the government’s prescribed solution seems to be therapy for the guilty conscience, but not a solution for the planet.

The fact is, when it comes to resource development, Canada has some of the highest environmental regulations in the world, while many other oil-producing countries have none. The global demand for oil and gas continues to climb. By reducing our production to “protect the environment,” Canada is effectually boosting production in countries like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia.

While the NDP-Liberals like to preach they are doing the right thing by crippling our oil and gas industry and congratulate those who comply with their anti-energy agenda, the fact of the matter is, they are doing the exact opposite. They are boosting oil production in countries that don’t care about environmental protection, or producing oil and gas ethically, or paying workers well.

The current government’s environmental policy is nothing more than therapeutic moralism.

It’s disastrous! The environment isn’t being stewarded, the economy is tanking, and dictators are being empowered.

Instead of cancelling pipeline projects that could get more of our product to market, we should be investing and building our export capabilities. Boosting oil and gas production in Canada would create more jobs and generate more revenue that could be directed toward vital infrastructure projects. It would not only make us more prosperous economically, but it would also ensure energy security for our nation and allow us to export to other countries.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has shown the world that energy security is integral to national security. Putin’s war machine is powered largely from oil and gas revenue brought in from European countries that are forced to purchase from Russia. Exporting Canadian oil and gas to nations that are currently dependent on dictators would help safeguard humanity.

Furthermore, Canadian LNG can play a significant role in lowering global emissions. A 2020 study in the Journal for Cleaner Production demonstrates that China’s emissions could be lowered by 62 per cent if coal was replaced by imported natural gas from Canada. Canada must plan and act globally if we truly wish to make a difference. Currently, that’s not the case.

It’s important to take a step back and question whether this false sense of gratification is worth it. Do we simply want to feel like we’re doing something worthwhile, or do we actually want to have an impact?

Knowing what I know about Canadians, I believe the majority of us truly desire to make our country and the world a better place. We don’t want to be swindled to advance someone else’s dishonest agenda.

Canadians have incredible grit, intelligence, and pragmatism.

Let’s insist on more than therapeutic moralism masquerading as a so-called environmental plan.

Lethbridge Herald: No to government control, yes to choice

Whenever we see government attempt to exert more control over the lives of Canadians, we should be on high alert.

Many have classified the Internet as the new public square.

A place where people are free to speak, debate, share, listen, critique, and learn from one another.

This space is unique in that it allows for connections to be made irrespective of geographical location. It is truly amazing!

The Internet has given us the opportunity to learn about different cultures, enjoy music from all over the world, find recipes from the 1600s, and learn how to maintain an urban garden, or change a flat tire.

Creators have been empowered to reach a global audience and viewers are able to access pretty much anything they wish.

Who could have predicted, even 30 years ago, the vast reach individuals would have through the Internet, or the success artists would achieve on various digital platforms? It is something remarkable and, I believe, something we should protect.

Why, you might ask, does this new public square need to be protected?

Quite simply, because the Liberal government is not comfortable with this vast space of open communication existing outside of its control.

There are tens of thousands of digital first creators and artists in Canada who have found a way to capitalize on this new system of digital communication.

They have built businesses and exported their art around the globe.

Instead of celebrating these accomplishments and encouraging these entrepreneurs to continue, the government has decided they need to be punished by having the draconian rules of the Broadcasting Act applied to them.

Enter Bill C-11.

Bill C-11 is the new iteration of Bill C-10. Its claimed intent is to level the playing field and make big web giants “pay their fair share.”

With this legislation, Canada will become the very first democratic country to apply its broadcasting act to the Internet.

In effect, Bill C-11 will put in place an “Internet czar”—the CRTC—which will govern how easily creators are able to make their content accessible online, and how easily viewers can access it.

In short, Canada will join the likes of China, Turkey, Iran, North Korea and Russia.

If that sounds alarming, it’s because it is!

It is important to note that the Broadcasting Act was never meant to regulate the Internet, which is infinite.

The Broadcasting Act was written for the purposes of regulating public television and radio programming.

The Liberals claim that bringing more government intervention through bureaucratic regulation will boost the Canadian arts and culture sector, but tell me about a time in history where more red tape and regulation has increased innovation, incentivized artistic creation, or prosperity.

You cannot because it does not.

This legislation sets up the CRTC as an unguided missile. Former CRTC Commissioner, Peter Menzies has warned, “a regulator left without limits will continue to seek to expand them.”

The Liberals assure us that this bill will protect and promote Canadian culture, but in actuality, it will prevent Canadian creatives from being able to organically gain and maintain a following.

The government, through the CRTC, will dictate what is “Canadian” enough to be kept on page one of your YouTube search, and what has to be bumped to page 53.

In other words, the CRTC will choose which creators get to succeed and which do not.

It will be up to government-instructed bureaucrats to pick winners and losers.

In effect, the government will simultaneously act as the arbiter of what you should and should not wish to watch based on a convoluted definition of how “Canadian” the content is.

Talk about a heavy-handed approach and a direct imposition on your freedom to choose.

World renowned Canadian YouTube artist, Lilly Singh said, “creators who have built their careers on the Internet need to be consulted on these decisions.”

“In trying to do what seems like a good thing –highlighting great Canadian-made content –you can unintentionally destroy a thriving creative ecosystem.”

Canadian digital first creators are hitting it out of the park without any intervention, strings-attached support, or regulation from the government.

As Morghan Fortier from Skyship Entertainment so eloquently put it:

“In Canada, digital content creators have built a successful, thriving industry on platforms such as YouTube, TikTok and others that exports a huge amount of Canadian content to the rest of the world…. They’ve done this through their entrepreneurial spirit, their hard work, and largely without government interference or assistance. This achievement should be supported, celebrated and encouraged.”

Bill C-11 is a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t exist.

Digital first creators are against this bill because they do not want the government getting in the way of their potential. Canadian viewers are concerned because they do not want the government to limit their viewing choice.

I am listening, and I could not agree more.

NO to government deciding what is best for Canadians to produce and view, and YES to Canadian artists and Canadian consumers choosing for themselves.

If you agree with me, please take a minute to write a two-word email to the Heritage minister, Mr. Rodriguez: “No C-11!”

He can be emailed here: hon.pablo.rodriguez@pch.gc.ca

Lethbridge Herald: Rights of convoy participants deserve to be respected

As I write this article, it is the morning of Thursday, February 3rd and I am in Ottawa. I just came into the office after walking down Wellington Street, where rigs, Honda Civics, Ford F-150s, and RVs are parked, and people of all ages and all backgrounds are advocating for a return to normal life.

I could take an alternate route that would allow me to avoid most of the supposed “chaos” but why would I? It is an honour and a joy to walk among and converse with those who have gathered on Parliament Hill from all corners of our country.

During my journey, I passed hundreds of signs that say “thank-you truckers”, others that speak of love, and yet others that call for freedom. I received a lot of smiles, many thumbs up, and a few horns were blared.

On Tuesday I talked with a family pulling a wagon with their two little girls and a baby in tow, carrying a sign that said, “Thank you Truckers.” I stopped and talked with them, and they shared that they travelled four hours to be present for the day. They are vaccinated but feel it is unfair to discriminate against those who are not.

The mainstream media would like you to believe that this is an anti-vaccination protest made up of a homogenous group of disgruntled white men. Even the Prime Minister continues to frame participants as a “fringe minority” with “unacceptable views.” It is just not true.

Throughout the week, I have talked with truckers, nurses, postal workers, teachers, construction workers, and stay-at-home moms. Some participants wear crosses and some wear turbans. Some are in their seventies and others are still in diapers. Some are not vaccinated, and others are vaccinated three times.

Images, sound recordings, and video footage of the Freedom Convoy, and the thousands-upon-thousands of Canadians who have come out to support the participants in their week-long journey to the capital, have inspired many.

Who would have imagined the largest trucking convoy in history would lead the way in a mass demonstration for freedom in the capital of Canada? There are reports of trucking convoys following suit in countries around the world.

Though there have been a few unfortunate incidents carried out by a handful of agitators, they do not reflect the majority of the protesters. I condemn those acts, as have the organizers of the Freedom Convoy. Those individuals must be held individually responsible. Afterall, just because Mr. Trudeau wore blackface, it does not mean all Liberals are racist, does it?

Some other things worth noting, which you will not hear from mainstream news, is the amount of respect and decency these protestors have displayed. They walk around at night picking up garbage. They shovel snow to clear the sidewalks. They have people manning the National War Memorial to ensure the monument and area around it is respected. How many other protests can boast the same?

In contrast, hundreds marched through the streets of Toronto on Saturday calling for the destruction of Israel and engaging in violent uprisings where “Death to the Jews” was shouted vehemently. Where was the mainstream media? Where was the Prime Minister?

The hypocrisy is sickening. Canadians should be outraged—or at least not silent.

The vast majority of those taking part in the Convoy for Freedom have positive motives. In a free and democratic country, they are peacefully demonstrating, which is their right to do. The Prime Minister would do well to listen. Canada is speaking.

We are witnessing a remarkable movement in history. If you do not respect the position taken by those participating, I hope you can at least respect their right to take it.