From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Changes to the law require companies to more rigorously prove their environmental claims.

The investment group in charge of Canada’s governmental pension plan has ditched its “net zero” mandate, joining a growing list of major institutions doing the same.

According to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) Investments’ latest annual report, the entity is no longer committed to carbon “net-zero” by 2050. The CPP’s ditching of the target comes after a number of major institutions, including the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD), Bank of Montreal (BMO), National Bank of Canada, and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC), all made similar moves in recent months.

While ditching the net-zero effort, chief executive of CPP Investments John Graham maintained that it is still “really important to incorporate climate and incorporate sustainability” in its long-term investment portfolio.

The dropping of the “climate” target comes as recent changes to Canada’s Competition Act now mandate that companies prove any environmental claims they make, with Graham insinuating these changes were a factor in the decision.

“Recent legal developments in Canada have introduced, kind of, new considerations around how net-zero commitments are interpreted, so that’s caused us to change a little bit how we talk about it, but nothing’s changed on what we’re actually doing.”

Over the past decade, left-wing activists have used “net zero” and “environmental, social & governance” (ESG) standards to encourage major Canadian and U.S. corporations to take particular stands on political and cultural issues, notably in promotion of homosexuality, transgenderism, race relations, the environment, and abortion.

Outside of Canada, many major corporations have announced they are walking back DEI and other related policies. Some of the most notable include Lowe’s, Jack Daniel’s, and Harley Davidson. Other companies such as Disney, Target, and Bud Light have faced negative sales due to consumers fighting back and refusing to patronize the businesses.

Since taking power in 2015, the Liberal government, first under Justin Trudeau and now under Mark Carney, has continued to push a radical environmental agenda in line with those promoted by the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.” Part of this push includes the promotion of so called net-zero energy by as early as 2035.

MxM News

Quick Hit:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a new U.S. policy to deny visas to foreign officials who pressure American tech firms to censor content. The move is the latest in a series of actions aimed at dismantling what the administration calls the “global censorship-industrial complex.”

Key Details:

• Visa bans will apply to foreign officials and their families involved in censorship targeting U.S. citizens, companies, or residents.
• Justice Alexandre de Moraes of Brazil and EU Digital Services Act (DSA) officials could be among those affected.
• The policy follows the shutdown of the State Department’s Global Engagement Center and a broader crackdown on foreign speech controls.

Around the world, governments are threatening & censoring US social media platforms for legal speech. Now, @SecRubio @StateDept says it will deny visas to foreign nationals engaged in censorship against Americans, US tech companies, and people posting from inside the US. pic.twitter.com/24g0EdHLyx

— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) May 28, 2025

Diving Deeper:

The United States will begin denying entry visas to foreign officials who attempt to censor American citizens or pressure U.S. tech companies to suppress free speech. The policy, unveiled by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, marks the most aggressive push yet by the Trump administration to confront what it calls “global censorship collusion.”

The new policy, enabled under provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, applies not just to the offending officials but also to their immediate families. It targets those responsible for direct censorship, those who engage in lawfare to silence political dissent, and those who try to export censorship mandates into American digital platforms.

While State Department officials were careful not to name specific individuals, the measure could impact Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes—widely criticized for ordering the censorship of political opponents—and senior officials in the European Union overseeing the controversial Digital Services Act. The DSA has drawn backlash from U.S. leaders for its sweeping influence over American-based companies like Google, Meta, and X.

Rubio, who has led a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy priorities since assuming office at Foggy Bottom, previously shut down the State Department’s Global Engagement Center. That office had funneled taxpayer money to NGOs like the UK-based Global Disinformation Index, which was implicated in censorship pressure campaigns linked to U.S. intelligence entities.

Just last week, the State Department hinted at potential Magnitsky Act sanctions against Moraes, whose aggressive speech controls in Brazil have become a global case study in judicial overreach. The Justice Committee in Congress also approved legislation aimed at banning him from entering the United States.

As part of the administration’s strategic realignment, Acting Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy Darren Beattie has been tasked with leading efforts to protect American free speech interests abroad. “Obviously, we don’t love the idea of the Europeans censoring their own citizens,” Beattie told The Wall Street Journal, “but the principal concern is these spillover effects affecting content-moderation policies and a variety of free-speech concerns within the United States.”

The administration’s stance is that U.S. free speech is not just a domestic issue but a strategic priority. A recent State Department communication said the U.S. “is committed to shutting down the global censorship-industrial complex.”

Under the new visa policy, sanctions could also apply to officials who threaten arrests or asset seizures against tech companies, or demand that U.S.-based firms alter content moderation policies in line with foreign censorship laws. It further covers foreign actors who try to punish U.S. residents for online speech, or order tech platforms to withhold payments to users in retaliation for political or social commentary.

The announcement is backed by the America First Policy Directive, an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in January, which declared that the protection of American citizens and their rights must remain a central objective of U.S. foreign policy.

The administration has made clear that it sees free speech not only as a constitutional right but also as a geopolitical asset. Vice President J.D. Vance, speaking at the Munich Security Conference in February, warned against the rise of censorship regimes in Europe targeting populist movements like that of Marine Le Pen in France.

(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, Pool)