From Resource Works

By Nelson Bennett

Canada’s climate rethink signals shift from green idealism to pragmatic prosperity.

Bill Gates raised some eyebrows last week – and probably the blood pressure of climate activists – when he published a memo calling for a “strategic pivot” on climate change.

In his memo, the Microsoft founder, whose philanthropy and impact investments have focused heavily on fighting climate change, argues that, while global warming is still a long-term threat to humanity, it’s not the only one.

There are other, more urgent challenges, like poverty and disease, that also need attention, he argues, and that the solution to climate change is technology and innovation, not unaffordable and unachievable near-term net zero policies.

“Unfortunately, the doomsday outlook is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world,” he writes.

Gates’ memo is timely, given that world leaders are currently gathered in Brazil for the COP30 climate summit. Canada may not be the only country reconsidering things like energy policy and near-term net zero targets, if only because they are unrealistic and unaffordable.

It could give some cover for Canadian COP30 delegates, who will be at Brazil summit at a time when Prime Minister Mark Carney is renegotiating his predecessor’s platinum climate action plan for a silver one – a plan that contains fewer carbon taxes and more fossil fuels.

It is telling that Carney is not at COP30 this week, but rather holding a summit with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.

The federal budget handed down last week contains kernels of the Carney government’s new Climate Competitiveness Strategy. It places greater emphasis on industrial strategy, investment, energy and resource development, including critical minerals mining and LNG.

Despite his Davos credentials, Carney is clearly alive to the fact it’s a different ballgame now. Canada cannot afford a hyper-focus on net zero and the green economy. It’s going to need some high octane fuel – oil, natural gas and mining – to prime Canada’s stuttering economic engine.

The prosperity promised from the green economy has not quite lived up to its billing, as a recent Fraser Institute study reveals.

Spending and tax incentives totaling $150 billion over a decade by Ottawa, B.C, Ontario, Alberta and Quebec created a meagre 68,000 jobs, the report found.

“It’s simply not big enough to make a huge difference to the overall performance of the economy,” said Jock Finlayson, chief economist for the Independent Contractors and Business Association and co-author of the report.

“If they want to turn around what I would describe as a moribund Canadian economy…they’re not going to be successful if they focus on these clean, green industries because they’re just not big enough.”

There are tentative moves in the federal budget and Climate Competitiveness Strategy to recalibrate Canada’s climate action policies, though the strategy is still very much in draft form.

Carney’s budget acknowledges that the world has changed, thanks to deglobalization and trade strife with the U.S.

“Industrial policy, once seen as secondary to market forces, is returning to the forefront,” the budget states.

Last week’s budget signals a shift from regulations towards more investment-based measures.

These measures aim to “catalyse” $500 billion in investment over five years through “strengthened industrial carbon pricing, a streamlined regulatory environment and aggressive tax incentives.”

There is, as-yet, no commitment to improve the investment landscape for Alberta’s oil industry with the three reforms that Alberta has called for: scrapping Bill C-69, a looming oil and gas emissions cap and a West Coast oil tanker moratorium, which is needed if Alberta is to get a new oil pipeline to the West Coast.

“I do think, if the Carney government is serious about Canada’s role, potentially, as an global energy superpower, and trying to increase our exports of all types of energy to offshore markets, they’re going to have to revisit those three policy files,” Finlayson said.

Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, said she thinks the emissions cap at least will be scrapped.

“The markets don’t lie,” she said, pointing to a post-budget boost to major Canadian energy stocks. “The energy index got a boost. The markets liked it. I don’t think the markets think there is going to be an emissions cap.”

Some key measures in the budget for unlocking investments in energy, mining and decarbonization include:

• incentives to leverage $1 trillion in investment over the next five years in nuclear and wind power, energy storage and grid infrastructure;

• an expansion of critical minerals eligible for a 30% clean technology manufacturing investment tax credit;
• $2 billion over five years to accelerate critical mineral production;
• tax credits for turquoise hydrogen (i.e. hydrogen made from natural gas through methane pyrolysis); and
• an extension of an investment tax credit for carbon capture utilization and storage through to 2035.

As for carbon taxes, the budget promises “strengthened industrial carbon pricing.”

This might suggest the government’s plan is to simply simply shift the burden for carbon pricing from the consumer entirely onto industry. If that’s the case, it could put Canadian resource industries at a disadvantage.

“How do we keep pushing up the carbon price — which means the price of energy — for these industries at a time when the United States has no carbon pricing at all?” Finlayson wonders.

Overall, Carney does seem to be moving in the right direction in terms of realigning Canada’s energy and climate policies.

“I think this version of a Liberal government is going to be more focused on investment and competitiveness and less focused around the virtue-signaling on climate change, even though Carney personally has a reputation as somebody who cares a lot about climate change,” Finlayson said.

“It’s an awkward dance for them. I think they are trying to set out a different direction relative to the Trudeau years, but they’re still trying to hold on to the Trudeau climate narrative.”

Pictured is Mark Carney at COP26 as UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance. He is not at COP30 this week. UNRIC/Miranda Alexander-Webber

Resource Works News

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Bill Flaig And Tom Carter

The recent leadership changes at Paramount Skydance suggest that the company may finally be ready to correct course after years of ideological drift, cultural activism posing as programming, and a pattern of self-inflicted financial and reputational damage.

Nowhere was this problem more visible than at CBS News, which for years operated as one of the most partisan and combative news organizations. Let’s be honest, CBS was the worst of an already left biased industry that stopped at nothing to censor conservatives. The network seemed committed to the idea that its viewers needed to be guided, corrected, or morally shaped by its editorial decisions.

This culminated in the CBS and 60 Minutes segment with Kamala Harris that was so heavily manipulated and so structurally misleading that it triggered widespread backlash and ultimately forced Paramount to settle a $16 million dispute with Donald Trump. That was not merely a legal or contractual problem. It was an institutional failure that demonstrated the degree to which political advocacy had overtaken journalistic integrity.

For many longtime viewers across the political spectrum, that episode represented a clear breaking point. It became impossible to argue that CBS News was simply leaning left. It was operating with a mission orientation that prioritized shaping narratives rather than reporting truth. As a result, trust collapsed. Many of us who once had long-term professional, commercial, or intellectual ties to Paramount and CBS walked away.

David Ellison’s acquisition of Paramount marks the most consequential change to the studio’s identity in a generation. Ellison is not anchored to the old Hollywood ecosystem where cultural signaling and activist messaging were considered more important than story, audience appeal, or shareholder value.

His professional history in film and strategic business management suggests an approach grounded in commercial performance, audience trust, and brand rebuilding rather than ideological identity. That shift matters because Paramount has spent years creating content and news coverage that seemed designed to provoke or instruct viewers rather than entertain or inform them. It was an approach that drained goodwill, eroded market share, and drove entire segments of the viewing public elsewhere.

The appointment of Bari Weiss as the new chief editor of CBS News is so significant. Weiss has built her reputation on rejecting ideological conformity imposed from either side. She has consistently spoken out against antisemitism and the moral disorientation that emerges when institutions prioritize political messaging over honesty.

Her brand centers on the belief that journalism should clarify rather than obscure. During President Trump’s recent 60 Minutes interview, he praised Weiss as a “great person” and credited her with helping restore integrity and editorial seriousness inside CBS. That moment signaled something important. Paramount is no longer simply rearranging executives. It is rethinking identity.

The appointment of Makan Delrahim as Chief Legal Officer was an early indicator. Delrahim’s background at the Department of Justice, where he led antitrust enforcement, signals seriousness about governance, compliance, and restoring institutional discipline.

But the deeper and more meaningful shift is occurring at the ownership and editorial levels, where the most politically charged parts of Paramount’s portfolio may finally be shedding the habits that alienated millions of viewers.The transformation will not be immediate. Institutions develop habits, internal cultures, and incentive structures that resist correction. There will be internal opposition, particularly from staff and producers who benefited from the ideological culture that defined CBS News in recent years.

There will be critics in Hollywood who see any shift toward balance as a threat to their influence. And there will be outside voices who will insist that any move away from their preferred political posture is regression.

But genuine reform never begins with instant consensus. It begins with leadership willing to be clear about the mission.

Paramount has the opportunity to reclaim what once made it extraordinary. Not as a symbol. Not as a message distribution vehicle. But as a studio that understands that good storytelling and credible reporting are not partisan aims. They are universal aims. Entertainment succeeds when it connects with audiences rather than instructing them. Journalism succeeds when it pursues truth rather than victory.

In an era when audiences have more viewing choices than at any time in history, trust is an economic asset. Viewers are sophisticated. They recognize when they are being lectured rather than engaged. They know when editorial goals are political rather than informational. And they are willing to reward any institution that treats them with respect.

There is now reason to believe Paramount understands this. The leadership is changing. The tone is changing. The incentives are being reassessed.

It is not the final outcome. But it is a real beginning. As the great Winston Churchill once said; “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”.

For the first time in a long time, the door to cultural realignment in legacy media is open. And Paramount is standing at the threshold and has the capability to become a market leader once again. If Paramount acts, the industry will follow.

Bill Flaig and Tom Carter are the Co-Founders of The American Conservatives Values ETF, Ticker Symbol ACVF traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Ticker Symbol ACVF

Learn more at www.InvestConservative.com