Economy
A Fair Deal Includes Energy Security
This article contributed by Josh Andrus, Executive Director of Project Confederation
Energy security.
It’s a concept that has been ignored by many – including our federal government in Ottawa – for far too long.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has suddenly helped the world realize what’s been obvious to many Albertans for a long time – we still need oil and gas!
The same parade of politicians who crusaded to save the world from the threat of “catastrophic” climate change are now coming to the realization that there is a fundamental flaw in the Green New Deal / Leave It In The Ground / Build Back Better strategy.
Energy is the industry that powers every other industry – and as such, a safe supply of affordable, reliable energy is not only good for the domestic economy but also a crucial tool in an increasingly volatile international geopolitical landscape.
Earlier this week, after a big push by our friends at the Alberta Institute, and many other political and non-profit groups, the federal government finally announced that they would ban the importation of Russian oil.
Russia’s aggressive actions, and the related uncertainty, have now driven the price of crude oil over the $115/bbl benchmark.
[Editor’s note: we had to increase that price four times while writing this piece!]
Thankfully, Alberta has a large supply of energy resources, resources that could displace the loss of Russian imports and help keep energy affordable for Canadians.
Of course, it would have been better if our calls had been listened to years ago, and we had the infrastructure in place already!
But, as the saying goes:
The best time to build a pipeline was 20 years ago.
The second-best time is now!
If our politicians had any sense, Keystone XL and Energy East would have been given emergency approval the moment war broke out.
Yet, here we are, a week into a European war, and there’s been nary a whisper from the White House or Rideau Cottage.
If Alberta can’t convince Canada to build a pipeline in the middle of a war in Europe, we’ll surely never get one.
To make matters worse, the pipeline issues aren’t even the only possible problem on the horizon.
In past years, $100+ oil was good for Alberta.
Economic growth explodes, jobs are plentiful, and the pay is phenomenal.
Some of that will surely happen in the coming months, but with this current boom coinciding with major inflationary pressures, there are risks for Alberta too.
High energy prices and the ensuing increase in the cost of living will hurt the rest of the country.
The Rest of Canada will complain that Alberta has it so good, while they struggle to pay their hydro bills.
Will the Rest of Canada decide to start extracting their own plentiful natural resources, currently kept in the ground for nonsensical environmental concerns?
Of course not.
Ottawa will, undoubtedly, devise yet another means of wealth redistribution instead.
Once again, they’ll figure out a way to make Alberta pay for their poor policy choices.
They probably won’t have the gall to call it a “National Energy Program”.
But they might.
Remember, the major issues driving Western alienation are structural deficiencies in Confederation, deficiencies that have only gotten worse in recent decades, not better.
The West is underrepresented in Parliament, the Senate is unelected and ineffective at protecting Provincial rights, the very concept of fairness is undermined in our Constitution via equalization, and the Supreme Court screws the West and protects the rest.
At Project Confederation, our mission is clear:
To build a movement that will reform Confederation and achieve a fairer deal, in whatever legal configuration that may require.
I suspect we’re going to have a lot of work to do in the coming months!
If you’d like to help us with that work, please reach out to us to get involved, or consider making a donation to help fund our efforts.
Regards,
Josh Andrus
Executive Director
Project Confederation
Business
Trump Blocks UN’s Back Door Carbon Tax

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Has the time come for America to seriously reassess its participation in and support for the United Nations (U.N.)?
It’s a question that some prominent people are asking this week after the increasingly woke and essentially useless globalist body attempted to sneak a global carbon tax in through the back door while no one was looking.
Except someone was looking, as it turns out. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee, who chairs the powerful Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and is part of the majority on both the Senate Judiciary and Senate Foreign Relations Committees, said in an X post Thursday evening that this latest bit of anti-American action “warrants our withdrawal from the UN.”
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in his own X post on the matter on Wednesday that the Trump administration “will not allow the UN to tax American citizens and companies. Under the leadership of POTUS (President Donald Trump), the U.S. will be a hard NO. We call on other nations to stand alongside the United States in defense of our citizens and sovereignty.”
On Friday afternoon, Mr. Rubio took to X again to announce the news that efforts by himself and others in the Trump administration succeeded in killing an effort to move the tax forward during a meeting in London. However, the proposal is not fully dead – a final vote on it was simply delayed for a year.
The issue at hand stems from an attempt by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) – an agency of the U.N. – to impose net-zero rules on fuels used for seaborne shipping operations. The Trump administration estimates the imposition of the new requirements will increase the cost of shipping goods by about 10%, thus creating yet another round of inflation hitting the poorest citizens the hardest thanks to the globalist obsession with the amount of plant food – carbon dioxide – in the atmosphere.
Known as the IMO Net-Zero Framework, the proposal claims it would effectively “zero out” emissions from the shipping industry by 2050.
The potential implications if the U.N. ultimately succeeds in implementing its own global carbon tax are obvious. If this unelected, unaccountable globalist body can levy a carbon tax on Americans, a concept that America’s own elected officials have steadfastly rejected across the terms of the last five U.S. presidents, what would then prevent it from imposing other kinds of taxes on the world to support its ideological goals?
President Trump’s opposition to exactly this kind of international intrusion into America’s domestic policy choices is the reason why he has twice won the presidency, each time de-committing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords.
It has become increasingly obvious in recent years that the central goal of the global climate alarm movement is to dramatically raise the cost of all kinds of energy in order to force the masses to live smaller, more restricted lives and make their behavior easier for authoritarian governments to control. This camel’s nose under the tent move by the U.N. to sneak a global carbon tax into reality is just the latest in a long parade of examples that serve as proof points for that thesis.
At some point, U.S. officials must seriously reassess the value proposition in continuing to spend billions of dollars each year supporting and hosting a globalist organization whose every action seems designed to inflict damage on our country and its people. Now would be a good time to do that, in fact.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Business
Trump Admin Blows Up UN ‘Global Green New Scam’ Tax Push, Forcing Pullback

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
A United Nations (UN) proposal for a global carbon tax, which threatened to raise consumer costs, was tabled on Friday following pressure from the Trump administration.
Members of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a UN body based in London, met this week to vote on a “Net-Zero Framework,” which would have imposed steep penalties on ship emissions. A majority of countries at the agency voted on Friday to postpone the decision for a year after the Trump administration pushed back and threatened retaliation against states supporting the measure.
“Common sense prevailed. The Trump Administration will not stand for the UN or any organization forcing American taxpayers to foot the bill for their environmental pet projects,” a senior State Department official told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
The proposed IMO Net-Zero Framework, aimed at achieving global shipping emissions neutrality by 2050, would have imposed taxes of $100 to $380 per ton of CO2 on ships that failed to meet targets. If the global fleet fell even 10% short of the targets, costs could soar to $20 to $30 billion by 2030 and exceed $300 billion by 2035, by some estimates.
The Trump administration has warned the plan could raise global shipping costs by as much as 10%, forcing higher prices for American consumers.
“The collapse of the UN-backed shipping emissions deal is not the disaster portrayed by climate activists — it’s a victory for sovereignty over what amounted to taxation without representation,” Anthony Watts, Senior Fellow at The Heartland Institute, told the DCNF. “Shipping may account for 3% of global emissions, but it moves 90% of global trade; taxing it in the name of ‘net zero’ would have punished consumers and developing nations alike while enriching bureaucrats and consultants in Geneva and New York.”
President Donald Trump personally weighed in against the measure.
“The United States will NOT stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping, and will not adhere to it in any way, shape, or form. We will not tolerate increased prices on American Consumers OR, the creation of a Green New Scam Bureaucracy to spend YOUR money on their Green dreams,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform Thursday. “Stand with the United States, and vote NO in London tomorrow!”
The Trump administration had threatened that member states backing the measures could face a range of repercussions, including probes into anti-competitive practices, visa restrictions on maritime crews, commercial and financial penalties, increased port fees, and sanctions targeting officials promoting climate policies.
“Better than merely not signing a UN climate treaty is promising to punish countries that do sign. The result is no treaty. Thank you, President Trump,” Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team advisor, told the DCNF.
Frank Lasee, president of Truth in Energy and Climate, said the president’s stance helped protect consumers from “neocolonial mandates that enrich China at our expense.”
“This global carbon tax isn’t climate action; it’s economic sabotage,” Lasee told the DCNF. “Trump’s masterstroke preserves innovation, low taxes, and freedom from globalist overreach — ensuring our future remains bright without new well-funded UN mischief.”
-
Business2 days ago
Federal Budget 2025: A responsible media would ensure Canadians know about the dismal state of federal finance
-
Business2 days ago
Canada has an energy edge, why won’t Ottawa use it?
-
International1 day ago
Poland’s president signs new zero income tax law for parents with two children
-
Automotive20 hours ago
$15 Billion, Zero Assurances: Stellantis Abandons Brampton as Trudeau-Era Green Deal Collapses
-
Alberta2 days ago
Diploma Exams Affected: No school Monday as ATA rejects offer of enhanced mediation
-
Business2 days ago
Ethics on Ice: See You Next Year
-
International1 day ago
Australian territory bans men from women’s prisons in national first
-
National1 day ago
Poilievre accuses Canada’s top police force of ‘covering up’ alleged Trudeau crimes