Opinion
Does Scottish gov’t turmoil signal the end of the ‘green’ agenda’s stranglehold on Europe?
Former Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf
From LifeSiteNews
By Frank Wright
‘Green’ politics is now understood as a campaign for electoral and national suicide. With the coming European elections the writing is on the wall for globalist ‘progressives’ across the continent.
The First Minister of Scotland, Humza Yousaf, quit on live television on April 29, following the collapse of his left/Green Party coalition government. A power sharing agreement between his bizarrely named Scottish National Party (SNP) and the Greens was broken over the SNP’s retreat on Net Zero commitments.
Despite his camera savvy assertions, Yousaf’s departure has nothing to do with either duty or principle, which he stressed in the speech announcing his resignation. It is the result of a feared public backlash against higher taxes, over-regulation, and the madness of progressive “green” policies which prefigures a European political realignment.
READ: Net Zero’s days are numbered? Why Europeans are souring on the climate agenda
Yousaf’s coalition with the Greens fell apart because his SNP had recognized that the extreme Net Zero agenda was unrealistic, and could deliver only electoral suicide. The SNP under Yousaf had abandoned its “decarbonization targets” in early April, with Green co-leaders Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie describing Yousaf’s attempts to ditch extremely unpopular policies as “an act of political cowardice” and a “betrayal.”
As a result, the Greens withdrew support from the SNP, which fell one seat short of a majority in 2021. A new deal with a new leader is unlikely, and the chaos spells doom for the SNP with an election coming this year. The SNP remains in power – for the time being – albeit in a minority government.
Wider lessons for globalist ‘greens’
The lesson from Scotland is that the liberal parties of Europe face electoral meltdown. A recent report from the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) warned of a “sharp right turn” following EU elections in June:
Inside the European Parliament, a populist right coalition of Christian democrats, conservatives, and radical right MEPs could emerge with a majority for the first time.
The future spells doom for the doomsayers, it seems, with the globalist agenda under severe threat. The existence of the globalist EU itself may be threatened, with Unherd saying in December that this decade may be the EU’s last.
The ECFR report continued:
This ‘sharp right turn’ is likely to have significant consequences for European-level policies, which will affect the foreign policy choices that the EU can make, particularly on environmental issues, where the new majority is likely to oppose ambitious EU action to tackle climate change.
The attempt of the SNP to avoid electoral oblivion has only made it fall faster. It is an example which will be nervously observed from the once-dominant power in Europe.
Germany next?
The SNP’s partnership in power with the “green” zealots mirrors that of the government of Europe’s former economic and industrial powerhouse, Germany.
The crisis-hit Scholz administration relies on the support of a Green party whose policies have not only devastated the economy with deindustrialization, lockdown debt, and soaring energy prices, but have also, as in Scotland, advanced a raft of extremist “progressive” issues, such as the promotion of the “trans” movement, opposition to border and immigration control, with both Green parties pursuing policies strongly resented by the public.
Scotland’s Greens sought to ban wood-burning stoves, and Germany’s Greens were met with similar outrage with their decision to ban gas-fired central heating, and mandate the use of heat pumps. Yet the money for the subsidies required has run out – as “green” policies have helped to destroy the economy.
The Greens succeeded in closing the last of Germany’s nuclear power stations in August 2023, but the policy of replacing home heating which works with an expensive alternative that does not, was met with widespread opposition.
As a result, it is not just heat pump sales that have plummeted in Germany, but the sales pitch of the international “green” lobby.
Faced with defeat in the European elections, which the ECFR blames on “national parties start[ing] to respond to the changing opinions of their voters,” many parties of the liberal establishment are rowing back on Net Zero commitments – as well as on other issues beloved of the shock-haired shock troops of “progress.”
The face of globalist progressives
The co-leader of the Scottish Greens is Patrick Harvie, whose social media accounts notify readers that his pronouns are he/him.

The causes he supports are an object lesson in how Net Zero is not the only crazy agenda aggressively pushed by the Greens, whose policy platform is increasingly seen as electorally toxic. He is a self-described member of the so-called “LGBTQ+ community,” identifying as “bisexual.”
Like many progressive fanatics, he strongly supports the futile and avoidable destruction of the population and nation of Ukraine.
Here he is in 2020, championing the prescription of hormones and surgery to sexualized children as “trans healthcare.”
I wish I could say it was shocking that an MSP today called on the First Minister to instruct the NHS to withdraw trans healthcare from young people.
Trans healthcare already suffers from unacceptably long waits, even for referral. Greens will continue to push for improvement. https://t.co/9iXwQ8zmUz
— Patrick Harvie 🇪🇺🌈 (@patrickharvie) December 10, 2020
Naturally, he repeatedly describes Christians with disdain, labelling the Christian Institute as a “hate group.” The institute “campaigns for “the furtherance and promotion of the Christian religion in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.”
The NSS recently agreed that after his latest outburst the racist historian David Starkey had to be removed as an Honorary Associate. They accepted that his racism was a red line. Why should homophobia, transphobia and misogyny be treated any differently?
— Patrick Harvie 🇪🇺🌈 (@patrickharvie) July 31, 2020
As Britain’s Telegraph reported, explaining the background to the collapse of Yousaf’s SNP-Green coalition:
Harvie’s determination to indulge his permanently-angry purple-haired activists even at the expense of the Scottish Government’s credibility was probably the last straw for many senior SNP ministers, if not for Yousaf himself.
Harvie is a strong advocate of abortion. He and his party describe the reminder that the lives of unborn children have value as “misinformation and intimidation,” as they seek to afford “dignity and privacy” to women killing their children, “as they are at every other medical procedure.”
SPUC, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, pointed out that the measure to legally enforce “buffer zones” around abortion facilities was “opposed by 70 percent” of the Scottish public.
The Greens in Scotland, as in Germany, vehemently oppose any attempt to control mass migration – however weak and belated.
The Greens have also refused to alter their stance on the now discredited notion of “gender affirming care” for children.
Against scientific advice, the Greens prefer to support the views of the “trans community,” saying “lived experience” is a better guide to reality than the clinical evidence that prescribing hormones and surgery to confused children is wrong, and causes irreversible harm.
The U.K.’s Cass Review, published in mid-April, cited a lack of “evidence based guidelines,” noting that pro-transgender organizations such as WPATH had exerted considerable influence in the adoption of the Dutch Pathway – a template which resulted in rapid access to hormones and surgery including for children.
Cass said in her introduction, “Although some think the clinical approach should be based on a social justice model, the NHS works in an evidence-based way.”
The rejection of the fast track to “puberty blockers” mirrors a similar preference for evidence-based decisions in Western electorates.
The Godless, nation-wrecking policies of national suicide have produced enough evidence of the motives, methods, and monumental disaster of the globalist Green agenda. It is anti-natalist, pro-open borders, anti-family, and seeks to promote the sexual distortion of the lives of what few children we still have. In a final irony, is also destroying the economic prosperity on whose subsidies it relies for its own survival.
Happily, “green” politics is now understood as a campaign for electoral as well as national suicide. This realization has spelled the end of the appalling Scottish coalition government, and with the coming European elections the writing is on the wall for globalist “progressives” across the continent.
Humza Yousaf’s left/Green government was just the first Green-backed coalition which has ended in disaster. It will not be the last. For the reality based community, the best news is yet to come.
Opinion
Hell freezes over, CTV’s fabrication of fake news and our 2026 forecast is still searching for sunshine
Plus! Politico warns that the far right’s stealing Christmas, a CBC content analysis ruffles feathers and more! Happy New Year
Last week, according to the people who produce the nation’s most popular newscast, the hell that is Gaza froze over.
That’s right. According to CTV News, “freezing” rain flooded Gaza camps, leaving “displaced Palestinians in dire conditions.” This, as was pointed out by social media critics (including the National Post’s Chris Selley) was an absolutely false statement. It was, to be clear, a lie.
The Rewrite is a dedicated to saving journalism from its worst instincts.
Please support us with a free or paid subscription
Winter rains had indeed fallen and made life unpleasant for people in Gaza. But the Associated Press (AP) report for which some eager beaver wrote the headline (one is tempted to suspect either a social justice warrior posing as a journalist or a bumbling incompetent produced by J-school) made no mention of anything “freezing.” Of course it didn’t, because on the day the story was published the high temperature in Gaza was 17C with a low of 13C.
Now, as one who has visited Disneyland in January, I am aware that temperatures can be relative. When it’s 14C in southern California, people from Saskatoon and Winnipeg are jumping into the local hotel pools while “cast members” at Disneyland are wearing toques and mittens. So AP was entirely within its rights to refer to conditions as chilly.
CTV Evening News, historically, has been one of Canada’s most watched regularly scheduled programs. It has boasted in the past about being the nation’s “most trusted” newscast.
So it was bad enough that CTV posted a barefaced falsehood. What was worse, although it did soften its internal headline to refer to “winter” rains, was that it did not take down its “freezing” posts or offer any hint of regret – at least none I could find – that it had ever posted information that amounted to the antithesis of journalism’s first obligation – The Truth.
While CTV’s owner, Bell, continues to lobby for its newsrooms to qualify for government subsidies such as the Journalism Labour Tax Credit and campaign in Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) hearings for newsroom funding, it does not appear super interested in investing in good journalism or even maintaining public trust in it.
Which is a shame, because last week its presentation of fake news did significant harm to trust in the craft and was inconsistent with its published standards.
Peter Stockland did a fine job the other day in addressing the fuss raised in media concerning CBS editor-in-chief Bari Weiss’s decision to pull back a story regarding US deportees because, she said, it wasn’t complete enough for airing on 60 Minutes. Others viewed it more suspiciously.
If you haven’t read it yet, please do. We’ll see how it all turns out but what caught my eye was the manner in which the Globe and Mail’s U.S. correspondent, Adrian Morrow, chose to describe Weiss. He portrayed her only as “an anti-woke media personality” – a term of which his editors apparently approved. Given that Weiss was the Opinion Editor of the Wall Street Journal and then the New York Times, this seems a little, shall we say, catty? A childishly nasty manner in which to refer to Weiss, I thought, considering she also launched an online publication – The Free Press – that, because she was good at being an editor, used talented journalists and paid them well, recently sold to Paramount Skydance for more than $200 million.
Most of all, though, I found the reference entirely unnecessary and self-indulgent, as if the piece was written for the approval of peers and not for the benefit of readers.
Unsubstantiated references to the “far right” continue to be in prolific use as we begin a New Year, still searching for reasons to be optimistic about the state of journalism. References to the “far left,” meanwhile, continue to defy Newton’s Third Law of Motion concerning equal and opposite actions.
The European edition of Politico used no less an occasion that the birth of the previous millenium’s most influential figure to weigh in with its report on “How the far right stole Christmas.”
“U.S. President Donald Trump claims to have “brought back” the phrase “Merry Christmas” in the United States,” Politico declared, “framing it as defiance against political correctness. Now, European far-right parties more usually focused on immigration or law-and-order concerns have adopted similar language, recasting Christmas as the latest battleground in a broader struggle over culture.”
Whew. Politico, focusing on Italian leader Giorgia Meloni, went so far as to quote attendees at a Christmas celebration who wished to remain anonymous for fear of being associated with a “far right” event.
Me? I thought it was Karl Marx, father of the far left, who labeled religion the “opium of the masses” and a human creation designed to keep the working classes oppressed. And weren’t the Soviet Union, China, North Korea and other Communist states the ones that did and do their level best to “steal” Christmas and other festivities founded in faith? Times have clearly changed, even if some newsroom instincts have not.
Speaking of disconnected media, prolific numbers man David Clinton has ruffled a few feathers with an extensive analysis in his Substack platform, The Audit, of CBC content. Here’s his summary of what he found:
“Of the 300 stories covered by my data, around 30 per cent – month after month – focused on Donald Trump and U.S.- Canada relations. Another 12-15 percent related to Gaza and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Domestic politics – including election coverage – took up another 12 percent, Indigenous issues attracted 9 percent, climate and the environment grabbed 8 percent, and gender identity, health-care worker assaults, immigrant suffering, and crime attracted around 4 percent each.”
Clinton provides a list of topics that were not “meaningfully represented in my sample of CBC’s Top Stories.” It includes housing affordability, immigration levels, crime rate, private sector investment success stories, the oil and gas sector, Chinese interference, etc. You can read his full analysis here.
You can also look for my New Year’s predictions on media that (spoiler alert) states that seeing as there has been no evidence of reform in CBC President Marie-Philippe Bouchard’s first year at the helm of the Mother Corp, you can expect more of the same nothing in 2026. That piece is expected to appear in The Hub this week.
Western Standard announced before Christmas that it’s heading East and hiring a reporter to cover news emanating from Queen’s Park, Ontario’s provincial legislature.
The most notable media-on-media smackdown that came to my attention over the festive season goes to the reliably rambunctious Ezra Levant of Rebel News.
Seizing on a year-end column by the Globe and Mail’s Lawrence Martin that hailed 2025 “as one of Canada’s great nation-building years” under Prime Minister Mark Carney, Levant had this to say:
|
And that, for this week, is that. Welcome to 2026.
(Peter Menzies is a commentator and consultant on media, Macdonald-Laurier Institute Senior Fellow, a past publisher of the Calgary Herald, a former vice chair of the CRTC and a National Newspaper Award winner.)
Invite your friends and earn rewards
Business
Virtue-signalling devotion to reconciliation will not end well
From the Fraser Institute
By Bruce Pardy
In September, the British Columbia Supreme Court threw private property into turmoil. Aboriginal title in Richmond, a suburb of Vancouver, is “prior and senior” to fee simple interests, the court said. That means it trumps the property you have in your house, farm or factory. If the decision holds up on appeal, it would mean private property is not secure anywhere a claim for Aboriginal title is made out.
If you thought things couldn’t get worse, you thought wrong. On Dec. 5, the B.C. Court of Appeal delivered a different kind of upheaval. Gitxaala and Ehattesaht First Nations claimed that B.C.’s mining regime was unlawful because it allowed miners to register claims on Crown land without consulting with them. In a 2-to-1 split decision, the court agreed. The mining permitting regime is inconsistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). And B.C. legislation, the court said, has made UNDRIP the law of B.C.
UNDRIP is a declaration of the United Nations General Assembly. It consists of pages and pages of Indigenous rights and entitlements. If UNDRIP is the law in B.C., then Indigenous peoples are entitled to everything—and to have other people pay for it. If you suspect that is an exaggeration, take a spin through UNDRIP for yourself.
Indigenous peoples, it says, “have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired… to own, use, develop and control, as well as the right to “redress” for these lands, through either “restitution” or “just, fair and equitable compensation.” It says that states “shall consult and cooperate in good faith” in order to “obtain free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources,” and that they have the right to “autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.”
The General Assembly adopted UNDRIP in 2007. At the time, Canada sensibly voted “no,” along with New Zealand, the United States and Australia. Eleven countries abstained. But in 2016, the newly elected Trudeau government reversed Canada’s objection.
UN General Assembly resolutions are not binding in international law. Nor are they enforceable in Canadian courts. But in 2019, NDP Premier John Horgan and his Attorney General David Eby, now the Premier, introduced Bill 41, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA). DRIPA proposed to require the B.C. government to “take all measures necessary to ensure the laws of British Columbia are consistent with the Declaration.” The B.C. Legislature unanimously passed the bill. (The Canadian Parliament passed a similar bill in 2021.)
Two years later, the legislature passed an amendment to the B.C. Interpretation Act. Eby, still B.C.’s Attorney General, sponsored the bill. The amendment read, “Every Act and regulation must be construed as being consistent with the Declaration.”
Eby has expressed dismay about the Court of Appeal decision. It “invites further and endless litigation,” he said. “It looked at the clear statements of intent in the legislature and the law, and yet reached dramatically different conclusions about what legislators did when we voted unanimously across party lines” to pass DRIPA. He has promised to amend the legislation.
These are crocodile tears. The majority judgment from the Court of Appeal is not a rogue decision from activist judges making things up and ignoring the law. Not this time, anyway. The court said that B.C. law must be construed as being consistent with UNDRIP—which is what Eby’s 2021 amendment to the Interpretation Act says.
In fact, Eby’s government has been doing everything in its power to champion Aboriginal interests. DRIPA is its mandate. It’s been making covert agreements with specific Aboriginal groups over specific territories. These agreements promise Aboriginal title and/or grant Aboriginal management rights over land use. In April 2024, an agreement with the Haida Council recognized Haida title and jurisdiction over Haida Gwaii, an archipelago off the B.C. coast formerly known as the Queen Charlotte Islands. Eby has said that the agreement is a template for what’s possible “in other places in British Columbia, and also in Canada.” He is putting title and control of B.C. into Aboriginal hands.
But it’s not just David Eby. The Richmond decision from the B.C. Supreme Court had nothing to do with B.C. legislation. It was a predictable result of years of Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) jurisprudence under Section 35 of the Constitution. That section guarantees “existing” Aboriginal and treaty rights as of 1982. But the SCC has since championed, evolved and enlarged those rights. Legislatures can fix their own statutes, but they cannot amend Section 35 or override judicial interpretation, even using the “notwithstanding clause.”
Meanwhile, on yet another track, Aboriginal rights are expanding under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On the same day as the B.C. Court of Appeal decision on UNDRIP, the Federal Court released two judgments. The federal government has an actionable duty to Aboriginal groups to provide housing and drinking water, the court declared. Taxpayer funded, of course.
One week later, at the other end of the country, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal weighed in. In a claim made by Wolastoqey First Nation for the western half of the province, the court said that Aboriginal title should not displace fee simple title of private owners. Yet it confirmed that a successful claim would require compensation in lieu of land. Private property owners or taxpayers, take your pick.
Like the proverb says, make yourself into a doormat and someone will walk all over you. Obsequious devotion to reconciliation has become a pathology of Canadian character. It won’t end well.
-
Energy20 hours agoThe U.S. Just Removed a Dictator and Canada is Collateral Damage
-
Haultain Research17 hours agoTrying to Defend Maduro’s Legitimacy
-
Business1 day agoVacant Somali Daycares In Viral Videos Are Also Linked To $300 Million ‘Feeding Our Future’ Fraud
-
International1 day ago“Captured and flown out”: Trump announces dramatic capture of Maduro
-
International1 day agoTrump Says U.S. Strike Captured Nicolás Maduro and Wife Cilia Flores; Bondi Says Couple Possessed Machine Guns
-
International20 hours agoU.S. Claims Western Hemispheric Domination, Denies Russia Security Interests On Its Own Border
-
International20 hours agoUS Justice Department Accusing Maduro’s Inner Circle of a Narco-State Conspiracy
-
International2 days agoMaduro says he’s “ready” to talk







