Trudeau’s climate chief threatens Saskatchewan’s Scott Moe for refusing to collect carbon tax

Moe, however, has refused to be intimidated by Guilbeault’s threats, telling media this week that the carbon tax “is driving inflation and we still are paying a good chunk in other areas and the position from the government of Saskatchewan’s perspective hasn’t changed nor will it change. It should be removed on all products for all.”

Trudeau’s Liberal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault has threatened to take “measures” against the premier of Saskatchewan for refusing to collect the federal carbon tax on home heating in his province.

On March 4, Guilbeault condemned Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe’s decision not to collect the carbon tax on home heating in the western province. Moe’s decision came after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government gave a carbon tax exemption on home heating oil, a break that almost exclusively benefits the Liberal voting Atlantic provinces.

“If Premier Scott Moe decides that he wants to start breaking laws and not respecting federal laws, then measures will have to be taken,” Guilbeault told reporters Monday.

“We can’t let that happen. What if somebody tomorrow decides that they don’t want to respect other federal laws, criminal laws? What would happen then if a prime minister, a premier of a province, would want to do that?” he questioned, apparently forgetting his own criminal history.

“It’s irresponsible and it’s frankly immoral on his part,” Guilbeault continued. “We can have disagreements about things like climate change, but to be so reckless is unspeakable, really.”

Beginning January 1, Saskatchewan stopped collecting the carbon tax on electric and natural gas home heating, a move which has already been shown to have lowered the province’s inflation rate.

Moe made the announcement in October after Trudeau suspended his carbon tax on home heating oil, which is almost exclusively used in Atlantic Canada to heat homes, and not in his province.

“I cannot accept the federal government giving an affordability break to people in one part of Canada but not here,” Moe said in a video posted on X at the time.

Moe promised that if the Trudeau government did not provide the exemption provided to Atlantic Canada to the rest of the nation, he would tell SaskEnergy, the province’s Crown corporation that provides energy to all residents, to stop collecting the carbon tax on natural gas. This, Moe said, would effectively provide “Saskatchewan residents with the very same exemption that the federal government has given heating oil in Atlantic Canada.”

Moe’s government has gone as far as introducing legislation to back the scrapping of the federal carbon tax on natural gas. The legislation will shield all executives at SaskEnergy from being jailed or fined by the federal government if they stop collecting the tax.

Despite the popularity and seeming fairness of Moe’s decision, Trudeau’s Liberal government has refused to rule out jail time for Moe if he refuses to collect the carbon tax on home heating.

Moe, however, has refused to be intimidated by Guilbeault’s threats, telling media this week that the carbon tax “is driving inflation and we still are paying a good chunk in other areas and the position from the government of Saskatchewan’s perspective hasn’t changed nor will it change. It should be removed on all products for all.”

Additionally, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre pointed out that while Guilbeault challenges Moe for breaking the law by refusing to collect the carbon tax, Guilbeault himself has a history of breaking the law.

“Guilbeault calls out Saskatchewan’s lawlessness for refusing to collect his carbon tax,” Poilievre posted on X with a photo of Guilbeault being arrested in 2001.

Guilbeault calls out Saskatchewan's lawlessness for refusing to collect his carbon tax. pic.twitter.com/p3PnwyHzWr

— Pierre Poilievre (@PierrePoilievre) March 6, 2024

While a current member of the Trudeau government cabinet, Guilbeault has a history of taking extreme action in the name of the climate.

In 1997, he joined Greenpeace and served for a time as a director and then campaign manager of its Quebec chapter for about 10 years.

He was arrested many times for environmental protests, the most famous arrest coming after an incident in 2001 when he climbed Toronto’s CN Tower with British activist Chris Holden. The pair hung a banner saying “Canada and Bush — Climate Killers.”

Greenpeace is a group that advocates for population control in addition to calling for an end to all oil and gas use.

Last month, Guilbeault was publicly ridiculed after he said the federal government would no longer fund any road construction projects and instead funnel the savings to “climate change” projects that promote walking instead of driving.

However, Guilbeault’s push for “climate change” regulations are consistent with those of Trudeau. Since taking office in 2015, Trudeau has continued to push a radical environmental agenda like the agendas being pushed the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.”

The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has also been pushed by the World Economic Forum – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization in which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.

The reality of Trudeau’s push for so-called renewable energy showed itself just over a month ago after Alberta’s power grid faced near certain collapse due to a failure of wind and solar power. Many called out the Trudeau government’s green energy agenda that is attempting to phase out carbon-based power in favor of “renewables” as the reason for the near failure.

Up Next

Federal government should change course in upcoming budget to revitalize economy

Don't Miss

Unpacking the Growing Cost of Home Heating Bills

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Their Strategy in the War on Food

Dan Knight / 16 hours ago

Trudeau’s $191 Million Scandal – Auditor General Exposes Rampant Cronyism with McKinsey Contracts

Brownstone Institute / 16 hours ago

How Did a Small Group Do This?

Agriculture

The Netherlands Reverses Host of Climate Policies

Published on June 16, 2024

Todayville

From Heartland Daily News

Agriculture-focused polices the new government is reversing include the previous government’s forced buyout and retirement of farms to cut fertilizer use and associated nitrogen emissions

The Netherlands recently elected a new right-of-center government which is downplaying climate alarm and European Union (EU)-driven climate policies that harm the country’s residents and agricultural producers.

“Geert Wilders, a prominent figure in Dutch politics, has led a coalition that marks a decisive shift in the Netherlands’ approach to climate policy. Wilders, often dubbed the “Dutch Trump,” formed a new government that includes the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB),” writes Charles Rotter at Watts Up With That. Rotter quotes a report in The Telegraph on the political right’s rise in the Netherlands and what it means for climate policy:

The Netherlands will tear up rules forcing homeowners to buy heat pumps as part of a war on net zero by Geert Wilders and the Dutch farmers’ party. Six months after his shock election victory, Mr. Wilders this week struck an agreement to usher in a Right-wing coalition government of four parties. “We are writing history,” he said as he announced the program for the new government.

Among the EU-endorsed climate policies Wilders’ coalition government is rescinding is the heat pump mandate, which would have forced homeowners to switch to expensive, inefficient hybrid heat pumps from traditional air conditioning and heating systems.

The EU had established a goal of installing a minimum of 10 million new heat pumps by 2027 as part of its 2050 net-zero ambition, a plan the previous Dutch government had endorsed and imposed. As The Telegraph reported, the Dutch government’s heat pump mandate was intended to drive “down Dutch household use of natural gas for heating, which is the largest source of its gas consumption, equivalent to about 30 percent in total.”

Commending the new coalition government’s reversal, Caroline van der Plas, leader of the BBB, cheerfully said, “Thanks to BBB’s efforts, the mandatory heat pump will be abolished.”

Agriculture-focused polices the new government is reversing include the previous government’s forced buyout and retirement of farms to cut fertilizer use and associated nitrogen emissions. In its place, the new government will establish a series of voluntary incentives to reduce emissions and offer interested farmers voluntary buyouts to end production.

Wilders government is also set to end subsidies for electric vehicles by 2025, which, as Rotter notes, is “a departure from the EU’s blanket approach to climate policy. These subsidies have been criticized for benefiting the wealthy who can afford electric vehicles while doing little to address broader environmental issues.”

Energy

Why we should be skeptical of the hydrogen economy

Published on June 16, 2024

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Hügo Krüger and Ian Madsen

Hydrogen has a low energy density by volume, compared to well-established and practical fuels such as gasoline, diesel, and natural gas. It also has a low ignition point and is three times as explosive as natural gas, which could be either positive or negative.

At first glance, using highly variable, intermittent, inexpensive renewable energy to produce hydrogen for energy supply stabilization seems logical. However, renewable energy is not always readily available. The concept of hydrogen as a ‘buffer,’ akin to a battery, to ensure consistent renewable power is more complex than it appears.

Upon further examination, the idea is impractical and expensive for several reasons. Among them, hydrogen has a low energy density by volume, compared to well-established and practical fuels such as gasoline, diesel, and natural gas. It also has a low ignition point and is three times as explosive as natural gas, which could be either positive or negative, depending on its use.

Contrary to claims, renewable energy is neither inexpensive nor environmentally benign. Storing hydrogen in a natural gaseous state requires massive, costly storage vessels. Electrolyzing is expensive and will likely remain that way. Similarly, the cost of producing hydrogen is higher than that of deriving it from natural gas, which produces carbon dioxide, which is unwanted. There are some other techniques, such as pressure, heat, and radiolysis from radiation emitted from nuclear reactors, that are feasible, perhaps in combination. Small ‘micro nuclear reactors’ may drive down these costs. Atomic reactors are already used in U.S. Navy aircraft carriers to produce aviation and diesel synthetic fuel.

There are also a series of impractical issues. Existing pipeline infrastructure cannot transport pure hydrogen due to hydrogen embrittlement, and hydrogen cannot easily be used as a transportation fuel. A new Teflon-coated pipeline and distribution system parallel to the existing natural gas network would have to be built, costing hundreds of billions of dollars in North America alone.

While the idea of synthetic fuels using hydrogen may seem more feasible, it would likely be limited to a ‘niche role,’ potentially in natural gas-deficient nations. However, this would still necessitate significant investment. Ultimately, diverting funds to this ‘hydrogen economy’ could be a misallocation of capital from other, potentially more viable, areas.

Download the full report in PDF format here. (16 pages)

Hügo Krüger is a YouTube podcaster, writer, and civil nuclear engineer who has worked on a variety of energy related infrastructure projects ranging from Nuclear Power, LNG and Renewable Technologies. He holds a Master’s in Nuclear Civil Engineering from École Spéciale des Travaux Publics, du bâtiment et de l’industrie, Paris and a bachelor’s from the University of Pretoria.

Ian Madsen, BA (Economics, University of Alberta), MBA (Finance, University of Toronto), holds the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. He was an investment portfolio manager; owned his own investment counselling firm; published an investment newsletter; founded the professional society now known as CFA Saskatchewan in 1986; and was a director of an investment research operation in India. Since 2016, he has been the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, performing valuation analyses on federal and provincial Crown corporations in Canada, and also written numerous policy analyses. He lives in Surrey, British Columbia with his family.