Instead Of Going Along With Paris Agreement Farce, Scheer Should Admit That The Accord Is A Joke


It makes sense politically for Scheer to say he can meet the Paris climate targets with his upcoming plan, but the truth is that no country really thinks they’re going to meet the targets and any talk otherwise is just BS.

When Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives voted in favour of Justin Trudeau’s decision to support the Paris Climate Accord, I said the vote made sense from a political perspective. After all, Justin Trudeau has been salivating for the chance to attack the Conservatives on the environment, and wanted the Paris Accord as a wedge issue.

That’s still true, and it still makes some political sense for Scheer to claim that his yet to be unveiled climate plan will meet the Paris targets without a carbon tax.

And yet, at some point leaders need to move beyond immediate political expediency and just say the truth: The Paris Climate Accord is BS and a joke.

Even France – the host nation for the accord – is failing to meet the targets. The Trudeau government recently announced that they’re failing to meet the targets.

And – the few countries that claim they will meet the targets (such as China) – are allowed to keep increasing their emissions up till at least 2030 (and will certainly be increasing them long after).

The world should be paying Canada for all we do for the environment

The truth is that Canada should actually get paid by the rest of the world for all we do for the environment, particularly all the emissions absorbed by our vast forests – which makes our country carbon neutral overall.

Clearly, the Paris Climate Accord has been a virtue-signalling and bandwagon jumping exercise that unfairly restricts nations like Canada.

Canada will always have to heat up a modern economy in a vast and cold land expanse, so to think that we should be bound by the same policies as countries that are warmer and more condensed is foolishness.

The Paris Climate Accord is a farce, and rather than go along with that farce, Scheer should level with the Canadian people. Much can be done to reduce pollution (which is what environmental policy should be focused on), and much can be done to encourage innovation. Additionally, Scheer – and other pro Canadian-energy leaders – should be focusing attention on how Canada’s energy industry has the best environmental record on earth while fighting back against the lies of the eco-radicals.

That said, some people have been saying that Scheer’s environmental position is now the same as Trudeau’s. However, that’s not the case. Trudeau is forcing an economically destructive carbon tax on the country, while Scheer plans to scrap the carbon tax.

While Scheer (like any politician) is not at all perfect, that is still a huge policy difference, and all Canadian taxpayers and our Canadian energy industry would tangibly benefit from Scheer defeating Trudeau.

Still, some more truth would be great for our country.

Spencer Fernando

Photo – YouTube

*****
SpencerFernando.com will never have a paywall, and I will never charge for content.
If you would like to voluntarily support my journalism, there are two ways you can contribute:
Monthly contribution through Patreon
 Donation through PayPal:




12 comments Add yours
  1. I am still very concerned that Scheer has bought in, if only closet-like, to the climate alarmists hoax…very concerned. Cannot someone on his staff provide him with at least some reading material that shows the deception of the global warmng/ climate change zealots?

  2. What a great article, Fernando! The truth has been said. I have a complaint about the Liberals who never vote on the same side of the Conservatives. They got this one and could not even return the favor, once. NOT EVEN ONCE. How come China will reach its target when their pollution over 1 week is equivalent to 30 years of pollution in Canada. There is something funny going on here. Very odd!

  3. Andrew Scheer is understood to be a devout, practicing Roman Catholic and his father is a Catholic Deacon (a step away from being a priest) at St. Patrick’s Basilica in Ottawa.
    Pope Francis urges world leaders to take action on climate change
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/pope-francis-climate-change-technology-1.4283678
    Looks like Trudeau takes his marching order from Soros and Scheer takes his from Pope Francis. Scheer now leads the CINO Party of Canada.

  4. I’m voting for Andrew Scheer next year but this is a major disappointment to me and I will not take much more before my vote goes to someone else. He needs to be aligned with grass roots conservatives views, we don’t want anything to do with climate change or anything that the United Nations has to offer Canada, we want Canada to be ran for the Majority of Canadians views and wishes not the minorities. If he continues this UN attitude I can see the country breaking up , the west wants to become a country and they have large numbers for new party, They won’t win this time around but their numbers are growing because governments aren’t listening to its people. Thanks

  5. The CPC needs to grow a set, and start speaking the truth rather than trying to embrace work within the Liberal delusions and lies.
    Also they need to stop using the Lib lexicon, its embarrassing.

  6. Very disappointing and disheartening … I thought Scheer was bigger than that.
    We’d better very soon find someone with the gonads to stand up for the real conservatives in this country, because anything less is going to take us straight down the toilet that JT is priming …

  7. SO DO I HE HAD CANADA S VOTE NOW EVERY BODY IS SECOND GUESSING HE WAS MY MAN AND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF OTHERS , HE BETTER SPEAK UP FOR CANADA OR HE IS TOAST !!!!

  8. time for a CPC leadership review, and pry globalist, feminist, syncophantic shill scheer out of his unearned, installed position, and put Mad Max Bernier back to his rightful position as CPC leader, to wipe the floor with zoolander in 2019

  9. Not sure I see why Scheer should necessarily alienate himself so emphatically at this point.

    Trump didn’t even divorce himself from Paris to that degree.
    He said he was going to assess it from a cost/benefit perspective.
    As far as I’m concerned, that’s all Scheer is essentially saying at this point. I’m actually curious as to how he thinks he can do it. If he can with little economic impact and hardship, what’s the big deal?

    What I do know is that Bjorn Lomborg also thinks we can. And Lomborg is essentially a Masters and PhD economist/political scientist who specializes in environmental economics. Why we’re not listening to him more confounds me. He doesn’t fit the narrative though. The nefarious ulterior agenda.

    What it means is Suzuki et al can’t necessarily hammer him from that angle. I see that as a bonus. I see it as actually pretty darn smart.

    I wasn’t concerned with Brad Wall or Trump saying essentially the same thing, and I’m not concerned about Scheer saying it.

    Why anybody is is puzzling.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *