At the UN, on Sept. 23, 2019 (more than a year ago), the world received a timely and inspirational wake-up call about the undeniable dangers of climate change from someone wise beyond her years — someone who has grasped the urgency of the global climate crisis much better than many of our (so-called) world leaders and corporation heads.
Instead of the younger generation pleading with us to secure our common future, we should be the ones ensuring that the next two generations (including our children and grandchildren) inherit a world that will be livable.
I am, of course, referring to Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teenager who understands better than most members of the generation that currently wields power, that we cannot go on destroying our planet as we have been since the start of the Industrial Revolution — especially during the last 50 years.
In 1987, Gro Harlem Brundtland (the former prime minister of Norway) delivered what became commonly known as the Brundtland Report — Our Common Future, for the World Commission on Environment and Development — as requested by the United Nations General Assembly.
The team, of which she was the chair, included members from at least 22 countries. It is interesting to note that these two Scandinavian countries have produced two such forward-thinking people — albeit two generations apart.
In the early 1960s, one brilliant mind stated: “A rising tide lifts all boats” (erroneously attributed to JFK). By the same token, rising greenhouse gas (GHG) levels harm all people, animals and plants in the world. What can we, as individuals and a nation, do to mitigate this global climate crisis?
Following, in very broad strokes, is a plan of how Canada can graduate from a fossil fuel economy to a renewable and sustainable one.
Some people (especially those in the fossil fuel industry) would say that — because of the COVID-19 crisis — now is not the time to be introducing such new measures into our economy. On the contrary, because of the slowdown in the Canadian and world economies and the reduced demand for fossil fuel products, now is the perfect time to change our basic energy generation model.
We all know that the fossil fuel industry is highly subsidized by us — the taxpayers — through our federal and provincial governments. But nobody seems to know the magnitude of these subsidies (or at least, they won’t tell us). They appear to amount to billions of dollars! What would happen if these subsidies were redirected into “green” and renewable energy projects? The ultimate outcome would probably be the creation of many more highly skilled jobs than would be lost by the redirection of funds away from the fossil fuel sector. It would also result in a much cleaner biosphere.
As I see it, there are three (or four) major obstacles to converting our economy from the FF to the renewable sector:
1. As the fossil fuel sector has been subsidized for many years, it has momentum driving it forward at a great rate;
2. No government (so far) has had the political will to start the conversation — let alone the conversion — from fossil fuel jobs to the new, green economy. This is true mainly because this initiative would not bear fruit until long after its initiators have left politics;
3. The fossil fuel industry has so much economic and political power that it will take a huge grassroots effort to deflect its path onto a new course;
4.The worldwide COVID crisis. There is obviously going to be major pushback from the fossil fuel industry and those governments and individuals who espouse this fossil fuel-driven industrial philosophy. However, once started, we must stick to our guns and see it through to its final conclusion.
Granted, if Canada were the only country to go this route, we would not be competitive in the short term, but I feel that as soon as one country shows leadership in this field, others will inevitably follow. Admittedly, this isn’t the only GHG reduction initiative we should undertake, but it is one that can start this paradigm shift relatively quickly.
The generally agreed-upon critical date for stabilizing (and reducing) the generation of GHGs is 2030 — less than 10 years from now. There are probably many ways of carrying out this conversion. But, so we don’t destabilize our economy any more than COVID-19 has, I’d advocate the following strategy:
Reduce the fossil fuel industry subsidies by 20 per cent per year for five years. Direct 100 per cent of these funds to sustainable energy projects immediately. An additional advantage of this strategy is that each time funds are directed to innovative, sustainable technologies, it will attract other funds (both nationally and internationally), thereby doubling or tripling the funds available.
To negate the necessity of creating a new bureaucracy to administer this plan, convert existing staff from the fossil fuel and energy sectors to its implementation and administration.
The fact that many government staff have already switched to work on administering the COVID-19 program proves that we can redirect government staff to other projects.
Admittedly, this conversion will be a thankless task — in the short term, any government that implements this plan will become the “most reviled” government to the Fossil Fools, provinces, and parties who deny climate change. But in 20 or 30 years, it will be described as the “most revered” and enlightened government ever — by your children and grandchildren.
How will we persuade the Canadian federal and provincial governments to legislate this redirection of subsidies from fossil fuel industry to renewable projects? It will take an all-party agreement to implement this plan; everyone must be on board.
We must take a “Manhattan Project” approach, as employed during the Second World War. We could call it the Canada Climate Battle Plan (or CCBP). Whereas the Manhattan Project (to build the atomic bomb) was the most secret project in the world during the Second World War (of necessity), the CCBP must be the most open and transparent enterprise in Canadian history — as everyone in Canada will have a stake in its outcome.
We need a plan that will put us on the road to converting our economy away from fossil fuel consumption, and towards a sustainable, green economy. We will have to set milestone targets and report on our progress towards them at least twice a year.
Now obviously, this cannot happen overnight, so it will have to be phased in over the next five years, as noted earlier. It will take upwards of a year just to set up a task force to organize and implement the plan and to retrain workers.
Setting up this task force is only the beginning; hundreds, if not thousands, of details will have to be worked out. It should be led by a forward-thinking group (say, three individuals) who’d have no personal conflicts of interest in its implementation. I can think of several Canadian visionaries who’d fit this bill: John Ralston Saul, Naomi Klein, Margaret MacMillan and Frank McKenna; I’m sure you can add many more potential names to this list.
One way to get buy-in to this enterprise from all Canadian citizens would be to emulate a European initiative. In Denmark (and several other European countries), cities, towns and villages are co-owners of the local energy systems. These include electricity (wind turbines, photovoltaic arrays, biomass enterprises) and heating (district heating), so everyone has a stake in producing the “greenest” energy possible — at the lowest price.
All stakeholders will pay the lowest price for energy and, if there are any dividends, they will share equally in their proceeds.
The question now facing us is, “How can we implement this climate crisis task force?” With a relatively newly-elected minority government, we have a chance to start the process.
We can’t use the excuse that Canada produces such a small fraction (less than two per cent) of the world’s GHGs, and that reducing our emissions won’t make any difference to the global picture. If everyone uses this excuse (and many countries and individuals have), nothing will ever get done.
One country has to be the first to enact this type of legislation — and there is no reason why Canada cannot be that country! If we set the example — to prove that it can be done — then other like-minded countries will follow suit. It’s up to us to convince our government members at the federal and provincial levels to get us started on the right track to tackle this genuine climate crisis.
OTTAWA – Canada’s unemployment rate held steady at 6.5 per cent last month as hiring remained weak across the economy.
Statistics Canada’s labour force survey on Friday said employment rose by a modest 15,000 jobs in October.
Business, building and support services saw the largest gain in employment.
Meanwhile, finance, insurance, real estate, rental and leasing experienced the largest decline.
Many economists see weakness in the job market continuing in the short term, before the Bank of Canada’s interest rate cuts spark a rebound in economic growth next year.
Despite ongoing softness in the labour market, however, strong wage growth has raged on in Canada. Average hourly wages in October grew 4.9 per cent from a year ago, reaching $35.76.
Friday’s report also shed some light on the financial health of households.
According to the agency, 28.8 per cent of Canadians aged 15 or older were living in a household that had difficulty meeting financial needs – like food and housing – in the previous four weeks.
That was down from 33.1 per cent in October 2023 and 35.5 per cent in October 2022, but still above the 20.4 per cent figure recorded in October 2020.
People living in a rented home were more likely to report difficulty meeting financial needs, with nearly four in 10 reporting that was the case.
That compares with just under a quarter of those living in an owned home by a household member.
Immigrants were also more likely to report facing financial strain last month, with about four out of 10 immigrants who landed in the last year doing so.
That compares with about three in 10 more established immigrants and one in four of people born in Canada.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2024.
The Canadian Institute for Health Information says health-care spending in Canada is projected to reach a new high in 2024.
The annual report released Thursday says total health spending is expected to hit $372 billion, or $9,054 per Canadian.
CIHI’s national analysis predicts expenditures will rise by 5.7 per cent in 2024, compared to 4.5 per cent in 2023 and 1.7 per cent in 2022.
This year’s health spending is estimated to represent 12.4 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product. Excluding two years of the pandemic, it would be the highest ratio in the country’s history.
While it’s not unusual for health expenditures to outpace economic growth, the report says this could be the case for the next several years due to Canada’s growing population and its aging demographic.
Canada’s per capita spending on health care in 2022 was among the highest in the world, but still less than countries such as the United States and Sweden.
The report notes that the Canadian dental and pharmacare plans could push health-care spending even further as more people who previously couldn’t afford these services start using them.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 7, 2024.
Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.
As Canadians wake up to news that Donald Trump will return to the White House, the president-elect’s protectionist stance is casting a spotlight on what effect his second term will have on Canada-U.S. economic ties.
Some Canadian business leaders have expressed worry over Trump’s promise to introduce a universal 10 per cent tariff on all American imports.
A Canadian Chamber of Commerce report released last month suggested those tariffs would shrink the Canadian economy, resulting in around $30 billion per year in economic costs.
More than 77 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S.
Canada’s manufacturing sector faces the biggest risk should Trump push forward on imposing broad tariffs, said Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters president and CEO Dennis Darby. He said the sector is the “most trade-exposed” within Canada.
“It’s in the U.S.’s best interest, it’s in our best interest, but most importantly for consumers across North America, that we’re able to trade goods, materials, ingredients, as we have under the trade agreements,” Darby said in an interview.
“It’s a more complex or complicated outcome than it would have been with the Democrats, but we’ve had to deal with this before and we’re going to do our best to deal with it again.”
American economists have also warned Trump’s plan could cause inflation and possibly a recession, which could have ripple effects in Canada.
It’s consumers who will ultimately feel the burden of any inflationary effect caused by broad tariffs, said Darby.
“A tariff tends to raise costs, and it ultimately raises prices, so that’s something that we have to be prepared for,” he said.
“It could tilt production mandates. A tariff makes goods more expensive, but on the same token, it also will make inputs for the U.S. more expensive.”
A report last month by TD economist Marc Ercolao said research shows a full-scale implementation of Trump’s tariff plan could lead to a near-five per cent reduction in Canadian export volumes to the U.S. by early-2027, relative to current baseline forecasts.
Retaliation by Canada would also increase costs for domestic producers, and push import volumes lower in the process.
“Slowing import activity mitigates some of the negative net trade impact on total GDP enough to avoid a technical recession, but still produces a period of extended stagnation through 2025 and 2026,” Ercolao said.
Since the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement came into effect in 2020, trade between Canada and the U.S. has surged by 46 per cent, according to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.
With that deal is up for review in 2026, Canadian Chamber of Commerce president and CEO Candace Laing said the Canadian government “must collaborate effectively with the Trump administration to preserve and strengthen our bilateral economic partnership.”
“With an impressive $3.6 billion in daily trade, Canada and the United States are each other’s closest international partners. The secure and efficient flow of goods and people across our border … remains essential for the economies of both countries,” she said in a statement.
“By resisting tariffs and trade barriers that will only raise prices and hurt consumers in both countries, Canada and the United States can strengthen resilient cross-border supply chains that enhance our shared economic security.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 6, 2024.
