• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing January 23, 2023
Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’ January 23, 2023
Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom January 23, 2023
IRON OXIDE: New Battery Brings Long-Duration Storage to Grids, 750 Jobs to West Virginia January 23, 2023
BREAKING: GFANZ Banks, Investors Pour Hundreds of Billions into Fossil Fuels January 17, 2023
Next
Prev
Opinion & Analysis

Beer: After Spat Over Pro-Fossil T-Shirt, Are Climate Action Messages Now Welcome in Senate Gallery?

September 10, 2019
Reading time: 3 minutes
Primary Author: Mitchell Beer @mitchellbeer

Mightydrake/Wikimedia Commons

Mightydrake/Wikimedia Commons

1
SHARES
 

The agency responsible for security across Parliamentary Precinct in Ottawa seems to be inadvertently taking sides in Canada’s politically fraught energy debates, after an oil and gas executive associated with the pro-fossil Canada Action lobby group tried to wear a provocative “I love Canadian oil and gas” t-shirt during a visit to the Senate.

The message was certainly (absolutely!) within the realm of the free speech rights any Canadian should expect. But there was just one problem: The Parliament of Canada’s website warns that “participating in any form of demonstration inside the buildings is prohibited, including wearing items or clothing with visible political messages,” CBC reports.

  • Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
  • Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
  • The Weekender: The climate news you need.
New!
Subscribe

So during a Senate tour last week, William Lacey, CFO of Calgary-based Steelhead Petroleum, “was told by a security guard that he would have to remove his shirt because it could be offensive,” CBC writes. “He says he chose to turn the shirt inside out to be part of the tour because his other option was to leave.” Afterwards, he explained that he’s “worked in the sector for more than 20 years and wore the shirt in Ottawa because he’s proud of the energy industry, but knows many people think of it negatively,” the national broadcaster adds.

The episode was enough to raise the ire of pro-fossil senators during a committee meeting last Thursday.

“As a Canadian, I find it outrageous,” thundered Sen. David Tkachuk (C-SK), the fiercely partisan committee chair who spent more than a year dissecting the federal government’s proposed Impact Assessment Act, Bill C-69, ultimately incurring criticism for wasting government resources.

“As a western Canadian, I just find that outrageous,” echoed Saskatchewan Conservative Denise Batters.

“It’s important that people should be allowed to express themselves in a positive and non-confrontational way,” Lacey said. He questioned whether an “I love Canadian forests” t-shirt would have produced the same reaction, then wrote to members of Parliament, senators, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to complain about the experience.

The Parliamentary Protective Service caved almost immediately. “Personnel misinterpreted a message on the visitor’s article of clothing,” wrote Acting Chief of Staff Guillaume Vandal. “The staff involved will be receiving operational guidance and training with respect to visitors to the Hill.”

Left unanswered were two questions: how, exactly, the security staff misinterpreted the message on Lacey’s shirt, and how far their upcoming “operational guidance” will go.

“Does your response to the original complaint in this matter mean the Parliamentary Protective Service would now permit an equal and opposite message, supporting a fossil fuel phaseout that helped protect Canadians from the worst impacts of a climate crisis that the House of Commons has already declared an emergency?” The Energy Mix wrote Friday, kicking off a series of questions to the PPS media desk.

“If not, does that mean the Parliamentary Protective Service now considers it political speech to support a managed decline in fossil fuel development, but non-political speech to explicitly support expanding that same industry? If so, on what evidence base is the Parliamentary Protective Service taking sides?” And “how will your responses to these questions shape the ‘operational guidance’ M. Vandal promised for front-line staff?”When The Mix called the PPS last Friday, the day after the CBC report, it was clear the organization was under pressure and utterly unaccustomed to the scrutiny it was receiving. By Tuesday, there’d been no response to the original set of questions. After a follow-up call, we received an email with a repeat of Vandal’s initial statement, leaving the follow-up questions unaddressed



in Canada, Energy Politics, Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion, Oil & Gas, Opinion & Analysis

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

United Nations
Air & Marine

Salvage of $20B ‘Floating Time Bomb’ Delayed by Rising Cost of Oil Tankers

January 27, 2023
50
RL0919/wikimedia commons
Finance & Investment

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2.2k
@tongbingxue/Twitter
Ending Emissions

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
288

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

EcoAnalytics

Albertans Want a Just Transition, Despite Premier’s Grumbling

January 23, 2023
244
United Nations

Salvage of $20B ‘Floating Time Bomb’ Delayed by Rising Cost of Oil Tankers

January 27, 2023
50
RL0919/wikimedia commons

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2.2k
@tongbingxue/Twitter

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
288
Weirton, WV by Jon Dawson/flickr

IRON OXIDE: New Battery Brings Long-Duration Storage to Grids, 750 Jobs to West Virginia

January 23, 2023
511
Rachel Notley/Facebook

Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom

January 23, 2023
268

Recent Posts

Sergio Boscaino/flickr

Dubai Mulls Quitting C40 Cities Over ‘Costly’ Climate Target

January 24, 2023
89
hangela/pixabay

New UK Coal Mine Faces Two Legal Challenges

January 24, 2023
46

Gas Stoves Enter U.S. Climate Culture War, Become ‘Bellwether’ for Industry

January 22, 2023
75
Jeff Hitchcock/flickr.

BREAKING: GFANZ Banks, Investors Pour Hundreds of Billions into Fossil Fuels

January 23, 2023
498

Exxon Had the Right Global Warming Numbers Through Decades of Denial: Study

January 17, 2023
226
willenhallwench / Pixabay

Ontario Greenwashes with ‘Misleading, Illegitimate’ Emission Credits

January 16, 2023
314
Next Post
Parti conservateur du Québec/flickr

Climate Denial, Online Abuse Dominate Twitter as Election Messaging Gears Up

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}