• 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
13 Canadian Fossils Linked to Massive Losses in Western Wildfires May 29, 2023
Out-of-Control Wildfire Burns Homes, Forces Evacuations Outside Halifax May 29, 2023
Hamilton Plans Heat Bylaw for Rental Housing May 29, 2023
UK Traffic Calming Strategy Produces Solid Results, Manufactured Anxiety May 29, 2023
Community Wind Farm Earns Support, Generates Income in German Village May 29, 2023
Next
Prev

Ford Government Leans on Climate Denial to Defend Against Youth Lawsuit

May 11, 2022
Reading time: 4 minutes
Primary Author: Mitchell Beer @mitchellbeer

Ken Lund/flickr

Ken Lund/flickr

12
SHARES
 

The Doug Ford government in Ontario is relying on a “known climate change denier” to defend against a youth-led constitutional challenge to its climate change policies, Toronto-based Environmental Defence Canada contends, citing one of two affidavits filed as part of the province’s response to the case.

“This Ontario government has been playing pretend on climate for years, and now we know why,” EDC Programs Director Keith Brooks said in a release this week. “The government is apparently not convinced by the scientific consensus on climate change, or that Ontario has a role to play in reducing Canada’s or the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

  • 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.
Subscribe

Environmental Defence is taking issue with affidavits [pdf] sworn in late February by William van Wijngaarden, a physics professor at York University, and Philip Cross, a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

Van Wijngaarden is affiliated with the Arlington, Virginia-based CO2 Coalition, whose stated purpose in 2015 was to “engage thought leaders, policy makers, and the public in an informed and dispassionate discussion about the important contribution made by carbon dioxide and fossil fuels” and “shift the debate from the unjustified criticism of CO2 and fossil fuels”.

The affidavits from van Wijngaarden and Cross, who spent three dozen years at Statistics Canada specializing in macroeconomics, have Environmental Defence accusing the province of relying on a “new climate denialism” to fend off a court case by seven youth plaintiffs that has already broken new legal ground.

The youth—Sophia Mathur, Zoe Keary-Matzner, Shaelyn Hoffman-Menard, Shelby Gagnon, Madison Dyck, Alexandra Neufeldt, and Beze Gray—first launched their action against the Ford government for “tearing up the province’s climate laws and violating their Charter rights to life, liberty, and security of the person” in November, 2019. They’ve been racking up procedural wins ever since.

In November, 2020, the Superior Court affirmed their right to pursue the case, with a ruling that the climate crisis does threaten fundamental rights protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Canadian citizens can therefore challenge their governments’ climate failures on constitutional grounds. When the province asked permission to appeal that ruling, a judge refused, Ecojustice reported in March 2021.

With those rulings, “Mathur et. al. has now progressed further in the courts than any other rights-based climate lawsuit in Canada,” the environmental law charity writes.

In his affidavit, van Wijngaarden says Ontario generated only 0.35% of global carbon dioxide emissions, a contribution that “is dwarfed by that of other countries, especially China, the USA and India”. He characterizes CO2 a “an odourless, invisible gas that plants use for food,” and that greenhouse growers routinely add to promote plant growth. He claims that atmospheric CO2 levels have become saturated, so that further emissions won’t drive up global temperatures or lead to more extreme weather—contrary to research results from the vast majority of the world’s climate scientists.

Cross says Ontario’s emissions won’t have a “decisive impact” on Canada’s ability to meet its climate targets, despite analysis showing the province committed to just 11% of the emission cuts that will be needed to meet the federal target. He also argues in his affidavit and elsewhere that energy transitions can only happen over long spans of time, despite the rapid surge in renewable energy and energy storage, the potential for energy efficiency to achieve the same—and the urgent need to get this transition done faster than he deems possible.

“The choice of expert witness reveals a fact that should be shocking to Ontarians: our government doubts the science on climate change and doesn’t really believe that the province has a responsibility to act,” Brooks said in the EDC release. “This is profoundly worrisome given that scientists tell us we’re in a critical decade for climate action.”

Even in its court challenge to the federal carbon pricing plan, Ontario acknowledged the reality of climate change, and it didn’t question its own responsibility to take action, Brooks told The Energy Mix in an interview. In the latest case, “I don’t know if it’s the best defence they have, but it’s the defence they’ve chosen,” he said. “I guess they’re looking for a way to excuse themselves of responsibility by saying either that climate change isn’t real, or if it is real, that there’s nothing we can do about it and therefore they’re not responsible.”

Ontario is expected to file its final defence in the next few months.

Ministry of the Attorney General spokesperson Brian Gray declined to comment on the case while it’s before the court.

With a provincial election in full swing, Brooks said Mathur et. al. could become redundant if a future government reverses Ford’s climate program cuts.

“The applicants are asking for a stronger target for the province and for a credible plan to fight climate change,” he said. With all the opposition parties declaring more ambitious targets and laying out elements of their climate plans,  “it may be that that would be sufficient” to end the lawsuit, though “there would still be work to be done to hold any government to account for following through on its promises and increasing ambition.”



in Canada, Climate Action / "Blockadia", Climate Denial & Greenwashing, Energy Politics, Legal & Regulatory, Ontario, Sub-National Governments

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Martin Davis/Facebook
Carbon Levels & Measurement

13 Canadian Fossils Linked to Massive Losses in Western Wildfires

May 29, 2023
368
Neal Alderson/Twitter
Drought & Wildfires

Out-of-Control Wildfire Burns Homes, Forces Evacuations Outside Halifax

May 29, 2023
2.2k
York Region/flickr
Heat & Temperature

Hamilton Plans Heat Bylaw for Rental Housing

May 29, 2023
263

Comments 2

  1. Bill Henderson says:
    1 year ago

    Whereas most reading The Mix agree that climate change is real, happening, potentially existentially dangerous to our world, civilization and even humanities very existence, and we all agree that it must be effectively mitigated urgently, the two intervenors are “ looking for a way to excuse themselves of responsibility by saying either that climate change isn’t real, or if it is real, that there’s nothing we can do about it and therefore they’re not responsible.”

    Which is not reasonable or responsible, which will not solve our climate problem so it’s just a newer form of climate denial.

    But Phillip Cross’ testimony – from page 116 in the affidavit – about the length of time energy transitions take should be an eye opener and I’m directing you to reread because it is important if you do take climate seriously and recognize the imperative of effectively reducing emissions.

    We are still stuck in a conception of climate mitigation that is critically flawed: the best science is adamant that we need at least a 50% emission reduction by 2030 but we are trapped in an ‘energy transition’ conception where this rate of emission reduction isn’t remotely possible within that timeline.

    Instead of focusing upon the real mitigation path now needed.

    Instead of focusing upon regulating a wind-down or managed decline of fossil fuel production and use which could reduce emissions at a scale needed.

    Instead of recognizing that we need to power down to a socio-economy using far less energy and raw materials not just ‘transition’ in BAU.

    Staying in the energy transition conception of mitigation when we must know that building renewables is not going to displace or in any other way phase out fossil fuels is maybe as much climate denial as the denial effecting the intervenors. And we should know better than just playing pretend as we’ve been doing for decades.

    Reply
    • Mitchell Beer says:
      1 year ago

      Thanks for this, Bill — and for taking the time to read in to the affidavit!

      Reply

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

Neal Alderson/Twitter

Out-of-Control Wildfire Burns Homes, Forces Evacuations Outside Halifax

May 29, 2023
2.2k
Martin Davis/Facebook

13 Canadian Fossils Linked to Massive Losses in Western Wildfires

May 29, 2023
368
York Region/flickr

Hamilton Plans Heat Bylaw for Rental Housing

May 29, 2023
263
Crenaissanceman/wikimedia commons

Electric School Buses Boost School Attendance, Deliver Emergency Power

May 7, 2023
352

Waste Heat from Quebec Data Centre to Grow 80,000 Tonnes of Veggies Per Year

May 29, 2023
102

U.S. Megadrought Brings Private Water Brokers Into Focus

May 28, 2023
63

Recent Posts

Jörg Möller/Pixabay

UK Traffic Calming Strategy Produces Solid Results, Manufactured Anxiety

May 29, 2023
69
kpgolfpro/Pixabay

Community Wind Farm Earns Support, Generates Income in German Village

May 29, 2023
61
Pexels/pixabay

Engineers Replace Sand in Concrete with Disposable Diapers

May 30, 2023
50
Sol y Playa condo, Rincón, Puerto Rico

Storms, Sea Level Rise Intensify Conflicts Over Public Beach Access

May 29, 2023
61
FMSC/Flickr

Waive Debt to Unlock Urgently Needed Adaptation Funds, Researchers Urge

May 27, 2023
33
Arctic Circle/flickr

‘Remarkable Rebuke’: 130 U.S, EU Legislators Ask UN to Ditch Fossil CEO as COP 28 Chair

May 23, 2023
412
Next Post
EcoFlight

Ottawa to Appeal After Alberta’s Top Court Rules Against Impact Assessment Act

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}