• 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
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
  FEATURED
REVEALED: Imperial Oil, Alberta Regulator Knew of Toxic Seepage at Kearl Mine for Years, Kept First Nation in the Dark October 3, 2023
Oil and Gas, Buildings Drive 2.1% Rise in Canada’s Climate Pollution October 2, 2023
Shell CEO Doubles Down on Renewable Cuts Despite Internal Pushback October 2, 2023
Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds October 2, 2023
UAE Holds Major Oil and Gas Conference Before Hosting COP 28 Climate Summit October 2, 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

jasonwoodhead23/flickr
Tar Sands / Oil Sands

REVEALED: Imperial Oil, Alberta Regulator Knew of Toxic Seepage at Kearl Mine for Years, Kept First Nation in the Dark

October 3, 2023
147
Dawn Ellner/flickr
Carbon Levels & Measurement

Oil and Gas, Buildings Drive 2.1% Rise in Canada’s Climate Pollution

October 2, 2023
62
Ramon FVelasquez/Wikipedia
Finance & Investment

Shell CEO Doubles Down on Renewable Cuts Despite Internal Pushback

October 2, 2023
142

Comments 3

  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
  2. Christopher Richard Wilson says:
    3 months ago

    You do realise that the Ford Government relies on developers for its financing and that they cannot possibly admit the increasingly warm summers and the forest fires and the death arising from same are to do with climate change without having to fundamentally vary policies about building.

    And I am sure you also realise that the vast majority of Ford supporters and frankly quite of lot of those who claim not be be, have absolutely no intention of giving up their large carbon footprint lifestyle — two SUV’s and a HVAC’ed suburban house.

    Ontario is a rich and powerful province in a rich and powerful country and we excuse our carbon creation with the very plausible excuse that there are so few of us living so far north and often in such extreme conditions that a pleasant lifestyle would not be possible without the carbon burn.

    Sixty year ago when Rachel Carson wrote Silent Spring those of us working in media and law in Windsor Ontario looked across the often flaming Rouge River at the Ford Factory and agreed nothing was going to change until and unless there was public realization that our privileged lifestyles were the problem and that expecting us to vote in a government either side of the border which would address that problem was about as likely as the City of Detroit hiring black (we called them negro back then) policemen.

    Well that happened. And a lot of other things also happened but nothing really has changed.

    No provincial or federal government nor any composite of the same is ever going to actually vote in rules that change climate deterioration. They simply have no mandate to do so and will never get that mandate. Oddly the countries doing most about mitigation of the problem are the dictatorships with cash. China for instance replacing its fossil fuel burn with cheaper and more climate friendly systems using less energy. MAG rail for example.

    Its rather like watching the province and the city of Toronto paying lip service to cheaper housing without actually offending all of those who vote for them who live in houses they are going to fight tooth and nail to keep as expensive as possible because that is where much of their wealth is.

    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

jasonwoodhead23/flickr

REVEALED: Imperial Oil, Alberta Regulator Knew of Toxic Seepage at Kearl Mine for Years, Kept First Nation in the Dark

October 3, 2023
147
Ramon FVelasquez/Wikipedia

Shell CEO Doubles Down on Renewable Cuts Despite Internal Pushback

October 2, 2023
142
Iota 9/Wikimedia Commons

‘Huge Loss’ for Local Green Economy as Vancouver Shutters Its Economic Commission

September 28, 2023
359
YouTube

UAE Holds Major Oil and Gas Conference Before Hosting COP 28 Climate Summit

October 3, 2023
75
Solarimo/pixabay

Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds

October 2, 2023
261
Jon Sullivan/flickr

Thorold Gas Peaker Plant Won’t Be Built After Unanimous City Council Vote

September 21, 2023
880

Recent Posts

Dawn Ellner/flickr

Oil and Gas, Buildings Drive 2.1% Rise in Canada’s Climate Pollution

October 2, 2023
62
Northvolt plant in Sweden, Spisen/wikimedia commons

Quebec Lands $7B Battery Gigafactory Investment from Sweden’s Northvolt

October 2, 2023
62
GFDL/Wikimedia Commons

Clean Energy Funding Isn’t Just About Money, Policy Expert Warns

October 2, 2023
39
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/Wikimedia Commons

Climate Change Brings Rapid Ice Loss to Antarctica, Arctic, Swiss Glaciers

October 2, 2023
58
Duffins Agriculture Preserve/North Country House Media via Greenbelt Foundation

Green Space Groups Gear for Bigger Fights After Ontario Reverses Greenbelt Land Grab

September 28, 2023
221
DiscoverEganville/wikimedia commons

EV Rentals to Improve Transportation Access for Ontario Townships

September 28, 2023
82
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
The Energy Mix - Energy Central
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance

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}