Kent Insists – Against the Evidence – that Canada has a Plan

Kent Insists – Against the Evidence – that Canada has a Plan
on

Environment Minister Even Calls that Plan “Credible”

Postmedia reporter Mike De Souza has an amusing story about outrage in the office of Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent over coverage of a ministerial speech last week.

The Minister had told the Economic Club of Canada that “Canada has a credible plan for addressing our environmental challenges.” At the same time, his department was releasing a document with the graph at left, showing a vast gap between the government’s stated emission reduction targets and the continuing rise of those emissions.

De Souza gives the Minister’s office every chance to comment, clarify or correct his report. But at the end of the day, it sure looks like Canada’s plan is to blow off its commitments once again – woefully, just as everyone expected.

Related Posts

on

For years, top advertising and PR firms have profited by helping the fossil fuel industry spread misinformation, set up front groups, promote false solutions, and obstruct climate action. Climate scientists are demanding PR firms part ways with climate deniers

For years, top advertising and PR firms have profited by helping the fossil fuel industry spread misinformation, set up front groups, promote false solutions, and obstruct climate action. Climate scientists are demanding PR firms part ways with climate deniers
on

Speak up, identify the stakes, and use language that inspires action and combats right-wing messaging, says climate communications expert Genevieve Guenther.

Speak up, identify the stakes, and use language that inspires action and combats right-wing messaging, says climate communications expert Genevieve Guenther.
on

America’s largest oil firm claims its history of publicly denying the climate crisis is protected by the first amendment.

America’s largest oil firm claims its history of publicly denying the climate crisis is protected by the first amendment.
on

A judge said the claimants’ focus on specific years when the companies received more in tax breaks than they sent to the government was “nonsensical”.

A judge said the claimants’ focus on specific years when the companies received more in tax breaks than they sent to the government was “nonsensical”.