Category: Climate Change Scam

Posted on

CCS #6(C): Supreme Court Rules Carbon Tax Constitutional, No Real Opposition From “Conservatives”

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 6-3 decision, confirmed that the Carbon tax is constitutional. This is not surprising in the slightest, considering there was no real opposition. All parties parroted the sentiments that climate change was an urgent threat that needed dealt with. In short, they agreed with the underlying facts, so there wasn’t much to argue.

The “resistance”, pictured above, did nothing but orchestrate a dog-and-pony show. It duped plenty of people into convincing them that these politicians were actually fighting.

1. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

The entire climate change industry, (and yes, it is an industry) is a hoax perpetrated by the people in power. See the other articles on the scam, the propaganda machine in action, and some of the court documents in Canada. Carbon taxes are just a small part of the picture, and conservatives are intentionally sabotaging their court cases.

2. The Supreme Court Of Canada Ruling

[7] Global climate change is real, and it is clear that human activities are the primary cause. In simple terms, the combustion of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) into the atmosphere, and those gases trap solar energy from the sun’s incoming radiation in the atmosphere instead of allowing it to escape, thereby warming the planet. Carbon dioxide is the most prevalent and recognizable GHG resulting from human activities. Other common GHGs include methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride and nitrogen trifluoride.

[8] At appropriate levels, GHGs are beneficial, keeping temperatures around the world at levels at which humans, animals, plants and marine life can live in balance. And the level of GHGs in the atmosphere has been relatively stable over the last 400,000 years. Since the 1950s, however, the concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere have increased at an alarming rate, and they continue to rise. As a result, global surface temperatures have already increased by 1.0°C above pre-industrial levels, and that increase is expected to reach 1.5°C by 2040 if the current rate of warming continues.

This appears to be almost cut and paste directly from Ontario’s Factum during their Provincial challenge.

[9] These temperature increases are significant. As a result of the current warming of 1.0°C, the world is already experiencing more extreme weather, rising sea levels and diminishing Arctic sea ice. Should warming reach or exceed 1.5°C, the world could experience even more extreme consequences, including still higher sea levels and greater loss of Arctic sea ice, a 70 percent or greater global decline of coral reefs, the thawing of permafrost, ecosystem fragility and negative effects on human health, including heat-related and ozone-related morbidity and mortality.

[10] The effects of climate change have been and will be particularly severe and devastating in Canada. Temperatures in this country have risen by 1.7°C since 1948, roughly double the global average rate of increase, and are expected to continue to rise faster than that rate. Canada is also expected to continue to be affected by extreme weather events like floods and forest fires, changes in precipitation levels, degradation of soil and water resources, increased frequency and severity of heat waves, sea level rise, and the spread of potentially life-threatening vector-borne diseases like Lyme disease and West Nile virus.

[11] The Canadian Arctic faces a disproportionately high risk from climate change. There, the average temperature has increased at a rate of nearly three times the global average, and that increase is causing significant reductions in sea ice, accelerated permafrost thaw, the loss of glaciers and other ecosystem impacts. Canada’s coastline, the longest in the world, is also being affected disproportionately by climate change, as it experiences changes in relative sea level and rising water temperatures, as well as increased ocean acidity and loss of sea ice and permafrost. Climate change has also had a particularly serious effect on Indigenous peoples, threatening the ability of Indigenous communities in Canada to sustain themselves and maintain their traditional ways of life.

[12] Climate change has three unique characteristics that are worth noting. First, it has no boundaries; the entire country and entire world are experiencing and will continue to experience its effects. Second, the effects of climate change do not have a direct connection to the source of GHG emissions. Provinces and territories with low GHG emissions can experience effects of climate change that are grossly disproportionate to their individual contributions to Canada’s and the world’s total GHG emissions. In 2016, for example, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia accounted for approximately 90.5 percent of Canada’s total GHG emissions, while the approximate percentages were 9.1 percent for the other five provinces and 0.4 percent for the territories. Yet the effects of climate change are and will continue to be experienced across Canada, with heightened impacts in the Canadian Arctic, coastal regions and Indigenous territories. Third, no one province, territory or country can address the issue of climate change on its own. Addressing climate change requires collective national and international action. This is because the harmful effects of GHGs are, by their very nature, not confined by borders.

B. Canada’s Efforts to Address Climate Change
.
[13] Canada’s history of international commitments to address climate change began in 1992 with its ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, U.N. Doc. A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1, May 15, 1992 (“UNFCCC”). After failing to meet its commitments under multiple UNFCCC agreements, including the Kyoto Protocol, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/1997/L.7/Add.1, December 10, 1997, and the Copenhagen Accord, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1, December 18, 2009, Canada agreed to the Paris Agreement in 2015. Recognizing that “climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet and thus requires the widest possible cooperation by all countries”, the participating states agreed to hold the global average temperature increase to well below 2.0°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit that increase to 1.5°C: United Nations, Framework Convention on Climate Change, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its twenty-first session, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1, January 29, 2016, at p. 2; Paris Agreement, art. 2(1)(a). Canada ratified the Paris Agreement in 2016, and the agreement entered into force that same year. Canada committed to reducing its GHG emissions by 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.

This has been a bipartisan effort, to entangle Canada with more and more UN treaties. Each one erodes more sovereignty.

[14] Under the Paris Agreement, states are free to choose their preferred approaches for meeting their nationally determined contributions. In Canada, the provinces and the federal government agreed to work together in order to meet the country’s international commitments. In March 2016, before Canada had ratified the Paris Agreement, all the First Ministers met in Vancouver and adopted the Vancouver Declaration on clean growth and climate change (“Vancouver Declaration”): Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat, March 3, 2016 (online). In that declaration, the First Ministers recognized the call in the Paris Agreement for significant reductions in GHG emissions and committed to “[i]mplement[ing] GHG mitigation policies in support of meeting or exceeding Canada’s 2030 target of a 30% reduction below 2005 levels of emissions, including specific provincial and territorial targets and objectives”: ibid, at p. 3. In the Vancouver Declaration, the First Ministers also recognized the importance of a collaborative approach between provincial and territorial governments and the federal government to reducing GHG emissions and noted that “the federal government has committed to ensuring that the provinces and territories have the flexibility to design their own policies to meet emission reductions targets”: ibid.

[15] The Vancouver Declaration resulted in the establishment of a federal-provincial-territorial Working Group on Carbon Pricing Mechanisms (“Working Group”) to study the role of carbon pricing mechanisms in meeting Canada’s emissions reduction targets. The Working Group included at least one representative from each provincial and territorial government as well as the federal government. Its final report identified carbon pricing as one of the most efficient policy approaches for reducing GHG emissions and outlined three carbon pricing options: (1) a single form broad-based carbon pricing mechanism that would apply across Canada, an option that would not be supportive of existing or planned provincial or territorial pricing policies; (2) broad-based carbon pricing mechanisms across Canada, an option that would give each province and territory flexibility as to the choice of instruments; and (3) a range of broad-based carbon pricing mechanisms in some jurisdictions, while the remaining jurisdictions would implement other mechanisms or policies designed to meet GHG emissions reduction targets within their borders: Working Group on Carbon Pricing Mechanisms, Final Report, 2016 (online), at pp. 1, 44-47 and 50.

[16] Carbon pricing, or GHG pricing, is a regulatory mechanism that, in simple terms, puts a price on GHG emissions in order to induce behavioural changes that will lead to widespread reductions in emissions. By putting a price on GHG emissions, governments can incentivize individuals and businesses to change their behaviour so as to make more environmentally sustainable purchasing and consumption choices, to redirect their financial investments, and to reduce their GHG emissions by substituting carbon-intensive goods for low-GHG alternatives. Generally speaking, there are two different approaches to GHG pricing: (1) a carbon tax that entails setting a price on GHG emissions directly, but not setting a cap on emissions; and (2) a cap-and-trade system that prices emissions indirectly by placing a cap on GHG emissions, allocating emission permits to businesses and allowing businesses to buy and sell emission permits from and to other businesses. A carbon tax sets an effective price per unit of GHG emissions. In a cap-and-trade system, the market sets an effective price per unit of GHG emissions, but a cap is placed on permitted emissions. Both approaches put a price on GHG emissions. I also find it worthwhile to note that while “carbon tax” is the term used among policy experts to describe GHG pricing approaches that directly price GHG emissions, it has no connection to the concept of taxation as understood in the constitutional context.

Losing the case at the Supreme Court of Canada was not surprising in the least. At no point during this challenge, or the Saskatchewan, Onatario, or Alberta challenges, so these so-called “conservatives” ever deny that climate change is a threat to humanity. They agree almost word for word with the UN agendas. Since there is no real opposition on the “facts”, the Court is only asked to address the case on narrow legal grounds.

Regarding the 1992 framework on climate change, it’s worth pointing out that “Conservative” Brian Mulroney was in power then, and had a large majority government. He didn’tt have to do this.

Also, the 2009 Copenhagen Accord was signed by “Conservative” Stephen Harper. He also signed Agenda 2030 in September 2015. Had he been reelected the following month, he almost certainly would have signed the Paris Agreement as well.

This is the “opposition” Trudeau had to contend with?

3. CPC Still Supports Climate Scam

Does any of this look like Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe actually opposes the agenda? He is fully on board with it, and just has a disagreement over the best way to proceed. Likewise with the other Premiers.

It’s amusing that Moe complains about being double crossed by Trudeau, as that is exactly what he did to his supporters in Saskatchewan.

4. CPC Still Supports Climate Scam

CPC Policy Declaration, August 2018

UN globalist Erin O’Toole seems to be fully on board with the climate agenda. Even if he were Prime Minister, it seems unlikely he would have done anything differently. The Paris Agreement is all about wealth transfer, and it’s disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Also, take a read through this earlier piece on the various Carbon tax challenges. They were doomed from the start.

Posted on

IBC #8(B): Various Bonds, Enterprises, The World Bank Group Is Running

The World Bank tries to portray itself as an organization devoted to the welfare of humankind globally. However, the organization is involved in many bond schemes that most people are completely unaware of. It’s quite the lucrative side operation.

1. More On The International Banking Cartel

For more on the banking cartel, check this page. The Canadian Government, like so many others, has sold out the independence and sovereignty of its monetary system to foreign interests. BIS, like its central banks, exceed their agenda and try to influence other social agendas. See who is really controlling things, and the common lies that politicians and media figures tell. The bankers work with the climate mafia and pandemic pushers to promote mutual goals of control and debt slavery.

2. Important Links

5 Organizations Make Up The World Bank

World Bank Launches “Blockchain Bond” In 2018
Second Round Of Blockchain Bonds In 2019
Video Explaining Blockchain Implementation In New Bonds
Seychelles Launches Blue Bonds In 2018
Blue Bonds Partially Financed By Rockefeller Foundation
Video Explaining Blue (Water) Bonds Concept
Rockefeller Foundation Financing Green Bonds
Founders And Partners Of Climate Bonds
“Pandemic Bonds” Started in 2017 By World Bank Group
Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility
World Bank Won’t Pay Out Pandemic Bonds
Video Explaining Pandemic Bonds Concept
World Bank Launching Social Impact Bonds
Lukashenko Claims IMF & World Bank Offered Bribe

3. About The World Bank Group

  • IBRD, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
  • IDA, The International Development Association
  • IFC, The International Finance Corporation
  • MIGA, The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency
  • ICSID, The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute

Partnering With Governments
Together, IBRD and IDA form the World Bank, which provides financing, policy advice, and technical assistance to governments of developing countries. IDA focuses on the world’s poorest countries, while IBRD assists middle-income and creditworthy poorer countries.
.
Partnering With The Private Sector
IFC, MIGA, and ICSID focus on strengthening the private sector in developing countries. Through these institutions, the World Bank Group provides financing, technical assistance, political risk insurance, and settlement of disputes to private enterprises, including financial institutions.
.
One World Bank Group
While our five institutions have their own country membership, governing boards, and articles of agreement, we work as one to serve our partner countries. Today’s development challenges can only be met if the private sector is part of the solution. But the public sector sets the groundwork to enable private investment and allow it to thrive. The complementary roles of our institutions give the World Bank Group a unique ability to connect global financial resources, knowledge, and innovative solutions to the needs of developing countries.

Most people don’t know this, but the World Bank is actually the partnership of 5 organizations. Strangely, an outside search of them reveals nothing about them, other than being part of the World Bank Group. A deep dive is needed into the inner workings of the World Bank, and is coming in a future article.

4. Types Of Bonds World Bank Involved With

Here are some of the programs the World Bank has been mixed up in. It’s quite the varied and lucrative enterprise. People can become very wealthy with these schemes, although, it’s dependent on others playing along.

  • Blockchain Bonds
  • Blue (Water) Bonds
  • Green Bonds
  • Pandemic Bonds
  • Social Bonds
  • Vaccine Bonds

5. World Bank & Blockchain Bonds

WASHINGTON/SYDNEY, August 23/24, 2018 – The World Bank launched bond-i (blockchain operated new debt instrument), the world’s first bond to be created, allocated, transferred and managed through its life cycle using distributed ledger technology. The two-year bond raised $110 million, marking the first time that investors have supported the World Bank’s development activities in a transaction that is fully managed using the blockchain technology.

The World Bank mandated Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) as arranger for the bond on August 10. The announcement was followed by a two-week consultation period with the market, with key investors indicating strong support for the issuance.

Investors in the bond include CBA, First State Super, NSW Treasury Corporation, Northern Trust, QBE, SAFA, and Treasury Corporation of Victoria. CBA and the World Bank will continue to welcome investor interest in the bond throughout its life cycle, and inquiries from other market participants in relation to the platform.

The bond is part of a broader strategic focus of the World Bank to harness the potential of disruptive technologies for development. In June 2017, the World Bank launched a Blockchain Innovation Lab to understand the impact of blockchain and other disruptive technologies in areas such as land administration, supply chain management, health, education, cross-border payments, and carbon market trading.

The World Bank Group started “blockchain bonds” in 2018. Rather than the more traditional methods, this would, as the name implies, use Blockchain technology as an alternative. The next round of bonds came in 2019.

6. World Bank & Blue (Water) Bonds

The Republic of Seychelles start the first sovereign “blue bond” in 2018. The Rockefeller Foundation, Standard Chartered Bank and Bank of New York Mellon helped with payments. The bonds themselves were placed with the private investors: Nuveen, Prudential and Calvert Impact Capital.

7. World Bank & Green/Climate Bonds

Climate Bonds, or “Green Bonds“, is yet another growing industry that the Rockefellers and other environmental groups are trying to pump up. This is an industry that is potentially worth $100 trillion or more. However, the money likely won’t be going where people think it will.

8. World Bank, PEFF & Pandemic Bonds

Washington, DC, June 28, 2017 – The World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) today launched specialized bonds aimed at providing financial support to the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF), a facility created by the World Bank to channel surge funding to developing countries facing the risk of a pandemic.

This marks the first time that World Bank bonds are being used to finance efforts against infectious diseases, and the first time that pandemic risk in low-income countries is being transferred to the financial markets.

The PEF will provide more than $500 million to cover developing countries against the risk of pandemic outbreaks over the next five years, through a combination of bonds and derivatives priced today, a cash window, and future commitments from donor countries for additional coverage.

The transaction, that enables PEF to potentially save millions of lives, was oversubscribed by 200% reflecting an overwhelmingly positive reception from investors and a high level of confidence in the new World Bank sponsored instrument. With such strong demand, the World Bank was able to price the transaction well below the original guidance from the market. The total amount of risk transferred to the market through the bonds and derivatives is $425 million.

In June 2017, the World Bank started up “Pandemic Bonds“, which would be a sort of insurance policy against infectious diseases. Of course, one has to wonder how far ahead they saw in starting this.

The PEFF, or Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility, will determine if there is a pandemic, according to certain criteria. But early in 2020, the World Bank was accused of “waiting for people to die”, by refusing to pay out this money.

9. World Bank & Social Impact Bonds

In February 2019 “Social Impact Bonds” were started up. They are marketed as a sort of social investment driver, to improve the quality of live for people in the 3rd World, particularly women. They are also supposed to help with the financing of the UNSDA, or United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda.

10. World Bank, IFFM & Vaccine Bonds

This was addressed in the Planned-emic series. Instead of giving money directly to GAVI, there is a convoluted scheme that involves making pledges to IFFIm, the International Finance Facility for Immunizations. Those pledges are then used to generate bonds which are sold to the World Bank. The World Bank then re-sells those bonds on the open market. The money from sales goes to GAVI, who uses it to finance their vaccine agenda.

Note: IFFIm is actually financed by GAVI (who is financed by Gates), so there isn’t really any independence here.

Of course, these means that donor pledges end up costing much more than originally told, or it means only a portion of that money is put to use.

11. Some Thoughts On These Bonds

In early 2020, the President of Belarus claimed that the IMF (International Monetary Fund), and World Bank, offered him a bribe of almost $1 billion if he would impose pandemic measures on his country. He refused. While that seemed like an absurd conspiracy theory at the time, more and more questions need to be answered.

What are the IMF and World Bank up to, and are these bonds connected to their push for drastic (and forced) social changes?

While all of these projects have nice enough sounding names, a question keeps coming up: why is it necessary to use these bonds at all? Instead of selling, and reselling bonds, shouldn’t the money go directly to the people who will be impacted? After all, the average person doesn’t benefit from increased bond values, only the bond holders do.

It’s interesting that the Rockefeller Foundation is so supportive of all of this. After all, they drafted the Lockstep Narrative in 2010. They lay out in broad strokes how to force social change under the false pretense of a global health crisis.

Of course, companies that don’t play along with the agenda, such as “non-green” industries, will soon be forced out of business. The threats have been openly made for a long time now.

Posted on

CV #42(D): WEF/Davos “Great Reset”, “Green New Deal”, And “Stakeholder Capitalism” Are Euphemisms For Global Communism

The “Great Reset” was initially dismissed as a conspiracy theory, and vehemently denied. Now, that it’s out in the open, it’s necessary to restructure society. Pretty opportunistic isn’t it? Wasn’t this all about a virus before? Or is it about implementing an agenda that couldn’t be sold politically before?

Truth about politicians, CEOs, academics and activists colluding is still considered a conspiracy theory. Give it time, and the narrative will shift again. Now there will have been collusion, but it was necessary.

1. WEF Gaslighting Public On Issue Of Trust

The participants at the World Economic Forum keep talking about having to build trust between people. However, this is completely disingenuous, considering the deception and lies at the heart of the matter. Here are important topics, in no particular order.

CENTRAL BANKING
Central Banks Pushing For Digital Currency Implementation
Global Taxation Efforts And Programs Underway
1934 Bank Of Canada Act, Bank For International Settlements
Bank For International Settlements Pushing Green Bonds
Central Banks Network For Greening The Financial System
Usury Involved In Debt-For-Nature Swaps

CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM
Mark Carney, With U.N. Climate Action & Finance
Green New Deal Group Modelling After 2008 Bank Failure
Green Climate Fund, A GLOBAL Green New Deal
New Development Funds: Global Bait-And-Switch
NGOs Meddling In Carbon Tax Court Cases
Paris Accord, A Global Wealth Transfer Scheme

PHARMACEUTICAL LOBBYING
GAVI/Crestview Strategy Lobbying Ottawa
Motion M-132, Pharma Research For Canada And The World
Alberta Pharmaceutical Lobbying
Quebec Pharma Lobbying
Ontario Pharma Lobbying, Bill 160

LACK OF SCIENCE BEHIND PANDEMIC MEASURES
Pandemic Model Donors Have Conflict Of Interest
Virus Has Never Even Been Isolated
WHO Admits PCR Tests Are A Complete Fraud
WHO Admits Little Evidence Masks Work
Business Shut Downs Dependent On Corruption, Lobbying
Ottawa Lies About 2m “Social Distancing”
No Scientific Basis For Limiting Group Sizes
People Recover En Masse Without Vaccines

CENSORSHIP MEASURES
Social Media Collusion On “Pandemic” Narrative
Collusion To Promote Pro-Vaxx Narrative
Proposal To Introduce Laws Against “Misinformation”
Canadian Media Subsidized By Taxpayers, Biased
Fact-Checking Organizations Run By Political Operatives

Speakers at Davos complain that there is far too little trust between people and their leaders. Perhaps addressing some of these issues openly and honestly would help alleviate that. Or how about addressing the next one?

2. Aleksandr Lukashenko Alleges IMF Bribe

Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko publicly accused the World Bank and IMF (International Monetary Fund), of offering a bribe of almost $1 billion U.S. Dollars if he would crash the economy, and impose masks and lockdowns nationwide. Is any of this true?

Before any real trust can be established, honesty is necessary. Is Lukashenko lying, or did the IMF and World Bank manufacture this collapse?

3. Rise Of The Trust Brokers (3rd Parties)

Supposedly, it’s now too difficult and complex for people to manage their own personal data. Hiring 3rd parties to do thinking and decision making may be a better option. Alternatively, an automated system, or artificial intelligence can be put in control instead.

Who’s going to ensure that these 3rd parties are who they claim, and will honour personal information? How will that work with some sort of AI system? Too many questions need answering.

4. Stake Holder Capitalism New Way Of Life

The video is too large to upload here. “Stakeholder Capitalism” is what they want to replace “Shareholder Capitalism”, which is property rights. In short, this agenda is to water down (if not abolish altogether), private property. It’s Communism by any other name.

Don’t worry. You’ll own nothing, have no privacy, and your life will never be better. That predictive programming video came out a few years ago.

That being said, some valid points are made, such as corruption, debt and currency. However, it’s never pointed out that central banking (aided by corrupt politicians), enables such debt slavery. A country’s currency should never be held hostage to foreign private interests.

5. Advancing A New Social Contract

A “Social Contract” is often referred to as agreements within societies. This can refer to the expectation that Governments will provide certain protections and benefits, and citizens will behave in certain ways. Considering the underlying dishonesty of Officials in this “pandemic”, how can they be trusted now?

Historical reference. A social contract is also a reference to then-Ontario Premier Bob Rae imposing certain cuts in the public sector, in order to avoid job losses.

6. Tackling The Inequality Virus

The Covid-19 “pandemic” has also provided to allow a wealth redistribution to take place. Under the guise of fighting racial and gender inequality, these people want to forcibly make things more equal. They quite openly talk about reshaping society.

Also, apparently the virus is racist, since it isn’t killing off whites nearly to the same degree as blacks. Go figure. Perhaps it’s not nearly as deadly when there is equality in society.

7. UN’s Guterres: Pandemic A “Dress Rehearsal”

This “pandemic” is a dress rehearsal for other challenges coming. Antonio Guterres seems almost giddy that this has provided political cover to implement an agenda which could never have been achieved otherwise. If this wasn’t planned out, then it is crass opportunism.

He also says that he plans to vaccinate everyone, saying it’s the key to reopening society.

Interestingly, he also talks about virus mutations, which would render any existing vaccines completely worthless. Considering that WHO recommends AGAINST virus isolation, how would one know they were vaccinating against the correct strain?

Guterres also talks about debt relief, but deliberately omits that most countries participate in private central banking (aided by corrupt politicians). This, above all else, leads to the endless debt slavery that all pay for. Interesting that he talks about environmentally “borrowing” from children and grandchildren, but he leaves out how central banks do much the same thing.

8. Central Banking Is Predatory Lending

Governments and central banks have injected $11 trillion into the global economy, slashed interest rates and purchased large-scale assets to prevent financial collapse due to COVID-19. What monetary and fiscal stabilization policies that have emerged during the crisis should be sustained and scaled up, and how should competition policy be designed in an era of increasing concentration?
.
Speakers: Raghuram G. Rajan, Geoff Cutmore, Alex Cobham, Rain Newton-Smith
.
The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. We believe that progress happens by bringing together people from all walks of life who have the drive and the influence to make positive change.

The description on the video is misleading. Most countries operate private central banks, which means they are forced to borrow — at interest — in order to fund their needs. $11 trillion was generated out of nothing, but now it’s considered debt. As a consequence, “assets” can now be bought off with artificially created wealth.

They float a solution — allowing borrowing at low rates — but it doesn’t address the corrupt system itself. This is not surprising at this point. Politicians and media talking heads frequently address a symptom (the debt), but never the disease (the monetary system). This is intentional.

9. Bonnie Henry: Not Based On Science

A rare moment of honesty from BC Provincial Health Officer Bonnie Henry. Despite a Province-wide ban on gatherings, she admits that none of this is based on science. There’s just vague references to models, a tacit admission that models are not proof or science. Also see TCN TV Network, for more information.

10. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the GREAT RESET. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. The International Health Regulations are legally binding. The media is paid off. The virus was never isolated, PCR tests are a fraud, as are forced masks, social bubbles, and 2m distancing.

Posted on

Bill C-12/C-232; Net Zero 2050; OTPP; Green Bonds & Pension Funds

Bill C-12 has been introduced in the House of Commons. It is to force Canada to formally adopt the “Net Zero Emissions by 2050” environmental agenda. A lot more is going on than simply this legislation. Bill C-232 is a Private Member’s Bill concerning the “Climate Emergency Action Framework”.

1. What’s In Bills C-232/C-12?

Climate Emergency Action Framework
Climate emergency action framework
4 (1) The Minister must, in consultation with Indigenous peoples and civil society, develop and implement a climate emergency action framework to achieve the objectives of the Convention on Climate Change respecting the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The framework must include measures to
(a) ensure that Canada meets, at a minimum, the greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets set for 2030 under the Convention on Climate Change;
(b) ensure a transition towards a green economy by, among other means, increasing employment in green energy, infrastructure and housing; and
(c) ensure the economic well-being, public health and protection of the natural environment of Canada.

SUMMARY
This enactment requires that national targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada be set, with the objective of attaining net-zero emissions by 2050. The targets are to be set by the Minister of the Environment for 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2045.
In order to promote transparency and accountability in relation to meeting those targets, the enactment also
(a) requires that an emissions reduction plan, a progress report and an assessment report with respect to each target be tabled in each House of Parliament;
(b) provides for public participation;
(c) establishes an advisory body to provide the Minister of the Environment with advice with respect to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 and matters that are referred to it by the Minister;
(d) requires the Minister of Finance to prepare an annual report respecting key measures that the federal public administration has taken to manage its financial risks and opportunities related to climate change; and
(e) requires the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to, at least once every 5 years, examine and report on the Government of Canada’s implementation of measures aimed at mitigating climate change.

Bill C-232, the Climate Emergency Action Framework, would entrench further Canada’s obligations to Agenda 2030, which was signed in 2015 by Stephen Harper. Wasn’t that supposed to be non-binding?

Bill C-12 is the so-called Net Zero by 2050. Not only will it shut down entire sectors of the economy, the Finance Minister will be required to consider the impacts of climate change in all future reports.

2. Conservatives Support Climate Change Hoax

We know while in Paris, despite often criticizing the former Harper government, ultimately the Liberal government adopted those same targets it said would be a minimum. Of course, we all know today the Liberal government has massively failed to reach that so-called minimum. In fact, some reports suggest the Liberal government may be off the target by 123 million tonnes.
.
Obviously that is why we are here today debating this bill and why last week it was Bill C-12. Bill C-12 was quite fascinating from a political perspective. It literally kicks the can so far down the road that it will be up to future governments, and ultimately the government of the day in 2050, to deal with it. How do we get there? There is no road map, no solutions and no costs or penalties for failure. There is more of the same, more promises to do better down the road. They promise.
.
However, that is enough about Bill C-12.
.
Bill C-232 proposes that, at a minimum, Canada meet the 2030 targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions set under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
.
Much like Bill C-12, this bill does not say anything at all about how this will actually be done. The underlying promise of every federal government to date has been a return to the targets set by Mr. Chrétien in 1993. It is easy to make promises about targets, but not as easy to meet them.
.
To be frank, I do not think that we will need both Bill C-232 and Bill C-12 going forward. One of them will be enough. To end the suspense, I will be clear and say that I already support Bill C-12. I will not support Bill C-232 as it now stands, and I will explain why.

This pattern is extremely common among “Conservative” politicians, both Federally and Provincially. They will argue ad nauseum of minor details of implementation, to give the illusion of opposition. They pretend to fight, although, in the end, they support the same policies.

Think that Conservatives will revive the oil & gas sector, if they ever regained power? Nope, they are fully committed to letting industries like that die off.

3. Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, Net Zero

January 21, 2021
.
TORONTO, ON – Building on over a decade of climate change efforts, Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board (Ontario Teachers’) today announced its commitment to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. This is a meaningful decision that advances Ontario Teachers’ mission to deliver retirement security for its members, while creating a positive impact for its partners and the communities where it operates.

“As a global pension plan, we will leverage our scale and influence to transition to a low-carbon economy and create a sustainable climate future,” said Jo Taylor, President and CEO. “With coordinated action net zero by 2050 is an ambitious but achievable goal. We are committed to playing our part alongside other organizations and governments around the world to effect significant, positive change.”

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges faced by society and businesses today. The effects of global warming, from rising sea levels and devastating floods to disrupted weather patterns and destructive storms, are clear and wide-ranging.

“While the transition to the low-carbon economy presents many challenges, it also presents many opportunities to earn the returns we need to pay our members’ pensions while more broadly benefiting society and the environment,” said Ziad Hindo, Chief Investment Officer.

The OTTP, Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, announced a few days ago that it would be adopting the “Net Zero” initiative. Contributions will now be funneled through environmental causes that are virtuous. In short, this is a way to monetize the eco-push.

Not only will carbon taxes be funneled to various U.N. groups, but it seems that their pensions will be as well. It would be interesting to know if the members ever voted on this.

4. Investment Plans And Environmentalism

Kevin Uebelein
Chief Executive Officer
Alberta Investment Management Corporation

Gordon J. Fyfe
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Investment Officer
British Columbia Investment Management Corporation

Charles Emond
President and Chief Executive Officer
Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec

Mark Machin
President and Chief Executive Offier
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board

Jeff Wendling
President and Chief Executive Officer
Chief Investment Officer
Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan

Blake Hutcheson
President and CEO
Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System

Jo Taylor
President and Chief Executive Officer
Ontario Teachers Pension Plan

Neil Cunningham
President and Chief Executive Officer
Public Sector Pension Investment Board

CEO-Statement-CEO-Signatures-EN-Nov25-2020

The heads of 8 asset management/pension funds have recently signed a pledge to insert the climate change agenda into their investment decisions.

5. Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance

23 September 2019: An alliance of the world’s largest pension funds and insurers committed to achieve carbon-neutral investment portfolios by 2050. Participating pension funds and insurers launched the UN-convened ‘Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance’ at the UN Secretary-General’s Climate Action Summit.

Allianz, Caisse des Dépôts, La Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), Folksam Group, Pension Danmark and Swiss Re initiated the Alliance at the beginning of 2019. Alecta, AMF, CalPERS, Nordea Life and Pension, Storebrand and Zurich have now joined as founding members. The Alliance brings together pension funds and insurers that are responsible for directing over USD 2.4 trillion in investments. These asset owners represent some of the largest pools of capital in the world and typically have highly diversified investment portfolios that are exposed to all sectors of the global economy.

Some 13 organizations — insurers and pension funds — representing some $2.4 trillion in assets banded together to found this group. It’s only expected to grow in numbers and overall value. That is, of course, until the eco-bubble bursts.

6. UN Principles For Responsible Investment

The UN-convened Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance commissioned the Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) to apply their One Earth Climate model to sectors as defined by sector classification schemes commonly used in finance, with the aim to develop sectoral pathways to net zero by 2050 with carbon emissions (scope 1-2) and energy intensity and carbon intensity (scope 1-2) milestones in 5-year intervals for agreed high emitting sectors.

UNPRI is trying to embed the climate change agenda into all major business and pension related decisions. Recent decisions include eliminating investments for coal, and phasing out oil & gas.

7. Merging ESG Factors And Credit Risk

We, the undersigned, recognise that environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors can affect borrowers’ cash flows and the likelihood that they will default on their debt obligations. ESG factors are therefore important elements in assessing the creditworthiness of borrowers. For corporates, concerns such as stranded assets linked to climate change, labour relations challenges or lack of transparency around accounting practices can cause unexpected losses, expenditure, inefficiencies, litigation, regulatory pressure and reputational impacts.

Typically, a person’s or company’s credit risk was determined by their payment history, and ability to pay off future debts. Now, the ESG factors will be considered as well.

8. UN Environment Program, Commitments

New York, 23 September, 2019 – In one of the boldest actions yet by the world’s largest investors to decarbonize the global economy, an alliance of the world’s largest pension funds and insurers – responsible for directing more than US$ 2.4 trillion in investments – has today committed to carbon-neutral investment portfolios by 2050.

This commitment by the newly launched, United Nations-convened Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance was announced today at the UN Secretary-General’s Climate Action Summit, which brought together governments, companies and civil society to strengthen commitments and accelerate the implementation of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

The Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance is an example of investors stepping up to protect people and planet with the knowledge that companies that transform their businesses to deliver a low carbon economy will benefit most from the opportunities presented by climate change.

In the Fall of 2019, the UN Environment Programme announced this effort to transition into a low Carbon economy. Already, trillions of dollars were available for the change in investment strategy.

What to wonder what will happen to those oil & gas workers in Western Canada who have been put out of work because of political ideology. Doesn’t look like those jobs are coming back.

9. CPP Investment Board, Green Bonds

Green Bonds started off as a novelty over a decade ago. Now, they are seen as a legitimate item to invest in. It’s difficult to see to what degree this move is altruism, and what is opportunism.

But in any event, organizations like CPPIB have made the business decision that certain industries are not worth investing in. As this pattern grows, and access to capital drops, more businesses will have to downsize or shut down.

10. Low-Carbon Transition Not Voluntary

Will this “transition” be voluntary? Will people and companies be free to make their own decisions when it comes to embracing (or rejecting) the green agenda? Not really. People like Mark Carney, now head of U.N. Climate Action & Finance, have made overt threats: play ball or go bankrupt.

(1) Bill C-12: Net Zero Emissions By 2050, First Reading
(2) Bill C-232: Climate Emergency Action Framework
(3) Bill C-262: Income Tax Changes On Carbon Capture
(4) MP Dan Albas On Bills C-12/C-232
(5) Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Pledges 2050 Net Zero
(6) Pledge Of 8 Canadian Companies’ CEOs
(7) IISD On: Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance
(8) UN Principles For Responsible Investing, Net Zero
(9) UNPRI: No More Investments in Coal Industry
(10) UNPRI On Phasing Out Oil & Gas Industry
(11) UNPRI: ESG Now Part Of Credit Worthiness
(12) UN Environment Programme On Net Zero Movement
(13) Canada Pension Plan Investments

Posted on

Who’s Pulling Steven Guilbeault’s Strings? (Part 1: Eco-Movement)

Steven Guilbeault, the new Heritage Minister of Canada, was arrested in 2001 for climbing the CN Tower. While obviously an eco-supporter, there is more to him than meets the eye.

1. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

The entire climate change industry, (and yes, it is an industry) is a hoax perpetrated by the people in power, run by international bankers. Plenty has also been covered on the climate scam, the propaganda machine in action, and some of the court documents in Canada. Carbon taxes are just a small part of the picture, and conservatives are intentionally sabotaging their court cases.

2. Important Links

Office Of The Lobbying Commissioner Of Canada
National Post On Steven Guilbeault
Steven Guilbeault’s Wikipedia Page
Equiterre’s Profile With Canada Revenue Agency
CBC: Guilbeault Steps Down As Director
Cycle Capital Management

3. Guilbeault A Lobbyist For Greenpeace

From 2000 until 2006, Guilbeault was formally registered as a lobbyist for Greenpeace Canada. He was one of many.

4. Guilbeault A Lobbyist For Équiterre

YEAR GRANTING INSTITUTE AMOUNT
2009 Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) $108,361.00
2009 Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) $23,780.00
2009 Transport Canada $33,107.00
2010 Canadian Heritage (PCH) $2,970.00
2010 Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) $18,654.00
2010 Développement compétence Canada $5,214.00
2010 Industry Canada $49,278.00
2010 Transport Canada (TC) $26,893.00
2011 Canadian Heritage (PCH) $2,970.00
2011 Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA $18,654.00
2011 Développement compétence Canada $5,214.00
2011 Industry Canada $49,278.00
2011 Transport Canada (TC) $26,893.00
2012 Canadian Heritage (PCH) $1,258.00
2011 Human Resources and Skills Development Canada $5,082.00
2013 Employment and Social Development Canada $3,845.00

From 2010 until 2018, Guilbeault was a lobbyist for Équiterre. He oversaw an ever dwindling amount of Government grants come in from Canadian taxpayers.

5. Équiterre A Registered Canadian Charity

Year 2014
Receipted donations $1,136,703.00 (34.14%)
Non-receipted donations $187,277.00 (5.63%)
Gifts from other registered charities $105,088.00 (3.16%)
Government funding $363,750.00 (10.93%)
All other revenue $1,536,304.00 (46.15%)
Total income: $3,329,122.00

Year 2015
Receipted donations $1,511,658.00 (43.31%)
Non-receipted donations $232,393.00 (6.66%)
Gifts from other registered charities $17,508.00 (0.50%)
Government funding $334,028.00 (9.57%)
All other revenue $1,394,949.00 (39.96%)
Total income: $3,490,536.00

Year 2016
Receipted donations $1,860,021.00 (49.27%)
Non-receipted donations $120,156.00 (3.18%)
Gifts from other registered charities $330,213.00 (8.75%)
Government funding $277,160.00 (7.34%)
All other revenue $1,187,945.00 (31.46%)
Total income: $3,775,495.00

Year 2017
Charitable programs $2,968,892.00 (67.96%)
Management and administration $366,635.00 (8.39%)
Fundraising $928,004.00 (21.24%)
Political activities $105,099.00 (2.41%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $4,368,630.00

Year 2018
Charitable programs $3,596,315.00 (70.94%)
Management and administration $358,669.00 (7.07%)
Fundraising $1,114,748.00 (21.99%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $5,069,732.00

In 2018, Équiterre took in some $5 million in revenue. The majority of which went to the group’s employees. Incoming money has been high for quite a while.

Équiterre welcomes the regulatory tightening in the federal government’s new climate plan, but reiterates the need for new and more ambitious targets – an obligation in order to face the climate crisis.

“Will we get it right this time – will we finally meet our targets? Let’s hope! The European Union just unveiled its new target of reducing GHGs by at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. For its part, Canada is still working within a scenario of a 30% reduction in emissions by 2030 compared to 2005 levels, despite its intention to improve this target. Today’s announcement is progress in our current scenario, but our current scenario is not adapted to the climate emergency,” says Marc-André Viau, Director of Government Relations at Équiterre.

One has to wonder why Guilbeault was selected as Heritage Minister, instead of Climate Change Minister. This is clearly where his group’s passion is.

6. David Suzuki Foundation Lobbies Guilbeault

The David Suzuki Foundation has lobbied Guilbeault for a “green budget”, and for the 2020, 2050 agendas. Interesting that they also list Implementation of Canada’s Policy for the Conservation of Wild Pacific Salmon in their profile.

7. Climate Action Network Lobbies Guilbeault

Climate Action Network is advocating for the destruction of the oil & gas sector by cutting off potential subsidies and tax breaks. They also are on board with the climate change agenda.

8. Environmental Defence Canada Lobbies

Environmental Defense Canada has also lobbied Guilbeault on a number of environmental initiatives.

9. Cycle Capital Management, Lobbying

Subject Matter Details
.
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution
Representations made so that orientations are taken in order to possibly authorize a mixed real estate project (residential in condo or rental, convenience store and offices) near the Bonaventure Expressway in the Ville-Marie borough (Bassin Peel sector, between Wellington, Mill and Bridge streets).
.
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution, Policies or Program
Representations made to the Government of Canada in order to obtain the creation of a program or action plan for its participation in the financing of a fourth investment fund to be formed by Cycle Capital Management and whose mission would be to investments in the clean technology sector.

Guilbeault went to work for Cycle Capital Management, a “green investment” firm. One of their lobbying goals was the funding in the green technology sector, which they wanted taxpayers to finance.

It’s also interesting to note that CCM was lobbying the Prime Minister’s Office as recently as 2019. Guess what? Now, one of their people, Steven Guilbeault, is in Cabinet, and has direct access to the PMO. That is pretty convenient.

10. Did Guilbeault Really Leave The Movement?

Steven Guilbeault, one of the most well-known faces in Quebec’s environmental movement, has announced he is leaving his job, but not abandoning the cause.

“I’ve made the very hard decision to leave Équiterre after being, in a way or another with the organization for 25 years, not because I don’t like working at Équiterre and not because I don’t love the people who are here,” he said during a news conference Friday.

Guilbeault, who co-founded Équiterre and has been a senior director since 2007, says he is stepping down because he wants to explore “new elements of the fight against climate change.”

He is going to work with Cycle capital management, which he called one of the biggest fund managers for clean technology in Canada.

He will also work as a public relations advisor with Copticom, a company specializing in green and social economy issues.

He and Sidney Ribaux co-founded Équiterre in 1993, a citizens’ group that aimed to find solutions to issues such as pollution and large-scale industrialization.

Ribaux said Guilbeault is an incredible communicator, and credited him with making environmental issues more accessible.

A legitimate question needs to be asked: has Steven Guilbeault actually left the movement? Or is he using his position as a Cabinet Minister to implement policies that he couldn’t otherwise have done? Is he really a public servant, or an operative who’s infiltrated the Government?

Stay tuned for Part 2. There is even more to Guilbeault than what we are being told publicly.

Posted on

CCS #22: European Environmental Agency Relies On UNIPCC For Its Climate Change Data

The following exchange came from a reader who has had dealings with the EEA, or European Environmental Agency. In short, the EEA doesn’t prove climate change is real. Instead, it relies on the United Nations to provide such data.

1. Email Exchange Between Researcher And EEA

An interesting discovery. The EEA doesn’t actually do anything to prove that climate change exists as its advertised. Instead, it relies on the UN to TELL THEM that it happens.

2. Debunking The Climate Change Scam

The entire climate change industry, (and yes, it is an industry) is a hoax perpetrated by the people in power, run by international bankers. Plenty has also been covered on the climate scam, the propaganda machine in action, and some of the court documents in Canada. Carbon taxes are just a small part of the picture, and conservatives are intentionally sabotaging their court cases.