Danielle Smith & Scott Moe Slam Trudeau’s Net-Zero Electricity Regulations

The Premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan took to social media to slam the Trudeau government for punishing their provinces with unrealistic net-zero electricity targets despite their major role in driving Canada’s economy. 

On the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter,) Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was engaging in an unrealistic plan. 

“Trudeau’s net-zero electricity regulations are unaffordable, unrealistic and unconstitutional. They will drive electricity rates through the roof and leave Saskatchewan with an unreliable power supply. Our government will not let the federal government do that to the Saskatchewan people,” wrote Moe. 

TRUDEAU’S NET-ZERO ELECTRICITY REGULATIONS ARE UNAFFORDABLE, UNREALISTIC AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
THEY WILL DRIVE ELECTRICITY RATES THROUGH THE ROOF AND LEAVE SASKATCHEWAN WITH AN UNRELIABLE POWER SUPPLY.
OUR GOVERNMENT WILL NOT LET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DO THAT TO SASKATCHEWAN… PIC.TWITTER.COM/DSIMCY82JI— Scott Moe (@PremierScottMoe) August 10, 2023

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith also chimed in on Thursday evening saying that the government’s threats were “completely unnecessary.” 

“I couldn’t agree more with Premier Scott Moe. Ottawa’s unrealistic net-zero targets and recent escalation is completely unnecessary. It’s time for the feds to face reality and work with us on pragmatic solutions,” tweeted Smith. 

I COULDN’T AGREE MORE WITH PREMIER SCOTT MOE.

OTTAWA’S UNREALISTIC NET-ZERO TARGETS AND RECENT ESCALATION IS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY. IT’S TIME FOR THE FEDS TO FACE REALITY AND WORK WITH US ON PRAGMATIC SOLUTIONS. HTTPS://T.CO/SLQVIV0DAB— Danielle Smith (@ABDanielleSmith) August 9, 2023

The federal government has put out several aggressive signals to ensure compliance with the incoming regulations. 

Shared from https://tnc.news/2023/08/10/smith-moe-netzero-regs/

Trudeau gov’t suggests withholding billions from provinces that refuse to comply with ‘clean’ energy rules

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe have both roundly condemned the suggestion as ‘divisive, destructive and dangerous.’

OTTAWA, Ontario (LifeSiteNews) — The federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is threatening to withhold billions of taxpayer dollars in funding for provinces which continue to use natural resources such as oil, gas and coal past the year 2035.  

On August 8, Minister of Natural Resources Jonathan Wilkinson published “Powering Canada Forward” which proposed denying funds to provinces which refuse to switch from natural resources to electricity by 2035, despite both Saskatchewan and Alberta explaining that this goal is “impossible.”  

“The federal government is working to implement its new funding commitments in partnership with provinces and territories, and in a way that supports affordable net-zero electricity across Canada,” the document states.  

While the proposal is phrased as providing funding and tax benefits to provinces which comply with the new electricity regulations, it essentially bars provinces which choose to use natural resources from receiving billions in government funding.  

The publication promises compliant provinces with benefits such as a 15 percent investment tax credit and a $3 billion fund for so-called renewable energy. 

“The federal government will make these tools available to provinces and territories that take concrete action to achieve net zero,” the document reads.  

“This includes demonstrating a commitment to use federal funding to lower electricity bills for households and businesses, and a commitment to achieve a net-zero electricity sector, which will apply to the Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit and potentially to other federal instruments,” it continued.  

Alberta Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz roundly condemned the federal government for their threats, writing,”Today, the federal government threatened to withhold funding unless Alberta agreed to their unrealistic and costly 2035 net-zero target.”  

“We will not agree to any target that will drive up power bills and compromise the integrity of our power grid,” she promised.  

Today, the federal government threatened to withhold funding unless Alberta agreed to their unrealistic and costly 2035 net-zero target.

We will not agree to any target that will drive up power bills and compromise the integrity of our power grid.

My full statement: pic.twitter.com/eqiclS9SzB

— Rebecca Schulz (@rebeccakschulz) August 8, 2023

Similarly, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe bashed the suggestion of withholding taxpayer dollars from provinces which refuse to shut down their natural resource plants.  

“What kind of a national government acts like this?” Moe questioned. “It’s divisive, destructive and dangerous.” 

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith voiced her support for Moe, writing, “I couldn’t agree more with Premier Scott Moe. Ottawa’s unrealistic net-zero targets and recent escalation is completely unnecessary. It’s time for the feds to face reality and work with us on pragmatic solutions.” 

I couldn’t agree more with Premier Scott Moe.

Ottawa’s unrealistic net-zero targets and recent escalation is completely unnecessary. It’s time for the feds to face reality and work with us on pragmatic solutions. https://t.co/slQVIV0DAb

— Danielle Smith (@ABDanielleSmith) August 9, 2023

This is hardly the first time that the Trudeau government has targeted Alberta and Saskatchewan for placing their province’s wellbeing above the claims of climate alarmists. 

In May, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault declared that violating environmental regulations banning the use of coal and gas-fired power after 2035 could result in criminal sanctions days after Moe stated that his province would continue to run their plants.

In 2022, Moe blasted Trudeau’s environmental policy goals, stating that a “fossil fuel phase-out by 2035″ is “going to make for an awfully cold house in Saskatoon on Jan. 1, 2036.” 

In June, Smith condemned the Trudeau government’s “Sustainable Jobs Act,” reaffirming her past promise to defend her “province’s constitutional jurisdiction” over its “natural resources” and “energy workforce.” 

The Trudeau government’s current environmental goals – in lockstep with the United Nations’ “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” – include phasing out coal-fired power plants, reducing fertilizer usage, and curbing natural gas use over the coming decades.   

The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil-fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has also been pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.    

While Trudeau’s plan has been pushed under the guise of “sustainability,” his intention to decrease nitrous oxide emissions by limiting the use of fertilizer has been criticized by farmers. They say this will reduce profits and could even lead to food shortages.  

Moreover, experts are warning that the Trudeau government’s new “clean fuel” regulations, which come into effect next year, will cost Canadian workers  – many of whom are already struggling under decades-high inflation rates – an average $1,277 extra annually.  

Shared from https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/trudeau-govt-suggests-withholding-billions-from-provinces-that-refuse-to-comply-with-clean-energy-rules/

Legality of Ottawa’s new ‘net-zero’ electricity ultimatums unclear, say constitutional scholars

OTTAWA – As the premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan prepare to fight Ottawa’s new draft regulations to force through a “net-zero” power grid, legal scholars say it’s iffy who might win a potential constitutional court battle.

“The question really doesn’t really turn on as much where provincial jurisdiction lies as how far you can stretch federal jurisdiction,” said Andrew Leach, a professor of law and economics at the University of Alberta.

Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault unveiled his plan Thursday to mostly force fossil fuels out of Canadian electricity generation by 2035, while also significantly expanding the amount of power to meet rising electrification mandates. While Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia rely mostly on carbon-free hydro or nuclear  power, Alberta and Saskatchewan, as well as other provinces, rely heavily on fossil fuels to generate electricity. The new rules will require any power plants that cannot get to zero emissions to shutter.

On Thursday, after the draft rules were introduced, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe it wasn’t feasible for his province to meet the 2035 targets for net zero, a term which means emissions are technically eliminated, after accounting for offset credits.

“Trudeau’s net-zero electricity regulations are unaffordable, unrealistic and unconstitutional. They will drive electricity rates through the roof and leave Saskatchewan with an unreliable power supply,” Moe said.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said she is prepared to fight the new regulations in court and her environment minister Rebecca Schulz told a Calgary radio station the UCP government could invoke its sovereignty act , which is meant to shield the province from federal legislation it considers harmful.

“If they continue to come out with irresponsible and completely unachievable targets … we will use every tool at our disposal to represent the best interests of Albertans,” Schulz said.

• Ottawa admits ‘net zero’ electricity will raise rates; Guilbeault slammed for ‘unrealistic’ fossil fuels ‘phase down’
• Don Braid: Federal electricity rules spark the return of defiant Danielle Smith

University of Calgary law professor Martin Olszynski said the federal government’s regulations, which set up a specific prohibition on greenhouse gases from power production, appear to take advantage of Ottawa’s criminal enforcement powers. He said those powers go beyond what people typically associate with criminality and allow the government to prohibit certain things, such as tobacco advertising or toxic, when it can demonstrate a clear purpose for doing so.

He said there is a lot of precedent going back decades that allows the government to use these powers on a national scale to regulate the environment and he sees an uphill battle for any constitutional challenge.

“The reality I think is that horses left the barn a long time ago, 20 to 30 years ago,” he said. “On the basis of precedent, I think the feds have a pretty good argument.”

Olszynski said there is always a chance the provincial governments could challenge the law, but to present the new rules as clearly outside Ottawa’s powers is a stretch.

“I don’t think anyone can argue for it to be a slam-dunk unconstitutional law,” he said. “I think they’re puffing up a little bit there, frankly.”

Leach said the federal government has been using the criminal power to push into areas of provincial constitutional jurisdiction and the Supreme Court has been largely deferential to the Liberals’ previous incursions, such as with the carbon tax . But he said it’s possible the court could find the government has pushed too far this time.

“Probably with today’s Supreme Court, it ends up as valid federal legislation, but I don’t think it’s a slam dunk,” he said.

Leach said the federal government definitely has a role to play in environmental legislation, but courts have usually tried to limit its ability to micromanage the economy.

“What we tend to avoid having federal governments do or giving federal governments the power to do is to micromanage either individual facilities or individual industries,” he said.

The constitutionality of the federal carbon tax was challenged all the way to the Supreme Court, after being challenged both successfully and unsuccessfully in provincial courts, and was ultimately upheld in a split 6-3 decision. The justices relied on a section of the Constitution that allows the government to intervene in an area of national concern under what is called the “peace, order and good government clause.”

Leach and Olszynski both say that probably wouldn’t be the central issue in a case over the electricity regulations.

Leach said the fact the carbon-tax case was not settled with a unanimous decision is proof that there is room for debate on what the government’s powers are when it comes to regulating the environment.

But he said it’s also possible the issue never ends up in a courtroom.

“There’s a lot of bluster right now about what’s going to happen and who’s going to challenge and how is it going to play out,” he said. “There are a lot of pathways both political and legally where this doesn’t end up being challenged.”

• Email: rtumilty@postmedia.com | Twitter: ryantumilty

Shared from https://www.saltwire.com/atlantic-canada/news/legality-of-ottawas-new-net-zero-electricity-ultimatums-unclear-say-constitutional-scholars-100882274/

“This is what happens when ideology runs a power grid.”

Alberta News Live

.