It might seem unremarkable that Canada’s government is ramping up spending by millions of dollars to inflict climate propaganda on children. Sorry, to “empower young Canadians to address climate change.” But it deserves mention because as we said in May, “the new federal administration of Mark Carney is at once committed to Net Zero and obliged to revive the economy after a lost decade of sluggish productivity, weak investment and minimal real wage growth. It will be an interesting demonstration project to see how they try to do it, and what results.” And apparently what they’re trying to do is change course while holding steady and speed up project approvals by erecting even more barriers because they’re unable to prevail in the fight against their most dangerous foe: their own ideas.

The result is at once instructive and painful to watch. For instance our new Energy and Natural Resources Minister, Tim Hodgson, just expressed confidence in export markets for liquified natural gas unlike, say, our old Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. But, CTV reports:

“when asked whether his government is prepared to scrap some of the controversial environmental policies implemented by its predecessor, in order to move so-called nation-building projects forward, Hodgson wouldn’t say.”

And while the Canadian government’s commitment to disclosure, something Trudeau called “openness by default” yet never involved revealing any information, however trivial or important, unless forced to, it’s also very possible that he either doesn’t know or had never realized it might be important. Because among the crucial bad ideas that paralyze such public figures is the notion that if they want something with sufficient intensity, their inherent excellence will make it happen.

Some on the left smell a conspiracy. Gillian Steward in the Toronto Star complained that Carney had apparently abandoned climate despite an adult lifetime of advocacy for it, touting as evidence of defection by this former Greta Thunberg fanboy that:

“In his meetings with the premiers hardly a word is spoken about the need to address climate change as he considers the big nation building projects such as ports, pipelines, and railroads.”

That Carney might see no conflict between the two and habitually focus on whatever his current audience wants to hear so as to bring everyone along in the grand cosmic scheme seems not to have occurred to her. But consider this news item from the National Post:

“Less than two weeks after the Liberal cabinet was sworn in, the presidents of the five major automakers appealed directly to Prime Minister Mark Carney, requesting him to ‘urgently’ repeal the federal zero-emission vehicle sales mandate, warning of industry-wide repercussions if it is not. More than two months later, and with no public indication as to whether the government will listen, frustration is only building, says Brian Kingston, president and CEO of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association, which sent the May 26 letter and represents Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis.”

If Carney were in fact going to repeal or at least significantly modify it, surely he’d have said so to loud applause. The public seems to be on board with boosting productivity including by developing conventional energy and its infrastructure. And despite the Privy Council scrounging for public support for aggressive climate policy, the actual public is clearly much more worried about the economy. Despite which Carney has not supported modifying the EV mandate, and his new Environment Minister has said no, in part we suspect because of the chronic have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too expectation of what Thomas Sowell has called “unconstrained” thinkers, that is, people whose conception of public affairs is not constrained by painful trade-offs and lessons from history. As a recent Fraser Institute commentary put it:

“Following last month’s European Union-Canada 2025 Summit, Prime Minister Carney and his EU counterparts issued a joint statement reaffirming their shared commitments, which include reaching ‘net-zero’ by 2050 and transitioning away from fossil fuels. This confirms the Carney government intends to stay the course set by the Trudeau government. However, despite these commitments and the trillions invested toward this goal, the timeline to phase out fossil fuels and achieve a zero-carbon economy by 2050 remains disconnected from reality.”

So Carney certainly seems to be as committed as ever to Net Zero by Five Zero. Just not to the methods and sacrifices necessary to get us there because he not only doesn’t know what they are, he doesn’t know they exist. His career, at any rate, is not marked by a persistent awareness of the importance of trade-offs and of choosing how to allocate limited means among competing ends. That kind of stuff is for mean right-wingers.

People like Carney and his cabinet see it differently. Thus Tim Hodgson is happy to scatter magic beans:

“Canada is likely to see major new electricity transmission projects on the east and west coasts as the government moves to increase energy production, the country’s natural resources minister said. Tim Hodgson told Bloomberg News that electricity grids are an ‘incredibly important’ part of the drive to strengthen the economy in the face of the Trump administration’s protectionist policies. Prime Minister Mark Carney has stated many times that his objective is to make Canada an ‘energy superpower.’”

What he hasn’t done is state is plan. And again we quote Mole from Pogo: “A plan! You’re right! I’ll need a plan.” And alas, as Gina Pappano recently put it:

“So why are we striving to become an energy superpower? Why aren’t we an energy superpower already? The answer is clear. Because of net zero, the kryptonite to Canada’s energy ambitions.”

And as Brainiac might be aware, this kind of conflict between stated goals and apparent policies is creating another kind of kryptonite, namely uncertainty that keeps investments and projects away. As Matthew Holmes quoted Steven Covey with regard to this very point in the Financial Post, “You can only move at the speed of trust.” And businesses can’t trust Carney’s intentions because they can’t understand them. Even on his cherished “consensus”, Carney seems better able to say it than to build it. Instead he hands out unilateral vetoes, especially to aboriginals, in the apparent belief that if you have one you won’t use it but if you don’t you might. Or something. It really is hard to tell.

Lest we seem to be saying he should just give up on reconciling the two goals of rapidly increased prosperity instead of the stagnation of the last decade and meaningful reduction of greenhouse gases, we note that Clean Prosperity recently called for a “grand bargain in which:

“the federal and provincial governments should reset their relationship on climate policy. A new vision paper from Clean Prosperity explains how. The paper recommends that the federal government cancel the oil and gas emissions cap and the Clean Electricity Regulations. Instead Ottawa should reach a deal with the provinces to strengthen their industrial carbon markets. For their parts, provinces must commit to carbon market reforms, and backstop them with carbon contracts for difference offered in partnership with the federal government.”

We’re not saying it’s a good plan. But we are saying it’s a plan which is good because then people can understand it, discuss and debate it and maybe even act based on it. Instead, as Blacklock’s Reporter noted of Carney’s famous, often-mentioned and sonorous “nation-building” projects, as though he were a second Sir John A. Macdonald building the railway that made us a country:

“Prime Minister Mark Carney yesterday said he is ‘not yet at the “what” stage’ of selecting new, nation-building industrial projects for fast-tracked permits. Speaking to reporters at a meeting with First Nations, Carney predicted many proposals ‘will fall by the wayside.’”

Great. You can take that to the lack of bank. They’re good at ramming through ambitious bills. But implementation? Not so much. Indeed nobody’s sure how the fast-tracking would work let alone what it would work on. So arbitrary, yet sluggish. Just what we need.

In this regard it is not unfair to note that very little in the Canadian government works even when they try. Thus as the National Post observes, an earlier nation-building project, the much-touted “Canada Infrastructure Bank”, was launched by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with the intention of spending $35 billion by 2027-28 on “green energy and other infrastructure projects”. Instead according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer it only seems to have shoveled $14.9 billion out the window, getting we know not what for our money. Moreover:

“The infrastructure bank also has sector-specific investment goals for five priority areas – broadband, public transit, clean power, green infrastructure, and trade and transportation – ranging between $3 billion and $10 billion each. But the PBO said the Crown corporation is not on track to meet any of those targets either.”

So this “demonstration project” of what happens when you pivot away from your aggressive climate fixation toward productivity growth while remaining resolutely fixated on it suggests that you spin in circles exhausting yourself, baffling people and wasting precious time.

It’s not that surprising. But if it needed to be shown, Canada is leading the way. Yay us.