- Last week we condemned Canada’s overwhelmed and underwhelming Industry Minister Mélanie Joly for knowing nothing and seeing nothing with regard to slave labour in Chinese EVs, saying “you should ask the minister of foreign affairs” which was her job for more than three years until late last spring. Now Blacklock’s Reporter tells us some naïve or puckish MP did ask Anita Anand, our current overwhelmed and underwhelming foreign minister. And guess what? She served word salad with ignorance dressing: “Foreign Minister Anita Anand yesterday could not say how cabinet’s approval for 278,989 imported Chinese battery electric cars will comply with a federal ban on slave-made goods. ‘I cannot confirm what will be on the list,’ she said.” Pretty bad, right? Not to her: “‘This is Canada standing up for human rights and this is Canada standing up for workers’ rights,’ said Anand. ‘We are demonstrating to other middle powers that you don’t have to choose between strong trade and strong values. We are delivering both.’” By not knowing if we’re importing products of slave labour, not caring, and not treating it seriously. Surely “ditzy” is, again, not too unkind a word for such a performance.
- A recent study says the subject of clouds is cloudy. Specifically, the possibility that in some places during the 19th century soot from large-scale burning of wood, peat and coal was seeding clouds. As Science observes, “With the realization that the skies of old were foggy compared to our previous estimates, our estimation of the impact of pollutants on cloud coverage (and hence global cooling) might be wrong…. The importance of getting aerosol-cloud interactions right cannot be overemphasized; even a little change in cloud cover could result in major changes in temperatures.” And then they make a singularly important point: “This is certainly no theory at all.” By which they seem to mean it is not a theory but established fact that we need to get clouds right and so far don’t. But it’s also the case that there’s no theory here about what is right, only a strong hypotheses about what’s not. Namely our existing understanding even of the fabled “pre-industrial” climate of the 75 or so years after the Industrial Revolution began. Which means we don’t know how much the planet has warmed since 1850 or why. It’s kind of important to the story.
- People still seem baffled that incentives matter. Climate Home News complains that when Shell sold its oil-producing assets in Nigeria’s Niger Delta last year “the divestment boosted its climate record – at least on paper. But, as Climate Home News revealed this week, Shell has continued trading millions of barrels of oil produced at the sites, while avoiding responsibility for the growing emissions linked to them.” Well, yes. If you pressure people to do a certain thing, and measure it a certain way, they are liable to respond my maximizing their benefits and minimizing their costs according to your measurement system. (And of course trying to capture the measurement system politically or bureaucratically.) Blaming them for it seems obtuse.
- Last month, facing soaring gas prices from the Iran war and obstruction of the Strait of Hormuz, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the administration was “open to all ideas” including suspending the federal tax on gasoline. The what? Why the devil does the US, or anyone single out gasoline for taxation? It’s not just that taxes on specific products inherently distort economic decisions, so with the purpose of taxation being to raise revenue for the state broad-based taxes are better. Its that if you are the kind of arrogant meddler who insists on targeting particular things to mess with markets and reduce efficiency, why not something less essential than gasoline? Say, pet rocks.
- Meanwhile the gravy plane roars on in Canada. The federal cabinet’s Chief Science Advisor, for instance, has billed for 12 business-class flights to Paris, with total travel expenses since being appointed in 2017 of over $400k, though she told MPs she couldn’t remember flying business. One does, you know. I mean crammed in with the proles? Ugh. Worse, when an MP asked “What exactly are Canadian taxpayers paying you to do?” she responded “What the Canadian public is paying for is an independent advisor who is functioning in a transparent and trustworthy manner.” Except the bit about not remembering flying luxury not steerage in order to, uh… well, see “We add a lot of value by bringing people together.” Which people? What value? Well, places like Washington, Tokyo, London or Brussels. Not the boonies where, again, the proles might lurk. She also insisted that “Travel was part of the job description,” though why one cannot email in science advice from one’s office or study isn’t clear. And when another MP asked “Does it have to be in business class?” she snapped “Travel is an easy target.” Well, yes. Unless of course your advice was that carbon is not pollution. Was it? We didn’t think so.
- Are you kidding us? MSN repeats yet again “Scientists warn AMOC slowdown nears climate tipping point”. Do you think your audience are paying so little attention to your product that they don’t know you run that stale chestnut every week?
- Especially since they also run a story “2035: The point of no return” about how “Climate scientists have identified the mid-2030s as the window in which several irreversible tipping points may be crossed, making this decade the most consequential in human history.” Waaait a minute. Are you saying after all these decades we still have that same 10 years to save the planet? If only the “only 10 years until” we hit some weird life milestone (to quote a sardonic friend, “it’s weird being the same age as old people”) kept resetting.
See Comments 
Tidbits
24 Jun 2026 | News Roundup
