'Canadians are being asked to trust the plan, so back that trust with science and clarity'
Smoke from wildfires turns our sky orange and floods make streets of mud. Neighbours check on each other, families reassure their kids, and everyone feels the smoke or overflow, no matter where it comes from.
Climate change doesn’t stop at borders, and neither does caring. Canadians already look out for one another, but we are also looking for a climate policy that helps our resiliency: clear, proven, and built for the future our youth will inherit.
In a recent CBC What on Earth interview, Julie Dabrusin, federal minister of the environment and climate change, framed Canada’s Climate Competitiveness Strategy (CCS) as proof that climate action and economic growth can reinforce one another. These choices risk pulling the country in opposite directions.
Dabrusin highlighted the CCS pillars: industrial carbon pricing, clean electricity investments, methane regulations, and clean-tech innovation. These proven tools drive cleaner air, stronger investment, and long-term competitiveness. Around the world, clean grids, efficient industry, and low-carbon innovation attract investment and create lasting jobs. The strategy can work.
In Canada, we’re not there yet. The CCS depends on co-operation across provinces, territories, First Nations, and the federal government, and on shared understanding that climate policy isn’t something to delay or trade away. All this is being tested by mixed signals.
At COP30, Canada received the Fossil of the Day award. The federal response was bold: “The world is moving toward clean energy and low-carbon industries, and Canada is determined to lead that transition.” But back home, Canada is expanding LNG exports, softening the zero-emissions vehicle standard, and delaying Alberta’s promised oil and gas emissions cap, with Prime Minister Mark Carney describing the federal-Alberta memorandum of understanding (MOU) as “pragmatic,” combining stronger carbon pricing with “responsible energy development that supports workers and communities.”
But the deal increases crude oil production, allows regulatory suspensions, and leans heavily on carbon capture technology that has not yet been delivered beyond attempts to make fossil fuel extraction easier. Canadians deserve to see the modelling, timelines, and safeguards that prove this understanding keeps the country on track.
The Alberta MOU also repeats a familiar claim: Alberta will produce “some of the lowest carbon-intensity oil in the world.” But “low carbon” refers only to extraction. Burning oil remains 10 to 100 times more polluting than renewable energy. Additionally, methane capture is the fastest, most cost-effective way for Canada to cut emissions this decade.
While federal methane regulations are now finalized and aligned with leading European Union standards, the MOU still leans heavily on voluntary reductions and commitments repeatedly unfulfilled for more than a decade.
The math question remains unavoidable: How does Canada meet climate targets if production rises while regulations pause and key guardrails don’t phase in until 2028? If the numbers work, show them. If the timeline works, explain it. Canadians are being asked to trust the plan, so back that trust with science and clarity.
Meanwhile, global oil demand is flattening, and prices are dropping. Countries like India, often cited as future fossil fuel buyers, are rapidly building renewables to secure energy independence. These shifts make it urgent that Canada accelerates future-ready energy systems. Clean energy isn’t hypothetical. Canada’s major projects list already includes offshore wind, grid integration, industrial electrification, energy-efficiency upgrades, and next-generation methane capture. These projects are ready to build now with careers that will last. Canadians overwhelmingly support job creation that lasts, and youth, who inherit the greatest risk, deserve careers in industries that protect the future, not pollute it.
Other questions of fairness remain: If carbon-capture projects fail, or if methane regulations don’t deliver by 2030, what safeguards will protect Canadians? During the MOU, was there discussion of lifting Alberta’s renewable energy moratorium to diversify its economy, instead of relying mainly on fossil fuels and decades-away nuclear expansion where profit goes south of the border like in Ontario? Ontario, with induced pollution from the proposed Highway 413 and gas-generated electricity, sees pollution rising while local renewable companies remain blocked and the moratorium on offshore wind is still in place.
What we also now see, after moves like removing the Greenbelt from the Ontario curriculum, is the proposal to repeal sections of the Cap and Trade Cancellation Act so Ontario no longer has a legal obligation to establish or update specific emissions targets or produce regular progress reports. While this provincial government might have us bury our heads in the sand, it isn’t fitting with public sentiment. A 2025 survey by the insurance industry noted more than 73 per cent households are worried about being affected by climate extreme weather and more than 74 per cent worry climate change is driving up their insurance.
As we wait for government clarity, Canadians are not waiting to say yes to a safer future. We are already acting: choosing efficient homes, heat pumps, reducing waste, supporting cleaner energy, and making low-carbon choices where we can. People are also raising their voices at town halls, in letters, and with companies, insisting climate action remains rooted in science and public interest.
Climate Action Newmarket-Aurora will continue to advocate for transparency, proven technologies, immediate methane reductions, and a strong national framework for clean exports and clean growth. A resilient, competitive, low-carbon future is within reach. Climate policy must be a clear plan that builds our children’s future, not a puzzle to decode or a promise that keeps shifting back to the oil sands. Join the Power of Yes.