Even Premier Notley is behind the curve


This very good woman the premier of Alberta is caught in the crosshairs of an ugly provincial politics. Alberta has long been in the pockets of Texas oil people who see no difference in the country north of the 49th parallel. Canada to them is simply Texas north . As a result Alberta the oil rich province has suffered from abysmal economic leadership for decades. All her eggs in the petroleum basket. The government never planned for a rainy day and when the sky fell and oil prices plummeted she suddenly became a poorer province.

The bigger story is that the progressive Notley has to genuflect to the reactionary past and work out of an outmoded worldview.The economic worldview, Wall Street wisdom, has proven to be physically, soulfully and ecologically world destroying. As the Dow Jones rises more species go out of existence.The Living Planet report warns us
Populations of fish, birds, mammals, amphibians and reptiles have declined by 52% between 1970 and 2010.
Humanity’s demand on the planet is more than 50% larger than what nature can renew.
We are currently using the equivalent of 1.5 planets to support our activities – if everyone on Earth lived as the average Canadian does, we’d need 3.7 planets to support our demand.

The emerging myth of the 21st century is the ecological imperative proclaimed by environmentalists all over the world, theologians with their ears close to the earth, the air and the natural habitats. This of course has been fought by troglodytes like Stephen Harper and his oil company base. The Tar Sands with its massive footprint,humanity’s demands on nature has shamed and embarrassed Canada for far too long.The jobs created in the oil patch pale in comparison to those in conservation.

On May 12 Martin Lukacs writing in The Guardian wrote a prophetic piece.


Looking to discover the source of the destruction in Fort McMurray, Notley’s province.look to the crime scene and name the arsonists.
They’re the companies that helped turn the boreal forest into a flammable tinder-box. The same companies that have undermined attempts to rein in carbon emissions. The same companies that, by their very design, chase profits with no mind for the ecological and human consequences.

Yet in the fire’s aftermath, it has seemed impossible to name them: fossil fuel corporations. Of course they’re not the only ones who have fuelled climate change: all of us consume oil at every level of our lives. But the record is clear that we are not equally responsible: an astonishing 90 companies alone have caused two-thirds of global carbon emissions. And all the oil giants involved in the Alberta tar sands are among them: ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Total, CNRL, Chevron.


“We have loaded the dice for more extreme wildfires,” says Mike Flannigan, a wildfire scientist at the University of Alberta. “We attribute the increase in wildfires and their severity and intensity to human-caused climate change. We’ve been saying it for years. Many of us saw a Fort McMurray-like situation coming, but none of us expected anything as horrific as what has happened.”


The answer is obvious…but even Rachel Notley can not see it so captured she is by the Alberta ethos

Lukacs says what only the LEAP Manifesto boldly says : keep most fossil fuels in the ground.

Economics as the organizing earth principle is dead. The earth and sacred ecology must become our fundamental organizing principle.




  1. 1
    mushafta Says:

    And where is Stephen Harper? Nowhere to be seen!
    Now on his way to corporate America.
    Left the scene of the crime he helped create.
    So totally out of touch with all things but greed and avarice.

  2. 2
    mushafta Says:

    Says Blayne Haggart of Brock University in today’s Globe and Mail summing up the linkage between the Fort Mac fire and climate change:

    “If Mr. Kingdon’s understanding of policy change is correct, the closing of this window tells us that Canadians do not really perceive climate change as much of a threat. If we did, linking the two would not have been perceived as an insult. We (including the blameless victims of the fire) would have embraced the linkage, even in the presence of uncertainty over climate change’s exact role in the disaster.

    Why Canadians have rejected this linkage is open to debate. Regardless, this rejection strongly suggests we as a society effectively are choosing the climate-change path of least resistance and maximum damage. We are choosing to deal with the increasing number of extreme weather events as they happen, and choosing to avoid even thinking about concerted, costly efforts to halt climate change.

    So, no, I will not link the Fort McMurray fire to climate change. But I do link Canadians’ unwillingness to discuss climate change in the context of the Fort McMurray fire to our collective unwillingness to face head-on the challenge of climate change. What that portends for future generations is incredibly depressing.”

RSS Feed for this entry

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: