As Consumers Pay, Oil CEOs Refuse to Testify to Congress About Soaring Prices

"While Americans struggle with high gas prices, these companies are doing victory laps, showering their already wealthy executives and shareholders with billions in stock buybacks and bonus compensation," said one watchdog group. "They should be ashamed."


A pedestrian walks past a gas station advertising gas prices on March 25, 2022 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images)

JULIA CONLEY

COMMON DREAMS

March 29, 2022

As people across the United States face record-high gas prices—compounded by rising grocery bills and prices for other essentials—executives at three major oil companies are refusing to testify before Congress about what their firms could do to lessen the burden on U.S. households, leaving Democratic lawmakers and consumer advocates to condemn the companies for profiting amid lower and middle-class people's financial pain.

Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee, had invited the CEOs of EOG Resources Inc., Devon Energy Corp. and Occidental Petroleum Corp. to testify next week, only to be rebuffed Tuesday by the executives, who have personally profited off gas prices which averaged $4.24 per gallon on Monday.

"I invited these companies to come before the committee and make their case, but apparently they don't think it's worth defending," Grijalva said in a statement Tuesday. "Their silence tells us all we need to know—that cries for more drilling and looser regulations are nothing more than another age-old attempt to line their own pockets."

Since oil and gas prices began rising earlier this year as traveling and commuting increased, and went up further following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February, the fossil fuel industry has claimed the Biden administration should release more permits for drilling on public lands and accelerate approval of permits for building energy infrastructure, with the American Petroleum Institute pushing for what Grijalva called "a domestic drilling free-for-all" earlier this month.

Lawmakers including Grijalva have argued that the companies could easily stabilize gas prices immediately, considering the billions of dollars in profits EOG Resources, Devon Energy, and Occidental Petroleum raked in last year.

Instead, watchdog group Accountable.US said Tuesday, Occidental Petroleum planned to use $3 billion for stock buybacks in 2022, while Devon Energy gave nearly $2 billion in share buybacks and dividends to shareholders last year. EOG Resources gave CEO William R. Thomas a $150,000 raise in 2021, making his total compensation $9.8 million.

"We want to work with them to reduce gas prices, but it seems as though they're too busy taking in record profits while refusing to pass savings on to consumers," said Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.), a member of the Natural Resources Committee.

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) sarcastically expressed empathy for the "spineless" executives who refused to testify before Grijalva's committee.

"It is hardly surprising that EOG Resources, Devon Energy, and Occidental Petroleum are dodging accountability by refusing to testify in Congress," said Kyle Herrig, president of watchdog group Accountable.US. "While Americans struggle with high gas prices, these companies are doing victory laps, showering their already wealthy executives and shareholders with billions in stock buybacks and bonus compensation. They should be ashamed."

Grijalva noted that while the industry has used the Russian invasion of Ukraine to call for even more freedom to drill for oil and gas, fossil fuel companies hold leases on 26 million acres of land.

"These same companies already have over 9,000 approved permits they can use whenever they want," Grijalva told Public News Service on Tuesday. "And the very companies with thousands of acres of existing leases and hundreds of unused permits are the same ones shouting that they need more land for drilling."

According to Accountable.US, the three companies refusing to speak to Grijalva's committee "are among the top leaseholders of public lands oil and gas leases with 4,114 leases covering nearly 1.5 million acres."

Companies including BP, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, and Shell have also been invited to testify at upcoming hearings on their business practices and impacts on consumers. In February, board members from the four companies refused to testify about the firms' climate pledges.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) noted last week that oil prices dropped in recent days, but no savings were passed onto consumers.

"The bewildering incongruity between falling oil prices and rising gas prices smacks of price gouging and is deeply damaging to working Americans," Schumer said last week. "The Senate is going to get answers."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

'Possible Coverup' Alleged as Jan. 6 Logs Show 457-Minute Gap in Trump Calls

"Nixon had an 18.5-minute gap in his White House tapes," noted one watchdog group. "Trump has a 7.5-hour gap in phone logs from January 6th."

Then-President Donald Trump shushed journalists before signing legislation on June 5, 2020 in Washington, D.C. 

(Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

JAKE JOHNSON

COMMON DREAMS

March 29, 2022

Internal White House documents handed over to a House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol attack show a gap of seven hours and 37 minutes in former President Donald Trump's call logs from that day, raising suspicions that Trump allies are illegally concealing his phone records from lawmakers.

The Washington Post's Bob Woodward and CBS News' Robert Costa reported Tuesday that "the lack of an official White House notation of any calls placed to or by Trump for 457 minutes on January 6, 2021—from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m.—means the committee has no record of his phone conversations as his supporters descended on the Capitol, battled overwhelmed police, and forcibly entered the building, prompting lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence to flee for safety."

"The 11 pages of records, which consist of the president's official daily diary and the White House switchboard call logs, were turned over by the National Archives earlier this year to the House select committee investigating the January 6 attack," noted the news outlets, which obtained the documents.

Woodward and Costa continued:

The records show that Trump was active on the phone for part of the day, documenting conversations that he had with at least eight people in the morning and 11 people that evening. The seven-hour gap also stands in stark contrast to the extensive public reporting about phone conversations he had with allies during the attack, such as a call Trump made to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)—seeking to talk to Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)—and a phone conversation he had with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).

The House panel is now investigating whether Trump communicated that day through backchannels, phones of aides or personal disposable phones, known as 'burner phones,' according to two people with knowledge of the probe.

One unnamed lawmaker on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack, which is working to discern Trump's activities during the assault that he helped provoke, told the Post and CBS that the panel is probing a "possible coverup" of official White House phone records from that day.



Throughout his four-year tenure in the White House, Trump often used his personal cellphone as well as his aides' phones to speak to allies and outside advisers, bypassing official channels of communication. The former president also had a habit of tearing up schedules, memos, and other official records, a likely violation of federal law.

In a statement to the Post and CBS late Monday before their story went to press, Trump insisted that he "no idea what a burner phone is."

"To the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term," said the former president, who has attempted to obstruct the January 6 panel's investigation at every turn.

In a federal court filing earlier this month, the select committee accused Trump and his allies of engaging in "a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States" as they attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

On Monday, a federal judge argued that Trump "more likely than not" committed felony obstruction of Congress by attempting to subvert congressional certification of President Joe Biden's victory.

Hours after the federal judge's ruling, the House January 6 panel recommended that the Biden Justice Department pursue criminal contempt of Congress charges against former Trump aides Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino, both of whom have refused to comply with the committee's investigation.

"It is good that the House January 6 Committee is taking its job very seriously and moving to refer for contempt charges those who won't cooperate with subpoenas," said Noah Bookbinder, president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "Investigating an insurrection is deadly serious, and the Justice Department and all of us should be treating it so."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Federal prosecutors are zeroing in on a single Trump tweet that may have been the catalyst for right-wing extremists to join the Capitol riot

ssheth@businessinsider.com (Sonam Sheth) 



Prosecutors are looking at a December Trump tweet as a call to action for far-right extremists.

Trump urged supporters to attend the Jan. 6 rally, tweeting: "Be there, it will be wild!"

The January 6 panel is gathering evidence to prove the tweet was in part a catalyst for the riot.

Federal prosecutors are zeroing in on a December 2020 tweet from then President Donald Trump that may have been a call for far-right actors to converge on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, The New York Times reported.

"Big protest in D.C. on January 6th," Trump tweeted on December 19. It was the first time he announced the "Save America" rally, which took place at the Ellipse in Washington, DC, less than two miles from the US Capitol. "Be there, will be wild!" the tweet said.

Prosecutors believe far-right and extremist groups immediately interpreted Trump's message as a call to action for them to head to the Capitol and stop Congress from certifying Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 election that day, The Times said.

According to court filings and interview records compiled by the House Select Committee investigating the Capitol riot, multiple people associated with far-right groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys started communicating with each other on messaging apps and gathering arms and protective gear.

By The Times' accounting, prosecutors have included examples of these actions in at least five criminal cases charging extremists with an array of crimes in connection to the Capitol riot, including seditious conspiracy. And according to the report, both the Justice Department and the House select panel are gathering more evidence that shows Trump's initial December 2020 tweet announcing the rally was a "powerful catalyst" for his supporters to head to the Capitol on January 6.

A number of defendants in the Justice Department's sprawling Capitol riot probe have blamed Trump for "inspiring" and inciting the deadly siege at the Capitol.

"The boss of the country said, 'People of the country, come on down, let people know what you think,'" a defense lawyer for Proud Boys member Dominic Pezzola, who has been charged with conspiracy in connection to the riot, previously told Reuters. "The logical thinking was, 'He invited us down.'"

Earlier this month, the select committee said in a court filing that it believes Trump's efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election violated several US laws.

Specifically, the panel said that the evidence it's gathered so far suggests Trump tried to obstruct an official proceeding, conspired to defraud the United States, and engaged in common law fraud.

The legality of Trump's actions and statements leading up to and on the day of the Capitol riot has also been called into question by more than one federal judge.

On Monday, US District Judge David Carter said in a bombshell ruling that it's "likely" Trump committed felony obstruction of Congress on January 6.

"Disagreeing with the law entitled President Trump to seek a remedy in court, not to disrupt a constitutionally-mandated process," Carter wrote.

After "filing and losing more than sixty suits, this plan was a last-ditch attempt to secure the Presidency by any means," the ruling said, adding that the "illegality of the plan was obvious."

He was referring to a legally dubious plan by the conservative lawyer John Eastman, which Trump supported, that called for then Vice President Mike Pence to unilaterally reject electoral slates from battleground states that Biden won.

Trump and Eastman "launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history," Carter wrote. "Their campaign was not confined to the ivory tower — it was a coup in search of a legal theory."

US District Judge Amit Mehta also ruled in a separate case last month that Trump can be sued over the Capitol riot and engaged in a "civil conspiracy" with key supporters and far-right groups.

The word "we" being "used repeatedly in this context implies that the President and rally-goers would be acting together toward a common goal," Mehta wrote. "That is the essence of a civil conspiracy."

Insider reached out to representatives for Trump for comment.

 Donald Trump and his allies are facing a flurry of legal challenges this year. Investigations into his company's finances are ongoing, along with others related to January 6. Here are the dates to watch out for this year. Former President Donald Trump has had a number of surprising legal victories ever since he left the White House — though his greatest potential battles are still looming.In November, Summer Zervos, who had accused Trump of sexual assault following her appearance on "The Apprentice," dropped her lawsuit against him before he was forced to sit for a deposition. At around the same time, a New York state judge dismissed a lawsuit from Michael Cohen seeking to have the Trump Organization reimburse his legal fees for work he did on Trump's behalf.But greater dangers loom. The Trump Organization is the subject of a sprawling investigation from the Manhattan district attorney's office and the New York attorney general's office into alleged financial misconduct.In Atlanta, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is weighing charges over his conduct in the 2020 election. Those investigations are proceeding as the Justice Department comes up on the five-year deadline to prosecute Trump over acts of possible obstruction that former Special Counsel Robert Mueller III scrutinized as part of his investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election.Meanwhile, the Biden administration is sending a steady stream of Trump's White House records to the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. And Trump — along with many of his allies — face federal investigations and lawsuits stemming from the January 6 insurrection. Expect the judges in those cases to set court dates later this year.While Trump mulls whether to run for president again in 2024, 2022 is shaping up to be a year of legal headaches for the former president and his associates. Here's a timeline of the threats Trumpworld faces.

1/9 SLIDES © Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images; Scott Olson/Getty Images; Greg Nash-Pool/Getty Images

2022 IS SHAPING UP TO BE A LEGAL NIGHTMARE FOR TRUMPWORLD. HERE'S A TIMELINE OF UPCOMING COURT CASES AND LEGAL OBSTACLES.

Donald Trump and his allies are facing a flurry of legal challenges this year.
Investigations into his company's finances are ongoing, along with others related to January 6.

Here are the dates to watch out for this year.

Former President Donald Trump has had a number of surprising legal victories ever since he left the White House — though his greatest potential battles are still looming.

In November, Summer Zervos, who had accused Trump of sexual assault following her appearance on "The Apprentice," dropped her lawsuit against him before he was forced to sit for a deposition. At around the same time, a New York state judge dismissed a lawsuit from Michael Cohen seeking to have the Trump Organization reimburse his legal fees for work he did on Trump's behalf.

But greater dangers loom. The Trump Organization is the subject of a sprawling investigation from the Manhattan district attorney's office and the New York attorney general's office into alleged financial misconduct.

In Atlanta, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is weighing charges over his conduct in the 2020 election. Those investigations are proceeding as the Justice Department comes up on the five-year deadline to prosecute Trump over acts of possible obstruction that former Special Counsel Robert Mueller III scrutinized as part of his investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration is sending a steady stream of Trump's White House records to the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. And Trump — along with many of his allies — face federal investigations and lawsuits stemming from the January 6 insurrection. Expect the judges in those cases to set court dates later this year.

While Trump mulls whether to run for president again in 2024, 2022 is shaping up to be a year of legal headaches for the former president and his associates. Here's a timeline of the threats Trumpworld faces.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Biden Wants to Give 163 Times More to US Military Than to Global Pandemic Response

"Failing to fund the global fight against Covid-19 is a choice to extend the pandemic," said one public health expert.


President Joe Biden tours the Pfizer Kalamazoo Manufacturing Site on February 19, 2021 in Portage, Michigan. (Photo: Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

KENNY STANCIL

COMMON DREAMS

March 29, 2022

One day after President Joe Biden asked Congress to approve a record-shattering $813 billion U.S. military budget, public health advocates are lamenting that his Fiscal Year 2023 spending blueprint requests roughly 163 times less funding to help mitigate the Covid-19 pandemic on a global scale.

"Ending the pandemic is a choice."

"The defense budget request is $813 billion. By comparison, the White House has asked for just $5 billion to fight global Covid, or $22.5 billion to fight Covid in total," Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen's Access to Medicines program, said Tuesday in a statement.

"That's roughly 3% of defense spending to help end a pandemic that has taken more American lives than any war, and nearly 20 million lives worldwide so far," he added, referring to estimates of excess mortality.

Lindsay Koshgarian, director of the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, said Monday in a statement that "at $813 billion, the president's request for the Pentagon exceeds even the $782 billion budget that Congress just passed by $31 billion. The increase alone is twice the amount that Congress refused for ongoing Covid aid for antivirals, vaccines, and tests, after nearly one million Americans have died of the virus."

Earlier this month, as Common Dreams reported, Democratic congressional leaders removed $15.6 billion in coronavirus relief from a recently passed $1.5 trillion omnibus spending bill after Republican lawmakers, questioning the need for any new funding to fight the pandemic, insisted on repurposing money already allocated to state programs.

Democratic lawmakers are reportedly trying to find a way to pass a coronavirus aid package separately. In the meantime, however, the defunding of the U.S. pandemic response—which the GOP spearheaded as infections caused by an Omicron subvariant surged in Europe and Asia, sparking fears of an imminent wave at home—has led to what one physician called "the rationing of Covid-care by ability to pay."

Last week, a federal health agency tasked with covering Covid-19 testing and treatment for uninsured people in the U.S. stopped accepting claims, and those patients will now be charged $125 for a single PCR test.

On the global front, Maybarduk warned that "without emergency funding, vaccines will expire on shelves in countries where they are needed most. The extraordinary efforts of scientists, health workers, and activists worldwide to develop, manufacture, and distribute lifesaving medicine against Covid will falter for want of the least we could ask of governments."

As lawmakers discuss Biden's funding request for the domestic and international pandemic response, Maybarduk pointed out that "health experts called for $17 billion from Congress to resource the global fight," emphasizing that "$5 billion is the bare minimum needed to prevent global vaccination, testing, and emergency relief from screeching to a halt."

In a recent report documenting the harmful economic impacts of global vaccine inequity on informal workers and other vulnerable populations in low-income countries, the United Nations estimated that it would cost just $18 billion to vaccinate 70% of the world's population by mid-2022.

Public Citizen, for its part, has developed a blueprint showing how the U.S., with a $25 billion investment, could establish regional manufacturing hubs to produce eight billion lifesaving doses in less than a year.

Related Content

Rich Nations Could 'Make Enough Vaccine for the World' With Just $25 Billion: Analysis
Kenny Stancil

"Ending the pandemic is a choice," said Maybarduk. "Congress must step up and pass funds to support the White House's already-pared back request. Failing to fund the global fight against Covid-19 is a choice to extend the pandemic, to accept preventable suffering and insecurity for all, and to live with the knowledge that, deep in the time of the world's greatest need, the United States gave up."

Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, wrote Monday on social media that as elected officials race toward a trillion-dollar Pentagon budget, "this shameful spending makes the U.S. less secure." Washington, he warned, will be "more likely to engage in warfare" and "no more able to address pandemics or climate chaos."

According to Stephen Semler of the Security Policy Reform Institute, Biden's budget request "is tantamount to climate change denialism." Semler found that despite mentioning some version of "tackling the climate crisis" nearly a dozen times in his proposal, the president wants to spend 18 times more on the U.S. military-industrial complex—a bigger polluter than 171 countries—than he does on slashing greenhouse gas emissions.

Koshgarian, meanwhile, noted that "the U.S. military budget is already more than the next 11 countries combined, 12 times more than Russia's, and higher than at the peak of the Vietnam War or the Cold War."

"If more militarism were the key to a stable and secure world," she added, "we would already be there."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely

SEE LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

'This Is A Tipping Point': Justice Thomas Must Resign, AOC Says

If the Supreme Court justice does not step down, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez said, he should face an investigation and possible impeachment proceedings.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaks at a rally in New York City on June 5, 2021. 

(Photo: Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

JULIA CONLEY

COMMON DREAMS

March 29, 2022

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Tuesday became the latest Democratic lawmaker to demand that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas resign in the wake of new revelations that his wife, right-wing activist Ginni Thomas, pushed at least one Trump administration official to try to overturn the 2020 election.

If Thomas does not step down, said the New York Democrat, his conduct "could serve as grounds for impeachment."

Ocasio-Cortez's call came days after the Washington Post reported that Ginni Thomas exchanged more than two dozen text messages with former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows after the election, urging him to "Help This Great President stand firm" while former President Donald Trump was claiming the election results were fraudulent.

Government watchdogs and a growing number of Democratic lawmakers have argued that Thomas' actions constituted a clear conflict of interest in cases her husband has heard since the election.

As Ocasio-Cortez noted on Twitter Tuesday, Justice Thomas dissented in a ruling regarding Trump's attempt to block the congressional committee examining the January 6, 2021 insurrection from viewing White House records.

The justice has not recused himself from hearing at least 10 cases related to the 2020 election which his wife worked to overturn, according to The Hill.

Related Content

Watchdogs Say If Clarence Thomas Won't Resign, 'Congress Must Move to Impeach'

Ocasio-Cortez joined lawmakers including Reps. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) in calling on Thomas to step down. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) was the first Democrat to call for Thomas' impeachment, while Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have demanded that the judge recuse himself from all cases involving the January 6 attack on the Capitol building.

Supreme Court justices are free to decide when it is appropriate to recuse themselves from hearing and ruling in cases; Jayapal called Thomas' decision not to recuse "stunning" and "outrageous."

"Clearly the Supreme Court is in need of ethics reforms," she told Politico Tuesday.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees impeachment powers and proceedings, told Politico Tuesday that he is "very concerned" about the reports of Ginni Thomas' communications with Meadows, but said, "It's much too early to talk about" impeachment or the possibility that Congress could censure Justice Thomas.

Ocasio-Cortez, however, said inaction by Congress would send "a loud, dangerous signal to the full court."

"This is a tipping point," the congresswoman added.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely

PRESS PROGRESS COVERS COUTTS BORDER BLOCKADE 

When threats of violence began to spring up during the border blockade in Coutts, I wanted to look for voices that were being left out of the mainstream coverage from Alberta’s big media outlets.

You might remember how vehicles broke through an RCMP line and attempted to block the Canada-US border. Emboldened by its success, the blockade grew with thousands of people joining the blockade.

Police later charged 13 people at Coutts, including several people on conspiracy to murder charges following the disturbing discovery of a gun cache present at the border and materials affiliated with a far-right militia group.

One thing mostly overlooked in all of this chaos was the town at the center of it all: a sleepy community of 200 or so people, mostly seniors.

I wanted to find out how the people who call Coutts ‘home’ felt about the blockade.

So, I spoke to the residents of this small border town—they told me they were afraid of the outsiders descending on their hometown.

They told me stories about strangers coming and photographing their homes, stories about people receiving threats and senior citizens who had to pass through multiple police checkpoints just to get groceries and visit the dentist.

Coutts had suddenly become a town under heavy police presence, with checkpoints in and out, and helicopters flying overhead, full of residents who suddenly couldn’t access home care or access groceries and services.

These are real issues to the people in Coutts. I think it’s important to make sure those issues are front and centre in the public conversation about the convoy and blockades.

The only way we can keep investigating and reporting like this is if readers like you support our work. 

Support PressProgress

Oil and gas sector emissions need to be cut two-fifths by 2030, new climate plan says

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the Canadian oil industry Tuesday that it should use the massive bump in profits from the current surge in prices to fund a transition to cut their emissions.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

The federal government unveiled an emissions-reduction plan to reach its new greenhouse-gas targets by 2030. It projects the oil and gas industry needs to cut emissions 42 per cent from current levels if Canada is to meet its new goals.

Speaking at the Globe Forum sustainability conference in Vancouver, Trudeau said it is a "clear, reasonable contribution" for the sector to make and that the money is there for it to be done.

"With record profits, this is the moment for the oil and gas sector to invest in the sustainable future that will be good for business, good for communities and good for our future," Trudeau said.

"Big oil lobbyists have had their time on the field. Now, it's over to the workers and engineers who will build solutions."

The plan uses economic and emissions modelling to gauge the most affordable and feasible projects when it comes to Canada's target to cut emissions by 2030 to no more than 60 per cent of what they were in 2005.

In 2019, Canada produced 730 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide.

Canada needs to get to between 407 million tonnes and 443 million tonnes to hit the current target.

Since 2005, oil and gas emissions have increased 20 per cent to 191 million tonnes. The new plan wants them to fall to 110 million tonnes by 2030. They haven't been that low in more than three decades.

Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault insists this is not the cap on oil and gas emissions the Liberals promised as part of the fall election platform. It is a projection of what the government believes is possible, and will inform but not dictate the final cap that will be legislated or imposed through regulation after it is set.

Several environment organizations say Canada's overall target is still not ambitious enough and that the oil and gas sector isn't pulling its weight.

If the sector cut its emissions to 40 to 45 per cent of what they were in 2005, their target would be 88 to 96 million tonnes, not 110 million tonnes.

"Tackling climate change must be a team effort, but the plan released today shows that some players are still sitting on the bench," said Caroline Brouillette, national policy manager at the Climate Action Network — Canada.

Atiya Jaffar, Canada digital manager with 350.org, said the plan doesn't keep up with the science and the fossil-fuel target is "appallingly low and nowhere close to the fossil fuel industry's fair share."

Kendell Dilling, interim director of the Oil Sands Pathways to Net Zero Alliance of the six biggest oilsands companies in Canada, said the plan is "an ambitious challenge" for the sector and the companies are reviewing it to see how it lines up against their current plans.

"Although there are differences between the ERP and our plan, it’s clear we agree on the need to reduce emissions significantly by 2030 and that collaboration is essential for us to meet our goals," she said.

Conservative environment critic Kyle Seeback said he is "deeply concerned" about the economic impact of the plan, and said the Liberals can't be trusted to actually implement it.

"I don't think they're going to meet these targets, because they don't have a track record where they meet any targets," he said. "What we do know is that the cost of some of the things that they've put in this plan are going to be economically disastrous for Canadians."

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said the plan is not ambitious enough and is too focused on aid to the fossil fuel sector.

"When will this Liberal government respond to the crisis of the climate crisis with the urgency that it deserves?" he asked in question period.

The plan includes $9 billion in new spending mostly to expand existing climate action grant and loan programs, including another $1.7 billion for electric vehicle rebates. More details on the new spending are expected in the next federal budget when it is tabled later this spring.

The plan also promises a tougher schedule to shift Canadian vehicle sales to electric models, mandating one in five new passenger vehicles be battery-operated by 2026, 60 per cent by 2030 and 100 per cent by 2035.

The current target set just last May says half of all new vehicles sold must be electric by 2030, and 100 per cent by 2035.

Guilbeault said it will take a little longer for transport to catch up to other sectors on cutting emissions. Transportation accounts for one-quarter of all emissions, and its carbon footprint has increased 16 per cent in the last 17 years.

The report says by 2030 the sector should be able to cut emissions 23 per cent from current levels.

"We are making some progress between now and 2030," Guilbeault said. "But there'll be even more progress to come between 2030 and 2035."

The government will also aim for one-third of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles sold to be electric by 2030 and 100 per cent by 2040.

The report forecasts that emissions from waste, including landfills, can be cut by 43 per cent by 2030, electricity by 77 per cent, heavy industry by 32 per cent, and emissions from buildings by 42 per cent.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 29, 2022.

Mia Rabson, The Canadian Press

Frank Stronach: Too many university grads, not enough tradespeople in Canada

Special to National Post 11 hrs ago

For the past several decades, we’ve been producing far too many social scientists and too few plumbers and electricians. A lot of teenagers nowadays can’t even drive a nail into a two-by-four or change a flat tire on a car. The plain truth is, as a society we haven’t done a very good job of preparing young Canadians for good-paying careers in the skilled trades.

© Provided by National Post File: 

Not enough young people know how to hammer a nail or change a flat tire, argues Frank Stronach.

Even though our economy is becoming increasingly digital, we will still need people to build machines and houses and cars. And a lot of those jobs will require people with skilled technical trades. But unless we start teaching those skilled trades to young Canadians at an early age, we won’t have enough people here in this country to make and build things, and once we lose that know-how, our standard of living will drop significantly.

When I was 14 years old, my mother took me by the hand, marched me down to the factory where she worked, and asked the foreman to put me into a trade apprenticeship program. I became a toolmaker, which is sometimes referred to as the second oldest profession in the world. Toolmakers create precision tools that are used to cut, shape, and form metal and other materials like plastic. Every product we use, every appliance, the phone or laptop you’re reading this column on, and even the plastic clip on a dollar-store pen — all were made with a tool, and behind every tool was a toolmaker. The practical skills I learned as a toolmaker — as well as critical complementary skills such as precision and perseverance — became the foundation of my future success in business.

Still to this day, European students who do not plan to study in university begin apprenticing in various trade programs at fourteen years of age. And while 14 may be considered too young by North American standards, I believe that when a student reaches the age of 16, they should be exposed to one or more various technical trades or industry-related jobs in high school.

Under my proposal, students between the ages of 16 and 18 would spend two years learning various trades at businesses and factories and restaurants outside school. Students would be exposed to four different trades over two years — with training in careers such as plumbing, bricklaying, carpentry, metalworking, farming, culinary arts and health care — and students would spend approximately six months in each trade.

The government would pay the student apprentices a stipend to cover meal costs and transportation expenses. And businesses that take on student apprentices would be entitled to a tax write-off as an incentive for participating in the trade apprenticeship program. This sort of exposure would give students some practical, hands-on experience and allow them to explore various career interests, test their skills and discover what they really love to do and what they are good at doing. Adopting this approach would help create a feeder system to provide the skilled technicians and trades people our country needs — everything from carpenters and chefs to robotics technicians.

As a country, we need to urgently develop our skills base. If we no longer have the skilled workers and capability to manufacture products, then businesses will be forced to look elsewhere by relocating manufacturing or farming out skilled production to other countries in eastern Europe and Asia. Take my own trade of toolmaking as one example: many toolmakers are now quickly approaching retirement, and there aren’t enough toolmakers coming up through the ranks to replace them. Years ago, when I first started out in business, most of the toolmakers I hired were European immigrants like myself, but that source of skilled trades has also dried up.

The great problem we face is that we have drifted away from a real economy, where we manufacture products, to a predominantly financial economy built on financial transactions and the transfer of financial assets. However, a strong and vibrant manufacturing sector — and the technology base it rests on — is vital to our economic health and our standard of living.

I believe we’ve already reached a tipping point and are entering a new era in which blue-collar workers — people who can build and fix things — will make more money than white-collar workers in paper-shuffling office jobs. That wage gap will only get larger in the years ahead due to the growing shortage of skilled tradespeople.

A skilled trade was my ticket to success here in Canada, the country I immigrated to in 1954. In the years ahead, I believe that high-paying skilled trades jobs will open up the doors of opportunity, career satisfaction and wealth for many more Canadians.

But we need to begin teaching them these skills before it’s too late and our dwindling expertise and know-how have vanished.

Frank Stronach is the founder of Magna International Inc., one of Canada’s largest global companies, and an inductee in the Automotive Hall of Fame. He can reached at fstronachpost@gmail.com

I AGREE

 MY FATHER IN LAW DID HIS PHD IN EDUCATION COMPARING HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION IN EDMONTON, GERMANY AND JAPAN WHERE TRADES SCHOOLS EXIST HE CAME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION AS FRANK. AND THAT WAS IN THE EIGHTIES!

WHAT OCCURED IN OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM WAS THE DUMBING DOWN OF THE TRADES , A PLUMBER I KNEW WAS ALSO A DRAMATIST, WHEN I WORKED AT THE TRADES SCHOOL WP WAGNER, AS A CUSTODIAN, BY THE EIGHTIES THE SCHOOL HAD MORE COMICS IN THE LIBRARY AND NO HP LOVECRAFT.  

TWO OF MY COUSINS GRADUATED FROM THE SCHOOL AS TRADES APPRENTICES EVENTUALLY BECOMING JOURNEYMEN.

OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM BEGAN PUMPING OUT GENERAL DIPLOMA STUDENTS (60% OF GRADUATES HAVE NO PROSPECTS POST HIGH SCHOOL) AND  THOSE DESTINED FOR POST SECONDARY EDUCATION (40%) THAT IS UNIVERSITY.

SO FOR THE PAST FIFTY YEARS WE HAVE HAD A FAILURE IN TRADES EDUCATION AND A FAILURE TO INTERGRATE TRADES AND UNIVERSITY.

EVERY PLUMBER A DRAMATURGE

Former Alberta medical examiner's wrongful dismissal lawsuit against province heading to trial

Jonny Wakefield 

EDMONTON JOURNAL

A wrongful dismissal lawsuit filed by Alberta’s former chief medical examiner is set to head to trial later this week after a COVID-related delay.

© Provided by Edmonton Journal Dr. Anny Sauvageau, former Chief Medical Examiner, at a 2014 roundtable debate on Alberta's child death review system for kids in provincial care. Sauvageau later sued the province after her contract was not renewed, alleging the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner had been exposed to political interference.

Dr. Anny Sauvageau sued the Government of Alberta and five senior officials including ex-Progressive Conservative justice minister Jonathan Denis in February 2015, claiming the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) had been subjected to political interference.

Sauvageau’s initial $5-million claim alleged government meddling in the OCME’s body-viewing policies, death review procedures and contracting and staffing decisions. She claimed that her contract was not renewed in late 2014 “in direct retaliation and retribution for the concerns (she) raised about political interference.”

After years of legal back and forth, Sauvageau’s lawsuit was set to begin a civil trial before Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Doreen Sulyma Monday.

Instead, the case was delayed due to an undisclosed COVID issue, Sauvageau’s lawyer confirmed. It will now begin April 1.

Sauvageau initially sought $5.15 million in lost wages and damages, upping the total to $7.5 million in 2017. Allegations from her lawsuit — which no longer names Denis or the other officials as defendants — have not been proven in court.

Sauvageau claims she was pressured to approve amended body transportation contracts to benefit the Alberta Funeral Services Association in an effort to shore up the “rural vote,” which she said would cost an extra $3 million over the three-year term of the contract.

Sauvageau alleges she was ignored when she raised the issue with the premier, the late Jim Prentice, in 2014.

Sauvageau also claimed that when she was hired, she had been led to believe she could remain with OCME for the remainder of her career.

At the time of the lawsuit, the government said Sauvageau’s contract expired Dec. 31, 2014, and that “no government contractor is entitled to an automatic renewal.”

The defendants later sought to have her lawsuit deemed vexatious , claiming in a statement of defence that Sauvageau was “obstructionist, confrontational, and disrespectful” during her tenure.

That allegation also remains unproven.

Sauvageau became Alberta’s top forensic pathologist in July 2011. The OCME experienced considerable turnover at the top following her departure.

Sauvageau’s successor, Dr. Jeffrey Gofton, resigned after 18 months. Dr. Elizabeth Brooks-Lim later took the role but resigned in January 2020 citing “personal” reasons.

Alberta’s current chief medical examiner is Dr. Thambirajah Balachandra.

Allan Garber is representing Sauvageau at trial, while the lawyer for the respondents is Craig Neuman.

jwakefield@postmedia.com

twitter.com/jonnywakefield

(Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect that the claim against individual government officials has been discontinued.)

More RCMP sent to bolster international court war crimes investigation of Russia

OTTAWA — Canada is sending additional RCMP officers to assist the International Criminal Court investigation into possible war crimes by Russia in its invasion of Ukraine.

\

© Provided by The Canadian Press

Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino said Tuesday the "war machine" of President Vladimir Putin is destroying houses, hospitals and schools.

Canada was one of several dozen countries to refer the Ukraine situation to the prosecutor's office of the court. Mendicino said Canada was sending the additional police resources at the request of the prosecutor's office.

Mendicino said they have "the skills and the expertise to help collect evidence and to marshal a case to bring charges on war crimes or crimes against humanity in a subsequent prosecution." The investigation is part of an effort to hold Putin to account for an illegal and egregious invasion, he added.

"And part of the exercise of holding him accountable is ensuring that we preserve the record that we collect, the evidence of what has happened and what is continuing to happen in Ukraine and doing that in real time."

The move comes as negotiators from Russia and Ukraine met Tuesday in Turkey in an attempt to end the invasion that began on Feb. 24, forcing 10 million Ukrainians from their homes, including 3.8 million that have fled the country.

Ukraine has proposed that it would remain a neutral country, but its security would be guaranteed by a group of countries in a fashion similar to NATO's Article 5, which specifies that an attack on one is an attack on all.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Trudeau said Tuesday he discussed those issues in a phone call a day earlier with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but he brushed aside a question about his view of the Ukrainian position and whether Canada had a role to play as a security guarantor for Ukraine.

"The bottom line is Canada will continue to be there to support Ukraine and stand against Russia every step of the way. We're in talks with allies and partners in NATO and elsewhere about how the best path forward is on that," he said.

Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly also deflected questions about the Canadian role in the ceasefire talks after speaking Tuesday with her Ukrainian counterpart, Dmytro Kuleba.

She said the Canadian efforts are focused on strengthening Ukraine's position at the bargaining table by providing its forces with more weapons and by imposing more sanctions.

Video: RCMP to support ICC probe into Russian war crimes, launch own investigation: Trudeau (Global News)

"More sanctions are coming, and also more lethal and non-lethal aid," Joly said.

"This is reinforcing Ukraine at the table of negotiations and our goal is to make sure that they're in a strong position as they're fighting for their freedom and at the same time as diplomacy is continuing."

In a tweet about his conversation with Joly, Kuleba said he believes Canada's support for his country "remains ironclad. We agreed on the need to further strengthen Ukraine's defence capabilities, apply more severe sanctions on Russia."

Defence Minister Anita Anand said she spoke Tuesday with U.S. Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin to co-ordinate efforts on providing "comprehensive military assistance" to Ukraine, her office said in a statement.

In a speech earlier in the day in Vancouver, Trudeau said nothing short of a full withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine is required to find a resolution.

"People ask me how this will end. I can tell you, that's not what Ukrainians are asking. They're talking about how this must end: a full withdrawal of Russian troops, and peace, democracy, freedom and sovereignty restored."

Trudeau said Canada and its allies would remain steadfast in their support of Ukraine by continuing to provide military, economic and humanitarian aid, as well as safe haven for civilians fleeing the country.

"We must remain resolved to punish this criminal invasion with catastrophic sanctions on Putin and his inner circle to make them pay, for as long as it takes. If Putin thinks we don’t have the staying power to see this through, he is dead wrong," said Trudeau.

He also said there will be challenges and pain for democratic countries such as Canada as the war in Ukraine leads to higher food and energy prices.

"But others in the world may face outright shortages and famine. While Ukrainians themselves fight for their lives and pay with their lives."

Russia, meanwhile, has announced it will significantly scale back its military operations near Kyiv and the northern city of Chernihiv to build trust during the talks after several unsuccessful rounds. The United States and other allies greeted that news with skepticism.

The apparent show of good faith by Russia comes after its advance on the Ukrainian capital has effectively stalled in the face of a military resistance that has exceed the expectations of both the country's invaders and its Western allies.

On Twitter, Lesia Vasylenko, a Ukrainian MP, said air raid sirens were sounding across western Ukraine on Tuesday evening.

"This is #putin retreating to the East for you … the sound of war is loud and clear," she wrote.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 29, 2022.

Mike Blanchfield, The Canadian Press