Discontent with left-wing policy is triggering massive protests all over the world

Agriculture ministers from several provinces say they’re concerned about the federal government’s plan to reduce fertilizer emissions in the name of climate change at a time when global food security is an issue.

A three-day meeting of federal, provincial, and territorial ministers concluded in Saskatoon on July 22 with Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Ontario expressing disappointment over the Liberals’ intent to impose fertilizer emissions reduction targets on Canadian farmers.

With a global food crisis looming, does Justin Trudeau really believe restricting the use of fertilizer is the right thing to do?
As Premier, I would defend Alberta farmers & use every tool at our disposal to fight these egregious federal policies.#ucpldr https://t.co/LPuUKFRaIJ pic.twitter.com/0P5czXoYE5

— Travis Toews (@TravisToewsAB) July 24, 2022

“We’re really concerned with this arbitrary goal,” said Saskatchewan Agriculture Minister David Marit in a joint statement with his counterpart in Alberta, Nate Horner. “The Trudeau government has apparently moved on from their attack on the oil and gas industry and set their sights on Saskatchewan farmers.”

According to Alberta Agriculture Minister Nate Horner, “This has been the most expensive crop anyone has put in, following a very difficult year on the prairies. The world is looking for Canada to increase production and be a solution to global food shortages. The Federal government needs to display that they understand this. They owe it to our producers.”

We can’t let this happen here. We need to stand with our Canadian farm families #cdnag #cdnpoli #agriculture pic.twitter.com/bTspkSTTB3

— John Barlow (@JohnBarlowMP) July 15, 2022

Fertilizer prices are a major input cost for already low-margin cash crop operations. A 35 per cent hike from this tariff — when combined with farmers’ already-inflated energy and gasoline bills — puts a lot of upward pressure on commodity prices.

That’s why Koeslag’s organization — along with the Grain Farmers of Ontario, the Ontario Canola Growers, the Atlantic Grains Council, Les Producteurs de Grains du Quebec, a half-dozen other farm groups from Eastern Canada and fertilizer industry representatives — called on the federal government again this week to reconsider.

Manitoba farmers are disappointed that their premier haven’t responded to Trudeau’s actions.

Please share widely pic.twitter.com/OYRbwOprqy

— Kevin Friesen (@Tobakev1) July 24, 2022

The federal government is looking to impose a requirement to reduce nitrous oxide emissions from fertilizers saying it is a greenhouse gas contributing to climate change. While the Trudeau government says they want a 30% reduction in emissions, not fertilizer, farm producer groups say that at this point, reducing nitrous oxide emissions can’t be done without reducing fertilizer use.

Today the federal government releases the first batch of 2022 carbon tax returns to Albertans, according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF).

Expecting a carbon tax rebate on your taxes this year from Trudeau?

Think again…#cdnpoli #skpoli #ScrapTheCarbonTax #Saskatoon #YXE pic.twitter.com/im8EPX0GRt

— Brad Redekopp (@BradRedekopp) March 17, 2022

Individuals and lower income families will likely benefit from the carbon tax rebates. However; the carbon taxes are potentially crippling for farmers, and other commercial operations that are forced to pay thousands into carbon taxes while trying to maintain profitability.

The carbon tax rebate is not fair for all farmers. pic.twitter.com/XvsNICAKVn

— Shelby Kramp-Neuman MP (@Shelby_Kramp) May 3, 2022

It is unfortunate to see public servants picking winners and losers in our industry and defending the redistribution of wealth inherent in the Liberal Carbon Tax.

The official declined to respond on the lack of fairness of the current rebate system.

Our farmers deserve better! pic.twitter.com/IqOECzH6mB

— Dave Epp (@DaveEppCKL) June 17, 2022

For individuals and families the CTF estimates that from 2022 to 2030, the carbon tax will cost the average household a net total of $13,041 in Alberta, $8,091 in Saskatchewan, $8,059 in Ontario, and $6,439 in Manitoba.

The first round of the quarterly-based Climate Action Incentive (CAI) rebate starts with a “double-up” payment that returns proceeds from the first two quarters of the 2022-2023 fuel charge year. Two further single-quarter payments will be released in October 2022 and January 2023.

Single adults will receive $269.50. For a couple, or in the case of a single parent, the first adult or the single parent will also receive $269.50, while the second adult in the couple or the first child of the single parent will receive $135.

Additional children under 18—starting with the second child in the case of single parents—will receive $67.50 each.

The Federal government says the incentive payments mean 80% of families will be better off financially compared to what they pay in carbon taxes.

However, the parliamentary budget officer says when the total impact of Trudeau’s carbon tax on the economy is considered, 60% of families are left worse off.

Statement in the HOC June 10, 2019: Turns out the Liberal Carbon Tax Rebate is not as advertised. Canadians are getting much less than @cathmckenna said they would. Watch my statement in the House of Commons today. #Barrie #Innisfil #cdnpoli #onpoli pic.twitter.com/9cOaznHg6N

— John Brassard (@JohnBrassardCPC) June 10, 2019

I would like to start off by questioning Miss Lucky commissioner of the RCMP. Miss Lucky Do you acknowledge and agree that the RCMP is independent of the federal government and is free to investigate without influence? Yes. Has the RCMP ever been influenced and or deterred by the federal government to investigate a criminal matter? Not to my knowledge. Is the RCMP free from any influence or direction by the federal government to lay a criminal charge?

Absolutely.

If the subject matter of an investigation, is the prime minister himself, are you concerned about any government interference or reprisal? No.

The measures that were undertaken pursuant to the scope motion that Mr. brach himself voted for, and that’s with respect to the enforcement measures.

I suggest we listen to Mr. Brock here his line of questioning not sure, but I would imagine that there was a link there.

Miss Lucky? Are you aware that today in the house during question period, the Prime Minister admitted that he did not give himself permission to accept a free vacation from a federal lobbyist competing mission.

I’m gonna have to agree with Mr. Villani to rock unless you have an explanation to provide I don’t think this is relevant to our current study, on the declaration in the state of emergency.

I respectfully disagree. The prime minister as head of government, the Prime Minister was the lead voice in the invocation of the emergencies act. He is now under a cloud of suspicion with respect to the offense of fraud. Fraud is offense of dishonesty. Dishonesty involves the matter of integrity and character.

I would just like us to give Mr. Brock an opportunity to explain things he’s comments or I’ve said are not relevant. He’s trying to make an argument to try to convince us I’m listening but he hasn’t yet caused me to change my mind. I’m gonna let him have this opportunity to continue explain thing. Are you done? Mr. Brock?

I had one final point. Okay. On the issue of integrity and character and honesty, Canadians have a right to know whether or not our head of government has been compromised because of his involvement in this particular matter. And hence, there has been an erosion of trust in the federal government to grow the nation.

I’m sorry, Mr. Brock, but thank you, Mr. Brock. I’m maintaining my decision in that. This question, this line of questioning is not relevant to our debate.