The post Green Party of Canada warns Billy Bishop expansion could be next under Ottawa’s bulldozer politics appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I love this Sunday – Palm Sunday. I hear from many readers that my religious references are barely tolerated, NOT their cup of tea. Still, please let me share why it is a jubilant historic event. The local people rushing forward with cloaks and palms to cover the dusty path to Jerusalem, were not acting with religious fervour. This was a political demonstration against the occupying force. Every palm frond was a protest sign. The crowd was massing against an occupying force. The story’s arc is a cautionary tale. The crowds that praised the non-violent rebel leader on Sunday had turned against him by Friday — an angry mob calling for the release of a common criminal and death to Jesus. I always suspect an organizing hand, like a rent a crowd used today by dictators to bus in their supporters. 2,000 years ago, they overcame the village square intimidated those too frightened to shout in support. Well, that is a longer story, but the nature of that celebration and of the cries of Hosanna at Palm Sunday service never fail to lift my spirits.

My 2018 trip to Jerusalem was part of my work as co-chair of the Canada-Palestinian Parliamentary Friendship Group. I paid my own way, but the Palestinian Authority organized the trip and helped enormously. The Canadian permanent mission in Ramallah was also hugely helpful. We were 18 MPs from every party in parliament. We toured the West Bank – Bethlehem, Hebron, Ramallah, Jerusalem and many refugee camps along the way. Even then, eight years ago, the Canadian government thought Gaza was too dangerous and did not allow us to go there. The situation for Palestinians was unbearable then. I worry that the international agreement that respects Jerusalem’s special status as shared among the three theistic religions with sacred ties there- Judaism, Islam and Christianity, but even in 2018 it was clear Israeli so-called “settlers” (whom I observed to be well armed and menacing thugs) were determined to kick other religions out of Jerusalem, and do violence to the Palestinians. It is so much worse now.

This week I participated in a press conference with the Canadians preparing the next flotilla to try to deliver aid to Gaza. We must not lose sight of the threat to Palestinian civilians as the weak cease fire frays and humanitarian supplies continue to be blocked.

I attend church this morning far from home, in Hamilton, Ontario. I am here for the JUNOs! Political work is weird and, to stay relevant in the media frame, I try to attend major national events where other party leaders are likely to be! I am very excited to see (and maybe meet) Joni Mitchell, receiving a lifetime achievement award. “Big Yellow Taxi” has been the anthem of the environmental movement! It came out in 1970, the year I always mark as the beginning of my firm commitment to environmental work. I was in Grade 10 and organized for that first Earth Day, April 22, 1970 in my high school.

By the way, our local Green association (The Green SGI EDA that puts out this letter- an all volunteer effort every week!) has organized handing out reusable, organic cloth bags to give out at local grocery stores with reminders to Reduce, Re-use Recycle, and REJECT. Reject plastic and excess packaging! Buy local. It will be a fun activity next month on Saturday April 25^th.

Yesterday in Toronto I attended a great rally at Queens Park denouncing multiple anti-democratic and anti-environmental actions by the Doug Ford Ontario government. Organized to align with US demonstrations against Trump – No Kings – there were demonstrations across Ontario, and a few elsewhere in Canada. The anti-Ford rally focused quite a lot on a recent outrage. In a huge affront to the City of Toronto municipal government, Ford proclaimed that he can take over the Toronto Island airport, expand it to long runways to allow jets to land in the downtown. The federal government has the power to stop this mad scheme. Ford says Carney is on board. So far no federal Liberal MP has contradicted that claim. It may give an unexpected boost to the Green candidates in the upcoming by-elections in Scarborough Southwest (Pooja Malhotra) and University Rosedale (Andrew Massey).

This week in Parliament I was glad I had the chance to speak and explain why I was voting against the so-called “anti-hate” bill, C-9. I fear it will lead to police over-reach in shutting down non-violent protests and citizen assembly. But it, of course, sailed through. Explaining why I hate the “anti-hate” bill, here is my C-9 Speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqbkzi1Qsjo

I also was lucky to secure a 60-second speaking opportunity on March 24 – David Suzuki’s 90^th birthday to mark the occasion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM5MYXJe4Nc

And here is my attempt to slow down the bulldozed cyber security bill – C-8… as ever, moments after I spoke it was pushed through “on division” without a vote. Speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMVqdmnd5ao 

As all of you know, with all the challenges in Canada, the turmoil globally, the reckless and dangerous actions of Trump and Netanyahu continue to shock the conscience of the world. Canada can and must do more. This week the prime minister announced more support for military spending and even suggested we might be involved in opening up the Strait of Hormuz. Please let our government know how we feel about our obligation to do more work for peace, relying on diplomacy and international law. We have to try!

With love and thanks,

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #312 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Last night I spoke to the Centre for Peace in Vancouver, co-housed with the Canadian Memorial United Church. I chose the need for peace-building as my theme. As Canadians we take pride in our historic role as a peace-builder and peace maker. This record is increasingly one of a different era, that of Lester B Pearson and his role, before being our prime minister. Back in 1956, Louis Saint Laurent was prime minister and Lester B Pearson his Secretary of State for External Affairs. Yet, from that relatively lowly spot in world affairs, Pearson defused a dangerous global conflict. Nasser of Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, a major shipping route (echoing today’s dispute over the Strait of Hormuz). Nasser was reacting to the UK and French governments’ decision to renege on the promised financing of the Aswan dam.. Despite Nasser’s offer to compensate those British and French private interests, owners of the canal, the UK did not trust Nasser, neither did France. A military campaign to re-take the canal was launched by Israel, invading the Sinai Peninsula, while the UK and France launched their own campaigns. Both the USA and USSR were concerned about the conflict. Into this mix came our steady, mild-mannered Canadian. Pearson, the diplomat, went to the United Nations and quietly and steadily built a coalition of nations keen to resolve the Suez Crisis. It was Pearson who found the key, creating the first-ever United Nations peace-keeping force. For this Lester B Pearson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Yet here we are over 70 years later, standing on the sidelines at best, supporting Trump and Netanyahu, at least tacitly, at worst.

As I defend the United Nations Charter and the paramount importance of the United Nations in our Parliament, too many MPs denounce my position, asking if we should let Iran’s tyrannical thuggery of a government continue to brutalize its people.

As ever, I call for diplomatic solutions. I plead for our government to find like-minded nations capable of crafting a multi-lateral solution. I do not believe international law has collapsed. We must use the tools we have to work for peace.

It is clear that the growing world order that buttresses transnational corporate trade is under threat. No doubt the World Trade Organization is ignored by Trump as are all of the US trade agreements. Here today, gone tomorrow. But the old motto of the World Federalist Movement “World Peace through World Law” is still our guiding star through the fog of war.

The world seems increasingly at war. It is four years since Putin did the unthinkable, launching a full scale war in Europe. Ukraine hangs on, but faces steep losses, of its infrastructure and innocent civilians. The conflicts in the Middle East have steadily worsened since the illegal attacks by Hamas on Israeli civilians, and then the predictable, brutal and illegal Israeli war on Gaza and elsewhere in the West Bank. Now all worsened by the February 28 attacks on Iran, by both the US and Israel, allowing a spreading war engulfing Lebanon, Gulf states, Iran and threatening Canadian forces and civilians in the region. The genocide in Darfur prosecuted by Sudan hardly merits a mention. Meanwhile Canada has drifted ever farther from our peace-making history. While the Liberals’ 2025 campaign platform committed to spending 2% of our GDP on our military to meet a target set by NATO, the 2025 budget pledged far more- 5% of total spending. And in setting out our path to prosperity, the prime minister’s statements increasingly mention three economic sectors- “being an energy super power” meaning more fossil fuels and nuclear, renewables are not mentioned, Artificial Intelligence  and the Military are centres for economic growth. .

Canada highlights those three sectors in joint statements following trade visits, such as with the UAE, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Prime Minister Carney is hardly the first prime minister to see economic growth opportunities in military spending. Back in 1997, former PM Jean Chretien committed a modest $10 million to get a seat at the table for whatever subcontracts might come to our aerospace sector from Lockheed Martin’s planned super expensive F-35 fighter jets. At the time, the Green Party noted that the F35 millions did not stem from an analysis of Canada’s Defence needs. The F35, as a single engine jet was not suitable for Canada, according to many analysts. Its high cost was a result of its capabilities to evade radar detection, to sneak up on an enemy and drop bombs before they could see us coming. We have continued putting more billions in the F35 increasing our domestic commitment to a home-grown military industrial complex. In 2019 we published our Green Plan “Mission Possible” calling for Canada to cancel the F35 bombers and buy water bombers instead.

We keep putting more money into war and preparation for war. As for climate – we move in the wrong direction. Despite a lot of talk of a national fire-fighting force to deal with “FireWeather” as John Valliant has aptly named it, the budget calls for money to lease four water bombers.

Meanwhile our role in the global arms race grows. This report from Project Ploughshares is illuminating. https://ploughshares.ca/canadas-soaring-arms-exports-what-the-2024-numbers-reveal/

“Canada is exporting weapons at some of the highest levels in its history. The latest government report, released in June, shows $2.5-billion in arms exports to countries outside the United States in 2024, including to states with troubling human rights records and those engaged in active conflicts.”

Ploughshares notes recent efforts to reduce military sales to Israel but also notes several limitations on new export authorizations to Israel …, it does not cover indirect arms transfers to Israel through the United States. A key example of this is Canadian-made components integrated into American-made F-35 combat aircraft, intended for Israel. Jenny Kwan, NDP MP for Vancouver East tried to block this loophole in her private members’ bill C233. I joined Kwan and was the official joint seconder for the bill. Despite widespread public support, the “no loop holes” bill only received 22 votes in support. It was defeated at Second Reading on March 11. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-bill-loopholes-arms-exports-9.7124756

News coverage did not give the kind of detail I think Good Sunday Morning readers might appreciate- noting how all MPs voted. The bill did not receive any votes from Conservatives or Bloc Quebecois, and obviously all Green MPs (me) plus all NDP supported it. Here is the interesting break down of Liberals who voted in favour and then 2 categories of Liberals who either “paired their vote” arranging in advance that if they were missing the vote another MP from another party also missed the vote, or who chose not to vote at all, the latter being braver than the paired vote Liberals. Liberals who voted YES took a real stand and deserve letters of thanks.

Liberals who voted “Yea” (15)

Fares Al Soud (Mississauga Centre)

Sean Casey (Charlottetown)

Michael Coteau (Scarborough—Woburn)

Nathaniel Erskine-Smith (Beaches—East York)

Greg Fergus (Hull—Aylmer)

Steven Guilbeault (Laurier—Sainte-Marie)

Lori Idlout (Nunavut)

Iqra Khalid (Mississauga—Erin Mills)

Chi Nguyen (Spadina—Harbourfront)

Aslam Rana (Hamilton Centre)

Gurbux Saini (Fleetwood—Port Kells)

Kristina Tesser Derksen (Milton East—Halton Hills South)

Patrick Weiler (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country)

Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre—Don Valley East)

Sameer Zuberi (Pierrefonds—Dollard)

Liberals who paired (2)

Wade Grant (Vancouver Quadra)

Alexandra Mendès (Brossard—Saint-Lambert)

Rechie Valdez (Mississauga—Streetsville)

Liberals who did not vote (12)

Abdelhaq Sari (Bourassa)

Ahmed Hussen (York South—Weston—Etobicoke)

Amandeep Sodhi (Brampton Centre)

Bardish Chagger (Waterloo)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) (The Speaker, so not surprising)

Karina Gould (Burlington)

Marcus Powlowski (Thunder Bay—Rainy River)

Sima Acan (Oakville West)

Sophie Chatel (Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi)

Taleeb Noormohamed (Vancouver Granville)

Tim Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)

Will Greaves (Victoria)

The Green Party is the only party embracing the core value of peace and non-violence. Putin’s attack on Ukraine posed a real challenge for the Green Parties around the world. Canadian Greens joined our colleagues in Europe and most Greens globally in supporting sending Ukraine military support for actions in self-defence. The Greens in the US left the Global Green movement over this issue. We continue to be a voice for peace and diplomacy amid the bellicose calls for more war.

As ever, all we are saying is give peace a chance.

Thanks for reading and please support the call for peace, nuclear disarmament and sanity. Go on line and support the Peace Charter: https://www.internationalpeacecharter.org/about/

Love and thanks,

Elizabeth

PS an early SAVE THE DATE! May 2, 2026 will mark the 15^th anniversary of Canada’s first elected Green, either provincially or federally! And yes it was our first win in Saanich-Gulf Islands. Join our celebration from 7-10pm May 2 at the Unitarian church on West Saanich Road. More details soon on amazing entertainers and speakers, RSVP to Saanich-Gulf Islands Greens <info@sgigreenparty.ca>

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #311 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Last Sunday, the prime minister, not unexpectedly, announced three by-elections to fill currently empty seats. Two of those vacancies are due to the prime minister’s desire to clear the decks of some Trudeau-era Cabinet ministers he wanted to move elsewhere- Chrystia Freeland to duties in Ukraine while living in the UK, and Bill Blair to High Commissioner from Canada to the UK. Only the Terrebonne by-election was due to events not driven by Carney himself. The Supreme Court of Canada nullified the results that had elected a first-time Liberal by only one vote. On April 13^th voters in University Rosedale, Scarborough Southwest, and Terrebonne will choose their next MP. Greens are off to the races. Yesterday I was with Scarborough Southwest candidate Pooja Malhotra walking gingerly up icy driveways. Pooja took one quite dramatic fall on a particularly icy patch, but in good Green fashion bounced back up proclaiming “no damage done!” We had a surprisingly good reception at the door. The new Liberal candidate had, mere hours before her appointment as Liberal federal candidate, been the Ontario NDP’s deputy leader. And in more floor crossing news, this week Carney got closer to a majority after Nunavut NDP MP Lori Idlout joined the Liberal ranks. Lori is a very dedicated Inuk woman and we are friends, but I wish she had not made that move.

Meanwhile our University Rosedale Green candidate Andrew Massey is finding Liberal voters quite angry that the federal Liberals are (apparently) supporting Doug Ford’s move to expand the Toronto Island airport. Ford wants to massively extend runways to where commercial jets can land in downtown Toronto. Former Toronto Mayor David Miller won on the issue of keeping the Toronto Island airport small. “No Jets” is a familiar urban Toronto rallying cry. Toronto area Liberal MPs are now suggesting, times have changed.

Globally Greens have done well in two recent elections. As I shared on Sunday’s March 1 letter, on February 27, the Greens of England and Wales won a decisive victory in the Manchester area by-election in Gorton and Denton. And last Sunday, the German Greens pulled off an upset win in German “car country” electing the first premiership by a German of Turkish origin. Good and inspiring news all round! As quoted from the Guardian: “Significantly, Mr Özdemir met this challenge head-on, foregrounding the economic opportunities unleashed by a confident green agenda. As he told one broadcaster: “If you unite climate action and the economy, you can find a lot of support.” His victory showcased the potential of a pragmatic programme focused on gamechanging climate investment and improving the quality and delivery of public goods, from rail networks to social housing.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/09/bitter-result-friedrich-merz-greens-baden-wurttemberg-cem-ozdemir

The three April 13^th by-elections are not likely to be the last this year. Rumours increase that Mark Carney will name North Vancouver MP Jonathan Wilkinson to a European diplomatic post.

This week my efforts to raise awareness of the routine bulldozing of dreadful bills through parliament got a tad more media notice. For the first time since Carney became Prime Minister, the Senate amended a bill. C-4 the Affordability Act had a hidden bit if weirdness in amending the Elections Act, with changes to take effect 26 years ago. The Senate amendments would have required he government to deal with privacy protections for Canadians’ information held by federal political parties within three years. Not only did the Liberals reject the Senate amendments, they were joined by the Conservatives, the Bloc and the NDP. I was the only MP to speak in favour of keeping the sensible Senate amendments. I blasted them all and asked if they were not embarrassed to be standing for a bill that had hidden sections operating a time machine. Maybe they were embarrassed. Maybe that is why not one MP asked me a single question. Within moments, the Speaker proclaimed that as debate had collapsed and no recognized party had requested a recorded vote, C-4 rejecting Senate amendments was now carried on Division. Royal Assent quickly followed.

Here is my Speech on Bill C-4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfuUYVO4UWE

In more climate backtracking, this week Mark Carney’s welcome announcement of investments in Arctic sovereignty included massive subsidies to oil and gas. Going all the way back to the efforts to develop the gas deposits of the Mackenzie Valley.. Carney’s announcement included $1,5 billion for the 800km Mackenzie Highway project, now being referred to the Major Projects Office. While $1.5 billion is stated, the true costs will be double or triple that. The big winners will be mining and fossil fuels.

Work this week also included opposing the widening war in Iran, in both my question in QP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpgVnmbb5uk and my speech in the Take Note debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBW5CjtdqcE.

And noting that March 9th marked Mark Carney’s first anniversary as prime minister, I held a press conference to provide something of a review.

Press Conference: https://www.cpac.ca/headline-politics/episode/green-party-leader-elizabeth-may-speaks-with-reporters–march-12-2026?id=5ed73856-d44d-4b76-aafb-c7bec5ca5bdc.

I am grateful for the many notes I received from readers after last week’s letter.

Please hang on to hope. There are positive glimmers to be found in the beating hearts of democracies everywhere.

love and thanks

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #310 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Likely most of you know about my Friday. Such an unusual, difficult and yet inspiring day. Friday the 13^th and not unlucky – mostly.

On Thursday, late in the afternoon, we learned the Prime Minister had invited all party leaders to join him on a flight to Tumbler Ridge to join a community vigil. So it was that Friday morning I joined Mark Carney and his wife Diana Fox Carney, Pierre Poilievre, Don Davies, and Yves Francois Blanchet on a 10-seater government plane for the five-hour flight.

I was determined not to drop the ball on my parliamentary work. I have been trying to stop – or amend, Bill C-14. A Liberal bill, it is taken right from Poilievre’s rhyming slogan “Jail not Bail.” I find it shocking that people who have not been tried or convicted of any crime would be denied bail due to this new “tough on crime” populist swing. When I went to law school, we learned that the cornerstone of British common law justice was the 1760’s maxim of Sir William Blackstone: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” It is the basis of the core principle that people are innocent until proven guilty. But C-14 would reverse the onus and put the burden of proving why they should be allowed to continue their lives until trial – keep working, caring for family, etc. – on the accused. Often the accused person is disproportionately a person of colour, indigenous and without resources to get a good lawyer. Bail and the business of speedy trials is all provincial jurisdiction, but the federal government can pass a retrograde law like this.

The only serious scheduling conflict for me in going to Tumbler Ridge was tabling my C-14 amendments at Report Stage. NDP MP and friend Lori Idlout had agreed to second my amendments. Timing was tight and the PMO was unclear how good the wi-fi would be on board. So, literally, as we taxied down the runway, I was logged into Parliament, and held my breath as all my amendments were tabled and seconded. I then had the floor and could only say, that “due to circumstance” I was forgoing my speech to urge members to pass these critical amendments. And as the plane climbed, the wi-fi cut out. At least I got the amendments on the record and knew I was slowing down any attempt by the Liberals, Conservatives and Bloc to get Bill C-14 pushed through on Friday.

Imagine my shock when hours later my staff sent me this bizarre, and in my experience, unprecedented statement from the Speaker:

Assistant Deputy Speaker (John Nater): I would like to make a brief statement for the benefit of all members. The member in whose name the report stage motion is standing is not in a position to indicate that it should be adopted. No other members have indicated that it should be either adopted or negativized. Our own practice is silent as to what to do in such a situation. However, the issue has come up in the British House of Commons. Erskine May, 25th edition, in paragraph 20.56, states the following, “When, on the question being put, no member has said either ‘aye’ or ‘no’, the Deputy Speaker has declared the question negatived”.

He then ruled all my amendments were defeated, and the big parties rushed through a vote that C-14 was carried at all stages and was now off to the Senate.

Later that day, by unanimous consent putting forward a fast-tracking of the Budget Implementation Bill, C-15. I still have a chance to try to stop erosion of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and new powers to any minister to exempt any person or corporation from any federal law, (except the criminal code). I have mentioned this in my Sunday letter before, but now we are getting some attention and push back, The C-15 amendments to exempt “entities” from federal law are amendments to the Red Tape Reduction Act. The government witnesses in committee have downplayed this outrageous extension of power to an individual cabinet member, describing it is a routine part of something, they claim is quite routine, called a “regulatory sandbox.” I have been searching in other countries for anything as broad as what C-15 asserts – “A minister may make an order under subsection (1) only if the minister is of the opinion that

• (a) the exemption is in the public interest;
• (b) the exemption would enable the testing of, among other things, a product, service, process, procedure or regulatory measure with the aim of facilitating the design, modification or administration of a regulatory regime to encourage innovation, competitiveness or economic growth;
• (c) the benefits associated with the exemption outweigh the risks…”

It turns out this “regulatory sandbox” concept comes from the UK under Tory governments and was intended to innovate in financial matters. Yet as you can see from the above excerpt, exemptions from health and environmental regulation for any product or process. And who will promote the benefits? The entity wanting to be exempt from the law. And who will bear the risks? The public that knows nothing of the pending exemption.

Finally, even the Conservatives think this is a reach too far.

As rumours swirl of a snap election, I am hoping the Liberals may be open to amending the over 600-page bill. Today is the first day on which the Prime Minister can call for the by-elections for University Rosedale, left vacant by Chrystia Freeland, and Scarborough Southwest, vacant due to Bill Blair’s appointment to be our High Commissioner to the UK. As betting and early indicators may foreshadow, if Carney calls those by-elections soon, that means a spring election is less likely. But there are no sure bets. Just a nagging sense that the Liberal desire for a majority, even with the Conservatives and Bloc supporting most of their legislative agenda, may overcome the public desire to avoid an unnecessary election.

On board for the flight to Tumbler Ridge, I knew nothing of what was transpiring unexpectedly in Parliament.

The jet was remarkably quiet and were able to talk. It would have been great to sort out C-14, C-15 and climate policy, but we talked about why we were together and what we had heard of news from Tumbler Ridge. It was clear the Prime Minister had studied the file. He knew the names and something of the background of each of those killed. We stuck to non-controversial topics. The closest we got to any discussion of policy was the problem of what to do with 24 Sussex Drive. None of my colleagues had heard Margaret Trudeau’s great line that “24 Sussex Drive is the Crown jewel in Canada’s penitentiary system.” We landed in Dawson Creek, the closest airstrip to Tumbler Ridge. From there, we were loaded into different cars, a convoy, Don Davies and Yves Francois Blanchet and I rode with some PMO staffers, with lots of RCMP, for the hour and a half drive to Tumbler Ridge,

Arriving on an inappropriately brilliantly sunny day to a town in mourning, I quickly learned that you did not even have to ask, “Would you like a hug?” The reply was always, “Tumbler Ridge is all about hugging.”

I spoke with parents and grandparents – those who lost children and those who felt the narrowest of escapes. “My grandson stayed home on Wednesday… I took my 12-year-old out of school last month or she would have been in that library with all her friends…” and some so shell-shocked it felt an intrusion to do more than wipe away my own tears.

There will be many questions and painful details to be debated, uncovered on a mobius loop of pain. Somehow this shooting – horrifically killing nine people – has touched leaders who have lost hundreds and thousands of innocents. President Zelensky sent condolences. Parents everywhere felt the brush with the fear of losing children.

After last week’s Sunday letter, one reader asked that I share this, and it feels right to do so now.

Feb. 7, 2026.  The Long Ukrainian Winter  by Timothy Snyder

Dear Friends,

Russia’s full-scale of invasion began four years ago. It began in winter, and so this winter is the fifth. And, for civilians, the worst.

The Russian war effort is struggling in the field. Territorial gains are minimal and come at huge cost. What Russia can do is launch ballistic missiles and drones at Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in order to force Ukrainians to endure the freezing cold. Russia also simply targets Ukrainian workers at their factories and Ukrainians generally in their homes.

Sadly, we in North America and Europe share some responsibility in this. The Ukrainians are fighting well enough that we do not have to fight. And so it is all too easy to accept this war, the bloodiest since 1945, as simply part of the status quo.

A year ago, during the fourth winter of the war, celebrating the opening of an underground (physically underground) school in Zaporizhzhiia, Ukraine. An underground school can operate during wartime, because the children are safe from Russian attacks. The children here had been away from physical school for five years, because of covid and then because of Russian invasion. They were very happy to be in school

And so we – the EU and the US alike – have taken far too long to cut off Russian gas and oil from world markets. The US government has stopped all military aid to Ukraine – what continues are shipments of US arms to Ukraine that are purchased by Europeans, as well as European arms shipments. Even though the Ukrainian need is great and the Europeans are paying for everything, the United States has been slow to make deliveries.

We are not sending the Ukrainians the air defense they need to protect themselves. This is one reason millions of people are in the cold, and why civilians die almost every day.

The major policy of the Trump administration has been to use the word “peace.” Peace comes when an aggressor ceases to aggress and the country that is attacked can rebuild. But Trump has been unable to muster a policy that would change Russia’s incentives. He has difficulty even presenting the war as a war, rather than as a misunderstanding about real estate; his administration issues official statements that praise Russia for its desire for peace, even as the offensives continue missiles fall. Trump has put pressure on Ukrainians, who, unlike the Russians, have to fight. For Russia, this is an ego war, a war by a dictator for his own legacy. For Ukraine, this is a war of national sovereignty and physical survival.

Fortunately, there is something that we as individuals can do. There are non-governmental organizations, in Ukraine and abroad, that support Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. There is a Ukrainian government platform, United24, that enables donations to specific areas of need. I will share a few ways that you can help. I hope that many of you will do so, thinking of this fifth winter of the war, and of the people who have no choice but to fight and to endure.

United24 is the official fundraising platform of the Ukrainian state, organized by the president’s office. Again here you can find a number of ongoing initiatives that are worthy of support. One of these is Sky Sentinel, a Ukrainian-designed system that destroys Russian drones.

Come Back Alive is a major, respected, and trusted Ukrainian NGO. They have a number of ongoing projects. One in particular helps to equip Ukrainian air defense units to follow and destroy Russian missiles and drones that have bypassed the first line of protection. They also engage in important training projects.

Help99 is an Estonian NGO (with whom I have worked with great outcomes) that delivers trucks and other gear to specific Ukrainian units. They work hard and are hands-on. If you do a bit of scrolling you can find a way to make your donation US-tax deductible

The other night I gave a lecture to help fundraise for the Canada-Ukraine Foundation. They are running programs to assist Ukrainian veterans and to provide humanitarian aid.

In the United States, Razom does important advocacy work, as well as coordinating important aid programs in Ukraine, including for Ukrainian tactical medicine. It is a US 501(c)3.

I want to acknowledge and thank all of you who have already supported the work of these institutions and who have already taken part in fundraisers where I was involved these last four years. Most recently we equipped the Ukrainian National Guard with automobiles that can jam Russian drones, enabling the rescue of the wounded. In United24 fundraisers we have enabled the Ukrainian government to purchase armored ambulances, mine-clearing robots, robots that rescue the wounded, and systems to detect Russian drones. All of this has made a difference, all of this has saved lives.

Sadly, the war continues, as does our own responsibility. Thank you for whatever you can do. Please share this message with others who might want to support Ukraine during this long winter.

https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-long-ukrainian-winter

—————————————————————————————————-

Thank you all for support in these difficult times.

Much love,

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #306 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I start writing Good Sunday Morning in my sleep. Well, not literally, but Friday night to Saturday morning, when I roll over from time to time, briefly awake, I start composing Good Sunday Morning. As John can attest, it is one of life’s great blessings and a reason I am able to work long days and keep on trucking, that I sleep like a rock, deeply and well (thank you Lord). I wake up thinking, “I’ll just double check this or that factoid online,” before I start writing Good Sunday Morning. But today, dammit, once again my memory is better than Google!

So, I will tell you the story of the misidentified Brown Spruce Longhorn beetle. I know it is true and if anyone can help me find old newspaper clippings that would be grand. But first, why I am trying to verify the mystery of the misidentified beetle!

Last week, I was contacted by Dr. Art Borkent, a retired scientist living in Salmon Arm. He is very concerned that Agriculture Canada’s cuts will have disastrous consequences. He sent me a briefing note, which I sent it to the Minister of Agriculture, the Hon. Heath MacDonald with my own letter expressing alarm. The crux of the matter is that Ag Canada is eliminating the entire group of experts in the taxonomy of Diptera (flies). Here is how Dr. Borkent set out his background: “I am an insect taxonomist who specializes in midges.” Not a sentence to ring alarm bells in the PMO.

Through Zoom, Dr. Borkent and I have become friends. Art and I agreed that the “Build Canada Strong” crowd was unlikely to think the taxonomy of Diptera was anywhere on their list of footnotes, much less priorities. Below is an excerpt from Dr. Borkent’s letter to the minister:

“Reducing bureaucracy in the federal government should not result in a loss of vital scientific capacity. A mistake has been made that must be reversed, as explained below. The Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids and Nematodes is a world-class and world-famous collection of insects that includes more than 18 million specimens…recent cuts to staffing within Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada include the scientists and their support staff working on flies (Diptera Unit). This gutting of a whole unit will leave a substantial gap in our capacity to identify flies in Canada. …What is at stake here is the continued existence of a core scientific capability: the ability to document, identify, curate, and interpret insect biodiversity in support of agriculture, biosecurity, conservation, and environmental policy. At the same time, biodiversity loss is consistently ranked among the top global risks for the coming decade, making the erosion of this capacity particularly difficult to justify.”

Art and I agreed that without an economic risk it would be hard to get government’s attention. For many years, the field of taxonomy has been losing resources, and respect. But then I remembered and started telling Art a story he had not heard. “Don’t you remember that time when…”

As a former resident of Halifax, I remember the devastation of the trees of Point Pleasant Park. For years, and if memory serves, starting in the 1990s, trees were dying in this amazing urban park. There was news coverage of Canadian Forest Service experts who said the trees were diseased, but the municipal parks workers contested that explanation. They pointed out that when trees were felled, they were healthy and solid to the core. These were healthy spruce that were dying. No sign of inner rot or disease. And still the trees died. Federal scientists outranked the men who for years had cared for the trees. Friends of Point Pleasant Park protested the plans to fell thousands of trees. As they were cut, they went to local sawmills, well out of Halifax.

It was not until a bit of serendipity that the cause of the death of Point Pleasant’s trees was discovered. A British expert in beetle taxonomy visited Ottawa. Piecing together from what can be found online of the loss of trees in Point Pleasant Park, I am guessing he visited in 1999. Our visiting expert spent time at the Ottawa Experimental Farm, repository of the vast collections of insects. In examining the collection he noted, “Ah, this one is misidentified. This is not a [whatever] beetle, this is a brown spruce longhorn beetle (Tetropium fuscum). This one is quite nasty”–or some such observation. The Brown Spruce Longhorn beetle is native to parts of Europe and Asia–not Canada. It likely arrived in the wood of a shipping container. And then the key and alarming fact, the misidentified beetle had been collected in Point Pleasant Park nearly a decade earlier! Oh dear. For the lack of an expert taxonomist, the Brown Spruce Longhorn beetle had become established in Point Pleasant Park, and at high concentrations, able to kill healthy trees. The parks woods workers were right. And those trees, with their attached beetles had been sent to other parts of Nova Scotia. Risking further infestation.

The cost is large and has never been properly calculated. Point Pleasant Park has since been hit with other disasters–Hurricane Juan in 2003 and much more recently, the invasive Emerald Ash Borer has been discovered. How many trees might have survived Hurricane Juan if established in healthy stands of strong spruce? We will never know.

The point is that science matters. We paid tribute in Parliament on Friday to one of the only MPs who was a serious scientist. I am heartbroken that my friend Kirsty Duncan has died, at only 59 years old. She was Canada’s first Minister for Science, appointed by Trudeau in 2015. As it stands, she will be the last. After the Trudeau Liberals’ re-election in 2019, Dr. Duncan was moved from Minister of Science to Minister for Sport, and science was no longer a stand-alone portfolio, merged with Industry and Innovation.

Kirsty was an amazing person, with too many talents and accomplishments for me to do justice to even listing them here. I first got to know her before either of us were in politics when she was a climate scientist working in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. She was among the number that shared in the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. She was first elected as an MP one year later.

In preparing remarks to honour her memory, I contacted some other IPCC scientists, one of whom is a regular reader of GSM: Dr. Ian Burton, Officer of the Order of Canada and one of the world’s leading experts in climate adaptation.

I made a bit of a botch of my speech in her memory. I got too emotional and messed up my timing. As the Speaker cut me off, (not her fault) I lost track of the hard stop I had at five minutes, a dear friend sitting near the Speaker, Ontario Conservative MP Scott Reid (Lanark-Frontenac) (not audible as not recognized by the speaker and was not heard on his microphone) asked the Speaker if, by unanimous consent, I could please be allowed to complete my eulogy. And all colleagues agreed. Tribute to Kirsty Duncan. I had to shorten remarks from scientists quite a bit. Thanks to friends Dr. Gordon McBean and Ian for sending tributes.

I should mention that one of this week’s major news items was that the Prime Minister has scrapped the mandate for new car sales to be EVs. In its place he is restoring the $5,000 rebate to Canadians who wish to buy EVs, and pledges to use the regulatory approach under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) to reduce pollution from all passenger vehicles through something called the CAFE standard–-corporate average fuel economy. This will apply to internal combustion engines of passenger vehicles. In a media interview, I pressed for the government to extend these standards to the bulk of the new car market–-SUVs and trucks. If they did that, without crunching the numbers, my hunch is that emissions reductions could be even better than the EV mandate. Thus far it is unclear if they will.

As a near throw-away line at the end of the press conference, the Prime Minister mentioned significantly improving Canada’s electricity grid, with details to be announced soon. That would be good news indeed. It is a long-sought goal of the Green Party and the key major project to allow Canada to move off fossil fuels, by electrifying more and using 100% renewable electricity from wind, solar, run-of-the-river hydro, tidal and geothermal. It is possible. It will not be easy nor inexpensive, but as Liberals are prepared to waste billions in subsidies to fossil fuels, carbon capture and storage (unlikely to ever make a dent in our climate challenge) and fanciful investments in small modular reactors, we need to press for a cross-country, north-south-east-west electricity grid.

Speaking of doling out billions to Big Oil in fossil fuel subsidies, on Tuesday evening, I had a debate at what is called “adjournment proceedings” or colloquially “late show.” In these debates, opposition MPs are allowed to follow up on questions from Question Period in the House – often months later. The government sends out their parliamentary secretaries for such debates.

I was following up on my question to the Minister of Finance from December 4^th. The question was simple: Now that the government has broken its budget commitment not to provide subsidies for enhanced oil recovery, how much larger is the deficit? Instead of an answer from Finance, on December 4^th, the Minister of Environment, Julie DaBrusin, rose and gave a non-answer from the Liberal pre-prepared crib sheet extolling the Canada-Alberta MOU. So, I had hoped that in the February 3^rd late show there might be a reply–if not an answer–from the ballpark of the subject matter of my question. No luck.

Instead of anyone from Finance–or Environment–this time, the Parliamentary Secretary for Housing was given the script. Once again, no answer and a pile of hooey about the great and wonderful Build Canada Strong plan. Ah well. Here is the clip (10 minutes) Late Show.

I will write more soon about the bogus claims of great reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG) to be expected from the billions we are spending on the “Pathways Project.” The Pathways Project is the key prize in the Canada-Alberta MOU, claiming to make Alberta’s bitumen carbon neutral. With promises to back up the assertion I made in the House that the only thing Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) has ever captured is government money, I will include an annex to deep and detailed analysis should you want to dive into them. You will find it in the P.S. to today’s letter.

To all who signed the petition calling for Zain Haq to be brought home—he was the the first-ever climate activist to be deported from Canada–thank you for being one of the over 4,000 people who supported his case. I presented the Petition for Zain on Friday. The government now has 45 days to respond to the petitioners’ demand that Zain be united with his Canadian born wife Sophia Papp so they can return to their home in Vancouver.

And finally, some really good news for salmon–a win in Federal Court and a reprieve from the BC Ministry of Transport! Thanks to Ecojustice for great work for wild salmon in our courts!

And lastly, deep thanks to all who have been protesting, weekly, the threat to Goldstream, with inspiring leadership from Tsartlip elder Carl Olsen. It is a “pause” not a full victory so try to join Carl in the on-going protests if you can !

From snowy and chilly Ottawa, sending love and thanks!

Elizabeth

P.S. Annex of background on CCS, with thanks to my wonderful intern Michelle Angksara for pulling these together for me!:

International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)

• There are seven CCS projects currently operating in Canada, mostly in the oil and gas sector, capturing about 0.5% of national emissions. CCS in oil and gas production does not address emissions from downstream uses of those fuels. Captured carbon is used predominantly for enhanced oil recovery to facilitate additional oil extraction. 
• CCS in the oil and gas sector is expensive—as much as CAD $200 per tonne for currently operating projects—as well as energy intensive, slow to implement, and unproven at scale, making it a poor strategy for decarbonizing oil and gas production, as evidenced by the track record of the technology in Canada and globally.
• Despite this, the federal government provides substantial support for CCS, having committed at least CAD 9.1 billion public dollars to date, alongside CAD 3.8 billion from the governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Industry is seeking further public funding.

International Energy Agency

• The report also notes that carbon capture, currently the linchpin of many firms’ transition strategies, cannot be used to maintain the status quo. If oil and natural gas consumption were to evolve as projected under today’s policy settings, limiting the temperature rise to 1.5 °C would require an entirely inconceivable 32 billion tonnes of carbon captured for utilization or storage by 2050, including 23 billion tonnes via direct air capture. Theamount of electricity needed to power these technologies would be greater than the entire world’s electricity demand today.

Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA)

• For gas companies, CCS means removing the CO2 contained in the gas field; this is known as Scope One emissions and often represents well under 10% of the total emissions associated with each gas project.
• Global energy-related CO2 emissions rose by 410 million tonnes (mt) to reach a new high of 37.4 billion tonnes in 2023. Meanwhile, after 50 years of trying, the capacity of CCS dedicated to the geological storage of CO2 was only 11.33 million tonnes per annum (mtpa), and the amount of CO2 injected was below capacity levels.
• Given that it has taken around 50 years to capture less than 10mtpa of CO2, it is going to take a heroic technical effort to meaningfully reduce the 37 billion tonnes of CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere each year, and a gargantuan sum of money to build the CCS facilities. Chevron and its Gorgon CCS partners have invested more than AU$3.2 billion in the Gorgon CCS project to bury a total of around 9.5mt of CO2, which equates to a cost of AU$336.8 to bury a tonne of CO2. Apply that to the 37 billion tonnes of CO2 of energy-related emissions each year, and the cost is in the trillions.

2025 Stanford study: “Energy, Health, and Climate Costs of Carbon-Capture and Direct-Air Capture versus 100%-Wind-Water-Solar Climate Policies in 149 Countries”

• Summary article here
• The carbon capture scenario does not produce the same energy savings and health benefits. Old, dirty combustion infrastructure is inefficient, expensive, and causes harmful air pollution. Carbon capture and direct air capture, even if deployed safely across the world, would help lower carbon emissions but would not address those secondary issues.
• The authors’ conclusion is striking. Policy promoting carbon capture as a climate solution “should be abandoned.” Even when carbon capture is powered by 100% renewable energy, they argue, there is an opportunity cost to not using that same clean energy to just replace fossil fuel generators.
  • From the article’s conclusion: “Given the speed and magnitude of changes needed for an energy transition, all-of-the-above policies promoting carbon capture (CC) and direct air capture (DAC) may, in the limit, cause millions of unnecessary air pollution deaths each year and substantial climate damage in both the short-term (by slowing the elimination of black and brown carbon, tropospheric ozone, and methane) and long-term (by slowing the elimination of CO2). As such, policies promoting CC and synthetic DAC should be abandoned.”

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #305 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I love to share good news! So, in case you missed it, a stunning climate decision was issued in the Netherlands by a Hague district court. It is one of the first to test climate obligations on a national level. Other strong climate rulings have come from international courts, such as the landmark 2024 European climate ruling and last year’s influential World Court advisory opinion. In this case, due to the colonial history of these low-lying islands, Bonaire, along with two other islands, St. Eustatius and Saba, became special Dutch municipalities in 2010, and their 20,000 residents are Dutch citizens.

The court ruled that the government of the Netherlands had not acted with sufficient urgency to cut CO2 to protect the Caribbean island of Bonaire. The court has given the government 18 months to set up a legally binding plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050. The people of Bonaire, with the support of Greenpeace, brought the court challenge.

And in other good news, public pressure has worked to reverse a business deal–the purchase of a Florida warehouse by ICE from BC billionaire Jimmy Pattison.

The news coverage of Canadian businesses dealing with ICE prompted this news release from the Green Party on Tuesday:

January 27, 2026

The Green Party of Canada urges Canada’s government to take steps to act in response to the brutal excesses of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Ottawa

Canadians from coast to coast to coast are horrified by excessive violence, including the killing of law-abiding, non-violent bystanders and protesters, U.S. citizens, and others by the U.S. force known as ICE. In recent weeks, masked federal agents have carried out aggressive operations in public spaces, resulting in the killing of Renée Nicole Good and Alex Pretti, both in Minnesota. The Green Party is also deeply concerned by reports of kidnappings, detentions, and the violent targeting of civilians, including the detention of a five-year-old child.

We recognize that the increasing violence and escalation, while deeply disturbing, is primarily outside Canadian jurisdiction. However, there are concrete things our government must do to defend the rights, life, liberty, and security of our neighbours.

The Green Party of Canada calls for the government to:

1. Immediately cancel the Safe Third Country Agreement with the U.S., which requires Canada to turn away refugee claimants if they enter Canada from the U.S. It cannot be said that the U.S. is a “safe country” for those seeking protection and refuge.
2. Issue a travel advisory for Canadians who may travel to the United States, especially given recent reports from Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN) based on warnings from the Assembly of First Nations. These warnings are that Indigenous peoples may be targeted by ICE agents who are poorly trained and more than prepared to arrest and assault people without any evidence. Indigenous people could be endangered by ICE.
3. Take action to ensure Canadian private sector enterprises are not aiding and abetting this para-military threat to public safety in the United States. Given recent reports that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has moved to obtain Canadian-made armoured vehicles built by Ontario manufacturer Roshel, Canada must not supply equipment that supports or normalizes abusive enforcement operations.

Similarly, recent B.C. news reports indicate that B.C.’s Pattison Group may be willing to sell property in its real estate holdings to be used by ICE as detention centres.

The federal government must act to stop any transfers, exports, or procurement pathways that equip ICE with the tools used to violate human rights, including weapons, real estate, and tactical gear.

Greens believe that private-sector Canadian companies cannot support or deal with ICE while it represents a threat to the peace and security of our neighbours. Just as, by law, Canadians cannot support named foreign terrorist organizations, we should explore a law to place ICE and, potentially, similar foreign law enforcement organizations with a serious record of human rights abuses on a list of entities with which Canadians must not engage.

“Canada has an out-sized role in the world—as a democracy that defends human rights and fairness. We must protect vulnerable people, not turn them away, and not profit from systems that brutalize the innocent and non-violent,” said Green Party leader Elizabeth May.

—————————————————————————–

On Wednesday, there was a remarkable protest across the street from the US Embassy in Ottawa. What made it remarkable was that it was organized by one concerned citizen. A nurse himself, and the same age as Alex Pretti, he emailed others–nurses and nurses’ unions, the Canadian Labour Congress, the local Ottawa South Green party and me, asking people to join him at noon for a vigil. Marlene Wells, director of the political hub for the Green Party phoned him to get the details for the daily news advisory of my public events. She told me, “I don’t think he has ever organized anything. I think we are going to be the only media to notice, God bless his heart, he’s just doing it.” John and I joined the group in the freezing cold and light snow. It had been a long time since I joined in singing “We Shall Overcome.” Young nursing students showed up, almost shy. And said they had never done anything like this and could not stay long. They were holding flowers and rolled up posters. I asked if I could see their posters. They were so sweet, and said, “They are not very good…” Handwritten calls for Freedom and Justice. And they came to stand in the cold. Another woman brought homemade chocolate chip cookies. And thanks to Marlene’s notice, a few reporters showed up too.

I am including this 17-minute podcast interviewing me about our calls for action, thanks to Energimedia and host Markham Hislop.

BC Green leader Emily Lowan’s call for a boycott against Pattison Group made it to CBC TV The National!

By Friday, Pattison announced the sale was off!

B.C. billionaire won’t sell an industrial building in Virginia that was proposed to become an ICE facility

It is always good news when public pressure works. In the scheme of things, this may be a small win, but a win nonetheless!

In other news this week the Prime Minister met with the premiers. Although Alberta separatists being encouraged by Trump officials to break up Canada was not a main topic of discussion among the premiers, it dominated the media coverage.

It was reported last week by BBC News that “US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has weighed in on a separatist movement in Alberta, saying the western Canadian province is a ‘natural partner for the US’.

“Alberta has a wealth of natural resources, but they won’t let them build a pipeline to the Pacific,” Bessent told an American right wing commentator in an interview on Thursday.

“I think we should let them come down into the US, and Alberta is a natural partner for the US. They have great resources. The Albertans are very independent people.”

Following that unprecedented intervention into Canadian domestic affairs by senior US government officials, it was confirmed that representatives of the “Alberta Prosperity Project” had been in touch with US government representatives, pursuing the possibility of a $500 billion line of credit for an independent Alberta.

BC Premier David Eby did not mince words, calling such efforts “treason.”

… “to go to a foreign country and to ask for assistance in breaking up Canada. There’s an old-fashioned word for that, and that word is treason,” said Eby.

That ramped up the heat in the media questions. Premier Smith did “mince” words as did the Prime Minister. Neither would criticize the Alberta separatists, but they would not criticize the Trump administration either. Smith framed her response as trusting in the US government to respect Canadian sovereignty. And Carney completely agreed with Premier Smith. Very good Boy Scout responses. But this is still the bully Carney called out in Davos. After calling our Prime Minister “Governor Carney”, draping the US flag over Canada in his social media graphics, I really doubt we can count on the US to respect Canada’s sovereignty. It is certainly a good example of the winning entry when, years ago, CBC Morningside and Peter Gzowski asked us to complete the phrase “as Canadian as…” And the winner was “as Canadian as possible under the circumstances.”

As to whether the word “treason” is appropriate,

The Criminal Code,

s 46, 2) defines treason as “Every one commits treason who, in Canada,

• (a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
• (b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
• (c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
• (d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
• (e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.

So, clearly going to Washington to beg for billions to break up the country is not Criminal Code treason.

On the other hand, it is certainly anti-Canadian, treacherous and to be condemned. But whose example were they following?

It surprises me that no one in the media has raised Danielle Smith’s conduct in going to Mar-a-Lago to kiss the Emperor’s ring before his inauguration. As documented in this CBC story, while the rest of us, federal party leaders across party lines, had signed up for “Team Canada,” Premier Smith visited Trump to try to cut a better deal for Alberta, and the devil take the hindmost for the other provinces.

In these circumstances, I think it unwise, as Danielle Smith says, to demonize any element within Alberta. But that does not apply to tempering our language toward the Trump administration. Imagine if in the Quebec referendum debate, separatists had been encouraged by the French government. Canada’s prime minister would have rightly denounced foreign interference.

The 1967 breach of protocol by Charles deGaulle when he proclaimed “Vive le Quebec Libre” in Montreal was immediately and strenuously rebuked by prime minister Lester B. Pearson.

The Quebec separation referendum was nearly 40 years later, in 1995. But imagine such a breach when the prospect of a separation referendum was live and current, as it is now, with an Alberta petition campaign underway. A senior Trump official is suggesting Alberta would be a great part of the US! It deserves a much stronger response from Canada. We can ignore the Alberta Prosperity folks and work harder to make the case that “My Canada includes Alberta” just as we did across Canada that Canada loves Quebec. Where are voices of Alberta MPs in response to this very real threat?

Danielle Smith may not be a separatist, but she sure is playing footsie with them. She reminds me of hapless former UK prime minister David Cameron. He thought he could mollify the small anti-EU fringe within his party by promising a referendum. He was confident, based on the polling, that the UK would stay within the EU. We all know what happened. The forces for Brexit were ground zero for the use of social media and algorithms to drive a campaign of disinformation and lies that misled UK voters into voting for Brexit.

Two films help us remember and learn from that history.

Netflix produced a great film, part documentary and satirical dramatic re-creation, with Benedict Cumberbatch as chief architect Dominic Cummings–Brexit:The Uncivil War.

it is no longer on Netflix, but is so good, I found it on YouTube for you.

And then there is a broader look across many countries–pure documentary–Netflix’s The Great Hack. It is well worth watching. Educational and terrifying.

We need to be informed and demand that any and all elections–including referendums at the provincial level–have strong controls against foreign interference and on-line manipulation. This is not a moment to look away, cross our fingers, and hope everything in Alberta just works out fine.

As I leave you to face tomorrow and Groundhog Day, I have included some links to my work this week in Ottawa.

Have a great week! Many thanks for all you do, in all the ways, big and small, to stand up for what’s right, for Canada and for the planet where we live!

Love,

Elizabeth

Here’s a summary of my work in Parliament this week:

January 26 Press Conference:

Speech on Canada-Indonesia trade deal, C-18:

Question about laying off emergency oil spill response workers in Question Period:

And sharing a brilliant new ad from the UK Greens, Enjoy!

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #304 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The cross Canada train trip was fantastic – as ever. One of the things about train travel is that you meet so many people and talk about things with people you would never have met otherwise. On our trip we met tourists from New Zealand, Australia, Austria, the UK, Japan and from all over Canada and the United States. For the first time in my travels, every American we met started by apologizing, making sure they let every Canadian they met on Via Rail know that they were appalled by the US President. One visitor from Chicago, a bit older than me, has been working with a group, a movement I had not heard of before. She goes out in the street with her cell phone camera to monitor ICE activities. I thought her very brave. And now I do know the name of the group – Indivisible Movement.

I am so shaken by the murder of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis. At least one newscast I heard mentioned Indivisible, a legal and non-violent group. It relies on using rights under the US Constitution. And if I knew how to contact the lovely Chicago senior on the train I would urge her to stop being brave. It is too dangerous. An ICE agent has killed a 37 year old mother, an American citizen, whose last words were “I am not mad at you” to the man who then killed her. As George Floyd’s last words in that same city were “I can’t breathe.” Against the odds, the police who killed George Floyd were arrested, charged, tried and convicted. The White House is doing everything it can to shield the ICE agent who claimed lethal force was justified in killing Renee Nicole Good. The Minnesota government does not accept the claim by US Vice President JD Vance that the ICE agent has “absolute immunity.”

We will be seeing numerous versions of slow motion reviews of cell phone videos of Nicole Good’s murder. But it it now clear that the ICE agent who killed Renee Nicole Good had not been run over by her car as President Trump claimed. It is clear that she met no known definition of terrorist. For Canadians, the increased violence and lawlessness of police and federal officers in the US is not something we can simply ignore; No more than we can ignore the brutal Iranian regime, increasing anti-semitism or the ongoing violence in Gaza. But as neighbours, what do we do for justice in Minnesota? The basic precepts, the fundamental pillars of US democracy are under assault.

Trump is undeterred by the US Constitution. He does not wait for the US Senate to sanction military assaults, as in Venezuela. He has unilaterally pulled the US out of the Framework Convention on Climate Change, itself ratified by two-thirds of the US Senate. It remains a debate in the US as to whether he can do so legally without engaging the Senate in the process.

But claiming for the US the resources of another country is a reach too far for many. Trump says he can “run Venezuela.”

First, I want to dig into Trump’s actions and claims of the vast riches of Venezuelan oil and then to the opportunistic use of these events to try to push pipelines across British Columbia.

The first piece I want to share is from US economist, Nobel Prize recipient, Paul Krugman. What Krugman sets out is that the Chavez administration vastly inflated the value of its reserves. Somewhat like, but not identical to oil sands bitumen, Venezuela’s heavy crude is not prized. It is low value, requiring expensive steps in refining. Hence, Krugman’s title “sticky fantasy”.

The Emperor’s New Oil Wealth – The truth behind Trump’s black, sticky fantasy

Paul Krugman   Jan 07, 2026

“When George W. Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, he claimed that the goal was to establish a democratic regime. Some members of his administration may even have believed that. But many leftist critics insisted that it was all about seizing Iraq’s oil.

Although I was an outspoken opponent of that war, and deeply cynical about the Bush administration’s motives, I never believed the “war for oil” story. The principal motivation for the war, I still believe, was to wag the dog — to use a showy military victory to secure Bush’s reelection. According to some political scientists, that was a mission the war did, in fact, accomplish.

Donald Trump’s Venezuela venture is a very different story. During his triumphalist press conference after the abduction of Nicolás Maduro, Trump never used the word “democracy.” He did, however, say “oil” 27 times, declaring, “We’re going to take back the oil that, frankly, we should have taken back a long time ago.”

Even so, whatever it is we’re doing in Venezuela isn’t really a war for oil. It is, instead, a war for oil fantasies. The vast wealth Trump imagines is waiting there to be taken doesn’t exist.

…..

On Monday, Trump suggested that he might reimburse oil companies for investment in the nation he claims — with no basis in reality — to control, reimbursing them for their outlays there. That is, we’ve gone in a matter of days from big talk about huge money-making opportunities to a proposal to, in effect, subsidize oil-industry investments in Venezuela at U.S. taxpayers’ expense….

Which is not to say that nobody has profited from the abduction of Maduro. A few months ago Trumpist billionaire Paul Singer bought Citgo, the former U.S.-based arm of Venezuela’s state-run oil company. Citgo owns three Gulf Coast refineries custom-built to process Venezuelan crude, refineries that have suffered from the U.S. embargo on imports of that crude. If Trump lifts that embargo, Singer will receive a huge windfall. But this windfall will have nothing to do with reviving Venezuelan production.

Singer has made huge political donations to Trump, raising questions about how much he has influenced policy. His purchase of Citgo was also remarkably well-timed. What did he know?

At a deeper level, Trump’s apparent belief that oil in the ground is a precious asset is decades out of date.

These days oil is cheap by historical standards. …. [current prices] $62 a barrel wouldn’t be high enough to make investing in [Venezuela’s] Orinoco Belt, where the estimated breakeven is more than $80, profitable even if there were no political risks.

In short, Trump’s belief that he has captured a lucrative prize in Venezuela’s oil fields would be an unrealistic fantasy even if he really were in control of a nation that is, in practice, still controlled by the same thugs who controlled it before Maduro was abducted.”

And now to the Canadian perspective. Does Trump claiming to own Venezuela’s oil have any impact on the oil sands?

This analysis is helpful. It is pure opportunism by Alberta to claim that the situation in Venezuela means we need more pipelines in Canada:

“The United States intervention in Venezuela and seizure of the country’s president immediately raised questions about what impact American stewardship of the oil-rich nation could have on demand for Canadian bitumen.

But Werner Antweiler, an associate professor at the University of British Columbia and expert on international oil economics, argues it won’t make a new pipeline from Alberta to B.C.’s coast any more necessary, or economically viable. He called the arguments otherwise “opportunistic.” “They will find any reason to make their political case, but that is not the same as making an economic case,” Antweiler said. Shifts in the market reflect future expectations, but Antweiler says the circumstances on the ground in terms of oil production haven’t changed. That will take years and require a much larger political transformation.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith had said earlier in the week she thought the situation increases the urgency of expediting projects to diversify and expand oil exports — including a new pipeline to the West Coast, according to the Canadian Press. Smith signed a memorandum of understanding with the federal government in November to explore a possible pipeline project.

Premier David Eby opposes this push and responded to Smith’s latest comments on Tuesday by arguing that no private proponent has stepped up to pay for a pipeline, and the only way to make one happen would be with massive public subsidies. Eby called for promoting energy independence, but suggested it would be better to spend public funds to increase Canadian refining capacity. He said this could satisfy domestic and demand and be shipped abroad. “It’s something we should be talking about,” Eby said. “As opposed to shipping raw resources out as quickly as possible.” But Antweiler takes issue with this plan as well. He said Eby is “misunderstanding” how refinery economics works, and that it is a lot easier to ship crude oil than gasoline. “You build refineries to satisfy our local demand,” Antweiler said. “If the local demand isn’t there, it’s not going to pay off.

The last major Canadian refinery to come online — Canada has 17 total — was the Sturgeon facility built north of Edmonton. This was built with substantial public investment, but has turned into a financial boondoggle. Anweiler says a better option would be to upgrade the current Trans Mountain pipeline and dredge Burrard Inlet to allow more oil to be loaded onto ships, lowering costs. Eby is supportive of these types of plans. Real impact of Venezuela situation on global oil markets a long way off. The idea behind building a new pipeline is to transport oil to tidewaters more cheaply. This would diversify trade and make Alberta oil more competitive, particularly important if the market was suddenly flooded with Venezuelan oil. But Antweiler said it is unlikely Venezuela’s oil industry can ramp up production and push the price down any time soon. He said the country’s oil infrastructure has been “ruined” by years of corruption and mismanagement. Experts estimate this could require as much as $100 billion to fix.

President Donald Trump met with oil executives at the White House on Friday to try to drum up that investment, according to U.S. news outlets. But Antweiler said companies will likely be reluctant to make an investment when the next U.S. administration could lose interest. And even if that investment is made, it may be years before the gains are realized. Antweiler said Venezuela produces fewer than 1 million barrels per day, down from a peak of more than 3 million 30 years ago. “Anyone who’s suggesting you could just flip the switch and crank up the production from 1 million to 3 million barrels today, that’s completely unrealistic,” Antweiler said. This is also a small fraction of global oil production, currently about 100 million barrels per day.

Another problem facing long-term investors is that “peak oil” is likely already reached amid flattening worldwide population and decarbonization efforts in major economies such as China. “In China, every second car that is now being sold is either electric or hybrid electric,” Antweiler said. But Smith continues to push for a new pipeline. Antweiler says this is partly because Alberta has a “chip on its shoulder” that dates back to Pierre Trudeau’s National Energy Plan. ‘They want this pipeline no matter what,’ he said. ‘Even though it doesn’t make economic sense.’”

Speaking of people who seem to want a pipeline built and will grab any argument to promote it, we come to the latest arguments from our prime minister. Mark Carney was reported by anonymous Liberal MPs to be quite emotional when speaking to his caucus in defence of the MOU with Alberta. He urged his caucus to support the MOU, suppress objections to the pipeline, to keep Alberta in Canada; to blunt the separatist movement within Alberta.

So far, in 2026, it is hard to see how we get to the Happy part of “Happy New Year.” But we will, because we must. I am so grateful to be Canadian. I am doubly grateful to be a Canadian parliamentarian. And I feel a strong sense of responsibility to share what I learn and stand up for democracy. This little letter is one avenue. The community meetings are another.

Please use your voices, letters to the editor, etc to point out the fallacies of the unjustified notion that there is any reason to build more pipelines, much less any reason for urgency. The calls to move and move FAST are calls to ignore planning and thinking.

There is one very HAPPY bit of news to share, with a big thank you!! The Green Party succeeded in year-end fundraising and has totally paid off all debt! Finishing with a surplus going into 2026 is very encouraging! Thanks to all who chipped in!

Until next week, many thanks!! and please sign the Peace Charter petition. Tomorrow is the deadline to add your name!! So please do it now.

Love and thanks.

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #301 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post Green Party of Canada Condemns U.S. Actions in Venezuela as Violation of International Law appeared first on Elizabeth May.

2026 is off with a bang, pun intended, with Trump’s illegal assault on Venezuela.

Here is our press release from yesterday:

Green Party of Canada Condemns U.S. Actions in Venezuela as Violation of International Law

January 3, 2026

“Ottawa — The Green Party of Canada, in solidarity with the Federation of Green Parties of the Americas (FPVA), strongly condemns all military actions, including the kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro, carried out by the United States government on Venezuelan territory on January 3, 2026.

“In an increasingly destabilized world, our North Star must remain respect for international law,” said Green Party of Canada Leader Elizabeth May.

Violation of International Law

We denounce this action as a flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the fundamental principles of national sovereignty. The unilateral use of military force contravenes international law and undermines the global rules-based order.

Threat to Continental Stability

An attack against Venezuela constitutes an act of aggression that threatens the peace, security, and territorial integrity of the region as a whole.

Defence of Life Over Politics

The FPVA emphasizes that, while Green Party members in Venezuela oppose the current government, they equally reject armed intervention. The protection of life and territory must transcend partisan political differences. Violence will never be a pathway to representative democracy or respect for human rights.

Call to the Global Community

As an integral part of the Global Greens, we call for decisive action from the international community and from human rights organizations worldwide.

We urge world leaders to condemn this dangerous precedent, which sacrifices the future of coming generations and jeopardizes planetary security. In this context, Canadian Greens call on the federal government of Canada to denounce the illegal actions of the United States government.

“We can’t stand by while one man’s insatiable and violent thirst for oil makes an already perilous time in the world even less safe and even more unstable,” said Green Party of Canada Deputy Leader Mike Morrice.”

If not for the US aggression in not only deposing the Venezuelan leader but announcing Trump’s intention to “run Venezuela,” this morning’s letter would have focused on the issue of floor crossings.

Over the last month, we have had significant shifts in the relative balance between parties in the current minority Parliament. So far, two Conservative MPs have crossed the floor to join the Liberal ranks (Nova Scotian Chris D’Entremont and Ontario MP Michael Ma) while a third, Matt Jeneroux, who was in serious talks with the Liberals about crossing the floor and apparently had such disturbing threats from his party’s leader’s office that he has announced he will quit parliament altogether. Whenever he finally does leave the House, a by-election will be required in Jeneroux’s seat of Edmonton Riverbend. Matt Jeneroux is well liked across party lines. The various rumours I have heard should, like most Ottawa gossip, be taken with a grain of salt. The most credible version involve the Conservatives’ former campaign manager, senior advisor to Stephen Harper and Pierre Poilievre, Jenni Byrne. She has a well earned reputation for nasty, bare-knuckled politics. Whatever occurred has not increased affection for PP in his own caucus.

There are many hints of more defections to come. Currently, the Liberals are one MP shy of a majority.

These moves are hugely consequential for our country. With a majority, no matter whether from First Past the Post distortions or defections after the election, with 43.8% of the popular vote Mr. Carney will have 100% of the power. In Westminster parliamentary democracy there is no such thing as the “checks and balances” built in to the US Constitution after the former British colonies won the Revolutionary War of 1776 and set up a new system within a Republic. (Now, obviously, the famous checks and balances of US democracy are on the rocks).

For many reasons, I prefer our system of Westminster parliamentary democracy. One reason Canada urgently needs electoral reform is this feature of our system: Any party leader with the majority of the seats has total control over the Executive (PM and Cabinet) and Legislative (Parliament) branches of government.

In reviewing the history of floor-crossing in Westminster parliamentary democracies, perhaps none was as memorable as Winston Churchill, who famously crossed the floor twice! Churchill left the Conservatives in 1904 over free trade policy, joining the Liberals, only to return to the Tories in 1924.

He famously quipped, “Anyone can rat, but it takes a certain amount of ingenuity to re-rat.”

Not mentioned in the recent spate of news articles about floor crossings in Canadian politics, the most consequential was that of Lucien Bouchard in 1990. I will always be grateful to Lucien Bouchard as an outstanding Minister of the Environment. In fact, and I owe this personal reflection to the late NDP MP Jim Fulton, (a dear friend who went on to be the first Executive Director of the David Suzuki Foundation,) both Bouchard and Fulton were at the 1990 climate negotiations in Bergen, Norway. The Bergen climate conference was a key milestone on the way to the 1992 Earth Summit and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Bouchard was one of 34 environment ministers in attendance. He committed Canada to our first international goal – to ensure that emissions in 2000 would not exceed our 1990 levels. It was a fateful time for Bouchard to be out of the country as the Meech Lake discussions moved in a direction he believed had betrayed his old friend Brian Mulroney’s commitments to Quebec. He left the Conservative ranks, bringing four other Conservative Quebec MPs and two Quebec Liberal MPs to eventually form the Bloc Quebecois. Incredibly, within three years, the Bloc had become the Official Opposition.

There have been other stunning defections. Some created a wave of public revulsion, such as in 2006 when former Liberal member of Paul Martin’s Cabinet, David Emerson, crossed over and directly into Stephen Harper’s Cabinet.

Overwhelmingly the 80 MPs who crossed the floor over the last 25 years represented personal decisions. Whether momentarily breathtaking, like Belinda Stronach’s move from Stephen Harper to Paul Martin, or accepted as principled, as Scott Brison who shifted to the Liberals as a former Progressive Conservative. He felt his party had left him. Most of floor crossings have been one at a time, small moves; personal and individual, and non-consequential to the parliament as a whole.

That is why I think of the Bloc. Lucien Bouchard’s move shifted Canadian politics in consequential ways over decades. Not since that shift has something as profound been moved by floor crossings as those Mr Carney is engineering. I believe we will see more. They are in keeping with Mr.Carney’s style. As our first CEO prime minister he needs total control and total power. He has been acting as though he had it since the April election. If he does get a majority in the House, it is unlikely there will be another election before 2029.

Floor crossing is an unusual process. Unlike gaining approval to stand as a candidate for a particular party by winning a nomination, an MP can join another party by writing the Speaker a letter. The MP merely instructs the Speaker to list that MP as a member of party X. During trials and tribulations of Bloc leadership after the 2011 election, variously a number of Bloc MPs described themselves in their letters to the Speaker as members of “Quebec Debout” or of “Force et Democracie”. These parties did not exist under Elections Canada rules, yet they had sitting members of Parliament. The rules allow for more creativity than is generally known.

One hope is for MPs from other parties who feel betrayed by their own leadership (whether Conservative or Liberal or NDP) to either form a new progressive party, or a coalition?, or best hope, join the Greens. The benefit of joining Greens is that MPs who do so can always vote their conscience, as they feel their own constituents want. No whipped votes means more democracy.

The reality of Mark Carney’s shifting positions, aligning with Trump in anti-refugee policies and with Poilievre on climate, creates the need for a review of this Parliament, not seat by seat, but at a 40,000 foot level. Canadians voted for MPs to keep “elbows up” in dealing with Trump. Not dropping the Digital Services Tax because Trump demanded it. Nor to drop retaliatory tariffs and invite foreign corporations to benefit from lower tax rates than in the US, leaving us once, as forever, a raw resource colony for other countries.

We have 343 MPs. In theory, we are all equal. We have huge challenges as a nation. Maybe Mark Carney is the best hope for our time. I am not sure, but I am sure that working together and finding cooperative parliamentary arrangements will bring better results than trusting Goldman Sachs to figure it out for us.

And with that I leave you for this week. John and I are on board the famed train the “Canadian” heading to Vancouver. We arrive on January 8th. Until then I am working on New Year’s Resolution numero uno! Take better care of myself!! We are without wifi on board, hooray! So thanks once again to my volunteer team in sending this out.

All my love and THANKS!! To everyone who sent along a donation, we finished 2025 in good shape! Details to come, but many thanks are in order!!

love,

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #300 appeared first on Elizabeth May.