Tomorrow is the beginning of an annual grueling push to summer’s parliamentary adjournment. After an unprecedented parliamentary two week break in May, we will push through June. When I first took my seat in the House in June 2011 and every year since, as early as May and typically for all of June, parliament shifts to midnight sittings. There is a one week constituency week in May, triggered by Victoria Day. And then the last push – known by the media as “silly season” begins. Working those long hours leads to widespread crankiness and hyper partisanship. But things are different under Prime Minister Carney. I sense he does not like being in the House and does not think our work there is important. While I do not lament having more time working in Saanich-Gulf Islands, allowing one-on-one meetings with constituents, it is odd to have had two 2-week breaks in March and April as well as in May.

I do not know how the decision was reached to have a two-week pause in Ottawa-based work in Parliament in May 2026. I do know that in the last two weeks, a massive amount of sweeping changes to Canada’s regulations and legislation have been launched through discussion papers. And we had the new MOU with Alberta. Massive changes being announced in rapid fire fashion without an hour of parliamentary discussion reduces accountability and transparency. I wrote the lead government ministers on May 14 to request open briefings for MPs.

I have reported on the various government announcements to you in these letters – two big discussion documents for 30 days’ review launched May 8.

On May 14, the government released a discussion paper on improving and expanding our electricity grid.

These discussion documents suggest legislative changes to come. I expect that soon after the June 8 end of consultations, we can expect massive omnibus bills. And given what happened last June with Bill C-5, when the Liberals had a minority and were able to bulldoze through legislation without adequate study, I anticipate a similar pace with their new majority with the intent to carve SRKW protection out of the Species at Risk Act, to promote fossil fuel infrastructure expansion while relaxing environmental assessment (now known as “impact assessment”) and drive “major projects” out the door.

Also in the two week parliamentary break, and perhaps most alarming announcements for climate, was the revised MOU with Alberta on May 15.

And just days ago on May 20, the Prime Minister and BC Premier met to redress the lack of consultation with BC about new pipelines across the province.

This report from the Canadian Press was first published May 20, 2026:

Prime Minister Mark Carney and British Columbia Premier David Eby have agreed to enter negotiations on B.C.’s economic priorities and Ottawa’s role in national development projects. 

Carney met with Eby in a closed-door meeting in Vancouver Wednesday, shortly after the prime minister spoke to B.C. business leaders at a separate event where he outlined prerequisites for a possible pipeline championed by Alberta. 

At the event hosted by the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, Carney noted that the pipeline would only go ahead with the creation of the Pathways carbon capture project as well as substantial economic benefits for B.C. and “non-negotiable” consultation with First Nations. 

“One of the benefits of actually sitting down and talking about these things, as opposed to litigating about these things across federal government and provinces, is that it develops a shared understanding, a recognition of what needs to be done, an understanding of why this is the right thing to do,” Carney told the Board of Trade before entering talks with Eby. 

“And that’s where we’re moving between the two governments.” 

The Eby-Carney meeting came after Ottawa’s handling of the national development file was repeatedly criticized by the premier, who has said Alberta should not be rewarded for “bad behaviour” and that Canada cannot work if “separatist premiers” get all the attention of the federal government.

Eby said Wednesday ahead of his meeting with Carney that part of friendship is telling each other the truth, including that developing the economy must be in line with protecting the environment. 

He said that includes the moratorium on oil tanker traffic off B.C.’s north coast, that has been raised as a potential impediment to any new pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast. 

“Part of the truth for British Columbia is that development work that we’re doing, developing our economy, has to go hand in hand with environmental protection for the next generation, including the north coast tanker ban,” Eby said. 

“That is crucially important for British Columbians, protecting our pristine north coast, as well as ensuring we have that balance, and I know the prime minister shares those values too.” 

Eby has been critical of the federal government after Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith last week signed an agreement that could see pipeline construction begin next year. 

The proposed project has no agreed route or private proponent. 

Eby has urged the prime minister to focus more on projects being advanced by B.C., a point he reiterated Wednesday. 

“When I think about what I’m hoping for out of this meeting, it’s a fair share for British Columbia of federal investment that the prime minister is committed to for this country and a fair share of federal enthusiasm for the projects that we’re bringing forward,” Eby said. “And that’s why I’m glad that the prime minister and I have agreed to enter into negotiations on B.C.’s priorities going forward.” 

Carney said it’s important to build in the right way, in partnership with First Nations and with an emphasis on sustainability, and the priorities of British Columbians. 

He told the Board of Trade earlier that British Columbians should share substantial economic and financial benefits from the project and that Ottawa must consult First Nations under section 35 of the Constitution Act. 

But Carney said that while Ottawa will “adjust to what people want” based on discussions similar to the one with Eby, it is essential that a resolution is found in a timely manner on topics such as the pipeline and others. 

“Look, we’re the federal government,” he told the board of trade. “It’s a big country. There’s lots of things going on. Life’s about time management. 

“But if things get stalled here, we’re going to be spending more time elsewhere in the country because we need to move forward. We need to invest at scale in the country.” 

As Chantal Hebert noted wryly on the CBC “At Issue” panel May 21, while the Prime Minister may say he can look elsewhere, there is only one province between the Alberta tar sands and the Pacific Ocean, so the implied threat of bypassing BC to “spend more time elsewhere in the country” does not give British Columbians comfort. We have the BC NDP and Energy Minister Adrian Dix offering up expanding the Trans Mountain pipeline and using more heavily loaded and larger tankers by dredging Vancouver Harbour. The Tsleil-Waututh Nation (TWN) has not been consulted about how dredging will undermine its transformative work in ecological restoration, working in partnership with local marine conservation organization SeaChange, restoring health of Burrard inlet, and allowing traditional foods of the TWN in shellfish to be restored. 

Dredging is not innocuous behaviour. A century’s worth of industrial waste, heavy metals and pollutants will be disturbed and unleashed. And we have the Carney Liberals calling for Canada’s new “energy superpower status” to deliver more fossil fuel exports through more pipelines. 

Carney makes it sound as though insisting on the “Pathways project” is synonymous with some sort of brake on increased GHG emissions. But the carbon capture and storage technology to be used on the “Pathways project” is unproven and – globally – largely a failure. As one satirical take on CCS has it, the only thing the technology has ever captured is government money. Thanks to Australia’s Juice media for these “Honest Government” ads. The YouTube video is six years old, but the facts have not changed. Apologies for the frequent use of 4-letter words in the video, but the real obscenity is the government lies in the face of the climate crisis. 

I do like to focus on good news… and we did have some this week. It is a bit tricky to communicate. Basically, scientists now report that the disruptive impact of the quicker than expected uptake of renewable energy is improving the GHG trajectory. Of course, the push from Trump and now Canada to fossil fuel expansion can shift that trajectory to higher global average temperature rise. But here is the news: Worst-case climate scenario fades, warming does not. 

The rapid rollout of renewable energy is helping to shift emissions trends, but expected temperature rises remain high as the UN moves to tighten countries’ commitments…. a scientific paper published in April says that doomsday pathway is now less probable. 

The world is not heading toward the worst-case scenario “because we’ve actually taken political measures allowing us to move away from that,” French climate scientist Christophe Cassou told the AFP news agency.

The new assessment attributes the shift to renewable energy build-out happening faster than expected, with many governments adopting policies that have slowed projected emissions growth.

Dr. Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London, acknowledged while it is “fundamentally good news,” he urged that it “should by no means lead to complacency.”

US President Donald Trump seized on the revision to claim climate scientists had been “wrong,” fueling attacks on climate science from skeptics and politicians in both the United States and Europe.

The far-right Alternative for Germany used the new narrative to argue for a rollback of the country’s climate policies during a parliamentary debate on Wednesday.

Besides scrapping the worst-case scenario, researchers have also abandoned their most optimistic climate pathway. They warn that the world is now likely to temporarily exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming above pre-industrial levels — the threshold contained in the 2015 Paris Agreement, as a means of avoiding the worst climate impacts.

The message now is clear. As emissions have not fallen fast enough, despite years of warnings and climate pledges, the world could still warm by around 3 degrees Celsius by 2100.

In other unambiguous good news, the United Nations General Assembly has approved a nonbinding resolution reinforcing countries’ obligations to combat climate change. Canada voted in support of the resolution.

The UN body voted overwhelmingly in favour of endorsing the advisory opinion issued last year by the International Court of Justice. That ruling said countries could be violating international law if they fail to adequately protect people from dangerous planetary heating. 

“The world’s highest court has spoken. Today, the General Assembly has answered,” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a statement. “This is a powerful affirmation of international law, climate justice, science, and the responsibility of states to protect people from the escalating climate crisis.”

The US, which withdrew from the Paris Agreement under Trump, as well as petrostates Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia, opposed the measure.

It is hoped that the resolution, spearheaded by Pacific island nation Vanuatu — which is already facing rising seas and intensifying storms — will strengthen the principle that governments have a legal responsibility to cut greenhouse gas emissions. 

The approved text refers to the phaseout of subsidies for fossil fuel exploration, production and exploitation, and calls for damages to be paid by those in violation. 

Looking ahead to the coming week in parliament, I will be presenting the petition for an International Peace Charter, timed to coincide with a press conference in Victoria launching the initiative. Should you want to attend, the Victoria event will be Monday May 27, 10 AM at the Inn at Laurel Point, 680 Montreal Street. Speakers include: PriyankaKrishna KALIHARIOM, Executive Director, International Peace Charter, Miles Craig, Founder and CEO, International Peace Charter, Emily Lowan, Leader of the BC Green Party, and Frances Litman, Founder of Creatively United for the Planet.

In Ottawa on May 26 I will be presenting to an all party forum featuring experts from the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation from the University of Waterloo. Prof. Blair Feltmate with Senators and MPs from our all-party climate caucus will inform all parliamentarians of the urgency of preparing for extreme weather events.

Fortunately, I am refueled with a good dose of hope and love from the amazing Legacy event for David Suzuki’s 90th birthday celebration on Friday. I know some of you were there to join hundreds in thanking David and Tara Cullis for all their years of activism! The David Suzuki Foundation pulled off an astonishing event with speakers from Jane Fonda, Rick Hansen, to Al Gore, with significant engagement and respectful gratitude to indigenous leadership of the Musqueam Indian Band, Squamish Nation, Tsleil-Waututh Nation, Namgis and old friends from the Haida Nation I had not hugged for way too long — Diane Brown, Guujaaw and Miles Richardson… as well as a star-studded roster of musical genius from Bruce Cockburn, Sarah McLachlan, William Price, Tanya Tagaq, Danny Michel, Sam Roberts Band and so many more including Neil Young! Neil was the surprise guest…and I am amazed to be able to share from the Rolling Stone website, his performance from Friday night!! Spread the love. Time to sing protest, resilience and resistance!

Until next Sunday, keep on rocking in the free world,

Love

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #320 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

And thanks to the fairies and sprites, Queen of the May and Green Man who made yesterday’s festival of spring on Mayne Island such a joy. May Day on Mayne is an annual high point for me. As MP I have the honour – and panic! – of awarding children for best costumes and hats. I used to count on organizers for having the prizes, but the last few years I have been making them.. glueing feathers and sparkles to ribbons and such. This year – out of time – I went to the Sidney Dollarama… Oh my! Some treasures and some horrors. Some mom may never forgive me for the loud blaring horn! And for the first time my own granddaughter Lily, bedecked in butterfly wings (thank you Anne-Marie!) joined as the children gathered at the May Pole. Lily, at a year and a half, is too young to be helpful at the traditional braiding of the ribbons. But what a joy!

This week I had a wonderful visit with an author, new to our area, whose book has blown me away. We met at the annual Shoah Project of Victoria annual Holocaust remembrance service (April 12, 2026). Randi Biederman was asked to speak about the book and her journey with her late husband through archives and historical record to find any trace of his family’s history. Even the existence of his father’s three sisters was unknown to them. Nearly his entire family and much of her own were killed in the Shoah. Their search, assisted by random encounters and serendipity, led to the astonishing discovery that his father was saved by none other than Oskar Schindler. In fact her father-in-law’s name was the third name on Schindler’s list. I ordered the book through Tanner’s in Sidney – Schindler’s Listed – The Search for my Father’s Lost Gold. It is riveting.

Tuesday morning, having coffee with Randi and dear friend Susan created human rights bookends for my week.

John and I were on Salt Spring Wednesday night for the Salt Spring Forum (an astonishingly rich speakers series) to hear Alex Neve. I am honoured to have known and worked with Alex for decades. He is perhaps bast known for his leadership at Amnesty International Canada. We both attended Dalhousie Law School, and although we were in different years, that is where we first met.

You may have heard him on CBC Radio this year as he gave the 2025 Massey Lectures. And as Massey lecturers are required to do, his themes were published in advance in book form.

He closed his Fulford Hall tour de force with a quote from Eleanor Roosevelt from a speech she gave in 1958:

“Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home—so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world… Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere.”

So it has hit me full force, like a spalsh of cold water in the morning, that far too many of my Jewish friends have verbalized a horrible reality – that they no longer feel safe in Canada. As I put it in a motion to parliament in April 2024. “That the House unequivocally condemn antisemitism, and in particular reject the idea that Jewish Canadians are responsible for the actions of the State of Israel.” It was carried unanimously.

But the rise in hate is palpable against many groups within Canada – against Indigenous peoples, LGBTQ+, Muslims, but without question particularly against Jews. It is a hate that lurks beneath the surface, like the climate changed induced “zombie fires.” Beneath the surface , too ready to break out. Recent actions of the government of Israel provoke but never justify it. I found myself wondering if other strongly pro-Palestinian Canadians (like me) are also very concerned that the horrific actions of the Netanyahu government are leaving too many of us on the sidelines – allowing members of the Jewish community to feel that increased hate and a lack of allyship from friends. The words of Eleanor Roosevelt – pierced for their accuracy  “in small places, close to home..” I think I need to do more, but am uncertain as to what that might be. A small conversation among friends? A circle of discussion among Greens about how we create protection for our friends, with a loud message that it is our collective responsibility that all parts of the fabric of Canadian society – whether Sikh or Indigenous, lesbian or disabled feel safe here. Let me know if such a circle of respectful conversation would be of interest. And try to find Randi’s book and read it.

Meanwhile, as I wrote last week we were hit with a Friday consultation document on a much needed, expanded elecrticity grid. The Friday before, there were two massive proposals – reducing protection of endangered species and Indigenous rights..and this Friday a new pipeline announcement. I do feel confirmed in my realization earlier this year that our new Prime Minister, although unlike Trump in nearly every way, operates with these two Trump-like mantras – “move fast and break things” and “flood the zone.” So much is announced so fast that staying on top of it is more than most citizens can manage – ever. And as that includes most of our conventional news media, most Canadians have a very hard time being anything but relieved that we are not being ruled by a Trump or Poilievre. We are forgiven for not having the time for even asking “who is this Mark Carney- and what does he stand for?”

This is my quick analysis of the latest pro-pipeline commitment. Both the November 27, 2025 and May 15, 2026 MOUs are on the Prime Minister’s office website:

May 15, 2026

Canada and Alberta renew commitments to energy policies of the past century

OTTAWA—The Canada-Alberta agreement announced on May 15 shows a fearful lack of concern for the uncertainties and risks roiling energy markets today, and the many calls worldwide to reduce future economic risks by reducing dependence on fossil fuels. To believe that the future (2033 and beyond) demand for the world’s most expensive fossil fuel, Alberta bitumen, will make a new pipeline profitable is not only imprudent but also flies in the face of global business and political logic. The opportunity cost of forgone investments in renewables, so clearly now the energy sources of the near future, will be enormous.

The November 27, 2025 MOU between Canada and Alberta reversed the November 4, 2025 budget commitment that using Carbon Capture and Storage projects (CCS) to increase oil production (“enhanced oil recovery”) would not be eligible for Investment Tax Credits. That reversal led directly to the resignation on principle of former Minister of Environment and Climate Change, the Hon. Steven Guilbeault.

The fiscal update of April 28, 2026 (spring economic statement) explicitly completed that reversal.

As November’s MOU was a low water mark for climate policy, it was unexpected that elements of that agreement were clearly stronger than the May 15, 2026 update.

For example, the November 27, 2025 MOU stated: “Canada and Alberta remain committed to achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.”

The May 15, 2026 update states a commitment only to “tangible progress toward net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.”

The November 27 MOU withdrew the promised oil and gas emissions cap in exchange for Alberta agreeing to ramp up to a minimum effective credit price of $130/tonne by 2030.

The May 15, 2026 MOU pushes that pricing back to 2040. It also introduces carbon market mechanisms that may prove useful in carbon pricing through so-called “Carbon Contracts for Difference.”

Overall, where commitments are hardened since November 27, 2025, they are for expanding production and exports of bitumen from the oil sands, whereas commitments for climate goals and tools to reach those goals are weakened.

Today’s 1,000-word MOU contains many specific commitments, including elements of the national electricity grid strategy, further expansion of nuclear energy and methane equivalency agreements.

The May 15, 2026 agreement gives Alberta until July 1 to submit its specific proposal to the federal Major Projects Office, with Canada committing to designate it as a “project of national interest” by October 1, 2026. The pipeline would transport more than 1,000,000 barrels of oil per day, beginning construction as early as September 2027.

As of now, the pipeline route is unknown, but we do know Alberta’s government wants the pipeline to cross northern B.C. and require a lifting of the ban on supertanker traffic through the hazardous waters of B.C.’s north coast.

“If Canada’s prime minister cares about climate action, it is clear that Alberta’s premier is the more skilled negotiator. Over the last six months, Alberta has won more concessions from Canada. At this rate, Canadians may once again find a Liberal prime minister spending public funds to build an uneconomical pipeline, just as former PM Trudeau did. The reality of global capital is that investors are moving away from fossil fuels,” noted Green Party leader Elizabeth May. “While the PM cited International Energy Agency head Fatih Birol in his press conference, he notably omitted Birol’s warning that the days of fossil fuels are numbered. Our government is choosing to embrace Trump’s energy strategy, thus risking our economic and climate future.”

Last week I reported on the two discussion papers issued by the federal Liberal government on Friday May 8, 2026. As environmental groups dig into the specific language to over-ride endangered species laws, it appears the proposal may have been specifically designed to allow the extinction of the SRKW without violating the law. As an exception to my comment about most news media, hats off to Althia Raj who really does dig in! This article from the Toronto Star is reason to subscribe to get past their pay-wall.

Carney government proposal targets extinction protections for endangered killer whales off B.C. coast

The orcas have been affected by shipping traffic causing physical and acoustic disturbances, pollutants and declining food stock.

May 14, 2026

By Althia Raj – National Columnist

Environmental groups raised the alarm Thursday after the Star reported that a government proposal to give cabinet the power to allow development projects to proceed — even if they could eradicate an entire species — was developed with the southern resident killer whale in mind, while the transport minister said the government isn’t “consciously” trying to kill the iconic orcas.

In a discussion paper released last week, Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government proposed, among other things, to grant cabinet the ability to “exempt specific projects from the application of the jeopardy test for species at risk, but only if it’s in the public interest and if the proponent (of the project) has made all reasonable efforts to avoid or reduce impacts on at-risk species.”

The “jeopardy test” is a prohibition on driving a species to extinction. “Not just kills the individuals, but wipes the species forever off the planet,” explained Environmental Defence’s Counsel and Ontario Environment Program Manager Phil Pothen.

Several sources — including two within the government, who spoke on condition of anonymity — told the Star that the measure is a carve-out for the southern resident killer whales, in particular.

There are only 73 to 75 of these coastal species left in the Salish Sea. Southern resident killer whales have been listed as endangered in Canada since 2001. But in the past ten years, their habitat has been so significantly impacted by shipping traffic causing physical and acoustic disturbances, pollutants in the ocean, and declining food stock, that their population has declined to the point that their continued existence is in jeopardy.

“We’re losing reproductive females, we are not able to lower mortality or improve the fecundity — the birth rates of these whales — and they’re not recovering,” said Misty MacDuffee, a biologist at Raincoast Conservation Foundation.

Building a pipeline to Burnaby or Tsawwassen, or expanding the Port of Vancouver through Roberts Bank Terminal 2, would impact the whales’ critical habitat and require a Species at Risk permit. But since the Species at Risk Act (SARA) doesn’t allow the minister to authorize harmful action that would jeopardize the survival of an endangered species, the Carney government is proposing an alternative.

“What they are trying to do, they are kind of bypassing any legal challenges on these whales by passing these provisions that say that they can fast-track these projects without having to adhere to the Species at Risk Act,” said MacDuffee. “They are trying to do an end run around the Species at Risk Act and at the same time, they’re trying to tell the public how much they’re investing in Canada’s nature.”

“The legal protections that the southern resident killer whale have under the Species at Risk Act, and that they need and they deserve, are essentially being put aside to advance projects,” said Hussein Alidina, the lead specialist in marine conservation at WWF-Canada.

On Thursday, after this story was first published online, Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon posted on X that “these reports could not be further from the truth.”

He said the government was “committed to building big things fast that connect and grow a strong Canadian economy, though always building in a manner that is sustainable to our environment, in solidarity with our workers, and in partnership with Indigenous Peoples.” He noted measures announced in the spring economic update, saying: “We would not take any actions that would undermine these important strategies and substantial investments.”

The Star outlined those measures: $160.8 million over five years to protect whale habitat on Canada’s coasts; and $91.3 million over five years to address “the potential for increased marine traffic on the West Coast as Canada embarks on its Trade Diversification Strategy.” The funding would support a regional noise monitoring and management program and address other threats to the southern resident killer whale population.

“And, in addition, the Star noted, the government said it would amend the Marine Mammal Regulations to increase the vessel approach distance from 200 metres to 1,000 metres for the southern resident killer whale to mitigate the threats posed by physical and acoustic disturbance from vessel traffic.

But in an email, MacKinnon said the “quarter of a billion dollars that we are spending to save this species (was too) deep in the story.”

He did not dispute the reporting. What he said was “‘false” is the notion that because “there could be a public interest test applied to SARA, should that come to be included, that we automatically would conclude that a species must be eliminated and therefore consciously decide that it occur(s).”

Nobody is suggesting that the government wants to kill the southern resident killer whales. But the actions the government is taking demonstrate it is aware that the projects it wants to approve will impact the critical habitat of an endangered species, and is looking for a way around the current laws.

““It’s a choice that they’re making, and that choice is to give up southern resident killer whales, and to say it’s OK for them to go extinct. And I don’t think that that really represents what communities here and people here want to see,” said Alidina.

The government’s proposal is open for public comments until June 7.

And with that, I wish you a Happy Victoria Day. Tomorrow I will be marching in our annual community celebration.

Much love and thanks!!

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #319 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Here is the Mother’s Day message I delivered in Parliament on Friday.

Meanwhile, on Friday the federal government launched its next grenade at thorough review of projects before they are approved, while showing an utter misunderstanding of obligations for proper consultation under UNDRIP and section 35 of our Constitution.

As I read the Government of Canada announcement, I marveled at how history is repeating itself. Stephen Harper did exactly what Carney wants to do now. Demand one project – one review, set firm timelines for faster review, and get rid of red tape.

It is “deja vu” all over again! As you know, I am cursed with a good memory.

The Kinder Morgan pipeline (before Canada bought it) was “one project – one review.” Under Christy Clark, B.C. opted to have NO BC environmental assessment and leave it to the feds. Then Harper (under C-38 in 2012) repealed the Mulroney era Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and put in his version which had explicit (short) timelines for review at each stage. Harper then shifted reviews away from the Environmental Assessment Agency and had energy projects reviewable by the NEB…

The NEB had no understanding of environmental reviews and ran a process that failed to meet minimal standards for such reviews. Meanwhile Kinder Morgan failed to properly consult First Nations. The failures that resulted in the permit being cancelled by the Federal Court of Appeal in the fall of 2018 were all predictable. These “haste make waste” errors were due to exactly the kind of changes Carney-Hodgson and company want now…

But this makes it all worse. Carney wants to move faster than Harper.

Here is what was released by the Government of Canada on Friday. Details below, but note this announcement launches a 30-day window for consultation on sweeping changes impacting the environment, Indigenous peoples and citizen rights of participation. Former minister Steven Guilbeault spoke out on Friday’s CBC Power and Politics. This is just shocking.

Excerpts:

“For too long, nation-building infrastructure – including ports, railways, energy corridors, critical mineral developments, and clean energy – has been bogged down in red tape, leaving enormous investment on the table.

To that end, the government is launching two discussion papers to engage Canadians over a 30-day period on proposed reforms to:

• • Get Major Projects Built in Canada
  • Strengthen One Canadian Economy through Trade and Transportation

• • Ensuring federal reviews and decision-making timelines take no more than one year, once all information from the project proponent has been received;

• • Establishing a Crown Consultation Hub to strengthen Crown consultation on project reviews and coordinate one Indigenous consultation process, per community, per project;
  • Creating a regulatory system where a single comprehensive federal decision is made on permits and approvals for major projects.”

As you can see – breathtaking. And now we know the government approved vocabulary for pipelines: “energy corridors.”

Environmental law groups are mobilizing. I am certain Indigenous law organizations will be enraged by the idea that “there is to be one Indigenous consultation process, per community, per project.” Community? We are talking about rights-holding nations. I cannot see how this discussion paper got through approvals within government. We have a fight on our hands.

Meanwhile in encouraging news, the first Transition Away from Fossil Fuels meeting in Colombia went very well!

Only one Canadian Parliamentarian was there, my friend, academic and scientist, Quebec Senator Rosa Galvez attended. An Environment Canada official was also there as an observer.

Here are some good summaries of what was achieved!

What Happened at Santa Marta—and What Comes Next?

Participants/ Stakeholders Involved

In some of my other work this week in Environment Committee, the Secretary of State for Nature confirmed what I had feared, that the Nature Accountability Act, Bill C-73 that died on the order paper January 6th 2025, was not coming back.

In debate on a Conservative motion to defend private property rights, I had a ten minute chance to try to explain the Cowichan decision:

Cowichan decision speech.

And lastly, my attempt to get answers on civil service cuts, including locally for Parks Canada and oil spill emergency response: Elizabeth May Questions Government on Cuts to Civil Service

And in closing, strong Green results coming out of local elections in the UK!

Zack Polanski declares two-party politics dead after Hackney mayoral win.

Greens leader celebrates victory over Labour for Zoë Garbett, his party’s first ever elected mayor.

I hope everyone has a lovely weekend. Parliament is inexplicably taking a two week break so I will be working at home in the riding. Much to do!

Love and thanks,

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #318 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post Green Party: “We are staring down the barrel of what could be a deadly global-warming fuelled summer, and we are not ready.” appeared first on Elizabeth May.

As the Climate Alarms Ring More Loudly, the Government Shuts out the Noise

There was a time when the Green Party was one in a crowd of parties calling for climate action. No longer. The Liberals have reversed their boldest programmes, the consumer carbon tax, the oil and gas emissions cap, the home energy retrofit funding, and the list goes on.

We were never on track to meet the climate target we adopted in the 2015 Paris Agreement to hold global average temperature increase to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above the global average temperature in the time before the Industrial Revolution. In fact we have never come close to any of our targets- whether 1997 Kyoto (adopted by Jean Chretien) or 2009 Copenhagen (adopted by Stephen Harper). We do not slide backward as much as rush to reach and breach planetary thresholds that threaten human civilization.

Targets and goals to meet the 1992 commitments of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change are broken time and again. The 1992 treaty pledged to avoid “dangerous” levels of warming. As I watched former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney sign that treaty at Rio’s Earth Summit, I was sure it would work. Canada succeeded with the 1987 Montreal Protocol in halting the damage to the ozone layer. We had succeeded in stopping the damage caused by acid rain. The thought that Canadians would be dying in large numbers, that tens of thousands of people would be forced to flee approaching wildfires, more of my fellow citizens dead in floods that cause billions of dollars in damage, washed out to sea by hurricanes – the very thought that such dangerous and deadly events would become routine, while governments call for more pipelines and more fossil fuels – that thought never entered my mind. Surely, we would heed the warnings of science long before the climate crisis claimed lives..

Now, the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP (at least NDP in provincial capitals) act as though climate action was a fad, like wearing a Swiftie bracelet. Climate science is out of fashion. Other than Greens, the only other MPs consistently opposing increasing fossil fuel production are those in the Bloc Quebecois.

The latest warnings are not of bad weather, increased heat domes and fires. The latest warnings are of global catastrophe.

Scientists around the world have been carefully monitoring evidence of the slow down of the great conveyor belt of ocean currents. In lay terms, we call it the Gulf Stream. Scientists call the larger system the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation. For years, the global consensus was that this was a low risk event. Recent updates have changed the consensus view. The latest analysis puts the risk at about 50-50. (Ditlevsen, P., Ditlevsen, S. Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation. Nat Commun 14, 4254 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-39810-w)

As quoted in the Guardian (April 15, 2026, byline Damien Carrington), Prof Stefan Rahmstorf, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said: “This .. shows that the ‘pessimistic’ models, which show a strong weakening of the Amoc by 2100, are, unfortunately, the realistic ones, in that they agree better with observational data.”

He added: “I now am increasingly worried that we may well pass that Amoc shutdown tipping point, where it becomes inevitable, in the middle of this century, which is quite close.”..Rahmstorf, who has studied the Amoc for 35 years, has said a collapse must be avoided “at all costs”. “I argued this when we thought the chance of an Amoc shutdown was maybe 5%, and even then we were saying that risk is too high, given the massive impacts. Now it looks like it’s more than 50%. The most dramatic and drastic climate changes we see in the last 100,000 years of Earth history have been when the Amoc switched to a different state.”

This is more than alarming. We should be pulling out all the stops to ensure we move off fossil fuels and restore forest cover as quickly as possible. Instead we are blinded by the “Build Canada Strong” messaging.

Greens also want a strong Canada. But a livable planet is absolutely essential for any Canada at all.

More pipelines, fracking and off-shore drilling will weaken life support systems. The collapse of the AMOC must be avoided at all costs. Millions of lives are at stake.

Truth is Canada remains the worst climate performer in the G-7. Oil and gas production is at an all time high and our government throws billions of dollars in subsidies to drive up global heating.

It is not too late to avoid this global tipping point. But it will surely be too late if we remain in the grip of fossil fuel boosterism.

Elizabeth May, O.C. is the Member of Parliament for Saanich Gulf Islands and leader of the Green Party of Canada. She is the co-author with John Kidder, Climate Change for Dummies (2022, John Wiley and sons),

The post OP-ED: As the Climate Alarms Ring More Loudly, the Government Shuts out the Noise appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Last night was our wonderful celebration of my election win on May 2, 2011. Thanks to everyone who came – to Bill Henderson and John Kidder for music and all the wonderful SGI volunteers who organized a fun night to celebrate! It brought back memories of our fabulous rally and celebration fifteen years ago! And the wonderful moment of phoning the party taking place at Moby’s Pub on Salt Spring! What a night that was.

Believe it or not, I was so depressed. I went home and cried myself to sleep. Obviously I was overjoyed that we won, but I had been certain it would be a minority parliament. I went to the Sidney airport hangar for our victory party with the Governor General’s phone number in my back pocket. My plan was to call him right away and ask him to give opposition party leaders time to negotiate a coalition that could retain the confidence of the House. Ah well, the Orange Wave crushed that and due to our bizarre voting system, with only 39.6% of the vote, Stephen Harper had his first majority government.

The last fifteen years of service in Canada’s parliament have been extraordinary. Some days I can barely stand it, but on balance, it is so gratifying to make a good thing happen. Small things for constituents or big wins, I know I am making a difference.

That was why one of the struggles of this week was so hard to accept. My small team (with big thanks to my legislative director, Steve Parkinson) had done a ton of work so I could present eleven amendments to a bill about which you likely have not read a word. C-16 is described as “An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code” (in relation to criminal and correctional matters – child protection, gender-based violence, and other measures).

This is, as far as it goes, a good and long overdue bill. At long last it provides support and legal tools to protect women in abusive relationships, expanding that abuse from physical violence to “coercive control”. When the husband, or “intimate partner” controls so much of a partner’s or woman’s life that their choice to find a safe place is simply not possible, it is abuse.

I wanted to make changes to deal with another and growing threat to vulnerable people. This group is, again, often women, but not always. It again involves loving someone who wants to control you. I tried to extend the act to protect this vulnerable group. I wanted to amend C-16 to protect seniors from elder abuse.

The trends are quite shocking. According to Statistics Canada, since 2018, family violence against older persons in Canada has increased by 49 percent. And when a woman is killed by a family member, more than half the time the accused is her own son (based on research by the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability). Witnesses told the Justice committee that when it comes to coercion and abuse, older women are at dual risk, from partners and children, too often leading to their death. The 2021 Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime report, by Professor Myrna Dawson, made the point in a chillingly blunt assessment: “…when it comes to older people, and older women especially, coercive control can also often happen at the hands of adult children, relatives, caregivers, or others in positions of trust. Indeed, after their mail partners, with respect to femicide, women in Canada have most to fear from their sons.” 

Other governments (England & Wales, Australia, Hawaii, and South Africa) have already expanded protection against coercive control from intimate partners to others in a position of trust, whether partners or family members.

I hoped I would have support for my amendments to do the same in Canada. But it was not to be, although we had partial success.

You may have heard in the news that this week the Liberals used their new majority (thanks to the five MPs who joined them from other parties) to change the standing orders to reconstruct parliamentary committees. This week, they used time allocation to rush through the debate and vote to change the committees until the next election. The Liberals have made committees larger and added more Liberal MPs to all of them to ensure they have a majority. In and of itself, that conforms to the usual situation. When a government wins the majority of seats naturally they control parliamentary committees. But this situation is unprecedented because the new majority occurred after the election. I also argued, as I did in a letter to the prime minister back in May, that the rules around so-called recognized parties are misused and that there are NO rules that prevent MPs in parties with fewer than 12 MPs from serving as full members of committees. My arguments continue to fall on deaf ears. Majority parliaments by whatever means are not illegitimate, but this first move was bad luck for me.

I attended the Justice committee for the clause-by-clause review of all C-16 amendments on the first day of the Liberal majority. My first amendment was voted down with no support from members allowed to vote. (Leah Gazan was there for the NDP, but like me with no vote). I know there was sympathy from many Liberal MPs and even some Conservatives on the committee, but the Liberals with control of the committee made it clear none of my amendments would carry. But they did offer to conduct a review two years from now and reconsider the matter. To say the atmosphere in the committee room was testy is a huge understatement. I knew staying to argue for eleven amendments over the course of a day and a half would only annoy the committee and that I would not get a single vote for any of my amendments. To solidify good will (from a number of Liberal backbenchers), and try to get the Minister of Justice to bring forward legislation to protect seniors sooner, I asked for my amendments to be withdrawn.

I still feel very queasy about giving up. For sure there was no hope, but I cannot help feeling I have let down the wonderful advocates at the Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse. This week I will talk to the Minister of Justice about a new bill – one focused on protecting seniors. I think we might be able to have such stand-alone legislation sooner than waiting for the two year review which is now part of C-16. Still, overall, I am crushed that this easy fix to C-16 was clobbered.

Of course, the big news this week was Tuesday’s Spring Economic Statement. For “big news” it was entirely underwhelming. This link includes what our small team in the lock up (Mike Morrice, John Kidder and I) wrote plus the video of our media scrum. Later that day, in debate in the House I offered more detailed analysis.. (although as you will note, still trying to figure out my “new” post-cataract surgery eyes and using only reading glasses). Here you go!

I did get a chance in the speech to raise the issue of the risk of tipping points in climate science. I also noted the increased risk of the collapse of the Atlantic Ocean conveyor belt of enormous ocean currents in my question in QP on Friday. The climate crisis is no longer receiving even lip service. The reversal in climate policy in the facing of increasingly loud warnings is the disconnect I find hardest to understand in the many disappointments of Mark Carney’s government.

In leaving you this Sunday morning, I ask you to support the campaign to stop the export of Canadian horses for slaughter in Japan. I presented this petition on Friday and ended by wishing I could quote Jann Arden, but could not because the language would be un-parliamentary. In case you do not know of her campaign it is called Horseshit! 

Thanks again for your continued interest in my work.  You keep me going!! MANY thanks,

Love,

Elizabeth

The post Good Sunday Morning! Issue #317 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post QUESTION PERIOD: Elizabeth May Asks Government When They Will Stop Ignoring Science and Enact Climate Solutions appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post ADJOURNMENT PROCEEDINGS: Elizabeth May Requests Funding for Projects Abandoned by Cancellation of BC Community Housing Fund appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post SPEECH IN THE HOUSE: Elizabeth May Speaks on Proposed Sovereign Wealth Fund appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post SPEECH IN THE HOUSE: Elizabeth May Responds to the Spring Economic Statement appeared first on Elizabeth May.