Supreme Court of Canada Demonstrate Rank Incompetence

Vincent J. Curtis

25 Mar 21

Today, the Supreme Court of Canada declared constitutional the Liberal government’s plan to impose a carbon tax across all of Canada.  The majority opinion wrote in part that climate change is real and an existential threat to Canada and the entire world, and that a price on pollution is a critical element to addressing it.  The Court ruled on matters of science and economics.  It is one thing for a court to acknowledge the facts of gravity, but a court of law ruling on highly disputed areas of science in favor bad science and bad economics is a sign of rank incompetence.  The Court has got to know its limitations.

What exactly does it mean that climate change is “real”?  Is this advocating a particular theory of global warming that could be wrong?

What does “existential” threat mean?  The laws of the conservation of mass and energy means that this planet will continue to orbit the sun regardless of changes in atmosphere.  Plant life will do very well with more atmospheric CO2.  And ocean life won’t be destroyed by minor changes in the atmosphere.  The existence of Canada is threatened by separatism, not CO2 generated in China.

And what is this statement that a tax on pollution is a crucial element of addressing climate change?  In the first place, carbon dioxide, being a natural constituent of air simply isn’t a pollutant.  University of Guelph economist Ross McKitrick disputes the efficacy of a tax on carbon to reduce CO2 emissions.

The Court decided that, because the aim is noble, the law will stand, and the constitutional details don’t matter in view of the nobility and urgency of the aim.  This is rank incompetence.

-30-