Historic European Green New Deal includes funding for a Just Transition Mechanism

ursala eu green new dealNew European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the European Green Deal on December 11 (here on YouTube ), calling it “Europe’s man on the moon moment”.    The 10  key points are outlined here , with the flagship commitment that the EU will aim to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, a goal that will be enshrined in a ‘Climate Law’ to be presented in March 2020.  To achieve net-zero, EU’s ambitions must rise to a 50-55% cut in greenhouse gas emissions, replacing the current 40% objective.

In “Europe’s Green New Deal“,   Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University writes for Project Syndicate that it “ is the first comprehensive plan to achieve sustainable development in any major world region. As such, it becomes a global benchmark – a “how-to” guide for planning  the transformation to a prosperous, socially inclusive, and environmentally sustainable economy.”  Clean Energy Wire compiles reaction from German politicians, NGO’s and think tanks: reactions are mixed – like Sachs, most commend the symbolic and political achievement of the EU statement, while tempering their enthusiasm with concerns for implementation details.  An article in The Guardian also summarizes the deal with some sense of the opposition and difficulties ahead.

The Euractiv summary  quotes EU Commissioner von der Leyen  on the proposal for a Just Transition Mechanism:  “We have the ambition to mobilise €100 billion precisely targeted to the most vulnerable regions and sectors”  and describes the initiative as having  three “legs”: 1. A just transition fund that will mobilise resources from the EU’s regional policy budget; 2. An  “InvestEU” programme, with money coming from the European Investment Bank (EIB); and 3.  EIB funding coming from the EU bank’s own capital.  The EU Commission website provides Details of the Just Transition Mechanism for download.

Redefining green jobs to include healthcare and educational workers in the Green New Deal

green new deal public housingA thoughtful new contribution to the “green jobs” debate comes in Re-defining Green Jobs for a Sustainable Economy ,  released by The Century Foundation, in cooperation with Data for Progress, on December 2.  Co-author Greg Carlock is currently Senior Fellow and Research Director for Climate at Data for Progress, and was one of the authors of the original visioning document A Green New Deal  , published in 2018 and leading to the current U.S. movement launched by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  Data for Progress continues to monitor public opinion and publish important contributions to the Green New Deal debate – in November, exploring the issue of a Green New Deal for Public Housing.

Re-defining Green Jobs for a Sustainable Economy outlines an interesting  history of the  “green jobs” definition and measurement in the U.S., but the  main purpose of the report is to propose an expanded definition and framework of green jobs which would encompass the principles of equity and sustainability. Ultimately, the report recommends how an expanded definition can be integrated into U.S. public policy.

Perhaps most importantly,  Re-defining Green Jobs for a Sustainable Economy focuses in detail on demonstrating  why health care and educational workers should be considered as part of the green workforce,  stating that including them in the green workforce definition  “would go a long way toward gender and racial equity, and toward ensuring all workers green, family-sustaining jobs.”

An expanded definition of a green job, from the report:

“A green job should refer to any position that is part of the sustainability workforce: a job that contributes to preserving or enhancing the well-being, culture, and governance of both current and future generations, as well as regenerating the natural resources and ecosystems upon which they rely. And in order for green jobs themselves to be sustainable, they need to be good, living-wage jobs…. These green job occupations stand in contrast to work—even decent-paying work—in industries that result in the depletion or degradation of ecological systems and the social, cultural, and political institutions that support them.”

 

 

Canadian government commits to a Just Transition Act, but COP25 deemed a failure

COP25 entranceThe 25th gathering of the UN Conference of the Parties (COP25) took place from December 2 to 15 in Madrid, and despite official UN press releases and statements (curated by IIDS here ),  a general feeling of frustration was present almost immediately. Early on, Greta Thunberg labelled the meetings “clever accounting and creative PR” in her speech to delegates  . Demonstrations and discontent by youth, Indigenous, and other civil society activists  on December 11 are described by Common Dreams ;  an article in The Guardian newspaper  describes the “unfortunate  security incident” on December 11 when civil society demonstrators were expelled by COP security guards. The article quotes #FridaysForFuture member Angela Valenzuela, who stated that the rough treatment was typical of  the treatment of women, Indigenous people, and workers in a COP process dominated by government officials and corporate cop25 reject teckvested interests. “The doors closed in our faces were a very powerful metaphor for what is happening here and what has happened for the last 25 years”.  Reinforcing this theme, Common Dreams highlights new research  by Corporate Accountability,  The Big Polluters Bankrolling COP25, which names the corporations sponsoring and lobbying COP25 and concludes: “Enough is enough — we cannot let corporations use the climate talks as a marketing campaign to greenwash without accountability.”

In the end, after the longest sessions in COP’s long history, the final result achieved nothing regarding the main purpose: international carbon markets and greater ambition for national emissions reductions targets.  The Canadian government official press release casts a positive light on the results, and general reaction and summary appears in The Guardian in  “The UN climate talks are over for another year – was anything achieved?”.  Good COP Bad COP   by Kate Aronoff and David Adler was published by Data for Progress on December 11, with a detailed summary of the proceedings from a U.S. point of view.  Inside Climate News explains the carbon markets discussion in  UN Climate Talks Stymied by Carbon Markets’ ‘Ghost from the Past’ .

Canadian headlines reflect strong disappointment: 

Even mainstream Toronto Globe and Mail states: “Madrid climate talks end in near failure as crucial decisions are bumped into 2020” (Dec. 15). In The National Observer  Chris Hatch and Barry Saxifrage ask  “Global climate summit. COP or Cop-out?” on Dec. 12 , followed by  “UN climate negotiations end in ‘demoralizing, enraging’ failure” on Dec. 15.   In The Energy Mix:  “U.S. Declared ‘Climate Criminal’ as ‘Stalemated’ COP 25 Limps to a Close” (Dec. 13) and  “Disgraceful COP 25 Shows Big Emitters ‘Betraying People Across the World’ in The Energy Mix (Dec. 16).

Climate Action Network Canada compiled  statements from some of its member organizations on December 15 under this headline: “COP25 derailed as polluters prioritized over people and planet” . Among the statements:

from Catherine Abreu, Executive Director of Climate Action Network Canada : On every issue of significance, COP25 has delivered a mediocre or non -outcome that betrays the millions of people around the world calling for real climate action. While Canadian negotiators were largely constructive on the ground, Canada has a lot of work to do at home to address the gap between its climate goals and its ongoing commitment to expand the fossil fuel industry, which got a lot of international attention here in Madrid. Minister Wilkinson must increase Canada’s climate finance contributions and deliver on his government’s election promise to bring a new, more ambitious Paris pledge to COP26 in 2020.”

Dale Marshall, National Climate Program Manager, Environmental Defence Canada
“It wasn’t just that the COP25 outcome was a disaster. It was also demoralizing and enraging to see countries erase human rights and the rights of Indigenous Peoples, not only in the text but in reality, and erode the environmental integrity of the Paris Agreement. It will be up to people in Canada and around the world to continue to mobilize and push governments to take real climate action.”

 Denis Bolduc, secretary general of the FTQ (Quebec Federation of Workers)
“We see once again the lack of ambition of States to respond to the climate emergency. The Quebec Federation of Workers (FTQ) demands that the voices of billions of people be heard. …. We demand a robust framework in which the Just Transition can take place. Workers and their communities must be at the heart of the solutions. Only a social dialogue where everyone has an equal voice will allow us to get out of this crisis. Although the states failed to answer the call, the FTQ joins all the groups of civil society to implement a real energy transition. What we want is a Just Transition and there will be no Just Transition without the workers.”

Julee Sanderson, 1st National Vice-President, Canadian Union of Postal Workers
“… Stuck in the past and unwilling to act on ambitions, governments that have aligned themselves with industry and capital have shown once again how simple it is to sidestep responsibility. In the face of all humanity and on a global stage it appears marching orders have come from the petroleum industry lobbyists rather than the millions watching from around the globe. Governments have managed to commit only to infinite growth and colonialism models. It is evident the message of civil society, its workers, its youth, its scientists, human rights groups, and Indigenous land, water, and air protectors have been inconvenient afterthoughts. Civil society must redouble its efforts on the front lines. There can be no ambition without human rights and a sustainable just transition for everyone.”

Labour achieves public promise of a Just Transition Act from  Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change 

cop25 just transitionThe Canadian Labour Congress Twitter feed  has been active in posting –  especially December 11 events regarding the Workshop on Just Transition. Sharing the stage with CLC’s Tara Peel, Canada’s New Minister of Environment and Climate Change publicly committed to the election promise of federal legislation: a Just Transition Act at that event.

CLC Twitter feed also highlights the Powering Past Coal Just Transition Task Force, launched in July 2019 with these Terms of Reference  . This is an international group, unrelated to the Government of Canada’s Just Transition Task Force which has already reported. Members include academics, including Linda Clarke, (ProBE, University of Westminster and Co-Director, ACW) and Lori Thorlakson (University of Alberta)  as well as unionists, including Hassan Yussuff, (president of the Canadian Labour Congress), Samantha Smith ( ITUC Just Transition Centre), Bill Adams ( Trades Union Congress), Suzanne Jeffreys (One Million Climate Jobs/Campaign against Climate Change).

During COP25, the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) released a new series of three Backgrounders with the theme:  We must all be part of the solution on climate change  .  The series consists of: Governments must take ActionThe Public Sector will be Part of the Solution , and The National Union will be Part of the Solution , the union’s commitment for its own action, as presented at the 2019 Triennial NUPGE Convention in June 2019.

ituc logoInternationally, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) maintained a COP25 blog .  Going into the meetings, the ITUC Topline Demands for COP25 were published as a  Frontline Briefing. They consist of “1. Greater ambition for Just Transition, with greater ambition in the new government climate plans, the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) that are due in 2020;  2. Governments must sign on to the “Climate Action and Jobs Initiative”   launched at the September 2019 Climate Action Summit in New York in September 2019; 3. Commit to financing for the most vulnerable: governments must live up to their promise to mobilise US $100 billion annually by 2020.”

From the ITUC Frontline Briefing:

“Our message for all country leaders: we have just 10 years. Talking is no longer enough – ambition and Just Transition plans are urgent to secure the trust of people in every nation. • Stop the delaying measures, increase ambition in the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) • Start implementing the social dialogue vital for agreements that deliver Just Transition for all. • Legislate for climate action including procurement rules. • Green New Deals must mean a new social contract in every country with labour rights, climate ambition and Just Transition at the core.”

Philippines Human Rights Commission delivers landmark decision, holding the Carbon Majors accountable for climate damages – Updated

The Human Rights Commission of the Philippines has concluded its three-year investigation of a complaint led by Greenpeace South-East Asia , and has found that the collective contribution to global heating by 47 coal, cement, and oil and gas companies has violated Filipinos’ basic human rights to life, water, food, sanitation, adequate housing and self-determination. Although the full decision is not yet available – but promised by the end of 2019 – the announcement made by one of the Commissioners at the COP25 meetings  stated that it would be up to individual countries to pass strong legislation and establish legal liability in their own courts, but that “there was clear scope under existing civil law in the Philippines to take action.”

The  Director of Greenpeace Philippines is quoted in the Greenpeace press release:

“The findings are a landmark victory for communities around the world who are at the frontlines of the climate emergency. This is the first ever finding of corporate responsibility for human rights harms resulting from the climate crisis. The outcome goes beyond the Philippines and can reach every single human being alive or yet to be born. However, this is only the beginning. We believe the findings provide very strong basis not just for future legal actions against big polluters, but also for citizens and communities to confront inaction by companies and governments in the streets and in the hallways of power.”

Greenpeace maintains an archive of documents related to this long-running investigation, including corporate responses and expert opinions.  Climate Liability News has published a number of articles, including “Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules” and  “Philippines Climate Case Could Find Fossil Fuel Companies Violate Human Rights” ( 2017), which  provides more background to the case.

Update:  On December 18, The Tyee published “Oilsands Firms ‘Morally Responsible’ for Deaths and Destruction from Climate Disasters”, an interview by Geoff Demicki with Greenpeace’s Naderev Yeb Saño , which “explains what a Philippines human rights investigation means for the fossil fuel industry in Canada.”

Rights-in-a-Changing-ClimateRelated: An authoritative chronicling of  the human rights dimension in UNFCCC decisions and the Paris Agreement appears in  Rights in a Changing Climate by the Centre for International Environmental Law , published on December 5. It includes examples of Just Transition and decent work. The CIEL also operates a Working Group on Climate Rights, with a dedicated website here.

Updates on climate litigation:

“Fossil Fuels on Trial: Where the Major Climate Change Lawsuits Stand Today”  was published by Inside Climate News on November 29, providing a good sum-up of the year, but too early to reflect the landmark Philippines decision, nor the December 10 decision in the suit by the New York Attorney General against  Exxon.  The surprising victory for Exxon is described in  “Judge Clears Exxon in Investor Fraud Case Over Climate Risk Disclosure”  in Inside Climate News, as well as in a New York Times article.

Newly-elected government in Canada outlines its climate priorities; faces first major test in the Frontier mine decision

Canada’s minority government is back in session after the October 2019 election, launched by the Speech from the Throne on December 5.  The Throne Speech traditionally is used to outline government priorities, and signals that Justin Trudeau and his Liberal party will try to stay in power by balancing the demands of the oil and gas proponents in Alberta against the environmental concerns of the rest of the country. The Toronto Star parsed the speech in “What does it mean? The Throne Speech Interpreted “.

On the issue of climate change, here are the actual words of the Throne Speech:

“In this election, Parliamentarians received a mandate from the people of Canada which Ministers will carry out. It is a mandate to fight climate change, strengthen the middle class, walk the road of reconciliation, keep Canadians safe and healthy, and position Canada for success in an uncertain world.”… A clear majority of Canadians voted for ambitious climate action now. And that is what the Government will deliver. It will continue to protect the environment and preserve Canada’s natural legacy. And it will do so in a way that grows the economy and makes life more affordable.

The Government will set a target to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. This goal is ambitious, but necessary – for both environmental protection and economic growth.

The Government will continue to lead in ensuring a price on pollution everywhere in this country, working with partners to further reduce emissions.

The Government will also:

help to make energy efficient homes more affordable, and introduce measures to build clean, efficient, and affordable communities;

make it easier for people to choose zero-emission vehicles;

work to make clean, affordable power available in every Canadian community;

work with businesses to make Canada the best place to start and grow a clean technology company; and

provide help for people displaced by climate-related disasters.

The Government will also act to preserve Canada’s natural legacy, protecting 25 percent of Canada’s land and 25 percent of Canada’s oceans by 2025. Further, it will continue efforts to reduce plastic pollution, and use nature-based solutions to fight climate change – including planting two billion trees to clean the air and make our communities greener.

And while the Government takes strong action to fight climate change, it will also work just as hard to get Canadian resources to new markets, and offer unwavering support to the hardworking women and men in Canada’s natural resources sectors, many of whom have faced tough times recently.”

 

Reaction from environmentalists and Opposition party leaders appeared in the National Observer, in  “Liberals commit to carbon-pollution target of net-zero by 2050”   (Dec. 5); and in “Throne speech climate commitments dwarfed by spending on Trans Mountain” by the Dogwood Institute .

The Canadian Labour Congress reacted with this generally supportive statement:  “We need bold targets to fight climate change, we owe that to our children …. “We also owe the next generation good jobs and commitments to minimize the impact on workers. Today’s commitments move us towards a greener economy.”   In advance of the Throne Speech, the Green Economy Network, a union network of which the CLC is one member, had made  a harder-hitting statement: “The GEN is demanding that the Prime Minister make climate job creation a priority through investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency and green buildings, public transit and higher speed rail transit.”

Also in advance of the Throne Speech, a group led by the Smart Prosperity Initiative  delivered an Open Letter outlining detailed demands for clean economy initiatives. The twenty-six signatories include leaders from business, environmental advocacy groups, and the United Steelworkers and BlueGreen Canada.

One of the first major tests for the minority government, should it last that long, will be the decision required by the end of February on whether to approve the application by Teck Resources for the massive Frontier oil sands project – a $20-billion, 260,000-barrel-per-day open-pit petroleum-mining project near Fort McKay in northern Alberta. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency website provides official documentation, including the July 2019 Joint Review Panel Report , which includes discussion of the  economic and employment impacts of the project (beginning page 883).  Critiques of the Joint Review Panel approval were published in July by The Narwhal here  and the Pembina Institute here .

And now, as Parliament reconvenes and the COP25 meetings are underway, the Frontier mine is becoming the  litmus test of Canada’s climate change policy, as laid out in  “Trudeau will fuel the fires of our climate crisis if he approves Canada’s mega mine”, an Opinion piece by Tzeporah Berman which appeared in The Guardian on December 10.  Also on December 10, Greta Thunberg and fourteen other young people released an Open Letter to government leaders of Canada and Norway, calling on them to block any new oil and gas projects and quickly phase out existing ones. The National Observer explains in  “Greta Thunberg and other youth call on Trudeau to ditch fossil fuels” (Dec.9) .

How to communicate “Just Transition” to union members and communities

Climate Outreach, a U.K.-based organization of  social scientists and communication specialists, has published new research, summarized in the handbook for a general audience, How to Have Conversations about Climate Change, released on December 5.  An earlier handbook released in September was aimed at NGO’s, policymakers and academics who seek to communicate better about Just Transition. Broadening engagement with Just Transition: Opportunities and Challenges is an 18-page handbook with practical recommendations for the language and imagery which reaches people across the political and economic spectrum – with very specific attention to union members. It is based from experience since 2010, including 55 workshops in Alberta in 2017 (7 of which were with oil workers), and interviews with UK union leaders about just transition in 2019. The full reports concerning the Alberta Narratives project is here.

Recommendations from Broadening engagement with Just Transition include:

…..The idea of just transition prompts negative reactions amongst some union representatives, who see it as a conversation about job losses, with little realistic chance of recompense.

…. In previous testing, the imagery and language of ‘justice’ has not resonated well across the political spectrum with centre-right audiences, suggesting that ‘just transition’ may prompt the same response. The subtly different framing of ‘fairness’ may work better with people who hold these values. Fairness is about doing right by everyone involved; justice, by contrast, may imply wrongdoing in the past that must be atoned for.

…People’s sense of identity is often closely bound up with the work they do. Extractive industries like coal mining are often, for example, closely associated with pride and a strong sense of place. Demonstrating gratitude and respect for the contribution of fossil fuels can create a strong basis for mutual discussion in the future – with renewables and natural resources as an extension of that pride.

….When people feel criticised and devalued, they are much less likely to engage. Approaching a conversation without a sense of blame is an important part of a productive dialogue.

….Many communities are turned off by the imagery and stereotypes associated with environmentalism, and will speak more openly with trusted members of their own community. In successful communications, trust between all parties is essential.

A good Canadian example of some of these principles  recently appeared on the CBC website in the form of  an OpEd by Rylan Higgins, now a professor at St. Mary’s University in Halifax, but formerly an oil worker.  He writes about his experiences in the oil fields in   “‘It’s pretty brutal, pretty unforgiving’: Why the West should move beyond an oilpatch economy” (Nov. 15), and  argues that the fossil industry has “long been one based on inequality, bootstrap individualism, and high-octane opportunism.” Importantly, he urges those working to transition Canada into the green economy “to consider the workers and families in the industry as we do so.” He adds that “the next economic arrangement should put workers [to whom he “tips his hard hat”], families, and the environment first—and investors and corporate bigwigs last.”

Australian companies are moving to renewable energy to meet employee expectations for climate action

reenergizingREenergising Australian business: the corporate race to 100% renewable energy was released by  Greenpeace Australia Pacific on December 4.

Drawing on public information as well as 34 responses to a survey sent to 80 “big-brand” companies, the report presents analysis of the corporate move to renewable energy, covering seven major industry sectors, as well as case studies of individual companies. Of the 80 companies profiled: 30% have committed to move to 100% renewable energy ;  26% have signed a corporate power purchase agreement , and  65% have invested in rooftop or onsite solar.

Regarding job creation: The report estimates the impact if companies moved to 100% renewable energy to power their operations: for 3 of Australia’s largest companies  (Woolworths, Coles and Telstra)  it would create 4194 construction job-years and 232 ongoing jobs ; the 10 largest companies in the property and construction sector would create more than 1000 construction job-years, and the 14 largest telecommunications, IT, and technology companies would create around 2000 construction job-years.

What is driving the corporate move to renewables? “The UComms polling found 67% of Australians would prefer to work for a company that uses renewable energy, rather than one that doesn’t, while 100% of companies surveyed by Greenpeace reported that a key reason for shifting to renewable energy is employee expectation. In 2019, the Edelman Trust Barometer found 67% of employees “expect that prospective employers will join them in taking action on societal issues” and 76% say “CEOs should take the lead on change rather than waiting for government to impose it.”

Just transition for the Coal and Car Industries – a period of “revolutionary” change in Europe

coal-cars-and-the-world-of-work coverTowards a just transition: Coal, cars and the world of work  is a new and unique report edited by Béla Galgóczi, senior researcher at the European Trade Union Institute, a member of the Adapting Canadian Work and Workplaces to Climate Change (ACW) research project , and the author of several previous reports on Just Transition, including  Phasing out Coal – A Just Transition approach (2019) and  Greening Industries and Creating Jobs (2012).

In his introduction, he states:

” ‘Just transition’ has become the main concept and strategy tool for managing the transformation towards a net zero-carbon economy in a way that is both balanced and fair, but it is also clear that this concept is developing in a too broad and general, and often even over-stretched, manner. In order to discuss it meaningfully, we need to turn to specific case studies. Coal-based energy generation on the one hand and the automobile industry on the other do not only represent two sectors that are responsible for a large part of total GHG emissions, they also illustrate what is really meant by the different contexts of just transition.”

The report chapters, available individually for download here, are written by European experts, and will provide English-speaking readers with access to some of the research written in the European languages.

Part 1 updates the well-researched decarbonization of the coal industry, in Poland, Germany, France and Italy.

Part 2 breaks newer ground, as it “delivers an account of the revolutionary change taking place in the automobile industry, proceeding from a European overview (chapter 6) to insights both from France (chapter 7) and from Germany, the latter with its central eastern European supply chains (chapter 8). Chapter 9 then gives the view of IG Metall, a trade union which has a key role in managing change in the automobile industry in an active and forward-looking way.”   Regarding the automobile industry, the introduction states: “With digitalisation and decarbonisation, the industry faces unprecedented challenges in the near future that will re-write its entire business model, redefine work and redraw its value chains. Managing this change requires innovative approaches from the main actors and new forms of relationships between the actors.”  Germany’s social partnership bargaining structure is the framework for the innovative initiatives described at the EU, federal, regional and plant level.

The report is summarized by Mr. Galgóczi  in “Why should just transition be an integral part of the European Green Deal?”,  which appeared in Social Europe on December 4.

Psychologists pledge to expand their role in combating climate change

Summit on Psychology and Global Health Karen signing proclamationJoining professionals from many other disciplines who are directing their skills and knowledge to the climate crisis, the leader of  the Canadian  Psychological Association, along with those from more than 40 other countries, signed a proclamation which pledges to use their expertise to take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts – not only at the individual level to help people cope with the mental health aspects such as eco-anxiety, but also at the societal level, as a proactive force to encourage communication, research, and to spark behaviour change and action.

Excerpts from the Proclamation on Collaboration, reproduced at the website of the Canadian Psychological Association , and signed at the International Summit on Psychology and Global Health in Lisbon on November 14 – 16, 2019.

WHEREAS climate crisis has a disproportionate impact on already vulnerable groups with fewer resources, including low-income individuals or those who live in rural areas, people of color, women, children, older adults, and individuals with disabilities;

​WHEREAS research shows that climate change-related events can result in major acute and chronic adverse mental health outcomes, including stress, trauma, and shock; post-traumatic stress disorder and other forms of anxiety; depression; and substance use disorder, which have been a secondary consideration in climate change communication and action;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that our psychology organizations will advocate for and support international and cross-disciplinary collaboration to mitigate and facilitate adaptation to climate crisis.

We will inform our respective members and the public about climate crisis, emphasizing scientific research and consensus on its causes and short- and long-term harms, and the need for immediate personal and societal action;

​We will encourage our members and other mental health leaders to be vocal advocates concerning the necessary preparatory and responsive adaptations to climate crisis and to invest more in research and practice is this area;

​We will advocate for Universities and other entities could include formation on societal challenges and, particularly, climate crisis for psychologists and other mental health professionals;

​We will increase the availability of services and supportive interventions to help minimize harm to mental health and well-being, especially among vulnerable populations, and increase community resilience;

​We will advocate for the rights of those most susceptible to the negative health, and mainly, mental health impacts of climate crisis, for example, by encouraging policymakers to fully fund programs to aid those who suffer harm from severe climate crisis-related events;

​We will support the development of a public awareness campaign to encourage individuals and communities to adopt behaviors to help prepare for and recover from gradual climate change and acute climate crisis events;

We will encourage governmental, educational, health, and corporate leaders to use more psychological science in police designs as well as to adopt norms, values, and policy to promote sustainable preventive and corrective behaviors in individuals, groups and communities”.

Moral failure and financial risk at the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board

Mark Carney will leave his role as Governor of the Bank of England in January 2020 and return to live in Canada as he takes up his new job as the United Nations’ special envoy on climate action and climate finance.  According to the BBC,  “Mr Carney will be tasked with mobilising private finance to take climate action and help transition to a net-zero carbon economy for the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP) meeting in Glasgow in November 2020. This will include building new frameworks for financial reporting and risk management, as well as making climate change a key priority in private financial decision making.”

fossil futures ccpaRequired reading on the topic:  Fossil Futures: The Canada Pension Plan’s failure to respect the 1.5-degree Celsius limit, released on November 19 by the Canadian Centre for Policy Analysis-B.C. (CCPA-BC).   The report reveals new evidence in the long-standing criticism of the management of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), which manages the fund on which all Canadians rely when they retire.  Fossil Futures’ major finding is that the CPPIB is failing to consider the Paris agreement target of 1.5 degrees C., stating:  “Within its public equities portfolio, it has over $4 billion invested in the top 200 publicly traded fossil fuel reserve holders (oil, gas and coal). To stay within 1.5 degrees, these companies can extract only 71.4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, yet the companies the CPPIB is invested in have 281 billion tonnes in reserve, meaning they have almost four times the carbon reserves that can be sold and ultimately burned to stay within 1.5 degrees. Since reserves are factored into current company valuations, this means the CPPIB has invested billions of dollars in companies whose financial worth depends on overshooting their carbon budget.”  This aspect of the report was highlighted in an article in The Narwhal .

Fossil Futures also considers why the CPPIB has lagged the rest of the world in climate responsibility, stating that “the board of directors and staff are entangled with the oil and gas industry. For example, one of the CPPIB’s managing directors of energy and resources sits on the board of nine oil and gas companies.”  And as for its traditional position that it has not divested from fossil fuel companies so that it can influence their direction on environmental issues, Fossil Futures concludes: “The CPPIB’s attempts to draw on proxy voting as a central tool to address climate in its portfolio appears ineffective at best, but at worst may misinform beneficiaries expecting a more stringent and meaningful climate strategy.”

Fossil Futures makes recommendations for both the CPPIB and the Canadian government:

  • The CPPIB should: 1. Carry out a portfolio-wide risk analysis in the context of the climate emergency and disclose all findings to pension members. 2. Divest and reinvest. The surest way to address the financial and ethical risks associated with investment in the fossil fuel industry is to start the process of divestment. This means freezing any new fossil fuel investment, developing a plan to first remove highrisk companies from portfolios such as coal, oil sands and fracked gas producers, and finally, moving toward sector-wide divestment and reinvestment of capital into renewable energy sources. 3. Advocate for strong climate policy. Scientific and economic experts predict that climate change beyond 1.5 degrees will result in widespread political, social and economic decline, with the attendant impacts on pension returns. While pension plans are incapable of preventing such changes on their own, managers of these plans can become strong advocates for climate policy that is in alignment with their intergenerational fiduciary duty.

 

  • The Canadian government should: 1. Require full public disclosure of climate risk—including disclosure of all fossil fuel holdings—for all pension funds. California recently passed a law requiring that its major public pensions disclose climate risk. The Canadian government should do the same with the CPPIB. 2. Provide regulatory clarity to ensure that executing fiduciary duty means avoiding shortterm economic gains that imperil long-term climatic security for Canadians and the global community. 3. Revise the CPPIB’s “investment-only” mandate so that social and ecological values are better represented in investment decisions. It is unclear that securing retirement income by investing in tobacco companies, weapons manufacturers, private prisons and the fossil fuel companies responsible for the climate emergency is aligned with the interests of current or future beneficiaries.

 

Is+your+pension+part+of+the+solution+-+Shift+graphicAction item:   Tides Canada campaign has launched a new campaign, called Shift your Pension, for individuals who are concerned about their pensions – both the financial health and the impact on the climate crisis.  It allows you to send your own message to the CPPIB as well as provincially-managed public sector pension funds.

Ontario updates: Advisory Panel on Climate Change appointed; Auditor General pans climate policies; Ontario youth launch new lawsuit

Post updated November 6:

In a November 28 press release,  Ontario’s  Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks announced the appointment of an Ontario Advisory Panel on Climate Change . The press release quotes the new Chair, Paul Kovacs who states: “The knowledge exists to prevent losses from flooding, wildfire and other climate extremes…. “Members of the advisory panel on climate change look forward to working with the Government of Ontario to champion climate resilience. Working together, we can break the alarming trend of rising severe weather damage to homes, businesses and public infrastructure. Action on climate resilience is a critical element of a comprehensive strategy on climate change.”

Members of the Advisory Panel come from a variety of sectors including non-profits, agriculture, insurance, and reflect the Panel’s focus on adaptation and conservation concerns. Neither green advocacy groups nor workers are represented. The brief bios of panelists are here :  Chair Paul Kovacs is founder and Executive Director of the  Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction at Western University; Vice-Chair Lynette Mader is the Manager of Provincial Operations for Ontario for Ducks Unlimited Canada and an expert on species-at-risk.  The other eight Panel members include Blair Feltmate , head of the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation at the University of Waterloo and Chair of the Government of Canada Expert Panel on Climate Adaptation and Resilience Results.

ontario auditor general 2019The Advisory Panel was announced on the one-year anniversary of the Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan.   On December 4,  that policy initiative was reviewed when the provincial Auditor General tabled her annual report in the Legislature, including  Volume 2:  Reports on the Environment . In 183 pages and three chapters, the report provides an overview of  1. environmental issues in Ontario; 2. Operation of the Environmental Bill of Rights, and 3. Climate Change: Ontario’s plan to reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The report details the government’s performance and finds that it has double-counted emissions reductions in some cases, over-estimated potential impacts of its own policies,  and is nowhere near able to meet its own 2030 emissions reductions targets.   The National Observer summarizes the report in “Ontario Auditor General slams Doug Ford’s climate policies”  and an analysis at the  TVO website tells a similar story in  “Ontario’s Auditor General gives the Tories’ climate plan a failing grade”.  This latest report follows on the previous  highly-critical report of the outgoing Environmental Commissioner,  A Healthy, Happy, Prosperous Ontario: Why we need more energy conservation  (March 2019), and  the Failure to Launch   report in October 2019 by Environmental Defence.

Youth launch lawsuit against Ontario government

All of these negative findings won’t help the government as they prepare to defend themselves against a new  climate change lawsuit by Ontario youth  who claim that the  Ford government’s softening of emissions reductions targets “will lead to widespread illness and death,” and thus has violated their charter rights under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Seven  applicants from communities across Ontario, ranging in age from 12 to 24, are represented by lawyers from Ecojustice and Stockwoods LLP .  Details are in the Ecojustice  Case Backgrounderan overview of the action appears in the National Observer in  “These Ontario kids are taking climate protest from streets to courthouse” (Nov. 26).

mathur v province of ontario

66 recommendations from Special Advisor in investigation of Ontario’s 2019 record-setting floods

Disastrous and record-setting flooding occurred across the province of Ontario between April and July 2019, with 23 municipalities declaring states of emergencies.  In July 2019, the government appointed Doug McNeil, an experienced public servant from Manitoba, as Special Advisor on Flooding , with a mandate to consider the flood management and land use systems in Ontario.  His report was submitted to the government on October 31 and made public on November 28 – the press release is here. flooding firefighterThe 157-page  Report of an Independent review of the 2019 flood events in Ontario describes in detail the complex administrative and regulatory system which governs the province’s flood management , and  concludes that “the government and its partners were effective at reducing and mitigating flood risks…. the flooding was caused by a combination of weather conditions and found no human error or negligence in the operation  of “water control structures” (translation: dams).

Reaction to the report includes “Doug Ford government ducks fiscal responsibility for severe flooding” in the National Observer  (November 28) – which points out: “The first Ford budget had slashed by 50 per cent the flood management funds given to conservation authorities by his ministry to protect Ontario’s watersheds and canceled tree-planting efforts that limit flood damage.”  A Toronto Globe and Mail article focuses on the home-owners perspective in their overview “Ontario homes at risk of flooding should be made public: report”The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority reacted positively– their press release notes that many of their recommendations and comments about urban flooding were incorporated in the Special Advisor’s recommendations.  It is notable that the Chair of the TRCA was appointed on the same day as a member of Ontario’s new Advisory Panel on Climate Change.

The Special Advisor makes sixty-six recommendations for improved action and coordination by the provincial ministries and conservation authorities, and calls for sustained funding for  budgets related to flood management .  Recommendations include:

  • #3: “That the following be incorporated into the Provincial Policy Statement: • The reference to “impacts of a changing climate” throughout the Provincial Policy Statement helps to bring it to everyone’s attention and should be included in the Preamble as well.”
  • #15: That the Province consider adopting legislation that will require flood risk properties to be identified in some way that is publicly accessible, at the very least on the property title, to ensure that prospective buyers are aware.
  • #16 That municipalities consider utilizing local improvement charges to help finance and install (or upgrade) shoreline protection works, and if necessary, that the Province provide municipalities with enhanced authority to do so.
  • #52: That the Province continue the dialogue with the Insurance Bureau of Canada and the federal government on the steps needed to make flood insurance more available to more Ontarians.
  • #66: That the Province maintain, at a minimum, the current level of funding in departmental budgets and programs related to everything flood (i.e. existing approval processes and associated policies and technical requirements, floodplain mapping, maintenance of flood infrastructure, satellite imagery, etc.).