Dear Editor,
And here I thought there were things governments could do to make our planet safer from the ravages of manmade climate change - offer subsidies to those who give us cleaner energy alternatives, or regulations to those who pollute.
Then, those of us who want to save our earthly home from climate catastrophe, can simply vote for the Party that seems most likely to do these things.
The “At Issue" panel on CBC TV reminded me just how wrong I was, when they recently discussed the topic of Alberta, now facing epic wildfires amidst an election campaign.
The guest panelist from Alberta thought “Danielle,” (Premier Danielle Smith) was “generally acting as a Premier” in the face of the crisis. (I wonder if she knows him as “Jason?”) The other panelists generally thought the way the Premier was handling things would probably be seen as "a plus,” too.
Never mind that, it wasn't that long ago that Smith considered the science of climate change, “unsettled,” or now describes the federal program to transition away from fossil fuels, “an existential threat.”
Neither does it apparently matter that, when Premier herself, Rachel Notley moved to phase out coal and place a cap on oil sands emissions.
I believe this panel, which mostly offers intelligent insight into world affairs, missed the mark this time.
They also insulted Alberta voters by suggesting they'll be basing their votes - not on solid, science-based policies which will make or break a successful, long-term counter-offensive against these"Hellfires" - but rather on a death-bed display of “showmanship” in the final days of a campaign.
Larry Powell
SHOAL LK MB
