Skip to main content

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau and delegates to the UN climate conference

LosAlamosLaboratory via Flickr

It’s time for Canada to become a global climate action leader. 

With policy-makers representing all levels of government coming together in Paris for the United Nations climate conference, Canada has an unprecedented opportunity to emerge as a front-runner on the road to developing a stronger, cleaner global economy. 

To seize this opportunity, leaders like you must work together in the best interests of all Canadians. The policies and technologies needed to solve the climate crisis already exist and are being used across the country. 

I urge you to advocate for these five outcomes from Canada in Paris: 

1. A responsible plan with clear, ambitious targets to cut carbon emissions.
2. A national price on carbon emissions to accelerate solutions. 
3. Investment in green and low-carbon infrastructure like transit and renewable energy. 
4. Strong efficiency standards for vehicles and buildings. 
5. A fair commitment to support developing nations in pursuing sustainable economies. 

As our leaders, you must work together to develop a coordinated plan to ensure Canada builds a national clean economy and that we do our part to support developing nations in strengthening their economies in the most responsible way possible. 

As a Canadian, I believe our country has the resources, workforce and leadership to show the world that prosperity doesn’t have to be at the expense of our environment and security. 

I ask you and your fellow Canadian delegates at the Paris climate summit to work to support an agreement that will promote healthier communities; a cleaner, more diversified economy and prevent global average temperatures from rising beyond a safe level.

Sincerely

Janet Vickers

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Ultimate Goal of Patriarchy is the End of Life

I want to clarify the line between men in general and patriarchal values propagated and imposed on human society.


In order for patriarchy to succeed, it had to kill more efficiently than the nine months gestation it took for a woman to give birth.  So the craft of war  became more than simply defending territory. It became the ritualized erasure of our human nature for the rule of centralized power. 

And no, it hasn't succeeded in diminishing the human population on this planet but it has succeeded in sustaining an ideology of what it means to be a man. 

Civilizations built on myths of great conquerors. Histories about the exploits of the greatest killers. Inventions of race, religious ideology and ritual that transformed the teachings of thoughtful prophets into crusades. Endless games of winning and losing.
Men who celebrate life through medicine, science, education, art, philosophy and poetry must be dismissed as soft, shamed as effeminate. 

Men who have been raised with love, love …

Anonymous Sources

Where does "Greatness" come from? The imagination? Facts? Confidence? A willing suspension of disbelief in a slogan that makes us happy? A capacity to judge well? An ability to observe and find solutions that benefit most if not all? Taking responsibility for the community? A masters degree from Oxford or Yale?

Let me offer the opinion that greatness comes from extraordinary effort or talent.  Greatness as it may exist in our anonymous ambitions does not win fame except in isolated circumstances.  That is to say, fame is not a realistic goal for an individual.

Greatness is like a dove in the imagination, an angel, a temporary insight, a fleeting epiphany. Something aspired to in the privacy of our minds.

Greatness was an ambition I held when I was a teen and had no proof that I was good at anything or useful to the world at all. After repeated criticism and dismissal from the community around me where I attempted to win something, anything, like a medal, a competition, or a…

Torturing Youth is Okay with us?

“More than two-thirds of Canadians feel Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made the wrong choice in awarding a $10.5 million settlement to Omar Khadr, according to a new poll by the Angus Reid Institute.” CBC News
But we don’t see the survey questions in this article. How was the poll actually worded? Reading one article might make us believe we are well informed, but how does a single poll actually tell us how people feel?  
“And while the survey shows that a majority of Liberals and New Democrats are opposed to the government's decision, how the numbers compare to previous polling suggests that views on Khadr have hardened over the last decade — and that he remains a divisive figure.”
How can a single poll tell whether Khadr is a divisive figure or not? What information do respondents have to make such a claim? 
The article then switches to a former US special force soldier who was blinded in one eye during the 2002 firefight in Afghanistan involving Khadr.  Of course he would be critica…