麻豆传媒AV

The Justin Trudeau-led federal government is coming up on five months at the helm in Canada.

If one were to read the gospel of the right wing on social media the Liberals have accomplished nothing, and because of that five months of non-Conservative rule the country lies of the cusp of oblivion.

The rhetoric has gone as far as to suggest Trudeau the worst Prime Minister in our history, with calls that we should rise up as a society signing petitions to somehow have him and his party plucked from power already.

Of course such contentions are absurd.

No PM can be judged on a mere five months, and while one might not like his approach, there is little done that would suggest he should be toppled just yet.

So we take such social media ranting as Conservative supporters still licking their wounds after former PM Stephen Harper botched up the election to the point of being relegated to the Opposition.

There are of course those on the same social media sites very much still basking in the glow of a fresh vision for Canada, one not as right wing as the last decade, a view supporters see as far more inclusive, tolerant, and with a view to the importance of Canada playing a role in the world outside its borders.

But that too may be a vision which needs tempered.

The truth is when it comes to what is actually transpiring social media is hardly the best place to monitor things. Hyperbole reins on such sites.

So what of the first few months?

In terms of farming not a lot has changed, although the muzzles placed on scientists by the Harper regime do seem to have been loosened, if not completely removed. That is an important step as farming will face pressures in the mid-term as climates change. You can argue the cause, and quibble over the ultimate impact of change, but it is occurring, and farmers will need the best science to adapt to such change.

In terms of climate change Trudeau managed to find agreement from the country鈥檚 premiers on a broad strategy to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and build Canada鈥檚 clean economy at a recent First Minister鈥檚 meeting,

The PM and premiers agreed additional action is needed to meet and exceed Canada鈥檚 international commitment to reduce greenhouse gases by 30 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030.

The Ministers meeting was a follow-up of sorts to a Paris climate conference, in which 196 countries concluded an agreement aimed at holding global warming to less than two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels to avert the worst impacts of climate change.

Trudeau was also looking for agreement to establish a minimum carbon price that would apply across the country but allow provinces to choose the approach and collect the revenue.

A carbon tax is usually defined as a tax based on greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) generated from burning fuels. It puts a price on each tonne of GHG emitted, sending a price signal that will, over time, elicit a powerful market response across the entire economy, resulting in reduced emissions. It has the advantage of providing an incentive without favouring any one way of reducing emissions over another. By reducing fuel consumption, increasing fuel efficiency, using cleaner fuels and adopting new technology, businesses and individuals can reduce the amount they pay in carbon tax, or even offset it altogether.

In Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall was quick in balking at Trudeau鈥檚 plan.

So in true political form they tweaked the agreement to make it ambiguous enough for all and came away with everyone鈥檚 signatures.

The compromise language 鈥� endorses the need for 鈥渃arbon pricing mechanisms adapted to each province鈥檚 and territory鈥檚 specific circumstances鈥�, but details will only come after a few months of negotiation to determine how every can save face and little will be done which is meaningful to the future of the environment.

Of course a carbon tax of any meaningful design is going to cost money, either in paying it, or upgrading facilities to reduce the emissions. That is the idea to protect the environment long term.

But we are in financial straits right now so Wall contends the idea is ill-timed, not that he or the previous federal government addressed the situation through stronger economic times.

Wall would rather build a pipeline east to prop up a sagging western pool sector.

Trudeau has taken lots of heat over not cramming the pipeline into existence, but the PM does seem on the same side as Wall, just that he鈥檇 like to build consensus rather than force feed the country the pipeline east.

Opening the Globe 2016 Leadership Summit in Vancouver on Wednesday Trudeau seemed to be saying projects such as the Energy East pipeline are needed in the short to midterm as a bridge.

鈥淲e want the low-carbon economy that continues to provide good jobs and great opportunities for all Canadians,鈥� he said in an article at www.nationalobserver.com

鈥淭o get there, we need to make smart strategic investments in clean growth and new infrastructure, but we must also continue to generate wealth from our abundant natural resources to fund this transition to a low-carbon economy.鈥�

And that is what a new PM should be doing. There needs to be concessions to ensure the present, but with an eye to making thing better over the long term.

The path to making both happen are far better having consensus, like the aforementioned agreement by the Premiers to see change by 2030, than being the heavy hand of Ottawa bludgeoning opponents into submission.

How Trudeau manages the balancinging act will determine how he ranks among Canadian PMs, but that is to be determined in the years ahead, not on a hand full of months at the controls.

Calvin Daniels is Assistant Editor with Yorkton This Week.