COP26, supposedly humanity’s “last best chance,” struggled to yield even faint hope of keeping temperatures from rising 2 C, let alone 1.5 C. Even so, egged on by catastrophists and the mainstream media, Canadian politicians are adopting increasingly damaging climate policies. Should we be surprised that Canada’s delegation to COP26 was the world’s largest? Surprised, not so much. Appalled, definitely.

So far, our politicians still seem to be supported by a public they have bombarded with dire warnings about an existential climate emergency, while dishonestly downplaying the costs of mitigation and ignoring the reality that Canada is too small a global emitter, at 1.53 per cent of the world total, to achieve anything measurable. Moreover, at least one of their hugely expensive initiatives is actually environmentally counter-productive: the missed opportunity to export oil and gas to Asia to substitute for higher-emitting coal.

Prime Minister Trudeau and many premiers will not have the intellectual honesty to concede their policies are ineffectual and will reduce our standard of living and endanger our security and national unity. Candour would produce a political backlash that would undermine public support for green initiatives and imperil their own political survival. So instead we are treated to shameless misrepresentation and mindless self-harm.

Quebec Premier François Legault recently announced he will block further exploitation and development of fossil fuels in the province, which at COP26 joined the Denmark- and Costa Rica-led BOGA (Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance). According to the Montreal Economic Institute, the opportunity cost of abandoning Quebec’s hydrocarbon resources would be over 9,000 jobs, $93 billion in wealth and $15 billion in funding to the government. Meanwhile, the province is importing some 300,000 barrels of oil per day and spending $5 billion annually for Alberta and U.S. energy. Oil and gas make up over 80 per cent of its trade deficit.

The premier was aware of that potential eight years ago when he wrote about the enormous resources in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. “Quebecers have the duty to explore and extract these fossil fuels to help reduce their dependence on foreign oil and to guarantee their future well-being.” And he cited Norway as an example of the benefits of resource development to national prosperity and public wealth accumulation. No more. Now Quebec, along with New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, have banned fracking, which enabled the U.S. to become the world’s leading producer of natural gas and oil.

The most prominent politician to contradict previous pronouncements is Justin Trudeau, who in a March 2017 speech in Houston said that “there is no path to prosperity in Canada that does not include a thriving, vibrant energy sector, both traditional and renewable … no country would find 173 billion barrels of oil in the ground and just leave them there.” He could have added mention of the 1,383 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, enough for 300 years at current production. Also the fact that the energy industry represents over 10 per cent of Canada’s economy, creates 830,000 direct and indirect jobs and generates a quarter of our exports.

That was then. Now, former (?) radical activist Steven Guilbeault is minister responsible for the environment and climate change. In Glasgow, Trudeau reaffirmed a hard cap on oil and gas emissions and an eventual move off of fossil fuels entirely. His government’s intent to destroy the oil and gas industry is explicit and unrelenting. The only unsettled issue is timing.

As a wealthy country, Canada can indulge in costly virtue-signalling and moral gestures — up to a point. But it cannot afford to live beyond its means indefinitely. Eventually, it will hit a fiscal wall. And the provinces will hit the wall first, since they cannot print money.

Meanwhile, it’s “Drill, baby, drill!” in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Russia, Qatar, Norway and other resource-rich exporters, including even the United States, which, despite new restrictions on drilling on federal land, continues to enjoy the benefits of the fracking revolution. A global energy crisis has dramatically increased oil and gas prices. Irate Brits and Germans are rebelling against the deprivation wrought by green policies, as they confront blackouts this winter. Developing countries, the biggest emitters, are determined to provide whatever fuel is available to their most impoverished citizens. Ironically, two coal plants were paid an exorbitant £4,000/MWh to keep the lights on for COP26 delegates because the wind was not blowing on command — this as a resolution to restrict coal use was being rejected by the U.S., India, China and Australia.

Though Trudeau is inflicting hardship on Canadians to advance his obsession with the sin of emissions, he is insulated from any personal sacrifice and, in a few years, may seek sunnier pastures. Ravaging the hated energy industry is sure to burnish his resume for a gig as head of an environmental consulting firm or multilateral organization. Will he regret leaving behind a polarized, debt-ridden country that missed out on its vast potential or, like Édith Piaf, will he regret nothing?