Tag Archives: world economics

How Canada Can Help Repair Today’s Global Trading System

The article below (Furthering the Benefits of Global Economic Integration through
Institution Building: Canada as 2024 Chair of CPTPP) was first published by the C.D. Howe Institute by Paul Jenkins and Mark Kruger.

Introduction

Over the last 10 to 15 years, the global economy has become fragmented. There are many reasons for this fragmentation – both economic and geopolitical. A particularly important factor has been the inability of the institutions that provide the governance framework for international trade and finance to adapt to the changing realities of the global economy.

This erosion is reflected in the cycles of outcome-based measures of globalization, such as trade-to-GDP ratios. Research indicates that the development of institutions that promote global integration is highly correlated with more rapid economic growth. To secure the benefits of economic integration, the international community should re-commit to a set of common rules. This should involve the renewal of existing institutions in line with current economic realities.


But institutional renewal alone is not sufficient. Nurturing and growing new institutions are also critical, especially ones reflecting the realities of today’s global economy. Most promising in this regard is the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).


The CPTPP is seen as a “next generation” trade agreement. It takes World Trade Organization (WTO) rules further in several key areas, such as electronic commerce, intellectual property, and state-owned enterprises.
Expansion of CPTPP represents a unique opportunity to strengthen global trade rules, deepen global economic cooperation on trade and sustain an open global trading system. The benefits for Canada of an expanded CPTPP are further diversification of its export markets and deepened ties with countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

Trusted Policy Intelligence


The challenge to enabling broad-based accession to CPTPP is geopolitical, reflecting the rising aspirations of the developing world, the associated
heightened contest between democracy and autocracy, and the prioritization of security. Indeed, for many, today’s security concerns are at the forefront, trumping economic issues. We argue that recognition of the economic benefits
of global economic integration must also remain at the forefront, and that research presented in this paper shows that institutional building is at the core
of securing such benefits.


As 2024 Chair of the CPTPP Commission, Canada has an opportunity to play a leadership role, as it did in the creation of the Bretton Woods institutions 80 years ago, by again promoting global institution building, this time through the successful accession of countries to the CPTPP, both this year and over the long run.

  1. Cycles in Global Economic Integration
    Former US Fed Chair Bernanke points out that the process of global economic integration has been going on for centuries. New technologies have been a major force in linking economies and markets but the process has not been a smooth and steady one. Rather, there have been waves of integration, dis-integration, and re-integration.
    Before World War I, the global economy was connected by extensive international trade, investment, and financial flows. Improved transportation – steamships, railways and canals – and communication – international mail and the telegraph – facilitated this “first era of globalization.” The gold standard linked countries financially and promoted currency stability. Trade barriers were reduced by the adoption of standardized customs procedures and trade regulations. The movement of goods, capital, and people was relatively unrestricted.
    The outbreak of World War I frayed global economic ties and set the stage for a more fragmented interwar period. The Treaty of Versailles imposed
    punitive measures on Germany, exacerbating economic hardships. Protectionist policies, such as high tariffs and competitive devaluations, became widespread as countries prioritized domestic interests.
    The collapse of the gold standard further destabilized international finance. In contrast to the cooperation seen before the war, countries pursued economic nationalism and isolationism.
    Protectionism increased in the 1930s as a result of the dislocation caused by the Great Depression. In an attempt to shield domestic industries from foreign competition and address soaring unemployment, many countries imposed tariffs and trade barriers.
    The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in the United States exemplified this trend, triggering a series of beggar-thy-neighbour policies. These protectionist policies exacerbated the downturn and contributed to a contraction in international trade that worsened the severity and duration of the Great Depression.
    Mindful of the lessons of the 1930s, a more liberal economic order was established in the aftermath of World War II. The creation of the Bretton Woods Institutions – the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) – provided the principal mechanisms for managing and governing the global economy over the second half of the 20th century.
    Building on the GATT, the formation of the World Trade Organization in 1995 provided the institutional framework for overseeing international trade and settling disputes. China became the 143rd member of the WTO in 2001 and almost all global trade became subject to a common set of rules.
    The rise and fall of international economic governance are reflected in the cycles of outcome-based measures of globalization. Looking at trade openness, i.e., the sum of exports and imports as a percentage of GDP, the IMF divides the process of global integration into five periods: (i) the
    industrialization era, (ii) the interwar era, (iii) the Bretton Woods era, (iv) the liberalization era, and (v) “slowbalization” (Figure 1).
    Many factors have contributed to the plateauing of trade openness in the last 10 to 15 years. The fallout from the Global Financial Crisis was severe and the recovery was tepid. Brexit, with its inward-looking perspective, has disengaged the UK from Europe.
    Populist protectionism has led to “re-shoring” in an effort to address rising inequalities and labour’s falling share of national income. There has been far-reaching cyclical and structural fallout from COVID-19.
    And while the AI revolution portends significant opportunities, uncertainties over labour displacement abound.
    Geopolitics has also played a critical role. Security concerns have become more important, trumping economic issues in the eyes of many. This has led to multiple sanctions, along with export and investment controls, being imposed to protect national security interests.
    The IMF has carried out several modelling exercises that estimate the consequences of fragmentation if further trade and technology barriers were to be imposed. The studies employ a variety of assumptions regarding trade restrictions and technology de-coupling. In summary, the cost of further fragmentation ranges from 1.5 to 6.9 percent of global GDP. As with all modelling exercises, a degree of caution is warranted. At the same time, these studies should not be viewed as upper-bound estimates because they disregard many other transmission channels of global economic integration.
  2. De Jure and De Facto Globalization
    In assessing the evolution of globalization, however, it would be misleading to focus too narrowly on outcome-based measures such as the trade-to-GDP ratio depicted in Figure 1.
    The data compiled by KOF, a Swiss research institute, provide a more nuanced view of global economic integration. KOF constructs globalization
    indices that measure integration across economic, social, and political dimensions. Its globalization indices are among the most widely used in academic literature. KOF’s data set covers 203 countries over the period 1970 to 2021. Our focus here is on KOF’s economic indices.
    In terms of economic globalization, KOF looks at the evolution of finance as well as trade. Moreover, one of the unique aspects of KOF’s work is that it examines globalization on both de facto and de jure bases.
    KOF’s de facto globalization indices measure actual international flows and activities. In terms of trade, it includes cross-border goods and services flows and trading partner diversity. For financial globalization, its indices measure stocks of international assets and liabilities as well as cross-border payments and receipts.
    KOF’s de jure globalization indices try to capture the policies and conditions that, in principle, foster these flows and activities. For trade globalization,
    these include income from taxes on trade, non-tariff barriers, tariffs, and trade agreements. De jure financial globalization is designed to measure the institutional openness of a country to international financial flows and investments. Variables to measure capital account openness, investment restrictions and international agreements and treaties with investment provisions are included in these indices.
    The trends in KOF’s de facto and de jure economic globalization indices are shown in Figure 2. Both globalization measures increased rapidly from 1990
    until the Global Financial Crisis. Both measures subsequently plateaued. In 2020, as the global pandemic took hold, the de facto index plunged to its
    lowest level since 2011. In 2021, it recovered half of the distance it lost the previous year. The de jure index has essentially been flat for the last decade.
    There has been a sharp divergence between KOF’s de facto and de jure trade globalization measures in the last five years (Figure 3). By 2020, de facto trade globalization had dropped to a 25-year low. Although it recovered somewhat in 2021, it remains well below the average of the last decade. In contrast, de jure trade globalization levelled off after the Global Financial
    Crisis. It reached a modest new high in 2019 and has essentially remained there since then.
    The trends in financial globalization are almost the reverse of those of trade globalization. De facto financial globalization continued to increase through
    2020 and dipped slightly in 2021. De jure financial globalization has been essentially flat over the last two decades (Figure 4).
    The KOF researchers provide convincing econometric evidence that economic globalization supports per capita GDP growth. Importantly,
    their analysis shows that institutions matter. They demonstrate that the positive impact on growth from trade and financial globalization comes from
    institutional liberalization rather than greater economic flows. Through a series of panel regressions, the researchers show that it is the de jure trade and financial globalization indices that are correlated with more rapid per capita GDP growth. In contrast, there is no significant relationship between growth and the de facto indices.
    KOF’s conclusions are consistent with the work of Rodrik, Subramanian and Trebbi who examine the contributions of institutions, geography, and trade
    in determining relative income levels around the world. They find that institutional quality “trumps everything else.” Once institutions are controlled for, conventional measures of geography have weak effects on incomes and the contribution of trade is generally not significant.
    Thus, to recapture the economic benefits of free trade and open markets, countries need to recommit to finding ways to further de jure globalization; that is, putting in place the institutional building blocks in
    support of enhanced trade and financial integration.
  3. Geopolitical Realities
    Institutional reform, however, requires trust and mutual respect among partners. Many would argue that such trust and respect is in limited supply
    today, especially between the United States and China. The United States is willing to endure the costs of heightened protectionism to purportedly
    strengthen the resilience of its economy and secure greater political security. This has resulted in multiple sanctions, particularly in areas of digital technologies.
    In response, China, amongst other measures, has imposed export controls on critical minerals used in advanced technology in defence of its geopolitical goals.
    Yet, as discussed by Fareed Zakaria in a Foreign Affairs article, The Self-Doubting Superpower, China has become the second largest economy in the world richer and more powerful within an integrated global economic system; a system that if overturned would result in severely negative consequences for China.
    For the United States, its inherent strength has been its commitment to open markets and its vision of the world that has considered the interests of others. In many respects, it remains uniquely capable of playing the central role in sustaining the global economic system.
    Following a recent trip to China, Treasury Secretary Yellen stated that “the relationship between the United States and China is one of the most consequential of our time,” and that it “is possible to achieve an economic
    relationship that is mutually beneficial in the long-run – one that supports growth and innovation on both sides.”
    This means that the United States would need to accommodate China’s legitimate efforts to sustain a rising standard of living for its citizens, while
    deterring illegitimate ones. For China, it would mean a clear and abiding commitment to an open, rules-based global economic system.
    It appears that there is currently no clear path forward for this change in mindset, given what many see as insurmountable geopolitics in both the United States and China. Yet, history shows that achieving and sustaining long-term economic growth is in every country’s best interest, and that such growth is best secured through ongoing global economic integration.
  4. A Way Forward
    Recent discussions at the IMF’s Annual Meeting in Marrakech about IMF quota reform, including quota increases and realignment in quota shares to
    better reflect members’ relative positions in the global economy, are important signals of possible renewal.
    Similarly, calls to revamp the World Bank’s mandate, operational model, and ability to finance global public goods, such as climate transition, reflect a growing consensus that the Bretton Woods Institutions must change in the face of today’s realities.
    But institutional renewal alone is insufficient.
    Broad-based accession to the CPTPP represents a unique opportunity to strengthen global governance overall, and to address common challenges in ways that benefit both countries as well as the global economy.
    The CPTPP sets a high bar, requiring countries to:
  • eliminate or substantially reduce tariffs and other
    trade barriers;
  • make strong commitments to opening their markets;
  • abide by strict rules on competition, government
    procurement, state-owned enterprises, and
    protection of foreign companies; and
  • operate within, as well as help promote, a
    predictable, comprehensive framework in the critical
    area of digital trade flows.
    The United Kingdom formally agreed to join the
    CPTPP in July 2023. Once its Parliament ratifies
    the Agreement, the UK will join Australia, Brunei
    Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico,
    New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam in the
    trading block.
    Such a diverse membership clearly demonstrates
    that countries do not have to be geographically close
    to form an effective trading block.
    A half-dozen other countries have also applied
    to join the CPTPP, with China’s application having
    been the earliest received.
    Petri and Plummer estimate that joining the
    CPTPP would yield large economic benefits for
    China and the global economy. For the latter, the
    boost to global GDP would be in the order of $600
    billion annually. The United States in joining would
    gain preferential access to rapidly growing Pacific Rim
    markets. Much of the additional market access would
    come from China’s opening of its service sector.
    Industrial policy and state-owned enterprises,
    however, will continue to play a much larger role
    in China than they do in Western economies. The
    key for China is to demonstrate that a socialist
    market economy (i.e., one that has a mixed capitalist
    market and government-controlled economy) can be
    consistent with fair trade.
    The process of China joining the CPTPP will
    undoubtedly be time-consuming. It took 15 years of
    negotiations before China joined the WTO in 2001.
    This was five more years, on average, than it took
    those countries that joined after 1995.
    The challenge for Canada, and subsequent chairs,
    is to ensure that China’s entry maintains the high
    standards CPTPP members have met so far.
    Broad based accession to the CPTPP, including
    the United States and China, however, is best viewed
    Page 8 Verbatim
    Trusted Policy Intelligence
    as a long-term goal. China would need to undertake
    unprecedented reforms, involving complex political
    challenges, including Taiwan’s potential accession. For
    its part, the United States would need to step well
    back from its current mercantilist mind set, which
    risks worsening.

Canada as Chair in 2024

While efforts to renew existing global institutions to better reflect current economic realities are important, we see promoting broad accession to the CPTPP as the best means to turn today’s global economic fragmentation around.
At the heart of the global economic system is the open trading framework put in place at Bretton Woods in 1944. Many would see today’s fragmentation as becoming more acute, rather than getting better, due to geopolitical divisions.
But further fragmentation is no way to save the open, rules-based global trading system that has served so many countries so well for so long.


While restrictions reflecting legitimate security concerns are inevitable, an open, competitive trading system remains in the best interests of all countries.
As 2024 Chair of the CPTPP Commission, Canada has an opportunity to contribute to turning around the fragmentation of today’s global trading system and moving the global economy back along a path towards a
more open, rules-based trading system.


An important goal for Canada’s chairmanship would be to clarify the rules of accession. This would be a big step forward in sustaining expansion of CPTPP. While today’s geopolitical realities surrounding the applications of both China and Taiwan represent a particularly challenging area to advance, significant progress in other areas must be made. It should accelerate inclusion of Costa Rica, Uruguay, Ecuador, and Ukraine, all of whom have applied. And it should help move forward discussions with South Korea, Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand, who have expressed interest in joining.


Over and above all that, however, at a more strategic level, Canada should also champion discussion and understanding of why building towards the long-run goal of broad accession to CPTPP is important. Open and inclusive institutions are at the core of providing the benefits of global economic integration to all countries.


Canada will also be Chair of the G7 Summit in 2025. This, along with the various ministerial and officials’ meetings leading up to the Summit, offers another critical avenue for Canada to take a leadership role in sustaining and promoting an open, rules-based global trading system.

    Former Canada Finance Minister’s Thank-You Letter to WEF Suggests More Collaboration Than Disclosed

    Former Finance Minister’s Thank-You Letter to WEF Suggests More Collaboration Than Disclosed
    A press photographer works next to the logo of the World Economic Forum (WEF) at the opening of their annual meeting in Davos on Jan. 15, 2024. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
    Noé Chartier

    By our friends at Epoch Times/ Noé Chartier

    Close interactions between Canadian cabinet ministers and the World Economic Forum are well-documented, but a newly revealed letter suggests forum staff may have been doing more work with the federal government than previously disclosed.

    In an undated letter to a WEF official, former Finance Minister Bill Morneau praised the organization and its collaboration to achieve “common” objectives.

    “I would also like to take this opportunity to express my sincere appreciation to the WEF staff, for the support provided to the Government of Canada,” wrote Mr. Morneau in the letter obtained through the access-to-information regime.

    Neither the WEF nor the Canadian government typically advertise what support the forum provides. The finance department has not replied to a request for information about the date of the letter and details of how WEF staff helped the government.

    The letter was addressed to Philipp Rösler, a former German politician who served as a WEF manager and head of its Centre for Regional Strategies.

    The federal government is known to have been involved in at least two WEF policy initiatives: the Known Traveller Digital Identification (KTDI) project and the Agile Nations network.

    Poilievre Reaffirms Ban on WEF Ties in Conservative Party, Calls Davos Crowd ‘Hypocrites’

    John Robson: The Feds’ Green Dreams Touted at WEF Are Detached From Reality

    KTDI was a pilot project between Canada, the Netherlands, and private sector interests to develop a system of digital credentials for airplane travel between countries. Agile Nations is a group of countries working to streamline regulations to usher in the WEF-promoted “Fourth Industrial Revolution” that includes gene editing and artificial intelligence.

    KTDI began in 2018, and Canada signed onto Agile Nations in November 2020, a few months after Mr. Morneau resigned during the WeCharity scandal. Both projects were worked on while Mr. Morneau was finance minister from 2015 to 2020.

    Since both these projects fell outside of Mr. Morneau’s portfolio as finance minister, it seems to suggest that his letter of appreciation to the WEF was referring to other joint collaborations.

    Canada's then-minister of Finance Bill Morneau speaks to the Canadian Club of Canada in Toronto, on March 6, 2020. (Cole Burston/The Canadian Press)
    Canada’s then-minister of Finance Bill Morneau speaks to the Canadian Club of Canada in Toronto, on March 6, 2020. (Cole Burston/The Canadian Press)

    The WEF’s mission statement says it is dedicated to “improving the state of the world.” It gathers leaders in the fields of politics, business, and activism to promote progressive policies on issues like climate change and making capitalism more “inclusive.” As is routine with the organization, it did not respond to requests for comment.

    Critics of the WEF, which gathers world elites to shape global policies, often disagree with its progressive agenda and warn about its influence on countries.

    “No staff, no ministers, no MPs in my caucus will be involved whatsoever in that organization,” Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre said in January.

    He added that officials who attend the forum’s annual meeting in Davos are “high flying, high tax, high carbon hypocrites” who travel in private jets while telling average citizens not to “heat their homes or drive their pickup trucks.”

    Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has also criticized the WEF, saying in 2022 she finds it “distasteful when billionaires brag about how much control they have over political leaders, as the head of that organization has.”

    Ms. Smith was likely referring to comments made by WEF founder and chairman Klaus Schwab in 2017, when he said said he was “very proud” to “penetrate the cabinets” of world governments, including that of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

    “I know that half of his cabinet or even more than half of his cabinet are actually Young Global Leaders of the World Economic Forum,” Mr. Schwab told an audience at Harvard University.

    WEF founder Klaus Schwab delivers a speech during the "Crystal Award" ceremony at the World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos, on Jan. 16, 2023. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
    WEF founder Klaus Schwab delivers a speech during the “Crystal Award” ceremony at the World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos, on Jan. 16, 2023. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)

    Davos Links

    Mr. Morneau’s letter to the WEF comes from internal Finance Department records and is the only document in the release package that pertains to Mr. Morneau. It consists mostly of praise for the organization.

    “As a Steward of Economic Growth and Social Inclusion, I have had the privilege of observing first-hand and benefiting from the WEF’s important contributions to foster public and private collaboration towards developing concrete solutions for strong, broad-based economic growth,” he wrote, adding that WEF analysis of different topics such as “structural reform priorities” was “helpful to develop substantive policy measures.”

    He wrote that “as we enter another ambitious year for the WEF, I look forward to a continued fruitful collaboration to pursue our common objective of achieving stronger, sustainable and more inclusive growth.”

    Other department records relate to current Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland and her involvement with the WEF. She is a board member of the forum and also an alumnus of the Young Global Leaders program that Mr. Schwab referenced.

    Mr. Morneau, who resigned as minister in 2020, is listed on the WEF website as an “agenda contributor“ and a ”digital member.” He was a regular participant at the group’s annual meetings in Davos, Switzerland, while he was in office.

    During those years, the Finance Department’s media relations office wasn’t shy about advertising ministerial trips to Davos.

    “Canada’s strong presence at the Forum underscores the importance of this meeting for shaping the international agenda and advancing economic opportunities for Canadians,” read a January 2020 press release from the department announcing Mr. Morneau’s trip.

    The Finance Department has not returned inquiries in recent years pertaining to Ms. Freeland’s involvement with the WEF, nor has it issued press releases referencing her involvement.

    Some have questioned whether Ms. Freeland’s role as deputy prime minister and finance minister as well as a forum board member constitutes a conflict of interest. The Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner said in its 2022 annual report it received more than 1,000 requests in a two-month period from members of the public to investigate the participation of MPs and ministers in the WEF.

    The office said the requests “did not provide sufficient information to warrant an investigation.” Ms. Freeland’s leadership position with the WEF has been declared to the office and has therefore been cleared.

    Featured image: Original paintings by R. Delaney.

    International Monetary Fund- World Economy Still Recovering

    The IMF announced today (Tuesday, April 11, 2023) in the World Economic Outlook’s press briefing that the baseline forecast for global output growth is 0.1 percentage point lower than predicted in the January 2023 WEO Update, before rising to 3.0 percent in 2024.

    “The world economy is still recovering from the unprecedented upheavals of the last three years, and the recent banking turmoil has increased uncertainties.”

    “We expect global output growth to fall from 3.4% last year to 2.8% in 2023, before rising to 3% in 2024, mostly unchanged from our January projections. Advanced economies are expected to see an especially pronounced growth slowdown from 2.7% in 2022 to 1.3% in 2023. Global headline inflation is set to fall from 8.7% in 2022 to 7% in 2023 on the back of lower commodity prices but underlying core inflation is proving to be stickier. Importantly, this outlook assumes that recent financial stresses remain contained,” said Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, the IMF’s Chief Economist.

    Much uncertainty clouds the short- and medium-term outlook as the global economy adjusts to the shocks of 2020–22 and the recent financial sector turmoil. Recession concerns have gained prominence, while worries about stubbornly high inflation persist.

    Chart- world economic outlook projections including Canada.

    “Once again, risks are heavily tilted to the downside, they have risen with the recent financial turmoil. Most prominently, recent banking system turbulence could result in a sharper and more persistent tightening of global financial conditions. The simultaneous rate hikes across countries could have more contractionary effects than expected, especially as debt levels are at historical highs. There might be a need for more monetary tightening if inflation remains stickier than expected. These risks and more could all materialize at a time when policymakers face much more limited policy space to offset negative shocks, especially in low-income countries,” added Gourinchas.

    With the fog around current and prospective economic conditions thickening, policymakers have a narrow path to walk towards restoring price stability while avoiding a recession and maintaining financial stability. Achieving strong, sustainable, and inclusive growth will require policymakers to stay agile and be ready to adjust as information becomes available.

    “First, as long as financial stress is not systemic as it is now, the fight against inflation should remain the priority for central banks. Second, to safeguard financial stability, central banks should use separate tools and communicate their objectives clearly to avoid unwarranted volatility. Financial policies should remain laser focused on preserving financial stability and watch for any buildup of risks in banks, non-banks, and the real estate sectors. Third, in many countries fiscal policy should tighten to ease inflation pressures, restore debt sustainability, and rebuild fiscal buffers. Finally, in the event of capital outflows that raise financial stability risks, emerging market and developing economies should use the integrated Policy framework, combining temporary targeted foreign exchange interventions and capital flow measures where appropriate,” said Gourinchas.

    US Climate Scientist Pushes For Canadian Carbon Tax Serfdom?

    (Calgary, Alberta) The Canadian Federation of Taxpayers (CTF) has issued a new report on global carbon taxes, showing most countries have frozen or rolled back carbon taxes, but US climate scientist James Hansen is pushing for a $210/t carbon tax in Canada by 2030Hansen’s argument is that the tax has to be high enough that people will buy into the carbon dividend (rebate to lower income households) – effectively making Canadians into carbon serfs and a carbon welfare society. CTF reports: About half of the emissions covered by carbon taxes are priced below US$10/tCO2e, according to the World Bank’s most recent State and Trends of Carbon Pricing (2019).”  Canada has more than 600 greenhouse gas reduction/incentive measures on the books, which have never been audited for effectiveness.

    This begs the question of “what is a climate scientist doing dabbling in Canada’s domestic affairs on carbon taxes, pushing a carbon tax that is 21 times that of the world,” says Friends of Science Society. 

    As revealed by Lawrence Solomon in the 2009 article “Enron’s Other Secret” “James Hansen, the scientist who more than any other is responsible for bringing the possibility of climate-change catastrophe to the public, was among the scientists Enron commissioned.”

    Chart: How the World Puts a Price on Carbon | Statista

    Enron had profited from cap and trade, but the company collapsed into a pile of ashes in 2001 due to off-book accounting and financial fraud.

    None-the-less, a group of green billionaires took up the global cap-and-trade challenge, apparently working from the Enron carbon/cap-and-trade scheme model, as reported by Nisbet in 2018.  Like Enron, they have funded local and global environmental groups to agitate for policies in countries around the world, favorable to their proposed global cap and trade plan. The plans require a price on carbon with the intention of funding their trillions in vested interests in renewables.  Many of these groups are associated with the Tar Sands Campaign that has falsely created “Fear and Loathing” of the Alberta oil sands and driven a downturn in the economy.

    Michael Moore’s recent movie “Planet of the Humans” revealed how this green crony capitalism is destroying the planet for no climate benefit.

    Canadians now face an onslaught of Carbonbaggers – the number one being Mark Carney, now UN Climate Czar and former Bank of England and Bank of Canada governor.  Carney threatens firms with bankruptcy if they do not comply with his demands to report on climate risk and abandon fossil fuel investments.

    As Robert Lyman’s new report shows: “Broken Promises: Why Renewables Offer No Resilient Recovery”, Carney is misleading the public and investors on global oil consumption and demand.

    Both oil production and consumption have risen by more than one million barrels per day per year since 2012.

    • Oil demand is at its highest level in history.

    • In absolute terms, oil demand is growing twice as fast as renewables.

    • Global oil reserves have risen throughout the period, from 1141 billion barrels in 1998 to 1730 billion barrels in 2018; peak oil is nowhere in sight. That is a 10 million barrel per day increase over the nine years.

    • In absolute terms, natural gas is experiencing the fastest rate of growth of all energy sources, almost three times as fast as renewables.

    • Natural gas demand is at its highest level in history.

    Friends of Science Society says carbon dioxide from human industry is a nominal influence on climate change, known since the 2013 IPCC AR5 report.  The fact that financial ‘experts’ like Mark Carney are still pushing the climate-carbon dioxide catastrophe theme constitutes a violation of securities regulations related to ‘material change’.  Furthermore, as Roger Pielke, Jr. reports, climate catastrophe scenarios are the product of green billionaires pushing the ‘climate porn’ scenario, which is far from reality or business-as-usual.

    “Green” groups in Canada are demanding that the new Canadian Infrastructure Bank be used to finance their green crony capitalist schemes. 

    Friends of Science Society issued a request for ethics investigation into the development of the Canadian Infrastructure Bank in Nov. 2017.  The Conflict of Interest concerns expressed there are still valid in their opinion.

    Evidence from Norway to Zimbabwe shows that carbon taxes have no discernible impact on emissions reduction and are simply oppressive to taxpayers and industry.  Friends of Science Society says Carbonbaggers should not be using carbon taxes as a means of creating a Canadian climate welfare state, especially not driven by foreign influences, street theatre, and deception.

    See “The Roots of Global Warming”.

    About

    Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens who are celebrating its 17th year of offering climate science insights. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).

    Featured image by @HeatherLibby

    Invest In eSports- Ministers Welcome Commonwealth Interventions To Rebuild Hard Hit Sport Sector

    Commonwealth collaboration is vital to the recovery of the sport sector which has suffered a crushing blow from essential measures to stem the spread of COVID-19. This was the recurring theme as sports ministers from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Europe and the Pacific met at a landmark forum on the impact of the pandemic on their sector.

    Countries spoke about the deep health and economic scars left by the closure of community sport, gyms and exercise facilities, the decimation of the local and international sporting calendar, and the loss of revenue from broadcasting and sponsorship deals.

    Screenshot 2020-07-23 at 11.59.23.png

    According to a recent Commonwealth study, while the overall economy of the 54 member countries would contract on average by 3.2 per cent in 2020, the contribution of sport sectors to GDP could drop by well over 20 per cent in several states.

    Commonwealth Secretary-General Patricia Scotland said: “Our countries are shouldering many very heavy burdens as a result of the pandemic. Among these, necessary restrictions affecting the sport sector make much of its future is uncertain and are preventing it from making its much-needed contributions to physical well-being, mental health and economic activity. So it was really encouraging to see how Sports Ministers in our member countries are responding to the effects of COVID-19 with powerful and imaginative initiatives. Return-to-play tool kits, grants for community clubs and virtual programs to help people of all ages to be physically active were among examples shared at the forum. What also came through loud and clear is that by continuing to work together our chances of success in overcoming the impacts of the pandemic are greater, and our recovery will be swifter and more sustainable. Building on existing cooperation and momentum already achieved, the Commonwealth Secretariat has launched a range of innovative projects and programs, based on careful research and analysis, so that in all our member countries sport can be used more effectively to build communities that are socially and economically more resilient with healthier populations”

    Resources such as the new Commonwealth Moves program was shared with ministers to support efforts to get more people active while complying with the rules imposed to suppress the pandemic. The online tool is tailored to tackle the ongoing ‘pandemic’ of immobility, exacerbated by COVID-19 disruptions. It includes activities for all demographics, including young people, the elderly and persons with disabilities. Forum participants expressed strong support for the Secretariat’s initiatives.

    This includes its program on measuring sport’s contribution to the sustainable development goals and its recent online course on designing effective policies and programs.

    Kenya’s Cabinet Secretary for Sports, Culture and Heritage, Amina Mohamed chaired the forum. She said: “This forum was timely and critical for many governments still working very hard to fight the devastating pandemic that ambushed the globe early this year. The forum confirmed an unmistakable desire among Commonwealth Sport Ministers to collaborate, share solutions and pool their collective knowledge aided by the Commonwealth Secretariat including a newly developed pool of resources, carefully crafted to support countries resuscitate sport sectors choked by COVID-19, and ensure that we re-build healthier, more resilient, inclusive and sustainable economies and populations. “

    Ministers at the forum presented how they are responding to the current challenges and planning the safe and staged return-to-sport.

    These range from guidelines for cross border competitions and provisions of economic support for grassroots clubs to investment in the e-sport sector and helplines to address abuse in sport. In a statement released after the forum, sports ministers agreed that future policies, programs and competitions should integrate delivery modifications and virus suppression measures, and that the sector should be a focus of recovery and rebuilding efforts. 
    For the Silo, Snober Abbasi.

    VisaNet Connects Two And A Half Billion Credit Cards

    One of the many ways the Internet is driving the global economy is through digital payments, making it easy for consumers to buy just about anything from anywhere. VisaNet is the largest payment processing network in the world, connecting 2.4 billion credit cards at 36 million locations across 200 countries.