The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - April 23, 2024


Canada's climate tyrant doesn't care what the courts say


Episode Stats


Length

10 minutes

Words per minute

187.57845

Word count

1,943

Sentence count

126


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Environment Minister Stephen Gilbeau is fighting a federal court ruling that strikes down his ban on single-use plastic cups and utensils. Vashi Capellos of CTV News pushes back, pointing out that the court last year ruled that the ban was unconstitutional.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
00:00:00.000 I think it stands to reason by observing their behavior. If every federal liberal minister was
00:00:05.520 offered the chance to click a button and become Canada's dictator tomorrow, a lot of them would do
00:00:11.020 it. And I think the man that that is most true about is Canada's environment minister, Stephen
00:00:16.540 Gilboa, a man I don't think actually cares about Canada's constitution whatsoever. He doesn't care
00:00:22.220 about the rule of law or anyone's perspective, but his very own. He is a radical environmentalist.
00:00:28.480 And because he has a radical utopian vision, he believes that anyone in his way is a villain
00:00:34.120 who he must basically either brush aside or destroy. And that's how we get crazy interviews
00:00:40.100 like this, where Vashi Capellos from CTV News is actually pushing back on Stephen Gilboa,
00:00:45.320 pointing out that the court last year said his single-use plastic ban was unconstitutional,
00:00:50.860 a massive overreach of government power. And Gilboa just doesn't seem to get it. He doesn't care.
00:00:55.960 He just thinks that, well, I'm doing the right thing, so I'm allowed to do whatever I want.
00:01:00.060 And I can twist whatever the judge said to basically saying, do whatever you want,
00:01:04.100 Gilboa, wink. And like that, I just have to basically make tiny concessions here and there.
00:01:08.640 Like, no, no, you can't just ban entire materials from being used on a daily basis for functions that
00:01:14.880 they're better at than paper and metal and others. It's insane that he thought this could ever be
00:01:19.580 upheld in even a liberal court, that ban. Anyways, here's the interview. But before I start
00:01:25.920 playing the interview, I just want to do two things. One, point out that that is the ugliest
00:01:30.640 suit I've ever seen. I don't know why he keeps wearing it. It's like plaid, but also baby puke
00:01:36.260 pink. It's horrifying. And then he's wearing like a tie that he stole from a discotheque in the 1970s.
00:01:43.000 Anyways, I hate terrible menswear. It is my biggest pet peeve. But also, I just quickly want to plug
00:01:48.840 the fact that I have the GiveSendGo link for the National Telegraph's legal fund in the description
00:01:52.800 of this video. We're being sued by a Chinese billionaire developer for defamation that he
00:01:57.180 has not actually submitted any evidence to prove after over two years. He's just trying to abuse us
00:02:01.060 in court. And we had a $3,000 bill come up for our legal, you know, our defense. So if you want to
00:02:06.380 donate anything, it really helps us out. GiveSendGo link in the description below. But here's
00:02:10.320 Gilboa being absolutely delusional. I'm glad you brought up the ban that your
00:02:15.660 government brought in. Because I did want to ask you if the recent federal court decision
00:02:20.720 of late last year has that sort of, you know, essentially ruled that something cabinet had
00:02:27.580 decided on that underpinned that ban was constituted overreach. Has that undermined your negotiating
00:02:33.780 position at these at these meetings? Actually, Vashi, the federal court judge didn't rule that
00:02:41.700 it was federal overreach. They said that that judge said that there was, in her view, there
00:02:47.100 wasn't enough scientific evidence to talk about plastics as toxics. That is the definition of
00:02:53.780 overreach. You are trying to ban something that there is no grounds to ban. There is no federal
00:03:00.480 reason in order to ban that. You can't just ban anything and just because, well, we just didn't
00:03:06.540 have enough reason yet to ban it. Like, no, you actually need like an actual immediate threat
00:03:11.660 coming from that object, like asbestos. That makes sense. You can't just say like plastic straws
00:03:16.340 because I don't like them. It's completely insane that they're even thinking that it's
00:03:20.400 environmental to ban plastic straws and other single-use plastics. They take less energy to create
00:03:25.500 than paper products, than metal, and whatnot. But Stephen Gilbeau thinks for some reason that this
00:03:30.840 is not actually a challenge to him. It's just an issue that he has to get around.
00:03:35.180 Products. And I respectfully disagree with that federal court judge, which is why we...
00:03:41.920 It's constitutional ruling. It's not really whether or not you agree with him or not.
00:03:45.600 It depends on how you carry forward. You just are not allowed to get around. You're not allowed to do
00:03:51.780 this ban. Appeal with the federal court of appeal. No one thinks that we can ban our way out of plastic
00:03:57.020 pollution. Stop doing it then. We can't recycle our way out of plastic pollution. We have to adopt
00:04:02.140 a number of different solutions for different stages of plastic pollution and for different types
00:04:06.760 of plastics as well. Sure. Just to respectfully challenge you, though, Minister, my understanding
00:04:11.740 and what I've read from the decision itself was that basically Ottawa had overstepped by labeling
00:04:16.660 all quote-unquote plastic manufactured items as toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection
00:04:21.900 Act. Evidence shows thousands of different items in that category have different uses and chemical
00:04:27.100 makeups. And basically, you couldn't just arbitrarily say all of them constitute the exact same level
00:04:32.660 of toxicity. Is there any way to address that rather than just ask for, you know, appeal and ask for a
00:04:38.860 stay? And does the ban just continue as is in the interim? So, I mean, I think you and I agree that
00:04:47.480 the federal court judge didn't say that federal government was overreaching on plastics. She
00:04:52.560 disagreed with the characterization of plastics as as toxics. This is what we will be debating.
00:04:57.700 Thank you, Vashi, for making the point for me. But yeah, you can't say, well, he's not there. The judge
00:05:04.440 isn't saying that it's overreach. They're just saying that we're way overreaching by banning something
00:05:09.280 that there's no reason to ban because you can't prove it's toxic the same way asbestos and other
00:05:14.180 chemicals are. In the federal. Yeah, exactly. This is we we we stand by that regulation. In fact,
00:05:22.840 the regulation still applies in Canada. The industry is on board. Scientists are on board.
00:05:27.240 The vast majority of governments are on board. Pretty much everyone is on board with the fact
00:05:31.820 that we need to do this and the time to do it is now. No one's on board. It was like one of the most
00:05:37.120 unpopular policies that the liberals have ever pushed forward. It's unpopular in the same way
00:05:42.760 that like Gondek's plastic bag ban is is unpopular. They're very similar policies, as well as the 15
00:05:48.060 cents for fast food bags, which is now thankfully gone in my city. It was the dumbest thing I've ever seen.
00:05:53.160 But it's unpopular with Canadians in even a more intense way than maybe even the carbon tax,
00:05:58.740 because it's just so silly that I go to a fast food restaurant, I have to use a paper straw,
00:06:04.480 because that's what's going to save the environment. They've proven that they don't
00:06:06.900 even really biodegrade. And again, a paper straw, I've seen the studies, the paper straw takes 10 times
00:06:13.920 the amount of energy to create compared to a plastic straw. A reusable bag takes like tons,
00:06:20.540 thousands times more energy to make a reusable bag than a plastic bag. And people are definitely
00:06:26.640 not reusing those things thousands of times. Plus, you got to wash them if they're fabric,
00:06:31.180 or even if they're plastic, simply because you get meat juice on them, you get other sort of materials
00:06:36.480 that can rot that are touching them, you have to wash them, it can entirely defeat the purpose
00:06:41.300 of saving energy. So much so many environmental, like, like measures, regulations, taxes, have no
00:06:49.160 actual bearing on reality, they're not tied to reality on what an actual environmental issue is.
00:06:55.020 If you want to help the environment, you should be using less resources. And oftentimes, that actually
00:07:00.320 means using the most efficient materials. And when you let the market do what it does, it's naturally
00:07:05.840 going to settle on extremely efficient materials. The market doesn't use inefficient high energy cost
00:07:11.540 materials, because high energy cost materials cost a lot. So the market over time has been
00:07:16.840 incentivized to burn less fuel to make more products. That's why a truck in the 1970s burned way more
00:07:25.040 fuel, it was actually reasonable to classify it as gas guzzler back in the 70s. But the same like
00:07:30.220 companies trucks now burn like 45% less fuel, because people are greedy, and they want to pay
00:07:36.420 as little money for as much value as possible. And that means emissions per capita have gone way down
00:07:42.820 in Canada. But, you know, Stephen Gilboa thinks that all this sort of free market stuff is horribly bad,
00:07:50.380 because like his suit, which I have to comment on again, is horrifyingly gross. Like his suit, he is a
00:07:55.460 massive pinko. And he just believes that government solutions are the only solutions because he might
00:08:01.760 be a radical environmentalist, but he's also a communist. And so his solutions will always hinge
00:08:07.140 on the idea of giving the government as much power as humanly possible. Because really, he wants the
00:08:12.440 utopian society where there's effectively no emissions at all. And the free market's never going
00:08:17.000 to support no emissions because people have to live. And Gilboa thinks that people breathing in and out
00:08:22.040 and not dying is just a little bit of a niggling little technicality, and that he can figure out
00:08:27.300 a way of getting us to net zero, while only half killing us. But yeah, the man's out of his mind,
00:08:33.980 these people need to be removed from government ASAP. I am happy that even though it's the NDP who
00:08:39.540 might be in his riding that somebody's going to beat him, because this man at least has some political
00:08:45.020 clout in elite circles. So I'd rather just be some nutty NDPer who a lot of people see as crazy,
00:08:50.740 because there is a lot of people who just from Stephen Gilboa talking moderate will think,
00:08:55.720 well, he's asking for reasonable things. He's not. He's a flat out dictator. The man would become
00:08:59.940 a dictator tomorrow if he wasn't being bound by the law. The man just wants his vision. So many
00:09:07.620 leftists only use the system to get what they want because they have to. If they could just overthrow
00:09:13.320 society to get what they want, they would do it. And that describes Stephen Gilboa. He's proven in
00:09:19.140 the past from being a criminal that he doesn't care about the law. You shouldn't think that he
00:09:22.760 cares about the law now just because he's wearing a disgusting suit and a horrifyingly, embarrassingly
00:09:27.620 ugly tie. Anyways, sorry, I kept to keep harping on how he dresses. It looks so bad in thumbnails
00:09:32.940 whenever I take screenshots of that for the thumbnail. He looks horrible there, but I'll still
00:09:38.340 have to use it just because now I've mentioned his suit so much, it would be weird if that suit
00:09:42.880 wasn't in the thumbnail. Oh, okay. Anyways, I just want to quickly plug the fact that I,
00:09:48.660 Wyatt Claypool, I'm running in the riding of Calgary Signal Hill for the nomination for the
00:09:52.860 Conservative Party. If you live in this riding, buy a Conservative Party membership and visit my
00:09:56.620 website in the description below, wyattclaypool.com. And again, consider donating to the TNT Legal Fund
00:10:02.740 to help reduce the burden of cost that we've incurred from our lawsuit. We've incurred like $29,000
00:10:08.040 worth of cost fighting this guy. So anything you can donate helps us actually reinvest more into
00:10:13.240 the National Telegraph and not have to put in 100% of everything we make in just fighting these
00:10:18.800 stupid battles. Anyways, that's it for me.