Convoy protests in 2019 bore fruit in 2023 with Supreme Court ruling

Oil and agriculture trucks rolled through Regina to rally in 2019 to rally against the carbon tax, Bills C-69 and C-48, and in support of pipelines. Photo by Brian Zinchuk

Right side of history: Two protest leaders from 2019 truck convoys react to “No More Pipelines Act” ruling.

But is that going to stop Steven Guilbeault from moving to cap oil and gas emissions? Hell no.

20 Replies to “Convoy protests in 2019 bore fruit in 2023 with Supreme Court ruling”

  1. “The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers told Guilbeault in 2022 that both of the options for enforcing the cap would require producers to scale back how much oil they pump out.”

    Saskatchewan and Alberta should state up front that any production cuts from the Trudeau liberal-NDP government’s emmision caps will result in a reduction of oil and natural gas moving east. Maintaining, or even increasing, exports to the US and other countries will be prioritized at the expense of shipments to central and eastern Canada. Why? Because the people who voted for the Trudeau liberal-NDP government should feel the economic consequences of voting for political parties who continuously attack the economy of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

        1. I think Saudi oil is light, sweet. Do central and eastern Canada refineries also need the heavy, sour crude that the west produces? Not enough heavy crude has become an issue in the US.

          Then there’s the need for western Canada’s natgas that runs through Canadian pipelines. Plus propane shipments, etc. I don’t think Canadians realize how many petroleum products they get from the west.

          1. The Saudi’s have an extra light, a medium and a heavy export price, not sure what the eastern refineries require.

  2. Protest bears fruit????
    How many people have had their lives ruined AND yet Turd/Shit Jr. is still prancing around recking havoc???

    1. How many people stood up and kicked the bastards in the government in the ass? Right, not one single person. No one gives a damn how many lives this government destroys and they are still pushing the cloth shots to kill even more. WE are so stupid we do deserve to die.

  3. LC
    “people who voted for the Trudeau liberal-NDP government should feel the economic consequences of voting for political parties who continuously attack the economy of Alberta and Saskatchewan.”
    That’s the type of bullshit I don’t expect from you, we didn’t vote in McNutly, you’s did. Butt, Brad Lost (trost) admonished me for referring to that stupid cow as McNutly, and than went on about Religion in politics. You can NOT sever 2 masters at the same time, either be a political rep., or a rep of yer own religious BS. You can’t do both at the same time, but the POUNDERS out west try. And cause some centrists, moderate cons, and centrist liberals to shun the cuckservatives, I know, because I talk to a wide range of people. Shut down the bible pounders, and cons will appeal to a far wider demographic.

    666

    1. You can change your identity, but you still sound like a simpleton. Or is that your demographic?
      Satan? I think not.

    2. I’m from Saskatchewan. We’ve been NDP and Liberal free for quite awhile. I’m also agnostic/atheist. I have never been a member of an organized religion although I’ve read quite a few religious books and have great respect for many of their teachings. Satanism, OTOH, is a warped byproduct of Christianity…so you’re far more religious than I am.

      Next time present actual, rational arguments or you’ll go on the ‘trolls who aren’t worthy of a response’ list. Ahh,to hell with you, you’re too unbalanced to waste any more time on.

    3. Ah yes – the old “appeal to wider demographic” canard. Just like with O’Toole and Scheer. Jason Kenney, Prentice, Stelmach, etc etc. Showed throwing your base under the bus is what loses easily winnable elections.

      Do the opposite of what Satan says is always a good path to follow

      1. “Ah yes – the old “appeal to wider demographic” canard. Just like with O’Toole and Scheer. Jason Kenney, Prentice, Stelmach, etc etc. Showed throwing your base under the bus is what loses easily winnable elections.”

        Absolutely. I despise that thinking too. We don’t need another ‘conservative’ leader to water down his (and our) principles and/or panic and hurriedly change policies every time someone says something critical of them. We need a real leader to stand up and say “Here are our policies, they are better than the Liberal ones and *this is why*”….then proceed to explain them concisely and factually. That’s all.

        Every time the Liberals are in power for a decade or so they screw Canada up so badly that the voting public starts looking for an alternative. The ‘Progressive’ Conservatives used to be that non-threatening option, since their polices and beliefs were virtually indistinguishable from those of the Liberals….but that actually solved none of the real issues and problems Canada faced (and for the obvious reasons: they would do *exactly* the same things as the Liberals would have done, with just minor cosmetic changes).

        We need a REAL conservative leader to lead the party, and sadly, Poilievre just isn’t the answer. He’s shaping up to be just another “progressive’ conservative, and the result for Canada will just be “more of the same”. I wish that wasn’t true and I hope I’m wrong, but I can’t see anything changing for the better under his leadership.

  4. Bureaucrats and Lieberal politicians have always disregarded court decisions that ruled against them.

  5. Guilbeault should never be considered someone capable of rational thought. His psychosis notwithstanding, he hails from the hysteria pimping industry which is big business. He is doing their business the same way that a real estate developer setting zoning bylaws would. He will return to that big business when he leaves politics. ENGOs have an unfinishable agenda in that no level of environmental protection would be satisfactory (even if that meant deindustrialization and poverty as they are funded by the filthy rich and legacy corporate foundations) as that would mean them going out of business. Most NGOs fall in this category, particularly those that accept government funding.

Navigation