Environmentalism – Bill C-69 & Gender

The trouble with environmentalists

Environmentalists can be a demanding crowd. They variously want to save endangered species, save habitats, prevent damage from GM food and, of course, prevent catastrophic climate change. Worthy goals all, but often in conflict – both with each other and with humanity’s basic needs for comfortable living standards and enough to eat. Widespread concern for animal welfare and promotion of vegetarianism can be thrown into the mix. We’re left with a flurry of incompatible goals, and a cacophony of confused guidance on living ethically.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/dec/05/thetroublewithenvironmental
“Hippies Crying Over Dead Trees”

In 2008, some wonderful soul uploaded a video titled “Hippies-Crying Over Dead Trees” to YouTube. It is glorious. Enjoy.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2015/04/22/flashback-hippies-crying-over-dead-trees-video-n1989074
Bills C-68 and C-69 and the Consideration of Sex, Gender and Other Identity Factors

Over the past couple of months, several of my colleagues have posted comments on Bill C-68 and Bill C-69 (see here). My focus in this post is on one section that is common to Bills C-68 and C-69, which provides that when making a decision under the relevant Act, the decision-maker may or indeed must consider, among other things, “the intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors” (see proposed section 2.5(i) of the Fisheries Act (“may”), section 22(1)(s) of the proposed Impact Assessment Act (“must”), and sections 183(2)(c), 262(2)(c) and 298(3)(c) of the proposed Canadian Energy Regulator Act (“must”)). The preamble of Bill C-69 also states that “the Government of Canada is committed to assessing how groups of women, men and gender-diverse people may experience policies, programs and projects and to taking actions that contribute to an inclusive and democratic society and allow all Canadians to participate fully in all spheres of their lives.”

https://abl..