Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Key oceans treaty crosses threshold to come into force

News Feed
Saturday, September 20, 2025

A global agreement designed to protect the world's oceans and reverse damage to marine life is set to become international law. The High Seas Treaty received its 60th ratification by Morocco on Friday, meaning that it will now take effect from January.The deal, which has been two decades in the making, will pave the way for international waters to be placed into marine protected areas.Environmentalists heralded the milestone as a "monumental achievement" and evidence that countries can work together for environmental protection."Covering more than two-thirds of the ocean, the agreement sets binding rules to conserve and sustainably use marine biodiversity," United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said.Decades of overfishing, pollution from shipping and warming oceans from climate change have damaged life below the surface. In the latest assessment of marine species, nearly 10% were found to be at risk of extinction, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).Three years ago countries agreed that 30% of the world's national and international waters - high seas - must be protected by 2030 to help depleted marine life recover.But protecting the high seas is challenging. No one country controls these waters and all nations have a right to ship and fish there. Currently just 1% of the high seas are protected, leaving marine life at risk from overexploitation. So, in 2023 countries signed the High Seas Treaty pledging to put 30% of these waters into Marine Protected Areas.But it was only able to enter force if more than 60 nations ratified it - meaning they agreed to be legally bound by it. With many nations requiring parliament approval, ratification can often take more than five years, Elizabeth Wilson, senior director for environmental policy at environmental NGO The Pews Charitable Trust, told the BBC at the UN Oceans Conference earlier this year. She said this was "record time". The UK introduced its bill for ratification to Parliament earlier this month. Kirsten Schuijt, director general of WWF International, hailed "a monumental achievement for ocean conservation" after the treaty threshold was reached. She added: "The High Seas Treaty will be a positive catalyst for collaboration across international waters and agreements and is a turning point for two-thirds of the world's ocean that lie beyond national jurisdiction."Mads Christensen, executive director of Greenpeace International, called it "a landmark moment" and "proof that countries can come together to protect our blue planet". "The era of exploitation and destruction must end. Our oceans can't wait and neither can we," he added.Once the treaty comes into force, countries will propose areas to be protected, and these will then be voted on by the countries that sign up to the treaty.Critics point out that countries will conduct their own environmental impact assessments (EIA) and make the final decision - although other countries can register concerns with the monitoring bodies.The ocean is crucial for the survival of all organisms on the planet. It is the largest ecosystem, is estimated to contribute $2.5 trillion to world economies, and provides up to 80% of the oxygen we breathe.

Sixty states have ratified a global treaty to protect the oceans - it will become law in January.

A global agreement designed to protect the world's oceans and reverse damage to marine life is set to become international law.

The High Seas Treaty received its 60th ratification by Morocco on Friday, meaning that it will now take effect from January.

The deal, which has been two decades in the making, will pave the way for international waters to be placed into marine protected areas.

Environmentalists heralded the milestone as a "monumental achievement" and evidence that countries can work together for environmental protection.

"Covering more than two-thirds of the ocean, the agreement sets binding rules to conserve and sustainably use marine biodiversity," United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said.

Decades of overfishing, pollution from shipping and warming oceans from climate change have damaged life below the surface.

In the latest assessment of marine species, nearly 10% were found to be at risk of extinction, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Three years ago countries agreed that 30% of the world's national and international waters - high seas - must be protected by 2030 to help depleted marine life recover.

But protecting the high seas is challenging. No one country controls these waters and all nations have a right to ship and fish there.

Currently just 1% of the high seas are protected, leaving marine life at risk from overexploitation.

So, in 2023 countries signed the High Seas Treaty pledging to put 30% of these waters into Marine Protected Areas.

But it was only able to enter force if more than 60 nations ratified it - meaning they agreed to be legally bound by it.

With many nations requiring parliament approval, ratification can often take more than five years, Elizabeth Wilson, senior director for environmental policy at environmental NGO The Pews Charitable Trust, told the BBC at the UN Oceans Conference earlier this year. She said this was "record time".

The UK introduced its bill for ratification to Parliament earlier this month.

Kirsten Schuijt, director general of WWF International, hailed "a monumental achievement for ocean conservation" after the treaty threshold was reached.

She added: "The High Seas Treaty will be a positive catalyst for collaboration across international waters and agreements and is a turning point for two-thirds of the world's ocean that lie beyond national jurisdiction."

Mads Christensen, executive director of Greenpeace International, called it "a landmark moment" and "proof that countries can come together to protect our blue planet".

"The era of exploitation and destruction must end. Our oceans can't wait and neither can we," he added.

Once the treaty comes into force, countries will propose areas to be protected, and these will then be voted on by the countries that sign up to the treaty.

Critics point out that countries will conduct their own environmental impact assessments (EIA) and make the final decision - although other countries can register concerns with the monitoring bodies.

The ocean is crucial for the survival of all organisms on the planet. It is the largest ecosystem, is estimated to contribute $2.5 trillion to world economies, and provides up to 80% of the oxygen we breathe.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

William follows in mother Diana's footsteps with Rio statue photo

The Prince of Wales posed beneath the Christ the Redeemer statue 34 years after his mother did.

William follows in mother Diana's footsteps with statue photoDaniela Relph,Royal correspondent, Rio de Janeiro and Hafsa KhalilPA MediaThe Prince of Wales has followed in his mother's footsteps with a visit to the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro.Prince William stood in the same spot that Diana, Princess of Wales, was photographed in 34 years ago.He is on the third day of his five-day visit to Brazil, where he will be presenting the Earthshot Prize, the annual award from the charity he set up.The star-studded event will be held in Rio's Museum of Tomorrow on Wednesday evening, where Kylie Minogue and Shawn Mendes will perform as five projects win £1m.Associated PressPrincess Diana pictured in front of the Christ the Redeemer statue in 1991The prince is also scheduled to give a speech at COP30, the UN's annual climate meeting.On a picture perfect day, the future king stood alone in a moment of reflection as he took in the views of Rio de Janeiro from the top of Mount Corcovado where Christ the Redeemer stands.The iconic and imposing statue is one of the largest Art Deco sculptures in the world, standing at 30 metres tall and reaching 28 metres wide with its outstretched arms.It has become a symbol of hope and resilience and is said to protect the people of Rio. Princess Diana posed in the same spot in April 1991 during her six-day tour of Brazil with the now King Charles III.During Prince William's walkabouts in Rio, dozens of people spoke to him about his late mother, who died in August 1997. "The prince has loved meeting so many people from across Rio over the last few days," said a spokesperson for the prince. "He's been incredibly struck by the number of people who fondly remember his mother's visit to this beautiful city."At Christ the Redeemer, Prince William also had some time away from the cameras in the chapel that sits beneath the statue.Security has been high throughout his trip.Public access to the statue was temporarily suspended to allow him to visit the site and meet the 15 Earthshot Prize finalists ahead of the evening's awards ceremony.ReutersThe Prince of Wales spoke to the Earthshot Prize finalists before Wednesday evening's ceremonyThe shortlist this year includes the city of Guangzhou in China and its electric public transport network, Lagos Fashion Week in Nigeria, nominated for its work reshaping the fashion industry, and Barbados for its environmental leadership.The prize annually awards a £1m grant in five different categories to projects that aim to repair the world's climate.UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer will join the prince for the ceremony before they both head to Belem in the Amazon rainforest for COP30, where world leaders will discuss how to limit and pepare for further climate change.Prince William's first day in Brazil involved football in the Maracana Stadium and barefoot beach volleyball on Copacabana.On Tuesday, focus shifted to the environment - his reason for visiting the country.The prince criticised criminals for their involvment in the deforestation of the Amazon rainforest during a speech at the United for Wildlife conference.He also travelled to the small island of Paqueta, where he met locals, learnt about mangrove conservation and planted tree saplings.

Democrats Win Big Over GOP Incumbents in 2 Statewide Georgia Utility Regulator Races

Democrats have won blowout victories in two races for the Georgia Public Service Commission

ATLANTA (AP) — Two Democrats romped to wins over Republican incumbents in elections to the Georgia Public Service Commission on Tuesday, delivering the largest statewide margins of victory by Democrats in more than 20 years.Wins by Democrats Peter Hubbard and Alicia Johnson over Republicans Fitz Johnson and Tim Echols are the first time Democrats have won statewide elections to a state-level office in Georgia since 2006. The victories could juice Democratic fundraising and enthusiasm next year, when Georgia’s ballot will be topped by Democratic U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff’s reelection bid and an open governor’s race.Both Hubbard and Johnson won nearly 63% of the vote in complete but unofficial results compiled by the Georgia Secretary of State. Results aren't official until certified, and turnout was only 30% of last year's presidential election. But such large victories in a swing state where Democrats have been able to eke out only the narrowest wins suggest discontent over high electricity bills could be a potent political issue nationwide.“The people of Georgia came out very strong and said, ’You know what? We’re not putting up with it no more,’” Democratic Party of Georgia Chair Charlie Bailey said. “We’re ready to turn the page on this 22 years of Republican rule in our state that has made the American dream less attainable now than it was 22 years ago.”Georgia wasn't the only state where electricity prices are a political issue this year. They were debated in governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia. Nationwide, electric prices for residential consumers went up 5.2% from July 2024 to July 2025, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.“I think that we decisively won this election, flipped two seats to the Democrats on this all-Republican Public Service Commission because they were not centering the people in their decision making,” Hubbard told The Associated Press, saying commissioners have been “rubber-stamping” the plans of Georgia Power Co., the state’s only privately owned utility.Georgia's Public Service Commission had been made up of five Republicans, and a three-member GOP majority will remain after Hubbard and Alicia Johnson take office in January.“Georgia Power has always worked constructively with the elected members of the Georgia Public Service Commission, and we will continue to do so,” said Matthew Kent, a company spokesperson.Alicia Johnson will become the first Black woman elected to a partisan office statewide in Georgia. Multiple Black women have won nonpartisan elections to statewide courts after being appointed by governors. Environmental groups backed Democrats Environmental groups led by Georgia Conservation Voters spent more than $3 million to elect Hubbard, a green energy advocate and Johnson, a health care consultant, because they see the current commission as too friendly to utility plans to keep burning climate-changing fossil fuels to generate power.Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and other Republicans pledged to spend millions of their own, urging Republicans to reject green energy and vote on party loyalty. The GOP sees Tuesday’s results as a fluke, driven by unusual off-year elections following a court case that took place as elections in Atlanta and other cities drew Democrats to the polls.“Voters have chose a different direction in this election, but I'm certain the underlying policies offered by the Democrats don't reflect the preferences of the majority of Georgians,” said Fitz Johnson, who was appointed to the commission in 2021 by Kemp. Hubbard must run for reelection in 2026 and Fitz Johnson pledged to challenge him next year.Hubbard pledged aggressive action to cut rates in the next year.“I intend to ask hard questions of Georgia Power Co. about why they’re constantly pushing what is lucrative for their shareholders,” Hubbard said. Focus on costs yields Democratic blowout Echols said Democrats were effective in appealing to voters unhappy with bill increases from Georgia Power, which serves 2.3 million customers. The unit of Atlanta-based Southern Co. has raised bills six times in recent years because of higher natural gas costs and construction projects, including two new nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle near Augusta. A typical Georgia Power residential customer now pays more than $175 a month, including taxes.“The Democrats, really, I think, did a good job focusing everything on that power bill,” Echols, who had served on the commission since 2011, said in an election-night webcast.Republicans touted a three-year freeze in base rates they enacted in July. They tried to flip the cost argument, claiming Democrats would try to shutter natural gas plants, drive up power bills with environmental mandates and unfairly subsidize poorer customers.Ed McElveen of Stone Mountain, said he backed Republican incumbents. “I wanted somebody who knows what they’re doing,” McElveen said.But even some voters who aren't Georgia Power customers voted Tuesday to express their discontent.“I’ve heard a lot of bad things about Georgia Power,” said Angela Ford, also of Stone Mountain. She gets her electricity from a cooperative.The breadth of the Republican defeat was stunning. Turnout lagged in key Republican areas during early voting. GOP hopes for a comeback grew as Election Day turnout soared, but Democrats scored a blowout win among those who voted Tuesday as well. They made deep inroads into Republican territories, for example, winning the Augusta suburb of Columbia County, which Trump carried 62% to 37% last year.Associated Press writer Charlotte Kramon contributed to this report.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

EU Agrees on New Emissions Targets Before Global Climate Summit in Brazil

The European Union has announced plans to slash carbon emissions by 90% by 2040

BRUSSELS (AP) — The European Union said Wednesday it would slash carbon emissions by 90% by 2040, in an agreement widely seen as a weakening of the 27-nation bloc's previous climate goals, after an overnight debate ahead of the U.N. climate conference in Brazil.Hungary, Slovakia and Poland voted against the agreement, despite other nations agreeing to key compromises including allowing flexibility for member states to buy carbon credits internationally to reach their emissions targets and for the EU to reassess its climate policy depending on economic performance. The agreement also allows for postponing a new carbon trading plan covering transport and heating, a central demand of Poland.Environmentalists criticized the deal for provisions that will allow the EU to buy carbon credits from less-developed countries, effectively outsourcing the bloc's obligations. “The use of offshore carbon laundering to meet this nominal target means the EU’s own commitment is much lower, and that commitment means even less with a baked-in clause to dilute the target every two years,” said Greenpeace EU climate campaigner Thomas Gelin. Jeroen Gerlag, Europe director at the nonprofit Climate Group, said that “while the EU keeps its 90% commitment on paper, in effect it’ll be offshoring some of its emission reductions – making it someone else’s problem.”The agreement was hammered out between EU climate ministers in a marathon session overnight into Wednesday morning. Before it becomes a legally-binding document, the European Parliament will vote on it and negotiate its contents with the European Council.“This is exactly the signal that Europe has to send in these times,” said Swedish climate minister Romina Pourmokhtari, who thanked Finland, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands for pushing for high emissions cuts in the debate.Wopke Hoekstra, the European Commissioner for Climate, Net-Zero and Clean Growth, said the agreement is strong compared to those of allies in the Pacific, Europe and North America, but that some compromise was necessary amid current geopolitical and economic tension.“On this continent, we will continue with climate action, but it has to be bridged, it has to be married with independence and competitiveness. Not one without the other. All three are essential,” he said.The EU executive, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, will now travel to Brazil for the Conference of Parties — known as COP30 — with a clear EU emissions agreement.“Now we have the possibility to go to Belem with leadership,” said Sara Aagesen, Spain’s climate minister.Many EU governments have shifted to the right since the Paris Agreement in 2015. Some see climate regulations as shackling the economy, while others say Europe will either make and sell renewables or be forced to buy energy or green products from countries like China.Wildfires, heat waves and floods have become more frequent across Europe, spurring calls for more climate action. But crises like Russia’s war in Ukraine, and a newly volatile relationship with the United States, have increased political and economic pressure to curtail flagship environmental policies.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Intensive livestock farms fail to declare climate impacts in ‘emissions scandal’

Local councils are giving the green light to large-scale pig and poultry farms with patchy or non-existent climate dataPlans for intensive livestock “megafarms” are omitting crucial climate impacts, it can be revealed.Campaigners last year celebrated a “beginning of the end” to polluting factory farming, after the landmark Finch supreme court ruling on a Surrey oil well confirmed that applications for major developments should consider all significant direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions. Continue reading...

Plans for intensive livestock “megafarms” are omitting crucial climate impacts, it can be revealed.Campaigners last year celebrated a “beginning of the end” to polluting factory farming, after the landmark Finch supreme court ruling on a Surrey oil well confirmed that applications for major developments should consider all significant direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions.However, a review of 35 proposed developments across the UK’s largest farming counties since the June 2024 ruling found that applications routinely ignored or downplayed the industry’s carbon footprint.The research by advocacy group Sustain, which was analysed by DeSmog and the Guardian, looked at all applications for Herefordshire, Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Nottinghamshire, Shropshire, Yorkshire, Wales and Northern Ireland which were under consideration by local councils between the 2024 ruling and September this year.Farms housing more than 900 sows, 3,000 pigs, 60,000 hens for eggs, or 85,000 chickens for meat are required to provide information on expected environmental impacts under UK law when applying for planning permission.The applications reviewed were mainly submitted by UK-based farm companies, but some were from major meat producers – including Crown Chicken, a subsidiary of Cranswick, which is one of the largest meat companies in Europe and slaughters nearly 60 million birds a year. Cranswick was responsible for three million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions in 2024.If all applications reviewed were accepted for development, an additional 30,000 pigs and nearly five million chickens would be farmed across England, Northern Ireland and Wales – amounting to more than 37 million additional animals reared in the UK each year.Intensive pig and poultry farms are high emitters of methane and nitrous oxide, potent greenhouse gases that cause about 30 and 300 times more global warming respectively than carbon dioxide over a 100-year period. According to Sustain’s estimates, if all the applications analysed were approved this could generate an estimated 634,000 tonnes of CO2-equivalent emissions annually — the equivalent of 488,000 return flights from London to New York.None of the 35 applications provided figures on likely emissions from the farm, despite the fact that councils are required to factor in climate harms in planning decisions. Government policies say that local planning should support the country’s goal to reach net zero by 2050.The findings come as numbers of intensive livestock farms increase across Europe, with more than 1,500 industrial-scale pig and poultry farms operating in the UK.“Vital information is being kept from councils and the public,” Ruth Westcott, campaign manager at Sustain, said.“It’s clear that agribusinesses don’t want to come clean about the pollution they cause because it could affect whether they are allowed to expand, and thus make more profits at the expense of our communities,” she added. “It’s an emissions scandal.”Councils are facing growing pressure from residents to refuse planning permission to companies which fail to robustly assess climate impacts.In April, after public pressure, King’s Lynn & West Norfolk borough council denied planning permission for the Methwold megafarm that would have housed almost 900,000 chickens and pigs, partly due to its lack of climate assessment – making it the first-known refusal on these grounds.Breckland council in Norfolk likewise refused planning permission to the Cherry Tree Farm in October, in part because it had not provided an updated environmental impact assessment, including “project-specific carbon emissions”. The farm – which is owned by Wayland Farms, also a subsidiary of Cranswick – was forced to apply for retrospective approval for previously completed construction. Local residents had made complaints over the “stench” after its expansion in 2019.When asked about the lack of climate data in its applications, Cranswick declined to comment.In total, four of the applications reviewed have been refused so far – three of which were submitted by Cranswick.However, other councils in Norfolk, Nottinghamshire, Suffolk, Lincolnshire and Yorkshire have approved six farms that have not provided any specific information on the farm’s climate impacts in the past 12 months, the research shows.Councils which responded to requests for comment said they had complied with planning regulations, and that they were unable to comment on individual planning applications.More than half (57%) of the planning applications reviewed were for major extensions and alterations, and the remainder for new farms.Jan Palmer – a resident of Methwold village in Norfolk who campaigned against the Cranswick megafarm that was denied planning permission in April – has called for greater scrutiny of impacts from proposed farms.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“These are industrial developments. It’s called industrial farming, and it has industrial emissions,” she said. “If my local megafarm application hadn’t been so fiercely challenged, and by so many, it would’ve slipped through the system like so many others do – quietly and without scrutiny but with devastating consequences.”Companies seeking permission for any large-scale developments – ranging from motorways and oil and gas extraction sites to intensive farms – are required to conduct environmental impact assessments showing the likely effects of developments on biodiversity, the climate, and other environmental factors.Applications for intensive livestock farms routinely include information on issues such as air pollutants and unpleasant smells, the review showed. However, the vast majority of applications overlooked climate impacts.Of the applications reviewed, 35% mentioned the farm’s operations only in passing, while 55% did not discuss these climate impacts at all.Large projects must assess all “significant environmental impacts” under UK planning law. Lawyers said few cases had so far tested the threshold for significant climate impacts from farms in the courts, but given the well-documented emissions from intensive farming, applications could face growing challenges in coming years.“Where the companies are not assessing their climate impacts, they may be open to legal challenge,” said Ricardo Gama, an environmental lawyer at Leigh Day solicitors. “Agriculture has flown under the radar on so many of these issues, but I think that is changing.”Over the past year, six local councils have granted permission to applications which did not contain any assessment of the farms’ likely emissions, as well as one that granted permission to a farm with only passing discussion, the research shows.Planning authorities have an obligation to consider all relevant environmental impacts before granting permission, according to legal experts.While applicants propose which environmental impacts should be assessed as part of planning applications, it is the council’s legal responsibility to ensure that all significant effects are covered and that adequate information on these is provided before granting planning permission.“When the council or the inspector or the secretary of state is considering whether to grant planning permission, climate impacts need to be weighed in the balance,” Gama said. “I think councils’ approach[es] will change as the public becomes more aware of the climate impact of agriculture.”The research found that environmental assessments also repeatedly failed to discuss emissions that did not directly arise on the farms. Of the 35 applications reviewed, just one included information on the farm’s likely emissions from animal feed – the largest source of greenhouse gases for both big livestock and poultry.The majority of pigs and chickens in the UK are fed soy, which is one of the biggest drivers of deforestation in regions such as the Amazon. According to campaign group WWF, the UK’s demand for soy requires more than 1.7m hectares of land each year – an area larger than Northern Ireland.One environmental impact assessment for the expansion of a poultry megafarm currently under consideration in Shropshire – which would increase its total number of birds to up to 350,000 – stated that carbon dioxide emitted from the development would be offset “due to the reduction in emissions from transporting poultry meat from elsewhere”.Transportation accounts for between just 5-7% of total emissions from chickens reared in the UK.A Shropshire council spokesperson said applications were processed “in accordance with [EIA] regulations”, which included taking into account direct and indirect effects of the proposed development on the environment.

Mark Carney sets his sights on Trudeau's legacy

The prime minister’s first budget revisits a decade of Liberal policy on climate, taxes and the public service.

OTTAWA — Canada’s prime minister unveiled his first federal budget plan on Tuesday, a long-awaited moment in the annual cycle of Canadian politics when Ottawa tells the country how it wants to spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars.And with that plan, Mark Carney is openly dismantling parts of Justin Trudeau's legacy — an ongoing project in service to economic growth and a more muscular Canada.Carney’s ambitious blueprint aims to slim down the federal public service that ballooned under Trudeau’s watch, while spending tens of billions on national defense and billions more on trade, transport and health infrastructure.The plan also sets its sights on reworking, winding down or eliminating various climate, energy and tax policies that helped define Trudeau's decade in power.Farees Nathoo, a former director of parliamentary affairs and issues management to then-Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, said the budget stands out from the Trudeau era because of its policy focus and fiscal discipline."The budget quite tactically conveys Prime Minister Carney’s economic policy and puts forward a new brand — including by very explicitly differentiating himself from some of Mr. Trudeau’s hallmark commitments," said Nathoo, who is now vice president of strategy and risk at Enterprise Canada. "Carney is focused on infrastructure, housing, defense and productivity."But Carney is skating on thin parliamentary ice. His Liberal government is two seats short of a majority in the House of Commons, and will need the support of at least one opposition party to approve the fiscal plan and avoid an election.Carney is also fending off a Conservative Party that nearly won power after Trudeau's departure — and NDP and Bloc Québécois MPs who've threatened to vote against his budget.Trudeau, we hardly knew yeThe budget book is peppered with reminders that this is no longer Trudeau's Ottawa. The former PM brought in ambitious social programs, including child care, pharma care and dental care. He also prioritized climate and energy programs and regulations that reshaped Canada's effort to curb emissions, and raised the bar for resource project approvals.Carney preserved most of those measures, but not everything made the cut.Gone is a decade-long effort to plant 2 billion trees — a pledge first made in 2019 that struggled mightily to keep pace with planting goals.And federal workers are in for anxious times.Carney's plan notes the federal bureaucracy ballooned by 40 percent during the 10 years Trudeau was in power, an "unsustainable" pace that has "left federal finances strained." Departments and agencies are planning to shed roughly 10 percent of the workforce — "about 40,000 positions."In a stark departure from the former PM's aims, fine print in the budget acknowledges that men will disproportionately benefit from some proposals.Trudeau came to power on a promise to infuse gender equality into government operations.He famously explained that his front bench featured an equal number of men and women "because it's 2015." Ten years later, Carney has maintained that parity.But he's also proposing measures that, by the government's own admission, favor men.One example: The government will eliminate a Trudeau-era luxury tax on aircraft and boats, which an annex at the back of the budget documents takes time to explain will favor buyers who are "disproportionately higher income and primarily men."A shift on climate changeCarney's first order of business in office was using a Sharpie to zero out an unpopular consumer carbon price that he called "divisive."Carney is not getting rid of an industrial price on carbon that has Conservatives howling, nor is he moving to repeal a tanker ban on the West Coast or controversial environmental assessment regulations.The government is, though, hinting at winding down an oil and gas emissions cap that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has for years claimed is a drag on industry — one of several climate-focused measures that soured relations between Smith and Trudeau.The government didn't exactly promise to eliminate the cap, but it signaled a suite of other emission reduction policies could make it unnecessary.The budget document claims carbon markets, methane regulations and carbon capture technology could render an emissions cap redundant, "as it would have marginal value in reducing emissions."Smith has joined industry voices in railing against anti-“greenwashing” provisions that penalize companies that make false or misleading environmental claims. Smith says the law poses a threat to free speech.Carney intends to amend part of that law, which is "creating investment uncertainty and having the opposite of the desired effect."Earlier this year, Carney also paused a Trudeau-era push to mandate the sale of electric vehicles. The budget documents promise "next steps … in the coming weeks."In 2022, when German then-Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Canada, Trudeau took heat for raising doubts about the "business case" for LNG exports to Germany.The government is now renewing an expired measure that allowed LNG companies to write off the depreciated cost of liquefaction equipment. That measure, in place as of Wednesday only for "low-carbon" facilities, is meant to "accelerate the type of business investment that will drive productivity growth in Canada."Hey America, this one's for youCarney is also ratcheting up defense spending as an olive branch to a Trump administration that demanded NATO members bulk up their contributions to the alliance.Trudeau eventually promised to spend the NATO benchmark of 2 percent of GDP by 2030. Earlier this year, Carney promised to hit it by March — and then agreed to meet NATO's new 5-percent minimum by 2035.In another nod across the border, Americans who own property in Canada will also welcome the government's plans to cancel a 1 percent annual tax on the value of "vacant or underused" properties.Former Rep. Brian Higgins, a Democrat who represented part of Buffalo, New York, long railed against the levy. He argued it unfairly punished Americans — and he even advocated for retaliation.The budget documents acknowledge the group of taxpayers who will benefit from the axed measure "likely includes a high percentage of non-resident, non-Canadians."

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.