288: Canada's Climate Crossroads: Will Carney deliver real progress?

Catherine McKenna: [00:24:03] We won. I defended it saying people got more money back. We were very clear on how much people got back and we wanted the Supreme Court. So I kind of thought we would be able to keep this policy. But the challenge is the price goes up every year, so you have to defend it every year. And the government did not. They were focused on other things. And I think we had very good folks in government. But the reality is you have to keep on explaining to people your policies and why they are good and why they work. Environmentalists moved on. They wanted new things, new shiny objects, which is fine. But the reality is this was very consequential to reducing our emissions. We have a price on heavy emitters. So an oil and gas and and hard to decarbonize sectors. So that's also really important. That's the number one most important policy in driving down our emissions. But having a consumer price where it was actually helping low income people. It was that it was actually working was important. But we also did other things. We failed to really properly advertise. While, you know everyone, the we had all the opposition from provinces, premiers that were conservative for fighting it. And so we didn't defend it well enough. And then unfortunately, and it was really unfortunate, the Prime Minister did a pause on the price on heating oil because there had been a very effective of opposition by oil and gas companies.

Catherine McKenna: [00:25:23] Behind the scenes, to say, actually the whole reason the price of heating oil, which is largely used in the eastern part of Canada, was so high was carbon pricing, which was not true. That's a total lie. The price of heating oil was high. Why in Christianity you would appreciate this? Because you often are speaking out because of the price charged by oil and gas companies. So it's so ironic. But I would say the lesson for progressives is you have to be tough and you have to fight all the time. And I know people, especially in Canada, like people don't love fighting, but I'm sorry. It's elbows up against Trump's tariffs and Trump's discussion of annexation. And it's got to be elbows up strategically on climate policy and always talking to people, real people. Why does this matter? You're going to get more money back. We could not get that message through. So ironically, we're killing a policy that works. And now people are going to be less well off now. I had a long conversation with Mark, who I've known for a long time, the Prime minister. And I mean, it is clearly critical that the price goes up on heavy emitters on oil and gas.

Catherine McKenna: [00:26:27] That is the most significant thing to drive down emissions. He's committed to that. He's also committed to energy efficiency. And maybe this is where we need to be more strategic in helping people save money directly with programs that are well designed, often not well designed, but you can get people to get heat pumps, for example, or, you know, electric vehicle incentives or there's lots of different policies. So he has a plan. It's just unfortunate. And I was supportive. It is hard for me, but I am about winning. And if we were to lose, I the Liberal Party loses to the conservative leader. He said he's going to kill the price on pollution, on heavy emitters, which is bonkers because conservatives have supported it. So we would actually lose everything. And so yeah, we need to win. And we also obviously Canada's sovereignty is critically important in Canada's economy. So it was a tough pill. There are definitely lessons learned. I will write about this because I think people need to actually, you know, be serious about how we design policies, but how we keep them. But we're just going to move forward. And of course, I'm committed to helping Mark win the Prime minister win the election.

Christiana: [00:27:35] And you've you've said that we have to win. My sense is, although you have called him a climate champion, which he is, that that's not how he's going to win. Given the context that we have, he is going to have to lead from the depth of his economic experience, because that is really what is going to make the difference. It's going to make the difference, obviously, in how he stands up to these crazy tariffs that Trump is imposing. It also might make the difference for how he explains the various climate policies that Canada may wish to follow. He's not I don't think he's going to do that from a climate perspective. He is going to argue that from the depth of his economic expertise. And I believe that that is his secret weapon or his best secret weapon, and the one that he is really going to be putting forward. Would you agree with that 100%?

Catherine McKenna: [00:28:32] I mean, there's generally questions in an election. Sometimes it's like, you know, who could replace a leader that we're sick of? And unfortunately, you know, the former prime minister, people are very tired of Justin Trudeau for a variety of reasons. He'd been in power for ten years. But, you know, the, you know, the mistakes were made or whatever. And so Mark Carney is coming in at a different time, and he's really the person who when when Canadians think about what the ballot question is, the ballot question is literally going to be who's going to stand up for Canada's economy in the face of Trump tariffs? But we've had to add on and stand up for Canada's sovereignty in the face of threats of annexation. And I know people. I'm just saying this to anyone who's listening. It may sound funny and completely bonkers. But these are serious threats. These threats are not idle threats. The conversations with our foreign minister, the Prime Minister have involved talks about Canada's water, have talked about Canada's Arctic. These are not, you know, sort of just throwing them out there, kind of a joke or they certainly don't feel like a joke to us. But Canada's economy is 70% reliant on the US market. We are also the largest market for U.S. goods. So, you know, the tariffs make no sense. I'm actually a trade lawyer by training, recovering trade lawyer, recovering politician. But I mean, the tariffs make no sense. There's just a tax that's being paid by American consumers. But certainly a massive impact here. And I think Carney of course, he's well suited. And that's what we're focusing on of course. I also am not going to you know, I don't just support people because I just want them to win. We have to do the right thing. And I think a lot of Canadians still want to see smart climate policy. But they you know, I think we need to frame it in a different way. Of course, we need to focus on dollars and cents and jobs for people.

Christiana: [00:30:16] Dollars and cents. Yes.

Catherine McKenna: [00:30:17] And of course risks. Canadians are paying huge costs. We saw that with the wildfires. But we also saw that with, you know, the town of Lytton was incinerated. 600 people died because of a heat dome. Our Arctic is thawing, which is now a national security issue. So I think we need to talk about real things to real people. But that's not going to be the main issue. However, you know, we need to make sure that we also have serious policies on the economy, on climate, on infrastructure, on jobs. And that's also part of it.

Tom: [00:30:46] Yeah. Catherine, thank you so much. I mean, your point earlier about how the policy can be as good as you like, but if you stop selling it, then actually you just see the narrative. And I think the design we were talking earlier about how when you put that tax in place, it was the one that we thought was going to work. Right, because it was revenue neutral. It provided revenue back. And so the lesson you provided there is really interesting to just pivot a little bit. One other area that we're not at the moment selling as a policy on the corporate space is net zero. We're seeing this retreat from net zero around the world, the narrative is shifting in a different direction. There have been reports recently of all these companies stepping away from Dei, as well as net zero commitments. You've chaired for Antonio Guterres, the SG of the UN. The panel is looking at net zero integrity. How do you think about that work now? And what do you think we need to do to ensure that we reclaim the momentum towards net zero on a corporate space, while not letting go of the integrity?

Catherine McKenna: [00:31:37] Yeah. I mean, look, it's kind of weird. I mean, I think there's a broader discussion about media and independent media and social media and distortions and disinformation and misinformation that are all part of these campaigns that we see. I mean, it's a bit like carbon pricing, which works and gave more money back to people. I mean, net zero is just like, how do we avoid risk to companies and create opportunities? And the opportunities are like jobs, innovation, growth, attracting talent. But of course, it's also like ensuring a sustainable planet. It. Like, look, I in a way I learned in when I was in politics and I didn't come to it as an environmentalist, which may have weirdly helped that I didn't care why people wanted to do the right thing. I wasn't stuck on language as much as action. And I think we need to, you know, adjust. But that doesn't mean that we don't need folks to be committed to the goals of the Paris Agreement. We absolutely do. We have a framework. It seems bonkers that we wouldn't take advantage of the costs that have precipitously gone down for renewables and see that as an energy security issue, especially after Russias illegal invasion of Ukraine, which caused massive havoc when it came to, you know, Europe in particular, being reliant on Russian gas. So, look, I think you got to frame things a bit differently. So for the UN reports, I'm doing as chair of the UN Secretary's task Force on net zero, we're doing our next report. Our first report set out clear rules of the game. If you're going to say your net zero, put up your hand, then there's the price of admission. You have to do things, and it's not like I'm going to be net zero by 2050. As my kids would say to me, mom, you're probably going to be dead by 2050. And then I'd do the math and I'd say, probably not. Probably not.

Catherine McKenna: [00:33:19] That's right. The hope is I'm still around, but it's what we do today and tomorrow.

Tom: [00:33:23] Right?

Catherine McKenna: [00:33:24] But this year, last year's report to the secretary general was on net zero progress. So we highlighted progress from everyone from net zero asset owners, like the big money that is actually focused on reducing emissions and actually where they're deciding where they're going to invest. You want to attract money. You're a corporate, you know you need to get money from these folks, but also cities and regions that have continued to act this year. We're going to frame it a bit differently. We're looking at how did we get to Paris Plus ten? Because the reality is it's easy to say nothing's happened or it's all terrible. It feels like that some days. But you know, we were able to reduce emissions. Should everyone do what they've said they're going to do. So that's a big shift. But we will be at around 2.6, 2.7 degrees. That is a lot better than being over four degrees, which is where we were when the Paris Agreement was entered into. So we have to like actually not always be very negative and say we can't do things. And that is not diminishing where we are. Obviously emissions continue to rise. It's you know, we need to be doing far more. So we're looking at what were the things that actually worked at scale that were governments like, say, regional or cities working potentially with your national government, who we've said our 10th recommendation is in the end, you got to regulate. So sometimes governments regulated or where the private sector led the way. And we would say on renewables, I think a lot of this, yes, government policies played a role, but it was also innovation.

Catherine McKenna: [00:34:52] It was also scale and driving down costs. So we're looking at what are lessons learned at scale from the period, the first ten years of the Paris Agreement. And now we're looking at, okay, we've got to drive for 1.5. So how are we going to do that in the next ten years? And really, we will sort of say there are choices. So I think we're at a critical path. We either decide, okay, we're giving up on climate, we don't care. I guess we'll try to pretend we'll adapt far more expensive, not possible. And there's massive risks and costs. And businesses in the end, have to be rational to governments, by the way. And I was just in California. They literally cannot afford another UCLA fire. The costs of bankruptcies, the cost to governments, local governments, the state government. People are not able to get insurance like that's bonkers. So, you know, people have to be rational. So assuming folks are rational about risk and about costs and reducing costs by choosing lower cost solutions that are less polluting, then we have this other path. And what are the things that scale we need to do. And there's been a lot of good work. The International Energy Agency is very helpfully laid out. What are the most consequential things we need to do with the focus on 2030? We're saying ten years. So that is if we say BLM plus ten, that takes us to 2035. But 2030 is obviously really critical. So what are the things we need to do at scale that we can do? We've done good work. We have way far to go, but we can do it. And these are the things we need to do. But we have a choice. As a world, we have a choice.

Christiana: [00:36:19] Catherine, among the many hats that you wear, you are also the CEO of Climate and Nature Solutions. And you founded Women Leading on Climate. What do those two have to do with each other?

Catherine McKenna: [00:36:31] Well, so when I left politics, I didn't have a grand plan. I just was like, I think I'm done. People couldn't believe it. They were like, why are you leaving? And, you know, politics is a vehicle for change. But also, you know, you work. You both work globally. And I felt some of the lessons we learned cool. Phase out or different areas. There could be ways we should move forward. So climate in Nature Solutions is I'm a CEO. It's a company. I have great people who work all women actually, as it happens right now. But we work with foundations, but we also work for profit companies that are focused on real climate solutions. So that's that's part of what we do. Then a woman leading on climate was something that I saw. Christiana. You inspired me, you and Lawrence. But so many women in the Paris Agreement. I went there as a newbie. I don't really I was like, okay, I'd done international negotiations. I was certainly not an.

Christiana: [00:37:21] Well, you certainly made your entrance known, that's for sure.

Catherine McKenna: [00:37:25] Like you gotta do. We gotta get stepped on. I was the first minister abroad after our new government. I was like, we are all in. I am all in. So thank you. I did a little bit. I mean, I worked, I worked hard, but what I noticed, which was really interesting to me and I wasn't seeking it out. I just noticed there's really kick ass women here, and we would not have been able to get an ambitious agreement without the efforts of these women, I no doubt. I mean, people can go if they want to fight me on it. I'm happy to go head to head on this. And it was women from you, Christiana and Lawrence, who I think approached it. You had very different styles but were very strategic about how to get ambition, but it was also people like Jennifer Morgan from Greenpeace or Mary Robinson from a social justice perspective, or Rachel Kyte, who was at the world Bank then to ministers in their own country. So it was amazing to see the women. So I filed that away. Then come 2017, I was minister and it was Donald Trump, and we were hosting the G7. And I was like, oh God, how am I going to get things through? And I support women because we're half the flippin population. So we should be in all of these roles. But also, I think women are just more ambitious on climate, and that has been demonstrated through studies and facts. And so I leveraged the women to help get ambition on oceans and climate in our G7. And then I started women Leading on climate when I left politics, partly as a side thing, which I just thought it was important. But I think it's more important than ever, because in life you have to have you have to adjust to circumstances. And my theory of change on this is a subversive theory of change, but it's a little bit obvious. But because men kind of rule the world, it's less obvious to them. Maybe. Tom, I love you, but no.

Tom: [00:39:04] I'm just. I don't rule the world.

Speaker23: [00:39:06] You don't rule the world, okay?

Catherine McKenna: [00:39:07] But, you know, women may not be the leaders at cops, mostly. I mean, we're very small percentage of women leading countries. Even at the negotiating table. We may not always be the lead negotiator or in businesses, we may not be the CEOs, but women are pushing extremely hard in all of these spaces. So whether it's at boardroom tables, a cabinet, tables, at negotiating tables, in communities, in the streets, women are doing the hard work of climate action. They are talking to their friends and neighbors about it as a practical issue. And like I'll give you one example, if you have women in your C-suite, you are more likely to disclose your emissions. When are two and a half times more likely to push for climate action than men? So we need to tap into that, and we need to do it in a strategic way. So we have a group. It's not exclusive of women who are leading on climate globally, and we have national chapters. And the whole plan is to help support these women, to do more and to feel like you're not the only person in the room, because I'll tell you, sometimes I was in the cabinet room and I felt kind of lonely. And I know people were saying, and we laugh like the women, some of the women that are part of this network were like, oh God, that woman. She's going to talk again about climate change. And I was like, yeah, damn right I am. Damn right. And it helps to know that in other boardroom tables, negotiating tables, cabinet tables, you know, community meetings, that there are other women stepping up because we need solidarity more than ever. And so we have a global we have an agenda for the year. I mean, of course, ensuring the success of Cop and women who are leading like an attorney who's leading the cop for Brazil, or Rachel Kyte, who's the climate ambassador, or Theresa Rivera, who's fighting in Europe for for more ambitious climate action, we need to be supporting these women, but we also need to be setting an agenda and doing it in ways that people may not, you know, be like, you're not the leader or you're not the CEO, but we can still make our mark, and it can sometimes be in being quieter ways. It doesn't always have to be shouting from the rooftops. It can be phone calls to leaders to say we're watching you.

Catherine McKenna: [00:41:05] You know, and then we have that's that's totally true. And we should show for them. Don't worry. Like us. You know, I'm a pretty good shouter, but, uh, but we also have another side of it, which is also a social media side where we're organizing. We did a great campaign at cops. A cop was really hard. I fell down, but the thing that made me the happiest at court, beyond the work with the SSG, which I think is really important to support him, was women leaning on climate and we had a social media campaign. It had 41 million impressions. It had influencers around the world, women from over 50 countries participated. And it was particularly good because it was women saying, I'm doing this on climate. And what doesn't matter what you're doing in your community, you could be, you know, a girl, you could be, you know, a CEO who doesn't matter. You're doing something and you expect leaders to step up. And it was really empowering. And I will say, because there's also, sadly, a lot of misogyny out there right now. So we have misogyny meeting climate denial or climate inaction. And so I think we need to feel strong, but we also have to be practical and keep on pushing. And part of women leading on climate is really this idea that 80% of people globally want more climate action than their governments are delivering. We don't often hear that message, so we need to be pushing. Yeah, I do high low. I'm like, whatever we can all do working together. By Christiana. You were definitely one of my huge role models. I remember writing, you asked me to write a profile of the Paris Agreement, and it was just about these amazing women that I randomly met that are still out there fighting, that have become friends and supporters. And when I'm down, I can call them up and they'll say, pick yourself up. We just gotta keep on going.

Tom: [00:42:43] I would just like to ask you as a closing question, outrage and optimism as you look, very quickly, the future of Canada. What makes you feel outraged? What makes you feel optimistic?

Catherine McKenna: [00:42:50] Well, I feel outraged that we have Donald Trump talking about like, imposing huge economic tariffs, annexing our country. That's a complete misunderstanding of Canadians. As you can see. I'm kind of a nice person, but I'm not that nice. And we now have this saying in Canada is called elbows up. And if you don't know what elbows up is, you can go Google it. Or you can go to my Twitter because I have a picture of Mike Myers, the comedian, or he's doing this on Saturday Night Live. Elbows up. Is it a hockey game? Canadians are nice, but you start fooling around and you start like hitting our players. Elbows up. Watch out. So the outrage is how we're being treated by a great friend and ally. And we had people who died, who fought for, you know, in Afghanistan because of September 11th as part of NATO and then to be told NATO doesn't matter and our relationships don't matter. And it's not about the American public. I think a lot of the American public don't. They have no interest in, you know, what's happening between Canada and the US. So I think that is has made me outraged. But the good news is Canadians are outraged and we are tough.

Catherine McKenna: [00:43:50] And then the optimism is that, look, I think we will win this election. It is going to be extremely hard and I take nothing for granted. I will knock on a gazillion doors and go help all sorts of whoever's running and, you know, go help them. But I think then we can play an important role like, look, we're only Canada. And I saw this with the Paris Agreement. I mean, I wasn't going to overstay. We're not going to, like, solve climate change, but we can play an important positive role in the world doing things differently. Like Canadians, I think we are thoughtful. We are facts and science base, ideally at our best, and we are ambitious for things that matter. Which is a better life for, you know, not just Canadians. It's not just about us and taking all the time. It's actually for the world with, you know, good jobs and economic opportunity. And so I will do everything to do that. And as I say, you know what? Outrage also breeds action. And for me then it breeds optimism. But I sometimes have to go through the stages, like every day.

Tom: [00:44:52] We all do.

Christiana: [00:44:53] We all do.

Tom: [00:44:54] Catherine, thank you so much. It's great to see you.

Catherine McKenna: [00:44:56] It's great to see you, too.

Christiana: [00:44:58] Catherine, thank you so much. So much. Um, you know, I used to when my girls were very young. I used to pray with them at night. And I would finish always by saying amen until they corrected me. And they said, hey, women.

Catherine McKenna: [00:45:15] I love it. We will show power.

Christiana: [00:45:17] We will show power. Catherine, thank you so much for joining us again on the podcast. Really appreciate it.

Catherine McKenna: [00:45:24] Awesome. Well take care. Keep on fighting.

Christiana: [00:45:26] Always.

Tom: [00:45:26] See you soon. Bye. Christiana how nice to see Catherine McKenna again. What did you leave that with?

Christiana: [00:45:35] Well, I am so thrilled that she has not changed a bit. She still has her oomph, her enthusiasm, her commitment. I am just sothrilled that she just seems to get more and more ferocious, delightfully ferocious.

Tom: [00:45:52] Paul,

Paul: [00:45:53] I find her just the completely inspiring politician just because she has kind of energy truth. She's very clear. And that's what you really want. And I'm particularly struck by her talking about how you have to keep talking about climate change. You have to keep mentioning it. You know, during the interview, I discovered that the Trump administration is now trying to shut down the mount, a lower observatory that's been following CO2 emissions since 1958. The point is, we have a full blown attack on action on climate change. And Trump is not talking about climate change at all. And somehow we've lost the ability to talk about climate change. And I think we are making a huge error because if Trump is not talking about climate change, then we should be talking about it. And Catherine McKenna inspires in me that clear message. What do you think, John?

Tom: [00:46:40] Well, I mean, I was just taken by many things, but the fact that she had designed a climate policy that was inspired by right of center thinkers and is supposed to be a conservative solution that is pro-growth, that is about returning capital, that is about consumer expansion. And yet the narrative battle was lost. Now, that's obviously not her fault that it was lost. There should have been a lot more defense from senior government figures, but also just from the climate movement writ large. We just need to keep banking our wins, and we have this tendency to think about the next thing and keep pushing further forward.

Paul: [00:47:14] Next shiny thing, she said.

Tom: [00:47:15] Yeah, exactly. And the trouble there is that you can lose the progress that you made. And I think that's sort of an answer to the question that we posed to Christiana in the first half, where Christiana says you didn't know why it had not been more popular. And the answer is that it needed more support. It needed proper, proactive, thoughtful defense on a regular basis until it was really well established and became part of the culture.

Christiana: [00:47:37] Yeah, I thought she was very clear in answering that question. And and what touched me was her humility about that because she was so involved in that and so convinced that it was really going to be a long term policy in Canada. And I was very touched that she said, well, you know, we have to learn. Yeah, we have to learn how to how to do things better. So to just keep that beginner's mind and constantly say, okay, I did this, but here is what I learned. Next time around, apply those lessons. And if we fail again, we have to apply new lessons. I was really impressed with her. Yeah, that kind of a humble, willing to learn attitude.

Tom: [00:48:20] Now, unfortunately, one of the things that we have had sacrificed because we had such a brilliant interview with Catherine is we don't have so long for a wrap up. So I'm afraid that's it for this week and we'll be back next week. Thank you for joining us everybody. Always appreciate questions. Comments. Please follow us on social media and stay connected to the podcast and we will be back next week. Talk to you then.

Christiana: [00:48:38] Bye bye.