Request for Feedback on Report: Recommendation to Withdraw from the FCM-ICLEI Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
Recommendation to Withdraw from the FCM-ICLEI Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
Dear Gather 2030 Community,
We are reaching out to seek your valuable feedback on an important report we are preparing to send to municipal councils across Canada. The report, titled "Recommendation to Withdraw from the FCM-ICLEI Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program," outlines significant concerns regarding the PCP program and its implications for Canadian municipalities.
The report recommends that municipalities withdraw from the PCP program and instead develop locally driven environmental strategies that align with each community's values, priorities, and financial capabilities.
Next Steps: Before we distribute this report to municipal councils, and create additional tools for local advocates we are asking for your input. Your insights and perspectives are crucial to ensuring that the concerns and recommendations presented are thorough and representative of the broader community's views.
How You Can Help: Please review the attached draft of the report and provide any feedback or suggestions you may have. We are particularly interested in your thoughts on the key concerns highlighted, the proposed resolution for municipalities, and any additional considerations you believe should be included. The reference section is still being updated.
You can submit your feedback directly by replying to this email, commenting on this article, or through email at info@kiclei.ca.
Thank you for your continued support and engagement. Together, we can work towards a future where environmental stewardship is locally driven, practical, and aligned with the values and needs of our communities.
Best regards,
Margaret Hope Braun
Ecosystems Management & Civic Advocate
KICLEI Canada
Report: Recommendation to Withdraw for the FCM-ICLEI Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
Prepared for: Canadian Municipal Councils
Date: August 11, 2024
By: Margaret Hope Braun, Ecosystems Management and Civic Advocacy
Introduction
The motion for Canadian municipalities to register as members of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program necessitates a thorough re-examination. While environmental protection is crucial, this program introduces several challenges and considerations that require careful scrutiny to ensure it aligns with the best interests of all Canadian municipalities and their residents.
Purpose
This report recommends that Canadian municipalities reconsider their participation in the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program due to significant concerns regarding data collection and privacy, financial burden, local autonomy, ethical concerns, and impacts on the housing market, agriculture, and construction industry. The recommendation emphasizes prioritizing energy security and creating locally driven environmental stewardship strategies that align with each community's values, priorities, and financial capabilities.
Background on the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
The following background on the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program effectively ties together the historical and ideological roots of the program, its connection to global sustainability initiatives, and the foundational concepts that drive its implementation. It emphasizes the significant influence of international agendas on local governance through the program, drawing a clear line from the origins of sustainable development to current practices and policies at the municipal level in Canada. This context helps to frame the concerns and considerations surrounding the PCP program, particularly regarding issues of local autonomy, land use, and the influence of broader global frameworks on municipal governance.
The Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program is a significant initiative within the United Nations framework, aimed at addressing climate change at the municipal level in Canada. Administered by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and funded by ICLEI Canada and the Government of Canada, this program has been adopted by over 500 municipalities, impacting 98% of Canadians. Despite funding and administrating the program, the FCM and the Government of Canada have waived liability for the program's adoption and implementation.
ICLEI, the organization behind the PCP program, was founded at the 1990 World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future. The PCP program itself was launched in 1994, coinciding with the release of the FCM's Municipal Primer on the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). According to the primer, the FCM and ICLEI collaborated to draft Agenda 21 for UNCED, a comprehensive action plan for sustainable development.
The concept of "sustainable development" was introduced during the Brundtland Commission, which argued that land could not be treated as an ordinary asset controlled by individuals. The Commission emphasized the necessity of public control over land use to facilitate their development schemes. This philosophy forms the foundation of many sustainable development policies and programs, including those promoted by ICLEI and the FCM, which often centralize land use control to achieve broader environmental and economic objectives. The timing and connections between these initiatives underscore the deep ties between the PCP program and the larger international environmental agenda.
Five Milestones of the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
The PCP program involves five milestones designed to guide municipalities in addressing climate change:
Detailed Analysis of Energy Consumption and Waste: Municipalities collect and analyze energy consumption and waste data from all sectors and sources.
Setting Reduction Targets: Reduction targets are set, often aiming to achieve net zero by 2050.
Developing and Implementing Local Action Plans: These plans typically include purchasing electric vehicles, staff training, exploring renewable energy, conducting energy audits, and adopting green building standards.
Endorsing a Climate Action Plan: Local councils endorse the action plan, which often includes declarations of climate emergencies to galvanize public opinion and justify expenditures and policy changes.
Repeating the Data Collection Process: Continuous data collection and monitoring are conducted to track community progress towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs), creating a cyclical process that can pressure councils to adopt costly green technologies and policies without thorough scrutiny.
Key Concerns
Geographic and Environmental Context
Canada’s Geographic Context: Considering the necessity of CO₂-producing activities in Canada’s vast and cold environment is crucial. Policies must reflect the practical realities of living and working in a country with unique geographic and climatic conditions.
Privacy and Data Security
Privacy and Trust: Extensive data collection infringes on the privacy of residents and staff, who may be unaware that their daily energy and waste habits are being meticulously recorded, leading to distrust in local governance.
Data Security: Data managed by third-party companies like ICLEI raises concerns about data security and potential misuse, including risks of data breaches or exploitation for commercial purposes.
Financial Concerns
High Costs and Taxation: Residents already contribute to provincial and federal climate initiatives. The program’s milestones require costly measures like purchasing electric vehicles, conducting energy audits, and adopting green building standards. This adds a third level of taxation on residents and can strain municipal budgets.
Profit-Driven Motives: The primary purpose of this data collection appears to be for the marketing of green energy products, suggesting a profit-driven motive that may prioritize corporate gain over genuine environmental stewardship.
Governance and Autonomy
Shift in FCM’s Mandate: This program represents a shift in the FCM’s mandate from local to international representation and introduces federal and international influences that may undermine provincial jurisdiction over municipal governance, as outlined in Section 92 of the Canadian Constitution.
Influence of ICLEI Funding Sources: Corporate funding for ICLEI from entities like Google, BlackRock, and Vanguard raises concerns about policy direction and market influence. Such funding can shift the focus towards the interests of these corporations, potentially at the expense of local priorities and needs.
External Guidelines, Staff Influence, and Democracy: Reliance on external guidelines from ICLEI, which recommend staff-driven policy decisions over elected officials, can undermine representative governance and erode democratic principles.
Binding Targets: Setting reduction targets through the PCP program entails a significant commitment that may shape all future municipal plans and decisions. Targets often align with global agreements and are difficult to reverse, binding future councils to established commitments.
Voluntary Participation and Liability: The PCP program's voluntary nature, coupled with waived liability from the Government of Canada and FCM, transfers significant risk to local governments. Municipalities may face financial and legal challenges if program outcomes do not align with community expectations or resources.
Housing and Real Estate Impact
Impact on Housing Market and Housing Crisis: High-cost mandates and green building standards can increase construction costs and delay development approval processes, exacerbating the housing crisis by making housing less affordable and accessible.
Impact on Construction Industry: High-cost mandates and green building standards lack practicality, complicate and delay development approval, increase construction costs, and negatively impact the construction industry and economic development.
Real Estate Acquisitions: The long-term effects of sustainable development policies have enabled large-scale property acquisitions by ICLEI’s sponsors and other foreign investors. These acquisitions can drive up housing prices and limit affordable housing availability, exacerbating the housing crisis and making it harder for residents to find affordable homes.
Urban and Rural Dynamics
Impact of Urban Bias in Sustainable Development Programs: Sustainable development programs often recommend limiting population growth in rural communities, resulting in an urban bias. Policies that reduce the tax base and services in smaller municipalities and housing availability in urban centers fail to address the unique environmental and economic challenges of both rural and urban municipalities.
Urban Crisis: High-density housing can negatively impact quality of life, economic disparities, and environmental sustainability. Policies must balance development with the preservation of community well-being and equitable access to resources.
Holistic Rural Development: Canada is primarily composed of rural municipalities. Tailored approaches to rural development should focus on robust agriculture, resource management, and community empowerment. Prioritizing local control over land use and property ownership is crucial for community stability and preventing displacement. These strategies promote long-term rural resilience and economic vitality.
Impact on Agriculture: Provincial mapping that designates most of the land as ecologically protected or prime agricultural restricts landowners from the enjoyment and use of their land and limits their ability to sever. This often forces land sales or forfeitures, displacing farmers and disrupting the local agricultural economy.
Practicality and Feasibility
Active Transportation: The PCP program's emphasis on active transportation is impractical in the Canadian climate and rural settings, where harsh weather conditions and long distances make such measures unsuitable for daily commuting.
Energy Security: Net Zero by 2050 targets require 100% renewable energy and near-zero reliance on fossil fuels. Prioritizing energy security and diverse fuel options ensures stable and affordable energy supplies for residents and businesses, which is crucial for economic stability and community well-being.
Transparency and Trust
Transparency and Trust: Adopting the PCP program without full disclosure of liability, funding sources, data collection methods, potential long-term consequences, and cost of implementation to councils and the public undermines transparency and community trust.
For more information and further recommendations, in-depth reports on each concern will be released on kiclei.substack.ca and kiclei.ca.
Conclusion
After a thorough examination of the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program, it is evident that the challenges and concerns associated with its implementation outweigh the potential benefits for Canadian municipalities. The program introduces significant risks related to data privacy, financial burdens, governance, and local autonomy, all of which could negatively impact residents and the overall well-being of communities across Canada.
The reliance on external guidelines, coupled with the shift in the Federation of Canadian Municipalities’ (FCM) mandate, raises serious questions about the erosion of local control and the influence of international agendas on municipal governance. Additionally, the financial strain from high-cost mandates, along with the impact on the housing market, agriculture, and construction industry, further exacerbates the issues facing Canadian municipalities.
Given Canada’s unique geographic and climatic context, the impracticality of some PCP initiatives, such as active transportation and 100% renewable energy reliance, underscores the need for a more tailored approach to environmental stewardship. Municipalities’ priorities should focus on energy security, holistic development that respects local property rights, and strategies that address both urban and rural challenges without compromising community stability or economic vitality.
To protect the interests of Canadian municipalities and their residents, it is recommended that municipalities withdraw from the PCP program and instead develop locally driven environmental strategies. These strategies should be grounded in transparency, community trust, and practical solutions that align with each municipality's values, priorities, and financial capabilities. By doing so, municipalities across Canada can ensure a more resilient and sustainable future that genuinely reflects the needs and aspirations of their communities.
References
Federation of Canadian Municipalities. "Partners for Climate Protection Program." FCM, 2024.
Details the PCP program’s objectives and its impact on Canadian municipalities.
ICLEI Canada. "Local Governments for Sustainability." ICLEI Canada, 2024.
Provides background on ICLEI's role in sustainable development and its collaboration with Canadian municipalities.
Government of Canada. "Climate Action Incentive Fund." Government of Canada, 2023.
Outlines the Government of Canada's financial involvement in climate action programs.
United Nations. "Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio." UNCED, 1992.
Agenda 21 is the action plan developed at the UN Conference on Environment and Development.
World Commission on Environment and Development. "Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report)." United Nations, 1987.
Introduced the concept of "sustainable development," emphasizing the need for public control over land use.
Canadian Constitution, Section 92. "Powers of Provincial Legislatures." Government of Canada, 2024.
Provides the legal framework for provincial jurisdiction over municipal governance.
BlackRock. "Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Policies." BlackRock, 2024.
Describes corporate involvement in sustainable development and its potential influence on public policy.
Google. "Sustainability Initiatives." Google, 2024.
Outlines Google's sustainability efforts and its partnerships with global organizations like ICLEI.
Vanguard. "Investment Strategies and Real Estate." Vanguard, 2024.
Highlights Vanguard's investment in real estate and the potential impact on housing markets.
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. "Agricultural Land Use Planning." OMAFRA, 2023.
Discusses the impact of land use policies on agriculture in Ontario.
Statistics Canada. "Canadian Housing Market Data." Statistics Canada, 2024.
Provides statistical data on housing market trends in Canada.
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. "Privacy Concerns and Data Protection." Privacy Commissioner of Canada, 2024.
Addresses data privacy concerns related to municipal data collection and third-party management.
Proposed Resolution for Canadian Municipalities to Withdraw from the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
Date: [Insert Date]
Resolution No.: [Insert Number]
Subject: Withdrawal from the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
Moved by: [Insert Name]
Seconded by: [Insert Name]
WHEREAS Canadian municipalities have participated in the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program, which has introduced several significant concerns, including data collection and privacy issues, financial burdens, potential undermining of local autonomy, and ethical concerns regarding corporate influences;
AND WHEREAS the program’s mandates, including high-cost measures such as purchasing electric vehicles, conducting energy audits, and adopting green building standards, add a third level of taxation on residents and strain municipal budgets;
AND WHEREAS the program's emphasis on urban-centric solutions and external guidelines may not adequately address the unique environmental and economic challenges faced by rural municipalities across Canada;
AND WHEREAS adopting the PCP program without full disclosure of liability, funding sources, data collection methods, and the cost of implementation undermines transparency and community trust;
AND WHEREAS Canadian municipalities value robust local control over land use and property ownership to ensure community stability and prevent displacement, supporting long-term community resilience and economic vitality;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT [Insert Municipality Name] withdraws its membership from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program;
AND THAT [Insert Municipality Name] will develop and implement a locally driven environmental stewardship strategy that aligns with the community's values, priorities, and financial capabilities, focusing on energy security, conventional agriculture, resource management, and community empowerment;
AND THAT the Municipal Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and ICLEI Canada of this decision and take the necessary steps to formalize the municipality's withdrawal from the PCP program;
AND THAT [Insert Municipality Name] will engage in a comprehensive consultation process with residents and stakeholders to ensure transparency, gain community support, and tailor environmental initiatives to the specific needs of the municipality.
Certified a true copy of Resolution No. [Insert Number] passed by the Council of [Insert Municipality Name] at its regular meeting held on [Insert Date].
Municipal Clerk
Mayor/Warden
[Insert Municipality Name] Council Meeting
Date: [Insert Date]
Time: [Insert Time]
Location: [Insert Location]
I will give my input to this important cause. Without sounding melodramatic, humanity is what is at stake. The rich, the globalists, their organizations and multinational companies are on a quest to capture as many countries as possible and plunder as much land, resources and wealth as possible. Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, Agenda 2050, any net-zero policy that is initiated for municipal or provincial or state use, C40 cities and Pandemic and Emergency Agreement (World Health Organization) and One Health are connected. All these policies and initiatives are there to diminish the sovereignty, health, well-being and personal finances of the people. Many of these policies also lead to depopulation.
May I start with "excellent work" Gather 2030 team. I have read it in detail and made many notes. I put forth just a few of them to you now.
1. I believe many of the aspects of this program would infringe upon our constitutional rights. Under the Canadian Constitution, "Legal Rights" "7 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and has the right not to be deprived thereof..." Forcing us to live in 15 minute cities, not allowing us our birthright to be in nature or rural areas, restricting the use of/ or forcing the use of our private properties for outside agendas is all a violation of our constitutional right to liberty!
2. I think it is paramount for the Municipalities to understand that they are left holding the bag, ie; being legally responsible since the Federal gov has already made themselves legally immune. With tax payer dollars footing the bill, no federal gov liability, no citizen input all while allowing outside global agendas and Corporate interests to dictate Canadian policy they can expect many lawsuits.
3. In regards to centralizing land use, ie; restricting or forcing new land use policies upon privately owned land. I wonder what legal terms would have been in place when purchasing a property. Not sure if this would go back to crown land first being sold to an individual or where one would find this. It seems to me there would be an existing legal standing in place at the time the land was first sold to those individuals. If so, this would be breaking the legal (and ethical) terms and conditions of their purchase. This may not be useful for this purpose, but perhaps as a back up should things proceed in an undesirable direction.
4. In regards to meeting externally set goals I would ask, "What happens to a municipality if they don’t meet those goals? What happens to individuals whose consumption is too high?" Repercussions, punishment? Financial penalties?
5. This agreement is a CLEAR CONFLICT OF INTEREST! Gives governance over our daily lives to an UN-ELECTED International organization. It provides control and private information to international sources and to Corporations for their own gain and not for ecological benefit. I think it is very important to remind them that this is an “un-elected” organization dictating our Country and it’s people’s activities. This agreement undermines Canada and it’s people and a word beginning with T and rhyming with Reason comes to mind.
Until we can be sure that corporate interest is not being served when mandating particular “green products”, then this initiative cannot be considered a true effort towards environmental sustainability, but instead a corporate money grab to dupe the public and steal their hard earned cash.
6. We need a Holistic approach that acknowledges that humans are part of the environment, not a disease to be contained within a city. This approach of separation from nature is a big part of the problem, and should not even be considered to be a part of any solution. Instead, asking, "how can we live in reverence and harmony WITH the natural world?"
7. In the conclusion, within paragraph 3, when referring to the Municipalities’ priorities, I would like to see “local agriculture & food security” included in this sentence. I believe any community without local food production is vulnerable and ripe for exploitation. Local = environmentally sustainable security.
8. A community that is engaged in the process will take pride in supporting the initiatives! Local Community involvement is part of a sustainable solution!
I know that some points you have already made, and I was just adding to them. Other points might be useful to consider for another time and a few things to perhaps add in. Hope this was helpful and does not burden you. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute.