Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Lisa Novakowski's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
Helen's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
33 more comments...

No posts