Great Reset: French Govt to Recruit 3,000 ‘Green Police’ over Climate Change

A senior minister in France has demanded that the country create 3,000 ‘green police’ posts in the face of global warming.

Gérald Darmanin, who serves as France’s Minister of the Interior, has announced that he aims to create 3,000 posts for new “green police” officials, a move that he has deemed necessary in the face to tackle climate change.

News of the potential creation of these new posts in France follows calls from European Union bigwigs for the creation of a bloc-wide “Civil Protection Force” to fight the effects of climate change under the control of Brussels, a move slammed by some as an attempt by Eurocrats to hoard even more power.

In an interview with Le Journal du Dimanche, Darmanin justified the creation of 3,000 new posts specifically aimed at green-related criminal issues by citing the effects climate change was having on France, especially in regard to forest fires, nine out of ten of which have allegedly been caused by human activity.

“Faced with this, we must improve the work of judicial investigation,” the journal reports the politician as saying.

“We have therefore decided to massively reinforce the resources of the Central Office for the Fight against Damage to the Environment and to launch 3,000 ‘green police’ posts,” he continued. “The objective is that, in each gendarmerie brigade, there are gendarmes trained in attacks on ecology.”

“It will be a revolution,” Darmanin added.

The French minister’s plan to bring in 3,000 new “green police” comes as officials in Europe look at expanding their own resources, ostensibly to fight the effects of climate change.

In particular, one Eurocrat last week asked for Brussels to be handed more powers to create a “Civil Protection Force” directly under its control that would be able to “protect” member-states from disasters allegedly caused by the changing climate.

“[W]e have a growing sense that more Europe is needed in civil protection,” crisis management chief Janez Lenarcic declared regarding the proposal, with the technocrat seemingly arguing that Brussels would be able to provide this “protection” if handed more sovereign power over its member-states.

However, such a suggestion has been denounced by critics, with one MEP saying that “unelected bureaucrats” in the organisation “are using any excuse to grab more power”.

“These European bureaucrats are not the solution, but the cause of many problems that the EU is facing, and the deeply damaging energy crisis is just a proof of that,” said Cristian Terhes, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for Romania.

“Handing to these irresponsible and unaccountable bureaucrats even more power would just simply be irresponsible,” he continued.

“What Europe needs is a rebirth of national and sovereign democracy, with creativity and power for local people rather than one size fits all bureaucratic control from the centre of Brussels.”

DENIAL: Climate Change Minister on defence over trespass scandal

Trudeau’s Climate Change Minister, Steven Guilbeault, is on the defensive, finally responding to Saskatchewan Minister Jeremy Cockrill’s warning that federal agents could be arrested for trespassing on private land to take samples.

“I believe that we, and Canadians, are best served when we engage on the facts—not heated and misinformed rhetoric,” writes Climate Change Minister Guilbeault in a signed letter to Cockrill.

“…. On August 11, Environment and Climate Change Canada water scientists were taking samples alongside a highway in Pense, Saskatchewan on behalf of Health Canada. A landowner approached the scientists to inform them that they were in fact on private land.”

As previously reported by The Counter Signal, not one but several landowners, according to Minister Cockrill, have contacted the Saskatchewan government to raise “serious concerns about Government of Canada employees, in clearly marked Government of Canada vehicles, trespassing on private lands.”

As per the farmers, they were told by federal climate change agents that they were testing water sources for pesticide/nitrate levels on farms in the Pense, Mossbank, and Pilot Butte areas of the province.

While Guilbeault does not deny that it was possible that Government of Canada employees might have trespassed on a farm in Pense, Guilbeault contradicts Cockrill’s report of the farmers’ account, outright denying that the agents weren’t there to test nitrate levels.

“You brought this matter to my attention in your very public and very frank letter of August 21,” writes Guilbeault. “I also took note of your comments openly speculating about the work of these scientists. Please allow me to be equally frank and public in my response: departmental officials are not testing water for nitrates or nutrients related to farm runoff, and their study is not related to the non-regulated, voluntary goals of the Government of Canada in an effort to reduce emissions from agricultural fertilizers.”

Guilbeault continues, calling reports from outlets like The Counter Signal on Trudeau’s prospective nitrogen reduction policy that will see nitrogen capped at 30% below 2020 levels by 2030 “misinformation.”

“The claims made in the media about this incident compound other recent misinformation regarding the voluntary nature of the fertilizer emission reduction goals, mischaracterizing work that is voluntary, unregulated and being done in partnership with Canadian farmers to reduce emissions, not fertilizer use,” Guilbeault writes.

To be clear, The Counter Signal has never stated that Trudeau’s goal of reducing nitrous oxide emissions from fertilizer has passed the house or senate and become the law of the land.

We have, however, brought attention to the prospective policy and what it will mean for farmers and Canadians at large if it were to pass, and this reporting is backed up by Fertilizer Canada, which has stated that attempts to reduce fertilizer emissions will result in less fertilizer use and lower crop yield consequently. It doesn’t matter what the government’s stated intent of the emissions reduction is; that’s the inevitable result.

As per a report from Fertilizer Canada:

Total Emission Reduction puts a cap on the total emissions allowable from fertilizer at 30% below 2020 levels. As the yield of Canadian crops is directly linked to proper fertilizer application this creates a ceiling on Canadian agricultural productivity well below 2020 levels….

It is estimated that a 30% absolute emission reduction for a farmer with 1000 acres of canola and 1000 acres of wheat, stands to have their profit reduced by approximately $38,000 – $40,500/ annually.

In 2020, Western Canadian farmers planted approximately 20.8 million acres of canola. Using these values, cumulatively farm revenues from canola could be reduced by $396M – $441M on an annual basis. Wheat farmers could experience a reduction of $400M.

Besides the media, Canada’s former Agriculture Minister, Gerry Ritz, was so disturbed by the possibility of this informal policy being made a reality that he took it upon himself to go on the biggest live news show in the world, Tucker Carlson Tonight, to voice his concerns.

But I guess Ritz is just a hapless victim of “misinformation,” too. 

Guilbeault continues his letter, saying that Environment and Climate Change Canada is now “reviewing its sampling protocols” just in case agents did “inadvertently” encroach on private lands to make sure they’re following the law in the future as a “measure of good faith.”

In an email to The Counter Signal, ECCC confirmed that they were reviewing their sampling protocols before undertaking any further testing.

“We have many great and common challenges as Canadians that require our united action and effort. All orders of government should be able to agree on the value of collecting baseline scientific data, in accordance with the laws of the land, to protect the health and safety of Canadians,” Guilbeault’s letter concludes.

Student backlash builds over Western University mask, vaccine mandate

A back-to-school backlash has erupted at Western University over its requirement that students and teachers wear masks and provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination when classes resume this fall, with one affiliated school declining to enforce such rules.

A student protest is planned for noon Saturday at the campus’s concrete beach, according students4agency, an Instagram account whose hashtag ENOUGHISENOUGH is protesting the mask and vaccination requirements.

“(We) will not be backing down any time soon,” reads one message on their social-media post. “We’re prepared to support alternative peaceful demonstrations in the coming weeks if necessary.”

Monday, Western University officials announced medical-grade masks and proof of vaccination will be required when thousands of students converge on campus for the new school year. The Canadian Press is reporting that 14 of 83 universities surveyed nationwide will require masks.

The school’s faculty association supports the COVID-related policies, with officials issuing a statement on Wednesday that “our priorities are to keep everyone safe and to minimize any disruption to teaching and learning which might result from widespread outbreaks.”

But backlash at Western is also brewing, prompting the school’s student government to weigh in.

“The USC (University Students’ Council) is aware of students’ concerns about the recent COVID updates shared by Western University,” USC president Ethan Gardner said. “We are in the process of collecting feedback and elevating student voices to decision makers.”

Students at one Western University affiliate, Brescia University College, won’t have to provide proof of vaccination or wear masks to attend classes or get on its campus — an effort to prioritize student learning and get students back to the classroom, it said.

But Brescia also “encourages students to submit their vaccination status through Western’s online portal” and says it is “readily prepared to receive student concerns regarding their submission of a vaccination status.”

Justice Centre brings legal challenge against ArriveCAN and quarantine measures

TORONTO: The Justice Centre filed a lawsuit today in the Federal Court of Canada, on behalf of 11 Canadians either fined for not using the ArriveCAN and/or ordered to quarantine for 14 days after returning home from abroad. The Applicants involved in this legal challenge have received fines of up to $8,500 each and been forced to disclose private medical information via ArriveCAN. The legal challenge seeks to strike down the mandatory use of ArriveCAN and declare unconstitutional the 14-day quarantine requirements for Canadians who refuse to use ArriveCAN when returning home.

ArriveCan was initially implemented in April 2020 to force Canadian citizens returning home to submit quarantine plans due to Covid. It was mandated for air travellers November 21, 2020. In February 2021, the federal government mandated ArriveCan for all land travellers, while the US-Canada land crossing was still closed. After the Covid vaccine rollouts, travellers were required to upload their vaccination certificates onto the ArriveCAN app.

Mr. Matthew Leccese, one of the applicants, went to the United States for 25 minutes to pick up some parts for his vehicle. Upon his return, the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) demanded that he submit his vaccination certificate via ArriveCAN. Mr. Leccese refused because he had privacy concerns with ArriveCAN, but offered to present his vaccination certificate. CBSA refused to accept his paper certificate and issued him a ticket for $7,210 for not using ArriveCAN.

Mr. Alexander Macdonald, another applicant, attempted to cross the U.S. border in April 2022. He was refused entry by U.S. border agents and was allowed to return to Canada without issue. He tried to cross the U.S. border again in July 2022 and was again denied entry and returned to the Canadian side of the border. This time a CBSA agent ordered Mr. Macdonald to download ArriveCAN and submit to the 14-day quarantine despite never having set foot in the U.S.

Ms. Amanda Yates returned to Canada via a land crossing. Her husband used ArriveCAN on their behalf, but a glitch in the system sent them to secondary screening. She refused to disclose her vaccination status and was fined and required to quarantine for 14 days.  Her husband did disclose his vaccination status, and was not required to quarantine, despite living in the same house with Ms. Yates.

A glitch with ArriveCAN sent an automated message to over 10,000 vaccinated Canadians, requiring them to quarantine for 14 days. It took the government 12 days to inform the affected individuals that the app had malfunctioned.

ArriveCAN continues to come under heavy criticism for creating massive delays at international crossings. In July 2022, Toronto Pearson International Airport ranked number one worst airport in terms of delays and there were also significant delays reported at Montreal Pierre Elliot Trudeau International Airport.

The Minister of Transport has defended ArriveCan as vital in preventing the spread of Covid despite evidence that vaccines cannot stop transmission or infection. The minister also claimed ArriveCAN has not caused the ongoing travel backlog, despite evidence that the CBSA agents have stated it is in fact causing delays.

The Justice Centre has filed a Notice of Application against the federal government and is awaiting a trial date.

“The Justice Centre has heard from thousands of Canadians who have been negatively impacted by the federal government’s mandatory requirement to use ArriveCan. Thousands of law-abiding citizens have been fined egregiously simply for returning to their home country. The differential treatment and discriminating between vaccinated and unvaccinated travellers also defies science, which the federal government claims to follow,” says Eva Chipiuk, a lawyer on this case.

Students in court today fighting Seneca College vaccination mandate

TORONTO: The Justice Centre announces that lawyers will be in court on behalf of Seneca College students today, arguing their right to equal treatment free of discrimination due to their Covid vaccine status. The Justice Centre has advanced legal arguments to ensure that Seneca students will be allowed to return to their studies this fall on an interim basis pending the full court hearing.

Seneca was among the first post-secondary institutions in Ontario to enforce a Covid vaccine mandate. It remains one of the few to maintain the requirement, despite governments and other institutions dropping it in early 2022, in the wake of the Omicron variant and clear evidence that the Covid shots do not prevent transmission of the virus.

On August 30, 2021, Dr. Kieran Moore, Chief Medical Health Officer (CMHO) of Ontario, provided all post-secondary education institutions in the province with instructions requiring that students be offered three choices as part of their Covid vaccine plans, any of which would facilitate their access to campus:

  1. Show proof of double vaccination;
  2. Show medical exemption which the institution must approve; or
  3. Attend a Covid-19 vaccine education session on the safety and benefits of the vaccine.

Students who chose the final option were required to frequently test for Covid, and organizations declining to offer the final option were to require one of the first two.

Seneca chose not to offer testing options to its students. These students do not have the option to complete their studies online and some have been forced to take alternative employment that pays less than their projected career earnings.

Two of the Applicants, Ms. Costa and Ms. Love, were in the final year of their respective programs and had expected to begin their new careers in April 2022. Both students are single mothers who enrolled at Seneca to provide a better life for their children.

Despite ample evidence, the now widely recognized fact that vaccines do not stop transmission, and the termination of the CMHO’s instructions, Seneca has refused to rescind its Covid vaccine mandate for the Fall 2022 session.

It is well known that the risks associated with Covid increase exponentially with age. Both students involved in the injunction are under 40 years old and have a low chance of serious illness or death. The Center for Disease Control recently updated its guidance to inform the public that Covid transmission risk is the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

During the injunction counsel will present arguments to the Court that Seneca College is jeopardizing the careers of the named students and that prolonged absence from their studies will cause irreparable harm, compounded by the stress of financial insecurity as they struggle to provide for their families.

“Students are being coerced to choose between bodily integrity or receiving an education to make a living for themselves,” states Justice Centre lawyer Andre Memauri, adding, “Seneca College’s vaccination mandate is rogue, out-dated, discriminatory and a punishing policy which needs to come to an end to allow our students to return back to school.”

“The damage this policy has caused in the lives of these single mothers trying to finish their schooling to provide for their children is deeply troubling,” concludes Mr. Memauri.