Contact us now: Phone: +111111111



The Great (Opportunistic) Re-Set

Tue, November 24, 2020   |   Author: Peter Vogel   |   Volume 27    Issue 47 | Share: Facebook | Twitter   

This pandemic has provided us with an opportunity for a re-set.” These are the words of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as he addressed a UN conference recently. He went on to say, “This is our chance . . . to reimagine economic systems,” and to combat poverty and climate change, among other things, and to “building back better.”

Indeed… But who will build back better? How? And why? What are they trying to re-set, and why? Is a re-set simply an inevitability of the economic crisis that we are facing, or is a re-set something that can be precipitated by powerful governments and international bodies?

What we can see on the ground is that many restaurants and other small businesses have been “re-set” from operating on a tight margin, to going under completely. Some long-term care homes went from being poorly managed and funded, but largely forgotten, to being “re-set” into the spotlight, and, rightfully, embarrassed by their lack of proper care for their patients. These are just a few of the re-sets that have been happening, but they don’t seem to be the kinds of things that the PM was talking about.

Brian Lilley wrote this about Trudeau’s address: “If you aren’t familiar with The Great Reset or Agenda 2030, fear not, it just means you are a very normal person leading your life. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be worried.” He goes on to explain: “Although starting in the environmental movement, Agenda 2030 and its predecessor (Agenda 21) have been clear that they want to use climate change to bring about a more socialist economic change in society.” That certainly raises some concerns; what is “The Great Reset” and what is “Agenda 2030”?

Neither “The Great Reset” nor “Agenda 2030” are hidden agendas. Both have official websites dedicated to their goals. The website for “The Great Reset” talks about “how we can recover from COVID-19 to build a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.” Sounds nice, and there are probably plenty of people with good intentions working on solutions to big problems that have been exposed or created in these last few months. But this is an unelected international body, and one should ask if their ideas are suggestions, or if they will become top-down decrees.

The same question will have to be asked of “Agenda 2030;” will its seventeen “sustainable development goals” become seventeen internationally-imposed decrees? The seventeen goals themselves are not all bad, but they are not necessarily your top preoccupations, and not necessarily those of most Canadians — and this is where our government has to be very careful!

While the seventeen goals of Agenda 2030 line up with much of what our Liberal Government might want to do, they did not run for office during the last election on that platform. They also didn’t lay out all of the implications of a great economic reset — so they must not proceed in these directions without a new mandate from Canadian citizens!

Canadians need to be told in very specific terms what the Prime Minister means when he talks about “building back better” and “reimagining economic systems.” Your definition of “better” and Trudeau’s might not be quite the same….

One might also wonder if an economic system reimagined by someone who thinks that budgets can balance themselves would actually work. The re-set of Parliament to its present hampered state is not an encouraging sign for our democracy or for future re-sets proposed by our government.

So far, the main things that governments across this country have been re-setting are Canadians’ civil liberties. We’ve been restricted in our travel to and from some regions, from visiting seniors, from attending family death-beds, from celebrating family marriages, and from our meeting together for public worship. Are these “resets” constitutional? Are our governments, at all levels, as concerned about our freedoms as they are about our “safety”? It is worth noting that there is no mention of religious freedom or individual liberty in the list of seventeen goals on Agenda 2030. There is, however, mention of “strong institutions” and it would not be a stretch to imagine the UN including themselves in this; they have a history of growth and involvement, even interference in independent countries internal affairs.

What about “Affordable and Clean Energy”? The environment has been a major issue for the UN; while clean energy is a nice-sounding goal, it is not achievable in the short-term for many developing economies. “The opponents of fossil fuel projects have not provided solutions in alternate sources that could deliver the same type of stable electricity that coal projects would. Yet, they propose a ban on new fossil fuel projects in Africa, a move that can curtail developmental goals for many more decades.” The UN (with Canada’s cooperation) could hamper development in Africa. The actions of today must line up with present realities, not just with the futuristic and unproven goals of the UN.

If there is to be any economic re-set, it should be in the direction of freedom for people to start businesses and earn living for themselves and for their families. MP Rachel Harder recently said in Parliament: “I am talking about the very privilege of work, the honour of work, the dignity of work. It is an incredible thing to earn what one receives. Studies show that individuals who receive money without earning it are more likely to be depressed and less likely to feel fulfilled.” She also said: “We can shift the spotlight onto Canadians, onto business owners, and entrepreneurs. It is Canadians who are best able to generate wealth, create solutions and solve problems, not the government.” That perspective would be a welcome “re-set” in attitude if more of our MPs took heed.

Canada needs a moral re-set on abortion, euthanasia (MAiD), and sexual ethics. We don’t need a re-set towards bigger government, more socialism, or more interference from an unelected United Nations seeking global powers. We need a re-set towards greater accountability for our Parliament, and away from the current direction of rule by unelected “experts,” domestic or international.

Most of the re-sets that we need are a return to things that used to be considered common sense, informed by an underlying Christian heritage. As we have drifted farther from this heritage, common sense has become less common.

If you believe that Canada needs a re-set of political and moral priorities, please consider joining and supporting CHP.

Download PDF Version

Other Commentary by Peter Vogel: