On climate pollution

Martin Olzynski's submission this week has called plenty of attention to the Kenney UCP's funding of climate denialism through an inquiry attacking environmentalism. But let's note that the response to Olzynski's observations only makes the inquiry look all the worse.

Here's the excuse from the inquiry's spokesman:

Boras suggested to Global News that concerns raised about whether some of the reports question climate change and the role humans play in it are irrelevant to the inquiry’s mandate.

“The inquiry is not about the status of climate, that’s not in its terms of reference,” he said. “A forensic accounting exercise about foreign funding of policy initiatives by groups in Canada (is).”

Even if the plan is to avoid any recognition of climate change (and it's telling that the inquiry's response is to try to downplay its existence), consider what the response implies about the inquiry's operations.

Taking Boras' explanation at face value, that would mean a public inquiry has spent substantial amounts of money on "expert" reports which consist of climate denialists spouting propaganda which has nothing to do with either the inquiry's mandate, or their own commissioned role. 

And rather than trying to at least ensure that the work product of its own process meets even the barest standards of accuracy or relevance, the inquiry has in turn willingly served as a conduit for that denialism by distributing it to participants - only to disclaim responsibility by saying people apparently shouldn't care that its hand-picked collaborators are engaging in gratuitous anti-science disinformation on the public dime.

Of course, it shouldn't come as any surprise that a process long steeped in corruption and bias is continuing to demonstrate both at appalling levels. But it's remarkable when the best defence the inquiry has to valid concerns about being anti-evidence is that it's also wasteful and careless.