Party leaders are ignoring climate change; environmental groups plan to change that 

The choice Canadians are being asked to make at the voting booth in less than two weeks will be made with little clarity around what each party plans to do about the greatest risk to everyone on the planet. Today, the country’s top environmental organizations have demanded detailed information from those seeking to form government on how they plan to confront climate change–the top priority for many Canadians, according to widespread polling.

A recent national survey by Leger, commissioned by the David Suzuki Foundation, found that 67 percent of Canadians believe the next federal government should make climate action and protecting nature a top priority. 

Despite this, detailed climate plans are lacking from Canada’s big political parties, save for the Greens, meaning voters must choose a new prime minister and governing party without knowing how they would limit emissions to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change, or how they plan to protect Canada’s beloved natural spaces in the face of unchecked resource extraction and urban sprawl. 

“Canadians are proud of their country and want to protect its air, water, forests and wildlife. With climate catastrophes like wildfires, floods, and biodiversity loss on the rise, we can’t afford half measures or silence. Voters deserve to know where parties stand on the urgent environmental issues shaping our future,” Environmental Defence’s executive director Tim Gray said in a statement.

As politicians focus on trade tensions, rising nationalism in the shadow of Trump-era politics, economic uncertainty and increasingly volatile geopolitics, there has been scant mention of environmental issues throughout the shortened campaign.

Ahead of the federal election, Greenpeace Canada projected bold messages like ‘Don’t Trump Canada’ onto Niagara Falls.

(Greenpeace Canada)

“Nature is part of what makes Canada strong and free – our leaders must rise to the challenge,” Nature Canada’s executive director Emily McMillan said.

She stressed the country’s “next prime minister will not be able to ignore the biodiversity crisis” as increasingly common and unpredictable severe weather events and natural disasters devastate Canada's most “beautiful and bountiful landscapes”.

“We need action to protect and restore nature now,” she added.  

This sidelining has been particularly evident in the case of the Green Party. Once expected to drive the national conversation on environmental policy, it has struggled to set an agenda this election cycle. 

Despite initially meeting the criteria to participate in the televised leaders’ debates scheduled for April 16 and 17, the party was dropped from the lineup after the Leaders’ Debates Commission concluded it no longer met the requirements to participate.

The Commission had originally invited the Green Party leader to participate, after determining two of the three criteria had been met: it had at least one elected member of Parliament as of the election call on March 23, and had submitted a list of 343 endorsed candidates—meeting the 90 percent national coverage requirement—by the March 31 deadline.

Elections Canada’s final list published on April 9 showed that only 232 Green Party candidates were officially confirmed—well below the 90 percent threshold. The party later acknowledged that it had made a “strategic decision” not to run candidates in certain ridings, particularly where the Conservatives were seen as likely to win.

The Commission found that this deliberate reduction in candidates undermined the intention behind the participation criteria—namely, to assess whether a party had the national presence and organizational strength to offer a viable electoral option to Canadians.

“Deliberately reducing the number of candidates running for strategic reasons is inconsistent with the Commission’s interpretation of party viability,” the Commission wrote in a statement.

The Green Party’s exclusion not only reignited concerns about the fairness of debate participation rules but also underscored how environmental issues are being marginalized in the national conversation—despite widespread public support for stronger climate policies.

In a statement released Wednesday, a coalition of 16 leading environmental groups expressed disappointment with the five federal parties and their responses to a series of questions on key environmental issues including climate action, biodiversity loss, Indigenous-led conservation and the transition to clean energy. 

The Liberal Party, NDP, Bloc Québécois and Green Party submitted responses—some incomplete—the Conservative Party did not respond.

Notably, only the NDP, Bloc Québécois, and Green Party provided structured answers using “yes”, “no” or “partial” responses, accompanied by explanations. 

The Liberals, in contrast, offered only narrative responses without clearly indicating whether the party supported the initiatives being asked about—in contrast to its championing of former leader Justin Trudeau’s environmental legacy.

The Liberal government under Trudeau was criticized for a similarly weak stance on environmental issues. 

Being part of several major international environmental agreements, including the Paris Agreement, and the Global Methane Pledge, Canada has committed to reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 and cutting methane emissions by 30 percent by 2030.

Canada’s current Paris Agreement target aims for a 40 to 45 percent reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2030.

Canada’s national emissions are currently only nine percent below 2005 levels, according to the latest data from the Government of Canada.

(Statistics Canada)

Since signing the Paris Agreement in 2016, Canada’s total GHG emissions have been on a steady rise.

(Government of Canada)

Canada's total GHG emissions increased 1.3 percent to 708 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2022 from 698 in 2021. Canada’s federal Ministry of Environment and Climate Change has reassured the public in the past that the country is on track to meet its 2030 target, but recent audits by Environment Commissioner Jerry DeMarco reveal otherwise. 

Using the government’s data, DeMarco projects a shortfall of about 50 megatonnes between Canada’s likely emissions and the 2030 goal, highlighting gaps in the Climate Change Action Plan, pointing to missed deadlines and absent emission reduction targets for many of the plan’s 80 measures. 

He criticized the Liberal government’s “overly optimistic” assumptions, which overlooked the financial and health impacts of climate change and relied heavily on emerging technologies like carbon capture, which have yet to see widespread deployment.

In its response to questions sent by the environmental groups, the Green Party rejected the current federal approach as “fraudulent,” saying the Liberal government’s Climate Accountability Act failed to enshrine Paris Agreement targets into law. 

The Greens propose legally binding emissions targets, a transition to 100 percent renewable electricity by 2035, and the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies. The party’s plan includes five-year interim milestones, investment in clean energy technologies, and an inter-party climate cabinet to ensure sustained political cooperation.

(David Suzuki Foundation)

“If the next federal government is serious about energy security, it should make clean energy investments that respect Indigenous sovereignty and protect future generations, not double down on an industry that accelerates climate catastrophe, boosts profits for American gas producers and passes off risky investments to First Nations,” David Suzuki Foundation’s senior adviser and member of Stellat’en First Nation, Janelle Lapointe, said. “Over the years, Indigenous leaders have cautioned against deepening dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets that threaten our lands, waters and communities.” 

On the question of eliminating public subsidies for polluting industries, the Green Party called for the immediate end of all fossil fuel subsidies and proposed a full fiscal review to redirect harmful subsidies toward renewable energy, public transit, and nature restoration.

In 2023, the federal government provided more than $18 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry including $8 billion in loan guarantees for the TransMountain pipeline expansion, over $1.3 billion in carbon capture and storage projects, and $7.3 billion in public financing through crown corporation Export Development Canada. 

In just four years, Ottawa provided at least $65 billion in financial support to major fossil fuel players. “That level of support could have fully funded every major wind and solar project in Canada from 2019-2021 twelve times over,” a 2024 report by Environmental Defence highlighted.

As part of their energy plan, the party calls for a national strategy to connect regional grids with a robust east-west and north-south transmission corridor, deploying smart-grid technology and energy storage to ensure affordability, resilience and full renewability by 2035 as well as off-grid renewable microgrids for remote communities.

When asked how would the national parties ensure that Canada meets its national and international carbon pollution reduction targets as detailed in the Paris Agreement and the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, each party presented their approach while one party took aim at Liberal leader Mark Carney’s rollback of the consumer carbon tax.  

The Bloc Québécois strongly opposed the federal government’s retreat from carbon pricing under Carney’s leadership, saying it unfairly shifts environmental and financial risks onto the public while allowing private profits to grow unchecked. As previously reported by The Pointer, the move may have quieted Conservative opposition, but it left local environmental advocates questioning the politically motivated decision to abandon the consumer carbon tax.

The Liberals have kept the industrial carbon tax, which puts a price on approximately 70 percent of Canada’s emissions, and have vowed to keep it in place if they form the next government, proposing stricter criteria and controls that would offset much of the loss from eliminating the consumer tax, according to the party.

The NDP agreed with the federal government on removing the consumer carbon tax “for good,” and emphasized the need for enforceable science-based targets, promising to declare a climate emergency and redirect public investments toward sustainable infrastructure and green jobs. “We are committed to meeting our targets as well as meeting the objectives of the Sustainable Jobs Act which sets on a path to protect and create good, unionized jobs in a net-zero future.”

The NDP plans to focus on workforce development, committing to train and retain thousands of electricians, powerline workers and technicians needed to build a net-zero grid. For NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, “Trump-proofing” Canada’s economy is key—linking energy security directly with climate action.

Singh is committed to removing oil and gas exploration subsidies and redirecting funds to retrofit over 3 million homes, focusing on low-income Canadians.

The Sustainable Jobs Act was given royal assent in June 2024 with the aim of ensuring transparency and accountability in creating green jobs in Canada’s transition to a net-zero future.

(Government of Canada)

While the Liberal party reaffirmed its commitment to the Paris targets, it was criticized by experts for the lack of detail on how it planned to reach those targets. Under Mark Carney’s leadership, the party promises a climate plan that is “credible, unifying and science-based,” with strengthened carbon pricing and investments in clean energy and green industry.

“Canada’s emissions are going down, and we are committed to making more progress under Mark Carney’s leadership. Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre won’t make big polluters pay and has committed to removing almost every emission reduction policy put into place since 2015,” the Liberals answered. 

Poilievre and the Conservatives have avoided questions about their lack of a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and have not put forward any policy proposal to address climate change with figures and data that could be measured.

Canada has long been the world’s fourth-largest oil producer and fifth-largest natural gas producer with the petro-chemical industry accounting for nearly a third of the country’s GHG emissions. 

One of the most profound impacts of this industry is on biodiversity and the health of natural ecosystems. This contradicts Canada’s pledge to protect 30 percent of its land and waters by 2030 under the Global Biodiversity Framework.

All four parties were asked about their plans to ensure Canada meets its international biodiversity targets to halt and reverse biodiversity loss as detailed in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

The Green Party offered the most comprehensive plan, focused on Indigenous-led conservation, strict enforcement of protection laws, and a halt to old-growth logging. Party officials propose major investments in ecosystem restoration and a network of Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas (IPCAs).

“We would immediately halt logging of endangered old-growth forests. Comprehensive restoration strategies would revitalize degraded ecosystems, such as wetlands, coastlines, and wildlife habitats, using nature-based solutions to halt and reverse biodiversity loss and strengthen climate resilience,” Green Party officials stated in their response. “Stronger environmental regulations to curb pollution and habitat destruction, updated legislation to protect at-risk species, and increased support for ecological research, biodiversity monitoring, and public education would ensure Canada meets its international biodiversity commitments.”

The NDP proposed a biodiversity accountability law and immediate funding to protect endangered species and restore degraded ecosystems.

The Liberals outlined a wide-ranging plan to create 10 new national parks, 15 urban parks, and launch water protection and marine clean-up initiatives.

“Nature is part of our very identity as Canadians,” Liberal leader Mark Carney said in a press release. “In this time of crisis, we need bold new approaches to protect Canada’s natural heritage and defend it for future generations.”

(Liberal Party of Canada)

Asked about Indigenous leadership in conservation, all four responding parties expressed support, though proposed approaches vary significantly.

“Indigenous-led conservation is one of the most important pathways for achieving Canada’s biodiversity, conservation and climate goals, while also supporting Indigenous reconciliation,” the Liberal response reads. The party has pledged new funding for Indigenous conservation projects, including an Arctic Guardians program, and promised to enshrine First Nations’ right to clean water into law.

The Green Party committed to full legal recognition of Indigenous stewardship rights, long-term support for Indigenous Land Guardians programs, and transferring fisheries management in key areas to Indigenous governance. 

The Green party also promised to tackle environmental racism and justice by fully implementing Bill C-226 through a new Office of Environmental Justice.

“Communities historically affected by environmental racism, such as Grassy Narrows First Nation dealing with mercury poisoning, Aamjiwnaang First Nation facing ongoing chemical pollution, and the toxic waste issues in Kanesatake would receive targeted support and resources to redress these injustices. We would enforce robust regulations and accountability measures to prevent further injustices and contamination,” the Green response outlined.

The NDP proposed an Environmental Bill of Rights and a federal justice office, with a mandate to address disproportionate environmental impacts on marginalized communities. 

“Indigenous knowledge and stewardship will be prioritized through an expanded Indigenous Guardians program and Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas with long-term sustainable funding mechanisms co-developed with Indigenous peoples,” the NDP said.

Parties also weighed in on the global plastics crisis as Canada hosted the UN’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution (INC-4) in 2024. The Green Party is calling for a binding international treaty to end plastic pollution by 2040 and would expand domestic bans on single-use plastics, phase out non-essential plastics in packaging and consumer goods, and implement extended producer responsibility.

“We would also ban the export of Canadian plastic and solid waste by 2030, ensuring Canada manages its own waste responsibly,” the party said.

Canada adopted a Zero Plastic Waste Agenda in 2018 to eliminate plastic waste by 2030. The Liberals reaffirmed their Zero Plastic Waste agenda, emphasizing science-based action and a multi-stakeholder approach, including regulation and improved recycling. Party officials confirmed Canada’s intention to finalize a global plastics treaty by year’s end. 

“It would mark one of the most significant environmental decisions since the Paris Agreement and the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework,” the Liberals responded.

The NDP criticized the Liberals for exporting Canadian plastic waste to countries without proper disposal infrastructure, creating environmental and health hazards abroad.

“Plastic waste threatens our ecosystem, biodiversity and people’s health. Instead of reducing plastics, we are sadly making more in Canada,” NDP MP Gord Johns said. 

“Not only that. The Liberals continue to allow the shipment of plastic waste from Canada to countries in the Global South that don’t have the infrastructure to manage it responsibly. This creates plastic waste slums endangering communities and marine life—this has to stop.”

Before 2017, Canada exported about 210,000 tonnes of plastic waste annually. In 2023, Canada exported 202 million kilograms of plastic waste, up from 183 million kilograms in 2022. A significant portion of this waste is sent to the United States, where it is often mixed with domestic waste and then shipped to other countries, particularly in Asia.

Chemical exposure is another major challenge that’s becoming an increasing public health and environmental concern in Canada, with PFAS—commonly known as “forever chemicals”—at the centre of attention. 

Found in everything from firefighting foam and food packaging to cosmetics and textiles, PFAS are persistent, bioaccumulative and linked to serious health risks.

(Environmental Defence)

The growing presence of toxic substances in consumer goods, water and ecosystems has sparked demands for stronger, faster regulation.

The Green Party supports a comprehensive, class-based ban on PFAS in consumer goods and industrial applications, backed by a new Toxics Use and Products Reduction Act along with clear labelling, environmental monitoring and safer substitutes.

The party advocates for long-term, expanded funding for the Chemicals Management Plan (CMP), calling for a precautionary and transparent system with greater public access to exposure data.

The Liberals point to their 2023 Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act as a key milestone, and promise to continue prioritizing high-risk substances. 

“The previous Liberal government announced in March 2025 steps to propose the addition of the class of PFAS, excluding fluoropolymers, to Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act,” the party argued, stating their current PFAS phased approach began in March 2025, starting with firefighting foam and gradually expanding to other consumer goods such as cosmetics and food packaging.

“Emerging science has shown that we cannot continue to use PFAS the way that they are being used now.”

On April 15 2024, NDP MP Laurel Collins introduced a motion demanding urgent action, particularly to protect firefighters exposed to PFAS through gear and foam. The motion pushes for Canada to align with the EU and U.S. states on banning the full class of PFAS, and to explore legal avenues to recover cleanup and health costs.

All four parties acknowledged the importance of protecting Canadians from toxic chemical exposures, though their confidence in the current system varies. The Green Party supports permanent, expanded funding for the Chemicals Management Plan (CMP), advocating a proactive, precautionary approach with improved labelling and public access to data.

The NDP gave a simple but clear “yes” to long-term CMP funding without a detailed answer.

(David Suzuki Foundation) 

As voters prepare to cast their ballot on April 28, Stand.earth’s senior campaigns director Liz McDowell said “political parties must have science-based environmental plans that address the root causes of the cascading crises we face.”

It was part of the call to action.

“It’s imperative that Canada’s next Parliament put climate at the top of its agenda – making life affordable, building a more resilient society for all, and confronting the climate emergency are interconnected.” 

The Pointer's 2025 federal election coverage is partly supported by the Covering Canada: Election 2025 Fund. 

Email: [email protected]

At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you