We Lost the Election BUT we’re winning the War<\/p>\n
Ha<\/p>\n
https:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/world\/canada-pension-plan-abandons-net-zero-pledge-5861910?<\/a><\/p>\n The Canada Pension Plan (CPP) is no longer maintaining its commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. CPP\u2019s announcement comes at a time when many corporations and banks have been divesting from net-zero initiatives.<\/p>\n Four of Canada\u2019s largest banks announced in January they would leave the United Nations-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance. The Bank of Montreal, TD Bank, National Bank of Canada, and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce followed six other American banks in leaving the alliance ahead of the inauguration of U.S. President Donald Trump.<\/p>\n …………..<\/p>\n Blarney Con Carney just stated that He will Punish any Business that does Not Toe His Green Line<\/p>\n Punish the CPP ? Punish the Banks ? You dipshit….<\/p>\n There’s always another Turd to Flush in Canada<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" We Lost the Election BUT we’re winning the War Ha https:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/world\/canada-pension-plan-abandons-net-zero-pledge-5861910? The Canada Pension Plan (CPP) is no longer maintaining its commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The $700 billion plan\u2019s investment board (CPPIB) said May 21 on its … Continue reading
\nThe $700 billion plan\u2019s investment board (CPPIB) said May 21 on its website that while achieving net-zero emissions remains a widely adopted goal for many countries, it presents \u201crisks and opportunities\u201d for investors. It said \u201crecent legal developments\u201d in Canada have changed how net-zero commitments are interpreted.
\n\u201cIn particular, there is increasing pressure to adopt standardized emissions metrics and interim targets, many of which don\u2019t reflect the complexity of a global investment portfolio like ours,\u201d the pension fund said.
\nThe pension fund\u2019s board did not explain what recent legal developments it was referring to, and had not responded to The Epoch Times\u2019 request for comment by publication time.<\/p>\n