Fighting AGW is anti-Canadian

In today's Post Terence Corcoran wrote a satirical April Fools take-off on the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy.  In it he covers a report from the "National Roundtable on Canada’s Future as a Hot Green Economy":

... in a preliminary report titled Let the Warm-Up Begin, finds Canada has nothing to fear from future increases in temperature. “We’ll have trees in the tundra, balmy beaches in Hudson’s Bay, oranges in Ontario and tulips in Tuktoyaktuk,” said the report.

... “We could lose most of Prince Edward Island and much of Nova Scotia if the sea level rises as expected,” said Ms. LaChauffage, “but our research shows the benefits of climate change to Canada as a whole far outweigh the costs.”

... The loss of P.E.I. as a province seems certain. Nova Scotia would be cut off from the mainland. “Goodbye to Nova Scotia” is a chapter heading.

Hilarious!  It's the opposite of the actual "Round Table" position.  But, April Fools aside, the fake report's general viewpoint that any warming is likely to be economically beneficial to Canada is true. This really should be Canada's official default position. The alternative scenario is the onset of a new ice-age which some say is due in the not-so-distant future. For Canada an ice-age is the ultimate doomsday scenario. It has happened before and when it happens again all traces of civilization will be completely destroyed - crushed and scraped away by kilometer deep glaciers.  The precautionary principle dictates that we do everything possible to avoid this ;)

As well as letting us reap the immediate direct economic benefits of warming, AGW could well forestall a new ice-age. So, accepting AGW as proven (as it is now by every level of government and environmental dupe in the country), rather than fighting it we should all be vigorously promoting a bigger carbon footprint. In fact, fighting AGW is grossly anti-Canadian.