Collaborative Proposal Creation
Create, improve and sponsor proposals in a respectful, fully bilingual environment. Grow proposals in the "Hothouse", for promotion to the "Workshop", to become official GPC policy.
Proposal text
BE IT RESOLVED that all advertising (including paid promotion and sponsorships) for fossil fuels; fossil-fuelled vehicles, machines and tools; and fossil-fuelled travel should be banned in Canada, with exceptions for for public transit, passenger coach services, and agricultural machinery for which there is not yet a viable alternative.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Canadian regulations should mandate disclosure, at the point of sale of such products, of the health and environmental risks of fossil fuel production and use.
Type of Proposal
Public policy that the party would represent
Objective / Benefit
In the age of climate crisis, we must do everything we can to reduce emissions, including reducing both supply and demand as fast as possible.
Currently, fossil fuel (and fossil-fuelled) companies purchase "demand generation" advertising, inflating social desire to consume more than is needed, so they can grow their private profits, at the expense of future generations.
They then use increased consumption as a ‘social licence’ for continued expansion of supply.
Removing the artificially-inflated demand created by advertising, promotion and sponsorships will be one of the ‘lowest-hanging fruit’ in emission reduction, similar to ending tobacco advertising.
If your proposal replaces an existing policy or policies, which one does it replace?
N/A
List any supporting evidence for your proposal
On the success of TAPS (Tobacco ad) bans:
* https://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/m21_7.pdf
* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3734674/
* https://www.who.int/activities/enforcing-tobacco-advertising-promotion-sponsorship-bans
Bans on FFAPS (Fossil Fuel ads) already introduced:
* France, Amsterdam: https://www.corporateknights.com/leadership/will-more-countries-ban-fossil-fuel-ads/
* The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jan/29/guardian-to-ban-advertising-from-fossil-fuel-firms-climate-crisis
Advocacy groups working worldwide to expand this practice:
* Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment: https://www.stopfossilfuelads.ca/
* European Citizens Initiative: https://banfossilfuelads.org/
* Australia: https://fossiladban.org/
* Other global initiatives: https://www.worldwithoutfossilads.org/projects/
* List of others: https://verbiedfossielereclame.nl/only-words/
Does this proposal affect any particular group and what efforts have been made to consult with the group or groups?
It affects all current and future citizens of the world positively, by reducing emissions from unnecessary demand.
While it will likely affect the financial profits of the fossil fuel industry, I consider the decline of that industry and a transition to others to be a net benefit, so I don’t consider it necessary to consult with them.
Jurisdiction: Is this proposal under federal jurisdiction?
Yes
Please indicate the language the proposal is being submitted in.
English
This proposal is being evaluated
Posted on the Continuous Motion Development Vote tab for member review prior to the all-member vote.
We're building a new kind of politics. One that is open, participatory, and people-powered
If you believe in what we're doing, please consider making a small donation to help us build it
Related images
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
I think that it would be useful to require all online advertisers (fossil fuel or not) to buy insurance from a Canadian company. This would help in fixing the issue of the explosion of online ads which impersonate someone (oftentimes Mr Beast, Elon Musk - but potentially noted environmentalists like David Suzuki) or impersonate a brand (ex CBC News). The fact that the insurance company is Canadian means that if you are affected by the scam, you can sue the insurance company for damages. This means that the insurance company will have a motivation to do due diligence (as opposed to the status quo of no one doing due diligence on online ads) Currently the advertiser is almost always a foreign company or a foreign individual. Suing a foreign company which is committing crimes (defamation) is much harder than suing a domestic company. I think that this will significantly reduce the amount of scams in online advertising. From a fossil fuel angle, this will make it less likely that an advertiser would run ads impersonating David Suzuki.
Loading comments ...