This Thursday, just weeks before it is at the CANSEC weapons show in Ottawa, Lockheed Martin will be holding its Virtual Annual Meeting.

As You Sow, on behalf of the Remmer Family Foundation, has put forward a resolution on climate change to that annual meeting. That proposal can be found under Proposal 7 (on page 88) of the company’s Proxy Statement & Notice of Annual Meeting.

It states: “Shareholders request the Board issue a report, at a reasonable expense and excluding confidential information, disclosing how the Company intends to reduce its full value chain greenhouse gas emissions in alignment with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C degree goal requiring Net Zero emissions by 2050.”

The Lockheed Martin Board of Directors rejects this proposal.

It says (on page 89): “The Board of Directors recommends that stockholders vote AGAINST this proposal because we believe that its approach is duplicative, unnecessarily prescriptive, premature and not in the best interest of our Company or our stockholders.”

Lockheed Martin is a major carbon polluter

The weapons that Lockheed Martin produces are major carbon emitters.

CODEPINK has posted: “For every hour of flight, the F-35 burns 1,340 gallons [5,072.452 litres] of fuel, pumping roughly 28,140 lbs of CO2 into the atmosphere. This jet is a disaster for the environment.”

The Canadian government intends to purchase 88 F-35s.

How much fuel will just one Canadian F-35 burn? Given each F-35 is supposed to have a service lifetime of 8,000 hours, one could estimate that 8,000 hours x 5,072 litres of fuel an hour amounts to about 40.5 million litres of fuel.

How many barrels is that? Given 1 barrel of oil holds 158.987 litres, one can further estimate an F-35 could burn about 255,000 barrels of jet fuel over its lifespan.

How much carbon will just one F-35 emit? 8,000 hours x 28,140 pounds is pounds tells us about 225 million pounds or about 102,000 metric tonnes.

And 88 F-35s? That would be about 8.98 megatonnes.

The Canadian government has not made public the carbon emissions expected from its purchase.

Transparency is needed on military emissions

Under the Paris Agreement reached at the COP21 climate summit in Paris in 2015, militaries lost their automatic exemption, but were not obligated to cut their emissions and reporting on those emissions was left to the discretion of individual states.

Author Jonathan Cook has also commented: “All too often the figures are disguised – lumped in with emissions from other sectors, such as transport.”

For instance, this article in The Conversation notes: “Canada reports its emissions under multiple IPCC categories, reporting military flights under general transport, and energy for bases under commercial/institutional emissions.”

Fighter jets also exempt from Canada’s greening strategy

In August 2021, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released a report titled Leading the way? A critical assessment of the federal Greening Government Strategy.

The CCPA report specifies: “The Department of National Defence alone accounted for 59% of federal emissions in 2019–20.”

It then highlights: “The [Department of National Defence is] exempt from key commitments in the Greening Government Strategy [of reducing emissions by 40% below 2005 levels by 2025]. Specifically, while [DND is] beholden to the 2025 target for facilities and administrative fleets, their operational fleets [i.e., the air force] are only subject to the 2050 target [of net zero emissions].”

DND on F-35s and the environment

In January 2023, Global News reported that Jessica Lamirande, a DND spokesperson, says that an assessment has been conducted on the “environmental impact” of F-35 fighter jets that includes the “planned capture of emissions”.

The article notes: “The government says they have conducted an assessment of the jets’ environmental impact, concluding that it would be the same as those of the existing CF-18 aircraft.”

It then quotes Lamirande who says: “The analysis supports the conclusion that replacing the current fighter fleet with the future fighter fleet will not have an adverse impact on the environment.”

Not just about carbon emissions

As CODEPINK national director Danaka Katovich and Peace Action development associate David Gibson comment: “Even if Lockheed Martin were environmentally friendly, it would still be accountable for a variety of offenses, chief among them flooding the world with weapons. That said, committing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is necessary as we stare down the barrel of climate disaster. Shareholders breaking with the board and voting yes would be a good start. Given the enormity of the crisis we face, anything less would be criminal.”

For more, please see their article The Board of Lockheed Martin Has Spoken: Climate Change May Proceed (The Jacobin, April 20, 2023).

Climate change and human rights

When she was the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet commented: “Without a healthy planet to live on, there will be no human rights. Let me be very clear: the triple threat of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss constitutes the single greatest challenge to human rights in our era.”

Lockheed Martin appears to have chosen profit over human rights and a sustainable environment.

Lockheed Martin and CANSEC

As noted at the top, Lockheed Martin is a sponsor of the CANSEC weapons show taking place in Ottawa this coming May 31 to June 1.

A popular mobilization is being organized to #ShutDownCANSEC.

As Defence Minister Anita Anand is expected to be a keynote speaker the morning of May 31, this is an opportunity to express concern to her about the F-35’s carbon emissions and the death and destruction caused by warplanes.

For more on the upcoming mobilization against CANSEC, click here.

Photo: Cadets at RCMP Academy Depot Division.

The  North-West Mounted Police (NWMP), the forerunner of the present-day Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), was established in 1873.

Journalist Stephen Maher writes in Maclean’s magazine that Canada’s first prime minister modelled the NWMP on the Royal Irish Constabulary, “a colonial, paramilitary force designed to project power over a subject people”.

Beginning in 1885 all NWMP/RCMP cadets have been required to go through six months of training at Depot, the RCMP Academy in Regina, Saskatchewan.

It is the only location where the RCMP trains its cadets.

As such, it is where the RCMP officers who comprise the controversial Community-Industry Response Group (C-IRG) are trained.

Scott Blandford, a 30-year veteran with a major police force who is now a professor at Wilfred Laurier University, describes the Depot as “essentially military boot camp”.

Retired Dalhousie professor Chris Murphy and former RCMP assistant commissioner Cal Corley have also commented: “Too many aspects of the training at Depot reinforce an outdated traditional paramilitary culture.”

And former Supreme Court of Canada justice Michel Bastarache wrote in Broken Dreams, Broken Lives: The Devastating Effects of Sexual Harassment on Women in the RCMP (November 2020) that the nature of training cadets receive at Depot contributes to the toxic culture within the RCMP.

Bastarache wrote the report as part of the $125 million settlement of claims from 2,304 female Mounties who were sexually abused or harassed on the job.

Mass Casualty Commission recommendations

The final report (March 2023) of the Mass Casualty Commission has recommended that the RCMP phase out the Depot.

The Commission recommended (on page 56): “The RCMP phase out the Depot model of RCMP training by 2032 and the RCMP consult with the Métis and Saskatchewan Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations with respect to how the land and the facility should be used in the future.”

Asked about this recommendation, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently stated: “Depot is a Canadian institution just as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are. We know how important it is for the local economy, but we also know how impactful it is in training police officers who then serve all across the country. We will continue to look very carefully at the recommendations.”

Overall, the Commission stated (on page 145) its “recommendations to the RCMP [are] about the changes needed to transform from its present paramilitary structure to a police service that better reflects contemporary Canadian legal norms and community expectations.”

Photo: On November 16, 1885, Metis resistance leader Louis Riel was hung at Depot. University of Manitoba professor Sean Carleton: “Mounties still get trained at the spot where Riel was killed by the state.”

Photo: Depot, 1937.

RCMP Heritage Centre

The RCMP Heritage Centre, currently in the process of seeking to become a national museum, is located on the grounds of the Depot.

Earlier this year, the Canadian Press reported: “Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised during the 2019 election campaign that the Liberals would expand the RCMP Heritage Centre, which is currently operated by a charitable organization, into a national institution. …The centre has spent years advocating to gain national museum status, which would require the federal government to amend the Museums Act. National museums operate as Crown Corporations and have their operating costs covered by Ottawa.”

Abolish C-IRG

The Globe and Mail editorial board recently commented: “The time for delicacy is over. The [Mass Casualty] commission’s findings about the RCMP are so stark that the only responsible conclusion is that Canada’s national police force needs to be torn down to its foundations, and then those foundations need to be dynamited.”

More specifically, a new coalition has called for the abolition of the RCMP’s C-IRG unit.

The C-IRG is comprised of RCMP officers who request to be temporarily reassigned from their regular duties. The controversial police unit has received at least $49.9 million since 2017-18 for its actions to enable the construction of the TC Energy Coastal GasLink pipeline on Wet’suwet’en territory, the Government of Canada-owned Trans Mountain tar sands pipeline on Secwepemc territory, and Teal Jones logging in the Fairy Creek watershed.

After receiving nearly 500 formal complaints against the C-IRG alleging excessive force, illegal tactics, unprofessional behaviour, racism, discrimination and Charter violations, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, an independent federal watchdog agency, launched a systemic investigation of the C-IRG this past March.

PBI-Canada is part of Abolish C-IRG, a new coalition of frontline defenders, lawyers, professors, researchers, students, non-profits and settler allies.

On March 22, the coalition called for a suspension of C-IRG deployments during the CRCC systemic investigation.

The letter states: “The CRCC reviews can take years to complete, and it is irresponsible to have this unit continue operations during that time, enabling the continuation of unlawful use of force, arrests, detentions, and assaults that have sparked such an investigation.”

Then on April 19, the coalition issued this letter, signed by Indigenous land defenders and 60+ organizations, that states: “We call on the Province of British Columbia, the provincial Ministry of Public Safety and the Solicitor General, the federal Ministry of Public Safety and Prime Minister’s Office, and RCMP ‘E’ Division to immediately disband the C-IRG.”

You can follow Abolish C-IRG on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

For more, see The RCMP promoted a video for recruitment. But critics say its focus on ‘military-style’ policing won’t attract new and diverse cadets (Toronto Star, February 27, 2020).

APTN Video: C-IRG on Gitxsan territory, November 2021.

Terrace, BC-based CFNR reports: “After months, even years, of RCMP activity on their lands, the Gitxsan Huwilp Government are proposing a military armistice agreement. If approved, the agreement would limit the activity of the RCMP’s controversial Community-Industry Response Group on their territory.”

“[Last] month saw the Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs ban the unit from their territory, but the RCMP refused to comply. Now, they have drawn up a draft armistice agreement, which will be presented to RCMP leadership next Tuesday [April 25].”

The article further explains: “It would limit the C-IRG’s access to Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan territory unless approved by Parliament, call for the cessation of hostile acts on the land, and limit the number of RCMP allowed on their territory to 9 authorized officers.”

Gitxsan governance

The Gitxsan Huwilp Government is comprised of 48 chiefs. And as explained on the Gitxsan Huwilp Government website: “The diverse Gitxsan Nation, in Northern BC, is made up of four clans and House Groups called Huwilp led by Simgiigyet who hold the governance authority (Daxgyet).”

C-IRG on Gitxsan territory

The previous notice prohibiting the C-IRG from Gitxsan territories had stated: “While we embrace safety measures for our community, the militarized squadron of the RCMP [the C-IRG] funded to the tune of $50M, have been sent to terrorize our people at the barrel of a gun during peaceful protests and blockades.”

Gitxsan hereditary chief Sim’ooget Gwiiyeehl (Brian Williams) has commented: “We’re a peaceful people and we’re not trying to hurt anyone on our lands and the C-IRG, they’re usually in full fatigues, carry lethal weapons and have dogs.”

In December 2021, CBC reported: “Gitxsan leaders say MLA Nathan Cullen is no longer welcome on their territory after he failed to meet them to discuss the deployment of RCMP officers at an encampment at a railway line in New Hazelton, B.C.”

The article adds: “It followed the release on social media of a video showing an arrest near the encampment in the northern B.C. community, in which four officers are seen on top of a man who is shouting that he can’t breathe.”

Video: Denzel Sutherland-Wilson shouts “I can’t breathe!” as C-IRG officers tackle him.

In February 2020, after the second C-IRG raid on Wet’suwet’en territory, Ricochet also reported RCMP arrest three hereditary chiefs at Gitxsan rail blockade. That article noted: “The blockade participants’ only demands were that the RCMP withdraw from Wet’suwet’en territory and the provincial and federal governments agree to negotiate.”

Abolish C-IRG

In this letter, Secwepemc, Sinixt, Wet’suwet’en, Gidimt’en and Unist’ot’en communities have also called for the abolition of the C-IRG.

That letter also notes: “Gitxsan hereditary leaders have spoken out about the unnecessary militarization and criminalization displayed by C-IRG. Some of the Simgiigyet (hereditary chiefs) have called for C-IRG to be prohibited from their lands for the safety of all.”

We continue to follow this.