Timothy Johnson

JSGS 808
1/29/2021

Ethics Underlying Fossil Fuel Clash

A recent clash between Premier Scott Moe and Regina city council member Dan Leblanc

provides insight into opposing positions on a salient political issue: fossil fuel industries. Simply

put, Leblanc’s proposed amendment to the Sponsorship, Naming Rights and Advertising Policy

prohibited fossil fuel companies from advertising and sponsoring with the city (Guignard 2021).

The following analysis relies on issue rhetoric to unpack each leader's implicit ethical

justifications. Beginning with Leblanc, I highlight elements of deontology and consequentialism

in public statements. Next, a tweet from Scott Moe illustrates a different interpretation of

consequentialism and raises the question of ethical blindness (Plazzo, Krings, and Hoffrage

2012). The public value lens is then applied (Talbot 2011) to Leblanc’s decision to withdraw the

motion, followed by an assessment of leadership with recommendations.

Leblanc's deontology and consequentialism: According to duty ethics, an action's

rightness is determined by its alignment with “overriding moral rules” (Kernaghan and Langford

2014, 66). In support of the proposed ban, Leblanc argued that "[s]ponsorships are associative in

nature and therefore alignment with predetermined city values is necessary” (Djuric 2021). By

arguing that alignment with values is necessary, Leblanc's position resembles a deontological

duty to follow rules.

Leblanc also makes a broader consequentialist argument in stating, “[j]obs in the fossil

fuel industry are going to decline” (Leblanc 2021). He is justifying his proposal by showing that

his choice is, “right because of its propensity to produce good outcomes” (Kernaghan and
Langford 2014, 62). In this case, absent a transition to greener energy, one future outcome will

be a decline in jobs.

Moe's bad faith consequentialism: Scott Moe tweeted, “This motion is a hypocritical

attack on the hardworking workers and employers that fuel Saskatchewan’s economy” (Moe

2021). This is consistent with Moe's leadership philosophy of a “Strong Saskatchewan”, which is

ethically justified in the consequentialist calculation that any shift away from carbon reliance

negatively impacts workers and the economy. In the language of “ethical blindness”, Moe’s rigid

framing of the issue promotes a very particular problem definition (Plazzo, Krings, and Hoffrage

2012, 326). Such framing also suggests that maximizing economic gain is inherently moral

(Plazzo, Krings, and Hoffrage 2011, 327). Given that green energy plans always promote

employment and economic longevity and that climate change is established science, it is difficult

to believe that Moe’s position is a true case of ethical blindness- he being fully “unconscious” of

these facts. (Plazzo, Krings, and Hoffrage 2011, 325).

Paradoxical Public Value: Colin Talbot’s version of public value places self, public, and

procedural interests into a single framework to describe unavoidable paradoxes of ethical

leadership (Talbot 2011). When Leblanc addressed the divisions over the motion within his

constituency, he acknowledged the conflicting simultaneity of the three aforementioned

principles within individuals and the community. He noted that some constituents self-identified

as environmentally responsible, but felt this was “too much, too fast” (Leblanc 2021). The

synthesis of this conflict between constituent's self-interest (income, taxes) and public interest

(environment, economy) occurred when Leblanc withdrew his proposal by prioritizing

procedural interest, stating, “You [constituents] have made your voices heard and you will

continue to do so over the coming days. I promise I will continue to listen.” (Leblanc 2021)
 In sum: I have argued that deontological, consequentialist, ethical blindness, and public

value frameworks can elucidate the actions of the two leaders. Leblanc's ultimate decision to

withdraw his proposal undermines his previous deontological and consequentialist arguments.

Given his progressive (and winning) campaign platform, stronger leadership would have entailed

staying the course. Moe’s narrow consequentialism suggests a bad faith blindness to globally

changing economic and environmental realities. Considering that Saskatchewan’s greenhouse

gas emissions per unit of GDP and per capita are the highest nationwide (Saskwind 2020), I

recommend that the Premier familiarize himself with Kant’s categorical imperative, particularly

the universalization test.

Bibliography

Dan Leblanc Ward 6. (2021, Jan 24) Dear residents of Ward 6 [...] [Facebook update]. Retrieved
from https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?
story_fbid=227870332370844&id=110084244149454

Djuric, Mickey. (2021, Jan 20). Regina weighs ban of fossil fuel sponsorships, drawing ire of
Sask. Premier. CBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/city-of-regina-fossil-fuel-advertised-
sponsorship-1.5881378

Guignard, Jonathan. (2021, Jan 23). University of Regina professor defends executive
committee's fossil fuel motion. Global News. Retrieved from
https://globalnews.ca/news/7595452/uofr-prof-fossil-fuel-motion-response/

Kernaghan, K. and Langford, J. (2014). The Responsible Public Servant, second edition.
Toronto: Institute of Public Administration of Canada

Palazzo, G., H. Krings and U. Hoffrage. (2012). Ethical Blindness. Journal of Business Ethics.
Volume 109, Issue 3, pp. 323-338

Talbot, Colin. (2011). Paradoxes and prospects of ‘public value’, Public Money &
Management,31:1, 27-34, DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2011.545544.

PremierScottMoe. (2021, Jan 20). Regina City Council’s Executive Committee has passed an
absurd motion that would restrict energy companies from sponsoring or advertising with the City
of Regina. I commend Mayor Sandra Masters and the three other Councillors for voting against
this. Read my full statement:[Twitter post]. Retrieved from
https://twitter.com/PremierScottMoe/status/1351999092998635523

Saskwind. (2020). GHG Emissions: Saskatchewan dead last on multiple metrics..Saskwind.ca.

Retrieved from https://www.saskwind.ca/blogbackend/2016/5/7/ghg-province-comparison