A prominent co-chair of the federal government's Net-Zero Advisory Body has stepped down, delivering a sharp critique that the advisory process has felt 'neglected and performative.' The resignation, effective December 4, 2025, deals a blow to the government's public-facing climate governance structure.
A Resignation Rooted in Frustration
While the official announcement did not name the departing co-chair, the resignation letter's powerful language underscores a significant rift. The individual cited a profound sense that their work and the body's recommendations were being sidelined, describing the experience as more about political theatre than substantive policy development. This move raises immediate questions about the government's commitment to leveraging expert advice in its race to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
Context and Mandate of the Advisory Body
Established under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, the independent advisory body is tasked with providing the Minister of Environment and Climate Change with expert advice on the most effective pathways to reach the country's legally binding climate targets. The body's members are selected for their expertise in climate science, clean technology, Indigenous knowledge, and economics. The co-chair's resignation suggests that this expertise is not being adequately integrated into the government's decision-making processes, potentially jeopardizing the credibility and effectiveness of Canada's climate plans.
The timing is particularly sensitive, as the government is expected to soon update its emissions reduction plan. The loss of a senior leader from this key advisory group creates a vacuum of leadership and institutional knowledge at a critical juncture.
Potential Repercussions for Climate Policy
This public resignation risks eroding trust in the government's climate governance framework. It signals to other experts, stakeholders, and the public that the mechanisms designed to ensure accountability and science-based policy may be faltering. The allegation of a 'performative' process aligns with criticisms from some environmental groups that government climate action is heavy on announcements but light on implementation and ambition.
The government now faces pressure to not only find a suitable replacement but also to address the underlying concerns about how it receives and acts on independent expert advice. The effectiveness of Canada's future climate policies may hinge on its ability to rebuild a collaborative and respectful relationship with the very experts it appoints to guide it.
As of now, the federal government has not issued a detailed public response to the resignation or the specific criticisms leveled by the departing co-chair. All eyes will be on Ottawa to see how it manages this challenge to the integrity of its net-zero advisory apparatus.
