Montreal, Canada – For years, Pierre Poilievre has hammered home a simple slogan: “Axe the tax”.
The Conservative Party leader of Canada’s opposition coalition, who is slated to take the place of Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government, has pledged to repeal a carbon pricing policy.
As part of the nation’s efforts to lower emissions and address the climate crisis, the policy added a cost to fossil fuel products like gasoline.
Poilievre has attributed the environmental program to Canada’s “carbon tax,” despite research that shows that carbon pricing has had little to no impact on inflation. Additionally, he has pledged to “turn the tax on everyone forever.”
“We need a carbon tax election to fire them all and bring home a common-sense Conservative government”, he said in a recent video posted on social media, referring to the Liberals.
As Canadians continue to face high grocery and housing costs, the Conservatives are hoping that their anti-carbon tax approach will offset the upcoming federal election.
Even the frontrunners to replace Trudeau as head of the ruling Liberal Party are turning against carbon pricing, according to experts who are aware of the Tories’ campaign’s political difficulties.
“The Conservatives have made a lot of political hay by opposing carbon pricing,” the Conservatives claim. Axe the tax ‘ is now the central pillar of the federal Conservative campaign strategy”, said Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood, a senior researcher with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
“There’s certainly some political opportunism happening here. The Conservatives have doubled and tripled down on this controversial topic and made it into a contentious position.
However, according to Mertins-Kirkwood, the political discourse surrounding carbon pricing has “dramatically overblown” the problem in terms of both its impact on affordability and its significance in the climate fight as a whole.
The issue is that it has evolved into “this political football,” the “exegetical epitome of climate policy,” and the “representation of overreach” on the one hand. And I just think it’s neither of those things”.
What is a carbon price?
The Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, which establishes the minimum national standards for carbon pricing in provinces and territories across Canada, was passed in 2018.
The federal government established two systems for Canadian consumers and large industrial polluters.
The consumer-level carbon price, which has attracted the most scrutiny and political ire, has imposed taxes on everyday purchases of fossil fuel fuel, such as diesel, gasoline, and natural gas.
Over time, these taxes have grown. The latest hike in April meant that the policy now costs $0.12 ($0.176 Canadian) more per litre of petrol, according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (PDF).
Consumers in Canada are being forced to change their behavior and steer clear of products that increase greenhouse gas emissions, according to the theory.
The Liberal government’s overall plan to combat climate change is only one component of the plan.
“You’re making everybody pay a little bit all the time, and so it’s a highly visible policy”, Mertins-Kirkwood said. He noted that every time they use their gas tanks, pay for their natural gas, or visit the grocery store, Canadians experience the effects of carbon pricing.
“That’s just a recipe for unpopularity, even if it’s not a big price and even if — as is the case in basically the entire country — you get a rebate”, he explained.
“Psychologically, it’s just not a winning equation. I do think that’s an inherent problem with carbon pricing, independent of how it’s been handled politically. It’s not politically a winning policy”.
Poor communications
In an effort to help Canadian households offset the carbon price, the federal government established a rebate system.
Trevor Tombe and Jennifer Winter, professors at the University of Calgary, discovered in a December report that Canadian households received quarterly payments through the government’s rebate system that “frequently outweigh the additional expense caused” by the carbon price.
This means that many families, especially those on lower incomes, are protected from emissions pricing’ negative financial effects, and some families may receive a net financial gain, according to the professors.
They also pointed out that emissions pricing had a 0.5% increase in overall consumer prices in Canada since 2019.
According to them, “most of the price increases were caused by global factors, such as rising energy prices and supply chain disruptions.”
According to Keith Stewart, a senior energy strategist with Greenpeace Canada, the government’s failure to clearly explain how the system operated, which gave the Conservatives the power to “poison the water.”
They responded with, “Trust us,'” which is what they had to say. We’re smart economists. ‘ It hasn’t been well communicated”, he said.
The Canadians’ compensation under the carbon rebate also wasn’t clearly labeled. Funds were deposited into people’s accounts without being marked as part of the policy, fuelling confusion.
Stewart, however, cautioned against “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” in the fight to end carbon pricing in Canada.
The industrial carbon pricing scheme could still be strengthened, he said, even if the consumer price is cut. It will perform the same task without igniting the same resentment.
He also rebuffed the Conservatives’ claim that their “axe the tax” is in opposition to their party’s wider-ranging plan to reduce climate change and boost fossil fuel production.
Canada is home to one of the world’s largest oil deposits, in the western province of Alberta. Poilievre has pushed for new fossil-fuel infrastructure, such as pipelines, and opposed a Liberal proposal to cap pollution by Canada’s oil and gas sector.
“Right now, the Conservatives have proposed eliminating not just the carbon tax but also the clean fuel standard, the electric vehicles mandate”, Stewart added. That “axing the tax” has a much bigger impact than how they say.
Liberals break with policy
Caroline Brouillette, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, said some Canadian politicians have been “scapegoating carbon pricing” as part of an “effort to limit all climate action”.
She added that, so far, the Conservatives haven’t “presented any constructive proposals or climate plans.”
In the face of one of the most pressing crises that the constituents he’s competing to serve are in, Mr. Poilievre only comes to the conclusion that he will only be telling us what he will be doing less of.
Before the upcoming election, which must occur by October 20, Canadian political parties should be outlining what they intend to do to address both climate and economic issues.
Instead of starting a race to the bottom, “we are hoping to see these candidates engage in a constructive conversation about what they are proposing to address the climate and affordability issues together,” she said.
In the meantime, the Liberal Party will elect a replacement leader for Justin Trudeau in the first few months, and the two candidates’ early campaign promises include eliminating consumer carbon pricing.
Let’s take a new approach to fighting climate change. https: //t. co/KRLQbGjigL pic. twitter.com/wFcUETlH6E
Former governor of the Bank of Canada and front-runner in the race, Mark Carney, announced last week that incentives would be used to “reward people for making greener choices.”
Those choices include “buying a more efficient appliance, driving an electric car or insulating your home”, Carney said. “The truth is, the consumer carbon tax isn’t working. It’s become too distracting and too divisive. That’s why I will cancel it”.
Chrystia Freeland, Trudeau’s longtime deputy and former finance minister, said she plans to abolish the carbon price for Canadians, as well as his rival for the leadership position.
“Where people have a consumer-facing price on carbon, they’re saying, ‘ You know, we don’t like it, ‘” she said in a recent interview. “So we have to listen, and at the same time, we do need a strong plan to fight climate change”.
“Force behavior changes,”
Ultimately, Mertins-Kirkwood said the debate over carbon pricing has, in part, served to distract Canadians “from talking about what would actually be effective climate policy”.
He claimed that putting in place regulations that would make climate change a requirement rather than a suggestion would be more effective.
Mertins-Kirkwood pointed to the mandated phase-out of coal-fired electricity as one such example, as well as a plan to ban the sale of new vehicles with internal-combustion engines by 2035.
“These are hard regulations. These are hard tactics that cause behavior change, he said, in contrast to things like carbon pricing or incentives for electric vehicles, where you’re incentivising and hoping that people will do that.
According to Stewart of Greenpeace, Canada should be looking to develop “a green industrial strategy” that will lead to better investments and jobs.
Source: Aljazeera
Leave a Reply