GUNTER: Alberta UCP jacking up its disguised PST, the provincial fuel tax

Opinion by Lorne Gunter • 20h •  Edmonton Sun

The provincial fuel tax is jumping again to 13 cents per litre of gasoline or diesel on April 1, the very same day the Trudeau government is jacking up the federal carbon tax from just over 14 cents a litre to nearer 18 cents.

© Provided by Edmonton Sun

Who says Alberta doesn’t have a provincial sales tax (PST) — or at least a consumer tax that acts very much like a sales tax?

The provincial government’s fuel tax — a per-litre charge on gasoline and diesel — goes up when the province needs it to, and for the same purposes as a PST.

The provincial fuel tax, which was zero at the end of 2023, jumped up by nine cents a litre on Jan. 1. Now, as provincial Finance Minister Nate Horner announced on Thursday, it is jumping again to 13 cents per litre of gasoline or diesel on April 1, the very same day the Trudeau government is jacking up the federal carbon tax from just over 14 cents a litre to nearer 18 cents.

And here’s the irony of ironies, despite Premier Danielle Smith having been one of the premiers most critical of Ottawa’s added grab, her government’s gas tax is going up by 44 per cent on April 1. The federal Liberals’ tax is rising by “only” 23 per cent.

While Smith was one of the first premiers to request that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “pause” his carbon tax hike until the cost of living comes down in Canada, she seems unable to see that her government’s reimposition of its full fuel tax has the same inflationary effect.

Global NewsAlberta budget 2024: Tax cut delayed, EV levy added
1:38

Global NewsAlberta's new electric vehicle tax called an ‘ideological move’
1:58


If adding nearly four federal cents per litre raises the cost of everything that moves (including the tractors that plant your food and the trucks that bring it to your neighbourhood grocery store), then Smith’s four provincial cents per litre does exactly the same thing.

Inflation recognizes no difference between federal and provincial taxes. If increasing one stunts the economy, so does raising the other.

Here’s another irony. While Prime Minister Trudeau is delusional when he insists his government’s quarterly carbon tax rebates make the federal carbon tax a financial “win” for middle-class families, at least Canadians get some of the federal carbon tax back.

Few Canadians get as much back in rebates as they pay in carbon tax, but Albertans get nothing back on the provincial fuel tax.

I’m guessing if most UCP MLAs were federal Conservative MPs instead, they’d be in Ottawa right now voting to have the Liberal government stall its April 1 carbon-tax increase. However, there hasn’t been one peep from any of them about their own government’s fuel tax rise.


If Smith is to have any credibility at all when attacking Trudeau’s 23-per-cent tax spike, she has to stop her own 44-per-cent increase.

But how does all this make Alberta’s fuel tax the equivalent of a PST?

During his announcement on Thursday, Horner explained the provincial fuel tax program “is designed to save Albertans money when oil prices are high and bring in needed government revenue when oil prices drop.”

That’s the first time I can recall the Smith government admitting its fuel tax is meant to supplement government revenues.

As oil prices fall (and take government revenues from royalties, leases and taxes down with them), the government admits “revenue from the provincial fuel tax helps fund the programs, services and infrastructure Albertans rely on every day.”

For decades, “progressives” in Alberta have been pushing for a PST to regularize the flow of government revenues and lessen our dependence on oil and gas. In other provinces, when general revenues fall, they increase the PST.

Here we don’t have a PST, so the provincial government appears to be using the fuel tax as an alternative.

With gasoline already at nearly $1.50 a litre and diesel at $1.65 or more, the last thing Alberta drivers and businesses need is yet another fuel tax increase — federal or provincial.

 

Alberta set to fully reinstate gas tax of 13 cents a litre after drop in oil prices


Alberta set to fully reinstate gas tax of 13 cents a litre after drop in oil prices© Provided by The Canadian Press

EDMONTON — Gas prices are set to rise in Alberta next month, with the provincial government fully reinstating its fuel tax following a drop in oil prices.

Finance Minister Nate Horner says the fuel tax for gas and diesel will be 13 cents per litre starting April 1, an increase of four cents.

Under the provincial Fuel Tax Relief Program, the tax can be paused or reinstated partially or in full, depending on oil prices.

Fuel tax rates are adjusted quarterly based on the average price per barrel of the benchmark West Texas Intermediate oil.

Horner says Albertans will continue to pay some of the lowest fuel prices in the country even after the increased rate takes effect.

He says the tax rate will drop back down if oil prices hit US$80 a barrel or higher.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 21, 2024.


Related video: Preliminary water allocation forecasts in southern Alberta below average (Global News) View on Watch
More videos

Global NewsAlberta budget 2024: Tax cut delayed, EV levy added
1:38

Global NewsAlberta's new electric vehicle tax called an ‘ideological move’
1:58

Global News‘Too much, too soon’: Alberta EV owners suggest more equitable tax models
1:59

UCP & KENNEY CUT NOSE TO SPITE FACE

McKenna announces carbon tax on Alberta a week after province kills former tax

In 2020, a family of four in Alberta can claim $888 in carbon tax rebate on income taxes

Peter Zimonjic · CBC News · Posted: Jun 13, 2019

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna says she has written to Alberta 

to inform the province that the federal government will begin imposing the

 federal carbon tax in the province Jan. 1. 2020. 

(Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna says she has given notice to the provincial government in Alberta that the federal government will begin imposing its price on carbon in the province beginning Jan.1, 2020.

McKenna made the announcement in Ottawa today, a week after Alberta's Lt.-Gov. Lois Mitchell signed the province's Carbon Tax Repeal Act into law.

"As a result of Alberta's decision to make it free to pollute in Alberta, we will have the federal price on pollution," she said. "It's unfortunate, because Alberta had a made-in-Alberta plan to put a price on pollution."

McKenna said Canada needs Alberta to take part in the pan-Canadian framework on climate change because it's the province with the highest emissions in the country.

Under the terms of the framework — a deal agreed to by most of the provinces and the federal government in December 2016 — provinces had to develop policies to put a price on carbon through a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system.

As a part of the plan, Ottawa said it would impose a tax on provinces that refuse to develop their own plans — at a rate of $20 on every tonne of greenhouse gas emissions starting in 2019, rising by $10 each year to $50 a tonne by 2022.

Ottawa needs to boost carbon tax by $50 a tonne to meet emissions reduction targets: budget officer

Ontario wants anti-carbon tax gas pump stickers displayed by end of August

Scheer accuses Trudeau of undermining national unity in policy speech

McKenna said that, by law, 100 per cent of the revenues collected federally will go back to Alberta — 90 per cent returned to families and the remaining 10 per cent directed to funding schools, hospitals, municipalities and green energy initiatives.

But because that revenue is being returned to families, a family of four in Alberta will be able to claim a rebate of $888 when they file their income taxes next year, she said.

"Its unfortunate that we're in this situation with another conservative premier ... who doesn't seem to understand that pricing pollution is proven, that provinces that have had a price on pollution have been the fastest-growing in the country and pricing pollution is the most efficient way to reduce emissions," McKenna said.

CBC News

'We will have the federal price on pollution,' McKenna says.

WATCH 00:00 01:12

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna said the federal government will begin imposing a carbon tax on Alberta in January 2020. 1:12

Alberta's Environment Minister Jason Nixon said that with the provincial tax gone and the new tax not coming in until the new year, Albertans will enjoy some of the lowest gas prices in the country for the time being.

"Thankfully, Premier Kenney followed through on his promise of killing the carbon tax," he said. "We've removed that tax from our system and at least for the next several months, until January first, we won't have the burden of the carbon tax on our economy."

Nixon noted that the introduction of the federal tax hinges on the Liberals winning the October federal election.

"There will be a federal election in-between and many things can happen between now and January 1," he said.

Joining the conservative pack

Before losing the provincial election in April, NDP Premier Rachel Notley introduced a carbon tax in Alberta. The tax was imposed in 2015 but it did not take effect until Jan. 1, 2017.

It started at $20 per tonne of carbon emissions and increased to $30 the following year — but the annual price increases were put on hold by Notley after the construction of the Trans Mountain pipeline was halted.

The Carbon Tax Repeal Act was the first piece of legislation introduced by Premier Jason Kenney and his newly elected United Conservative government.

Carbon taxes don't prevent forest fires, says Jason Kenney 

Kenney won the provincial election on a promise to kill the tax, saying it hadn't helped to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and took money out of the pockets of working families.

Kenney said his government will continue with a tax on large industrial greenhouse gas emitters and has promised to challenge the constitutionality of the federal carbon tax in court.

Alberta now joins four other provinces led by centre-right premiers — Ontario, New Brunswick, Manitoba and Saskatchewan — which have cancelled their provincial plans only to see the federal government impose its own.

Meeting the Paris targets

When Canada signed on to the Paris agreement, it pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

According to a report published today by the Parliamentary Budget Office, the pan-Canadian framework will not meet that goal without imposing a second tax of $6 a tonne in 2023, rising to $52 per tonne by 2030. If that plan was imposed on top of the Liberal framework, Canadians would have to pay as much as $102 per tonne by 2030.

In a statement, McKenna said that the federal government has "no plan to increase the price post 2022."

"We will meet our 2030 target through what we are already doing and new measures, including tackling plastic pollution, doubling the amount of nature that we are protecting, investments in clean tech and innovation," she said. 

LETS LOOK AT THAT MAGICK NUMBER 888

888 (number) - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/888_(number)

In Christian numerology, the number 888 represents Jesus, or sometimes more specifically Christ the Redeemer. ... In Chinese numerology, 888 has a different meaning, triple fortune, a strengthening of the meaning of the digit 8.

In Chinese numerology, 888 has a different meaning, triple fortune, a strengthening of the meaning of the digit 8. For this reason, addresses and phone numbers containing the digit sequence 888 are considered particularly lucky, and may command a premium because of it.

Octal: 1570₈

Cardinal: eight hundred eighty-eight

Greek numeral: ΩΠΗ´

888 (number) - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/888_(number)

W

hy is 555 and 888 so lucky in China? - Quora

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-555-and-888-so-lucky-in-China

Aug 31, 2017 - In Cantonese Chinese, the number 8 sound like the word for luck, so 888 ... It is an interesting phenomenon that 666 's meaning in China have ...

Number 888 Symbolism, 888 Meaning and Numerology

https://www.ridingthebeast.com/numbers/nu888.php

Dec 19, 1998 - Numerology, meaning and symbolism of the number 888.

Kabbalah and Freemasonry - Masonic World

www.masonicworld.com/education/.../KABBALAH%20AND%20FREEMASONRY.ht...

According to the definition contained in the Oxford Dictionary the Kabbalah is, ..... appears add up to 8, giving, with the newly-made Mason himself, again 888

88 ANGEL NUMBER (888 Meaning) – Angel Number Meanings

https://thesecretofthetarot.com/numerology-number-888/

Mar 3, 2019 - Affectionately known as “The Angel Number”, the number 888 is a symbol of abundance and positivity in numerology. When you notice this number appearing often, be prepared for an overwhelming amount of goodness coming your way. ... Therefore, the power of this number is increased threefold when it presents itself as 888.

UPDATED

Canadian Supreme Court says the federal carbon price is constitutional

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada says the federal carbon price is entirely constitutional

The split decision upholds a pivotal part of the Liberal climate-change plan, accounting for at least one-third of the emissions Canada aims to cut over the next decade.

Chief Justice Richard Wagner says in the written ruling that climate change is a real danger and evidence shows a price on pollution is a critical element in addressing it.

“It is a threat of the highest order to the country, and indeed to the world,” Wagner wrote for six of the nine judges

Given that, said Wagner, Canada’s evidence that this is a matter of national concern, is sound.

“The undisputed existence of a threat to the future of humanity cannot be ignored,” he wrote.

Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson issued an immediate statement lauding the decision as "a win for the millions of Canadians who believe we must build a prosperous economy that fights climate change."

"The question is whether this decision will put an end to the efforts of Conservative politicians fighting climate action in court, and whether they will join Canadians in fighting climate change."

The onus was on the federal government to prove to the court that this is an issue of national concern that would allow it to take control of the matter rather than leaving it to the provinces.

The majority of the court found the federal government did that, noting all parties, including the provinces challenging the law, agreed climate change is “an existential challenge.”

“This context, on its own, provides some assurance that in the case at bar, Canada is not seeking to invoke the national concern doctrine too lightly," Wagner wrote.

Wagner also wrote provinces can’t set minimum national standards on their own and if even one province fails to reduce its emissions, that could have an inordinate impact on other provinces.

He noted that the three provinces that challenged the ruling also withdrew from the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change. That agreement, signed in 2016, agreed to set a national carbon price.

"When provinces that are collectively responsible for more than two-thirds of Canada's total GHG emissions opt out of a cooperative scheme, this illustrates the stark limitations of a non-binding cooperative approach," he wrote.

That left the remaining provinces, responsible for only one-third of Canada's total emissions, "vulnerable to the consequences of the lion's share of the emissions being generated by the non-participating provinces."

He also said climate change in Canada is having a disproportionate impact on the Canadian Arctic, coastal communities and Indigenous territories.

Justice Suzanne Côté dissented in part, agreeing climate change is an issue of national concern but taking issue with the power the federal cabinet gave itself to adjust the law's scope, including which fuels the price would apply to.

Justices Malcolm Rowe and Russell Brown dissented with the entire decision, arguing Canada had not shown that climate change reaches the level of national concern. They objected that the precedent the majority's decision sets would allow Ottawa to set minimum national standards in all areas of provincial jurisdiction.

Wagner pushed back, finding there is a limited scope for national standards that is unchanged by this ruling.

Canada implemented the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act in 2019, setting a minimum price on carbon emissions in provinces that don’t have equivalent provincial prices, a law that was challenged by Saskatchewan, Ontario and Alberta.

The program applies a price per tonne to fuel purchases by individuals and businesses with lower emissions, and on part of the actual emissions produced by entities with large emissions, such as pipelines, manufacturing plants and coal-fired power plants.

The federal fuel-input charge applies in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, while the federal charge for big emitters currently covers only Manitoba and Prince Edward Island.

All other provinces have systems that meet the federal threshold.

The territories adopted the federal fuel charge.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 25, 2021.

A quick look at some of the reaction to the Supreme Court carbon tax decision

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada ruled Thursday the federal carbon price is entirely constitutional. Here's a quick look at some of the reaction to the decision:© Provided by The Canadian Press

"We welcome the Supreme Court's ruling, but Canadians are still worried about the climate crisis and the lack of meaningful action from the Liberal government. They’re being asked to do their part, and they want to know it is making a real difference."

— Laurel Collins, NDP critic for Environment and Climate Change

———

“Small firms simply cannot afford a further increase in their overall tax burden, especially as many remain in full lockdown or subject to significant COVID-19 related restrictions.”

— Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business

———

“The fact remains that this tax represents higher costs for millions of Canadian families and businesses, causing significant economic pain in exchange for no environmental gain."

— Aaron Wudrick, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

BULLSHIT 80% OF CANADIANS WOULD GET A REBATE 

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 25, 2021.

The Canadian Press

Canada's top court upholds pillar of Trudeau's plan to fight climate change

By Nia Williams and Steve Scherer 

© Reuters/MARK BLINCH FILE PHOTO: Canada's Prime Minister Trudeau speaks during a Liberal Climate Action Rally in Toronto

CALGARY, Alberta/OTTAWA (Reuters) -Canada's Supreme Court ruled in favour of the federal government's carbon pricing policy on Thursday, upholding a central pillar of Prime Minister Justin's Trudeau's climate plan and overriding opposition from some provinces.

The country's top court said climate change is a threat to the country as a whole and upheld the legality of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, which had been challenged by the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario.

Carbon pricing, often called a carbon tax by opponents, is the lynchpin of the federal government's plan to ultimately reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Ottawa will steadily ramp up the price of carbon to C$170 ($135.08) a ton by 2030, from C$30 a ton currently.

Canada is the fourth-largest oil producer in the world and the fifth-largest greenhouse gas emitter on a per capita basis.

"Parliament has jurisdiction to enact this law as a matter of national concern," Chief Justice Richard Wagner wrote in the ruling. "All parties to this proceeding agree that climate change is an existential challenge. It is a threat of the highest order to the country, and indeed to the world."

Under the carbon pricing act, Ottawa can impose a federal levy on provinces that do not have an adequate carbon pricing system of their own. Opposing provinces argued this infringed on their jurisdiction, but the Supreme Court ruled federal intervention was justified.

The ruling was backed by six members of the nine-member court, with three dissenting opinions.

"This decision is a win for the millions of Canadians who believe we must build a prosperous economy that fights climate change," Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said in a statement.

Canada needs to cut emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 to fulfil its international climate commitments, which would involve slashing annual emissions to 511 megatons, compared with 729 megatons in 2018.

The Liberals unveiled a strengthened climate plan last year aimed at reducing emissions to 503 megatons.

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said his government would unveil its own climate measures to avoid being subject to the "punitive and ineffective" federal carbon tax.

"Today's decision by the Supreme Court of Canada does not change our core conviction that the federal carbon tax is bad environmental policy, bad economic policy, and simply wrong," Moe said in a statement.

Ontario also released a statement outlining its own environment plan and Alberta did not immediately comment.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce (CCC) said the Supreme Court ruling provided policy certainty, but concerns remained about the competitiveness of Canadian businesses. "The issue is divisive for many Canadians," said Aaron Henry, a senior director at the CCC.

BULLSHIT

($1 = 1.2585 Canadian dollars)

(Reporting by Nia Williams; Editing by Hugh Lawson and Nick Zieminski)

Saskatchewan NDP respond to carbon tax defeat at Supreme Court



Ottawa – The governments of Saskatchewan, Ontario and Alberta suffered a defeat in their battle against the federal carbon tax on March 25 as the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 6-3 against their joint challenge. The ever-increasing carbon tax is the key initiative in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s fight against climate change. By 2030, that carbon tax is supposed to rise to $170 per tonne of CO2 equivalent, after having been introduced at $20 per tonne.

Saskatchewan’s Official Opposition New Democratic Party Leader Ryan Meili responded in an emailed statement. He said: “The Saskatchewan NDP caucus is focused on creating good jobs here in Saskatchewan, and prosperity for our province’s families and businesses. Today’s ruling means that Trudeau’s economy-wide carbon tax will continue to take more from the people of Saskatchewan than they get back, with people living in rural and remote areas being most affected. That’s not right.

“This economy-wide price on carbon is not something that Saskatchewan people, or the Saskatchewan NDP support. Scott Moe chose to maintain the Trudeau carbon tax for two whole years instead of trying to negotiate a better deal.

“With the decision reached today, Scott Moe and the Sask. Party government must act quickly to negotiate a better deal that protects Saskatchewan’s economy and gives working families a break, including:

· Exempts fuel used for grain drying

· Explores all options to limit costs for families

· Ensures rebates leave regular families with more money in their pockets than they pay in carbon tax”

The continued ratchetting up of the carbon tax is also an issue, according to Meili. He said, “The federal government must press pause on its plans to dramatically increase the carbon tax, especially while so many families across the country - not just in Saskatchewan - are struggling coming through the pandemic. Now is not the time to increase costs on working families.

“Justin Trudeau must also acknowledge that the carbon tax disproportionately affects the Saskatchewan economy. With that fact comes a responsibility on the federal government to make dedicated investments that will make a difference here including support for workers in our hard-hit industries and helping to create good sustainable jobs in renewable energy. Saskatchewan has many opportunities in biofuels, geothermal, solar and wind energy, but we need the federal support to kickstart these new industries.

“The people of Saskatchewan know climate change is real, and want to do their part to reduce emissions while creating good jobs for the future in wind, solar, and geothermal. It’s time for Justin Trudeau and Scott Moe to put wrangling aside and get to work - together - on real solutions across the board that will ensure good jobs and prosperity for all of us.”

Brian Zinchuk, Local Journalism Initiative reporter, Estevan Mercury

‘Simply wrong’: Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe reacts to Supreme Court carbon price ruling

Jonathan Guignard 

© Michael Bell / The Canadian Press On Thursday, the Supreme Court of Canada gave the federal government the constitutional right to impose a carbon tax on provinces.

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe says the province isn’t changing its stance on carbon pricing following Thursday’s decision by the Supreme Court of Canada to allow the federal government to impose it on provinces.

“The federal carbon tax is bad environmental policy, bad economic policy, and simply wrong,” Moe said in a statement Thursday.

“While the Supreme Court has determined that Prime Minister Trudeau has the legal right to impose a carbon tax, it doesn’t mean he should, and it doesn’t make the carbon tax any less punitive for Saskatchewan people.”

The federal carbon-tax-and-rebate program was introduced in 2018 and laid out a national framework for pricing carbon — one that applies to everyday consumers as well as industrial emitters.

Read more: Canada’s carbon price is constitutional, Supreme Court rules

The Supreme Court of Canada found that climate change poses a real, serious threat to the world and is serious enough to allow the federal government to step in.

“The (Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act) is constitutional,” Chief Justice Richard Wagner wrote in the decision.

“Although this restriction may interfere with a province’s preferred balance between economic and environmental considerations, it is necessary to consider the interests that would be harmed — owing to irreversible consequences for the environment, for human health and safety, and for the economy — if Parliament were unable to constitutionally address the matter at a national level.”

Under the ruling, Ottawa would collect the carbon tax in Saskatchewan, then provide rebates to individual tax filers in the province.

Revenue Canada says the average household of four can expect about $1,000 in rebates for 2020.

Moe warns the decision has “far-reaching implications for federal intrusion into areas of provincial jurisdiction.”

“Saskatchewan will remain vigilant in defending our constitutional jurisdiction from further infringement from this federal government,” Moe said.

“Saskatchewan people have seen the federal carbon tax for what it is — a blunt, ineffective instrument that kills job, threatens the competitiveness of our industries, and penalizes essential, daily activities of families across our province.

“Our government will continue to make every effort to protect Saskatchewan families, workers and businesses from the negative consequences of the federal carbon tax.”

The Saskatchewan NDP shares similar feelings as the province, saying the carbon-tax-and-rebate program will hurt Saskatchewan people.

Read more: Farmers concerned criteria for federal carbon credits may leave them out

“(Thursday’s) ruling means that Trudeau’s economy-wide carbon tax will continue to take more from the people of Saskatchewan than they get back, with people living in rural and remote areas being most affected. That’s not right,” Ryan Meili, Saskatchewan NDP leader, said in a statement Thursday.

“This economy-wide price on carbon is not something that Saskatchewan people, or the Saskatchewan NDP support.”

Meili said Moe should have spent the past two years trying to negotiate a better deal with the federal government rather than fighting against it.

He would like Moe to begin negotiating a deal with Trudeau that would exempt fuel used for grain drying, explore all options to limit costs for families, and offer rebates to families to offset the cost of a carbon tax.

Read more: Is Canada’s carbon tax working? Experts, advocacy groups weigh in

“The people of Saskatchewan know climate change is real, and want to do their part to reduce emissions while creating good jobs for the future in wind, solar, and geothermal,” Meili said.

“It’s time for Justin Trudeau and Scott Moe to put wrangling aside and get to work - together - on real solutions across the board that will ensure good jobs and prosperity for all of us.”

The Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce also expressed its disappointment regarding Thursday’s ruling.

VIDEO
Supreme Court of Canada rules federal carbon levy is constitutional


“To be clear, the debate is not, and should not, be whether we need to transition to a lower carbon economy, but how to manage the process,” said Steve McLellan, Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce CEO in a statement Thursday.

“There is a better way forward, the federal government’s pan-Canadian approach to pollution pricing has not recognized the unique challenges present in Saskatchewan; putting undue hardship on our residents and businesses, it is unfortunate that they will continue this approach.”

Moe said he will outline measures the province will take in the months ahead to “protect Saskatchewan people” on Thursday, at the same time addressing climate change.

-With files from Rachel Gilmore

Federal carbon tax to increase to $170 per tonne by 2030 as Liberals unveil new climate plan

© Provided by National Post 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau makes a climate policy announcement on November 19, 2020.

OTTAWA – The Liberals announced a new climate plan Friday that will see the carbon tax jump from $50 per tonne in 2022 to $170 per tonne by 2030.

The carbon tax hike was met with dismay in some provinces with Ontario Premier Doug Ford calling it a tax grab and Alberta Environment Minister Jason Nixon saying it was Ottawa imposing its values on the province.

The plan will see $15 per year increases from 2022 to 2030 and will raise the cost of gasoline, natural gas home heating and other goods dependent on fossil fuels. But the government says most families subject to the federal tax will recoup more than they pay through rebates, which will soon be distributed quarterly instead of annually.

It also includes $15-billion in spending on items such as energy-efficient building retrofits, renewable energy projects, incentives for zero-emission vehicles and funding for Indigenous and remote communities to move off diesel fuel.

“There is no vaccine against a polluted planet,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in announcing the plan. “It’s up to us to act, because there is a real cost to pollution.”

The Ontario premier, whose government is challenging the carbon tax as unconstitutional, took a different tone.

“Folks, this carbon tax is going to be the worst thing you could ever see,” Ford said. “I’m a strong believer of protecting the environment. But you don’t have to protect the environment on the backs of the hard working people of this province and this country at a time when people are barely holding on by their fingernails.”

Ford called it a tax grab and said he’s “never, ever, ever been more disappointed in an announcement ever since I’ve been in politics.”

Federal Conservative environment critic Dan Albas slammed the government for announcing an increase to taxes while a pandemic still rages.

“This increase will mean that Canadians will pay more for groceries, home heating, and add up to 37.57 cents per litre to the cost of gas,” Albas said.

The Conservatives also pointed to the word games that Catherine McKenna, then the Liberal environment minister, had played with the carbon tax ahead of the 2019 election. In June 2019, McKenna had said “the plan is not to increase the price post-2022,” then she later walked that back to say the government’s plan only went to 2022 and it had “no intention” to change the price until it had consulted with provinces.

“The Trudeau Liberals promised that they wouldn’t raise the carbon tax, but that is exactly what they are doing today,” Albas said. “This is just another example of the Trudeau Liberals promising one thing to get elected, and then breaking their promise when they no longer need your vote.”

On Friday, neither Trudeau nor Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson would specifically answer when they were asked whether the federal government had consulted with provinces on the plan. Wilkinson only said there had been general “conversations” on the topic with provinces.

“We’ve been very clear as a government that our view is that the price on pollution is the most efficient way to reduce emissions, that incents innovation, and it is a critical part of the plan going forward,” Wilkinson said. “All of the provinces and territories are aware of that, and that conversation will continue.”

The Supreme Court of Canada will soon rule on a provincial challenge that argues the federal carbon tax is an unconstitutional overreach by Ottawa. If the court sides with the federal government, provinces would either have the federal tax imposed on them or be required to ensure their own carbon pricing regime grows equivalently with the federal one.

If the court rules against the federal government, the Liberals may have to go back to the drawing board on their climate plan, depending on what exactly the court says. Trudeau did not say what the government would do if they lose, instead criticizing the provincial governments that have opposed carbon pricing.

“There are some places in this country that still want to make pollution free again,” he said. “We’re not going to do that.”

Alberta’s environment minister called the carbon tax increase “another attack on Alberta’s economy and on Alberta’s jurisdiction.”

Nixon said Alberta is already making progress on reducing emissions through its own programs, such as methane reduction initiatives and hydrogen and carbon capture programs.

“On a federal level, the prime minister continues to impose this Ottawa-knows-best attitude on Alberta, at a time when Albertans can least afford it,” Nixon said.

The plan announced on Friday does not have details on another policy that could increase fuel costs, the Clean Fuel Standard. Officials said those details will be coming soon. However, the government did say those regulations will now only apply to liquid fuels, not gas or solid fuels.

The government will also “explore the potential of border carbon adjustments,” the background documents say, promising Canada will “work with like-minded economies — including the E.U. and Canada’s North American partners — to consider how this approach could fit into Canada’s broader strategy to meet climate targets while ensuring a fair environment for businesses.”

The goal of the climate plan is to reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions to 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, a target that had also been set by the previous Conservative government, but which the government was not on track to achieve. The government says this new plan will put it on track to exceed the target for the first time.

“By further working with provinces and territories, the government is confident Canada can achieve reductions within the range of 32 to 40 percent below 2005 levels in 2030,” the background documents say.

Other items in the plan include:
$1.5 billion over three years for green and inclusive community buildings, with 10 per cent reserved for Indigenous communities;
$2.6 billion over seven years for homeowners making their homes more energy efficient;
$287 million over two years for the Incentives for Zero- Emission Vehicles program, which provides a rebate of up to $5,000 on a light-duty zero-emission vehicle;
$150 million over three years in charging and refueling stations across Canada;
$964 million over four years for renewable energy and grid modernization projects;
$300 million over five years to help rural, remote and Indigenous communities currently relying on diesel to switch to clean energy.

• Email: bplatt@postmedia.com | Twitter: btaplatt

MORE ON THE NEW CLIMATE PLAN:

THE THINGS THEY SAY

“The price will not go up…. the plan is not to increase the price post-2022.”

— Catherine McKenna, then environment minister, in June of last year, before the election. She was replying to questions about a parliamentary budget office report that said the carbon tax would have to rise above $50 a tonne.

THE NUMBERS GAME

The government says the money raised from the carbon tax will go back to households in rebates. The prime minister said an average family of four in Ontario would receive $1,259 when the price hits $95 per tonne in 2025, going up to $2,018 in 2030 — an increase of 60 per cent. But in the same period the carbon tax rises from $95 to $170 — an increase of 78 per cent.

AT THE PUMPS

37.57¢ — Expected rise in the cost of a litre of gas by the end of the decade. (In 1979, Joe Clark’s minority government fell after it proposed an 18¢ tax on a gallon of gas — about 4.5¢ a litre.

NOT THE TREES AGAIN?

As first announced on the campaign trail in September 2019 — after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met activist Greta Thunberg — and reiterated in the fiscal update almost two weeks ago, the Liberals are again promising $3.16 billion, over 10 years, to plant two billion trees. And to repeat: to date no trees have been planted under this initiative.

Quebec’s big win

The one province that won’t feel the force of a federal government carbon tax of $170 by 2030 is Quebec.

Quebec is exempt from the federal government’s carbon tax because since 2013 it operates a cap-and-trade system and will reap the benefits of that system in the future.

In Quebec, certain companies are capped on the amount of greenhouse gases they emit. Going over that cap requires companies to buy credits, or permits, for every tonne of carbon they exceed.

Canadian prices for permits that Quebec industry can buy were trading at $17 as of Dec. 1. It is estimated that Quebec’s “carbon tax” for 2022 will be about $23 per tonne while the federal carbon tax will be $50 — and raising fast.

As Jack Mintz, economist at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, noted, Quebecers already get cheaper electricity than the rest of Canada.

“That does give producers a huge benefit in Quebec. People who use energy (in Quebec), because the carbon price is lower, are going to have lower energy costs.”

He added, “Quebec, given that its cap and trade system is recognized as a substitute for the carbon tax, and the Quebec price is only $17 Canadian, which is little more than half the (current) carbon tax in other provinces, this produces in Quebec a significant competitive advantage not only internationally but to other markets in Canada. This will be particularly relevant to energy intensive manufacturing such as aluminum.”