TOMS LAKE – B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell was forced to defend his government's carbon tax on the campaign trail Thursday after a national government advisory panel issued a report saying the tax isn't the way to go.
The National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy concluded in a lengthy report that hard caps on emissions and a scheme to trade them is a better alternative to a carbon tax.
The report noted that the carbon tax proposed by the federal Liberals in the last election was soundly defeated by voters.
But Campbell said his government is trying to do more than the report suggests needs to be done and a cap-and-trade approach simply won't accomplish that goal.
"What the report says is cap and trade is necessary and if you read the report, they're calling for a 20-per-cent reduction in green house gases by 2020," Campbell said while campaigning in the province's gas-rich northeast.
"We said in British Columbia it's going to be 33 per cent. We all support that. That's going to require not just a cap and trade, but a carbon tax."
As part of its green strategy, British Columbia introduced an escalating carbon tax last July adding 2.4 cents a litre on the price of fossil fuels, including gasoline. The tax will increase to about eight cents by 2012.
The province's green strategy also commits it to participating in a cap-and-trade scheme that has been endorsed by Quebec, Manitoba and Ontario and seven U.S. states.
NDP Leader Carole James pounced on the federal report's nod in her party's direction.
James is campaigning on a promise to eliminate the carbon tax and replace it with participation in a cap-and-trade system – a position that has drawn the ire of many traditional NDP supporters in the environmental movement.
"They (the report's authors) ruled out a carbon tax because they said it was important to have consistency and a level playing field across this country and the way to do that is through cap-and-trade because that's the way people are heading," James said before a town hall meeting in Kamloops.
Later in the report, however, the authors offers praise to the B.C. approach, noting the province's carbon tax establishes certainty because the increases are legislated, but also offers flexibility because the rates can be adjusted after four years.
This is a key feature for effective, long-term climate policy that doesn't hinder investment, the report says.
Campbell wore steel-toed work boots, coveralls and a hard hat to tour a natural gas drilling rig during a campaign stop in Toms Lake, in the heart of oil and gas country.
A spokesman for EnCana, a major industry player in the area, estimated the company will pay up to $5 million in carbon taxes to the government – a levy he says the company can live with if everybody pays their share.
But James said the controversial tax is taking money out of the pockets of regular British Columbians. She said it adds up to $300 in fuel costs per year for the average family.
Dirk Meissner and Greg Joyce report for The Canadian Press.
19
Login or register to post comments
de Falla
3 years ago
The Spinmeister
To suggest that only a carbon tax will get you to a 33 percent reduction is absurd. A cap and trade regime can get you there as well, simply regulate the cap to that level. The report argues against a tax because it also recognizes the need for inter-jurisdictional trade and carbon price equivalencies and the need for linkages if not full integration to protect Canadian businesses trading across hte border with the US. The US is moving to cap and trade, and being forced to establish equivalencies of pricing from outside of that framework just because of a DSF fundraising tool turned Campbell political tool is sad.
The report does comment on the idea of a tax as providing certainty of price, but not certainty of reductions... and consumption of fuels in the province of BC post tax implementation seem to prove that out.
I\'ll take certainty of reduction - cause I\'m worried about climate change.
Frank
3 years ago
Carbon tax supporters
All seem to be against actual reductions in emissions but all for regressive taxes.
Rod Smelser
3 years ago
What does Jaccard say?
What was Mark Jaccard's response to this report from the Federal Roundtable?
Grumpy
3 years ago
A farce - complete farce.
This whole carbon tax issue is a complete total farce and I agree with Carole James on the is issue. Until China, Russia, and the USA all join in, BC's carbon tax is a farce.
Campbell knew this, but he also knew it would placate the more nut-bar fringe of the environmentalist fringe, who seem to support more taxes, in lieu of doing any 'real' solutions.
The likes of Berman, Jaccard, et al have been sucked in, while Campbell gets a new gas tax and the 'green' vote has been split.
And for that, the Carbon/gas tax has been successful.
redunk
3 years ago
he said she said journalism
The carbon Tax: Is it a cost to consumers? Is it a cost to industry? This article provides me with nothing to make an informed decision - it must be unknown?
But wait the tax actually has a system of collecting and redistributing money - numbers in documents tells the story not words from vote-getting politicians.
So in actuality there is a possible way to determine if this tax knocks Northern Nick more than Johnny Business Pants.
The answer is surprise surprise the Liberals are redistributing money from business to consumers. I wonder if the NDP drafted this gas tax, sorry carbon tax, sorry reality tax, the story would probably be all about the huddled masses and their storming of the Bastille.
Not sure why you did a verbatim reprint here Captain Hook? Yarh! i mean yikes!
fisher
3 years ago
carbon tax
To reduce emissions you must go to source and fix it or change it. A carbon tax will only increase the burden on the user and ultimatley drag down the economy.
Skywalker
3 years ago
Who cares...
...what Mark Jaccard, Tseporah Borman, or David Suzuki say on the subject. They have backed themselves into a corner with the liberals on this and can't change now.
crh
3 years ago
redunk
please provide a source for your claim...I don't believe you.
MAC
3 years ago
Carbon Tax Does Not Work
The National Environment and Economic Roundtable is correct - a Carbon Tax does NOT work. People do not drive less because of this tax, they do not heat their homes less because of this tax.
The revenue collected from the Carbon Tax is not going to any "program" to help the environment - its not going to ensure fuel efficient vehicles are affordable for the average person.
Just where does the revenue from this Carbon Tax go? Does anyone know?
According to the BC Liberals, all revenue collected through this Carbon Tax is returned to every citizen over 18 years of age through tax cuts or refund cheques (even if they don't drive a vehicle or pay a home heating bill). So how does this benefit the environment? What is the cost to administer this carbon tax?
These self appointed environmentalist who speak out to support a tax that does nothing to improve or benefit the environment need to do their homework, and please - get educated. Why are these people not denouncing all the other anti-enivornmental policies of the BC Liberals. Maybe we need to "follow the money" and take a closer look why.
There are so many other important issues that need to be addressed in this election. Once a self sufficient province, we have lost all our natural resources under the BC Liberal government. Fish farms have been allowed to destroy our entire wild salmon with disease, our forests have disappeared (we will soon be importing wood rather than producing and exporting it), agricultural land is being given away or rezoned (we will soon be importing ALL our food where we once had the best farmland in the world), BC Hydro will be privatized and we will be purchasing our own water back from other countries, our medical system is failing because of downloading services, we have gang wars and a crime rate now equal to a third world country, we have the highest job loss under the BC Liberals, and "significant" over spending on a 2 week sporting event called the "O", and the list goes on, and on, and on.
kl
3 years ago
You are right MAC
MAC you are spot on and we do need to follow the money to find out why the enviros have such a love on for the carbon tax, a tax that has been totally discredited.
Berman just announced her parting of ways with the NDP. Good riddance in my opinion. All of the enviros are looking bad on this. Even Gregor Robertson's support of Campbell is making him look like a chump.
When Campbell foresaw a budget shortfall due to tax cuts he suddenly became an environmentalist and announced a carbon tax would be put in place. The enviros fell in love with Campbell. Why?
The carbon tax is a general revenue tax that apparently is returned to us anyway according to Campbell. So what's the point and how is this helping the environment?
freebear
3 years ago
I hope the enviros lose
I hope the enviros lose memberships and donations on this!
And Campbell will likely win the election through the purposefully created green fog of confusion and misdirection.
The Best Place on Earth, for what?
mopled
3 years ago
This is all terribly funny
Berman defending an energy tax and the NDP wanting a cap and trade system.
The infrastructure of a cap and trade system will be impossible to get rid of once established. It is rent seeking of the worst kind. The Banksters are drooling over a new commodity to trade which unlike others requires no storage or even proof of existence.
Al Gore, Maurice Strong and Goldman Sachs are all involved in carbon trading through the Chicago Climate Exchange. Montreal seems to be the center for Canada.
http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/content.jsf?id=1763
Meanwhile, temperatures are dropping and sea level hasn't risen in three years.
"global temperature had been falling for seven years; that CO2 concentration had been rising at about half the UN’s central estimate, requiring its warming projections to be halved and rendering them harmless; and that 20 years of satellite observations of changes in outgoing long-wave radiation had demonstrated conclusively that the UN had exaggerated the effect of CO2 on temperature by a factor of 7-10. The economic graph showed the cost of adapting to “global warming” (if and when it resumed) as being many times cheaper than the cost of attempting to mitigate it."
http://www.icecap.us/
redunk
3 years ago
crh
look at the government's tax redistribution graphs. It's right there. Look at how the money is redistributed.
$770 for business in tax cuts
$1179 for individuals ($255 million of that for low income people (the stormers of the Bastille)
http://www.livesmartbc.ca/government/carbon_tax.html
greenhouse gas by sector
12% residential/commercial
14% other industry
22% fossil fuels
3% electricity
8% waste
4% agriculture
37% transport
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/soe/et07/04_climate_change/technical_paper/climate_change.pdf
The tax doesn't cover roughly 30% of fossil fuels. (agriculture, fossil fuels and waste) (that will be under cap and trade - another story)
Of the roughly 70% left, there is residential and commercial, industry, electricity, and transport.
Industry is a staggering 14% alone, not to mention it's stake in transport, electricity, and the commercial of the "residential and commercial" category (Granted I didn't find the breakdown in my 15 minute search, but I'm not the paid journalist here, as a secondary source see below)
www.davidsuzuki.org/files/climate/BC_Carbon_Tax_Reality_Check.pdf
www.davidsuzuki.org/files/climate/BC_Carbon_Tax_Reality_Check.pdf
Rod Smelser
3 years ago
redunk: That's funny!
redunk
look at the government's tax redistribution graphs ...
Right. I am reminded of a man who once told me that the best source of information on gas pricing was oil company adverts. Nice try, though.
redunk
3 years ago
rod smesler
Until otherwise told by the opposition, the press, or independent third party analysis that the government has lied and the tax is a giant ponzi scheme to funnel money to Campbell's BC Rail buddies or Karl Heinz Schreiber, there is no reason to a believe their numbers are a fabrication.
Though our country may seem like banana republic, and BC the mightiest plantation of them all, we are a rather tame, uncorrupted, well governed country. So please, save me the Montana letter-bombing the government is going to steal your baby straw-man blah blah blah yaddi yaddi yaddi
Frank
3 years ago
From the livesmart website...
"It rewards green choices"
How? Does the government forget that transit fares were increased?
"encourages consumers to reduce their fuel consumption"
But does it actually do that? Are there less cars on the road, is less gas being used in BC? No.
"increase fuel efficiency"
Again, how? And has it happened?
"use cleaner fuels"
Are we now using cleaner fuels than we were last year? Could I be given a link?
"and adopt new technology"
What new technology owes its existence to the carbon tax?
redunk
3 years ago
reality
I stood at a protest when Campbell was about trying to introduce 2 coal fired power plants to BC. The most vocal, well spoken and fiercest critic of Campbell was Mark Jaccard.
This tax, following many of Jaccard's suggestions, is one of the most intelligent pieces of environmental legislation ever introduced in North America. The only reason it got panned in the report was because the public, like most of you posting comments, can't handle a tax, even though it is administratively less complex, and less expensive than a cap and trade system (therefore less of a cost to the tax payer).
This tax can be avoided by reducing your fossil fuel consumption. Yes, some aspects of that may be difficult, but when giant organizations like UBC have a $40 million dollar incentive to cut emissions at this level of the tax, you don't think that has an impact?
You should be up in arms over income tax, that tries to put limits on wealth creation - well I will just try to make less money to save paying taxes, lalalalala - your living in smurf village!
It's sad to see, on the leading progressive news sources in BC, this level of discourse. Your all a bunch of parochial Negative Nancys with a limited vision for our country, the future and how to combat climate change, a serious problem!
Any one have a better solution?
Frank
3 years ago
redunk
"This tax can be avoided by reducing your fossil fuel consumption."
Thank god you're not trying to fix the food crisis in the same manner.
"This tax, following many of Jaccard's suggestions, is one of the most intelligent pieces of environmental legislation ever introduced in North America."
Says you. Its idiocy says me.
"but when giant organizations like UBC have a $40 million dollar incentive to cut emissions at this level of the tax, you don't think that has an impact?"
Didn't they already have motivation when the price of gas at the pump climbed to $1.50? What is the price of gas that will make you feel good? $1.00 a litre? $1.10 a litre? $2.00 a litre?
Your gas tax is meaningless because the tax itself is less than the variability in the price.
"your living in smurf village"
In other words you have no argument. Perhaps you can use Simpson quotes in your next post to make yourself look more intelligent.
Frank
3 years ago
redunk
"It's sad to see, on the leading progressive news sources in BC"
Yes, we prefer progressives here but regressives like yourself are welcome too