The Hook

Carbon Tax no perfect, but can be improved

Well... Who said the BC carbon tax was perfect? Knowing Campbell's record on transparency,the environment (...) who would even expect there would not be loopholes in the bill...? However, even though I could spent a long time thrashing the Premier for many things I think he did wrong, in this case he got it right, and so did Dion for that matter.

To keep this discussion in BC, I would argue that the fact we have an implementation of the carbon tax in the Province is critical. Not perfect? sure! It can always be improved.

One could imagine that in a fictitious world, where the NDP would be spending time discussing issues, its leaders would recognize that the Campbell's carbon tax is a good solution, and so according to a large range of experts. This fictitious NDP could make propositions on how to improve the bill as well. Wow, that really sounds like a stretch isn't it? How can one think about such an elaborate plan...?

You prefer Cap and Trade? Well, it may work as well. Unfortunately, the real NDP's line is to try to make people believe that only "big polluters" will have to pay, which is ludicrous. We are big polluters too, collectively. And especially in Canada where our energy consumption per capita is one of the largest in the world !! And don't tell me we are so special, that it is ok for us to pump so much CO2 in the atmosphere, because it is not.

With a Cap and Trade approach, costs would inevitably be transferred to the consumer for things that push emissions up, and price would eventually drop for things that are not emitting as much CO2... Hmmm.. it sounds like a price shifting from what we don't want towards what we want... Sounds familiar? Ok there are differences, and both approaches have their merits, but come on NDP ,don't squander our chances to actually do something effective with cheap politics.

So in short the NDP's stance is a fraud. And it helps the Conservative's plan of demonization of the Carbon Tax, hence slowing down any real progress we so crucially need. Shame!

NDP are neanderthals

Clinton isn't the only one praising BC

Although Bill Rees dumped on the tax as not going far enough in his Tyee article he did quote Sightline Institute's Alan Durning in his article and did not dispute this:

"B.C.'s Campbell government has introduced what is "by far the most aggressive carbon pricing regime in North America. In fact, it's one of the more aggressive regimes in the world."

Presumably Bill Rees knows how to get into power and pass something that would immediately reduce CO2 emissions by the 90% he's calling for but so far, he isn't bothering to actually file papers to run for office. Who cares? The best thing, and Bill's actions speak louder than his words on this, is to work in Academia where the carbon footprints are big, and you won't be criticized for making an effort to put in an experimental effort like this carbon tax is at doing something about climate in a political situation where doing so might cost you your job. Yo Bill. Here's to you.

In the meantime, we have to either support or oppose what those who do try to get power and form governments do and we can see where the party to the left of Clinton in BC is standing.

The NDP under James are Neanderthals. Their opportunistic opposition to the best first attempt in North America to do something about climate will be remembered. Wherever hypocrisy and planet killing are celebrated, members of the NDP will be able to hold their heads high.

laurentm

I disagree.

Have you read Bill 37 and the Regulation?

If you haven't, then I question whether you can really comment.

The problem is not the tax per se, it is the fact that it does nothing but generate cash, slosh it around in general revenue for the balance of the fiscal year and then spew it out again (supposedly) to the same taxpayers who paid the tax in the first place.

It creates no jobs - except in the civil service. It does not diminish CO2 one gram because it neither encourages people to drive less nor does it develop alternatives and, it exempts airplanes and cruise ships which, you must know, are major polluters.

Had Campbell wanted to make a difference there are lots of ways the money could have been spent to reduce CO2. He didn't do any of them and I'd ask you why not?

This has bugger all to with the NDP it is Campbell's own stupid policy that needs to be exposed for what it is - a money laundering scheme and nothing more.

NDP loves climate action

Before the NDP figured out there were votes in it if they opposed doing the slightest thing about climate change, they made some serious mistakes. They trumpeted publicly that they cared.

What follows is part of a letter to the editor I wrote a while ago. It contains descriptions of the context, and quotes from Corky's response to the Throne Speech that announced action was coming on climate:

When he rose in the Legislature to respond to last years throne speech Corky Evans called parts of it "wonderful". He referred, again and again, to the government's recognition, in that throne speech, that "climate change is real".

Corky: "We have to manage our own pollution and to do something to see that the planet survives" Referring to past inaction on this issue, he said nevertheless, all that time, "we all knew in our hearts that the way we govern, and maybe even the way we live is precluding the future for our children"

The throne speech said: "The science is clear. It leaves no room for procrastination." Corky responded: "we have to restructure everything we do"

Corky was very concerned that the Liberals were just lying, that their throne speech was just “spin”, so Liberals could gain from rising poll numbers showing support for action on climate change even though they may have had no intention of doing anything at all.

"If this is spin, this is the biggest lie.... [he got the word "lie" in, then retracted, saying "we aren't allowed to say lie in this building"] then he said: "if this is spin, it is the largest immoral gesture to come into this building in a long time"

He muttered in advance, as if he soon expected to see proof that this extremely large immoral gesture had in fact occurred: "Where is the line, between comin' in here with integrity, sayin' words you believe in…” "Exactly what substance is there to make me believe that they meant the words when they say climate change is real and now we're going to govern differently?"

Corky: "If climate change is real, its gonna take BOTH sides to make it [referring to any possible solution] work. Its more important to find a solution for this than... [he drifted off in his inimitable manner implying its more important than becoming the government, staying in power, keeping ones seat, etc.]

All I hear on CBC radio reports these days when a report is made on what NDP leader James is saying, the constant drumbeat is carbon tax, we oppose the carbon tax. What's changed is that although the public still would like to do something, polls show that they aren't buying the carbon tax and rather than risk anything by doing what Corky foresaw was necessary, i.e. working together with political enemies, both sides in this divided province helping to make this work, and both sides working together to help explain why this new tax is necessary, the NDP took the easy road of seeing if they could exploit it and catapult a few points up in the polls.

ditto to you Tranche Demerde

Have you read the bill?

Are you aware of the administrative costs?

Do you really think that 2.5c/litre (or 7c/litre) is going to make a difference when there isn't enough transit available now?

When housing is so unaffordable that people have no choice but to drive long distances to and from work?

When there are no practical measures fo insultate houses better and increase the use of clean energy for heating - in fact BC Hydro is doing the opposite.

The NDP has acknowledged that there will be costs to cutting CO2 production - it's the Campbell government which tries to pretend there won't be.

That all that's necessary is to collect a lot of money and then give it back again in tax refunds or pander payments.

That's baloney and anyone who thinks about it knows it.

Demand for gas and oil is relatively inelastic - if it weren't then consumption would have fallen precipitously in the past 6 months...you can't seriously believe that, as prices fall (and they are falling) that 7c is going to make a difference if 60c a litre didn't.

And, surely, you have to wonder why the Campbell tax doesn't apply to airlines and cruise ships? Have they suddenly become green?

OK I don't have a license

The Bloc is an amalgam of every faction they've got in Quebec I believe. People that wouldn't give an apple to other people who were in the gutter starving, and the people who didn't get the apples are in there together, united around nationalism rather than letting themselves be split into all the factions they really are and the ones they'll split into once they are a nation.

Or at least they were when the idea of independence was more real in the population's mind. And the provincial plan was to get elected to control the province so they could hold the referendum and create the nation.

Nationalism has been a potent political driver. All us plumbers, even the ones like me who don't have a license and aren't about to buy a business that makes anything, I'm not even a plumber, but I'm ready to set it all aside and work together with anyone on this climate thing.

Even with someone who implements progressive policy in his own jurisdiction while supporting someone who is stamping it out in his. I'm supporting the guy who is implementing, and I'm opposing the guy who is stamping it out, and if anyone wants my support all they have to do is start working on climate. I see climate change as an issue that will have to be stronger than nationalism.

And when Gordon Campbell addresses climate change

And when Gordon Campbell actually addresses climate change I'll give him some credit for it.

So far he hasn't - all he's done is spin money and create a lot of global warming into the bargain....

Climate change needs to be confronted but it won't be the BC Liberals that do it.

In fact, I don't think any political party will do it until the people are prepared to tell them that the time has come.

Most of us, sadly, haven't reached that point as yet - we like to feel good about our 'efforts' and that's all Campbell's tax is designed to do - create good feelings and give the impression that a sociopathic personality can change.

Bill is a Republican

The only thing progressive about Bill Clinton is BS. Other than that a Republican given to support for Neocon light.

We have all these environmentalists extolling the virtues of the Campbell carbon tax over NDP cap and trade. Somehow Campbell's destruction of numerous salmon runs with his fish farms, is OK with partisan Greens.

These so-called environmentists, conveniently forget that while we the great unwashed pay almost 100% of the BC carbon tax, it is Campbell's big campaign donators, paying almost none of the tax, that get the enormous taxpayer funded payoffs. Perhaps these environmental activists might ask Boss Campbell if UNOWHO's Green tax windfall would be better spent on transit improvements instead spending 65% of it on campaign donation kickbacks to Gordo's corporate cronies.

One of BC's biggest exports and largest polluter is the oil and gas industry. Will the world price of oil or natural gas go up because of the the NDP cap and and trade system. Will Big Four Oil cut production? As if!!!! How then will they pass the cost along to we the great unwashed.

The NDP cap and and trade system is an excellent way to squeeze some blood out of the big four oil companies at zero cost to UNOWHO.

laurentm to gwest

Alright, I am going to rephrase what I said on the top of the post, hopefully in a more clear manner:

1. Yes, Campbell's Carbon Tax Bill has holes in it.

2. Yes, the C02 cost / tonne is currenltly too low to have any significant effect.

3. HOWEVER: there is a bill in place, and the key is to understand that it will become really effective in its continuity, when carbon will be priced way higher than it is now. This is the trajectory that counts. Not today's pricing.

4. The above has several key advantages. Three of them are: (a) It give certainty in terms of pricing, which is good for a business stand point. (b) it start low-priced, hence doesn't hurt, and slowly increases with time, which leaves time to switch technologies for instance. (c). Even for a low pricing per tonnes, it gives a price signal to everyone and get people thinking, and hopefully acting up.

Do you think we would be blabbing about this so much if there was an obscure cap and trade system in place with that many more loopholes...? Because in terms of transparency, a cap and trade is more prone to loopholes, special cases, "omissions" etc etc... I am not saying we should not implement a cap and trade, but I can see that as a very tricky and slow process... And we have to act NOW.

Well it's clear that he's

Well it's clear that he's another millionaire telling us plebes what is good for us. We pay the tax and the big companies get off with the tax breaks that make it revenue neutral.Arthur Griffith's will be telling us next how good it is for those of us with no transit , no natural gas. Yeah rural BC suffer for the elite and the Lower Mainland bullies.BC ferries finally cutting fuel cahrges. Two years till they say debt load is too great must sell everything that they still own off to the leasing companies.

Big polluters and us the righteous

Sure, big polluters must pay. I agree 100%.

But hey, when we poor gasoline in our cars, (SUV anyone?), heat up our not-so insulated houses (4000sq.ft mansion?), fly to Hawai with that super savers deal vacation... What are we?

Let's look at the wasteful habits we have in this country, and most of everywhere in the west, and tell me we are not big polluters!

I am sorry to say that if we want to do something effective to mitigate the consequences of the climate issue, we have to stop pointing fingers at others... We're all in it... and we got to cough it up, just like the big polluters do.

So I don't care if some positive steps are from Campbell or not. I am not saying you got to vote him in another time. But there is good stuff in the carbon tax, and that cannot be ignored.

Phonies playing Politics

laurentm
Carbon Tax no perfect, but can be improved
"You prefer Cap and Trade? Well, it may work as well. Unfortunately, the real NDP's line is to try to make people believe that only "big polluters" will have to pay, which is ludicrous. ...

So in short the NDP's stance is a fraud. And it helps the Conservative's plan of demonization of the Carbon Tax, hence slowing down any real progress we so crucially need. Shame!"

Tranche Demerde
NDP are neanderthals
The NDP under James are Neanderthals. Their opportunistic opposition to the best first attempt in North America to do something about climate will be remembered. Wherever hypocrisy and planet killing are celebrated, members of the NDP will be able to hold their heads high.

David Lewis
NDP loves climate action
Before the NDP figured out there were votes in it if they opposed doing the slightest thing about climate change, they made some serious mistakes. They trumpeted publicly that they cared....

All I hear on CBC radio reports these days when a report is made on what NDP leader James is saying, the constant drumbeat is carbon tax, we oppose the carbon tax.

These posts prove that the people who wrote them, rather like the Georgia Straight, are concerned about politics, not policy, and Liberal Party politics at that. If they were at all concerned about climate change, which they clearly are not, they would have read this quotation by James B. Davies, Professor and past Chairperson of the Department of Economics (1992-2001), University of Western Ontario and current editor of Canadian Public Policy, which was included by the 200 economists in their open letter on climate policies:

"Canada's political leaders are agreed that carbon emissions should be reduced. There are good ways and bad ways to try to do this. Economists can advise which approaches are likely to be the best in economic tems. The two that stand out are a revenue-neutral carbon tax and a cap-and-trade system with fully auctioned emission permits. Those are the smart ways to reduce emissions. Other approaches typically involve heavy-handed regulation or ineffective half measures. I hope Canadians will support leaders who sincerely promise to pursue a smart approach."

Davies thinks cap and trade, the policy prefered by Jack Layton and Carole James, is a perfectly good system. The three phonies who offered up their own little Brad Zubyk style bits of political spin may fool a lot of people, unfortunately, but that's all they're doing, just manipulating people with intellectual sounding pieces of spin.

It is simple.

Clinton likes Campbell's Carbon Tax because he doesn't pay it and even if he did it wouldn't even bite into his coffee money. Campbell puts more carbon emissions into the air on one trip to Maui than I do in a year so why would he care. He gets extra cash with which to bribe the voters a bit and spend the rest on highways. Budd Campbell has it right on!

Big names and us

What is important is this:

1. We need policies that will drive the Co2 emission down.

2.The most often discussed these days are carbon taxes, and cap&trade. Maybe there are other ways as well.

3.The atmospheric system doesn't have any favorite, and couldn't care less where Campbell, Jaccard or Suzuki live, really.

4.All that matters is reducing emissions to zero within 75-100years, with the least possible negative effect on human societies.

5.Both approaches are considered to have merit IF and only IF they are well defined. And both can equally be botched and hijacked.

6. Note that Point 4 refers to 0 emission. Which in a way is good. It will be less effort for the already "good" people out there to get there. More effort for the rest of us.

7. A good reference for the above is the new book from Andrew Weaver: Keeping our Cool. see http://climate.uvic.ca/people/weaver/
And you don't have to buy it. It will be in library.

I agree CO2 must be addressed

The Campbell Tax doesn't address it in anything but a facile and 'political' way - as Budd has pointed out.

Campbell's pandering cream separator of a tax will not help and in fact it actually makes the situation worse because it does nothing while spreading the obvious lie that is doing something.

Lulling people into the false sense of security that Campbell and his public affairs bureau recognize is the necessary pre-condition for re-election.

Don't be fooled.

Not fooled

GWest: Looking at Campbell, being fooled is definitly something to be worried about.

The point I really want to make through this discussion is this:

- a badly designed carbon tax legislation is still better than no legislation at all. It is the first step.

- Once there is a legislation in place, it will be onus on the next governments to improve it.

- The above will only happen if people voice their concerns and/or rage at how bad the legislation is today. In short, participating in the debate in earnest.

- The private sector will have a key role in all this if it is willing to play the game by showing that revenue can be generated while cutting emissions. And this will be facilitated when there will be a cost incurred for dumping CO2 in the atmosphere. (Same goes go waste in general).

- yes, Campbell's tax as it is now may be a sham.

- Thinking that only big polluters will have to pay is being fooled by Carole James.

laurentm: Free Time Postings on behalf of the Liberal Party

Quoting from two of laurentm's posts:

3.The atmospheric system doesn't have any favorite, and couldn't care less where Campbell, Jaccard or Suzuki live, really.

4.All that matters is reducing emissions to zero within 75-100years, with the least possible negative effect on human societies.

- yes, Campbell's tax as it is now may be a sham.

- Thinking that only big polluters will have to pay is being fooled by Carole James.

laurentm just becomes more and more revealing with each successive post. First off, I have never heard anyone suggest that emissions will ever be reduced to zero. Have I missed something?

The climate may not care where Campbell, Jaccard and Suzuki live, but laurentm said he cares a great deal that some people live in large houses, taking lots of oil or gas to heat. (Well, actually, I suppose that Suzuki and Wade Davis probably heat their Ealue Lake cabins with wood, but I think the main focus was on the more urban and suburban palaces, not the quaint little 2500 square foot, architect designed log cottages in the Spatsizi country). That laurentm cares only where others live, meaning anyone of ordinary means with a detached dwelling in Surrey, or Langley, or Ridge-Meadows, says all one needs to know about the undisguised class warfare that's being waged behind the climate change camouflage.

laurentm states that Campbell's tax "may be a sham". But this doesn't matter to him one bit. The only thing that does matter to him is his false claim that Carole James has said a cap and trade system would result in carbon pricing paid only by large firms. James has never said any such thing, and neither has Jack Layton. laurentm knows that, and so do Jaccard and Andrew Weaver, the former's caustic CanWest op-ed pieces notwithstanding.

So in summation, ... "the policy may be a sham, but it's a great thing that we must all pledge our undivided allegiance to!" Yes, that sounds like a Canadian Liberal alright. There's a diehard Liberal in my workplace, and compared to the Conservatives there he's the most authoritarian, intolerant, hard-line right-winger around. It's a real eye-opener to hear him go on, and on, and on.