News

Global Warming Debate Lost in Carbon Tax Fog

'Partisan scrabbling' ruining chance to educate voters: VTACC's Washbrook.

By Tom Barrett, 27 Apr 2009, TheTyee.ca

Kevin Washbrook

Enviro Kevin Washbrook: NDP, Libs agree on much.

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

The B.C. election campaign has heard plenty of heated talk from the New Democratic Party and environmentalists about the carbon tax. But up in Fort Nelson, Mayor Bill Streeper says he doesn't hear much about it.

"Basically, up here it's not a major issue," Streeper told The Tyee. "Nobody is really mad."

A year ago, Streeper's predecessor, former mayor Chris Morey, was one of the leaders of the anti-carbon tax campaign in the North and Interior. Back then, folks in the North pretty much agreed the tax was unfair.

"It's like people complained about the GST when it was first introduced," Streeper said. "But nobody's complaining now.

Pollsters Mario Canseco, of Angus Reid Strategies, and Evi Mustel, of The Mustel Group, also said in interviews at the beginning of the campaign that the carbon tax doesn't seem to be catching on with the voters.

Lost in the carbon tax haze

But there are those who would like to see British Columbians pay more attention to the bigger question of climate change, an issue they feel is being lost in the carbon tax rhetoric.

Kevin Washbrook, of Voters Taking Action on Climate Change, is one.

"In the general public, I don't have a strong sense that [climate change] is a concern right now," he said in an interview. "I think the bigger picture is getting lost in this sort of partisan scrabbling over short term advantage."

What is needed is an agreement on broad principles, Washbrook said.

"I think if you sat the NDP and the Liberals down, they'd both agree we need to put a price on carbon emissions. It's just a question of how you do that."

Washbrook's group isn't endorsing any party's climate platform. Instead, they'd like to see a cooler, less partisan debate.

Not that there's much chance of that happening in the middle of an election campaign -- especially one in which the NDP has tried to use North America's first comprehensive carbon tax as a populist rallying point against the governing Liberals.

'Fix the tax': CCPA's Lee

The NDP's "axe the tax" campaign has drawn the ire of high profile experts like the University of Victoria's Andrew Weaver and environmentalists David Suzuki and Tzeporah Berman.

"The NDP chose a course of opposing the carbon tax, which was very controversial within the party from what I understand," said Marc Lee, of the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. "It was a political choice."

The carbon tax was one issue where the NDP believed it could get "serious traction" with voters, Lee said, "in particular in the Interior of the province where there are seats to be gained."

Lee, who has studied the effects of the carbon tax, describes himself as a "fix the tax" advocate, rather than an "axe the tax" man.

The Liberals' tax, he said, is too low, it doesn't cover all B.C.'s greenhouse gas emissions and it only goes to 2012. As well, as currently structured, the tax will penalize low-income British Columbians in the future.

Still, Lee has quarrelled with the NDP over what he calls its "misrepresentations" of the tax. The party's claim, for example, that the tax "lets big polluters off the hook" is "patently wrong," Lee says.

The case against the Liberals' version of the tax can be made quite well by sticking to the facts, he said.

There are some points in the NDP's climate change platform that Lee does like -- more money for public transportation, more money for energy-efficient retrofits and a hard cap on the emissions of big industrial polluters.

But when it comes to the carbon tax, the NDP "went over the top and turned this into this demonic tax," he said.

Carbon tax idea already damaged?

US Will Call Shots on BC's Climate Change Approach

Even voters who have been following the climate change debate in B.C. might be forgiven for thinking they face a choice between a carbon tax under the Liberals and a cap-and-trade system under the New Democrats.

In fact, cap and trade is a big part of both parties' climate change strategies. B.C. has been working toward a regional cap-and-trade system through the Western Climate Initiative since 2007. The plan is to adjust the carbon tax so it complements cap and trade.

While the WCI continues to move forward, the election of Barack Obama, who supports a national cap-and-trade system in the U.S., has made it more likely that Canada will eventually join whatever national scheme emerges south of the border.

That means that whichever party gets elected in B.C. on May 12 is likely to be looking to the States for a big portion of its climate change strategy.

Cap and trade schemes are extremely complex. But basically, this is how the system would work:

Governments would place a limit, or cap, on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted. Companies that are covered by the cap would have to obtain permits equal to their emissions. A company that reduced its emissions below the level of its permits would be left with excess permits -- which it would be able to sell to companies that can't meet their targets. (That's the trade part.)

For companies that go over their limit, the cost of having to buy permits acts as an incentive to make long-term decisions that will reduce emissions.

Meanwhile, over time, governments lower the overall cap so that big emitters produce less and less greenhouse gas.

That leaves plenty of questions, however:

Which sectors of the economy do you cover? How much greenhouse gas does a company have to emit to be covered? How do you make sure the permits accurately reflect emissions? Do you allow emitters to meet their targets by purchasing offsets? If so, how many offsets should they be allowed to buy? And how do you allocate the permits -- do you hand them out for free or do you auction them?

Get the details right and cap and trade can be very effective, like the U.S. system that reduced acid rain in the 1990s.

Get the details wrong and you end up with something that is at best ineffective and at worst is vulnerable to Enron-style gaming. -- T.B.

Having said that, Lee believes environmentalists are also overemphasizing the carbon tax, while downplaying some of the flaws in the rest of the Liberals' climate change plan.

"I think it's unfair of some of the environmental groups to be so singularly focused on the carbon tax as the litmus test for credibility on climate policy," he said.

The Liberals would be more deserving of the environmentalists' praise if they had put a moratorium on the development of the oil and gas industry -- "one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the province" -- or had scrapped the plans for a 10-lane Port Mann Bridge, Lee said.

"There are enough kind of blatant contradictions in other parts of the Liberal platform that completely swamp any impact that the carbon tax was going to have" on carbon emissions, Lee said.

He thinks the environmental movement is digging in its heels on the tax because it believes that if the carbon tax dies in B.C., no other North American government will touch it.

"My sense is that's already happened," he said. "There's a default aversion to taxes in the first place, which meant the carbon tax is barely viable in Canada or the United States, period."

B.C.'s experience, where the tax has being attacked by an Opposition that would be expected to support it, "would basically say to any politician, 'Stay away from this one,' " Lee said.

Cap-and-trade and its risks

The U.S. is going for a national cap-and-trade system rather than a carbon tax and it seems likely that Canada will join up with whatever the U.S. puts together.

"And we'd better hope that it's a well-designed system because cap and trade is very vulnerable to political pressure, to favoritism of certain industries, to gaming of the system, to speculation," said Lee. "The devil's very much in the details."

Although the NDP is pitching the abolition of the carbon tax as an economic stimulus, Lee cautions that such a move won't have much impact.

"The impact of tax cuts as stimulus tends to be pretty weak in general compared to public spending," Lee said.

In this fiscal year, the carbon tax is expected to bring in about $500 million, he said.

"Half a billion dollars in a provincial economy which is $200 billion -- that's what, a quarter of one per cent? And typically with tax cuts, less than a third actually gets spent.

"So yeah, there would be some stimulus to it, but it would be very, very small."

'Frustrated' with debate: Pembina's Horne

Lee added that any plan that puts a price on carbon emissions will be felt by the consumer: "Any actual plan that reduces greenhouse gas emissions, whether it's carbon tax, cap and trade or just regulation, is going to increase consumer prices somehow, some way."

At this point, he said, "I'll support anything that moves us in the right direction.... Too much has been focused on the carbon tax. I guess I feel a little frustrated watching this debate play out."

He's not the only one. Ask Matt Horne, of the Pembina Institute, what he thinks of B.C.'s climate change debate and he replies: "I'm a bit frustrated."

He said the institute is pleased with some of the steps the Liberal government has taken so far, but there is more to be done.

"The way the debate has been set up, we're not productively getting into those next steps," said Horne. "We're talking about staying where we are or taking steps backwards."

Suzuki, Pembina on NDP's platform

Horne said the institute likes some things about the NDP platform: the Green Bonds proposal, the commitment to continuing the moratorium on offshore drilling and the promise not to go ahead with coal-bed methane exploitation without community consultation.

But he was critical of the NDP's plan to drop the carbon tax, which covers about 76 per cent of the economy, in favour of a hard cap on the biggest industrial emitters. That hard cap, Horne said, would at best deal with only 32 per cent of the province's emissions until B.C. joins whatever cap-and-trade scheme the U.S. develops.

An analysis of the NDP climate change platform released by the Pembina Institute, the David Suzuki Foundation and ForestEthics says:

"The NDP election platform eliminates the foundation of the existing B.C. climate plan without offering an equivalent or improved replacement. The positive ideas offered are insufficient to compensate for the carbon tax's cancellation."

The U.S. plan might cover emissions across the economy, but it could end up being much narrower, Horne told The Tyee.

"Our perspective as an organization is we are agnostic between carbon tax, cap and trade or a combination of the two," he said. "The key point being that the system is applied economy wide."

NDP environment critic Shane Simpson told The Tyee that the party expects the hard cap will get it "probably about eight per cent" of the way towards the province's goal of reducing emissions levels by 33 per cent by 2020.

Conservatives: scrap carbon tax

Meanwhile, the B.C. Conservative Party is rejecting both the carbon tax and cap and trade.

"B.C. Conservatives will work to ensure that the future energy needs for British Columbia are provided for in a clean environment by supporting the development and utilization of new technologies such as tidal power, wind power, geothermal power and the development and production of biodiesel from waste wood, ethanol and hydrogen," the party's platform says.

The platform says the Conservatives are "the only party in B.C. proposing a balanced approach, combining a strong economy with effective environmental protection. This approach does not include a discriminatory punitive tax on consumption or carbon dioxide production."

Instead, the party said it will support "incentives for industry to develop new, clean technology."

Greens: scrap 'all Gateway projects'

As might be expected, the Green party has a lengthy climate change platform. It includes:

  • Increasing the carbon tax to $50 per tonne. (The current tax starting last July at $10 per tonne of emissions. It is scheduled to increase by $5 per tonne each year for the next four years to $30 per tonne in 2012.)

  • Exempting low-income earners;

  • Extending the carbon tax to the oil and gas and cement industries;

  • Placing a hard cap on large industrial polluters, similar to that called for by the NDP;

  • Phasing out subsidies to the oil and gas industry;

  • Placing a permanent moratorium on coal-bed methane projects and shale-bed gas exploration and production.

  • Cancelling "all Gateway projects, including new bridge construction, highway widening in the Lower Mainland and the pipeline project in the North and the energy corridor through central B.C.";

  • Phasing out gasoline-powered cars and short-haul trucks by 2030.

Green party energy critic Philip Stone told The Tyee Gateway should be scrapped and the money put into rail transit. Gateway, he said, "is going to dwarf any effect that a two-and-a-half-cent gas tax is going to have" on emissions.

Related Tyee stories:

[Tyee]

Tom Barrett is a Tyee contributing editor who has written extensively about climate change policy.

43 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • Grumpy

    2 years ago

    Want to reduce pollution............

    ............ greenhouse gases and save the environment? Try the Rail for The Valley's 300 kilometer solution @

    http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/the-300-km-solution-an-affordable-way-to-reduce-gridlock-and-pollution/

  • Frank

    2 years ago

    Something good may come out of this

    "B.C.'s experience, where the tax has being attacked by an Opposition that would be expected to support it, "would basically say to any politician, 'Stay away from this one,' " Lee said."

    Good.

  • frenchy mcswede

    2 years ago

    The above is a worthwhile read but

    I would still very like to know: Where was david suzuki and the pembina institute when the bc liberals were gutting every single important environmental regulation in their first term? Where were they when campbell was paving over a pristine unique ecological area in west vancouver to save skiers 5 minutes travel time? No please, don't both answer at once. Oh, and perhaps both of these foundations could release the figures on what percentage of their donations come from corporations for the purpose of tax writeoffs, and then it they could both just swear affidavits that no pressure whatever was put upon them by said corporations to support campbell's "carbon" tax, then perhaps they might retain at least a few scraps of credibility.

    The major problem with the so-called carbon tax is that it has almost nothing green about it. I t does not fund transit; if it's revenue neutral, then there's really no penalty, except for the poor,as it is inflationary, and if it's just symbolic, it must be, by definition, -premier campbell's disastrous environmental record aside- merely one more form of green washing.

    In closing I look forward to seeing those affadavits and records of corporate contributions posted for all to read on the tyee and in the mainstream press, mr suzuki and the pembina institute. Prove me wrong...

  • seth

    2 years ago

    Regulation and Nuclear War

    It was regulation not tax that worked on reducing vehicle emissions, acid rain etc. These fuzzy headed environmental wacks don't understand that their silly carbon taxes and cap and trades just play into the hands of Big Coal/Oil who understand this stuff has zero chance of working.

    Only a world war type effort in building mass produced nuclear power stations has any chance of putting the breaks on global warming.

  • Van Isle

    2 years ago

    The trouble with the NDP is

    The trouble with the NDP is that it's made up of special interest groups who, when they don't get their way, want to take their ball and go home. Classical was the then Premier Harcort tried to compromise with the Carmanah Valley issue. This whole carbon/gas tax debate is doing the same thing.

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    Van Isle

    You are so right!

    Did you read that piece last November in the Georgia Straight by Charlie Smith?

    http://www.straight.com/article-170453/gregor-robertson-beware-power-ndp-kingsway-mafia

  • crh

    2 years ago

    Electric cars reduce carbon output totals

    We could have several hundred thousand electric cars on north american roads today if it were not killed by big oil and the car companies.

    The consumer wants these cars, and we can't get them. But by all means, make us pay for all the polution and let the big corps off the hook.

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    No Liberals quoted, just one NDPer, briefly.

    What I notice about this election article is the politics. No one from the Liberal Party or Govt is quoted at any point. Instead, the frame of the piece is "environmental experts" versus the NDP. There is one brief quote from NDP MLA Shane Simpson, but that's really about it in terms of replying to the criticism.

    That's generally consistent with the strategy that emerged in last Fall's federal election, spread the word that the NDP has betrayed the environment on the climate issue. It was a strategy that didn't do the Liberals any direct good, but at least in BC, at least around Vancouver, it did help to harm the NDP's potential, leading to a disappointing result for the party.

    This provincial election is probably the last go around for the Liberal/ENGO/academics carbon tax/Green Shift meme. With Michael Ignatieff repudiating the idea, it's days are numbered. Next election, there will be a new strategy in place.

    And this election is also likely the last time one will hear of opposition to the PMH1 project, which the NDP was urged to oppose by the same supposedly environmental interests as were demanding the party stand up for Premier Campbell's carbon tax, the same environmental interests who weren't at all opposed to the Hwy 99 project because that serves properties in Whistler, where the donors and their guests like to enjoy supernatural BC at its very best.

    The strategy was always electoral, urging the NDP support an unpopular Liberal policy, the tax, and oppose a popular one, expanding the highway and freeway system. That's just not a coincidence.

    Some people tend to forget that ENGOs, especially those with six million dollar budgets and payrolls to match, are spokespersons for the the well-to-do. It's not minimum wage workers, or even middle income families that are handing over the donations in the thousands. It's upper level professionals, business executives, entreprenuers and the like. These people may have genuine environmental and outdoor interests, but they also have other interests, financial interests.

    It's not hard to imagine a scenario where ENGOs who are harshly critical of the NDP's axe the tax stance are funded by people who businesses stand to benefit from the re-election of the Liberals. Private hydro companies and companies that supply them with equipment are just one obvious example.

    No one is reporting on any of this. The assumption is that the public is too naive, too much in the thrall of various big name enviro-personalities to question where the money's coming from for all those slick websites purporting to be just one more group of earnest, concerned citizens who are so worried about climate change that the only thing they could do was start a group and a website and use it to skewer Jack Layton and Carole James.

  • rac

    2 years ago

    Fix the Tax

    There is far less aversion to taxes at least in the US when the revenues are tied to solutions. In the last election, several tax for transit initiatives passed.

    The best option for here is what the Metro Vancouver mayors are fighting for. Use the carbon tax revenue from Metro Vancouver to fund transit in Metro Vancouver so people have an option to drive and pay the tax or use transit and not pay the tax.

    http://everyoneforever.org/blogger/2008/12/provide-solutions-and-avoid-gas-tax.html

    It is too bad the the NDP chose to make Axe the Tax the centre of their campaign. The big news around North America will be whether or not a party that supports the tax gets elected or not. This has made it impossible for many of us to vote for the NDP. I likely will just stay at home for the first election in years unless they show the common sense to fix the tax.

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    Rod

    There was no conspiracy. Don't forget that Jack Layton and Carole James, and her team, are not on the same page when it comes to the environment. NDP National is supportive of the positions held by Suzuki and the Pembina Institute, even though these positions severely criticize the BC NDP.

    "Jack Layton and the New Democrats will:

    Implement Jack Layton's legislation to achieve deep, science-based reductions of climate pollution in the post 2012 period. The Climate Change Accountability Act, proposed by the New Democrats and adopted by Parliament on June 4, 2008, is based on the Case for Deep Reductions report by the Pembina Institute, the David Suzuki Foundation"

    http://www.ndp.ca/platform/environment/aplanthatwillwork

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Good Shot, "realistic"man!

    realisticman
    There was no conspiracy. Don't forget that Jack Layton and Carole James, and her team, are not on the same page when it comes to the environment.

    That's pretty good, you've got a link and everything. But it's not the case at all. Jack Layton and Carole James support a cap and trade system rather than a carbon tax, similar to the position taken by Barack Obama. The report you link to makes it clear that it's Pembina and Suzuki who have been shifting positions for partisan reasons. That's part of their deal with the Liberals.

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Richard: That's exactly what Bill Tieleman said

    rac
    It is too bad the the NDP chose to make Axe the Tax the centre of their campaign. The big news around North America will be whether or not a party that supports the tax gets elected or not. This has made it impossible for many of us to vote for the NDP. I likely will just stay at home for the first election in years unless they show the common sense to fix the tax.

    Bill Tieleman stated in a column a few days ago that there has been pressure, heavy pressure, placed on Canadian environmental NGOs to back the carbon tax in B.C. from big trusts and foundations in the U.S. that provide funds for ENGOs, including those here in Canada which have joined you in saying that NDP cannot be trusted on climate change.

    Whenever a person expresses themselves politically by saying it's impossible for them and people like them to vote for a certain party, it's usually a matter of religion, sometimes secular religion. Putting excessive and uncritical faith in people Gary Holman rightly called "self-appointed enviro-gods" can easily be abused so that people are ruthlessly manipulated.

  • secret cove

    2 years ago

    @ Jodie Emery/Green party

    Looks like you were wrong Jodie Emery!

    I listened to the CKNW audio vault and on 24th of april 1pm to 2pm on the Christie Clark show,Jodie Emery you said the following things.

    "Raising minimum wages will cause job losses,we believe in tax shifting"

    A paramedic called and asked about getting a decent contract,Jodie Emery you responded.

    "Hard times are coming,we all need to sacrifice,these wages are too high,we can`t throw money at every problem,goverment doesn`t have an endless supply"

    Christie Clark asked you Jodie Emery who had a better enviromental plan,the Liberals or the NDP,you answered

    "I think the liberals might"

    And you never mentioned anything about the Greens enviromental platform.

    Check the cknw audio vault friday april 24th 1pm to 2pm--

    http://www.cknw.com/other/audiovault.html

    You can knit pick with Campbellwearsatutu Jodie Emery,but he was right,you are wrong,I just finished listening to the segment and.

    From what I heard you said your against raising minimum wages,your against giving a decent contract to striking Paramedics,and you praised the bc liberal enviromental platform without saying ONE WORD ABOUT THE GREEN ENVIROMENTAL PLATFORM.

    So if you praised the bc liberals enviromental plan then you are in fact IN FAVOUR OF FISH FARMS,IN FAVOUR OF OFF SHORE OIL N GAS,IN FAVOUR OF GATEWAY,IN FAVOUR OF GAS FLARING,IN FAVOUR OF COAL BED METHANE,IN FAVOUR OF PIPELINES-You can`t have it both ways.

    And maybe you weren`t in your right mind on the christie clark show,I suggest you listen to the entire segment and clarify your position,clarify your statements.

    Clarify what you mean about paramedics having to make sacrifices,clarify what you mean with saying "raising minimum wage will cause job losses"

    Yoy don`t like what Campbellwearsatutu said then go back on the radio and tell christie clark what you really meant!And tell the world you believe the fraser institute studies!
    HYPOCRIT--DOUBLE SPEAK POLITICIAN-OR PERHAPS OVER MEDICATED-Which one is it Jodie Emery?

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    Rod

    "Pembina and Suzuki who have been shifting positions for partisan reasons."

    If you think it's for partisan purposes then obviously not even The Suzuki Foundation can change your mind. You've already had your reply.

    "Ian Hanington says:
    04/16/2009, 10:21:28
    “It's difficult, especially during an election, for many people to see beyond the left-right, black-and white-arguments. But the David Suzuki Foundation has championed a carbon tax for more than 10 years now. The Liberals have implemented one. The NDP opposes it. We are in favour of the policy, but we have also been highly critical of other Liberal policies, such as those regarding aquaculture, for example. Because we support one policy, a policy that is also supported by most of the world's environmentalists and economists, doesn't mean we support all of the party's platform and policies. And, in fact, we believe the carbon tax needs to be strengthened."

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blog/DSF1_04150901.asp

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    "realistic"man: I didn't know you were an environmentalist!

    realisticman
    If you think it's for partisan purposes then obviously not even The Suzuki Foundation can change your mind. You've already had your reply.

    "Ian Hanington says:
    04/16/2009, 10:21:28
    “It's difficult, especially during an election, for many people to see beyond the left-right, black-and white-arguments. ...

    I didn't know, "realistic"man, that you were an environmentalist. When did this start?

    I like your phrase "not even the David Suzuki Foundation". It's amusing to think that the greatest authority on the subject is the one which has over the past few years tied itself most closely and most conspicuously to your party.

    As for Hannington, I haven't heard of him, I assume he's one of the many well-paid staff on the Suzuki Foundation's six million dollar a year establishment, and as facile, perfunctory denials go this one is particularly threadbare. In fact, it's a joke. Like you, he thinks people are real stupid, so he starts out bemoaning how hard it is for some people to get beyond the "left-right, black-and white" stereotypes. He then goes into his own black and white stereotypes on carbon taxes without mentioning cap and trade and without mentioning the pressure that Canadian ENGOs have received from American funders to make a stand on this carbon tax.

    Why can't he just level with us and tell us the inside story???

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    Rod

    He replied to you on the Suzuki site.

    "Rod Smelser says:
    04/15/2009, 23:35:41

    The tone of this message stands in marked contrast to the explicit "Vote Liberal" demands featured in the press release with the Pembina Inst and in the Vancouver Sun op-ed piece. Is this an attempt to sound non-partisan?

    Nina Kessler replies:
    3 days ago, 13:04:19
    “I agree. I have been deeply disappointed by the reports in the papers that the Suzuki Foundation has been pressing for the Liberal's program even though the tax collected goes to general revenues and does nothing to encourage green industry.

    Ian Hanington says:
    04/16/2009, 10:21:28
    “It's difficult, especially during an election, for many people to see beyond the left-right,'

    "Ian Hanington is a communications specialist for the David Suzuki Foundation. In that position, he is able to apply many of the skills he gained as a writer and editor, both freelance and staff. He has worked as a researcher, news reporter, opinion-column writer, critic, and editor for a variety of newspapers and magazines in B.C., from small-town community papers to Canada's largest alternative weekly. During his 11 years at the Georgia Straight , he worked his way from editorial assistant to assistant editor, managing editor, and finally editor."

    Rod, I became concerned about the environment over 30 years ago when reading about water pollution.

    Perhaps you are too young to remember when Nixon went to China. It was revolutionary. For a republican president to be the first US president to go to China and particularly at that time. He hadn't been bought off by opposition partisans. He felt that it was the right thing to do. The BC Liberal party probably feels the same way vis-a-vis the environment.

    By the way, I don't belong to any party and have voted for many.

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Campbell as Nixon, eh?

    Does this mean there will soon be an Oliver Stone movie? Who will play Campbell? What about James Gandolfino?

  • rac

    2 years ago

    Made in BC Solution

    Rod

    Myself and many other people in BC feel the same way about the disastrous "Axe the Tax" campaign. We are not being manipulated by outside interests.

    As well, these " outside interests tend to be pushing the "revenue neutral" carbon tax, which is just a really bad idea. As I said, the revenue at least in Metro Vancouver, should go to transit.

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    crh

    Your car will come:

    http://www.byd.com/

    http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/04/byd-electric-car-e6-crossover-mpv.php

    Warren Buffett, he of multi-billion fame, has invested $230 million in BYD.

    The battery technology will be Chinese. Same scientists that constantly improve your cell-phone battery. The base is lithium; plenty in Tibet.

    Power: Electricity. In BC, hydro dams and run-of-river, natural gas and maybe, on day, nuclear.

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Made for Whom in BC?

    rac
    As I said, the revenue at least in Metro Vancouver, should go to transit.

    In BC its been policy for many years to use points on the gas tax to subsidize public transit. The reason this is done is simple, to avoid putting the cost of those subsidies onto the property tax. The rest of the story lines that get advanced for this policy choice are really just advertising material.

    The demand for a revenue neutral tax really comes from American policy advocates who wanted to price carbon, but wanted to somehow steer clear of the never ending opposition their to high gas taxes. Canadian taxpayers are only slightly less averse to European style gas taxes.

  • rac

    2 years ago

    I Know

    Rod

    "The demand for a revenue neutral tax really comes from American policy advocates who wanted to price carbon, but wanted to somehow steer clear of the never ending opposition their to high gas taxes. Canadian taxpayers are only slightly less averse to European style gas taxes."

    The problem is that they are wrong. The mistake was to make the tax "revenue neutral". It would gain more acceptance if the revenue is given transit. People want solutions not punishment. Voters in the States often approve higher taxes specifically for transit improvements.

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    Rod

    You might be familiar with Leo Panitch.
    Leo Panitch is a Distinguished Research Professor, renowned political economist, Marxist theorist and editor of the Socialist Register and a professor at York University in Toronto.

    The fact is the Gordon Campbell Liberals have done the right thing with this tax and that is why so many are against the NDP's opposition to it.

    Enviros and Socialists say it is the right thing.

    Writing in Foreign Affairs next month he suggests, as I have, that trading carbon credits, Chicago being the only current North American trader, would open this up to the same problems we have seen in the financial sector. The BC Carbon Tax keeps the whole thing here in British Columbia.

    " ...The financial crisis today also exposes irrationalities in realms beyond finance. One example is U.S. President Barack Obama’s call for trading in carbon credits as a solution to the climate crisis. In that supposedly progressive proposal, corporations that meet emissions standards sell credits to others that fail to meet their own targets. The Kyoto Protocol called for a similar system swapped across states. Fatefully however, both plans depend on the same volatile derivatives markets that are inherently open to manipulation and credit crashes. Marx would insist that, to find solutions to global problems such as climate change, we need to break with the logic of capitalist markets rather than use state institutions to reinforce them. ..."

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4856

  • bcvoter11

    2 years ago

    NDP Carbon Tax Hypocrisy

    You know, for all of the NDP's pious high horse rants, they do seem to be backtracking on so many different issues:

    http://votesmartbc.com/?q=spotlight

    Carole James previously on the Carbon Tax:

    I can’t promise you that, if I were premier, reducing greenhouse gases won’t cost you. It will."
    – Carole James, Sun, Feb. 28/07

    Carole James now:

    "During a time when record high gas prices and a slowing economy are seriously impacting businesses and average people, the last thing British Columbians needed was another tax..."

    She'll say anything for an election we guess.

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Never read anything he's written and don't intend to

    realisticman
    You might be familiar with Leo Panitch.
    Leo Panitch is a Distinguished Research Professor, renowned political economist, Marxist theorist and editor of the Socialist Register and a professor at York University in Toronto.

    I have a feeling I may have heard that name somewhere before, it seems to ring a very small bell, but I have never read anything he's written and don't intend to. Have you read any of his material?

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Say hello to Phil, bcvoter11

    bcvoter11

    http://votesmartbc.com/?q=spotlight

    BTW, ... is there any special significance to the number 11

  • Frank

    2 years ago

    rac

    The gas taxes already go to transit. If the carbon tax did the same then it wouldn't be a "new idea". It would just be the same as the gas taxes in every way.

    What the carbon tax does however is reduce income tax in favour of a consumption tax, a long-time dream of people like the Fraser Institute and other Friedman types.

    Ergo, when people say the carbon tax should be fixed by putting the money into transit instead of tax cuts they are in fact asking for the tax to be abolished and replaced with a higher gas tax.

    The carbon tax is ideological.

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    Eco Socialism

    If ever the BC NDP wanted a Canadian socialist that has written extensively on 'progressive' environment issues this is their man and he does NOT support cap-&-trade.

    "How can class and environmental politics be brought together? What are the shortcomings Green parties and “green commerce”? What are viable Eco-Socialist strategies, and how can they marry democracy with the planning needed to come to terms with nature?"

    He was a member of the Movement for an Independent and Socialist Canada, 1973-1975, the Ottawa Committee for Labour Action, 1975-1984, the Canadian Political Science Association, the Committee of Socialist Studies, the Marxist Institute and the Royal Society of Canada. He is currently a supporter of the Socialist Project.

    "http://www.fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/286"

  • freebear

    2 years ago

    "The carbon tax is ideological."

    And has been put forward by an Idiot!

  • freebear

    2 years ago

    Ooops!

    I should have said dangerous Idiot!

  • Bobb999

    2 years ago

    NDP foolishly alienates green-minded voters again

    At their peril the NDP raises the ire of environmentalists once more, this time over CO2.

    Angry green-minded voters who otherwise might vote NDP may go to the Greens in numbers large enough to help deny the NDP a victory.

    Many Green minded folk are still smarting from the Glen Clark years. Clark was widely viewed at the time as a having stuck a knife in the back of the environmental movement and the green wing of his own party. Not one to mince words, Clark declared environmentalists "enemies of BC", no less!

    After successfully scheming, Machiavelli-like, to oust Mike Harcourt as NDP leader, BC watched as Clark systematically rolled back many of the green policies, initiatives, and advances made by Harcourt's NDP gov't. Anger and a sense of betrayal were common feelings at the time.

    Beyond the financial scandals associated with Clark, I believe the NDP's betrayal of the environmental movement drove away many green-minded voters, and helped reduce the NDP, in the next election, to less-than-a-rump, to a two seat McPhail/Kwan opposition.

    Ms. James adds insult to injury by misrepresenting the carbon tax as just a "gas tax". A captive of crass, short-sighted political calculations on this issue, she neglects to own up to the fact that taxing carbon is viewed by the vast majority of environmentalists and green economists as the most effective and fastest way to lower CO2 emissions - not because it "punishes" drivers, but because the tax allows alternative, cleaner forms of energy to become competitively priced. By opposing a carbon tax, the NDP puts a huge obstacle in the way of clean energy development and adoption, greatly slowing transformation to a new, less carbon-based economy.

    The NDP would do well to look back at BC election history, and realize that alienating green-minded voters is perilous.
    I fear they won't figure this out till it's too late, after they've lost another election.

  • Frank

    2 years ago

    Bobb999

    You may as well demand that the NDP stop turning its back on business and start supporting a lower minimum wage.

    If the carbon tax were exactly the same as the current gas taxes it wouldn't be great but it would actually be better than this.

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    We need to do all we can?

    For our environment and one thing we can do right now is not dump 450,000 tonnes of carbon by holding a sporting a event that is an environmental hazard as it dumbs 450,000 tonnes of carbon. Its the same Government into creating a deregulation nightmare for our environment who loves the environment so much it put in a carbon tax when it didn't need to? Apparently you don't need to eat in this province as other life's necessities like food as those who can least afford it are forced to starve of malnutrition a slow a horrible death for anyone, much less a child. Its an everyday norm here in BC.

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    Say No To Global Warming

    AND STOP 450,000 tonnes of CARBON FROM POLLUTING THE PLANET as it equal to what its takes to run some countires. And how can Green justify that??? Its a carbon nightmare about to happen. Stop it before it doses it damage to our environment as we know how important it is. Right Campbell??? Right Greenie???

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    Hypocrites rule the environment?

    Well if you can't count on Greenie to do the right thing? Like not dump 450,000 tonnes of carbon into environment along deregulation nightmare of a government than who can you count???? Green supporters in this province are more like the boggie man, as they are onboard a environmential disaster about to happen, the 2010 OLYMPICS.

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    And Frank

    Maybe Liberals could ensure costs for business stay competitive so the people who do the work make a working wage. Instead of all their money going on ridiculous high rents as one business after another goes down. And all who does this province put the brunt of the load on the guy who can lease afford. As Frank's on board of people who work hard but don't get paid for their work. Thats no permitted in this province as to busy making zillions on over priced real estate that is an nightmare for everyone.....Small business especially also the highest taxes in the land...along with the highest rents...

  • Rod Smelser

    2 years ago

    Bob999 - Glen Clark is the issue, is it?

    Bobb999
    Many Green minded folk are still smarting from the Glen Clark years. Clark was widely viewed at the time as a having stuck a knife in the back of the environmental movement and the green wing of his own party. Not one to mince words, Clark declared environmentalists "enemies of BC", no less!

    ... BC watched as Clark systematically rolled back many of the green policies, initiatives, and advances made by Harcourt's NDP gov't.

    Can you name one single environmental measure or policy of the Harcourt NDP Govt that Clark terminated?

    Ms. James adds insult to injury by misrepresenting the carbon tax as just a "gas tax". A captive of crass, short-sighted political calculations on this issue, she neglects to own up to the fact that taxing carbon is viewed by the vast majority of environmentalists and green economists as the most effective and fastest way to lower CO2 emissions - not because it "punishes" drivers, but because the tax allows alternative, cleaner forms of energy to become competitively priced. By opposing a carbon tax, the NDP puts a huge obstacle in the way of clean energy development and adoption, greatly slowing transformation to a new, less carbon-based economy.

    This analysis is absolutely false and you know it. A cap and trade system of the type prefered by Jack Layton and Carole James, and by President Barack Obama, will also put a price on carbon and therefore make alternatives relatively more affordable than they are now. You're simply making things up, but then you already know that.

  • G West

    2 years ago

    But Bobb999

    How come the Campbell Tax hasn't reduced gas consumption?

    I'll tell you why. Because demand for gas is inelastic - the economic premise behind the enviros commitment to the Campbell Tax is fallacious.

    The only way to overcome the inelasticity of demand is to drive the price of gas - instantly - to the point where no one except the wealthy can afford it.

    Without some kind of alternative (and Campbell's alternative looks to me like something from the Road Builders of BC - you remember the Gateway thing I suppose?) such a tax would be greeted with - well, use your imagination.

    We live in the real world, not a pretend existence in a condo high above False Creek.

    The environmentalists (so-called) who ignore Campbell's record, the utter uselessness of the Campbell Tax and his serial disregard for anyone who doesn't make at least 100G/annum, is bizarre.

    But, don't worry, if campbell is re-elected, you can be sure someone will remind you of it.

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    Clark's not running Bobbie?

    Carol James is. So about that environment thing what about 450,000 tonnes of carbon dumped into the environment while BC's poor face Genocide???? Is it a winning ticket in the next election??? Or how we talk about things that have no importance like who was in office 20 years ago?

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    And the cap and trade

    And the environment should be a combined effort from all levels of government along with their communities with a blueprint for change. Deregulation by Campbell government is a guarantee for further pollution as big business gets off the hook.
    With the biggest tax breaks out their while the poor pick up the slack as they are forced to live in the dark and go cold and hungry. While those that pollute contintue to do so without fear as they got the bucks and they got the cars to speed with no doubt.
    I predict the Olympics is going to be the biggest failure or better yet a environmental success as people forego the 2010 Olympics as its just some stupid sporting event. As they get their priorities right and stay home and catch the environmential disaster on TV.

  • morechatter

    2 years ago

    Oh I forgot Its Media to blame

    As it was said that 70% of the carbon waste was largely do to Media from around the world along with the Athletes who all head towards BC 2010 Olympics to make this event another major, major disaster when its comes to global warming.

  • dave49

    2 years ago

    True Cost of the Liberals’ Carbon Neutrality targets?

    The Liberals are getting a lot of great press mileage from their carbon tax. This is a clever policy and I’m sure the Libs were well aware of the rural-urban conflicts it would raise. In all the fuss about the Liberals’ carbon tax versus the NDPs’ proposals for an alternative who is asking about the true cost of the Liberals carbon neutrality targets?

    In concert with the escalating carbon tax, there are targets for “government-funded” services to be carbon neutral by 2010 and a voluntary program for communities and local governments to do so by 2012. Over 100 BC communities signed on to the Climate Action Charter.

    The carbon tax was announced almost two years ago, yet little has happened to help achieve those carbon neutrality goals. Two small programs the Liberals funded to help education & health care districts and local governments tackle comprehensive energy audits and energy efficiency upgrades shut down in April 2008 when funding was not renewed. Nothing replaced them. Apparently, the government has been working through a lengthy process of qualifying engineering and consulting firms for GHG inventory and energy retrofit work. My contacts in that industry tell me the whole ‘sustainability industry’ is on hold, waiting for those next steps, policies and incentives to get on with the assessment, planning and implementation of projects to achieve ‘carbon neutrality’. This all takes time and an energy audit and comprehensive energy retrofit make take from a year and a half to three years.

    So, it would appear there will have to be significant purchases of GHG offsets to meet carbon neutrality goals, especially for education and health care. At the Federation of BC Municipalities annual conference last year, the Liberals threw out the carrot of committing to pay municipalities’ carbon tax to help ease the transition. However, what about offsets? Unless the offsets are waived by the Liberal government, or extra money is provided in the budgets of government-funded services, these offset charges will effectively be budget cuts.

    The follow-up question is what will the money in the offsetting fund be used for? One suggestion I heard last year was a fund to finance green energy development. That ought to go over like a lead balloon, environmental taxes paid by education and health care lining the pockets of Gordon Campbell’s friends in the private, run-of-river power sector.

  • freebear

    2 years ago

    Can't afford the Climate Charter

    I know one municipality that has decided , or is thinking to, not sign on to the Climate Charter because they can't afford the commitment!

    At the same time they are part of a region that have asked a citizens working group to come up with a sutstainability stratey for an entire valley (Comox).

    Soon the green wash will fall like wool from our eyes!

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.