fbpx
Connect with us

Opinion

Alberta’s Carbon-Tax Repeal Already Bearing Fruits

Alberta’s repeal is in line with wanting both economic prosperity and environmental protection: without the former, we cannot have the latter.

mm

Published

on

Utopian legislators in the United States often look with rose-tinted glasses upon the Canadian approach to everything, from higher education and medical care to global warming and international affairs. Since Canadians are the ones who live with such policies, they are more inclined to recognize their own mistakes and to reverse the course, as exhibited by Alberta’s carbon tax.

The repeal of the carbon tax in Alberta has had one indisputable beneficiary: Albertans. Alberta’s Premier introduced the repeal bill in May as one of his first actions in office, arguing the tax imposed on families an undue burden with no significant environmental benefit.

In theory, the carbon-pricing scheme was supposed to internalize externalities, decrease fossil-fuel consumption, and incentivize alternative energy. In practice, over the course of a single year, it costindividuals $286 and couples $388, on average. Couples with two children paid $508.

And these stiff prices did not account for indirect burdens arising through more expensive groceries further inflated by higher transportation costs to the Prairie province. 

Justin Trudeau, Andrew Scheer and Yves-François Blanchet

As well, the carbon tax, which went into effect in 2017, set back Alberta businesses by $1.4 billion per year, a downer for investment and job growth.

Celebration under Threat from Ottawa

The repeal, however, may not be the final word on the matter. Ottawa still plans to impose a carbon tax on Alberta on January 1, 2020—in the same way the capital has done with Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and New Brunswick. In these four provinces, in 2019, the federal carbon tax started at $20 per tonne of carbon emitted. This means an additional 4.4 cents per litre of gas, which is scheduled to increase annually until it reaches 11 cents per litre in 2022, or $50 per tonne.

The Albertan government has vowed to challenge the federal imposition in court when the time comes, even though Ontario and Saskatchewan had previously failed in that endeavor.  

study by the Taxpayer Federation shows Canadians pay on average 34 per cent of the pump price in taxes. Another lesser-known fact is that they pay sales tax on the excise and carbon taxes when buying gasoline. This “tax on tax” adds an extra 3.4 cents per litre making the combined total tax burden range from around 34 cents per litre in Manitoba to almost 55 cents per litre in Quebec.

Aussies Have Learned Their Lesson

Australian elected officials acknowledged the unaffordability of the misguided clean-energy initiatives when they killed their own carbon tax in 2014. Repealing it cut down over 1,000 pages of red tape, retail energy costs by 9 per cent, average household costs by $500 per year, and business compliance costs by tens of millions. Further, the repeal boosted the country’s economic growth and international competitiveness.

The major problem with carbon-tax schemes is that they fail to deliver. Allegedly, the motive is not to increase fiscal revenue but to make pollution substantially costlier than emissions-saving sources and technologies. However, governments end up raking in billions while making life harder for families and businesses, with miniscule or nonexistent environmental benefits. 

In Australia, the carbon tax decreased carbon emissions by only 1.4 per cent in the second year while increasing energy prices by 10 per cent for the average family. The hike was even more significant for small and medium-sized businesses, since carbon costs and other so-called green schemes constituted up to one third of their energy bills.

Cost-Benefit Analysis versus Lofty Rhetoric

Proponents might be well intentioned, but Australians, as well as Albertans, have paid the price directly for what they saw as an insufficient gain. Alberta’s repeal is in line with wanting both economic prosperity and environmental protection: without the former, we cannot have the latter.

The continued push to burden voters in Australia led to a surprise loss for the Labor Party down under. Daniel Wild, director of economics at the Melbourne-based Institute of Public Affairs, opined in the election leadup that “the interests of the out-of-touch elite ha[d] taken precedent,” as they have across Canada.

Rather than mandating changes and taxing constituents, legislators would be better off focusing on how to provide a business-friendly jurisdiction. Innovation would then thrive as we are transitioning to a more environmentally-friendly economy.

The Stone Age didn’t end because mankind ran out of stones; we simply found better and cheaper substitutes. Likewise, fossil fuels will predominate until they are no longer economically advantageous.

Most inhabitants of this world, especially those in poor countries, still rely on coal and petroleum to power their homes, hospitals, and schools. Severe impediments to these energy sources, without readily available alternatives, are heartless and inefficient—akin to asking the poor to remain poor.

A scientific paper in Nature: Climate Change notes China, India, Germany, and the United States have all been substituting coal with natural gas in power plants. This transition, which can take place without stiff intervention, has enabled lower carbon emissions with minimal, if any, penalties on families and businesses.

If more efficient green-energy sources are available at competitive prices, people will prefer them. The solution is not in making fossil fuels more expensive, or in dictating policies from Ottawa, but in rendering clean energy cheaper. Fergus Hodgson

Fergus Hodgson is a Research Associate with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

This article was republisher from www.fcpp.org

Continue Reading
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Daniel

    October 29, 2019 at 9:53 pm

    See now that’s what pisses me right off when people start talking about paying tax on tax ! Where the hell does the law stand when it is against the law to do exactly that charge tax on tax I think we have to start putting these policy makers right where they belong ! In jail !!! The funny thing is how things have taken on new names & discriptions to fit the political greed ( global warming ) hell when I was in school it was taught to us as evolution & I quote the world is evolving & we have to evolve with it . Truth be known if it wasn’t for ” global warming the earth would still be covered in ICE you idiots ! So pull your heads out of your asses and smell the flowers all the money in the world will not change what is going to happen except the rich get richer & the poor get poorer !

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Opinion

McCAFFREY: Don’t let Calgary ruin the region

Central planning doesn’t work and the current government should reverse this mistake as soon as possible by abolishing the Calgary Metropolitan Region Board and allowing municipalities to return to cooperating on a voluntary basis.

Published

on

The Calgary Metropolitan Region Board (CMRB) was created in 2015 by the NDP government to control planning and development for the entirety of the Calgary region. 

Since then, this unelected body has been working on creating a new growth plan for the region that contains some of the most radical changes to development and planning rules ever proposed in Alberta.

With the enactment of this growth plan, the CMRB is set to become what will effectively be a fourth level of government for citizens of the Calgary region and will allow Calgary to export its bad policies across all the other municipalities of the region.

Yet barely anyone in the Calgary region has even heard of the board.

How is it possible a new level of government could be introduced without anyone noticing?

Well, in part, that’s thanks to a very deliberate effort by the former NDP government, and the board itself, to keep the powers and potential wide-ranging influence of the board as below the radar as possible for as long as possible.

The board, at least according to its designers, is simply meant to help manage planning and development issues, in order to help manage the significant population growth that the Calgary region is expected to experience in the coming decades.

Make no mistake about it, though, the CMRB and its growth plan do much more than this.

The entire growth plan is based on the philosophy that a small group of people, in this case, bureaucrats and city planners—particularly in Calgary—can do a better job planning and managing population and employment growth than the free market can.

The central planners believe the challenges of growth are better addressed by forcing the municipalities in the Calgary region to cooperate rather than compete to provide these services and facilities.

Rather than merely permitting cooperation between municipalities as claimed, however, the creation of the CMRB and the implementation of the growth plan actually forces Calgary and the surrounding municipalities to cooperate on many issues, even when this goes against the wishes of the municipalities and their residents.

Requiring municipalities to cooperate even if they believe it’s against their and their residents’ interests to do so is bound to lead to less fair and less equitable outcomes for the whole of the Calgary region.

Even worse, the forced co-operation doesn’t go both ways.

Despite claims the board is based on cooperation, the 10-member municipalities are being forced to participate in the organization, they cannot leave, and the voting system of the board effectively gives a veto to the Calgary on every issue.

In effect, this puts Calgary politicians and bureaucrats in charge of planning and development for the entire region, as without Calgary’s approval, no plan or development can go ahead.

This is no accident, the board was very deliberately created to do exactly this.

For years, Calgary has pursued bad public policies that have increased rules, regulations, red tape, and taxes on businesses and residents of Calgary.

The situation has become so dire that now many businesses and residents are leaving Calgary entirely and setting up their operations and family lives outside of the city in one of the many surrounding municipalities, where regulations and taxes are lighter.

Essentially, Calgary has become noncompetitive with other municipalities in the region, but planners in Calgary don’t see this as a problem, rather they see it as an opportunity.

But Calgary didn’t want to fix the problem by cutting red tape, getting taxes and spending under control, and working to become competitive again.

Rather, the city lobbied the provincial government to help them out by giving Calgary the power to impose the same high levels of regulations across the entire region—essentially killing off the competition.

It was perhaps not surprising that the former NDP government was willing to give Calgary this power, as the NDP government do not understand or believe in the benefits of free market competition to begin with.

But the current Alberta government has repeatedly stated its core focus is on reducing red tape and unleashing Alberta’s economy. They have put significant effort into achieving this goal in many other policy areas.

Yet, when it comes to regional planning they have, so far at least, permitted the exact opposite to continue.

Rather than reducing red tape and regulation to get the Calgary region’s economy going, in almost every policy area the growth plan goes in completely the other direction and essentially centralizes planning decisions for the entire region.

All types of development—single family houses, row houses, apartments, shopping malls, retail stores, manufacturing, warehouses, agricultural services, and more—will now have to be approved not only by the local municipality but also by an unelected board dominated by Calgary.

Thrown out the window is any concept of the free market, individual choice, property rights, competition and, frankly, basic economics.

This dramatic centralization will impose a series of significant direct and indirect costs on the economy of the Calgary region, none of which are considered by the CMRB in its growth plan.

These costs include the millions of dollars spent creating and operating what is effectively a fourth level of government, the significant costs to Calgary businesses, residents, and the economy as a result of this extra bureaucracy, the dramatic costs that would be incurred by projects being reduced, relocated, or cancelled under the growth plan, as well as indirect and intangible costs.

The plan also runs roughshod over local democracy in the member municipalities, and over the property rights of the residents of those municipalities.

What, exactly, is the point of electing a local council in your district or town, if planning and development rules—until now one of the most important tasks of a local government—will now be controlled centrally by an unelected board?

Worse yet, this move from voluntary cooperation to forced cooperation will not solve the very problems the CMRB and the growth plan were designed to fix.

The end result of a growth plan that replaces voluntary cooperation and competition with forced collaboration will be higher taxes and higher fees, more regulation and red tape, increased housing and infrastructure costs, less efficient delivery of utilities and services, and worse environmental outcomes for the entire region.

There are far better ways to accommodate future population growth in the Calgary region than via a top-down, centrally controlled regional growth plan that violates the values that made Alberta what it is today: individual freedom, personal choice, fiscal responsibility, property rights, and a free market built on competition rather than government diktat.

The proposed growth plan would block billions of dollars of investment, redirect billions more out of the Calgary region, and cost tens of thousands of jobs. This is the exact opposite of what the Calgary region needs right now.

The CMRB, and the requirement for them to create a growth plan to control development in the region, were an ideological creation of the former provincial government, based on the idea that top-down central planning is the best way to run an economy.

Central planning doesn’t work and the current government should reverse this mistake as soon as possible by abolishing the CMRB and allowing municipalities to return to cooperating on a voluntary basis.

Peter McCaffrey is the President of the Alberta Institute, an independent, libertarian-minded, public policy think tank that aims to advance personal freedom and choice in Alberta.

The Alberta Institute has prepared an academic research paper outlining the history of regional planning in the Calgary Region, and looking at the implications of the Calgary Metropolitan Region Board on jobs, investment and democracy for Alberta.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Krahnicle’s Cartoon: September 17, 2021

mm

Published

on

Continue Reading

Opinion

MORGAN: It’s time for Kenney to resign

“I say this regretfully, but it’s time for Jason Kenney to resign as premier of Alberta and as the leader of the United Conservative Party. I wish things had ended differently.”

mm

Published

on

Premier Jason Kenney gambled and lost.

His move to declare Alberta as being permanently open for business was a hail-Mary pass for a beleaguered government and it has failed in the worst possible way.

Alberta is in the midst of a health care crisis, deaths are on the rise and we are entering a new period of mandatory vaccine passports, lockdowns, and other restrictions.

I say this regretfully, but it’s time for Jason Kenney to resign as premier of Alberta and as the leader of the United Conservative Party.

I had the highest of hopes for Kenney. I was enthusiastic as he won multiple leadership races and merged the previously intransigent Wildrose and Progressive Conservative parties. I was thrilled when Rachel Notley’s NDP government was trounced in the general election. I thought we’d be looking forward to some steady, competent, conservative governance for at least a couple of election cycles.

I was wrong. Boy, was I ever wrong.

Love him or hate him, Jason Kenney is undeniably one of the brightest and hardest working politicians in Canada. He worked his way from advocacy into elected office and then became a respected cabinet minister in a number of portfolios. It appears Kenney met his match when it comes to the party and provincial leadership. He has managed to alienate both the left and the right within the province and I don’t see how he can recover from this.

Kenney’s leadership woes were already appearing well before the COVID-19 pandemic appeared on the scene. The shotgun marriage of the Wildrose Party and the Progressive Conservatives was showing cracks as caucus infighting began to smolder. The pandemic crisis exacerbated the issue and Kenney is now heading up a deeply divided caucus with multiple members having been tossed out of the party or disciplined. This inability to manage his own caucus has shaken the confidence Albertans had in Kenney to manage the province.

The Kenney government has been noteworthy for setting high targets and then failing to move toward them. The Fair Deal panel appeared to be an act of deferral, rather than an exercise to build a stronger, more independent province.

Kenney refused to take strong actions against Ottawa despite the open hostility shown to Alberta by the Trudeau government. This has fed the theory Kenney is using Alberta as a stepping stone towards pursuing a federal run. We can safely say Kenney’s federal career is finished at this point.

It seems that everything Kenney has touches turns to scheiße. The energy “war room” has turned into a running joke and with long and constant delays on its launch. The Allen Report examining groups that attack Alberta’s energy sector has been a waste of time. Energy producers seeking a sense of confidence in Alberta have been left disappointed.

In picking a battle with Alberta’s doctors and nurses, Kenney has drawn fire from all sides of the political spectrum. While there certainly is room to reexamine the agreements with health care providers, it has to be done carefully and with strong leadership. The UCP has appeared ham-handed and virtually leaderless on the issue.

The Kenney government has become election fodder used to hammer the O’Toole Conservatives on the federal front. The UCP looks so inept and unpopular that Trudeau is using it to attack O’Toole, and O’Toole hides from any association with Kenney.

Politicians are by nature self-interested beings. Caucus members within the UCP are surely weighing their options as the Kenney government continues to crash and burn in public opinion. With less than two years to go before the next provincial election comes, they know the window for getting rid of Kenney is closing quickly. The only hope the UCP has of winning the next election is to get a new leader and show some sign of new direction, and soon.

Rumblings from caucus are soon going to become a roar.

There are two options for the UCP right now. They can keep Kenney into the next election and most likely hand Rachel Notley a second NDP term, or they can get on with finding a new leader and reconnecting with Albertans. The UCP now is simply too wildly unpopular to regain the trust of the electorate under Kenney’s leadership.

I still respect Jason Kenney and appreciate what he did on the federal front, along with his efforts to unite conservatives in Alberta. I would like to see Kenney retain what dignity he can by resigning for the sake of Alberta and his party. It would hurt his pride, but it still would be a better end to a political career than being kicked out by his own caucus, or by the electorate in a general election. His “best summer ever” strategy failed and it’s time to face the music.

I wish things had ended differently.

Cory Morgan is the Alberta Political Columnist for the Western Standard and Host of the Cory Morgan Show

Continue Reading

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Share

Petition: No Media Bailouts

We the undersigned call on the Canadian government to immediately cease all payouts to media companies.

343 signatures

No Media Bailouts

The fourth estate is critical to a functioning democracy in holding the government to account. An objective media can't maintain editorial integrity when it accepts money from a government we expect it to be critical of.

We the undersigned call on the Canadian government to immediately cease all payouts to media companies.

**your signature**



The Western Standard will never accept government bailout money. By becoming a Western Standard member, you are supporting government bailout-free and proudly western media that is on your side. With your support, we can give Westerners a voice that doesn\'t need taxpayers money.

Share this with your friends:

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard New Media Corp.