Energy
A carbon tax by any other name
From Canadians for Affordable Energy
Written By Dan McTeague
It turns out that the story circulating last week from The Toronto Star that the Liberals were considering a “rebranding” of their Carbon Taxation program was true. On Wednesday the Liberals announced that the previously known “Climate Action Incentive Payment,” will now be referred to as the “Canada Carbon Rebate.” This was done “in an attempt to tackle what it calls confusion and misconceptions about the scheme.”
According to Liberal Minister Seamus O’Regan “If we can speak the language that people speak, because people say the words ‘carbon,’ they say the words, ‘rebate,’ right? And if we can speak that language, that’s important, so people understand what’s going on here.”
The Liberals seem to actually believe that the problem Canadians have with the carbon tax, and their growing support for Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives to “Axe the Tax,” has simply been a matter of Canadians not “understand[ing] what is going on.”
The implication, of course, is that Canadians aren’t really struggling to pay their bills, feed their families and heat their homes right now. That their lives haven’t gotten more expensive overall as the cost of fuel has risen steadily.
That they’re just confused by poor branding — probably some high-priced marketing firm’s fault, really — and that once Trudeau & Co. find the right words, people will finally be happy to pay the tax, and be grateful to get some of their money back, since doing so will — somehow — save the planet.
Which is ridiculous.
It’s worth pointing out that this isn’t even the first time Trudeau’s carbon tax has been rebranded. You might recall that prior to 2018, the scheme was referred to as “carbon pricing” or simply the “carbon tax.” If you look back at Hansard records — the records of Parliamentary debate — you can see that in October 2018, Liberal MPs began referring to the scheme as a ‘price on pollution.’ Of course, calling carbon dioxide, a gas on which all life on earth depends, “pollution” was an obvious attempt to justify taxing Canadians for it.
But no matter what they call the thing, they are determined not to let it go.
Recent polls have indicated that the carbon tax is losing support from Canadians. A Nanos poll showed nearly half of Canadians think the carbon tax is ineffective; another poll indicates most Canadians want it reduced or killed altogether.
So why are the Liberals clinging so desperately to this tax that Canadians don’t support? Going so far as to rebrand, reframe, recommunicate rather than scrap it?
I might start to sound like a broken record here, but the only way to understand the context of the carbon tax, the second carbon tax (the Clean Fuel Standard,) an emissions cap, electric vehicle mandates and on and on, is to recognize that they are all components of the insane Net-Zero-by-2050 scheme dreamed up by Justin Trudeau and his UN and World Economic Forum cronies.
A carbon tax is simply one of the pillars of their Net Zero Agenda which they contend will enable Canada to achieve this nebulous goal of Net Zero emissions by 2050.
Though apparently to achieve it, the tax will need to get progressively more punishing. On April 1 the carbon tax goes up another $15, to $80 per ton, and will continue to rise yearly until it hits $170 a ton in 2030. Canadians are already feeling the pinch and it is hard to imagine it getting worse. But Liberals aren’t concerned with the struggles of everyday people and that is the reality. This has become a communications issue to them, not an existential one.
As to the new name itself, the Trudeau Liberals love to pay lip service to their rebate scheme and claim that Canadians are getting back more than they pay. But as we well know even the Independent Parliamentary Budget Officer found that, contrary to what their talking point, a substantial majority of households are paying more in carbon taxes than they get back.
Their communications plan too is so unhinged that they are pitching the carbon tax as an affordability measure designed to help struggling Canadians. Of course this begs the question: If Canadians are getting back more than they pay in carbon taxes, why take the money in the first place?
The rubber is hitting the road and Canadians have had enough. No matter what it’s called, the carbon tax has made our lives worse.
That will continue to be true, no matter what they call it.
Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy
Alberta
Pierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada
From Pierre Poilievre
Photo by David Bloom / Postmedia file
From Energy Now
By Gary Mar
With the Trans Mountain Expansion online, we have new access to Pacific markets and Asia has responded, with China now a top buyer of Canadian crude.
The world is short on reliable energy and long on instability. Tankers edge through choke points like the Strait of Hormuz. Wars threaten pipelines and power grids. Markets flinch with every headline. As authoritarian regimes rattle sabres and weaponize supply chains, the global appetite for energy from stable, democratic, responsible producers has never been greater.
Canada checks every box: vast reserves, rigorous environmental standards, rule of law and a commitment to Indigenous partnership. We should be leading the race, but instead we’ve effectively tied our own shoelaces together.
In 2024, Canada set new records for oil production and exports. Alberta alone pumped nearly 1.5 billion barrels, a 4.5 per cent increase over 2023. With the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) online, we have new access to Pacific markets and Asia has responded, with China now a top buyer of Canadian crude.
The bad news is that we’re limiting where energy can leave the country. Bill C-48, the so-called tanker ban, prohibits tankers carrying over 12,500 tons of crude oil from stopping or unloading crude at ports or marine installations along B.C.’s northern coast. That includes Kitimat and Prince Rupert, two ports with strategic access to Indo-Pacific markets. Yes, we must do all we can to mitigate risks to Canada’s coastlines, but this should be balanced against a need to reduce our reliance on trade with the U.S. and increase our access to global markets.
Add to that the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) which was designed in part to shorten approval times and add certainty about how long the process would take. It has not had that effect and it’s scaring off investment. Business confidence in Canada has dropped to pandemic-era lows, due in part to unpredictable rules.
At a time when Canada is facing a modest recession and needs to attract private capital, we’ve made building trade infrastructure feel like trying to drive a snowplow through molasses.
What’s needed isn’t revolutionary, just practical. A start would be to maximize the amount of crude transported through the Trans Mountain Expansion pipeline, which ran at 77 per cent capacity in 2024. Under-utilization is attributed to a variety of factors, one of which is higher tolls being charged to producers.
Canada also needs to overhaul the IAA and create a review system that’s fast, clear and focused on accountability, not red tape. Investors need to know where the goalposts are. And, while we are making recommendations, strategic ports like Prince Rupert should be able to participate in global energy trade under the same high safety standards used elsewhere in Canada.
Canada needs a national approach to energy exporting. A 10-year projects and partnerships plan would give governments, Indigenous nations and industry a common direction. This could be coupled with the development of a category of “strategic export infrastructure” to prioritize trade-enabling projects and move them through approvals faster.
Of course, none of this can take place without bringing Indigenous partners into the planning process. A dedicated federal mechanism should be put in place to streamline and strengthen Indigenous consultation for major trade infrastructure, ensuring the process is both faster and fairer and that Indigenous equity options are built in from the start.
None of this is about blocking the energy transition. It’s about bridging it. Until we invent, build and scale the clean technologies of tomorrow, responsibly produced oil and gas will remain part of the mix. The only question is who will supply it.
Canada is the most stable of the world’s top oil producers, but we are a puzzle to the rest of the world, which doesn’t understand why we can’t get more of our oil and natural gas to market. In recent years, Norway and the U.S. have increased crude oil production. Notably, the U.S. also increased its natural gas exports through the construction of new LNG export terminals, which have helped supply European allies seeking to reduce their reliance on Russian natural gas.
Canada could be the bridge between demand and security, but if we want to be the world’s go-to energy partner, we need to act like it. That means building faster, regulating smarter and treating trade infrastructure like the strategic asset it is.
The world is watching. The opportunity is now. Let’s not waste it.
Gary Mar is president and CEO of the Canada West Foundation
The Quiet Invasion: How Transnational Crime and Chinese State Actors Infiltrated Vancouver and Eroded Canada’s Sovereignty
RFK Jr. says Hep B vaccine is linked to 1,135% higher autism rate
Alberta Independence Seekers Take First Step: Citizen Initiative Application Approved, Notice of Initiative Petition Issued
National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
-
Business1 day ago
RFK Jr. says Hep B vaccine is linked to 1,135% higher autism rate
-
Crime2 days ago
National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
-
Business15 hours agoWhy it’s time to repeal the oil tanker ban on B.C.’s north coast
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoGlobal media alliance colluded with foreign nations to crush free speech in America: House report
-
Alberta10 hours agoAlberta Provincial Police – New chief of Independent Agency Police Service
-
Health2 days agoRFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets on Tucker—And Surprises Everyone on Trump
-
Alberta15 hours ago
Pierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada
-
Opinion7 hours agoBlind to the Left: Canada’s Counter-Extremism Failure Leaves Neo-Marxist and Islamist Threats Unchecked