Business
Carney says as PM he would replace the Carbon Tax with something ‘more effective’

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Carney stumbles out the gate on carbon taxes
Prime minister hopeful Mark Carney is supposed to be the economic messiah sent to save the Liberals from the depths of polling purgatory.
But right out the gate, Carney showed he doesn’t have an answer to the most important question:
Will he keep the carbon tax?
Carney should have seen that question coming. His campaign leaked to the media that he would scrap the carbon tax. But when reporters asked him that question at his campaign kickoff in Edmonton, he went wonky and wobbly.
It should have been a yes or no answer. Instead, Carney served up an unappetizing word salad.
“If you are going to take out the carbon tax, we should replace it with something that is at least, if not more, effective,” Carney said. “Perception may be that it takes out more than the rebate provides, but reality is different, and Canadians will miss that money.”
Carney’s stance on the carbon tax is clear as mud and it’s bad for two key reasons.
First: he’d replace the carbon tax with something more “effective.”
The carbon tax has been very effective at sucking a lot of money out of the wallets of Canadians. And the carbon tax has been ineffective at hitting the government’s own emissions targets.
The carbon tax is an expensive failure.
Second: Carney parrots the insulting Trudeau government narrative that the carbon tax is all a “perception” problem.
The message is Canadians are too stupid to appreciate the genius of the carbon tax, and if the government could change the perception of the masses, the carbon tax would be just fine.
Worse for Carney, his answer was an assault on his own brand.
Carney’s the guy who is supposed to have his homework done. Instead, he shrugged at the obvious question, saying he’d release a “comprehensive” plan later.
In other words: just trust him.
But here’s the thing: Carney should have had an answer yesterday and taxpayers have trust issues.
When the Liberals won the 2015 election, their platform was sparse on details about their future signature policy. The carbon tax was buried on page 39 of their platform as “a price on carbon.”
The Liberal government imposed a carbon tax in 2019 misleading Canadians, saying the tax would stop at 11 cents per litre of gasoline in 2022.
“The commitment was to go up to 2022,” then environment minister Catherine McKenna said, shortly before the 2019 federal election. “There was no intention to go up beyond that, there’s no secret agenda.”
After the election, the Trudeau government announced it would keep cranking up the carbon tax every year until it cost 37 cents per litre in 2030. Filling up a minivan at that rate would cost nearly $30 extra in just the carbon tax.
The current Liberal government still won’t rule out future carbon tax hikes.
The government also claims most families get more back in rebates than they pay in the carbon tax, despite the Parliamentary Budget Officer issuing three reports confirming the carbon tax costs Canadians.
The carbon tax will cost the average family up to $399 this year, even with the rebates factored in, according to the PBO.
Liberal leadership hopefuls who want to earn trust with taxpayers must push the Trudeau cabinet to scrap the carbon tax immediately.
The next Liberal leader faces a daunting timeline.
When Parliament comes back on March 24, there will be a throne speech, then likely a flurry of confidence motions. This could bring down the government and trigger an election.
On April 1, the government is set to hike the carbon tax.
Does Carney want to hike the carbon tax during the first week of his election campaign?
If Carney is as savvy as we’ve been told, then his answer should be a loud “no.”
To prove to Canadians he’s opposed to the carbon tax, Carney must call on the Trudeau cabinet to scrap it right now.
Business
Top Canadian bank ditches UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate goals it helped create

From LifeSiteNews
RBC’s dropping of its ‘net zero’ finance targets came just one day after the Liberal Party under Mark Carney was re-elected in Canada.
Just one day after the re-election of the Liberal Party under Mark Carney, the Royal Bank of Canada joined the growing list of top banks withdrawing from a United Nations-backed “net zero” alliance that supports the eventual elimination of the nation’s oil and gas industry in the name of “climate change.”
The Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) on Tuesday quietly dumped its UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) sustainable finance targets, which called for banks to come in line with the push for net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The NZBA is a subgroup of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), which Carney was co-chair of until recently.
RBC’s departure comes despite the fact that it was one of the NZBA’s founding members.
RBC joins Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD), Bank of Montreal (BMO), National Bank of Canada, and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) who earlier in the year said they were withdrawing from the NZBA.
The bank announced the move away from a green agenda in its 2024 sustainability report, noting it would no longer look to pursue a $500 billion sustainable finance goal. It cited changes to Canada’s federal Competition Act as the reason.
The changes to the act, known as the “greenwashing law,” now mandate that companies provide proof of their environmental claims.
“We have reviewed our methodology and have concluded that it may not have appropriately measured certain of our sustainable finance activities,” noted RBC in its report.
RBC also noted it would not make public any of its metrics regarding its energy supply ratio.
Monday’s election saw Liberal leader Carney beat out Conservative rival Poilievre, who also lost his seat. The Conservatives managed to pick up over 20 new seats, however, and Poilievre has vowed to stay on as party leader, for now.
Carney worked as the former governor of the Bank of Canada and Bank of England and spent many years promoting green financial agendas.
The GFANZ was formed in 2021 while Carney was its co-chair. He resigned from his role in the alliance right before he announced he would run for Liberal leadership to replace former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Large U.S. banks such as Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo and Bank of America have all withdrawn from the group as well.
Since taking office in 2015, the Liberal government, first under Trudeau and now under Carney, has continued to push a radical environmental agenda in line with those promoted by the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.” Part of this push includes the promotion of so called net-zero energy by as early as 2035.
Business
Overregulation is choking Canadian businesses, says the MEI

From the Montreal Economic Institute
The federal government’s growing regulatory burden on businesses is holding Canada back and must be urgently reviewed, argues a new publication from the MEI released this morning.
“Regulation creep is a real thing, and Ottawa has been fuelling it for decades,” says Krystle Wittevrongel, director of research at the MEI and coauthor of the Viewpoint. “Regulations are passed but rarely reviewed, making it burdensome to run a business, or even too costly to get started.”
Between 2006 and 2021, the number of federal regulatory requirements in Canada rose by 37 per cent, from 234,200 to 320,900. This is estimated to have reduced real GDP growth by 1.7 percentage points, employment growth by 1.3 percentage points, and labour productivity by 0.4 percentage points, according to recent Statistics Canada data.
Small businesses are disproportionately impacted by the proliferation of new regulations.
In 2024, firms with fewer than five employees pay over $10,200 per employee in regulatory and red tape compliance costs, compared to roughly $1,400 per employee for businesses with 100 or more employees, according to data from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.
Overall, Canadian businesses spend 768 million hours a year on compliance, which is equivalent to almost 394,000 full-time jobs. The costs to the economy in 2024 alone were over $51.5 billion.
It is hardly surprising in this context that entrepreneurship in Canada is on the decline. In the year 2000, 3 out of every 1,000 Canadians started a business. By 2022, that rate had fallen to just 1.3, representing a nearly 57 per cent drop since 2000.
The impact of regulation in particular is real: had Ottawa maintained the number of regulations at 2006 levels, Canada would have seen about 10 per cent more business start-ups in 2021, according to Statistics Canada.
The MEI researcher proposes a practical way to reevaluate the necessity of these regulations, applying a model based on the Chrétien government’s 1995 Program Review.
In the 1990s, the federal government launched a review process aimed at reducing federal spending. Over the course of two years, it successfully eliminated $12 billion in federal spending, a reduction of 9.7 per cent, and restored fiscal balance.
A similar approach applied to regulations could help identify rules that are outdated, duplicative, or unjustified.
The publication outlines six key questions to evaluate existing or proposed regulations:
- What is the purpose of the regulation?
- Does it serve the public interest?
- What is the role of the federal government and is its intervention necessary?
- What is the expected economic cost of the regulation?
- Is there a less costly or intrusive way to solve the problem the regulation seeks to address?
- Is there a net benefit?
According to OECD projections, Canada is expected to experience the lowest GDP per capita growth among advanced economies through 2060.
“Canada has just lived through a decade marked by weak growth, stagnant wages, and declining prosperity,” says Ms. Wittevrongel. “If policymakers are serious about reversing this trend, they must start by asking whether existing regulations are doing more harm than good.”
The MEI Viewpoint is available here.
* * *
The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.
-
Alberta2 days ago
It’s On! Alberta Challenging Liberals Unconstitutional and Destructive Net-Zero Legislation
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta’s future in Canada depends on Carney’s greatest fear: Trump or Climate Change
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
The Liberals torched their own agenda just to cling to power
-
Crime15 hours ago
Canada Blocked DEA Request to Investigate Massive Toronto Carfentanil Seizure for Terror Links
-
Agriculture2 days ago
Liberal win puts Canada’s farmers and food supply at risk
-
Business1 day ago
Trump says he expects ‘great relationship’ with Carney, who ‘hated’ him less than Poilievre
-
Business1 day ago
Canada urgently needs a watchdog for government waste
-
COVID-197 hours ago
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’