Business
Court ruling on plastics ban welcome news for Canadians

From the Fraser Institute
The future of the Trudeau government’s ban on single-use plastic is uncertain following the recent Federal Court ruling, which declared that Ottawa exceeded its authority by classifying all “plastic manufactured items” as toxic. As the federal government considers the possibility of appealing the decision, it’s essential to understand that Ottawa’s plastic ban is an expensive measure to a relatively minor environmental issue in Canada and likely hurts, rather than helps the environment.
The Trudeau government’s ban on six types of single-use plastics, including cutlery, checkout bags, and straws, came into effect in 2022 as part of an effort to achieve zero plastic waste by 2030.
For starters, as the government admits, Canada doesn’t have a significant plastic waste problem – 99 per cent of the country’s plastic waste is already disposed of safely through recycling, incinerating and environmentally-friendly landfills. Furthermore, Canada’s contribution to global aquatic plastic pollution is estimated to be between 0.02 per cent and 0.03 per cent of the total, with nearly 90 per cent of the pollution originating from Asia and Africa. Eliminating Canada’s plastic waste would, therefore, have an undetectable impact on ocean plastic pollution.
Far from being an environmental solution, the federal government’s own analysis acknowledges that banning single-use plastics will actually increase waste generation rather than reduce it. According to the analysis, while the regulation will remove 1.5 million tonnes of plastics from 2023 to 2032, it will almost double that tonnage in substitutes such as paper, wood and aluminum over the same period. In other words, the ban will increase, not decrease, the amount of net garbage in Canada.
However, the environmental effects of the plastic ban go beyond an increase of waste. According to the government’s Strategic Environmental Assessment, plastic substitutes “typically have higher climate change impacts” including higher greenhouse gases (GHG) and lower air quality. Indeed, some studies suggest that substitutes for single-use plastics such as paper are heavier, require more energy to transport, create higher smog formation and ozone depletion, require more water and energy to be produced, and result in higher GHG emissions. Simply put, the plastic ban harms, not helps, the environment.
And that’s not all. According to the federal government’s own estimates, the plastic ban will bring $616 million in benefits on avoided clean-up expenses over the next 10 years but will cost around $2 billion over the same period, due to the management of additional waste discussed above and enforcement costs of the ban. This cost surpasses the benefit by more than a 3-to-1 ratio.
The Trudeau government needs to carefully consider the Federal Court and reconsider its stance on this policy, which has an overall adverse impact on both the environment and the economy.
Business
Carbon tax, not carve out, Trudeau’s real failure

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Author: Franco Terrazzano
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stepped in it when he removed the carbon tax from furnace oil, while leaving 97 per cent of Canadians out in the cold.
Even in Atlantic Canada, where Trudeau tried to buy off MPs with the carve out, 77 per cent of people in the region support carbon tax relief for everyone.
But Trudeau’s mistake wasn’t providing relief. The real lesson here is Trudeau never won the hearts and minds of Canadians. And he lost credibility early on.
Months before the 2019 election, the former environment minister said the government had “no intention” of raising the carbon tax beyond 11 cents per litre of gas.
After the election, Trudeau announced he would keep cranking up his carbon tax until it reached 37 cents per litre.
Trudeau and his ministers repeat the myth that eight-out-of-ten families get more money in rebates than they pay in carbon taxes.
Their favourite talking point limps on despite the obvious reality that a government can’t raise taxes, skim money off the top to pay for hundreds of administration bureaucrats and still make everyone better off.
In fact, the carbon tax will cost the average family up to $710 more than they get back in rebates this year, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
The government said carbon taxes reduce emissions.
But even in British Columbia, which had the first and (for years) costliest carbon tax, emissions rose. B.C. imposed its carbon tax in 2008. B.C.’s emissions have increased between 2007 and 2019 – the last year before the pandemic brought economic activity to a screeching halt.
And even if the carbon tax cut emissions at home, “Canada’s own emissions are not large enough to materially impact climate change,” as the PBO explains.
Making it more expensive to live in Canada won’t reduce emissions in China, Russia, India or the United States. And this leads to Trudeau’s diplomatic failure.
At the United Nations, the Trudeau government launched the Global Carbon Pricing Challenge to get more countries to impose carbon taxes.
“The impact and effectiveness of carbon pricing increases as more countries adopt pricing solutions,” the Trudeau government acknowledged.
The world’s largest economy, the United States, rejects carbon taxes.
President Joe Biden, a Democrat, hasn’t imposed a carbon tax. Good luck convincing a Republican president to impose one.
The U.S. is the rule, not the exception.
About three-quarters of countries don’t have a national carbon tax, according to the World Bank’s Carbon Pricing Dashboard.
And while Trudeau raised taxes, peers like the United Kingdom, Sweden, Australia, South Korea, the Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Ireland, India, Israel, Italy, New Zealand and Portugal, among others, cut fuel taxes.
If Canada’s carbon tax is essential for the environment, shouldn’t all taxpayers pay the same rate?
A driver in Alberta pays a carbon tax of 14 cent per litre of gas. In Quebec, the carbon tax is about 12 cents. By 2030, that gap will grow to more than 14 cents per litre.
Quebec’s special deal proves Trudeau’s carbon tax is about politics, not the environment.
When crafting the carbon tax, the government never truly asked the people what they thought. Everyone wants a better environment. You won’t find opposition to that.
But did anyone ask Canadians if they support a carbon tax even if it means average families will lose hundreds of dollars every year? Did anyone ask Canadians if they support a carbon tax even though most countries don’t?
Trudeau is displaying rank regional favouritism. But his real mistake wasn’t the carve out that favoured Atlantic Canada. It’s that he never won the hearts and minds of the people and failed to acknowledge carbon taxes cause real pain.
Business
Budget update proves Trudeau isn’t serious about federal finances

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Author: Franco Terrazzano
“when you pay the GST on a hockey stick, a tank of gas or bar of soap, every penny will go to interest charges on the federal debt. In fact, interest charges will surpass federal health-care transfers next year”
Taxpayers should brace for impact based on the finance minister’s latest projections.
Interest charges on the federal debt will go from $47 billion this year to $61 billion in 2028-29, according to the budget update.
But what does $61 billion mean to you?
Sixty-one billion is the same amount the government plans to collect with the GST in 2028-29.
So, in a few short years, when you pay the GST on a hockey stick, a tank of gas or bar of soap, every penny will go to interest charges on the federal debt.
In fact, interest charges will surpass federal health-care transfers next year.
Let the shock sink in just a little deeper: what could we do if it weren’t for the federal debt?
We could virtually double federal health spending.
Or we could completely eliminate the GST in a couple years.
Somehow the government is communicating these perplexing projections with considerable calmness.
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland claims “the foundation of our Fall Economic Statement is our responsible fiscal plan.”
But last year the government spent $474 billion. And this year the feds plan on spending $489 billion. By 2029, the government will be spending $595 billion a year.
Pro-tip for Freeland: when you spend billions of dollars more every year, you’re saving money wrong.
And all that spending comes on top of an already ballooned base line. Even before the pandemic, the Trudeau government was spending all-time highs. And that’s after accounting for inflation and population differences.
Last year’s $35-billion deficit will increase to $40 billion this year. The feds have no plan to balance the budget. And that’s pushing up interest charges.
Again, brace yourself, because in 2028, federal debt interest charges will cost taxpayers $61 billion. For context, pre-pandemic interest charges were around $20 billion a year.
Meanwhile, if you’re hoping for meaningful tax relief from this government, you shouldn’t hold your breath.
“I absolutely understand that after three difficult years – with a global pandemic, global inflation, and global interest rate hikes – Canadians are worn out, frustrated, and feeling the squeeze,” Freeland said. “What Canadians deserve today is for us to address the very real pain that so many are feeling.”
The easiest and simplest way for Freeland to help Canadians is to stop taking so much money from taxpayers’ wallets in the first place.
But Freeland and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau aren’t even willing to provide the simplest forms of tax relief like ending the sales tax-on-tax at the gas pumps. The GST on the carbon tax alone will cost taxpayers $429 million this year.
The government isn’t willing to end the anti-democratic escalator that increases alcohol taxes every year without a single vote in Parliament. Next year’s hike will cost taxpayers about $100 million.
The government isn’t even willing to extend the same relief to all Canadians that it gave Atlantic Canadian families and remove the carbon tax from everyone’s home heating bills. The carbon tax on natural gas will cost the average family $300 this year.
The budget update is an admission that the government has a spending problem, but it still isn’t serious about managing our finances or providing real tax relief.
The solution for Trudeau and Freeland should be simple: put down the credit card and pick up some scissors.
This column was originally published in the Toronto Sun on Nov. 24, 2023.
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
Could AI Make Yesterday Into Today For Culture, Sports & Politics?
-
Health1 day ago
Canadian medical college suggests doctors prioritize ‘social justice’ over ‘expertise’
-
Community1 day ago
Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis condemns MAiD in Parliament as targeting nation’s most vulnerable
-
Alberta1 day ago
City of Edmonton has a spending problem
-
Business1 day ago
Indigenous loan program must include oil and gas
-
Business1 day ago
Budget update proves Trudeau isn’t serious about federal finances
-
Canadian Energy Centre1 day ago
Reality check: Global emissions from coal plants
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
Witnessing the Media’s Covid Coverage from the Inside