Connect with us

Economy

MP Earl Dreeshen explains opposition to budget and support for plan to replace the Carbon Tax

Published

4 years ago

9 minute read

Submitted by Red Deer – Mountain View MP Earl Dreeshen

In Touch with MP Earl Dreeshen

2021 has continued to be a challenging year after a turbulent 2020. Our community as well as communities and governments around the world are navigating the COVID-19 pandemic and it has led to significant challenges. Many people are dealing with significant health effects, financial strain, mental health strain, and so much more.

I would challenge everybody to recognize that, to some degree, everyone in Canada has been affected by the pandemic. I encourage you to keep that in mind in our dealing with our neighbors and fellow community members going forward.

2021 Budget

For the first time in over two years, the Liberal Government has tabled a budget. They spent most of the pandemic, and the year prior, dodging from accountability on their spending and we can see why.

It’s clear Justin Trudeau’s election budget fails to put forward a plan to adequately fund healthcare, grow the economy, and create jobs.

Justin Trudeau’s budget is a massive letdown for Canadians. Unemployed Canadians hoping to see a plan to create new jobs and economic opportunities for their families are going to feel let down. Workers who have had their wages cut and hours slashed hoping to see a plan to reopen the economy are going to feel let down. Families that can’t afford more taxes and are struggling to save more money for their children’s education or to buy a home are going to feel let down.

This is not stimulus spending focused on creating jobs, but spending on Liberal partisan priorities backed by a $100 billion election slush fund. Unfortunately, this budget does nothing to secure long term prosperity for Canadians. Instead, what Justin Trudeau has proposed is a “reimagined” Canadian economy that dabbles in risky economic ideas, like abandoning Canada’s world leading and sustainable natural resource industries, leaving our economy in a precarious position.

For these reasons, my Conservative colleagues and I voted against the 2021 Budget. More of my thoughts on the budget can be found here

Economic Recovery

As Conservatives, we have been focused on economic recovery across Canada. We acknowledge that these times are unprecedented and additional measures were necessary. Millions of Canadians had their employment and businesses impacted and there was a responsibility to those who fell through the cracks.

However, the reason why these programs need to be extended is due to Justin Trudeau’s failure on vaccines. We are behind many of our allies on moving forward which is why it is so critical that we have a plan to recovery now, and can hit the ground running when possible.

Erin O’Toole and our team has put forward Canada’s Recovery Plan, which is focused on creating financial security and certainty. This plan will safely secure our future and deliver a Canada where those who have struggled the most through this pandemic can get back to work.

This plan will ensure that manufacturing at home is bolstered, where wages go up, and where the dream of affording a better life for their children can be realized by all Canadians.

We are focused on securing jobs and the economy for Canadians who have been left behind by Justin Trudeau.

Canada’s Conservatives got Canada through the last recession, and with Canada’s Recovery Plan, we will get Canadians through this one too.

Conservative Environment Policy

I have heard a lot of feedback already on the proposed Conservative Environment Policy.

As you might know, I have been a vehement opponent of the Liberal government’s environmental approach, and of their Carbon Tax. I have spoken in the House of Commons and other venues on many occasions about the devastating impact the Carbon Tax is having on our farmers and ranchers as well as its devastating impact on all residents of Alberta – who are literally seeing their paychecks and their savings eaten away by this ill-conceived Liberal tax.

My Conservative colleagues and I remain committed to scrapping the job-killing Carbon Tax. We also remain firmly committed to protecting and enhancing our environment – as Conservatives have always done. Conservatives have always been the party which cares the most about conserving our resources, protecting our soils and waters, while taking action to preserve the environment we live in. As Western Canadians, we all understand the need to preserve the environment for future generations.

What we don’t understand is the Liberal government’s approach which is one of big government taxing consumers and phasing out jobs at a time that we need them the most.

Our plan for the environment does include a carbon pricing mechanism. Young Canadians in particular want to see us take action on this front. And we will need a broader base of voter support than we have had in the past if we are going to form Canada’s next government.

In a nutshell, the Low Carbon Saving Account works like Airmiles or other affinity programs. When you purchase gas, your card is fully credited the carbon price. You can bank that money to eventually use on energy efficient products like new windows, hot water tanks, low emission equipment for your farm or business, etc. Businesses get their own account so they no longer pass the cost onto you the consumer as a ‘hidden carbon tax’.

A comparison I have heard is to the deposit on your cans and bottles. You pay it, but if you return the cans and bottles you get that money back. Yes, there will be upfront costs, but the costs will be less than 1/3 of the Liberal plan once fully implemented and you retain agency of every penny you put in.

One of the other major concepts is that small businesses and non-profits will be able to keep control of the money they pay, instead of the current system where these organizations subsidize the program for people in downtown Toronto who don’t have to drive to work.

The savings account idea is only a portion of the plan in total. I would encourage you to look at the whole plan if you are interested. One of the driving ideas is that we don’t want to shut down our industry just to see it end up in other jurisdictions. Our plan addresses that by being less punishing for using carbon while still incentivising more environmentally friendly practises through use of the savings plan. We will also study putting tariffs on certain products that come from places like China that do not do their part in addressing the environment, so that we are not artificially harming our own industries.

Independent analysis, conducted by Navius Research, found this plan would be expected to achieve substantially the same emission reductions as the Stephen Harper’s targets, while resulting in a boost to jobs and the economy. In addition, not a cent of consumer tax dollars will end up with bureaucrats in Ottawa.

I would ask you to take the time to read the plan in its entirety and not rely solely on media coverage.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 5 hours ago

The Digital Services Tax Q&A: “It was going to be complicated and messy”

Alberta / 5 hours ago

Pierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada

International / 5 hours ago

Elon Musk forms America Party after split with Trump

Alberta

Pierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada

Published on July 6, 2025

By

From Pierre Poilievre

The tiny town of Hardisty, Alberta (623 people) moves $90 billion in energy a year—that’s more than the GDP of some countries.

Continue Reading

Business

Why it’s time to repeal the oil tanker ban on B.C.’s north coast

Published on July 6, 2025

By

The Port of Prince Rupert on the north coast of British Columbia. Photo courtesy Prince Rupert Port Authority

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Will Gibson

Moratorium does little to improve marine safety while sending the wrong message to energy investors

In 2019, Martha Hall Findlay, then-CEO of the Canada West Foundation, penned a strongly worded op-ed in the Globe and Mail calling the federal ban of oil tankers on B.C.’s northern coast “un-Canadian.”

Six years later, her opinion hasn’t changed.

“It was bad legislation and the government should get rid of it,” said Hall Findlay, now director of the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.

The moratorium, known as Bill C-48, banned vessels carrying more than 12,500 tonnes of oil from accessing northern B.C. ports.

Targeting products from one sector in one area does little to achieve the goal of overall improved marine transport safety, she said.

“There are risks associated with any kind of transportation with any goods, and not all of them are with oil tankers. All that singling out one part of one coast did was prevent more oil and gas from being produced that could be shipped off that coast,” she said.

Hall Findlay is a former Liberal MP who served as Suncor Energy’s chief sustainability officer before taking on her role at the University of Calgary.

She sees an opportunity to remove the tanker moratorium in light of changing attitudes about resource development across Canada and a new federal government that has publicly committed to delivering nation-building energy projects.

“There’s a greater recognition in large portions of the public across the country, not just Alberta and Saskatchewan, that Canada is too dependent on the United States as the only customer for our energy products,” she said.

“There are better alternatives to C-48, such as setting aside what are called Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas, which have been established in areas such as the Great Barrier Reef and the Galapagos Islands.”

The Business Council of British Columbia, which represents more than 200 companies, post-secondary institutions and industry associations, echoes Hall Findlay’s call for the tanker ban to be repealed.

“Comparable shipments face no such restrictions on the East Coast,” said Denise Mullen, the council’s director of environment, sustainability and Indigenous relations.

“This unfair treatment reinforces Canada’s over-reliance on the U.S. market, where Canadian oil is sold at a discount, by restricting access to Asia-Pacific markets.

“This results in billions in lost government revenues and reduced private investment at a time when our economy can least afford it.”

The ban on tanker traffic specifically in northern B.C. doesn’t make sense given Canada already has strong marine safety regulations in place, Mullen said.

Notably, completion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion in 2024 also doubled marine spill response capacity on Canada’s West Coast. A $170 million investment added new equipment, personnel and response bases in the Salish Sea.

“The [C-48] moratorium adds little real protection while sending a damaging message to global investors,” she said.

“This undermines the confidence needed for long-term investment in critical trade-enabling infrastructure.”

Indigenous Resource Network executive director John Desjarlais senses there’s an openness to revisiting the issue for Indigenous communities.

“Sentiment has changed and evolved in the past six years,” he said.

“There are still concerns and trust that needs to be built. But there’s also a recognition that in addition to environmental impacts, [there are] consequences of not doing it in terms of an economic impact as well as the cascading socio-economic impacts.”

The ban effectively killed the proposed $16-billion Eagle Spirit project, an Indigenous-led pipeline that would have shipped oil from northern Alberta to a tidewater export terminal at Prince Rupert, B.C.

“When you have Indigenous participants who want to advance these projects, the moratorium needs to be revisited,” Desjarlais said.

He notes that in the six years since the tanker ban went into effect, there are growing partnerships between B.C. First Nations and the energy industry, including the Haisla Nation’s Cedar LNG project and the Nisga’a Nation’s Ksi Lisims LNG project.

This has deepened the trust that projects can mitigate risks while providing economic reconciliation and benefits to communities, Dejarlais said.

“Industry has come leaps and bounds in terms of working with First Nations,” he said.

“They are treating the rights of the communities they work with appropriately in terms of project risk and returns.”

Hall Findlay is cautiously optimistic that the tanker ban will be replaced by more appropriate legislation.

“I’m hoping that we see the revival of a federal government that brings pragmatism to governing the country,” she said.

“Repealing C-48 would be a sign of that happening.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X