The uncertain future of B.C.’s carbon tax

Posted by Derek Pieper on March 24, 2009
Canada, Politics

Canadian coins (Pieper)

Canadian coins (Pieper)

 

 

The Canadian province of British Columbia has a carbon tax that is not yet a year old and already it is on thin ice.  First announced during the delivery of the 2008 budget and implemented July 1, 2008, British Columbia`s carbon tax policy came as a surprise to many observers in the Canadian environmental field and was considered a significant shift in policy on climate change for the Government of British Columbia.  The orgin of the policy is thought to be as a result of the direct influence of Gordon Campball, Premier of British Columbia, who has been strongly influenced by the ‘green’ California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In the context of an increasing sense of urgency about environmental policy making, consideration of this new carbon pricing policy is instructive as the suggestion has been made that the B.C. carbon tax may be internationally significant as a model of carbon pricing policy.

However, despite the passing of the 2008 British Columbia Budget containing the carbon tax measure, the future of British Columbia’s environmental tax policy remains uncertain. 

In the short-term a scheduled provincial election on May 12, 2009 could result in a complete overturning or re-shaping of the policy should the Liberal Party of British Columbia – the incumbent party who proposed and implemented the policy – lose the election.  The current opposition party, the New Democratic Party of British Columbia, has opposed the policy and the latest public opinion data suggests that a 55% majority of British Columbians oppose the carbon tax measure. Without the support of a broad, multi-party coalition, the future of the British Columbia carbon tax remains unclear in the immediate future.

National politics may also influence the future of British Columbia carbon tax policy.  In the Canadian federal system, the sub-national jurisdictions (10 provinces and 3 territories) retain control over natural resources, environment, and energy policy.  As a result, the Canadian climate change and energy policy landscape has been described as a ‘patchwork’, differing significantly between the provinces in scope, scale, and instrumentation, and which suffers from a lack of coordination and leadership from the federal government.  Without coordination of efforts across Canada, the compatibility of B.C.’s carbon tax with other provincial and federal actions might be limited, thereby reducing the overall effectiveness of the measure.  In the October 2008 federal election the Canadian public clearly rejected the central policy of the opposition Liberal Party of Canada – a nation-wide carbon tax similar in structure to that of the provincial tax in British Columbia.  Demonstrated public opposition to carbon tax measures across Canada may influence future decisions to increase the rate of B.C.’s carbon tax. The current rate is $10 CAD per tonne of carbon dioxide, or carbon dioxide equivalent, emissions scheduled to escalate $5 per year until reaching $30 per tonne in 2012.  Those increases, and even higher rates in the future, will be required in order to achieve significant GHG reductions but they are at risk in an uncertain political and economic climate.

The effectiveness and the future existence of the B.C. carbon tax policy might also be influenced by international developments in carbon pricing, climate change negotiations, and global economic conditions.  US President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper have both signalled their interest in the creation of a North America wide emissions cap-and-trade scheme and potentially new emissions reduction mechanisms will emerge from ongoing international negotiations proceeding under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The impacts of the current global financial crisis might also have an impact on the future plans for increasing the rate of British Columbia’s carbon tax.   Despite the fact that emissions tend to decrease during economic recessions, political reactions to the downturn might influence the ability of the carbon tax to reduce emissions effectively when the economy recovers (eg. if the carbon price does not escalate over time according to the proposed plan). 

While it is too early to evaluate the overall impact of B.C.’s carbon tax, given increasing international trends towards the implementation of market-based mechanisms to meet stringent environmental targets (should the policy remian) B.C. may gain a ‘learning-by-doing’ advantage for having first implemented a significant carbon pricing policy in Canada and North America.

Related posts:

  1. Ontario poised to leap into an uncertain Green Energy future
  2. Obama visits Canada: future climate policy convergence?
  3. Cap and Trade keeps Canada middle of the pack
  4. The Struggle for North America’s Energy Future: California and Alberta
  5. Canada’s Carbon Bank

Tags: , , ,

Make a Donation

Like what you read? Climatico is a nonprofit organization and relies on donations from readers like you to continue to provide you with quality independent coverage. Help show your support and make a tax-deductible donation today.

Comments


  • “In the October 2008 federal election the Canadian public clearly rejected the central policy of the opposition Liberal Party of Canada – a nation-wide carbon tax similar in structure to that of the provincial tax in British Columbia.”

    I don’t think this is entirely fair.

    The Canadian democratic system offers voters with only an incredibly crude mechanism for expressing their political preferences. In one vote, they have to express their preferences on local candidates, parties, leaders, and policies. Any attempt to untangle what they were trying to say runs up against that fundamental limitation.

    That being said, the failure of the Liberals federally does make it seem less likely that future Canadian leaders will be bold enough to embrace carbon taxes. The big irony is that, while a carbon tax trusts the market, the regulated cap-and-trade approach that has been announced more closely resembles Soviet central planning.

    March 24 2009
    CommentsLike
    • Dan

      Could the downturn be the reason the tax is unpopular? Under cap and trade, carbon prices decrease during a downturn as demand shrinks. A tax, on the other hand, is not sensitive to the economic cycle and brakes industrial output regardless. I’d hypothesise that taxes fare worse politically than cap and trade in a downturn.

      March 24 2009
      CommentsLike