One expert said it could be tricky for the government to get an oil and gas emissions cap through the courts
One expert says to expect a very different sort of fight this time around.
Trevor Tombe, an economist with the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, says that regulatory mechanisms like the emissions cap can be a more elusive political target than direct carbon levies as their costs to consumers are largely hidden.
“The costs (of regulations) are foregone economic opportunities rather than actual cash flows,” said Tombe in an interview. “Psychologically, that might be easier for people to live with than explicit taxation.”
Emitter-focused mechanisms like the oil and gas cap are one of few tools left to policymakers who want to lower carbon emissions, says Tombe.
“Industrial pricing is the only sustainable type of carbon pricing from this point forward,” said Tombe. “Thanks to the (federal) government.”
There will be a strong argument to make that the (federal emissions regulations) impermissibly intrude into provincial areas of jurisdiction
Since then, several prominent centre-left politicians have come out against the carbon tax, including federal NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh and British Columbia Premier David Eby.
An ex-NDP officeholder from Alberta, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that the business-friendly consumer carbon tax was always an odd thing for progressives to rally behind.
“(We) lost the plot the plot in defending what essentially amounts to a conservative policy,” said the source; adding that the carbon tax is the option that “best shields industrial emitters from any scrutiny or attention.”
Tombe said that equity could be a key selling point of regulatory approaches like the emissions cap.
“With regulations, you might be better able to target where these costs land,” said Tombe. “An issue with the carbon tax being so broad-based is that everyone pays part of the cost, which strikes some as unfair.”
Tombe said it could be tricky for the federal government to get an oil and gas emissions cap through the courts, citing its uneven regional impacts.
“It effectively targets a specific region (Western Canada) for reasons that are largely political,” said Tombe.
Geoffrey Sigalet, the director of UBC’s Centre for Constitutional Law, agrees.
“There will be a strong argument to make that the (federal emissions regulations) impermissibly intrude into provincial areas of jurisdiction, namely over the management of natural resources under section 92A of the Constitution,” Sigalet told the National Post.
Ryan Fournier, a spokesman for Alberta Environment Minister Rebecca Schultz said the province was ready to fight the federal emissions cap in court.
“We will use every legal tool at our disposal to defend our constitutional jurisdiction and the livelihoods of all Albertans,” said Fournier in an email.
A senior official with Environment and Climate Change Canada said the ministry was confident the federal cap will hold up in court, noting that the policy targets emissions, not the actual production of energy.
The official said Alberta and other energy-producing provinces can continue to expand oil and gas production under the cap if they scale up emissions-reducing carbon capture and storage technologies.
National Post
[email protected]
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.