Business
UK leader Rishi Sunak signals plan to backtrack on some climate goals
Oxfam’s Rishi Sunak ‘big head’ protests outside the Parliament in London, Tuesday, Sept. 19, 2023. On the eve of the UN Climate Ambition Summit, Oxfam’s Rishi Sunak ‘big head’ staged a protest on top of a giant oil barrel, amongst dozens of real oil drums, supporting the Make Polluters Pay campaign. Calling for oil and gas giants, such as BP and Shell, to pay more tax to raise critical funds to help communities devastated by climate change. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung)
By Jill Lawless in London
LONDON (AP) — Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is preparing to water down some of Britain’s environmental commitments on Wednesday, saying the country must fight climate change without penalizing workers and consumers.
The news drew wide criticism from political opponents, environmental groups and large chunks of U.K. industry, but was welcomed by sections of the governing Conservative Party.
Sunak issued a late-night statement Tuesday in response to a BBC report saying the prime minister is considering extending deadlines for bans on new gasoline and diesel cars — currently set for 2030 — and on new natural-gas home heating, due in 2035.
Sunak said he would set out a “proportionate” approach to the environment. He summoned his Cabinet to an unscheduled conference call to discuss the plans ahead of a speech hastily rescheduled for Wednesday afternoon. It had been due later in the week.
“For too many years, politicians in governments of all stripes have not been honest about costs and trade-offs,” Sunak said. “Instead, they have taken the easy way out, saying we can have it all.”
Sunak did not confirm details of his announcements. He said he would keep a promise to reduce the U.K.’s emissions of climate-warming greenhouse gases to net zero by 2050, but “in a better, more proportionate way.”
The government has previously boasted of Britain being a leader in cutting carbon emissions. U.K. greenhouse gas emissions have fallen by 46% from 1990 levels, mainly because of the almost complete removal of coal from electricity generation. The government had pledged to reduce emissions by 68% of 1990 levels by 2030 and to reach net zero by 2050.
But with just seven years to go until the first goalpost, the government’s climate advisers said in June that the pace of action is “worryingly slow.” Sunak’s decision in July to approve new North Sea oil and gas drilling also spurred critics to question his commitment to climate goals.
Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who brought in the 2030 gasoline car target when he was leader, said businesses “must have certainty about our net-zero commitments.”
“We cannot afford to falter now or in any way lose our ambition for this country,” he said.
News of plans to backtrack broke as senior politicians and diplomats from the U.K. and around the world — as well as heir to the British throne Prince William — gathered at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, where climate is high on the agenda. Sunak is not attending, sending his deputy instead.
Greenpeace U.K. policy director Doug Parr said the prime minister was “taking the public for fools.”
“Rowing back on home insulation and commitments to help people move away from gas will ensure we stay at the mercy of volatile fossil fuels and exploitative energy companies,” Parr said.
Environmentalists were not the only ones blindsided by the move. Automakers, who have invested heavily in the switch to electric vehicles, expressed frustration at the government’s apparent change of plan.
“We’re questioning what is the strategy here, because we need to shift the mobility of road transport away from fossil fuels towards sustainable transport,” said Mike Hawes, chief executive of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, an industry body.
Ford U.K. head Lisa Brankin said the company had invested 430 million pounds ($530 million) to build electric cars in Britain.
“Our business needs three things from the U.K. government: ambition, commitment and consistency. A relaxation of 2030 would undermine all three,” she said.
Analyst Tara Clee of investment firm Hargreaves Lansdown said the retreat could undermine Britain’s hard-won reputation for leadership on green technology, threatening the wider economy.
“The market has been directing capital to the net-zero transition and has been working in good faith,” Clee said. “These changes send a message that nothing is set in stone, and committing in earnest to a movable goalpost could be a major business risk.”
Britain’s Conservatives have been openly reassessing their climate change promises after a special election result in July that was widely seen as a thumbs-down from voters to a tax on polluting cars.
The party, which trails behind the Labour opposition nationwide, unexpectedly won the contest for the suburban London Uxbridge district by focusing on a divisive levy on older vehicles imposed by London’s Labour mayor, Sadiq Khan. Some Conservatives believe axing green policies is a vote-winner that can help the party avoid defeat in a national election due by the end of next year.
“We’re not going to save the planet by bankrupting the British people,” Home Secretary Suella Braverman said Wednesday.
But Conservative lawmaker Alok Sharma, who chaired the COP26 international climate conference in Glasgow in 2021, warned that it would be “incredibly damaging … if the political consensus that we have forged in our country on the environment and climate action is fractured.”
“And frankly, I really do not believe that it’s going to help any political party electorally which chooses to go down this path,” he told the BBC.
Alberta
Federal taxes increasing for Albertans in 2025: Report
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
By Kris Sims
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation released its annual New Year’s Tax Changes report today to highlight major tax changes in 2025.
The key provincial tax change expected for Alberta is a reduction in the income tax rate.
“The Alberta government promised to reduce our lowest income tax bracket from 10 down to eight per cent and we expect the government to keep that promise in the new year,” said Kris Sims, CTF Alberta Director. “The United Conservatives said this provincial income tax cut would save families about $1,500 each and Alberta families need that kind of tax relief right now.
“Premier Danielle Smith promised to cut taxes and Albertans expect her to deliver.”
Albertans will see several federal tax hikes coming from Ottawa in 2025.
Payroll taxes: The federal government is raising the mandatory Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance contributions in 2025. These payroll tax increases will cost a worker up to an additional $403 next year.
Federal payroll taxes (CPP and EI tax) will cost a worker making $81,200 or more $5,507 in 2025. Their employer will also be forced to pay $5,938.
Carbon tax: The federal carbon tax is increasing to about 21 cents per litre of gasoline, 25 cents per litre of diesel and 18 cents per cubic metre of natural gas on April 1. The carbon tax will cost the average household between $133 and $477 in 2025-26, even after the rebates, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Alcohol taxes: Federal alcohol taxes will increase by two per cent on April 1. This alcohol tax hike will cost taxpayers $40.9 million in 2025-26, according to Beer Canada.
Following Budget 2024, the federal government also increased capital gains taxes and imposed a digital services tax and an online streaming tax.
Temporary Sales Tax Holiday: The federal government announced a two month sales tax holiday on certain items like pre-made groceries, children’s clothing, drinks and snacks. The holiday will last until Feb. 15, 2025, and could save taxpayers $2.7 billion.
“In 2025, the Trudeau government will yet again take more money out of Canadians’ pockets with payroll tax hikes and will make life more expensive by raising carbon taxes and alcohol taxes,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should drop his plans to take more money out of Canadians’ pockets and deliver serious tax relief.”
You can find the CTF’s New Year’s Tax Changes report HERE.
Business
The gun ban and buyback still isn’t worth it for taxpayers
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Even worse than the cost is the simple fact that the policy isn’t making Canadians safer. Trudeau banned the initial list of 1,500 guns in 2020, meaning that it’s illegal to buy, sell or use them. In every year since, violent gun crime in Canada has increased.
Right from the beginning, experts have told the prime minister that his gun ban and buyback will divert resources away from fighting crime rather than making Canada safer.
Instead of changing course, the Trudeau government announced it’s diverting even more taxpayers’ money to its failing gun policy policy.
And it’s an expensive diversion.
The federal government recently announced an additional 324 models of firearms are now prohibited and being added to the buyback list. That brings the total makes and models banned to almost 2,500.
Even though Ottawa hasn’t confiscated a single gun yet, costs have already begun to pile up for taxpayers. Since 2020, when the ban was first announced, the government has spent $67 million on the program. By the end of the fiscal year the government is likely to increase that number to about $100 million, according to government documents.
The projected costs of this scheme have been a problem from the start. In 2019, the government said the buyback would cost taxpayers $200 million. But according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, buying back the guns could cost up to $756 million, not including administrative costs. Other government documents show that the buyback is now likely to cost almost $2 billion.
Those costs do not include the newly banned firearms. And it looks like the government has plans to expand the list even further. That means even more costs to taxpayers.
Minister of Public Safety Dominic Leblanc, who is charge in charge of the gun ban, hinted during the press conference the popular SKS rifle might be added to the ban list next. There are estimated to be a million of those firearms in Canada.
That means the costs to taxpayers could soar and even more people could lose their guns. The PBO report estimates that there were about 518,000 firearms banned on the original list. Adding the SKS could more than double the projected $756 million it would cost to confiscate the guns.
The government tried to ban the SKS before. It was included in an amendment to Bill C-21 that would have seen it banned along with a lot of hunting rifles. The Assembly of First Nations immediately passed an emergency resolution opposing this amendment at the time.
“It’s a tool,” said Kitigan Zibi Chief Dylan Whiteduck about the list of rifles that would have been banned. “It’s not a weapon.”
The government backed down on that amendment. There is no doubt it would encounter similar resistance from Indigenous hunters if Ottawa reimposed it.
Even worse than the cost is the simple fact that the policy isn’t making Canadians safer. Trudeau banned the initial list of 1,500 guns in 2020, meaning that it’s illegal to buy, sell or use them. In every year since, violent gun crime in Canada has increased.
And international examples confirm the pattern. New Zealand conducted a similar, but more extensive, gun ban and buyback in 2019. New Zealand had 1,216 violent firearm offenses in 2023. That’s 349 more offences than the year before the buyback.
All of this only confirms what experts have said from the beginning: This cost a lot of money, but won’t make Canada safer.
The union that represents the RCMP says the buyback “diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”
“The gun ban is not working,” said the president of the Toronto Police Association. “We should focus on criminals.”
Academics who study the subject also agree.
“Buyback programs are largely ineffective at reducing gun violence, in large part because the people who participate in such programs are not likely to use those guns to commit violence,” said University of Toronto professor Jooyoung Lee.
Everyone but the prime minister can see the obvious. The costs for this program keep ballooning and taxpayers have every reason to worry the tab is only getting bigger. Yet our streets aren’t safer. Trudeau must scrap this ineffective and expensive gun buyback.
-
Housing2 days ago
Trudeau loses another cabinet member as Housing Minister Sean Fraser resigns
-
conflict2 days ago
Trump has started negotiations to end the war in Ukraine
-
Business2 days ago
Fiscal update reveals extent of federal government mismanagement
-
Economy2 days ago
The White Pill: Big Government Can Be Defeated (Just Ask the Soviet Union)
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
A Potpourri of the World’s Unexposed Scandals
-
National2 days ago
As Trudeau’s government teeters, Pierre Poilievre pushes for immediate election call
-
conflict2 days ago
Trump’s election victory shows the American people want peace in Ukraine
-
COVID-191 day ago
Biden HHS extends immunity for COVID shot manufacturers through 2029