Connect with us

Business

Federal government’s emission-reduction plan will cost Canadian workers $6,700 annually by 2030—while failing to meet government’s emission-reduction target

Published

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Ross McKitrick

The federal government’s plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will impose significant costs on Canadians—while also failing to meet the government’s own emission-reduction target, finds a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“The government’s plan will significantly hurt Canada’s economy and cost workers money and jobs,” said Ross McKitrick, professor of economics at the University of Guelph, senior fellow at the Fraser Institute and author of The Economic Impact and GHG Effects of the Federal Government’s Emissions Reduction Plan through 2030.

The government wants to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. To meet this target, the government has enacted a series of policies including the federal carbon tax, clean fuel standards and various other GHG-related regulations such as energy efficiency requirements for buildings,
fertilizer restrictions on farms, and electric vehicle mandates.

The study finds that these combined policies will only reduce GHG emissions by an estimated 57 per cent of the government’s 2030 emission-reduction target.

And crucially, by 2030 these policies will:

• reduce Canada’s GDP by 6.2 per cent
• cost $6,700 per worker annually
• reduce employment in Canada by 164,000 jobs

“This poorly-designed plan, which will worsen the current downward trends in productivity and income, will reduce emissions but at a cost many times higher than the government’s estimated benefits,” McKitrick said.

  • The federal government has set a GHG emissions reduction target of at least 40% below 2005 levels by 2030, equivalent to 38.5% below 2022 levels.
  • This report examines proposed policies aimed at achieving these goals and evaluates their potential impact, aiming to address the gap left by the federal government’s lack of efforts in this matter.
  • The paper uses a peer-reviewed macroeconomic model to assess the federal government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP), including carbon pricing, Clean Fuel Regulations, and other regulatory measures such as EV mandates.
  • It is estimated that the ERP will reduce Canada’s GHG emissions by about 26.5% between 2019 and 2030, reaching approximately 57% of the government’s 2030 target, leaving a substantial gap.
  • The implementation of the ERP is expected to significantly dampen economic growth, with a projected 6.2% reduction in Canada’s economy (i.e., real GDP) compared to the base case by 2030.
  • Income per worker, adjusted for inflation, is forecasted to stagnate during the 2020s and decrease by 1.5% by 2030 compared to 2022 levels.
  • The ERP costs $6,700 per worker annually by 2030, which is more than five times the cost per worker compared to the carbon tax alone.
  • Overall, while the federal ERP will contribute to reducing GHG emissions, it falls short of meeting the 2026 or 2030 targets and imposes significant economic burdens on Canadian households. Additionally, due to the high marginal cost of many regulatory measures, the ERP plan is costlier than it needs to be for what it will accomplish.

Adobe PDF Read the Full Report

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

Business

Every week, Canadians are paying a billion dollars in interest payments thanks to federal government overspending

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Franco Terrazzano

PBO projects higher deficit than Budget 2024

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the federal government to immediately cut spending following today’s Parliamentary Budget Officer report showing the deficit is $6.6 billion over budget.

“As bad as the budget was, the independent budget watchdog is showing federal finances are in even worse shape,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “The Trudeau government continues to mismanage our finances and that means more money wasted on interest charges, higher taxes and more debt that Canadians’ kids and grandkids have to pay back.”

The PBO’s October 2024 Economic and Fiscal Outlook projects this year’s deficit at $46.4 billion. That’s up from Budget 2024’s deficit of $39.8 billion.

“Compared to our March 2024 outlook, we project budgetary deficits that are $4.1 billion higher, on average, over 2023-24 to 2028-29,” according to the PBO. “This increase is largely due to new spending measures announced by the Government.”

Interest on the debt will cost taxpayers $52.8 billion this year, according to the PBO. For comparison, the federal government will spend $52.1 billion through its Canada Health Transfer this year.

Almost 11 per cent of the government’s revenue will go to paying interest on the debt this year, which is above the pre-pandemic level of seven per cent, according to the PBO.

“It’s 2024, the pandemic is over, so it’s ridiculous and unacceptable for the government to be running a $40-billion deficit,” Terrazzano said. “Massive deficits for years mean debt interest charges now blow a $1-billion hole in the budget every week.

“The government must cut spending.”

Continue Reading

Business

All politicians—no matter the party—should engage with natural resource industry

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

When federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault recently criticized Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre for hosting a fundraiser that included an oil company executive, he raised an interesting question. How should our politicians—of all parties—engage with Canada’s natural resource sector and the industry leaders that drive our natural resource economy?

Consider a recent report by the Chamber of Commerce, entitled Canada’s Natural Wealth, which notes that Canada’s natural resources sector contributed $464 billion to Canada’s economy (measured by real GDP) and supported 3 million jobs in 2023. That represented 21 per cent of the national economy and 15 per cent of employment.

Within the natural resources sector, mining, oil and gas, and pipeline transmission represent 45 per cent of all GDP impact from the sector. Oil and gas production accounted for $71 billion in GDP in 2023. If you throw in the support sector for oil and gas production, and for manufacturing petroleum and coal products, that number reaches nearly $100 billion in GDP.

Shouldn’t any responsible leader want to regularly consult with industry leaders in the natural resource sector to determine how they can facilitate expansion of the sector’s contribution to Canada’s economy?

The Chamber also notes that the natural resource sector is a massive contributor to Canada’s balance of trade, reporting that last year the “sector generated $377 billion in exports, accounting for nearly 50% of Canada’s merchandise exports, and a $228 billion trade surplus (that is, exports over imports) —critical for offsetting trade deficits (more imports than exports) in other sectors.”

Again, shouldn’t all government leaders want to work with industry leaders to promote even more natural resource trade and exports?

The natural resource sector also accounts for one out of every seven jobs in Canada’s economy, and the wages offered in the natural resource sector are higher than the national average—annual wages in the sector were $25,000 above the national average in 2023. And workers in the sector are about 2.5 times more productive, meaning they contribute more to the economy compared to workers in other industries.

One more time—shouldn’t all of Canada’s political leaders, regardless of political stripe, want to work with natural resource producers to create more high-paying jobs for more Canadians?

Finally, the Chamber of Commerce report suggests that some environmental policies require swift reform. Proliferating regulations have made investing in Canada a “riskier and more costly proposition.” The report notes that carbon pricing, Clean Fuel Regulations, proposed Clean Electricity Regulations, proposed federal emissions cap and proposed methane regulations all deter investment in Canada. Which means less economic opportunity for many Canadian workers.

With so much of Canada’s economic prosperity at stake, it’s not improper—as Guilbeault and others suggest—for any politician to meet with and seek political support from Canada’s natural resource industry leaders. Indeed, to not meet with and listen to these leaders would be an act of economic recklessness and constitute imprudent leadership of the worst kind.

Continue Reading

Trending

X