Carney says as PM he would replace the Carbon Tax with something ‘more effective’

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Carney stumbles out the gate on carbon taxes

Prime minister hopeful Mark Carney is supposed to be the economic messiah sent to save the Liberals from the depths of polling purgatory.

But right out the gate, Carney showed he doesn’t have an answer to the most important question:

Will he keep the carbon tax?

Carney should have seen that question coming. His campaign leaked to the media that he would scrap the carbon tax. But when reporters asked him that question at his campaign kickoff in Edmonton, he went wonky and wobbly.

It should have been a yes or no answer. Instead, Carney served up an unappetizing word salad.

“If you are going to take out the carbon tax, we should replace it with something that is at least, if not more, effective,” Carney said. “Perception may be that it takes out more than the rebate provides, but reality is different, and Canadians will miss that money.”

Carney’s stance on the carbon tax is clear as mud and it’s bad for two key reasons.

First: he’d replace the carbon tax with something more “effective.”

The carbon tax has been very effective at sucking a lot of money out of the wallets of Canadians. And the carbon tax has been ineffective at hitting the government’s own emissions targets.

The carbon tax is an expensive failure.

Second: Carney parrots the insulting Trudeau government narrative that the carbon tax is all a “perception” problem.

The message is Canadians are too stupid to appreciate the genius of the carbon tax, and if the government could change the perception of the masses, the carbon tax would be just fine.

Worse for Carney, his answer was an assault on his own brand.

Carney’s the guy who is supposed to have his homework done. Instead, he shrugged at the obvious question, saying he’d release a “comprehensive” plan later.

In other words: just trust him.

But here’s the thing: Carney should have had an answer yesterday and taxpayers have trust issues.

When the Liberals won the 2015 election, their platform was sparse on details about their future signature policy. The carbon tax was buried on page 39 of their platform as “a price on carbon.”

The Liberal government imposed a carbon tax in 2019 misleading Canadians, saying the tax would stop at 11 cents per litre of gasoline in 2022.

“The commitment was to go up to 2022,” then environment minister Catherine McKenna said, shortly before the 2019 federal election. “There was no intention to go up beyond that, there’s no secret agenda.”

After the election, the Trudeau government announced it would keep cranking up the carbon tax every year until it cost 37 cents per litre in 2030. Filling up a minivan at that rate would cost nearly $30 extra in just the carbon tax.

The current Liberal government still won’t rule out future carbon tax hikes.

The government also claims most families get more back in rebates than they pay in the carbon tax, despite the Parliamentary Budget Officer issuing three reports confirming the carbon tax costs Canadians.

The carbon tax will cost the average family up to $399 this year, even with the rebates factored in, according to the PBO.

Liberal leadership hopefuls who want to earn trust with taxpayers must push the Trudeau cabinet to scrap the carbon tax immediately.

The next Liberal leader faces a daunting timeline.

When Parliament comes back on March 24, there will be a throne speech, then likely a flurry of confidence motions. This could bring down the government and trigger an election.

On April 1, the government is set to hike the carbon tax.

Does Carney want to hike the carbon tax during the first week of his election campaign?

If Carney is as savvy as we’ve been told, then his answer should be a loud “no.”

To prove to Canadians he’s opposed to the carbon tax, Carney must call on the Trudeau cabinet to scrap it right now.

Related Topics:#CanadianTaxpayersFederation #FrancoTerrazzano feature LiberalLeadership MarkCarneyCarbonTax

Up Next

Freeland and Carney owe Canadians clear answer on carbon taxes

Don't Miss

Biden preemptively pardons Fauci, Cheney, Milley on way out

Todayville

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

Liberals to increase CBC funding to nearly $2 billion per year

Business / 33 mins ago

Trump promises new era of government efficiency with DOGE

illegal immigration / 60 mins ago

Trump to declare national emergency on border, issue executive orders

Business

Liberals to increase CBC funding to nearly $2 billion per year

Published on January 20, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The Department of Canadian Heritage promised funding to offset the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s nearly 10 percent drop in ad revenue last year despite an audience share of 1.7 percent, meaning over 98 percent of the country is not watching the network.

The Liberal government has promised to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to compensate CBC-TV for ads that the network cannot sell.

According to information released January 20 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Liberal-run Department of Canadian Heritage will give CBC millions more, bringing the network’s total parliamentary grant near $2 billion a year.

“The CBC has been grappling with a range of financial pressures that are challenging its ability to maintain programming and service levels,” Liberals argued, adding that their department will be “providing additional funding to make it less reliant on private advertising with a goal of eliminating advertising during news and other public affairs shows.”

“The CBC is a pillar of Canada’s creative economy, a key provider of programming made by and for Canadians and a significant source of trusted news and information,” Liberals claimed.

“This government is committed to ensuring the sustainability of the CBC so that it can continue to create public value and adapt to the needs and expectations of Canadians,” the department continued.

The increased government subsidies come after an October report found that CBC’s advertising revenue dropped nearly 10 percent last year.

Furthermore, CBC’s own quarterly report found that its network audience share is only 1.7%, meaning more than 98% of Canadians are not watching CBC.

However, Liberals have chosen to ignore the fact that Canadians are not watching CBC, instead spending millions of dollars to prop up the failing outlet.

Beginning in 2019, Parliament changed the Income Tax Act to give yearly rebates of 25 percent for each news employee in cabinet-approved media outlets earning up to $55,000 a year to a maximum of $13,750.

Last November, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau again announced increased payouts for legacy media outlets that coincide with the leadup to the 2025 election. The subsidies are expected to cost taxpayers $129 million over the next five years.

That amount to the CBC is in addition to massive media payouts that already make up roughly 70 percent of its operating budget and total more than $1 billion annually.

However, many have pointed out that the obscene amount of money thrown at CBC by Liberals is a ploy to buy the outlet’s loyalty.

Furthermore, in October, Canadian Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge’s department admitted that federally funded media outlets buy “social cohesion.”

Additionally, in September, House leader Karina Gould directed mainstream media reporters to “scrutinize” Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, who has repeatedly condemned government-funded media as an arm of the Liberals.

Gould’s comments were in reference to Poilievre’s promise to defund the CBC if elected prime minister. Poilievre is a longtime critic of government-funded media, especially the CBC.

Business

Trump promises new era of government efficiency with DOGE

Published on January 20, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Brett Rowland

Group files suit over DOGE secrecy on Trump’s first day

President Donald Trump promised Americans that their federal government would operate more efficiently with the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency.

“My administration will establish the brand new Department of Government Efficiency,” the 47th president said to applause from Republicans.

Trump’s remarks on DOGE came the same day as a nonprofit group joined a union to file suit over the outside agency, alleging its secret meetings violate federal law.

The complaint, filed by Public Citizen and the American Federation of Government Employees, alleges DOGE violates the Federal Advisory Committee Act because “members do not have a fair balance of viewpoints, meetings are held in secret and without public notice and records and work product are not available to the public.”

“AFGE will not stand idly by as a secretive group of ultra-wealthy individuals with major conflicts of interest attempt to deregulate themselves and give their own companies sweetheart government contracts while firing civil servants and dismantling the institutions designed to serve the American people,” AFGE National President Everett Kelley said in a statement. “This fight is about fairness, accountability, and the integrity of our government.”

Trump spoke about DOGE during his inauguration after making bold promises for the department after winning the 2024 election.

Trump picked Tesla CEO Elon Musk and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy to lead DOGE. Trump said the new group will pave the way for his administration to “dismantle government bureaucracy, slash excess regulation, cut wasteful expenditures and restructure federal agencies.”

Both Musk and Ramaswamy attended Trump’s inauguration Monday. The two men previously outlined their plans for DOGE, which includes reducing regulations that would lead to mass layoffs of federal employees.

“A drastic reduction in federal regulations provides sound industrial logic for mass head-count reductions across the federal bureaucracy,” Musk and Ramaswamy wrote in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal in November. “DOGE intends to work with embedded appointees in agencies to identify the minimum number of employees required at an agency for it to perform its constitutionally permissible and statutorily mandated functions.”

AFGE, which represents more than 800,000 workers in nearly every federal agency, had previously denounced DOGE. Kelley said it will hollow out the federal government and its workforce.

“By their very nature, cuts of this size also would require slashing spending on our military, homeland security, federal law enforcement, and virtually every aspect of our government operations,” he said. “This kind of financial pressure would lead to painful, widespread reductions in services that will affect Americans from every walk of life.”

Trump has promised to cut “hundreds of billions” in federal spending in 2025 through the reconciliation process. DOGE co-leader Musk initially suggested DOGE could cut $2 trillion in spending. Musk more recently said the group will aim for $2 trillion, but likely come up with half that amount.

Congress controls the purse strings for discretionary spending, which totaled about $1.7 trillion in 2023. Congress generally allocates about half of its discretionary spending to the U.S. Department of Defense.

“The number of federal employees to cut should be at least proportionate to the number of federal regulations that are nullified: Not only are fewer employees required to enforce fewer regulations, but the agency would produce fewer regulations once its scope of authority is properly limited,” Musk and Ramaswamy wrote. “Employees whose positions are eliminated deserve to be treated with respect, and DOGE’s goal is to help support their transition into the private sector. The president can use existing laws to give them incentives for early retirement and to make voluntary severance payments to facilitate a graceful exit.”

Congress has run a deficit every year since 2001. In the past 50 years, the federal government has ended with a fiscal year-end budget surplus four times, most recently in 2001.

Last week, the federal government reported net costs of $7.4 trillion in fiscal year 2024, but it couldn’t fully account for its spending. The U.S. Government Accountability Office, which is Congress’s research arm, said that the federal government must address “serious deficiencies” in federal financial management and correct course on its “unsustainable” long-term fiscal path.