Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Economy

Canada’s current climate plan is ineffective and wasteful

Published

2 years ago

4 minute read

Article submitted by The MacDonald Laurier Institute

Alternative approaches will not only reduce emissions more efficiently but will provide socio-economic benefits beyond Green-House Gas mitigation.

OTTAWA, ON (June 27, 2023): The federal government has committed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40 to 45 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and has spent or committed over $113 billion in climate related initiatives. Yet, Canada will still likely miss its 2030 emissions target by 48 percent. The government risks heavily indebting Canadians without meeting its climate goals.

In this new MLI paper – Maximizing value, minimizing emissions: The cost-effective path for Canada’s climate agenda, Senior Fellow Jerome Gessaroli proposes a climate policy based on international collaboration that would be more cost-effective than policies the government has implemented to date.

“A marginal cost analysis of methane abatement projects shows that it is possible for Canada to reduce its GHG emissions in a more cost-effective way by looking further afield to other countries than by focusing only on domestic projects.”

According to Gessaroli, Canada, along with numerous other countries, has yet to tap into the potential benefits of international cooperation. By leveraging comparative advantages such as technologies, lower costs, and mitigation opportunities, countries can join forces to reduce GHG emissions beyond their territorial borders. Recognition and encouragement of emissions reductions resulting from international collaboration, as outlined in Article 6 of the 2015 Paris Agreement, can lead to more effective climate outcomes compared to domestic initiatives.

Of particular significance is Article 6.2, which allows countries to voluntarily collaborate on GHG emissions reduction and receive credit for reductions achieved outside their political boundaries. Canada can leverage Article 6.2 by engaging in cooperative arrangements with foreign countries to share costs or exchange technical capabilities for mitigation benefits. By doing so, Canada can reduce global emissions while receiving credit toward its formal climate targets under the Paris Agreement.

“The projects can lead to further international collaboration and partnerships in other areas,” writes Gessaroli.

“And depending upon the project, local benefits such as job creation, worker training, enhanced water quality, more efficient water usage, and greater agricultural productivity are possible extras over and above the emissions mitigation.”

Regrettably, the federal government appears to show limited interest in utilizing Article 6.2 to meet greenhouse gas emission goals. With a range of abatement technologies across multiple sectors, Canada possesses the means to facilitate substantial GHG emission reductions in other countries, thereby helping to meet our own climate objectives.

The report concludes by urging the federal government to rethink its climate spending priorities and prioritize policies that deliver the greatest GHG abatement outcomes at the lowest cost. By embracing international collaboration and actively pursuing cooperative climate initiatives, Canada can significantly contribute to global emissions reductions while simultaneously reaping socio-economic benefits.

To learn more, read the full paper here:

***

Jerome Gessaroli is a senior fellow with the Macdonald Laurier Institute. He writes on economic and environmental matters, from a market-based principles perspective. Jerome teaches full-time at the British Columbia Institute of Technology’s School of Business, courses in corporate finance, security analysis, and advanced finance. He was also a visiting lecturer at Simon Fraser University’s Beedie School of Business, teaching into their undergraduate and executive MBA programs.

The Macdonald-Laurier Institute is the only non-partisan, independent national public policy think tank in Ottawa focusing on the full range of issues that fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government.
Related Topics:

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

More from this author
Digital ID / 3 hours ago

Wales Becomes First UK Testbed for Citywide AI-Powered Facial Recognition Surveillance

conflict / 15 hours ago

Hamas, Palestinians paraded dead babies coffins through streets before handover to Israel

Health / 15 hours ago

RFK Jr: There’s no medical justification for vaccinating one-day-old babies for Hepatitis B

Business

Worst kept secret—red tape strangling Canada’s economy

Published on February 22, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

In the past nine years, business investment in Canada has fallen while increasing more than 30 per cent in the U.S. on a real per-person basis. Workers in Canada now receive barely half as much new capital per worker than in the U.S.

According to a new Statistics Canada report, government regulation has grown over the years and it’s hurting Canada’s economy. The report, which uses a regulatory burden measure devised by KPMG and Transport Canada, shows government regulatory requirements increased 2.1 per cent annually from 2006 to 2021, with the effect of reducing the business sector’s GDP, employment, labour productivity and investment.

Specifically, the growth in regulation over these years cut business-sector investment by an estimated nine per cent and “reduced business start-ups and business dynamism,” cut GDP in the business sector by 1.7 percentage points, cut employment growth by 1.3 percentage points, and labour productivity by 0.4 percentage points.

While the report only covered regulatory growth through 2021, in the past four years an avalanche of new regulations has made the already existing problem of overregulation worse.

The Trudeau government in particular has intensified its regulatory assault on the extraction sector with a greenhouse gas emissions cap, new fuel regulations and new methane emissions regulations. In the last few years, federal diktats and expansions of bureaucratic control have swept the auto industry, child care, supermarkets and many other sectors.

Again, the negative results are evident. Over the past nine years, Canada’s cumulative real growth in per-person GDP (an indicator of incomes and living standards) has been a paltry 1.7 per cent and trending downward, compared to 18.6 per cent and trending upward in the United States. Put differently, if the Canadian economy had tracked with the U.S. economy over the past nine years, average incomes in Canada would be much higher today.

Also in the past nine years, business investment in Canada has fallen while increasing more than 30 per cent in the U.S. on a real per-person basis. Workers in Canada now receive barely half as much new capital per worker than in the U.S., and only about two-thirds as much new capital (on average) as workers in other developed countries.

Consequently, Canada is mired in an economic growth crisis—a fact that even the Trudeau government does not deny. “We have more work to do,” said Anita Anand, then-president of the Treasury Board, last August, “to examine the causes of low productivity levels.” The Statistics Canada report, if nothing else, confirms what economists and the business community already knew—the regulatory burden is much of the problem.

Of course, regulation is not the only factor hurting Canada’s economy. Higher federal carbon taxes, higher payroll taxes and higher top marginal income tax rates are also weakening Canada’s productivity, GDP, business investment and entrepreneurship.

Finally, while the Statistics Canada report shows significant economic costs of regulation, the authors note that their estimate of the effect of regulatory accumulation on GDP is “much smaller” than the effect estimated in an American study published several years ago in the Review of Economic Dynamics. In other words, the negative effects of regulation in Canada may be even higher than StatsCan suggests.

Whether Statistics Canada has underestimated the economic costs of regulation or not, one thing is clear: reducing regulation and reversing the policy course of recent years would help get Canada out of its current economic rut. The country is effectively in a recession even if, as a result of rapid population growth fuelled by record levels of immigration, the GDP statistics do not meet the technical definition of a recession.

With dismal GDP and business investment numbers, a turnaround—both in policy and outcomes—can’t come quickly enough for Canadians.

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Business

‘Out and out fraud’: DOGE questions $2 billion Biden grant to left-wing ‘green energy’ nonprofit`

Published on February 22, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

The EPA under the Biden administration awarded $2 billion to a ‘green energy’ group that appears to have been little more than a means to enrich left-wing activists.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Biden administration awarded $2 billion to a “green energy” nonprofit that appears to have been little more than a means to enrich left-wing activists such as former Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams.

Founded in 2023 as a coalition of nonprofits, corporations, unions, municipalities, and other groups, Power Forward Communities (PFC) bills itself as “the first national program to finance home energy efficiency upgrades at scale, saving Americans thousands of dollars on their utility bills every year.” It says it “will help homeowners, developers, and renters swap outdated, inefficient appliances with more efficient and modernized options, saving money for years ahead and ensuring our kids can grow up with cleaner, pollutant-free air.”

The organization’s website boasts more than 300 member organizations across 46 states but does not detail actual activities. It does have job postings for three open positions and a form for people to sign up for more information.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) project, along with new EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, are raising questions about the $2 billion grant PFC received from the Biden EPA’s National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF), ostensibly for the “affordable decarbonization of homes and apartments throughout the country, with a particular focus on low-income and disadvantaged communities.”

PFC’s announcement of the grant is the organization’s only press release to date and is alarming given that the organization had somehow reported only $100 in revenue at the end of 2023.

“I made a commitment to members of Congress and to the American people to be a good steward of tax dollars and I’ve wasted no time in keeping my word,” Zeldin said. “When we learned about the Biden administration’s scheme to quickly park $20 billion outside the agency, we suspected that some organizations were created out of thin air just to take advantage of this.” Zeldin previously announced the Biden EPA had deposited the $20 billion in a Citibank account, apparently to make it harder for the next administration to retrieve and review it.

“As we continue to learn more about where some of this money went, it is even more apparent how far-reaching and widely accepted this waste and abuse has been,” he added. “It’s extremely concerning that an organization that reported just $100 in revenue in 2023 was chosen to receive $2 billion. That’s 20 million times the organization’s reported revenue.”

Daniel Turner, executive director of energy advocacy group Power the Future, told the Beacon that in his opinion “for an organization that has no experience in this, that was literally just established, and had $100 in the bank to receive a $2 billion grant — it doesn’t just fly in the face of common sense, it’s out and out fraud.”

Prominent among PFC’s insiders is Abrams, the former Georgia House minority leader best known for persistent false claims about having the state’s gubernatorial election stolen from her in 2018. Abrams founded two of PFC’s partner organizations (Southern Economic Advancement Project and Fair Count) and serves as lead counsel for a third group (Rewiring America) in the coalition. A longtime advocate of left-wing environmental policies, Abrams is also a member of the national advisory board for advocacy group Climate Power.

Continue Reading

Trending

X