Canadians should understand costs of Ottawa’s Emissions Reduction Plan

On its first day in office, the Trump administration withdrew from the Paris climate agreement and began a regulation effort aimed largely at the energy sector. Meanwhile, the Trudeau government wants to reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 to satisfy its commitment to the Paris agreement that Trudeau signed back in 2016.

But far from “building a strong economy” and making Canada “more competitive,” as the government claims, its Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) will hurt Canada’s already struggling economy while failing to meet its own emission reduction targets.

In essence, the ERP has two components. The first one, and probably the most well-known to Canadians, is the carbon tax, which places a cost on fossil fuel use based on the amount of GHG emissions produced. The tax increased to $80 per tonne on April 1, 2024 and is scheduled to reach $170 per tonne by 2030.

The second—and least discussed—ERP component is the Trudeau government’s cascade of regulatory measures and mandates including requirements for fuel producers and importers to reduce the carbon content of their fuels, and electric vehicle mandates that require all new (light-duty) vehicles sold to be zero-emission by 2035 (with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030). Additional measures include restrictions on fertilizer use in agriculture, emissions caps in the oil and gas industry, energy efficiency mandates for buildings, and more. With more regulations come increased costs to producers, and these costs are largely passed to consumers in the form of higher prices.

But aside from vague and unsupported claims that the ERP will strengthen the economy, the government hasn’t provided a detailed assessment of the plan’s costs and benefits. In other words, while the government has outlined how it plans to reduce emissions—carbon taxes, regulations, mandates—we still don’t know how much these policies will cost or how they will benefit Canadians.

But a recent study published by the Fraser Institute evaluate the economic and environmental impacts of the ERP.

According to the study’s projections, the carbon tax alone will cost $1,302 per worker annually by 2030, reduce employment by an estimated 57,000 jobs, and shrink the Canadian economy by 1.5 per cent compared to a scenario without the ERP. Considering that the economy grew just by 1.3 per cent in 2023, this cost is significant.

After you account for the ERP’s additional regulatory measures and mandates, the economic cost rises. By 2030, the full implementation of the ERP—which includes the carbon tax, regulatory measures and mandates—will shrink the economy by 6.2 per cent, cost Canadian workers $6,700 annually, and reduce employment by 164,000 jobs. Alberta, of course, will bear a large portion of these costs.

To make matters worse, the ERP will still fall short of the Trudeau government’s 2030 emission-reduction target. According to the study, the ERP will reduce Canada’s GHG emissions by about 26.5 per cent between 2019 and 2030, achieving only approximately 57 per cent of the government’s target. In short, Trudeau’s climate plan won’t deliver the economic growth or environmental impact the government anticipates.

Canadians should understand the costs of the Trudeau government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP), which won’t achieve its targets while making Canadians worse-off. Any government should reject climate targets and policies where Canadians are merely an afterthought.

Don't Miss

Trump orders federal employees to remove pronouns from email signatures by end of day

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

Canadians should understand costs of Ottawa’s Emissions Reduction Plan

Alberta / 5 hours ago

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to consider halting COVID vaccines for healthy children

Opinion / 5 hours ago

JK Rowling condemns Canadian policy allowing ‘transgender’ males in women’s shelters

Business

Oil may be exempt from Trump Tariffs as Trump says oil “has nothing to do with it”

Published on January 31, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Trump to impose 25% tariffs on Canada, Mexico this Saturday

U.S. President Donald Trump has confirmed that he will implement 25% tariffs on all imports from Canada and Mexico this Saturday.

During a January 30 interview, Trump announced that, beginning February 1, he will impose 25% tariffs on all imports from Canada and Mexico while Canada’s Parliament remains suspended thanks to an order by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“Number one is the people that have poured into our country so horribly and so much,” Trump told media. “Number two are the drugs, fentanyl, and everything else that have come into the country; and, number three are the massive subsidies that we’re giving to Canada and to Mexico in the form of deficits.”

It’s unclear if Canada’s oil will be exempt from the tariff as Trump told reporters that oil “has nothing to do with it.”

Trump’s tariffs aim to force Canada and Mexico to take serious action against illegal drug smuggling and immigration which occurs at their borders.   

Initially, the tariff was to take effect on his first day of office, January 20, but was postponed until February 1, leaving Canadians under two weeks to respond to his demands. 

However, because Trudeau prorogued Parliament until March 24, little action has been taken by Canadian politicians to respond to Trump’s threats.

Trudeau, who is slated to resign once a new Liberal leader is selected, has told Canadians that Liberals are considering all options, including retaliatory tariffs.

“We will not hesitate to act,” Trudeau said at a meeting of the Council on Canada-U.S. Relations on January 17. “We will respond and, I will say it again, everything is on the table.”  

“Canada is facing a critical challenge. On February 1st we are facing the risk of unjustified 25% tariffs by our largest trading partner that would have damaging consequences across our country,” wrote Poilievre in a news release Tuesday. 

Meanwhile, polls have revealed that 77 percent of Canadians want an immediate election to deal with the tariff threat.  

Ontario Premier Doug Ford has done just that, calling a snap election to take place on February 27. The election, according to Ford, allows him to secure a new “four-year” mandate from Ontario voters to respond to Trump’s tariffs.

News that the tariffs are to take effect also come after Trump has repeatedly suggested that he would like to annex Canada and make the country the “51st state” of America.

While Trump’s comments were initially passed over as a joke or trolling, Trump has persistently referred to Canada as the “51st state” and even threatened to use “economic force” to overtake Canada.

Trump claimed that there is a $200 billion trade deficit between Canada and the U.S. regarding spending on “subsidies” and the fact that the U.S. military is there to also “protect Canada.”

Just last week, Trump told the World Economic Forum (WEF), “We love Canada, but they might be better off as part of the United States.” He made the comments to suggest that Canada, as a way of avoiding the tariffs he is threatening, should just up and join the United States.

Trump’s repeated threats have drawn the ire of many Canadians, who boldly tell the president that Canada will remain its own country. Others have warned that the move to annex Canada would bring about the beginning of a one-world government.

Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre, who is likely to become prime minister in the next election, has had choice words for Trump. He has said Canada will “never” become a U.S. “state.”

“We are a great and independent country,” he continued. “We are the best friend to the U.S. We spent billions of dollars and hundreds of lives helping Americans retaliate against Al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks. We supply the U.S. with billions of dollars of high-quality and totally reliable energy well below market prices. We buy hundreds of billions of dollars of American goods.”

Business

Canada holds valuable bargaining chip in trade negotiations with Trump

Published on January 30, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Alex Whalen and Jake Fuss

On the eve of a possible trade war with the United States, Canadian policymakers have a valuable bargaining chip they can play in any negotiations—namely, Canada’s “supply management” system.

During his first day in the Oval Office, President Donald Trump said he may impose “25 per cent” tariffs on Canadian and Mexican exports into the United States on Feb. 1. In light of his resounding election win and Republican control of both houses of congress, Trump has a strong hand.

In response, Canadian policymakers—including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ontario Premier Doug Ford—have threatened retaliation. But any retaliation (tariffs imposed on the U.S., for example) would likely increase the cost of living for Canadians.

Thankfully, there’s another way. To improve our trade position with the U.S.—and simultaneously benefit Canadian consumers—policymakers could dismantle our outdated system of supply management, which restricts supply, controls imports and allows producers of milk, eggs and poultry to maintain higher prices for their products than would otherwise exist in a competitive market. Government dictates who can produce, what can be produced, when and how much. While some aspects of the system are provincial (such as certain marketing boards), the federal government controls many key components of supply management including import restrictions and national quotas.

How would this help Canada minimize the Trump threat?

In the U.S., farmers backed Trump by a three-to-one margin in the 2024 election, and given Trump’s overall views on trade, the new administration will likely target Canadian supply management in the near future. (Ironically, Trump has cried foul about Canadian tariffs, which underpin our supply management system.) Given the transactional nature of Trump’s leadership, Canadian negotiators could put supply management on the negotiating table as a bargaining chip to counter demands that would actually damage the Canadian economy, such as Trump’s tariffs. This would allow Trump to deliver increased access to the Canadian market for the farmers that overwhelmingly supported him in the election.

And crucially, this would also be good for Canadian consumers. According to a 2015 study, our supply management system costs the average Canadian household an estimated extra $300 to $444 annually, and higher prices hurt lower-income Canadians more than any other group. If we scrapped supply management, we’d see falling prices at the grocery store and increased choice due to dairy imports from the U.S.

Unfortunately, Parliament has been moving in the opposite direction. Bill C-282, which recently passed in the House of Commons and is now before the Senate, would entrench supply management by restricting the ability of Canadian trade negotiators to use increased market access as a tool in international trade negotiations. In other words, the bill—if passed—will rob Canadian negotiators of a key bargaining chip in negotiations with Trump. With a potential federal election looming, any party looking to strengthen Canada’s trade position and benefit consumers here at home should reject Bill C-282.

Trade negotiations in the second Trump era will be difficult so our policymakers in Ottawa and the provinces must avoid self-inflicted wounds. By dismantling Canada’s system of supply management, they could win concessions from Team Trump, possibly avert a destructive tit-for-tat tariff exchange, and reduce the cost of living for Canadians.