From Resource Works

“These latest measures fail to recognize provinces have jurisdiction over the development and management of electricity. The federal regulations are duplicative, inefficient, and add to costs.”

The federal government has clarified its clean-energy goal for a net-zero power grid.

Its final Clean Electricity Regulations target a net-zero grid across the country by 2050. But didn’t Ottawa previously, in August 2023, set a goal of 2035?

Certainly, one leading environmental group declared: “The federal government has committed to achieving zero-emissions electricity by 2035.”

And a law firm that analyses energy matters told followers in August 2023: “Government of Canada releases draft Clean Electricity Regulations aimed at achieving net-zero emissions from Canada’s electricity grid by 2035.”

What Ottawa said in August 2023 was this: “The proposed regulations would set performance standards that would ensure that the sector achieves significant transformation by 2035, so that a robust foundation of clean electricity is available to power the electric technologies (e.g., electric transportation) needed to support Canada’s transition to a net-zero GHG emissions economy by 2050.”

Announcing that 2035 goal was a case of fuzzy wording, according to Energy Minister Jonathan Wilkinson. He said Ottawa could have been more precise in its language and context around what exactly the 2035 target referred to.

He now says: “2035 was really having a plan as to how you were going to reduce emissions to be able to get to a net-zero economy by 2050… Perhaps we were not as precise with our language as we should have been.”

Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault issued an update in February 2024: “All G7 countries, including Canada and the United States, have committed to transitioning to a net-zero electricity grid as a foundational measure to help achieve low-carbon economies by 2050.”

And he now says: “We knew from the get-go, from where we are to where we need to be, we couldn’t get there in 10 years… It was always our intention that we want to see things happening before 2035. But that we wouldn’t be able to get to a decarbonized grid before 2050.”

Whatever they said, meant, clarified, updated, and/or corrected, the new regulations face opposition and a court challenge from Alberta, for one.

Premier Danielle Smith criticized the latest regulations as unconstitutional, arguing they seek to regulate an area of provincial jurisdiction.

“After years of watching the federal government gaslight Canadians about the feasibility of achieving a net-zero power grid by 2030, we are gratified to see Ottawa finally admit that the Government of Alberta’s plan to achieve a carbon-neutral power grid by 2050 is a more responsible, affordable, and realistic target.

“That said, the federal government’s finalized electricity regulations remain entirely unconstitutional as they seek to regulate in an area of exclusive provincial jurisdiction. They also require generators to meet unreasonable and unattainable federally mandated interim targets beginning in 2035, which will still make electricity unaffordable for Canadian families.

“Alberta will therefore be preparing an immediate court challenge of these electricity regulations.”

Saskatchewan’s government said in a news release that it will simply not comply with the new regulations.

“Our government unequivocally rejects federal intrusion into our exclusive provincial jurisdiction over the electricity system.

“Saskatchewan will prioritize maintaining an affordable and reliable electricity grid to support our regional needs and growth. The federal Clean Electricity Regulations are unconstitutional, unaffordable, unachievable, and Saskatchewan cannot, and will not, comply with them.”

The Business Council of BC slammed the new federal regulations on multiple grounds: constitutionality, jeopardizing the reliability of electricity delivery, higher costs for businesses and households, limiting investment, regional inequities, technological limitations, and risks to greenhouse-gas management.

“These latest measures fail to recognize provinces have jurisdiction over the development and management of electricity. The federal regulations are duplicative, inefficient, and add to costs.”

And: “It is important to recognize that Canada’s combined electricity systems are already 84% non-emitting, and that electricity represents less than 10% of Canada’s total emissions. The sector has made more progress in reducing emissions than any other sector in the country over the past two decades.

“We urge the government to set aside these new regulations and work collaboratively with the electricity sector to develop a more balanced approach that respects provincial roles and will not risk undermining investment and driving up costs. The path to a cleaner energy system requires cooperation, not regulation.”

The latest announcement from Ottawa includes these statements:

• “Federal analyses find that the Regulations have no impact on electricity rates for the vast majority of Canadians, and in some cases, will even have a slightly positive impact on rates. Independent third-party expert modelling substantiates federal analysis that the Regulations are feasible.
• “To ensure rates are affordable for Canadian families over the coming decade, the federal government is investing $60 billion to support the electricity sector.
• “The adoption of efficient electric appliances, vehicles, and heat pumps presents an enormous opportunity for families to save money on their energy bills.
• “In the shift to clean electricity, 84% of households are expected to spend less on their monthly energy costs, when accounting for the over $60 billion in federal clean electricity incentives. This could lead to $15 billion in total energy-related savings for Canadians by 2035.”

All subject to clarification, updating, and/or correction—and Alberta’s promised court case.

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

On Monday, after weeks of turmoil and speculation, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Canadians he’ll resign after the Liberal Party choses a new leader. There will be much talk about Trudeau’s legacy, but the modern Trudeau era was distinguished—among other things—by unprecedented levels of government spending.

The numbers don’t lie.

For example, from 2018 to 2023 Justin Trudeau recorded the six-highest levels of spending (on a per-person basis, after adjusting for inflation) in Canadian history, even after excluding emergency spending during the pandemic. For context, that means the Trudeau government spent more per person during those six years than the federal government spent during the Great Depression, both world wars and the height of the Global Financial Crisis in 2008-09.

Unsurprisingly, the Trudeau government was unable to balance the budget during his nine years in power. After first being elected in 2015, Trudeau promised to balance the budget by 2019—then ran nine consecutive deficits including an astonishing $61.9 billion deficit for the 2023/24 fiscal year, the largest deficit of any year outside of COVID.

The result? Historically high levels of government debt compared to previous prime ministers. From 2020 to 2023, the government racked up the four highest years of total federal debt per person (inflation-adjusted) in Canadian history. Compared to 2014/15 (the last full year under Prime Minister Harper), federal debt per person had increased by $14,127 (as of 2023/24).

While a portion of this debt accumulation took place during the pandemic, a sizable chunk of federal COVID-related spending was wasteful. And federal debt increased significantly before, during and after the pandemic. In short, you can’t blame COVID for the Trudeau government’s wild spending and borrowing spree.

This fiscal record, marked by record-high levels, defines Prime Minister Trudeau’s fiscal legacy, which will burden Canadians for years to come. Spending-driven deficits and debt accumulation impose costs on Canadians—largely in the form of higher debt interest costs, which will hit $53.7 billion in 2024/25 or $1,301 per person. That’s more than all revenue collected via the federal GST.

And because government borrowing pushes the responsibility of paying for today’s spending into the future, today’s debt burden will fall disproportionately on younger generations of Canadians who will face higher taxes to finance today’s borrowing. And a growing tax burden (due to debt accumulation) can hurt future economic performance and the country’s ability to compete with other jurisdictions worldwide for business investment and high-skilled workers.

Under Trudeau, Canada has had an abysmal investment record. From 2014 to 2022 (the latest year of available data), inflation-adjusted total business investment (in plants, machinery, equipment and new technologies but excluding residential construction) in Canada declined by $34 billion. During the same period, after adjusting for inflation, business investment declined by $3,748 per worker—from $20,264 per worker in 2014 to $16,515 per worker in 2022. Due in part to Canada’s collapsing business investment, incomes and living standards have stagnated in recent years.

At the same time, Trudeau raised taxes on top-earners who help drive job-creation and prosperity across the income spectrum, and increased the tax burden on middle-class Canadians. Indeed, 86 per cent of middle-income Canadian families pay more in taxes than they did in 2015.

After approximately a decade in office, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is stepping down. In his wake, he leaves behind a record of unprecedented spending, a mountain of debt, and higher taxes. It’s no wonder many Canadians are looking for change.