The Green Party and the Carbon Tax
[An open letter in response to the Hon. Jay Hill]
Recently, the Hon. Jay Hill suggested that the Green Party’s carbon tax is wrong for Canada. In making his assessment, however, Mr. Hill has failed to consider several key factors.
First, the gradual introduction of a carbon tax is simply one part of our Green Tax Shift policy. In addition to our commitment to balancing budgets and paying down the debt, we are committed to reducing taxes on things we all want to encourage, like income and employment, while increasing taxes on things we want to discourage—things that harm us and our environment.
So, importantly, the Green Tax Shift is revenue-neutral. That is, there would be no net gain to the government’s tax coffers. Greens are genuinely dedicated to open government, less wastefulness in Ottawa, and responsible fiscal management. We will not introduce new taxes unless we can also ensure that taxes on income will also be lowered. And, we will lower these taxes in primarily two ways:
1. Reduce income and payroll taxes to put more money in the pockets of hard-working and prudent Canadians.
2. Allow income splitting to reduce the tax burden on many middle-class Canadians. That is, households where one partner is in a higher tax bracket than the other will end up paying less tax when they are allowed to split their income for tax purposes (i.e. file their income taxes as a family).
By gradually shifting the taxes off the things we would like to encourage and onto things we would like to discourage, we can begin to create a government and a country that is less wasteful, more responsible, and more efficient—a Canada that is not only healthy and prosperous for us, but also for our children and grandchildren.
By gradually increasing the cost of fossil fuel energy in clearly prescribed stages, the carbon tax will drive technological innovation, vehicle fleet conversion, appropriate government regulations, and personal transportation adjustments that will in turn reduce wastefulness. And, in fact, even Duke Energy has publicly called for a carbon tax as a way of sharing the cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors of the economy.
The Green Party is a practical party and we are aware that northern Canadians need to use more energy than Canadians living in urban areas in the south. So, our Green Tax Shift will include a rebate program for low-income Canadians living in rural areas.
In addition, unlike high income taxes which flow into the coffers of the government in Ottawa, the Green Party’s carbon tax would give more financial flexibility and independence to the provinces. Our carbon tax would be federally standardized but provincially-collected so that provinces would retain the tax revenue levied on production within their borders.
Finally, like the provincial and territorial governments, Canadian businesses want two things from their government—predictability and policy coherence. Recently, for example, Tom d’Aquino of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives warned that some businesses were hesitating to invest in Canada because of the uncertain and inconsistent policies of the federal and provincial governments. Green Party MP’s will ensure that the rules are clear, the playing field is level, and decision-making is transparent.
The driving principles of the Greens’ economic policy are reducing waste and maximizing efficiency. As we face growing uncertainty and concern regarding our economy, it is important that we have MP’s who will avoid big government spending and, at the same time, ensure hard work, efficiency, and innovation are rewarded.
Jared Giesbrecht
Green Party Candidate, Prince George – Peace River
- Jared Giesbrecht's blog
- Login or register to post comments





Comments
We may have to provide better definition on point
Lambton Kent Middlesex EDA (SW Ontario)
"In addition, unlike high income taxes which flow into the coffers of the government in Ottawa, the Green Party’s carbon tax would give more financial flexibility and independence to the provinces. Our carbon tax would be federally standardized but provincially-collected so that provinces would retain the tax revenue levied on production within their borders."
Now this does appear to be an appropriate option in our Federal structure.
What it does however is remove the Federal ability to use the carbon tax revenue to do as specified in your previous paragraph: "1. Reduce income and payroll taxes to put more money in the pockets of hard-working and prudent Canadians."
What this might mean is that there would be a massive shift of money to producing provinces who might be induced to distribute it to the hard working in their own provinces... a wonderful idea for them. But it would not put much money in the pockets of voters in consuming provinces. In Ontario, for instance, and Quebec, there would be almost no money to lower provincial income taxes. But the money will come out of consumption in those provinces too.
If the tax is so structured as to put no extra cost on residents of Ontario and Quebec we should expect no reduction in use of fossil fuels, no reduction in emissions as a result of the carbon tax.
If the consuming provinces choose to apply their own carbon tax on all fossil fuels imported from other provinces or further abroad, (this could be a coordinated rate), the consuming provinces could redistribute this to their taxpayers in the manner described, or they could just put it into general revenue. It would not be a federal decision.
Just as how the producing provinces opt to use the windfall from carbon tax, the consuming provinces owe no compliance to the federal government. So Federally, about all GPC would be doing is coordinating the rate of tax so that all provinces use the same rate. Federally we would have no lever to direct how either producing or consuming provinces use the money, whether it will be revenue neutral, whether the tax will benefit mostly middle class or poor or rich... it will not be federal money to direct.