OTTAWA — In a decision that marked an important victory for
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s climate change agenda, Canada’s Supreme Court
ruled that the federal government’s imposition of carbon taxes in provinces
that oppose them was constitutional.
اضافة اعلان
Citing Parliament’s power to legislate on matters related to “peace,
order and good government,” the court said that fighting climate change by
reducing greenhouse gas emissions was a matter of “national concern” protected
under the constitution.
“This matter is critical to our response to an existential
threat to human life in Canada and around the world,” the court wrote in its
6-3 decision. “Climate change is real. It is caused by greenhouse gas emissions
resulting from human activities and it poses a grave threat to humanity’s
future.”
The concept of carbon pricing has been widely endorsed by
economists and, according to the World Bank, some form of it has been carried
out or is in development in 64 countries, either through direct taxes on fossil
fuels or through cap-and-trade programs.
Setting minimum carbon prices as a way to reduce emissions and
encourage efficiency is a cornerstone of Trudeau’s climate change program.
During the 2015 election campaign that first brought him to power, Trudeau
emphasized the need for provinces to implement carbon pricing, an approach
opposed by his Conservative predecessor, Stephen Harper.
Several US states have carbon pricing programs, notably
California. Money and tax credits to address climate change are expected to
underpin much of President Joe Biden’s coming spending proposals, which aides
and documents suggest could cost as much as $4 trillion over the next decade.
But several people familiar with the forthcoming infrastructure
package in the United States said that there are no plans to price carbon
emissions. Instead, the president plans to greatly raise fuel efficiency
standards for cars, forcing automakers toward electric vehicles through
regulation, not legislation. Similarly, Biden plans to reimpose strict
emissions regulations on electric power plants to move the sector away from
coal.
Republicans in Congress remain firmly opposed to a carbon tax
and have voted repeatedly and nearly unanimously over the years to bar the
government from imposing one.
Like Republicans in the United States, conservative premiers in
the oil-producing provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan have long strenuously
campaigned against carbon pricing. They were joined by Doug Ford, another
Conservative, who canceled the carbon pricing program in Ontario shortly after
he became premier of Canada’s most populous province in 2018.
Court challenges by those three provinces of Trudeau’s carbon pricing
law ultimately led to the Supreme Court’s decision.
“We certainly would hope that this brings an end to the
jurisdictional and partisan battle around climate action here in Canada,” said
Keith Brooks, programs director at Environmental Defence, an advocacy group. “People,
including premiers who don’t like carbon pricing, use it as a political wedge
and to sow division but also misinformation.”
While the Supreme Court decision’s detailed the dangers of
climate changes to Canada and its coastlines, Arctic region and Indigenous
people in particular, none of the three provinces that started the legal
challenges dispute its effects. Their objections instead focused on the
argument that Trudeau’s program had overstepped the federal government’s
constitutional powers.
In 2019, Trudeau set a minimum price for carbon. It will become
40 Canadian dollars ($31.71) a metric ton April 1 and will reach 170 dollars a
ton in 2030. Most provinces have their own programs to meet those targets,
either through a direct charge on fuels and industry emissions or by setting a
cap on emissions and then creating a marketplace for industries that exceed the
limit to buy emission permits from other businesses who fall below the cap.
The federal government has only stepped in when a province, like
Ontario under Ford, refused to price carbon. In those cases, it placed a tax on
fuel and set other fees for industrial emissions.
Individual Canadians receive carbon tax rebates from the
government to compensate for the surcharge on fuel. A review by Parliament’s
budget watchdog found that most households are paid more in rebates than they
spend on carbon taxes. Households can boost that bonus by further cutting
emissions by using more efficient or electric vehicles or improving their
heating systems.
Jason Kenney, the premier of Alberta, who canceled his province’s
program, told reporters that he was disappointed with the decision but declined
to say if his province will come up with a carbon pricing system to replace the
federally imposed one.
“We’re going to consult with Albertans and talk to our allied
provinces to determine the best way forward,” he said.
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law in
part because the federal plan only kicks in if provinces do not set up their
programs, thus maintaining the shared jurisdiction the two levels of government
hold on environmental issues.
It also concluded that setting a single national minimum price
for carbon is necessary for effectively reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs), which
makes federal involvement essential.
“Addressing climate change requires collective national and
international action,” the court wrote. “This is because the harmful effects of
GHGs are, by their very nature, not confined by borders.”
.jpg)
.jpg)
