Alberta NDP government seeks to lead in green initiatives

Could carbon taxes improve Canadian influence on the international stage?

Environmental concerns were amongst the most hotly debated topics amidst Canada’s 2015 national election, and in the end the Conservatives’ monotonous defense fell on deaf ears. Canadians have shown a proactive interest in maintaining responsible environmental policies, and in the case of BC we have proven ourselves capable of shouldering the burden of carbon taxes, regardless of the economy. On Nov. 22, Alberta implemented its own carbon taxes, with ambitious goals to start leading in clean energy initiatives.

The carbon tax plan is not, however, without criticism. Alberta-based Wildrose party leader Brian Jean claims that the NDP’s decision to shut down 18 coal-based power plants in Alberta could lead to “the most dramatic power price spike in Alberta history.” In doubt of the Alberta carbon tax plan, Jean adds that in BC the carbon tax plan had worked because the Government levied lower income taxes, offsetting the increasing costs of gasoline and heating.

The carbon tax plan is set to cost Alberta citizens $500 extra annually to acquire gas for heating or transportation, the figure does not account for electricity or effects of the carbon tax on other goods. Though the NDP has created an adjustment fund from what money is collected from the tax, there is concern that the money will not flow back to Alberta households.

In announcing the plan last month, Premier of Alberta Rachel Notley confirms that, further down the road, the government may consider using portions of the carbon tax to pay portions of the provincial debt—though not right away, as the economy is currently in a fragile position. Notley adds that “low and middle-income Albertans will experience not that much pain,” adding further that those who act in anticipation of the tax could even experience gain when rebates are mailed out.

The provincial government of Alberta has chosen not to introduce income tax cuts like those seen in BC because they believe revenue neutrality doesn’t encourage people to lower their use of gas or electricity. There are a lot of prices to pay to set an example in leadership, and Alberta might just have their plates full. As the province leading the oil and gas industry in Canada, this demands a drastic and sudden change, perhaps undeservedly to the average family household.

As unrelenting as the tax may be—at least, in comparison to BC’s—a portion of the tax proceeds will be funding clean energy technology and research, as well as public transit and programs to reduce Alberta’s energy usage. The stakes are high, but is the reward? Besides helping to improve the environment, on the international stage it just might be a recuperating element in Canada’s global influence.

During the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, Justin Trudeau held his first formal meeting since becoming Prime Minister with President Obama. Canada’s international influence in clean energy received a second wind because of the ambitious standards we have set for ourselves. Obama refers to Trudeau with a regard seemingly higher than Harper’s, saying, “The fact is we now have a very strong partner in Canada.”

Obama’s refusal of the Keystone XL pipeline project was rooted in environmental concerns, expressing doubt in the transport of “dirty” oil from Alberta across the United States. A dedication to clean environmental policy in today’s world could be essential to large trade agreements with our allies and neighbors. Harper’s Government sought the situation from the eyes of a shrewd businessman, calling the deal a “no-brainer.” Now, with a new Canadian government to work with, it’s clear that President Obama was not just looking for a good deal—he was looking for an environmentally responsible deal as well.