Environment Committee on Oct. 25th, 2018

[Wayne Stetski]

In British Columbia, when carbon pricing came into place 10 years ago, in 2007, we all got a cheque in the mail from the government in preparation for the new tax coming in. In 2008, when the tax came in, the money went into a pool, and various organizations could apply for funds out of that pool to invest in green initiatives.

I was mayor of Cranbrook for three years, and at one point we received permission to reinvest our carbon offset costs in our community rather than pay them to the province. As long as we were spending the equivalent amount to benefit the community, we were allowed to do that. I think they ended up putting it in general revenue, which is the worst thing to do with any kind of a targeted tax.

Do you have any views on the best way to implement a price on carbon, a price on pollution?

[Anne-Raphaëlle Audouin]

There's still a bit of trial and error. The systems are being designed. There are examples at the provincial levels that are demonstrating that the system can work, as in B.C. You were quoting that example. We're still designing it at the national level and trying to replace whatever doesn't exist at the provincial level and putting stringent measures in place.

Experience is key to success in that area. It's really the first time Canada has tried to do this at the national level. That's about the extent of the feedback we have just yet.

[Wayne Stetski]

There's no particular model you would prefer.

[Patrick Bateman]

Just to add to what Anne-Raphaëlle has said, there are a number of different options for revenue recycling, and they meet different objectives. From CanCORE's perspective, the most important thing for carbon pricing is a clear price signal that will shift investment, over the long term, from emitting to non-emitting generation.

The revenues and what can be done with those is also an important and beneficial conversation, but that price signal is the most important part.

[Michael Binnion]

I would just like to add that the new Shell LNG plant in British Columbia is against the world benchmark of LNG plants. Forget coal and other LNG around the world; it's generating 50% fewer emissions, yet the B.C. carbon tax and climate policy discourages the building of that plant.

[The Chair]

Well, that takes us to 17 minutes to bells. Given how we divide things up, I'm not sure that it's worth trying to squeeze anything else in, because it will be really tight.

With that, again, thank you so much to our witnesses for their flexibility and the testimony they brought to us, and the brief discussion we've had. We will adjourn for today. Everybody can head back upstairs. We'll pick this up again next week. Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.