Environment committee  . If you believe that your policy instrument is something like a carbon tax--that would be one of my two options, something that puts a financial penalty on using the atmosphere as a free waste receptacle--you would literally have to have a graduated schedule so everybody knew what

Environment committee  That's well understood. Mr. Jaccard, you talked about taxes and you said that the carbon tax could be between $120 and $150 a tonne. If you consider that every Canadian has a reduction objective of 10 tonnes per person, we'd be sending a bill for $1,500 to everyone in Canada

Environment committee  The carbon tax would be $150 a tonne, and every Canadian has to achieve a reduction of approximately 10 tonnes a year. As there are 30 million Canadians, that means a greenhouse gas reduction of 300 tonnes. If every Canadian has to reduce GHGs by 10 tonnes and you're levying

Environment committee  Going back to taxes, you talked about carbon taxes that should be levied on businesses or individuals.

Environment committee  Mr. Jaccard, you said that if we were serious about reducing greenhouse gas--and I look forward to reading your book, and you've already answered regarding the carbon tax in clarification. You're recommending strongly that we have a graduated scheme. My background is in local

Environment committee   timeframe.” That was what I tried to say in my opening comments. The final point, though, is yes, graduated, we need time, but I believe the policy can be immediate. We have talked about the details of these enough. We have countries that implemented carbon taxes fifteen years ago. So

Environment committee  Very briefly, I often hear this point that any kind of constraint on your domestic economy, a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system--and I don't say tradeable, it has to be a cap, otherwise nothing is going on--will lead to flight of capital. I think it's too late now

Environment committee   is, of course, the price that you put on things? Whether it's a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system, depending on what you put into the machine, you're going to get certain kinds of results. I guess that shows us the policy options and the choices we have to make. The third question

Environment committee  With respect to a carbon tax, we followed the proposal in Quebec with some interest. The concern I raise with any dedicated tax is that revenues go into general revenues, and our experience with dedicated taxes in the past hasn't been very encouraging. The road tax doesn't go

Environment committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to follow up on the discussion that had been started on the carbon tax, I found out to my surprise a couple of weeks ago when I attended a symposium at which one of the speakers was one of the leading experts on biofuels, from Georgia Tech university

Environment committee   we have emission trading or nothing. Emissions trading is seen as a better solution than others. If you ask industry whether it would rather have a carbon tax or emission trading scheme, they will flat out answer that they want the emission trading. If you ask them whether

Environment committee   approaches. The first one was that Canada would not use a carbon tax. The second one was that we would have this absurd price cap for emissions trading. When you start to do that, you become more and more restricted in the policy options you can put forward. So I would encourage

Environment committee   it's carbon trading or a carbon tax, it's essentially a metaphor for putting a price on carbon. We applied a price in the modelling effort that showed in fact that through regulation and pricing mechanisms, which were not in any way destructive to the economy, we could achieve our

Canada's Clean Air Act   investment in new technology, but we will not use a carbon tax, because the only people who end up paying are Canadian taxpayers and we think that they have paid enough through their health. Under a Conservative government, it will only be the polluter that will pay. Any industry

Canada's Clean Air Act   of the process she was involved in? Fourth, why is it that we have to deal with where the short term targets for greenhouse gas emissions are? By that I mean, what does she hope to have achieved by 2012? Fifth, if she will not have a carbon tax, will she at least accept a cap and trade