Finance committee  Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. I represent Canada's Ecofiscal Commission. We are a panel of senior economists from across the country supported by a cross-partisan advisory board with representatives from industry, civil society, and perspectives across

Finance committee  There are no examples so far. That being said, the previously proposed Ontario plan, before the change in leadership, would have included a fully revenue-neutral carbon pricing policy with revenue used to reduce taxes. The Manitoba plan is also exploring that possibility.

Finance committee  [Technical Difficulty—Editor] analysis explored how revenue recycling can address these issues for low-income households and found that using about 10% to 13% of the revenue generated from a carbon price would be sufficient to make the bottom 40% of households, in terms of income

Finance committee  Just because Mr. Kenney raised the report, I wanted to clarify that the point of a carbon price is to avoid regulations that impose those higher implicit carbon costs. Those high costs that Mr. Kenney alluded to would be potentially imposed by regulatory policies, by non-pricing

Finance committee  I think there are clear benefits to putting in policy now rather than waiting. The longer you wait, the more expensive it's going to be to drive these changes. As to the specifics of exactly where the market is going, the great advantage to carbon pricing is that you don't need

Environment committee  Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to you today about carbon pricing. I represent Canada's Ecofiscal Commission, a group of leading economists from across the country. The Ecofiscal commissioners are also supported by an advisory board with representation from acros

Environment committee  I think it's the outcome that matters, from an economic perspective, the consistent, harmonized carbon price across the country, which is the outcome that will minimize costs overall. That coordination could be achieved from the bottom up, between provinces coordinating with each

Environment committee  I'll chime in here too. One of the advantages of the pan-Canadian framework is the flexibility it gives to provinces to implement their own carbon pricing policy in different ways. We've seen different levels and different approaches to output-based carbon pricing and output-bas

Environment committee  I'll take a first shot at this. Lower carbon prices will drive lower emissions reductions. Higher carbon prices will drive higher emissions reductions. It isn't a question of yes or no, or whether emissions reductions are effective or ineffective. It's a question of degree and o

Environment committee  Sorry, clarify the question, please. I don't understand.

Environment committee  You're talking about transaction costs and the cost to government of operating that process.

Environment committee  I think they are quite small, given that the CRA already provides rebates and given that those rebates are equal across different households. There's no customization of those rebates. It's uniform.

Environment committee  I think we can go even further. If Canada is not taking action to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, what reason do we have to expect that other countries would do the same? That is exactly the nature of the collective action problem that is climate change. Only by all taking a

Environment committee  I think it's a solid approach that minimizes costs and relies on carbon pricing. I think it could go further. I think the economists of the Ecofiscal Commission might argue for even more reliance on carbon pricing and even less reliance on other instruments. That being said, I t

Environment committee  Yes. I think you want to—