Standing on Principle: Explaining the DeSmogBlog's Position on the BC Election

authordefault
on

An election campaign is unfolding in the Canadian province of British Columbia over the next month, the outcome of which could have important implications all over North America and, ultimately, around theย world.

A central issue in this provincial political squabble is a carbon tax – according to most analysts, the least-expensive, most effective and most transparent of climate change solutions (checkย this report, for example from the U.S. Congressional Budget Office [PDF]).

But if carbon taxes are popular among economists, they are widely regarded as toxic among voters – as any new tax is likely to be. Thatโ€™s why the B.C. election is so important. For people outside this jurisdiction, it is being seen not so much as a minor election in a distant place, but as a referendum on carbon taxes. The assumption here is that if the tax fails here, it wonโ€™t be worth trying anywhere in Northย America.

By way of background, B.C.โ€™s incumbent government – a right-of-centre coalition that goes under the perhaps-confusing name โ€œLiberalโ€ – launched a modest ($10-a-tonne) carbon tax last year, the implementation of which coincided exactly (and unfortunately) with last summerโ€™s spike in oilย prices.

B.C.โ€™s other major political force is the New Democratic Party (NDP), historically a loose coalition of organized labour, social policy leftists and environmentalists. Surprisingly, given the partyโ€™s traditional environmental component, the NDP decided to fight the carbon tax, apparently seeing political advantage in doingย so.

The gamble paid off in the short term. By the end of the last, hot summer, voters were furious about gas prices (which doubled in a matter of months to nearly $1.50 Cdn per litre – well over $5 US per [US] gallon). Even though the carbon tax made up less than 10 cents/gallon of that total, voters turned their anger on the governing Liberals and the NDP got a nice bump in the polls. At least one poll showed them in the lead for the first time since theย mid-1990s.

But oil prices have fallen, and with them, the fortunes of the โ€œaxe-the-taxโ€ NDP. The party, which is battling against the carbon tax as hard as ever, is divided on the issue and is bleeding votes to the Green Party, which in some recent polls is showing a best-everย performance.

Now, some of the NDPโ€™s functionaries are beginning to accuse critics of being in some kind of unhealthy alliance with the (leading) Liberal party. For example, when the widely respected and internationally recognized energy economist Dr. Mark Jaccard releasedย an analysisย that was critical of the NDP carbon tax position, the New Democratsโ€™ leader Carole James and Environment critic Shane Simpson bothย slammed the manย as a partisan rather than actually addressing the substance of his criticism. (For the record, Jaccard has an impeccable record for political impartiality, having been engaged over the years as an expert by parties of all political stripes – including the NDP.)

There are, of course, other issues in this election, but for the DeSmogBlog there is only one: the carbon tax. Premier Gordon Campbell took a significant political risk in implementing this, the most progressive climate change legislation in any jurisdiction in North America. And he stuck to his guns, even when the politically expedient thing would have been to organize a timelyย retreat.

For that leadership, he deserves the support thatย he has been receiving recently from Canadian environmental groups. Climate-conscious voters who are uncomfortable with the remainder of his centre-right platform also have the option of voting for the Green Party, which has also taken an intelligent and responsible position in support of the carbon tax. (In fact, the Greens have gone the extra step of pointing out that, even on its rising trajectory, the tax is not yet high enough to be trulyย effective.)

I was invited to Washington, D.C. early this year by the U.S. Carbon Tax Centre. They had arranged a Capitol Hill briefing on this issue and they were interested in the Canadian experience. They were concerned, firstly, that a federal party (also called Liberal, but unrelated) had recently proposed a carbon tax and lost the subsequent election and, secondly, that the BC government โ€“ the only one to have passed such a tax โ€“ now seemed to be inย danger.

So, I am convinced: politicians and policymakers from across North America are watching this election โ€“ which means that we at the DeSmogBlog will continue to give it attention, and to criticize those who, for whatever reasons, are campaigning against this worthy โ€“ necessary โ€“ย policy.

For the record, this puts us in an interesting and unfamiliar position. As long-time and trenchant critics of the climate change (non-)policies of the Bush Republicans in the U.S. and the Harper Conservatives in Canada, we at the DeSmogBlog frequently have been castigated as somehow โ€œleft-wingโ€ โ€“ as if caring about the environment we leave to our children is the stuff of communist conspiracy.ย Since the start of the election, however, the NDPโ€™s defenders have started calling us โ€œright-wingโ€ โ€“ in one reference, someone even called usย โ€œneo-cons.โ€

This smacks of old-fashioned, partisan politics where you set up and attack labels because you donโ€™t want to discuss theย issue.

Two things forย clarity:

1.ย ย  This dispute is all about climate change. Specifically, itโ€™s about the carbon tax. If the New Democrats want the DeSmogBlogโ€™s support, they can change policies. As long as they attack the carbon tax and continue in what seems to be a transparent attempt to take advantage of public confusion on the issue, they can call us whatever names they please, but they can count on our continuedย opposition.

2.ย ย  The opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone (although, clearly, they are widely supported within the DeSmogBlog). They do not represent the operating prerogatives or the personal opinions of those in my public relations firm, Hoggan & Associates, and neither do they reflect in any way on the opinions or policies of any of the other organizations with which I amย affiliated.

ย 

Related Posts

on

The elite agency has been going all out to win positive press for the hosts of the UN climate talks.

The elite agency has been going all out to win positive press for the hosts of the UN climate talks.
on

One of the sponsors of the UK pavilion has worked with major polluters to help them extract more oil and gas.

One of the sponsors of the UK pavilion has worked with major polluters to help them extract more oil and gas.
on

The Heritage Foundationโ€™s Project 2025 blueprint proposes sweeping anti-climate policies.

The Heritage Foundationโ€™s Project 2025 blueprint proposes sweeping anti-climate policies.
on

Former ExxonMobil climate scientist Lindsey Gulden: "It was after I was fired for reporting a garden variety fraud that I really sat back and thought about the implications for climate change."

Former ExxonMobil climate scientist Lindsey Gulden: "It was after I was fired for reporting a garden variety fraud that I really sat back and thought about the implications for climate change."