Taxing our intelligence

Re: Mckenna rejects Ontario’s carbon plan, Nov. 30

Catherine Mckenna’s arrogant rejection of Ontario’s newly released climate plan is disappointing, if not surprising.

She clearly made no attempt to ascertain whether the proposed plan would in fact achieve Ontario’s goal of 30 per cent emission reduction from 2005 levels, but simply dismissed it as a retrograde step. One has to wonder whether her speedy rejection has more to do with the political optics of a carbon tax with generous refunds rather than with any science.

What is much more disturbing about Mckenna is her highly selective use of IPCC reports.

Mckenna touts the government’s plan as one that effectively combines support for the economy and adequate CO2 reductions, but signally fails to note that the latest IPCC report identifies Canada as a country that will not meet its 2030 targets. While she invokes the same IPCC reports as requiring urgent action, Mckenna again is completely silent with respect to the levels of carbon tax demanded by them.

The first report, issued a few weeks ago, called for an immediate imposition of a tax at US$130 per ton, rising to over US$5,000 by 2030. The second calls for a tax of at least US$40 per ton. By either standard, Canada’s response is hugely inadequate.

Canadians are entitled to know whether Mckenna truly accepts the findings of the IPCC.

If she does, why is she defending her current carbon tax, which clearly does not meet the required standard? If not, exactly what agency is her climate authority?

Even more, does she have a good understanding of the science of climate change, or is she merely parroting sections of various reports to suit her political objectives?