Is Tory climate plan workable?

Re: Tory plan would tax big emitters, April 15; and When politics results in foggy policy, Matt Gurney, April 17 It’s great to see Conservatives finally coming around on carbon pricing, but Erin O’toole’s new plan seems like a grudging concession to reality. It also seems much less likely to succeed than the current federal backstop.

With a cap set at $50 per tonne, the price will be far less effective at reducing emissions. The “personal low carbon savings accounts” also seem like a complicated way to rebate the money. That’s a little like scratching your right ear with your left foot.

What we need now — and need urgently — is a straightforward way of pricing GHG emissions and returning the money to consumers so they can do better things with it. The carbon fee and dividend design of the federal backstop already does that. Let’s stick with it.

Andy Kubrin, Calgary

I applaud Mr. O’toole for his leadership in finally including carbon pricing in the Conservative Party of Canada’s climate change plan. Matt Gurney is right though to point out the party’s contortionist efforts to distinguish itself from the Liberals.

The Conservatives’ small $50 carbon fee is designed more as a shopping mechanism than as a significant driver of made-in-canada innovative clean-tech solutions. It still assumes that carbon pricing is punitive rather than a powerful economic tool.

An annually rising fee on carbon that in time surpasses $100 per carbon tonne sends a predictable and powerful market signal. To support the economy this mechanism must be revenue neutral. Money directly returned to Canadians in the form of rebate cheques is an efficient and transparent approach to helping us during the transition to affordable carbon-free energy and products.

But rather than trust the market, the Conservatives plan relies on government regulation to do the heavy lifting to reduce emissions. I would love to see the Conservative plan look more conservative. Cheryl Mcnamara, Toronto