Roundup: Undaunted by the facts

Posted on by

The Parliamentary Budget Officer issued a report yesterday that confirmed what the federal government has been saying – that yes indeed, because the federal carbon price backstop is legislated that 90 percent of proceeds must be returned to individual households, that the vast majority of Canadians will be better off as a result, and yes, this includes both direct and indirect costs, and he did a whole analysis based on input and output-based pricing, and confirmed it all with StatsCan data. The federal government might as well have said “I told you so.” But did this force a mea culpa from the Conservatives that perhaps they were wrong about the whole thing? Nope. Instead, both Andrew Scheer and Ed Fast, his environment critic, issued released that cherry picked a couple of pieces from the report, divorced of proper context, to say that it “proved” their false narrative about said price. Because of course they did. And did we see any fact checking about their statements? Not anywhere that I could see. Which is your preview of the coming election – that fact-free shitposts will continue to spin lies, and they will largely get away with it, even after they’ve been debunked.

Meanwhile, the Globe and Mail reports that Andrew Scheer and several of his campaign team were meeting up with oil and gas executives to help plot the demise of the Liberals in the coming election. And before you get any ideas about this being old boys with cigars in backrooms, it should be noted that these were executives from fairly junior companies and not the big players, who do support carbon pricing (for which Jason Kenney wants to go to war with them). (As an aside, one of these junior company executives is a fairly robust troll on Twitter, so that should give you a taste of what this was about). Much like Kenney’s rhetoric, the players at this conference discussed using litigation as a tool to fight their critics, but one has to wonder how they possibly think this is going to appeal to the centrist voters they need in key battlegrounds like the 905 belt around Toronto, let alone to have any hope of winning seats in Quebec. You would think that a meeting like this just confirms for Canadians the caricatures that they have about the energy industry and its lobbyists, and doesn’t really engender sympathy for the pain that the industry is feeling at present. But maybe I’m just missing something.

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau says that Ontario’s decision to try and block the federal carbon price backstop is short-sighted and irresponsible.
  • Amarjeet Sohi says that while he expects a Trans Mountain decision to be made in June, he can’t offer any guarantees.
  • Jonathan Wilkinson announced that oil and gas activity will be henceforth banned in marine protected areas.
  • The federal and BC privacy commissioners issued a scathing report on Facebook’s practices, plus a plan to take them to federal court to force them to comply.
  • The US has removed Canada from its priority watch list for intellectual property violators (but we’re still on a lower-level watch list).
  • While the president of the Philippines is threatening Canada over those garbage shipments, here is an assessment of the validity of his rhetoric.
  • Here’s an exploration of the issues surrounding Jason Kenney’s threat to “turn off the taps” to BC, and how it’s really not very constitutional.
  • A recent report shows extremism on the rise in Alberta (which should be no surprise given the anger being stoked for political gain with no outlet).
  • Aaron Wherry looks into how Doug Ford is throwing Scott Moe and Jason Kenney under the bus by saying Ontario has done more than its fair share of lowering GHGs.
  • Susan Delacourt notes how the recent Facebook revelations can only make the widening trust gap worse among Canadians.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

5 thoughts on “Roundup: Undaunted by the facts”

  1. I wonder why it is that the majority of news outlets when discussing the “carbon tax never mention that the majority of the tax goes back to Canadians in the form of a tax reduction or a check?

  2. I’m a big fan of carbon pricing, and I’m not a Conservative, but the Scheer graphic [“Who is paying for Justin Trudeau’s Carbon Tax?”] isn’t particularly out of line as partisan political posturing goes. Why? Because that’s pretty much what Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux said to Vassy Kapelos on Power & Politics on April 25:

    VK: “You also looked at where the revenue is coming from. And you divided it between the sort of two sections of the legislation, one of which applies to everyday Canadians like you and me and the other one that applies to heavy emitters. And what did you find there?”

    YG: “Well, we find that under the federal regime as it is designed, more than 90 percent of the revenues or the income generated by the federal pricing system will be coming from the household sector, or will be paid by the households. So, 92 percent, based on our estimate, and the remainder will be paid by heavy emitters, big industries.”

    • And therefore for the average Canadian consumer through tax credits or direct payment will find the levy will be revenue neutral.Today received a Tory questionnaire from Mark Strahl the Tory heckler in chief that asks his constituents to believe that they will go broke because their heating bill gas and oil or natural gas will be unaffordable because of a revenue neutral levy and he is an MP in BC that has had a “gas tax” with a tax credit for years. This is lying in the first degree. Usually a politician like Strahl lies when he moves his lips. Here we have it in black and white. But the right wing sheeple will believe him because they are not inundated by fact.

      • Unfortunately, Christy Clark moved away from revenue neutrality for BC’s carbon tax regime and Premier Horgan has continued down the same path. Conservative MPs from BC who use the centrally-produced CPP householders referencing the federal backstop carbon tax in their ridings just look ignorant.

  3. One of the shady characters they met with is a Koch-sponsored dirty trickster. Mike Roman worked for none other than Donald Trump. Cons can’t win on their CRAP platform so they cheat and go on the attack. The involvement of the American Kochtopus means that if this election produces a Con “victory,” the outcome is already illegitimate and tainted.

Comments are closed.