I am disappointed to see the…

I am disappointed to see the repeal of this Act and the vague measures in place to replace it. Putting a price on carbon has been shown to be an effective method of reducing emissions and transitioning to a cleaner economy without negative economic impact. The cap and trade method of carbon pricing, as a market-based incentive, should have appeal across the political spectrum. I am concerned about the absence of any concrete plan to combat climate change in the absence of the cap and trade system. At the least, the cap and trade system should be left in place until a new plan is developed. I find the direction to "establish targets" and "prepare a climate change plan" unconvincing as neither has any detail or timelines associated with it and both may be revised "from time to time" - whenever the mood strikes. If a target can be revised whenever you feel like it, how useful can it be?

The proposal notice does not clearly describe the details in the Act, so I've endeavoured to interpret the proposed legislation myself.

With the details given in the new Act it is impossible to determine or estimate what the retirement of the Act will cost the government in compensation. It is also impossible to tell what the retirement will cost businesses, given the restrictions on compensation. However, I think it is fair to expect there will be a substantial cost to both, and as far as I can tell, now that the system is in place and credits purchased, there is little to gain for that expense at this point. It seems ludicrous to incur these expenses while also eliminating substantial revenue for the government which could be used for a climate change plan such as whatever the government plans to implement in place of this. The repeal will certainly cost taxpayers more than leaving it in place, and, of course, we will have a carbon tax anyway under the federal government (fortunately - and I look forward to receiving my cheque in the mail for that.)

I find it astonishing that a government can pass legislation essentially declaring that it won't be held liable for any of the harm it is doing and exempting itself from various recourses available to its citizens. That should be for the courts to determine. Governments should not be above the law, and passing legislation to wash your hands of the negative consequences of your decisions is irresponsible and not in keeping with democratic ideals.

I hope the government will conduct its own estimate of the costs involved with repealing this system and reconsider its decision. Intellectual humility - the ability to reconsider a decision in light of better information - is essential to good governance.