I guess elections have consequences - so I know that this act will go forward but I offer the following regardless of the outcome of this act:
1. The government saw the cap and trade as just a tax to remove but such a simplistic view is easy to articulate to the public but that doesn't mean that we don't have a real problem with climate change. Economists widely feel that we have to put a price on carbon. If we don't then what is the government idea on how to tackle climate change beyond just dismissing it or stating that this is China's, USA's and India's problem?
2. The current repeal act doesn't really let the public know how this repeal act will effect relationships with California and Quebec concerning not only climate change act legislation or the cap and trade process but trade in general and abilities to advance our climate change tools and technical applications that might be designed and available to use with these two partners? Have we lost a potential technological advantage that also could effect economic growth and jobs? With NAFTA the way it is going relationships with US states might be also valuable?
3. There is no mention in the act concerning a timeline for a new climate change plan? My feeling is the government doesn't see this as a priority. I feel the future "plan" is really ... the cheque is in the mail? I not sure we will really see an effective plan but I could be wrong. The act should place a reasonable timeline on the Minister to table a plan in front of the house or at least a first posting to the EBR.
4. Compensation for repeal is extensive in this act. Not sure that the Crown will get off as easy as it wants but I guess we will see what this will cost in the end to those participating currently in the program. More law suits possibly but the government will have to deal with this and the public eventually will have to pay.
5. The cost of making the environment paying will delay further our action and future generations will pay in a number of ways from greater storms, changes in biodiversity, loss of options, economic costs, etc. This government shouldn't pass this act unless they have a viable alternative... I don't see that alternative?????
Submitted September 12, 2018 9:06 AM