LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Hey rest of Canada, life doesn't end when the price of gasoline goes up a few cents thanks to a carbon tax.

Take it from your friends in Alberta, which has been, depending on your political stripe, labouring under the yoke of unfair carbon taxation, or doing its fair share to fight global climate Armageddon, for a couple of years now.

This week's announcement from Justin Trudeau about his plans to impose a federal tax on citizens with recalcitrant provincial governments will spur a little mental arithmetic to compare the experience in Alberta to the about-to-be-instituted federal regime.

The feds are initially pricing carbon at 20 cents a tonne.  Alberta's tax is 30 cents.  A nice federal rebate will pop back into individual household budgets at tax time for folks in Ontario, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.  In Alberta there is also a rebate system that covers the tax cost in part or whole for about 60 per cent of households.

Do big pickup trucks still fill up at the Costco pumps around Alberta despite the tax?  You betcha.  Does everyone turn down the home thermostat at night to just this side of chilly to save on the tax?  Maybe some do, but not all.

But it does have some people thinking about the cost, both in wallet terms and global future terms, of burning all that fuel.  If you subscribe to the every-little-bit-helps theory of climate action, then that, at least is a start.  And there are the little things like carbon-tax subsidized cheap sustainable lightbulbs, whiz-bang programmable thermostats, rebates on better insulated windows to allow the individual to take just that bit more actual action.

The carbon tax didn't appear to prolong the slump of the 2015-16 Alberta recession (economists agree the province is recovering nicely despite crap energy prices).

So why is Alberta's opposition United Conservative Party making the repeal of the Alberta carbon tax the lynchpin of its election platform?

Part of that strategy is a general overarching national conservative stand against the current iteration of carbon taxes.  Liberals like 'em so conservatives hate them, from sea to sea.

But in Alberta, there is an enduring political truth that further bolsters UCP Leader Jason Kenney's hope that tax repeal is the big winning promise.  That truth is Albertans deep dislike of taxes in any form.

Even when taxes are good for them, Albertans don't want them.  For years economists and pundits have argued that the province's fiscal woes, including a $53 billion debt, could be solved with a modest sales tax.  It has been so much easier and painless to lean on energy royalties to float the Alberta boat, rather than ask individual citizens to add two or three cents per buck to their purchases.

And if we must have taxes, Albertans want them to be incredibly simple to understand.  Hence the Ralph Klein administration's institution of a flat income tax was bizarrely popular.

So a tax on carbon, even if Nobel prize winning economists argue that it shifts consumer carbon emissions, is a tough sell in the province.

And Premier Rachel Notley made the error of tying the tax to "social license" to get pipelines built — a concept only simple enough for Alberta taxpayers to understand if it shows pretty immediate results.  So far that is not the case.

One blow Kenney does land on the NDP government in his relentless attack on the carbon tax is his contention that the NDP didn't specifically mention the tax during the 2015 election campaign.

Fair enough.  Notley argues that she campaigned on instituting a strong climate change policy but the actual word tax was never mentioned.  In fact it still is rarely mentioned, with euphemisms like levy and carbon pricing replacing the ultimate dirty word in official documents.

In May 2019 the UCP is aiming to make the carbon tax the compelling issue at the ballot box.  In a province that would rather drown in red ink than institute a sales tax, the prospect of nixing a carbon tax may seem an easy choice — much easier than taking public transportation more often, turning down the thermostat or beefing up home insulation.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Premier Penny-Pincher Ford has been busy virtue-signalling how frugal he is with taxpayers' money.  Look at Premier Penny-Pincher Ford flying economy class!  Look at him getting his caucus to bring their own paper-bag lunches to meetings!  Look at his Finance Minister Vic Fedeli tossing away the anachronistic landline telephones!  Look at him shrinking Toronto city council in half!

In reality, these largely superficial cuts will not even begin to scratch the surface of the current gluttonous waste (thanks to the Liberals past fifteen years fattening the public sector and blowing money on boondoggles) of the Ontario government.

Bringing their own lunches to caucus meetings probably saves Ontario taxpayers hundreds of dollars per meeting.  Ford flying economy saved Ontario taxpayers a few thousand dollars at most, but when he wastes taxpayers' money to fly out west to join a campaign rally with Jason Kenney the original good gesture is nullified.  Fedeli tossing out those old telephones may save tens of thousands of dollars annually, but that's only if the cell phone plans are significantly lower in cost, which remains to be seen (either way, the savings are infinitesimally small in the grand scheme of things and not even worth spending time accounting for).  Cutting Toronto city council does save millions from a city councillor operating budget of $23 million in 2018, but that's from Toronto's $13 billion total operating budget, not Ontario's $158.5 billion budget.

As Premier Ford's government has pointed out, the deficit they inherited is far worse than their predecessors led on, the real number being pegged at $15 billion.  Scrapping cap-and-trade resulted in a loss of $3 billion in revenue.  So how does Premier Penny-Pincher deal with astronomical numbers like that by skimping on paid lunches and flying alongside the plebs?

Bringing a butter knife and soup spoon to perform heart surgery won't end well.

And for readers thinking I'm cherry picking less significant cost saving measures already enacted by Premier Penny-Packer, other cuts have been underwhelming and insignificant.  Cutting $335 million annually from planned funding for mental health isn't insignificant, but it doesn't reduce current expenditures at all, meaning Ford's only shrinking an additional cost added next year.  Axing the basic income pilot project and the Drive Clean emissions test program were both frills worth removing, but again, they're mere drops in an ocean.  Substantial cuts are still desperately needed.

As fellow Loonie Politics columnist Jonathan Scott pointed out in a recent column, getting the budget under control doesn't have to be all pain no gain.  Scott pointed out how some ingenuity in better utilizing the provinces many real estate assets could give Ford's government a much needed windfall.

Premier Penny-Pincher is great at preening for the camera of his propaganda arm Ontario News Now he blew money on once getting into office.  I'm sure Ontarians would like to know how much he wasted on Ontario News Now, including PR-flack-masquerading-as-a-journalist Lyndsey Vanstone, a cameraman and a web site.

But no amount of PR stunts like paper-bag lunches and PR lackeys like Vanstone are going to dupe the public into thinking Ford has actually even begun tackling the debt in any meaningful way yet.  Declining interviews while giving your flack the exclusive won't immunize him from the nagging questions about the crippling debt.

Take care of the pennies and the billions in debt will only grow.  Premier Penny-Pincher better up his game soon or fiscal conservatives may start writing him off — like many already have — as an unserious shyster.

Photo Credit: Jeff Burney, Loonie Politics

Written by Graeme C. Gordon

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


 

If there's one reason to miss Sun News Network (full disclosure: my employer from 2011 to 2015), it's the effort they put into Canadian election coverage.  Every province and major city could expect a reporter and crew on the ground at each major party's Election Night do, plus two hosts and a full slate of commentators in studio, always including a few locals with deep knowledge of the area's political culture.  There were no holographic electoral maps, of course, but SNN put maximum energy into keeping viewers up to speed, even if the bias reeked through the screen.

But, of course, SNN is no more.  If you were an avid viewer of SNN, you probably wouldn't have been particularly inclined to look to CBC as an alternative for live coverage of municipal elections across B.C. (October 20), Ontario (October 22), or Manitoba (October 24).  Instead, the venerable public broadcaster  not the state broadcaster, contrary to the words of many an ex-SNN personality confined coverage to radio, social media, the regular 11 p.m. news, apparently certain that no one, least of all advertisers, would be interested in seeing the results come in on television.  Making this decision even more baffling is their production of a broadcast-quality live stream that can still be found on Twitter, and had been available on cbc.ca at the time.

Let's take a look at what CBC had on schedule for when polls closed:

  • CBC Vancouver, October 20, 8 p.m.: Edmonton Oilers vs. Nashville Predators.
  • CBC Toronto and Ottawa, October 22, 8 p.m.: Murdoch Mysteriesas promised.
  • CBC Winnipeg, October 24, 8 p.m.: Chocolate Week on The Great Canadian Baking Show.

An NHL game is a somewhat more understandable alternative to election coverage, or at least it would be if it weren't the Oilers.  And I'll take an hour of chocolate over almost anything.  But why did CBC feel the need to air an episode of one of its dinosaur shows over coverage of Ontario's elections?  According to CBC apologist Daniel Bernhard, of Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, it's because they receive too little money from the government to risk displeasing their advertisers.  To which I can only point out that SNN managed it without $1.2 billion in government funding as of March 2018, which happens to be more than twice CBC's revenue from other sources and about four times their revenue from advertising.

Let's look at what CBC's still-standing private-sector competitors had to offer at the same times:

  • CTV Vancouver: Election coverage.
  • Global BC: An episode of a crime procedural about a detective who is partnered with a former pro hockey player.  They do list "Decision 2018" at 10 p.m. that night, which makes me wonder about their website's understanding of time zones.
  • CTV Toronto: Election coverage.
  • Global Toronto: The Neighborhood, a sitcom about a white family moving into a predominantly black part of L.A.  Yes, this stuff gets green-lit in 2018.
  • CTV Winnipeg: Election coverage.
  • Global Winnipeg: A procedural about Navy SEALs.

So Global can't claim either the moral high ground or the content quality high ground; if anything, their TV entertainment offerings are considerably worse.  But expectations for Global, the Fredo of Canada's three major networks, are always dismal.  Meanwhile, CTV, despite much less of a mandate to do anything of the sort, has taken up what you'd think would be CBC's job: informing Canadians about events taking place in their own backyards, in real time.

If CBC wants to make a case for more money from taxpayers, they should use more of what they already get to prioritize local journalism on all of their platforms.  TV is still the medium that lends itself best to Election Nights, combining the discussion and analysis opportunities of radio, the text and graphic updates of social media, and the advertising space of TV itself.  It's also still popular among older news consumers.  And even if CBC would prefer to appeal more to younger demographics who get news from digital sources, there is no compelling reason for them not to air their live show on TV and the web at the same hour least of all Murdoch Mysteries, which is up there with This Hour Has 22 Minutesas an example of how old CanCon never, ever dies.

The backlash CBC has already earned for their genius approach to Election Night programming will hurt them much more than an hour of advertiser placation helped.  Look forward to October 2019, when federal election coverage will be pre-empted for that long-awaited Beachcombers marathon.

Photo Credit: Toronto Star

Written by Jess Morgan

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.