Politics here, environment there
The Carbon Tax Question: Clarifying Canada’s Most Consequential Policy Debate
by Thomas F. Pedersen
Madeira Park: Harbour Publishing, 2024
$26.95 / 9781990776977
Reviewed by Matthew Downey
*
The timing of the release of Thomas Pedersen’s The Carbon Tax Question: Clarifying Canada’s Most Consequential Policy Debate may seem strange. At the very least, the relevance alluded to in its title as a clarification of a policy debate may be challenged by the fact that, in the wake of its publication, that very debate seems to be dead. On 31 March 2025, British Columbian Premier David Eby issued a statement announcing the cancellation of his province’s carbon tax, stating “people shouldn’t have to choose between climate action and being able to afford their bills.” This justification stood in direct contrast to one of the pillars of BC’s pioneering approach to pricing carbon emissions: the fact that the carbon tax would be offset by rebates and income tax reduction, in many cases leaving low-income families with more money. Eby’s statement followed the repeal of the nation-wide carbon tax by the federal Liberal Party, who in a series of posts on X in mid-March lauded how the cancellation would “put more money in your pocket.” The posts ironically mirrored the same language used by the Liberal government to defend the carbon tax in the past, when they declared that the carbon tax rebate would in fact leave more money in Canadians’ pockets. How can these governments, both pioneers in championing the political manifestation of a carbon tax, have backtracked so profusely and with such contradictory language? The striking relevance in The Carbon Tax Question rests in its strong ability to help answer that very question. Professor Pedersen, formerly Dean of Science at the University of Victoria and influential proponent of climate policy in BC and Canada, utilizes his experience well in providing an expert analysis of the murky waters of climate politics. His book will prove vital to understanding the crashing fall of the carbon tax in Canada, and to the sober assessment of the future of climate policy internationally.
Why did the carbon tax fail? Pedersen’s insight, drawn from his direct experience in advising the design and implementation of the policies, sheds light on the shifting narratives of its proponents and opponents. Initially, the British Columbian carbon tax was inspired by conservative principles. After seeing the harmful manifestations of global warming through the blight of pine beetles sweeping the interior forests of the province, BC Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell was compelled to act in a way that would appeal to everyone, including his right-wing caucus members. After extensive consultation with industry and academic representatives, the policy design took the form of a revenue neutral carbon tax. Revenue neutrality was the most important political factor, as it meant that tax cuts would offset any increases in carbon pricing. As Pedersen recounts, this was integral to the conservative nature of the policy. The revenues from carbon pricing would not go to funding government programs but would instead allow for cuts to income taxes. It would give British Columbians the choice to save money through lowering their emissions. Such conservative bona fides were amplified by the initial left-wing opposition from the NDP, who loudly called for the government to “axe the tax.”
Pedersen’s book, while intently focused on British Columbia’s carbon tax experience, makes use of a comparative case study in Australia. A similarly resource-based economy with a like-minded political culture to Western Canada, Australia was faced with a dramatic manifestation of climate change in the form of the Millenium Drought, which lasted for 15 years from 1996 to 2010. The remarkable sensitivity of Australian politicians to public opinion – with shorter term limits and easier methods for party leaders to be removed by their caucus members – a new “carbon tax” was seen as too politically treacherous. Opting instead for a cap-and-trade system that involved allowing carbon-intensive companies to enter a market to buy and sell carbon credits, Pedersen describes how Australia’s carbon reduction scheme was more complicated than a carbon tax and more vulnerable to political machinations. With the input of resource extraction industry leaders and Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, Australia’s fight against global warming was a fractured failure in Pedersen’s description. The Australian case study, which dominates the middle three chapters of the book, is meant to warn the reader about what a lack of clarity and a preponderance of power politics can do to kill meaningful action against carbon pollution. However, it serves another purpose in juxtaposing two cultures of democratic accountability and how they relate to carbon tax politics. While clarity is key in executing carbon policies, the public trust must also be maintained. While Australia saw chaotic back and forth engagement due to its sensitive democracy, in Canada the public were taken for granted.
As Pedersen relates it, the ultimate downfall of the carbon tax was essentially tied to the inability of the government to communicate the benefits of revenue neutrality. While people saw fuel prices rising, they often paid little attention to the specifics of their tax returns. As Pedersen notes, oftentimes the carbon tax rebates were titled with indecipherable acronyms. The connection between the refunds and the carbon tax was simply not clear. This made the policy even more vulnerable to the tumultuous personality clashes in the political arena. Accordingly, this created an opening for cynical opponents in politics and business to sow dissent among the sceptical public. So goes Pedersen’s assessment – but can the spread of carbon tax opposition really be chalked up to pure cynical manipulation? Could the lack of political unity be attributed solely to clashing personalities and power grabs?
While it is undoubtable that certain actors have had a disproportionate influence on political and popular attitudes towards the carbon tax – ranging from Rupert Murdoch to Bill Tieleman – there are reasons other than a simple lack of communication that resulted in the policy’s failing. These can be gleaned from Pedersen’s book, though they do not get the lion’s share of attention. Accountability is likely the most prominent issue in Canadian politics today. Justin Trudeau, by the end of his time as prime minister, was seen by many as both unaccountable and as the top proponent of the carbon tax. For the carbon tax to be accepted and successful, there must be both clarity from the government and trust in the government. Leader of the Opposition Pierre Poilievre’s attacks on the carbon tax were not successful simply because of the dislike fomented towards that policy, but because the policy was inextricably tied to the existent unpopularity of Trudeau resulting from his many other scandals and refusal of accountability.
The carbon tax became a symbol of a government that had clung to power through a decade that saw increased costs, political divides, and political scandal. This hindered Trudeau’s ability to communicate revenue neutrality as a core principle of the carbon tax. While mistakes highlighted by Pedersen, such as the Liberals’ pause on the carbon tax in the Maritime provinces, did much to propagate an image of carbon pricing as a burden, that action was taken after an unwillingness by the public to accept the Prime Minister’s previous affirmations. Trudeau could talk about rebates, while Poilievre could talk about soaring prices, and the public would simply register it as one unpopular politician’s word against another’s. Poilievre indeed displayed cynicism towards the need for a carbon tax – mirroring Australian politicians like Tony Abbott – but he was not alone in killing the carbon tax. Its politicized association with the federal Liberals caused the policy’s death in British Columbia, the jurisdiction which had initially been a global pioneer in action against climate change. What had initially been a philosophically conservative motion spurred on by the visible dangers of climate change was cynically adopted to offset the distrustful image of an unpopular prime minister. The carbon tax was proposed in order to offer a choice to people – the choice to burn less fuel would save more money. However, when people who lack access to public transportation observe an unresponsive government causing rising gas prices, a vaguely labelled rebate cheque is hardly the only issue driving their cynicism.
Professor Pedersen’s involved and detailed study of the political milieu surrounding the carbon tax in BC and Canada should be a necessary read for those who want to understand climate policy today. The vulnerability of climate policy to the torments of Canadian parliamentary politics may depress those convicted to care about combatting pollution, but that hardly makes the politics less important to study. In a country where democratic values, a respect for accountability, and stewardship of a vast and resource-rich environment must be balanced, clarity and consistency must come from a common respect for public institutions. When climate policy is personally tied to a politician for either beneficial or oppositional reasons, the social and political responsibilities of our country’s citizenry, specifically that responsibility towards our environment, is negated. One comes away from Pedersen’s book with a strong idea of what went wrong in the climate policy debate over the past few decades; it therefore may inspire improved action in the future – action that takes into account necessities of politics.
*
Matthew Vernon Downey is an independent writer and researcher based out of Victoria, B.C.. He has degrees from UVic (BA hons) and the London School of Economics (MSc). [Editor’s note: Matthew Downey has also reviewed books by Tim Martin, M. Wylie Blanchet, Jonathan Manthorpe, Robert Amos, Alan R. Warren, and Gregor Craigie for The British Columbia Review. He has also contributed an essay on the subject of Amor de Cosmos.]
*
The British Columbia Review
Interim Editors, 2023-26: Trevor Marc Hughes (non-fiction), Brett Josef Grubisic (fiction)
Publisher: Richard Mackie
Formerly The Ormsby Review, The British Columbia Review is an on-line book review and journal service for BC writers and readers. The Advisory Board now consists of Jean Barman, Wade Davis, Robin Fisher, Barry Gough, Hugh Johnston, Kathy Mezei, Patricia Roy, and Graeme Wynn. Provincial Government Patron (since September 2018): Creative BC. Honorary Patron: Yosef Wosk. Scholarly Patron: SFU Graduate Liberal Studies. The British Columbia Review was founded in 2016 by Richard Mackie and Alan Twigg.
“Only connect.” – E.M. Forster