Provinces take the lead

Provincial plans making up for federal inaction, but Alberta lags

| Commenting on this story is closed.

${image_caption}$

A new report by the David Suzuki Foundation says that recent climate change policies implemented by provincial and territorial governments are making up for inaction at the federal level, but it warns that the provinces with the highest levels of emissions—Alberta and Saskatchewan—are lagging behind and jeopardizing national progress on significantly reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Dale Marshall, a climate change policy analyst with the institute and author of Provincial Power Play: Breaking Away from Federal Inaction on Climate Change, says that there has been a “remarkable shift” in provincial measures since 2006.

“There is a significant amount of leadership actually happening at the provincial level on climate change and some forward momentum on policy development,” he says.

“You have what I called the four provincial leaders—BC, Québec, Manitoba and Ontario—that have all committed themselves to a cap-and-trade system. Ontario and Manitoba have come out with new climate change plans, BC has put into place a whole bunch of policies including a carbon tax, Québec has beefed up its 2006 plan. So you have a bunch of different provinces that are actually filling the leadership void that Ottawa has left, given that what we have still at the federal level is a proposal for an intensity-based system that may be in place in 2010.”

While it’s good news that these four provinces—accounting for three-quarters of Canada’s population and half its emissions—are doing far more than the federal government, Marshall says the situation at the sub-national level isn’t all positive.

Alberta has dropped below neighbouring Saskatchewan as having the weakest provincial approach to emissions.

“In the last two assessments I did Alberta was near the bottom but not last,” Marshall explains. “The reason that they’re last now is because they are in fact the only province which plans on continuing to increase emissions. Saskatchewan, who was at the bottom the first two times, now has an actual target to reduce emissions by 32 per cent, whereas Alberta is going to continue to increase emissions until at least 2020. So, eight provinces have targets that are 10 to 15 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020. Alberta’s plan is to be 45 per cent above 1990 levels by 2020. In the face of the science of climate change it’s just incredibly irresponsible.”

Marshall says that the weak stance taken by the two Prairie provinces—the only provinces without targets to actually reduce emissions below 1990 levels by 2020—is especially troubling since each has per capita emissions three times the national average.

He dismisses the argument that it is harder for the energy-dependent provinces to make reductions, explaining, for example, that our reliance on coal-generated electricity means improvements in energy efficiency will result in greater reductions here compared to a province with more hydroelectric power.

“It’s actually a lot easier to reduce emissions in jurisdictions that have really high emissions in the same way that it’s easier for a 300 pound man to lost weight than for a 150 pound man to lose weight,” he says. “The only reason why we’re not seeing leadership coming from places that have really high per capita emissions like Alberta and Saskatchewan is because they don’t care about climate change. They’ve decided to absolve themselves completely of the issue. At least Saskatchewan has reduction targets—no plan yet—but Alberta is just making it completely clear that the science of climate change means absolutely nothing to them.”

He says that the rapid growth of the tar sands and our heavy reliance on coal means that Alberta alone can derail the efforts of the other provinces.

“We have Québec with one-sixth the per capita emissions of what Alberta does. If Alberta just simply ignores climate change and continues to increase emissions, there’s nothing that Québec could do to offset that increase. So that’s the real problem, that the lack of leadership in one province can actually undermine the ability of the country as a whole to take a leadership stance internationally.”

The report does give Alberta marks for its efforts to reduce emissions from government operations and for having a climate change plan in place, but says that the focus on reducing the intensity of emissions relative to economic output rather than making real cuts means the plan “delivers mostly vague or meaningless policy prescriptions.”

The report also cautions that even in provinces which are taking the lead, the planned reductions of 10 to 15 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 fall short of the kinds of cuts Canada needs to make.

“For Canada to do its fair share in avoiding dangerous climate change our emissions would have to be 25 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020. Eight provinces have targets that are at least in the negative and on the way to the minus 25 that’s needed, but none of them have adopted that more stringent target.”

Marshall says that it will take federal involvement to bolster provincial initiatives to reach those targets. The report calls for the introduction of a carbon tax, which can be implemented quickly, in conjunction with the development and implementation of a cap-and-trade system to regulate the industrial emissions which make up almost half Canada’s total. V

Provinces take the lead

Provincial plans making up for federal inaction, but Alberta lags

Most recent comments