Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault on Tuesday misstated the effectiveness of the carbon tax, claiming it had reduced greenhouse gas emissions by a third, while actual figures indicate a reduction closer to 2%.“I have provided you with figures today,” Guilbeault testified at the Commons environment committee. “They give an explanation.”“I will be the first one to recognize it is complex. If you want simple answers, I am sorry. There is no simple answer when it comes to climate change or modeling.”“Carbon pricing works. This has never been clearer.” Blacklock's Reporter said Guilbeault reiterated his department’s claim that emissions were a third lower due to the carbon tax.“Carbon pricing alone accounts for around a third of emission reductions expected in Canada,” said Guilbeault. He attributed this claim to “complex statistical calculations.”Conservative MP Dan Mazier (Dauphin-Swan River, Man.) challenged Guilbeault to specify the actual impact. The Minister provided the following figures:“In 2018, five megatonnes; 2019, fourteen megatonnes; 2020, seventeen megatonnes; 2021, eighteen megatonnes; 2022, nineteen megatonnes.”These figures sum up to 73 million tonnes, representing only about 2% of the 3,597 million tonnes of emissions over the same five-year period, according to National Inventory Reports. Annual emissions have never fallen below 686 million tonnes a year.“The numbers I gave you are specifically related to the carbon pricing,” said Guilbeault, without clarifying how the department calculated the 33% benefit.“I have provided you with figures today,” he reiterated. “They give an explanation based on the National Inventory Report and an analysis conducted by our department of the impact of carbon pricing on our emissions target.”Conservative MP Michael Kram (Regina-Wascana) pointed out the discrepancy. “I want to make sure I have the math correct,” he said. “In 2022, emissions were at 708 megatonnes and the carbon tax was responsible for reducing 19 megatonnes. By my math that works out to a 3% reduction.”Lawrence Hanson, associate deputy environment minister, clarified that the carbon tax had not reduced emissions by 33%. “It’s the distinction between how much the carbon price might have affected emissions in one year versus how much in 2030,” said Hanson. “So when you heard us talking about its responsibility for one third of reductions, we were talking about the 2030 number.”Derek Hermanutz, director general of the department’s economic analysis directorate, attempted another explanation. “When we talk about one third, it’s one third of our expected reductions,” he said. “That’s getting to 2030.”“Yes, but 3% of the total emissions have been reduced as a result of carbon pricing?” asked MP Kram.“No, emissions have declined 3% in total,” replied John Moffet, assistant deputy minister.“And so only 1% of that 3% is from the carbon tax?” asked MP Kram.“To date,” replied Moffet.
Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault on Tuesday misstated the effectiveness of the carbon tax, claiming it had reduced greenhouse gas emissions by a third, while actual figures indicate a reduction closer to 2%.“I have provided you with figures today,” Guilbeault testified at the Commons environment committee. “They give an explanation.”“I will be the first one to recognize it is complex. If you want simple answers, I am sorry. There is no simple answer when it comes to climate change or modeling.”“Carbon pricing works. This has never been clearer.” Blacklock's Reporter said Guilbeault reiterated his department’s claim that emissions were a third lower due to the carbon tax.“Carbon pricing alone accounts for around a third of emission reductions expected in Canada,” said Guilbeault. He attributed this claim to “complex statistical calculations.”Conservative MP Dan Mazier (Dauphin-Swan River, Man.) challenged Guilbeault to specify the actual impact. The Minister provided the following figures:“In 2018, five megatonnes; 2019, fourteen megatonnes; 2020, seventeen megatonnes; 2021, eighteen megatonnes; 2022, nineteen megatonnes.”These figures sum up to 73 million tonnes, representing only about 2% of the 3,597 million tonnes of emissions over the same five-year period, according to National Inventory Reports. Annual emissions have never fallen below 686 million tonnes a year.“The numbers I gave you are specifically related to the carbon pricing,” said Guilbeault, without clarifying how the department calculated the 33% benefit.“I have provided you with figures today,” he reiterated. “They give an explanation based on the National Inventory Report and an analysis conducted by our department of the impact of carbon pricing on our emissions target.”Conservative MP Michael Kram (Regina-Wascana) pointed out the discrepancy. “I want to make sure I have the math correct,” he said. “In 2022, emissions were at 708 megatonnes and the carbon tax was responsible for reducing 19 megatonnes. By my math that works out to a 3% reduction.”Lawrence Hanson, associate deputy environment minister, clarified that the carbon tax had not reduced emissions by 33%. “It’s the distinction between how much the carbon price might have affected emissions in one year versus how much in 2030,” said Hanson. “So when you heard us talking about its responsibility for one third of reductions, we were talking about the 2030 number.”Derek Hermanutz, director general of the department’s economic analysis directorate, attempted another explanation. “When we talk about one third, it’s one third of our expected reductions,” he said. “That’s getting to 2030.”“Yes, but 3% of the total emissions have been reduced as a result of carbon pricing?” asked MP Kram.“No, emissions have declined 3% in total,” replied John Moffet, assistant deputy minister.“And so only 1% of that 3% is from the carbon tax?” asked MP Kram.“To date,” replied Moffet.
