The output is amazing. Justin Trudeau announces a change to his carbon pricing model, which he has so far defended with all his might. A violation has just occurred. Are the Conservative leader’s repeated attacks on the ‘carbon tax’ starting to expand?
The prime minister himself acknowledges that his carbon pricing model is not doing enough to change the habits of Canadians in certain parts of the country.
“We can already see that we need to refine the program a little to ensure that people have access to the necessary alternatives, especially in the area of oil heating,” he explained on Thursday afternoon.
The prime minister announced that his carbon price would not apply to heating oil used to heat homes in provinces where the federal scheme is in effect for three years. The carbon price discount will be increased for residents of rural areas. In the Atlantic, funding for the transition from an oil system to a heat pump is being increased.
The CO2 pricing model will not be questioned, assures Justin Trudeau.
However, this announcement has only given his conservative opponent additional ammunition. The attack was not long in coming. After slumping in the polls, hesitating and despairing, Justin Trudeau is now changing his carbon tax, wrote Pierre Poilievre on social media.
This about-face has the Conservative leader salivating, as he goes out of his way to link the cost of living crisis to carbon pricing. In his eyes, this equation has become even more ingrained in the minds of Canadians.
A panic signal?
When Justin Trudeau is forced to add an asterisk to a key policy of his government, it is also a way of admitting that his political position is very difficult.
There are increasing warnings for the Liberals in national surveys. The prime minister has declined significantly and feels the need to save the furniture in rural regions of Canada, particularly in the Atlantic, where he holds 24 of 32 seats.
A recent poll (Pallas, see methodology below) shows the Conservatives making progress in this region, with 39.2% voting intentions compared to 31% for the Liberals.
This is also the case in the Atlantic, where, according to a recent Postmedia Léger survey (methodology explained below), resistance to carbon pricing is greatest; 48% of respondents from these four provinces said they were in favor of completely eliminating carbon pricing at the federal level.
Open in full screen mode
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre at a gas station in Saint-Jean, New Brunswick (file photo)
Photo: CBC / Shane Magee
No wonder Pierre Poilievre is going on the offensive in this region of the country to make gains. He is also holding two “Abolish the Tax” rallies this week in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.
With this announcement, Justin Trudeau also wants to respond to increasing concerns within his own political family. During his announcement, he was surrounded by his cohort of Atlantic MPs. The signal is clear: the Prime Minister wants to show that he is listening to the elected representatives of his group whose seats may be under threat. Dissatisfaction has been expressed in liberal ranks in recent weeks.
In early October, Ken McDonald, a Liberal MP from Newfoundland and Labrador, went so far as to vote for a Conservative motion that called for eliminating the federal carbon price. This was the second time he opposed the Liberal project by supporting a Conservative motion.
The previous ones
Justin Trudeau is trying to make a case that he is not dogmatic in applying his carbon pricing model and is capable of pragmatism, but the Liberal leader has just set precedents that could be politically costly.
A step backwards in the CO2 price, however moderate and temporary, remains a step backwards.
Open in full screen mode
The only way in and out of the Métis community of East Prairie is a 40-kilometer road.
Photo: Associated Press
After residential heating, the door is open to a number of new exemption requests for other sectors. What about people who heat with natural gas in Ontario? What about those who have no choice but to drive long distances across the Canadian prairies?
This is a test for the government. Will it be able to withstand this renewed pressure and the opening of new gaps?
With this adjustment, according to some Liberals, Justin Trudeau has taken away the ground from Pierre Poilievre with his attacks on carbon pricing and the cost of living.
However, softening can also be an admission of weakness on the part of the prime minister. He has just made changes for political reasons to a model that he has vehemently defended for years.
The effects of this decision were also felt at the cabinet table. Justin Trudeau just proved he’s willing to work around the wishes of key ministries, in this case Steven Guilbeault of the Environment Ministry. One can assume that the latter are disappointed that an exception has been introduced in the federal system. This mistake will not go unnoticed by voters whose priority is the fight against climate change.
“It is the very principle of carbon pricing that is being achieved,” emphasizes Pierre-Olivier Pineau, energy policy expert and professor at HEC Montréal.
This is really a step backwards. The idea of carbon pricing is that it applies as comprehensively as possible to as many fuels and sectors as possible, he explained in an interview with Radio-Canada.
Would the adjustment have been sufficient if Justin Trudeau had simply increased his subsidies and rebate for rural residents without going so far as to introduce an exception for residential heating?
In difficult situations, his approach can show that he listens to Canadians who can’t make ends meet. However, Justin Trudeau also takes risks: he appears weakened compared to his opponents and his principles. After all, the carbon price is a central measure of his political legacy.
Survey methodology
- Pallas survey: conducted among 1,484 adults in Canada, October 21 and 22, 2023. Margin of error of plus or minus 2.5%, 19 out of 20 cases.
- Postmedia Léger poll: conducted online with 1,564 Canadians in September. For comparison, a probability survey with a sample of this size corresponds to a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5%, 19 times out of 20.