In defence of the new carbon tax adjustments

“How would you like me to change?” was the common reflection we heard from constituents this summer on the doorsteps when talking about pollution pricing. It is the central question underpinning the entire rationale for a pollution price. As we know, the signal created by a price on pollution gives people an economic incentive to change behaviour towards more environmentally friendly practices, but not all Canadians are on equal footing to make those changes.

Our constituents, like most rural Canadians, commute to work, take their kids to sports, or access services, and generally must drive longer distances without public transit. Yes, the quarterly pollution price rebate helps, but we heard more was needed.

That’s why the doubling of the rural supplement for Canadians living outside of a census metropolitan area from an extra 10 per cent to 20 per cent is a meaningful change that seeks to ensure better equity in the program so Canadians are not disadvantaged simply based on where they live.

That same logic to adjust policies in the name of equity is what drove the government’s decisions on home heating oil. Relatively few Canadians still use heating oil to heat their homes. Statistics Canada estimates that just over one million homes use oil, with a disproportionately higher number being in rural Canada and Atlantic Canada, where energy poverty is among the highest in the country. Across Canada, most people using heating oil are below the median income.

Heating oil is extremely expensive, on average costing up to four times what alternatives such as natural gas or electric sources cost. Prices have been volatile and have increased 73 per cent over the past two years. It is also the worst form of heating from an environmental perspective.

Anyone who can change behaviour has likely already done so because there is a clear economic case to transition. Therein lies the challenge: Many Canadians using heating oil simply do not have the money to make the switch. This is exactly why the government launched the national oil to heat pump program in fall 2022, a program which will now offer up to $15,000 in federal grants to help people switch.

This strengthened program is open to all provincial and territorial governments willing to come to the table with the federal government. The goal? Breaking the cycle of vulnerable households that are using the most expensive and most polluting sources of energy to heat their homes.

Much ink has been spilled and commentary made on the exemption.

In 2018, the minister of environment and climate change recognized reasonable exemptions could be made. As an example, that’s why on-farm fuels were exempted. From where we sit, ask yourself the rationale for a price signal when the cost of the fuel is already exorbitant and rising and people don’t have the cash upfront to switch. Maintaining the price signal in this situation would have simply been punitive. Therefore, a temporary pause tied directly to the national program to help people make the switch was the right call.

The national conversation has turned to the question of fairness, with premiers, the NDP and the Conservative Party suggesting the decision to focus on heating oil is not fair. That assessment misses the fact that while affordability is a concern across the country, those heating their homes with a source other than heating oil are getting more money back than what they pay in under the federal backstop system.

The logic advanced by the NDP and the CPC on Monday’s Opposition Day motion is akin to saying that the Guaranteed Income Supplement for low-income seniors should be extended to all seniors on the premise of equality, because the GIS has a higher proportion of beneficiaries in rural Canada and Atlantic Canada.

We won’t apologize for fighting for vulnerable Canadians across the country, including the many who live in rural Canada and Atlantic Canada. To the pundits who say the decision was a step back on climate, come see our reality in rural Canada, maybe you’ll see the decision differently.

Kody Blois is the member of Parliament for Kings-Hants and the chair of the Atlantic Liberal Caucus. Francis Drouin is the member of Parliament for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell and is the former chair of the Rural Liberal Caucus. Marc Serré is the member of Parliament for Nickel Belt in northern Ontario.