Remember when the Liberal carbon tax was a conservative idea?

[dmlfarmer]

Chuck2 have to admit I am disappointed in the Globe and Mail. Stephen Dion first proposed a carbon tax back in 2008. If you don't believe me read: "Carbon tax plan good for the wallet Dion pledges" on cbc.ca June 19,2008. So to say this is a conservative idea is totally false. What is interesting is that Dion's plan involved lowering personal and corporate tax rates instead of the income redistribution involved in Justin Trudeau's plan. It is much more comprehensive and well thought out. Preston Manning's plan also recommended tax cuts to personal and corporate rates to compensate for increased costs due to a carbon tax. Trudeau's plan like Premier Notley's is about income redistribution and penalizing business. I hope this will correct the record. Enjoy your day.

"First, the Conservatives previously supported and promoted cap-and-trade. And they did so repeatedly and over a number of years. In their 2004 election platform, the Conservatives said they would “investigate a cap-and-trade system that will allow firms to generate credits by reducing smog-causing pollutants.” The commitment was repeated in the party’s 2005 policy declaration. In 2008, the Conservative party’s policy declaration expressed support for “a domestic cap-and-trade system that will allow firms to generate credits by reducing smog-causing pollutants.” In May 2008, John Baird celebrated the launch of a carbon market in Montreal. “Carbon trading and the establishment of a market price on carbon are key parts of our Turning the Corner plan,” he explained. In their 2008 election platform, the Conservatives promised to help “develop and implement a North America-wide cap and trade system for greenhouse gases and air pollution.” The Harper government repeated the pledge in the subsequent Throne Speech. In June 2009, Jim Prentice announced an offset system that would “generate real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions … by establishing a price on carbon.” In September 2009, Mr. Prentice lobbied the Alberta government to support cap-and-trade. In December 2009, the Harper government claimed to be “working in collaboration with the provinces and territories to develop a cap and trade system that will ultimately be aligned with the emerging cap and trade program in the United States.” McLeans Sept 21, 2012

[furrowtickler]

"First, the Conservatives previously supported and promoted cap-and-trade. And they did so repeatedly and over a number of years. In their 2004 election platform, the Conservatives said they would “investigate a cap-and-trade system that will allow firms to generate credits by reducing smog-causing pollutants.” The commitment was repeated in the party’s 2005 policy declaration. In 2008, the Conservative party’s policy declaration expressed support for “a domestic cap-and-trade system that will allow firms to generate credits by reducing smog-causing pollutants.” In May 2008, John Baird celebrated the launch of a carbon market in Montreal. “Carbon trading and the establishment of a market price on carbon are key parts of our Turning the Corner plan,” he explained. In their 2008 election platform, the Conservatives promised to help “develop and implement a North America-wide cap and trade system for greenhouse gases and air pollution.” The Harper government repeated the pledge in the subsequent Throne Speech. In June 2009, Jim Prentice announced an offset system that would “generate real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions … by establishing a price on carbon.” In September 2009, Mr. Prentice lobbied the Alberta government to support cap-and-trade. In December 2009, the Harper government claimed to be “working in collaboration with the provinces and territories to develop a cap and trade system that will ultimately be aligned with the emerging cap and trade program in the United States.” McLeans Sept 21, 2012

Back then we were going to get carbon credits as farmers , which we should
Now we are going to just simply get bent over .

[dmlfarmer]

Back then we were going to get carbon credits as farmers , which we should
Now we are going to just simply get bent over .

Tell me, where do you think the money for carbon credits was going to come from? Government? Taxes? or large emitters of carbon? If farmers are to get carbon credits, someone has to be paying for carbon. A cap and trade is no different than a carbon tax as both put a price on carbon.

If you think government should just pay credits or incentives without some means of collecting the money going out, you are a socialist. Cap and trade is a capitalist answer for reducing carbon.

Finally, if you actually represent the views of most farmers, why would any government, no matter of views ever support paying carbon credits when farmers continually deny climate change and oppose any action to reduce GHGs? Farmers have a huge opportunity to be part of the solution and be credited financially for it, if they would realize they could be selling sequestration as a product of their farms to a public that is in support of sequestration and a public that is willing to pay for farmers to sequester it. But no, farmers would rather claim actual climate scientists are all corrupt and instead believe conspiracy theories and junk science.

[Hamloc]

"First, the Conservatives previously supported and promoted cap-and-trade. And they did so repeatedly and over a number of years. In their 2004 election platform, the Conservatives said they would “investigate a cap-and-trade system that will allow firms to generate credits by reducing smog-causing pollutants.” The commitment was repeated in the party’s 2005 policy declaration. In 2008, the Conservative party’s policy declaration expressed support for “a domestic cap-and-trade system that will allow firms to generate credits by reducing smog-causing pollutants.” In May 2008, John Baird celebrated the launch of a carbon market in Montreal. “Carbon trading and the establishment of a market price on carbon are key parts of our Turning the Corner plan,” he explained. In their 2008 election platform, the Conservatives promised to help “develop and implement a North America-wide cap and trade system for greenhouse gases and air pollution.” The Harper government repeated the pledge in the subsequent Throne Speech. In June 2009, Jim Prentice announced an offset system that would “generate real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions … by establishing a price on carbon.” In September 2009, Mr. Prentice lobbied the Alberta government to support cap-and-trade. In December 2009, the Harper government claimed to be “working in collaboration with the provinces and territories to develop a cap and trade system that will ultimately be aligned with the emerging cap and trade program in the United States.” McLeans Sept 21, 2012

Dml you do realize it was believed at the time that President Obama was about to implement a cap and trade system which Harper planned to duplicate in Canada. Harper believed a cap and trade system harmonized with our largest trading partner made sense and did not put us at a competitive disadvantage. Justin Trudeau on the other hand is implementing a carbon tax while the U.S. is not which will put us at a competitive disadvantage. Plus his carbon tax is taking money from businesses and using it to subsidize the rebates to all taxpayers in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and NewBrunswick because business owners have far less voting power than the general public.

[furrowtickler]

Farmers have a huge opportunity to be part of the solution and be credited financially for it, if they would realize they could be selling sequestration as a product of their farms to a public that is in support of sequestration and a public that is willing to pay for farmers to sequester it.

Can you explain this ?
Was this not exactly what I just brought up ? Or is it just not called “carbon credits” ?

You tell me ... where is the carbon tax going to come from ?? After doing your tax’s do you have all the extra cash laying around ? Time will tell next tax season .

[dmlfarmer]

Farmers have a huge opportunity to be part of the solution and be credited financially for it, if they would realize they could be selling sequestration as a product of their farms to a public that is in support of sequestration and a public that is willing to pay for farmers to sequester it.

Can you explain this ?
Was this not exactly what I just brought up ? Or is it just not called “carbon credits” ?

You tell me ... where is the carbon tax going to come from ?? After doing your tax’s do you have all the extra cash laying around ? Time will tell next tax season .

Re-read my entire post and especially note that for farmers to get credits, that money has to come from somewhere. It could come from a carbon tax, or from cap and trade, both are capitalist means to reduce emissions. To expect governments to simply pay farmers without collecting revenues to cover carbon credit costs is simply socialism. Is that what you want?

If you believe in carbon credits and that farming sequesters carbon, farmers should be lobbying government for a price for sequestration that would be significantly higher than cost of the carbon tax instead of fighting the tax. Farmers should be seeking to profit from sequestration, which is a saleable commodity, instead of arguing that science, government, and the public are simply wrong about climate change.

[jazz]

If you believe in carbon credits and that farming sequesters carbon, farmers should be lobbying government for a price for sequestration that would be significantly higher than cost of the carbon tax instead of fighting the tax. Farmers should be seeking to profit from sequestration, which is a saleable commodity, instead of arguing that science, government, and the public are simply wrong about climate change.

No dml, the govt twisted the narrative from the get go to make Canada look like we are an emissions laggard and then virtuous trying to do something about it. They ignored our freshwater, boreal forest and carbon sequestered farmland on purpose. We werent even in the game to argue our point. Carbon credit cash can come from any source, local companies wanting to do something or even foreign countries who cant reduce their own. Then you provide capitalist tax incentives for people to make reasonable adjustments in lifestyle and improvements. That's not socialism at all. That's a capitalist approach to an nebulous problem.

[westernvicki]

Minimum tillage farmers of western Canada have made significant contributions to reducing carbon & sequestration, if there is a carbon tax, there should be carbon tax credits for farmers and cap and trade.

Google the Quebec system.

[dmlfarmer]

Minimum tillage farmers of western Canada have made significant contributions to reducing carbon & sequestration, if there is a carbon tax, there should be carbon tax credits for farmers and cap and trade.

Google the Quebec system.

absolutely, I agree fully, but farmers are so busy arguing climate change is not real and pricing carbon is a government conspiracy that we have zero credibility to make a case for carbon credits. Furthermore farmers have no united voice - we cannot even discuss climate change without conspiracy theories, name calling, and politics; much less make a science based claim that we should be paid for sequestration.

[fjlip]

Found this, well said...the real issue is how could such measurements be done?

"Here is the question I always ask the AGW gang. I have yet to have even one answer (except for an avalanche of ad hominems). And, BTW, I hold a PhD in Atmospheric Fluid Dynamics from McGill. Before we commit to spending billions upon billions of dollars to solve this problem, how about we define it scientifically? You know, in a way that can be measured. Real scientists check out the value of their theories and hypotheses by using data. So let's try that here. What, exactly, is being *measured*?

And how accurate are those measurements, both now and over time? And how do you know what the contribution of human activity is to whatever you are measuring? I'll make it even easier for you. Since AGW believers frequently bring up surface temperature, let's look at it. After all, it's about the simplest thing involved, isn't it? So show me a map of the earth's surface temperature, and a companion map of the margin of error. Then do the same thing in (say) 1950. If you prefer another atmospheric parameter than surface temperature, suggest it and provide reasons for your choice, and then answer the same questions. Finally, tell me what part of the differences is due to human activity, how you know, and how accurately you know it. Bet you can't."