Cory Morgan: Double Standard: Why Should Quebec Pay Less Carbon Tax Than Other Provinces?

A man replaces the nozzle after filling up at a gas station in Montreal in a file photo. The Canadian Press/Paul Chiasson

Commentary

It’s tough to justify the inexorable growth in carbon taxes in Canada while citizens struggle with increases in the cost of living. But the inequitable application of the scheme across provinces adds insult to injury.

B.C. was the first province out of the gate to impose a carbon tax in 2008 to battle emissions. Since imposing the tax, B.C.’s emissions have continued to rise and they are nowhere close to reaching their targets.

Nova Scotia took a cap-and-trade approach to emission reduction and they have seen an emission reduction of 36 percent since 2005. As a reward for Nova Scotia’s success, the federal government has slapped the entire 14 cents per litre carbon tax on fuels in the province.

Quebec also has imposed a cap-and-trade system but it doesn’t appear to be as effective as Nova Scotia’s since Quebec’s emissions only dropped by 12 percent. The federal government is using that 12 percent emission reduction as justification to reduce the carbon tax for Quebec to 10 cents per litre, while the rest of the country pays the full 14 cents.

The double standard is galling, yet is all too common. Canadians have come to cynically accept that Quebec will get preferential treatment within the federation as federal governments of every partisan stripe try to fend off secessionism in la belle province. Such efforts may or may not be quelling independence sentiment in Quebec, but they are certainly feeding regional discontent in the rest of the nation.

National pride is on the wane as Canada Day celebrations are becoming muted while regionalism is on the rise. In the West, provincial governments are embracing soft secessionism as Saskatchewan and Alberta have both created “sovereignty” acts in response to Ottawa’s incursions into provincial rights. Support for outright independence holds at a steady 25 percent in Alberta, and could grow quickly if a battle with the federal government erupts.

Grumbling in the Maritime provinces is growing as new federal regulations hit them hard in the pocketbook, and Newfoundland is considering taking the government to court.

As citizens look to their provincial governments to defend themselves from Ottawa, regionalism is bound to grow. Provincial politicians are less inclined to take national interests into account with policies than federal ones.

The reason people are looking to their provincial governments to deal with regional inequity in the Liberal government’s policies is they have nowhere else to go. Even the Conservative Party of Canada remains deathly silent on issues that may perturb Quebec. The blatant inequity with the national application of the carbon tax should be a natural issue for a federal opposition leader to jump on. Still, so far Pierre Poilievre hasn’t touched it. It’s unlikely he will for fear of threatening potential electoral gains in Quebec.

The CPC’s refusal to call out national double standards when it comes to Quebec isn’t just with the carbon tax. That’s only the most recent issue.

While Quebec was already overrepresented in both the Senate and Supreme Court, representation by population applied to seats in the House of Commons. At least it used to.

Due to population growth in other parts of the country outpacing growth in Quebec, the province was supposed to lose a seat in the House of Commons in the latest round of seat redistribution. But Quebec raised a fuss about the issue, which isn’t surprising. What was surprising and disappointing was that members of Parliament voted to toss the principle of representation by population out the window and guarantee Quebec a minimum number of seats no matter how low their population may drop.

If local MPs won’t vote in the interest of their constituents, what is the point of local representation? Many Canadians have been asking themselves that question and it is a line of thinking that can lead to the notion of regional secessionism.

Whether it’s with equalization, taxation, targeted subsidies, or democratic representation, Quebec always gets preferential treatment in Canada. While MPs take the support of their constituents for granted, frustration and regionalism is growing among Canadians outside central Canada.

It’s understandable from a politically strategic point of view why national parties won’t take a stand when it comes to issues with Quebec.

Is the pursuit of votes in Quebec worth risking the fracturing of Canada’s fragile national unity?

So far, the answer appears to be yes.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.