"Its implications go far beyond the act, opening the door to federal intrusion - by way of the imposition of national standards - into all areas of provincial jurisdiction, including intra-provincial trade and commerce, health, and the management of natural resources. "This is a model of federalism that rejects our Constitution and rewrites the rules of Confederation," Brown wrote. Justices Russell Brown and Malcolm Rowe both strongly disagreed with the majority's decision, writing lengthy dissenting opinions in response to Wagner.īrown said the law's subject matter "falls squarely within provincial jurisdiction."
The imposition of a tax on a good enables the government to free#
"They are free to design any GHG pricing system they choose as long as they meet the federal government's outcome-based targets." Lengthy dissenting opinions "Emitting provinces retain the ability to legislate, without any federal supervision, in relation to all methods of regulating GHG emissions that do not involve pricing," Wagner said. The federal tax, the so-called "backstop," only applies if a province refuses to act - so "the impact on provinces' freedom to legislate is minimal," Wagner said. While encouraging provinces to craft their own plans, Ottawa said it would slap a carbon tax on fuels in provinces and territories that failed to establish adequate emissions pricing regimes.
"A failure to include one province in the scheme would jeopardize its success in the rest of Canada," Wagner wrote. Wagner said because emissions are "extraprovincial" by nature and "carbon leakage" across borders is inevitable, there's a regulatory role for Ottawa to play in ensuring that each jurisdiction contributes to the national effort.
"As a result, it readily passes the threshold test and warrants consideration as a possible matter of national concern." Emissions are 'extraprovincial': Wagner This matter is critical to our response to an existential threat to human life," Wagner wrote. "The evidence clearly shows that establishing minimum national standards of GHG price stringency to reduce GHG emissions is of concern for Canada as a whole. While Ottawa's legislation does tread on provincial jurisdiction as set out by the Constitution Act, 1867, the threat of climate change "justifies the limited constitutional impact." Wagner said a patchwork approach - with some provinces refusing to impose a price on carbon - would hinder Canada's collective fight against climate change. He said there is a "broad consensus among international bodies" that carbon pricing is a "critical measure for the reduction of GHG emissions." Ontario Premier Doug Ford, left, and Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, right, have been resistant to nationally mandated carbon pricing. It is caused by greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities, and it poses a grave threat to humanity's future," Wagner wrote. He agreed with the federal government's argument that climate change is a pressing matter of national concern and said it's constitutionally permissible for Ottawa to take the lead on a threat that crosses provincial boundaries. Some provinces - notably Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan - have forcefully opposed the carbon tax, arguing natural resources are in the provinces' jurisdiction under the Constitution.Ĭhief Justice Richard Wagner, writing for the majority, said the federal government is free to impose minimum pricing standards because the threat of climate change is so great that it demands a co-ordinated national approach. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled the federal Liberal government's carbon pricing regime is constitutional - a major decision that allows Ottawa to push ahead with its ambitious plan to ensure every province and territory has a price on carbon to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
0 kommentar(er)
