By Trevor McLeod
In the Vancouver Sun

March 24, 2015

 

The province of British Columbia and the city of Vancouver are undisputed environmental leaders in Canada. Yet both B.C. and Vancouver could use a reminder that not all environmental projects are worth doing.

A report released recently by the Canada West Foundation — Walkin’ the Walk: Five Steps toward Efficient Cities — makes the case that most western Canadian cities need to do more to reduce their energy use and carbon footprint. This storyline does not really apply in British Columbia.

B.C. has set the example for other western provinces to follow by both leading the way and getting out of the way. The provincial government has led the way with a carbon tax (more on that later) and with its voluntary Climate Action Charter, which commits communities to achieving carbon neutral corporate operations, and to measuring and reporting community greenhouse emissions. It moved out of the way when it legislated the Vancouver Charter and when it allowed mayors to proceed with the Metro Vancouver Congestion Improvement Tax referendum.

The Vancouver Charter, which gives the city additional powers, such as the right to establish and operate an energy utility system, should be emulated by other western Canadian provinces. We are pleased to see Alberta moving down this path with Calgary and Edmonton. The transit tax, which would increase the provincial sales tax by 0.5 per cent while generating $7.5 billion in transit spending over the next decade, is a welcome innovation.

Yet there is a case to be made that B.C. and Vancouver need to do less, or at least be more discerning about environmental decisions. Environmental projects that are worth doing meaningfully reduce energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and costs to taxpayers over time.

On these criteria, it is possible B.C.’s carbon tax is not the most efficient way to reduce emissions; that is, it may not have changed consumer behaviour enough to reduce GHG emissions. The latest Statistics Canada data finds B.C.’s gasoline consumption in 2014 is higher than in 2008, the year the carbon tax started. It is hard to explain this away through population growth (which has grown on average one per cent each year since 2008) or through economic growth (which has increased about three per cent each year since 2008). Since the money raised goes to offset other taxes — instead of, for example, environmental technology — the carbon tax may not meaningfully reduce GHG emissions.

Unlike the carbon tax, the problem with Metro Vancouver’s proposed transit tax is not about the environmental benefit. The plan — which includes building a new bridge, improved bus and rapid transit service, road upgrades, and extension of cycling and pedestrian walkway networks — makes good environmental sense. This is why the Yes side continues to accumulate endorsements from diverse voices, including think tanks, police services, chambers of commerce and the HandyDART Riders Alliance.

Unfortunately, for the Yes side, endorsements focused on selling the merits of the plan are unlikely to shift public support to their side. The people of the Lower Mainland already understand that transportation decisions matter; they know infrastructure lasts for decades and influences short-tem and long-term energy options.

However, the Lower Mainland is already one of the most expensive places in the world to live. Vancouverites have some of the biggest debt loads and mortgages in Canada and pay the highest gasoline costs in the country. People are tired of paying additional tax.

People also do not trust municipal politicians and TransLink to manage their tax dollars wisely. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a single-issue organization that is often easy to ignore, has a point in this case. TransLink already takes 17 cents per litre on gas, five cents per litre on the federal government’s gas tax and a 21-per-cent levy on BC Hydro bills. These statistics, combined with the perception that TransLink mismanages money, could be fatal to the Yes side.

While Vancouver has done so much right environmentally, it needs to focus on environmental projects that deliver meaningful GHG reductions and true taxpayer value.

Trevor McLeod is director of the Centre for Natural Resources Policy at the Canada West Foundation.