Scheer will put a price on carbon for large emitters but says ‘it’s not a tax’

Scheer will put a price on carbon for large emitters but says ‘it’s not a tax’
Scheer will put a price on carbon for large emitters but says ‘it’s not a tax’
It’S a promise that jog the conservative leader and Russia are since he made it right here on this program back in April of 2018, that he will have a climate plan that will meet the parents of missions reduction Target with no carbon tax. Remember that oh and unveil a plan that reaches the targets that we have already voted in favor weed with last money in greenetech. Will it cost be passed on to Consumers, but you’re also pledges to help other countries reduce their missions by exporting natural gas or clean technology? But can Canada really get credit for that? The plan has no formal Target or even measurement tool. So how can we tell it’s going to work? Let’S find out joining me. Now? Is conservative party leader Andrew Scheer, great Caesar, absolutely did, and you also promised on this program that in the plan which I have here, the real plan to protect the environment would meet your commitment and your parties commitment to the Paris climate Accord. Emissions reduction. Will it Meet The Targets? This plan gives the best shot at making those targets. We know the liberal approach isn’t hitting those targets were falling further and further behind their carbon tax is not reducing emissions and it’s raising the cost of everything. This plan, according to the Parliamentary budget officer with our focus on a logical advancements in investments in Innovation, gives Canada the best shot at meeting with targets. Okay, there’s no. I looked through this plan how much and Carlos planas you’re saying it’s the best shot, but we have no way to measure it. Where are the numbers to show how much this will actually work, that technological would reduce emissions by about a hundred megatons? That’S the that’s! Just the technological innovation that we also talked about how there are 3000 coal-fired power plants in China, if just 100 of them used KTM carbon capture technology, that would reduce Global emissions, the tune of about 300 megatons of the very popular that’s home renovation, if they not. If 100 gold plant shift over to LNG, for example, we don’t know that the plan, though to be fair, does not document year-over-year. How we would reach 30 Target is that why would they be interested? Would other governments other countries be interested in this type of Technology? The answer is, yes, are they already have been knocking on our door? We have this amazing made-in-canada technology, carbon capture and storage, that if we had a government that supported that that could help leverage that promote it, facilitate the adoption of that. I that we would in fact reduce emissions CO2 out of the atmosphere. Let’S talk about big emitters. The key to your plan is a cap on need. Whatever the cap is, they’ve got to pay some kind of feet. I ask you: isn’t that a price on carbon and if so, what is the price, collects the revenue, the bats attacks? So what this is is a cap, as you point out on on large emitters, but with the flexibility that they can use those funds to invest in any number of things for ticker. How much do they have to invest in technology? In the end, like you’re dancing around saying, there’s a price on car., I’m I’m over X number of times. I have to therefore invest Xterra. What’S the number the key difference between attacks and this plan is that the government doesn’t collect this review. This is not going to fund programs, like the Liberals, are right now giving 12 million dollars to Loblaws matter multibillion-dollar corporations. This is a process of a mechanism whereby these emitters can invest in reducing their emissions. They can form industry Alliance if they can partner with other companies in the same field mechanism. To pick up with the bassline is so once who sets the Target that the Federal Government Federal Government We Will Rock You bought and sold on International markets that that that they don’t actually go into reducing emissions? They just buy a piece of paper that says this allows you to admit more missions, you’re setting a price on carbon for big emitters, but they have to if they exceed it, they have to pay whatever. That price is back into a text and my school is you: if your department will have to set that price on carbon per ton, and I’m going to ask you, is it going to be $ 50? How much does that price have to be to be effective? We will be setting all those all those rights we will be setting that schedule and it will be designed to ensure that large industrial Motors play their role. How do you know that emitters cast the cost of that on to the consumer with this model, with the incentive requirement to invest in lowering emissions? We know that that will lead to efficiencies. Companies are going to be consuming less energy, going to find more efficient ways of producing or transporting their good that will lead to price reductions. So we believe that this approach will not impose higher costs on consumers because of you that the money that they’re collecting from these come from these companies are going to government coffers need directions. Are you picking this big companies has happened in Australia ultimate pass on? Whatever cost they have to the consumer, how do you know this is going to translate into emissions reductions and, if so, exactly how much that they will have to? I do fit within the schedule that we will oppose. I said compliance that this is not just a set-it-and-forget-it type of plant. There will have to be certification that there will have to be that that that government agencies will have to recognize say yes, this is actually appropriate use of the of the funds from this regime and whether that is investing in R & D at a university. Whether it’s several companies within an industry coming together, it’s okay, we’re good. We know start a find at a University Research Center or what-have-you that there’s a lot of flexibility design in here. The reason for that is cuz, that’s a better model than the government, just collecting more taxes taken out of the economy and making our country less competitive. Let’S get credit for exporting, let’s gas to China, it’s cool, as you spoke about earlier, to the Paris climate Accord, to swap pretty obscure, but that would require China giving up in credits for switching to Canada and then Uno in the Paris climate Accord. You can’t count emission reductions in another country to towards your target, so I asked you this just as a pure realism. Are you going to try to renegotiate the Paris climate Accord, emissions reductions in other countries which it doesn’t allow right now and to why? Would China give up its credits to Canada, so we can make that plant whether to focus our incentive or facilitation actions that we do here lead to reductions in global emissions.? That’S something that could the Canadian government should pursue. Why wouldn’t we? We all know that we could shut everything off tomorrow. We can shut it all down and within about twenty one day, 3 weeks Global Pace, wood would replace everything that we just did here. So I believe that when you look at countries like China, like Indonesia, like others in the in the region, that we can leverage what we have here to reduce Global emissions at the end of the day, that’s more important, taking CO2 out of the atmosphere is more Important then, you know how the paperwork follows it’s important to have the exact words it’s important to that all the countries agree on it, but with this plan does that takes the flight Global? It recognizes that if we only look here, I’m just trying to figure out where already trying to export LNG, I’m just trying to figure out how that this your plan would do anything but kind of say: look you don’t forget the Paris Ellen. We get credit for that, even though no one else in the world regards that as part of our plan you’re just going to take credit. You know that, like I just wonder if you’re moving around the deck chairs on the Titanic, I that that is a British Columbia that only proceed it, because it got an exemption from the little carbon tax that if we want to play a meaningful role in reducing What I’m saying is that if we have an environmental policy that does not recognize that we can take action, hear that reduces Global emissions and, in fact prevent that from happening, we’re not doing the world any favors. Thank you. So much
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer discusses his climate plan and says he will put a cap on large emitters, but that it’s not a price on carbon.


Subscribe to CTV News to watch more videos:

Connect with CTV News:
For the latest news visit:
For a full video offering visit the CTV News Network:
CTV News on Facebook:
CTV News on Twitter:
Watch CTV News on Twitter:
CTV News on Google+:
CTV News on Instagram:
CTV News on Pinterest:

CTV News is Canada’s most-watched news organization both locally and nationally, and has a network of national, international, and local news operations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *