The Bull Meter: Jack Layton on cap-and-trade

There’s no reason to think “big polluters’ won’t pass on those extra costs to consumers

by Erica Alini on Friday, April 29, 2011 4:46pm - 39 Comments
Layton_bull
"I don’t accept this analysis that is being offered, that the big polluters should suddenly be justified to raise prices . . . If you look at their own books, they are already booking the cost of a cap-and-trade system and they’re dealing with it elsewhere"
- Jack Layton
April 28, 2011

Bull Meter score:

Layton’s statement means he doesn’t believe a cap-and-trade program would lead to an increase in gas prices for consumers, something the NDP leader later reiterated to reporters, according to a tweet by the CBC’s Rosemary Barton. That is “absolutely wrong,” says Andrew Leach, an assistant professor at the University of Alberta’s School of Business.

In a cap-and-trade system, the government sets an overall cap on emissions for industry and distributes limited authorizations to emit. Polluters are free to buy or sell these allowances, or bank them for future use. This means that they can either invest in green technologies to lower their emissions levels to or below their cap, or continue to emit at higher levels, and buy allowances to cover that excess. The whole idea behind cap-and-trade, and any other carbon policy, is to attach a price tag to emissions to create an incentive for price-conscious polluters to modify their behavior.

Now, businesses (i.e. what the NDP calls “big polluters”) are first to foot the bill for cap-and-trade, but there’s no reason to think that they won’t pass on those extra costs to consumers, (i.e. voters). In the refinery sector, in particular, “most of the evidence is that cost pass-through in refined products is pretty near to 100 per cent, and pretty quick—within two months or so,” says Leach. The NDP reportedly would have refineries pay only for the green house gases they emit while producing refined gas products, and not for the emissions coming out of drivers’ tailpipes, which have been filled with those refined products. Still, even that limited version of cap-and-trade would hit consumers’ pockets, by lifting gas prices by three or four cents a litre, according to Leach.

And, quoting Rosemary Barton’s Twitter account again, Layton seemed to acknowledge our point when he later admitted “he can implement cap-and-trade, but he cannot legally prevent companies from passing costs onto consumers.”

Heard something that doesn’t sound quite right? Send quotes from the campaign trail to macbullmeter@gmail.com and we’ll tell you just how much bull they contain.

Sources:

Layton’s quote

Rosemary Barton’s tweets

Cap and trade 101

Bookmark and Share
  • DBM

    Is that the first '5 Bull'?

    • DPT

      yep, and you could likely apply that to the entire NDP platform.

  • OriginalEmily1

    LOL and right on cue….here comes the kitchen sink!
    http://trustytorytwo.blogspot.com/2011/04/everyth…

    • Leo

      Sending this link to my friends on Vancouver Island. They are big union, forestry workers and "love" Jack!!

      Still licking my wounds from spending Easter long-weekend with them, lol!!!

      • jmw

        Wonder why Jack is promising Quebec 25 % of the votes in the House of Commons, but voted AGAINST B.C. getting the 7 more M.P.s it deserves (per population). Jack is bashing the HST in B.C., yet telling Quebec it's the best things since sliced bread and so is the 5 billion he is promising in transition payments. To me, he's manipulating east against west and telling everyone what they WANT to hear. He will cancel most of our existing trade agreements, so tell your union friends to expect lay-offs since we won't have a market for whatever product their producing. We will not be competitive between corporate tax hikes and cap and trade. No sane person would think he can deliver on his promises. The cap and trade will cost each family of four $4000.00 per year to start. And you can expect your RRSP and retirement savings to drop down to recession levels within a short period of time as foreign investment capital exits. And since he has NO plan to cut the deficit, our kids, not us, will be the ones to carry the cost of these expensive and reckless choices.
        All BCGEU members got a letter (that's 66,000) in B.C. to vote for their individual riding's NDP candidate. BCGEU is not a registered third party lobbyist. This is illegal according to Elections Canada, but ethics is not the strong point of the NDP. Just imagine what they'll do with all our tax money!

    • Curt

      Emily,
      You must really enjoy La-La- land as you obviously don't know economics. Jack's cap and trade has nothing to do about the reduction of emissions but every thing about taxes for his pet projects. He wants to penalize soccer moms who are taking their kids across town. He wants to have single moms pay more for gasoline when they go to the grocery store to buy more expensive food.. He wants to increase the cost of electricity in NFLD., NS. PEI. Ont. Sask., Alta., BC. YT, NWT. In other words he wants to screw the economy.
      You can LOL but 34 million Canadians will not be laughing with you.

      • OriginalEmily1

        Actually I work in economics.

        You work in Con propaganda.

        • Curt

          You got it wrong Emily! I retired some years ago without a pension. So you pay his taxes and my healthcare. Since you are now supporting him, thanks.

          • OriginalEmily1

            So you're a cranky ol white guy who mooches off the system while trashing it.

            Doesn't surprise me you do a little Craig's list moonlighting on the side.

          • Curt

            Emily,
            Check out the newest rumblings about Jack.
            Retired doesn't mean what you assume. Athlete perhaps? Lottery winner? Health?

          • OriginalEmily1

            The only 'rumblings' about Jack come from the Con propaganda machine….same as that fake story about Iggy being on the front lines with a gun in Iraq. LOL

            In any case, I haven't the least interest in Jack…or your cranky moochy ol' white guy routine.

          • Catcher22

            Hey curt wait till the Emily heads start runnning the ndp government. The NDP is full of them heads. Lots of fun to look forward too

          • OriginalEmily1

            Sorry, I've never been NDP….only PC and Reform/CA

        • Atchison

          Emily deals in an economy of ignorance.

  • Sally

    First of many

  • MTB

    It would be nice if Jack were a little more grounded in reality on this, but at the same time, the real question is "does anyone besides the most ideological conservative care if gas prices go up a few cents if it provides an incentive for companies to reduce pollution?" If British Columbia is any indication, the answer is "no." It was the Liberal (really a conservative) party that introduced the carbon tax there, and when the NDP proposed eliminating it, they were lambasted for it. What's more, we all need to get off the sauce if we're going to clean up our air. So much the better that we do get a little "incentive" of sorts.

  • http://ragingranter.blogspot.com Raging_Ranter

    http://www.torontosun.com/2011/04/29/us-union-con…

    United Autoworkers of America filing papers to the US Labor Department indicating tens of thousands of dollars in donations to the NDP party? Apparently it is justified because Canadian union dues go to the US parent, so that makes the US parent's donations to Canadian political parties OK. :)

    Wonder why this story isn't getting more play. Oh right, the media is too busy covering the NDP "surge".

  • bergkamp

    "Layton’s statement means he doesn’t believe a cap-and-trade program would lead to an increase in gas prices for consumers … "

    What's the point if there is no increase in prices? How does Layton think his program will work if prices stay same?

    Also, has anyone asked about recent IMF numbers that show:

    "Non-OECD" means poor countries, and the IMF figures that short-term price elasticity in poor countries is -0.007, which means that a 1% increase in price leads to only a 0.007% decrease in consumption. Put another way, even a 50% increase in price leads to only a negligible 0.35% decrease in consumption1. Long-term elasticity is higher, but even here a 50% price hike would lead to only a 1.8% decrease in consumption.

    The rich world is modestly more sensitive. In the short term, a 50% price increase produces a 1.2% decrease in consumption. In the long term, it produces a 4.7% decrease." Kevin Drum, Mother Jones, Apr 22

  • BGLong

    But surely there must be some confusion here … the esteemed M. Harper insists
    on telling us over and over and over again that the CLC supports his budget. A
    puzzlement, yes?

  • BGLong

    There are other assessments of a non-bovine variety …

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/otta…

  • http://myblahg.com Robert McClelland

    Layton’s statement means he doesn’t believe a cap-and-trade program would lead to an increase in gas prices for consumers

    No it doesn't. It means he thinks there's no justification for producers passing on the cost to consumers. Or in other words, exactly what he said.

    5 bulls and remedial lessons in reading comprehension for you.

    • jmw

      Gas prices? How about price increases on EVERYTHING! The estimated cost of cap and trade to consumers (that's us taxpayers) is an estimated 12 % IN ADDITION to the HST. Now we're close to a 25% tax on most everything purchased. Hello, brave new world! The problem in Europe is that the socialist gov'ts. extended social programs far beyond the revenue they were able to generate. Can you say Spain, Portugal, Ireland…it would be sad to see Canada join them.

    • wafer

      It makes no difference what Jack thinks about justifiably passing the cost on to consumers.
      What matters is the fact that we all know the producers will pass the full cost on and in all likely hood add a percent or so just for good measure which will go to the companies bottom line. How could they pass up an opportunity like that especially when they can blame it on the government. As it stands right now the oil companies use any and every opportunity to jack up the price of fuel no matter how small or inconsequential.

  • hosertohoosier

    The real problem is that Layton is using cap and trade as a piggy bank. Something like the Green shift, where revenues are pushed into corporate tax cuts, would cushion the very real transitional costs of pricing carbon (though it is going to be painful either way – in the two years after Sweden implemented a carbon tax GDP fell from 258 billion to 202 billion. Sweden did not permanently pass its pre-carbon tax GDP till 12 years later in 2003) .

  • chet

    "Yeah, but he walks with a cane in a neveaux disabled chic sort of way, and he smiles a lot….so like, who cares if he'll destroy our economy"…..giddy giggles……
    (today's balanced ever-in-touch media)

  • chet

    The media has spent the better part of a year demonizing….literally demonizing… the insertion of a "not' and other purported sins against mankind, while willfully ignoring the real distruction the policies offered by the opposition could wreak on us and our children.

    Yes, tell us more about two students being kicked out a CPC campain…..so much more important that the….oh…I dunno…wacko policies the NDP has been offering up to Canadians, and which now threaten our economy as we know it.

    • Catcher22

      tabloid sort of news has even taken over the macleans webpage……..it used to be interesting. but who reelly cares

  • JoeC

    Really, everyone's freaking out about a 3 or 4 cent increase in the cost of gas? Am I the only one who's noticed the 70 cent increase that gas companies have colluded to impose on consumers over the past five years? Like another 4 cents is going to destroy our economy. Give me a break!

    That said, I prefer I carbon tax combined with an income tax reduction, but some sort of action on pollution would be nice.

  • Facts for all

    He(Jack Layton) wants to save middle and lower class people's pocket books.
    How many middle and lower class people own cars?
    How many of above said cars use gasoline?
    How much would gasoline prices increase with a "cap and trade" program?

    Jacky said it himself, the government can't control the prices set for consumer products by corporations.

    I sincerely apologize, Mr. Layton, your aspirations to have a cap and trade program in Canada were pronounced dead at the scene(press release).

  • secret bay

    Honest Jack????
    Yesterday laton said NB's budget with a 400 million defect was balanced. (CKNW Radio) He got treated at a private clinic in QB and cheated on his housing allowance and had a happy ending at a massage parlor in Toronto but you don't report this.

    Honest Jack???
    Unbised Reporting ???

  • tsmith

    With all due respect, the very notion that fees can be "passed on to consumers" displays such a fundamental misunderstanding of supply and demand economics that it's absurd.

    No costs are ever "passed on to the consumer." Prices are determined by demand. That means the price is the highest it will be before consumers drop off enough to cut into profits. No businesses are ever sitting there saying "we made more money because we paid lower fees. That means we should drop the price." They say "We made more money. Disco."

    Conversely, when there are fees, they don't say "oh no we have higher costs. Let's alienate our consumers and drop profits even lower by messing with the prices." They say "oh no we have a higher bottom line. Damnit."

    Every time i see this ransom-threat "pass costs on to the consumer" business in these papers I wonder where you people get your economics training from.

  • HarveyMushman

    We need a "Bull Meter" on the "I thought it was a legitimate therapeutic massage clinic."

  • cbombast

    I oppose cap and trade mainly because I think it would just become another bond market full of greedy people looking for loopholes, lining their pockets, and not caring a whit about emissions. Most of them probably wouldn't even believe in the climate science. Lots of people don't. I wish I didn't because I don't think we have the stones to reduce emissions anywhere close to the levels scientists say we need to. Denial seems like a welcome respite compared to what we're supposedly in for.

    In any case, anyone who thinks for one moment that the energy sector won't pass on costs to the consumer must never buy petrol at the pumps. They'll use any excuse to ratchet up the cost/litre. Cap and trade would be a wonderful way to increase profits and point the blame directly at an NDP or Liberal government. Now that is a win-win!

  • http://ragingranter.blogspot.com Raging_Ranter

    I know. I used to work for the federal government. Our union – PIPSC – was sending out emails in support of the coalition takeover attempt in October 2008. They are absolutely shameless. My former colleagues tell me they're still up to it. Several emails urging them to vote strategically and the like.

  • http://ragingranter.blogspot.com Raging_Ranter

    You are correct. Many of the companies pushing for cap and trade laws themselves stand to benefit from selling credits. Dupont in the US is one of the biggest proponents of cap and trade. That's because they've made massive investments in energy efficiency over the past two decades. And why not? It makes good business sense to cut energy consumption. But, they've already benefited from those investments in the form of lower energy costs. Now they want to be able to market "emissions credits" and gain billions more in economic rent. Politicians would have to be nuts to play into their hands like that.

  • jmw

    the BCGEU in BC is also sending out daily emails to the same effect.

  • http://wakinguponplanetx.blogspot.com Candace

    The "Friends of the Canada Wheat Board" or some such is running ads in Edmonton urging people to vote for the candidate(s) (since the Liberals like it too) that support the ongoing screwing of western Canadian farmers. I thought there was a rule about how much a 3rd party could spend on advertising?

  • http://ragingranter.blogspot.com Raging_Ranter

    I just heard a "public service announcement" on the radio this evening. It was by "Canada's public service unions", urging Canadians to…. you guessed it, vote strategically against Harper to ensure a strong public service. Unions are so cute sometimes.

From Macleans