On September 9 council agenda there is a resolution tabled by Mayor Pellegrini and seconded by Councillor Boyd. The resolution is to i) ask the federal government to exclude home heating from the federal carbon tax and  ii) ask the federal and provincial governments to reinstate home energy retrofit rebate and grant programs to help King residents retrofit their homes to be more energy efficient.

I am totally supportive of the 2nd portion of the resolution. There is an upfront cost for residents to transition away from heating and cooling their homes with fossil fuels. As the previously offered rebates and programs were very popular it’s evident that people are interested in making the transition to a better and ultimately lower cost way of heating their homes but the upfront costs are a hurdle. As both jurisdictions have goals to move to reduce emissions it’s critical that homeowners make the transition. As noted in the draft KCCAP, which is on Council agenda this evening, 27% of emissions in King are from the residential sector.

I am not supportive of the first portion of the resolution as I don’t think it really will help people and it can be argued that it will disadvantage some,  particularly low income households.  The carbon tax is revenue neutral; excluding home heating from a  carbon tax would result in lower revenue for the Federal government and accordingly the magnitude of the carbon rebate will be reduced for everyone.  The PBO issued a report in 2023 which shows that in Ontario it is only the households in the highest income quintile which pay more carbon tax than their rebate. This makes sense to me as it is these households who have larger homes and drive multiple cars.  The Parliamentary Budget Office has recently confirmed that approximately 80%of Canadian households will get more money back from the rebate than what the tax costs them.  Per a Stats Canada model 94% of households with incomes below $50,000 received a larger rebate than their carbon tax cost.

I also do not support this part of the resolution as I believe putting a cost on carbon is necessary to encourage both individuals and businesses to transition away from use of fossil fuels. I know that some jurisdictions have opted to “chip at” the carbon tax; I disagree with those choices and I don’t want to encourage more.  If one is seriously going to argue that there should not be a cost on carbon there should be either a proposal for an alternative means of incenting transition or acknowlegment of the cost of ignoring the problem.

If you wish to make a deputation and/or make comments to Council please register with clerks@king.ca or send an email by noon Sept. 9th.  You can make a post on this blog or contact me directly.