Transcript Ontario renewable energy and climate change policy in the Canadian Intergovernmental and

Ontario renewable energy and
climate change policy in the
Canadian Intergovernmental and
North American contexts
Douglas Macdonald
Format
• What decides subnational lead or veto role?
• Why do federated systems have to allocate
reductions?
• Ontario and Canadian national policy
• Ontario and Canadian national climate-change
policy
• The likelihood of an Ontario lead role
• The way forward
Subnational lead or veto?
• Environmental threat = lead, eg Sweden acid
rain
• Economic cost = veto, eg Saudi Arabia, Alberta
• Low economic cost = lead, eg Germany 1997
• Internal politics, government ideology also
factors, may = lead role or veto
• Desire reduce competitiveness problems, gain
political cover = lead role, eg California, WCI
Why must federations allocate?
• Climate change a global collective action problem
• Federated countries/systems (EU) can only have one
target in international regime
• Geographically concentrated sources means cost differ
geographically
• Relevant subnational governments defend their
economic interest, play veto role
• That can only be overcome by bargaining
• Bargaining can only happen if there is explicit
recognition of the need to allocate, reach agreement
on equitable cost sharing
Ontario and Canadian national policy
• 1867 Canada created by the Ontario-Quebec axis;
industrial heartland, agricultural hinterland
• 1960s Premier John Robarts, Ontario and
Canadian interest seen as identical
• 1982 Ontario support for Trudeau repatriation
constitution
• 1990s Premier Bob Rae, Ontario seen to have a
separate interest
• 2015 Premier Wynne, return to Quebec alliance,
no identification with national interest
Ontario and national climate-change
policy
• 1985 federal-provincial acid rain program, Ontario
resistance, then action for domestic reasons
• 1990 – 2002 feds and provinces on the climate policy
highway, Ontario “on the service road”
• 2000 Ontario sabotaged NCCP Framework Agreement,
burden sharing
• 2003-15 coal phase-out, renewable FIT, purely
domestic, not related to national policy
• Participant Council of Federation CES, but lead role
Alberta
• Ontario has not played a lead national role to date
The likelihood of an Ontario lead role
• No particular environmental threat
• No particularly high cost
• Internal politics, government ideology only work
if Liberal or NDP government
• Reduce competitiveness, Ontario focus crossborder not just within Canada
• As a province, lacks sticks or carrots to influence
other provinces
• Low likelihood
The way forward
• Provinces are unilaterally taking lead action, eg BC carbon
tax; but not many “lead points” to date on national coordination; closest has been Quebec, Liberal federal
governments
• Powerful veto point, the higher per capita cost of reduction
in oil provinces (geographically concentrated sources)
• Federal government stick = threaten regulation
• Federal government carrot = cost sharing
• Leadership has to come from Ottawa, ideally supported by
some provinces
• First step: federal-provincial agreement on equitable
sharing of reductions among provinces and sectors