Jim Dinning Praises Rachel Notley Over Carbon Txes

Yes, it takes real courage to jack up prices for nothing:

The NDP government’s carbon tax is getting major props from a former PC finance minister.

Jim Dinning praised Premier Rachel Notley for taking a step that many governments “historically have lacked the courage” to do.

According to Dinning, an across-the-board carbon levy is “the best way” to get people to reduce their carbon emissions. 

“What I do is applaud the government, or any government across the country who is willing to have the courage to say, ‘We’re going to bring carbon pricing to the marketplace, and it’s going to apply across the board from the big, big companies all the way to you or I, when we fill up our car with gas, or when we pay our Enmax bill at the end of the month,” Dinning said.

“Any government who is willing to do that, in my view, they get a tick mark for doing just that.”

Dinning said the alternative would be to create “inches and inches” of red tape.

“I still am a Conservative supporter. I believe in the Conservative Party. That’s why I believe in pricing carbon, rather than the government putting these massive amounts of regulation in place,” Dinning said.

“Let the market decide how it, how we, will reduce carbon.”


This is what carbon taxes do: they raise costs for everyone else other than the government under the assumption that carbon, one of the most common elements on the planet is a pollutant.

Cases in point:

In Australia:

The official register of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions will reveal that in the financial year before the carbon tax was introduced Australia produced 546.2 million tonnes of emissions. After the carbon tax was introduced, the emissions dropped to just 545.9 million tonnes. These figures do not include fuels and refrigerants.

Climate Change Minister Greg Hunt said the best Christmas present Labor could give voters was axing the carbon tax.

“Bill Shorten simply refuses to accept the outcome of the election. He doesn’t care about rising power bills or the will of the Australian people,” Mr Hunt said.

Not only did this tax not what it was meant to do, it raised power bills for every citizen.


In the United Kingdom:

The boss of one of the UK’s largest energy companies has attacked a new green tax that will add an estimated £10 to annual electricity bills from April 1 as “completely ineffective”.

Tony Cocker, chief executive of German-owned E.ON UK, said that the carbon tax — originally intended to promote the construction of new nuclear reactors — will only result in a windfall for the Treasury and the operator of the UK’s existing nuclear fleet, EDF Energy.


In Norway, the tax did not do what it was intended to do- to limit carbon release by major industries that no one really wanted to touch:

As one of the pioneer countries in the world to implement the carbon tax, Norway might have tried to do its best. The high carbon tax that Norway imposed to some industries has partially reduced its GHG emissions. However, the carbon tax is not economically efficient, because the government intends to protect its domestic industries and exempts too many industries from the carbon tax. According to Hoel, an efficient carbon tax system “should be equal for all users of fossil fuels”(1996). It is recommended that Norwegian government should eliminate the policy of protecting the activities of increasing environmental damage, such as exempting or reducing carbon tax on certain energy-intensive industries.

No one is going to want to completely swamp its major industries, where the tax was meant to do some (purported) good. The Norwegian case showed the tax unequally levied against smaller industries and citizens.

Carbon taxes are a fraud and theft.

Where are the riots?