Globe & Mail: Canadian support for paying for pollution could help in the fight against Trump tariffs

Originally published in The Globe & Mail on March 1, 2025

With Liberal leadership frontrunners promising to eliminate the consumer price on carbon and replace it with alternative approaches, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has succeeded in making the “carbon tax” politically toxic in Canada. Reversing this central piece of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s climate plan will be a signature achievement for Mr. Poilievre. I doubt it will be one that history writes well of, as costs and hardships mount from extreme weather.

While he won his “axe the tax” political fight, new polling shows Mr. Poilievre didn’t dissuade most Canadians from the responsibility we feel to protect our kids from pollution. This is fortuitous, because our enduring support for paying for pollution provides a key tool to fight the looming tariffs threatened by U.S. President Donald Trump.

The poll, conducted by Research Co. on behalf of Generation Squeeze, asked whether respondents agreed or disagreed with two statements. The first said: “It’s important to pay for our pollution, because there is no better planet to protect for our kids. There are better ways to make life more affordable than ‘axing the tax’ on carbon pollution – like better investments in housing, childcare, postsecondary and retirement.”

Overall, 67 per cent of respondents agreed.

The second stated: “If you make a mess, clean it up. That’s a responsibility our parents teach us. Politicians betray this family value when they propose to stop paying for pollution, because it forces our kids to pay even more dearly for the messes we leave them.

This time 73 per cent agreed. A majority supported both statements in all regions of the country, and across political parties. (The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 per cent, 19 times in 20.)

Politicians should harness this sense of duty to protect our kids from pollution as a central part of our plan to defend Canada from Mr. Trump’s tariff threats.

Mr. Carney has featured this opportunity in his Liberal leadership bid. He would improve how large industrial emitters pay for their pollution at home and abroad, including cement, oil and gas, iron and steel, mining and chemicals.

Canada already uses performance standards for large emitting industries to regulate the intensity of pollution that companies emit per product they produce. Those that limit their emissions to this standard are exempt from any pollution payment, while those that have dirtier modes of production must buy credits to cover their excess mess. Cleaner companies that pollute less than the industry standard earn credits they can sell to dirtier firms.

Such regulations create profit opportunities for the least-polluting companies, which generates incentives to drive down emissions. Similar systems are used throughout the EU, Britain and elsewhere.

Although our Large-Emitter Trading Systems aren’t perfect, the Canadian Climate Institute finds they reduce more carbon pollution than any other Canadian policy tool.

Mr. Carney would build on this momentum by closing loopholes that make it too easy for companies to earn credits to sell to dirtier competitors. This is important, because our kids and future generations are counting on us to do more, not less, to protect the planet’s health.

Armed with strong LETS, Canada could then counter Mr. Trump’s tariffs by targeting the United States' dirtiest companies. The EU already uses pollution tariffs to protect its high-emitting industries from unfair competition by companies in other countries that do not regulate pollution levels. Britain is following suit, as would Mr. Carney if elected prime minister.

Hugo Cordeau, a clever doctoral student in economics, recently made the case that this policy direction would hit Mr. Trump where it hurts – the states most likely to vote for him.

Mr. Cordeau recommends a pollution tariff based on the dirtiness of a region’s electricity. He reports that U.S. electricity is twice as dirty as Canada’s, and that many Republican states generate electricity that is two- to three-times dirtier than the American average, because they rely on coal.

As Mr. Trump gleefully retreats from international climate co-operation, Canada should impose a carbon tariff that targets the United States' dirtiest companies – and do so to stand up for our kids and country.

It would mean somewhat higher costs for Canadians as we buy or boycott American goods. So politicians must publicize plans to help financially insecure households cope.

But for those who enjoy more security, many have taken pride in absorbing such costs by selecting differently at the grocery store and cancelling vacations to the U.S. We should go even further by paying to protect the planet for our children and charging some of the largest polluters in Mr. Trump’s country to do the same.

Dr. Paul Kershaw is Founder, Lead Researcher & Executive Chair of Generation Squeeze. He is a policy professor in the UBC School of Population and Public Health, and Director of the UBC Masters of Public Health program.