Canada News
Climate policy is missing in action in Saskatchewan election
Saskatchewan residents have suffered the effects of climate change with more intense forest fires and agricultural drought, but this has not translated into a widespread call for climate action. (Pexels Photo)
Climate policy has not been a significant focus for the governing Saskatchewan Party or the opposition NDP in the Oct. 28 provincial election.
In their Oct. 16 debate, neither Saskatchewan Party Leader Scott Moe nor NDP Leader Carla Beck were asked about their plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Moe referred to climate policy on two occasions – both focused on his government’s opposition to the federal price on carbon and the carbon-pricing exemption that Saskatchewan has instituted for natural gas used for home heating. Beck did not mention climate specifically in the debate.
Why is there no talk about climate policy in Saskatchewan during this election?
Perhaps it is because the province, with its resource-intensive economy, doesn’t have a record of which to be proud. Perhaps it’s because polls show voters care far more about other issues. That may also explain why neither party feels compelled to put forward a GHG emissions-reduction target in its 2024 platforms or have serious action plans if they form the next government.
With neither party committing to serious action, it may be up to individual citizens to take action, using boycotts, protests and social media to raise awareness.
Already falling short of its goals
Saskatchewan and Alberta are laggards on climate policy, according to reports this year from both the Pembina Institute and Clean Energy Canada (CEC). This is particularly concerning because nearly half of the country’s emissions come from these two provinces, Environment and Climate Change Canada data shows.
Saskatchewan has long been falling short of its climate goals.
In 2007, the Saskatchewan Party came to power promising to stabilize GHG emissions by 2010, reduce them by 32 per cent from 2007 levels by 2020, and then cut them by 80 per cent from 2007 levels by 2050. Its platforms after 2007 have omitted such targets.
The Saskatchewan NDP offered similar GHG emissions-reduction targets in the 2007 election and continued to set targets in its 2011 and 2016 platforms. It did not set targets in its 2020 or 2024 platforms.
Table 1 shows what each of these 2007 goals represented in actual GHG emissions reductions in terms of megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e Mt).
The governing Saskatchewan Party missed its 2010 target. It missed its 2020 target by 19.6 megatonnes and is not on track to reach the 80-per-cent reduction by 2050 target.
The issue is complicated by Saskatchewan’s resource-intensive economy (figure 1).
Has the Saskatchewan government actually been trying to reduce its emissions?
We can evaluate the government’s climate policy record using the Canadian climate policy inventory created by the University of Calgary’s Canadian Climate Policy Partnership (C2P2).
To be included in the C2P2 database, a policy must be enacted with the primary purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Targets and goals are not included because they do not, in and of themselves, reduce GHG emissions.
Saskatchewan has 29 climate-change mitigation policies (figure 2). Of these, 12 target the building sector, despite it making up only a small portion of provincial emissions (figure 1).
This is followed by five policies for transportation, three for agriculture and two for electricity. Only two target oil and gas, although this industry accounts for nearly one-third of provincial emissions. Five additional policies apply to multiple sectors.
However, the number of policies implemented is not necessarily representative of a province’s climate policy ambition.
Some policies reduce emissions more effectively than others. There are sticks and there are carrots. Regulations, for example, are sticks. They tend to be more effective than incentive programs, which are carrots: easy to introduce, cancel or let expire. The most effective policies use a mix of carrots and sticks.
Most policies in Saskatchewan are incentives and funding instruments (20 out of 29, as figure 3 shows). Saskatchewan’s climate-policy mix includes only six regulations and one market-based pricing policy – the province’s output-based performance standard for industrial emitters.
Also important is the scope of each of the Saskatchewan climate policies. Policies with a wider scope – sector-wide or multi-sector-wide – can lead to greater emissions reductions than policies that are narrowly scoped, such as project-based policies.
Of Saskatchewan’s policies, only two apply to multiple sectors and two are sector-wide (figure 3). Most incentive policies are project-based or apply to a specific technology or class of technologies.
This absence of broad-based, effective climate policies is one of the main reasons why Saskatchewan has not achieved its emissions-reduction goals.
So, how might this election affect Saskatchewan’s climate policy?
If the Saskatchewan Party retains power, it is unlikely to change course. Moe has made it a point of pride to oppose federal climate policy and in 2022 stated “I don’t care” about Saskatchewan having the highest per-capita emissions in the country.
The word “climate” does not appear in the 2024 Saskatchewan Party platform, but the phrase “carbon tax” occurs 11 times – not as a proposed climate solution, but instead to reiterate the party’s promise to continue exempting home heating from the federal carbon price – for which the province is $56 million (and counting) in debt to the federal government as of April.
The federal government accepted in July the province’s letter of credit for the money owed until the dispute is settled by the Tax Court of Canada at a date not yet determined.
Would climate policy look different if the NDP forms the next government? The NDP platform does contain a reference to climate change and states the party would “invest dollars through climate initiatives into rapidly building out renewable power, energy efficiency retrofits, and lower energy costs for families.”
This indicates the potential for some additional incentive policies, but the NDP platform proposes no additional regulatory or market-based climate policies.
The NDP has also stated that if elected, it would cut the gas tax of 15 cents/litre at the pump for six months. This would have the opposite effect of a price on carbon. It would be a disincentive for people to drive less or switch to electric vehicles.
Why the real climate change fight is in Saskatchewan
If neither of Saskatchewan’s two main political parties is offering effective climate policy, does that mean the people don’t want it?
The top issues on voters’ minds are health care, taxes, affordability and the cost of living, according to recent polling. Education and the state of the economy are next on the list.
Saskatchewan residents have suffered the effects of climate change with more intense forest fires and agricultural drought, but this has not translated into a widespread call for climate action.
The lack of stated climate concern in opinion polls may explain the state of climate policy in the province. It may also explain why neither the Saskatchewan Party nor the NDP felt compelled to put forward a GHG emissions-reduction target in their 2024 platforms.
So, what is a climate-concerned citizen to do?
Some advice comes from Simon Fraser University’s Mark Jaccard in his book The Citizen’s Guide to Climate Success: citizens should consider civil actions. They should have conversations with friends and family, use social media, boycott, peacefully protest, volunteer with environmental organizations and vocally support ambitious policies when politicians do implement them.
In Saskatchewan, it may require increased and sustained civil action to ensure that the party that takes office works to fill in the province’s climate policy gaps and turns Saskatchewan from a climate policy laggard to a leader.
The research used in this commentary is supported in part by funding from the Canadian Climate Institute, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (PDG #890-2022-0076), the office of the vice-president (research) at the University of Calgary, the school of public policy at the University of Calgary, and the federal government through the environmental damages fund (grant #EDF-CA-2022g009).
This article first appeared on Policy Options and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
