Angry in the Great White North

Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion promises to isolate Canada from foreign manufacturers via a carbon tariff as part of his carbon tax plan.

Perhaps he thinks that a carbon tariff that keeps foreign goods from leaving the country of origin will also somehow keeps carbon dioxide trapped their too.

In any case, the idea of a carbon tariff is simply stated:

We will build carbon pricing into our strategy for international trade, endeavouring where possible to ensure that goods from countries that are not pricing carbon will face a tariff reflective of carbon content.

So I have a bunch of questions.

First, does that country need to be pricing carbon at the same rate?  If in Year 3 of Stephane Dion's plan to tax carbon, Canada is pricing carbon at $30 a tonne, and another country is applying a $20 tax, does that mean we apply a $10-per-tonne tariff?  But maybe that country's emissions don't justify a steep tax, having lowered emissions through other means.  Is the tariff adjusted to reflect how "good" another country is?  Or does any pricing of carbon eliminate the tariff?

What is the other country is applying a steeper tax?  Sweden applies a tax of over $100 per tonne.  Does Sweden retaliate by applying a $70-per-tonne tariff on Canadian exports that are only being taxed in Canada at $30 per tonne in Year 3?  Does Stephane Dion praise Sweden's tariff equivalent to $70-per-tonne tariff on Canadian goods sent to Sweden (copper, heavy petroleum oil, electrical parts and appliances, video games, paper products, lumber, motor vehicles and computers) as being ecologically responsible?  Perhaps Stephane Dion will assure Canadians exporters that the pain will fade by suggesting that he will raise carbon tax to meet Swedish levels as a solution.

And what about our huge trading partners like the United States and China?

Since the next president of the United States, be he a Republican or Democrat, has already committed to pricing carbon, this will likely not impact our largest trading partner.

Well, no mention of China is the carbon tax plan, and the cavalier dismissal of the United States reflects either a fundamental misunderstanding of how the US government works, or a deliberate attempt to hide the truth.  In any case, a president can only sign laws presented to him by Congress.   John McCain and Barack Obama can signal their willingness to support legislation for a carbon tax, but if Congress doesn't present a carbon tax the President doesn't like, it won't happen.  If a large enough group senators or representatives don't support a carbon tax, it won't happen.  If influential senators or representatives don't support a carbon tax, they can derail it by attaching unacceptable side bills that would force the President to veto the entire package (Presidents don't have a line item veto, a limitation on his veto ability which preserves the law-drafting role of Congress that is at the core of their separation of powers, since a line-item change would essentially alter the bill and make the President the author of the bill he is about to sign).

Not likely impact our largest trading partner?  Guess again.  And if Stephane Dion slaps a tariff on US imports, what do you think the reaction of the US Congress will be?  "Oh gosh.  A Canadian tariff?!  Quickly, we must impose our own carbon tax on our voters in order to placate Stephane Dion."

A cynic might think instead think it will be something along the lines of "Let's shut down softwood lumber and beef imports from Canada.  That'll win us some votes!"

And what about China?  A new coal-fired power plant every week, massive subsidization of gas (Chinese consumers pay about fifty cents a liter even as Canadians pay $1.40 per liter), 20,000 new vehicles every day.

China is not obligated under Kyoto to do anything.  Canada imports well over $20 billion in goods from China.  Is Stephane Dion going to apply a tariff to all these goods?  How much?  I mean, the carbon content used to make a toothbrush in China is likely to be a lot more than to make the same item in Canada.  Is China going to be asked to deliver numbers on how much energy was used to make items it exports? 

Or does China get a pass because Kyoto doesn't apply to it?  That makes sense actually.  I mean, is it fair to penalize China for not applying a carbon tax when the Kyoto Protocol exokicitly exempted China from taking any steps to reduce emissions?

I hate to say it, but I think Stephane Dion will be compelled to apply punitive carbon tariffs to countries like the United States who are not meeting Kyoto commitments with a carbon tax, and keep the trade doors open for massive polluters like China.

Does this make sense?  Is this helping the environment?