In my honest opinion this program was poorly thought out, poorly implemented, and it definitely unfairly impacts the people of BC … depending on where they live

Today we have a follow up to the post, “Any smart business person would have made those changes anyways. Why? Because doing them increases profits, and saves them money!” from last Tuesday (May 29, 2012)

This morning I received a comment from HB2cents, who said:

I just wanted to share one tid-bit of info with you that you might consider - the Carbon Tax is revenue neutral, and the PCT doesn't get a cent of it. Taxpayers get income tax breaks as a result of the tax (that's why it is revenue neutral, i.e. government doesn't keep the money).

The tax was implemented to price carbon so that people would give thought to using less. If you do use less, you benefit even more - by saving on fuel and income tax.

Just wanted to make that point of clarification.

You should also know that Carbon Neutral Government (the reason why public sector pays for offsets to the Pacific Carbon Trust) is an incentive for those organizations to reduce carbon so they pay less in offsets. As a result of this, busy hospital CEOs and the like have actually paid more attention to their energy use because they are required to measure their CO2 output. This forces them to see the opportunities to reduce energy use - and they are doing it.

Like you point out in your article, you would think that if there is the potential for a business or school to save money by investing in new technology or simply turning down the heat, they would. The sad truth is people see cost (new curtains in a greenhouse, solar hot water heaters) and they turn the other way... unless there is a discount or incentive or law.

Alternatively, when people show leadership and demonstrate the benefits of investing, you can get others to follow - that is another kind of incentive. Now that carbon pricing has been in effect for a few years, and there are some good demonstrations of reducing emissions and saving money, I think we'll see more change by "carrot" than by "stick".

Just my 2 cents :) 
@HB2cents (June 5, 2012 9:11 AM)

There was a lot there in those comments, which in themselves could have seen at least a couple of new posts, this however was the reply that I made:

Thanks for your comments HB2cents ... they are appreciated.

I, and many others, still fail to understand how something that is revenue neutral can all of a sudden create a $1+ billion dollar hole in the government’s revenues if it is removed.

Another problem, I think, is the tax reduction itself. As I mentioned, for those in larger urban centres, public transportation is more readily available, to more locations, and more often. In the interior and the north that is not necessarily the case. Those who work in the resource sector also aren't able to hope on a city transit bus to head out in the bush or the job site.

So ... we end up with those outside urban centres, paying for the tax break people in larger centres are receiving.

I for one agree we should be seeing hospitals / schools looking at ways to reduce their energy usage -- so why not take the money pillaged from their budgets to implement a series of plan full building improvements?

Instead the money is pulled from budgets they have already received, returned to the government, and then government gives it back when they announce a "NEW" government project complete with photo op for the premier and associated cabinet ministers.

Last night I drove by the Provincial Law Courts in Kamloops just after 9pm. The building was closed -- but 50% of the lights were on scattered throughout various parts of the building. It seems to me the government itself should perhaps look into seeing "the opportunities to reduce energy use"

In my honest opinion this program was poorly thought out, poorly implemented, and it definitely unfairly impacts the people of BC … depending on where they live.

I believe the Carbon Tax allowed for a new source of tax revenue for the government, under the guide of a green initiative that is questionable at best.

Take care ... and thanks again for taking the time to express your thoughts.

Anyone else care to weigh in with a thought on the comments which were made in the original post I made, or in the reply I received?  A good healthy debate is always welcome.

I’m Alan Forseth in Kamloops, with the thoughts of one conservative.