What do you do when the only political party that might have slowed our headlong rush to climate catastrophe completely caves on the single issue that most threatens human habitability on planet Earth?
I live on the fringe. Okay, not true. I live in a smallish condo in a prosperous Vancouver neighbourhood, the kind of place where a socially progressive politician might usually attract friendly smiles, but very few votes.
I’m also a liberal — though, emphatically, not a Liberal. Federally, that party is so clearly invested in the ego of its leader that it has abandoned even its foundational dedication to political opportunism.
And in British Columbia (B.C.), the Liberal brand has disappeared altogether. By ‘liberal,’ I mean someone who learned in high school (thank you history teacher Doug Steinson) to be deeply distrustful of extremists.
Finally, I am a climate-change voter. I accept the scientific consensus that human-caused global warming presents an existential crisis that we should be addressing with the haste and vigor appropriate to an issue that is, unequivocally, EXISTENTIAL!
So, imagine my delight when the savvy and resourceful Vancouver city councillor Christine Boyle announced her intention to contest the coming B.C. election as a New Democratic Party candidate in my riding (Vancouver-Little Mountain). In past elections, I have often found myself placing my ‘X’ beside the Green Party candidate. In our flawed first-past-the-post system, I was reduced to expressing an environmentally-concerned opinion, rather than casting a ‘strategic’ vote that had no potential to shift the balance. But Boyle’s a star. Her candidacy tempted me to believe there might be a chance to nudge this riding away from the reactionaries.
Then, with my finger hovering over the volunteer button, B.C. Premier David Eby and national NDP leader Jagmeet Singh stepped up to trash the carbon tax, so widely regarded among economists, policy wonks — and pretty much anyone who’s done the reading — as the most effective climate mitigation measure that any government could implement.
In doing so, Eby and Singh indicate, to me at least, that their party is in thrall not to science, idealism or even decent economic theory, but to the shallow populism of Conservative leaders Pierre Poilievre (federally), John Rustad (provincially) and Donald Trump (notionally). Seeing the success that those demagogues are having while playing to their base, the B.C. and national NDP leaders have obviously decided to adopt the same strategy. Weirdly, though, they also decided to play not to their own base, but to Poilievre and Rustad’s — freely abandoning NDP supporters, as well as anyone else who hoped to make headway on addressing climate change.
I get it. And I really, really don’t get it. I understand that by misrepresenting the impact of the federal and provincial carbon taxes, Poilievre and Rustad have made the issue politically radioactive. And through their incompetence and cynicism in alternatively not defending or outright damaging the federal tax, the Liberals have added a dangerous trigger to the now-fissionable material. Eby and Singh have seen polls: this policy is a political loser.
But really, what is the strategic benefit of endorsing your political opponents’ most effective — and disingenuous — position? Do New Democrats seriously believe that ‘axe the tax’ voters are now going to rush away from the dissembling Poilievre and the outright climate-change-denying Rustad? (And, c’mon: anyone who says he believes in climate change, but doubts that it’s a problem, is absolutely in denial.) Nope. Low-information, anti-tax voters will still pick the obvious choice and, David, Jagmeet: it’s not you!
Even more ridiculously, Eby and Singh say they are going to shift to policies that make big polluters pay, taking the burden off the working class. And they’re going to do it by trashing the single tax policy that, through its enforced neutrality, has actually put more money back in the hands of low-income voters. Yet, the B.C. NDP has already given the liquified natural gas industry tax breaks that likely dwarf the entirety of its carbon tax repayments. We know that industry is expert at dodging almost every other measure. That’s why economists love the simple, unavoidable carbon tax: it works. Or it will until after the next election.
I’m still going to vote. I still want to hope. And I’m happy that Boyle will make a great — and still available — candidate for mayor in the 2026 Vancouver municipal election. But, an immodest prediction: we all will live to rue the day that the NDP chose panic over policy, joined Poilievre and Rustad, and drove a nail into the coffin of the best climate policy on the continent.
Richard Littlemore is a freelance journalist, speechwriter, ghostwriter and consultant, with clients currently concentrated in the academic, business and property development sectors.
Comments
This is a dilemma that many Canadians face. I finally decided that I should be voting for something rather than against it and will vote for the Green Party because I know where they stand on climate change and energy and that they won't change with shifting political winds. I have met others who are exhausted from changing their votes in order to keep one party out of power. When people vote a party out of office they don't always consider what will replace it. That is how Iran became a theocracy - much to the dismay of most of the citizens. Alberta is a leading example in Canada where key democratic institutions have been captured by a single industry that is not interested in ethics or the public good. I also support proportional representation and Fair Vote Canada in the hopes that this will provide better long-term planning and stability.
The NDP (the Nothing Doing Party) under Singh is past it's prime and like the Liberals, needs new leadership that isn't afraid to tackle climate change issues head on, than adding to the political garbage being spewed by Pierre "Snake Oil Salesman" Poilievre. Most smart people know that Pierre is just spreading disinformation on the 'axe the tax', ignoring the fact the only reason to do so is to benefit the oil & gas industry and top wealthy Canadians. Eliminating this, will only hurt the majority of Canadians who benefit from the program.
Instead, both Singh and Trudeau should be challenging Pierre on his disinformation campaign and why he wants to hurt the majority of Canadians who benefit from the program. But it seems both are now lost in the political nonsense fabricated by Pierre.
The Green Parties in Canada were created 40 years ago to address the very problems pointed out here - the other parties just don't get it or get the seriousness of climate change and other disastrous-for-the-environment policies. So glad that you are voting for principles this time around - again.
“Finally, I am a climate-change voter. I accept the scientific consensus that human-caused global warming presents an existential crisis that we should be addressing with the haste and vigor appropriate to an issue that is, unequivocally, EXISTENTIAL!”
Hear! Hear! Thank you for articulating my dismay over the platforms offered by the big political parties. This climate voter will be voting Green.
If progressive politicians cannot make the case for carbon pricing with rebates, that is an admission of failed communication skills.
People with poor communication skills should not run for public office in the first place.
Littlemore: "But really, what is the strategic benefit of endorsing your political opponents’ most effective — and disingenuous — position?"
Precisely. Which is what confounds progressives and climate activists in Alberta, as we witness the NDP's antics. Successive NDP leaders — first Notley, now Nenshi — dropped the ball on climate, shifted right on energy issues, and embraced the petro-party's neoliberal policies on energy and obstructive policies on climate.
Notley's NDP chased the UCP to the right — and lost the 2019 election by a landslide. As Premier, Notley became chief cheerleader for the Trans Mtn pipeline. Notley threw environmentalists and climate activists under the bus, and even castigated the federal NDP leader.
When Danielle Smith rejects the just transition, Notley opposed it too. When Smith embraced carbon capture and storage (CCS), Notley went along. When Smith opposed the federal O&G emissions cap, Notley attacked it too.
Today, the NDP now rejects consumer carbon pricing. Now supports carbon capture and storage. Supports O&G subsidies. Supports new pipelines that sabotage Canada's climate targets. Opposes a just transition for workers. Nenshi now opposes the federal greenwashing bill.
"Nenshi criticizes federal energy policy in first address to Calgary business community" (Calgary Herald, Sep 17, 2024)
"In his first address to Calgary's business community as Alberta NDP leader, Naheed Nenshi on Tuesday criticized several proposed federal energy and emissions-reduction policies while steering away from making firm policy commitments.
"Nenshi said he's been working with the energy industry on creating a submission to the federal government on Bill C-59, an anti-greenwashing provision that led oil and gas companies to scrub their websites, citing confusion over the advertising standards being applied.
"Nenshi said the federal government is 'fundamentally wrong in what they're putting forward' and the provision is 'against freedom of speech and expression.'"
Of course, the O&G industry has every right to greenwash its operations.
On O&G issues, the NDP and UCP are virtually indistinguishable. Both parties plan to fail on climate.
The NDP's shift to the right was a political blunder. A NDP win in 2019 was not on the menu. Notley was always a one-term premier. Notley's oil-soaked "pragmatism" foundered on delusion and denial. Most pipeline boosters would not vote NDP if Notley built a billion pipelines.
Pandering to fossil fuel dinosaurs just fed the right-wing frenzy. A pipeline project became the rallying flag for Albertans, whose sense of grievance against Ottawa burns eternal. Fuelling the right-wing rage machine. O&G supporters will vote for the real O&G party. Notley's pipeline hysterics only inflamed Albertans against the NDP and alienated her own supporters.
"the art of the possible"
The suggestion that our petro-progressive politicians are failing us is typically met with mindless slogans: "Politics is the art of the possible." "Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good."
An excuse for failed leadership. An attempt to lower expectations and diminish responsibility.
Politics is the art of the necessary. Anybody can do the politically expedient. Anybody can govern by poll. Anybody can follow the parade. Anybody can pander to industry. True leaders do what is necessary, even if unpopular. They persuade people to follow.
If "progressive" politicians are not willing or able to defend the public interest, why run for public office? Why enter politics in the first place if you cannot sell and defend your values and policies? If all parties simply go where the votes are, that eliminates any role for leadership. Government by poll fails to serve the public interest.
We do not need nominally progressive politicians who blow with the wind. A government that merely follows the parade and turns its back on science (i.e., reality) is worse than useless.
"Politicians are weathervanes when they are supposed to be compasses."
The NDP, both federally and provincially, keeps making the same mistake over & over -- backtracking to the center which keeps sliding further and further to the right.
"The NDP's shift to the right was a political blunder. A NDP win in 2019 was not on the menu. Notley was always a one-term premier. Notley's oil-soaked "pragmatism" foundered on delusion and denial. Most pipeline boosters would not vote NDP if Notley built a billion pipelines".
Says it all for the NDP in Canada and BC, and the left in Europe too.