Thread by @l_stone

Back at the court of appeal where Ontario is challenging the federal carbon tax. Up today is Canada’s lawyer, who begins her submission by saying climate change is an “urgent threat to humanity,” that is not contained within geographic boundaries. #onpoli

Only a few minutes in and the justices are also interrupting and questioning the government’s lawyer, asking her about greenhouse gas emissions and to definite its cumulative effects.

Woah snap. One of the judges, Justice Huscroft, tells the government’s lawyer that carbon pricing is “just a means to an end.” When she agrees he tells her, “That’s a point against you. You shouldn’t be agreeing with it.” #onpoli

Wow. Another judge, Justice MacPherson, points out that Ontario’s emissions reduced by 22 per cent after closing coal-fired plants (under previous Liberal govt). Tells federal govt’s lawyer he doesn’t care how they achieved it.
“Why don’t you just leave them alone?” #onpoli

Then Justice MacPherson asks why Ontario has to pay more than its share because other provinces aren’t doing theirs. #onpoli

(Just an observation here but I’m not sure the judges’ hard questioning can be taken as an indication of what their decision will be. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. But it’s interesting to hear them challenge and push back on both Ontario and Ottawa’s lawyers.)

By far the most skeptical judge is Justice Huscroft. Ottawa’s lawyer keeps arguing that it’s not forcing the province to do pricing, but Ontario made its choice by cancelling cap and trade. “You’re making them do the thing they didn’t want to do,” Huscroft replies. #onpoli

Justice Huscroft trying to nail down Ottawa’s argument about how far it’s willing to go to curb greenhouse gas emissions. “You won’t pin yourself down on what it’s going to apply to,” he says. #onpoli

Huscroft presses Ottawa’s lawyer about whether the Feds could ban wood-burning fireplaces or limit home heating temps. She says in the abstract it would “beyond federal reach,” then reference a heroin case, which is somewhat confusing.

Ottawa’s lawyer goes back to basics: pricing reduces emissions. “That is an unquestioned fact.” #onpoli

Back in court this afternoon, Ottawa’s lawyer is arguing the carbon-pricing scheme is a regulatory charge intended to change behaviour, not raise money. #onpoli